Commons Sitting of 10 June 1907

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

  PRIVATE BILLS [LORDS] (STANDING ORDERS NOT PREVIOUSLY INQUIRED INTO COMPLIED WITH).
  Mr. SPEAKER laid upon the Table Report from one of the Examiners of Petitions for Private Bills, That in the case of the following Bills, originating in the Lords, and referred on the First Reading thereof, the Standing Orders not previously inquired into, and which are applicable thereto, have been complied with, viz.:—Wisbech Water Bill [Lords]; Renfrewshire Upper District (Eastwood and Mearns) Water Bill [Lords].
  Ordered, That the Bills be read a second time.

  PROVISIONAL ORDER BILL (NO STANDING ORDERS. APPLICABLE).
  Mr. SPEAKER laid upon the Table Report from one of the Examiners of Petitions for Private Bills, That, in the case of the following Bill, referred on I the First Reading thereof, no Standing Orders are applicable, viz.:—Local Government Provisional Order (No. 15)Bill.
  Ordered, That the Bill be read a second time To-morrow.
  Tyne Improvement Bill [Lords] (by Order) (King's Consent signified).—Bill read the third time and passed, with Amendments.
  Clyde Navigation Provisional Order Confirmation Bill.—Consideration deferred till To-morrow.
  Electric Lighting Provisional Orders (No. 5) Bill (by Order).—As amended considered; to be read the third time To-morrow.
  Caledonian Railway Order Confirmation Bill.— "To confirm a Provisional Order under The Private Legislation Procedure (Scotland) Act, 1899, relating to the Caledonian Railway," presented by Mr. Sinclair; read the first time; and ordered (under Section 9 of the Act) to be read a second time upon Tuesday 18th June, and to be printed. [Bill 224]
  Great Western, London and North Western, and Rhymney Railway Companies Bill.—Reported [Preamble not proved]; to lie upon the Table, and to be printed.

MESSAGE FROM THE LORDS.
That they have passed a Bill, intituled, "An Act to confirm a Provisional Order made by the Board of Trade, under The Railway and Canal Traffic Act, 1888, containing the Schedule of Maximum Tolls and Charges applicable to the New Junction Canal of the Undertakers of the Aire and Calder Navigation." [Canal Tolls and Charges (New junction Canal) Order Confirmation Bill [Lords.]
And, also, a Bill, intituled, "An Act to confirm certain Provisional Orders

1043
made by the Board of Education under the Education Acts, 1870 to 1903, to enable the councils of the administrative county of Surrey and the county boroughs of Birkenhead and Southport to put in force the Lands Clauses Acts." [Education Board Provisional Orders Confirmation (Surrey, etc.) Bill [Lords.]
Canal Tolls and Charges (New Junction Canal) Order Confirmation Bill [Lords]. —Read the first time; referred to the Examiners of Petitions for Private Bills, and to be printed. [Bill 227.]
Education Board Provisional Orders Confirmation (Surrey, etc.) Bill [Lords]. Read the first time; referred to the Examiners of Petitions for Private Bills, and to be printed. [Bill 228.]
Keswick Urban District Council (Water) Bill (by Order).—Lords' Amendments considered—
Lords' Amendment, in page 1, line 3 leave out "in this Act called 'the Council' "read a second time, and agreed to.
Lords' Amendment, in page 2, line 7, leave out "water," the next Amendment read a second time.
Motion made, and Question proposed "That this House doth agree with the Lords in the said Amendment." —(Mr. Caldwell.)
Motion made, and Question, "That the debate be now adjourned "—(Mr. Mooney) I —put, and agreed to.
Debate to be resumed to-morrow.

PETITION.
  EDUCATION (SPECIAL RELIGIOUS INSTRUCTION) BILL.
  Petition from Earlestown, against; to lie upon the Table.
RETURNS, REPORTS, ETC.
  ENGLISH GOVERNMENT DEPARTMENTS (POWERS IN IRELAND).
  Return presented, relative thereto [ordered 29th May; Captain Craig]; to lie upon the Table.
  BOARD OF EDUCATION.
  Copy presented, of Regulations for Technical Schools, Schools of Art, and other Schools and Classes for further Education (from 1st August, 1907, to 31st July, 1908) [by Command]; to lie upon the Table.
  MERCHANT SEAMEN'S FUND.
  Account presented, of the Receipt and Expenditure under the Seamen's Fund Winding-up Act from 1st January to 31st December, 1906 [by Act]; to lie upon the Table, and to be printed. [No. 183.]
  FLEETS (GREAT BRITAIN AND FOREIGN COUNTRIES).
  Return presented, relative thereto [ordered 9th April; Sir Charles Dilke]; to lie upon the Table, and to be printed. [No. 184.]
  TRADE REPORTS (ANNUAL SERIES).
  Copies presented, of Diplomatic and Consular Reports, Annual Series, Nos. 3816 to 3820 [by Command]; to lie upon the Table.
  UNIVERSAL POSTAL UNION.
  Copy presented, of the Convention of Rome,' dated 26th May, 1906 [by Command]; to lie upon the Table.
QUESTIONS AND ANSWERS CIRCULATED WITH THE VOTES.

  List of Public Elementary Schools—Details of Accomodation.
  MR. HARVEY: To ask the President of the Board of Education if, prior to the next issue of the list of public elementary schools, he will take steps to secure the publication of revised and corrected figures of accommodation by eliminating from the measurements of floor space upon which accommodation is based such portions of the school buildings as are not available for effective teaching, and by taking into consideration the existence of a proper number of class-rooms.
  (Answered by Mr. McKenna.) The figures of accommodation appearing in the list of public elementary schools

  1045
  represent the accommodation recognised by the Board, and do not in every case coincide with the accommodation available for effective teaching. I fear the burden on the ratepayers that would be caused by the condemnation of schools and class-rooms which ought not properly to be regarded as suitable for effective teaching renders such an. immediate step impossible. The Board are endeavouring to secure in all schools that not less than ten square feet of floor space shall be provided for each child, and to remove from the list unsuitable schools and class-rooms where alternative accommodation is available or, failing this, so soon as it can be secured. The difficulty of carrying out these necessary reforms with geater rapidity lies solely in the reluctance on the part of many local education authorities to provide the accommodation required for the children displaced.

  The "Forest Hall"—Pilot's Remuneration.
  MR. BOLAND: To ask the President of the Board of Trade whether he is now in a position to say what steps have been taken to secure remuneration for James Galvin for his services in saving the vessel which, but for his help, would have been wrecked on the coast of Kerry, near Ballinskelligs Bay.
  (Answered by Mr. Kearley.) The Board of Trade have obtained a statement regarding this matter from the master of the "Forest Hall," who denies that the vessel was in distress, and states that he merely asked Galvin to show him the anchorage in Ballinskelligs Bay, and promised to pay him the usual pilotage fees in and out, amounting to £5. The matter is one for decision by the Courts, and is not one in regard to which the Board of Trade have any power to intervene.

  Vaccination Prosecutions by Guardians.
  SIR W. J. COLLINS: To ask the President of the Local Government Board, whether he is aware that, by general orders of 31st October, 1874, the Local Government Board prescribed it as the duty of the guardians of the poor
  1046
  to give directions to their vaccination officers to take proceedings in cases in which the proceedings of the Vaccination Act of 1867 had not been complied with, and that in July, 1875, the Local Government Board obtained a mandamus to compel the guardians of the Keighley union to give directions to their vaccination officer; and that in consequence of their default the guardians of that union suffered imprisonment; whether, seeing that Lord Herschell's Commission on Vaccination reported in 1896 that it is the duty of the guardians to put the law in regard to vaccination in operation, he will say whether the powers and duties of guardians in regard to such prosecutions under Sections 29 and 31 of the Act of 1867 have since been altered by statute; and, if not, whether the powers of the guardians in directing their officers in instituting proceedings under the Vaccination Acts are the same now as they were held to be in 1875 and in 1896.
  (Answered by Mr. John Burns.) I am aware of the facts referred to in the Question. Some limitations were placed by Sections 2, 3 and 4 of The Vaccination Act, 1898, on the cases in which prosecutions could be instituted under Sections 29 and 31 of The Vaccination Act, 1867, but, subject to this, there has been no statutory provision since 1896 which would affect the powers and duties of guardians in regard to prosecutions under those sections. Since that date, however, the Courts of Law have decided that it is the duty of the vaccination officer to institute these prosecutions without any directions from the guardians. When in 1898 the Order of 1874 mentioned by my hon. friend was rescinded, the provision which it contained as to directions by the guardians in cases of this kind was not inserted in the Order which took its place. That Order provided, however, that the guardians should from time to time ascertain whether the vaccination officer was performing the duties imposed on him by the Vaccination Acts of enforcing the provisions of those Acts and the duties imposed on him by the Order, and should require the due performance by him of such duties.

  Enniskillen Post Office Staff.
  MR. SLOAN: To ask the Postmaster-General whether he can now state the result of the surveyor's inquiries at Enniskillen on the questions of bad duties, caused by an undue proportion of female labour, and the matter i of supervision at that office, no information having yet been received by the i staff as to the result of that inquiry.
  (Answered by Mr. Sydney Buxton.) A revision of the indoor force at Enniskillen is about to be submitted to the Treasury for authority.

  Artillery for Indian Army.
  MR. ARNOLD-FORSTER: To ask the Secretary of State for War whether in view of the fact that the Indian Army is unprovided with horse or field artillery other than mountain batteries, it is contemplated, in the event of war, that the Indian Army should take the field without horse or field artillery; and, if not, what is the number of regular batteries which will be required, and from what source they will be provided.
  (Answered by Mr. Hobhouse.) Except in expeditions of very small importance the Indian Army never takes the field without Britishtroops. The Secretary of State has already informed the House that there are eleven batteries of horse artillery and forty-five batteries of field ' artillery now in India.

  Territorial Force—Men required in Civil Positions in the event of War.
  COLONEL KENYON-SLANEY: To ask the Secretary of State for War whether, in view of the announcement that no man shall be recruited for the territorial force who cannot accept a liability to a six months embodiment on the Army Reserve being called out, he proposes to disband or reduce such corps as the Civil Service, the Post Office, the Elswick, the Woolwich, the Dockyard, and the Railway Volunteers; and whether he proposes to discharge from other battalions all Volunteers who from being in the Government service or from the nature of their employment are unable to comply with such requirement.
  (Answered by Mr. Secretary Haldane.) I have never stated that any particular Volunteer units will be disbanded or reduced, or that any individual now serving must be discharged if the Territorial and Reserve Forces Bill becomes Law. What I did say, and what I now repeat, is that the Government does not intend to spend money in paying, clothing, and training men who, owing to the nature of their civil employment, cannot in any circumstances be embodied for military service in the event of national emergency. Seeing that the liability of Militia, Yeomanry, and Volunteers to be embodied will be the same in the future as in the past, I presume that Government departments and private employers have already faced the contingency of those in their employment who are now serving in these forces being called out on mobilisation, and I do not therefore anticipate that any serious consequences will follow if this Bill becomes law.

  Sewage Disposal—Government Bill.
  SIR FREDERICK BANBURY: To ask the President of the Local Government Board whether it is the intention of the Government to introduce a Bill dealing with the recommendations of the Royal Commission on Sewage Disposal.
  (Answered by Mr. John Burns.) As I stated on Friday last, in answer to a Question by the hon. Member for the Ecclesall Division, I cannot hold out any expectation that I could introduce a Bill on this subject during the present session.

  Motor Omnibuses.
  MR. CHIOZZA MONEY: To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department if his attention has been directed to the loss and inconvenience which has been sustained on omnibus routes in Paddington through the traffic of improperly constructed vehicles; and if he can give any assurance that more stringent regulations for motor omnibuses will be enforced in respect of such points as noise, vibration, and emission of vapour.
  (Answered by Mr. Secretary Gladstone.) The regulations under which motor omnibuses are licensed were considered

  1049
  and approved by a Select Committee of the House of Commons, and are being strictly enforced. Unduly noisy omni buses are warned off the streets. In some places, the state of the roadway is responsible for most of the vibration and for some of the noise of these vehicles. At the same time every effort is constantly being made to improve matters, and in the opinion of the Commissioner of Police a marked improvement has been effected.

  Ship.

  Programme.

  Date laid down.

  Date completed.

  Time occupied in building.

  Yrs.

  Months.

  Gneisenau

  1904–5

  June 1904 (Launched 14th June 1906)

  Not yet completed.

  —

  Scharnhorst

  1905–6

  May 1905 (Launched 22nd March 1906)

  „

  —

  Roon

  1902–3

  1st August 1902

  October 1905

  3

  2

  Yorek

  1903–4

  25th April 1903

  November 1905

  2

  7

  British Shipbuilding.
  MR. NIELD: To ask the Secretary to the Admiralty to what year's programme the armoured cruisers "Minotaur," "Shannon," "Defence," "Achilles," "Cochrane," "Natal," and "Warrior"

  Ship.

  Programme.

  Date laid down.

  Date completed.

  Time occupied in building.

  Yrs

  Months.

  Minotaur

  1904–5

  2nd Jan. 1305

  February 1908†

  3

  1‡

  Shannon

  „

  2nd Jan. 1905

  February 1908†

  3

  1‡

  Defence

  „

  22nd Feb. 1905

  December 1908†

  3

  10‡

  Achilles

  1903–4

  22nd Feb. 1904

  March 1907

  3

  1

  Cochrane

  „

  24th March 1904

  February 1907

  2

  11

  Natal

  „

  6th Jan. 1904

  April 1907

  3

  3

  Warrior

  „

  5th Nov. 1903

  May 1907

  3

  6

  † Anticipated dates of completion.

  ‡ Estimated.

  German Shipbuilding Programme.
  MR. NIELD: To ask the Secretary to the Admiralty to what year's programme the German armoured cruisers "Gneisenau," "Scharnhorst," "Roon," and "Yorck," belong; on what dates they were laid down; on what dates they were completed; and what time was occupied in building them.
  (Answered by Mr. Edmund Robertson.) The information desired is as follows—
  belong; on what dates they were laid down; on what dates they were or will be completed; and what time was occupied in building them.
  (Answered by Mr. Edmund Robertson) The information desired is as follows—

  Naval Lands (Volunteers) Bill—Date of Second Beading.
  MR. ARTHUR LEE: To ask the Secretary to the Admiralty if he can hold out any hope that the Second Reading of the Naval Lands (Volunteers) Bill will be taken at an early date.
  (Answered by Mr. Edmund Robertson.) This Bill was originally promoted by the late Government, and was reintroduced last session and again this session. On the understanding that no prolonged discussion will be considered necessary, I have hopes of being able to persuade the Patronage Secretary to give it an early place.

  Renewal of Free Kits to Naval Volunteer Reserves.
  MR. ARTHUR LEE: To ask the Secretary to the Admiralty whether the question of renewal of free kits to Naval Volunteer Reserves has been under discussion at the Admiralty for over two years; and whether, in view of the prejudicial effect that the uncertainty on this subject is having upon the recruiting of the Volunteer force, he can now state if any definite decision has been arrived at.
  (Answered by Mr. Edmund Robertson.) I am informed that this question was raised about two years ago, but that no decision was then reached. The present Board has not hitherto been able to see its way to a definite decision, but the matter will not be lost sight of.

  Electric Generating Station at Mill-bank.
  MR. CLELAND: To ask the First Commissioner of Works what steps he proposes to take to secure that the new electric generating station near the Houses of Parliament and the British Art Gallery shall be constructed and worked so as to obviate injury to the fabrics of these public buildings, the art treasures therein, and the vegetation in the Victoria Tower Gardens which are about to be extended at great cost close up to the new station site.
  (Answered by Mr. Harcourt.) I shall do my utmost to obtain the insertion of
  1052
  protective provisions at a later stage of a Bill now before this House. With the opinions of Professor Church and Dr. Thorpe before me, and the knowledge lately acquired of what is happening elsewhere, I take a most serious view of the national risk which is being incurred in this matter unless precautions are adopted, according to my recommendations, to protect the Houses of Parliament, the adjoining grounds and the British Art Gallery. I hope I shall have public support in my action.

  Stamp Duty on Workmen's Compensation Insurance Policies.
  VISCOUNT CASTLEREAGH: To ask Mr. Chancellor of the Exchequer whether, having regard to the number of policies likely to be effected in view of the coming into operation of The Workmen's Compensation Act, 1906, and to the hardship of the imposition by law of a stamp of sixpence upon each such policy, he will, in the interests of insurers with small means, consider the advisability of providing that, as in the case of insurances against fire, a stamp of one penny shall cover policies effected against the liability cast upon all classes of employers under the Act of 1906.
  (Answered by Mr. Asquith.) As I explained in reply to a Question asked by the noble Lord on the 22nd April, all policies of indemnity against accidents on which the annual premium does not exceed £1 are, under Section 11 of the Finance Act, 1899, treated as policies of insurance against accidents and attract a duty of no more than Id. This would seem to be sufficient to meet the case of "insurers with small means," regard being had to the rates of premium usually charged upon such policies, except perhaps in some particularly dangerous trades. The question whether, in view of recent legislation, there is a case for the further extension of the concession is, as I have already stated, engaging my attention.

  Transfer of Portions of the Madras Railway.
  SIR LEWIS MCIVER: To ask the Secretary of State for India whether the proposal to transfer portions of the property of the Madras Railway to

  1053
  another company or line, which was recently intimated to the Madras Railway Company, has been finally and irrevocably decided on, or whether facilities will be given to the proprietors of the Madras Railway Company and the people of Madras to make representations to the Government before the matter is finally decided on.
  (Answered by Mr. Secretary Morley.) The transfer of the Madras Railway from the present company has been finally decided on, with a view to a rearrangement of the railways in Southern India, which was considered by the Government of India and the Railway Board to be imperative on administrative grounds. Subject to the settlement of satisfactory conditions, the Southern Mahratta, South Indian, and Great Indian Peninsula Railway Companies have provsionally accepted the offers which have been made to them to include in their systems portion of the present Madras Railway.

  Indian Army Artillery.
  MR. ARNOLD-FORSTER: To ask the Secretary of State for India at what dates eleven batteries of horse artillery and forty-five batteries of field artillery were added to the Indian Army.
  (Answered by Mr. Secretary Morley.) I have not stated that there has been an addition of eleven batteries of horse artillery and forty-five batteries of field artillery. The above number of horse artillery batteries have been on the establishment of the Army in India since 1885 and of field artillery batteries since April, 1902.

  Exceptional Payment of Residual Capitation Grant
  MR. HAYDEN: To ask the Chief Secretary to the Lord-Lieutenant of Ireland whether he is aware that the residual capitation grant for the year ended 31st March, 1907, has not been paid to the acting principal teacher, Miss Quinn, of Ballagh School, Roll No. 5,811, Circuit No. 12, county of Roscommon; that this school remained during the term mentioned in communication with the National Board; that the grant was earned; whether the technical application of Rule No. 111, not designed
  1054
  to meet a ease of this description, will be held to deprive the teacher of the school of a grant which she earned; and, if so held, to whom will the grant be paid, or must it be forfeited by those interested in that school.
  (Answered by Mr. Birrell.) In ordinary circumstances the teacher referred to would not be entitled to the residual captitation grant, but, having regard to the unusually long period, nearly a year, during which she acted as principal teacher, the Commissioners have decided to make the grant to her as an entirely exceptional case.

  Irish Railways.
  MR. HAYDEN: To ask the Chief Secretary to the Lord-Lieutenant of Ireland whether he can state if during the Chief Secretaryship of Mr. Gerald Balfour, and at the request of the Government, a report on the Irish railways was made by the late Mr. Robertson, the then Chairman of the Board of Works in Ireland; whether this Report favoured the idea of State purchase of all the Irish railways; whether it is still in existence and in possession of the Government or any of its departments; and, if so, whether it will be submitted with any other official Reports made on the same subject to the Viceregal Commission now considering the Irish railway problem.
  (Answered by Mr. Birrell.) I have no information that any Report of the nature referred to was ever made by Mr. Robertson. There is no record of such a Report either in the Chief Secretary's Office, or in that of the Board of Works.

  Irish Evicted Tenants—Application of Michael O'Connor.
  MR. THOMAS F. SMYTH: To ask the Chief Secretary to the Lord-Lieutenant of Ireland if the Estates Commissioners have received an application on reinstatement from Michael O'Connor for a farm of land from which he was evicted, on the Crofton estate at Mohill, county Leitrim; and, if so, will the same be investigated by an inspector.
  (Answered by Mr. Birrell.) The Estates Commissioners have had Michael

  1055
  O'Connor's application investigated by an inspector. The holding from which O'Connor was evicted does not appear to be one to which the Land Law Acts apply, and the Commissioners can, therefore, take no action in the matter.

  Purchase of the Estate of Major St- George French.
  MR. JAMES O'KELLY: To ask the Chief Secretary to the Lord-Lieutenant of Ireland whether the Congested Districts Board have purchased the estate of Major St. George French, Clooniquinn, county Roscommon; whether the property in question includes the Clooniquinn Farm, which is now in the possession of a non-resident grazier; and whether the Board propose in the near future to use their powers and allot it in sections to the holders of uneconomic holdings in the immediate neighbourhood.
  (Answered by Mr. Birrell.) The Congested Districts Board have purchased this estate. It is assumed that the grazing farm referred to in the Question is the non-residential farm which is held by Mr. Timothy Rourke, junior, under lease for thirty-one years from 1902. The Board have no power under the existing law to determine the tenure in this case.

  The Sarah Flannery Estate—Case of James Farrell.
  MR. JAMES O'KELLY: To ask the Chief Secretary to the Lord-Lieutenant of Ireland whether he is aware that the Sarah Flannery Estate, near Strokes-town, county Roscommon, has been purchased by the Estates Commissioners and resold to the tenants, and that an exception has been made in the case of one of the tenants, named James Farrell, on the grounds that he had not paid his interest in time; and whether, seeing that Farrell has since offered to pay up all arrears and is now willing to do so, he will, under the circumstances, instruct the Commissioners to give this tenant the full benefit of the Act.
  (Answered by Mr. Birrell.) The Estates Commissioners inform me that, since I answered the hon. Member's previous Question on this subject on 25th
  1056
  February, † they have received no application in the matter either from Farrell or the landlord. If such an application should be made to them they will give it due consideration

  Irish Land Purchase—Case of O'Leary v. Sherlock.
  MR. CREAN: To ask the Chief Secretary to the Lord-Lieutenant of Ireland whether his attention has been called to the case of O'Leary v. Sherlock; whether he is aware that the Sub-Commissioners, on the application of O'Leary, who was then under notice to quit, fixed a fair rent on his holding; that Chief-Commissioner Fitzgerald, on appeal of Mr. Sherlock, the landlord, reversed the decision of the Sub-Commissioners; and that the Lord Chief Baron and Lords Justices Holmes and Fitzgibbon, on appeal by the tenant, unanimously decided in favour of the Sub-Commissioners and set aside the ruling of Chief-Commissioner Fitzgerald; and whether, in view of the fact that many of the poorer tenants in Ireland are deprived of their rights under the Land Acts, being unable to face the expenses of vexatious appeals, some method less costly than the present will be provided to enable them to secure these advantages.
  (Answered by Mr. Birrell.) I am informed that the facts are substantially as stated in the Question. The Court of Appeal ordered the landlord to pay the tenant's costs of the appeal. The decisions of the Land Commission Court under the Land Law Acts are, like the decisions of the ordinary superior courts, subject to appeal to the Court of Appeal. The Land Commission decide several thousand fair rent cases annually and very few of these cases are taken to the Court of Appeal. I am informed that the system works satisfactorily. It seems desirable that, in land cases as in other cases, questions of law should in the last resort be subject to review by the highest authority.

  Belfast Dock Strike Disturbance.
  MR. C. DUNCAN: To ask the Chief Secretary to the Lord-Lieutenant of Ireland whether his attention has been called to a disturbance in
  †See(4)Debates,clxix,1239.

  1057
  the streets of Belfast on 31st May, when a labourer named Bamber, who had been imported to take the place of the dock labourers at present on strike and who was under the influence of drink, has been charged with cutting and wounding a man named Brown; and whether he will take such steps as will prevent a repetition of such an occurrence during the present dispute.
  MR. C. DUNCAN:To ask the Chief Secretary to the Lord-Lieutenant of Ireland whether his attention has been drawn to the arrest of a man named Larkin, in Belfast, on 31st May, and his detention for a period of six hours before any charge was preferred against him; whether he is aware that Larkin is now charged with stone throwing, after having himself been slashed with a knife by the imported labourer, Bamber; and whether he will take steps to prevent the arrest of persons in the future unless some definite charge is preferred against them at the time of their arrest.
  (Answered by Mr. Birrell.) On 31st May Richard Bamber, who is an imported labourer, was arrested upon the charge of stabbing John Brown and two other men; and on the same occasion James Larkin, who belongs to the National Union of Dock Labourers, was arrested for assaulting Bamber by wounding him on the head with a stone. Larkin was charged with assault at the time he was arrested, but the charge was not formally entered until some hours later in the day. Bamber's injuries were at first believed to be more serious than proved to be the case, and until he had been treated at hospital it was not known whether a more serious charge might have to be preferred against Larkin. Both of the defendants were remanded and the cases were to be heard to-day. The police are taking all possible measures to preserve the peace.

  Driving of Cattle off Irish Grazing Lands.
  MR. PIKE PEASE: To ask the Chief Secretary to the Lord-Lieutenant of Ireland under what provision of the law are proceedings taken against persons who are found driving off cattle from the land of graziers; and,
  1058
  when the offence is proved, what punishment can be awarded.
  (Answered by Mr. Birrell.) In some cases prosecutions have been instituted for the indictable offence of unlawful assembly, and in others of a lens serious nature, proceedings have been taken to require persons to find sureties to keep the peace and be of good behaviour. The punishment to be imposed for unlawful assembly rests with the courts which deal with the case.

  Position of Surveyors of the Staff for Engineer Service.
  MR. CAVE: To ask the Secretary of State for War whether the question of improving the position of the surveyors and assistant surveyors of the staff for engineer services, which was stated as long ago as on the 27th March to be still under consideration, has now been sufficiently considered; and whether, in view of the anxiety which is felt on the subject, he will now announce his decision.
  (Answered by Mr. Secretary Haldane.) Steady progress has been made in regard to this matter, but no final decision has yet been reached.

  Return of Crown Agents' Business.
  MR. AUSTIN TAYLOR: To ask the Under-Secretary of State for the Colonies when the Return of Crown Agents' Business, ordered 13th March, will be laid upon the Table of the House.
  (Answered by Mr. Churchill.) The Return has now been laid, and will be published to-morrow.

  Grant of Land to Mr. R. B. Cole in British East Africa.
  MR. BOWLES: To ask the Secretary of State for the Colonies whether grants of land in British East Africa are usually limited to 10,000 acres; whether this principle has been adopted in order to discourage large speculations in that region; and, if so, whether he can state, the grounds upon which the principle has been departed from in the case of the grant of

  1059
  100 square miles of this territory to Mr. R. B. Cole.
  (Answered by Mr. Churchill.) The Answer to the first Question is in the affirmative. With regard to Mr. Cole's land, the Director of Agriculture reported that it was useless for agricultural purposes. The only purpose for which it appeared capable of being utilised was the collection of the wild fibre growing upon it; and, as the fibre requires expensive machinery for its treatment, it was thought necessary to grant leases of large areas in order to induce persons to embark the necessary capital.

  Birr Postmastership.
  MR. FIELD: To ask the Postmaster-General whether he can state the date of the Civil Service certificate of the recently appointed postmaster at Birr, and the date of such certificates of the senior Irish overseer applicant, and of the senior applying from the; rank of post office official for the Birr postmastership.
  (Answered by Mr. Sydney Buxton.) I regret that I can add nothing to the Answers on this subject I have already given to the hon. Member.

  Appointment of Assistant Teacher to Broughton National School, Hants.
  MR. YOXALL: To ask the President of the Board of Education whether he is aware that the managers of the Broughton national school, Hants, have appointed as assistant teacher in that school a young man possessing no recognised educational qualifications or school experience, and formerly employed as gardener, groom, and general helper to week-end visitors; and whether he can inquire, into the circumstances of this case and will take the necessary steps to prevent the appointment and employment of unqualified persons as teachers in schools maintained out of public funds.
  (Answered by Mr. McKenna.) I will make inquiries as to the sufficiency and efficiency of the staff employed at this school.

  Support of Relatives.
  MR. L. HASLAM: To ask the President of the Local Government Board whether he will consider the advisability of introducing legislation for the purpose of empowering magistrates to sentence to imprisonment with hard labour persons who, being able to contribute, fail, on a second appearance, to comply with a magisterial order to contribute towards the support of relatives who are chargeable to the common fund of a union.
  (Answered by Mr. John Burns.) I have received representations from several boards of guardians in favour of an alteration of the law in the sense mentioned in the Question. The Royal Commission on the Poor Law have before them the subject of the contributions which should be made by persons for the support of their relatives, and I will bring under their notice the representations I have received. I do not think that legislation should be proposed on the subject pending their Report.

  Manufacture of Cordite by Kynoch, Ltd.
  MR. BELLAIRS: To ask Mr. Attorney-General whether his attention has been called to the evidence in the appeal trial of Kynoch, Limited, tendered by the manager of the Arklow factory, on 24th April; and what action he proposes to take in view of the fact that it is now established that Kynoch, Limited, have added mercuric chloride to cordite as well as mining explosives,
  (Answered by Sir John Walton.) I do not think the case is one in which I can properly take any action.

  Census of Production Office.
  MR. W. T. WILSON: To ask the President of the Board of Trade whether the three chief staff officers and the three staff officers (first class) in the Census of Production Office were in his Department previous to the establishment of the Census of Production Office; if they were not, which Department were they transferred from; and what were their positions previous to the transfer.
  (Answered by Mr. Kearley.) The hon. Member is, I think, under a misapprehension. The three chief staff officers and three staff officers of the first class mentioned in the Estimates for 1907–8, page 121, to whom I assume that reference is made, are not employed in the office of the Census of Production, but in other branches of the Commercial, Labour, and Statistical Department of the Board of Trade.

  South Eastern and Chatham Railway-Local Service between City and Spa Road and Southwark Park.
  DR. COOPER: To ask the President of the Board of Trade whether his attention has been drawn to the action of the South Eastern Railway in reducing, since 1st May, the number of trains leaving Charing Cross and Cannon Street Stations between the hours of five and nine in the evening, and stopping at the Spa Road Station from fifteen to eight trains, at Southwark Park Station from twenty-two to eight, and at the Deptford Station from eleven to eight; whether he is aware that while the number of trains stopping at these stations after 5 p.m. have been reduced the number of trains leaving these stations for the City and West End before nine in the morning have been increased; whether he is aware the facilities for travelling by tramway or omnibus have not increased, but are the same as have been in existence for twenty years, and that owing to reducing the trains in the evening the trains are overcrowded, and inconvenience experienced by the travelling public in the parts of Bermondsey and Deptford served by this railway; and whether he will authorise an inquiry by the Railway Commissioners into the matter.
  (Answered by Mr. Lloyd-George.) The Board of Trade have invited the observations of the managing committee of the railway upon the points raised by my hon. friend, and will communicate with him upon receipt of the committee's reply.

  Engines for Salmon Fisheries.
  MR. HAY MORGAN: To ask the hon. Member for
  1062
  South Somerset, as representing the President of the Board of Agriculture, whether he is aware that a Special Commission was appointed in 1866 of a judicial character to inquiry into the various fixed engines used in the capture of salmon in the English and Welsh rivers, and into the right of the owners of the fisheries to use the same, and that the said Commissioners held several inquiries for such purposes relating to the River Wye, in the counties of Hereford, Gloucester, and Monmouth; and will he say whether any record is in existence of the claims made by the owners of the fisheries on the River Wye to use such engines, and of the judgments arrived at by the Commission; and, if the record is in existence, whether he will grant facilities for persons interested to inspect and take copies of such record.
  (Answered by Sir Edward Strachey.) The Answer to the first part of my hon. friend's Question is in the affirmative. He will probably find the information he requires in a Return (No. 369 of 1872) to an Order of the House of Commons dated 18th March 1872, which contains particulars of all inquiries held by the Commissioners up to the date of the Order and includes certain cases of fisheries in the Wye.

  Income-Tax on Pensions.
  MR. L. HASLAM: To ask Mr. Chancellor of the Exchequer, whether, in the new regulations with regard to income-tax, pensions will be assessed as earned or unearned incomes.
  (Answered by Mr. Asquith.) The question is receiving careful consideration, and I shall be prepared to make a further statement upon it when the clause embodying the definition of "earned income" comes under discussion in Committee.

  Irish Land Legislation.
  MR. GINNELL: To ask the Chief Secretary to the Lord-Lieutenant of Ireland whether, in view of the losses disclosed in the working of the Irish Land Act of 1903, and the failure of that Act to distribute the untenanted tracts among people in need, he can now see his way to allay discontent and promote

  1063
  forbearance during the coming months by undertaking that the Land Bill to be introduced by Government next session will restore inspection in every case of sale, and will deal with untenanted land throughout Ireland and not in particular parts only.
  (Answered by Mr. Birrell.) I beg to refer to my Answer to the Question relating to Irish land legislation which was put by the hon. Member for Waterford on the 5th instant. † It would not be possible at present to indicate the lines upon which amending legislation in respect of Irish land may be introduced by the Government next session.

