Lords Sitting of 26 June 1900

PRIVATE BILL BUSINESS.
The LORD CHANCELLOR acquainted the House that the Clerk of the Parliaments had laid upon the Table the Certificates from the Examiners that the further Standing Orders applicable to the following Bills have been complied with:—

Belfast and County Down Railway.

Great Northern Railway (Ireland).

Also the Certificates that no Standing Orders are applicable to the following Bills:—

Local Government Provisional Orders (No. 6).

Local Government Provisional Orders (Poor Law).

Local Government Provisional Orders (No. 8).

And also the Certificates that the Standing Orders applicable to the following Bills have been complied with—

Gas Provisional Order (No. 3).

Pier and Harbour Provisional Orders (No.1).

Land Registry (New Buildings).

The same were ordered to lie on the Table.

STANDING ORDERS COMMITTEE.
Report from, That the Standing Orders not complied with in respect of the following Bills:—

Metropolitan District Railway,

South Metropolitan Gas,

ought to be dispensed with, and the Bills allowed to proceed.
Read, and agreed to.

NEWRY, KEADY, AND TYNAN LIGHT RAILWAY BILL.
A Petition of Messrs. Grahames, Currey, and Spens, of No. 30, Great George Street, Westminster, parliamentary agents, praying for leave to present a Petition of the promoters of the Kingscourt, Keady, and Armagh Railway Bill, praying to be heard by counsel against the Bill, although the time limited by Standing Order No.
1026
93 for presenting such Petition has expired; read, and ordered to lie on the Table: and Standing Order No. 93 to be considered on Thursday next in order to its being dispensed with in respect of the said Petition.

NORTH WARWICKSHIRE WATER BILL.
Reported with Amendments.
VALE OF RHEIDOL LIGHT RAILWAY BILL.
Reported with an Amendment.
AIRDRIE, COATBRIDGE, AND DISTRICT WATER TRUST BILL.
  HARTLEPOOL GAS AND WATER BILL.

    GREAT EASTERN RAILWAY BILL.
    LANCASHIRE, DERBYSHIRE, AND EAST COAST RAILWAY BILL.
    CITY OF LONDON ELECTRIC LIGHTING BILL.
    Reported with Amendments.

DUBLIN CORPORATION BILL.
  CLONTARF URBAN DISTRICT COUNCIL BILL.
  Leave given to the Select Committee to adjourn over To-morrow.
FRASER SETTLED CHATTELS BILL [H.L.]
  CHRISTCHURCH AND BOURNEMOUTH TRAMWAYS BILL.
    BLACKPOOL, ST. ANNE'S, AND LYTHAM TRAMWAYS BILL.
    Read 2a.
BRITISH GASLIGHT COMPANY (STAFFORDSHIRE POTTERIES) BILL.
Read 2a, and committed.
RICKMANSWORTH AND UXBRIDGE VALLEY WATER BILL.
Read 2a, and committed. The Committee to be proposed by the Committee of Selection.
LANCASTER CORPORATION BILL.
  ST. DAVID'S RAILWAY (ABANDONMENT) BILL.
  Read 2a, and committed.
WEST BROMWICH CORPORATION BILL.
  GREAT WESTERN RAILWAY BILL.
  Read 2a, and committed. The Committees to be proposed by the Committee of Selection.
FARNWORTH URBAN DISTRICT COUNCIL BILL.
  GAS LIGHT AND COKE, COMMERCIAL GAS, AND SOUTH METROPOLITAN GAS COMPANIES BILL.
  Read 2a, and committed.
HALIFAX CORPORATION BILL.
  HUDDERSFIELD CORPORATION TRAMWAYS BILL.
  Read 2a, and committed. The Committees to be proposed by the Committee of Selection.
JARROW AND HEBBURN ELECTRICITY SUPPLY BILL.
Read 2a, and committed.
KINGSCOURT, KEADY, AND ARMAGH RAILWAY BILL.
  LAMBETH WATER BILL.
  Read 2a, and committed. The Committees to be proposed by the Committee of Selection.
LONDON AND SAINT KATHERINE DOCKS, AND EAST AND WEST INDIA DOCK COMPANIES BILL.
Read 2a, and committed.
MID-KENT WATER BILL.
  PORTLAND ORBAN DISTRICT GAS BILL.
  Read 2a, and committed. The Committees to be proposed by the Committee of Selection.
SOUTHPORT AND LYTHAM TRAMROAD BILL.
Read 2a, and committed.
WANDSWORTH AND PUTNEY GAS BILL.
  SOUTH METROPOLITAN GAS BILL.
    METROPOLITAN DISTRICT RAILWAY BILL.
    Read 2a, and committed. The Committees to be proposed by the Committee of Selection.
BELFAST AND COUNTY DOWN RAILWAY BILL.
  GREAT NORTHERN RAILWAY (IRELAND) BILL.
  Read 2a.
SOUTH SHIELDS CORPORATION BILL [H.L.]
Read 3a, and passed, and sent to the Commons.
ROCHDALE CORPORATION BILL.
Brought from the Commons; read 1a; and referred to the Examiners.
OSSETT CORPORATION GAS BILL.
  SOUTHPORT EXTENSION AND TRAMWAYS BILL.
    STOCKPORT CORPORATION TRAMWAYS BILL.
    Returned from the Commons with the Amendments agreed to.
MERSEY DOCKS AND HARBOUR BOARD BILL [H.L.]
  PAIGNTON URBAN DISTRICT WATER BILL [H.L.]
  Returned from the Commons agreed to, with Amendments.
ELECTRIC LIGHTING PROVISIONAL ORDERS (No. 7) BILL [H.L.]
  TRAMWAYS ORDERS CONFIRMATION (No. 1) BILL [H.L.]
  Amendments reported (according to Order), and Bills to be read 3a on Friday next.
LOCAL GOVERNMENT (IRELAND) PROVISIONAL ORDER (No. 1) BILL.
Read 3a (according to Order), and passed.
LOCAL GOVERNMENT (IRELAND) PROVISIONAL ORDERS (No. 2) BILL.
  LOCAL GOVERNMENT PROVISIONAL ORDERS (No. 2) BILL.
  Amendments reported (according to Order), and Bills to be read 3a on Thursday next.
LOCAL GOVERNMENT PROVISIONAL ORDERS (No. 3) BILL.
  LOCAL GOVERNMENT PROVISIONAL ORDERS (No. 4) BILL.
  Read 3a (according to Order) and passed.
WATER ORDERS CONFIRMATION BILL [H.L.]
Read 3a (according to Order), and passed, and sent to the Commons.
LOCAL GOVERNMENT PROVISIONAL ORDERS (No. 1) BILL.
Road 2a (according to Order), and committed. The Committee to be proposed by the Committee of Selection.
LOCAL GOVERNMENT PROVISIONAL ORDERS (GAS) BILL.
Bead 2a (according to Order), and committed to a Committee of the whole House on Thursday next.
LOCAL GOVERNMENT PROVISIONAL ORDERS (No. 5) BILL.
  LOCAL GOVERNMENT PROVISIONAL ORDERS (No. 6) BLLL.

    LOCAL GOVERNMENT PROVISIONAL ORDERS (No. 8) BILL.
    LOCAL GOVERNMENT PROVISIONAL ORDERS (POOR LAW) BILL.
    Read 2a (according to Order).

GAS PROVISIONAL ORDER (No. 3) BILL.
  PIER AND HARBOUR PROVISIONAL ORDERS (No. 1) BILL.
  Read 2a (according to Order).
EDUCATION BOARD PROVISIONAL ORDER CONFIRMATION (LONDON) BILL [H.L.]
House in Committee (according to Order). The Amendments proposed by the Select Committee made; Standing Committee negatived; the Report of Amendments to be received on Thursday next.
RETURNS, REPORTS, ETC.

  TRADE REPORTS.
  I. Annual Series:—2461. Portugal (Goa); No. 2462. Turkey (Smyrna and district).

  II. Miscellaneous Series:—No. 528. German Colonies, for the year ending 30th June, 1899; No. 529. Waterway between the Baltic and Black Sea.

  COLONIES.
  I. Annual:—No. 290. British Guiana (Reports for 1897–98 and 1898–99); No. 291. Falkland Islands (Report for 1899); No. 292. British New Guinea (Report for 1898–99); No. 293. Bermuda (Report for 1899).

  II. Miscellaneous:—No. 13. Cook Islands (Report for 1899).

  CYPRUS.
  Annual Report for 1898–99.
  Presented (by Command), and ordered to lie on the Table.

  UNIVERSITIES (SCOTLAND) ACT.
  Annual Statistical Report by the University Court of the University of St. Andrews to the Secretary for Scotland under the provisions of the Act.
  PUBLIC RECORDS (COURT OF EXCHEQUER).
  Schedule of classes of documents connected with actions arising out of seizures of goods, etc., or for the recovery of penalties under Acts relating to the customs or excise, and other process in matters relating to the revenue, which formerly were or ought to have been in the office of the King's or Queen's Remembrancer, or of the Exchequer, and which are now in, but are not considered of sufficient public value to justify their preservation in, the Public Record Office.

  COUNTY TREASURERS (IRELAND) (FEE FUND).
  Account for the year ended 25th March, 1900.
  Laid before the House (pursuant to Act), and ordered to lie on the Table.

