Sitting of 8 August 1898

Preamble
Mr. SPEAKER took the Chair at Three of the Clock.
PRIVATE BILL BUSINESS.
  FISHGUARD AND ROSSLARE RAILWAYS AND HARBOURS BILL.
  Lords' Amendments considered, and agreed to.
  GREAT CENTRAL RAILWAY BILL.
  Lords' Amendments considered, and agreed to.
  GREAT WESTERN RAILWAY (NEW WORKS) BILL.
  Lords' Amendments considered, and agreed to.
  KEIGHLEY CORPORATION BILL.
  Lords' Amendments considered, and agreed to.
  LONDON UNITED TRAMWAYS BILL.
  Lords' Amendments considered, and agreed to.
  PAIGNTON IMPROVEMENT BILL.
  Lords' Amendments considered, and agreed to.
  ST. HELEN'S CORPORATION BILL.
  Lords' Amendments considered, and agreed to.
  WESTHAM CORPORATION BILL.
  Lords' Amendments considered, and agreed to.
  WEY VALLEY WATER BILL.
  Lords' Amendments considered, and agreed to.

  STANDING ORDERS.
  Standing Order 24 was read and amended by adding at the end the words—
  "And a copy of the said map, with the said boundaries delineated thereon, shall also be deposited at the Office of the Board of Agriculture."
  Standing Order 26 was read and amended—
  "Line 1, by leaving out the words 'the work is to be situate on.' "
  "Line 2, after the word 'tides,' by inserting the words ' are to be acquired, or in any way affected.'"
  "Line 4, after the third word 'the,' by inserting the words 'Fisheries and.'"
  Standing Order 26a was read and amended—
  "Lines 2 and 3, by leaving out the words ' having a Board of Conservators constituted by Act of Parliament.'"
  "Line 5, after the third word 'the,' by inserting the words Fisheries and Harbour Department of the Board of Trade, and at the Office of the Board of.'"
  "Line 5, after the word 'Conservators,' by inserting the words 'if any.'"
  Standing Order 33 was read and amended—
  "Line 8, by leaving out the word 'or.'"
  "Line 8, after the word 'port,' by inserting the words 'or tidal waters.' "
  "Line 8, after the second word 'the,' by inserting the words 'Fisheries and.'"
  Standing Order 34a was read and amended—
  "Line 4, by leaving out the words 'having a Board of Conservators constituted by Act of Parliament.'"
  "Line 5, after the second word 'the,' by inserting the words 'Fisheries and Harbour Department of the Board of Trade and at the Office of the Board of.'"
  "Line 5, after the word 'Conservators,' by inserting the words 'if any.'"
  Standing Order 72 was read and amended, by adding at the end thereof the words—
  "In cases where provisions are sought to be inserted upon petition for additional provision which were comprised in the original notices, but were not contained in the Bill as introduced into Parliament, the original notices shall not be held to apply to the additional provisions proposed to be inserted."—(The Chairman of Ways and Means.)
  Ordered, That Standing Orders 220 and 216, relating to Private Bills, be suspended for the remainder of the Session.
  Ordered, That, as regards Private Bills already returned by the House of Lords, with Amendments, such Amendments be now considered.
  Ordered, That, as regards Private Bills to be returned by the House of Lords with Amendments, such Amendments be considered forthwith.
  Ordered, That, when it is intended to propose any Amendments thereto, a copy of such Amendments shall be deposited in the Private Bill Office, and notice given on the day on which the Bill shall have been returned from the Lords.—(The Chairman of Ways and Means.)

  WHITECHAPEL AND BOW RAILWAY BILL.
  Lords' Amendments considered accordingly, and agreed to.
  LOCAL GOVERNMENT PROVISIONAL ORDER (No. 10) BILL.
  Lords' Amendments considered, and agreed to.
  ELECTRIC LIGHTING PROVISIONAL ORDERS (No. 7) BILL. [H.L.]
  Read the third time, and passed, without Amendment.
  ELECTRIC LIGHTING PROVISIONAL ORDERS (No. 8) BILL. [H.L.]
  Read the third time, and passed, without Amendment.
  ELECTRIC LIGHTING PROVISIONAL ORDER (No. 15) BILL. [H.L.]
  Read the third time, and passed, without Amendment.

  MILITARY LANDS PROVISIONAL ORDERS CONFIRMATION (No. 2) BILL.
  On the order for the Third Reading of the Military Lands Provisional Orders Confirmation (No. 2) Bill (Lords),
  Sir C. DILKE: Since this Bill was before the House on the last occasion I have been informed that there is in the list of orders contained in it an order which includes an alleged common. It is taken by the Bill as though not subject to common rights. If it is common it ought, of course, to be regulated by a scheme, and be used by the commoners at the times when it is not used by the War Office. I have been, by the kindness of the Under Secretary of State for War, shown a document in his possession which goes to throw doubt upon the land in question being common. I was aware that there had been a dispute with regard to it between the lord of the manor and the alleged commoners, and according to the right honourable Gentleman, I believe he is prepared to state that, in the opinion of the War Office, the land is not
  464
  common. That is to say, that the lord of the manor has successfully urged his right against any rights of the alleged, commoners. Under the circumstances, I do not care about taking the responsibility of postponing this Bill till tomorrow.
  THE UNDER SECRETARY of STATE FOR WAR (Mr. W. St. John BRODRICK,): As stated by the right honourable Baronet the War Office has no reason whatever to believe that this is common land. The lord of the manor claims it as his absolute property, and exercises rights of ownership over it, and whenever attempts have been made to set up rights of common over it they have failed, and on prosecutions being commenced, convictions have followed. It, therefore, appears to me to be perfectly clear that in law no such rights exist. I may, however, say that this land will not be inclosed, and that there will be no interference whatever with the public going on it, excepting while firing; is going on.

PETITIONS.
  EAST INDIA (CONTAGIOUS DISEASES).
  From Bristol, against State Regulation; to lie upon the Table.
  SCIENCE AND ART GRANTS.
  From Clayton, for alteration of Law; to lie upon the Table.
RETURNS, REPORTS, ETC.
  FACTORY AND WORKSHOP ACTS (PARTICULARS OF PIECE WORK WAGES) (WHOLESALE TAILORING).
  Copy presented of Order of the Secretary of State, dated 6th August, 1898, applying with modifications the provisions of Section 40 of The Factory and Workshop Act, 1895, to Factories and Workshops in which Wholesale Tailoring is carried on [by Act]; to lie upon the Table.
  POLLING DISTRICTS (WARWICKSHIRE).
  Copy presented of Resolution of the County Council of Warwickshire, dividing the Chilvers Coton Parliamentary Polling District into two new Parliamentary Polling Districts [by Act]; to lie upon the Table.
  IRISH LAND COMMISSION (PROCEEDINGS).
  Copy presented of Return of Proceedings of the Commission during the months of March, April, and May, 1898 [by Command]; to be upon the Table.
  BANKING, RAILWAY, AND SHIPPING STATISTICS (IRELAND).
  Copy presented of Report for the half-year ended 30th June, 1898 [by Command]; to lie upon the Table.
  QUEEN'S COLLEGE (GALWAY).
  Copy presented of Report of the President for the Session 1897–8 [by Command]; to lie upon the Table.
  NATIONAL DEBT.
  Copy presented of History of the earlier years of the Funded Debt from 1694 to 1786 [by Command]; to lie upon the Table.
  BOARD OF TRADE (LABOUR DEPARTMENT).
  Copy presented of Fifth Annual Abstract of Labour Statistics of the United Kingdom [by Command]; to lie upon the Table.
  STRIKES AND LOCK-OUTS.
  Copy presented of Report by the Chief Labour Correspondent on the Strikes and Lock-Outs of 1897, etc. [by Command]; to lie upon the Table.
  TRADE UNIONS.
  Copy presented of Report by the Chief Labour Correspondent of the Board of Trade on Trade Unions, etc., 1897 [by Command]; to lie upon the Table.
  INDUSTRIAL PROPERTY AND MERCHANDISE MARKS.
  Copy presented of Papers and Correspondence relative to the recent Conference at Brussels on the subject of Industrial Property, and Merchandise Marks (in continuation of [C. 6417] of Session 1891) [by Command]; to lie upon the Table.
  NAVAL EXPENDITURE AND MERCANTILE MARINE, (GREAT BRITAIN, ETC.)
  Return presented relative thereto (in continuation of Parliamentary Paper, No. 416, of Session 1897) [ordered 7th March; Sir John Colomb]; to lie upon the Table, and to be printed. [No. 362.]
  FOREIGN TRADE (COMPARATIVE GROWTH).
  Return presented relative thereto (in continuation of Parliamentary Paper, No. '262, of Session 1890–91) [ordered 22nd March, Sir Howard Vincent]; to lie upon the Table, and to be printed. [No. 363.]
  GAS UNDERTAKINGS.
  Return presented relative thereto (in continuation of Parliamentary Paper, No. 359, of Session 1897 [ordered 29th March; Mr. Ritchie]; to lie upon the Table, and to be printed. [No. 364.]
  GAS UNDERTAKINGS (LOCAL AUTHORITIES).
  Return presented relative thereto (in continuation of Parliamentary Paper, No. 360, of Session 1897) [ordered 29th March; Mr. Ritchie]; to lie upon the Table, and to be printed. [No. 365.]
  RAILWAY SERVANTS (HOURS OF LABOUR).
  Copy presented of Report by the Board of Trade of their Proceedings under The Railway Regulation Act, 1893, during the year ended 27th July, 1898 [by Act]; to lie upon the Table, and to be printed. [No. 366.]
  WEIGHTS AND MEASURES.
  Copy presented of Report by the Board of Trade on their Proceedings and Business under the Weights and Measures Acts, 1878 to 1897 [by Act]; to lie upon the Table, and to be printed. [No. 367.]
  SECONDARY EDUCATION (SCOTLAND).
  Copy presented of Report for the year 1898 by Sir Henry Craik, K.C.B., on the Inspection of Higher Class Schools in Scotland, and the Examination for Leaving Certificates [by Command]; to lie upon the Table.
  LOCAL AUTHORITIES IN SCOTLAND (TECHNICAL EDUCATION).
  Return presented relative thereto [ordered 24th June; The Lord Advocate]; to lie upon the Table, and to be printed. [No. 368.]
  RATES (NON-PAYMENT) (SCOTLAND).
  Return presented relative thereto [ordered 14th July; Mr. Caldwell]; to lie upon the Table.
  LOCAL AUTHORITY (SCOTLAND) (CONDITIONS OF CONTRACTS).
  Return presented relative thereto [ordered 28th July; Mr. Caldwell]; to lie upon the Table.
  LOCAL TAXATION (SCOTLAND).
  Copy presented of the Annual Local Taxation Returns (Scotland) for the year 1896–7 [by Act]; to lie upon the Table, and to be printed. [No. 369.]
  NAVAL PRIZE MONEY.
  Accounts presented, showing the Receipt and Expenditure of Naval Prize, Bounty, Salvage, and other Moneys between the 1st April, 1897, and 31st March, 1898 [by Act]; to lie upon the Table, and to be printed. [No. 370.]
  BIRTHS, DEATHS AND MARRIAGES (ENGLAND).
  Copy presented of Sixtieth Annual Report of the Registrar General, 1897 [by Command]; to lie upon the Table.

  EAST INDIA (CANTONMENT REGULATIONS).
  Copy presented of Instructions issued by the Government of India on the Cantonment Regulations, published 15th October, 1897 [by Command]; to lie upon the Table.
  Papers laid upon the Table by the Clerk of the House—

  1. Charity Commissioners' Reports, and Swansea County Borough (Inquiry into Charities) and Cardiff County Borough (Inquiry into Charities), further Return relative thereto [ordered 17th February, 1896, amid 31st. July, 1897; Mr. Grant Lawson]; to be printed. [No. 371.]

  2. Charitable Endowments (Anglesey) (Inquiries Held), Further Return relative thereto [ordered 10th February; Mr. Grant Lawson]; to be printed. [No. 372.]

  3. Inquiry into Charities (County of Carnarvon), Further Return relative thereto [ordered 10th February; Mr. Grant Lawson]; to be printed. [No. 373.]

  4. Inquiry into Charities (County of Anglesey, Parish of Llan Rhyddlad), Return relative thereto [ordered 14th June; Mr. Grant Lawson]; to be printed. [No. 374.]

  HABITUAL INEBRIATES BILL.
  Lords' Amendments to be considered forthwith; considered, and agreed to.
  INDIA OFFICE (STORE DEPOT) BILL.
  Lords' Amendments to be considered forthwith; considered, and agreed to.

  COUNTY COURTS (PLAINTS AND SITTINGS).
  Address for "Returns from every County Court in England and Wales of the total number of Plaints, etc., entered in each Court from the 1st day of January to the 31st day of December, 1897, both days inclusive, distinguishing those not exceeding £20, those above £20 and not exceeding £50, and those by agreement over £50";
  "And, of the Sittings of the County Courts in England and Wales holden before the Judges of such Courts in the year 1897 (in continuation of Parliamentary Paper, C 8691.)"—(Mr. Jesse Collings.)

  EAST INDIA (CONTRIBUTIONS BY INDIA TO THE IMPERIAL INSTITUTE).
  Address for "Copies of the Further Reports on the Indian Section of the Imperial Institute issued by the India Office since the publication of the Return of the 21st day of April 1896."—(Sir Mancherjee Bhownaggree.)

  INQUIRY INTO CHARITIES (COUNTY OF LANCASTER).
  Return ordered, "comprising (1) the Reports made to the Charity Commissioners, in the result of an Inquiry held in every parish wholly or partly within the administrative county of Lancaster into Endowments, subject to the provisions of the Charitable Trusts Acts, 1853 to 1894, and appropriated in whole or in part for the benefit of that county, or of any part thereof, together with the Reports on those Endowments of the Com-
  470
  missioners for inquiring concerning Charities, 1818 to 1837; (2) a Digest showing in the case of each such parish whether any and, if any, what such Endowments are recorded in the books of the Charity Commissioners in the parish; and (3) an Index, alphabetically arranged, of names and places mentioned in the Reports."— (Mr. Grant Lawson.)

  VAGRANCY ACT AMENDMENT BILL.
  Lords' Amendments to be considered To-morrow, and to be printed. [Bill 326.]
  FLOODS PREVENTION BILL. [H.L.]
  Order for Second Reading read, and discharged; Bill withdrawn.
  AUSTRALASIA (BOUNTIES, ETC.),
  Order [21st July] for Address for Return relative thereto read, and discharged.—(Mr. Secretary Chamberlain.)
  INTOXICATING LIQUORS (LICENCES REFUSED) (SCOTLAND).
  Return ordered "of the number of Victuallers, Beer House, Public House, Grocers, and other Licences for the Sale of Intoxicating Liquors, the renewal of which has been refused in the year 1897 by the Licensing Magistrates, Justices of the Peace, or other Licensing Authority in each Licensing District in Scotland, and showing also the result of an appeal, if any."—(Mr. John Wilson (Govan.)
  COLONIAL BOUNTIES ON AGRICULTURAL PRODUCE.
  Address for "Return showing the British Colonies which pay Bounties on the export of Agricultural Produce and defining the commodities on which such Bounties are paid, and the amounts under each heading."—(Mr. O'Kelly.)

  JOINT STOCK COMPANIES.
  Copy ordered, "of Returns of the names, objects, or business, places where business is or was conducted, date of registration, number of persons who signed the Memorandum of Association, total number of shares taken up by such subscribers, nominal capital, number of shares into which it is divided, number of shares taken up, amount of calls made on each share, and the total amount of calls received of all Joint Stock Companies formed since the 1st day of January 1897 to the 31st day of December 1897, inclusive, distinguishing whether the Companies are limited or unlimited, and also the number of shareholders in each of the said Companies at the date of the last Return, and whether still in operation or being wound up. Of the total number having their registered offices in the Ctiy of London, or within five miles of the General Post Offce. And, of the total number and the paid-up capital of all registered Companies which are believed to be carrying on business at the present time."—(Mr. Ritchie.)
  Copy presented accordingly; to lie upon the Table, and to be printed. [No. 375.]

  MESSAGE PROM THE LORDS.
  That they have agreed to—
  CUSTOMS AND INLAND REVENUE BILL.
  without Amendment.
NONCONFORMIST MARRIAGES (ATTENDANCE OF REGISTRARS) BILL.
  ELEMENTARY SCHOOL TEACHERS (SUPERANNUATION) BILL.

    CARDIFF RAILWAY BILL.
    with Amendments.
    Amendments to Amendments to—

    LOCAL GOVERNMENT (IRELAND) BILL,
    and to the Consequential Amendment made by this House to the Bill, without Amendment; and do not insist on certain of their Amendments to which this House has disagreed.
    That they have agreed to Amendments to—

HEYWOOD CORPORATION WATER BILL. [H.L.]
  TODMORDEN CORPORATION WATER BILL. [H.L.]
    MERSEY RAILWAY BILL. [H.L.]
    without Amendment.
ORAL ANSWERS TO QUESTIONS
  QUESTIONS.

    NATIONAL EDUCATION IN IRELAND.
    Mr. VESEY KNOX: I beg to ask the Chief Secretary to the Lord Lieutenant of Ireland whether the National Board have recommended any changes in the system of national education in Ireland consequent on the Report of the Commission on Manual Instruction; and whether he will especially consider the desirability of providing further facilities for the erection and equipment of training colleges for teachers, in order to carry out the changes proposed?
    The ATTORNEY GENERAL for IRELAND (Mr. ATKINSON,): My right honourable Friend the Chief Secretary has asked me to answer the Questions addressed to him. The Report of the Commission on Manual Instruction has only recently been received, and the Commissioners of National Education have not had sufficient time to decide as to the changes in respect to schools and training colleges that it may be found expedient to recommend. The Commissioners are not at present in a position to offer an, opinion as to the matter referred to in the second paragraph.

    LONDONDERRY POLICE.
    Mr. VESEY KNOX: I beg to ask the Chief Secretary to the Lord Lieutenant of Ireland whether he will consider during the Recess the possibility of reducing the police force in the city of Londonderry,

    473
    and thus reducing the charge upon the rates; and whether he will allow the Corporation of the city to put before him in detail their views on this subject?
    MR. ATKINSON: The question of the strength of the police force in Derry is under the consideration of the Government. My right honourable Friend the Chief Secretary will be happy to receive any communication from the Corporation on the subject.

    IRISH DAILY MAIL.
    MR. VESEY KNOX: I beg to ask the Secretary to the Treasury, as representing the Postmaster General, whether he can state what arrangements have been made in connection with the change in the hour of despatch of the Irish daily mail to secure an acceleration of delivery in English provincial towns, especially Liverpool, so as to secure delivery of Irish letters during business hours?
    THE FINANCIAL SECRETARY TO THE TREASURY (Mr. R. W. HANBURY,): The Post Office always foresaw, and its representative on Mr. Robertson's Committee clearly stated, that the later departure from Dublin of the day mail for England must involve a later arrival at Liverpool and other English provincial towns. In deference, however, to the strong feeling of the Irish people that the advantage gained by the later despatch from Dublin was sufficient to counterbalance any inconvenience which might be occasioned by the later arrival in England, the Treasury decided to sanction the new arrangement. I fear, therefore, that the inconvenience is one which is inevitable.

    CLERKSHIPS IN THE IRISH HIGH COURT OF JUSTICE.
    MR. VESEY KNOX: I beg to ask the Attorney General for Ireland whether, seeing that the Irish Judicature Act of 1877 (sec. 73), providing that, on the death or resignation of judges exercising patronage, clerkships
    474
    in the High Court were to be filled by open competition or transfer, there is anything in the Judicature Act of 1897 preventing this course being taken in the case of clerkships in the Probate Department of the Queen's Bench Division; and whether the vacancy now existing for a junior clerkship in that division will be filled up by open competition?
    MR. ATKINSON: The Government have been advised that section 5 of the Act of 1897 confers on the judge, assigned by the Lord Lieutenant under that section, the same rights of patronage and appointment as the judge of the Probate and Matrimonial Division had at the passing of the Act, and that the provisions of this section have, pro tanto, repealed by implication the provisions of the Act of 1877, as to filling appointments by open competitive examination. It is the intention of the Government, to introduce next Session an amending Bill, declaring that, subject to the rights of the assigned judge, junior clerks in the Probate Division shall thenceforward be appointed in like manner as all other junior clerks are appointed under the provisions of the 73rd section of the Act of 1877.

    DERRY ASYLUM.
    MR. VESEY KNOX: I beg to ask the Chief Secretary to the Lord Lieutenant of Ireland whether there has been any decrease in the overcrowding in Derry Asylum which led the board of control on grounds of humanity to require the erection of a new asylum; whether, though the land has been acquired, and the plans prepared, and a resolution passed by the asylum governors in favour of inviting tenders, the board of control now decline to allow any steps to be taken for the provision of more humane treatment for the lunatics; and whether the board of control have considered whether the circumstances are such that after the passing of the Local Government Bill the Lord Lieutenant would be obliged under its provisions to require the erection of a new asylum?
    MR. ATKINSON: The reply to the first paragraph is in the negative. In accordance with the resolution adopted by the asylum governors, the board of control have directed the completion of the plans for the new asylum, and the preparation of the necessary specifications. This portion of the work will necessarily occupy a considerable time. The board of control will cease to exist on the passing of the Local Government Bill, and, they have not considered the question whether the Lord Lieutenant will take any action after the Bill has received the Royal Assent. The new county council will have to provide funds for the building of the new asylum.

    SERVING CHILDREN IN PUBLIC-HOUSES.
    MR. SIDEBOTHAM: I beg to ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department whether he will issue a circular to the clerks to the magistrates embodying a question asked on 13th June by the right honourable Gentleman the Member for Thanet on the subject of serving children under 13 years of age with liquor for consumption off the premises, together with his answer, so that in the forthcoming brewster sessions there may be no doubt as to what the law is and what the action of Parliament has been upon this matter?
    THE SECRETARY OF STATE FOR THE HOME DEPARTMENT (Sir M. WHITE RIDLEY,): I do not think it would be desirable for me to issue such a circular as my honourable Friend suggests. I do not think that there is any doubt about the law, or the action of Parliament hitherto upon this matter.

    BOYS FOR THE MERCANTILE MARINE.
    SIR E. GOURLEY: I beg to ask the President of the Board of Trade whether he intends to issue regulations regarding the education and housing of boys who may be indentured by
    476
    shipowners under the Merchant Shipping (Mercantile Marine Fund) Bill; if so, can he state what they are to be; and will the regulations be similar for all classes of vessels (whether steam or sail), as well as for all trades?
    THE PRESIDENT OF THE BOARD OF AGRICULTURE (for Mr. RITCHIE): The regulations to be issued under the Merchant Shipping (Mercantile Marine Fund) Bill will be carefully considered during the Recess and the point referred to by the honourable Baronet shall be borne in mind. The regulations will probably be similar for all classes of vessels.

    IMPRESSMENT FOR COMMISSARIAT SERVICE IN INDIA.
    MR. PICKERSGILL: I beg to ask the Secretary of State for India whether there are any statutes or regulations having the force of statutes which authorise the impressment of Her Majesty's subjects in British India for the commissariat service in connection with warlike operations on the frontier; if so, will he give the reference to these statutes or regulations; and was the recent impressment of 25,000 men in the Punjaub for the commissariat service made under the authority of any and, if so, which of these statutes or regulations?
    THE SECRETARY OF STATE FOR INDIA: The right to impress for purpose of war throughout India is based upon immemorial usage and custom, and has been invariably resorted to in the Punjaub, as elsewhere, Whenever the circumstances seemed to require it. In certain parts of India the practice has had, in addition, the sanction of specific legislation, and for some time past a draft Bill dealing with impressment in the Punjaub has been under consideration in India, but, as I now learn, it has not yet become law. As to the number of men and animals impressed during the recent operations, I am expecting a Report from India, but I have reason to think that it has been much exaggerated.
    MR. PICKERSGILL: Then, do I understand there is no statute authorising this?
    THE SECRETARY OF STATE FOR, INDIA: There is no statute in force so far as I know.

    INDIAN ARMY STAFF.
    MR. PIRIE: I beg to ask the Secretary of State for India whether, in view of the recently granted addition to the pay of the officers of the Indian Army whilst studying at the Staff College, and in view of the desirability of the standard of qualifications for appointments on the staff of the Indian Army being maintained at the same level as for similar appointments at home and in the Colonies, he is prepared to take steps to bring the Indian Army Regulations on this subject more into accord with the Queen's Regulations than they are at present?
    THE SECRETARY OF STATE FOR INDIA (Lord GEORGE HAMILTON,): It is true that the Government of India and the Commander-in-Chief have a wider discretion in selecting officers for staff employment than the authorities in this country, as the conditions of service in India are frequently in themselves a valuable test of an officer's efficiency; but I am confident that in the exercise of that discretion they give due weight to the possession of a Staff College certificate, and I am not prepared to initiate any change in the Indian regulations on this subject.

    CUBRAGH CAMB.
    MR. PIRIE: I beg to ask the Under Secretary of State for War whether the sale of battled beer is experimentally being tried in the coffee rooms of some regiments quartered at the Curragh Camp; and, if so, seeing that the coffee room is the only room in most battalions and corps where temperance men can obtain non-intoxicating drinks, he will take steps to put an end to a practice which causes temptation to the men in
    478
    the one place in barracks where total abstainers can meet?
    THE UNDER SECRETARY OF STATE FOR WAR (Mr. ST. JOHN BRODRICK,): The experiment referred to in the Question has not been sanctioned by the Secretary of State, and will, therefore, be prohibited—at all events, for the present.

    SUMMERHILL POLICE FORCE.
    MR. MACALEESE: I beg to ask the Chief Secretary to the Lord Lieutenant of Ireland will he explain why the constabulary force at Summerhill, county Meath, has been recently strengthened, seeing that the district in question is in a crimeless and quiet condition?
    MR. ATKINSON: The police force at Summerhill has been increased by one man, on the recommendation of the local authorities, with a view to the continued maintenance of peace and order in the district. The fact that at any particular moment few crimes have been actually committed in a district is not the only matter to be taken into consideration in the distribution of the police.

    MRS. M'GONNELL'S FARM.
    MR. MACALEESE: I beg to ask the Chief Secretary to the Lord Lieutenant of Ireland if he can give any information regarding the alleged handing over of the vacant farm of a Mrs. M'Gonnell, of Knocknasane, county Monaghan, to an emergency man named Matson; and is he aware that Mrs. M'Gonnell, whose health was shaken by the death of her husband, went to Belfast, for hospital treatment, and on her return after the lapse of some months found that, without any legal process whatever, her farm had been given to Matson; if so. will he see if anything can be done to have Mrs. M'Gonnell restored to her farm?
    MR. ATKINSON: It is not the fact that the farm in question has been

    479
    handed over to an emergency man. Mrs. M'Gonnell was evicted in March, 1895, under legal process, for non-payment of seven years' rent, amounting to J42. She has not since, I understand, been in occupation. She was offered to be reinstated on payment of £12, but this offer she declined. The Government do not propose to take any action in the direction suggested.

    BARACH FAWR LETTER DELIVERIES.
    MR. BRYN ROBERTS: I beg to ask the Secretary to the Treasury, as representing the Postmaster General, whether he is aware that several houses in the neighbourhood of Barach Fawr, in Llangian, Carnarvonshire, have delivery of letters only three days a week, although they are less than a mile from the village and parish church of Llangian; and whether the Postmaster General will provide a post office at, and daily delivery from, Llangian?
    MR. HANBURY: The Postmaster General is not aware that several houses in the neighbourhood of Barach Fawr, in Llangian, Carnarvonshire, have a delivery of letters only three days a week, although less than a mile from the village and parish church of Llangian. If this is the fact, however, he will inquire whether the circumstances are such as to justify the establishment of a post office at, and a daily delivery from, Llangian.

    BIRTH CERTIFICATES IN SUNDERLAND.
    MR. H. J. WILSON: I beg to ask the President of the Local Government Board whether his attention has been directed to the case of Mrs. Wainwright, now of Sheffield, who applied to Mr. James Lindsay, tie superintendent registrar at Sunderland, for the certificate of the birth of her child born in that town; whether he is aware that the superintendent registrar stated that there was no such name in the district specified in the period specified; that on this woman travelling to
    480
    Sunderland, the superintendent registrar found the entry of birth at the time and place which he had formerly denied, and gave the certificate accordingly; and that the certificate is practically illegible and technically irregular; whether he is also aware that Mrs. Wainwright complained to the Registrar General, enclosing the certificate and other documents, but that the chief clerk to the Registrar General returned these documents with an official reply defending the superintendent registrar at Sunderland; and is he aware that, in an interview which the honourable Members for the Brightside Division and for the Holmfirth Division had with the Registrar General and the chief clerk, it was shown that the latter had never adequately examined the documents forwarded to him by Mrs. Wainwright; whether he will take steps to secure the better discharge of their duties by the superintendent registrar of Sunderland and the chief clerk of the Registrar General; and whether there is any fund from which compensation can be made for the expenses incurred by this woman in her journey to Sunderland, which was necessitated by the neglect of the superintendent registrar?
    THE SECRETARY TO THE LOCAL GOVERNMENT BOARD (MR. T. W. RUSSELL,): I am informed by the Registrar General that the statements in the first two paragraphs are substantially correct. As to the first part of the third paragraph, the Registrar General states that his chief clerk did not defend the conduct of the superintendent registrar, and as to the second part, he holds the complaint against his officer to be not proven. As regards the fourth paragraph, neither of the officers referred to is in any way subject to my jurisdiction. I am not aware that there is any such fund as that referred to in the fifth paragraph.
    MR. H. J. WILSON: Can the honourable Gentleman say to whom these officers are subject?
    MR. T. W. RUSSELL: I do not know that I can. I understand the Local Government Board has some connection with the Registrar General's office, but I do not know that it has any control

    481
    over the officers. Questions affecting them are undoubtedly answered by the Local Government Board.
    MR. H. J. WILSON: Can any steps be taken by the Local Government Board or Registrar General to induce the Sunderland registrar to write his certificate legibly?
    MR. T. W. RUSSELL: No, Sir; the Local Government Board are unable to take any such action.

    MILK TRADE.
    MR. CHANNING: I beg to' ask the President of the Local Government Board whether he has now considered the portions of the Report of the Tuberculosis Commission dealing with the supply of milk, and the urgent necessity for strengthening and facilitating the operation of the Dairies, Cowsheds, and Workshops Order, 1885–86, with a View to secure uniformity of action and for extending the powers of local authorities to inspect dairies and byres; and whether he will, by administrative order, effect immediately such administrative checks to the mischiefs now existing as are possible, and proceed next Session to ask for the extension of the powers of the Department and of local authorities as are necessary to reduce the risk from tuberculosis in milk to a minimum?
    MR. T. W. RUSSELL: The numerous questions which are raised by the Report of the Royal Commission on Tuberculosis are now under consideration, both with regard to administrative orders and to legislation which may be necessary. The evidence has only very recently been delivered.
    MR. CHANNING: Can the honourable Gentleman give me any further assurance that the Government is prepared to take action on the recommendation, and on the suggestions of very serious danger from milk to the public health?
    MR. T. W. RUSSELL: I have told the honourable Gentleman that, both, as regards administration and legislation, the matter is under consideration. I can go no further.

    BELFAST TELEGRAPHISTS.
    MR. STEADMAN: I beg to ask the Secretary to the Treasury, as representing the Postmaster General, whether he is aware that several members of the male staff at Belfast Post Office, who have been continuously employed either as learners or acting sorting clerks and telegraphists for five years and upwards, still remain unappointed and are therefore suffering pecuniary loss by reason of their not receiving regular annual increments or pay whilst absent, sick; and, seeing that these officers hold Civil Service certificates, will he explain Why they were, after nearly four years' service, informed that before they could be appointed a certain qualification, the attainment of which has involved an additional attendance without pay of from, sixty to ninety minutes a day during the past 18 months, must be obtained in a branch of the service for which they were not originally employed, and into which it never was their intention to go, and have now been informed that they cannot be appointed to the vacancies at present existing until they have attained a further qualification, which, according to a memorandum of the telegraph superintendent at Belfast, will involve an extra attendance on the part of each of these officers of one hour daily without additional pay during the next 12 months, and for that period delay their appointments?
    MR. HANBURY: It is the fact that there are several learners or acting sorting clerks and telegraphists at Belfast who are still unappointed after a service of four years or more, and who are consequently not in enjoyment of all the privileges granted to appointed officers. There are at present four vacancies available for these officers, but three of them have not reached the standard of qualification which is necessary to admit of their appointment at the salary their age and service would justify. They could be appointed at 12s. or 14s. a week, but for 18s. or more, an officer is required to be able to take sole charge of a circuit, and this the three officers referred to cannot do. It is expected they will be qualified in two or three months. The fourth officer is able to take charge of a

    483
    circuit, and his appointment will be proceeded with. It is more than two years since notice was given to these and all other learners that no appointments would in future be made, unless the officer were qualified both in postal and in telegraph work.

    LIVERPOOL POSTAL DEPARTMENT.
    MR. HOUSTON: I beg to ask the Secretary to the Treasury, as representing the Postmaster General, whether he is aware that the system of continuous acting in superior positions without receiving extra pay is felt by the officials in the postal department at Liverpool to be a hardship and a cause of discontent, more especially owing to the increase in the work of the postal department there and the fact that the concession granting superior duty pay after performing higher duties continuously for nine months has proved to be of little benefit to the staff; and whether the Postmaster General will, in view of the promise made in a circular addressed to the staff dated 19th August, 1897, create a number of superior positions at Liverpool, or grant superior duty allowances to officials performing higher duties irrespective of the time they may have to perform, such higher duties?
    MR. BANBURY: The Postmaster General is aware that the Liverpool staff are not satisfied with the arrangements referred to, but he cannot admit that there are good grounds for dissatisfaction. In accordance with the promise conveyed in the Post Office Circular, of 10th August, 1897, a full investigation was made into the question of increasing the number of superior appointments at Liverpool, and, as a result, an addition of 12 such appointments for men and two for women was sanctioned in February last. No more are warranted at the present time. The concession which was made by the Postmaster General and myself, that officers discharging superior duties for lengthened periods should, after nine months' continuous employment on such duties, be granted superior duty pay, was never intended to apply to offices like Liverpool, where there are
    484
    already an adequate number of superior appointments. It was intended to meet the case of offices where, either from the prolonged illness of some of the superintending staff, or from some other cause, officers were unavoidably employed for lengthened periods on those duties.

    BARRACK ACCOMMODATION IN SCOTLAND.
    MR. PIRIE: I beg to ask the Under Secretary of State for War what is the sum allowed to the General Officer commanding the North British district for expenditure this year in Scotland on barrack accommodation, and if the sum is sufficient to replace the old Piershill Barracks, near Edinburgh, by modern cavalry barracks, of which several on a large scale have been built in England and Ireland during the last few years; and, if not, having regard to the fact that the annual average expenditure in round numbers on the provision of "barrack accommodation, excluding maintenance, during the five years 1892–97 has "been in England £560,000, in Ireland £116,000, and in Scotland only £7,000 per annum, he will look more closely into the requirements of this latter country in the future, and give attention to the suggested improvement?
    MR. BRODRICK: There is no intention of building new cavalry barracks in Scotland, where there are no facilities for exercising cavalry in brigade movements or with other arms of the service; I fear, therefore, that I cannot hold out any hopes of a new cavalry barrack being built if the Piershill Barracks are given up. I may remind the honourable Member that, during three of the five years referred to, the Secretary of State for War was a Scotchman, representing a Scottish constituency, and therefore well acquainted with the requirements of the country.
    MR. PIRIE: Can the right honourable Gentleman answer the first paragraph as to the sum allowed?
    MR. BRODRICK: I am afraid I cannot state the exact sum.
    MR. PIRIE: I shall repeat the Question to-morrow.

    COLONIAL BOUNTIES ON AGRICULTURAL PRODUCE.
    MR. PATRICK O'BRIEN: On behalf of the honourable Member for North Roscommon, I beg to ask the Secretary of State for the Colonies whether he will grant the Return relating to Colonial Bounties on Agricultural Produce, which stands on this day's Paper?
    THE SECRETARY OF STATE FOR THE COLONIES (Mr. J.CHAMBERLAIN,): Yes, Sir; a Return has already been ordered, but I propose to move to discharge that Order, and to grant the wider Return now on the Paper.

    ADVERTISEMENTS OF GOVERNMENT CONTRACTS.
    MR. PIRIE: I beg to ask the Secretary to the Treasury whether he can obtain from the heads of the chief Government Departments, and state, for the information of the House, the numbers of newspapers in England, Scotland, and Ireland, respectively, in which advertisements are inserted for tenders for Government contracts; and whether invitations for tenders forwarded by Her Majesty's Consuls from foreign Governments to our Foreign Office are advertised in any Scottish newspaper; if so, how many and what has been the expenditure for advertisements of those descriptions in Scotland during the last year, and under what Vote will it be found?
    MR. HANBURY: The information asked for in the first paragraph could only be given in the form of a Return. I doubt whether it would be possible to give any definite statistics, as the Departments presumably vary their lists of newspapers according to the subject-matter of the particular advertisement. But if the honourable Member will give notice to move for a Return, I will see what can be done. The answer to the second paragraph is that no paid advertisements of the invitations communicated from abroad are inserted in any newspaper, and so no expenditure for the
    486
    purpose is incurred. A note of each communication of the kind is sent for gratuitous insertion to 39 newspapers, of which five are Scottish. Copies of the note are also supplied to two telegraph agencies and to two commercial associations.

    BALLYSIMON LETTER DELIVERIES.
    MR. PATRICK O'BRIEN: I beg to ask the Secretary to the Treasury, as representing the Postmaster General, when the house to house delivery of letters will be carried into operation in the districts of Ballysimon, Scart, and Killoran, all situate within about five miles of the city of Limerick?
    MR. HANBURY: The Postmaster General has just sanctioned arrangements for affording a delivery of letters in the districts of Ballysimon, Scart, and Killoran, and he expects that the delivery will commence to-day.

    ACCELERATION OF IRISH DAY MAILS.
    MR. PATRICK O'BRIEN: I beg to ask the Secretary to the Treasury, as representing the Postmaster General, whether it is intended to present to the House and circulate amongst Members the Reports of Irish Day Mails Acceleration Departmental Committee, and also the evidence; and, if so, will he state when?
    MR. HANBURY: I hope the Report will be circulated in a few days.

    CIVIL SERVICE SUPERANNUATION.
    MR. A. MORTON: I beg to ask the Secretary to the Treasury whether he can say when it is expected that an answer will be given to the Civil Service memorials praying for an inquiry into the superannuation system?
    MR. HANBURY: I am afraid I cannot say when an answer will be given. The subject is one requiring very full consideration.

    RAILWAY BRAKES.
    MR. MACALEESE: I beg to ask the President of the Board of Trade has he received any report, official or otherwise, of an accident which occurred on Tuesday last between Dundalk and Clones on the Great Northern Railway of Ireland; was it due to the defective brake system in use on this line that the engine and carriages refused to answer the check, and rushed through the station to the stop block, which they cut through, embedding themselves in an adjoining field; how many persons were injured in this accident; and are any of the injuries of a fatal kind; and will he make representations to this company which will ensure by them the use of proper appliances, so that the travelling public on their line may have some protection against accident?
    THE PRESIDENT OF THE BOARD OF AGRICULTURE (Mr. W. H.LONG,): My right honourable Friend the President of the Board of Trade desires me to say that the Board of Trade have received a report from the company of the accident referred to; it seems that there was no failure of the automatic brake which was in use on the passenger portion of the train. The accident would appear to have arisen through the driver misjudging his distance and running too fast into, the station, without taking adequate precaution, having regard to the state of the rails, which were wet at the time. Two passengers are reported as having received slight bruises, and one as having hurt his hand by jumping from the train.
    MR. MADDISON: Can the right, honourable Gentleman say if this was a mixed train, carrying both passengers and goods?
    THE PRESIDENT OF THE BOARD OF AGRICULTURE: I am afraid I cannot answer without notice.

    CENTRAL TELEGRAPH OFFICE.
    MR. STEADMAN: I beg to ask the Secretary to the Treasury, as representing the Postmaster General, whether the
    488
    female medical officer is aware that certain insanitary conditions are complained of in the H Division Central Telegraph Office; and whether the Postmaster General will take steps to immediately remove the causes of the unpleasantness?
    MR. HANBURY: Complaints of bad smells in the north-east wing of the H Division of the Central Telegraph Office were reported to the female medical officer in June last, and a case of illness which was attributed to bad smells was treated by that officer. On the flooring being taken up a dead rat was found. Since its removal no further complaints have been made.

    DRUNKENNESS IN DUBLIN.
    MR. W. JOHNSTON: I beg to ask the Chief Secretary to the Lord Lieutenant of Ireland if his attention has been called to the charge of the Lord Chief Baron to the grand jury in the court-house, Green Street, Dublin, on Wednesday last, the 3rd inst., concerning the deplorable increase of drunkenness in the Dublin Metropolitan Police area, amounting to 1,385 cases, or 50 per cent, over the corresponding period for 1897; and whether, taking into, consideration the statement of the Lord Chief Baron, that two-thirds of the entire crime investigated in courts of justice were due to drunkenness, he will facilitate the passing of the Bill for Sunday Closing and Earlier Saturday Closing next Session, as it was approved by the Select Committee of the House of Commons?
    MR. ATKINSON: The attention of the Irish Government has been directed to the observations of the Lord Chief Baron, to which reference is made in the Question. The Irish Government cannot at present give any pledge regarding legislation that may be introduced next Session.
    MR. PATRICK O'BRIEN: Is it not the fact that the figures given by the Lord Chief Baron relate to arrests for drunkenness. Does the law of England allow the police to arrest people merely for drunkenness——
    MR. SPEAKER: Order, order! The honourable Member is obviously arguing the Question.
    MR. PATRICK O'BRIEN: I will give notice of a Question.

    BARBADOES.
    MR. LAWRENCE: I beg to ask the Secretary of State for the Colonies whether he is aware that an attack has been made on the honourable A. J. Pile, C.M.G., Speaker of the House of Assembly of Barbadoes, resulting in his being shot at and seriously wounded, and whether the criminal has been captured; whether within the last eight weeks there has been a riotous raid in open day on a potato field, and also two cases of attempted highway robbery on estate managers; and whether, having regard to the apparently unsettled state of the island, the Government would reconsider its decision as to the early removal of the troops to St. Lucia?
    THE SECRETARY OF STATE FOR THE COLONIES: The Governor of Barbadoes has reported that Mr. Pile has been shot and seriously wounded; at the date of the dispatch his assailant had not been discovered. I have heard since that, although the wound is a serious one, Mr. Pile is going on well. On the 1st July, not in open day, but about 11 p.m., a number of villagers made a raid on a potato field, and at first offered some resistance to the police, but were soon dispersed, and several of the ringleaders arrested. I have not heard of any case of attempted highway robbery on estates managers. The Government have no reason to suppose that the island is in an unsettled state, and they do not propose to reconsider their decision as to the early removal of the troops to St. Lucia.

    ENGAGEMENT OF BRITISH SAILORS.
    MR. HAVELOCK WILSON: I beg to ask the President of the Board of Trade whether he can state if seamen engaged on British vessels
    490
    registered in the United Kingdom are subject to and protected by the provisions of the Merchant Shipping Act, 1894, notwithstanding the fact that they may be engaged in the United Kingdom, British possessions abroad, or in foreign ports; and whether there is any section of the Merchant Shipping Act which exempts any seaman so engaged from the operation of the Merchant Shipping Act, 1894, in British possessions abroad or in foreign ports; and, if so, which is the section?
    THE PRESIDENT OF THE BOARD OF AGRICULTURE (for Mr. RITCHIE): Yes, Sir; generally speaking, seamen engaged on British vessels are subject to the Act of 1894, even when engaged in British possessions or foreign ports. Section 125, however, contains special provisions with regard to natives of India.

