Commons Sitting of 15 May 1907

Preamble
The House met at a quarter before Three of the Clock.
PRIVATE BILL BUSINESS.
Lancashire and Yorkshire Railway Bill; Leeds Corporation Bill; London County Council (Money) Bill. Manchester Ship Canal (Bridgewater Canal) Bill [Lords]. As amended, considered; to be read the third time.
PRIVATE BILLS, &c.
Ordered, That Standing Orders 39, 128, and 230 be suspended, and that the time for depositing Petitions and Memorials against Private Bills, or against any Bill to confirm any Provisional Order or Provisional Certificate, and for depositing duplicates of any Documents relating to any Bill to confirm any Provisional Order or Provisional Certificate, also for depositing at the Private Bill Office all Documents relating to any Order under the Private Legislation Procedure(Scotland) Act, 1899, be extended to the first day on which the House shall sit after the Recess.—(The Chairman of Ways and Means.)

MESSAGE FROM THE LORDS.
That they have passed a Bill, intituled, "An Act to regulate and facilitate the increase of the capital of the Simon-Carves Bye-Product Coke Oven Construction and Working Company, Limited; and for other purposes." [Simon-Carves Bye-Product Coke Oven Construction and Working Company, Limited, Bill [Lords].
Simon-Carves Bye-Product Coke Oven Construction and Working Company, Limited, Bill [Lords]. Read the first time; and referred to the Examiners of Petitions for Private Bills.

PETITIONS.
  COAL MINES (EIGHT HOURS) BILL.
  Petition from Wombwell Main, in favour; to lie upon the Table.
  EDUCATION (SCOTLAND) BILL.
  Petition from Langholm, for alteration; to lie upon the Table.
  MARRIAGE WITH A DECEASED WIFE'S SISTER BILL.
  Petitions against; from Bristol; Edgbaston; Enfield; Prestbury; and, Wortham; to lie upon the Table.
  MUNICIPAL MILK DEPOTS BILL.
  Petition from Wandsworth, against; to lie upon the Table.
  PAUPER LUNATICS (COST OF MAINTENANCE).
  Petition from Wem, for legislation; to lie upon the Table.
  PUBLIC LIBRARIES BILL.
  Petition from Wandsworth, against; to lie upon the Table.
  WEEKLY REST DAY BILL.
  Petition from London, in favour; to lie upon the Table.
RETURNS, REPORTS, ETC.
  FISHERY BOARD (SCOTLAND).
  Copy presented, of Twenty-fifth Annual Report of the Fishery Board for Scotland, being for the year 1906. Part I., General Report [by Command]; to lie upon the Table.
  COMPENSATION FOR INDUSTRIAL DISEASES.
  Copy presented, of Report of the Departmental Committee on Compensation for industrial Diseases. Report, Minutes of Evidence, and Appendices [by Command]; to lie upon the Table.
  TRADE REPORTS (ANNUAL SERIES).
  Copy presented, of Diplomatic and Consular Reports, Annual Series, Nos. 3784 to 3790 [by Command]; to lie upon the Table.
  SINKING FUNDS.
  Account presented, of the Commissioners for the reduction of the National Debt, showing the amount received and applied in the year ended 31st March, 1907, in respect of the Old and New Sinking Funds [by Act]; to lie upon the Table, and to be printed. [No. 155.]
  PAPER LAID UPON THE TABLE BY THE CLERK OF THE HOUSE.
  Temporary Laws, Register of Temporary Laws for the Second Session, Twenty-eighth Parliament, of the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Ireland, pursuant to the Report of the Select Committee on Expiring Laws in session 1866; to be printed. [No. 156.]
  Address for "Return of the Memorandum of the Royal College of Physicians in May, 1905, on Plague."—(Dr. Rutherford.)
QUESTIONS AND ANSWERS CIRGULATED WITH THE VOTES.

  Indian Disturbances—Land Revenue System.
  MR. C. J. O'DONNELL: To ask the Secretary of State for India whether, in connection with the recent rioting in the Punjab, said to be due to enhancement of the land tax, he has considered the Report of Mr. S. S. Thorburn, Revenue Commissioner of the Punjab, that in 1891 he found, after a house-to-house investigation of the condition of the peasantry over an area of 1,000 square miles, quite half the old agriculturists already ruined beyond redemption in 126 villages by the system of land revenue administration in force; and whether he can state by how much the land tax of the Punjab has increased since 1891.
  (Answered by Mr. Secretary Morley.) I have seen the Report referred to, but I do not gather from it that Mr. Thorburn attributed to the pressure of the land revenue the indebtedness which he found existing in the villages examined by him. On the contrary, he described the assessments made after 1855 as having left a large margin of profit to the owners, thereby raising their credit and facilitating the contraction of debt. Since he reported restrictions have been placed on the power of the transfer of land, and the collection of the land revenue has been made more elastic. In the districts forming the Punjab the land revenue was £1,500,000 in 1891, and is now £1,925,000. The increase is chiefly due to extension of cultivation and irrigation in the canal tracts. In the canal colonies

  929
  alone nearly 2,000,000 acres have been brought under cultivation since 1891.

  Indian Budget—Issue of Explanatory Memorandum.
  MR. ANNAN BRYCE: To ask the Secretary of State for India whether the Memorandum explanatory of the Indian Budget is prepared in India or in London; whether either the document itself or the materials for its preparation have been for some time in the possession of the India Office; and whether, in the future, he will arrange, if it be prepared in India, that it be issued immediately after receipt, or, if it be prepared in London, that it be issued within a reasonable time after receipt of the materials so that there may be allowed, as was done last year, as long an interval as possible for the study of its contents before the discussion on the Indian Budget is taken.
  (Answered by Mr. Secretary Morley.) The Explanatory Memorandum by the Secretary of State for India is prepared in London. The materials from which it is compiled have been in the possession of the India Office for about one month, within which time the Memorandum (a blue-book of thirty-eight pages) has been prepared and printed. The proof was approved by me on the 8th instant, the earliest date on which the Memorandum has been approved during the twenty-one years since it was first published. I have satisfied myself that its completion at an earlier date cannot reasonably be asked for. It will be in the hands of Members for a considerable period before the Budget discussion.

  Progress of India—Date of Publication of Blue-book.
  MR. ANNAN BRYCE: To ask the Secretary of State for India when the speeches made on the Budget in Calcutta, and the annual volume entitled the Moral and Material Progress of India, will be distributed to Members.
  (Answered by Mr. Secretary Morley.) I hope that the Budget Statement will be distributed to-morrow, and the Moral and Material Progress Statement by the end of the week.

  Opening up of Trade Route from North East Assam to Sze-chuan.
  MR. LONSDALE: To ask the Secretary of State for India whether it is intended to open up negotiations with China for the opening of a trade route along the ancient road from the north-east corner of Assam, via Rima, into the Chinese provinces of Sze-chuan.
  (Answered by Mr. Secretary Morley.) The Answer is in the negative. The Government of India have no intention of opening up the trade route mentioned.

  Crews of His Majesty's Ships "Mars" and "Hannibal.
  MR. NIELD: To ask the Secretary to the Admiralty whence the men were drawn to complete the crows of the battleships "Mars" and "Hannibal" of the Devonport Division of the Home Fleet, temporarily replacing the "Commonwealth" and "Dominion" in the Channel Fleet.
  (Answered by Mr. Edmund Robertson.) The men to complete the crews of the "Mars" and "Hannibal" were drawn from the crews of the "Commonwealth" and "Dominion," respectively.

  Chatham and Sheerness Torpedo Boat Flotilla.
  MR. NIELD: To ask the Secretary to the Admiralty whether he will state the age, tonnage, speed, and armament of the torpedo boats forming the torpedo boat flotilla in commission at Sheerness and Chatham; whether any, and which, of them are manned with full crews.
  (Answered by Mr. Edmund Robertson.) I regret that I am unable to give the hon. Member the information he asks for, as it would not be in the public interest that the details of our defences in the naval ports should be made public.

  Promotion of Telegraphists at Edinburgh.
  MR. A. DEWAR: To ask the Postmaster-General whether, in accordance with his wishes that all telegraphists shall, as far as possible, be given equal opportunities to qualify for promotion, he will direct that all fully qualified telegraphists at Edinburgh shall,

  931
  by a rotary system, be placed on those writing duties the performance of which are held to be necessary qualifications for the position of overseer.
  (Answered by Mr. Sydney Buxton.) I am sorry to be unable to add anything to the Answer I gave to a Question on the same subject which the hon. Member put to me on the 7th instant, †

  Hours of Labour at Deptford Dockyard.
  MR. BOWERMAN: To ask the Secretary to the Admiralty whether, inasmuch as the men employed in His Majesty's dockyards, with the exception of Deptford, are working the same hours all the year through, he will consider the propriety of extending the same principle to the men employed in Deptford Dockyard.
  (Answered by Mr. Edmund Robertson.) The question of extending this principle to Deptford Victualling Yard was considered at the time, but the lighting arrangements at that yard do not at present render such a course practicable.
  MR. BOWERMAN: To ask the Secretary to the Admiralty whether he will consider the desirability of granting to the men employed at the Deptford Victualling Yard the same holiday as is granted to the men employed at Woolwich Arsenal and the Army Clothing Factory at Pimlico on the occasion of His Majesty's birthday.
  (Answered by Mr. Edmund Robertson.) It is not desirable that the practice at Deptford Victualling Yard, with regard to the observance of His Majesty's birthday, should differ from that adopted in other naval establishments in the United Kingdom.
  MR. BOWERMAN: To ask the Secretary to the Admiralty whether, in view of the fact that the Lords of the Admiralty have visited all His Majesty's dockyards with the exception of Deptford, it is the intention of their Lordships to pay a visit to that dockyard; or, failing such visit, will the Admiralty be prepared to receive a deputation from the men employed in Deptford Dockyard.
  † See (4) Debates, clxxiv., 204.
  (Answered by Mr. Edmund Robertson.) Deptford is no longer included amongst the royal dockyards, and the Board of Admiralty officially visit only the great dockyard establishments for the purpose of hearing petitions.

  Sanitary Condition of Post Offices in the City of London.
  MR. MYER: To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department whether during the early part of the year a Home Office official was deputed to make an inspection of various post offices in the City of London, with respect to their sanitary condition; and, if so, whether his Report is now ready for publication.
  (Answered by Mr. Secretary Gladstone.) In January last, at the request of my right hon. friend the Postmaster-General, I instructed one of His Majesty's Inspectors of Factories to inspect and report upon certain post offices in the City of London. His Report was transmitted to the Postmaster-General last month. It is for the Postmaster-General to decide what subsequent steps shall be taken.

  Irish Solicitors' Licence Duty.
  MR. O'DOHERTY: To ask Mr. Chancellor of the Exchequer if he can say whether he has received a copy of a resolution from the Northern Law Society in Ireland protesting against the continuance of the licence duty payable by solicitors in Ireland; if so, whether it is his intention to abolish this tax; and, if not, why.
  MR. O'DOHERTY: To ask Mr. Chancellor of the Exchequer if he can say whether he has received a memorial from the council of the Incorporated Law Society of Ireland, praying that the annual duties payable by solicitors in Ireland, under the provisions of the Stamp Act of 1891, be abolished from and after the 5th day of January, 1908; and whether he proposes to take steps to do So.
  MR. VINCENT KENNEDY: To ask Mr. Chancellor of the Exchequer if his attention has been called to a resolution from the Northern Law Society of Ireland praying for the abolition of the licence duty payable by

  933
  solicitors; and, if so, will he consider the advisability of removing this tax which is not paid by any other profession.
  (Answered by Mr. Asquith.) I have received the memorial and the resolution referred to, and I have given careful consideration to the arguments advanced in favour of the abolition of this licence duty. Nothing has, however, been urged against the duty which is not in my opinion equally applicable to many other licence duties of a more or less similar character, nor is there any sufficient reason for treating Ireland differently as regards this matter from other portions of the United Kingdom. I do not, therefore, see my way to taking any steps unless and until an opportunity arises of revising local taxation licences as a whole.

  Irish Council Bill—Income of the Eight Departments.
  MR. THOMAS O'DONNELL: To ask the Chief Secretary to the Lord-Lieutenant of Ireland whether he will state the present annual income of the eight Departments proposed to be dealt with in his Irish Council Bill under the heads of endowment, interest on invested capital, Parliamentary grants, and Exchequer contribution, and any other sources.
  (Answered by Mr. Birrell.) A Return which I intend shortly to lay upon the Table will include the information asked for.

  Irish Council Bill—Electoral Divisions.
  MR. O'MARA: To ask the Chief Secretary to the Lord-Lieutenant of Ireland if he will say whether the proposed distribution of electoral divisions given in Schedule 1 of the Irish Councils Bill is made on the basis of population.
  (Answered by Mr. Birrell.) In fixing the number of members for each of the counties and county boroughs regard was had, so far as possible, to the respective populations.

  Salmon Fisheries in Scotland—Public and Private Fishing Rights.
  MR. SUMMERBELL: To ask the Secretary for Scotland if he can give the names of the lochs, rivers, and burns in which salmon fishing takes place in Scotland and which are still the
  934
  property of the Woods and Forests Department, the number of such that are let for private fishing, and the number over which anglers in general have a right to fish.
  (Answered by Mr. Sinclair.) I am unable to give particulars of all the inland lochs, rivers, and burns in Scotland in which fishing for salmon takes place, and as to which the right to fish might on full investigation be found to be the property of the Crown, but the particulars of the lochs, rivers, and burns as to which the Crown's title to salmon fishings has been admitted, and which are let, are as follows:—Aberdeenshire: parts of Rivers Don, Dee, Ythan, and Fourdoun Burn; Berwickshire: parts of Rivers Whitadder and Blackadder; Dumfriesshire: parts of River Cairn and Dalwhat Water; Fife-shire: part of River Eden; Forfarshire: part of River Isla; Inverness-shire: parts of Rivers Morar and Caime and various small streams and lochs in the parish of Glenelg; Perthshire: parts of Rivers Teith and Allan; Ross shire: part of River Allness. The number of lettings in force is seventeen, and in two cases the lessees are under terms to grant licences to fish to the public. With these two exceptions lettings are for private fishing. The fishings are in most eases of very little value and the rents, with a few exceptions, nominal. There are no cases in which anglers in general have a right to fish for salmon.

  Whisky Frauds in Ireland—Arrest of the Secretary of D. E Williams, Limited.
  MR.HAVILAND BURKE: To ask Mr. Chancellor of the Exchequer whether he is aware that in the case of the Crown against D. E. Williams, Limited, of Tullamore, judgment has been marked against the secretary of the company as well as against the company itself for the sum of £65,000 in respect of cumulated penalties incurred for irregularities under the Spirits Act of 1880; whether he is aware that the secretary, a mere employee of the company and dependent solely upon the salary he received, has been placed under arrest and lodged in Tullamore Gaol, and still detained there, on a warrant issued by the sheriff of King's County for failing to satisfy the judgment; and whether having regard to the inability of this secretary to satisfy the

  935
  judgment debt for £65,000, the present intentions of the Crown as regards him can be made known.
  (Answered by Mr. Asquith.) The gentleman in question was released on Monday the 13th instant.

  Miscellaneous Revenue.
  MR. FIELD: To ask the Chief Secretary to the Lord-Lieutenant of Ireland whether he can state, outside the ordinary sources of Revenue, Customs, Excise, and Post Office, what has been the average annual amount of miscellaneous revenue for the last ten years; and whether it has been applied to Irish purposes, or how it has been otherwise expended.
  (Answered by Mr. Runciman.) The amounts derived each year from Ireland under the head of "Miscellaneous Revenue" are shown in the annual Financial Relations Returns. The average amount during the last ten years has been approximately £120,000. These receipts are paid into the Exchequer and applied in meeting the charges on the Exchequer, including the charge for Irish services.

  Irish Quit Rents.
  MR. FIELD: To ask the Chief Secretary to the Lord-Lieutenant of Ireland whether he can state what is the total amount of accumulated funds derived from quit rents in Ireland; how much was collected last year and how it has been expended; and whether the Government will consider the advisability of distributing this Irish money amongst the county councils of Ireland in aid of reafforestation according to the needs and capabilities of each county.
  (Answered by Mr. Runciman.) It cannot be said that there are any accumulated funds derived from quit rents in Ireland. As the hon. Member has been informed on several occasions, the surplus annual income from that source is annually paid into the Exchequer, as provided by the Crown Lands Acts, and goes in relief of general taxation in the United Kingdom, and the proceeds of the sale of quit rents have, under the same Acts, become merged in the capital of the land revenues
  936
  of the Crown, which is invested in land in Great Britain and Ireland and in British and Irish stocks. The amount collected in 1906–7 was £31,251. This money is not by law available for the purposes mentioned in the Question.

  Roscrea District Council Loan.
  MR. KENDAL O'BRIEN: To ask the Chief Secretary to the Lord-Lieutenant of Ireland whether he is aware that the Inland Revenue officer at Dublin has applied to the Roscrea No. 1 Rural District Council for payment of loan capital duty, at the rate of 2s. 6d. per cent. on a recent loan obtained by the council from the Irish Land Commission, under the Labourers Acts; will he say if this is the first application of the kind in Ireland, and if it is proposed to assess this duty on all future loans under the Acts mentioned; whether he is aware that there are 25,000 cottages to be built during the current year in Ireland, under improvement schemes now in the course of preparation; that each cottage will cost about £200; and that the loan capital duty (if assessed) will entail an unexpected expenditure, under these Acts, of more than £6,000 in respect of this duty alone; and, having regard to the provisions of the Labourers Act of last session, providing for the remission of stamp duty, he will arrange that this duty will not be assessed.
  (Answered by Mr. Runciman.) A claim for loan capital duty has been made as described. It is one of several, twenty-four in all, of which eighteen have been settled by recognition of the claim by the district councils concerned. Section 23 of The Labourers (Ireland) Act, 1906, which exempts from stamp duty agreements and certain other instruments, has no application to loans effected by district councils for purposes of the Act; and, under the law as it stands, neither the Board of Inland Revenue nor the Treasury has power to refrain from assessing the loan capital duty.

  Armagh District Council Loan-Delay in Sanction.
  MR. LONSDALE: To ask the Chief Secretary to the Lord-Lieutenant of Ireland whether he can explain the delay on the part of the Local Government

  937
  Board in sanctioning the loan in connection with the Armagh Rural District Council's No. 1 Labourers Scheme; whether he is aware that the labourers, interested in this scheme are suffering much hardship owing to the want of proper accommodation; and whether he will impress upon the Local Government Board the necessity of dealing with this matter at once, so that the rural district council can proceed with the construction of the cottages.
  (Answered by Mr. Birrell.) The Local Government Board have sanctioned the loan in this case, and the district council were so informed on the 8th instant. The delay in the case was due to correspondence with the council with a view to a reduction of the loan applied for, which was at the unusually high rate of £228 for each cottage and plot.

  New Irish Council—Cost of General Election.
  SIR F. BANBURY: To ask the Chief Secretary to the Lord-Lieutenant of Ireland whether he can inform the House of the approximate cost of a general election to the proposed Irish Council; and whether such charges will fall upon the ratepayers or upon the proposed Irish Exchequer.
  (Answered by Mr. Birrell.) It is assumed that £25,000 will cover the cost of the election. Under the Bill the cost of the first election will be provided by Parliament. The charge for subsequent elections will fall upon the Irish Exchequer.

  Irish Council—Incomes of Departments.
  MR. GEORGE CLARK: To ask the Chief Secretary to the Lord-Lieutenant of Ireland if he will grant a Return stating the incomes enjoyed by the departments and authorities mentioned in Clause 2 (1), and in Schedule 3 of the Irish Council Bill, apart from moneys voted to them annually by Parliament.
  (Answered by Mr. Birrell.) I propose to lay upon the Table a Return which will contain, among other things, the information asked for in the Question.

  Irish Evicted Tenants—Case of Mr. Timothy O'Callaghan.
  MR. FLYNN: To ask the Chief Secretary to the Lord-Lieutenant of Ireland whether the Estates Commissioners have yet taken any steps towards the reinstatement of Mr. Timothy O'Callaghan on the Newman estate, Dromahane, Mallow, County Cork; is he aware that, in consenting, at the landlord's solicitation, to exclude this tenant from the general sale to the tenants, although Mr. O'Callaghan was willing to purchase upon the same terms as his fellow tenants, upon the alleged ground that the landlords would, upon the expiry of the tenant's judicial term, seek to resume possession of the holding, the Commissioners acted ultra vires, inasmuch as this tenant was a judicial tenant, and, as such, entitled to apply to have a fair rent fixed for another statutory term of fifteen years on the expiration of the current term; whether he is aware that these facts were brought under the notice of the Commissioners, whilst purchase negotiations were proceeding, by O'Callaghan's solicitor and by the Member for the division (North Cork), and that, pending the correspondence with the Commissioners and Parliamentary inquiry respecting this man's exclusion from the purchase scheme, rent accrued, for the non-payment of which he was evicted from his holding; and whether, in view of the fact that it is now decided that a judicial tenant cannot now be excluded on the grounds herein set forth, the Commissioners will make a special effort to procure this man's reinstatement.
  (Answered by Mr. Birrell.) The Estates Commissioners inform me that they have endeavoured to effect the reinstatement of Mr. O'Callaghan in his former holding, but have not succeeded in doing so. They have, however, informed him that his case will be considered in connection with the distribution of any untenanted land which the Commissioners may acquire in the county. The Commissioners are not aware of any legal decision which would go to show that their action in allowing the sale of the estate to be concluded without the inclusion of O'Callaghan's holding was ultra vires. O'Callaghan was evicted in consequence of his refusing to pay rent after his holding had been omitted from the sale and the

  939
  advances had been made in respect of the other holdings.

  Telephone from Tralee Police Barracks.
  MR. THOMAS O'DONNELL: To ask the Chief Secretary to the Lord-Lieutenant of Ireland whether the Royal Irish Constabulary authorities have received a communication from the Tralee Urban Council in reference to the necessity of connecting the Tralee police barracks with the local telephone system; whether the constabulary authorities, if such a connection were established, would be prepared to pay the annual rent; and, if so, will he take steps to have this connection established.
  (Answered by Mr. Birrell.) The Inspector General informs me that he has received from the Tralee Urban Council a communication to the effect stated, but is unable to adopt the suggestion of the council. No provision for such expenditure is made in the Vote for the Constabulary.

  Irish Council—Administrative Action and Sanction of the Lord Lieutenant.
  LORD BALCARRES: To ask the Chief Secretary to the Lord-Lieutenant of Ireland if it is proposed to permit the Irish Council to perform any administrative function without their having previously submitted the intended course of action in the form of a resolution to the Lord-Lieutenant, or whether the Council will be empowered to act, if they so choose, without reference to the Lord-Lieutenant.
  (Answered by Mr. Birrell.) I beg to refer the noble Lord to Clause 21 (2) of the Bill.

  Cession of part of Swaziland to the Transvaal.
  MR. ALDEN: To ask the Under-Secretary of State for the Colonies whether any negotiations are taking place with the view of ceding some portion of Swaziland to the Transvaal Government; and whether, before any definite decision is arrived at, the House will be fully advised and consulted on the matter.
  (Answered by Mr. Churchill.) No such negotiations are in progress.

  Revenue and Expenditure for Ireland.
  MR. FIELD: To ask the Secretary to the Treasury whether he will state the approximate true revenue and expenditure for Ireland during each of the last twenty years, and the approximate annual amount of this expenditure spent on material imported into Ireland.
  (Answered by Mr. Runciman) The figures of Irish revenue and expenditure are shown in the annual Financial Relations Returns. I have no information as to the amount expended on material imported into Ireland.

  Civil Service Higher Appointments.
  MR. FIELD: To ask the Secretary to the Treasury whether he will give a list of the number of cases which have occurred during the last five years in which heads of departments have recommended for the higher posts under their control experienced men risen from the ranks, whilst the Treasury opposed such recommendations on the ground that these higher posts should be filled by men successful in the Higher Division open competitions; and whether he will state in how many cases did the Treasury view prevail.
  (Answered by Mr. Runciman.) I am not aware of any such cases. But I cannot undertake to have a search made through the Treasury correspondence of the last five years.

  Appointments in the Surveying Department of the Post Office.
  MR. FIELD: To ask the Secretary to the Treasury whether some short time ago correspondence passed between the Treasury and the Post Office on the question of appointments in the surveying department of the Post Office; whether the Post Office put forward the view that these posts should be filled by men risen from the ranks and experienced in Post Office work, and the Treasury persisted in the view that these posts should be given to inexperienced young men successful in Higher Division open competitions; and whether he will state the ultimate arrangement which was decided on.
  (Answered by Mr. Runciman.) There is no fixed rule as to the manner in which

  941
  these appointments should be filled, and, so far as I am aware, there is no difference of opinion on the subject between the two Departments.

  Surpluses Surrendered from Irish Votes.
  MR. FIELD: To ask the Secretary to the Treasury whether he can have a Return prepared showing the surpluses from Irish Votes surrendered to the Treasury since the passing of the Land Act, 1903, and setting forth the effect of the finance provisions of the said Act; and what would be their effect if those savings were placed against the losses of the Treasury instead of being used in the reduction of the National Debt.
  (Answered by Mr. Runciman.) I have already explained, in answer to the hon. Member's Question on the 2nd instant, that the mere fact of the expenditure on a voted service being less than it has been estimated to be does not necessarily ensure that any money is thereby set free for application to another purpose. I do not think that any useful purpose would be served by instituting a comparison between the savings on Irish Votes and the deficiencies on the Irish Land Purchase Fund.

  Increase on Customs Estimate due to Increase of Salaries.
  MR. CLAUDE HAY: To ask the Secretary to the Treasury how much of the net increment of £6,000 in the Estimates for Customs is due to increments of salary; how many officers have received an increase of salary, and the amount by which the salary of each official has been increased; and the number of officers whose salaries have not been affected by the revision effected under the Estimate.
  (Answered by Mr. Runciman.) I find that the preparation of the information required by the hon. Member, so far as it is not available from the published volume of the Estimates, would take a far greater amount of time and labour than I feel justified in authorising, but the Board of Customs inform me that they will be happy to furnish the hon. Member with any particulars regarding individual officers which can be properly and readily given.

  Post Office Savings Bank—Unclaimed Balances.
  MR. SWIFT MACNEILL: To ask the Postmaster-General what is the amount approximately of the unclaimed balances in the books of the Post Office Savings Bank; when was the last account of these unclaimed balances presented to the public; and whether, having regard to the amount of money unclaimed and never likely to be claimed in Post Office investments, any, and, if so, what plan has been made for its disposition to the public use.
  (Answered by Mr. Sydney Buxton). The approximate total of the unclaimed balances standing to the credit of depositors in the Post Office Savings Bank could only be ascertained by a detailed examination of the ledgers, and I do not think the result would justify the labour and expense involved. No account of these balances has been published, and I am not prepared to sanction the compilation of such an account. The bank may at any time be called upon to discharge its liability in respects of deposits; and it frequently happens that a demand for repayment is made after an account has remained untouched for a considerable period.

