Sitting of 3 August 1899

PRIVATE BILL BUSINESS.
  BEXHILL AND ROTHERFIELD RAILWAY BILL.
  Lords Amendment considered, and agreed to.
LONDON AND SOUTH-WESTERN RAILWAY BILL [Lords].
  MANCHESTER CORPORATION TRAMWAYS BILL [Lords].
    PAISLEY AND BARRHEAD DISTRICT RAILWAY BILL [Lords].
    Read the third time, and passed, with an Amendment.
    ROCHDALE CANAL BILL [Lords].
    Read the third time, and passed, with an Amendment.
  WOLVERHAMPTON CORPORATION BILL [Lords].
    WORKINGTON CORPORATION BILL [Lords].
    Read the third time, and passed, with Amendments.

    BIRMINGHAM, NORTH WARWICKSHIRE, AND STRATFORD-UPON-AVON RAILWAY BILL [Lords].
    As amended, considered:
    Amendments made.
    Ordered, that Standing Orders 223 and 243 be suspended, and that the Bill be now read the third time.—(Dr. Farquharson.)
    Bill read the third time accordingly, and passed with Amendments.

    SOUTHPORT AND LYTHAM TRAMROAD BILL [Lords].
    Ordered, that, in the case of the South-port and Lytham Tramroad Bill [Lords], as amended, Standing Orders 84, 214, 215, and 239 be suspended, and that the Bill be now taken into consideration provided amended prints shall have been previously deposited.—(Dr. Farquharson.)
    Bill considered accordingly.
    Ordered, that Standing Orders 223 and 243 be suspended, and that the Bill be now read the third time.—(Dr. Farquharson.)
    Bill read the third time accordingly, and passed.

    PRIVATE BLLLS.
    Ordered, that Standing Orders 220 and 246 relating to Private Bills be suspended for the remainder of the session.
    That, as regards Private Bills already returned by the House of Lords with Amendments, such Amendments be now considered.
    That, as regards Private Bills to be returned by the House of Lords with Amendments, such Amendments to be considered forthwith.
    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.)

BELFAST CORPORATION BILL.
  CITY AND BRIXTON RAILWAY BILL.

    GATESHEAD AND DISTRICT TRAMWAYS BILL.
    LONDON, WALTHAMSTOW, AND EPPING FOREST RAILWAY BILL.
    WEST METROPOLITAN RAILWAY BILL.
    Lords Amendments considered accordingly, and agreed to.

    EDUCATION DEPARTMENT PROVISIONAL ORDER CONFIRMATION (LONDON) BILL [Lords].
    As amended, further considered.
    SIR MANCHERJEE BHOWNAGGREE: In proposing the Amendment which stands in my name, I wish to explain that the object I have in view is to extend the provision which the Home Secretary is inserting in this Order to all the previous Orders confirmed by Parliament. I fully admit that the Home Secretary has given his most

    1265
    sympathetic consideration to the mischief which has been brought to his notice on account of the evasion by the London School Board of its statutory obligations with regard to the re-housing of the occupants of working class dwellings displaced by the acquisition of School Board sites. In my opinion the Home Secretary's provision does not go far enough. There were many such evasions before the year 1895—the limit chosen by the right hon. Gentleman—and it would be an act of gross injustice not to go back before that date. The Home Secretary and the School Board have admitted that the evasions have taken place, and I do not see why, in trying to remedy a mischief which has been deliberately and designedly committed, we should stop short of the full measure of justice which ought to be applied. The question of the re-housing of the working class population is one felt severely in the East End of London among the poorer population, for whose special benefit this provision was made by Parliament; yet the School Board, which is supposed in one department of life to serve the best interests of these classes, has deliberately and of set purpose, and not in ignorance, evaded its plain duty. I trust the Home Secretary will look on my Amendment as the logical outcome of the provision he has inserted in this Order, and that by accepting it he will apply a remedy to what is felt to be a crying evil in the East End of London.
    Amendment proposed—
    "In page 4, in Amendment inserted in Committee, in line 2, after the word 'Orders,' to insert the word 'previously.' "—(Sir Mancherjee Bhownaggree.)
    Question proposed, "That the word 'previously' be there inserted."
    THE VICE-PRESIDENT OF THE COMMITTEE OF COUNCIL ON EDUCATION (Sir JOHN GORST,): There is no doubt that the evil to which the hon. Member refers does exist, and the intention of Parliament has been evaded. The duty of providing fresh dwellings when more than twenty houses have been acquired in any one year for the erection of a School Board has been evaded by taking less than twenty in a year. In order to meet that evasion, the Home Secretary has proposed
    1266
    an Amendment extending the obligation to replace working-class dwellings to a period of five years; so that if more than twenty houses are taken in five years the replacement is obligatory. The hon. Member wishes to carry it still further, and to make it practically perpetual; but the opinion of the Secretary of State is, that it is not necessary to go beyond the period of five years, for persons displaced earlier than that would probably be lost in the crowd by that time. In fact, it would be carrying the remedy to an unreasonable extent. I hope my hon. friend will be satisfied with the Amendment introduced into this Order—an Amendment which I understand will be introduced henceforth into every Bill of this nature.
    MR. FLOWER: The hon. Member who moved this Amendment seemed to think there will be no difficulty experienced by the School Board in giving effect to it. Upon that I join issue with him. He desires its operation should extend back for twenty-five years, and that would involve the London School Board instituting a search for many thousands of people amongst a population of an admittedly migratory character. Moreover, it would involve an expenditure of many thousands of pounds, and bearing in mind how heavy the London School Board rate already is, and remembering also, as a member of the board, that the projects and plans we have for the future do not afford much prospect of any early reduction, I would suggest to the hon. Member that, in trying to do an act of kindness and justice, he may at the same time be inflicting a severe punishment in another direction, by making an increased rate necessary. I think the Amendment of the Home Secretary goes quite far enough. I, for one, view with alarm any prospect of the School Board setting itself to work as a housing authority. The London County Council have done something in that direction, but their work has been marred by the high rents which they have been obliged to charge for the buildings they have erected. The School Board would have to face a like difficulty, and there would be a temptation to them to cramp the play-grounds, so as to reduce their obligations in the matter of re-housing. This evasion of the law has not been confined to the present School Board; it is a, legacy from many previous boards, and I

    1267
    trust the hon. Member will be satisfied with the punishment meted out to us by the Home Secretary.
    MR. PICKERSGILL: If the Home Secretary had seen his way to make this provision absolutely retrospective, I, for one, would have been very glad, as the more accommodation we can get for the dispossessed poor the better. But I think the right hon. Gentleman has gone as far as we could expect, and Ministers with large majorities at their backs will be disposed to refuse all concessions if they find that when they offer reasonable ones they are met in a hostile spirit.
    LORD HUGH CECIL: I agree with the last speaker that my hon. friend would be well advised not to press this Amendment, in view of the sympathetic treatment the Government have given to the matter. At the same, time, I hold that he has done well in calling public attention to the subject. It is almost incredible that a public body in the position of the London School Board should for a number of years continue to evade Acts of Parliament for the benefit of the working classes. We have to face the fact that this public body has broken the law, and is now putting forward the astonishing defence that it would cost them a great deal of money to undo the wrong. So much the worse for them and for the ratepayers, who have been so foolish as to entrust their educational interests to a body of that kind. The board has been fanatically set upon the erection of school after school, wholly regardless of the interests of the working classes and of voluntary schools; and, now they are asked to pay the bill, they complain that the demand is unreasonable. I think my hon. friend has done well to bring the matter before the House, and I hope the people of London, when the next School Board election comes round, will take effectual measures to prevent a recurrence of such conduct.
    SIR MANCHEEJEE BHOWNAGGREE: After what has been said on behalf of the Government, and being satisfied with the opportunity I have had of calling attention to the great mischief which has occurred in the past, so as to prevent its recurrence in the future, I beg leave to withdraw my Amendment.
    Amendment, by leave, withdrawn.
    Bill to be read the third time To-morrow.

    LONDON WATER (WELSH RESERVOIRS AND WORKS) BILL.
    Order [13th March] that the London Water (Welsh Reservoirs and Works) Bill be read a second time read, and discharged:—Bill withdrawn.—[Dr. Farquharson.)
  PETITIONS.
    POOR LAW AMENDMENT (SCOTLAND) ACT, 1845.
    Petitions for alteration of Law; from Castleton; Fodderty; and, Kennethmont; to lie upon the Table.
  RETURNS, REPORTS, &c.
    POLICE (METROPOLIS).
    Copy presented.—of Report of the Commissioners of Police for the Metropolis for 1898 [by Command]; to lie upon the Table.
    REFORMATORY AND INDUSTRIAL SCHOOLS (GREAT BRITAIN).
    Copy presented,—of Forty-second Report of the Inspector for 1898 [by Command]; to lie upon the Table.
    INEBRIATES ACTS, 1879 AND 1888.
    Copy presented,—of Report of Nineteenth Report of the Inspector of Retreats, for the year 1898 [by Command]; to lie upon the Table.
    PRISONS (ENGLAND AND WALES).
    Copy presented,—of Report of the Commissioners of Prisons and the Directors of Convict Prisons for the year ended 31st March 1899 [by Command]; to lie upon the Table.
    REVENUE AND EXPENDITURE (ENGLAND, SCOTLAND AND IRELAND).
    Return presented,—relative thereto [ordered 18th April; Mr. Lough]; to lie upon the Table, and to be printed. (No. 317.)
    IMPERIAL REVENUE (COLLECTION AND EXPENDITURE) (GREAT BRITAIN AND IRELAND).
    Return presented,—relative thereto [ordered 18th April; Mr. Lough]; to lie upon the Table, and to be printed. (No. 318.)
    POST OFFICE TELEGRAPHS (REVENUE AND EXPENDITURE).
    Return presented,—relative thereto [ordered 25th July; Mr. Hanbury]; to lie upon the Table, and to be printed. (No. 319.)
    POST OFFICE (REVENUE AND EXPENDITURE).
    Return presented,—relative thereto [ordered 25th July; Mr. Hanbury]; to lie upon the Table, and to be printed. (No. 320.)
    TAXES AND IMPOSTS.
    Return presented,—relative thereto [ordered 20th April; Mr. Goddard]; to lie upon the Table, and to be printed. (No. 321.)
    VAGRANT CHILDREN RELIEVED.
    Return presented,—relative thereto [ordered 16th March; Mr. Maddison]; to lie upon the Table, and to be printed. (No. 322.)
    LONDON (EQUALISATION OF RATES) ACT, 1894 (ACCOUNTS UNDER SECTION 1 (7) OF THE ACT).
    Return presented,—relative thereto [ordered 21st July; Mr. T. W. Russell]; to lie upon the Table, and to be printed.[No. 323.]
    COUNTY TREASURERS'FEE FUND (IRELAND).
    Account presented,—for the year ended 25th March 1899 [by Act];to lie upon the Table.
    ARMY (MEDICAL DEPARTMENT).
    Copy presented,—of Report for the year 1898, Volume XL. [by Command]; to lie upon, the Table.
    COLONIAL REPORTS (ANNUAL).
    Copy presented,—of Report No. 264 (Gambia, Annual Report for 1898) [by Command]; to lie upon the Table.
    COLONIAL REPORTS (ANNUAL).
    Copy presented,—of Report No. 265 (St. Helena, Annual Report for 1898) [by Command]; to lie upon the Table.

    PAPERS LAID UPON THE TABLE BY THE CLERK OF THE HOUSE.
    1. Adjournment Motions under Standing Order No. 17,—Return relative thereto [ordered 1st August; Dr. Farquharson]; to be printed. [No. 324.]

    2. Closure of Debate (Standing Order No. 25),—Return relative thereto [ordered 1st August; Dr. Farquharson]; to be printed. [No. 325.]

    3. Divisions of the House,—Return relative thereto [ordered 1st August; Dr. Farquharson]; to be printed.

    4. Private Bills and Private Business,—Return relative thereto [ordered 1st August; Dr. Farquharson,]; to be printed.

    5. Public Bills,—Return relative thereto [ordered 1st August; Dr. Farquharson]; to be printed.

    6. Public Petitions,—Return relative thereto [ordered 1st August; Dr. Farquharson]; to be printed.

    7. Select Committees,—Return relative thereto [ordered 1st August; Dr. Farquharson]; to be printed.

    8. Sittings of the House,—Return relative thereto [ordered 1st August; Dr. Farquharson]; to be printed.

    9. Business of the House (Days Occupied by Government and by Private Members),—Return relative there [ordered 1st August; Dr. Farquharson]; to be printed. [No. 326.]

    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, 1898, 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 1898 (in continuation of Parliamentary Paper, No. 385, of Session 1898)."—(Mr. Jesse Collings.)

    TRAMWAYS (STREET AND ROAD).
    Return ordered,—"of Street and Road Tramways authorised by Parliament, showing the amount of Capital authorised, paid up, and expended; the length of Tramway authorised, and the length open for the public conveyance of passengers, down to the 30th day of June, 1899; the gross Receipts, working Expenditure, and net Receipts; the number of Passengers conveyed and the number of miles run by Cars during the year ending the 30th day of June, 1899; together with the number of Horses, Engines, and Cars at that date (in continuation of Parliamentary Paper, No. 355, of Session 1898."—(Mr. Ritchie.)
    Return presented accordingly; to lie upon the Table, and to be printed. [No. 327.]

QUESTIONS.

  TRAINING SHIP FOR HARWICH HARBOUR.
  MR. ROUND:I beg to ask the First Lord of the Admiralty if he can now state whether a training ship for boys of the Royal Navy is to be stationed in Harwich Harbour.
  THE FIRST LORD OF THE ADMIRALTY (Mr. GOSCHEN,): A plan to that effect is taking shape.

  DISCHARGES FROM THE ROYAL MARINES.
  SIR CHARLES CAMERON: I beg to ask the First Lord of the Admiralty whether his attention has been called to a statement of Mrs. Farquhar, of 83, Dalmarnock Road, Glasgow, to the effect that in May last, after correspondence with the Admiralty as to the steps to be taken to secure the discharge of her husband, John Farquhar, who on 1st May had enlisted in the Marines and was serving on board H.M.S. "Northumberland," she sent £10 to the master-at-arms of that vessel, receipt of which was duly acknowledged, to procure his discharge; whether she has sent to the Admiralty documents in proof of her statement, but that, on the excuse that the £10 has been lost, her husband still remains undischarged; and whether he
  1272
  will take steps to have the case promptly settled, either by discharging Farquhar or returning the £10, for which his wife, a very poor woman, having had to borrow, it, is responsible.
  MR. GOSCHEN: The first intimation received at the Admiralty with regard to the matter referred to in the question was by a letter received from Mrs. Farquhar on July 20th. A report as to the circumstances, which was at once called for from H.M.S. "Northumberland," was received yesterday, August 2nd. It appears that the delay, as set out in the question, has been occasioned by the purchase money having been sent in Scotch notes, which were refused by the Accountant Officer of the ship and were subsequently handed to Farquhar, the husband whose discharge his wife was seeking. He states that he himself lost them while vainly endeavouring to get them changed into gold at the local banks. Under the special circumstances, though the necessary money has not been received by the Government, Farquhar's discharge will be sanctioned without any further payment.

  ARMY ORDNANCE DEPARTMENT, PIMLICO.
  CAPTAIN NORTON: I beg to ask the Under Secretary of State for War whether, seeing that it is contemplated that no Civil Servants of higher rank than Second Division clerks are to be employed in the Army Ordnance Department, Pimlico, it is to be understood that the superior duties now performed by the storekeeper and the staff officers, and the regulations and estimates work until recently in the hands of the principal clerk, will eventually be discharged by Ordnance officers; and, if not, by whom they will be discharged; whether steps are being, taken to have the future Civil establishment in the Store and Factory fixed at the same time as the accounts are taken over by the Accountant-General; and by what date the whole re-organisation of the Clothing Department will be at length completed and the new clerical establishments settled.
  THE UNDER SECRETARY OF STATE FOR WAR (Mr. WYNDHAM,): The matter is still under consideration.

  WAR OFFICE ADMINISTRATION.
  MAJOR RASCH: On behalf of the hon. Member for West Belfast I beg to ask the Under Secretary of State for War whether the attention of the Secretary of State has been called to the statement made in evidence before the War Office Re-Organisation Committee by the Lieutenant-General Commanding at Aldershot to the effect that he thought, and he believed he had sufficiently verified his opinion, that the whole system of reports, regulations, and warrants under which the Army now serves has grown up entirely for the benefit of the War Office clerks, and to find work for the War Office, rather than to provide control over the Army; whether during a period of ten years the officer referred to held a post of Quarter-master-General and Adjutant-General at the War Office, and whether during that period he made any official report respecting the office over which he presided to the same effect as the statement above referred to; and whether the facts are as stated by Sir Redvers Buller; and, if so, whether any, and what, steps have been taken to put an end to such a state of things.
  MR. WYNDHAM: The Committee on Decentralisation reported to the Secretary of State, and he laid its Report, with the evidence, before Parliament. The sentence quoted formed part only of one reply in the course of a long examination; and an accurate knowledge of Sir Redvers Buller's views can best be gathered by reading the whole of his evidence. In reply to the second paragraph, Sir Redvers Buller did not make any report with respect to the branches of the War Office over which he presided; his views on the clerical staff of the whole office were before the Secretary of State in 1895, when certain changes were under consideration. In reply to the third paragraph, the question is one of opinion and not of fact.

  RECRUITS' AGES.
  MR. PIRIE: I beg to ask the Under Secretary of State for War whether he will state the extent to which the experiment to establish a system of verification of the ages of recruits for the Army was carried, and what means were employed; whether the general qualifications as to character, education, and re-
  1274
  spectability of the recruits whose ages could not be verified could compare favourably with those of the recruits who had no difficulty in producing satisfactory proof of age; and whether the immediate discharge from the Army can always be procured of boys proved to be under seventeen years who are prompted thoughtlessly by the allurements of the recruiting agency to give false statements as to their ages, such discharge from the Army taking place without punishment being awarded them from either a civil or military court.
  MR. WYNDHAM: Search was made in the registers at Somerset House, in Edinburgh, and in Dublin for the certificates concerning 18,000 recruits under the age of twenty according to the places of birth and dates given on attestation. Although a liberal margin was allowed for errors in date, 45 percent. could not be traced at all, and 15 percent. were very doubtful. The labour was very great and the result was not considered to be of sufficient value to justify its continuance. There is no record of the comparative characters of the men identified and those not identified. A boy proved to be under seventeen years of age is immediately discharged; but under Sections 33 and 99 of the Army Act he is liable to punishment for having made a false statement of age on attestation.
  MR. PIRIE: Did this inquiry take place lately?
  MR. WYNDHAM: Yes.

  INDIAN GOVERNMENT CONTRACTS—IRON MANUFACTURE.
  MR. HARWOOD: I beg to ask the Secretary of State for India if it is the practice of the Indian Government to treat Indian manufacturers of iron and of other products purchased by the Government on equal terms with British or Continental manufacturers as ordered by paragraph 28, of Resolution 185, January, 1883.
  THE SECRETARY OF STATE FOR INDIA (Lord G. HAMILTON,): In November, 1895, I instructed the Government of India to be careful to avoid giving any preference to either English or Indian goods, as such, and so far as I am aware they have acted, and are acting, accordingly.

  ECCLESIASTICAL TITLES IN INDIA.
  MR. H. D. GREENE: I beg to ask the Secretary of State for India whether, having regard to the importance of Her Majesty's Indian Empire, and to the fact that certain bishops of the Church of England in the colonies have recently adopted and assumed the style of Archbishop, Her Majesty's Government will take steps to amend the statutes affecting the Church of England in the East Indies, so as really to confer on the Bishop of Calcutta, as statutory Metropolitan Bishop in India, the style and precedence of an Archbishop.
  LORD G. HAMILTON: I am well aware of the nature of the position of the Bishop of Calcutta as Metropolitan of India, and the suggestion contained in the hon. Member's question is not new to me. But there are many important considerations involved, and it is impossible for me at present to give any undertaking on the subject.

  MAJOR PARSONS, 7TH BENGAL CAVALRY.
  MR. DILLON: On behalf of the hon. Member for South Donegal, I beg to ask the Secretary of State for India whether his attention has been drawn to the case of Major (then Lieutenant) J. H. Parsons, 7th Bengal Cavalry, who was appointed in July, 1884, to the Burma Commission as Supernumerary Assistant Commissioner, but was obliged to go home to England on sick leave in 1886; whether he is aware that in 1890 Major Parsons was offered an opportunity of returning to his post in Burma, which he declined to accept, whereupon his name disappeared from the list of Commissioners, but that in April, 1897, Major Parsons was replaced in the Burma Commission after an absence of eleven and a-half years, and in July, 1898, was appointed to the post of Deputy Commissioner, third grade, superseding all the officers in the fourth grade, who had given a continuous service to the Commission; whether, seeing that the Secretary of State for India cancelled the orders of the Local Government of Burma, and reduced Major Parsons to the post of a Deputy Commissioner of the fourth grade, will he explain on what grounds the Burma Government has appointed that officer to officiate as
  1276
  Deputy Commissioner, first grade; and what steps will be taken to enforce the orders of the Secretary of State for India, granting redress to the officers who had been injured by being superseded in their promotion in favour of Major Parsons.
  LORD G. HAMILTON: I have to refer the hon. Member to the answer which I gave on the 1st instant to the hon. Member for the Basingstoke Division, and which, I think, covers all the points in this question. As I then stated, the orders given by me appear to have been duly carried out, and the recent promotions of Major Parsons have not interfered and will not interfere with those of other members of the Burma Commission.

  GUARANTEED RAILWAYS IN INDIA.
  MR. SOUTTAR: I beg to ask the Secretary of State for India whether he could state the dates at which, within the next two years, notice should be given to the several guaranteed or subsidised Indian railways for the termination or revision of their existing contracts or agreements with the Government of India or Secretary of State; and whether due care would be taken in any revision or renewal of these agreements so to limit the new terms as to safeguard the interests of the Government and taxpayers of India.
  LORD G. HAMILTON: Within the next two years notice of termination of contract may be given to one guaranteed Indian railway company, viz., the Great Indian Peninsula Railway Company (on any day within six months after the 17th of August, 1899). The contract with the Rohilkund and Kumaon Railway Company for the completion and working of the Lucknow-Bareilly State Railway may be terminated on the 31st of December, 1900, or on the 31st of December in any subsequent year, by giving not less than twelve months' previous notice. In any revision of contracts with Indian railway companies the interests of the Government and taxpayers of India will be duly safeguarded.

  THE TRANSVAAL PETITIONS.
  MR. BRYN ROBERTS: I beg to ask the Secretary

  1277
  of State for the Colonies whether, in view of the fact that, at the Bloemfontein Conference, President Kruger strongly disputed the genuineness of the petition from the Transvaal submitted to Her Majesty, and asserted that over 23,000 Uitlanders had sent him a counter petition, the proposed Joint Committee will be instructed to inquire to what extent the franchise is really desired by British Uitlanders, and how many would be willing to forfeit their British nationality in order to obtain it, and also to inquire whether the Uitlander movement in the Transvaal is, as alleged, to any and what extent due to instigation of capitalists and their agents.
  THE SECRETARY OF STATE FOR THE COLONIES (Mr. J. CHAMBERLAIN,): The inquiry will be confined to the details of the reforms required for giving immediate substantial representation to the Uitlanders. Full information is given as to the genuineness of the petition to the Queen on pages 184 and 224 of the Blue Book C. 9,345, and pages 46 and 60 and following pages of the Blue Book C. 9,404, as to the character of the counter petition on page 237 of C. 9,345 and page 22 of C. 9,404, and as to the nature of the Uitlander movement on pages 135, 163, and 207 of C. 9,345.

  BRITISH NEW GUINEA ORDINANCES.
  MR. HOGAN: I beg to ask the Secretary of State for the Colonies whether the monetary claims arising out of the disallowance of the Ordinance conferring certain concessions upon the British New Guinea Syndicate have yet been adjusted; and, if so, whether he can state the nature of the arrangement that has been arrived at.
  MR. J. CHAMBERLAIN: The negotiations respecting the claims of the British New Guinea Syndicate have been carried on between the Syndicate and Governments of the three Colonies concerned through their Agents-Generals. I have not been informed that a settlement has been arrived at.

  CONTEMPT OF COURT IN THE WEST INDIES.
  MR. THOMAS B. CURRAN: I beg to ask the Secretary of State for the Colonies whether, seeing that the Royal assent was given to The Barba does
  1278
  Contempt of Court Act, 1891, under which all cases of contempt, except in facie curiœ, must be tried by a jury and a judge other than the one who may be aggrieved; and that, on the 19th May, 1898, Her Majesty, by Order in Council, assented to a similar measure passed in the Leeward Islands, he would instruct the Governors of the Windward Islands and the adjoining Crown Colonies under the control of the Colonial Office to pass a law on the same lines, so as to make legislation on the subject uniform in the West Indies.
  MR. J. CHAMBERLAIN: I recognise the convenience of uniformity of legislation on the subject in the West Indian Colonies, and I will bring the matter under the consideration of the Governors of the Colonies referred to.

  SIERRA LEONE.
  MR. PICKERSGILL: I beg to ask the Secretary of State for the Colonies whether his attention has been specially drawn to page 121 of the Blue Book on Sierra Leone, just issued, from which it appears that in one of the recent trials, viz., Regina v. Caulker, three witnesses swore to the prisoner having killed a Mr. Roberts with his own hand, whereas it appeared, on looking up another murder case which had been held by the Deputy Judge, that Roberts was killed by an entirely different person, and so the prisoner was fortunately acquitted. And, whether, having regard to the kind of evidence produced at these trials, he will cause inquiry to be made into the circumstances of the prisoners who were convicted, with a view to the extension to them in suitable cases of the clemency of the Crown.
  MR. J. CHAMBERLAIN: Yes, Sir, my attention was called to the statement which appears on page 121 of the Blue Book to which the hon. Member's question refers. The evidence of natives requires very careful sifting, and the judge who tried the persons charged with murder, and who was especially selected for the purpose, exercised very great care. I see no reason to direct any general inquiry into the cases which have been tried, but if in any special case circumstances should be found to afford grounds for further inquiry, it will, of course, be made.
  MR. PICKERSGILL: I beg to ask the Secretary of State for the Colonies whether, having regard to the fact that Sir F. Cardew, Governor of Sierra Leone, brought a very serious impeachment against the newspaper press and the community of that colony—viz., that of inciting the natives of the Protectorate to resist payment of the hut tax, and that Her Majesty's Special Commissioner, Sir David Chalmers, has reported that Sir F. Cardew has entirely failed to establish this charge against the people of the colony which he administers, will he consider the advisability of transferring Sir F. Cardew to some other sphere of employment.
  MR. J. CHAMBERLAIN: The question of the effect of certain actions of individuals and of articles in the local press is a matter of opinion on which Sir D. Chalmers and Sir F. Cardew are not in full agreement; but even if Sir F. Cardew has, as I hope is the case, attached undue importance to these matters, it is not, in my opinion, a reason for putting a slight on a distinguished and zealous officer who has administered the government of the colony in most difficult and trying circumstances.
  MR. PICKERSGILL: I beg to ask the Secretary of State for the Colonies whether Sir David Chalmers recommended that the Insurgents' Temporary Detention Ordinance, 1898 (Sierra Leone), should be immediately repealed; and whether Commander Sir F. Cardew has admitted that this Ordinance could safely be repealed; and, if so, will he state why this course has not been taken.
  MR. J. CHAMBERLAIN: The facts are as stated. No action has been taken under the Ordinance for some time past, and instructions will now be given for its repeal.
  MR. PICKERSGILL: I beg to ask the Secretary of State for the Colonies whether Bai Bureh has been deported to Accra; and, having regard to the fact that Commander Sir F. Cardew reported that Bai Bureh had fought us squarely and well, and recommended that he should be allowed to return to his people, will he state upon what grounds this recommendation has not been adopted.
  MR. J. CHAMBERLAIN: I have not lost sight of the recommendation referred to; but, upon consulting the local authorities and Sir F. Cardew as to the date at which Bai Bureh should be sent back, I came reluctantly to the conclusion that it would not be advisable to allow him to return at present, and that in the meantime it would be better for Bai Bureh that he should be removed to Accra, where more liberty could be given him than in Freetown.

  BRITISH COMMERCIAL ATTACHÉS ABROAD.
  SIR STAFFORD NORTHCOTE: I beg to ask the Under Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs if any decision has been arrived at by Her Majesty's Government with respect to the increase in the number of British Commercial Attachés abroad.
  THE UNDER SECRETARY OF STATE FOR FOREIGN AFFAIRS (Mr. BRODRICK,): Her Majesty's Government, with a view to furthering British trading interests, have decided to appoint commercial agents in certain countries. Appointments will shortly be made in Russia, Switzerland, China and America. These agents will not have diplomatic rank, but will visit various commercial centres, and will be available for special consultation by British firms in respect of various, industries by payment of a moderate fee, such fees going to the Exchequer and not to the commercial agent, who will be paid by salary. The appointments will be made experimentally for two or three years.

  FOREIGN SERVICE MESSENGERS.
  SIR CHARLES DILKE: I beg to ask the Under Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs whether the Secretary of State is acting on the recommendations, in respect to Foreign Service messengers, contained in paragraph 20 of the final Report of the Ridley Commission, other than the recommendations as to salary and age which he has accepted.
  MR. BRODRICK: The Secretary of State in filling up the appointment of Queen's Messenger is ready as a general rule to give the preference to gentlemen, who have served in the Army or Navy,

  1281
  though not necessarily on half-pay or in receipt of pension, but he does not hold that the recommendations of the Commission deprive him of the power of appointing suitable civilians. The Secretary of State will also take care that the candidates selected possess a colloquial knowledge of French, are able to ride, to keep simple accounts, and are pronounced medically fit. The office of Queen's Messenger is included in Schedule B of the Order in Council of June 4th, 1870, and is therefore not one for which an examination is obligatory.

  RED SEA LIGHTS.
  SIR THOMAS SUTHERLAND: I beg to ask the President of the Board of Trade when it may be expected that the lighthouses which the Porte is said to have agreed to construct in the southern portion of the Red Sea will be commenced, and if any arrangement has been entered into or is pending for authorising the collection of dues in respect of such lights; and whether the annual surplus of the Egyptian lights revenue, amounting to £45,000, is considered available for this purpose, or if such surplus can only be applied to the reduction of dues on Egyptian lights in conformity with the Convention between Great Britain and Egypt; in the latter case when a reduction may be looked for.
  MR. BRODRICK: As regards the first paragraph of this question there is nothing at present to be added to the answer given to the question of the right hon. Member for the North-east Division of Manchester on the 27th of July ultimo. The sum available for the construction of the proposed lighthouses in the Red Sea is the accumulated amount, about £80,000 sterling, to which reference was made in reply to my hon. Friend's question of July 29th. I would, however, remind him that the dues were reduced by 30 per cent, on September 1st, 1897, and the revenue derived from them has fallen from £E110,000 in 1896 to £E87,000 in 1898. The engagement on the part of the Egyptian Government to reduce the Egyptian light dues by £E40,000, to which the hon. Member alludes, is contingent on the application of the customs tariff to all the Powers. This contingency has not yet arisen.

  BRITISH CLAIMS FOR LOSSES IN CONSTANTINOPLE.
  MR. DILLON: On behalf of the hon. Member for South Donegal, I beg to ask the Under Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs, whether Her Majesty's Government have received a petition from the British merchants in Constantinople, dated 9th May, 1898, praying for an early settlement of their claims against the Turkish Government for losses sustained by them in August, 1896, during the pillage of Pera, Galata, Stamboul, and Hasskein by a mob; whether Her Majesty's Ambassador to the Sublime Porte has reported that the mob in question was organised by and worked under the orders of Turkish officials whose names are known to the Ambassador; whether the Secretary of State is aware that two British firms at Constantinople have been compelled to suspend payment in consequence of the magnitude of their losses on that occasion, and that other firms are in financial difficulties from the same cause; and whether, seeing that no attention has been paid by the Ottoman Government to the note verbale, addressed to it by Sir Philip Currie on 24th March, 1898, Her Majesty's Government will now consider the advisability of liquidating the claims of the petitioners and recovering the sum paid from the Ottoman Government from the profits which will accrue by the conversion of the Cyprus Tribute into Two and a-half Per Cent. Consolidated Stock.
  MR. BRODRICK: The petition has been received. Her Majesty's Ambassador has not made the Report stated, but Her Majesty's Government consider that there are grounds for holding the Turkish Government liable to make compensation in certain cases. Her Majesty's Government are aware that the losses suffered on the occasion have caused serious embarrassment to several of the sufferers. They will continue to press the claim, but no arrangement has yet been made of the nature suggested in regard to the surplus revenue of Cyprus, and, consequently, no assurance can be given on the subject.

  HER MAJESTY'S CONSUL AT SMYRNA.
  MR. DILLON: On behalf of the hon. Member for South Donegal, I beg to ask the Under Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs whether the attention of the

  1283
  Secretary of State has been called to the unsatisfactory relations which for some time have existed between Mr. H. C. Cumber batch, Her Majesty's Consul at Smyrna, and the members of the British community in that city; whether he is aware that Mr. Cumber batch is Chairman of the Committee of the Seamen's Hospital, which has made grave charges against the personal character of the British medical officer of that city; can he state whether these charges have been disproved or withdrawn; and whether Mr. Cumberbatch still performs consular duties at Smyrna, and enjoys the confidence of Her Majesty's Government.
  MR. BRODRICK: The Secretary of State is not aware that unsatisfactory relations exist between Her Majesty's Consul at Smyrna and the members of the British community there. Charges against the personal character of the surgeon of the Seamen'sHospital were brought before the Hospital Committee, of which the Consul is the ex-officio chairman. The Judge of the Supreme Court at Constantinople eventually investigated these charges, and pronounced them to have been without any foundation. Mr. Cumberbatch still performs consular duties at Smyrna, and enjoys the confidence of Her Majesty's Government.

  UNITED STATES NAVIGATION LAWS.
  MR. RUNCIMAN: I beg to ask the Under Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs whether his attention has been called to Department Circular No. 17, dated 8th February, 1899, promulgated by the Treasury Department of the Bureau of Navigation at Washington, United States of America, reciting an amendment in the Federal Laws of 1884, by an Act approved 21st December, 1898; whether, under the amendment referred to, it becomes unlawful to pay any seaman wages in advance of the time when he has actually earned the same; also, whether any shipmaster paying such an advance to seamen becomes liable to heavy fine and six months' imprisonment; whether any treaty exists between Great Britain and the United States exempting our national shipping from the operation of American domestic legislation, which is in conflict with British law, or otherwise; and whether Her Majesty's Government are prepared to
  1284
  negotiate with the United States for the protection of British shipowners and seamen in regard to advances, which are legal in this country, and especially against the exaction of what is called "blood money" by crimps in lieu of such advances.
  MR. BRODRICK: My attention has been called to the Circular issued by the Treasury Department of the Bureau of Navigation at Washington. The questions affecting British shipping which arise in connection with the United States law referred to are receiving the careful consideration of Her Majesty's Government.

  CITY CHAMBERLAIN'S JURISDICTION OVER APPRENTICES.
  MR. HARWOOD: On behalf of the hon. Member for Pontefract, I beg to ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department whether he is aware that recently the City Chamberlain sentenced two boys, serving as apprentices to Messrs. Eyre and Spottiswoode, to fourteen days" solitary confinement at Bridewell for trifling offences connected with the breaking of their indentures; whether he will state to the House by virtue of what authority the City Chamberlain has jurisdiction in such matters, and whether the procedure followed is similar to the procedure of other courts; and whether he will make inquiries with a view to ascertaining if such jurisdiction and procedure is applicable to existing conditions.
  THE SECRETARY OF STATE FOR THE HOME DEPARTMENT (Sir M. WHITE RIDLEY,): The City Chamberlain has an ancient customary jurisdiction in connection with the Mayor's Court to adjudicate on disputes between masters and apprentices, and commits apprentices to the Bridewell for misconduct in accordance with a, scheme approved by the Master of the Rolls (under 52, George III. c. 101, and. the Charitable Trusts Acts). I am not aware of any reason for dissenting from the view expressed by my predecessors that the Chamberlain's Court is distinguished for its impartial administration and care of the rights of apprentices. I may add that the Bridewell is not a prison coming within the provisions of the Prison Act., nor is it in any way under the inspection or control of the Home Office.

  MAINTENANCE IN INDUSTRIAL AND REFORMATORY SCHOOLS.
  MR. J. G. TALBOT: I beg to ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department whether his attention has been drawn to paragraph 19 of the 4th Report of the Committee on Public Accounts; and whether, pending the future legislation therein referred to, he proposes to take any measures to enforce the better collection of parental contributions towards the maintenance of children detained in reformatory and industrial schools.
  SIR M. WHITE RIDLEY: A Bill containing provisions relating to the parental contributions referred to was introduced into and passed the House of Lords this session. I am sorry that it was impossible for any further progress to be made with it, but I may say that the inspector and his agents are instructed to use every effort to keep up and improve the present standard of collection; and that, even with the law as it stands, the increased energy devoted to this matter has not been without success.

  LANCASHIRE SEA FISHERIES COMMITTEE.
  MR. HARWOOD: I beg to ask the President of the Board of Trade if he will consider, before granting further powers to the Lancashire Sea Fisheries Committee, the cost already incurred, and the loss suffered by the fishermen.
  THE PRESIDENT OF THE BOARD OF AGRICULTURE (Mr. LONG,) (for Mr. Ritchie): The only application from this Committee for further powers at present before the Board of Trade is one for sanction to a bye-law for limiting the kind of nets or instruments to be used in fishing for shrimps or prawns in a certain part of the Mersey estuary. A public local inquiry will be held in regard to this, and any representations that fishermen or others interested may make to the inspector will receive the careful consideration of the Board of Trade. As regards any applications that may hereafter be made I can only say that due regard will be had to the interests of all those who may be affected by them.

  ACCOMMODATION FOR LASCAR SEAMEN.
  MR. HAVELOCK WILSON: I beg to ask the President of
  1286
  the Board of Trade whether he is now in a position to state if the 210th Section of the Merchant Shipping Act, which deals with the accommodation of seamen on board ship, applies to Lascar and other native seamen in the same manner as it applies to seamen engaged on board British vessels registered in ports of the United Kingdom; and if he is now in the position to give the opinion of the Law Officers of the Crown in accordance with the promise made some months ago.
  MR. LONG (for Mr. RITCHIE): Yes, Sir. The Board of Trade are now in possession of the opinion of the Law Officers of the Crown with regard to the point to which the hon. Member refers. The opinion is to the effect that the Board have acted properly in declining to allow any deduction from tonnage in respect of Lascar crew space which is not in accordance with the requirements of Section 210 of the Merchant Shipping Act; further, that the question whether proceedings should be taken to enforce these requirements is one for the consideration of the Board of Trade under all the circumstances of the case, among which are the provisions of Section 25 of the Imperial Act of George IV., 4 c. 80 and the conflicting provisions of the Indian Merchant Shipping Acts. At the moment, I can only say that the matter in all its bearings shall receive very careful consideration, and that I have already placed myself in communication with the India Office with a view of securing, if possible, an assimilation of the Indian to the Imperial law on the subject.
  MR. HAVELOCK WILSON: May I call attention to the fact that the right hon. Gentleman has not answered my question? I want to know whether the Law Officers of the Crown advise that the company are breaking the law in not providing for Lascars the same accommodation as the British seamen.
  MR. LONG: Obviously I cannot give any further answer in the unavoidable absence of my right hon. friend.
  MR. HAVELOCK WILSON: I have been promised an answer to this question for over four months. I shall take an early opportunity to call attention to the matter unless I soon get one.

  WEIGHTS AND MEASURES ACT—BREWERS' CASKS.
  MR. YOXALL: I beg to ask the President of the Board of Trade if he will explain to the House upon what statutory or legal authority, and under what case decided in a competent court of law, the Board of Trade issued their letter to the Warwickshire County Council dated 26th January, 1895, marked T.S.H 86, stating that brewers' casks in use which did not bear any permanent representation upon the cask itself, by way of marking or otherwise of its capacity or of the measure of its contents, were to be considered as exempt from obligation to the Statute and the operations of The Weights and Measures Act, 1878, under Section 22.
  MR. LONG (for Mr. RITCHIE): In December, 1894, the Warwickshire County Council asked for the "views" of the Board of Trade upon the subject, and in January, 1895, the Board wrote the letter referred to in the question upon the advice of their solicitor. I do not admit that the hon. Gentleman's question gives an accurate resumé of that letter.

  LIGHT DUES.
  MR. NICOL: I beg to ask the President of the Board of Trade if his attention has been called to the fact that light dues have been levied against vessels engaged in inland navigation and in areas not lighted at the expense of the General Lighthouse Fund; and, if so, whether he will make such alterations as may be necessary to relieve these vessels from this tax.
  MR. LONG (for Mr. RITCHIE): The question whether light dues should be levied on vessels exclusively engaged in areas not lighted at the expense of the General Lighthouse Fund has been brought to my notice. I am advised that such vessels are not exempt under the Act, and can only be exempted by Order in Council. This claim to exemption is only one of several which have arisen since the passing of the Act, and I propose that they shall all be very carefully considered as soon as we have a little more experience of the operation of the Act.

  FRASERBURGH LIGHT RAILWAY.
  MR. BUCHANAN: I beg to ask the President of the
  1288
  Board of Trade whether he can now state when the Order for the Light Railway from Fraser burgh to St. Courts will be issued.
  MR. LONG (for Mr. RITCHIE): The Board of Trade understand from the promoters that they will apply for confirmation of the Order as soon as they have settled with the Treasury the terms of the agreement for an advance of money from the State.

  ELECTRIC TRAMCAR ACCIDENT IN DUBLIN.
  MR. PATRICK O'BRIEN: I beg to ask the President of the Board of Trade whether he is aware that three passengers on an electric tramcar in Dublin, on Sunday last, were injured by the breaking of the electric wires, which was caused by a passenger pulling the trolly rope in mistake for the bell rope to stop the car; whether he is aware that Mr. Mahoney, the magistrate before whom a police charge was brought arising out of the accident, censured the tramway company for exposing the public using the trams to the danger of pulling the trolly rope by mistake for a bell rope, and also censured the Board of Trade for having sanctioned such a dangerous arrangement; and whether he will cause a departmental inquiry into this matter, and see that the trolly rope is so protected that it cannot be interfered with except by the officer in charge of the car, and that proper arrangements for stopping the cars are placed on the top as well as within them.
  MR. LONG (for Mr. RITCHIE): The Board of Trade have entered into communication with the company with reference to this matter. When their reply is received I will decide whether an expert inquiry will be useful. In the meantime I can express no opinion on the subject.

  HUDDERSFIELD SWINE FEVER REGULATIONS.
  MR. CAREW: On behalf of the hon. Member for the St. Patrick Division of Dublin, I beg to ask the President of the Board of Agriculture whether he is aware that the local authority for the county borough of Huddersfield have made a regulation that after the 26th July, 1899, no swine

  1289
  shall be moved into the county borough of Huddersfield from Ireland; and whether he will endeavour to have this regulation rescinded.
  MR. LONG: I have seen the regulation to which the hon. Member refers. It is made under similar circumstances to those which led to the making of the West Riding regulation with regard to which the hon. Member questioned me on Tuesday, and the answer I then gave is equally applicable on the present occasion.

  TITHE RENT-CHARGE (RATES) BILL.
  MR. MADDISON: I beg to ask the President of the Board of Agriculture if he will state the amount of the sum deducted in each case from the amount payable to Kent, Sussex, Brighton, Hastings, Middlesex, Hertfordshire, and the Isle of Wight out of the Local Taxation Grant, to provide the £87,000 taken from the grant under the Tithe Rent-Charge (Rates) Bill.
  MR. LONG: The share of the counties and county boroughs named in a sum of £87,000, distributed in the proportion of what are known as the "discontinued grants," would amount in the case of Kent to £2,636, East Sussex £868, West Sussex £404, Brighton £307, Hastings £107, Middlesex £2,445, Herts £753, and the Isle of Wight £276.
  MR. HEDDERWICK: I beg to ask the President of the Board of Agriculture if he will state the amount of the sum deducted in each case from the amount payable to the counties of Bucks and Berks, and the county boroughs of Reading, West Ham, and Bournemouth, out of the local taxation grant to provide the £87,000 taken from the grant under Tithe Rent-Charge (Rates) Bill.
  MR. LONG: The shares of the counties and of the first two county boroughs named, in a sum of £87,000, distributed in the proportion of what are known as the "discontinued grants," would be £630, £619, £139, and £551, respectively. The figures for the newly created county borough of Bournemouth are not yet available.

  RABIES AND THE MUZZLING ORDER.
  MR. WHITMORE: I beg to ask the President of the Board of Agri-
  1290
  culture what progress has been made with the extirpation of rabies in England since his last statement; and whether he can now say when it will be practicable and expedient to revoke the muzzling orders which are still in force.
  MR. LONG: Perhaps I may be allowed to give the number of cases of rabies known to have occurred in Great Britain since 1896, the year prior to the commencement of our operations against the disease. In that year 436 cases were confirmed; in 1897, 151 cases; in 1898, 17 cases; and during the present year, so far as it has gone, only one case has been confirmed. With regard to the revocation of the muzzling orders, we have now made arrangements for obtaining the same security against the introduction of the disease from Ireland as exists in the case of foreign countries, and as soon as these arrangements arc in effective operation I hope to be in a position to withdraw the Orders from the Midland and West Riding areas, to be followed at no distant date by the revocation of those in force in Lancashire and the metropolitan area, if no further cases occur.

  TUBERCULOSIS.
  MR. CHANNING: I beg to ask the President of the Board of Agriculture whether he now proposes to take any steps to give effect to the recommendations of the Commission on tuberculosis as regards what the Commission held to be the most important part of the inquiry, the elimination of the disease by the provision of guaranteed tuberculin, and the services of qualified veterinary surgeons gratuitously or otherwise; and whether, in any case, the Board of Agriculture will prepare and distribute a clear and concise statement of the method of elimination recommended by the Commission, and of the results of the adoption of this method in Denmark and other countries, and on certain estates in the United Kingdom.
  MR. LONG: Since the hon. Member last called my attention to this matter, nothing has occurred which would suggest that there is any general desire on the part of agriculturists that the Government should gratuitously provide tuberculin and the services of a veterinary surgeon for the purpose of enabling stock owners to test their animals for tuber-

  1291
  culosis, and in these circumstances I could not fairly ask the Treasury to supply funds for the purpose. With regard to the issue of literature on the subject, I may remind the hon. Member that the Royal Agricultural Society recently gave extensive circulation to a very concise and practical leaflet, but I propose during the recess to bring up to date our information as to the methods of dealing with the disease, and the results obtained in Denmark and other countries, so as to enable me to determine whether we can usefully supplement the particulars already in the possession of agriculturists on the subject.

