Lords Sitting of 29 May 1907

PRIVATE BILL BUSINESS.
Broadstairs and St. Peter's Urban District Water Bill [H.L.]. (Petition for additional Provision); Alton Military Hospital. (Petition for Bill); Examiner's Certificates of non-compliance with the Standing Orders referred to the Standing Orders Committee on Monday next.
Wisbech Water Bill [H.L.]. Reported, with Amendments.
Ashton-under-Lyne, Stalybridge, and Dukinfield (District) Waterworks Bill [H.L.]. Read 3a, and passed, and sent to the Commons.
Maidstone Gas Bill. Read 3a, with the Amendments, and passed, and returned to the Commons.
Birmingham Corporation Bill [H.L.]; Newquay and District Water Bill [H.L.]. Commons' Amendments considered and agreed to.
Aberdeen Corporation Bill [H.L.] Reported from the Select Committee, with Amendments.

RETURNS, REPORTS, ETC.
  ELEMENTARY SCHOOL TEACHERS SUPERANNUATION ACT, 1898.
  Rules in lieu of Rules 6 (3) and 7 (2), of the Elementary School Teachers Superannuation Rules, 1899.

  NATIONAL DEBT ANNUITIES.
  Account of the gross amount of all bank annuities and any annuities for terms of years, transferred, and of all sums of money paid to the Commissioners for the Reduction of the National Debt, and the gross amount of annuities for lives and for terms of years which have been granted for the same, and contracts for payments on death which have been made within the year ended 5th January, 1907.
  Laid before the House (pursuant to Act), and ordered to lie on the Table.

  TRANSVAAL REGISTRATION BILL.
  LORD AMPTHILLrose to call attention to the action of His Majesty's Government in regard to the Transvaal Registration Bill, and to move for Papers. The noble Lord said: My Lords, my object is to obtain the presentation to Parliament of Papers in continuation of Command Paper No. 3308 entitled "Correspondence relating to legislation affecting Asiatics in the Transvaal. "I have no doubt that such Papers will, in due course, and as a matter of course, be laid before Parliament; but I think there is some occasion for rather more expedition than is usual in the publication of official Papers, and at any rate for some statement in anticipation of that publication on the part of the Secretary of State for the Colonies.
  The Blue-book to which I have just referred led up to an important despatch dated 29th November, in which the Secretary of State for the Colonies gave his reasons for declining to proceed further with what is known loosely as the Transvaal Ordinance. The reasons given for this refusal were that the noble Earl found it impossible to regard the proposals embodied in the draft Ordinance as affording an adequate measure of relief from the disabilities to which British Indians were subject in the Transvaal. It was clear to him, said the noble Earl, that they fell far short of the reforms which Her late Majesty's Government repeatedly pressed on the Government of the late South African Republic, and that they did not contain more than an instalment of the measures of relief which had been advocated by his predecessor.
  The declaration made in this despatch, which, if I may say so, was couched in weighty and conciliatory, but, at the same time, firm, language, gave rise to a confident hope that the noble Earl would persist in his determination to obtain justice for our Indian fellow-subjects and that he would not relax his endeavours to succeed where his predecessors had failed. Meanwhile self-government was granted to the Transvaal Colony in circumstances with which your Lordships are familiar, and on 20th and 21st March the new Transvaal Legislature passed a Bill practically identical in substance with the rejected Ordinance. Naturally there was much speculation as to the action

