Sitting of 16 September 1893

Preamble
The House met at Twelve of the clock.

THE ROUTE TO MASHONALAND.
MR. WEBSTER: I beg to ask the Under Secretary of State for the Colonies whether Mr. Cecil Rhodes is at the present time proceeding to Fort Beira to take that route to Fort Salisbury, in Mashonaland; if, at the present time, a large section of that railway is completed and ready for formal opening; and if the route to Mashonaland, viâ the Matabele country, is or is not in any way interrupted?
THE UNDER SECRETARY OF STATE FOR THE COLONIES (Mr. S. BUXTON,): We understand that Mr. Rhodes' primary object in going to Beira is to open the completed portion of the railway, which we are informed is about 74 miles. I informed the hon. Gentleman yesterday that, as far as we are aware, the various land routes into Mashonaland are open.

THE MERCHANT SHIPPING CONSOLIDATION BILL.
MR. GIBSON BOWLES: I beg to ask the President of the Board of Trade whether he has directed copies of the Merchant Shipping Consolidation Bill to be sent to the various Pilots' Associations in the United Kingdom; and, if not, whether he will do so, either to all or to a selected number of these Associations?
THE PRESIDENT OF THE BOARD OF TRADE (Mr. MUNDELLA,): A copy of the Bill was sent to the various Pilotage Authorities, and also to the United Kingdom Pilotage Association at Swansea. I shall be happy to send a few more copies to the central office of the United Kingdom Pilotage Association for distribution if the hon. Member recommends that course.

TECHNICAL INSTRUCTION.
MR. LODER: I beg to ask the President of the Local Government Board whether he can state what proportions of the sums allocated to the London County Council in the last three years under "The Local Taxation (Customs and Excise) Act, 1890," have been made use of for the furtherance of technical instruction?
THE PRESIDENT OF THE LOCAL GOVERNMENT BOARD (Mr. H. H. FOWLER,): According to the Return to which I referred yesterday, the London County Council in 1892–3 appropriated £30,000 for technical education, and in the present year the sum so appropriated by them is £57,000. The residue paid to the County Council under the Local Taxation (Customs and Excise) Act, 1890, in the year 1892–3 was £172,000, and the sum payable in respect of the present year will probably be about the same amount.

WAGES IN THE DUBLIN ORDNANCE DEPARTMENT.
MR. FIELD: I beg to ask the Secretary to the Treasury whether anything has been done to raise the rate of wages in the Ordnance Department of Dublin proportionately to that paid in other places?
THE FINANCIAL SECRETARY TO THE WAR OFFICE (Mr. WOODALL,): It is intended to make some improvement in the position of the labourers employed in the Ordnance Stores, Dublin. I shall be glad if my hon. Friend repeats the question next Thursday.

THE GENERAL POST OFFICE.
MR. SAUNDERS: I beg to ask the Postmaster General if his attention has been called to an article in The Pall Mall Gazette, of 6th September, with plans of the General Post Office showing inadequate working space for employés and insufficient means of escape in the event of accident or panic, with consequent danger to the large number of servants employed both by day and by night; and will he take steps to insure sufficient space for employés and suitable means of exit, equal to what would be required by Sanitary Authorities in respect of other buildings used for industrial purposes?
THE POSTMASTER GENERAL (Mr. A. MORLEY,): My attention was. called to the article mentioned, and I have made inquiry on the subject. Every precaution is taken against fire, and the means of exit are judged to be sufficient. I am, however, making further inquiries.

CROFTER COLONISATION IN CANADA.
MR. LODER: I beg to ask the Secretary for Scotland when the Fourth Report of the Commissioners on Crofter Colonisation in Canada will be presented; and whether it is intended to ask Parliament to vote a further sum to carry on the experiments tried in 1888 and 1889?
THE SECRETARY FOR SCOTLAND (Sir G. TREVELYAN,): The Fourth Report of the Colonisation Board is now ready; but I regret to say that, as some of the members of the Board to whom it has been sent for approval and signature are out of the country, I shall not be able to lay it on the Table of the House until November. The Government do not intend to ask for a further Vote if for no other reason than that the former Vote is not yet exhausted. But hon. Members, before they press the Government for more money for State colonisation, will do well to read the Report.

THE PAYING OFF OF THE "TRAFALGAR."
MR. GIBSON BOWLES: I beg to ask the Secretary to the Admiralty whether he can inform the House why it was that H. M. S. Trafalgar, commissioned on the 2nd April, 1890, was paid off before H. M. S. Colossus, which was commissioned on the 19th March, 1890?
THE SECRETARY TO THE ADMIRALTY (Sir U. KAY-SHUTTLE-WORTH,): The reason is that, considering all the circumstances of the two ships and the requirements of the Public Service, it was the most convenient course to adopt.

THE GUNS OF H.M.S. "COLOSSUS."
MR. GIBSON BOWLES: I beg to ask the Secretary to the Admiralty whether it is the fact that three out of the four turret guns on H.M.S. Colossus were recently found to be unserviceable; that in order to replace them the whole reserve of guns at Malta, not only for the
1408
Colossus, but also for the Edinburgh and the Collingwood, had to be shipped on the Colossus, and that one gun of this reserve was found, when cleaned, to be more unserviceable than the gun it had replaced, and was consequently condemned as unfit for service; and whether any, and, if so, what, measures are now or will in future be taken to secure that guns in reserve are in serviceable condition?
SIR U. KAY-SHUTTLEWORTH: Three out of the four guns on Her Majesty's ship Colossus were recently reported to be unserviceable. It was previously known by the number of rounds fired that they were becoming worn, and these three guns were replaced from the reserve at Malta. One of the reserve guns, which had fired no rounds since leaving Woolwich, has been reported on as unserviceable, but whether this is the fact has yet to be decided by the experts at homo. A new gun will be shipped next week for the reserve at Malta. All necessary measures have been, and will in future be, taken to secure that guns in the reserve are in a serviceable condition. There is no reason to doubt the efficiency of the remaining three guns.

THE INDIAN POLICE.
VISCOUNT CRANBORNE: I beg to ask the Under Secretary of State for India whether, under the Rules recently made by the Secretary of State, the recruitment of the commissioned ranks of the Indian Police has been thrown open to Natives as well as Europeans; and, if so, whether, in view of the recent religious outbreaks between Mahomedans and Hindus, stretching across British India from Burmah to Bombay, the Secretary of State will consider the advisability of appointing Superintendents of Police who do not belong to either of these religious communities?
THE UNDER SECRETARY OF STATE FOR INDIA (Mr. G. RUSSELL,): The Rules make no distinction between Natives of India and other natural-born subjects of the Queen. No other consideration is entertained, in selecting officers for the appointment of Police Superintendent, save that of personal fitness for the post. The mere fact that a Native professes a

1409
certain religious faith is not a disqualification; but it would be a disqualification if in his practice of that faith he made himself offensive to his neighbours of another religion.

ORDERS OF THE DAY.

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

  SUPPLY-COMMITTEE.
    CIVIL SERVICES AND REVENUE DEPARTMENTS, 1893–4.

      CLASS IV.
      1. £405,015, to complete the sum for Science and Art Department.
      SIR R. TEMPLEsubmitted to the Minister in charge of the Vote that it would be very convenient to the Committee if he made a statement about it. When the Education Vote was before the Committee they had had a most interesting statement from his right hon. Friend, and the Vote for Science and Art was not less in importance than the Vote for Education.
      THE VICE PRESIDENT OF THE COUNCIL (Mr. ACLAND,): It has not been the custom to make any statement on this Vote.
      SIR R. TEMPLEsaid, he noticed that various items in the Vote were increased. The House would never grudge the Department the resources which it required; but it would be better, when they were asked to vote an increase of money, that a statement of the reasons for the change should be made. He asked for some explanation of the fact that there had been increases in the Vote under the heads of salaries of staff from £13,000 to £16,000, Science schools from £120,000 to £129,000, Art schools and classes from £50,000 to £58,000, Scholarships, local examinations, and prizes from £8,000 to £9,500, and building grants from £6,000 to £9,000. Turning to the sub-heads in the Museum division, in respect of South Kensington, Bethnal Green, and others, there was positively a decrease in salaries from £10,000 odd to £9,000 odd, and, in fact, the whole amount for the South Kensington Museum appeared to have fallen from £12,000 odd to £11,000. That, at first sight, would appear rather strange,
      1410
      as South Kensington was known to be one of the most important Museums in the world, for which the public would not grudge any assistance. Probably there were reasons for this decrease in expenditure, and it would be instructive to them if they could learn in a few words from the Minister what was the true position in that regard. In the item dealing with purchases for the Museums under the sub-head Works of Art there, was an increase from £7,000 odd to £10,000 odd. There were, no doubt, very valuable reasons for this, but it would have been desirable that a few words should have been added stating what were the works of art which had been purchased in such increasing quantity. He should also like to hear some explanation for the increase of the charges for copying from £12,000 to £13,000, and the rise from £12,000 to £14,0C0 for artisans, cleaners, and labourers.
      MR. ACLANDsaid, he would answer the questions which had been put to him by the hon. Baronet. First of all, the increase of salaries was partly due to changes made in the reorganisation of the staff. A certain number of copyists became abstractors, and thus rose to a higher class. The increase affecting Art schools and classes was due to a large development of technical schools growing up under the County Councils and to the increased demand for instruction in Science and Art. A large portion of the money was usefully used in many towns of the country in setting up important Technical Institutions. The next question of the hon. Member was as to Scholarships and local Exhibitions and prizes. The grant under this head in 1891–2 amounted to £20,000. The prizes in Art had been almost entirely converted into Scholarships, which were tenable for three years. In the first year the minimum amount was payable, the maximum being obtainable in the third year. That accounted for the increase involved during the present year. The building grants were necessary to meet the grants which had been made by localities for buildings which had been completed in the financial year. The same stimulus which had been given to Science and Art by the Local Taxation Act had led to the opening of a number of new local technical schools, and the Department made a certain grant towards