  HOSPITALS (EXEMPTION FROM RATES).
  Message from the Commons for leave for the Marquess of Bristol to attend to be examined as a witness before the Select Committee of that House.
  JOURNAL COMMITTEE.
  Report from, that the General Index to ten volumes of the Journals, viz., from the one hundred and sixteenth to the one hundred and twenty-fifth, both inclusive (47th and 48th Viet.—56th and 57th Viet.), is ready for delivery; the same to be delivered in the usual manner.
  COMMONWEALTH OF AUSTRALIA CONSTITUTION BILL.
  Brought from the Commons. Read 1a; to be printed; and to be read 2a on Friday next.—(The Earl of Selborne.) (No. 128.)
  DISTRICT COUNCILLORS AND GUARDIANS (TERM OF OFFICE) BILL.
  Brought from the Commons. Read 1; and to be printed. (No. 129.)

  MINES (PROHIBITION OF CHILD LABOUR UNDERGROUND) BILL.
  Reported from the Standing Committee with further Amendments. The Report of

  1031
  the Amendments made in Committee of the whole House and by the Standing Committee to be received on Friday next; and Bill to be printed as amended. (No. 130.)

  COUNTY COUNCILS (ELECTIONS) ACT (1891) AMENDMENT BILL.
  Reported from the Standing Committee without amendment, and to be read 3a on Thursday next.
  LUNACY REGULATION (IRELAND) BILL [H.L.]
  Reported from the Standing Committee with a further Amendment. The Report of the Amendments made in Committee of the whole House and by the Standing Committee to be received on Thursday next; and Bill to be printed as amended. (No. 131.)
  VOLUNTEERS BILL [H.L.]
  Reported from the Standing Committee with an Amendment; and re-committed to a Committee of the whole House on Thursday next; and Bill to be printed as amended. (No. 132.)
  MILITARY LANDS BILL [H.L.]
  Reported from the Standing Committee with further Amendments; the Report of the Amendments made in Committee of the whole House and by the Standing Committee to be received on Thursday next; and Bill to be printed as amended. (No. 133.)
  ANCIENT MONUMENTS PROTECTION BILL.
  Reported from the Standing Committee with further Amendments; the Report of the Amendments made in Committee of the whole House and by the Standing Committee to be received on Thursday next; and Bill to be printed as amended. (No. 134.)
RESERVE FORCES BILL [H.L.]
  MILITARY MANŒUVRES BILL [H.L.]
  Reported from the Standing Committee without amendment, and to be read 3a on Thursday next.

  SECONDARY EDUCATION BILL.
  THE LORD PRESIDENT OF THE COUNCIL (The Duke of DEVONSHIRE): My Lords, before I endeavour to explain the provisions of the Bill which I shall
  1032
  ask leave to introduce, it may be desirable that I should say something on the subject of the steps that have been taken under the Board of Education Bill which was passed last year, in order that the House may see under what central organisation the local authorities proposed to be constituted by this Bill will have to act. The main object of the Board of Education Bill was to unite in one office the two Educational Departments which previously existed under the names of the Education Office and the Science and Art Department, and at the same time to bring under the administration of the newly-constituted board some of the duties which had hitherto been discharged by the Charity Commissioners and, to a minor degree, some of the duties of the Board of Agriculture. Last year I said that a Departmental Committee had been appointed to inquire into the changes in the staff and organisation of the Education and Science and Art Departments which would be necessary in order to establish closer relations between them. That Committee consisted of Sir H. Walpole, chairman, Sir G. Kekewich, Sir W. Abney, Mr. S. Spring-Rice and Mr. Tucker, and Mr. Fearon, secretary of the Charity Commission, was subsequently added. It will not be necessary for me. I think to refer in detail to any of the recommendations of that Committee. Their labours have been of great value, and I am greatly indebted to them for the thorough examination they have made into all the arrangements of the Departments and for the labour which they have-bestowed in making their inquiries. Many of their recommendations have been, or are being, carried into effect, and I have no doubt that they will greatly tend to simplify the work and increase the efficiency of the administration of the office. There was one point, however, which could not be relegated to any Committee, however ably constituted. Your Lordships may remember that on the Bill of last year some discussion took place upon the future organisation of the Education Department. I thought at the time, and I am still more strongly of opinion now, that that discussion was some what premature. It proceeded on the assumption that the organisation of the new office would continue on the same lines as those which had existed when the educational Departments were separate and distinct, and that there would

  1033
  be in the now office two divisions, one of which would correspond with and carry on the work of the old Education Office in connection with elementary education, and the other of which would carry on the work of the Science and Art Department. An apprehension, perhaps not altogether unreasonable, was felt on the part of the secondary schools and those responsible for their management that the new powers which were conferred by the Act upon the Board of Education would be simply transferred to one or other of these divisions, and that they would be administered in accordance with the traditions which had for many years grown up and become established in both Departments. It was urged that a third division should be constituted to which the administration of secondary schools, so far as they came under the control of the new board, should be entrusted. I gave at that time an undertaking that, in framing the organisation of the new Department, I would have in view a triple rather than a dual division. I have said that I considered that the discussion was somewhat premature, and I have also to acknowledge that I think the undertaking or understanding which I then indicated was somewhat imprudent on my part. At all events, I have not been able to adhere to it literally, but I have endeavoured to adhere to it in spirit. That I intended to adhere to it literally is proved by the fact that, in the supplementary instructions given to the Committee, they were expressly directed to have regard to the undertaking of the Government to establish a third branch of the Education Office to deal with secondary education. In order to explain the reasons which have induced me to modify my views on this subject I must refer shortly to the relations which have hitherto existed between the old Education Department and the secondary schools and those which might be expected to grow up under the Act, and consider the nature of the work which could with advantage be transferred to the third division. The training colleges which have been subsidised and administered by the Education Department are in the nature of secondary schools, and it is quite possible that in time, when the unification of offices has been brought nearer completion, it may be possible to recognise them as secondary schools, and to regard their administration
  1034
  as a portion of secondary educational work. The training colleges are so closely connected with elementary schools that their administration must, for the present, remain as it is, and no change in respect to that administration can be carried out without a great deal of further consideration. Then, again, the high grade elementary schools which have been established by many school boards give an instruction which in many respects differs very little from secondary instruction. Some day it may be possible to draw a line of demarcation, which does not exist at present, between that education which is recognised as elementary, which is aided as elementary education by the State, and which may legitimately be provided by school boards or Voluntary school managers, and that recognised as secondary, which ought to be administered by other local authorities than school boards. A step has been taken towards drawing that line of demarcation by a Minute recently issued establishing higher elementary schools. But a great deal remains to be done before this line can be definitely drawn; and while many may be of opinion that the school boards have, in a great many cases, trespassed too far on the domain of secondary education, and while the Department may be considered to have been too lax in permitting such trespasses, there are, it must be admitted, great excuses for such encroachment, owing to the fact that the Legislature has never, up to the present time, provided anything in the nature of local secondary education authorities, and that school board work has been a work which could, in the present state of the law, not be done by anyone else. This is a deficiency which I hope the Bill I now ask leave to introduce may to some extent remedy. But until some such measure is passed, and the line I have referred to has been definitely drawn, it would be extremely inexpedient to attempt to place school boards under dual administration in respect of elementary work and that part of it which may more properly be considered to be of a secondary character. These to which I have referred are forms of secondary education with which the old Education Department has been connected, and in my opinion it would be undesirable, if it were not impossible, that the connection between the Elementary branch of the

  1035
  Office and these forms of education should be summarily severed. There are, however, other forms of 'secondary education with which the Science and Art Department has already established relations. By a scheme of examination and a grant depending on those examinations, it has influenced the course of education in a largo number of secondary schools, it has also established more direct relations, not only with detached classes and courses of lectures, but with schools which, under the name of schools of science, have been subsidised, or in many cases almost wholly maintained, by grants from the Science and Art Department. The most important work in respect of secondary education which may at present devolve on the Board will be the development of these schools of science. They are institutions which have been founded under the guidance and with the assistance of the late Science and Art Department. They have been founded by county councils, or, in large towns, by borough councils. Or, again, they are in many cases endowed schools existing under schemes of the Charity Commissioners, the governing bodies of which have brought their schools into connection with, and have been receiving subsidies from, the Science and Art Department. The relations between these schools and the scientific experts of the late Science and Art Department cannot be broken off, and must remain practically under the administration of the same persons, although, perhaps, under a somewhat different organisation. My Lords, I have given a brief, but, I am afraid, imperfect statement of the existing relations between the Education Department and secondary schools. The Act of last year, however, provides for the extension of those relations. It provides for the eventual transfer to the Board of Education of all the powers of the Charity Commission. It has been considered expedient, however, that this transfer should be gradual and tentative. The Order in Council now on the Table of the House is the first instalment of such transfer. The terms of that Order are necessarily extremely technical, and I do not know that it is necessary that I should attempt on this occasion to explain them in detail. I may say, however, that the first clause applies to England and Wales generally, and enables the Education Board to exercise, concurrently with the Charity Com-
  1036
  missioners, their powers of administration and inspection. That is a power which it was necessary the Board of Education should have, to enable them to make complete and effectual the educational inspection of such schools as might desire to place themselves in connection with the Board. The second clause makes a more complete transfer. It transfers, with certain exceptions, the powers at present exercised by the Charity Commissioners with regard to educational endowments regulated by schemes within the area of Wales and Monmouthshire. This is an area in which jurisdiction over educational endowments could be easily transferred without prejudice to continued temporary jurisdiction over similar endowments in England. Owing to the Welsh Intermediate Education Act, Wales already possesses a local organisation for secondary education, with whom the central authority will at once enter into relations, whereas in England such bodies have still to be created; and the experience gained by the Board in dealing with a limited area would prepare it for exercising similar powers throughout the country. The result of this review of the work, present and prospective, of the Board of Education in connection with secondary education was to convince us that little could be transferred from the control of the officials now engaged in its-administration to a third division. The duties of such a division would in the main be limited to the new work which would devolve on the Board under the Act of last year. It appeared to be scarcely worth while to create a new division solely for the purpose of work taken over from the Charity Commissioners, or for inspection of older secondary schools wishing to bring themselves into connection with the Board and submit to its examinations. It is probable that the great majority of these desire to enter into such connection on account of the impulse which may thereby be given to the newer order of studies, and the division charged with their inspection would have to rely mainly on the assistance of the scientific experts who would be connected with the other divisions of the Department. At the same time the schoolmasters and those who are engaged in the management of secondary schools appear to some extent to have modified their own views. Not very long ago I received an important deputation in