  Application for Labourer's Cottage in Ireland.
  MR. O'SHAUGHNESSY: To ask the Chief Secretary to the Lord-Lieutenant of Ireland if he can say, when the representation of a labourer for a cottage and plot of land is made and the representation rejected by the district councillors of the district on the ground that the cottage is applied for on demesne land, and without giving the labourer an opportunity of being heard to prove that the land is not demesne, what is the proper course to adopt so that his representation may be fully considered.
  (Answered by Mr. Birrell.) The rural district council are not bound by the suggestion contained in the representation as to the site to be taken for any cottage. The selection of the site is entirely in the hands of the district council, and if they do not approve of the particular site suggested by the labourer he is not entitled to insist upon his suggestion being reconsidered by them.

QUESTIONS IN THE HOUSE.

  Admiralty Purchase.
  MR. HUNT: I beg to ask the Secretary to the Admiralty whether cables, chains, furniture, or any of the many other articles required by the Admiralty can be obtained from abroad if they are found to be cheaper than those made in Great Britain or Ireland.
  † See (4) Debates, clxxv., 692.
  THE SECRETARY TO THE ADMIRALTY (MR. EDMUND ROBERTSON, Dundee): Chain cables and anchors are made under Admiralty supervision and are never obtained from abroad. As I have already explained in reply to previous questions, special care is taken to obtain supplies within the United Kingdom of all articles of primary importance for war. It is the practice of the Admiralty to buy only from the manufacturer, and, where ample competition is obtainable in this country, I see no reason to believe that articles of similar quality could be obtained more cheaply from abroad; but foreign competition is in some cases the only weapon against rings or other combinations among the producers in this country. If the hon. Member will only wait the issue of the Return of articles purchased abroad, for which the hon. and gallant Member for Central Sheffield will move on the 20th instant, he will see exactly what articles have been purchased abroad during the first year for which the present Administration were solely responsible.
  MR. HUNT: Are or are not any of these articles purchased abroad?
  MR. EDMUND ROBERTSON: The Answer will be found in the Return.
  MR. HUNT: Why can I never get a straight Answer?

  Saltburn Firing Accident.
  MR. WEIR: I beg to ask the Secretary to the Admiralty whether the Admiralty have yet decided on the compensation to be granted to a young girl who lives with her widowed mother at Saltburn, Ross-shire, and was seriously injured last summer by gunners from H.M.S. "Cæsar" during gun practice, and who, although now discharged from hospital, is unable to get about except on crutches.
  MR. EDMUND ROBERTSON: I am very sorry this accident occurred. The expenses for medical attendance prior to the admission of this child to Dingwall Infirmary have been paid from public funds. I am informed that no communication on the girl's behalf has yet been received in the Admiralty, but when it is received it will be taken into consideration.

  Defective Cartridgeds.
  MAJOR ANSTRUTHER-GRAY: I beg to ask the Secretary of State for War whether his attention has been called to cases that have occurred within the last few days of cartridges bursting in the rifle at Enfield; will he state the number of such cases, and say whether these cartridges were the new Mark VI.; and what steps have boon taken to put this matter right.
  THE SECRETARY OF STATE FOR WAR (Mr. HALDANE, Haddington): My attention has been called to these cases, of which there were sixty-four in the last three months at Enfield. The ammunition was in one case, made by a private firm, Mark VI., and in the other cases was specially made in Ordnance Factories to give 1,960 f. s. velocity for proof of rifles—being in other respects similar to Mark VI. The matter is under consideration, and in the meantime another Latch of ammunition is being used.
  MAJOR ANSTRUTHER-GRAY: Is any mercuric chloride used in these cartridges?
  MR. HALDANE: was understood to reply in the negative.
  MAJOR ANSTRUTHER-GRAY: I beg to ask the Secretary of State for War whether he can furnish any information regarding the defects in Mark VI. or other regulation ammunition; how many cases there have been during the last three months of cartridges bursting in the barrel; how many cases of blow backs; how many accidents have occurred; to what cause are these accidents attributed; and have all these defective cartridges been called in with a view to preventing further mishaps.
  MR. HALDANE: The investigation of defects recently found in the ammunition at Enfield is not yet completed. The number of cases of cartridges bursting in the barrel amounted to sixty-four at Enfield, and five at Woolwich. There were also four cases with service ammunition at out-stations, but full particulars are not yet to hand. A blow back is an escape of gas round the cap, and unless serious is not reported. As regards accidents, two men have been
  1066
  slightly injured by escaping gas at Enfield, and in two of the four cases at out-stations injuries were caused to two men. The use of any cartridges known to be defective will be stopped.

  Ballykinlar Camp Road Traffic
  CAPTAIN CRAIG: I beg to ask the Secretary of State for War whether any financial contribution has been made by the War Office since the establishment of the camp at Ballykinlar, county Down, towards repairs to the road between Tullymurry Station and the camp, rendered necessary by the damage occasioned by heavy military traffic; and, if not, whether he will authorise a grant in aid of the local rates for this purpose.
  MR. HALDANE: No grant has been made for this purpose, but a proposal to make a grant towards the cost of improving the road is under consideration. The usual contribution in lieu of rates, including road expenses, is made by the Treasury.

  Walking Out Uniforms
  MR. ASHLEY: I beg to ask the Secretary of State for War whether the walking-out uniforms, which it has been decided to issue to the territorial soldier at the public cost, will preserve any national or special characteristics or distinctions which they have at present.
  MR. HALDANE: No decision has been reached in regard to the uniform.
  MR. ASHLEY: Cannot the right hon. Gentleman say whether a corps such as the London Scottish will retain its national characteristics in its dress?
  MR. HALDANE: I cannot say at this stage.

  Morris Tube Cartridges.
  *CAPTAIN FABER: I beg to ask the Secretary of State for War why there is no supply of cartridges for Morris tubes at Portsmouth or Woolwich available for the National Rifle Association affiliated clubs.
  MR. HALDANE: The National Rifle Association affiliated clubs are allowed to draw Morris ammunition from store

  1067
  on payment when it is available, but the War Office cannot guarantee to have stocks always available, and when such is the case supplies must be obtained from the trade. At present the stock at Portsmouth and Woolwich has been exhausted, and further supplies will not be available until deliveries on contract are made in July.
  *CAPTAIN FABER: Is it not possible to employ more men and women in making this ammunition?
  MR. HALDANE: No, Sir.

  Harrismith Garrison Club.
  MR. LEA (St. Pancras, E.): I bog to ask the Secretary of State for War whether his attention has been drawn to certain proceedings of Brigadier-General Carter arising out of the affairs of the garrison club at Harrismith, and what action he proposes taking in this matter; and will he undertake that the officers who signed the minute in the suggestion book of the above-named club shall not surfer in any way through the action of the General referred to.
  MR. HALDANE: No report of the incident mentioned has been received by the War Office. The General Officer Commanding-in-Chief, South Africa, has been directed to inquire into the circumstances and render a report.
  MR. LEA: Will the right hon. Gentleman let us know the nature of the report.
  MR. HALDANE: I will communicate with the hon. Member on the subject.

  Special Campaign Pensions.
  CAPTAIN CRAIG: I beg to ask the Secretary of State for War if he will state in regard to Royal Warrant, Pay, and Promotion, 1906, paragraph 1176a, Special Campaign Pensions, what benefits will embodied Militiamen and Militia Reservists who served with the Regulars respectively derive in virtue of their services in the late South African War; and whether the Government will recognise the right of Militiamen who have served the country and gained medals alongside the Regular Forces to any rewards granted under this paragraph.
  MR. HALDANE: Only soldiers of the Regular Forces enlisted under ordinary conditions are eligible for the special campaign pensions, the scope of which it is not proposed to enlarge.

  Army Horses.
  MR. BRIDGEMAN: I beg to ask the Secretary of State for War if the Army Council has come to any decision as to the supply of horses in time of war.
  MR. HALDANE: The general consideration of the supply of horses in time of war to which I have alluded in previous Answers does not appear to involve any definite decision of the character suggested by the hon. Member. The supply of horses on emergency is governed by the Army Act. Apart from this there exists a system under which between 16,000 and 17,000 horses are voluntarily registered for a first call on emergency.

  Leakage of Official Intelligence.
  MR. LEA: I beg to ask the Secretary of State for War whether, in view of the fact that in many cases the first intimation to a military unit of a prospective change of its quarters emanates from the canteen contractor supplying that unit, and that in the case of the first appointment of an officer the news is often derived from the representative of a military tailor touting for the order for that officer's uniform, he will take steps to put a stop to such leakages of official intelligence.
  MR. HALDANE: Every effort is made to suppress leakages of official information, and persons who have improperly given information are dealt with when discovered.
  MR. PIRIE: Is the right hon. Gentleman aware that these malpractices are of very long standing, and that recent cases show that they are still very prevalent? Cannot he prohibit these brewers and tailors who indulge in the practice from being on the list of War Office contractors?
  MR. HALDANE: I fear I cannot control the energy of these contractors.
  MR. PIRIE: But surely the right hon. Gentleman can control the sources of

  1069
  information—the people at the War Office who give the information to the brewer and the tailor?
  MR. HALDANE: We always endeavour to discover the leakage and to deal with it.
  MR. PIRIE: Will the right hon. Gentleman endeavour to deal with it in the manner I have suggested?
  MR. HALDANE: I will investigate the matter.

  Army Returns.
  MR. BOWLES: I beg to ask the Secretary of State for War when he expects that the promised Return with reference to the numbers of the land forces of this and other countries in certain specified years will be presented to the House.
  MR. HALDANE: I am waiting for information which had necessarily to be obtained from India. I cannot therefore at present say when the Return will be ready.

  Soldiers' Free Kits.
  MR. ASHLEY: I beg to ask the Secretary of State for War whether there will be a free issue of any, and what, necessaries to the territorial soldier on joining the force.
  MR. HALDANE: I have nothing to add to what I have already stated in debate on this point. This matter is largely one of detail, which is being carefully considered.

  Lance-Corporals.
  MR. ASHLEY: I beg to ask the Secretary of State for War if he can yet say whether lance-corporals will be appointed in the Territorial Force or not.
  MR. HALDANE: No, Sir. I shall not for some time be able to give the hon. Member any information on this point.
  MR. ASHLEY: Are we not to be informed on this point during the discussion on the Bill?
  MR. HALDANE: I do not think it is a vital point.
  *MR. ARNOLD-FORSTER: Is it not a question affecting something like 10,000 men?
  MR. HALDANE: I do not know.

  Siege Guns.
  MR. ASHLEY: I beg to ask the Secretary of State for War if he can yet say whether any siege guns will be included in the artillery of the Territorial Force.
  MR. HALDANE: I have no information to add to that given to the hon. Member on the 27th ultimo.†

  Eltham Common.
  MR. CROOKS: I beg to ask the Secretary of State for War whether he can given an assurance that the trees and loam that are being removed from Eltham Common is not to clear the ground for the erection of military buildings.
  MR. HALDANE: As I have already stated clearly to the House, the felling of trees and the removal of soil on Eltham Common are for the purpose of rendering the ground more suitable for military training purposes and have nothing to do with the building proposals.
  LORD BALCARRES: Why is military training necessary on this common, which does not belong to the War Office, and is only the size of St. James's Park?
  MR. HALDANE: It does belong to the War Office.

  Lieutenant-Colonels' Pay.
  VISCOUNT VALENTIA: I beg to ask the Secretary of State for War what will be the aggregate sum required for the increase of pay to lieutenant colonels; and whether this sum will be met by a Vote in the Estimates for 1907–8, or by means of a Supplementary Estimate.
  MR. HALDANE: Approximately the sum of £15,000 a year will be required for this purpose. Provision for this charge has boon made in the Estimates for 1907–8, Vote 1.
  † See (4) Debates, clxxiv., 1307.

  Irish Militia and Yeomanry.
  CAPTAIN CRAIG: I beg to ask the Secretary of State for War whether he can now give detailed information as to the intentions of the Government respecting the amalgamation or disbandment of certain Irish Militia battalions of infantry, the future of their men and officers, the disposal of Irish Militia battalions of Artillery, the status of the North of Ireland and South of Ireland Imperial Yeomanry, and the payment of the men and officers; and whether County Associations are to be formed in Ireland as is proposed for England and Scotland; and, if so, can he outline their functions.
  MR. HALDANE: I hope to be able to deal with this matttr on debate this afternoon.

  Indian Army—Artillery.
  *MR. ARNOLD-FORSTER: I beg to ask the Secretary of State for War whether in view of the fact that the Indian Army is unprovided with Horse or Field Artillery, other than mountain batteries, it is contemplated, in the event of war, that the Indian Army should take the field without Horse or Field Artillery; and, if not, what is the number of regular batteries which will be required, and from what source they will be provided.
  THE UNDER - SECRETARY of STATE for INDIA (Mr. Charles HOBHOUSE, BRISTOL, E.): Except in expeditions of very small importance the Indian Army never takes the field without British troops. The Secretary of State has already informed the House that there are eleven batteries of Horse Artillery and forty-five batteries of Field Artillery now in India.
  *MR. ARNOLD-FORSTER: Will the hon. Gentleman answer my Question, which is—Are there any batteries of Horse and Field Artillery belonging to the Indian Army?
  MR. CHARLES HOBHOUSE: I do not quite understand what the right hon. Gentleman means. He is perfectly aware that there are no native batteries of Artillery, Horse or Field. But there are in India, available for campaigns in
  1072
  India or on the frontier, those numbers details of which I have already given.
  *MR. ARNOLD-FORSTER: Perhaps since he told my hon. friend the Member for Blackpool that he was totally misinformed in asking this Question, the hon. Gentleman will now say whether the Indian Army, which is not the British Army in India, has any Horse or Field Artillery.
  MR. CHARLES HOBHOUSE: No, none, and never has had since the Indian Mutiny.
  *MR. ARNOLD-FORSTER: Then it was not my hon. friend the Member for Blackpool who was misinformed, but the hon. Gentleman himself.

  Germany and Canada.
  *CAPTAIN FABER: I beg to ask the Under-Secretary of State for the Colonies whether he can now state if he has any information concerning a new line of steamships, cargo or otherwise, which it is proposed to run between Germany and Canada in the event of a favourable tariff arrangement being arrived at between those two countries; and, if not, whether he will cause inquiries to be made.
  The UNDER-SECRETARY OF STATE FOR THE COLONIES (Mr. CHURCHILL, Manchester, N. W.): I have nothing to add to my Answer to a similar Question on 30th May.†
  CAPTAIN FABER: Will the right hon. Gentleman make further inquiry?
  MR. CHURCHILL: I have no objection to doing so, but I do not think the result is likely to add to my Answer.

  Ceylon Railway Schemes.
  MR. SMEATON: I beg to ask the Under-Secretary of State for the Colonies whether the Secretary for the Colonies has sanctioned the following railway schemes in Ceylon, namely, the branch line from Aresawella to Ratuapura, and the survey of a branch line from the main north line to Manaar to connect with India; and whether he is aware that the Ratuapura extension is urgently needed in view of the large
  † See (4) Debates, clxxv., 68.

  1073
  areas opened and to be opened for rubber planting on the line, exclusive of tea already in bearing, and that the Chamber of Commerce have expressed the opinion that this extension will be profit earning from the day it is opened for traffic.
  MR. CHURCHILL: The Answer to the first part of the Question is in the negative. A fresh survey is about to be made of the line to Ratuapura, and the question of connection with India is still under the consideration of the Indian Government.

  Repatriation of Chinese Coolies.
  MR. HILLS: I beg to ask the Under-Secretary of State for the Colonies whether any decision has now been arrived at as to the financial responsibility for the repatriation of Chinese coolies.
  MR. CHURCHILL: If the hon. Member's Question refers to repatriation on the expiration of contracts the payments will of course be regulated by law, but if he desires information as to the repatriation of coolies under what is known as the repatriation notice I can add nothing to my reply to the hon. and gallant Member for East Down given on the 15th of May. †
  MR. HILLS: How soon can we get the information?
  MR. CHURCHILL: I presume the hon. Gentleman is referring to the second of the two alternatives. I do not quite know, but the Government in the Transvaal are at present carrying on the arrangement exactly as it has been.
  SIR GILBERT PARKER: Is this Government to continue to bear the financial responsibility or the Transvaal Government?
  MR. CHURCHILL: The cost of the repatriation of the Chinese who avail themselves of the special conditions offered to them by the Government will of course be met by this Government so long as the arrangement continues.
  † (4) Debates, clxxiv., 951–2.

  Transvaal Loan.
  MR. HILLS: I beg to ask the Undersecretary of State for the Colonies whether the guaranteeing by His Majesty's Government of a £5,000,000 loan for the Transvaal formed part of some general arrangement or understanding between His Majesty's Government and the Transvaal Government; and, if so, what are the terms of such arrangement or understanding, and what matters or subjects does it cover.
  MR. CHURCHILL: No, Sir.

  Swaziland.
  MR. HILLS: I beg to ask the Under-secretary of State for the Colonies whether any arrangement or under-standing has been come to with the Transvaal Government with reference to the future control of Swaziland; and, if so, what are the terms of such arrangement or understanding.
  MR. CHURCHILL: No, Sir, no arrangement has been made other than that set forth in the letters patent of the Transvaal constitution and the Order in Council of 1st December, 1906.

  Zulu Prisoners at St. Helena.
  MR. J. RAMSAY MACDONALD: I beg to ask the Under-secretary of State for the Colonies whether the Zulu prisoners sent to St. Helena are to be confined to gaol or to be allowed freedom of movement in the island, and generally be treated as political prisoners.
  MR. CHURCHILL: The native chiefs in question have been removed under the Colonial Prisoners Removal Act, 1884, and will, therefore, be convicts in status; but every effort will be made by His Majesty's Government agreeable to the law to relieve their confinement from all harsh conditions of labour, and from all restraints not necessary to their safe custody.
  MAJOR ANSTRUTHER-GRAY: Will their wives be allowed to accompany them?
  MR. CHURCHILL: It is not customary to allow persons serving as convicts in status to be accompanied by their wives.

  Sir Robert Bond and the Government.
  MR. LONSDALE: I beg to ask the Under-Secretary of State for the Colonies whether he is aware that the report of the discussion which followed the statement of Sir Robert Bond on the subject of the Newfoundland fishery has been omitted from the minutes of proceedings of the Colonial Conference recently issued to Members; whether he is aware of the reasons of this omission; and whether it is intended to issue an unexpurgated edition of the minutes for the information of hon. Members.
  MR. BOULTON: At the same time may I ask the Under-Secretary of State for the Colonies if, at the private discussion on Sir Robert Bond's statement at the recent Colonial Conference referred to in the Blue-book, Sir Robert Bond made any statement other than that published in the Blue-book; if so, if such statement was accompanied by any dramatic incident or contained any heated expression; and if the Colonial Office will put the House in possession of a full Report of all that took place in connection with the discussion in private on the subject of Newfoundland.
  MR. CHURCHILL: The conversation which followed Sir Robert Bond's statement on the subject of the Newfoundland fishery at the recent Colonial Conference was not published because the members of the Conference agreed that such publication would be contrary to the public interest as it related to negotiations which are pending with a foreign power. I may add, with reference to a similar Question of the hon. Member for the Ramsey division, that the discussion was not attended by any dramatic incident and did not contain any heated expression.
  MR. BOULTONasked whether copies of the correspondence that passed between the Colonial Office and Sir Robert Bond had been sent to the Press, and, if so, whether any explanation could be given of the fact that the Daily Mail, alone of the London newspapers, did not publish the correspondence.
  MR. CHURCHILL: I have no relations with the Daily Mail.
  CAPTAIN CRAIG: asked whether anything else of equal importance had been suppressed in the Blue-book.
  MR. CHURCHILL: I think that discussion was the only discussion which was not printed in extenso in the Report of the proceedings, and the reason was that it referred to foreign affairs and affected other countries besides Great Britain.
  MR. T. L. CORBETT: Does the right hon. Gentleman not admit the allegiance of his own followers who own the Daily Mail?
  [No Answer was returned.]
  MR. BOULTON: I beg to ask the Under-Secretary of State for the Colonies if Sir Robert Bond wrote a letter to the Colonial Office emphatically denying having admitted to a representative of the Daily Mail that the report in that newspaper concerning the discussion on Newfoundland was substantially correct; and, if so, if the Colonial Office will publish Sir Robert Bond's letter.
  MR. CHURCHILL: The correspondence to which my hon. friend refers has already been made public.

  Congo Free State.
  MR. PIKE PEASE: I beg to ask the Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs on what date the posts in Meridi, recently occupied by the Congo Free State troops, were evacuated.
  THE FINANCIAL SECRETARY to the TREASURY (Mr. RUNCIMAN, Dewsbury; for Sir EDWARD GREY): My right hon. friend has not yet received a reply to the inquiries which he has made on this subject in accordance with the promise given to the hon. Member on 28th May.†
  MR. PIKE PEASE: Can the hon. Gentleman say when he will probably have the answer?
  MR. RUNCIMAN: No, Sir.
  † See (4) Debates, clxxiv., 1471.

  United States Customs Regulations.
  MR. LONSDALE: I beg to ask the Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs whether the United States Government have notified that the new customs regulations made under the commercial agreement with Germany are to apply to all foreign countries so far as United States ports are concerned; and whether the evidence of British Chambers of Commerce as to the value of exported commodities will be accepted by the United States Customs officials equally with the evidence of German Chambers of Commerce.
  Mr. RUNCIMAN: Informal assurances have been given that the same administrative regulations made under the commercial agreement with Germany shall apply to all foreign countries, and that power to give certificates of value allowed to German Chambers of Commerce will be allowed to any bodies which may receive official authority to grant similar certificates. My right hon. friend is consulting the Board of Trade as to making arrangements in this country to fulfil the conditions required.

  Disturbances in China.
  MR. LONSDALE: I beg to ask the Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs whether he has any information respecting the riots in China; and whether any steps have been taken to protect the interests of His Majesty's subjects in the disturbed districts.
  MR. RUNCIMAN: Telegraphic inquiries have been made of His Majesty's Minister at Peking. He states that His Majesty's consul at Amoy reports that the surrounding country is free from disturbance, and that His Majesty's consul at Swatow states that the accounts in the newspapers of local disturbances have been exaggerated, and that there has never been the slightest occasion for uneasiness. The rioters were dispersed at once by the Chinese authorities.

  New Hebrides and Sierra Leone.
  MR. LONSDALE: I beg to ask the Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs whether negotiations are proceeding or pending between His Majesty's Government and the French Government for
  1078
  the exchange of the Now Hebrides for Sierra Leone.
  MR. RUNCIMAN: No, Sir.

  Morocco.
  MR. LONSDALE: I beg to ask the Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs whether it has been decided to extend the international police supervision in Morocco; and, if so, how many additional British officers will be appointed.
  MR. RUNCIMAN: The Answer is in the negative.

  North Sea Fisheries Investigation.
  MR. WEIR: I beg to ask the Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs whether, having regard to the fact that Great Britain, Germany, Sweden, Denmark, and Norway have expressed their determination to continue the North Sea fisheries investigation for another year, he will ascertain if either of the other Powers who wore party to the original scheme, viz., Russia, Holland, and Finland, intend to continue to participate in the investigations.
  MR. RUNCIMAN: My right hon. friend would refer the hon. Member to the reply which he gave him on the 5th instant. † The matter is not yet definitely settled, and the decision of the Powers in question will be ascertained when they are ready to make it known.

  The Consular Service.
  MR. ALDEN: I beg to ask the President of the Board of Trade if he can furnish the House with information as to the instructions issued to the consular service by the Foreign Office; whether a merchant in the United Kingdom applying for assistance to a British consul on the Continent is referred to the Board of Trade instead of being communicated with direct; if so, whether ho can give any reasons for issuing such an instruction; and whether he has, in drawing up these instructions, taken into account the success of the consular service of the United States.
  MR. RUNCIMAN: The Answer to the second part of the Question is in the negative. It is desirable that British traders should, before addressing inquiries
  †See(4)Debates,clxxv.,668

  1079
  to His Majesty's Consular officers, ascertain from the Commercial Intelligence Branch of the Board of Trade whether the information is available there. Consular officers supply this branch with information in order that it may be generally and quickly available. When a Consular officer receives a direct inquiry from a British merchant he forwards his reply through this branch, which transmits it to its destination after taking note of its contents for the benefit of British trade in general. The arrangement has been in force for some years. We are always ready to profit by the instructions of other countries.
  MR. ALDENasked whether the hon. Gentleman had taken into account the complaints of many merchants that this method did not facilitate the direct communication of complaints.
  MR. RUNCIMAN: Yes, that fact was taken into account, and, after consideration of the circumstances, this arrangement was allowed to stand good as the best for British trade in general.

  Vehicular Accidents in London.
  MR. THORNE: I beg to ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department what was the number of fatal and other accidents that happened in London, for the six months ending April, 1907, through omnibuses, cabs, and other vehicles drawn by horses.
  THE SECRETARY OF STATE FOR THE HOME DEPARTMENT (Mr. GLADSTONE, Leeds, W.): The total number of street accidents to persons and property in the Metropolitan police district, known to the police to have been caused by horse-drawn vehicles during the six months ended 30th April last, is 9,951, of which 903 were due to omnibuses, 346 to tramcars, and the remaining 8,702 to other vehicles. Seventy-one of these were fatal accidents, five of which were due to omnibuses, and four to tramcars; and there were in addition 2,892 cases of personal injury, 211 of which were caused by omnibuses, and 77 by tramcars.

  The Edalji Case.
  VISCOUNT CASTLEREAGH: I beg to ask the Secretary of State for the Homo Department whether
  1080
  his attention has been called to a note as to the practice of the Home Office in dealing with criminal petitions, issued as an Appendix to the Papers relating to the case of George Edalji, in which it is stated that it is useless to attempt to re-try at the Home Office, on paper, cases already heard in open court before a jury, that the Home Office cannot hear counsel, does not see the witnesses and cannot judge of their demeanour, and has no means of arriving at the truth by means of cross-examination, and that therefore, any attempted re-trial of the case would necessarily be inferior in every way to the original trial; will he say whether the Committee who recently considered the case of Mr. Edalji were in any better position for enabling them to re-try the case than is the Home Office; and, if not, whether he will advise the appointment of a Committee to hold a public inquiry into the whole circumstances of the case, with power to hear witnesses and to call for papers and records.
  MR. GLADSTONE: Yes, Sir. I am fully aware of the Memorandum to which the noble Lord refers, which correctly states the position. Sir Arthur Wilson and his colleagues did not attempt to retry the case of Mr. Edalji. They consented to examine the documents in the possession of the Home Office and to report to me. My correspondence with Sir Robert Romer, which has appeared in the Press, shows that I should have been glad to appoint such a Committee as the noble Lord suggests, but I had no power to do so.

  Fish Curing Industry.
  MR. J. RAMSAY MACDONALD: I beg to ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department whether his attention has been drawn to the want of regularity and uniformity in applying the Factory Acts to the fish trade, as illustrated in the contraventions of the Act reported in respect of five firms in Aberdeen since September, 1906, which led to no proceedings; and whether, in order to allay the uncertainty which exists in the trade, and to prevent honourable firms being penalised for doing their best to carry on their business within the law, he can say whether the Factory Acts are or are not to be uniformly enforced upon this trade.
  MR. GLADSTONE: I have had the whole question of the application of the Factory Act to the fish-curing trade under my consideration. Certain difficulties have been brought to my notice which were not raised by the industry when Section 41 of the Act was being settled, and I have directed an inquiry to be made during the present season into the conditions of the industry both as regards these points and also as regards other matters connected with the industry, including sanitary conditions which have been engaging the attention of my Department. The proceedings against the firms mentioned in the Question have been dropped pending the inquiry.
  MR. J. RAMSAY MACDONALD: Is the Act to be applied or not?
  MR. GLADSTONE: I take it it will be applied, but discretion will be exercised. Perhaps the hon. Member will put another Question down in more definite terms.
  MR. CATHCART WASON: Will the inquiry be extended to the fish-curing stations in Scotland?
  MR. GLADSTONE: I think so.

  Carlisle Boy's Conviction.
  MR. BARNES: I beg to ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department if his attention has been called to the case of the conviction of a boy, fifteen years of age, for the theft of biscuits valued at 3d., and the sentence of fourteen days hard labour for such theft passed at the Town Hall, Carlisle, on the 31st ultimo; and if, having regard to the fact of the theft being a first offence, he can take steps to remit the remainder of the term of imprisonment.
  MR. GLADSTONE: I have made inquiry into the case to which I understand the hon. Member to refer, and I find that the facts were not as represented in the newspapers. The defendant was eighteen years of age, not fifteen; he was of bad character, and he had been guilty of theft before. In the circumstances I see no reason for advising a reduction of sentence.

  Boy Birching in Manchester.
  MR. CLYNES: I beg to ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department whether his attention has been drawn to a number of petty robberies committed by boys in Manchester, and to their punishment by strokes with the birch rod; whether he is aware that the boys are children of poor parents who reside in districts where there is little facility or space for wholesome games and recreation; and, as one of the birched boys, who stole some biscuits and chocolate, is but eleven years old, whether he will consider the advisability of introducing legislation to prevent the infliction of birching in such cases.
  MR. GLADSTONE: I find on inquiry that in the case of juvenile offenders convicted of stealing, birching has been used in Manchester to a considerable extent as an appropriate punishment instead of fine or imprisonment. I may point out that it is usually poor people who suffer from the depredations of boys, and they have to be protected. I am not prepared to bring in the Bill suggested by the hon. Member, but I hope that the additional facilities afforded by the Probation of Offenders Bill now before the House may diminish the number of cases in which punishment is necessary.
  MR. CLYNES: In this case the theft was from a large warehouse not owned by poor people.
  MR. GLADSTONE: I think birching is a very useful form of punishment, and, honestly, I deem it better than sending a boy to gaol or imposing a fine on parents who cannot afford to pay.

  "The Mikado."
  MR. TREVELYAN: I beg to ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department whether the Lord Chamberlain has yet taken any steps to withdraw his prohibition of the production of The Mikado.
  MR. GLADSTONE: The Lord Chamberlain has the matter under his consideration at the present time.
  MR. TREVELYAN: How soon will the Lord Chamberlain be able to give a definite answer as to what his action will be?
  MR. GLADSTONE: If the hon. Gentleman will put the Question next week I will endeavour to answer it.
  MR. GEORGE FABER: In view of the serious loss and inconvenience suffered by innocent parties all over the country, will the right hon. Gentleman suggest to the Lord Chamberlain the desirability of making haste?
  MR. GLADSTONE: I have no doubt the Lord Chamberlain is losing no time. I will certainly confer with him on the subject. I think my hon. friend may assume that action will be taken, and taken as soon as possible.
  MR. WILLIAM REDMOND: Will the right hon. Gentleman communicate with the Secretary for Foreign Affairs and get him to ask the Mikado of Japan whether he really objects? I am sure he does not.
  MR. LEA: I desire to ask if the order of the Lord Chamberlain was in consequence of the visit of Prince Fushimi, and did the order emanate from His Majesty the King?
  [No Answer was returned.]
  MR. GEORGE FABER: I beg to ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department whether, considering the losses resulting to the owners of the copyright of The Mikado, and to owners and lessees of theatres, and others, under arrangement to produce it, and having regard to the public uncertainty and inconvenience caused through the recent action of the Lord Chamberlain in the matter, the Government will introduce a Bill providing that, after the granting of a licence for the production of a stage play by the Lord Chamberlain, the licence shall not be withdrawn unless the play has been materially altered.
  MR. GLADSTONE: No, Sir. The Government are not prepared to introduce legislation of the kind suggested.
  MR. GEORGE FABER: Has the right hon. Gentleman no remedy to propose to meet these very serious losses?
  MR. GLADSTONE: I think the hon. Gentleman rather overrates the matter.
  1084
  I certainly cannot bring in such a Bill as he suggests.
  MR. WILLIAM REDMOND: Is the right hon. Gentleman aware that there is a certain performance at a theatre in London which, from any point of view, is distinctly offensive to the German Kaiser?
  MR. GLADSTONE: I am not aware of it.
  MR. WILLIAM REDMOND: It is quite as bad as The Mikado.

  Criminal Appeal.
  MR. NIELD: I beg to ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department whether, pending the passing of the Criminal Appeal Bill, or independently thereof, he will require a proper and formal record of the evidence given upon the trials of prisoners at quarter sessions to be made by the presiding chairman, and safely preserved; and that such evidence should no longer be permitted to depend upon rough pencilled notes of the chairman, as is shown to have been done at the trial of the Edalji case.
  MR. GLADSTONE: Judges and chairmen of quarter sessions take notes of the evidence for their own guidance in summing up. I have no authority to issue any instructions in this matter. In any case the quickest way of acheiving the hon. Member's object lies in the speedy passage into law of the Court of Criminal Appeal Bill, which provides for the taking of a shorthand note.