  1587
  which would be taken by the noble Earl the Secretary of State for the Colonies and by His Majesty's Government. The next thing we heard was the statement made in another place, on behalf of the noble Earl, to the effect that the Government had decided not to advise His Majesty to disallow the Act, having regard to the fact that it was supported, by the unanimous authority of a Parliament newly elected in a self-governing Colony. I venture to think, my Lords, that this reason—the only reason—for a complete reversal of what had hitherto been the policy of His Majesty's Government under both Parties, was entirely inadequate. If it were adequate, what had become of the objections which had been made by the noble Earl and by his predecessors on the score of equity and of justice?
  If it is the case that the unanimous authority of the Transvaal Parliament cannot be questioned, what was the object, I should like to ask, of the provision in the Constitution which reserved for the decision of His Majesty's Government any law whereby persons not of European birth or descent may be subjected or made liable to any disabilities or restrictions to which persons of European birth or descent are not also subjected or made liable? Would this reservation also be nugatory in the circumstance, the not absolutely impossible circumstance, of the Transvaal Legislature deciding by a unanimous vote that they would maintain the institution of Chinese indentured labour?
  It is necessary to refer to the circumstances in which what is called the unanimous authority of the Transvaal Parliament was given. The Bill was rushed through all its stages in both Houses of the Legislature within a period of twenty-four hours. I need not point out how little discussion there could have been in those circumstances, or how much consideration could have been given to the objections which had been repeatedly and clearly stated on behalf of His Majesty's Government. I will content myself by quoting the words of Mr. Lionel Curtis, who was the Colonial Secretary to the Colony under the previous régime and who was himself actually the author of the Ordinance which had
  1588
  been superseded by this Registration Bill. Mr. Curtis, in the debate, said—
  "While supporting the Government in the most welcome action they had taken that day in regard to Asiatics, he also supported the Amendment of Mr. Martin."
  The Amendment of Mr. Martin was nothing more than a modest suggestion that the Committee stage should be postponed until the next day, so that the members of the Council might acquaint themselves with the Bill. Mr. Curtis went on to say—
  "If the measure before the House was rushed on the first day of the sitting, and especially without discussion in that Council, they would be putting a most powerful weapon in the hands of the antagonists in England of His Majesty's Government there. This matter was thrown out before, not on principle but on details, and how many members could say that they had familiarised themselves with the Bill? It was as important a measure as any which that or any other Parliament could deal with."
  The warning by Mr. Curtis was disregarded, and the Bill was rushed through without discussion and without consideration.
  I would ask what possible reason for this urgency can there have been? We have heard nothing to show that there was any sudden emergency or any danger of disturbance. Indeed, what danger of disturbance could there have been from the peaceful, law-abiding, gentle Indian folk who ply their various vocations in the Transvaal? The situation was this. On the one hand there were over 250,000 white men with full political power in their hands and with an open door through which an unlimited accession of their numbers could take place; on the other hand, there were approximately 14,000 British Indians with no power or privileges whatever, and—though it has not been proved—an alleged monthly increase of 100. It would be foreign to my purpose to comment on the general aspects of this trial of strength between the Parliament of the new Colony and His Majesty's Government; but surely the circumstances left it open to His Majesty's Government, without any fear of being considered unreasonable or of meeting with any formidable challenge on the part of the Colonists, to use the power which they had expressly reserved,

  1589
  in order, at least, to impose some condition on their assent to the proposed legislation. But, so far as we know, assent to the Bill was given unconditionally and without any qualifications whatever. At least, it ought to have been made a condition of the assent to the Bill that the regulations under the Bill, in which most of the harshness and injustice is found, should be so revised as to make them less degrading and humiliating.
  I dare say the noble Earl will tell me that General Botha, the Premier of the Transvaal, has given assurances that this will be done as far as possible; but, my Lords, the personal assurance of the Premier of the Colony, however much value we may set on it—and I am sure there is nobody who would question the value of an assurance on the part of General Botha—cannot be the same thing as a condition offered by His Majesty's Government and accepted by the Government of the Colony. There are two sides to this question, of course, as there are to every question of importance. I do not ignore the Colonial side of the question, but I do maintain that our side is equally important, and that, therefore, this was a matter for compromise and not for surrender. What reality or what value can there be in our Imperial hegemony if we have to give up rights which we are bound to safeguard on behalf of the Empire as a whole in the face of threats from a section of the community in any part of the Empire?
  We all admit in the fullest manner the right of the self-governing Colonies to manage their domestic concerns in their own way; but we cannot admit, nor can the Colonies claim, nor do they claim, that this right includes the liberty to injure any other part of the Empire. But this legislation does injure us. It vitally touches our honour, it renders of no account the pledges, actual and implied, which our statesmen have given to the peoples of India ever since we have ruled over that great Dominion of the Crown. To show your Lordships how we are being discredited in this matter I would like to quote what took place, if the newspaper reports are to be believed, at a recent meeting of the German Colonial Society. A resolution was passed at that meeting threatening British Indians
  1590
  in the German Colonies with differential legislation, and a Deputy of the Reichstag is said to have remarked that the Boers had passed sharp laws against the Indians and the British had taken them over, and that, therefore, there was no reason to fear complications with Great Britain. That shows what other countries are beginning to think of us, and I need not enlarge again on the opinion that will be formed in India of the failure of His Majesty's Government to redeem their pledges.
  I have said that there are two sides to this question. The attitude of the colonists in the matter is perfectly intelligible, and I am certainly not going to deny that from their point of view it is reasonable. They claim that the country that they have won with toil and strife should remain their country—a white man's country. We must admit their right to establish that condition of affairs; we must also admit that it is necessary, for the purpose, to restrict Asiatic immigration, and that the restrictions must be effective; but we cannot admit that those measures must be harsh, vindictive, and unjust. Take, for instance, registration, which is the instrument by which this immigration is restricted. Why should it be necessary to insist on a system of finger-print identification, a system which is associated in the minds of every Indian solely with the identification of criminals? There are only a proportion of the Indians in the Transvaal who cannot write. Why should it not be permissible for those who can write to give their signatures as other people do? Or, if a further condition were necessary, why should it not be permissible for them to furnish at their own expense photographs as a means of identification? Then the system of identification by finger-print would merely be confined to those who are illiterate and are unable to comply with the other and more reasonable conditions.
  There are other harsh regulations on which I do not intend to dwell, as on the present occasion I am dealing merely with general considerations. But while we are obliged, as reasonable men, to concede that the present condition of South Africa necessitates restrictions to which we must object on principle, we can, at the same time, consistently retain