  1037
  which the University of Oxford, the Headmasters' Conference, and the Headmasters' Association were represented, and their object was to urge that in the organisation of the office no hard-and-fast line ought to be drawn between the literary and scientific sides of instruction and the inspection of literary and scientific instruction. They did not, I admit, altogether abandon the position which was taken up by the school authorities last year, but they appeared to be conscious that the representations they were then putting forward were not altogether consistent with the position they had taken up last year. The deputation also strongly urged that a separation should be made between what is termed technology and literary or scientific instruction. This view is one which is also strongly held by those who have been chiefly associated in the promotion of technological study. The City and Guilds of London Institute, for instance, have urged upon the Department that the distinctive difference between the teaching of science as a part of general education and the teaching of science in its application to special industries ought to be recognised, and that the office ought to be arranged with this distinction in view. For the reasons which I have endeavoured to indicate, we now propose to revert to a dual organisation of the office, but not entirely upon the lines of the late Education and Science and Art Departments. The principal officers of the Department which we propose will be a principal permanent secretary, who will supervise generally the whole work of the Department. It must be remembered, when special importance is attached to this or that minor subordinate appointment, that it will be the permanent secretary who will be responsible to the President of the Board for the administration of the whole Department, and that it is impossible, and would be undesirable even if it were possible, that the office should be divided into what I may call water-tight compartments, the head of each of which would be charged with special duties and no other, and that the idea should be entertained that the work of the office should be carried on in separate departments, which should have no connection or relation with each other. We propose that under the principal permanent secretary there shall be two principal assistant
  1038
  secretaries—one mainly charged with duties in connection with elementary, and the other with secondary, education. We propose to abolish the name "Science and Art Department." The Science and Art Department will be merged in the secondary education branch of the office. As soon as it may be possible we propose to transfer the greater part of the staff of the late Science and Art Department from South Kensington to Whitehall, except such part of it as it may be necessary to leave at South Kensington for the administration of the museum and the colleges of science and art. In place of the third division that was contemplated, we now propose to give the principal assistant secretary of secondary education two additional assistant secretaries, one of whom will be chiefly charged with the supervision and control of literary instruction, and the other of technological study. This is not the organisation, I admit, to which I partly committed myself last year; but I trust that it may, in substance, meet the views, especially the later views, which have been expressed to me by high educational authorities. With the name we hope to get rid of many of the traditions which were supposed to attach to the old Science and Art Department—traditions which have, I believe, been regarded as opposed to the true interests of education by many of those who have been responsible for the management of the older endowed schools. The original idea of the Science and Art Department was, or at all events was supposed to be, that by means of lectures, classes, and examinations a knowledge of the principles of science and art, which would be valuable to the students themselves and to the nation at large, could be engrafted upon almost any kind of previous elementary or secondary training. It is quite true that this idea has been in recent years very largely modified, but I do not think that it is yet generally known how far the original traditions of the Science and Art Department have been already departed from. We hope and intend that the idea of the future education branch of the office will be to make science and art instruction a part of general education in addition to those classical and literary studies which have hitherto formed its main portion. In the schools and institutions directly assisted by the Board of Education the teaching of

  1039
  science and of art, with the addition, perhaps, of some commercial subjects, will probably remain the principal object. But, on the other hand, in those secondary schools, whether of older or more modern type, which desire to enter into connection with the Board there ought not to be, and there need not be, any interference with the older classical and literary studies so long as there continues to be a demand for them. At the same time, we hope that the scientific resources of the Board will be placed at their disposal if they desire, as many of them do desire, to develop the more modern sides of instruction and education. If I may put the case in another way, I conceive that the apprehension that was felt and given expression to last year was that the tendency to interference by the Education Department with secondary teaching would be in the direction of substituting scientific for classical studies, and next that scientific studies would only be regarded from the point of view of their commercial value. As I have said, it probably will be the case that any interposition of the Board in regard to secondary education will be in the direction of endeavouring to substitute more modern for the older studies, but it ought not to be difficult to find administrators of sufficiently wide knowledge and experience to make the latter result impossible. In connection with this point it may be of interest to the House to know what are the principal appointments which have been made or are proposed to be made in the principal office of the new secondary education branch of the department. Sir George Kekewich, the late secretary of the Board of Education, has become the permanent principal secretary of the new Board, and it is he who will be responsible to the President of the Board and to the Government for the administration of the Department as a whole. The principal assistant secretary for secondary education will be Sir William Abney, who has done more than any other man in extending the studies of the schools of science under the Science and Art Department. Under him the assistant secretary, who will be chiefly concerned with the literary side of instruction, will be Mr. Bruce, an Assistant Commissioner to the Charity Commission under the Endowed Schools Act, who has been
  1040
  chiefly engaged and has obtained much experience in the administration of the Welsh Intermediate Education Act. The assistant secretary for technological study has not yet been appointed. I come now to a brief statement of the objects of the Bill which I am asking leave to introduce. I will defer any explanation of detail until the text of the Bill is before your Lordships; but the Bill is based on foundations that already exist, and indeed it contains very little beyond the proposals which were contained in the Bill of 1896, so far as that Bill related to secondary education. Local authorities already exist under the Technical Instruction Act of 1889 and the Local Taxation Act of 1890, with limited powers of aiding and supervising technical and manual instruction as a part of secondary education. Those authorities are county councils, county borough councils, the councils of non-county boroughs, and urban district councils. The resources which they possess are the proceeds of a penny rate and a sum derived from the local taxation account, which now amounts to over £800,000 a year. The county councils and the county boroughs are alone the recipients of the sums derived from the local taxation fund. The Bill proposes to extend these existing foundations. In the first place it will make the application of the local taxation money to educational purposes compulsory instead of optional, as it is at present. It will enable the authority to apply both that fund and the rates to the purposes of secondary education generally, not limited to technical or manual instruction. It will, however, require that this shall only be done after adequate provision has been made for technical instruction; and in order not to bring about any sudden change or disruption in the work that has already been going on the authorities will be instructed to have regard to the existing application of the funds to educational purposes. It has been necessary to decide to what authorities acting in what areas the extended powers are to be given. We propose to follow the precedent of the Local Taxation Act, 1890, of the Bill of 1896, and the recommendations of the Royal Commission on Secondary Education, and to entrust these extended powers to county councils and county borough councils, only leaving to the minor authorities the powers which they already enjoy

  1041
  under the Technical Instruction Act. There is nothing in this provision that will prevent the constitution of authorities for other areas, either greater or smaller, if they should be found to be more convenient for educational purposes. The Bill proposes to constitute the education committees which already exist upon a more formal and recognised basis. Suggestions have been made that provision ought to be made in the Bill for the representation on those educational committees of the councils of non-county boroughs and of urban districts, and that the Bill should contain provisions for the representation on the education committees of school boards or other educational interests within the area. We consider, however, that the circumstances of the different districts in the country are so various that to include any provisions of this kind in the Bill which would be applicable alike to all parts of the country would be impracticable, and we thought the difficulty might be bettor solved by providing that these education committees shall be framed by schemes to be submitted to and approved by the Board of Education. The schemes may provide for the constitution of joint committees for areas in more than one county or county borough; or, on the other hand, by the words which are inserted in the Bill "or any part thereof" it is intended to indicate that either by means of sub-committees or otherwise provisions may be made for the management of any smaller area than that of a county or county borough. Under the existing law county councils and urban authorities have each the power to levy a penny rate, and it follows that in some districts which are subject to each authority a rate of twopence may at present be levied for the purposes of technical instruction. The Bill will propose to raise the rating limit to two-pence in all cases, but in no case shall the rate levied by the county and by the local authority combined exceed that amount. In the discussion on the Board of Education Bill last year the denominational question was not altogether excluded. It did not, however, I am happy to say, in relation to that Bill give rise to any very serious difficulty. I wish that might also be the case in regard to the present Bill, but such questions cannot be avoided by simply ignoring them, and we consider it necessary to state clearly in what way these difficulties may arise and how it is
  1042
  proposed to meet them. The Technical Instruction Act of 1889 contains certain instructions on the grants in aid to denominational institutions. The first of these was in the nature of a conscience clause. That appears to be perfectly reasonable, and has been maintained in the present Bill. The second was a provision of a rather remarkable character. I have never been able—the debate having been very imperfectly reported—to ascertain how it came to be introduced, nor what was its precise object. The provision was—
  "No religious catechism or religious formulary which is distinctive of any particular denomination shall be taught at any school aided out of the local rate to a scholar attending only for the purposes of technical or manual instruction under this Act, and the times for prayer or religious worship, or for any lesson or series of lessons on a religious subject, shall be conveniently arranged for the purpose of allowing the withdrawal of such scholar therefrom."
  It will be seen that it is a kind of Cowper-Temple provision. But the Cowper-Temple clause applies to schools, while this applies to scholars. It appears to contemplate the existence of classes for purposes of technical or manual instruction only, which might be attached to certain denominational schools apart from the ordinary course of instruction in that school. The provision might be suitable in the case of such classes, but is manifestly inapplicable to the case of aid given by a public authority to secondary instruction in general. So far as I have ascertained, the provision has had very little effect in restricting the range of aid given by local authorities to denominational schools. The retention of this clause would, however, obviously be objected to as unduly limiting the discretion of the local authority in the choice of schools, the schools of a denominational character being in many cases the only institutions of the kind which it is possible for the local authority to aid. A fair objection might also be taken to it as creating invidious objections between those numerous secondary schools which in some form give religious instruction and those comparatively few schools which give no religious instruction at all. To apply this provision without amendment to the present Bill would have the effect of making absolute nonsense of the provision. It would read, with the necessary correction—

