Sitting of 12 September 1893

ROYAL ASSENT.
Message to attend the Lords Commissioners.
The House went; and, being returned,
Mr. Speaker reported the Royal Assent to several Bills. [See page 937.]

QUESTIONS.

  THE LAND TRANSFER REGISTRY.
  MR. GREENE: I beg to ask the Chancellor of the Exchequer whether Her Majesty's Government are prepared to advise the application, and to apply public funds, and to what amount, for the purpose of establishing or maintaining, wholly or in part, registries and officers, or to provide for expenses and compensations so as to enable the provisions of the Land Transfer Bill to be carried out; and whether Her Majesty's Government have computed the expense or have received or can furnish any estimate either of the cost to the public of establishing and maintaining the proposed system of compulsory registration of title or of the revenue likely to arise from the charges to be payable upon registration?
  THE CHANCELLOR OF THE EXCHEQUER (Sir W. HARCOURT,): The Government do not contemplate the necessity of applying public funds for the purpose of the Land Transfer Bill. A very low scale of fees (in lieu of existing costs of conveyance) will, in our opinion, suffice for covering office expenses, so great is the number of transactions in land.

  TURNER'S DRAWINGS IN THE NATIONAL GALLERY.
  MR. JESSE COLLINGS: I beg to ask the Chancellor of the Exchequer if he will state about how many water-colour drawings by Turner are at present unexhibited in the National Gallery; and whether the Trustees are willing to prepare for exhibition in Provincial Museums and Art Galleries larger and more adequate Collections than are at present sent into the country?
  SIR W. HARCOURT: Over 600 drawings by Turner, in water-colours or pencil, are on daily view at the National Gallery. No water-colour drawings remain unexhibited, but only some rough sketch notes, chiefly in pencil, on leaves of small pocket-books. In 1891 the whole of the then unexhibited portion of Turner's drawings was carefully sifted, and everything at all fitted for exhibition selected. Out of these it was found possible to form a Loan Collection, which is at present in the Ruskin Museum, at Sheffield. There are now four circulating Collections, each of which contains 50 or more water-colour drawings or sketches.

  SOUTH KENSINGTON MUSEUM.
  MR. JESSE COLLINGS: I beg to ask the Vice President of the Committee of Council on Education what portion, if any, of the £3,500 increase in the Vote for South Kensington Museum under Sub-head F (Purchases for Museum and Circulation) will be devoted to the acquisition of original objects for the permanent Collections of Provincial Museums?
  THE VICE PRESIDENT OF THE COUNCIL (Mr. ACLAND,): The increased amount taken for purchases is a restoration of the amount taken off the Estimates in 1892–3. This Vote is not for the ac-
  940
  quisition of objects for the Collections of Provincial Museums, but for objects for the South Kensington Museum, many of which are constantly in circulation outside London. I have taken special care that a full proportion of the objects purchased with the sum now added to the Estimates will be circulated in the Provinces.
  MR. JESSE COLLINGS: I beg also to ask the right hon. Gentleman if he will state the number of Museum keepers and assistant Museum keepers at the South Kensington Museum, the nature of their duties, and rates of payment?
  MR. ACLAND: There are at the South Kensington Museum, as will be seen by reference to the Estimates—four Museum keepers, with salaries rising from £500 to £600; three Museum keepers, with salaries rising from £410 to £500; (second grade) eight assistant Museum keepers, £100 to £400. The keepers receive 5s. per hour, and the assistant keepers 3s. per hour, in addition to their salaries, when they are required to be in attendance after 6 p.m. on the nights when the Museums and Libraries are open to the public. The total amount paid for this service last year was £415 12s. The keepers are charged with the general supervision of their respective divisions, including the registration and arrangement of the objects, in which work they are assisted by the assistant keepers.

  WORK FOR ABLE-BODIED DESTITUTE PERSONS.
  MR. KEIR HARDIE: I beg to ask the President of the Local Government Board whether he can now state the extent of the powers possessed by the Boards of Guardians for acquiring laud and opening workshops to enable them to set able-bodied destitute persons to work at reasonable wages; whether employment so given necessarily pauperises and disfranchises the recipients; and whether he will cause a Circular to be issued to Boards of Guardians setting forth these powers, and how far the Local Government Board is prepared to co-operate with the Guardians in putting them into operation?
  THE PRESIDENT OF THE LOCAL GOVERNMENT BOARD (Mr. H. H. FOWLER,): The

  941
  Law Officers of the Crown have advised that the powers which were vested in overseers of parishes under the 43 Eliz., cap. 2 (passed in 1661) and the 59 Geo. III., cap. 12 (passed in 1819) are, by virtue of the Poor Law Amendment Acts of 1834 and 1835, vested in Boards of Guardians, subject to the control of the Local Government Board. The result appears to be that Boards of Guardians have power to purchase or rent land not exceeding 50 acres for any parish, and to open workshops for setting destitute able-bodied persons to work, and to pay such persons reasonable wages for their labour. The Law Officers further advised that wages so paid would be parochial relief, and would involve the same disfranchisement as other relief under the Poor Laws. The Law Officers are also of opinion that the provisions of the 43 Eliz., cap. 2, enabling the overseers to require or to appoint persons to work, and, if they refuse, to cause them to be committed to the House of Correction, are still in force. Although these various powers still remain on the Statute Book, there can be no doubt that during a long period of years they have been regarded as obsolete, and since the passing of the Poor Law Act in 1834 they have not been acted upon by Boards of Guardians. The principle by which Boards of Guardians have been governed in the administration of out-door relief to destitute able-bodied persons has been that in each case such relief should be given by them as the necessities of the case require, work being provided merely as a test of destitution. The adoption of schemes for the provision by Boards of Guardians of work at wages would involve an abandonment of what has hitherto been regarded as the principle of the new Poor Law, upon which the orders as to out-door relief which have been in force during the last half-century have been based. Whether so grave a change in the policy and administration of the Poor Law is desirable, and, if so, whether it should be made without legislative authority, are questions on which I could not express an opinion without the sanction of my Colleagues. In the meantime, the fullest and most careful consideration of the Local Government Board shall be given to the whole subject.
  MR. KEIR HARDIE: Arising out of the very full and satisfactory answer of the right hon. Gentleman, I wish to ask him whether in cases where two or more parishes are combined in one Union the Union has power to acquire 50 acres of land in respect of each parish or only 50 acres for the combined parishes?
  MR. H. H. FOWLER: We are advised that it would be for each parish. Therefore, if there were three parishes, the Union would have power to acquire 150 acres.

  RAILWAY BATES IN STAFFORDSHIRE.
  MR. JASPER MORE: I beg to ask the President of the Board of Trade whether his attention has been drawn to the excessive character of the railway rates charged by the North Staffordshire Railway for the carriage of Clee Hill stone; and whether the Board of Trade will use the powers conferred upon them by Section 31 of "The Railway and Canal Traffic Act, 1888," for the purpose of inducing the Railway Company to reduce the rates to a reasonable amount?
  THE PRESIDENT OF THE BOARD OF TRADE (Mr. MUNDELLA,): The Board of Trade have communicated with the North Staffordshire Railway Company with reference to their rates for Clee Hill stone, and they have received a letter from the Secretary which I shall be happy to show the hon. Member. If any person receiving or sending stone by this railway makes a complaint to the Board of Trade of unreasonable treatment the Board will use the powers conferred upon them by Section 31 of "The Railway and Canal Traffic Act, 1888."

  THE GENERAL REGISTER OF SASINES.
  MR. PAUL: I bog to ask the Secretary for Scotland whether it is the fact that writs given in at the General Register of Sasines during the month of May last were not given out till August; and whether, in view of the great inconvenience caused by the delay in the recording of writs, to those engaged in the winding-up of Trusts and other legal business, he would state if the working hours of the clerks in this Office are less than those recommended by the Ridley Commission, and generally adopted in the Civil Service?
  THE SECRETARY FOR SCOTLAND (Sir G. TREVELYAN,): It is the fact that several of the writs given in for registration during May last were not given out till August. But I must point out that no fewer than 9,150 writs were lodged for registration in May, being the largest number in the history of the Register. It has not been found possible to introduce the seven hours' system, because the Treasury cannot accept that system until the present staff of clerks, now in the course of reduction, is reduced still further to meet the additional cost in salaries which the seven hours day involves. But I may add that the pressure in the work takes place at the terms of May and November, and that a special sum of £600 is allowed by the Treasury to provide additional temporary clerical assistance, in order to meet this pressure.

  SALFORD AND THE MANCHESTER SHIP CANAL.
  MR. KNOWLES: I beg to ask the President of the Local Government Board whether his attention has been drawn to the fact that the nuisance arising from the Manchester Ship Canal has become dangerous to the health of the inhabitants of the county borough of Salford and the neighbourhood; and whether, as suggested by the Council, he will direct a Government inquiry to be held as to the best means of dealing with the subject?
  MR. H. H. FOWLER: I do not find that the Local Government Board have received any communication from the Town Council of Salford as to the condition of the Manchester Ship Canal. I will, however, very carefully consider any representations from the Town Council, or suggestions by them with regard to the means of remedying the nuisance to which reference is made; but at present I do not see that any sufficient advantage would arise from a Government inquiry.

  PROCEDURE UNDER "THE ASSIZES RELIEF ACT, 1889."
  MR. POWELL WILLIAMS: I beg to ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department whether he is aware that difficulties have arisen in relation to procedure under "The Assizes Relief Act, 1889," certain of Her Majesty's Judges holding that,
  944
  notwithstanding the provisions of this Act, prisoners triable at Quarter Sessions ought to be committed for trial to the Assizes, and other Judges holding otherwise; whether he is aware that, in consequence of such decisions, great doubt exists as to the proper course to be pursued by Magistrates in relation to such committals; and whether he will take steps to provide for a uniform and authorised system of procedure?
  THE SECRETARY OF STATE FOE THE HOME DEPARTMENT (Mr. ASQUITH,): I am aware that the divergence of practice to which the hon. Member refers exists, and that it gives rise to difficulties in the administration of justice by Magistrates. The matter is one of some complexity, and it is under the consideration of the Lord Chancellor.

  YORK CAVALRY BARRACKS.
  MR. BUTCHER: I beg to ask the Secretary of State for War whether the Government contract for the painting of the Cavalry Barracks at York has been sub-let; whether the sub-contractor, to whom such contract has been sub-let, is paying his workmen employed in doing the work contracted for by such contract wages, which in many cases are considerably below the wages generally accepted as current in the trade for competent workmen; and, having regard to the Resolution of this House of the 13th February, 1891, what steps the Government propose to take in the matter?
  THE FINANCIAL SECRETARY TO THE WAR OFFICE (Mr. WOODALL,): Inquiry was made into this matter, and the result appeared to be satisfactory; but, in consequence of a letter received this morning from the hon. Member's Colleague in the representation of the City of York, a further and more searching inquiry has been ordered.
  MR. BUTCHER: Can the hon. Gentleman say whether the contract has, in fact, been sub-let?
  MR. WOODALL: The contract has been sub-let without the permission that ought to have been asked for; but I will make a further explanation hereafter.

  ABERDEEN UNIVERSITY.
  MR. BENSON: I beg to ask the Secretary for Scotland when it is proposed to make an appointment to the new Chair of Literature in Aberdeen University?
  SIR G. TREVELYAN: The Draft Ordinance relating to the Chalmers Chair of English Literature in Aberdeen University is, I am informed by the Secretary to the Universities Commission, awaiting consideration of objections when the Commission resumes its sittings in October or November, and cannot be laid before Parliament till the, Autumn Session. I do not, therefore, see that the Ordinance can be laid before the Queen in Council till March, 1894, and fear the appointment to the Chair must be deferred till after that date.

  DRAWBACK ON BRITISH CIGARS.
  MR. E. PRICE: I beg to ask the Chancellor of the Exchequer whether his attention has been directed to statements made by The Cigar and Tobacco World, to the effect that by enforcing an old Statute (26 Vict., c. 7), which has remained in abeyance for 30 years, and which provides that no drawback can be allowed on exported tobacco of British manufacture which contains a greater quantity of inorganic matter than 22 per cent., the Board of Customs have put a stop to the export of British cigars, which was returned last year at over £112,000; whether it is not a fact that tobacco leaf from which cigars are manufactured contains more than 22 per cent. of inorganic matter; and whether, in the interests of an important British industry, he will at once give instructions to revert to the practice which has hitherto been in vogue pending the repeal of the Statute in question?
  SIR W. HARCOURT: The Statute in question has always been in force. The only difference is that cases in which the cigars presented for drawback have contained inorganic matter and sand to an extent exceeding the limit prescribed by the Statute have occurred in considerable number during the last few months, whereas before they had been very infrequent. I have satisfied myself that some amendment of the law is desirable in the interests of the trade, and in the next suitable Bill a clause will be inserted
  946
  legalising the grant of a reduced amount of drawback in such cases. Pending such legislation, I have no power to suspend the operation of the Act.

  PARLIAMENT AND THE UNION JACK.
  MR. ARNOLD-FORSTER: I beg to ask the First Commissioner of Works whether Her Majesty has been pleased to accede to the request conveyed to Her by the Lord Great Chamberlain that the National Flag should be hoisted upon the Palace of Westminster during such time as Parliament is sitting and Her Majesty is not within the precincts; and, if so, whether Her Majesty's Government will provide the necessary funds to purchase and maintain the National Flag?
  THE FIRST COMMISSIONER OF WORKS (Mr. SHAW LEFEVRE,): The Queen has intimated her consent to the application made to her by the Lord Great Chamberlain, prompted, I presume, by the hon. Member, that the Union Jack should be hoisted on the Victoria Tower when Parliament is sitting. I am informed that the cost of maintaining a flag large enough for such an elevated position, and the labour of a man in going up and down 700 steps twice a day, will come to about £25 a year. No provision is made for this in the Estimates of this year for the Department of the Lord Great Chamberlain, which is included in the Vote for the House of Lords. But I have no doubt the matter will be carefully considered by the Treasury in the preparation of next year's Estimates, on the application of the Lord Great Chamberlain.

  GIBRALTAR COAL STORES.
  MR. ARNOLD-FORSTER: I beg to ask the Secretary to the Admiralty whether the statement recently made by the hon. Member for the Normanton Division at a meeting of the Miners' Federation, to the effect that the coal stores at Gibraltar were cleared out, was accurate; and, if so, whether the statement applied wholly or in part to the coal stored for the use of the Royal Navy; and if he can state what is the amount of coal at present in store at Gibraltar, in the Naval and Commercial depots respectively?
  THE SECRETARY TO THE ADMIRALTY (Sir U. KAY-SHUTTLEWORTH,): The Admiralty store of coal at Gibraltar it not cleared out. On the contrary, in now contains the full stock usually maintained there. There is always a large stock in commercial stores, but it would be contrary to policy and practice to state the amount of coal at Gibraltar.

  THE "VICTORIA" COURT MARTIAL.
  MR. GIBSON BOWLES: I beg to ask the Secretary to the Admiralty whether he is now able to state when the Minutes of the Victoria Court Martial will be laid upon the Table of this House; and whether there is any prospect of these Minutes being in the hands of Members before the discussion on the Navy Estimates is resumed?
  SIR U. KAY-SHUTTLEWORTH: We have at last received proofs of the printed evidence from the printers. But the proofs of the lithographed plates will not be ready for some days. Without these the evidence would be incomplete, and there would be no advantage in presenting it. Under these circumstances, I fear that the Blue Book cannot be distributed to Members before the Adjournment of the House for the Recess.

  THE COMPANIES WINDING-UP ACTS.
  SIR A. ROLLIT: I beg to ask the President of the Board of Trade whether, and when, the Report of the Committee of the Board of Trade on the administration of the Companies Winding-up Acts will be presented to the House and circulated; and when the Annual Reports of the Board of Trade on Bankruptcy and Winding-up, respectively, will be presented and circulated, and to what date they will be brought up?
  MR. MUNDELLA: The Annual Report on Bankruptcy was presented on the 4th instant, ordered by the House to be printed on the 5th instant, and will be circulated shortly. The Statistical Tables for the Report on Winding-up are in print, but it will not be possible to present the Report till the Autumn Session. Both these Reports will be for the year ending 31st December, 1892.

  SMALL-POX IN THE METROPOLIS.
  MR. BENN: I beg to ask the President
  948
  of the Local Government Board whether he is aware that a very large proportion of the cases of small-pox admitted of late into the hospitals of the Metropolitan Asylums Board have been of the vagrant or casual class; and whether his attention has been directed to the Report of the Medical Officer of Health for Southwark as to a Salvation Army shelter in that district; if so, whether, in view of the serious risk to the public health and the heavy cost to the ratepayers consequent on such a state of affairs, he will take steps to give the Sanitary Authorities such a power to inspect charitable refuges as is already possessed by the Metropolitan Police in the case of common lodging-houses?
  THE SECRETARY TO THE LOCAL GOVERNMENT BOARD (Sir W. FOSTER,): I believe that it is the case that a large proportion of the persons suffering from small-pox admitted into the hospitals of the Metropolitan Asylums Board have been of the vagrant or casual class, and I am aware of a Report which was made by the Medical Officer of Health of St. George the Martyr, Southwark, as to the Salvation Army shelter at Blackfriars Road. The provisions of the Public Health (London) Act with reference to overcrowding and the sanitary condition of premises apply to these shelters in like manner as to any other house used as a dwelling. The Act gives the right to members of the Sanitary Authority and any officer authorised by them of entering, at any time between 6 a.m. and 9 p.m., any premises for the purpose of examining as to the existence thereon of any nuisance liable to be dealt with summarily under the Act referred to. In the event of a refusal to admit, an order may be made by a Magistrate requiring the admission, and where a house is alleged to be over-crowded so as to be a nuisance, an order of a Magistrate may authorise the entry at any hour of the day or night specified in the order. I cannot at present give any undertaking to propose legislation on the subject.

  THE CASE OF ABRAHAM MITCHELL, OF DUMBARTON.
  CAPTAIN SINCLAIR: I beg to ask the Secretary for Scotland, with regard to the proceedings at the trial of Abraham Mitchell, re-

  949
  cently sentenced by Sheriff Lees, at Dumbarton, to 30 days' imprisonment, with hard labour, whether he is aware that Brown, the principal witness, admitted at the trial that he stole the book in question; that accordingly his evidence was stated by the Sheriff to be receivable only with suspicion; that Craig, the only other witness, was materially contradicted in other evidence; that this was also admitted by the Sheriff in giving judgment; and that, on the other hand, there was no proof that the book was of value, nor that Abraham Mitchell, the accused, was ever seen with the book, or ever directly or indirectly made use of the book to the detriment of his employers or for any other purpose; whether he is aware of the following facts—namely, that the competing firm, in whose interests it was suggested at the trial that the theft was committed, have extracted a public apology from Messrs. Stirling and Sons for that unfounded imputation, and that Mitchell had been in the firm's employment for 14 years, had occupied public positions in the locality, but had recently differed from their representatives there on public questions; why Brown, who admitted the theft, was not prosecuted for that crime; and whether, under the circumstances, he can see his way to allay the intense public dissatisfaction with the outcome of this prosecution by ordering the immediate release of Mitchell the accused?
  SIR G. TREVELYAN: In answer to my hon. and gallant Friend, I must reply that I cannot enter into a discussion of particular points of the evidence. The evidence, if believed by the Court, was in point of law sufficient, and no one who did not hear the evidence and see the witnesses is in a position to form a judgment on it as against the presiding Judge. I have read the correspondence between Messrs. Stirling & Sons and Messrs. Steiner & Co.; but Messrs. Stirling deny that they imputed anything to Messrs. Steiner. I have no doubt that my hon. Friend's statements as to Mr. Mitchell's antecedents are correct. The essence of the charge was that Brown, in taking the book, had acted under the impulse of Mitchell. I cannot go back on my former decision.
  CAPTAIN SINCLAIR: This being a question of the credibility of evidence,
  950
  what remedy is there available for those who think that this man has been wrongfully convicted?
  SIR G. TREVELYAN: The time for a remedy has passed. There were three days during which the agent might have appealed on a question of law, but the opportunity was not taken advantage of. I am bound to say that in the course of the proceedings there were occasions on which the accused might have given explanations, but he failed to do so. I am afraid it is quite impossible for me to interfere in the matter.
  MR. HOZIER: Was the prosecution instituted by the Procurator Fiscal on instructions from the Crown Authorities in Edinburgh?
  SIR G. TREVELYAN: I have already once answered that question in the affirmative.

  EYE TESTS FOE THE ARMY.
  MR. JEFFREYS: I beg to ask the Secretary of State for War whether he is aware that G. M. Nicholson, a candidate for the Army, was twice passed sound by the medical examiners, but at the last examination, when he passed second for the Cavalry, the medical examiners refused to pass him on account of a slight congenital defect in one eye; whether he is aware that this candidate has never experienced any inconvenience from the alleged defect in his eye; whether G. M. Nicholson has served as an efficient officer in the Hampshire Artillery Militia; whether he is aware that this candidate's eyesight has never altered in the slightest degree, nor, according to the doctors, is likely to alter; and whether, under these circumstances, he will consent to refer the matter to an independent medical authority?
  THE SECRETARY OF STATE FOR WAR (Mr. CAMPBELL - BANNEKMAN,): The facts are in the main as stated. The result is that Mr. Nicholson has been found to fall short of the minimum standard of sight required for the Army, and I have no power to make any exception; nor would it be right in any case to do so, as the general opinion of my Professional Advisers is that that minimum is already too low.
  MR. JEFFREYS: Considering the hardship of this case, and that this

  951
  candidate was twice passed as sound by the Medical Authorities, and that it was only on a third examination, when there had been no change in his eyesight, that he was rejected, cannot some exception be made in his favour?
  MR. CAMPBELL-BANNERMAN: I am sorry to say not. Mr. Nicholson went to a London specialist, who confirmed the opinion of the Medical Board that the eye did not come up to the minimum of sight required. I should have been glad if it had been possible in any way to relax the rules, but it is not.

  ANTHRAX.
  MR. JEFFREYS: I beg to ask the President of the Board of Agriculture if there have been any fresh attacks of anthrax in the United Kingdom; and what steps he is taking to suppress this dangerous and infectious disease?
  THE UNDER SECRETARY OF STATE FOR THE HOME DEPARTMENT (Mr. H. GLADSTONE,): My right hon. Friend the President of the Board of Agriculture has requested me to answer this question in his absence. The number of outbreaks of anthrax reported during the three weeks ending the 2nd instant have been 11, 18, and 13 respectively. The business of enforcing the provisions of the law, and the Orders issued there under, rests, in the case of anthrax, not with the Board of Agriculture, but with the various Local Authorities under the Contagious Diseases (Animals) Acts. I have, however, addressed a Circular Letter to those authorities advising them as to the nature of the disease and the best means of preventing its spreading, and I have also issued a leaflet, for general circulation amongst stockowners, describing the symptoms of the disease and the steps which ought to be taken on its appearance. I shall be happy to supply the hon. Gentleman with copies of these documents.
  DR. FARQUHARSON: May I ask my hon. Friend whether, considering the persistent vitality of this bacillus, he will press the Local Authorities to insist on the burning of the bodies of all animals affected with this disease?
  MR. H. GLADSTONE: That is not a matter which comes within the
  952
  jurisdiction of the Home Office; but I have no doubt my right hon. Friend the President of the Board of Agriculture will consider it.