  RATING OF MACHINERY.
  MR. HAVELOCK WILSON: I beg to ask the President of the Local Government Board whether his attention has been called to a communication, addressed to his Department by the Sunderland Board of Guardians, calling attention to the fact that there are upwards of 300 unions in England and Wales in which machinery included in the various hereditaments is not rated, thus reducing the amount received from Imperial and other taxation; and what steps, if any, he intends to take in the matter.
  THE PRESIDENT OF THE LOCAL GOVERNMENT BOARD (Mr. CHAPLIN,): I have seen the communication referred to in the question; but the matter is not one with respect to which the Local Government Board have any authority to interfere. If a person is aggrieved on the ground that a particular hereditament is assessed too low, because the value of machinery which ought to be included in the assessment is not included, he can object to the valuation list before the Assessment Committee, and if he does not obtain relief he can appeal against the rate.

  RATES ON RIFLE RANGES.
  MR. CHANNING: I beg to ask the President of the Local Government Board whether he can state the number of instances in which Assessment Committees have allowed rifle ranges to be exempted from local rates; and whether he will make any representation, by circular or otherwise, to the local rating authorities in cases where this exemption has not been granted.
  MR. CHAPLIN: The Local Government Board have no information on the subject referred to in the question, nor have they any authority to intervene with regard to it.

  POISONOUS TINNED FOODS.
  MR. CHANNING: I beg to ask the President of the Local Government Board whether he has considered the circumstances disclosed at a recent inquest as to deaths at a London hotel, and other instances in the past few years of alleged danger to life from improperly prepared or packed tinned meats, fruits, vegetables. and other articles of food; what precautions are now taken in the way of inspection, or otherwise, to check these risks, both as regards imported and home-produced tinned articles of food; and whether further steps will be taken in the interests of public health.
  MR. CHAPLIN: The Local Government Board have from time to time made investigation into the circumstances of injury to health and danger to life by reason of the consumption of various articles of food, including cases of poisoning by tinned meats and other articles. The method of investigation in these cases is now well known, and it would appear that in the case to which the hon. Member refers the inquest has been adjourned in order that further analysis may be made. Power is given by the general law for the inspection and examination of articles of food deposited for the purpose of sale, or preparation for sale, and intended for the food of man, and it does not appear that further steps than those being adopted in the special case referred to, or than those applicable to the subject generally, are required.

  MOTOR CARS.
  MR. TRITTON: On behalf of the hon. Member for the Peckham Division of Camberwell, I beg to ask the President of the Local Government Board whether his attention has been called to the numerous accidents that have lately been caused by motor cars; and whether he will take steps to compel all drivers of motor cars to stop until horses and carriages have passed when requested to do so by the persons in charge of them.
  MR. CHAPLIN: No representations have been made to me as to numerous

  1293
  accidents caused by motor cars, and ample powers are given already under regulations made by the Local Government Board (Article IV., sub-section 8, of the Light Locomotives on Highways Order, 1896) to give effect to the object of the hon. Member. The article provides that every person shall, on the request of any police constable or of any person having charge of a restive horse, or on such constable or person putting up his hand as a signal for that purpose, cause the light locomotive to stop and to remain stationary so long as may be reasonably necessary.

  EAST CENTRAL SORTERS' HOLIDAYS.
  MR. STEADMAN: I beg to ask the Secretary to the Treasury, as representing the Postmaster-General, whether he is aware that Sorters White, Eastop, Woodbridge, Nicholls, North, Dyer, Davidson, and Kennedy, attached to the east central section General Post Office, have not received twenty-one days' annual leave although they have completed five years' service; and whether they are entitled to this period of leave under the Tweed-mouth scheme, seeing that two sorters attached to the east central section of exactly identical service with the first four mentioned have received it, and that with the exception of these two all the sorters granted leave in October, which carries with it a twenty-one days' leave without question, are juniors to the officers mentioned.
  THE FINANCIAL SECRETARY TO THE TREASURY (Mr. HANBURY,): The eight sorters referred to had not completed five years' service when the period arrived which they had selected for annual leave. As regards the latter part of the question the hon. Member appears to be under a misapprehension. Leave in October does not carry with it "a twenty-one days' leave without question"; and no officer completing five years' service (say) in November would be granted twenty-one days' leave in October.

  FIXED WAGES FOR RURAL POSTMEN.
  MR. STEADMAN: I beg to ask the Secretary to the Treasury, as representing the Postmaster-General, if he will consider the case of Thomas Cooper,
  1294
  rural postman of Pease down St. John, near Bath, who, notwithstanding the announced policy of abolishing the system of fixed wages, is still kept on the fixed scale of 16s: weekly, whereas a second, rural postman at the same office is on scale and is receiving 19s. weekly, although he does an hour less duty daily.
  MR. HANBURY: The hon. Member is under a misapprehension in supposing that a policy of abolishing fixed wages for established rural postman has been adopted. Such is not the case, inasmuch as fixed wages are paid to rural postmen working from many of the smaller post offices. Pease down St. John is one of those offices, and Thomas Cooper is rightly paid fixed wages of 16s. a week. The other rural postman at the same office is on an obsolete scale rising to 19s. a week, for which fixed wages of 16s. will be substituted on a vacancy.

  FINTONA MAILS.
  MR. DILLON: I beg to ask the Secretary to the Treasury, as representing the Postmaster-General, will he explain why the mails are not delivered in Fintona, County Tyrone, on Sunday mornings before 10 a.m., although they are despatched from Omagh, six miles distant, at 6 a.m.; and whether he is aware that the Great Northern train for Bundoran leaves Fintona on Sundays at 9.10, and that great inconvenience is caused to many inhabitants of Fintona by not receiving their letters before the departure of that train.
  MR. HANBURY: As stated in answer to the hon. Member's question of the 19th June, the mails are due at Fintona on Sundays about 9 a.m., and the delivery commences at 9.15. There being no early morning train to Fintona on Sundays, the mails have to be forwarded by road from Omagh. They are sent by the mounted postman leaving Omagh at 6 a.m., and reaching Derrabard, about 2¼ miles from Fintona, at 8.10a.m. From Derrabard the mails are conveyed by a foot messenger to Fintona. The train leaving Fintona at 9.10 a.m. on Sundays only runs during the summer, and few passengers go by it. No great or wide spread inconvenience is therefore caused through the letters not being delivered on Sundays before the departure of this train.
  MR. DILLON: Is it not the fact that Omagh is only six miles from Fintona? Can the right hon. Gentleman explain why it takes over three hours to convey the mails that distance?
  MR. HANBURY: I think the distance is nearer eight miles. Letters have to be delivered on the road, and that, I think, sufficiently accounts for the delay.

  RURAL DELIVERIES IN COUNTY MONAGHAN.
  MR. MACALEESE: I beg to ask the Secretary to the Treasury, as representing the Postmaster-General, has anything been done to redress the balance of rural deliveries in the district of Carrickroe, County Monaghan, where great dissatisfaction prevails with the system which provides for one and the same townland a four-day delivery, in certain parts, while in other parts providing for only a two-day delivery; and, whether, if this system cannot be improved, he will revert to the old methods of delivery.
  MR. HANBURY: The correspondence for the district in question is very small, and the service which has been granted to each part is of the greatest frequency that the circumstances at present permit. But fresh returns of the correspondence shall before long be taken, and if it is found that a more frequent service can be given, arrangements shall be made accordingly. If the present system cannot be improved, any of the residents who desire it can, as formerly, have their letters left at the Carrickroe Post Office to be called for.

  CLOUGHAN POSTAL ARRANGEMENTS.
  MR. HAYDEN: I beg to ask the Secretary to the Treasury, as representing the Postmaster-General, whether, seeing that the sub-post office at Coughing, near Mullingar, has been abolished since last May, it is intended to re-establish the office; whether he is aware that the people of the district are greatly inconvenienced by its discontinuance, as their only means at present of purchasing stamps is to meet the letter carrier at a specified time and place on the public roadway; and whether steps will be at once taken to establish the office once more at Coughing, where it is understood there is more than one
  1296
  properly qualified person ready to undertake the duties of the position of sub-postmaster.
  MR. HANBURY: It is not intended to re-establish the sub-post office at Coughing, near Mullingar. A house-to-house delivery has been afforded throughout the district, and an office is no longer needed as a place of call for letters. The Postmaster-General is not aware that the residents are greatly inconvenienced by the closing of the office. The sale of stamps at the Coughing office was small, and the supply carried by the postman is believed to suffice for the ordinary wants of the neighbourhood. The Postmaster-General sees no reason for establishing an office once more at Coughing.

  CROMWELL'S STATUE.
  MR. BROOKFIELD: I beg to ask the First Commissioner of Works whether he can state the precise process or arrangement by which it has been decided to erect a statue to Oliver Cromwell within the grounds of Westminster Palace, in addition to the bust of Cromwell already placed near the foot of the grand staircase leading to the Committee Rooms; whether any sanction has ever been given by Parliament for the erection of either of these two memorials; and whether the present House of Commons has had or will have any opportunity of expressing its opinion in the matter.
  MR. WILLIAM JOHNSTON: May I ask the right hon. Gentleman if he will also favourably consider the request in the third paragraph of the question, in order that the electors of this country may have an opportunity of taking note of those who are engaged in this, idiotic opposition to honouring the memory of England's greatest ruler?
  MR. SPEAKER: Order, order! The hon. Member is not in order in applying the language he has used to a question which appears on the Paper in the name of another hon. Member.
  MR. WILLIAM JOHNSTON: I did not apply it to the hon. Member, but to the opposition. I will be glad to exchange it for any Parliamentary equivalent.
  THE FIRST COMMISSIONER OF WORKS (Mr. AKERS-DOUGLAS,): I have already stated on several occasions that the offer of a statue of Oliver Cromwell was made to, and accepted by, the late Government, and a site for its erection chosen by my Predecessor at the Office of Works. The Government on their accession to office in 1895 were asked whether they would adhere to the action of their predecessors, and they agreed to do so. The bust of Oliver Cromwell, which is admitted to be a very fine work of art, was presented to, and accepted by, the First Lord of the Treasury in the name of the House. It has not been customary, nor is it necessary, to obtain the formal sanction of the House to gifts of this character.
  MR. JAMES LOWTHER: Has my right hon. friend had his attention called to the fact that there is a far more suitable site in Marylebone Road, in the neighbourhood of Baker Street, where there is a chamber specially reserved for malefactors?
  MR. T. M. HEALY: Is the right hon. Gentleman in a position to give us the name of the generous donor?
  MR. AKERS-DOUGLAS: No; I am not.
  MR T. M. HEALY: Is he ashamed of it?

  EMBO FISHERMAN'S FINES.
  MR. M'LEOD: I beg to ask the Lord Advocate, whether his attention has been called to the case of John Cumming, fisherman, Embo, who on 28th June last was sentenced at Tain to pay a fine of £5, which is the maximum which any police or summary court in Scotland can impose in the very worst case in which the option of a fine is allowed; whether he is aware that, prior to paying the fine, Cumming was compelled to pay a sum of £3 10s. for alleged damage to the cell in which he was confined without any citation being served upon him, or an independent valuation made; and, whether, as Cumming was fined the maximum penalty, the authorities will repay the £3 10s.
  THE LORD ADVOCATE (Mr. A. GRAHAM MURRAY,): The
  1298
  statement contained in the first paragraph of the hon. Member's question is not quite correct, as the maximum fine under the Burgh Police Act, 1892, is £10. I am informed by the Procurator-Fiscal that John Cumming was tried on the 29th ultimo, and was represented by an agent. The evidence fully supported the charges of serious assaults found proved, and the magistrates gave the accused the option of paying a fine out of compassion, and in respect of his calling as a fisherman, and his statement that he was robbed in the train of his earnings. The Procurator-Fiscal also informs me that the accused was very violent in the police cells, and that the amount acquiesced in and paid for by him for smashing the furniture will not, according to contract prices, now submitted, be sufficient to cover the loss. This matter rests with the county authorities, and I can give no assurance as to repayment.
  MR. MCLEOD: Will the Lord Advocate have an independent valuation made of the damage?
  MR. A. GRAHAM MURRAY: I believe the valuation made was accurate.

  SCHOOL BOARD REGISTERS.
  MR. MOSS: I beg to ask the Vice-President of the Committee of Council on Education, if his attention has been called to the working of the present arrangements for compiling the list of voters for School Board elections in parishes outside the metropolis, and outside boroughs, under Section 29 of the Education Act, 1870 (33 and 34 Vic., c. 75, s. 29), and under the second schedule of the Act of 1873 (36 and 37 Vic., c. 86, Schedule 2); and whether he will consider the advisability of taking the necessary steps for making the register of parochial electors also the register for the purposes of School Board elections.
  SIR J. GORST: My attention has been called to the matter by the question. The suggestion of the hon. Member cannot be carried out without legislation, which it is impossible at this period of the session to contemplate.

  COVENT CARDEN THEATRE FUND.
  MR. HOGAN: I beg to ask Mr. Solicitor-General, whether the scheme of distribution in connection with the Covent

  1299
  Garden Theatre Fund, recently promised by Mr. Attorney-General, will be presented before the close of the session.
  THE SOLICITOR-GENERAL (Sir R. FINLAY,): After careful consideration a scheme was formulated under the direction of the Attorney-General in May last. It would in all probability have already received the sanction of the court, but for unexpected opposition raised by the defendants in the suit. The matter stands in the judge's list for next Monday.

  IRISH ROAD CONTRACTORS.
  MR. FLYNN: I beg to ask Mr. Attorney-General for Ireland, whether his attention has been called to the position of road contractors in Ireland in connection with the Local Government (Ireland) Act, 1898; and whether a contractor for the maintenance and repair of county roads, as holding a place of profit under the council, is disqualified from holding the position of collector of poor rate; and, if so, will the attention of the Local Government Board be directed to the position of these contractors.
  THE ATTORNEY-GENERAL FOR IRELAND (Mr. ATKINSON,): The answer to the first paragraph is in the affirmative. I must ask the hon. Member to give a concrete case, as the answer will in some degree depend on the terms of the scheme under which the collector has been re-employed. The attention of the Local Government Bill is being directed to the matter, as there is some doubt whether it is provided for by this Order of the 3rd of July last.

  CONTAGIOUS DISEASES (ANIMALS) ACT IN IRELAND.
  MR. CAREW: I beg to ask the Chief Secretary to the Lord Lieutenant of Ireland whether the business of guardians as a local authority under the Contagious Diseases (Animals) Act, 1894, which was transferred to the County Council by the Local Government (Ireland) Act, has, by an Order of the Local Government Board of the 19th July, 1899, been retransferred to the guardians as District Council; and whether the Local Government Board has power to make an Order overruling an Act of Parliament; and, if so, whether the rights of clerks of unions for loss of office as existing officers are preserved.
  THE CHIEF SECRETARY FOR IRELAND (Mr. G. W. BALFOUR,): The reply to the first paragraph is in the negative. The Board's Order of the 19th July does not refer to the business of the guardians under the Diseases of Animals Act, 1894, which was transferred to the County Council by Section 6 (b) of the Local Government (Ireland) Act, 1898; but it empowers urban and rural district councils to appoint inspectors of dairies, milkshops, and cowsheds in accordance with the provisions of Section 9 of the Contagious Diseases (Animals) Act, 1896. The rights of clerks of unions to compensation for loss of office are not interfered with by the Local Government Board's Order above referred to.

  MILK ADULTERATION IN IRELAND.
  CAPTAIN DONELAN: I beg to ask the President of the Board of Agriculture whether his attention has been called to the nominal penalties recently imposed in cases of milk adulteration at a petty sessions in County Cork; and whether it will be possible for similar penalties to be imposed, in like cases, under the Sale of Food and Drugs Bill of the present session.
  MR. G. W. BALFOUR: At the request of my right hon. friend I will reply to this question. The answer to the first paragraph is in the affirmative. The Bill referred to in the second paragraph contains special provisions prescribing penalties for offences committed under the Sale of Food and Drugs Acts, the penalties in most cases being maximum sums which may be abated in the discretion of the magistrates.
  CAPTAIN DONELAN: Is the right hon. Gentleman aware that in one of the cases referred to, in which the milk was deficient in 30 per cent. of fat, the merely nominal fine of 5s. was imposed? Would it be possible for a similar type of penalty to be imposed in like cases under the Bill passed during the present session?
  MR. G. W. BALFOUR: I believe so.

  IRISH LAND COMMISSION VALUERS.
  MR. J. O'CONNOR,: On behalf of the hon. Member for North Meath, I beg to ask the Chief Secretary to the Lord Lieutenant of Ireland whether

  1301
  valuers in the Land Purchase Department of the Irish Land Commission are permitted to make private valuations or not; whether he is aware that on the Garnett estate, in the Land Judge's Court, a Mr. Thomas Roberts, one of the valuators of the Irish Land Commission Court, Purchase Department, made private valuations for the solicitors having carriage of sale, Messrs. Lonfield and Company, which caused the proposed arrangements to purchase by the tenants to fall through; and whether this gentleman, being a small incumbrancer on the property, was permitted to do so by the Land Commission; whether this Mr. Roberts, who is considerably over sixty-five years of age, will be continued as a Commissioner; and whether, in view of the contemplated sale of the portions of this estate in the hands of the encumbrancer and the recent advertisements of sale proposing to create tenancies and divide it into small areas from three acres to 150, the Congested Districts Board be consulted with a view to their purchasing this estate.
  MR. G. W. BALFOUR: All valuers in land purchase cases for the Land Commission are now Assistant-Commissioners. Assistant-Commissioners paid by annual salary are not permitted to make valuations of land, save in the performance of their duties for the Land Commission. Prior to his appointment in 1897 as a salaried Assistant-Commissioner, Mr. Thomas Roberts, who is an incumbrancer on the estate referred to, was Receiver over that estate. On his appointment in 1897 he resigned the Receivership, and states that he thereupon handed over his books and papers connected with the estate to the new Receiver. He further states that at no time did he inspect the estate for the purpose of valuing it or any part of it for sale, and never made any valuation for the solicitor having carriage of the sale. As to the last paragraph, if the estate referred to is in a congested district, a point upon which I have no information, any proposal that may come before the Congested Districts Board for its purchase would, of course, be considered.

  DELACOUR V. HEALY.
  MR. WILLIAM ABRAHAM: I beg to ask the Chief Secretary to the Lord Lieutenant of Ireland whether his attention has been
  1302
  directed to the case of Delacour v. Healy, heard at the Castletown Roche Petty Sessions on the 27th ult., and to the action of the magistrates in refusing to adjourn the case; whether he is aware that the adjournment was sought to enable the defendant to produce documentary evidence of his yearly tenancy, then in the possession of the clerk of the union, and that a decree for possession within fourteen days was granted on the ground that he was a caretaker; and if he will refuse to permit the police to execute this decree until an opportunity is afforded to the tenant to produce the evidence of his yearly tenancy.
  MR. G. W. BALFOUR: I believe the facts are correctly stated in the first and second paragraphs. I am informed that it was proved that the summons in the case had been served four days before the hearing, and that the magistrates considered this was ample time in which to obtain any documentary evidence from the clerk of the union. The decree was directed for execution to a special bailiff, and not to the police. I have no authority to put a stay on the execution of the decree.

  DUBLIN CITY POLICE.
  MR. CLANCY: I beg to ask the Chief Secretary to the Lord Lieutenant of Ireland whether any regulation exists by which members of the Dublin Metropolitan Police may be compelled to deal for such goods as they may require at particular shops; and, if not, whether he will inquire whether any compulsion in that direction has been attempted in the district of Kilmainham; and, if he finds that there has been, whether he will take steps to put a stop to it.
  MR. G. W. BALFOUR: No officer of any rank in the Dublin Metropolitan Police is permitted directly, or indirectly, to interfere with the members of the force in the purchase of goods that they require for their private use, and they are not required to deal with particular shops. A letter, bearing no signature, was recently received by the Chief Commissioner to the effect that an officer had influenced one of the men at Kilmainham Police Station to change his butcher, and on inquiry it was ascertained that there was

  1303
  not a particle of foundation for the allegation.

  LICENSING COMMISSION REPORTS—SUNDAY LIQUOR TRADE.
  MR. TRITTON: I beg to ask the First Lord of the Treasury whether, as both the majority and minority Reports of the Royal Commission on the Licensing Laws recommend a reduction in the hours of sale of intoxicating liquors on Sundays, he will consider the desirability of introducing a measure next session to carry out these recommendations, and thus effect a much needed reform.
  THE FIRST LORD OF THE TREASURY (Mr. A. J. BALFOUR,): In answer to my hon. friend, I have to say that the Report, or, rather, Reports, of the Royal Commission deserve, and will receive, our most careful attention, but I am not in a position to pledge the Government with regard to legislation on any of their recommendations at the present time.

  BEN NEVIS OBSERVATORY.
  MR. PIRIE: I beg to ask the First Lord of the Treasury, with reference to the proposal to discontinue the high level observatory on Ben Nevis for want of funds, if he is aware that of the £15,000 granted to the Meteorological Council by Government for scientific investigation, nearly £1,000 is taken as payment for the Council for managing the grant, whilst the secretary also receives £800; that a sum is being annually set aside by the Council in order to provide for a superannuation fund, which now amounts to £2,000, and that upwards of £3,000 has been sunk in the high level observatory at Ben Nevis, the benefits accruing to science from the expenditure of such money being probably lost if the cycle of observations is not completed; whether conditions were imposed by the Government on granting this sum for scientific research that the money should be devoted exclusively to that object, and, if not, whether such conditions could now be imposed; and if he will cause steps to be taken so that the annual grant of money may be made direct to the Scottish Society in place of going through the intermediary of the Council, thus avoiding recourse to private charity for the upkeep of the only observatory
  1304
  possessed by this country at the high level of 4,400 feet.
  MR. A. J. BALFOUR: The Government have no information as to the details of the expenditure of the Meteorological Council except such as may be derived from their report, and in that report no mention is made of any expenditure for superannuation. Their expenditure is, of course, annually audited. The council, I am informed, are overhauling their expenditure, and I trust that the result of that operation will be that more of the funds given by the State will be available for carrying on observatory work in the United Kingdom. As regards the second paragraph of the question, it is a condition that the grants should be applied exclusively to meteorological work, and no doubt the Controller and Auditor-General would call attention to any misapplication.
  MR. PIRIE: I beg to ask the First Lord of the Treasury whether, seeing that the Meteorological Council have disregarded the recommendation given last year by the Government to afford the Scottish Meteorological Society the necessary support to maintain the Ben Nevis Observatory, he will, failing other action, bring further pressure to bear on the Meteorological Council, or increase the grant to that body by the few hundred pounds necessary to keep up the observatory as a national one.
  MR. A. J. BALFOUR: The hon. Gentleman is under a misapprehension as regards the facts of this case. He seems to imply that pressure has been put by the Treasury on the council on former occasions with regard to the devotion of their funds to this or that purpose. The Treasury have carefully abstained from any action of that sort. The responsibility for spending their £15,000 rests, and must rest, with the Meteorologial Council.
  MR. BUCHANAN: Seeing that a private donor has come forward with funds to enable the observatory to be carried on for another year, will the right hon. Gentleman make inquiries during the recess to ascertain whether he would be justified in proposing next year a small grant of a few hundred pounds in aid of the observatory?
  MR. A. J. BALFOUR: It is not for me to say the Meteorological Council do or do not carry out the functions entrusted to them to the best advantage, but I confess I think a Government Department is even less qualified to deal with a strictly scientific matter.

  BUSINESS OF THE HOUSE.
  MR. DILLON: When does the Chief Secretary propose to take the Lords' Amendments to the Irish Agriculture and Technical Instruction Bill, which we may expect down to-morrow, as the Report stage is being taken to-day?
  MR. A. J. BALFOUR: It will not be possible to consider the Lords' Amendments to the Bill before Monday or Tuesday, because to-morrow must be devoted to the discussion of the Report of Supply.

MESSAGE FROM THE LORDS.

  DUBLIN CORPORATION BILL.
  That they insist on their Amendments to the Dublin Corporation Bill, to which this House have disagreed, for which they assign reasons, and disagree to the consequential Amendments made by this House to the Bill.
  That they have agreed to—

  ISLE OF MAN (CUSTOMS) BILL
  Without Amendment.
AGRICULTURE AND TECHNICAL INSTRUCTION (IRELAND) BILL.
  SALE OF FOOD AND DRUGS BILL.

    IMPROVEMENT OF LAND BILL.
    SMALL HOUSES (ACQUISITION OF OWNERSHIP) BILL.
    NORTH-WEST LONDON RAILWAY BILL.
    BROMPTON AND PICCADILLY CIRCUS RAILWAY BILL.
    LEEDS CORPORATION BILL.
    CHARING-CROSS, EUSTON, AND HAMPSTEAD RAILWAY BILL.
    NEWCASTLE-UPON-TYNE TRAMWAYS AND IMPROVEMENT BILL.
    LONDON IMPROVEMENTS BILL.
    HARROW AND UXBRIDGE RAILWAY BILL.
    UXBRIDGE AND RICKMANSWORTH RAILWAY BILL.
    With Amendments.
    Amendments made by this House to the Amendments made by the Lords, and to the consequential Amendment made by this House to

    LONDON AND NORTH WESTERN RAILWAY (ADDITIONAL POWERS) BILL.
    Amendments to—
TRAMWAYS ORDERS CONFIRMATION (No. 2) BILL [Lords].
  TRAMWAYS ORDERS CONFIRMATION (No. 3) BILL [Lords].

    RENFREW BURGH AND HARBOUR EXTENSION BILL [Lords].
    CALEDONIAN RAILWAY (GENERAL POWERS) BILL [Lords].
    ABERDEEN JOINT PASSENGER STATION BILL [Lords].
    LEIGH-ON-SEA URBAN DISTRICT COUNCIL BILL [Lords].
    MOSS SIDE URBAN DISTRICT COUNCIL (TRAMWAYS) BILL [Lords].
    STRETFORD URBAN DISTRICT COUNCIL (TRAMWAYS) BILL [Lords].
    WITHINGTON URBAN DISTRICT COUNCIL (TRAMWAYS) BILL [Lords].
    WESTON-SUPER-MARE, CLEVEDON, AND PORTISHEAD TRAMWAYS COMPANY (LIGHT RAILWAY EXTENSIONS) BILL [Lords].
    YEADON AND GUISELEY GAS BILL [Lords].
    GLASGOW AND SOUTH-WESTERN RAILWAY BILL [Lords].
    GREAT EASTERN RAILWAY (GENERAL POWERS) BILL [Lords].
    GREAT YARMOUTH WATER BILL [Lords].
    NORTH-EASTERN RAILWAY BILL [Lords].
    NORTH STAFFORDSHIRE RAILWAY BILL [Lords].
    WOLVERHAMPTON TRAMWAYS BILL [Lords].
    Without Amendment.

    AGRICULTURE AND TECHNICAL INSTRUCTION (IRELAND) BILL.
    Lords Amendments to be considered upon Monday next, and to be printed. [Bill 300.]
    SALE OF FOOD AND DRUGS BILL.
    Lords Amendments to be considered upon Monday next, and to be printed. [Bill 301.]
    SMALL HOUSES (ACQUISITION OF OWNERSHIP) BILL.
    Lords Amendments to be considered upon Monday next, and to be printed. [Bill 302.]

    SUPPLY [22ND ALLOTTED DAY.]
    Considered in Committee.
    (In the Committee.)

  CIVIL SERVICE ESTIMATES, 1899–1900.

    CLASS I.
    1. £2, 303, to complete the sum for harbours under the Board of Trade.
    2. Motion made, and Question proposed, "That a sum, not exceeding £17,500, 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, 1900, for constructing a new Harbour of Refuge at Peterhead."
    MAJOR JAMESON: I rise to protest against the enormous expenditure yearly upon Peterhead Harbour. I notice that £36,000 is taken for a railway which nobody wants, and £300 for a new road that nobody will travel over. In face of the fact that only £10,000 can be got for the whole of the harbours in Ireland, I object to £378,000 being spent on a useless harbour in the north of Scotland. I hope the House will join with me in my protest. The work is only undertaken in order to use convict labour, and it would be far cheaper to pension the convicts off, or lay them up in brown paper, than incur this enormous outlay. I beg to move to reduce the Vote by £3,500.
    Motion made, and Question, "That a sum, not exceeding £14,000, be granted for the said Service"—(Major Jameson)—put, and negatived.
    Original Question put, and agreed to.

    CLASS II.
    3. £329,579, to complete the sum for Stationery and Printing.
    CAPTAIN NORTON: Before this Vote passes I desire to ask the Secretary of the Treasury whether he can make any statement with reference to the course he proposes to take as to the payment to the reporters of The Official Debates of the sums they have lost owing to the bankruptcy of the late contractor.
    MR. LEWIS: I should like to ask the right hon. Gentleman as to the desirability of allowing every Member of this House, as is the case in almost every other Parliament in the world, to have a copy of the proceedings of each day on his breakfast table the following morning. In the case of Canada each Member of Parliament finds on his breakfast table an official report of the Parliamentary proceedings of the previous day. Why cannot the Imperial Parliament give to its Members what the Dominion Parliament gives to its Members? In what respect do the circumstances of the two Parliaments differ? When we last discussed this, the hon. Member who spoke on behalf of the Government seemed to be under the impression that the hours of the Dominion Parliament were very different from our own; but I have found, on careful inquiry, and by an examination of the official reports, that the Canadian Parliament sits quite as late as our own—and, indeed, very much later. Yet, notwithstanding this fact, and the additional fact that the proceedings are conducted in two languages, Members get the official report of the proceedings on their breakfast-table the next morning. If this can be done in Canada, why cannot it be done in London? Are our printers less enterprising? Is it a matter of expense? Then, surely, if the Dominion Parliament can afford it, the Imperial Parliament should be able to do so. It would be a great advantage to hon. Members to be able to secure the answers to questions, and to keep themselves au courant with the proceedings of the House. Are there not other directions in which economies might be made? Certain Papers, for instance, are printed under the regulations of the House which need not be printed. Cannot it be possible to hold such Papers.

    1309
    as unprinted and let them be seen in the Library? Let economy be practised as far as possible in the Stationery Office. No one has done more in that direction than the Gentleman who is now responsible for it; I know that he has done his utmost in connection with these contracts to save the country unnecessary expense in the printing department. In asking the right hon. Gentleman to spend a little more money, I am only asking him to act in a direction which would be useful, and I hope the right hon. Gentleman will take this question into serious consideration. In regard to the question asked by my hon. friend in reference to the reporters who have somewhat unfortunately been deprived of what must, in some cases, have been considerable sums of money, I wish to say that the sympathy of hon. Members on both sides of the House is universally with these reporters, and if the Government can see their way to do anything in the direction of helping them, nobody in this House, or outside it, would raise any objection.
    MR. MCLEOD: I wish to join the hon. Gentlemen who have just spoken in their appeal to the Secretary to the Treasury on behalf of the reporters of The Debates. I think the reflection should not lie on this House that the work on some of these volumes of Debates is not paid for. It may be perfectly true that the Treasury are not directly responsible, but they were responsible for accepting the contractor they did, and they should have seen to it that the security they got was thoroughly adequate, and that it was impossible for such circumstances to occur as they did in this case. There is another point I wish to refer to, and on which I wish some information. I must confess that when the reporters parted with their manuscript without an understanding that they would be paid for their arrears, they showed a simplicity not usually exhibited by the members of the Press. I am told that the officials held over them a threat that if the reporters refused, on any consideration, to give up their manuscript they would not be employed in future on The Debates. That is a reflection which ought to be removed if there is no ground for it. But, apart entirely from that consideration, I do think that on the broad ground that these men are not in a position to stand the very serious loss of
    1310
    not being paid for their labour, and on the ground that, after all, we were responsible for accepting the contractor, and that the sum involved is comparatively a small one, the Treasury should see their way to pay the gentlemen, and in that way remove a very considerable reflection on this assembly.
    MR. CARVELL WILLIAMS: There are two points in connection with this Vote to which I wish to call attention—I mean the quantity of printed matter poured in upon us, and the character of the reporting of The Debates. I lately, through a question, called the attention of the Secretary to the Treasury to the immense quantity of printed matter delivered to us—a large portion of which is of no interest to the general body of Members; and the right hon. Gentleman was good enough to promise to see if there could not be a reduction of that amount. I call attention to only one class of Papers—the Amendments to private Bills—that come down to us. I remember on one occasion there were 112 pages of Amendments to private Bills, and quite lately—within the last few days—forty pages of Amendments were delivered, and this morning twenty pages. With regard to the reporting of the Debates of the House, a great improvement has taken place since the new contract was entered into, in the speedy delivery of the reports, but with regard to the character of the reporting I am not able to express so favourable an opinion. The right hon. Gentleman said in June that the new contract was on precisely the same conditions as the preexisting contract. I was rather sorry to hear it, and my regret has been increased since, because we have still to complain of the inaccurate character of much of the reporting. It is a moot point whether condensed reports would not in the majority of cases be preferable to reports which are verbatim. Condensed reports, however, require a great deal of skill, and skill must be paid for. If we could always ensure that our Debates should be reported in the intelligent and admirable manner in which they appear day by day in The Times newspaper, we might be more content with condensed reports than we are at present. The most irritating part of it is that reports which pretend to be verbatim are not verbatim at all. They are given in the language of the reporter

    1311
    and not in the language of the speaker. I know some Members who say they cannot take the trouble, in revising the proofs of their speeches, to restore something like the original language they used. I do not know how long this contract is to run. I assume there is no opportunity of making an alteration at the present time, but I hope, if the right hon. Gentleman should be in office when the change is made, that he will see that it is made in the right direction.
    CAPTAIN SINCLAIR: There have been in the last few years several changes in the contractors who have undertaken the reporting, and that has led to a change in the system of indexing more than once. I hope that in future there will be greater uniformity in the indexing of the discussions. At the present time there are not a sufficient number of copies of the early Hansards of this year to supply hon. Members who want them. I wish to ask whether the Stationery Office would not reprint some of these earlier numbers.
    MR. PIRIE: I express a hope that before the Vote comes on next year the Government will see their way to follow the example set this session by the Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs, and have duplicate type-written answers to all questions placed in the library for the convenience of Members.
    THE CHAIRMAN: That is not a question on the printing Vote.
    THE FINANCIAL SECRETARY TO THE TREASURY (Mr. HANBURY,): An hon. Member below the Gangway seemed to raise some question with regard to the treatment of the reporters by the Stationery Office in reference to the handing over their manuscripts. I do not think there is any justification for that complaint. What happened was this. Under the circumstances the Stationery Office were most anxious to assist these reporters in every legitimate way, and therefore they took two steps. In the first place they asked the new contractor to take the reporters on. I do not know how far they were wise in doing so, for I think there is some justification for the complaints of the reporting by the hon. Member opposite. I am bound to say that the condensation
    1312
    of the speeches is not by any means done as well as the House has a right to expect. The reports which profess to be verbatim are not verbatim as a matter of fact. They are in the words not of the speaker, but of the reporter, and in that sense are misleading. It was a very difficult thing to interfere during the present session, as the Stationery Office was anxious that these reporters should be allowed to continue during the remainder of the session. But I am bound to say that the Stationery Office will have to take steps another year to see that the reporting is better done. We have a right to have it done well, because it is a fairly lucrative contract. I believe that with the exception of a few speakers we do not want the speeches at full length or verbatim. In the majority of cases the speeches should be condensed, and in order to get proper condensation we would have to employ reporters capable of doing that work well. With regard to the question of compensating the reporters who have been referred to, I hope the Committee will bear in mind that we ought not to run the risk of creating a very dangerous precedent. In the first place, so far as the contractor himself goes, I do not know that his contract stands in a different position from any other contract made on the part of the Government. It is not pretended that it was not a remunerative contract. It is not pretended that it was not a contract under which the contractor could very well afford, not only to pay good salaries, but to pay them punctually. I do not disguise from the Committee the fact that I believe that the contract is worth £3,000 a year to the contractor. If it is said that the late contractor took it at a price very much below the other tenders, I will tell the Committee exactly what happened. Under the last contract we had paid a subsidy of about £300 a volume for Hansard. To my astonishment, when the tenders were sent in I found that the large firms—whether they had combined together or not I cannot say—but, at any rate, it was a remarkable fact that the tenders of the principal firms were £900, £1,000, and £1,100 per volume. Well, the late contractor, being a foreman engaged by one of these firms, and who had been thoroughly well acquainted with the working of the contract, tendered on his own account at a low rate. We took sureties for the due performance

    1313
    of the contract, and, as I have said, in tendering for a subsidy of £300 per volume, he had admitted that he was able to make a large profit. That was sufficient justification in our case for not accepting the absurd tenders of £900, £1,000, and £1,100 per volume. Now, the new contractors are Messrs. Wyman's, a very responsible firm, who have got very large contracts with the Government, and they have taken over the contract on the same terms as Mr. Bussy. It is a very serious step indeed for the House to say that the responsibility must fall upon the taxpayer and not upon the contractor for the payment of his servants. That is not a rule which would be applied in the case of any other contract, so far as I know, and I therefore ask hon. Members, however anxious they may be to do justice in the case of these men, to recollect that there is no difference between this and any other contract; and if the bad precedent were once set of the Government making good wages and payments due by the Government contractors we should be saddled with an unlimited responsibility. I hope that anything which the Committee in its good nature may wish to do will not be of such a character as to set such a dangerous precedent. After all I believe what was in the minds of many hon. Members who signed the memorial asking that something should be done for these men, was perhaps the thought that these men were brought more closely into relations with the House than the employees of other contractors. There may be something in that view. But even if there is, I cannot see that that would be sufficient justification for such a step. The real question is—and this will have to be treated as an exceptional case—how far these reporters bonâ fide believed they were in the personal service of the House and not of the contractor. That is a question of evidence; and so far as the Government and the Stationery Office are concerned nothing has been said, written, or done which would lead the reporters to take that view. But I will undertake to see these reporters and find out what evidence they are able to afford the Government which would indicate that they had any just reason for supposing that they were in any sense in the employment of the Government. If they establish that case, then it is only right that the House should do something for them. The House is always
    1314
    very generous to those in its employment, but I ask the House to pause before creating a very dangerous precedent. The only ground for doing this is that these men thought they were in our employment. I will see them and go into the facts of the case; and the House may trust me that, if any reliable evidence is brought forward to show that these men had any sound ground to believe they were in the employment of the Government, I will make good what was due to them. But I cannot admit claims without scrutiny. If we are to pay anything, the proper course will be to see what claims are established against the estate in bankruptcy, and to recognise those claims; for I fear that nothing will come out of the estate. With regard to the point raised by the hon. Member for Flint, I do not know that there is any burning anxiety on the part of the House to get the reports of the previous night's debate on the breakfast table each morning, and unless there is a very strong desire on the part of hon. Gentlemen to have these reports produced so early I do not see any advantage in it. As to the Canadian Parliament, I do not think the hon. Member is quite accurate. The Canadian Parliament does not sit so late as the House of Commons, and I am told that the Members of that House do not receive their reports next day. But, however that may be, I cannot meet the hon. Member's views until the House displays a greater disposition to agree with him in the desire to have the reports furnished next day. I think myself that there is a great deal of waste in the printing of the House, that a great deal of printing is done that is not necessary, whether in the Orders of the Day or otherwise, and before next session I will consult with the authorities to see whether it is not possible to prevent some of this unnecessary printing. With regard to the earlier copies of Hansard's Debates for this session, I am afraid the late contractor's bankruptcy may create some difficulty. What we have done is this. We were afraid that, as there were only a limited number of copies, they might be bought up by outsiders and offered at prohibitive prices. Therefore I instructed the Controller of the Stationery Office to arrange with the Receiver in Bankruptcy to buy up all the printed copies, and these will be distributed in the ordinary way.

    1315
    There are more than enough to meet the claims of those who had given orders in advance: but the full extent of the demand cannot be gauged until the end of the session. I do not think it would be right that Members who have kept Hansard's Debates for a series of years should have to go without their copies: and, therefore, a reprint might be necessary.
    SIR CHARLES DILKE: We know by the examples in our library that it is very difficult to index our own Parliamentary papers; still, allowing for all the difficulties, the indexing of the Hansard Debates is extremely perplexing. But I rise with regard to one or two matters mentioned by the right hon. gentleman the Secretary to the Treasury. With regard to the official reporters, the right hon. gentleman has, I think, gone as near giving a promise to do something for the reporters as it is possible to do. He is disposed to do something if it is not brought up as a precedent in any other contract, and I accept his words as being virtually a promise that he will not only look into this matter but redress the grievance. He asks for evidence that these reporters believed themselves to be in the employment of the House. It seems to me that the use of the phrases during the last four years of "official reporters" and "official reports" is quite sufficient to justify the reporters in the belief that they were in the service of this House, and that was the main point in the mind of the Leader of the Opposition when he signed the memorial on behalf of these persons. With regard to the contract itself, the right hon. Gentleman spoke of its being so much a volume. Did the Treasury make any stipulation as to what should be the contents of a volume, because I notice in recent years some volumes have been brought down to such a size as to be less than a quarter of the size of the earlier volumes.
    MR. HANBURY: In the contract there is a definite minimum number of pages per volume fixed. The smallness of these volumes may be due to a difference in the spacing. There has been no alteration in the terms of the contract in respect to the number of pages.
    SIR CHARLES DILKE: With regard to the suggestion of my hon. friend that we should have the official report of the proceedings delivered the morning after those proceedings have taken place, I do not think there is any assembly in the world which sits anything like such a length of time as we do; and in those places where they circulate the official report the next day it is essentially an inconvenient practice, because hon. Members are kept up half the night to correct their speeches for the Press. I am quite sure that any such institution here would be entirely alien to our habits. With regard to the last suggestion, that the amount of printing should be reduced, no doubt it might be reduced; but there is a certain danger in reducing it. All the Members of the House would have to be informed by some careful index as to what the documents were which would not be printed. Even in the large amount of printing concerning private Bills, occasionally matters of considerable public importance are incorporated.
    MR. LEWIS: The right hon. Gentleman has expressed some doubt as to the hours of the sittings of the Canadian Parliament and as to the time that members receive the official reports. If the right hon. Gentleman would take the trouble to go to the library, he would see from those official reports the hour at which the Speaker takes the chair and the hour at which the House rises, and he would also see—I dare say very much to his surprise—that the Dominion Parliament very often sits as late as the Imperial Parliament, especially towards the end of the session. In spite of all these difficulties, however, the Dominion Parliament is able to produce the reports at the time I have mentioned. With regard to the time that the members receive proofs of their speeches, I may say that my authority is the hon. Member for South Longford, who occupied a very leading position in the Canadian Parliament for many years, and who may be supposed to know better than anyone in this country what the customs of the Canadian Parliament have been in this respect. I have thought it right to make this explanation, inasmuch as my statement has to some extent been traversed.
    Vote agreed to.
    4. £3,454, to complete the sum for the Lunacy Commission, Scotland.
    5. £2,829, to complete the sum for the Registrar-General's Office, Scotland.

    CLASS IV.
    6. £381,793, to complete the sum for the Science and Art Department.
    7. Motion made, and Question put, "That a sum, not exceeding £106,030 (including a Supplementary sum of £3,750), 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 1900, for the Salaries and other Expenses of the British Museum, and of the Natural History Museum, including certain Grants in Aid."
    MR. LEWIS: I have given notice of a motion for the reduction of this particular Vote, which is not on the Paper. My object in doing so is to draw attention to the unjust manner, as we regard it in Wales, in which Wales is treated in respect to the Museum Grant. This is by no means the first time that this question has been raised in the House, and I may say that on every previous occasion we have had replies of the most favourable character from the Minister in charge of the Vote. It is one in which non-political bodies in Wales take a very great interest. The county councils have, I believe, sent to the Chancellor of the Exchequer resolutions upon the subject, and I venture to hope that those representations, coming from the most influential quarters that we have in Wales, will receive favourable consideration. We think that our educational system in Wales is imperfect so long as we have no proper museum provision, especially in connection with our intermediate schools. Some of the most important collections have been destroyed by fire, and we have lost some of our most valued treasures on that account, and what we ask is that a
    national institution should be established in Wales, to which, I am sure, many collectors would be only too delighted to contribute.
    THE CHAIRMAN: Order, order! I do not think that this question arises under this Vote. The trustees of the British Museum are confined in their operations to the limits of certain Statutes, and the hon. Member must show that under these Statutes they could start a museum in Wales.
    MR. LEWIS: I have always hitherto been allowed to raise this question either under the heading of Science and Art, or under that of the British Museum. I was under the impression that I was taking the proper course by raising the question on the Vote for the British Museum. I will move to reduce the sum for the British Museum by £10,000, on the ground that the provision made for Welsh antiquities, manuscripts, &c., in the British Museum is inadequate, and that that institution ought to collect, as far as possible, all the antiquities relating to Wales, all the valuable manuscripts, and so forth, and place them in one portion of the building, where the Welsh public would be able to consult them, and in that way be able not only to have easy access to the articles of interest to Wales in the British Museum, but also to be able to see them all together. I recognise, of course, that your ruling, Mr. Chairman, has restricted the scope of my remarks very considerably, but I would venture to say that my proposal would be perhaps the essential preliminary to the establishment of a national museum in Wales. I can only assure the right hon. Gentleman that the greatest interest has for many years past been taken in this particular question, that people belonging to all parties are heartily united in its support, and that the requests we have made have been very small and very reasonable.
    The Committee divided:—Ayes, 136; Noes, 51. (Division List, No. 337.)

    AYES.

    Aird, John

    Bagot, Capt. J. FitzRoy

    Barton, Dunbar Plunket

    Allsopp, Hon. George

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

    Bathurst, Hon. A. Benjamin)

    Anson, Sir W. Reynell

    Balfour, Rt. Hn. G.W. (Leeds)

    Beach, Rt. Hn. Sir M. H.(Bristol

    Arnold, Alfred

    Balfour, Rt Hn J Blair (Clackm.

    Bethell, Commander

    Arrol, Sir William

    Banbury, Frederick George

    Bhownaggree, Sir M. M.

    Atkinson, Rt. Hon. John

    Barnes, Frederic Gorell

    Bigwood, James

    Blundell, Colonel Henry

    Goldsworthy, Major-General

    Morton, Edw. J. C. (Devonport)

    Bonsor, Henry Cosmo Orme

    Gordon, Hon. John Edward

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

    Boulnois, Edmund

    Gorst, Rt. Hon. Sir J. Eldon

    Murray, Chas. J. Coventry)

    Brassey, Albert

    Goulding, Edward Alfred

    Newdigate, Francis A.