  1591
  our ideal, and claim that nothing should be done now which would prevent the ultimate realisation of that ideal—that all who are subjects of His Majesty the King should be able to claim under the British flag in any part of the Empire, whatever their race, their colour, or their creed, rights and privileges which they could not claim elsewhere. The citizenship of the British Empire should carry with it something of the prestige which was associated with the proud boast Civis Romanus sum under the ancient Empire of Rome. We ought to be able to regard the present restrictions of British citizenship in the Transvaal as a temporary and transient condition of affairs, incidental, inevitably incidental perhaps, to a new country, but which will pass off when the country has been settled and fully developed by those who have the first right, as we admit, to own its resources. But that is not the case at present in view of the recent action of His Majesty's Government.
  There is one more point to which I should like to call attention. His Majesty's Government have promised to guarantee a loan of £5,000,000 to the Government of the Transvaal Colony, and it is remarked that a principal condition of that loan is a settlement of the Chinese labour question satisfactory to His Majesty's Government. I would ask, Is it also a condition of that£5,000,000 liability which the taxpayer of this country is to undertake in order to save the honour of a political Party that the British Indian question should be settled in a manner satisfactory to the nation? I trust that the noble Earl will be able to promise the early publication of further correspondence, and that he will meanwhile inform the House of the precise conditions, if any, on which he gave assent to the Transvaal Asiatic Law Amendment Bill. I beg to move.
  Moved, "That an humble address be presented to His Majesty for further Papers in regard to the Transvaal Registration Bill."—(Lord Ampthill.)
  *THE SECRETARY OF STATE FOR THE COLONIES (The Earl of ELGIN): My Lords, the noble Lord in reverting to the subject to which he drew your Lordships' attention some little time ago has, I think, still maintained, to a certain
  1592
  degree, the proposition which I then thought scarcely justifiable, namely, that it was necessary to vindicate the right of admission for all subjects of His Majesty, including His Majesty's subjects in India, into any part of the British Dominions. I do not think myself that that can be accepted without limitations.
  LORD AMPTHILL: I said as an ideal.
  *THE EARL OF ELGIN: I quite agree as an ideal. I only wish to put the point that there must be limitations to that ideal, and I was going on to observe that in another part of his observations to-night the noble Lord did accept that position, because, in speaking of the right of self-governing Colonies to legislate, he admitted that circumstances might occur in which it was necessary for the self-governing Colonies to exercise the right of imposing limitations upon other subjects of the Crown or upon aliens entering their possessions. That being so, what we really have to deal with in this question is not the admission of Asiatics, but their fair treatment when they are in the country. With regard to that, I think I said last time that I had always maintained in India, and that I maintained here, that we had a right to claim from the Colonies that they should give fair treatment to those subjects of the Crown of Asiatic birth whom they admit to dwell within their territory.
  Then the question is, how is that fair treatment to be secured? Granting, as the noble Earl does, the right of legislation to the self-governing Colonies, it can only proceed by the legislation which the self-governing Colonies adopt. The Ordinance which was before Parliament on the former occasion, and which His Majesty's Government advised that they could not accede to, was an Ordinance adopted by the Crown Colony Government which existed at that time in the Transvaal, and adopted at a very late stage in the existence of that Government. It was known to us that within a very few months that Government was to be changed and a self-governing Administration set up, and as there were certain modifications which, under our responsibilities in Crown Colonies, we would have desired to have insisted upon had the Crown Colony continued, we thought it necessary not to sanction that Ordinance