  1043
  "No religious catechism or religious formulary which is distinctive of any particular denomination shall be taught at any school aided out of the local rate to a scholar attending only for the purposes of secondary general education."
  For what other purpose could a scholar-attend these schools? Under the circumstances, and having regard to the very small effect which the clause has hitherto had, having been, as we suppose, in some way or another evaded by those whom its action was intended to restrain, we propose, while leaving the provision in force in the Technical Instruction Act, to replace it as regards the present Bill by a provision simply prohibiting aid to any school in respect of the religious instruction given therein. I will defer any further statement with respect to this Bill to another stage. I have, of course, at this advanced stage of the session very little hope that a Bill which may raise a considerable amount of controversy can pass into law in the present session. For one reason I regret this, because I think it is extremely desirable that as soon as possible the line of demarcation to which I have referred between elementary and secondary education should be drawn, and it should be understood what is the character of the education which the school boards can legitimately provide, and of that which ought to be provided by other local authorities. On the other hand, we have found considerable advantage from discussion in the country on the Bill which I introduced the year before last, and I hope that a similar result may follow if this Bill is not passed in the present session. At all events, I hope we shall have some discussion in this House, and I propose, therefore, as soon as may be, to move its Second Heading. I hope it may be convenient to do so within a week or ten days; but, of course, in the matter of time I shall be glad to consult the convenience of your Lordships. I have now only to ask leave to introduce the Bill.
  Moved, "That the Bill be read a first time."—(The Duke of Devonshire.)
  THE EARL OF KIMBERLEY: My Lords, I think it would be far better to postpone any serious discussion of the Bill until we have it in our hands. It is only fair to the noble Duke, however, to say that I think the arrangement of offices, as far as I can understand the
  1044
  matter, is a very great improvement on the plan which he laid before us last year. With regard to the provisions of the Bill, I should not like to express any opinion at present. I do not at all mean by that to express, in a side way, any unfavourable opinion. The matter is one of great importance, and I think we should have time to consider all the clauses of the Bill. I should suggest to the noble Duke that ten days or a fortnight would not be too long to give your Lordships for an examination of the Bill.
  Bill to make better provision for enabling county councils and other local authorities to aid forms of education not being elementary—presented by the Lord President (D. Devonshire); read 1a; and to be printed. (No. 135.)

BURIAL GROUNDS BILL.
[SECOND READING.]
Order of the Day for the Second Reading read.
LORD BELPER: The subject of the Bill which I have to ask your Lordships to read a second time this evening is one that has constantly attracted the attention of Parliament. The laws which govern the use of burial grounds are of a very complex nature; they are contained in a series of Acts of Parliament called the Burial Acts, which are administered under the supervision of the Home Office. The matter is rendered still more complicated by the fact that there is another Act, called the Public Health (Interments) Act, 1879, which is administered by the Local Government Board. The difficulties with regard to the present law relating to burial grounds do not by any means end hero. It is a notorious fact that the present state of the law has given rise to constant disputes and difficulties. How great those difficulties are has been shown by the fact that many parties have attempted to come to a compromise outside the provisions of the Acts in order to make an arrangement which would be more satisfactory. It is not surprising, therefore, that the attention of Parliament has been constantly called to the present state of affairs, and three years ago a suggestion was made in the House of Commons that a Select Committee should be appointed to inquire into the whole state of the law under the Burial

1045
Acts. That suggestion was accepted by the Government, and a Select Committee was appointed to inquire whether any alteration in the existing law was necessary, especially in regard to the consecration of ground, the provision of chapels, and the allocation of fees. The Committee was composed of gentlemen fairly representative, I think I may say, of the different sides of this very difficult question. It had the great advantage of being presided over by the Member for the University of Cambridge, Sir Richard Jebb, and I think it will be at once admitted that both the chairman and the other members of the Committee approached the matter in a very conciliatory spirit, and with an earnest desire to arrive at some fair and satisfactory compromise, for they came to what was practically a unanimous conclusion on the question. Their Report was made at the end of the session of 1898, after the Committee had taken a great deal of evidence with respect to the state of the law and the difficulties which had arisen under it. Last session a deputation waited upon the Home Secretary, consisting of representatives of both sides of the question, and requested him to bring in a Bill to carry out the recommendations of that Report. That Bill has been brought in this year by the Home Secretary. It is practically founded on all the suggestions made by the Select Committee, with two exceptions, which I will presently notice. The subsequent course of that Bill through the other House justified the arrangement that had been come to by the Committee, because it may be said to have met with the general assent of that House, and to have been passed through without any substantial amendment. That is the history of the Bill so far as it has got. With regard to the necessity for some amendment of the law, I think it is unnecessary for me to give any opinion of my own. I cannot put the case in favour of legislation more strongly than it is put by the Committee in almost the first paragraph of their Report. I will therefore venture to quote those few words to the House, because I think they express very clearly what is the feeling in the country generally upon the subject. The Committee say—
"Your Committee are of opinion that these laws are unduly complex, that some of their provisions are unjust, the machinery by which
1046
they are administered cumbrous and defective, and their operation has been, and still is, a frequent cause of controversy fraught with deplorable consequences to the peace of the localities concerned."
I do not think it would be possible to put-more strongly and concisely the defects in the provisions of these Acts, and those views are clearly shared by a number of people who have had experience in the working of the Acts. I should like to make it clear that this Bill deals only with burial grounds under the Burial Acts and the Public Health (Interments) Act. It does not affect churchyards in any way, nor does it refer in the slightest degree to cemeteries owned by companies and established under private Acts. The three most important questions with which it deals are those which were specially referred to the Committee, and which have no doubt caused the most friction in the administration of the law—namely, the consecration of burial grounds, the provision of chapels, and the fees which are payable to the different authorities. I will state as briefly as I can the effect of the provisions of this Bill, which carries out the recommendations of the Committee. With regard to consecration, the proposal which the Committee made, and which is carried out in this Bill, is that every local authority should have discretionary power to apply for the consecration of part of the cemetery, but if the local authority for any reason decline to, or do not, apply for the consecration of part of the cemetery, and a demand for consecrated ground is proved to be made by a reason able number of parishioners, then the Secretary of State has power to intervene and himself apply for consecration. As to the second point to which I alluded— the provision of chapels—the Committee recommended that in every cemetery the chapel or chapels which may be erected at the cost of the ratepayers should be unconsecrated and open to all, and, in addition to that, that a religious body, if they obtained the consent of the local authority, should have power to erect at their own cost a chapel for services according to the rites of their own body. If the local authority refuses its consent, then the Bill proposes that the Secretary of State might, if he thought fit, require the burial authority to erect or furnish or maintain such a chapel, or give the necessary facilities.