  Metropolitan Water Board and Treatment of the Staff.
  COLONEL LOCKWOOD: To ask the President of the Local Government Board whether he is aware that the Metropolitan Water Board are endeavouring to evade the provisions of Section 47, Sub-section 1, of The Metropolis Water Act, 1902, by forcing their transferred officers and servants to sign away their rights and privileges granted them by that Act under threat of not granting them any increase of salary or wages unless they do so; is he aware that Lord Balfour, the chairman of the Joint Select Committee, stated that the Committee's desire would be to put them in absolutely the position which, as reasonable men, they might reasonably look forward to if there had been no such Bill as this, which was endorsed by the counsel to the Local Government Board, the promoters of the Bill; whether he has any jurisdiction in the matter; and, if not, whether he will consider the advisability of introducing in any similar Bills in the future a right of appeal by

  943
  the parties concerned to the Local Government Board.
  (Answered by Mr. John Burns.) I have made inquiry on this subject and am informed that, where an officer transferred from one of the water companies to the Water Board is promoted to a higher office or greater emoluments than he was entitled to under the terms of his service with the company, the Water Board impose a condition that the advantages given to him shall not at some future time be made a ground for claiming also additional superannuation, or like allowance, to which he would not have been entitled under the terms of his service with the company. I am aware of the statements which were by Lord Balfour and by the counsel for the Local Government Board on the Bill for the Act of 1902, and which are referred to in the Question, but I find that the Water Board do not regard their action as forcing the transferred officers and servants to sign away their rights and privileges under the Act. I have no jurisdiction in the matter; but I will note the suggestion of the hon. Member.

  Payment of Vaccination Officers.
  SIR WILLIAM BULL: To ask the President of the Local Government Board if he will make provision by a Vaccination Order for the payment of a fee to the vaccination officer for registering the certificates proposed in his Bill, or abolish the payments by fee to the vaccination officer and provide for him to receive a fixed income based upon his average income for the five years previous to the Bill becoming law.
  (Answered by Mr. John Burns.) I am not aware of any sufficient reason for adopting the course suggested.

  Construction of Workhouses and Infirmaries.
  SIR WILLIAM BULL: To ask the President of the Local Government Board whether the Board some years ago issued a code of suggestions and instructions for the guidance of boards of guardians as to the mode of constructing workhouses and infirmaries for Poor Law purposes; what is the date of the last edition of the code; and whether in that code or in any other official publication, any suggestions have been
  944
  issued for the guidance of guardians as to the best mode of equipping these institutions with electricity for lighting and power purposes.
  (Answered by Mr. John Burns.) The Board some years ago issued a memorandum as to the points to be attended to in the construction of workhouse buildings, and extracts from it with certain alterations have continued to be issued. The last material alterations were made in 1897. A memorandum on the construction of Poor Law infirmaries was issued in October last. The Answer to the last part of the Question is in the negative.

  Charges for Certificates of Birth.
  MR. W. JOHNSON: To ask the President of the Local Government Board if he is aware that the sum of 2s. 7d. is charged for certificates of birth by superintendent registrars and registrars of birth, whereas under Section 134 of the Factory and Workshops Act, 1904, only 6d. should be the fee, owing to the applicants, who are very poor people, being in ignorance that they can obtain a requisition form free of charge from registrars and superintendent registrars of births; whether he will issue an order making it compulsory that registrars and superintendent registrars of births shall on every application for such certificates point out to the applicant that such a form is necessary and offer the said form to the applicants; and whether he will confer with the Secretary of State for the Home Department as to the inspectors of factories assisting the Local Government Board to prevent the imposition of such a charge upon applicants for certificates.
  (Answered by Mr. John Burns.) Where application is made to a superintendent registrar or registrar, and properly verified, for a certificate of the birth of any young person or child which is required for any of the purposes of the Factory and Workshop Act, 1901, or for any purpose connected with the employment in labour or elementary education of the young person or child, the officer is bound by the regulations in force to furnish the applicant with a cheap certificate costing 6d. instead of the usual fee of 3s. 7d. I understand from tie Registrar-General that he has no

  945
  reason to suppose that the officers do not act in accordance with the spirit and intention of the Act and regulations, but if any particular case to the contrary is brought to his notice he will cause inquiry to be made into it. It does not at present appear to me to be necessary to take further action in the matter.

  Local Government Board Messengers.
  SIR SAMUEL SCOTT: To ask the President of the Local Government Board how many appointments have been made in the Local Government Board to permanent messengerships since January, 1906; and what was the occupation of the individual men prior to appointment.
  (Answered by Mr. John Burns.) One appointment has been made. The person appointed was previously in domestic service.

  Midland Railway—Running Engines Tender First.
  SIR F. CHANNING: To ask the President of the Board of Trade whether he is aware that on certain portions of the Midland Railway a practice has been adopted of engine-drivers taking trains to points between thirty and forty miles distant and returning to the point from which they started with the tender first, instead of proceeding to the nearest station where a turntable is available; and whether, in view of the repeated comments of Board of Trade inspectors as to the increased risks involved in running engines tender first, he will make a representation to the company on this matter.
  (Answered by Mr Lloyd-George.) I will communicate with the railway company in this matter, and subsequently inform my hon. friend of the result.

  Discipline of Customs Officers.
  MR. SWIFT MACNEILL: To ask Mr. Chancellor of the Exchequer whether his attention has been directed to the fact that in the rules relating to discipline of officers of his Majesty's Customs, Rule 30 in the Abstracts of Regulations of 1905, whereby superior officers are prohibited from undertaking to collect or promoting a collection of subscriptions for any purpose whatever among the officers of a lower
  946
  grade is omitted from the Abstracts of Regulations of 1907; what has been the reason of this omission and under what circumstances has this rule been abrogated; and whether, having regard to the practically enforced subscriptions by subordinate officials to testimonials promoted and encouraged by official superiors, the old rule prohibiting the promotion of the collection of subscriptions by superior officers amongst officers of a lower grade will be restored and enforced.
  (Answered by Mr. Asquith.) The Abstracts of Regulations referred to appear to be those contained in "Ham's Customs Year Book," an unofficial publication for which the Board of Customs are in no way responsible. The rule against superior officers collecting or promoting the collection of subscriptions among their subordinates, which has been in force for about half a century, remains unaltered, and the Board have no reason to believe but that it has been faithfully observed. They would rigidly enforce the observance of the rule if any breach of it were brought to their notice.

  Irish Land Stock.
  MR. WALKER: To ask Mr. Chancellor of the Exchequer whether his attention has been called to the fact that the stock created under the Irish Land Act of 1903 is commonly quoted in the Press as Irish Land Stock; and whether, seeing that an erroneous impression would appear, from the price at which the stock stands, to have been engendered thereby that its security has some relation to the value of Irish land, he will signify the desire of His Majesty's Treasury that this stock should, in accordance with the terms of this Act, be entitled Guaranteed 2¾ per cent. Stock.
  (Answered by Mr. Asquith.) My hon. friend correctly states the statutory title of the stock. Writers in the Press presumably make use of the title which they find most convenient. They cannot be denied that freedom; but his Question will, perhaps, call attention to the more accurate description.

  Payment of Indian Officers on Leave in England.
  SIR SEYMOUR KING: To ask the Secretary of State for

  947
  India why the privilege granted to officers on combined leaves under civil leave rules of drawing their privilege pay at the Home Treasury has not been extended to military officers generally; and whether he will consider the advisability of granting this concession.
  (Answered by Mr. Secretary Morley.) The officers to whom the concession was granted draw their leave pay in arrear, but officers on combined leave under military leave rules draw the whole of their privilege leave pay in advance on leaving India. I do not see, therefore, that the concession would be of any value to them.

  Support of Michael Nealon, an ex-Army Man.
  MR. O'SHAUGHNESSY: To ask the Secretary of State for War whether he has received a copy of a resolution from the Newcastle West Board of Guardians, in the county of Limerick, protesting against having to support out of the rates Michael Nealon, a retired Army man, who is apparently suffering from a gunshot wound; and whether he intends to relieve the ratepayers of the union of this charge.
  (Answered by Mr. Secretary Haldane.) A copy of the resolution has been received, and the case shall be investigated as soon as the necessary particulars are known.

  Minimum Staff at Woolwich.
  VISCOUNT HELMSLEY: To ask the Secretary of State for War whether he can now state what is to be the minimum staff retained at the Royal Arsenal at Woolwich.
  (Answered by Mr. Secretary Haldane.) It is not possible at present to give this information.

  Pay and Position of Civil Engineers, Architects, etc, on Army Staff.
  MR. GODFREY BARING: To ask the Secretary of State for War whether he is aware that there is a body of civil engineers, architects, and surveyors on the Staff of the Army, fifty-eight in number, whose position, pay, and prospects have been the subject of three different Committees; and whether he can say if, and when, effect
  948
  will be given to the recommendations of those Committees.
  MR. GODFREY BARING: To ask the Secretary of State for War whether he is aware that there are on the Staff qualified civil engineers who will, owing to stoppage in their promotion which has been made since their entrance into the public service, remain stationary at a salary of £280 per annum until they are over sixty years of age; and whether it is intended to allow this state of things to continue.
  (Answered by Mr. Secretary Haldane.) These Questions presumably refer to the surveyors on the Royal Engineer Civil Staff. A scheme has been for some time under consideration by which the prospects of these gentlemen will be improved; and it is hoped that it will be possible to obtain a final decision at an early date.

  Pay of Special Reservists.
  VISCOUNT MORPETH: To ask the Secretary of State for War if the special reservists will be paid at the rate now paid to the first-class Army Reserve; and, if not, on what scale will the payment be made.
  (Answered by Mr. Secretary Haldane.) It is proposed that the pay of the special contingent when called up for training shall be on the scale of that of the Regular Army, and that their reserve pay shall approximate to the bounties now given to the Militia.

QUESTIONS IN THE HOUSE.

  Alton Military Hospital.
  MR. W. NICHOLSON: I beg to ask the Secretary of State for War if he is aware that the hospital at Alton, Hants, which was presented to the War Office by the subscribers to the Daily Mail Fund during the South African War, is no longer in use as an Army hospital; if he can state the reasons why the hospital has been closed; and if it is the intention of the War Office to dispose of it by sale.
  MR. J. A. PEASE: My right hon. friend has asked me to reply to this. This hospital

  949
  is no longer in use as an Army hospital as there is ample accommodation in the other Army hospitals at Aldershot. It is not at present proposed to dispose of the building by sale.

  Plague in India.
  DR. RUTHERFORD: I beg to ask the Secretary of State for India the number of deaths from plague in India during April, 1907, and the total number from September, 1896.
  THE SECRETARY OF STATE FOR INDIA (Mr. MORLEY,): The figures are:—for April, 1907, deaths from plague 314,000; from September, 1896, to end of April, 1907, 5,326,000 approximately.

  Unrest in India.
  DR. RUTHERFORD: I beg to ask the Secretary of State for India whether he will give the House the names of those who have been arrested and imprisoned without trial in India, the period of their detention, the charges upon which they are confined, and which of them, if any, have been released; and whether he proposes to release the others in accordance with the provisions of the Act of Habeas Corpus.
  MR. MORLEY: It would be impossible, without long inquiry, to give the names of all the persons who during the last eighty-nine years have been arrested and imprisoned under the Regulations of 1818, 1819, and 1827. The persons now in prison are ten in number, of whom five are not British subjects, and four are Moplahs indicated in the Moplah outbreak in 1894. If my hon. friend will come to my room presently, I will give him the list of names. I gave, on Monday, the considerations which prevented His Majesty's Government from repealing or annulling those Regulations; the same considerations prevent me from ordering the release of any of the persons now imprisoned under them.
  MR. O'GRADY: Is it not the fact that the Habeas Corpus Act is suspended over all India, or at least in some of the provinces?
  MR. MORLEY: There is no suspension of the Act beyond the implied suspen-
  950
  sion under the Regulations I have mentioned.
  MR. O'GRADY: Is there any truth in the statement that bodies of stalwart rustics armed with bludgeons are moving into Lahore? If so, what is the reason and why are they gathered in this manner. Has this statement anything to do with the large number of troops despatched to Lahore? And may I ask whether the Government intend to prevent such misleading statements being supplied to the Press at home by a well-known agency?
  MR MORLEY: I have received no official information with regard to the very striking allegation as to the stalwart rustics mentioned by my hon. friend. The statement published has no connection with the large number of troops despatched to Lahore. That was a proceeding taken on grounds of its own. When my hon. friend asks me whether I intend to prevent misleading statements being supplied to the Press, I should have thought he was the last man to invite me to take up the duty of Press censor. At the same time, I agree that it is deplorable that wild rumours, for many of which there is no foundation whatever, are so freely and disadvantageously circulated.
  MR. O'GRADY: Does not the right hon. Gentleman think it desirable, in view of the grave state of unrest in India, that a certain agency should be muzzled?
  MR. MORLEY: I feel sure that if I were, under the Regulation of 1818, to muzzle an agency in India and to try to muzzle it in this country, my hon. friend would be the first to complain.

  Cotton Growing in British East Africa.
  MR. BOWLES: I beg to ask the Under-Secretary of State for the Colonies whether he is aware that the directors of the British East Africa Corporation, Limited, state, in a prospectus issued to the public in February last, that they will operate an annual grant of £1,000 from the British East Africa Government, that they will work lands specially conceded by the Government, that the British Cotton Growing Association has subscribed for 10,000 shares at par in the capital of their

  951
  company, and that their general manager in East Africa is Major E. H. M. Leggett, D.S.O., R.E.; whether this Major Leggett is a Government official; and whether the House will have an opportunity of considering these Government grants of money and lands to a private company.
  THE UNDER-SECRETARY OF STATE FOR THE COLONIES (Mr. CHURCHILL,): The Secretary of State has seen the prospectus to which the hon. Member refers. As I explained on the 8th inst. in my reply to the question of the hon. Member for Rye, the British East Africa Corporation is merely employed by the British Cotton Growing Association to carry out the experimental work which the Assocition has undertaken to do for the Government under stringent conditions, in consideration of a grant of £1,000 per annum for three years from the funds of the East Africa Protectorate. Major Leggett is a Royal Engineer officer of special attainments whose services have been lent to the Corporation, at the request of the British Cotton Growing Association, for three years, during which period he will draw no pay from public funds. The grant of money to the British Cotton Growing Association and of land to the Corporation can be discussed on the Vote for Colonial Services, which includes a grant in aid of the revenue of the East Africa Protectorate.
  MR. BOWLES: Am I to understand that the statements in this prospectus that the British East Africa Corporation themselves operate a Government grant of £1,000 a year and lands specially conceded to them by the Government are inaccurate?
  MR. CHURCHILL: Yes; our dealings are with the British Cotton Growing Association, which we are endeavouring to further in all parts of the British Empire. So far as the East Africa Corporation are concerned, they are only concerned indirectly and through the British Cotton Growing Association.
  MR. BOWLES: If the Government grant of £1,000 granted to one body for experimental purposes is being used by another body, which is a private company, for its own purposes, will the right hon.
  952
  gentleman reconsider the circumstances under which that grant was made?
  MR. CHURCHILL: No; I think the grant is being applied so as to give the greatest possible effect to the purposes to which we, after much consideration, devoted the money.

  Swaziland.
  *SIR CHARLES DILKE: I beg to ask the Under-Secretary of State for the Colonies, with regard to proposals for the throwing open of Swaziland to prospectors, whether any change in the Swaziland Order in Council of December last is contemplated, or any interference with the direct control of the Crown over Swaziland or with the arrangements on behalf of the natives, and extended reservation of native lands, announced by him in connection with the grant of the Transvaal constitution.
  MR. CHURCHILL: No amendment of the Order in Council is at present in contemplation nor any alteration in the general policy of His Majesty's Government with regard to Swaziland.

  Transvaal Government and Coolie Labour.
  CAPTAIN CRAIG: I beg to ask the Prime Minister whether the Home Government have yet received any information from the new Transvaal Government regarding the date it is intended finally to dispense with Chinese indentured labour in the mines; whether the cost of repatriating those coolies who in the future consider the terms of indentured labour to be tantamount to slavery will be borne by the Home Government or the Transvaal; and can he state the numbers repatriated under this head before and subsequent to the granting of the new Transvaal Constitution.
  MR. CHURCHILL: It is undesirable to anticipate the declarations of policy which will, I understand, shortly be made to the Transvaal Parliament by the responsible Government of that Colony. The repatriation notice is still in force for the present, and the expenses incurred under it, if any, will continue to be paid by his Majesty's Government. The number of repatriations under the notice is 766, all of whom were sent to China

  953
  before the new Constitution came into force.
  CAPTAIN CRAIGasked if those 766 went back because they considered the conditions of labour were tantamount to slavery?
  MR. CHURCHILL: No, Sir. They are returned under the heading of those who were dissatisfied with the conditions of employment and had not the means themselves to return home.
  CAPTAIN CRAIGasked if there had been any repatriations since the new Transvaal Government came into power.
  MR. CHURCHILL: None that I know of.
  MR. CHARLES CRAIG: In view of the statement of the right hon. Gentleman that it is undesirable to anticipate declarations of policy to be made in the Transvaal Parliament, are we to understand that he knows what action is going to be taken there?
  MR. CHURCHILL: Certainly not. The hon. Gentleman must not understand anything of the kind. I was endeavouring to discourage speculations of an idle character.

  The Imperial Conference.
  MR. LEHMANNasked the Undersecretary of State for the Colonies whether he could confirm or deny the statement that at the previous day's Imperial Conference an incident occurred which caused Sir Robert Bond to leave the room in indignation, complaining that gross humiliation had been inflicted on him and on the Colony he represented.
  MR. CHURCHILL: My attention has been drawn to a report, in to-day's Daily Mail, of the proceedings at the Conference yesterday. I cannot undertake, as a general rule, to correct misstatements appearing in journals of that class and character; but as I learn that this particular report has been cabled fully to the Colonies, it has become necessary for me to say that it is from beginning to end a baseless and impudent fabrication, which bears not the slightest resemblance
  954
  in substance or form to anything that took place at the Colonial Conference. And I will further permit myself to observe that it is a matter of surprise to me that a person who has lately been created a Peer of the realm should be willing to allow newspapers under his control to employ, for political objects, methods of such transparent mendacity.
  MR. C. J. O'DONNELL: Has not the right hon. Gentleman seen the statements with regard to India which are equally false?
  [No Answer was returned.]

  New Transvaal Loan.
  MR. LANE-FOX: I beg to ask the Undersecretary of State for the Colonies on what date the guarantee of the new Transvaal loan was promised to General Botha.
  MR. CHURCHILL: The date was 4th May.

  General Botha and the Chinese Coolies.
  MR. LANE-FOX: I beg to ask the Under-Secretary of State for the Colonies whether any arrangement has been come to with General Botha as to the complete repatriation of the Chinese coolies from the Transvaal; and, if so, what was the date of such arrangement.
  MR. CHURCHILL: No, Sir, but the Prime Minister of the Transvaal, will, I understand, make a statement as to the policy of his Government in his own Parliament at a fitting moment.

  Morocco.
  MR. PIKE PEASE: On behalf of the hon. Member for the St. Andrews Burghs, I beg to ask the Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs whether he has any official information, with regard to the present state of affairs in Morocco; and whether any steps are being taken to protect the British residents there.
  THE FINANCIAL SECRETARY TO THE TREASURY (Mr. RUNCIMAN,; for Sir EDWARD GREY): It is presumed that the hon. Member refers more especially to the state of affairs at Morocco City, where some

  955
  of the tribes are reported to have assumed a hostile attitude towards their own authorities. There has been no mention, so far, of any attacks being directed against Europeans. But my right hon. friend is informed by His Majesty's Minister at Tangier that the British residents were to leave Morocco City on the 9th instant for a less disturbed part.

  Mr. Abbott's Ransom.
  LORD BALCARRES: On behalf of the hon. Member for the St. Andrews Burghs, I beg to ask the Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs what reply he has had from the Turkish Government to his request for the repayment of the £15,000 ransom paid to the brigands for the release of Mr. Abbott; and whether he will ask for compensation from the Turkish Government for this gentleman.
  MR. RUNCIMAN: No reply has yet been received from the Ottoman Government to the request which has been addressed to them for the reimbursement of the sum advanced for Mr. Abbott's ransom. With regard to the question of compensation, my right hon. friend has nothing to add to the statement which he made to the hon. Member on the 2nd instant, † Our demand is, as on previous occasions, for the repayment of the sum actually expended.

  Labour on the Panama Canal.
  MR. JOHN WARD: I beg to ask the Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs whether he has any information as to the number of emigrants from British Possessions now working upon the Panama Canal; whether he has any information as to the rate of sickness and mortality among such emigrants; what powers he possesses to enforce the terms of contracts under which such emigrants engaged; and whether His Majesty has any representative upon the canal to whom British subjects may appeal in case of necessity or grievance.
  MR. RUNCIMAN: The exact number of emigrants from British Possessions working on the canal is not known. But the immigrants into Panama from the British West Indies during 1906
  † See (4) Debates, clxxiii., 1061–2.
  956
  amounted to 24,400, presumably including women and children. In September last there were at work in the engineering department and earthworks of the canal over 10,000 men from these islands. If this information is not sufficient, a report will be called for from His Majesty's representative at Panama. The daily sick-rate for the first ten months of 1906 was twenty-eight per thousand; the annual death-rate 44·03 per thousand. These figures apply, however, to the whole body of canal labourers, and there is no special information as regards those from British Possessions. His Majesty's Government have no special powers to enforce the terms of the labourers' contracts. But in the event of a case of non-fulfilment of a contract being brought to their notice and warranting action on their part, a diplomatic representation could, of course, be addressed to the United States Government, as the employer. His Majesty's Representative at Panama, to whom all complaints made by British subjects are addressed, has, however, reported that any recent complaints made to him have been so few and trivial that he has generally found on investigation that they had no foundation. He is convinced that the labourers are well treated and well cared for.
  MR. J. WARD: Do I understand it is intended to ask for a special report?
  MR. RUNCIMAN: If the hon. Member so desires.
  MR. J. WARD: I certainly do.
  VISCOUNT TURNOUR: Is it not the case that extraordinary precautions have been taken by the United States Government to prevent sickness, and that the sanitary state of the workmen is good?
  MR. RUNCIMAN: I think it would be better to wait for a fuller report; but I understand that generally what the noble Lord states is accurate.

  Cost of the Consular Service.
  MR. CLAUDE HAY: I beg to ask the Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs if he will explain the developments of the Consular

  957
  Service which involve an increase of £15,484 in the Estimate for that service.
  MR. RUNCIMAN: The total increase in salaries and allowances is £8,767. This is principally due to the creation of new Consular posts, the increased cost of living in all parts of the world, the rise in the value of the Mexican dollar in China, and the additional duties thrown upon Consular Officers, which involve the employment of more clerks in the various Consulates.

  Consols.
  MR. STRAUS: I beg to ask Mr. Chancellor of the Exchequer whether he can give the exact amount of 2½ per cent. Consols on 13th May, 1907, and the amount on the same Monday in 1906.
  MR. RUNCIMAN: My right hon. friend has asked me to say that the exact amount of Consols on Monday, 13th May, 1907, was £583,177,773 5s. 2d., and on Monday, 14th May, 1906, £585,053,842 19s. 9d.

  Civil Servants' Pensions.
  MR. CLAUDE HAY: I beg to ask Mr. Chancellor of the Exchequer what steps he proposes to take to carry out the recommendation of the Departmental Committee that military service should be included in assessing the pensions payable to Civil Servants who have served in the Navy or in the Army.
  MR. RUNCIMAN: This question has been carefully reviewed by the last and the present Board of Treasury and they have both come to the conclusion that, having regard to the dissimilarity of the conditions affecting appointment, promotion, pay, and pension in the Army and Navy on the one hand, and in the Civil Service on the other, there is insufficient ground for asking Parliament to modify the present practice.

  Income Tax.
  MR. PIKE PEASE: I beg to ask Mr. Chancellor of the Exchequer if he will state, so far as available materials enable him to estimate, what is the aggregate value of the incomes subject to income-tax between the limits £160–£700 and £700–£2,000, respectively.
  MR. RUNCIMAN: It is possible, from the information obtained through claims for abatement, to estimate with approximate accuracy the aggregate of incomes lying between £160 and£700, and the amount (before deduction or abatements and allowances on life premiums) may be put at about £275,000,000. No similar data are available in respect of incomes between £700 and £2,000, and any estimate of the aggregate amount of such incomes must be exceedingly speculative. It is thought at Somerset House that it may, perhaps, be guessed to be about £150,000,000.

  London Police and Public Meetings.
  SIR HOWARD VINCENT: I beg to ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department how many inspectors, sergeants, and constables of the Metropolitan police, and how many horses, were deprived of their Sunday rest on 12th May by the demonstration in Hyde Park; what was the cost to the ratepayers in travelling and allowances for such police; and, having in view the constant recurrence of such employment on the Sabbath, will he consider the propriety of requiring the promoters of such Sunday gatherings being called upon to indemnify the public for such expenses, in like manner as the organisers of any other form of public entertainment or recreation.
  THE SECRETARY OF STATE FOR THE HOME DEPARTMENT (Mr. GLADSTONE,): Twenty-two Inspectors, thirty-six sergeants and 151 constables who would otherwise have been enjoying their fortnightly leave day were necessarily employed on Sunday the 12th instant. Each will receive a day's leave in exchange for the one thus lost. Fifty-five horses were also employed. They were drawn as far as possible from neighbouring divisions and the cost therefore is estimated not to exceed £15 for travelling, etc. I am afraid I cannot take any steps in the direction indicated in the last part of the hon. and gallant Member's Question.
  SIR HOWARD VINCENT: Can the right hon. Gentleman do nothing to limit the number of these extraordinary demonstrations which occupy the streets, employ a large number of police, and cause great inconvenience to the public?
  MR. J. WARDasked if his right hon. friend would also take into consideration the extraordinary expense and inconvenience caused to the police in regulating tariff reform meetings on Sunday afternoons?
  SIR HOWARD VINCENT: Are there any tariff reform meetings on Sunday afternoons?
  MR. CROOKS: And has he any information as to the cost of the police at the Moderate meeting in Trafalgar Square, where they paid 4s. per. head?
  MR. J. WARD: Where they did not pay 4s. a head.
  MR. GLADSTONE: As far as my knowledge goes, on the whole, these assemblies take place with extremely small inconvenience to the public.

  Lawlessness in London.
  MR. CLAUDE HAY: I beg to ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department what answer he proposes to make to the representations which have been addressed to him by the Borough Council of Shoreditch and others as to the lawlessness which is alleged to prevail in certain parts of London.
  MR. GLADSTONE: The representation from the Shoreditch Borough Council to which the hon. Member refers only reached me to-day. It shall have my careful consideration. I may say that I have already had reason to think the condition of the district unsatisfactory, and it is receiving the attention of myself and of the Commissioner of Metropolitan Police.

  Inspection of Laundries.
  MR. T. L. CORBETT: I beg to ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department whether he can now say when the Bill dealing with the inspection of laundries will be introduced.
  MR. GLADSTONE: The Bill was introduced in the House of Lords, under the title of the Factory and Workshop Bill, on the 2nd of this month, and read a second time yesterday afternoon.
  MR. T. L. CORBETT: Too late, I fear.

  Vivisection Licences.
  MR. SMEATON: I beg to ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department who are the expert advisers upon whose Report he relies before deciding whether applications for licences and new certificates should be granted or refused to vivisectors.
  MR. GLADSTONE: The whole procedure is fully detailed in the appendix to the first Report of the Royal Commission, and I may especially refer my hon. friend to pages 8, 10, 15 and 17.