  THE COAL STRIKE RIOTS.
  MR. NUSSEY: I beg to ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department whether he is aware that there was at Castleford, on the occasion of the recent regrettable riot, considerable delay in obtaining the presence of a County Magistrate, thus augmenting the disturbance; whether he will communicate with the Lord Chancellor, with a view to the appointment of more Magistrates in that district; and whether it is the intention of Her Majesty's Government to hold an inquiry into the recent unfortunate occurrences at Castleford, and as to how far the persons killed and injured were those who took part in the destruction of property?
  SIR C. W. DILKE: I have just received a telegram from the hon. Member for the Normanton Division desiring me to ask a further question—namely, why the troops were brought from Bradford when there was a force at Pontefract only two miles away; whether the troops were, sent at the request of the local Magistrates; and whether they had any right to interfere with the crowd without the presence of a Magistrate, and before the reading of the Riot Act?
  MR. ASQUITH: I cannot say why the troops were brought from Bradford rather than from Pontefract. The troops were sent by orders of the local Magistrate. I am aware that there was considerable delay on the occasion in question in obtaining the attendance of a Magistrate, but I cannot say whether the delay augmented the disturbance. The presence of a Magistrate is necessary before the Riot Act can be read, and by the Queen's Regulations an officer in command of troops acting in aid of the civil power is forbidden to order his men to fire unless distinctly required to do so by a Magistrate. But the military are not obliged to wait for the presence of a Magistrate before they take active steps to prevent outrages upon property and person. I have received complaints in the course of the recent disturbances in the West Riding of the difficulty of

  953
  obtaining the attendance of Magistrates at times and places where their presence would have been useful, and I am in communication with the Lord Chancellor on the subject. It would be premature to answer the last part of the question until the inquests on the men who were killed have been concluded.
  EARL COMPTON: May I ask whether the Home Secretary has received any information respecting the action of the Magistrates in Barnsley in preventing a large meeting of miners being held in that town yesterday; whether he is aware that the meeting was convened to express, in the first place, its strong disapprobation of the lawless proceedings which had taken place at Barnsley in the previous week, and to call upon all miners and law-abiding citizens to do their utmost in assisting to prevent a recurrence of the same; and, in the second place, to protest against the action of the authorities in importing military into the town, believing that there is no necessity for their presence, and demanding their withdrawal; and whether the right hon. Gentleman can take any steps to cause the withdrawal of the Magistrate's prohibition?
  MR. ASQUITH: I have no information on the subject beyond what appears in the newspapers this morning. Of course, not being aware of the local circumstances, it would be very improper in me to pronounce any opinion, at this stage at any rate, upon the action of the Magistrates. I have already taken steps to have this question submitted to them for observation, and I will reply to it when I have got their answer, in the course of a day or two.

  REPORTED OUTRAGES IN THE EAST.
  MR. PAULTON: I beg to ask the Under Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs if his attention has been called to a statement made recently in the Press, that a number of headless bodies had been washed ashore near Salonica; and if he can say whether there is any foundation either for the report or for the suspicions which are alleged to have been aroused by it?
  THE UNDER SECRETARY OF STATE FOR FOREIGN AFFAIRS (Sir E. GREY,): I did see the statement to this
  954
  effect in the Press, but I am glad to be able to say, in answer to my hon. Friend, that it is absolutely without any foundation in fact.

  THE WESTMINSTER CHOLERA CASE.
  SIR H. ROSCOE: I beg to ask the First Commissioner of Works whether his attention has been called to the fact that the house in which Mrs. Bailey resided in Westminster was found to be in an insanitary condition; and whether he will make representations to the Westminster Sanitary Authority as to the necessity of improving the admittedly unsatisfactory condition of the Westminster drains?
  MR. SHAW-LEFEVRE: I have learned only from the papers what the hon. Member has stated as to the insanitary condition of the premises where Mrs. Bailey resided. I have, however, decided on more general grounds to make representations to the Westminster Authorities with reference to their drainage. I have been in communication with the London Council on the ventilation of the main drain under their charge, and have almost come to a conclusion with them; but I am informed by them that the arrangements will not be complete without an improvement in the drains under the charge of the Westminster Sanitary Authority.

  THE REJECTION OF THE HOME RULE BILL—FEELING IN IRELAND.
  MR. SEXTON: I beg to ask the Chief Secretary to the Lord Lieutenant of Ireland whether he can give any particulars of the origin and extent of disturbances in Belfast and some other places in the North of Ireland on Saturday and Sunday last?
  THE CHIEF SECRETARY FOR IRELAND (Mr. J. MORLEY,): As to the Origin of these disturbances, such as they were, there can be no doubt that their immediate cause was the rejoicing of the Unionist Party on learning the result of the Division on Friday night in another place. The outcome of the different demonstrations has not been very important. No serious personal injury appears to have been sustained, and injury to property has been confined in the main to the breaking of a few panes of glass. In Belfast, if my hon. Friend

  955
  wishes further and better particulars, large crowds assembled at the newspaper offices on Friday night, and when the result of the Division was announced they dispersed quietly. Some Nationalists tried to get through a police cordon, and being refused stoned the police. One pane of glass was broken in a Catholic public-house, some trivial assaults took place, and I have just received a telegram to the effect that two persons have this day been sentenced to one month's imprisonment each for assaults, and that proceedings are pending against others. At Lurgan a number of windows were broken, the damage being estimated at about £5. It is believed by both parties that these injuries were committed by bands of young lads. It is reported this morning that two houses in Lurgan were fired into on the 10th instant, and that shots were fired at another house, but, striking a wall, they did not penetrate to the interior. At Londonderry a large number of people assembled, but there was no disturbance. A couple of panes of glass were broken in the house of a Nationalist, and also in the Protestant Sunday School. At Coleraine windows were broken in the Catholic Church, and in six private houses, including the house of the hon. Member for South Fermanagh. Stones were also thrown at the police. There were demonstrations, but no disturbances, at Dungannon and Cooks-town. At Omagh and some other places slight disturbances occurred. Windows were broken in some 17 houses in Magherafelt, but no one was injured. That, I think, is all that will interest my hon. Friend and that is worth stating. [Laughter]
  MR. SEXTON: It is not exactly a laughing matter. I wish to ask the right hon. Gentleman whether he has heard of a violent attack made upon a trade procession at Belfast on Saturday, and of serious injury inflicted upon the members of one of the bands; whether the hon. Member for Battersea (Mr. J. Burns), who was one of the speakers at a labour meeting in the city, was threatened with violence, and was pursued from the place of meeting by a disorderly crowd; and whether in any part of the 28 counties in which the Nationalists have a majority of the population there were any disturbances in consequence of a political event at which they had more
  956
  reason to feel resentment than the Unionist Party?
  MR. J. MORLEY: I am glad to be able to say, so far as I have heard—and I have Reports from most parts of Ireland—there was no attempt whatever on the part of Nationalists to indicate their vexation, if they felt vexation, at the political event that happened. As to the attack upon the trade procession at Belfast on Saturday, I understand the stones were thrown at two of the Nationalist bands, but I have not heard of anything that happened to the hon. Member for Battersea.
  MR. MACARTNEY: May I ask the right hon. Gentleman whether he has reason to believe that vexation is felt anywhere in Ireland at the political event referred to?
  MR. SEXTON: You will find that out.

  THE DUKE OF EDINBURGH'S DEVONPORT COMMAND.
  MR. KEARLEY: I beg to ask the Secretary to the Admiralty if he can state what was the total number of days upon which H.R.H. the Duke of Edinburgh was absent from his duties on leave or otherwise during each of the three years of his tenure of the appointment of Admiral of the Port at Devonport; and what was the total number of days upon which his predecessor was absent on leave or otherwise during each year for a corresponding period of time?
  SIR U. KAY-SHUTTLEWORTH: I stated last week that during the time that H.R.H. the Duke of Edinburgh held the appointment of Commander-in-Chief at Devonport he was subject to, and complied with, the Regulations with regard to leave. The Admiralty were responsible for the leave which was granted, and it did not interfere with the efficient performance of the duties of Commander-in-Chief. Under these circumstances, I must respectfully decline to answer the first question of my hon. Friend. With regard to the second question, the predecessor of the Duke of Edinburgh was granted all the leave for which he asked. Answers cannot be given to questions which propose to institute comparisons between the leave granted to one officer and another, especially when there is no doubt as to the fact that both discharged

  957
  their duties to the entire satisfaction of the Admiralty.
  MR. KEARLEY: Arising out of the answer, may I ask the right hon. Gentleman whether he is aware that the public journals, Service papers, and others, have stated that during the two years and ten months His Royal Highness held the post of Commander-in-Chief at Devon-port he was absent no less than 379 days?
  SIR U. KAY-SHUTTLEWORTH: No; I am not aware that the public journals have stated anything of the kind, and such statements would be entirely contrary to the facts of the case.

  THE CASE OF GEORGE KINK.
  MR. GREMER: I beg to ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department whether his attention has been called to the fact, as stated in The Star of the 7th instant, that George Kine, a boy who is now 13 years of age, was in March of last year charged at the Stratford Petty Sessions with playing truant and sentenced to be detained for four years in the industrial training ship Shaftesbury; that after being so detained for 12 months he was, without the knowledge of his parents or friends, drafted into the band of the First Royal Warwickshire Regiment; that the boy has since written several letters to his friends complaining of the way in which he was entrapped into the Army and begging of them to buy him out; whether he will state what the Rule is in regard to the transference of boys from industrial schools into the Army; and whether if boys of tender age consent to enter the Army such consent has to be given in the presence of their parents, guardians, or friends?
  MR. ASQUITH: I am inquiring into this case, and would be glad if my hon. Friend would further postpone this question for a week.

  BAKEHOUSES IN THE METROPOLIS.
  MR. CREMER: I beg to ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department whether his attention has been called to the startling revelations which have recently been made concerning the insanitary state of bakehouses in various parts of London, the filthy conditions under which bread is made, the terribly prolonged hours of labour of the opera-
  958
  tive bakers, and their low rate of wages; whether the power to order a careful inspection of all bakehouses in the Metropolis, and to compel their owners to put them into a perfect sanitary condition, rests with the Local Authorities or with the Home Office; and whether the Local Authorities are making any efforts to remedy the evils; and, if they are not, whether he will forthwith take the necessary steps for ascertaining the truth concerning the condition of the places in which the food of so many millions of people is prepared, and also the condition of the operative bakers who prepare it?
  MR. ASQUITH: The jurisdiction of the Home Office over bakehouses was transferred by Parliament in 1883 to the Local Sanitary Authorities. In London the matter is regulated by Section 26 of "The Public Health (London) Act, 1891." Whether the Local Authorities are performing their duties is a question for the Local Government Board. If that Board represents to me that there is in any district a failure of duty on the part of the Local Authority I shall consider whether I ought not to exercise the powers conferred on the Secretary of State by Section 1 of "The Factory Act, 1891."

  DUBLIN DRAINAGE WORKS.
  MR. JACKSON: I beg to ask the Chief Secretary to the Lord Lieutenant of Ireland whether any money has been borrowed by the Corporation of Dublin under the powers given by Section 2 of "The Provisional Order Confirmation (No. 10) Act, 1892;" and whether any of the works authorised by that Act for improving the main drainage of Dublin have been carried out?
  MR. J. MORLEY: No money has been borrowed by the Corporation of Dublin under the section of the Act referred to; and with regard to the inquiry in the second paragraph of the question of the right hon. Gentleman, I understand that none of the works referred to have been carried out or begun.

  IRISH POST OFFICE PROPERTY.
  SIR E. ASHMEAD-BARTLETT: I beg to ask the Chancellor of the Exchequer whether he will have an estimate made of the value of the property of the Post Office in Ireland?
  SIR W. HARCOURTwas understood to reply in the negative.

  FIJI.
  MR. HENNIKER HEATON: I beg to ask the Under Secretary of State for the Colonies whether a successor has been appointed to Sir J. B. Thurston as Governor of Fiji; and whether it is intended to extend his term of office there?
  THE UNDER SECRETARY OF STATE FOR THE COLONIES (Mr. S. BUXTOX,): The subject has not yet come under consideration.

  MASHONALAND.
  SIR E. ASHMEAD-BARTLETT: I beg to ask the Under Secretary of State for the Colonies whether any confirmation has been received of the alarming news which appears in the evening newspapers from Mashonaland, to the effect that the Matabele impis are raiding on the border of Mashonaland?
  MR. S. BUXTON: No confirmation of the statement has been received from Sir Henry Loch. Perhaps I may he allowed to say I think that the House and the hon. Member ought not to attach too much credence to sensational reports which come from Mashonaland.

  YACHTING ACCIDENT ON THE TAY.
  MR. W. WHITELAW: I beg to ask whether the Government has received any further information with regard to the sinking of a yacht in the Tay?
  MR. CAMPBELL-BANNERMAN: I have received a Report from the General Officer commanding in Scotland, who has carefully inquired into the matter. He states that the yacht sank close to the Lady buoy, at right angles to the line of fire, so that it is impossible that it could have been struck by a shot from any gun.
  MR. W. WHITELAW: I have further information which I will communicate to the right hon. Gentleman.

ORDERS OF THE DAY.

  SUPPLY—COMMITTEE.
  SUPPLY,—considered in Committee.
  (In the Committee.)

  SUPPLY—COMMITTEE.

    ARMY ESTIMATES, 1893–4.
    1. £74,400, Yeomanry Cavalry, Pay and Allowances.
    MR. HANBURYsaid, he wished to put two or three questions to the Secretary of State for War on the subject of this Vote. There had recently been considerable modifications in the Yeomanry Force, and he should like to get from the right hon. Gentleman some clear statement as to the exact nature of the changes introduced. He understood that one result was to include the Force in the mobilisation scheme, from which it had hitherto been excluded. He desired to know why the establishment of the Force had been reduced from 14,000 to 11,800 men, for he considered a drop to that extent was a matter of very considerable importance. He believed that as a fact the number of men who went up for training last year was something like 9,000, and he was anxious to be informed how it was that the Force was so much below its proper standard? Then he understood that considerable reductions had been made in the permanent staff. He was informed that the number of adjutants had been reduced from 39 to 18, and the number of Staff sergeants from 239 to 148. By these changes a saving of £14,000 a year was to be effected; and what, he asked, was to be done with that money? Having served in the Force for a period of nine or 10 years, he was bound to say that he considered these changes a step in the right direction; but he wanted to make sure that the money to be saved by the reduction of the staff would not be lost to the Force, but would still be received by it in the form of extra allowances. In regard to the reduction of the establishment, did the right hon. Gentleman anticipate that it would never be possible to work the Force again upon the old establishment? That was a very despondent view to take, and one which would not be realised if the Force got the encouragement it deserved.
    THE SECRETARY OF STATE FOR WAR (Mr. CAMPBELL - BANNERMAN,): The changes that have been introduced are based mainly on the recommendations of Lord Brownlow's Committee. The result of the organisation by brigades and squadrons is that a certain number of adjutants and sergeants were rendered unnecessary. The permanent staff has been reduced from 39 adjutants and 239 sergeants to 19 adjutants and 148 sergeants. This is no doubt economy,

    961
    but the economy thus effected is neutralised by reason of the extra sum required in consequence of the grant of additional contingent allowances, subject to certain conditions of efficiency, especially in musketry. The adjutant of each brigade which contains a second regiment will have an assistant who will receive pay for the days he is on actual work. The present establishment is that which we expect to be able to maintain in future.
    SIR C. W. DILKEsaid, a Parliamentary Paper which had been published gave the whole effect of these changes. He doubted whether value was obtained for the money spent on the Yeomanry. At the present moment they were drilled on the basis of an understanding that they would be used to charge in the field, and whilst that idea obtained the country would not get full value for its money. The Yeomanry would, he believed, be most useful as a defensive force accompanying a defensive army if they would learn other Cavalry work than that of charging in the field.
    MR. CAMPBELL-BANNERMANsaid, he had always held views similar to those to which the right hon. Baronet had given expression.
    CAPTAIN BAGOTsaid, that under the new system Yeomanry sergeant-majors would have to look after two troops instead of one. These troops would often be separated by a distance of 30 or 40 miles. In order to ensure their efficiency it was necessary that the sergeant-major should visit each of them at least once a week, and as they were only allowed travelling expenses sufficient to cover four or five visits in a year they would be subjected to considerable hardship. Would it not be possible to increase their travelling allowances?
    CAPTAIN NAYLOR - LEYLANDpointed out that the sum asked for for the Force this year—£74,000—was exactly the same as last year's total, and he asked an explanation of that in view of the fact that the establishment had been reduced, and a large saving effected by cutting down the permanent staff. Why was the Force to cost as much as last year when it was weaker to the extent of 2,300 men? They had been told that two or three regiments were to be combined for brigade administrative purposes, but even in
    962
    that case a Yeomanry brigade would be no stronger than an ordinary cavalry regiment, so was it not ridiculous to call it a brigade? Then he had to ask—was it intended to carry out all the recommendations of Lord Brownlow's Committee? It was of no use carrying out the brigade system unless they also adopted the squadron system, and he would remind them that the gist of the Report of the Committee was that the Yeomanry should be organised in squadrons. Then in regard to the reduction of the staff, it appeared to him that they were going to leave the whole of the "cocked-hat gentlemen" just as they were, and the result would be that they would have more cocked hats in a Yeomanry brigade than in a whole regiment of Cavalry.
    MR. CAMPBELL - BANNERMANsaid, the question of sergeant-majors' travelling allowances had been considered, and the concession asked for by the hon. and gallant Member had already been granted. It was intended to enforce the squadron system; the same amount of money would be spent on the Force this year as was expended last year, and at the end of 12 mouths the whole question would be reconsidered. As to the last complaint of the hon. and gallant Member for Colchester, he would remind him that the Force was not one with which the Government had a perfectly free hand to deal with it as it liked, as local considerations were often involved.
    SIR A. HAYTERsaid, he also should like to point out that according to the Estimates there was only one doctor to each regiment—or 39 in all. Chaplains were honorary officers, and were not, consequently, on the same footing as pay officers. He thought that the Government had done perfectly right in reducing the establishment. It was much better to have an establishment of 11,600 men, of whom 10,000 were absolutely enrolled Yeomen, and of whom over 9,000 presented themselves for drill. A real force was much better in fact than a sham one.
    Vote agreed to.
    2. £786,000, Volunteer Corps, Pay and Allowances.
    MR. CAMPBELL-BANNERMAN: I wish to make an announcement which

    963
    I am sure will be gratifying to the Committee—namely, that the Queen has been graciously pleased to give her sanction to the bestowal of a decoration or badge upon non-commissioned officers of a certain length of service and approved character for their zeal and efficiency in the Force. Every one must have felt—and I certainly did strongly feel—that when the right hon. Gentleman opposite was last year able to confer a decoration on officers, it almost followed as a matter of necessity that the claims of non-commissioned officers to something analogous should be considered; and therefore I am glad to be able to make this announcement, because I know that there are many non-commissioned officers who have done as hard and as successful service for their corps as any commissioned officers.
    MR. BRODRICKsaid, he was sure the Committee had heard the right hon. Gentleman's announcement with the utmost satisfaction, and would regard the decision as the complement of what was done by the Secretary of State for War in the last Administration. He wished to make a few observations as to the efficiency of the Volunteer Force. He believed he was right in saying that at the present moment the Force was 1,500 officers short. This was a serious state of affairs. They were informed, when Lord Harris's Committee investigated the question and the circumstances of the Volunteer Force generally in 1886, that one of the reasons of the great lack of officers and the indisposition of men to come forward who might otherwise take commissions was the enormous expense involved. They were told, further, that there was a deficit in the funds of nearly every corps, that there were heavy charges for prizes, and that unless a man had a liberal sum at his disposal he could hardly be expected to join the Force as an officer. But all this had been changed. In 1888 a large addition was made to the Capitation Grant, the House subsequently sanctioned a considerable expenditure for equipment, and he believed he was justified in saying that with economy the present allowances could be made sufficient to cover necessary expenses. Yet there was still a deficiency of officers, and there were many regiments which, if they were called
    964
    upon to take the field, would be practically inefficient, in consequence of the want of officers. The announcement made by the right hon. Gentleman was rather a two-edged sword in one respect. It was, of course, extremely desirable that non-commissioned officers should be encouraged to continue to give their services, but one inducement for them to become officers had now been taken away, as they could gain the same honour by remaining non-commissioned officers.
    MR. CAMPBELL-BANNERMAN: A similar honour.
    MR. BRODRICKsaid the House of Commons could hardly be expected to go on year after year paying a large sum for the Volunteer Force unless it was satisfied that sufficient money was voted to secure the object aimed at, and the question was, would a slight additional grant ensure a more effective service? One of the grievances of Volunteer officers was the great expense they were put to in regimental and brigade camps, where they only received the same allowance as privates and non-commissioned officers—namely, 2s. a day. Last year more than £40,000 was voted for these camps, or double the amount voted in 1887. True, officers might gain as much as £2 10s. in the way of grant, but all that went to the regiment and not into their pockets. He was not suggesting that Volunteer officers ought to be paid, but, seeing that the House had already recognised the principle of relieving the Volunteer of the expense of clothing and of maintaining him in camp, surely they might consider whether it was not possible to give similar relief to the officers, who had to find their uniform and equipment, at an expense varying from £20 to £30, whereas the private's uniform was found for him. Again, when the officer went into camp his expenses were at least from 5s. to 10s. per day. Now a special allowance of 10s. a day was made to the officers of the Volunteer submarine miners, and that had got rid of the difficulty experienced some years ago in inducing them to come up for training. Could not a similar policy be adopted in regard to Volunteer officers attending brigade and regimental camps? He was aware the Secretary of State for War was not labouring under a surplusage of funds, but probably by making

    965
    economies in other directions it would be possible to give the officers this relief, and a sum of £5,000 would probably suffice to cover the cost. He did not know what it would cost to provide uniforms for the officers, but probably the right hon. Gentleman could give the Committee an approximate estimate of the total sum required to make an allowance of, say, £20, whether for four or five years, to enable officers to obtain the necessary articles of equipment. He hoped the Secretary for War would consider these questions; for, unless they got rid of the deficit of officers, they could not regard the Force as in a state of efficiency.
    MR. T. H. BOLTONsaid, they must all recognise the importance of having a full and efficient staff of Volunteer officers, and it was most unsatisfactory that so many regiments should be deficient in that respect. He was sure the House and the country would cheerfully incur any expense that might be involved in relieving these officers of the burdens now cast upon them. But he believed there were other means by which suitable gentlemen might be induced to take commissions in the Force, besides the plan of relieving them of expense. The decorations recently bestowed constituted a compliment which was, no doubt, highly appreciated; but he would suggest that similar privileges as to joining the Regular Army should be given to Volunteer officers as were now enjoyed by Militia officers. This plan would do much to raise the status of the Volunteer officer, would be greatly appreciated by the Force generally, and would act as an inducement to young men to seek Volunteer commissions.
    COLONEL BROOKFIELDsaid, he was grateful to the hon. Members for St. Pancras and for the Guildford Division of Surrey for emphasising on that occasion what the friends of the Volunteer Force had often brought forward—namely, the extreme dearth of Volunteer officers. He was tempted to ask the Secretary of State for War what course he and the War Office would adopt supposing they found that they had no officers at all? Passing from this point, he desired to call the attention of the Committee to a rather broader question, in which the whole existence of the Volunteer Force was concerned. He wished to ask the right
    966
    hon. Gentleman a very simple question, that was, what Volunteers were for—what definite place they filled, either for defence or offence, in the military system of this country? The sum of money voted (£786,000 for 260,000 men) might, it appeared to him, be either a very small or a very large sum. It would be small if the services of the Volunteers were available in any national emergency or in time of war. But they were not available. It was a fact, which he thought the country did not sufficiently realise, that in time of war the Secretary of State for War had not the power to call out the Volunteers. Under the circumstances, it was a reasonable thing to ask—if they were not to be employed in time of war—what purpose were they maintained for? He was afraid that, if they were maintained only to take the place on paper of a reserve to release the Militia and Regular Forces from their duties in the field, the sum of money voted was a great deal larger than it should be, and the sooner the Force, under those circumstances, was disbanded the better it would be for the safety of the country. A few months ago he laid stress in that House on two subjects connected with the Volunteers. One was the subject to which he had just referred—the unreality of the status which the Volunteers occupied, and the other was that of the paucity of officers. But, in connection with this unreality of status, there was a great difficulty—a difficulty that increased as the Volunteers were brigaded with Regular troops—and that was the question of discipline. In reality, it was no exaggeration to say that no discipline existed in the Volunteer Force except what the Volunteers themselves chose to impose on each other. When Volunteers were brigaded with Regular troops they were nominally under the Mutiny Act, and subject to all the punishments which would be inflicted on Regular troops; and he would take one illustration to show how little reality there was in this state of things. Suppose a Volunteer brigaded with the Regular troops under canvas were to commit what was almost the most serious offence the soldier could commit—that was, to sleep on his post—would he be tried by Court Martial or subjected to any practical punishment, except being dismissed from his corps, which, perhaps, would be no punishment