    Bullard, Sir Harry

    Halsey, Thomas Frederick

    Pickersgill, Edward Hare

    Burdett-Coutts, W.

    Hanbury, Rt. Hn. Robert Wm.

    Pierpoint, Robert

    Campbell, J. H. M. (Dublin)

    Hayne, Rt. Hn. Charles Seale-

    Pryce-Jones, Lt.-Col. Edward

    Carlile, William Walter

    Heaton, John Henniker

    Purvis, Robert

    Cecil, Evelyn (Hertford, East)

    Hermon-Hodge, Robert Trotter

    Rasch, Major Frederic Carne

    Chaloner, Captain R. G. W.

    Hoare, Edw Brodie (Hampstead

    Ridley, Rt. Hon. Sir M. W.

    Chamberlain, Rt. Hon. J. (Birm.

    Houldsworth, Sir Wm. Henry

    Robertson, Herbert (Hackney)

    Chamberlain, J. Austen (Wore'r

    Hozier, Hn. James Henry Cecil

    Russell, T. W. (Tyrone)

    Chaplin, Rt. Hon. Henry

    Jenkins, Sir John Jones

    Savory, Sir Joseph

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

    Johnston, William (Belfast)

    Sharpe, William Edward T.

    Cohen, Benjamin Louis

    Kearley, Hudson E.

    Sidebottom, William (Derbys.)

    Collings, Rt. Hon. Jesse

    Kimber, Henry

    Simeon, Sir Barrington

    Cornwallis, Fiennes S. W.

    Knowles, Lees

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

    Cox, Irwin Edw. Bainbridge

    Lawrence, Sir E. D. (Corn.)

    Stanley, Hon. A. (Ormskirk)

    Curzon, Viscount

    Lawrence, Wm. F. (Liverpool)

    Stanley, Lord (Lancs.)

    Dalbiac, Colonel Philip Hugh

    Lawson, John Grant (Yorks.)

    Steadman, William Charles

    Davies, Sir Horatio D. (Chath'm

    Llewelyn, Sir Dillwyn-(Swans.

    Stone, Sir Benjamin

    Dickson-Poynder, Sir John P.

    Lockwood, Lieut.-Col. A. R.

    Strutt, Hon. Charles Hedley

    Douglas, Rt. Hon. A. Akers-

    Loder, Gerald Walter Erskine

    Sutherland, Sir Thomas

    Doxford, William Theodore

    Long, Col. Charles W. (Evesham

    Tomlinson, Wm. E. Murray

    Duncombe, Hon. Hubert V.

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

    Tritton, Charles Ernest

    Evans, Sir F. H. (South'ton)

    Lowe, Francis William

    Valentia, Viscount

    Fellowes, Hon. Ailwyn Edward

    Lubbock, Rt. Hon. Sir John

    Wanklyn, James Leslie

    Field, Admiral (Eastbourne)

    Macartney, W. G. Ellison

    Warde, Lieut.-Col. C. E. (Kent)

    Finch, George H.

    Macdona, John Cumming

    Williams, Joseph Powell-(Birm

    Finlay, Sir Robert Bannatyne

    MacIver, David (Liverpool)

    Wilson-Todd, W. H. (Yorks.)

    Fisher, William Hayes

    M'Arthur William (Cornwall)

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

    Fison, Frederick William

    M'Crae, George

    Wortley, Rt. Hn. C. B. Stuart-

    Fitzmaurice, Lord Edmond

    M'Ewan, William

    Wylie, Alexander

    Flannery, Sir Fortescue

    Malcolm, Ian

    Wyndham, George

    Flower, Ernest

    Mappin, Sir Frederick Thorpe

    Wyvill, Marmaduke D'Arcy

    Fowler, Rt. Hn. Sir Henry

    Mendl, Sigismund Ferdinand

    Yoxall, James Henry

    Fry, Lewis

    Monk, Charles James

    Gibbons, J. Lloyd

    Moon, Edward Robert Pacy

    TELLERS FOR THE AYES—Sir William Walrond and Mr. Anstruther.

    Gibbs, Hn. A. G. H (City of Lond

    Moore, William (Antrim, N.)

    Giles, Charles Tyrrell

    More, Robt. Jasper (Shropsh.)

    Gladstone, Rt. Hon. Herbert J.

    Morrell, George Herbert

    NOES.

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

    Jameson, Major J. Eustace

    Rickett, J. Compton

    Austin, M. (Limerick, W.)

    Joicey, Sir James

    Roberts, John Bryn (Eifion)

    Bainbridge, Emerson

    Jones, Wm. (Carnarvonshire)

    Robson, William Snowdon

    Bayley, Thomas (Derbyshire)

    Kilbride, Denis

    Runciman, Walter

    Billson, Alfred

    Lawson, Sir W. (Cumberland)

    Souttar, Robinson

    Broadhurst, Henry

    Macaleese, Daniel

    Spicer, Albert

    Caldwell, James

    M'Leod, John

    Sullivan, Donal (Westmeath)

    Cameron, Sir C. (Glasgow)

    Maddison, Fred.

    Ure, Alexander

    Channing, Francis (Allston)

    Morgan, W. Pritchard (Merthyr

    Wallace, Robert

    Curran Thomas B. (Donegal)

    Moss, Samuel

    Walton, J. Lawson (Leeds, S.)

    Dillon, John

    Norton, Capt. Cecil William

    Whiteley, George (Stockport)

    Donelan, Captain A.

    O'Brien, James F. X. (Cork)

    Whittaker, Thomas Palmer

    Fenwick, Charles

    O'Connor, Jas. (Wicklow, W.)

    Williams, John Carvell (Notts)

    Gourley, Sir Edward Temperley

    O'Connor, T. P. (Liverpool)

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

    Healy, Timothy M. (N. Louth

    Oldroyd, Mark

    Wilson, J. H. (Middlesbrough

    Hedderwick, Thomas C. H.

    Palmer, Sir Chas. M. (Durham

    TELLERS FOR THE NOES—Mr. Herbert Lewis and Mr. Lloyd-George.

    Holland, Wm. H. (York, W.R.

    Perks, Robert William

    Horniman, Frederick John

    Pirie, Duncan V.

    8. £6,149, to complete the sum for the National Gallery.
    MR. LEWIS: There is an amount of £5,000 for the purchase of pictures in 1893–99. Can the right hon. Gentleman say in what way that expenditure was incurred—what pictures were purchased?
    THE CHANCELLOR OF THE EXCHEQUER (Sir M. HICKS-BEACH,): was understood to say that two Rembrandts which were valuable pictures had been purchased.
    9. £2,981, to complete the sum for the National Portrait Gallery.
    MR. LEWIS: I observe that the amount voted for the purchase of pictures in 1898–99 was £1,104, while this year it is £750. May I ask whether there is any particular reason for that decrease?
    MR. HANBURY: There is no special reason.
    LORD EDMOND FITZMAURICE: I desire to say a few words in regard to the correspondence which has recently been published with reference to the National Portrait Gallery. I cannot help hoping that before another year Her Majesty's Government will consider as to whether this gallery, which is now so much appreciated by the public, cannot be treated with greater liberality. I am quite aware that there are very great demands upon the Government, but surely at a time when education of all kinds is being so much more appreciated, the artistic side might well be thought of. Perhaps I may be told that the artistic side of education and art itself are adequately represented by the National Gallery. I think then I may say that there is another side to the National Portrait Gallery, and that is the historical interest of it. Whatever may be the case with regard to the National Gallery, which is no doubt a popular gallery and attracts a great number of the public, yet on the whole the National Portrait Gallery appeals to the average citizen as much as, if not more than, the National Gallery. There are, no doubt, a considerable number of persons who value a picture on its artistic side, but there is a far larger class who take an interest in art from a historical point of view. There is another reason why the Government might do something to aid this collection. Up to the present time the national contribution has been, extraordinarily small. Not only is the annual Vote very small in amount, but the gallery itself was provided by the splendid generosity of one individual, so that it cannot be said that the nation has ever provided itself with a gallery of historical art. If Mr. Alexander had not presented at enormous cost that gallery to the nation, this magnificent collection would still be slowly deteriorating as it was for many years in the gallery at Bethnal Green, where the miserable parsimony of successive Governments left it to be gradually destroyed by
    1322
    the action of time. It is perfectly well known that one of the greatest authorities on art we ever had warned the Treasury over and over again that owing to the peculiar position of the gallery at Bethnal Green and the manner in which it was constructed, those pictures were bound to deteriorate year by year. At length, Mr. Alexander came forward, and owing to his generosity the country received this magnificent gift. That being so, the Trustees of the National Portrait Gallery may surely appeal to the Treasury for something more generous to be done in regard to the sum given annually than is now the case. I need not repeat to the House the terms of the almost ludicrous reply, if I may say so, which was given the other day by the Treasury to the letter of Lord Peel The Trustees appealed to the Treasury for a moderate enlargement of the annual sum voted, and Lord Peel, on their behalf, called special attention to the fact that there were certain pictures in the market at that moment which were of very great importance. One of those pictures was a portrait of Her Majesty the Queen, by a distinguished English artist, and pictures of the Queen by English artists are exceedingly rare; another was a picture, of great artistic and also of great historical value, of King Charles I.; and the third was a picture of Queen Henrietta Maria. Those are all of very great interest, both from the point of view of art and of history. The reply, which will certainly be historic but not artistic, appeared to be that these three persons were not of sufficient importance to find a place in the gallery. That is the meaning which might be extracted from the words, although I venture to say it was not intended; but the letter was a most awkward one and exceedingly ill-expressed, and every newspaper from one end of the country to the other burst into what may be called a prolonged peal of laughter over it. I venture to make a most earnest appeal to the Government to consider the position of this gallery. If they study the figures which we can give them, and which are in the possession of the House, they will see that this gallery is becoming more and more appreciated from year to year. A great nation like this, which can afford to vote enormous sums of money for all conceivable purposes, some of which, in my opinion, are of very doubtful value, ought not to grudge the few extra hundreds

    1323
    which the trustees, through Lord Peel, have asked for, in order to buy pictures which very likely may pass out of the country altogether, or if they do not pass out of the country, it will be because of the generosity of some private individual who occasionally comes forward at the last minute and saves a picture of great national interest.
    SIR M. HICKS-BEACH: What appears to me to be ludicrous in this matter is, not the Treasury letter, but the interpretation which has been placed upon it. By a peculiar form of criticism, which consists in adopting the answer of the Treasury to one request as the answer to another request, it has been made to appear that the Treasury has described Her Majesty the Queen, King Charles I., and Queen Henrietta Maria as persons who were not celebrated in history. In the first instance, the trustees asked for a special grant for the purchase of these three pictures, and that application was declined. Then they asked that their annual grant might be increased by a considerable amount, and they based that request on the ground of the increased cost of artistic pictures which they might desire to add to the gallery. To that a reply was returned to the effect that the intention of the National Portrait Gallery is rather to provide a gallery of portraits of celebrated characters in English history than a gallery of art. The result has been somewhat singular. The trustees of the National Portrait Gallery valued the three pictures to which the noble Lord has referred at very high prices, and I have seen a criticism of their valuation which describes it as quite excessive. As far as I am aware, no picture by Sir David Wilkie has ever reached the price put upon this particular picture by the trustees, and with regard to the other pictures, they are by no means of first-class artistic value. Since making that request to the Treasury, the trustees of the National Portrait Gallery do not now desire to purchase this particular portrait of Her Majesty the Queen, and with regard to the other two pictures of King Charles I. and Queen Henrietta Maria, it is notorious that there is in the National Gallery collection a picture of Charles I. of far greater artistic excellence; while there are pictures already of both these sovereigns in the National Portrait Gallery. That brings me to
    1324
    what is the real point of difficulty. Is the National Portrait Gallery to have its grant increased in order to enable it to bid against the National Gallery for the purchase of works of art in the market? That, I think, would be a ludicrous proposition, and one which the Committee would never sanction. I am informed that there are a good many portraits in the National Portrait Gallery which are by no means of historic importance, many of which have been given by the relatives of persons shortly after their death, and which have been allowed to find a place in the National Portrait Gallery. I would suggest to the noble Lord and his colleagues that they would be doing a useful work if they weeded their gallery of the pictures of persons of no historic importance. I would also make a further suggestion. I think it might be possible to make some arrangements between the trustees of the National Gallery and the National Portrait Gallery, by which the portraits of persons of historical importance in the history of the United Kingdom might be transferred from the National Gallery to the National Portrait Gallery. That would be greatly to the advantage of the National Portrait Gallery, and would stamp it as the national collection of portraits rather than of works of art. If an arrangement of that sort could be made, I should be quite prepared to consider, on the part of the Government, an application for the increase of the funds at the disposal of the trustees of the National Portrait Gallery, by which, if necessary, they might, from time to time, purchase valuable portraits of celebrated personages in the history of the United Kingdom, because then they would not be in competition with the trustees of the National Gallery. I hope I have not detained the Committee too long in explaining what seems to me to be the real difficulty.
    LORD EDMOND FITZMAURICE: In reply to what has fallen from the Chancellor of the Exchequer upon the general question of the position of the gallery, I can assure the right hon. gentleman that the points to which he has alluded have been present over and over again in the minds of the trustees of the National Portrait Gallery. I quite agree that some years ago there was a tendency on the part of the then trustees of the National

    1325
    Portrait Gallery to buy pictures which, from the historical and artistic point of view, combined, were not altogether worthy of the collection. I must also add that the pictures which come within that criticism are not those of personages recently deceased, and in this respect the Chancellor of the Exchequer is wrong. We have a rule, which we can only depart from by special arrangement, that we do not buy pictures of persons recently deceased. The whole of the pictures which are on our walls of persons recently deceased are pictures which have been given to us, and which have cost us nothing at all. We have had, for instance, a magnificent gift of pictures by that famous artist, Mr. Watts. I do not think anybody desires that we should refuse to accept such a magnificent gift as that. In regard to the question of a joint arrangement, I join with every single word which the right hon. Gentleman has said, and if he can persuade the authorities of the National Gallery to enter into any such arrangement I am sure nobody will be more delighted than the trustees of the National Portrait Gallery. So far as I can recollect, whenever any suggestion of that kind has been made by the trustees I do not think it has ever been received in a friendly spirit by the trustees of the National Gallery, for they do not like to denude their walls of pictures, some of which are the finest works of art, and they are determined to keep them there. I am quite willing to grant that from a commonsense point of view there are certain absurdities in these two galleries, which are door to door and back to back, occasionally appearing to compete with one another; but I must deny that under the present management it can be shown that the two galleries have driven up prices one against the other. If the right hon. Gentleman will examine carefully into this question, and put himself in communication with the trustees, he will find that they have had present in their minds all those points he has mentioned.
    Vote agreed to.
    10. £6,000, to complete the sum for the Wallace Collection.
    11. £67,700, to complete the sum for Universities and Colleges, Great Britain, and Intermediate Education, Wales.
    12. £4, to complete the sum for London University.
    13. Motion made, and Question proposed, "That a sum, not exceeding £701,861, 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, 1900, for Public Education in Scotland, and for Science and Art in Scotland."
    SIR CHARLES CAMERON: I desire to draw attention to the refusal of the School Board for Kilmalcolm to provide school accommodation for the 900 children who are inmates of the Quarrier Homes at Bridge-of-Weir. Mr. Quarrier considers that he is entitled to have the children in his homes educated at the public schools. He asked the School Board authorities to admit these children into the public schools, but they have refused to do so, and in this action they have been backed up by the Scotch Education Department, and that is what I desire to protest against. I asked the Lord Advocate the other day a question with regard to an exactly similar case in another parish, where there is a home maintained by the Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to Children, and in that home there are sixty or seventy children from all parts of Scotland. Now these children are educated at the Board school, and so far from there being any objection to them, the authorities are very glad to have them, because they find that the grant from the Imperial funds for their education pays all the expenses which they are put to. In the parish to which I allude it was necessary to enlarge the school in order to accommodate these children; but in the case to which I refer no such necessity exists, and Mr. Quarrier is willing to send the children to the school, but the authorities will not receive them. The result has been that since the middle of April last these children have been receiving absolutely no education. The excuse made by the Lord Advocate is that the Department do not think it is fair that these children should receive their education at the expense of this parish; but it is equally hard in other parishes where public institutions of this kind have been founded. I maintain that, as the law does not impose upon any other body except

    1327
    the School Board the duty of educating children, and as education is made compulsory by law, the School Board is bound to educate these children. The law takes no cognizance of Mr. Quarrier; it cannot compel him to educate these children. An offer has been made by the Education Department to pay for these children if Mr. Quarrier would submit his schools for examination; but Mr. Quarrier has a conscientious scruple to earning grants, and he has never availed himself of his right to obtain educational grants. The law cannot compel him to accept them, but the law does give the Department power to provide for the education of these children, and in leaving the matter in its present deadlock the Department is grossly neglecting its duty. I do not believe there would be any hardship on the parish if these children went into the public schools, because they would earn quite sufficient to defray every cost to which the School Board would be put in providing for their education. But there is a much greater obstruction than the question of expense. The parish concerned is a favourite residential district, and a number of genteel people send their children to the board schools, and they do not like their children coming into contact with Mr. Quarrier's waifs and strays. Such action is contrary to the whole principle of education in Scotland. Mr. Quarrier is a ratepayer, but the law does not demand that a man should be a ratepayer before he can have his children educated, or even that the children should be his own, because if a man has charge of children and they are not sent to school he is liable to be punished. The excuse put forward on behalf of the Department is absolutely flimsy and unsatisfactory, and I must protest against the elaborate show which is being made of care for secondary education, when such an elementary duty as the education of these children is so absolutely neglected and repudiated by the Department. I beg to move the reduction of the Vote by the sum of £1,000.
    Motion made, and Question proposed—
    "That a sum, not exceeding £700,861, be granted for the said Service."—(Sir Charles Cameron.)
    THE LORD ADVOCATE (Mr. A. GRAHAM MURRAY,): There is really not the slightest justification for
    1328
    the statement of the hon. Baronet that the Department has been in any way supine in this matter, or that they have made a flimsy excuse. The position is a very peculiar one. Of Mr. Quarrier I do not wish to say anything, except that he seems to be a gentleman whom it is difficult to get to give way when he has once made up his mind. Mr. Quarrier collected a large number of what the hon. Baronet calls waifs and strays and placed them in what after all is a little country parish. All of a sudden, and moved thereto by the fact that a legal decision had been given for which no one was specially responsible—it being merely a decision of the courts putting in force the law of the land—Mr. Quarrier announced that these 900 children would have to be educated at the Board schools.
    SIR CHARLES CAMERON: Mr. Quarrier stated that he would provide for the education of the children as long as he was not rated.
    MR. A. GRAHAM MURRAY: But it was not possible for the local body to grant him an exemption from rates. As far as educating these 900 children at the Board schools is concerned, that is physically impossible, as the accommodation is not equal to it. The School Board, rightly or wrongly, contend that there is no absolute duty on them, under the circumstances, to take these 900 children. An application was made to the Department, and, as the hon. Baronet is aware, the Department made an offer to Mr. Quarrier that if he would continue to educate these children as before they would be perfectly prepared under the condition of inspection to admit his school to a full share of the grant from public schools. Mr. Quarrier did not see his way to accept the offer, and the Department is confronted with the refusal of Mr. Quarrier on the one hand, and with the asseveration of the School Board on the other that they are not legally liable for the education of these children. I am not going to say now what the ultimate decision of the Education Department may be. What I do want to tell the Committee is that the matter is not such plain sailing as the hon. Baronet thinks. He seems to imagine that there is nothing more to do except to provide new schools for the education of these children, but

    1329
    then Mr. Quarrier might say, "No; I have changed my mind. I will educate the children myself again." It is not a simple question, but a question which has to be worked out very carefully. It is a question in which the Department cannot be forced. Negotiations have been going on with the School Board, and also with Mr. Quarrier. I can assure the hon. Baronet that the matter will be carried to an issue. The Department is in no way responsible for Mr. Quarrier choosing to raise the whole question by suddenly stopping the education of these children instead of raising it by procedure at law.
    SIR CHARLES CAMERON: The law in Scotland provides for the education of all children. The right hon. Gentleman says that Mr. Quarrier brought about a crisis by suddenly stopping the education of these children, but before that I asked a question of the right hon. Gentleman on the subject and he informed me that the case did not arise, whereupon Mr. Quarrier brought it to an issue by marching the children to the school. The case has now been running on for nearly four months, and while the Education Department are deliberating these children are growing up absolutely without education.
    MR. PIRIE: I am exceedingly glad the hon. Baronet has moved the reduction of the Vote. I only regret the hon. Member for West Renfrewshire, in whose constituency the district concerned is, is not present to give us his advice. This is a matter which is exciting almost as great an interest in Scotland as the case of Dr. Lamont, and may lead to an equal scandal. I may say, without exaggeration, that Mr. Quarrier is a man whose charity and benevolence are almost worldwide, and the outcome of his self-sacrificing labours is that 900 children are left for four months without any education at all. The right hon. Gentleman said that Mr. Quarrier was a difficult man to persuade. I am glad that he is, when he realises that he is right, and I hope that all Scotchmen when they realise they are right will not allow themselves to be persuaded they are wrong. Taking into consideration that a great many buildings and institutions such as Volunteer drill-halls, churches, and so on are exempt from rates, I think the regulations might
    1330
    have been somewhat relaxed in this case, at any rate until it was settled. The Lord Advocate says that Mr. Quarrier might have raised this question in a court of law. That is the old story—the weak having to bear the expenses against the strong. It is the most extraordinary idea of fairplay that I can imagine, that an appeal to the law should be made by the weaker rather than by the stronger party. The stronger should give way pending a settlement of the question; and then we would not see 900 children going without education. I intend to support the reduction of the Vote.
    MR. A. GRAHAM MURRAY: Legal proceedings have nothing to do with the question. As regards the other matters, the hon. Gentlemen suggested that there should be a stretching of regulations, but there are no regulations to stretch to meet the views of hon. Members. The matter does not concern the administration of any Government Department.
    MR. SOUTTAR: I know Mr. Quarrier's homes, and I admit the good work he has done; but I do not feel myself entirely in accord with what has been said by previous speakers. I think Mr. Quarrier has put himself in a false position. I know it is impossible to make an exception in the case of a charitable institution in the matter of rates. If a concession is made to one a hundred would claim it, and a good deal of embarrassment would ensue. I think Mr. Quarrier was wrong in fighting the question of rates. Of course, Mr. Quarrier is a poor man, and cannot fight the question in the Courts himself; but we must not forget that he has a large and influential backing, and there would not have been the slightest difficulty in finding the money. Mr. Quarrier made a mistake in stopping the education of these children. That was not a Scotch proceeding, and he has raised the question in an objectionable way. The fact remains, as the hon. Baronet says, that although the Scotch people are so very jealous in regard to educational matters, 900 Scotch children are at present not being educated in these schools. I am exceedingly glad to hear that there is a hope that this state of things will not long continue.
    Question put.
    The Committee divided:—Ayes, 66; Noes, 141. (Division List, No. 338.)

    AYES.

    Abraham, William (Cork, N.E.

    Joicey, Sir James

    Perks, Robert William

    Asher, Alexander

    Jones, Wm. (Carnarvonshire)

    Pickersgill, Edward Hare

    Balfour, Rt. Hn. J. B. (Clackm.

    Kearley, Hudson E.

    Rickett, J. Compton

    Billson, Alfred

    Kilbride, Denis

    Roberts, John Bryn (Eifion)

    Broadhurst, Henry

    Lawson, Sir Wilfrid (Cumb'l'nd

    Robson, William Snowdon

    Caldwell, James

    Lewis, John Herbert

    Runciman, Walter

    Curran, Thomas B. (Donegal)

    Lloyd-George, David

    Sinclair, Capt. J. (Forfarshire)

    Curran, Thomas (Sligo, S.)

    Macaleese, Daniel

    Souttar, Robinson

    Dalziel, James Henry

    M'Donnell, Dr. M. A. (Qn's C.)

    Spicer, Albert

    Dillon, John

    M'Crae, George

    Steadman. William Charles

    Donelan, Captain A.

    M'Leod, John

    Sullivan, Donal (Westmeath)

    Fenwick, Charles

    Maddison, Fred

    Wallace, Robert

    Fitzmaurice, Lord Edmond

    Mappin, Sir Frederick Thorpe

    Walton, J. Lawson (Leeds, S.

    Fowler, Rt. Hon. Sir Henry

    Mendl, Sigismund Ferdinand

    Warner, Thos. Courtenay T.

    Gourley, Sir Edw. Temperley

    Morgan, W. P. (Merthyr)

    Whiteley, George (Stockport)

    Harwood, George

    Morton, E. J. C. (Devonport)

    Whittaker, Thomas Palmer

    Hayne, Rt. Hon. Chas. Seale-

    Moss, Samuel

    Williams, J. Carvell (Notts.)

    Healy, Timothy M. (N. Louth

    Norton, Captain Cecil W.

    Wilson, Henry J. (York, W.R.

    Hedderwick, Thos. Chas. H.

    O'Brien, James F. X. (Cork)

    Wilson, Jos. H. (Middlesbro')

    Hogan, James Francis

    O'Connor, J. (Wicklow, W.)

    Yoxall, James Henry

    Holland. Wm. H. (York, W. R.

    O'Connor, T. P. (Liverpool)

    TELLERS FOR THE AYES—Sir Charles Cameron and Mr. Pirie.

    Horniman, Frederick John

    Oldroyd, Mark

    Jameson, Major J. Eustace

    Palmer, Sir C. M. (Durham)

    NOES.

    Aird, John

    Dyke, Rt. Hon. Sir Wm. Hart

    Mellor, Colonel (Lancashire)

    Allsopp, Hon. George

    Fellowes, Hon. Ailwyn Edw.

    Mildmay, Francis Bingham

    Anson, Sir William Reynell

    Field, Admiral (Eastbourne)

    Monk, Charles James

    Arnold, Alfred

    Finch, George H.

    Moon, Edward Robert Pacy

    Arrol, Sir William

    Finlay, Sir Robert Bannatyne

    Moore, William (Antrim, N.)

    Atkinson, Rt. Hon. John

    Firbank, Joseph Thomas

    More, Robert Jasper (Shropsh.)

    Bagot, Capt. J. FitzRoy

    Fisher, William Hayes

    Morrell, George Herbert

    Balfour, Rt. Hon. A. J. (Manch'r

    Fison, Frederick William

    Morton, A. H. A. (Deptford)

    Balfour, Rt. Hn. G. W. (Leeds

    Flannery, Sir Fortescue

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

    Banbury, Frederick George

    Flower, Ernest

    Murray, Chas. J. (Coventry)

    Barnes, Frederic Gorell

    Fry, Lewis

    Murray, Col. Wyndham (Bath)

    Barton, Dunbar Plunket

    Gedge, Sydney

    Newdigate, Francis Alexander

    Bathurst, Hon. A. Benjamin

    Gibbons, J. Lloyd

    Parkes, Ebenezer

    Beach, Rt. Hn. Sir M. H. (Bristol

    Gibbs, Hn A.G. H.(City of Lond

    Pierpoint, Robert

    Bethell. Commander

    Gibbs, Hon. Vicary (St. Albans)

    Pryce-Jones, Lt.-Col. Edward

    Bhownaggree, Sir M. M.

    Giles, Charles Tyrrell

    Purvis, Robert

    Bigwood, James

    Gilliat, John Saunders

    Ridley, Rt. Hn. Sir Matthew W.

    Blundell, Colonel Henry

    Goldsworthy, Major-General

    Ritchie, Rt. Hn Chas. Thomson

    Boscawen, Arthur Griffith-

    Gordon, Hon. John Edward

    Robertson, H. (Hackney)

    Boulnois, Edmund

    Gorst, Rt. Hon. sir John Eldon

    Round, James

    Brassey, Albert

    Goschen, Rt Hn G. J (St George's

    Russell, T. W. (Tyrone)

    Brodrick, Rt. Hon. St. John

    Goulding, Edward Alfred

    Savory, Sir Joseph

    Bullard, Sir Harry

    Gray, Ernest (West Ham)

    Scoble, Sir Andrew Richard

    Burdett-Coutts, W.

    Hanbury, Rt. Hon Robert Wm.

    Sharpe, William Edward T.

    Butcher, John George

    Heaton, John Henniker

    Sidebottom, Wm. (Derbyshire)

    Carlile, William Walter

    Hoare, Edw. Brodie (Hampst'd)

    Simeon, Sir Barrington

    Campbell, J. H. M. (Dublin)

    Houldsworth, Sir Wm. Henry

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

    Carlile, William Walter

    Hozier, Hon. James Henry Cecil

    Stanley Hn. A. (Ormskirk)

    Cayzer, Sir Charles William

    Jenkins, Sir John Jones

    Stanley, Lord (Lancs.)

    Cecil, Evelyn (Hertford, East)

    Jessel, Capt. Herbert Merton

    Strauss, Arthur

    Chaloner, Captain R. G. W.

    Johnston, William (Belfast)

    Strutt, Hon. Charles Hedley

    Chamberlain, Rt. Hon. J. (Birm.

    Kimber, Henry

    Sutherland, Sir Thomas

    Chamberlain, J. Austen (Wore'r

    Knowles, Lees

    Talbot, Rt. Hn. J. G. (Ox. Univ.)

    Chaplin, Rt. Hon. Henry

    Lawrence, Sir E. Durning (Corn

    Tomlinson, W E. Murray

    Charrington, Spencer

    Lawrence, W. F. (Liverpool)

    Tritton, Charles Ernest

    Clare, Octavius Leigh

    Lawson, John Grant (Yorks.)

    Valentia, Viscount

    Cochrane, Hn Thos. H. A. E.

    Llewelyn, Sir Dillwyn. (Swans.)

    Wanklyn, James Leslie

    Coghill, Douglas Harry

    Lockwood, Lieut.-Col. A. R.

    Warde, Lt.-Col. C. E. (Kent)

    Cohen, Benjamin Louis

    Loder, Gerald Walter Erskine

    Whitmore, Charles Algernon

    Collings, Rt. Hon. Jesse

    Long, Col. C. W. (Evesham)

    Williams, J. Powell- (Birm.)

    Cornwallis, Fiennes Stanley W.

    Long, Rt. Hn. W. (Liverpool)

    Wilson-Todd, Wm. H. (Yorks)

    Cox, Irwin Edw. Bainbridge

    Lowe, Francis William

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

    Curzon, Viscount

    Lowles, John

    Wylie, Alexander

    Dalbiac, Colonel Philip Hugh

    Lubbock, Right Hon. Sir J.

    Wyndham, George

    Davies, Sir H. D. (Chatham)

    Lucas-Shadwell, William

    Wylie, Marmaduke d'Arey

    Dickson-Poynder, Sir John P.

    Macartney, W. G. Ellison

    Douglas, Rt. Hon. A. Akers-

    Macdona, John Cumming

    TELLERS FOR THE NOES—Sir William Walrond and Mr. Anstruther.

    Doxford, William Theodore

    MacIver, David (Liverpool)

    Duncombe, Hon. Hubert V.

    M'Ewan, William

    Original Question put, and agreed to.

    14. £2,000, to complete the sum for the National Gallery, etc., Scotland.
    15. £621,117, to complete the sum for Public Education, Ireland.
    MR. DILLON: I wish to direct the attention of the Committee to a very great abuse that has arisen in connection with public education in Ireland. There are three or four extremely important questions which we have been anxious to bring under the notice of the Committee, and which we have been urged to bring forward by various parties interested in public education in Ireland. We made various appeals to the Government to give us another day for the discussion of the Irish Votes. The limit of time has been cut down this year to three days, instead of the four which were allowed us in the first year after the new rule as to Supply was introduced. The consequence is, that several of the largest and most important of the Irish Votes have been thrown over till this evening. This extremely important Vote for Public Education in Ireland really ought to have had a whole night in itself. I am not prepared to discuss the Vote to-night, for there is no adequate time to deal with it. Another reason which induces me to take this course, is that the large body of Irish Members had given up the hope of the Vote being discussed, and returned to Ireland. It is purely accidental that even a few of us are here on the present occasion, for we had no assurance that even a few hours would be given to the Vote to-night. I abstain, therefore, from entering into the question, and have risen only for the purpose of protesting against the treatment given to Irish supply this year.
    Vote agreed to.
    16. £560, to complete the sum for Endowed Schools Commissioners, Ireland,
    17. £1,300, to complete the sum for the National Gallery of Ireland.
    18. Motion made, and Question proposed, "That a sum, not exceeding £2,450, 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
    1334
    day of March 1900, for a Grant in Aid of the Expenses of the Queen's Colleges in Ireland."
    MR. DILLON: We had this year a very full discussion on the Queen's Colleges, which occupied an entire night. I only desire to make a few observations in order to protest against this Vote, and I will take a Division against it. We have had promises and declarations from Ministers with regard to this whole question of University Education in Ireland, which, I regret to say, have been departed from. In the speech of the First Lord of the Treasury during the debate this year on this question of the grievances of Irish Catholics, and the shameful oppression of the Irish Catholics in regard to University Education, a retrograde step has no doubt been taken. So far as we can judge from the answers of Ministers, we are now further removed from a hope of a settlement than we were twelve years ago, when a remarkable speech was made by the present Chancellor of the Exchequer on the eve of the defeat of the Tory Government; and certainly further removed than we were on the eve of the General Election of 1892, when the then Unionist Government gave the Irish Catholics distinctly to understand, not directly by the mouth of the Leader of the Government, but by various subterranean and irregular channels, that if the Unionists were returned to power this Irish grievance would be immediately dealt with. Now, the First Lord of the Treasury himself has gone so far on this question as to declare, in so many words, that if the Unionists could not settle this grievance, their moral claim to govern Ireland was severely shaken; and he conveyed the impression, in a great and remarkable speech a year ago last January, that he felt that the claim of this Parliament to be able to govern Ireland as well as a native Parliament could do, would be shattered and destroyed if this Parliament and Unionist Government were unable to redress this grievance. The First Lord of the Treasury, in the discussion on this matter six weeks ago, seemed to be under the impression that I was discouraging his efforts, and was ungrateful to him as an Irish Catholic for the exertions he had made to convert his party and others in the country to his point of view on Irish University Education. But that is not

    1335
    the fact. I have never spoken on this subject, either in Ireland or in this House, without saying that the Irish Catholics on this particular question, however bitterly we may differ from him on other questions, owe him a great debt of gratitude. But there is a limit to patience, and though we fully recognise the exertions of the right hon. Gentleman, and admire the eloquence with which he has stated our case, we do say that the time has come when the Government ought to declare their policy more specifically and categorically than they have hitherto done. The shadow of another General Election is deepening over us, and we are entitled to ask the Government what is their policy on this question, which they have over and over again declared to be one of first-rate importance. I say that the position taken up by the Government is indefensible. As I understand it, those leaders of the Government who are most concerned with and have had largest experience in Irish affairs admit that justice is on our side, and that the whole life of Ireland is warped and injured by the present system, in support of which we are now called upon to vote money. That is the opinion of the Chancellor of the Exchequer, of the First Lord of the Treasury, and the present Chief Secretary, and others, who have had any experience, or are or were responsible for the government of Ireland. But while they fully admit that, and have all along admitted it, they are drifting on in this extraordinary fashion. They say that, being a responsible Government, and admitting that it is a question of first-rate importance, they cannot deal with it on ordinary party lines. I say that is not a tolerable position to take, and that no Government ought to be allowed to adhere to it, at all events for a long period of years. They ought to be prepared, it is their duty, and according to all the tradition and practice of English politics, to state frankly to the country, and to the House of Commons, before the next General Election, whether their party and their Ministers are able and willing to grapple with this great question of Irish University Education, if they do not, I do not think they can complain if we dwell strongly on this confession of impotence on their part, as an argument for relegating this question, as well as other great questions of a purely Irish character, to the control of an Irish Legisla-
    1336
    ture. Great as are the differences which divide the Irish Members on some matters, if you relegated this question to a committee of Irish Members, including all sections, it would be settled by a larger majority than any other question could be settled, because we would have the solid vote of the whole of the Nationalist Members. On this question the Irish Members are in a majority of at least six to one. It is a monstrous oppression that the Irish people should be denied the acquisition of a university education. I say deliberately that in the province of education you cannot inflict a greater penalty, or a greater disablement, than to deny the Irish people the advantages of a university education. If I had to choose to-morrow—I do not say this view is shared by all my colleagues—as to whether I should first get a good system of primary education, or secondary education, or university education, I should without hesitation select university education first. I hold that on this question of education it is essential to build from above downwards, and that the greatest evil a country can labour under is a denial of the highest university education. But when we come to look into the future, what is our hope? In my own experience, during the last fifteen years, this question was retrograded. We brought it to an issue three years ago, but it was limited to debates in the House; and a few weeks ago we were assured that it had made progress. Are the Unionists prepared, in order to maintain the Unionist system, that the Irish Catholics should look forward to a boundless future, denied of the advantages which their Protestant fellow subjects enjoy? I know that this demand of ours will not have the sympathy of a great many Members of this House who habitually act with us in a friendly way. I know perfectly well that they hold strong views, which in my judgment are not sound views, and which cannot be logically held, but they hold them conscientiously, and are tying the hands of the Government on this question. I do not believe the main difficulty arises from the Government benches, but from the benches behind. How can the Government justify their position if they are in favour of religious schools? They invoked our aid to maintain religious teaching in the schools of this country, and because we believed in religious

    1337
    teaching in the schools we voted for our opponents, but when the same question is transferred to Irish soil these hon. Gentlemen refuse to support their own Government in conceding the claims of the Irish Roman Catholics. On what logic do those Gentlemen support their action? In England they advocate consistently in season and out of season religious teaching in schools, but when it comes to Ireland, a large section of them take their stand beside the hon. Member for South Belfast, and endeavour to intimidate the Government. In every assistance that is given to the denominational schools we are obliged to admit that there is serious injustice on the whole as regards the children of "non-com.'s" of this country, and many of them have suffered under great difficulties at times, but in Ireland no one can say that anything of that kind is involved. We have made no proposals except the simple proposal of the Government, who have sanctioned the suggestion, that there should be a university in Dublin for Catholics. The First Lord of the Treasury has gone so far as to declare in so many words that if the Unionists cannot settle this grievance their moral claim to govern Ireland is severely shaken. I have always admitted that Irish Catholics owed a debt of gratitude to the First Lord of the Treasury. They fully recognise the right hon. Gentleman's exertions. If hon. Members refer to the speeches and letters of Dr. Hamilton, the best qualified speaker upon the subject, they will find that he points out that such a university is in the interests of higher education, and he urges that so long as the present system is continued the interests of higher education are being sacrificed to the interests of partisanship and religious bigotry. Those of us who have approached this subject from that standpoint and not from the view of religious bigotry, or in a party spirit, have always opposed any agitation to disendow or despoil Trinity College. We have recognised that in Trinity College we possess a great institution of very distinguished history and great traditions, which undoubtedly has done a great deal to uphold in a position of honour in very dark times the name of Ireland in the paths of the higher learning before the world. We are, therefore, not anxious to destroy that institution or to agitate against it, because we want rather to build up than to pull down. But our
    1338
    patience has been badly rewarded. The Bishops of Ireland at their last meeting declared that if there was further delay in dealing with this grievance they would be compelled to call upon the people of Ireland to inaugurate an agitation against Trinity College. It will be a dangerous position of affairs, and a dangerous thing for this country, when that fiat goes forth. The Church of Ireland is very strong, and Trinity College is very strong, and I should be very sorry to agitate against either; but if the Irish Roman Catholics are driven to despair Trinity College will undoubtedly come down. Justice we will have in obtaining that higher education for our people, which we have longed for and which we have fought for from the remote periods of our history. So that it may come about that owing to the perversity on your part, and the stupidity which always obtains in dealing with Ireland, you may bring on Trinity College great misfortune, and drag down education in Ireland to a lower level than that at which it at present stands. You have Mahommedan Colleges, and that does not trouble your conscience in the least. There is a project, preposterous to my mind, to establish a great college at Khartum in which Christianity is not to be taught; but when the English people are asked to place the Irish Roman Catholics on a level of equality with the other portions of the United Kingdom, and to grant an endowment, their consciences rise against the proposal. I warn the Government that before next election they will be forced to make a more specific declaration in this matter, and that if they persist in protestations of impotence they will thereby give a great impetus to the demand for Home Rule.
    MR. PERKSthought that the Irish had some ground of complaint against the Government in respect that they were led to hope, from communications by subterranean channels, that a Unionist Government would deal with Roman Catholic University education.
    THE CHIEF SECRETARY FOR IRELAND (Mr. G. W. BALFOUR,): I never made any such communication.
    MR. PERKS: was quite aware that the Chief Secretary believed that the allegation was unfounded, but it was not.
    MR. G. W. BALFOUR: I believe it to be entirely unfounded.
    MR. PERKS: That was not the opinion of the hon. Member for East Mayo.
    MR. DILLON: When I referred to communications by subterranean and irregular channels, I had in my mind, for one thing, a well-remembered speech of the hon. Member for South Tyrone before the election of 1892, when he declared to the electors that if a Unionist Government was returned the subject would be dealt with.
    MR. PERKS, continuing, said at all events the unholy alliance seemed to have come to an end, or it would come to an end when his Irish friends thoroughly appreciated the fact that they would get nothing from Her Majesty's Government. Nonconformists were opposed to any scheme of Roman Catholic University education, because it was no part of the duty of the community to give money for religious instruction. How absurd it was for Irish Members to argue that English Nonconformists had no right to express an opinion upon Irish religious questions, when they were the very men who came forward to help the Government to saddle upon English Nonconformists an obnoxious system of elementary education! This question was no nearer a solution than it was years ago. A Liberal Government, supported as it was to such a large extent by the Nonconformists of England, Scotland, and Wales, would never consent to establish and endow a Roman Catholic University for Ireland.
    MR. T. P. O'CONNOR: It may be regrettable that the people of Ireland are not Dissenters—not even Wesleyan Methodists; but they are not, and, being in the main either Catholics or Presbyterians, they have somewhat different views on the education question from those of my hon. friend; and if they have the right to differ on religion, surely they are entitled to differ with regard to a question with which religion is inextricably mixed up—namely, the particular form of university education. My hon. friend is still angry with the part the Irish Members took on the voluntary schools question; but he has
    1340
    apparently forgotten that our attitude was largely regulated by the fact that there is a very considerable Catholic population in this country, and that the legislation of the Government dealt not only with their educational position, but also with their strongest and profoundest religious convictions. We should have been untrue to our convictions if we had not stood up for the rights of conscience of our own people in supporting the educational policy of Her Majesty's Government. I desire to discuss the question from a non-partisan point of view. I myself am an old student and graduate of Queen's College, Galway, and whatever poor attempts I have made with regard to education were largely owing to that college. I desire to state the good as well as the bad side of these colleges. Let me first say that in Ireland the university system has this enormous advantage over the university system in this country—that the colleges are brought home to the doors of the poor. I certainly should not have had the least chance of getting a university education if I had been born in this country; therefore, I hold that one of the first things we must consider if we are to bring the university system within reach of the people is that we should have universities largely distributed over the country. I desire to bear testimony to the extraordinary ability, and to the genius even, of some of the men who were at the head of the Queen's Colleges. I am glad to note that Professor D'Arcy Thompson is still there, and I must say that whatever love I have for literature I, largely owe to the fact that I had the happiness and privilege of being one of that gentleman's pupils. The men who formed the Queen's Colleges formed the idea that by bringing together the youth of different classes and creeds and races at the most susceptible period of their lives they would raise up another and a. broader-minded generation of Irishmen, and get over the racial and religious difficulties. This is the idea of some; others have different views. They think that every means should be adopted, for undermining the faith of the majority of the Irish people. Have their ideas been realized? Splendid buildings have been erected and equipped; and yet they do not touch the merest fringe of the people. What is the use of those splendid buildings and of the

    1341
    broad and generous views on which they are founded, if the people for whom they are intended obstinately remain outside? It is preposterous that at this time of day we should be discussing the question whether a nation, predominantly and intensely Catholic, should not have the system of education which it desires because the Protestants of England do not think it good for them. If that is not religious bigotry and intolerance I am unable to understand the meaning of the words. The hon. Member demanded that because he was Protestant and England was Protestant, Ireland should not have Catholic education.
    MR. PERKS: I never said anything of the sort. You can have as much Catholic education as you like, but not at the public expense.
    MR. T. P. O'CONNOR: I welcome the interruption. A large amount of what in its essence is Protestant education is maintained at the public expense in connection with Dublin University. Therefore we have this extraordinary contradiction in Ireland—that Protestantism, the religion of the minority and of the rich, is endowed at the expense of the State, while the education of the Catholic majority is left without any State aid. It has been suggested that we should level down by spreading the endowments of Trinity College over the whole of Ireland, but that is a policy that would be as bitterly opposed by Protestants as by Catholics in Ireland. I would further point out to the hon. Member that we have more distinctly and truly Catholic education in this country, amid the Protestant majority, than we have in Ireland.
    MR. PERKS: University education?
    MR. T. P. O'CONNOR: No, but in the elementary schools. Is it not grotesque that the liberty which we give to Catholics in Protestant England we refuse in Ireland? The Queen's Colleges, I admit, have done a great deal of good so far as education is concerned, but I trust before the close of this Parliament, in which those in favour of a close union of religion and education are in such an overwhelming majority, Ireland may be no longer left with this grievance unreformed, and that that country, which is rich only in
    1342
    the ability of her sons, will not be allowed to see two more generations pass without enjoying the supreme advantage of university education.
    MR. CARVELL WILLIAMS: I do not complain of the hon. Member for East Mayo that he has availed himself of the opportunity to make an impassioned and able appeal on behalf of Ireland for the creation of a Roman Catholic University. It seems to me that after the declaration of the Duke of Devonshire in another place it required something to rehabilitate the question in this House. What I complain of is that the hon. Member has endeavoured to convince the House, not to-night, but on a former occasion, that nearly all the public bodies in this country are in favour of the demand: in fact, the statements which he made on a former occasion would have led the Committee to suppose that it only required a little more courage on the part of the present Government, and then a Roman Catholic University would soon come into existence. The hon. Member has conspicuously left out of account the opposition he must encounter at the hands of the Nonconformists of this country. I can confirm the statements which have been made by my hon. friend the Member for Louth in regard to the unanimity, as well as the strength, of the feeling which exists among the Nonconformists of this country in regard to this question. They are resolved that, whatever an Irish Parliament may do, should one ever come into existence, they will resist to the utmost any attempt on the part of the Imperial Parliament to create such a university. The hon. Member for East Mayo and the hon. Member for the Scotland Division argued as though there were not two sides to the question, and no doubt they think Nonconformists a narrow, bigoted and intolerent set of persons. In my opinion it is quite possible for Nonconformists to defend and to vindicate their position by an array of arguments which is entitled to some respect. I assume the House will not devote another evening to this question, especially as in less than three hours the guillotine is to fall on all the remaining Votes in Supply. I wish, however, to refer to one remark of the hon. Member for East Mayo. The hon. Member has represented the opponents of this scheme as being ready ruthlessly to