  Women Weavers and their Dinner Hour.
  MR. BOWLES: I beg to ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department whether he is aware that Mr. J. H. Rogers, a factory inspector, stated before the Clitheroe magistrates on the 8th instant that if women weavers insisted on working during their dinner hour they should be beaten; whether this statement was sanctioned by the Home Office; and, if not, whether he will take steps to protect the weaving industry of Clitheroe from the further attentions of this official.
  MR. GLADSTONE: The inspector referred to informs me that he made no such statement.
  MR. BOWLES: The statement was reported in the prominent papers in the district and commented on in large type. What publicity will be given to the denial?
  MR. GLADSTONE: I presume my Answer to-day will also be reported.

  Cahirciveen Pier.
  MR. BOLAND: I beg to ask the President of the Board of Trade whether he has received the copy of a resolution passed by the Cahirciveen Ratepayers' Protective Association on 24th April with reference to the proposed improvements to the pier at Cahirciveen; and whether he proposes to take any, and, if so, what action in the matter.
  MR. RUNCIMAN (for Mr. LLOYD-GEORGE): I have received a copy of the resolution in question. The improvement to which the association takes exception is proposed to be carried out by Trinity

  961
  College in pursuance of the recommendation made by the Board of Trade inspector after a local inquiry. At the time of the inquiry the improvement was accepted by those interested as a satisfactory equivalent for the accommodation which they lost by the erection of a store on the quay, and the Kerry County Council afterwards passed a resolution urging that it should be carried out. The Board of Trade have already intimated to Trinity College that they are prepared to give their sanction to the proposed improvement.

  Shipping Dues.
  MR. J. WARD: On behalf of the hon. Member for South Glamorgan, I beg to ask the President, of the Board of Trade whether he is aware that thirty-two dock and harbour authorities, eleven in England and Wales, eleven in Scotland, and ten in Ireland, have had powers granted them by Parliament to levy dues on vessels upon a minimum percentage of the gross tonnage, in some cases of forty and in others of fifty per cent.; and whether, having regard to the Merchant Shipping (Deduction for Propelling Power) Bill now before the House, he proposes to take any measures to safeguard such powers.
  MR. RUNCIMAN (for Mr. LLOYD-GEORGE): There is nothing in the Bill now before the House which would prejudice the powers granted by Parliament to the dock and harbour authorities referred to by my hon. friend.

  Poor Relief Committee.
  MR. BROOKE: I beg to ask the President of the Local Government Board how many of the different boards of guardians in London have power now, under Orders from his Board, to assign their duties of giving relief to a Relief Committee; how many are now exercising that power; and what are their names.
  THE PRESIDENT OF THE LOCAL GOVERNMENT BOARD (Mr. John Burns,): All boards of guardians in London except those for the Poor Law Unions of St. George-in-the-East, Hampstead, Stepney, and White-chapel are empowered to appoint Relief Committees under Orders issued by the Local Government Board or their pre-
  962
  decessors. The power is generally exercised, but there is no Relief Committee in the Poor Law Unions of Mile End and the Strand, whilst at Paddington, Shoreditch, and Westminster, and in certain circumstances at Bethnal Green, the Committee consists of the whole Board.

  Education Code.
  *SIR FRANCIS POWELL: I beg to ask the President of the Board of Education when the Code for the present year will be presented, printed, and circulated among Members; and whether a full opportunity will be given to the House of discussing the Code and the Education Estimates this year.
  THE PRESIDENT OF THE BOARD OF EDUCATION (Mr. MCKENNA,): It will not be long, I hope, before the Code is laid upon the Table, but I am unable at present to fix the precise date. One of the allotted days will be devoted to the discussion of the Education Estimates.
  *SIR FRANCIS POWELL: Including the Code?
  MR. MCKENNA: Yes; that is one of the subjects that can be discussed on the Estimates.

  Secondary Schools.
  *SIR FRANCIS POWELL: I beg to ask the President of the Board of Education whether he intends to make any proposals in the course of the session relating to secondary schools; and, if so, at what date such proposals will be submitted for the consideration of the House.
  MR. MCKENNA: Such proposals as I have to make will be included in the Secondary School Regulations, which will, I hope, be presented to Parliament shortly after the Recess.

  Board of Education—Medical Department.
  MR. WEDGWOOD: I beg to ask the President of the Board of Education what immediate steps he proposes to take with a view to obtaining expert opinion as to the advisability of establishing a permanent medical department at the Board of Education, seeing that this matter was not considered

  963
  by the Inter-Departmental Committee on Medical Inspection two years ago, and seeing that no information concerning any other expert advice is available for consideration by this House.
  MR. MCKENNA: I can assure my hon. friend that experts have not failed to give me the great advantage of their advice upon this question. The opinions which I have received from them are by no means wanting in variety.

  Office of Works Staff.
  MR. CLAUDE HAY: I beg to ask the First Commissioner of Works whether he will give particulars of the increase of staff, and the salaries paid to the persons employed, involving an increase of £7,318 in the Estimate for the Office of Works.
  THE FIRST COMMISSIONER OF WORKS (Mr. HARCOURT,): The hon. Member will find all the facts in relation to this matter on pp. 185–187 of the Civil Service Estimates, Class II., Vote 25.

  Royal Botanic Gardens, Kew—Wages of Employees.
  MR. SUMMERBELL: I beg to ask the hon. Member for South Somerset, as representing the President of the Board of Agriculture, if he can now state to the House the decision of the Treasury in regard to the wages of the employees at the Royal Botanic Gardens, Kew.
  THE TREASURER OF THE HOUSEHOLD (Sir EDWARD STRACHEY,): The Treasury have sanctioned an increase from 23s. to 24s. a week in the wages of labourers who have given five years satisfactory service, and they have agreed to the wages of the gangers and the head-carter being raised from 25s. to 26s. a week. They have also expressed their willingness to grant some concession in respect of hours of work to the constables and museum porters, who are at present required to attend seven days a week, and receive only one day in twenty-eight in lieu of Sunday attendance. The details of this latter concession are under consideration.
  SIR HOWARD VINCENT: How many men will this affect?
  SIR EDWARD STRACHEY: I cannot say.
  SIR HOWARD VINCENT: Why do you not know it?
  [No Answer was returned.]

  Stokers at Kew Gardens.
  MR. SUMMERBELL: I beg to ask the hon. Member for South Somerset, as representing the President of the Board of Agriculture, if he is aware that, since the Board granted a fifty-seven hour week to the stokers in the palm-house section of Kew Gardens, the men have had additional work given to them, such work having previously been done by men from another department; and, if so, will he state what action, if any, he proposes to take in the matter.
  SIR EDWARD STRACHEY: Prior to the recent reduction in the hours of labour; certain labourers were employed in stoking, and were paid as stokers, during the period from November to February, when the work is heaviest, and during the remainder of the year reverted to the pay and status of labourers. Under the new arrangement a staff of six stokers is permanently employed and paid as such throughout the year, but during the winter period it is still necessary to call in the assistance of labourers to overtake the work. Between March and October, however, the stokers are able to undertake the whole of the work, and the assistance of labourers is therefore not required. There is no doubt that the present arrangement is a substantial benefit to the stokers, and the only alternative would be to revert to the old arrangement, whereby some of them were reduced to the status and pay of labourers during the greater part of the year.

  Scottish Justices of the Peace.
  MR. WATT: I beg to ask the Lord Advocate if he is aware that justices of the peace in Scotland are in the habit of sitting on the Bench while their partners or joint agents with them plead the cases at the bar; if this system has his sanction; and, if not, if he will take steps to put a stop to it in future.
  THE LORD ADVOCATE (Mr. THOMAS SHAW,): I am

  965
  not aware of any disregard of the statutory provisions bearing on disqualifications of justices, but if my hon. friend can furnish me with the specific facts on which his Question is based I shall willingly have them inquired into.

  Salmon Fisheries in Scotland.
  MR. SUMMERBELL: I beg to ask the Secretary for Scotland if he can give the names of the lochs, rivers, and burns in which salmon fishing takes place in Scotland and which are still the property of the Woods and Forests Department, the number of such that are let for private fishing, and the number over which anglers in general have a right to fish.
  THE SECRETARY FOR SCOTLAND (Mr. SINCLAIR,): The Answer to this Question is rather long, and with the hon. Member's permission I will circulate it with the Votes to-morrow, †

  New Irish Council.
  CAPTAIN CRAIG: I beg to ask the Chief Secretary to the Lord-Lieutenant of Ireland what is the amount paid in salaries and administration of the eight Boards proposed to be handed over to the new Irish Council, and the amount proposed to be saved under the committee system of administration.
  THE CHIEF SECRETARY FOR IRELAND (Mr. BIRRELL,): I propose to lay upon the Table a Return which will contain among other things the information asked for in the Question.

  Irish Local Government Appointments—Religious Pressure.
  CAPTAIN CRAIG: I beg to ask the Chief Secretary to the Lord-Lieutenant of Ireland whether he will favourably consider the advisability of promoting a short Bill introducing the same clause, as to religious pressure being brought to bear in the selection of candidates for local government appointments in Ireland and the penalties to be imposed for so doing, as is proposed in the new Irish Council Bill into the existing Local Government Acts, and making it retrospective.
  † See col. 934.
  MR. BIRRELL: The Government do not contemplate taking any such action.

  Reenard Pier.
  MR. BOLAND: I beg to ask the Chief Secretary to the Lord-Lieutenant of Ireland whether he is now in a position to say what decision has been come with reference to the construction of a pier at Reenard, county Kerry.
  MR. BIRRELL: The Irish Government have provisionally approved of a scheme for improving the existing pier accommodation at Reenard Point at an estimated cost of £2,500. A plan of the proposed scheme has been prepared by the Board of Works, and the Government are now in communication with the county council and the Congested Districts Board as to the fufilment by these bodies of the requirements of the Marine Works Act. As soon as the necessary assurances on this point have been received the sanction of the Treasury will be applied for.

  Belfast Mail Car Contracts.
  MR. T. L. CORBETT: I beg to ask the Chief Secretary to the Lord-Lieutenant of Ireland if he can state the terms of the contracts for carrying the mails by car from Belfast to Grey Abbey, Kircubbin, Ballyhalbert, Portavogie, Ballywalter, and Port ferry, and the dates on which these contracts expire.
  MR. BIRRELL: This Question should have been addressed to the Postmaster-General. My right hon. friend asks me to say that it is not usual to state publicly the terms of these contracts.

  MR. Timothy O'Rorke, J.P.
  MR. LONSDALE: I beg to ask the Chief Secretary to the Lord-Lieutenant of Ireland whether Mr. Timothy O'Rorke, J.P., has been appointed by the Congested Districts Board for taking and settling grazing cattle on derelict farms they have on hand.
  MR. BIRRELL: Mr. O'Rorke and other local persons have been appointed for a few days, as was done last year, to assist the Congested Districts Board's stock-master in taking cattle to graze on lands which are in the Board's hands pending their division into new holdings.
  MR. LONSDALE: Is the right hon. Gentleman aware that Mr. O'Rorke was on the platform at a United Irish League meeting, when advice was given by one of the speakers that certain persons should be boycotted?
  MR. BIRRELL: I think he is much better engaged in taking cattle to graze on the land.

  Elphin Demonstration.
  MR. LONSDALE: I beg to ask the Chief Secretary to the Lord-Lieutenant of Ireland whether police reporters were present at a United Irish League meeting in the public street at Elphin on the 25th of March last; whether the advice then given by two district councillors to boycott the farmers who had taken land under the eleven months system, was duly reported; and why, seeing that, in consequence of the intimidation which followed these proceedings, several farmers were compelled to relinquish their holdings, no prosecution has been instituted against the leaders in this agitation.
  MR. BIRRELL: I am informed that the meeting in question was not attended by police reporters, but policemen were present in the ordinary course of their duty. The proceedings were duly reported. Three prosecutions are pending in county Roscommon against twelve, eight, and six persons respectively for offences arising out of the agitation against the grazing system, and one of the district councillors referred to in the Question is a defendant.

  Newmarket-on-Fergus Outrage.
  MR. LONSDALE: I beg to ask the Chief Secretary to the Lord-Lieutenant of Ireland whether he is aware that a night attack was recently made upon the house of a man named Boland, caretaker of an evicted farm near Newmarket-on-Fergus, during which several shots were fired into the dwelling; and whether any arrests have taken place in connection with this occurence.
  MR. BIRRELL: On the night of 21st April, Boland heard a noise like a gunshot near his house, and on the following morning he found that some panes of glass in the window of an unoccupied
  968
  room were broken. The offender was not seen. No arrest has been made.

  Rinneen Outrage.
  MR. LONSDALE: I beg to ask the Chief Secretary to the Lord-Lieutenant of Ireland whether he has received particulars of the shooting of a young man named John Murphy, who resides at Rinneen, in the Ruane district, county Clare; whether he is aware that he was fired at from behind a hedge and badly wounded; whether he is acquainted with the reasons which prompted this attack; and whether any person has been arrested in connection with this attack.
  MR. BIRRELL: I have received police reports on this matter. It is the fact that Murphy was fired at from behind a fence and seriously wounded. I have no information as to the reasons which may have prompted the attack, but I am aware that Murphy holds part of a grazing farm. No arrests have yet been made. The police are still investigating the case.

  Steam Trawling in Ballinskelligs Bay.
  MR. BOLAND: I beg to ask the Chief Secretary to the Lord-Lieutenant of Ireland whether he is aware that steam trawlers have lately been fishing inside the legal limits off the coast of Ballinskelligs and Valentia, county Kerry, notably on the 5th instant; can he state what were the last two occasions on which the "Helga" visited this district; whether, in view of the difficulty of judging from the shore the exact position of the present legal limits, he will represent to the proper authority the necessity of compelling the trawlers to fish outside the Skelligs Rock; and whether, seeing that it is impossible for one boat, such as the "Helga" with its slow speed, to patrol the entire West Coast of Ireland effectively, he will represent to the Admiralty the advisability of detaching a cruiser or torpedo boats to assist the "Helga" in her work.
  MR. BIRRELL: Steam trawling is prohibited in Ballinskelligs Bay. The Department of Agriculture recently learnt that three vessels had been observed there, and at once despatched their steam cruiser to the locality. The vessel had last been in the district from 31st January to 9th February and from the 17th

  969
  to the 27th March. The Department's arrangements provide for keeping the locality under constant observation. The Admiralty do not enforce by-laws which prohibit steam trawling, but they protect Irish territorial waters from foreign vessels. The enforcement of the bylaws relating to steam trawling rests with the Department, and they hold that the steps hitherto taken with that object have been reasonably sufficient, as is shown by the great decrease in illegal trawling which has taken place.
  MR. CATHCART WASON: If there is power of prosecution will the right hon. Gentleman consider the advisability of offering rewards to local fishermen for information calculated to secure the conviction of the offenders?
  MR. BIRRELL: I will consider that.

  Kilmore Demonstration.
  SIR BERKELEY SHEFFIELD: I beg to ask the Chief Secretary to the Lord-Lieutenant of Ireland whether he is aware that on Sunday, the 5th instant, a crowd of between 2,000 and 3,000 persons assembled at Kilmore, county Roscommon, near the house of Mr. Samuel Russell, a landlord and owner of several large grazing farms, for the purpose of demonstrating against him and bringing pressure to bear on him to force him to sell his grazing lands; that Mr. Russell was assaulted and stoned when returning from church; and that a force of 300 police had to be requisitioned to keep the peace; and what steps the Government are taking to prevent a repetition of any such demonstrations.
  MR. BIRRELL: In this case proceedings have been instituted against eight persons in connection with the occurrence of the 5th instant, and while those proceedings are pending I must decline to enter into the details of the case. I think it only right, however, to say that according to the police reports which I have received, 200 and not 2,000 persons were present at the meeting referred to; the police force numbered 30, not 300; and Mr. Russell was not assaulted or stoned.

  Athenry Outrage.
  VISCOUNT TURNOUR: I beg to ask the Chief Secretary to the Lord-Lieutenant of Ireland whether any of the party of men who in October last, close to the town of Athenry, fired at and severely wounded a policeman named O'Halloran who was engaged in protecting the house of Colonel Lopdell, nave yet been made amenable to justice.
  MR. BIRRELL: Three men were arrested shortly after the occurrence, but were discharged for want of evidence. No further arrest has been made.

  Loughrea Grazing Farm Outrages.
  VISCOUNT TURNOUR: I beg to ask the Chief Secretary to the Lord-Lieutenant of Ireland whether on 29th April last a crowd of about 300 men assembled in the neighbourhood of Loughrea and marched to the grazing farms at Earl's Park, Ballinlawless, and Tullyhill, where they cleared the farms of all the cattle by driving them on to the public road; whether a force of twelve police, in attempting to prevent the cattle being driven off, were assaulted, and the head constable and two sergeants wounded; whether this is part of an organised campaign to clear out all the tenants of grazing farms; and what steps the Government is taking to cope with this movement.
  MR. BIRRELL: A prosecution against ten men has been instituted in connection with the occurrence of 29th April. The case is sub judice.

  Clooniskert Grazing Farm Outrage.
  MR.CHARLES CRAIG: I beg to ask the Chief Secretary to the Lord-Lieutenant of Ireland whether he is aware that on 1st May a number of persons assembled on the farm of Batty O'Brien at Clooniskert, county Roscommon, and drove his cattle on to the public road, to force O'Brien to give up his grazing farm for distribution amongst the neighbouring farmers; whether the police were present during the proceedings; whether they have summoned any of those who took part therein; and, if so, with what result.
  MR BIRRELL: On May 1st a number of persons assembled on a grazing farm occupied by Mr. O'Brien and drove the cattle from it to that gentleman's residence. I am informed that Mr. O'Brien had arranged to give the farm up for distribution among local tenants, and had appointed the 1st of May as the day on which he would surrender the farm. He failed, however, to appear on that day, and the people therefore took his cattle to his residence. It appears that the landlord had refused to release Mr. O'Brien from his tenancy. The police were present when the cattle were driven off, but in the circumstances mentioned it has not been considered necessary to institute criminal proceedings.
  MR CHARLES CRAIG: Was the agreement to give up this farm the direct result of intimidation or boycotting by the local branch of the United Irish League?
  MR. BIRRELL: I am afraid I cannot answer as to the motives which led to the giving up of the farm. No doubt a certain amount of intimidation and pressure was used.
  MR. MOORE: Will the right hon. Gentleman confer with the Secretary of State for India as to the best means of putting down intimidation in Ireland?

  Town Tenants' League, Athenry.
  MR CHARLES CRAIG: I beg to ask the Chief Secretary to the Lord Lieutenant of Ireland whether he is aware that the Town Tenants' League, of Athenry, served notices in April last on the grazing tenants of Caheroyan to give up their farms; that on 1st May crowds assembled with the intention of driving the cattle off the farms, but were prevented from doing so by the police; and that, owing to the intimidation and boycott to which these tenants have since been subjected, they have been compelled to give up their farms; and what steps His Majesty's Government is taking in the matter to ensure that peaceable subjects shall be able to exercise the ordinary rights and privileges of citizenship.
  MR. BIRRELL: I am informed that the tenants referred to received notices
  972
  to the effect mentioned, which purported to have been sent by the Town Tenants' League. The majority of the tenants removed their cattle from the farms before the 1st May. On that day crowds assembled with the object, as was understood, or driving the cattle off the remaining farms; but they were prevented from doing so by a large force of police which was assembled for the purpose. Subsequently the remaining tenants removed their cattle from the farms. In these cases the full protection of the law was given, and the Government will continue to afford such protection to all persons who need it. The police force in the Athenry district has been doubled, and the whole question of the police arrangements in the Riding is under consideration.

  Ballinmore Bridge Outrage.
  MR. CHARLES CRAIG: I beg to ask the Chief Secretary to the Lord-Lieutenant of Ireland whether he is aware that on 1st May the cattle were driven off Muckland Farm, near Ballinmore Bridge, by a crowd of men; that on the night of 30th April the cattle and sheep of Patrick Raftery were driven off the grazing farm of Cuskeydally, and scattered amongst the bogs and by roads of the neighbourhood; and that the walls on the farms were thrown down during the same night; and will he say what action he is taking in the matter.
  MR. BIRRELL: The facts are generally as stated in the Question. In the first case, the cattle were driven to the owner's residence and given up to him. The cattle were subsequently put back without opposition, an amicable agreement having been come to between the owner and the local tenants. In the second case, the cattle were driven off the farm at night through gaps in a loose stone wall. The cattle were recovered uninjured. In the first case it was not considered necessary to take proceedings, as the people had abandoned their attitude of opposition. In the second case the offenders were unknown.
  MR. T. L. CORBETT: What was the amicable arrangement come to?
  MR. BIRRELL: I cannot say.
  MR. T. L. CORBETT: Will the right hon. Gentleman make inquiry?
  MR. BIRRELL: If you like, yes.

  Irish Motor Communication Scheme.
  MR. T. L. CORBETT: I beg to ask the Chief Secretary to the Lord-Lieutenant of Ireland whether he has recently had any communication from Lord Pirrie with reference to his scheme for improving the means of communication in Ireland by motors.
  MR. BIEEELL: No, Sir.
  MR. T. L. CORBETT: Has the right hon. Gentleman any reason to believe that the promotion of the noble Lord to another place has somewhat cooled his ardour?
  MR. BIRRELL: No, I think not, strange to say.

  Grazing Farm Disputes.
  MR. CHARLES CRAIG: I beg to ask the Chief Secretary to the Lord-Lieutenant of Ireland whether in view of the number of landlords and tenants of grazing farms who have, by intimidation, boycotting, and other illegal means, been forced to give up possession of their farms so that they might be divided up amongst other tenants, he will consider the necessity of bringing into force again the rule which forbade the Estates Commissioners either buying or advancing the purchase money of any farm on any estate where intimidation or boycotting exists.
  MR. BIRRELL: I beg to refer to the Answer which I gave to a similar Question put by the hon. Member for the Oswestry Division.
  MR. MOORE: The right hon. Gentleman stated there was not sufficient intimidation to constitute a real danger. Will he reconsider that?
  MR. CHARLES CRAIG: Is not the right hon. Gentleman perfectly well aware that as the 1st May, the date on which these eleven months agreements were entered into, approaches, there is an immense amount of extra intimidation and boycotting in the counties of Galway, Roscommon and Leitrim?
  MR. BIRRELL: I am aware that the time referred to is one of great anxiety to the police and special precautions have to be taken.
  MR. CHARLES CRAIG: Is the right hon. Gentleman aware that by the very simple method of procedure for enforcing the law, introduced by the right hon. Gentleman the Member for Dublin County, S., this boycotting and intimidation could be stopped in one day?
  MR. SPEAKER: That is a matter of argument.
  MR. CHARLES CRAIG: But that is really the Question over again.
  MR. SPEAKER: I did not say it was not. I said it was an argumentative question which is not in order.
  MR. JOHN O'CONNOR: Have the prosecutions which have taken place been the result of Questions in this House?
  MR. BIRRELL: No, Sir.

  Irish Board of Agriculture Finance.
  CAPTAIN CRAIG: I beg to ask the Chief Secretary to the Lord-Lieutenant of Ireland if he will state the amount of the funds at the disposal of the Board of Agriculture for the coming year; and whether he will dispose of them in equal shares between each county in Ireland, or will he state how he intends to deal with their fair distribution.
  MR. BIRRELL: The receipts from the Department's Endowment Fund in the current financial year are estimated to amount to £189,700.The money is applied for the purposes and in the proportions prescribed by Section 16 of the Act creating the Department. The funds available for county schemes for the improvement of agriculture are not allocated to the counties in equal shares, but are applied in accordance with the principle laid down in the Sub-section 6 of the Section quoted, regard being had to the nature and extent of the approved schemes in operation in each county.

  Police Protection in County Galway.
  CAPTAIN CRAIG: I beg to ask the Chief Secretary to the Lord-Lieutenant of

  975
  Ireland whether he is aware that on the 7th May last a force of constabulary was required to protect farmers named Hughes, of Mucklon, near Ballyforan, county Galway, when putting back stock driven off their holding some days previous; can he state how many constabulary were present belonging to the local force and the depot, respectively; can he state the expense incurred; and whether anyone was brought to justice.
  MR. BIRRELL: The fact is as stated in the first part of the Question. The number of police employed on protection duty was fifty, all of whom belonged to the county force. The expense incurred was approximately £25. No opposition was offered by the people on the occasion, and there was therefore no necessity for bringing anyone to justice.

  Ballymoney Labourers' Cottage Scheme.
  MR. GLENDINNING: I beg to ask the Chief Secretary to the Lord-Lieutenant of Ireland if he has had a resolution directed to him by the Ballymoney Rural District Council concerning a labourer's cottage in Carnfinton, in the Ballymoney rural district; and, seeing that the tenant is not owner and occupier and that the Local Government Board and the landlord have blocked the building of the cottage, when the tenant and the rural council are anxious to build, whether he will grant an inquiry into the facts.
  MR. MOORE: Have this council shown their enthusiasm for the Labourers Acts by adjourning for twelve months the offer to give immediate possession of an estate selected for labourers' cottages?
  MR. BIRRELL: I beg to refer the hon. Member to the answer which I gave to his previous Question of 24th April, † By the provisional order issued by the Local Government Board in this case the rural district council were authorised to acquire the plot by agreement, it having been stated in evidence given on behalf of the council that the tenant of the plot was also the owner of it. It has since been ascertained that this evidence was incorrect, and it is entirely due to that fact that the council's present difficulty has arisen. The Local Government Board are placing no obstacle in the
  † See (4) Debates, clxxiii., 59–60.
  976
  way of the council, but are merely awaiting the arrangement by the council of terms of purchase. There is no dispute as to the facts of the case and an inquiry is therefore unnecessary.
  CAPTAIN CRAIG: Is it not the fact that the rural council in question selects sites which are calculated to give rise to opposition?

  Morley Estate, County Cavan.
  MR. VINCENT KENNEDY: I beg to ask the Chief Secretary to the Lord-Lieutenant of Ireland if he will state whether the Estates Commissioners have received the Report from their inspectors on the Morley estate, county Cavan; have the Estates Commissioners made an offer to the owners to purchase; if so, when; and will he say how matters now stand with regard to this estate.
  MR. BIRRELL: The Estates Commissioners have recently received their inspectors' report in this case, and will consider it as soon as possible with a view to making an offer for the purchase of the estate.

  The Irish Treasury.
  MR. PATRICK WHITE: I beg to ask the Chief Secretary to the Lord-Lieutenant of Ireland whether the new Government Department, to be called the Irish Treasury, proposed to be created under the Irish Council Bill, will be subject to the control of the Irish Council.
  MR. BIRRELL: Yes, Sir.

  Irish Equivalent Grants.
  MR. PATRICK WHITE: I beg to ask the Chief Secretary to the Lord-Lieutenant of Ireland, whether, in the event of Parliament voting within the next seven years increased amounts to English Departments or authorities analagous to those that will come under the authority of the proposed Irish Council, he will make provision that an equivalent amount shall be paid into the Irish Fund and Irish Treasury; and, if not, why not.
  MR.BIRRELL: The Bill proceeds upon the basis that the financial provision is adequate to meet the requirements of

  977
  the eight Departments during the quinquennial period. In the event of additional provision being made for English and Scottish services, the question of voting moneys to Ireland by way of equivalent grant will be one for the decision of Parliament as occasion may arise.

  Irish Departments—Constitution.
  MR. PATRICK WHITE: I beg to ask the Chief Secretary to the Lord Lieutenant of Ireland how many elected and how many nominated members constitute each of the following Departments, namely, the Council of Agriculture, the Agricultural Board, and the Board of Technical Instruction.
  MR. BIRRELL: The Council of Agriculture consists of sixty-eight elected and thirty-four nominated members; the Agricultural Board of eight elected and four nominated members; and the Board of Technical Instruction of fifteen elected and six nominated members. The President and Vice President of the Department are ex-officio members of these bodies.