  1593
  at the time, because it was obvious that there would not be an opportunity for the then existing Government to consider and introduce the modifications which we required.
  That was the position, therefore, when the Government changed. But the Government now is the ordinary Government of a self-governing Colony. That Government immediately on meeting passed, I quite admit with very great haste, a Bill which substantially was on the lines of the Ordinance which had been submitted to us. I regret very much that they thought it necessary to take that step; but I do not think it is correct to say that the only reason given for the precipitancy was the unanimous consent of all sections of the white population, though I am bound to say that the unanimous consent of all the representatives of the white population in the Colony is a very material fact. But there was another reason for prompt action, and that was that there was an illicit and unathorised influx of Asiatics into the Transvaal going on, which it was desired to check.
  Now, returning to the distinction which I drew at the beginning between the admission of Asiatics and their fair treatment in the Colony after admission, I think I have also a right to claim the assent of the noble Lord when I say that it was not unreasonable that the new Government should wish promptly to obtain powers adequately to check an illicit and unauthorised influx of Asiatics. The noble Lord seemed to think—and of course unless one considers the circumstances it was natural to think—that the fact that the Parliament had just met was a sufficient reason for taking longer time for consideration; but I would remind the House that the Parliament had to adjourn, and was adjourned, immediately, in order that the Prime Minister might attend the Colonial Conference in this country. Therefore, if the powers which were desired were to be obtained for use during these months until Parliament reassembled, the Bill had to be passed in the way in which it was passed.
  The position which His Majesty's Government took on this subject was that we were sorry that it was necessary to act in a manner which might be called hasty, but we did recognise the force of
  1594
  the reasons given and to which I have already referred. But in doing so we stated most distinctly in the despatch, which I shall have no objection to lay on the Table, that we adhered to the opinions expressed by successive Secretaries of State as to the desirability of relaxing the restrictions to which Asiatics are at present subject, and that we commended this view to the Transvaal Government in the hope that it might be considered how far practical effect might be given to it. We did not say that without some reason to suppose that that observation would be taken into consideration, because this took place during the time that the Prime Minister of the Transvaal was in this country; and, carrying out a promise which I made to the House on the last occasion, I did take every opportunity I could during the sittings of the Conference to confer with the representatives from the Colonies in regard to this matter.
  I should like to point out to the noble Lord, with regard to the fair treatment of Asiatics, that the greater part of the Bill simply enacts that registration should take place. Registration must take place. It is prescribed in the legislation which now exists, but it is not effective. If there is to be restriction at all of an illicit and unauthorised influx, a proper registration must take place. The regulations to which the noble Lord quite justly takes exception in some eases are not laid down in the Bill itself, but under powers in the 18th Section of the Bill. Powers are there given to the Governor in Council from time to time to alter and repeal regulations for certain purposes. Among these are the regulations to which the noble Lord called attention with regard to finger-prints. I am aware that there is a connection in people's minds between finger-prints and criminals, because I think it was during my time in India that the system of using finger-prints for identification of prisoners was very much developed there. But I do not see that making a mark with the thumb instead of with the pen should necessarily have any criminal connection.
  There is this further circumstance which I may perhaps mention. I had the honour of receiving a deputation at the time when the former Ordinance was under consideration, and one of the Native gentlemen who came from the Transvaal

  1595
  as a member of that deputation produced a pass which he himself had, and I found in the corner of it a fingerprint. I asked him to explain this. An attack was being made on the new Ordinance with regard to the adoption of finger-prints, yet here was a pass under the old Ordinance on which a finger-print was observable. He replied that that was true, but that it was given voluntarily. That was the distinction which he made. I believe there has been a further distinction drawn, that under the regulations as they were proposed not only the thumb but the fingers of the hand were to be imprinted. I only mention this to show that, if you argue the thing out, you come to a variety of distinctions, and this seems to me to diminish the seriousness of the objections to the regulations. However that may be, I do not wish to argue in favour of finger-prints except as being admittedly the easiest and most effective way of registering the identity of persons of deficient education. But, as I say, I had conferences with the representatives of the Colonies, and they made no objection whatever to undertaking to consider fairly and frankly this particular regulation when they went back, and also whether or not photography or some other method could be adopted.
  I have only to say, with regard to the Bill, that His Majesty's Government, while there were things that they would have liked to have seen altered in the regulations before the Bill had been passed, while they would have preferred to have seen the Bill longer debated and passed with the deliberation which characterises the proceedings of this House, did not think they would be justified in refusing sanction to this Act, coming as it did with the unanimous assent of the Transvaal representatives.
  As I have mentioned the Colonial Conference, I would like to take this opportunity of adding that I did confer, not only with the Prime Minister of the Transvaal, but also with the Prime Ministers and representatives of other Colonies on the whole of this subject. In some cases, as in the case of the Transvaal, those were personal conferences; but in one case, that of Australia and the position of Asiatics in that part of the world, the question did come before
  1596
  the Conference as a whole, at a meeting at which the representative of India was present and upon a point upon which India was particularly interested, the employment of lascars upon ocean-going steamers. In that case the view taken by His Majesty's Government was that they could not admit for a moment that the employment of lascars in these great lines of ocean-going steamers could legitimably be prevented, or that they could concur at any rate in its being prevented, by Colonial legislation. Of course, the Colonial Legislatures have a right to say what ought to be done in their own waters and with regard to their own coasting trade, but for the main trade between Australia and other parts of His Majesty's Dominions we maintained stoutly that the employment of lascars must continue to be permissible. I do not know that I have more to say in regard to this Bill, except to repeat that I am quite willing to give the despatches in connection with it. I think they are only two, but I will take the earliest opportunity of issuing the Papers in which they will be included.
  *THE MARQUESS OF LANSDOWNE: My Lords, I have never concealed from myself that the noble Earl has had a very difficult problem to deal with in connection with this matter. It is a problem which must be specially embarrassing to him, because he must evidently be drawn both ways, sometimes by his recollection of the country over which he presided as Viceroy with so much distinction, and sometimes by the claims of the Colonies, for whose interests he is now responsible. There can be no doubt that, as he has put it to your Lordships, the dominant fact we have to deal with is that the Transvaal has been given full responsible self-government, and that it would be a negation of that Government to deprive the people of the colony of the full right of, as it has been described, deciding the materials of which the future nation shall be built up.
  We know that it is the desire of this particular Colony that it shall be a white man's country, and we can understand their natural wish to prevent anything like an inroad of an alien population. The people of the Transvaal have before them the experience of the Colony of Natal, where the introduction of Asiatics has