    1343
    sacrifice the interests of higher education. On the contrary, the opponents of this project think that they are safeguarding the interests of higher education by offering resistance to any of the proposals which would put university education in the hands of ecclesiastics of the Roman Catholic Church.
    MR. DILLON: We have never made any such proposal.
    MR. CARVELL WILLIAMS: The First Lord of the Treasury, in a very notable speech which he made on a former occasion, did two things; however, he failed to do some other things. He made it quite clear to me, if it had not been made clear before, that a sectarian university is a contradiction in terms. He submitted to the House certain safeguards and restrictions the object of which was to mitigate, if not to put an end to, Protestant opposition to this proposal. But he did not say, from the beginning of his speech to the end, that the scheme which he then adumbrated had received the consent of the heads of the Irish Church. For aught we know to the contrary, if the Government were to introduce a Bill framed in accordance with the speech of the right hon. Gentleman, that proposal would be rejected by the heads of the Roman Catholic Church. The right hon. Gentleman, with all his desire to provide safeguards and restrictions, did not for a moment suggest that the government of the university should be otherwise than in the hands of the heads of the Roman Catholic Church, or of members of the Roman Catholic Church, lay or ecclesiastic. I do not remember that the right hon. Gentleman went so far as to suggest that the governing body of the university should be a mixed body. If a Catholic University is to be in the hands of ecclesiastics, it follows as a matter of course that the government of that university will be in accordance, as far as possible, with the views of the ecclesiastics. They will put the interests of the ecclesiastics first, and the interests of education second. I venture to express the opinion that no scheme for the creation of an Irish Roman Catholic University will be accepted by the Roman Catholic Church unless it gives to it sole control over its management. That, I contend, is a contradiction
    1344
    in terms. A university, to be worthy of its name, must be unsectarian and comprehensive. I desire to enter my caveat against the assumption of the hon. Member for East Mayo, that only a few and very insignificant number of persons are opposed to the scheme which he so ardently advocates.
    MR. T. M. HEALY: The hon. Member for Mansfield states that the Catholics in this House regard the Nonconformists of England as a narrow, bigoted lot of persons. In my opinion, however, there is no difference in principle between the point of view from which Nonconformists look at this educational problem and that from which Catholics look at it. Nonconformists are in favour of lay education in the public schools, because they are so small a body that they could not have schools of their own, and because, also, they are afraid that if religion were taught in schools it would be the religion of the Established Church, and that their children would be saturated and swamped in the views of episcopacy and establishment. Consequently they do as a minority what Catholics in Ireland do as a majority. Nonconformists will not have schools supported by the State for their children with what I believe is called a common denominator of Christianity—something that all believe in, such as the devil and hell. Animated by that spirit, Nonconformists cannot see any other means of preventing their children getting submerged in Episcopalian Protestantism except by demanding a purely lay education. Will anyone tell me that if in the morning England were to wake up Nonconformist, or half-Nonconformist, every Nonconformist minister and every Nonconformist chapel and conventicle would not at once insist on beating the drum in favour of sectarian schools? (Opposition cries of "No.") What do I say to that denial? I say, "Sour grapes." You wish to protect your children from the contagion of Episcopalian Protestantism, and you say, "We will insist on having schools in which no religion at all shall be taught, but merely the dry bones and skeletons." The Catholics look at the matter from exactly the same point of view, but they approach it from a different standpoint. The Catholics say, "Religion is so important to us, our faith is so dear to us, that we would rather have no

    1345
    education at all than that our children should be taught in Protestant schools." That is our position. You want the education first, and in order that your children may get the education, you say, "Oh, let religion go and be hanged." That is really what it comes to. You say, "We will have an undenominational Christianity." We say, "We will have our children taught their religion, even though they are taught nothing else." That being so, we have refused to go into those schools which are Protestant. You send your children to those schools, though you know they are Protestant, taking all the risks of infection, as you believe it to be. Contrast your position in denying us in Ireland this education. Within a stone's-throw of this House you will find that the poor, by their pence, have not only erected a temple of God, but have provided a little school where they keep themselves apart, having their own faith and their own masters and their own education. Compare that position with those who are able to get a million guineas from Methodism in the course of six or eight months, and ask yourselves which is the nobler position, and which is the greater or the poorer. What is our position in Ireland, where the Catholics are not in a minority, but in a majority? We claim that if we had the country in our own hands we would oppress no religion, but would give equally to each what was meet to its demands in the matter of religion. And we are so animated with the desire of keeping our children pure and undefiled from a faith in which we do not believe, that we will abstain from sending them into schools where that religion is taught. It is said that if we have this university we must get it, but not at the public expense. Will any man show me how a university education can be had in Ireland except at the public expense? I am old enough to remember—though it is thirty years ago now—how the Catholic bishops went begging and craving to this House—for what? They did not ask you then for a university education at the public expense, they asked you merely for a charter. They said, "Give us a charter for our universities." But Protestant England—though the Catholics did not ask for a penny, but only for a roll of parchment and a bit of sealing-wax upon it—
    1346
    refused the Catholic bishops and the people of Ireland that charter. Therefore it is idle at this time of day to suggest that we should not do this at the public expense, when the first essential of a university is that it should get State recognition of some sort. The hon. Member opposite turns the argument the other way. I am bound to say I think the position of Nonconformists in this matter towards us is entirely different from the position of the hon. Member for South Belfast. I believe the Nonconformists of England are not bigoted. I believe they desire to extend us this right. But they feel that if they do so they would be cutting away the ground from under their own position in England in relation to their own claims. It is not that they would seek to deny us our rights, but they are afraid of inflicting an injury to their own position. I respectfully say there is no reason why we should be sacrificed because of their political or religious necessities. The hon. Member for South Belfast is animated by an entirely different view in his opposition to a Catholic university education. His position is that the Pope and the Scarlet Lady are practically Siamese twins. It has been said the difference between a Calvinistic Presbyterian and a Presbyterian proper, was that the Calvinistic Prebyterian believed that the Catholic was destined to be damned, whereas the Presbyterian proper believed that he would be damned anyhow. I do not know whether the hon. Member for South Belfast occupies one or both of those positions. To-night he turns round and says in two or three interruptions, "Oh, but your Pope allows you to send your children to Oxford and Cambridge." But what is the position? The Catholics in England are in a minority, and a very small minority. Those who acquire higher university education are generally the sons of people of high lineage and of large means, who can afford not only to pay for this university education, but to pay for the conditions which the Pope has prescribed as ancillary to their children going to Oxford or Cambridge, namely, that they shall pay for residence in a hall or college presided over by some dignitary or ecclesiastic of the Catholic Church; so that, although they are at Oxford and Cambridge, they are at the same time under strict supervision so far as religious education is concerned. But with regard

    1347
    to elementary schools, wherever Catholics are sufficiently numerous they maintain a school, and therefore it is idle to contend that the case is the same. In Ireland there is a further reason, and one which does credit both to the Pope and to the Universities of Oxford and Cambridge. I read recently an account of a visit to Ireland of a Protestant dignitary, and he was describing the difference between the religious life of the Irish and the English Protestant Churches. He said that it seemed to him that the Protestantism taught in Ireland was of such a wholly different character as to be almost a different religion. For 300 years has not the object of Trinity College been to subvert the faith and to sap the integrity of the Catholic Church? The whole system had that object, and the Education Code was established with the same view; and, as the hon. Member for the Scotland Division said, so recently as the days of Archbishop Whateley there was an absolute confession under the hand of those who established the system that its object was proselytism and the perversion and subversion of the faith of the Catholic Church. Therefore, for my part, even though the Pope had not prescribed these conditions, I would approach the question of going to Oxford or Cambridge from an entirely different point of view—and for this reason. As a rule, Englishmen care very little about religion. In Oxford or Cambridge I am quite satisfied that the professors do not care a dump of what religion a man is, and the last thing any of them would seek to do would be to pervert the mind or attack the faith of any gentleman under their control. That comes of the liberality of thought which prevails in this country; that comes because you have all your political problems settled in this country; that comes from the ingrained and long descended habit of thought which has been cultivated in Tory and Liberal circles for generations. But is it the same in Ireland? In the opinion of the Member for South Belfast the Battle of the Boyne only occurred yesterday. He is as militant over those dead bones and feels as keenly about the matter as though the bloodstains were still fresh. That is the opinion which prevails, and, forsooth, we are to send our children to be instructed by a professoriate which is mainly manned by gentlemen holding such opinions. I remember
    1348
    hearing it said a long time ago that a distinguished surgeon in Trinity College when giving his lectures on anatomy, commenced by saying, especially if Catholics were present, "Gentlemen, I have dissected many subjects, but I have never yet come across the human soul." These things spread and percolate amongst the Catholic population. There is an instinctive dread—it may be unreasonable, but there is an instinctive dread—amongst the masses of the people of Ireland, that the object for which Queen Elizabeth founded Trinity College is still in vogue, even in the days of Queen Victoria—viz., the subversion of the Catholic people. If the Nonconformists are so anxious for equal education amongst all people in Ireland, why is it that from these benches we do not have continual motions for the destruction of the Divinity School at Trinity College? I never hear the hon. Member for Mansfield, or the hon. Member for Louth, get up to ballot for a Tuesday in order to attack this abominable system, under which thousands of pounds of public money has been devoted to sending forth youths equipped in Episcopal doctrine to act as the clerics of Protestant ascendancy in Ireland. I have never heard them say a word about it. They are quite satisfied that this Divinity School should prevail there. ("No.") I have no doubt the hon. Member who says "No" is such an iconoclast that if he could, without any great trouble of body or mind, pull down even Episcopalian Protestanism, he would pronounce an opinion in that sense, but we see no active efforts on the part of the Church militant on this side of the House to destroy the form of the Church militant. They are quite satisfied to allow it to remain, and, speaking for myself, I also am quite satisfied. I do not desire for one moment to deprive them of this. For my part, I never saw much good derived from the disestablishment of the Church of Ireland. I think it was rather rudely attacked, and the question was very stupidly handled. As far as I am concerned, if the Protestants of Ireland desire to have their Divinity School at Trinity College, so long as I and my children are not asked to attend it, let them have it. What do we ask? Here are we supplying you £8,000,000 of money, some of which is to go to the

    1349
    South Pole looking for icebergs, some to establish an observatory on the top of Ben Nevis, some for shooting the Boers, some for providing an open door in China, some to keep up Buddhism and Hindooism, some to create a college in favour of Mahommedanism in some part of Africa. What do we want? We want about as much money as would build a battleship in order to start this system. It is our own money we ask for. We do not ask for your money. You rob us of £3,000,000 every year, according to the Report of your own Commission. You pack the jury, and then quarrel with the verdict. It has now come to this, that one House will not allow us to found a university, and the other House will not allow us to drain our sewers. It is to that position we are brought to-night in this temple of British liberty. We must not have a university, we cannot even have a corporation; we cannot manage our cattle. Although the Catholics of Ireland have to contend under these unequal conditions, and have to come over here to your Parliament to look after the wants and grievances of their country, yet you hope at the same time to maintain loyalty in the
    hearts of the Irish people. When we advocate things that do not affect the Empire or the union, but which would enable our young men to enter your Civil Service, and to obtain distinction through the methods of education, you have some Protestant scruple which is to debar us, and keep us in such a condition as if emancipation had never taken place. Under these circumstances, I say the Emancipation Act is a fraud. The people of Ireland have this small demand. It is a demand which they have persisted in for generations—I may say for centuries—and considering that it is not yet more than eighty or ninety years since you compelled them to go abroad, not merely for religious education, but secular, I do think it is a remarkable thing that in the closing days of this century a sum of one or two millions of money should be denied by this House, in the day of £100,000,000 Budgets, to enable the Irish people to receive that higher education in accord with the system in which they believe, and in satisfaction of their consciences.
    The Committee divided:—Ayes, 169; Noes, 26. (Division List, No. 339.)

    AYES.

    Aird, John

    Chaplin, Rt. Hon. Henry

    Gibbs, Hon. V. (St. Albans)

    Anson, Sir William Reynell

    Charrington, Spencer

    Giles, Charles Tyrrell

    Arrol, Sir William

    Clare, Octavius Leigh

    Gilliat, John Saunders

    Asher, Alexander

    Clough, Walter Owen

    Goldsworthy, Major-General

    Atkinson, Rt. Hon. John

    Cochrane, Hon. Thos. H. A. E.

    Gordon, Hon. John Edward

    Bagot, Capt. Josceline Fitzroy

    Coghill, Douglas Harry

    Gorst, Rt. Hon. Sir J. Eldon

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

    Cohen, Benjamin Louis

    Goschen, Rt. Hn G J. (St George's

    Balfour, Rt. Hn. G. W. (Leeds)

    Collings, Rt. Hon. Jesse

    Goulding, Edward Alfred

    Banbury, Frederick George

    Cornwallis, Fiennes Stanley W.

    Gray, Ernest (West Ham)

    Barnes, Frederic Gorell

    Curzon, Viscount

    Greene, H. D. (Shrewsbury)

    Barton, Dunbar Plunket

    Dalkeith, Earl of

    Gull, Sir Cameron

    Bathurst, Hon. Allen Benjamin

    Dalziel, James Henry

    Hanbury, Rt. Hon. Robt. Wm.

    Beach, Rt. Hn. Sir M. H. (Bristol

    Davies, Sir Horatio D. (Chath'm

    Hayne, Rt. Hn. Chas. Seale-

    Bethell, Commander

    Dickson-Poynder, Sir J. P.

    Hedderwick, Thomas Charles H

    Bhownaggree, Sir M. M.

    Dilke, Rt. Hon. Sir Charles

    Hermon-Hodge, Robert Trotter

    Bigwood, James

    Douglas, Rt. Hon. A. Akers-

    Hoare, E. Brodie (Hampstead

    Billson, Alfred

    Doxford, William Theodore

    Hozier, Hn. James Henry Cecil

    Blundell, Colonel Henry

    Duncombe, Hon. Hubert V.

    Jeffreys, Arthur Frederick

    Bond, Edward

    Dyke, Rt. Hon. Sir W. Hart

    Jenkins, Sir John Jones

    Boscawen, Arthur Griffith-

    Fellowes, Hon. Ailwyn Edw.

    Johnstone, William (Belfast)

    Boulnois, Edmund

    Fenwick, Charles

    Keswick, William

    Bousfield, William Robert

    Field, Admiral (Eastbourne)

    Kimber, Henry

    Broadhurst, Henry

    Finch, George H.

    Lawrence, Sir E. Durning-(Corn

    Brodrick, Rt Hon. St. John

    Finlay, Sir Robert Bannatyne

    Lawson, John Grant (Yorks.)

    Bullard, Sir, Harry

    Fisher, William Hayes

    Lawson, Sir Wilfrid (Cumb'land

    Butcher, John George

    Fison, Frederick William

    Lea, Sir Thomas (Londonderry

    Caldwell, James

    Fitzmaurice, Lord Edmond

    Llewelyn, Sir Dillwyn-(Swans.)

    Campbell, J. H. M. (Dublin)

    Fitz Wygram, General Sir F.

    Lloyd-George, David

    Carlile, William Walter

    Flannerry, Sir Fortescue

    Lockwood, Lt.-Col. A. R.

    Cayzer, Sir Charles William

    Flower, Ernest

    Loder, Gerald Walter Erskine

    Cecil, Evelyn (Hertford, East)

    Foster, Harry S. (Suffolk)

    Long, Col. Chas. W. (Evesham)

    Chaloner, Captain R. G. W.

    Fry, Lewis

    Long, Rt. Hn. Walter (Liverpool

    Chamberlain, Rt. Hn. J. (Birm.

    Gedge. Sydney

    Lowe, Francis William

    Chamberlain, J. Austen(Wore.

    Gibbons, J. Lloyd

    Lowles, John

    Channing, Francis Allston

    Gibbs, Hn. A. G. H. (C. of Lond.)

    Macartney, W. G. Ellison

    Macdonna, John Cumming

    Rasch, Major Frederic Carne

    Stirling-Maxwell, Sir J. M.

    Maclure, Sir John William

    Richards, Henry Charles

    Stone, Sir Benjamin

    M'Arthur, Charles (Liverpool

    Rickett, J. Compton

    Strutt, Hon. Charles Hedley

    Maddison, Fred.

    Ridley, Rt. Hn. Sir Matthew W.

    Sutherland, Sir Thomas

    Mellor, Colonel (Lancashire)

    Ritchie, Rt. Hn. C. Thomson

    Tritton, Charles Ernest

    Mildmay, Francis Bingham

    Roberts, John Bryn (Eifion)

    Ure, Alexander

    Monk, Charles James

    Roberts, John H. (Denbighs)

    Valentia, Viscount

    Moore, William (Antrim, N.)

    Robertson, Herbert (Hackney)

    Wallace, Robert

    More, R. Jasper (Shropshire)

    Round, James

    Walton, J. Lawson (Leeds, S.)

    Morrell, George Herbert

    Runciman, Walter

    Wanklyn, James Leslie

    Morton, A. H. A. (Deptford)

    Russell, T. W. (Tyrone)

    Warde, Lt. -Col. C. E. (Kent)

    Moss, Samuel

    Savory, Sir Joseph

    Whittaker, Thomas Palmer

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

    Scoble, Sir Andrew Richard

    Williams, J. Carvell (Notts)

    Murray, Charles J. (Coventry)

    Sharpe, William Edward T.

    Williams, Jos. Powell- (Birm.

    Murray, Col. Wyndham (Bath)

    Sidebotham, J. W. (Cheshire)

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

    Newdigate, Francis Alexander

    Sidebottom, W. (Derbyshire)

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

    Nicol, Donald Ninian

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

    Wylie, Alexander

    Norton, Capt. Cecil William

    Souttar, Robinson

    Wyndham, George

    Oldroyd, Mark

    Spicer, Albert

    Yoxall, James Henry

    Parkes, Ebenezer

    Stanley, Hn. Arthur (Ormskirk

    Perks, Robert William

    Stanley, Edw. Jas. (Somerset)

    TELLERS FOR THE AYES—

    Pryce-Jones, Lt.-Col. Edward

    Stanley, Lord (Lancs.)

    Sir William Walrond and Mr. Anstruther.

    Purvis, Robert

    Steadman, William Charles

    NOES.

    Abraham, William (Cork, N. E.

    Hogan, James Francis

    Morgan, W. P. (Merthyr)

    Austin, M. (Limerick, W.)

    Jameson, Major J. Eustace

    O'Brien, James F. X. (Cork)

    Bolton, Thomas Dolling

    Jones, William (Carnarvonsh)

    O'Connor, J. (Wicklow, W.)

    Cameron, Sir Chas. (Glasgow)

    Kearley, Hudson E.

    O'Connor, T. P. (Liverpool)

    Crilly, Daniel

    Kilbride, Denis

    Sullivan, Donal (Westmeath)

    Curran, Thomas B. (Donegal)

    Macaleese, Daniel

    Wilson, J. H. (Middlesbrough)

    Curran, Thomas (Sligo, S.)

    M'Donnell. Dr. M. A. (Queen'sC

    Gourley, Sir Edw. Temperley

    M'Dermott, Patrick

    TELLERS FOR THE NOES—Mr. Dillon and Captain Donelan.

    Harwood, George

    M'Leod, John

    Healy, T. M. (N. Louth)

    Molloy, Bernard Charles

    CLASS V.
    19. Motion made, and Question proposed, "That a sum, not exceeding £227,335, 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, 1900, for the Expenses of Her Majesty's Embassies and Missions Abroad, and of the Consular Establishments Abroad and other Expenditure chargeable on the Consular Vote."
    SIR CHARLES DILKE: At this time of the evening, with the shadow of the guillotine hanging over us, there is a desire to discuss as many Votes as we can before the closure, and I shall therefore be very brief in the remarks I propose to make. I gave notice of my intention to move two reductions—to reduce the salary of Sir Arthur Hardinge as Consul-General for Zanzibar, and also on another item to reduce the salary of the same gentleman in respect of British East Africa—but for the convenience of the Committee I intend to take the two proposals together, and move a reduction
    1352
    of the entire Vote. In regard to Zanzibar all we have to say really is that the pace at which emancipation is proceeding, there is not, in our opinion, sufficiently rapid for the honour of the country, and also that the emancipation which has been effected has been accompanied by conditions which we think are in some degree disgraceful. But I shall not dwell upon the Zanzibar portion of the case. As is well known, we believe that the great majority of the slaves in Zanzibar, most of whom are brought from what has now become a British possession, are-illegally held in defiance of the proclamations of the Sultan of Zanzibar issued from time to time under our instructions. In respect of British East Africa certain new facts have come to our knowledge since this matter was last mentioned in. the House. Many of us have had an opportunity of meeting the gentleman who is at the head of the Primitive. Methodist Mission, where certain incidents occurred that have previously been brought to the knowledge of the House. The Foreign Office have on this question somewhat reverted to their earlier attitude, and. we have some complaint against

    1353
    the Under Secretary for having taken up, under the suggestion of Sir Arthur Hardinge, a non possums attitude with regard to any further change. At one moment the late Under Secretary very frankly admitted that the Foreign Office had changed their views. When we produced the warrants by which persons have been returned into slavery by British courts the Foreign Office stated that they had been entirely unaware of the practice of British courts in respect to returning fugitive slaves, and the late Under Secretary stated that under instructions which were given by the Government on the opinion of the Attorney-General, the Foreign Office was going to introduce a complete change of system. Now, Sir, after careful discussion with the gentleman to whom I have referred, all of us who have seen him are as convinced of his perfect truthfulness as we are of that of Bishop Tucker, who originally brought this matter to our knowledge, and I am sure Sir Arthur Hardinge shares that view as to the absolute truthfulness and good faith of the gentleman in question. What does he state? He tells us that besides the Kombe case, there have been other instances of the same description. For instance, one of his mission men was sent to prison in June, 1898, on a charge of luring away slaves from their owners, and facts which have been brought to our knowledge with regard to that charge go to show that that is one of those cases where the House of Commons are quite unaware of what is being done in their name by British courts in British East Africa. As regards the case which was previously brought to the knowledge of the House, the Kombe case, the Under Secretary made certain statements which, according to our present information, are quite opposed to the real facts of the case, as we thought they were at the time they were made, on the information then before us. This is a case, as the Committee will remember, of the return into slavery by the action of a British court of a person who had been ten years in freedom. That person was sent back by British authority to an Arab master, who had no means whatever of recovering that slave but for the intervention of the British court. After investigation we found that Mr. Lloyd, who tried the case, was a finance official, and that he had no experience as a magistrate, that he was entirely ignorant of the native tongue
    1354
    and absolutely dependent on his Arab interpreter. I need hardly say that the Government ought to view with the greatest suspicion the action of a British court in British East Africa, where the legal status of slavery has not yet been abolished, when it involves the return into slavery of persons who have been free for over ten years, after a hearing, before such a magistrate as I have described. On March 21st the Under Secretary made a statement with regard to this case in which he said that these slaves made no objection to returning to their master, that they were desirous of doing so in order to get food, and the master brought the matter into court as he wished to get a formal declaration of his legal right to their services in return for subsistence. The Attorney-General, speaking on that occasion, stated that these three persons were willing to return to their master. All I can say is that, after most careful investigation, we believe that this gentleman's, denial that those are the real facts of the case is one which the Committee may accept. That is all I wish to say with regard to the matter, except that further inquiry into the Indian law leads us entirely to maintain our contradiction of the assurance of the Under Secretary that the state of things in British East Africa is as good in respect of the recognition of slavery as it was in India immediately after 1843. The state of things in India then was very similar to that existing in the colony of Lagos, which was defended by the Secretary of State for the Colonies a day or two ago as being virtually equivalent to the total abolition of the legal status of slavery, and we maintain our view that the Under Secretary cannot justify his opinion that the state of things in India in 1843 was less good than that prevailing in British East Africa. I beg to move.
    Motion made, and Question proposed—
    "That a sum, not exceeding £277,135, be granted for the said service."—(Sir Charles Dilke.)
    THE UNDER SECRETARY OF STATE FOR FOREIGN AFFAIRS (Mr. BRODRICK,): It is only out of respect to the right hon. Gentleman that I rise to reply. The whole subject

    1355
    was discussed on the last occasion for three or four hours, and not a single new fact has been brought out this evening by the right hon. Gentleman. He himself said he would not discuss the question of Zanzibar, and then he said the process of emancipation ought to proceed more quickly. He has not given us any new cases, nor has he produced any new facts, except that the opinion which Sir Arthur Hardinge gave us as the result of his investigations, and which he gave publicly in his official position, was not borne out by a certain individual who has been over here, and whom the right hon. Gentleman has seen. I have seen neither that individual nor any information tendered by him in writing in support of his statements, and at this moment I am not in possession of anything but just the fact that even now these persons who were sent back to their master deny that they made any objection to that return. I have not the least doubt that there is some difference of opinion as to the facts, but on the other hand I am convinced that the despatch of Sir Arthur Hardinge shows that he had taken great pains to inform himself of the actual state of the facts. The statements made were, we believe, accurately reported to the presiding magistrate by the interpreter, and I do not think it is possible to provide that the English judge should always have a knowledge of the native tongue so as to be able to dispense with an interpreter. In a great number of courts all over the world that is not done, and I am quite certain there is no desire to do any injustice in the matter. Every effort was made to give these persons an opportunity of objecting if they desired to do so, or if they had any fear about returning to their master; they did not propose to lodge any objection at that time; it was found two or three months afterwards that one of these individuals had left his master again, and another had taken service elsewhere. I never felt that this was a particularly strong case on which to attack the government of Sir Arthur Hardinge. I only express the desire we have that the fullest consideration should be given in all these cases, and that escaped slaves should not be returned to their masters except in cases in which it is proved that we should otherwise be breaking the pledges which were given at the time the territory was taken over.
    MR. SYDNEY GEDGE: I am sorry this matter has been brought to such a very small issue as whether or not these so-called slaves were willing to go back to their master. It seems very strange, if they were willing, that their master should require to go to the court to make them. It is not a question of willingness or unwillingness; the whole question is whether, in any country in which justice is administered in a court in the name of Her Majesty, the judge or magistrate is seriously to consider whether a particular person belongs to himself or to anybody else. I do not suppose for a moment that in such a territory as Zanzibar we can immediately put down slavery, but putting down slavery by force is one thing, and recognising slavery is another. "When we take possession of a country we may leave the laws undisturbed for a time, but it does not follow that our courts ought to enforce those laws. The enforcement ought to be left to the natives themselves. That is a very different thing from lending the aid of our courts and magistrates to enforce the laws of slavery. This has been mentioned over and over again, and I must say it is intolerable that we should have cases arising time after time in which the old saying, that the moment a slave touched British territory he was free, no longer holds good, but that we should have courts of ours putting laws into operation in order that people may be returned to what are called their "owners." I cannot believe in anybody being the owner of somebody else, and I am sure the Members on the Front Bench hold the same view, and I want them to say that this intolerable state of things should not exist a single day longer.
    MR. BROADHURST: I think we have some cause of complaint in that the Under Secretary has not taken this matter more seriously. It is not sufficient to ignore a statement simply because it is a repetition of a previous statement. If it was true when first made, and still remains true, it requires an answer. I heard a short time ago, from an undoubted authority, that this law was being administered in Zanzibar in a manner most calculated to prevent it having the effect desired or intended by its authors—that every opposition was placed in the way of poor people in remote parts of the country getting to a magis-

    1357
    trate's court in order to lay bare their case against the slave-owner. These are the allegations, that actually under British government and British authority obstacles are placed in the way of these poor people taking the necessary legal procedure to liberate themselves from their slavery. The right hon. Gentleman ought to say that this is repugnant to British instincts, feeling and sentiment, and that he, as representing the Foreign Office in this House, would take a note of the statement of the right hon. Baronet, and do his best to see that the law is enforced with more energy and with more convenience to the persons seeking this redress than has been the case in the past. The status of slavery ought altogether to be abolished, and the right hon. Gentleman ought to tell us that by the time we reassemble next year much will have been done to meet the views of the people who take a great interest in this subject.
    MR. HAVELOCK WILSON: I have another subject to which I wish to call attention on this Vote. I want to refer, not to the slaves in Zanzibar, but to a class of men who are little better than slaves, and who receive very hard treatment from the hands of the present Government, and I want to point out that the Foreign Office is largely responsible for the treatment received. In 1897 I sent a report to the Board of Trade with regard to the position of seamen who are engaged and discharged at the consular shipping offices abroad, and I pointed out that seamen were assaulted in the offices of Her Majesty's consuls, that they were robbed in those offices, and that it was impossible for any seaman to engage in the ports of the United States without the intervention of "crimps" and other low characters, and that the consular officers allowed these "crimps" free access into the consular offices. I stated in that report that I myself had witnessed in New York as many as twenty or twenty-five of these "crimps" in the shipping office where the men were being engaged and discharged. I also stated that a number of shipowners in this country had entered into contracts with "crimps" in New York for the engagement of men, that these "crimps" charged the seamen as much as £3, £4, or £5 as a shipping fee, and that shipowners shared
    1358
    these fees with the "crimps" A number of Members thought my language was very extravagant; they said that the charges I made were very serious indeed, and they were inclined to doubt my assertions. However, in May, 1898, a Report was moved by a Member of this House in regard to the condition of affairs in the consuls' offices abroad, and I find in that Report that Her Majesty's consuls, themselves, in the United States, fully bear out every statement I made. Her Majesty's consul for Philadelphia said that in ports in the United States a system of contracting exists between the shipping agents and the owners in the United Kingdom for the supply of seamen; in which the blood money is even higher than I have mentioned, as much as twenty dollars being deducted from the seamen's advance. The agreements usually terminate at the final port of discharge in the United Kingdom, the United States, or the Continent of Europe, but in most cases the words "United States" are required by the master, or his agent, to be struck out by the consul. So that, should the vessel return to those waters, the shipowner can demand from one to three months' pay from the men for their discharge; that is to say, if a man engages in one of the ports of the United States, and makes a voyage, returning to the United States, he has paid twenty dollars to this "crimp" for the privilege of getting the employment; he cannot get employment unless he pays that fee, so he pays this twenty dollars for a start, makes a voyage of three or four months, and that ship returns to port. The captain wants to get rid of his crew, so he gives them all kinds of work to do, and no money to spend; and when, as a result, the men ask to be discharged, the captain says, "I will discharge you, but you must pay a month's or two months' wages, and in some cases three months' wages."
    THE CHAIRMAN: The hon. Member must confine himself on this Vote to a criticism of the conduct of Her Majesty's consuls abroad. The general system to which he is referring is not a matter within the discretion of the consuls. Any matter which is within the discretion or power of the consuls, in which he thinks they are acting improperly, he can bring under review.
    MR. HAVELOCK WILSON: I contend I am fully entitled to discuss anything which appears in this Report.
    THE CHAIRMAN: I do not think that would be right at all. Upon this Vote the hon. Gentleman is entitled to criticise the action of the consuls. If he considers they have not made a proper Report, he can criticise that, but he cannot criticise the system upon which the consuls happen to report.
    MR. HAVELOCK WILSON: Then, Sir, I will stick to the conduct of the consuls. I have maintained more than once that Her Majesty's consuls could put a stop to these proceedings if they took the matter in hand in a proper manner. I have asked that instructions should be issued by the Government to the consuls, that no one, except the seamen and the master, should be allowed in the consuls' offices when the men are being engaged. It is not a proper thing, when the consuls themselves have admitted that this class of men do fasten themselves on the seamen, that they should be tolerated in the offices of the consuls. Surely there must be something radically wrong when the business of Her Majesty's consuls cannot be conducted without—I would not like to say there is collusion between the consuls and these men, but it is a very improper state of things which exists. The Government have been fully aware of this for over two years. It is not a question of to-day. I have repeatedly raised the question in the House. I have put questions to different Ministers, calling their attention to it. My statements have not been denied; they have been confirmed by the consuls themselves, and yet nothing has been done. There is another matter on which I have to complain of the conduct of the consuls. Very often voyages terminate in foreign ports. Under the Merchant Shipping Act, Sec. 186, it is provided that whenever a seaman is discharged in a foreign port, the owner shall provide that man with a passage home, with maintenance, to the port in the United Kingdom at which he was engaged. That section of the Act has been disputed for a long time, but it is established by the decision of a court of law that that obligation is imposed. It is the duty of Her Majesty's consuls, whenever men are discharged in their
    1360
    ports, to see that that section of the Act is complied with. But they do not do so. What is more, I have complained of consuls who deliberately place seamen in such a position, that when they commence an action for the recovery of what they are entitled to under this section, by the action of many of the consuls the men are put out of court. There is a section which says that the consul shall insist upon a certain amount of money, which, in his judgment, is sufficient to defray the expenses, being paid down. Take, for instance, Rotterdam or Antwerp. Many of the consuls, when a captain refuses to pay the men's fares and maintenance to the port in the United Kingdom at which they were engaged, say, "You must deposit 10s."Ten shillings only carries a man to the nearest port in the United Kingdom—say Harwich, and from there a man engaged at Cardiff has to pay his fare to the latter place out of his own pocket. If the seaman desires to sue in a court of law for the balance, all the owners have to do is to prove that Her Majesty's consul made an endorsement on the articles of agreement that 10s. was sufficient, and then the man is put out of court, and has no remedy whatever. I do not want Her Majesty's Government to take up the side of the seamen—theycan take their own part; but I want instructions to be given to every consular-officer abroad that, whenever a seaman is. discharged in his port, he will not make an endorsement on the articles that the captain has complied with the Act, unless the seaman is paid his full passage money to the port at which he was engaged, with maintenance money. We are only asking that no obstruction shall be put on our road in a court of law. Only to-day I was in court in connection with a case in which seamen discharged at Marseilles, claimed passage to Cardiff, but the captain would only pay to London. We are now told that the captain complied with the requirements of the consul, and that the latter has written a letter stating that he asked that the men's fares should be paid to London only, and that the men were perfectly satisfied, and the consul is to be called as a witness against the men. Another section of the Act provides that where the captain or owner fails to pay the passage of the men to the port of engagement, the consul himself can pay, and recover the money as a debt due from the owners.

    1361
    Where is the protection for a British seaman if the consul takes the side of employers as against the men? That seems to me to be a just cause of complaint. I have repeatedly called attention to these matters, and I hope the right hon. Gentleman, the Under Secretary for Foreign Affairs, will see that the law is carried out. We do not ask for any special privileges. I wrote to the Board of Trade, informing them that it was our intention to place our own agents on the continent, so that wherever a captain refused to pay fares back to the port of engagement, our agents could pay and afterwards recover the amount as a debt. I got a letter from the Board of Trade, which no doubt came from the Foreign Office, stating that they could not see their way to issue any instructions. I hope, however, the Foreign Office will now issue instructions that crimps and robbers be kept off consular premises.
    MR. BRODRICK: The hon. Member has made a speech containing a considerable indictment of the officers in the consular service, but he did not give me the slightest notice that he was bringing forward this question, or any opportunity to study the points he was about to make. The hon. Member made several sweeping charges without supporting them by individual cases of fact. With regard to one point to which the hon. Member alluded, viz., the Consular Office at New York, into which he says crimps find their way and ought to be excluded, only a few days ago, in answer to a question on the subject, I said that the point was under consideration at the present moment. The hon. Member represented in vivid terms the scenes which take place in consular offices, but we are informed that disturbances are of very rare occurrence; and in this matter, as in the other, it would be desirable if the hon. Gentleman were more definite.
    MR. HAVELOCK WILSON: I have many cases, but I did not desire to take up the time of the Committee.
    MR. BRODRICK: I do not think the hon. Gentleman can really be under the impression—certainly, we are not under the impression—that there is any desire on the part of our consular officers to deprive any of our seamen of the protection to which they are entitled. The
    1362
    Government have no such desire, and if the hon. Gentleman can produce any cases of that kind, we will take care that they are properly investigated, but I do not think general statements are very helpful to us. The hon. Gentleman takes great interest in these matters; we take an interest in them also; and I may truly say that since I have been at the Foreign Office the hon. Gentleman has not addressed to me one single word of complaint with reference to consular officers.
    MR. HAVELOCK WILSON: I sent the complaints to the Board of Trade.
    MR. BRODRICK: If my right hon. friend the President of the Board of Trade were here, I think he would say that in those cases also the hon. Gentleman might have been more definite. I can assure the hon. Gentleman that there is the strongest desire on our part to see that our seamen get the best possible advantage from our consular officers. As the hon. Gentleman knows, it is illegal in the United States to advance money on wages, but I have not the least doubt, as the right hon. Gentleman says, that the law is to some extent evaded, and if he will give us particulars we will gladly take the matter up. I can only say that in every report we have received there is manifest the strongest desire on the part of our consular officers to do the very best they can for our seamen.
    MR. MADDISON: I think the question raised by the hon. Member for Middlesbrough is one of great importance, and I am quite sure it is through no fault of the right hon. Gentleman himself that he has not been able to give the hon. Member a satisfactory assurance. The right hon. Gentleman complained that no definite details had been given. I quite admit that to a Minister specific instances are of more value than any amount of argument. Well, last year, the hon. Member for Middlesbrough set out at considerable length, and in the minutest detail, charges against the consuls. I take it that this is no charge against the personal conduct of the consuls, but against the bad system. The hon. Member quoted last year, from personal observation, gross cases where the lowest of human kind, crimps, and their attendants, were allowed to go into the British Consular

    1363
    Office at New York. Not only did the hon. Member draw the attention of the House to these complaints last year, but also the year before, and surely we have a right to complain that these grievances have not been redressed in the course of two years. This is not a question concerning seamen only; it is one of national importance. Very useful reports have been issued by certain consuls, which show most conclusively that these crimps ply their baneful trade in the consular offices, where they have actually got a kind of official standing. It is pointed out in these reports that consuls could, if certain steps were taken, have much greater control over the seamen and the crimps than they now have. Mr. Laidlaw, the British Consul at Portland, Oregon, in his Report, says that a comprehensive Consular Convention should be concluded with the United States, giving the same exclusive jurisdiction as is now enjoyed by the French and German Consuls. That would include power to call upon the local authority for necessary assistance. That is a very fertile field of usefulness for the office the right hon. Gentleman represents. Mr. Laidlaw shows clearly the serious danger menacing British seamen, how great the power of the drinking saloon is, and that, in spite of all warning, the seamen listen to what the crimps say. I believe if this exclusive jurisdiction referred to by Mr. Laidlaw were granted it would effectually cure the worst of the evils complained of. I am sure that in the present temper of the United States, which we all rejoice at, a consular convention might be arrived at, and I hope that matter will be taken up in earnest by the right hon. Gentleman during the recess.
    MR. BRODRICK: I am fully aware of the importance of the subject, and I will undertake that in the course of the next few months the points raised shall be fully considered with the view of seeing what possible action can be taken to cure the evils complained of. The point brought forward more especially by Mr. Laidlaw, who is one of our most active and most excellent officers, will be considered, and although the subject is a very complicated one, I think I can promise the hon. Gentleman that he will have no occasion to raise the question next year.
    MR. BROADHURST: Two points have been strongly urged by my hon. friend the Member for Middlesbrough. In the first place, he referred to the crimps, contending that they ought not to be allowed on the consular premises while contracts were being made between the masters and the seamen. That is a very small point in itself, but it is very great in its effect upon the interests of the seamen, because it leads the seamen to feel that the crimp has some legal standing in the matter of the contract. The other point is that the consuls should be referred to the section of the Act which makes it imperative on the masters of a ship to pay the fare of a sailor back from the foreign port at which he is discharged to the port at which he was engaged. I think the right hon. Gentleman is entitled to complain, as he has done, that no notice was given that this matter would be revived, but I am sure my hon. friend would be the last person to strike where his opponent is off guard.
    MR. LOWLES: I should not have intervened in this Debate but for the fact that I have seen some of the evils complained of in New York, and I am bound to say that no language can exaggerate them. But I rose for the purpose of drawing attention to the valuable suggestions made in the very first Report published in the Blue Book by Consul Fraser, who speaks with special authority on the subject. Consul Fraser sums up his report by this recommendation:
    "From a very lengthened experience of the British seaman at American ports, and of the many persons who directly or indirectly make their living out of him, I believe that the first step to be taken, and which will doubtless greatly check desertion in the United States, and at some ports almost entirely eliminate it, is to get rid of the so-called shipping master; and until he has ceased to exist all efforts to stop desertion will, in my opinion, he fruitless."
    Then he goes on to make this valuable suggestion:
    "I would suggest the establishment, under the supervision of the consul, of a department on similar lines to mercantile marine officers in the United Kingdom. No man should be allowed to be brought to the consulate to be shipped by any person who makes it a business of finding employment for seamen, and he should also be strictly excluded from the office. Advance notes should be issued and paid at the consulate. Should a master desire to have

    1365
    his crew put on board by an employé of the consulate, a charge of not more than 2 dollars for each man would be made for the service. An objection to this cannot well be raised on the ground that it would be an additional burden on the ship, as it is willingly paid at present to persons who perform the same work."
    Then he goes on to say.
    "A similar department to that to which I have referred was established at the Consulate-General at New York in 1872, under my own supervision, which worked admirably for several years, but, most unfortunately, it had to be discontinued for want of funds."
    THE CHAIRMAN: Order, order! The question which the hon. Member is discussing cannot be discussed under this Vote.
    MR. LOWLES: All I want to say is that I believe from my own observation there is not sufficient supervision on the part of the Consul-General at New York. I regard the suggestion of Consul Fraser as a most valuable one, and if his proposal were carried out, and if greater supervision were to be exercised, these evils would very soon cease to exist.
    MR. ROBSON: I think much of the mischief has arisen from the consuls acting, in perfect good faith, upon a wrong view of their duties under the Merchant Shipping Act, and only allowing the seaman the bare cost of his passage home without maintenance. The courts, while declaring that view to be wrong, have, at the same time, held that they cannot override the discretion of a consul. The consul is in the position of an arbitrator, from whoso decision there is no appeal, and therefore the seaman has no remedy. Accordingly it comes peculiarly within the province of the Foreign Office to instruct the consuls on this point, and then seamen would be relieved of very great injustice and hardship.
    CAPTAIN NORTON: The matter to which I desire to call attention is the bearing of consular reports on trade. It is well within the knowledge of those connected with trade that we are far behind other countries in this matter, either because the reports furnished by consuls of other countries are superior to ours, or that the Foreign Office does not take sufficient steps to ventilate these reports. We find that in almost every
    1366
    country where there is a prospect of a growing trade, the German, Austrian, and Belgian consuls go in for minuter particulars of every class of trade, and that the various Foreign Offices take special steps to place those reports in the hands of the merchants. They have undoubtedly, by these means, cut us out of many markets where we had hitherto more than held our own. As a case in point, I would draw attention to the trade in Turkey, more especially as regards Asia Minor. I find, from the most excellent report of Acting-Consul Massey, that whereas some years ago our trade in a particular part of Turkey was extremely good, it fell away in consequence of events which took place in that quarter of the world. Now trade is about to revive, and the recovery which took place in 1897 has continued. We find that the exports are now £158,000, and the imports over £200,000. This sum, however, might be easily doubled. Prior to 1890 it was considerably larger than it is now. There is every opening for an increase of trade. But why is it this increase does not take place? Because there is no attempt made on the part of our Government, in conjunction with the consul, to see that proper trade catalogues are furnished, with price lists. The most absurd catalogues are sent out to these countries, furnishing a class of goods which it is altogether outside the power of the inhabitants to buy. It is suggested by the consul to whom I have referred, that a central agency should be established for the collation and distribution of catalogues, and for furnishing practical and useful information for the benefit of those who desire to encourage trade there. At the present time the entire trade is in the hands of a certain number of middlemen, mostly Greeks and Armenians, who are most unscrupulous in their dealing. The English merchant who sends out goods is completely in the hands of these men, who, for a commission of an extra five or six per cent., foist upon the people of this country low-class goods made in Austria and elsewhere. The establishment of a central agency, according to the consul, would not cost more than £2,000, and if the merchants of this country would put their hands in their pockets and pay £5 each, some 400 of them could provide the necessary money. At the present moment the entire trade in

    1367
    cloth is supplied from Austria. A large merchant in these parts declared that he sent an order to England, but it was not entertained. Another said he could not get a particular cloth.
    THE CHAIRMAN: Order, order! I do not see how the hon. and gallant Member connects these matters with the Vote. He is critising the actions of merchants.
    CAPTAIN NORTON: I am endeavouring to criticise the action of the Foreign Office, in not taking steps to bring home, by means of consular reports, the condition of our trade, and to distribute these reports amongst the merchants, and I submit that it is in consequence of this attitude that we are losing trade. There is a great opening for a trade of something like £8,000 worth of cloth, as used in one part of Asia Minor. At the present time, however, the whole of this commodity is manufactured in Austria.
    THE CHAIRMAN: Order, order! The hon. Member is really criticising the action of the merchants in not acting upon the consular report.
    CAPTAIN NORTON: My contention is that our consular reports fall distinctly behind those of all other great trading countries, as a consequence of which trade in all out-of-the-way places is passing into the hands of Germans and Belgians. I
    should therefore be glad if the Under Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs will say what steps are taken in order to prevent our competitors getting the better of us in these places.
    MR. LABOUCHERE: Is it not the fact that the consular reports are in many respects not up to the mark? I contend that the consular service should be made a real service, as it is in other countries. At present gentlemen are appointed haphazard without any training.
    MR. BRODRICKtotally denied the impeachment brought against the consuls by the hon. Member.
    MR. BAYLEYexpressed the hope that the right hon. Gentleman would seriously consider the question raised by the hon. and gallant Member for West Newington.
    SIR CHARLES DILKE: I propose to ask the Committee to divide, in consequence of the unsatisfactory reply given by the Under Secretary with regard to slavery in Zanzibar and in British East Africa.
    Question put.
    The Committee divided:—Ayes, 80; Noes, 174. (Division List, No. 340.)

    AYES.

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

    Hazell, Walter,

    Palmer, Sir C. M. (Durham)

    Asher, Alexander

    Healy, Timothy M. (N. Louth)

    Pearson, Sir Weetman D.