      1411
      the erection of those schools. The decrease of salaries referred to was due to retirements from posts which were not going to be filled up, though this did not mean less efficiency in the staff. Then, as to the increase in the purchase of Science and Art Collections for the Museums and for circulation, the hon. Baronet noticed there had been an increase of £2,700. That was the exact amount previously knocked off this Vote for the purchase of objects for the Museums and for their circulation throughout the country. The Treasury consented to put back the amount which the late Chancellor of the Exchequer knocked off at a time when he was somewhat hard up. The £2,700 had been restored, which simply meant that things were put back as they were about three years ago, in order that the Department should have an adequate Vote for purchases and for the circulation of works of Art in all the towns of the country where Museums existed. The increase in copying was one which must necessarily arise with an increase of work. As to artisans and labourers, he found that at South Kensington there were a few men working very long hours, some of them 16 hours a day. The matter was laid before the Chancellor of the Exchequer, and stops were taken to have that condition of affairs altered by not only lessening the number of hours worked by the artisans and labourers so as to bring them down four or five hours a week, but also to increase the wages, and to bring them up to the proper Trade Union scale.
      SIR F.S. POWELLsaid, that two or three years ago he called attention to the scandalous provision made for the exhibition of students' work sent from schools in the Provinces. He had now heartily to acknowledge his indebtedness to the Department for the steps they had taken to remedy that defect, and for the excellent arrangements they had now made for the exhibition of these works.
      Vote agreed to.
      2. £87,500, to complete the sum for British Museum.
      SIR R. TEMPLEdesired to call attention to the fact that the Vote showed a decrease as compared with last year, though the general impression of the public would be that more funds would
      1412
      be required towards the expenditure on material for this magnificent National Institution. The amount had fallen from £116,000 to £115,000 and though that was but a slight decrease, still even the slightest decrease was disappointing when one might have expected the very opposite.
      THE SECRETARY TO THE TREASURY (Sir J. T. HIBBERT,)said, the decrease was in salaries and wages, and not in purchases.
      SIR R. TEMPLEdid not agree, because he found that purchases and acquisitions showed a falling off from £22,000 to £20,000. The general idea was that, instead of less, they required larger grants for acquiring material for this magnificent Institution. The Vote for the Natural History Museum at South Kensington, which was the next in importance to the British Museum, also showed a slight decrease. South Kensington Museum was really one of the bright ornaments of our nation, and one would have thought that an increasing Vote would have been allowed year after year. He was sure the British taxpayer would not grudge the amount for such an Institution. South Kensington was in the hands of some of the best scientists of the day, and one would hope that due appreciation would be shown for this work in the shape of an increased money grant. Taking the two Museums together, the grants on the aggregate showed a falling off of from £161,000 to £160,000. He hoped they should hear some explanation on the point.
      SIR J. T. HIBBERTsaid, there was, he admitted, a slight decrease in the amount allowed for purchases for the British Museum proper, but that was due to the fact that in 1892–3 there was a special grant of £1,500, which did not re-appear in the current year. But though there was a decrease in that item for the British Museum, there was a considerable increase in the Natural History Museum. A purchase had been made of a valuable collection of insects, which was considered a good purchase, and was much appreciated by the Trustees of the British Museum. It would be a matter of great satisfaction for the Committee to know that the number of visitors to the Institution had increased.
      MR. TOMLINSONasked whether the increase had been in the day or evening attendances?
      SIR J. T. HIBBERT: It is in the day attendance chiefly.
      SIR R. TEMPLEremarked, that whereas the amount for the purchase of acquisitions had risen from £4,900 to £6,900, yet, pari passu with that, the amount for the purchase of pictures had fallen from £5,800 to £4,300?
      SIR F. S. POWELLsaid, that some years ago they had a discussion about attendance in the evening, and it was agreed to allow the British Museum to remain open in the evening. He should be glad to hear whether many had availed themselves of this opportunity?
      SIR J. T. HIBBERTsaid, that in 1891 the attendance in the evening was 40,149; in 1892, 40,649.
      Vote agreed to.
      3. £6,382, to complete the sum for National Gallery.
      MR. TOMLINSONsaid, he had heard it stated that purchases of pictures had been restricted on the ground that there was no immediate accommodation for their exhibition. It would be very much to be regretted if good opportunities for purchasing valuable pictures were lost merely because there were no means to exhibit them at once.
      THE CHANCELLOR OF THE EXCHEQUER (Sir W. HARCOURT,)said, it had long been felt that the space in the National Gallery was inadequate, and arrangements had been made to obtain further space by the additional accommodation which would be afforded at Millbank. The restriction of purchases was rather due, he suspected, to want of money than of space.
      Vote agreed to.
      4. £736, to complete the sum for National Portrait Gallery.
      SIR R. TEMPLEpointed out that there was a fall in salaries from £2,200 to £1,700. No doubt there was some good reason for the decrease.
      MR. LODERinquired when the National Portrait Gallery was likely to be finished?
      SIR J. T. HIBBERTcould not give any definite reply as to when the work would be finished. The decrease in the
      1414
      salaries was due to the fact that the Director who had retired did not receive a salary, but a gratuity for services he rendered.
      MR. BURNSexpressed the hope that the Financial Secretary to the Treasury would consult with the First Commissioner of Works in order to see whether the approaches to the National Portrait Gallery could not be improved by taking away entirely or setting back the ugly railings opposite St. Martin's Church.
      SIR J. T. HIBBERTsaid, that the suggestion of the hon. Gentleman should receive consideration.
      Vote agreed to.
      5. £13,663, to complete the sum for Scientific Investigation, &c.
      MR. TOMLINSONasked whether a larger amount might not properly be made to the Royal Geographical Society? He saw the sum of £4,000 was allowed to the Royal Society. No one would say that was a vast amount, considering the work that was to be done. Having regard to the vast importance of proper geographical investigation and the admirable work which was done by the Royal Geographical Society, it was desirable for the Government to consider whether the time had not arrived when a larger grant should not be made to that Society. There was no doubt if a larger amount were granted it would be used in a manner calculated to produce the greatest possible benefit to this country.
      MR. BURNSsincerely trusted the Secretary to the Treasury would discriminate between assistance given for real geographical and scientific purposes and assistance given to Mashonaland, ostensibly in the interests of science, but really in the interests of syndicates of company promoters.
      SIR R. TEMPLEsaid, that there was no Society which did more useful work than the Royal Geographical Society.
      MR. TOMLINSONwas sure the people of this country would not look coldly upon the efforts made in South Africa to open up new markets and promote the interests of this country.
      MR. BURNS: I am very glad that my shot hit the target.
      MR. PAULwould oppose any grants to this Royal Geographical Society unless and until it admitted women as Fellows.
      SIR J. T. HIBBERTsaid, the points raised should receive consideration, but no application had been received for an increase in the grant.
      Vote agreed to.
      6. £49,000, to complete the sum for Universities and Colleges, Great Britain.
      MR. CARVELL WILLIAMS: The Committee will remember that in the latter part of 1891 King's College and University College endeavoured to obtain a Charter for a new London University, of which they would have been the dominating constituents. Happily, as I and many others think, the scheme for creating the Albert University failed, and it is, therefore, not necessary for me to enter into that controversy on the present occasion. I refer to it because of the fact that during the discussion great surprise was expressed at the discovery that King's College was in receipt of a Parliamentary grant of £15,000 a year. The surprise was due to the fact that, whereas, by passing the University Tests Abolition Act of 1871, the Legislature had abolished all religious tests and disabilities at the National Universities, Parliament had accorded national support to an Institution in which those tests and disabilities exist and are rigorously enforced. The original Charter of King's College declared that the College was established as a College "In which instruction in the doctrines and duties of Christianity, as taught by the Church of England, should be for ever combined, with Other useful branches of education;" and the Archbishop of Canterbury, for the time being, was appointed Visitor. It was further declared that no person who was not a member of the Church of England should be competent to fill any office in the College, except the Professorships of Oriental Literature and Modern Languages. I am aware that that Charter is not now in force; but in 1882 King's College obtained an Act of re-incorporation, and that Act distinctly re-affirmed its Church of England character, and also maintained the religious test. I cannot speak from my
      1416
      own knowledge, but I am told that these provisions of the Charter are rigorously carried out, so that all officials, from the highest to the lowest, must be members of the Church of England. I am also informed that the Archbishop of Canterbury has a voice in all the College appointments. There are about 12 Colleges in all which participate in the grant of £15,000 a year annually voted by Parliament, and it is the only denominational College in the list. How came it to find a place there? In 1889 the late Government included in the Estimates for the first time a Vote of £15,000 for University Colleges in Great Britain, and by a Treasury Minute, dated March 11 in that year, they appointed a Committee of four persons to advise them as to the best mode of distributing the grant. That Minute named certain Colleges as claimants, and among them was King's College. The Committee proposed that grants of various sums, ranging from £500 to £1,800 should be paid to 12 Colleges, and King's College was set down for £1,700, which it has since annually received. Last-year the same Government appointed a second Committee, to report as to the results of the grants, and to consider whether they might be advantageously increased, diminished, or withheld. That Committee recommended, not only that the grants should be continued to each College until the expiration of five years from the date at which they commenced, but that there should be a substantial addition to the total amount—that, in fact, it should be doubled. They also proposed a new scale of payment, and had it been adopted King's College would have received, not £1,700 a year, but more than double that amount, or £3,500. For reasons with which I am unacquainted, the Government did not adopt the recommendation of the Committee, and so the amount has continued to be as at the beginning; the Vote now before the Committee being £15,000, of which King's College will receive £1,700. Now, there is a passage in the Report of this second Committee which has an important bearing on the question I desire to raise upon the Vote. The following appears as an addendum to the Report:—
      "We have not dissented from the recommendation of the Committee that King's Col-

      1417
      lege, London, should be included in the grant to University Colleges, because we understand that questions of general policy have not been referred to this Committee. But we desire to record our view that King's College, being by its constitution a strictly denominational institution, so far as relates to its Governing Body and its teaching staff, stands in a position differing from that of the other Colleges dealt with in this Report; and we reserve our own freedom of action on the subject, as Members of the House of Commons, in case the question of the right of King's College to participate in the grant should hereafter be raised in Parliament."
      That note has attached to it these signatures "H. E. Roscoe; J. Bryce." I am heartily glad that the Chancellor of the Duchy has put on record his opinion on this subject, and has reserved his freedom of action in the matter, and I now confidently look to him to use his influence with the Government of which he is so efficient a Member to induce them to give effect to the view thus expressed. I am also glad that the hon. Baronet the Member for South Manchester has done the same, because he has the advantage of even greater freedom than the Chancellor of the Duchy. This is not a case in which vested interests stand in the way of a change; nor can any cry of confiscation, or spoliation, be reasonably raised. The Treasury Minute, July I, 1889, after stating that if the grant is continued it should be liable to be reviewed every five years, proceeded to say that—
      "My Lords are anxious clearly to establish the principle that no College is to have a vested right to share, even for a limited number of years, in the sums voted by Parliament. On the contrary, each College should be considered as liable to be excluded at any time from further participation in the grant, if it should appear to the Treasury that, from any cause, it has ceased to be deserving of support from the National Exchequer. But any change must be made in connection with the Estimate, and be brought under the notice of Parliament."
      And, as I have already said, the second Treasury Minute also asked the Committee to consider whether the grants should be increased, diminished, or withheld. Parliament is, therefore, quite free to act in the matter; and this Government is also free, as not having been a party to the present arrangement. I, however, do not propose any harsh or precipitate action, and, therefore, do not wish the grant to King's College to be withheld this year. But as the term of five years, for which it was promised, is approaching its termination,
      1418
      I wish to elicit from the Government an expression of opinion on the subject, and to obtain an assurance that it shall be dealt with, not by a Departmental Committee, but on the responsibility of the Government and of this House. The Committee will have observed that I have said nothing in disparagement of King's College as an educational institution. But however efficient it may be, and however useful, it is disqualified for receiving Parliamentary support by the fact that it belongs, not to the nation or the public, but to a single religious body. The founders of King's College were fully entitled to give it a denominational character if they thought fit; but they must submit to the disadvantages, as well as enjoy the advantages, of denominationalism. They have had the opportunity of abandoning religious tests, and of throwing their doors as wide open as those of the other Colleges which share this grant. They were recommended to do so by an authority of great weight—I refer to the Duke of Devonshire's Committee on Scientific Instruction, from whose Report I quote this passage—
      "With regard to King's College, we would further suggest that the College should apply for a new Charter, or for an Act of Parliament, with a view of cancelling the proprietary rights of its shareholders, and of abolishing all religious restrictions (so far as any such exist) on the selection of Professors of Science, and on the privileges extending to students of Science. We consider that any grant of public money which may be made to King's College should be conditional on such a re-constitution of the College as should effect these objects."
      The Commissioners who so expressed themselves were not Liberationists, and certainly were not opponents of King's College; for they included, besides the then Duke of Devonshire, the Marquess of Lansdowne; Professor Miller, a Professor of King's College; Professor Stokes, and Sir J. Lubbock. This weighty advice of the Commissioners was not taken; for, when King's College obtained its new Act of Incorporation, these restrictions were not, as they then might have been, removed, and the authorities of King's College deliberately resolved to remain a denominational institution. They had a right, if they thought fit, to disregard this plainly-expressed opinion of the Commissioners; but there were two other bodies who ought not to have ignored it—I mean the Committee which

      1419
      recommended this grant to King's College and the Government which adopted their recommendation. I think that these are facts which should be brought under the notice of this House before it renews the grant even for a single year. And I hope that, as the result of the consideration which the subject deserves, the present Government and the present Parliament will by their future action re-affirm the great principle that Universities and Colleges claiming public support should, in the language of the University Tests Abolition Act of 1871, be "freely accessible to the nation."
      MR. ACLAND: My hon. Friend has called attention to a subject which has more than once engaged the attention of the Government. As he says, the grant was not absolutely promised, but it was indicated that at the end of five years the present arrangement would cease. It is perfectly true that the Charter which was laid on the Table of the House a year or two ago, which gave King's College, or proposed to give it, an established position in relation to the new London University, was largely affected by the condition of King's College in relation to the demands made upon its Professors and officers in regard to their being members of the Church of England, and I have no doubt myself that, among other causes of dissatisfaction which caused the withdrawal of the Charter, that was a very important one. But, of course, that is not the question immediately under our consideration. We have to note that when it was proposed to increase the grant to these University Colleges, two Members of this House—the hon. Member for Manchester (Sir H. Roscoe) and the Chancellor of the Duchy (Mr. Bryce) did place on record their view that King's College, being by its constitution a strictly Denominational Institution as far as relates to its Governing Body and teaching staff, stands in a position differing from that of other Colleges dealt with in this Report. If we take our great Universities and the Welsh Colleges, and all the other University Colleges which get grants from Parliament, there is no doubt the position is an exceptional one. In the King's College (London) Act, 1882, which gives the Charter, it is stated—and no doubt it is the fact—
      1420
      that no person in King's College who is not a member of the Church of England shall be competent to fill any office in the College except the Professorship of Oriental Literature and Oriental Language. That, of course, means that whereas at Oxford, Cambridge, and elsewhere no such demand is made for a Professor of Science, a Professor of Ancient Languages, or Political Economy, and the like, King's College stands alone in that particular, and in demanding that such Professors shall declare they are members of the Church of England before they can receive an appointment. I do not think it is necessary to enter into this matter in a controversial spirit My hon. Friend has stated it in a perfectly reasonable and fair way, and I can only say that the Government will carefully consider the matter on the lines which he has indicated, both in view of any increase of the grant or possible modification of the conditions under which the grant may be received. I understand he does not complain of the five years' arrangement; therefore, there is no actual complaint of the Estimates now, but he wishes us to look into that matter, as we shall do very carefully, in the future.
      SIR F. S. POWELLsaid, he had given notice to move a reduction of the Vote, but he should not proceed with that Motion, confining himself to a few general observations, his remarks applying more particularly to the Welsh Colleges. First of all, he wished to say one or two brief words respecting King's College. He thought the recommendations or suggestions which had been quoted would have carried more weight if they had come from Members of different political Parties. His hon. Friend the Member for Manchester and the Chancellor of the Duchy were both justly eminent Members, but they were of one particular Party. He thought it was rather unfortunate there should not have been recommendations from both sides; for more weight would have been attached to recommendations so originated. He thought there was also a broad distinction between King's College and these new Colleges. King's College was an existing Institution with an ancient constitution when these new Colleges were established, and it was not unnatural that these latter should

