Commons Sitting of 26 June 1913

Preamble
The House met at a Quarter before Three of the clock, Mr. SPEAKER in the Chair.

PRIVATE BUSINESS.
Private Bill Petitions [Lords], — Mr. SPEAKER laid upon the Table Report from one of the Examiners of Petitions for Private Bills, That in the case of the Petition for the following Bill, originating in the Lords, no Standing Orders are applicable, namely:—
Ascot Authority [Lords].
Mexborough and Swinton Tramways (Railless Traction) Bill,
West Bromwich Corporation Bill,
Read the third time, and passed.
Blyth and Cowpen Gas Bill,
Westminster Hospital Bill,
As amended, considered; to be read the third time.
East Ham Corporation Bill (by Order),
London County Council (Money) Bill (by Order),
Consideration, as amended, deferred till To-morrow.
North Eastern Railway Bill [Lords] (by Order),
Great Eastern Railway Bill [Lords] (by Order),
Second Reading deferred till To-morrow.
Local Government Provisional Order (No. 14) Bill,
Read the third time, and passed.
Ribble Fisheries Provisional Order Bill (by Order),
Second Reading deferred till Tuesday next.
Local Government Provisional Order (No. 18) Bill (by Order),
Read a second time, and committed.
Local Government Provisional Orders (No. 21) Bill (by Order),
Second Reading deferred till To-morrow.
London County Council (General Powers) Bill,
Reported, with Amendments [Title amended]; Report to lie upon the Table, and to be printed.
Northern Junction Railway Bill,
Reported [Preamble not proved]; Report to lie upon the Table, and to be printed.
Railway Bills (Group 4),
Mr. SOAMES further reported from the Committee on Group 4 of Railway Bills; That, for the convenience of parties, the Committee had adjourned till Tuesday next, at half-past Eleven of the clock.
Report to lie upon the Table.
Barry Urban District Council Bill,
Reported, with Amendments, from the Local Legislation Committee (Section B) [Title amended]; Report to lie upon the Table, and to be printed.
Hove Corporation Bill [Lords],
Reported, with Amendments, from the Local Legislation Committee (Section B); Report to lie upon the Table, and to be printed.
MacColl's Divorce Bill [Lords],
Reported, without Amendment, from the Select Committee on Divorce Bills, with Minutes of Proceedings; Report to lie upon the Table.
Bill to be read the third time.
MacColl's Divorce Bill (Lords],
Ordered, That the Minutes of Evidence and Proceedings in the House of Lords on the Second Reading of MacColl's Divorce Fill [Lords], together with the documents deposited in the case, be returned to the House of Lords.—[The Lord Advocate.]

MESSAGE FROM THE LORDS.
That they have agreed to,—
Land Drainage Provisional Order Bill,
Burgh and Parochial Schoolmasters' Widows' Fund (Scotland) Order Confirmation Bill, without Amendment.
Mynyddislwyn Urban District Council Bill,
Manchester Royal Exchange Bill,
Humber Commercial Railway and Dock Bill,
Bishop's Waltham Water Bill, with Amendments.
Amendments to—
Isle of Wight Central Railway (Gods-hill Transfer) Bill [Lords],
Porthcawl and District Gas Bill [Lords], without Amendment.
That they have passed a Bill, intituled "An Act to confirm a Provisional Order under The Private Legislation Procedure (Scotland) Act, 1899, relating to St. Andrews Burgh Extension and Links."[St. Andrews Burgh Extension and Links Order Confirmation Bill [Lords.]
Also, a Bill, intituled, "An Act to confirm a Provisional Order made by the Board of Education under the Education Acts, 1870 to 1911, to enable the London County Council to put in force the Lands Clauses Acts." [Education Board Provisional Order Confirmation (London, No. 1) Bill [Lords.]
Also, a Bill, intituled, "An Act to confirm a Provisional Order, made by the Beard of Education under the Education Acts, 1870 to 1911, to enable the London County Council to put in force the Lands Clauses Acts," [Education Board Provisional Order Confirmation (London, No. 2) Bill [Lords.]
Also, a Bill, intituled, "An Act to confirm a Provisional Order, made by the Board of Education under the Education Acts, 1870 to 1911, to enable the London County Council to put in force the Lands Clauses Acts." [Education Board Provisional Order Confirmation (London, No. 3) Bill [Lords.]
Also, a Bill, intituled, "An Act to confirm certain Provisional Orders made by the Board of Trade under The Gas and Water Works Facilities Act, 1870, relating to Bagnalstown Gas, Dronfield Gas, Alresford Water, and Borough of Portsmouth Water." [Gas and Water Orders Confirmation (No. 1) Bill [Lords.]
Also, a Bill, intituled, "An Act to confirm certain Provisional Orders made by the Board of Trade under the Electric Lighting Acts, 1882 to 1909, relating to Baildon, Beckenham (Extension), Chipping Norton, Hazel Grove and Bramhall, Itchen, Skelton and Brotton, Southborough, Stoke-on-Trent (Extension), Truro, and Weaverham District." [Electric Lighting Provisional Orders (No. 1) Bill [Lords.]
That they have passed a Bill, intituled, "An Act to confirm certain Provisional Orders made by the Board of Trade under the Electric Lighting Acts, 1882 to 1909, relating to Barnet (Extension), Barton-on-Humber, Basingstoke, Derby (Extension), Doncaster (Extension), Ellesmere Port and Whitby, Kingswear, Leatherhead and District (Extension), Mid-Sussex, and Northwood and Ruislip (Extension)."[Electric Lighting Provisional Orders (No. 2) Bill [Lords.]
Also, a Bill, intituled, "An Act to dissolve the marriage of Charlotte Carolin with Thomas John Carolin, her now husband, and to enable her to marry again; and for other purposes." [Carolin's Divorce Bill [Lords.]
Also, a Bill, intituled, "An Act to make better provision for the protection of the health of persons employed in underground workrooms." [Underground Workrooms Bill [Lords.]
Also, a Bill, intituled, "An Act to authorise the closing of Arundel Street and Panton Square, in the city of Westminster." [Arundell Estate (Closing of Arundell Street and Panton Square) Bill [Lords.]
And, also, a Bill, intituled, "An Act to dissolve the marriage of Emily Ernestine Dooner with William Dundas Dooner, her present husband, and to enable her to marry again; and for other purposes." [Dooner's Divorce Bill [Lords.]
Arundell Estate (Closing of Arundell Street and Panton Square) Bill [Lords],
Read the first tune; and referred to the Examiners of Petitions for Private Bills.
Carolin's Divorce Bill [Lords],
Dooner's Divorce Bill [Lords],
Read the first time; to be read a second time.
Education Board Provisional Order Confirmation (London, No. 1) Bill [Lords],
Read the first time; Referred to the Examiners of Petitions for Private Bills, and to be printed. [Bill 221.]
Education Board Provisional Order Confirmation (London, No. 2) Bill [Lords],
Read the first time; Referred to the Examiners of Petitions for Private Bills, and to be printed. [Bill 222.]
Education Board Provisional Order Confirmation (London, No. 3) Bill [Lords],
Read the first time; Referred to the Examiners of Petitions for Private Bills, and to be printed. [Bill 223.]
Gas and Water Orders Confirmation (No. 1) Bill [Lords],
Read the first time; Referred to the Examiners of Petitions for Private Bills, and to be printed. [Bill 224.]
Electric Lighting Provisional Orders (No. 1) Bill [Lords],
Read the first time; Referred to the Examiners of Petitions for Private Bills, and to be printed. [Bill 225.]
Electric Lighting Provisional Orders (No. 2) Bill [Lords.]
Read the first time; Referred to the Examiners of Petitions for Private Bills, and to be printed. [Bill 226.]
St. Andrews Burgh Extension and Links Order Confirmation Bill [Lords],
Ordered (under Section 7 of The Private Legislation Procedure (Scotland) Act, 1899) to be considered To-morrow.
Railway Bills (Group 1),
Mr. CLANCY reported from the Committee on Group 1 of Railway Bills; That, for the convenience of parties, the Committee had adjourned till Wednesday next, at half-past Eleven of the clock.
Report to lie upon the Table.
Local Government Provisional Orders (No. 6) Bill,
Reported, with Amendments [Provisional Orders confirmed]; Report to lie upon the Table.
Bill, as amended, to be considered To-morrow.
Local Government Provisional Orders (No. 17) Bill,
Reported, with Amendments [Provisional Orders confirmed]; Report to lie upon the Table.
Bill, as amended, to be considered To-morrow.
Local Government Provisional Order (No. 19) Bill,
Reported, without Amendment [Provisional Order confirmed]; Report to lie upon the Table.
Bill to be read the third time Tomorrow.
Local Government Provisional Order (No. 20) Bill,
Reported, without Amendment [Provisional Order confirmed]; Report to lie upon the Table.
Bill to be read the third time To-morrow.
Metropolitan District Railway Bill [Lords],
Reported, with Amendments; Report to lie upon the Table, and to be printed.
Wimbledon and Sutton Railway Bill [Lords],
Reported, with Amendments; Report to lie upon the Table, and to be printed.
Brighton Corporation Bill [Lords],
Reported, with Amendments [Title amended]; Report to lie upon the Table, and to be printed.
Oxford University (St. Edmund Hall and Gatcombe Rectory) Bill [Lords],
Reported, without Amendment; Report to lie upon the Table, and to be printed.
Bill to be read the third time.

UNITED KINGDOM (TRADE, COMMERCE, AND CONDITION OF PEOPLE).
Return ordered, "for the United Kingdom for each of the years 1851, 1861, 1871, 1881, 1891, 1901, 1906, 1907, 1908, 1909, 1910, 1911, and 1912, showing the following particulars so far as available:—(1) Population (millions); (2) Death Rate per Thousand; (3) Birth Rate per Thousand; (4) Paupers, total average number, Indoor and Outdoor; (5) Number of Paupers per 10,000 of the Population; (6) Total Cost of Poor Relief; (7) Net Passenger Movement outwards to Places out of Europe; (8) Average Gazette Price per Quarter of Wheat, Barley, and Oats; (9) Average Price of Beef at the Metropolitan Cattle Market; (10) Total Value of the Imports of Grain, Corn, and Flour; (11) Total Value of the Imports of Meat, Alive and Dead; (12) Total Value of the Imports of Food and Drink (exclusive of Tobacco); (13) Total Value of the Imports of Food and Drink (exclusive of Tobacco) from British Colonies and Possessions; (14) Total Value of the Imports of Food and Drink (exclusive of Tobacco) per Head of Population; (15) Total Quantity of Home-grown and Imported Wheat and Wheat-flour retained for Home Consumption; (16) Consumption of Wheat and Wheat-flour per Head of Population; (17) Value of Fish of

1197
British Taking landed on the Coasts of the United Kingdom; (18) Net Imports of Merchandise (deducting Re-exports), Total Value and Value per Head of Population; (19) Exports of the Produce and Manufactures of the United Kingdom, Total Value and Value per Head of Population; (20) Imports of Bullion and Specie; (21) Exports of Bullion and Specie; (22) Income Tax, Yield of each Penny; (23) Gross Income brought under Income Tax; (24) Amount standing to Credit of Depositors M Post Office and Trustee Savings Banks; (25) Consumption of Pig Iron per Head of Population; (26) Total Registered Tonnage of British Shipping; (27) Tonnage of British Shipping entered and cleared in the Foreign Trade at Ports in the United Kingdom; (28) Tonnage of Foreign Shipping entered and cleared in the Foreign Trade at Ports in the United Kingdom; and (29) Total Clearings at the London Bankers' Clearing House (in continuation of Parliamentary Paper, No. 194, of Session 1912–13)."—[Sir Walter Essex.]

EAST INDIA (RAILWAYS).
Copy presented of Administration Report on the Railways in India for the calendar year 1912 [by Command]; to lie upon the Table.
TRADE REPORTS (ANNUAL SERIES).
Copies presented of Diplomatic and Consular Reports, Annual Series, Nos. 5118 to 5120 [by Command]; to lie upon the Table.
TREATY SERIES (No. 9, 1913).
Copy presented of Treaties, etc., between the United Kingdom and Foreign States. Accessions, Withdrawals, etc. [by Command]; to lie upon the Table.
BOARD OF EDUCATION.
Copy presented of Minute of the Board of Education, dated 26th June, 1913, modifying the Regulations for Public Elementary Schools, 1912, in England and Wales [by Command]; to lie upon the Table.
GAS AND WATER WORKS FACILITIES ACT, 1870.
Copy presented of Special Reports by the Board of. Trade under Section 4 of the Act [by Command]; to lie upon the Table.
EDUCATION (SCOTLAND).
Copy presented of Regulations for the Preliminary Education, Training, and Certification of Teachers for various Grades of Schools, 1913 [by Command]; to lie upon the Table.
TWEED FISHERIES PROSECUTIONS.
Return presented relative thereto [ordered 1st January, 1913; Sir John Iarran]; to lie upon the Table, and to be printed. [No. 174.]
COURT OF SESSION ACT, 1868.
Copy presented of Act of Sederunt to regulate the hours Of attendance of Clerks of Session at the Register House in vacation and recess [by Act]; to lie upon the Table.
SHOPS ACT, 1912.
Copies presented of Orders by the Secretary for Scotland under the Act, dated 24th June, 1913, affecting certain classes of Shops in the burghs of Inverness and Dunfermline [by Act]; to lie upon the Table.
INTERMEDIATE EDUCATION. (IRELAND).
Copy presented of the Report of the Intermediate Education Board for Ireland for the year 1912 [by Command]; to lie upon the Table.

EAST INDIA (DELHI).
Copy presented of Second Report of the Delhi Town Planning Committee regarding the North Site, with Medical Report and two maps [by Command]; to lie upon the Table.
Copy presented of Final Report of the Delhi Town Planning Committee regarding the selected Site, with plan and two maps [by Command]; to lie upon the Table.

ESTABLISHED CHURCH (WALES) BILL.
Mr. C. E. PRICEpresented a Petition from the General Assembly of the United Free Church of Scotland, Edinburgh, praying that the Established Church (Wales) Bill be passed into law.

EMPLOYMENT OF CHILDREN BILL.
Mr. PRICE: I beg to present a Petition from the General Assembly of the United Free Church of Scotland with reference to the Employment of Children Bill. [The hon. Member proceeded to read the terms of the Petition.]
Mr. SPEAKER: The hon. Member is not entitled to read the Petition. All he is entitled to do is to summarise the prayer.
Mr. PRICE: They request that the age of boys entitled to sell on the streets should be raised from seventeen to eighteen, and of girls from eighteen to twenty-one.

ORAL ANSWERS TO QUESTIONS.

  Egypt (General Assembly).
  1. Mr. DILLONasked the Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs whether it is Proposed by a Khedival decree to abolish the General Assembly in Egypt; and whether, before he approves of any constitutional changes in Egypt, the House of Commons will be given an opportunity of considering the proposed changes?
  The SECRETARY of STATE for FOREIGN AFFAIRS (Sir Edward Grey): Certain modifications of the organic and electoral laws are to be introduced. They include the fusion of the General Assembly and Legislative Council, but their object is to enable the inhabitants of Egypt to take a more practical interest in their own affairs, and to develop existing Egyptian representative institutions. I have approved these modifications and developments, which have been considered and recommended by the Egyptian Government and their expert advisers together with His Majesty's Agent and Consul-General. I propose shortly to lay before the House of Commons Papers containing full information on the changes made, but I cannot make them dependent upon discussion in the House taking place.
  Mr. DILLON: Will not the right hon. Gentleman consider the desirability of laying these Papers immediately, so that nothing may be done to lessen the limited liberties of the Egyptian people without our knowledge?
  Sir E. GREY: It is not to lessen the liberties, but to increase them. With re-
  1200
  gard to the laying of Papers, I have had Papers already prepared, and I am only waiting for the receipt of the final text of the law, in which some modifications have been made, to lay them. I hope to lay them, at any rate, by the middle of next month, roughly speaking, in a fortnight.
  Captain CRAIG: Will the right hon. Gentleman take the same interest in the liberties of the people of Ulster?

  British Insurance Offices (Foreign Risks).
  Mr. KINGasked the Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs whether he is aware of the number of insurances effected by foreigners in British insurance offices; whether he has noted recent discussions at home and abroad concerning dangers to policies on foreign risks in the event of European hostilities and the tendency growing out of such discussions to insure elsewhere risks formerly covered in British offices; and whether he is considering such changes in international relations as would counteract this tendency with a view to proposals being brought before the next Hague Conference?
  Sir E. GREY: I have seen newspaper references to this subject, but I am not aware that there is, to any appreciable extent, a growing tendency to insure elsewhere risks formerly covered in British offices. There appears to be no occasion for His Majesty's Government bringing proposals before a Conference at The Hague. I fail to understand how a tendency such as my hon. Friend describes even if it existed, would be affected by a change in our international relations.
  Mr. KING: Will the right hon. Gentleman inquire through our Consuls whether there is such a tendency to remove the insurance risks from this country to others? If he got the facts, might he not then be in a position to do something and take up a strong position?
  Sir E. GREY: I do not see what can be done or how a strong position is going to affect the question of insurance.

  San Thomé and Principé.
  Mr. JOWETTasked the Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs how many ships, and of what carrying capacity for labourers, clear the ports of San Thomé and Principé for Angola in the year?
  Sir E. GREY: I have no information on the subject.

  Outrages (Ireland).
  Captain CRAIGasked the Chief Secretary for Ireland whether he has been informed of a cattle-drive which took place on the 11th instant, near Edenderry, in King's County; whether thirty head of cattle and thirty sheep were driven off some grazing lands for a considerable distance; whether any arrests have been made or any persons made amenable for this outrage; and what steps are being taken to protect the owners of the cattle on this land from further outrage?
  The CHIEF SECRETARY for IRELAND (Mr. Birrell): The police authorities inform me that thirty-one head of cattle and thirty sheep were driven off a farm near Edenderry on the night of the 11th instant. Most of the cattle were found uninjured next morning on the public road close to the farm. So far the police have not obtained sufficient evidence to justify any arrests. Frequent patrols visit the farm with a view to preventing a repetition of the occurrence.
  Mr. NEWMANasked the Chief Secretary whether he is aware that, owing to the intolerance displayed by a section of the population of Cork City, street preachers and members of the Salvation Army are compelled to hold their services under police protection; and whether he has any information as to the causes or origin of the methods of intimidation now practised?
  Mr. BIRRELL: I am informed that a local body of street preachers and the Salvation Army hold open air meetings in Cork without molestation every Sunday afternoon. Whenever open-air services are held it is usual to have some police in the vicinity.
  Mr. NEWMANasked the Chief Secretary whether he is aware that on the 15th instant the street corners of the town of Millstreet, county Cork, were painted by means of a tar brush with an appeal to boycott England's Army, and printed notices also extensively posted calling on young men not to join the British Army and Navy; and whether, in view of the fact that no special efforts have been made for some years past to attract young men to either Service, he will have inquiries made as to the reason for the above-mentioned course being adopted?
  Mr. BIRRELL: The police inform me that a notice advising young men not to
  1202
  join the Army or Navy or police was painted with a tar brush in Millstreet on the 15th instant, and that printed notices to the same effect were posted round the town. Such notices have, from time to time, been posted in the district and are believed to be the work of a few people of extreme views.
  Mr. NEWMAN: Is it a fact that the very same notices have been posted round Dublin?
  Mr. BIRRELL: Everyone knows that such notices, unfortunately, do appear in Cork and Dublin and other places, but wise people take no notice of them?
  Captain CRAIG: Is it not a fact that not only wise people take no notice of them, but that fools close their eyes to them?
  Mr. NEWMANasked the Chief Secretary whether he is aware that on the 19th instant, on the occasion of a foreign missionary demonstration held at the Wesley Chapel, in Cork, the congregation were prevented from leaving the church owing to the presence of a hostile crowd, which had been congregated in the street, and were detained until the arrival of a force of constabulary; whether it was necessary for the constabulary to charge the crowd before the congregation could be conveyed from the building; and whether any arrests have been made?
  Captain CRAIGasked the Chief Secretary if his attention has been called to an attack threatened by a hostile crowd of over 1,000 Roman Catholics on members of the Methodist Conference now in session at Cork, and their friends, during a missionary meeting held in the Wesley Chapel, Cork, on Wednesday evening, the 19th June; if he is aware that the missionary meeting in the Wesley Chapel was repeatedly interrupted during the addresses of the president and others, and while hymns were being sung if crowds outside the windows shouted and sung a rebel song called "A Nation Once Again"; and that a large force of police had to be requisitioned to give protection to the persons who attended the missionary meeting, and if many of those who attended had to escape by a side door and get away by back streets; and if he will take all necessary steps to have the members of the Methodist Conference and all other Protestant assemblies accorded adequate protection to carry on their duties in future?
  Mr. BIRRELL: The police inform me that open-air meetings were held by Methodist preachers in Cork on the 16th, 17th, and 18th instant. As their addresses met with marked disapproval they decided to discontinue meetings in the street. This decision was not generally known and a number of people gathered on the 19th expecting a meeting, and when none was held moved to the Wesley Chapel, where service was going on. A large and rather rough crowd soon collected and began to sing and shout. A head constable who was present with a few police thought it wise to ask the congregation to remain for a few minutes in the chapel until he got some more men. He then moved back the crowd and the congregation left without interference. There was no charge nor was there any misconduct on the part of the crowd necessitating arrests. There has been no repetition of this disorder.
  Mr. SWIFT MacNEILL: Is the right hon. Gentleman aware that Wesley and his followers were never molested in the whole history of Ireland by Irish Catholics?
  Mr. CHARLES CRAIGasked how many shooting outrages there have been in county Galway since 1st January last?
  Mr. BIRRELL: The Inspector-General informs me that there were nine shooting outrages in county Galway since 1st January last.

  School Teachers and Public Demonstrations (Ireland).
  Captain CRAIGasked the Chief Secretary for Ireland whether, at a public demonstration of the Ancient Order of Hibernians, in Skibbereen, on Sunday, the 18th May last, four local national school teachers took part in the proceedings wearing the Ancient Order of Hibernians badges; whether the Commissioners of National Education are prepared to sanction this action of the teachers in a district where a number of the inhabitants, whose children attend national schools, are entirely opposed to the Ancient Order of Hibernians; and what steps will be taken to prevent these teachers from similar party displays in future?
  Mr. BIRRELL: The Commissioners of National Education have no information as regards this matter, but inquiry is being made through their local inspector.

  Kingstown (Visit of Home Fleet).
  Captain CRAIGasked upon what date the Lord Lieutenant received the official information of the visit of the Home Fleet to Kingstown, and upon what date the information was conveyed from the Lord Lieutenant to the Kingstown Urban Council?
  The following questions also stood upon the Paper:—
  Mr. KERR-SMILEYasked the Chief Secretary for Ireland (1) whether the Lord Lieutenant intimated to the Lord Mayor of Dublin the intention of the Home Fleet to visit Kingstown; and, if so, what answer was returned by the Lord Mayor to the Lord Lieutenant's communication; and (2) upon what date the Lord Lieutenant received the official information of the visit of the Home Fleet to Kingstown; and upon what date the information was conveyed from the Lord Lieutenant to the Kingstown Urban Council?
  Mr. RONALD M'NEILLasked (1) upon what date the Lord Lieutenant received the official information of the visit of the Home Fleet to Kingstown; and upon what date the information was conveyed from the Lord Lieutenant to the Kingstown Urban Council; and (2) whether the Lord Lieutenant intimated to the Lord Mayor of Dublin the intention of the Home Fleet to visit Kingstown; and, if so, what answer was returned by the Lord Mayor to the Lord Lieutenant's communication?
  Mr. GEORGE TERRELLasked (1) whether the Lord Lieutenant intimated to the Lord Mayor of Dublin the intention of the Home Fleet to visit Kingstown; and, if so, what answer was returned by the Lord Mayor to the Lord Lieutenant's communication; and (2) upon what date the Lord Lieutenant received the official information of the visit of the Home Fleet to Kingstown; and upon what date the information was conveyed from the Lord Lieutenant to the Kingstown Urban Council?
  Mr. BIRRELL: I will answer all these questions together. No communication was made by the Lord Lieutenant to the Lord Mayor, and no answer was therefore returned. During the third week in May the Lord Lieutenant received an official intimation of the intended visit of the Fleet to Kingstown. It has never been

  1205
  the practice for the Lord Lieutenant to inform local authorities regarding such visits, and no such communication was made in the present instance. Subsequently, however, in order that there might be no uncertainty regarding the visit of the Fleet, the Lord Lieutenant sent a telegram to the clerk of the Kingstown Urban Council informing him that the Fleet would arrive on the. 13th of June, the 12th having been the date originally fixed and published in the newspapers.
  Captain CRAIG: Can the right hon. Gentleman tell us when that telegram was sent off by the Lord Lieutenant?
  Mr. BIRRELL: No, Sir. I do not know, but I can assure the hon. and gallant Gentleman that no inconveniece arose to the Kingstown authorities from it. They knew all about it, and they were able to entertain the Fleet with an entertainment and ball, which gave universal satisfaction and for which they received the thanks of the admiral.
  Mr. MacVEAGH: Another mare's nest!

  Tristan d'Acunha.
  Major ANSTRUTHER-GRAYasked the Secretary of State for the Colonies whether he can state the date of the last communication with the Island of Tristan d'Acunha; and when he expects to receive further intelligence?
  Mr. GULLAND (Lord of the Treasury): The last information received in the Colonial Office is that all was well on Tristan on 12th November. This news arrived on 28th January. I cannot say when another mail will arrive.

  Ex-Soldiers and Sailors (Civil Service).
  Mr. CASSELasked the Prime Minister whether he has received any protest from ex-soldiers and ex-sailors who have subsequently obtained established positions in the Civil Service against the rule by which service with the Colours is not allowed to count for pension on retirement; and whether he proposes to remedy this state of affairs by Order in Council or otherwise?
  The PRIME MINISTER (Mr. Asquith): Representations on this subject were fully considered in the course of last year. The matter is governed by Statute and I regret to be unable to propose any alteration of the law in this respect.

  Parliament Act (Suggested Amendments to Bills).
  Mr. HEWINSasked the Prime Minister whether, in order to secure that the question whether any suggested Amendments to Bills for which the advantage of the Parliament Act is to be claimed should be decided by an impartial authority instead of by the Government, he will consider favourably a proposal that an impartial Committee be empowered to select the suggested Amendments which are to be considered by this House?
  The PRIME MINISTER: Hear that the suggestion of the hon. Member is hardly practicable.

  Historical Monuments (Scotland).
  Mr. JAMES HOGGEasked the hon. Member for St. George's-in-the-East, as representing the First Commissioner of Works, whether he has received an important and representative memorial from the various architectural associations of Scotland, praying him to constitute an independent Board to deal with Scottish national historical monuments; whether he has also received a similar request from the Scottish Ecclesiological Society; and whether he intends to accede to these requests?
  Mr. WEDGWOOD BENN (Lord of the Treasury): The First Commissioner has received the memorials to which my hon. Friend refers, and he intends to form a separate Board for Scotland.

  Post Office Contracts (Fair-Wages Clause).
  Mr. O'GRADYasked the Postmaster-General whether he is aware that the firm of Samuel Butler and Company, Albion Works, Stanningley, near Leeds, only pays the builders' labourers employed in the erection of the new telephone exchange, Basinghall Street, Leeds, 5d. per hour, while the local Conciliation Board decision is (such decision being rendered 1st May, 1913), that the wages for such labour shall be 7d. per hour; and whether inquiries will be made into the case and, if the facts are as stated, steps will be taken to compel the firm in question to pay the correct rate and any back moneys that would be owing the builders' labourers employed on the building since the commencement?
  Mr. WEDGWOOD BENN: The First Commissioner has received no complaints as to the rate of wages being paid to

  1207
  builders' labourers employed on the Leeds Telephone Exchange, but will cause inquiry to be made into the case. If the facts are as stated by the hon. Member, the First Commissioner will take the necessary steps to secure compliance with the Fair-Wages Clauses of the contract.

  Revising Barristers as Parliamentary Candidates (Ireland).
  Captain CRAIGasked whether those members of the Bar who stood as Liberal or Nationalist candidates at the last General Election and, as revising barristers, revised the voters' lists in South Dublin county and in other constituencies at the last revision, are to be reappointed for the coming revision; and, if so, will they be appointed for the same constituencies as they then revised?
  Mr. BIRRELL: When the time comes for making these appointments the qualifications of the several candidates and the circumstances of the various Parliamentary Divisions will be carefully considered.
  Captain CRAIG: Will it be laid on the Table of the House?
  Mr. BIRRELL: I do not know about that. I shall have to consider them in about ten days' time. If the hon. and gallant Gentleman will repeat the question I will tell him what we have done.

  County Courts (Ireland).
  Mr. C. CRAIGasked the Chief Secretary whether, in view of the recommendation of the County Court judges of Ireland, he will appoint a Commission of Inquiry into the working of the Irish County Courts, including the sheriff's officer, with the object of forming a basis for future legislation on the subject?
  Mr. BIRRELL: I do not think that the recommendations of the County Court judges are such as to necessitate the appointment of a Commission to inquire into the working of the Irish County Courts.

  Public Trustee (Ireland).
  Sir THOMAS ESMONDEasked the Chief Secretary if he is aware that the appointing of the existing Public Trustee in Ireland as Public Trustee for general purposes need make no difference to his already established relations with the Consolidated Fund; and if, in the circumstances, he will proceed with his promised Bill to give Ireland the same advantages as are enjoyed in England in this respect?
  Mr. BIRRELL: I am sorry to say the matter is not so simple as the hon Member appears to think. There are difficulties in the way of extending the guarantee on the Consolidated Fund which make it impossible for me to hope to get the Bill through as an agreed measure during the present Session.

  Erection of Pier (Blackwater).
  Sir T. ESMONDEasked the Chief Secretary if he is aware that the Wexford County Council have voted £1,000, in accordance with the arrangement of 1911, for the erection of a pier at Blackwater in that county; and when the balance of the estimated cost of the pier will be forthcoming?
  Mr. BIRRELL: I am aware that the Wexford County Council have voted a sum of £1,000 towards the construction of a pier at Blackwater. In the present state of their funds the Department of Agriculture are unable to offer a contribution exceeding £350 towards the project, and they are advised that no work of utility could be constructed at the place in question for £1,350.
  Sir T. ESMONDE: Does that mean that no more will be forthcoming?
  Mr. BIRRELL: Unless more money can be obtained from the county council.

  Land Purchase (Ireland).
  Captain CRAIGasked the Chief Secretary whether he is aware that when the Congested Districts Board was in negotiation for the purchase of the O'Callaghan Westropp estate one of its officials, Mr. Henry Doran, expressly stated to Colonel O'Callaghan Westropp that all his staff would be employed in the management of the estate on as good terms as they had from him until the untenanted land would be divided; that Robert Bell, of Knocklaur, Bodyke, county Clare, was one of such employés so transferred; that he had been a trusted herd on the estate continuously for fifteen years; that Mr. Francis S. Sheridan, one of the Board's officials, wrote, under date the 18th September, 1912, to Messrs. Maunsell, Darley, and Orpen, of 18, St. Stephen's Green, North Dublin, that the Board could not give Robert Bell a holding as he was not a herd; that the Board, contrary to their representative's promise, deprived Robert Bell of his position and appointed a herd in his place; that he has since been served with an ejectment notice by the

  1209
  Board for no fault except that he is a loyalist and is the subject of persecution by a Nationalist named Patrick Wall, of Knockbrack, and a branch of the United Irish League; and whether, under these circumstances, he will recall the ejectment notice and allot him a holding?
  Mr. MALCOLMasked the Chief Secretary (1) whether he is aware that, after fourteen years' service as a herd on the O'Callaghan Westropp estate, Robert Bell has been dismissed, for no fault, by the Congested Districts Board, and that his place has been filled by John Cudmore, who is a cousin of one of the inspectors to the Board; and whether such action has the sanction and approval of the President of the Board; and (2) whether he will consent to postpone the ejectment of Robert Bell, of Knocklaur, Bodyke, county Clare, until such time as he has put the full facts leading up to the decision of the Congested Districts Board in the possession of this House?
  Mr. BIRRELL: Mr. Doran informs me that he did not make the statement attributed to him, but he did say to Colonel Westropp that it was the custom of the Congested Districts Board to continue the employment of bailiffs and other persons who had been employed on an estate purchased by them while their services were required in connection with the preparation of the estate for resale. The letter referred to was sent to the solicitors named on the 18th September as stated, but the Board subsequently decided to admit Bell's claim as a herd under Section 53 of the Act of 1909, and offered him a farm elsewhere in the county which he refused. The Board have appointed a man named John Cudmore to take charge of one of the bogs on the estate, a duty formerly performed by Bell, but they are not aware that Cudmore is related to any official of the Board. Bell's appointment was terminated because his services are no longer required on the estate, and the Board see no reason for delaying the proceedings for tasking possession of the house and land which he occupied. It would seem unreasonable that a landlord should sell his land to the Board for the relief of congestion, which is great in the neighbourhood, and expect them to provide for his herd when he could have rewarded the faithful service of the man by making him either a "present" or a "future" tenant before selling his estate. The alleged attitude of the League had nothing what-
  1210
  ever to do with the action of the Congested Districts Board.
  Mr. NEWMANasked the Prime Minister whether he can give a date for the introduction of the Land Purchase (Ireland) Bill; and whether it is intended to send the Bill for consideration by a Standing Committee after it has been read a second time?
  The PRIME MINISTER: The answer to the first part of the question is in the negative. I cannot make any statement as to further stages until after the Bill has been introduced.

  NATIONAL INSURANCE ACT.

    UNEMPLOYMENT BENEFIT.
    Mr. ROWLANDSasked the President of the Board of Trade whether he has received complaint from the Dartford and District Trades Council in regard to the following cases: Mr. J. A. Fraser on 19th May and Mr. W. T. M. Trust on 20th May, who, on applying to the Gravesend Labour Exchange, were refused information as to the names of the firms to which they were referred for employment, and on account of their declining to go because no information was given their society were informed that their unemployed benefit was suspended from the above dates, and subsequently Fraser, again being unemployed, applied to the Exchange on 12th June, when a similar case arose; whether he will have the facts of these cases thoroughly inquired into; whether information will in future be given to applicants so that they know whether, as trade union men, it is any use their applying; and whether he will see that in future refusal to go on trade union grounds will not mean suspension from benefit?
    The PARLIAMENTARY SECRETARY to the BOARD of TRADE (Mr. Robertson): I received a letter on Tuesday from the Dartford and District Trades Council on this subject. I understand that the workmen in question declined to consider any employment in the district in which it was offered them, and that, therefore, no useful purpose would have been served by furnishing them with the names of particular employers in that district. A workman is, of course, always informed of an employer's name and of the conditions of employment offered before he is sent to a distance. The workmen referred to are members of an association with which the

    1211
    Board of Trade have made an arrangement under Section 105 of the National Insurance Act, and ample machinery is provided for deciding any differences that may arise under that arrangement as to the qualification of any member of the association to receive unemployment benefit under the Act. Up to the present the association have not taken any steps to put this machinery in motion in the present case, but I will see that their attention is again called to the matter. As regards the last part of my hon. Friend's question, the workman is protected by the proviso to Section 86 of the Act, of which I am sending my hon. Friend a copy.
    Mr. ROWLANDS: Is not the statement of the men and their charge against the Department that they did not receive this information, and therefore they could not judge at once whether the houses come within the trade union rule, and that is what they want the inquiry about?
    Mr ROBERTSON: There is a clear conflict of statement. I will go carefully into the matter.