    Ashton, Thomas Gair

    Hedderwick, Thomas C. H.

    Perks, Robert William

    Atherley-Jones, L.

    Hogan, James Francis

    Pickersgill, Edward Hare

    Austin, M. (Limerick, W.)

    Horniman, Frederick John

    Pirie, Duncan V.

    Balfour, Rt. Hon. J. B. (Clackm.

    Jameson, Major J. Eustace

    Provand, Andrew Dryburgh

    Bayley, Thomas (Derbyshire)

    Joicey, Sir James

    Rickett, J. Compton

    Bllison, Alfred

    Jones, William (Carnarvonsh.)

    Roberts, J. Bryn (Eifion)

    Bolton, Thomas Dolling

    Kearley, Hudson E.

    Roberts, John H. (Denbighs).

    Burns, John

    Kilbride, Denis

    Robson, William Snowdon

    Caldwell, James

    Labouchere, Henry

    Runciman, Walter

    Cameron, Sir C. (Glasgow)

    Lawson, Sir Wilfrid (Cumb'land

    Souttar, Robinson

    Causton, Richard Knight

    Lewis, John Herbert

    Steadman, William Charles

    Cawley, Frederick

    Macaleese, Daniel

    Sullivan, Donal (Westmeath)

    Channing, Francis Allston

    M'Dermott, Patrick

    Trevelyan, Charles Philips

    Clough, Walter Owen

    M'Leod, John

    Ure, Alexander

    Curran, Thomas (Sligo, S.)

    Maddison, Fred.

    Wallace, Robert

    Curran, Thomas B. (Donegal)

    Maden, John Henry

    Walton, John L. (Leeds, S.)

    Dalziel, James Henry

    Mendl, Sigismund Ferdinand

    Warner, Thos. Courtenay T.

    Dillon, John

    Morgan, W. Pritchard (Merthyr

    Whittaker, Thomas Palmer

    Donelan, Captain A.

    Morton, E. J. C. (Devonport)

    Williams, John Carvell (Notts)

    Fenwick, Charles

    Moss, Samuel

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

    Fitzmaurice, Lord Edmond

    Moulton, John Fletcher

    Wilson, Jos. H. (Middlesbro')

    Fowler, Rt. Hon. Sir Henry

    Norton, Capt. Cecil William

    Yoxall, James Henry

    Gedge Sydney

    O'Brien, James F. X. (Cork)

    Gourley, Sir E. Temperley

    O'Connor, James (Wicklow, W.

    TELLERS FOR THE AYES—Sir Charles Dilke and Mr. Broadhurst.

    Griffith, Ellis J.

    O'Connor, T. P. (Liverpool)

    Hayne, Rt. Hon. Chas. Seale-

    Oldroyd, Mark

    NOES.

    Arid, John

    Fisher, William Hayes

    Milward, Colonel Victor

    Allsopp, Hon. George

    FitzWigram, General Sir F.

    Monk, Charles James

    Arnold, Alfred

    Flannery, Sir Fortescue

    Moon, Edward Robert Pacy

    Atkinson, Rt. Hon. John

    Flower, Ernest

    Moore, William (Antrim, N.)

    Balfour, Rt. Hon. A. J. (Man)

    Foster, Harry S. (Suffolk)

    More, Robt. Jasper (Shropshire)

    Balfour, Rt. Hn. G. W. (Leeds)

    Fry, Lewis

    Morrell, George Herbert

    Banbury, Frederick George

    Galloway, W. Johnson

    Morton, A. H. A. (Deptford)

    Barnes, Frederic Gorell

    Gibbons, J. Lloyd

    Murray, Rt Hn A. Graham (Bute

    Barton, Dunbar Plunket

    Gibbs, Hon. V (St. Albans)

    Murray, Charles J. (Coventry)

    Bathurst, Hon. A. Benjamin

    Giles, Charles Tyrrell

    Murray, Col. Wyndham (Bath)

    Beach, Rt. Hn. Sir M. H. (Bristol

    Gilliat, John Saunders

    Newdigate, Francis Alexander

    Bethell, Commander

    Goldsworthy, Major-General

    Nicholson, William Graham

    Bhownaggree, Sir M. M.

    Gordon, Hon. John Edward

    Nicol, Donald Ninian

    Bigwood, James

    Gorst, Rt. Hn. Sir John Eldon

    Northcote, Hon. Sir H. Stafford

    Blundell, Colonel Henry

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

    Orr-Ewing, Charles Lindsay

    Bond, Edward

    Goulding, Edward Alfred

    Parkes, Ebenezer

    Boscawen, Arthur Griffith-

    Gray, Ernest (West Ham)

    Pierpoint, Robert

    Boulnois, Edmund

    Greene, Henry D. (Shrewsbury

    Pryce-Jones, Lt.-Col. Edward

    Bousfield, William Robert

    Green, W. Raymond- (Cambs)

    Purvis, Robert

    Brassey, Albert

    Greville, Hon. Ronald

    Rasch, Major Frederic Carne

    Brodrick, Rt. Hon. St. John

    Gull, Sir Cameron

    Richards, Henry Charles

    Bullard, Sir Harry

    Hanbury, Rt. Hon. Robert W.

    Ridley, Rt. Hn. Sir Matthew W.

    Butcher, John George

    Heaton, John Henniker

    Ritchie, Rt. Hon. C. T.

    Campbell, J. H. M. (Dublin)

    Hermon-Hodge, R. Trotter

    Robertson, Herbert (Hackney)

    Carlile, William Walter

    Hill, Rt. Hn. A. Staveley (Staffs

    Round, James

    Cayzer, Sir Charles William

    Hoare, Edw. Brodie (Hampste'd

    Russell, T. W. (Tyrone)

    Cecil, Evely'n (Hertford, E.)

    Houldsworth, Sir Wm. Henry

    Scoble, Sir Andrew Richard

    Cecil, Lord Hugh (Greenwich)

    Howard, Joseph

    Sharpe, William Edward T.

    Chaloner, Captain R. G. W.

    Hozier, Hon. James Henry Cecil

    Sidebotham, J. W. (Cheshire)

    Chamberlain, Rt. Hon. J. (Birm.

    Jackson, Rt. Hon. W. Lawies

    Sidebottom, Wm. (Derbyshire)

    Chamberlain, J. Austen (Worc'r

    Jeffreys, Arthur Frederick

    Simeon, Sir Barrington

    Chaplin, Rt. Hon. Henry

    Jenkins, Sir John Jones

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

    Charrington, Spencer

    Jessel, Captain Herbert M.

    Spencer, Ernest

    Clare, Octavins Leigh

    Johnston, William (Belfast)

    Stanley, Edw. Jas. (Somerset)

    Cochrane, Hon. Thos. H. A. E.

    Keswick, William

    Stanley, Lord (Lancs.)

    Coghill, Douglas Harry

    Kimber, Henry

    Stirling-Maxwell, Sir John M.

    Cohen, Benjamin Louis

    Knowles, Lees

    Stone, Sir Bgnjamin

    Collings, Rt. Hon. Jesse

    Lawrence, Sir E Durning-(Corn

    Strauss, Arthur

    Colston, Chas. Ed. H. Athole

    Lawrence, Wm. F. (Liverpool

    Strutt, Hon. Charles Hedley

    Cook, Fred. Lucas (Lambeth)

    Lawson, John Grant (Yorks)

    Sturt, Hon. Humphry Napier

    Cornwallis, Fiennes Stanley W.

    Lea, Sir T. (Londonderry)

    Sutherland, Sir Thomas

    Cox, Irwin E. Bainbridge

    Leigh-Bennett, Henry Carrie

    Talbot, Rt Hn J. G. (Oxford Uni.

    Cripps, Charles Alfred

    Llewelyn, Sir D.-(Swansea)

    Tollemache, Henry James

    Curzon, Viscount

    Lock wood, Lieut.-Col. A. R.

    Tomlinson, Wm. Edw. Murray

    Dalbiac, Col. Philip Hugh

    Loder, Gerald Walter Erskine

    Tritton, Charles Ernest

    Dalkeith, Earl of

    Long, Col. C. W. (Evesham)

    Valentia, Viscount

    Davies, Sir H. D. (Chatham)

    Long, Rt. Hn. W. (Liverpool)

    Wanklyn, James Leslie

    Dickson-Poynder, Sir J. P.

    Lowe, Marquess of

    Warde, Lt.-Col. C. E. (Kent)

    Disraeli, Coningsby Ralph

    Lowe, Francis William

    Williams, J. Powell- (Birm.)

    Donkin, Richard Sim

    Lowles, John

    Wilson, J. W. (Worcestersh., N.

    Doughty, George

    Macartney, W. G. Ellison

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

    Douglas, Rt. Hon. A. Akers-

    Macdona, John Cumming

    Wortley, Rt. Hon. C. B. Stuart-

    Doxford, William Theodore

    Maclure, Sir John William

    Wylie, Alexander

    Duncombe, Hon. Hubert V.

    M'Arthur, Charles (Liverpool)

    Wyndham, George

    Fellowes, Hon. Ailwyn Edw.

    Malcolm, Ian

    Wyndham-Quin, Maj. W. H.

    Field, Admiral (Eastbourne)

    Manners, Lord Edward Wm. J.

    Wyvill, Marmaduke d'Arcy

    Finch, George H.

    Maxwell, Rt. Hn. Sir Herbert E.

    TELLERS FOR THE NOES—Sir William Walrond and Mr.Anstruther.

    Finlay, Sir Robert Bannatyne

    Mellor, Colonel (Lancashire)

    Firbank, Joseph Thomas

    Mildmay, Francis Bingham

    Original Question put, and agreed to.

    It being after Ten of the clock, the Chairman, in pursuance of the Order of the House of the 23rdFebruary last, proceeded to put the Questions necessary to dispose of the outstanding Votes in the Committee of Supply.
    20. Motion made, and Question put, "That a sum, not exceeding £154,463, be
    1370
    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, 1900, 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, 206; Noes, 69. (Division List No. 341.)

    AYES.

    Aird, John

    Fison, Frederick William

    More, Robert Jasp. (Shropshire)

    Allsopp, Hon. George

    Fitzmaurice, Lord Edmond

    Morrell, George Herbert

    Anson, Sir William Reynell

    FitzWygram, General Sir F.

    Morton, A. H. A. (Deptford)

    Arnold, Alfred

    Flannery, Sir Forcescue

    Morton, E. J. C. (Devonport)

    Asher, Alexander

    Flower, Ernest

    Murray, Rt Hn A. Graham (Bute

    Atkinson, Rt. Hon. John

    Foster, Harry S. (Suffolk)

    Murray, Charles J. (Coventry)

    Bagot, Capt. Josceline FitzRoy

    Fowler, Rt. Hon. Sir Henry

    Murray, Col. Wyndham (Bath)

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

    Fry, Lewis

    Newdigate, Francis Alexander

    Balfour, Rt. Hn. G. W. (Leeds)

    Galloway, William Johnson

    Nicholson, William Graham

    Balfour, Rt. Hn. J. B. (Clackm.)

    Gedge, Sydney

    Nicol, Donald Ninian

    Banbury, Frederick George

    Gibbons, J. Lloyd

    Northcote, Hon. Sir H. Stafford

    Barnes, Frederic Gorell

    Gibbs, Hn. A. G. H (City of Lond)

    Oldroyd, Mark

    Barton, Dunbar Plunket

    Gibbs, Hon. Vicary (St. Albans)

    Orr-Ewing, Charles Lindsay

    Bathurst, Hon. A. Benjamin

    Giles, Charles Tyrrell

    Parkes, Ebenezer

    Beach, Rt. Hn. Sir M. H. (Bristol

    Gilliat, John Saunders

    Pearson, Sir Weetman D.

    Bethell, Commander

    Goldsworthy, Major-General

    Pierpoint, Robert

    Bhownaggree, Sir M. M.

    Gordon, Hon. John Edward

    Pollock, Harry Frederick

    Bigwood, James

    Gorst, Rt. Hon. Sir John Eldon

    Pyrce-Jones, Lt.-Col. Edward

    Blundell, Colonel Henry

    Goschen, Rt Hn G. J (St George's

    Purvis, Robert

    Bond, Edward

    Goulding, Edward Alfred

    Rasch, Major Frederic Carne

    Boscawen, Arthur Griffith-

    Gray, Ernest (West Ham)

    Richards, Henry Charles

    Boulnois, Edmund

    Greene, Henry D. (Shrewb'ry)

    Ridley, Rt. Hn. Sir Matthew W.

    Bousfield, William Robert

    Greene, W. Raymond-(Cambs.)

    Ritchie, Rt. Hon. C. Thomson

    Brassey, Albert

    Greville, Hon. Ronald

    Robertson, Herbert (Hackney)

    Brodrick, Rt. Hon. St. John

    Gull, Sir Cameron

    Round, James

    Bullard, Sir Harry

    Hanbury, Rt. Hon. Robert Wm.

    Russell, T. W. (Tyrone)

    Burdett-Coutts, W.

    Harwood, George

    Ryder, John Herbert Dudley

    Butcher, John George

    Hazell, Walter

    Savory, Sir Joseph

    Campbell, J. H. M. (Dublin)

    Heaton, John Henniker

    Scoble, Sir Andrew Richard

    Carlile, William Walter

    Hermon-Hodge, Robert Trotter

    Seely, Charles Hilton

    Causton, Richard Knight

    Hill, Rt. Hn. A. Staveiey (Staffs

    Sharpe, William Edward T.

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

    Hoare, Ed. B. (Hampstead)

    Sidebotham, J. W. (Cheshire)

    Cayzer, Sir Charles William

    Hogan, James Francis

    Sidebottom, Wm. (Derbyshire)

    Cecil, Evelyn (Hertford, East)

    Houldsworth, Sir W. Henry

    Simeon, Sir Barrington

    Cecil, Lord Hugh (Greenwich)

    Howard, Joseph

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

    Chaloner, Captain R. G. W.

    Hozier, Hon J. Henry Cecil

    Spencer, Ernest

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

    Jackson, Rt. Hn. Wm. Lawies

    Stanley, Hon Arthur (Ormskirk

    Chamberlain, J. A. (Worc'r)

    Jeffreys, Arthur Frederick

    Stanley, Edw. Jas. (Somerset)

    Chaplin, Rt. Hon. Henry

    Jenkins, Sir John Jones

    Stanley, Lord (Lancs)

    Charrington, Spencer

    Jessel, Capt. Herbert Morton

    Stephens, Henry Charles

    Chelsea, Viscount

    Johnston, William (Belfast)

    Stirling-Maxwell, Sir J. M.

    Clare, Octavius Leigh

    Keswick, William

    Stone, Sir Benjamin

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

    Kimber, Henry

    Strauss, Arthur

    Coghill, Douglas Harry

    Knowles, Lees

    Strutt, Hon. Charles Hedley

    Cohen, Benjamin Louis

    Lawrence, Sir E. Durning-(Corn

    Sturt, Hon. Humphry Napier

    Collings, Rt. Hon. Jesse

    Lawrence, Wm. F. (Liverpool)

    Sutherland, Sir Thomas

    Colston, Chas. Edw. H. Athole

    Lawson, John Grant (Yorks)

    Talbot, Rt Hn. J. G. (Ox'dUniv.

    Cook, Fred. Lucas (Lambeth)

    Lea, Sir Thomas (Londonderry

    Thornton, Percy M.

    Cooke, C. W. Radcliffe (Heref'd

    Leigh-Bennet, Henry Currie

    Tollemache, Henry James

    Cornwallis, Fiennes Stanley W.

    Llewelyn, Sir Dillwyn-(Sw'ns'a

    Tomlinson, Wm. Ed. Murray

    Cox, Irwin Edward Bainbridge

    Lockwood, Lieut. Col. A. R.

    Tritton, Charles Ernest

    Cripps, Charles Alfred

    Loder, Gerald Walter Erskine

    Usborne, Thomas

    Curzon, Viscount

    Long, Col. Chas. W. (Evesham

    Valentia, Viscount

    Dalbiac, Col. Philip Hugh

    Long, Rt. Hn. Walter (Liverpool

    Walton, J. Lawson (Leeds, S.)

    Dalkeith, Earl of

    Lowe, Marquis of

    Wanklyn, James Leslie

    Davies, Sir Horatio D. (Chath'm

    Lowe, Francis William

    Williams, J. Powell-(Birm'g'm.

    Dickson-Poynder, Sir John P.

    Lowles, John

    Wilson, J. W. (Worcestersh. N.)

    Disraeli, Coningsby Ralph

    Macartney, W. G. Ellison

    Wilson-Todd, Wm. H. (Yorks.)

    Donkin, Richard Sim

    Macdona, John Cumming

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

    Doughty, George

    Maclure, Sir John William

    Woodhouse, Sir J. T. (Hudderf'd

    Douglas, Rt. Hon. A. Akers-

    M'Arthur, Chas. (Liverpool)

    Wortley, Rt. Hon. C. B. Stuart-

    Doxford, William Theodore

    Malcolm, Ian

    Wylie, Alexander

    Duncombe, Hon. Hubert V.

    Manners, Lord Edw. Wm. J.

    Wyndham, George

    Dyke, Rt. Hn. Sir Williain Hart

    Maple, Sir John Blundell

    Wyndham-Quin, Major W. H.

    Fellowes, Hon. Ailwyn Edward

    Mellor, Colonel (Lancashire)

    Wyvill, Marmaduke D'Arcy

    Field, Admiral (Eastbourne)

    Mildmay, Francis Bingham

    Young, Commander (Berks, E.

    Finch, George H.

    Milward, Colonel Victor

    Finlay, Sir Robert Bannatyne

    Monk, Charles James

    TELLERS FOR THE AYES—Sir William Walrond and Mr. Anstruther.

    Firbank, Joseph Thomas

    Moon, Edw. Robert Pacy

    Fisher, William Hayes

    Moore, William (Antrim, N.).

    1372

    1373

    NOES.

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

    Healy, Timothy M. (N. Louth)

    Perks, Robert William

    Ashton, Thomas Gair

    Hedderwick, Thomas Charles H

    Pickersgill, Edward Hare

    Atherley-Jones, L.

    Horniman, Frederick John

    Provand, Andrew Dryburgh

    Austin,' M. (Limerick, W.)

    Jameson, Major J. Eustace

    Rickett, J. Compton

    Bayley, Thomas (Derbyshire)

    Joicey, Sir James

    Roberts, John Bryn (Eifion)

    Billson, Alfred

    Jones, William (Carnarvonsh.)

    Roberts, John H. (Denbighs)

    Bolton, Thomas Dolling

    Kearley, Hudson E.

    Roberts, William Snowdon

    Broadhurst, Henry

    Kilbride, Denis

    Runciman, Walter

    Burns, John

    Labouehere, Henry

    Sinclair, Capt. John (Forfarsh.

    Caldwell, James

    Lawson, Sir W. (Cumberland)

    Souttar, Robinson

    Cameron, Sir Chas. (Glasgow)

    Lewis, John Herbert

    Steadman, William Charles

    Cawley, Frederick

    Macaleese, Daniel

    Sullivan, Donal (Westmeath)

    Channing, Francis Allston

    M'Dermott, Patrick

    Trevelvan, Charles Philips

    Crilly, Daniel

    M'Leod, John

    Ure, Alexander

    Curran, Thomas B. (Donegal)

    Maddison, Fred.

    Wallace, Robert

    Curran, Thomas (Sligo, S.)

    Maden, John Henry

    Warner, Thomas Courtenay T.

    Dalziel, James Henry

    Mendl, Sigismund Ferdinand

    Whiteley, George (Stockport)

    Dilke, Rt. Hon. Sir Charles

    Morgan, W. P. (Merthyr)

    Whittaker, Thomas Palmer

    Dillon, John

    Moss, Samuel

    Williams, John Carvell (Notts).

    Donelan, Captain A.

    Moulton, John Fletcher

    Wilson, J. H. (Middlesbro'gh)

    Fenwick, Charles

    O'Brien, James F. X. (Cork)

    Yoxall, James Henry

    Gourley, Sir E. Temperley

    O'Connor, J. (Wicklow, W.)

    TELLERS FOR THE NOES—Captain Norton and Mr. Pirie.

    Griffith, Ellis J.

    O'Connor, T. P. (Liverpool)

    Hayne, Rt. Hn. Charles Seale-

    Palmer, Sir Charles M. (Durham

    21. Motion made, and Question put, "That a sum, not exceeding £1,000, 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 March, 1900,
    for a Grant in Aid of the Revenue of the Island of Cyprus."
    The Committee divided:—Ayes, 196; Noes, 78. (Division List, No. 342.)

    AYES.

    Aird, John

    Clare, Octavius Leigh

    Gibbons, J. Lloyd

    Allsopp, Hon. George

    Cochrane, Hon. Thos. H. A. E.

    Gibbs, Hn. A. G. H. (City of Lond

    Anson, Sir William Reynell

    Coghill, Douglas Harry

    Gibbs, Hon. Vicary (St. Albans

    Arnold, Alfred

    Cohen, Benjamin Louis

    Giles, Charles Tyrrell

    Atkinson, Rt. Hon. John

    Collings, Rt. Hon. Jesse

    Gilliat, John Saunders

    Bagot, Cap. J. FitzRoy

    Colston, Chas. E. H. Athole

    Goldsworthy, Major-General

    Balfour, Rt. Hon. G. W. (Leeds

    Cook, Fred. Lucas (Lambeth)

    Gordon, Hon. John Edward

    Banbury, Frederick George

    Cooke, C. W. Radoliffe (Herefd.

    Gorst, Rt. Hon. Sir John Eldon

    Barnes, Frederic Gorell

    Cornwallis, Fiennes Stanley W.

    Goulding, Edward Alfred

    Barton, Dunbar Pluuket

    Cox, Irwin Edward Bainbridge

    Gray, Ernest (West Ham)

    Bathurst, Hon. Allen Benj.

    Cripps, Charles Alfred

    Greene, Henry D. (Shrewsbury

    Beach, Rt. Hn. Sir M. H. (Bristol

    Curzon, Viscount

    Greene, W. Raymond- (Cambs.

    Bethell, Commander

    Dalbiac, Colonel Philip Hugh

    Greville, Hon. Ronald

    Bhownaggree, Sir M. M.

    Dalkeith, Earl of

    Gull, Sir Cameron

    Bigwood, James

    Davies, Sir H. D. (Chatham)

    Hanbury, Rt. Hn. Robert Wm.

    Blundell, Colonel Henry

    Dickson-Poynder, Sir John P.

    Harwood, George

    Bond, Edward

    Disraeli, Coningsby Ralph

    Heaton, John Henniker

    Boscawen, Arthur Griffith-

    Donkin, Richard Sim

    Hermon-Hodge, Robt. Trotter

    Boulnois, Edmund

    Doughty, George

    Hill, Rt. Hn. A. Staveley (Staffs.

    Bousfield, William Robert

    Douglas, Rt. Hon. A. Akers-

    Hoare. Ed. Brodie (Hampstead)

    Brassey, Albert

    Doxford. William Theodore

    Houldsworth, Sir Wm. Henry

    Brodrick, Rt. Hon. St. John

    Duncombe, Hon. Hubert V.

    Howard, Joseph

    Bullard, Sir Harry

    Dyke, Rt. Hon. Sir Wm. Hart

    Hozier. Hon. J. Henry Cecil

    Burdett-Coutts, W.

    Fellowes, Hon. Ailwyn Edw.

    Jackson, Rt. Hn. Wm. Lawies

    Butcher, John George

    Field, Admiral (Eastbourne)

    Jeffreys, Arthur Frederick

    Campbell, J. H. M. (Dublin)

    Finch, George H.

    Jenkins, Sir John Jones

    Carlile, William Walter

    Finlay, Sir Robert Bannatyne

    Jessel, Capt. Herbert Merton

    Cavendish, V. C. W. (Derbysh.

    Firbank, Joseph Thomas

    Johnston, William (Belfast)

    Cayzer, Sir Charles William

    Fisher, William Hayes

    Keswick, William

    Cecil, Evelyn (Hertford, East)

    Fison, Frederick William

    Kimber, Henry

    Cecil, Lord Hugh (Greenwich)

    FitzWygram, General Sir F.

    Knowles, Lees

    Chaloner, Captain R. G. W.

    Flannery, Sir Fortescue

    Lawrence, Sir E Durning-(Corn

    Chamberlain, Rt. Hn. J. (Birm.

    Flower. Ernest

    Lawrence, Wm. F. (Liverpool)

    Chamberlain, J. Austen (Worc'r

    Foster, Harry S. (Suffolk)

    Lawson, John Grant (Yorks.)

    Chaplin, Rt. Hon. Henry

    Fry, Lewis

    Lea, Sir Thomas (Londonderry)

    Charrington, Spencer

    Galloway, William Johnson

    Leigh-Bennett, Henry Currie

    Chelsea, Viscount

    Gedge, Sydney

    Llewelyn, Sir Dillwyn-(Sw'ns'a

    Lockwood, Lt.-Col. A. R.

    Northcote, Hon Sir H. Stafford

    Stirling-Maxwell, Sir J. M.

    Loder, Gerald Walter Erskine

    Orr-Ewing, Charles Lindsay

    Stone, Sir Benjamin

    Long, Col. Chas. W. (Evesham)

    Parkes, Ebenezer

    Strauss, Arthur

    Long, Rt. Hon. W. (Liverpool)

    Pierpoint, Robert

    Strutt, Hon. Charles Hedley

    Lowe, Marquees of

    Pollock, Harry Frederick

    Sturt, Hon. Humphry Napier

    Lowe, Francis William

    Pryce-Jones, Lt.-Col. Edward

    Sutherland, Sir Thomas

    Lowles, John

    Purvis, Robert

    Talbot, Rt Hn J. G. (Oxford Uni.

    Macartney, W. G. Ellison

    Rasch, Major Frederic Carne

    Thornton, Percy M.

    Macdona, John Cumming

    Richards, Henry Charles

    Tollemache, Henry James

    Maclure, Sir John William

    Ridley, Rt. Hn. Sir M. W.

    Tomlinson, Wm. Edw. Murray

    M'Arthur, Charles (Liverpool)

    Ritchie, Rt. Hon. C. T.

    Tritton, Charles Ernest

    Malcolm Ian

    Robertson, Herbert (Hackney)

    Usborne, Thomas

    Manners, Ld. Edward Wm. J.

    Rollit, Sir Albert Kaye

    Valentia, Viscount

    Maple, Sir John Blundell

    Round, James

    Wanklyn, James Leslie

    Mellor, Colonel (Lancashire)

    Russell, T. W. (Tyrone)

    Warde, Lieut.-Col. C. E. (Kent)

    Mildmay, Francis Bingham

    Ryder, John Herbert Dudley

    Whitmore, Charles Algernon

    Milward, Colonel Victor

    Sandys, Lieut.-Col. T. Myles

    Williams, Joseph Powell-(Birm.

    Monk, Charles James

    Savory, Sir Joseph

    Wilson, J. W. (Worcestersh. N)

    Moon, Edward Robert Pacy

    Scobel, Sir Andrew Richard

    Wilson-Todd, W. H. (Yorks)

    Moore, William (Antrim, N.)

    Seely, Charles Hilton

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

    More, Robt. Jasper (Shropsh.)

    Sharpe, William Edward T.

    Wortley, Rt. Hon. C. B. Stuart-

    Morrell, George Herbert

    Sidebotham, J. W. (Cheshire)

    Wylie, Alexander

    Morton (A. H. A. (Deptford)

    SideBottom, Wm. (Derbysh.)

    Wyndham, George

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

    Simeon, Sir Barrington

    Wyndham-Quin, Major W. H.

    Murray, Charles J. (Coventry)

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

    Wyvill, Marmaduke D'Arcy

    Murray, Col. Wyndham (Bath)

    Spencer, Ernest

    Young, Commander (Berks, E.

    Newdigate, Francis Alexander

    Stanley, Hon. A. (Ormskirk)

    TELLERS FOR THE AYES—Sir William Walrond and Mr. Anstruther.

    Nicholson, William Graham

    Stanley, E. James (Somerset)

    Nicol, Donald Ninian

    Stanley, Lord (Lancashire)

    NOES.

    Abraham, William (Cork, N. E.

    Healy, Timothy M. (N. Louth)

    Perks, Robert William

    Asher, Alexander

    Hedderwiek, Thomas C. H.

    Pickersgill, Edward Hare

    Ashton, Thomas Gair

    Hogan, James Francis

    Pirie, Duncan V.

    Atherley-Jones, L.

    Horniman, Frederick John

    Provand, Andrew Dryburgh

    Austin, M. (Limerick, W.)

    Jameson, Major J. Eustace

    Rickett, J. Compton

    Balfour, Rt. Hon. J. B. (Clackm.

    Joicey, Sir James

    Roberts, John Bryn (Eifion)

    Billson, Alfred

    Jones, W. (Carnarvonshire)

    Roberts, John H. (Denbighs.)

    Bolton, Thomas Dolling

    Kearley, Hudson E.

    Robson, William Snowdon

    Broadhurst, Henry

    Kilbride, Denis

    Runciman, Walter

    Burns, John

    Lawson, Sir W. (Cumberland)

    Sinclair, Capt. John (Forfarsh.)

    Caldwell, James

    Lewis, John Herbert

    Souttar, Robinson

    Cameron, Sir Charles (Glasgow

    Macaleese, Daniel

    Steadman, William Charles

    Causton, Richard Knight

    M'Dermott, Patrick

    Sullivan, Donal (Westmeath)

    Cawley, Frederick

    M'Leod, John

    Trevelyan, Charles Philips

    Crilly, Daniel

    Maddison, Fred

    Ure, Alexander

    Curran, Thomas B. (Donegal)

    Maden, John Henry

    Wallace, Robert

    Curran, Thomas (Sligo, S.)

    Mendl, Sigismund Ferdinand

    Walton, J. Lawson (Leeds, S.)

    Dalziel, James Henry

    Moore, Arthur (Londonderry)

    Warner, Thos. Courtenay T.

    Dlike, Rt. Hon. Sir Charles

    Morgan, W. Pritchard (Merth'r

    Whiteley, George (Stockport)

    Dillon, John

    Morton, E. J. C. (Devonport)

    Whittaker, Thomas Palmer

    Donelan, Captain A.

    Moss, Samuel

    Williams, John Carvell (Notts.

    Fenwick, Charles

    Moulton, John Fletcher

    Woodhouse, Sir J. T. (Hudderf'd

    Fitzmaurice, Lord Edmond

    O'Brien, James F. X. (Cork)

    Yoxall, James Henry

    Fowler, Rt. Hon. Sir Henry

    O'Connor, Jas. (Wicklow, W.)

    Gourley, Sir Edw. Temperley

    O'Connor, T. P. (Liverpool)

    TELLERS FOR THE NOES—Mr. Channing and Captain Norton.

    Griffith, Ellis J.

    Oldroyd, Mark

    Hayne, Rt. Hon. Charles Seale-

    Palmer, Sir C. M. (Durham)

    Hazell, Walter

    Pearson, Sir Weetman D.

    22. Motion made, and Question put, "That a sum, not exceeding £34,241, 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,
    1900, for the Subsidies to certain Telegraph Companies."
    The Committee divided:—Ayes, 197; Noes, 84. (Division List, No. 343.)

    AYES.

    Aird, John

    Fisher, William Hayes

    Morrell, George Herbert

    Allsopp, Hon. George

    Fison, Frederick William

    Morton, A. H. A. (Deptford)

    Anson, Sir William Reynell

    FitzWygram, General Sir F.

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

    Arnold, Alfred

    Flannery, Sir Fortescue

    Murray, Charles J. (Coventry)

    Atkinson, Rt. Hon. John

    Flower, Ernest

    Murray, Col. Wyndham (Bath)

    Bagot, Capt. Josceline FizRoy

    Foster, Harry S. (Suffolk)

    Newdigate, Francis Alexander

    Balfour, Rt Hn Gerald W. (Leeds

    Fry, Lewis

    Nicholson, William Graham

    Banbury, Frederick George

    Galloway, Wm. Johnson

    Nicol, Donald Ninian

    Barnes, Frederick Gorell

    Gedge, Sydney

    Northcote, Hn. Sir H. Stafford

    Barton, Dunbar Plunket

    Gibbons, J. Lloyd

    Orr-Ewing, Charles Lindsay

    Bathurst, Hon. Allen Benjamin

    Gibbs, Hn A.G. H. (City of Lond.

    Parkes, Ebenezer

    Beach, Rt. Hn. Sir M. H. (Bristol

    Gibbs, Hn. Vicary (St. Albans)

    Pierpoint, Robert

    Bentinck, Lord Henry C.

    Giles, Charles Tyrrell

    Pollock, Harry Frederick

    Bethell, Commander

    Gilliat, John Saunders

    Pryce-Jones, Lt.-Col. Edward

    Bhownaggree, Sir M. M.

    Goldsworthy, Major-General

    Purvis, Robert

    Bigwood, James

    Gordon, Hon. John Edward

    Rasch, Major Frederic Carne

    Blundell, Colonel Henry

    Gorst, Rt. Hon. Sir John E.

    Richards, Henry Charles

    Bond, Edward

    Goschen, Rt Hn G. J. (St George's

    Ridley, Rt Hon Sir Matthew W.

    Boscawen, Arthur Griffith-

    Goulding, Edward Alfred

    Ritchie, Rt. Hon. C. Thomson

    Boulnois, Edward

    Gray, Ernest (West Ham)

    Robertson, Herbert (Hackney)

    Bousfield, William Robert

    Green, H. D. (Shrewsbury)

    Rollit, Sir Albert Kaye

    Brassey, Albert

    Greene, W. Raymond-(Cambs.)

    Round, James

    Brodrick, Rt. Hon. St. John

    Greville, Hon. Ronald

    Russell, T. W. (Tyrone)

    Bullard, Sir Harry

    Gull, Sir Cameron

    Ryder, John Herbert Dudley

    Burdett-Coutts, W.

    Hanbury, Rt. Hon. Robt. W.

    Sandys, Lieut.-Col. Thos Myles

    Butcher, John George

    Harwood, George

    Savory, Sir Joseph

    Campbell, J. H. M. (Dublin)

    Hermon-Hodge, Robert Trotter

    Scoble, Sir Henry Richard

    Carlile, William Walter

    Hill, Rt. Hn. A. Staveley (Staffs.

    Seely, Charles Hilton

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

    Hoare, Ed. Brodie (Hampstead

    Sharpe, William Edward T.

    Cayzer, Sir Charles William

    Houldsworth, Sir Wm. Henry

    Sidebotham, J. W. (Cheshire)

    Cecil, Evelyn (Hertford, East)

    Howard, Joseph

    Sidebottom, William (Derbysh.

    Cecil, Lord Hugh (Greenwich)

    Hozier, Hon. Jas. Henry Cecil

    Simeon, Sir Barrington

    Chaloner, Captain R. G. W.

    Jackson, Rt. Hon. Wm. Lawies

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

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

    Jeffreys, Arthur Frederick

    Spencer, Ernest

    Chamberlain, J. Austen (Worc'r

    Jenkins, Sir John Jones

    Stanley, Hon. A. (Ormskirk)

    Chaplin, Rt. Hon. Henry

    Jessel, Capt. Herbert Merton

    Stanley, E. Jas. (Somerset)

    Charrington, Spencer

    Johnston, William (Belfast)

    Stanley, Lord (Lancs.)

    Chelsea, Viscount

    Keswick, William

    Stirling-Maxwell, Sir John M.

    Clare, Octavius Leigh

    Kimber, Henry

    Stone, Sir Benjamin

    Cochrane, Hon. Thos. H. A. E.

    Knowles, Lees

    Strauss, Arthur

    Coghill, Douglas Harry

    Lawrence, Sir E. Durning-(Corn

    Strutt, Hon. Charles Hedley

    Cohen, Benjamin Louis

    Lawrence, W. F. (Liverpool)

    Sturt, Hon. Humphry Napier

    Collings, Rt. Hon. Jesse

    Lawson, John Grant (Yorks.)

    Sutherland, Sir Thomas

    Colston, Chas. Ed. H. Athole

    Lea, Sir Thomas(Londonderry)

    Talbot, Rt. Hn. J G (Oxf'd Univ.)

    Cook, Fred. Lucas (Lambeth)

    Leigh-Bennett, Henry Currie

    Thornton, Percy M.

    Cooke, C. W. R. (Hereford)

    Llewelyn, Sir Dillwyn-(Swans'a

    Tollemache, Henry James

    Cornwallis, Fiennes Stanley W.

    Lockwood, Lieut.-Col. A. R.

    Tomlinson, Wm. E. Murray

    Cox, Irwin Edward Bainbridge

    Loder, Gerald Walter Erskine

    Tritton, Charles Ernest

    Cripps, Charles Alfred

    Long, Col. Charles W. (Evesham

    Usborne Thomas

    Curzon, Viscount

    Long, Rt. Hn. Walter (L'pool)

    Valentia, Viscount

    Dalbiac, Colonel Philip Hugh

    Lorne, Marquess of

    Wanklyn, James Leslie

    Dalkeith, Earl of

    Lowe, Francis William

    Warde, Lt.-Col. C. E. (Kent)

    Davies, Sir Horatio D (Chatham

    Lowles, John

    Whitmore, Charles Algernon

    Dickson-Poynder, Sir John P.

    Macartney, W. G. Ellison

    Williams Joseph Powell-(Birm

    Disraeli, Coningsby Ralph

    Macdona, John Cumming

    Wilson, J. W. (Worcestersh. N.

    Donkin, Richard Sim

    Maclure, Sir John William

    Wilson-Todd, Wm. H. (Yorks)

    Doughty, George

    M'Arthur, Charles (Liverpool)

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

    Douglas, Rt. Hon. A. Akers-

    Malcolm, Ian

    Wortley, Rt. Hn. C. B. Stuart-

    Doxford, William Theodore

    Manners, Lord Edward Wm. J.

    Wylie, Alexander

    Drucker, A.

    Maple, Sir John Blundell

    Wyndham, George

    Duncombe. Hon. Hubert V.

    Mellor, Colonel (Lancashire)

    Wyndham-Quin, Maj. W. H.

    Dyke, Rt. Hn. Sir William Hart

    Mildmay, Francis Bingham

    Wyvil, Marmaduke D'Arcy

    Fellowes, Hon. Ailwyn Edwd.

    Milward, Colonel Victor

    Young, Commander (Berks, E.

    Field, Admiral (Eastbourne)

    Monk, Charles James

    Finch, George H.

    Moon, Edward Robert Pacy

    TELLERS FOR THE AYES—Sir William Walrond and Mr. Anstruther.

    Finlay, Sir Robert Bannatyne

    Moore, William (Antrim, N.)

    Firbank, Joseph Thomas

    More, Robt. J. (Shropshire)

    NOES.

    Abraham, William (Cork, N.E.

    Austin, M. (Limerick, W.)

    Broadhurst, Henry

    Asher, Alexander

    Balfour, Rt. Hn. J. B.(Clackm.

    Burns, John

    Ashton, Thomas Gair

    Billson, Alfred

    Caldwell, James

    Atherley-Jones, L.

    Bolton, Thomas Dolling

    Cameron, Sir Chas. (Glasgow)

    1378

    1379

    Causton, Richard Knight

    Joicey, Sir James

    Perks, Robert Willams

    Cawley, Frederick

    Jones, Wm. (Carnarvonshire)

    Pickersgill, Edward Hare

    Channing, Francis Allston

    Kearley, Hudson, E.

    Provand, Andrew Dryburgh

    Crilly, Daniel

    Kilbride, Denis

    Rickett, J. Compton

    Curran, Thomas B. (Donegal)

    Lawson, Sir W. (Cumberland)

    Roberts, John Bryn (Eifion)

    Curran, Thomas (Sligo, S.)

    Lewis, John Herbert

    Roberts John H. (Denbighs.)

    Dalziel, James Henry

    Lloyd-George, David

    Robson, William Snowdon

    Dilke, Rt. Hon. Sir Charles

    Macaleese, Daniel

    Runciman, Walter

    Dillon, John

    M'Dermott, Patrick

    Sinclair, Capt. John (Forfarsh.)

    Donelan, Captain A.

    M'Ewan, William

    Souttar, Robinson

    Fen wick, Charles

    M'Leod, John

    Steadman, William Charles

    Fitzmaurice, Lord Edmond

    Maddison, Fred.

    Sullivan, Donal (Westmeath)

    Fowler, Rt. Hon. Sir Henry

    Maden, John Henry

    Trevelyan, Charles Philips

    Gladstone, Rt. Hn. H. John

    Mendl, Sigismund Ferdinand

    Ure, Alexander

    Gourley, Sir E. Temperley

    Moore, Arthur (Londonderry)

    Wallace, Robert

    Griffith, Ellis J.

    Morgan, W. Pritchard (Merthr.

    Walton, John Lawson (Leeds, S.

    Hayne, Rt. Hn. Chas. Seale-

    Morton, E. J. C. (Devonport)

    Warner, Thomas C. T.

    Hazell, Walter

    Moss, Samuel

    Whiteley, George (Stockport)

    Healy, Timothy M. (N. Louth)

    Moulton, John Fletcher

    Whittaker, Thomas Palmer

    Heaton, John Henniker

    O'Brien, James F. X. (Cork)

    Williams, John Carvell (Notts.

    Hedderwick, Thos. Chas. H.

    O'Connor, J. (Wicklow, W.)

    Woodhouse, Sir J. T. (Huddrsfld

    Hogan, James Francis

    O'Connor, T. P. (Liverpool)

    Yoxall, James Henry

    Holland, Wm. H. (York, W. R.)

    Oldroyd, Mark

    TELLERS FOR THE NOES—Captain Norton and Mr. Pirie.

    Horniman, Frederick John

    Palmer, Sir Chas. M. (Durham).

    Jameson, Major J. Eustace

    Pearson, Sir Weetman D.

    CLASS I.
    23. £4,000, Supplementary, Royal Palaces and Marlborough House.
    24. Motion made, and Question put, "That a sum, not exceeding £130,537, 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, 1900, for the Survey of the United Kingdom, and for minor services connected therewith."
    The Committee divided:—Ayes, 207; Noes, 76. (Division List, No. 344.)

    AYES.

    Aird, John

    Chaloner, Captain R. G. W.

    Fisher, William Hayes

    Allsopp, Hon. George

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

    Fison, Frederick William

    Anson, Sir William Reynell

    Chamberlain, J. A. (Worc'r)

    FitzWygram, General Sir F.

    Arnold. Alfred

    Chaplin, Rt. Hon. Henry

    Flannery, Sir Fortescue

    Asher, Alexander

    Charrington, Spencer

    Flower, Ernest

    Atkinson, Right Hon. John

    Chelsea, Viscount

    Foster, Harry S. (Suffolk)

    Bagot, Capt. Josceline FitzRoy

    Clare, Octavius Leigh

    Fowler, Rt. Hon. Sir Henry

    Balfour, Rt. Hn. G. W. (Leeds)

    Cochrane, Hon. Thos. H. A. E.

    Fry, Lewis

    Balfour, Rt. Hn. J. B. (Clackm.)

    Coghill, Douglas Harry

    Galloway, William Johnson

    Banbury, Frederick George

    Cohen, Benjamin Louis

    Gedge, Sydney

    Barnes, Frederic Gorell

    Collings, Rt. Hon. Jesse

    Gibbons, J. Lloyd

    Barton Dunbar Plunket

    Colston, C. E. H. Athole

    Gibbs, Hn A. G. H. (City of Lond.

    Bathurst, Hon. Allen B.

    Cook, F. L. (Lambeth)

    Gibbs, Hon. Vicary (St. Albans)

    Beach, Rt. Hn. Sir M. H. (Bristol)

    Cooke, C. W. R. (Hereford)

    Giles, Charles Tyrrell

    Bentinck, Lord Henry C.

    Cornwallis, Fiennes Stanley, W

    Gilliat, John Saunders

    Bethell, Commander

    Cox, Irwin Edw. Bainbridge

    Gladstone, Rt. Hon. H. John.

    Bhownaggree, Sir M. M.

    Cripps, Charles Alfred

    Goldsworthy, Major-General

    Bigwood, James

    Curzon, Viscount

    Gordon, Hon. John Edward

    Blundell, Colonel Henry

    Dalbiac, Colonel Philip Hugh

    Gorst, Rt. Hn. Sir John Eldon

    Bond, Edward

    Dalkeith. Earl of

    Goschen, Rt Hn G J (St George's)

    Boscawen, Arthur Griffith-

    Davies, Sir H. D. (Chatham)

    Goulding, Edward Alfred

    Boulnois, Edmund

    Dickson-Poynder, Sir J. P.

    Gray, Ernest (West Ham)

    Bousfield, William Robert

    Disraeli, Coningsby Ralph

    Greene, Henry D. (Shrewsbury

    Brassey, Albert

    Donkin, Richard Sim

    Greene, W. Raymond-(Cambs-

    Brodrick, Rt. Hon. St. John

    Doughty, George

    Greville, Hon. Ronald

    Bullard, Sir Harry

    Douglas, Rt. Hon. A. Akers-

    Gull, Sir Cameron

    Burdett-Coutts, W.

    Doxford, William Theodore

    Hanbury, Rt. Hon. R. W.

    Butcher, John George

    Drucker, A.

    Harwood, George

    Campbell, J. H. M. (Dublin)

    Duncombe, Hon. Hubert V.

    Heaton, John Henniker

    Carlile, William Walter

    Dyke, Rt. Hon. Sir W. Hart

    Hermon-Hodge, Robt. Trotter

    Causton, Richard Knight

    Fellowes, Hon. Ailywn Edw.

    Hill, Rt. Hn. A. Staveley (Staffs.

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

    Field, Admiral (Eastbourne)

    Hoare, Edw Brodie (Hampstead

    Cayzer, Sir Charles William

    Finch, George H.

    Houldsworth, Sir Wm. Henry

    Cecil, E. (Hertford, East)

    Finlay, Sir Robert Bannatyne

    Howard, Joseph

    Cecil, Lord H. (Greenwich)

    Firbank, Joseph Thomas

    Hozier, Hn. James Henry Cecil

    Jackson, Rt. Hon. Wm. Lawies

    More, Robt, Jasper (Shropshire)

    Stanley, Hon. A. (Ormskirk)

    Jeffreys, Arthur Frederick

    Morrell, George Herbert

    Stanley, E. J. (Somerset)

    Jenkins, Sir John Jones

    Morton, A. H. A. (Deptford)

    Stanley, Lord (Lancs.)

    Jessel, Captain Herbert Merton

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

    Stephens, Henry Charles

    Johnston, William (Belfast)

    Murray, Charles J. (Coventry)

    Stirling-Maxwell, Sir John M.