  The Home Office and Messrs Kynoch.
  MR. MOONEY: I beg to ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department, in connection with the recent charge made by his Department against Messrs. Kynoch for the use of a sterilising ingredient in the manufacture of certain explosives, if he can state when and to whom did Messrs. Kynoch state that they declined to admit that the ingredient was there at all.
  MR. GLADSTONE: Messrs. Kynoch stated in two letters to His Majesty's Chief Inspector of Explosives, dated 19th December, 1906, and 4th January, 1907, respectively, that there was no

  1085
  unauthorised ingredient in the explosives which had been seized.
  MR. MOONEYsaid the question he had asked was whether Messrs. Kynoch had ever stated that a certain ingredient was not used in the manufacture of certain explosives.
  MR. GLADSTONE: The certain Ingredient in question is mercury, and mercury is unauthorised. They stated in these letters that there was no unauthorised ingredient in the explosives.
  MR. MOONEY: Are not the Homo Office deciding this case before it has been decided judicially?
  MR. GLADSTONE: The hon. Gentleman has put a question to me, and I have to answer it as well as I can. The Court of first instance gave judgment in favour of the Home Office, and that judgment was confirmed by Court of quarter sessions. Messrs. Kynoch have appealed on a technical point of law, whether the mercury was not such an infinitesimal quantity that the law ought not to apply. I am advised that the law is perfectly clear against Messrs. Kynoch on that point.
  MR. BELLAIRSasked whether the manager to Messrs. Kynoch at Arklow had stated that no mercuric chloride was added to the cordite, but only to the mining explosive.
  [No Answer was returned.]
  MR. MOONEY: I beg to ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department if his attention has been called to the evidence in the recent action against Messrs. Kynoch, given by Captain Thomson, His Majesty's Chief Inspector of Explosives, Dr. Farmer, Government chemist, J. M. Thompson, Government chemist, and Sir Frederick Nathan, superintendent, Waltham Abbey, to the effect that in foreign countries a solution of mercury was used for the purpose of acting as an antiseptic for gun-cotton; and whether, in view of these statements by the Home Office experts, he will state the grounds on which the Home Office hold that this ingredient is used else-where for the purpose of masking the heat test rather than as an antiseptic.
  MR. GLADSTONE: The witnesses mentioned did not state that mercury was used as an antiseptic in foreign countries; they only said they had heard statements to that effect. Captain Thomson, moreover, expressed his disbelief that the mercury was for antiseptic purposes only. The reasons why the Home Office hold that this ingredient is probably used elsewhere for the purpose of masking the heat test rather than as an antiseptic are that the explosives of two foreign firms who have abandoned the use of mercury in consequence of the rejection of their goods previously sent to this country, have since that abandonment failed to pass the heat test; and one of them has since been detected in the attempt to use another masking agent to conceal the very impure nature of their explosive.
  MR. MOONEY: Is it not the fact that Captain Thomson stated that this mercury was used under the regulations of the German War Office, and did not Dr. Farmer state that it was used as an antiseptic?
  MR. GLADSTONE: I understand the witnesses stated it was not used as an antiseptic.
  MR. MOONEY: Will the right hon. Gentleman look into the evidence?
  MR. GLADSTONE: Yes, Sir.

  Free Pardons.
  MR. F. E. SMITH: I beg to ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department in how many cases during the last twenty years free pardons, in addition to monetary compensation, were granted by the Home Office to persons convicted of criminal offences.
  MR. GLADSTONE: During the last twenty years free pardons in addition to compensation have been granted in four cases, involving six persons. I may add that altogether the number of free pardons granted during the last twenty years is forty-two, involving seventy-six persons.

  Colwyn Bay Drainage.
  MR. WEIR: I beg to ask the President of the Local Government Board whether the drainage at Colwyn Bay has yet been

  1087
  linked up with the new drainage system; and, if not, will he state the cause of the delay.
  THE PRESIDENT OF THE LOCAL GOVERNMENT BOARD (Mr. JOHN BURNS, Battersea): I have made inquiry on this subject, and am informed that the whole of the drainage of Colwyn Bay has been linked up with the new drainage system, and that the old sewer outfalls have been done away with.
  MR. WEIR: When will they be done away with?
  MR. JOHN BURNS: They have been done away with.
  MR. WEIR: Is the right hon. Gentleman aware that the smells are most offensive and dangerous to the public health?
  MR. JOHN BURNS: I gather that a Member of this House went to this particular neighbourhood last year and thought he smelt a smell, but that smell did not emanate from the drain or the sewer outfalls, but was an escape from a gas main.
  MR. WEIR: I was that Member, and I remember the smell was foul and fœtid.
  MR. HERBERT ROBERTS: Are not the local authorities carrying out improvements at a cost of thousands of pounds, and have not the reports of the Medical Officer of Health and the death rate been most satisfactory for years past?
  MR. JOHN BURNS: I am satisfied that the local authority has been and is doing everything that can be done.

  Valuation Bill.
  MR. CLAUDE HAY: I beg to ask the President of the Local Government Board whether he has yet fixed a date for the introduction of the Valuation Bill.
  MR. JOHN BURNS: The reply is in the negative.

  Royal Commission on Sewage Disposal.
  *MR. THOMASSON: I beg to ask the President of the Local Govern-
  1088
  ment Board whether the Royal Commission on Sewage Disposal, appointed on 7th May, 1898, is still sitting; if so, whether he can inform the House when it will issue its Report on the bacterial or artificial methods of sewage treatment as distinguished from the natural method or land treatment; and when the final Report will be issued.
  MR. JOHN BURNS: The Royal Commission are still sitting, and I understand that in their fifth Report, which they hope to issue before the end of the year, the methods of sewage treatment referred to in the Question will be dealt with. I further understand that the investigation of the disposal of trade effluents when not mixed with sewage, which will form the subject of the final Report of the Commission, has been commenced.

  West Ham Guardians.
  MR. PATRICK WHITE: I beg to ask the President of the Local Government Board whether his attention had been called to the statement by the chairman of the West Ham Guardians, Mr. G. A. Paul, that if the Local Government Board had done their duty absent colleagues would be there that day instead of having been tempted By villains with pockets full of gold to do what they should hot have done; and whether he has received the Report which he had instructed an assistant secretary of the Local Government Board to make with regard to the conduct of the officers of the West Ham Guardians.
  MR. JOHN BURNS: I observe that in the accounts in the newspapers of a recent meeting of the guardians the statement mentioned in the first part of the Question is attributed to the chairman. I regret that any such statement should have been made. The Report of the assistant secretary referred to in the last part of the Question has been made. I have to-day received a communication from the guardians with respect to the officers implicated, and I will proceed to deal with the matter.

  Tinned Meats.
  *CAPTAIN FABER: I beg to ask the President of the Board of Trade whether ho has any official information showing that a Report has been published by the

  1089
  State Commissioner of Health at Albany to the effect that the reforms to be made in American tinned meat are still incomplete, and that the chemical analyses of 154 samples of canned meats show the presence of boron preservative and other bad matter; and, if so, whether he will take steps to prevent these canned meats being landed in England.
  MR. JOHN BURKS: My right hon. friend has asked me to reply to this Question. I have soon some account in a newspaper of the Report referred to in the Question, and I have asked for a copy of it. It does not appear to me that in the present state of the law I am empowered to take action of the kind suggested by the hon. Member, but, as he is no doubt aware, I have before the House a Bill which would empower me to make regulations authorising measures to be taken for the prevention of danger to the public health arising from the importation of articles of food. I hope I may have the assistance of the hon. Member in passing it.
  In reply to Mr. Alden (Middlesex, Tottenham),
  MR. JOHN BURNSsaid the Bill was on the Order Paper, and, if Members would remove their blocking Motions, he saw no reason why it should not go through to-day or to-morrow.

  Wages of Unskilled Workmen.
  MR. CLYNES: I beg to ask the President of the Board of Trade whether his Department can estimate the proportion of advance given to men classed as unskilled workmen out of the £60,000 which he has stated represents the weekly increase in wages during 1906; whether he has records to show that the total increase is due chiefly to workmen's organisations in the various trades; and whether he is aware that the legal right of trade union combination amongst unskilled workmen is often denied to them as a condition of employment.
  THE PARLIAMENTARY SECRETARY TO THE BOARD of TRADE (Mr. KEARLEY, Devonport): I regret that the Board of Trade are not able to make any trustworthy estimate of the proportion of the £00,000 which re-
  1090
  presents the rise in wages of unskilled workmen. A large part of the recorded rise took place in industries such as the textile trades and mining, in which trade unions are strong, but it is not possible to say precisely how much of the increase is duo to those organisations. As regards the last part of the Question, I am aware that some employers have refused to employ members of trade unions. However regrettable this may be considered, it cannot be said to be illegal.

  Crumford Canal
  Mr. J. RAMSAY MACDONALD: I beg to ask the President of the Board of Trade whether he has received any complaint from the local authorities and traders of the district that the Midland Railway Company is not carrying out the duties imposed upon it by the Crumford Canal Sale Act, 1846, and is allowing the canal and works, including the Butterley Tunnel, to fall into such a state of disrepair as to make them inconvenient and almost useless for traffic; whether an inspector of the Board of Trade has been sent to inspect this tunnel and the transport system immediately connected with it; whether the Report of the inspector has been received, and when it is to be published; and whether the Board of Trade proposes to delay the Midland Railway Company's Bill, now before Parliament, until this Report is in the hands of Members.
  MR. KEARLEY: Complaint has been made of the condition of this canal by traders and owners of other canals. Sir William Matthews has been appointed to inspect the canal and report to the Board of Trade thereon, and held his inquiry during the past week. The Board of Trade expect to receive his Report very shortly, and will then consider the question of its publication. In the meantime they have intimated to the proper authorities that the Midland Railway Company's Bill, which contains certain provisions relating to the canal, will not be treated as an unopposed measure until Sir William Matthews' Report is received.

  Foreign Prison-Made Goods.
  MR. MITCHELL-THOMSON: I bog to ask the President of the Board of Trade what was the value

  1091
  of foreign prison-made goods of a description manufactured in the United Kingdom, and not being goods in transit, imported into the United Kingdom in each year from 1898 to 190G respectively.
  MR. KEARLEY: Under the "Foreign Prison-made Goods Act, 18E7," goods of the nature alluded to in the Question are seized on importation if the Commissioners of Customs arc satisfied as to their origin by evidence tendered to them. In 1898 goods to the value of £183 were seized under this Act. Since that year I understand that no further seizures have been made.
  MR. MITCHELL-THOMSON: May I ask, in view of the fact that the limitation of sources of supply of goods for the United Kingdom is inconsistent with the pledges of the Government and incompatible with the interests of British consumers, when the Government propose to further the cause of free trade by introducing a Bill to repeal this Act?
  MR. KEARLEY: I must ask for notice of that Question.

  Postmaster-General and Rural Roads and Footpaths.
  VISCOUNT CASTLEREAGH: I beg to ask the Postmaster-General whether, as the Telegraph (Construction) Bill proposes to deal with nine sections in three separate statutes forming part of a series of the twenty-two Telegraph Acts, 1863 to 1906, by incorporation, reference, or repeal, he will cause a Memorandum to be issued, showing in plain language the effect of the suggested legislation, especially so far as it proposes to enable the Postmaster-General to interfere with ornamental or other trees at the sides of rural roads and public footpaths in rural districts.
  THE POSTMASTER-GENERAL (Mr. SYDNEY BUXTON, Tower Hamlets, Poplar): I shall be glad to meet the wishes of the hon. Member and will lay a Memorandum on the Table to accompany the Bill in question.

  Committee on Post Office Servants.
  MR. CLAUDE HAY: I beg to ask the Under-Secretary of State for India, as Chairman of the Select Committee on Post Office Servants, appointed and
  1092
  nominated on the 28th February, if he will say why the Committee has not met since its first sitting on 15th April, when it was adjourned sine die: and when he proposes to call them together to consider the Report which the House has ordered them to make.
  MR. CHARLES HOBHOUSE: At the sitting on the 15th April, at which the hon. Member was not present, I explained that I was drafting a Report at the request of the Members. I hope that Report will shortly be circulated.

  Australian Mail Subsidy.
  MR. LONSDALE: I beg to ask the Postmaster-General whether any understanding has been arrived at as to the amount of subsidy to be paid by the Imperial Government for the new Australian mail service and as to the conditions to be attached to the subsidy.
  MR. SYDNEY BUXTON: I beg leave to refer the hon. Member to the Answer which I gave to two Questions in this House on the 27th of last month.†I then gave details of the new contract which I propose to enter into with the Peninsular and Oriental Steam Navigation Company. In alternate weeks the mail service to and from Australia is provided by the Commonwealth authorities; and I have no information as to the arrangements which will be made by them.

  Kent Education Committee.
  SIR EDWARD SASSOON: I beg to ask the President of the Board of Education whether the regulations of the Kent Education Committee defining the constitution, functions, and powers of local committees for higher education will be communicated to the several local authorities concerned in Kent, for their consideration and for the formulation of any suggestions before they receive the final approval of the Board; whether copies can be obtained; and what are the nature and scope of these regulations.
  THE PARLIAMENTARY SECRETARY TO THE BOARD of EDUCATION (Mr. Lough, Islington, W.): The making of regulations for local sub-committees of the Kent Education Committee is a
  † (4) Debates, clxxiv., 1324–5.

  1093
  matter for the Kent local education authority, and the approval of the Board is only required in cases where the Board are asked to accept such sub-committees as managers or governors of schools or classes applying for recognition for grants from the Board. The Board have given their assistance to the Kent Education Committee in framing regulations defining the constitution, functions, and powers of local sub-committees to be accepted by the Board as governing bodies of grant-earning secondary schools. They have been informed by the Committee that the borough or urban education committee concerned will be consulted before any rules for the establishment of such local sub-committees are approved. The distribution of copies is a matter for the discretion of the Kent Education Committee, and so far as I am aware the regulations are not yet in their final form.

  Teachers' Training Colleges.
  MR. HAY MORGAN: I beg to ask the President of the Board of Education whether, in view of the fact that after 31st July, 1909, the Board will require a certain proportion of the staff in all public elementary schools to be trained certificated teachers, he can inform the House what is being done by the Board of Education and by the local education authorities to increase the present inadequate training college accommodation.
  MR. LOUGH: Subject to compliance with the regulations, building grants are now made by the Board to local education authorities to an amount not exceeding 75 per cent. in respect of all capital expenditure incurred by them for the provision of sites and buildings for training colleges, whether day or residential. Grants to the amount of £3 per place provided or 75 per cent. of the rent, whichever is the less, are also made in aid of renting temporary premises, whore the Board are satisfied that it is inexpedient or impracticable at once to provide permanent premises. As the regulations under which these higher grants are payable were not issued until June of last year, there has been scarcely time for local authorities to take full advantage of them, but several applications are now under my consideration,
  1094
  and I have reason to believe that others which are now under discussion by various authorities will shortly mature.

  Proposed Additional Judge.
  MR. CAVE: I beg to ask Mr. Attorney-General whether the powers conferred upon His Majesty, by Section 18 of the Appellate Jurisdiction Act, 1876, and Section 6 of the Railway and Canal Traffic Act, 1888, to appoint, on an Address by both Houses of Parliament, additional Judges of the High Court of Justice have been fully exorcised, or in what manner and to what extent the same have been exercised; and, if not, whether, in view of the present serious congestion of business in the King's Bench Division and the Court of Appeal, His Majesty's Government will recommend Parliament to present such an Address.
  THE ATTORNEY-GENERAL (SIR JOHN WALTON, Leeds, S.): There remains power, in my opinion, under the Act of 1876, Section 18, to appoint an additional Judge of the High Court of Justice on an Address by both Houses of Parliament. As the condition contemplated by the Act now exists, it is the intention of the Government at an early date to invite the House to adopt a Resolution in favour of the presentation of such an Address.

  King's Lynn Crown Tenant.
  MR. WALTER LONG: I beg to ask the hon. Member for South Somerset, as representing the President of the Board of Agriculture, whether M r. Eastland, a tenant of the Crown near King's Lynn, has been called upon to surrender half of his farm to enable the Crown to experiment upon small holdings in that district; whether Mr. Eastland has offered to give up 100 acres for the purpose; whether the Crown have in hand 350 acres which could be utilised for small holdings if desirable; and on what grounds the President of the Board of Agriculture has thought it right to disturb a tenant who has been in occupation of the farm for sixty years.
  MR. LEA: Was not notice given to this tenant on the ground that he was an unsatisfactory tenant before the present President of the Board succeeded to office?
  THE TREASURER OF THE HOUSEHOLD (Sir EDWARD STRACHEY, Somersetshire, S.): The right hon. Gentleman has been misinformed as to the facts of this case. Mr. Eastland has not been tenant of this farm for sixty years. He only holds it at present as executor of his mother, who was the Crown tenant and who died in January, 1906. Mr. Eastland was joint tenant with his mother from 1893 to 1898, but his tenancy was then terminated on the ground that the farm was not well managed, and it was subsequently relet to his mother as sole tenant. On his mother's death, Mr. Eastland applied to take the farm, which comprises nearly 950 acres, but he was not considered capable of managing so large a holding, and notice to quit at Michaelmas next was therefore given in September last. All this was done before the property was transferred to the management of my noble friend. With a view, however, to enable Mr. Eastland to retain the old home, my noble friend has offered to lot him the farm house and principal buildings with about 368 acres of land, and it is proposed to let the remainder for small holdings, for which there is a great demand in the neighbourhood and for which the land is well suited. The 350 acres referred to by the right hon. Gentleman consists of marsh land in a very exposed position, and it is not land which is well adapted for small holdings. For some years past the grazing has been let by auction each year in small lots, the rent receivable for the current year being £1,270.

  Crown Salmon Fishing Eights.
  MR. WEIR: I beg to ask the President of the Board of Trade if the Woods and Forests Department have sold or let any Crown lights to salmon fishings in the estuary of the Ness and Beauly Rivers, Ross-shire; and, if so, will he give particulars as to the extent of the fishings.
  MR. RUNCIMAN: I am informed that there have been three lettings and one sale by the Commissioners of Woods of salmon fishings in the estuary of the Ness and Beauly Rivers. The fishings let are those ex adcerso the lands of Cairnlaw in the parish and county of Inverness, and the lands of Flowerburn in the parish of Rosemarkie and county
  1096
  of Ross, and the lands of Meikle Suddy in the parish of Knockbane or Avoch in the county of Ross; and the fishings sold are those ex adverso the lands of Bennets-field and Rosehaugh in the lust mentioned parish and county.

  Balinakill Burial Ground.
  MR. WEIR: I beg to ask the Secretary for Scotland whether a new site for a burial ground at Balinakill, in the parish of Uig, Island of Lewis, has yet been prepared for interments.
  THE SECRETARY FOR SCOTLAND (Mr. SINCLAIR, Forfarshire): Consideration of this matter has been deferred by the sheriff till next month, but a site has been selected in anticipation of his decision.

  Insanitary Schools in Scotland.
  MR. WEIR: I beg to ask the Secretary for Scotland if he will state in what way he proposes to deal with the sanitary defects in the public schools on the western mainland of Ross-shire and the Island of Lewis, as disclosed in the statement made by the medical officer of health for the county at page 7 of his last Report, to the effect that there was still much to do in the case of schools on the West Coast and the Lews, particularly with regard to the want of a due supply of pure water and the filthy condition of the cloak-rooms and usual conveniences.
  MR. SINCLAIR: On the general question raised by my hon. friend I may refer him to the last two paragraphs of page lvii. of the Local Government Board Report for 1900. The Annual Report of the medical officer of the county of Ross and Cromarty goes to show that, supported by His Majesty's inspector of schools, he is drawing the attention of school boards to such defects as exist. When cases of failure of school boards to act on the recommendations of the sanitary officials are brought to the notice of the Local Government Board, it is that Board's practice to co-operate with the Scottish Education Department in securing improvements in the sanitary conditions of schools.

  Compulsory Hiring of Land
  MR. CATHCART WASON: I bog to ask the Secretary for Scotland whether, in drafting the Amendment

  1097
  to carry out the pledge given that where land may be hired compulsorily, in the event of such hiring proving disastrous no loss will be sustained by the landlord, in the event of such hiring proving successful any profit arising from feuing or increased rent will be held for the benefit of the State.
  MR. SINCLAIR: I shall be glad to bear in mind the suggestion of my hon. friend.

  Crofters' Grazings in the Island of Lewis.
  MR. WEIR: I beg to ask the Secretary for Scotland whether, in view of the fact that large areas of the crofters' common grazings in the Island of Lewis are absolutely valueless for grazing purposes, being merely skinned land from which the peat has been removed, he will consider the expediency of introducing an Amendment or clause into the Small Landholders (Scotland) Bill to render such land available for fishermen's dwellings.
  MR. SINCLAIR: The point shall be considered, but it does not seem desirable that I should give any undertaking now to extend the present scope of this Bill.

  Dog Poisoning in Scotland.
  MR. WEIR: I beg to ask the Secretary for Scotland whether he is aware that the inhabitants of the Kilmuir and Logie districts of Ross-shire recently held a meeting at Scotsburn, Kildary, Ross-shire, under the presidency of Mr. R. H. Bone, county councillor for the district, for the purpose of considering the best mode of dealing with the numorous cases of dog poisoning resulting in the loss of about twenty dogs to the crofters; and will he communicate with the police for the purpose of instituting a searching inquiry and bringing the offenders to justice.
  MR. SINCLAIR: I have no information regarding the matter referred to by my hon. friend, but I am causing inquiries to be made.
  MR. WEIR: I will furnish the right hon. Gentleman with information.

  Land Values (Scotland) Bill.
  *MR. YOUNGER: I beg to ask the Secretary for Scotland whether
  1098
  any estimates have been called for from the Scottish assessors of the extra cost to them involved in the separation of land values under the Land Values (Scotland) Bill; what is the total amount of such estimates; and how the extra charge will be met.
  MR. SINCLAIR: I have nothing to add to the reply given by mo last Thursday to the same Question, but shall be glad to answer any further Questions the hon. Member wishes to ask.
  *MR. YOUNGER: I repeated this Question as the right hon. Gentleman was not in his place on Thursday owing to the unprecedentedly late hour to which the Scottish Committee sat, and I now desire to ask him whether he will get an estimate from the assessors before the Second Reading comes on in view of the heavy cost which will undoubtedly be incurred both by the local authorities and by individuals?
  MR. SINCLAIR: I do not admit that premiss. The question has been considered, but it is not considered necessary to ask for an estimate.
  *MR. YOUNGER: Is the right hon. Gentleman not aware that competent authorities have put the cost in Glasgow alone at over half a million?
  [No Answer was returned.]

  Irish Exhibition in Dublin.
  MR. MOORE: I beg to ask the Vice-President of the Department of Agriculture (Ireland) if he is aware that the management of the exhibition in Dublin have decided to carry it on on Sundays; and if, in view of the dissatisfaction caused by this decision, the Department will use its influence to prevent this course being continued.
  THE ATTORNEY-GENERAL FOR IRELAND (Mr. CHERRY, Liverpool, Exchange): My hon. friend has asked me to answer this Question for him. It appears from statements in the public press that the executive of the Irish International Exhibition recently decided to open certain parts of the exhibition on Sundays. The Department have no authority over the executive of the exhibition, and do not feel called upon to take any action in the matter.
  MR. MOORE: Is not the Department one of the principal guarantors of the exhibition?
  MR. CHERRY: I am not aware of that.
  MR. MOORE: I regret the Vice-President is not in his place to answer.
  *MR. SPEAKER: The hon. Member is not entitled to make a statement.

  Aughavas Letter Delivery.
  MR. THOMAS F. SMYTH: I beg to ask the Postmaster-General if he will consider the advisability of having letters for the Aughavas district, in county Leitrim, delivered from Cloone post office instead of from Carrigallen post office, as at present, as letters posted; are not delivered until the second day after from Carrigallen, whereas they would be delivered on the following day from Cloone.
  MR. SYDNEY BUXTON: Inquiry is being made on this subject; and when it is completed, I will acquaint the hon. Member with the result.

  Poyntzpass Level Crossing.
  MR. MCKILLOP: I beg to ask the President of the Board of Trade whether he is aware that delay and inconvenience have been caused to the public by the action of the Great Northern Railway in keeping the gates of the level crossing at Poyntzpass, county Armagh, closed to the public from ten to fifteen minutes at a time whilst goods trains are shunting; if he will direct the company to erect a footbridge at the end of the platform so as to allow foot passengers to cross the line whilst the trains are shunting; and if he can state what is the time allowed to the company for closing up the county road, as the action of the company in this matter has become a public nuisance.
  MR. KEARLEY: The Board of Trade have communicated with the railway company on the subject of the hon. Member's complaint and have received a reply of which I am sending him a copy. The Board of Trade have no power to require the construction of a footbridge at this crossing.
  The following is the reply referred to:—
  [COPY.]
  Great Northern Railway Co, (Ireland),
  General Manager's Office,
  London.
  8th June, 1907.
  SIR,
  In answer to your favour (R7187) of the 6th instant, enclosing copy of a Question which Mr. McKillop proposes to ask in the House of Commons on 10th instant regarding the level crossing at Poyntzpass station, I beg to say that every possible measure is taken by the company to prevent any undue delay at this crossing. There are only two goods trains stopping at Poyntzpass during the daytime (one in each direction), and I enclose copy of an instruction that is in force regulating the work at the station in connection with these trains. Our station master informs me that the crossing gates are never closed for more than four or five minutes at a time, and L have never received a complaint of undue delay having been experienced by the public.
  I am, etc.,
  (Signed) HENRY PLEWS,
  General Manager.
  The Assistant Secretary
  (Railway Department),
  Board of Trade, London.
  WORKING TIME TABLE JUNE, 1907.
  Level Crossing, Poyntzpass Station.
  Down goods trains having shunting operations to perform at Poyntzpass station must come to a stand outside the down home signal. The train then to be divided for the purpose of detaching and attaching as required, and the front portion drawn forward clear of the level crossing, which must then be opened for the passage of public traffic. When the shunting operations have been completed the train to be joined up. It must be the special care of all concerned that the shunting operations are so conducted that there will be no danger of the vehicles being shunted coming in contact with the gates. The guard of the train before dividing same must see that the brake is "hard on" on rear van.

  BUSINESS OF THE HOUSE.
  MR. A. J. BALFOUR: I want to ask any Minister who can say —I am not sure whom to ask—when the Government intend to bring forward their Resolution on the House of Lords. As there must be considerable notice of the Question on the Paper, I take it it will not be brought forward as first suggested on the 17th instant.
  MR. HALDANEsaid he believed the Resolution would not be taken on the 17th, but probably on the 24th. Perhaps the right hon. Gentleman would repeat his Question to-morrow to the Prime Minister as to the terms of the Resolution and as to the notice which would be given of it.

SELECTION (STANDING COMMITTEES).
Sir WILLIAM BRAMPTON GURDON reported from the Committee of Selection; That they had discharged the following Member from Standing Committtee B (in respect of the Probation of Offenders (No. 2) Bill): Mr. Barnard; and and had appointed in substitution (in respect of the Probation of Offenders (No 2) Bill): Mr. Toulmin. Report to lie upon the Table.

MUNICIPAL ELECTIONS BILL.
Reported, with Amendments, from Standing Committee A.
Ordered, That the Report do lie upon the Table, and be printed. [No. 185.]
Ordered, That the Minutes of the Proceedings of the Standing Committee be printed. [No. 185.]
Ordered, That the Bill, as amended (in the Standing Committee), be taken into consideration to-morrow, and be printed. [Bill. 225.]

NEW BILL.
  FACTORY AND WORKSHOP ACT (1901) AMENDMENT (No. 3) BILL.
  "To amend the Factory and Workshop Act, 1901," presented by Mr. Steadman; supported by Mr. Thorne; to be read a second time upon Friday, 12th July, and to be printed. [Bill 226.]

  TERRITORIAL AND RESERVE FORCES BILL.
  Considered in Committee.
  (In the Committee.)
  [Mr. EMMOTT (Oldham) in the Chair.]
  Clause 28:—
  SIR HOWARD VINCENTsaid it was extremely necessary in all transfers that the feelings of the individual regiments should be considered in every possible way and that transfers should not be made in an arbitrary manner. The insertion of the words contained in the Amendment he desired to move would oil the wheels considerably, and therefore facilitate the carrying out of the measure.
  Amendment proposed—
  "In page 19, line 18, after the word 'Order,' to insert the words 'and the commanding officer of which has signified in writing his consent thereto.' "—(Sir Howard Vincent.)
  THE SECRETARY OF STATE FOR WAR (Mr. HALDANE, Haddington)replied that the reasons put forward by the hon. and gallant Member were hardly sufficient for the acceptance of his Amendment. Sub-section 1, Clause 28, only proposed to entitle the King by order in Council to transfer units.
  SIR HOWARD VINCENTbegged, leave to withdraw his Amendment.
  Amendment, by leave, withdrawn.
  MR. ASHLEY,in moving to insert after the words "every such unit or part thereof," in. Sub-section (1) the following—
  "Shall continue to be officially described in such a manner as to preserve any national or special description of the said unit, and,"
  said that his object was to continue the old names of the corps, which meant a great deal to the Auxiliary Forces. The right hon. Gentleman knew what esprit de corps meant to the 10th Legion and the Old Guard. Anything which would; lead to a discontinuance of their old names would be strongly resented by men in the old corps of the Auxiliary Forces and by the nation at large. For instance, there were the Honourable

  1103
  Artillery Company—a corps which had a glorious history—and Lovat's Scouts, and the King's Colonials; it was to be hoped the names by which they were known all over the world would not be abolished. A man who knew that his father had belonged to the Honourable Artillery Company would be much more likely to enlist in it under that name than if it were called the 4th Middlesex Artillery. Retaining the old names would continue the glorious traditions of the corps and considerably help in getting recruits.
  Amendment proposed—
  "In page 19, line 18, after the word 'thereof,' to insert the words 'shall continue to be officially described in such a manner as to preserve any national or special description of the said unit, and' "—(Mr. Ashley.)
  Question proposed, "That those words be there inserted."
  MR. HALDANEsaid that, wherever he could keep up the characteristics and traditions of a corps he hoped to do so, and that would be done in a great many cases. But this Amendment was imperative and would impose a statutory duty upon the military authorities to continue the old names in official descriptions. The sympathies of the Government were with the general policy of the Amendment, and they would endeavour, whenever circumstances permitted, to give effect to it. They laid great stress on preserving the continuity of traditions, but he thought there would be cases in which it would not be possible, having regard to the organisation as a whole. There were points at which it was imperative to draw the line in every scheme of organisation, and they must be left free to carry out their arrangements. He did not object to nine-tenths of what the hon. Gentleman had said, but he did not wish the insertion of a cast-iron provision of this sort.
  SIR HOWARD VINCENTsaid there was one thing the people of this country had confidence in, and that was in the honour of the House of Commons. If a provision was in a statute, it was regarded as were the laws of the Medes and the Persians, and there was no doubting it. As the hon. Member for Blackpool had said, there was nothing to which the Regular Army and the Auxiliary Forces attached more
  1104
  importance than to old titles and old associations. The Westminster Volunteers, with which he had been for many years associated, was always looked upon as a Parliamentary regiment and associated with the Palace of Westminster and the City of Westminster. At the present time there was great interest and anxiety us to what would be the fate of that regiment and of others, and if anything could be done to preserve them it ought to be done. The right hon. Gentleman had chosen the territorial element as being a very powerful factor in the success of his Bill, as was shown by its title. He evidently desired to connect each regiment with a locality, and that had been the desire of all military reformers for the last thirty or forty years. Lord Card-well began it and Lord Wolseley continued it. If ho accepted the Amendment, the right hon. Gentleman would only carry out his own intention, and prevent any tendency in a contrary direction on the part of a less friendly successor.
  *MR. CARLILEsaid he would venture to call the right hon. Gentleman's attention to the fact that when regiments were at work in brigades the title of the individual regiment formed part of the word of command, and every commanding officer knew that he could appeal to his men by that title, and obtain a smart response which might be quite absent if there was no such condition present. Anyone who had commanded a battalion at any time would agree that the mere fact that the title of the battalion constituted an essential portion of the word of command was of vital importance. It could not be the same thing if battalions were numbered from one to 100 in the Territorial Force, and if the old characteristics associated with the old names as far back as men could remember were done away with. If this change were made the military spirit might disappear and the efficiency of their military work be destroyed. The right hon. Gentleman seemed to think that they were unreasonable in asking that this provision should be embodied in the Bill, but he thought that they on that side of the House had already received from Ministers so many promises which

  1105
  had not in any sense been fulfilled that they were justified in making the request. All the right hon. Gentleman had said was that he would do his best and see if it was possible, but they were not satisfied; they wanted what ho undertook put down in black and white. Last year on the Education Bill they were again and again promised all sorts of things which they never got because they were never embodied in the Bill, and he had no doubt that if under this Bill titles of battalions were wiped out they would be told, "Well, I did my best, but I could not manage it." That was not enough, and he hoped his hon. friend the Member for Blackpool would go to a division on the subject. Nothing would go further to destroy the right hon. Gentleman's Bill than that it should be left an open question whether battalions or brigades or other military units were to be left without those essentially individual and personal titles with which they had always in the past been associated. He hoped the right hon. Gentleman would see his way to adopt the Amendment.
  *MR. REESsaid that if he thought the insertion of these words would interfere with the right hon. Gentleman's plans or create confusion in his scheme he would not vote for them, but he was bound to say, so far as his own personal observation and inquiry into the matter went, there was ample proof that an intention to preserve the existing designation of each unit would be very favourably received. Ho remembered when Lord Card well's scheme was introduced what a feeling arose about the incorporation of the Monmouthshire Light Infantry regiment with the Oxfordshire Light Infantry, and how the Monmouthshire men resented the suppression of the name of their regiment. As far as regarded the county part of which he had the honour to represent, there was, he was sure, every desire to retain the present titles, which were greatly appreciated. Ho would not oppose the right hon. Gentleman if he objected, because he recognised that the Amendment, as drafted, tied his hands very tightly, and was certainly an unusual sort of insertion in a Bill, but if he could see his way to accept the Amendment he would be grateful to him, and be believed that the retention of present titles would
  1106
  be found of very great service in recruiting.
  SIR GILBERT PARKERsaid that if the right hon. Gentleman did not accept the Amendment he would plainly show that he did not appreciate how strong local patriotism was. The King's Colonials, for instance, had grown in the last two years; the title made an appeal to a great number of Colonials who were in this country either temporarily or permanently, and they were very proud of the position to which the force had attained. He thought the right hon. Gentleman would agree that it was a good thing to absorb into the force any Colonials in the country, and through their assistance be able to complete a Volunteer organisation. In the same way the different local regiments wished to retain their distinctive designations. Let hon. Members imagine what effect would be produced upon the London Scottish if the right hon. Gentleman tried to do away with the name and the distinctive garb of the corps. He thought there would be a revolt of a kind which would startle the right hon. Gentleman, who would do well to cultivate that spirit of local patriotism He hoped the right hon. Gentleman did not think he was supporting the Amendment for the sake of obstructing the Bill; he was urging the point with absolute sincerity because he believed it to be of national importance. If these distinctive titles were not preserved the right hon. Gentleman, in the future, would have to contend with a good deal of disaffection and ill-feeling. The whole conduct of the Bill by the right hon. Gentleman had been most conciliatory, but he had been full of resistance in regard to concessions and had made none. In this case his yielding would be not a concession but an act of justice and wisdom, and he would not sacrifice anything. Did the right hon. Gentleman intend this Territorial Army to be all of one dull colour, and to deprive it of anything of a distinctive character? Such a course would be very unwise, because the different corps of Volunteers coming under the County Associations valued their distinctive character and dress. It seemed a very small thing, but he urged the right hon. Gentleman to consider it, because ho believed that behind