    LEADENHALL PRESS EMPLOYÉS.
    Mr. F. HALLasked the Secretary to the Treasury if his attention has been called to the case of the employés of the Leadenhall Press, Limited, who, under the National Insurance Act, 1911, have received between 18th June, 1912, and 31st March, 1913, benefits of a total value of £9 10s. 4d. in return for contributions made by and on their behalf of £147 8s. 9d., or a proportion of about ½d. to 9d.; and whether, in this and similar cases, the employed contributors affected will be noted with a view to their receiving additional benefits to correspond more adequately with the payments made by them?
    The FINANCIAL to the TREASURY (Mr. Masterman): I have no information as to the payments made to employés of particular companies. As the National Insurance Act did not come into operation till 15th July, 1912, and payments only commenced on 13th January, the period mentioned is obviously incorrect, and it is not stated how the "total value" of the benefits has been estimated. In any case payments to, and in respect of, less than 200 persons (the majority probably of such an age that the full demands of sickness and sick pay have not yet appeared) over a period of about
    1212
    nine months, which includes the non-recurring six months waiting periods for benefits, obviously offer no general inferences of importance; and certainly do not require to be seriously considered as against the actuarial estimates, and the actual experience, for the whole country. With regard to the latter part of the question I would point out that the Act already provides that societies whose members draw less than the estimated sums in benefit shall devote the saving to giving additional benefits to their members or reducing their contributions.
    Mr. F. HALL: Is the right hon. Gentleman aware that the actual premiums which have been paid are very much more than the payments received in benefits?
    Mr. MASTERMAN: If you take persons through the whole of their lives, the premiums charged from sixteen to seventy years of age might in many cases be greater than the amount received in benefits, and, of course, you might find a person who had had no sickness at all.
    Mr. F. HALL: Is there anything in the amending Bill for doing away with what to all intents and purposes is an anomaly, seeing that some people have to pay more in premiums than they receive in benefits?
    Mr. MASTERMAN: People should be happy if they have been lucky enough to be well.
    Mr. F. HALL rose——
    Mr. SPEAKER: The hon. Member cannot argue this matter out by question and answer.

    CHEMISTS' ACCOUNTS.
    Mr. ALDENasked the Secretary to the Treasury whether he is aware that a number of chemists in certain counties have not yet been paid for the first quarter's working of the National Insurance Act, and that many of these men are unable to give credit for long periods owing to the fact that they themselves have to pay cash to the wholesale druggists; and whether, under the circumstances, he will arrange that these accounts shall be paid as speedily as possible?
    Mr. MASTERMAN: No, Sir. As I have previously pointed out, the regulations which are incorporated in the agreements entered into by the chemists provide for periodical advances, although a final settlement can only be made at the end

    1213
    of the medical year. Advances have already been made, in some cases up to 75 per cent. of the accounts rendered up to the end of last quarter, and I am not aware of any case in which payments have not been made where accounts have been rendered.

    AMENDING BILL.
    Mr. C. BATHURSTasked if it is proposed in the National Insurance Act (1911) Amendment Bill to make provision for the inclusion in medical benefit of the nursing of insured persons, or otherwise to take steps to provide such persons with efficient nursing and prevent the threatened extinction through lack of financial support of county and district nursing associations?
    Mr. MASTERMAN: No, Sir. Provision is already made under Section 21 of the principal Act whereby approved societies and insurance committees may subscribe for the support of district nurses for the purpose of visiting and nursing insured persons, but there has not yet been sufficent experience of the working of the Act to show the full effect of this provision or whether any amendment is needed.
    Mr. C. BATHURSTasked the Chancellor of the Exchequer whether, in pursuance of the recent Report of the Departmental Committee appointed to consider the conditions imposed by Section 15 (5) (3) of the National Insurance Act, there has been introduced into the amending Bill of the present Session a provision authorising a person, firm, or body corporate who or which has entered into arrangements with an insurance committee for the dispensing of medicines for insured persons to employ in such dispensing, not necessarily under the supervision of a registered pharmacist, any person who shall have satisfied such conditions as may be prescribed by the Privy Council for that purpose; and, if not, whether he will accept an Amendment to that effect?
    Mr. MASTERMAN: The answer to the first part of the the question is in the negative. The Report of the Committee is at present under consideration, and I am not yet in a position to state what action will be taken upon it.

    DEPOSIT CONTRIBUTORS.
    Mr. MacCALLUM SCOTTasked the Secretary to the Treasury whether, in the case of a deposit contributor who was over sixty-five when he entered insurance and who is therefore not entitled to claim
    1214
    medical benefit, the Commissioners propose to make any arrangement with regard to the balance, if any, standing to his credit when he reaches the age of seventy; whether they will make any contribution towards the cost of medical attendance; or whether they will allow him to draw out four-sevenths of the balance, as he might do if he had emigrated or as his nominee might do on his death?
    Mr. MASTERMAN: A deposit contributor who was over sixty-five on 15th July, 1912, is entitled to such benefits as the insurance committee may determine. Any balance standing to a contributor's credit when he reaches the age of seventy will in the ordinary course remain in the Post Office Fund until his death, but committees are in most cases allowing contributors who enter insurance at the age of sixty-nine and upwards to draw sickness benefit after they reach the age of seventy.
    Mr. FREDERICK HALL (Dulwich): Does the gross amount stand to the man's credit, or are deductions made for management?
    Mr. MASTERMAN: I am not quite sure, but I think the new Bill deals with that.

    MATERNITY BENEFIT.
    Mr. MacCALLUM SCOTTasked the Secretary to the Treasury whether, in the case of an insured English woman who is married to an alien, the full Government Grant is made towards maternity benefit if her husband is not also insured and she is entitled to receive the full maternity benefit, but if her husband is also insured no Government Grant is made towards maternity benefit and her husband is only entitled to receive a, reduced maternity benefit in respect of her confinement; and, if this be so, whether he will consider the propriety of amending this in the forthcoming Bill?
    Mr. MASTERMAN: The woman referred to would, under the Naturalisation Act, 1870, be an alien, so that there would be no difference as to the payment of the Government Grant in the two cases referred to by my hon. Friend.
    Mr. MacCALLUM SCOTT: Is it proposed to deal with this subject in the new Bill?
    Mr. MASTERMAN: I do not think so.
    Mr. MacCALLUM SCOTT: Is it not the case that provision has been made in the Act that these women should not be treated as aliens, and is not a similar provision made in the Old Age Pensions Act?
    Mr. MASTERMAN: I do not think that is the case.
    Mr. MacCALLUM SCOTT: Is it the case in the Old Age Pensions Act?
    Mr. MASTERMAN: I cannot say.

    GOVERNMENT CONTRACTS.
    Mr. MacCALLUM SCOTTasked the Secretary to the Treasury if the arbitration in a somewhat similar case to certain maintenance contracts made by the Board of Works with contractors in Glasgow has yet been concluded; and if he can now say whether the Treasury has considered the effect of the National Insurance Act upon such contracts and the question of sanctioning such variation of the terms of the contract as the equities of the case may demand?
    Mr. MASTERMAN: I fear I cannot at present add anything to the answer which I gave to my hon. Friend on the 1st April last. The arbitration is not yet concluded.

    Committee of Imperial Defence.
    Mr. F. HALLasked the Prime Minister to which Colonial Governments he has given an invitation to appoint a permanent representative on the Committee of Imperial Defence; how many of the Colonies have agreed to do this; and what will be the ultimate proportion of Colonial to British Members of the Committee when the arrangement for Colonial representation is completed?
    The PRIME MINISTER: Full information with regard to the invitation is given in the Parliamentary Paper, Cd. 6560, and I cannot add anything to my reply to a question on the subject on 1st April last, except that Colonel Allen has now returned to New Zealand. As regards the last part of the question, it is impossible to arrive at any proportion, as the number of Members invited to attend meetings of the Committee of Imperial Defence varies according to the nature of the subjects to be discussed.

    Housing (Rural Districts).
    Mr. NEWMANasked the Prime Minister whether the Government have under consideration a scheme to provide
    1216
    adequate housing in rural districts, and to provide assistance from national funds to small holders; whether their policy is based on any recommendations made by the secret and unofficial Committee that, since July of last year, has been investigating rural problems; and whether and when any Report of this Committee will be made available for study by Members?
    The PRIME MINISTER: The Government, are considering the housing question in all its aspects, and any proposals they may make will be made on their own responsibility. As I have already stated, 1 understand a Report will be published by the Committee referred to, but I am unable to say when.

    Customs Waterguard (Allowances).
    Mr. O'GRADYasked the Secretary to the Treasury whether he is now in a position to state when the Report of the Committee appointed to inquire into the question of allowances for the Customs waterguard will be published?
    Mr. MASTERMAN: The Board of Customs and Excise hope to issue the new Regulations dealing with overtime and Sunday pay for the waterguard staff in the course of a week.

    Slave-trading Practices (West Africa).
    Mr. FERENSasked the First Lord of the Admiralty whether the commander of His Majesty's ship "Dwarf" has within the last two years called the attention of His Majesty's Government to slave-trading practices in West Africa; and, if so, will he lay such Papers before the House of Commons at an early date?
    The UNDER-SECRETARY of STATE for FOREIGN AFFAIRS (Mr. Acland): The commander of His Majesty's ship "Dwarf" has called attention to some suspicious cases, which have been brought, to the notice of the Foreign Office. We are inquiring into the matter, and it would be premature to lay Papers at present.
    Mr. FERENSasked the First Lord of the Admiralty whether his attention has been drawn to a report submitted to the Foreign Office alleging slave trade of grave proportions between a port south of Benguella and San Thom6; and, if so, whether he will give instructions to the commander of His Majesty's ship "Dwarf," or other suitable vessel, to pay more frequent visits to those regions?
    Mr. ACLAND: The only definite allegations in the report to which the hon. Member presumably refers relate to a period before recruiting in Angola, and export of labourers thence was stopped. It is known that at the time abuses did occur. The efforts of His Majesty's Government were directed to getting the Portuguese Government to put a stop to these in Angola. This we believe has been done, and statements as to what went on previously are irrelevant to the state of things that now exist, and it is most unfair to quote them as evidence that these particular abuses continue. If recent evidence to the contrary is produced it would of course be considered.

  ROYAL NAVY.

    ACTION IN PERSIAN GULF.
    Lord CHARLES BERESFORDasked the First Lord of the Admiralty whether Frederick George Leatham, seaman, of His Majesty's Ship "Philomel," who was killed in action up the Persian Gulf, left a widow, or father, or mother who were dependent upon him; if so, what pensions have been granted; and whether he has received satisfactory accounts of the wounded men?
    The PARLIAMENTARY SECRETARY to the ADMIRALTY (Dr. Macnamara): So far as my information goes, the answer to the first part of the question is in the negative. No reports have been received as to the condition of the wounded.

    SHIPS' STEWARDS (WAGES).
    Lord C. BERESFORDasked the First Lord of the Admiralty whether he is aware that, although the pay circular of December, 1912, made the pay of 6s. a day to ships' stewards attainable after twelve years, and benefited fifty-seven ships' stewards between twelve and fifteen years' seniority, the twelve senior ships' stewards who have served fifteen years in that rating, and were already in the possession of 6s. a day pay, received no increase; and whether the Board of Admiralty can see their way to grant these twelve senior ships' stewards an increase of 1s. a day in their pay?
    Dr. MACNAMARA: The facts are as stated with regard to any ships' stewards who were already drawing the 6s. rate when the pay of the class was revised last December. As stated in my reply to the Noble Lord on the 2nd instant, it is not proposed to make any further change. I
    1218
    may add that a ship's steward entered before 1st January, 1911, is entitled to the rate of 7s. a day on completion of twenty years' service in that rating.

    GOUROCK TORPEDO WORKS (WAGES).
    Mr. BARNESasked the First Lord of the Admiralty whether he is aware that at the Gourock Torpedo Works engineers, instrument makers, coppersmiths, braziers, and sheet-metal workers are being started at a wage below the district rate of 38s. 3d. per week; and whether he will make inquiries into the matter and see that the proper rate is paid?
    Dr. MACNAMARA: The following changes will take place, dating as from 1st June: The starting rate of mechanics will be raised from 37s. to 38s. a week. The mean rate for skilled labourers will be raised from 25s. to 26s. The labourers' rate will be raised from 22s. to 23s.

    REGULATIONS AS TO PROMOTION.
    Mr. DOUGLAS HALLasked the First Lord of the Admiralty whether can now see his way to make regulations which would enable blacksmiths, coopers, plumbers, and painters with the necessary qualifications to attain the rank of chief petty officer?
    Dr. MACNAMARA: As stated in reply to the Noble Lord the Member for Portsmouth on 2nd June, the conditions of service of the ratings mentioned were carefully considered at the recent revision, and it is not proposed to introduce further changes in them.

  AIRCRAFT.

    AEROPLANE ACCIDENTS.
    Mr. FELLasked the First Lord of the Admiralty if his attention has been called to the accidents which have taken place with aeroplanes which have met with accidents and have been repaired and which are afterwards unsound; if the Admiralty scrap aeroplanes which have been badly damaged or repair them; and, if so, if care is taken that absolutely new material is put into them?
    Dr. MACNAMARA: The Board of Admiralty are, through their advisers, in the closest touch with all the information that can be obtained in connection with accidents that have taken place with aeroplanes. If a machine is so badly damaged

    1219
    that it is beyond repair, it is scrapped. If it is so damaged that complete rebuilding is necessary, care is taken that the machine is turned out almost as good as new. A good supply of spare parts is provided for making small repairs. As far as possible new material is always used.
    Mr. FELL: In view of the statement that where a machine has to be rebuilt care is taken that it is turned out almost as good as new, does the right hon. Gentleman consider that it is safe to go up in?
    Dr. MACNAMARA: I should say that it would be absolutely as safe as a new machine.

    Infant Mortality (England and Wales).
    Mr. ALDENasked the President of the Local Government Board to state the latest figures as regards infant mortality in England and Wales; and also the highest and lowest infant mortality rates for towns of over 50,000; and whether he is able to furnish the House with figures showing the effect of recent legislation and administration upon the rate of infant mortality?
    The PRESIDENT of the LOCAL GOVERNMENT BOARD (Mr. Burns): The infant mortality rate in England and Wales in 1912 was 95 per 1,000 births. As regards the second part of the question, I will send my hon. Friend the figures as regards a number of towns. I am afraid it is not practicable to apportion in any exact manner the effect of recent changes in legislation or adminstration on the infant mortality rate, but as my hon. Friend is aware, this rate has exhibited a marked tendency to fall during the last eight years. I may add that a Report on the subject of infant mortality in now being prepared by the medical officer of the Local Government Board, and that I hope shortly to present this.
    Mr. WEDGWOOD: Does my right hon. Friend think that this reduction in mortality is due to inspectors or to a change in public opinion?
    Mr. BURNS: I believe it is due to a variety of causes.
    Mr. OUTHWAITE: Is it not a fact that infant mortality is determined by the wage conditions in particular localities, and has there been any legislation to meet that?
    Mr. BURNS: I think the remarkable diminution in infant mortality during the last ten years is due to the fact that the attention of local authorities, doctors, and public opinion generally, has concentrated upon many causes which previously were ignored with regard to infant feeding after birth, and the condition of the mother before the child was born.

    Demand Notes for Voluntary Rate (Ashton-in-Makerfield).
    Mr. KINGhad the following question on the Notice Paper: To ask the President of the Local Government Board whether his attention has been called to the demand notes for a voluntary rate of 8d. in the pound now being sent out by the collector of rates from the overseers' office of the township of Ashton-in-Makerfield; whether he is aware that demand notes so sent out are calculated to mislead ratepayers to believe that the amounts demanded therein have been officially levied; and whether he will take immediate action to have the demand notes issued at Ashton-in-Makerfield withdrawn and the amounts already collected returned to the ratepayers?
    I shall postpone this question until Monday, on the understanding that it is to be taken up actively.

    Parish Council Election (Aldbourne).
    Lord H. CAVENDISH-BENTINCKasked the President of the Local Government Board whether he is aware that, at a parish meeting held at Aldbourne in connection with the recent parish council elections, the chairman ruled that the nomination of Mrs. Bartrum was invalid on the ground that she was not an occupier or resident in the parish; and, seeing that the ruling of the chairman for the disqualification of Mrs. Bartrum is not in accordance with the rules laid down by the Local Government Board, will he say what action he proposes to take?
    Mr. BURNS: My attention has been called to this case, but I am not empowered to take any action with respect to it. I am advised that, in the circumstances, the decision of the chairman could only be questioned by means of an election petition, and that the time within which such a petition could be presented has now passed.

    Butlocks Heath School Dispute.
    Captain FABERasked the President to the Board of Education whether the

    1221
    Buttocks Heath school dispute is now settled, and, if not, whether he will now have an inquiry made into the case with a view to a satisfactory settlement; whether any compensation has been made to Miss Watts, and, if so, what; and whether she has obtained another post as schoolmistress?
    Mr. PEASE: I am at present in communication with the local education authority and am not yet in a position to make any statement on the matter, but on the facts at present before me I am doubtful whether I have any power to intervene. I have no information on the subject of compensation, and this is not a matter with which the Board are concerned. I have received no notice of Miss Watts' appointment to a post in any other public elementary school.
    Captain FABER: May I ask the right hon. Gentleman whether Miss Watts has obtained another place, and whether the headmaster who was responsible for the dispute is still in Buttocks Heath school?
    Mr. PEASE: I understand that Miss Watts is teaching in a private school, and so far as I know efficient education is being given in that school. I do not know anything with regard to the other question of the hon. Member.
    Mr. ROWLANDS: Is it a fact that the school in which this teacher is teaching is one provided by private persons independently of the education authority, and can the right hon. Gentleman not see his way to take up this case in which the future of this young lady is concerned?
    Mr. PEASE: I am not concerned with a private venture school of the character which I understand is adopted in this particular case, and I only got the intimation from the same source probably as the hon. Member that this is a private venture school which is being run by the parents of the children who were formerly at the provided schools.
    Mr. ROWLANDS: At their expense or at the expense of the local authority?
    Mr. PEASE: I have no information as to who pays the expense, but it certainly is not at the expense of the public authorities.
    Captain FABER: Will the right hon. Gentleman let me know when he has any information?
    Mr. PEASE: Yes. I will either publicly or privately communicate with the hon. Member.
    Mr. KING: Will the right hon. Gentleman not communicate with the House, and not privately with the hon. Member?
    Mr. PEASE: Yes, if a settlement can be arrived at publicly I shall not hesitate, but I must use my own discretion if I think that a more satisfactory arrangement can be made by a private communication.

    Ewell Charities.
    Mr. KINGasked the President of the Board of Education what amount of money taken from the charities of Ewell, Surrey, has been permitted to be devoted for providing premises for a Church of England school; whether the charities from which such moneys have been taken are ecclesiastical charities devoted to the special use of the Church of England; whether he is aware that a previous application was made that the money from these charities should be used for providing a council school and that the request was refused; whether, before deciding to authorise further expenditure from Ewell charity funds, he will consider the public authorities of the parish, especially as to the benefits which the proposed expenditure would bring to the parishioners as a whole; and whether he will explain why educational charities for the whole parish may be used for erecting denominational schools but not for publicly erected, owned, and managed schools?
    Mr. PEASE: The Board have advised the trustees that they may properly apply to this purpose the accumulated income of Brumfield's Educational Foundation and one-half of the accumulated income of Calverley's Educational Foundation. They have also offered to allow one-half of the capital of Calverley's Foundation (consisting of £205 Consols) to be applied to the same purpose. I am advised that Calverley's Foundation is the only one of the charities which is an ecclesiastical charity. The answer to the third part of the hon. Member's question is in the affirmative. As I have already informed him, in my answer to a previous question, I am advised that no part of the funds of the charities could properly be allocated towards meeting the cost of the new council school, but I shall be prepared to consider any proposals which are not

    1223
    inconsistent with the existing trusts. The fact that the charities may be used for the purposes of the Church of England school to the extent which I have indicated is due to the terms of the trusts.

    Fisheries (Territorial Limit).
    Major ANSTRUTHER-GRAYasked the Chancellor of the Duchy of Lancaster how many meetings there have been of inter-departmental committees to consider the territorial limit and other fishery matters; and whether he can make any statement as to the progress made up to date?
    The CHANCELLOR of the DUCHY of LANCASTER (Mr. Hobhouse): The number of public meetings held is twelve. The Committee are awaiting further evidence on the question of the extent of territorial limits.
    Mr. MUNRO: Can the right hon. Gentleman give any indication as to when the Report of the Committee may be expected?
    Mr. HOBHOUSE: The witnesses who have to appear before the Committee are mostly seafaring men. It is very difficult to get them before the Committee, and it is quite impossible to say when the Committee's proceedings are likely to terminate.

    Revenue Bill.
    Mr. PIKE PEASEasked the Chancellor of the Exchequer when the Revenue Bill will be printed which was introduced on 7th May of this year?
    Mr. MASTERMAN: I am afraid that for the moment I cannot add to the answer my right hon. Friend gave to the hon. Baronet the Member for Ayr Burghs on 17th June.

  BRITISH ARMY.

    FOREIGN MEAT SUPPLY.
    Mr. HUNTasked the Secretary of State for War what is the average price paid by the Government for beef from abroad supplied to the Regular and Auxiliary Forces?
    The FINANCIAL SECRETARY to the WAR OFFICE (Mr. Harold Baker): The average price of frozen beef on last year's contracts may be taken at slightly under 4d. per pound.

    KING'S OWN SCOTTISH BORDERERS (MAJOR T. B. SELLAR).
    Major ARCHER-SHEEasked the Secretary of State for War whether he is aware that Major T. B. Sellar, late King's Own Scottish Borderers, who retired in May, 1913, with the rank of major, was only granted a pension of £200 a year, although the rate of retired pay for majors when this officer joined the Service was £300 a year; and whether, in view of the fact that the retrospective action of recent amendments of the Royal Warrant has been cancelled by Army Order 38 of 1913, he will now appoint a Committee to consider the cases of injustice caused by the alteration of the Warrant in 1909, under which the pensions of officers were reduced from £300 to £200 a year whilst they were serving?
    Mr. BAKER: I am reconsidering this case, but I must not be taken to admit the suggestion made in the last part of the question.

    WAIL OFFICE (MESSENGERS).
    Mr. F. HALLasked how many employes of the messenger class are employed under the War Office; and how many of these are paid at the rate of 21s. a week or less?
    Mr. BAKER: There are 132 established and temporary messengers and labourers. Of these fifty-three receive wages of over 21s. a week and seventy-nine of 21s. a week. Of the latter sixteen are in receipt of additional wages for special duties. There are also seventy-two boy messengers who receive wages of less than 21s. a week.
    Mr. F. HALL: Does the hon. Gentleman consider 21s. a reasonable wage for an adult, and does this state of affairs represent the attitude of the Government as a model employer of labour?
    Mr. BAKER: It depends on the duties that these men perform. I rather think that a good many of them are in receipt of pensions, too.
    Mr. F. HALL: Would the hon. Gentleman answer the first part of my question: Does he consider 21s. a reasonable wage?
    Mr. BAKER: I have answered every question which the hon. Member put on the Paper.

    Royal Irish Constabulary.
    Mr. DORISasked the Chief Secretary for Ireland the age and number of

    1225
    years' service of each of the following district inspectors of the Royal Irish Constabulary: Messrs. Peter Leonard,
    Loughrea; Patrick Culhone, Armagh; Hugh Shier, Ballina; Patrick M'Hugh, Derry; James M'Mahon, Lisnaskea; Joseph Smyth, Rathoe; T. O'Neill, Gorey; and Thomas Keaveney, Belfast; is the statutory period of service of a district inspector forty years; and why have these officers not been retired in accordance with the Act of Parliament?
    Mr. BIRRELL: The Constabulary (Ireland) Amendment Act, 1882, provides that a district inspector of the Royal Irish Constabulary shall be retired when he attains the age of sixty and has become qualified to receive the maximum pension of the rank and class in which he is serving. Only one of the officers mentioned has attained the age of sixty, and under the terms of the Statute the retirement of none of them is obligatory at present.

    British South Africa Company.
    Mr. SWIFT MacNEILLasked the Secretary of State for the Colonies whether there was any other and, if so, what consideration for which Liebig's Extract of Meat Company acquired from the British South Africa Company the right to select 1,200,000 acres of ranching land in Southern Rhodesia at a quit rent tenure at a price of 1s. an acre; was the price paid for this vast area of ranching land credited to the shareholders or to the administration in the accounts which should be presented to the Colonial Office under Section 17 of the Royal Charter; whether he is aware that the purchasers are Germans engaged in the meat trade who give the natives any price for their cattle they think fit, and prohibit them from driving the cattle to the neighbouring markets; whether any steps will be taken to protect the rights of the natives to trade their cattle freely with any other purchaser than the Liebig's Extract of Meat Company; how many natives were living on this area before this purchase, and, what steps, if any, have been taken to enforce the obligation of the British South Africa Company, under Order in Council of 1898, to protect the occupation rights of the natives who have now been reduced to a condition bordering on slavery; and, if the money obtained from the sale of these ranching lands has been taken by the shareholders of the Chartered Company, will any moans be taken to secure that the proceeds of the sale should
    1226
    be for the benefit of the community at large?
    Mr. GULLAND: I am informed by the British South Africa Company as follows: 1. In addition to the purchase price of 1s. per acre, the right to select the land was granted to the Liebig Company in consideration of its undertaking to spend a considerable amount of capital in developing the land and stocking it with cattle. 2. The purchase money was credited to the British South Africa Company's commercial account. 3. The Liebig Company is a British company, incorporated in London in the year 1865. Natives are under m obligation to sell any cattle to the Liebig Company, and all cattle bought from natives by the company have been paid for at currenst market rates. Native owners are perfectly free to sell to other purchasers, and it is therefore unnecessary to take special steps to protect the rights of natives in this matter. 4. There is no precise information available as to the number of natives living on this area before purchase. They are, however, believed to have been few in number, and many of them are able to obtain remunerative employment at current rates of wages from the Liebig Company. It appears from this information that further details with regard to the position of the natives are required, and I have asked the High Commissioner for a report. I may, however, at once say that I am confident that whatever the exact facts may be with regard to the natives there is no reason to apprehend that they are in a condition bordering on slavery. With regard to the company's right to the land I cannot usefully add anything to my reply to a question on the subject on 8th April.

    Suffragist Prisoners.
    Mr. JOWETTasked the Secretary of State for the Home Department whether it is the intention of the Government again to arrest Mrs. Emmeline Parkhurst?
    The SECRETARY of STATE for the HOME DEPARTMENT (Mr. McKenna): I would refer my hon. Friend to the answer I gave to the hon. Member for Newcastle under-Lyme on Monday last.
    Mr. WEDWOOD: Will the right hon. Gentleman say whether the other circumstances to which he alluded in connection with the rearrest of Mrs. Parkhurst apply also to the other suffragist prisoners?
    Mr. McKENNA: Yes, Sir.
    Mr. JOWETTasked the Secretary of State for the Home Department if he is aware that Mrs. Pankhurst is in a serious state of health owing to the treatment that she has received; and is the Government prepared to face her death should this treatment be continued?
    Mr. McKENNA: I have no exact information as to Mrs. Pankhurst's present state of health; but, if it be serious, this is certainly not owing to her treatment in prison by the officials, from whom she received every possible care and consideration. The prison authorities supplied her with food, and did all they could to induce her to take it, and she alone is responsible for the consequences of her persistent refusal to take the food necessary for health.
    Mr. JOWETTasked (1) whether the suffragist prisoners, sentenced at the Old Bailey on Wednesday last, are in Holloway Prison or whether they have been sent to other prisons; and (2) whether the suffragist prisoners, sentenced at the Old Bailey on Wednesday last, are being accorded the same treatment as accorded to other prisoners in the third division?
    Mr. McKENNA: These prisoners have all been released under the Prisoners (Temporary Discharge for Ill-Health) Act
    Mr. JOWETT: They will be treated in exactly the same way as Mrs. Pankhurst?
    Mr. McKENNA: Yes. When their licence expires, if they are in a fit state to go to prison, they will be brought back to prison.
    Mr. JOWETT: No difference will be made between their treatment and that of Mrs. Pankhurst?
    Mr. McKENNA: I have stated so over and over again—no difference at all.

    Heinrich Grosse.
    Mr. KINGasked the Home Secretary whether it is intended to release Heinrich Grosse; if so, when; and, if not, will he explain why this is not to be done?
    Mr. McKENNA: His Majesty's Government appreciate the clemency shown by the Imperial German Government in the case of three British officers, and if any German officer were now under sentence in this country for espionage, it would give His Majesty's Government much pleasure to be able to reciprocate. Grosse is not an officer in the German Army, and his criminal record, including a sentence of penal
    1228
    servitude in Singapore, for uttering forged notes, is such that no parallel can be drawn between his case and that of the British officers.
    Mr. KING: Are we to conclude, then, that there is one law for gentlemen with high influences and another law for ordinary working men who have no influence?
    Mr. McKENNA: I fail altogether to see the relevance of my hon. Friend's question.

    Criminal Law Amendment Act (Prosecutions).
    Mr. JAMES HOGGEasked the Home Secretary whether his attention has been drawn to the action of magistrates in connection with charges under the Criminal Law Amendment Act, 1912, in declaring the proceedings a secret inquiry, and in admitting the Press as a concession, on their agreeing to suppress the names of the accused; and, if so, whether he will consider the desirability of introducing legislation to prevent white slave traffic cases being conducted as secret inquiries?
    Mr. McKENNA: Magistrates are authorised by Section 19 of the Indictable Offences Act, 1848, to exclude the public from the preliminary hearing of indictable cases, and I understand that they avail themselves of this power in cases where the facts to be disclosed are of a grossly obscene character. In the case to which my hon. Friend refers the magistrate took this course, but, in his discretion, allowed representatives of the Press to be present and trusted to their honour not to publish the names of persons where it would have been contrary to the interests of justice to do so. The practice adopted by the magistrates in such cases appears to me justified by considerations of decency and morality, and I see no reason for interfering with it.
    Mr. HOGGE: May I ask whether any further proceedings in this case will be in public?
    Mr. McKENNA: It does not depend upon me.
    Mr. KING: Will my right hon. Friend consent to giving a Return of such cases so that we may know how far the administration of justice is being carried on in secret?
    Mr. SPEAKER: The hon. Member must give notice of that question.

    Metropolitan. Police (Constable Matthew Barrett).
    Mr. F. HALLasked the Home Secretary if he will have inquiry made into the case of Matthew Barrett, a constable in the Metropolitan police force, who was invalided from the force in 1894 after twelve years' service; if he is aware that previous to joining the police Barrett served for fourteen years with the Royal Irish Fusiliers, being discharged from that regiment in 1882 with a good conduct certificate; if he will state whether Barrett received any pension or gratuity on his retirement from either the Army or the police; and if he will consider the practicability of arranging in cases in which combined service in the Army or Navy and the Metropolitan police or some similar public service exceeds a certain period of granting a pension?
    Mr. McKENNA: Matthew Barrett was invalided from the Metropolitan Police in 1894, after twelve years of service, and he was given the gratuity to which his service entitled him. He had served in the Royal Irish Fusiliers, but the police records do not show his length of service. I have no power to combine Army service with police service for the purposes of pension in the manner suggested by the hon. Member.
    Mr. F. HALL: Does not the right hon. Gentleman think it would be good policy, both in regard to the Army and the Navy, if the time given in either Service could be counted in subsequent service?
    Mr. SPEAKER: The hon. Member must give notice of that question.

    Van Boy Labour (Committee's Report).
    Lord H. CAVENDISH-BENTINCKasked the Home Secretary if he will say when the Departmental Committee on van boy labour will present its Report?
    Mr. McKENNA: The Report of the Committee has been received and was presented to Parliament yesterday. Copies will be available for Members shortly.

    Eyesight Tests for Colour-Blindness.
    Captain O'NEILLasked the President of the Board of Trade whether he is aware that on the 4th April Mr. John M'Meekin M'Caw, second mate on Messrs. J. P. Corry and Company's steamship "Star of India," failed in the eyesight test for colour-blindness, although he had passed the test in October, 1912; whether
    1230
    he is aware that this failure was due to the novel introduction of the lantern test; will he state why this is now, for the first time, made obligatory; and, seeing that had this man attended for examination a fortnight earlier, before the lantern test was introduced, he would have passed the eyesight test and been able to remain for years in the service which he will now be compelled to leave, whether he will look into this case and, if possible, take steps that this officer should not be deprived of his employment and career?
    Mr. ROBERTSON: The facts of the case are as stated in the first part of the question. The lantern test has been made obligatory for candidates for certificates of competency in the mercantile marine on the advice of the Committee appointed in 1910 to consider the sight tests. I sympathise with such cases as that referred to, but when the Board of Trade have reason to believe, as the result of the local examination, and on the subsequent report of their special examiners, that an officer's colour vision is defective, it is the duty of the Board, in the interests of safety at sea, to ensure so far as possible that he shall not serve as a watch-keeping officer at sea.
    Captain O'NEILL: Can anything be done in cases of this sort to find employment for the men?
    Mr. ROBERTSON: I am not aware that anything can be done, but at any rate the suggestion is one deserving of careful consideration.
    Mr. JOHN WARD: Is it not the fact, in regard to those who fail at the test, that the shades between green and blue are so fine that it is a difficult proposition to decide which is green and which is blue?
    Mr. ROBERTSON: I can assure my hon. Friend that he is mistaken, and I should be very glad for him to make an examination of the whole system of colour tests, and he would then realise that there is no such confusion as he has stated.
    Mr. LYNCH: Does not this very case seem to demonstrate that the lantern test is the sole reliable test, and the only one that can be used in the public interest?
    Mr. ROBERTSON: Certainly, I think it a most important test, but it is most desirable to have several concurrent tests.

    Postal Arrangements (Culleybackey, Antrim).
    Captain O'NEILLasked the Postmaster-General whether improved postal facilities can be arranged for Cullybackey, county Antrim, whereby letters posted there up to 6 p.m. should be delivered in Manchester early next morning and incoming letters from England which reach Belfast early enough should be dispatched in Cullybackey either by the 8 a.m. or 8.25 a.m. train?
    The POSTMASTER-GENERAL (Mr. Herbert Samuel): I will have inquiry made, and will communicate with the hon. and gallant Member.