    INDIAN MERCHANT SHIPPING ACT.
    MR. HAVELOCK WILSON: I beg to ask the President of the Board of Trade whether the Indian Merchant Shipping Act applies only to vessels registered in India and employed in trading to and from ports in India; whether he can state the number of cubic feet of special accommodation allocated to each seaman under such Act; whether he is aware of the fact that a movement has been and now is on foot in India to increase the special accommodation allocated to Indian seamen up to the standard provided for under the Merchant Shipping Act, 1894; and whether he is aware that the principal opponents of such movement are the Peninsular and Oriental Steamship Company?
    THE PRESIDENT OF THE BOARD OF AGRICULTURE (for Mr. RITCHIE): The question of the exact application of the Indian Merchant Shipping Act depends upon the subject-matter, and involves points of considerable intricacy, with which I am not prepared to deal within the limits of a reply to a Question in this House. In the case of Lascars, I understand that the Indian Act requires six superficial and 36 cubic

    491
    feet of space for each man. In the case of Europeans, a space of 10 superficial feet is required when the space is six feet or more high—60 cubic feet if it is less. The Board of Trade have reason to believe that proposals have been made in India to increase the space allocated to Indian seamen, but they are not aware of the nature of the opposition raised to such proposals or from what quarters it emanated.

    LASCAR SEAMEN.
    MR. HAVELOCK WILSON: I beg to ask the President of the Board of Trade whether, in view of the fact that the Board of Trade is considering the subject of the statutory accommodation allocated to Lascar seamen, they will take into consideration part II., section 124, of the Merchant Shipping Act, 1894, and state whether such section does provide that the provision of the Act respecting agreements applies to all seamen whether engaged in a British possession or in a foreign port?
    THE PRESIDENT OF THE BOARD OF AGRICULTURE (for Mr. RITCHIE): The section does so provide subject to the 'modifications contained in the section, and any qualifications arising from local legislation based on Imperial law.
    DR. CLARK: May I ask whether, in the case of the Peninsular and Oriental Company, who have steamers sailing from London to Australia and back, the shipping of Lascars in India is not an evasion of the Merchant Shipping Act?
    THE PRESIDENT OF THE BOARD OF AGRICULTURE: I am informed that that is one of the points on which the Board of Trade is unable at present to express a definite opinion. The whole question is now being considered by the Board of Trade in order to ascertain precisely the state of the law.
    DR. CLARK: May I take it, then, that when they get the information they will prosecute the Peninsular and Oriental Company?
    [No Reply.]
    President of Board of Agriculture.

    P. AND O. COMPANY'S SUBSIDY.
    MR. HAVELOCK WILSON: I beg to ask the Secretary to the Treasury, as representing the Postmaster General, whether he can state the amount of money paid to the Peninsular and Oriental Steamship Company during the year 1897 for the carriage of Her Majesty's mails?
    MR. BANBURY: £353,794.

    PORT CHALMERS.
    MR. HAVELOCK WILSON: I beg to ask the President of the Board of Trade whether he is aware that the British steamship Port Chalmers discharged her crew at the port of New York, United States of America, on 1st July last, and whether he is aware that the Consular shipping office at that port was besieged by a crowd of crimps and low character; that a seaman named Northstrom was violently assaulted and robbed of his wages in the said shipping office, and that no efforts were made to protect this seaman; whether he is aware that many complaints have been made with regard to such conduct at this office; and whether it is intended to give instructions to Her Britannic Majesty's Consul General to exclude from the shipping office all persons except the captains and men?
    THE PRESIDENT OF THE BOARD OF AGRICULTURE (for Mr. RITCHIE): The Board of Trade are not aware of the circumstances of the case referred to in the Question, but inquiry shall be made. In reply to the second and third paragraphs of the Question, the Board are in communication with the Foreign Office and with the Consul General at New York, with a view to improving the conditions under which seamen on British ships are engaged and discharged at that port.

    MULLAGH, CO. CAVAN.
    MR. PATRICK O'BRIEN: On behalf of the honourable Member for the St. Patrick Division of Dublin I beg to ask the Chief Secretary to the Lord Lieu-

    493
    tenant of Ireland if he can state whether the Local Government Board have taken the local opinion of the Kells and Bailieborough boards of guardians as to the proposed addition of Mullagh Eastern Division, county Cavan, to the county Meath; if so, with what result?
    MR. ATKINSON: The electoral division of Mullagh forms part of the Kells Union, and is situated in the county Cavan. The Bailieborough guardians are strongly in favour of the transfer of the division to their union. So far as the Local Government Board are aware the Kells guardians have not expressed any opinion on the subject. Representations, however, have been received from a number of ratepayers resident in the division in favour of its retention in the Kells Union, and these representations will be carefully considered when the Board are preparing their Orders under the boundary clauses of the Local Government Bill.

    BEAR ISLAND FORTIFICATIONS.
    MR. PATRICK O'BRIEN: On behalf of the honourable Member for the St. Patrick Division of Dublin I beg to ask the Chief Secretary to the Lord Lieutenant of Ireland whether he can state what amount of money has been voted for the fortification of Bear Island, in Bantry Bay; whether a portion of that amount has been already expended; and whether the Government will devote a portion of that money, or provide a separate fund, for the extension of the railroad from Kenmare to a deep-water pier in Berehaven?
    MR. ATKINSON: The inquiries in the first and second paragraphs should be addressed to my right honourable Friend the Secretary to the Admiralty. As regards the third paragraph the honourable Member has, I think, been informed more than once that there are no funds at the disposal of the Irish Government for the construction of additional lines of railway.

    LAWLESSNESS IN LONDON STREETS.
    MR. MASSEY-MAINWARING: I beg to ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department whether his attention has been called to the insecurity of the streets in Clerkenwell and elsewhere caused by organised bands of ruffians; and whether, in view of the danger to peaceful citizens residing there, he will cause the force of police to be increased in such districts?
    THE SECRETARY OF STATE FOR THE HOME DEPARTMENT: I have received representations from the vestry on this subject, but after making inquiries I was not satisfied that there was any such insecurity as was alleged, or such a condition of lawlessness that the existing force of police in the district were unable to cope with it. In certain districts there is doubtless more street rowdyism than in others, due to the general character of the population, but, as far as the police are concerned, active steps are taken by them to suppress any disturbances and to arrest offenders. The matter is, of course, of some importance, and I shall not lose sight of it.

    SCIENCE AND ART MUSEUMS.
    MR. MASSEY-MAINWARING: I beg to ask the First Commissioner of Works whether, if the Science and Art Museums are combined, very serious danger to the art collections may arise by fire and escape of corrosive gases; and whether, in consequence of these serious risks, and for want of space, the art collections will alone be housed to the east of Exhibition Road?
    THE FIRST COMMISSIONER OF WORKS (Mr. AKERS DOUGLAS,): The whole subject of the housing of the Science and Art Departments is now under consideration, and the points raised by my honourable Friend in regard to fire and corrosive gases shall not be overlooked.

    ORDANACE SURVEY OFFICE, SOUTHAMPTON.
    MR. STEADMAN: I beg to ask the President of the Board of Agriculture whether he is aware that workmen employed graining and preparing zinco-photo plates in the zinco-printing department at the Ordnance Survey Office, Southampton, have recently had their wages reduced from 27s. to 21s. and from 34s. to 22s. 6d. per week, in consequence of piecework being abolished, and the men being required to perform, the same amount of work as formerly, but for which they are now paid at the day work rates of 21s. and 22s. 6d. per week; and whether he will take the necessary steps to remedy this grievance?
    THE PRESIDENT OF THE BOARD OF AGRICULTURE: It has recently been found necessary to diminish the extent to which the workmen referred to are employed on piecework, and inasmuch as their earnings when so employed are greater than when they are employed at a daily rate of pay, their aggregate earnings have doubtless been reduced, although not to the extent mentioned in the Question. I cannot enter into any undertaking that any class of men engaged on the survey should be continuously employed on piecework—a daily rate of pay being the normal rule; but I will make inquiry as to whether the men referred to have any cause for complaint as to the rate paid in their particular case. So far, neither the Director General nor I have received any direct representations on the subject.

    SOUTH OF IRELAND MAILS.
    CAPTAIN DONELAN: I beg to ask the Secretary to the Treasury, as representing the Postmaster General, whether under the new arrangement the mails for the South of Ireland will be forwarded from Dublin by the train leaving Kingsbridge at 6.20 p.m.?
    MR. HANBURY: Mails for Cork and other important towns on the Great Southern and Western Railway have been forwarded by the 6.20 p.m. train from Kingsbridge since the 1st of July, when the train commenced running at that hour.

    MILLOM COUNTY COURT BUSINESS.
    MR. HELDER: I beg to ask the Attorney General whether Millom (Cumberland) is about to be made a separate county court district; and whether theme is a sufficient number of plaints from Millom to justify that course, as the effect of the alteration, if made, would probably be to render both Whitehaven and Millom unable to pay the working expenses of their respective courts?
    THE ATTORNEY GENERAL (Sir R.WEBSTER,): Very strong local representations have been made in favour of a separate court at Millom. The number of plaints is not expected to be large, though larger than in many courts. It is neither desirable nor possible to lay down any hard and fast rule as to courts paying their way.

    EVIDENCE IN CRIMINAL CASES.
    MR. PICKERSGILL: I beg to ask the Attorney General whether his attention has been drawn to a report of the observations made by Mr. Justice Wills, in directing the grand jury at the Flint Assizes on the 23rd ultimo to throw out a bill which had been preferred against a, man for committing perjury in evidence given on his own behalf upon his trial for an offence under the Criminal Law Amendment Act, when the learned judge described the proceeding as an attempt to try the man for perjury in saying that he was not guilty of the accusation, and denying the circumstances of the story told against him, and characterised the committal as an entire mistake founded on the misapprehension of a properly well-known principle that was at the root of the administration of justice; whether, in accordance with this view of the law, and in performance of his statutory duty of supervising the director of public prosecutions, he proposes to instruct that officer not to prosecute in such cases which may arise under the Evidence in Criminal Cases Bill of the present Session; and whether he will enter a nolle prosequi on behalf of the Crown if such prosecutions should be instituted by other persons?
    SIR R. WEBSTER: I have seen a report of the case referred to in the first paragraph of the Question of the honourable and learned Member. I do not propose to give any general directions of the kind suggested in the second paragraph, or to give any pledge of the character suggested in the third. Every case must depend upon its own facts.

    CLERGY DISCIPLINE ACT.
    MR. DRAGE: On behalf of the noble Lord the Member for Greenwich I beg to ask the Attorney General whether his attention has been called to statements showing the heavy cost of proceedings before the Judicial Committee of the Privy Council under the Clergy Discipline Act; and whether it is in the power of the Rule Committee under that Act, or of the Privy Council, to diminish the expenses of such proceedings by regulations; and, if so, whether he can suggest in the proper quarter the issue of such regulations?
    SIR R. WEBSTER: My attention has not been called to the matter referred to by the noble Lord, but I am aware that the costs of proceedings in the Privy Council are heavy. I will communicate with the proper authorities to ascertain whether it is possible to make a reduction in this respect.

    LAND TRANSFER ACT.
    MR. GEDGE: I beg to ask the Attorney General whether the Order in Council made under the Land Transfer Act, 1897, on the 18th July last, and laid on the Table of the House on the 19th July last, will become valid after 40 days if no address disapproving of such Order be carried, in the event of Parliament being prorogued before the 40 days have elapsed, or will they begin again to run from the first day of next Session, as is the case with the Orders of the Council approving charitable schemes?
    SIR R, WEBSTER: So far as the question is one of law, I am of opinion that under sub-section 9 of section 20 of the Land Transfer Act, which is worded differently from the sections in other Acts of Parliament relating to similar matters, the Order will become valid 10 days after 19th July, unless an address be carried within that time disapproving of such Order.
    MR. GEDGE: I beg to ask the First Lord of the Treasury whether the Government will, by starring it, enable me to move the Resolution of which I have given notice with regard to the Order of Council recently made under the Land Transfer Act, 1897?
    THE FIRST LORD OF THE TREASURY (Mr. A. J.BALFOUR,): I think my honourable Friend has a very strong case, and that the wording of the Bill leaves a great deal to be desired. I do not know who is responsible for it. I will give my honourable Friend an answer to his Question in the course of the evening.

    MURDER OF BRITISH POSTAL OFFICIALS AT CONSTANTINOPLE.
    MR. CHANNLNG: On behalf of the honourable Member for the Eye Division, of Suffolk I beg to ask the First Lord of the Treasury whether he will consider the desirability of providing out of the Royal Bounty Fund (pending the payment of adequate compensation by the Turkish Government) for the families of the two officials of the British Post Office at Constantinople who were murdered on 26th August, 1896, especially having regard to the fact that these families have for more than 23 months been dependent on private charity?
    THE FIRST LORD OF THE TREASURY: In the event of the payment of compensation being much longer delayed, I shall be prepared to consider any representations that may be made to me on behalf of these persons.

    WEI-HAI-WEI.
    SIR E. GOURLEY: I beg to ask the First Lord of the Treasury whether he is aware that the main portion of the anchorage at Wei-hai-Wei is dangerous, and exposed to the northerly winds, which blow almost continuously with considerable fury during winter, whilst Port Arthur is almost landlocked; whether large sums of money will have to be expended over a breakwater, and the deepening of the channels and harbours, as well as in the construction of docks and fortifications, before Wei-hai-Wei can be utilised efficiently as a naval base; whether that, in the opinion of experts, it will need a garrison of about 20,000 men to hold it against a land attack; and is it the intention of the Government to ask Parliament for the money needed, or negotiate with China for an exchange from Wei-hai-Wei to some place (say, Chusan or the Woosung Forts) in the neighbourhood of the Yang-tsze Valley?
    THE FIRST LORD OF THE TREASURY: The latest information that we have from the officers of Her Majesty's Government at Wei-hai-Wei does not confirm in any particular the impression suggested by the honourable Member's Question. Until a completed survey has been made by the officers sent out for the purpose no definite statement can be made to Parliament on the subject. No exchange of Wei-hai-Wei for any other place is contemplated, that position being exceedingly well suited for the purpose for which it was acquired.

    TOWER OF LONDON—SUNDAY OPENING.
    MR. MASSEY-MAINWARING: I beg to ask the First Lord of the Treasury whether the Tower of London will shortly be opened to the public on Sundays: and, if not, what are the objections of those
    500
    responsible for its safety to its being so opened?
    MR. JOHNSTON: May I ask the right honourable Gentleman whether he is not aware that there is a large amount of public opinion in this country that objects to the assimilation of the English to the Continental Sunday?
    THE FIRST LORD OF THE TREASURY: I am not at present in a position to make any statement at all with regard to this Question.

    TELEPHONE COMMITTEE'S REPORT.
    MR. BARTLEY: May I ask the Secretary to the Treasury a Question of which I have given him private notice—namely, whether his attention has been drawn to the publication in full detail in the Press of the report of the Telephone Committee, showing that one of the proofs corrected by the Committee on Friday last has been communicated to the Press, and whether some steps will not be taken to prevent the Times or other newspapers publishing confidential documents which certainly ought not to appear?
    MR. HANBURY: As my honourable Friend is aware, it was actually an amended copy of our Report which was apparently got hold of by the Times and published on Saturday. That Report had only been amended on the previous day. Every possible precaution was taken by the Committee to guard against anything of the kind being done, because whenever we left the room, even for luncheon, we carefully had the doors locked. We have taken every possible step to ascertain how the filching of this paper could possibly have occurred, but hitherto without success. I can only say that in my opinion, and in the opinion

    501
    of the Committee, the practice complained of is becoming absolutely intolerable.

    ABMY BOOTS.
    COLONEL LOCKWOOD: May I ask the Financial Secretary to the War Office if the authorities are prepared to make experiments with boots during the forthcoming manœuvres at Aldershot?
    THE FINANCIAL SECRETARY TO THE WAR OFFICE (Mr. J. POWELL WILLIAMS,): Yes, Sir; 1,200 pairs of boots of two kinds will be on trial, and the experiment will be carefully watched.

  NEW BILL.

    BURGH POLICE AND HEALTH (SCOTLAND).
    Bill to amend the Law in regard to the Sewerage and Drainage and Water Supply of Burghs in Scotland.—(The Lord Advocate.)
    MR. GRAHAM MURRAY: This is a Bill which is the result of a promise given last year. It is entirely of a non-controversial nature, and I think honourable Gentlemen opposite have no objection to it, and I appeal to them not to oppose it, as we wish that it should be printed, so that the burghs should have an opportunity of perusing it in the autumn.
    Bill brought in and read a first time.

ORDERS OF THE DAY.

  SUPPLY [22ND ALLOTTED DAY.]
  The House then went into Committee of Supply, Mr. J. W. LOWTHER (Cumberland, Penrith) in the Chair.
  (In the Committee.)

  CIVIL SERVICE ESTIMATE, 1898–9.

    CLASS V.
    On the Vote of £1,000 for a grant in aid of the revenues of the Island of Cyprus,
    MR. PIERPOINT: I had no opportunity of addressing the House in Committee last year upon this question, and therefore I take the present opportunity of doing so; but, before the few remarks which I intend to address to the Committee, I desire to say that I thoroughly recognise that my right honourable Friend the Colonial Secretary has shown far more sympathy towards the island and the people who inhabit it than any of his predecessors. He has shown an anxiety to promote public, works in the island, and also to promote the welfare of the people. I do not intend to enter to-day into the subject of the tribute, although I do regard it as one of the great grievances of the island, and perhaps the greatest which the island has had, and I wish merely to bring to the attention of the Committee a few figures to make that question quite clear. I take my figures from the date that England took over and occupied the island up to March, 1897. The revenue during that period has been £3,294,528, the expenditure during the same period, excluding the tribute, has been £2,159,421, leaving an excess of revenue over expenditure, exclusive of the tribute, of £1,135,107. The tribute during that period has amounted to £1,728,948. Subtract the total excess of revenue, exclusive of the tribute, from the lump sum of tribute, and there is left a deficit of £593,841, which has taken the form of grants in aid given by this country to the island. Upon those figures the fact remains that, had not the island got to pay this tribute, according to the Convention of the 4th June, 1878, it would actually have had during the 20 years it has been in the occupation of England an excess of revenue over expenditure amounting to £1,135,107. Now, after dealing with those figures so shortly, I desire to remind the Com-

    503
    mittee that, by the Convention of the 4th of June, 1878, the actual wording of the Convention is—
    "That England will pay to the Porte whatever is the present excess of revenue over expenditure."
    and that has been, rightly or wrongly, interpreted to mean that Cyprus shall pay. Of course I need scarcely say that that is a very great burden on the island, especially when one considers the smallness of the population, which only amounts to about 210,000, which has to pay this large amount of money. I sincerely hope that some day or other some arrangement may be made by which this difficulty may be obviated. In the meantime I should like to remind the Committee that when we took possession of the island we took possession with a large intention of doing something towards the benefit of the island and its inhabitants. We promised them a great many things which we have never performed; and a very considerable promise was made by Sir Garnet Wolseley to the people that nothing should be left undone which would tend to their welfare. He issued the following proclamation:—
    "Her Majesty commands me to assure the inhabitants of Cyprus that she proposes to order the acceptance of such measures as may be deemed most suitable for the advancement and the development of commerce and agriculture of the country. No measure will be neglected contributing to the moral and material progress of the welfare of the people."
    Now, Sir, it was known at that time that it was intended to make Cyprus a place d'armes, as it is called, and that would have meant the expenditure of a large amount of money in the island upon a naval station, and probably also a large amount expended in maintaining a large garrison there. Nothing whatever has been done towards making a naval station there, and as to the garrison, I think I should not be very far wrong if I said the soldiers there are practically reduced to no more than a handful of caretakers. There were one or two companies there some time ago, I believe, but they have new been removed to Egypt to join the Soudan expedition. Now, Sir, of course when you spend in an island a
    504
    large amount of money in naval works, and you also keep a considerable garrison there, you indirectly benefit the population very largely. Now, the people have not had any benefit from that kind of expenditure in the island. I should like to point out to my right honourable Friend, also, that it would not only be a benefit to the island, itself but to this country as well, and. I would further desire to impress upon, him, that he should, at all events, consider the advisability of starting naval works, in consultation with the right honourable Gentleman the First Lord of the Admiralty. It is of enormous, importance to our Navy that we should have a naval harbour capable of taking our Navy other than Valetta, Malta, and there are two reasons why it is desirable. One is that the harbour of Valetta in. Malta is, I think I may say, a proverbially unhealthy harbour. The town sewage used to drain into it; the ships do so now. The amount of fever round and about Valetta harbour is very considerable indeed, and I will point to the latest returns as to the health of the Navy with regard to malarial fever to illustrate it. The medical officer of the Howe, January 14th to April 10th, says—
    "The weather is clear, dry, and exceedingly pleasant. The younger members of the ship's company suffered a good deal from Mediterranean fever."
    He speaks further of several cases of as later date having been primarily contracted in Malta. At Malta malaria, occurs very often in that port, and has been responsible for a great deal of the disease which has appeared in the Navy. Besides that, the advantage of it would be—and it would be a distinct advantage in view of possible occurrences in the future—that we should have a naval station in the far eastern Mediterranean, and considering that our ships were only lately at Alexandretta and other places in that part of the world it is necessary that we should have some re-fitting station somewhere nearer than Malta. With regard to the matter of the unhealthiness of Malta—Valetta harbour—I believe it is a very common thing in the Navy for officers to feel some regret

    505
    upon being ordered to Malta, because of the unhealthiness of the island. I have often been, and I know the harbour very well indeed. I was never there in the hot weather, but I must say that the smell from the water was simply abominable. One of these Reports speaks of a large amount of fever, which was supposed to have arisen in connection with a steam "grab-all," as it is called, which was dredging up the mud in one of the side creeks of Valetta harbour, but, from my own knowledge, there is no necessity to grab up the mud to get the smell in the side creeks. Our ships, perhaps, make their rendezvous at Alexandretta, and it is necessary to have a refitting station in those parts. In Cyprus there are two possible places for a harbour. One is ready-made by nature, and only wants the reefs built in and making good; that is at Famagusta. The old harbour is too small for modern ships, although it might have been useful in past times, but outside the old harbour there is a very large space of water around which is a natural reef. It has been surveyed, and I think in that harbour, if it were made, we should be able to swing 12 or 14 ironclads. That is the project so far as Famagusta is concerned. But there is another place, called Lake Limasol, in the promontory of Akroter, which is two miles and a half in diameter. It is shallow now, but when completed by the dredging and by a canal being made from the east side of the promontory to the lake, which is only half a mile, and a canal on the west side, the length there being one mile and an eighth, you would have a harbour approachable in all weathers, and it has high ground for guns and fortifications in the rear. The distance from Alexandretta to Cyprus is, roughly, 200 sea miles, from Port Said 205, and Alexandria 260 miles. To Malta from Alexandretta is 1,050 miles, so that it would be a very serious thing if the ships had to go and refit there. I have put that view to the Committee to-night at some length, and now, before I sit down, I desire to ask my right honourable Friend what is being done in Cyprus? The authorities there have passed a resolution for a railway between Larnaka and the capital, Nicosia, but whether there is
    506
    any likelihood of its being constructed, and whether it is to go direct from Larnaka to Nicosia, or whether it is to go viâ Vatili, I do not know. If it is made at all, it would be better to take the longer route, and go round by Vatili. The shorter and direct route from Larnaka to Nicosia is 25 miles, and if the railway is made it should not cost more than £67,000; but if the railway is constructed through the longer route the cost will be £95,000. I also wish to ask the right honourable Gentleman whether the steamship line to Alexandria is still going on, and whether it is prosperous. I also wish to draw his attention to what I understand is the fact, that the Ottoman Bank, which is the only bank in the island, has closed all its branches, and is also going to close its head office at Nicosia. If it does so, that will mean that the bank would remove itself from the island altogether. I should, perhaps, more than anything else like to ask the right honourable Gentleman whether he could give us any information as to the irrigation works which he has promised to the people of the island. I should also like to draw his attention to another matter which greatly concerns us there. There is on the island, in common with all parts of the Levant, an unhappy community of lepers, and although the disease is decreasing, still it exists, and is a shocking disease. What I desire to ask my right honourable Friend is this. The chief medical officer, who has been there for 20 years, has been working for many years upon what medical men have been investigating before, and what he believes to be a cure for this horrible disease. He is certainly of opinion that he has discovered a remedy which will cure the disease, if it is used in the early stages. I wish to ask the right honourable Gentleman whether he would not be able to get a sum of money granted to help the medical officer of health towards perfecting this discovery. If it turns out to be a good discovers, it will be one of extreme importance. Now, I have only a few more words to add. The right honourable Gentleman said last year that Cyprus was "no worse off for the British occupation, and there was no contract that she should be better off." I do not desire to tie him to the logical

    507
    conclusion of this statement. I think that he, and all of us, believe that wherever the English flag flies, it is not a matter of contract, but that we expect that the country over which it flies, and the people whom it rules, shall be better off. I desire to ask the right honourable Gentleman whether he will grant a Committee to inquire into the relations of Cyprus to this country, as to whether the view which has been held by Chancellors of the Exchequer is fair to the island, and as to whether something cannot be done to render it content, happy, and prosperous, after its long centuries of oppression and misrule?
    MR. DILLON: It is not for the purpose of endeavouring to reply to the speech of the honourable Member that I now address the Committee, but for the purpose of considering the whole question of the occupation of the island. Having regard to the circumstances under which this country took possession of the island, I do think that there does lie upon the Government of England the obligation to see that the condition of the people is improved so long as they have the control of it. If we are to believe the statements of the people themselves, there is a very trifling improvement, so far as they themselves are concerned, under English rule. They complain that, so far from there being any improvement, they are now held to certain arrangements, to which I shall allude in a moment, and they are made to pay £160,000 a year more than they would otherwise have tO pay. I do not pretend to any such information as that possessed by the honourable Gentleman who has just spoken; I merely speak from statements which have reached me from the inhabitants of the island themselves, and where they hoped that when they came under the rule of England their position would be improved, as compared with the rule of the Sultan, it has not been improved, and they have been brought under heavier taxation without any adequate increase in the expenditure of public money in public works. Now, the last Debate that we had upon this subject was, so far as I recollect, on the 8th of March, 1895, and the then Chancellor of the Exchequer, the right honourable Gentleman the
    508
    Member for Monmouthshire, declared that the responsibilities of the island of Cyprus cost the British taxpayer in round numbers £200,000 a year. Now, what struck me was that almost immediately after that, in the House of Lords, Lord Salisbury, then in opposition, moved for a Return for the purpose of showing that the statement of the then Chancellor of the Exchequer was far from accurate, that so far from costing the British taxpayer anything, the island had been run at a profit. Then it was that the Cyprus Return of 1895 was made, which, so far from showing that any loss was made by the island, the Exchequer was actually making a profit of about £10,000 a year. In the subsequent Debate which took place on the 19th of March in the same year, it was said we had derived a benefit out of the island of £170,000, that being the profit which this country had made out of the island; and it transpired in the course of the Debate that the revenues of Cyprus had been intercepted by the Government, and used for the purpose of paying the Turkish Loan of 1855, which should have been paid by this country and France. Now, it appears to me a harsh and cruel condition of things. It was admitted by all parties that the island of Cyprus was taken over for the purposes of Imperial policy, and, under the circumstances, we certainly ought to have acted generously towards the island, and not made a profit out of the unfortunate taxpayers. It is a very small and poor country. We ought not to have made a profit out of the transaction; whereas, as a matter of fact, England has made a profit of £200,000 since she took the island of Cyprus. I think it is only fair that these poor people should have a hearing. Cyprus was taken up by a secret Convention, and a clause was put into the agreement under which it was contracted that the treaty which had been made in the base currency should in future be paid in gold. The result of it is, according to the Cyprus Committee, that the value of the tribute was enormously raised. If that be true, I must say that the loss in that transaction ought, to fall on England. Nothing could be more unjust, if it be true. The whole of the loss ought, unquestionably, to fall upon the English Government, Further, it is complained

    509
    that the amount of taxation now paid by the people of Cyprus enormously and grotesquely exceeds any fair proportion towards the actual gross products of the island. A statement has been sent to me, and it shows that the gross value of the island is £800,000 a year, while the revenue is about £200,000. I see that the figure given by the islanders as the loss in consequence of the tribute having to be paid in gold, is £45,000 a year. That is what they estimate it at. I want to know whether that is true or not. It is either true, or it is not true. The conversion of the loan, no doubt, was a very substantial relief to the people of Cyprus. It was a substantial relief to give them £27,000 a year. I would like to urge upon the Secretary of State for the Colonies that this is the case of an island that has recently emerged from the terrors of Turkish rule, and that it is notoriously very poor, because the produce of the island is of an agricultural character. I was looking at a report this year, and I see that the produce is confined to very few articles—a condition of things which argues that the island ought to be generously considered. Even if there is a reduction of £27,000 a year on the loan, they should not withdraw altogether the grant in aid. The grant in aid has averaged £30,000 a year, and if, under this new conversion scheme, the tribute were reduced by £27,000 a year it would be a harsh thing to make that an excuse for withdrawing the grant in aid. That would interfere with the opportunity of starting works, which would materially improve the condition of the island.
    SIR A. K. ROLLIT: Having some connection with the island, I desire to say a few words. I recognise the practical interest the right honourable Gentleman the Secretary of State for the Colonies has taken in this matter, and, even more, the prospects which he is tentatively opening up for further development in the same direction. I believe myself that if the operations suggested are carried out, the result will be beneficial; they will not only be of advantage to the island, but they will also prove a remunerative investment. My honourable Friend has proposed that it is desirable that there should be a Com-
    510
    mittee of the House on the financial relations between the island and ourselves, and I would venture to suggest that the precedent the right honourable Gentleman has created, with regard to the West Indies, should be followed, and that the appointment of an expert Commission would be an extremely desirable step to take. It is a step in which there is a field both for investigation and for action, which, I believe, might be made very profitable. Hitherto, so far from any real and permanent advantage having arisen, very grave doubts as to the value of our occupation of the island have been entertained. But I should hope that, under the application of this policy of development, which, I am sure, commends itself to this country, a new departure will be made, and we have reason to hope that the result of that will bring credit, instead of discredit, to our country, with which credit only ought to be associated. When we think how highly taxed the island has been in proportion to its resources, and what a drain upon its resources the tribute has hitherto been, and how much capital has been prevented from finding its way into remunerative investments in the island itself—when these things are thought of, the retrospect is not one which can be indulged in with great satisfaction by this country, and it is to be hoped that the occasion will be taken for developing the agricultural and also the general industries of the island, of the latter of which there are but few, too few for a stable position of affairs. I think the right honourable Gentleman has had one more opportunity of displaying his statesmanship in making the best, instead of the worst, of our Colonies and dependencies. But, in the first instance, as to the conversion of the residue of the 1855 loan, I should like to know for whose benefit that is to accrue. Sixty years hence is a distant period, and I should like to know who in the nearer future is going to get the advantage of this undoubtedly desirable conversion? Is it to be our own country, to the neglect of Cyprus itself? Or, are we going to continue the system of grants in aid of the country we took, and which we hold, for our own convenience, and the future of which we are considering, even to-day, from the point of view

    511
    of our own advantage? The origin of our occupation seems to me to establish a distinct claim upon us. I should hope, therefore, that the right honourable Gentleman will be able to tell us to-day that this financial portion of the scheme will in itself be advantageous, not only to this country, but also to Cyprus. But I have risen especially and chiefly to dwell upon another view of this matter, to discuss it not from the point of view of arms, but rather from the aspect of view of the arts. I congratulate the right honourable Gentleman on the practical steps he seems likely to take with a view to the commercial development of the island. In undertaking certain public works, at least tentatively, and in having as his professional representative there a specialist who has had great experience in India in dealing with similar matters, and in what has already been foreshadowed, I think the right honourable Gentleman is taking a course which will recommend itself to everyone who knows anything about the island. The irrigation reservoirs and works are absolutely essential to counteract the uncertainty of the rainfall, and they are in experienced hands; and even the immediate result of ending waste of water by storage indicates what the future may be. At present, few second crops are taken from the land, but under a good system of irrigation it would be quite possible to crop the country annually, instead of biennially, according to the present system of letting half the land lie fallow every year, and to get, without any difficulty, a second summer crop, which is now generally impossible. I hope afforestation will be carried further, as even the mere protection and preservation of the forests has proved a means of reducing droughts. With regard to agriculture, of course, primarily, the question is that of irrigation; but we are here also brought into contact with further requirements, especially the introduction into the island of a more collective system—a system of greater cooperation. Each planter now does his own work, and the consequence has not been for the advantage of agriculture. In these ways I believe very much more might be accomplished. One great want of the island is the introduction of a better banking system. I am
    512
    not forgetting that an attempt has been made in that direction; but it was an attempt made under not the best conditions. Having regard to the general success of agricultural banks in Germany, I believe that if we were to introduce such into the island, with the help of the Government, a great benefit would be conferred, and I regret that at present such banks do not seem to meet with official favour; still, they are worth a trial under the new and better conditions. As to roads, the need for them will be illustrated by the fact that some of the more important towns in the provinces have nothing to connect them more than bridle-paths—e.g., there is no carriage road between Limasol and Paphos. There certainly has to be done much for the island in the way of harbour accommodation, and more direct steamship communication; and for a commercial harbour the Lake of Limasol seems to be the best site. If an improvement could be effected, it would be very advantageous to the commerce of the island. Railways, too, are wanted; and I am told that they ought to be, above all things, of a light description. Such lines have been found to be of advantage in our own and in some other countries. In general industries, that of wine has improved in its manufacture during the 15 or 20 years in which I have now and again drunk it, but, like agriculture needs more collective and co-operative action. That of silk is promising under the help given to it, and might be more improved, and needs more irrigation and mulberry planting; and there are some very small village textile industries in homespuns which are worth attention. Well, Sir, the position in the past has been such as we have reason to regret. At present some steps are being taken which I think do not fulfil our original intention of keeping Cyprus as a place of arms, but which will at least do something for its commercial development; and I trust the right honourable Gentleman will, as he has done in some other parts of the world, apply those principles which bring countries into a better commercial position, and, at any rate, show that the mind of this country does not forget its great obligations. Thus in Cyprus, too, there may be both patience

    513
    and prudence, progress and remunerative investment both for the island and for this country, and also a realisation at last of right and duty.
    SIR C. DILKE: The honourable Member for Warrington has departed from his usual practice of dealing with Cyprus, and has launched out into a very ambitious naval and military scheme. The honourable Gentleman has taken a great interest in the subject, which is always to his credit; but may I suggest that on the present occasion he has not, perhaps, given enough preliminary consideration to his proposal for making a naval base in connection with the island? We are speaking here in the absence of any representative of the Admiralty. It would be rather for the First Lord of the Admiralty than for my right "honourable Friend the Secretary of State for the Colonies to deal with that portion of the subject. These are not new proposals. They were made during two successive Governments. They were the subjects of very full Reports by naval and military experts, which were laid before this House. The two successive Governments sent naval and military experts to report upon the possibility of making a harbour at Famagusta. The effect of those Reports was that Famagusta could be made, by enormous expenditure, into a most valuable naval and military harour if one was wanted in the neighbourhood. As none is, the matter is not worth contemplating for one moment. It would mean spending something like two millions of money to make it a great naval and military harbour. My honourable Friend generally mentioned certain military and naval authorities from which he has got a certain opinion in favour of the course he advises us to take. In the debates in the Royal United Service Institution there has never been made any suggestion for making a great harbour in Cyprus. It is a well-known fact that there is a harbour in that part of the Eastern Mediterranean which is much better suited as a base in war. I think it is a very rash thing to ask the Government to engage upon. Now, Sir, the position in which for years past we have stood in Cyprus has been a painful position. Successive Governments of this country have been
    514
    forced to certain action by our original rashness in occupying Cyprus before we knew anything about its value. Recent achievements in the same direction show the danger in which this country may fall of acting without full consideration and without obtaining a sound and well-conceived opinion of the naval and military fitness of the step. As regards the present and future, that is a matter we can most usefully discuss to-day. There is a particular point to which no reference has been made, and in regard to which I believe there is a somewhat hopeful future. I believe it is a matter that has been brought before the attention of the right honourable Gentleman. Cyprus was celebrated in the past for the character of its silk cocoons. I believe the silk produced from the cocoons is superior to any other produced anywhere else in the world. Yet the silk made from that cocoon is inferior silk. The people have not got the manufacturing skill to make good use of their cocoon. I should be very glad if, in the course of any remarks the right honourable Gentleman may make upon the development of the agriculture and commerce of Cyprus, which I know has occupied his mind, he may allude to any chance he sees in the future of giving a start to what is likely to become a thriving trade.
    SIR J. FERGUSSON: I have always taken an interest in the matter of the Turkish Loan, and there is a point I should like to mention. We do not know what becomes of the £10,000 a year surplus. It has been stated that it has not been applied to the service of the debt, and that this surplus has been accumulating until it now amounts to £170,000. I should like to know what is intended to be done with this money.
    THE SECRETARY OF STATE FOR the COLONIES: There is no surplus at all. The amount of the tribute, roughly speaking, is £80,000 a year; £40,000 a year of that goes to pay the interest of the French portion of the loan and the other £40.000 goes to pay the interest on the English portion. After paying this tribute of £80,000 a year there is a deficit in the finances of Cyprus which amounts annually to something like £30,000, and which has

    515
    been made up by this country. The total sum we have spent in making up this deficit is something over £500,000.
    SIR J. FERGUSSON: Is there no surplus left in the hands of the Treasury?
    MR. BILL: With reference to what has fallen from the right honourable Gentleman the Member for the Forest of Dean, I would say that he wrote an article last month in the Cosmopolis magazine, in which he stated—
    "The British Government of 1880, containing as it did two prominent members of the present administration, put on record its opinion of the worthlessness of Cyprus as a military or naval station."
    He then proceeded to advocate the surrender of Cyprus to the Kingdom of Greece. Lord Salisbury, at any rate, did not consider Cyprus worthless from a naval point of view—for the Duke of Somerset, on the 21st March, 1879, asked Lord Salisbury whether it was the intention of the Government to undertake the works necessary to make Famagusta habitable. And this was his answer—
    "The harbour of Famagusta has undoubtedly been selected, and such improvements are to be made in it as may be required to make it fit for the purposes of a great Power. When the harbour is completed, it will, I believe, be a considerably finer harbour than that of Malta, for, if I recollect rightly, whereas the harbour of Malta can only contain nine large ships, three-quarters of a cable length apart, that of Famagusta will be capable of containing 14 ships, one cable length apart. The position besides is one of very great importance in that part of the world, and is not to be overrated from a strategical point of view."
    I should just like to say a word or two about the agricultural value of the island, which, I think, after listening to all the Debates which have been held in this House since I became a Member of it, appears have been unduly depreciated. There are Members in this House who will hardly credit what I am going to tell them. The year 1891 was a bumper one as regards cereals in Cyprus, and proved the best harvest experienced since we took possession of the island. The cereal produce in that year from all our three Colonies—West Australia, Tasmania, and Queensland—amounted to 4,562,738 bushels; whereas the cereal produce of
    516
    Cyprus in that year amounted to 5,000,000 bushels, thus showing a surplus of 500,000 bushels over those three great Colonies all put together. Well, that shows the great value that must be attached to this island for wheat-growing purposes. If it grows such an enormous crop in a year without anything being put into the soil to help it, it conclusively proves what the island can do. I do hope, therefore, that although the island has been called by the late Chancellor of the Exchequer a dilapidated property, there can be no doubt that under proper government, favoured by a reduction of taxation, and with sympathetic treatment from England, it may become in the future, what it has given evidence of being in the past, the finest granary in Europe.
    MR. R. G. WEBSTER: I have listened with great interest to the speeches of my honourable Friends the Member for Warrington and the Member for Islington on this subject, and as to the desirability of forming Cyprus into a naval station, I would observe that the Mediterranean is already strongly fortified. It will not only be of importance to us to recollect what the Leader of the House has pointed out, that it has not only got a good harbour, but there is Malta, which, by the way is practically governed by a curious legislative body. Only a few years ago there occurred an incident for which no reason could be given that the Admiralty could understand——
    THE CHAIRMAN: Order, order!
    MR. R. G. WEBSTER: I was merely alluding to the conditions under which the British Admiral was placed in quarantine in Malta. However, he took his fleet away. He said—
    "You put me in quarantine. I will show you what quarantine means."
    And he took the fleet away on a six or eight weeks' cruise. It is a remarkable thing that this place of arms should be under the control, so far as the military forces are concerned, of the Home District of the War Office. I venture to hope that if Cyprus is aided by the various proposals of my honourable Friend the Member for Islington and the honourable

    517
    Member for Warrington, and others, much good will accrue.
    THE SECRETARY OF STATE FOR THE COLONIES: The object of honourable Members is, no doubt, to obtain information, and in putting their questions they have, in spite of the lateness of the Session, roamed over a wide variety of subjects; but I think it would tax even the ingenuity of my right honourable Friend the Member for the Forest of Dean to seize this opportunity for denouncing the acquisition of Wei-hai-Wei. In regard to the present Debate the Committee will recollect that my responsibility for the island only dates from 1895; and it is impossible for me to defend the policy which led to the acquisition of the island prior to the period when I came into office. From that time, however, I have had the pleasure to agree with my honourable Friend the Member for Warrington and other speakers as to one particular point in their speeches. That is to say, I think I laid it down, within a few weeks of my being in office, that I regarded the island of Cyprus as one of those Colonial estates which it was well worth the interest of this country to develop in a reasonable and cautious manner. But I wish at the same time to say that I differ entirely from those honourable Members, and especially from my honourable Friend the Member for Warrington, when the assertion is made that under British rule the Cypriotes have not already greatly benefited, and, indeed, that they were better off under their old masters.
    MR. DILLON: More lightly taxed.
    THE SECRETARY OF STATE FOR THE COLONIES: I will take it any way the honourable Member, likes; and I am prepared to prove that they are certainly much better off than they were under their Turkish masters. If that is not the case, I should be surprised to learn if, on a vote, the islanders would be prepared to express any desire to revert to their old régime. It so happens that there is a considerable number of Armenians who are seeking entry to the island of Cyprus, and to
    518
    establish themselves there; and if we come to terms with regard to certain difficulties connected with their immigration no doubt land will be found for them, and I hope they will make a satisfactory and industrious portion of the population. In. the first place, let me say what has been done in the last few years on the part of this country in order to improve the condition of the island. Last year the Committee made a very liberal Vote—much, larger than ever before—in order to carry out what I consider to be essential in the shape of public works in the island. It was necessary to put the roads in order, and to rebuild the bridges, which had been destroyed by the torrents, and whose absence had made it impossible for the market produce to find a proper market. These works have been carried out with very great success and to the satisfaction of the islanders, who have evinced their gratitude in many different ways. We are making progress with what I believe to be one of the most important improvements. Irrigation works have been begun. The House authorised a loan in the first instance of £60,000, with the full intention on my part to propose a larger loan, if the first experiment turned out to be a great success. I believe that by the irrigation now proceeding we shall bring into cultivation a large amount of fertile territory, thereby increasing the production of the island, and finding opportunities for placing on the land a great number of the population. A director of agricultural education has been appointed, who is teaching the islanders all that is necessary with regard to the grafting and cultivation of their trees, and special attention is being given to the silk industry, to the cultivation and preparation of cocoons, to which subject, no doubt, great importance is properly attached. It was found that inferior eggs of silkworms were being imported into the island, and measures were taken to stop their importation with such success that the silk industry of the island has trebled within the last few years. The mail service to Egypt has been continued with great advantage, and it is found that the exports have very largely increased in consequence of railway communication. Certain reforms in taxation have been made; and though I cannot say that we

    519
    have been able largely to reduce taxation, some of the small taxes which caused irritation and embarrassment to trade, altogether beyond the value of the amount which they produced, have been entirely abolished. An engineer 'has been sent in order to make a proper survey of the railway to go to Nicosia, Famagusta, and Larnaka; but as to the exact route to be taken I must wait for further information. The whole progress of the scheme will depend to some extent on the growing prosperity of the island. At the same time, although there is no intention to make a great naval and military harbour at Famagusta, the subject is being attended to, and the harbour will be rendered more useful for commercial purposes. As regards leprosy, the segregation of cases which has been carried out has proved beneficial, and the disease, which was a common feature in the island, has now become rarer. I understand that the investigations made on the spot by the doctor were only temporarily interrupted, and I hope he will be able to resume them before long; but the question of funds is a question that does not cause the interruption. Then, Sir, it is true that certain branch banks of the Ottoman Bank were closed because it found that the business was not sufficiently remunerative, and it was rumoured that the bank would be withdrawn altogether. All I can say is that we are prepared for such an eventuality, and in case the bank should leave the island the Government will take measures in order to secure the necessary facilities. In these circumstances which I have described I cannot see any necessity for a special Committee. We are doing all that we are called upon to do at present. In asking this House to be liberal to the island, I undertake a considerable personal responsibility, and I should not ask for the money unless I thought the investment would make a good return. I do think it right to proceed prudently and cautiously, and not to make increasing demands upon the Exchequer, without giving some proof that my expectations are likely to be fulfilled. I say, then, I think it can be shown that in recent years the condition of the island has improved, regard being had to certain general features, to which attention
    520
    should always be paid when we test the prosperity of a dependency. I find that in less than 10 years the population of this island, which, we are told, is now in a worse condition than when under the barbaric rule of Turkey——
    AN HONOURABLE MEMBER: I never said so.
    THE SECRETARY OF STATE FOR THE COLONIES: That the population has increased from 186,000 to 209,000. It shows that the condition of the island is not as bad as it represented.
    MR. DILLON: What they are representing is that we are paying more taxation.
    THE SECRETARY OF STATE FOR THE COLONIES: I say that is also a mistake. Taxes upon wine and cultivation, which interfered with trade, have been removed or altered, and I believe very greatly to the advantage of the island. Now, Sir, I take another case. It is said that this island is heavily taxed. The population of the island must now be 230,000 people, and the average taxation of the island during the last 10 years has been £176,000—less than 13s. or 14s. per head. Compare that, for example, with the taxation of the West Indian Islands, where the taxation is sometimes nearly £2 per head of the population; or compare it with the taxation in England, Scotland, or Ireland. I think it will be seen that the taxation of Cyprus is not excessive, although, no doubt, the island is not a very wealthy one, and although taxation always bears hardly upon the poor people, at all events, the taxation is measured by the increase in population, which I have given. Now, exports have increased to an extraordinary degree. It is true they have not increased so much in amount, but if I look at the point it shows that in the production of the island a very largo increase has taken place since the British occupation, and therefore on a review of the whole circumstances I say that although for the first 15 years of our occupation we did not do quite as much as we might have done for the benefit of the island, yet, in spite of that, the mere presence of British administration instead of Turkish adminis-

    521
    tiation gave an additional confidence, and the expenditure of money for the benefit of the island has produced very satisfactory results. One other point as to the question of tribute. I think the statement in the Times is, to say the least of it, premature. Any arrangement that may be made will come before this House for discussion and approval, and as it is quite impossible that anything of the sort can be brought forward this Session, I think it ought to be left over until next Session before going into the details of the question. But I protest once more against the statement that this country gains anything out of the tribute. That is an absolute mistake. The tribute is treated as security in connection with the Guaranteed Turkish Loan of 1855. It was convenient that we should take our security in possessions of which we are the administrators. That arrangement made the matter more certain, but it did not alter our position as regards Turkey. The island was paying at the time an average sum of £80,000 a year. The amount of the present tribute was fixed by the British official sent over by the Treasury, in agreement with the Turkish Government. If we had never been in the island the inhabitants would still have had to pay Turkey £80,000 a year——
    AN HONOURABLE MEMBER: £90,000.
    THE SECRETARY OF STATE FOR THE COLONIES: Or, as an honourable Member says, £90,000. In any case, the only difference under the existing arrangement is this, that where before the annexation the inhabitants had to pay the whole of that £80,000 or £90,000 a year, they now have in aid of that, payment the annual subsidy which has been granted by the British Government, which varies year by year according to the needs of the island, and which has mounted up to a total of £500,000. Under these circumstances, I think the islanders would be very ungrateful if they did not recognise the sacrifices made on their behalf by the Government.
    MR. DILLON: It was admitted by the Chancellor of the Exchequer in a previous Debate that it had been proved by
    522
    Lord Salisbury that, instead of this-country losing £30,000 a year, the British Exchequer was gaining £10,000 a year through the acquisition of Cyprus. The right honourable Gentleman says now that, on the contrary, the British taxpayer has lost half a million. There is here a direct conflict of testimony. But nothing can be clearer than that Lord Salisbury contended that this, country was to the good to the extent of £10,000 a year, and he undertook to prove that. I do not profess to have knowledge enough of the subject myself to know whether the statement of the islanders is correct or not; all I say is that it is stated that the circumstances under which the original convention was signed were opened by the British, official, and that the tribute had to be paid in base currency. That is a plain; statement. I do not know whether it is true or not, I only say that was the statement that was made.
    THE SECRETARY OF STATE FOR THE COLONIES: I have told the honourable Member that it was incorrect.
    MR. DILLON: I accept the correction: with reserve.
    SIR J. FERGUSSON: I remember that there was a question asked in the House five years ago on this, subject, and the right honourable Gentle, man the Member for Monmouthshire stated that the guarantee loan was£80,000—that is to say, that that sum taken from the uniform sum was over and above the interest on the debt. But as regards what the honourable Member for East Mayo has said just now, the matter does not admit of argument, because at the same time the right honourable Gentleman the Member for Monmouthshire stated that the present Sinking Fund was £88,800.
    Question put.
    Grant agreed to.