  1597
  been freely permitted, and in which, unless I am misinformed, there are something like thirteen non-Europeans to every ten Europeans in the country. Of course, in an inland colony like the Transvaal the difficulty is greater, because it is not easy to prevent the gradual infiltration of Asiatics across a land frontier of considerable extent. I noticed that the noble Earl spoke more than once of what he called an illicit and unauthorised influx of Asiatics, and I take it that he meant by that a surreptitious introduction of Asiatics in opposition to the law or regulation now in force.
  *THE EARL OF ELGIN: That was the reason which was given for the former Ordinance by the Transvaal Government, and it is repeated now.
  *THE MARQUESS OF LANSDOWNE: Under the present law this influx is illegal?
  *THE EARL OF ELGIN: It is said to be illegal, but there is no proper registration to go upon, and the matter is difficult to check.
  *THE MARQUESS OF LANSDOWNE: Of course, if there is a doubt as to the illegality—
  *THE EARL OF ELGIN: I did not mean that there was the slightest doubt on that point.
  *THE MARQUESS OF LANSDOWNE: In the circumstances it is difficult to see what else the Colonial Government can do, if the introduction of these people is really illegal, except to take such measures as are within their reach to prevent the introduction from proceeding, and at the same time to treat with proper consideration and in an equitable spirit those Asiatics who have already acquired a domicile in the colony, and for whom; we are bound, as the noble Earl admits, to secure fair treatment. The question is, does this new law really secure what the noble Earl means by fair treatment? I own that I have a little difficulty in persuading myself that it does, because we have on record the statement of the noble Earl that the Ordinance which His Majesty's Government in the first instance disallowed contained proposals which could not be regarded as affording an
  1598
  adequate measure of relief from the disabilities to which British Indians were subject in the Transvaal, and therefore fell far short of the reforms repeatedly pressed upon the Government of the late South African Republic. Now the noble Earl tells us that the Act which has been passed differs very little from the Ordinance which he denounced in such clear and emphatic language; therefore we certainly cannot congratulate the noble Earl upon having succeeded in obtaining for British Indians what he has himself described as fair treatment. With regard to the system of registration and the use of digital marks, the noble Earl has mentioned his conversation with a gentleman who of his free will allowed his thumb mark to be put upon a document which he carried in his pocket.
  *THE EARL OF ELGIN: There was a space for it.
  *THE MARQUESS OF LANSDOWNE: That is not the same thing as inflicting upon the whole of these people a system of registration by the marks of the ten digits, which these Indians unquestionably connect in their minds with the system of police supervision of the criminal classes. What hope does the noble Earl hold out to us that this state of things will be in any way improved? My noble friend behind me suggested, and I think very fairly, that the occasion was one when the noble Earl, so to speak, held a good many trumps in his hand, and when he might have given his approval to the proposed legislation conditionally upon some of these matters being put straight. The noble Earl has told your Lordships that he could not do this, because the matter was argent owing to the Asiatics continuing to pour into the Transvaal. I do not think that is a very conclusive reason. Even supposing that a few hundred more of these people had succeeded in crossing the frontier, that is surely a lesser evil than even in appearance to throw over the interests of these Indians, who themselves look to you for protection, and whose fellow countrymen in India are watching what is taking place. The hurry in passing the legislation seemed to me, I must say, indecent. The noble Earl, with a smile on his countenance which he could not conceal, spoke of the

  1599
  Bill having passed through the Colonial Parliament with more precipitation than is usual in your Lordships' House, but I think he must look to that exceptional activity which this House sometimes displays in the dog days if he wants to find anything like an expedition corresponding to that displayed by the Transvaal Legislature on this particular occasion.
  The only gleam of hope which the noble Earl held out was this. He told us the other day that, although in his opinion the matter was not one which he could ask the Conference to deal with, there might be informal conferences on the subject, and he tells us this evening that His Majesty's Government have signified a hope that there may be some improvement in the treatment of the Indians already domiciled. We all remain under the favorable impression left here by the distinguished statesman of the Transvaal who has lately honoured this country by his presence; and I feel sure that if he has given the noble Earl any encouragement to expect that these matters will be reconsidered, such encouragement has not been given in vain. But I frankly own that, looking at the matter as it stands at this moment, the position in which these British Indians have been left does not appear to me to be satisfactory or very creditable to the manner in which their interests have been watched over by the Government of this country.
  On Question, Motion agreed to, and ordered accordingly.