1047
The third point deals with the fees which should be paid, and under this head there is a clause of considerable length. I will not trouble your Lordships by stating all the details of the clause; but, generally speaking, the proposal is that in the future all ecclesiastical fees other than fees for services actually rendered should be abolished in cemeteries which are here-after to be provided by the local authority. The fees that are paid to incumbents already receiving them are continued for either fifteen years or the life of the incumbent, whichever period is the shorter. In addition to that there are regulations which lay down that the fees should be submitted to the Secretary of State for approval, and that in all cases the same amount should be demanded in respect of burial in consecrated as in unconsecrated ground. I do not presume to enter into an elaborate argument in favour of those particular proposals. I prefer to rely upon the fact that these are compromises which have been arranged, after very careful consideration, by representatives of both sides who have had full opportunity of knowing what the difficulties of the case are, and that they have been accepted, generally speaking, by both sides as a fair and reasonable arrangement. There are two other points I should like briefly to refer to. There was one recommendation in the Report of the Committee to the effect that the confusion which was caused by the two central authorities—the Local Government Board and the Homo Office—should be done away with, and that in future all these matters should be submitted to the Local Government Board. The Bill does not propose to carry out that recommendation precisely. What it proposes is that all those matters which concern finance, sanitary regulations, and questions of that sort, should be transferred from the Home Office to the Local Government Board, but that the Home Office should retain the management of what may be called ecclesiastical matters, such as the consecration of ground and the fees which are paid for ecclesiastical purposes. The Committee strongly recommend that in addition to an amendment of the law the Burial Acts should be consolidated, and anyone who has had the misfortune to have to study those Acts will agree that it would be very desirable that consolidation should take place. The Home Secretary, however, felt that if he
1048
introduced consolidation into a Bill which was proposing to make an important amendment in the law, it might place difficulties in the way of the passing of the Bill; but that if the Bill passed in its present form, it would pave the way for another Bill to consolidate the Burial Acts. The Home Secretary hopes, as we all do, that consolidation may take place, but it will be better done after this amendment of the law has been carried out. I hope I have said enough to induce your Lordships to give a favourable consideration to the Bill, and to allow it to be read a second time. I know that this is a subject in which a great many of your Lordships take a deep interest, and it is quite possible that there may be some individual Members of your Lordships' House who may not think that the particular proposals in the Bill are ideally the best. I will only ask them to recognise that this Bill is a compromise which has been arranged, as I have said, by a Committee representing both sides of the question, that the settlement arrived at has been accepted by the Government and endorsed by the other House of Parliament, and that if the Bill can pass into law in substantially the same form as it now assumes, there is every hope that those unhappy disputes and differences which have too frequently occurred, and which are especially painful when they take place at the side of the open grave, may in the future cease and harmony reign in their stead.
Moved, "That the Bill be now read a second time."—(Lord Belper.)
THE LORD ARCHBISHOP OF CANTERBURY: My Lords, I think the Government are very much to be congratulated on having succeeded in producing a Bill which certainly satisfies the great majority of those who are interested in the matter. I think this is a very fair and reasonable attempt to settle what is a very difficult matter; and though, of course, there will be difference of opinion here and there, I doubt very much indeed whether it would be possible to make a better arrangement than that which is put before us in this Bill. I shall probably place an Amendment on the Paper when the Bill gets into Committee, but my Amendment will not touch the principle of the Bill in the slightest degree. With the Bill, as a whole, I am entirely in agreement.
THE LORD ARCHBISHOP OF YORK: I should like to add my congratulations to those of my brother Archbishop, and to especially compliment the Committee upon the successful issue to which they have brought their deliberations. No one who is familiar with the Burial Acts can doubt that there is an immediate necessity for some amendment. It used to be said that there was only one man in England who could understand the Burial Acts, and that he did not, owing to their being so extremely complicated. I think the Committee have arrived at a compromise which will satisfy all the persons concerned, and I can say, on behalf of those who sit on this Bench, that no hindrance will be offered to the passing of the Bill.
*THE LORD BISHOP OF WINCHESTER: My Lords, it seems to me desirable that we should, especially, perhaps, from this Bench, boar testimony to our sense of the spirit in which this matter has been approached by those who do not ordinarily approve of our ecclesiastical system, and who might, perhaps, be regarded as our opponents in a matter of this kind. To all of us who have followed this controversy, it will be at once apparent that there has been a genuine desire to arrive at a peaceful and harmonious settlement of the question. There are always some people who endeavour to keep a grievance open for the sake of its usefulness to the cause to which they belong, but there has, so far as I can see, been no such endeavour in this case. The difficulties were acute rather than widespread; but they were certainly real, and this Bill is a genuine and satisfactory endeavour to grapple with them.
On Question, agreed to. Bill read 2a accordingly, and committed to a Committee of the whole House on Friday next.

MARRIAGE ACT AMENDMENT BILL [H.L.]
House in Committee (according to Order).
Clause 1 agreed to.
Clause 2:—
THE LORD CHANCELLOR (The Earl of HALSBURY): This Bill seems to me to be drawn with so little care that I
1050
shall not undertake the responsibility of trying to amend it. For instance, Clause 2 says that:—
"'usual place of abode' shall mean any ordinary residence of the person referred to, whether he has more than one or not, or his usual abode for fifteen days immediately preceding his making an affidavit to lead a licence."
What is the difference between those two things? What is the object of such an interpretation as that? This is only one example of a good many more to which I shall have to allude. What I particularly want to call attention to is that having made a definition of that sort it is not followed in the course of the Bill. The words "dwelling place" are used throughout the Bill without reference to the definition clause. In my opinion the; whole Bill ought to be redrafted with more care.
THE LORD ARCHBISHOP OF CANTERBURY: I would point out to the noble and learned Lord that this Bill was before the House years ago. It was very considerably amended, and then went down to the House of Commons. The Bill which I have introduced this year is verbatim the same Bill as that which passed the House on the last occasion. Therefore, if it is so very badly drafted the responsibility surely rests with the House of Lords. When I proposed to bring in the Bill again this year I gave instructions that the measure, as it passed the House before, should be precisely followed, and I cannot find any instance in which my instructions have not been fully carried out. I do not profess to be a draughtsman of Bills, but I think I was justified in supposing that if the Bill had passed through your Lordships' House in this form it would not be necessary for me to look any further to the drafting. Of course, it is quite possible that this House may have been a little somnolent on the former occasion, but at that time the Bill was discussed very fully indeed. As a matter of fact, the noble and learned Lord him self took part in the discussion and supported the Bill. I will hand him the Bill and he can see for himself. It left this House on 12th May, 1891, and was printed in the House of Commons on 1st June of the same year. There has been no change made in the Bill since then. I do not quite understand the objection which the Lord Chancellor has now raised

1051
to something in Clause 2, but I should be very glad to accept an Amendment, either here or in the Standing Committee, if his Lordship thinks the clause can be easily amended.
Clause 2 agreed to.
Clauses 3 and 4 agreed to.
Clause 5:—
THE EARL OF HALSBURY: I cannot help thinking that anyone who reads this clause would do the most rev. Prelate the injustice of supposing that he wanted to obtain power to alter the form of solemnisation of marriage. The clause reads—
"The Archbishops of Canterbury and York, with the consent of the Convocations, are hereby authorised, subject to the approval of Her Majesty the Queen, to make such alterations in the rubrics after the Nicene Creed and in the form of solemnisation of matrimony as will make them agree with this Act."
I do not believe that the most rev. Prelate really wishes to alter the form of solemnisation of matrimony. What he desires would toe obtained by inserting, after the words "Nicene Creed," "and in the rubrics in the form of solemnisation of matrimony." This is an illustration of the loose drafting I refer to. I really do not remember what happened nine years ago, and under what circumstances my attention was not called to the matter. I do not think we are committed to the Bill as it stands by the fact of having been in a somnolent state when it last passed. We now have the facts before us, and must deal with them as they are.
THE LORD ARCHBISHOP OF CANTERBURY: I shall be most willing to agree to any amendment of the kind referred to which the noble and learned Lord on the Woolsack may move in Standing Committee.
Clause 5 agreed to.
Clause 6:—
THE EARL OF HALSBURY: This clause raises a serious question of principle in respect to the publication of the place of marriage. Under Lord Hardwicke's Act there is a positive prohibition against a marriage being celebrated in any church other than that in which the banns have been published. It is now proposed to alter this. Since the Second Reading of
1052
the Bill, when I ventured to make a few observations on this point, my attention has been called by more than one communication to this provision of the Bill, and the serious and unfortunate consequences that might have arisen had this been the law under the Act of 1823. The clause provides that the marriage may be solemnised in any church in the diocese where the banns are published. This will tend to make the place of marriage a secret, and is an alteration in the existing law for which no necessity has been shown. The parties must make up their minds where their banns are to be published. Then why cannot they make up their minds where the marriage is to be celebrated? What is the evil to be got rid of? The right rev. Prelate said the present law might be inconvenient, but I should like him to give your Lordships a concrete case in which inconvenience may arise. It appears to me that this is a most serious departure from the code of law which has existed ever since Lord Hardwicke's time, and has been found most useful in correcting what were most serious abuses. I am afraid I must ask your Lordships to express an opinion upon it one way or the other, unless a better reason than I have yet heard is given for altering the law.
THE LORD ARCHBISHOP OF CANTERBURY: One of the great purposes of the Bill is to facilitate marriages in churches as compared with marriages at registrars' offices. The latter are now practically quite secret. The notice which has to be exhibited in lieu of banns is put up in the office in such a way that a person must go on purpose to the place to find that the notice is there. The notice is generally placed upon a door in such a manner as not to be easily seen, and a man who wants to find out whether a marriage has been notified, in the usual way has to find out that it is likely to be notified and then to go to the office to see if it has been. This procedure at the registry office has already very considerably diminished the publicity that should attend marriages, and people resort to the office instead of attending church. I think this is a very great mischief, and I desire to remove every obstacle to marriage in church. This is the object of the clause. The clause provides that the banns shall continue to be published as they are at present, but that the persons