      1421
      be based on what some regarded as a wider and more liberal foundation. Considering that only the previous night the House declared in favour of denominational teaching in Ireland in connection with Training Colleges, it was a rather hard measure that the members of the Church of England, only a few hours afterwards, should be exposed to difficulties and embarrassments in their career. He did not understand that the restrictions which referred to the teaching staff of King's College had occasioned the slightest difficulty to those who were taught. As regarded University Colleges, especially in connection with University Colleges in Wales, he felt anxious to make his position perfectly clear. He was by no means antagonistic to University Colleges. On the contrary, he had borne a humble but most energetic part in the foundation of the Yorkshire College at Leeds, and was a member of the Court of the Victoria University, which had to deal with these most promising, hopeful, and already most valuable undertakings. But what occurred to him was this: that they ought to have, as regarded these University Colleges, further particulars, so that they might be able to see what work these Institutions were doing. The statement as to these Colleges was almost a blank; whereas in regard to the Scotch Universities, the Royal University of Ireland, and the Queen's Colleges, Ireland, the fullest information was given on all the different points. He hoped the Government would next year present a Report from which they might really gather what had been done.
      SIR J. T. HIBBERT: I will promise that this matter shall be considered.
      SIR F. S. POWELLhoped the word "considered' would be taken in a Parliamentary sense, and that it would lead to action. He did not desire a meddling interference with these Colleges—he should deprecate any such interference—but he thought there should be such a statement as would secure public confidence in these Institutions. Then, with regard, to the Welsh Colleges, perhaps he might be permitted to make some brief remarks respecting Bangor. Some weeks ago he should have been inclined to state the case of Miss Hughes, who was the head of the women's portion of Bangor College, but the progress
      1422
      of matters had been such that her position had been fully established.
      THE CHAIRMAN: I must point out to the hon. Baronet that this, being a matter of internal discipline, cannot be brought forward in Committee of Supply.
      SIR F. S. POWELLbowed to the Chairman's ruling, but submitted that the conduct of the teachers of this College, which was maintained out of the Vote, with reference to a person holding a high position, was a matter that they might discuss in Committee.
      THE CHAIRMAN: I think not.
      SIR F. S. POWELLsaid, of course, he would obey the ruling of the Chair; but perhaps he might be allowed to say that Miss Hughes's character was entirely restored. Though he was not allowed to say anything on this subject, he felt that those who guided this College, those who were responsible to Parliament for the administration of the funds provided by this Vote, should have regard, and very careful regard, to the delicate character of their duties; for when they were bringing together as an experiment young men and young women, and the mothers of England were asked to send their daughters to a College sustained by a Parliamentary Vote, they were entitled to be thoroughly satisfied that the most anxious care would be taken as regarded, not only the teaching and discipline, but the formation of the character of these young persons. There was, as they all knew, a considerable number of young women in Cambridge, but they were gathered together at Girton College and Newnham College, and some slight difficulties had at first arisen there, but, at the same time, he was only speaking of the fact that there were—
      THE CHAIRMAN: I must call the hon. Gentleman's attention to the fact that they are not in this Vote.
      THE CHANCELLOR OF THE DUCHY OF LANCASTER (Mr. BRYCE,): As the hon. Member has made that statement, I feel bound to say that if he has been informed that there were difficulties at Girton or Newnham he has been misinformed. I have been from its first foundation one of the Governing Body of Girton College, and I can

      1423
      assure him that no difficulties have arisen.
      SIR F. S. POWELLwould not carry the point any further. Another question he wished to ask was, how many students there were in these Welsh Colleges? There seemed to him a great contrast in the numbers between the Welsh Colleges and the Victoria Colleges. In the Yorkshire College the number was 1,110; at Bangor, 120; Aberystwith, in 1891, 132; and what number there was at Cardiff he did not know, but it seemed to him that if real good work was to be carried out there must be a considerable enlargement in the number of students, and he hoped the increase would soon take place. He had not spoken in a hostile spirit with reference to these Colleges, for he hoped and earnestly desired their prosperity. Another important point connected with the College was, how many students took advantage of the complete curriculum, and how many attended, as it were, only incidentally and, so to say, as amateurs? Another question was whether there were any means for recording any comparison between the students of Welsh nativity and residence, and students of other nativity and other residence? It had been reported of some of the Colleges that they were greatly frequented by English persons. He did not regret that circumstance, but he thought the Committee should have cognisance of it, as it might have some effect on the deliberations of Parliament in regard to the Vote. Of those educated at these Colleges, he wished to know how many were men, and how many were women? He rejoiced to see the attention paid to the education of women at two of these Colleges. Then he thought they should have some information of the character of the entrance examination, and the instruction given throughout. The success of any establishment and institution must depend on the attainments at the entrance. If the attainment was inferior, the teaching throughout would follow that inferiority. He hoped to hear in answer to his remark that there was an effective examination and entrance in order to made certain that the students were qualified to take advantage of the instruction given in these Colleges. He should then wish to know how many students in these Colleges had taken
      1424
      degrees in the University of London? In Manchester there was a great desire to have the examinations by teachers at the College where the instruction was given to the students, and this was one reason for the application for the Charter. He hoped someone in charge of the Vote would be able to inform them what were the number of degrees won by the students at the London University. The only other point he desired to mention was the fees paid by the students. He himself was entirely ignorant of the scale of fees paid, but they had an important bearing on the financial position of any University, and no University could prosper without being in possession of considerable funds. Thanking the Committee for the patience with which they had heard him, he only wished further to say that he had not made these remarks in a hostile spirit, because he hoped that a career of prosperity was before the University Colleges.
      MR. ACLAND: I think I had better answer the points raised by the hon. Baronet at once. Certainly, in relation to the Colleges, my hon. Friend has a very reasonable and real right to speak, as few men have taken more intense interest in them than he has himself. I will not touch the general question further than to say that questions of internal discipline are not matters with which we, as a Government, ought to interfere; we think that so long as a College goes on reason ably and satisfactorily in general education the Education Department is not called on to look into questions of internal discipline. You must trust the College authorities to do their duty, and until you have grave reason to suppose that they are not doing so you would not be justified in considering the withdrawal of the grant. This is the first time the Vice President has been asked to extend the Vote, and I can only say I echo what my right hon. Friend the Secretary to the Treasury has said, that we have enough material—and the authorities of the College will assist us in this matter—to lay before the House in another year some adequate Report on many of the points raised, as to the men and women students, as to the numbers, the degrees, and generally such an account of each College as Parliament is thoroughly entitled to see. As to the

      1425
      English and Welsh Colleges, I think I ought to say the number of day students in the first instance are between 600 and 700; and if we take the Yorkshire Colleges, the day classes are something over 300. The work at the Welsh Colleges and the increase of students has been of a most remarkable character. I am not able to give the number of London degrees, and for details of that sort we must wait for the Report I have promised. I can say the Welsh Colleges are doing as rapidly increasing and good work as the English Colleges, and when they get, as we hope they may now get, some arrangement of their own in connection with the University, I have the fullest possible confidence that every one of these three Colleges will develop and increase even more rapidly than before.
      SIR A. ROLLITsaid, that as allusion had been made to King's College, and some criticism had been directed to the denominational character of the College, and as no one connected with the College had replied to them, he thought he ought to say a few words. He would not go into the question of denominational education, though he thought what was said last night in regard to the Training Colleges in Ireland was perfectly relevant. The Queen's Colleges were denominational. According to the district in which they were placed, there the religious denomination of that locality was prevalent. For instance, Belfast was distinctly Presbyterian; Cork was almost entirely Roman Catholic, and a denominational character, as was natural, was given to those Colleges. As to King's College, not only did students come from all parts of the world, but he did not know any College or school where the religious character of the College was more diverse. Persons of all religions were educated in common at King's College, and he need scarcely add that in these days a Conscience Clause not only existed, but was rigidly acted upon, so that all the benefits of a high education were given without the disadvantage of any encroachment on the religious opinions of any student. He preferred to leave that question, and to say they were prepared to report fully and regularly on the character of their work. So far as the education given was concerned, the higher class work was well performed,
      1426
      and in one instance it would be impossible to improve on the work done at King's College—he meant the instruction given in Civil Service work; it had been extremely useful to the large class of students who had to get their knowledge how and as best they could. He regretted to be compelled to admit that by no means as many of their students went to their own University of London as they should wish. It had been his personal desire to stimulate that in every possible way, and to ally the College as much as possible with the University. The whole question, they must remember, of education in London had been in solution; they were looking anxiously for the Report of the Royal Commission, which he presumed they would got about December, and he hoped one of the elements of that Report would be a closer association with the University, which was the only means of doing a good teaching work in London. The Parliamentary grants had been extremely useful, and he did not know how they could have carried on the work at King's College without them. Their teaching staff, also, had made great sacrifices in order to continue the work, and he hoped the time might come when, instead of £15,000, a larger grant might be made for higher education. Everything pointed to the greater cost of modern scientific education. They must have equipment, appliances, modern laboratories, and the like, both for teaching and examination purposes, which rendered the cost infinitely greater than in the old days, when the education was of a classical character, extremely useful in its way. And he would point out as a suggestion for more help what might, perhaps, surprise the Committee. The encouragement given by other nations to higher education was remarkable. In the case of Germany the fees paid by the students at all the Universities in the country did not amount to the sum paid by the students attending King's College in London, and that meant a great State subsidy, and it was a sacrifice that was economical and most amply repaid. Take the case of what had been done at Strasbourg, since the war. That University had risen until it consisted of some eight departments, each of which was better than anything they had here; and when they found competing nations

      1427
      doing that class of work, and showing the effect of that work in their everyday industry, it ought to be followed. He had only one word to say in conclusion, and that was in regard to secondary instruction. This work would not be complete until, by a process of selection, the poorest clever boys and girls were enabled to rise, first, to these Colleges, and, ultimately, to the attainment of the University degree. He hoped the day was not far distant when they would be able to put the whole course of instruction on a higher and a better footing.
      MR. LLOYD-GEORGEsaid, before this Vote was taken he wished to make a few observations with reference to Bangor College. He fully recognised the way in which the hon. Baronet had referred to this College, and he only wished the same spirit which animated the hon. Baronet had also animated the hon. Baronet's friends in the country and in another place. He was sure that if it had, a great deal of difficulty and a considerable amount of ill-feeling would have been spared. He was aware the Chairman had ruled any reference to this matter out of Order. The College itself had nothing to gain by burking any discussion; they were fully prepared to refer to the whole of the circumstances, and he was positive the College would not lose by the discussion. Perhaps he might be permitted to make one observation about the character of Miss Hughes now being perfectly established. He was not aware that any attack was made upon her character by the College authorities; his recollection was that it was the other way about; that Miss Hughes made an attack on the College authorities. He quite agreed with what had been said about the desirability of having an annual Report of what occurred in the Colleges, and he was glad that the Vice President of the Council would do his best to carry it out.
      SIR J. T. HIBBERT: After the interesting discussion we have listened to, may I appeal to the Committee to allow us now to take this Vote?
      MR. BRYN ROBERTSonly wished to make a few observations. The hon. Baronet regretted that both political Parties had not joined in the recommendation with regard to
      1428
      King's College. He (Mr. Bryn Roberts) joined in that regret, but if they had to wait until the Conservative Party joined the Liberal Party in a representation for the removal of religious disabilities he feared they would have to wait for a very long time, and that none of those which had been removed would have been removed if they had to wait until the Conservative Party joined with the Liberals in attempting to remove them. With regard to Bangor College, he was not going to discuss the difficulties that had arisen there, but he must notice one observation that was likely to lead to a misapprehension. The hon. Baronet referred to difficulties of a delicate nature which might probably arise in mixed Colleges where young men and young women were educated together, and that rather led to the supposition that the dispute that recently arose in Bangor had reference to that mixed education. He wished to point out that it had no reference whatever to anything of the kind. Male and female students had been educated there ever since the establishment of the College, 12 years ago, but no difficulties of any kind had ever arisen in consequence of the mixed character of the College. In this matter the real difficulty that had arisen—
      THE CHAIRMAN: The hon. Member is not in Order in discussing that.
      MR. BRYN ROBERTSsaid, he only wished to say that the difficulty arose amongst the female students with the Principal.
      MR. POWELL-WILLIAMSsaid, his hon. Friend opposite had made the best defence that could be made for King's College, but, after all, it seemed to him to be unsatisfactory. The hon. Member had spoken of the Conscience Clause, but why on earth should not the Conscience Clause be applied to the Professorships? It seemed to him that a system under which they excluded a Christian from a Professorship because he did not take precisely the same views they took, and at the same time admitted a Buddhist or Mohammedan to a Professorship, was in itself ridiculous. King's College was a Theological College, and they were subscribing national funds to support it; it had a very strong theological side, and it was difficult to say the contribution it received from the Crown was not in some