    Marconi Contract.
    Mr. F. HALLasked the Postmaster-General if Mr. Taylor, the Post Office official who was reduced in rank for investing in the shares of the Marconi Company, expressed regret at the time, or has done so since, for his action or has indicated that it was taken under a misconception of the circumstances and the peculiar obligations of his office; and, if so, whether, in consideration of such expression of regret, he will now consider as to reinstating Mr. Taylor in his former position?
    Mr. HERBERT SAMUEL: The answer to the first part of the question is in the affirmative, and to the second part in the negative.

ORDERS OF THE DAY.

  BUSINESS OF THE HOUSE.
  The PRIME MINISTER (Mr. Asquith): To-morrow we shall take, first the Procedure Committee Motion; then the Second Reading of the Mental Deficiency and Lunacy (Scotland) Bill, and of the Elementary Education (Defective and Epileptic Children) Bill, and the Money Resolution on the Mental Deficiency Bill.
  On Monday the first Order will be the Established Church (Wales) [Money] (Committee); then the Government of Ireland [Money] (Report), and the Committee stage of the Bill; the Appellate Jurisdiction [Money] (Committee), and the Consolidated Fund Bill (Committee).
  On Tuesday, we shall take the Established Church (Wales) [Money] (Report), and the Committee stage of the Bill; the Appellate Jurisdiction [Money] (Report), the Plural Voting Bill (Committee), and the Consolidated Fund Bill (Third Reading).
  On Wednesday, the Temperance (Scotland) Bill (Committee), and the Plural Voting Bill (Committee).
  On Thursday, Supply, which I understand is in process of arrangement, and the Votes have not yet been agreed upon.
  As to Friday, I shall make a statement next week.
  Sir PHILIP MAGNUS: Can the right hon. Gentleman say when the National Insurance Act Amendment Rill will be printed and available for Members?
  The PRIME MINISTER: It is in the Vote Office now, I am told.
  Sir G. YOUNGER: Is it proposed to take the Temperance (Scotland) Bill after Committee on the Government of Ireland Bill and before the Plural Voting Bill?
  The PRIME MINISTER: We will take it as the first Order on Wednesday.
  Earl WINTERTON: Will the right hon. Gentleman endeavour to arrange that Vote 8 of the Navy Estimates shall be taken at an early date, in order to enable the First Lord of the Admiralty to make a full statement?
  The PRIME MINISTER: Yes.
  Mr. ROBERT HARCOURT: When will it be taken?
  The PRIME MINISTER: I cannot say.
  Mr. JAMES HOPE: When is the first of the Education Bills likely to be introduced, and what is the meaning of "Ways and Means," which appears as the third Order.
  The PRIME MINISTER: As to Ways and Means I do not know, but in regard to the Education Bill I shall make a. statement next week.

  MOTION FOR ADJOURNMENT.
  Mr. IAN MALCOLM: I ask leave to move the Adjournment of the House, in order to call attention to a definite matter of urgent public importance, namely, the proposed eviction of Robert Bell from his home in Knocklaur, county Clare, on Tuesday next, decided upon by an order of the Congested Districts Board in contravention of their distinct promise, and contrary to the spirit of the Land Act of 1909.
  Mr. SPEAKER: I am afraid I cannot accept that as a matter of public importance. It is a matter of considerable importance to the man himself, but it is not a matter of public importance, and does not raise any public principle. The answer of the Chief Secretary to-day put quite a different complexion upon the facts as they appeared upon the Paper.
  Mr. MALCOLM: Might I, with very great respect, point out that the honour of the Congested Districts Board and justice to the individual are really very closely concerned in this matter, and that a short discussion would probably satisfy both one and the other.
  Mr. SPEAKER: If there had been any promise on the part of the Congested Districts Board that they would not turn this man out, I think a serious occasion would have arisen; but the Chief Secretary, in his reply, distinctly stated that no such promise was intended or given. That is what I mean when I said the answer put a very different complexion upon the matter.
  Captain CRAIG: May I point out that what the right hon. Gentleman has said is not correct, and that a definite promise was made to Colonel O'Callaghan Westropp that this man would receive exactly the same treatment, under the Board, as he had received for fourteen years under Colonel O'Callaghan Westropp, so that the Chief Secretary has been misinformed.
  Mr. SPEAKER: I am bound to take the official statement.

SUPPLY.- [TWELFTH ALLOTTED DAY.]
Considered in the Committee.
[Mr. MACLEAN in the Chair.]

CIVIL, SERVICES AND REVENUE DEPARTMENTS ESTIMATES, 1913-14.— [Progress.]

  BOARD OF AGRICULTURE, SCOTLAND (Class II. —VOTE 29.)
  Motion made and Question proposed,
  "That a sum, not exceeding £121,181, be granted to His Majesty, to complete the sum necessary to defray the Charge which will come in course of payment during the year ending on the 31st day of March, 1914, for the Salaries and Expenses of the Board -of Agriculture for Scotland." [Note.—£110,000 has been voted on account.]
  Mr. HARRY HOPE Mr. HARRY HOPE rose——
  The SECRETARY for SCOTAND (Mr. McKinnon Wood): I think, perhaps, I need not apologise upon this occasion for offering a few preliminary observations.
  Earl WINTERTON: On a point of Order. May I ask when my hon. Friend the Member for Bute is called upon and is willing to speak, has the Secretary for Scotland any right to intervene?
  The DEPUTY-CHAIRMAN: The hon. Member gave way to the Secretary for Scotland.
  Mr. McKINNON WOOD: I am quite willing to give way to the hon. Member if he desires, but I think I need not explain why it is desirable on this particular Vote that I should make a few preliminary observations. There are two reasons. We are dealing with a Vote connected with a new institution—a new Board which came into being on the 1st April last year, and which was constituted for two very important objects. One of these was that we might have a Scottish Board of Agriculture acting closely with that great body of Scottish farmers whose known enterprise has earned for them a name all over the world; and the second reason was that we should have a body to deal with the new Small Landholders Act. I think the House will appreciate that a new and important departure in legislation is made by the Small Landholders Act, and even if it was put in charge of a large Department with large staffs there still would be
  1248
  considerable labour and difficulty on the commencement of so large a piece of work. Naturally there has been criticism and some impatience. I do not complain of that in the least; it indicates keenness to see the Act put into operation with which I entirely sympathise and share. It was perhaps natural that sufficient allowance should not be made for the preliminary work which had to be done by the Board and the large difficulties inherent in the beginning of a new unfamiliar system. There is a great deal to do. The Board during the past year, instead of being slack has been considerably overworked. The first thing it had to do was to create a staff; it had to decide what officials were necessary, and it had to obtain the assent of the Treasury to its proposals. And, in the second place, it had to constitute the machinery necessary for dealing with business complicated by an enormous mass of detail, and, in the third place—and I attach great importance to this—it had to settle the number with which it could proceed in a businesslike way to deal with the applicants and with the acquisition of land in regard to which they were bound by the conditions prescribed by the Act. I clearly recognise that my colleagues from Scotland in this House who had to do with the passing of the Act, who know the conditions well and are most anxious for rapid progress, have very fairly appreciated the conditions of the Board. They have urged two things. First, it was necessary to increase the powers of the Board to deal with applications which amounted to a very large number, and, secondly, they suggested that the time had come when they ought to have more money—frequently a. popular and in this case a very necessary matter.
  I have made application to the Treasury for an increase in the staff of the Board, and I am glad to say the Treasury has consented to enlarge the Land Department. There will be one additional Sub-Commissioner and four assistant Sub-Commissioners, so instead of having three officials to interview applicants and to look for suitable land, there will be eight. Of course, the House knows what their duties will be. They will have to interview applicants, to discover and to inspect suitable land, and to deal with all matters connected with the new circumstances, and, in addition to that, the Treasury have sanctioned an additional clerical staff to the number of eleven necessary to supplement the work of these new officers. But,

  1249
  of course, the matter of the greatest importance and, I think, of the greatest difficulty at the beginning of this work, has been obtaining suitable land. I think hon. Members generally appreciate that; it is not always appreciated outside. I have received two or three letters—I am merely giving extreme cases of lack of appreciation of the difficuties under the Act—in which the writers seem to be under the impression that the Board is neglecting its duty. Half a dozen applicants asking for a farm at the present time want to know why the present occupier is not dispossessed and the applicants established in his place. I regret to say that in some cases these letters are accompanied by expressions of violence. If the Board were to administer the Act in the spirit of some of those writers useful progress could not be made.
  Speaking of Scotland as a whole, certainly of great parts of Scotland, the Board has not to deal with vast tracts of vacant land ready for cultivation or unused as in a new country; but for the most part we have to deal with land covered with occupiers already cultivating it, and the immediate removal of whom is not in many eases possible. In the Act the Board are instructed to ascertain what land is falling or about to fall out of lease where the present tenant is not an offerer, and preferably to acquire such land when other wise suitable for the constitution of new holdings. A great deal of land is expressly excluded by the Act. All farms tinder 150 acres or £80 rental are excluded. These are not to be divided. As my colleagues from Scotland know, in many parts of the country there are a very large number of farms to which that condition applies. These are not cases in which I think anybody would advocate robbing Peter to pay Paul. There are a very large number of small holdings in Scotland at the present moment. It has been estimated that there are over 50,000 smaller than those of which I have been speaking, but practically the -kind of farm we are considering when we speak about small holdings. Another condition in the Act is that land subject to leases in force at Whit Sunday, 1911, or in crofting counties at Whit Sunday, 1906, cannot be disturbed. Particular kinds of land are excluded, such as home farms, pleasure grounds, woodland, and grass farms held for the purpose of businesses not primarily agricultural or pastoral.
  1250
  In some places it cannot be denied that there is not enough suitable land for suitable applicants. There are undoubtedly cases in which migration to another part of Scotland by some of the applicants is the only remedy for the congestion. Another thing which sometimes causes difficulty is that applicants are frequently only willing to take land in a particular small district, and sometimes they demand a particular portion of a farm. Speaking generally, the entry of a new tenant can only be arranged at the term days, Martinmas and Whit Sunday, but the Board have sometimes found that a farm which they knew was becoming vacant at the next term and in regard to which they had actually entered into negotiation for the purpose of creating mill holdings, had been let in advance. That, of course, causes new difficulties in dealing with the matter, and involves expense and compensation to the tenant. These are partly initial difficulties; they are reasons why rapid progress in the first year was not possible; but as time goes on and the Board have an opportunity of acquiring a more complete knowledge in advance of the land available, these difficulties will diminish. The Board are taking steps to acquaint themselves wherever there is a demand for small holdings with the land which will become available. I hope that they will be able to bring into use for small holders land which is not at present cultivated or being used to the best advantage. During the past century large areas under arable cultivation steadily passed into permanent pasture, and a great change took place. I hope we may be able to place many small holders on land of this description. This process will largely increase the number of men maintained upon the soil. As regards deer forests, there are two cases in which owners have offered to negotiate for settlement, and there are several other cases in which negotiations are going on. But, of course, when you are dealing only with a piece of land in the middle of a deer forest, difficult questions of compensation arise, which may make the taking of a small part of a deer forest an extremely costly business. I think that all will admit that there have been serious difficulties in the beginning of the work, and it was really inevitable that progress during the first year should be slow, or at least should appear slow. In future these difficulties will be less, and progress will be more steady and more rapid. I can assure the

  1251
  House that it is from no lack of keen interest in the development of small holdings and from no slackness in working that delays have arisen.
  One unavoidable cause of delay is that in most cases it has been necessary to apply to the Land Court to fix rents, to decide the terms of compensation, or in many cases to give compulsory powers. The procedure of the Land Court must necessarily take a little time. There is the hearing of the case, then the Court or some of its members have to inspect the land, and, finally, a decision has to be arrived at. These three stages cannot possibly be avoided. There is another stage which I confess that I personally regret, namely, the arbitration stage. Where a landlord claims more than £300, instead of being decided by the Land Court, the case goes to an arbitrator. I am afraid that that will be a fruitful cause of delay and expense. However, it is a matter which cannot be avoided. This is not the time to discuss the Land Court, but I may point out in connection with this subject that, apart from the constitution of new holdings, the Court has to deal with the fixing of rents for existing crofters, and with a class created under the Act—the statutory small tenants—both as regards fair rents and increased security of tenure. This is a most valuable and important part of their work. I must acknowledge the readiness of the Court to assist the establishment of new small holdings by dealing with those cases with all the dispatch possible under the procedure of the Act. As to the work that has been done, I must refer the Committee to the figures on page 15 of the Report of the Board. It is there stated that by the end of the year, the Board having been at work nine months, subject to the decision of the Land Court, arrangements had been made to provide for 500 applicants. By the end of the nine months the Board had opened negotiation with proprietors for providing land for 1,000 persons. For various reasons a number of these negotiations had to be abandoned, but I am glad to say in many cases it is not a final abandonment; it is simply a deferment. The information will be useful in future, and will, in many cases, lead to settlement.
  Since the date of the Report, a great deal of work has been done. There are many hundreds of cases in various stages of development. Detached figures give
  1252
  very untrustworthy information in regard to these matters, because there are many stages, and a matter in which a great deal of work has been done, although not complete, may be very near completion. Considering the facts that I have stated, and the difficulties inseparable from the beginning of a new work of such complexity, I submit that the account I have given represents a large amount of work on the part of the Board and its officials. It is reasonable to expect that as time goes on, as both the applicants and landowners and their agents, become familiar with the conditions and working of the Act, a great deal more will be accomplished with the same amount of labour, and naturally, still more with the increased staff which I have obtained. The principles upon which we have to proceed will be more generally understood by all parties. I hope that the friction and opposition which cause delay at the beginning of a new procedure will be diminished. The Board will acquire far greater knowledge of the land available and the need for it. I do not know that we have a right to be surprised that an Act which was very strongly opposed during its passage should not have been very ardently welcomed at first.
  Sir G. YOUNGER: It was considerably amended.
  4.0 P.M.
  Mr. McKINNON WOOD: Yes, but the principle of it was not amended. We have had to meet a good deal of unavoidable opposition and delay—at least that we could not avoid. I hope as time goes on that friction will give place to a willingness to work. I am the more hopeful of this because we find that in the crofter districts where the owners and agents are familiar with the crofting practice, that there have been a number of proprietors who already had offered land. I am really hopeful that that spirit will extend throughout Scotland. We are not only anxious—that is, the Board of Agriculture and myself—to find land for small holders but we are equally anxious to assist them to cultivate it successfully; to give them opportunities by practical instruction and demonstration to learn the best methods of cultivation, and also to assist them, for instance, to keep up the quality of the stock, to encourage the breeding of poultry and everything which will make the small holding profitable. Two, questions naturally arise in this connection, that is co-operation and credit banks. I know very well the

  1253
  importance of the subject of co-operation,-and recognise that co-operation in the purchase of seeds, foodstuffs, and manure, and in the sale of all kinds of farm produce, are most important in the case of small holders. We cannot, of course, expect this to grow to any large extent till we have the small holdings. Our first attention naturally was to them. I do not know that there has been a very great disposition to co-operation in Scotland in the past, but progress is being made. There is a society in Scotland to which the Development Commissioners make an annual Grant—the Scottish Agricultural Organisation Society—for the express purpose of promoting co-operation and to assist in the formation of co-operative societies. The Board is the medium through which this Grant is given and is responsible to the Development Commissioners for the proper application of the money. In the past few years no less than ninety-six cooperative societies have been formed in Scotland, chiefly amongst small holders, and new ones are being formed every year. The House may be certain that the work of the co-operative societies will proceed step by step with the establishment of the small holdings so far as the Board are concerned.
  Mr. BARNES: Are these agricultural societies?
  Mr. McKINNON WOOD: No, co-operative societies.
  Mr. BARNES: Does the right hon. Gentleman refer to societies in the agricultural areas alone or to ninety-six societies altogether in Scotland?
  Mr. McKINNON WOOD: Purely to the agricultural areas and to the small societies. I am not speaking about the great co-operative societies of Scotland. In regard to credit banks to assist small holders, the Board is at present in communication with certain of the Scottish banks to see if they can secure better credit facilities for co-operative societies and small holders, and the society I have already referred to, the Scottish Agricultural Organisation Society, and another society recently formed to promote small holdings, are both proposing to try to provide credit banks for the assistance of small holders. Another matter in which the Board is very deeply interested is the encouragement of agricultural education and research, not only in the education given in the three important colleges,
  1254
  which have been doing excellent work for some years, but the education of the smaller cultivators, which they are anxious to promote by various methods. There are, for example, local co-operative societies dealing with questions like that of dairying, the making of butter and cheese, the keeping of poultry, bee keeping, and so on. There is the very useful method of encouraging model small holdings so as to show examples of successful working. This has been tried in different parts of Scotland, and I think it is worth developing.
  Mr. JAMES HOGGE: Where are they?
  Mr. McKINNON WOOD: In the North of Scotland. The Aberdeen College of Agriculture has several colleges, and so have other colleges in other parts of Scotland. The Board are anxious also to provide new institutions wherein extensive practical training may be given to those who will not go to agricultural colleges, and perhaps cannot afford to go there—I refer to the daughters and sons of small holders. We have put a scheme before the Development Commissioners for this purpose which I hope they will be prepared to assist, but I have not yet received any answer. The work begun by the Congested Districts Board is being carried on, the breeding of various animals is being extended and attention given to the breeding of both heavy and light horses, cattle and pigs—the latter rather neglected by small holders in some parts of Scotland—poultry keeping, vegetable growing, and things of that sort. On the whole, dealing with small holders, the Board has stated its conclusion in the Report in these words:—
  "The number of practicable proposals which are at present before the Board leads them to the belief that the number of small holdings which can be created will be determined by the resources of the Agriculture (Scotland) Fund." (Page XIV.)
  When the time arrives—and I believe it will be in the near future—the Government will consider a matter which for some time past I have been giving my best consideration to, and will be able to deal with it, I believe, satisfactorily. We have at present £206,000 per year. That, of course, is not all for purposes of small holdings. Out of that money we have to spend an amount on the general purposes of agriculture, many of which benefit the small holder as well as other farmers, though some of it is for the special benefit of the small holders. With regard to the small holdings themselves we have had to

  1255
  provide compensation to landowners in many cases, and in many cases compensation to tenants. We have found the expenses of the application to the Land Courts for an arbitrator, we have also to assist the small landowners by loans, we have erected necessary buildings and fences, and we have provided money for water supply, etc. So far as our loans are concerned I have heard no complaint of the terms. We lend money for fifty years at 4 per cent., which includes the interest, the repayment of capital, and the insurance on the buildings.
  Sir G. YOUNGER: How much does that bring in?
  Mr. McKINNON WOOD: It is a Sinking Fund over a period of fifty years. It will be seen, therefore, that while a part of our outgoings are not recoverable, there is a considerable portion of it which is by way of loan and which will be gradually repaid by annual instalments. I hope as time goes on and the work overtaxes our present resources, that means will be found to meet the case, though I am not in a position to go into details of the plan I am considering, to which of course the assent of the Treasury will be necessary.
  Mr. HOGGE: How much of that £206,000 was used for small holdings?
  Mr. McKINNON WOOD: If I gave the figure it would be a most misleading figure, because with regard to a large proportion of these 500 small holdings, we have not got the decision of the Court. None of the money can be spent though the money is practically ear-marked, subject to the consent of the Court. The money must be found, as we are pledged to these small holdings. I do not think it would be useful if I entered into other departments of the Board's activities. Other matters are set out in the Report which deals with that great subject of agricultural education and research. I may mention two things which are not in the Report. We are preparing to set up what has been much desired, a seed-testing station, and we have been doing the work of inspecting nurseries so that we may give the certificates which are demanded in relation to plants which are -exported to the Colonies and abroad.
  Captain MURRAY: Where will the seed-testing station be?
  Mr. McKINNON WOOD: I think in Edinburgh. With regard to forestry, the House will remember that about a year ago I set up an Advisory Committee of gentlemen interested in forestry. They have since then been considering a site for a demonstration college, but at present they have not reported to me. Obviously there is very much useful labour before the new Board. The sketch I have given does not pretend to be either adequate or complete. I have naturally had to deal with the circumstances which affected the new Board, and I have made no attempt to anticipate criticism. Other topics are dealt with in the Report, and no doubt will be raised in the Debate. My principal object——
  Mr. C. E. PRICE: Can the right hon. Gentleman give us any further information about the School of Forestry?
  Mr. McKINNON WOOD: The Advisory Committee have been looking into the matter, and have examined a good many sites, but they have not come to a final decision or made any Report to me on the subject. It would not do for me to anticipate their Report. My principal object has been to deal with the special circumstances of the first year's work of the Board. It is the beginning of a great task, which, I hope, will be extended for the benefit of rural Scotland. To accomplish it will require much hard work, some patience and judgment, and goodwill.
  Mr. GRETTON: On a point of Order, Mr. Deputy-Chairman. Is it in accordance with the ancient usage of this House for a Minister to read the whole of his speech?
  Mr. McKINNON WOOD: As a matter of fact I did not read the whole of my speech.
  Mr. GRETTON: Would it not be more convenient under the circumstances to circulate it?
  The DEPUTY - CHAIRMAN (Mr. Maclean): It is quite in accordance with the practice of this House, so far as I have been able to observe it, for a Member to refresh his memory with notes. There has been no departure from that practice in the case of the Secretary for Scotland.
  Mr. HARRY HOPE: I think there will be general agreement that there are large opportunities for useful work being done by the Board of Agriculture in Scotland, and also that its activities may be many sided. The right hon. Gentleman has

  1257
  made an important statement with regard to new small holdings, but I think his object in doing so must have been to ward off opposition from some of his own supporters who have been led to indulge in rash political promises as to the creation of new small holdings. Questions like this, which are very difficult to settle, ought to be settled first of all free from any political partisanship, and also without having any reference to any rash political promises which may have been made. We all recognise that the Board of Agriculture may do good work in doing something to check the lamentable amount of emigration which is going on; also that it may do a good deal to enable and encourage our cultivators of land to increase the productivity of the soil, thereby bringing more prosperity to our rural districts, and also producing a, larger amount of produce for a great mass of consumers. As we see from this Report, there are about 3,370 applications for new small holdings. Of that large number 2,760 come from the crofting counties and 1,300 come from the Outer Hebrides, while 650 come from Lewis. We see in Lewis a very extraordinary condition of affairs exists. As the right hon. Gentleman has said, the case there is that there is not as much land as would give all that those 650 people desire. I have been there and seen the condition of life in which those people live, and I cannot help thinking that it is caused by so much subdivision between the crofter and his subtenant. That state of affairs is bad, and I only hope that nothing will be done by the Board to make the condition of the people there less economic than they are at present. No doubt there is a good deal of land from which peat has been taken. A great deal of that land might be utilised and given to the new applicants, and when all those applications come to be considered, something in that way might be wisely done. On this great problem of satisfying new holders with land, I would urge the House not to do anything to drive our Board of Agriculture from doing that, which, in its wisdom, it may think the best course to adopt. I think we have got good officials at the head of the Agriculture Board, and I hope no political pressure will be brought to hear upon them or false promises or false hopes held out. The Board of Agriculture should be left with a free hand to act in their good judgment to do what is best. I have no doubt some expert Commissioners are needed. I always thought that a Commissioner for small holdings having charge of
  1258
  forestry, was perhaps overloaded with work. I do not know whether so many as five are needed, but with some additional Sub-Commissioners I have not the least doubt that the work in the way of investigating the claims could be done without any panic being raised by politicians in favour of cutting up the whole of Scotland into small holdings.
  The activities of the Board of Agriculture are many sided. I think there is no aspect of the work they do of more importance than that with regard to education and research. We have got three agricultural colleges in Scotland at present, but I do not think we will have the best possible results until each of them has got an experimental farm in which the students and others can see practical work being done, and upon which they can test what they themselves believe to be best. I would like to see each of those three colleges possessed of experimental farms. Besides the work carried on in those colleges we have county lecturers and itinerant instructors. No doubt those men can do good work and can bring expert knowledge to men in remote country districts, where at present they have no idea of things except such as their fathers and grandfathers had. I do not think, however, that that form of instruction is all that is required. When we look at what is done in other countries and see what is done in Ireland, and what the Irish peasantry have got done for them by institutes and farming schools, we then can see what a great future may be in front of agricultural education in Scotland if the State do what they have done in the case of the Irish Board of Agriculture. The President of the English Board realises this fact, and I believe he has announced that £320,000 is coming from the Development Commissioners for the setting up of farm schools and agricultural institutes in all parts of England, which will do an immense amount towards teaching young men and women expert knowledge in dairy and poultry and other matters. Not only will those men and women be more expert, but when they go out into service they will find that they are skilled workmen and workwomen, and their wages will be higher, and the general productivity of our soil will be increased, and benefit will come to all parties in the community.
  I desire to say a word about forestry. The right hon. Gentleman did not tell us what his Advisory Committee say as to where the experimental area should be.

  1259
  The Development Commissioners a year ago in their Report said that the main requirement of forestry was a demonstration area. I think that is recognised by all, and the question is, where should it be? We know that in Edinburgh there has been a lectureship for forestry as far hack as 1888, and since then the Court of Edinburgh University desires to raise that lectureship to a professorship, and I understand that at the present time they are appying to the Carnegie Trust for something like £5,000 to endow the Chair. Besides that, the East of Scotland Agricultural College has a course of lectures by practical men in forestry. I think when we have that good work going on it would be wise to have this demonstration area accessible, and not in a remote part of the country, so that men studying and learning this valuable course in Edinburgh, where laboratories have been set up, can go out and see the demonstration area and work with further benefit. I only hope that when the Advisory Committee's Report is published that that conclusion will be arrived at. The central part of Scotland in Perthshire is very accessible to Edinburgh, and I have no doubt a good site could be obtained there. There is a very serious disease in Scotland for the last few years which affects potatoes, and which is called the "Black Scab" disease. As a result the American Government have put an embargo on Scottish potatoes. In some years when potatoes are cheap they go to America in large quantities, so that the effect if the embargo is not removed is likely to be very injurious. The disease only exists to a very small extent in ten counties at present, and, in fact, only in four counties is it found in anything like recognisable quantity at all, namely, in small gardens in the counties of Perth, Fife, Clackmannan, and Kinross. I think there will be a serious responsibility resting upon our new Board of Agriculture if it does nothing to check this disease in its initial stage. Now is the time to stop the disease from getting hold of the country. The Board have done something, and I do not complain at all that they have not. Last year they issued an Order by which they made this disease notifiable either to the Board or the local authority. The local authority have power to appoint inspectors, but, as we all know, people in the country have a great dread of inspectors and do not care to do anything derogatory to the work of their own farms.
  1260
  There is naturally great fear of official control, and therefore this disease, although it exists to a small extent, undoubtedly is concealed. There is no doubt about it.
  I want to see the disease not concealed but rather stamped out-, and the suggestion I would make to the right hon. Gentleman is this: Maintain your Order, enforce notification and draw the attention of the local authorities to the duty which rests upon them of appointing inspectors. If they fail to do so, then I would ask that the Board appoint inspectors, and send them into the districts. When the disease is found the potatoes should be taken possession of and pay the small holder compensation for them. If they are diseased and rubbishy stuff, very little compensation will have to be paid, and, therefore, little money is involved. In addition to that, maintain the Order that the small holder cannot grow potatoes on that piece of ground for three years after the disease has been discovered. But, while you maintain that, I would say give the man compensation for any loss he may be put to owing to that prevention. The money involved by that would be small, because he probably could grow cabbages and other things. The expenditure on these two points would not be very much, while the practical result would be that instead of concealment you would get a ready willingness on the part of our small holders to come forward and admit the disease, so that it would be stamped out, and a scourge of a most serious character got rid of. You would have success in that way, and without compensation I fear you will never succeed. I urge again, in conclusion, that the work to be done by this Board is great, and I have no doubt it is growing. Let us do nothing in this House to hamper the action of our officials. Personally, I have confidence in them; I think they are men who will carry out the objects of the Act. Do not let us hold the drag over them of Parliamentary criticism, and do not let us hold them up to public derision, simply because a few of us in ignorance may have made some rash political promises.
  Sir JOHN DEWAR: I had intended to say a good many hard things about the Board of Agriculture, but I am hound to say that the statement that has just been made by the right hon. Gentleman has to some extent satisfied me. The delay in giving effect to the Small Landholders

  1261
  Act has had a most irritating effect all over the North of Scotland, and on behalf or my Constituency I have the strongest protest to make against the action of the Board of Agriculture in this respect. The Board should not have been taken by surprise by the number of applications which have come in, because many of them have been before the Congested Districts Board and the Crofters Commission for a considerable time. The men in those districts have a passionate desire to get back to the holdings from which their forefathers have been evicted. In the past the staff provided to deal with those applications has been notoriously inadequate, and the Report which has just been issued proves that. It points out that three small holders' Commissioners have been appointed, one to deal with the South of Scotland, where 600 applications are waiting to be dealt with, and two for the North of Scotland, where there are about 5,000 applications. Having regard to the difficulty of getting to some of those places and dealing with those applications there should have been from the first not two, but at least five—the number which is now proposed. It seems that applications are still coming in at a greater rate than they are being dealt with. There were 3,000 during the first six months and 5,000 at the end of the year. I would like to know how many cases there are now as compared with the number which was before the Board at the beginning of last year. I do not think the excuse that there is not enough money is a good one, because, as yet, apparently the Board has not spent dm money they have got, or, at least, we have no figures showing that they have spent anything like £200,000. The number which the Board expect to settle is abut 500 cases, and a great many of those are extensions, and not new holdings. With regard to extensions, in many cases no expenditure of capital is needed. In the list of applications it appears that some 400 of the applicants themselves possess capital ranging from £200 to £1,000 each.
  I complain that more has not been done in the way of settling people on the land although I agree that the Secretary for Scotland has given a fair defence of the delay, but no defence whatever in regard to dealing with the applications. I am constantly having letters saying that applications were made a year ago, and still no reply has been received from the Board
  of Agriculture. This morning I had a
  1262
  letter stating that more than a year ago an application was made for the extension of a holding and up to the present nothing has been heard of it. This is very cruel, because those men who have made these applications have been anticipating for years that they would get those extensions, and they have delayed carrying out other arrangements in view of that expectation. No doubt many of these men will be found to be ineligible, but I think the applicants should be told at the earliest possible moment so that they will be able to make other arrangements. My correspondent says that he will emigrate to Canada if he cannot get the extension he applied for. I think the Board ought to reply at once and let the applicants know what they are to expect in order that they may make other arrangements accordingly. The promise to appoint more Commissioners meets this case very well, and when they get to work we shall probably not have so much reason to complain. We have got an excellent Board of Agriculture, but they have not been sufficiently backed up by getting the support of Sub-Commissioners; and this support in the future will enable them to carry out the object they have in view, and the small holders, who for generations have been looking forward to getting access to the land of their forefathers, we hope will be able to achieve their object within a reasonable time. I wish to ask the Secretary for Scotland a question about the lecturers in the county of Perth. So far as I know there has not been any of these lectures in my own district, and the people there who are ready to take advantage of them have not had the opportunity of doing so.
  Sir GEORGE YOUNGER: I think the Secretary for Scotland acted wisely to-day in opening this Debate with his very interesting statement. The situation is a perfectly new one, and it is desirable that he should anticipate the complaints of the last few weeks, and I think he has dealt with them most adequately. I have not dwelt upon those complaints because I am not opposed to small holdings where they can be established with a reasonable chance of success, but at the same time it is impossible for the Board, if they wish to be successful, to proceed in anything but a careful manner. The delay arises largely from the absurdity of the Act in denying to any landowner who is ready to make a voluntary agreement that compensation in the case of holdings

  1263
  becoming derelict which is given in the case of compulsion by the Land Court. A more senseless provision in any Act of Parliament it is difficult to conceive. While I agree with the hon. Member for Inverness (Sir John Dewar) that it, is necessary to have these extra Commissioners, I am sure it would expedite matters still more if we had an amendment of the Act in the sense that encouragement should be given, and not discouragement, to all landowners who are prepared by voluntary arrangements to hand over land for this purpose. I think there ought to be general agreement on this. I know of no argument why this should not be done, and I am sure it would very largely tend to expedite the work of the Agricultural Commissioners.
  There are one or two questions I wish to ask relating to matters which have been brought under my notice with regard to the procedure of the Board of Agriculture. The first matter is the preparation of the register of small holdings. As everyone knows, the Act provides that there is to be a register of small holdings, but I am not aware what steps have been taken, if any, to check the returns sent by these people in the schedules which have been submitted. If there is one thing more certain than another, it is that no register of small holdings can be considered to be in the least accurate or of any value unless the entries are checked by the landlords who own those small holdings. In the course of the Land Court proceedings it has been shown more than once that erroneous statements are often made, and I remember one case in Arran where it was said on one holding there were only forty-one sheep, whereas it was proved in the Dip Returns that there were 141.
  Attention called to the fact that forty Members were not present. House counted, and forty Members being found present—
  Sir GEORGE YOUNGER: Similar inaccuracies have occurred in statements made in regard to the acreage. Perhaps the right hon. Gentleman may be able to tell us before the Debate closes whether the register has been kept. If the information is not accurate, the fact that a man is put on the register does not count for anything whatever or make him a landholder or a statutory tenant, but it is desirable that we
  1264
  should have accuracy, because proceedings may happen at a later date and this register may be quoted as if it were accurate, and, therefore, to be of any value, I think both sides should make a statement and the landlords should be able to check the tenant's statement. The Secretary for Scotland should see that an opportunity is given for securing that these statements are checked. This register must not, however, be confused with the Smallholders Register which is kept by the Sheriff Clerk. I should like to press upon the right hon. Gentleman the desirability of bringing in a measure to deal with Faiars Court prices That is a matter cognate to the whole of this discussion and there would be no difficulty in obtaining a general agreement. We have a Scotch Committee set up, and I think it might be utilised for this purpose in order to see if we can agree upon some measure to deal with this question. While I am speaking of that subject I do not hesitate to express my own opinion that the most simple way out of the difficulty, perhaps, is to summon the grower of the grain and not the buyer at all. Under these circumstances, you would get a perfectly accurate return. A man would be under an obligation to make a declaration before a justice of the peace, you would have no double return, and people would be very much more satisfied with the correctness of the return. I join with my hon. Friend who preceded me in hoping that the Board may have a successful career, and in believing that they are an excellent. Board. I am glad to say that, but I am not so sure that I can say the same thing about the Land Court. I am certain that this Board is taking the very greatest care, and doing the very best possible work, and they ought not to be unfairly pressed or harassed in the performance of that work.
  I want to ask one or two questions about the Congested Districts Board, and the last Report we have received from that body. I have to begin by making a complaint I have made before about the manner in which its accounts are presented. The final account is found on page 28 of the Report. The whole of the income and expenditure of the Board during the period of its existence is lumped together and various details are given with regard to certain schemes. I am afraid one cannot say that the schemes of the Board have been attended with any very great or real success. It is hopelessly