  Irish Departments — Lord-Lieutenant's and Chief Secretary's Powers of Appointment or Dismissal.
  MR. PATRICK WHITE: To ask the Chief Secretary to the Lord-Lieutenant of Ireland what officers it is competent for the Lord-Lieutenant or Chief Secretary to appoint or dismiss in the following Departments, namely, the Local Government Board for Ireland, the Department of Agriculture and Technical Instruction for Ireland, the Congested Districts Board for Ireland, the Commissioners of Public Works in Ireland, the Inspector of Reformatory and Industrial Schools, the Registrar-General, the Commissioners of National Education in Ireland, and the Intermediate Education Board for Ireland.
  MR. BIRRELL: If the hon. Member should see fit to move for a Return, I will offer no objection to its being granted.

  Police Protection on Grazing Farms.
  MR. ARKWRIGHT: I beg to ask the Chief Secretary to the Lord-Lieutenant of Ireland if he can now state
  978
  how many police are at present employed in affording protection to the occupiers of grazing farms in the counties of Galway, Mayo, Roscommon, Leitrim, and Westmeath.
  MR. BIRRELL: Eighty-one policemen are occupied in affording protection to the occupiers of grazing farms in the counties of Galway, Mayo, and Roscommon. In addition, some 400 police secure the stock on the farms from molestation.
  VISCOUNT TURNOUR: Does the right hon. Gentleman consider that the force of police is sufficient to prevent any of these outrages taking place in the future?
  MR. BIRRELL: Any request made by the police for further men is always very carefully considered. I am told that the force is sufficient at present.

  Local Taxation (Ireland)Account.
  MR. PATRICK WHITE: I beg to ask the Secretary to the Treasury what was the total amount of payments made to the Local Taxation (Ireland) Account out of the Consolidated Fund or out of any revenue for the years 1901–2, 1903, 1904, and 1905 respectively; and for what Departments and under what Acts they were made.
  MR. RUNCIMAN: The total payments, partly from the Consolidated Fund and partly from assigned Revenues, in the respective years were: 1901–2, £1,445,403; 1902–3, £1,441,079; 1903–4, £1,435,374; 1904–5, £1,432,918. Some of the grants included in these totals are not paid direct into the Local Taxation (Ireland) Account. They are paid in the first instance to the Guarantee Fund under the Land Purchase Acts and are subsequently transferred to the Local Taxation Account after the claims on that Fund have been met. The Acts of Parliament governing the payments are the Customs and Inland Revenue Act, 1890; the Land Purchase (Ireland) Act, 1891; the Finance Act, 1894; and the Local Government (Ireland)Act, 1898. The application of moneys out of the Local Taxation Account is not under the control of the Treasury, but of the Irish Government.

  Irish Lotteries.
  MR. BOTTOMLEY: I beg to ask Mr. Attorney General for Ireland whether he is aware that invitations to participate in Irish lotteries are being largely circulated in this country; whether there is any law in force forbidding the holding of such lotteries; and, if not, whether he will introduce legislation extending the Lottery Act to Ireland.
  THE ATTORNEY GENERAL FOR IRELAND (Mr. CHERRY,): I have no official intimation that invitations to participate in Irish lotteries are being largely circulated in England, but I believe the fact to be as stated by the hon. Member. The law on the subject is the same in England and in Ireland. In both countries such lotteries are illegal; so that there is no necessity for any such legislation as the hon. Member suggests.

  The Prime Minister and the Condition of Ireland.
  CAPTAIN CRAIG: I beg to ask the Prime Minister whether his attention has been called to the increasing number of outrages throughout the south and west of Ireland; whether he has any official information showing that they have been instigated or condoned by the United Irish League, and, if so, whether the Government intend to proceed further with the Irish Council Bill; and, if they do, will he give a day before the Second Reading to debate the state of affairs at present existing.
  THE PRIME MINISTER AND FIRST LORD OF THE TREASURY (Sir H. CAMPBELL-BANNERMAN,): I am not aware that there is any foundation for the suggestion contained in the first part of the Question. My right hon. friend the Chief Secretary informs me that the condition of Ireland as a whole is very satisfactory, though in certain limited areas disturbances have recently taken place in consequence of the agitation against the grazing system. Proper measures are being taken for the preservation of the peace in these districts, and there does not seem to be any reason why the present state of Ireland should be debated.
  CAPTAIN CRAIG: Will the right hon. Gentleman in his leisure time look to
  980
  the Questions addressed to the Chief Secretary and the Answers thereto as showing the state of the country?
  MR. MOONEY: Is it not within the knowledge of the House that the invariable Answer to the Questions put by hon. Members is a direct denial on the part of the Government?
  VISCOUNT TURNOURasked if the right hon. Gentleman was prepared to say that the state of the west of Ireland was satisfactory.
  SIR H. CAMPBELL-BANNERMAN: I have given all the information I have, and it is quite sufficient for my purpose. With regard to the Questions and Answers referred to, the conclusion I have come to on the whole matter is that there never was an Answer given in the House to some hon. Gentleman that would not have a Question arising out of it.
  CAPTAIN CRAIG: May I press for an Answer to my Question as to whether these outrages have been instigated or condoned by the United Irish League?
  MR. T. L. CORBETT: Was the right hon. Gentleman present when the right hon. Gentleman the Chief Secretary made very grave admissions this afternoon as to the state of Ireland?
  MR. SPEAKER: Order, order! That does not arise out of the Question.

  Unemployed Fund.
  CAPTAIN CRAIG: I beg to ask the Prime Minister what is the total amount disbursed under the Unemployed Fund since its creation, in England, Scotland, and Ireland, respectively.
  SIR H. CAMPBELL-BANNERMAN: The sum voted in 1906–7 in aid of expenses under the Unemployed Workmen Act was £200,000. The actual expenditure out of the Vote in the three countries has been: England, £105,420; Scotland, £7,552; Ireland, £11,050; total, £124,022.

  Unrest in India.
  MR. C. J. O'DONNELL: I beg to ask the Prime

  981
  Minister if a day can be allotted immediately after the Whitsuntide holidays to discuss the causes of unrest and discontent in India, in connection especially with the excessive taxation of land and its impoverishment of the people.
  SIR H. CAMPBELL-BANNERMAN: My right hon. friend the Secretary of State for India expressed doubts on Monday as to the desirability, in the public interest, of discussion at the present moment. I share those doubts, and inasmuch as the debate on the Indian financial statement (which I hope will be taken at a very early date after the recess) will afford hon. Members ample opportunity to place their views before the House, I am not prepared to allot a day specially for the purpose.
  MR. C. J. O'DONNELL: Will ample time be given for the discussion of this very important question?
  SIR H. CAMPBELL-BANNERMAN: I think a full day for the Indian Budget will give ample time.

  Blocking Motions.
  DR. RUTHERFORD: I beg to ask the Prime Minister whether, in view of the situation in India, he will ask the hon. Member for the Montgomery Boroughs to remove his Motion, which prevents the House from discharging its duty to India, and in fact reduces the House at a critical period to a condition of paralysis and impotence.
  MR. REESon a point of order, asked whether the hon. Member was in order in imputing to him that he could possibly be influenced by any right hon. or hon. Gentleman in regard to taking off or putting on any Motion; and further, whether the hon. Gentleman should not have addressed his Question to him, in which case he would have had an Answer suited to his intervention.
  SIR H. CAMPBELL-BANNERMAN: No, Sir. I do not think that I can interfere in these personal amenities. My hon. friend ought to address himself to the hon. Member for the Montgomery Boroughs. But I would refer my hon. friend to the Answer I have just given to my hon. friend the Member for Walworth.
  DR. RUTHERFORDasked if the Government would not take action with reference to these blocking Motions generally?
  SIR H. CAMPBELL-BANNERMAN: Yes, Sir, we are willing to do so. As I have repeatedly stated in answer to demands from the other side—strange coming from the other side—[Cries from the Opposition Benches, "Why?"]— hon. Members who are so anxious were not present in the previous Parliament, otherwise they would understand why— there is nothing more to be said on that subject just now. We are considering the best form of rule, but it will not be proceeded with unless it obtains the full assent of both sides of the House.
  MR. MOORE: Will it be brought forward along with the Resolutions relating to the House of Lords?
  SIR H. CAMPBELL-BANNERMAN: I do not see that they have much to do with each other. Perhaps, however, the word "blocking" suggests a connection to the hon. Member.

  Sittings of the House.
  MR. SAMUEL EVANS: I beg to ask the Prime Minister if he can now state whether the Government intend to proceed with the session continuously to end in August or September, or whether they intend to adjourn in the summer months and resume the session in the autumn.
  SIR H. CAMPBELL-BANNERMAN: The time has not come when a positive Answer can be given to this Question. We are anxious, if possible, to avoid an autumn session.

SELECT1ON (STANDING COMMITTEES).
Sir BRAMPTON GURDONreported from the Committee of Selection; That they had discharged the following Member from Standing Committee B (in respect of the Probation of Offenders (No. 2) Bill): Dr. Macnamara; and had appointed in substitution (in respect of the Probation of Offenders (No. 2) Bill): Mr. Herbert Samuel.
Report to lie upon the Table.

EDUCATION (POPULAR CONTROL).
MR. D. A. THOMASasked leave to introduce a Bill to amend the law relating to the management of public elementary schools not provided by the local education authority. He said its object was to amend the Education Act of 1902 by providing that the local authority should have two-thirds representation on the managament of non-provided schools instead of one-third as at present, or, in other words, that out of the six managers four should be appointed by the local education authority instead of two. An Amendment of that kind, he said, was proposed when the Act of 1902 was under discussion in that House, and was supported by the whole of the then Opposition who were now on the Government side of the House. Since then the country had undoubtedly given the Government a mandate in favour of popular control. Unfortunately the Government so far had not been able to give effect to that mandate, and there seemed to be no prospect of their doing so in this Parliament. The Bill was urgent in the case of Wales, where a revolt policy had been adopted. He was not going to justify that policy, but the fact remained, whether it was right or not, that it had been adopted by nearly all the education authorities in Wales, and it was likely to remain so unless some amendment was made. He hoped and believed that this Bill would remove the friction and bitterness which existed in Wales, and also remove any excuse for the policy adopted by the local authorities. The Welsh local authorities declined to contribute anything out of the rates towards the maintenance of non-provided schools because they had no measure of control over them. A discrimination was made by the local education authorities between the two classes of schools—public and denominational—and over that discrimination the Board of Education had no authority or control whatever. The result was that in Glamorganshire, which was far the largest county in Wales, something like 38 or 40 per cent. more money was spent out of county funds on public than on denominational schools. Although the education in the non-provided schools came up to the statutory efficiency required by the Board of Education, the standard could not be the same as in the provided schools. That inflicted hard-
984
ships upon the teachers, who did not receive the same salaries, and the children not only of Churchmen and Catholics, but also of Nonconformists, who attended; those schools must in consequence suffer. The system had engendered an amount of bitterness in Wales of which the majority of Members of that House had no conception. He hoped the House would agree to the introduction of the Bill, and that the Prime Minister would carefully consider whether he could give facilities for its progress.
Motion made, and Question, "That leave be given to bring in a Bill to amend the law relating to the management of public elementary schools not provided by the local education authority"—(Mr. D. A. Thomas)—put, and agreed to.
Bill ordered to be brought in by Mr. David Alfred Thomas, Mr. Abraham (Rhondda), Mr. Brace, Mr. David Davies, Mr. Samuel Evans, Colonel Herbert, Sir David Brynmor Jones, Mr. Lloyd Morgan, Mr. Wynford Philipps, Mr. Robinson, and Mr. Osmond Williams.

EDUCATION (POPULAR CONTROL) BILL.
"To amend the law relating to the management of public elementary schools not provided by the local education authority," presented accordingly, and read the first time; to be read a second time upon Tuesday, 28th May, and to be printed. [Bill 204.]

THE WHITSUNTIDE RECESS.
Motion made—"That the House at its rising on May 16th, do adjourn until Thursday, May 23rd."— Sir H. Campbell-Bannerman.
*SIR JOHN KENNAWAYsaid he wished to ask the Foreign Secretary to give the House some information regarding the progress of the Congo question. The hearts of the people had been deeply stirred, as was shown by a movement not confined to the Churches. In all the crowded centres of population large meetings had been held, presided over by the chief magistrates to protest against the continuance of the system of misrule on the Congo, where, by the imposition of forced labour for private profit, almost the whole of the population.

985
had been reduced to a condition of slavery and bondage under most barbarous conditions. It was not merely on humanitarian grounds that a settlement of the question was sought. The recent letter of Sir Henry John stone, who was well qualified to speak on the subject, showed that its continuance was raising a feeling among the negro races which constituted a growing menace to white administration in Africa. He felt a great responsibility in bringing the question forward, and recognised that it ought to be handled with extreme delicacy, lest they should seem to give a friendly nation any ground for thinking that it was their desire to interfere with their affairs and with their freedom of action. Belgium and England were united by closest ties of alliance, friendship, and community of interests. They knew how intimate was the connection of the two Royal Houses. He had, himself, warm recollections of hospitality and kindness, received at the Brussels Conference of 1876, at the hands of the King. But the fact was clear that the Congo Free State which came into existence as a great philanthropic enterprise had become the scene of vast profits earned by slave labour, and had thereby produced a scandal of great dimensions. Where did England's duty come in the matter? She was largely responsible for the Berlin Treaty of 1892. The Congo Free State would never have come into existence but for the co-operation and sanction and help of Great Britain. Remonstrances had been made again and again. They had hoped against hope. They had looked for reforms which it was said were going to be arrived at. They had been told that the sufferings of the natives and the cruelties perpetrated were exaggerated. He thought he had the authority of the right hon. Gentleman for saying that the statements had been corroborated to the full, and that the reforms were nothing but a delusion and a snare. Their attention had been called to the Parliamentary crisis in Belgium, but he was afraid that the result of that Parliamentary crisis had been to put an even stronger contingent of the King's Party in the new Government than there was in the previous Government, and a contingent less favourable to freedom. There had been going on, and was going on now, an attempt to start the annexation to
986
Belgium of the Congo, which would leave the King in complete control, and Belgium was being deluded into thinking that a valuable property was being put before her, and that England, against whom a torrent of abuse had been, and was being poured out, was wishing to keep her out of it. That new scheme of annexation would practically uphold the present system in all essentials. They were raising the question that day with the earnest desire to support His Majesty's Government in pressing for reform. He hoped it would be made clear to the people of Belgium that if she annexed the Congo she was bound by the terms of the Act of Berlin, interpreted so as to mean that the native of the Congo had an unquestioned right to sell his labour freely. They wished to consider in every way the susceptibilities of the Belgian people, but they felt it to be their clear duty to try to inform them on this matter, and to show that the proposed form of annexation would give them no real control at all. They asked the Belgian people to demand from their Government and from the King the whole truth about the state of affairs in the Congo, its provinces, its liabilities, its revenue and expenditure, in order that they might be able to judge for themselves as to whether the continuance of the system would conduce to their honour and the continuance of their high fame. In the last resource, they hoped that England, backed by the other Powers, would insist that a free State, established under international powers, and subject to international treaties, should become the subject of international consideration. The Foreign Secretary would know how that might be brought about—whether a conference could be summoned or other action might be possible. They believed in his earnest desire to press forward this matter. They recognised the difficulties that surrounded his action, and they desired to give him all the support and encouragement in their power.
*SIR CHARLES DILKEsaid that in bringing forward this question they all, he thought, spoke with a very deep sense of responsibility, and followed the lines and tone adopted by the right hon. Baronet

987
opposite. It would be very easy to do harm in this delicate question were they not to speak on the subject with responsibility. It was unnecessary to go into the past history of the question; they had to deal with the present situation to which the right hon. Baronet had directed his remarks. No one could speak more weightily than the right hon. Gentleman on the subject, because he had taken a prominent part in connection with the Congo State. In 1877 he was one of those who believed in the enterprise of King Leopold, and as President of the Church Missionary Society, a member of the Comite d'Études du Haut Congo, and of the international anti-slavery societies, he helped to put King Leopold into the place of Portugal to protect the natives. The enterprise had turned out sadly, as they all admitted. The Congo State, as the right hon Baronet had told them, was international in its character. It had been brought into existence, as he thought the Powers generally contended, including even the United States, by the Berlin Act. To that statement, which was the foundation of their case, King Leopold replied that it was the United States which brought the Congo State into existence, If so, their case was virtually the same, because the American treaty, though made before the Berlin and other treaties, was on the same lines, and recognised the flag of the Congo Committee, of which the right hon. Baronet was a member. It was recognised that the State was founded for philanthropic objects, but in recent days the King of the Belgians had set up a claim couched in almost stronger terms than those of Louis XIV. which had been often quoted. The Congo State of the American Treaty had no boundaries; it was a State in embryo. The United States, which King Leopold quoted as having created the Congo State, had expressed the same doctrine as our Government expressed, and it might be claimed, therefore, that the Government of the United States shared in the views which the right hon. Baronet had put forward. Such a conference as that.suggested by the right hon. Baronet could be forced by us at any time. There were several obvious means, which it might or might not be wise to go into,
988
by which we could bring about a conference. No one could read the Berlin Act without seeing that it was so. In reply to the deputation of last year and afterwards in the House of Commons, the Secretary of State used these words—
"It was impossible for the Powers to contemplate the maintenance of the present régime in breach of the declaration of the Powers in the Berlin Act."
The right hon. Gentleman also said, which they were prepared to confirm—
"That there was no one in this country who had any individual interest in this matter."
Our interest was national and philanthropic, because we were responsible in a high degree for the creation of the Congo State. That responsibility was a double one—a treble one, he might almost say. We were not only responsible as one of the Powers, but we were also responsible singly, and again doubly with America. Our responsibility as one of the Powers was an active one and admitted by all. The Government were responsible in a high degree, as the right hon. Baronet had said, as having been the Power which did the most to bring the Congo State into existence. We had the treaties made by Cameron and refused by Mr. Disraeli. We refused to take over the territory. We were encouraged by philanthropists and anti-slavery societies to give over the territory to King Leopold, and had it not been for us, Portugal, which had the old rights and a strong claim, would have been in possession. It was our action largely, and the action of the House of Commons and of the missionary bodies and anti-slavery societies, which turned out Portugal and put in King Leopold. We had also a joint responsibility with the United States, because had it not been for the action of the United States, the Berlin Conference would not have come about. His right hon. friend had alluded to the view of the Secretary of State as being that of both Front Benches and of Lord Lansdowne. His right hon. friend's words, in closing the discussion with the deputation last year were satisfactory, and he repeated them in the House afterwards. The Secretary of State said—
"We wished for the Belgian solution, in order to obtain publicity and constitutional

989
responsibility in Belgium, which would give Europe some security. He desired Belgium to be unembarrassed in her choice which he wished her to exercise by taking over the Congo State."
The desire that Belgium should be "unembarrassed" meant, of course, unembarrassed except by the provisions of the Act of Berlin, of which she could not rid herself, except with the consent of Europe. Belgium could not free herself from her treaties except with the consent of the Powers and of the United States. In every other sense she was unembarrassed. They who had been all along connected with this question had held their hands; they had been careful, moderate, and reserved in their action in that House. It had been impossible to prevent public meetings, when the people were strongly excited by the accounts of what had taken place, but their action had been moderate and on correct lines. Belgium had been given much time and left, unembarrassed, to her choice. His right hon. friend the Secretary of State added that—
"he refused to face the prospect of the continuance of the present régime for an indefinite time and thought it impossible to continue to recognise indefinitely the present state of things."
That was the crux of the question. Their case was that delay might create difficulties. Some months ago they were alarmed by seeing the statement that the action of the late Belgian Government was likely to be postponed until November. They were threatened by the late Belgian Government with postponement of the Bill to November, which might mean the beginning of next year. They were threatened by the new Belgian Government with a similar postponement. The scrupulous moderation of the Secretary of State's speeches had not met with due reward, and England, as represented by the uniform statements of Lord Lansdowne and the Foreign Secretary, was held up to execration as desiring to interfere with the liberty of Belgium. There was no trace of such a desire. Belgium could only by treaty take the Congo State as it existed; that was subject to the Berlin Act and to the treaties. Unless that was made clear to the Belgian Government, there was a risk that when
990
Europe had to interfere, as, if the declaration of the new Cabinet was to stand, it must interfere, it would be face to face with an opinion of a majority in the present Belgian Chamber wilfully misled upon this point. The obvious danger of an interference which must then take place would be increased. The subject was one upon which France, and Germany, as adjoining Powers to the Congo State, ought to come to an understanding. If the Belgian solution broke down, we recognised the French right of pre-emption, but it was possible that France might not desire to act fully on that right, and might, if Belgium chose to stand out, prefer to make fresh arrangements in which Germany would be a sharer, and in which, with our assent, there might be some measure of partition in which we should not desire to participate. The Lado enclave was, of course, only leased by us and fell back into the Soudan. Some time ago Lord Fitzmaurice pointed out, and his phrase was afterwards quoted by the noble Lord the Member for South Kensington, when Under-Secretary of State, that we would and in certain circumstances must take a forcible step which would immediately bring about a conference of the Powers. The same result might be attained by our proposing that we and the United States and Italy, and probably France, should resume consular jurisdiction over our own subjects in the Congo. Their case to-day was that the declaration of the new Belgian Government flew in the face of the Berlin Act and that their proposals did not seem calculated to produce publicity in the Congo administration; that, under these circumstances, delay in again making our position perfectly clear was dangerous. Our policy was that the Belgian Parliament should at once pass a Bill taking over the Congo State under conditions which would give the Belgian Parliament real power to improve the administration, and, failing that, recognition of the French right of preemption, and suggestion that France should be induced to communicate with Germany as to the eventual exercise of that right of pre-emption. Such a policy could alone avoid increased, danger.
EARL PERCY: We are all agreed in believing that the best and probably the only solution of the evils of which we complain is what the right hon. Baronet has called the Belgian solution, the annexation of the Congo State by Belgium. All we have to consider on the present occasion is whether there are any steps we can take in order to bring about that desirable consummation. There is one step which I think we can take, if it has not been taken already, and that is to make it quite clear—I think the right hon. Gentleman has made it clear in his speeches to deputations, if not in his speeches in this House—that supposing the policy of annexation is rejected, there is nothing in the decrees promulgated last year which would reconcile His Majesty's Government to an indefinite prolongation of the existing state of things. To begin with there is considerable ambiguity on certain very important points as to the intentions of the authors of those decrees. I mentioned one last year. The Committee which sat to elaborate the reforms recommended that no fresh concessions should be granted to private companies which would involve powers of administration and taxation, and that though the existing companies might continue to exercise their present functions they should be deprived of all power of coercion. But the Decrees went further than that, because they assigned the duty of levying taxation in future exclusively to special agents appointed by the State and acting under the authority of the District Commissioners. That seemed to imply that in future no persons could be employed in levying taxation who were in any way directly or indirectly connected with the affairs of the trading companies, and who, therefore, had a personal motive for extortion. If that was the interpretation it was the recognition of a very valuable principle. But no one, I think, can read the White-paper, published within the past few days, without very grave suspicion, amounting almost to a feeling of certainty, that the term "State agent" really means the agent of the companies, and, in point of fact, it is the same individual under a different name; and, in view of the rumours of fresh concessions on a large scale to American
992
and other companies, this is a question to which I think it would be well worth while to draw the attention of the Congo Government, in order, if possible, to obtain an explanation. Then there is the question of how far the reforms which are embodied in these decrees have been carried into execution. If we are to judge from the reports of the vice-consuls in various parts of the Congo, and the reports of missionaries, I think we shall certainly arrive at the conclusion that the reforms which have bean carried out are few and that they have produced very small results. Quite apart from those reports, I think we should arrive at the same conclusion from the circumstance referred to in the Belgian Parliament, namely, that last year there has been no such diminution in the rubber export as we should have expected if the decree had been carried out reducing the labour tax from sixty to forty hours a month. But the really important point with regard to these decrees, what makes it impossible to regard them as in any sense affording a basis for a permanent settlement of this problem, is the assumption upon which they rest, that reform in the Congo State is not to be regarded as an act of tardy justice and reparation which is to be carried out, whatever the cost, but as a distant ideal, a distant counsel of perfection which is not to interfere with the efficiency of the Congo State Government as an instrument for raising revenue. His Majesty's Government should make it clear that they cannot under any circumstances admit that financial difficulties supply any excuse for refusing to carry out the purposes, the prospect and promise of which alone secured recognition for the Congo State twenty five years ago. It has been argued that even annexation by Belgium would not necessarily provide a remedy, and it has been suggested in some quarters that the right hon. Gentleman should make an announcement before the question comes up for decision in the Belgian Parliament that annexation will not have our approval unless it is accompanied by guarantees for what we are accustomed to regard as constitutional control. I am am not sure that annexation would be valueless even if it took place under the

993
derisory conditions contemplated by the Colonial law. Almost anything will be better than the existing state of things. I cannot help thinking that, once the principle of national responsibility is accepted by Belgium, it will not be very long before the restrictions which hamper the action of Parliament will be swept away, and I think any announcement of the kind suggested would be both inexpedient and unnecessary. I cannot believe the Belgian people are likely to accept annexation except in circumstances which would enable them to put an end to abuses of which they are as conscious as we are ourselves. What we have to apprehend much more is that they may be deterred from undertaking annexation by the financial liabilities. That is the crucial point. If reforms are carried out and abuses are put a stop to it will mean a large loss of revenue, which will have to be made good out of the pockets of the Belgian taxpayers. That brings me to the only suggestion which I should like to put forward, and I do so in all humility on my own responsibility because I think it is worthy of some consideration. None of us are in a position to say how far, supposing effectual reforms are carried out, it will be possible to carry on the administration without a great discrepancy between revenue and expenditure. In the case of almost everyone of our British Protectorates, for a great number of years they could only be carried on by the assistance of large grants in aid. Belgium is precluded from raising any large amount of revenue in the form of indirect taxation by the provisions of the Berlin Act, which limit the rate of Customs duties to a very low scale and were inserted with the express idea of encouraging and freeing international trade. As a matter of fact, freedom of trade has been strangled by the introduction of the concessionary system. Assuming it would be possible by a moderate all-round increase of the Customs duties, which would not involve any differentiation between the imports of one Power and those of another, to make up for the deficit which would be caused in the revenue by the introduction of reforms, is it not worth while considering whether the Powers
994
should not intimate their willingness to take into consideration the question of a revision of duties on condition that annexation by Belgium is accompanied by solid guarantees for the termination of abuses and the removal of restrictions which in fact have proved more injurious to the growth of trade than any tariff would have been? As to a further attempt being made to induce the various Powers to come together in a conference, the right hon. Gentleman will be able to inform the House whether the prospects of such a conference are more favourable now than when the late Government made the proposal. We have the very gratifying resolution passed on the motion of Senator Lodge in the United States Senate, and a very remarkable change of tone is noticeable both in the French and German Press. What is desired in this matter is not merely to carry other Powers with us. but, as far as possible, to carry with us public opinion in Belgium itself; and I cannot imagine a better way of doing that than by giving some concrete and tangible evidence that a conference, if it meets, will act in no hostile spirit towards Belgium, but only in the desire to give her every assistance in putting her own house in order.
*MR. BENNETTsaid he thought that every Member of the House agreed that I the time for the production of evidence against the administration of the Congo State was past and over. The evidence lay before them complete and indubitable, and all that remained for them was action based upon that evidence. Large and enthusiastic meetings had been held in practically every big town and city in the Kingdom, and he was certain that a very large number of thoughtful people in the country felt very deeply on the matter, and would be grievously disappointed if the present policy of drift were allowed to continue. Apart, however, from the mass of testimony accumulated in the past it was worth while noticing that the evils of Congo mis-government continued at this moment unabated. Missionaries and travellers continued to send in reports of the systematic barbarism practised by the Conglese officials, and one story