  TECHNICAL INSTRUCTION TO SOLDIERS.
  LORD MONKSWELL: My Lords, I rise to call attention to instructions issued by the War Office on 31st October last to the various military commands with reference to giving technical instruction to soldiers to fit them for civil life; to ask what steps have been taken by commanding officers in accordance with such instructions, what facilities have been given to soldiers to obtain technical instruction, and how far they have availed themselves of such facilities; and to move for Papers.
  It may be in the recollection of some of your Lordships that last session I took exception to the action of the
  1600
  Government in not completely following out the recommendations of Sir Edward Ward's Committee on this question. That Committee recommended that the soldier should be given every facility to learn a trade, and also that he should be required to learn a trade. The Government, however, have thrown over the second recommendation, and have only partially adopted the first. In recruiting you have two objects in view—namely, to get the best men you can, and to keep out the bad men. Those objects are mutually dependent. There is no greater obstacle to recruiting than the knowledge on the part of good men that they may possibly be required to associate with undesirable persons, and if undesirable persons are kept out you will not only get better recruits but in the long run more recruits. The best way to keep out undesirables is, in my opinion, to tell the soldier on enlistment that he will be compelled to learn a trade. The Government, however, have done nothing to keep idlers out of the Army, or to secure-that when idlers get into the Army they shall be idlers no longer.
  In several respects the Government have not only refused to adopt, but have gone absolutely counter to, the recommendations of Sir Edward Ward's Committee. In their circular letter they state that in all cases, whatever trade the soldier takes up, he shall be compelled to pay part of the cost himself. That is not in accordance with the recommendation of Sir Edward Ward's Committee, but absolutely contrary. The Committee recommended—
  "In some of the subjects a portion of the expense should be borne by the men, the instruction and materials being expensive."
  That means, of course, that where the materials are not costly and the instruction not very expensive the soldier should be entitled to be taught the trade free. It seems to me that the Government are doing their best to make a dead letter of this important recommendation.
  The various agencies which endeavour to obtain employment for ex-soldiers point out that they are confronted not only by the difficulty of the soldier not being trained for civil life, but that they have to face the difficulty that in many cases he is shy of work and refuses to accept any situation where hard work

  1601
  is involved. This state of things is partly due to the demoralising influence of the life of the infantry soldier. On this point I would quote what was said by a gallant officer who spoke with considerable authority on that matter. I refer to General Sir Frederick Fitz-wygram, who frequently called attention in the House of Commons to the absolute necessity of giving soldiers instruction which would fit them for civil life; but I am afraid that his efforts in that respect met with as little success as have my own. On 10th June,1892, General Fitzwygram pointed out that there was no difficulty in recruiting except for the infantry, and that is the case at the present day. In the course of his speech on that occasion—I am quoting from Hansard—General Fitzwygram said—
  "Looking at the causes, I think the failure of the infantry lies in the exceedingly idle life which the infantry soldier is compelled to lead during his seven years of service. Beyond an hour or two's drill and a little cleaning he has nothing to do, and therefore it is unreasonable to suppose that such a man would readily take to the hard work which is part of civil life."
  And again he said—
  "I look on this question of the employment of infantry soldiers during their period of service as the important element in relation to recruiting. When a man leaves the service to loaf about, he damages that service, and damages, too, the recruiting; but were the infantry soldier fairly well employed during his seven years of service I believe that he would prosper on regaining civil life."
  Those are very strong words, and it appears to me that if they are to any extent true, they prove that our system of recruiting is unjust and cruel to the men and most detrimental to the public service. At present the soldier may be as idle as he pleases, and, naturally, when he leaves the Army he is an incapable, and his failure to get work discourages others from enlisting. Everything has been done apparently to prevent recruiting being a success, and then people express astonishment and clamour for conscription. The sort of recruits who go into the Army in order to live an idle life are the bad bargains of the service; they are the men who desert, who malinger, and who keep good men out of the Army. It seems to me that if you were to tell the recruit on joining that he must learn a trade during his term of service you would attract only good men into the Army and men who desired to make the most of their opportunities.
  1602
  I notice that the Association for the Employment of Discharged Soldiers, which is under the direct patronage of the War Office, pointed out in their last Report that—
  "It was more difficult this year than ever to obtain employment, especially for unskilled men."
  The whole of the Report is extremely eloquent on the subject of the old soldier being given preferential employment, but it is absolutely silent with regard to the important question of the industrial training of the soldier while in the Army. I think the soldier is entitled to have preferential employment, but, after all, that is but a surface remedy; it is merely skin plaster, and does not touch the root of the evil, which is that the soldier is not an employable person in civil life. I am very much obliged to the noble Marquess opposite who presided at the meeting of the Association for the Employment of Discharged Soldiers at which the Report from which I have quoted was presented, for what he said on that occasion. I think he was the only speaker at the meeting who called attention to the necessity that the soldier should be given some instruction that would be of use to him in civil life.
  I wish to call attention very briefly to the Report on Recruiting, and to quote one sentence which seems to me of the utmost importance. At the end of his yearly Report the Director of Recruiting says—
  "Several districts, in their annual Reports, have stated that if the recommendations of the Ward Committee were carried out the recruiting problem would be solved, and there is no doubt whatever that the adoption of the recommendations would go a considerable distance towards the solution."
  I would ask the noble Earl whether it might not be possible to publish some, at all events, of the district Reports on recruiting, so that we might know what the view is in the district commands with regard to the recommendations of the Ward Committee. I wish to know whether the circular letter issued by the War Office has produced any result at all. My information is that it has produced none, and that it is absolutely a dead letter.
  The noble Earl will find it suggested in the War Office Circular, at the top of page 2, that the preliminary arrangements would best be carried out by a