    967
    at all? In his opinion, the Volunteers had always had to contend with two classes of enemies in this country, the class of old-fashioned soldiers, who were constantly finding fault with them, and saying they could never do right, and the much more numerous official class, who were always glossing over their faults, and telling them they were the finest fellows alive. Yet they had more than once heard unpleasant stories showing the non-existence of any practical system of discipline in the Volunteer Force. Those stories never reached them from official quarters. They were always glossed over, the same pernicious practice was pursued; and the Volunteers were still told that they were equal to the men of the Line, and perhaps rather better. He ventured some time ago to make a suggestion—to which the right hon. Gentleman promised careful consideration—for improving the discipline of the Volunteer Force without causing any personal inconvenience to individual members of the Force. That was, to take the simple course of putting the Commanding Officer himself under the Mutiny Act. Then, at all events, he would know what the wishes of the authorities were—whether he was pleasing the authorities or not in the manner in which he carried out the instructions he received. On this point he believed that if the authorities would exercise a little care in the selection of Commanding Officers, and not simply take, as he was afraid they did now, any name that was submitted to them, paying very little regard to the age or any other qualifications of the gentleman proposed, they would then have no need to fear administering slightly more stringent discipline. He felt loth to pick holes in a Force to winch he belonged himself, but those who never found fault with the Volunteers were not their best friends. Some time ago he put a question to the right hon. Gentleman on the subject of practical joking, which went on in the camp at Shoeburyness, and the right hon. Gentleman treated the subject very lightly. Everybody knew that in camp as long as men were only larking in their shirt sleeves it was a good thing for themselves and everybody else. But when it came to men dressing themselves in full dress, taking their arms with them, and
    968
    going through the travesty of a military funeral they had a right to say that the corps to which these men belonged was in a bad state of discipline, and that the Commandant who was over them should have been held responsible for such a gross irregularity. With very little difficulty he could cite many more cases, though he was happy to say that they were not cases which had come within his personal experience. With regard to the dearth of officers, he was glad to hear the hon. Member for St. Pancras make one suggestion which he (Colonel Brookfield) made some time ago—a suggestion which had been in turn commended by several of the right hon. Gentleman's predecessors. It was, that there should be commissions in the Line given to Volunteer battalions. He believed that at the present time the difficulty of finding officers was really not due to the expense to which officers were put, but arose from a want of public spirit amongst the young men to whom they looked, and looked in vain, for the taking up of these commissions. It was also very much a matter of fashion and prejudice. It was now the fashion for young men of good family to take commissions in the Yeomanry, but there was a sort of social boycott in respect to taking commissions in the Volunteers, and the first really useful thing would be to remove that prejudice. This would not be done by making the officers hold their commissions on eleemosynary conditions, but by making the Force more a part of the defences of the country—a Force to which it would be more a credit to belong. He had alluded to the fact that he had raised this question of the Volunteers on a previous occasion. Before sitting down he would therefore remind the right hon. Gentleman of three definite suggestions which he made, but of which he had since heard nothing. One was the suggestion that Commanding Officers should be placed under the Mutiny Act. Another was, that the Volunteers should be rendered liable to three days' permanent duty on the same footing with the Yeomanry, who were, he believed, liable to six days' duty every year. The third suggestion was, that the right hon. Gentleman should do a thing which he could do at once by a mere stroke of the pen—namely, prohibit meetings of Volun-

    969
    teers taking place for the purpose of passing "rules" or carrying amendments to rules. Such gatherings were utterly destructive of even the most elementary notions of discipline. Whilst referring to this subject, he might say that he had seen it announced in a newspaper that a Masonic Lodge had been authorised in one of the Volunteer corps. He appealed to any hon. Member who had served in the Army to say whether regimental Masonic Lodges were not entirely subversive of discipline, and whether it had not in the Army been found desirable gradually to get rid of them. Speaking as a Volunteer and a Mason also, he could not but express the opinion that Volunteer discipline and the existence of a Masonic Lodge in a battalion were incompatible things, and he greatly regretted that the right hon. Gentleman should have sanctioned the establishment of such a Lodge, if indeed his permission had ever been asked at all. He thanked the right hon. Gentleman for the intimation which he had given as to the extension of a decoration to non-commissioned officers. The non-commissioned officers of Volunteers were an excellent body of men, who, if officers were not forthcoming, might have to take the sole command. But while he was thankful for this concession, he would be still more thankful, and indeed the country itself would be more grateful, if he would put the Volunteer Service on a more satisfactory basis, and at once turn his attention to the lamentable dearth of officers.
    MR. E. STANHOPE: My hon. Friend has referred to the Volunteer Act and to the matters of discipline in regard to which it has not been found to work properly. That is a matter which he usefully brought forward on a previous occasion, and it is one to which I gave a considerable amount of attention. When I was at the War Office I felt some difficulty in passing a new Volunteer Act through the House, because it was calculated to raise questions of considerable difficulty, and no Government could undertake such a task unless it had a large amount of time at its disposal. But the question might be dealt with in another way, and I would suggest that the right hon. Gentleman should appoint a Committee to consider the Volunteer Acts. This
    970
    Committee might propose amendments, and a Bill brought in founded on the recommendation of the Committee would pass through the House with comparatively little difficulty. I think it is impossible to exaggerate the importance of the dearth of Volunteer officers, because, although it is only in the lower ranks that it occurs, it is desirable to induce good men to take commissions in the Service. Several attempts have lately been made in that direction. First, there was the grant of the decoration; and, in passing, I may say I am glad my right hon. Friend has thought it desirable to ask Her Majesty to extend some form of recognition also to the Volunteer sergeants. Something might still be done in the direction of exempting Volunteer officers from serving on juries. I am aware that that proposal has been rather thrust aside because some of my hon. Friends asked for a good deal more—namely, total exemption of Volunteers generally. In that I think they are asking too much, but I believe if the Government were to bring in a Bill next year granting the exemption to officers they would be doing a good deal to make the Service more attractive. I know it was the intention of the late Government to proceed with a Bill of this kind, and the Lord Chancellor of that day was willing to give his assent so far as Volunteer officers were concerned. We may have to consider the question of giving some payment to officers in the shape of defraying a portion of their expenses. I confess I do not view such a proposal with unmixed approval, although we may have to come to it. I am afraid it may tend to lower the status of men who seek Volunteer commissions.
    MR. BENSONsaid, he had been for six years trying to find some one to succeed him in the command of a Volunteer company; he had been unsuccessful in all his attempts; but he did not think that expense was, in any case in his experience, the serious difficulty. He concluded by remarking that the tactical examinations for Volunteer officers were not of a practical character. He thought that any money the War Office could spare could be more beneficially applied than in grants to officers.
    COLONEL MURRAYsaid he desired to make a few observations on the refusal of a firm of Government

    971
    contractors to allow their men to join the Volunteer Force. When he put a question in the House on the subject a few weeks since, the Secretary of State for War read an explanation from the firm in question, to the effect that in a large factory such as theirs the absence of a number of men involved the stoppage of the machinery, and inflicted great hardships on other men, and on women and children as well, by making them idle, and consequently diminishing their wages. He did not think the firm had in any way justified its action, because it was a well-known fact that Volunteer drills were conducted in the evening and on Saturday afternoons after working hours, and therefore there was no necessity for stopping machinery. The firm to which his question referred was one which made serge for the Army; and it was making a living, and probably a large fortune, out of the country by supplying clothing for the Army and Volunteer Forces. A second letter said that for 20 years the head of the firm was an officer in the corps, and was still one of its strongest supporters. He had given his permission to his men to join the Volunteers, but on his retirement his successor as head of the firm was scrupulous in regard to supporting soldiers—though he had no objection to making money out of an Army contract—and refused the permission. The Secretary of State for War had said that he did not feel called upon to interfere with the relations between an employer and his workpeople, still the right hon. Gentleman might interfere between the employer and his profits by withholding these Army contracts. With regard to the discipline of the Volunteers, there had been many letters in the Press of late criticising the conduct of the men at Aldershot. Only yesterday a gentleman, writing from the camp to The Times, said—
    "I have witnessed scenes of insubordination and riotous conduct showing absolute want of control of the men on the part of Volunteer officers which has never yet before had a parallel, to my knowledge, within the precincts of a Volunteer camp."
    Whether these statements were true or not it was right to draw attention to them, so that some explanation might be given by the Secretary of State for War. The Volunteer Force was a fine one, and if any weaknesses
    972
    were detected it in they should be cured. Perhaps it would be well to stiffen it by brigading it with Regular troops. Instead of going into large Army Corps they might go into Brigade camps attached to their territorial regiments of Regulars.
    MR. CAMPBELL-BANNERMAN: I am sorry that the hon. Gentleman should, on the faith of an anonymous letter, have impugned the value and efficiency of the Volunteer Force. No doubt the Force must always allow themselves to be open to criticism. The General Officer commanding at Aldershot, in his Report this year upon the Volunteers in camp, attaches very little importance to the stories which have appeared in the newspapers as to their state of discipline. The Commanding Officer introduces some qualifications; but, on the whole, he speaks exceedingly well of the Volunteers—not only with respect to their zeal, but of their behaviour. There is a difference, no doubt, in the regiments; some are excellent, and some are far from being excellent; but, on the whole, the Commanding Officer speaks in the most satisfactory terms of them. The hon. Member suggests that the Volunteers should not go to Aldershot, but I think it would be a great pity if they did not. As to the firm of contractors referred to, I manifestly cannot interfere between them and their staff. One member of the firm was a friend of Volunteers, and was himself an officer; but on his retirement the remaining partners had notions of their own as to the employment of Volunteers. If it were a question of punishing only the employer by withholding contracts, the suggestion might be worthy of consideration. But the punishment would fall upon the War Office, for it happens that this firm are most excellent contractors and business men. I am not, therefore, prepared to take the steps suggested. With regard to the scarcity of officers, I must say it is not the blighting mischief indicated. There is one thing about it which is satisfactory so far as it goes. The scarcity is getting no worse, and there is no greater deficiency now than there was a year or two ago. The hon. Member for Guildford made two suggestions with the view of inducing gentlemen to take commissions in the Volunteers.

    973
    One suggestion was that some aid should be given in the shape of camp allowances, and the other was that some aid should be given in the matter of outfit. I am quite willing to consider both of these suggestions, and anything I say now must not be considered as a final judgment in regard to them. As to allowances for going into camp, I think it would be undesirable to make the allowances personal allowance to individuals, and also undesirable in these days to accentuate the differences between officers, non-commissioned officers, and men. With regard to the expenses of the outfit, that no doubt runs into a good deal of money, but we have not anything like a unanimous opinion expressed on the part of the Volunteers that this is a critical difficulty. Some gentlemen who are acquainted with the circumstances of the Volunteers tell me that the outfit is really the great impediment to obtain officers, while others say quite the reverse. Supposing each officer receives £20 on obtaining a commission, the cost to the State would be something like £16,000 a year. That is a very large sum, and I confess I was somewhat surprised when I heard the large cost of the outfit of a Volunteer officer. I doubt very much whether all that cost is necessary, and I suspect that a good deal of uniform is mere fanciful adornment, unnecessary to the discharge of an officer's duty. The proposal to alter the condition of the employment of Volunteers from cases of actual or of apprehended invasion to cases of imminent national danger has been before the House of Commons, and has shown that there is considerable difference of opinion on the subject. And the same may be said with regard to making Volunteers liable to three days' permanent duty, to interference with their holding public meetings, and to other similar questions of discipline in connection with the Volunteer Force raised by the hon. Member for Eye. I am obliged to the right hon. Member for Horncastle for his suggestion that a Committee of the House should be appointed next year to consider the various matters which come broadly under the Volunteer Act. That is a reasonable suggestion. Whether I shall be able to carry it out is another matter, but I do not see any particular difficulty in the way. I have seen a full
    974
    account of the mock funeral at Colchester. None of the officers regard the matter as serious. It was merely the arrangement of a mock scene for an amateur photographer—a silly piece of play, no doubt, but not worthy of being described in the serious terms laid down by the hon. Member (Mr. Brookfield). I have not heard of the existence of a. Masonic Lodge in any corps. As to the proposal that officers of Volunteers should be exempted from serving on juries, no doubt if the claim were conceded it would not make a large difference in the number of citizens of the country available to serve on juries; but if all Volunteers were to be exempted, who would be left? In these days, too, some exception might be taken to making invidious distinctions between classes in the community if officers were exempted from this service and not privates. Therefore, I cannot see my way, as Minister for War, to take any part either for or against the proposal for this year. As to the proposal that the Volunteer Force should be made a bye-way for admission into the Regular Army, I confess that I am not very much enamoured of the bye-road through the Militia, and I am not disposed to open up another bye-way. There is a most elaborate system of examination for a commission in the Army. Parents are put to very great expense, and boys to infinite torture, in order that they may be fitted for this examination, and yet we are asked to establish sideways by which young men who have never been subjected to this severe test may enter the Regular Army. There is something to be said for the double entry, and if we leave the Militia as it is it will be enough.
    MR. BUTCHERsaid, the country would receive with satisfaction the statement of the right hon. Gentleman that it was the intention of Her Majesty to bestow on non-commissioned Volunteer officers similar decorations to those conferred on commissioned officers. He would ask the right hon. Gentleman, however, to consider the advisability of extending this mark of favour to Volunteer privates. Probably it would not affect a large number of men, because a Volunteer who had served the requisite number of years would, in all probability, have risen to the rank of

    975
    an officer or a non-commissioned officer. Still, there were men who, after long service, for one reason or another, continued in the ranks, and he thought it desirable that they should not be excluded from this mark of favour. The right hon. Gentleman had pointed out that there were many matters in respect of which it was not desirable to make a difference between officers and privates, and he would venture to urge on the right hon. Gentleman that this should be regarded as one of them.
    MR. T. H. BOLTONsaid, the Volunteers of the country would observe with surprise, if not with some indignation, the tone of the Secretary of State for War in dealing with the suggestion of commissions in the Army for efficient Volunteer officers.
    MR. CAMPBELL-BANNERMAN: I am sure I adopted no objectionable tone.
    MR. T. H. BOLTONsaid, that if it was right to render the Militia an avenue through which officers could enter the Army, it could not be wrong to render the Volunteers a similar avenue. If this privilege was desirable with a view of encouraging officers to join the Militia, it was surely desirable from the same point of view in connection with the Volunteers. The Volunteers would regard with dissatisfaction—["No, no!"]—the slight which the right hon. Gentleman had thought proper to cast upon that body in the answer he had given. Volunteer officers who spent their time and money in the Public Service had a special right to consideration. Right hon. Gentlemen on the Treasury Bench might ridicule the claim of Volunteer officers to be placed on the same footing as Militia officers—["No, no!"]; but this suggestion had been made before, and it had been favourably received, and it was reserved for the right hon. Gentleman to throw cold water upon it. It might be that officers of the Volunteers did not come from quite the same social strata as the generality of officers in the Regular Army, but that was hardly a reason which should prevail with the right hon. Gentleman. That such a reply should come from the War Minister of a Radical Government was quite unexpected.
    MR. GIBSON BOWLESthought it right that Volunteer officers should be
    976
    treated in this matter exactly on the same footing as the Militia. It was not a question of adding another bye-way into the Army, but it was a question of letting the Volunteer officers in by the same door as that by which Militia officers entered the Army. He doubted if there was any difference in the class from which the officers of the various branches of the Auxiliary Services came; and even if there were, it would not be very pertinent to the matter. Volunteer officers did not, like Militia officers, join the Service as a profession, but out of their enthusiasm for the defence of the country; therefore, it seemed to him that the door for their admission into the Army should, by preference, be opened even wider to them than to Militia officers. These were the very class of men it was desirable to get into the Army. Though the right hon. Gentleman was put up to say things against the present proposal, he could not fail to be in favour of it. In connection with another matter, he trusted the right hon. Gentleman would stiffen his back against the suggestion for the exemption of Volunteers from service as jurors. It was said that the whole object of the laws of England was to get 12 men into a box. He agreed that that was the main object, but one of the most important things was that these should be good men and true. He knew no better man than the Volunteer officer, unless it was the Volunteer private; and even if they exempted such inferior animals as lawyers and Members of Parliament, he thought they ought to have Volunteers in the jury box. He did not think that Volunteers would wish to shirk their responsibilities in this respect.
    MR. WARNERsaid, the hon. Member who wished as an inducement to gentlemen to become Volunteer officers to see the same facilities for entering the Regular Army extended to those officers as were extended to Militia officers seemed to forget that the Militia were as short of officers as the Volunteers, and the Militia was the more important body, as it could be called out in the event of war, whereas the Volunteers could only be called out in the event of an invasion. He should have liked the Secretary of State for War to have given a little more consideration to the subject of putting the Volunteers in a better position by making them

    977
    liable to serve not only in the event of invasion, but in the event of this country being at war.
    MR. A. C. MORTONsaid, the Volunteers had been sneered at at the Horse Guards, but they knew very well that the Force was of immense advantage to the country. The Secretary of State for War would, no doubt, consider the desirability of opening the door wider for admission into the Army of Volunteer officers, and then probably the three great commands of Portsmouth, Bombay, and Aldershot could be given to Volunteers. As to decorations, he did not trouble much about them. He did not regard them as of much consequence; but the Volunteers did, and their feelings and opinions had a right to be considered. He was glad, therefore, that it was intended to confer these decorations on non-commissioned officers. But he did not see why there should be any difference between non-commissioned officers and privates. He thought we owed a great deal to the Volunteers, and was of opinion that the State should bear the whole expense of equipping and maintaining the Force.
    GENERAL GOLDSWORTHYthought that the grant made in respect of the Volunteers ought to be sufficient to enable the Force to pay for what was required, and to prevent it suffering pecuniarily. As to what had fallen from the hon. Member for St. Pancras (Mr. T. H. Bolton), he did not think there would be any harm in giving a few commissions in the Army to Volunteer officers. On the contrary, he thought it would be an encouragement to persons to join the Volunteers. A large number of the Volunteer officers were of the same social position as officers in the Army. Anything that could be done to popularise the Service and to show the Volunteers that the War Office and the Horse Guards appreciated their efforts would tend to fill the ranks with men and would also tend to produce a sufficient number of officers. He did not see why officers of Volunteers should not have the same chance of getting into the Regular Army as officers of the Militia had. He was certain it would redound to the credit of any Government to make concessions which cost very little, but which would have a great effect on the country, and
    978
    would improve the Service whose interests they all had at heart.
    MR. BUTCHERasked whether the right hon. Gentleman in giving the decorations would distinguish between non-commissioned officers and privates of 20 years' standing?
    MR. CAMPBELL-BANNERMAN: I have already said I propose to give the decorations to non-commissioned officers only. A private of 20 years' standing has generally either not been zealous enough to obtain promotion to the rank of a non-commissioned officer, or has remained in the corps for the purpose of obtaining shooting prizes. What we want to do is to encourage those who really take an active part in promoting the efficiency of Volunteer corps, and who are officers, on the one hand, or noncommissioned officers on the other.
    MR. A. C. MORTONremarked that he had known privates of long standing who objected to become either non-commissioned or commissioned officers on account of the expense. He hoped the right hon. Gentleman would re-consider the question in the interests of the Force.
    COLONEL NOLANinquired whether decorations were confined to officers and non-commissioned officers in any Army in the world? In England the very essence of the Volunteer Force was that the private was supposed to be on the same social footing as the officers.
    MR. GODSONsaid, he knew two cases of privates who had served for 20 years, who had declined any promotion, and who were not very great shots. He asked the Secretary of State for War whether, before fully making up his mind, he would get a Return of the number of privates to whom such a decoration would be granted for long service? He thought the right hon. Gentleman would find that it would cost the country practically nothing to extend the decoration to such privates.
    MR. TOMLINSONsaid, he wished to know whether the Government intended to act up to the spirit as well as the letter of the provision made by the House of Commons two or three years ago for the equipment of the Volunteers. When, as sometimes happened, a battalion had been below its authorised strength, but had been brought up to its full strength, the War Office declined to

    979
    make any addition to the Equipment Grant. One corps with which he was acquainted had been for three or four years or more below its Establishment; but a new Commander was appointed, and in consequence of the energetic steps he took the corps was brought up to the proper numbers. The Colonel then applied for an Equipment Grant similar to that which would have been allowed if the corps had been up to its full establishment when the grant was originally made. He was told that the Equipment Grant could not be given in cases where such an addition was made to the numbers. The corps he had particularly in mind was known as the Border Regiment. If at the time the Equipment Grant was originally made this corps had been recruited to its full strength a Capitation Grant would have been received for the whole of the men. Now that the regiment had been made efficient it was in a position of disadvantage as compared with other corps which were also efficient.
    MR. CAMPBELL-BANNERMAN: The matter has been explained a great many times in this House, and I think the hon. Gentleman perfectly understands it. I do not know that any further explanation is required.
    MR. TOMLINSONsaid, in that case he would move to reduce the Vote by £100 in order to call attention to the question. He concluded that the War Office were, to a certain extent, breaking faith with those who were called upon to administer the Volunteer Forces by declining to increase the Equipment Grant under the circumstances he had mentioned.
    MR. CAMPBELL-BANNERMAN: I have already pointed out that the Equipment Grant was given by my predecessor to all the men who were then serving. The allowance was given annually to each man. Everyone who has received a great-coat or an equivalent grant has to wait for a further grant until the coat is supposed to be worn out. The greatcoat allowance is given for the men who are enrolled on the occasion of any addition to the Establishment, because in that case you have practically a new corps constituted. Unless there is any addition to the Establishment, any increase in the numbers of the corps within its present Establishment is
    980
    expected to be provided for out of the funds already given. The annual allowances are not given to individuals, but are added to the funds of the regiment, and it is the business of the regiment to so manage the fund that there shall be a sufficient amount available to meet expenses of this kind. If it cannot meet them immediately the regiment can recoup itself out of the allowances in years to come.
    MR. TOMLINSONsaid, the right hon. Gentleman's explanation showed that those corps which increased their numbers were placed at a disadvantage.
    Vote agreed to.
    3. £623,000, Transports and Remounts.
    MR. JEFFREYSasked whether the right hon. Gentleman the Secretary of State for War could give the Committee any information as to the proportion of horses to men in the Cavalry regiments? It would be very useful to know whether there was a sufficient number of horses to mount the men? He believed that if in case of war we had to send abroad a number of our regiments there would be the greatest difficulty in supplying the men with a sufficient number of horses.
    THE FINANCIAL SECRETARY TO THE WAR OFFICE (Mr. WOODALL,): No.
    MR. JEFFREYSsaid, he was glad to hear the hon. Gentleman's denial; but the opinion he had stated was popularly held in the country, and was also entertained in some of the Cavalry regiments. He wished to know from whence were the horses drawn for remounts for the Cavalry? Formerly a great many came from Ireland, but he had heard that a good many had since been purchased in Canada. He wished to know whether any efforts had been made to encourage the breeding of horses in England so as to obtain remounts for the Cavalry of horses bred in this country? It used to be the custom for officers to go round the country towns in order to see whether they could purchase horses for the Cavalry, but he did not think that system was now pursued. No doubt the 10s. registration fee paid for 14,000 horses was a very valuable provision, but he imagined that the horses so registered were to be used merely for trans-

    981
    port purposes. He wished to know whence these horses were to be drawn? Most of them, he believed, were omnibus and tramway horses, and a Cavalry regiment could hardly be mounted with horses which were accustomed to go in harness.
    MR. HANBURYthought the Committee ought specially this year to be keeping their eye on the War Office in order to see that the proper number of horses was kept up. In a year when the cost of forage was so high there would probably be a great tendency on the part of the War Office to cut down the supply. If, as he was informed, the amount estimated for was £4,000 less than last year that rather showed that the fear he had expressed had some foundation. He should like to have an explicit assurance that no such false economy as he had suggested had taken place. He rather grudged the considerable expenditure on part of this Vote, because he felt that a great many of our regiments when moving from one station to another in England might be marched through the country more than they were. There were large districts in England which never hardly saw a soldier, and the result was that the people in country districts were losing all their interest in the Army, and we were failing to get the recruits which used to be forthcoming from the country districts. As his hon. Friend (Mr. Jeffreys) had pointed out, horses were not bought from the farmers to the same extent as they used to be, and the result was that the interest which the farmers formerly took in the Army was being lost. Consequently, too much of our recruiting was now done in the large towns. On the question of allowances for transport, he had had complaints made to him of the heavy expenses which fell on officers of the Umpire Staff and the Staff generally at the Manœuvres. The officers had to find horses at their own expense, and also transports for their baggage without receiving any compensation whatever. He wished to impress upon the right hon. Gentleman that this point was a simple one, and that the grievance ought to have attention, if that could be given to it. Then there was another point as to troopships. Upon that he had to say that the question of troopships required looking into. The Assistance, for instance, was a very bad
    982
    case, and it was often employed for conveying troops. The overcrowding in that case was very considerable. He had facts before him on the subject. He did not know about the troopships going to India—they might be fairly well off; but certainly that was not the case in regard to the ordinary troopships between this country and, say, Ireland. A great many complaints were made in regard to them. He had personally received a great number of complaints—some containing statements to which he did not give entire credence, but, allowing for that, he could not discount a great deal that was said as to overcrowding and diet, and as to the general treatment of the soldiers, and as to the character of the vessels themselves. Those statements required attention. They had been previously raised in this House, and had been promised attention. They might have received consideration; but that was all that was promised, and he would ask the right hon. Gentleman to go further and deal with them in a manner that would be more satisfactory to the House and to all who were concerned in the question.
    MR. CAMPBELL - BANNERMANsaid, the hon. Gentleman declared that these complaints had received no attention.
    MR. HANBURY: Consideration; they have not been attended to.
    MR. CAMPBELL - BANNERMANsaid, the complaint was that nothing had been done. Well, he could say that he had himself given time and attention to this matter. In the case of the Assistance, he admitted that there was good ground for believing that she was not suited for this work. In the case of a recent voyage it was alleged that she had carried a larger number than she was entitled to. The matter was examined into by the Admiralty and the War Office, and it was found necessary to reduce the number she was entitled to carry.
    MR. FORWOOD: By what number?
    MR. CAMPBELL - BANNERMANsaid, he was not prepared to say at the moment; but the number had been reduced. It had also been resolved to use their coastwise services in a more moderate measure than hitherto, and to provide, where there was a long distance to be covered, that, if possible, it should