995
recently reported by Mr. Bond, of the Balolo Mission—the gradual decimation of a village community by sordid and murderous cruelty—was one of the most terrible items in the long and appalling list of Congo atrocities. And if such things were actually going on under the very eyes of Englishmen, let hon. Members try to realise, if they could, the devilries which were being perpetrated in outlying districts of that vast area as yet unvisited by missionaries or travellers. If anyone were disposed partially to discount such evidence as that given above on the ground of its being too "sensational," let such a critic tarn to a recent Report furnished by our own Vice-Consul Armstrong who speaks of the imposition in A. B.I. R. territories of a new poll-tax of 25 francs per annum. Now as the native received for 1 kilo, of rubber, of the market value of 8–10 francs, only 1 kilo, of salt, value 30–50 centimes, the imposition of this cruel tax meant the production of 4 kilos, of rubber per month—a practical impossibility for the wretched labourer, as it would leave him absolutely no margin of time to secure any adequate subsistence for himself or his family. Never in his opinion had the position of affairs with respect to Congo reform been more critical than at present, or the prospect of securing such reform more gloomy. In the first place, King Leopold had openly repudiated any British right of interference. In an interview with Sir Arthur Hardinge, M. de Cuvelier, the Belgian Minister, had used these words—
"No foreign Power had any right to interfere with the internal administration of the Congo Free State."
Sir Arthur Hardinge had then asked whether, if King Leopold saw fit to establish a system of absolute and undisguised slavery, the signatory Powers would still possess no rights of interference, and the same answer had been returned by the Belgian Minister. Again, the constitution of the new Cabinet at Brussels could not inspire much hopefulness. Some of the Ministers appeared to be mere subservient nominees of the King, and others had direct financial interests in the profits of the Congo rubber companies. But the chief reason of his pessimism as to present possibilities of Congo reform was as follows. The Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs
996
had declared last July that "we cannot wait for ever"; how greatly he wished that the right hon. Gentleman could tell the House that evening "we can wait no longer." He feared that at any moment the King, through his subservient Cabinet, might secure the technical annexation of the Congo by Belgium on the same evil lines—the negation of all civil rights to the natives, the denial to the black of any right to the produce of the soil, his own labour, his wife and children, or, indeed, his own life. If the Congo were annexed on such conditions as those our difficulties would be increased tenfold. If we had found it difficult to deal with the private ruler of a State, of which we ourselves were, so to speak, a trustee, let the House think of the obstacles in our way if the Congo was governed on the same conditions by the Belgian nation, the neutrality of which had been guaranteed by the Powers of Europe! If that came to pass, he feared that the infamy of the Congo would become stereotyped and permanent. That present discussion on the Congo would perhaps be the last within the House of Commons, and the long series of Parliamentary speeches on the subject delivered by Members of different political parties since 1903 would remain in Hansard as melancholy monuments of futile enthusiasm and, he was bound to add, national discredit. King Leopold had recently appeared to abandon his attempts to justify the misconduct of his satraps on the Congo, or contradict the verdict of his own Commission. He had taken refuge in patriotism—the last resort of such a monarch—and his followers were indulging in violent abuse of the British Government and people for our supposed intention to override the "constitutional rights of Belgium." The Belgian apologists for Congo misrule adopted the ad hominem argument of recounting various instances of alleged misdoings on the part of Great Britain herself. A Belgian Minister had, for example, recently exclaimed in the Chamber, "We are not a Transvaal to be suppressed amid the protests of the civilised world." Well, he was quite ready to acknowledge that our own hands as an Imperial race were not wholly clean. He frankly confessed that since he had entered that House things had occurred in Egypt, Natal, India, and the Transvaal which, to

997
some extent, shocked and disappointed his Radicalism: he regretted that recognition was so readily accorded to that mischievous fetish, the superior wisdom and humanity of the "man on the spot," and that at the recent Colonial Conference, wherein certain commercial advantages for a handful of Colonial farmers were discussed ad nauseam, no single word was uttered on behalf of the grievances, material welfare, or moral advancement of the King's black subjects in those self-governing Colonies. Nevertheless, all said and done, to compare our own failures and errors with the atrocious oppression of the Congolese natives was to lack all sense of proportion; it was in fact impossible, he thought, to find anywhere in history, ancient or modern, any parallel for this cruel and continuous exploitation of 15,000,000 of helpless blacks for the sake of private profit. At any rate we could say with the utmost sincerity that in this matter of Congo reform we were absolutely disinterested. If to-morrow morning the Congo State were partitioned between France and Germany, every Member of that House would greet the news with unfeigned delight. Of course private Members in that House could not help realising their impotence in these great questions of foreign policy and international ethics. They were like the rank and file of the Homeric armies who advanced "breathing valour" or "chattering like cranes," but contributed very little to the settlement of the great issues which were decided by their leaders. Nevertheless, he ventured to beg the Secretary for Foreign Affairs to use his best endeavours to bring about a conference of the signatory Powers. The moment might not be wholly propitious, but the possible alternative—Belgian annexation on existing lines—was too dreadful to contemplate. Nay, if the British Government declined to recognise any longer the flag of what was virtually a slave State, and tried the effect of a "peaceful blockade," he thought that the despatch of a single cruiser to the mouth of the river would speedily bring the monarch of the Congo on his knees. The Foreign Secretary had spoken as follows in 1904—
"He did not think that any of the great European Powers, with the facts so clearly established as they now were, ought to be content in view of their own honour in the matter to sit still and do nothing."
998
If those words were true then, as they certainly were, they were a fortiori true now.
MR. PIKE PEASEsaid he wished to ask the right hon. Gentleman the Foreign Secretary whether he thought there was any likelihood of Belgium taking over the Congo. He understood from answers that had been given that practically a promise had been given that a Bill would be brought into the Belgian Chamber which would carry out that proposal. Everybody realised the importance of the question and that the statements made with reference to savagery and cruelty on the Congo were quite true. There was no doubt that a large number of people had believed that those reports were very much exaggerated, but, although there might have been a certain amount of exaggeration, it was perfectly plain from the testimony received from Italy, France, Germany, and Belgium herself that the statements were true to a very great extent, and that at present there was an extraordinary amount of cruelty, tyranny, and savagery going on in the Congo. He would like, in confirmation of that statement, to quote to the House what appeared on 28th February last in Le Patriote, a Belgian Royalist and Catholic paper. An indignant editorial on the situation contained the following—
"The rebellion in the A. B. I. R. territory extends. The Government itself forces the rubber, and delivers it on the Antwerp quay to the brokers of the A. B. I. R. … Nothing is altered on the Congo. The same abominable measures are adopted; the same outrages take place. … The Government is adopting the same measures as in the Mongalla, flooding the A. B. I. R. territory with soldiers to utterly smash the people, whom it thinks will then work, and the rubber output be increased. … The memory of these deeds will remain graven in the memory of man, and in the memory of Divine vengeance. Sooner or later the executioners will have to render an account to God and to history."
He believed that more than one Belgian paper corroborated the testimony to which he had referred. Many persons desired that there should be a conference in regard to the matter. It appeared to them that if there was a conference between Germany and France, taking into account the fact that France had a right of pre-emption, and if we were

999
allowed to attend that conference with the United States and those other countries, there might be found some means of forcing Belgium to take action in the matter. He was very glad the debate on this question had taken place, and he sincerely trusted that the outcome might be some action which would lead to the cessation of the abuses of which they complained. The question had not been raised in any hostile spirit, for they all recognised that the Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs had the interests of this country at heart in every particular. He sincerely trusted that the right hon. Gentleman might be able to do something for the benefit of the unfortunate people of the Congo Free State.
*SIR F. CHANNINGsaid hon. Members in all parts of the House were grateful to the right hon. Baronet for having raised this discussion. The noble Lord the Member for South Kensington had contributed a thoughtful analysis of the actual situation in connection with the Congo. It did not seem to him that it would be useful to enter into the appalling record of the terrible condition of affairs in the Congo with which they were familiar, or to develop any arguments based on the special conduct of the Belgian monarch, which might tend to exasperate the situation in Belgium. He thought that all wise, thoughtful, and humane men who had studied the acknowledged facts of the question would be at one in wishing, without stirring up bitterness which might defeat their object, to find some practical suggestions which might lead to a termination of this chapter of horrors in the Congo basin. The noble Lord had said with perfect accuracy that annexation pure and simple, such as some Belgians were willing to agree to, might tend to bring about through publicity and discussion in the Belgian Parliament those checks upon ill-government in Africa which right-minded men would wish to see. The noble Lord had suggested that we should not insist on the conditions which the various treaties placed at our disposal.
*EARL PERCY: I do not think I suggested that.
*SIR F. CHANNINGsaid he thought that the noble Lord rather discouraged the idea of the right hon. Member for the Forest of Dean that we should insist on those general conditions of the Berlin and Brussels Conferences being observed, upon the basis of which the Congo State was explicitly formed. The noble Lord made a suggestion in regard to what really lay at the bottom of the whole matter, the economic position in which Belgium would find herself after annexation. His suggestion that the Powers should permit customs duties to be levied on imports into the Congo basin was of great importance, but if that would lead to a diminution of the trade they wished to see on the Congo River and the Congo basin it might defeat the very object he had in view. The very first means contemplated by the Powers for carrying out the policy of the civilisation of the Congo had been to throw it open to the legitimate trade of the whole world. They were all familiar with the experiences related by Sir Henry Stanley who stated his impression that the natives had splendid qualities for carrying on trade. He submitted that that was the true key to the solution of this problem if Belgium did annex the Congo Free State. What they had to do was to insist, as a solemn duty, on the conditions under which the Congo Free State war, established, being carried out to the letter, and this opening to trade was the only way of accomplishing that purpose. It should be remembered that this country was not only responsible for the Congo State, it was responsible for the very existence of Belgium as a. State in Europe; and that imposed upon us the solemn duty of supporting those Members of the Belgian Parliament who were endeavouring to work out a right and proper solution of the problem of the government of the Congo, and who were well aware of the terrible condition of things that prevailed there, and of the mendacious statements that were made in some quarters to disguise what had occurred. They need not exasperate the situation by criticising the action of the Belgian monarch; but what they might do in that House was to point out the enormous possibilities which a rational handling of the economic situation by the development of trade might bring about, A.

1001
European conference might be brought about. That should be their first aim, but if that were impracticable, there might be joint action between this country and the United States. President Roosevelt had solved more than one great international problem; and he thought that if President Roosevelt could, with the assistance of His Majesty's Government, bring pressure to bear on the Belgium Government on this matter, the result would be that they might face the difficulties of the future in that part of Africa. As he had already said, the key to the whole situation was to open the great area of Central Africa to free commerce, which would extend civilisation and give the natives that rational hold upon their own lands and rational interest in the products of their industry on which civilisation must rest.
*MR. NOLANsaid he had listened with great attention to the various speeches which had just been delivered, but he had not been able to discover any sufficient reason why this debate should have been initiated under present circumstances. They were on the eve of the holidays, and the few hon. Members present were anxious to get away to other scenes and other occupations for a brief time. But certain Members of the House seemed to consider that that was a fitting occasion on which to arraign the rule of a friendly State, with the view of getting a judgment of that House upon it. He had read much that had been written and said in regard to the government of the Congo Free State. It struck him that the history of that State could be divided into three parts. The pre-Belgian period, the Belgian period before 1896, and the Belgian period after 1896. Up to the time of the journey through the territory by the late Sir Henry Stanley the map of Africa of that region was a blank. It was described by geographers as a jungle inhabited by savage wild beasts, and by men still more savage. Sir Henry Stanley found that there were great possibilities connected with it and on his return to Europe he did his utmost to awaken interest in it in this country, but signally failed. Sir Henry Stanley, however, found in Belgium a more sympathetic audience and succeeded in inducing the King of
1002
Belgium to take an interest in his scheme. Amongst other things King Leopold sent out a staff of officers who organised an army to cope with the slave traders. At the time when Stanley visited the country, the House must remember that those slave traders were in the habit of raiding the country, inflicting a loss of life calculated at 100,000 per annum. In addition a number of boys and girls were annually carried away into slavery. King Leopold, after a long and severe struggle, succeeded in smashing the power of these Arab slave traders and raiders and put an end to the system. The King also prevented the introduction of alcoholic drink which had wrought such havoc in other parts of Africa. He had spent millions of money, some of it his own money and some of it the money of his friends, in the construction of a railway connecting the upper and the lower Congo. He had also constructed landing stages, and placed fleets of steamers for service on the rivers and lakes. He had made provision for the establishment of Christian Missions which he (Mr. Nolan) understood were as successful in dealing with the natives as the missions in any other part of the world. In fact he learned that the system was so far successful that some of the natives who came under the influence of these missions and acquired some knowledge were able to preach religion among the savage tribes at some distance from the mission, and teach them what they themselves had learnt. Up to the year 1896 there were no words found sufficient to express the admiration of the civilised world for King Leopold while he was carrying out this great work at his own expense and that of his immediate friends. So long as there was no prospect of any monetary return for the outlay of the King there was not a single word uttered against him or his representatives; but in 1896 rubber commenced to be found in large quantities, and there were rumours also of the existence of gold in the Congo. A change at once took place. First, demands were made on behalf of an interested group of people in Liverpool that the Congo should be thrown open to trade. Rightly or wrongly, that demand was refused.

1003
Possibly King Leopold and his advisers thought that, having expended millions of treasure in establishing public works, they should not allow independent traders from other countries to come in and carry on trade in a manner not likely to improve the condition of the natives or of the country. There were examples of what the introduction of private traders meant in some of our own Colonies in West Africa. From that time forward a change took place in the way in which King Leopold and his work in the Congo was spoken about, and no words could be found too abusive to apply to him. He thought the climax was reached when the ruler of a friendly state was described as being "an inhuman monster." But there was another side to the picture. On the occasion of King Leopold's jubilee a year or two ago he was presented with an address of a highly complimentary character by 600 English gentlemen living in Belgium, who had every opportunity of forming an opinion as to King Leopold's character. He had heard some of the speakers refer to meetings which had been held in this country at which King Leopold's rule in the Congo Free State had been denounced. One afternoon, there being no pressing business in the House, he went to one of these meetings, and heard a great deal of abuse of the Congo Free State Government. But not one word of evidence in support of the charges which were made was brought forward. One gentleman, who was active in making charges, was asked whether he could give any proof in support of them, and he produced several strips of ribbon with pieces of twigs attached to them, and he said those twigs represented people who had been murdered, along twig being for a man, a shorter one being for a woman, and the smaller ones for children. He did not know what the others thought, but he thought this was rather trifling with the audience. Some years ago a gentleman connected with the Congo Reform Association did make a specific charge against an officer of the Congo Free State. What was the result? That officer of the Congo Free State brought an action against him, not in Belgium, not in the Congo, but in London, and the result was that the officer
1004
obtained a verdict with £500 damages and costs against that employee of the Congo Reform Association. It would be noticed that from that day onwards the lecturers of the Reform Association had carefully abstained from giving particulars as to these alleged outrages in the Congo Free State. What did the inquiries of the Consuls and Vice-Consuls who went out to investigate the state of affairs in the Belgian Congo amount to? The whole of their discoveries, as shown in the White-book issued a few days ago, amounted to this: that a British subject who was a native of Nigeria had been flogged by a Belgian officer for prowling about a camp at night. He believed the Congo Government called this Belgian officer to account, but that he died on his way to the coast to be tried. Notwithstanding that, compensation was given to the man who was flogged. In regard to that matter he would like hon. Members to think of what went on in India under the rule of the British Government. They knew that His Majesty's subjects were imprisoned there for long periods without being brought to trial, and were flogged every year by thousands for breaches of the law. If half of what happened under our own rule in British Possessions could be charged to the Congo Free State Government he could understand Members of that House rising up to denounce it. The Congo Government did not pretend that there were no abuses, but what they did say was that every effort was being made by the Government to put an end to those abuses. Were there no abuses in London? Here, in the heart of the British Empire, there was a Commission sitting to consider the administration of the police, against whom charges were made which were more terrible than any form of physical violence. If those charges were now being brought against the police of the Metropolis, it was not surprising that some of the officials in the Congo Free State, thousands of miles from civilisation, armed with modern weapons, surrounded by natives, should have been guilty of cruelty. But whenever a charge of that sort had been brought to the attention of the authorities the official was brought to justice for it. He knew that a number of Members' of that House had

1005
their minds made up on this question. They had not heard, and did not appear to desire to hear, anything beyond one side of the question, and although the wild charges that were made were not supported by any practical testimony they were accepted as true. He noticed in the organ which had been specially started and run to make these attacks on King Leopold and the officials of the Congo Free State that from one end of the year to the other not one word of credit had been given to King Leopold or the Government of the Congo Free State for any of the good work that had been done. Cardinal Gibbons arid other independent witnesses of the highest character, Catholic and Protestant, had vouched for the good work done there. But no notice was taken of evidence of that kind. Many people took it for granted that no charge against King Leopold and his Government could be too bad to be believed. They would not give attention to the other side. What happened in German Africa? King Leopold had never sent out an army to the Congo; he had sent out some European officers, not all Belgian, but some Italians, some Swedes, and a few English. Germany sent out an army supplied with arms of precision and plenty of ammunition to make war on the Hereros, and the slaughter went on for years; but there was no protest against that, and he supposed that if King Leopold had been the master of many Jegions there would have been no protest against what had taken place in the Congo Free State. But because King Leopold was the ruler of a small industrial State every kind of abuse could be poured upon him without any reproof by any person in authority. He had no personal interest in this matter direct or indirect; but he liked fair play, and since his attention had been called to this question he had read the evidence on both sides, and while he was prepared to admit that there were abuses in the Congo, yet he claimed, in the interests of fair play, that people ought to look not merely on the admitted abuses but on the great work being done there in the interests of Christian civilisation.
MR. GEORGE WHITEsaid he felt it was great cause for satisfaction that one more
1006
opportunity had been given for discussing this question. His difficulty in discussing it was that of approaching it from the attitude of anything like statesmanship, or to use language in regard to it that would be permitted in that Assembly. If ever there was a subject to which strong language was appropriate it was this. The hon. Member for South Louth had fallen foul of some Members of the House because they, in attacking the Congo, attacked the ruler of a friendly State. If he were tempted into that line of discussion it would not be very difficult to justify any attack which the hon. Member had attempted to repel, but which had never boon made. The history of the Congo Free State showed that the missionaries were there long before the King of the Belgians undertook the civilisation of the district. The hon. Member had contrasted the action of King Leopold with that of Germany, who had sent out an army to another part of Africa. But the Free State had armed savages and cannibals. Had the hon. Member read the Belgian Commission's report upon this matter?
MR. NOLANsaid that if the hon. Member for N. W. Norfolk had read it he would have found that while the Commissioners recommended certain reforms, they gave credit for the great work effected.
*MR. GEORGE WHITEreplied that he had read it, and that it teemed with facts of the grossest atrocities on the very largest scale. He had never read in the whole history of the civilised world of atrocities to equal them. He had himself been over and over again in the company of men who had seen those mutilated natives, and he had heard their statements of how those terrible mutilations had been inflicted, and it was too late in the day for any hon. Member, in any circumstances, to get up and attempt to suggest that those statements were altogether manufactured for the purpose of getting up an agitation in this country. The evidence of the number of twigs as to the murders committed in certain districts, and the testimony of the men who had accepted those records from those who had knowledge of the deeds, were amply sufficient, and the hon. Member had no right to

1007
get up in that House and say that those statements were absolutely false.
*MR. NOLANsaid that the records of which the hon. Member spoke did not look as if they had over been in Africa; they could get them made in London by the waggon-load.
*MR. GEORGE WHITEsaid that they set up in that House and in the country a claim to being animated by a spirit of universal brotherhood. What a burlesque the whole thing was in the face of those gigantic atrocities! If natives under British sway had been treated in that way, hundreds and thousands being subjected to those cruelties, the whole Empire would have risen in indignation and demanded reparation. He thought, therefore, that they were bound to press upon the Government that they should take such steps as would bring about a termination of such gross misrule. The agitation had been going on now in this country for several years, and yet practically nothing had been changed. There was no proper administration in the Congo. An hon. Member had spoken of the slave trade having been abolished. He would venture to say that a great number of the natives of those districts had been subjected to influences which were worse than the slave trade as it was carried on before. The whole system of management was rotten to the core, and hethought that our obligations required us to take such steps as might be necessary to enable the Belgian people to understand that these things would no longer be tolerated. Many of the missionaries were in districts where the cruelties had been going on, but latterly it had become difficult for them to keep their position; yet even those who were a considerable distance away from the centre of maladministration had become acquainted with what was going on. He had said just now that there had been no change. He thought that there had been a change in one respect, that the district was getting rather too warm for the continuance of the missionaries, and attempts were now being made to prevent them from getting sites for their chapels where they could carry on their worship. He did not wonder at it. No British missionary could live in the districts where these things were going on without being compelled to report and protest
1008
against them. The missionaries were the first to protest against slavery in Jamaica, and they were the main instruments in getting that slavery removed. So now, in these days, unless they could support the missionaries in the demands they had made for freedom of worship, they would not get the information which they had a right to demand at their hands. It was for His Majesty's Government to say what were the steps which could be taken to put an end to these misdeeds. For his own part he felt that it was dangerous to consent without conditions to the annexation of the Congo Free State to Belgium. He had presented to the House a few days ago a petition from working men, the prayer of which exactly described the position which the nation ought to take up, and he thought the Government ought not to be behind public opinion. Like the hon. Member who had just spoken, he had attended one or two of the meetings which had been held in different parts of the country. He was bound to say that they had been perfectly unanimous; and he would like those who had been witnesses of these transactions, and gentlemen connected with the Congo Reform Association of Liverpool, to put the House in full possession of their statements, and then no man would doubt the truth of the statements, nor the sincerity of those who had spoken to them. The House had to consider the position which we occupied, having accepted the Declaration, which, of course, was accepted under the very specious promises of King Leopold. It was quite true that eleven or twelve years ago King Leopold was hailed as the saviour of the Congo, but that was on the strength of his promises, and those promises had not been fulfilled in any one particular, so far as he knew. Therefore, as a party to the Declaration, this country had a right to take a firm and consistent step, and he could not but believe that the other nations of Europe, which were quite as much interested in the condition of the Congo and desired to see these cruelties abolished, would join in any reasonable arrangement, first by calling a Conference, and then by seeing what were the steps which could be devised. He hoped that this nation would not consent to the annexation of the Congo to Belgium, unless under such conditions as would ensure

1009
some reasonable terms for these poor native races who had been so cruelly misused and ill-treated by their governors.
*MR. REESsaid he had understood the noble Lord to say, though he must have mistaken him, that the British taxpayer would be called upon in certain contingencies to provide funds for the administration of the Congo.
*EARL PERCY: No, the Belgian taxpayer.
*MR. REEShoped, at any rate, that before long this country would be fid of a responsibility which it seemed equally unable to discharge or to evade. He did not wish to touch upon this question except in regard to what was said by the hon. Member for Woodstock, who had remarked that our hands were not clean but that other nations' hands were less clean in dealing with subject peoples. He was not concerned to appraise the degrees of dirt that might adhere to the hands of others, but he did repudiate the assumption that our hands were not clean. He remembered that the hon. Member for Woodstock referred to this question last year and said that British officers abroad regarded natives as or born slaves. But on the other hand the hon. Member regarded the British officer abroad as or born tyrant. Of the two creeds he would rather subscribe to the former than to the latter. His object in rising, however, was to ask the Foreign Secretary a question with regard to another matter that had reference to the contemplated communications between Anatolia and Persia, which, in point of fact, made a new road to India. The particular question of this so called Baghdad railway was indeed a most important one, and the Leader of the Opposition, when he was in office, proposed, at one time, that we should actively participate in the scheme. He wished to ask, in reference to the increase by 3 per cent. of Turkish customs, which, as he understood, had been practically agreed upon, whether the funds which would be realised over and above what were required would be so earmarked that they could not be used by the Turkish Government as a guarantee to the German concessionaire. He was well aware that this was a German
1010
concession, but he believed that large funds would be raised in France, and hoped that in some way this country would be able to participate in the inter-nationalisation of the scheme with which it was so intimately interested. If any great military power was in a position to bring troops down the Persian Gulf, the flank of our Indian Empire would be turned. The whole of the money we had spent in fortifying the North-west Indian frontier would be wasted, and we would be exposed to the attack of another and a strong military Power. He heartily acknowledged, if he might say so with respect, that the Foreign Secretary, as he understood, accepted the position of Lord Lansdowne as to the supremacy which we must maintain in the Persian Gulf. The Foreign Secretary had in no case departed from the wise and continuous conduct of our foreign affairs, which was the tradition of his office and of its distinguished holders. If the right hon. Gentleman could say anything about the matter he would be glad to hear what he had to state about the participation of England in this scheme. As to the action taken with regard to the Turkish customs, he believed that it had been engineered from first to last with the object, whether successful or not, of providing the interest on the funds to be raised for the prosecution of this German enterprise for a railway to the Persian Gulf. If arrangements as regards this increase in the customs had been concluded, it became necessary for the House to know that the Foreign Secretary, at any rate, had this aspect of the matter before him. He did not expect the right hon. Gentleman to make any great statement on the subject, but perhaps he would be able to say something. The question was admittedly an important one and to anyone who know the region of Mesopotamia, and knew what it had been in the past, and what it might be in the future, it assumed quite international importance. We were interested in the matter in respect of the approach to our Indian Empire, and also because the settlement of the question would determine which Power was to dominate that portion of Asia Minor through which the rails would pass. Already the Sultan was preparing a scheme for making the land between the Tigris and Euphrates what it once was, the garden of Asia and