  1107
  it lay the secret of success in recruiting. The right hon. Gentleman would have quite enough of the dull drab in his special contingents.
  MR. HALDANEsaid he much appreciated the considerations which had been put forward, but when he came to look at the clause and the rigidity of an Act of Parliament, he thought the wisdom of the advice he had received was against it. It was not a case of resisting pressure so much as a lapse from virtue. He was afraid of what the effect might be. He was anxious, like Christian in the "Pilgrim's Progress," to reach the end of his journey without falling into a precipice on the one hand, or being stuck in a quag on the other, and this Amendment looked something like a quag.
  SIR GILBERT PARKERsaid he had not gathered from the right hon. Gentleman's answer whether he was in sympathy with the Amendment or not.
  MR. WYNDHAMthought they were entitled to know what was at the back of the right hon. Gentleman's mind. What was he afraid of? There was no rigidity in the Amendment. They were not asking the right hon. Gentleman to do the impossible. There wore two points involved, and he wanted to know whether the right hon. Gentleman was afraid of the Militia, the Yeomanry, or the Volunteers continuing to be known under his scheme by those names, or was he afraid of the local names being retained, as for instance, the Kentish Regiment being called the Buffs, and so forth. Was he afraid of either, or both of those things? If he was afraid of the first, the second would give him a ground of defence, because all those regiments had been affiliated to some line regiment, and if he allowed them to be called by their local names that fear would be got rid of, because the units in the field were numbered in a particular way. In the field they became the first battalion of the second division of the third brigade, and so on.
  MR. HALDANE: said the right hon. Gentleman had asked him what he had at the back of his mind. It was not
  1108
  what was at the back of his mind, but what was in front of his eyes. The units
  "shall continue to be officially described in such a manner as to preserve any national or special description of the said units."
  He did not know what the latter words meant, and on those he did not propose to commit himself. But he did know that the first part of the Amendment took away all latitude from the authorities. The Government were disposed to carry out the views which had been expressed, but declined to tie their hands. General considerations must prevail. They desired to be free in carrying out their promises, and could not tie their hands.
  MR. ASHLEYthought the right hon. Gentleman had a certain amount of sympathy with the Amendment. There could no doubt that if they went to a, division on the question it would tell very greatly against the Government in the country. They did not want in the least to interfere with the right hon. Gentleman's organisation. All they desired was to insure that the units should retain their old names. They were not asking that the Militia, Yeomanry, and Volunteers should still be called the Yeomanry, Militia, and Volunteers, but that the regiments should retain the names they had in the past. If the right hon. Gentleman could not accept the Amendment as it stood, would he accept it if after the word "continue" the words "wherever possible" were inserted? It would not tie the hands of the Government to accept it in that form, but it would put into the Act what he believed was the desire of every Member of the House, namely, that when these forces were transferred to the new Territorial Force they should be allowed to retain the local names which they had had ever since they were brought into being.
  VISCOUNT MORPETHsaid he did not gather from the answer of the Secretary of State to the right hon. Member for Dover whether there was to be any connection between the Territorial battalions and the Line battalions, or whether they were to be numbered separately.
  MR. HALDANEsaid that all these matters he proposed at a later stage to refer to a representative Committee of the Territorial Force.
  *MR. ARNOLD-FORSTERsaid that this was a matter as to which the Committee ought to be thoroughly assured, because the proposed practice had already been resorted to with very unsatisfactory results. The right hon. Gentleman had said he was going to consult a representative Committee. He remembered the House being assured that the loading questions contained in the Bill were to be referred to an influential Committee, and they wore so referred. The House had heard a good deal of that body of gentlemen, but they had heard nothing of their conclusions; they had never had a report from them, and they had never heard what their opinions were. They were in this difficult position, that on a great many questions that had been raised in the Bill they had been told that the matter was going to be considered or had not been considered, but in no case had they been told that it had been considered and that they could be told the result. He would not be astonished at any hon. Member asking for some further assurance of the right hon. Gentleman's intentions. He had not won the confidence of the Committee in this matter. He had refused to give the information required. He had not even answered the last question put to him by the right hon. Member for Dover. He would advise his right hon. friend under the circumstances to put his question again and ask for a definite answer.
  MR. WYNDHAMsaid the right hon. Gentleman could easily answer because now the Prime Minister was beside him, and the right hon. Gentleman, when Minister for War, made a very good reform in the Army when he linked the Auxiliary Forces to the Line. Was the Secretary of State for War now going to throw over the policy of the Prime Minister or adhere to it?
  MR. ASHLEYsaid that as ho had had no answer from the right hon. Gentleman he would formally move as an Amendment the suggestion he had made. He only wished to have it put on record that that was the wish of the House of Commons.
  Amendment proposed to the proposed Amendment—
  "After the word 'continue' to insert the words ' wherever possible.' "—(Mr. Ashley.)
  Question proposed, "That those words be there inserted in the proposed Amendment."
  MR. HALDANEsaid the insertion of the words would be an example of thoroughly bad drafting. What was the meaning of "wherever possible"? The words imposed no legal obligation, and would merely disfigure the drafting. The Bill was carefully drawn, and it would be much better to accept the assurance which he had given on behalf of the Government that they recognised the point which hon. and right hon. Gentlemen were raising, and he would do his best to gather opinion upon it. The words suggested by the hon. Member would simply leave the matter to the discretion of the Government, and after the declaration he had made on their behalf it would not be right to accept the words.
  SIR HOWARD VINCENTsaid the drafting of the Bill was not like a picture in the Academy, which was to be framed to show its artistic effect, and have the name underneath of the master who had introduced it into the House of Commons. It was purely a matter of convenience. If the right hon. Gentleman was a perpetual Secretary of State for War, they might rely with confidence on his statement, for his words had been taken down, and they would always be able to point to them if there was any departure from his declaration. But as Lord Elgin said at the Imperial Conference, a Minister of State was purely a will o' th' wisp, a passing shadow, and what his hon. friend wanted to do was to put into the clause words which would show successive Secretaries of State for War that it was the desire of the House of Commons which passed this Bill to retain the old territorial distinctions of regiments. He did not think the Secretary of State did himself justice when he said that the Amendment would disfigure the drafting. The right hon. Gentleman had expressed the intention of consulting a committee of officers. He was a member of the old Duma, as it was called

  1111
  —the right hon. Gentleman called it a Council—but it had not met since last July. They had never seen the Bill, and they knew nothing whatever of its provisions. What of the new Duma which the Secretary of State for War proposed to call into existence with a view to consulting it about these territorial distinctions? It might be called once, and, after a long speech or a few words, adjourned and never summoned again, just as in the case of the old Duma; he did not know whether the latter was in existence now or not. Surely the right hon. Gentleman could accept the Amendment, it would not tie his hands absolutely, but would simply act as a guide to the Army Council in the future, and to the successors of the right hon. Gentleman.
  COLONEL KENYON-SLANEYsaid the right hon. Gentleman had expressed his intention of gathering from officers opinion as to the direction in which territorial feeling ran, but he would best gather that opinion from Members in the House who represented the districts concerned and knew their wishes.
  *THE CHAIRMANsaid it would be better if they got rid of the Amendment to the Amendment, and they could then resume the discussion of the original Amendment.
  LORD BALCARRESsaid the essence of the Amendment to the Amendment was that they ought to allow the latitude which was already allowed elsewhere in the Bill. The right hon. Gentleman had said that the insertion of the words would disfigure the drafting, and that was the only real objection he had taken; he had not dealt with the point of the Amendment at all. But if the Secretary for War looked at his own Bill he would find in a dozen places words as indefinite as those of his hon. friend. The words "wherever possible" in the context clearly meant nothing else than" wherever possible" in the eyes of the central authority, namely, the War Office. In one part of the Bill appeared the words "definite or indefinite," and he supposed the period to be served must be "definite or indefinite"; why did the right hon. Gentleman put such disfigurements into his Bill? The fact was that the
  1112
  Government were determined to smash up these distinctions to which the regiments unquestionably attached incalculable value; and the right hon. Gentleman, if he rejected this and all similar Amendments, would greatly alienate the sentiment on which these distinctions were founded, and although he might gain from the financial point of view, from the Territorial Army point of view the result would be very serious.
  Amendment to the Amendment agreed to.
  Question proposed, "That those words, as amended, be there inserted."
  COLONEL KENYON-SLANEYsaid that, as the right hon. Gentleman was going to rely on the territorial feeling for the recruiting of his Territorial Army, if he wished to make that force popular he ought to listen to those who represented the territorial case, and who told him that where he would get one recruit for a numbered battalion of the Territorial Force, he would get fifty recruits for such and such a battalion of the county regiment, because that battalion had its traditions and a name. Why should the right hon. Gentleman hesitate? He said that the Amendment would be a disfigurement. Instead of "wherever possible" the form "as far as may be consistent with" might possibly not be a drafting disfigurement. The right hon. Gentleman would recognise that they were not trying to drive him into a corner. What they were discussing were the particular titles and names to which territorially they attached great importance; and what they asked for was a definite promise that as far as possible those territorial titles should be preserved. He could not see why the right hon. Gentleman should be so coy and coquettish over the question. Surely, if he would not adopt the words "wherever possible," he could accept the form "so far as may be consistent" with his general scheme. That would not be bad drafting. If he would put into the clause some such words, they would do their level best to help the Bill when it became an Act; it was not their intention to throw cold water upon it. Would the battalions be 1, 2, and 3 of the Territorial Army, or would they be 1, 2 and 3 of such and such

  1113
  a regiment, with its title? They wanted to know, for those who represented counties were aware of the strength of the territorial feeling, and the right hon. Gentleman would never have a Territorial Force unless he consulted that feeling.
  *SIR H. AUBREY-FLETCHERsaid that, as one who had served as a Volunteer officer, and who assisted in the formation of the Volunteers, he would like to join in the appeal to the right hon. Gentleman. He could add to what others had said that the Volunteers attached great importance to the change which was made for the administrative battalions of the county to that of the battalions of their own county regiment. They were very proud indeed of the alteration. He had been for twenty years a commanding officer of one of those battalions, and he was one of those who approached the Prime Minister at the time the change was made. He was certain it would give the greatest satisfaction to those who joined the new Territorial Army if the Amendment wore adopted, and it would bring more recruits to the Territorial Force than if they simply had the battalions numbered.
  *VISCOUNT MORPETHsaid it was really more than a more question of nomenclature. He had asked the right hon. Gentleman a point which was vital to the Bill, viz., whether the connection between the Auxiliary Forces and the Regular Army was going to be maintained and whether the battalions of the Territorial Force were to be known by their own special numbers, or whether they would be known as the 4th, 5th, and 6th battalions of their respective county regiments. They had received the astonishing answer that the matter was not settled and that it was going to be referred to a committee of those interested in the Territorial Army. He entirely objected to that way of settling the matter, because the question whether the Territorial Army was to remain in close connection with the Regular Army or whether it was to be an Army by itself was vital to the whole Bill. He would point out that the committee was to be appointed by the County Associations nominated by the Army Council. The Army Council would have the first and last voice in settling the matter, and it
  1114
  seemed to him that the right hon. Gentleman, as the representative of the War Office, might now tell them, instead of deferring it to a committee which would have no real voice in settling the matter at all, but which would be purely consultative, and whose opinion would not be accepted if it ran counter to that of the Secretary of State.
  SIR GILBERT PARKERasked the right hon. Gentleman if he would, in view of his professed sympathy, undertake on Report to bring in an Amendment properly drafted embodying the policy of the Government on the point at issue. If they had that assurance he was sure his hon. friend would be willing to withdraw his Amendment.
  MR. HALDANEsaid ho did not wish to put into the Act all sorts of things which were inappropriate. He had given an assurance that the Government appreciated the general desire that these territorial designations should be maintained. Their present intention was that there should be, say the 4th, 5th or the 6th battalions of Territorial Regiments, and not separate organisations altogether. He thought that so far as territorial organisation was concerned he had given every assurance that could be reasonably asked for.
  *MR. ARNOLD-FORSTERsaid he could not vote for the original Amendment, because it would be unfair to impose a statutory liability on the right hon. Gentleman. But for the Amendment as modified he could vote. Let them notice what the position would be. His hon. friend had affirmed categorically that it was desirable to make it part of the duty of the War Minister to have regard as far as possible to the territorial divisions of the battalions of the new Army, and that seemed a very legitimate and reasonable proposal. That was met by a categorical negative on the part of the Government. They had refused to make it part of the duty of the Army Council and the War Office to have regard to the territorial traditions of the county regiments.
  Mr. HALDANE: Yes, the statutory duty.
  *MR. ARNOLD-FORSTERYes, the statutory duty. Nothing the right hon. Gentleman could now state would have any weight with the Army Council in future. He hoped every Volunteer and every corps throughout the land would understand that the Government had met this reasonable and moderate proposal which had been put forward in the interests of Volunteer Corps with a categorical negative, and had refused to make it the duty of the Army Council to consider the territorial traditions of the battalions.
  *SIR J. DICKSON-POYNDERsaid the right hon. Member for Croydon had expressed in very inadequate terms the impression that was left on his mind and on the minds of his hon. friends around him. The Secretary of State for War refused to put anything into an Act of Parliament which would bind him or the War Office hereafter as to the designation of each branch of the Territorial Army. He gathered that as far as the Yeomanry were concerned the right hon. Gentleman had already given an undertaking that that designation would be maintained. As regarded the Militia to be transferred to the Volunteer battalions, it was quite impossible in debates of this kind for the light hon. Gentleman to undertake the designation of those battalions, because many of them would be extinguished, and others would be merged one into another, and therefore it was necessary that the authorities should be left a free hand. His right hon. friend had said in the clearest possible way that where battalions survived the territorial traditions would be maintained in the future as in the past. He thought that was as much as could be expected.
  MR. ASHLEYsaid they might rest perfectly satisfied if the right hon. Gentleman was going to remain in his present position. They knew, however, that the present Government was not going to last much longer, and what they wanted was to put into the Bill something that would secure that these titles should be continued, and he would not be satisfied unless some assurance of the kind were given.
  COLONEL KENYON - SLANEYsaid the hon. Member for Chippenham had assured the Committee that the right hon.
  1116
  Gentleman had given a distinct undertaking that that which they were now insisting upon had actually been promised in the case of the Yeomanry. Was that so? If that was the case, then they had a right to demand it on behalf of the Volunteers and the Militia. Surely the right hon. Gentleman did not imagine that the territorial feeling was confined to those who rode horses.
  MR. COURTENAY WARNERsaid that one difficulty in carrying out this proposal was that there might be a regiment called the Shoreditch Fusiliers, whom it might be necessary under this scheme to convert into artillery, and in that case how could they retain the old name? It would be ridiculous to tie the Army Council down by Act of Parliament to use the actual nomenclature of particular battalions. The Secretary of State for War had given a pledge on the point, and if the right hon. Gentleman went out of office, and the present Opposition formed a Government, they would have no difficulty in persuading the future War Minister to carry out what they were now asking for. He thought it would be a great pity to tie down the Army Council in the way suggested by the Amendment.
  SIR HOWARD VINCENTsaid the hon. Member for the Chippenham Division had made the case much more serious, because he had led them to suppose that he had been able to conclude some kind of arrangement with the Secretary of State for War that his regiment should be known as the Wiltshire Yeomanry, although he had sacrificed any such arrangement as far as the Volunteers and Militia were concerned. He was much obliged to the hon. Baronet for letting the cat out of the bag. That revelation made it all the more important that the right hon. Gentleman should accept the Amendment. They wanted something in the Act of Parliament which people could see, and read, and understand.
  SIR SAMUEL SCOTTasked the right hon. Gentleman to state clearly to the House whether he had given the undertaking to which the hon. Baronet the Member for Chippenham had referred.
  MR. HALDANEsaid that what he did say was that he saw no reason why there should not be Yeomanry in the Territorial Force.
  COLONEL KENYON-SLANEYsaid that really was not the point. They wished to know what the Yeomanry were to be called. Were the Yeomanry to be allowed to serve under their special regimental territorial titles? He wished to have an indication whether that particular privilege would be given to them.
  MR. HALDANEsaid he thought the right hon. and gallant Gentleman had got enough information.
  LORD BALCARRESasked the right hon. Gentleman to give a straight answer. There appeared to be a conflict of opinion between him and the hon. and gallant Member for the Chippenham Division.
  *Sir J. DICKSON-POYNDERsaid he thought it quite unnecessary to repeat what the right hon. Gentleman had said. The right hon. Gentleman had given an indication, but it was not to be put in the Act of Parliament. The indication was given in the clearest possible language which must be intelligible to anyone who desired to understand what the Yeomanry were to be called.
  SIR HOWARD VINCENT: What are they to be called?
  LORD BALCARRESsaid he had heard nothing from the Secretary of State to indicate exactly what the Yeomanry were to be called. It was not a question whether they were to be called the Yeomanry, the Cavalry, or the men of the Territorial Force, but whether they were to be allowed to retain their old traditional territorial designations. The hon. Baronet opposite had stated that an undertaking had been given to the Yeomanry. The right hon. Gentleman had denied an undertaking to the infantry branch.
  *SIR J. DICKSON-POYNDERsaid he did not suppose that the Wiltshire Yeomanry would be called the Yorkshire Yeomanry.
  LORD BALCARRESsaid they might be called the Western District No. 6. The Yeomanry officers might be satisfied with the undertaking which had been given, but he extremely regretted that the right hon. Gentleman had not complied with the request to give an undertaking for the infantry.
  Question put.
  The Committee divided:—Ayes, 85; Noes, 210. (Division List No. 223.)

  AYES.

  Acland-Hood, Rt. Hn.SirAlex.F.

  Craig,Charles Curtis(Antrim,S.

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

  Anson, Sir William Reynell

  Craig, Captain James( Down, E.)

  Long.Col. CharlesW.(Evesham

  Anstruther-Gray, Major

  Craik, Sir Henry

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

  Arnold-Forster,Rt.Hn.Hugh O.

  Dixon-Hartland,Sir FredDixon

  Lonsdale, John Brownlee

  Aubrey-Fletcher, Rt. Hon Sir H.

  Douglas, Rt. Hon. A. Akers-

  Lyttelton, Rt. Hon. Alfred

  Balcarres, Lord

  Duncan, C. (Barrow-in-Furness

  M'Iver,SirLewis (Edinburgh,W

  Baldwin, Alfred

  Duncan,Robert (Lanark,Govan

  Marks, H. H. (Kent)

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

  Faber, George Denison (York)

  Mildmay, Francis Bingham

  Banbury, Sir Frederick George

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

  Moore, William

  Banner, John S. Harmood-

  Fardell, Sir T. George

  Morpeth, Viscount

  Baring,Capt.Hn.G.( Winchester

  Fell, Arthur

  Nicholson, Wm. G. (Petersfield

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

  Gardner, Ernest (Berks, East)

  O'Neill, Hon. Robert Torrens

  Bignold, Sir Arthur

  Hardy,Laurence (Kent.Ashford

  Parker, Sir Gilbert (Gravesend)

  Bowles, G. Stewart

  Harris, Frederick Leverton

  Randles, Sir John Scurrah

  Bridgeman, W. Clive

  Harrison-Broadley, H. B.

  Remnant, James Farquharson

  Butcher, Samuel Henry

  Hay, Hon. Claude George

  Roberts, G. H. (Norwich)

  Carlile, E. Hildred

  Heaton, John Henniker

  Roberts,S. (Sheffield, Ecclesall)

  Carson, Rt. Hon. Sir Edw. H.

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

  Rothschild, Hon. Lionel Walter

  Cave, George

  Hill, Sir Clement (Shrewsbury)

  Sandys, Lieut.-Col. Thos. Myles

  Cavendish, Rt.Hon. Victor C. W.

  Hills, J. W.

  Sassoon, Sir Edward Albert

  Cecil, Evelyn (Aston Manor)

  Hunt, Rowland

  Scott, Sir S. (Marylebone, W.)

  Chamberlain,RtHn.J.A. (Wore.

  Kennaway,Rt.Hon.Sir John H.

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

  Chaplin, Rt. Hon. Henry

  Kenyon-Slaney, Rt. Hon. Sir John H

  Snowden, P.

  Clynes, J. R.

  Lambton, Hon. Frederick Wm.

  Talbot, Lord E. (Chichester)

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

  Lea,Hugh Cecil (St. Pancras, E.

  Thomson, W.Mitchell- (Lanark)

  Corbett, T. L. (Down, North)

  Lee, ArthurH. (Hants. Fareham

  Valentia, Viscount

  Wolff, Gustav Wilhelm

  TELLERS FOR THE AYES—

  Walrond, Hon. Lionel

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

  Mr Ashley and Sir Howard Vincent.

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

  Wyndham, Rt. Hon. George

  Wilson, W. T. (Westhoughton)

  Younger, George

  NOES.

  Acland, Francis Dyke

  Foster, Rt. Hon. Sir Walter

  Morton, Alpheus Cleophas

  Adkins, W. Ryland D.

  Fowler, Rt. Hon. Sir Henry

  Myer, Horatio

  Ainsworth, John Stirling

  Fuller, John Michael F.

  Napier, T. B.

  Alden, Percy

  Furness, Sir Christopher

  Newnes, F. (Notts, Bassetlaw)

  Ashton, Thomas Gair

  Gardner,Col.Alan (Hereford, S.

  Nicholson,Clarles N (Doncast'r

  Asquith,Rt.Hon Herbert Henry

  Gladstone.Rt.Hn.Herbert John

  Norman, Sir Henry

  Astbury, John Meir

  Goddard, Daniel Ford

  Norton, Capt. Cecil William

  Baker, Sir John (Portsmouth)

  Gooch, George Peabody

  Nussey, Thomas Willans

  Baker, Joseph A.(Finsbury,E.)

  Gulland, John W.

  Nuttall, Harry

  Balfour, Robert (Lanark)

  Haldane, Rt. Hon. Richard B.

  Parker, James (Halifax)

  Baring,Godfrey (Isle of Wight)

  Harcourt, Rt. Hon. Lewis

  Pearce, William (Limehouse)

  Barker, John

  Hardy, George A. (Suffolk)

  Philipps,J. Wynford (Pembroke

  Barlow,JohnEmmott(Somerset

  Hart-Davies, T.

  Pickersgill, Edward Hare

  Barlow, Percy (Bedford)

  Haworth, Arthur A.

  Pirie, Duncan V.

  Barry,Redmond J. (Tyrone,N.)

  Hedges, A. Paget

  Pollard, Dr.

  Beauchamp, E.

  Hemmerde, Edward George

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

  Beck, A. Cecil

  Henry, Charles S.

  Price,RobertJohn (Norfolk,E.)

  Bellairs, Carlyon

  Herbert,Colonel Ivor(Mon., S.)

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

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

  Herbert, T. Arnold (Wycombe)

  Pullar, Sir Robert

  Bennett, E. N.

  Higham, John Sharp

  Radford, G. H.

  Billson, Alfred

  Hobhouse, Charles E. H.

  Raphael, Herbert H.

  Birrell, Rt. Hon. Augustine

  Holland, Sir William Henry

  Rea, Russell (Gloucester)

  Boulton, A. C. F.

  Hope,W.Bateman(Somerset,N.

  Rees, J. D.

  Brace, William

  Howard, Hon. Geoffrey

  Renton, Major Leslie

  Branch, James

  Idris, T. H. W.

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

  Brooke, Stopford

  Illingworth, Percy H.

  Ridsdale, E. A.

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

  Jackson, R. S.

  Roberts, Charles H. (Lincoln)

  Bryce, J. Annan

  Jacoby, Sir James Alfred

  Roberts, John H. (Denbigh.)

  Buchanan, Thomas Ryburn

  Johnson, John (Gateshead)

  Robertson, J. M. (Tyneside)

  Burns, Rt. Hon. John

  Jones, Leif (Appleby)

  Robinson, S.

  Burnyeat, W. J. D.

  Jones,William (Carnarvonshire

  Robson, Sir William Snowdon

  Burt, Rt. Hon. Thomas

  Kearley, Hudson E.

  Rose, Charles Day

  Buxton,Rt.Hn. Sydney Charles

  King, Alfred John (Knutsford)

  Rowlands, J.

  Byles, William Pollard

  Laidlaw, Robert

  Runciman. Walter

  Cameron, Robert

  Lamb, Ernest H. (Rochester)

  Rutherford, V. H. (Brentford)

  Campbell-Bannerman, Sir H.

  Lamont, Norman

  Samuel, Herbert L. (Cleveland)

  Carr-Gomm, H. W.

  Layland-Barratt, Francis

  Schwann, C. Duncan (Hyde)

  Causton, Rt. Hn. RichardKnight

  Leese,SirJoseph F.(Accrington)

  Sears, J. E.

  Chance, Frederick William

  Lehmann, R. C.

  Seaverns, J. H.

  Cheetham, John Frederick

  Lever, W.H. (Cheshire, Wirral)

  Shackleton, David James

  Cherry, Rt. Hon. R. R.

  Levy, Maurice

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

  Cleland, J. W.

  Lewis, John Herbert

  Shipman, Dr. John G.

  Clough, William

  Lloyd-George, Rt. Hon. David

  Sinclair, Rt. Hon. John

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

  Lough, Thomas

  Smeaton, Donald Mackenzie

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

  Lyell, Charles Henry

  Soames, Arthur Wellesley

  Cooper, G. J.

  Macdonald, J. R. (Leicester)

  Spicer, Sir Albert

  Corbett,C.H (Sussex,EGrinst'd

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

  Stanger, H. Y.

  Cornwall, Sir Edwin A.

  Maclean, Donald

  Stanley,Hn.A. Lyulph(Chesh.)

  Cotton, Sir H. J. S.

  Macnamara, Dr. Thomas J.

  Steadman, W. C.

  Crosfield, A. H.

  M'Callum, John M.

  Stewart, Halley (Greenock)

  Davies, M. Vaughan- (Cardigan

  M'Kenna, Rt. Hon. Reginald

  Strachey, Sir Edward

  Dewar, Arthur (Edinburgh, S.)

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

  Stuart, James (Sunderland)

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

  M'Micking, Major G.

  Sutherland. J. E.

  Dickson-Poynder, Sir John P.

  Maddison, Frederick

  Taylor, Austin (East Toxteth)

  Duncan, J. H. (York, Otley)

  Mallet, Charles E.

  Taylor, Theodore C. (Radcliffe)

  Dunne,Major E.Martin(Walsall

  Manfield, Harry (Northants)

  Tennant.Sir Edward(Salisbury

  Edwards, Frank (Radnor)

  Marnham, F. J.

  Thomas, Abel (Carmarthen, E.)

  Elibank, Master of

  Massie, J.

  Thomas,Sir A. (Glamorgan, E.)

  Ellis, Rt. Hon. John Edward

  Masterman, C. F. G.

  Torrance, Sir A. M.

  Esslemont, George Birnie

  Menzies, Walter

  Trevelyan, Charles Philips

  Evans, Samuel T.

  Molteno, Percy Alport

  Verney, F. W.

  Everett, R. Lacey

  Money, L. G. Chiozza

  Vivian, Henry

  Faber, G. H. (Boston)

  Morgan, G. Hay (Cornwall)

  Walker, H. De R. (Leicester)

  Fenwick, Charles

  Morgan,J.Lloyd (Carmarthen)

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

  Ferens, T. R.

  Morrell, Philip

  Wardle, George J.

  1120

  1121

  Warner, Thomas Courtenay T.

  White, Luke (York, E.R.)

  Winfrey, R.

  Wason, Eugene (Clackmannan)

  Whitley,John Henry (Halifax)

  Yoxall, James Henry '

  Wason,John Cathcart (Orkney)

  Wiles, Thomas

  Waterlow, D. S.

  Williams, Osmond (Merioneth)

  TELLERS FOR THE NOES—

  Weir, James Galloway

  Wilson, John (Durham, Mid)

  Mr. Whiteley and Mr. J. A. Pease.

  Whitbread, Howard

  Wilson, J. H. (Middlesbrough)

  White, J. D. (Dumbartonshire)

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

  Question, "That the words proposed to be left out stand part of the clause," put, and agreed to.

  SIR HOWARD VINCENTmoved to leave out from the word "that" to the end of the sub-section, and to insert the words, "any person commissioned, enlisted, or enrolled in the Militia, Yeomanry, or Volunteer Forces before the passing of this Act will be entitled upon application, in writing to his commanding officer, to a free discharge from any contract, obligation, or undertaking he may have entered into." He said his object was to secure that any person who had enlisted in the Militia, Yeomanry, or Volunteers, and who did not see his way to consent to the new condition of affairs, should be entitled to a free discharge. There was nothing more unsatisfactory than to detain in the Army men who would not give willing service. He quite granted that there were many provisions in the Bill by which the penal clauses did not apply to a man without his consent. But that would establish two classes in every regiment, than which nothing would more militate against the efficiency of the force. The one class might be dissatisfied with the new condition of things and they would go about saying, "We cannot get our discharge; we never bargained for this, and it is unfair." All that would interfere with recruiting and would do infinite harm, and it would be bettor for the service if the men were out of the regiment. If the right hon. Gentleman accepted his Amendment he might be deprived of the services of a limited number of men; but, on the other hand, it would deprive those men of a very sound grievance.
  Amendment proposed—
  "In page 19, line 26, to leave out from the word ' that,' to the end of the sub-section, and insert the words, 'any person commissioned, enlisted, or enrolled in the Militia, Yeomanry, or Volunteer Forces before the passing of this Act will be entitled upon application, in writing to his commanding officer, to a free discharge from any contract, obligation, or undertaking he may have entered into.' "— (Sir Howard Vincent.)
  Question proposed, "That the words proposed to be left out stand part of the clause."
  MR. HALDANEsaid that the Amendment in its language was very startling. There was no limitation of the right of the Volunteer to be relieved of all obligations, including even a promise of marriage! He saw what the hon. and gallant Member meant, but the proposal as it stood would be absolutely unworkable. Moreover, it was really unnecessary, because subsection (2) section 28 provided that "nothing in this section or in any Order made there under shall, without his consent, affect the conditions or area of service of any person commissioned, enlisted, or enrolled before the passing of this Act." Anyone who said he did not want to go under the new conditions would be released. Consequently his discharge was absolutely certain.
  SIR HOWARD VINCENTasked if there was any section which would enable the man to demand his discharge under the new conditions?
  MR. HALDANEsaid that it would be wrong to discharge a man who refused to give up his rifle, which was the property of the Secretary of State; but on giving up his rifle, if he did not want to take service under the new conditions he would be discharged forthwith.
  COLONEL R. WILLIAMSsaid that the words of the Amendment might not be all that could be desired, but the point raised by the hon. and gallant Member for Central Sheffield was worth considering. The men were often under other obligations than that of giving up their rifles. It was quite true that under a subsequent subsection the men might continue under the old conditions and also under the new; but, in his opinion, that would not work at all. There were a good number of men who would want to go on under the old conditions but who would not give a pledge under the new conditions to undergo a six months' training, and, therefore, he submitted that those men who could not go on under the new conditions were entitled to their discharge.
  Mr. HALDANEsaid it was clear that as regarded an obligation to serve under the new conditions, if the men did not consent they would have no difficulty in obtaining a discharge. But in cases where the men had come under obligation to the corps, that was a matter of contract, and he thought it would be safe to leave that to be worked out by the associations.
  SIR HOWARD VINCENT: said he would be satisfied if the Secretary for War could devise a form of words which would secure what he wanted. He had no pretensions to be a Parliamentary draftsman, and he might have made his Amendment too wide to carry out his own views.
  MR. HALDANEsaid he could draw his own clauses but not clauses devised by other people. He could assure the hon. and gallant Gentleman that there was no desire to retain an unwilling man under the new conditions, and there would be no great difficulty in his obtaining his discharge.
  SIR HOWARD VINCENTasked leave to withdraw his Amendment.
  Amendment, by leave, withdrawn.
  MR. ASHLEYsaid that he wished to move an Amendment to subsection (c) merely to ventilate the subject, rather than to force a division.
  MR. HALDANE, interposing, said he had considered this question, and he was prepared to accept an Amendment placed on the Paper by the hon. and gallant Member for Central Sheffield, subject to some Amendments which he had suggested. This would also cover the object the hon. Member for Blackpool had in view.
  SIR HOWARD VINCENTthanked the right hon. Gentleman for his courtesy for meeting the views of many regiments in this matter. Great apprehension had been excited, especially in the best administered corps, those which had economised their funds and resources, in regard to subsection (c). Those corps had erected buildings, constructed rifle ranges, and spent money in other directions. There-
  1124
  fore acting on the advice of a very eminent counsel he had put down his Amendment which he would move in the slightly altered form suggested by the Secretary for War, so that subsection (c) would read as follows:—" For transferring to the association any property belonging to or held for the benefit of any such unit so however that all property so transferred shall as from the date of the transfer be held by the association for the benefit in like manner of the corresponding unit of the Territorial Force or for such other purposes as the association with the consent of such corresponding unit, to be ascertained in the prescribed manner, shall direct; and any question which may arise as to whether any property is transferred to an association, or as to the trusts or purposes upon or for which it is or ought to be held, shall be referred for the decision of the Secretary of State, whose decision shall be final.'" If such a concession were made it would entirely meet the views of himself and others who had given the matter very long and careful consideration. He begged to move.
  Amendment proposed—
  " In page 20, line 2, after the word ' to,' to insert the words,' or held for the benefit of.' "— (Sir Howard Vincent.)
  Question proposed, "That those words be there inserted."
  *MR. ASHLEYasked whether, if this property was transferred to the associations, it would be possible for them to borrow money upon the security of it. A provision had been put in Clause 4 that the Association should have power to borrow money. They could not borrow it upon the rates because they had no power to raise any, and the only security, he presumed, was the money which would come to them from the Volunteer Force. In the case of the drill halls under the Military Loans Act the remainder was vested in the right hon. Gentleman, and therefore there would not be any security at all.
  MR. HALDANEwas understood to say that there would be a great deal of property upon which the associations would not be able to borrow money without the leave of the Army Council,

  1125
  but there would in the ordinary course of things be some property which they possessed, not affected by trusts, upon which they would be able to borrow money.
  Amendment proposed—
  " In page 20, line 2, to leave out all after the word ' unit' to the end of the subsection, and insert the words ' so however that all property so transferred, shall as from the date of the transfer be held by the association for the benefit in like manner of the corresponding unit of the Territorial Force or for such other purposes as the association, with the consent of such corresponding unit, to be ascertained in the prescribed manner, shall direct; and any question which may arise as to whether any property is transferred to an association, or as to the trusts or purposes upon or for which it is or ought to be held, shall be referred for the decision of the Secretary of State, whose decision shall be final.'"—(Sir Howard Vincent.)
  Proposed words there inserted.
  Clause 28, as amended, agreed to.
  Clause 29:—
  *MR. ASHLEYmoved the omission of subsection (1) which seemed to him far the most important part of the Bill, as it dealt with that portion of our land forces which was most likely to be used in the future, and enabled the Government to enlist men into the Reserve who would never serve in the Regular Army and make them special Reservists. There was no question which so vitally affected the future of the Regular Army. We had not had an invasion of this country for many hundreds of years, but in all the wars in which we had taken part during those years our Regular land forces had been engaged. It was not in the past our Volunteers who had been engaged, but our Regular Forces, and in all probability it was those forces who would be engaged in the future. Therefore this change as to special reservists was one of the most important which the Bill made in our Army system and one of the most momentous which had been made for a number of years. It must be remembered
  1126
  that this proposal as to special reservists was made concurrently with a reduction of the Army by 20,000 men and such a step must proportionately reduce the first class Army reserve. During the last administration the object was to increase as far as possible the first class Army reserve, but they now had before them a direct reversal of that policy, because it could not be denied that if the establishment was smaller, the length of service longer, and the units fewer, we could not get the same amount of reserves. A good many untrained reservists were to be invited to enlist. They were to come in at seventeen, be trained till they were twenty, and then be sent out to form the backbone of His Majesty's battalions when engaged in war. It was a most revolutionary proceeding. In describing the Militia in February last the right hon. Gentleman had alluded to the fact that that force was composed of youths of seventeen years of age, and that they could not be sent to the front until they were twenty. That he said was a deplorable state of things. Now however he proposed to setup third battalions composed of that very material which would be useless for war purposes. If the circumstances were not tragic they would be laughable. These boys would be formed into battalions under officers and non-commissioned officers under whom they would not serve in time of war. They would not be battalions but depots—if they liked, glorified depots under another name—the men enlisted would be the men who were now standing at street corners waiting for odd jobs, and would not belong to the class of men like telegraphists, medical officers, transport drivers and others who had to discharge the same duties in times of war that they did in times of peace. The present first class Army Reservist was usually a man of from twenty-five to thirty years of age and of good physique, because he was the survival of all those who had joined the Army. He had served abroad and had often gone through active service. He had knocked about the world and was imbued with all those traditions for which the British Army was celebrated. He loved his regiment as a sailor loved his ship; he served under the same officers in war as he served under in peace and with the comrades with whom he had been trained in the past.