    983
    be done by land, and to do all that possibly could be done to avoid discomfort. The hon. Gentleman had made a suggestion that horses had been improperly reduced owing to the high prices of forage. He seemed always to start on the supposition that everybody was trying to do something that was not right, and then he appeared surprised that he was not justified in the supposition. There had been no reduction of the kind indicated by him.
    MR. HANBURYsaid, a Member of the late Government told him to look into this question, as it was a thing all Governments were likely to do.
    MR. CAMPBELL - BANNERMANsaid, the fact that the hon. Gentleman was told by someone else did not alter the position. He wished to say that they had sufficient horses for the First Army Corps. Every man did not require to be mounted. They had a sufficient number for all purposes—
    COLONEL NOLAN: Are they bought in Canada?
    MR. CAMPBELL-BANNERMANsaid, he could not state all the places at which the horses were purchased, but a large number were bought from owners and private breeders.
    COLONEL LOCKWOODasked whether the right hon. Gentleman was aware that the private proprietors from whom such purchases were made existed in reality, and not merely on paper?
    COLONEL NOLANsaid, he would like to point out that Canadian horses were much dearer than Irish horses, and that they should do what they could to encourage the Irish in the breeding of good animals. There were countries where they had artificial production. [Laughter.] Yes; he had come across it himself in Russia. They ought, at any rate, to encourage the Irish people in the rearing of horses. It was absurd to say they should have a horse for every man. They ought to consider the method of training, and the fact that a man could not train two horses and do it properly—at least, he would suffer himself if he was engaged in so much work. The system regarding the purchase of three-year-olds was expensive. The French adopted a like system. In his opinion, they would get them far cheaper if they got them as four-year-olds. Another point was the amount of money spent
    984
    on the officers and staff who bought horses. Did they buy from farmers or from dealers? Those that came from dealers were the more expensive; and he knew, from his own experience in Irish fairs, that they could be had at a cheaper rate from the farmers. These were questions upon which they should have information from the Military Authorities.
    MR. FORWOODsaid, he was very glad to hear the right hon. Gentleman state that it was intended to use the Assistance less frequently than heretofore, because he thought a more unsuitable ship, or one less adapted to modern requirements, could not be found. But, as she was to be less frequently used in future, he would expect the expenditure to come down; yet he found that £10,400 was to be expended in transport work this year against £11,100 last year. If they were not going to use this vessel as often as before, he thought they might consider, as he would strongly recommend, that she should be done away with altogether. He happened to know that the vessel would require very considerable overhauling and repairs, and if the right hon. Gentleman's military advisers did not think she should be used as often, he did not think a large amount should be spent on her for that purpose. He wished to know whether the Admiralty could not be consulted? He also wished to confirm what had been said by the hon. Member for Preston about the overcrowding of troopships. If they took the Himalaya, that vessel carried altogether 1,385 souls, but only 900 persons ought to be put on board. He-did not think that because a vessel belonged to Her Majesty she should be allowed to carry 400 persons more than she was capable of carrying.
    MR. CAMPBELL-BANNERMANsaid, the question regarding the Assistance had only been decided during the present Session. It was a question upon which the Admiralty would require to be consulted if anything was to be done in the direction stated; for himself, he had an open mind upon the question.
    MR. HANBURYsaid, they now had an admission that there was overcrowding.
    MR. CAMPBELL-BANNERMAN: I did not say so.
    MR. HANBURYsaid, they had it from the late Secretary to the Admiralty (Mr. Forwood). He wanted to know where this responsibility rested—with the Admiralty, or with the Military Authorities? Which Department fixed the number? He started with the fact that ships were overcrowded, and he thought they should have a definite answer to show with whom the responsibility lay? It must lie with either one Department or the other.
    MR. CAMPBELL-BANNERMANsaid, the Admiralty alone could decide upon the point, and, on the representations made to them, they had modified their opinion on the question.
    MR. FORWOODsaid, some of these vessels were over 30 years old. When they were built the troops were regarded from a different point of view; and he had no doubt that if an examination were made in each case a very large reduction would be made.
    MR. T. H. BOLTONsaid, he would like a little more information showing how the horses were procured, whether from private owners or from bus and tram companies? His opinion was that no private individual would take the trouble that would be involved in registering a horse on the terms given—namely, 10s. a year. He could, therefore, only imagine that the horses were supplied by these companies, and, if that were so, the choice of selection was very considerably reduced. They were told by a distinguished Cavalry officer in that House that only a short time was necessary to make a horse broken to saddle and bridle available as a charger, and it might be necessary to increase this grant, so that they could have a larger number of horses fit for chargers. He could not help thinking that some additional inducement should be held out to private owners to avail themselves of the grant.
    MR. E. STANHOPEsaid, what was intended was that the horses should be capable of doing what was expected of them; and that made a considerable difference. Private owners might be able to supply the horses, but there was the question of inspection, which involved considerable trouble. Last year a number of small owners did enter; but he would point
    986
    out that there were always difficulties in carrying out inspection in these cases.
    COLONEL LOCKWOOD: Were they inspected last year?
    COLONEL NOLANwished to know whether the horses were procured from dealers, or from individual owners?
    MR. CAMPBELL - BANNERMANsaid, he could not give the proportion, but he was aware that a number had been bought from private owners.
    COLONEL LOCKWOOD: Are they inspected?
    MR. CAMPBELL-BANNERMAN: Yes.
    Vote agreed to.
    4. Motion made, and Question proposed,
    "That a sum, not exceeding £6,622,400, be granted to Her Majesty, to defray the Charge for Provisions, Forage, and other Supplies, which will come in course of payment during the year ending on the 31st day of March 1894."
    COLONEL NOLANsaid, he would like to have some information regarding the quality of the meat and provisions. The soldiers should have their wants adequately attended to in these matters. What he should like to hear was the terms of the contractors, and what was the quality of the food supplied?
    MR. HANBURYsaid, he would like to add a few words to those which had fallen from the hon. and gallant Gentleman. This was one of the most important Votes in connection with the Army, and the question was one of which they heard considerable complaint—that was, as to the way in which their soldiers were fed. A great deal had been done by the late Secretary for War (Mr. E. Stanhope), but he thought much still remained to be done. There was, for instance, the case of the cooking. There was no complaint at Aldershot; but they should know what was passing in other parts of the country. But there were one or two other questions which he would ask on this Vote. He did not know how far the question of forage would affect this Vote; but he knew that in France the additional cost led to a Supplementary Estimate for over £500,000—on account of the additional cost of hay and straw. He did not know what the extent of the additional cost was here, but it had, doubtless, been an-

    987
    ticipated in some measure. He saw there had been no rise in the Estimate on this Vote; but that might have been provided for, and he thought they should know, as in many cases any increase must mean an addition to the burdens of the taxpayers. There was the case of fixed allowances. It appeared to him to be a very hard case that men who had such allowances in a year of such an exceptional character as this had been should get only the same allowance as in any other year when the cost was a great deal less. He did not know whether an allowance was being made to meet the circumstances, but he considered that there was a fair grievance on the part of those men. It might be said that the man having a fixed allowance took his chance—that he must take the good year with the bad—but it was to be remembered that the standard was not always the same; that they had not always the lowest prices, and, if that were so, the cost of forage this year must fall heavily upon these men. One other point. The right hon. Gentleman would remember that a mouth or two ago he called his attention to the advertisements appearing in local papers inducing young men to join the Army on the grounds that they would be get good clothing and good food. The Minister for War promised him that he would see that the advertisements were altered. The idea suggested to the ordinary man by reading in those advertisements that he would be well fed was that the whole of his food would be supplied by the country, which, as they all knew, was not the fact. He should like to know whether the promised alterations had been made in the advertisements? It was absolutely necessary that a man should not be drawn into the Army by such inducements. The whole truth, and nothing but the truth, should be told, and a stop should be put to the practice of getting men to join the Army, he would not say on false pretences, but through advertisements which lent themselves to a false interpretation. Then he would like to direct the attention of the right hon. Gentleman to the question of the appointments of regimental master cooks. He had been told by military officers that it was very important that those men should be made to understand their work. Lance corporals who had gone through some
    988
    training in cooking at Aldershot were offered those appointments, and they were accepted principally on account of their smarter uniforms. The men, however, were really not qualified for the posts, and as the cooking fell upon them to a great extent it was of great importance that they should be properly trained in their duties. He was doubtful whether the quantity of food supplied to the men was sufficient; but, at any rate, the complaints had principally been against the quality and the cooking of the food. If the authorities could not get good cooks inside the troops they should get them from outside. He was glad to notice that at Woolwich and other military centres garrison bakeries had been started. There used to be great complaints of the bread, and it used to be thrown away wholesale by the men; but, as a consequence of the starting of these bakeries, the quality of the bread was now much better. The hon. and gallant Member for North Galway had raised a most important point in regard to the meat contracts. Undoubtedly the contract prices for meat were very low. The average price last year was as low as 4½d. per pound. The men must get the very worst portions of the animal for such a low price. The allowance of meat per man was only three-quarters of a pound, bone included; and, that being so, the men should get some of the best portions of the animal and not the worst. He also thought the soldiers ought to be fed on English meat. He was afraid the practice of using frozen meat imported from abroad was growing in the Army. It was very false economy indeed to give the soldiers badly cooked food of a bad quality, and he was inclined to divide the Committee on that point. He was afraid also that the soldiers did not even get the best bits of this imported meat. He believed that it was the practice of Quartermasters and officers to buy their meat at contract price, with the result that they get the best bits and the rest went to the men. That practice was most unfair to the men, and should be stopped. Although the question did not rise on this Vote, he hoped the right hon. Gentleman would find means of supplying the men with separate dining rooms, instead of compelling them to eat in their living rooms as at present. With regard to contracts

    989
    generally, he thought the system of long contracts for food was most disadvantageous. Even though the contract prices for meat were very low, they were paying much more than they ought to pay, because they might depend upon it that when a contract was made for two or three years the contractor guarded himself well against any contingency that might arise. A very good custom had been set up in some military centres, in the buying of fodder, of doing away with the middleman and dealing with the producer. He hoped that system would be extended, as the result where it had been tried was a considerable economy.
    GENERAL SIR F. FITZWYGRAMsaid, that with regard to the feeding of horses, the system in the Army was to give the animals the smallest possible-portion of corn and the highest possible portion of hay that would keep them in condition. The allowance was 10 lbs. of corn and 12 lbs. of hay. In the best training and hunting stables horses were allowed as much corn as they liked, which was generally 15 lbs. of corn and 41bs. of hay per day. As hay was likely to be dear this year, it would be a good change if the Secretary of State ordered a supply of 141bs. of corn and 41bs. of hay for the horses. With regard to the question of the meat supply, it had been said that the best parts of the meat were reserved for the officers. If that were so, it was not the fault of the contractors, but the fault of the responsible officer. The contractor knew the amount of meat required, and he brought a whole ox, or the side of an ox, a whole sheep, or the side of a sheep, as the case might be, which gave about 401bs. more meat than was needed. The Orderly Officer was generally in a hurry; the contractor had two men with him, one began to cut the fore part, and the other the hind part, leaving about 40 or 501bs. of the middle, or best part of the animal, to be carried away by the contractor. There was now a school at Aldershot for the instruction of officers and quartermasters in matters connected with the feeding of the men, and if attention were directed to putting a stop to the practice to which he had referred, there would not in the future be any complaint that the soldiers did not get their fair share of the best part of the joints. He also thought that it
    990
    would be a great advantage to the troops if the Secretary of State took the supplying of groceries into his own hands, instead of leaving it to contractors. He had noticed that in some regiments the men looked in good condition, while in other regiments they seemed to be underfed, and he ascribed the difference in the appearance of the men to the manner in which their food supplies were attended to.
    MR. J. W. SIDEBOTHAMsaid, that he had received a letter from a correspondent, who complained that a regiment that had been sent down to Bedford for musketry practice was supplied with blankets which were so filthy and covered with vermin that the men refused them. He hoped that the right hon. Gentleman would make inquiries into the matter, and administer a reprimand to the officer responsible for such a scandalous state of things.
    GENERAL GOLDSWORTHYagreed that if the Secretary of State supplied groceries to the troops a great improvement in the rations of the soldiers would result. With regard to the cooking of the rations, he did not find, on inquiry, that young officers at Sandhurst were trained in the inspection of meat and other food supplies. It depended entirely on the opinion of the officers as to whether the supplies were good or bad, and, of course, if the officers had not the requisite knowledge and experience, they were likely to pass things that were not good. Cooking was also a matter of great importance, and he would suggest that a large number of men in each regiment should be trained in cooking, in order to be ready for emergencies in the time of war. The Commission which had been appointed by his right hon. Friend the late Secretary of State for War, to inquire into the subject of rations, had recommended that the loaf of bread, instead of being cut into four pieces, should be divided only into two. He thought, however, that each soldier should have his loaf baked separately. That would mean an increase in the cost; but it would also mean less waste, more material, and the bread keeping in better condition. He would also urge that the soldier should be provided with full rations by the State.
    MR. WOODALLsaid that, with regard to the statement of the hon. Member for Hyde, he could only say that it was surprising. If the hon. Member would furnish him with the particulars he would have a most searching investigation into the matter. He could assure hon. Members the character of the meat supplied to our troops had received, and was still receiving, the most careful attention from the Military Authorities. He was surprised to hear it even suggested that the contracts were for second-class meat. The contractors were required to give assurances that the supply of meat for the troops was of a high quality.
    COLONEL NOLAN: What are the words used in the advertisements—"first class" or "choice"?
    MR. WOODALLsaid, he was not specifically familiar with the details of contracts, but he would be glad to furnish the hon. and gallant Gentleman with the information he asked for. After steady and increasing trials, the opinion of those most competent to speak on the subject was much more favourable in regard to the quality of refrigerated meat than that of the hon. Member for Preston. The contracts for refrigerated meat extended only over a period of eight mouths in the year, and they did not apply to more than 60 per cent. of the supply, as 40 per cent. must be fresh English meat. The meat was as nutritious, and as satisfactory in every respect as could be desired; and the War Office in using it were only pursuing the same course as other large Institutions throughout the country. Great attention had been given to cooking in recent years, and better apparatus had been provided and instruction given, with the result that, on all hands, there was testimony that not only was the food of better quality than it used to be, but that it was better cooked. There was a class at Aldershot for the instruction of officers and others in matters appertaining to the supply of food. Quartermasters, he might point out, were not able, though the contrary had been suggested, to select from the food supplied tit-bits for themselves. The orders of the Quartermaster General prevented this. With respect to forage, the Military Authorities, in common with other people, had experienced some difficulty
    992
    in obtaining hay this season. The contractors, however, had been enabled to fulfil their obligations with an allowance of about 20 per cent. on the price originally agreed upon. But whilst the War Office had had to pay a higher price for hay they had profited by the lower price of oats. Complaint had been made that recruits were likely to be deceived by the promises held out in recruiting advertisements. There was, he believed, no danger now of any deception, because the recruiting advertisements had been severely revised, and no recruit could suppose that he had been promised anything more than was provided. There was nothing connected with enlistment which received more attention than the question of the general food and treatment of the common soldier, and he believed the result was satisfactory to the Army generally. He thought the Committee would agree with him in that opinion.
    MR. JEFFREYSsaid, he did not want to occupy the time of the Committee; but he thought the Financial Secretary should state how it was that no less than 60 per cent. of the meat consumed in the Army was frozen meat, and the remaining 40 per cent. frequently consisted of imported cattle. The forage consisted of foreign oats; and compressed hay and straw, now that it was a little dearer in this country, came from abroad. Therefore, when the British taxpayer voted over £2,500,000 for food and forage for the Army, three-fourths of the articles came from abroad. He considered such a thing was scandalous. If bought in large quantities—as it necessarily must be—English meat could be purchased as cheaply as frozen mutton. He wished some pressure could be brought to bear upon those responsible for the present state of matters. With regard to forage, he certainly thought they should have the supplies, as far as possible, from this country. But, as a matter of fact, the supplies appeared to be provided from abroad. He only wished to bring these matters before the Committee and the country. They were questions that, in his opinion, required attention.
    MR. WOODALLsaid that, as far as possible, of course, the Government had been glad to avail itself of home-grown produce; but the hon. Member seemed to

    993
    forget that this country was incapable of producing more than half the food required for its sustenance. Large powers, however, were now given to officers to make their orders locally and independently; and, in the exercise of those powers, the General Officer at Aldershot had been able to make his own purchases of hay and oats, as far as possible, from the farmers round about. That policy had been largely extended during the last few years.
    COLONEL NOLANsaid, on the general question, he should like to know how the officers and private soldiers liked this foreign meat? It had occasionally been tried in the Dining Room of the House, and there was an impression that it was not up to the English standard.
    MR. HANBURYsaid, he would move a reduction of the Vote by £1,000, as a protest against the system of feeding the soldiers with meat 60 per cent. of which was refrigerated—meat which hon. Members would not eat themselves—a system which was unjust to the English producer as well as to the soldier. Seeing that he only had three-quarters of a pound of meat a day, the soldier should have the best article which could be procured for him, and not be supplied with frozen meat. He was told that the odd 40 per cent. of the fresh meat supplied was not English, but Spanish; and he did not see why some preference should not be given to English beef, and so confer some benefit on the English producer. The English farmer was not so prosperous that he could afford to dispense with such aid as this would give him. He begged to move the reduction of the Vote by £1,000.
    Motion made, and Question proposed, "That a sum, not exceeding £2,621,400, be granted for the said Service."—(Mr. Hanbury.)
    MR. CAMPBELL - BANNERMANsaid, he could not agree either with the doctrine or the conclusion of the hon. Gentleman who had moved this reduction. It was not attempted to give the soldier anything extravagant or beyond the ordinary character of the food of the masses of the people. He said a certain proportion of refrigerated meat was a perfectly legitimate food. No complaints were made; and the soldiers, so
    994
    far as he was aware, were perfectly satisfied. Enormous attention was given to the cooking of the meat, and the soldier got twice the enjoyment and twice the sustenance out of his ration now that he did half-a-dozen years ago. If the soldiers were canvassed he believed no complaint would be lodged as to their food, but that surprise would be expressed at the goodness of the rations they received. It was all very well for the hon. Member to say soldiers must have this and must have that without any regard to the large cost which would be imposed on the taxpayers. But if the men were canvassed, he thought it would be found, as he said, that they had no reason to complain, and that they did not complain.
    MR. BRODRICKsaid, he thought upon this question his hon. Friend had gone too far in his remarks about the character of the meat supplied. He should be sorry to have it go forth that their soldiers were fed with inferior meat. A question had been raised with regard to whether there was a shrinkage in cooking in the case of refrigerated meat. If there was a shrinkage, and the soldier received less in weight than he ought, then the country would not be carrying out their bargain with him. But he believed the right hon. Gentleman was in a position to tell the Committee that that was not so, and that in refrigerated meat the soldier received the full amount to which he was entitled.
    MR. CAMPBELL-BANNERMAN: Hear, hear!
    MR. BRODRICKsaid, yes; they were, he understood, receiving their fair amount at the present time. Then there was the question of refrigerated meat. The whole Army ought to be fed on this meat. He agreed that if the supplies for the Army could be procured of English farmers at the same price as was paid for foreign meat, they should have the preference; but that was not an easy matter to arrange, and he was satisfied that the frozen meat was good, and gave satisfaction to the soldiers. The hon. Member for Basingstoke said that all the supplies could be got in England—so he understood him to say. That was not the case, and he could only repeat what he had said already on that point. He hoped the Committee would support the Government, not because he wished to

    995
    see an extension of the system of buying abroad, but because he thought the best supplies ought to be got. The country could not afford to spend £400,000 or £500,000 a year more in buying at home, though, if all things were equal, the home producer should have the advantage.
    GENERAL GOLDSWORTHYsaid, probably the Secretary of State for War would be able to tell the Committee the difference in cost between home-grown meat and refrigerated meat. He thought if it would not increase the cost largely, the money ought to be spent among their own people.
    MR. JAMES LOWTHERsaid, he had only one or two remarks to make. He had heard the expression "buying abroad" made use of by the Secretary for War and other Members. He wanted to know where the meat came from. Did it come from Her Majesty's Colonies? He wished to know whether, although the word "foreign" had been used with regard to the frozen meat, it came from the British Colonies? If it came from the Colonies that expression ought not to be used. If it did not come from the Colonies—if it came from South America, for instance—
    MR. CAMPBELL-BANNERMAN: It comes generally from Australia.
    MR. J. LOWTHERsaid, he regarded buying from Her Majesty's subjects, in whatever part of the world they resided, as very different from buying abroad. In his judgment, Pier Majesty's subjects ought to have the first pull. His vote would depend very much upon the question of where these supplies were drawn from, and he must protest against the indiscriminate manner in which supplies from abroad were spoken of in the same breath as supplies from portions of the British Empire; and he confessed he regarded the general tone in which this matter had been treated, both by the Government and his hon. Friend near him (Mr. Brodrick), as affording occasion for vigilance upon the part of the Committee.
    MR. POWELL WILLIAMSsaid, he hoped the hon. Member for Preston would not divide the Committee, because it would be unfortunate if it were to go out to the country that there was any considerable body of
    996
    Members of the House who thought the British soldier was not properly fed. There was no ground whatever for the suggestion, and the soldiers were quite contented with their food. Complaint had been made of the foreign meat, and of its failure to satisfy, in the House; but the fact was, that if the hon. Gentleman who made that complaint was in the habit of having his household supplied with British meat, he had had the same quality of foreign meat supplied under that name over and over again. He would repeat that there was no ground for complaint, and that the Motion ought not to be pressed.
    MR. GIBSON BOWLESsaid, when the Front Benches fell out honest men got their own—[Laughter]—well, he need hardly indicate the converse—that when the Front Benches agreed, Tommy Atkins was in great danger. Instead of the British soldier having the roast beef of Old England, he had the frozen beef of old South America or old Spain. As the occupants of the Front Benches were so enamoured of frozen meat, would they pledge themselves to live on it for the rest of their lives? Would they undertake to give it to their servants? [Cries of "Divide!"] They knew perfectly well they would do nothing of the sort. They were told that the cooking was very good—so he understood from the right hon. Gentleman. That, he supposed, was one of the reasons why the frozen meat was endured by the soldier. The goodness of the cookery concealed the badness of the meat. Another argument, to which he would direct special attention, was that this frozen meat was produced on a labour-sweating principle, and by using it they were encouraging that system. He objected also to the supplies of hay and straw from abroad. These were reasons why they should, he thought, agree to the reduction.
    COMMANDER BETHELLdid not dispute the fact that refrigerated meat was good, but he thought they might well protest against large purchases of meat outside the United Kingdom that was intended for the Army in chief; and in that sense, if his hon. Friend went to a Division, he would divide with him.
    Question put.
    The Committee divided:—Ayes 31; Noes 141.—(Division List, No. 304.)
    Original Question put, and agreed to.
    Motion made, and Question proposed,
    "That a sum, not exceeding £790,600, be granted to Her Majesty, to defray the Charge for Clothing Establishments and Services, which will come in course of payment during the year ending on the 31st day of March, 1894."
    MR. BROOKFIELD*MR. BROOKFIELD (Sussex, Rye) moved the reduction of the Vote for the purpose of calling attention to the absence of any Regulation regarding the wearing of distinctive uniforms for advertising and other purposes in the streets. With the permission of the Committee he would refer to a letter recently addressed to the editor of The Army and Navy Gazette by an Australian who had noticed with astonishment the wearing of Army uniforms in the streets. This gentleman asked if there was no person connected with the Army who had influence and energy enough to crush out the insult offered to the British Army by peripatetic advertisers. He said—
    "Every day in the Strand may be seen gangs of scarecrows wearing British Infantry uniforms,"
    and he ended his letter by thanking God he was not an Englishman. He (Mr. Brookfield) believed that this matter had been brought to the personal attention of the right hon. Gentleman, and no doubt the right hon. Gentleman felt some sympathy with the grievance of which he (Mr. Brookfield) complained. Though in the matter of advertising he thought this had been carried to the greatest length, it was not at all confined to that particular form. He himself once attended a meeting at Macclesfield where there was a band performing, which was attired completely in the uniform of a most distinguished regiment, the 17th Lancers. As this was such a distinctive dress, he thought the offence was rather increased. There they were wearing the peculiar button with the inscription "death or glory," the white facings, cap lines, and so on, and they wore it for no other reason than because they thought it was a handsome dress, and that it was amusing to wear it. This was not fair to the soldier, who was told on joining the Service that it was
    998
    an honour to wear this particular dress. He would give one still more remarkable instance, which might strike the imagination of the Committee, and that was the case of a convict recently executed, a murderer of the name of Deeming. This person, in the course of his career of crime, used to wear the full uniform of an officer in the Indian Army, and though it imposed on very few persons indeed, the fact remained that there was no remedy whatever for this insult and outrage which was perpetuated at the present moment by the figure of Deeming being exhibited in the Chamber of Horrors dressed in this brilliant uniform, to which he had not the smallest right or title. The right hon. Gentleman, when such matters had been brought to his notice, had generally contented himself with saying he believed the evil was confined to what he called "travesties" of uniform. He did not see that that made any material difference. Regiments and soldiers ought to be protected by the right hon. Gentleman from travesties being made of the dress they were taught to respect. The right hon. Gentleman said it was impossible to do anything, and asked what they would have him do. ["Hear, hear!"] An hon. Gentleman below the Gangway cheered that, and he (Mr. Brookfield) might answer he would have the right hon. Gentleman do what was done in every other European country; and what was so exasperating in the matter was that the right hon. Gentleman, when his attention was called to it, seemed to join in the wonderment expressed at such a thing being allowed; but it never seemed to occur to him that he was primarily responsible for letting it go on. Some time ago the right hon. Gentleman supplied him (Mr. Brookfield) with a Return obtained from the military attachés at Foreign Courts as to the Regulations in force in these foreign countries to restrict the wearing of military and naval uniforms. He would inform the Committee that the offence in Austro-Hungary was punished by the Penal Code with a fine of £5. In France, on the other hand, the punishment was from six months' to two years' imprisonment without the option of a fine. In Germany the punishment was six weeks' imprisonment, or a fine of £7 10s. In Italy the punishment was six weeks'