    CLASS II.
    Motion made, and Question proposed—
    "That a sum, not exceeding £30,726, be I 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, 1899, for the salaries and expenses of the Board of Agriculture, and to pay certain grants in aid."
    MR. STRACHEY: I desire to move a reduction of this Vote for the salary of the President of the Board of Agriculture by £100, in order to give the right honourable Gentleman an opportunity of making a full, if not a more satisfactory, explanation than he did on Friday last. As the right honourable Gentleman is aware, the action of his Board has caused the greatest dissatisfaction in Somerset, a part of which I have the honour to represent. In fact, so strong is the feeling among the agricultural classes in Somerset, that the executive committee of the county council have taken up the matter. They brought it fully before the right honourable Gentleman, and he was asked to accede to the very reasonable request of the committee for a modification of the Swine Fever Order of this year. Now, the right honourable Gentleman may say that the reason why he cannot alter the restrictions he has made in connection with the movement of swine in Somerset is that the outbreaks of fever have considerably increased. Taking the year beginning 1895, there were 641 outbreaks, but there were only 207 in 1896, and the number fell to 72 in 1897. That would show that there was no reason for putting a stronger order in force in direct opposition to the local authorities. I am glad to notice that in the correspondence which has taken place between the county council and the Board of Agriculture the Board acknowledge the very valuable co-operation of the council in carrying out the regulations, and I know from personal knowledge that this has only been done at great trouble and self-sacrifice on the part of the members of the committee; and I cannot help thinking that if the right honourable Gentleman is not inclined to alleviate the grievance under which the agriculturists are suffering at the present moment he will not have in future all
    524
    that hearty co-operation from Somerset which he says is so valuable. As practical men, the members of the executive committee know something about this matter, and I venture to say that they are as capable of appreciating whether these new regulations are or are not desirable as are the Board of Agriculture. I venture to appeal to the right honourable Gentleman as a practical man himself, and one who thoroughly understands the interests of agriculturists, to consider this matter. As an agriculturist myself, I feel that in anything affecting the interests of farmers we have a very good friend in the right honourable Gentleman, and I can assure him that in bringing forward this question I have no desire to attack him, because that is the last thing in the world I would wish to do. There is also another matter for complaint. If it were necessary to have this new Order, surely a very unfortunate time was chosen to put it into operation. It came into operation on May 27th, and, as the right honourable Gentleman is no doubt aware, there is in Somerset during the summer a great movement of fat swine fit for slaughter, and store swine are bought up by the large farmers all over the county from labourers and small farmers. The new Order was put into operation at a time when it caused the greatest in convenience and the greatest loss to the farmers of Somerset, who, as the right honourable Gentleman is aware, are to a great extent dairy farmers. Then again, the County Council of Somerset asked the right honourable Gentleman whether, if he could not entirely abrogate the Order for 1898, he could not go back to the Order of 1894 as regards the movement of swine fit for slaughter. They pointed out that the movement of swine fit for slaughter was attended with very little real risk, and under the Order of 1894 it was done effectively. I am quite aware that the argument has been used, though I think it cannot apply to Somerset, that the marks which were put on swine showing that they were going to be slaughtered were afterwards rubbed off, and that the swine were returned to the farm or sent to another farm. If that be the case, I venture to suggest that some other means of marking swine sent away to be slaughtered should be

    525
    adopted. I can assure the right honourable Gentleman that there is a very strong feeling on this point. If he cannot entirely abrogate the Order, he might abrogate it as regards the movement of fat swine. Under the existing Order, if store pigs are brought in, the swine fit for slaughter cannot be sent to market for a fortnight after, and the consequence is that a farmer, who has to watch his pigs from day to day, and see that they do not increase beyond a certain weight, is compelled to keep them longer than he should, and it entails a heavy loss. It is also a hardship to the labourer or the small farmer with, perhaps, only one sow, because he is prevented from sending that sow to the boar kept by his richer neighbour. It is a very real inconvenience, not only to the large farmers, but also to the small farmers and agricultural labourers. I suppose the right honourable Gentleman will say that he is getting swine fever under. But exactly the same statement was made by his predecessors. The right honourable Gentleman himself says that the Board are grappling with it, and that they hope the next Order will do everything necessary. It is taking a very long time, and the position is very unsatisfactory. You are simply putting one Order on another, and issuing regulations which are becoming more intolerable everyday. Farmers at first readily consented to accept these severe regulations for a few weeks or months, or perhaps a year, thinking swine fever would be stamped out, but that has not been the case. I would ask if the right honourable Gentleman whether, instead of the attention of the Board being turned to more restrictive regulations, some other means should not be tried of dealing with this matter. Surely there is some other means of dealing with this disease. Certainly the position is not satisfactory at present. Very little good has come out of these regulations, and if, instead of harassing farmers all over the country, the Department of the right honourable Gentleman would turn their attention to other remedies more good might be done. I beg to move, Sir.
    Motion made, and Question put—
    "That Item A be reduced by £100. in respect of the salary of the President of the Board of Agriculture."
    MR. WARNER: This is a very serious matter. Both my honourable Friend the Member for Somersetshire and myself took a very strong view on this subject some few years before this Government came into office, and it is one that causes a great deal of trouble to dairy farmers. In the present state of agriculture in this country, the dairy farmer, who represents almost the whole of the agricultural interest of the country, depends to a very large extent for his profit on the fattening of pigs. The recent Order which has been brought in has put an extra restriction on him. It restricts him in the mode of buying store pigs and in selling fat pigs. It was suggested some years ago that the destruction of pigs suffering from swine fever ought to be made more agreeable to the owners by some compensation being made to them for the loss. What we complain of is the tiresome restriction put upon this description of farming without any real improvement being obtained. In the Assistant Secretary's Report it is stated that there have recently been fewer cases of rabies. Now, I believe, that there are more cases than there were before. Swine fever is increasing, and has been increasing, in spite of the restrictions. But there is another point which comes under the same Department, and which I think is equally important, and that is the publication by the same Department of the dog-muzzling Orders. A curious instance of the effect of the Department's policy came before me the other day. It is rather an important case, because under the old scheme the local authorities carried on this work, and the method being unpopular, the new system of enforcing muzzling was brought in. It is a curious circumstance that both the councils in the district to which I am referring are against the enforcement of the Order, and yet it is enforced in the district. The district is in my own constituency—the Lichfield petty sessional district—and there has been no case of rabies, except in Birmingham, which is 12 miles from the nearest point of the district, and 24 miles from the farthest. According to the words of the Assistant Secretary, these districts are arranged on the principle of" the rabid dog on the march. "I do not know whether or not that means that there are certain dis-

    527
    tricts which the dog would run to if it had not been killed or stopped; but I understand that there is another system of taking these districts, and that is what may be called the thickly-populated dog areas. I believe my right honourable Friend the President of the Board of Agriculture considers that this is the right way to deal with these districts, but, at the same time, it does seem to me rather hard that because a dog from even a thickly-populated area should go 12 miles away, that the people not only living in that district, but even 24 miles off should have to have their dogs muzzled, and especially in view of the fact that muzzling has not yet been proved to extirpate rabies. I know that there are very strong arguments in favour of muzzling, and they are put forward in the Report of the Assistant Secretary of the Animals Department. But this partial muzzling of dogs does not seem to have been a success in this country, and if one looks at the maps, and sees the places where rabies has broken out, it is quite evident that the system is altogether unsuccessful. I hope my honourable Friend will press this matter upon the Government. I think there should be some mitigation of the Muzzling Order throughout the country, and a more understandable system introduced than that in existence.
    COLONEL LOCKWOOD: I do not propose to support the Motion for the reduction of the right honourable Gentleman's salary, although I have been a very considerable sufferer myself from the effects of the Muzzling Order. On the whole, I think the Muzzling Orders have had a good effect, but I should like an assurance from the right honourable Gentleman that the inoculatory experiments tried on living animals are conducted with every possible precaution, in order to ensure that there is no unnecessary suffering.
    MR. CHANNING: I cannot quite agree with the action my honourable friend the Member for Somersetshire has taken with regard to the swine fever policy. It may be that serious inconveniences have arisen in some districts, but so far as I have followed its course, I should be inclined to give the general policy of the Board of
    528
    Agriculture my support. Obviously, my honourable Friend should for one of two-things. If the present policy is to be carried out he cannot, complain of the strengthening of the regulations against the movement of swine just at the time that the outbreaks are increasing. If, on the other hand, he can adduce sufficient evidence to show that this policy does not get rid of swine fever, then there may be some reason to justify him in asking the right honourable Gentleman for a Departmental inquiry into the success of his policy. But, so far as I have been able to watch the course of the right honourable Gentleman's policy, I think the opposite has been the case, and I shall certainly be inclined to support him.
    THE PRESIDENT OF THE BOARD OF AGRICULTURE (Mr. W. H. LONG,):The policy with regard to swine fever was deliberately adopted at the unanimous request of the House of Commons. I have never regarded the condition of things as to that disease as satisfactory, nor has there been any substantial improvement, but nevertheless, the number of cases has decreased, leading us to hope that in time we shall be able to combat the disease. I regret that the policy has entailed suffering on the Somersetshire farmers, but it is necessary, in the interest of the whole country. I believe there is a cure, and that it is to prevent movement, so as to avoid infection through contact. We are doing our best, but we cannot stamp out a disease of this kind without interfering with the material interests of many of the breeders concerned. The honourable Member for Lichfield asked me a question about the number of dogs, and appeared to be unconvinced by the figures I had the honour to announce to the House the other day as to the efficacy of the policy we are carrying out. He seemed also to question what our officials have said as to the march of the mad dog, but if the honourable Gentleman would give one-quarter of the amount of study to that subject which the advisers of the Board of Agriculture have given to it, he would very soon learn that there was nothing to laugh at in the march of the mad dog. It is very disagreeable, no doubt, but it is what the mad dog does, and it is the case that,

    529
    from close observation and examination of this insidious and most hateful disease, we learn that there is such a thing as the march of the mad dog, and it is for the reason that it tends, in a particular direction, almost invariably, that we draw our orders in a manner which sometimes seems difficult for outsiders to understand. We are justified by the result, and by the result I am content to stand. My honourable and gallant Friend the Member for Essex was good enough to express his thanks for what we have done, but the honourable Gentleman opposite seemed to think that there were some orders issued by officials of the Board of Agriculture, for which I am not responsible. I beg to assure him that he is entirely mistaken. I do not think that any detail of this policy has been adopted without my knowledge. It is possible that occasionally some small details may escape the notice of the head of the Department, but Whether they are a failure or a success, the one responsible person is myself, and if the honourable Gentleman objects, he must attack me and not those of my subordinates who are unable here to defend themselves. With regard to what has been said on vivisection by my honourable and gallant Friend, I can give him and the Committee a satisfactory assurance. All the experiments were simply inoculation experiments, in which every possible precaution was taken. Let me assure my honourable and gallant Friend that we have made, and are making, no experiments whatever on dogs. The only experiments conducted under our supervision have been experiments necessary in order to ascertain whether a dog had died from rabies or not. Those experiments were made upon rabbits, and I have every reason to believe were of a painless character, while they were necessary in order that a vast amount of suffering might be saved on the part of a large number of human beings. The mental torture through which human beings go on suspicion of being bitten by a mad dog is so great, that I am satisfied that it is necessary and justifiable that we should ascertain as rapidly as possible what it is that a dog under these circumstances has died from, so that, if possible, we may relieve persons from the agony which they would otherwise suffer.
    530
    The only other experiment we have been carrying on has been with regard to the use of mallein, which appeared to be a curative for glanders. In both these oases the experiments are conducted under the closest supervision, and every precaution is taken. I believe it is impossible that anything could be better done than this work, and if the experiments are sanctioned by the law, as, of course, they are, for they are at present conducted under a certificate issued by the Home Office, and of every experiment the officer responsible has to make a full report, it seems to me that every precaution is made which it would be possible to have, taken to prevent any abuse of these powers. Of course, some special inconvenience may be caused by these orders amongst a dense population, but we endeavour to cause as little inconvenience as possible. We are satisfied that if this disease is to be eradicated, it can only be done by imposing a certain amount of inconvenience upon the people of this country, and I hope sincerely that we may appeal to them to put up with it, in order that at no distant date we may be able to congratulate them on the final result when this disease has been eradicated.
    MR. WARNER: I did not, in the remarks I made, in the least desire to blame any particular person, but I thought the Orders might be carried out in accordance with the office idea, though I have no doubt that the officials and the right honourable Gentleman himself are doing what they think is the best that can possibly be done. But the speech of the right honourable Gentleman has proved that it is under a, very intricate system that these Muzzling Orders are carried out, and he himself admits that it is very difficult for anybody who is not in the Department, and who has not closely studied the matter, to know on what principle they are acting. He has said that in thickly-populated districts the march of the dog is not a thing to laugh at. I did not laugh at it, but what I laughed at was that there were so many ideas given us as to the way of defining districts. I do not wish to say that the work is not done properly, but in the view of ordinary, persons it is not done to the satis-

    531
    faction of the people and of dog-owners. What I wanted to get from the right honourable Gentleman was an assurance that there should be some definition of the rules, so that the grievances of those who now complain should be removed. There are serious complaints of the unequal operation of the Orders in many cases, and I think that if some idea were given to the people as to the principle on which the rules are laid down, it would diminish dissatisfaction. The people are dissatisfied because they think that these rules have been carried out in a way to give the maximum of dissatisfaction, and although they have resulted in some good they have not produced as much good as they might have done.
    MR. LEWIS: There are two policies which may be carried out with regard to swine fever—the one the policy of the open door, and the other that of the sphere of influence. It appears to me that the one policy has been as ineffective as the other. The right honourable Gentleman, who is certainly as capable as any Minister in this House of defending the action of his own Department, has not given us a very rosy picture of the results arrived at by the method of administration, which, as he quite correctly says, was not forced upon the Board of Agriculture, but was adopted by the Board of Agriculture with the consent of the whole House. But the difficulty with regard to the whole question is that it is so easy to evade these regulations, and that evasions do so constantly take place. As a matter of fact, when a man is obliged to sell a pig or two in order to pay his rent, or to pay his tradesmen's bills, as the case may be, he must find some way of disposing of his live stock, and the consequence is that he goes as near the fair as he can drive his animals, and keeps them just outside the boundary of the town. The dealers find him in the lanes, they buy his pigs at a very low price, and he goes home, with very much less money in his pocket than he otherwise would have taken with him. Unquestionably, it is a very great hardship that this misfortune should fall with its heaviest weight upon the small people, and the question this House ought to consider in regard to swine fever—I do
    532
    not raise the question with regard to dogs—is whether, as a matter of fact, it would not be just as well for us to throw into the Thames all the money we have spent in the attempted extirpation of this disease. I am bound to say that, from the tone of the right honourable Gentleman, I do not gather that these Measures have been the success that was anticipated from them, or, indeed, I would even venture to say they have not been the success which we could expect, having regard to the expenditure of the country upon them. We are in a very unsatisfactory position with regard to the whole matter. The question is, whether we should go on or go back; whether we should stick to the sphere of influence, or stick to the open door. So far as I can see at present, the policy of the open door is the only one which the House can take into consideration.
    MR. STRACHEY: I wish to ask the right honourable Gentleman if he would say if there was an increase or a decrease of swine fever in Somerset in 1895 and 1897, as compared with 1894, before his new regulations came into force? I would like to remind the right honourable Gentle-man that, in face of the new Order, which came into force on the 27th of May this year, in six weeks there have been 20 outbreaks of swine fever in Somerset, showing that the new Order has done nothing to decrease them in that county.
    THE PRESIDENT OF THE BOARD OF AGRICULTURE: I cannot tell the honourable Gentleman what the particulars may be with regard to Somerset, but the figures for the whole country show that there have been 1,702 outbreaks in 31 weeks this year, as compared with 3,670 in the same period of the year before.
    MR. STRACHEY: My question was as to what occurred before the new Order came into force, and whether it had done anything to decrease the outbreaks.
    THE PRESIDENT OF THE BOARD OF AGRICULTURE: The Order did not come into force until recently. We know that, unfortunately, the disease is there, and we have tried to limit the danger of infection.
    MR. LAMBERT: Will the right honourable Gentleman state how much it has cost to carry out the swine fever regulation?
    THE PRESIDENT OF THE BOARD OF AGRICULTURE: I am sorry to say that I cannot state how much has been expended from the Imperial Exchequer, or how much from the local taxation account, but I may inform the honourable Gentleman that the cost has been about £50,000 a year.
    MR. DOOGAN: There are restrictions which press very hard upon the poor farmers. I think the right honourable Gentleman promised to make inquiries, and that whatever restrictions were enforced he would interpose as far as he possibly could to remove them. As to the importation of swine fever in England, I may say that practically Ireland is free from it. Under these circumstances I ask the right honourable Gentleman whether he took any steps with reference to removing these restrictions?
    THE PRESIDENT OF THE BOARD OF AGRICULTURE: I think the honourable Gentleman refers to regulations made by the counties for their own protection. With that power we have no right to interfere. I have never suggested that I would ask these counties to take off these restrictions. I never interfere with the county councils in the exercise of their own discretion.
    MR. WOODS: I am sorry to intervene in the Debate. I have a question down to-morrow on the subject. I know there is a very strong feeling against the Muzzling Order altogether. I share very largely in that feeling, and I think the right honourable Gentleman ought to explain to the House the rules by which there is this line of demarcation between the places where the Muzzling Order is enforced and where it is not enforced. I think we would be justified in dividing the House upon this Motion as a protest. I should be sorry to talk about expediency. The whole thing
    534
    is made a farce. Take the county of Essex. The Muzzling Order is enforced in great portion of that county, but if you go to Southend the Muzzling Order is not enforced. It is quite a common thing for gentlemen to go down from. London with dogs, and when they get to Southend they pull their muzzles off and let the dogs go free. It is very easy for a dog with rabies to go from one district into another. If muzzling is at all necessary it ought to be applied to the whole country. We know that dogs afflicted with the disease travel very far, and therefore there ought either to be a general application or it ought to be repealed altogether. I entertain strong feelings in the matter, and when we find as many dogs going about unmuzzled as the others it is clear that there ought to be a general solution of the whole difficulty. If the Member for Somerset divides the House I shall certainly vote with him. I hope the right honourable Gentleman will give us some information as to how the authorities act with regard to putting the Muzzling Order into force. Knowing the strong feeling in the country, I think there is no alternative but to divide the House—that is, unless we get a satisfactory answer.
    THE PRESIDENT OF THE BOARD OF AGRICULTURE: I suppose the honourable Gentleman was not in the House when I explained the principle with regard to muzzling.
    MR. WOODS: I was in the House when the right honourable Gentleman replied, and I think the answer the right honourable Gentleman gave was far from satisfactory.
    THE PRESIDENT OF THE BOARD OF AGRICULTURE: That, I think, is very likely. I am afraid it is the only explanation I have to give. I respectfully suggest that he should divide the House as the simplest way of settling the question.
    The House divided: —Ayes 130—(Division List No. 287.)

    AYES.

    Barlow, John Emmott

    Jones, W. (Carnarvonshire)

    Steadman, William Charles

    Bayley, Thos. (Derbysh.)

    Lambert, George

    Sullivan, Donal (Westmeath)

    Bolton, Thomas Dolling

    Lewis, John Herbert

    Wallace, Robert (Edinburgh)

    Broadhurst, Henry

    Macaleese, Daniel

    Wallace, Robert (Perth)

    Caldwell, James

    McEwan, William

    Walton, Joseph (Barnsley)

    Cameron, Robert (Durham)

    M'Ghee, Richard

    Wedderburn, Sir William

    Causton, Richard Knight

    Maddison, Fred.

    Williams, J. Carvell (Notts)

    Clark, Dr. G. B. (Caithness-sh.)

    Mendl, Sigismund Ferdinand

    Wilson, J. H. (Middlesbro')

    Clough, Walter Owen

    Morton, E. J. C. (Devonport)

    Woodhouse, Sir J T (Hudd'rst ld)

    Colville, John

    Moss, Samuel

    Woods, Samuel

    Dilke, Rt. Hon. Sir Charles

    Moulton, John Fletcher

    Yoxall, James Henry

    Dillon, Charles

    Palmer, Sir C. M. (Durham)

    Doogan, P. C.

    Pickersgill, Edward Hare

    TELLERS FOR THE AYES—

    Foster, Sir W. (Derby Co.)

    Pirie, Duncan V.

    Mr. Strachey and Mr. Courtenay Warner.

    Haldane, Richard Burdon

    Rickett, J. Compton

    Hayne, Rt. Hon. Chas. Seale

    Souttar, Robinson

    Joicey, Sir James

    Spicer, Albert

    NOES.

    Aird, John

    Finch, George H.

    Massey-Mainwaring, Hn. W. F.

    Arnold, Alfred

    Finlay, Sir Robert Bannatyne

    Mellor, Colonel (Lancashire)

    Bagot, Captain J. FitzRoy

    Firbank, Joseph Thomas

    Milton, Viscount

    Baillie, J. E. B. (Inverness)

    Fisher, William Hayes

    Monk, Charles James

    Banbury, Frederick George

    Fison, Frederick William

    Morton, A. H. A. (Deptford)

    Bartley, George C. T.

    Flannery, Fortescue

    Murray, Rt. Hn. A. G. (Bute)

    Barton, Dunbar Plunket

    Flower, Ernest

    Myers, William Henry

    Bathurst, Hon. Allen Benj.

    Folkestone, Viscount

    Newdigate, Francis Alex.

    Bemrose, Sir Henry Howe

    Fowler, Rt. Hon. Sir Henry

    Nicholson, William Graham

    Bethell, Commander

    Fry, Lewis

    Nicol, Donald Ninian

    Bhownaggree, Sir M. M.

    Garfit, William

    O'Connor, Arthur (Donegal)

    Bill, Charles

    Gedge, Sydney

    Penn, John

    Blundell, Colonel Henry

    Gibbs, Hon. V. (St. Albans)

    Pierpoint, Robert

    Bond, Edward

    Gilliat, John Saunders

    Pryce-Jones, Lieut.-Col. E.

    Boulnois, Edmund

    Goschen, George J. (Sussex)

    Purvis, Robert

    Brassey, Albert

    Gray, Ernest (West Ham)

    Ridley, Rt. Hon. Sir M. W.

    Brodrick, Rt. Hon. St. John

    Greene, H. D. (Shrewsbury)

    Roberts, John Bryn (Eifion)

    Bullard, Sir Harry

    Greene, W. R. (Cambs)

    Robertson, Herbert (Hackney)

    Butcher, John George

    Greville, Captain

    Rollit, Sir Albert Kaye

    Cavendish, R. F. (N. Lanes)

    Gull, Sir Cameron

    Russell, T. W. (Tyrone)

    Cavendish, V. C. W. (Derbysh.)

    Hamilton, Rt. Hon. Lord G.

    Ryder, John Herbert Dudley

    Cecil, Lord Hugh (Greenwich)

    Hanbury, Rt. Hon. Robt. W.

    Scoble, Sir Andrew Richard

    Chaloner, Capt. R. G. W.

    Helder, Augustus

    Scott, Sir S. (Marvlebone, W.)

    Chamberlain, Rt. Hn. J. (Birm.)

    Henderson. Alexander

    Sharpe, William Edward T.

    Channing, Francis Allston

    Holland, Hon. Lionel Raleigh

    Sidebotham, J. W. (Cheshire)

    Chaplin, Rt. Hon. Henry

    Hornby, William Henry

    Simeon, Sir Barrington

    Charrington, Spencer

    Howard Joseph

    Smith, Hon. W. F. D. (Strand);

    Chelsea, Viscount

    Hubbard, Hon. Evelyn

    Spencer, Ernest

    Cochrane, Hon. T. H A. E.

    Jenkins, Sir John Jones

    Stanley, Lord (Lanes)

    Coghill, Douglas Harry

    Johnston, William (Belfast)

    Sturt, Hon. Humphrey N.

    Cohen, Benjamin Louis

    Johnstone, John H. (Sussex)

    Thornton, Percy M.

    Collings, Rt. Hon. Jesse

    Kenyon, James

    Tritton, Charles Ernest

    Cook, Fred. Lucas (Lambeth)

    Kilbride, Denis

    Ure, Alexander

    Courtney, Rt. Hon. L. H.

    Lafone, Alfred

    Webster, R. G. (St. Pancras)

    Cozens-Hardy, Herbert H.

    Lawrence, Sir E. D. (Corn.)

    Welby, Lt.-Col. A. C. E.

    Curzon, Rt Hn. G. N. (Lanc, SW)

    Lawrence, W. F. (Liverp'l)

    Whiteley, George (Stockport)

    Curzon, Viscount (Bucks)

    Lawson, John Grant (Yorks)

    Williams, J. Powell (Birm.)

    Dalbiac, Colonel Philip Hugh

    Llewellyn, E. H. (Somerset)

    Wilson, H. J. (York. W.R.)

    Dickson-Poynder, Sir John P.

    Lockwood, Lieut.-Col. A. R.

    Wodehouse, Rt. Hn. E. R. (Bath)

    Douglas, Rt. Hon. A. Akers

    Loder, Gerald Walter Erskine

    Young, Comm. (Berks, E.)

    Drage, Geoffrey

    Long, Col. C. W. (Evesham)

    Drucker, A.

    Long, Rt. Hon. W. (Liverp'l)

    TELLERS FOR THE NOES—

    Duncombe, Hon. Hubert V.

    Lowles, John

    Sir William Walrond and Mr. Anstruther.

    Fergusson, Rt Hn. Sir J. (Manc.)

    Lyttelton, Hon. Alfred

    Field, Admiral (Eastbourne)

    McArthur. Charles (Liverp'l)

    MR. CHANNING: I wish to say a few words before the Vote is passed, on the subject of the chief recommendation of the Tuberculosis Commission, which affects the Board of Agriculture. And in doing so, I wish to draw the attention of the Committee to the fact that the Board of Agriculture is asking this year for £3,000 less for dealing with diseases of animals and grants in aid—that is to say, the Board of Agriculture is spending this year £3,000 less in reducing the diseases of animals by administrative and other action. The recommendaton of the Tubercolosis Commission is the initiation in this country of the policy which has proved so successful in other countries in reducing this terrible scourge of agriculturists. When the Committee realises that the estimate made by the Commission of the probable cost of the initiation of this policy only amounts to £5,625 per annum, I think they will see—and I have some ground in the matter of figures for arguing—that the reduction in the expenditure on animal diseases, which we see on the Board of Agriculture Vote, is an unreasonable reduction, and that, on the contrary, we ought to see the Board of Agriculture at the present rime welcoming the very important Report of this Commission, and endeavouring to develop, and as rapidly as possible, the resources of science in reducing this great scourge in this country. Now, Sir, I must complain, to some extent, of the postponement of Votes of this kind to the very last stages of the Session, when it would tax the patience of the House unfairly if we were to deal with such questions in detail. I think I am entitled to say this much, that the country ought to realise—this Committee ought to realise—what is the enormous extent of this disease. The figures which are disclosed by this Report are of the most startling and terrible nature. The Commission's Report quotes the figures of a large number of cattle slaughtered in Germany, at Leipzig, and it is seen from these that whereas the percentage of disease in cattle of upwards of one year is over 33 per cent., that is, more than, one in three, when you come to dairy cows the proportion is nearly one in two, affected by tuberculosis. This is an enormous question, and a question which we ought to
    538
    deal with as promptly as possible. My friend Mr. Speir, who was a member of the Commission, has applied the tuberculin test in some of the dairy counties in Scotland, and he found in Wigtownshire that 75 per cent, of the cows were affected; in Ayrshire and Lanarkshire 75, and even 90, per cent, of the cows were affected. In only one case has he found a single herd entirely free from disease. Now, Mr. Lowther, that briefly is one essential fact which we have to consider—the enormous prevalence of this disease; and, on the other hand, we have in this Report the absolute adoption by the Commission of the principle that this tuberculin test, which has now been in operation for some years in Denmark and Germany, is practically infallible in the detection of disease. Now, without attempting to trench unfairly on the time of the Committee by dealing with the question in detail, I say that we ought to take these three facts into consideration; first, that the Board of Agriculture is actually spending less this year on animal diseases than it has spent hitherto; secondly, that we have these startling figures of the enormous prevalence of disease, especially in dairy cows, of which it is most important to secure a healthy condition; and, thirdly, that this test is scientifically established to be an accurate test for diagnosing the presence of disease in these cows. Now, I will proceed to one of the central and essential recommendations of the Commission, to which they attached supreme importance. They took the trouble to go through the districts of Denmark, where the policy of what is called the elimination of tuberculosis is being successfully carried out, and has been for some years, and they found the results were eminently satisfactory. The policy, I may just say to the Committee, is by the application of the tuberculin test to carry out the isolation of those cattle which are affected, and the isolation of the calves. It is found that when these cows are isolated, and the calves fed on boiled milk, they turn out perfectly healthy, and the result is that the number of diseased cattle is gradually reduced in these herds. The honourable Member for Midlothian, who I am sorry is not in the House, has carried out some notable experiments in his own herd in Scotland,

    539
    which tend also to show the success of this Danish policy of gradually weeding out the number of diseased cows and cattle in a herd or dairy. I think that now only one in 300 calves have been found by experiment in Denmark to be affected congenitally with tuberculosis and the calves, being isolated and specially fed, grow up to be healthy cattle. In the same way, this policy of the isolation of the disease would enable us in a very few years to reduce this tremendous scourge to a minimum. Now, the Commission was presided over by the honourable Member for Wigtownshire, who is a special expert on these questions, and I have had many conferences with him on this subject, and he tells me that he has not the slightest doubt of the entire success of this Danish policy. The Commissioners in their Report say—
    "We consider that by far the most important part of the inquiry committed to us as to what administrative procedures are available and would be desirable for controlling the danger to man through the use as food of the meat and milk of tuberculous animals lies in the direction of eliminating the disease."
    Now, what is the suggestion of the Commission? It is that we should start here in England, and as quickly as possible, a laboratory where tuberculin could be scientifically and carefully prepared, and that we should adopt the policy of enabling those who wish voluntarily to use the test for their cattle to do so; that we should not force this test at once upon the agriculturists in this country, but that we should adopt the policy of offering the test gratuitously to those who wish to use it for eliminating disease from their herds and from their dairies, and that the State should pay the cost of the veterinary surgeons in carrying out these tests. It seems to me that that is a reasonable and wise administrative step to take. The Estimate by the Commission, after the careful inquiry they made, results in the calculation that a sum, as I have said, of £5,625 would be enough to start this policy in this country, and start this laboratory, and pay for the veterinary aid for one year, and for that small sum we should have this policy initiated in this way and enable a large
    540
    number of agriculturists to test their herds and begin adopting on their farms the sort of policy which the honourable Member for Midlothian and perhaps others are carrying out successfully. I would like, before I sit down, to draw attention to the fact that already in foreign countries many of our prize shorthorns have actually been excluded because the test had not been applied, and because cattle were not sold subject to the test. There is, therefore, a risk to this country of actual loss if this policy is not adopted. I would point out to the Government that if they adopt this policy they would be carrying out and helping to extend the policy which has already been adopted by several of the large dairies which supply London with milk. I do not think it is right in this House to advertise any of those companies which have thus guaranteed their milk, but it must be known to other honourable Members that large dairies are advertising that the tuberculin test has been applied to their cows, and I myself think that anyone who knows anything about the scientific aspects of this matter will take very good care in the future not to allow his children or his family to consume milk which does not come from dairies which apply this test. When Denmark is going ahead of us right and left in the organisation of the butter, trade, and in such matters as this, it does seem to me to be a short-sighted policy if we do not frankly and fully adopt the results of science and apply them boldly to reducing this great scourge in this country. I myself have attempted, in my own report on the Agriculture Commission, to make a calculation of the gain it would be to agriculturists in this country if this disease could be stamped out successfully, on lines adopted in Denmark, and whether it amounted to the million a year I put it at or not, it would certainly amount to an enormous additional sum in the pockets of our farmers, as well as being a great advantage to the health of the community. I would like, in conclusion, to express an earnest hope that the reply of my right honourable Friend, who, I am sure, feels very much as I do on the scientific aspects of the case, when he said that he was not willing to under-

    541
    take the policy at the present time, because the Central Chamber of Agriculture has not expressed any recommendation in favour of this step, was not his final reply. I hope he will take a broader view of the question. Anyone who reads the evidence before the Commission will know very well that the British agriculturist—I am not blaming him—has not had the opportunity, or the occasion, to make a scientific study of this question. The practical farmers who came before the Commission certainly showed that they had very little knowledge, hardly any knowledge whatever, of the scientific results obtained by this tuberculin test. In the broader interests of agriculture, and in the general interests of the community at large, we ought not to let this question rest because certain of the farmers have not at the present time acquired sufficient information to enable them to support this policy. I would ask the right honourable Gentleman and the Committee to remember that this is not a question of compulsory interference with the agriculturists of this country. It is a question of using, under the recommendation of this Commission, a small sum, in order to place easily and gratuitously at the services of agriculturists the system which is being found to work wonders in the gradual, I would say almost rapid, diminution of disease in Denmark and elsewhere, and which is being largely encouraged in many other countries. Our own country is lagging far behind, but I venture to hope that the right honourable Gentleman, in dealing with this question, will indicate that the very important recommendations of the Commission on this point will be carried out in the near future.
    Mr. BROADHURST: I should like to draw the right honourable Gentleman's attention to the fact that a week or two back he promised to send out a circular to the chambers of agriculture and the agricultural associations on the subject raised by my honourable Friend. Now, I fear that a great deal of literature that goes to those associations remains either on the table or under the table. May I suggest to him, if it would be possible, at the same time to send copies of this circular to public institutions, and especially to our large
    542
    public schools. Many parents in the past year have become exceedingly anxious about the health of their children, in reference to their drinking milk at these institutions, supplied, probably, from diseased cows. There is considerable agitation in some quarters with respect to that. If he would send a copy of that statement to all of these institutions, the masters and proprietors of all these schools, I think that would exercise great influence with owners of herds and induce them to take some steps to have the test applied. Again, there are others, I know—it has come under my notice this last week or two—who would be glad to have the assurance from Government of a test that would be infallible to apply to their herds. In many country districts it is very difficult for agriculturists to provide themselves with sufficient scientific skill to assure them that, the test would be efficacious. Now, if the suggestion of my honourable Friend behind me were adopted, and the Government would introduce that it would place within the reach of those who desire to avail themselves of it this security, and I think a great deal more would be done. I would especially urge the Government to send out these notices of the existence of this disease as widely as possible and not confine it to the agricultural associations only. If that is done I think great good will come of it. I do not think it is a large request to make to the President of the Board of Agriculture, and I hope in his reply ha will do his best to make the case known as widely as possible amongst those whom it concerns.
    THE PRESIDENT OF THE BOARD OF AGRICULTURE: Sir, the honourable Member is under a misapprehension. What I said a few weeks ago was that I would see whether it would be possible to issue some extracts giving the information in this Report which relates to the use of tuberculin with the risks arising from tuberculosed cattle. The greater part A this Report does not apply to me or my Department. At the same time I would point out that these Reports, published in very large numbers by the

    543
    Government Department, are not extravagant or expensive documents, and I am afraid, whether we send them out or whether we provide them, they are not very much more likely to be read in the future than in the past. With reference to the question raised by the honourable Member for East Northampton, I desire to say, on the part of the Government, that we attach the greatest possible importance to the very valuable Report presented by this Committee, and we are very much indebted to the honourable Member for Wigtonshire and his colleagues for the exhaustive and careful examination they made into this very interesting question, and also for their Reports. I confess I am a little disappointed in regard to that portion of their Report which deals with the use of tuberculin. What the honourable Gentleman the Member for Northampton suggests is that we should adopt the recommendation of that Commission, and should provide tuberculin and defray the cost of its application to cows by veterinary officers. As a matter of fact, it is perfectly true that the cost of this would be verysmall— £5,000 would probaby cover it. Sir, I am bound to say that as far as I have been able to examine this question, notwithstanding the fact that in Denmark a similar policy has succeeded, I very much question whether it would be of the slightest use for us to provide tuberculin for the cows of the tenant farmer and give 2s. 3d. a cow, if it is left in doubt what is to be done with his cows when they re-act. I do not think that policy would be accepted by any large section of the farmers if they realize that nobody is going to compensate them if the cows should be found to answer to the test and were condemned. That view, I may say, has been forcibly expressed both at the public meetings and meetings of agricultural bodies who have discussed the proposition. The question really is one far beyond the Agricultural Department or the agricultural community. It is asserted in this Report that there is a very large amount of tubercular disease amongst the dairy stock of this country, and that the dairy produce consequently becomes infectious and in a state in which it is not desirable that
    544
    it should be consumed. As to these latter points there is still considerable doubt. I confess that in the information I have been able to get hold of I cannot find that the risk to human life is very much, but if there be risk to human life it is a questnon that goes beyond the Agricultural Department and becomes a general and national question, and it may become necessary to pay large sums of money by way of compensation to the owners for the eradication of a disease which is a danger to human life. The recommendation of this Commission has only gone part of the way. All that they suggest is that we should provide the tuberculin and the services of a veterinary officer at a charge of half-a-crown. The honourable Member for Midlothian has done this work for himself in a public-spirited manner, and with the greatest possible success, and I hope he is now able to say he has entirely eradicated the disease out of his herd. What he has done can be done by others, and I hope the matter will become more generally known in consequence of this Debate and the publication of this Report, I am quite willing, Sir, to consider further the question of circulating information on the subject, but I cannot say I should feel justified in asking the Treasury for thousands a year to spend on work of this kind, so long as I have not the smallest indication of any desire on the part of the agricultural community to put in force these powers if they had them. But, Sir, this matter which the honourable Member for Northampton has raised, is one I have not lost sight of. I do not think it is desirable I should apply to the Treasury for money to provide tuberculin and to pay a veterinary surgeon, when we believe that unless you are prepared to go further, and having found that this disease existed, are prepared to provide compensation. Therefore, as I am at present advised, I am not prepared to assent to the Report.
    MR. CHANNING: Sir, I wish to express the profound regret I feel at the reply of the right honourable Gentleman. He seems to have taken the measure of his aspirations from the least well-informed and most ignorant classes among the British farmers.
    THE PRESIDENT OF THE BOARD OF AGRICULTURE: No, no! The British farmere is not ignorant. He is quite as able to understand what belongs to him as the honourable Gentleman is. But apart from the ignorance of the British farmer, what he says on this occasion is: if you are going to depreciate my property, you must compensate me.
    MR. CHAINING: The ignorance I spoke of was the entire want of information with the majority of farmers as to the success of this tuberculin test. I am astonished that the right honourable Gentleman has not referred to the most essential point of the scientific aspect of this question—that the tuberculin test reveals the very slightest disease present in the animal; so that, therefore, the agriculturist, by the use of this test, is at once placed in possession of most important information, and he can dispose of his cattle—send them to slaughter—whilethecarcase is still of value. And the other recommendation of the Commission, which I cannot deal with now, would also extend the intelligent methods of other countries to the treatment of meat, and instead of having destruction of whole carcases, as has been, and is at the present time, the ignorant and stupid method of management in this matter, we would have an intelligent method of dealing with this question, and only those portions of the carcasses in which the slightest possible portion of the disease is detected would be condemned, and the rest would remain as an asset of the farmer. But, Sir, this question of compensation in case of comdemnation is a question which, of course, will have to appear in any form of legislation. Legislation I cannot discuss at this moment, but I must express my profound regret that the Board of Agriculture, when a great scientific discovery is placed at the disposal of agriculturists all over the country, should, instead of boldly initiating this policy at the trifling cost suggested by the Commission, fall back upon the cry that the farmers of this country are not intelligent and enterprising enough to attempt, like the honourable Member for Midlothian, to rid their herds of these diseased cattle which entail such enormous loss.
    MR. BROADHURST: I do not know whether I rightly understood the right
    546
    honourable Gentleman as saying that he would go outside the agricultural associations in the circulation of this literature. He said that he would circulate it as widely as possible, but I do not know whether that included the direction in what I desired that he should circulate it. Now, it is not a question of the cost of the literature. The people do not know where to get it. That is the difficulty; it is not the question of cost. What I thought was that the health of the community, being as important as their material welfare, the honourable Gentleman might very well arrange to put up notices in the usual public places, like the Post Office does, or any other Department, with regard to matters connected with that department. I make no demand upon him. It is a matter of common interest, and if he would consider this it would be useful. May I, Mr. Lowther, add one other word? I do not know how the right honourable Gentleman proposes to circulate this information, but if he would get someone used to adapting things to the popular understanding I think that would be useful. What I mean is this—not to send the bare copy of certain paragraphs, but to put it in a form the meaning of which will be easily acquired by any person reading it.
    DR. CLARK: The Vote for this Department is more than double what it was seven years ago, and during that period the cost of the right honourable Gentleman's own office has increased by £10,000 a year. You began with a staff to which you paid £25,000 a year, and now it has increased to £35,000 out of a sum of £120,000, and I think in view of this heavy expenditure this is one of the questions upon which the right honourable Gentleman might do something to show that his Department was really worth their money. From his reply, I should say that they are evidently not worth the money. The only thing that he has said to-night is that the English farmers are so ignorant—ignorant in a sense of not understanding the danger or of what affects their own interest—and because of that ignorance the Department will do nothing. Now, what are the facts of the case? The facts show that you are having a terrible