      1429
      sense in aid of that theological side. He thought his hon. Friend the Member for Nottingham (Mr. Carvell Williams) was right in calling attention to this matter, and he hoped it would receive the consideration of the Government.
      SIR F. S. POWELLonly wished to say that from the latest Report 440 students attended the evening classes, and there were 670 regular day students.
      Vote agreed to.
      7. £12 (including a Supplementary sum of £100), to complete the sum for London University.
      MR. A. C. MORTONasked whether the right hon. Gentleman had considered the question, raised early in the Session, with regard to the reduction of the fees, so as to make the University examinations still more useful to the people?
      SIR A. ROLLITsaid, that further accommodation in the University of London was urgently needed. The examinations could not continue to be properly carried out without it. These examinations were highly scientific, and required special accommodation. The Thames Embankment had been suggested as the place upon which the accommodation could be given, but he was representing the views of those connected with the University when he said that that would not be a satisfactory site. With regard to the fees of the University, he would point out that they went to the State.
      MR. POWELL-WILLIAMSsaid, that the fees for local examinations were higher than those charged at the University itself. The fee was one guinea at the University, but two guineas at some of the local centres, which was clearly a grievance.
      SIR J. T. HIBBERTsaid, he would inquire into the matter.
      Vote agreed to.
      8. £2,650, to complete the sum for National Gallery, &c, Scotland.

  CLASS VI.
  9. £249,625, to complete the sum for Superannuations and Retired Allowances.
  10. £4,100, to complete the sum for Merchant Seamen's Fund Pensions.
  11. £15,352, Savings Banks and Friendly Societies Deficiency.
  12. £706, to complete the sum for Miscellaneous Charitable and other Allowances, Great Britain.

  CLASS VII.
  13. £15,177, to complete the sum for Temporary Commissions.
  SIR T. ESMONDEsaid, that on this Vote he wished to draw attention to the way in which the Irish Congested Districts Board discharged its duties. During the past 12 months he had laid a number of schemes for the construction of piers, and so forth, before the Board, but so far nothing had come of it, although during the past 12 mouths they had had ample opportunity for considering the schemes. He had had a correspondence with the Board respecting a pier at the Magharees, County Kerry. He would not read the whole of it, but he would go through a portion to show how the work of the Congested Districts Board was conducted. In August last year he forwarded to the Board a Memorial praying for the construction of a pier at the Magharees. On the 16th August, 1892, he received this reply—
  "I beg to acknowledge the receipt of your letter dated the 15th instant, in support of a Memorial from the fishermen of the Magharees, County Kerry, praying for the construction of a fishery pier, and to state that it shall be brought before the Congested Districts Board."
  He wrote again, and received this letter of 19th September—
  "I am directed by the Congested Districts Board to acknowledge the receipt of your communication of the 15th instant, and to inform you that no decision with respect to the construction of a pier at Magharees has yet been arrived at."
  He wrote again, and received the following reply on the 30th September—
  "In reply to your letter of the 28th instant, I beg to state that I am not in a position to say when a decision as to the proposed pier at Magharees will be made by the Congested Districts Board for Ireland. I shall place your letter before the Board at its next meeting."
  He wrote again, and received the following, dated 14th December:—
  "I am directed to inform you that works mentioned by you were discussed minutely by the members of the Board at their recent meetings, but no final decision has yet been arrived at."
  He wrote again in February, 1893, and this was the answer, dated February 7—

  1431
  "I am directed by the Congested Districts Board for Ireland to acknowledge the receipt of your letter of the 4th instant, and to state that. … they regret that they are not yet able to inform you definitely which of the proposed works in County Kerry will be constructed."
  He wrote again, and on March 22 received the following:—
  "I am directed by the Congested Districts Board to acknowledge the receipt of your communication of the 16th instant, and to inform you that they are not yet in a position to state definitely their decision as to the proposed pier at the Magharees, County Kerry."
  He wrote again, and on March 30 received this answer—
  "With reference to your letter of the 23rd instant as to the proposed pier at Magharees, I regret that I am not authorised to make a more definite statement than that contained in previous correspondence."
  He wrote again in April, and on April 20 received this answer—
  "I am directed by the Congested Districts Board for Ireland to inform you that they are not yet able to state what they will do in reference to the proposed marine works at the Magharees."
  He wrote in June, and on the 22nd of that month received the following:—
  "I am directed by the Congested Districts Board for Ireland to acknowledge the receipt of your letter of the 13th instant, and to state that they are not yet able to state definitely what action will be taken by them about the proposed pier at Scraggane."
  He wrote again, and, on August 3rd, received this—
  "I am directed by the Congested Districts Board for Ireland to acknowledge the receipt of your letter of the 2nd instant, and to state that no decision has yet been arrived at as to the building of a pier at Scraggane Bay."
  He wrote again, and on the 24th August received the following:—
  "I am directed by the Congested Districts Board for Ireland to acknowledge the receipt of your letter of the 22nd instant, and to state that they have not yet finally decided upon building a pier at Scraggane Bay, County Kerry."
  He had another letter dated 13th September, 1893, as follows:—
  "I am directed by the Congested Districts Board for Ireland to acknowledge the receipt of your letter of the 11th instant, and to state. … the Board's Marine Engineer is at present engaged in making some surveys along the West Coast of Kerry, and the Board now await his Report."
  This might be very fine fooling, but it certainly was not business. He could assure the Government that unless they
  1432
  gave satisfactory consideration to the various schemes brought before them it would be necessary to trouble the House at considerable length on these subjects. It was ludicrous to say that a body of this kind should not be able to decide within 12 mouths whether they would spend £200 or £300 or not on a certain object. The question was really one whether the Irish Government would insist upon the Board paying more attention to the representations of Irish Members. He had submitted a number of schemes to the Board on behalf of his constituents in West Kerry. In addition to the pier he had first spoken of, a landing place was needed in the Great Blasket Islands, and there were a number of rocks in the mouths of creeks which ought to be removed, as they very easily could be, because they blocked up harbours.
  SIR J. T. HIBBERT: This is a matter which I think ought to have been brought forward on the consideration of the Chief Secretary's salary, as he is the Chairman of the Congested Districts Board. In my right hon. Friend's absence, I am not able to deal specifically with the subject. I can only say I have much sympathy with my hon. Friend in the difficulties he has experienced in obtaining the consent of the Congested Districts Board to his proposals. I know, from my own experience of the work of that Board, that they have a great amount of work to do, but at the same time I think it is desirable that the Board should, whenever they can, assist in the formation of piers and the improvements of harbours, where such improvements are needed. I will bring the matter before my right hon. Friend, and ask him to give attention to the complaints the hon. Baronet has made.
  SIR C. W. DILKEsaid, this Vote was one which had always aroused discussion, because it furnished the only opportunity of calling in question the practice of appointing Commissions to get out of difficulties. A great number of the Commissions which were appointed certainly did no good whatever to the country. They produced great masses of evidence which were never read. Statements of the highest importance by the most competent persons, which, if published in the

  1433
  newspapers, would attract much attention, secured no attention whatever if they were buried in the Report of a Commission. Two kinds of Commissions were provided for in the Vote—Executive Commissions and Inquiry Commissions. The Colonisation Board was one of the Executive Commissions. He did not know whether the right hon. Gentleman the Secretary for Scotland (Sir G. Trevelyan) thought that any expenditure on behalf of that Board ought to be continued, inasmuch as the Commission had been a total failure. With regard to the Highlands and Islands Commission, as far as he could make out, it was going over again ground which had been covered by previous inquiries. It seemed to him to be a waste of public money to repeat an inquiry which took place only a few years ago. A great number of Commissions were now being promised almost from week to week. [Cries of "No!"] Hon. Gentlemen dissented, but he had heard of three or four within the last few weeks. He supposed that the item in the Vote respecting Commissions not specifically provided for included the Agricultural Commission. Two-thirds of his constituents were agriculturists, and he knew their opinion was, as his opinion was, that the Agricultural Commission was a mere fraud, and was not likely to lead to any good result. It was a mere pretence of doing something. He should not himself divide the Committee upon it, but if any gentleman opposite did he should certainly vote with him, because he thought the time had come when Members should raise their protest against the continued reference of inquiries to Commissions, the usual result of whose proceedings was merely to produce a great mass of evidence which nobody read.
  SIR J. GORSTentirely agreed with the right hon. Gentleman who had just sat down as to the entire uselessness of Royal Commissions, and should like to add that when the House chose to have a Royal Commission the least it could do was to pay for it. Amongst the Commissions dealt with in the Vote was one appointed in consequence of the views expressed by the House for the purpose of making a very expensive inquiry into the consumption of opium in India. He understood the arrangement the Government had
  1434
  made was that half the costs of that Commission should be paid by the taxpayers of this country and the other half should be imposed upon the impoverished taxpayers of India, who did not want a Commission of the kind, and would gain nothing whatever by its inquiry. He intended to raise this question upon the Indian Budget.
  MR. LODERremarked that the Vaccination Commission, which was appointed four and a-half years ago, had at present only presented a short interim Report. He hoped the President of the Local Government Board would urge the Commission to prepare their full Report at the earliest moment. The evidence taken had now become so voluminous that he should think that hardly anybody would take the trouble to read it. As to the Colonisation Board, he did not entirely agree with what had fallen from the right hon. Gentleman opposite (Sir C. W. Dilke). It was perfectly true that the settlement made in 1889 had not been at all a success, but, at the same time, the 30 families who were settled at a place called Killarney in Manitoba in 1888 had done comparatively well according to the last Report.
  THE PRESIDENT OF THE LOCAL GOVERNMENT BOARD (Mr. H. H. FOWLER,): I cannot speak as to the Scotch Commission, but I should like to answer the question put to me about the Vaccination Commission. The other night, when the Vote was taken on the Local Government Board, I expressed the opinion that it was of the greatest importance that the Vaccination Commission should report as soon as possible, and I quite agree with what the hon. Gentleman opposite has said on the subject. The position, however, is that the Commission has felt it its duty this year to inquire into certain outbreaks of small-pox which had taken place recently. I think the inquiry will come to an end very shortly, and I hope to have the Report on the general question this year. Certainly any influence I possess shall be used with the object of getting the Report as soon as possible. I must express my dissent from the conclusion at which my right hon. Friend (Sir C. W. Dilke) has arrived on the subject of Royal Commissions generally. There are Commissions and Commissions, and no one knows