    999
    imprisonment, or fines ranging from £2 to £40. And there were also in all these countries punishments provided for another class of offence that was very common, and that was the improper assumption of military titles. This country stood alone in this, as in so many other matters, in persisting in what involved the greatest injustice to all military men. He ventured to submit to the right hon. Gentleman that he should follow the example of these other countries and should, at all events, make it an offence, punishable by a fine, for a person to wear the distinctive dress of any regiment in the Service if he was not entitled so to do. The right hon. Gentleman might not only make it a punishable offence, but he might make it almost impossible for those who were not soldiers to obtain clothing of this kind. The simplest plan would be to make it an offence either to buy, or to sell, or to make unauthorised uniforms. It appeared to him that this plan might also be adopted. First, to provide Regulations under which all uniform articles, without distinction, should be given in to store at the end of a man's service with the colours. In the second place, if the uniform became a man's own property, let the State or the regiment buy it from him, instead of allowing him to go to a pawnbroker or a marine-store dealer by whom he was invariably cheated. The only other plan was to keep the uniform in store to be issued occasionally for fatigue purposes; then if they had to sell it, then let them make it unrecognisable by the simple process of cutting off the buttons and throwing the whole thing into a dyer's vat and making it black instead of scarlet. That, at least, was a practical way of preventing the evil of which he complained. Whilst on this subject he might say he thought one sure way of making the uniform of the soldier more respected in the streets and elsewhere (as it certainly was not at the present moment) would be for commissioned officers to wear their uniforms more constantly than they did now. The Regulations, Section 12, paragraph 5, left to the discretion of the General Officer commanding the district the dispensing with uniform for purposes of recreation. That discretion seemed to him to be invariably exercised in one direction.
    1000
    He also thought that an example might be set to the rest of the Army if the distinguished officers at headquarters and the Horse Guards would wear uniform more often. He should move the reduction of the Vote, but he trusted the right hon. Gentleman would be able to announce to them that he would endeavour to provide some remedy for the evil of which he complained, and which he was sure the right hon. Gentleman must regret, in common with every well-wisher of the Army. He therefore would move the reduction of the Vote by £1,000.
    Motion made, and Question proposed, "That a sum, not exceeding £789,600, be granted for the said Service."—(Mr. Brookfield.)
    COLONEL LOCKWOODdid not wish to take up much of the time of the Committee, as he considered it was rather a disgraceful question, that of wearing the uniform of the Services about the streets for advertising purposes. He had understood there had been some Order issued on the subject, but he was afraid he was mistaken. He confessed it was very disagreeable—to officers especially—to see these men walking about in various conditions of misery, and with the small remnant of respectability in the shape of Her Majesty's uniform in shreds and tatters. Still, he confessed that it must be a difficult matter for the right hon. Gentleman to deal with, and it was hardly fair to find fault with the existing custom if one was not prepared to suggest a remedy. One thing he would suggest was this: Though he could not think it would be possible to dye the various uniforms all black, he thought perhaps some Regulation might be made whereby the buttons, facings, and collars of the various uniforms should be cut off. Perhaps the new Director General of Clothing might be able to make a better suggestion than that, though he fancied it would have the effect of so destroying the uniform that they would not have the disagreeable sight they so often met with now. Another question he wished to bring forward had reference to regimental badges, upon which he asked a question some time ago. The question related to the right of soldiers to wear national badges on national days. A

    1001
    notice had been issued giving Commanding Officers discretion to allow soldiers to wear the rose, the thistle, the leek, or the shamrock. He was afraid that would lead to disagreeable results and bad feeling in large garrison towns, as some Commanding Officers might be willing to give the permission and others might not, and he would suggest that the discretion be left with the General Officer commanding in the garrison, as that would insure uniformity, and would get rid of any disagreeable feeling there might otherwise be.
    MR. CONYBEAREthought the hon. and gallant Gentleman, and the hon. Member who brought this grievance forward, must be members of a particularly sensitive regiment if, as officers, they could not bear to see the old regimental coats upon the backs of sandwich men. If he understood the effect of their grievance they must have a very slight sense of humour in their composition. But what he would point out in reference to this particular part of the subject was that they had not shown them any way by which they could prevent old regimentals being manufactured for the purpose. They might prevent the sale of old regimentals to the parties who wished to provide sandwich men with such uniforms, but he did not see how they were to prevent the manufacture of old regimentals. To cut off the buttons, facings, and collars, and to dye them all black, would be to deprive the old regimentals of all value and prevent some old soldiers who did a good business in old regimentals from earning an honest penny. What he wanted to point out to hon. and gallant Gentlemen opposite was that they had not taken half a white glove view of the matter. If they wanted to protect British officers from this degradation they must request the War Office to extend its ægis all over the wilds of South Africa, of Australia, and even over South America. He could not speak with regard to the bush-men of Australia, but he could speak for South Africa, and he could assure hon. and gallant Gentlemen they could not go anywhere in South Africa without seeing the natives dressed up in our old cast-offs. He had seen dozens and scores of them standing about with scarlet uniforms clothing the upper half, and their understandings without any
    1002
    clothing whatever. He could conceive nothing more ridiculous than to object to this, or more likely to bring the scarlet coats of the British Infantry soldier into contempt. He thought it was hardly worth the hon. and gallant Gentleman's while to waste the time of the Committee upon this subject. To speak of it as likely to increase the energy of the War Office was ridiculous.
    MR. CAMPBELL-BANNERMAN: said, this was not a very large question, and he should not have any difficulty in answering the hon. and gallant Gentleman. He (Mr. Campbell-Bannerman) went about a good deal himself, and he was bound to say that the evil, if evil there was, did not assume the proportions attributed to it. On one occasion, of which he had personal knowledge, the uniform worn was not that of the Regular Army, but that of a Volunteer. He agreed with the hon. and gallant Gentleman that it was degrading to the Service to have the uniform of any branch of the Army used in this way—it was certainly unpleasant and vulgar. But how were they to prevent it? The hon. and gallant Gentleman referred them to France and Germany, and the punishment inflicted there. Did he really think that they in this country could introduce a Bill, and pass it here?
    MR. BROOKFIELD: Certainly.
    MR. CAMPBELL-BANNERMANsaid, the hon. and gallant Gentleman said, "Certainly." He (Mr. Campbell-Bannerman) would be very glad to see him bring in such a Bill. He had, therefore, the cure for anything that was wrong in his own hand, and perhaps he would set it forth that the House might deal with it. He (Mr. Campbell-Bannerman) did not feel that he would be justified in interfering. Then it was said that they should issue a new Regulation. What happened at present was that when a man left the Colours his uniform became the property of the State. The first thing done to it was that the distinctive marks were taken off it, and then it was disposed of; but under a new arrangement it was probable that the uniform would be the property of the soldier—at all events, it would be disposed of to the benefit of the soldier and not given to any clothes-dealer. In that case also attention would be given to the disappearance of distinctive marks. Further

    1003
    than that, he did not know how anything was to be done. As he had said, it was an unpleasant thing to have such uniforms worn in the manner described, but there was only a certain length to which they could go in this country in the matter of interfering with the liberty of action of the individual. He did not see any advantage that would be gained by adopting the suggestion of the hon. and gallant Gentleman.
    MR. HANBURYrose—
    THE CHAIRMAN: Is this on the same point?
    MR. HANBURY: On the same point, Sir.
    THE CHAIRMAN: Order!
    MR. HANBURYthought his hon. Friend was entitled to thanks for the way in which he had brought forward that which, so far as regarded the honour of the British uniform, was of great importance.
    Notice taken, that 40 Members were not present; Committee counted, and 40 Members being found present,
    MR. HANBURYsaid, the hon. Member had complained of the way in which the British uniform was allowed to be worn by sandwich men and others in the United Kingdom, by which means it was exposed to ridicule and contumely. Various foreign countries had attached severe penalties to the degradation of the national uniform; and although he did not think that this country would ever go that length, there could be no doubt that the matter was very important and worthy of serious attention. But he would remark to the Secretary of Sate for War that we had in this country a check upon that abuse which existed in no other country, because all these uniforms were sold practically to one contractor and under a most peculiar form of contract, which showed the unbusinesslike character of a great deal that was done in the War Office. It was a fact, which was almost incredible, that every three years, in the month of March, all the disused clothing of the British Army, a great deal of which at the time had not been actually made—perhaps it was not even cloth—was for three years ahead put up to auction and bid for by a ring of Jew merchants. No fewer than 250,000 articles were sold in one year—articles coming from the United Kingdom, from
    1004
    abroad, and from the Colonies—for a mere song. He believed there were only two conditions attached to the sale of disused clothing—firstly, that it should not be allowed to be sold in England. It might go to the Colonies. It might be sold to the bushmen, and he saw no objection to that. If the bushman liked to swagger about in it, and if it increased his sense of importance, well and good, but the Regulations ought to be more stringent than they were. He had seen British—at places like Havre—bandsmen and circus employés dressed in the red tunic of the British Infantry, and he considered it a scandal. The limitation in the Rules as they at present stood was not sufficient, and he hoped the hon. Member who had charge of the contracts would put a stop to the existing system. If the clothing, some of which was unused, having been issued to officers' servants, cooks, and so on, was sold in smaller lots in different parts of the country there would be more people to bid for it, and better prices would be realised. It might be sold to the shoddy mills and put to uses of that kind. The second limitation attached to the purchase of the old uniforms was that all the buttons and distinctive marks should be taken off. But this Regulation was not complied with, for he himself had bought old Army overcoats for charitable purposes, and had found the buttons and regimental marks still upon them. Though in these matters they should not punish the people who bought and wore the uniforms—as was done in foreign countries—still, some closer control should be exercised over the contractor. With regard to the ridiculously low prices at which these articles were sold, he found that Messrs. Moore, of Lauder-dale Buildings, Aldersgate, advertised ordinary scarlet tunics for use by coolies and other native labourers at 1s. apiece, and the "very best selection" at 1s. 3d. apiece. Blue cloth overcoats were quoted at 3s. 11d., and grey cloth overcoats, lined, with capes, at 5s. 11d.—"very best selection" 7s. 11d. This showed the small price the original contractor gave for the goods when, after passing through the hands of several middlemen, the articles could be sold at these low rates. Something had been said about this disused clothing becoming the property of the soldier himself. That

    1005
    would, to a certain extent, do away with the scandal he had mentioned. At the beginning of the Session he understood the matter had been definitely settled by the late Secretary of State for War, but only an hour ago the present Secretary of State for War told them that no decision had bean arrived at. After all this incubation he should have thought that the right hon. Gentleman would have been able to give them some official information. He should have thought the right hon. Gentleman could have made up his mind on such a simple point in a few hours. He was bound to say that, if only to avoid the scandals to which he had alluded the Secretary of State for War might have settled the matter long ago. With regard to the sea-kit and Indian clothing of the troops, he had some suspicion that, though there were a great many grievances connected with the clothing of the British soldier at home, the only concession which would be made would be in connection with the Khaki uniforms, for the reason that the burden would fall not upon the British taxpayer, but on our Indian fellow-subjects. ["Oh, oh!"] "Oh, oh! "said an hon. Member, but no one would deny that if a concession were to be made to the soldier in regard to his sea-kit and Indian clothing, the Indian and not the British taxpayer would suffer.
    MR. E. STANHOPEsaid, he desired to deny that either on one side of the House or the other was there a wish to gain any advantage for this country at the expense of the Indian taxpayer.
    MR. HANBURYsaid, his statement was that the two concessions made would fall upon the Indian taxpayer, and he desired to see a similar burden borne by the British taxpayer. He now wished to call attention to another point, about which he confessed he did not feel much certainty, as the information which had reached him was somewhat contradictory. He was informed that recruits were very often obliged to find considerable sums of money out of their own pockets to replace clothing worn out, on account of the extra amount of work and drill that fell to the lot of recruits. He should like some definite information on this point. The subject of advertisements he had referred to on a previous Vote. It
    1006
    was announced in the ordinary advertisements that the man who joined the Army was to be well fed. The recruit was also informed that he would be well clothed, which would be naturally understood to mean that there would be a free kit supplied. They knew, however, that a number of articles of clothing had to be paid for by the men themselves, and he desired to see that fact set out in the advertisements. Probably these matters had been already dealt with, but subjects had been overlooked before, and he wanted to make sure that at any rate these things should be thoroughly impressed on the mind of the Secretary of State for War. The next point on which he wished to make a few observations was as to the reserves of clothing. Looking at the Appropriation Account, he found that the reserves fell off to the extent of 20 per cent. in 1891–2. He was sorry to see that, because one thing which struck him very forcibly was that our reserves of clothing for an emergency were very small indeed. We had a reserve of ordinary clothing for 50,000 men, and of hot climate clothing for 30,000 men. This was a very small amount, having regard to the fact that the Reserves now amounted to 76,000 men. They knew, as a matter of fact, the Pimlico Clothing Establishment would not be ready to meet an emergency if it arose. He was one of those who had always objected to the Pimlico system. He had always thought that it would be better to adopt the Continental system, under which the clothing was made up by the regiments or battalions themselves—a system which had been in vogue with our own Cavalry. The clothing for the Infantry was sent down from Pimlico in assorted sizes, and instead of the uniform being made to fit the soldier the soldier was made to fit the uniform. That was a ridiculous system, and a very costly one, because the soldier grumbled when his clothes reached him, and great cost had to be incurred by the regiment in getting them made to fit. The one redeeming feature had been that, as he had said, the Cavalry regiments were allowed to make up their clothing for themselves. But that was to be done away with. He did not know what reforming genius suggested this—whether it was the brilliant idea of the right hon. Gentleman the Member for the Horncastle Division or

    1007
    of the present Secretary of State for War. Whoever it was, he heartily congratulated him upon it, and he hoped the Cavalry soldier would glory in the new uniform. There was one important fact, however, that ought to be borne in mind. Our Army contained proportionately more married soldiers than any other Army in the world. Many of the wives of the soldiers were by no means in a prosperous condition, more especially those unfortunate women who had married soldiers without leave. In Prussia many of the soldiers' wives did a great deal of the work of making and repairing uniforms, and up to the present time the wives of our soldiers had done a good deal in that direction. He thought it a thousand pities that such work should be taken away from them, and that all of it should be concentrated at the central depot in Pimlico. He had always contended that the Pimlico Establishment was a bad one. In the first place, it was situated in the worst possible spot in London. He believed that if the site were sold it would bring in a very large sum indeed to the British taxpayer, as it was in a more or less fashionable locality where building land was valuable. It was also in a neighbourhood where wages were exceptionally high. The uniform of the British Army cost at present something like 50 per cent. more than the uniform of the German Army. Surely a uniform that was good enough for the German Army was good enough for us. The British uniform, besides being costly, was unserviceable. If we were to go to war to-morrow he believed we should adopt a totally different uniform from that which our soldiers were wearing now. If the smokeless powder was to be adopted our present uniform would be about the worst we could possibly have, because it would be more visible than any other in Europe at the present moment. In order to show the difference in the cost he would compare our uniforms with those worn in the German Army. The Cavalry uniform in the English Army cost £4 18s., whilst the German Cavalry uniform cost £2 18s., or very nearly 50 per cent. less. The English Infantry uniform cost £3 14s., whilst the German Infantry uniform cost £2 11s., or about 30 per cent. less. At the same time, the German uniform was required to last a
    1008
    great deal longer than the British uniform. He confessed that in the German Army the period the uniform was required to last was something ridiculous, and he should be very sorry to ask our soldiers to wear their clothing for such a long time. Still, as a matter of fact, the German uniform did last a great deal longer than the British uniform. He felt bound to complain about an appointment recently made at Pimlico. Once more a civilian with practically no knowledge of the particular subject he had to deal with was placed at the head of the Army Clothing Establishment. He believed this gentleman had been a most valuable public servant at the War Office, and he did not wish to depreciate his services as a War Office official; but he contended that, distinguished public servant as he was, he could have no knowledge whatever of the Army Clothing Establishment at Pimlico. He very much regretted the appointment, and thought a great opportunity had been lost; but the mischief was now done, and he was not going to move a reduction in consequence. He had laid stress on the fact that there were very small reserves of clothing for the Line, whilst there was absolutely no reserve of clothing for the Reserve. If the Reserves were called out to-morrow we should have no uniforms to put on their backs. This was a somewhat awkward state of things. There was one peculiar feature in connection with this matter about the Pimlico Factory. In all the other factories in case of an emergency we could depend upon the men doing their work, because they were on the Establishment and entitled to pensions; but if an emergency arose which would necessitate a large manufacture of clothing, we should not be in a similar position with regard to Pimlico, because at Pimlico there was practically no Establishment, and very few of the men drew pensions. The result might very well be that at an important crisis a strike might take place at Pimlico, and we should either have to raise the wages considerably or do without the supply of clothing needed. The main point he had in view, however, in addressing the Committee was to call attention to the system of disposing of disused clothing, and he hoped that his hon. Friend opposite (Mr. Woodall) would do what he could to put

    1009
    an end to a system which was certainly not advantageous to the British taxpayer, and which was unjust to the British soldier.
    MR. WOODALLsaid, his hon. Friend who had just sat down had so completely departed from the Amendment before the Committee that he might take it that the Committee was now discussing the Main Vote. His hon. Friend had travelled from China to Peru, and had dealt with a very large range of subjects. With reference to this disused clothing, it was, no doubt, impossible for the War Office under the present system to guard against the dangers of rings of contractors constituted for the purpose of making the objects of the sale realise less than they were worth. All he could say was that under the old system the worn-out clothing was offered for sale in the most public manner, and was disposed of under certain restrictive conditions for the highest tenders. It was quite true that sometimes good clothing was sold with the bad, but, on the other hand, the contractor got a great deal of clothing that was absolutely worthless. As to the great-coats which had particularly attracted the attention of his hon. Friend as having been sold very cheaply, they originally cost £1, and did not reach the hands of the contractor until they had been worn for five years. The ingenious contractor probably made one good garment out of a number of old ones. The War Office had, however, done something to change all this. His hon. Friend thought it was strange that the Secretary of State for War should have been so long in making up his mind as to the expediency of adopting a new system, but his hon. Friend knew perfectly well how a change of such importance involved many intricacies, besides necessitating the assent of the Treasury. He (Mr. Woodall) believed he was betraying no confidence when he said it had now been determined, as was recommended and advised in the first instance by the right hon. Gentleman opposite (Mr. E. Stanhope), that the clothing of a soldier should become his own property; that he should have every opportunity of economising, and that at the conclusion of his term of service he should be at liberty to make such a sale of it either to his comrades or within the walls of the
    1010
    barracks as was consistent with the Regulations.
    MR. BROOKFIELD: Will he be able to sell it out of barracks?
    MR. WOODALLsaid, he would not. As to the clothing used in India, the system used to be for a soldier on landing in India to bear the expense of an outfit of Indian clothing. A change had now been made, and at present the whole expense of the necessary garments was borne by the Indian Government. As to fatigue clothing for the recruit, he thought the change he had just mentioned would meet the difficulty suggested by his hon. Friend. From the time a man was recruited he would become the owner of his uniform, and there would be every possible inducement to him to economise his clothing. He would be able either to buy clothing from his comrades, or to use such portions of his own uniform as might not be quite fitted for parade. A very grave charge had been made with regard to the clothing of the Reserve. On that point also he was able to give his hon. Friend the fullest and most satisfactory information. He had been unable to follow his hon. Friend precisely in detail, but he could assure him that the right hon. Gentleman (Mr. Stanhope) fixed the quantity of clothing it was necessary to have in reserve, and that the Regulation laid down by the right hon. Gentleman had been carefully carried out. He would repeat unreservedly that the Regulations laid down by the former Secretary of State for War had been carefully observed. The practice of manufacturing the articles from certain models at Pimlico, and then having the clothing adjusted by the regimental tailor, was a system which had been attended with very advantageous results. As to the objections which had been raised against the selection of Pimlico as a site for the Clothing Factory, he could only say that the responsibility did not attach to the present nor to any recent Government. But it must be admitted that they experienced no difficulty in obtaining labour on fair and moderate terms. With regard to the recent appointment to the Directorship of the Clothing Factory at Pimlico, the Government were of opinion that, in view of the system which prevailed, and possessing, as they did, the admirable service of expert and practical