    547
    increase of tuberculosis as far as animals are concerned. Take the case of Ayrshire—why the whole herd of Ayrshire cattle are practically affected. The disease is not limited even to the Ayrshires, for the shorthorns are also suffering very severely from it. In other countries experiments have been made upon this question, more particularly in Denmark, and the subject has been brought under the notice of the Commission; but with all these facts before him the Minister of Agriculture says that he is going to do nothing whatever with regard to it. He tells us that if you do anything the farmer will require compensation. Well, you should give him compensation if you destroy his herd, but nobody proposes to do that. All that is proposed is that you can give just as in the case of the Local Government Board. They give lymph, so you will give tuberculin as a remedy for tuberculosis. By the way, the Government are opening a laboratory where they will make glycerinated lymph in one department, and with the same materials they can make tuberculin.
    AN HONOURABLE MEMBER: But suppose they got mixed up?
    DR CLARK: Well, then it would be serious if they got mixed. Now, it is well known that a large number of cows get tuberculosis by being fed by the milk from their mothers, by means of which the calves begin to develop tuberculosis. Take the case of the average English farmer; he is beginning to realise that his cows are getting more difficult to manage, and they are beginning to cease to give milk largely. Now, if you can tell that farmer: "Here is a simple test. You can apply it, and you can tell by the temperature whether there is tuberculosis or not," it will simplify matters. If it is a bull, the best way would be to get rid of it; if it is a cow, and if the farmer breeds from that cow, then he will take care, as a result of that experiment and scientific knowledge, not to feed it from its mother's milk if he is a sensible man, But you give the farmer no means of doing this and of taking this precaution. The Commissioners recommend that you give them those facilities for using this tuberculin, and that, if necessary, you pay the salary
    548
    or fee of the veterinary surgeon, to do it in a proper fashion. If you do that you will be able to tell the farmer the source of the disease, and he will be able, for his own interest, to guard against it. If something is not done, the result will be that you will very soon have your shorthorn herds as bad as your Ayrshire herds. Then, again, take your dairy supplies, and the conditions under which a great many dairies are carried on, especially in the neighbourhood of large towns. Why, these conditions tend to develop tuberculosis. In the dairies near large towns they all desire to get a good flow of milk, irrespective of the cattle. All they try to do is to get a large amount of milk. They keep a high temperature, and feed the cows with brewers' grain, and the whole tendency of this is to develop a disease; and we are getting into a very sad condition of things indeed. I am afraid that you have just as bad results in shorthorns as in Ayrshires. I think something ought to be done by the Government in the way of endeavouring to carry out the Report of the Tuberculosis Commission. By about £5,000 spent in this way a saving would be effected of about £50,000, or perhaps £500,000, because, if we continue to go on like this, we shall lose our great and valuable herds on account of this disease. I do hope the Government will reconsider this matter and do something, because tuberculin can be easily applied to prevent this rapid development of tuberculosis, which is now going on.
    MR. URE: There has been a very important question raised by the Report, and that is with regard to compensation to the owners of cattle found to be suffering from tuberculosis. Now, the right honourable Gentleman is aware that there is a very sharp division of opinion upon that question. I think the honourable Gentleman who presided over the Commission was in a minority, but he held a very strong view that owners of cattle affected by tuberculosis ought to be compensated when it is discovered that their cattle were suffering from this very serious disease, and there seems to be no good reason why they should not be compensated on principle. As the Government allow compensation in the case of cattle affected with pleuro-pneumonia, and in the cases

    549
    of swine fever, I think there seems to be an almost, stronger case in favour of the owner of tuberculous cattle, because there is even less chance of the owner knowing that the cattle are affected by the disease than in the case of the other two diseases. The right honourable Gentleman said that in his view the dangers to cattle suffering from tuberculosis had been very much exaggerated. Well, that may be, and no doubt among scientists there is some difference of opinion but I think that the balance is in favour of the view that the disease is communicated by the milk to the community, and that a very serious danger arises, especially among children, by using the milk from cattle affected in that way. I remember, not many years ago, that the question was most thoroughly investigated before a tribunal in the great city of Glasgow, in connection with two heads of cattle, which were destroyed because they were found to be suffering from tuberculosis. The disease was not discernible in any way except by microscopical examination, and as the result of a week's trial the tribunal decided that the cattle were rightly destroyed. Now, the owners of these cattle had no means, I believe, of knowing that they were affected with this disease, and it was a great hardship to them to destroy cattle for which they had no doubt paid a full price; and not only this, but they were saddled with the expense of the inquiry. Now, I do not profess to have any special knowledge upon this subject, but I am assured by those who know that the elimination of the disease in Scotland, at all events, is an impossibility unless the owners are to be compensated; and I should like to ask the right honourable Gentleman whether the Government have ever seriously considered this question, and whether, in their judgment, a distinction is rightly drawn between cattle suffering from tuberculosis and pleuro-pneumonia and swine fever, for in the latter case compensation is given. I should also like to know whether the Government do not think it advisable, with a view to the extermination of the disease, that the principle of compensation should be recognised, and should be given legislative effect to, in connection with tuberculosis.
    MR. V. CAVENDISH: rise for the purpose of urging my right honourable Friend the President of the Board of Agriculture to strongly adhere to the statement he has made. I have had various opportunities of seeing this particular test in operation, and the opinion I have formed is that it is not at all certain. As an instance, I might say I heard of a cow which showed every sign of tuberculosis; the test was applied, and all the symptoms pointed to the fact that the animal had got the disorder. It was eventually discovered that the indisposition of the cow was caused by its having swallowed a lady's hat-pin. I think, before we encourage this test too much, we should wait and see the results of future tests. There is another reason why we should not be too anxious to adopt this test too freely. I have seen the test applied, and I think if it does not re-act, it gets into the system of the animal, and may do a great deal of harm. I do trust that my right honourable Friend will adhere to the position he has taken up in the matter, in spite of what comes from the opposite side of the House, and will wait before he adopts this test until we are a little more certain of it.
    THE PRESIDENT OF THE BOARD OF AGRICULTUREwas understood to say with regard to the suggestion of the honourable Gentleman opposite, that the Government ought to follow the precedent adopted with regard to pleuro-pneumonia, and pay compensation for animals slaughtered. Hitherto the Government had only paid compensation when the animals had been seized by the officers and had been slaughtered in both cases. The whole question would be carefully considered together with the points taken by honourable Members with regard to the future. He, therefore, ventured to hope that the Vote would be taken in order that the Committee might have an opportunity of expressing: its views upon other matters which had to be discussed.
    MR. LEWIS: I wish to respect the appeal of the right honourable Gentleman, and shall therefore make my remarks as brief as possible. But I would ask him whether the administration of

    551
    the Animals Diseases Act has been a success. I should like to ask the right honourable Gentleman to very briefly give us his views upon that matter. If the Act were properly carried out it would be a very valuable piece of legislation, but, from causes which I need not enter into, the Act has not been a success. There is just one thing I should like to allude to, and that I shall deal with very briefly indeed, and that is the question of higher agricultural education. The Vote for that purpose under this Department is extremely small when we compare it with the amount that is spent by other countries and what they are doing in that direction, and it does seem to me that British agriculture is unfairly handicapped in this respect. I am afraid that the complacency with which we assume our own superiority in almost everything does not conduce to progress in any branch of agriculture or commercial manufacture, and if we only keep our eyes open and see what other countries are doing—I am quite sure the right honourable Gentleman has done so—we shall find that we are very far behind in this respect. But I wish to know why the right honourable Gentleman does not press the Treasury for the means to carry out agricultural education in this country as it is carried out in others. Take the case of Finland, which is a very poor country. What happened there a few years ago? The country was practically on the verge of ruin in respect to agriculture, when the Finnish Diet took the matter in hand and established agricultural schools all over the country, and agricultural institutes which give advice to agriculturists upon all kinds of subjects connected with agricultural life, and do inestimable service, making analyses of soils and manure and so forth, for a nominal sum; and the Government themselves keep 80 stallions, in order to improve the breed of horses. What they have done has already led to an immense extension of private enterprise in this direction. I will not say anything more about Finland; but in Finland and Denmark and Sweden, all those who have paid attention to the agricultural statistics of those countries know that they outstripped the agriculture of this country. Agriculture
    552
    here had an annual grant to the extent of £2,000,000 in relief of the rates, but if some portion of that had been allocated to agricultural instruction, it would, I think, have been far more beneficial to the country. Without going any further into the matter, I will simply ask the right honourable Gentleman whether it would not be possible for us to do something more for agricultural instruction, especially in its higher branches?
    MR. BBIGG: Having had an opportunity of seeing what has gone on during last autumn, I might say one word upon this subject to the right honourable Gentleman. I wish to say I am simply ashamed of the Agricultural Department and all connected with it. In our own Dominion of Canada, we find the exports have extended from £2,000,000 to £6,000,000, and that they are continually increasing. We are allowing other countries to outstrip us and are very far behind in this matter of agricultural education. It is not only in education alone, but they take very good care to know what is going on in the markets of the world. Now, I understand that the right honourable Gentleman is going to do away with the intelligence department, the most important department he could have under his control; that is to be done away with in order that a paltry £800 is to be saved. Out of the large amount of money spent by this Department a very small sum is spent upon agricultural education, and a considerable portion of that is given to various farms, and we want to know what is done for the money which is spent. Without going into the matter further, I may say, for my own part, I think it would be much better to spend more on the intelligence department than in spending these large sums upon persons who have lost their cattle by means of this disease. I hope the right honourable Gentleman will give his attention to this matter, and so ensure that in those things that we can produce in this country we shall be able to compete with our competitors. Upon what has been done in the country I could dilate for a considerable time, but I will only sincerely urge upon the right honourable

    553
    Gentleman the necessity of further education. There are several colleges in existence, but they all act upon their own responsibility, and many of them lose upon experiments which we would naturally look to the Board of Agriculture to make, to obtain the information that is required. I think one of the most important things for the Minister of Agriculture to know is what other countries are doing and follow them up so that we could reap the benefit.
    THE PRESIDENT OF THE BOARD OF AGRICULTUREsaid he thought both honourable Gentlemen had lost sight of the fact that the money expended for agricultural education, by the Board of Agriculture did not constitute the total sum expended for that purpose, and it was extremely unfair to draw comparisons between this country and others and at the same time ignore the fact that large sums of money were put into the hands of the county councils to be used for this and kindred purposes. The Department believed it was far better to leave this matter to the local authorities and the people themselves to apply a system of agricultural education. Honourable Gentlemen were altogether in error in this matter when they said nothing was being done. There were both stationary schools and wandering schools, which went from village to village to teach the villagers, and it was quite a mistake to suppose that the Board of Agriculture was not ready or willing to deal with the question. With regard to the particular sum which they spent they would certainly spend more if it were given to them. They had provided a good deal of money in other ways, and if more were given to them they would see it was spent advantageously.
    MR. LEWIS: May I just explain that I specially referred to higher education in agriculture? I had quite in my mind the work which the county councils have in hand, but what I say is that in what may be regarded as the higher agricultural education we are far behind other countries. It is true that, quite by accident, a considerable sum was placed at the disposal of the county councils, but I do not know that the county coun-
    554
    cils have anybody to thank for that. But there is one element of uncertainty with regard to the county councils, because, while some are applying the money in this direction and working to the best of their ability, other county councils that I can name are applying it to other purposes altogether, and do not apply a single penny in this direction. What we ask is, and I am not saying for a moment that Wales is suffering from an unfair division in this matter, that upon general grounds more money should be spent upon higher agricultural education. I did not intend in any way to be unfair to the right honourable Gentleman.
    MR. BRIGG: I also disclaim any such intention, but, so far as the county councils go, I may say I have been interested in the agricultural question for the last ten years, and we have been trying to establish for the last four or five years, and we have very great difficulty now in getting farms. I am bound to say we never obtained any assistance from the Agricultural Department. Where the money has come from the county council it has been allotted by the county council itself for that purpose. I may also inform the right honourable Gentleman that before this matter was taken in hand it was the duty of the county council to make investigations for the agricultural councils in England, and it was done, and, although I have done it myself for some years, I must say I have not yet seen that the benevolent, and guiding hand of that Department has been of much assistance.
    DR. CLARK: May I say, with regard to the 15th and 16th paragraphs, that a great deal of so-called commercial tuberculin is not tuberculin at all? Will the Agricultural Department supply it themselves, and will they also supply the information to the Commission?
    MR. CALDWELL: I wish to call attention to the extravagance which takes place at the Board of Agriculture. We find in this Department, which is so recently established, the expenses have grown up enormously, and are far beyond the scale of allowances

    555
    granted to the different Departments. We find that they are higher than the allowances which are made for similar work in other Departments of the State. This Department, for instance, has a secretary who has a salary of £1,500 a year, and an assistant secretary at £1,000 a year, and now, under the present Vote we are to give another £1,000 a year for another assistant secretary. Then we find here another item which is peculiar to this Department in the shape of a legal adviser, at a salary of £800 to £1,000, and not only has the Department a legal adviser, but it also has an assistant legal adviser, at a salary of from £500 to £600 a year. To me, at all events, it does seem strange that the Board of Agriculture should employ a legal adviser against any occasion that may arise, when there are the great law officers of the Crown, one of whose duties it is to advise the Departments when necessity requires. It does seem strange that, when we have to pay one secretary £1,500, and two assistant secretaries £1,000 each, that they should not make themselves familiar with the law upon this subject. Another matter to which I must refer is that this Department, in the question of salaries, is going beyond the scale, which is allowed for that particular class of work. There is a new chief clerk at £700 a year. The salary for the position is £400, rising to £600 a year, but we find in this Department that the two present clerks are actually receiving £100 in excess of the scale—they are receiving £700 a. year each. Now, it is impossible—look at the time that this Department has been in existence—that the clerk would have obtained the maximum salary at the present moment, and yet he is receiving £700, which is £100 in excess of the maximum in the scale allowed for that particular class of civil service. And we find a corresponding excess in the cases of other clerks connected with the Department, one receiving £50, and another £40, above the maximum, which they could not possibly have reached in their term of service. What I object to is the fact that they have got a scale fixed by the Commissioners, but we find the Department does not content itself with the scale, but in a great many cases gives
    556
    salaries far in excess of the maximum laid down in the scale for the particular class of work. Look at the case of the veterinary inspector. There, again, you find a curious difference in the salaries of the veterinary inspectors of London and Liverpool, which are £400 to £500 a year, and the veterinary inspector of Glasgow, whose salary is £250. Glasgow is quite as important as Liverpool; of course I do not compare it with London, and it does seem strange to me that the veterinary inspector of Liverpool should receive £400, rising to £500, a year, and that £250 should be sufficient for the Glasgow veterinary inspector. Another point I wish to draw attention to is the doubling of appointments; for instance, there is a private secretary to the President; upon this Vote there is £300 for his salary, but we find, upon further investigation, that he is also an inspector drawing a large salary in respect of those duties. Now, obviously the man cannot do the two duties, and the practical result is that if the President is getting this man's time as secretary, he is not doing his duty as an inspector; and by giving him the position of an inspector you are giving him an extra £300 a year, which he does not earn. It is not right or fair, because the man cannot perform both duties. The same remark also applies to the private secretary to the secretary, whose salary is £100; he also occupies another position in the Department at a salary of £350. He cannot perform both, and so confines himself to his private secretarial duties, and receives £450 for doing it, though the salary is nominally only £100 a year. Then, again, among the superintendent inspectors you find one with a salary of £600 a year, who also draws his pay as an adjutant of volunteers.; obviously that gentleman cannot perform both duties. Another is a retired naval officer, at £350 a year. I cannot really myself see any connection between a retired naval officer performing work in connection with agriculture; but he is promoted to that particular post. In the same way we find a retired officer of the Royal Engineers, whose pension allowance is £450, and hose salary from the Department is £350. As a protest against these excessive salaries, and against the system of dual

    557
    offices, which exists in this Department, I move to reduce the Vote by £500
    The Committee divided:—Ayes 43; Noes 126.—(Division List No. 288.)
    MR. LLOYD-GEORGE: I desire to call the attention of the President of the Board of Agriculture to Item B—a sum of £7,000 for agricultural dairy education. I hope the right honourable Gentleman will be able to bring pressure to bear in the proper quarter to get a larger grant for this important object. Agriculture is our greatest industry, and I would suggest that the sum of £20,000 a year should be voted for technical education in that direction. It is an industry which is of material importance to our national prosperity and our national existence. A good deal of excellent work has been done by the university colleges of Great Britain and Ireland, but what can they do, with £7,000 divided between them? The sum is insignificant. I understand the President of the Board of Agriculture has said that the county councils have at their disposal a sum of money for this purpose, granted under the Local Taxation Bill; but, as far as Wales is concerned, that money has been voted admost entirely for secondary education, and nothing has been given for technical education. There is no industry in which we are so behindhand as agriculture, and in some counties the farmers are practically using the same methods as their forefathers did 200 years ago. In these circumstances, it was not surprising that a good deal was heard of agricultural distress. Farmers were themselves to some extent responsible; but so also was the state of technical education in agriculture, which was more backward than in any other country in the world, except Turkey and Spain.
    The PRESIDENT OF THE BOARD OF AGRICULTURE: I admit that £7,000 a year is a small sum, and if I am fortunate enough to get more money I shall do my best to increase the grant.
    On the Vote to complete the sum of £40,787 for the salaries and expenses of the Charity Comimission.
    MR. STRACHEY: Mr. Lowther, I am compelled to move the reduction of the salary of the Chief Commissioner by £100, because my honourable Friend who represents the Charity Commissioners in this House has no salary himself. I am sorry to have to
    560
    move to reduce the Vote, but the fact is, Sir, that the Charity Commission are not carrying out the spirit of the charity clauses of the Local Government Act of 1894. I contend that the Commissioners have shown a decided tendency to ignore and curtail the principle of that Act as it affects parochial charities. Parochial charities in this country are to a great extent under the control of the Commissioners. The Charity Commissioners have certainly not interpreted in a liberal spirit the Local Government Act of 1894. I am assured that it was the intention of my right honourable Friend the Member for Wolverhampton to give by that Act real representative local control. The Charity Commissioners have not, as far as might have been possible, carried out the provisions as to parochial control. They have instead tried, where they could, to introduce the ex officio element by nominating the rector an ex officio trustee. A charity has come under my personal notice in a parish where there was only one trustee. The mere fact of his ownership of a particular house gave him the sole right of being trustee of that charity. It is true that he had associated with him two churchwardens of the parish, and the scheme provides that the charity shall be distributed by the two churchwardens, but at the sole discretion and direction of the trustee, who is a layman; and this money has to be distributed by the scheme for no purpose than what is civil. When the owner of that particular house, and the sole trustee of that charity, requested the Charity Commissioners to be allowed to hand over the charity to the Parish Meeting, believing that they were the proper body to administer it, what happened was this: that while the parish were ready to receive, and the sole trustee was willing to hand it over, the Commissioners would not allow it, because they said that the charity was an ecclesiastical one, from the fact that churchwardens were the channel through which the charity was distributed, though applied to secular purposes. I think that shows the ecclesiastical tendency of the Charity Commissioners. That is a spirit of activity we must endeavour to restrict. I have another instance in a parish called Glutton, in Somerset, where three charities

    561
    were proposed to be amalgamated. The parish council moved in this matter; but, as I am informed, up to the present moment the scheme has not been put in force. It is nearly three years since the Charity Commissioners began to deal with the question; but how did they deal with it? Well, there again, they went against the views of the parish council. They consulted the wishes of the incumbent and one churchwarden instead. The parish council proposed that these three charities should have eight trustees, to be nominated by the parish council. The Charity Commissioners would not hear of it; and their proposition was that the parish council should only nominate two trustees, with the rector as an ex officio trustee. There again it became an ecclesiastical question. Two trustees were to be elected on the nomination of the churchwardens and one of them was the son of the rector of the parish. This is why I say the Charity Commissioners have not dealt with this matter in a liberal spirit. In fact, I maintain that they have done all they can to curtail the working of the charity clauses of the Local Government Act of 1894. I beg to move the reduction of the Vote by £100.
    MR. BRIGG: Before the Vote is taken I would like to say a word or two on the subject. It is true that the Charity Commissioners are bad enough for anything; I do not want to defend them. This burden has fallen on their shoulders through the county council regulations; and, really, it must be admitted that they have a large amount of work to do—in fact, they are overworked. At the same time, if that is the case, I think I may suggest a remedy, which I do not think need be much considered. That is, that a portion of the staff of the department of the Endowed Schools Commissioners—who are still in existence, and receiving something like £5,872 per annum—should be called into requisition to assist this overworked department. These Endowed Commissioners were appointed many years ago, in order to re-organise the endowed grammar schools of the country. Well, this they did efficiently and quickly, but the time has come when these endowed schools, having been re-organised, cannot go on re-organising for
    562
    ever; therefore I mention the matter in order to ascertain what has been done, and what is the effect of the Report of the Commissioners. It seems to me, judging from the work which was formerly done by the Endowed Schools Commissioners, and judging by the work as it is now done, that there ought to be a considerable reduction in the staff of that department, and which, I suggest, might be very feasible, if a portion of them were to be turned over to assist the other already much overworked department. They have in the past year reduced the cost by £770, and having five Commissioners instead of six, I venture to think that the amount of £5,772, which goes in salaries, law charges, and other incidental expenses of this department, is more than is warranted by the amount of work they do. Therefore. I would strongly urge the honourable Gentleman to look into the question, and devise some means, in the way of reducing the staff of the Endowed Schools Commissioners, as a remedy.
    THE PARLIAMENTARY CHARITY COMMISSIONER (Mr. J. GRANT LAWSON,): I may point out, in reply to the honourable Member for Keighley, that the Endowed Schools Commission was many years ago amalgamated with the Charity Commission, so that they are now working conjointly all over England and Wales. The inspection of schools, established under these schemes, is to see, as is only natural, that the schemes are working well and properly. As regards the speech of the honourable Member for Somerset, who has moved this reduction, I am rather surprised to hear the Charity Commissioners charged with being a reactionary body, and in favour of very old Tory institutions. The usual charge against the Charity Commissioners in this House is that they are a Radical and predatory body, bent upon plundering the Church. But the present charge is that they do not carry out the spirit of the 14th clause of the Parish Councils Act. Well, it is not our duty to carry out the spirit of any Act, but th.9 letter of it, and the judicial interpretation of the Acts of Parliament. Now, the honourable Member for Somerset, in criticising us, should remember that under the Parish Councils Act the charities

    563
    were not handed over to the parish councils, and surely the Charity Commissioners have nothing whatever to do with the framing of the Act.
    MR. STRACHEY: I did not say that. What I said was that I could not acquit my own leaders of that.
    MR. J. GRANT LAWSON: I took it to apply to the Leaders of this House. The honourable Member complained of the introduction of the principle of co-optation, but this is a very old matter on boards of trustees, for nearly everybody was co-opted in the old days, except the vicar and the churchwardens; but the whole tendency of the Commission is now steadily breaking down the co-optative principle wherever it can get a chance to do it. Now, the honourable Member has cited two oases out of all this mass of grievances against the Charity Commission. The first was a ease in which there was a sole trustee, and he wanted to hand over his trust to the parish council, and he was stopped from doing so by the Charity Commissioners. Well, now, the only subjection under which he could possibly hand over his

    AYES.

    Allen, W. (Newc.-und.-Lyme)

    Jones, W. (Carnarvonshire)

    Steadman, William Charles

    Barlow, John Emmott

    Kilbride, Denis

    Sullivan, Donal (Westmeath)

    Bayley, T. (Derbyshire)

    Lewis, John Herbert

    Wallace, R. (Edinburgh)

    Brigg, John

    Lloyd-George, David

    Walton, Joseph (Barnsley)

    Broadhurst, Henry

    Macaleese, Daniel

    Williams, John C. (Notts)

    Burns, John

    Maddison, Fred

    Wilson, H. J. (York, W.R.)

    Carvill, Patrick George K.

    Morton, E. J. C. (Devonport)

    Wilson, J. H. (Middlesbrough)

    Clark, Dr. G. B. (Caithness-sh.)

    Moss, Samuel

    Woodhouse, Sir JT (Hudd'rsf'ld)

    Clough, Walter Cwen

    Pickersgill, Edward Hare

    Yoxall, James Henry

    Colville, John

    Provand, Andrew Dryburgh

    Crilly, Daniel

    Rickett, J. Compton

    TELLEES FOR THE AYES—

    Doogan, P. C.

    Roberts, John Bryn (Eifion)

    Mr. Strachey and Mr. Caldwell.

    Joicey, Sir James

    Robson, William Snowdon

    NOES.

    Aird, John

    Brassey, Albert

    Collings, Rt. Hon. Jesse

    Atkinson, Rt. Hon. John

    Brodrick, Rt. Hon. St. John

    Cook, F. Lucas (Lambeth)

    Bagot, Capt. J. FitzRoy

    Butcher, John George

    Curzon Rt Hn. G. N. (Lancs SW)

    Balfour, Rt. Hn. A. J. (Manch'r)

    Cavendish, R. F. (N. Lancs)

    Curzon, Viscount (Bucks)

    Banbury, Frederick George

    Cecil, Lord H. (Greenwich)

    Dickson-Poynder, Sir John P.

    Bartley, George C. T.

    Chaloner, Captain R. G. W.

    Douglas, Rt. Hon. A. Akers

    Barton, Dunbar Plunket

    Chamberlain, J. A. (Worc'r)

    Drage, Geoffrey

    Bemrose, Sir Henry Howe

    Chaplin, Rt. Hon. Henry

    Drucker, A.

    Bethell, Commander

    Charrington, Spencer

    Duncombe, Hon. Herbert V.

    Bhownaggree, Sir M. M.

    Clare, Octavius Leigh

    Fellowes, Hon. Ailwyn E.

    Blundell, Colonel Henry

    Cochrane, Hon. T. H. A. E.

    Field, Admiral (Eastbourne)

    Bond, Edward

    Coghill, Douglas Harry

    Finch, George H.

    Boulnois, Edmund

    Cohen, Benjamin Louis

    Fisher, William Hayes

    trust is the first sub-section, but I do not quite understand the nature of the case——
    MR. STRACHEY: It was given before the Charity Commissioners.
    MR. J. GRANT LAWSON: If the honourable Member will put it down in the form of a Question, I will endeavour to answer it. My honourable Friend appears to be quarrelling with the law, for section 14 expressly excludes ecclesiastical charities from the purview of that section; we have no licence to suspend and disregard the law, even though we may have a conscientious objection to it. That is the main point which my honourable Friend raised, and I do not think there is anything else to which I need refer, for in a certain sense I have, I think, disposed of his objection, and I hope now that he will not press his Amendment.
    Question put.
    The Committee divided: —Ayes 35; Noes 120.—(Division List No. 289.)

    Fison, Frederick William

    Lawrence, Sir E. D. (Corn.)

    Rollit, Sir Albert Kaye

    Flower, Ernest

    Lawrence, W. F. (Liverpool)

    Russell, T. W, (Tyrone)

    Folkestone, Viscount

    Lawson, John Grant (Yorks)

    Ryder, John Herbert Dudley

    Fry, Lewis

    Leigh-Bennett, Henry Currie

    Scoble, Sir Andrew Richard

    Garfit, William

    Lockwood, Lt.-Col. A. R.

    Sharpe, William Edward T.

    Gibbs, Hon. V. (St. Albans)

    Loder, Gerald Walter E.

    Sidebotham, J. W. (Cheshire)

    Gilliat, John Saunders

    Long, Rt. Hn. W. (Liverp'l)

    Simeon, Sir Barrington

    Gorst, Rt. Hon. Sir John E.

    Lowe, Francis William

    Skewes-Cox, Thomas

    Goschen, Rt Hn. G. J. (St. G'rg's)

    Lowles, John

    Smith, Hn. W. F. D. (Strand)

    Goschen, C. J. (Sessex)

    Lyttelton, Hon. Alfred

    Spencer, Ernest

    Gray, Ernest (West Ham)

    Macartney, W. G. Ellison

    Spicer, Albert

    Greene, H. D. (Shrewsbury)

    Maclure, Sir John William

    Stanley, Lord (Lancs)

    Greene, W. Raymond (Cambs)

    McKillop, James

    Strauss, Arthur

    Gretton, John

    Massey-Mainwaring, Hn. W. F.

    Sturt, Hon. Humphry N.

    Greville, Captain

    Mildmay, Francis Bingham

    Thornton, Percy M.

    Gull, Sir Cameron

    Monk, Charles James

    Tomlinson, W. E. Murray

    Hamilton, Rt. Hon. Lord G.

    Morton, A. H. A. (Deptford)

    Tritton, Charles Ernest

    Hanbury, Rt. Hon. R. W.

    Murray, Rt. Hn. A. G. (Bute)

    Ure, Alexander

    Heath, James

    Murray, C. J. (Coventry)

    Webster, Sir R. E. (I. of W.)

    Helder, Augustus

    Myers, William Henry

    Welby, Lieut.-Col. A. C. E.

    Henderson, Alexander

    Newdigate, Francis A.

    Williams, J. Powell (Birm.)

    Hill, Sir Edward S. (Bristol)

    Nacol, Donald Ninian

    Wodehouse, Rt. Hn. E. R. (Bath)

    Hoare, E. B. (Hampstead)

    Pierpoint, Robert

    Young, Comm. (Berks, E.)

    Holland, Hon. Lionel R.

    Pollock, Harry Frederick

    Hornby, William Henry

    Pryce-Jones, Lt.-Col. E.

    TELLERS FOR THE NOES—

    Hughes, Colonel Edwin

    Purvis, Robert

    Sir William Walrond and Mr. Anstruther.

    Johnston, William (Belfast)

    Rasch, Major Frederic Carne

    Johnstone, J. H. (Sussex)

    Ridley, Rt. Hon. Sir M. W.

    Lafone, Alfred

    Robertson, H. (Hackney)

    Vote agreed to.
    On the Vote of £132,085, for the salaries and expenses of the Local Government Board, on the return of the Chairman after the usual interval,
    MR. PICKERSGILL: Mr. Lowther, what I desire to call attention to on this Vote is the action which has been taken by the Local Government Board, consequent upon the Report and recommendation of the Departmental Committee on Metropolitan schools. In the first place, I wish to congratulate the right honourable Gentleman the President of the Beard of Agriculture upon the decision he has taken to break up the huge aggregation of children in what are known as the Sutton Schools. As a result of that decision a very important question arises, and that question is, how are the children so displaced to be provided for? Now, on that issue the advice given by the right honourable Gentleman to the boards of guardians is not, to my mind, altogether reassuring. In a letter dated the 14th of March to the guardians of the unions who are inte-
    566
    rested in the Sutton Schools, the right honourable Gentleman says—
    "The Local Government Board are prepared to consider any scheme for the provision of buildings in blocks, to accommodate 60 in each block."
    Now, Sir, it seems to me——
    THE SECRETARY TO THE LOCAL GOVERNMENT BOARD (Mr. T. W. RUSSELL,): That was said after a deputation had waited upon me, and made the suggestion.
    MR. PICKERSGILL: That may be so, and I thank the right honourable Gentleman for giving me that information, I was not aware of it. But still, I think such a suggestion, from whatever quarter it emanates, is open, at all events, to some criticism. In the first place, it seems to me to be inconsistent with the policy involved in the dissolution of the Sutton Schools, because, if I am correctly informed, a portion of those schools were erected upon the block system; and, in the second place, it seems to commit the ratepayers forthwith to a large expenditure upon buildings; and it will result in the placing of the children turned out of the Sutton Schools in a class of schools which will still be barrack schools, though of an improved pattern. It may be said that this is only carrying

    567
    out the recommendation made by Dr. Stevenson as a result of his inquiry. I should like to point out that the reference to Dr. Stevenson was of a very limited kind.
    MR. DUNCOMBEcalled attention to the fact that there were not 40 Members present.
    The CHAIRMAN: Under the Orders of the House it is not possible to take any action which would prevent Supply being finished by 10 o'clock. I therefore cannot take any action on the honourable Gentleman's intervention.
    MR. PICKERSGILL: Dr. Stevenson simply pointed out what is the best form of school, assuming that children are to be massed together in schools. There is another consideration which arises, I think, very properly out of Dr. Stevenson's Report, and that is the financial arrangement. I should be the last person to say, in a matter of this kind that financial considerations should be paramount. But at the same time, I should strongly object to pay the highest price for the second-best method. We know that at the present moment the most expensive mode of providing for children is in these barrack schools. The point I wish to make is this: that if Dr. Stevenson's recommendations are carried out, the expense per child in these schools, which is already very high as compared with other modes of providing for the children, will be very materially increased. Therefore, Sir, I think the question is whether there are not other and better modes of providing for children who will be displaced from the Sutton Schools. There are various modes which are open to the guardians. For my own part, I do not desire to pin my faith to any particular method. I think that the method should be chosen in each case which is the most suitable for the child concerned. In many fields we are recognising more and more that individual treatment of men or women, or, as in this case, of children, solves many difficulties. We have recognised that to a large extent with regard to our prisons. The Bill of this present Session recognised that principle, and I hope it will be possible to carry it into effect. The system of
    568
    individual treatment, I think, may very properly be adopted with regard to children. Here, then, where you have many hundreds of children displaced from a certain school, there is a great opportunity for the guardians concerned very carefully to consider the case of each individual child, and to provide for that child in the future in a manner which is best adapted to the needs of each particular case. The Whitechapel Guardians did what I suggest. I refer to the occasion when the Forest Gate Schools district was dissolved. At the time of the dissolution the Whitechapel Guardians had 76 children being educated in these schools. The dissolution threw these children into the hands of the guardians, and under the direction, and with the help of the estimable gentleman who is the clerk of that union, every individual case was gone into, with this result—which I hope the guardians concerned in the South Metropolitan district will take to heart—that out of the 76 children they found that there were 35 who could be dealt with in various ways, and by existing agencies, leaving only 41 to be provided for directly by the guardians. I think that is a most important mode, which every metropolitan board might wisely adopt. What are the other methods to which I have alluded, which are in competition with the barrack schools? There is, first, the boarding-out system. That system is, of course, by law, limited in its operation. It approaches most nearly to home life. I am one of those who think that it must be a very bad home indeed which is not better than even the best institution. When you have a system like this boarding-out system, which most nearly approaches to that natural mode of bringing up a child in the home, I hope the boards of guardians will very carefully consider it. I am aware there are objections to the boarding-out system, that it requires to be very carefully watched, or it might possibly be grossly abused. This consideration led the Sheffield guardians to adopt a method between the boarding-out system on the one hand, and cottage homes on the other. I refer to what is well known to those who are interested in the subject as what is called the Sheffield Scattered Cottage Homes. I am afraid that the

    569
    system has not received much encouragement from the Local Government Board. I fear that difficulties were raised in the way of the Sheffield Guardians which ought not to have been raised. I do not know that the Local Government Board regards that system as favourably as it deserves at the present moment. For my own part, though there have been one or two small matters to which objection may probably be taken, I think they are not very serious, and that the Sheffield system has been a great success, which other boards of guardians might wisely adopt. Then there is a third system, which I must say does not receive from many boards of guardians the attention it deserves. I do not say the guardians are ignorant, but, outside the narrow limits of the guardians, gentlemen who are interested in these questions are not, I think, fully aware that there are a very large number of small homes which are certified by the Local Government Board, and to which it is open to the boards of guardians to send any child. That is under 25 and 26 Victoria, chapter 43; and there art no fewer than 223 of these small homes which are certified by the Local Government Board. The great advantage of these small certified homes has been proved. There are a large number of them, and they are situated in all parts of the country, so that it is possible for the boards of guardians to select one of these homes in a locality where the air is adapted to the health of the particular child. There is also an enormous range from which they may select the home which on every ground may suit the idiosyncrasy of the children. I should like to see a larger use made of these small certified homes. Then the last method which can compete with the large barrack schools is emigration. Emigration does not permit of being carried out on a large scale. I think it ought to be carried out on a larger scale than it is at present. In 1894 only 299 children emigrated. I think that that unwillingness on the part of boards of guardians to emigrate children does them credit. They were not satisfied with the arrangements made for the supervision of the children in Canada. But, Sir, only last year an Act was passed
    570
    by the Legislature of the Province of Ontario which to a large extent removed the strong objection which previously existed. It provides a number of safeguards which might meet the objections which guardians have felt in sending children beyond the sea. My object in mentioning these various modes of providing for children is the hope that the Local Government Board, in advising the guardians, will very carefully consider individual cases of children, and not press them all in a mass into the barrack schools. There is another matter in connection with this upon which I desire to ask a question—that is the subject of epileptic children. As the Committee are no doubt aware, children suffering from epilepsy have, under the new Order of the Local Government Board, been handed over to the special care of the Committee of the Metropolitan Asylums Board. I find from the answer given by the right honourable Gentleman in this House on the 19th July, that the Committee of the Metropolitan Asylums Board is in negotiation with the managers to secure Sutton Schools, and it seems to me, Mr. Lowther, rather disquieting information, because we are breaking up the Sutton Schools on the ground that the aggregation of children in the mass is undesirable. But are we to have instead of the children who are in the Sutton Schools an equal number of epileptic children placed in these schools? I should like some information as to what the scheme is. It is obvious that if you are going to use fully the present building, that would be an aggregation of epileptic children, which would be even more objectionable than the aggregation which at present exists. I think possibly there may be some explanation which would meet the objection. I now raise this question in order that the explanation may be made. Then there is a further question to which I desire to call attention. The Departmental Committee to which I have referred pointed out that for 19 or 20 years boards of guardians all over the country have been grossly breaking the law. I mean, in this respect, that they have been working as half-timers children of as low an age as eight. That was a condition of things upon which the Committee, as I think very rightly, made some strong

    571
    observations. It is a really monstrous thing, seeing that we prosecute employers and parents for sending their children to work before the statutory age, that public bodies throughout the country are breaking the law in this open and wholesale way. What I want to ask is whether, since the Report of the Departmental Committee, there has been a beneficial change in this respect, and whether inspectors of the Local Government Board are very closely watching the matter. Those are all the points I desire to call attention to. I formally move the reduction of the Vote by £100.
    MR. FLOWER: I am quite sure the Committee will have listened with great interest to the speech which has been made by my honourable and learned Friend the Member for South Bethnal Green. I, for one, as interested in the question of the reform of poor law administration, must venture to differ from the conclusions at which he arrives. I most certainly shall not follow my honourable and learned Friend into the Division Lobby when the Division is called on this Vote, because my honourable and learned Friend proposes to reduce the salary of the right honourable Gentleman the President of the Local Government Board. If I have to compare the records in the work of poor law reform this Session, as between my honourable and learned Friend and the right honourable Gentleman the President of the Local Government Board, my chief regret is this: that, owing to the niggardliness of our Constitution, under which private Members are not paid, I am unable to move a reduction in the salary of my honourable and learned Friend opposite. But I will present to him, as very pertinent to poor law reform, this advice: that, while he continues to dwell in a crystal palace he will do well to avoid a reckless and promiscuous use of the catapult. I rise to take part in this discussion in the interest of poor law reform, an interest which has kept me and my honourable and learned Friend opposite up for many nights this Session. There are one or two points I would mention, which I hope may produce a favourable answer from the President of the Local Government
    572
    Board. In the first place, I would ask the right honourable Gentleman to take into consideration the great and growing need of increasing the powers of boards of guardians to deal with children of dissolute parents in this country. From time to time this matter has been mooted in this House, and from time to time Bills have been introduced in accordance with the Reports of the Departmental Committees. I venture to suggest to the right honourable Gentleman, who I know is anxious to meet, the views of poor law reformers, whether the time has not come for the Government to take up this great question, and by a Measure of their own deal with the large and growing number of children in this country who are at this moment unable to be dealt with by the ordinary operations of the poor law, to enlarge the powers of boards of guardians, and bring those children within the influence of civilisation and Christianity. In doing so, I venture to think that the Local Government Board would touch upon a question of even equal importance with the question of vagrancy. I saw a Return made some time ago, in which it was stated that some 13,000 children slept in casual wards on a particular day. This question needs to be dealt with. It needs to be dealt with, not by some private Member; it is a matter that demands the consideration of a great Government Department. I sincerely hope that the President of the Local Government Board will not be unmindful of the matter. Then there is an important question—no less an important question to poor law reformers than the settlement of paupers. Sir, I think the time is quite ripe for taking some fresh departure in our treatment of that question. I think that we ought to do what we can to put an end to the litigation between the different boards of guardians of the country on this question. I think we might fairly do so if we entrusted to the Local Government Board some power of arbitration upon the conflicting claims and conflicting arguments of boards of guardians upon this question. My honourable and learned Friend the Member for South Bethnal Green has touched upon the sequence of events which has followed the dissolution of the Sutton Schools. I do not think he remembers the tribute

    573
    of a Blue Book to the dissolution of those schools; but the dissolution of the Sutton Schools was a matter which earned the approval of all friends of poor law reform. I venture to think that the whole Committee cordially approve of the dissolution of the Sutton Schools. Several very interesting questions arose. There was the question of the future distribution of the children of those schools. I should like to say that I feel very strongly that those who are now at the head of the Local Government Board are not the creators of the system. It would perhaps be comparatively easy to provide a complete system of poor law reform in this country. But it is by no means an easy task to draft reforms upon existing institutions, and to develop old customs in accordance with modern ideas. The dissolution of the Sutton Schools offered a great variety of useful and valuable experiments to the Local Government Board for testing various methods of dealing with poor law children. I hold, myself, very strongly by the principle of boarding out, but I do not claim it to be infallible, nor do those whose views I represent here make that claim. The first point that will occur to us in dealing with the question is the importance of the children losing all trace of the pauper taint, and so entering into their work in the community with equal privileges and equal advantages to other children. In that connection, it is well to remember the important question of emigration, especially with regard to boys. With regard to boys, it must also be remembered that technical education can only be obtained for them in trade schools, and we ask the Local Government Board to consider the importance of placing these children in localities where they may be enabled to obtain the advantages of technical education. In sending a letter to the Camberwell guardians regarding cottage homes for elder girls, the President of the Local Government Board was giving his sanction to a very interesting experiment in one direction. But I am not anxious that the right honourable Gentleman should give his sanction at this moment to an experiment in any one particular direction. I think the right honourable Gentleman ought to aim at encouraging reforms in all directions. All
    574
    our experience goes to show that the training of poor law children in the artificial life of a poor law colony is not only expensive, but is also ineffective. I venture to offer the following remedies to the President of the Local Government Board. In the first place, boarding out under careful and frequent individual supervision; in the second place, the making use of the small industrial schools, of which there are 222 under the Local Government Board; in the third place, the encouragement of emigration, which has undergone a regrettable diminution. With regard to feeble-minded, ophthalmic, and other children, I think a very large measure of credit and gratitude is due to the present President of the Local Government Board for the action he has taken in this matter, which has placed these unfortunate children under the control of the Metropolitan Asylums Board. That is a great step in reform, and when the right honourable Member for Bethnal Green moved the reduction of this Vote, I hope he forgot the immense improvement in the condition of poor law children which has been effected by that change. For the other children, one can only suggest the adoption and development of the Sheffield plan of scattered homes. We want these children to lose the taint of pauperism, and to taste fully and freely of the individual life of citizenship.
    MR. SIDEBOTHAM: I desire to ask the right honourable Gentleman the President of the Local Government Board if he can make any statement regarding the enhancement of the period allowed for the repayment of loans for poor law buildings. I do not ask the right honourable Gentleman for any promise, but I should like him to say that his mind is not entirely closed on the question, and that he will give it his attention during the Recess?
    MR. BRAMSTON BEACH: I desire to make the same appeal.
    THE PRESIDENT OF THE LOCAL GOVERNMENT BOARD: With regard to the last question, I am perfectly well aware that there is in many quarters a feeling that the period for the repayment of loans for poor law buildings and

    575
    other purposes should be enhanced. But honourable Members must remember the position of the Local Government Board in this matter. The Local Government Board is, to all intents and purposes, trustees for posterity. The future ratepayers have no one to protect them except the Local Government Board, and, while I am prepared to admit that there is no special virtue in terms of 29, 30, 31, or 32 years, 30 years is the period that has been decided on with regard to the repayment of these building loans. I cannot pledge myself to any specific promise in the matter, but I will say that before next Session I will make it my business to examine most carefully the reason why the present period was arrived at, and to consider whether any alteration can be made with justice to the future as well as the present. With regard to the question of giving boards of guardians greater and more enhanced powers over neglected children, I can only say that I heartily supported and entirely sympathised with the Bill which had been introduced by my honourable Friend during the present Session. There are a variety of methods by which the question of the poor law metropolitan schools may be dealt with. The old method, known as the barrack-school system, has been universally condemned, and the Local Government Board has broken up the system in one of the great London metropolitan districts. The Bill would have conferred great benefits upon the class in whose interests it was initiated, and would have promoted the cause of poor law reform. I deeply regret that owing to the persistent and unnecessary opposition of the honourable Member for Bethnal Green the passage of that Bill was inevitably put off. I protest against the statement of the honourable Member for Bethnal Green, that what we have done is, after all, nothing but the old barrack system. It is nothing of the kind. The honourable Member has asked us to adopt proposals by which the children should be individualised as far as possible. I believe in that system, but there are very narrow limits to its possibility, as the honourable Member will find out if he tries to deal with it. What are the alternatives to the old system? The alternative of boarding out has been
    576
    suggested. I approve of and warmly sympathise with boarding out, subject to one condition, which is of surpassing importance—namely, that the inspection of the children boarded out shall be adequate and effective. I cannot conceive a position of greater misery and hardship than that of some poor, unfortunate little child boarded out to someone who takes care of it, not for love of the child, but simply for the purpose of making a gain and profit out of it. There must be adequate and efficient inspection, and that is one of the greatest difficulties in the world to overcome. So far as it is possible to promote that adequate inspection, no efforts on the part of the Local Government Board are wanting, and wherever it is possible to board out on those conditions the Board gives its assistance. Another system suggested is that of scattered homes on the Sheffield plan. Where that system is adequately carried out the results undoubtedly are good, but unfortunately the Board have received reports of instances of bad management which make us careful in regard to other proposals in that direction. The Camberwell guardians have approached me on the subject, and after a long conference I have agreed to accept their proposals on two conditions: first, that they satisfy me that they can get proper houses for the scattered homes; and, second, that they can be quite sure of having an adequate system of inspection. At present they have only got two homes, and are arranging for another three out of the 35 necessary to accommodate 350 children. That will show the honourable Member that this system is not so easily adopted as he considers. I have been very anxious to do anything and everything that is possible and right to meet the views of the great number of people who are very earnestly considering this question. But there are difficulties with which many of them are not acquainted, and they must give us credit that, as far as we have become acquainted with the difficulties—which are, perhaps, not altogether apparent to them—we have given them our most careful consideration with regard to the block system. There is an admirable example of it at Banstead. There were demands for the services of the girls from all parts of the

    577
    country. During a visit which I paid to the place I was told that there were at that moment 1,000 applications for children to place in good situations. I have, therefore, arrived at the conclusion that the block system, provided there are not too many children in the same area, deserves our consideration. But I have no absolute power to compel boards of guardians to adopt any particular system that seems best to the Local Government Board. I can only point out to a board the system which I think

    AYES.