  1265
  impossible to separate capital charges and capital receipts from income and expenditure in the account which is given to us. Two or three years ago it was, promised that we should have a more accurate and clear statement, but I suppose the Board do not think it necessary to take that trouble, and we are just as much in the dark as ever as to the outcome of the various schemes in Vatersay and the other places for which the Board is responsible. They were forced very often to experiment in various districts with schemes they could not expect or hope would be any great success, and they are not altogether to blame for the failure of many of these transactions to show not only a profit, but to avoid a very heavy and serious loss. The situation with which they have had to deal has been a difficult one. You have only got to read the Report to see how difficult it has been, particularly, for example, in the Island of Lewis. It has been said already by the right hon. Gentleman the Secretary for Scotland that the only way to deal with the situation there is by migration of the inhabitants from the Island of Lewis to some place on the main land.
  I should like to ask the right hon. Gentleman to give us a little information about the position at Vatersay. What is the state of the case there with regard to arrears? How are the tenants progressing on that island? And do the Board consider that the formation of small holdings has been a wise or an unwise proceeding? I should also like to ask whether there are not difficulties with regard to Seafield, and what those difficulties are. I saw a statement that the tenants there were complaining that they had not been properly treated by the Board of Agriculture, by which I suppose they meant the Congested Districts Board. A good many have been coaxed into taking these holdings, and various promises have been made to them, but they are very dissatisfied with the buildings erected and the old buildings allotted to them. If the right hon. Gentleman could give the Committee any information about them I think it would be desirable to have it. I believe that the Congested Districts Board have dealt as well as they possibly could with an extremely difficult proposition. Many of their experiments, however, have been very costly and disappointing, and I hope, in future, that we shall avoid dabbling in some of those transactions, of which I know the Lord Advocate has got about as poor an opinion as I have myself.
  Mr. JAMES HOGGE: I beg to move to reduce the Vote by £100.
  Like the rest of the speakers since the-right hon. Gentleman made his introductory remarks, I desire to congratulate-him on arriving now at the conclusion that the Board of Agriculture requires waking up. If the right hon. Gentleman had given us the same information as he has given us to-day in answer to questions which he-has been asked from time to time, we should have more confidence in the promise-that the administration of that Board was going to be tighter than it has been during the past year. I do not blame the Secretary for Scotland personally on that account, because he, himself, has recognised in a public utterance that it is impossible for one man to adequately control and observe all that is going on in the-large number of Boards of which he has control. I have, for that reason, no sympathy at all with those Motions which are down on the Paper to reduce the right hon. Gentleman's salary. On the contrary, I think that it ought to be increased. The Secretary for Scotland ought to be raised in status to the same position as other Members of the Cabinet, and his salary should at least be doubled if the post is to occupy the importance it ought to occupy in the Cabinet. Of course, one is labouring under a disadvantage in making these remarks, because one is making them to Members who agree with him. The Distil party, who are interested apparently in Scottish affairs, the Welsh party, which is represented by their latest addition to this House, and who are apparently also interested in Scottish affairs, and the vast body of English Members, who are continually demanding that Scotsmen should remain in this Chamber, are absent on the only occasion on which they might get information about questions that affect Scotland very much. If we wanted an argument in favour of Scotsmen being allowed to look after their own affairs in their own way, I think the other Members of this House, the Irishmen, the Welshmen, and the Englishmen, ought to be compulsorily brought into the Galleries, left and right, in order to see the exact position of affairs in Scotland.
  Sir G. YOUNGER: They have gone to tea.
  Mr. HOGGE: I should have thought that they had gone for something stronger. I am going to a Division in

  1267
  order that those Members who do not take part in the Debate may, at any rate, be compelled to vote. There are a great many disappointing features about this Report. It can be judged from two points, of view—first of all, by the number of applications which have been made to the Board for small holdings, and, secondly, by what has been achieved by the Board. On page five in the first Report we get the number of applications for small holdings, and, as has been hinted at already, there is a curious circumstance with regard to those applications. Practically all the applications are confined to the crafting counties of Scotland or to the Northern and Western counties of Scotland, and there are no applications at all worth considering from Lowland Scotland. I was not in the House when the Small Holdings Act was carried through, but I was in the country, and I have a very distinct recollection that at least in three 'General Elections definite promises of small holdings were held out to the Liberal electors if they would support Liberal candidates at the poll. I am certain that a number of men who represent Lowland counties in this House would not be here to-day were it not for the promises that were made in connection with the proposed small holdings legislation, and it must be a matter of supreme importance to them, and of even more importance to the electors themselves, that these small holdings should be provided without undue delay. If you look at the Table, you will find, for example, that there have only been applications for six from the county of Berwick. Anyone who knows anything about Berwick must know that there is some reason to explain that inadequate application. There are none at all from Clackmannan.
  Sir G. YOUNGER: There never will be.
  Mr. HOGGE: I do not know whether the hon. Baronet remembers the Scotch distinction between "will" and "shall."
  Sir G. YOUNGER: Yes, I do.
  Mr. HOGGE: There are only six from Haddington, seven from Banff, seven from Linlithgow, five from Kinross, three from Nairn, the unlucky number of thirteen from the Deputy-Chairman's own constituency (Peebles), thirty-one from Roxburgh, and eleven from Selkirk. I should like to ask how far this Report is justified by what has been done. I asked the Secretary
  1268
  for Scotland, in a question in this House, to tell us what had been actually achieved by this Board, and we have this startling result, that the Board, the wisdom of which has been lauded this afternoon, and which is agreed on both sides of the House cannot be bettered, have inside the year created twenty-eight new holdings and provided for six enlargements.
  Mr. McKINNON WOOD: The hon. Member asked me how many had been created by agreement.
  Mr. HOGGE: Will the right hon. Gentleman allow me to remind him of the terms of the question? He was asked if he would give the number of new small holdings created in the crafting counties as distinct from the number of schemes of land settlement in respect of which the Board of Agriculture had applied to the Land Courts since the coming into force of the Small Landholders Act, passed last year. His reply was that there had been twenty-eight new holdings and six enlargements in the crofting counties, and in the rest of Scotland six new holdings by agreement without the Board going to the Land Courts for the money. I have no information as to holdings voluntarily created outside the Act.
  Mr. McKINNON WOOD: I understood the question to relate to how many holdings had been established under the Act, and I answered it in that sense.
  Mr. HOGGE: If there had been other small holdings formed outside the Act where is the information concerning them? The Report contains no record of a single holding having been so formed. If there is any such record I shall be glad to have it pointed out to me. But, in reply to a question put in this House, we are informed that there have been twenty-eight new holdings and six enlargements in the crofting counties and six in the rest of Scotland. If there have been any set up by agreement I would ask the right hon. Gentleman how ninny have been so formed?
  Mr. McKINNON WOOD: There have been actually over 150.
  Mr. HOGGE: The right hon. Gentleman might have given us that information in his interesting preliminary statement. But taking his own figures as to the working of this Board—the result of its activity has been that while there have been created over 150 holdings by agree-

  1269
  ment, only twenty-eight new holdings and six enlargements had been established in the crofting counties and six in the rest of Scotland. The remainder have been got without the action of the Board.
  Mr. McKINNON WOOD: It does not mean there has been no effort on the part of the Board.
  Mr. HOGGE: If it done by agreement it was not necessary for the Board to help at all. If you have a landlord agreeable to have a small holder on his holding, whether the Board is in existence or not. It only happens that the Board the moment, but if there is willingness on both sides there is no reason at all for the Act.
  Sir G. YOUNGER: The hon. Gentleman will remember the reason why very few agreements are made, and that is that if a holding becomes derelict no compensation is payable to the landlord.
  Mr. HOGGE: That is a subsidiary reason.
  Sir G. YOUNGER: It is an important point.
  Mr. HOGGE: I admit that if you are going to create holdings in Scotland and these holdings happen, for reasons over which the owner of the land has no control, to be unsuccessful, the owner of the land surely ought to be compensated for any loss arising under those circumstances. If the Act can be amended in that direction later on the hon. Baronet will rind such a proposal will receive support on this side of the House. I am not caviling, however, at the action of the Secretary for Scotland. I think I have already made it plain that the right hon. Gentleman, in his position, cannot be expected to make this Board the active body which it might be if it were supervised, as is the case in England, by a separate Minister, and I hope that that admission on my part will be borne in mind even in connection with any other criticisms I may make before I sit down. I am sorry that this should be the case, but it is the result of circumstances over which no Scottish Member has any control. What is the reason for this disparity between the expectations created by this Act being passed and the realization which is found in the 150 small holdings? I would like to ask the right hon. Gentleman if he has
  1270
  observed that one of the most widely circulated newspapers in Scotland, the "People's Journal," a paper which goes into every cottage practically in the North and East and the central parts of Scotland, has been conducting not an official inquiry, but an inquiry into the administration of the Act throughout the length and breadth of Scotland, with the help of special Commissioners, who themselves have knowledge of the conditions that obtain in Scotland and of the aspirations of the Scottish ploughmen throughout the agricultural classes of Scotland. What does one find? One finds, as a matter of fact, that there is still prevailing an enormous amount of ignorance in regard to the Act, and that ignorance is due to the fact that proper means have not yet been taken in Scotland to acquaint the people who want to make use of the Act with the conditions that obtain under it. Let hon. Members bear in mind what took place in Scotland in connection with the Insurance Act. They will remember that, in order to make that Act effective, some seventeen lecturers were appointed, and an amount approaching £2,000 was spent by the Insurance Commissioners in holding 900 meetings, in order to explain the provisions of the Act. But in spite of that educational effort the ignorance prevailing with regard to that Act has not been altogether removed. In connection with this particular Act no such steps were taken; no such means were employed by the Board of Agriculture, even although the members of that Board were quite cognisant that legislation was going to ensue and were occupied in helping the Bill through the House.
  I asked the Secretary for Scotland the other day whether or not certain leaflets were out of print. One recalls the fact that the Board of Agriculture has printed and distributed four special leaflets dealing with the operations of the Board of Agriculture in Scotland. They are presumed to have distributed them all over Scotland among people wanting the information. The right hon. Gentleman informed me one day last week that it was practically true that two of these leaflets were out of print, but that there would be a supply available within a few days or weeks. I know, as a matter of fact, that four months ago application was made to the Board of Agriculture in Scotland for copies of the four leaflets, and the applicant was then informed that they were out of print. It has, therefore,

  1271
  taken the Board of Agriculture four months to deal with this matter, and even now they have not got the two leaflets reprinted—leaflets which give a large amount of information to the people of Scotland with regard to this Act. I put it to the House whether or not the administration of this Act is in the hands one would wish it to be if it takes four months to reprint two of the leaflets which embody 50 per cent. of the entire information prepared for distribution in Scotland with regard to the Act!
  Then there has been in connection with the administration of the Act a tremendous amount of delay in replying to applicants for land. I have myself seen from 1,500 to 2,000 letters—and I shall be very glad if the Secretary for Scotland can find leisure to look over them. In these letters there are complaints from the applicants for small holdings of the enormous delay in regard to their applications. I have one or two here, and it might perhaps be interesting if I read a few of them. The first letter complains that it is about a year since the writer applied to the Board of Agriculture, and, inside of five months, he has heard absolutely nothing from them. The next letter is from a man who applied fifteen months ago, and who has since had a call from a Sub-Commissioner, but who has not yet heard anything in black and white from the Commissioners. The third letter is from a man in one of the Western Islands of Scotland who sent in his application and has heard nothing for twelve months. The next letter is from a different part of Scotland and the writer says that, although local inquiry has been made, he bas received no information as to his application. One could go on with these letters, but I do not propose to weary the Committee. They afford, however, an illustration of how things are done. I have here, for instance, a packet of letters passing between an applicant and the Board of Agriculture. I have had some experience personally in writing to an official Department of the Government, and I understand the weariness of the flesh in awaiting replies from that Department. But here I have a series of letters, starting on the 9th December, 1912, in which the applicant raises a question similar to that raised just now by the hon. Member for Inverness-shire, and in which he makes a definite application to the Board on a matter that concerns him very intimately. The correspondence goes on until the 9th
  1272
  May, 1913, and then the Board gives the man this gratuitous advice:—
  "It would seem advisable for you not to delay making your own arrangements for the coining year."
  Therefore it will be seen that this Board, in which the Secretary for Scotland reposes so much confidence in regard to the administration of this Act, takes not less than six months to deal with a matter which it ought to be able to deal with at once. With the addition of staff promised this afternoon it may be found to be easier to avoid such delays in the future.
  But there is another reason why the realisations have not been such as might have been expected, and it is to be found in the fact that there have been no object lessons in small holdings attempted anywhere in Scotland, so far as I know. Those of us who represent Scottish constituencies and have an intimate knowledge of the kind of man we have to deal with—and I suppose most of us, whether we represent burghs or county constituencies, have addressed political meetings in the country from time to time—are aware how in a village, for example, the ploughman, the man who works on the laud, ranges himself alongside the dyke, yards away from the man who wishes to address him, and displays as little interest as he can in the subject under discussion, in order that he may conceal any knowledge he thinks ought not to be assumed to be in his possession from his attitude. This is especially true about the agricultural labourer. He will not put a pen to paper; he will write nothing down. That is characteristic of the Scottish race, and one of the great difficulties with regard to getting applications in connection with this Act has been that natural reluctance on the part of the average Scottish agriculturist to put down in black and white exactly what he desires. If this Board had gone about its work in a different way, if it had taken the trouble to provide in various parts of Scotland an object lesson of what could be clone in the way of small holdings, I am perfectly certain there would not have been that absolute—because it is absolute, and not comparative—that absolute failure of the small holdings movement in the Lowland counties of Scotland. If you compare the experience this House has within its own knowledge of the administration of the English Act dealing with small holdings, you will remember that that Act was largely inoperative until you could get experiments in small holdings and more Commissioners. I

  1273
  remember the operation of that Act in Yorkshire. I happened to be associated with one of the hon. Members for Hull in a society in Yorkshire which had for its object the creation of a co-operative society for getting men on to the holdings before the application for the land was actually made. Those men were exactly like the average Scotsman. They do not believe in the possibility of a successful isolated experiment in small holdings. They would be willing to try it in groups. The work that wants doing in a great many parts of Scotland is the grouping together of men who are willing to take small holdings, and to take their place upon the land. The attitude of the Board is expressed in a sentence in their Report with regard to the Lowlands of Scotland. They say:—
  "It appeared to the Board that their efforts should first be directed to meeting the demand in those districts where it is most urgent."
  I state quite freely that that is an absolute failure to understand the real demand there is for holdings in Scotland. It is an attempt to put off dealing with the problem in the border counties of Scotland, because of the obvious response from those counties in Scotland which have had experience of the Crofters Act behind them for a great number of years. I maintain that, because in the Lowland counties there was not the same apparent response for holdings, there was the greater necessity that the Board of Agriculture should, at any rate, have taken means to place before the average agriculturist in the Lowland counties what was in the Act, what were the potentialities of the Act, and how to go about in order to get his application dealt with. So much with regard to the point dealing with administration. We ought to bear in mind what this problem is with regard to Scotland. We are confronted over and over again with figures, which are a warning to hon. Members who represent Scotland, as to the effect which the non-success of this Act and the delay in putting it into operation is having upon the people of the country. I suppose it must be true, because the figures prove it, that there is a larger exodus from Scotland to-day, and of the people of Scotland from these shores, than there has been within the memory of any man now in this Committee. On the other hand, you find that that it is perfectly possible for people who are not Scotsmen to get possession of land in Scotland for purposes which are entirely different from the purposes which this Act
  1274
  is seeking to provide. I read in the "Times" the other day a column of names of men who have already got their shootings in Scotland for the "glorious twelfth" and the succeeding weeks. There is no difficulty in getting that kind of land in Scotland, but there is an enormous difficulty in getting the kind of land that is wanted for the small holder. In fact it is pathetic, when one thinks of the condition of Scotland to day, that so small progress is being made under this particular Act. The shores of Cromarty Firth are in the hands of Lea and Perrin's sauce, Ben Wyvis is in the hands of Shoolbred's furniture, the land of the McKenzies and the Mathiesons is owned by Baron Schroder, Skye is owned by Nixey's black lead, Loch Ness is rented by Bass' beer, and Inverary Castle is owned by Beecham's pills. [HON. MEMBERS: "Why not?"] There is no reason why these places should not be rented by those people, but there is this point about it, that if so much land in Scotland which previously was able to rear men, can now be devoted to that kind of purpose, it is the duty of every Scottish Member to see that any Board that controls the administration of this Act shall see that the people who want land get that land upon which to live. That is the point of these observations. You cannot land on Rhum without knowing that it is the one local veto area in Scotland, with regard to land in any case. With regard to large parts of Scotland we surely ought to put every kind of possible pressure upon the Board of Agriculture in order that they may provide, what they ought to have provided inside the time at their disposal, more of these holdings for the people who want them. What is required in order to achieve this result? The Secretary for Scotland has told us that nothing can be clone unless we have more money. Do I understand the right hon. Gentleman does not agree with that?
  Mr. McKINNON WOOD: I did not say that. I said we could do more with more money.
  Mr. HOGGE: That is my point. All we want is more money. How are we to get more money? It does not interest me at all to agree with the right hon. Gentleman upon the fact that we want more money for Scotland. I cannot get it from the Treasury, and no private Member from Scotland can get it from the Treasury. The right hon. Gentleman can get it from the

  1275
  Treasury. He can get his own way in the Cabinet. We have that on record. He got his own way upon the occasion of the discussion on the Scottish Temperance Bill. He threatened to resign from the Cabinet unless he got his way, and the Cabinet gave in. Let him threaten to resign again unless they will give us money for the operations of the Board of Agriculture, and then the right hon. Gentleman will have performed a service for Scotland for which we shall bear him in grateful recollection. The second point which is necessary to bear in mind with regard to this matter, and I hope the right hon. Gentleman will be able to give us some information about it when he replies, is that it is perfectly obvious that until we get more money from the Treasury we will need to be careful of the money of those men who are applying for the holdings. There, again, you come up against a proposition which is bound to affect the whole development of small holdings in Scotland. I presume that by this time the right hon. Gentleman is aware that these holdings, desired by a great many agriculturists in Scotland, are not possible on account of the fact that the men lack the capital necessary to stock these particular holdings.
  If you look at the figures of the Report itself, you will find that a very small number of the people who applied up to the end of December—I am not taking into account those who applied since—had a very large capital. I think in the right hon. Gentleman's Report he states that only 417 of the applicants were possessed of £200 or more, that 509 had from £100 to £200, and that 744 had from £50 to £100. I take it that we are agreed that only the 417, who have £200 and over, are men whose ability to stock the small holding is above suspicion, and that the 509 who have between £100 and £200 represent a class of men in Scotland who have sufficient security in the holding that they might get, along with the capital they possess, to be fit subjects to whom a loan could be given by either a credit bank or the State itself, if the State were so disposed. The figures given in the Report show that 50 per cent. of the applicants, according to the position taken up by the Board of Agriculture, are financially unsuitable, and would not be able to stock their holdings. Obviously, if we are going to make any progress in this particular direction, it is absolutely necessary
  1276
  that the right hon. Gentleman should also press the Board of Agriculture to establish a land bank. They have the power to do it. They have been in existence for fifteen months, and, so far as I know, they have done nothing at any rate that can be reported with regard to such a scheme. I have dealt with the third remedy, which I think is absolutely essential to the running of small holdings, namely, the establishment of experimental holdings. I do not think the erection of a seed-testing station in connection with a university or an area dealing with forestry, or any other experiment attached to a university college, however important in themselves and useful for their particular purposes, are what is required for the practical demonstration of how to best do the things among the men who are actually on the land. After all, ploughmen cannot come from the border counties of Scotland in order to see purely university technical experiments. What you want is a practical illustration of what can be done in those districts where it is required on account of the number of small holders that exist. I am perfectly certain that if this Board is to secure the confidence of the men who have applied for holdings, they must, have more efficient methods of dealing with the mass of applicants. I do not understand whether the right hon. Gentleman stated that the clerical staff was to be increased by eleven or to eleven.
  Mr. McKINNON WOOD: By eleven.
  Mr. HOGGE: If the clerical staff is to be increased by eleven, that is an obvious admission now that the staff was absolutely insufficient to deal with the mass of correspondence that might naturally have been anticipated by any reasonable group of men attempting to deal with this problem. I think that this Act still requires to be advertised. Walking through the streets of London just now, one is struck by the number of large posters inviting people to spend their holidays in Scotland. [HON MEMBERS: "Hear, hear."] We have no objection to as many people coming to Scotland as can come. These posters are illustrated with scenery and events in that scenery which the average Scotsman is not accustomed to see. I always think, when I look at these posters inviting people to come and enjoy the scenery of Scotland, that they might take with them the Report of the hon. Member for Inverness-shire (Sir J. Dewar) upon the Highlands and Islands of Scotland. There they would find an entirely different story

  1277
  as to the real economic, industrial, and social conditions of those parts of Scotland to which people are invited to come by these railway posters. I am perfectly certain that the Board of Agriculture will require to take a page out of that kind of book and see to it that the Act is actually made known to the people in Scotland, because it would not he difficult to produce sufficient evidence to prove that in large districts of Scotland there are people to whom the information has not been conveyed, and it has not been made plain enough where they may apply, and they are ignorant of the conditions of the Act. I would appeal, therefore, to the right hon. Gentleman, without going into any other specific cases, to bear in mind that it is not enough to state, by way of preface, that so many Commissioners and so many Sub-Commissioners are going to be appointed and that the clerical staff is going to be increased by eleven, and that such-and-such things are going to be done. Those things ought to be being done all the time and all along. It is not sufficient, after the expiry of fifteen months' trial, to say that so far the administration of the Act has been a failure. It is the duty of the Scottish Secretary, more than any other duty that I know in Scotland, to put hi back into the administration of this Act and to see, what is a most obvious and a most regrettable fact in Scotland at the moment, that the very people you want to keep in Scotland, and to keep on the land in Scotland, cultivating that land and fitting into the social developments which are going on, are the people who are leaving it in thousands every day from the Clyde.
  Mr. MOLTENO: I quite agree with the hen. Member (Sir G. Younger) that the Secretary for Scotland was well advised in making a statement at the beginning of the Debate, because I am sure that statement was welcomed in every part of the House. We have all felt, from the Report of the Board of Agriculture, that the time has come when a very decided step forward should be taken, and a larger view should be taken of the requirements of Scotland in regard to the administration of the Small Landholders Act. When that, Act was passing through this House it was naturally regarded as to some extent an experiment. Machinery was provided for making a start, and no sooner was the Act promulgated than it became perfectly evident that the applications under it have been of a very satisfactory
  1278
  and gratifying character. They have been overwhelmed by applications from every direction. That being the case, it is incumbent upon the Secretary for Scotland, to take a much wider view of the situation than could be done before the Act came into operation. We have now a certainty that there is a very large number of Scotsmen thoroughly suited, even equipped with capital, to take up holdings under that Act. We have land, and we have machinery, and what we want to do now is to increase that machinery, make it more effective, and enlarge it so that we may be able more rapidly to cope with the very large number of applications which are now before the Board. When the Board made its Report the number of applications, was no less than 5,352. I understand that as the result of about a year's work we may be expected to have about 500 holdings created. Five hundred holdings a year means no less a period of time than ten years to satisfy the existing applications for land. There is not the slightest doubt that, as soon as there is a real chance of getting land under this Act, the number of applications will be enormous. I do not say that merely from my own experience. The Board tells us:—
  "The present evidence in regard to holdings cannot, in the opinion of the Board, be reckoned as a reliable indication. Since 1886 the full privileges of fixity of tenure and fair rent have been well understood, and the people, understanding their opportunities from experience, immediately press their claims upon the Board. There is reason to believe that when the benefits conferred by the Act are, through experience, fully understood in the Southern counties, there will be au increasing and steady demand."
  That I believe to be the actual fact. As soon as men have seen, and are satisfied that it will be possible to get a holding within a reasonable time, you will have a. very large number of applications from men who are thoroughly fitted to undertake small holdings—men who have saved money and have capital to stock them. Naturally, under the present condition of things, there is a long time to wait. They see that they cannot get holdings. In the same Report they say:—
  "The number of practical proposals which are a present before the Board leads us to believe that the limit to the number of small holdings which can be created will be determined by the resources of the Agriculture (Scotland) Fund."
  There it is already apparent that the, Board see a limit to their resources. The right hon. Gentleman has perhaps wisely not given us the exact limit to the extension of the fund which will be proposed because he wants to know our views. It is essential that we should have a substantial

  1279
  amount for the finance of the Act. In regard to that it is surely, to us who know something of the rural districts, a very sad fact that you have an enormous emigration from these rural districts. You have the very men we want to see settled on the land emigrating. It is established by this Report that these men are ready, willing, and desirous to stay in Scotland. They are men who would benefit Scotland in every way and they are men to whom all our Colonies are sending inducements to go out there. We all know that land in Scotland is as good as the land anywhere else. It is the finest part of the whole world. All we need now is large machinery and a reasonable prospect of putting land in the way of these men. I have never ceased, from the time I entered this House, to draw attention to the growing depopulation of the rural districts of Scotland. It has been enormous, and it has been deplorable in the Southern districts. In those districts where agriculturists mostly flourish the depopulation is greatest, and there is the greatest need of small holdings. It is often suggested that these men will not succeed and will not be able to equip their holdings. Where the soil is poor, these men, as is proved by fifty-five years experience under the Crofters Acts, have succeeded in rebuilding almost the whole of their houses. That is shown in the Report of the Crofters' Commission. I should like to say with what gratification I heard the statement of the Secretary for Scotland that he did intend to increase the machinery and make it more active and more efficient, so that these applications may be coped with more speedily. We all know that it takes time, and that does not mean that you must put off all these matters till the Greek kalends. It means that we must increase our machinery and be ready to deal with the applications. I could give instances in my own experience where men have been put off and have felt very sore, but I do not want to go into detail, because we all understand it. This Report does great credit to the Board of Agriculture. Considering the time at their disposal, they have done a great deal and they have shown great assiduity and great skill. This is a difficult thing to start, but when it has been once started successfully we are in a position to come to the House and ask for a larger sum. We can spend it well and we can spend it truly for the benefit of our country. What is it to spend half a
  1280
  million for this purpose? It is only a fifth of the cost of a "Dreadnought," and surely the security of the country is worth it!
  Mr. MUNRO: I was born and brought up in the Highlands of Scotland, and I am connected with the Highlands by political ties. I desire to approach the subject really from the point of view of the North of Scotland. In discussing the success or failure of the Board of Agriculture it is necessary to bear in mind more than one consideration or one will arrive at a wrong conclusion. In the first place, it is necessary to remember that too sanguine and glowing expectations were entertained in certain quarters with regard to the immediate and the complete success of the working of this Act of Parliament, and certain persons who entertained those anticipations have undoubtedly found that it was impossible to create a new heaven and earth by Act of Parliament, and certiainly not within fifteen months' time. Accordingly one must make due allowance for the feeling, which was very widely entertained. Further, I agree with the Secretary for Scotland that in launching a large administrative scheme of this sort, you are bound to be faced with very great initial difficulties. As regards this particular scheme, there are many inherent difficulties of which it is impossible to get rid. Let me remind the Committee how that matter stands. In the case of every application presented, it will be the duty of the Board to consider the character of the applicant, his financial capacity, his experience, the sort of holding he desires, where he desires the holding to be, and whether there is land available; and, if not, whether it is worth while in the circumstances to break a lease and pay compensation; and, if so, how much? I think reflection on these matters will be sufficient to convince any man that there will be great difficulty in working this scheme at the outset, and indeed unavoidable delay even when it is placed upon a, sound and proper footing.
  I desire also to say that I entirely agree with what has been stated with regard to the present Board. I am not here to question the capacity of the Board of Agriculture as constituted. On the contrary, I desire to confirm what has been said as to their entire sincerity of purpose, and to acknowledge that under very difficult circumstances they have no doubt endeavoured to do their best. But I am bound to add, speaking from the point of view of

  1281
  the North of Scotland, that the work of the Board so far is not satisfactory to the people in that part of the country, and not only is it not satisfactory, but a very wide, general, and profound feeling of dissatisfaction at the present moment prevails regarding it. It is no use blinking the fact—it is worse than idle to shut one's eyes to it. A great many sympathetic speeches have been made with respect to the work of the Board. I have listened to them with interest, but I think the Committee would go very far wrong if it did not recognise what has been pointed out forcibly by the hon. Member for East Edinburgh (Mr. Hogge) that in the North of Scotland the work of the Board up to date is not satisfactory, and it is public property that it is not satisfactory. In regard to that matter I turn to the Report of the Board, and what do I find? I do not think that I am putting it too strongly—I shall deal with the question of the increased staff and the possibilities of the future later on—when I say that it discloses two things. It discloses that as regards the work of the Board of Agriculture in connection with the formation of small holdings and the enlargement of existing holdings the Act of Parliament has been really inoperative in the Lowlands of Scotland in respect of a lack of applications, and that it has been inoperative in the North of Scotland by reason of a glut of applications.
  If you look at the figures, you find that there have been 3,370 applications for new holdings, and 1,982 applications for the enlargement of holdings. That is the way in which the matter of applications stands. How have these applications been gratified? I read in the Report that some 500 applications are to be dealt with—I hope in a satisfactory way—or have been dealt with, by the end of the year. What does that mean? It means that 4,800 applications, namely, the balance of the total which I have referred to, are not in the position of having any definite arrangement made with regard to any one of them at the present moment. That is surely a very serious state of matters. If you take the other test as to what has been accomplished, and come from the region of negotiation to the region of fact you find that the Secretary for Scotland now tells us that 150 tenants have been put in, and are now settled on small holdings. That is to say, during the period of more than fifteen months 150 out of over 5,000 applicants have been settled upon the holdings they desired to settle upon. All I can say is that, even if that rate of speed were
  1282
  doubled, there are so many applications in the first year of the working of the Act, many of the applicants would probably not live to see the day when they would be settled upon holdings; and, accordingly, it is not surprising that frank recognition has been given by the Secretary for Scotland of the eminently unsatisfactory position of that matter at the present time. I am glad that he proposes to take certain measures in order to mitigate the undoubted hardship which now exists.
  There is another point with respect to which I invite the Secretary for Scotland to say a word. It appears from a perusal of the Report that numerous applications have been already made to the Land Court by the Board of Agriculture for the purpose of accomplishing compulsory settlements where voluntary agreements were impossible. It is suggested, if not, indeed, definitely stated, that applications have been made to the Land Court for that purpose. I turn to the Report of the Land Court and find, on page 21, this statement:
  "We have only received one application from the Board for a compulsory order before the end of the year."
  That only applies to nineteen holdings in all. I do not know whether that means that the Board of Agriculture has, by means of voluntary arrangements so succeeded that it has not been necessary to apply to the Land Court. I think there is a discrepancy here which requires to he cleared up. That relates to the past, and with the past we cannot interfere now. The practical question is as to how in future the Board shall be managed more successfully, and more for the benefit of the people of Scotland, than it has been in the past. If there is one thing which has been made more clear than another, it is that the Board requires further resources to be placed at its disposal, and that now. I understand the Secretary for Scotland to say that he proposes at some date in the future, which he did not indicate, but which he said would not be very far off, to apply to the Treasury for further funds. I venture respectfully to say that the Report of the Board discloses that money is required now, and certainly it will be with the increased staff which he has promised, and, therefore, a larger number of applications would be dealt with than in the past. That money is urgently required. On page 7 the Board report in these terms:—
  "The work of the past month has disclosed a demand for land settlement far in excess of the present resources of the fund."

  1283
  If that does not mean that more money is required now, I really do not know what it means. That is one of the most useful and illuminating passages in the Report, which is couched in terms of amiable complaisancy, but which has been very much altered after what has been said by my right hon. Friend to-day. So far as money is concerned, one would like to know from the Secretary for Scotland whether he proposes to go to the Treasury and ask more money, and to do it at an early date. I think it must be obvious to him that with the large increase in staff he is now going to have, and with 4,800 applications in arrear and not dealt with in any way, and with applications coming in week by week and month by month, one of the first things he will find himself confronted with is the urgent need of more funds. The right hon. Gentleman has been Financial Secretary to the Treasury and he knows every lock and key of the Department. I would urge him in the most respectful way to wend his path to the Treasury at an early date, and ask whether they do not consider that, if we can spend £3,000,000 on a loan to the Soudan, we may ask an additional £100,000 for the people of Scotland?
  I hope I am not unduly pessimistic, but even with the increased staff there may be difficulties. With regard to that we shall be in a better position to judge next year. In conclusion, I venture to put it to the Secretary for Scotland that, this is a very urgent, matter on which many of us feel very strongly. I entirely agree with the hon. Member (Mr. Molteno) as to the bearing of this important question upon emigration. It is not a question which admits of any delay, for while you fail to settle the people on their native land, they are settling themselves on Colonial soil, and while the cottages are emptying, the ships which carry these people to the Colonies are becoming full. One is bound to remember these things when dealing with a question which is connected with emigration, as this undoubtedly is. I venture to hope that it will be recognised this is not a Scottish problem only, but an English problem as well, because these men are of the very class we have given to the country freely for the Army and the Navy, and it would indeed be lamentable if, when these men are required in time of strain and stress, you should find they are no longer in existence, because of the niggardliness of the English Exchequer.
  1284
  I hope the Secretary for Scotland will approach the Treasury and press this upon their attention. If he does so, I think I can assure him that he will have the backing of every Member who sits here from Scotland.
  6.0 P.M.
  Major HOPE: I think there has not been very great progress made in the way of providing small holdings throughout Scotland. I believe we all regret that, although we do not agree that the methods of the Board of Agriculture and the Land Court are entirely judicious, or likely, if continued on present lines, to ultimately prove a great success in promoting the formation of small holdings. It is absolutely useless dumping down men on the land if some steps are not taken to give them a fair chance of making a decent livelihood. The establishment of land banks and machinery for co-operation and combination amongst small holders is absolutely essential in order to give them this chance. The Secretary for Scotland stated to-day that something was going to be done in the direction of co-operation, and the establishment of land banks. He said his first object must be to create holdings, and then establish machinery for co-operation. It appears to me that it is during the first year of the small holder's occupancy that he will find it most difficult to keep his head above water. That is the time when he most requires the assistance of co-operative arrangements and land banks. It was interesting to hear from the right hon. Gentleman that money can be advanced at the rate of 4 per cent., which would extinguish capital and interest in fifty years. I think he said also that this included the insurance of buildings. I am sure we are glad to have this admission, because it means that, if land is purchased and small holders are put in and pay 4 per cent. on the purchase price, they would in fifty years become the owners of their holdings. I am sure we are glad to have the admission that it is to be so easily done. It is shown in the Report that at present there is little demand for small holdings in the South of Scotland. The Secretary for Scotland suggested that there should be some settlements formed as rapidly as possible as a sort of advertisement and to foster this demand. The Member for East Edinburgh goes still further and suggests that public money should be spent in providing lecturers to go round to advertise the advantage of small holdings.