    1011
    men, it was desirable to place at the head of that Department a man of administrative training and official experience, enjoying the confidence of successive Secretaries of State. Such a man they had secured in Mr. Fleetwood Wilson. He did not think the Committee would expect him to go into the comparison between the cost of the clothing of an English soldier and that of a Continental soldier. They had to deal with a system that was in the strongest contrast with the Armies of the Continent. Our Army had to be made attractive in the matter of clothing as in other matters, and it was absolutely necessary, following upon that, that it should cost us a little more per man than was the case in other countries with an entirely different system. A comparison might as well be made between the appearance of our workmen and the workmen of the Continent as between our soldiers and Continental soldiers in the matter of clothing.
    MR. E. STANHOPEwas not going to follow the hon. Member for Preston into the whole of the matters he had raised, but there were one or two points with which he should like to deal. With regard to the reserve of clothing, when he went to the War Office he felt that this was one of the first things they ought to deal with, so that they might have such a reserve of clothing as would enable the troops to take the field without any delay. He accordingly consulted with the Military Authorities and the Director of Clothing, and an agreement was arrived at by which they took into account not only the actual clothing in store, but that also which was in process of manufacture. They considered that the moment any apprehension arose of a war, that clothing in process of manufacture could, in a very short period indeed, be actually converted into wearing clothing. They also took into consideration the actual resources of the country, and they laid down the absolute requirements of the Army as to what ought to be in store in order to enable the military forces of the country to take the field without delay. That quantity was laid down, and was maintained during the period he held Office, and he firmly believed if that store of clothing was constantly maintained in the same condition as heretofore, the difficulty as
    1012
    to reserve of clothing would have been practically got over. As to the question of Pimlico, the hon. Member for Preston was very fond of attacking Pimlico. Hon. Members of that House had an opportunity of going to see the factory at Pimlico any day they pleased, and if they went there and examined for themselves the method of manufacture carried on there, he should be surprised if they then endorsed the accusations made by the hon. Member for Preston.
    MR. HANBURY: My complaint was as to the site—
    MR. E. STANHOPEdeclined to give way to the hon. Gentleman. The hon. Member had made many complaints of Pimlico as a whole, and he (Mr. E. Stanhope) was not going to be put aside by that statement. He asked hon. Members to go to Pimlico and judge for themselves, and when the hon. Member made his speech next Session they would have an opportunity of knowing what its merits were. As to the site of Pimlico, that was not a matter for which any recent Government could be blamed—if, indeed, there could be said to be any blame in the matter at all. As a matter of fact, Pimlico was one of the most convenient sites in the world: The moment war was declared hundreds of tons of clothing could be sent away at once. Pimlico was within easy reach of all the Railway Stations, and within 48 hours all the requisite clothing could be despatched from there to its destination; therefore, although there might be some disadvantages, on the whole the site of the factory was convenient and well chosen. As to the appointment recently made to the Directorship of the Army-Clothing Establishment at Pimlico, he believed it was an admirable one, and one which was likely to lead to the advantage of the Public Service.
    MR. WADDYsaid, the point which commenced this controversy seemed to have been forgotten—namely, the assertion that a great number of uniforms of our soldiers were to be found in this country and other countries under circumstances which were by no means reputable or creditable to our management of the Army. If that were true, it was a monstrous shame. He understood the Secretary of State for War to deny that these uniforms were so sold, but the hon. Member

    1013
    for Preston, in the most detailed fashion, stated the circumstances under which they were sold, and which were not, as they understood, for the purpose of destruction, but they were sold to certain contractors without any limitation or condition against re-sale.
    MR. HANBURYsaid, the condition attached was that red uniforms might not be sold in this country or India without the buttons being taken off.
    MR. WADDYsaid, the limitations were of such a character that the contractors could immediately after advertise them for public sale in Houndsditch and elsewhere, and that was done as a matter of trade, as had been shown by the Circular read out by the hon. Member for Preston. It was perfectly clear that these uniforms ought not to be sold when they were in such a condition that they could be used for the purpose for which they were originally intended. They should be used so long as they could be reasonably used, and no longer, and then they should be sent down to the West Riding or some other place, where that instrument known by the uncanny name of the "devil" would tear them up in such a way that they could no longer be worn.
    MR. WOODALLsaid, he had already stated that important changes with regard to clothing were about to be brought into operation, and the War Office pledged themselves to look into this question, in order to guard against the abuses which had been brought forward.
    MR. WADDYsaid, if that was to be done he was quite satisfied, and all that was necessary for him to say was that it ought to have been done long since. They ought to be grateful to the hon. Member for Preston for giving them information on many important points.
    COLONEL NOLANdesired to know what proportion of clothing was now made in Limerick? He expressed the fear that central establishments, such as Pimlico, would be likely to cut out provincial establishments which employed a large amount of labour. Of course, as the clothing for the Army had to be manufactured rapidly it was necessary to keep up a central establishment; but they should not go to the other extreme, and concentrate everything in one Public Department, to the injury of private firms.
    MR. WOODALLsaid, that although it had been necessary to establish Government factories, the plan of the Government was to keep actively alive the outside trade. He believed that of the Army clothing required, fully one-third in value was obtained from outside firms, and that among the many competing factories which participated in that portion the factory at Limerick, which had always been held in the very highest regard, obtained a fair share. With respect to the employment of women, he thought the Committee would be pleased to know that 300,090 shirts annually required for the troops were made by the wives of soldiers, widows of soldiers, and pensioners.
    MR. GIBSON BOWLESbelieved the old argument which had been used by the right hon. Gentleman, that it was necessary to have the uniforms attractive so as to make the Army popular, was unsound. Which did the right hon. Gentleman consider the more attractive of the two Services—the Army or the Navy? The Navy never had any difficulty in getting recruits, but there was constant difficulty in getting recruits for the Army. Therefore, if they had no difficulty whatever in getting men for the Navy whilst they had for the Army, it was a proof that the Navy was the more attractive Service of the two, as undoubtedly it was. That was a sufficient answer to the argument that it was necessary to make the uniform attractive. But it was perfectly possible to make the uniform attractive, and at the same time a working uniform, which the present uniform of the soldier was not. The men in the Navy made their own clothes, and he could never understand why the soldiers, first of all, should not have a working uniform; and, secondly, having so much less to do than sailors, why they should not make that working uniform themselves, and thus save a vast amount of money to the country. He hoped they would not hear again the excuse for this lavish expenditure on clothing that it was necessary to make Tommy Atkins look beautiful in the eyes of the servant-maids. The sailor was just as popular as the soldier, although his uniform was much cheaper, and he made it himself, an example which the Army Authorities might

    1015
    see followed by their branch of the Service.
    MR. BUTCHERremarked that when a soldier joined the Army he was given a uniform which he was told to keep clean. To do so he required certain materials, such as pipe clay and other things, every one of which he had to buy out of his own pocket. It might be said that this was a very small hardship; but these small things produced much discomfort to the soldier, and ought to be abolished.
    MR. CAMPBELL-BANNERMAN: I promise to look into the matter referred to by the hon. Member for York.
    Question put, and negatived.
    Original Question put, and agreed to.
    6. £114,400, Establishments for Military Education.
    MR. HANBURYwished to bring before the notice of the Secretary of State for War a statement which he had received from an officer of high reputation in reference to the Artillery College. He was informed that the number of Artillery officers occupying posts in the different factories was becoming smaller and smaller, and that this College, with its highly paid staff costing £5,000 for the training of these officers, was now more or less unnecessary. During the last 26 years the average number of students who had annually obtained certificates was three; and as the period of residence was two years, these students had cost £2,000 each to the country, and at present there were only five officers studying for these certificates. He would also like to know whether it was the fact that the posts in the manufacturing establishments, to train officers for which the College had been founded, were now open to civilians? If that were so, then the need for the College was at an end.
    MR. CAMPBELL-BANNERMAN: I admit that the Artillery College, which was established for the teaching of the higher Artillery studies, is an expensive institution, as the number of students is necessarily limited. I am quite sensible of the fact that it can no longer be confined to Artillery officers, and accordingly, with the view of enlarging the field of selection, not only for appointments in the Manufacturing Departments, but for appointments in the Inspection
    1016
    Department, I issued a new Regulation admitting members of other branches of the Service to the College on the condition that before entrance they passed a test examination in order to show that they had sufficient knowledge of the scientific subjects to enable them to profit fully from the instruction given in the College.
    COLONEL NOLANsaid, he knew the Artillery College well, as he had spent two years in it, and he insisted on its great usefulness. The small number of students was due to the fact that officers went there at a pretty advanced ago, between 30 and 40 years, in order to equip themselves with the highest possible scientific attainments. Artillery was not like Cavalry—all dash—or like Infantry, in which the chief qualities required were zeal and courage. The Artillery required those qualities also, but it won chiefly by science. The point, therefore, was whether they would grudge those couple of thousands of pounds a year when they had in return for the expenditure a few Artillery officers of the highest scientific attainments in every brigade? Another reason why the students in the College were few was that the officers who passed through it were badly rewarded. He thought an inducement should be held out to officers to go through the College by rewarding those who passed through it creditably with good appointments. He thought the Secretary of State for War should pause before he opened the Artillery College to Infantry officers, because it would mean an entire change in the course of study.
    SIR A. HAYTERsaid, he desired to call attention to certain defects in the system of education pursued at Sandhurst—defects which all visitors agreed were very serious. He was sure it would be a surprise to Members to be told that the hours of study per diem at Sandhurst were only a little over four in summer, and less in the winter. There were no lectures on Saturdays, with the result that a great many of the students left the College from Saturday to Monday, not much to their own advantage, and certainly to the great expense of their parents. Some of the studies were entirely useless—such as military law and musketry, which had to be gone through again when the student joined his regiment. The study of tactics ought to be

    1017
    carried very much further, or abandoned altogether. It was proposed that there should be a better system of teaching military history and geography, both of which subjects were extremely useful. In the entrance examination at Sandhurst no fewer than 2,000 marks were given for French and German, and in the Vote under discussion provision was made for rewards, for proficiency in foreign languages. Yet in the whole course at Sandhurst there was not the slightest inducement held out to continue those studies, which would be of the utmost value later on. It was a mischievous policy to induce young men to learn French and German before they entered Sandhurst, and afterwards to give them no opportunity of prosecuting the study of those languages. The expense which a cadet was forced to incur for uniform ought to be reduced. He was obliged to provide himself with four uniforms. The mess jacket might be abolished with advantage, and the tunic worn at mess instead. The helmet, which was very expensive and hardly ever used, might also be done away with. He hoped he had made out such a case as would induce his right hon. Friend to look into it, with a view to reducing the expenses at Sandhurst, which were very heavy on poor officers, and improving the system of education, which at that critical period of his career every young officer so much required.
    MR. CAMPBELL-BANNERMAN: I am obliged to my hon. Friend for having made this statement, for it shows that when I induced him to serve on the Board of Visitors I had got hold of the right man. I think that the recommendations of the Board of Visitors are very sensible. I cannot, however, at this moment say that they can be adopted; but I undertake to give careful and sympathetic consideration to all that my hon. Friend has said.
    MR. TOMLINSONthought that whatever change was made in the uniform in use at Sandhurst it would not be desirable to abolish the mess jacket and substitute the tunic instead, for if these young officers were required to have a full dress uniform it could not be kept in the condition for which it was primarily designed if used at mess. An inexpensive sort of mess jacket might be devised.
    MR. HANBURYsaid, the statement of the Minister for War that he intended to throw open the Artillery College to all branches of the Military Service reminded him that some weeks ago he had asked the right hon. Gentleman to throw open the College to Infantry officers, so as to enable them to get a training in their own small arms. Complaints had been made that small arms were inspected by Artillery officers. Infantry officers considered that small arms should be inspected by some of themselves. He, therefore, wished to know whether Infantry officers who passed through the College would be qualified for these posts of inspection?
    MR. CAMPBELL-BANNERMAN: Anyone who passes with credit through the College will be eligible for every post.
    Vote agreed to.
    7. £126,300, Miscellaneous Effective Services.
    CAPTAIN GRICE - HUTCHINSONsaid he, on a previous occasion, had called attention to the very inadequate contribution which the Government made to the admirable charitable institution, the National Society in Aid of Discharged Soldiers. The donation had been only £200, and the Government had generously increased it. Much might still be done in other directions. Just now there was a great demand for work by Reserve soldiers. According to the last Report of the National Society, 11,000 Reserve soldiers had sought employment, and the Society had been successful in obtaining 4,000 situations. The Report of Lord Wantage's Committee showed that a great deal more might be done for them than was done. As far as he could ascertain, not one of the recommendations made by the Committee had yet been adopted. The system of deferred pay was condemned by most of the witnesses who appeared before the Committee, it being their opinion that it bribed men to join the Reserve. There were many posts now filled by men who were kept on the active lists which should be given to Reserve soldiers, the employment in these positions being really civilian employment. On the question of technical education, a soldier should certainly have an oppor-

    1019
    tunity given him, if not of learning a trade, at least of keeping up the one he might have already learned. This would be a great advantage to him when he left the Colours and joined the Reserve. He did not see why in the great camps, such as Aldershot and the Curragh, some system of this kind should not be inaugurated.
    MR. CAMPBELL-BANNERMANsaid, the contribution to the National Society for Old Soldiers had now reached the substantial figure of £500. When he was in Office in 1886 be had been the first to induce the Treasury to recognise the Society. At that time the contribution was, he thought, £20; it had since gradually increased till it reached £500, being higher this year than in any previous year. That was a substantial proof of their desire not only to encourage the employment of discharged soldiers, but also to aid this Society, which did so much in all parts of the country for that purpose. This question had been discussed several times during the present Session, and he had nothing to add to what he said on those occasions. He was most anxious to provide even better opportunities than now existed for the employment in various capacities of discharged soldiers and Reserve men, and everything he could do in that direction he would not fail to do.
    MR. JAMES LOWTHERobserved that, although the right hon. Gentleman had enunciated very sound sentiments on this question of the employment of discharged soldiers, he did not think all the right hon. Gentleman's Colleagues—and certainly not all the supporters of the Government—had taken precisely the same view. If the Government in all its various Departments were to offer opportunities for the employment of old soldiers, he believed more would be done than could possibly be accomplished by any private agencies. He would like to ask the Secretary of State for War had he succeeded in pressing upon his Colleagues the desirability of extending the system of the employment of Reserve soldiers throughout the different Government Departments? Until he had done that he did not think the right hon. Gentleman would have discharged his full duty in connection with this subject, in connection with which they were asked to make a specific Vote from the
    1020
    pockets of the taxpayers. By practice and example the Government could do much more than they could do by the Vote of £500 to which the right hon. Gentleman had referred as having been due, in a great measure, to his own individual effort. He recognised that the right hon. Gentleman had done his duty towards this matter, and he hoped the Chancellor of the Exchequer, when any of his Colleagues came to him for any augmentations of their Departmental resources, would impress upon them that they ought as far as they possibly could to assist in this great national work in which the Secretary of State for War, so far as he was able, had evinced a warm interest. Some hon. Gentlemen opposite, however, rather threw cold water on this subject, and seemed to think that some of their constituents might be shut out of the receipt of some jobbing appointment if this system were carried out. They appeared to think that the recommendations they might forward to the Departmental Chiefs might be set aside, and the places they sought for their constituents occupied by deserving persons who had served the Crown. He hoped the Government as a body would seriously consider this matter. The employment of old soldiers, he ventured to say, was a matter of urgent and vital concern. There were few inducements for men of good character to enter the Army and encounter what was, in many respects, a hard life. But if they were to realise that occupations would be prepared for them when they advanced in life and were unable to serve longer with the Colours, the inducement to enter the Service would be much greater, and the labours of the recruiting sergeant would be largely decreased.
    MR. E. STANHOPEsaid, before they left this subject he wanted to call attention to a very important question. They had all, he hoped, endeavoured, as far as they could, to promote the employment of Reserve and discharged soldiers. He himself, while in Office, did all he could to encourage that employment; and in conjunction with the late Postmaster General established a system by means of which enormous encouragement was given to discharged soldiers in the Post Office and in the service of the Railway Companies. This Session ought not to be allowed to terminate without obtaining

    1021
    from the Postmaster General a distinct statement of what he had done in this matter. If the right hon. Gentleman had done what was ascribed to him in the public Press, then he believed he had done that which was most calculated to interfere with the employment of discharged and Reserve soldiers in the Post Office.
    MR. ARNOLD-FORSTERcalled attention to the labours of the Ordnance Committee in reference to field-guns and siege-guns. He had seen two experimental 12-pounder guns for siege purposes started at Woolwich Arsenal up to the present time, and as far as he knew, they represented all the efforts of the Ordnance Committee. Three years ago he saw the practice with two experimental howitzers which were to be supplied to the Army by the Ordnance Committee, and these guns were still in the experimental stage. He had seen most extraordinary practice abroad with these guns. He had seen in every Army in Europe guns lighter in weight than our guns, at the same time carrying much heavier shell, and there was not a single one of the right hon. Gentleman's military advisers who did not know perfectly well that the present 12-pounder field-gun was utterly unsuitable, the very slight gain in the additional velocity being more than outweighed by the great disadvantage of the weight of the gun. At Aldershot the wheels of the guns were six inches higher than the wheels of the corresponding guns on the Continent; the weights were greater, and, what was worse was that, whilst our guns were confined to carrying 12-pound shells, the German and French had guns carrying 18 or 20-pound shells. They had been waiting year after year in this country for something to be supplied to the Artillery which would furnish them with what they required; but they seemed to be getting no nearer to this result. Their present field-guns were too heavy, and whilst as regarded howitzers they had only 12-pouuder guns, Continental Armies were supplied with 30-pounder howitzers. He should like to know whether the Ordnance Committee had got beyond the experimental stage, and whether there was any hope that these howitzers would be furnished within a reasonable space of time?
    COLONEL NOLANdesired to have some information from the Secretary of State for War as to the value of cordite. When it was kept in war magazines or otherwise knocked about, was there any change of velocity? He should like to hear some statement as to the permanence of this velocity.
    MR. CAMPBELL-BANNERMANregretted that the question respecting cordite had not been put on the previous night, when he had all the facts and Reports by him. He had every reason to believe that cordite would be safe at 120 degrees; but, on the whole, he believed it would be safer to base their calculation on 100 degrees. Although he had not the Reports at present, he could honestly state that all the information received by him in regard to cordite was favourable. It did not lose any of its energy by being kept. With regard to the question by the Member for West Belfast as to the lighter field gun, he was glad to say that most satisfactory progress had been made in that matter, and there was every prospect of an early adoption of a gun that would give satisfaction. He quite agreed there had been a long delay in the matter, but he hoped they were now near a solution.
    SIR C. W. DILKEdesired to know if the Secretary of State for War could state what was the temperature at which cordite began to go wrong? Did it commence to go wrong at a temperature of anything like 100 degrees, because 125 degrees was not an uncommon temperature in the Bengal Service?
    MR. HANBURYsaid, that certain experiments were to have been made at Okehampton with cordite. The day before that on which the tests were to be made an artificer went down to prepare the guns, but when he arrived he found he had not got the proper tools for the purpose, and the experiments could not, therefore, be carried out. He should like to have some information as to what did happen.
    MR. CAMPBELL-BANNERMANcould not give a clear explanation as to the actual details of the case, but he believed what occurred was substantially what the hon. Member had stated. Some slight alterations were necessary in the mechanism of the guns before the experiments could be made.
    MR. HANBURY: Will all the guns have to be altered for cordite?
    MR. CAMPBELL-BANNERMAN: Yes.
    SIR C. W. DILKE: To what extent does it go wrong at 100 degrees?
    MR. CAMPBELL-BANNERMAN: That I cannot say.
    MR. TOMLINSON: The experiments, I understand, were not carried out. Is it intended to complete them on some future occasion?
    MR. CAMPBELL-BANNERMAN: No doubt.
    MR. BRODRICKsaid, as to the sums voted for the employment of Reserve soldiers, he would like to know what number of men had now been received into the employment of the Railway Companies in accordance with the promise made by the Railway Companies to the late Secretary of State for War?
    THE CHAIRMANruled that question out of Order, as there was no matter relating to the Railway Companies in the Vote.
    MR. CAMPBELL - BANNERMANsaid, he had not the information which would enable him to answer this question; and even if he had, he ought not to give it, as the Chairman had ruled it out of Order.
    MR. HANBURYsaid, with reference to the Brennan torpedo, they had already spent enormous sums upon it. They started with £125,000, which they gave for the invention, but year after year large sums continued to be paid to Mr. Brennan. They had a further sum this year of £3,500. When were they going to finally pay for this wonderful invention? With regard to barracks, he should like to know what were the duties of the Sanitary Committee? They had had complaints from Ireland with regard to the insanitary condition of the barracks there, and now they had serious complaints with regard to the barracks at Windsor. He had received information which showed that the right hon. Gentleman was not quite accurate when he said the complaint was confined to the officers' quarters. As a matter of fact, the whole drainage system was bad, and the medical officer stationed there distinctly stated that it would be dangerous that these troops should he allowed to live
    1024
    over these drains for six months. The money for carrying out improvements at these particular barracks had been put down in the Votes, and struck off, he supposed, for Treasury convenience. It was most important, however, that this matter should be settled. Further, with reference to the question of the employment of discharged soldiers, he wished to know whether facilities could not be given for their service in the Metropolitan Police by extending the age at which they could enter the Force? They would be admirably suited, by their training, to discharge such duties.
    MR. CAMPBELL-BANNERMANwould be glad if means could be devised of employing discharged soldiers in the Metropolitan Police, and he would consult his right hon. Friend the Home Secretary on the point. But he was afraid there would be some opposition to the proposal. He was himself a Member of the Committee which sat in 1876 on this subject. There was at that time a good deal of discussion on the question of these men entering the Police. A good deal could be said against it, and he would consult his right hon. Friend, and look into the whole matter. As to the Brennan torpedo, it was advancing in a very lively manner, and there was every reason to believe it to be a great invention. He was himself a witness recently of some most interesting and surprising experiments in working the Brennan torpedo from a movable base. He was sure that everybody who witnessed those experiments would be satisfied not only as to the extremely ingenious nature of the torpedo, but also as to its formidable character for the purposes of war. The hon. Member had asked him what were the duties of the Sanitary Committee. The Sanitary Committee were a consultative and not an executive body. They were called in by the War Office when any new barracks were to be constructed, or large enterprises of that sort undertaken. As to the barracks at Windsor, the hon. Member was wrong in saying that he (Mr. Campbell-Bannerman) gave an inaccurate answer to his question. What he stated was that the smells complained of affected the officers' quarters. He was aware that the whole system of the drainage of the barracks was old-fashioned and bad, and should be altered, but that

    1025
    was a very large undertaking. In the meantime, he was face to face with the fact that many other barracks required their drainage improving, and that the health of the troops at Windsor bad been good for many years. He had seen a Return of the actual diseases, and there was hardly any disease in the barracks attributable to anything that could result from bad drainage, and the Director General of the Army Medical Department agreed that there was no reason to pronounce the barracks unhealthy, still less uninhabitable, although it was admitted that the drains were of an old-fashioned kind, and on a very imperfect system. What he (Mr. Campbell-Bannerman) spoke of was individual complaints of offensive smells in the officers' quarters, and these had been traced, he thought with accuracy, to a foul latrine, and an escape of burning gas in the building. The sanitary officer of the Royal Engineer Department, a most intelligent and capable man, went down and applied the smoke test, and investigated the whole matter. That was the conclusion he came to, and both the Inspector General of Fortifications and the Director General of the Army Medical Department advised him that with a cure applied to these smaller evils there was no probability of danger in occupying the barracks until the time arrived for undertaking the much larger repairs which would undoubtedly be required.
    MR. TOMLINSONurged the necessity of devising some system by which men who had been in the Army could join the Police Force for duty at barracks and at other permanent institutions.
    SIR J. GORSTdid not see that there would be any insuperable difficulty in having discharged soldiers and sailors enrolled in the Metropolitan Police expressly for service in the arsenals and dockyards. Though they might not be fitted at their more advanced age for the very severe work which was required in the real Metropolitan Police, they might be quite fit and able to discharge those particular functions of the Metropolitan Police which had relation to the dockyards and arsenals, and he hoped the Home Secretary would consider whether it was not possible to enrol these men in the Metropolitan Police specially for service at the dockyards and arsenals.
    MR. BRODRICKfancied the War Department had found it more convenient and economical to have members of the Metropolitan Police employed who were changed from time to time according to discipline. Unless he was mistaken, the total number of police employed by the War Department was only between 200 and 300, while the total number of Metropolitan Police who were old soldiers was between 2,800 and 3,000. If that were so, there were 10 Metropolitan policemen who were old soldiers for every one employed by the War Department.
    Vote agreed to.
    8. £1,385,400, Pensions and other Non-Effective Charges for Warrant Officers, Non-commissioned Officers, Men, and others.—Agreed to.
    9. £156,700, Superannuation and other Allowances and Gratuities.

  CIVIL SERVICES AND REVENUE DEPARTMENTS, 1893–94.