    Aird, John

    Field, Admiral (Eastbourne)

    Lowe, Francis William

    Arnold, Alfred

    Finch, George H.

    Lowles, John

    Ascroft, Robert

    Finlay, Sir Robert Bannatyne

    Lyttelton, Hon. Alfred

    Asquith, Rt. Hon. H. H.

    Fisher, William Hayes

    Macartney, W. G. Ellison

    Atkinson, Rt. Hon. John

    Fison, Frederick William

    Maclure, Sir John William

    Bagot, Captain J. FitzRoy

    Flower, Ernest

    McKillop, James

    Balfour, Rt. Hn. A. J. (Manch'r)

    Folkestone, Viscount

    Massey-Mainwaring, Hn. W. F.

    Banbury, Frederick George

    Forwood, Rt. Hon. Sir A. B.

    Mildmay, Francis Bingham

    Bartley, George C. T.

    Foster, Sir W. (Derby Co.)

    Monk, Charles James

    Barton, Dunbar Plunkett

    Fowler, Rt. Hon. Sir Henry

    Morton, A. H. A. (Deptford)

    Bathurst, Hon. Allen B.

    Fry, Lewis

    Murray, Rt. Hn. A. G. (Bute)

    Bemrose, Sir Henry Howe

    Garfit, William

    Murray, C. J. (Coventry)

    Bethell, Commander

    Gedge, Sydney

    Myers, William Henry

    Bhownaggree, Sir M. M.

    Gibbs, Hon. V. (St. Albans)

    Newdigate, Francis Alex.

    Bill, Charles

    Gilliat, John Saunders

    Nicol, Donald Ninian

    Blundell, Colonel Henry

    Gorst, Rt. Hon. Sir John E.

    Phillpotts, Captain Arthur

    Bond, Edward

    GoscheN, Rt Hn. G. J. (St. G'rg's)

    Pierpoint, Robert

    Boulnois, Edmund

    Goschen, G. J. (Sussex)

    Pollock, Harry Frederick

    Brassey, Albert

    Gray, Ernest (West Ham)

    Pryce-Jones, Lt.-Col. Edward

    Brodrick, Rt. Hon. St. John

    Greene, H. D. (Shrewsbury)

    Purvis, Robert

    Butcher, John George

    Greene, W. Raymond (Cambs)

    Rasch, Major Frederic Carne

    Causton, Richard Knight

    Gretton, John

    Ridley, Rt. Hon. Sir M. W.

    Cavendish, R. F. (N. Lancs)

    Greville, Captain

    Robertson, H. (Hackney)

    Cavendish, V. C. W. (Derbysh.)

    Gull, Sir Cameron

    Russell, T. W. (Tyrone)

    Cecil, Evelyn (Hertford, E.)

    Hamilton, Rt. Hon. Lord G.

    Ryder, John Herbert Didley

    Cecil, Lord H. (Greenwich)

    Hanbury, Rt. Hon. R. W.

    Scoble, Sir Andrew Richard

    Chaloner, Captain R. G. W.

    Hazell, Walter

    Scott, Sir S. (Marylebone, W.)

    Chamberlain, Rt. Hn. J. (Birm.)

    Heath, James

    Sharpe, William Edward T.

    Chamberlain, J. A. (Worc'r)

    Helder, Augustus

    Sidebotham, J. W. (Cheshire)

    Chaplin, Rt. Hon. Henry

    Henderson, Alexander

    Simeon, Sir Barrington

    Charrington, Spencer

    Hill, Sir Edward S. (Bristol)

    Sinclair, Capt. J. (Forfarsh.)

    Chelsea, Viscount

    Hoare, E. B. (Hampstead)

    Sinclair, Louis (Romford)

    Clare, Octavius Leigh

    Holland, Hon. Lionel R.

    Skewes-Cox, Thomas

    Clough, Walter Owen

    Hornby, William Henry

    Smith, Hn. W. F. D. (Strand)

    Cochrane, Hon. T. H. A. E.

    Howard, Joseph

    Spencer, Ernest

    Coghill, Douglas Harry

    Hozier, Hon. James H. C.

    Stanley, Lord (Lanes)

    Cohen, Benjamin Louis

    Hubbard, Hon. Evelyn

    Strauss, Arthur

    Collings, Rt. Hon. Jesse

    Hughes, Colonel Edwin

    Sturt, Hon Humphry N.

    Colomb, Sir John C. R.

    Jenkins, Sir John Jones

    Thornton, Percy M.

    Cook, F. Lucas (Lambeth)

    Johnston, W. (Belfast)

    Tomlinson, W. E. Murray

    Courtney, Rt. Hon. L. H.

    Johnstone, J. H. (Sussex)

    Tritton, Charles Ernest

    Cozens-Hardy, Herbert H.

    Kenyon, James

    Webster, R. G. (St. Pancras)

    Cripps, Charles Alfred

    Lafone, Alfred

    Webster, Sir R. E. (I. of W.)

    Curzon, Rt Hn. G. N. (LancsSW)

    Lawrence, Sir E. (Corn.)

    Welby, Lieut.-Col. A. C. E.

    Curzon, Viscount (Bucks)

    Lawrence, W. F. (Liverpool)

    Whiteley, G. (Stockport)

    Dickson-Poynder, Sir John P.

    Lawson, John Grant (Yorks)

    Williams, J. Powell (Birm.)

    Dilke, Rt. Hon. Sir Charles

    Leigh-Bennett, Henry Currie

    Wodehouse, Rt. Hn. E. R. (Bath)

    Douglas, Rt. Hon. A. Akers

    Llewellyn, E. H. (Somerset)

    Young, Comm. (Berks, E.)

    Drage, Geoffrey

    Lockwood, Lt.-Col. A. R.

    Drucker, A.

    Loder, Gerald Walter E.

    Duncombe, Hon. Hubert V.

    Long, Col. C. W. (Evesham)

    TELLERS FOR THE AYES—

    Edwards, Gen. Sir J. B.

    Long, Rt. Hn. W. (Liverp'l)

    Sir William Walrond and Mr. Anstruther.

    Fellowes, Hon. Ailwyn E.

    Lorne, Marquess of

    would be most advantageous. I am surprised that no honourable Member who has taken part in the Debate has alluded to the admirable system for the training of children which prevails on the Ex-mouth training ship. That is a system which I should like to encourage by every means in my power.
    MR. PICKERSGILL: I beg leave to withdraw my Motion.
    The Committee divided:—Ayes 155; Noes 48.—(Division List No. 290.)

    NOES.

    Allen, W. (Newc.-und.-Lyme)

    Lewis John Herbert

    Sullivan, Donal (Westmeath)

    Barlow, John Emmott

    Lloyd-George, David

    Ure, Alexander

    Birrell, Augustine

    Lough, Thomas

    Wallace, Robert (Edinburgh)

    Bolton, Thomas Dolling

    Macaleese, Daniel

    Wallace, Robert (Perth)

    Brigg, John

    Maddison, Fred

    Walton, Joseph (Barnsley)

    Broadhurst, Henry

    Mendl, Sigismund Ferdinand

    Wedderburn, Sir William

    Caldwell, James

    Molloy, Bernard Charles

    Williams, John C. (Notts)

    Cameron, Robert (Durham)

    Morton, E. J. C. (Devonport)

    Wilson, H. J. (York, W. R.)

    Cawley, Frederick

    Moss, Samuel

    Wilson, J. H. (Middlesbrough)

    Clark, Dr. G. B. (Caithness-sh.)

    Palmer, Sir C. M. (Durham)

    Woodhouse, Sir J T (Hudd'rsf'ld)

    Colville, John

    Pickersgill, Edward Hare

    Woods, Samuel

    Dalziel, James Henry

    Pirie, Duncan V.

    Yoxall, James Henry

    Dillon, John

    Provand, Andrew Dryburgh

    Doogan, P. C.

    Rickett, J. Compton

    TELLERS FOR THE NOES—

    Griffith, Ellis J.

    Roberts, J. Bryn (Eifion)

    Mr. Channing and Mr. Steadman.

    Joicey, Sir James

    Robson, William Snowdon

    Jones, Wm. (Carnarvonshire)

    Spicer, Albert

    Knox, Edmund Francis Vesey

    Strachey, Edward

    It. being Ten o'clock, the Chairman of Ways and Means, in conformity with the Standing Order, proceeded to put the remaining Votes, without discussion.
    Motion made, and Question put—
    "That a sum, not exceeding £114,773, be

    AYES.

    Aird, John

    Colomb, Sir John Charles R.

    Haldane, Richard Burdon

    Arnold, Alfred

    Cook, Fred. Lucas (Lambeth)

    Hamilton, Rt. Hon. Lord G.

    Ascroft, Robert

    Courtney, Rt. Hon. L. H.

    Hanbury, Rt. Hon. R. W.

    Asquith, Rt. Hon. H. H.

    Cripps, Charles Alfred

    Hazell, Walter

    Atkinson, Rt. Hon. John

    Curzon, Rt Hn. G. N. (Lanc, S W)

    Heath, James

    Bagot, Captain J. FitzRoy

    Curzon, Viscount (Bucks)

    Helder, Augustus

    Balfour, Rt. Hn. A. J. (Manch'r)

    Dickson-Poynder, Sir John P.

    Henderson, Alexander

    Banbury, Frederick George

    Dilke, Rt. Hon. Sir Charles

    Hill, Sir E. Stock (Bristol)

    Bartley, George C. T.

    Douglas, Rt. Hon. A. Akers

    Hoare, E. B. (Hampstead)

    Barton, Dunbar Plunket

    Drage, Geoffrey

    Holland, Hon. Lionel Raleigh

    Bathurst, Hon. Allen B.

    Drucker, A.

    Hornby, William Henry

    Bemrose, Sir Henry Howe

    Duncombe, Hon. Hubert V.

    Howard, Joseph

    Bethell, Commander

    Edwards, Gen. Sir J. Bevan

    Hozier, Hon. J. H. C.

    Bhownaggree, Sir M. M.

    Fellowes, Hon. Ailwyn Edw.

    Hubbard, Hon. Evelyn

    Bill, Charles

    Field, Admiral (Eastbourne)

    Hughes, Colonel Edwin

    Blundell, Colonel Henry

    Finch, George H.

    Jenkins, Sir John Jones

    Bond, Edward

    Finlay, Sir Robert Bannatyne

    Johnston, William (Belfast)

    Boulnois, Edmund

    Fisher, William Hayes

    Johnstone, John H. (Sussex)

    Brassey, Albert

    Fison, Frederick William

    Kenyon, James

    Brodrick, Rt. Hon. St. John

    Flower, Ernest

    Lafone, Alfred

    Burdett-Coutts, W.

    Folkestone, Viscount

    Lawrence, Sir E. D. (Corn.)

    Butcher, John George

    Forwood, Rt. Hon. Sir A. B.

    Lawrence, W. F. (Liverpool)

    Cavendish, R. F. (N. Lancs)

    Fowler, Rt. Hon. Sir Henry

    Lawson, John Grant (Yorks)

    Cavendish, V. C. W. (Derbysh.)

    Fry, Lewis

    Leigh-Bennett, Henry Currie

    Cecil, Evelyn (Hertford, E)

    Garfit, William

    Llewellyn, E. H. (Somerset)

    Cecil, Lord Hugh (Greenwich)

    Gedge, Sydney

    Lockwood, Lieut.-Col. A. R.

    Chaloner, Capt. R. G. W.

    Gibbs, Hon. V. (St. Albans)

    Loder, Gerald Walter Erskine

    Chamberlain, Rt. Hn. J. (Birm.)

    Gilliat, John Saunders

    Long, Col. C. W. (Evesham)

    Chamberlain, J. A. (Worc'r)

    Godson, Sir Augustus Fredk.

    Long, Rt. Hon. W. (Liverp'l)

    Chaplin, Rt. Hon. Henry

    Gorst, Rt. Hon. Sir J. Eldon

    Lorne, Marquess of

    Charrington, Spencer

    Goschen, Rt Hn. G. J. (St. G'rg's)

    Lowe, Francis William

    Chelsea, Viscount

    Goschen, George J. (Sussex)

    Lowles, John

    Clare, Octavius Leigh

    Gray, Ernest (West Ham)

    Lyttelton, Hon. Alfred

    Clough, Walter Owen

    Greene, H. D. (Shrewsbury)

    Macartney, W. G. Ellison

    Cochrane, Hon. T. H. A. E.

    Greene, W. R. (Cambs)

    Maclure, Sir John William

    Coghill, Douglas Harry

    Gretton, John

    McArthur, Charles (Liverp'l)

    Cohen, Benjamin Louis

    Greville, Captain

    McKillop, James

    Collings, Rt. Hon. Jesse

    Gull, Sir Cameron

    Massey-Mainwaring, Hn. W. F.

    granted to Her Majesty, for the Salaries and Expenses of the Local Government Board in Ireland, including certain grants in aid of local taxation."
    The Committee divided:—Ayes 156; Noes 52.—(Division List No. 291.)

    Mildmay, Francis Bingham

    Robertson, Herbert (Hackney)

    Thornton, Percy M.

    Monk, Charles James

    Russell, T. W. (Tyrone)

    Tomlinson, Wm. Edw. M.

    Morton, A. H. A. (Deptford)

    Ryder, John Herbert Dudley

    Tritton, Charles Ernest

    Murray, Rt. Hn. A. G. (Bute)

    Scoble, Sir Andrew Richard

    Webster, R. G. (St. Pancras)

    Murray, Charles J. (Coventry)

    Scott, Sir S. (Marylebone, W.)

    Webster, Sir R. E. (I. of W.)

    Myers, William Henry

    Sharpe, William Edward T.

    Welby, Lieut.-Col. A. C. E.

    Newdigate, Francis Alexander

    Sidebotham, J. W. (Cheshire)

    Whiteley, George (Stockport)

    Nicol, Donald Ninian

    Simeon, Sir Barrington

    Williams, J. P. (Birm.)

    Penn, John

    Sinclair, Capt. J. (Forfarsh.)

    Wodehouse, Rt. Hn. E. R. (Bath)

    Phillpotts, Captain Arthur

    Sinclair, Louis (Romford)

    Young, Comm. (Berks, E.)

    Pierpoint, Robert

    Skewes-Cox, Thomas

    Pollock, Harry Frederick

    Smith, Hon. W. F. D. (Strand)

    TELLERS FOR THE AYES—

    Pryce-Jones, Lieut.-Col. E.

    Spencer, Ernest

    Sir William Walrond and Mr. Anstruther.

    Purvis, Robert

    Stanley, Lord (Lancs)

    Rasch, Major Frederic Carne

    Strauss, Arthur

    Ridley, Rt. Hon. Sir M. W.

    Start, Hon. Humphry N.

    NOES.

    Allen, W. (Newc.-under-L.)

    Joicey, Sir James

    Spicer, Albert

    Barlow, John Emmott

    Jones, Wm. (Carnarvonshire)

    Steadman, William Charles

    Bavley, Thos. (Derbysh.)

    Knox, Edmund Francis Vesey

    Strachey, Edward

    Birrell, Augustine

    Lewis, John Herbert

    Sullivan, Donal (Westmeath)

    Bolton, Thomas Dolling

    Lloyd-George, David

    Ure, Alexander

    Brigg, John

    Lough, Thomas

    Wallace, Robert (Edinburgh)

    Broadhurst, Henry

    Macaleese, Daniel

    Wallace, Robert (Perth)

    Caldwell, James

    Maddison, Fred.

    Walton, Joseph (Barnsley)

    Cameron, Robert (Durham)

    Mendl, Sigismund Ferdinand

    Wedderburn, Sir William

    Causton, Richard Knight

    Molloy, Bernard Charles

    Williams, John C. (Notts)

    Cawley, Frederick

    Morton, E. J. C. (Devonport)

    Wilson, J. H. (Middlesbro')

    Channing, Francis Allston

    Moss, Samuel

    Woodhouse, Sir J T (Hudd'rsf'ld)

    Clark, Dr. G. B. (Caithness-sh.)

    Palmer, Sir C. M. (Durham)

    Woods, Samuel

    Colville, John

    Pickersgill, Edward Hare

    Yoxall, James Henry

    Cozens-Hardy, Herbert Hardy

    Pirie, Duncan V.

    Dalziel, James Henry

    Provand, Andrew Dryburgh

    TELLERS FOR THE NOES—

    Foster, Sir W. (Derby Co.)

    Rickett, J. Compton

    Mr. Dillon and Mr. Doogan.

    Griffith, Ellis J.

    Roberts, John Bryn (Eifion)

    Hayne, Rt. Hon. Chas. Seale-

    Robson, William Snowdon

    Motion made, and Question put—
    "That a sum, not exceeding £26,119, be granted to Her Majesty for the Salaries and

    AYES.

    Aird, John

    Cecil, Evelyn (Hertford, E.)

    Drage, Geoffrey

    Arnold, Alfred

    Cecil, Lord Hugh (Greenwich)

    Drucker, A.

    Ascroft, Robert

    Chaloner, Capt. R. G. W.

    Duncombe, Hon. Hubert V.

    Atkinson, Rt. Hon. John

    Chamberlain, Rt. Hn. J. (Birm.)

    Edwards, Gen. Sir Jas. B.

    Bagot, Capt. J. FitzRoy

    Chamberlain, J. A. (Wor'cr)

    Fellowes, Hon. Ailwyn Edw.

    Balfour, Rt. Hon. A. J. (Manc'r)

    Chaplin, Rt. Hon. Henry

    Field, Admiral (Eastbourne)

    Banbury, Frederick George

    Charrington, Spencer

    Finch, George H.

    Bartley, George C. T.

    Chelsea, Viscount

    Finlay, Sir Robert Bannatyne

    Barton, Dunbar Plunket

    Clare, Octavius Leigh

    Fisher, William Hayes

    Bathurst, Hon. Allen Benj.

    Clough, Walter Owen

    Fison, Frederick

    Bemrose, Sir Henry Howe

    Cochrane, Hon. T. H. A. E.

    Flower, Ernest

    Bethell, Commander

    Coghill, Douglas Harry

    Folkestone, Viscount

    Bhownaggree, Sir M. M.

    Cohen, Benjamin Louis

    Forwood, Rt. Hon. Sir A. B.

    Bill, Charles

    Collings, Rt. Hon. Jesse

    Fowler, Rt. Hon. Sir Henry

    Blundell, Colonel Henry

    Colomb, Sir John Charles R.

    Fry, Lewis

    Bond, Edward

    Cook, Fred. Lucas (Lambeth)

    Garfit, William

    Boulnois, Edmund

    Courtney, Rt. Hon. L. H.

    Gedge, Sydney

    Brassey, Albert

    Cripps, Charles Alfred

    Gibbs, Hon. V. (St. Albans)

    Brodrick, Rt. Hon. St. John

    Curzon, Rt Hn. G. N. (Lanc, S W)

    Gilliat, John Saunders

    Burdett-Coutts, W.

    Curzon, Viscount (Bucks)

    Godson, Sir Augustus Fredk.

    Butcher, John George

    Dickson-Poynder, Sir John P.

    Gorst, Rt. Hon. Sir J. Eldon

    Cavendish, R. F. (N. Lancs)

    Dilke, Rt. Hon. Sir Charles

    Goschen, Rt Hn. G. J. (St. G'rg's)

    Cavendish, V. C. W. (Derbysh.)

    Douglas, Rt. Hon. A. Akers

    Goschen, George J. (Sussex)

    Expenses of the Office of Public Works in Ireland."
    The Committee divided:—Ayes 155; Noes 57.—(Division List No. 292.)

    Gray, Ernest (West Ham)

    Lockwood, Lieut-Col. A. R.

    Robertson, Herbert (Hackney)

    Greene, H. D. (Shrewsbury)

    Loder, Gerald Walter Erskine

    Russell, T. W. (Tyrone)

    Greene, W. R. (Cambs)

    Long, Col. C. W. (Evesham)

    Ryder, John Herbert Dudley

    Gretton, John

    Long, Bt. Hon. W. (Liverp'l)

    Scoble, Sir Andrew Richard

    Greville, Captain

    Lorne, Marquess of

    Scott, Sir S. (Marylebone, W.)

    Gull, Sir Cameron

    Lowe, Francis William

    Sharpe, William Edward T.

    Hamilton, Bt. Hon. Lord G.

    Lowles, John

    Sidebotham, J. W. (Cheshire)

    Hanbury, Bt. Hon. B. W.

    Lyttelton, Hon. Alfred

    Simeon, Sir Barrington

    Hazell, Walter

    Macartney, W. G. Ellison

    Sinclair, Capt. J. (Forfarsh.)

    Heath, James

    Maclure, Sir John William

    Sinclair, Louis (Romford)

    Helder, Augustus

    McArthur, Chas. (Liverpool)

    Skewes-Cox, Thomas

    Henderson, Alexander

    McKillop, James

    Smith, Hon. W. F. D. (Strand)

    Hill, Sir E. S. (Bristol)

    Massey-Mainwaring, Hn. W. F.

    Spencer, Ernest

    Hoare, E. B. (Hampstead)

    Mildmay, Francis Bingham

    Stanley, Lord (Lancs)

    Holland, Hon. L. B.

    Monk, Charles James

    Strauss, Arthur

    Hornby, William Henry

    Morton, A. H. A. (Deptford)

    Sturt, Hon. Humphrey N.

    Howard, Joseph

    Murray, Bt. Hn. A. G. (Bute)

    Thornton, Percy M.

    Hozier, Hon. James H. Cecil

    Murray, Charles J. (Coventry)

    Tomlinson, W. E. Murray

    Hubbard, Hon. Evelyn

    Myers, William Henry

    Tritton, Charles Ernest

    Hughes, Colonel Edwin

    Newdigate, Francis Alex.

    Webster, R. G. (St. Pancras)

    Jenkins, Sir John Jones

    Nicholson, William Graham

    Webster, Sir R. E. (I. of W.)

    Johnston, William (Belfast)

    Nicol, Donald Ninian

    Welby, Lieut.-Col. A. C. E.

    Johnstone, John H. (Sussex)

    Penn, John

    Whiteley, George (Stockport)

    Kenyon, James

    Phillpotts, Captain Arthur

    Williams, J. P. (Birm.)

    Lafone, Alfred

    Pierpoint, Robert

    Wodehouse, Rt. Hn. E. R. (Bath)

    Lawrence, Sir E. D. (Corn.)

    Pollock, Harry Frederick

    Young, Comm. (Berks, E.)

    Lawrence, W. P. (Liverpool)

    Pryce-Jones, Lieut.-Col. E.

    Lawson, John Grant (Yorks)

    Purvis, Robert

    TELLERS FOR THE AYES—

    Leigh-Bennett, Henry Currie

    Rasch, Major Frederic Came

    Sir William Walrond and Mr. Anstruther.

    Llewellyn, E. H. (Somerset)

    Bidley, Rt. Hon. Sir M. W.

    NOES.

    Allen, Wm. (Newc.-under-L.)

    Hayne, Rt. Hon. Chas. Seale

    Roberts, John Brvn (Eifion)

    Asquith, Bt. Hon. H. H.

    Joicey, Sir James

    Robson, William Snowdon

    Barlow, John Emmott

    Jones, Wm. (Carnarvonshire)

    Spicer, Albert

    Bayley, Thos. (Derbysh.)

    Knox, Edmund Francis Vesey

    Steadman, William Charles

    Birrell, Augustine

    Lewis, John Herbert

    Strachey, Edward

    Bolton, Thomas Dolling

    Lloyd-George, David

    Sullivan, Donal (Westmeath)

    Brigg, John

    Lough, Thomas

    Ure, Alexander

    Broadhurst, Henry

    Macaleese, Daniel

    Wallace, Robert (Edinburgh)

    Caldwell, James

    M'Ghee, Richard

    Wallace, Robert (Perth)

    Cameron, Robert (Durham)

    Maddison, Fred.

    Walton, Joseph (Barnsley)

    Causton, Richard Knight

    Mendl, Sigismund Ferdinand

    Wedderburn, Sir William

    Cawley, Frederick

    Molloy, Bernard Charles

    Williams, John C. (Notts)

    Channing, Francis Allston

    Morton, E. J. C. (Devonport)

    Wilson, H. J. (York, W. R.)

    Clark, Dr. G. B. (Caithness-sh.)

    Moss, Samuel

    Wilson, J. H. (Middlesbro')

    Colville, John

    Moulton, John Fletcher

    Woodhouse, Sir J T (Hudd'rsf'ld)

    Cozens-Hardy, Herbert Hardy

    Palmer, Sir C. M. (Durham)

    Woods, Samuel

    Dalziel, James Henry

    Pickersgill, Edward Hare

    Yoxall, James Henry

    Foster, Sir W. (Derby Co.)

    Pirie, Duncan V.

    Griffith, Ellis J.

    Provand, Andrew Dryburgh

    TELLERS FOR THE NOES—

    Haldane, Richard Burdon

    Rickett, J. Compton

    Mr. Dillon and Mr. Doogan.

    CLASS III.
    Motion made, and Question put—
    "That a sum, not exceeding £77,151, be granted to Her Majesty for the Salaries, Al-

    AYES.

    Aird, John

    Banbury, Frederick George

    Bill, Charles

    Arnold, Alfred

    Bartley, George C. T.

    Blundell, Colonel Henry

    Ascroft, Robert

    Barton, Dunbar Plunket

    Bond, Edward

    Asquith, Rt. Hon. H. H.

    Bathurst, Hon. A. Benjamin

    Boulnois, Edmund

    Atkinson, Rt. Hon. John

    Bemrose, Sir Henry Howe

    Brassey, Albert

    Bagot, Capt. J. F.

    Bethell, Commander

    Brodrick, Rt. Hon. St. John

    Balfour, Rt. Hn. A. J. (Manch'r)

    Bhownaggree, Sir M. M.

    Burdett-Coutts, W.

    lowances, Expenses, and Pensions of various County Court officers in Ireland."
    The Committee divided:—Ayes 158; Noes 56.—(Division List No. 293.)

    Butcher, John George

    Gorst, Rt. Hon. Sir J. E.

    Mildmay, Francis Bingham

    Cavendish, R. F. (N. Lancs)

    Goschen, Rt. Hn. G. J (St. Geo's)

    Monk, Charles James

    Cavendish, V. C. W. (Derbysh.)

    Gosehen, G. J. (Sussex)

    Morton, A. H. A. (Deptford)

    Cecil, Evelyn (Hertford, E.)

    Gray, Ernest (West Ham)

    Murray, Rt. Hn. A. G. (Bute)

    Cecil, Lord H. (Greenwich)

    Greene, H. D. (Shrewsbury)

    Murray, C. J. (Coventry)

    Chaloner, Captain R. G. W.

    Greene, W. R. (Cambs)

    Myers, William Henry

    Chamberlain, Rt. Hn. J. (Birm.)

    Gretton, John

    Newdigate, Francis Alexander

    Chamberlain, J. A. (Worc'r)

    Greville, Captain

    Nicholson, William Graham

    Chaplin, Rt. Hon. Henry

    Gull, Sir Cameron

    Nicol, Donald Ninian

    Charrington, Spencer

    Haldane, Richard Burdon

    Penn, John

    Chelsea, Viscount

    Hamilton, Rt. Hon. Lord G.

    Phillpotts, Captain Arthur

    Clare, Octavius Leigh

    Hanbury, Rt. Hon. R. W.

    Pierpoint, Robert

    Clough, Walter Owen

    Heath, James

    Pollock, Harry Frederick

    Cochrane, Hon. T. H. A. E.

    Helder, Augustus

    Pryce-Jones, Lt.-Col. Edward

    Coghill, Douglas Harry

    Henderson, Alexander

    Purvis, Robert

    Cohen, Benjamin Louis

    Hill, Sir E. S. (Bristol)

    Rasch, Major Frederic Carne

    Collings, Rt. Hon. Jesse

    Hoare, E. B. (Hampstead)

    Ridley, Rt. Hon. Sir M. W.

    Colomb, Sir J. C. Ready

    Holland, Hon. L. R.

    Robertson, H. (Hackney)

    Cook, Fred. L. (Lambeth)

    Hornby, William Henry

    Russell, T. W. (Tyrone)

    Courtney, Rt. Hon. L. H.

    Howard, Joseph

    Ryder, John Herbert Dudley

    Cripps, Charles Alfred

    Hozier, Hon. J. H. C.

    Scoble, Sir Andrew Richard

    Curzon, Rt Hn. G. N. (Lanc, S W)

    Hubbard, Hon. Evelyn

    Scott, Sir S. (Marylebone, W.)

    Curzon, Viscount (Bucks)

    Hughes, Colonel Edwin

    Sharpe, William Edward T.

    Dickson-Poynder, Sir J. P.

    Jenkins, Sir John Jones

    Sidebotham, J. W. (Cheshire)

    Dilke, Rt. Hon. Sir Charles

    Johnston, William (Belfast)

    Simeon, Sir Barrington

    Douglas, Rt. Hon. A. Akers

    Johnstone, J. H. (Sussex)

    Sinclair, Capt. J. (Forfarsh.)

    Drage, Geoffrey

    Kenyon, James

    Sinclair, Louis (Romford)

    Drucker, A.

    Lawrence, Sir E. D. (Corn.)

    Skewes-Cox, Thomas

    Duncombe, Hon. Hubert V.

    Lafone, Alfred

    Smith, Hn. W. F. D. (Strand)

    Edwards, Gen. Sir J. B.

    Lawrence, W. F. (Liverpool)

    Spencer, Ernest

    Fellowes, Hon. A. Edward

    Lawson, John. Grant (Yorks)

    Stanley, Lord (Lancs)

    Field, Admiral (Eastbourne)

    Lea, Sir T. (Londonderry)

    Strauss, Arthur

    Finch, George H.

    Leigh-Bennett, Henry Currie

    Sturt, Hon. Humphry N.

    Finlay, Sir R. Bannatyne

    Llewellyn, E. H. (Somerset)

    Thornton, Percy M.

    Firbank, Joseph Thomas

    Lockwood, Lt.-Col. A. R.

    Tomlinson, W. E. Murray

    Fisher, William Hayes

    Loder, G. W. E.

    Tritton, Charles Ernest

    Fison, Frederick William

    Long, Col. C. W. (Evesham)

    Webster, R. G. (St. Pancras)

    Flower, Ernest

    Long, Rt. Hn. W. (Liverp'l)

    Webster, Sir R. E. (I. of W.)

    Folkestone, Viscount

    Lorne, Marquess of

    Welby, Lt.-Col. A. C. E.

    Forwood, Rt. Hon. Sir A. B.

    Lowe, Francis William

    Whiteley, George (Stockport)

    Fowler, Rt. Hon. Sir Henry

    Lowles, John

    Williams, J. Powell (Birm.)

    Fry, Lewis

    Lyttelton, Hon. Alfred

    Wodehouse, Rt. Hn. E. R. (Bath)

    Garfit, William

    Macartney, W. G. Ellison

    Young, Commander (Berks, E.)

    Gedge, Sydney

    Maclure, Sir John William

    Gibbs, Hon. V. (St. Albans)

    McArthur, C. (Liverpool)

    TELLERS FOR THE AYES—

    Gilliat, John Saunders

    McKillop, James

    Sir William Walrond and Mr. Anstruther.

    Godson, Sir A. F.

    Massey-Mainwaring, Hn. W. F.

    NOES.

    Allen, W. (Newc-under-Lyme)

    Joicey, Sir James

    Robson, William Snowdon

    Barlow, John Emmott

    Jones, W. (Carnarvonshire)

    Spicer, Albert

    Bayley, T. (Derbyshire)

    Knox, Edmund Francis Vesey

    Steadman, William Charles

    Birrell, Augustine

    Lewis, John Herbert

    Strachey, Edward

    Bolton, Thomas Dolling

    Lloyd-George, David

    Sullivan, Donal (Westmeath)

    Brigg, John

    Lough, Thomas

    Ure, Alexander

    Broadhurst, Henry

    Macaleese, Daniel

    Wallace, Robert (Edinburgh)

    Caldwell, James

    M'Ghee, Richard

    Wallace, Robert (Perth)

    Cameron, Robert (Durham)

    Maddison, Fred.

    Walton, Joseph (Barnsley)

    Causton, Richard Knight

    Mendl, Sigismund Ferdinand

    Wedderburn, Sir William

    Cawley, Frederick

    Molloy, Bernard Charles

    Williams, John C. (Notts)

    Channing, Francis Allston

    Morton, E. J. C. (Devonport)

    Wilson, H. J. (York, W. R.)

    Clark, Dr. G. B. (Caithness-sh.)

    Moss, Samuel

    Wilson, J. H. (Middlesbro')

    Colville, John

    Moulton, John Fletcher

    Woodhouse, Sir J T (Hudd'rsf'ld)

    Cozens-Hardy, Herbert H.

    Palmer, Sir C. M. (Durham)

    Woods, Samuel

    Dalziel, James Henry

    Pickersgill, Edward Hare

    Yoxall, James Henry

    Foster, Sir W. (Derby Co.)

    Pirie, Duncan V.

    Griffith, Ellis J.

    Provand, Andrew Dryburgh

    TELLERS FOR THE NOES—

    Hayne, Rt. Hon. C. Seale-

    Rickett, J. Compton

    Mr. Dillon and Mr. Doogan.

    Hazell, Walter

    Roberts, J. B. (Eifion)

    Motion made, and Question put—
    "That a sum, not exceeding £67,953, including a supplementary sum of £1,500, be granted to Her Majesty for the Salaries and Expenses of the Metropolitan Police establishments in Dublin."
    Agreed to.

    AYES.

    Aird, John

    Finlay, Sir R. Bannatyne

    Lowles, John

    Arnold, Alfred

    Firbank, Joseph Thomas

    Lyttelton, Hon. Alfred

    Ascroft, Robert

    Fisher, William Hayes

    Macartney, W. G. Ellison

    Atkinson, Rt. Hon. John

    Fison, Frederick William

    Maclure, Sir John William

    Bagot, Capt. J. F.

    Flower, Ernest

    McArthur, C. (Liverpool)

    Balfour, Rt. Hn. A. J. (Manch'r)

    Folkestone, Viscount

    McKillop, James

    Banbury Frederick George

    Forwood, Rt. Hon. Sir A. B.

    Massey-Mainwaring, Hn. W. F.

    Bartley, George C. T.

    Fowler, Rt. Hon. Sir Henry

    Mildmay, Francis Bingham

    Barton, Dunbar Plunket

    Fry, Lewis

    Monk, Charles James

    Bathurst, Hon. A. B.

    Garfit, William

    Morton, A. H. A. (Deptford)

    Bemrose, Sir Henry Howe

    Gedge, Sydney

    Murray, Rt. Hn. A. G. (Bute)

    Bethell, Commander

    Gibbs, Hon. V. (St. Albans)

    Myers, William Henry

    Bhownaggree, Sir M. M.

    Gilliat, John Saunders

    Newdigate, Francis Alexander

    Bill, Charles

    Godson, Sir A. F.

    Nicholson, William Graham

    Blundell, Colonel Henry

    Gorst, Rt. Hon. Sir J. E.

    Nicol, Donald Ninian

    Bond, Edward

    Goschen, Rt. Hn. G. J. (St. Geo's)

    Penn, John

    Boulnois, Edmund

    Goschen, George J. (Sussex)

    Phillpotts, Captain Arthur

    Brassey, Albert

    Gray, Ernest (West Ham)

    Pierpoint, Robert

    Brodrick, Rt. Hon. St. John

    Greene, H. D. (Shrewsbury)

    Pollock, Harry Frederick

    Burdett-Coutts, W.

    Greene, W. R. (Cambs)

    Pryce-Jones, Lt.-Col. Edward

    Butcher, John George

    Gretton, John

    Purvis, Robert

    Cavendish, R. P. (N. Lancs)

    Greville, Captain

    Rasch, Major Frederic Came

    Cavendish, V. C. W. (Derbysh.)

    Gull, Sir Cameron

    Ridley, Rt. Hon. Sir M. W.

    Cecil, Evelyn (Hertford, E.)

    Hamilton, Rt. Hon. Lord G.

    Robertson, H. (Hackney)

    Cecil, Lord H. (Greenwich)

    Hanbury, Rt. Hon. R. W.

    Russell, T. W. (Tyrone)

    Chaloner, Captain R. G. W.

    Heath, James

    Ryder, John Herbert Dudley

    Chamberlain, Rt. Hn. J. (Birm.)

    Helder, Augustus

    Scoble, Sir Andrew Richard

    Chamberlain, J. A. (Worc'r)

    Henderson, Alexander

    Scott, Sir S. (Marylebone, W.)

    Chaplin, Rt. Hon. Henry

    Hill, Sir E. S. (Bristol)

    Sharpe, William Edward T.

    Charrington, Spencer

    Hoare, E. B. (Hampstead)

    Sidebotham, J. W. (Cheshire)

    Chelsea, Viscount

    Holland, Hon. L. R.

    Simeon, Sir Barrington

    Clare, Octavius Leigh

    Hornby, William Henry

    Sinclair, Louis (Romford)

    Clough, Walter Owen

    Howard, Joseph

    Skewes-Cox, Thomas

    Cochrane, Hon. T. H. A. E.

    Hozier, Hon. J. H. C.

    Smith, Hn. W. F. D. (Strand)

    Coghill, Douglas Harry

    Hubbard, Hon. Evelyn

    Spencer, Ernest

    Cohen, Benjamin Louis

    Hughes, Colonel Jones

    Stanley, Lord (Lancs)

    Collings, Rt. Hon. Jesse

    Jenkins, Sir John Jones

    Strauss, Arthur

    Colomb, Sir J. C. Ready

    Johnston, William (Belfast)

    Sturt, Hon. Humphry N.

    Cook, Fred. L. (Lambeth)

    Johnstone, J. H. (Sussex)

    Thornton, Percy M.

    Courtney, Rt. Hon. L. H.

    Kenyon, James

    Tomlinson, W. E. Murray

    Cripps, Charles Alfred

    Lafone, Alfred

    Tritton, Charles Ernest

    Curzon, Rt Hn. G. N. (Lanc, S W)

    Lawrence, Sir E. D. (Corn.)

    Webster, R. G. (St. Pancras)

    Curzon, Viscount (Bucks)

    Lawrence, W. F. (Liverpool)

    Webster, Sir R. E. (I. of W.)

    Dickson-Poynder, Sir J. P.

    Lawson, John Grant (Yorks)

    Welby, Lieut.-Col. A. C. E.

    Dilke, Rt. Hon. Sir Charles

    Lea, Sir T. (Londonderry)

    Whiteley, George (Stockport)

    Douglas, Rt. Hon. A. Akers

    Leigh-Bennett, Henry Currie

    Williams, J. P. (Birm.)

    Drage, Geoffrey

    Llewellyn, E. H. (Somerset)

    Wodehouse, Rt. Hn. E. R. (Bath)

    Drucker, A.

    Lockwood, Lieut.-Col. A. R.

    Young, Commander (Berks, E.)

    Duncombe, Hon. Hubert V.

    Loder, G. W. E.

    Edwards, Gen. Sir J. B.

    Long, Col. C. W. (Evesham)

    TELLERS FOR THE AYES—

    Fellowes, Hon. A. Edward

    Long, Rt. Hon. W. (Liverp'l)

    Sir William Walrond and Mr. Anstruther.

    Field, Admiral (Eastbourne)

    Lome, Marquess of

    Finch, George H.

    Lowe, Francis William

    NOES.

    Allen, W. (Newc.-und.-Lyme)

    Birrell, Augustine

    Caldwell, James

    Asquith, Rt. Hn. Herbert H.