  1285
  I should like to remind the Secretary for Scotland that at the present moment we have a little advertisement for small holdings at Muiriston, where there is a settlement, and I submit that unless some more consideration is given to the tenants, it will not be likely to encourage new applicants to come forward.
  At Muiriston there are five allotments of between ten and fifteen acres, which were constituted about two years ago from land reclaimed by the work of the unemployed under distress committees. These allotments are within half a mile of a railway station. Owing to the work of the unemployed, trenching and covering the land with large quantities of town manure from Edinburgh, the land is fairly good for market garden purposes, though not absolutely first class. One of these five tenants a few months ago did a moonlight flitting, and left the land covered with a tropical growth of weeds, and in such a state that money will have to be provided for a new tenant to induce him to cultivate the land. I visited that settlement a month ago at the invitation of one of the tenants, and of the remaining four, one man is losing money, but cannot give up his holding because he has erected glass houses and planted fruit bushes, and he cannot get compensation. The other three are struggling along, but they find the rent, £4 10s. an acre, far too high to enable them to make a decent living. These four tenants may not be absolutely select first-class men of experience and energy, but I think we may take them as being up to the usual average of small holders. I do not think that the fault entirely lies with any of them. I commend this settlement to the careful investigations of the Board of Agriculture as likely to give them useful experience, and information for future guidance in the constitution of small holdings, but I really rose to put forward the claim of the Lowlands that as they cannot in the meantime participate in this income of £206,000 a year of the Board of Agriculture for Scotland in the matter of small holdings they should participate in it in another form for the promotion of agriculture. The hon. Member for Bute has already referred to the outbreak of wart disuse in potatoes. The Board of Agriculture Report states that this outbreak is chiefly confined to small allotments and cottage gardens. If this disease is not stamped out it may spread over the potato crop of
  1286
  the whole of the South of Scotland. Even now not only is the export of potatoes from Scotland to the United States stopped, but it is largely hampered to South Africa, Malta, Jersey, and Guernsey. Again I quote from the Report.
  The Board of Agriculture have taken steps to stamp out this disease, but I do not think that their regulations are stringent enough. The power to deal with the disease is delegated to local authorities but no money is provided for compensation. No part of a crop in which diseased tubers are found should be sold, but the whole crop should be destroyed and the ground should not be used again for planting potatoes of any kind for some years. Naturally local authorities will hesitate to inflict loss and damage on small holders, and rightly, too, where they cannot compensate. If a comparatively small share of this £206,000 a year were handed over for this purpose and administered by the Board of Agriculture it would stamp out this disease. It is really a national object that this wart disease should be prevented from spreading further. I also suggest that the Board of Agriculture for Scotland might further consider the paying, out of the £206,000, of the half of the compensation for the slaughter of tuberculous cattle under the Tuberculosis Order, 1913, which now falls on the local authorities. At present the English Board of Agriculture pay half and the other half falls on the local authorities. The Treasury refuse to assist further. No doubt it is within the knowledge of the Secretary for Scotland that a memorial from a Committee, representing all the local authorities in Scotland, on the 6th June stated that pending a further decision from the President of the Board of Agriculture the majority of Scottish local authorities are taking no steps to carry out this Order. The stamping out of tuberculosis amongst cattle is equally a national object, and there is a very strong argument in favour of doing something, because under the present Order there is a direct incentive to local authorities to save money by being as lax as they can in administering tuberculosis Orders. The principle that the central funds should pay all compensation for enforced slaughter has been recognised in the pleuro-pneu-monia, swine fever, and foot-and-mouth disease Orders. The only exception being in the comparatively minor case of the glanders or farcy Order, where the burden has fallen upon the local authorities.
  The DEPUTY-CHAIRMAN: I cannot find any item in relation to this question. It is a matter for the Board of Agriculture.
  Major HOPE: I was only submitting in reference to small holdings that portions of the grant to which we would have been entitled should be diverted to these two objects which would benefit agriculture. I only hope, in conclusion, that something will be done to give the Lowlands of Scotland some advantage from this large sum of £206,000. I do not agree with this proposal for spending more money in advertising and trying to foster a demand for small holdings, and I think the money would be better spent in providing for the present applicants satisfactorily.
  Mr. CATHCART WASON: I regret exceedingly to find myself in almost total disagreement with my very excellent Friend and colleague the Member for Wick Burghs (Mr. Munro). I claim to be as well acquainted with the crofting district as any man in this House, and personally I do not have these very violent denunciations, or any denunciations at all, of the Board of Agriculture in my very large Constituency. The only complaint I have had at all in reference to the Board of Agriculture was because they did not do something which they could not possibly do, namely, break existing leases. You know perfectly well, Sir, as you were the author of the Bill, and you tried to get it through, but could not. Apart from that the Board of Agriculture appear to have managed operations exceedingly well. It is all very well for my hon. Friend to talk about land reform and to blame the Board of Agriculture. The Board of Agriculture are not to blame but this House, and the Members of this House who passed the Act as it stood are to blame. They refused point-blank to listen to any of the representations which we made as regards the difference between the Highlands and Islands and the rest of Scotland. Every word we then advanced in argument has been brought out clearly in this Report. There were 5,300 applications for land and enlargements; 5,000 of those are in the crofting districts, where the conditions are entirely dissimilar from what they are in the South. In the crofting districts the crofter or his father or grandfather has done everything to the land and the landlord has done practically nothing. These are the men who want more land and an enlargement of their holdings. These are the men who are
  1288
  anxious to get back on to the land. In the South the position is absolutely different. Of the 5,300 applications there were 108 from Lanarkshire and less than a 100 from all the rest of the Lowlands of Scotland put together. My hon. Friend the Member for East Edinburgh has made a number of very serious charges against the Land Court and the Board of Agriculture and the whole Department in this matter. He spoke with great knowledge of the condition of the Lowlands, but I claim to speak both on behalf of the Lowlands and the crofting district in this matter, and the conditions which prevail in the South of Scotland are entirely different. With all the facts of the case the Scottish peasant or ploughman is not the ignorant creature who refuses to put his name to anything. We have heard of the old Highland lady who denies what she said, but does not deny what she wrote.
  Attention called to the fact that forty Members were not present. House counted, and forty Members being found present—
  Mr. CATHCART WASON: There was no need for the hon. Member to move a count or seek to achieve something in the nature of a snap Division, because everybody knows that a Scotch Debate is not interesting to English or Irish Members. They are never expected to turn up. I was alluding to the remarks of my hon. Friend the Member for East Edinburgh in regard to the Lowlands of Scotland, and I understood that he referred to the reluctance of the Lowland farmer to sign his name to an application. What more could the Board of Agriculture do in respect of giving information on this subject than they have already done? I had myself great hope of getting something out of this Act in the Lowlands of Scotland, and I only had to apply to the Chairman of the Board and a Commissioner was sent down almost immediately. He took a motor drive of two days round the country, and saw a whole lot of people who might possibly apply for land. It is not want of capital which stands in the way; I do not know what it is, unless it be an inherent obstinacy or dislike on the part of the Lowland Scotsman to go out of his ordinary way. He has not been accustomed to small holdings, like the crofter, and that is one of the inherent difficulties of the whole position. In comparison with the average crofter the ploughman in the Lowlands is in receipt

  1289
  of a good wage, and he is not so badly off. With us the average farmer is labouring under very severe conditions indeed. After he has made up his account at the end of the year, if he has allowed any sum of money in respect of his labour and ordinary services, and if he has allowed anything for the services of his wife as dairymaid, there is nothing but absolute bankruptcy staring him in the face. I submit that there could be nothing more fatal than for the Board of Agriculture to start on a scheme in the Lowlands of Scotland, and it would be a disastrous failure.
  It has been pointed out that millions are spent in the Soudan and that millions are spent on "Dreadnoughts," but those millions are being spent for definite purposes in the interests of the country. When my hon. Friend behind me (Mr. Munro) is made Prime Minister in a Scottish Home Rule Parliament, as I hope he may be some day, would he propose to the Chancellor of the Exchequer in that Parliament to come down with a loan of £3,000,000 and pay the interest on that loan in order to subsidise land settlement and pay the people to go on to the land
  In the Lowlands of Scotland there are numbers of people, I believe, who are ready and willing to go on to the land, but it will take time and patience. Whatever else you can do you cannot rush a Scotsman. The Scotsman may on occasion do a thing foolishly, but if he does, it is because he has not thought over the matter very carefully. Therefore, I do entreat my right hon. Friend the Secretary for. Scotland not to be led by the pathetic observations of my hon. Friend for Wick Burghs (Mr. Munro) into going to the Treasury with a demand for more money at the present time. The old joke that a Scotsman can keep the Sabbath and everything else he gets his hands on, is quite out of place in this instance. That is not what it means at all. The Scotsman may be what is called "near," but he has an inherent conviction that it is wasteful and sinful to spend money fruitlessly and uselessly, and nothing would bring more discredit upon the Board of Agriculture than to start upon this scheme. My right hon. Friend, if he were to make a raid on the Treasury, would have to prove his case up to the hilt. Reference has been made to what the English Board of Agriculture are doing. They are not spending millions or even hundreds of thousands of pounds, but something like 40,000 a year on small holdings and allotments. My
  1290
  hon. Friend seems to doubt that statement, but it is the Return which has been given to me by the President of the Board of Agriculture in this country. They have actually got 38,000 small holdings at an annual expenditure of something like £40,000.
  The only reproach I have to make against the Act is, as I have said, its non-inclusion of leaseholders, and that, of course, the Board of Agriculture cannot help. I was a little surprised at the observations of my hon. Friend the Member for Inverness, who stated that sonic persons did not receive any answer to their letters. [HON. MEMBERS: "Hear, hear."] "Hear, hear"—I do not understand that. If the Board of Agriculture or the Fishery Board or any other Board of Scotland, or even the Post Office here, are written to by any of my Constituents, and they do not get a reply, I hear of the fact very shortly afterwards, but directly the matter to which any letter may refer is represented to the Department which may be concerned, I am sure every Member will agree with me when I say that any representation is always received with the utmost courtesy and attention. Why some constituents have not received replies to their letters is that their Members have not taken upon themselves to answer, and I think that is their fault and not so much the fault of the Board of Agriculture. The whole question is exceedingly difficult, and I for one, while deprecating any undue haste on the part of the Board of Agriculture, would like to emphasise the fact already urged on this point by the Chancellor of the Exchequer, namely, that this question of the laud settlement in the country and the question of rural depopulation are together one of the most grave national problems we have to deal with.
  We cannot have a healthy and safe country while we have vast numbers of our rural population in a state of discontent. Certain figures were alluded to by several of my hon. Friends in regard to the number of emigrants leaving the shores of Scotland for other countries. It is largely due, in my opinion, to the meretricious sort of advertisements we see in the papers lauding the Colonies. The Board of Agriculture cannot compete with countries which offer a free farm, a free passage, and large wages. Emigration agents who are paid so much per head for every emigrant sent out are not too particular what they say. I think that it is a discredit to the Colonial Governments, every one of them,

  1291
  that they should allow emigration agents to issue statements which on the face of them are often practically nonsense. The emigrant who goes to any of those Colonies goes to a very hard life, for which only those who are the strongest are fitted, and when they get to the other side we do not hear any more of them. I sincerely trust that the outcome of the Debate will be to assure the Secretary for Scotland that the vast majority of his colleagues in this House are very well satisfied with the operation of the Act and the manner in which the Board of Agriculture has conducted its work. It is not nearly fifteen months, but a little over twelve months, since the Act came into operation, and let Scottish Members take on their own shoulders—it has nothing to do with the Secretary for Scotland—the whole blame of any defects there may be in connection with its operation, and not try to throw it upon the administrators on the Board in Edinburgh.
  Mr. MORTON: I do not agree with the speech which my hon. Friend has just made, and all I can say is that none of the Northern counties will endorse in any shape or form what he has said. My own recollection of Orkney and Shetland is that they have made more applications and got more money than any other part of the North of Scotland. What I cannot understand is that anybody should talk of settling the land question without money. Many of us want money quite as much as the Irish party, for Ireland has got hundreds of millions for the purpose of settling the land question—millions which I voted for, because I wanted the question to be settled. That is an additional reason why we in Scotland should have money in order to settle the land question in that country. I do not know whether the Government realise, the gravity of the land question in Scotland. In my opinion it is both serious and urgent, and I am glad that at last the Government realise its gravity and urgency by putting this Vote down first for discussion. Hitherto, from one cause or another, we have had no such opportunity for discussion. I wish to speak more particularly about Sutherland-shire. The information which I have got from Sutherland-shire is that up to this very date not one holding has been cut out or any old holding enlarged. This is an extract from a letter I have received:—
  "Now we are getting nothing done by the Board of Agriculture — not a new holding cut out or an old
  1292
  holding enlarged—and to tell these applicants that they have no capital is a mockery. Instead of facilitating the settlement of the people on the land, the Board of Agriculture seem bent on finding all the obstacles they can."
  Of course, it may be said that there is no land. I want to make quite clear that there is plenty of land.
  The matter is felt very strongly in Sutherlandshire, where, during three or four elections, it has been the main question. They are not satisfied with the working, or, shall I say, the non-working, of the Board of Agriculture, because I suppose they have not done anything. It is said that instead of setting to work under the Land Act they seem to have put every obstacle in the way of carrying it out. I know some people say that there is no land in Sutherlandshire. I know better than that. I want to show the Committee where the land is, so that the Board of Agriculture may find out in time where Sutherlandshire is, for I am not quite sure whether they know where it is. The Royal Commission reported in 1895 that there were in Sutherland 395,892 acres of land fit for holdings. I want to know why we cannot have that 395,000 acres of land which the Royal Commission has shown to be available in the county of Sutherland for small holdings, as soon as it can be got possession of. With regard to the Land Act, it is a bad Act, and we knew it was at the time it was passed, but we gave way to the Lords, who did too much in the making of the Act, because we thought, as there was great need to be doing something, we might get something out of the Act, and consequently allowed it to go through. What we have to think about is administration. I really do not think that anybody is satisfied with the working of the Agricultural Board. I realise that does not apply to the Land Court, in which Lord Kennedy has done very good work indeed. We are, however, in this difficulty, that matters must commence with the Board of Agriculture, and you cannot get to the Land Court until you have got past
  them. It may be said that there is no proof that the Board are not going as fast as they ought or not recognising their duty. I have been sending applicants from crofters and others, some of them wanting new and some enlarged holdings. They all say they sent in applications more than a year ago and nothing whatever has been done. That applies to dozens of cases all over the county. I

  1293
  have sent a number of letters to the Secretary for Scotland in regard to these matters, and he took copies of the letters I received. Here is an answer I got the other day from him, and which is really an answer from the Board of Agriculture. It is dated 17th June:—
  "Dear Sir,—I am asked by Mr. McKinnon Wood to thank you for your letter of June 16th and enclosure referring to the application of Mr. John Campbell, of Durness, for a small holding, and to say that he regrets that he does not see his way to do anything in the matter."
  There is another case which I brought before the House, of the enlargement of holdings, where the land happened to belong to another landlord from the one under whom they held. When we were discussing the Act in Committee an Amendment was passed. What did the Board of Agriculture do? They trumped up a case, and said that by an Amendment of the Act, unless they got the land from the same landlord, they could have no land at all. My complaint against the Board of Agriculture in this matter is, instead of going to the Lord Advocate and finding out what was done in Committee of this House, and leaving it to the landlord to raise an objection and find the matter out, the Board did it themselves. All we have been enabled to do in that case is to secure that the matter shall be taken to the Land Court to be settled. That may take twelve months, and in the meantime the land may be let to somebody else, and they may never get it. I do not wish to make any personal complaint against anybody. I do not wish to make a personal complaint against the Secretary for Scotland, but I do say he ought to put his foot down and say that things should be done properly, and instead of they being his master, he should be the master. There is no other way of managing these extraordinary Boards, and until something of that sort is done we are not likely to get any reforms. We must have more money to settle the land question. The matter is urgent and serious enough, and something must be done to prevent this emigration and depopulation going on. I do hope the Secretary for Scotland will recognise the serious nature of the land question in Scotland, and do something more even than he has promised to-day to get the matter settled. I am glad to know that he is appointing five more Commissioners, and if twenty more are required we ought to have them.
  From reports and letters which appear in the newspapers, I am pleased to note
  1294
  they have taken up this question, and give particulars which, I trust, the Secretary for Scotland will read, so that he may understand the land question. As far as the North of Scotland is concerned, some effort must be made to settle the land question, unless you want the country to be ruined. The matter is a serious one, and I am sure the Members for the Island counties feel, like myself, that it is our duty to do something for our constituents. Unless we get something more satisfactory still to-day than I have heard, I shall be bound to vote with my hon. Friends, so as to let them know in a practical way what we mean. I told the House before, and I say now, I do not think the Government are treating the people of Scotland fairly in this matter and other matters. It is too much taken for granted that because Scotland is the most orderly and law-abiding part of the United Kingdom that you can do as you like with it. I wish to assure the Secretary for Scotland that we have taken off our gloves in this matter and that the Members for Scotland insist upon everything being properly administered, because it is not so much a matter of politics as of administration. Let the Government bear in mind they depend for their existence as a Government on the Scottish Members, and that if they do not do their duty to the people of Scotland, and act fairly and, honestly towards that country, they may find that the Scottish Members will band together, as the Irish and Labour Members, and insist on their demands being looked after properly for the benefit of the whole of the Scottish people. I do assure the Committee that our constituents are in earnest on the land question, and that we shall, in the best possible way we can do, insist on Scotland being treated in a fair, honourable, and honest manner by the Government of the day.
  Captain GILMOUR: I have listened with considerable interest to the discussion so far as it has gone, and with the exception of the statement made by the Secretary for Scotland I have not noticed that any Member who has spoken to-day has dealt with the question of the Board of Agriculture except from the one point of view, namely, as to the settlement of small holdings. I wish to remind the House that, after all, the Board of Agriculture is constituted for other purposes as well as that of small holdings. I do not wish it to be understood for a single moment that I am antagonistic to the

  1295
  principle of setting up small holdings in Scotland, or that I would do anything to put obstacles in the way of the propagation of those small holdings. But I do think that it is time that in the interests of agriculture, as a whole, in Scotland we should take stock of the situation. My own opinion has always been that, whether this Scottish Board of Agriculture has, as far as it has gone, done what it could to the best of its ability, or whether it will ever under any circumstances be able to fulfil all the hopes and aspirations of agriculturists in Scotland. I have always been of the belief that we made a great mistake in losing the knowledge and experience of the Board of Agriculture in England. I have always thought if we had a Department in Scotland, with a representative sitting here answering for that Department in this House, that not only would the agriculturists of Scotland have been brought closely into touch with those who had to administer agricultural matters, but that we would have had all that added advantage of being able to utilise the knowledge that had been compiled through a long period, and which has now got to be freshly built up by a meagre staff handicapped by the fact that they have not at their disposal a sufficient amount of funds. I confess, having listened to this Debate, my hopes for the general agricultural interests of the country have received no encouragement. With regard to small holdings, what is the policy of the Board to be on the general question of the acceptance of candidates? Are they setting up before themselves any particular standard as to the amount of capital which applicants should have before they are given small holdings? Although we may desire to see men settled upon the land in greater numbers, we ought to be very careful indeed that the men have sufficient working capital to make their venture a success, and if there are not sufficient applicants with the necessary funds, it then becomes a problem whether sufficient funds can be found in other ways. I would urge upon the Secretary for Scotland and the Board that if they are going to make a success, as we would hope they might do, of the settlement of these small holders, they must. be most careful to see that the men they settle on the land have sufficient capital to give them a fair opportunity.
  1296
  The right hon. Gentleman mentioned the necessity for co-operation. I am glad that he referred to a body which has been working in Scotland on this very subject—the Agricultural Co-operative Society_ He said that very little had really been done in that direction. There are a number of Members on the other side who are well aware of the work which this society has been doing. For the last five or six years, at any rate, it has been laying the foundations of a movement which, if it is assisted, as I hope it may be, by the Government of the day, from whichever party it is drawn, will be able to do infinitely more than almost any other movement for the small holders and the small agriculturists throughout the country. We have received assistance from the Development Commission, and I trust that the relations between the Scottish Board of Agriculture and this voluntary body will continue to be of a. very happy nature. I am sure, if that is so, it will be of benefit to the country. Mention was made of the necessity of having some object lessons in small holdings. I am not at all averse to that. I confess that I have seen object lessons in small holdings in Scotland, some of them good, but a great many of them very bad indeed. I think it very desirable that we should have in selected areas under the supervision of the Board of Agriculture, not only object lessons in small holdings, but, rather, upon the lines of what we find in Canada, object lessons in general farming in connection with the education of the people throughout various districts in Scotland. In reference to forestry, it has been claimed by one university or another that the demonstration area should be in close proximity to that university. For myself, I. would say that if this demonstration area is to be of the utility which we would desire to see, it must depend not so much upon being in the vicinity of any particular university, as upon being chosen in that part of the country where there is most likelihood of a really practical area being selected. It appears to me that each and every one of the universities in Scotland can include in its curriculum the necessary education of the class-room on forestry matters; but when it comes to the more practical work of the field, if it is to be of real value, those who are receiving the education must inevitably, in my opinion, leave the classes for a considerable period and go to that

  1297
  area where they will receive instruction from a practical forester on the spot. The Report is not yet submitted, and this is all conjecture. I would urge upon the secretary for Scotland if, when the Report is submitted, he has to come to a decision as to the suitability of one area as against another, he should keep before him what I believe to be the most important consideration to which I have just referred.
  The right hon. Gentleman also stated that the Board of Agriculture were doing something to assist horse breeding, both light and heavy. I am glad to recognise the good work which the Board have done, particularly in the matter of light horse breeding, and to congratulate them upon the result of their representations, not only in encouraging farmers to breed horses, but in inducing the Army buyers to purchase directly from the farmers. That is of the utmost importance. In view of the fact that for a considerable number of years practically no horses have been bought in Scotland by the Army, it is very encouraging to know that within the last few weeks, as a result of the representations of the Board, assisted by private representations, purchases have actually been made. I wish to emphasise the point that it is not only the duty of the Board of Agriculture to secure as far as possible the settlement of people upon small holdings, but it is as much, if not more, their duty, to take an active and close interest in the propagation of all agricultural matters. We welcome the setting up such institutions as seed-testing stations. I should hope to see in the future experiments in breeding, feeding, and the like, and if it were possible—although this probably comes under the English Board—one would welcome some such testing station for diseases in stock as has been established in England. In conclusion, while no one interested in agriculture in Scotland would say for a single moment that he was entirely satisfied either with the powers of the Board or with the work that they have done, yet no one can help realising that they have undertaken a very large and important task and have been handicapped by lack of funds. From whatever part of Scotland we may come, and whatever interest may be nearest our hearts, we will all do whatever we can to assist them in the work which lies before them, in the hope that they will not disappoint us, but will realise that, however much they may have done in the initial stages, there is still a great deal more to do.
  7.0 P.M.
  Mr. AINSWORTH: It must be very pleasing to all those interested in the subject under discussion, that during this Debate, although there has been criticism which, of course, the Department expects, and which ought to make the future working of the Board better and easier, we have had from every quarter of the House a practically unanimous opinion that something must be done to deal with the emigration of the industrial and agricultural classes from Scotland. The only means we have at present for dealing with the problem is the machinery provided by the Government and agreed to by the House of Commons, when they passed the Small Landholders Act. The work which we have before us is that of making that Act, as far as possible, a success. I believe that the principal reason why the Act has perhaps been a little slow in getting into work is that the Board of Agriculture have naturally and wisely determined that their first experiment shall be a success. It is an old saying that nothing succeeds like success. There are always persons prepared to complain, but if the first experiment is a success. we know that it will spread. The people who are doubtful and lukewarm will then come round to the view that this machinery is the one means we have of dealing with the problem and will give it their support. I wish in every way that I can to support it. I do not know what other Scottish Members feel, but whenever I read the numbers of able-bodied men and women who are leaving the Clyde every week for the Colonies, it seems to me deplorable. One of my hon. Friends said that it was a question, not only for Scotland, but for the United Kingdom. I consider it a question, not only for the United Kingdom, but for the Empire at large. What are you going to do if you cannot keep the race going, and have people about your hearthstones, at home in the Highlands—how, I say, are you going to assist, not only in the development of that country or the United Kingdom, but of the Empire oversea? I do think our Debate to-day has brought clearly before us the fact that the only machinery that we have at present fitted to deal with this matter is the machinery of the Small Landholders Act (Scotland). I sincerely hope that all my hon. Friends here—I think this Debate has shown their willingness—will join in helping to make the Act and its working a success. At the same time I perfectly agree that the faults

  1299
  of the Act should be shown, and that we should assist in having these faults amended. I hope the House will not be alarmed if I give a quotation from the poet Burns, for I shall guard myself by giving it in prose. In one of his letters, the poet says:—
  "I believe that wherever I see the smoke of a cottage there is room for all the virtues in this life."
  That is perfectly true. Those who know how the population of Scotland is brought up, know that though it may be extremely poorly, though the children may be barefooted, all these children get a thoroughly good education; they are brought up healthily, and sound physically, morally, and mentally. Nobody wants to see the growth of such a population checked as it has unfortunately been checked in past years. We have had the Crofters Act, which undoubtedly has done an enormous amount of good, and to a certain extent has enabled us to keep our population. I sincerely trust that with the aid of the Small Landholders Act we shall be able to carry on the same work, and by so doing have the reasonable satisfaction of knowing that we are doing a good work, not only for our own country, but for the Empire. I should like to mention two or three points which I should like to bring to the attention of the Secretary for Scotland in the hope that he may be able to give some sort of a satisfactory reply. I spent some time a few weeks ago in my Constituency, in those parts where the Act, was beginning to be put into force, and I heard a great deal on both sides of the question. I came across a number of instances in which proprietors and large farmers were helping to start the Act. So far as the farmers are concerned. I think they are beginning to see that there can be no greater loss or damage to them than by the decrease and emigration of the population. So far as the landowners go, now that they are not so much alarmed about the Act as they were, they cannot help seeing that they may possibly get as good a rent from a considerable number of small holders as they did before. I want the Secretary for Scotland and the Board of Agriculture to bear in mind some of the points that I have mentioned, and will mention. As I have said, there is the delay in bringing the Act into force. I understand the policy has been in the first instance to create a, new home wherever it could be done, rather than devote time and money to the enlargement of holdings. That is perfectly right. Now, how-
  1300
  ever, that the Board have made a start, I want them to consider the enlargement of existing holdings as much as they do the creation of new ones. Where we have an existing holding and have a family there, even if it is impossible that that household should be at the first an economic household, let them consider that it may be as well to have them permanently etstablished in the place. I came across several instances in my tour where owners of buildings, which were not in a particularly good state of repair, were prepared, if the Board would only find them some of the money or offer facilities, to do the repairs themselves. I sincerely hope the Board will be able to deal with questions of that kind.
  As to the question of water supply and sanitation. I think I am quite right in saying that one of the duties of the old Congested Districts Board was to assist localities in the improvement of their water supply and sanitation. In fact, all consideration that could be accounted considerations of health. I find that under the Congested Districts Act (Scotland), Commissioners of the Board are appointed for the purpose of administering sums available for the improvement of the congested districts. What greater improvement can you have than the health of the congested districts? I sincerely hope the Board will devote themselves to this matter wherever they create a new district and encourage a new population. If they have not sufficient power to do the things that I mention and that seem so desirable, I hope they will come back as soon as possible to Parliament, who no doubt will give them the extra powers needed to deal with a satisfactory water supply, and so on. Some hon. Gentlemen have asked how are we going to get any more money? They suggest that more is needed to efficiently carry out the work of the Board under the Act. I can tell the Board of Agriculture, and I think I have the support of the House of Commons in so doing, that if they can make their work valuable enough, they have only to come to this House and ask for any additional powers necessary or any additional money required, and I am certain this House will be prepared to let them have it. I trust this Vote will be agreed to without a Division. An hon. Member spoke of taking the matter to a Division. In his speech he was careful to say that he did not consider the Secretary for Scotland sufficiently well paid, and yet he is endeavouring to carry out his policy by deducting £100 from that salary. I

  1301
  hope we shall all associate ourselves with the hon. Member for the Northern Burghs, arid support the chiefs in this matter in the hope that they will proceed on the lines they have taken. I trust they will have no hesitation in asking for more money whenever they want it, so that before long we may have the satisfaction of seeing the best results effected through the operation of the Act, not only in relation to Scotland, but in relation to the Empire.
  Mr. BARNES: I was not present when my hon. Friend the Member for East Edinburgh moved the reduction. I suppose being one of those who are supposed to be "agin" the Government I should vote with him, but I do not feel disposed to do so. I have heard some of the criticism today of the right hon. Gentleman the Secretary for Scotland. I think some of it is well founded as, for instance, when I heard the Member for Inverness complain that some of his constituents had not received replies to their letters until a very long time after those letters had been sent. I have also heard complaints From other hon. Members. I have to take, of course, what I know of Scottish agricultural matters largely at second-hand, but I am inclined to think that there has been some legitimate cause of irritation during the last few months. On the whole, however, I do not think it is quite fair to the right hon. Gentleman to come here to-day after a Department has been in operation for only nine months, having regard to the legal and no doubt other obstacles that have lain in his path, and having regard to all the circumstances, to put a matter of this sort to the vote. I rise to refer to only one point that has been mentioned by several speakers. I want to dwell upon that point for a few minutes, because I think it is a very important one, and has at all events an indirect bearing upon the problem with which we were familiar some four or five years ago, and that we shall be familiar with once more before many years go over our heads. I refer to the problem of unemployment. I want also to refer to the question of afforestation, because I think it has a, bearing even upon getting people settled on the land in small holdings. I believe that there are some parts of Scotland where, if you had afforestation and small holdings running together, you might very likely place a good many people in employment, whereas neither small holdings nor afforestation would of themselves be sufficient to achieve that object. I want to complain about the
  1302
  inaction, I will not say of the Secretary for Scotland, but of somebody, and I want to fix the blame on somebody. I do not know who is to blame. It is possible we shall get to know. But what I have in my mind is that this question of afforestation is no new one. It has been before this House on many occasions, and I think pretty well everybody, not only in this House but outside of it, who has gone into these matters agrees that this is one of the most important matters that could engage the attention of the Board of Agriculture. I remember when I was on the other side of the House a Report being submitted by a Commission that had been set up, I think in 1906, to inquire into the most suitable areas available for afforestation in connection with unemployment and various other matters. That Commission reported four or five years ago and told the House that there were so many million acres of land—I forget now the number, but a great many—
  Mr. MacCALLUM SCOTT: Six millions.
  Mr. BARNES: My hon. Friend says six millions available, or, at all events, suitable for afforestation. Following that Report, nothing was done. Later, having regard to the importance of this particular matter, a Departmental Committee was appointed, I believe by the Scottish office, to inquire into the question of afforestation, not generally speaking, not applying to the whole of the Kingdom or the three Kingdoms, but to Scotland alone. That Committee reported. I want to compare the proceedings of that Committee with the one that was set up some eight or nine years ago, so far as time is concerned. I am now speaking from memory, but I believe I am right in saying that that Departmental Committee set up in 1911. It reported in the same year and made certain recommendations, and I should like to know what is actually being done to bring this question of afforestation out of the region of mere talk and abstraction down to a really practical proposition dealing with some of these vital problems that concern the every-day life of the people. That Committee reported in 1911. Then we had an Advisory Committee. I believe that followed from the Report of the Departmental Committee. One Committee follows another, but we seem to get no forrarder. One of the recommendations of that Committee was that we should have an Advisory Committee to

  1303
  advise upon the proper and the most suitable demonstration area, and to advise as to a school of instruction, and one or two other things; and I hope the Committee to which reference has been made in the Report of the Board of Agriculture, and which was appointed at the end of July, eleven months ago, will advise that we should cease talking and get to business. We want to know what has been done in the last eleven months.
  I believe the right hon. Gentleman opposite was quite right in regard to the proper area for that work. So far as I understand, he expressed the opinion that the area should not be one next to the school of instruction, but one where the land and all the circumstances were such as would produce the best results, having regard to the problem. I take it that the first step is not to purchase land and plant new trees and employ a few people on the planting of them, and then wait a generation before we can get anything in the way of timber. Of course, that would be one one part of the problem; but another part, and a more important one as it as a going concern so that as speedily as seems to me, would be to buy up a forest possible we could set people to work in cutting down what I may call the ripe trees and employing in the vicinity of the afforestation area labour in the subsidiary industries, and also giving employment to those people on some estates or farms where they do not at present eke out a complete living. I ask the Secretary for Scotland to tell us what has been done in regard to this matter. I think it is time, having regard to all the Committees and Commissions that have sat, and the immense discussion that has gone on in the last few years, and having regard also to the fact that we shall find the unemployment surgeon round our doors soon, and shall be confronted with the need of doing something, that we should get some explanation or justification, if there is such, for the inaction of this Committee which has been eleven months at work and has as yet done nothing. I understand from the Secretary for Scotland that he made application for more money, and I am glad to know that he has got more money for the staffing of his office. I am sure the Development Commissioners would take a generous view of any application for the development of this matter. Some years ago when the Development Commission was started, it was generally under
  1304
  stood that it would apply money for the purpose of the economic development of the country. Here is something that would contribute more than anything else that I know of to the economic development of Scotland. I should like to know what the Committee has done, or if it has done anything, and when we are likely to have any real practical results.
  Mr. FALCONER: I rise, not for the purpose of discussing the work of the Board of Agriculture generally, but for the purpose of saying a word with regard to the small holdings problem in the Lowlands. I hold very strong opinions upon this question. I think so far as Scotland is concerned, the development of small holdings and the populations of the country districts is a matter, not of choice, but of absolute necessity if Scotland is to continue in the future as she has done in the past to depend very largely upon a race brought up within her own shores. It is quite obvious to anyone who takes note of the change which is going on in the rural districts that people are leaving them, and that the same class of people are not being maintained there. I myself have been much struck by two things in my own experience. One thing that strikes me in the Lowland counties with which I am best acquainted on the East Coast of Scotland is the number of people going abroad in order to find land, and the second thing that strikes me, and it is emphasised by reading the Report of the Board of Agriculture, is the comparatively small number of applications made to the Board of Agriculture for land in the Lowland counties. I know of my own knowledge there are many men eminently suited in these counties, and that there is any amount of land eminently suited near to the market, having ideal conditions as regards soil and climate, and I have made it my business to ascertain by inquiries what is the reason for the people not having taken advantage of the Small Landholders Act and applying for holdings, and I find almost invariably that it is this: The ordinary Lowland ploughman and grieve who in a position to take a small holding and has a little money left or ready by him will not make an application for a small holding unless he knows definitely that he will get it. That, I believe, is the real difficulty with regard to the Lowlands. No doubt in the Highlands you have a different set of conditions, but, in the Lowlands the main source of difficulty which