    CLASS II.
    10. Motion made, and Question proposed,
    "That a sum. not exceeding £90,621, be granted to Her Majesty, to complete the sum necessary to defray the Charge which will come in course of payment during the year ending on the 31st day of March 1894, for the Salaries and Expenses of the Local Government Board."
    SIR J. GORSTdesired the President of the Local Government Board to afford the Committee some explanation, in addition to that he gave at Question time, of the proposal made by certain Boards of Guardians in the East of London to acquire land for the purpose of setting the unemployed to work upon it. He thought it was impossible to exaggerate the importance of a question of this kind, because if there was one thing more than another which the electors of the country really took an interest in it was in the reform of the Poor Law and any experiment tried in the direction of a reform of the Poor Law was sure to excite the greatest possible interest on the part of the people of this country, and if any successful experiment could be carried out it would redound more than anything else they could do to the credit of the Minister and the Government under which it was conducted. He believed this question of the unemployed

    1027
    was one which might at any time become acute, and give immense trouble and difficulty both to the Government and to Parliament, and it was one well deserving the careful and anxious consideration not only of the Government, but of the House itself. It appeared, from researches made and from information placed before the Local Government Board, that there was now under old Statutes which had long fallen into disuse power vested in the Boards of Guardians to acquire land not exceeding 50 acres for each parish, and upon that land to set unemployed persons to work at remunerative occupations and to give them reasonable wages. For many years past the London Guardians had practised a very clumsy kind of public employment. There was in every Union a most barbarous institution known as a stone-yard, and in that yard able-bodied men who applied for work were set to the work of breaking up stones for macadam. They were not paid according to the quantity of work they did, and it was a sort of labour test. The men had to break a certain quantity of stone in the day, and then they were paid not in proportion to the work they had done, but in the shape of outdoor relief according to their needs and to the number of their family. The system was objectionable, and had never answered in practice. It had had the effect of pauperising the recipients of the relief, and had certainly failed to relieve a great amount of distress. There was no idea more fascinating to anyone than that of a Public Authority like a Board of Guardians being able to give an honest man out of work, who was anxious to work and could not get it to do, to give him employment and pay him not in the relief which a pauper would receive, but to pay him what these old Statutes called reasonable wages for the work which he did. In social questions they must make a great number of experiments—and some experiments which would fail—before they hit upon a right mode of meeting the social difficulties with which they were surrounded. He did not at all enter into the feelings of a man who never tried anything because he thought it might fail. In science how many scientific men had tried experiments which had been failures; how many ideas had been adopted by men of science which, after trial and experiment,
    1028
    had had to be abandoned! It was just the same in social matters. They should make a number of experiments and make an immense number of failures, and they should have to go through a period of trial and failure before they arrived at a solution of social difficulties. No doubt failures would be experienced; but when there were people willing to try experiments and entrusted by the ratepayers with power to do so, it seemed to him that the Government should afford them every facility that could be afforded consistently with the law. There were several unions in the East of London who anxiously desired to try the experiment of acquiring land for the purpose of setting the unemployed to work if the President of the Local Government Board would authorise them to do so. They could not do so without permission. He thought that Local Authorities were now too much interfered with by the Local Government Board. That was not fair, and he would press upon the right hon. Gentleman that, unless there were some very serious objections not yet publicly stated, he would allow these publicly-elected Bodies to try these experiments. He might point out that experiments of the kind had been tried for the last two years by the Salvation Army. He did not know whether those experiments had been an economical success; but anyone who would take the trouble to go down to the Army farm in Essex would see that, as a method of getting people actually to work—people recruited from the riff-raff of the East End of London—they had not been a failure. It seemed to him that in the light of those experiments Boards of Guardians might make most valuable experiments themselves, which could not possibly do any harm, which would certainly be productive of instruction, and might guide them in the direction in which this great social problem might be solved.
    SIR C. W. DILKEsaid, those who were acquainted with the experiments referred to by the right hon. Gentleman would recognise the difficulties that existed in carrying out his suggestion. The vast majority of those who came under the care of Boards of Guardians were either old or sick. They could not be looked upon as able-bodied people, very few of

    1029
    whom remained with them long. At the same time, he was entirely in accord with the right hon. Gentleman in his desire to see Boards of Guardians permitted to make experiments. Undoubtedly the tendency of the time was more and more in the direction of local control in these matters. With regard to the cholera epidemic, he had the most complete confidence in the Local Government Board, and he was of opinion that there was not the slightest cause for alarm. All, he was satisfied, that could be done had been done. But there was another and more delicate question to which he would direct attention. He wished to suggest to the Local Government Board that they should select their auditors from experienced auditors' clerks. He acknowledged that the President of the Local Government Board had heretofore exercised his patronage most carefully, and he had the fullest confidence in him; but he thought it right to bring this matter before him. He believed there had been only one such vacancy, and that the right hon. Gentleman had followed the course now suggested by him (Sir C. W. Dilke). He hoped he would continue to follow that course. And, again, the general Inspectors should be selected from the best class of auditors.
    MR. LONGsaid, he sympathised with the desire of the right hon. Gentleman for the employment of the unemployed, but he could not approve of his proposal. He did not think that anyone who was acquainted with the working of the Salvation Army farm would endorse his right hon. Friend's (Sir J. Gorst's) opinion. In saying that, he did not intend to refer to the Salvation Army itself; the farm colony was another matter altogether. He thought it had been made clear that, through the attempts of the Salvation Army to deal with this problem, considerable industries had been destroyed; and that in employing one set of people others had been submerged. It was the duty of the Local Government Board to so advise the Local Authorities that their action should be taken in the interests of the community as a whole, and not calculated merely to meet a difficulty which might be tem-
    1030
    porary and local. He did not think that the Local Government Board were likely to hold out much encouragement in the direction indicated by the right hon. Gentleman (Sir J. Gorst), because if they were to encourage Local Authorities to find work for the unemployed that work could only be of two kinds. It must either be work which was unnecessary or work which was necessary and must be done. If the work was necessary it could only be done in the way indicated by the displacement of free labour.
    SIR J. GORST: Not necessarily.
    MR. LONGsaid, his right hon. Friend said "not necessarily," but there must be displacement, and he would point out in addition that it would be a dangerous thing to raise hopes in the minds of the unemployed unless they were certain they could give practical effect to what they desired. As to what had been said by the right hon. Baronet (Sir C. W. Dilke) of the cholera scare, everybody who had any experience of the Local Government Board would have full confidence in the zeal and efficiency of its officers. He had also confidence in the Local Authorities. There ought, however, to be at the disposal of the Local Government Board, as the Public Health Department of the country, a larger power of spending money in emergencies, and the Sanitary Department ought to be better equipped in that respect. That Department was fortunate at the present time in having the right hon. Gentleman (Mr. H. H. Fowler) at its head, and, not merely that, but in having such distinguished officials and professional men to guide it. But when this country was threatened with the outbreak of an epidemic it ought to have larger power of spending money, and it should be provided with the means of indulging in experiments in any particular direction. The Department had, however, no funds at its disposal to undertake experiments. He believed the labour attendant upon holding local inquiries had greatly increased.
    THE PRESIDENT OF THE LOCAL GOVERNMENT BOARD (Mr. H. H. FOWLER,): Doubled in four years.
    MR. LONGsaid, as the work had increased, increased power should be given. Again, he would point out that the staff of Medical Inspectors should be strengthened. He believed that there was no cause for alarm in reference to the outbreak of cholera. On the contrary, he thought the scare which had been created had proved a safeguard, as it had directed attention to the necessity of taking precautions. He was confident that, in the hands of the President of the Local Government Board and the permanent officials of the Department, they were as safe as human ingenuity could make them. He believed that the President would be able to give a satisfactory report to the House as to the present cases.
    SIR H. ROSCOEsaid, he desired to express his hearty sympathy with what had fallen from the hon. Member for the West Derby Division. He had the highest opinion of the medical officers of the Local Government Board, but he agreed with the hon. Member that their number and the means at their disposal for carrying out important investigations were too small. The hon. Member had remarked that abroad the condition of things was very different, and he (Sir H. Roscoe), from his own experiences, also agreed with the hon. Member in that. Governments in other countries had large and important establishments for the very purpose of carrying out investigations which we attempted in a small manner to carry out under this important Department. The attention of the country ought to be drawn to the matter, for there was nothing in this country comparable to the institutions existing in Berlin, St. Petersburg, and Paris. They all had confidence in the President of the Local Government Board, and those who acted under him; and if the attention of the country were drawn to this matter, he was sure we should not long be behind other countries in these matters. He believed that the country was free at present from the danger of anything like a large outbreak of cholera. He had full confidence in the arrangements that had been made by the Department and by the Local Authorities.
    MR. POWELL WILLIAMSsaid, the hon. Member who had just sat down seemed to open a non possumus to what he did not think the right hon. Member for Cambridge University had suggested. The matter was of some importance in view of the condition of things which might be expected in the forthcoming winter. The unemployed could not be ignored, and the question of finding suitable occupation for them was one which must, sooner or later, be faced. In dealing with it, however, care must be taken—and he agreed with the hon. Member for the West Derby Division in this respect—to find work for the unemployed which would not drive the employed out of occupation. The suggestion to put the unemployed to the cultivation of land would be, perhaps more than any other proposal, open to the objection he had named. Of course, if they could find a considerable tract of land not at present under cultivation and put the unemployed on it, by such a policy no one would be thrown out of work and the occupation would be infinitely preferable to that of the stone-yard. Possibly, the solution of the question might be found in this direction. There were several objections to putting the unemployed into the stone-yard. In the first place, stone-breaking was skilled labour, and to put the unemployed upon it was to interfere with the skilled labourer. Investigation made into the subject in Birmingham had disclosed the fact that there was a certain way of striking the stone—a certain face on which it was desirable to strike it—in order to produce the best material for road-making. Moreover, the trades of many of the unemployed were delicate, such as the manufacture of jewellery. He knew a jeweller who, when unemployed, was put to stone-breaking, and the result was that on obtaining work again it was fully a fortnight before he had the proper use of his fingers. The right hon. Gentleman the Member for the Forest of Dean had told them that the unemployed largely consisted of persons who were aged.
    SIR C. W. DILKEsaid, he had made that statement in reference to the people who went before the Guardians, not with, reference to the unemployed.
    MR. POWELL WILLIAMSsaid, he had misunderstood the right hon. Baronet. On another point, they were informed the other day that the Local and County Authorities were liable to make good damage done through riots, such as they had had experience of during the past few weeks.
    MR. H. H. FOWLER: I have nothing to do with that.
    MR. POWELL WILLIAMS: But he would have to do with rioting on the part of the unemployed, who might require assistance from the Local Government Board.
    MR. H. H. FOWLER: No.
    MR. FORWOODsaid, he was sure it was most satisfactory to hear the statement of the hon. Baronet the Member for Manchester on the subject of the cholera epidemic—to the effect that it was not likely to spread. He (Mr. Forwood) wished to say one word oil behalf of the trading community of the country—especially as to the shipping trade. There had been a good deal of exaggeration, particularly in the newspapers, in regard to the epidemic, and he would counsel the President of the Local Government Board to guard against that exaggeration. Foreign Governments were very apt to take alarm at the slightest appearance of disease, and to put quarantine on British vessels, thus stopping the trade of this country. They had already had some experience of this, and if a scare such as got abroad last year occurred again it would be a very serious matter for the shipping trade and for the commerce of the country.
    MR. TOMLINSONsaid, that with reference to the point raised by the right hon. Baronet the Member for the Forest of Dean in reference to the appointment of auditors, he considered it necessary that, in addition to a knowledge of accountancy, these officials should have a sufficient acquaintance with legal principles, and with the Acts that regulated the powers of the authorities to enable them to deal satisfactorily with the subject of surcharges. Many Local Authorities throughout the country were
    1034
    dissatisfied with the decisions of the auditors. On another point, he thought the Local Government Board should do something in the way of setting up a standard of requirement in regard to local sanitary engineering. The public should not be left at the mercy of local engineers who liked to carry out theories of their own.
    MR. MACDONAsaid, he had several times put questions to the Local Government Board on a question on which he felt warmly. He was of opinion that infectious diseases were brought to this country in old rags; and in view of the spread of the cholera epidemic, he thought that something should be done to induce the Government to re-impose the prohibition against the introduction of these rags. He admitted that up to the present time the Local Government Board had done everything in their power to stop the cholera, and he knew that doctors differed as to whether or not infectious diseases were brought into the country by means of old rags. He, however, was of opinion that they were, and he therefore took this opportunity of making a further appeal to the Government on the question.
    MR. GIBSON BOWLES—[Cries of "Divide!"]—said, he desired to move a reduction in the salary of the President of the Local Government Board, not as a personal matter, but in order to call attention to the Board itself. [Cries of "Divide!" and "Agreed!"] He considered the Local Government Board a Board of interference with those who carried on local government. He would not go through the whole gamut of the delinquencies of the Board, but when he had succeeded in getting an adequate amount of silence in the House he would give three illustrations. In the first place—[Cries of "Agreed!"]—he objected to the Board imposing auditors on localities when those localities were engaged merely in managing their own property and spending their own money. Now, why was this? Would hon. Gentlemen like to have auditors sent down to them to manage their private accounts? Certainly not. The fact that Local Government Board inquiries as to the

    1035
    propriety of allowing Local Authorities to spend their own money had increased, instead of giving him that pleasure which the Government expected it would inspire in hon. Members, raised within him rather a feeling of shame to think that the Local Authorities should be thus interfered with in their domestic concerns. His second point was this—he did not believe very much in doctors, nor in the cholera. He was very much of opinion that whenever an easterly wind blew for a considerable time various mischiefs were blown to us, including revolutionary Radical ideas and the germs of various diseases. If these things were cured it would not be by doctors, but by a breath of westerly wind, which would blow them back again. [Cries of "Divide!" "Agreed!" and interruption.] He protested against the policy of interfering with the Local Authorities during the present cholera scare, and leaving those Local Authorities to pay all the expenses of the precautions the Local Government Board imposed on them. His third point was in regard to the establishment for vaccination. The President of the Local Government Board kept up a vaccination establishment with a doctor or two and a calf or two at a large and increasing expenditure. The expenses if this Department seemed to increase in proportion as vaccination decreased. It was known that the Vaccination Acts were in the agonies of death, the Royal Commission having recommended that the cumulative penalty should no longer be imposed. The moment, therefore, bad arrived when the right lion. Gentleman the President of the Local Government Board might re-consider his calves.
    MR. H. H. FOWLER: The right hon. Gentleman the Member for the University of Cambridge raised the question of the administration of the Poor Law as far as it relates not to existing paupers, but to the unemployed. He put to me questions as to the powers of the Local Government Board and the course I intended to pursue. I, this afternoon, answered a question addressed to me on that subject, and I would just remind the House of what my answer was—and that will be my reply to the
    1036
    right hon. Gentleman the Member for Cambridge University, and also to my right hon. Friend the Member for the Forest of Dean and the hon. Member for Birmingham. Few greater curses ever afflicted this country than the old Poor Law, and the reform of the Poor Law in 1834 was one of the greatest social reforms of this century. The old Act of Elizabeth empowered the Guardians and Overseers to put persons not able to get an honest livelihood—that is to say, destitute persons—to labour, and it also empowered them to find funds and raw material for that purpose. That was passed 300 years ago. In the reign of George III., about the beginning of this century, an Act was passed empowering Churchwardens and Overseers to acquire land to the amount of 50 acres in a parish, and to set indigent persons to work upon it. And the Act also empowered the Justices to commit to the House of Correction any of these persons who refused to work. No doubt it was the theory—whether correct or not—that these measures were repealed when the present Poor Law system was introduced, but the Law Officers of the Crown have advised me that, although obsolete in practice, they are still on the Statute Book and that action can be taken under them. Whether, however, this practically obsolete legislation, which would effect so great a change in our present system, should be revived I do not feel myself authorised on my own Ministerial authority to decide. The question must come before the Cabinet, and it will be for the Cabinet to consider whether it should apply to the Legislature for sanction to put into force powers which have not been exercised for many generations. That is my answer to those who ask what course we intend to pursue. I, of course, sympathise with all that has been said as to this difficult problem of the unemployed. I agree with the hon. Member for Birmingham that the question is one that statesmen of both Parties will have to face. For my own part, I have never claimed for the Local Government Board infallibility or unalterability. I have already recognised the importance of the subject by recommending the appointment of a Royal Commission to make inquiries as to the aged poor, and I think that it will probably be

    1037
    desirable to re-elect the same Commission or to appoint another to make investigations in regard to other branches of the Poor Law. With respect to the qualifications of auditors, I agree that to be a good auditor a man must be a competent accountant, acquainted with the law relating to the duties which he has to fulfil. The auditors of the Board, in my opinion, discharge their duties with wonderful ability and great impartiality. The number of appeals from them has this year been singularly few, and their decisions have but rarely been overruled. As to the qualification of these gentlemen, my desire is, and has been, that the persons appointed as auditors shall have been trained to the business. There is no part of my duty more distasteful to me than the exercise of patronage. I wish I had none to exercise. I cannot make a pledge, however, as to what I shall do in the event of vacancies arising in the offices of auditors and inspectors, for each case will have to be judged on its own merits. I have had only one auditor to appoint since I have been in Office, but in that case, I may say, I confined my area of selection to those who had served under auditors. The gentleman I appointed had been in the work of public audit since he Was 16 or 17 years of age. I have to thank the hon. Gentleman opposite for expressing confidence in the Local Government Board. He expressed a desire that the Board should be given larger powers and more money to spend. Of course, I should be glad to have more money to spend—every Department desires that; and I should like to have it to spend on scientific inquiries, especially as to the difference between English cholera and Asiatic cholera, a matter in regard to which I have been in communication with Dr. Thorne. But it is due to the Treasury to say that every application for additional help which I have made to that Department this year has been readily assented to. The increase in the expenditure of the Board is some £5,000, and £4,000 of that amount was for the services of additional Medical Inspectors. They have granted me all I asked for. I asked for two permanent and four temporary Medical Inspectors, as it was
    1038
    the opinion of Dr. Thorne Thorne that, with that addition to his staff, he would be able to grapple with all emergencies. The Treasury have granted me that aid, and, in consideration of the large number of local inquiries, they have assented to the permanent employment of two of the three Engineering Inspectors who had been temporarily engaged. I agree with my hon. Friend as to the danger of this cholera scare. We live in a very sensational age, and I am sorry to say the Press is very fond of sensational news, and there is a tendency to exaggerate the state of things. The right hon. Gentleman the Member for Ormskirk (Mr. Forwood) says the Local Government Board should be careful to avoid any exaggeration in the reports emanating from it. We have regarded it as important to state to the public the true facts of the case, neither extenuating nor exaggerating them. As far as our general proceedings are concerned, I do not think that more can be done than is being done. We have a most competent medical staff, presided over by one of the most distinguished men in the Medical Profession, Dr. Thorne Thorne, and I have the great advantage of having as Parliamentary Secretary an eminent physician of great experience. Everything is being done that can be done. I am bound to say that we are having the strongest support from Local Authorities, who are doing their duty to the utmost in this emergency. The only other question that has been raised is as to the importation of rags. I quite agree that if we were satisfied that raga were a means of importation of disease, it would be necessary to take very stringent precautions. But at the recent Conference at Dresden the opinion expressed by the scientists of Europe, and the result of the practical experience of Europe, was that there was no case known of cholera being communicated by rags imported under the circumstances in which we allow rags to be imported. I stated to the House the other afternoon that the importation of all rags is now prohibited except rags compressed by hydraulic force, transported in bales surrounded with iron bands and containing marks showing their origin and accepted by the authorities of the country of destination. I am informed by my advisers that some of the rags that are coming in now are rags

    1039
    that were collected three or four years ago, and that if I want to prohibit the rags of 1893 from coming into England, the prohibition will have to be in force somewhere about the year 1896 or 1897. I may state in passing that that very eminent scientist, Dr. Koch, was of the same opinion as the other leading authorities present at the Conference at Dresden—namely, that in no case had cholera been traced to rags in the form I have mentioned. Having received that evidence, and the Conference having on behalf of all the Great Powers of Europe, including Great Britain, signed the Convention specifying under what conditions rags should be imported into the different countries, I do not think we should be justified in prohibiting the importation, there being no evidence of the public health being in danger. The only other speech addressed to the House was that of the hon. Gentleman opposite (Mr. Gibson Bowles), who has been through what he called the gamut of wickedness of the Local Government Board. Well, Sir, I am responsible for that wickedness, and must plead guilty to it. I can answer his question as to auditors. It is in accordance with the Statute, and it is very much to the interest of the public, that there should be public auditors appointed to look after the ratepayers' money. I believe the tendency of public Opinion is to extend the powers of Local Authorities to borrow money; and I am strongly of opinion that as the accounts of County Councils and Poor Law Guardians are audited, the accounts of Municipal Authorities ought also to be audited. That is, however, a question of legislation, and not of administration. I do not think I need go into the question of vaccination; but my hon. Friend (Sir W. Foster) will be able to answer any questions to which a reply may be needed. We are still waiting for the Report of the Royal Commission. No one is more anxious than I am to have that Report. I think the country is very impatient for it, and many of our operations are seriously interfered with by the fact that we do not know what the Report will be. I hope we shall receive it in the course of a very few weeks. I have to thank hon. Members who have spoken for the way in which they have referred to the Local
    1040
    Government Board, and I can assure the Committee that in grappling with emergencies we shall feel strengthened by knowing that we have the confidence of Parliament. We shall not hesitate to take any steps that may be necessary, and I am sure this House will not hesitate to give the Local Government Board any additional powers that may be necessary.
    Question put, and agreed to.
    11. £30,000, to complete the sum for Mercantile Marine Fund (Grant in Aid).
    MR. GIBSON BOWLESremarked that the sum of £50,000 was made up of an ordinary Vote in aid of £40,000, and of an extra Vote this year of £10,000, given for the specific purpose of effecting communication between lighthouses and lightships and the shore. He submitted that, whatever might be the case as regarded the £40,000, the demand for the £10,000 could hardly be defended, inasmuch as the right hon. Gentleman the President of the Board of Trade (Mr. Mundella) was already possessed of a. fund that was sufficient for establishing the communications in question. The Mercantile Marine Fund was levied from light dues on ships to the extent of £520,000, and there was, in addition, £5,000 for the unpaid wages and the effects of dead sailors. Out of the £525,000 there was allocated to lightships and to matters connected with the Sea Service generally a sum of £400,000, leaving a balance of £125,000. It was proposed to allocate this money for other purposes, including £94,000 for the Mercantile Marine Offices. The Mercantile Marine Offices were always supposed to pay their own fees, but had not succeeded in doing so, and consequently the amount the right hon. Gentleman had in his hands, derived every penny of it from ships and sailors, was applied to purposes not germane to those for which it was intended. Under the circumstances, he thought the £10,000 should not be asked for. It seemed to him that the Mercantile Marine Fund might very easily be increased. Why should Her Majesty's ships and yachts be exempted from light dues, which were in the same category as rates,

    1041
    being payments for services rendered? Were this exemption removed a large accession of income would be secured for the Mercantile Marine Fund. The contributions made towards the provision of lifeboats, rocket apparatus, and so forth, should not, in his opinion, be charged to that Fund, but should come out of the national taxation. He did not at all deny that life-saving and the collection of statistics with regard to loss of life at sea were proper purposes on which to spend national funds, but he denied that they should be paid for by a special class of property. He was sorry not to see the late Chancellor of the Exchequer (Mr. Goschen) in his place, because seven years ago his right hon. Friend absolutely promised that the subject should be carefully examined, and said it was evident that the finances of the Fund were in a most unsatisfactory condition. So far as he (Mr. Gibson Bowles) could ascertain, no change whatever had been made in the general treatment of the Fund. It was rather hard that the Committee should be asked for the £40,000, inasmuch as the Fund had £125,000 to spare, and still harder that they should be asked for the £10,000 for the purpose of a particular service with regard to particular lightships or lighthouses.
    MR. LODERentirely disagreed with the views of his hon. Friend who had just sat down with reference to the extra grant in aid. He only wished it had been £20,000 instead of £10,000. He regretted that the Government had not seen their way to carrying out more fully the recommendations of the Royal Commission who made a tour of the lighthouses last year, more especially as their Report was of a very moderate character. The total cost of establishing communications with the lighthouses and lightships recommended would be less than £30,000, and he was sorry to say that only about a third of that sum had at present been expended. The Royal Commission specially recommended that two lightships should be connected with the coast at the time that the Gunfleet Lighthouse was dealt with, but this recommendation had not been carried out. The Commission recommended that certain lighthouses should have their cables laid
    1042
    at the same time as the cable was laid to Lundy. That had not been done, and the result was that the expense of the work would be increased. He was sorry also that the Fastnet Lighthouse, one of the most important on our coasts, had not yet been connected with the shore.
    THE PRESIDENT OF THE BOARD OF TRADE (Mr. MUNDELLA,): I think the hon. Gentleman who has just spoken fully appreciates the reason why we ask for this extra Vote of £10,000. There was no Fund to which this Supplementary Vote could be so properly applied as the Mercantile Marine Fund, because that Fund supplies the money for the whole of the lighthouses and lightships on the coast of the United Kingdom. It was distinctly understood, when the Royal Commission was appointed, that any expenditure that was involved should not come out of the Mercantile Marine Fund.
    MR. GIBSON BOWLES: Does the £10,000 not come out of the Mercantile Marine Fund?
    MR. MUNDELLA: No; it does not. As to the remarks of the hon. Member for Brighton (Mr. Loder), I can assure him that we are making as much progress as can be reasonably expected. The work cannot be carried out safely without being done tentatively. A great deal of work has already been done; certain lighthouses have already been connected with the shore, and we are now undertaking these three vessels and two lighthouses. I hope we shall be able to satisfy hon. Gentlemen that we are making as much progress as can reasonably be anticipated. There is no intention to come annually to the Treasury, or to increase the sum beyond the £40,000, except so far as it is necessary to complete works of real necessity, and for that purpose we must come to the Treasury on the distinct understanding that the Treasury shall provide the funds. I hope we shall now be allowed to take the Vote.
    MR. A. C. MORTONwas told by people who understood this matter—namely, Merchant Captains—that the French Government managed this service much better than it was managed