  1127
  For such men the right hon. Gentleman was going to substitute, or supplement them by, youths of seventeen with seven months training who could not be sent abroad until they were twenty and would be useless till then. And these were the men who were to stiffen a battalion going on active service. What regimental traditions would these men have? They would not serve under the same officers or with the comrades with whom they had trained. He did not think either the House or the country sufficiently realised the gravity of the proposals made by the right hon. Gentleman. He thought it was almost a crime against the Army and the officers, non commissioned officers and men, that when they went to fight the battles of their country they should have, instead of men considerably older than themselves to raise the standard and physique of the regiment and lend it a hand, these waifs and strays to stiffen the battalion. After all was said and done, was not quality better than quantity? He himself, if he were in command of a battalion, would rather have twenty-five of the old first class Army Reserve than 100 of the right hon. Gentleman's special reservists. He felt very strongly on the matter and could not let the debate pass without raising his voice against what he regarded as a wrong and pernicious proposal. He begged to move.
  Amendment proposed
  " In page 20, line 31, to leave out Subsection (1)."—(Mr. Ashley.)
  Question proposed, "That the words proposed to be left out to the word ' and ' in page 20, line 34, stand part of the clause."
  MR. HALDANEsaid the hon. Member had spoken as though they had it in contemplation to substitute for the Reserve properly so-called the men of these training battalions. They had never proposed anything of the kind. The battalions would be mobilised with their own reserves. How the eventual normal strength of the Reserve, about 115,000, was arrived at, was made luminously clear in an article by the military correspondent of The Times last Wednesday. He admitted that they had made various changes in the terms of service, and, of course, they could not
  1128
  have as large a Reserve as under the three years system; but the three years system had broken down completely. It was, perhaps, the most dreadful blunder that had been made in recent years. It had gone as a principle; there were no three years service men in the Infantry of the Line. [Mr. ASHLEY: The Guards.] They had got rid of it in the Infantry of the Line. The Reserve they asked for was sufficient to mobilise a battalion and to leave something over. That being so, what was it that the men in these third battalions were wanted for? The hon. Member assumed that they were going out as units. They were not; nothing of the sort had ever been suggested. The only reason why they took young men of seventeen was that they might get the men who were now got in the Militia, and who went through the Militia to the Line. They would take them from that age and upwards in order to get a stream of recruits for the Line. They would prefer to take men of nineteen or twenty for training, and would try to take them at an age not less than eighteen. The third battalions did not exist for the purpose of going out as units; they existed simply for the purposes of drafts to provide for the wastage of war. It was no objection that a man enlisted in the training battalion when of tender years, for he was not used until he became of the proper age. The men of the training battalion were not intended to go out into the first line at the commencement of war; that was the function of the Reserve brought out at mobilisation. The men who went out from the training battalion would be men selected from that establishment, who were of sufficient age to go out as drafts to supply wastage. The Japanese military authorities supplied their wastage from drafts who had some times had three months' training and sometimes less, and they found it answered very well so long as they got drafts. To send out men of immature age was under any circumstances foolish, but as he had explained, such youths were taken in order to provide the machinery for drafts. The present condition of the Line was one of confusion. The Militia Reserve was destroyed in 1901, and no machinery was then supplied for providing drafts. What was the proposition of the right hon. Member for Croydon? He was going

  1129
  to create trained Reservists, but what sort of men were to go into it? Under the Government's system the men of the Reserve who mobilised the battalions were highly trained men who had served with the colours; but the right hon. Gentleman proposed to abolish Reserves and depots, and to do all the dreadful things of which the hon. Member had spoken. The right hon. Gentleman proposed to substitute for a large portion of the high class Reserve which we had at present, and which the Government meant to keep, men who had two years training. They, however, did not propose to disturb the function of the Reserve, nor to abolish Reserves; what they did was to fill up a gap that had existed up to now in the organisation of our forces in consequence of there being no machinery for providing drafts. That was the primary and only purpose of the organisation to which this part of the Bill referred.
  *MR. ARNOLD-FORSTERsaid he was glad that this was one of the portions of the Bill that the Committee was allowed to discuss, because in his opinion the clause which abolished the Militia was the most important in the Bill. He had hoped that the right hon. Gentleman would have been able to give more comfort and satisfaction to the Committee than he had. This part of the Bill affected the fighting portion of the Army. The right hon. Gentleman had said that the clause was lucid, but it was not very lucid to him. It dealt with three distinct classes of Reservists. He was in the company of twelve very competent persons not long ago, and they were absolutely divided in opinion as to what the clause really referred to. There were three classes of Reservists who came within the purview of the clause. There were those who, enlisting in the Territorial Army, enlisted on a special basis, received a special training, and passed to a special branch of the Army in time of war. In the second place, there were the men who were now serving as special Reservists in the Army, and were called to form a striking force in the case of small wars. Lastly, there were the Reservists who, by the Bill they were now discussing, formed the special contingent. He proposed to discuss the question of the third class of Reservists. The right hon. Gentleman had criticised
  1130
  his hon. friend, thinking he had made the statement that these Reservists ware to act as units. He did not think his hon. friend had made any such statement, and he himself had certainly never done so. On the contrary, he thought the gravamen of their charge against the Bill was that there would be no units, and that it would actually destroy potential units by the creation of a force which could never be embodied in units until it was in the presence of the enemy.
  It was absolutely impossible to discuss the clause without taking into consideration something which did not appear in it. Why was the clause necessary at all? It was necessary because the War Office knew perfectly well that in time of war the Army Reserve would be totally inadequate for the purpose of a great war. He maintained that what he had stated with regard to the Reserve, if it erred at all, erred on the side of moderation. They were now preparing, with their eyes open, for a state of things more serious than confronted the country in 1899. In that year the Army was mobilised. It was not mobilised for a great European War. The losses in the South African War were absolutely nothing to the losses which would unfortunately take place in great conflicts between large bodies of men armed with all the modern weapons. It was notorious, and it was the basis of all the efforts made by Army reformers, that the Reserve in the South African War was absolutely inadequate for the primary purpose for which Reserves were intended, that of bringing fighting battalions up to their war strength. That was not an assertion of his; it was a fact which came out before the War Commission, and which was recorded in a whole series of official publications. The regiments were mobilised, and many of the battalions actually went out 200 short, after taking every Reservist they could get. When the matter was brought to the right hon. Gentleman's attention, what did he say? He gave a strange explanation, which to his mind only made the matter more obscure. He said that nineteen of these battalions had already sent their lndian drafts. What did that teach? It taught them that if the mobilisation had taken place in March instead of October, every single battalion would have sent its Indian drafts, and

  1131
  that every single battalion would have been 200, 300, and in some cases 400 short of the number of men necessary to enable them to go to war at all. At that time the circumstances were very peculiar. India was not making great demands on this country for drafts; on the contrary, on the outbreak of the war the authorities stopped sending drafts to India, and they even withdrew men from India. The right hon. Gentleman knew perfectly well that in any war such as they contemplated the chances were that India would be making very great demands for reinforcements. Yet. they were asked to reproduce not merely a state of things as bad as was experienced in 1899, but a state of things much worse. The right hon. Gentleman had challenged his statement that the Reserve would be greatly reduced. He still maintained that it inevitably would be. He would call attention to two arguments which had been used to refute what he had said on this point. It had been said in the first place that the Army Reserve would be greatly increased because there had been additions to the Army outside the Infantry. That was perfectly true as far as it went. Those additions which were made by the right hon. Gentleman, the Army Service Corps and the Army Medical Corps and other auxiliary branches of the Army, would produce a very small addition to the Army Reserve. Apart from that, they were told that the Army Reserve would be increased, because the number of extensions in the Army was decreasing. What did that mean? That was an excuse; it was nothing but simply an excuse. In the first place, the extensions had not diminished; on the contrary they had increased very heavily, until last year they were heavier than they had been for many years past. To go back to his original proposition, which had not been assailed, and which never would be assailed, they could not get a larger Infantry Reserve by taking off eight battalions from the Infantry, two battalions from the Guards, and reducing all the Home battalions by thirty men. That was not possible. Still less was it possible that, when they had made all these reductions, that they could have an Infantry Reserve nearly 8,000 larger than they had under the old state of things. He had ventured once before to refer to this matter in the House, and he then stated
  1132
  that there were two Returns emanating from the War Office, and both signed by the same actuary. He could have understood it had the right hon. Gentleman at once said that there was a discrepancy between those two Returns, owing to their having been founded on different bases. But that was not what happened. He did not believe the right hon. Gentleman had over soon the Returns before, but he suggested that those Returns differed in this respect, that the point dealt only with battalions at Home, and dealt with nine years instead of twelve years enlistment. He did not know why these suggestions were made to the House; on the face of the documents, it apparently was not so. Undoubtedly if those suggestions were true they would seriously affect the calculations. But they were both wrong. He had been happily able to give his authority at the moment, and what he had stated was entirely correct. Therefore, they had the fact that the calculations made in 1905 were repeated in 1907 on the same basis, with the exception that the material for making the Reserve in 1907 was much less than in 1905. The excess of Infantry alone as shown in the later return was over was 7,000. He had only had one explanation vouchsafed to him, and he challenged the right hon. Gentleman to sustain that explanation. It was no explanation at all, and he challenged the right hon. Gentleman to say that it had any validity whatever in this matter. It was perfectly true that it they had a larger number of men who were serving seven years, who took their discharge into the Reserve, and did not extend, the Reserve would be prota tanto increased, and the right hon. Gentleman's explanation would be to some extent justified. But even if that were true, the whole question would not be affected by 500 men one way or the other. The facts, however, were not as the right hon. Gentleman had supposed. The extensions were not decreasing, they were increasing, and therefore he had been compelled, in self defence, to repeat his conclusion, a very simple one by itself, that they were preparing smaller Reserves for the Infantry and the Regular Army than they had in 1899. They were also reducing the Reserve of the Guards. They knew how prolific the Guards were in producing Reserves. Perhaps hon. Members hardly realised that

  1133
  two battalions of the Guards produced 1,900 men as Reserves, and that the Reserve was capable of fitting up the whole Regiment to full war strength, and leaving a margin of over 1,000 men. If they reduced the battalions of Guards they seriously affected the Reserve; and when they destroyed eight battalions of Infantry they still further reduced the Reserve. He had given the result of the calculations, and he submitted that the fighting strength of the Reserve, after making the requisite reductions for Infantry of the Line, would not exceed, on classes A, B and D, 50,000 men. That was a very important fact, if true. It was a fact so important that it ought to be tested thoroughly from beginning to end to ascertain whether it was or was not the case, because, if it were the ease, the state of things would be as in 1899, only very much worse. That was why they had the proposal now to supplement the Reserve with this special contingent. The right hon. Gentleman in justification of his proposal had referred to the fact that the Japanese had sent a large number of men of three months' service only as drafts to their Army. Would it not have been a good deal better if the right hon. Gentleman had added the rest of the story? The Japanese who were sent to the front were men who had been two years in training under officers of the Regular Army, and they were all men of over twenty years of age. During the Russo Japanese War some of the Reserves sent out were in many cases used as drafts into different regiments. It was true that a certain number of men were sent with a vary small amount of training. Why? Because the Japanese thought that was a proper thing to do, and because they desired to do it? Not at all. It was simply due to the fact that the Japanese system was a comparatively new one, and that there were men in the Reserves who had not passed the initial stage of training for the Army. But that lesson was no lesson for us, and the right hon. Gentleman should have gone a little further and said that the Japanese were contented with the arrangement. It was only under the compulsion of circumstances that they allowed any of these men to go to the front, and for the future the whole of the Japanese army would receive this tremendous disciplinary instruction for two years in the
  1134
  ranks of the Regular Army and in the Reserve. The right hon. Gentleman said something about what the late Government had done in respect of the provision of a Reserve and the raising of men with two years' training. The training proposed was that which had been recommended by every soldier, and was, moreover, that which was given to every European Army without exception, and there were hundreds of these men in the Reserve who had received this training up to the present time. There was definite and specific training, and when the right hon. Gentleman spoke of men being unfit to serve in the ranks when they had only had two years training he was saying something which was remarkably incompatible with what he had asked the Committee to do under this scheme. Moreover, there was no intention of discharging men into the Reserve and of allowing them to remain without training; on the contrary, the training was specifically provided for. But if the men with two years training with the colours and under their own officers were unfit to serve in the Reserve at the age of twenty, how much more unfit would boys be who were enlisted at the age of seventeen and discharged straightway into the gutter, to be taken at the end of two or three years to servo in the Regular Army? What was this Reserve going to be? The right hon. Gentleman said that he would take any age he could get, and he had told the Committee that he proposed to take into this contingent the men who now went into the Militia. The Committee knew exactly what these men were like. They could be divided into two categories—(1) Men capable of going into the Line; and (2) men who were not capable of entering it. But the Line would make a demand upon these boys to the extent of 12,000 or 13,000 a year; so that out of 28,000 boys recruited for the Militia at least 12,000 over eighteen years must be taken from the contingent. It was obvious, therefore, that the bulk of the special contingent must be boy between seventeen and eighteen years of age. What was to happen then? Those boys went into the depots at the age of seventeen. In some cases seventy per cent. of the boys were only waiting their opportunity to pass from the depots into the Line. They were without moral or physical training, and

  1135
  they were not in any sense the material of which any Army could be composed. Two out of three of these boys died out of the Army before they came to the period when a man was qualified to enter the Reserve. They died out on being tested by the realities of the Army service—the hardships, the trials of campaigning, and marching. But after two months training in the depots these new Reservists were to be turned adrift, with no occupation, no help, receiving sixpence a day, or just enough to maintain themselves as loafers. At the end of a year, or a year and a half, they came back to the depot and remained for another four months. When they came back they found a new set of comrades, and having got six months training in two parts, they would be discharged. They were taken away from the influence of the officers, from association with their comrades; they never saw their regiments or their officers, and yet they were supposed to be first-class Reservists for the British Army. Within three months of the opening of any war the Infantry Reserve of the Army would be exhausted, and these boys would have to go to the front; nay, they would have to go into the ranks the moment mobilisation was decided upon. Battalion after battalion was sent out short in 1899, some as much as 200 men short. Under this scheme the War Office were putting these boys to bear the brunt of battle alongside the Regular troops on the very day war was declared. We had learned many lessons on this subject. In 1899, 80,000 or 90,000 boys were left behind because they were unfit to take their places in the ranks. They were attached by the thousand to the Militia. It was right to leave the boys behind, because they were unfit by every rule of common sense and medical hygiene to go to the front. But what happened to them? They were actually sent to the front to the number of 18,000 with the Militia battalions to which they were attached. That was the kind of risk we were now running again, and the time might come when that risk would be much greater than in 1899. The right hon. Gentleman had never been able to give information as to what proportion of those boys was likely to be available at any time. The total number was 72,000, including the Irish Militia. He had gone carefully into these figures,
  1136
  and he maintained that they stood. These boys as a rule would be enlisted between seventeen and eighteen, and they would be for one, two, or two and a half years drawing pay as soldiers of the Crown, and supposed to be part of the strength of the Army when they were absolutely forbidden by the regulations of the Army from taking part in any war. He wanted to know the proportion of the 72,000 who would be between seventeen and twenty, because, when they calculated on this Reserve, he said that such a reserve was never heard of in any other country. In the case of the German and the French armies the reserve could be called upon immediately, and the reserves could go the front. He would not dogmatise on the subject, as he had not the figures before him, but he ventured to suggest that the probability was that not fifty per cent. of these boys would be allowed to go to the front with their battalions. They would be here paying for a nominal reserve of 72,000, of which only 36,000 would be able to render the very modest services which the right hon. Gentleman expected. Was that common sense? Ought they to be told that this was a reserve on which they could rely in the event of war? The Irish Militia had been included in this force. That seemed to him another example of the extraordinary make-believe of the whole Bill. Why were eight battalions of the Irish Militia to be kept for this purpose? They would, he supposed, guard the lines of communication, reinforce the garrisons at Malta or Gibraltar. Why? Was it on military grounds that they were selected? Was it because they were specially good battalions, full of officers and full of men? Was it because their numbers were particularly large? It was a piece of pure political expediency, and nothing else the scheme would not fit Ireland. The Government were playing a game with regard to the Irish Militia battalions. It was unthinkable, in the case of war, that they should be compelled to rely upon the accident whether eight Irish Militia battalions, selected by a series of accidents, would be able to undertake the duty to be placed upon them. He thought it really approached the bounds of farce. He had talked to many officers about this special contingent, for he confessed it was the part of the whole scheme

  1137
  in the Bill which interested him most. He had asked them how they would like to lead these men in war, but he had not found one who would care to do so. At the time of the Crimean War we were not able to rely on the streams of patriotism which the right hon. Gentleman was relying on. At the end of two and a half years fighting we had 15,000 foreigners paid as British soldiers camped on Chobham Common.
  MR. HALDANEsaid we had not then the Cardwell system.
  *MR. ARNOLD-FORSTERsaid he was sure that interruption meant something to the right hon. Gentleman, but it did not mean anything to him. What had the Cardwell system to do with the question whether they could rely on streams of patriotism to make up the shortage of the Regular Army in the Crimean War? We were then paying 15,000 Germans and Swiss to play at being British soldiers here in England. That was a lesson of some value, which should be remembered when considering this scheme. We never kept up an Army of 40,000 in the field, but we went into the open market and tried to buy up boys. We bought up a certain number of boys and sent them out, but they were unsatisfactory as to training. What happened? It was a melancholy story. Those boys could not be got out of the trenches in front of the Redan, and gave no support to the gallant men who formed the forlorn hopes. Was it any blame to the boys? He supposed that no boys in the world would have behaved very differently, looking to their physique and moral standard. The things which they did were not because of their lack of good will. The qualities which went to make up a soldier came from the power to face death in an emergency; they came from a variety of reasons which went to make up a human soul in time of war. He asked if that was to go entirely disregarded by the right hon. Gentleman. He submitted to the Committee that he had made out a prima facie case. He thought he had proved, in the first place, that even on the most sanguine estimate the Infantry Reserve would be insufficient. It would be totally insufficient to mobilise the Army. Whether that was so or not, it would be absolutely insufficient to
  1138
  keep it in the field, and then would come the time when we should have to fall back on two sources of reinforcement. We should have to fall back on the Territorial Army which had been discussed for the past few days. Who for a moment pretended that we were going to get out of the Territorial Army the necessary reinforcements for the Army in the field in a modern war? The other source of reinforcement would be the boys of the special contingent. All information as to that contingent had been refused to the Committee up to the present moment. They did not know the estimate of the numbers, they did not know where they were coming from, or how many were to be available for the purposes of war. If there were any hon. Members who were not satisfied with the accuracy of what he had said, they could easily by inquiry find out that it was true. He asked them to inquire, so that they might be prevented from relying on this force in time of war. The matter was deadly serious. The authorities might play with troops at home, but they could not afford to play with the Army they had to fight with in time of war. The matter was all the more serious, because, in his belief, they were doing almost irreparable harm by depriving themselves of one adjunct of the Regular Army which had stood the country in good stead in the past, and might be made to serve them again well in the future —he meant the Militia. He sincerely trusted hon. Members would refuse to pass this clause, or, if they did, would do all in their power to repair the evil which he much feared must result.
  MR. COURTENAY WARNERhoped the Secretary of State would see his way to modify this clause. While he admitted that there would be enormous advantage in being able to embody a large number of men when war came, he thought there was some danger under the proposed new system in regard to the training of recruits. They were to be trained at depots under officers and noncommissioned officers whom they would not see again. He looked upon the special contingent clause of the Bill as somewhat dangerous, not only in respect of drafts for the Regular Army, but in respect of the whole military system throughout the country. Hon. Members

  1139
  might say that he was prejudiced in favour of the Militia, with which he had been a long time connected. He had recently seen the Militia and the Regular troops working together on Salisbury Plain, and he was convinced of the great advantage the country had enjoyed in the past from being able to reinforce the Regular Army by drafts from the Militia. It was the historical force from which drafts had been drawn. The Army was reinforced by Militia drafts at Agincourt, in the Peninsula, and at Waterloo. The men under this new scheme would only have the training in the barrack yard, or at most a little while on Salisbury Plain. They would not have the training of men who had been taught to look up to their officers, and who realised that they were part of a vast organisation in which each soldier felt that on his obedience to orders the fortunes of a whole brigade or division might depend. He did not attach the same importance as hon. Gentlemen opposite to the name Militia, or to the historical traditions which attached to it; but he thought the organisation of men in fighting ought to be that in which they were trained. When they had their recruits and got them trained, they ought to be able to take them with their regimental officers as a whole, instead of in drafts, because he thought it likely that in time of war the battalions would be wanted, not merely as drafts, but to form actual brigades, and battalions would be utterly useless unless the officers and non-commissioned officers knew each other. He hoped the men who formed third battalions would be trained as battalions, and as they would have been if they had been Militia. He hoped that the right hon. Gentleman himself would consider whether it was possible to retain the old battalions of the Militia and make them into the third battalions which the right hon. Member for Croydon had called the special contingents. He hoped that these men who were to form the third battalions would be trained as battalions, as they would have been if they had been in the Militia. He did not think it was necessary to keep to the old name of the Militia or of the old battalions. He knew that it was not the senior officers who would be wanting. There were lots of old colonels who had served their time in the Army; and at present the Militia
  1140
  produced an enormous number of company officers, although that force could do with a great many more. They had been trained as Militia officers. He was not saying that they were good officers, but they were better than officers who had not been trained at all. More than half of the officers he had talked to would not join the Territorial Army, and he thought it would be a great pity if so many officers were lost. He did not think that they would lose the men who formerly joined the Militia. Then as to the establishment of the special Reservists, if they were trained only for six months they would be inefficient as Reservists, because, for one reason, they would go to the front with officers they did not know. He hoped the battalion system would be kept up. He was sure that if the system were tried in one or two counties, and if the Reservists so trained were to join the Regular Army, it would be found how inefficient they would be. He knew that the Duke of Wellington did not think much of the Militia, but in those days the Militia were not trained so well as they had been in recent years. The Militia, however, had always been useful for providing drafts to the Regular Army. He did not see how the opinion of Commanding Officers should interfere with that of the country. When the country demanded drafts for the Regular Army, it was the duty of the Militia to supply them. He hoped that the training would not be confined to two, four, or six months after the outbreak of war, but that it would be continued for a month every year, and that the Reservists would not be trained in depots, but in battalions.
  SIR HOWARD VINCENTsaid that the importance of this clause had been in no way exaggerated by the right hon. Member for Croydon. He agreed, in the main, with the observations of the hon. Member for the Lichfield Division, who was an expert on this branch of the subject, and whose views ought to have considerable weight with the Secretary of State for War. He himself did not think that the Militia colonels ever made any objection to the Militia being liable, and to the Militia units being made liable, for service abroad. What they objected to was being required to furnish all their best men at a time of crisis as drafts for the benefit of the Regular Army. He objected to the depot system

  1141
  of training the Reservists. It would involve a very large expenditure of public money if the depots were to be made capable of training even 250 men. What efficient training could be given to a battalion of 250 men? It would be absolutely useless. There would be casualities, guard duties, orderlies, servants, and the available strength for training could only be at most 150 to 200 men. It was not at all likely that good officers from the Regular Army could be got to enter that service, which would be extremely irksome. The only pleasure in instruction to a good officer was to see the results of that instruction; but if those officers were going to be nothing but drill sergeants, and never to see their men again, they would be little inclined to take a real interest in them. The depot system had always been a failure He quite sympathised with the view of the Secretary of State for War as to the necessity of his being able to lay his hands on a large number of men to serve abroad; but why was the organisation of the Militia to be put into the melting pot? Why should the right hen. Gentleman go in for this system of special reservists? There would be no esprit-de-corps amongst them; the officers would not know their men, who would do their duty in the most perfunctory manner they possibly could. He understood that an experiment of the scheme was to be tried in the counties of Lancashire and Northamptonshire; if so hew long would it be before this branch of the Territorial Force was established? He put it, at the minimum, at ten years. If any communications had passed between the right hon. Gentleman and the hon. Member for Lichfield, the Committee should be taken into his confidence in regard to this question of the special reservist battalions. He also urged thy right hon. Gentleman to reply in detail to the observations of the right hon. Member for Croydon, who spoke with great authority and knowledge on this difficult and complex problem. The observations which had fallen from hon. Gentlemen on the other side of the House, as well as from the Opposition, showed that the Committee, as a whole, felt that they were entitled to a more explicit declaration than they had yet received from the Secretary of State.
  THE UNDER - SECRETARY OF STATE FOR INDIA (MR. CHARLES HOB-HOUSE, Bristol, E )said he did not propose to follow the right hon. Gentleman the Member for Croydon into all the figures and statistics which he laid before the Committee; but he wanted to answer what he believed to be the gravamen of his charge against this clause, and to reply to the principle involved in it. He thought everyone who had spoken that evening ignored the reason why they were bound to have such a clause as this. If the Committee would accept for a moment the principle that they must have a system of special Reservists, they would see, he thought, why the clause was necessary. Under the Reserve Forces Act, 1890, men might be enlisted and enter the Reserve without any term of practical Army service. At the present moment a man could not be admitted for training into the Reserve without his first enlisting in the Army, and this clause would enable them to take the special Reservist and pass him at once into the Reserve Force, without going through the farce of first making him a Regular soldier. The clause was absolutely necessary in order to create the class of special Reservists. The pith of the speech of the right hon. Member for Croydon was that the proposal of his right hon. friend would leave the Army with a smaller number of Regular Reservists than were found available at the outbreak of the South African war. At the present moment the calculation of his right hon. friend, which had been very carefully made, and was supported by that most acute critic, the military correspondent of The Times, was that the Reserve would number about 115,000. When the war broke out in 1899 there were at the outside about 80,000 Reservists, and that number failed to bring all the battalions up to war strength. In some regiments there were not enough, and in others there were too many, and there was no power to transfer from one corps to another. In a very carefully prepared memorandum the right hon. Gentleman, when Secretary for War in 1905–6, told them that the condition of the Militia was very unsatisfactory, and said it would in some cases be necessary to reduce units, and that in others the only possible course would be to amalgamate units, getting

  1143
  rid of about one half of the Militia units. If the Militia was to be used as a purely draft producing force, it would never be able to go abroad in the form of units, and it mattered very little whether it was called Militia or training battalions. It was true that the old Militia Reserve produced at the outbreak of the war 2.8,000, but the special contingent of his right hon. friend would produce about 33,000, and the amount of training which they would have would be very nearly, if not quite, as large as that of the old Militia reserve. What was the position? The Militia, as now enlisted, went out for training foreighty-fourdays, but the special reservists would go out for practically twice that time, although it was true that in subsequent years the period of training was reduced. In this they were following the example of the Swiss Army. The right hon. Gentleman the Member for Croydon had dwelt at considerable length on the supplies of reserves. He would point out that under the proposals of his right hon. friend sixty-six battalions would be mobilised, producing a force of about 160,000 men. No proposal to mobilise so large a striking force was ever contemplated before. There would be no more of that hurrying immature men to the front, and he hoped that those members of the Committee who looked at the question from an impartial point of view would not forget the extraordinary advantages to be gained from the great increase in the striking force.
  SIR GILBERT PARKERsaid those who had listened to the speech of the right hon. Gentleman the Member for Croydon had been greatly impressed by the tragic seriousness of this part of the Bill, and he wondered what attitude the hon. Gentleman who had just spoken would have taken if he had been sitting on that side of the House. The other day the hon. Gentleman used some rather contemptuous terms with regard to certain remarks he had made in reference to a reform of the Militia. But there opposite to him sat a Militia reformer in the person of the hon. Gentleman himself, who evidently believed in the reform of that force. The hon. Gentleman had suggested that his right hon. friend had stated that he himself would have reformed the Militia, and indicated in what way he would have reformed it. He did not think his right hon. friend
  1144
  did anything of the kind. He had turned up an admirable article written two years ago by the hon. Gentleman on the question of how the Militia could be reformed, and how the Militia and the Rifle Brigade could' be increased by 40 per cent. if certain suggestions were adopted. Throughout these debates, however, the hon. Gentleman had done nothing but pour contempt upon all their suggestions as to the reform of the Militia.
  MR. CHARLES HOBHOUSEsaid that in what he stated about the Militia he was quoting from a memorandum issued by the Secretary of State for War.
  SIR GILBERT PARKERsaid that that might be so, but the hon. Gentleman did not quote himself as one who had taken considerable part in Army debates. His right hon. friend had expressed no intention to abolish the Militia, although he had pointed out the weakness of the force, as it was his duty to do when he was War Minister. It was now, however, proposed by the present Secretary for War to wipe out the Militia, and instead to put in its place this new force.
  MR. CHARLES HOBHOUSE: I did ' not say so.
  SIR GILBERT PARKERsaid it appeared from the statement of the right hon. Gentleman that the Government proposed to take their men from a training battalion, and so provide a regular scheme of drafts for the Army in time of war. But what different scheme of drafts? The men were taken between seventeen and twenty years of age to provide those drafts. Was not that the whole point? To his mind the basis of the whole scheme was wrong. The training battalions had no prestige, no traditions, and nothing which would attract men to them, and even after they had been trained they would have no feeling about them. He had made a note of two or three points which struck him as to these training battalions as distinguished from the Militia. The men would not be trained near their homes, or in special battalions, and they would not have any service together to give them cohesion and smooth working as arose under the system of training adopted by the Militia. In the training battalions