    Bolton, Thomas Dolling

    Cameron, Robert (Durham)

    Barlow, John Emmott

    Brigg, John

    Causton, Richard Knight

    Bayley, T. (Derbyshire)

    Broadhurst, Henry

    Cawley, Frederick

    Motion made, and Question put—
    "That a sum, not exceeding £754,557, be granted to Her Majesty for the expenses of the Royal Irish Constabulary."
    The Committee divided:—Ayes 154; Noes 58.—(Division List No. 294.)

    Charnning, Francis Allston

    Macaleese, Daniel

    Strachey, Edward

    Clark, Dr. G. B. (Caithness-sh.)

    M'Ghee, Richard

    Sullivan, Donal (Westmeath)

    Colville, John

    Maddison, Fred.

    Ure, Alexander

    Cozens-Hardy, Herbert H.

    Mendl, Sigismund Ferdinand

    Wallace, Robert (Edinburgh)

    Dalziel, James Henry

    Morton, E. J. C. (Devonport)

    Wallace, Robert (Perth)

    Foster, Sir W. (Derby Co.)

    Moss, Samuel

    Walton, Joseph (Barnsley)

    Griffith, Ellis J.

    Moulton, John Fletcher

    Wedderburn, Sir William

    Haldane, Richard Burdon

    Palmer, Sir C. M. (Durham)

    Williams, J. C. (Notts)

    Hayne, Rt. Hon. C. Seale

    Pickersgill, Edward Hare

    Wilson, J. H. (Middlesbro')

    Hazell, Walter.

    Pirie, Duncan V.

    Woodhouse, Sir J T (Hudd'rsf'ld)

    Joicey, Sir James

    Provand, Andrew Dryburgh

    Woods, Samuel

    Jones, W. (Carnarvonshire)

    Rickett, J. Compton

    Yoxall, James Henry

    Knox, Edmund Francis Vesey

    Roberts, John B. (Eifion)

    Lambert, George

    Robson, William Snowdon

    TELLERS FOR THE NOES—

    Lewis, John Herbert

    Sinclair, Capt. J. (Forfarsh.)

    Mr. Dillon and Mr. Doogan.

    Lloyd-George, David

    Spicer, Albert

    Lough, Thomas

    Steadman, William Charles

    Motion made, and Question put—
    "That a sum, not exceeding £69,096, be granted to Her Majesty for the expenses of the General Prisons Board in Ireland."
    Agreed to.
    Motion made, and Question put—
    "That a sum, not exceeding £54,936, be granted to Her Majesty for the Expenses of the Reformatory and Industrial Schools in Ireland."
    Agreed to.

    AYES.

    Aird, John

    Charrington, Spencer

    Forwood, Rt. Hon. Sir A. B.

    Arnold, Alfred

    Chelsea, Viscount

    Foster, Sir W. (Derby Co.)

    Ascroft, Robert

    Clare, Octavius Leigh

    Fowler, Rt. Hon. Sir H.

    Asquith, Rt. Hon. H. H.

    Clough, Walter Owen

    Fry, Lewis

    Atkinson, Rt. Hon. John

    Cochrane, Hon. T. H. A. E.

    Garfit, William

    Bagot Capt. J. F.

    Coghill, Douglas Harry

    Gedge, Sydney

    Balfour, Rt. Hn. A. J. (Manch'r)

    Cohen, Benjamin Louis

    Gibbs, Hon. V. (St. Albans)

    Banbury, Frederick George

    Collings, Rt. Hon. Jesse

    Gilliat, John Saunders

    Bartley, George C. T.

    Colomb, Sir J. C. Ready

    Godson, Sir A. F.

    Barton, Dunbar Plunket

    Cook, Fred. L. (Lambeth)

    Gorst, Rt. Hon. Sir J. E.

    Bathurst, Hon. A. Benjamin

    Courtney. Rt. Hon. L. H.

    Goschen, Rt Hn. G. J. (St. G'rg's)

    Bemrose, Sir Henry Howe

    Cozens-Hardy, Herbert H.

    Goschen, George J. (Sussex)

    Bethell, Commander

    Cripps, Charles Alfred

    Gray, Ernest (West Ham)

    Bhownaggree, Sir M. M.

    Curzon, Rt Hn. G. N. (Lanc, S W)

    Greene, H. D. (Shrewsbury)

    Bill, Charles

    Curzon, Viscount (Bucks)

    Greene, W. R. (Cambs)

    Birrell, Augustine

    Dickson-Poynder, Sir J. P.

    Gretton, John

    Blundell, Colonel Henry

    Dilke, Rt. Hon. Sir Charits

    Greville, Captain

    Bond, Edward

    Douglas, Rt. Hon. A. Alters

    Gull, Sir Cameron

    Boulnois, Edmund

    Drage, Geoffrey

    Haldane, Richard Burdon

    Brassey, Albert

    Drucker, A.

    Hamilton Rt. Hon. Lord G.

    Brodrick, Rt. Hon. St. John

    Duncombe, Hon. Hubert V.

    Hanbury, Rt. Hon. R. W.

    Burdett-Coutts, W.

    Edwards, Gen. Sir J. B.

    Hazell, Walter

    Causton, Richard Knight

    Fellowes, Hon. A. Edward

    Heath, James

    Cavendish R. F. (N. Lanes)

    Field, Admiral (Eastbourne)

    Helder, Augustus

    Cavendish, V. C. W. (Derbysh.)

    Finch, George H.

    Henderson, Alexander

    Cecil, Evelyn (Hertford. E.)

    Finlay, Sir R. Bannatyne

    Hill, Sir E. S. (Bristol)

    Cecil, Lord H. (Greenwich)

    Firbank, Joseph Thomas

    Hoare, E. B. (Hampstead)

    Chaloner, Captain R. G. W.

    Fisher, William Haves

    Holland, Hon. L. R.

    Chamberlain, Rt. Hn. J. (Birm.)

    Fison, Frederick William.

    Hornby, William Henry

    Chamberlain, J. A. (Worc'r)

    Flower, Ernest

    Howard, Joseph

    Chaplin, Rt. Hon. Henry

    Folkestone, Viscount

    Hozier, Hon. J. H. C.

    Motion made, and Question put—
    "That a sum, not exceeding £3,955, be granted to Her Majesty for the maintenance of criminal lunatics in the Dundrum Asylum."
    Agreed to.

    CLASS I.
    Motion made, and Question put—
    "That a sum, not exceeding £129,672, be granted to Her Majesty for the survey of the United Kingdom, and for minor surveys connected therewith."
    The Committee divided:—Ayes 161; Noes 52.—(Division List No. 295.)

    Hubbard, Hon. Evelyn

    McKillop, James

    Sharpe, Wm, Edward T.

    Hughes, Colonel Edwin

    Massey-Mainwaring, Hn. W. F.

    Sidebotham, J. W. (Cheshire)

    Jenkins, Sir John Jones

    Mildmay, Francis Bingham

    Sinclair, Capt. J. (Forfarsh.)

    Johnston, William (Belfast)

    Monk, Charles James

    Sinclair, Louis (Romford)

    Johnstone, J. H. (Sussex)

    Morton, A. H. A. (Deptford)

    Skewes-Cox, Thomas

    Kenyon, James

    Murray, Rt. Hn. A. G. (Bute)

    Smith, Hn. W. F. D. (Strand

    Lafone, Alfred

    Myers, William Henry

    Spencer, Ernest

    Lawrence, Sir E. D. (Corn.)

    Newdigate, Francis Alex.

    Stanley, Lord (Lanes)

    Lawrence, W. F. (Liverp'l)

    Nicholson, William Graham

    Strauss, Arthur

    Lawson, John Grant (Yorks)

    Nicol, Donald Ninian

    Sturt, Hon. Humphry N.

    Lea, Sir Thos. (Londonderry)

    Palmer, Sir C. M. (Durham)

    Thornton, Percy M.

    Leigh-Bennett, Henry Currie

    Penn, John

    Tomlinson, W. E. Murray

    Llewellyn, E. H. (Somerset)

    Phillpotts, Captain Arthur

    Tritton, Charles Ernest

    Lockwood, Lieut.-Col. A. R.

    Pierpoint, Robert

    Webster, R. G. (St. Pancras)

    Loder, Gerald Walter Erskine

    Pollock, Harry Frederick

    Webster, Sir R, E. (I. of W.)

    Long, Col. C. W. (Evesham)

    Pryce-Jones, Lieut.-Col. E.

    Welby, Lieut.-Col. A. C. E.

    Long, Bt. Hon. W. (Liverp'l)

    Purvis, Robert

    Whiteley, George (Stockport)

    Lorne, Marquess of

    Rasch, Major Frederic Carne

    Williams, J. Powell (Birm.)

    Lowe, Francis William

    Ridley, Rt. Hon. Sir M. W.

    Wodehouse, Rt. Hn. E. R. (Bath)

    Lowles, John

    Robertson, Herbert (Hackney)

    Young, Commander (Berks, E.)

    Lyttelton, Hon. Alfred

    Russell, T. W. (Tyrone)

    Macartney, W. G. Ellison

    Ryder, John Herbert Dudley

    TELLERS FOR THE AYES—

    Maclure, Sir John William

    Scoble, Sir Andrew Richard

    Sir William Walrond and Mr. Anstruther.

    McArthur, Chas. (Liverpool)

    Scott, Sir S. (Marylebone, W.)

    NOES.

    Allen, W. (Newc.-under-L.)

    Knox, Edmund Francis V.

    Spicer, Albert

    Barlow, John Emmott

    Lambert, George

    Steadman, William Charles

    Bolton, Thomas Dolling

    Lewis, John Herbert

    Strachey, Edward

    Brigg, John

    Lloyd-George, David

    Sullivan, Donal (Westmeath)

    Broadhurst, Henry

    Lough, Thomas

    Ure, Alexander

    Butcher, John George

    Macaleese, Daniel

    Wallace, Robert (Edinburgh)

    Caldwell, James

    M'Ghee, Richard

    Wallace, Robert (Perth)

    Cameron, Robert (Durham)

    Maddison, Fred.

    Walton, Joseph (Barnsley)

    Cawley, Frederick

    Mendl, Sigismund Ferdinand

    Wedderburn, Sir William

    Channing, Francis Allston

    Morton, E. J. C. (Devonport)

    Williams, J. C. (Notts)

    Clark, Dr. G. B. (Caithness-sh.)

    Moss, Samuel

    Wilson, J. H. (Middlesbro')

    Colville, John

    Moulton, John Fletcher

    Woodhouse, Sir J T (Hudd'rsfld)

    Dalziel, James Henry

    Pickersgill, Edward Hare

    Woods, Samuel

    Dillon, John

    Pirie, Duncan V.

    Yoxall, James Henry

    Doogan, P. C.

    Provand, Andrew Dryburgh

    Griffith, Ellis J.

    Rickett, J. Compton

    TELLERS FOR THE NOES—

    Hayne, Rt. Hon. Chas. Seale

    Roberts, John Bryn (Eifion)

    Sir Barrington Simeon and Sir Francis Evans

    Joicey, Sir James

    Bobson, William Snowdon

    Jones, W. (Carnarvonshire)

    Roche, Hon. J. (E. Kerry)

    Motion made, and Question put—
    "That a sum, not exceeding £136,978, be granted to Her Majesty for Public Buildings in Ireland."

    AYES.

    Aird, John

    Burdett-Coutts, W.

    Collings, Rt. Hon. Jesse

    Arnold, Alfred

    Butcher, John George

    Colomb, Sir J. C. Ready

    Atkinson, Rt. Hon. John

    Cavendish, R. F. (N. Lanes)

    Cook, Fred. L. (Lambeth)

    Bagot, Capt. J. F.

    Cavendish, V. C. W. (Derbysh.)

    Courtney. Rt. Hon. L. H.

    Banbury, Frederick George

    Cecil, Evelyn (Hertford, E.)

    Cripps, Charles Alfred

    Bartley, George C. T.

    Cecil, Lord H. (Greenwich)

    Curzon, Rt Hn. G. N. (Lanc, S W)

    Barton, Dunbar Plunket

    Chaloner, Captain R. G. W.

    Curzon, Viscount (Bucks)

    Bathurst, Hon. A. Benjamin

    Chamberlain, Rt. Hn. J. (Birm.)

    Dickson-Poynder, Sir J. P.

    Bemrose, Sir Henry Howe

    Chamberlain, J. A. (Worc'r)

    Dilke, Rt. Hon. Sir Charles

    Bethell, Commander

    Chaplin, Rt. Hon. Henry

    Douglas, Rt. Hon. A. Akers-

    Bhownaggree, Sir M. M.

    Charrington, Spencer

    Drage, Geoffrey

    Bill, Charles

    Chelsea, Viscount

    Drucker, A.

    Blundell, Colonel Henry

    Clare, Octavius Leigh

    Duncombe, Hon. Hubert V.

    Bond, Edward

    Clough, Walter Owen

    Edwards, Gen. Sir J. B.

    Boulnois, Edmund

    Cochrane, Hon. T. H. A. E.

    Fellowes, Hon. A. Edward

    Brassey, Albert

    Coghill, Douglas Harry

    Field, Admiral (Eastbourne)

    Brodrick, Rt. Hon. St. John

    Cohen, Benjamin Louis

    Finch, George H.

    The Committee divided:—Ayes 153; Noes 59.—(Division List No. 296.)

    Finlay, Sir R. Bannatyne

    Hughes, Colonel Edwin

    Pollock, Harry Frederick

    Firbank, Joseph Thomas

    Jenkins, Sir John Jones

    Pryce-Jones, Lt.-Col. Edward

    Fisher, William Hayes

    Johnston, William (Belfast)

    Purvis, Robert

    Fison, Frederick William

    Johnstone, John H. (Sussex)

    Rasch, Major Frederic Came

    Flower, Ernest

    Kenyon, James

    Ridley, Rt. Hon. Sir M. W.

    Folkestone, Viscount

    Lafone, Alfred

    Robertson, H. (Hackney)

    Forwood, Rt. Hon. Sir A. B.

    Lawrence, Sir E. D. (Corn)

    Russell, T. W. (Tyrone)

    Fowler, Rt. Hon. Sir Henry

    Lawrence, W. F. (Liverpool)

    Ryder, John Herbert Dudley

    Fry, Lewis

    Lawson, John Grant (Yorks)

    Scoble, Sir Andrew Richard

    Garfit, William

    Lea, Sir T. (Londonderry)

    Scott, Sir S. (Marylebone, W.)

    Gedge, Sydney

    Leigh-Bennett, Henry Currie

    Sharpe, William Edward T.

    Gibbs, Hon. V. (St. Albans)

    Llewellyn, E. H. (Somerset)

    Sidebotham, J. W. (Cheshire)

    Gilliat, John Saunders

    Lockwood, Lt.-Col. A. B.

    Simeon, Sir Barrington

    Godson, Sir A. F.

    Loder, G. W. Erskine

    Sinclair, Louis (Romford)

    Gorst, Rt. Hon. Sir J. E.

    Long, Col. C. W. (Evesham)

    Skewes-Cox, Thomas

    Goschen, Rt Hn. G. J. (St. G'rg's)

    Long, Rt. Hon. W. (Liverp'l)

    Smith, Hn. W. F. D. (Strand)

    Goschen, George J. (Sussex)

    Lorne, Marquess of

    Spencer, Ernest

    Gray, Ernest (West Ham)

    Lowe, Francis William

    Stanley, Lord (Lanes)

    Greene, H. D. (Shrewsbury)

    Lowles, John

    Strauss, Arthur

    Greene, W. R. (Cambs)

    Lyttelton, Hon. Alfred

    Sturt, Hon. Humphry Napier

    Gretton, John,

    Macartney, W. G. Ellison

    Thornton, Percy M.

    Greville, Captain

    Maclure, Sir John William

    Tomlinson, W. E. Murray

    Gull, Sir Cameron

    McArthur, C. (Liverpool)

    Tritton, Charles Ernest

    Haldane, Richard Burdon

    McKillop, James

    Webster, B. G. (St. Pancras)

    Hamilton, Bt. Hon Lord G.

    Massey-Mainwaring, Hn. W. F.

    Webster Sir B. E. (I. of W.)

    Hanbury, Rt. Hon. B. W.

    Mildmay, Francis Bingham

    Welby, Lt.-Col. A. C. E.

    Heath, James

    Monk, Charles James

    Whiteley, George (Stockport)

    Helder, Augustus

    Morton, A. H. A. (Deptford)

    Williams, J. P. (Birm.)

    Henderson, Alexander

    Murray, Rt. Hn. A. G. (Bute)

    Wodehouse, Rt. Hn. E. R. (Bath)

    Hill, Sir E. S. (Bristol)

    Myers, William Henry

    Young, Commander (Berks, E)

    Hoare, E. B. (Hampstead)

    Newdigate, Francis Alexander

    Holland, Hon. L. R.

    Nicholson, William Graham

    TELLERS FOR THE AYES—

    Hornby, William Henry

    Nicol, Donald Ninian

    Sir William Walrond and Mr. Anstruther.

    Howard, Joseph

    Penn, John

    Hozier, Hon. J. H. C.

    Phillpotts, Captain Arthur

    Hubbard, Hon. Evelyn

    Pierpoint, Robert

    NOES.

    Allen, W. (Newc.-under-Lyme)

    Joicey, Sir James

    Roche, Hon. J. (Kerry, E.)

    Asquith, Bt. Hon. H. H.

    Jones, W. (Carnarvonshire)

    Sinclair, Capt. J. (Forfarsh.)

    Barlow, John Emmott

    Knox, Edmund Francis V.

    Spicer, Albert

    Bayley, T. (Derbyshire)

    Lambert, George

    Steadman, William Charles

    Birrell, Augustine

    Lewis, John Herbert

    Strachey, Edward

    Bolton, Thomas Dolling

    Lloyd-George, David

    Sullivan, Donal (Westmeath)

    Brigg, John

    Lough, Thomas

    Ure, Alexander

    Broadhurst, Henry

    Macaleese, Daniel

    Wallace, R. (Edinburgh)

    Caldwell, James

    M'Ghee, Richard

    Wallace, Robert (Perth)

    Cameron, Robert (Durham)

    Maddison, Fred.

    Walton, Joseph (Barnsley)

    Causton, Richard Knight

    Mendl, Sigismund Ferdinand

    Wedderburn, Sir William

    Cawley, Frederick

    Morton, E. J. C. (Devonport)

    Williams J. C. (Notts)

    Channing, Francis Allston

    Moss, Samuel

    Wilson, H. J. (Yorks, W.R.)

    Clark, Dr. G. B. (Caithness-sh.)

    Moulton, John Fletcher

    Wilson, J. H. (Middlesbro')

    Colville, John

    Palmer, Sir C. M. (Durham)

    Woodhouse, Sir J T (Hudd'rsf'ld)

    Cozens-Hardy, Herbert H.

    Pickersgill, Edward Hare

    Woods, Samuel

    Dalziel, James Henry

    Pirie, Duncan V.

    Yoxall, James Henry

    Foster, Sir W. (Derby Co.)

    Provand, Andrew Dryburgh

    Griffith, Ellis J.

    Bickett, J. Compton

    TELLERS FOR THE NOES—

    Hayne, Rt. Hon. C. Seale-

    Roberts, J. B. (Eifion)

    Mr. Dillon, and Mr. Doogan.

    Hazell, Walter

    Robson, William Snowdon

    Motion made, and Question put—
    "£22,207, to complete the sum for Railways, Ireland."
    Agreed to.
    Motion made, and Question put—
    "That a Supplementary sum, not exceeding £25,000, be granted to Her Majesty, to defray
    594
    the Charge which will come in course of payment during the year ending on the 31st day of March, 1899, for Expenditure in respect of Diplomatic and Consular Buildings."
    The Committee divided:—Ayes 158; Noes 50.—(Division List No. 297.)

    AYES.

    Aird, John

    Fisher, William Hayes

    Lyttelton, Hon. Alfred

    Arnold, Alfred

    Fison, Frederick William

    Macartney, W. G. Ellison

    Asquith, Rt. Hon. H. H.

    Flower, Ernest

    Maclure, Sir John William

    Atkinson, Rt. Hon. John

    Folkestone, Viscount

    McArthur, C. (Liverpool)

    Bagot, Capt. J. F.

    Forwood, Rt. Hon. Sir A. B.

    McKillop, James

    Banbury, Frederick George

    Fowler, Rt. Hon. Sir Henry

    Massey-Mainwaring, Hn. W. F.

    Barton, Dunbar Plunket

    Fry, Lewis,

    Mildmay, Francis Bingham

    Bathurst, Hon. A. Benjamin

    Garfit, William

    Milton, Viscount

    Bemrose, Sir Henry Howe

    Gedge, Sydney

    Monk, Charles James

    Bethell, Commander

    Gibbs, Hon. V. (St. Albans)

    Morton, A. H. A. (Deptford)

    Bhownaggree, Sir M. M.

    Gilliat, John Saunders

    Murray, Rt. Hn. A. G. (Bute)

    Bill, Charles

    Godson, Sir A. F.

    Myers, William Henry

    Birrell, Augustine

    Gorst, Rt. Hon. Sir J. E.

    Newdigate, Francis Alexander

    Blundell, Colonel Henry

    Goschen, Rt Hn. G. J. (St. G'rg's)

    Nicholson, William Graham

    Bond, Edward

    Goschen, George J. (Sussex)

    Nicol, Donald Ninian

    Boulnois, Edmund

    Gray, Ernest (West Ham)

    Penn, John

    Brassey, Albert

    Greene, H. D. (Shrewsbury)

    Phillpotts, Captain Arthur

    Brodrick, Rt. Hon. St. John

    Greene, W. R. (Cambs)

    Pierpoint, Robert

    Burdett-Coutts, W.

    Gretton, John

    Pollock, Harry Frederick

    Butcher, John George

    Greville, Captain

    Pryce-Jones, Lt.-Col. Edward

    Cavendish, R. F. (N. Lancs)

    Gull, Sir Cameron

    Purvis, Robert

    Cavendish, V. C. W. (Derbysh.)

    Haldane, Richard Burdon

    Rasch, Major Frederic Carne

    Cecil, Evelyn (Hertford, E.)

    Hamilton Rt. Hon. Lord G.

    Ridley, Rt. Hon. Sir M. W.

    Cecil, Lord H. (Greenwich)

    Hanbury, Rt. Hon. R. W.

    Roberts, J. B. (Eifion)

    Chaloner, Captain R. G. W.

    Hazell, Walter

    Robertson, H. (Hackney)

    Chamberlain, Rt. Hn. J. (Birm.)

    Heath, James

    Russell, T. W. (Tyrone)

    Chamberlain, J. A. (Worc'r)

    Helder, Augustus

    Ryder, John Herbert Dudley

    Chaplin, Rt. Hon. Henry

    Henderson, Alexander

    Scoble, Sir Andrew Richard

    Charrington, Spencer

    Hill, Sir Edward S. (Bristol)

    Scott, Sir S. (Marylebone, W.)

    Chelsea, Viscount

    Hoare, E. B. ((Hampstead)

    Sharpe, William Edward T.

    Clare, Octavius Leigh

    Holland, Hon. L. R.

    Sidebotham, J. W. (Cheshire)

    Clough, Walter Owen

    Hornby, William Henry

    Sinclair, Capt, J. Forfarsh.)

    Cochrane, Hon. T. H. A. E.

    Howard, Joseph

    Sinclair, Louis (Romford)

    Coghill Douglas Harry

    Hozier, Hon. J. H. C.

    Skewes-Cox, Thomas

    Cohen, Benjamin, Louis

    Hubbard, Hon. Evelyn

    Smith, Hn. W. F. D. (Strand)

    Colomb, Sir J. C. Ready

    Hughes, Colonel Edwin

    Spencer, Ernest

    Cook, Fred. L. (Lambeth)

    Jenkins, Sir John Jones

    Stanley, Lord (Lanes)

    Courtney, Rt. Hon. L. H.

    Johnston, William (Belfast)

    Strauss, Arthur

    Cozens-Hardy, Herbert H.

    Johnstone, John H. (Sussex)

    Sturt, Hon. Humphry Napier

    Cripps, Charles Alfred

    Kenyon, James

    Thornton, Percy M.

    Curzon, Viscount (Bucks)

    Lafone, Alfred

    Tomlinson, W. E. Murray

    Dickson-Poynder Sir J. P.

    Lawrence, Sir E. D. (Corn.)

    Ure, Alexander

    Dilke, Rt. Hon. Sir Charles

    Lawrence, W. F. (Liverpool)

    Webster, Sir R. E. (I. of W.)

    Douglas, Rt. Hon. A. Akers

    Lawson, John Grant (Yorks)

    Welby, Lt.-Col. A. C. E.

    Drage, Geoffrey

    Lea, Sir T. (Londonderry)

    Whiteley George (Stockport)

    Drucker, A.

    Leigh-Bennett, Henry Currie

    Williams; J. P. (Birm.)

    Duncombe, Hon. Hubert V.

    Llewellyn, E. H. (Somerset)

    Wilson, H. J. (York, W. R.)

    Edwards, Gen. Sir J. B.

    Lockwood, Lt.-Col. A. R.

    Wodehouse, Rt. Hn. E. R. (Bath)

    Fellowes, Hon. A. Edward

    Loder, G. W. E.

    Young, Commander (Berks, E.)

    Fergusson, Rt Hn Sir J. (Manc'r)

    Long, Col. C. W. (Evesham)

    Field, Admiral (Eastbourne)

    Long, Rt. Hon. W. (Liverp'l)

    TELLERS FOR THE AYES—

    Finch, George H.

    Lome, Marquess of

    Sir William Walrond and Mr. Anstruther.

    Finlay, Sir R. Bannatyne

    Lowe, Francis William

    Firbank, Joseph Thomas

    Lowles, John

    NOES.

    Barlow, John Emmott

    Colville, John

    Lewis, John Herbert

    Bayley, T. (Derbyshire)

    Dalziel, James Henry

    Lloyd-George, David

    Bolton, Thomas Dolling

    Dillon, John

    Macaleese, Daniel

    Brigg, John

    Doogan, P. C.

    M'Ghee, Richard

    Broadhurst, Henry

    Foster, Sir W. (Derby Co.)

    Maddison, Fred.

    Caldwell, James

    Griffith, Ellis J.

    Mendl, Sigismund Ferdinand

    Cameron, Robert (Durham)

    Hayne, Rt. Hon. C. Seale

    Morton, E. J. C. (Devonport)

    Causton, Richard Knight

    Joicey, Sir James

    Moss, Samuel

    Cawley, Frederick

    Jones, W. (Carnarvonshire)

    Moulton, John Fletcher

    Channing, Francis Allston

    Knox, Edmund Francis V.

    Palmer, Sir C. M. (Durham)

    Clark, Dr. G. B. (Caithness-sh.)

    Lambert, George

    Pickersgill, Edward Hare

    596

    597

    Pirie, Duncan V.

    Sullivan, Donal (Westmeath)

    Woods, Samuel

    Provand, Andrew Dryburgh

    Wallace, R. (Edinburgh)

    Yoxall, James Henry

    Rickett, J. Compton

    Wallace, Robert (Perth)

    Robson, William Snowdon,

    Walton, Joseph (Barnsley)

    TELLERS FOR THE NOES—

    Roche, Hon. J. (Kerry, E.)

    Wedderburn, Sir William

    Mr. Havelock Wilson and Mr. Steadman.

    Spicer, Albert

    Williams, J. C. (Notts)

    Strachey, Edward

    Woodhouse, Sir J T (Hudd'rsfld)

    CLASS II.
    Motion made, and Question put—
    "That a sum, not exceeding £8,107, be granted to Her Majesty, to complete the sum necessary to defray the Charge which will

    AYES.

    Aird, John

    Fison, Frederick William

    Maclure, Sir John William

    Arnold, Alfred

    Flower, Ernest

    McArthur, C. (Liverpool)

    Atkinson. Rt. Hon. John

    Folkestone, Viscount

    McKillop, James

    Bagot, Capt. J. FitzRoy

    Forwood, Rt. Hon. Sir A. B.

    Massey-Mainwaring, Hn. W. F.

    Banbury, Frederick George

    Fry, Lewis

    Mellor, Colonel (Lancashire)

    Barton, Dunbar Plunket

    Garfit, William

    Mildmay, Francis Bingham

    Bathurst, Hon. Allen B.

    Gedge, Sydney

    Milton, Viscount

    Bemrose, Sir Henry Howe

    Gibbs, Hon. V. (St. Albans)

    Monk, Charles James

    Bethell, Commander

    Gilliat, John Saunders

    Morton, A. H. A. (Deptford)

    Bhownaggree, Sir M. M.

    Godson, Sir Augustus Fred.

    Murray, Rt. Hn. A. G (Bute)

    Bill, Charles

    Gorst, Rt. Hon. Sir John E.

    Myers, William Henry

    Blundell, Colonel Henry

    Goschen, Rt Hn. G. J. (St. G'rg's)

    Newdigate, Francis Alex.

    Bond, Edward

    Goschen, G. J. (Sussex)

    Nicholson, William Graham

    Boulnois, Edmund

    Gray, Ernest (West Ham)

    Nicol, Donald Ninian

    Brassey, Albert

    Greene, H. D. (Shrewsbury)

    Penn, John

    Brodrick, Rt. Hon. St, John

    Greene, W. R. (Cambs)

    Phillpotts, Captain Arthur

    Burdett-Coutts, W.

    Gretton, John

    Pierpoint, Robert

    Butcher, John George

    Greville, Captain

    Pollock, Harry, Frederick

    Cavendish, R. F. (N. Lanes)

    Gull, Sir Cameron

    Pryce-Jones, Lt.-Col. E.

    Cavendish, V. C. W. (Derbysh.)

    Hamilton, Rt. Hon. Lord G.

    Purvis, Robert

    Cecil, Evelyn (Hertford, E.)

    Hanbury, Rt. Hon. R. W.

    Rasch, Major Frederic Came

    Cecil, Lord H. (Greenwich)

    Heath, James

    Ridley, Rt. Hon. Sir M. W.

    Chaloner, Captain R. G. W.

    Helder, Augustus

    Robertson, Herbert (Hackney)

    Chamberlain, Rt. Hn. J. (Birm.)

    Henderson, Alexander

    Russell, T. W. (Tyrone)

    Chamberlain, J. A. (Worc'r)

    Hill, Sir Edward S. (Bristol)

    Ryder, John Herbert Dudley

    Chaplin, Rt. Hon. Henry

    Hoare, H. B. (Hampstead)

    Scoble, Sir Andrew Richard

    Charrington, Spencer

    Holland, Hon. Lionel R.

    Scott, Sir S. (Marylebone, W.)

    Chelsea, Viscount

    Hornby, William Henry

    Sharpe, William Edward T.

    Clare, Octavius Leigh

    Howard, Joseph

    Sidebotham, J. W. (Cheshire)

    Cochrane, Hon. T. H. A. E.

    Hozier, Hon. James Henry C.

    Simeon, Sir Barrington

    Coghill, Douglas Harry

    Hubbard, Hon. Evelyn

    Sinclair, Louis (Romford)

    Cohen, Benjamin Louis

    Hughes, Colonel Edwin

    Skewes-Cox, Thomas

    Collings, Rt. Hon. Jesse

    Jenkins, Sir John Jones

    Smith, Hn. W. F. D. (Strand)

    Colomb, Sir John Charles R.

    Johnston, William (Belfast)

    Spencer, Ernest

    Cook, F. Lucas (Lambeth)

    Johnstone, John H. (Sussex)

    Stanley, Lord (Lanes)

    Courtney, Rt. Hon. L. H.

    Kenyon, James

    Strauss, Arthur

    Cripps, Charles Alfred

    Lafone, Alfred

    Start, Hon. Humphry N.

    Curzon, Viscount (Bucks)

    Lawrence, Sir E. D. (Corn.)

    Thornton, Percy M.

    Dickson-Poynder, Sir John P.

    Lawson, John Grant (Yorks)

    Tomlinson, W. E. Murray

    Douglas, Rt. Hon. A. Akers

    Lea, Sir T. (Londonderry)

    Ward, Hon. R. A. (Crewe)

    Drage, Geoffrey

    Leigh-Bennett, Henry Currie

    Webster, R. G. (St. Pancras)

    Drucker, A.

    Llewellyn, E. H. (Somerset)

    Webster, Sir R. E. (I. of W.)

    Duncombe, Hon. Hubert V.

    Lockwood, Lt.-Col. A. R.

    Welby, Lieut.-Col. A. C. E.

    Edwards, Gen. Sir James B.

    Loder, Gerald Walter E.

    Whiteley, George (Stockport)

    Fellowes, Hon. Ailwyn E.

    Long, Col. C. W. (Evesham)

    Williams, J. Powell (Birm.)

    Fergusson, Rt Hn Sir. J. (Manc'r)

    Long, Rt. Hn. W. (Liverp'l)

    Wodehouse, Rt. Hn. E. R. (Bath)

    Field, Admiral (Eastbourne)

    Lowe, Marquess of

    Young, Comm. (Berks, E.)

    Finch, George H.

    Lowe, Francis William

    Finlay, Sir Robert Bannatyne

    Lowles, John

    TELLERS FOR THE AYES—

    Firbank, Joseph Thomas

    Lyttelton, Hon. Alfred

    Sir William Walrond and Mr. Anstruther.

    Fisher, William Hayes

    Macartney, W. G. Ellison

    come in course of payment during the year ending on the 31st day of March, 1899, for the Salaries and Expenses of the Offices of the House of Lords."
    The Committee divided:—Ayes 149; Noes 65.—(Division List No. 298.)

    Abraham, W. (Cork, N.E.)

    Fowler, Rt. Hon. Sir H.

    Provand, Andrew Dryburgh

    Allen, W. (Newc.-und.-Lyme)

    Griffith, Ellis J.

    Rickett, J. Compton

    Asquith, Rt. Hon. H. H.

    Haldane, Richard Burdon

    Roberts, John B. (Eifion)

    Barlow, John Emmott

    Hayne, Rt. Hon. C. Seale

    Robson, William Snowdon

    Bayley, Thomas (Derbyshire)

    Hazell, Walter

    Roche, Hon. J. (E. Kerry)

    Birrell, Augustine

    Joicey, Sir James

    Sinclair, Capt. J. (Forfarsh.)

    Bolton, Thomas Dolling

    Jones, W. (Carnarvonshire)

    Spicer, Albert

    Brigg, John

    Kilbride, Denis

    Steadman, William Charles

    Broadhurst, Henry

    Knox, Edmund Francis Vesey

    Strachey, Edward

    Caldwell, James

    Lambert, George

    Sullivan, Donal (Westmeath)

    Cameron, Robert (Durham)

    Lewis, John Herbert

    Ure, Alexander

    Causton, Richard Knight

    Lloyd-George, David

    Wallace, Robert (Edinburgh)

    Cawley, Frederick

    Lough, Thomas

    Wallace, Robert (Perth)

    Channing, Francis Allston

    Macaleese, Daniel

    Walton, Joseph (Barnslev)

    Clark, Dr. G. B. (Caithness-sh.)

    M'Ghee, Richard

    Wedderburn, Sir William

    Clough, Walter Owen

    Maddison, Fred.

    Williams, John C. (Notts

    Colville, John

    Mendl, Sigismund Ferdinand

    Wilson, H. J. (York, W.R.)

    Cozens-Hardy, Herbert H.

    Morton, E. J. C. (Devonport)

    Woodhouse, Sir J T (Hudd'rsf'ld)

    Dalziel, James Henry

    Moss, Samuel

    Yoxall, James Henry

    Dilke, Rt. Hon. Sir C.

    Moulton, John Fletcher

    Dillon, John

    Palmer, Sir C. M. (Durham)

    TELLERS FOR THE NOES—

    Doogan, P. C.

    Pickersgill, Edward Hare

    Mr. Woods and Mr. Havelock Wilson.

    Foster, Sir W. (Derby Co.)

    Pirie, Duncan V.

    "£17,005, to complete the sum for House of Commons Offices."
    "£59,440, to complete the sum for Treasury and Subordinate Departments."
    Agreed to.
    Motion made, and Question put—
    "That a sum, not exceeding £29,250, be granted to Her Majesty, to complete the gum

    AYES.

    Aird, John

    Collings, Rt. Hon. Jesse

    Greene, H. D. (Shrewsbury)

    Arnold, Alfred

    Colomb, Sir John Charles R.

    Greene, W. R. (Cambs)

    Atkinson, Rt. Hon. John

    Cook, F. Lucas (Lambeth)

    Gretton, John

    Bagot, Capt. J. FitzRoy

    Courtney. Rt. Hon. L. H.

    Greville, Captain

    Balfour, Rt. Hon. A. J. (Manc'r)

    Cripps, Charles Alfred

    Gull, Sir Cameron

    Banbury, Frederick George

    Curzon, Viscount (Bucks)

    Haldane, Richard Burdon

    Barton, Dunbar Plunket

    Dickson-Poynder, Sir J. P.

    Hamilton, Rt. Hon. Lord G.

    Bathurst, Hon. Allen B.

    Douglas, Rt. Hon. A. Akers

    Hanbury, Rt. Hon. R. W.

    Bemrose, Sir Henry Howe

    Drage, Geoffrey

    Hazell, Walter

    Bethell, Commander

    Drucker, A.

    Heath, James

    Bhownaggree, Sir M. M.

    Duncombe, Hon. Hubert V.

    Helder, Augustus

    Bill, Charles

    Edwards, Gen. Sir James B.

    Henderson, Alexander

    Blundell, Colonel Henry

    Fellowes, Hon. Ailwyn E.

    Hill, Sir Edward S. (Bristol)

    Bond, Edward

    Fergusson, Rt Hn. Sir J. (Manc'r)

    Hoare, E. B. (Hampstead)

    Boulnois, Edmund

    Field, Admiral (Eastbourne)

    Holland, Hon. Lionel R.

    Brassey, Albert

    Finch, George H.

    Hornby, William Henry

    Brodrick, Rt. Hon. St. John

    Finlay, Sir Robert Bannatyne

    Howard, Joseph

    Burdett-Coutts, W.

    Firbank, Joseph Thomas

    Hozier, Hon. James Henry C.

    Butcher, John George

    Fisher, William Hayes

    Hubbard, Hon. Evelyn

    Cavendish, R. F. (N. Lancs)

    Fison, Frederick William

    Hughes, Colonel Edwin

    Cavendish, V. C. W. (Derbysh.)

    Flower, Ernest

    Jenkins, Sir John Jones

    Cecil, Evelyn (Hertford, E.)

    Folkestone, Viscount

    Johnston, William (Belfast)

    Cecil, Lord H. (Greenwich)

    Forwood, Rt. Hon. Sir A. B.

    Johnstone, J. H. (Sussex)

    Chaloner, Captain R. G. W.

    Fry, Lewis

    Kenyon, James

    Chamberlain, Rt. Hn. J. (Birm.)

    Garfit, William

    Lafone, Alfred

    Chamberlain, J. A. (Worc'r)

    Gedge, Sydney

    Lawrence, Sir E. D. (Corn.)

    Chaplin, Rt. Hon. Henry

    Gibbs, Hon. V. (St. Albans)

    Lawson, John Grant (Yorks)

    Charrington, Spencer

    Gilliat, John Saunders

    Lea, Sir T. (Londonderry)

    Chelsea, Viscount

    Godson, Sir Augustus F.

    Leigh-Bennett, Henry Currie

    Clare, Octavius Leigh

    Gorst, Rt. Hon. Sir J. E.

    Llewellyn, E. H. (Somerset)

    Cochrane, Hon. T. H. A. E.

    Goschen, Rt Hn. G. J. (St. G'rg's)

    Lockwood, Lt.-Col. A. R.

    Coghill, Douglas Harry

    Goschen, G. J. (Sussex)

    Loder, Gerald Walter E.

    Cohen, Benjamin Louis

    Gray, Ernest (West Ham)

    Long, Col. C. W. (Evesham)

    necessary to defray the Charge which will come in course of payment during the year ending on the 31st day of March, 1899, for the Salaries and Expenses of the Department of Her Majesty's Secretary of State for the Colonies, including a Grant in Aid of certain Expenses connected with Emigration."
    The Committee divided:—Ayes 153; Noes 55.—(Division List No. 299.)

    Long, Rt. Hn. W. (Liverp'l)

    Penn, John

    Spencer, Ernest

    Lorne, Marquess of

    Phillpotts, Captain Arthur

    Spicer, Albert

    Lowe, Francis William

    Pierpoint, Robert

    Stanley, Lord (Lancs)

    Lowles, John

    Pryce-Jones, Lt.-Col. E.

    Strauss, Arthur

    Lyttelton, Hon. Alfred

    Purvis, Robert

    Sturt, Hon. Humphry N.

    Macartney, W. G. Ellison

    Rasch, Major Frederic Carne

    Thornton, Percy M.

    Maclure, Sir John William

    Ridley, Rt. Hon. Sir M. W.

    Tomlinson, W. E. Murray

    McArthur, C. (Liverpool)

    Robertson, H. (Hackney)

    Ward, Hon. R. A. (Crewe)

    McKillop, James

    Russell, T. W. (Tyrone)

    Webster, R. G. (St. Pancras)

    Massey-Mainwaring, Hn. W. F.

    Ryder, John Herbert Dudley

    Webster, Sir R. E. (I. of W.)

    Mellor, Colonel (Lancashire)

    Scoble, Sir Andrew Richard

    Welby, Lieut.-Col. A. C. E.

    Mildmay, Francis Bingham

    Scott, Sir S. (Marylebone, W.)

    Whiteley, George (Stockport)

    Milton, Viscount

    Sharpe, William Edward T.

    Williams, J. Powell (Birm.)

    Monk, Charles James

    Sidebotham, J. W. (Cheshire)

    Wodehouse, Rt. Hn. E. R. (Bath)

    Murray, Rt. Hn. A. G. (Bute)

    Simeon, Sir Barrington

    Young, Comm. (Berks, E.)

    Myers, William Henry

    Sinclair, Capt. J. (Forfarsh.)

    Newdigate, Francis Alex.

    Sinclair, Louis (Romford)

    TELLERS FOR THE AYES—

    Nicholson, William Graham

    Skewes-Cox, Thomas

    Sir William Walrond and Mr. Anstruther.

    Nicol, Donald Ninian

    Smith, Hn. W. F. D. (Strand)

    NOES.

    Asquith, Rt. Hon. H. H.

    Griffith, Ellis J.

    Provand, Andrew Dryburgh

    Barlow, John Emmott

    Hayne, Rt. Hon. C. Seale-

    Rickett, J. Compton

    Bayley, Thomas (Derbyshire)

    Joicey, Sir James

    Roberts, John B. (Eifion)

    Birrell, Augustine

    Jones, W. (Carnarvonshire)

    Robson, William Snowdon

    Bolton, Thomas Dolling

    Kilbride, Denis

    Roche, Hon. J. (E. Kerry)

    Brigg, John

    Knox, Edmund Francis Vesey

    Steadman, William Charles

    Broadhurst, Henry

    Lambert, George

    Strachey, Edward

    Caldwell, James

    Lewis, John Herbert

    Sullivan, Donal (Westmeath)

    Cameron, Robert (Durham)

    Lloyd-George, David

    Ure, Alexander

    Causton, Richard Knight

    Lough, Thomas

    Wallace, Robert (Edinburgh)

    Cawley, Frederick

    Macaleese, Daniel

    Wallace, Robert (Perth)

    Channing, Francis Allston

    M'Ghee, Richard

    Walton, Joseph (Barnsley)

    Clark, Dr. G. B. (Caithness-sh.)

    Maddison, Fred

    Wedderburn, Sir William

    Clough, Walter Owen

    Mendl, Sigismund Ferdinand

    Williams, John C. (Notts)

    Colville, John

    Morton, E. J. C. (Devonport)

    Woodhouse, Sir J T (Hudd'rsf'ld)

    Cozens-Hardy, Herbert H.

    Moss, Samuel

    Dalziel, James Henry

    Moulton, John Fletcher

    TELLERS FOR THE NOES—

    Dillon, John

    Palmer, Sir C. M. (Durham)

    Mr. Woods and Mr. Havelock Wilson.

    Doogan, P. C.

    Pickersgill, Edward Hare

    Foster, Sir W. (Derby Co.)

    Pirie, Duncan V.