  1435
  better than he does that some of the most valuable legislation this House has ever passed has been recommended by Royal Commissions. My right hon. Friend must also remember the pressure that is put upon the Government week after week to appoint Commissions, and that the Commissions actually appointed bear a very small proportion to those we are asked to appoint. As to the amount of the evidence which appears in the Reports of Royal Commissions, it must be borne in mind that the evidence really forms the basis of the conclusion at which a Commission arrives, and it is, of course, necessary to give with the Report the evidence on which it is based. I may say that the Commission on the Aged Poor is bringing its labours to a very rapid conclusion, and I hope that the Report will be laid on the Table before the next Session—not the Autumn Session, but the next Session—commences.
  SIR R. TEMPLEagreed with his right hon. Friend (Sir J. Gorst) that it was too bad to put even a fraction of the cost of the Opium Commission on the Revenues of India. The Commission was never asked for by the Government of India, or by the people of India, and be believed that if the truth were known it was very much objected to by the people of India. Under these circumstances, he thought that to charge the cost of the Commission on the Indian taxpayers was unworthy of the generosity of this Imperial Parliament.
  MR. A. C. MORTONconcurred in the opinion expressed by his right hon. Friend (Sir C. W. Dilke) that a great many Royal Commissions were shams and frauds on the nation. In a great many cases they were appointed for the purpose of putting matters off, and sometimes for electioneering purposes, as was the case with the Labour Commission two years ago. As he understood, the main object of the Colonisation Board was to drive away from Scotland the crofter population in order to make room for deer, so that Londoners might amuse themselves in the autumn. He hoped to hear from the Secretary for Scotland that something would be done in the direction of emigrating the deer instead of driving the people from their country. The crofters were anxious to have the land and till it,
  1436
  and they were prepared to pay a fair rent for it; and the land should surely be used for the people, instead of for deer. Then, he agreed with the right hon. Baronet the Member for the Forest of Dean that the Deer Forests Commission was of no use whatever. Everyone knew what was wanted, but it was necessary to put off the question for a time. But the worst of it was that it was put off not only to the detriment of the crofters, but at a waste of public money. He had to complain that one of the Commissioners, apparently in the interests of the landlords of Scotland, was a paid Commissioner; that he got five guinea's a day and one guinea allowance; and that he was allowed a vote. They were informed that the Commission themselves had allowed this payment; but without the vote of this particular Commissioner, and the casting vote of the Chairman, the resolution would not have been carried. He submitted that if a paid Commissioner was to be put on this Commission there should have been one on each side, and that the crofters should have had a paid representative on the Commission just as this land agent was. Nothing had been done during the present Session to assist the crofters, who had waited patiently for the advent of a Liberal and Radical Government; and they did not know when the Commission was going to report. He hoped they would have an assurance that the Government were going to do something for the crofters. He had personal experience that they were a most deserving, hard-working people. They had been during the Session trying to do justice to the Irish people. [Laughter.] Hon. Members might laugh; but he came there with a sincere desire to do justice in that matter. He hoped the claims of the crofters would not be forgotten. They had waited very patiently. He had laid the facts before the Committee; and he felt sure the Secretary for Scotland, if the Government would allow him, would do something. The patience of the crofters deserved some recognition at the hands of the Government, and he repeated that he hoped to have an assurance on the point.
  THE SECRETARY FOR SCOTLAND (Sir G. TREVELYAN,): Mr. Mellor, the hon. Gentleman and the right hon. Baronet the Member for the Forest of Dean have

  1437
  asked me why this Commission is kept up, and the right hon. Baronet has described the Colonisation Commission as a deplorable failure. Well, Sir, the Report of the Colonisation Board will be before the House very soon, and Members will then be able to judge whether the remarks of the right hon. Member for the Forest of Dean are well founded. All I can say is that when that Report is before hon. Members, I think it will be many a long year before a Government will undertake a scheme of State Colonisation. Both colonies sent out have proved failures. The colony of Saltcoats has been reduced from 49 families to 18 already; and in the case of the colony of Killarney, where the people were said to be fairly flourishing, none of the instalments which became due last autumn have been paid. But that is not all. The very moderate municipal taxes have not been paid by 35 of the crofters of Killarney, who were said to be so flourishing. Their houses and farms have been put up for sale, and have actually been bought in by the Municipality, and the tenants were now, he imagined, very much in the position of caretakers. That would give some idea of what the state of matters is.
  MR. A. C. MORTON: What is the cost?
  SIR G. TREVELYAN: The matter comes very much to this—and it will give the Committee some idea of what State emigration is when conducted by well-meaning men with ample funds. I believe that the people who were sent out were not natural emigrants; and not only so, but that even when they had energy and self-reliance, they were so cockered up under this system that they lost it, and did not consider it an obligation even to pay their taxes. There were no emigrants from the Highlands for whom Parliament voted this money to emigrate. Last year invitations were sent to all the congested districts from which this class of emigrant had been drawn. Those invitations were drawn up in the Gaelic language, yet there was not one single family which presented itself from any of those districts from which Parliament intended the emigrants to be drawn. That is the state of affairs,
  1438
  and I think Parliament will consider that the Government are quite right in suspending their action in the matter and suspending that action certainly, so far as I am concerned, indefinitely. As to the cost, £20,000 in round figures have been spent on these two colonies, of which £18,000 was from Vote and £2,000 from private subscriptions. The hon. Member and the right hon. Gentleman speaks of the Highlands and Islands Commission.
  SIR C. W. DILKE: What is the salary of the gentleman in charge on this side?
  SIR G. TREVELYAN: The salaries are:—£150 for a gentleman on this side of the water, and £200 for a gentleman on the other side. The gentleman on this side, Mr. Cornier, is attached to the Canadian Agency here, and he conducts the whole correspondence and has the whole matter in hand. He, in fact, is the best representative we have of a strong Executive Board upon the business. In my own opinion, the salaries are all the more necessary on account of the state of things I have mentioned. We need agents and servants for two purposes—one to protect and look after these unfortunate people, and the other for the purpose of protecting the interests of the Government. I may say that there is still some £7,000 of the money which has been voted unspent, and that will more than cover the necessary salaries and expenses of winding up the scheme. The Government have sunk £18,000 in land, all of which is bound to be repaid, and we can get nothing, or little, back when the farms have been sold for the purpose of paying the taxes of the Municipality. Not only is it an unfortunate thing that this scheme of colonisation was set on foot, but that, having been set on foot, it should not have been conducted by the Executive Government. To divide the responsibility of it with a Board was a misfortune. With reference to the Highlands and Islands Commission, the very antipodes of the other, my right hon. Friend did not speak with his usual acumen when he said that the Commission was doing over again the work of former

  1439
  Commissions. Lord Napier's Commission, which worked with very great energy and thoroughness, made recommendations as to what legislation should be carried out for the benefit of the Highlands. But they did not examine and survey the land, whereas this Commission has spent the whole of its time in a very careful and minute examination of land suited for the purpose of the enlargement of crofter holdings. This is entirely different work; it is work that must be done after legislation, even if it were not done before legislation, were passed. At this moment the difficulties of the Commission arise from the resignation of one member, Mr. M'Leod, whose resignation we all regret. Mr. M'Leod has thought it right—he has given no reasons—and I think he is right in that—for his resignation. He has simply stated that it arises from differences in the Commission, and I have no authority to say, on behalf of Mr. M'Leod, or even to conjecture, what those differences are. But it is well-known there has been a difficulty—and I separate this altogether from Mr. M'Leod—about the payment of one of the members of the Commission. But this payment is in accordance with a very general practice of the Treasury, which frequently pays not five guineas, but 10, which is the usual sum paid to professional men conducting such an investigation. That practice has been followed in this case in the person of a very eminent surveyor and valuator, and I am bound to say I did not expect it would raise in any quarter any serious objection. This gentleman has been employed not because he is a landlord's man—I do not know what is meant by that—but because he is an eminent surveyor and valuator. I will not enter into the pros and cons of what that gentleman's political views and leanings are; but he is paid for his professional work, and he has done that work very well. I hope and believe that the Commission will carry on its work to the end, unless, indeed, it should resolve to give a Report soon, and give the Government the benefit of its experience and labours. When that Report does come to hand, I will lose no opportunity of urging on the Government any proposals which may be made for the enlargement of the holdings of the Highland people, and the extension
  1440
  of the advantages of the Crofters Act to leaseholders.
  MR. A. C. MORTONsaid, it would be interesting to know how it was that the Government did not also appoint a surveyor in the interests of the crofters?
  SIR G. TREVELYANsaid, the gentleman who was referred to was a surveyor, and he did not represent the interests of the landlords specially. The hon. Gentleman thought the crofters should be more strongly represented on the Commission; but the fact was that he had been charged with giving them too strong a representation on that Body.
  MR. BUTCHERsaid, he wished to refer for a moment to the matter which had been brought forward by the hon. Baronet the Member for Kerry (Sir T. Esmonde). He was anxious to support the contention of the hon. Baronet with regard to the necessity for piers in Kerry and along the West Coast of Ireland generally. He had no doubt that for the purposes of the fisheries such piers would be of the greatest advantage to that part of the country. The Congested Districts Board had very great demands upon them, and very large sums placed at their disposal; but the sums were small enough for the purposes to which they were to be applied, and he was not surprised that this Board was unable to meet all the demands. He hoped the Government would do what they could towards the construction of these piers and the development of the coast industries. There was one other question. He wished to know when they might expect the Report of the Labour Commission?
  SIR J. T. HIBBERT: At the end of this year.
  MR. BUTCHERsaid, that was all he wished to ask.
  MR. PAULsaid, referring to the cost of the Labour Commission, some of the items appeared to him to be exorbitant. Upwards of £4,000 had been paid for salaries and £3,000 for travelling expenses. He thought that the Committee

  1441
  ought to know when this Commission, which seemed to. have withdrawn itself very modestly from the public eye, last held a meeting, and when it proposed to hold another meeting, or whether it was simply engaged in the preparation of its Report?
  MR. W. WHITELAWsaid, he wished to ask the Secretary for Scotland one question about the funds of the Highlands and Islands Commission. He knew that a difficulty had arisen within the Commission, but he did not desire to press the right hon. Gentleman upon that point. He had his own opinion on the matter. But he hoped the right hon. Gentleman would tell them that the Commission would proceed with its work. As to what the Member for Peterborough (Mr. Morton) had said regarding the land valuer, he (Mr. Whitelaw) thought that the Secretary for Scotland had been quite right in appointing a gentleman of skill independently of whether he held one class of opinions or another. He had no doubt the right hon. Gentleman had taken considerable care to appoint a gentleman whose impartiality he could thoroughly trust, and he thought in the case of expert evidence it was very much better not to put one man against another. He presumed there would be a further Vote for the Commission, and when the Vote was presented next year they would be in possession of the Report and would be in a better position for offering criticism.
  SIR J. GORST: In reply to the hon. Member opposite, I desire to say that the public meetings of the Labour Commission concluded some mouths ago, and since then the Commission has been withdrawn from the public eye. Two Committees of the Commission have been preparing Digests of the evidence and summaries of the Reports of foreign countries; and I expect that everything will be ready in time to enable the Commission to meet for the consideration of its Report about the end of next month. It is confidently anticipated that the Report will be presented to Her Majesty before the end of the year.
  SIR G. TREVELYAN: I wish to say, in reply to the hon. Member for
  1442
  Perth, that the same sum will be on the Estimates next year.
  Vote agreed to.
  14. Motion made, and Question proposed,
  "That a sum, not exceeding £1,885, 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 certain Miscellaneous Expenses."
  SIR C. W. DILKEsaid, he objected to the item for Queen's Plates in Ireland, but he would not trouble the Committee by dividing upon it. The item was rejected at one time by the House, the Irish Members voting against it, though they afterwards turned round and supported it.
  MR. GIBSON BOWLESsaid, he approved of the Queen's Plates, because they encouraged the breeding of horses. But the item of £6,228 in the Vote seemed to him to be an alarming sum to pay for honours and dignities—for the Lyon King of Arms, the Ulster King of Arms, the State Trumpeters, and Kettle Drummers. He was far from advocating the abolition of these honours and dignities, or of heraldic distinctions, for he thought them of interest and importance, but he thought those who desired such distinctions should pay the cost themselves, just as coats of arms on carriages were charged for. He was shocked that an eminent Radical like the right hon. Member for the Forest of Dean should pass these things by and object to the Queen's Plates. He was also shocked that the most Radical of Radical Governments, which had been returned pledged to economy, did not begin by doing away with this entirely unnecessary and foolish expenditure. £2,000 were paid for this nonsense and frippery. There was one matter in the Vote to which he particularly desired to call the attention of Members from Ireland. He found that whilst the cost of the installation of the Knight of the Order of St. George was £440, the cost of the installation of a Knight of St. Patrick was only £40. If that was not a wrong and an insult to Ireland he did not know what was. St. Patrick was put at only one-tenth the value of St. George. It appeared to be perfectly monstrous. He found that every Knight