    Joicey, Sir James

    Murray, Col. Wyndham (Bath

    Stone, Sir Benjamin

    Keswick, William

    Newdigate, Francis Alexander

    Strauss, Arthur

    Kimber, Henry

    Nicholson, William Graham

    Strurtt, Hon. Charles Hedley

    Knowles, Lees

    Nicol, Donald Ninian

    Sturt, Hon. Humphry Napier

    Lawrence, Sir E Durning-(Corn

    Northcote, Hon. Sir H. Stafford

    Sutherland, Sir Thomas

    Lawrence, Wm. F. (Liverpool)

    Orr-Ewing, Charles Lindsay

    Talbot, Rt. Hn. J. G. (Ox. U.)

    Lawson, John Grant (Yorks)

    Parkes, Ebenezer

    Thornton, Percy M.

    Lea, Sir T. (Londonderry)

    Pierpoint, Robert

    Tollemache, Henry James

    Leigh-Bennett, Henry Currie

    Pollock, Harry Frederick

    Tomlinson, Wm. Edw. Murray

    Llewelyn, Sir D. (Swansea)

    Pryce-Jones, Lt.-Col. Edward

    Tritton, Charles Ernest

    Lockwood, Lt.-Col. A. R.

    Purvis, Robert

    Ure, Alexander

    Loder, Gerald Walter Erskine

    Rasch, Major Frederic Carne

    Usborne, Thomas

    Long, Col. C. W. (Evesham)

    Richards, Henry Charles

    Valentia, Viscount

    Long, Rt. Hn. W. (Liverpool)

    Ridley, Rt. Hn. Sir Matthew W

    Vincent, Col. Sir C. E. Howard

    Lorne, Marquess of

    Ritchie, Rt. Hn. C. Thomson

    Wanklyn, James Leslie

    Lowe, Francis William

    Robertson, Herbert (Hackney

    Warde, Lt.-Col. C. E. (Kent)

    Lowles, John

    Rollit, Sir Albert Kaye

    Whitmore, Charles Algernon

    Macartney, W. G. Ellison

    Round, James

    Williams, Joseph Powell (Birm.

    Macdona, John Cumming

    Russell, T. W. (Tyrone)

    Wilson, J. W (Worcestersh., N.

    Maclure, Sir John William

    Ryder, John Herbert Dudley

    Wilson-Todd, W. H. (Yorks.)

    M'Arthur, Charles (Liverpool)

    Sandys, Lt.-Col. Thos. Myles

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

    Malcolm, Ian

    Savory, Sir Joseph

    Wortley, Rt. Hon. C. B. Stuart-

    Manners, Lord Ed. Wm. J.

    Scoble, Sir Andrew Richard

    Wylie, Alexander

    Maple, Sir John Blundell

    Seely, Charles Hilton

    Wyndham, George

    Mellor, Colonel (Lancashire)

    Sharpe, William Edward T.

    Wyndham-Quin, Major W. H.

    Mildmay, Francis Bingham

    Sidebotham, J. W. (Cheshire)

    Wyvil, Marmaduke D'Arcy

    Milward. Colonel Victor

    Sidebottom, William (Derbysh)

    Young, Commander (Berks, E.)

    Monk, Charles James

    Simeon, Sir Barrington

    TELLERS FOR THE AYES.—Sir William Walrond and Mr. Anstruther.

    Moon, Edward Robert Pacy

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

    Moore, William (Antrim, N.)

    Spencer, Ernest

    NOES.

    Abraham, William (Cork, N. E.)

    Horniman, Frederick John

    Pickersgill, Edward Hare

    Ashton, Thomas Gair

    Jameson, Major J. Eustace

    Pirie, Duncan V.

    Atherley-Jones, L.

    Kearley, Hudson E.

    Provand, Andrew Dryburgh

    Austin, M. (Limerick, W.)

    Kilbride, Denis

    Rickett, J. Compton

    Billson, Alfred

    Lawson, Sir Wilfrid (Cumb'land

    Roberts John Bryn (Eifion)

    Bolton, Thomas Dolling

    Lloyd-George, David

    Roberts, John H. (Denbighs.)

    Broad hurst, Henry

    Macaleese, Daniel

    Robson, William Snowdon

    Burns, John

    MacDonnell, Dr M. A (Queen'sC

    Runciman, Walter

    Caldwell, James

    M'Dermott, Patrick

    Sinclair, Capt. J. (Forfarshire)

    Cameron, Sir Charles (Glasgow)

    M'Ewan, William

    Souttar, Robinson

    Cawley, Frederick

    M'Leod, John

    Steadman, William Charles

    Channing, Francis Allston

    Maddison, Fred.

    Sullivan, Donal (Westmeath)

    Crilly, Daniel

    Maden, John Henry

    Trevelyan, Charles Philips

    Curran, Thomas B. (Donegal)

    Mendl, Sigismund Ferdinand

    Wallace, Robert

    Curran, Thomas (Sligo, S.)

    Moore, Arthur (Londonderry)

    Walton, John Lawson (Leeds, S.)

    Dalziel, James Henry

    Morgan, W. Pritchard (Merthyr

    Warner, Thomas Courtenay T.

    Dilke, Rt. Hon. Sir Charles

    Morton, E. J. C. (Devonport)

    Whiteley, George (Stockport)

    Dillon, John

    Moss, Samuel

    Whittaker, Thomas Palmer

    Donelan, Captain A.

    Moulton, John Fletcher

    Williams, John Carvell (Notts.

    Fenwick, Charles

    Norton, Capt. Cecil William

    Wilson, Joseph (Middlesbro')

    Gourley, Sir Edw. Temperley

    O'Brien, James F. X. (Cork)

    Woodhouse, Sir J. T. (Hudders F.

    Griffith, Ellis J.

    O'Connor, James (Wicklow W,

    Yoxall, James Henry

    Hayne, Rt. Hon. Charles Seale-

    O'Connor, T. P. (Liverpool)

    Hazell, Walter

    Oldroyd, Mark

    TELLERS FOR THE NOES—Mr. Herbert Lewis and Mr. William Jones.

    Healy, Timothy M. (N. Louth)

    Palmer, Sir Chas. M. (Durham

    Hedderwick, Thomas Charles H

    Pearson, Sir Weetman D.

    Holland, Wm. H. (York, W. R.)

    Perks, Robert William

    25. Motion made, and Question put, "That a sum, not exceeding £17,641 (including a Supplementary sum of£13,000), 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, 1900, for the Erection,
    Repairs, and Maintenance of Public Buildings in Ireland, for the Maintenance of certain Parks and Public Works, and for the Maintenance of Drainage Works on the River Shannon."
    The Committee divided:—Ayes, 196; Noes, 81. (Division List, No. 345.)

    AYES.

    Aird, John

    Fisher, William Hayes

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

    Allsopp, Hon. George

    Fison, Frederick William

    Murray, Charles J. (Coventry)

    Anson, Sir William Reynell

    Fitz Wygram, General Sir F.

    Murray, Col. Wyndham (Bath)

    Arnold, Alfred

    Flannery, Sir Fortescue

    Newdigate, Francis Alex.

    Atkinson, Right Hon. John

    Flower, Ernest

    Nicholson, William Graham

    Bagot, Capt. Josceline FitzRoy

    Foster, Harry S. (Suffolk)

    Nicol, Donald Ninian

    Balfour, Rt. Hon Grld W. (Leeds

    Fry, Lewis

    Northcote, Hon. Sir H. Stafford

    Banbury, Frederick George

    Galloway, William Johnson

    Orr-Ewing, Charles Lindsay

    Barnes, Frederic Gorell

    Gedge, Sydney

    Parkes, Ebenezer

    Barton, Dunbar Plunket

    Gibbons, J. Lloyd

    Pierpoint, Robert

    Bathurst, Hon. A. Benjamin

    Gibbs, Hn. A. G. H. (City of Lon.

    Pollock, Harry Frederick

    Beach, Rt. Hn. Sir M. H. (Bristol)

    Gibbs, Hon. Vicary (St. Albans)

    Pryce-Jones, Lt.-Col. Edward

    Bentinck, Lord Henry C.

    Giles, Charles Tyrrell

    Purvis, Robert

    Bethell, Commander

    Gilliat, John Saunders

    Rasch, Major Frederic Carne

    Bhownaggree, Sir M. M.

    Goldsworthy, Major-General

    Richards, Henry Charles

    Bigwood, James

    Gordon, Hon. John Edward

    Ridley, Rt Hon Sir Matthew W.

    Blundell, Colonel Henry

    Gorst, Rt. Hon. Sir J. Eldon

    Ritchie, Rt. Hon. Charles T.

    Bond, Edward

    Goschen, Rt Hn G J (St George's)

    Robertson, Herbert (Hackney)

    Boscawen, Arthur Griffth-

    Goulding, Edward Alfred

    Rollitt, Sir Albert Kaye

    Boulnois, Edmund

    Gray, Ernest (West Ham)

    Round, James

    Bousfield, William Robert

    Greene, H. D. (Shrewsbury)

    Russell, T. W. (Tyrone)

    Brassey, Albert

    Greene, W. Raymond-(Cambs.

    Ryder, John Herbert Dudley

    Brodrick, Rt. Hon. St. John

    Greville, Hon. Ronald

    Sandys, Lieut-Col. Thomas M.

    Bullard, Sir Harry

    Gull, Sir Cameron

    Savory, Sir Joseph

    Burdett-Coutts, W.

    Hanbury, Rt. Hn. Robert Wm.

    Scoble, Sir Andrew Richard

    Butcher, John George

    Hermon-Hodge, Rbt. Trotter

    Seeley, Charles Hilton

    Campbell, J. H. M. (Dublin)

    Hill, Rt. Hn. A. Staveley (Staffs

    Sharpe, William Edward T.

    Carlile, William Walter

    Hoare, Edw. Brodie (Hampstd.

    Sidebotham, J. W. (Cheshire)

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

    Houldsworth, Sir Wm. Henry

    Sidebottom, William (Derbys.

    Cayzer, Sir Charles William

    Howard, Joseph

    Simeon, Sir Barrington

    Cecil, Evelyn (Hertford, East)

    Hozier, Hon. J. Henry Cecil

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

    Cecil, Lord Hugh (Greenwich)

    Jackson, Rt. Hon. Wm. Lawies

    Spencer, Ernest

    Chaloner, Captain R. G. W.

    Jeffreys, Arthur Frederick

    Stanley, Hon. A. (Ormskirk)

    Chamberlain, Rt. Hon. J.(Birm.

    Jenkins, Sir John Jones

    Stanley, Edw. Jas. (Somerset)

    Chamberlain, J. A. (Worc'r)

    Jessel, Capt. Herbert Merton

    Stanley, Lord (Lancs.)

    Chaplin, Rt. Hon. Henry

    Johnston, William (Belfast)

    Stephens, Henry Charles

    Charrington, Spencer

    Keswick, William

    Stirling-Maxwell, Sir John M.

    Chelsea, Viscount

    Kimber, Henry

    Stone, Sir Benjamin

    Clare, Octavius Leigh

    Knowles, Lees

    Strauss, Arthur

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

    Lawrence, Sir E. Durning-(Corn

    Strutt, Hon. Charles Hedley

    Coghill, Douglas Harry

    Lawrence, Wm. F. (Liverpool

    Sturt, Hon. Humphry Napier

    Cohen, Benjamin Louis

    Lawson, John Grant (Yorks)

    Sutherland, Sir Thomas

    Collings, Rt. Hon. Jesse

    Lea, Sir Thos. (Londonderry)

    Talbot, Rt. Hn. J. G. (Ox. Univ.)

    Colston, Chas. Edw. H. Athole

    Leigh-Bennett, Henry Currie

    Thornton, Percy M.

    Cook, Fred. Lucas (Lambeth)

    Llewelyn, Sir Dillwyn-(Sw'nsea

    Tollemache, Henry James

    Cooke, C. W.R. (Hereford)

    Lockwood, Lt.-Col. A. R.

    Tomlinson, Wm. E. Murray

    Corwallis, Fiennes Stanley W.

    Loder, Gerald W. Erskine

    Tritton, Charles Ernest

    Cox, Irwin Edward Bainbridge

    Long, Col. C. W. (Evesham)

    Usborne, Thomas

    Cripps, Charles Alfred

    Long, Rt. Hn Walter (Liverpool

    Valentia, Viscount

    Curzon, Viscount

    Lorne, Marquess of

    Vincent, Col. Sir C. E. Howard

    Dalbiac, Colonel Philip Hugh

    Lowe, Francis William

    Wanklyn, James Leslie

    Dalkeith, Earl of

    Lowles, John

    Warde, Lieut.-Col. C. E.(Kent)

    Davies, Sir H. D. (Chatham)

    Macartney, W. G. Ellison

    Whitmore, Charles Algernon

    Dickson-Poynder, Sir John P.

    Macdona, John Cumming

    Williams, J. Powell-(Birm.)

    Disraeli, Coningsby Ralph

    Maclure, Sir John William

    Wilson, J. W. (Worcestersh. N.

    Donkin, Richard Sim

    M'Arthur, Charles (Liverpool)

    Wilson-Todd, Wm. H. (Yorks.)

    Doughty, George

    Malcolm, Ian

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

    Douglas, Rt. Hon. A. Akers-

    Maple, Sir John Blundell

    Wortley, Rt. Hon. C. B. Stuart-

    Doxford, William Theodore

    Mellor, Colonel (Lancashire)

    Wylie, Alexander

    Drucker, A.

    Mildmay, Francis Bingham

    Wyndham, George

    Duncombe, Hon. Hubert V.

    Milward, Colonel Victor

    Wyndham-Quin, Major W. H.

    Dyke, Rt. Hn. Sir William Hart

    Monk, Charles James

    Wyvill, Marmaduke D'Arcy

    Fellowes, Hon. Ailwyn Edw.

    Moon, Edward Robert Pacy

    Young; Commander (Berks, E.)

    Field, Admiral (Eastbourne)

    Moore, William (Antrim, N.)

    Finch, George H.

    More, Robert.(Shropshire)

    TELLERS FOR THE AYES—

    Finlay, Sir Robert Bannatyne

    Morrell, George Herbert

    Sir William Walrond and Mr. Anstruther.

    Firbank, Joseph Thomas

    Morton, A. H. A. (Deptford)

    NOES.

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

    Atherley-Jones, L.

    Billson, Alfred

    Asher, Alexander

    Austin, M. (Limerick, W.)

    Bolton, Thomas Dolling

    Ashton, Thomas Gair

    Balfour, Rt Hn. J. Blair (Clackm

    Broadhurst, Henry

    1384

    1385

    Burns, John

    Kearley, Hudson E.

    Pickersgill, Edward Hare

    Caldwell, James

    Kilbride, Denis

    Pirie, Duncan V.

    Cameron, Sir Charles (Gl'sg'w)

    Lawson, Sir W. (Cumberland)

    Provand, Andrew Dryburgh

    Cawley, Frederick

    Lewis, John Herbert

    Rickett, J. Compton

    Channing, Francis Allston

    Lloyd-George, David

    Roberts, John Bryn (Eifion)

    Crilly, Daniel

    Macaleese, Daniel

    Roberts, J. H. (Denbighsh.)

    Curran, Thomas B. (Donegal)

    MacDonnell, Dr. M A (Queen'sC

    Robson, William Snowdon

    Curran, Thomas (Sligo, S.)

    M'Dermott, Patrick

    Runciman, Walter

    Dalziel, James Henry

    M'Ewan, William

    Sinclair, Capt. J. (Forfarshire)

    Dilke, Rt. Hon. Sir Charles

    M'Leod, John

    Souttar, Robinson

    Dillon, John

    Maddison, Fred.

    Steadman, William Charles

    Fenwick, Charles

    Maden, John Henry

    Trevelyan, Charles Phillips

    Fowler, Rt. Hon. Sir Henry

    Mendl, Sigismund Ferdinand

    Ure, Alexander

    Gourley, Sir Edw. Temperley

    Morgan, W. Pritchard (Merth.)

    Wallace, Robert

    Griffith, Ellis J.

    Morton, Edw. J. C.(Devonport)

    Walton, J. Lawson (Leeds, S.)

    Harwood, George

    Moss, Samuel

    Warner, Thos. Courtenay T.

    Hayne, Rt. Hn. Chas. Seale-

    Moulton, John Fletcher

    Whiteley, George (Stockport)

    Hazell, Walter

    Norton, Capt. Cecil William

    Whittaker, Thomas Palmer

    Healy, Timothy M. (N. Louth)

    O'Brien, James F. X. (Cork)

    Williams, J. Carvell (Notts.)

    Hedderwick, Thomas C. H.

    O'Connor, Arthur (Donegal)

    Wilson, J. H. (Middlesbrough)

    Holland, W. H. (York, W. R.)

    O'Connor, James (Wicklow, W.

    Woodhouse, Sir JT. (Hudd'field

    Horniman, Frederick John

    O'Connor, T. P. (Liverpool)

    Yoxall, James Henry

    Jameson, Major J. Eustace

    Oldroyd, Mark

    TELLERS FOR THE NOES—Captain Donelan and Mr. Donal Sullivan.

    Joicey, Sir James

    Palmer, Sir C. M. (Durham)

    Jones, William (Carnarvonsh.)

    Perks, Robert William

    CLASS II.
    26. Motion made, and Question put, That a sum, not exceeding £6,099, 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, 1900, for the Salaries and Expenses of the Offices of the House of Lords."
    The Committee divided:—Ayes, 198; Noes, 81. (Division List, No. 346.)

    AYES.

    Aird, John

    Cohen, Benjamin Louis

    Gilliat, John Saunders

    Allsopp, Hon. George

    Collings, Rt. Hon. Jesse

    Goldsworthy, Major General

    Anson, Sir William Reynell

    Colston, Chas. Edw. H. Athole

    Gordon, Hon. John Edward

    Arnold, Alfred

    Cook, Fred Lucas (Lambeth)

    Gorst, Rt. Hn. Sir John Eldon

    Atkinson, Right Hon. John

    Cooke, C. W. R. (Hereford)

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

    Bagot, Capt. J. FitzRoy

    Cornwallis, Fiennes Stanley W.

    Goulding, Edward Alfred

    Balfour, Rt. Hn. G. W. (Leeds)

    Cox, Irwin Edward Bainbridge

    Gray, Ernest (West Ham)

    Banbury, Frederick George

    Cripps, Charles Alfred

    Greene, H. D. (Shrewsbury)

    Barnes, Frederic Gorell

    Curzon, Viscount

    Greene, W. Raymond-(Cambs.

    Barton, Dunbar Plunket

    Dalbiac, Col. Philip Hugh

    Greville, Hon. Ronald

    Bathurst, Hon. A. Benjamin

    Dalkeith, Earl of

    Gull, Sir Cameron

    Beach, Rt. Hn. Sir M. H. (Bristol

    Davies, Sir H. D. (Chatham)

    Hanbury, Rt. Hon. Rbt. Wm.

    Bentinck, Lord Henry C.

    Dickson-Poynder, Sir John P.

    Hermon-Hodge, R. Trotter

    Bethell, Commander

    Disraeli, Coningsby Ralph

    Hill, Rt Hon A Staveley (Staffs)

    Bhownaggree, Sir M. M.

    Donkin, Richard Sim

    Hoare, E. B. (Hampstead)

    Bigwood, James

    Doughty, George

    Houldsworth, Sir Wm. H.

    Blundell, Colonel Henry

    Douglas, Rt. Hon. A. Akers-

    Howard, Joseph

    Boscawen, Arthur Griffith-

    Doxford, William Theodore

    Hozier, Hon. J. H. Cecil

    Boulnois, Edmund

    Drucker, A.

    Jackson, Rt. Hn. Wm. Lawies

    Bousfield, William Robert

    Duncombe, Hon. Hubert V.

    Jeffreys, Arthur Frederick

    Brassey, Albert

    Dyke, Rt. Hon. Sir W. Hart-

    Jenkins, Sir John Jones

    Brodrick, Rt. Hon. St. John

    Fellowes, Hon. Ailwyn Edward

    Jessel, Captain H. Merton

    Bullard, Sir Harry

    Field, Admiral (Eastbourne)

    Johnston, William (Belfast)

    Burdett-Coutts, W.

    Finch, George H.

    Keswick, William

    Buteher, John George

    Finlay, Sir Robert Bannatyne

    Kimber, Henry

    Campbell, J. H. M. (Dublin)

    Firbank, Joseph Thomas

    Knowles, Lees

    Carlile, William Walter

    Fisher, William Hayes

    Lawrence, Sir E. Durning-(Corn

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

    F'ison, Frederick William

    Lawrence, Wm F. (Liverpool

    Cayzer, Sir Charles William

    Fitz Wygram, General Sir F.

    Lawson, John Grant (Yorks.)

    Cecil, Evelyn (Hertford, East)

    Flannery, Sir Fortescue

    Lea, Sir Thomas (Londond'rry

    Cecil, Lord Hugh (Greenwich)

    Flower, Ernest

    Leigh-Bennett, Henry Currie

    Chaloner, Captain R. G. W.

    Foster, Harry S. (Suffolk)

    Llewelyn Sir Dillwyn-(Swansea

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

    Fowler, Rt. Hon. Sir Henry

    Lockwood, Lt.-Col. A. R.

    Chamberlain, J. Austen (Wor.)

    Fry, Lewis

    Loder, Gerald Walter Erskine

    Chaplin, Right Hon. Henry

    Galloway, William Johnson

    Long, Col. Charles W. (Evesham

    Charrington, Spencer

    Gedge, Sydney

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

    Chelsea, Viscount

    Gibbons, J. Lloyd

    Lorne, Marquess of

    Clare, Octavius Leigh

    Gibbs, Hn. A. G. H. (City Lond.)

    Lowe, Francis William

    Cochrane, Hon. Thos. H. A. E.

    Gibbs, Hn. Vicary (St. Albans

    Lowles, John

    Coghill, Douglas Harry

    Giles, Charles Tyrrell

    Macartney, W. G. Ellison

    Macdona, John Gumming

    Purvis, Robert

    Strutt, Hon. Charles Hedley

    Maclure, Sir John William

    Rasch, Major Frederic Carne Richard, Henry Charles

    Sturt, Hon. Humphry Napier

    M'Arthur, Charles (Liverpool)

    Richard, Henry Charles

    Sutherland, Sir Thomas

    Malcolm, Ian

    Ridley, Rt. Hn. Sir Matthew W.

    Talbot, Rt. Hon. J. G. (Oxf'd U.

    Manners, Lord Edward W. J.

    Ritchie, Rt. Hn. Chas. Thomson

    Thornton, Percy M.

    Maple, Sir John Blundell

    Robertson, Herbert (Hackney)

    Tollemache, Henry James

    Mellor, Colonel (Lancashire)

    Rollit, Sir Albert Kaye

    Tomlinson, Wm. Edw. Murray

    Mildmay, Francis Bingham

    Round, James

    Tritton, Charles Ernest

    Milward, Colonel Victor

    Russell, T. W. (Tyrone)

    Usborne, Thomas

    Monk, Charles James

    Ryder, John Herbert Dudley

    Valentia, Viscount

    Moon, Edward Robert Pacy

    Sandys, Lt.-Col. Thos. Myles

    Vincent, Col. Sir C. E. Howard

    Moore, William (Antrim), N.)

    Savory, Sir Joseph

    Wanklyn, James Leslie

    More, R. Jasper (Shropshire)

    Scoble, Sir Andrew Richard

    Warde, Lieut.-Col. C. E. (Kent)

    Morrell, George Herbert

    Seely, Charles Hilton

    Whitmore, Charles Algernon

    Morton, Arthur H.A.(Deptford

    Sharpe, William Edward T.

    Williams, Jos. Powell-(Birm.)

    Murray Rt. Hon. A. G. (Bute

    Sidebotham, J. W. (Cheshire)

    Wilson, J. W. (Worcestersh., N.

    Murray, Charles J. (Coventry)

    Sidebottom, Wm. (Derbysh.)

    Wilson-Todd, Wm. H. (Yorks.)

    Murray, Col. Wyndham(Bath)

    Simeon, Sir Barrington

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

    Newdigate, Francis Alexander

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

    Wortley, Rt.Hn. C. B. Stuart-

    Nicholson, William Graham

    Spencer, Ernest

    Wylie, Alexander

    Nicol, Donald Ninian

    Stanley, Hn. Arthur (Ormskirk

    Wyndham, George

    Northcote, Hon. Sir H. Stafford

    Stanley, Edw. Jas. (Somerset)

    Wyndham-Quin, Major W. H.

    Orr-Ewing, Charles Lindsay

    Stanley, Lord (Lancs.)

    Wyvill, Marmaduke D'Arcy

    Parkes, Ebenezer

    Stephens, Henry Charles

    Young, Commander (Berks, E.

    Pierpoint, Robert

    Stirling-Maxwell, Sir John M.

    TELLERS FOR THE AYES—Sir William Walrond and Mr. Anstruther.

    Pollock, Harry Frederick

    Stone, Sir Benjamin

    Pryce-Jones, Lt.-Col. Edward

    Strauss, Arthur.

    NOES.

    Abraham, William (Cork, N. E.

    Healy, Timothy M. (N. Louth)

    Palmer, Sir Chas. M. (Durham)

    Asher, Alexander

    Hedderwick, Thomas Charles H

    Pearson, Sir Weetman D.

    Ashton, Thomas Gair

    Holland, W. H. (York, W. R.)

    Perks, Robert William

    Atherley.Jones, L.

    Horniman, Frederick John

    Pickersgill, Edward Hare

    Austin, M. (Limberick, W.)

    Jameson, Major J. Eustace

    Provand, Andrew Dryburgh

    Balfour, Rt. Hon. J. B. (Clackm.

    Joicey, Sir James

    Rickett, J. Compton

    Billson, Alfred

    Jones, William (Carnarvonsh.)

    Roberts, John Bryn (Eifion)

    Bolton, Thomas Dolling

    Kearley, Hudson E.

    Roberts, John H. (Denbighs.)

    Broadhurst, Henry

    Kilbride, Denis

    Robson, William Snowdon

    Burns, John

    Lawson Sir Wilfrid (Cumb'land

    Runciman, Walter

    Caldwell, James

    Lewis, John Herbert

    Sinclair, Capt. John (Forfarsh.

    Cameron, Sir Charles (Glasgow

    Lloyd-George, David

    Souttar, Robinson

    Causton, Richard Knight

    Macaleese, Daniel

    Steadman, William Charles

    Cawley, Frederick

    MacDonnell, Dr. M. A. (Qn'sC.)

    Sullivan, Donal (Westmeath).

    Channing, Francis Allston

    M'Dermott, Patrick

    Trevelyan, Charles Philips

    Crilly, Daniel

    M'Ewan, William

    Ure, Alexander

    Curran, Thomas, B. (Donegal)

    M'Leod, John

    Wallace, Robert

    Curran, Thomas (Sligo, S.)

    Maddison, Fred.

    Walton, J. Lawson (Leeds, S.)

    Dalziel, James Henry

    Maden, John Henry

    Warner, Thomas Courtenay T.

    Dilke, Rt. Hon. Sir Charles

    Mendl, Sigismund Ferdinand

    Whiteley, (George (Stockport)

    Dillon, John

    Morgan, W. P. (Merthyr)

    Whittaker, Thomas Palmer

    Donelan, Captain A.

    Morton, Edw. J. C. (Devonport)

    Williams, J. Carvell (Notts.)

    Fenwick, Charles

    Moss, Samuel

    Wilson, Jos. H. (Middlesbrough

    Gourley, Sir Edward Temperley

    Moulton, John Fletcher

    Woodhouse, Sir J. T. (Huddersf.

    Griffith, Ellis J.

    O'Connor, Arthur (Donegal)

    Yoxall, James Henry

    Harwood, George

    O'Connor, James (Wricklow, W

    TELLERS FOR THE NOES—Captain Norton and. Mr. Pirie.

    Hayne, Rt Hn. Charles Seale-

    O'Connor, T. P. (Liverpool).

    Hazell, Walter

    Olroyd, Mark

    27. £15,269, to complete the sum for House of Commons Offices.
    28. £59,300, to complete the sum for the Treasury and Subordinate Departments.
    29. Motion made, and Question put, "That a sum, not exceeding £96,868, 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, 1900, for the Salaries and Expenses of the Office of Her Majesty's. Secretary of State for the Home Department and Subordinate Offices."
    The Committee divided:—Ayes, 204;Noes, 74. (Division List, No. 347.)

    AYES.

    Aird, John

    Asher, Alexander

    Balfour, Rt Hn Gerald W (Leeds

    Allsopp, Hon. George

    Atkinson, Rt. Hon. John

    Balfour, Rt Hn J. Blair (Clackm.

    Anson, Sir William Reynell

    Bagot, Capt. Josceline FitzRoy

    Banbury, Frederick George

    Arnold, Alfred

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

    Barnes, Frederic Gorell

    Barton, Dunbar Plunket

    Fry, Lewis

    Murray, Charles J. (Coventry)

    Bathurst, Hon. Allen B.

    Galloway, William Johnson

    Murray, Col. Wyndham (Bath)

    Beach, Rt, Hn. Sir M. H. (Bristol

    Gedge, Sydney

    Newdigate, Francis Alexander

    Bentinck, Lord Henry C.

    Gibbons, J Lloyd

    Nicholson, William Graham

    Bethell, Commander

    Gibbs, Hn. A. G. H. (City of Lon.

    Nicol, Donald Ninian

    Bhownaggree, Sir M. M.

    Gibbs, Hon. V. (St. Albans)

    Northcote, Hn. Sir H. Stafford

    Bigwood, James

    Giles, Charles Tyrrell

    Orr-Ewing, Charles Lindsay

    Blundell, Colonel Henry

    Gilliat, John Saunders

    Parkes, Ebenezer

    Bond, Edward

    Goldsworthy, Major-General

    Pierpoint, Robert

    Boscawen. Arthur Griffith-

    Gordon, Hon. John Edward

    Pollock, Harry Frederick

    Boulnois, Edmund

    Gorst, Rt. Hon. Sir J. Eldon

    Pryce-Jones, Lt.-Col. Edward

    Bousfield, William Robert

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

    Purvis, Robert

    Brassey, Albert

    Goulding, Edward Alfred

    Rasch, Major Frederic Carne

    Brodrick, Rt. Hon. St. John

    Gray, Ernest (West Ham)

    Richards, Henry Charles

    Bullard, Sir Harry

    Green, H. D. (Shrewsbury)

    Ridley, Rt. Hon Sir Matthew W

    Burdett-Coutts. W.

    Greene, W. Raymond-(Cambs.)

    Ritchie, Rt. Hon Chas. Thomson

    Butcher, John George

    Greville, Hon. Ronald

    Roberts, John Bryn (Eifion)

    Campbell. J. H. M. (Dublin)

    Gull, Sir Cameron

    Robertson, Herbert (Hackney)

    Carlile, William Walter

    Hanbury, Rt. Hon. R. Wm.

    Rollitt, Sir Albert Kaye

    Causton, Richard Knight

    Hedderwick, Thomas C. H.

    Round, James

    Cavendish, V. C. W. (Derbysh.

    Hermon-Hodge, Robt. Trotter

    Russell, T. W. (Tyrone)

    Cayzer, Sir Charles William

    Hill, Rt. Hn. A. Staveley (Staffs)

    Ryder, John Herbert Dudley

    Cecil, Evelyn (Hertford, East)

    Hoare, Ed. Brodie (Hampstead)

    Sandys, Lieut.-Col. T. Myles

    Cecil, Lord Hugh (Greenwich)

    Houldsworth, Sir Wm. Henry

    Savory, Sir Joseph

    Chaloner, Captain R. G. W.

    Howard, Joseph

    Scoble, Sir Andrew Richard

    Chamberlain, J. Austen(Worc.

    Hozier, Hon. James H. Cecil

    Seely, Charles Hilton

    Chaplin, Rt. Hon. Henry

    Jackson, Rt. Hon. W. Lawies

    Sharpe, William Edward T.

    Charrington, Spencer

    Jeffreys, Arthur Frederick

    Sidebotham, J. W. (Cheshire)

    Chelsea, Viscount

    Jenkins, Sir John Jones

    Sidebottom, Wm. (Derbyshire)

    Clare, Octavius Leigh

    Jessel, Capt. Herbert Merton

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

    Cochrane, Hon. Thos. H. A.E.

    Johnston, William (Belfast)

    Spencer, Ernest

    Coghill, Douglas Harry

    Joicey, Sir James

    Stanley, Hon. A. (Ormskirk)

    Cohen, Benjamin Louis

    Keswick, William

    Stanley, E. J. (Somerset)

    Collings, Rt. Hon. Jesse

    Kimber, Henry

    Stanley, Lord (Lancs.)

    Colston, Chas. Edw. H. Athole

    Knowles, Lees

    Stephens, Henry Charles

    Cook, Fred. Lucas (Lambeth)

    Lawrence, Sir E. Durning-(Corn

    Stirling-Maxwell, Sir John M.

    Cooke, C. W. Radcliffe(Heref'd)

    Lawrence, Wm. F. (Liverp'l)

    Stone, Sir Benjamin

    Cornwallis, Fiennes Stanley W.

    Lawson, John Grant (Yorks.)

    Strauss, Arthur

    Cox, Irwin Edward Bainbridge

    Lea, Sir Thos. (Londonderry)

    Strutt, Hon. Charles Hedley

    Cripps, Charles Alfred

    Leigh-Bennett, Henry Currie

    Sturt, Hon. Humphry Napier

    Curzon, Viscount

    Llewelyn, Sir Dillwyn-(Swans.

    Sutherland, Sir Thomas

    Dalbiac, Colonel Philip Hugh

    Lock Wood, Lieut.-Col. A. R.

    Talbot, Rt Hn J.G.(Oxf'd Univ.

    Dalkeith, Earl of

    Loder, Gerald Walter Erskine

    Thornton, Percy M.

    Davies, Sir H. D. (Chatham)

    Long, Col. Charles W. (Evesham

    Tollemache, Henry James

    Dickson-Poynder, Sir J. P,

    Long, Rt. Hn. Walter (Liver'l)

    Tomlinson, Wm. Edward M.

    Disraeli, Coningsby Ralph

    Lorne, Marquess of

    Tritton, Charles Ernest

    Donkin, Richard Sim

    Lowe, Francis William

    Usborne, Thomas

    Doughty, George

    Lowles, John

    Valentia, Viscount

    Douglas, Rt. Hon. A. Akers-

    Macartney, W. G. Ellison

    Vincent, Col. Sir C. E. Howard

    Doxford, William Theodore

    Maedona, John Cumming

    Wanklyn, James Leslie

    Drucker, A.

    Maclure, Sir John William

    Warde, Lieut.-Col. C. E. (Kent)

    Duncombe, Hon. Hubert V.

    M'Arthur, Charles (Liverpool

    Whitmore, Charles Algernon

    Dyke, Rt. Hon. Sir W. Hart

    Malcolm, Ian

    Williams, J. Powell-(Birm.)

    Fellowes, Hon. Ailwyn Edwd.

    Manners, Lord Edward W. J.

    Wilson,. J. W. (Worcestersh., N.

    Field, Admiral (Eastbourne)

    Maple, Sir John Blundell

    Wilson-Todd, Wm. H.(Yorks.)

    Finch, George H.

    Mellor, Colonel (Lancashire)

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

    Finlay, Sir Robert Bannatyne

    Mildmay, Francis Bingham

    Wortley, Rt. Hon. C. B. Stuart—

    Firbank, Joseph Thomas

    Milward, Colonel Victor

    Wylie, Alexander

    Fisher, William Hayes

    Monk, Charles James

    Wyndham, George

    Fison, Frederick William

    Moon, Edward Robert Pacy

    Wyndham-Quin, Major W. H.

    FitzWygram, General Sir F.

    Moore, William (Antrium, N.)

    Wyvill, Marmaduke D'Arcy

    Flannery, Sir Fortescue

    More, Robt. Jasper (Shropsh.)

    Young, Commander (Berks, E.)

    Flower, Ernest

    Morrell, George Herbert

    TELLERS FOR THE AYES—Sir William Walrond and Mr. Anstruther.

    Foster, Harry S. (Suffolk)

    Morton, Arthur H. A. (Dept'd

    Fowler, Rt. Hon. Sir Henry

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

    NOES.

    Abraham, Williaim (Cork, N. E.

    Cameron, Sir Chas. (Glasgow)

    Donelan, Captain A.

    Ashton, Thomas Gair

    Cawley, Frederick

    Fenwick, Charles

    Atherley-Jones, L.

    Channing, Francis Allston

    Gourley, Sir E. Temperley

    Austin, M. (Limerick, W.)

    Crilly, Daniel

    Griffith, Ellis J.

    Billson, Alfred

    Curran, Thos. B. (Donegal)

    Harwood, George

    Bolton, Thomas Dolling

    Curran, Thomas (Sligo, S.)

    Hayne, Rt. Hon. Chas. Seale—

    Broadhurst, Henry

    Dalziel, James Henry

    Hazell, Walter

    Burns, John

    Dilke, Rt. Hon. Sir Charles

    Healy, Timothy M. (N. Louth

    Caldwell, James

    Dillon, John

    Holland, Wm. H. (York. W. R.

    1390

    1391

    Horniman, Frederick John

    Morton, E. J. C. (Devonport)

    Steadman, William Charles

    Jameson, Major J. Eustace

    Moss, Samuel

    Sullivan, Donal (Westmeath)

    Jones, Wm. (Carnarvonshire)

    Moulton, John Fletcher

    Trevelyan, Charles Philips

    Kearley, Hudson E.

    O'Connor, Arthur (Donegal)

    Ure, Alexander

    Kilbride, Denis

    O'Connor, J. (Wicklow, W.)

    Wallace, Robert

    Lawson, Sir Wilfrid(Cumb'land

    O'Connor, T. P. (Liverpool)

    Walton, J. Lawson (Leeds, S.)

    Lewis, John Herbert

    Oldroyd, Mark

    Warner, Thomas Courtenay T.

    Lloyd-George, David

    Palmer, Sir C. M. (Durham)

    Whiteley, George (Stockport)

    Macaleese, Daniel

    Pearson, Sir Weetman D.

    Whittaker, Thomas Palmer

    MacDonnell, Dr. M. A. (Q'n's C.

    Pickersgill, Edward Hare

    Williams, J. Carvell (Notts.)

    M'Dermott, Patrick

    Provand, Andrew Dryburgh

    Wilson, J. H. (Middlesbrough)

    M'Ewan, William

    Rickett, J. Compton

    Woodhouse, Sir J. T. (Huddrstld

    M'Leod, John

    Roberts, John H. (Denbighs)

    Yoxall, James Henry

    Maddison, Fred.

    Robson, William Snowdon

    Maden, John Henry

    Runciman, Walter

    TELLERS FOR THE NOES.—Captain Norton and Mr. Pirie.

    Mendl, Sigismund Ferdinand

    Sinclair, Capt. J. (Forfarshire

    Morgan, W. P. (Merthyr)

    Souttar, Robinson

    30. Motion made, and Question put, "That a sum, not exceeding £49,482, 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, 1900, for the Salaries and Expenses of the Department of Her Majesty's Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs."
    The Committee divided:—Ayes, 197; Noes, 77. (Division List, No. 348.)

    AYES.

    Aird, John

    Cripps, Charles Alfred

    Houldsworth, Sir William H.

    Allsopp, Hon. George

    Curzon, Viscount

    Howard, Joseph

    Anson, Sir William Reynell

    Dalbiac, Colonel Philip Hugh

    Hozier, Hon. James H. Cecil

    Arnold, Alfred

    Dalkeith, Karl of

    Jackson, Rt. Hon. Wm. Lawies

    Atkinson, Rt. Hon. John

    Davies, Sir Horatio D (Chath'm

    Jeffreys, Arthur Frederick

    Bagot, Capt. Josceline FitzRoy

    Dickson-Poynder, Sir John P.

    Jenkins, Sir John Jones

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

    Disraeli, Coningsby Ralph

    Jessell, Capt. Herbert Merton

    Balfour, Rt. Hn. G. W. (Leeds)

    Donkin, Richard Sim

    Johnston, William (Belfast)

    Banbury, Frederick George

    Doughty, George

    Keswick, William

    Barnes, Frederic Gorell

    Douglas, Rt. Hon. A. Akers-

    Kimber, Henry

    Barton, Dunbar Plunket

    Doxford, William Theodore

    Knowles, Lees

    Bathurst. Hon. A. Benjamin

    Drucker, A.

    Lawrence, Sir E. Durning-(Corn

    Beach, Rt. Hn. Sir M. H. (Bristol

    Duncombe, Hon. Hubert V.

    Lawrence, Wm. F. (Liverpool)

    Bentinck, Lord Henry C.

    Dyke, Rt. Hon. Sir W. Hart

    Lawson, John Grant (Yorks.)

    Bethell, Commander

    Fellowes, Hon. Ailwyn Edw.

    Lea, Sir Thomas (Loudonderry)

    Bhownaggree, Sir M. M.

    Field, Admiral (Eastbourne)

    Leigh-Bennett, Henry Currie

    Bigwood, James

    Finch, George H.

    Llewelyn. Sir Dillwyn-(Swans'a

    Blundell, Colonel Henry

    Finlay, Sir Robert Bannatyne

    Lockwood, Lt.-Col. A. R.

    Bond, Edward

    Firbank, Joseph Thomas

    Loder, Gerald Walter Erskine

    Boseawen, Arthur Griffith-

    Fisher, William Hayes

    Long, Col. Chas. W.(Evesham)

    Boulnois, Edmund

    Fison, Frederick William

    Long, Rt. Hn. Walter (Liverpool

    Boasfield, William Robert

    FitzWygram, General Sir F.

    Lorne, Marquess of

    Brassey, Albert

    Flannery, Sir Fortescue

    Lowe, Francis William

    Brodrick, Rt. Hon. St. John

    Flower. Ernest

    Lowles, John

    Bullird, Sir Harry

    Foster, Harry S. (Suffolk)

    Macartney, W. G. Ellison

    Burdett-Coutts, W.

    Fowler, Rt. Hon. Sir Henry

    Macdona, John cumming

    Butcher, John George

    Fry, Lewis

    Maclure, Sir John William

    Campbell, J. H. M. (Dublin)

    Galloway, William Johnson

    M'Arthur, Charles (Liverpool)

    Carlile, William Walter

    Gedge, Sydney

    Malcolm, Ian

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

    Gibbons, J. Lloyd

    Manners, Lord Edward Wm. J.

    Cayzer, Sir Charles William

    Gibbs, Hn. A. G. H. (City of Lon.

    Maple, Sir John Blundell

    Cecil, Evelyn (Hertford, E.)

    Gibbs, Hn. Vicary (St. Albans

    Mellor, Colonel (Lancashire)

    Cecil, Lord Hugh (Greenwich)

    Giles, Charles Tyrrell

    Mildmay, Francis Bingham

    Chaloner, Captain R. G. W.

    Gilliat, John Saunders

    Monk, Charles James

    Chamberlain, J. Austen(Worc'r

    Goldsworthy, Major-General

    Moon, Edward Robert Pacy

    Chaplin, Rt. Hon. Henry

    Gordon, Hon. John Edward

    Moore, William (Antrim, N.)

    Charrington, Spencer

    Gorst, Rt. Hon. Sir J. Eldon

    More, Rbt. Jasper (Shropshire)

    Chelsea, Viscount

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

    Morrell, George Herbert

    Clare, Octavius Leigh

    Goulding, Edward Alfred

    Morton, A. H. A. (Deptford)

    Cochrane, Hn. T. H. A. E.

    Gray, Ernest (West Ham)

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

    Coghill, Douglas, Harry

    Green, H. D. (Shrewsbury)

    Murray, Chas. J. (Coventry)

    Cohen, Benjamin Louis

    Greene, W. Raymond-(Cambs.)

    Murray, Col. Wyndham (Bath)

    Collings, Rt. Hon. Jesse

    Greville, Hon. Ronald

    Newdigate, Francis Alexander

    Colston, Chas. Edw. H. Athole

    Gull, Sir Cameron

    Nicholson, William Graham

    Cook, Fred. Lucas (Lambeth)

    Hanbury, Rt Hon. R. Wm.

    Nicol, Donald Ninian

    Cooke, C.W. Radcliffe (Heref'd

    Hermon-Hodge, Robt. Trotter

    Northcote, Hon. Sir H. Stafford

    Cornwallis, Fiennes Stanley W

    Hill. Rt. Hn. A. Staveley (Staffs

    Orr-Ewing Charles Lindsay

    Cox, lrwin Edw. Bainbridge

    Hoare, Ed. Brodie (Hampstead

    Parkes, Ebenezer

    Pierpoint, Robert

    Sidebottom, William (Derbys.)

    Valentia, Viscount

    Pollock, Harry Frederick

    Simeon, Sir Barrington

    Vincent, Col. Sir C. E. H.

    Pryce-Jones, Lt.-Col. Edward

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

    Wanklyn, James Leslie

    Purvis, Robert

    Spencer, Ernest

    Warde, Lt.-Col. C.E. (Kent)

    Rasch, Major Frederick Carne

    Stanley, Edward J. (Somerset)

    Whitmore, Charles Algernon

    Richards, Henry Charles

    Stanley, Lord (Lancs.)

    Williams, J. Powell-(Birm.)

    Ridley, Rt. Hon. Sir M. W.

    Stephens, Henry Charles

    Wilson, J. W. (Worcestersh. N.)

    Ritchie, Rt. Hon. C. Thomson

    Stirling-Maxwell, Sir J. M.

    Wilson-Todd, Wm. H. (Yorks.)

    Robertson. Herbert (Hackney)

    Stone, Sir Benjamin

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

    Rollit, Sir Albert Kaye

    Strauss, Arthur

    Wortley, Rt. Hon. C. B. Stuart-

    Round, James

    Strutt, Hon. Charles Hedley

    Wylie, Alexander

    Russell, T. W. (Tyrone)

    Sturt, Hon. Humphry Napier

    Wyndham, George

    Ryder, John Herbert Dudley

    Sutherland, Sir Thomas

    Wyndham-Quin, Major W.H.

    Sandys, Lieut.-Col. T. Myles

    Talbot, Rt. Hn. J. G. (Oxf. Univ.

    Wyvill, Marmaduke D'Arcy

    Savory, Sir Joseph

    Thornton, Percy M.

    Young, Commander (Berks, E.)

    Scobel, Sir Andrew Richard

    Tollemache, Henry James

    Seely, Charles Hilton

    Tomlinson, W. E. Murray

    TELLERS FOR THE AYES—Sir William Walrond and Mr. Anstruther.