  1305
  the Board of Agriculture have got to meet is the difficulty that those men will not apply for holdings in the existing situation unless they know definitely that they will get them. I am bound to say that is an attitude I would adopt. These men, who may be employed as ploughmen on a farm or who may be managers, are in good situations; they have their families, and they are prudent, thrifty men. Such a man sees an advertisement, and sees that the Board of Agriculture are setting about the creation of small holdings, but he will not apply unless he is prepared to give up his situation, and he will not give up his situation, which is usually a yearly one, unless he well knows he will get a holding and unless he knows in what quarter it is situated, so as to judge of its suitability both in regard to situation and rent.
  My reason for rising was to put that view before the Secretary for Scotland. If he is going to get these people to settle on the land here instead of going abroad, he must say, "I am prepared to find a holding for you and to find it by a definite date," otherwise he will not get the men. What is necessary for that is simply that he should have a staff capable of dealing with all suitable applications he receives, and also he should have money to provide the holdings. When one considers the importance to the country of securing those people on the land, when you consider that at the present moment you have many suitable applicants, and that if you do not take advantage of that and keep them now, you never will get another chance of keeping them, I say it is the clear duty of the Government and the Board of Agriculture to get the staff necessary to deal with suitable applications whenever they receive them, and also to get money to provide for the buildings and equipments. It may be said that that is a large order. I do not think so. When you consider the value to the country of the people going out of it, the amount expended in their upbringing and education, and the capital and the energy that is lost to the country, and when you consider that there is not a single agricultural county that is not urgently in need of some men to do agricultural work, then I say it would pay the country to raise the necessary money, if it goes to a million instead of half a million, in order to say to those suitable to stay upon the land, "We will find you a place within a definite period." If you have the land and the money available
  1306
  and the staff, any business man would say, "Let us take advantage of this opportunity at any cost as regards organisation," and any cost as regards providing the necessary capital would pay to carry that out, and if you do not do it now you will lose your opportunity. I press that most earnestly. I know the number of people leaving the country; I know the loss we are suffering, which we will never be able to make good hereafter if we lose the opportunity now.
  In the farming industry at the last Whitsuntide term, when engagements were renewed, there was such a dearth of suitable men to carry on the farming business that wages jumped up to an extent to which they never jumped in my memory before. What does that mean? It means that, if this is to go on continually it will be impossible to get the men required for the cultivation of the land. The only cure that I see is that we should have these small holdings, from which we will get the best men for agriculture or for any other work in the country. I agree it is a very difficult problem in the Lowlands. People that were plentiful are gradually disappearing. In my own district small holdings have gradually died out for want of capital on the part of the landlords to provide the necessary buildings, and where there used to be many small holdings you have now the large farms instead, and people who have gone out of the small holdings—the ploughman and the ploughman's son—have no way of getting small holdings. If you set up examples, you will get a nucleus which will gradually spread and people will come forward and take these small holdings, and there will be a denser population and different classes of people will not be looking to the attractions of the Colonies. I think it is not the attraction of the Colonies that leads people to what is very often a desolate and solitary life, especially for the wife and children; it is eminently undesirable that they should be far removed from doctors and churches and education, and isolated from social enjoyments, which all those people like as much as anybody else. There is no attraction in Canada, Australia or New Zealand to be compared to the attraction, so far as home is concerned, to be found in our own country, with all its advantages.
  I think the Board of Agriculture if they had the staff and sufficient money to grapple with this problem would have

  1307
  little difficulty in persuading the people to remain in this country. The difficulty is that the people know applications have already been sent in, that it will take ten or twelve years to satisfy, and under those circumstances what is the use of advising people to come forward and make applications when the Board is already choked up with work which it will take them ten or twelve years to overcome. If they have the necessary staff and money and are able to point to the advantage of climate and soil and social surroundings, I do not think the commission agents from Canada will be listened to with much patience by the ordinary Scotsman who wants to live in his own land, and make a home for himself in the place in which he was brought up. 1 urge the Secretary for Scotland to go on in the direction of increasing his staff, and I can assure him that so far as I am concerned, and I believe so far as Scottish Members are concerned, he will find us at his back in demanding that whatever money is necessary for this object shall be provided. It is money which will come back again and this is an eminently suitable case for finding the money at once, if necessary by loan, in order to enable the work to go forward. I urge the right hon. Gentleman to insist with all the strength of which he is capable, and in the interests of the country he represents, upon the Treasury not being allowed to stand in the way of any money which the situation demands. I do not complain that the Board of Agriculture have not gone rashly about their work in regard to the problem, because it is a very difficult one. To settle one small holding takes a great deal of time and requires careful consideration. Therefore I am not complaining that they have not accomplished much, but now that they have settled down to their work and now that the Secretary for Scotland is able to support them with men and money the Board of Agriculture are upon their trial for the future, and we shall look for much greater results than we have had in the past. I think they will find not only the Members for Scotland, but the whole body of public opinion in Scotland at their back in attempting to do something to stop emigration from Scotland which threatens to be so disastrous.
  Mr. MACPHERSON: I wish to say a few words with regard to the administration of the Land Act of 1911. I agree with the hon. Member for Wick Burghs (Mr.
  1308
  Munro) that there is a great deal of dissatisfaotion in the North of Scotland with reference to the operation of the Land Act, and I would make this observation in regard to it. The Land Act is clearly divisible into two distinct parts: first of all, the Land Court, and, secondly, the Board of Agriculture. I know the Land Court Vote is coming on and I will only say that while the Land Court has admittedly been a ground for great satisfaction throughout the whole of Scotland there may be a very good reason for that in the fact that it is carrying on a settled policy of land legislation in Scotland, a policy which has been settled, fixed, admired, and loved by the people in the North of Scotland for twenty-five years, and it is administered under a very capable, earnest, and competent president. With regard to the Board of Agriculture the case is entirely different. That is a new Board in Scotland. It has no fixed policy and no past traditions to rely upon or to base its future policy upon. It has got to fix and frame its own policy, and it is handicapped in a tremendous way by the fact that it has only a limited amount of money to spend.
  I can quite imagine that in 1911 when we passed the Act for Scotland we never realised the magnitude of the problem we had to face. I am perfectly certain that even the most enthusiastic of us in this House did not realise the enormous magnitude of the problem, and I can sympathise with the Secretary for Scotland and the Board of Agriculture who found themselves faced with that problem the magnitude of which none of us realised. I join in the earnest appeal which has been made by the hon. Member for Forfarshire (Mr. Falconer) and I trust that appeal will be listened to by the Secretary for Scotland. That well known Radical paper, "The People's Journal," which has done a great deal to advertise the Act and make it popular in Scotland, has concentrated the opinion of the people of Scotland upon this question, and has made it clear that we have not at the present time sufficient money from the Treasury to make the Act a success. Why do I say we require more money? I have myself preached the land problem doctrine both inside Parliament and out of it, and we all held out promises to the ploughman and grieves that they would be able to occupy the land and that we should find depopulation and emigration in Scotland ceasing. As a matter of fact, these men are not

  1309
  encouraged by the Act to remain upon the land. There is not sufficient money to do it. They can get a Grant for certain things at a low rate of interest, but the first thing we want is to get some method of being able to give a Grant to the in-coming landholder to enable him to stock his holdings.
  The DEPUTY-CHAIRMAN (Mr. Lyell): To do what the hon. Member is now suggesting would require legislation, and that is not in order.
  Mr. MACPHERSON: Then I will deal with another aspect of the question. In the North of Scotland we have an enormous number of applications for small holdings because we have been accustomed to crofter legislation in the North of Scotland, and I suggest to the right hon. Gentleman, if he really wishes the Land Act to be a national Act all over Scotland, that he ought to advertise the Act as much as possible by sending competent speakers and authorities upon the subject to make it clear. I heard it stated in this Debate that people are attracted from their homes to the Colonies by the advertisements of the emigration agents. I do not know why they should not, be attracted by word of mouth and by an explanation of this Act to remain in their native land. There is one other aspect of the case. You cannot get people to remain on the land in the North of Scotland even if you provide them with the land, unless you also provide them with railway and pier facilities, so that they may be able to get their agricultural produce as quickly as possible to the market. You can only do that by railway facilities, by river and sea facilities, and also by piers. On the west coast of Ross-shire I know of two or three instances of the necessity of having such a pier. I have mentioned one to the right hon. Gentleman, where there is a community of 1,000 souls on the West Coast of Scotland, and they have not now got a respectable pier by means of which they can get their groceries into their homes and their agricultural produce away to the Southern districts. I know another district which is in exactly the same position. I would ask my right hon. Friend to remember that while the first and main proposition connected with the Land Act in Scotland is the provision of small holdings, the Board of Agriculture should not forget that there are other things required in the North of Scotland, such as piers and roads, and
  1310
  these require to be attended to. You cannot expect people to take up holdings unless you provide them with facilities to cultivate the land easily and at a profit. From my experience of the right hon. Gentleman I feel sure that the observations which have been made by Highland Members and others will be listened to, and I earnestly hope that he will be able to persuade the Treasury to allow a decent Grant in order to make the Land Act a, success in Scotland.
  Sir A. WILLIAMSON: I should not be doing my duty to my Constituents if I did not express their views as to the way the Land Act has been administered by the Board of Agriculture. They sent in a number of applications for extension of holdings, and for new small holdings, and not one single holding has been created under the Board of Agriculture, nor has there been any extension of holdings in the counties which I have the honour to represent, so far as I know. No doubt the Secretary for Scotland can put good reasons before us to explain that delay, but it is very difficult indeed amongst the people who apply for these small holdings to avoid a feeling of disappointment. I happen to know several cases of men who are balancing at the present time their future lives as to the career they are going to follow. The question is, Are they going to secure small holdings, which they have enough money to equip, or are they going abroad to the Colonies I am afraid that owing to the delay a very large number of them have decided to go abroad, but if they have not, and there is a reasonable prospect of getting small holdings within a reasonable length of time, they may stay at home and help to repopulate the district. These people feel that the delay and the uncertainty are so great that in many cases they have gone away. I believe I am correct in saying that in the first three months of this year 1,500 people emigrated from my Constituency alone, the population of which is something like 40,000. That is a very heavy percentage when we remember that these are mostly people well fitted for an agricultural life and to develop the resources of our own country. It seems a great pity that any further delay should take place if it is avoidable.
  If the Secretary for Scotland could do anything to speed up the machine, he would be doing a national service for which we should owe him gratitude. Beyond that, there is the question of the men's ability

  1311
  to stock these farms or small holdings, and, behind that, lies the question of the wages which the farmers pay to the men. The question of wages has a great deal to do with the ability of working men to become small farmers. Perhaps we, in this country, have not advanced in the direction of remunerating our agricultural labourers so rapidly as in the case of other classes of labourers. That has a good deal of bearing on the question whether working men can take advantage of a career upon the land which is held out to them. No doubt we have provided certain machinery for offering a career on the soil. A ploughman may become a small holder if he can stock the holding, and he might in time be able to take a larger holding, and become a pretty well-to-do farmer. That opportunity exists abroad. On my own property in America, a number of ploughmen who went out, were, because the wages were good, able in about two years to save enough to be able to stock a small farm with the aid of credit. One hundred pounds has been scoffed at this afternoon, but it is not a very small sum. If you have £100 you can get as much as is worth £100, and that is credit. I hope, therefore, the Secretary for Scotland has in mind the importance not only of supplying small holdings, but also of enabling men of ability to take advantage of them. Speed up the machinery as fast as you can, because, meantime, you are disappointing people able and willing to take small holdings.
  Sir H. CRAIK: After listening to a great number of speeches from the other side, of which the tone has been precisely similar with arguments almost identical, I rise in order to present a somewhat different aspect of the case. I observe that the hon. Member who has just spoken, like the rest of his colleagues, as soon as he has delivered his speech, removes himself from the Chamber, without troubling to listen to any remarks that may be made in reply. Another hon. Member who spoke just before him, has also, according to the modern method, quitted the Chamber. I wish to point out an aspect of this matter, which is rather different from that put forward with such monotony by hon. Gentlemen opposite. We are all content with the Small Landholders Act, and we are endeavouring to make the Act, and hoping that it will, operate as well as possible. Personally, I do not hesitate to say that I think the Act was based to a large extent upon
  1312
  false economic principles, but, as it has been passed by this House, I am quite ready to give all the assistance and support I can to the Secretary for Scotland in carrying it out. What have we heard from the last two or three Members who have spoken, and especially from the hon. Member for Forfarshire (Mr. Falconer) and the hon. Member for Ross (Mr. Macpherson), who left the House the moment he had delivered his speech? Because, forsooth, the Act does not carry out all the lavish promises that these hon. Members made at election times it is wrong, and the administration is wrong. We all know what their promises were during those election times. Catch-penny promises and delusive baits were held out to these agricultural labourers by such hon. Members as the hon. Member for Ross, and now, because they have been proved to be delusive promises, he objects to the administration, and thinks the Act ought to be altogether different. The hon. Member for Forfarshire said: "You are not giving near enough money; establish these poor people on comfortable farms, and give them money to stock them. If you do not do so, it is quite impossible for them to succeed."
  Mr. FALCONER: I am not conscious that I said anything of the sort.
  Sir H. CRAIK: Perhaps the OFFICIAL REPORT to-morrow will confirm my recollection of what the hon. Member said. Are there no dwellers in towns? Are there no artizans in the towns? Are they to be taxed, and is the revenue of the country to be increased, that this special class, not a very numerous class, may be established on comfortable farms at the public expense? That is not in the Act. The Act, I believe and trust, is being administered in its spirit and in its letter. If the moment an Act has been passed, Parliament is to be told because it does not carry out lavish promises made in the heat of an election by hon. Members opposite, that it must double and treble the expenditure and not count the cost, it may be all very well for candidates in search of electioneering promises, but it is not administration, it is not statesmanship, it is not sound economy, and in the end it will prove disastrous. These hon. Members said, "Spend lavishly, amply, ungrudgingly, and all the rest of the community to carry it out. What a tremendous pity it is that you do not carry this out in such an extravagant way that you will prevent all emigration to the

  1313
  Colonies?" I, for one, with the greatest wish to benefit my fellow-countrymen, and with the deepest sympathy for them, say that for many of them the Colonies are the best place to which they can go. There are openings and chances in life for them and prospects of prosperity in Canada, which there are not in the congested districts of Scotland, and never will be, whatever expenditure the State may be prepared to incur. Hon. Members say that there are discomforts and difficulties in Canada. Yes, but what are the prospects, and what is the value of the energies you call out by the difficulties they have to meet there? Take one of these crofters, whom you place on a farm only that he may in the long run come to financial disaster, and plant him in Canada or Australia, with all the prospects of Canada and Australia before him, and see what he will be in ten years' time compared with the man you settle on some wretched crofting, which will hardly pay, with a burden of debt hanging round him. I doubted the advantages of many of the provisions of this Act. I knew, and many of us said so beforehand, that it would not carry out all the prospects you held before those whom you were, as I think, deluding with your promises; but if the passing of a Small Holdings Act of this kind is to be constantly made the pretext for asking for more and more from the taxpayer, in order to support by artificial means one small class of the community, then I say you give fair warning of what we are to expect by the multiplication of these Small Holdings Acts. I have spoken freely about, this question, and I am perfectly ready to take the responsibility.
  I wish to refer to another less controversial point that has arisen, and it is with regard to the School of Forestry. I must take issue with the hon. Member for Buteshire (Mr. Harry Hope) in thinking that the only place where the practical part of the School of Forestry can be established is in the neighbourhood of Edinburgh. I do not think so, and the Committee appointed to report did not take that view. They held, as most of those who have studied the question hold, that the Dee side was the best place for the practical branch of that School of Forestry. I agree that the practical part of the school must necessarily be placed where the trees may be best grown, and where the climate and other conditions are most favourable to the experiment, but you must remember that it must he carried
  1314
  on in conjunction with, and must be organised alongside of, the theoretical school, which is to lay down the principles which you are to illustrate by the experiment. I contend that in the University of Aberdeen you have got the best union of these two conditions. You have, in the first place, a thoroughly well organised school, which is advancing year after year, which is being enriched by the lavish generosity of the Chancellor of the University, Lord Strathcona, and which has attracted students from all parts of the world. You have close to that theoretical school what is, by general agreement, the very best part of Scotland for the establishment of the experimental branch of the School of Forestry. It is for these reasons that I, in opposition to my hon. Friend, the Member for Buteshire, have to advance, and advance with great confidence and with the utmost strength, the claim of the University of Aberdeen. I trust that the Secretary for Scotland will keep a perfectly open mind on the question, will follow the advice of his own Committee, and will not prejudge, by any Departmental action, the selection of any other school until the claims of Aberdeen have been fully heard.
  8.0 P.M.
  Sir W. BEALE: I do not altogether agree with what the hon. Member has said about the exaggeration of the probable effect of this Act. I think it is very likely due to the state of the public mind that so many Members have felt it their duty to their constituents to urge that the Secretary for Scotland should speed up this matter and get more money for the purpose. I do not altogether agree that it is done for electioneering purposes. All I can say is that, as far as I know, we looked at this matter from a purely business point of view. I do not think I have ever held out any promise to any of my Lowland Constituents that they would gain any benefit from the Act, unless it could be applied and worked in an economical manner. Undoubtedly it must take time for this legislation to be thoroughly understood, so that it may be worked to the best advantage. It is true that in the Highlands, where there is a great demand for an extension of the number of holdings, the country is very much more ripe for the Act than they are in the Lowlands. At the same time, I am convinced the Act will gain ground in the Lowlands, although not, perhaps, to such a great extent as in the Highlands. I do not think any immediate gain would be obtained merely

  1315
  by trying to secure a big sum of money for the working of the Act. It is not so very necessary to have an agitation to induce people to make claims for holdings. I think such speeding up would do harm rather than good. There are certain legitimate reasons for reluctance on the part of landlords, and there are certain reasons for reluctance on the part of people who might become small holders, but the objections of both may be removed by experience and time. I rather agree with the hon. Member for Burghs it is a pity that the question of the possibility of landlords who suffer under the Act not being compensated was lost sight of. I think that such cases as those suggested by the hon. Member for Midlothian ought to have been anticipated. I do not think it would have been difficult to find a reasonable way of removing that difficulty. In a case where the land is returned to a landlord greatly deteriorated there should be some way of arranging compensation. Probably it would be better to rearrange the whole original scheme. I have always held, however, that when there is a danger of injustice there is always a remedy which can be found, if only patience is exercised.
  At the time when the Act was passed I had some personal experience with certain farms which might become small holdings, and that experience tended to show how the Act might benefit the landlord. The latter is very glad always to keep a good tenant. He often finds it difficult to get rid of a bad tenant, and I have seen cases in which I am quite sure, if it had been desired to get rid of a tenant, it might have been possible for the landlord to have done so without causing that local disturbance which sometimes follows on the removal of a tenant whose family has been upon the land for sonic time. The landlord might be induced to say that he would give facilities for the creation of small holdings. I doubt if the real difficulty of getting land altogether accounts for the emigration of the best men from some parts of the Lowlands. There are other reasons why they will not stop on the land. I am not quite so sure as the last speaker that it is better for them to emigrate. I quite understand the hon. Gentleman's picture of how a strong man would gain by going out, to Canada and working hard there, but I am not so sure that, under the present system of emigra
  1316
  tion, such men stand to gain as much as they might obtain if they stopped on the land here under proper conditions. Quite apart from emigration there is the temptation of the towns. Further, you do not find that farmers are anxious to give their children an agricultural education. They want facilities for them to be near a school where they can gain bursaries, so that they may rise in the world. They are, in fact, too ambitious for the land; therefore I do not think that the removal of the mere difficulty of getting a holding would be a very large factor in keeping desirable people on the land.
  I agree with very much that fell from the hon. Member for East Renfrewshire (Captain Gilmour) that we should not lose sight of the other powers which the Board of Agriculture have. I believe one of the difficulties in connection with small holdings is in regard to distribution. What is required is co-operation in distributing the produce of the land. I see in the Report of the Board of Agriculture something is said on this point, but not more than a little talk about facilitating this work being done by the Scottish Chamber of Commerce. A great deal more attention might be paid to that question. Then, again, you might give a little more discretion to those inspectors who, on sanitary grounds, quite unnecessarily hamper the creation of small holdings, because there are cases in which the landlord of such holdings finds it does not pay to comply with the letter of the Departmental regulations. Some discretion, therefore, might be given in that direction. Every effort should be made to push this matter along. It requires time, however; it is not well to rush it. So far as the landlords are concerned the Act undoubtedly offers great benefits. It also tends to check the emigration of people who, it is desirable, should be retained in this country.
  Let me say one word about forestry, a subject to which I have given special attention, having been a member of the Royal Commission inquiring into the question. If you can utilise forestry for this purpose you will undoubtedly do good. The Report states, I believe, that by means of it you can have ten men employed where only one man now is working. Therefore forestry should be encouraged as much as possible. But I am not sure as to the desirability of pushing on with the school of experimental forestry. I do not think there was a very

  1317
  strong case made out for this. Undoubtedly, however, if you could find the large sum of money necessary for a great national scheme of forestry it would be well, and that is the direction in which the Board of Agriculture should work, for by that means much more could be done to retain the population on the land than by any system of small holdings.
  Mr. ANNAN BRYCE: I agree it is to be regretted that extravagant expectations were raised by the passing of the Small Landholders Act. There is a great deal of force in what has been said as to the prophecies indulged in at the time the Bill was passed. But the criticism of the hon. Member for the Glasgow and Aberdeen Universities (Sir H. Craik) would have been very much more effective had it not been the case that only a fortnight since the Leader of his party in the House of Lords (Lord Lansdowne) adumbrated a scheme such as this as likely to be undertaken—a scheme involving an enormously greater sum of public money to be spent on similar purposes to those for which this Act was passed. Under these circumstances it is surely rather hard that the hon. Member should have complained of hon. Gentlemen on this side asking that the money which is necessary to make this Act a success should be found by the State. Undoubtedly, extreme exasperation does exist, rightly or wrongly, in the North of Scotland with regard to the slowness with which the initial stages of the business have been undertaken. After making allowance for all the difficulties of organisation it does appear that a great deal more might have been done in the time than has actually been accomplished. We were all very glad to hear of the promise of additional assistance. The hon. Member for Glasgow and Aberdeen Universities descended from the Imperial frame in which he disported himself in the earlier part of his speech to a more parochial atmosphere in the latter part, when he claimed for the university he represents that there should be established in its neighbourhood a demonstration forest by which the teachings of the university might be practically demonstrated.
  Sir H. CRAIK: I did not claim it should be established in the neighbourhood of the Aberdeen University because it is near Aberdeen, but I did suggest that the best territory for such a scheme happens to be on the Deeside, which is no doubt near to it.
  Mr. BRYCE: I misunderstood my hon. Friend and I apologise. But in connection with that somewhat parochial view I may perhaps be allowed to put my parochial view. We consider in Inverness-shire that Inverness is the best place for such a forest, and arrangements are being made by which the teaching of forestry shall be undertaken in that centre. I hope, therefore, when the day comes to consider where these demonstration areas shall be established the claims of Inverness-shire will have due consideration.
  Mr. BARNES: Is there to be any reply from the Secretary for Scotland?
  It being a Quarter-past Eight of the clock, and there being Private Business set down by direction of the Chairman of Ways and Means, under Standing Order No. 8, further Proceeding was postponed without Question put.
  The CLERK-ASSISTANT (Mr. Arthur W. Nicholson): I have to inform the House of the unavoidable absence of Mr. Speaker from the remainder of this day's Sitting.

PRIVATE BUSINESS.

  GREENOCK PORT AND HARBOURS BILL [Lords]. (By Order.)
  [Mr. DEPUTY-SPEAKER (Mr. WHITLEY) in the Chair.]
  Order for Second Reading read.
  Motion made, and Question proposed, "That the Bill be now read a second time."
  Mr. HOLT: I beg to move, as an Amendment, to leave out from the word "That" to the end of the Question, and to add instead thereof the words, "this House declines to proceed with any measure for reconstituting the Greenock Harbour Trust until an inquiry has been held as to the desirability of placing the harbours and the conservancy of the Clyde under a single control."
  I feel that an English Member owes something like an apology to the House for venturing to speak upon a Scottish subject on a Scottish night, but I have some excuse for taking part in this matter, in that in my ordinary private business I happen to be one of the largest traders to Glasgow and an old customer of the shipbuilding yards at Greenock. I approach

  1319
  this subject, I hope, as a friend to all parties, and also with a certain freedom and detachment from local bias, not always possible among the persons who actually live in the place. The Bill now before the House, which runs to something over 200 Clauses, is not so formidable as it looks. It is brought in to meet the unfortunate position in which the Harbour Trust of Greenock finds itself through being more or less financially under a cloud. In fact, for some years past it has been under what the lawyers call an official receiver. The object of the Bill, by postponing to a very late date the position of some junior securities of the Trust, is to enable a sum of £100,000 to be raised on the guarantee of the corporation for the purpose of developing the harbours. I have not the slightest doubt that the works proposed to be authorised by the Bill are most desirable, and that in the unfortunate situation in which Greenock is found this is probably the only way at the moment of getting the money they require. Attention requires to be drawn to the curious position in which the Trust will be if this Bill passes, because the corporation, having provided the money absolutely necessary for any further improvements, will almost logically be bound to provide any money required for still further extensions in the future. Everybody who knows anything about harbours will realise that these further extensions must come sooner or later. That being so, I think it is not unsuitable to take the opportunity, which my Amendment affords, of considering whether the unfortunate position in which this great harbour finds itself cannot best be alleviated by looking at the problem of the government of the River Clyde as a whole. When I speak of the River Clyde, I mean the navigable waters of the Clyde and its tributaries above the Cloch Lighthouse. The River Clyde is of the utmost importance to the whole prosperity of southern Scotland. There is nothing which is more vital to the importance of Scotland as a whole. It is not a local question; it is a question of the material interests of the whole of industrial Scotland.
  No one who has had occasion to go down the Clyde, as I did a few weeks ago in a large steamer, and no one who has had any experience of business in trading or shipbuilding, could fail to realise the very congested state of the river or the very
  1320
  great difficulties which have got to be grappled with, or the extreme skill and courage shown by the persons responsible for the river in grappling with those difficulties; but it is my firm conviction that it is impossible to get the best value out of that great river for the trade of Scotland unless the government of the river is treated as a whole, unless there is one controlling authority which is empowered to direct that those works and that sort of trade which can be more advantageously carried on in the lower reaches of the river should go there, and that those which can be most advantageously carried on in the upper reaches of the river should go there, and unless the river is treated as a whole, and is not disfigured and spoilt by competition amongst the various districts upon its banks. I may point out, in this connection, that the river necessarily has to be dredged. Dredging is always going on, probably always will be going on, and is now in process if the "Aquitania" is to reach the sea. From my own experience as a shipowner with ships trading from Glasgow to Australia, we find it regularly necessary to go to Liverpool to get bunker coal, because it is impossible to come down the Clyde with all on board. That illustrates the importance of doing the best that can be done for the development of the river. Perhaps I may explain here that, as the House probably knows, Lord Inverclyde has taken a very great interest in the subject and raised the matter upon a discussion of this Bill in another place. I have, of course, had communications with him, but I think I may fairly say that I had formed the opinion that a unified control ought to be established some time before I knew the part that Lord Inver clyde had taken and the views he held, so that his opinion and my opinion are two totally independent opinions
  I find that there are on the river no less than seven authorities controlling the government of the Clyde. The dredging I spoke of just now, which is so absolutely necessary, is controlled by two different authorities. One portion of the river, the major portion, is under the Trustees of the Clyde Navigation, and the lower portion is under the Clyde Lighthouse Trustees. The dredging work which either undertakes is absolutely thrown away unless the other authority takes precisely similar steps. That seems to any ordinary business man a most unsatisfactory state of affairs. It must lead to a great deal of duplication of the expenses of the different

  1321
  authorities, and in the case of any disagreement—which fortunately has not occurred, at any rate recently—there would be a very serious loss o to the development of the river. In any case such a dual authority must always cause a certain amount of unavoidable delay. I am not going to recapitulate the names of the seven authorities. I understand that many of them are by no means as financially strong as harbour authorities ought to be, and I am not sure that the position of Greenock is not shared more or less by several of the rest of them. I am not asking the House in my Amendment to declare that there ought to be a unified control of the Clyde. That is a step going much further than an ordinary Member can ask the House to take. I am asking the House to say that there should be a full public inquiry—I hope by a Royal Commission—into the government of the Clyde, so that a concerted and well-conceived plan may be put forward to the greatest possible advantage of the river. The opinion that something should be done is not held by a few eccentric people alone. It is quite largely held in Glasgow. I should like to read to the House some extracts from letters written to Lord Inverclyde, first of all, by the Secretary of the Chamber of Commerce and Manufactures. He says:—
  "The directors expressed themselves as favourable to the principle of unity and co-operation of the navigation and harbour authorities on the Clyde, so that the Clyde estuary may be placed under one administration, if the authorities could come to an agreement on suitable and reasonable terms."
  I should like also to turn to a letter written by the chairman of the Clyde Navigation Trustees, in which he says:—
  "I have to inform you that, after full discussion and careful consideration, the trustees, while generally favourable to one control of the whore river have resolved that under existing conditions the time is not opportune for entering into negotiations, especially having regard to the present position of the authorities promoting rival Bills in respect of that harbour."
  Therefore, my view as to what ought to be done is clearly shared by the most influential opinion in Glasgow. I understand, from the answer given me at Question Time the other day by the Secretary to the Board of Trade, that the Board of Trade themselves are somewhat inclined to share the same opinion. I ask now that the Board of Trade shall give the House, at any rate, a definite assurance that such an inquiry as I have indicated will be held. I think it would be better if the inquiry were held before anything was done to change the position of Greenock, but there may be a difference of opinion on
  1322
  that point, and if it is clearly understood that the action now proposed to be taken in the Greenock Bill is not in any way to be held to prejudice what may afterwards be thought desirable in the way of putting the river under unified control, I should not necessarily persist in my Amendment.
  Sir ARCHIBALD WILLIAMSON: I beg to second the Amendment.
  The question of the administration of the Clyde to the best advantage does not concern only Glasgow, or Greenock, or Port Glasgow, or Dumbarton. It is a much larger question, which concerns the whole of Scotland, and really the whole of British Trade. I, therefore, rise as a Scottish Member interested in the affairs of Scotland, and also as a British merchant who trades both to and from the Clyde. I have also had an opportunity of learning something of what occurred when there are various authorities in control of a great port or estuary, because I sat on the Joint Committee of Lords and Commons to inquire into the Port of London Bill, and there were many opportunities of seeing what happened when various authorities had control of one estuary. The River Clyde is, or should be, considered not as a number of little or more or less great ports, but as o one great port and one great harbour, and if that view were taken, there would be an opportunity of avoiding overlapping, and of arriving at the best possible method of developing the Clyde in the interests of British trade. The authorities in Glasgow are not really adverse to the object which we have in view. Their difficulties more or less consist of local difficulties, financial and otherwise, and perhaps there may also be local jealousies. It will be necessary for someone apparently to take them by the hand if unanimity is to be arrived at. Speaking for the Government on a recent debate, Lord Crewe stated that the Board of Trade were fully cognisant of the difficulties in the matter of Clyde legislation and would be far from sorry if such an inquiry as this Amendment points to, could be granted. After that it requires very little justification for this Amendment. It has been pointed in the correspondence between Lord Inverclyde and various authorities that the present affords a good opportunity for considering this whole matter, and it is only because of what might be called local difficulties that we, representing a great nation, are defrauded of what is our right, and that

  1323
  is the proper administration of the Clyde. No doubt each authority has done its best —no one wishes to say otherwise—but there is an opportunity now afforded for bringing these authorities together, and for having a great harbour authority on the Clyde, as we have now a great harbour authority on the Thames and also one great harbour controlling the docks on both sides of the Mersey. That opportunity occurs now, and I have great pleasure in seconding the Amendment.
  The PARLIAMENTARY SECRETARY to the BOARD of TRADE (Mr. J. M. Robertson): Speaking for the Board of Trade, I can assure my hon. Friends that we are quite in sympathy with their desire for an inquiry into the question of the unification of the authorities of the Clyde, and that we have already taken steps in the direction they wish. All the analogies point towards the course that they recommend. There is the case of the Mersey, constituted in one authority as long ago as 1857, and there is the more recent case of the Humber Conservancy, in 1907, to say nothing of the Port of London Bill. They are quite right in saying that there is a general trend of public opinion in Scotland and elsewhere —they truly say the matter is one of national importance—in the direction of the unification that they propose, and I can assure them that the preliminary inquiries are being actively made with a view to securing such an inquiry. Of course, the Board of Trade has to put itself in communication with the Scottish Office. The Scottish Office is not at all unfavourable, and what has to take place new is a preliminary inquiry with a view to eliciting whether there is anything like general agreement on the part of the authorities concerned, and whether those concerned would prefer an inquiry under the Board of Trade or under the Scottish Office. The Scottish Office has no prejudice in the matter, and if, as we are led to understand, the general feeling turns out to be in favour of a Board of Trade inquiry, that inquiry will be duly undertaken, and I see no reason to doubt that the end in view may be successfully obtained.
  But if we were to declare now that we will hold an inquiry before we have ascertained that there is general agreement on the part of the Clyde authorities, we might frustrate the end in view. It is only fitting that those authorities should
  1324
  be consulted. Their willingness should be ascertained. That is the natural and, I think, the judicious course to take, and I appeal to my hon. Friend, in view of this readiness on the Hart both of the Board of Trade and the Scottish Office, to accept the assurance that the preliminary investigations leading up to an inquiry are actually being conducted, and that we are entirely in favour of holding such an inquiry in due course. I think my hon. Friend may accept that assurance, and not hold up the Bill until the inquiry is carried out. It will need to be a long and elaborate inquiry. The needs of Greenock are, I think, pronounced. There is a very general agreement as to the need for this measure. I am sure local opinion will be very strong on that point, and I do not think there is any argument in favour of delaying this Bill until the inquiry has been held. The Greenock authority, which has been practically moribund, is now, as it were, reconstituting itself in an active way, and when we do come to make the inquiry, it will be better to deal with a living and vigorous authority than one in a state of inertia, such as has characterised the position of the Greenock authority for some time. The works called for by the Bill are necessary works. The promoters of the Bill will in no way constitute an obstacle to the inquiry which my hon. Friends desire. I trust that in view of the general sympathy with that point of view, and also of the fact that, so far as my information goes, the feeling on the Clyde is substantially in favour of the inquiry which is wished, if we can ascertain that that is so, the inquiry, as a matter of course, will take place, and I see no reason to doubt that their aim will be attained. Having given that assurance in the only form in which I can give it, I would say to my hon. Friends that they should allow the measure to pass its present stage.
  Mr. GODFREY COLLINS: The hon. Member for Hexham (Mr. Holt) was careful to point out that he did not commit himself to one authority being set up for the control of affairs on the Clyde. It might well be, after the inquiry took place, that it might be held one control was not in the best interests of the Clyde. If his Amendment was carried to-night, and the inquiry was held, the Port of Greenock in a few years time might be in the same position as it is in to-day. There is nothing, as I understand, in the Bill which will hinder or delay the consideration of the general question of a conservancy for the

  1325
  Clyde. I have spoken to certain Members of the Greenock Trustees and I am authorised to say that they are not averse to the question of one control on the Clyde being considered. The question of the Port of London was considered in 1904 when the Bill was introduced in this House, but it was not until 1908 that the Bill ultimately reached the Statute Book. In other words, five years elapsed from the first introducetion of the Bill until the new authority was set up. In view of these facts, and in view also of the favourable reply given by the Government, and that public opinion in the West of Scotland is slowly being formed on the matter, I would appeal to my hon. Friend to withdraw his Amendment.
  Mr. HOLT: After the very satisfactory assurance given by my hon. Friend, I ask leave to withdraw the Amendment.
  Amendment, by leave, withdrawn.
  Question put, "That the Bill be now read a second time."
  Mr. HOGGE: I beg to move, "That the Bill be not read a second time."
  Mr. DEPUTY-SPEAKER: The hon. Member can speak against the Second Reading, but he cannot move that the Bill be not read a second time.
  Mr. HOGGE: Then I wish to oppose the Second Reading, and I do so as a protest against this Bill being brought foward at all on one of the days on which Scottish Members were to be allowed to debate Scottish affairs.
  Mr. DEPUTY-SPEAKER: I could not allow that. It is not relevant to the Motion in any way. The Bill is taken by Order.
  Mr. HOGGE: Can I move the adjournment of the Debate?
  Mr. DEPUTY-SPEAKER: I could not accept that Motion. The hon. Member would get more speedily back to the discussion of the Scottish Estimates by remaining in his seat. I put the question, "That the Bill be now read a second time." Having collected the voices I think the Ayes have it.
  Mr. HOGGE: The Noes have it.
  Mr. DEPUTY-SPEAKER: I think the Ayes have it.
  Mr. HOGGE: The Noes have it.
  A Division was called, and Mr. DEPUTY-SPEAKER announced the names of Mr. Godfrey Collins and Colonel Greig as tellers for the Ayes, and added, "There being no tellers for the NOes, the Ayes have it."
  Bill read a second time, and committed.