1053
who hand them in to be published shall always state where they intend to seek for the actual marriage, and in what church it is to be solemnised. The clause further provides that—
"The marriage shall not be solemnised in any church wherein the banns have not been published without the consent of the minister thereof, nor until after the production to him of a certificate of due publication of the banns at each of the churches where they were published, and that they were not forbidden by any person having a right to stop the marriage, and that an entry was made in the banns book of the intention to solemnise the marriage in such church."
I should be quite willing, if it would satisfy my noble and learned friend, to add a proviso that at the publication of the banns the name of the church where the marriage is to be solemnised should be mentioned. A large number of the artisan class particularly complain very much that they cannot be married without having all their acquaintances about them, who make a kind of mob at the marriage. Besides this, there are demands upon them for a wedding breakfast, and the consequence is that they are desirous of getting away from their friends and being married at some convenient distance, but at a distance which will be too far away for their acquaintances to follow them. The fact that they have to do this makes them prefer to go to the registrar's office, where they can contrive to have the marriage entirely in secrecy. This Bill will really ensure greater publicity for the marriage ceremony than attends marriages in a registrar's office. I will insert words, as I have said, providing that on the publication of the banns the name of the church where the marriage is to take Place shall be mentioned, and I trust that will satisfy the Lord Chancellor. I do not think the clause, as amended, will be quite as good, but it will be tolerably good.
THE LORD BISHOP OF ST. ALBANS: My Lords, I think this clause will have the effect of getting rid of what I may call fictitious residence. London clergymen are constantly faced with the difficulty that people wish to be married in their church who are not living in the parish. They therefore leave an empty carpetbag in some room in the parish for fifteen days, and that is called a residence. It would be much better if people
1054
desiring to be married in a particular church should be able to do so without this sort of humbug. The thing should be straightforward. Where banns are published in a registrar's office the marriage may still take place in a church, and therefore under the present law it is not always necessary for the marriage to take place where the banns are published.
THE EARL OF HALSBURY: This is the first time I have heard a wedding party described as a mob from whom the bride and bridegroom were endeavouring to escape. The most rev. prelate complains that the notices are exhibited in the registrars' offices in such a way that they easily pass unnoticed, but it is an odd way to remedy that by increasing the secrecy of marriages by this sort of provision. If there is anything wrong in the manner in which banns are published in a registrar's office, let it be amended, but what relevancy has that to the question" now under discussion? I have asked the most rev. prelate for some concrete case showing the particular inconvenience which it is desired to remove, but he gave me nothing except the grotesque account of people who wish to escape from their neighbours and friends on the ground that the latter would expect them to provide a breakfast. I shall insist upon my Amendment to omit the clause.
*THE LORD BISHOP OF WINCHESTER: With all respect to the noble and learned Lord Chancellor, I venture to deny that marriages under this Bill will, as the noble and learned Lord supposes, be attended by greater secrecy. On the contrary, so far as there is any difference at all, the effect will be to ensure greater publicity. We will suppose that two people desire to be married, and that the father of the bride wishes to prevent the marriage. I want to know how that will be rendered easier for him because the marriage takes place in one of the two churches in which the banns have been published than it would be in the third church, the name of which had been announced when the banns were published? If the noble and learned Lord could show that the suggested provision would lead to additional secrecy I should be entirely with him in objecting to it, but I fail to see how such can be the case.

1055
It is very desirable to get rid of the mischievous sham fictitious "residence," to which the Bishop of St. Albans has referred, and it is with a view to the promotion of openness and straightforwardness that this clause has been drafted.
THE EARL OF CAMPERDOWN: Will the most rev. Prelate tell the House whether he intends to move the Amendment he indicated in the course of his remarks? I think it would be better if the clause were amended before it is proposed to strike it out altogether.
THE LORD ARCHBISHOP OF CANTERBURY: I confess I thought my Amendment would have satisfied the noble and learned Lord. I am quite prepared to move it.
Moved—
"In Clause 6, page 2, line 26, after 'published' to insert 'provided that at the publication of the banns the name of such church is mentioned.'"—(The Lord Archbishop of Canterbury.)
LORD GLENESK: My Lords, I venture to think that already in England marriage is more easy than in any other country, and the proposal in the Bill will tend to give additional facilities for parties going away from their friends to get married. This is exactly one of the things which promotes bigamy in England. I would like to know how many workingmen have two wives, and think nothing of it. In other countries people cannot get married without the consent of their parents until they are forty years of age. I know a case in which an actor and actress, Jewess and Greek, wished to get married, and the Roman Catholic law in France would not allow them to do so without the consent of their parents, as they were under forty years of age. They therefore decided to come over to England.
THE EARL OF KIMBERLEY: Very wise of them.
LORD GLENESK: They wrote to a solicitor in this country, asking him to make arrangements for getting them married on arrival. The solicitor replied that it was impossible, and the lady then telegraphed to him to see me, saying she knew Sir Algernon (as I then was) could
1056
arrange anything, and would get the sheriff to come to the railway station and marry them on arrival. The couple came to England, and what was my astonishment on being told when I met them that they had been married that morning. On inquiry I found that the marriage had been solemnised in one of the highest churches in London by means of a licence obtained from a predecessor of the most rev. Prelate, on the representation that the man had been in England for three weeks. In view of circumstances such as these I cannot support the clause.
THE EARL OF KIMBERLEY: So far as I can see, the very interesting story told by the noble Lord does not bear on the Bill. He is desirous that we should have the French law of marriage introduced into this country.
LORD GLENESK: No.
THE EARL OF KIMBERLEY: He wants the consent of the parents and all kinds of things to be obtained, but what has that to do wish this Bill? If it goes to a division I shall vote with the right rev. Bench on this matter, because I cannot see that, after the Amendment which the most rev. Prelate has proposed is made, there can be any possible chance of due publicity not being given, and if due publicity is given I do not see why this facility should not be afforded to those tormented persons referred to who wish to run away from their friends.
THE LORD BISHOP OF CHICHESTER: In rising to support this clause I would point out that the publication of banns in the various churches will be carried out under this Bill in exactly the same way as at present. The only question is, whether it is absolutely necessary to continue the present law by which the marriage must take place in one of the churches in which the banns have been published. A case arose only recently in my own diocese where the inconvenience of the present law was made manifest. Two members of the choir in one parish, who were living in other parishes, desired to get married. They were, of course, compelled to have the banns published in the parishes in which they lived, but they wished to be married in the church of whose choir they were members. And why should they not? There would be

1057
perfect publicity, because the name of the church in which they were to be married would be mentioned when the banns were published. I cannot see any objection to the clause.
Clause agreed to.
Clause 7:—
THE EARL OF HALSBURY: I do not intend to divide upon this Clause, but I must protest against it. I very much doubt whether, under the circumstances suggested here, it is very desirable to facilitate the marriages of seamen. One knows what is said in the case of seamen, and in Clause 7 it is provided that a seaman, if his ship is in port, may be married in any church within five miles of the ship. That seems to me to encourage the practice to which the noble Lord opposite objected.
Clause agreed to.
Clauses 8 to 18 agreed to.
THE EARL OF HALSBURY: Upon every one of these clauses I think questions may arise as to the drafting, but, as I have said, it seems to me that the Bill is so extremely ill-drawn that I shall not attempt to amend it. Therefore, those who are in charge of the Bill will take their own responsibility of keeping it as it stands.
Bill re-committed to the Standing Committee; and to be printed as amended. (No. 136.)
On Question, "That Clause 6 stand part of the Bill," their Lordships divided:—Contents, 29; Not Contents, 18.

CONTENTS.

Canterbury, L. Abp.

Chichester, L, Bp.

Burghclere, L.

Camperdown, E.

Durham, L. Bp.

Calthorpe, L.

Crewe, E.

Hereford, L. Bp.

Clonbrock, L.

Grey, E.

Lichfield, L. Bp.

Leigh, L.

Kimberley, E.

Lincoln, L. Bp.

Monkswell, L. [Teller.]

Leven and Melville, E.

Norwich, L. Bp.

Reay, L. [Teller.]

Morley, E.

St. Albans, L. Bp.

Robertson, L.

Romney, E.

Southwell, L. Bp.

St. Levan, L.

Spencer, E.

Winchester, L. Bp.

Windsor, L.

Carlisle, L. Bp.

Ashcombe, L.

NOT-CONTENTS.

Halsbury, E. (L. Chancellor.)

Mar, E.

Belper, L. [Teller.]

Devonshire, D. (L. President.)

Mayo, E.

Churchill, L.

Cross, V. (L. Privy Seal.)[Teller.]

Waldegrave, E.

Glenesk, L.

Knutsford, V.

Harris, L.

Pembroke and Montgomery, E. (L. Steward.)

Frankfort de Montmorency, V.

Heneage, L.

Hopetoun, L. (E. Hopetoun.)(L Chamberlain.)

James, L.

Denbigh, E.

Sudley, L. (E. Arran.)

On Question, Amendment agreed to.

COUNTY SURVEYORS (IRELAND) BILL.
  NAVAL RESERVE (MOBILISATION) BILL.
  Read 3a (according to Order), and passed.