  1145
  there would be no comradeship and no traditions. There was no esprit de corps and there was no common danger or service with their colleagues which would draw the men together. The men would be men from a training battalion and nothing more. There was no idea of regimental prestige or of attachment to the colours and none of the allurements of a march-out as a body of men attached to the same force. They could not disregard all these things which had gone to make up a body having traditions which were loved. Probably the best class of young men who joined the Militia had been attracted in the first instance by outside show, but there would be nothing of that sort; moreover, outside show had a power to make a man. He ventured to say that three-fourths of the "corner boys "who enlisted in the Militia had no idea of patriotism or national service. They were after a job, and this was a job which allured them from certain aspects. It was after they had enlisted in the Militia that there grew up in the minds of the men some conception of what the game was and what soldiering meant to himself, his fellow countrymen, and the nation. There was no Militiaman who had been long in the service who did not feel that the Militia did not exist alone, but as a part of a machine under the control of the officers, the non-commissioned officers and the colonel, who was to the youug soldier a kind of demi-god. All those qualities which went to make up a soldier were found in the Militia to a far greater degree than would the case in special contingent. His hon. and gallant friend had said it would take ten years to produce the Army which the Secretary of State for War was looking for, and the right hon. Gentleman had expressed the same opinion himself. He always read the right hon. Gentleman's speeches with admiration, because he had a way of protecting himself by means of glittering generalities which attracted for the moment but conveyed no idea to the mind of the listener. The right hon. Gentleman often relied upon a fine theatrical and sometimes a dramatic speech. For instance, the right hon. Gentleman had said he had been thinking for a year, and a year was not sufficient to deal with the great problem of the British Army, nor ten years,—indeed he thought twenty-five years could not
  1146
  effectively solve that great problem. For himself he thought the Bill proved that very conclusively, and this part of the Bill more clearly than any other, because it was just on this clause that the Bill broke down. With the hon. Member for Lichfiold he believed that the Militia could have been reformed and could have supplied effective drafts, but instead of reforming it the right hon. Gentleman offered them this special contingent composed of young men seventeen years of age who could not provide efficient drafts nor be sent abroad. This proposal would lead to the lowest class of men in point of physique and citizenship joining the special Reserve because they were driven to it by want. A totally different class of men would thus be passed into the Reserve, and when they went to the front they would go really as infants in training for war, and what would be left would be the Territorial Army. If war broke out on the frontiers of India it would not be only the 160,000 men that would be wanted. Before six months they would want not only the Reservists but every man of the Territorial Army. In the event of a big war, moreover, not only need the entire Army but 200,000 or 300,000 Volunteers would be needed as well. The Japanese to face the Russians had to have 750,000 men in the first eight months of the war. Clause 29 was to his mind the whole crux of the Bill, and under it the Secretary for War would have a class of Reservists such as had never been used in the past, and which after one experience would never be used again.
  *MAJOR DUNNEwished to call the attention of the Committee to one aspect of the Special Contingent battalions which had received scarcely any notice, viz., their relation to what were now known as provisional battalions. He happened to be during the whole of the South African War employed on the General Staff of the Aldershot District. He might tell the Committee that the work of these provisional battalions was extremely unsatisfactory. In the exigencies of the campaign there was considerable difficulty in regard to officers, non-commissioned officers, and men. There was continual change going on in connection with the battalions. They were not there a month,

  1147
  not even a week, before they were sent off to the seat of war, and their place would be taken by Militia officers, and in some cases by Volunteer officers; in a very large number of cases there were Reserve officers. The result of it was that the training was very inadequate, and the whole object for which they were sent abroad was defeated. What they had especially to contend with was the very bad interior arrangements of the battalions. He knew that incertainly one battalion the public service lost considerable sums of money simply because of their inability to bring home responsibility for the maladministration of the different companies of these battalions to any officer. As soon as they tried to bring home responsibility to any officer probably he had already left for the seat of war. It was never possible to bring home to any one the loss on the accounts of a company, owing to the continual changes. He welcomed the special contingents, or third battalions as he preferred to call them, under the scheme of the right hon. Gentleman. They would provide a permanent organisation which would take all the masses of recruits who would undoubtedly come forward under the enthusiasm of war; they would get them from the depot and get them fully enrolled in the third battalions. He thought that there would be a very ample opportunity of training these men, who were of the same standard of training as the old Militia Reserve. They would be under permanent officers in charge of the different companies forming the battalions. Perhaps the right hon. Gentleman would allow him to make one suggestion, or give him one warning in connection with the establishment of the third battalions. Four captains were to be put in command of the companies forming the third battalions, and his suggestion was they should permanently remain in command of their companies. He would also suggest that the colour-sergeants should also remain permanently. He had no doubt that in time of war much pressure would be brought to bear on the Secretary for War to allow those officers to go out to the seat of war. They all knew that when war broke out every soldier worthy the name of soldier was anxious to go out. But it should be clearly established that the officers in command of these companies were to remain per-
  1148
  manently in command of their companies. In that way they would be of real service. Undoubtedly, it would be an invidious duty, and none of the officers would like it. If, however, it was shown that the duty which they performed was of great advantage to their country, though the situation was unpleasant, they would see that they were doing a great and good work here, and he thought that it should have its distinctions and rewards, as did the work of their more fortunate brother officers in the field. If such distinctions were conferred, he thought that they would get the right sort of officers to remain behind. He hoped that the War Office would heartily recognise the sacrifice that these officers and non-commissioned officers would make in retaining permanently command of the companies of these battalions, while other more fortunate officers were at the seat of war.
  COLONEL KENYON-SLANEYasked the Secretary of State for War to realise what sort of officer he was likely to get if he adopted the suggestion which had just been made. The officer was to train the men and put spirit into them, and then he was to say to them, "I am not going out myself. I will teach you how to advance and attack, but I am not going out to advance and attack." Training of that sort would not be worth its salt; he did not admire it at all. He could not quite follow the hon. Gentleman in his idea as to the advantage that would accrue to the recruits in joining the third battalions of their own regiments. The third battalions were not going to be third battalions of their regiments. They would be a conglomerate mass of men coming from one regiment and another; they would not be trained by any officer attached to any particular regiment at all; and everything that was of value in a regiment would be remarkably absent in their training. He certainly agreed that the clause had for many of them, certainly for those who were or had been regular officers, a more intense interest than any other clause in the Bill. If the country would only recognise that all these schemes were not worth consideration, unless they led up to the effectual reinforcement of that part of the Army which had to do the fighting abroad, it would better realise what was required. All the rest was blether and

  1149
  nonsense and not worth wasting time about. It was in regard to that provision that the scheme unfortunately broke down. He asked the Committee to realise hew far that essential purpose was being met by the provisions of this clause. War on a large scale, and not on a small scale, was the essential fact before them. There were now no long wars. The enemy could not be persuaded to play the game according to rules laid down, it could not be postulated that there should be six months' notice and a large amount of warning before war broke out. If this scheme were adopted, on the sudden outbreak of war on a large scale the War Office would have to make provision for the mobilisation of the whole fighting line. Then they had to test the scheme by examining hew far it would support that fighting line in action. What had they got? They would mobilise the 160,000 men, and then they would take every single man of the first class Army Reserve, made up of men effectively trained with the regiment, who might be relied on to do their work well and to maintain to the full the fighting efficiency of the various battalions to which they were sent. But it should be remembered that even the men of the first-class Army Reserve were a little time before they fused absolutely with the other elements of the regiment. He acknowledged that they were good stuff, and rapidly became moulded into first-rate soldiers, as good as any they could have for their purposes. Let not hon. Members exaggerate or think that any men who were not fresh from training were as good as men fresh from training; they were not so good for the purpose of endurance or discipline. The right hon. Gentleman had said that he was to have the use of a number of his battalions; were they going to be an efficient part of his Reserve; was he still going to get a larger Reserve with a smaller amount of material?
  MR. HALDANE: It will be larger than it was.
  COLONEL KENYON-SLANEYpointed out that the right hon. Gentleman did not make his machine any larger to produce the supply; the machine was diminished in size, and yet it was said that they were going to have a greater product than the
  1150
  larger machine had been capable of. That was one of the most astonishing things to him, and he could not make it out at present. They had got the first-class Army Reserve, and so far he was satisfied. Then they had to fall back upon the amount of reinforcements provided by the special Reservists. The fact remained that the reserves drawn by these battalions were not going to be very valuable as reserves. They would lack a great portion of the most necessary training of a soldier, and when they were put into the ranks of the fighting force they would be without that which made a first-class Army Reserve valuable. If the authorities relied upon them they would rely on a broken reed. He did not say that, after several months with their comrades, they would not pick up all that was necessary, but that they ought to have all that was requisite when they joined, and they were first called upon to fight. The Committee must recognise that danger would lie in the fact that they might have to face a very severe action with troops a portion of whom were not reliable because they had not been efficiently trained. They did not provide under this Bill that one single man of the Territorial Force need go. Let them assume that the war was unpopular.
  *THE CHAIRMANI really think we must adhere a little more closely to this clause which deals with special reservists and not with the Territorial Force.
  COLONEL KENYON - SLANEYsaid that when the debates commenced he expected to find himself in agreement with the Secretary of State for War in regard to the Militia. At first he fancied that the right hon. Gentleman was proceeding on the right lines in reducing the Militia, but the whole course of the debate had shown that he was utterly wrong upon that point. In his opinion it would have been much better had the Government taken the Militia as it stood and made them the most effective part of the reinforcing portion of the new Army. The present training of the Militia might not be all they could wish, but it was four times better than that which they were now proposing. Those who were old soldiers were apt to attach far more importance to the training of the men than those who had not served in the

  1151
  Regular Array. He did not see how they were going to get effective reinforcements on the lines upon which the special Reserves were to be trained. How could they get an effective fighting force if the men had not the essential element of trust in their officers and that loyal spirit which impelled a man to go to the front instead of to the rear? They could not deal with soldiers on logical or mathematical lines; they had to deal with them as human beings affected by certain impulses. The country would be blind to its own interest if it relied on men so trained for forming any valuable portion of the reinforcing force. He hoped the right hon. Gentleman would recognise the opinion of those who had probably not been slow in expressing their views behind the scenes. He regretted that the right hon. Gentleman had not got the full benefit he ought to have got out of the Militia. He hoped the Committee would recognise that unless the Army scheme provided that the fighting line should be reinforced by a sufficient number of trained men the country would be running a very grave danger.
  *SIR J. DICKSON-POYNDERsaid that this was one of the most important clauses in the Bill, and upon its maintenance in its entirety depended the whole structure of the scheme of Army organisation proposed by his right hon. friend. The scheme they were discussing depended largely upon the Militia, and it contemplated not the extinguishing of that force, but simply a transformation. That transformation was directed into two channels, the first of which had already been dealt with in a previous clause giving an option to the Militia battalions to transfer themselves bag and baggage to the Territorial Army. He was glad that the Amendments intended to upset that proposal were successfully resisted, and he hoped the Amendment now under consideration which was intended to upset the second channel of transformation would meet with the same result. The second channel was the establishment of these special battalions or draft-producing depots. It had been said that the right hon. Gentleman would not secure from these depots an efficient type of soldier because they would not be constituted under the same organisation as the present Militia.
  1152
  The importance of these depots was confined to securing an adequate number of drafts for the other units. The Militia as units would still exist; but, whereas there were now but some 94,000 Militia available in an emergency, in future there would be the whole 300,000 of the Territorial Army. These draft-producing depots offered a completely new supply for the Army. They were an advance on anything that had been in existence before. These drafts were over and above the present system of draft producing from the Militia and from the first-class Army Reserve into the Regular Army. The depots were purely for draft purposes. If these men were being asked to go out as units under the depot system without battalion discipline there would be some force in the opposition of hon. Members opposite, but as long as the depots were being established for draft-producing purposes there was no strength in their arguments. The present Regular first-class Reserve would be absorbed almost to a man on the outbreak of war upon mobilisation, and these depots would be asked to supply the first drafts of men two or three months after the outbreak of the war. The scheme which his right hon. friend had introduced was entirely new, and was in advance of anything which had been introduced in the Army before. The Committee would remember what happened to the immature ill-trained boys who were sent out to the Crimea. In the case of the South African War the first drafts sent out were the men who had been condemned and discarded by the Regular battalions upon mobilisation. They had been serving in the Regular regiments, but upon mobilisation they were not able to pass the standard. Later in the war the depot centres were filled up by recruits. Fortunately the infantry battalions at the front in South Africa were not called very much into requisition, but if they had been called upon to do much fighting, with the incomplete organisation in this country, great deterioration would have set in. The conclusion which he drew from these previous experiences was that the special reserve depot was a clear profit beyond anything the Army had enjoyed hitherto. It must be better than any substitute which would be casually raised in time of emergency to meet the demands which had not been met by previous arrangements. They must have drafts. The

  1153
  present Militia system would not provide those drafts. They could not be obtained from levies on the reserve of the Regular Army unless they were prepared largely to increase the Regular Army, and that the country was not prepared to do, or to revert to the system of short service of three years which was tried by the right hon. Gentleman the Member for Croydon and found to be a hopeless failure, because the drafts could not be provided for the garrisons and for service abroad. The short service system was right so far as the Guards were concerned, but it must be remembered that they did not provide drafts for abroad. It was said that under the new scheme they would not get the men. There had been many predictions about the Army in recent years which had been proved to be false. At any rate it was worth trying. It was bound to be somewhat of an experiment. The second criticism was as to the standard of efficiency. They were told that the necessary standard of efficiency would not be got from these men under the depot system. There would be great force in that argument if the men had to go out as units or battalions to fight in an incompletely trained state, but when they were sent as drafts he thought most modern scientific soldiers would agree that the position was quite different. The men would go into depots for six months, and be trained by highly trained officers and non-commissioned officers. They would get in that time somewhat of cohesion, and although naturally they would not be the same as if they were trained under the battalion system, there was no reason why they should not get as good training and as successful results as in the period of time allotted to Militiamen. In the opinion of modern scientific soldiers the usefulness of men as partially trained units as compared with men in unprepared units was as two to one. That was to say 2,000 ill-trained drafts fighting in well organised battalions would be more useful than 4,000 men constituted in ill-trained or partially trained units. Therefore, in regard to efficiency, these depots would provide all that was necessary in connection with this proposal. The men would be largely recruited at the ago of seventeen. He thought he was right in saying that after they had passed six
  1154
  months training they were to go into the Reserve for six years. He thought those who had practical experience in these matters were agreed that young men could, at the age of nineteen, be sent out to the front to all temperate climates. They had only to wait two years before these men became useful soldiers at the front. They could discard one-sixth of the men as undergoing training and another sixth as being too young. The remaining four-sixths would be available for all ordinary purposes abroad. The scheme was well worth trying, because it produced drafts and an organisation which was far less expensive than the present. It seemed to him that those who were arguing against the proposal had lost to a certain extent the true perspective of the scheme of Army reform now proposed. If the members of each branch of the Army came to the House and argued for maintaining the traditions of his own particular branch of the service, then it would be impossible for his right hon. friend to attempt any general scheme of Army reform. It was time for those who were interested in particular branches to sink their rather local feelings in regard to the distinctions between different branches and to look at the scheme from a broader point of view. Our voluntary system had great inherent difficulties and the Government were trying to make a large reform to meet the necessities of a wide spreading empire. He sincerely hoped the Committee would resist the Amendment and retain in its entirety the clause which, in his opinion, was the most important in the Bill.
  *VISCOUNT MORPETHsaid he could not understand how the hon. Baronet opposite could imagine that the Militia in any proper sense would continue to exist after it had been torn asunder in the way proposed. He agreed that the different branches of the Auxiliary Forces should be prepared to make sacrifices for the general good, but that was a sentiment which should have been allowed to stand alone without any pretence that the Militia was going to be saved. What was really vital was the condition of the Regular Army, because the Territorial Forces in most cases would only come into play either to retrieve disaster or to avert it rather later in the day. It was to the initial success of the,

  1155
  Regular Army that the country must look for safety. The hon. Baronet had said that the men would be able to be sent to the front at nineteen years of age. Throughout the discussions on the Bill they had been told that different categories of troops would be able to serve in different parts of the Empire, some at home, some in Europe, some in the tropics, and some in India. The system which gave so many different categories of men was not a simple one. If some could be used in one place and some in others it was very likely that the whole of them would not be able to be used at the one point where they would be most required. Besides being too young the men were too little trained. The hon. Baronet had rather thrown cold water upon the regimental feeling which existed in the Militia, and had said there was very little distinction between that and the sort of loyalty that could be felt towards the depots, even going so far as to suggest that there might be a sort of depot tradition. He himself did not know what a depot tradition might be, but it would be curious if it could be a substitute for the feeling which existed in the Army and Auxiliary Forces now. If that was the feeling on which the hon. Baronet relied, he had the faintest hopes of what the second line of the right hon. Gentleman's Army was going to be. He did not wish to speak in praise of the product in the past. He thought it was in many respects very bad, but it was probably a great deal better than anything they were likely to see under the present scheme. The men who went into the Militia Reserve and were liable to be drafted into the Regular Army were men who had served a certain length of time in the Militia, had trained under their own officers, and had acquired to some extent the regimental feeling. That would not be the case with the boys who came from the depots. The men sent to the Regular Army from the Militia Reserve were better soldiers than those who would be sent under the new scheme, and who would have no opportunity of learning their duty or becoming acquainted with their comrades. It was perfectly true that when a large number of reservists rejoined the colours the machine did not work as smoothly as in the case of men who were serving with the colours. That was a difficulty in Continental armies when a large number
  1156
  of reservists were suddenly drafted into the regular army. That difficulty would be emphasised if they had only Reservists in name and not in fact. It had been said that the system was necessary because it was absolutely essential to keep the Regular Army filled up. Every hon. Member acknowledged that; it was only when that object had been achieved and when they had the Regular Army equal to the establishment and that establishment efficient, that they had a right to consider the Auxiliary Forces. The only way to keep the Regular Forces up to full strength was, he contended, to keep the Auxiliary Forces up to full strength. He submitted that the scheme put forward by the right hon. Gentleman would not in any case solve the difficulty. The strength of the Militia now was 90,000 men, and that number was a diminishing one. The strength which the right hon. Gentleman desired for his third battalions was 72,000 men, but what reason was there to expect that he would get them? The Militia was abolishing itself, because it was simply a drafting machine; and it was impossible to get men to join a force when the prospect was that they were to be drilled in the depots and afterwards to be drafted into regiments they cared nothing about? They were told that the Militia were going to be abolished because certain colonels objected to the drafting of their men into the Regular Army. He could prophesy just as well as the right hon. Gentleman, and he declared that the men for these third battalions would not be forthcoming. If they did come, they would be of indifferent quality, and if they did not come the right hon. Gentleman's scheme would break down. The hon. Member for the Abercromby division was very fond of saying that partially trained troops were better than the Regular troops who had had a fuller training. That was a paradox. His own belief was that the men belonging to the Auxiliary Forces were often superior in quality to the men in the Regular Army, and that superiority might make up to a certain degree for a want of training. But certainly no one would be able to maintain that the quality of the men of the third battalions would make up for the deficiency of the training, and to say that they would be more intelligent, better shots, and stronger men than the

  1157
  Regulars who had had a longer training was to court disaster. A system founded on such a basis must, in his opinion, break down.
  *MR. REESsaid he was very far indeed from sympathising with that unreasoning and aggressive anti-military spirit which manifested itself in such an extraordinary fashion in certain quarters of the House; but he thought that the hon. Member for Gravesend was talking at large when he declared that 300,000 or 400,000 troops would be wanted on the North-West Indian frontier within a few months of the outbreak of a war with Russia. What we had to fear was a Russian approach by railway towards the Persian Gulf or a railway under German control through Mesopotamia. The danger point had shifted from the frontier hills to the inland sea. An invasion of India by way of Afghanistan was a most unlikely contingency, but war ships in the Gulf were necessary.
  *THE DEPUTY CHAIRMANsaid that the hon. Member was going too much into detail, away from the Amendment which the Committee were now discussing.
  *MR. REESsaid he had been only following the argument of the hon. Member for Gravesend as to what number of men would be available and would be required for re-enforcing the Regular Army on the frontier of India in case of war with Russia. However, he would immediately drop the subject. He presumed he would be in order in saying that if by any compromise the character and composition of the Militia Forces could to any extent be preserved, it would be advantageous to the Territorial Army in his belief, and such preservation would, he was certain, be very acceptable to the Auxiliary Forces.
  *CAPTAIN CRAIGsaid that the Secretary for War had stated in answer to a Question he had put to him that when the Committee came to this particular part of the Bill, he would give information on the points raised in the Question in which the people of Ireland were interested; but so far the right hon. Gentleman had witheld that information. In dealing with the first-class Army Reserve they required to go into every detail, and to examine closely not only
  1158
  the class of the Reserve but also the class from which it was drawn. At the same time, in order to enable them to judge as to whether the scheme proposed by the Secretary of State for War was good for the country, they were be und to compare the Reserves which he proposed with those that now existed. He failed to see why the right hon. Gentleman had taken such a risk as to do away with the class of men that had been hitherto attracted to the colours in order to secure the power to enlist in the first-class Reserves men who had not served before. It was a very grave risk and one which he did not believe the country was prepared to accept, and he feared if the clause was put into operation it would be found to be a far larger risk than anything which the Secretary of State anticipated. The right hon. Member for Croydon had stated that there were to be left as a sort of connecting link between the old Reserve and the new a certain number of Irish Militia battalions. That was one point on which the right hon. Gentleman ought to have enlightened the Committee He ought to have stated whether they were to be retained in their entirety or to be amalgamated and done away with as Irish battalions. The right hon. Member for Croydon had mentioned that eight battalions were not to be interfered with; but to show the state of chaos that existed in this matter there was a strong rumour in Ireland that it was twelve and not eight.
  *THE DEPUTY CHAIRMANsaid that all this had nothing to do with the Amendment under discussion, which was to leave out subsection (1) which simply authorised the enlisting into the first class Army Reserve, of men who had not served in His Majesty's Regular Forces.
  CAPTAIN CRAIGsaid he only touched upon the point because of the way in which the Secretary of State for War put off the Committee.
  MR. WYNDHAMpointed out that earlier in the afternoon there was a tacit understanding arrived at between both Front Benches that this would be an appropriate place to consider the two alternatives before them, either to keep the Militia to perform certain functions as at present, or to adopt the now scheme.

  1159
  He submitted it was rather difficult to develop the argument if it was ruled that these words did not alter the meaning that had been attached to them.
  *THE DEPUTY CHAIRMANsaid he did not wish to interfere with any arrangement that had been come to, but it did not appear to him that the observations of the hon. Member were in order.
  MR. WYNDHAMquite admitted that the words of the Amendment did not suggest what he had said, but there had been a tacit arrangement that on this should take place the debate on the principles of the scheme.
  MR. CHARLES HOBHOUSEsaid he could confirm what the right hon. Gentleman said in that respect.
  *THE DEPUTY CHAIRMANsaid that, on that understanding, he should allow the discussion to proceed.
  CAPTAIN CRAIGsaid he only wanted to touch upon the question because of the way in which the Committee had been put off, and he would not carry it further. Passing from that he would ask whether they could rely upon the country off-hand filling up the blank left by the abolition of the Militia? Could they on the outbreak of war rely on the country furnishing the Reserves which were necessary to carry on a campaign? In all good faith he held out a solemn warning to the right hon. Gentleman that his Reserves would fail him. He did not say that the men would fail, but he simply said the scheme would break down. They had heard a great deal about the spirit of the depot and the associations which would be thrown around young men of seventeen who were to be brought to the depot to be trained, but he could scarcely imagine that any great amount of regimental enthusiasm could occur on the outbreak of war, when neither the commissioned nor the non-commissioned officers accompanied these boys to the front, and when the boys themselves, who had been trained and brought up in the barrack yard together, did not go out as a unit, but were drafted into different regiments—some to guard the lines of communication and others to go to the
  1160
  front. The regimental association, such as it was, would be broken into, and there could be no esprit de corps, and none of that tradition which was found under present conditions. There could be none of these things in the new Reserve, especially when they had regard to the fact that nowadays so much depended on the individuality of the various officers. When they considered the lack of inducements for a boy of the proper class to join the new Reserve it was impossible to discover anything which would overcome the difficulties he had mentioned. The pay was not such as would attract the best class of Reservists, and if the best class was required that class must be attracted by either the pay or the terms of service, or in some other way. But even supposing the men would volunteer for the Reserves from patriotic reasons, the training they would receive would be that which was least suited to enable them to perform the functions they would be called upon to perform. If men were to be trained for times of national emergency they must be trained with the troops by the side of whom they were to fight. Were these boys on the outbreak of war expected to go to a foreign land like India and to be drafted into the ranks of seasoned troops? The truth of the matter was that they were not. They were a Reserve on paper only, and on the outbreak of war there would be no Reserve to send to the assistance of the Regular Army at the front. If they were sent out he had no hesitation in saying that they would be a danger to those whom they were sent out to assist. If they were properly trained they would be quite ready to take their place in the ranks of seasoned troops, and would, no doubt, have a steadying influence on the battalion. It seemed to him almost hopeless to expect to get the best results from such an unbusiness like method. A first-class Army Reserve scheme should be thoroughly well thought out by the Government before the Committee was asked to consider it at all. Yet not one question put by the right hon. Member for Croydon had been answered. The speech of the Under-Secretary of State for India could not be considered as an answer in any way by anyone who knew the conditions of the Reserves at the present time. Was it the case,

  1161
  as the hon. Member for Lichfield inferred in the question he had put to the right hon. Gentleman, that the necessity for the scheme would never have arisen had it not been for the fact that the colonels of Militia regiments objected strongly to their men being sent out as drafts piecemeal? He hardly thought that that was the real reason for this Bill, because when a regiment was sent out to the seat of war it was immediately broken up for drafts; but if it was, the colonels of the Militia who refused to allow their units to be so treated were responsible for the present state of things. It was not possible to have an arrangement for Reserve purposes, whether it was a depot for sending out drafts, or a company raised by somebody in times of emergency, no matter how they were trained at home, by which they could expect to send out men to stand beside seasoned troops. He considered the Bill a retrograde measure, and that the Government were producing a force which was not convenient to handle or to get together. We had now a thoroughly well-trained Reserve which a postcard could call to the colours at any time, and if the right hon. Gentleman was going to destroy that it would be a great convenience to the Committee if he would give them some idea of whether his now Reserve force would be equal to the present; where he was going to draw his reserve from; whether it was going to be the good old Militia Reservist class, or whether a new race was to spring up to fit the coat which the right hon. Gentleman had made for it. The next point was as to the various classes of recruits which the right hon. Gentleman got under this clause. It was possible to raise a class of Reservists in one part of the country who certainly would not harmonise or go well with those from another part. For his part, he would very much have preferred if the right hon. Gentleman could have seen his way to establish a general depot for the training of the first-class Reservists gathered in the various recruiting districts throughout the country. If the units were to be scattered throughout the country where they would be of no use, they would not be worth talking about; there would be no enthusiasm about them. They might call it sentiment if they liked, but the
  1162
  country was dependent upon sentiment for its Volunteer Army, and not upon conscription or other enforced methods of service The right hon. Gentleman had not given the slightest indication of how he intended to foster that sentiment, nor had he said whether the first class Army Reservists were to be trained at isolated stations throughout the country or brought together at one general depot. He hoped that before the close of the debate the right hon. Gentleman would answer the Questions as regards the Irish regiments, and what was to happen to them.
  MR. WYNDHAMsaid he rose to express the earnest hope that they had not heard the last word from the Government upon this all-important, and what he might call, this momentous subsection of the Bill. He hoped that the Committee would understand that he was casting no disparaging reflection upon the reply of the Under-Secretary for India to the heavy indictment delivered earlier in the debate by his right hon. friend the Member for Croydon. That was not the occasion for making scores, even if they could be made, off those who had spoken on the other side. They were not discussing a Party question, and they were not seeking a Party advantage. With the possible exception of the hon. and gallant Member for Chippenham, he was unaware of a single person in the House, or out of the House, in the service, or amongst the gentlemen who wrote the able Military correspondence, who had not expressed some concern as to the possible consequences which might ensue from this clause. The Military Correspondent of The Times had often been cited by be the sides of the House and by the Secretary for War. But the right hon. Gentleman knew that, if they read between the lines of the letters of that distinguished soldier and able journalist, they found great disquietude in his mind at the consequences which might ensue from passing this subsection. He gathered from his letters that the Military Correspondent of The Times would have preferred that the Secretary for War had taken some loss drastic steps in respect of the Militia. And certainly the correspondent of the Westminster Gazette, who had been supporting the right hon. Gentleman, had said more than once, in

  1163
  so many words, that he would be very glad if the right hon. Gentleman would reconsider the consequences of this sub-section in so far as they affected the Militia. It was not only the most important passage in the whole Bill, but it was of a character quite distinct from any other part. It had far-reaching consequences affecting the forces of the Crown as a whole, the Regular Army and every branch of the Auxiliary Forces. If the right hon. Gentleman had any hope to hold out to them, if he had another word to say upon the clause and the consequences which it would entail, he thought he ought to say it now. He ought to say it in the House of Commons; he ought to say it to the Committee, curtailed as their opportunities for debate had unfortunately been. Let him take for one moment the speech of the Under-Secretary for India. He would illustrate his contention that the clause was totally different from all the other clauses, and that it marked a great change of policy, or the possibilities of a great change of policy, really greater than anything that had happened since the time of Mr. Cardwell. The Under-Secretary for India, when he began his speech, made a very large assumption. He read out this sub-section, and said that if they were to have Special Reservists at all, that was the way to get them. He did not hold that to be a travesty of the hon. Gentle man's speech, and it was a very large assumption which they must examine. The speech of the Under-Secretary for India was, as he was sure it was intended to be, perfectly straightforward and sincere, and he could only have had in his mind that class of man who was now enlisted in the Army for the purpose of putting him into the Reserve, to per form certain definite functions—a man who might be called a trained soldier, a man who did administrative work in the Army as distinct from the fighting work of the Army. For that purpose they made a short circuit, so that instead of enlisting a man for the Army, giving him his shilling, and then putting him into the Reserve, they took the man at once for this purpose and this purpose alone. But they knew—because the right hon. Gentleman had dealt very fairly with them—they knew from the Minister in charge of the Bill that this sub-section
  1164
  covered no less than what he had called taking the whole substance of the Militia and putting it into the Reserve, which was a totally different matter. The one was an administrative device to get their Army Service Corps men into the Reserve so that they could call upon them in time of war on the embodiment of the Army. That was one thing. But to take the whole substance of the Militia and there by kill the Militia, without the possibility of resurrection, in order to make a new kind of Reserve which they thought, on the whole, compared unfavourably with the present Reserve, was a totally different affair. He thought he would be right in saying that these five lines of the Bill covered other purposes too. They took fourteen squadrons piecemeal out of the Yeomanry; they covered and took, too, Volunteers to serve in the ammunition columns of the Regular Artillery; they covered the taking of the Army Service Corps men into the Auxiliary troops, as they were called, of the Army. So that in these five lines they had several policies—the policy of substituting these 3rd training battalions for the Militia; the policy of extracting all that was best in the Yeomanry and putting it into the Reserve under the obligations of the Reserve Acts; and the policy of eking out the Regular Artillery by taking the Volunteers and putting them also under the Reserve Acts. Out of these three policies, on any one of which the House should have had proper time for deliberation, incomparably the most important to his mind, was the proposal to kill the Militia, and to take its substance and put it into the new training battalions. He noted, and he asked the Secretary for War to note, one phrase which the Under-Secretary for India had used in speaking for the Government. He said that the Bill passed last year enabled the War Office of that date to take in Reservists. Let them think what a flood of light that threw upon the possible consequences of this sub-section. Every man who went into the Reserve, whether he belonged to the substance of the Militia and went into the battalion, or to the Yeomanry and went into the squadron, or to the Volunteers and went into the ammunition column of the Artillery—every man abstracted from the Auxiliary Forces and put into the Reserve would, by the legislation of last year, be a

  1165
  contravontion of the power of the War Office. Surely they ought to be told what the clause meant. When the Bill became an Act and this clause was part of it, the intentions of the right hon. Gentleman would be matters of historical interest, but they would not shape and determine the lives of men in the Auxiliary Forces who went into this Reserve. The Under-Secretary of State for India had laid it down as an absolute proposition, to which apparently no exception was to be found, that if the Militia were to give drafts to the Regular Army they could not go abroad. That was what the hon. Gentleman had stated. It was a matter of common knowledge that the Secretary of State for War entered into negotiations with the colonels of the Militia to allow their regiments to supply drafts for the Regular Army, and, if the colonels of the Militia had not raised difficulties, amounting almost to a refusal, in the language of the military correspondent of The Times, the right hon. Gentleman's scheme would not have boon that under discussion, but a scheme under which the Militia would be preserved and be prepared to give drafts to the Line. Therefore, they could not accept it as an unalterable proposition that a body of troops which gave drafts could not, after giving those drafts, be used for the units. They knew that was not the case. What had happened in the past? What happened when the brigade of Guards went to the front, and when the brigade of Highlanders went to the front, and when the brigade of Irish regiments went to the front, or the regiments forming those brigades, which largely helped the other battalions in the first stage of the war? It was that spirit of patriotism to which the right hon. Gentleman was always referring which called the recruits into the second battalion, and that second battalion was reinforced as the units were called to duty abroad, although it had furnished drafts for the first battalion. It was far more preferable, after all, that all those who were going to fight, who were going to endure those trying experiences, those awful experiences described by his right hon. Friend—it was far bettor that those who had got to face the firing line should have been trained in a battalion rather than in a depot. It was better that they should be inspired by the traditions which that battalion had
  1166
  accumulated during two hundred years; it was better for them to feel that if they failed at the front, they failed, not as individuals, casting discredit on those who had gone before them, but as part of a battalion with great traditions. The advantages of that inspiring sentiment wore greater and not smaller simply because it was sentiment. There was nothing interesting in squad drill, if they looked to getting their drafts from among boys of seventeen who were to be got into shape by placing them in obsolete depots, to be trained under officers they had never seen before; and then probably sent out in little battalions jumbled together on one ship, attached to regiments they had never heard of, and put into the firing line to suffer death. The patriotism of the country was a force upon which the right hon. Gentleman could count, but let him train it into the proper channel. The right hon. Gentle man made a great point by saying that these training battalions would never go abroad as units. That was one of the deplorable features of the scheme. These battalions, according to the right hon. Gentleman, were simply to provide drafts to make good the wastage of war; but later on he added that they were also to supply that stream of recruits for the Line which the Line now received from the Militia. But did not the right hon. Gentleman feel that he had much better rely on the old force, which at present not only supplied drafts and recruits, but did garrison service abroad? What warrant had the right hon. Gentleman for telling the Committee that this new force would discharge at least two obligations which the Militia had discharged with a great measure of success? The right hon. Gentleman should say why he had thrown the Militia into the melting-pot, because he bad wedded himself to the force that could not be used as a separate unit to go abroad. The right hon. Gentleman would search history in vain in support of so sweeping a contention. The right hon. Gentleman turned the substance of the Militia into a Reserve which could not be com pared with the Reserve we now had, and thon he was forced to turn the Volunteers into a substitute for the Militia, a function for which they were not suited. But the right hon. Gentleman had left nothing between the Regulars-the