  1603
  committee of officers interested in technical instruction, who would not only suggest methods of instruction but get into touch with the technical institutes in the towns in which soldiers are quartered. I wish to know if anything has been done in that direction. It is said that commanding officers are as a rule hostile to the system of training soldiers for employment. The noble Earl opposite, Lord Donoughmore, when he was Undersecretary of State for War, said, in speaking on this question, that the British officer was an old-world Tory, compared to whose toryism the toryism of noble Lords opposite was as moonlight is to sunlight or as water is to wine. His suggestion was that British officers were such absolutely immovable Tories that they would not look at any new idea at all. I confess I have better hopes of commanding officers than the noble Earl opposite. I hope that, even though they may think it is time wasted, they will defer to superior authority and do their best to carry into effect the recommendations of Sir Edward Ward's Committee. If they do they will add enormously to the great debt of gratitude they have already earned at the hands of their countrymen. To turn the Army into an excellent school for civil life is, I think, the most important military reform that has ever come before the country, and I do hope that the Government will stiffen their backs and insist that every recommendation of the Ward Committee should be carried into effect. I beg to move for Papers.
  Moved, "That an humble address be presented to His Majesty for Papers relating to the answers received to the circular issued by the War Office on the 31st October last, to the various military commands with reference to giving technical instruction to soldiers to fit them for civil life."—(Lord Monkswell.)
  *THE UNDER-SECRETAEY OF STATE FOR WAR (The Earl of PORTSMOUTH): My Lords, my noble friend has covered a large amount of ground, and I hope he will not consider that I am in any way wanting in sympathy with many of the views he has expressed if I feel bound to confine myself, more or less, to the actual points contained in the Question on the Paper. I think that perhaps the most straightforward and best course
  1604
  I could adopt would be to state as briefly as I can exactly what has taken place since the noble Lord brought the question forward in November of last year, and I laid on the Table a circular letter dated 31st October, which was issued by the War Office to the various commands at home and abroad.
  We have received at the War Office a great number of replies in response to that circular. I do not propose to lay upon the Table the whole of the official literature which has accumulated; some of it is of a partly confidential character, and some of it is too detailed, but I have had a careful précis made which I propose to lay on the Table of the House in reply to my noble friend's Motion. In that précis all the salient points in the replies will be clearly set out. From it your Lordships will see what steps the general officers commanding in each of the eight large commands have taken to comply with the instructions contained in the circular letter. Considerable difficulties have been presented, and I think I ought in fairness to state that the commanding officers lay great stress on the very discouraging attitude in regard to this matter which has been taken up by some of the trade unions. If I remember aright, my noble friend gave us to understand, in the autumn of last year, that the trade unions would not feel themselves aggrieved in this matter, and that their jealousies would not be aroused. Your Lordships will see in the précis which I propose to lay that several of the general officers commanding state most clearly that in this matter we have to overcome, to put the matter in a very mild form, a considerable amount of opposition on the part of the trade unions. Lord Grenfell, writing from Ireland, states—
  "All the large firms approached say that the trade, unions make it impossible for them to offer facilities for training without Government intervention."
  And the General Officer Commanding the Eastern command, Lord Methuen, says that—
  "The trade union system, as at present regulated, seems fatal to the success of soldiers in skilled trades."
  The General Officer Commanding in Scotland writes—
  "There is little doubt that the trade unions would take prompt measures to prevent ex-soldiers from getting employment to the