    "£7,255, to complete the sum for Privy Council Office."
    "£129,544, to complete the sum for Board of Trade."
    "£27,525, to complete the sum for Mercantile Marine Fund (Grant in Aid)."
    "£7, to complete the sum for Bankruptcy Department of the Board of Trade."
    "£9,432, to complete the sum for Lunacy Commission, England."
    Agreed to.

    AYES.

    Aird, John

    Brassey, Albert

    Clough, Walter Owen

    Arnold, Alfred

    Brodrick, Rt. Hon. St. John

    Cochrane, Hon. T. H. A. E.

    Atkinson, Rt. Hon. John

    Burdett-Coutts, W.

    Coghill, Douglas Harry

    Bagot, Capt. J. FitzRoy

    Butcher, John George

    Cohen, Benjamin Louis

    Balfour, Rt. Hon. A. J. (Manc'r)

    Cavendish, R. F. (N. Lancs)

    Collings, Rt. Hon. Jesse

    Banbury, Frederick George

    Cavendish, V. C. W. (Derbysh.)

    Colomb, Sir John Charles R.

    Barton, Dunbar Plunket

    Cecil, Evelyn (Hertford, E.)

    Cook, Fred. Lucas (Lambeth)

    Bathurst, Hon. Allen Benj.

    Cecil, Lord Hugh (Greenwich)

    Courtney, Rt. Hon. L. H.

    Bemrose, Sir Henry Howe

    Chaloner, Captain R. G. W.

    Cozens-Hardy, Herbert Hardy

    Bethell, Commander

    Chamberlain, Rt. Hn. J. (Birm.)

    Cripps, Charles Alfred

    Bhownaggree, Sir M. M.

    Chamberlain, J. A. (Worc'r)

    Curzon, Viscount (Bucks)

    Blundell, Colonel Henry

    Chaplin, Rt. Hon. Henry

    Dickson-Poynder, Sir John P.

    Bolton, Thomas Dolling

    Charrington, Spencer

    Dilke, Rt. Hon. Sir Charles

    Bond, Edward

    Chelsea, Viscount

    Douglas, Rt. Hon. A. Akers

    Boulnois, Edmund

    Clare, Octavius Leigh

    Drage, Geoffrey

    Motion made, and Question put—
    "That a sum, not exceeding £42, 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, 1899, for the Salaries and Expenses of the Mint, including the Expenses of Coinage."
    The Committee divided:—Ayes 154; Noes 51.—(Division List No. 300.)

    Drucker, A.

    Howard, Joseph

    Pierpoint, Robert

    Duncombe, Hon. Hubert V.

    Hozier, Hon. J. H. C.

    Purvis, Robert

    Edwards, Gen. Sir J. Bevan

    Hubbard, Hon. Evelyn

    Rasch, Major Frederic Carne

    Fellowes, Hon. Ailwyn Edw.

    Hughes, Colonel Edwin

    Rickett, J. Compton

    Fergusson, Rt Hn. Sir J. (Manc.)

    Jenkins, Sir John Jones

    Ridley, Rt. Hon. Sir M. W.

    Field, Admiral (Eastbourne)

    Johnston, William (Belfast)

    Robertson, H. (Hackney)

    Finch, George H.

    Johnstone, John H. (Sussex)

    Russell, T. W. (Tyrone)

    Finlay, Sir Robert Bannatyne

    Kenyon, James

    Ryder, John Herbert Dudley

    Fisher, William Hayes

    Lafone, Alfred

    Scoble, Sir Andrew Richard

    Fison, Frederick William

    Lawrence, Sir E. D. (Corn.)

    Scott, Sir S. (Marylebone, W.)

    Flower, Ernest

    Lawson, John Grant (Yorks)

    Sharpe, William Edward T.

    Folkestone, Viscount

    Lea, Sir T. (Londonderry)

    Sidebotham, J. W. (Cheshire)

    Forwood, Rt. Hon. Sir A. B.

    Leigh-Bennett, Henry Currie

    Simeon, Sir Barrington

    Fry, Lewis

    Llewellyn, E. H. (Somerset)

    Sinclair, Capt. J. (Forfarsh.)

    Garfit, William

    Loder, Gerald Walter Erskine

    Sinclair, Louis (Romford)

    Gedge, Sydney

    Long, Col. C. W. (Evesham)

    Skewes-Cox, Thomas

    Gibbs, Hon. V. (St. Albans)

    Long, Rt. Hon. W. (Liverp'l)

    Smith, Hon. W. F. D. (Strand)

    Gilliat, John Saunders

    Lorne, Marquess of

    Spencer, Ernest

    Godson, Sir Augustus F.

    Lowe, Francis William

    Stanley, Lord (Lancs)

    Gorst, Rt. Hon. Sir J. Eldon

    Lowles, John

    Stirling-Maxwell, Sir J. M.

    Goschen, Rt Hn. G. J. (St. G'rg's)

    Lyttelton, Hon. Alfred

    Strauss, Arthur

    Goschen, George J. (Sussex)

    Macartney, W. G. Ellison

    Sturt, Hon. Humphrey N.

    Gray, Ernest (West Ham)

    Maclure, Sir John William

    Thornton, Percy M.

    Greene, H. D. (Shrewsbury)

    McArthur, Chas. (Liverpool)

    Tomlinson, W. E. Murray

    Greene, W. R. (Cambs)

    McKillop, James

    Ure, Alexander

    Gretton, John

    Massey-Mainwaring, Hn. W. F.

    Ward, Hon. R. A. (Crewe)

    Greville, Captain

    Mellor, Colonel (Lancashire)

    Webster, Sir R. E. (I. of W.)

    Gull, Sir Cameron

    Mildmay, Francis Bingham

    Welby, Lieut.-Col. A. C. E.

    Hamilton, Rt. Hon. Lord G.

    Milton, Viscount

    Whiteley, George (Stockport)

    Hanbury, Rt. Hon. R. W.

    Monk, Charles James

    Williams, John C. (Notts)

    Hazell, Walter

    Morton, A. H. A. (Deptford)

    Williams, J. P. (Birm.)

    Heath, James

    Murray, Rt. Hn. A. G. (Bute)

    Wodehouse, Rt. Hn. E. R. (Bath)

    Helder, Augustus

    Myers, William Henry

    Young, Comm. (Berks, E.)

    Henderson. Alexander

    Newdigate, Francis Alexander

    Hill, Sir E. S. (Bristol)

    Nicholson, William Graham

    TELLERS FOR THE AYES—

    Hoare, E. B. (Hampstead)

    Nicol, Donald Ninian

    Sir William Walrond and Mr. Anstruther.

    Holland, Hon. Lionel Raleigh

    Penn, John

    Hornby, William Henry

    Phillpotts, Captain Arthur

    NOES.

    Asquith, Rt. Hon. H. H.

    Jones, William (Carnarvonsh.)

    Robson, William Snowdon

    Barlow, John Emmott

    Knox, Edmund Francis Vesey

    Roche, Hon. J. (Kerry, E.)

    Bayley, Thos. (Derbyshire)

    Kilbride, Denis

    Spicer, Albert

    Brigg, John

    Lambert, George

    Steadman, William Charles

    Broadhurst, Henry

    Lockwood, Lieut.-Col. A. R.

    Strachey, Edward

    Caldwell, James

    Lough, Thomas

    Sullivan, Donal (Westmeath)

    Cameron, Robert (Durham)

    Macaleese, Daniel

    Wallace, Robert (Edinburgh)

    Causton, Richard Knight

    M'Ghee, Richard

    Wallace, Robert (Perth)

    Channing, Francis Allston

    Maddison, Fred.

    Walton, Joseph (Barnsley)

    Clark, Dr. G. B. (Caithness-sh.)

    Mendl, Sigismund Ferdinand

    Wedderburn, Sir William

    Colville, John

    Morton, E. J. C. (Devonport)

    Wilson, J. H. (Middlesbro')

    Dalziel, James Henry

    Moss, Samuel

    Woodhouse, Sir J T (Hudd'rsfld)

    Dillon, John

    Moulton, John Fletcher

    Woods, Samuel

    Doogan, P. C.

    Palmer, Sir C. M. (Durham)

    Foster, Sir W. (Derby Co.)

    Pickersgill, Edward Hare

    TELLERS FOR THE NOES—

    Griffith, Ellis J.

    Pirie, Duncan V.

    Mr. Lloyd-George and Mr. Herbert Lewis.

    Haldane, Richard Burdon

    Provand, Andrew Dryburgh

    Hayne, Rt. Hon. Chas. Seale-

    Pryce-Jones, Lt.-Col. Edw.

    Joicey, Sir James

    Roberts, John Bryn (Eifion)

    "£15,372, to complete the sum for Public Record Office."
    "£1,195, to complete the sum for Public Works Loan Commission."
    "£3,612, to complete the sum for Lunacy Commission, Scotland."
    Agreed to.
    Motion made, and Question put—
    "That a sum, not exceeding £27,932, be granted to Her Majesty, to complete the sum
    604
    necessary to defray the Charge which will come in course of payment during the year ending on the 31st day of March, 1899, for the Salaries and Expenses of the Offices of the Chief Secretary to the Lord Lieutenant in Dublin and London, and Subordinate Departments."
    The Committee divided:—Ayes 148; Noes 58.—(Division List No. 301.)

    AYES.

    Aird, John

    Fison, Frederick William

    Maclure, Sir John William

    Arnold, Alfred

    Flower, Ernest

    McArthur, Chas. (Liverpool)

    Atkinson, Rt. Hon. John

    Folkestone, Viscount

    M'Killop, James

    Bagot, Capt. J. FitzRoy

    Forwood, Rt. Hon. Sir A. B.

    Massey-Mainwaring, Hn. W. F.

    Banbury, Frederick George

    Fry, Lewis

    Mellor, Colonel (Lancashire)

    Barton, Dunbar Plunket

    Garfit, William

    Mildmay, Francis Bingham

    Bathurst, Hon. Allen Benj.

    Gedge, Sidney

    Milton, Viscount

    Bemrose, Sir Henry Howe

    Gibbs, Hon. V. (St. Alban's)

    Monk, Charles James

    Bethell, Commander

    Gilliat, John Saunders

    Morton, A. H. A. (Deptford)

    Bhownaggree, Sir M. M.

    Godson, Sir Augustus Fredk.

    Murray, Rt. Hn. A. G. (Bute)

    Blundell, Colonel Henry

    Gorst, Rt. Hon. Sir J. Eldon

    Myers, William Henry

    Bond, Edward

    Goschen, Rt Hn. G. J. (St. G'rg's)

    Newdigate, Francis Alex.

    Boulnois, Edmund

    Goschen, George J. (Sussex)

    Nicholson William Graham

    Brassey, Albert

    Gray, Ernest (West Ham)

    Nicol, Donald Ninian

    Brodrick, Rt. Hon. St. John

    Greene, H. D. (Shrewsbury)

    Penn, John

    Butcher, John George

    Greene, W. R. (Cambs)

    Phillpotts, Captain Arthur

    Cavendish, R. F. (N. Lancs)

    Gretton, John

    Pierpoint, Robert

    Cavendish, V. C. W. (Derbysh.)

    Greville, Captain

    Pryce-Jones, Lieut.-Col. Edw.

    Cecil, Evelyn (Hertford, E.)

    Gull, Sir Cameron

    Purvis, Robert

    Cecil, Lord Hugh (Greenwich)

    Hamilton, Rt. Hon. Lord G.

    Rasch, Major Frederic Carna

    Chaloner, Captain R. G. W.

    Hanbury, Rt. Hon. R. W.

    Ridley, Rt. Hon. Sir M. W.

    Chamberlain, Rt. Hn. J. (Birm.)

    Heath, James

    Robertson, Herbert (Hackney)

    Chamberlain, J. A. (Worc'r)

    Helder, Augustus

    Russell, T. W. (Tvrone)

    Chaplin, Rt. Hon. Henry

    Henderson, Alexander

    Ryder, John Herbert Dudley

    Charrington, Spencer

    Hill, Sir Edward S. (Bristol)

    Scoble, Sir Andrew Richard

    Chelsea. Viscount

    Hoare, E. B. (Hampstead)

    Scott, Sir S. (Marylebone, W.)

    Clare, Octavius Leigh

    Holland, Hon. Lionel Raleigh

    Sharpe, William Edward T.

    Clough, Walter Owen

    Hornby, William Henry

    Sidebotham, J. W. (Cheshire)

    Cochrane, Hon. T. H. A. E.

    Howard, Joseph

    Simeon, Sir Barrington

    Coghill, Douglas Harry

    Hozier, Hon. J. H. C.

    Sinclair, Louis (Romford)

    Cohen, Benjamin Louis

    Hubbard, Hon. Evelyn

    Skewes-Cox, Thomas

    Collings, Rt. Hon. Jesse

    Hughes, Colonel Edwin

    Smith, Hon. W. F. D. (Strand)

    Colomb, Sir John Charles R.

    Jenkins, Sir John Jones

    Spencer, Ernest

    Cook, Fred. Lucas (Lambeth)

    Johnston, William (Belfast)

    Stanley, Lord (Lancs)

    Courtney, Rt. Hon. L. H.

    Johnstone, John H. (Sussex)

    Stirling-Maxwell, Sir John M.

    Cripps, Charles Alfred

    Kenyon, James

    Strauss, Arthur

    Curzon, Viscount (Bucks)

    Lafone, Alfred

    Sturt, Hon. Humphrey N.

    Dickson-Poynder, Sir John P.

    Lawrence, Sir E. D. (Corn.)

    Thornton, Percy M.

    Dilke, Rt. Hon. Sir Charles

    Lawson, John Grant (Yorks)

    Tomlinson, W. E. Murray

    Douglas, Rt. Hon. A. Akers

    Lea, Sir T. (Londonderry)

    Ward, Hon. R. A. (Crewe)

    Drage, Geoffrey

    Leigh-Bennett, Henry Currie

    Webster, Sir R, E. (I. of W.)

    Drucker, A.

    Llewellyn, E. H. (Somerset)

    Webster, R. G. (St. Pancras)

    Duncombe, Hon. Hubert V.

    Lockwood, Lieut-Col. A. R.

    Welby, Lieut.-Col. A. C. E.

    Edwards, Gen. Sir Jas. Bevan

    Loder, Gerald Walter Erskine

    Whiteley, George (Stockport)

    Fellowes, Hon. Ailwyn Edw.

    Long, Col. C. W. (Evesham)

    Williams, Joseph P. (Birm.)

    Fergusson, Rt Hn. Sir J. (Manc.)

    Long, Rt. Hon. W. (Liverp'l)

    Wodehouse, Rt. Hn. E. R. (Bath)

    Field, Admiral (Eastbourne)

    Lorne, Marquess of

    Young, Comm. (Berks, E.)

    Finch, George H.

    Lowe, Francis William

    TELLERS FOR THE AYES—

    Finlay, Sir Robert Bannatyne

    Lowles, John

    Sir William Walrond and Mr. Anstruther.

    Fisher, William Hayes

    Macartney, W. G. Ellison

    NOES.

    Abraham, Wm. (Cork, N. E.)

    Jones, Wm. (Carnarvonshire)

    Roche, Hon. J. (Kerry, E.)

    Asquith, Rt. Hon. H. H.

    Kilbride, Denis

    Sinclair, Capt. J. (Forfarsh.)

    Barlow, John Emmott

    Knox, Edmund Francis Vesey

    Spicer, Albert

    Bayley, Thos. (Derbyshire)

    Lambert, George

    Steadman, William Charles

    Bolton, Thomas Dolling

    Lewis, John Herbert

    Strachey, Edward

    Brigg, John

    Lloyd-George, David

    Sullivan, Donal (Westmeath)

    Broadhurst, Henry

    Lough, Thomas

    Ure, Alexander

    Caldwell, James

    Macaleese, Daniel

    Wallace, Robert (Edinburgh)

    Cameron, Robert (Durham)

    M'Ghee, Richard

    Wallace, Robert (Perth)

    Causton, Richard Knight

    Maddison, Fred.

    Walton, Joseph (Barnsley)

    Channing, Grancis Allston

    Mendl, Sigismund Ferdinand

    Wedderburn, Sir William

    Clark, Dr. G. B. (Caithness-sh.)

    Morton, E. J. C. (Devonport)

    Williams, John C. (Notts)

    Colville, John

    Moss, Samuel

    Wilson, H. J. (York, W. R.)

    Cozens-Hardy, H. H.

    Moulton, John Fletcher

    Wilson, J. H. (Middlesbro')

    Dalziel, James Henry

    Palmer, Sir C. M. (Durham)

    Woodhouse, Sir J T (Hudd'rsf'ld)

    Foster, Sir W. (Derby Co.)

    Pickersgill, Edward Hare

    Woods, Samuel

    Griffith, Ellis J.

    Pirie, Duncan V.

    Haldane, Richard Burdon

    Provand, Andrew Dryburgh

    TELLERS FOR THE NOES—

    Hayne, Rt. Hon Chas. Seale

    Rickett, J. Compton

    Mr. Dillon and Mr. Doogan.

    Hazell, Walter

    Roberts, John Bryn (Eifion)

    Joicey, Sir James

    Robson, William Snowdon

    CLASS III.
    Motion made, and Question put—
    "That a sum, not exceeding £3,250, be granted to Her Majesty, to complete the sum necessary to defray the Charge which will come in course of payment during the year

    AYES.

    Aird, John

    Fisher, William Hayes

    Macartney, W. G. Ellison

    Arnold, Alfred

    Fison, Frederick William

    Maclure, Sir John William

    Atkinson, Rt. Hon. John

    Flower, Ernest

    McArthur, C. (Liverpool)

    Bagot, Capt. J. F.

    Folkestone, Viscount

    McKillop, James

    Balfour, Rt. Hon. A. J. (Manc'r)

    Forwood, Rt. Hon. Sir A. B.

    Massey-Mainwaring, Hn. W. F.

    Banbury, Frederick George

    Fry, Lewis

    Mellor, Colonel (Lancashire)

    Barton, Dunbar Plunket

    Garfit, William

    Mildmay, Francis Bingham

    Bathurst, Hon. A. Benjamin

    Gedge, Sydney

    Milton, Viscount

    Bemrose, Sir Henry Howe

    Gibbs, Hon. V. (St. Albans)

    Monk, Charles James

    Bethell, Commander

    Gilliat, John Saunders

    Morton, A. H. A. (Deptford)

    Blundell, Colonel Henry

    Godson, Sir A. F.

    Murray, Rt. Hn A. G. (Bute)

    Bond, Edward

    Gorst, Rt. Hon. Sir J. E.

    Myers, William Henry

    Boulnois, Edmund

    Goschen, Rt Hn. G. J (St. G'rg's)

    Newdigate, Francis Alexander

    Brassey, Albert

    Goschen, George J. (Sussex)

    Nicholson, William Graham

    Brodrick, Rt. Hon. St. John

    Gray, Ernest, West Ham)

    Nicol, Donald Ninian

    Butcher, John George

    Greene, H. D. (Shrewsbury)

    Penn, John

    Cavendish, R. F. (N. Lancs)

    Greene, W. R. (Cambs)

    Phillpotts, Captain Arthur

    Cavendish, V. C. W. (Derbysh.)

    Gretton, John

    Pierpoint, Robert

    Cecil, E. (Hertford, E.)

    Greville, Captain

    Pryce-Jones, Lt.-Col. Edward

    Cecil, Lord H. (Greenwich)

    Gull, Sir Cameron

    Rasch, Major Frederic Carne

    Chaloner, Captain R. G. W.

    Hamilton, Rt. Hon. Lord G.

    Ridley, Rt. Hon. Sir M. W.

    Chamberlain, Rt. Hn. J. (Birm.)

    Hanbury, Rt. Hon. R. W.

    Robertson, H. (Hackney)

    Chamberlain, J. A. (Worc'r)

    Heath, James

    Russell, T. W. (Tyrone)

    Chaplin, Rt. Hon. Henry

    Helder, Augustus

    Ryder, John Herbert Dudley

    Charrington, Spencer

    Henderson, Alexander

    Scott, Sir S. (Marylebone, W.)

    Chelsea, Viscount

    Hill, Sir E. S. (Bristol)

    Sharpe, William Edward T.

    Clare, Octavius Leigh

    Holland, Hon. L. R.

    Sidebotham, J. W. (Cheshire)

    Clough, Walter Owen

    Hornby, William Henry

    Simeon, Sir Barrington

    Cochrane, Hon. T. H. A. E.

    Howard, Joseph

    Sinclair, Louis (Romford)

    Coghill, Douglas Harry

    Hozier, Hon. J. H. C.

    Skewes-Cox, Thomas

    Cohen, Benjamin Louis

    Hubbard, Hon. Evelyn

    Smith, Hn. W. F. D. (Strand)

    Collings, Rt. Hon. Jesse

    Jenkins, Sir John Jones

    Spencer, Ernest

    Colomb, Sir J. C. Ready

    Johnston, William (Belfast)

    Stanley, Lord (Lancs)

    Cook, Fred. L. (Lambeth)

    Johnstone, J. H. (Sussex)

    Stirling-Maxwell, Sir J. M.

    Courtney, Rt. Hon. L. H.

    Kenyon, James

    Strauss, Arthur

    Cozens-Hardy, Herbert H.

    Lafone, Alfred

    Sturt, Hon. Humphry Napier

    Cripps, Charles Alfred

    Lawrence, Sir E. D. (Corn.)

    Thornton, Percy M.

    Curzon, Viscount (Bucks)

    Lawson, John Grant (Yorks)

    Tomlinson, W. E. Murray

    Dickson-Poynder, Sir J. P.

    Lea, Sir T. (Londonderry)

    Ward, Hon. R. A. (Crewe)

    Douglas, Rt. Hon. A. Akers

    Leigh-Bennett, Henry Currie

    Webster, Sir R. E. (I. of W.)

    Drage, Geoffrey

    Llewellyn, E. H. (Somerset)

    Welby, Lt.-Col. A. C. E.

    Drucker, A.

    Lockwood, Lt.-Col. A. R.

    Whiteley, George (Stockport)

    Duncombe, Hon. Hubert V.

    Loder, G. W. E.

    Williams, J. P. (Birm.)

    Edwards, Gen. Sir J. B.

    Long, Col. C. W. (Evesham)

    Wodehouse, Rt. Hn. E. R. (Bath)

    Fellowes, Hon. A. Edward

    Long, Rt. Hon. W. (Liverp'l)

    Young, Commander (Berks, E.)

    Fergusson, Rt Hn. Sir J. (Manc'r)

    Lorne, Marquess of

    Field, Admiral (Eastbourne)

    Lowe, Francis William

    TELLERS FOR THE AYES—

    Finch, George H.

    Lowles, John

    Sir William Walrond and Mr. Anstruther.

    Finlay, Sir R. Bannatyne

    Lyttelton, Hon. Alfred

    NOES.

    Abraham, W. (Cork, N. E.)

    Dilke, Rt. Hon. Sir Charles

    Lewis, John Herbert

    Asquith, Rt. Hon. H. H.

    Dillon, John

    Lloyd-George, David

    Barlow, John Emmott

    Doogan, P. C.

    Lough, Thomas

    Bayley, T. (Derbyshire)

    Foster, Sir W. (Derby Co.)

    Macaleese, Daniel

    Bolton, Thomas Dolling

    Griffith, Ellis J.

    M'Ghee, Richard

    Brigg, John

    Haldane, Richard Burdon

    Maddison, Fred.

    Broadhurst, Henry

    Hayne, Rt. Hon. C. Seale-

    Mendl, Sigismund Ferdinand

    Caldwell, James

    Hazell, Walter

    Morton, E. J. C. (Devonport)

    Cameron, Robert (Durham)

    Joicey, Sir James

    Moss, Samuel

    Causton, Richard Knight

    Jones, W. (Carnarvonshire)

    Moulton, John Fletcher

    Channing, Francis Allston

    Kilbride, Denis

    Palmer, Sir C. M. (Durham)

    Colville, John

    Knox, Edmund Francis V.

    Pickersgill, Edward Hare

    Dalziel, James Henry

    Lambert, George

    Pirie, Duncan V.

    ending on the 31st day of March, 1899, for the Expenses of the Establishment of the Crofters' Commission."
    The Committee divided:—Ayes 144; Noes 56.—(Division List No. 302.)

    Rickett, J. Compton

    Sullivan, Donal (Westmeath)

    Wilson, J. H. (Middlesbro')

    Roberts, J. B. (Eifion)

    Ure, Alexander

    Woodhouse, Sir J T (Hudd'rsf'ld)

    Robson, William Snowdon

    Wallace, Robert (Perth)

    Woods, Samuel

    Roche, Hon. J. (Kerry, E.)

    Walton, Joseph (Barnsley)

    Sinclair, Capt. J. (Forfarsh.)

    Wedderburn, Sir William

    TELLERS FOR THE NOES— Dr. Clark and Mr. Robert Wallace (Edinburgh).

    Spicer, Albert

    Williams, John C. (Notts)

    Strachey, Edward

    Wilson, H. J. (York, W. R.)

    Motion made, and Question put—
    "That a sum, not exceeding £54,889, 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, 1899, for the Expenses of the Prison Commissioners for

    AYES.

    Aird, John

    Fisher, William Hayes

    Macartney, W. G. Ellison

    Arnold, Alfred

    Fison, Frederick William

    Maclure, Sir John William

    Atkinson, Rt. Hon. John

    Flower, Ernest

    McArthur, C. (Liverpool)

    Bagot, Capt. J. F.

    Folkestone, Viscount

    McKillop, James

    Balfour, Rt. Hn. A. J. (Manc'r)

    Forwood, Rt. Hon. Sir A. B.

    Massey-Mainwaring, Hn. W. E.

    Banbury, Frederick George

    Fry, Lewis

    Mellor, Colonel (Lancashire)

    Barton, Dunbar Plunket

    Garfit, William

    Mildmay, Francis Bingham

    Bathurst, Hon. A. Benjamin

    Gedge, Sydney

    Milton, Viscount

    Bemrose, Sir Henry Howe

    Gibbs, Hon. V. (St. Albans)

    Monk, Charles James

    Bethell, Commander

    Gilliat, John Saunders

    Morton, A. H. A. (Deptford)

    Blundell, Colonel Henry

    Godson, Sir A. F.

    Murray, Rt. Hn. A. G. (Bute)

    Bond, Edward

    Gorst, Rt. Hon. Sir J. E.

    Myers, William Henry

    Boulnois, Edmund

    Goschen, Rt Hn. G. J. (St. G'rg's)

    Newdigate, Francis Alexander

    Brassey, Albert

    Goschen, George J. (Sussex)

    Nicholson, William Graham

    Brodrick, Rt. Hon. St. John

    Gray, Ernest (West Ham)

    Nicol, Donald Ninian

    Butcher, John George

    Greene, H. D. (Shrewsbury)

    Penn, John

    Cavendish, R. F. (N. Lancs)

    Greene, W. E. (Cambs)

    Phillpotts, Captain Arthur

    Cavendish, V. C. W. (Derbysh.)

    Gretton, John

    Pierpoint, Robert

    Cecil, Evelyn (Hertford, E.)

    Greville, Captain

    Pryce-Jones, Lt.-Col. Edward.

    Cecil, Lord H. (Greenwich)

    Gull, Sir Cameron

    Purvis, Robert

    Chaloner, Captain R. G W.

    Hamilton, Rt. Hon. Lord G.

    Rasch, Major Frederic Carne

    Chamberlain, Rt. Hn. J. (Birm.)

    Hanbury, Rt. Hon. R. W.

    Ridley, Rt. Hon. Sir M. W.

    Chamberlain, J. A. (Worc'r)

    Heath, James

    Robertson, H. (Hackney)

    Chaplin, Rt. Hon. Henry

    Helder, Augustus

    Russell, T. W. (Tyrone)

    Charrington, Spencer

    Henderson, Alexander

    Ryder, John Herbert Dudley

    Chelsea, Viscount

    Hill, Sir E. S. (Bristol)

    Scott, Sir S. (Marylebone, W.)

    Clare, Octavius Leigh

    Holland, Hon. L. R.

    Sharpe, William Edward T.

    Clough, Walter Owen

    Hornby, William Henry

    Sidebotham, J. W. (Cheshire)

    Cochrane, Hon. T. H. A. E.

    Howard, Joseph

    Simeon, Sir Barrington)

    Coghill, Douglas Harry

    Hozier, Hon. J. H. C.

    Sinclair, Louis (Romford)

    Cohen, Benjamin Louis

    Hubbard, Hon. Evelyn

    Skewes-Cox, Thomas

    Collings, Rt. Hon. Jesse

    Jenkins, Sir John Jones

    Smith, Hn. W. F. D. (Strand)

    Colomb, Sir J. C. Ready

    Johnston, William (Belfast)

    Spencer, Ernest

    Cook, Fred. L. (Lambeth)

    Johnstone, John H. (Sussex)

    Stanley, Lord (Lancs)

    Courtney, Bt. Hon. L. H.

    Kenyon, James

    Stirling-Maxwell, Sir J. M.

    Cripps, Charles Alfred

    Lafone, Alfred

    Strauss, Arthur

    Curzon, Viscount (Bucks)

    Lawrence, Sir E. D. (Corn.)

    Sturt, Hon. Humphry Napier

    Dickson-Poynder, Sir J. P.

    Lawson, John Grant (Yorks)

    Thornton, Percy M.

    Dilke, Rt. Hon. Sir Charles

    Lea, Sir T. (Londonderry)

    Tomlinson, W. E. Murray

    Douglas, Rt. Hon. A. Akers

    Leigh-Bennett, Henry Currie

    Ward, Hon. R. A. (Crewe)

    Drage, Geoffrey

    Llewellyn, E. H. (Somerset)

    Webster, Sir R. E. (I. of W.)

    Drucker, A.

    Lockwood, Lt.-Col. A. R.

    Welby, Lieut.-Col. A. C. E.

    Duncombe, Hon. H. V.

    Loder, G. W. E.

    Whiteley, George (Stockport)

    Edwards, Gen. Sir J. B.

    Long, Col. C. W. (Evesham)

    Williams, J. P. (Birm.)

    Fellowes, Hon. A. Edward

    Long, Rt. Hon. W. (Liverp'l)

    Wodehouse, Rt. Hn. E. R. (Bath)

    Fergusson, Rt Hn. Sir J. (Manc'r)

    Lorne, Marquess of

    Young, Commander (Berks, E.)

    Field, Admiral (Eastbourne)

    Lowe, Francis William

    TELLERS FOR THE AYES—

    Finch, George H.

    Lowles, John

    Sir William Walrond and Mr. Anstruther.

    Finlay, Sir R. Bannatyne

    Lyttelton, Hon. Alfred

    NOES.

    Abraham, W. (Cork, N. E.)

    Brigg, John

    Causton, Richard Knight

    Barlow, John Emmott

    Broadhurst, Henry

    Channing, Francis Allston

    Bayley, T. (Derbyshire)

    Caldwell, James

    Clark, Dr. G. B. (Caithness-sh.)

    Bolton, Thomas Dolling

    Cameron, Robert (Durham)

    Colville, John

    Scotland, and of the Prisons under their control, including the Maintenance of Criminal Lunatics and the Preparation of Judicial Statistics."
    The Committee divided:—Ayes 144; Noes 55.—(Division List No. 303.)

    Cozens-Hardy, Herbert H.

    Macaleese, Daniel

    Spicer, Albert

    Dalziel, James Henry

    M'Ghee, Richard

    Strachey, Edward

    Dillon, John

    Maddison, Fred.

    Sullivan, Donal (Westmeath)

    Doogan, P. C.

    Mendl, Sigismund Ferdinand

    Ure, Alexander

    Poster, Sir W. (Derby Co.)

    Morton, E. J. C. (Devonport)

    Walton, Joseph (Barnsley)

    Griffith, Ellis J.

    Moss, Samuel

    Wedderburn, Sir William

    Haldane, Richard Burdon

    Moulton, John Fletcher

    Williams, John C. (Notts)

    Hayne, Kt. Hon. C. Seale-

    Palmer, Sir C. M. (Durham)

    Wilson, H. J. (York, W. R.)

    Hazell, Walter

    Pickersgill, Edward Hare

    Wilson, J. H. (Middlesbro')

    Joicey, Sir James

    Pirie, Duncan V.

    Woodhouse, Sir J T (Hudd'rsf'ld)

    Jones, W. (Carnarvonshire)

    Provand, Andrew Dryburgh

    Woods, Samuel

    Kilbride, Denis

    Rickett, J. Compton

    Knox, Edmund Francis V.

    Roberts, J. B. (Eifion)

    TELLERS FOR THE NOES—

    Lambert, George

    Robson, William Snowdon

    Mr. Robert Wallace (Edinburgh) and Mr. Robert Wallace (Perth).

    Lewis, John Herbert

    Roche, Hon. J. (Kerry, E.)

    Lough, Thomas

    Sinclair, Capt. J. (Forfarsh.)

    CLASS IV.
    "£605, to complete the sum for Endowed Schools Commissioners, Ireland."
    "£1,604, to complete the sum for National Gallery of Ireland."
    Agreed to.
    Motion made, and Question put—
    "That a sum, not exceeding £2,450, be

    AYES.

    Aird, John

    Dilke, Rt. Hon. Sir Charles

    Hozier, Hon. J. H. C.

    Arnold, Alfred

    Douglas, Rt. Hon. A. Akers

    Hubbard, Hon. Evelyn

    Atkinson, Rt. Hon. John

    Drage, Geoffrey

    Jenkins, Sir John Jones

    Bagot, Capt. J. FitzRoy

    Drucker, A.

    Johnston, William (Belfast)

    Balfour, Rt. Hon. A. J. (Manc'r)

    Duncombe, Hon. Hubert V.

    Johnstone, John H. (Sussex)

    Banbury, Frederick George

    Edwards, Gen. Sir J. B.

    Kenyon, James

    Barton, Dunbar Plunket

    Fellowes, Hon. Ailwyn Edw.

    Lafone, Alfred

    Bathurst, Hon. Allen Benj.

    Fergusson, Rt Hn. Sir J. (Manc'r)

    Lawrence, Sir E. D. (Corn.)

    Bemrose, Sir Henry Howe

    Finch, George H.

    Lawson, John Grant (Yorks)

    Bethell, Commander

    Finlay, Sir Robert Bannatyne

    Lea, Sir Thos. (Londonderry)

    Blundell, Colonel Henry

    Fisher, William Hayes

    Leigh-Bennett, Henry Currie

    Bond, Edward

    Fison, Frederick William

    Lewis, John Herbert

    Boulnois, Edmund

    Flower, Ernest

    Llewellyn, Rt. H. (Somerset)

    Brassey, Albert

    Folkestone, Viscount

    Lockwood, Lieut.-Col. A. R.

    Brodrick, Rt. Hon. St. John

    Forwood, Rt. Hon. Sir A. B.

    Loder, Gerald Walter Erskine

    Butcher, John George

    Foster, Sir W. (Derby Co.)

    Long, Col. C. W. (Evesham)

    Causton, Richard Knight

    Fry, Lewis

    Long, Rt. Hon. W. (Liverp'l)

    Cavendish, R. F. (N. Lancs)

    Garfit, William

    Lorne, Marquess of

    Cavendish, V. C. W. (Derbysh.)

    Gedge, Sydney

    Lough, Thomas

    Cecil, Evelyn (Hertford, E.)

    Gilliat, John Saunders

    Lowe, Francis William

    Cecil, Lord Hugh (Greenwich)

    Godson, Sir Augustus F.

    Lowles, John

    Chaloner, Capt. R. G. W.

    Gorst, Rt. Hon. Sir J. Eldon

    Lyttelton, Hon. Alfred

    Chamberlain, Rt. Hn. J. (Birm.)

    Goschen, Rt Hn. G. J. (St. G'rg s)

    Macartney, W. G. Ellison

    Chamberlain, J. A. (Worc'r)

    Goschen, George J. (Sussex)

    Maclure, Sir John William

    Channing, Francis Allston

    Gray, Ernest (West Ham)

    McArthur, Chas. (Liverpool)

    Chaplin, Rt. Hon. Henry

    Greene, H. D. (Shrewsbury)

    McKillop, James

    Charrington, Spencer

    Greene, W. R. (Cambs)

    Maddison, Fred.

    Chelsea, Viscount

    Gretton, John

    Massey-Mainwaring, Hn. W. F.

    Clare, Octavius Leigh

    Greville, Captain

    Mellor, Colonel (Lancashire)

    Clough, Walter Owen

    Gull, Sir Cameron

    Mildmay, Francis Bingham

    Cochrane, Hon. T. H. A. E.

    Haldane, Richard Burdon

    Milton, Viscount

    Coghill, Douglas Harry

    Hamilton, Rt. Hon. Lord G.

    Monk, Chas. James

    Cohen, Benjamin Louis

    Hanbury. Rt. Hon. R. W.

    Morton, A. H. A. (Deptford)

    Collings, Rt. Hon. Jesse

    Hayne, Rt. Hn. Charles Seale

    Murray, Rt. Hn. A. G. (Bute)

    Colomb, Sir John Charles R.

    Hazell, Walter

    Myers, William Henry

    Colville, John

    Heath, James

    Newdigate, Francis Alexander

    Cook, Fred. Lucas (Lambeth)

    Helder, Augustus

    Nicholson, William Graham

    Courtney, Rt. Hon. L. H.

    Henderson, Alexander

    Nicol, Donald Ninian

    Cozens-Hardy, Herbert Hardy

    Hill, Sir E. S. (Bristol)

    Palmer, Sir C. M. (Durham)

    Cripps, Charles Alfred

    Holland, Hon. Lionel Raleigh

    Penn, John

    Curzon, Viscount (Bucks)

    Hornby, William Henry

    Phillpotts, Captain Arthur

    Dickson-Poynder, Sir J. P.

    Howard, Joseph

    Pickersgill, Edward Hare

    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, 1899, for the Grants in Aid of the Expenses of the Queen's Colleges in Ireland."
    The Committee divided:—Ayes 166; Noes 31.—(Division List No. 304.)

    Pierpoint, Robert

    Sinclair, Capt. J. (Forfarsh.)

    Ward, Hon. R. A. (Crewe)

    Provand, Andrew Dryburgh

    Sinclair, Louis (Romford)

    Webster, Sir R. E. (I. of W.)

    Pryce-Jones, Lieut.-Col. E'dw.

    Skewes-Cox, Thomas

    Welby, Lieut.-Col. K. C. E.

    Purvis, Robert

    Smith, Hon. W. F. D. (Strand)

    Whiteley, George (Stockport)

    Rasch, Major Frederic Carne

    Spencer, Ernest

    Williams, John C. (Notts)

    Rickett, J. Compton

    Spicer, Albert

    Williams, Joseph P. (Birm.)

    Ridley, Rt. Hon. Sir M. W.

    Stanley, Lord (Lancs)

    Wilson, H. J. (York, W. R.)

    Robertson, Herbert (Hackney)

    Stirling-Maxwell, Sir J. M.

    Wodehouse, Rt. Hn. E. R. (Bath)

    Robson, William Snowdon

    Strachey, Edward

    Woodhouse, Sir J. T. (Hud'sfld)

    Russell, T. W. (Tyrone)

    Strauss, Arthur

    Young, Comm. (Berks, E.)

    Ryder, John Herbert Dudley

    Start, Hon. Humphrey N.

    Scott, Sir S. (Marylebone, W.)

    Thornton, Percy M.

    TELLERS FOR THE AYES—

    Sharpe, William Edward T.

    Tomlinson, W. E. Murray

    Sir William Walrond and Mr. Anstruther.

    Sidebotham, J. W. (Cheshire)

    Wallace, Robert (Perth)

    Simeon, Sir Barrington

    Walton, Joseph (Barnsley)

    NOES.

    Abraham, Wm. (Cork, N. E.)

    Jones, Wm. (Carnarvonshire)

    Roberts, John Bryn (Eifion)

    Barlow, John Emmott

    Kilbride, Denis

    Roche, Hon. J. (Kerry, E.)

    Bayley, Thos. (Derbysh.)

    Knox, Edmund Francis Vesey

    Sullivan, Donal (Westmeath)

    Bolton, Thomas Dolling

    Lambert, George

    Ure, Alexander

    Brigg, John

    Macaleese, Daniel

    Wallace, Robert (Edinburgh)

    Broadhurst, Henry

    M'Ghee, Richard

    Wedderburn, Sir William

    Caldwell, James

    Mendl, Sigismund Ferdinand

    Wilson, H. J. (York, W. R.)

    Cameron, Robert (Durham)

    Morton, E. J. C. (Devonport)

    Wilson, J. H. (Middlesbro')

    Clark, Dr. G. B. (Caithness-sh.)

    Moss, Samuel

    Woods, Samuel

    Dalziel, James Henry

    Moulton, John Fletcher

    Griffith, Ellis J.

    Pirie, Duncan V.

    TELLERS FOR THE NOES—

    Joicey, Sir James

    Provand, Andrew Dryburgh

    Mr. Dillon and Mr. Doogan.

    CLASS V.
    Motion made, and Question put—
    "That a sum, not exceeding £182,463, be granted to Her Majesty, to complete the sum necessary to defray the Charge which will come in course of payment during the year

    AYES.

    Aird, John

    Cohen, Benjamin Louis

    Greene, W. D. (Cambs)

    Arnold, Alfred

    Collings, Rt. Hon. Jesse

    Gretton, John

    Atkinson, Rt. Hon. John

    Colomb, Sir John C. Ready

    Greville, Captain

    Bagot, Capt. J. FitzRoy

    Colville, John

    Gull, Sir Cameron

    Balfour, Rt. Hon. A. J. (Manc'r)

    Cook, Fred. Lucas (Lambeth)

    Hamilton, Rt. Hon. Lord G.

    Banbury, Frederick George

    Cozens-Hardy, Herbert Hardy

    Hanbury, Rt. Hon. R. W.

    Barton, Dunbar Plunket

    Curzon, Viscount (Bucks)

    Heath, James

    Bathurst, Hon. Allen Benj.

    Dickson-Poynder, Sir John P.

    Helder, Augustus

    Bemrose, Sir Henry Howe

    Douglas, Rt. Hon. A. Akers

    Henderson, Alexander

    Bethell, Commander

    Drage, Geoffrey

    Hill, Sir E. Stock (Bristol)

    Blundell, Colonel Henry

    Drucker, A.

    Holland, Hon. Lionel Raleigh

    Bond, Edward

    Duncombe, Hon. Hubert V.

    Hornby, William Henry

    Boulnois, Edmund

    Fellowes, Hon. Ailwyn Edw.

    Howard, Joseph

    Brassey, Albert

    Fergusson, Rt Hn. Sir J. (Manc'r)

    Hozier, Hon. J. H. C.

    Brodrick, Rt. Hon. St. John

    Finch, George H.

    Hubbard, Hon. Evelyn

    Butcher, John George

    Finlay, Sir Robert Bannatyne

    Jenkins, Sir John Jones

    Cavendish, R. F. (N. Lancs)

    Fisher, William Hayes

    Johnston, Wm. (Belfast)

    Cavendish, V. C. W. (Derbysh.)

    Fison, Frederick William

    Johnstone, John H. (Sussex)

    Cecil, Evelyn (Hertford, E.)

    Flower, Ernest

    Joicey, Sir James

    Cecil, Lord Hugh (Greenwich)

    Folkestone, Viscount

    Kenyon, James

    Chaloner, Captain R. G. W.

    Forwood, Rt. Hon. Sir A. B.

    Lafone, Alfred

    Chamberlain, Rt. Hn. J. (Birm.)

    Garfit, William

    Lawrence. Sir E. D. (Corn.)

    Chamberlain, J. A. (Worc'r)

    Gedge, Sydney

    Lawson, John Grant (Yorks)

    Chaplin, Rt. Hon. Henry

    Gilliat, John Saunders

    Lea, Sir T. (Londonderry)

    Charrington, Spencer

    Godson, Sir Augustus Fredk.

    Leigh-Bennett, Henry Currie

    Chelsea, Viscount

    Gorst, Rt. Hon. Sir J. Eldon

    Llewellyn, E. H. (Somerset)

    Clare, Octavius Leigh

    Goschen, Rt Hn. G. J. (St. Geo's)

    Lockwood, Lieut.-Col. A. R.

    Clough, Walter Owen

    Goschen, George J. (Sussex)

    Loder, Gerald Walter Erskine

    Cochrane, Hon. T. H. A. E.