1011
it might well be that in no long time a new significance would attach to that blessed word Mesopotamia.
THE SECRETARY OF STATE FOR FOREIGN AFFAIRS (Sir EDWARD GREY,): I do not at all deprecate the fact that my hon. friend who has just sat down has put before the House his views on the subject of the Baghdad Railway, because I fully admit that it is a subject, or may become a subject, of considerable importance. But at the same time it is a subject with regard to which we have not got. treaty rights, and with regard to which there does not exist that humanitarian and moral interest which attaches to the previous subject of debate, and is therefore one on which at the present moment I do not see how I can well make a statement without touching upon, in a somewhat presumptuous way, affairs which are in the hands of others. At the present moment the Baghdad Railway, so far as it has gone, is a matter of local interest, developing, no doubt, the resources of the country through which it passes, and possibly of interest to those who have invested money in it. What my hon. friend anticipates is that it will be so developed as to provide an alternative route to the East. I entirely agree with him that should that, or any other alternative route, be established it must be a matter of first rate importance, and of great interest to all those Powers who have possessions in the East, or who have possessions in the neighbourhood. I therefore do not in the least wish to detract from the impression my hon. friend has given of the importance of the subject named, but it is not one on which at the present moment I am prepared or indeed have a right to make a statement. Now, Sir, with regard to the main subject of debate, I should like first of all to put it on record that the intention of everyone who has spoken, I think without exception, has been to show a desire to avoid saying anything which might in any way reflect on Belgiumor the Belgian people, or which might legitimately be taken as a matter of offence by them. I wish to say that very explicitly, because it is sometimes represented that the mere fact of a debate taking place in this House on the Congo State is something
1012
which ought to be resented as being directed in some way against Belgium. I am sure that nothing is further from the intention of those who have spoken, and I think we may go a little further now than we have ever gone before in regard to the feelings of Belgium, and say that as far as we are concerned we have hitherto been Belgium's best friends in this matter. Many of the Powers, or at least more than one of the Powers, may feel that it has a potential interest in regard to the Congo State, but no Power which has treaty rights or potential interests in regard to the Congo State has recognised the rights of Belgium so exclusively and so emphatically as they have been recognised by His Majesty's Government. I think that ought to be recognised in Belgium, because one cannot foresee what the developments of this Congo question may come to be, and the time may come when Belgium may regret that she did not recognise in time who was her best friend in this matter. I agree with the noble Lord that there must be a change of system in the government of the Congo State. Sooner or later that must come. It cannot go on under its present irresponsible rule, and I agree with the noble Lord that the reforms which have been promulgated, or I think any reforms, will not secure the changes we desire unless there be a change in the system of government in the Congo State. We can have any number of reforms, but what we desire is results, and the consequence at any rate of my experience at the Foreign Office is that the one point upon which those who desire Congo reforms have concentrated and ought to concentrate themselves is to secure not a mere list of reforms, but a change in the system of government in the Congo State. Now it seems most natural, and I think it will be generally accepted by the House, that that should take place by the government of the State being transferred to the Government of Belgium, responsible to the Belgian Parliament. Belgium has her rights in the matter, and that is the most natural way in which a change should be effected. I do not agree with what has been said by one or two speakers that the prospect of that change taking place satisfactorily is less favourable now than before. I think the right hon. Baronet

1013
who introduced the subject said that the now Belgian Government was less favourable to freedom than the previous one. I do not believe that to be the case. I believe that the present Belgian Government is anxious to approach the question with the desire to secure a satisfactory solution; but I admit that those who are interested in the question will naturally wait to see under what conditions annexation is to take place and what the scheme of annexation presented to the Belgian Parliament will be. I do not know what the schemes of annexation will be which the Belgian Parliament will be called upon to discuss; still less do I know what scheme the Belgian Parliament will approve. I wait therefore to see what the conditions will be, and what the scheme of annexation will be. Pending that time, I should be reluctant, as the noble Lord opposite was reluctant, to lay down definitely the conditions which must be satisfactory, for this reason. If the Belgian Parliament is to act in this matter as we should like to see it act, it must do so of its own free will, without interference and without pressure from outside, and if there be in the Belgian Parliament even a suspicion that there is a desire on our part to interfere with their action or to put pressure upon them so as to influence their action, it will undoubtedly be prejudicing the chance of a favourable solution of the question. What we desire is to see the Belgian Parliament approach this matter with its mind perfectly free and untrammelled, and concentrated upon the need for reform and with the intention to reform the Congo State. But if there comes pressure from outside or a suspicion of interference from outside, what will naturally be in the mind of the Belgian Parliament will be the distraction of thinking how it is to resist that influence and uphold their sovereign rights against outside interference; and that is why I said that if we wish to see a favourable solution of what is known as the Belgian plan and the Belgian solution of the question we must respect the rights both of the Belgian Government and the Belgian Parliament, and make it clear to them that they must deal with the matter absolutely uninfluenced and uninterfered with from outside. I agree with the noble Lord that if Belgium will act in this matter
1014
—that is to say, if the Belgian Government takes over the Congo State not with nominal but with real responsibility —I assume that will be the solution of the matter, because I cannot suppose for a moment that the Belgian Government would accept a nominal responsibility which would be merely a veil put in front of the old order of things, and, while having a nominal responsibility, would be content to allow the real control not to be in its own hands, and abuses still to go on behind the veil. If Belgium takes over that real responsibility then we shall have secured two things; one is that the governing authority of the Congo will no longer be the trader; and in the next place you will have publicity. If you have publicity, if you have a Government responsible to the Belgian Parliament, the effect of publicity will be such that the abuses which have hitherto taken place will not be able to live in the light to which they will be exposed. The noble Lord pointed out how serious the financial difficulty of Belgium might be in this matter, and he put forward a suggestion tentatively of his own as to a method by which relief might be given. It is one which I have not previously considered. If Belgium feels the task before her is likely to be heavy and burdensome, and is anxious by any method to approach the treaty Powers—the Powers who were parties to the Treaty of Berlin—with the object of finding from them some help or some means by which the task may be made less burdensome to her, we, at any rate, shall be very glad to listen to any proposals which she desires to make. So much as to what I hope will be the ultimate and satisfactory solution of the Congo difficulty—annexation by Belgium. The change of Government has been in part responsible for delay in this matter. I think it is only right and fair to say that now that that Government has lost no time in declaring its intention to annex we should wait for a reasonable time to see what progress is made, and what the conditions of annexation will be. That is my attitude at the present moment. But I would repeat again what I said in the House last year, that I do not think anyone can wait indefinitely upon this question. I have been pressed

1015
as to what should be done if the Belgian solution breaks down, if Belgium finds herself either unwilling or unequal to taking the matter in hand. Well, Sir, then of course it becomes an international question. I do not wish for one moment to diminish our sense of responsibility, but at the same time if a change of government in the Congo is to take place, if the State is to pass into other hands which will reform abuses, then that is not a responsibility which we are prepared to undertake. We will share our responsibilities with the other Powers, that is our political and diplomatic responsibilities, but we have heavy burdens on us already, and I am not anxious to see this direct burden of responsibility increased by further additions to territory. That a Conference of the treaty Powers or the Powers interested should meet we have always been willing. The United States Government has also expressed its willingness to approach this question from the same point of view. We gladly recognise that as a favourable step, and one which may perhaps bear good fruit. But two Powers are not enough to form a Conference by themselves. The late Government issued an invitation to a Conference and were not met with an affirmative answer. The noble Lord asks whether the conditions would now be more favourable for the summoning of a Conference than they were then. I am afraid that in the last year or two Conferences in general have not increased in popularity. I should not like to repeat that invitation till I had some assurance from other Powers besides the United States that it was one they would be willing to accept. If any sign is forthcoming that the Powers which were not ready for a Conference when last asked have now changed their opinion we should be only too delighted if they desired it to issue such an invitation, and still more pleased to accept it if other Powers desire to issue it. But the question of forcing a Conference—which I think was one of the phrases used in the debate—is another matter. I doubt whether a forced Conference would effect the results which we all desire. A Conference to which people go unwillingly is much more likely to add another to the European complications than to settle this or any other problem with which it
1016
is its object to deal. I can only say that we are most ready to join with other Powers whenever they are willing to find a solution of this question, and any other Power who desires to approach us will find us not only willing, but unselfish and disinterested. We have no designs, no ambitions, no desires of a territorial character with regard to the Congo State. We have one or two boundary questions pending, but apart from that we shall approach the question, as far as we are concerned, absolutely without arrière pensée and with the most disinterested mind. If there be other Powers who have rights with regard to the Congo State or who have interests they desire to assert or put forward, no one of them has anything to fear as far as we are concerned. I should prefer myself, on the ground of right and because it is the least complicated solution, that the Belgian Government should act strenuously and effectively in taking over the Congo State; but the present irresponsible Government of the Congo is one which I think the Powers who are interested, especially the neighbouring Powers, cannot continue to recognise indefinitely. It may become, if it has not already become, a pressing condition of danger to the neighbouring States. If things go on as they have been going on for the last two years the result will be that the Congo State will remain as it is, a huge territory, and will become one which is exhausted, impoverished, and full of discontent and restlessness. That cannot be a result which can be contemplated with equanimity by the neighbouring Powers. All that we ask with regard to the Congo now is that the present system of Government, with all the abuses which have been shown and proved to be consequent upon it, and which I fear are inseparable from that system, should come to an end and its place should be taken by something which can be respected and trusted to govern the country well and reform abuses. If the Belgian Government are prepared to proceed in the matter they will have no better friend than ourselves. Failing Belgian action we shall be glad to recognise, to encourage, and to further anything which will secure good government and the reform of abuses, and which commends itself to other Powers, especially to those who may have special rights or interests of their own in the Congo basin.
MR. WALSHsaid he desired to draw attention to the condition of things prevailing in the Transvaal with respect to Chinese labour. There were a number of labourers there with no licences at all. [Laughter.] He noticed that some hon. Members on the Conservative Benches seemed to think that that was a matter for laughter. He was quite sure that if they searched their consciences they would not find that it was a matter for laughter. No matter that came before the public at the general election was more responsible for the disconsolate state of the Conservative Benches—not even free trade—than the question of Chinese labour, so that really from the political aspect of the question alone there was little occasion for laughter on the part of the occupants of those benches. But even they, the authors of the whole system, stated in 1903 and 1904 that the system, if it was brought in at all, was to be temporary and transitorial. It was admitted also that no coolies should be brought into the Transvaal unless they were properly licensed. There were now 259 people there without any licences at all. No licenses had been issued for them. [Cries of dissent.] If they had been issued, it had been after the event. He wished to call the attention of the House to the excuses—they did not seem to him to amount to reasons—that had been given for the presence of these people there. It was said that owing to an error in the counterfoil of a small book the figures had been inaccurately stated. He supposed that was a book kept by some person whom nobody could trace, and for whom nobody was specially responsible. One side contained the number 553, whereas the real number should have been 246. He knew from his own experience that figures were the most perplexing of human inventions, but he could not understand a mistake of that kind. He did not think the House, or even the country, would mind the mistake very much if it were not one of a series of regrettable incidents. [An HON. MEMBER: Was it a mistake?] Now that the Transvaal had obtained responsible government, he thought that everybody in the House hoped the mistake referred to was the last of the series of regrettable
1018
incidents. According to a Paper recently issued Lord Selborne was prepared to go bail for the officials under him. He did not wish to detract from the honour due to Lord Selborne for his readiness to stand by the officials. But who was to go bail for Lord Selborne? He could not forget that the whole of these regrettable incidents had happened during the time Lord Selborne had been at the head of the Government in the Transvaal. The noble Lord was the whole cause of the issue of 16,119 licences against the advice of the right hon. Gentleman who represented the Colonial Office in this House. He was there when the flogging took place with his knowledge, if not his connivance. Lord Selborne, in his opinion, was not altogether blameless in these matters. He and his friends only asked that the misgovernment which had been going on should now close, and that the constitutional freedom which had been granted to the Transvaal should not be infringed. The constitution had been granted on the distinct understanding that the contracts now in operation should cease at the end of three years, and that there should be no re-indentures. If there was to be Chinese labour in the Transvaal, it should only be in accordance with an ordinance sanctioned by His Majesty's responsible authorities and containing no servile conditions. He did not in any degree blame the Under-Secretary for the Colonies, to whom alone the Labour Members could address their observations on this subject. They had from the beginning recognised that his position was one of extreme difficulty. If they recognised the serious burdens and obligations they had to bear, and if their remarks seemed a little hard and severe, it was because they felt they were between the nether and the higher millstone. That position was liable to friction. They recognised that the situation might have brought about a great deal of trouble and friction, and if serious complications had not arisen it was largely due to the strenuous and statesmanlike way in which the right hon. Gentleman the Under-Secretary for the Colonies had dealt with the whole situation. It was not because he and his friends were ungrateful, but they believed that there might have been

1019
more of that supervision which had been promised and which they had a right to expect. It was to be hoped that this sordid chapter in our colonial history was coming to an end. He had seen a few ways ago in a leading Conservative paper that a deputation had waited on the Colonial Secretary with the view of inducing him to allow the Chinese to remain in the Transvaal until some other cheap labour should be obtained. But how did the case stand? The output of gold in the Transvaal in 1904 was £16,000,000. In 1906 it was £21,500,000, which enabled a dividend to be paid over the whole of 56 per cent. In 1906 one mine alone paid 180 per cent. on its shares. And all this time they were warning Englishmen not to come to the Transvaal! The number of white labourers in the Transvaal was becoming smaller and smaller every day, and all the predictions of Lord Milner were being falsified. The Labour Party hoped that the Government were absolutely determined that no more of the "regrettable incidents" to which reference had been made should take place in South Africa. If they succeeded in securing that, they would obtain the confidence of the people of this country.
*MR. MACKARNESSsaid he wished to ask the right hon. Gentleman the Under-Secretary for the Colonies when the Letters Patent enacting the constitution of the Orange River Colony were to be published. The House had been first informed that they would be published shortly after Christmas, and a few weeks ago the Under-Secretary had said that they would be published before Whitsuntide. It should be remembered that the right hon. Member for West Birmingham had said that the Orange River Colony was more entitled to have constitutional self-government than the Transvaal. The delay in announcing the conditions of the proposed constitution of the Orange River Colony had caused already anxiety and feeling in South Africa, and he hoped that his right hon. friend would make a statement as to the definite date when the Letters Patent granting the constitution would be made public. He hoped that the nominations to the Second Chamber
1020
would not be made, as was the case in regard to the Transvaal, before the political complexion of the Lower Chamber had been ascertained by popular election, but that the responsible Ministers would be consulted. The subject to which his hon. friend had referred was deserving of the notice of the House. A large number of Chinese coolies had been introduced into the Transvaal in breach of a deliberate undertaking given by the Under-Secretary for the Colonies. That undertaking was given because it was recognised by the Government and Liberal Party that the introduction of Chinese coolies involved very grave moral, social, and political considerations. The telegrams which had been published showed that there had been very gross carelessness in the way of management, j but there was nothing to show that either Lord Elgin or Lord Selborne ever thought of the graver considerations, and the undertaking that the coolies should be sent back was thrown over simply because it might cost a few thousand pounds to carry it out. Lord Elgin had put his ringer on the superintendent who was responsible for the gross carelessness which led to the miscalculation of the number of the coolies licensed. But that superintendent had not received any punishment. In fact he had received a very strong commendation from Lord Selborne. Yet that was the same man who a year ago was condemned by a Judge of the High Court to a fine and severe censure for illegality and cruelty to Chinese; under his care. Had anyone who was appointed to look after and supervise the system of the Chinese employment in the compounds been reproved? The whole of those men remained, so far as they could learn, in the Government service. It should be remembered that it was on the very eve of the resignation of the Imperial Government that they brought in a fresh lot of Chinese to whom the great bulk of the people of the Transvaal—as they well knew and as the elections had shown—most strongly objected. And they were brought in without the slightest investigation as to what their legal position would be. He had asked questions on this point. Were those Chinese coolies kept in the compounds

1021
without the slightest legal warrant? And were they in the compounds in excess of the number which the late Government said over and over again they would not allow? The Colonial Office seemed equally ignorant of and indifferent to those matters. It was true that that matter had now passed out of the purview of the British Parliament into that of General Botha and his colleagues, and he had not the slightest doubt that they would deal with the question drastically. His right hon. friend had tried to dismiss that matter as one of mere historical interest, but did he mean to suggest that a question of that kind should, because it happened a few weeks ago, cease to be a matter of practical importance? And did he think that his own undertaking given to the House, and the breach of it, could be dismissed in that light and airy way? That could not be treated, and ought not to be treated, as a matter of no importance. In the near, or in the distant future, as he thought in the near future of a general election, when men looked back to the political annals of that time, they would be glad to find that there was an earnest band of Liberals in that House and out of it who thought it was their duty to protest against that system, and although they were not at first successful, that after a long and painful struggle, by the help of their new Boer and British fellow-subjects in the Transvaal, they had finally turned that cursed system out of the Empire.
THE UNDER-SECRETARY OF STATE FOR THE COLONIES (Mr. CHURCHILL,): I do not complain of the two speeches which have just been delivered; I think they show the cooler atmosphere in which we are now enabled to discuss this South African question. I recognise the spirit in which hon. Members speak of the manner in which I have endeavoured to explain to the House of Commons the policy which Lord Elgin has adopted, and for which he, as representing the Cabinet, must necessarily be responsible. This incident of the introduction of 259 coolies is in inconvenient and unwelcome feature. It arises from a pure error, from an error of the most, innocent and fortuitous
1022
character, committed a long time ago by a subordinate official beyond the reach or immediate purview of the High Commissioner. My hon. friends have inquired whether we have taken any stops to punish the official who was guilty of making this inconvenient and vexatious mistake. As I understand it, a reprimand has been administered, but I deprecate, and will always deprecate, the undue penalising of individuals who may make lapses in their public service just because the circumstance of their fault is connected with some matter in which the House of Commons takes a particular and special interest. I am sure my hon. friends will realise that, however irritating this error may be, there is no bad faith about it; and, as there is no bad faith about it, I am not disposed to admit that we have broken, in substance or in spirit, any pledge which I have given to the House of Commons. The pledge which I gave was in answer to a supplementary question, and what I had in my mind when I gave it was, not the accidental or fortuitous importation of coolies, but some deliberate and purposed attempt on the part of those who were concerned in the importation of Chinese coolies to bring in a large number beyond the number sanctioned by the House. The distinction is, perhaps, a fine one, and I do not dwell too strongly upon it; but I think it is sufficient, at any rate, to clear me, in my own mind, of having failed, even in the most minute detail, to satisfy the House in regard to the undertaking which I made. No one can pretend that the accidental importation of 259 coolies raises any question of principle. I wish the mistake had been the other way, though that was hardly to be expected. The full correspondence on this subject which I have laid before the House will, I think, show to any, I will not say reasonable or practical man, but to any dispassionate critic the very great seriousness which the Government attach even to an unpremeditated statement in answer to a supplementary question, and the great expense, trouble, and exertion which they are prepared to make to give full effect to any such undertaking as may be given. But I think the House will wish that in dealing with such matters we should be guided by practical considerations of expense and of difficulty, and that, at a time when so many large

1023
issues are moving smoothly and harmoniously to their conclusion in South Africa, we should have done wrong to have thrown this particular incident into an altogether disproportionate position. My hon. friend has asked who is prepared to go bail for Lord Selborne. The Government are prepared to go bail for Lord Selborne. Lord Selborne is an officer of State employed under His Majesty's Government. While he holds office under His Majesty's Government we are responsible for what he says and what he does, and we must be judged harshly or well by the House without being separated from him in any way. When I say that, I do not pretend for one moment that Lord Selborne's views on South African affairs are the same as those which the Government and their supporters have held. There are, admittedly, divergencies and differences which have never been disguised or concealed; but I say with seriousness to the House that we have been greatly benefited in the policy which we have carried out in South Africa by Lord Selborne's presence in the country. And at the time when we introduced the Transvaal Constitution in the summer of last year, Lord Selborne came forward and voluntarily from that moment associated himself with the dispositions and the constitutional arrangements which we were making, and by so doing enormously steadied public opinion in this country, and rendered the reception of that Constitution much more composed than it would otherwise have been. I have no doubt whatever that the great advantages which we have derived, and which we shall continue to derive, from his presence in South Africa fully justifies the cooperation which has been maintained between him and His Majesty's Government during the period in which we have been responsible for the direction of affairs, I will ask my two hon. friends not to dwell unduly on the gloomy side of things. I think a little optimism may be indulged in nowadays about South Africa, and I think that, instead of heading a search party to penetrate into the recesses of the South African mines in search of the exact legal status of these unfortunate 259 coolies, my two hon. friends will be better advised if they turn their eyes to the horizon upon which the smoke of the steamers is already visible which are to carry away
1024
the first batches of Chinese back to their own country. While I do not complain that this matter should be raised, I deprecate any very long or particularly heated debate taking place on it at the present time. The new Government is fully competent to deal with the question. Above all things it is important to our relations with that Government that we should not "nag" it, that we should not fidget from day to day about its affairs or how it conducts them. We shall repose confidence in a Parliament freely elected, and in a Government thoroughly representative of the majority of that Colony. Their problems are problems of the utmost complexity. My hon. friends have spoken of the great wealth of the Rand. Indeed, it is a wonderful thing that, with this fountain of £24,500,000 bubbling up every year in the midst of a comparatively small community, there should be, on all sides, distress and financial embarrassment, actual want of food and employment. It is a grave, complex problem with which those Ministers have to deal, and His Majesty's Government have great confidence that they will show themselves not unequal to the problem. A declaration of policy will be made when the Transvaal Parliament assembles. I do not want to anticipate—I would not if I could—what that declaration of policy will be. It would be presumptious on our part to attempt, beforehand, to dictate as to the deliberations of a new Parliament or to outline the policy which the responsible Colonial Government will expound. I do not know what their policy will be on Chinese labour. I know what I hope it will be, what I think it will be. All I know is what the policy of His Majesty's Government will be. It will be a strict and exact observance of the pledges which are recorded in the speeches of the most important Ministers of the Government and which are borne on the face of the Letters Patent. With regard to the Orange River Colony, the Letters Patent will be laid before the House almost immediately after we assemble after the Whitsuntide holidays.
MR. LYTTELTON (St. George's,said he had only one remark to make with regard to these 259 Chinamen. He thought that to punish a subordinate official for a clerical error would

1025
be a peevish and almost a malicious thing to do. He entirely agreed with the right hon. Gentleman the Undersecretary that it would be a great scandal to impose such a punishment simply because it was in the interest of Party politicians. It would also have been manifestly ridiculous for the Government to have incurred the expense of £12,000 in repatriating those 259 men. Hon. Members must remember very well that the Government refused, not to repatriate 16,000 coolies who had come into South Africa under licence in 1905, but to revoke the licences of those men before any expense whatever had been incurred and before a single Chinaman had been put on board a ship. Manifestly, therefore, it would have been ridiculous for a Government which was unwilling to do that to incur this great expense in repatriating Chinamen who had entered South Africa in error. The circumstance that interested him in the matter was that it had on all sides years ago been represented that the Chinamen were going into slavery. Tested by the facts with with regard to these 259 Chinamen, how was that case made out? The House was told in the documents presented to it that these coolies would be so indignant at not going into slavery that if they were repatriated a riot might be anticipated. They were assured by the representatives of the Government in that House, who had so often made these charges there and elsewhere, that £12,000 would have had to be expended in order to indemnify these Chinamen for not going into slavery.
MR. CHURCHILL: That was not my statement.
MR. LYTTELTONsaid that was the statement made in the White Papers.
MR. CHURCHILLsaid the right hon. Gentleman must not suggest that he was the author of those statements. It was his duty to lay before the House the statements that had been made, but whether he must be assumed to agree with the statements contained in any letters he laid before the House was quite another matter.
MR. LYTTELTONadmitted that that was a fair explanation and he accepted
1026
it. But those were statements of Lord Selborne and Mr. Jameson. The Government were responsible for repatriating these Chinamen, and the ground upon which they refused to do it was that the Chinamen would riot against not being sent to the Transvaal unless they were paid a heavy compensation for not putting these fetters upon themselves. That was all he desired to call attention to. It was all on a piece with the rest of the evidence which had been put before the House. On the first occasion the question came up it was stated that 1 ¼ per cent. refused to be repatriated at the Government's expense, and on the next they were told that the Chinamen would riot if they were not allowed to put on these manacles of which they had so often heard.
MR. PIRIEsaid he desired to call attention to the new rules passed at Easter. He complained that the constitution of the Scottish Committee had not received adequate discussion. The new rules were passed sub silentio. He did not hold the Government responsible for their being passed in that manner, because it might have been possible for them to have been properly discussed if the hon. Members on the Opposition benches had shown a little more genuine interest in the matter. He expressed regret that the Scottish Committee was not composed entirely of Scottish members. A resolution was passed last April, at the convention of Royal Burghs held in Edinburgh, which expressed the wish that a Scottish Grand Committee might be set up which consisting entirely of Scottish members with power to deal with the Committee stages of Scottish Bills. The Scottish Liberal Association had also endorsed that view, which was generally held in Scotland. His main object in rising was to let the people in Scotland know that the Committee as at present formed fell very short of what they had hoped for. He ventured to say that even on the Front Bench there were members who were pledged on this subject, and he did not doubt for a moment that they were perfectly ready to give effect to the views which they had enunciated as to a greater measure of self-government for Scotland.
MR. SPEAKER: The hon. Member is not entitled on this Motion to deal with questions of legislation.
MR. PIRIEsaid he merely wished to show that there were members of the Government who had supported Home Rule for Scotland. In regard to the Scottish Grand Committee proposal, there were eight Amendments put down which, if they had been discussed, would have thrown a great, light on the position of that Committee. They raised the questions of the number of members, the power to add members, the qualifications of members for the Committee, the appointment of Chairman, and other matters. But the Scottish Grand Committee as it was now constituted fell very far short of what the people of Scotland had been led to expect and of what they had hoped for. The view of Scottish Members on this subject remained absolutely unchanged from what it was in 1894, when the Scottish Home Rule Resolution was passed in that House. They accepted the Scottish Grand Committee for what it was worth, and as a temporary means of bridging over the pressure of business, but by no means as a final settlement of the question. The introduction of the Irish Council Bill ought to be followed before long by a similar measure for Scotland. They would watch the financial provisions of the Irish Bill closely in order to render them as economical as possible, in the hope that by saving the pocket of the British taxpayers support would all the more readily be given to the Scottish Bill when it was brought before the House.
MR. J. WARDsaid that every time the right hon. Gentleman the Member for St. George's, Hanover Square, referred to the question of Chinese labour he seemed to derive great satisfaction from the fact that some few days before the end of his term of office he issued some 16,000 new licences suddenly and apparently without any special reason. Then they were told that the mere fact that these Chinamen did not wish to return to their country, and that, even before they landed, they understood the conditions under which they were to labour, was proof that the conditions
1028
were not in any way approaching slavery He thought it was generally understood that slaves did not always wish for their freedom. It was within the range of possibility that men might be born under certain circumstances and conditions which were grafted into their nature, so that they failed to see that there was any disgrace or immorality about the position in which they were placed. He believed there was such a thing as cannibalism existing to-day. Missionaries and others had sometimes urged that the British should use force to put it down, but those who lived under those conditions had not that high sense of what was proper as between man and man which was to be found in civilised conditions of life, and we had a right to insist upon such a practice being suppressed whether the natives themselves liked it or not. That was exactly the principle involved in the question of Chinese labour. It was not a question whether the Chinamen, as individuals, wanted those conditions. The sole question to be decided was whether, considering our ideas and our state of human development, we could give sanction to that system as part of our public policy. He did not think anyone could defend it on any grounds whatever. With regard to the state of public business, he had heard the subject discussed very vigorously within the precincts of the House during the last month or so, and he would like, if possible, to get some information as to the position of affairs to-day. Clearly the legislative programme of the session was not nearly so advanced as it was this time last year. To an outsider there seemed to be a want of energy, almost amounting to a want of foresight, in the conduct of business. Everyone noticed last session that things seemed to be going smoothly. Everyone seemed determined to do his share of the work and to assist in the conduct of business; but this session, he did not know whether it was the inertia of the Government—he could not believe that it was want of energy on the part of Members—the position of affairs did not seem nearly as favourablefor a decent legislative output as at the same period last year. Members were as anxious to work to-day as they were on the day they were elected. It

