CHILDREN [EXPENSES]. (Hansard, 27 May 1908)

§ MR. WILLIAM RUTHERFORD
said that no objection ought to be raised to the vote being taken, but he did not know whether he was in order in asking whether there was any reasonable chance, with regard to the matters which had been put down for the next day, of having 1226 the Bill printed so that they might be referred to. It was after eleven o'clock and many of them were not prepared to discuss this Resolution. They had not anticipated that it would be brought forward at that stage. It was very inconvenient that they should have to submit to this Resolution being forced on the House. Several of the matters put down for next day had not been printed.

§ MR. SPEAKER
The hon. Member can obtain them at the Vote Office.

§ MR. J. A. PEASE (Essex, Saffron Walden)
said he had given notice at about twenty to nine on the last evening that it was proposed to take this stage after eleven o'clock.

§ MR. RAWLINSON (Cambridge University)
said he wished to point out the great inconvenience of this method.

§ MR. SPEAKER
The hon. Member is discussing the Resolution which was passed yesterday. He should have raised his objection then.

§ MR. RAWLINSON
said he was dealing with the report of the Children (Expenses) Resolution, and he had great difficulty in discussing the question because of the procedure which was inconvenient to Members, many of whom did not know it was coming on. The Government were asking for a grant of money without giving the slightest estimate or limit as to the amount required, and they were doing it at a time which was inconvenient. The right hon. Gentleman himself on many occasions in the last Parliament had protested against giving a blank cheque to the Government. There were Amendments limiting the amount which ought to be discussed, but which would not be moved. He appealed to the Government not to take matters of this kind at that time of night.

§ SIR F. BANBURY
said he had an Amendment to leave out the words "and of any contributions that may be made," which were extremely vague. He had never heard anything which threw any light on what they meant. If they were left out the expenses which might be incurred would still be provided. He did not wish to enter into a long explanation. He would content himself with moving to omit those words.

§ THE UNDERSECRETARY OF STATE FOR THE HOME DEPARTMENT (Mr. HERBERT SAMUEL,) Yorkshire, Cleveland
said they had already had a discussion of over an hour's duration on this Resolution, and had gone into all the questions to which the hon. and learned Member for Cambridge University had referred—the blank cheque, the £5,000 limit and so forth—and he hardly thought the House would desire to repeat them. The Amendment raised a different point, but it was merely a drafting point. The hon. Member proposed that the Resolution should authorise any expenses which might be incurred, but not any contributions which might be made. The difference between expenses and contributions was purely a verbal one. "Contributions" was inserted because under the Bill it was proposed to enable them to be made for industrial and reformatory school children who might be emigrated, and it was, perhaps, doubtful whether "expenses" would cover these 1228 contributions. Contributions for emigration were to be made in accordance with the recommendation of a Departmental Committee presided over by a Member of the late Government.

§ MR. SPEAKER
Does the hon. Member move the next Amendment of which he has given notice?

§ SIR F. BANBURY
did not think it was any use. Perhaps it would be more convenient to submit to the greater strength of the Government, but he must raise a protest against this way of conducting business.