    1043
    in this country, and at much less cost, the reason being that it was in the hands of the Government. Trinity House was an anomaly, and ought to be abolished, and the whole matter placed under responsible Government authority. He hoped that early next Session they would have an opportunity of discussing this matter at a reasonable hour, and when they could divide upon it.
    Vote agreed to.
    12. Motion made, and Question proposed,
    "That a sum, not exceeding £5,812, be granted to Her Majesty, to complete the sum necessary to defray the Charge which will come in course of payment during the year ending on the 31st day of March 1894, for the Salaries and Expenses of the Establishment under the Public Works Loan Commissioners."
    Mr. T. W. Russellmoved, "That the Chairman do report Progress, and ask leave to sit again;" but the Chairman, being of opinion that the Motion was an abuse of the Rules of the House, declined to propose the Question thereupon to the Committee.
    Question put, and agreed to.
    13. £30,659, to complete the sum for the Registrar General's Office, England.—Agreed to.
    14. £280,232, to complete the sum for Stationery and Printing.
    MR. M. AUSTINsaid, that in directing the attention of the Committee to the question of Government printing in Ireland, he had hoped from the discussion that took place a couple of weeks ago that some practical good would result. At that late hour it was not his intention to detain the Committee, especially as it would be repeating an old story of the violation of all Trades Union principles by long hours and low wages. In connection with the Queen's printers in Ireland, Messrs. Thom, his chief complaint was the large number of boys employed there and brought up to the printing trade in that establishment. While his mind was not narrowed by any Conservative principles in this matter, he felt, as a practical workman, that no more pernicious system as affecting our industrial working class could exist; and when he thought of the Resolution that was passed
    1044
    by the House of Commons, which it was hoped would cope with such an evil, and the failure of that Resolution to be fairly considered, he was entitled to some reply from the Secretary to the Treasury. Another branch of the printing department was entrusted to a house (Messrs. Browne and Nolan) which confined its operations to ignoring the legitimate printers of Dublin, which house enjoined longer hours upon its employés and paid lower wages than other establishments. The Government, in its parental capacity in looking after the social well-being of the people, oftentimes neglected this important duty, and hence the strong agitation which had arisen during the past 12 months for the carrying out of that great principle. Then there was the important fact of the Government supporting, he might say solely, a paper in the City of Dublin, The General Advertiser, which was brought out under conditions that brought home to his mind some of the most important evidence revealed under the Sweating Commission. In bringing these matters before the Committee he was actuated by no spirit of hostility, but when he remembered the conditions of life under which working men had often to earn a living he would be unworthy of his position if on every opportunity afforded him he did not ventilate their grievances. He appealed to the right hon. Gentleman the Secretary to the Treasury for some declaration on this matter, so that the printers of Dublin might have their grievances attended to in the same prompt manner as was done in the case of the complaints made by the hon. Member for the Ince Division (Mr. Woods) on behalf of the printers of M'Corquodale and Co.
    SIR J. T. HIBBERT, in reply, explained that part of the work referred to by the hon. Member was under the control of the Treasury, and part under the control of the Irish Office. He could only speak so far as the Treasury was concerned, but he could assure the hon. Member that they intended to apply the same rule in Ireland as in England with respect to the matter, and that if he found a violation of the conditions it would be his duty to intimate to the firms that had been referred to that their contracts would not be renewed. This

    1045
    whole question would receive every attention.
    SIR R. TEMPLEdesired to know what was being done about the Report of the Committee which sat upon the subject of reporting the Parliamentary Debates? He believed some action had been taken, and he hoped, if that action could not be reported to the House before the Adjournment, they might understand what had been done when they met again in November. He would venture to impress upon the Secretary to the Treasury that this Hansard record was of great importance in a Parliamentary and historic sense, and proper means ought to be taken to insure its accuracy. That could only be done if Members who made speeches had sufficient facilities for correcting the proofs. No doubt it was desirable that the speeches should be reported in brief—that was to say, that the report should be in some degree abbreviated and summarised. But if that were done the report should be written in the third person. He earnestly hoped there might be no repetition of the absurd process which took place last Session and the Session before—namely, of the speeches being abbreviated by one-third or one-fourth, and then the report written in the first person. All literary men would assure the right hon. Gentleman that such a process could only end in absurdity, and he, therefore, trusted there would be no repetition of it. He desired to take that opportunity of expressing his sense of the great improvement which had been made this Session over any previous Session in his experience in the important work of Parliamentary reporting. The efficiency, zeal, accuracy, and competency shown by the present staff in reporting the Debates was worthy of the highest commendation; and, as one having had some experience of the work, he thought it his duty to bear public testimony to the efficiency of the present reports.
    SIR J. T. HIBBERT: I can assure my hon. Friend that I entirely endorse the views he has expressed. Having sat with him for a considerable time on the Committee which considered this question, I can assure him I have the greatest interest in the recommendations of the Committee being carried out. I am not in a position
    1046
    to-day to say how the recommendations will be carried out. They are under the consideration of the Treasury at the present moment, and I hope, when we meet again in the Autumn Session, I shall be able to state what is proposed to be done in carrying out the recommendations of the Committee. I am very glad to hear my hon. Friend say that he considers the present reporting very much better than it has been in past years. I think myself, however, that still further improvements might be made, and I hope such improvements will be carried out in future years.
    SIR R. TEMPLEdesired to say that the right hon. Gentleman had made a mistake in thinking he (Sir R. Temple) was a Member of the Committee on Parliamentary Reporting. He was not on that Committee, and he spoke quite impartially on the subject.
    MR. TOMLINSONremarked that there was a small item of £100 for the distribution of Parliamentary Papers. He should like to know on what principle this distribution took place, and whether, the sum being small, a selection was made of the Papers to be distributed?
    SIR J. T. HIBBERTsaid, this money was quite sufficient for the purposes for which it was required. It had now been granted for several years, and the whole amount had never been expended in one year. Greater demands might be made for these Parliamentary Papers, and a larger amount than that formerly spent was considered necessary; but, so far, the application for Parliamentary Papers by Free Libraries had not been sufficient as to cause the expenditure of the whole of the money voted by Parliament.
    MR. TOMLINSONasked whether any means had been taken for acquainting managers of Free Libraries with the kind of Papers in existence which might be suitable for them? because they might not apply for Papers, not knowing what they contained.
    SIR J. T. HIBBERTthought the managers of the Libraries were quite capable of judging of their own requirements in this matter.
    MR. GIBSON BOWLESasked whether the Controller of the Stationery

    1047
    Office was the registered proprietor of the paper called The Labour Gazette? If so, how was it they had no account relating to that paper under this Vote?
    MR. MUNDELLApointed out that the subject had been discussed upon the Board of Trade Vote, and the money passed. They voted this sum the other night.
    MR. GIBSON BOWLES: I voted against it if I voted at all. I am merely asking a question.
    THE CHAIRMAN: The matter does not arise on this Vote.
    MR. GIBSON BOWLES: Then, if I am not in Order, I shall move a reduction of the Controller's salary.
    THE CHAIRMAN: That is clearly out of Order on this Vote.
    MR. GIBSON BOWLES: It is not out of Order to move the reduction.
    THE CHAIRMAN: It does not arise on the Vote. The hon. Member cannot put himself in Order by moving the reduction for this purpose.
    Vote agreed to.
    15. £13,129, to complete the sum for Woods, Forests, and Land Revenues, &c. Office.
    MR. LLOYD-GEORGEsaid, the Member for Merthyr (Mr. Pritchard Morgan) had a Motion down for a reduction of this Vote, the hon. Member being particularly anxious to raise certain questions upon it. Would the Chancellor of the Exchequer consent to postpone the Vote until to-morrow?
    SIR W. HARCOURTreplied, that it would not be convenient to postpone the Vote, but the Report stage should be taken to-morrow in time to enable reasonable discussion to take place. When the Report came on, he thought he would be able to make a statement which would be satisfactory to the hon. Member for Merthyr. He could not allow this Vote to pass without asking leave of the Committee to express his deep sorrow, which he was sure would be shared by everybody who knew him, at the death of Mr. Culley, the Chief of the Woods and Forests Department. The Public Service had sustained a great
    1048
    loss by Mr. Culley's death, he being a gentleman to whom the Public Service owed a great deal.
    MR. S. T. EVANSsaid, that as it was not expected that this particular Vote would be reached at this hour, he thought they might fairly ask that the Committee should now report Progress.
    SIR W. HARCOURThoped the Motion to report Progress would not be persisted in. If the Member for Merthyr Tydvil was not satisfied with the statement that would be made, he would have an opportunity of stating his reasons on the Report stage. He desired to state what course the Government proposed to take in regard to Supply. They would finish the other English Votes of this Class, of which there were two which were not of serious importance, and would not lead to long Debate. They would take the Scotch Votes to-morrow and certain other remaining Votes.
    MR. LLOYD-GEORGEasked whether the Report of the Vote would be taken at such an hour as to enable them to discuss the administration of this Department?
    SIR W. HARCOURT: So I understand.
    MR. A. O'CONNORsaid, he desired some explanation as to a letter he had received from the Office of the Commissioner for Woods and Forests. Some time ago he moved for a Return with regard to quit-rents in Ireland, which was a Return of much interest, but one that possibly might involve a certain amount of trouble and inconvenience to the Department. Having obtained the Return, a few days after-wards he received a letter notifying him that he was in arrear with the payment of a sum of 5s. in respect of quit-rents on certain property in Roscommon, and threatening him with all sorts of pains and penalties if he did not at once pay that sum, and warning him that a distraint would be levied against his goods and chattels if he omitted to make the payment. As he did not happen to possess any property in Roscommon, subject to quit-rent or otherwise, he was a little surprised by that communication. He had not the least objection to the Com-

    1049
    missioners distraining on his goods and chattels in Roscommon, but it did appear to him that the officials of the Department having been put to a certain amount of trouble, and finding a name similar to his own on their list, at once assumed there was an opportunity of visiting him with punishment, because he had moved for the Return. He did not know whether the Financial Secretary to the Treasury (Sir J. T. Hibbert) could give any explanation of the matter, but he desired to convey to the Commissioners of Woods and Forests that he should regard with perfect equanimity any action they might take in regard to quit-rents in Roscommon.
    SIR C. W. DILKEasked if the Treasury would be able, in future years, to induce the Office of Woods and Forests to give fuller accounts than they had done in the past? If the right hon. Gentleman could induce the Office to give more items and details, together with the names of tenants of sporting leases, it would be an advantage?
    SIR J. T. HIBBERTsaid, he had been in communication with his right hon. Friend (Sir C. Dilke) on the subject of the Report. As to the point raised by the hon. Member opposite, he was rather sorry that he had not mentioned this matter to him, so that he could have made inquiries into it. Not knowing anything about it, he was unable at present to give the hon. Gentleman any information; but he would make inquiries as to it, and would give him the explanation he desired.
    SIR R. TEMPLEasked the Chancellor of the Exchequer to take the Report stage of this Vote at an earlier hour than half-past 5 o'clock, otherwise Members would be kept in the House until perhaps 7 o'clock, and compelled to break engagements they had made. He asked the Government to show a little consideration towards private Members.
    SIR W. HARCOURTshould be very glad to meet the hon. Baronet if it were possible but he was afraid that, under the circumstances, a great many of them had to break engagements which they had made. They were not bound to take the Report of Supply by any particular
    1050
    hour, but if it was taken at half-past 5 he hoped there would be plenty of time for the discussion of any subject which could properly be taken on that Report. He was afraid some inconvenience might be sustained by hon. Members, but he had endeavoured to collect the feelings and wishes of gentlemen on the other side of the House as well as on this, and he had come to the conclusion that the most convenient course for all would be to finish the English Votes of this Class to-night; to take Scotch Votes and such other Votes as might be taken up till half-past 5 on Wednesday, and then take the Report of Supply, which would leave a sufficiently elastic margin for any necessary discussion.
    MR. A. C. MORTONdid not want to discuss this Vote now, but he was aware that enormous reforms were wanted in the administration of this Office. Indeed, he was not sure whether the proper thing would not be to get a good big broom and sweep out the present administration altogether.
    Vote agreed to.
    16. £30,287, to complete the sum for Works and Public Buildings Office.—Agreed to.
    17. £16,000, to complete the sum for Secret Service.
    MR. POWELL WILLIAMSasked whether the money unspent at the end of the year was returned to the Treasury?
    SIR W. HARCOURT: Yes, Sir.
    MR. GIBSON BOWLESsaid, he noticed that the Under Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs took £300 a year for managing the Secret Service Fund. Ho should like an assurance from the Secretary to the Treasury that he would look into this matter, for it needed looking into.
    SIR J. T. HIBBERT: I have no acquaintance, in any way, with this Fund.
    MR. A.C. MORTONsaid, that when the Radicals were in Opposition they always took a Division against the Vote. He would have been glad to take a Division against it now, were it not for the lateness of the Session and the pressure of Public Business, but he protested against it, as

    1051
    he had always done every year since he entered Parliament.
    Vote agreed to.
    Resolutions to be reported To-morrow; Committee to sit again To-morrow.

  SUPPLY—REPORT.
  Resolutions [11th September] reported.
  SUPPLY—REPORT.

    ARMY ESTIMATES, 1893–4.
    1 "That a sum, not exceeding £257,800, be granted to Her Majesty, to defray the Charge for the Salaries and Miscellaneous Charges of the War Office, which will come in course of payment during the year ending on the 31st day of March 1894."
    2. "That a sum, not exceeding £560,000, be granted to Her Majesty, to defray the Charge for the Pay and Allowances (exclusive of Supplies, Clothing, &.) of the Militia (to a number not exceeding 135,546, including 30,000 Militia Reserve) which will come in course of payment during the year ending on the 31st day of March 1894."
    Resolutions agreed to.

  PISTOLS BILL.—(No. 425.)

    COMMITTEE.
    Considered in Committee.
    (In the Committee.)
    SIR R. TEMPLEasked whether the restrictions of the Bill applied to pistols which were not fire-arms, but merely specimens of art?
    MR. ASQUITH: Clause 7 provides that the Bill shall not apply to the sale of any antique pistol, curiosity, or ornament.
    Clause 1.
    MR. BYLESsaid, he was sure that if Members had examined the Bill they would never have read it a second time. He moved the rejection of Clause has involving an unnecessary interference with private liberty.
    Motion made, and Question proposed, "That the Clause be omitted."—(Mr. Byles.)
    THE UNDER SECRETARY OF STATE FOE THE HOME DEPARTMENT (Mr. H.): If the clause is defeated the Bill must be dropped.
    MR. CONYBEAREsupported his hon. Friend's objection, as the Bill had not received the attention which ought to have been given to it. A great deal could be said against the restrictions contained in the Bill.
    Question put, "That Clause 1, as amended, stand part of the Bill."
    The Committee divided:—Ayes 109; Noes 17.—(Division List, No. 305.)
    Clause 2 to 6, inclusive, agreed to.
    SIR R. TEMPLEsaid, he would like to know whether a pistol of modern make, but intended purely for ornament, would come within the restrictions of the clause?
    MR. ASQUITHsaid, unless the exemption was strictly limited to "antique" pistols it would be liable to abuse.
    MR. CONYBEAREsaid, the clause was open to grave objection in that respect. He would suggest that the word "historical" be introduced to meet the difficulty.
    MR. H. GLADSTONEsaid, the word would not remove the feature which the hon. Member considered objectionable.
    Clause agreed to.
    Clause 8 agreed to.
    Clause 9.
    Motion made, and Question proposed, "That the Clause be omitted."
    MR. A. C. MORTONsaid, it was surprising that any Radical Government should propose such a clause as this. Any Government doing so deserved censure.
    MR. CONYBEAREsaid, before they passed away from this, he thought they should have some reason assigned for the introduction of such a clause. There might be reasons for the passing of the Bill, but they were entitled to some explanation for the appearance of this clause.
    Question put, and agreed to.
    Clauses 10 and 11 agreed to.
    Clause 12.
    MR. CONYBEAREsaid, the definition of a pistol as a firearm of less than

    1053
    15 in. in length should be amended, so as to exclude toy-pistols and other such harmless weapons.
    MR. H. GLADSTONEsaid, the definition was considered satisfactory as it stood.
    MR. STUART-WORTLEYsaid, perhaps the insertion of the words "capable of inflicting grievous bodily harm" would meet the case.
    MR. ASQUITHsaid, such words would be most objectionable, because serious injury was often inflicted with toys. The question had been carefully considered, and they were not prepared to adopt these suggestions.
    MR. STUART-WORTLEYthought the words he suggested would meet the case.
    MR. CONYBEARE: Do we understand that the Bill will apply to small pistols?
    MR. ASQUITH: Yes.
    Clause agreed to.
    Remaining clauses agreed to.
    Bill reported; as amended, to be considered upon Thursday, and to be printed. [Bill 458.]

  MADRAS AND BOMBAY ARMIES BILL. [Lords].—(No. 413.)

    COMMITTEE. [Progress, Clause 1, 11th September.]
    Bill considered in Committee.
    (In the Committee.)
    Amendment proposed, in page 1, line 27, to leave out the word "continue," in order to insert the word "cease."—(Mr. Naoroji.)
    Question proposed, "That the word 'continue' stand part of the Clause."
    THE UNDER SECRETARY OF STATE FOR INDIA (Mr. G. RUSSELL,)said, he was desirous of explaining that, as introduced in another place, the Bill contained the proposition now made. But in Committee an Amendment was introduced providing that the Commanders should retain their seats. The Secretary of State accepted the Amendment in order to secure the passing
    1054
    of the Bill, but reserved his freedom of action when the Bill reached the House of Commons. It was hardly becoming that they should make any alteration now, and he was, therefore, prepared to accept his hon. Friend's Amendment.
    SIR R. TEMPLEsaid, he must strongly object to the course which the Government intended to pursue. It was of great importance that the Bill should remain as it was, and that the word "continue" should stand part of it, so that the Commanders should retain their seats in the Councils. He would repeat what had been said in favour of that course; but he thought it was quite clear last night that the Committee intended to stand by the Bill as it came down from the Lords. He could not but regard this as a most extraordinary surrender, and he objected to this being done by the Secretary of State in opposition to the feeling and opinion of the Military Authorities. It would be a great misfortune if they did not adhere to the arrangement previously made. The matter had gone so far that a certain amount of friction could not be avoided, he feared; but much would be done if the Government would stand by their Bill as passed in another place, and passed with the sanction of noble Lords who had held Office under the Crown. The right hon. Gentleman the Member for Manchester and himself—and he thought they had had experience which entitled them to be heard—were not in favour of this alteration, and would once more very earnestly appeal to the Government to stand by their measure. If necessary, he would be—if in Order—ready to divide the Committee on this question.
    SIR C. W. DILKEsaid, it was evident the hon. Baronet (Sir R. Temple) was strongly opposed to the Bill, and that he wished to defeat its object, which was the centralisation of military authority in India. There might be some feeling hostile to this change in the minds of high Bombay authorities; but he (Sir C. W. Dilke) believed the opinion now expressed by the Mover and supporters of the Amendment was approved by successive Governor Generals, and military opinion generally. Military opinion, indeed, was very strong upon the question.
    SIR R. TEMPLEsaid, he was not dealing with the question as a local one, but from his acquaintance with the needs and requirements of the countries to which the Bill would apply.
    SIR C. W. DILKEsaid, he understood the hon. Baronet to say that he had authority to speak for the Military Authorities.
    SIR R. TEMPLEsaid, he could not allow the question to pass unchallenged. He would, therefore, move "That the Chairman do report Progress, and ask leave to sit again."
    THE CHAIRMAN: I cannot put that Motion; I was about to put the Amendment.
    MR. TOMLINSON MR. TOMLINSON rose, and was understood to say that he could not agree with the views set forth by the right hon. Baronet (Sir C. W. Dilke).
    Question put, and negatived.
    Remaining Clause agreed to.
    Bill reported; as amended, to be considered upon Thursday.

  ELEMENTARY EDUCATION (SCHOOL ATTENDANCE) BILL.
  Lords Amendment to be considered forthwith; considered, and agreed to.
  SEA FISHERIES REGULATION (SCOTLAND) BILL.—(No. 244.)
  As amended, considered, read the third time, and passed.
  SALE OF GOODS (re-committed) BILL [Lords].—(No. 441.)
  Considered in Committee; Committee report Progress; to sit again upon Thursday.
  LAW OF COMMONS AMENDMENT BILL [Lords].—(No. 442.)
  Considered in Committee, and reported, without Amendment; read the third time, and passed, without Amendment.
  CONGESTED DISTRICTS BOARD (IRELAND).
  Return presented,—relative thereto [ordered 16th May; Sir Thomas Esmonde]; to lie upon the Table.
  QUEENSLAND (IMMIGRATION).
  Return presented,—relative thereto [Address 1st September; Mr. John Ellis]; to lie upon the Table.
  TRADE REPORTS (ANNUAL SERIES).
  Copy presented,—of Diplomatic and Consular Reports on Trade and Finance, No. 1288 (Amsterdam) [by Command]; to lie upon the Table.
  TRADE REPORTS (MISCELLANEOUS SERIES).
  Copy presented,—of Reports on Subjects of General and Commercial Interest, No. 302 (Mexico) [by Command]; to lie upon the Table.
  NAVAL SAVINGS BANKS.
  Account presented,—of Deposits in Naval Savings Banks and the Payments thereof, and the Interest thereon, and Investments therein, &c., during the financial year, 1891–2 [by Act]; to lie upon the Table.
  ROYAL UNIVERSITY OF IRELAND.
  Paper laid upon the Table by the Clerk of the House,—Account of Receipts and Expenditure for the year ended 31st March, 1893, with Report of the Comptroller and Auditor General thereon [by Act].

  ADJOURNMENT.
  Motion made, and Question, "That this House do now adjourn,"—(The Chancellor of the Exchequer,)—put, and agreed to.
  House adjourned at half after Two o'clock.

COMMISSION.
The following Bills received the Royal Assent:—

1. Consolidated Fund (No. 4.)

2. Naval Defence Amendment.

3. Irish Education Act, 1892, Amendment (No. 2.)

4. Public Works Loans (No. 2.)

5. Industrial and Provident Societies.

6. Contagious Diseases (Animals) (Swine Fever.)

7. Elementary Education (Blind and Deaf Children.)

8. Sheriff Courts Consignations (Scotland.)

9. Public Health (London) Act, 1891, Amendment.

10.Canal Rates, Tolls, and Charges Provisional Order (Leeds and Liverpool Canal.)

11.Canal Rates, Tolls, and Charges Provisional Order (Navigation of the Rivers Aire and Calder.)

12.Canal Tolls and Charges Provisional Order (Grand Junction Canal.)

13.Canal Tolls and Charges Provisional Order (Warwick and Birmingham Canal.)

14.Local Government Provisional Orders (No. 13.)

METROPOLIS MANAGEMENT (PLUMSTEAD AND HACKNEY) BILL.
Reported without amendment, and committed to a Committee of the Whole House on Tuesday next.
COUNTY SUEVEYORS (IRELAND) BILL [H.L.]
Commons Amendment considered (according to Order), and agreed to.
REFORMATORY SCHOOLS BILL [H.L.]
Returned from the Commons agreed to.
STATUTE LAW REVISION (No. 2) BILL [H.L.]
Returned from the Commons agreed to.
TRUSTEE (CONSOLIDATION) BILL [H.L.]
Returned from the Commons agreed to.
BURGHS GAS SUPPLY (SCOTLAND) ACT (1876) AMENDMENT BILL.
Returned from the Commons with the Amendment agreed to.
ELEMENTARY EDUCATION (SCHOOL ATTENDANCE) BILL.
Returned from the Commons with the Amendment agreed to.

LIGHT RAILWAYS (IRELAND) BILL.
Brought from the Commons; read 1a; to be printed; and to be read 2a on Tuesday next.—(The Lord President [E. Kimberley]). (No. 269.)
House adjourned at a quarter past Three o'clock, till Tuesday next, Three o'clock.