  IRISH LAND COMMISSION—RETURN OF EXPENSES.
  THE EARL OF MAYO: My Lords, I beg to move for a Return showing the total expenses of the Irish Land Commission for each of the five years ended 31st March, 1896, to 1900. The Irish Land Commission exercises a very important part in our lives in Ireland, and also in the lives of our tenants. I know of no public document readily accessible which gives this Return, and therefore I hope there will be no objection to granting it.
  Moved, "That there be laid before the House a Return showing the total expenses of the Irish Land Commission for each of the five years ended 31st March, 1896 to 1900."— (The Earl of Mayo.)
  THE EARL OF DENBIGH: My Lords, the information which the noble Earl asks for is already given, to a great extent, in the annual Appropriation Account which is presented to Parliament every year, the last of which is to 31st March, 1899. That for 1899–1900 will

  1059
  be presented in due course, but I may tell the noble Lord that the net expenditure for that year was, approximately, £125,000. There are one or two exceptions, however, in that the salaries of the Chief Commissioners are not shown in the Appropriation Account. They are charged to the Consolidated Fund, and amount to about £14,000. In addition to the amounts shown in the Appropriation Account there are certain items for office accommodation, stationery, printing, etc., the details of which will be found set forth in the annual Estimate for the Land Commission. I think if the noble Earl will look up those documents he will get all the, information he requires.
  THE EARL OF MAYO: May I ask the noble Earl if those different items might be consolidated? This would give us the Return in a very simple form.
  THE EARL OF DENBIGH: I will inquire of the Irish Office, but the answer I have given to the noble Earl was the answer which I obtained to his question.
  THE EARL OF MAYO: The items are all mixed up at present, and if they were consolidated it would save us a great deal of trouble.
  THE EARL OF DENBIGH: I will inquire.
  Motion, by leave of the House, withdrawn.

  LUNACY ADMINISTRATION—THE "ST. PANCUAS SCANDAL."
  *LORD BUSSELL OF KILLOWEN: My Lords, I rise to call the attention of the House to what the Press has described as the "St. Pancras Scandal"; and to ask the noble and learned Lord on the Woolsack, who has special authority and responsibility in relation to the care of lunatics in this country, whether it is proposed to take any, and what, proceedings in the matter. Looking to the hour which has been reached my observations will be brief. Your Lordships are aware that the parish authorities have very important duties to discharge in relation to lunatics within their parish, and that these functions are discharged largely by two sets of officers paid by the parish, called the relieving officer and the medical
  1060
  officer. Some very startling facts have been brought to light in connection with the administration of the lunacy laws in the parish of St. Pancras which certainly do call for public notice, especially as; it appears from the report of the authority itself that the state of things there disclosed has existed for a period of something, approaching thirty years. The remarkable facts connected with the case are mainly three: (1) That the number of persons detained as insane in St. Pancras is some 100 per cent. greater than in the adjoining parish of Islington, according to population; (2) that a much greater number of lunatics- are sent to private asylums from St. Pancras than from the adjoining parish; and (3) that the cost of the maintenance of insane persons in St. Pancras, which falls, of course, upon the ratepayer, is from 100 to 200 per cent. higher than in the adjoining parish. According to the report issued by the Marylebone Vestry, it appears that the total cost to St. Pancras for the half-year ending Lady-day, 1899, was £14,143 17s. 3d. At Islington the cost was £5,543 17s. 4d.—between a half and a third of the cost in St. Pancras. Further, the report states that in Islington, for the whole six months, only six patients were sent from that parish to expensive private licensed houses at the rate of £2 2s. a week, while twenty-seven were sent from St. Pancras to Hoxton House and thirteen to Bethnal House—namely, forty from St. Pancras as against six from Islington. These facts having been tardily drawn to the attention of the vestry, an inquiry was instituted into the matter, and the report discloses what I am now about to mention. I would remind the House of what the duties and the powers of the relieving officers are. A relieving officer may, on his own responsibility, take up—take into custody practically—a person whom he has reason to believe to be insane and dangerous to the public, and without any medical examination, and without authority from anyone, cause such person to be detained for a period of three days, after which time some step must be taken which involves judicial inquiry before a magistrate and a medical examination. It appears that the relieving officers in St. Pancras have, over the long period I have mentioned, been in the habit of receiving, and receiving regularly, as if it were a right, a sum of about five shillings for each medical

  1061
  examination of a person believed to be insane. That is to say, when a relieving officer produced a patient for the purpose of examination to a medical man, that medical man paid him five shillings and sometimes less. When I remind your Lordships that there may be two or even three of such examinations when the medical officer and the magistrate are not able to arrive at a definite conclusion, your Lordships will see that the fees paid in that way may become considerable. Next, the; report ascertains the fact that the medical men who were honourable and high-minded enough to decline to pay these douceurs to the relieving officer for doing that which was merely his duty were, as it were, boycotted by the relieving officer, and persons supposed to be insane were not brought to them for examination. Lastly, the report finds that relieving officers, on taking patients to private asylums, are paid varying fees by the owners of those private asylums— fees varying from 10s. to £1 and sometimes as much as £2. The figures of those detained do not exhaust the working of this corrupt system, because it does not follow that every person who is taken into custody by the relieving officer is pronounced by the medical man and the Justice of the Peace to be a fit subject for further detention; but, whether that is the result or not, the medical officer gets his fee all the same, and the relieving officer who takes the case to his pet medical man also gets his proportion of that fee. I think your Lordships can have little doubt as to the obvious dangers to which this state of things gives rise. What is most significant is the statement in the report adopted by the St. Pancras Vestry, that there is reason to think that the system is not confined to St. Pancras, but is very general. Since this notice appeared on your Lordships' Paper, I have been waited upon by a member of the vestry of St. Matthews, Bethnal Green, and I will tell your Lordships the result of the communication made to me by him. That vestry found that there existed this dishonest state of relations between their salaried officer and the medical officer and the owners of these private asylums. They drew the attention of the Local Government Board to it as far back as September, 1899. They also drew the attention of the Lunacy Commissioners to it, but the latter replied that they had no authority to deal with
  1062
  the matter. All they could do would be to give warning to the owners of these private asylums that they must not continue to give these douceurs or bribes to the relieving officers. It was not until much later that an inquiry took place by an inspect or appointed by the Local Government Board. What the Local Government Board contemplate doing I know not, but I am informed that up to this time they have done nothing. I would like to read to your Lordships two documents. The first is the statement of the relieving officers of Bethnal Green in their own defence. They say, with some naiceté—
  "In order that there may be no misunderstanding on the part of the Board as to our position, and also, if possible, to avoid the trouble and indignity of question and cross-question, we beg to set forth herein the facts of the matter, which we declare to be the truth."
  They begin by a general denial that they had been parties to any system of blackmail or tipping, and then proceed in this remarkable language:—
  "The examinations being now conducted by district medical officers, these gentlemen have, in the full exercise of their own free will and judgment, chosen to hand us respectively at the end of each quarter—"
  Your Lordships will see that there is a running account between the relieving officer and the medical man.
  —"a sum varying in amount, but usually equal to 5s. for each £1 1s. received for lunacy examination work during the preceding quarter."
  And then they say—
  "As to the allegations made with reference to occasional fees being received from private asylums—to wit, Hoxton House and Bethnal Green—the simple fact is that when it is not possible to secure vacancies for cases in the county asylums it has been, and is, the custom of the authorities of these local asylums, through their respective secretaries, to give to the officer concerned an honorarium— at Hoxton House of £2 2s. and at Bethnal Green of £2."
  How far these offerings from medical men are to be regarded as a voluntary tribute to the merits of the relieving officers your Lordships will gather from a communication, also furnished to me from one of these relieving officers to the doctor asking for an advance of payment. It is dated 3rd August, 1899, and there is no reason why the relieving officer's name should not be mentioned. It is Christopher A. Forrest, and he writes—

  1063
  "Dear Doctor Burdoe,—As a matter of very i great urgency I ask you to let me have £1 of next quarter's affair. We have seven cases, and I am going after another one to-night. I do sincerely trust that you will endeavour to oblige."
  That is addressed by the receiving officer to a medical gentleman in the neighbourhood. The same gentleman who gave me this information has informed me that since the inquiry last autumn there has been a marked decrease not only in the number of persons detained, but in the number of those originally taken up, so to speak, by the relieving officer and afterwards rejected—in other words, the number of cases is reduced to bonâ fide cases. The conclusion is almost irresistible that people have been taken up for examination with a view to fees being obtained. It appears that the guardians have no power, of their own motion, to dismiss these relieving officers; they cannot do that without the sanction of the Local Government Board. It does not appear that they have asked for that sanction in either case. Therefore I have thought it right to call the attention of the noble and learned Lord on the Woolsack, who, as I have said, is vested with special authority and responsibility, to the matter, in order to see whether some scheme cannot be devised to prevent the continuance and recurrence of this state of things. I desire also to ask whether the attention of the Law Officers has been drawn to this matter. Has the Public Prosecutor had his attention called to it, because, unless I am greatly mistaken, a clear violation of the law (Lord R. Churchill's Act, 1889) has been perpetrated both by the relieving officers and by the medical men. I see that in the other House of Parliament the learned Attorney General stated, as I expected he would state, that the law is as I conceive it to be. He said—
  "If the facts were as stated an offence of a very serious character had been committed, both by the officials in question and by the persons who were alleged to have given the bribes."
  I have a very earnest conviction that this system of corruption is very much more widespread than is generally conceived, and that it is eating into the public sense of morality. It surely is necessary, therefore, that the Government of the country should take notice of this evil.
  THE EARL OF HALSBURY: My Lords, I do not think the noble and learned Lord has at all overstated the seriousness of the matters to which he has called attention. I should say at once that the attention of the Commissioners in Lunacy was called to the Bethnal Green case as long ago as last November. They took exactly the same view as the noble and learned Lord does, and invited the Public Prosecutor to consider whether or not there ought to be a prosecution of the persons concerned. The Public Prosecutor, after taking the opinion of counsel, came to the conclusion that the particular section of the Act to which the noble and learned Lord has called attention would not reach those persons who are in the ambit of animadversion. My own attention has been drawn to the matter this year by the Lunacy Commissioners in connection with an amending Lunacy Bill which passed through your Lordships' House on 9th March last. After the Bill had left the House I received from the Commissioners a draft clause, which they suggested, providing that if the proprietor or manager of a house licensed under the principal Act should offer, or cause to be offered, any gift to any person as an inducement to bring any lunatic to the house, he should be guilty of a misdemeanour. I regret to say that the Bill has not been read a second time in the House of Commons. It is, I believe, a measure urgently demanded, not only in regard to the particular matter now brought under review, but on other and general grounds. Looking at the period of the session, I am afraid the Bill is in peril, and so long as the House of Commons permits its business to be delayed by one or two persons who may have particular objections, so long, I am afraid, will great public evils continue to exist. This is, I think, the third time that the Bill has passed through your Lordships' House, and it has not yet had an opportunity of passing into law. Unless some legislation with regard to this subject is placed on the Statute-book the evil will continue to increase. I do not think that the noble and learned Lord has at all exaggerated the matter. If anything, he has understated it. My own belief is that the evil is much more widespread than is supposed, and the facilities with which sometimes certificates of insanity are signed is one of the things which the Bill