  1443
  of the Garter paid £700 or £800 for the honour conferred on him. The Collar and the George cost £265. The Garter itself cost £30 16s. Every Knight of the Garter had also to buy three pairs of hose at a cost of £7 10s. If he were to become a Knight of the Garter he should certainly object to pay £2 10s. a pair for his stockings. The Knight's two pieces of Garter ribbon cost £13 1s. That ribbon was extremely dear. But, at any rate, the cost should fall on the Knight of the Garter and not on the public. For the mere frippery connected with these offices the public had to pay £4,265. They who earned their bread by the sweat of their brow could not afford to spend £4,265 on old clothes. [Laughter.] Yes, many of them were old clothes. It often happened he was told; for he did not, personally, understand these mysteries, that when a new Knight was appointed he succeeded to the old insignia of his predecessor. He was sure that the Committee would be delighted to hear that the Tower of London, in which the Royal jewels were kept, paid its own expenses, and something more. The cost of the Tower was £1,088; but the admission fees paid by the public to see the jewels during the year was £1,900, so that there was a profit of £900. Why should not the country also make money out of the Knights of St. George and St. Patrick? A chamber could be fitted up with effigies with the insignia of those Orders upon them—he would not make it an essential condition that the Knights themselves should be there—and by charging for admission the cost of the College of Arms might be defrayed. He was sure the Committee would consider his proposal very proper and very sensible.
  MR. A. C. MORTONsaid, he had opposed this Vote every year since he entered Parliament, and meant to oppose it now. The whole of this matter might be called tomfoolery. The people who wanted this tomfoolery ought to be made to pay for it, and not the nation. He saw an item of £20 for cost of medals, awarded by Her Majesty for saving life on land. That was one £20, at any rate, that was properly, usefully, and even decently spent. He had always objected
  1444
  to the Queen's Plates for Ireland. It was merely to encourage racing, one of the greatest scandals and the worst evils they had to deal with in this country—a practice which had done more mischief than almost anything else he knew of. As a protest against all this tomfoolery he begged to move the reduction of the Vote by £100.
  Motion made, and Question put, "That a sum, not exceeding £1,785, be granted for the said Service."—(Mr. A. C. Morton.)
  The Committee divided:—Ayes 39; Noes 83.—(Division List, No. 307.)
  Original Question put, and agreed to.
  15. £45,000, to complete the sum for Pleuro-Pneumonia, agreed to.
  16. £23,000, to complete the sum for Highlands and Islands of Scotland (Public Works and Communications).
  SIR C. W. DILKEdirected attention to an increase in the Vote in respect of the construction of roads in the Highlands, and asked for an explanation on the subject.
  MR. W. WHITELAWexpressed the opinion that if there was to be an increased expenditure upon increased communications in the Highlands, it should be upon railways. He would only make one appeal to the Government upon this point. The Garve and Ullapool Railway—
  SIR J. T. HIBBERT: I submit that the question of railways cannot be raised upon this Vote.
  THE CHAIRMAN (Mr. ROBY): Railways do not come under this Vote.
  SIR G. TREVELYANsaid, this Vote was a peculiar one in some respects. In former years not half of the money had been spent, and that had been largely due to the circumstances that it had been voted to purposes which were extremely difficult to carry out, and which the country did not really stand in need of. But this year there was very great distress in the Highlands, and he found himself obliged to refuse altogether any-

  1445
  thing in the way of direct aid. He looked upon that as pauperising a district beyond all hope of recovery. The only form in which they felt that aid could possibly be given was not the making of roads, as it was called in the Vote, but of footpaths in this part of the country where the people were quite unable to make them themselves, and where the children were kept from school in great numbers by the danger and inconvenience of the means of travelling. The money was extremely well laid out, and he did not think it could be taken to establish any dangerous precedent. £1,000 was allotted on a previous occasion for a great road across the Island of Lewis, and nothing fresh of that sort had been done. This small sum of money, dealt out in this manner, had relieved the Highlands from a good deal of distress and from a great deal of demoralisation.
  MR. W. WHITELAWsaid, he found he could make reference to the question of railway communication in the Highlands on the question of the harbour at Ullapool. A Report had been made to the Treasury condemning the harbour at Ullapool as unsafe for navigation and as unsuitable for the fishermen of the northwest of Scotland and the Lews. He was informed that of the Committee who reported on this harbour not a single man went near it, or took any local evidence upon it. The harbour was declared to be unsafe because of the number of islets and rocks at the mouth of it. But he had received evidence, the authority for which he thought the Secretary for Scotland would recognise—Mr. Mac Brayne and Sir John Burns—who declared that the navigation of this harbour was perfectly safe in all weathers and at all tides. Beyond that he had the evidence of the masters of all sorts of vessels. He thought that, after the evidence he had been able to put before the Secretary for Scotland, he really ought to satisfy himself as to whether the Report of the Treasury Committee should continue to receive credit; or whether it was a Report, at any rate, in respect to this harbour which ought to be discredited. He wanted to get the Treasury to admit that the Report was
  1446
  wrong in this respect, because, if he could get them to do so, he thought he would have made some progress towards securing some day or other a grant to the railway which he was interested in.
  Vote agreed to.
  17. £1,000, to complete the sum for Chicago Exhibition, agreed to.
  18. £11,868, Repayment to the Local Loans Fund, agreed to.
  19. 5,005, Repayments to the Civil Contingencies Fund.
  MR. BUTCHERasked for information respecting an item for a new Great Seal for Ireland. He understood that a new Great Seal was provided whenever a new Lord Chancellor came into Office. He also drew attention to the equipage money given under this Vote to the Lord Chancellor of Ireland and the Lord Lieutenant, the sums being respectively £923 and £2,700.
  COLONEL NOLANthought the item for equipages was reasonable as regarded the Lord Chancellor. With respect to the Lord Lieutenant, if there was to be one at all, the Office should be kept up tolerably well.
  SIR J. T. HIBBERTsaid, it had been necessary to provide a new Great Seal, because the one in use previously was worn out, and it was ordered in the year 1891. How it came to be in that condition he could not say. It was an error to suppose that a new Seal was provided whenever a new Lord Chancellor was appointed in Ireland. The equipage charges were the same as had always been allowed. They were customary payments.
  MR. A. C. MORTONwanted to know why the salary of the Secretary to the Lord Privy Seal was included in this Vote? He also would like particulars as to how this money in the Vote now before the Committee was spent.
  SIR J. T. HIBBERTsaid, the Vote had been carefully considered, and not a single item had been allowed to be

  1447
  entered without the assent of the Treasury.
  Vote agreed to.

  REVENUE DEPARTMENTS.
  20. £663,264, to complete the sum for Customs.
  SIR C. W. DILKEsaid, there was a great saving to be made in the amalgamation of the Customs and Inland Revenue, and a great increase in efficiency would also thereby be produced. He was quite certain that this matter must come forward shortly.
  SIR W. HARCOURT: I entirely agree as to the importance of this matter, but I do not know whether my right hon. Friend is aware that there has already been a most elaborate examination of the subject. My predilections were entirely in the direction of those stated by the right hon. Gentleman, but a Committee which was appointed to inquire into this subject reported not long ago that the amalgamation would not be advantageous, and would hardly be possible. Thus, so far as the most recent investigation has gone, it has been adverse to the plan of amalgamation.
  MR. MACDONALDsaid, he had been asked by the hon. Member for North West Ham, who was absent through illness, to call attention to the grievances of the outdoor officers of the Customs. Duties that had originally been performed by a superior class of officers had been imposed upon them, but no increase had been made in their salary. Mr. Murray, the Chairman of the Customs Board, stated before the Ridley Commission that the duties performed by these outdoor officers were in all particulars analogous to those performed by the assistants of Excise. But, although the duties were analogous, the minimum salary paid to an outdoor officer of the Customs was £35, increasing by annual increments of £2 10s. to £75 10s. after seven years' service, with a maximum of £100; whereas the assistants of Excise started with £78, increasing by annual increments of £5 after seven years' service to £115, with a maximum of
  1448
  £250. Both classes of officers had to pass in the ordinary elementary subjects; but in the case of the outdoor officers arithmetic and geography were compulsory subjects, while they were optional with the other class of officers. The grievance in respect of salary had not been inquired into, because these officers, naturally relying upon a Memorial they had sent in on the question of the inadequacy of their salaries, had, on the inquiry, given evidence in respect of minor grievances only. In consequence of that mistake on their part, the late Chancellor of the Exchequer had in his Minute entirely failed to take notice of the grievance in respect of the smallness of the salary, although he did something to remedy the minor grievances. He hoped, under the circumstances, the Treasury would consider that the case of these officers was one that ought to be taken into their favourable consideration.
  SIR W. HARCOURT: With great respect to my hon. Friend, I would submit to him that the House cannot undertake to settle questions of the internal organisation of the Departments of this country. How in the world is the House of Commons to undertake to say whether the salaries correspond to the duties performed by these particular officers, or as to how they compare with the salaries of other officers? There could only be an ex parte statement on the one side and the answer of a Minister on the other. You might as well undertake the discipline of the Army as undertake a matter of this kind. The responsible Heads of the Departments ought to be left to deal with the details of matters of this kind. This matter was undertaken by my Predecessor in Office. He made a careful examination into the condition of all these officers. I am not prepared to reverse the decision which has been come to after inquiry by a competent body; and, although the Treasury will always consider any representations made either by hon. Members or by the parties concerned in respect of such matters, I would deprecate any further discussion at the present time and under present circumstances.
  MR. HANBURYsaid, he could not quite agree with the dictum of

  1449
  the right hon. Gentleman, because there were some classes of salary which were capable of being dealt with by this House; but having been upon a Commission that dealt with this question, he knew that nothing gave them so much trouble as matters connected with the Customs and Inland Revenue. He, therefore, agreed that it would be very difficult to deal with these particular salaries. With regard to the outdoor officers, some of them were remnants of the bad system of patronage under which Civil servants were appointed on the nomination of Members of this House, and he would ask the Chancellor of the Exchequer whether he could not do away with this somewhat obsolete system of patronage? If that were done the boatmen would come before the House without the prejudice that at present attached to their appointment, and their case would be much better than it was now.
  MR. SEXTONagreed with the Chancellor of the Exchequer that the time and general circumstances were inconvenient for the discussion of this question; but a gross disparity between these particular salaries had been shown. While he thought this Committee was not competent to enter into a comparison, because it was not competent to inquire how far the duties were analogous, he thought a case of grievance had been disclosed. The men had forwarded a Memorial to the Department previously, which dealt with the question of salaries; and thinking that matter had been sufficiently mentioned, they only put forward minor grievances before the Commission. He hoped the Chancellor of the Exchequer would see that any representations on the subject would be duly considered.
  MR. BURNS. whilst agreeing with what the hon. Member had said in relation to wages and supporting the hon. Member for Bow, who had so ably put this question before the House, generally concurred with the Chancellor of the Exchequer in the line the right hon. Gentleman took in his remarks as to the undesirability of the House settling questions of the internal organisation of a Department. But when
  1450
  they had exceptional abuses such as those disclosed, he thought it was the duty of the House to interpose, and not always to take the advice of the Head of a Department. Some of the Customs boatmen were on duty for extremely long stretches of time—sometimes 10, 12, 14, 18, 24, and, in some cases 36 hours. That was altogether unnecessary, and a simple re-organisation would prevent such a thing. He would recommend the Chancellor of the Exchequer to see the Head of the Department and get him to put a stop to this anarchical and ignorant method.
  MR. MACDONALDpointed out that the comparison was really instituted at the Commission, and was made by the Chairman of the Customs Board.
  Vote agreed to.
  21. £1,382,914, to complete the sum for Inland Revenue, agreed to.
  Resolutions to be reported.
  Motion made, and Question proposed,
  "That a sum, not exceeding £5,140,575, 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 Post Office Services, the Expenses of Post Office Savings Banks, and Government Annuities and Insurances, and the Collection of Post Office Revenue."
  SIR T. ESMONDEasked the Postmaster General for some information as to how the matter stood with reference to Queenstown as a port of call for the American mails. The question was one of enormous importance to Ireland as well also to Liverpool, Manchester, and other large cities and towns in England. The present arrangement was one of a purely temporary character; and if Queenstown was to remain as a port of call for the American mails, it would be necessary that considerable improvement should be made in the present system, so that Queenstown might not be left behind. The existing contract for the carriage of mails expired with a year's notice towards the end of 1894; and if a proper service was to be instituted between Queenstown and London, it would be necessary that the

  1451
  Post Office authorities should take such steps as were necessary to secure that time should be given to whatever companies were anxious to enter into that contract. It was impossible for Queens-town to hold its own if the present system continued, but, on the other hand, it was quite easy for Queenstown to be placed in such a position of superiority that her position as a port of call could be maintained with perfect safety. A saving of time could be effected between Queenstown and Dublin, between Queens-town and Holyhead, and also between Holyhead and the large centres in the North of England. This could easily be done if the Post Office would signify their intention of paying for an improved service for the carriage of mails. The matter was one of pressing urgency. All the Irish Members were united in their determination to retain for Queenstown and Ireland generally the great benefits of having that place a port of call for American mails, and he hoped to hear some favourable reply from the Postmaster General on the subject.
  MR. RADCLIFFE COOKEwished to call attention to a matter of considerable interest to his constituents, whose wishes had been altogether disregarded by the Postmaster General or his Department. A sub-postmastership had been instituted in Hereford at Harold Street Post Office. It was located in a most convenient spot, and the postal business was conducted in a shop where there was ample accommodation for the purpose. About May of this year the proprietor of this shop—who was a provision merchant—died, and the widow disposed of the business to a man named Reynolds, who entered into possession in May, and from that date until August conducted pro tem. the duties of postmaster of that sub-district with satisfaction. He made application to be appointed sub-postmaster. It was true that another application probably was made to the late Member, Mr. Grenfell, by a person named Kaye, but the priority of the application did not affect the point in question. When it was known that there was a suggestion that Harold Street Post Office should be removed to a less eligible spot a Memo-
  1452
  rial, signed by 300 residents of the district, was sent to the Postmaster General, praying him to retain this particular office on the ground that it was the most convenient place, and one where the business had been admirably conducted for many years. No answer was sent to that Memorial for a period of three months. Then Mr. Grenfell resigned; on the 15th August he (Mr. Cooke) was elected in his place, and on the 16th August the Department for the first time replied to the Memorial, stating, in effect, that they could pay no attention whatever to the wishes of the residents of the district concerned, and they appointed Mr. Kaye to the sub-postmastership, and the business of the office was removed to a less convenient district, and to an establishment where the accommodation was insufficient. He thought this was a disregard of the wishes of the people of a district, which required some explanation.
  MR. R. WALLACEsaid, he wished to place two points before the Postmaster General. One had reference to the mode of selection to vacant postmasterships, and the other was with regard to the increase of their pay. He understood that when a vacancy occurred in a locality for a postmaster the method was to advertise it in the weekly official Circular. Then, after some time, when candidates had sent in applications, an announcement was made in the same Circular that so-and-so had been appointed to the position. He was not sure that that was the most encouraging way for the Service. It encouraged suspicion sometimes of private and indirect influence being used in making appointments. He was asked whether it would not be better to substitute the system that worked very well in other Departments of the Public Service, of promotion by recognised seniority and position and merit, in preference to the present accidental and, to a certain extent, haphazard way of filling up vacancies. With respect to the encouragement given to postmasters, he was told that increase of pay was made to depend on the commercial prosperity of the place in which he officiated. That had often a very unfair and discouraging influence upon the