    Gray, Ernest (West Ham)

    Long, Col. C. W. (Evesham)

    Coghill, Douglas Harry

    Greene, H. D. (Shrewsbury)

    Long, Rt. Hon. W. (Liverp'l)

    ending on the 31st day of March, 1899, for Grants in Aid of the Expenses of the British Protectorates in Uganda and in Central and East Africa, and under the Uganda Railway Act, 1896."
    The Committee divided:—Ayes 143; Noes 47.—(Division List No. 305.)

    Lorne, Marquess of

    Penn, John

    Spencer, Ernest

    Lowe, Francis William

    Phillpotts, Captain Arthur

    Spicer, Albert

    Lowles, John

    Pierpoint, Robert

    Stanley, Lord (Lancs)

    Lyttelton, Hon. Alfred

    Provand, Andrew Dryburgh

    Stirling-Maxwell, Sir J. M.

    Macartney, W. G. Ellison

    Pryce-Jones, Lieut.-Col. Edw.

    Strauss, Arthur

    Maclure, Sir John William

    Purvis, Robert

    Sturt, Hon. Humphry N.

    McArthur, Chas. (Liverpool)

    Rasch, Major Frederic Carne

    Thornton, Percy M.

    McKillop, James

    Ridley, Rt. Hon. Sir M. W.

    Tomlinson, W. E. Murray

    Massey-Mainwaring, Hn. W. F.

    Robertson, Herbert (Hackney)

    Ward, Hon. R. A. (Crewe)

    Mellor, Colonel (Lancashire)

    Russell, T. W. (Tyrone)

    Webster, Sir R. E. (I. of W.)

    Mildmay, Francis Bingham

    Ryder, John Herbert Dudley

    Welby, Lieut.-Col. A. C. E.

    Milton, Viscount

    Scott, Sir S. (Marylebone, W.)

    Williams, J. P. (Birm.)

    Monk, Charles James

    Sharpe, William Edward T.

    Wodehouse, Rt. Hn. E. R. (Bath)

    Morton, A. H. A. (Deptford)

    Sidebotham, J. W. (Cheshire)

    Woodhouse, Sir J T (Hudd'rsf'ld)

    Murray, Rt. Hn. A. G. (Bute)

    Simeon, Sir Barrington

    Young, Comm. (Berks, E.)

    Myers, William Henry

    Sinclair, Capt. J. (Forfarsh.)

    Nicholson, William Graham

    Sinclair, Louis (Romford)

    TELLERS FOR THE AYES—

    Nicol, Donald Ninian

    Skewes-Cox, Thomas

    Sir William Walrond and Mr. Anstruther.

    Palmer, Sir C. M. (Durham)

    Smith, Hon. W. F. D. (Strand)

    NOES.

    Abraham, Wm. (Cork, N. E.)

    Hayne, Rt. Hon. Chas. Seale-

    Roberts, John Bryn (Eifion)

    Barlow, John Emmott

    Hazell, Walter

    Robson, William Snowdon

    Bolton, Thomas Dolling

    Kilbride, Denis

    Roche, Hon. J. (Kerry, E.)

    Brigg, John

    Knox, Edmund Francis Vesey

    Strachey, Edward

    Caldwell, James

    Lambert, George

    Sullivan, Donal (Westmeath)

    Cameron, Robert (Durham)

    Lewis, John Herbert

    Ure, Alexander

    Causton, Richard Knight

    Lough, Thomas

    Wallace, Robert (Perth)

    Channing, Francis Allston

    Macaleese, Daniel

    Walton, Joseph (Barnsley)

    Clark, Dr. G. B. (Caithness-sh.)

    M'Ghee, Richard

    Wedderburn, Sir William

    Courtney, Rt. Hon. L. H.

    Maddison, Fred.

    Williams, John C. (Notts)

    Dalziel, James Henry

    Mendl, Sigismund Ferdinand

    Wilson, H. J. (York, W. R.)

    Dilke, Rt. Hon. Sir Charles

    Morton, E. J. C. (Devonport)

    Wilson, J. H. (Middlesbro')

    Dillon, John

    Moss, Samuel

    Woods, Samuel

    Doogan, P. C.

    Moulton, John Fletcher

    Foster, Sir W. (Derby Co.)

    Pickersgill, Edward Hare

    TELLERS FOR THE NOES—

    Griffith, Ellis J.

    Pirie, Duncan V.

    Mr. Bayley and Mr. William Jones.

    Haldane, Richard Burdon

    Rickett, J. Compton

    Resolutions to be reported this day.
    SIR C. DILKE: Will the Leader of the House say in what order he proposes to take the Votes to-morrow?
    THE FIRST LORD OF THE TREASURY: The first Report of Supply will be that relating to the Votes passed during the present sitting. One reason for that is that we shall be able to take the Local Government Board (Ireland) Vote rather early in the proceedings, and that, I understand, will be the most appropriate Vote for the discussion which the honourable Member for East Mayo wishes to raise on the question of Irish distress.

    SUPPLY REPORT [5TH AUGUST].
    Deferred until this day.

    WAYS AND MEANS.
    Considered in Committee.
    (In the Committee.)
    Resolved, "That, towards making good the Supply granted to Her Majesty for the service of the year ending on the 31st March 1899, the sum of £42,968,470 be granted out of the Consolidated Fund of the United Kingdom."—(Mr. Chancellor of the Exchequer.)
    Resolution to be reported this day.

  ADJOURNMENT.
  Whereupon, in pursuance of the Order of the House of the 18th day of July last, Mr. Speaker adjourned the House without Question put.
  House adjourned at 12.45

Preamble
The LORD CHANCELLOR took his seat on the Woolsack at a quarter past Four of the Clock.
PRIVATE BILL BUSINESS.
  COMPANIES BILL. [H.L.]
  Report from the Select Committee (with the Minutes of Proceedings) made, and to be printed. [No. 207.] Minutes of evidence laid upon the Table, and to be delivered out.
  CARDIFF RAILWAY BILL.
  Moved, that Standing Orders Nos. 143 and 143A be considered in order to their being dispensed with in respect of the said Bill; agreed to; Bill read the third time with the Amendments; 'Bill passed, and returned to the Commons.
  LANCASHIRE, DERBYSHIRE, AND EAST COAST RAILWAY BILL.
  Returned from the Commons with the Amendments agreed to.
  LINCOLN AND EAST COAST RAILWAY AND DOCK BILL.
  Returned from the Commons with the Amendments agreed to.
  MIDDLESEX COUNTY COUNCIL BILL.
  Returned from the Commons with the Amendments agreed to.
  LIVERPOOL CORPORATION BILL.
  Returned from the Commons with the Amendments agreed to, with Amendments; the said Amendments considered, and agreed to.
RETURNS, REPORTS, ETC.
  SECONDARY EDUCATION (SCOTLAND).
  Report for the year 1898 by Sir Henry Craik, K.C.B., on the inspection of higher class schools and the examination for leaving certificates.
  BIRTHS, DEATHS, AND MARRIAGES (ENGLAND)
  Sixtieth annual Report of the Registrar-General, for 1897.
  NATIONAL DEBT.
  History of the earlier years of the funded Debt, from 1864 to 1786.

  AGRICULTURAL STATISTICS (IRELAND).
  I. General abstracts, showing the acreage under crops, also the number and description of live stock in each county and province, for 1897–98;
  II. Tables showing the extent in statute acres, and the produce of the crops, for the year 1898;
  III. (Migratory Labourers.) Report and tables relating to migratory agricultural labourers, for the year 1898.

  CONGESTED DISTRICTS BOARD (IRELAND).
  Report of the Board, for the period from 1st April, 1897, to 31st June, 1898.
  BANKING, RAILWAY, AND SHIPPING STATISTICS (IRELAND).
  Report for the half-year ended 30th June, 1898.
  IRISH LAND COMMISSION (PROCEEDINGS).
  Return of Proceedings during the months of March, April, and May, 1898.
  QUEEN'S COLLEGE, GALWAY.
  Annual Report of the President, for the Session 1897–98.
  INDIA (CANTONMENT REGULATIONS).
  Instructions issued by the Government of India on the Cantonment Regulations, published 15th October, 1897.
  LABOUR DEPARTMENT, BOARD OF TRADE.
  Fifth annual abstract of labour statistics of the United Kingdom.
  TRADE UNIONS.
  Report by the chief labour correspondent of the Board of Trade on trade unions, 1897; with comparative statistics for 1892–97.
  STRIKES AND LOCK-OUTS.
  Report by the chief labour correspondent of the Board of Trade on the strikes and lock-outs of 1897, with statistical tables.

  INDUSTRIAL PROPERTY AND MERCHANDISE MARKS.
  Papers and correspondence relative to the recent conference at Brussels on the subject of industrial property and merchandise marks.
  Presented (by command), and ordered to lie on the Table.

  NAVAL PRIZE MONEY.
  Account showing the receipt and expenditure of naval prize, bounty, salvage, and other moneys, between the 1st April, 1897, and the 31st March, 1898; laid before the House (pursuant to Act), and ordered to lie on the Table.
  POLLING DISTRICTS (WARWICK-SHIRE).
  Resolution of the County Council of Warwickshire dividing the Chilvers Coton Parliamentary polling district into two new Parliamentary polling districts; laid before the House (pursuant to Act), and ordered to lie on the Table.
  SUPERANNUATION.
  Treasury Minute, dated 29th July, 1898, declaring that John William Squiers, postman, Woodford Green, in the service of the Postmaster General, was appointed without a civil service certificate, through inadvertence on the part of the head of his Department; laid before the House (pursuant to Act), and ordered to lie on the Table.
  SUPERANNUATION ACT, 1887.
  Return, for the year ended 31st March, 1898, of the Army and Navy officers permitted under rule 2 of the regulations drawn up under section 6 of the Act to hold civil employment of profit under public Departments; laid before the House (pursuant to Act), and ordered to lie on the Table.
  FACTORY AND WORKSHOP (PARTICULARS OF PIECE-WORK WAGES) (WHOLESALE TAILORING)
  Order of the Secretary of State for the Home Department, dated 6th August, 1898, applying, with modifications, the provisions of section 40 of the Factory and Workshop Act, 1895, to factories and workshops in which wholesale tailoring is carried on; laid before the House (pursuant to Act), and ordered to lie on the Table.
  RAILWAY SERVANTS (HOURS OF LABOUR).
  Report by the Board of Trade respecting the proceedings of the Board of Trade under the Railway Regulation Act, 1893, during the year ended 27th July, 1898; laid before the House (pursuant to Act), and ordered to lie on the Table.
  WEIGHTS AND MEASURES.
  Report by the Board of Trade on their proceedings and business under the Weights and Measures Acts, 1878 to 1897; laid before the House (pursuant to Act), and ordered to lie on the Table.
  LOCAL TAXATION RETURNS (SCOTLAND) ACT, 1881.
  The annual local taxation Returns for the year 1896–97; laid before the House (pursuant to Act), and ordered to lie on the Table.
PUBLIC BUSINESS.
  LOCAL TAXATION ACCOUNT (SCOTLAND) BILL.
  Read the first time; to be printed; and to be read the second time To-morrow: (The Lord Balfour); and Standing Orders Nos. XXXIX. and XLV. to be considered in order to their being dispensed with. [No. 208.]

  NONCONFORMIST MARRIAGES (ATTENDANCE OF REGISTRARS) BILL.
  House in Committee, as ordered.
  Question put—
  "That clauses 1, 2, and 3 stand part of the Bill."
  Motion agreed to.

  CLAUSE 4.
  Amendment proposed—
  "Page 1, line 18, leave out 'such,' and insert 'the.'"—(The Earl of Selborne.)
  THE EARL OF SELBORNE: The Amendments that I have to move are merely drafting Amendments, and I hops your Lordships will agree to them.
  Question put.
  Amendment agreed to.
  Amendment proposed—
  "Line 22, after 'or,' insert 'certificate and.'"—(The Earl of Selborne.)
  Question put.
  Amendment agreed to.
  Question put.—
  "That clause 4, as amended, stand part of the Bill."
  Motion agreed to.

  CLAUSE 5.
  Amendment proposed—
  "Page 2, line 2, leave out 'such,' and insert 'the.'"—(The Earl of Selborne.)
  Question put.
  Amendment agreed to.
  Amendment proposed—
  "Line 5, leave out 'such,' and insert 'the.'"—(The Earl of Selborne.)
  Question put.
  Amendment agreed to.
  Amendment proposed—
  "Line 8, leave out 'such.'"—(The Earl of Selborne.)
  Question put.
  Amendment agreed to.
  Amendment proposed—
  "Line 9, leave out 'intended.' "—(The of Selborne.)
  Question put.
  Amendment agreed to.
  Amendment proposed—
  "Line 16, leave out 'said.' "—(The Earl of Selborne.)
  Question put.
  Amendment agreed to.
  Amendment proposed—
  "Line 17, after 'instructions,' insert 'in the prescribed form.' "—(The Earl of Selborne.)
  Question put.
  Amendment agreed to.
  Amendment proposed—
  "Line 17, leave out 'said.'"—(The Earl of Selborne.)
  Question put.
  Amendment agreed to.
  Amendment proposed—
  "Lines 17 and 18, leave out 'in the form prescribed by rules under this Act.'" —(The Earl of Selborne.)
  Question put.
  Amendment agreed to.
  Question put—
  "That clause 5, as amended, stand part of the Bill."
  Motion agreed to.

  CLAUSE 6.
  Amendment proposed—
  "Page 2, lines 19 and 20, leave out 'the provisions of.'"—(The Earl of Selborne.)
  Question put.
  Amendment agreed to.
  Amendment proposed—
  "Line 20, leave out 'said.' "—(The Earl of Selborne.)
  Question put.
  Amendment agreed to.
  Amendment proposed—
  "Line 25, leave out 'I call upon these persons here present to witness that.'"— (Viscount Llandaff.)
  VISCOUNT LLANDAFF: My Lords, the object of this Amendment is to make the declaration conform in terms to the form of the marriage service which is common, certainly, to the Catholic Church, the English Church, and, I believe, to many of the Dissenting churches.
  Question put.
  Amendment agreed to.
  Amendment proposed—
  "Line 26, leave out 'lawful.'"—(Viscount Llandaff.)
  VISCOUNT LLANDAFF: My Lords, I move this Amendment for the same reason.
  Question put.
  Amendment agreed to.
  Amendment proposed—
  "Line 28, leave out 'declaration.' "—(Viscount Llandaff.)
  Question put.
  Amendment agreed to.
  Amendment proposed—
  "Line 32, after 'person,' insert 'in this Act referred to as an authorised person.'"—(Viscount Llandaff.)
  Question put.
  Amendment agreed to.
  Question put—
  "That clause 6, as amended, stand the Bill."
  Motion agreed to.

  CLAUSE 7.
  Amendment proposed—
  "Page 3, lines 4 and 5, leave out 'at which the registrar is not required to be present,' and insert 'under this Act.'" —(The Earl of Selborne.)
  Question put.
  Amendment agreed to.
  Amendment proposed—
  "Line 8, leave out 'said.' "—(The Earl of Selborne.)
  Question put.
  Amendment agreed to.
  Amendment proposed—
  "Line 18, leave out 'other.'"—(The Earl of Selborne.)
  Question put.
  Amendment agreed to.
  Question put—
  "That clause 7, as amended, stand part of the Bill."
  Motion agreed to.
  Question put—
  "That clauses 8, 9, 10, and 11 be added to the Bill."
  Motion agreed to.
  Remaining clauses, with slight drafting Amendments, agreed to.
  Standing Orders Nos. 39 and 40 dispensed with, and
  Bill read a third time, and passed.

  ELEMENTARY SCHOOL TEACHERS (SUPERANNUATION) BILL.
  The LORD PRIVY SEAL (Viscount CROSS): My Lords, I beg to move the Second Reading of this Bill, which, provides for superannuation and other annuities and allowances to elementary school teachers certificated by the Education Department. This matter has been before the other House of Parliament a long time. In 1891 and 1892 unanimous resolutions were passed in favour of some such scheme as this, and a Special Committee was appointed to go into the whole subject. They made a Report, and this Bill contains their recommendations. I hope your Lordships will consent to give the Bill a Second Reading.
  Question put.
  Bill read a second time.
  Standing Order dispensed with.
  House in Committee as ordered.
  Amendments proposed—

  CLAUSE 12.
  "Page 7, after sub-section (1), insert as a new sub-section—
  "The expression 'public elementary school' means a public or other school in receipt of annual Parliamentary grant."
  "Page 8, line 8, leave out sub-section (5), and insert as a new sub-section—
  "It shall not be lawful for a school board in Scotland to grant under the powers conferred by section sixty-one of the Education (Scotland) Act, 1872, a retiring allowance payable out of the school fund to any teacher of a public school under their management who has accepted this Act in pursuance of the provisions of section five hereof, or to whom this Act otherwise applies."—(The Lord Privy Seal.)
  Question put.
  Amendments agreed to.
  Standing Orders dispensed with, and
  Bill read a third time, and passed.

  SEED SUPPLY AND POTATO SPRAYING (IRELAND) BILL.
  House in Committee (according to order); Bill reported' without Amendment; Standing Committee negatived; and Bill to be read the third time Tomorrow.
  KINGSTOWN HARBOUR ROADS TRANSFER BILL.
  House in Committee (according to order); Bill reported without Amendment; Standing Committee negatived; and Bill to be read the third time Tomorrow.

  OUTDOOR RELIEF (IRELAND) BILL.
  THE LORD CHANCELLOR OF IRELAND (Lord ASHBOURNE): My Lords, this Bill is the counterpart of a Bill that was brought in and passed last year to deal with cases in some parts of Ireland where there was special distress that required the relaxation of the Outdoor Relief Act. The Bill sanctions the administration for a short period of a special relief by boards of guardians with the approval of the Local Government Board for Ireland, and I beg to move that the Bill be read a second time.
  Question put.
  Bill read a second time.

  METROPOLITAN COMMONS BILL.
  House in Committee (according to order); Bill reported without Amendment; Standing Committee negatived; and Bill to be read the third time Tomorrow.
  METROPOLITAN COMMON POOR FUND BILL.
  Read the third time (according to order), and passed.
  MERCHANT SHIPPING (MERCANTILE MARINE FUND) BILL.
  Read the third time (according to order), and passed.
  TRUSTS (SCOTLAND) BILL.
  Read the third time (according to rder), and passed.
  EXPIRING LAWS CONTINUANCE BILL.
  House in Committee (according to order); Bill reported without Amendment; Standing Committee negatived; and Bill to be read the third time Tomorrow.
  PUBLIC WORKS LOANS BILL.
  Read the second time (according to order); Committee negatived; and Bill to be read the third time To-morrow.

VACCINATION BILL.
Message received from the Commons stating that they agreed with several of the Amendments made by the Lords to the Vaccination Bill, but that they disagreed with the Amendment to strike cut clause 2 on the ground that unless some provision were made for those who conscientiously objected to vaccination, the enforcement of vaccination would be impracticable in many districts, and that the Amendment is not in the interests of the promotion of vaccination.
LORD HARRIS: My Lords, I have to ask your Lordships not to insist on the Amendment to which the House of Commons have disagreed. I do not think I have much to add to what I have already said upon this subject, but I should like to repeat once more the argument I used the other night with regard to the three classes of parents who are affected by the particular clause which is under discussion. As I said the other night, the parents may be divided into three classes—the unwilling parent, the willing parent, and the lazy parent. As to the

445
unwilling parents, it does not matter what law you pass, they will not have their children vaccinated. The willing parents are as likely to be willing to have their children vaccinated now, if this clause is accepted, as they were before, because they will be put to less trouble. The only class of parent you have to consider is the lazy, negligent parent. Under the present law these parents have to take their children to the vaccination station, possibly at some distance, and possibly in inclement weather. In fact, they are put to a great deal of trouble; but, if this clause is accepted, these parents are actually saved trouble. The vaccinating officer comes to their house and offers to vaccinate the child, and they are put to no trouble whatever; if, on the other hand, they want to obtain this exemption from the magistrates, they have to take the trouble to go to petty sessions and prove their case. I submit from the practical point of view, therefore, that it is far more likely that there will be an increase of vaccination with the clause in than under the present law, and I hope your Lordships will not insist on your Amendment, The question your Lordships have to consider to-night is whether you will accept this clause—the conscientious exemption clause—which the House of Commons has put in again, or whether the other advantages of the Bill are to be lost, at any rate, for this year. I repeat what I have already said, that it is my honest conviction that the Bill, as it now comes before your Lordships, is more likely to encourage vaccination than the Act as it at present exists, or the Bill as it was originally introduced into the House of Commons. I hope your Lordships will agree with the Commons' Amendment.
LORD ROOKWOOD: My Lords, I have taken so little part in political discussion now for some years that I feel I owe almost an apology to the House for venturing to trespass on your Lordships' time for even a few moments. I was unable to be present the other day when the Bill was discussed, but I should nit like it to go through, as I suppose it will, one way or the other to-day, without offering my protest against what I believe to be legislation the most subversive of good government which has taken place
446
in recent times. No one of your Lordships, I imagine, will for a moment deny the advantages that have been derived from vaccination. No one, at all events, who can remember as I can the former effect of this horrible disease upon so many people, will hesitate to admit the advantages that have been derived from vaccination. Now, we are asked, because a few faddists choose to pose under the name of "conscientious objectors," to pass an exemption which will allow them to imperil not only the lives, as we believe, of their own children, but the lives of others who may be brought in contact with them. If people are allowed to set the law at defiance at their own sweet will, where are we to stop? I can conceive—it may be a ludicrous idea—that the burglar may have a conscientious objection to your interfering with his liberty, but in that case you are only protecting property, and not the health of the community. And from what I saw in the newspapers the other day, even to Mr. Long's Act, which is supposed to protect us from that terrible disease, rabies, there may be conscientious objectors. I believe there were improvements to the present law in the Bill as it was first brought in by the Government, and that that Bill would have been a great boon to the country. By rejecting the clause we shall only be delaying the matter for another year, as the responsibility to bring in a Bill of this kind will lie on the Government, if they believe, as I think they do, in the advantage of the improvements they propose to introduce. I will not occupy your Lordships' time longer, but I did not like, as an old Parliamentary hand in another place, to let this Bill pass without expressing my protest against what I believe to be a mischievous departure in legislation. I hope your Lordships will adhere to the decision you came to the other day.
VISCOUNT GALWAT: My Lords, I am unwilling to give a silent vote on this question to-day, because I was not in my place last week when the Bill came before your Lordships. I feel very strongly that nothing has been said by Members of the Government to show why this clause could not have been omitted and the rest of the Bill, which

447
contains many important Amendments of the present law, accepted. If the Government choose to abandon the Bill for the present Session it will simply be to postpone it for six months. It seems to me that there is a determination at the present moment on the Front Bench in both Houses of 'Parliament to try and force through the whole Bill. I must say with the deepest regret, having supported Her Majesty's Government in this House and the other House for several years, that there seems to be a general feeling growing up all over the country, as well as in Parliament, that a change has come over those who lead the Conservative Party, and that less attention is being paid by the Government to the wishes of the Members of the Conservative Party than used to be the case. Whether this is owing to the very large majority in the other House it is not for me to say. I will exemplify this by one illustration. In the case of the Employers' Liability Bill of last year, which affected very large industries in the northern, and midland counties of England, Amendments were moved which had the support of over 60 Members of the Conservative Party, but no attention was paid to them. I can assure the Government that this is not forgotten in the northern and midland counties. Moreover, of the 38 Members who supported the clause under discussion the other day 30 were Members of the Government or those holding official positions, and in the division in the House of Commons the Leader of the Oppositon and about 40 followers of the Radical and Irish Parties supported the Government in sending this clause back to your Lordships. I think the Conservative Party have a right to say that the legislation of the present Government is not to be conducted simply by the votes of the Leader of the Opposition and the Radical and Irish Parties. If the Government choose, in consequence of your Lordships insisting, as I hope you will, on your Amendment, to withdraw the Bill and not carry the other clauses that may prove beneficial, then the responsibility must rest with them and them, alone. I am quite sure a. great deal more would be got by the Government consulting the feelings of their followers all over
448
the country than by endeavouring to catch a few votes.
LORD ZOUCHE of HARYNGWORTH: My Lords, as a, humble supporter of the Government, who felt compelled to register his vote against them when this Bill was before your Lordships on the last occasion, I should like to be allowed to say one word. I do not know how this Debate is going to end, nor what the result of the Division will be, but I would venture to make an earnest appeal to Her Majesty's Government, even at the last moment, to- consider well and pause before they force through this Measure, which is undoubtedly and admittedly obnoxious to a large majority of the people of this country. I say "admittedly," because, my Lords, it has never been attempted to be shown that there is anything like a majority against vaccination. On the contrary, it is admitted that there is a great majority in favour of it. The facts show that there are at least two-thirds of the people in favour of the law as it stands, with, possibly, such modifications as may be necessary without altering it in this vital particular. Another reason why I think this clause as it stands should not be carried, is that it will not be workable. It provides that a conscientious objector may go before two magistrates and there make a declaration that he objects to vaccination. This puts a very undesirable and very responsible duty upon the magistrates, because they have to determine whether the applicant is telling the truth or not. The result will be that this will degenerate into a mere form. The clause seems to be loosely drafted, because it does not stipulate in what form the declaration has to be made—whether the conscientious objector has to make a statement or sign a paper; and I do not think it is laid down whether it is to be on oath or not. At any rate, we can anticipate that it will be a dead letter. It has, however, occurred to me that, with a little further consideration, this clause, if it is necessary to pass it at all, might be passed in better form. Having regard to the methods of operation of the antivaccinationists, I suggest that the clause might be so altered as to provide for the objector to come, in the first instance,

449
before one or two medical men, who could interrogate him as to the grounds of his objection, and point out the dangers of non-vaccination, and the advantages of the new lymph as obviating any danger. Afterwards, if it was necessary, the matter could be left for magisterial determination. Of course, there is no time for such an alteration of the clause this Session, but what I have said points to the great desirability of this very important matter being reconsidered. The clause has been practically sprung upon the House of Commons and the country, and I venture to think that if it is passed in its present form it will not be giving the great cause of vaccination a fair chance, while it will be exposing the country to great danger. Even if this Bill is postponed until the next Session of Parliament, as I would suggest it should be, the country will be subjected to no disadvantage, for there is no reason why the Government could not direct the use of the new lymph by the public vaccinators without the necessity of passing a Bill. Therefore, I cannot see what you would really lose by postponing this Bill for a few months only; but, on the other hand, a good deal is to be gained, because much valuable opinion will, no doubt, make itself heard, which will be available for utilisation by the Government when next they introduce the Measure, whilst another advantage of postponement will be that it will obviate any possible question of friction or disagreement between the two Houses of Parliament.
LORD STANMORE: My Lords, on the last occasion when this question was considered by your Lordships, my noble Friend at the head of the Government made a speech of great force and great ingenuity, which was delivered with more than his usual eloquence, to convince the House that we should accept this clause. I wish, for one moment, to direct the attention of the House to the difference between the arguments used by my noble Friend at the head of the Government and those which have been pressed upon us by the noble Lord in charge of the Bill. One of the arguments relied upon by the latter—certainly the one upon which he laid most emphasis—was that lit would be an uncommonly bold thing
450
on our part to resist the recommendations of the Royal Commission. There is a slightly comic element involved in his being so exceedingly shocked at our boldness, and his not seeing any boldness at all in the fact of the Government, in the first instance, having taken exactly the same course. I confess I do not read the Report of the Royal Commission quite in the same way as the noble Lord. The Report of the Commission is explicit enough as to the inexpediency of reiterated and repeated penalties, and as to that I think we are all of one mind; but I do not read the Report as saying that the penalties should not be inflicted1 at all upon objectors. That is not, however, of great importance, The noble Marquess at the head of the Government, who spoke as a statesman, and presented to us a large and intelligent issue, dwelt, and dwelt nobly, on a great truth, which is not so much recognised as it should be—namely, the inutility of making laws unless you have public opinion to back up their enforcement. That was the sum and substance of the speech of the noble Marquess, and, as your Lordships will perceive, that completely throws over the conscientious objector. It is the objector as such that the noble Marquess speaks of, and not merely the conscientious one; his argument is that you have not a sufficiently united public opinion to enable you to enforce the law. It is not because he is a conscientious objector that my noble Friend wishes to1 relieve the parent, but because there is an amount of objection, conscientious or not, which makes it difficult to execute the law. That is an essentially different point. I suppose at this stage of the Bill it is impossible to propose any Amendment; otherwise I should like to have moved to omit the word "conscientious," and leave the clause in appearance that which it is in fact—namely, a, provision to enable any objector to evade compliance with the law. If the speech made by the noble Marquess at the head of the Government had been made in the first instance by the Minister who introduced the Bill, I for one would have accepted on the authority of the Government the assurance that there was a necessity to pass such a clause. I should have done so with regret, because I believe the clause is more likely to do mischief than good.

451
and because it introduces the new and dangerous doctrine that conscientious objection on the part of an individual is to be a sufficient excuse for disobedience to a law passed in the general interest. We have been told, and I have been accustomed to believe hitherto, that in this country, at least, we had
"some reverence for the laws ourselves have made,"
though we might do our best to have them amended when we consider them objectionable. Though I should have gone with the Government if they had told the House in the first instance that such a Measure was necessary, the position now before us is very different, because the Government themselves deliberately, and after full consideration, determined that the Bill should be presented to Parliament without this "conscientious objection" clause. The clause has been foisted into the Bill by pressure upon the Government; they did not originate it, though apparently they have adopted it with all the zeal of converts, and the House is now told that the rejection of this clause means the loss of the Bill. I do not think we have any right offhand to assume that the House of Commons will not respect the reiterated decision of this House on that point, and that the Bill will be dropped. I have known not very long ago Amendments made in your Lordships' House rejected by the Commons, but, being returned, finally accepted by the other House. I allude to the Parish Councils Act. Why should that not happen in this case? The Government have the power, if they choose, to pass the Bill as they originally drafted it. There are some admittedly good points about the Bill, and there is no necessity for it being dropped. The noble Lord, Lord Lister, the other night expressed a fear that if the Bill were lost the Government would not reintroduce it; but that is a matter for which we are not responsible, but the Government. The question for us is— which will be the least harmful, the non-passing of the Bill now, or the passing of it with this clause in it? We believe that the postponement of the Bill, which need only be a postponement, as my noble Friend who has just spoken pointed out, for a few months, would be the least
452
evil. Lord Lister, on the other hand, thinks that would be the greater evil, but I would venture to point out to your Lordships that his great fame and great reputation have been earned in a far nobler field than that of political struggles, and that on a question of practical politics we are justified in not ranking his opinion quite so highly as we should on a question of medical science. It is evident that Lord Lister's desire that the Bill should pass now was greatly prompted by the hope that next year the Government would bring in a Bill for compulsory revaccination of adults. He is led by a mere ignis fatuus; for anyone who has had practical experience of public life must be well aware that neither next year or ever will any Government voluntarily introduce a Measure certain to encounter such widespread opposition. I hope your Lordships will adhere to your decision.
LORD GLENESK: My Lords, I desire to express my strong and conscientious objection to this clause, which certainly opens up the greatest danger to the lives of thousands of our children, and the risk of moral deterioration, in holding out an invitation to our fellow-countrymen to come forward, not as honest objectors at the polls, but as "conscientious" objectors. You are practically inviting them to bear false witness, before their countrymen. The whole clause is too ill considered to be worth serious discussion at the hands of experienced men. The noble Lord in charge of the Bill indicated three classes of the community concerned—the parents who willingly submit their children for vaccination, and those do not require to be dealt with at all; the lazy parents, and their case is admirably met by the domiciliary visits of the doctor; and, lastly, there are the unwilling parents, and they are to be called "conscientious objectors." Well, if concessions are made to this class, you may say goodbye to most of your laws. You will find conscientious objectors, rising up as thickly as possible in all directions. I think, therefore, my Lords, that it will be wise and judicious, and in conform, it with the wishes of the majority of your countrymen, of whom you have often proved the truest representatives, if you obey their mandate—a, mandate which is

453
expressed by a majority of 140 in the House of Commons (though not, I admit, in relation to this particular issue), and, at the same time, obey your own consciences, by insisting on the exclusion of the clause, thereby saving the lives of thousands of children, and preventing this country from becoming the centre of infection for other countries.
THE EARL OF FEVERSHAM: My Lords, after what has fallen from the noble Lords who have spoken, I do not think that I shall be justified in detaining your Lordships more than one or two minutes. I cannot admit that the only choice lies between the Bill with the clause in it, or no Bill at all. It appears to me that there is a third alternative—the passing of the Bill without the second clause. It seems extraordinary that we cannot do so when we remember that the Bill without the second clause is very much the same Bill as was first introduced by the right honourable Gentleman the President of the Local Government Board in the other House. Supposing the Bill is lost: the responsibility will lie with the Government. If I were asked whether I would prefer the Bill to pass with the second clause included, or not at all, I, for one, would much prefer that it should not pass, for I think the second clause involves a great danger to the health of the people of this country. I regard the clause as one which is likely to produce great evils, and I hope your Lordships will follow the advice of the noble Lords who have preceded me, and adhere to the decision we arrived at the other night. Lord Lister then said he would be glad if the Bill could be withdrawn this year, and brought in again next year with other improvements, and I think that would be the best and wisest course to pursue.
LORD ALDENHAM: My Lords, I venture to urge upon your Lordships to take the third alternative my noble Friend has just suggested. I can hardly conceive it possible that, if your Lordships were to insist upon the rejection of this clause, the House of Commons, which will have got by the first clause that which Lord Harris said they would not dare to postpone for a day, would refuse to go on with the Bill on that account. For myself, I detest all options, local or indi-
454
vidual, that have to do with obedience to the law. Conscientious objection to obedience to the law is subversive of all law if you legalise it, and the principle of this clause is to legalise disobedience to the law. To that I most entirely object. I very much hope that the Government will use the influence they have in the House of Commons to induce that House to change their minds once again. They have changed it once, and put in a second clause which was inconsistent with the first, and there is no reason why they should not change their minds once again. I think this clause, to which we-conscientiously object, only panders to the sense of those people who, as a physician stated in the Times the other day, wish to get rid of vaccination, and, I think he said, all other foolish, prophylactic inoculations. I hope, therefore, that your Lordships will insist on the rejection of this clause.
THE EARL OF PORTSMOUTH: My Lords, I am sure it is the general wish that we should come to a Division as soon as possible. I only wish to say, as one of those who told the noble Earl, the Earl of Feversham, that I should vote again in favour of insisting upon the action we took the other night, that I have been waiting to see if there was still one independent Conservative Peer who who rise to support this clause. We have already had several speeches from members of the Government, but we have not had the testimony, as yet, of one single independent Conservative or Unionist Peer in favour of this clause. My Lords, I entirely endorse the views which fell from my noble Friend Lord Galway. I believe there is a strong feeling against this conscience clause in the country, and if we insist on the course we took last Friday, I am sure we shall receive, as we deserve, the support of the country at large.
THE PREMIER AND SECRETARY OF STATE FOR FOREIGN AFFAIRS: (The Marquess of Salisbury): My Lords, we have heard a good many statistics and estimates of force, which appear to me to be derived rather from the internal consciousness of the speakers than from any evidence on which they can rely. I think the noble. Lord who has just sat down and two or

455
three other speakers have insisted that the country is very strongly on the side of the 40 who voted the other night, and very strongly against the 38. Well, my Lords, I do not know where that information comes from. The House of Commons apparently here by common consent has been ruled out as a body which knows nothing of the opinion of the country, and I will not venture, before an audience which might be unfavourable, to plead any title which they might have to that distinction. But, apart from the Vote of the House of Commons, I really know no means of ascertaining what the opinion of the country is, and I think we must come to our decision without placing that weight either in one scale or in the other. But if it is difficult to ascertain what the opinion of the country is, it seems to me to be still more difficult for many noble Lords to forecast what the result of their action will be if the Amendment is insisted on this evening. I have very little to add to what I said the other night, and I speak with great hesitation, because I observe that my noble Friend Lord Feversham has taxed me with threatening the House of Lords because I said I thought the result of the Amendment would be to destroy the Bill.
THE EARL OF FEVERSHAM: I beg the noble Marquess's pardon. I never used the word "threat."
THE PREMIER AND SECRETARY OF STATE FOR FOREIGN AFFAIRS: I think you used the word "menace."
THE EARL OF FEVERSHAM: I have no recollection of it. I never used the word "menace."
THE PREMIER AND SECRETARY OF STATE FOR FOREIGN AFFAIRS: Did you not? Then I beg your pardon; but I certainly understood the noble Earl to say so. I can assure your Lordships that I never intended—it would have been most absurd and improper on my part to have done so—that anything I said should have the slightest tinge of menace about it. It would be as absurd to tax me with menace because I attempted to forecast what was going to happen as it would be to say that the weather forecast menaces you with rain.
456
My object is just to see what is likely to happen if, in the state of things as it is now, the House of Lords insists on this Amendment, What would the conduct of the House of Commons be? I know no other way of judging of the conduct of another assembly than by asking what would be the conduct of this assembly in corresponding circumstances. Supposing that you had passed a provision by a majority of 90, and supposing the House of Commons sent it back to you refused by a majority of two? Do you mean to tell me that the House of Lords would accept the verdict of the two and efface the verdict of the 90? I am quite certain, from a long experience of this House, that the House of Lords would do nothing of the kind. Well, then, that is the case we have to deal with in the House of Commons. If the House of Commons are asked to change their mind—as my noble Friend, with an unkind sarcasm, said, "Change their mind once again"—my impression is that they would ask to see by what majority that demand had been made upon them, and that when they found that the majority by which the clause was originally struck out was only two, I think they would be very much disposed to adhere to the resolution that they came to by a majority of 90. That seems to me to be the probability of the case, and I utterly deny that there is any impropriety in forecasting the decision of the House of Commons by such lights as we have on the subject. But, of course, if the House of Commons adhere to their Vote, it is not a question of discussion, it is not a matter of argument, it is a matter of fact—the Bill falls ipso facto. The Bill disappears, and that is a matter of rule. Some noble Lords seem to think that, directly Parliament meets, the Government will be eager again to introduce a Vaccination Bill to the attention of Parliament. I do not venture to make any prophecy on that subject. I have no doubt the Government will do whatever it thinks most advantageous to the public service and most likely to promote the progress of public business. But I have observed that when there is a difference of opinion between the two Houses on a Measure, Governments are anxious to avoid touch-

457
ing that subject as long as they can; and I doubt very much myself whether there will be any great desire to introduce the subject on which the House of Commons and the House of Lords appear to be in a hopelessly different frame of mind. Therefore the probability of a Measure next year, though I do not put it aside altogether, seems to me to be very faint. If there is not a Measure next year, if we have to go on to the Dissolution, if we have to go on with the law as it is, do you think that the law as it is will be a very efficacious instrument? I observe that everybody thinks only of the conscientious objector, and whatever else I may praise in the Bill I do not praise the person who invented that phrase, because it has absolutely nothing to do with the subject. The conscientious objector is only in a secondary degree the important person. There is no doubt that a penalty falls upon him if he declines to obey the law, and there is no doubt that it is that penalty inflicted on him by the law that has created that public opinion in a considerable section of the people with which we have to deal. But it is not his objection to have his child vaccinated which is the most formidable manifestation of that opinion. What we really have to deal with is the action of local authorities, and it is now a matter of experience that one-fourth, I think, of the local authorities of the country decline to promote and work this law. Well, if you have no power over the local authorities you cannot, say, "Let us vindicate the law and send them to prison." They are the masters in this matter. You can recast the whole system on which you are working and allow vaccination to proceed by a decree from Whitehall, but, apart from all other difficulties that attach to that process it means an entirely new Bill, and a very formidable contest in Parliament. If you leave the matter as it stands, no doubt you depend upon the feeling of the local authorities, and, so far as we are able to see, the feeling of the local authorities is more and more against carrying out the Bill, and against that feeling you are powerless. You have not even the gratification of saying that they pretend to be conscientious, and that, therefore, you will punish them, because they
458
have not got to advance the conscientious plea which offends you so much. They do it by their own will, and there is no' appeal from their action, and if they choose not to fulfil the law, if the law does not sufficiently impress them to induce them to act upon it, the number of cases where the law is not put into force will grow gradually more, the disrespect in which it is held will increase, the popular respect for vaccination which you desire, and justly desire, to disseminate and augment will become less and less, and you will have presented to yourself all over the country a fight in one local body after another, in which the issue will not be so much vaccination or not vaccination, but an issue running into all kinds of collateral and political issues, in which the fact that the law only exists by the will of a majority of two in the House of Lords, and has been condemned by a large majority in the House of Commons, you may be certain will not be forgotten, but will be very constantly insisted upon. My Lords, I do not look to the effect of this, except in one direction; I ask what effect will that have upon that willing adoption of vaccination which is the only healthy result which you can desire to accomplish? If you pass this Bill now there is nothing whatever, suppose the difficulties about the conscientious objector turn out to be real, to prevent you having another Bill to strengthen what may be thought to be too weak in this Bill. But, at all events, you will have offered an opportunity to those who say your coercion is a mistake, and you will have given an experimental trial to those improved processes by which you hope the popular illusion will be dissipated; you will have had a truce and an armistice, the bitterness will have calmed and the agitation will have gone down, and you will be able to induce local authorities to work with you instead of against you in carrying out this great enterprise for the health and welfare of the people. I think that the advice which has been given to you, under all the circumstances—I do not look beyond that—to kill the Bill is very unwise advice, and for the sake of your own opinions, for the sake of the reform of the law, for the sake of the ultimate achievement of united

459
action upon a matter in which union and concord are essential, you ought to forego the Amendment which you only passed by a majority of two three nights ago, and allow the Bill to pass into law.
The House divided:—Contents 55; Not-Contents 45.

CONTENTS.

Halsbury, E. (L. Chancellor)

Addington, L.

Ampthill, L.

Devonshire, D. (L. President)

Arundell of Wardour, L.

Cross, V. (L. Privy Seal)

Ashbourne, L.

Bagot, L.

Balfour, L.

Norfolk, D. (E. Marshal)

Bateman, L.

Belper, L.

Portland, D.

Churchill, L. [Teller].

Westminster, D.

Dormer, L

Farquhar, L.

Salisbury, M.

Fingall, L. (E. Fingall)

Zetland, M.

Headley, L.

Pembroke and Montgomery, E. (L. Steward)

Headley, L.

Hopetoun, L. (E. Hopetoun)

Abingdon, E.

James, L.

Camperdown, E.

Kintore, L. (E. Kintore)

Carrington, E.

Clarendon, E..

Lawrence, L.

Coventry, E

Lister, L.

de Montalt, E.

Lurgan, L.

de Montalt, E.

Northington, L. (L. Henley)

Dudley, E,

Durham, E.

Rathmore, L.

Howe, E.

Ribblesdale, L.

Lucan, E.

Rothschild, L.

Selborne, E.

Russell of Killowen, L.

Stamford, E.

Ventry, L.

Waldegrave, E. [Teller]

Wantage, L.

Wigan, L. (E. Crawford)

Yarborough, E.

Knutsford, V.

Wolverton, L.

Templetown, V.

NOT-CONTENTS.

Ailesbury, M.

Bolton, L.

Boyle, L. (E. Cork and Orrery)

Bathurst, E.

Brownlow, E.

Braye, L.

Cawdor, E.

Cheylesmore, L.

Feversham, E. [Teller]

Colchester, L.

Hardwicke, E.

de Vesci, L. (V. de Vesei)

Ilchester, E.

Portsmouth, E. [Teller]

Forbes, L.

Scarbrough, E.

Glenesk, L.

Hood, V.

Hampton, L.

Llandaff, V.

Hood of Avalon, L.

Howard de Walden, L.

St. Albans, L. Bp.

Winchester, L. Bp.

Lingen, L.

Monckton, L. (V. Galway)

Aldenham, L.

460

Monk Bretton, L.

Stanley of Alderley, L

Raglan, L.

Rookwood, L.

Stanmore, L.

Saye and Sele, L.

Tennyson, L.

Seaton, L.

Thring, L.

Sherborne, L.

Wandsworth, L.

Sinclair, L.

Wemyss, L. (E. Wemyss)

Somerhill, L. (M. Clanricarde)

Worlingham, L. (E. Gosford)

Southampton, L.

Stalbridge, L.

Zouche of Haryngworth, L.

Clause, as amended by the Commons, agreed to.
House adjourned at 5.55.