  1065
  to which I have referred is intended to correct. This is another branch of the system of corruption to which the noble and learned Lord has previously called attention, and I hope most sincerely that the Bill will pass, and that it will be rendered penal both to give and receive money for these purposes. The case to which the noble and learned Lord has drawn attention occurred since the Bethnal Green case, and there is reason to believe that there are many other cases in which the same system prevails. I only regret that for some technical reasons, with which I need not trouble your Lordships, the Public Prosecutor and the learned counsel whom he consulted were of opinion that under the particular circumstances of this case an indictment would not have a chance of being successful. In a case of this sort an unsuccessful indictment is an extremely dangerous thing, and therefore the Public Prosecutor was quite right in not instituting a prosecution. But no such objection could be raised if the clause to which I have referred had been passed into law. I can only say that the noble and learned Lord has done a public service in calling attention to the matter, and I hope it will not be forgotten in the House of Commons when the question of the Lunacy Bill is under debate.
  THE EARL OF KIMBERLEY: I should like to ask the noble and learned Lord on the Woolsack whether he can give us any information as to any action taken by the Local Government Board. I read that these officers had not been dismissed. If that is the case, it is a most outrageous proceeding. If it is really the case that an important local body in this city have deliberately condoned an offence of this kind and have continued in office persons who have been guilty of these most abominable practices, then if the Local Government Board possesses any powers to deal with that body and to compel them to do their duty, that power ought to be exercised. If, on the other hand, the Local Government Board cannot compel that body to do its duty, the sooner the law is altered the bettor.
  *LORD RUSSELL OF KILLOWEN: I should like to correct a misapprehension under which the noble Earl who has just spoken is labouring. I stated that the local authority had no power to dismiss
  1066
  the officials of their own motion, but that they required the authority and concurrence of the Local Government Board.
  THE EARL OF KIMBERLEY: Yes; but did they ask for it? That is the point.
  *LORD RUSSELL OF KILLOWEN: I believe it is the case that a censure was passed on the officials by the local authority. I am not aware that any application was made to the Local Government Board for their dismissal. With reference to what the noble and learned Lord on the Woolsack has said, I would remind the House that I have read the language used by the Attorney General a few days ago in the other House upon the very facts which I have mentioned. I do not wish to set up my opinion, not having thoroughly considered the matter, against that of the counsel whom the Public Prosecutor consulted; but, as at present advised, my opinion is that the case comes within the statute known as Lord R. Churchill's Act, and I would suggest that the Lord Chancellor should ask the opinion of the Law Officers on that point.
  THE EARL OF HALSBURY: Not unnaturally, my mind was more particularly directed to that for which I am responsible, and I have in consequence omitted to state that I have received a communication from the Local Government Board on the subject. It states that the guardians of the parish of St. Pancras have forwarded to the Local Government Board a report in connection with this matter, from which it appears that the guardians have publicly and severely censured the relieving officers and warned them that any recurrence of the offence will result in their immediate suspension from duty. In view of the gravity of the charge, the Board have directed that a careful inquiry shall be held by one of their1 inspectors. The Local Government Board state that the charges in the Bethnal Green case appear to be well founded, but they have not yet given their decision in that case. As it is alleged that similar practices prevail in other parishes, the Local Government Board propose to address a circular letter to boards of guardians on the subject.

  SECRETARIES TO IRISH COUNTY COUNCILS.
  *THE EARL OF ARRAN: My Lords, I rise to ask Her Majesty's Government whether the delay which has occured between the election of a secretary to the Mayo County Council and the ratification of that election by the Local Government Board has been the cause of any additional expense; and, if so, whether such additional expense will be borne by the Local Government Board or the ratepayers of the county; whether for the future it will not be possible in all similar circumstances to oblige candidates to satisfy the Local Government Board that they possess one or other of the qualifications for the post of secretary to a county council, as laid down by the Board's instructions, before presenting themselves before the county council for election instead of after the election, as was in this instance the case. In asking this question I should like also to put another question to the noble Lord of which I have given him private notice—namely, whether before ratifying the appointment the Local Government Board had taken any steps to ascertain the fitness of Mr. D. O'Connor Kelly, the late secretary to the Mayo County Council, for that post, to which he was appointed by the council, and, if not, whether the expense caused by the condition of the accounts when Mr. Kelly resigned the office will be borne by the Local Government Board or the ratepayers. The circumstances are these. On the resignation of the secretary to the Grand Jury (Mr. Blake), Mr. D. O'Connor Kelly was appointed secretary to the county council in his place. I have no reason to doubt the talents of Mr. D. O'Connor Kelly, but apparently they were not such as made him a very efficient secretary to the county council, because the state of business became so bad that the Local Government Board were forced to write a very strong letter to the Mayo County Council setting forth the condition of affairs and begging that the business should be at once put upon a satisfactory footing. Whether in consequence of this letter or not I am not able to say, but at any rate Mr. D. O'Connor Kelly resigned his post, and it was then found that the condition of
  1068
  accounts was such—I wish at once to say that I am only referring to their confusion—that a staff of forty-five clerks had to be sent down by the Local Government Board to put them in a proper condition. The clerks were so long at work that the expense occasioned amounted to something like £1,000. What I want to know is, will this £1,000 be borne by the ratepayers or by the Local Government Board. I have not been able to discover that the Local Government Board took any steps before sanctioning the appointment to ascertain whether Mr. Kelly was competent to fulfil the duties of the office. The Local Government Board must have been perfectly well aware of the circumstances under which the appointment was made. The circumstances of the appointment by the Mayo County Council would not be very interesting to your Lordships, and I will merely say that the gentlemen who made the appointment were men possessing the purest and highest motives of patriotism according to their lights, and that their only object was to save the pockets of the ratepayers whom they represented and whose votes they hoped to got again at the next election. They were, however, under a certain feeling of fear of the most powerful man in Ireland at this moment, Mr. William O'Brien, and, under those circumstances, the Local Government Board should have taken the utmost pains to see that any appointment made by them was really a fitting one. I now come to the questions standing in my name on the Paper. The case is as follows: An advertisement was issued in the newspapers stating that an election of a secretary to the Mayo County Council would take place on a certain date, and this advertisement was signed by the acting secretary who had been sent down by the Local Government Board. It was distinctly stated in that advertisement that no person should be eligible to be appointed to the office unless he had been secretary to another county council, or had proved by examination that he was fitted for the post. Three candidates of importance came before the council. One certainly fulfilled all the conditions laid down in the advertisement. The county council, however, elected a gentleman who had absolutely no qualifications, and when his appointment was communicated to the Local Government Board, that body also ignored the fact that he had passed no examina-

  1069
  tion. They proceeded to set him an examination, and gave him six weeks to prepare for it. I should like to know whether any extra expense was caused by this six weeks delay, which was altogether irregular.
  THE EARL OF DENBIGH: I am afraid a little confusion exists with regard to the noble Earl's questions, because he commences by asking me a question which is not on the Paper. I do not know whether that is what he referred to when he spoke of a question of which he had given mo private notice.
  *THE EARL OF ARRAN: I sent the notice to the Irish Office.
  THE EARL OF DENBIGH: When?
  *THE EARL OF ARRAN: Before the holidays.
  THE EARL OF DENBIGH: I heard of that, but as the noble Lord did not put it on the Paper I understood that he was not going to ask it. I am afraid I have not got a very full answer to the questions asked as to the expense incurred in the unravelling of the accounts referred to. I can only say that the appointment of the late secretary was not ratified by the Local Government Board; on the contrary, the Department refused to ratify it because the late secretary declined to present himself for examination. If the noble Earl wishes me to make further inquiries with regard to the expense incurred I will do so if he will place a question on the Paper.
  *THE EARL OF ARRAN: Then I understand the late secretary was acting solely on the election of the county council, without his appointment being ratified by the Local Government Board?
  THE EARL OF DENBIGH: That is the Report which is given by the Local Government Board. The delay which occurred between the election of a secretary to the Mayo County Council and the ratification of the appointment by the Local Government Board has caused no additional expense either to the county or to the Department. In answer to the other question, the Local Government Board report that it would not be practi-
  1070
  cable to require all the candidates to satisfy them that they are possessed of the requisite qualifications before they present themselves for election.
  House adjourned at half-past Seven of the clock, to Thursday next, half-past Ten of the clock.