    Sharpe, William Edward T.

    Tritton, Charles Ernest

    Sidebotham, J. W. (Cheshire)

    Usborne, Thomas.

    NOES.

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

    Hedderwick, Thomas C. H.

    Palmer, Sir C. M. (Durham)

    Asher, Alexander

    Holland, W. H. (York, W.R.)

    Pearson, Sir Weetman D.

    Ashton, Thomas Gair

    Horniman, Frederick John

    Pickersgill, Edward Hare

    Atherley-Jones, L.

    Jameson, Major J. Eustace

    Rickett, J. Compton

    Austin, M. (Limerick, W.)

    Joicey, Sir James

    Roberts, John Bryn (Eifion)

    Balfour. Rt Hn J. Blair (Clackm.

    Jones, William (Carnarvonsh.

    Roberts, John H. (Denbighsh)

    Billson, Alfred

    Kearley, Hudson E.

    Robson, William (Snowdon)

    Bolton, Thomas Dolling

    Kilbride, Denis

    Runciman, Walter

    Broadhurst, Henry

    Lawson, Sir Wilfrid (Cumb'l'd

    Sinclair, Capt. J. (Forfarshire

    Burns, John

    Lewis, John Herbert

    Souttar, Robinson

    Caldwell, James

    Macaleese, Daniel

    Steadman, William Charles

    Cameron, Sir Charles (Glasgow)

    MacDonnell, Dr M A (Queen'sC)

    Sullivan, Donal (Westmeath)

    Cawley, Frederick

    M'Dermott, Patrick

    Trevelyan, Charles Philips

    Channing, Francis Allston

    M'Ewan, William

    Ure, Alexander

    Crilly, Daniel

    M'Leod, John

    Wallace, Robert

    Curran, Thomas (Sligo, S.)

    Maddison, Fred.

    Walton, John Lawson (Leeds, S.

    Dalziel, James Henry

    Maden, John Henry

    Warner, Thomas Courtenay T.

    Dilke, Rt. Hon. Sir Charles

    Mendl, Sigismund Ferdinand

    Whiteley, George (Stockport)

    Dillon, John

    Morgan, W. P. (Merthyr)

    Whittaker, Thomas Palmer

    Donelan, Captain A.

    Morton, E. J. C. (Devonport)

    Williams, John Carvell (Notts

    Fenwick, Charles

    Moss, Samuel

    Wilson, J. H. (Middlesbrough)

    Gourley, Sir E. Temperley

    Moulton, John Fletcher

    Woodhouse, Sir J T (Huddersf'd

    Harwood, George

    O'Connor, Arthur (Donegal)

    Yoxall, James Henry

    Hayne, Rt. Hon. Chas. Seale-

    O'Connor, James (Wicklow, W.

    TELLERS FOR THE NOES—Captain Norton and Mr. Pirie.

    Hazell, Walter

    O'Connor, T. P. (Liverpool)

    Healy, Timothy M. (N. Louth)

    Oldroyd, Mark

    31. £64,070, to complete the sum for Mercantile Marine Services.
    32 £6, to complete the sum for the Bankruptcy Department of the Board of Trade.
    33. Motion made, and Question put "That a sum, not exceeding £28,919, 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, 1900, for the Salaries and Expenses of the Board of Agriculture, and to pay certain Grants in Aid."
    The Committee divided:—Ayes, 196; Noes, 77. (Division List, No. 349.)

    AYES.

    Aird, John

    Blundell, Colonel Henry

    Chamberlain, J. Austen (Worc'r

    Allsopp, Hon. George

    Bond, Edward

    Chaplin, Rt. Hon. Henry

    Anson, Sir William Reynell

    Boscawen, Arthur Griffith-

    Charrington, Spencer

    Arnold, Alfred

    Boulnois, Edmund

    Chelsea, Viscount

    Atkinson, Rt. Hon. John

    Bousfield, William Robert

    Clare, Octavius Leigh

    Bagot, Capt. Joseline FitzRoy

    Brassey, Albert

    Cochrane, Hon. Thos. H. A. E.

    Balfour, Rt. Hon. A. J. (Manchr'

    Brodrick, Rt. Hon. St. John

    Coghill, Douglas Harry

    Balfour, Rt. Hn. G.W. (Leeds)

    Bullard, Sir Harry

    Cohen, Benjamin Lewis

    Banbury, Frederick George

    Burdett-Coutts, W.

    Collings, Rt. Hon. Jesse

    Barnes, Frederic Gorrell

    Butcher, John George

    Colston, Chas. Ed. H. Athole

    Barton, Dunbar Plunket

    Campbell, J. H. M. (Dublin)

    Cook, Fred. Lucas (Lambeth)

    Bathurst, Hon. Allen Benjamin

    Carlile, William Walter

    Cooke, C. W. Radcliffe (Heref'd)

    Beach. Rt. Hn. Sir M. H. (Bristol

    Cavendish, V. C. W. (Derbysh.

    Cornwalls, Fiennes Stanley W.

    Bentinck, Lord Henry C.

    Cayzer, Sir Charles William

    Cox, Irwin Edward Bainbridge

    Bethell, Commander

    Cecil, Evelyn (Hertford, East)

    Cripps, Charles Alfred

    Bhownaggree, Sir M. M.

    Cecil, Lord Hugh (Greenwich)

    Curzon, Viscount

    Bigwood, James

    Chaloner, Captain R. G. W.

    Dalbiac, Colonel Philip Hugh

    Davies, Sir H. D. (Chatham)

    Johnston, William (Belfast)

    Robertson, Herbert (Hackney)

    Dickson-Poynder, Sir John P.

    Keswick, William

    Rollit, Sir Albert Kaye

    Disraeli, Coningsby Ralph

    Kimber, Henry

    Round, James

    Donkin, Richard Sim

    Knowles, Lees

    Russell, T. W. (Tyrone)

    Doughty, George

    Lawrence, Sir E. Durning-(Corn

    Ryder, John Herbert Dudley

    Douglas, Rt. Hon. A. Akers-

    Lawson, John Grant (Yorks.)

    Sandys, Lt.-Col. Thos. Myles

    Doxford, William Theodore

    Lea, Sir Thomas (Londonderry

    Savory, Sir Joseph

    Drucker, A.

    Leigh-Bennett, Henry Currie

    Seoble, Sir Andrew Richard

    Duncombe. Hon. Hubert V.

    Llewelyn, Sir Dillwyn-(Swans.

    Seely, Charles Hilton

    Dyke, Rt. Hn. Sir William Hart

    Lockwood, Lt.-Col. A. R.

    Sharpe, William Edward T.

    Fellowes, Hon. Ailwyn Edward

    Loder, Gerald Walter Erskine

    Sidebotham, J. W. (Cheshire)

    Field, Admiral (Eastbourne)

    Long, Col. C. W. (Evesham)

    Sidebottom, William (Derbysh.

    Finch, George H.

    Long, Rt. Hn. Walter (Liverpool

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

    Finlay, Sir Robert Bannatyne

    Lorne, Marquess of

    Spencer, Ernest

    Firbank, Joseph Thomas

    Lowe, Francis William

    Stanley, Hon. A. (Ormskirk

    Fisher, William Hayes

    Lowles, John

    Stanley, Edward J. (Somerset)

    Fison, Frederick William

    Macartney, W. G. Ellison

    Stanley, Lord (Lancs.)

    FitzWygram, General Sir F.

    Macdona, John Cumming

    Stephens, Henry Charles

    Flannery, Sir Fortescue

    MacIver, David (Liverpool)

    Stirling-Maxwell, Sir John M.

    Flower, Ernest

    Maclure, Sir John William

    Stone, Sir Benjamin

    Foster, Harry S. (Suffolk)

    M'Arthur, Charles (Liverpool)

    Strauss, Arthur

    Fowler, Rt. Hon. Sir Henry

    Malcolm, Ian

    Strutt, Hon. Charles Hedley

    Fry, Lewis

    Manners, Lord Edward Wm. J.

    Sturt, Hon. H. Napier

    Galloway, William Johnson

    Maple, Sir John Blundell

    Sutherland, Sir Thomas

    Gedge, Sydney

    Mellor, Colonel (Lancashire)

    Talbot, Rt. Hn. J. G. (Oxf'dU.

    Gibbons, J. Lloyd

    Mildmay, Francis Bingham

    Thornton, Percy M.

    Gibbs, Hn. A. G. H (City of Lond.

    Milward, Colonel Victor

    Tolleimache, Henry James

    Gibbs, Hon. Vicary (St. Albans

    Monk, Charles James

    Tomlinson, Wm. Edw. Murray

    Giles, Charles Tyrell

    Moon, Edward Robert Pacy

    Tritton, Charles Ernest

    Gilliat, John Saunders

    More, Rbt. Jasper (Shropshire)

    Usborne, Thomas

    Goldsworthy, Major-General

    Morrell, George Herbert

    Valentia, Viscount

    Gordon, Hon. John Edward

    Morton, A. H. A. (Deptford)

    Vincent, Col. Sir C. E. Howard

    Gorst, Rt. Hon. Sir John Eldon

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

    Wanklyn, James Leslie

    Goschen, Rt Hn G. J. (St George's

    Murray, Charles J. (Coventry)

    Warde. Lt.-Col. C. E. (Kent)

    Goulding, Edward Alfred

    Murray, Col. Wyndham (Bath

    Whitmore, Charles Algernon

    Gray, Ernest (West Ham)

    Newdigate, Francis Alexander

    Williams, J. Powell-(Birm.)

    Greene, Henry D.(Shrewsbury)

    Nicholson, William Graham

    Wilson, J. W. (Worcestersh. N.)

    Greene, W. Raymond-(Cambs.)

    Nicol, Donald Ninian

    Wilson-Todd, Wm. H. (Yorks.)

    Greville, Hon. Ronald

    Northcote, Hn. Sir H. Stafford

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

    Gull, Sir Cameron

    Orr-Ewing, Charles Lindsay

    Wortley, Rt. Hon. C. B. Stuart-

    Hanbury, Rt. Hon. Robert Wm.

    Palmer, Sir C. M. (Durham)

    Wylie, Alexander

    Hermon-Hodge, Robert Trotter

    Parkes, Ebenezer

    Wyndham, George

    Hill, Rt. Hn. A. Staveley (Staffs.

    Pierpoint, Robert

    Wyndham-Quin, Major W. H.

    Houldsworth, Sir Wm. Henry

    Pollock, Harry Frederick

    Wyvill, Marmaduke D'Arcy

    Howard, Joseph

    Pryce- Jones, Lt.-Col. Edward

    Young, Commander (Berks, E.)

    Hozier, Hon. James Henry Cecil

    Purvis, Robert

    Jackson, Rt. Hon. Wm. Lawies

    Rasch, Major Frederic Carne

    TELLERS FOR THE AYES—Sir William Walrond and Mr. Anstruther.

    Jeffreys, Arthur Frederick

    Richards, Henry Charles

    Jenkins, Sir John Jones

    Ridley, Rt, Hn. Sir Matthew W.

    Jessel. Capt. Herbert Merton

    Ritchie, Rt. Hn. Chas. Thomson

    NOES.

    Abraham, William (Cork, N. E.)

    Hedderwick, Thomas Chas. H.

    O'Connor, T. P. (Liverpool)

    Asher, Alexander

    Holland, Wm. H. (York, W.R.)

    Pearson, Sir Weetman D.

    Ashton, Thomas Gair

    Horniman, Frederick, John

    Pickersgill, Edward Hare

    Atherley-Jones, L.

    Jameson, Major J. Eustace

    Pirie, Duncan V.

    Austin, M. (Limerick, W.)

    Joicey, Sir James

    Rickett, J. Compton

    Balfour, Rt Hn J Blair (Clackm.

    Jones, William (Carnarvonsh.

    Roberts, John Bryn (Eifion)

    Billson, Alfred

    Kearley, Hudson E.

    Roberts, John H. (Denbighs.)

    Bolton, Thomas Dolling

    Kilbride, Denis

    Robson, William Snowdon

    Broadhurst, Henry

    Lawson, Sir Wilfrid (Cumb'land

    Runciman, Walter

    Burns, John

    Lewis, John Herbert

    Sinclair, Capt. J.(Forfarshire)

    Caldwell, James

    Lloyd-George, David

    Souttar, Robinson

    Cameron, Sir Charles (Glasgow

    Macaleese, Daniel

    Steadman, William Charles

    Cawley, Frederick

    MacDonnell, Dr. M. A. (Qn's. C.)

    Sullivan, Donal (Westmeath)

    Crilly, Daniel

    M'Dermott, Patrick

    Trevelyan, Charles Philips

    Curran, Thomas (Sligo, S.)

    M'Ewan, William

    Ure, Alexander

    Dalziel, James Henry

    M'Leod, John

    Wallace, Robert

    Dilke, Rt. Hon. Sir Charles

    Maddison, Fred.

    Walton, J. Lawson (Leeds, S.)

    Dillon, John

    Maden, John Henry

    Whiteley, George (Stockport)

    Donelan, Captain A.

    Mendl, Sigismund Ferdinand

    Whittaker, Thomas Palmer

    Fenwick, Charles

    Morgan, W. P. (Merthyr)

    Williams, John C. (Notts.)

    Gourley, Sir Edward Temperley

    Morton, E. J. C. (Devonport)

    Wilson, J. H. (Middlesbrough)

    Griffith, Ellis J.

    Moss, Samuel

    Wood house, Sir J. T. (Huddsfld)

    Harwood, George

    Moulton, John Fletcher

    Yoxall, James Henry

    Hayne, Rt. Hon. Chas. Seale-

    Norton, Capt. Cecil William

    TELLERS FOR THE NOES.—Mr. Channing and Mr Warner.

    Hazell, Walter

    O'Connor, Arthur (Donegal)

    Healy, Timothy M. (N. Louth)

    O'Connor, J. (Wicklow, W.)

    34. Motion made, and Question put, "That a sum, not exceeding £132,732, 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 1900, for the Salaries and Expenses of the Local Government Board."
    The Committee divided:—Ayes, 196; Noes, 72. (Division List, No. 350.)

    AYES.

    Allsopp, Hon. George

    Fisher, William Hayes

    Morrell, George Herbert

    Anson, Sir William Reynell

    Fison, Frederick William

    Morton, Arthur H. A. (Deptford

    Arnold, Alfred

    FitzWygram, General Sir F.

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

    Atkinson, Rt. Hon. John

    Flannery, Sir Fortescue

    Murray, Charles J. (Coventry)

    Bagot, Capt. Josceline FitzRoy

    Flower, Ernest

    Murray, Col Wyndham (Bath)

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

    Foster, Harry S. (Suffolk)

    Newdigate, Francis Alexander

    Balfour, Rt. Hn. G. W. (Leeds)

    Fry, Lewis

    Nicholson, William Graham

    Balfour, Rt. Hn. J. B. (Clackm.)

    Galloway, William Johnson

    Nicol, Donald Ninian

    Banbury, Frederick George

    Gedge, Sydney

    Northcote, Hon. Sir H. Stafford

    Barnes, Frederic Gorell

    Gibbons, J. Lloyd

    Orr-Ewing, Charles Lindsay

    Barton, Dunbar Plunket

    Gibbs, Hn A. G. H. (Cy. of Lond.)

    Parkes, Ebenezer

    Bathurst, Hn. Allen Benjamin

    Gibbs, Hon. Vicary (St. Albans

    Pierpoint, Robert

    Beach, Rt. Hn. Sir M. H. (Brstl.)

    Giles, Charles Tyrrell

    Pollock, Harry Frederick

    Bentinck, Lord Henry C.

    Gilliat, John Saunders

    Pryce-Jones, Lt.-Col. Edward

    Bethell, Commander

    Goldsworthy, Major-General

    Purvis, Robert

    Bhownaggree, Sir M. M.

    Gordon, Hon. John Edward

    Rasch, Major Frederic Carne

    Bigwood, James

    Gorst, Rt. Hn. Sir John Eldon

    Ridley, Rt. Hon. Sir M. W.

    Blundell, Colonel Henry

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

    Ritchie, Rt. Hn. Chas. Thomson

    Bond, Edward

    Goulding, Edward Alfred

    Robertson, Herbert (Hackney)

    Boscawen, Arthur Griffith-

    Gray, Ernest (West Ham)

    Rollit, Sir Albert Kaye

    Boulnois, Edmund

    Greene, Henry D. (Shrewsbury

    Round, James

    Bousfield, William Robert

    Greene, W. Raymond- (Cambs.)

    Russell, T. W. (Tyrone)

    Brassey, Albert

    Greville, Hon. Ronald

    Ryder, John Herbert Dudley

    Brodrick, Rt. Hon. St. John

    Gull, Sir Cameron

    Sandys, Lieut.-Col. T. Myles

    Bullard, Sir Harry

    Hanbury, Rt. Hn. Robt. Wm.

    Savory, Sir Joseph

    Burdett-Coutts. W.

    Hayne, Rt. Hn. Charles Seale-

    Scoble, Sir Andrew Richard

    Butcher, John George

    Hermon-Hodge, R. Trotter

    Seely, Charles Hilton

    Campbell, J. H. M. (Dublin)

    Hill, Rt. Hon. A. S. (Staffs.)

    Sharpe, William Edward T.

    Carlile, William Walter

    Houldsworth. Sir Wm. Henry

    Sidebotham, J. W. (Cheshire)

    Causton, Richard Knight

    Howard, Joseph

    Sidebottom, Wm. (Derbysh.)

    Cavendish, V. C. W. (Derbys.

    Hozier, Hon. James Hy. Cecil

    Simeon, Sir Barrington

    Cayzer, Sir Charles William

    Jackson, Rt. Hon. Wm. Lawies

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

    Cecil, Evelyn (Hertford, E.)

    Jeffreys, Arthur Frederick

    Spencer, Ernest

    Cecil, Lord Hugh (Greenwich)

    Jessel, Capt. Herbert Merton

    Stanley, Hon. A. (Ormskirk)

    Chaloner, Captain R. G. W.

    Johnston, William (Belfast)

    Stanley, Edward J. (Somerset)

    Chamberlain, J. A. (Worc'r)

    Keswick, William

    Stanley, Lord (Lancs.)

    Chaplin, Rt. Hon. Henry

    Kimber, Henry

    Stephens, Henry Charles

    Charrington, Spencer

    Knowles, Lees

    Stirling-Maxwell, Sir J. M.

    Chelsea, Viscount

    Lawrenee, Sir E. Durning- (Corn

    Stone, Sir Benjamin

    Cochrane, Hon. Thos. H. A. E.

    Lawrence, Wm. F. (Liverpool)

    Strauss, Arthur

    Coghill, Douglas Harry

    Lawson, John Grant (Yorks.)

    Strutt, Hon. Charles Hedley

    Cohen, Benjamin Louis

    Lea, Sir Thos. (Londonderry)

    Sturt, Hon. Humphry Napier

    Collings, Rt. Hon. Jesse

    Leigh-Bennett, Henry Currie

    Sutherland, Sir Thomas

    Colston, Chas. Ed. H. Athole

    Llewelyn, Sir Dillwyn-(Swan.)

    Talbot, Rt. Hn. J. G. (Oxf'd Univ.

    Cook, Fred Lucas (Lambeth)

    Lockwood, Lieut.-Col. A. R.

    Thornton, Percy M.

    Cooke, C. W. Radcliffe (Heref'd

    Loder, Gerald Walter Erskine

    Tollemache, Henry James

    Cornwallis, Fiennes S. W.

    Long, Col. C. W. (Evesham)

    Tomlinson, Wm. E. Murray

    Cox, Irwin Edward Bainbridge

    Long, Rt. Hn. W. (Liverpool)

    Tritton, Charles Ernest

    Cripps, Charles Alfred

    Lorne, Marquess of

    Usborne, Thomas

    Curzon, Viscount

    Lowe, Francis William

    Valentia, Viscount

    Dalbiac, Colonel Philip Hugh

    Lowles, John

    Vincent, Col. C. E. Howard

    Dalkieth, Earl of

    Macartney, W. G. Ellison

    Wanklyn, James Leslie

    Davies, Sir Horatio D. (Chat'm

    Macdona, John Cumming

    Warde, Lt.-Col. C. E. (Kent)

    Dickson-Poynder, Sir John P.

    MacIver, David (Liverpool)

    Whitmore, Charles Algernon

    Donkin, Richard Sim

    Maclure, Sir John William

    Williams, Jos. Powell-(Birm.

    Doughty, George

    M'Arthur, Charles (Liverpool)

    Wilson, J. W. (Worcestersh, N.)

    Douglas, Rt. Hon. A. Akers-

    Malcolm, Ian

    Wilson-Todd, Wm. H. (Yorks.)

    Doxford, William Theodore

    Manners, Lord Edward W. J.

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

    Drucker, A.

    Maple, Sir John Blundell

    Wortley, Rt. Hon. C. B. Stuart-

    Duncombe, Hon. Hubert V.

    Mellor, Colonel (Lancashire)

    Wylie, Alexander

    Dyke, Rt. Hon. Sir Wm. Hart

    Mildmay, Francis Bingham

    Wyndham, George

    Fellowes, Hon. Ailwyn Edw.

    Milward, Colonel Victor

    Wyndham-Quin, Major W. H.

    Field, Admiral (Eastbourne)

    Monk, Charles James

    Wyvill, Marmaduke D'Arcy

    Finch, George H.

    Moon, Edward Robert Pacy

    TELLERS FOR THE AYES—Sir William Walrond and Mr. Anstruther.

    Finlay, Sir Robert Bannatyne

    Moore, William (Antrim, N.)

    Firbank, Joseph Thomas

    More, R. Jasper (Shropshire)

    NOES.

    Abraham, William (Cork, N. E.

    Joicey, Sir James

    Pickersgill, Edward Hare

    Asher, Alexander

    Jones, William (Carnarvonsh.

    Pirie, Duncan V.

    Ashton, Thomas Gair

    Kearley, Hudson E.

    Provaud, Andrew Dryburgh

    Atherley-Jones, L.

    Kilbride, Denis

    Rickett, J. Compton

    Austin, M. (Limerick, W.)

    Lawson, Sir W. (Cumberland)

    Roberts, John Bryn (Eifion)

    Billson, Alfred

    Lewis, John Herbert

    Roberts, John H. (Denbighsh.

    Bolton, Thomas Dolling

    Lloyd-George, David

    Robson, William Snowdon

    Burns, John

    Macaleese, Daniel

    Runciman, Walter

    Caldwell, James

    MacDonnell, Dr M A (Qu'n's C.

    Sinclair, Capt. J. (Forfarshire)

    Cameron, Sir Charles (Glasgow

    M'Dermott, Patrick

    Souttar, Robinson

    Cawley, Frederick

    M'Ewan, William

    Steadman, William Charles

    Crilly, Daniel

    M'Leod, John

    Sullivan, Donal (Westmeath)

    Curran, Thomas (Sligo, S.)

    Maddison, Fred.

    Trevelyan, Charles Philips

    Dalziel, James Henry

    Maden, John Henry

    Ure, Alexander

    Donelan, Captain A.

    Mendl, Sigismund Ferdinand

    Wallace, Robert

    Fenwick, Charles

    Morgan, W. Pritchard (Merth'r

    Walton, John Lawson (Leeds, S)

    Gourley, Sir Edward Temperley

    Morton, E. J. C. (Devonport)

    Whiteley, George (Stockport)

    Griffitn, Ellis J.

    Moss, Samuel

    Whittaker, Thomas Palmer

    Harwood, George

    Moulton, John Fletcher

    Williams, John Carvell (Notts

    Hazell, Walter

    Norton, Capt. Cecil William

    Wilson, Jos. H. (Middlesbr'gh

    Healy, Timothy M.(N. Louth)

    O'Connor Arthur (Donegal)

    Woodhouse, Sir J T (Huddersf'd.

    Hedderwick, Thomas Chas. H.

    O'Connor, James (Wicklow, W.

    Yoxall, James Henry

    Holland, W. H. (York, W.R.)

    Oldroyd, Mark

    TELLERS FOR THE NOES.—Mr. Channing and Mr. Broadhurst.

    Horniman, Frederick John

    Palmer, Sir C. M. (Durham)

    Jameson, Major J. Eustace

    Pearson, Sir Weetman D.

    35. Motion made, and Question put, "That a sum, not exceeding £13,000, 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
    1900, for Her Majesty's Foreign and other Secret Services."
    The Committee divided:—Ayes, 201; Noes, 71. (Division List, No. 351).

    AYES.

    Allsopp, Hon. George

    Chamberlain, J. A. (Worc'r.)

    Fisher, William Hayes

    Anson, Sir William Reynell

    Chaplin, Rt. Hon. Henry

    Fison, Frederick William

    Arnold, Alfred

    Charrington, Spencer

    FitzWygram, General Sir F.

    Atkinson, Rt. Hon. John

    Chelsea, Viscount

    Flannery, Sir Fortescue

    Bagot, Capt. Josceline FitzRoy

    Cochrane, Hon. Thos. H. A. E.

    Flower, Ernest

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

    Coghill, Douglas Harry

    Foster, Harry S. (Suffolk)

    Balfour, Rt Hon G. W. (Leeds

    Cohen, Benjamin Louis

    Fry, Lewis

    Banbury, Frederick George

    Collings, Rt. Hon. Jesse

    Galloway, William Johnson

    Barnes, Frederic Gorell

    Colston, Chas. E. H. Athole

    Gedge, Sydney

    Barton, Dunbar Plunket

    Cook, Fred. Lucas (Lambeth)

    Gibbons, J. Lloyd

    Bathurst, Hn. Allen Benjamin

    Cooke, C. W. Radeliffe (Heref'd)

    Gibbs. Hn A. G. H. (City of Lond.

    Beach, Rt Hn Sir M. H. (Bristol

    Cornwallis, Fiennes Stanley W.

    Gibbs, Hon. Vicary (St. Albans)

    Bentinck, Lord Henry C.

    Cox, Irwin Edwd. Bainbridge

    Giles, Charles Tyrrell

    Bethell, Commander

    Cripps, Charles Edward

    Gilliat, John Saunders

    Bhownaggree, Sir M. M.

    Curzon, Viscount

    Goldsworthy, Major-General

    Bigwood, James

    Dalbiac, Colonel Philip Hugh

    Gordon, Hon. John Edward

    Blundell, Colonel Henry

    Dalkeith, Earl of

    Gorst, Rt. Hon. Sir John Eldon

    Bond, Edward

    Davies, Sir Horatio D. (Chath'm

    Goschen, Rt Hn G. J. (St. Georg's

    Boscawen, Arthur Griffith-

    Dickson-Poynder, Sir John P.

    Goulding, Edward Alfred

    Boulnois, Edmund

    Dilke, Rt. Hn. Sir Charles

    Gray, Ernest (West Ham)

    Bousfield, William Robert

    Disraeli, Coningsby Ralph

    Greene, Henry D. (Shrewsbury)

    Brassey, Albert

    Donkin, Richard Sim

    Greene, W. Raymond- (Cambs.)

    Brodrick, Rt. Hon. St. John

    Doughty, George

    Greville, Hon. Ronald

    Bullard, Sir Harry

    Douglas, Rt. Hon. A. Akers-

    Gull, Sir Cameron

    Burdett-Coutts, W.

    Doxford, William Theodore

    Hanbury, Rt. Hon. Robert Wm.

    Butcher, John George

    Drucker, A.

    Harwood, George

    Campbell, J. H. M. (Dublin)

    Duncombe, Hon. Hubert V.

    Hermon-Hodge, Robt. Trotter

    Carlile, William Walter

    Dyke. Rt. Hn. Sir William Hart

    Hill, Rt. Hn. A. Staveley (Staffs.

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

    Fellowes, Hn. Ailwyn Edward

    Houldsworth, Sir Wm. Henry

    Cayzer, Sir Charles William

    Field, Admiral (Eastbourne)

    Howard, Joseph

    Cecil, Evelyn (Hertford, East)

    Finch, George H.

    Hozier, Hon. James Henry Cecil

    Cecil, Lord Hugh (Greenwich)

    Finlay, Sir Robert Bannatyne

    Jackson, Rt. Hon. Wm. Lawies

    Chaloner, Captain R. G. W.

    Firbank, Joseph Thomas

    Jeffreys, Arthur Frederick

    Jenkins, Sir John Jones

    Morgan, W. Pritchard (Merthyr

    Stanley, Hn. Arthur (Ormskirk)

    Jessel, Captain Herbert Merton

    Morrell, George Herbert

    Stanley, Edward Jas. (Somerset

    Johnston, William (Belfast)

    Morton, Arthur H. A. (Deptford

    Stanley, Lord (Lancs.)

    Keswick, William

    Murray, Rt. Hon. A. G. (Bute

    Stephens, Henry Charles

    Kimber, Henry

    Murray, Charles J. (Coventry)

    Stirling-Maxwell, Sir John M.

    Knowles, Lees

    Murray, Col. Wyndham (Bath)

    Stone, Sir Benjamin

    Lawrence, Sir E. Durning-(Corn

    Newdigate, Francis Alexander

    Strauss, Arthur

    Lawrence, Wm. F. (Liverpool

    Nicholson, William Graham

    Strutt, Hon. Charles Hedley

    Lawson, John Grant (Yorks)

    Nicol, Donald Ninian

    Sturt, Hon. Humphry Napier

    Lea, Sir Thomas (Londonderry)

    Northcote, Hon. Sir. H. Stafford

    Sutherland, Sir Thomas

    Leigh-Bennett, Henry Currie

    Orr-Ewing, Charles Lindsay

    Talbot, Rt. Hn. J. G. (Oxford U.)

    Llewelyn, Sir Dillwyn- (Swan.

    Parkes, Ebenezer

    Thornton, Percy M.

    Lockwood, Lt.-Col. A. R.

    Pierpoint, Robert

    Tollemache, Henry James

    Loder, Gerald Walter Erskine

    Pollock, Harry Frederick

    Tomlinson, Wm. Edw. Murray

    Long, Col. C. W. (Evesham)

    Pryce-Jones, Lt.-Col. Edward

    Tritton, Charles Ernest

    Long, Rt. Hon. W. (Liverpool)

    Purvis, Robert

    Usborne, Thomas

    Lorne, Marquess of

    Rasch, Major Frederic Carne

    Valentia, Viscount

    Lowe, Francis William

    Rickett, J. Compton

    Vincent, Col. Sir C. E. Howard

    Lowles, John

    Ridley, Rt. Hn. Sir Matthew W.

    Wanklyn, James Leslie

    Macartney, W. G. Ellison

    Ritchie, Rt. Hn. Chas. Thomson

    Warde Lt.-Col. C. E. (Kent)

    Macdona, John Cumming

    Robertson, Herbert (Hackney)

    Warner, Thomas Courtenay T.

    MacIver, David (Liverpool)

    Rollit, Sir Albert Kaye

    Whitmore, Charles Algernon

    Maclure, Sir John William

    Round, James

    Williams, Jos. Powell- (Birm.)

    M'Arthur, Charles (Liverpool)

    Russell, T. W. (Tyrone)

    Wilson, J. W. (Worcestersh, N.)

    Malcolm, Ian

    Ryder, John Herbert Dudley

    Wilson-Todd, Wm. H. (Yorks)

    Manners, Lord Edward Wm. J.

    Sandys, Lieut.-Col. Thos. Myles

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

    Maple, Sir John Blundell

    Savory, Sir Joseph

    Wortley, Rt. Hon. C. B. Stuart-

    Mellor, Colonel (Lancashire)

    Scoble, Sir Andrew Richard

    Wylie, Alexander

    Mendl, Sigismund Ferdinand

    Seely, Charles Hilton

    Wyndham, George

    Mildmay, Francis Bingham

    Sharpe, William Edward T.

    Wyndham-Quin, Major W. H.

    Milwand, Colonel Victor

    Sidebotham, J. W. (Cheshire)

    Wyvill, Marmaduke D'Arcy

    Monk, Charles James

    Sidebottom, William (Derbysh.

    Young, Commander(Berks, E.)

    Moon, Edward Robert Pacy

    Simeon, Sir Barrington

    TELLERS FOR THE AYES.—Sir William Walrond and Mr. Anstruther.

    Moore, William (Antrim, N.)

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

    More, Robt. Jasper (Shropshire)

    Spencer, Ernest

    NOES.

    Abraham, William (Cork, N. E.

    Holland, Wm. H. (York, W. R.)

    Pickersgill, Edward Hare

    Asher, Alexander

    Horniman, Frederick John

    Pirie, Duncan V.

    Ashton, Thomas Gair

    Joicey, Sir James

    Provand, Andrew Dryburgh

    Atherley-Jones, L.

    Jones, Wm. (Carnarvonshire)

    Roberts, John Bryn (Eifion)

    Balfour, Rt Hn J. Blair (Clackm.

    Kearley, Hudson E.

    Roberts, John H. (Denbighs.)

    Billson, Alfred

    Kilbride, Denis

    Robson, William Snowdon

    Bolton, Thomas Dolling

    Lawson, Sir Wilfrid (Cumb'land

    Runciman, Walter

    Broadhurst, Henry

    Lewis, John Herbert

    Sinclair, Capt. J. (Forfarshire)

    Burns, John

    Lloyd-George, David

    Souttar, Robinson

    Caldwell, James

    Macaleese, Daniel

    Steadman, William Charles

    Cameron, Sir Charles (Glasgow)

    MacDonnell, Dr M A (Queen'sC.

    Sullivan, Donal (Westmeath)

    Causton, Richard Knight

    M'Dermott, Patrick

    Trevelyan, Charles Philips

    Cawley, Frederick

    M'Ewan, William

    Ure, Alexander

    Channing, Francis Allston

    M'Leod, John

    Wallace, Robert

    Crilly, Daniel

    Maddison, Fred.

    Walton, J. Lawson (Leeds, S.)

    Curran, Thomas (Sligo, S.)

    Maden, John Henry

    Whiteley, George (Stockport)

    Dalziel, James Henry

    Morton, E. J. C. (Devonport)

    Whittaker, Thomas Palmer

    Donelan, Captain A.

    Moss, Samnel

    Williams, John Carvell (Notts.

    Fenwick, Charles

    Moulton, John Fletcher

    Wilson, J. H. (Middlesbrough)

    Gourley, Sir Edward Temperley

    Norton, Capt. Cecil William

    Woodhouse, Sir J. T. (Hddersf'd

    Griffith, Ellis J.

    O'Connor, Arthur (Donegal)

    Yoxall, James Henry

    Hayne, Rt. Hon. Chas. Seale-

    O'Connor, J. (Wicklow, W.)

    Hazell, Walter

    Oldroyd, Mark

    TELLERS FOR THE NOES—Major Jameson and Mr. Pirie.

    Healy, Timothy M. (N. Louth)

    Palmer, Sir C. M. (Durham)

    Hedderwick, Thos. Charles H.

    Pearson, Sir Weetman D.

    36. Motion made, and Question put, "That a sum, not exceeding £16,169, 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 1900, for the Salaries and Expenses of
    the Fishery Board in Scotland and for Grants in Aid of Piers or Quays."
    The Committee proceeded to a Division, and the Chairman stated that he thought the Ayes had it; and on his decision.
    being challenged it appeared to him that the Division was frivolously claimed, and he accordingly directed the Noes to stand up in their places, and five Members having stood up, the Chairman declared that the Ayes had it.
    37. £8,000, to complete the sum for the Local Government Board for Scotland.
    38. Motion made, and Question put, "That a sum, not exceeding £28,782, 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 1900, 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, 193; Noes, 75. (Division List, No. 352.)

    AYES.

    Allsopp, Hon. George

    Duncombe, Hon. Hubert V.

    Lowles, John

    Anson, Sir William Reynell

    Dyke, Rt. Hon. Sir Wm. Hart

    Macartney, W. G. Ellison

    Arnold, Alfred

    Fellowes, Hon. Ailwyn Edw.

    Macdona, John Cumming

    Atkinson, Rt. Hon. John

    Field, Admiral (Eastbourne)

    MacIver, David (Liverpool)

    Bagot, Capt. Josceline FitzRoy

    Finch, George H.

    Maclure, Sir John William

    Balfour, Rt. Hon. G. W. (Leeds)

    Finlay, Sir Robert Bannatyne

    M'Arthur, Charles (Liverpool)

    Banbury, Frederick George

    Firbank, Joseph Thomas

    Malcom, Ian

    Barnes, Frederick Gorell

    Fisher, William Hayes

    Manners, Lord Edward W. J.

    Barton, Dunbar Plunket

    Fison, Frederick William

    Maple, Sir John Blundell

    Bathurst, Hon. Allen Benjamin

    FitzWygram, General Sir F.

    Mellor, Colonel (Lancashire)

    Beach, Rt. Hn. Sir M. H.(Bristol)

    Flannery, Sir Fortescue

    Mildmay, Francis Bingham

    Bentinck, Lord Henry C.

    Flower, Ernest

    Milward, Colonel Victor

    Bethell, Commander

    Foster, Harry S. (Suffolk)

    Monk, Charles James

    Bhownaggree, Sir M. M.

    Fry, Lewis

    Moon, Edward Robert Pacy

    Bigwood, James

    Galloway, William Johnson

    Moore, William (Antrim, N.)

    Blundell, Colonel Henry

    Gedge, Sydney

    More, Robt. J. (Shropshire)

    Boscawen, Arthur Griffith-

    Gibbons, J. Lloyd

    Morrell, George Herbert

    Boulnois, Edmund

    Gibbs, Hn. A. G. H. (Cy. of Lond.

    Morton, A. H. A. (Deptford)

    Bousfield, William Robert

    Gibbs, Hon. Vicary (St. Albans)

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

    Brassey, Albert

    Giles, Charles Tyrrell

    Murray, Charles J. (Coventry)

    Brodrick, Rt. Hon. St. John

    Gilliat, John Saunders

    Murray, Col. Wyndham (Bath)

    Bullard, Sir Harry

    Goldsworthy, Major-General

    Newdigate, Francis Alexander

    Burdett-Coutts, W.

    Gordon, Hon. John Edward

    Nicholson, William Graham

    Butcher, John George

    Gorst, Rt. Hon. Sir J. Eldon

    Nicol, Donald Ninian

    Campbell, J. H. M. (Dublin)

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

    Northcote, Hn. Sir H. Staff'd

    Carlile, William Walter

    Goulding, Edward Alfred

    Orr-Ewing, Charles Lindsay

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

    Gray, Ernest (West Ham)

    Cayzer, Sir Charles William

    Greene, Hy. D. (Shrewsbury)

    Parkes, Ebenezer

    Cecil, Evelyn (Hertford, E.)

    Greene, W. Raymond (Cambs.)

    Pierpoint, Robert

    Cecil Lord Hugh (Greenwich)

    Greville, Hon. Ronald

    Pollock, Harry Frederick

    Chaloner, Captain R. G. W

    Gull, Sir Cameron

    Pryce-Jones, Lt.-Col. Edward

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

    Hanbury, Rt. Hon. Robert W.

    Purvis, Robert

    Chamberlain, J. A. (Worc'r)

    Hermon-Hodge, Robert T.

    Rasch, Major Frederic Carne

    Chaplin, Rt. Hon. Henry

    Hill, Rt. Hn. A. Staveley (Staffs.

    Ridley, Rt. Hon. Sir M. W.

    Charrington, Spencer

    Houldsworth, Sir Wm. Henry

    Richie, Rt. Hon. Charles T.

    Chelsea, Viscount

    Howard, Joseph

    Robertson, Herbert (Hackney)

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

    Hozier, Hon. James Hy. Cecil

    Rollit, Sir Albert Kaye

    Coghill, Douglas Harry

    Jackson, Rt. Hon.Wm. Lawies

    Round, James

    Cohen, Benjamin Louis

    Jeffreys, Arthur Frederick

    Russell, T. W. (Tyrone)

    Collings, Rt. Hon. Jesse

    Jenkins, Sir John Jones

    Ryder, John Herbert Dudley

    Colston, Chas. Edw. H. Athole

    Jessel, Capt. Herbert Merton

    Sandys, Lt.-Col. Thos. Myles

    Cook, Fred. Lucas (Lambeth)

    Johnston, William (Belfast)

    Savory, Sir Joseph

    Cooke, C. W. R. (Hereford)

    Keswick, William

    Scoble, Sir Andrew Richard

    Cornwallis, Fiennes Stanley W.

    Kimber, Henry

    Seely, Charles Hilton

    Cox, Irwin Edward Bainbridge

    Knowles, Lees

    Sharpe, William Edward T.

    Cripps, Charles Alfred

    Lawrence, Sir E Durning-(Corn.

    Sidebotham, J. W. (Cheshire)

    Curzon, Viscount

    Lawrence, Wm. F. (Liverpool)

    Sidebottom, Wm. (Derbysh.)

    Dalbiac, Colonel Philip Hugh

    Lawson, John Grant (Yorks.)

    Simeon, Sir Barrington

    Dalkeith, Earl of

    Lea, Sir Thomas (Londonderry

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

    Davies, Sir Horatio D. (Chatham

    Leigh-Bennett, Henry Currie

    Spencer, Ernest

    Dickson-Poynder, Sir John P.

    Llewelyn, Sir Dillwyn-(Swans.

    Stanley, Hon. A. (Ormskirk)

    Disraeli, Coningsby Ralph

    Lockwood, Lieut.-Col. A. R.

    Stanley, Edward Jas. (Somerset

    Donkin, Richard Sim

    Loder, Gerald Walter Erskine

    Stanley, Lord (Lancs.)

    Doughty, George

    Long, Col. C. W. (Evesham)

    Stephens, Henry Charles

    Douglas, Rt. Hon. A. Akers-

    Long Rt. Hn. W. (Liverpool)

    Stirling-Maxwell, Sir John M.

    Doxford, William Theodore

    Lorne, Marquess of

    Stone, Sir Benjamin

    Drucker, A.

    Lowe, Francis William

    Strauss, Arthur

    Strutt, Hon. Charles Hedley

    Vincent, Col. Sir C. E. Howard

    Wylie, Alexander

    Sturt, Hon. Humphry Napier

    Wanklyn, James Leslie

    Wyndham, George

    Sutherland, Sir Thomas

    Warde, Lt.-Col. C. E. (Kent)

    Wyndham-Quin, Major W. H.

    Talbot, Rt. Hn. J. G. (Oxf. Univ.

    Whitmore, Charles Algernon

    Wyvill, Marmaduke D'Arcy

    Thornton, Percy M.

    Williams, Jos. Powell- (Birm.)

    Young, Commander (Berks, E.)

    Tomlinson, Wm. Edw. Murray

    Wilson, J. W. (Worcestersh, N.)

    Tritton, Charles Ernest

    Wilson-Todd, Wm. H.(Yorks.)

    TELLERS FOR THE AYES—Sir William Walrond and Mr. Anstruther.

    Usborne, Thomas

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

    Valentia, Viscount

    Wortley, Rt. Hon. C. B. Stuart-

    NOES.

    Abraham, William(Cork, N. E.

    Holland, W. H. (York, W. R.)

    Palmer, Sir Charles M. (Durham

    Asher, Alexander

    Horniman, Frederick John

    Pearson, Sir Weetman D.

    Ashton, Thomas Gair

    Jameson, Major J. Eustace

    Pickersgill, Edward Hare

    Atherley-Jones, L.

    Joicey, Sir James

    Pirie, Duncan V.

    Balfour, Rt. Hn. J. Blair (Clackm

    Jones, Wm. (Carnarvonshire)

    Provand, Andrew Dryburgh

    Billson, Alfred

    Kearley, Hudson E.

    Rickett, J. Compton

    Bolton, Thomas Dolling

    Kilbride, Denis

    Roberts, John Bryn (Eifion)

    Broadhurst, Henry

    Lawson, Sir Wilfrid (Cumb'land

    Roberts, John H. (Denbighs)

    Burns, John

    Lewis, John Herbert

    Robson, William Snowdon

    Caldwell, James

    Lloyd-George, David

    Runciman, Walter

    Cameron, Sir Charles(Glasgow)

    Macaleese, Daniel

    Souttar, Robinson

    Cawley, Frederick

    MacDonnell, Dr M A (Queen'sC.

    Steadman, William Charles

    Channing, Francis Allston

    M'Dermott, Patrick

    Trevelyan, Charles Philips

    Crilly, Daniel

    M'Ewan, William

    Ure, Alexander

    Curran, Thomas B. (Donegal)

    M'Leod, John

    Wallace, Robert

    Curran, Thomas (Sligo, S.)

    Maddison, Fred.

    Walton, John Lawson (Leeds. S.

    Dalziel, James Henry

    Maden, John Henry

    Warner, Thos. Courtenay T

    Dilke, Rt. Hon. Sir Charles

    Mendl, Sigismund Ferdinand

    Whittaker, Thomas Palmer

    Fenwick, Charles

    Morgan, W. P. (Merthyr)

    Williams, John Carvell (Notts.)

    Gourley, Sir E. Temperley

    Morton, Ed W. J. C. (Devonport)

    Wilson, Jos. H. (Middlesbrough

    Griffith, Ellis J.

    Moss, Samuel

    Woodhouse, Sir J T (Huddersf'd

    Harwood, George

    Moulton, John Fletcher

    Yoxall, James Henry

    Hayne, Rt. Hon. Chas. Seale-

    Norton, Capt. Cecil William

    Hazells, Walter

    O'Connor, Arthur (Donegal)

    TELLERS FOR THE NOES—Captain Donelan and Mr. Donal Sullivan.

    Healy, Timothy M. (N. Louth)

    O'Connor, James (Wicklow, W.

    Hedderwick, Thomas C. H.

    Oldroyd, Mark

    39. £27,479, to complete the sum for the Local Government Board, Ireland.

    CLASS III.
    40. £60,806, to complete the sum for Law Charges and Courts of Law, Scotland.
    41. £29,565, to complete the sum for the Register House, Edinburgh.
    42. £3,000, to complete the sum for the Crofters' Commission.
    43. £53,180, to complete the sum for Prisons, Scotland.
    44. Motion made, and Question put, "That a sum not exceeding £71,777 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,1900, for such of the Salaries and Expenses of the Supreme Court of Judicature and of certain other Legal Departments in Ireland as are not charged on the Consolidated Fund."
    The Committee divided:—Ayes, 188; Noes, 69. (Division List, No. 353.)

    AYES.

    Aird, John

    Bathurst, Hon. Allen Benj.

    Brassey, Albert

    Allsopp, Hon. Ceorge

    Beach. Rt. Hn. Sir M. H. -(Brist'l

    Brodrick, Rt. Hon. St. John

    Anson, Sir William Reynell

    Bentinck, Lord Henry C.