1029
seemed to himself and his colleagues of the Labour Party that if the full programme was to be proceeded with an autumn session was absolutely essential. Yet no one seemed to be able to give them the slightest idea as to what were the intentions of the Administration in regard to the subjects that remained still to be dealt with. The direct representatives of labour—the trade union representatives—had to manage their business in such a way as to earn their living in the recess, and it was essential for them to know whether there was to be a sacrifice of the most important part of the Government programme, or whether they were going to adjourn, say, at the end of June, and sit again in October or the middle of September. For himself he much preferred the latter. He would be told that the reason the session was so backward was because of the autumn session last year, there not being time between the two sessions to enable Bills to be prepared in the way they otherwise would be. That could only be correct on two suppositions, neither of which would be very complimentary to the Government—first, that in spite of their large majority they could not calculate with certainty upon support except from session to session; or, secondly, that though they could absolutely rely upon support during the whole life of the Parliament, they had not made up their minds as to the problems they intended to solve or the policy they intended to pursue. If the Government had made up its mind as to what it wanted to do what was to prevent its draftsman from being employed in drafting Bills for the next session months beforehand? It seemed a. simple business to a man engaged in the ordinary affairs of life. It seemed to him that if he could rely on his majority, he would not leave matters over from session to session, never thinking what was going to be done until the next session arrived, but that he would, taking for granted that he had the support of his Party, provided he carried out faithfully their policy, begin to prepare for the whole Parliament from beginning to end. He did not know whether Governments conducted their business on those lines or not, or whether
1030
they lived from day to day, like Mr. Micawber, waiting for something to turn up. It was absurd to contend that one session should end before the drafting for another session began. He would like to know whether it was the intention of the Government to drop a considerable portion of their programme and rise in August, and whether they were going to meet again in the autumn. If an autumn session was possible or probable it would be much more convenient if they knew of it early in the summer. He did not like to feel that they were going to sit on until August and then be called back again in September or October. The session was now so far advanced that he thought they were entitled to have the views of the Government upon the point.
MR. AUSTIN TAYLORsaid he sympathised with the object of the hon. Member for Stoke-on-Trent and shared his enthusiasm for progress; but with longer Parliamentary experience the hon. Member would appreciate the difficulty in carrying on proceedings upon business lines such as he suggested. The remarks of the hon. Member for Aberdeen referred to one of the most important points in procedure. He regretted that there was not a fuller House to hear what the hon. Member said, because this question of Grand Committee procedure was certainly one of the most important subjects that could be brought before the House. He agreed that the Government had given to the consideration of the Rules of Procedure all the time that it was possible to give compatible with the business of the House. As an English Member he was inclined to think there were strong reasons why Scottish legislation should not be withdrawn from the purview of the House. Scotland, sometimes spoken of as a field for legislative experiment, had often given a lead in sanitary and other legislation which England had followed, and it was extremely important that English Members should have the opportunity of following the discussions in the Scottish Committee. On the memorable occasion when the property of the Free Church of Scotland was by a decision of the House of Lords transferred to a minority in the

1031
Highlands, the House undertook legislation on the subject, and the importance of the discussion was apparent to anyone conversant with what was going on in the Church of England and who might think that to some extent the positions were parallel. Again, it was possible that the Land Tenure Bill for Scotland might form a model for legislation to be applied to this country, and it was desirable that English Members should become acquainted with the arguments used in Committee. The discussions in Grand Committee would take the place of discussions in Committee of the Whole House, but they had not the same publicity. He therefore suggested that arrangements should be made for a verbatim report of the proceedings, or for a record similar to Hansard. It must be apparent that those Committees, on important measures, would take the place of the Committee stage of that House. He was aware that his right hon. friend had given a pledge that when the Scottish Bill came up on Report greater latitude would be given for discussion than was originally proposed. He was sure it would be a great help to English Members if they could get the proceedings of the Scottish Committee placed on record, so that the very valuable arguments upon such intricate questions as those involved in this Scottish land question might be open and accessible not only to hon. Members, but in future years to those who desired to study the question with a view to possible legislation in this country.
THE PRIME MINISTER AND FIRST LORD OF THE TREASURY (Sir H. CAMPBELL-BANNERMAN,)said the observations of the hon. Member for East Toxteth were somewhat belated; they appeared to be a remnant from the long discussions upon the Procedure Rules in which the subject was fully considered. He took the machinery of business as a whole. The minute points in a Scottish Bill were discussed in Committee of the whole House in the absence of English and Irish members who voted upon occasion without knowing the a. b. c. of the matter they were, dealing with. Scottish members were conscious of this atrociously bad method of conducting busi-
1032
ness, and the committal to a Scottish Committee was a change made for the better. English members would give or receive enlightenment on the return of a Scottish Bill to the House. The hon. Member desired there should be verbatim reports of the Committee proceedings; but the effect of that would be elaborate speeches which would be a drag on the progress it was hoped would be made by the change. There were reports in newspapers quite sufficient to enable members to follow the proceedings, and they must be content with those reports; he could not accept the suggestion for a further record. The hon. Member for Stoke had made a speech which, whether intended or not, was about as uncomplimentary to the Government as could possibly be made, and to himself as head of the Government especially.
MR. JOHN WARD: No, no.
SIR H. CAMPBELL-BANNERMANsaid it implied that the Government conducted business in a haphazard way, not looking beyond their noses, upon the principle that sufficient for the legislative day was the business thereof, and that the Government ought to look much further ahead than the session. His hon. friend seemed to ignore the fact that the necessities, the views, the desires of the constituencies and the country changed with the changing seasons. Often a matter that was of the first importance one year, if not dealt with, sank the next year into insignificance They could not be guided by any fixed plan extending over a good many years. The Government had declared themselves at the general election, and on other occasions, in favour of certain changes, both social and political. They had not departed from their desire to effect those changes; but the order in which they were to be taken up must, of course, be left to be decided year after year. His hon. friend had also raised the old familiar question of the part of the year over which the session should extend, whether they should adjourn at the end of June with a view to meeting again in the autumn, or whether they should sit on, as they had been accustomed, for the most part, to do in the past, well into August, rather than have an autumn

1033
session. That had been a subject of controversy during the whole of the thirty-eight years he had had the honour of having a seat in the House, and, though he would not positively swear to it, he must have changed his mind in regard to it, if not thirty-eight times, certainly many times in the course of those years, there were so many advantages in each proposal when it was looked at by itself. But that was not the occasion when the Government could lay down any general arrangements of that sort. His hon. friend had implied that the Government were behind with their business, and it had been alleged by someone that that was owing to the autumn session of last year. What was true of the autumn session of last year was that the Government—or, in similar circumstances, any Government—were naturally not so well prepared with I their Bills this session as they would have been had there been no autumn session, not because they themselves had been taking too much holiday, but because the officials of the various Departments had been so occupied in watching, and nursing, as it were, the current legislation of the autumn session that they were unable to give the final form, under the direction of the Cabinet, to the Bills of the present session. But, except in that respect, the Government were not at all behind with their business. So far there had been thirty-four full days and eighteen half-days—that was, days ending at 8.15—devoted to Government business. Six full days and one short day were spent on the Address; in Supply, thirteen full and seven short days; on the Patents Bill, one short day; on the Budget, four full and three short days; on Procedure, four full and two short days; on the Army Bill, four full days and one short day; on the Irish Council Bill, one full day; on a number of small Bills one short day; on the Landholders (Scotland) Bill, two full days; and on Motions for the adjournment, two half-days. The result was that they had in that time got the Second Readings of the Finance Bill, the Army Bill, I the Butter Bill, the Patents Bill, and the Small Landholders(Scotland) Bill, and the Irish Council Bill had been introduced, and most important procedure rules had been passed. As to the future prospects of the Government measures, that was not an occasion on which he
1034
could make any statement. The innocents were not yet ripe for massacre. He fully appreciated the saying of his hon. friend, that it would be a great convenience to Members generally if they were informed definitely as to the period of the year when they would be required to attend Parliament. The whole of that question was in a somewhat fluid state at present, and he did not think that anything could be said just now even with respect to this year. As he had announced at question time, the Government were anxious, if possible, to avoid an autumn session, not only on account of its inconvenience to Members, but because it occupied the attention of the officials of the Departments to the prejudice of the business of the session that was to follow. But that was a question the Government had yet to consider. He could only say now that they had every hope and determination of proceeding with the greater part of the measures that had been introduced, if not all of them; and they trusted the House would assist them in so doing by refraining from any extreme prolixity of debate, so as to give them the necessary time. He could quite understand that Members who had not been long in the House, who entered it full of desire to pass useful measures, should, in the circumstances, feel disappointment, and chafe at the slow progress of things. He had always set his face against much time being spent in purely Party debates and in Second Reading debates on a large scale. It had been considered below the dignity of a first-class measure to give fewer than four or five days to its Second Reading. When the House entered upon that process the more reasonable Members took a holiday, returning in time for the division, and often there was the greatest difficulty in keeping up the debate for the required period, Members on both sides being urged to speak so as to keep it going. He was strongly against that sort of thing, for his own sake as well as for the sake of the progress of business, though he fully recognised that there should be ample time given for the discussion of important questions. His hon. friend the Member for North Aberdeen had complained that the Scottish Grand Committee had been created without discussion. He agreed there was substance in the complaint, but the guillotine had to be applied if the thing were to be done

1035
at all. Would his hon. friend vote for cancelling the Resolution which appointed the Scottish Grand Committee? He was sure he would not, because it gave to the Scottish people a power over their own affairs and the opportunity of having their opinions and desires expressed which they had never enjoyed before, except in two years which he remembered, when there was a Scottish Committee of the same character, and which answered the same purpose. He trusted the experience of the session would show that these Grand Committees had been the means of contributing good useful legislation to the Statute-book. The Government were anxious to get the affairs of the House into regular order, and, as far as possible, to meet the convenience of Members, so long as it did not trench upon the rapid despatch of the business which they were sent to Parliament to discharge.
LORD BALCARRESsaid he regretted the right hon. Gentleman did not see his way to have the proceedings before the Grand Committee reported. He thought the experience of the last few weeks in Grand Committees was not particularly hopeful. The public were absolutely ignorant of what the proceedings before those Committees were. The right hon. Gentleman had said that they must look to the newspapers for reports; but the readers of newspapers only looked at the report of the Parliamentary proceedings, and never thought of looking at any paragraphs in regard to what took place in Committees. At any rate, there was no official record of the proceedings of those Grand Committees. In the case of the Merchandise Marks Amendment Bill, introduced by the hon. and gallant Member for Sheffield, the Committee met and had to be adjourned owing to the necessary absence of the President of the Board of Trade at the Imperial Conference. All that added to the strain on Members, which was very serious indeed. The Opposition were justified in complaining of this addition to Parliamentary work, for, owing to the paucity of their numbers, every Member of the Party now served on some Committee, and some on two or three. As a consequence of the constant morning work on the Committees beginning at 11.30, and the lack of a dinner interval in the House, the strain upon Mem-
1036
bers was immensely increased. He did not suggest that they should revert to the longer adjournment, but he thought that an interval of twenty minutes or half an hour would be a great advantage. Apart from the relief to Members to enable them to obtain some dinner, it would give an opportunity to the servants of the House to tidy up the Chamber, and have it thoroughly ventilated. During the hot weather last year the atmosphere of the House manifestly suffered from the lack of such an opportunity, and the health of Members suffered in a corresponding ratio. Right hon. and hon. Gentleman opposite could go away to dine when they pleased; those on the Opposition side of the House could not. They were a small party. Ministers had shown clearly enough that they valued for themselves an interval for dinner. In the session of last summer, from April 24th, when the change was made, he had computed the attendance of Ministers from 7.15 p.m. to 10 p.m. from their participation or otherwise in the divisions—the only effective test which could be applied. The Chancellor of the Exchequer was absent from 59 per cent. of the divisions taken during those hours. The President of the Local Government Board, who was, perhaps, most regular in his attendance in the House, was only absent from 9 per cent. of divisions in those hours. He would leave out of account the Leader of the House, of whose engagements they did not know. The Under-Secretary for the Colonies was absent from 56 per cent. of the divisions in those hours; the Chancellor of the Duchy from 70 percent.; the President of the Board of Trade from 52 per cent.; the Secretary for India from 60 per cent.; and the Secretary for Scotland from 65 per cent. Those figures showed that right hon. Gentlemen opposite valued the dinner hour between 7.15 p.m. and 10 p.m. He made an appeal on behalf of what he believed to be the bulk of the House that a reversion should be made to the old system of having a general dinner interval. He did not believe that public business would suffer in any degree from such an interval. He would not press the right hon. Gentleman as to whether there was to be an autumn session or not since the right hon. Gentleman had given a promise that in two or three weeks he

1037
would make a statement in regard to that subject. He would point out that an autumn session was incompatible with prompt legislation.
Question put, and agreed.
Resolved, "That this House at its rising To-morrow do adjourn until Thursday the 23rd May."—(Sir H. Campbell-Bannerman.)

HIGHER EDUCATION.
MR. SILCOCKrose to call attention to the administration of education other than elementary in England, and to move—"That in the opinion of this House it is desirable that further encouragement shall be given by the Board of Education to those schools which have, since the Act of 1902, been classified as other than elementary, and that the principle of public local control should be extended to all schools other than elementary and to training colleges which receive help from public funds, at least to the extent of securing adequate local public representation on the governing body; and, further, that all schools arid training colleges assisted by public funds should be freed from all sectarian tests for teachers, scholars, or members of the governing body." He said that fie did not intend to deal with the question of elementary education except to say that the present position of that subject excited deep dissatisfaction in the country. Secondary education, according the Report of the Board of Education or the year 1906, was the most important educational question of the present day, affecting as it did the efficiency, intelligence, and well-being of the nation. It was, however, described in that Report as being in a state of chaos, and the object of his Resolution was really to ask the Board of Education to take steps to bring order out of that chaos. There were nearly 5,000,000 of children between the ages of seven and fourteen in the schools of the country. A fair proportion of them might be expected to avail themselves of higher education the opportunity were given them. Every year there were in schools 600,000 children reaching the age of twelve, and some provision should be made for their education other than elementary. They ought to expect that a considerable
1038
proportion of those children would be prepared to avail themselves of any opportunity given to them, but the provision was wholly inadequate. In Scotland every child up to the age of eighteen had efficient and suitable education free of charge and under public control. Let the House contrast that with the position of affairs in England. The total number of children in secondary schools or in schools which were not public elementary schools was under 1,000,000, and excluding those in the evening schools and in pupil teacher and training colleges, there were only 160,000 children in the secondary schools receiving public money. Every Member of the House must admit that that showed that the provision was utterly inadequate. The chief provision for secondary education was by means of scholarships given by education authorities, but only 14,000 scholarships were given in the whole of England. The conditions made by the Board of Education tended to keep the children of the working classes out of those schools. The fee of £3 should be abolished. The artificial distinction between elementary and non-elementary schools should be removed altogether. There should be a continuous system and no hard and fast line drawn between the two. Secondary education should be as much for the poor child as for the child of the upper and middle classes. Restrictions as to the number of free places should be removed, and the safeguards and restrictions now applied to elementary schools under which money was given should apply also to secondary schools that received public money. The Board of Education should encourage the building of new schools by local authorities and discourage the system of scholarships which was really a subvention to private schools. The principle of public local control should be extended to all schools in receipt of public money. They also wanted those schools to be free from all sectarian tests. In the pastsecondary education had not been so afflicted with the religious difficulty as elementary. Steps should be taken by the Board of Education to see that the religious difficulty did not find a lodgment in secondary education. The Board should always refuse grants to public teachers' colleges unless they bad religious freedom within their walls.

1039
They asked that the principle of religious freedom should be applied wherever money was granted to aid secondary schools. As to the general question of secondary education, he reminded the House that it was not a charity. It was, he contended, the duty of the State in its own interests to see that the children of the State were properly educated. If the State was to have hotter workmen and better citizens the education of the children must be carried a stage beyond that to which it was carried at the present time. The Imperialists who dreaded the competition of foreign countries might well remember Sir Lyon Play fair's remark to the members of the British Association that the competition between the nations of the future would be the competition of intellect. They looked forward to the time when men would be educated in this country, to whatever class they belonged, and when it would not be considered an anomaly for a man to be well educated because he happened to belong to the working class. They asked that the Government should take steps to put an end to the present waste of the nation's resources; to organise and bring order out of chaos; and to deal in a broad and comprehensive spirit with this question of secondary education. He begged to move.
*MR. ADKINSin seconding the Resolution, said that it, like many that had been brought before the House in the present session or the last, was not intended as a Resolution of censure upon the Government, but was meant to ventilate a great and important subject, to show to the Government and to the House what a strong public feeling there was on the matter, and to encourage the Government, in whom they had confidence, to take up the question and advance it, in spite of its difficulties, another stage or two towards the solution they desired. The problem of secondary education, although it was difficult, was most vital and pressing. The child who left an elementary school, in spite of all that had been done for him, had hardly begun to be educated. Many of the greatest advantages that came from education would not be gained by that child unless that education was supplemented. They felt that the nation itself,
1040
compared with other nations, was in a very large degree imperilled, if the bulk of those inhabiting the country did not get any education beyond that within the limits of what was called elementary. With regard to the last paragraph of the Resolution, which touched on the question of sectarian tests, the deliberate wishes of the House and he ventured to say of the majority of the people in the country could not for ever be thwarted by the action of the subordinate branch of the Legislature. The difficulties which attended the problem in regard to elementary education did not attend it to anything like the same extent when they were dealing with education other than elementary. They were dealing, with lads and girls who were older, and to whom, therefore, the State during that period of their education was not so much in the place of a parent And in cases where there were endowments the true solution lay in the provision of hostels of a denominational character from denominational endowments, while all the scholars could share in the general teaching of the school. The central part of the Resolution referred to the question of encouraging education other than elementary and the question of extending the principle of popular control. Before the Act of 1902 a good deal of education was conducted by school boards and other authorities as a higher kind of elementary education, a kind which under that Act must now be described as secondary education. The effect of that Act, whether intended or not, whether merely transitional or not, had been in many parts of the country to distress, hinder, and arrest that higher elementary, or lower secondary, education which in many places was flourishing greatly to the public advantage before the Act was passed. He would give an illustration from the constituency which he had the honour to represent. In the town of Little borough there was an elementary school which had a great deal of local support and in which the inhabitants took great interest. It was extended upwards in ways which, he dared say, were not according to Cockerton, but which were of local advantage and aroused a great deal of local enthusiasm. That form of education was given in the same buildings and to a large extent by the same teachers. The effect of the Act of 1902 upon that institution

1041
was this. Promising young people were told that there was a grammar school at Manchester fifteen miles away and another at Todmorden, an interesting fact to a few but not so interesting to many of the people who sent their children to that school. Orders were sent out by the Board of Education that a wall must be built between the part of the building in which strict elementary education was given and that in which the secondary education was given, as if it was a fever hospital whore isolation was necessary. Suggestions were made as to fees which were most embarrassing to those interested, and the result had been for the time at all events to injure if not to kill the local enthusiasm for something better than ordinary strict elementary education. Matters like that were a public evil. In this country people could not be driven and dragooned into better ways. They might be led, and, as he had ventured to say before, would go still further if they were taken by the hand. The policy of the last five or six years, though perhaps only a temporary one, had been to hinder and prevent further development of what in many cases was a valuable kind of education. In the desire to foster secondary education of a higher type there was, no doubt, one practical difficulty realised by all educationists, which was that a boy whose education was to last until he was sixteen had to be caught young and passed through a curriculum which differed in many respects from that given to a boy who was intended to leave school earlier. It was certainly most important that all that was best in our old secondary education and those traditions which with all their faults had been bound up with the civilisation of our country should be retained, diffused, and extended, and the policy advocated by the Resolution was that the education hitherto enjoyed by the few should be purified, made better, and handed an to the many who had had up to the present no opportunity of getting it. He understood the wish of the Department to maintain and extend education of a high type which this form or method of curriculum might help, and a great deal might be said for it, but alongside of that educational policy was i great educational danger. If in order to secure such a curriculum they so exercised their administrative powers as
1042
to widen the gulf between the few who could and the many who could not attain to it, they were likely to do more harm by the social effects of their policy than good by reason of the valuable educational advantages which it possessed. If secondary education was to flourish, if the House was prepared to vote more money for it, if they were to have support from the local rates along with the local self-government which must follow, it was necessary surely to enlist the sympathies of people generally, and, most of all of that great bulk of their fellow-countrymen who up to now had been content practically with merely elementary education. Therefore it seemed to him that the pith of the problem was to combine the maintenance of that high standard and the preservation of all that was good in old educational tradition with the enlistment of the sympathies of the many, making it easy for the many and not merely the few, to get the benefits which he had described. How did the matter appear to many poor workmen in different parts of the country? They saw that their own children won very few scholarships. So far was the educational theory to which he had referred rigidly acted upon that those scholarships had to be won by the children at a comparatively early age. It did not always follow that the child who showed cleverness at an early age was going to be more worthy the higher education than the child which developed later. A workman's child won a scholarship and went to a secondary school, which was very often away from his home, and which was very often steeped in what was good in educational tradition, and also in what was not so good. The child was better educated perhaps, but when he returned home he was utterly out of sympathy with his parents and with the humble life from which he had sprung and in reference to which he ought to be qualified to give high and valuable service. He could understand the extravagant phrases which had been used with regard to this subject, and he could well imagine how the present conditions were looked upon as if the children of the poor must become either part of a horde of serfs or part of a handful of snobs; and it was precisely because that feeling was in the air, and because that was felt so strongly

1043
up and down the country, that some of them were anxious this session to ventilate the matter in Parliament, and if possible get the matter discussed in the House of Commons. What were the remedies? He ventured to suggest one or two on the lines of the Resolution. In the first place, in great towns they ought to have, at any rate, one large school in which was given both the education appropriate to those who were going to leave early, and the education appropriate to those who were going to stay longer. It might well happen that there were many parts of teaching which could not be given in common, but there were other parts which he was convinced could be given in that way. There were the elements of the history of our country, there were the beginnings of the knowledge of our literature, and matters of that kind, which ought to be taught with all that was best in the old traditions infused into them and taught to both kinds of scholars. Even if the plan involved largely duplicating the staff to meet the need of separate instruction in many subjects, it was still worth while to have both types in one school. To those who loft at the age of fourteen and to those who stayed later, there was this advantage in being in one and the same school rather than in separate schools, namely, that if they were both in the same school they shared its life, were its badge, and they had, as it were, two sets who met in the playground, where they learned to cherish the feeling that they belonged to the same school, and where they also learned that social distinctions were trifling compared with the true spirit of comradeship between young Englishmen. He suggested that that was one method that ought to be tried, because the want of sympathy with higher education and the class feeling connected with it which were now so prevalent were dangers to the State which it required enterprise and flexibility of method to deal with. In the second place it was surely possible to increase very considerably the local public control of every public school in which secondary education was given with help from public funds. There were some schools which received not a farthing from the rates, but were supported by old endowments, by fees, and by grants from the Board of
1044
Education. Even in those cases he would ask his right hon. friend to make it a condition of receiving the grants that there should be some representative of the local education authority. And for this reason among others: if the local education authority had been backward, if the local ratepayers were even more economical than ratepayers generally were, it meant that they had yet to learn the duty of spending money on this important matter, and if some of their number were allowed to go on the governing bodies of such schools, they would return to their councils interested in the work that had been done and anxious to strengthen local control and support the school from local resources. He had seen in his experience more than one case where the governors of a school which had no local support had been strengthened by the presence on their board of members of the local education authority. What had been the result? The school had awakened much greater interest, and the local education authority, after a time, became willing to help. When they came to those schools where help was given by the local authorities, he was sure that his right hon. friend required no suggestion and very little encouragement to strengthen the principle of popular local control, and those cases were bound to be more and more numerous as time went on, because unless support did come from local and Imperial sources, the problem of secondary education could never be solved. Then he submitted that that local control ought to be more of a reality than it was. He had received a letter that day from his friend the Chairman of the Worcestershire County Council, Mr. Willis Bund, a great administrator, who pointed out to him the important discussion his council was having with the Board of Education on this point, namely, that where the county supplied a considerable part of the money the county authority ought to have a considerable voice in the way in which that money was spent. He knew he was touching on delicate points of administration, but he unhesitatingly said that they would do well to bring about gradually, steadily, yet rapidly a system in which those elected by the people to look after local education should have a more quick and living interest and power in the administration

1045
of higher education. There was also the great question of endowments. In every county in England there were a considerable number of educational endowments, many, for instance, less than £50 a year. It was one of the many difficult matters which followed upon the Act of 1902, that those town and village endowments had to be settled with very great care by the Board of Education. The Board did show great care, but it frequently went into too great detail, deciding that half-a-sovereign had to go here and another small sum to some other purpose. He submitted that those endowments, at least those under £50, ought to be left to be used by the trustees, for any purpose of education other than elementary provided that the local education authority approved. They would thereby strengthen the local control over secondary education, and promote the much needed flexibility of administration which would assist those who knew the local conditions, and yet who worked in a sufficiently large area not to be dominated by local prejudices. Those who brought this question before the House did so, not in any spirit of antagonism to the Government, nor with any aim which would tend to destroy educational machinery. They were most anxious that the benefit of secondary education should be extended as far as possible. They were most anxious that the mass of the people should no longer be alienated from secondary education in any way. Some part of their position might be founded on misconceptions; if so, let those misconceptions be cleared up. Some of their grievances might be founded on facts; if so, let those facts be altered. It might be that a change of policy or exposition of policy was required; for his own part he thought something of both was wanted. He hoped that the Government, in spite of their many difficulties and their great amount of work, would deal with this question. He was sure that the great majority of Members of that House, who by accident of birth and circumstance had been allowed personally to know something of what higher education meant, would desire that those who had been less fortunate in the past should be succeeded by a generation that should share in their advantages, and that the humanising, helpful, and elevating tendencies of real education might be
1046
known throughout our streets and in the places where our people dwelt.
*SIR PHILIP MAGNUSsaid he did not think anyone could complain of the substance or tone of the speeches which had been made by the two hon. Gentleman who moved and seconded this Resolution. The Resolution contained three propositions—(1) that it was desirable that further encouragement should be given by the Board of Education to secondary education; (2) that schools receiving State aid should be brought more definitely under public control than they were at the present time; and (3) that such schools, including training colleges, should be free from all sorts of religious tests. He did not propose in the very few remarks he intended to make to refer at any length to the third of those propositions, he must say, however, as regarded the first proposition that he was in complete sympathy with the mover and seconder of the Resolution. Those two hon. Members were quite correct in stating that there were few subjects at present before the country which were of more importance than the question of secondary education. At the same time, he would like them to bear in mind the fact that as regarded the question of the extension of secondary instruction it did not do to be in too great a hurry. They must remember that it was not yet five years since the Act of 1902 came into operation which placed secondary schools under the direct control of the Board of Education. He was not there as an apologist for the Board of Education, which would no doubt be represented by its President at a later stage in the debate. From his own knowledge of what the Board of Education had done he must say that it had always shown a sympathetic interest in all attempts which had been made to improve secondary education, and having regard to the difficulties of the work which they had to undertake he did not think they had been at all slow in the progress they had made. He thought, however, it would be very unfortunate, and in this he believed the mover and seconder would be disposed to agree with him, that the supply of secondary education should be in excess of the demand. What they had to take care of was that there should be among the working classes and among those