  1453
  position and prospects of particular postmasters. He wished to know whether that rule applied in other Departments of the Service? He wished to know whether, on these two points, the right hon. Gentleman would give the Committee information as to what changes and reforms he had in his mind?
  SIR A. ROLLIT, in reference to the subject of the Queenstown mail route, said, the question was one of public convenience as well as of expense. The London Chamber of Commerce had taken a poll in order to ascertain the feeling of its members on the subject, and the result was that there was a very great and preponderating feeling in favour of that route being continued and made efficient.
  MR. MACDONALDsaid, he had formally put down a Motion for the reduction of this Vote in order to bring before the Committee various circumstances connected with the Post Office Department. The proposal he desired to urge on the Postmaster General was that he, on behalf of the Government, should consent to the appointment of a Committee of Inquiry into the administration of the Post Office with special bearing upon the grievances which he was informed affected the main body of the Post Office servants. He believed it was originally intended that the Ridley Commission should inquire into the administration of the Post Office, where, more than in any other Department, disorganisation prevailed. The main grievances of the men were classification, split duties, and the existence of a supernumerary staff. The men desired an independent inquiry into these grievances by a Parliamentary Committee, and they had expressed their perfect willingness to abide by the result of that inquiry. He pointed out that in 1891 the present Postmaster General voted in favour of an inquiry such as that for which he (Mr. Macdonald) now asked, and he wished to know whether anything had occurred to cause the right hon. Gentleman to change his view since that time?
  SIR A. ROLLITsaid, this was a question in which his constituents were interested, and he would like to impress the
  1454
  importance of the matter on the Government. Nothing could be more disadvantageous to the Service than that these men should labour under grievances, and should be denied full inquiry. He hoped the Postmaster General would agree that such an inquiry should be held. There could be no question with regard to the grievances of the postmen and auxiliary postmen, and the only request by these men was for impartial inquiry. Might he also venture to ask the Postmaster General, who had already recognised to so large an extent the rights which the Post Office officials had claimed, if he would consider whether an amnesty could not now be granted in favour of those who had been dispossessed of their posts? These men were suffering for principle; one of his own constituents was among the number, and he thought he and his fellows laboured under great injustice, and that their case was entitled to favourable consideration.
  GENERAL GOLDSWORTHYsaid, he should feel bound to support the hon. Member opposite if he went to a Division, unless the Postmaster General was prepared to promise that an inquiry would be granted. All they asked for was inquiry, and that could be granted with the best results, he believed, to the Public Service. He trusted the late Postmaster General (Sir J. Fergusson) would support this appeal simply for an impartial inquiry.
  DR. COMMINSsaid, he would urge upon the right hon. Gentleman the desirability of renewing the contract with the Liverpool Steamship Companies for the carriage of the American mails viâ Queenstown. He would remind him that two Liverpool vessels had recently made the journey in five days and 13 and a-half hours, which was an astonishing improvement, and one that showed how efficient the service was likely to be made. The present contract would expire on September 30, 1894, and the Liverpool Companies were anxious to be assured that they would have the renewal of it. To adopt another route now would be, he was satisfied, a great inconvenience to many parts of England—the North, for example—and he would

  1455
  appeal to the right hon. Gentleman to give an answer to his inquiry which would be satisfactory to those who wished to see a really good Transatlantic service.
  MR. BUTCHERsaid, he would like to refer to the Regulation which prohibited postmen in some districts from smoking when in uniform. In certain localities postmen wore uniforms for 15 hours a day, although they were on duty for only eight hours. That they should be prohibited from smoking during the remaining seven hours was a vexatious restriction. What was the result, however? Why that the men were driven—or tempted, at any rate, to resort—to the public-house. He hoped something would be done in this matter.
  MR. TOMLINSONsaid, he would point out to the right hon. Gentleman the necessity of acquiring sites for new Post Office buildings. A plan ought to be devised under which the Department would be empowered to acquire sites when favourable opportunities presented themselves. Otherwise, in his opinion, the Post Office would never make good bargains. If they acted upon his suggestion they might have good cheap sites. He trusted this matter of administration would not be lost sight of by the Postmaster General.
  MR. BURNIEsaid, he had been in communication with the Postmaster General, whom he found to be exceedingly kind and courteous, with reference to increased postal facilities for Swansea, and he hoped they would be granted. He desired also to express a hope that like facilities would be given to South Wales as to other parts of the United Kingdom, especially with regard to American correspondence.
  CAPTAIN DONELANsaid, he only wished in a word to support what had been urged by the hon. Member for West Kerry and others in favour of the Queenstown route. He hoped the Postmaster General would give serious attention to the views of the London Chamber of Commerce as stated by its Chairman, the hon. Member for South Islington (Sir A. Rollit).
  MR. R. WALLACEsaid, the Metropolitan Post Office of Scotland happened to be in the constituency he had the honour to represent, and he had received many pressing applications on the subject of an inquiry into the grievances of Post Office servants. He believed there was a strong desire in Scotland for this inquiry, and that the granting of it would be the best way of allaying any existing discontent.
  MR. MACDONALDbegged to move the reduction of the Vote for the Postmaster General's salary by £100.
  Motion made, and Question proposed, "That Item A, Salaries, be reduced by £100, in respect of the Salary of the Postmaster General."—(Mr. Macdonald.)
  SIR J. FERGUSSON: The discussion has been a little discursive, but I think it my duty to deal with one matter which has been referred to by several hon. Gentlemen. As I have had recent experience of the grievances that have been the subject of complaint, I think I may venture to say a few words regarding them. It would, undoubtedly, be very wrong if a Government or the Head of a Department were to neglect inquiry into substantial grievances until they culminate in grave dissatisfaction or disaffection. But the complaints of large classes in the Post Office have been a matter of careful inquiry in successive years, and has been met by very large concessions on the part of the Department. If hon. Members will look at the Return showing the income and expenditure of the Post Office, they will see that the income has not increased in proportion to the expenditure. There has been an annual progressive increase in the percentage of salaries as compared with total Revenue. Many of the concessions were made in the time of my Predecessor; and when I succeeded to the Post Office I found that the mere fact of raising the salaries of the suburban postmen had caused a new grievance among Metropolitan postmen, and the Treasury consented, on my application, to raise the wages of these men very substantially. My experience is that no case whatever has been made

  1457
  out for inquiry outside the Department, and Members ought to be slow in committing themselves to any such contention merely because certain allegations have been made. Hon. Gentlemen will agree with me that the Service is very popular, and, I think, if we find the employment in any branch of Her Majesty's Service is popular, that shows that the remuneration is not insufficient. There is no branch of the Public Service more eagerly sought after than the Post Office, because there is regular work, proper discipline, and the certainty of a pension at the end, when a man is no longer able to work. I must, therefore, say no case has been made out for inquiry, and hope the Government will resist the inquiry that has been asked for. With respect to the conveyance of mails from Queenstown as against the growing popularity and facilities of Southampton, I have to say that Queenstown has proved a most speedy and convenient route for mails, and I cannot conceive that it is likely to be ousted from its position. But the claims now made involve a very large expenditure. In my time a very considerable contribution was made to the Great Southern and Western Railway to accelerate the mails by the Queenstown route, but it would be necessary to prove a general public advantage when any great increase of expenditure is asked for. The demands made for shortening the conveyance of the mails by two or three hours would certainly involve an expenditure so great as to interfere with other corresponding claims. And now a few words upon a subject which I have raised more than once in this House; that is, with regard to the employment of soldiers in the Post Office. I have seen with regret that the Postmaster General has altered the Regulations, framed when I was at the Post Office, with regard to the employment of soldiers in that Department after they have left the Army. The right hon. Gentleman has drawn up what is called an "enlistment scheme," and has arranged that telegraph messengers shall have a preferential claim to appointments as postmen, instead of soldiers as I had arranged, always, of course, having regard to existing engagements, explicit or implied. When I made the arrange-
  1458
  ment as to the employment of soldiers I was led to believe that it was a popular movement. It was mentioned more than once in the House, and received with approval, and it was believed that it would tend to the benefit of the two Services—both of the Army and the Post Office. No doubt it would be impossible to carry out a scheme of that kind without giving dissatisfaction in some quarters; but if we are to make the employment of soldiers at the Post Office the rule rather than the exception we must persevere even in the face of considerable opposition. The system that I endeavoured to introduce prevails in foreign countries—in France, Germany, Austria, and Italy. Not only are soldiers largely employed in preference to civilians, but an expectation is held out to soldiers of employment after their discharge from the Army; and non-commissioned officers, after 12 years' service, are entitled to employment in the Civil Service. A young Army, though it will have weaknesses, may be kept practically efficient if it has experienced non-commissioned officers. At present it is not easy to get men to remain in the Service long enough as non - commissioned officers, for if they are not discharged until after they reach 30 years of age, it is difficult for them to obtain employment. But if they had a prospect of obtaining Civil employment under the Government on leaving the Army after long service, they would be content to stop, and the result would be beneficial both to the Army and the Post Office. The right hon. Gentleman the present Postmaster General has not abandoned the system I inaugurated, but he has modified it in a very important particular. According to an answer he gave me the other day about 1,000 appointments a year are lost to the Army by the arrangement he has made, which makes a great hole in the number of appointments the soldiers were led to expect. As a result of the system I adopted, I have been told by officers that they find a great improvement in the conduct of the young soldiers, who know that if they behave themselves there will be a good prospect of obtaining work when they leave the Army. I wish I could think that the Government are in earnest in this matter, for unless the

  1459
  Government and the House are in earnest they will lose a great opportunity of improving the respectability and the conduct of the men who join the Army, and also of improving the character of those who serve in the lower ranks of the Civil Service.
  EARL COMPTONsaid, he had several times in past years stood up and spoken for the telegraph clerks, and as the Amendment before the Committee related practically to them it would be dishonest and mean on his part if, having taken a strong course in opposition, he did not take the same course now his friends were in power. He desired in the first place to thank the Postmaster General for the courteous communications he (Earl Compton) had received from him, and for the course the right hon. Gentleman had taken on various matters which had tended to give great satisfaction to the Post Office. They were all thankful to the right hon. Gentleman for having reinstated some of the postmen whose case had been brought before the House in previous Sessions. With regard to the telegraphists, he had to say that he did not think anything would settle the matter except an impartial inquiry. If such an inquiry were held, and a decision adverse to the telegraphists were arrived at, he believed they would honestly bow to that verdict. He had listened attentively to the speech of the ex-Postmaster General, and he had found it very like the speeches the right hon. Gentleman had made in previous years. He had assumed that the present Postmaster General would endorse his view; but in that the right hon. Gentleman was a little premature. What was occurring just now in the Telegraph Department of the Post Office? The Postmaster General would agree with him (Earl Compton) that a large amount of overtime was being worked. The right hon. Gentleman would say that this overtime work was voluntary and that the telegraphists would be very much displeased if it were taken away from them. But it was not a question of their working overtime for an hour or two. When they agreed to do such work they were kept on until they were dismissed, and he
  1460
  conceived it to be the absolute duty of the Department to see that men should not be allowed to work too long hours, to the probable detriment of their health. Previously, whenever he had brought forward the case of the telegraphists, he had been told by the late Mr. Raikes and the ex-Postmaster General that his statements were correct. The case he had laid before the present Postmaster General he had gathered not from one individual, but from various sources—as was his custom before calling attention to a grievance. He was told to-day that his statement was exaggerated. Well, if the information he had received from a large number of individuals employed in the Telegraph Department was at variance with the information supplied to the Postmaster General, all the more reason was there for an inquiry. He hoped that even now the right hon. Gentleman would see the necessity for an inquiry. The right hon. Gentleman had once voted for the Motion he (Earl Compton) had brought forward, and nothing had occurred since then to change the situation. Other Members of the present Government had also voted with him. and he hoped to-day they would redeem the pledge they had given to him. There had been an increase of salary granted to Post Office officials, and he wished to know how much was added to the salaries of the higher officials when a rise in the salaries of the juniors was asked for?
  THE POSTMASTER GENERAL (Mr. A. MORLEY,)THE POSTMASTER GENERAL (Mr. A. MORLEY, Nottingham, E.), who was very indistinctly heard, was understood to say that he recognised the friendly tone of the Debate so far as he himself was concerned. Therefore, he did not look upon the Motion for reduction of the Vote as a personal matter. The Motion was, however, unfortunate, because the issue it raised was mixed up with other questions. He was asked how he could account for his Vote in 1891 when he had supported the Motion of the noble Earl the Member for Barnsley. He accounted for it on two grounds: He had supported the proposal, which was an unprecedented one, because there was an unprecedented condition of discontent prevailing through-