SUPPLY.— [TWELFTH ALLOTTED DAY.]
Considered in Committee.
[Mr. MACLEAN in the Chair.]

SUPPLY.— [TWELFTH ALLOTTED DAY.]
  CIVIL SERVICES AND REVENUE DEPARTMENTS ESTIMATES, 1913–14.

    BOARD OF AGRICULTURE, SCOTLAND.— (Class II. VOTE 29.)
    Postponed proceeding on Amendment to Question, "That a sum not exceeding £121,181 be granted to His Majesty, to complete the sum necessary to defray the Charge which will come in course of payment during the year ending on the 31st day of March, 1914, for the Salaries and Expenses of the Board of Agriculture for Scotland." [Note—£110,000 has been voted on account.]
    Which Amendment was to reduce the Vote by £100.—[Mr. James Hogge.]
    Question again proposed. Debate resumed.
    Mr. MILLAR: A good many hon. Members who have taken part in the Debate have directed their attention entirely to the question of agriculture in the Highlands. I wish to say a word or two in regard to the applications for small holdings which have come from the Lowland counties. Some hon. Members have suggested that the Small Landholders Act was passed almost entirely in the interests of the Highland counties, and that it has had a very limited operation so far within the Lowland counties. I should like to remind the Committee that in Lanarkshire there had been no fewer than 108 applications received by the end of last year, and that that county comes seventh in order among the other counties in regard to the number of applications. The number of applications received from Lanarkshire exceeds the number received from a number of the northern counties, from which one might have expected a greater demand would have been intimated. The chief purpose I have in view at the present moment is to point out that there is an equal land

    1327
    hunger felt in the Lowlands of Scotland, and not only so, but that the applicants who have come forward have shown themselves possessed of the necessary qualifications both in regard to the experience required and the capital required for entering upon small holdings. I should like to draw the attention of the Committee to the fact that in the Report of the Board of Agriculture special reference is made to the character of the holdings which are chiefly in demand in the South of Scotland. At page 12 it is said:—
    "In the South of Scotland two types of holdings are wanted, the one sufficient to keep a pair of horses in work and the other round about ten acres. The former will occupy the whole time of the holder and his family, while the latter are wanted (1) by those who have some regular employment and only require a 'Mime' with sufficient land to keep one or two cows, and some pigs and poultry, and (2) by others who wish to utilise the ground for market gardening."
    The latter class of holding is one which ought to be encouraged by the Board of Agriculture. I refer especially to the case of those who, having some regular employment of their own, are very anxious to take up at the same time, in a comparatively small way, agricultural occupation, the keeping of cows, pigs, poultry, and to have sufficient land round about them to be able to meet their own family needs and also to those who desire to go in, in a small way perhaps, for market gardening. It so happens that that type of holder is found in considerable numbers in the Lowlands of Scotland, and I am very glad that the Beard of Agriculture should have recognised the fact that beyond those who intend to devote their whole time to the cultivation of small holdings, there is a large class of those who are engaged in other occupations to whom land ought to be made available. For instance, there are many mining districts in which you find a certain class of miner, some of whom have had a connection with the land in the way of cultivation at an earlier period and are quite fit and very anxious to cultivate a certain area or land round about their dwelling houses. I should like that in such cases assistance might be made available for all the necessary equipment of the holdings, and in certain cases for buildings. But I recognise that there are many cases in which it would not be possible for the Board to provide the buildings, but in which they could intervene with very great advantage in order to secure the land. I believe that in certain districts the land could be got without much difficulty by agree-
    1328
    ment with the landowners. In other districts I believe that through the intervention of the Board an order might be made which would secure at a very reasonable rate the land which was required in order to start in small mining villages in some of the districts of Lanarkshire which are remote from the large centres and where there is a large demand for a small holding, an object lesson in the way of cultivation of land, and in such communities there might be a certain amount of co-operation and common work undertaken by those interested in the scheme. I trust that the right hon. Gentleman in charge of this Vote will indicate to us who represent Lowland constituencies in Scotland that it is intended that the Act shall be made a success in the Lowlands as in the Highlands of Scotland and that the land hunger which has already been manifested in the Lowlands is likely to be satisfied at an early moment. Reference has been made to the number of applications from the Highland counties, but I would remind the Committee that from the Lowland counties of Scotland there have been no fewer than 419 applications for new holdings alone, not counting the enlargement of holdings, and that to overtake that number of applications would in itself be a considerable task, requiring some time of the Board, but a task deserving of immediate attention. Out of the 108 applications received in Lanarkshire the number which has been dealt with is practically nil. I understand from the Report that there is a prospect of one small holder being settled with a small holding of six acres during the course of the coming year. That is one of the schemes authorised by the Secretary for Scotland before the end of the coming year although others are being considered.
    Captain CAMPBELL: I beg to draw attention to the fact that there are not forty Members present.
    The DEPUTY-CHAIRMAN: I cannot take a count until a quarter past nine o'clock.
    Mr. MILLAR: That is a very small proporton, and it is well worthy of the consideration of hon. Members who, like the hon. Member oposite, who has just moved a count, represent Lowland counties in Scotland. I sincerely hope that the hon. Member will indicate that his interest in this matter is greater than that which he has shown by moving a count.
    Captain CAMPBELL: As far as my own Constituency is concerned only two applications have been made for small holdings, and both of those came from urban areas in Glasgow, so that I see no particular need to be enthusiastic in favour of this proposal.
    Mr. MILLAR: The hon. Member has indicated the enthusiasm which hon. Members opposite have for small holdings, and I may recall the character of the opposition which we had to the passing of the Act at an earlier period, and which is revived in this Debate on Scottish Estimates.
    Captain CAMPBELL: There is a bigger ratio of Scottish Unionists here.
    9.0 P.M.
    Mr. MILLAR: I find from the Report that no fewer than forty-two applications came from the county of Ayr, part of which the hon. Member represents. I would like also in a word to refer to the question of afforestation, which has been dealt with by a number of hon. Members on both sides. I agree that it is one of the most urgent aspects of the problem, and I think that the right hon. Gentleman ought to be in a position to explain to the House why so much delay has occurred in dealing with this matter. I regard this matter as of very urgent importance, because we look to the Development Fund for assistance in this matter, and the Development Commissioners have clearly expressed the view that this is a matter which cannot be dealt with until an experimental area has been secured in Scotland. I may refer to the Report of the Board, at page 32, where it is said that the Development Commissioners, in their second Annual Report published in June last, indicate that in their view one of the main requirements of forestry in Scotland is a suitable demonstration area, and, after referring to the appointment of a Departmental Committee, they note that no official proposal had been received by the end of the year. I understand that we are in this position: We are hoping to get further assistance from the Development Commission to secure further funds to deal with this matter which is in charge of the Board. Surely we ought at the very earliest moment to seek to fulfill the requirements which the Development Board lay down if we want to carry them with us. I would like to hear from the right hon. Gentleman what his explanation is of the long delay which
    1330
    has taken place since the appointment of the Advisory Committee in regard to the selection of an area. We have heard the hon. Member for Glasgow and Aberdeen Universities say that in his view the Dee-side district has been considered by this Advisory Committee as the most important and suitable district in Scotland. I understood that the matter had not yet been decided. Although I can well understand why the hon. Member should have sought to show how important a teaching centre Aberdeen was, I should have thought it extremely desirable that one of the primary conditions referred to by the Advisory Committee set up by the right hon. Gentleman the Secretary for Scotland, should have been kept in view, namely, that the area selected should be within easy access by rail from the existing teaching centres, not from one, but from all. Great interest is taken in this subject both in Glasgow and in Edinburgh, where there are good forestry schools and where every effort has been made to deal with the situation. I sincerely hope the right hon. Gentleman, when it comes to the actual selection of an area, will keep in view that while it is necessary, no doubt, to have suitable conditions within the area selected, it is equally necessary that the area should be within easy access by rail from all existing centres, and the selection should be made conditional on that. I only want to express to the right hon. Gentleman the satisfaction which I feel at what he has undertaken to-day to do in order to speed up the machinery of the Board of Agriculture. I regard the need for further funds as being absolutely vital to the success of the work which lies before us. I think we may look to the Development Commissioners to assist us largely in that, direction, but we must make it clear to Scotland, and I hope the result of this Debate will be to make it clear to Scotland that there is to be no slackening at all in regard to putting into operation the provisions of the Smallholders Act, that an attempt will be made to meet all the applications at the earliest possible moment, and that the urgency of the problem is now being fully realised. We have had evidence since the Board started its operations of land hunger even beyond what I believe many of us imagined to exist in Scotland. I hope that, instead of discouraging these applications, in future we shall be able to deal with them in such a way as to encourage larger numbers of applicants, and to secure the settlement on the soil of Scotland of those who, at the

    1331
    present moment, are tempted to find
    their homes elsewhere. I have attended one or two gatherings of applicants for small holdings in my own Constituency who were very anxious indeed to secure the advantages of the Act. Many of them are undoubtedly feeling very much dissatisfied and irritated through the delay which has occurred, but I hope we will be able to inform all applicants that the Board of Agriculture will speedily be in a position to deal with their claims, and that an attempt will be made to satisfy the demand not only of those who are prepared to settle on the soil and to devote their whole time to its cultivation, but also of those who seek for some land in order that they may be able to carry on occupations subsidiary to their main employment in which they are engaged. In this way I believe we would encourage a very much larger class of small holders throughout the country.
    Mr. PIRIE: I only wish to state one or two reasons why, if my hon. Friend who moved the reduction goes to a Division, I shall support him. My main reason may be summed up almost in a sentence, and it is that since the Act came into operation about a year ago the number of small holdings that have been taken is not worth speaking of in proportion to the number of applications which have been made. That is the main reason why I pledge my vote to the reduction. I think it would have been better and more acceptable to Scottish Members if the Secretary for Scotland had been able to announce at once that the Government contemplated taking a serious view of this all-important question to Scotland by appointing the President of the Scottish Board of Agriculture to sit in this House. It is high time that we had more than one Minister apart from the Lord Advocate, and that we should have two Ministers to represent the numerous Scotch Boards. As long as the present system exists I shall consider myself not only entitled, but that I am not doing my duty unless I enter my protest against it. It has been pointed out with great force that nothing has been done, practically speaking, by the Department. There has been delay as regards the creation of small holdings, and still greater delay in coming to a decision on the question of forestry. I was very glad indeed to hear what was said by the hon. Member who spoke from the Front Bench oppo-
    1332
    site, and who laid down the eminently sound thesis as regards forestry, that it ought not to be a question of which university gives the best education. However important that may be, the great thing is to secure an area suitable in every way, including the presence of a sufficient amount of timber for a good demonstration area.
    What is unquestionably the best area, in regard to these different points, is in the western district of Aberdeenshire. [HON. MEMBERS: "Hear, hear."] I know it will be thought that I am simply speaking in favour of my own Constituency, for it does so happen that the two are combined together to a most wonderful extent. It would be a comparatively short journey to that area from any of the universities, and any difficulty in regard to the length of the journey would be therefore overcome. It is not a question of a visit of a few days, for perhaps the students would spend a month or so in the area itself, and there certainly should be sufficient rough accommodation placed there to allow the students to take full advantage of the exceptional facilities afforded by that western portion of Aberdeenshire for the study of forestry. In my opinion the two questions of small holdings and forestry stand together in a most remarkable way. There is great responsibility on the Scottish Office at the present moment in view of the enormous and appalling figures—I do not share the view of the hon. Member for Aberdeen University, who welcomed emigration—that we have seen in regard to the numbers who are leaving Scotland. It is lamentable to see all her best sons leaving for the Colonies. I have read statistics after statistics, one set more appalling than another, of emigration from Scotland, with the result, as lamentable as in the case of Ireland, that Scotland is one of the largest centres in the British Islands from which there is emigration. Besides the large areas for forestry in Scotland, you could create numberless small holdings, and I do think that the Government, are largely to blame in not hurrying up the Advisory Committee which I understand has been appointed, in order that the land may be settled more largely and without further delay. If the right hon. Gentleman had displayed the same energy in dealing with this question as he did in dealing with the case of distress on St. Kilda the other day, on which I congratulate him, then I think some of us might have a different opinion

    1333
    of his administrative ability. The great question is that of money, and with the knowledge the right hon. Gentleman has of the inner working of the Treasury, and with the resolution which he is said to have shown on perhaps a less auspicious occasion, when he is said to have tendered his resignation on the question of temperance, I think there is no excuse for him in not being able to secure enough money.
    As I have said before, I should like to see the day come when any Scottish Member, who calls himself a Liberal, would refuse to be a Secretary for Scotland under the present conditions which exist as regards the holding of that office. He is at the beck and call of the other Ministers, and he is the Cinderella of the Cabinet. I should like, as I say, to see the day when any self-respecting Liberal Scottish Member would refuse to be Secretary under the somewhat degrading conditions under which that office is held. This Debate is rather typical of the usual Debate which takes place when Scottish Questions are under discussion. I moved a count an hour after the Debate had begun in the middle of the afternoon, and there have been three since, in order to show the Scottish people the interest English and Irish Members take in this question. Of course, at present, it is the dinner hour. When I moved a count there were three Members opposite from England and one Welsh and one Irish Member. The more the attention of the people of Scotland can be called to the way in which Scottish Debates are treated in this House, the better. Before eleven o'clock there will be a fourth attempt at a count. As usual, there could not have been a Scottish Debate without the Government putting down a Private Bill. Who was the Member who prolonged that Debate, in order to take up some of the little time we have? He was a Member for Hexham Division (Mr. R. D. Holt) and the only English Liberal Member who distinguished himself by voting against the Second Reading of the Scottish. Home Rule Bill. The more the Scottish people study these matters, the more convinced will they be that their true interest lies in the removal of their own affairs from here to their own country, and that the sooner it takes place the better. If the hon. Member goes to a Division against the system which exists, and in condemnation of the dilatoriness which exists with regard to the question of small holdings, shall support him.
    Mr. FREDERICK WHYTE: The hon. Member who has just spoken likened Scotland with regard to legislative and administrative treatment to a Cinderella. We all know he has aspired to play the part of Fairy Prince, and to get her a Parliament of her own. He complains this House is not filled with English and Irish Members to listen to Scottish Members, whereas, I imagine, the real burden of his complaint to be that while this House is empty, the Division Lobby will be filled when he goes into the Lobby against the Government. There has been a great deal of criticism directed against the Board of Agriculture to-day, and with the spirit of that criticism I agree, because it represents the strong desire which is very evident in the agricultural district in Scotland that the working of the Small Landholders (Scotland) Act, 1911, should be more speedy than it has been in the past. But I think both the Secretary for Scotland and the hon. and gallant Gentleman who spoke from the Opposition Front Bench (Captain Gilmour) were certainly right when they warned the House not to press a new Department like this to act with precipitation during the early period of its office. After all, this Board only came into operation in April, 1912, and it had a very serious task in front of it. It was a Board consisting of persons who, at least in their official capacity, had never worked together before, and who were working more or less on unknown ground, and who, consequently, had to explore the field of their operations before they could set to work at all. I think, considering the smallness of their staff and the task they had in hand, they have accomplished a great deal. But I am sure my hon. Friends below the Gangway will have taken one part of the speech of the Secretary for Scotland as a justification of the demand which they have bean making. The part I refer to is that in which he told the House he had decided to ask for a great enlargement of the staff which deals particularly with small holdings in Scotland. That is, as I say, a notable justification of the complaints which have been made during this Session by my hon. Friend from Scotland, and particularly by those who represent rural districts, for a more rapid application of the Smallholders Act all over Scotland.
    I would, however, if I may, associate myself with the words which fell from the Secretary for Scotland, and appeal to my hon. Friends not to be too precipitate in

    1335
    their demands for the immediate application of the Act all over, because there is nothing more certain than this, that, while the success of the small holder really depends primarily upon his own capacity and ability and knowledge of agriculture, it depends in a hardly less degree upon the character of the land and the position of the land which he occupies. I am perfectly certain we should run serious danger of having large numbers of holders placed on unsatisfactory land if the Board were pressed too hard to carry on their work more rapidly than in the past. There is then the question of forestry. I do not suppose it is within the power of the Secretary for Scotland to apply the spur to the Advisory Committee he set up a year ago to examine the question of an administration area in Scotland, but perhaps the members of that Committee will read what has been said this afternoon and evening, and will realise that there is a great desire among all classes of people in Scotland to see a move forward made in the direction of afforestation in Scotland. The first move, of course, is to make the necessary preliminary survey of the area of Scotland, and to gather together the necessary staff. That part is already being done in some degree by the Board of Agriculture. We all hope that this Committee will bring its labours to a conclusion as speedily as possible. My hon. Friend from Aberdeen suggested that Aberdeenshire is the most suitable place for a demonstration area for Scottish forestry. I would suggest that there is no more central county than the one containing the burgh which I have the honour to represent. It lies almost equidistant from all four Scottish universities. As a claim has been made on behalf of other places, I feel it incumbent on me as representing the Borough of Perth to put in a claim on her behalf.
    Sir JOHN M'CALLUM: I am sure that most Scottish Members must be delighted to learn that Scotland now in reference to agriculture is in such a healthy condition. The statement made by the Secretary for Scotland was very satisfactory. He indicated how the Board had been working, and that he had gone to the Treasury——
    Captain CAMPBELL: I beg to call attention to the fact that there are not forty Members present. We really must put a stop to these electioneering speeches.
    The DEPUTY-CHAIRMAN: The second remark made by the hon. Member is quite an improper one to make in calling my attention to the fact that there are not forty Members present. In regard to the fact to which he has called my attention, a Division was called about a quarter to nine. I was then in the House, and I satisfied myself that there were a sufficient number of Members present. That being so, after so short an interval I feel justified in disregarding the hon. Gentleman's intimation.
    Captain CAMPBELL: Did you not inform me when last I rose that at a quarter past nine you would allow a count?
    The DEPUTY-CHAIRMAN: I informed the hon. Member that a count could not be called until a quarter past nine. I gave no indication as to the view I should take if my attention was then called to the fact that forty Members were not present.
    Sir JOHN M'CALLUM: I can assure the hon. Member that. I shall not detain the Committee more than two or three minutes. The Government are going to work this business in a scientific way. In connection with agriculture it is impossible in our day to make any advance whatever by old-fashioned methods. The system of scientific agriculture has to be introduced. Under the Act the system of waste will be put aside, and we shall adopt such methods as will enable us to make the best of our opportunities—in a word, to make two i blades of grass grow where only one is growing now. It is impossible to get the desired results in a few months. It will be probably five years before we see the real fruit of what we are now attempting. I thank the hon. Member for Bute for the tone and spirit in which he dealt with this subject. He and his family are perhaps the greatest authorities upon agriculture in Scotland, and praise from his lips is high praise indeed. I wish some of our Ishmaelite friends, instead of continually carping, would take a wide view of great problems, the proper solution of which will take some years. We have men now on the Government Bench who are in earnest, and we have the best authorities in connection with agriculture, from both the practical and the educational points of view, able in every way to carry on this great work. I rejoice to hear what has been said this afternoon. I am extremely sorry that the

    1337
    hon. Member for North Aberdeen (Captain Pirie) is not in his place. He comes for- ward continually finding fault, no matter who may be the Secretary for Scotland. It would require an angel from Heaven to preside over the destinies of Scotland to please the hon. Member. Some Members will never be satisfied until they them selves occupy that position. But the interests of Scotland must be regarded from a higher point of view than that. I would ask hon. Members whether they imagine for a moment that the interests of Scotland are being served by this system of continual fault-finding? We are simply exposing ourselves to the sarcasm of those who differ from us on the other side. We are often held forth as men who are sensible and peculiarly wise in our methods of life; but in Parliament of late years we have had an exhibition of Scottish character which is most revolting to some of us. We believe that the greatest things are done in silence, and that if we go on quietly working, keeping these questions to the front as we have been doing for years, we shall be most successful. It took five years to secure this Small Landholders Act; it will take five or ten years more to see the fruits of its working.
    Mr. EYRES-MONSELL: I rise to protest against the statement that no Members other than Scottish Members take any interest whatsoever in this Debate. I have not a single drop of Scottish blood in me, although in the present state of the House I am not disposed to boast over much of that fact. I wish to question a statement made by the hon. Member for North-East Lanarkshire (Mr. Duncan Millar). I understood him to advocate the establishment of market gardens in the Highlands.
    Mr. DUNCAN MILLAR: I was referring solely to the condition of the Lowlands throughout the whole of my speech. I thought I made that point clear.
    Mr. EYRES-MONSELL: I thought the hon. Member spoke rather lightly about market gardens, and that he did not attach sufficient importance to the difficulties under which market gardeners in this country labour. He suggested that market gardening might be carried out in spare time. I do not think it is a good plan to hold out hopes of that sort to people in Scotland. Does the hon. Member realise what a highly specialised business market gardening now is? Three conditions are essential. In the Evesham
    1338
    district, which I have the honour to represent, we have those conditions, namely, a good climate, good markets, and good transit—because we have two competing railway lines—and yet it is very difficult indeed to make market gardening pay. We have to labour against a very great number of difficulties. Foreign competition is a real difficulty, because sometimes even two shiploads of fruit coming from abroad will bring down the price of gooseberries, say, to half that our market gardeners are getting, and perhaps for the rest of the season the price never recovers itself. This year we are having a very bad fruit year in consequence of insect pests, due, no doubt, to the lack of frost last winter. I am afraid we are going to have a very bad fruit and vegetable season indeed. In spite of all these difficulties, hon. Members opposite always seem to vote for putting further difficulties in our way. It is no use advocating these things for the Highlands, or for the Lowlands, or anywhere else, if you go on putting difficulties in our way, difficulties such as Undeveloped Land Duty. I know the feeling of the market gardeners in my Constituency, and all I ask hon. Members opposite to do before holding out these hopes——
    The DEPUTY-CHAIRMAN: I do not quite see the relevance of the hon. Member's observations to the Vote before the Committee, which is for the Board of Agriculture in Scotland.
    Mr. EYRES-MONSELL: I beg your pardon. I was only wishful to say that before hon. Members opposite hold out the hope they do to market gardeners in any part of Scotland that. they should take a general survey of agriculture: then they will do all they can for market gardeners.
    Mr. C. E. PRICE: I only wish to refer to a matter which has already been referred to by one of the representatives for Edinburgh. It has relation to the proposed school of forestry. I saw an announcement in the Press some days ago of the anticipated purchase of an estate in a portion of Aberdeenshire. I received several communications from Edinburgh, particularly from some educational authorities, as to the concern with which they looked forward to the possible prospects of having this estate in Aberdeenshire. I should be the last one to say that in the purchase of an estate regard only should be had to the claims of Edinburgh, because I think it is essential that such an estate should

    1339
    be in such a position that the different universities can take full advantage of it. But so far as Edinburgh is concerned, she has special claims to consideration. She was the first university in Scotland to establish a forestry lectureship, thus establishing a standard, and, further, her teaching is recognised as qualifying for examination for the Indian Civil Service. Hitherto this has been confined to Oxford and Cambridge. Therefore, now that Edinburgh has been recognised as a teaching school to qualify for the Indian Civil Service, I think it would be disastrous if this school of forestry were placed in such a position that Edinburgh could not take full advantage of it. Some of us are greatly concerned at the enormous emigration from Scotland. Sonic of us are greatly concerned at the loss of time since the Small Landholders Act was created —concerned that the matter has gone forward at so slow a rate. I had the advantage of going over the Western Highlands in 1888, two years after the passing of the Crofters Act. I covered again the same ground in 1908, twenty years after the Act carne into operation. The change in the Highlands as a result of that Act and as a result of security of tenure and fair rents was enormous. Those of us who have seen the benefit from that Act look forward, in view of the experience gained, to this last Land Bill as likely to have even a greater effect over the whole of Scotland than the Act of 1886. The Opposition, at all events, should welcome this Act above all others, because when the 1886 Act was passed they said that that Act was absolutely unsuited to the Highlands, though it was suited to the Lowlands. We now have the extension to the Highlands, and, therefore, they should welcome it. I have gone through the Debates of that time very carefully and I find that the Opposition said that the Crofters Act, if it had been applied to the Lowlands, would have been very beneficial, but that it was absolutely unsuited to the Highlands. The creation of small holdings is not the only thing which will check the depopulation of Scotland. There is the housing problem, which is a very important matter. I was the other day talking to a farmer in Forfarshire who told me he had lost two of his best men simply from the fact that he could not get houses for them. They emigrated. Some of us therefore look forward not only to this Act being very beneficial in getting the people on the
    1340
    land, but look forward to an extension dealing with the land problem associated with the taxation of land values.
    Mr. MacCALLUM SCOTT: I would like to say a word in reference to the remarks which fell from the hon. Member on the Front Bench opposite a few moments ago. I think he showed lamentable ignorance of the fame and reputation of the Scottish people as market gardeners. He obviously knows very little about Scotland. If he had known more I think he would know that there is no country in the world where the art of market gardening has been more highly developed. If he goes around among the great estates in England, and if he looks into the gardens there, I venture to say that he will in a very large number of cases find that the gardener comes from Scotland.
    Mr. EYRES-MONSELL: That is not quite the same thing. If the hon. Member will come to my Constituency I should be glad to show him what I mean.
    Mr. MacCALLUM SCOTT: That is quite true, but there are hundreds and hundreds of men who go in for training and serve their apprenticeship as gardeners who have careers afterwards as gardeners on estates. In many cases they spring from market-garden stocks. I had intended to say something with reference to two aspects of the Report which is now before us. First, there is the question of small holdings, and, secondly, the question of afforestation. The Scottish Board of Agriculture, whose first annual Report we are now discussing, is the first fruits of the Small Landholders Act. The Small Landholders Act, is the first fruit of the new national movement in Scotland. That Act, 1 believe, marked an epoch in the political history of Scotland, and besides marking an epoch in the political history, it marked an epoch in the social and industrial history of Scotland—a completely new development in the agricultural system——
    The DEPUTY-CHAIRMAN: The hon. Gentleman's observations are not quite directed to the Vote that is under discussion.
    Mr. MacCALLUM SCOTT: I was endeavouring to explain that the Scottish Board of Agriculture, whose annual Report we are now discussing, marks an epoch in the history of Scotland. The principles upon which this Board has been established are not widely appreciated in England. They are not new to Scotland,

    1341
    but their extension to the whole of Scotland is new.
    They have been in practice for generations in six of the northern counties, and the extension of them to the whole of Scotland is not some doctrinaire theory, some vague principle elaborated in an arm-chair, but it is the extension of a principle which has been tried by practice and experience in the North of Scotland, and has been found valuable and effective. I hope that as the principles upon which this Board is based are appreciated in Scotland, and as their work is seen throughout Scotland, they will be accepted as a guide to future land legislation. in England. One of the first things revealed has been the extraordinray rush of applicants for land in Scotland. In England, when the Small Holdings Act was passed, there were 23,000 applicants for small holdings in the first year. In Scotland, there were 5,000 applicants; that is practically double in Scotland in proportion to England. In England there was practically one applicant for every two thousand of the population, and in Scotland one foe every thousand of population.
    The DEPUTY-CHAIRMAN: The hon. Member seems to be directing his remarks to a comparison between the difficulties of the English and the Scottish Acts. What we are now dealing with is the particular Vote with regard to the Board of Agriculture in Scotland, and I must ask the hon. Member to confine his remarks to that with special reference to items in the Vote.
    Mr. MacCALLUM SCOTT: If I am out of order, I will desist altogether from that branch of the subject, but I am dealing with the number of applicants with which this Board deals, and I was endeavouring to show that the number was double in Scotland as compared with England. If that is not germane, I shall sit down, but what I have to say is concerned with that aspect of the problem. The hunger for land in Scotland, as evidenced by the applications mentioned in this Report, is double that of England. We have a remarkable testimony of the extent and urgency of that demand in the Report before us. I will take two small quotations from the Report. The first is:—
    "The work of tie past six months has disclosed a demand for land settlement far in excess of the present resources of the fund."
    And a second quotation is:—
    "The number of practical proposals at present before the Board leads them to believe that the limit to the
    1342
    number of small holdings that can be created will be determined by the resources of the fund."
    Here we have a remarkable state of affairs. An Act is passed to meet the demand for small holdings. As soon as he Act is passed there is an enormous rush of applicants, and then it is found that the means provided by the Act are altogether inadequate. Of course, one could not judge accurately what the demand would be, but now that its effects are made manifest they cannot be ignored, and we cannot remain content with the provision made for meeting this demand under the Act. The right hon. Gentleman, who is responsible for the administration of this Act is to be congratulated on the speedy efforts he has made to secure an addition to the means for meeting that demand. The first thing necessary is, of course, to increase the existing machinery: That applies in England also. In England also the demand far exceeded the capacity of the machinery created at the time the Act was passed, but in England it took four years before additional small holdings commissioners could be appointed, and I think the right hon. Gentleman the Secretary for Scotland is to be congratulated that in the first year he has succeeded in securing this extension of the machinery which had taken four years to get in England. But the extension of the machinery, while valuable and necessary, is not enough. We are told very plainly in the first sentence quoted that the extension of land settlement is limited by the resources of the fund. We need more money in order to meet the demand called forth, and having been called forth it cannot be ignored. I trust the right hon. Gentleman will press his demand for more money, and I trust that in doing so he will have the unanimous support of all his colleagues in Scotland, and in this House.
    The other subject in the Report to which I intend to devote a few remarks is that of afforestation. While I profess the utmost satisfaction at the extension of the machinery for dealing with small holdings. I confess some disappointment at the slowness with which we are proceeding in this matter of afforestation. There are some signs in the Report which seem to indicate that the importance of afforestation is not fully appreciated by the Board of Agriculture. I think the idea is expressed almost in so many words that the first claim upon this fund must be for small holdings and not for afforestation.