1047
who received the main part of their education at elementary schools a demand for that secondary education which the State was asked to offer. The people of this country required to be encouraged to see its importance. His own experience went to show that there was a lack of interest and desire among the working classes for the facilities which already existed. He asked the House to remember that it was not advisable to be in too great a hurry to multiply secondary schools before the demand for such instruction could be said to exist. It had been pointed out by the seconder of the Resolution that it was desirable there should be continuous education from the elementary to the secondary schools. He was in complete sympathy with that idea, but of course there was a difficulty in carrying it into effect, and that was due to a great extent to the character of instruction given in elementary and secondary schools. They should remember that as they advanced from elementary to higher forms of education the kind of education the children received tended to become differentiated. Elementary education was very much the same for all classes of children, but secondary education in all countries differed very considerably. He was quite willing to admit that it was somewhat chaotic at the present time in this country, but that was owing to the fact that secondary education had been under the direction of the Board of Education for so very short a time. When they compared secondary education in this country with what they found in Germany and other countries they were comparing it with organisations which had been in existence for decades. In all those countries where secondary education was well organised they would find different types of schools. It was very important, if children were to be taken from the elementary school into a secondary school of a particular kind, that they should be removed at an early age in order that they might receive the different kind of training afforded to them in the higher school. That was one of the difficulties which existed in the way of having a continuous scheme of elementary and secondary education. The difference was not entirely a social distinction, as people were very often inclined to imagine, but it was a distinction essential to the character of the
1048
education. The curriculum of any school must depend upon, and be regulated by the age at which it was probable the child would leave the school. If the entire education of a child or of the great majority of the children in a particular school was likely to be completed at the age of fourteen, that would be the determining factor in arranging the curriculum. If the children were to pass from that school into a school of a different character then they must be taken away at the age of eleven or twelve. There ought to be no difficulty in discovering the capabilities of children at that age for secondary education. He was strongly of opinion that whenever they found children of eleven or twelve years of ago who showed ability on the literary, scientific, artistic, or mathematical side, they should at once seize those children not only for their own sakes, but for the benefit of the State, and give them the highest possible education. The only way therefore in which that opportunity could be afforded was by means of scholarships. It should be borne in mind that it was not possible for the parent of every child to afford to continue the child's education up to the age of seventeen years or eighteen years. Therefore the education must be free, but beyond that the parent should be helped with regard to the education of his child, and that could only be done by way of scholarships. He was disposed to think that it was not necessary to select those children in all cases by means of competitive examinations. He thought that the system of competitive examinations applied to children of eleven and twelve years of age was a cruel system, and the teachers themselves should be consulted as to the children who were most competent. After the teachers had been consulted a selection might be made, and those children after having been carefully examined both physically and intellectually ought to be passed on to the secondary schools. As had already been pointed out a large number of children were not sufficiently developed educationally at the age of eleven or twelve, and they might show more promise at the age of fourteen. He was sure they did not want to exclude children of fourteen years of age from the higher education to which they might be entitled. But it was quite certain that the kind

1049
of secondary school to which a child of fourteen should be sent ought to be different from the school to which they sent children of eleven and twelve years of age. He was most desirous of seeing secondary education very carefully organised with a view to providing schools of different types. He would be the last person to suggest that anything should be done to lower the standard of our classical education. He thought that was a most valuable training, and young people with literary ability ought to have the opportunity of pursuing their studies in schools providing such instruction. He was equally desirous of seeing schools of the same grade as some of our literary secondary schools, in which the education was almost exclusively scientific and practical, and dealing with modern languages. Such modern schools scarcely existed on the lines which he wished to see. If secondary schools of that kind were organised from which Latin and Greek were excluded, but where the education was carried out upon practical lines, and where there was a sound literary instruction, and at the same time good teaching in modern languages, there would be no difficulty in taking a child who had boon well educated at an elementary school and removing him at the age of fourteen into a school of that type. The child could pass from a school of that sort to a secondary school without any break in the continuity of his education. Referring to the question of control, he did not think that the governors of any secondary school would object to some amount of what was called public control. He was not certain that it would always be an advantage. He saw no objection to it; but many hon. Members must be aware of the difficulty which local authorities sometimes had in finding persons willing to accept the position of managers of secondary schools. In many cases the local authority had to appoint persons who were not members of the authority at all. He doubted whether public control would add much to the value of the education given in the secondary schools. He believed public control would be attended with considerable difficulty in the girls' schools to which reference had been made by a previous speaker. The Girls' Public Day School Trust had been to a great extent the pioneers of secondary education for girls,
1050
and the public owed them a debt of gratitude. While there would be considerable difficulty in asking that those schools should be placed under local control, he did not see that the governors should have any objection to someone representing the Board of Education being appointed to the governing body. Personally he was not disposed to attach much value to local control in some of our public schools. He was not aware of any secondary school in which the religious difficulty existed. He appealed to hon. Members not to do anything which would raise the religious bogey in the secondary schools. There were difficulties enough in the organisation of those schools without introducing the religious question. In connection with the elementary schools it was a difficulty which existed far more in that House than in the country at large. He was confident that the President of the Board of Education would give a sympathetic reply.
*MR. SHACKLETONsaid he felt the importance of providing proper facilities for secondary education. If there were any Members in the House who had occasion to complain of the want of those facilities in the past it was those with whom he was associated. He was not aware that there was even one of the Labour Members who had had more than the opportunities afforded by the elementary schools. If they were in earnest in this matter it was because they felt personally the need for adequate provision being made. Something had been said by previous speakers as to the opinion of the working men of the country on this question. There were organised methods of ascertaining the opinions of working men, and a more accurate estimate of their opinions could be obtained in that way than by taking the opinions expressed by individual workmen. Such organisations as trade councils had as good a right to express the opinion of working men on education questions as upon other matters. The principal point raised in the Resolution now before the House was that in relation to finance. Year after year working men through their representatives in trade organisations had passed resolutions in favour of the State coming more to their assistance in regard to secondary education. It was in the

1051
direction indicated by the Resolution that working men thought the Government should come to their assistance in that matter. He thought, therefore, that the Labour Members were entitled to support the Resolution. He took it that no Member would oppose the Resolution and say that the child of the workman should not have fair opportunities. The fact that the Resolution had the support not only of working men's representatives, but also of Members in the House generally, should be sufficient to enable the Government to accept it. They had been told that there was not such a demand from the workman that his child should be educated as there ought to be. He admitted that there was not the demand which he would like to see, but surely they were going the wrong way to put that right by stifling the demand. He knew what the feeling was among the people whom he represented when they were told that they had to meet a charge of £3 before a child could be sent to a secondary school. That was not the way to encourage a man who had 25s. or 30s. a week to send his boy or girl to a secondary school and to make the sacrifice involved in keeping the child out of the factory. If the President of the Board of Education could see his way to remove that barrier he was perfectly certain that the working classes would thank him. It was the duty of those interested in the development of secondary education to encourage the working classes to take a broader view of the question than they had at present, so that their children might have greater opportunities for receiving higher education. He thought schoolmasters and schoolmistresses in their own localities could do something to foster the desire for secondary education. When boys and girls were on the point of leaving school the teachers should endeavour to induce them to remain a little longer, and if they could not succeed in that, they should impress on the pupils the desirability of going on with their education at a continuation school. He agreed with the last speaker that examination was hardly a fair test of the qualifications of a child of twelve or thirteen years of age. The schoolmaster ought to be a fair judge whether a young lad had such ability as would make him a fit and proper person to
1052
proceed to a secondary school. There was a duty also in regard to the relations between employers and apprentices. At present employers were not inclined to take a lad as an apprentice after fourteen, and therefore those lads who remained at school until sixteen years of age suffered a disadvantage, especially in the engineering shops. Although there might not be much difficulty on the subject of religious tests in secondary schools, there was a good deal of difficulty felt on that subject in regard to the training colleges. In fact, that was the greatest blot on our educational system. When the result of a King's scholarship examination was published, he had known of lads spending as much as 15s. in telegrams to ascertain whether there were vacancies in training colleges for them. And the result was almost invariably that there was no room. In his opinion it was absurd that young lads should have to change their religion in order to got into a training college, which too often was the case.
THE PRESIDENT OF THE BOARD OF EDUCATION (Mr. MCKENNA,)apologised for speaking so comparatively early in the debate, but he thought that what he wanted to say would clear the ground somewhat. The difficulty in which he found himself arose from the fact that criticism had been directed against the Board, partly for what it now did and had the power to alter and partly for what it did and had no power to alter. It was of value to the President of the Board that he should have the advantage of knowing what men with experience in local educational matters felt on this subject. The duty of providing secondary education rested solely on the local education authorities. The Board acted on secondary education in no other way than through the grants, and they depended on the regulations which the Board made. One of the regulations, which, he hoped, would be introduced very shortly, was in those terms—
"A school:'—"
that was a secondary school—
"may be with or without fees, but any scale of fees must be approved by the Board."
That, he thought, disposed of the criticism directed against the Board of insisting on fees. What was the position as to

1053
fees at the present moment? There were, in the 600 secondary schools recognised by the Board and receiving grants, 104,938 scholars, and of these over 56,808 came from public elementary schools. Of those 28,674 attended schools which were already under complete municipal control, 24,941 attended ordinary endowed schools, and 3,253 attended other secondary schools. Of the total 56,868 scholars from public elementary schools, 29,440 paid no fees and enjoyed free education at secondary schools. If they took, in addition, the figures of the children in attendance at higher elementary schools and in the top classes in the elementary schools it would be soon that the position, although nothing like what he would wish to see, was not quite so black as it had been painted. Turning to another point as to how they were going to administer education grants, especially in regard to free places, the duty of providing the schools rested upon the education authority, but it was their business to see that it administered the grants so that the will of Parliament should be carried out. As he construed the will of Parliament he believed he was carrying it out. His hon. friend for the Wells Division had complained with great truth that at the present time there was not anything like a sufficient supply of secondary schools, and it would be a pity if they began to deal with the existing supply by cutting it down. There was a supply of secondary schools at the present time, such as it was, which depended in many cases upon endowments, fees, and grants. Many of them did comply with such conditions as he thought the majority of that House would wish, to see, but if they took away the grants they would in many cases be closing those schools. The Chancellor of the Exchequer had placed at his disposal additional money for secondary education, and he proposed to divide the grants for the ensuing year into two categories. The schools which refused to remain under any regulations other than the old regulations he proposed to confine to the
1054
old grants, and nothing more. Then he had a second category. He proposed that the additional grants should be given only to the schools which conformed to the now conditions. Those conditions were, first, that there must be a majority of representative managers, either appointed by local representative authorities such as county or borough councils, district or parish councils, or boards of guardians, or elected by popular local constituences, such as parish meetings. The second condition was that the instrument under which the school was governed must not require members of the teaching staff to belong or not to belong to any particular denomination; it must not require a majority of the governing body to belong or not to belong to any religious denomination; and it must not provide for the appointment of a majority of the governing body by any person or persons or any body the majority of whom were required to belong or not not to belong to any particular denomination. Thus in every way freedom of conscience, whether on the staff or in the governing body, was obtained for the school. There might or might not be fees, but if there were the fees must be subject to the approval of the Board, and there must also be an adequate number of free places. Those must not be confused with scholarships. They would be for public elementary school children who would not be asked to compete with children outside, but who would only be asked to pass a qualifying examination. The general rule would be that any school receiving the additional grant should offer at least 25 per cent. of its places for public elementary school children, who should enter free. The schools might have as many more free places as they liked, and where the schools were provided by the local education authority he trusted they would all be free. There were cases, however, where 25 per cent. of the places would not be used in any ease in that way. He proposed that, where a resolution was passed by the local education authority

1055
supporting the application for recognition by a school which did not in all respects comply with those requirements about public management and conscience clause, the Board might, if they saw fit, waive those requirements. With regard to training colleges, he had found that question a difficult one to deal with. The only conclusion he had been able to come to was that in every training college there ought to be a conscience clause. The training colleges were almost exclusively supported out of public funds. That regulation would, for administrative reasons, not come into force this year, but it would come before the House next year. With regard to the supply of additional schools, that duty rested upon the local education authority who were bound to carry out the views of the ratepayers. All the Board of Education could do was to offer them the bribe of the general grant; and under the new regulations the Board had materially in creased the grant. It would be an increase in the proportion of three to five. They were, therefore, offering a distinct inducement to the local educational authorities to put their hands in their pockets to provide additional schools. He appealed to the hon. Member for Clitheroe to use his influence with the trade councils in this matter. Their resolutions should be addressed to the local authorities, and they should urge upon the local ratepayers the duty of facing the burden. The Government were willing to assist them; but theirs was the primary responsibility, and they must act. The Board's inspectors did their utmost to induce the local authorities to be generous; and he was thankful to say that there were many local authorities doing their utmost in the way of providing secondary schools. It would be invidious to mention particular eases; but he saw around him several gentlemen who had personally interested themselves in inducing their local authorities to appeal to the ratepayers to find the necessary money, and had succeeded. The Board had to deal with the country
1056
as a whole, and their figures were small because many of the local authorities were so backward in taking action. Why, until the law compelled, some of them would not spend the whisky money, much less rate themselves. Very recently a local authority could have got over its difficulty by a rate of a sixth of a penny, but it could not be induced to put even that charge upon the ratepayers. He hoped, therefore, hon. Members would be lenient with the Board of Education and accept his assurance that the Department would do its best with an earnest, active, and intelligent desire to raise the general educational level and obtain a good, efficient system of secondary schools. They would obtain such schools, but meanwhile lot a little patience be extended to the Board. The policy of the Board was to democratise the secondary schools in the sense of raising the level and securing for the humblest in the land the opportunity of education for their children in really good schools. Much of the criticism addressed to the Board in the discussion should be directed to local authorities, and so far as the Board of Education had influence the utmost endeavours would be made to carry out the views of hon. Members.
*SIR WILLIAM ANSON (Oxford Univerity)said they had listened with great interest to the right hon. Gentleman's statement of the policy of the Board of Education in relation to the Resolution. The Resolution asked for three things—more encouragement for schools other than elementary, more local control over them, and the diminution or.abolition of sectarian requirements. The right hon. Gentleman had told the House in general terms that he had more money to dispose of—which they were glad to hear—which he was going to use to induce local authorities to come forward by offering them more local control under certain conditions; but he had expected from the Board rather more guidance. What had to be filled was the gap between elementary schools and secondary

1057
schools of the type properly defined by the Board. Before 1902 elementary schools did good work, not always of an elementary kind; they wandered into the region of secondary or higher education, in some cases doing it very well and in other cases not very well. In almost all cases where they did the work well the attention of the best teachers was distracted from the children who were their proper concern in elementary schools. The Act of 1902 compelled a distinction to be made between elementary and secondary schools. Secondary schools were required to give some teaching in languages and literature and give the pupils some notion of scientific methods, but in almost all cases the practical requirements of the child had to be considered in relation to the work he would have to do, and, though there was an attempt to specialise in the last two years, there was always a gap between the two schools. How did the Hoard propose to fill that gap, or would it be loft to local authorities to work out the complicated matter? When he was at the Board of Education he had endeavoured to move from below and to fill the gap by higher elementary schools developing elementary work on higher lines suited to the requirements of the children. There was, however, still a gap between those schools and the higher type of secondary schools, and he hoped to hear how that was proposed to be tilled. Local authorities had taken up the work with great good-will and readiness, and in some cases with a great deal of acumen, but many were inexperienced in the work of education. It must be borne in mind that a school was not made a secondary school simply by calling it a secondary school; and that the education of a boy was not served by sending him to a school which could not give him; the education he required. The resources upon which a school rested were Government grants, rates, and fees, and if fees were knocked away the financial stability of the school must be impaired. Now it was proposed that a local authority
1058
might start a school and offer it as a free gift to the locality. That would be extremely popular for a time. But would such a school be able to do all it professed to do? The absence of fees often meant lower salaries. If the salaries of teachers were low, the staff would be inefficient, and if the staff were inefficient, whatever the school might profess to do, it could not really do it. Although a school might be ostensibly a secondary school, although it might have a curriculum which excited admiration, although the scholars might be really anxious to obtain teaching therein, although the teachers might be desirous of giving it, yet they might not be able to get the kind of teacher who could give the sort of teaching which the school professed to give; and he, therefore, hoped that the President of the Board would bear this in mind, that if they created a type of school which professed to give a kind of education which it could not in reality give, because it could not afford the kind of teacher who could give the education which the school professed to give, then the splendid conception of bringing secondary education to the door of the working classes would be a disappointment and a fraud. He trusted that the Board of Education would take steps to set free the local authorities as regarded the remission of fees, and that they would also inquire very carefully into the financial conditions of a school before encouraging it, by offering it a grant, to undertake that which it could not successfully perform. They were all glad that the local authorities should be represented in the government of the schools, but the complete control of the school by the local authority was not always to the advantage of the school. In the Report of the Commission on Secondary Education it was contemplated that the local authorities should be represented, but not that they should have the entire control of the schools. On page 56 of the Report of the Board of Education for 1906, an illustration was afforded of a school governed entirely

1059
by the local education authority through one or more Committees, and mainly through the agency of the organising secretary. Now, if the head master and head mistress could only communicate with the governing body (the committee of the county council) through the organising secretary, that was not likely to create any strong sense of responsibility, nor was the teacher likely to approach his task with any great enthusiasm. No doubt, with longer experience, local authorities would become perfectly well informed on these subjects, but at present they did not know all that was required for the proper government of the secondary school; and, although he welcomed the representation of the local authorities in all cases, he could not help thinking that the requirement that there should be a majority of local representatives in all cases where a school was to receive the higher grant, was a somewhat dangerous move in the direction of creating a government of secondary schools which might not always be to the advantage of those schools. He was very glad to hear that State aid was not to be altogether withdrawn from the schools which were not under local control. If the Board of Education were to go so far in the direction of requiring local control as to decline to give a grant to any school privately governed, he thought they would do great injury to secondary education. The local authorities had so recently taken up the question of secondary education that the supply of schools was deficient and would remain deficient for some time, if the Board of Education did not encourage reliance on those schools which were not at present under local control. As regarded the training colleges, the effect of what had been told them by the President of the Board of Educa-
1060
tion was not at first sight very obvious, but at the same time it did not strike him as being very alarming to those colleges which had been built and started by denominations. It would be a very unfortunate thing if in the case of colleges which had been built in the faith that they would be maintained by Government grant, they were to be told that because they were denominational henceforth they were to be starved. The private enterprise which had started the training of teachers in this country had emanated from the Church of England, which was entitled to the consideration due to the pioneer in the great work of training the teachers of the country, he was quite ready to admit the generous nature of the Government grant so far as the maintenance of the students was concerned, but it must be borne in mind that the grant was dependent on the existence of a building. The Government had not until recently offered any contribution to building, and local authorities had shrunk from the charge of maintaining the schools. The requirements of the proposed conscience clause did not seem to him to amount to more than this, that a Nonconformist would be able to go to a Church college, and that a Church of England student would be able to go to a Nonconformist college, both without any fear, of proselytising. But there was one matter arising out of the Resolution which he thought its mover ought to bear in mind. It was constantly urged that the Government should bear the whole cost of the training of teachers. If so it was difficult to see where local control came in. He had always urged local authorities to build training colleges and retain that right of local control which could only arise if they contributed something either to the building or to the maintenance of

1061
the college, and which was necessary to them if they were to construct a scheme for the boys and girls within their area who would enter the teaching profession. He welcomed the announcement made by the President of the Board of Education that more money would be forthcoming for secondary education. He wished the right hon. Gentleman had told them the amount. He had himself made a humble effort in that direction for which his successor got the credit. The great object which the Board of Education had to carry out was the moulding of the secondary schools to meet the requirements of the children in any given area, and the instruction of the local authorities in the best method of filling up the interval which existed between the elementary and the higher type of secondary school. The Education Board in these matters must guide the local authorities, because they had a survey over the whole area of England and Wales, and they could bring an amount of experience to bear upon the subject that no local authority could offer. It was for the Board rather than the local authorities to instruct and guide the public mind as to what the various types of education other than elementary should be. It would have been more satisfactory if the right hon. Gentleman had said he was going to spend this money for schools of a new and definite type such as were badly wanted in various parts of the country. Before they could form an opinion about what was going to be done for the training colleges they must wait to see the regulations, but he was glad that the action of Board with respect to denominational training colleges did not appear to be harsh.
MR. YOXALLcongratulated his right hon. friend on
1062
the spirit in which he had approached this problem. It marked a new epoch for the President of the Board of Education to get up in the House of Commons and say that the conscience clause was now to apply to training colleges for teachers. He wished to ask one or two questions. The conscience clause was hung up in every public elementary school, and it protected every child in that school who needed its protection, and any child in the neighbourhood might demand to enter that school and could not be kept out of it because of any religious opinions. Would the President of the Board of Education accompany this regulation dealing with the conscience clause by another regulation that no King's scholar who had passed the necessary qualifying examination should be excluded from any training college on account of religion? That was the vital part of the whole question. It was useless to put a statement upon the wall in a training college that any student, once inside, would have the right to abstain from attending religious observances at a certain place of worship. The committee of management of such a college might, under that rule, still be able to exclude from entering the college any student who did not state tacitly, if not expressly, his willingness to observe the religious observances of the college and to worship in a certain place. He rejoiced that the right hon. Gentleman was going to give more money to secondary schools and to insist upon a real course of instruction in those schools. The President of the Board of Education had stated that he intended to invite the governing body in existing secondary schools to admit a number of persons representing the local authority. Did he mean to apply that principle to the training colleges? If so they might expect the management of those colleges

1063
to be democratised and then all religious tests, so far as those colleges were concerned, would be removed. More money was to be given to those secondary schools which adopted popular methods of management. Would the President of the Board of Education tell the House in what way he proposed to apportion the grants to which he had referred? Were the grants to be apportioned equally in the first, second, third, and fourth years, or were they to be apportioned on an ascending scale from year to year? The right hon. Gentleman had the advantage of knowing what the figures were up to date. The latest figures which he himself had been able to obtain were two years old. He wished that arrangements could be made for placing more recent figures at the disposal of Members of the House. The statement of the right hon. Gentleman that half of the children; attending the secondary schools and receiving grants from the Board of Education had gone through the public elementary schools, and that half of the children were attending the secondary schools free of fees, might be perfectly accurate so far as it went, but he thought it revealed a specious aspect which was perhaps hardly fair to those who had brought this matter forward. How many of the number were probationers or pupil teachers? How many were obtaining secondary education on the understanding that they should become teachers later on? He did not question the statement made by the right hon. Gentleman as to free places, but he would point out that there was not a single secondary school in the county of London where free places existed for children from elementary schools. The Minister for Education had expressed his proud determination to see that second
1064
ary schools were really and properly secondary schools, where secondary education of the right type was given. He hoped that that did not mean that in his opinion there was only one right type. No one acquainted with the subject would wish to destroy that secondary education of the classical and literary type which had existed so long. Whether she advantages of that type of school came from the curriculum or the other conditions of public schools might be doubted. He was inclined to think it lay in the playing fields, with their organised games, and the spirit of subordination and unselfishness which they produced. If they could have this in the elementary and the modern secondary school he was inclined to think the same results would be achieved. At the same time he hoped it would be open to local authorities to develop whit they sought to develop, and what the people of this country wished—a secondary education of a more modern and more practical type.
MR. BUTCHERsaid he had noticed with especial pleasure from the speech of the President of the Board of Education that he considered the free air of discussion was almost essential for intending teachers who had passed the age of childhood. His fooling was that the training colleges of the future would need to be drawn into closer relations with the Universities. University life, he considered, would provide the froe atmosphere which was desired. At the same time he recognised that so long as we provided teachers to give religious instruction some kind of denominational college would be necessary. There was a certain unity of life and thought which could not be got apart from that. He welcomed the suggestion that there

1065
should be a conscience clause. To his mind the most important part of the discussion that evening related to popular control over schools which received State grants. There seemed to be some difference of opinion as to what that popular control should be. He himself was in favour in such cases of some representation being given either to the local authority or to the Board of Education. One of the first conditions of improvement was that the local authorities should realise that the salaries of the teachers should be raised. The whole equipment of secondary schools was something entirely different from what was thought sufficient ten, fifteen, or twenty years ago; and therefore the remark of the President of the Board of Education that because they had got on with a smaller grant in the past, they could get on with a smaller grant in the future was entirely wrong. If this demand for popular control was carried out to its full effect, the result would be undoubtedly that secondary education would be far more costly than at present, because the springs of private enterprise would be dried up, and instead of giving larger access to secondary education for the many, they would be closing many doors and admitting only the few. He held that secondary education should come in future somewhat more under local control. We were still in what he might call an experimental stage, and we could not get any one definite typo of what was best. What was needed was diversity and variety which would come through the initiative and capacity of the head masters who were allowed the utmost freedom. The local authorities were new to their work and did not know very much, and, even if they did know their work, however loyal the local authorities
1066
and however patriotic their committees might be, they were inclined to make far too rigorous and uniform requirements to suit the type of school which he desired to see. He was perfectly convinced that freedom in the schools, combined, of course, with a certain amount of suitable discipline, was the first of all necessities, not only in regard to the intellectual methods to be pursued, but in regard to the character-forming influences which should be existent in the school. If they asked the best teachers in the secondary schools what their chief grievance in the matter of control was, they would say that they were subject to many harassing restrictions and vexatious regulations which were supposed to be part of a policy of control in regard to grants of public money. Popular control ought, however, in his judgment to carry with it the utmost freedom to the headmaster and the capacity to develop the greatest diversity in the type of school.
MR. STUARTcongratulated the mover and seconder of the Resolution on the reply which they had drawn from the President of the Board of Education in regard to the secondary part of the education of the country. There were a good many points in the right hon. Gentleman's statement which might give rise to difference of opinion, such as his references to training colleges and popular control. However, he did not rise to deal with any of those subjects, but to point to two questions in which he thought hon. Members upon both sides of the House would be enabled to approach the consideration of the matter from the same point of view. The first point was that whatever might be done in regard to secondary education the great difficulty which had to be overcome throughout the country was that of bringing the

1067
local authority up to scratch in all cases so that they took up the subject in a proper manner. He admitted that there had been a great advance, especially since the Act of 1902, in regard to secondary education, but the local authorities were still behindhand. The local authorities were too distinct one from another and suffered from want of knowledge of what kind of secondary education was to be aimed at, and what class of schools they should establish. There were in the schools two classes of pupils, those who came forward at an early age and were permitted to receive secondary education, and those who were permitted to receive it only at the end of their course of elementary instruction. They could not, however, keep up secondary education merely as a continuance of elementary education. They could not say after a person went through a course of elementary education for a certain number of years that he should go through a course of secondary education. He thought a great deal might be done by the Board of Education in giving much more assistance than they did—although he knew they did a great deal—as to the character of schools required in the country. He agreed with the hon. Member who had last spoken, that there should be greater variety in the schools under the same local authority, and he believed that information on the matter might be diffused more widely by the Department. The other point he wished to call attention to was the unwillingness of the local authorities to raise the money. The real necessity was to raise the demand for secondary education in the constituencies so that the local education authorities would be supported in their efforts to forward it, and he appealed to hon. Members generally to use their influence
1068
so that money might be raised for the purposes of secondary education.
MR. SILCOCKsaid that, after the statement of the Minister for Education, and after the satisfactory discussion which had taken place, he begged leave to withdraw his Motion.
Motion, by leave, withdrawn.

LIMITED PARTNERSHIPS BILL
Order for consideration, as amended (by the Standing Committee), read.
MR. SPEAKERcalled the attention of the House to the fact that by inadvertence an irregularity had been committed by the Standing Committee, in that a clause imposing a Stamp Duty had been inserted in the Bill without the sanction of a Resolution of a Committee of the Whole House, agreed to by the House. It was his duty to recommit the Bill.
LORD BALCARRESsubmitted as a point of order that probably the best course would be to recommit the Bill in regard to the particular clause which imposed the charge.
MR. SPEAKERsaid that it was his duty to inform the House that in consequence of the irregularity which had been committed by the Standing Committee the Bill must be recommitted.
Bill recommitted to the former Committee in respect of Clause 11.
Adjourned at eight minutes after Eleven o'clock.