  1461
  out the Postal and Telegraph Service—or, he confessed, he was under that impression at the time. The condition of things in various branches of the Service was serious. There had been an emeute in the Savings Bank Department, and, whether with reason or without reason, the whole of the Services were discontented with their position. The condition of things at present, however, did not bear out the idea that there was anything like general discontent prevailing. He accounted for his action on another ground. Since 1891 large concessions had been made, with enormous additional expense to the country, and that made the state of things very different to what it was when he supported the noble Lord's Motion. Having had a year to look into the grievances, he had come to the conclusion that they could be examined into—and he would take care that they should be examined into—by himself and others associated with him in the administration of the Department. As the Chancellor of the Exchequer had said, a Committee of the House was not a proper tribunal to try questions of this kind. He knew, from his own experience, the intricate and complicated nature of the grievances at the Post Office. Those grievances, as he had said, had been remedied. Revisions had been effected greatly to the advantage of the postal and telegraph staff; and he did not think they could expect men who had not spent a long time in the Public Service to thoroughly examine into the classifications and organisations of a great Department like the Post Office. He would point to the great number of applicants for vacancies in proof of his assertion that the Post Office was a popular Service, and the same could be said of the Telegraph Department. For instance, for Male telegraph clerks in London, Edinburgh, and Dublin, there had been 624 candidates to fill 28 vacancies; in the Second Division there had been 582 candidates to fill 59 vacancies, and in the Third Division an equally large number of candidates to fill 75 vacancies. These figures showed that the Public Service, so far as the Post Office Telegraph Service was concerned, was a popular Service. It was not likely that they would find such a large number of persons applying for
  1462
  these vacancies if there was ground for distrust. He was not going to argue that that fact was conclusive evidence, but he did say that it showed that the would be telegraphists, who were seeking to get into the Service, did not think the terms and conditions hard or unsatisfactory. But there was another piece of evidence which bore strongly on this matter—the question of resignations from the Service. He had had a Return prepared which showed that the resignations from the Central Telegraph Office since 1890—more than three years—had been 23 out of 2,000 clerks, and 15 of those had left to go into foreign telegraph service, where wages were higher and the conditions as to promotion better, and three had sought to come back again. In the Metropolitan District only two resignations had taken place, whilst in 11 of the largest Provincial Post Offices there had been only 49 resignations since July, 1890, out of a staff exceeding 2,000 men. He thought it would be admitted that if there had been widespread discontent there would have been a much larger number of resignations. In regard to the salaries, the figures had increased year by year since 1889–90. In 1890–91 the increase was £364,248, in 1891–92 it was, in round figures, £423,000, in 1892–93 £435,000, and this year it was still more—namely, £485,000. There had, in fact, been an absolute increase of £1,678,513 in the amounts paid in wages and salaries, of which about £1,200,000 was paid in the Postal, and the remainder in the Telegraph, Department. It might be said that a great deal of the increase was due to increase in the force, and that was true. He had had a Table drawn out which showed the percentage of salaries and wages as compared with the total expenditure in the Telegraph Service, and also as compared with the total revenue, which showed that there had been enormous additions to wages and salaries. In 1883–84—10 years ago—the percentage of wages and salaries to total expenditure was 49–50, and in 1892–93 it was 63–78; so that there had been an increase of over 14 per cent. in the 10 years. The percentage of wages on the total revenue in the Telegraph Service, in 1883–84, was £50,05, and in 1892–93 it was 67·95, showing an in-

  1463
  crease of nearly 18 per cent. There had been revisions during that time in nearly every branch of the Postal Service. The increase in the amount paid in salaries and weekly wages was estimated at £500,000 sterling. He thought, therefore, he had substantiated the statement made in an earlier part of his remarks that there had been an enormous expenditure consequent on the revision which had taken place.
  SIR A. ROLLITasked whether that proved anything more than that the men were underpaid before?
  MR. A. MORLEYsaid, he was not going to say that there was not justification for the increase in the amount paid, but he contended that fair and liberal additions had been made to the wages. He had practically admitted that there might be grievances at the present time, but he said they were not grievances which could be fairly submitted to such an inquiry as was suggested. He had had an inquiry made as to what would be the cost of doing away with split duties. He had only the figures with regard to London; but he was informed that, on a rough estimate, the addition to the force that would be necessary in the London District would be 1,300 men, and the cost would be £120,000 a year. As to overtime in connection with the Central Telegraph Office, he was strongly of opinion that it ought to be kept down as much as possible. It had been stated that the increase this year was due to the great increase of work consequent on the exciting nature of the Debates in the House of Commons. It would be impossible to have a permanent staff in a Department like the Telegraph Department capable of meeting sudden emergencies of this kind. If they had such a staff it would mean an enormous waste of labour when the emergency came to an end and the work of the Department fell into its former routine. He was of opinion that not only overtime but the auxiliary staff should be kept down as much as possible. A great deal had, however, been done during the past year in reducing overtime in the main Departments of the Postal Service, and in turning auxiliary and unestablished postal servants into permanent members of the Civil Service.
  1464
  He regretted that be was unable to accede to the suggestion of his hon. Friend, who, he hoped, would not press his objection to a Division. He was prepared to consider any grievance that might be brought forward, or anything that bore on the face of it a primâ facie appearance of a grievance; but he did not think that a Committee of the kind suggested would be really beneficial or would lead to a satisfactory conclusion. He proposed now very shortly to deal with the various questions raised by the different speakers. The late Postmaster General (Sir J. Fergusson) referred to the subject of enlistment. He (Mr. A. Morley) had already informed the right hon. Gentleman of the grounds on which he came to the conclusion that a change was necessary. One of the first facts that was brought to his knowledge after he was appointed to his present post was that there was very serious objection felt by parents of many boys to the rule which prevailed that at the end of so many years' service as telegraph messengers they should be excluded from the Postal Service unless they passed through a period in the Army. He had called for Reports from various Postmasters in the large centres of population, and he should like to just mention one or two of them which he thought were very fair samples of the great body of them. The Postmaster of Liverpool wrote, when the proposal was first placed before the Department, his communication being dated 2nd December, 1891, that he could not reasonably expect a father to send his son to act as messenger during the best years of his life when at the end of four or five years the boy must be cut adrift. The Postmasters of Manchester and other towns wrote in a similar strain, all of them deprecating the system of enlistment. Under these circumstances, he felt that there was no course before him but to rescind that portion of the Regulations which dealt with enlistment. At the same time, he allowed that portion of the Regulations which gave precedence to Army Reserve men over outsiders to remain in full force, and certainly at present he saw no ground for rescinding it. Questions had been asked by several Members with reference to the Queenstown Mail Service. He thought hon. Members from Ireland

  1465
  were a little unreasonable on this subject. He thought the Government had done something to justify the confidence of the Irish Members and to show their desire to give every reasonable facility for the Queenstown Mail Service. One of the first things that was done by the present Chancellor of the Exchequer on coming into Office was to grant a considerable subsidy to the Great Southern and Western Railway Company of Ireland to facilitate the mails, and since that time a special mail service had been instituted. Although that service was only tentative, he thought hon. Members knew that when the Post Office started a service of the kind as a tentative proposal it was not likely to be abandoned unless it proved to be a hopeless failure. He thought, therefore, it might be taken that the special service would be crystallised into the ordinary service. It was not correct to say that the Holyhead contract would terminate in September, 1894. It could only be terminated on the 13th September, 1895, by notice given on the 13th September, 1894. He would undertake that before the time came at which notice would have to be given, if at all, the matter should be very carefully considered and that opportunity should be given to hon. Members who took an interest in the subject to express their views. The hon. Member for Hereford (Mr. Radcliffe Cooke), who had called attention to the appointment of a sub-postmaster in his constituency, was evidently ignorant of the rule governing such appointments. Whether wisely or unwisely they were regarded as matters of patronage, and were not in his hands at all. The Secretary to the Treasury had a right to make the appointment, and the nominations were sent to him (Mr. A. Morley), but it was only in the event of the person named being unsuitable or the premises being unsuitable that he had the right or power to interfere. In the particular case referred to the Report which reached him from the surveyor of the district was that the person was suitable and that the situation of the office was, on the whole, as satisfactory as that of the old office. Under these circumstances, he had no power to interfere. His hon. Friend for East Edinburgh (Mr. R. Wallace) had referred to the question of head postmasters, and had
  1466
  asked whether seniority and recognised merit could not be taken into account in making appointments to these positions. He could assure his hon. Friend that recognised merit and seniority had been the whole and sole ground for every appointment he had made, and he should be extremely averse to disturbing that system of selection. He had done all in his power to prevent political or other influences being brought to bear on these appointments, because he thought it was of immense importance to have men in these positions who had good powers of organisation. As to the question of the amount of the estimates for sites, the sum adopted was that which was thought to be reasonable this year, and he could not agree that the Post Office ought to purchase sites before they were needed.
  MR. TOMLINSONsaid, his point had been that the Post Office ought to know some years beforehand that they would want a new Post Office.
  MR. A. MORLEYsaid, that he quite agreed that the Post Office ought to have its eyes open as to future needs. The only other question he had to mention was that of postal communication in South Wales. He should be very glad if he could see his way to accede to the request which had been made to him on this subject, but he must protest against the notion of the Post Office being expected to put on special trains to carry mails under ordinary circumstances at an earlier or a later hour than the Railway Companies could under ordinary circumstances carry them. There must be an enormous mass of mail matter to justify the putting on of a special train, and at the present time South Wales did not produce a sufficient amount of correspondence to justify special trains. He would inquire into the question which had been raised respecting postmen smoking in uniform. He did not believe that any rule against smoking in uniform existed—certainly there was no Service Rule of this kind. There might be rules made by particular postmasters, but if

  1467
  so he would take care that such a prohibition was not continued.
  SIR W. HARCOURT: I rise to point out, in the interests of the Committee, that this discussion might now close. I would suggest to my hon. Friend behind me (Mr. Macdonald) that the most positive way of securing an increase of salaries is not by moving to diminish the salary of my right hon. Friend the Postmaster General. From my own knowledge, if there is any man who works overtime at the Post Office it is my right hon. Friend. I hope my hon. Friend will not be disposed to press the reduction to a Division, but that if he wishes to do so he will take the Division at once.
  MR. MACDONALDsaid, he understood that the Government admitted that there was some grievance. He understood the right hon. Gentleman had consented to inquire into the matter, and on that understanding he begged to withdraw the Motion.
  Motion, by leave, withdrawn.
  Original Question again proposed.
  SIR W. HARCOURT: I should have been very glad if we could have brought the Debate to a conclusion this evening, but it is not now likely that it can be done within a reasonable time according to the information which I have received. I hope that everything that remains will be dealt with and concluded on Monday, and I think I shall be consulting the convenience of the House if I now move to report Progress.
  Motion made, and Question proposed, "That the Chairman do report Progress, and ask leave to sit again."—(The Chancellor of the Exchequer.)
  MR. SEXTON: I have some observations to make on the Queenstown Mail Service, but it will be as convenient to us to take that subject on Monday.
  Question put, and agreed to.
  Resolutions to be reported upon Monday next; Committee also report Progress; to sit again upon Monday next.
  MR. A. C. MORTONasked what Votes would be taken first on Monday?
  SIR W. HARCOURT: Class V.

  SUPPLY—REPORT.
  Resolutions [15th September] reported and agreed to.—[See page 1297.]

  EAST INDIA REVENUE ACCOUNTS.
  Ordered, That the several Accounts and Papers which have been presented to the House in this Session of Parliament, relating to the Revenues of India, be referred to the consideration of a Committee of the Whole House.
  Resolved, That this House will, upon Wednesday next, resolve itself into the said Committee.—(Mr. G. Russell.)

  NAVY AND ARMY EXPENDITURE, 1891–2.
  Resolutions [15th September] reported, and agreed to.—[See page 1400.]

  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 Six o'clock till Monday next.