  1605
  detriment of men who have passed through the mill."
  The question from the industrial point of view is not such a simple and easy one as some of your Lordships might have supposed; and I confess to a little disappointment that we have not been able to make more progress in this matter.
  In the précis the possibilities of civil and military employment are enumerated. Suggestions are made as to which trades are best suited to local requirements, several additional trades being added to those mentioned in the circular. All the Reports made have been considered by the Advisory Committee. Two circular letters have been issued dealing with the value of civil technical schools and with the great possibilities of instruction in agriculture and telegraphy. These I also propose to lay. Last year we were allotted£1,000 for training, the principal part of which has been spent on new motorcars, motor driving commending itself as an occupation to many of the men. Certain sums were provided for general capital expenditure in workshops. This year a much larger sum has been placed on the Estimates than last year, the amount having been raised to £2,500. I hope this is some indication that we are not neglecting this matter.
  The question of compelling men to learn a trade as a condition of joining the Army is a very large one, and I am not entitled to express an opinion on the subject without much more thorough knowledge than I now possess. It will be necessary to hear the opinions of those who are experienced in recruiting. A Committee at the War Office, of which I was Chairman, has been considering the question of the Army schools. The principal reason why we have to maintain these schools is that it is necessary to educate adult soldiers, a large proportion coming from the country with which my noble friend opposite (Lord Donoughmore) is connected, and where they do not enjoy such efficient elementary education as exists in England and Scotland. Evidence was given before the Committee that the great difficulty was that, though a large number of these men joined the adult classes, after a time they "tailed off" and ceased to attend. That, I am sorry to say, is what we were told by those personally acquainted with the
  1606
  matter in regard to these classes of technical instruction.
  We have already asked the general officers commanding for suggestions regarding the distribution of the £2,500 provided in the present year's Estimates. We shall keep in touch through our Standing Committee at headquarters with the local committees, and with the Automobile Club, or any other associations that may be of assistance, and in conjunction with the general officers commanding, we hope to co-ordinate central and local efforts. It is not quite fair to imply that some general officers show a want of interest, or adopt almost an obstructive policy as regards the question of technical instruction. I do not think we have any evidence of that. I feel that this is a matter in which we have to proceed extremely tentatively. Our Army is a voluntary Army, and, however much one may wish that the soldiers would undertake certain additional duties, it is necessary to consider very carefully a step which they may regard as a restriction of their personal liberty. I shall be glad to lay Papers on the Table.
  THE EARL OF DONOUGHMORE: My Lords, I cannot refrain from rising to the fly that was thrown by the noble Earl who has just sat down, being naturally stung by his suggestion to the effect that the Army schools have to be kept up because the recruits from Ireland are so illiterate.
  THE EARL OF PORTSMOUTH: I did not say all, but a large proportion.
  THE EARL OF DONOUGHMORE: If I may judge by what I saw when at the War Office, the English and Scottish recruits were justas illiterate as the Irish recruits. The boy who had been four or five years away from school had generally forgotten even how to read and write, and Irish recruits were not peculiar in the matter. No doubt the system of education in Ireland is not all it ought to be, but it is better than it would be if a certain Bill now before the other House were passed into law. I think the noble Lord who initiated this discussion, and to whom we are indebted for the persistence with which he raises the question, may content himself that we have advanced a step this evening. I do

  1607
  not propose to offer any further remarks before I have had an opportunity of reading the document which is to be laid on the Table, and from which I anticipate we shall derive some interesting reading. I hope my noble friend Lord Monkswell will keep his eye on that document, and return to the charge later in the session.
  LORD MONKSWELL: My Lords, I agree with the noble Earl that we have got a step further. The sum included in this year's Estimates—£2,500—is not large, but it is certainly an advance on the amount previously provided. The War Office circular contemplated that there should be an advisory committee in every district, but up to the present that had not been done. The noble Earl said he was not prepared to express any opinion on the question of compulsion. I would point out that Sir Edward Ward's Committee did give a very decided opinion on that subject, and if you do not go in for compulsion you are not carrying out the most important recommendation of the Committee. The experiment at Woolwich which was cited on a former occasion as showing that the men would not learn a trade, I found on inquiry had been carried out in such a way that success was impossible. The classes were absolutely unfitted for the soldier, and no trouble was taken to see that the soldier could attend the classes. The noble Earl the Under-Secretary brought forward another point which I answered in November last. It is not the fact that trade unions object to this teaching. I went to the fountain-head in regard to that matter and saw Mr. Crooks, M.P., who stated that what they objected to was giving the soldier preferential employment. But, notwithstanding this, commanding officers continue to press for preferential treatment. There may be trade unions that are foolish enough to object, but I am certain that if the question was properly put to the working classes they would be very glad that their fellow-citizens who enlist in the Army should be taught a trade.
  On Question, Motion agreed to, and ordered accordingly.

  MUNICIPAL REPRESENTATION BILL [H.L.]
  The Lord Bishop of Bristol added to the Select Committee.

  TURKEY AND MACEDONIA.
  On the Motion for the adjournment of the House,
  LORD NEWTONsaid: Before the House adjourns I beg to ask the noble Lord the Under-Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs whether he intends to lay any Papers on the Table relating to South-Eastern Europe.
  THE UNDER-SECEETARY OF STATE FOR FOREIGN AFFAIRS (Lord FITZMAURICE): My Lords, I received a similar inquiry from the Bishop of Hereford, who very kindly, at my request, put off the Motion, which he was about to hand in, to call attention to the condition of Macedonia. My noble friend Lord Newton has asked me practically the same Question. I am now able to say that I hope, not later than the end of next week, to lay three Blue-books before your Lordships dealing with (i.) the general situation in Macedonia during 1906; (ii.) the negotiations relating to the increase in the Turkish Customs duties from 8 to 11 per cent.; and (iii.) the results so far achieved by the Macedonian Financial Commission.
  House adjourned at Six o'clock, till To-morrow, half-past Ten o'clock.