    1343
    That is almost as if one were to say the first claim must be for small holdings and not for Commissioners. It would be
    almost as if it were to refuse money for appointing Small Holdings Commissioners and officials because the money was to be devoted to small holdings. I believe it is
    true that you cannot have a very large extension of small holdings in Scotland without large progress with afforestation. There is a large part of the area in Scotland in which small holdings are quite economically impossible and in which they cannot be made profitable without some auxiliary industry. That auxiliary industry does exist in many parts of Scotland on the coast, in fishing, but in the interior, where that resource is not available, it is
    quite impracticable, even where you can get some land, to establish small holdings upon a real economic basis. I wonder if the officials of the Board of Agriculture have considered the extent to which small holdings have been found possible and practical and paying throughout Germany by the establishment of afforestation in
    that country? I have here a Report already referred to—the Report of the Commission on Coast Erosion—which was specially required to consider the question of afforestation, and to present a Special Report upon it. The quotation I am going
    to give is not on the authority of that Commission, but on that of Professor Schlich, who is one of the greatest authorities on the question of forestry and afforestation. He says:—
    "It is almost a universal rule in Germany that there are no permanent forest workmen hut only a protecting staff. The work in the German forests, as a general proposition in the greater part of the country, is done in the winter, and the men employed are the same men who cultivate the small holdings, some of one acre, some five acres, and some of ton acres, which they cultivate in the summer, and in the winter they work in the forests. They frequently earn 4s. and 5s. a day. In a great part of Germany and France the same men work in the fields in the sunnier, and von have skilled men to do the work in the winter in the forests."
    I should like to make one other quotation from the Departmental Committee appointed by the Scottish Office in 1911. In their Report they say:—
    "Forests of the same size give ten times as much employment as sheep forming, and would enable hundreds of small holders to thrive in glens, where a score could otherwise scarcely scrape a living."
    The Scottish Board of Agriculture must beware of establishing by a great expenditure of money a large number of small holdings and then finding that the little, capital of these people has been thrown away, because they may not be able to earn a decent living on the land. If after
    1344
    much money has been spent these men find that they are not able to maintain themselves properly, they would turn round and blame those who placed them on the holdings.
    Sir H. CRAIK: And quite justly.
    Mr. MacCALLUM SCOTT: If there is to be a large and successful extension of small holdings, it can only be accomplished by a large development in afforestation. It is hardly realised what afforestation means for Scotland. There is one quarter of the surface of Scotland at present lying waste or being used for poor grazing or purposes of sport which could be better used for afforestation than at present, and which cannot be used for small holdings because it is not arable land. Just think what the reclamation of one quarter of the surface of Scotland would mean. It would mean more for Scotland than if the gold mines of the Rand were discovered there, because they would be worked out some day, but if we had this quarter of the land of Scotland afforested, it would add greatly to the material prosperity of Scotland. The land to which I am referring is not suitable for the best kind of agriculture, but it is not waste and desert and stony land.
    Sir G. YOUNGER: But it is land subject to terrible ravages and gales, which make it hopeless for cultivation.
    Mr. MacCALLUM SCOTT: No, they are large areas which have borne forests in the past and which are at present desert and waste. I am disappointed with the manner in which the Board of Agriculture has dealt with this question of afforestation. Many hon. Members have spoken about it in the House on all sides, and I call the right hon. Gentleman's attention to the widespread desire for some progress in this matter of afforestation. In 1911 we thought something would be done because a Departmental Committee was appointed to consider what practical advance could be made, and they were not to consider mere theoretical questions. This Committee was appointed to report as to the selection of a suitable location for a demonstration area and as to any further steps, following upon the acquisition of the site of the raid area, desirable to promote sylviculture in Scotland. That Committee reported in 1911, and it made a variety of definite recommendations. They recommended that a demonstration area from 4,000 to 10,000

    1345
    acres, with every staff and equipment, should be acquired; certain educational measures for producing the staff; a fully developed forestry school in connection with one of the universities for training forest officers; a school for working foresters in the demonstration area; a flying survey of the whole of Scotland, and the appointment of advisory forestry officers to advise how to handle best the forests on the estates. They also recommended that a limited number of State trial forests should be initiated.
    It will no doubt be said that these are big recommendations for which much money will be needed, and that we have not got the cash to carry them out. That is true, but what about the Development Commissioners? One of the functions of the Development Commissioners is to promote forestry and forestry is a Scottish question more than it is an English or an Irish question. The amount of land which is available for this purpose in Scotland is double that which is available in the whole of England and Ireland. Why has nothing been done to secure a Grant from the Development Commissioners for this purpose I know that an Advisory Committee has been appointed. It was appointed in July last year and this Committee has not yet advised. The matter has been delayed from month to month, and we find that in England they are making more rapid progress in this matter in spite of this being a more urgent question in Scotland. In England I believe you have had some Grants for afforestation. I am sure that it is through no lack of appreciation of the importance of the subject that the Scottish Board has not moved. No doubt the Scottish Board has had many matters to occupy its attention during the first year, and I can only conclude that in the press and crush of many other matters this one has been overlooked. I press the right hon. Gentleman to endeavour to stir up this Advisory Committee and if he finds it can do nothing, dismiss it and appoint another. We, who are interested in the development of small holdings, believe that afforestation is one of the means to that end.
    Mr. McKINNON WOOD: The hon. Baronet the Member for the Ayr Burghs (Sir G. Younger), raised several questions of interest. One of them was the question of the register of small holdings, and he asked what steps had been taken to check them. [An HON. MEMBER: "We
    1346
    cannot hear you."] I am bound to confess that it is a matter which we ought to take into consideration to see by what means we can best ensure the absolute accuracy of that register, or at any rate its practical accuracy for statistical purposes, and that matter will have consideration. The hon. Baronet also referred to the question of Fiars Courts. If the hon. Baronet and I can agree to a little Bill, if time permits, if there is no objection on Second Reading, and it is entirely agreed, I think we might bring in that Bill, if not this Session, at any rate next Session. The hon. Baronet asked me two questions, one about Vatersay and the other about Seafield. My information is that matters are proceeding satisfactorily at Vatersay, that the arrears are a small amount, and that the tenants are satisfied with their position. With regard to Seafield, there is only one tenant with whom we have had any trouble, and it is trouble of a kind that might arise on any estate and does not call for any special comment. I do not think that the hon. Member for East Edinburgh (Mr. Hogge) quite appreciates the object of the new seed-testing station. Of course, the idea is to enable farmers to obtain seed of undoubted purity. My hon. Friend also gave an interesting and picturesque account of what I am supposed to do. I should not have referred to it except that it was quoted by another hon. Member, the hon. Member for one of the Divisions of Aberdeen, and I am bound to say that I must not be taken as assenting to the story which he told. The hon. Member for Midlothian (Major Hope) spoke of the small holdings at Muiriston. I do not know why, she brought them in; they have nothing to do with the Board of Agriculture; they are under the control of the Corporation of Edinburgh, and they are not managed upon the same principle as those under the Board of Agriculture.
    Major HOPE: May I say that at present they are under the Scottish Local Government Board? The Scottish Local Government Board are the superiors or landlords of the tenants at Muiriston, and they have applied for a valuer of the Scottish Board of Agriculture to be sent down.
    Mr. McKINNON WOOD: It is certainly news to me that the Local Government Board are the superiors, or that they fix the rents. That is not my information, but at any rate it is not the Board of Agriculture, and the rents are not fixed upon

    1347
    the same principle. The hon. Member for East Renfrewshire (Captain Gilmour) asked me about the policy of the Board as to the amount of capital required before acceptance of applicants. The capital required, of course, varies in different parts of Scotland and according to the size of holding supplied. The amount required in the case of a fisherman who wants a small amount of land to eke out a living is smaller than is required in the case of a man who wants to make it his sole Source of livelihood, say, in the Lowlands. These questions, therefore, do not admit of a precise arithmetical answer. The hon. Member for Argyllshire (Mr. Ainsworth) asked that the enlargement of existing holdings might be considered, although he appreciated that the pressure in the first instance was for new holdings. The Board are considering the enlargement of the existing holdings in his county and in other parts of Scotland, and that matter will be dealt with in the future. He said, quite properly, that the water supply was a matter of great public importance, Of course, we have not money to deal with large public supplies of water, but we have to supply water where new holdings are instituted and where the supply is deficient.
    10.0 P.M.
    I now come to the hon. Member for Blackfriars and this much discussed question of the Advisory Committee on Forestry. The hon. Member stated quite truly that a Departmental Committee was appointed two or three years
    ago to consider the question. They laid down certain principles, but they did not decide upon recommending any specific area for a demonstration centre. That they proposed should be the work of a succeeding Advisory Committee. I followed their recommendations, and set up an Advisory Committee which contained some of the gentlemen most enthusiastic in afforestation in Scotland. There was my right hon. Friend the Member for Leith Burghs (Mr. Munro-Ferguson), Sir John Stirling Maxwell, the hon. Member for West Aberdeenshire (Mr. J. M. Henderson). I am asked why they have not made a recommendation as to the area to be selected. I am not able to answer that question, but I have a suspicion of the reason. I think that the Debate to-day might suggest a reason. Member after Member has arisen and recommended different parts of Scotland. I noticed that they were all parts of Scotland with which
    1348
    they were interested. There was the hon. Member for Perth (Mr. Whyte) half jocular and half in satire, and there was in dead seriousness the hon. Member for Aberdeen University (Sir H. Craik). Then we got the Edinburgh Members——
    Sir H. CRAIK: Was it not the recommendation of the Advisory Committee?
    Mr. McKINNON WOOD: No, they have not made any recommendations yet.
    Sir H. CRAIK: Yes.
    Mr. MacCALLUM SCOTT: The Departmental Committee.
    Sir H. CRAIK: Yes, the Departmental Committee.
    Mr. McKINNON WOOD: No, they did not. No doubt this poor Advisory Committee is much distracted by these diverse counsels and local interests, but I must really wait until they have settled the matter. I do not know whether I could adopt the advice one hon. Member has given me about appointing another Advisory Committee, but I have the gravest doubts that we should be in the same position, with the same difficulties. The same pullings from various local interests would take place again, and the poor distracted Committee might be as long arriving at a decision as this one. I hope, however, the Committee will arrive at a decision. I can assure the hon. Member for the Black-friars Division (Mr. Barnes) that forestry has no great relation to unemployment. I do not think that the setting up of forestry areas would do much for unemployment in Scotland. I do not see that if you were to have forestry areas in different centres in Scotland you would do much to find employment. The fact is that it is work which has to be done at certain seasons by a particular kind of trained labour. Afforestation on small holdings is quite a different matter. My hon. Friend the Member for North-East Lanark (Mr. Duncan Millar) asked if we hoped to do something for the Lowlands. We do hope and expect to do a good deal for the Lowlands, and I believe some of the best small holdings will be found in the Lowlands in a very few years time. He spoke about Lanark, and asked why it was we had not been able to plant small holdings in Lanarkshire. Just let me take that case-with the general knowledge I have. We

    1349
    have had five disappointments in Lanarkshire, five attempts to secure suitable farms. In two cases the farms were let after we began negotiations with the owner, and that stopped the proceedings. In two cases we were excluded by the terms of the Act, and in one case there was a very long lease, and taking the farm would have involved costly compensation beyond what we should have been justified in paying. Lanarkshire is not a place where it is easy at a moment's notice to find land ready to be taken for the purposes of occupation.
    There has been one fallacy running through several speeches. Hon. Members have compared the number of small holdings applied for with the number of applicants actually settled, and have declared it would take so many years to get through the work. But that is quite a fallacious calculation. In the first place, all the applicants are not suitable. Some have not the necessary experience, and it is useless putting men on the land without experience of small holdings. Some do not comply with the conditions of the Act, arid we cannot satisfy ourselves that they are able to fulfil their obligations. Consequently a certain number must be taken off the total. Then the number who are settled does not indicate the amount of work actually done. You may have hundreds of cases which have reached various stages; you may have a number of cases which, although they have not been completed, have had an. immense amount of labour expended on them. Therefore you cannot make the calculation on this basis. We had to move with a certain amount of deliberation, otherwise the results might have discredited the whole movement, and we should have lost the confidence of all sensible people. I believe that the judgment of the House, and the
    judgment of my Scotch colleague, to which I attach more importance, is with us in saying that we were quite right in moving with care. We have not moved with slowness or slackness. The officials of the Board have worked very hard on this problem, and the additional help they are now getting is absolutely necessary if the work is to be done with proper expedition. I hope next year we shall be able to make much more rapid progress, and that a much larger number of men will be settled on the land as small holders than during the past year.
    Mr. MORTON: The right hon. Gentleman has said nothing as to what has been done in Sutherlandshire.
    Mr. McKINNON WOOD: We have two schemes in that county, one for farming and one for afforestation. I cannot give details as they are not sufficiently advanced, and it is not in the interests of the success of the schemes that we should go into them prematurely.
    Mr. MORTON: I should like to know where the afforestation scheme is to be tried. But I wish to emphasise the point that there is plenty of land available in Sutherlandshire, and I do not want to wait until the people are driven out of the county by emigration. I do not want the depopulation which we so much deplore to continue, and therefore, I shall feel bound, in the interests of my constituents, to vote for the Amendment.
    Question put, "That a sum, not exceeding £121,081, be granted for the said Service."
    The Committee divided: Ayes, 9; Noes, 194.

    Division No. 120.]

    AYES.

    [10.11 p.m.

    Baird, J. L.

    Eyres-Monsell, Bolton M.

    Pryce-Jones, Colonel E.

    Bridgeman, W. Clive

    Goldsmith, Frank

    Campbell, Captain Duncan F. (Ayr, N.)

    Henderson, Major H. (Berks, Abingdon)

    TELLERS FOR THE AYES.—Mr. Hogge and Mr. Morton.

    Craik, Sir Henry

    Pirie, Duncan V.

    NOES.

    Abraham, William (Dublin, Harbour)

    Bathurst, Charles (Wilts, Wilton)

    Buxton, Noel (Norfolk, North)

    Adamson, William

    Beale, Sir William Phipson

    Carr-Gomm, H. W.

    Ainsworth, John Stirling

    Benn, Ion Hamilton (Greenwich)

    Chancellor, H. G.

    Allen, Arthur A. (Dumbarton)

    Benn, W. W. (T. Hamlets, St. George)

    Clancy, John Joseph

    Allen, Rt. Hon. Charles P. (Stroud)

    Boland, John Plus

    Clough, William

    Arnold, Sydney

    Bowerman, Charles W.

    Compton-Rickett, Rt. Hon. Sir J.

    Baker, Joseph Allen (Finsbury, E.)

    Boyle, Daniel (Mayo, North)

    Condon, Thomas Joseph

    Balfour, Sir Robert (Lanark)

    Boyton, James

    Cornwall, Sir Edwin A.

    Barnes, George N.

    Brace, William

    Cotton, William Francis

    Barren, Sir J. (Hawick Burghs)

    Brady, P. J.

    Cowan, W. H.

    Barton, William

    Burt, Rt. Hon. Thomas

    Crumley, Patrick

    Cullinan, John

    Kellaway, Frederick George

    Ponsonby, Arthur A. W. H.

    Dalziel, Rt. Hon. Sir J. H. (Kirkcaldy)

    Kelly, Edward

    Price, C. E. (Edinburgh, Central)

    Davies, Ellis William (Eifion)

    Kilbride, Denis

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

    Davies, Sir W. Howall (Bristol, S.)

    King, J.

    Raffan, Peter Wilson

    Delany, William

    Lambert, Rt. Hon. G. (Devon, S. Molton)

    Rea, Rt. Hon. Russell (South Shields)

    Denman, Hon. Richard Douglas

    Lambert, Richard (Wilts, Cricklade)

    Rea, Walter Russell (Scarborough)

    Devlin, Joseph

    Lardner, James C. R.

    Reddy, Michael

    Dewar, Sir J. A.

    Law, Hugh A. (Donegal, West)

    Redmond, William Archer (Tyrone, E.)

    Dillon, John

    Leach, Charles

    Richardson, Albion (Peckham)

    Doris, William

    Lewis, Rt. Hon. John Herbert

    Roberts, Charles H. (Lincoln)

    Duffy, William J.

    Lough, Rt. Hon. Thomas

    Roberts, G. H. (Norwich)

    Duncan, C. (Barrow-in-Furness)

    Lundon, Thomas

    Robertson, John M. (Tyneside)

    Elverston, Sir Harold

    Lyell, Charles Henry

    Robinson, Sidney

    Esmonde, Dr. John (Tipperary, N.)

    Lynch, A. A.

    Roche, Augustine (Louth)

    Esmonde, Sir Thomas (Wexford, N.)

    Lyttelton, Hon J. C. (Droitwich)

    Roe, Sir Thomas

    Essex, Sir Richard Walter

    Macdonald, J. Ramsay (Leicester)

    Rowntree, Arnold

    Esslemont, George Birnie

    Macdonald, J. M. (Falkirk Burghs)

    Samuel, J. (Stockton-on-Tees)

    Falconer, J.

    McGhee, Richard

    Samuel, Samuel (Wandsworth)

    Fenwick, Rt. Hon. Charles

    Macnamara, Rt. Hon. Dr. T. J.

    Scanlan, Thomas

    Ferens, Rt. Hon. Thomas Robinson

    MacVeagh, Jeremiah

    Scott, A. MacCallum (Glas., Bridgeton)

    Ffrench, Peter

    M'Callum, Sir John M.

    Sheeny, David

    Fitzgibbon, John

    M'Laren, Hon. F. W. S. (Lines, Spalding)

    Sherwell, Arthur James

    Flavin, Michael Joseph

    M'Micking, Major Gilbert

    Shortt, Edward

    France, Gerald Ashburner

    Manfield, Harry

    Smith, Albert (Lanes., Clitheroe)

    Gladstone, W. G. C.

    Marks, Sir George Croydon

    Smyth, Thomas F. (Leitrim, S.)

    Goldstone, Frank

    Marshall, Arthur Harold

    Spear, Sir John Ward

    Greene, W. R.

    Meagher, Michael

    Stanier, Beville

    Greig, Colonel J. W.

    Meehan, Patrick J. (Queen's Co., Leix)

    Strauss, Edward A. (Southwark, West)

    Gwynn, Stephen Lucius (Galway)

    Millar, James Duncan

    Sutherland, John E.

    Hackett, John

    Molloy, Michael

    Sutton, John E.

    Hancock, John George

    Mooney, John J.

    Talbot, Lord E.

    Harcourt, Robert V. (Montrose)

    Morgan, George Hay

    Thomas, J. H.

    Harmsworth, Cecil (Luton, Beds)

    Morison, Hector

    Thynne, Lord Alexander

    Harmsworth, R. L. (Caithness-shire)

    Muldoon, John

    Toulmin, Sir George

    Harvey, A. G. C. (Rochdale)

    Munro, R.

    Ure, Rt. Hon. Alexander

    Haslam, Lewis (Monmouth)

    Murphy, Martin J.

    Wadsworth, J.

    Havelock-Allan, Sir Henry

    Neilson, Francis

    Walsh, Stephen (Lanes., Ince)

    Hayden, John Patrick

    Nolan, Joseph

    Wason, John Cathcart (Orkney)

    Hayward, Evan

    Nugent, Sir Walter Richard

    White, J. Dundas (Glasgow, Tradeston)

    Hazleton, Richard

    Nuttall, Harry

    White, Sir Luke (Yorks, E. R.)

    Henderson, Arthur (Durham)

    O'Brien, Patrick (Kilkenny)

    White, Patrick (Meath, North)

    Higham, John Sharp

    O'Doherty, Philip

    Whitehouse, John Howard

    Hinds, John

    O'Dowd, John

    Whyte, A. F. (Perth)

    Hodge, John

    O'Kelly, Edward P. (Wicklow, W.)

    Wiles, Thomas

    Holmes, Daniel Turner

    O'Neill, Dr. Charles (Armagh, S.)

    Williams, Llewelyn (Carmarthen)

    Hope, Harry (Bute)

    O'Shaughnessy, P. J.

    Williams, Penry (Middlesbrough)

    Hope, Major J. A. (Midlothian)

    O'Shee, James John

    Wilson, W. T. (Westhoughton)

    Hughes, Spencer Leigh

    O'Sullivan, Timothy

    Wood, Rt. Hon. T. McKinnon (Glasgow)

    Jones, Edgar (Merthyr Tydvil)

    Parkes, Ebenezer

    Young, William (Perth, East)

    Jones, H. Haydn (Merioneth)

    Parry, Thomas H.

    Younger, Sir George

    Jones, J. Towyn (Carmarthen, East)

    Pearce, Robert (Staffs, Leek)

    Yoxall, Sir James Henry

    Jones, Leif Stratten (Notts, Rushcliffe)

    Peel, Lieut-Colonel R. F.

    Jones, William (Carnarvonshire)

    Phillips, John (Longford, S.)

    TELLERS FOR THE NOES.—Mr. Illingworth and Mr. Gulland.

    Joyce, Michael

    Pointer, Joseph

    Keating, Matthew

    Pollock, Ernest Murray

    Original Question put, and agreed to.

  SCOTTISH LAND COURT.—(Class III.— VOTE 12.)
  Motion made, and Question proposed,
  "That a sum, not exceeding £6,000, be granted to His Majesty, to complete the sum necessary to defray the Charge which will come in course of payment during the year ending on the 31st day of March, 1914, for the Salaries and Expenses of the Office of the Scottish Land Court."—[Note.— £4,000 has been voted on account.]
  Sir GEORGE YOUNGER: I desire to raise a point of Order upon this Vote. As every hon. Member in this Committee 'knows perfectly well, the Small Landholders (Scotland) Act enjoins upon the Land Court in Scotland the obligation of
  1352
  submitting each year to Parliament a report of its proceedings. The peculiarity of the situation seems to consist in this: That while the salaries of the officials of the Land Court, and the various costs and expenses of administration, and so forth are borne upon this Vote, the salaries of the members of the Land Court are borne upon the Consolidated Fund, and, therefore, cannot be discussed in this Committee upon this particular Vote. At all events, I do not suppose we could discuss individually any question arising in regard to those members of the Land Court, the chairman and other members of the Court. I do not myself see how it is possible to discuss the Report of the Land Court without making certain references—because the discussion of the Report involves that—to the Court as a whole.

  1353
  I should like to ask your ruling, as this is a perfectly now proceeding and a somewhat difficult one to understand, whether, in discussing this Report, one would be entitled to discuss the Court as a whole in connection with the Report or whether one is debarred from doing so?
  The DEPUTY-CHAIRMAN: I think the Land Court as a body is properly open to criticism, but the personal head of that Department, who has the status of a judge of the High Court of Scotland, is not open to criticism. I found my decision upon a decision which was given, I think, in September, 1887, on the occasion of the Irish Land Court, when a somewhat similar point was raised.
  Sir G. YOUNGER: We only received this Report at a late hour last evening, and it is very difficult indeed to discuss it at such short notice. It is a long and elaborate Report involving many points of interest. As there is to be another Scottish day on the Estimates, I assume the discussion, if not concluded to-night, can be continued on the next occasion. Otherwise, I suppose it would be desirable to move to report Progress.
  Mr. R. HARCOURT: If the hon. Baronet finds it inconvenient to discuss this Vote, there are other very important Votes on the Paper. Education and the Fishery Board come next.
  Mr. McKINNION WOOD: It would be better if we could go on, seeing that under your ruling it does not appear that we can have any long discussion on this Report. At the same time it is quite true that the Report was only in the hands of Members yesterday morning, and I do not like to press the matter unduly. This Vote might be left over and we might go on with other Votes, but, on the other hand, there are two important Votes to consider, and I should like to ask the hon. Baronet if he will allow us to go on with the Vote under the circumstances.
  Sir G. YOUNGER: I desire to call attention to this Report in so far as it deals with two points. The first is the narrative in connection with the proceedings which took place in the Island of Arran. If there is one thing which a Court of this kind ought to be careful about, it is surely that their proceedings should be carried out in the most judicial and careful spirit, and I do not think anyone who reads those pages will disagree with me in saying that
  1354
  there are, at all events, certain paragraphs appearing there which ought not to have appeared in the Report. They involve special pleading of a most distinct and obvious kind. They precede the decision of the Court on this question, because the Court has given no decision yet. They deal with the attitude of the estate in Arran. They proceed to deal with the administration of the estate and to discuss it in such a way as, in my view, is calculated to prejudice the effect and the value of any decision which may be given after the prolonged inquiry which has taken place. I do think that, taking the whole history of that Court into consideration, and regarding it from the point of view from which it has been criticised in Scotland from practically every quarter, colour is given and justification is given to those criticisms by the fact that those pages are entered in this Report. I should be very much surprised to find that on. receiving this Report my right hon. Friend the Secretary for Scotland did not himself see—I do not know whether he will admit it, but he must have seen—that a good deal was special pleading which should not have appeared in a Report of this kind. The observation I wish to make upon it is that, although it has occurred in the first Report submitted to us by the Land Court, I hope that, notice having been taken of it here, there will be no such breach of decorum again in any Report we receive from that body.
  The other point I desire to mention is that contained on page 20. It deals with the very large reductions of rent made in the various districts of Scotland in which they have been dealing with claims for rearrangements of the rentals of small holdings. I dare say it is perfectly right—I do not question the decisions the Land Court arrived at in connection with these various claims—but I think it would be very interesting if the House were in some way informed as to the principle on which those reductions are made. It is a curious fact, for example, in connection with the reductions of rent in Caithness, that the Crofters' Commission dealt only two or three years ago with the very holdings dealt with by the Land Court last year, and then fixed the rents with the knowledge which the Crofters' Commission had obtained over a long series of years, to the satisfaction, I believe, of both parties concerned I cannot understand the principle on which the Land Court, in reviewing

  1355
  those rents, have made the enormous reductions they have made, considering that agriculturists have done very much better, that rents have been very much better, and that farmers have been very much better off in the last year or two than in preceding years before the rents were fixed by the Court. I do not say that they are wrong—I know nothing of the facts of the case—but I do think some information is required on the subject. We ought to know, and the people of Scotland ought to understand, the principle on which they are acting in the matter, and, if possible, they should get some satisfaction as to what may be expected in cases of that kind. Looking through the more detailed reports one notices, for instance, certain landlords who I am certain would not ask any tenant to pay more than what was reasonable and fair for his holding, one of them an hon. Member of this House, and in that particular case an enormous reduction was made. Large sums of arrears were wiped out and no reason is given. It is impossible to understand the principle on which the Court acted. We should be made aware of the principle on which action is taken so that some reasonable consistency may be secured in future. There is in this Report a most plaintive complaint that the accommodation provided for the Court at its inception was of a very limited and undignified character; a basement about Parliament Square was all that was available. I cannot understand why they could not have taken flats in hotels or anywhere else in the same way as other bodies do. They have now landed themselves in a palatial establishment in Grosvenor Crescent, I should think much too big for their requirements. I do not know what they have paid for it, but I think that it is altogether larger than they require, and it is not at all in a suitable situation, being quite out of the way of main thoroughfares. I cannot understand why that house was bought, unless it be that it belonged to an immediate relative of a very prominent Member of the Government. Certainly it is the very last place I should have chosen for the habitation of a Land Court. Above all we want to know if it is not possible to save a great deal of the money spent on the travelling expenses of the Land Court. I heard not long ago of this Land Court going in a proces-
  1356
  sion of motor-cars from Oban to fix a fair rent, or an equitable rent on the Inverliver estate. I do not know to what extent the rent on that holding was reduced—possibly by£1 or £2—but I would undertake to say that it cost about £30 to do what the Government factor might very well have done himself without letting the country in for that great expense.
  If these things are not curbed now we shall get into a very extravagant system of management in the future. The Land Court should be warned that there is an eagle eye upon them, a great many eagle eyes upon them. I happened to hear that in this particular case the expenditure was incurred, because the Government desired to place itself at, the disposal of the Land Court just as it expects the landlords to do, with the result that it cost the country a great deal of money. Next year I dare say we shall have a great deal more to say about the Land Court. They have only recently commenced their work, and what they may do yet we do not know. I have no doubt that they will treat the land question quite judiciously and fairly, and I hope that they may do it successfully. But it is a very responsible duty which they have to perform, and they have very great difficulties to encounter. They will be debarred, I believe, in many eases from acquiring the land for small holdings in many districts because of the immense amount of compensation they will have to pay. Therefore we get back again, as we did in the last discussion, to the necessity for the very thankless task which the right hon. Gentleman will have of going to the Treasury and asking for a great deal more money than is provided now for the purposes of the Landholders Act. It is all very well to tell the Secretary for Scotland to go to the Treasury to borrow money. He has done that up to now successfully in many ways, for he knows the tricks of the Treasury better than most people, as he has been there himself. It was his duty to refuse many applicants, and he knows exactly how to do it. He perhaps knows better than most people how to meet those arguments when my right hon. Friend the present Financial Secretary to the Treasury meets him and when he goes with a demand of that kind. If the Government are really serious in this matter, and mean those holdings to be successfully established, I have no doubt the right hon. Gentleman will be able to show how much the money is

  1357
  needed for this scheme. The Court, as a whole, should be a little more judicial in its treatment of these matters than it has been during the last year. It has laid itself open to much scandal, and let us hope that the effect of the Debate in this House, and your ruling, Sir, from the Chair, will show that it is exposed to criticism from which perhaps it thought it was free.
  The LORD ADVOCATE (Mr. Ure): The scheme of the Report, the Committee must have observed, is to give in popular language the result of the Court's investigations and their decisions upon the varied cases which they have met with in different parts of Scotland. They tell the questions which were raised and the details and contentions which were submitted, and as modified on one side or the other, and they state the decision at which they have arrived. When they reached the Island of Arran they had there very protracted sittings. In order to account for the long investigation given to the Island of Arran, the Report states that they received an intimation at the outset that the facts they had to consider had exclusively reference to agricultural values, but as is well known, there are in Arran what are known as "summer letting" values. That very important statement was made at the outset, and it was one to which the members of the Land Court naturally directed their attention. When they entered upon their investigation, the Report says, agricultural values had alone been taken, but anyone with a superficial acquaintance with the conditions in the Island of Arran must know that summer letting value would be considered. And that led to a protracted investigation. The Committee will readily understand that it did not rest on ex parte statements. A number of witnesses were examined and cross-examined, with the result that it was ascertained that in the fixing of the rents the summer lettings had been taken into account. By that means the Land Court were able to explain to readers of the Report the reason for the considerable reductions in rent which either have been or may be made.
  Sir G. YOUNGER: They have not given any decision yet.
  Mr. URE: Preliminary, I have no doubt, to considerable reductions in rent which will be found when the decisions are given.
  Sir G. YOUNGER: That was not the point I was referring to. I alluded to the ex parte statements about estate management and the objection of estate management about crofters in Arran.
  Mr. URE: The hon. Baronet directed and centred our attention on page 21 with reference to the Island of Arran.
  Sir G. YOUNGER: Certainly not that point.
  Mr URE: I am endeavouring to reply to the charge made against the Court of special pleading. The hon. Baronet complained at a later stage in his speech of the absence of any indication with the Report of the principles which had actuated the Land Court in reducing rents in other parts of Scotland. I should not have expected that the Land Court would state in their Report the principles upon which they had proceeded, because those principles are singularly well established, and very plainly indicated in the Act they are administering. They are to fix a fair and equitable rent for the holding between the landlord and tenant as a willing lessor and a willing lessee. That is exactly the task to which they addressed themselves. Each case must depend on the considerations which are applicable to that case—and it is impossible therefore for the Land Court to give in particular instances the particular considerations which weighed with them in making a large, or it may be, a small reduction. I do not think you will ever find in the Report of the Land Court any further indication, nor could we properly expect any further indication of the rules under which they are proceeding, except the statement from the Act to which I have referred. With regard to the housing of the Land Court, it is perfectly true they are housed in what, I agree with the hon. Baronet, is a handsome residence in the West of Edinburgh. Let me assure him that it is a highly convenient place for the Court. I know the house well, and the hon. Baronet knows just as well as I do the reason which actuated the Government in purchasing that particular residence.
  Sir G. YOUNGER: I do not in the least.
  Mr. URE: Then I can inform the hon. Member. It is the largest residence in the vicinity, and for that reason was very difficult to dispose of when the former occupant died. It was in the market for a considerable time, and we were able to

  1359
  secure it on what we believed to be exceedingly reasonable terms. We all hope that it will not be the permanent home of the Land Court, but that the Court will by and by be housed under the same roof as the Local Government Board and the other Boards for Scotland.
  The DEPUTY-CHAIRMAN: When the hon. Baronet referred to this point, my attention was not directed to the fact that it does not come under this Vote. I have permitted the Lord Advocate to reply, but I mention the matter now to exclude any further reference to the subject.
  Mr. C. E. PRICE: It is a pity this Report was not issued earlier, as it is one of the most human documents submitted to the House for a long time. It is the first Report presented since the Crofters' Commission ceased to exist, and I would strongly recommend all Scottish Members to read it. I was very sorry to hear the remarks of the hon. Baronet opposite with regard to the want of the judicial mind.
  Sir G. YOUNGER: I adhere to them absolutely.
  Mr. PRICE: The best testimony to the admirable manner in which the work has been carried out is the fact that in all the cases which have been appealed to the Court of Sessions the decisions have been confirmed.
  Sir G. YOUNGER: Will the hon. Gentleman say what cases have been appealed to the Court of Sessions? I never heard of one.
  Mr. PRICE: There have been three or four, but I will not waste time by giving the hon. Baronet information on that point as showing the great advantage that this Act is already proving, not only to the old crofters, but to all those who are making applications for first term fair rents. I find that in Caithness there are 118 cases, and the tenants have had reductions in rent of no less than 34 per cent., and reductions in arrears of 75 per cent. Only those who know these counties can appreciate what a boon the Act is already proving to these people. The hon. Baronet is concerned as to the fairness of the Court. Here is a case where before the Act of 1886 the rent was £6 4s.; it was reduced after the first term to £4 15s., it has now been raised to £9 14s. In that case the rent has actually been raised above the figure of 1886.
  1360
  On the other hand, here is a case where the old rent was £119 12s., on the first term fair rent it was reduced by £7 13s., and in 1912 it was reduced to £52 2s. 6d.—a reduction of 60 per cent. The Report is one of the finest documents I have read for a. long time, and I sincerely hope Members will read it.
  Sir H. CRAIK: If for nothing else, this discussion has been valuable for the clear but astonishing statement of the Lord Advocate as to the methods which he anticipates will be pursued under this Act He tells us that no principles whatever can be laid down with regard to fixing rents, that it is not the intention to lay down any such principles, and that we are not to anticipate that the Land Court will ever condescend to make any statement of the grounds or principles upon which they may reduce rents.
  Mr. URE: They commenced their Report by saying that this is a fair rent, and not a competitive rent.
  Sir H. CRAIK: The right hon. Gentleman said there are an infinite number of cases—I heard him—each of which must carry its weight with the Land Court, and that Court cannot be expected to state the grounds of their decision.
  Mr. U RE: Hear, hear.
  Sir H. CRAIK: That is a remarkable exposition of the legislation or anticipation of legislation that you are holding out in regard to the future action of this precious Land Court. I wish to call attention to the special part of the Report touched upon in such terms of laudation by the hon. Member for East Edinburgh. What infinite benefits this Act has brought about! The Land Court fixed the fair rents of 256 holdings, which involved 40,000 acres. What did the change in the old and the new rents amount to? £656 for 256 holdings! What an enormous benefit to the crofters! How can we exaggerate it? That is not all. The Land Court followed that up by a revision of the rents in the case of ninety-nine holdings in the septennial expiring period. What was the charge here? The reductions in the new fair rents amounted to £137. We come to the last part of the portentous work of the Court. In eighty-nine holdings the equitable rents fixed meant a reduction of 25 per cent. Something like a little over £1,000 less over 500 holdings! What did this cost? For nine months the Vote is for

  1361
  £17,711: that is to say, the Land Court saved these poor crofters just about one-seventeenth of the cost of their own salaries, accommodation, and travelling expenses. I leave such an Act to its friends. I think the Report itself is sufficient exposure of the humbug of the whole thing.
  Mr. BAIRD: If there was time I think we would be justified in protesting most strongly against the treatment which Scotland is receiving by the endeavour to dispose of a large question like this Land Court in three-quarters of an hour. There we have a Court set up last year to deal with holdings in Scotland with a rent under £50 per year. It issues a Report of which the introduction covers twenty-one pages, and the Report itself 124 pages, and that was made accessible to Members only yesterday morning, and we get now within twenty-four hours of its issue three-quarters of an hour for its discussion. By the ruling of the Chair it is open to us to go very largely into the decisions of these Courts. There will be differences of opinion as to whether they were wise or unwise, just or unjust, but at. any rate, before voting the sum necessary to pay the salaries of those Gentlemen, surely we ought to have an opportunity of going into the question whether they are worth the money or not. That is what we are not allowed to do to-night. If there is any understanding that this Vote is not going to be taken to-night, I shall not further detain the Committee, but if not I ask leave to move" That you do report progress, and ask leave to sit again."
  The DEPUTY-CHAIRMAN: The Committee at this stage will not go on longer than a couple of minutes. I understand it is not intended to take the Vote tonight. When it comes to eleven o'clock, it will stand over in the ordinary way.
  Mr. BAIRD: Is there any understanding to that effect?
  Mr. URE: Yes.
  Mr. BAIRD: There is an enormous number of questions which deserve discussion, and it may be noted that the subject which was pounced upon by the Lord-Advocate was one not dealt with by the hon. Baronet (Sir G. Younger), but which appears on page 19 of the Report. The right hon. Gentleman did not carry it any further, which was a fair indication that,. being a busy man, and only receiving the. Report like the rest 'of us yesterday morning, he was not able to do so. Then there-is this question of the annual cost of this body of lawyers who have been created judges for the purpose of going into the question of Scottish land, and the very small output of work which they have done. Surely the questions which my hon. Friend the Member for Aberdeen University (Sir H. Craik) dealt with very briefly are an indication that these matters ought. to be threshed out before the Committee. comes to a decision? I am myself aware of a considerable number of cases which have been brought to my notice in the North-East corner of Scotland where these judges have given extreme dissatisfaction, and where their judgment have not been considered to be anything approaching impartial, and I do think that as we are allowed to discuss their procedure as a whole, advantage should be taken of the opportunity in order to go thoroughly into, this question. That is totally impossible in the few minutes at our disposal. These are extremely important questions. Large hopes raised in the minds of a great many modest, humble people have been disappointed, and it is only fair and right that these matters should be thoroughly discussed. I am not sure whether one is entitled to deal with the constitution of the Court itself——
  It being Eleven o'clock, the CHAIRMAN left the Chair to make his report to the House; Committee report Progress; to sit again upon Monday next (30th June).
  The remaining Orders were read, and postponed.
  Adjourned at Seven minutes after Eleven
  o'clock.