  1167
  sterling quality of which had been debased by this amalgam of boys of seven-teen—and the Volunteers who were to have no adequate training in time of peace and to be under no stringent obligation in time of war. He urged the right hon. Gentleman, therefore, to tell the Committee whether he definitely des paired of the Militia, and whether there was an irretrievable pledge to use these special Reservists in the place of the Militia. The right hon. Gentleman counted upon getting enough of the special Reservists to make good the wastage of war during six months. Even upon that reckoning he thought that the right hon. Gentleman was in error. This was a very important question. He would not repeat what the right hon. Gentleman the Member for Croydon had said that afternoon as to the possibility of our Regular Reserve being made larger. It was clear that the right hon. Gentle man would not have as many men as ho would have had if he had not destroyed the machine for making the Reserves, or if he had preserved the modest, but at the same time very useful, expedient of having 100 three years men in every Line battalion. He was not accusing the right hon. Gentleman of taking steps to reduce the Regular Reserve. After a war there was always a great oscillation, and one of the first effects was to deplete the Reserve. But would the right hon. Gentleman get enough men by the device he had adopted? The military corespondent of The Times, who had supported him so brilliantly with his pen, said on 1st April, as to the supply of the new special Reservists during the first six months of a war, that—
  "these calculations excluded the whole question of the reinforcement of India or Egypt or the Colonies by drafts; we have little or nothing to draw upon in the shape of Regular troops when the field Army has left our shores."
  Those who defended the right hon. Gentleman's scheme, therefore, said that this expedient would not give him the quantities of men absolutely necessary. Whatever might be said about the quantity, however, no one pretended that the scheme gave the quality of our existing Reserve, or of that of any other army known to us. The right hon. Gentleman had criticised the provisions of having short service battalions, in which the men served two years. Did he allege that the Guards at three years service furnished a bad Reserve? In foreign armies the men
  1168
  were enlisted for two years, and men who had served for two years in a historic battalion had a different temper from the men whom the right hon. Gentleman contemplated putting in the Reserve. In respect of quantity the plan would fail. Why did the right hon. Gentleman expect to get a sufficient number of recruits? As things were now a boy entered the Militia at seventeen; perhaps he joined a Militia battalion which bore the name of a county regiment. They did not know whether it would continue to bear that name. He went into that battalion, he saw what battalion work was like, what soldiering was like, and he went on into the county regiment, and ultimately into the Reserve. That had a certain inspiring influence which under the scheme of the right hon. Gentleman would not be operative in getting recruits. The boy would join as a special Reservist, and then he passed under an uncertain obligation to be taken for any service for which the War Office chose to call him. Who was going to be attracted by the prospect of squad drill in a barrack-yard by an officer whom the man had never seen before and might never see again? And what would the quality be like? It was said that, after all, the boy of seventeen who went into the special Reserve was the same sort of boy who went into the Militia. But what happened to the two? In the case of the boy who went into the Militia, if he liked soldiering, ho wont into the county regiment. He was there for seven years, and then, at twenty-four or twenty-five, when he went into the Reserve, he was a man on whose character and quality they might depend. They were some times asked to consider the wastage; but was it not better to get what they wanted now rather than adopt the policy of the right hon. Gentleman? How did the right hon. Gentleman meet that? He met it by not exposing these boys to a process of medical examination. They might be consumptive or undermined with hereditary disease, but they could go into the Reserve for an indefinite period, and they would appear in the Estimates year by year as Reservists who wore to make up the wastage of war. For all the House knew, they might be wasted in peace. Don Quixote exposed his helmet to a great test. He struck it with a sword and made a hole in it. Then he mended it with cardboard, put it on his

  1169
  head, and was satisfied that it was a very good helmet indeed. So the right hon. Gentleman said that the boys who now went into the Militia would go into the special contingent, but he applied no test to them. The right hon. Gentleman asked the country to be satisfied that in the day of peril these men would be forthcoming and ready to do duty in a war on which, perhaps, might depend the existence of the country. This apparently innocent subsection had far-reaching consequences upon our first line, the Regular Forces, and it had no less far-reaching consequences on the second line, the Auxiliaries. The right hon. Gentleman had said that the whole Militia regiment might become one of the service battalions. If that were so, they would be absolutely under the thumb of the War Office of the day. How were they going to recruit the Auxiliary Forces under those conditions? Would it not be better to proceed under Clause 12, and allow men to take the foreign obligation? Under this clause, from the very start a man was to be asked," Are you for the special contingent or the special Reserve?" If he said yes, he was under an obligation which might last for twelve years. It was a ludicrous plan; it shattered the Auxiliary Forces; and it was an un necessary plan. It would take the pith and marrow of the Yeomanry to be drilled apart and to take a six years obligation to go into the Reserve and perhaps to be taken for a cavalry regiment. The purpose might be met by allowing young men to undertake the obligation, putting it upon the colonel to have at any time the quota that might be needed. That could be done by appealing to the generous emulation of the youth of the country without shattering the force past all redemption.
  MR. HALDANEsaid the Committee were fortunate in the concentration of the debate upon a particular point, and discussion had shed light on the position. A point which must have struck every body who had taken part in the debates was that the Government after all had—whether for better or worse was another question—a definite plan which they had put before the House. They had been some eighteen months in office, and, at all events, they had brought forward this definite plan. It had been
  1170
  subjected to criticism, but criticism upon the Government proposal to be effective should be accompanied by an alternative plan to meet the special circumstances of the case. The right hon. Gentleman opposite had been in office for ten years and his Government had been endeavouring to deal with the Army question. Plan had succeeded plan. Did the right hon. Gentleman the Member for Croydon make no proposition to alter the Re serves? He made proposals, but his colleagues did not agree with him.
  *MR. ARNOLD-FORSTERsaid there was no foundation for the statement that his colleagues disagreed with him. So far from that being the case, the scheme was put in force, and a considerable number of men were passed into the Reserves.
  Mr. HALDANE: They raised very few under that scheme.
  *Mr. ARNOLD-FORSTER: I say that 52 per cent. of the men enlisted enlisted for short service.
  MR. HALDANEsaid the men joined the Reserves on an extremely small and microscopic scale. The plan was brought forward on 1st August, 1904. Why did it not make any further progress? That was one of those puzzling things which it was not for him to look into. The right hon. Gentleman the Member for Dover made one observation with which ho cordially agreed, that the only use of a Reserve force was for a war purpose. It was for that purpose that reorganisation was proposed, it was for that purpose that he withstood the objections of Service men to the proposed changes. The right hon. Gentleman had said that the plan had caused general concern, and he suggested that few soldiers were in favour of it. Did he attach no importance to the fact that the Army Council had cordially endorsed it?
  MR. WYNDHAM: I am sorry to say I attach no importance to that.
  MR. HALDANEasked whether the right hon. Gentleman attached no importance to the fact that the Defence Committee approved of the scheme. After all, the opinions of distinguished soldiers—men like General French—were not to be altogether despised in this matter.
  MR. WYNDHAMsaid that the right hon. Gentleman was supporting his scheme as a whole, while he was protesting against this substitution of the third battalions as the worst form of Reserves.
  MR. HALDANEsaid that the right hon. Gentleman could not have taken a more unlucky illustration. The scheme had been worked out with all the skill that the best professional element in the Army could bring to bear on it. If there was anything in the Bill that was an Army scheme it was the third battalions and the Reserve they produced. The right hon. Gentleman could not have forgotten that Lord Elgin's Commission had said that the Militia was going from bad to worse. The force was 40,000 men short of its establishment, and 1,000 officers. Those were the reasons why the Government insisted that if something was to be done with the question of Army reform it must be approached in a serious way, and all other considerations which could not be intelligently applied must be brushed aside. With its present organisation the Militia was incapable of making an efficient adjunct to the Regular Army. Did hon. Members believe that the same unit could produce the drafts that were necessary, and at the same time be efficient in war? Why was it the late Government abolished the Militia Reserve, the most valuable thing the Militia produced? Why should they sweep that away? They were left at this moment without any machinery to provide for the west ago of war. The Government had surveyed the Line, and they had found hole after hole and gap after gap in its constitution, and their work was to make good those holes and gaps. It had boon suggested that the drafts they produced were not of the same quality as the Reserve, and that they were weakening the Reserve and deteriorating the quality of the force. The drafts they were creating they sought to create, not in substitution of the Reserve, but for the reason only that the late Government, having destroyed the Militia Reserve, had left the country without anything to make up the wastage of war. He agreed that Part III. was the most vital part of the Bill. Without it they could not make up the deficiency in the first line. The expeditionary force was of no account unless they could mobilise it, and they
  1172
  could not mobilise it unless they filled up the gaps. His hon. friend the Member for the Lichfield Division had said that this was an integral portion of the scheme, and that without it the plan of the expeditionary force would be incomplete, because otherwise no provision could be made for the wastage of war. In fact they could not keep it alive unless they provided the machinery to make up for the wastage of war. The right hon. Gentleman the Member for Dover had said that one of the startling features of Part III. was that it applied not only to the Militia and the wastage of war, but to the Yeomanry and artillery, and, he might add, to the Army Service Corps and the Army Medical Corps. The theory of the Bill was to organise two lines, and two lines only—that there must be a clear line of demarcation between the Regular expeditionary force on the one hand and the Territorial Force for home defence on the other. It was true that there were several services, the material for which could well be drawn from the Territorial Force, and he believed it would contain many men who would be keen about soldiering and willing to come over the line and bring themselves within Part III. of the scheme If they did they would belong to the first line. It was true that he hoped to get from the Yeomanry a certain number of men who would take engagements under Part III. and then belong to the Regular cavalry. It was true that they proposed to get a number of artillerymen belonging to what used to be the Militia class who would come over in training brigades and would form a reserve for artillery, for divisional ammunition columns, and, in time, for brigade ammunition columns. But the point was that it was absolutely true that Part III. was a vital, and per haps the most vital part of the Bill, for without it the deficiencies of the first line could not be made up. It was all very well to talk of the largeness of the expeditionary force: but that force would be of no account unless it could be mobilised, and in order to mobilise it they must provide for the wastage and the subsidiary services. There had been a good deal of discussion about the Regular Reserve, and the right hon. Gentleman the Member for Croydon had said it was being reduced. The units would now produce their own Reserve, and the Reserve was adequate to mobilise the

  1173
  units. Of course there was a smaller Reserve than there would be if there were more units; but an enormous amount of nonsense had been talked about the reduction in the Reserve. He had before him notes of the most careful description of the criticisms which the right hon. Gentleman the Member for Croydon had made upon the Reserve which the Government proposed to constitute. He was not going to be so hostile as to quote all the hard things which the military correspondent of The Times had said about the right hon. Gentleman's calculations; but the right hon. Gentleman would admit that the military correspondent of The Times was perhaps not wholly without reason in saying that the right hon. Gentleman had slightly misrepresented certain propositions forming the foundation of his calculations. According to the latest figures, what was the actual state of the Reserve? With section D as low as 16,293 the total was 100,777. If section D were not below its normal—if it had not been closed down—its figure would have been not 16,000 but 25,000—a difference of 9,000. The actual Reserve on 1st April, 1907, was 117,070. His calculation was that the Reserve to be got under the terms of service settled with the view of getting this very Reserve which they considered adequate was 115,000; but this normal Reserve of 115,000 took section D at 25,180, which it would be on normal conditions on his terms of service, so that he had that difference in his favour. Few things were more misleading than to take the state of the Reserve at a particular date and compare it with the normal state of the Reserve. He had known a Reserve down as much as 2,000 in the course of seven or eight weeks. He had another table calculated in 1905, which, compared with the table calculated in 1907, gave the Reserve as loss, al though the establishments were larger. That table was calculated for infantry only, and on the hypothesis, which proved to be altogether misleading, that the number of extensions would be very much larger than they actually were.
  *MR. ARNOLD FORSTER: How much larger?
  MR. HALDANE: said the right hon. Gentleman's calculation was based on the assumption that the proportion of ex-
  1174
  tensions from seven to twelve years would be 30 per cent. on the average. They were nothing approaching 30 per cent. Ho had no interest in this matter but to get at the truth. The figures he had given to the Committee had been worked out for him by the best experts he could command, and he thought that in the light of the criticism of the military correspondent of The Times, and what he had himself said, the Committee would consider that the result remained un shaken. The right hon. Gentleman had referred to the Crimea, and no doubt the case of the Crimea was deplorable. That was because we had no provision to give us a Reserve, and we had to improvise recruits to be sent out, but the Commander-in-Chief asked us to send no more because they were so bad. To-day, thanks to the working of the Cardwell system, we had a magnificent Reserve in the Home battalions, and we had an establishment which, if it consisted of a smaller number of units, was in some respects better than the right hon. Gentleman had to deal with. The strength of the Colonial battalions had been increased by seventy-four men each. It was true they had reduced temporarily the establishment of the Home battalions from 750 to 720. That was owing to the shortage produced by the unfortunate three years system. As soon as the strength corrected itself and made the establishment correspond with the facts, one thing he would insist upon was that establishment and strength should henceforward correspond. He would like to know whether the Leader of the Opposition could give them, even in outline, a plan for making the Militia as efficient for the supply of drafts and units comparable in simplicity with the plan of these battalions. He agreed that they were taking the substance of the Militia battalions for the third or training battalions. But they were leaving more than sufficient of the units, and they would be able to mobilise more units under this plan than they could have mobilised before. What they proposed to do with the twelve battalions of Irish Militia who would not form third battalions was typical of what they were going to do under Part III. The Irish Militia without exception would pass under Part III. if this scheme was carried through. They would be en listed into the special Reserve and would belong to the special contingent. But as

  1175
  they would not be wanted for the third battalions of the Regular regiments, that was to say, beyond the production of the eight battalions which were required to form the third battalions of the eight Irish regiments, there would be a surplus; and the Government proposed to bring the battalions together, to bring up their establishment, and to deal with them in a fashion which, they hoped, would make them efficient and would produce twelve more battalions. These twelve battalions would be liable to furnish drafts in case of need, but their primary function would be, not to furnish drafts—they had enough in the eight battalions—but to serve as units unless the supreme necessity of the first line required them to form drafts. The principle might be extended by some future Parliament, but it was capable of a great deal of application even in present circumstances. It insured an expeditionary force of sixty-six battalions of the Line, and was capable of doing much of the work for which it was necessary to draw on all sorts of odd units, under the old, confused state of things. As to officers, one of the things which he had put most prominently forward was a plan for the creation of a Reserve of Officers. At present the miserable situation was that we were nearly 4,000 officers short for the first line, and more than that number short for the second line. That was the state of things which he had undertaken to attempt to remedy. The outline of proposals had been put before the House, and seeing that the Govern-had been at work for only eighteen months, it could not be said that they had allowed the grass to grow under their feet. He had shown why the Government felt bound to deal with the Militia, and why they attached vital importance to this third part of the Bill, in supplying the deficiencies of the first line, not only in regard to the wastage of war, but in regard to cavalry, ammunition columns, Army Service Corps, Army Ordnance, Medical, and Veterinary Corps. He had shown why the Government felt bound to this organisation in two lines, and how it was that Part III. of the Bill completed the mechanism necessary for the efficiency of the Regular line. No plan could be ideal. The Government had done their best, with the best assistance they could command, to get a work able machinery which would give the
  1176
  nation value for its money and make the best of the materials at disposal. They might have failed or they might have succeeded, but they were not open to the criticism of those who had experienced the enormous difficulties of the problem and who, after ten years, had been able to produce no other alternative.
  Mr. A. J. BALFOURsaid that the right hon. Gentleman had imparted rather an unnecessarily polemical tone to his observations. The right hon. Gentle man asked for a plan, and left nineteen minutes for its explanation and defence. He would not attempt to copy a practice in which the right hon. Gentleman was indulging almost to excess—that of describing everyone from whom he differed as guilty of mixed thinking, and everyone with whom ho agreed as a master of the are. of clear thinking, and the plan which ho recommended as the one which alone deserved the name of scientific. He hoped the right hon. Gentleman would not think him worse than other people in the obscurity of his thinking or in the unscientific character of his suggestions if he rose to the right hon. Gentleman's invitation and pointed out where his plan might be modified for the better. He did not mean to touch on the controversy between the right hon. Gentleman and his right hon. friend the Member for Croydon as to the amount of the Regular Reserve of the Army. It was impossible for those who were not actuaries and who were not inside the War Office to deal with that question. But it was sufficient for the Committee to remember that the source from which the Reserve sprang was the Regular battalions; that those were being diminished; and that the inevitable consequence was and must be that the Regular Reserve produced under this scheme must be less than before if the terms of service remained the same. The real question, and the only question they had to determine, was whether they did better by abolishing the Militia and substituting for them these so-called Third Battalions, which were not battalions at all, but depots, or whether they could not improve their Militia and make them subserve the double purpose of providing, or helping to provide drafts, at the same time leaving it open to them to provide, in case of need, separate units for service on the lines of

  1177
  communication, and ultimately, it might be, for service in the fighting line. He would earnestly suggest to the Committee that it was not inconsistent with the right hon. Gentleman's scheme that the existing Militia, with all their traditions, all their esprit de corps, all the organisation, which required improvement, but which was capable of improvement, should be used to carry out what, ho agreed with him, were the two great purposes which every Secretary of State for War must have regard to. If the right hon. Gentleman said, as he had said, that it was not only necessary to provide Regular battalions for service in the field, but also to provide machinery by which those battalions could be fed and the wastage of war supplied, there was no man in the House who did not agree with him. Could they not use their Militia battalions partly for that purpose? That was the first question he would ask. The second question ho would ask was this. The Militia battalions as they were at present constituted had proved them selves, even when depleted, most valuable units in the field. That was not a question of speculation. It was a certainty. It had been done within the last ten years. If they were all agreed, and ho thought they were, that drafts could be provided and that the units were also useful and had proved themselves useful, the question arose—Could the Militia, especially the Militia reorganised and improved, not carry out both the great functions of providing drafts and units? The right hon. Gentleman had told them that he did desire the Irish Militia to carry out those functions, and, when ho asked him what his plan was, his reply was to give to the English Militia the organisation which the right hon. Gentle man proposed to give to the Irish Militia, and to ask the English Militia to perform the duties which he was already prepared and determined to ask the Irish Militia to perform. The right hon. Gentleman had told them that he was going to ask the Irish Militia to provide drafts and fighting units. That seemed to be the moral to be drawn from the first part of his observations. The right hon. Gentleman had told thorn, rather cursorily, but in unmistakable terms, and with perfect lucidity, that he desired the Irish Militia to carry out both functions. And the scheme of the Irish Militia was that they were to provide both
  1178
  drafts and units. If that were true—and he did not think that it could be denied by those who had followed cither the right hon. Gentleman's speech or the scheme—if it were true that the Irish Militia were to fulfil both functions, then they asked why the plan was not applied to the English Militia or to the Scottish Militia. He proposed that they should give to the English Militia the organisation that it was intended to apply to the Irish Militia, and he asked that the English Militia should perform the duties which were already prepared and determined upon for the Irish Militia. He thought that was a very simple answer to the question of the right hon. Gentle-man; and he would venture very earnestly to point out to the right hon. Gentleman and to the Committee that if that plan wore carried out it would not violate the fundamental lines of the scheme. It was wholly consistent with the demands made upon the population for war purposes; it conflicted in no way with the general lines of the Bill. It was perfectly consistent even with Part III. of the Bill; and he was not in Committee going to commit the solecism of suggesting any plan for adoption which was inconsistent with what the right hon. Gentleman regarded as the fundamental principle of his Bill. He ventured most respectfully, and certainly in no controversial spirit, to press upon the right hon. Gentleman that, though he could not modify the main lines or the roots from which his scheme had grown, yet he could extend to England and to Scotland the Militia organisation which he had applied to Ireland. In Ireland the right hon. Gentleman proposed to retain a certain number of Militia regiments, and some Of those Militia regiments were to supply drafts and units in case of need. It was an excellent plan, which seemed to him to be admirably fitted to the exigencies of a Volunteer Army. He only asked the right hon. Gentleman to adapt that plan to England and Scotland. It could not be out of harmony with his general scheme. If it was good for Ireland it could not be wrong for the other two parts of the United Kingdom. If it were consistent with his general Army scheme, if it helped the Forces of the Crown as fighting units, if it wore useful in time of war when dealing with Ireland, then according to the canons of military policy it could not

  1179
  be a failure if they adopted it for England and Scotland. They did not ask the right hon. Gentleman to reverse the fundamental principles which he had laid down. They did not ask him to give up anything which could be regarded as an essential part of the Bill. It would be absurd to make such a demand; he did not make it; all he was asking him was to consider whether he could not extend wholly or partially his own plan for Ireland to other parts of the United Kingdom. That was a consideration which he was sure involved no inconsistency on the part of His Majesty's Government, which certainly involved the giving up of no principle, and was in harmony with all the right hon. Gentleman had said and the admirable principles he had laid down; and if he saw his way at that stage, or a future stage of the Bill, to go further than he himself had marked out, he was sure that he would greatly facilitate the acceptance of his measure, and he would give it a degree of popularity, uncontroversial popularity, which in its present shape—he did not speak of its substance—it was hardly possible for it to obtain. That was his reply to the question put to him by the right hon. Gentleman, he hoped not couched in any controversial form. He did not ask the right hon. Gentleman for any statement at this stage, but he hoped that he would recognise that in what he had said ho had
  done his best to fit his idea at all events to those which governed the right hon. Gentleman's advisers and the Party which he represented in this matter; and he was certain that if the right hon. Gentle man could see his way to meet him, not on his (Mr. Balfour's) lines but on his (the Secretary of State's) own lines, he was certain that it would do much to help the progress of the Bill through the House and through Parliament, and would make it what he was sure it could be made, a Bill generally accepted by all parties of the State, and one which would improve our military organisation.
  MR. HALDANEsaid he could only say that the speech which the right hon. Gentleman had made was a very important one, and he would consider it very closely. The proposition, he understood, was this, that a plan suggested with regard to Ireland was agreeable to him. Of course he could not pledge himself that anything would be carried out, but he would consider the substance of the right hon. Gentleman's proposition and what was the substance of his own proposition and give the matter careful consideration.
  Question put.
  The Committee divided:— Ayes, 302, Noes, 108. (Division List No. 224.)

  AYES

  Abraham, William (Rhondda)

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

  Cheetham, John Frederick

  Acland, Francis Dyke

  Bethell, T. R. (Essex, Maldon)

  Cherry, Rt. Hon. R. R.

  Alden, Percy

  Billson, Alfred

  Clough, William

  Allen, A. Acland (Christchurch)

  Boulton, A. C. F.

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

  Armitage, R.

  Brace, William

  Collins, Stephen (Lambeth)

  Ashton, Thomas Gair

  Bramsdon, T. A.

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

  Asquith, Rt. Hon Herbert Henry

  Branch, James

  Cooper, G. J.

  Astbury, John Meir

  Brigg, John

  Corbett, CH (Sussex. E. Grinstd

  Baker, Sir John (Portsmouth)

  Brocklehurst, W. B.

  Cornwall, Sir Edwin A.

  Baker, Joseph A. (Finsbury, E.)

  Brodie, H. C.

  Cory, Clifford John

  Balfour, Robert (Lanark)

  Brooke, Stopford

  Cotton, Sir H. J. S.

  Baring, Godfrey (Isle of Wight)

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

  Cowan, W. H.

  Barker, John

  Brunner, RtHnSirJ.T (Cheshire

  Craig, Herbert J. (Tynemouth)

  Barlow,JohnEmmott(Somers't

  Bryce, J. Annan

  Cremer, William Randal

  Barlow, Percy (Bedford)

  Buchanan, Thomas Ryburn

  Crombie, John William

  Barnes, G. N.

  Buckmaster, Stanley O.

  Crooks, William

  Barry, Redmond J. (Tyrone,N.

  Burns, Rt. Hon. John

  Crossley, William J.

  Beale, W. P.

  Burnyeat, W. J. D.

  Davies, Ellis William (Eifion)

  Beauchamp, E.

  Burt, Rt. Hon. Thomas

  Davies, M. Vaughan- (Cardigan

  Beck| A. Cecil

  Buxton, Rt. Hn. SydneyCharles

  Davies, Timothy (Fulham)

  Bell, Richard

  Byles, William Pollard

  Dewar, Arthur (Edinburgh, S.)

  Bellairs, Carlyon

  Carr-Gomm, H. W.

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

  Benn,SirJ. Williams (Devonp'rt

  C'auston,Rt.Hn.RichardKnight

  Dickson-Poynder, Sir John P.

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

  Cawley, Sir Frederick

  Duncan, C. (Barrow-in-Furness

  Bennett, E. N.

  Chance, Frederick William

  Dunn. A. Edward (Camborne)

  Berridge, T. H. D.

  Channing, Sir Francis Allston

  Dunne,-MajorE.Martin (Walsall

  Edwards, Clement (Denbigh)

  Leese,SirJosephF.(Accrington)

  Robertson, J. M.(Tyneside)

  Edwards, Frank (Radnor)

  Lehmann,R. C.

  Robinson, S.

  Elibank, Master of

  Lever,A.Levy (Essex,Harwich)

  Robson, Sir William Snowdon

  Esslemont, George Birnie

  Lever, W. H. (Cheshire, Wirral)

  Roe, Sir Thomas

  Evans, Samuel T.

  Levy, Maurice

  Rose, Charles Day

  Eve, Harry Trelawney

  Lewis, John Herbert

  Rowlands, J.

  Everett, R. Lacey

  Lough, Thomas

  Rutherford, V. H. (Brentford)

  Fenwick, Charles

  Lupton, Arnold

  Samuel, HerbertL.(Cleveland)

  Ferens, T. R.

  Luttrell, Hugh Fownes

  Samuel, S. M. (Whitechapel)

  Fiennes, Hon. Eustace

  Lyell Charles Henry

  Schwann, C. Duncan (Hyde)

  Findlay, Alexander

  Lynch, H. B.

  Schwann, Sir C.E.(Manchester)

  Fowler, Rt. Hon. Sir Henry

  Macdonald, J. R. (Leicester)

  Scott, A.H.(Ashton under Lyne

  Freeman-Thomas, Freeman

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

  Seaverns, J. H.

  Fuller, John Michael F.

  Mackarness, Frederic C.

  Shackleton, David James

  Fullerton, Hugh

  Macnamara, Dr. Thomas J.

  Shaw, Charles Edw. (Stafford)

  Furness, Sir Christopher

  M'Callum, John M.

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

  Gardner, Col. Alan (Hereford, S.

  M'Crae, George

  Sherwell, Arthur James

  Gibb, James (Harrow)

  M'Kenna, Rt. Hon. Reginald

  Shipman, Dr. John G.

  Gladstone, Rt. Hn. Herbert John

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

  Silcock, Thomas Ball

  Glover, Thomas

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

  Simon, John Allsebrook

  Goddard, Daniel Ford

  M'Micking, Major G.

  Sinclair, Rt. Hon. John

  Gooch, George Peabody

  Maddison, Frederick

  Smeaton, Donald Mackenzie

  Grant, Corrie

  Mallet, Charles E.

  Spicer, Sir Albert

  Greenwood, G. (Peterborough)

  Manfield, Harry (Northants)

  Stanger, H. Y.

  Griffith, Ellis J.

  Mansfield, H. Rendall (Lincoln)

  Stanley.Hn. A. Lyulph (Chesh.)

  Guest, Hon. Ivor Churchill

  Markham, Arthur Basil

  Steadman, W. C.

  Gulland, John W.

  Marks, G. Croydon(Launceston)

  Stewart, Halley (Greenock)

  Gurdon, Sir W. Brampton

  Marnham, F. J.

  Strachey. Sir Edward

  Haldane, Rt. Hon. Richard B.

  Mason, A. E. W. (Coventry)

  Straus, B. S. (Mile End)

  Harcourt, Rt. Hon. Lewis

  Massie, J.

  Strauss, E. A.(Abingdon)

  Hardy, George A. (Suffolk)

  Menzies, Walter

  Summerbell, T.

  Harmsworth, Cecil B. (Wore'r)

  Micklem, Nathaniel

  Sutherland, J. E.

  Hart-Davies, T.

  Molteno, Percy Alport

  Taylor, Austin(East Toxteth)

  Harvey, A. G. C. (Rochdale)

  Mond, A.

  Taylor, John W. (Durham)

  Harwood, George

  Money, L. G. Chiozza

  Taylor, Theodore C. (Radcliffe)

  Haslam, Lewis (Monmouth)

  Montgomery, H. G.

  Tennant, Sir Edward(Salisbury)

  Haworth, Arthur A.

  Morgan, G. Hay (Cornwall)

  Tennant, H. J. (Berwickshire)

  Hedges, A. Paget

  Morgan, J. Lloyd(Carmarthen)

  Thomas, Abel (Carmarthen, E.)

  Helme, Norval Watson

  Morrell, Philip

  Thomasson, Franklin

  Hemmerde, Edward George

  Morse, L. L.

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

  Henry, Charles S.

  Morton, Alpheus Cleophas

  Torrance, Sir A. M.

  Herbert, Colonel Ivor (Mon., S.)

  Murray, James

  Toulmin, George

  Herbert, T. Arnold (Wycombe)

  Myer, Horatio

  Trevelyan, Charles Philips

  Higham, John Sharp

  Napier, T. B.

  Verney, F. W.

  Hobhouse, Charles E. H.

  Nicholson, Charles N (Doncast'r

  Vivian, Henry

  Holden, E. Hopkinson

  Norman, Sir Henry

  Walker, H. Do R. (Leicester)

  Holland, Sir William Henry

  Norton, Capt. Cecil William

  Walsh, Stephen

  Hope, W. Bateman (Somerset, N

  Nuttall, Harry

  Walters, John Tudor

  Horniman, Emslie John

  O'Donnell, C. J. (Walworth)

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

  Horridge, Thomas Gardner

  Parker, James (Halifax)

  Walton, Joseph (Barnsley)

  Hudson, Walter

  Paulton, James Mellor

  Ward, John (Stoke upon Trent

  Hyde, Clarendon

  Pearce, Robert (Staffs., Leek)

  Wardle, George J.

  Idris, T. H. W.

  Pearce, William (Limehouse)

  Waring, Walter

  Isaacs, Rufus Daniel.

  Philipps, Col. Ivor(S'thampton)

  Wason, Eugene (Clackmannan)

  Jackson, R. S.

  Philipps, J. Wynford(Pembroke

  Wason, John Cathcart (Orkney)

  Jacoby, Sir James Alfred

  Philipps, Owen C. (Pembroke)

  Waterlow, D. S.

  Jardine, Sir J.

  Pickersgill, Edward Hare

  Watt, Henry A.

  Johnson, John (Gateshead)

  Pirie, Duncan V.

  Wedgwood, Josiah C.

  Jones, Sir D. Brynmore(Swanse

  Pollard, Dr.

  Weir, James Galloway

  Jones, Leif (Appleby)

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

  White, George (Norfolk)

  Jones, William (Carnarvonshire

  Priestley, Arthur (Grantham)

  White, J. D. (Dumbartonshire)

  Jowett, F. W.

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

  White, Luke (York, E. R.)

  Kearley, Hudson E.

  Radford, G. H.

  Whitehead, Rowland

  Kekewich, Sir George

  Raphael, Herbert H.

  Whitley, John Henry (Halifax)

  Kincaid-Smith, Captain

  Rea, Russell (Gloucester)

  Whittaker, Sir Thomas Palmer

  King, Alfred John (Knutsford)

  Rea, Walter Russell (Scarboro'

  Wiles, Thomas

  Laidlaw, Robert

  Rees, J. D.

  Williams, J. (Glamorgan)

  Lamb, EdmundG. (Leominster

  Rendall, Athelstan

  Williams, Llewelyn(Carm'rth'n)

  Lamb, Ernest H. (Rochester)

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

  Williams, Osmond (Merioneth)

  Lambert, George

  Ridsdale, E. A.

  Williamson, A.

  Lamont, Norman

  Roberts, Charles H. (Lincoln)

  Wills, Arthur Walters

  Layland-Barratt, Francis

  Roberts, G. H.(Norwich)

  Wilson, John ('Durham, Mid.)

  Lea,Hugh Cecil (St. Pancras, E.

  Roberts, John H. (Denbighs.)

  1182

  1183

  Wilson, J. H. (Middlesbrough)

  Wodehouse, Lord

  TELLERS FOR THE AYES—

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

  Wood, T. M'Kinnon

  Mr.Whiteley and Mr. J. A.Pease

  Winfrey, R.

  Yoxall, James Henry

  .

  NOES.

  Anstruther-Gray, Major

  Forster, Henry William

  Nicholson, Wm. G. (Petersfield

  Arkwright, John Stanhope

  Gardner, Ernest (Berks, East)

  Nield, Herbert

  Arnold-Forster, Rt. Hn. HughO.

  Gibbs, G. A. (Bristol, West)

  Parker, SirGilbert(Gravesend)

  Ashley, W. W.

  Haddock, George R.

  Percy, Earl

  Aubrey-Fletcher, Rt. Hn. Sir H.

  Hardy, Laurence( Kent, Ashford

  Powell, Sir Francis Sharp

  Balcarres, Lord

  Harris, Frederick Leverton

  Randles. Sir John Scurrah

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

  Harrison-Broadley, H. B.

  Rawlinson, JohnFrederickPeel

  Banbury, Sir Frederick George

  Hay, Hon. Claude George

  Remnant. James Farquharson

  Banner, John S. Harmood-

  Helmsley, Viscount

  Renton Major Leslie

  Baring, Capt. Hn. G.(Winchester

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

  Roberts, S.(Sheffield, Ecclesall)

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

  Hill, Sir Clement (Shrewsbury)

  Salter, Arthur Clavell

  Beach, Hn. Michael HughHicks

  Hills, J. W.

  Sassoon, Sir Edward Albert

  Beckett, Hon. Gervase

  Hodge, John

  Scott, Sir S. (Marylebone, W.)

  Bignold, Sir Arthur

  Houston, Robert Paterson

  Seddon, J.

  Bowles, G. Stewart

  Hunt, Rowland

  Smith, Abel H. (Hertford, East)

  Bull, Sir William James

  Kennaway, Rt. Hn. Sir John H.

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

  Burdett-Coutts, W.

  Kenyon-Slaney, Rt. Hn. Col. W

  Snowden, P.

  Butcher, Samuel Henry

  Keswick, William

  Starkey, John R.

  Carlile, E. Hildred

  King, Sir Henry Seymour(Hull)

  Talbot, Lord E. (Chichester)

  Cave, George

  Lambton, Hon. Frederick Wm.

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

  Cavendish, Rt. Hn. VictorC. W.

  Lane-Fox, G. R.

  Thomson, W. Mitchell-(Lanark)

  Cecil, Evelyn (Aston Manor)

  Law, Andrew Bonar (Dulwich)

  Thornton, Percy M.

  Chamberlain, RtHnJ. A. (Wore.

  Lee, Arthur H(Hants.,Fareham

  Tuke, Sir John Batty

  Clynes, J. R.

  Liddell, Henry

  Vincent, Col. Sir C. E. Howard

  Coates, E. Feetham(Lewisham)

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

  Walker, Col. W. H. (Lancashire)

  Corbett, A. Cameron (Glasgow)

  Long, Col. Charles W.(Evesham)

  Walrond, Hon. Lionel

  Craig, Charles Curtis(Antrim, S.

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

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

  Craig, Captain James( Down, E.)

  Lonsdale, John Brownlee

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

  Craik, Sir Henry

  Lowe, Sir Francis William

  Wilson, W. T.(Westhoughton)

  Dalrymple, Viscount

  Macpherson, J. T.

  Wolff, Gustav Wilhelm

  Dixon-Hartland, SirFredDixon

  M'Calmont, Colonel James

  Wyndham, Rt. Hon. George

  Douglas, Rt. Hon. A. Akers-

  M'Iver, SirLewis (Edinburgh W

  Younger, George

  Duncan, Robert(Lanark, Govan

  Magnus, Sir Philip

  Faber, George Denison (York)

  Marks, H. H. (Kent)

  TELLERS FOB THE NOES—

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

  Mason, James F. (Windsor)

  Sir Alexander Acland-Hood and Viscount Valentia.

  Fardell, Sir T. George

  Mildmay, Francis Bingham

  Fell, Arthur

  Moore, William

  Fletcher, J. S.

  Morpeth, Viscount

  And, it being half-past ten of the clock, the CHAIRMAN proceeded, pursuant to the Order of the House of the 6th May, successively to put forthwith the Questions necessary to dispose of the Business to be concluded.
  Question put," That the clause stand part of the Bill"
  The Committee divided:— Ayes, 310; Noes, 110. (Division List No. 225.)

  AYES.

  Abraham, William (Rhondda)

  Barnes, G. N.

  Brace, William

  Acland, Francis Dyke

  Barry, Redmond J. (Tyrone, N.)

  Bramsdon, T. A.

  Alden, Percy

  Beale, W. P.

  Branch, James

  Allen, A. Acland (Christchurch)

  Beauchamp, E.

  Brigg, John

  Armitage, R.

  Beck, A. Cecil

  Brocklehurst, W. B.

  Armstrong, W. C. Heaton

  Bell Richard

  Brodie, H. C.

  Ashton, Thomas Gair

  Bellairs, Carlyon

  Brooke, Stopford

  Asquith, Rt. Hn. HerbertHenry

  Benn, Sir J. Williams (Devonp't

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

  Astbury, John Meir

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

  Brunner,Rt. Hn. Sir J.T. (Ches

  Baker, Sir John (Portsmouth)

  Bennett, E. N.

  Bryce, J. Annan

  Baker, Joseph A. (Finsbury, E.

  Berridge, T. H. D.

  Buchanan, Thomas Ryburn

  Balfour, Robert (Lanark)

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

  Buckmaster, Stanley O.

  Baring, Godfrey (Isle of Wight)

  Bethell, T. R. (Essex, Maldon)

  Burns, Rt. Hon. John

  Barker, John

  Billson, Alfred

  Burnyeat, W. J. D.

  Barlow, John Emmott (S'mers't

  Birrell, Rt. Hon. Augustine

  Burt, Rt. Hon. Thomas

  Barlow, Percy (Bedford)

  Boulton, A.. C. F.

  Buxton,Rt.Hn.Sydney Charles

  Byles, William Pollard

  Helme, Norval Watson

  Morrell, Philip

  Carr-Gomm, H. W.

  Hemmerde, Edward George

  Morse, L. L.

  Causton, Rt. Hn. RichardKnight

  Henry, Charles S.

  Morton, Alpheus Cleophas

  Cawley, Sir Frederick

  Herbert, Colonel Ivor (Mon., S,

  Murray, James

  Chance, Frederick William

  Herbert, T. Arnold (Wycombe)

  Myer, Horatio

  Channing, Sir Francis Allston

  Higham, John Sharp

  Napier, T. B.

  Cheetham, John Frederick

  Hobhouse, Charles E. H.

  Nicholson, Charles N.(Doncast'r

  Cherry, Rt. Hon. R. R.

  Hodge, John

  Norman, Sir Henry

  Churchill, Rt. Hon. Winston S.

  Holden, E. Hopkinson

  Norton, Capt. Cecil William

  Clough, William

  Holland, Sir William Henry

  Nuttall, Harry

  Clynes, J. R.

  Hope, V. Bateman (Somerset,N

  O'Donnell, C. J. (Walworth)

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

  Horniman, Eraslie John

  Parker, James (Halifax)

  Collins, Stephen (Lambeth)

  Horridge, Thomas Gardner

  Paulton, James Mellor

  Collins, Sir Wm.J.(S.PancrasW

  Hudson, Walter

  Pearce, Robert (Staffs. Lock)

  Cooper, G. J.

  Hyde, Clarendon

  Pearce, William (Limehouse)

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

  Idris, T. H. VV.

  Philipps, Col. Ivor (S'thampton)

  Cornwall, Sir Edwin A.

  Isaacs, Rufus Daniel

  Philipps, J. Wynford (Pembroke

  Cory, Clifford John

  Jackson, R. S.

  Philipps, Owen C. (Pembroke)

  Cotton, Sir H. J. S.

  Jacoby, Sir James Alfred

  Pickersgill, Edward Hare)

  Cowan, W. H.

  Jardine, Sir J.

  Pirie, Duncan V.

  Craig, Herbert J. (Tynemouth)

  Johnson, John (Gateshead)

  Pollard, Dr.

  Cremer, William Randal

  Jones, Sir D. Brynmor (Swansea

  Price, C. E. (Edinburgh. Central

  Crombie, John William

  Jones, Leif (Appleby)

  Priestley, Arthur (Grantham)

  Crooks, William

  Jones, William (Carnarvonshire

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

  Crosfield, A. H.

  Kearley, Hudson E.

  Radford, G. H.

  (Irossley, William J.

  Kekewich, Sir George

  Raphael, Herbert H.

  Davies, Ellis William (Eifion)

  Kincaid-Smith, Captain

  Rea, Russell (Gloucester)

  Davies, M. Vaughan- (Cardigan

  King, Alfred John (Knutsford)

  Rea, Walter Russell (Scarboro'

  Davies, Timothy (Fulham)

  Laidlaw, Robert

  Rees, J. D.

  Dowar, Arthur (Edinburgh, S.)

  Lamb, Edmund G. (Leominster

  Rendall, Athelstan

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

  Lamb, Ernest H. (Rochester)

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

  Dickson-Poynder, Sir John P.

  Lambert, George

  Ridsdale, E. A.

  Duncan, C. (Barrow-in-Furness

  Lamont, Norman

  Roberts, Charles H. (Lincoln)

  Dunn, A. Edward (Camborne)

  Layland-Barratt, Francis

  Roberts, G. H. (Norwich)

  Dunne, Major E. Martin (Wals'l

  Lea,Hugh Cecil (St.Pancras, E.

  Roberts, John H. (Denbigh^.)

  Edwards, Clement (Denbigh)

  Leese, Sir Joseph F. (Accringt'n

  Robertson, J. M. (Tyneside)

  Edwards, Frank (Radnor)

  Lehmann, R. C.

  Robinson, S.

  Elibank, Master of

  Lever, A. Levy (Essex,Harwich)

  Robson, Sir William Snowdon

  Esslemont, George Birnie

  Lever, W. H. (Cheshire, Wirral)

  Roe, Sir Thomas

  Evans, Samuel T.

  Levy, Maurice

  Rose, Charles Day

  Eve, Harry Trelawney

  Lewis, John Herbert

  Rowlands, J.

  Everett, R. Lacey

  Lough, Thomas

  Rutherford, V. H. (Brentford)

  Fen wick, Charles

  Lupton, Arnold

  Samuel, Herbert L. (Cleveland)

  Ferens, T. R.

  Luttrell, Hugh Fowness

  Samuel, S. M. (Whitechapel)

  Fiennes, Hon. Eustace

  Lyell, (Charles Henry

  Schwann, C. Duncan (Hyde)

  Findlay. Alexander

  Lynch, H. B.

  Schwann, Sir C. E.(Manchester)

  Foster, Rt. Hon. Sir Walter

  Macdonald, J. R. (Leicester)

  Scott, A.H.(Ashton under Lyne

  Fowler, Rt. Hon. Sir Henry

  Macdonald, J. M.(Falkirk B'ghs

  Seaverns, J. H.

  Freeman-Thomas, Freeman

  Mackarness, Frederic C.

  Shackleton, David James

  Fuller, John Michael F.

  Macnamara, Dr. Thomas J.

  Shaw, Charles Edw. (Stafford)

  Fullerton, Hugh

  M'Callum, John M.

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

  Furness, Sir Christopher

  M'Crae, George

  Sherwell, Arthur James

  Gardner, Col. Alan (Hereford, S.

  M'Kenna, Rt. Hon. Reginald

  Shipman, Dr. John G.

  Gibb, James (Harrow)

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

  Silcock, Thomas Ball

  Gladstone, Rt. Hn. Herbert John

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

  Simon, John Allsebrook

  Glover, Thomas

  M'Micking, Major G.

  Sinclair, Rt. Hon. John

  Goddard, Daniel Ford

  Maddison, Frederick

  Smeaton, Donald Mackenzie

  Gooch, George Peabody

  Mallet, Charles E.

  Snowden, P.

  Greenwood, G. (Peterborough)

  Manfield, Harry (Northants)

  Spicer, Sir Albert

  Griffith, Ellis J.

  Mansfield, H. Rendall (Lincoln

  Stanger, H. Y.'

  Guest, Hon. Ivor Churchill

  Markham, Arthur Basil

  Stanley, Hn. A. Lyulph (Chesh.)

  Gulland, John W.

  Marks, G. Croydon (Launceston)

  Steadman, W. C.

  Gurdon, Sir W. Brampton

  Marnham, F. J.

  Stewart, Halley (Greenock)

  Haldane, Rt. Hon. Richard B.

  Mason, A. E. W. (Coventry)

  Stewart-Smith, D. (Kendal)

  Harcourt, Rt. Hon. Lewis

  Massie, J.

  Strachey, Sir Edward

  Hardy, George A. (Suffolk)

  Menzies, Walter

  Straus, B. S. (Mile End)

  Harmsworth, Cecil B. (Wore'r.

  Micklem, Nathaniel

  Strauss, E. A. (Abingdon)

  Hart-Davies, T.

  Molteno, Percy Alport

  Stuart, James (Sunderland)

  Harvey, A. G. C. (Rochdale)

  Mond, A.

  Summerbell, T.

  Harwood, George

  Money, L. G. Chiozza

  Sutherland, J. E.

  Haslam, Lewis (Monmouth)

  Montgomery, H. G.

  Taylor, Austin (East Toxteth)

  Haworth, Arthur A.

  Morgan, G. Hay (Cornwall)

  Taylor, John W. (Durham)

  Hedges, A. Paget

  Morgan, J. Lloyd (Carmarthen)

  Taylor, Theodore C. (Radcliffe)

  1186

  1187

  Tennant, Sir Edward (Salisbury

  Wardle, George J.

  Williams, Llewelyn (Carmarthn

  Tennant, H. J. (Berwickshire)

  Waring, Walter

  Williams, Osmond (Merioneth)

  Thomas, Abel (Carmarthen, E.)

  Wason, Eugene (Clackmannan)

  Williamson, A.

  Thomasson, Franklin

  Wason, John Cathcart (Orkney

  Wills, Arthur Walters

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

  Waterlow, D. S.

  Wilson, John (Durham, Mid.)

  Torrance, Sir A. M.

  Watt, Henry A.

  Wilson, J. H. (Middlesbrough

  Toulmin, George

  Wedgwood, Josiah C.

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

  Trevelyan, Charles Philips

  Weir, James Galloway

  Winfrey, R.

  Verney, F. W.

  White, George (Norfolk)

  Wodehouse, Lord

  Vivian, Henry

  White, J. D. (Dumbartonshire

  Wood, T. M'Kinnon

  Walker, H. De R. (Leicester)

  White, Luke (York, E. R.)

  Yoxall, James Henry

  Walsh, Stephen

  Whitehead, Rowland

  Walters, John Tudor

  Whitley, John Henry (Halifax

  TELLERS FOR THE AYES—

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

  Whittaker, Sir Thomas Palmer

  MR.Whiteley and Mr. J. A. Pease.

  Walton, Joseph (Barnsley)

  Wiles, Thomas

  Ward, John (Stoke upon Trent

  Williams, J. (Glamorgan)

  NOES.

  Acland-Hood, Rt. Hn. SirAlex. F.

  Fletcher, J. S.

  Moore, William

  Anson, Sir William Reynell

  Forster, Henry William

  Morpeth, Viscount

  Anstruther-Gray, Major

  Gardner, Ernest (Berks, East)

  Nicholson, Wm. G.(Peterfield)

  Arkwright, John Stanhope

  Gibbs, G. A. (Bristol, West)

  Nield, Herbert

  Arnold-Forster, Rt. Hn. Hugh 0.

  Haddock, George R.

  Parker, SirGilbert(Gravesend)

  Aubrey-Fletcher, Rt, Hon. SirH.

  Hardy, Laurence(Kent, Ashford

  Percy, Earl

  Balcarres, Lord

  Harris, Frederick Leverton

  Powell, Sir Francis Sharp

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

  Harrison-Broadley, H. B.

  Randles, Sir John Scurrah

  Banbury,Sir Frederick George

  Hay, Hon. Claude George

  Rawlinson,John FrederickPeel

  Banner, John S. Harmood-

  Helmsley, Viscount

  Remnant, James Farquharson

  Baring,Capt Hn.G(Winchester

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

  Renton, Major Leslie

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

  Hill, Sir Clement (Shrewsbury)

  Roberts.S.(Shcffield.Ecclesall)

  Beach,Hn.MichaelHughHicks

  Hills, J. W.

  Salter, Arthur Clavell

  Beckett, Hon. Gervase

  Houston, Robert Paterson

  Sassoon, Sir Edward Albert

  Bignold, Sir Arthur

  Hunt, Rowland

  Scott, Sir S. (Marylebone, W.)

  Bowles, G. Stewart

  Jowett, F. W.

  Seddon,J.

  Bridgeman, W. Clive

  Kennaway, Rt. Hon. Sir John H.

  Smith, AbelH.(Hertord,East)

  Bull, Sir William James

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

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

  Burdett-Coutts, W.

  Keswick, William

  Starkey, John R.

  Butcher, Samuel Henry

  King, SirHenrySeymour(Hull)

  Talbot, Lord E. (Chichester)

  Carlile, E. Hildred

  Lambton, Hon. Frederick Wm.

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

  Cave, George

  Lane-Fox, G. R.

  Thomson,W.Mitchell-(Lanark)

  Cavendish, Rt. Hon. Victor.C. W.

  Law, Andrew Bonar (Dulwich)

  Thornton, Percy M.

  Cecil, Evelyn (Aston Manor)

  Lee, ArthurH.(Hants., Fareham

  Tuke, Sir John Batty

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

  Liddell, Henry

  Valentia, Viscount

  Coates,E Feetham (Lewisham)

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

  Vincent, Col. SirC, E, Howard

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

  Long,Col.CharlesW.(Evesham)

  Walker, Col.W.H.(Lancashire)

  Corbett, A. Cameron (Glasgow)

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

  Walrond. Hon. Lionel

  Craig, CharlesCurtis(Antrim,S.)

  Lonsdale, John Brown lee

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

  Craik, Sir Henry

  Lowe, Sir Francis William

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

  Dalrymple, Viscount

  Lyttelton, Rt. Hon. Alfred

  Wilson, W. T. (Westhoughton)

  Dixon-Hartland,Sir Fred Dixon

  Macpherson, J. T.

  Wolff, Gustav Wilhelm

  Douglas, Rt. Hon. A. Akers-

  M'Calmont, Colonel James

  Wyndham, Rt. Hon. George

  Duncan, Robert(Lanark, Govan

  M'Iver, SirLewis(EdinburghW.

  Younger, George

  Faber, George Denison (York)

  Magnus, Sir Philip

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

  Marks, H. H. (Kent)

  TELLERS FOR THE NOES—

  Fardell, Sir T, George

  Mason, James F. (Windsor)

  Mr.Ashley and Captain Craig.

  Fell, Arthur

  Mildmay, Francis Bingham

  Clause 30 agreed to.
  Clause 31:
  The Committee divided:—Ayes, 286;Noes, 108. (Division List No. 226.)

  AYES

  Abraham, William (Rhondda)

  Balfour, Robert (Lanark)

  Beck. A. Cecil.

  Acland, Francis Dyke

  Baring, Godfrey(Isle of Wight)

  Bell, Richard

  Alden, Percy

  Barker, John

  Bellairs, Carlyon

  Allen, A. Acland(Christchurch)

  Barlow, JohnEmmott(Somerset

  Belloc, HilaireJosephPeterR..

  Armitage, R.

  Barlow, Percy (Bedford)

  Benn, SirJ. Williams(Devonp'rt

  Armstrong, W. C. Heaton

  Barnard, E. B.

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

  Ashton, Thomas Gair

  Barnes, G. N.

  Bennett, E. N.

  Astbury, John Meir

  Barry, Redmond J. (Tyrone, N.)

  Berridge, T. H. D.

  Baker, Sir John (Portsmouth)

  Beale, W. P.

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

  Baker, Joseph A.(Finsbury, E.)

  Beauchamp, E.

  Bethell, T. R, (Essex, Maldon)

  Billson, Alfred

  Gulland, John W.

  Micklem, Nathaniel

  Birrell, Rt. Hon. Augustine

  Gurdon, Sir W. Brampton

  Molteno, Percy Alport

  Boulton, A. C. F.

  Haldane, Rt. Hon. Richard B.

  Mond, A.

  Bramsdon, T. A.

  Harcourt, Rt. Hon. Lewis

  Money, L. G. Chiozza

  Branch, James

  Hardy, George A. (Suffolk)

  Montgomery, H. G.

  Brigg, John

  Harmsworth, Cecil B. (Worc'r)

  Morgan, G. Hay (Cornwall)

  Brocklehurst, W. B.

  Hart-Davies, T.

  Morgan, J. Lloyd (Carmarthen)

  Brodie, H. C.

  Harvey, A. G. C. (Rochdale)

  Morrell, Philip

  Brooke, Stopford

  Harwood, George

  Morse, L. L.

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

  Haslam, Lewis (Monmouth)

  Morton, Alpheus Cleophas

  Brunner, RtHnSirJ. T(Cheshire

  Haworth, Arthur A.

  Murray, James

  Bryce, J. Annan

  Hedges, A. Paget

  Myer, Horatio

  Buchanan, Thomas Ryburn

  Helme, Norval Watson

  Napier, T. B.

  Buckmaster, Stanley O.

  Hemmerde, Edward George

  Nicholson, Charles N.(Doncast'r

  Burns, Rt. Hon. John

  Henry, Charles S.

  Norman, Sir Henry

  Burnyeat, W. J. D.

  Herbert, Colonel Ivor (Mon.,S.)

  Norton, Capt. Cecil William

  Burt, Rt. Hon. Thomas

  Herbert, T. Arnold (Wycombe)

  Nuttall, Harry

  Buxton, Rt. Hn. SydneyCharles

  Higham, John Sharp

  O'Donnell, C. J. (Walworth)

  Carr-Gomm, H. W.

  Hills, J. W.

  Paulton, James Mellor

  Causton, Rt. Hn. RichardKnight

  Hobhouse, Charles E. H.

  Pearce, Robert (Staffs., Leek)

  Cawley, Sir Frederick

  Holden, E. Hopkinson

  Pearce, William (Limehouse)

  Chance, Frederick William

  Holland, Sir William Henry

  Philipps, Col. Ivor(S'thampton)

  Cheetham, John Frederick

  Hope, W. Bateman(Somerset,N.

  Philipps, J. Wynford(Pembroke

  Cherry, Rt. Hon. R. R.

  Horniman, Emslie John

  Philipps, Owen C. (Pembroke)

  Churchill, Rt, Hon. Winston S.

  Horridge, Thomas Gardner

  Pickersgill, Edward Hare

  Clough, William

  Hyde, Clarendon

  Pollard, Dr.

  Coats,SirT. Glen(Renfrew, W.)

  Idris, T. H. W.

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

  Collins, Stephen (Lambeth)

  Isaacs, Rufus Daniel

  Price, Robert John (Norfolk, E.)

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

  Jackson, R. S.

  Priestley, Arthur (Grantham)

  Corbett, A. Cameron (Glasgow)

  Jacoby, Sir James Alfred

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

  Corbett, CH(Sussex, E. Grmst'd

  Jardine, Sir J.

  Radford, G. H.

  Cornwall, Sir Edwin A.

  Jones, SirD. Brynmor(Swansea)

  Raphael, Herbert H.

  Cory, Clifford John

  Jones, Leif (Appleby)

  Rea, Russell (Gloucester)

  Cotton, Sir H. J. S.

  Jones, William(Carnarvonshire

  Rea, Walter Russell (Scarboro'

  Cowan, W. H.

  Kearley, Hudson E.

  Rees, J. D.

  Craig, Herbert J.(Tynemouth)

  Kekewich, Sir George

  Rendall, Athelstan

  Cremer, William Randal

  Kincaid-Smith, Captain

  Renton, Major Leslie

  Crombie, John William

  King, Alfred John (Knutsford)

  Ridsdale, E. A.

  Crosfield, A. H.

  Laidlaw, Robert

  Roberts, Charles H. (Lincoln)

  Crossley, William J.

  Lamb, Edmund G. (Leominster

  Roberts, John H. (Denbighs.)

  Davies, Ellis William (Eifion)

  Lamb, Ernest H. (Rochester)

  Robertson, J. M. (Tyneside)

  Davies, M. Vaughan-(Cardigan

  Lambert, George

  Robinson, S.

  Davies, Timothy (Fulham)

  Lamont, Norman

  Robson, Sir William Snowdon

  Dewar, Arthur (Edinburgh, S.)

  Layland-Barratt, Francis

  Roe, Sir Thomas

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

  Leese, Sir JosephF.(Accrington)

  Rose, Charles Day

  Dickson-Poynder, Sir John P.

  Lehmann, R. C.

  Rowlands, J.

  Dunn, A. Edward (Cam borne)

  Lever, A. Levy (Essex,Harwich

  Rutherford, V. H. (Brentford)

  Dunne, MajorE. Martin(Walsall

  Lever, W. H. (Cheshire, Wirral)

  Samuel, Herbert L.(Cleveland)

  Edwards, Clement (Denbigh)

  Levy, Maurice

  Samuel, S. M. (Whitechapel)

  Edwards, Frank (Radnor

  Lewis, John Herbert

  Schwann, C. Duncan (Hyde)

  Elibank, Master of

  Lough, Thomas

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

  Esslemont, George Birnie

  Lupton, Arnold

  Seaverns, J. H.

  Evans, Samuel T.

  Luttrell, Hugh Fownes

  Shaw, Charles Edw. (Stafford)

  Eve, Harry Trelawney

  Lyell, Charles Henry

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

  Everett, R. Lacey

  Lynch, H. B.

  Sherwell, Arthur James

  Fenwick, Charles

  Macdonald. J. M. (Falkirk B'ghs

  Shipman, Dr. John G.

  Ferens, T. R.

  Macnamara, Dr. Thomas J.

  Silcock, Thomas Ball

  Fiennes, Hon. Eustace

  M'Callum, John M.

  Simon, John Allsebrook

  Findlay, Alexander

  M'Crae, George

  Smeaton, Donald Mackenzie

  Foster, Rt. Hon. Sir Walter

  M'Kenna, Rt. Hon. Reginald

  Snowden, P.

  Fowler, Rt. Hon. Sir Henry

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

  Spicer, Sir Albert

  Freeman-Thomas, Freeman

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

  Stanger, H. Y.

  Fuller, John Michael F.

  M'Micking, Major G.

  Stanley, Hn. A Lyulph(Chesh.)

  Fullerton, Hugh

  Maddison, Frederick

  Stewart-Smith, D. (Kendal)

  Furness, Sir Christopher

  Mallet, Charles E.

  Strachey, Sir Edward

  Gardner, Col. Alan(Hereford,S.)

  Manfield, Harry (Northants)

  Straus, B. S. (Mile End)

  Gibb, James (Harrow)

  Mansfield, H. Rendall (Lincoln)

  Strauss, E. A. (Abingdon)

  Gladstone, Rt. Hn. Herbert John

  Markham, Arthur Basil

  Stuart, James (Sunderland)

  Goddard, Daniel Ford

  Marks, G Croydon(Launceston)

  Sutherland, J. E.

  Gooch, George Peabody

  Marnham, F. J.

  Taylor, Austin (East Toxteth)

  Greenwood, G. (Peterborough)

  Mason, A. E. W. (Coventry)

  Taylor, Theodore C. (Radcliffe)

  Griffith, Ellis J.

  Massie, J.

  Tennant, Sir Edward (Salisbury

  Guest, Hon. Ivor Churchill

  Menzies, Walter

  Tennant, H. J. (Berwickshire)

  1190

  1191

  Thomas, Abel (Carmarthen, E.)

  Wason, Eugene (Clackmannan)

  Williamson, A.

  Thomasson, Franklin

  Wason, John Cathcart(Orkney

  Wills, Arthur Walters

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

  Waterlow, D. S.

  Wilson, John (Durham, Mid)

  Torrance, Sir A. M.

  Watt, Henry A.

  Wilson, J. H. (Middlesbrough)

  Toulmin, George

  Wedgwood, Josiah C.

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

  Trevelyan, Charles Philips

  White, George (Norfolk)

  Winfrey, R.

  Verney, F. W.

  White, J. D. (Dumbartonshire)

  Wodehouse, Lord

  Vivian, Henry

  White, Luke (York, E.R.)

  Wood, T. M'Kinnon

  Walker, H. De R. (Leicester)

  Whitehead, Rowland

  Yoxall, James Henry

  Walters, John Tudor

  Whitley, John Henry (Halifax)

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

  Whittaker, Sir Thomas Palmer

  TELLERS FOR THE AYES—

  Walton, Joseph (Barnsley)

  Wiles, Thomas

  Mr.Whiteley and Mr. J. A Pease.

  Ward, John(Stoke-upon-Trent)

  Williams,Llewelyn(Carmarth'n

  Waring, Walter

  Williams, Osmond (Merioneth)

  NOES.

  Anson, Sir William Reynell

  Gardner, Ernest (Berks, East)

  Nield, Herbert

  Anstruther-Gray, Major

  Gibbs, G. A. (Bristol, West)

  Parker,Sir Gilbert(Gravesend)

  Ashley, W. W.

  Glover, Thomas

  Parker, James (Halifax)

  Aubrey-Fletcher,Rt. HonSirH.

  Haddock, George R.

  Pirie, Duncan V.

  Balcarres, Lord

  Hardy, Laurence(Kent, Ashford

  Powell, Sir Francis Sharp

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

  Harris, Fredrick Leverton

  Randles, Sir John Scurrah

  Banbury, Sir Frederick George

  Harrison-Broadley, H. B.

  Rawlinson,John Frederick Peel

  Banner, John S. Harmood-

  Hay, Hon. Claude George

  Remnant, James Farquharson

  Barrie H. T. (Londonderry.N.)

  Helmsley, Viscount

  Richards, T. F. (Wolverhmpt'n

  Beach,Hn. Michael Hugh Hicks

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

  Roberts, S.(Sheffield, Ecclesall)

  Bignold, Sir Arthur

  Hill, SirClement (Shrewsbury)

  Sassoon, Sir Edward Albert

  Bowerman, C. W.

  Hodge, John

  Scott, Sir S. (Marylebone, W.)

  Bowles, G. Stewart

  Houston, Robert Paterson

  Seddon, J.

  Brace, William

  Hudson, Walter

  Shackleton, David James

  Bridgeman, W. Clive

  Hunt, Rowland

  Smith,Abel H.(Hertford,East)

  Bull, Sir William James

  Johnson, John (Gateshead)

  Starkey, John R.

  Butcher, Samuel Henry

  Jowett, F. W.

  Steadman, W. C

  Byles, William Pollard

  Kennaway, Rt. Hon. Sir John H.

  Summerbell, T.

  Carlile, E. Hildred

  Kenyon-Slaney, Rt Hon. Col. W.

  Taylor, John W. (Durham)

  Cecil, Evelyn (Aston Manor)

  Keswick, William

  Thomson, W. Mitchell-(Lanark

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

  King, Sir Henry Seymour (Hull)

  Thornton, Percy M.

  Clynes, J. R.

  Lane-Fox, G. R.

  Tuke, Sir John Batty

  Coates, E. Feetham (Lewisham

  Lea, HughCecil(St. Pancras, E.

  Walker,Col. W. H. (Lancashire)

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

  Lee,ArthurH(Hants., Fareham

  Walrond, Hon. Lionel

  Cooper, G. J.

  Liddell, Henry

  Walsh, Stephen

  Craig,Charles Curtis (Antrim, S.

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

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

  Craig, Captain James( Down.E.)

  Long.Col. CharlesW.(Evesham

  Wardle, George J.

  Craik, Sir Henry

  Lonsdale, John Brownlee

  Williams, J. (Glamorgan)

  Crooks, William

  Lowe, Sir Francis William

  Williams, Col. R. (Dorset, W)

  Dalrymple, Viscount

  Lyttelton, Rt. Hon. Alfred

  Wilson, W. T. (Westhoughton)

  Dixon-Hartland, Sir FredDixon

  Macpherson, J. T.

  Wolff, Gustav Wilhelm

  Duncan, C. (Barrow-in-Furness

  M'Calmont, Colonel James

  Younger, George

  Duncan,Robert( Lanark, Govan

  Makrs, H. H. (Kent)

  Faber, George Denison (York)

  Mason, James F. (Windsor)

  TELLERS FOR THE NOES—

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

  Mildmay, Francis Bingham

  Mr.Ramsay Macdonald and Mr.George Roberts.

  Fardell, Sir T. George

  Moore, William

  Fell, Arthur

  Morpeth, Viscount

  Fletcher J. S.

  Nicholson, Wm. G. (Petersfield

  Resolution agreed to.

  Question put, "That the Clause stand part of the Bill."
  Remaining clauses and schedules agreed to.
  Bill reported; as amended, to be considered upon Monday next, and to be printed. [Bill 229.]

  LIMITED PARTNERSHIPS [STAMP DUTY]
  Resolution reported, "That it is expedient to authorise the imposition of an ad valorem stamp duty on the statement of the amount contributed or to be contributed by a limited partner, or of any increase in such amount, of five shillings
  for every one hundred pounds and any fraction of one hundred pounds over any multiple of one hundred pounds of the amount so contributed or to be contributed or of the increase of that amount, as the case may be, in pursuance of any Act of the present Session to establish Limited Partnerships; and to make pro vision for recovery of such stamp duty, with interest thereon, in pursuance of such Act."
  Adjourned at twelve minutes after Eleven o'clock.