    Bullard, Sir Harry

    Arnold, Alfred

    Bethell, Commander

    Burdett-Coutts, W.

    Atkinson, Rt. Hon. John

    Bigwood, James

    Butcher, John George

    Bagot, Capt. Josceline FitzRoy

    Blundell, Colonel Henry

    Campbell, J. H. M. (Dublin)

    Balfour, Rt Hn Gerald W.(Leeds

    Bond, Edward

    Carlile, William Walter

    Banbury, Frederick George

    Boscawen, Arthur Griffith-

    Cavendish, V. C. W. (Derbysh

    Barnes, Frederic Gorell

    Boulnois, Edmund

    Cayzer, Sir Charles William

    Barton, Dunbar Plunket

    Bousfield, William Robert

    Cecil, Evelyn (Hertford, E.)

    Cecil, Lord Hugh (Greenwich)

    Greville, Hon. Ronald

    Pollock, Harry Frederick

    Chaloner, Captain R. G. W.

    Gull, Sir Cameron

    Pryce-Jones, Lt.-Col. Edward

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

    Hanbury, Rt. Hon. Robert W.

    Purvis, Robert

    Chamberlain, J. Austen (Worc'r

    Hill, Rt. Hn. A. Staveley (Staffs.

    Rasch, Major Frederic Carne

    Chaplin, Rt. Hon. Henry

    Howard, Joseph

    Ridley, Rt. Hn. Sir Matthew W.

    Charrington, Spencer

    Hozier, Hon. James Henry C.

    Ritchie, Rt. Hn. Chas. Thomson

    Chelsea, Viscount

    Jackson, Rt. Hon. Wm. Lawies

    Robertson, Herbert (Hackney)

    Cochrane, Hon. Thos. H. A. E.

    Jeffreys, Arthur Frederick

    Rollit, Sir Albert Kaye

    Coghill, Douglas Harry

    Jenkins, Sir John Jones

    Russell, T. W. (Tyrone)

    Cohen, Benjamin Louis

    Jessel, Capt. Herbert Merton

    Ryder, John Herbert Dudley

    Collings, Rt. Hon. Jesse

    Johnston, William (Belfast)

    Sandys, Lt.-Col. Thos. Myles

    Colston, Chas. E. W. Athole

    Keswick, William

    Savory, Sir Joseph

    Cook, Fred. Lucas (Lambeth)

    Kimber, Henry

    Scoble, Sir Andrew Richard

    Cooke, C. W. Radcliffe (Heref'd)

    Knowles, Lees

    Seely, Charles Hilton

    Cornwallis, Fiennes S. W.

    Lawrence, Sir E. Durning-(Corn

    Sharpe, William Edward T.

    Cox, Irwin E. Bainbridge

    Lawrence, Wm. F. (Liverpool)

    Sidebotham, J. W. (Cheshire)

    Curzon, Viscount

    Lawson, John Grant (Yorks.)

    Sidebottom, Wm. (Derbysh.)

    Dalbiac, Colonel Philip Hugh

    Lea, Sir Thos. (Londonderry)

    Simeon, Sir Barrington

    Dalkeith, Earl of

    Leigh-Bennett, Henry Currie

    Sinclair, Louis (Romford)

    Davies, Sir H. D. (Chatham)

    Llewelyn, Sir Dillwyn-(Sw'ns'a

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

    Dickson-Poynder, Sir J. P.

    Lockwood, Lt.-Col. A. R.

    Spencer, Ernest

    Disraeli, Coningsby Ralph

    Loder, Gerald Walter Erskine

    Stanley, Hn. Arthur (Ormskirk

    Donkin, Richard Sim

    Long, Col. Chas. W. (Evesham)

    Stanley, Edward J. (Somerset)

    Doughty, George

    Long, Rt. Hon. W. (Liverpool)

    Stanley, Lord (Lancs.)

    Douglas, Rt. Hon. A. Akers-

    Lorne, Marquess of

    Stephens, Henry Charles

    Doxford, William Theodore

    Lowe, Francis William

    Stirling-Maxwell, Sir John M.

    Duncombe, Hon. Hubert V.

    Lowles, John

    Stone, Sir Benjamin

    Dyke, Rt. Hon. Sir W. Hart

    Macartney, W. G. Ellison

    Strauss, Arthur

    Fellowes, Hon. Ailwyn Edw.

    Macdona, John Cimming

    Strutt, Hon. Charles Hedley

    Field, Admiral (Eastbourne)

    MacIver, David (Liverpool)

    Sturt, Hon. Humphry Napier

    Finch, George H.

    Maclure, Sir John William

    Sutherland, Sir Thomas

    Finlay, Sir Robert Bannatyne

    M'Arthur, Charles (Liverpool)

    Talbot, Rt. Hn. J. G. (Ox.Uni.)

    Firbank, Joseph Thomas

    Malcolm, Ian

    Thornton, Percy M.

    Fisher, William Hayes

    Manners, Lord Edward W. J.

    Tomlinson, Wm. Edw. Murray

    Fison, Frederick William

    Maple, Sir John Blundell

    Tritton, Charles Ernest

    FitzWygram, General Sir F.

    Mellor, Colonel (Lancashire)

    Usborne, Thomas

    Flannery, Sir Fortescue

    Mildmay, Francis Bingham

    Valentia, Viscount

    Flower, Ernest

    Milward, Colonel Victor

    Vincent, Col. Sir C. E. H.

    Foster, Harry S. (Suffolk)

    Monk, Charles James

    Wanklyn, James Leslie

    Fry, Lewis

    Moon, Edward Robert Pacy

    Warde, Lieut.-Col. C. E. (Kent)

    Galloway, William Johnson

    Moore, William (Antrim, N.)

    Whitmore, Charles Algernon

    Gedge, Sydney

    More, R. Jasper (Shropshire)

    Williams, J. Powell- (Birm.)

    Gibbons, J. Lloyd

    Morrell. George Herbert

    Wilson, J. W. (Worcestersh. N.)

    Gibbs, Hn.A.G. H.(City of Lond

    Morton, A. H. A. (Deptford)

    Wilson-Todd, Wm. H. (Yorks).

    Giles, Charles Tyrrell

    Murray, Rt Hn A. Graham (Bute

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

    Gilliat, John Saunders

    Murray, Charles J. (Coventry)

    Wortley, Rt. Hn. C. B. Stuart-

    Goldsworthy, Major-General

    Murray, Col. Wyndham (Bath)

    Wylie, Alexander

    Gordon, Hon. John Edward

    Newdigate, Francis Alexander

    Wyndham, George

    Gorst, Rt. Hon. Sir John Eldon

    Nicholson, William Graham

    Wyndham-Quin, Major H. W.

    Goschen, Rt Hn G J (St George's)

    Nicol, Donald Ninian

    Wyvill, Marmaduke D'Arcy

    Goulding, Edward Alfred

    Northcote, Hn. Sir H. Stafford

    Young, Commander (Berks, E.)

    Gray, Ernest (West Ham)

    Orr-Ewing, Charles Lindsay

    TELLERS FOR THE AYES—Sir William Walrond and Mr. Anstruther.

    Greene, H. D. (Shrewsbury)

    Parkes, Ebenezer

    Greene, W. Raymond-(Cambs.)

    Pierpoint, Robert

    NOES.

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

    Fenwick, Charles

    Macaleese, Daniel

    Asher, Alexander

    Gourley, Sir Edw. Temperley

    MacDonnell, Dr. M. A. (Qu'n'sC

    Austin, M. (Limerick, W.)

    Griffith, Ellis J.

    M'Dermott, Patrick

    Balfour, Rt. Hn. J. B. (Clackm.)

    Hayne, Rt. Hon. Chas. Seale-

    M'Ewan, William

    Billson, Alfred

    Hazell, Walter

    M'Leod, John

    Bolton, Thomas Dolling

    Healy, Timothy M. (N. Louth)

    Maddison, Fred.

    Broadhurst, Henry

    Hedderwick, Thos. Chas. H.

    Maden, John Henry

    Burns, John

    Holland, Wm. H. (York, W. R.)

    Mendl, Sigismund Ferdinand

    Caldwell, James

    Horniman, Frederick John

    Morgan. W Pritchard (Merthyr

    Cameron, Sir Chas. (Glasgow)

    Jameson, Major J. Eustace

    Morton, E. J. C. (Devonport)

    Cawley, Frederick

    Joicey, Sir James

    Moss, Samuel

    Channing, Francis Allston

    Jones, Wm. (Carnarvonshire)

    Moulton, John Fletcher

    Crilly, Daniel

    Kearley, Hudson E.

    Norton, Capt. Cecil William

    Curran, Thos. B. (Donegal)

    Kilbride, Denis

    O'Connor, Jas. (Wicklow, W.)

    Curran, Thos. (Sligo, S.)

    Lawson, Sir Wilfrid (Cumb'land

    Oldroyd, Mark

    Dalziel, James Henry

    Lewis, John Herbert

    Palmer, Sir C. M. (Durham)

    Dilke, Rt. Hon. Sir Charles

    Lloyd-George, David

    Pearson, Sir Weetman D.

    Pirie, Duncan V.

    Souttar, Robinson

    Willams, J. Carvell (Notts.)

    Provand, Andrew Dryburgh

    Steadman, William Charles

    Wilson, J. H. (Middlesbrough

    Rickett, J. Compton

    Trevelyan, Charles Philips

    Woodhouse, Sir J T (Huddersf'd

    Roberts John Bryn (Eifion)

    Ure, Alexander

    Yoxall, James Henry

    Roberts. John H. (Denbighs.)

    Wallace, Robert

    TELLERS FOR THE NOES—Captain Donelan and Mr. Donal Sullivan.

    Robson, William Snowdon

    Warner, Thos. Courtney T.

    Runciman, Walter

    Whittaker, Thomas Palmer

    45. Motion made, and Question put, "That a sum, not exceeding £84,484, 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,
    1900, for the Salaries and Expenses of the Office of the Irish Land Commission."
    The Committee divided:—Ayes, 186; Noes, 66. (Division List, No. 354.)

    AYES.

    Allsopp, Hon. George

    Duncombe, Hon. Hubert V.

    Macartney, W. G. Ellison

    Anson, Sir William Reynell

    Dyke, Rt. Hon. Sir W. Hart

    Macdona, John Cumming

    Arnold. Alfred

    Fellowes, Hon. Ailwyn Edward

    MacIver, David (Liverpool)

    Atkinson, Rt. Hon. John

    Field, Admiral (Eastbourne)

    Maclure, Sir John William

    Bagot, Capt. Josceline FitzRoy

    Finch, George H.

    M'Arthur Charles (Liverpool)

    Balfour, Rt. Hon. G. W. (Leeds)

    Finlay, Sir Robert Bannatyne

    Malcolm Ian

    Banbury, Frederick George

    Firbank, Joseph Thomas

    Manners, Lord Edward W. J.

    Barnes, Frederic Gorell

    Fisher, William Hayes

    Maple, Sir John Blundell

    Barton, Dunbar Plunket

    Fison, Frederick William

    Mildmay, Francis Bingham

    Bathurst, Hon. Allen B.

    FitzWygram, General Sir F.

    Milward, Colonel Victor

    Beach, Rt. Hn. Sir M. H.-(Bristol

    Flannery, Sir Fortescue

    Monk, Charles James

    Bentinck, Lord Henry C.

    Flower, Ernest

    Moon, Edward Robert Pacy

    Bethell, Commander

    Foster, Harry S. (Suffolk)

    Moore, William (Antrim, N.)

    Bigwood, James

    Fry, Lewis

    More, R. Jasper (Shropshire)

    Blundell, Colonel Henry

    Galloway, William Johnson

    Morrell, George Herbert

    Bond, Edward

    Gedge, Sydney

    Morton, Arthur H. A. (Deptf'd

    Boscawen, Arthur Griffith-

    Gibbons, J. Lloyd

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

    Boulnois, Edmund

    Gibbs. Hn. A. G H. (City of Lon.

    Murray, Charles J. (Coventry)

    Bousfield, William Robert

    Giles, Charles Tyrrell

    Murray, Col. Wyndham (Bath

    Brassey, Albert

    Gilliat, John Saunders

    Newdigate, Francis Alexander

    Brodrick, Rt. Hon. St. John

    Goldsworthy, Major-General

    Nicholson, William Graham

    Bullard, Sir Harry

    Gordon, Hon. John Edward

    Nicol, Donald Ninian

    Burdett-Coutts, W.

    Gorst, Rt. Hon. Sir J. Eldon

    Northcote, Hon. Sir H. Stafford.

    Butcher, John George

    Goschen, Rt Hn G. J (St George's

    Orr-Ewing, Charles Lindsay

    Campbell. J. H. M. (Dublin)

    Goulding, Edward Alfred

    Parkes, Ebenezer

    Carlile, William Walter

    Gray, Ernest (West Ham)

    Pierpoint, Robert

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

    Greene, Henry D. (Shrewsby.

    Pollock, Harry Frederick

    Cayzer, Sir Charles William

    Greene, W. Raymond-(Cambs.

    Pryce-Jones, Lt.-Col. Edward

    Cecil, Evelyn (Hertford, East)

    Greville, Hon. Ronald

    Purvis, Robert

    Cecil, Lord Hugh (Greenwich)

    Gull, Sir Cameron

    Rasch, Major Frederic Carne

    Chaloner, Captain R. G. W.

    Hanbury, Rt. Hon. Rbt. Wm.

    Ridley, Rt. Hn. Sir Matthew W.

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

    Hill, Rt. Hn. A. Staveley (Staffs.

    Ritchie, Rt. Hn. Chas. Thomson

    Chamberlain, J. Austen (Worc'r

    Howard, Joseph

    Robertson, Herbert (Hackney)

    Chaplin, Rt. Hon. Henry

    Hozier, Hon. J. Henry Cecil

    Rollit, Sir Albert Kaye

    Charrington, Spencer

    Jackson, Rt. Hon. Wm. Lawies

    Russell, T. W. (Tyrone)

    Chelsea, Viscount

    Jeffreys, Arthur Frederick

    Ryder, John Herbert Dudley

    Cochrane, Hon. Thos. H. A. E.

    Jenkins, Sir John Jones

    Sandys, Lieut.-Col. T. Myles

    Coghill, Douglas Harry

    Jessel, Capt. Herbert Merton

    Savory, Sir Joseph

    Cohen, Benjamin Louis

    Johnston, William (Belfast)

    Scoble, Sir Andrew Richard

    Collings, Rt. Hon. Jesse

    Keswick, William

    Seely, Charles Hilton

    Colston, Chas. Edw. H. Athole

    Kimber, Henry

    Sharpe, William Edward T.

    Cook, Fred. Lucas (Lambeth)

    Knowles, Lees

    Sidebotham, J. W. (Cheshire)

    Cooke, C. W. Radcliffe (Heref'd)

    Lawrence, Sir E. Durning-(Corn

    Sidebottom, Wm. (Derbyshire)

    Cornwallis, Fiennes Stanley W.

    Lawrence, Wm. F. (Liverpool)

    Simeon, Sir Barrington

    Cox, Irwin Edward Bainbridge

    Lawson, John Grant (Yorks.)

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

    Curzon, Vicount

    Lea, Sir Thomas (Londonderry

    Spencer, Ernest

    Dalbiac, Colonel Philip Hugh

    Leigh-Bennett, Henry Currie

    Stanley, Hon. A. (Ormskirk)

    Dalkeith, Earl of

    Llewelyn, Sir Dillwyn-(Swans,

    Stanley, E. James (Somerset)

    Davies, Sir Horatio D (Chatham

    Lockwood, Lt-Col. A. R.

    Stanley, Lord (Lancs.)

    Dickson-Poynder, Sir John P.

    Loder, Gerald Walter Erskine

    Stephens, Henry Charles

    Disraeli, Coningsby Ralph

    Long, Col. Chas. W. (Evesham

    Stirling-Maxwell, Sir John M.

    Donkin, Richard Sim

    Long, Rt. Hn Walter (Liverpool

    Stone, Sir Benjamir

    Doughty, George

    Lorne, Marquess of

    Strauss, Arthur

    Douglas, Rt. Hon. A. Akers-

    Lowe, Francis William

    Strutt, Hon. Charles Hedley

    Doxford, William Theodore

    Lowles, John

    Sturt, Hon. Humphry Napier.

    Sutherland, Sir Thomas

    Wanklyn, James Leslie

    Wylie, Alexander

    Talbot, Rt Hn J. G. (Oxf'dUniv.)

    Warde, Lt.-Col. C. E. (Kent)

    Wyndham, George

    Thornton, Percy M.

    Whitmore, Charles Algernon

    Wyndham-Quin, Major W. H.

    Tomlinson, Wm. E. Murray

    Williams, J. Powell- (Birm.)

    Wyvill, Marmaduke D'Arcy

    Tritton, Charles Ernest

    Wilson, J. W. (Worcestersh., N

    Young, Commander (Berks, E.)

    Usborne, Thomas

    Wilson-Todd, Wm. H.(Yorks.)

    TELLERS FOR THE AYES—Sir William Walrond and Mr. Anstruther.

    Valentia, Viscount

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

    Vincent, Col. Sir C. E. Howard

    Wortley, Rt. Hn. C. B. Stuart-

    NOES.

    Abraham, William (Cork, N. E.

    Horniman, Frederick John

    Oldroyd, Mark

    Asher, Alexander

    Jameson, Major J. Eustace

    Palmer, Sir C. M. (Durham)

    Austin, M. (Limerick, W.)

    Joicey, Sir James

    Pearson, Sir Weetman D.

    Balfour, Rt. Hn. J. B. (Clackm.)

    Jones, Wm. (Carnarvonshire)

    Pirie, Duncan V.

    Billson, Alfred

    Kearley, Hudson, E.

    Provand, Andrew Dryburgh

    Bolton, Thomas Dolling

    Kilbride, Denis

    Rickett, J. Compton

    Broadhurst, Henry

    Lawson, Sir Wilfrid (Cumb'l'nd

    Roberts, John Bryn (Eifion)

    Burns, John

    Lewis, John Herbert

    Roberts, John H. (Denbighs)

    Caldwell, James

    Lloyd-George, David

    Robson, William Snowdon

    Cameron, Sir Charles (Glasgow)

    Macaleese, Daniel

    Runciman, Walter

    Channing, Francis Allston

    MacDonnell, Dr. M. A.(Qn's C.

    Souttar, Robinson

    Crilly, Daniel

    M'Dermott, Patrick

    Steadman, William Charles

    Curran, Thomas (Sligo, S.)

    M'Ewan, William

    Trevelyan, Charles Philips

    Dalziel, James Henry

    M'Leod, John

    Ure, Alexander

    Dilke, Rt. Hon. Sir Charles

    Maddison, Fred.

    Wallace, Robert

    Fenwick, Charles

    Maden, John Henry

    Warner, Thomas Courtenay T.

    Gourley, Sir Ed. Temperley

    Mendl, Sigismund Ferdinand

    Williams, John Carvell (Notts

    Griffith, Ellis J.

    Morgan, W. Pritchard (Merthyr

    Wilson, J. H. (Middlesbrough

    Hayne, Rt. Hn. Charles Seale-

    Morton, E. J. C. (Devonport)

    Woodhouse, Sir J. T. (Hudderf'd

    Hazell, Walter

    Moss, Samuel

    Yoxall, James Henry

    Healy, Timothy M. (N. Louth)

    Moulton, John Fletcher

    TELLERS FOR THE NOES—Captain Donelan and Mr. Donal Sullivan.

    Hedderwiek, Thomas Chas. H.

    Norton, Capt. Cecil William

    Holland, Wm. H. (York. W. R.)

    O'Connor, James (Wicklow, W.

    46. £75,675, to complete the sum for County Court Officers, &c., Ireland.
    47. £63,316, to complete the sum for Dublin Metropolitan Police.
    48. Motion made, and Question put," That a sum, not exceeding £750,900,
    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, 1900, for the Expenses of the Royal Irish Constabulary."
    The Committee divided:—Ayes, 178; Noes, 64. (Division List, No. 355.)

    AYES.

    Allsopp, Hon. George

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

    Doughty, George

    Anson, Sir William Reynell

    Cayzer, Sir Charles William

    Douglas, Rt. Hon. A. Akers-

    Arnold, Alfred

    Cecil, Evelyn (Hertford, East)

    Doxford, William Theodore

    Atkinson, Rt. Hon. John

    Chaloner, Captain R. G. W.

    Duncombe, Hon. Hubert V.

    Bagot, Capt. Joseeline FitzRoy

    Chamberlain, Rt. Hon. J. (Birm.

    Dyke, Rt. Hn. Sir William Hart

    Balfour, Rt Hn Gerald W (Leeds

    Chamberlain, J. Austen (Worc'r

    Fellowes, Hn. Ailwyn Edward

    Banbury, Frederick George

    Chaplin, Rt. Hon. Henry

    Field, Admiral (Eastbourne)

    Barnes, Frederic Gorell

    Charrington, Spencer

    Finch, George H.

    Barton, Dunbar Plunket

    Chelsea, Viscount

    Finlay, Sir Robert Bannatyne

    Bathurst, Hon. Allen Benjamin

    Cochrane, Hon. Thos. H. A. E.

    Firbank, Joseph Thomas

    Beach, Rt. Hn Sir M. H. (Bristol)

    Coghill, Douglas Harry

    Fisher, William Hayes

    Bentinck, Lord Henry C.

    Cohen, Benjamin Louis

    Fison, Frederick William

    Bethell, Commander

    Collings, Rt. Hon. Jesse

    FitzWygram, General Sir F.

    Bigwood, James

    Colston, Chas. Edw. H. Athole

    Flannery, Sir Fortescue

    Blundell, Colonel Henry

    Cook, Fred. Lucas (Lambeth)

    Flower, Ernest

    Boscawen, Arthur Griffith-

    Cooke, C. W. Radcliffe (Heref d)

    Foster, Harry S. (Suffolk)

    Bousfield, William Robert

    Cornwallis, Fiennes Stanley W.

    Fry, Lewis

    Brassey, Albert

    Cox, Irwin Edward Bainbridge

    Galloway, William Johnson

    Brodrick, Rt. Hon. St. John

    Curzon, Viscount

    Gedge, Sydney

    Bullard, Sir Harry

    Dalkeith, Earl of

    Gibbons, J. Lloyd

    Burdett-Coutts, W.

    Davies, Sir Horatio D (Chatham

    Gibbs, Hn. A. G. H. (City of Lond

    Butcher, John George

    Dickson-Poynder, Sir John P.

    Giles, Charles Tyrrell

    Campbell, J. H. M. (Dublin)

    Disraeli, Coningsby Ralph

    Gilliat, John Saunders

    Carlile, William Walter

    Donkin, Richard Sim

    Goldsworthy, Major-General

    Gordon, Hon. John Edward

    M'Arthur, Charles (Liverpool)

    Sidebottom, Wm. (Derbysh.)

    Gorst, Rt. Hn. Sir John Eldon

    Malcolm, Ian

    Simeon, Sir Barrington

    Goschen, Rt. Hn. G. J (St Georg's

    Manners, Lord Edward Wm. J.

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

    Goulding, Edward Alfred

    Maple, Sir John Blundell

    Spencer, Ernest

    Gray, Ernest (West Ham)

    Mildmay, Francis Bingham

    Stanley, Hn. Arthur(Ormskirk)

    Greene, Henry D. (Shrewsbury)

    Milward, Colonel Victor

    Stanley, Edw. Jas. (Somerset)

    Greene, W. Raymond-(Cambs.)

    Monk, Charles James

    Stanley, Lord (Lancs.)

    Greville, Hon. Ronald

    Moon, Edward Robert Pacy

    Stephens, Henry Charles

    Gull, Sir Cameron

    Moore, William (Antrim, N.)

    Stirling-Maxwell, Sir John M.

    Hanbury, Rt. Hon. Robt. Wm.

    More, Robert J. (Shropshire)

    Stone, Sir Benjamin

    Hill, Rt. Hn. A. Staveley (Staffs.

    Morrell, George Herbert

    Strauss, Arthur

    Howard, Joseph

    Morton, A. H. A. (Deptford)

    Strutt, Hon. Charles Hedley

    Hozier, Hn. James Henry Cecil

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

    Sturt, Hon. Humphry Napier

    Jackson, Rt. Hon. Wm. Lawies

    Murray, Charles J. (Coventry)

    Sutherland, Sir Thomas

    Jeffreys, Arthur Frederick

    Murray, Col. Wyndham (Bath)

    Thornton, Percy M.

    Jenkins, Sir John Jones

    Newdigate, Francis Alexander

    Tomlinson, Wm. Edw. Murray

    Jessel, Captain Herbert Merton

    Nicholson, William Graham

    Tritton, Charles Ernest

    Johnston, William (Belfast)

    Nicol, Donald Ninian

    Usborne, Thomas

    Keswick, William

    Northcote, Hn. Sir H. Stafford

    Valentia, Viscount

    Kimber, Henry

    Orr-Ewing, Charles Lindsay

    Vincent, Col. Sir C. E. Howard

    Knowles, Lees

    Pierpoint, Robert

    Wanklyn, James Leslie

    Lawrence, Sir E. Durning-(Corn

    Pollock, Harry Frederick

    Warde, Lieut.-Col. C. E. (Kent

    Lawson, John Grant (Yorks.)

    Pryce-Jones, Lt.-Col. Edward

    Williams, Jos. Powell-(Birm.)

    Lea, Sir Thomas (Londonderry)

    Purvis, Robert

    Wilson, J. W. (Worcestersh, N.

    Leigh-Bennett, Henry Currie

    Rasch, Major Frederic Carne

    Wilson-Todd. Wm. H. (Yorks.)

    Llewelyn, Sir Dillwyn-(Sw'nsea

    Ridley, Rt. Hn. Sir Matthew W.

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

    Lockwood, Lt.-Colonel A. R.

    Ritchie, Rt. Hn. Chas. Thomson

    Wortley, Rt. Hn. C. B. Stuart-

    Loder, Gerald Walter Erskine

    Robertson, Herbert (Hackney)

    Wylie, Alexander

    Long, Col. Chas. W. (Evesham)

    Rollit, Sir Albert Kaye

    Wyndham, George

    Long, Rt. Hon. W. (Liverpool)

    Russell, T. W. (Tyrone)

    Wyndham-Quin, Major W. H.

    Lorne, Marquess of

    Ryder, John Herbert Dudley

    Wyvill, Marmaduke D'Arcy

    Lowe, Francis William

    Sandys, Lt.-Col. Thos. Myles

    Young, Commander (Berks, E.)

    Lowles, John

    Savory, Sir Joseph

    Macartney, W. G. Ellison

    Scoble, Sir Andrew Richard

    TELLERS FOR THE AYES—Sir William Walrond and Mr. Anstruther.

    Macdona, John Cumming

    Seely, Charles Hilton

    MacIver, David (Liverpool)

    Sharpe, William Edward T.

    Maclure. Sir John William

    Sidebotham, J. W. (Cheshire)

    NOES.

    Abraham, William (Cork, N. E.

    Jameson, Major J. Eustace

    Palmer, Sir Chas. M. (Durham)

    Asher, Alexander

    Joicey, Sir James

    Pearson, Sir Weetman D.

    Austin, M. (Limerick, W.)

    Jones, W. (Carnarvonshire)

    Pirie, Duncan V.

    Balfour, Rt. Hn. J. B. (Clackm.)

    Kearley, Hudson E.

    Provand, Andrew Dryburgh

    Billson, Alfred

    Kilbride, Denis

    Rickett, J. Compton

    Bolton, Thomas Dolling

    Lawson, Sir W. (Cumberland)

    Roberts, John Bryn (Eifion)

    Burns, John

    Lewis, John Herbert

    Roberts, John H. (Denbighs.)

    Caldwell, James

    Lloyd-George, David

    Robson, William Snowdon

    Cameron, Sir Chas. (Glasgow)

    Macaleese, Daniel

    Runciman, Walter

    Channing, Francis Allston

    MacDonnel, Dr. M. A. (Q'n's C).

    Souttar, Robinson

    Crilly, Daniel

    M'Dermott, Patrick

    Steadman, William Charles

    Curran, Thomas (Sligo, S.)

    M'Ewan, William

    Trevelyan, Charles Philips

    Dalziel, James Henry

    M'Leod, John

    Ure, Alexander

    Dilke, Rt. Hon. Sir Charles

    Maddison, Fred.

    Wallace, Robert

    Fenwick, Charles

    Maden, John Henry

    Warner, Thomas Courtenay T.

    Gourley, Sir Edward T.

    Mendl, Sigismund Ferdinand

    Whittaker, Thomas Palmer

    Griffith, Ellis J.

    Morgan, W. Pritchard (M'rthyr

    Williams, J. Carvell (Notts.)

    Hayne, Rt Hn. Charles Seale-

    Morton, E. J.C. (Devonport)

    Woodhouse, Sir J. T. (Hudd'rfld

    Hazell, Walter

    Moss, Samuel

    Healthy, T. M. (N. Louth)

    Moulton, John Fletcher

    TELLERS FOR THE NOES—Captain Donelan and Mr. Donal Sullivan.

    Hedderwick, Thomas C. H.

    Norton, Capt. Cecil William

    Holland, Wm. H. (York, W. R.

    O'Connor, J. (Wicklow, W.)

    Horniman, Frederick John

    Oldroyd, Mark

    49. £69,096, to complete the sum for Prisons, Ireland.
    50. £54,669, to complete the sum for Reformatory and Industrial Schools, Ireland.
    51. £4,044, to complete the sum for Dundrum Criminal Lunatic Asylum, Ireland.

    CLASS VI.
    52. £7,497, to complete the sum for Hospitals and Charities, Ireland.

    CLASS VII.
    53. Motion made, and Question put, "That a sum, not exceeding £10,928 (including a Supplementary sum of £4,000), 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, 1900, for certain Miscellaneous Expenses."
    The Committee divided:—Ayes, 180; Noes, 60. (Division List, No. 356.)

    AYES.

    Allsopp, Hon. George

    Flannery, Sir Fortescue

    Murray, Charles J. (Coventry)

    Anson, Sir William Reynell

    Flower, Ernest

    Murray, Col. Wyndham (Bath)

    Arnold, Alfred

    Foster, Harry S. (Suffolk)

    Newdigate, Francis Alexander

    Atkinson, Rt. Hon. John

    Fry, Lewis

    Nicholson, William Graham

    Bagot, Capt. Josceline FitzRoy

    Galloway, William Johnson

    Nicol, Donald Ninian

    Balfour, Rt Hn Gerald W. (Leeds

    Gedge, Sydney

    Northcote, Hon. Sir H. Stafford

    Balfour, Rt. Hn J Blair (Clackm.

    Gibbons, J. Lloyd

    Orr-Ewing, Charles Lindsay

    Banbury, Frederick George

    Gibbs, Hn. A. G. H. (City of Lon.

    Barnes, Frederic Gorell

    Giles, Charles Tyrrell

    Parkes, Ebenezer

    Barton, Dunbar Plunket

    Gilliat, John Saunders

    Pierpoint, Robert

    Beach. Rt. Hn. Sir M. H. (Bristol

    Gladstone, Rt. Hon. H. John

    Pollock, Harry Frederick

    Bentinck, Lord Henry C.

    Goldsworthy, Major-General

    Pryce-Jones, Lt.-Col. Edward

    Bethell, Commander

    Gordon, Hon. John Edward

    Purvis, Robert

    Bigwood, James

    Gorst, Rt. Hon. Sir John Eldon

    Rasch, Major Frederic Carne

    Blundell, Colonel Henry

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

    Ridley, Rt. Hon. Sir M. W.

    Boscawen, Arthur Griffith-

    Goulding, Edward Alfred

    Ritchie, Rt. Hon. C. Thomson

    Bousfield, William Robert

    Gray, Ernest (West Ham)

    Robertson, Herbert (Hackney)

    Brassey, Albert

    Greene, Henry D. (Shrewsbury)

    Rollit, Sir Albert Kaye

    Brodrick, Rt. Hn. St. John.

    Greene, W. Raymond-(Cambs.)

    Russell, T. W. (Tyrone)

    Bullard, Sir Harry

    Greville, Hon. Ronald

    Ryder, John Herbert Dudley

    Burdett-Coutts, W.

    Gull, Sir Cameron

    Sandys, Lt.-Col. Thos. Myles

    Butcher, John George

    Hanbury, Rt. Hon. Robert W.

    Savory, Sir Joseph

    Campbell, J. H. M. (Dublin)

    Hill, Rt, Hon. A. Staveley (Staffs

    Scoble, Sir Andrew Richard

    Carlile, William Walter

    Howard, Joseph

    Seely, Charles Hilton

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

    Hozier, Hon. James Henry Cecil

    Sharpe, William Edward T.

    Cayzer, Sir Charles William

    Jackson, Rt. Hon. Wm. Lawies

    Sidebotham, J. W. (Cheshire)

    Cecil, Evelyn (Hertford, East)

    Jeffreys, Arthur Frederick

    Sidebottom, Wm. (Derbyshire)

    Cecil, Lord Hugh (Greenwich)

    Jenkins, Sir John Jones

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

    Chaloner, Captain R. G. W.

    Johnston, William (Belfast)

    Spencer, Ernest

    Chamberlain, Rt. Hn. J. (Birm.

    Keswick, William

    Stanley, Hon. A. (Ormskirk)

    Chamberlain, J. Austen (Worc'r

    Kimber, Henry

    Stanley, Edward Jas. (Somerset

    Chaplin, Rt. Hon. Henry

    Knowles, Lees

    Stanley, Lord (Lancs.)

    Charrington, Spencer

    Lawrence, Sir E. Durning-(Corn

    Stephens, Henry Charles

    Chelsea, Viscount

    Lawson, John Grant (Yorks.)

    Stirling-Maxwell, Sir John M.

    Cochrane, Hon. Thos. H. A. E.

    Lea, Sir Thos. (Londonderry)

    Stone, Sir Benjamin

    Coghill, Douglas Harry

    Leigh-Bennett, Henry Currie

    Strauss, Arthur

    Cohen, Benjamin Louis

    Llewelyn, Sir Dillwyn-(Swans.)

    Strutt, Hon. Charles Hedley

    Collings, Rt. Hon. Jesse

    Lockwood, Lieut.-Col. A. R.

    Sturt, Hon. Humphry Napier

    Colston, C. Edward H. Athole

    Loder, Gerald Walter Erskine

    Sutherland, Sir Thomas

    Cook, Fred. Lucas (Lambeth)

    Long, Col. Chas. W. (Evesham

    Thornton, Percy M.

    Cooke, C. W. Radcliffe (Heref'd)

    Long, Rt. Hn. Walter (L'pool)

    Tomlinson, Wm. E. Murray

    Cornwallis, Fiennes Stanley W.

    Lorne, Marquess of

    Tritton, Charles Ernest

    Cox, Irwin Edward Bainbridge

    Lowe, Francis William

    Usborne, Thomas

    Curzon, Viscount

    Lowles, John

    Valentia, Viscount

    Dalkeith, Earl of

    Macartney, W. G. Ellison

    Vincent, Col. Sir C. E. Howard

    Davies, Sir H. D. (Chatham)

    Macdona, John Cumming

    Dickson-Poynder, Sir John P.

    MacIver, David (Liverpool)

    Wanklyn, James Leslie

    Disraeli, Coningsby Ralph

    Maclure, Sir John William

    Warde, Lt.-Col. C. E. (Kent)

    Donkin, Richard Sim

    M'Arthur, Charles (Liverpool)

    Williams, Joseph Powell-(Birm

    Doughty, George

    M'Ewan, William

    Wilson, J. W. (Worcestersh. N.

    Douglas, Rt. Hon. A. Akers-

    Malcolm, Ian

    Wilson-Todd, W. H. (Yorks.)

    Doxford, William Theodore

    Manners, Lord Edward W. J.

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

    Duncombe, Hon. Hubert V.

    Maple, Sir John Blundell

    Wortley, Rt. Hon. C. B. Stuart-

    Dyke, Rt. Hn. Sir William Hart

    Mildmay, Francis Bingham

    Wylie, Alexander

    Fellowes, Hon. Ailwyn Edward

    Milward, Colonel Victor

    Wyndham, George

    Field, Admiral (Eastbourne)

    Monk, Charles James

    Wyndham-Quin, Major W. H.

    Finch, George H.

    Moon, Edward Robert Pacy

    Wyvil, Marmaduke D'Arcy

    Finlay, Sir R. Bannatyne

    Moore, William (Antrim, N.)

    Young, Commander (Berks, E.

    Firbank, Joseph Thomas

    More, Robt. Jasper (Shropshire)

    Fisher, William Hayes

    Morrell, George Herbert

    TELLERS FOR THE AYES—Sir William Walrond and Mr. Anstruther.

    Fison, Frederick William

    Morton, Arthur H. A. (Deptford

    FitzWygram, General Sir F.

    Murray, Rt. Hn Abraham (Bute

    NOES.

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

    Holland, Wm. H. (York, W. R.)

    Oldroyd, Mark

    Asher, Alexander

    Horniman, Frederick John

    Palmer, Sir C. M. (Durham)

    Austin, M. (Limerick, W.)

    Jameson, Major J. Eustace

    Pearson, Sir Weetman D.

    Billson, Alfred

    Joicey, Sir James

    Pirie, Duncan V.

    Bolton, Thomas Dolling

    Jones, Wm. (Carnarvonshire)

    Provand, Andrew, Dryburgh

    Burns, John

    Kearley, Hudson E.

    Rickett, J. Compton

    Caldwell, James

    Kilbride, Denis

    Roberts, John Bryn (Eifion)

    Cameron, Sir Charles (Glasgow

    Lawson, Sir W. (Cumberland)

    Roberts, John H. (Denbighs)

    Channing, Francis Allston

    Lewis, John Herbert

    Robson, William Snowdon

    Crilly, Daniel

    Lloyd-George, David

    Runciman, Walter

    Curran, Thomas (Sligo, S.)

    Macaleese, Daniel

    Souttar, Robinson

    Dalziel, James Henry

    MacDonnell, Dr. M. A (Q'n'sC.)

    Sullivan, Donal (Westmeath)

    Dilke, Rt. Hon. Sir Charles

    M'Dermott, Patrick

    Trevelyan, Charles Philips

    Donelan, Captain A.

    M'Leod, John

    Ure, Alexander

    Fenwick, Charles

    Maden, John Henry

    Warner, Thomas Courtenay T.

    Gourley, Sir Edw. Temperley

    Mendl, Sigismund Ferdinand

    Whittaker, Thomas Palmer

    Griffith, Ellis J.

    Morgan, W. Pritchard (Merthyr

    Williams, John Carvell (Notts

    Hayne, Rt. Hn. Charles Seale-

    Morton, Edw. J. C. (Devonport)

    Woodhouse, Sir J. T. (Huddrsf'd

    Hazell, Walter

    Moss, Samuel

    TELLERS FOR THE NOES.—Captain Norton and Mr. Steadman.

    Healy, Timothy M.(N. Lonth)

    Moulton, John Fletcher

    Hedderwick, Thos. Charles H.

    O'Connor, James (Wicklow, W.

    54. £20,000, for the Congested Districts Board, Scotland.
    55. £14,251, for repayments to the Civil Contingencies Fund.
    56. £60,000, for the Paris Exhibition, 1900.

    'ARMY ESTIMATES, 1899–1900.
    57. £305,800, for Medical Establishment, Pay, etc.
    58. £571,000, for Militia Pay, Bounty, etc.
    59. £75,000, for Yeomanry Cavalry, Pay and Allowance.
    60. £624,200, for Volunteer Corps, Pay and Allowances.
    61. £790,000, for Transports and Remounts.
    62. £111,100, for Establishments for Military Education.
    63. £60,200, for Miscellaneous Effective Services.
    64. Motion made, and Question put, "That a sum, not exceeding £248,300, be granted to Her Majesty, to defray the Charge for the Salaries and Miscellaneous Charges of the War Office, which will come in course of payment during the year ending on the 31st day of March,1900."
    The Committee divided:—Ayes, 180; Noes, 57. (Division List, No. 357.)

    AYES.

    Allsopp, Hon. George

    Cayzer, Sir Charles William

    Fellowes, Hon. Ailwyn Ed.

    Anson, Sir William Reynell

    Cecil, Evelyn (Hertford, East)

    Field, Admiral (Eastbourne)

    Arnold, Alfred

    Cecil, Lord Hugh (Greenwich)

    Finch, George H.

    Asher, Alexander

    Chaloner, Captain R. G. W.

    Finlay, Sir Robert Bannatyne

    Atkinson, Rt. Hon. John

    Chamberlain, J. A. (Worc'r)

    Firbank, Joseph Thomas

    Bagot, Capt. Josceline FitzRoy

    Chaplin, Rt. Hon. Henry

    Fisher, William Hayes

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

    Charrington, Spencer

    Fison, Frederick William

    Balfour, Rt. Hn. G. W. (Leeds

    Chelsea, Viscount

    FitzWygram, General Sir F.

    Balfour, Rt Hn J. Bair (Clackm.

    Cochrane, Hon. Thos. H. A. E.

    Flannery, Sir Fortescue

    Banbury, Frederick George

    Coghill, Douglas Harry

    Flower, Ernest

    Barnes, Frederic Gorrell

    Cohen, Benjamin Louis

    Foster, Harry S. (Suffolk)

    Barton, Dunbar Plunket

    Collings, Rt. Hon. Jesse

    Fry, Lewis

    Bathurst, Hon. Allen Benjamin

    Colston, Chas. Edw. H. Athole

    Galloway, William Johnson

    Beach, Rt. Hn. Sir M. H. (Bristol

    Cook, Fred. Lucas (Lambeth)

    Gedge, Sydney

    Bentinck, Lord Henry C.

    Cooke, C. W. R (Hereford)

    Gibbons, J. Lloyd

    Bethell, Commander

    Cornwallis, Fiennes Stanley W.

    Gibbs, Hn. A. G. H. (C. of Lond.)

    Bigwood, James

    Cox, Irwin Edwd. Bainbridge

    Giles, Charles Tyrrell

    Blundell, Colonel Henry

    Curzon, Viscount

    Goldsworthy, Major-General

    Boscawen, Arthur Griffith

    Dalkeith, Earl of

    Gordon, Hon. John Edward

    Bousfield, William Robert

    Davies, Sir Horatio D. (Chath'm

    Gorst, Rt. Hon. Sir J. Eldon

    Brassey, Albert

    Dickson-Poynder, Sir John P.

    Goschen, Rt Hn G. J (St George's

    Brodrick, Rt. Hon. St. John

    Disraeli, Coningsby Ralph

    Goulding, Edward Alfred

    Bullard, Sir Harry

    Donkin, Richard Sim

    Gray, Ernest (West Ham)

    Burdett-Coutts, W.

    Doughty, George

    Greene, H. D. (Shrewsbury)

    Butcher, John George

    Douglas, Rt. Hon. A Akers-

    Greene, W. Raymond-(Cambs.)

    Campbell, J. H. M. (Dublin)

    Doxford, William Theodore

    Greville, Hon. Ronald

    Carlile, William Walter

    Duncombe, Hon. Hubert V.

    Gull, Sir Cameron

    Cavendish, V. C W (Derbyshire)

    Dyke, Rt. Hon. Sir Wm. Hart

    Hanbury, Rt. Hon. R. Wm.

    Hill, Rt. Hn. A. Staveley (Staffs.

    Monk, Charles James

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

    Howard, Joseph

    Moon, Edward Robert Pacy

    Spencer, Ernest

    Hozier, Hon. James Henry Cecil

    Moore, William (Antrim, N.)

    Stanley, Hon. A. (Ormskirk)

    Jackson, Rt. Hon. Wm. Lawies

    More, Robt. Jasper (Shropsh.)

    Stanley, Edw. Jas. (Somerset)

    Jeffreys, Arthur Frederick

    Morrell, George Herbert

    Stanley, Lord (Lancs.)

    Jenkins, Sir John Jones

    Morton, A. H. A. (Deptford)

    Stephens, Henry Charles

    Johnston, William (Belfast)

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

    Stirling-Maxwell, Sir John M.

    Keswick, William

    Murray, Charles J. (Coventry)

    Stone, Sir Benjamin

    Kimber, Henry

    Murray, Col. Wyndham (Bath)

    Strauss, Arthur

    Knowles, Lees

    Newdigate, Francis Alexander

    Strutt, Hon. Charles Hedley

    Lawrence, Sir E.Durning-(Corn

    Nicholson, William Graham

    Sturt, Hon. Humphry Napier

    Lawson, John Grant (Yorks)

    Nicol, Donald Ninian

    Sutherland, Sir Thomas

    Lea, Sir Thos. (Londonderry)

    Northcote, Hon. Sir H. Stafford

    Thornton, Percy M.

    Leigh-Bennett, Henry Currie

    Orr-Ewing, Charles Lindsay

    Tomlinson, Wm. E. Murray

    Llewelyn, Sir Dillwyn-(Sw'ns'a

    Parkes, Ebenezer

    Tritton, Charles Ernest

    Lockwood, Lt.-Col. A. R.

    Pierpoint, Robert

    Usborne, Thomas

    Loder, Gerald Walter Erskine

    Pollock, Harry Frederick

    Valentia, Viscount

    Long, Col. C. W. (Evesham)

    Pryce-Jones, Lt.-Col. Edward

    Vincent, Col. Sir C. E. H.

    Long, Rt. Hon. W. (Liverpool)

    Purvis, Robert

    Wanklyn, James Leslie

    Lorne, Marquess of

    Rasch, Major Frederic Carne

    Warde, Lieut.-Col. C. E. (Kent)

    Lowe, Francis William

    Ridley, Rt. Hn. Sir Matthew W.

    Williams, Joseph Powell-(Birm

    Lowles, John

    Ritchie. Rt. Hon Chas. Thomson

    Wilson, J. W. (Worcestersh., N.)

    Macartney, W. G. Ellison

    Robertson, Herbert (Hackney)

    Wilson-Todd, W. H. (Yorks.)

    Macdona, John Cumming

    Rollit, Sir Albert Kaye

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

    MacIver, David (Liverpool)

    Russell, T. W. (Tyrone)

    Wortley, Rt. Hn. C. B. Stuart-

    Maclure, Sir John William

    Ryder, John Herbert Dudley

    Wylie, Alexander

    M'Arthur, Charles (Liverpool)

    Savory, Sir Joseph

    Wyndham, George

    M'Ewan, William

    Scoble, Sir Andrew Richard

    Wyndham-Quin, Major W. H.

    Malcolm, Ian

    Seely, Charles Hilton

    Wyvill, Marmaduke D'Arcy

    Manners. Lord Edward W. J.

    Sharpe, William Edward T.

    Young, Commander (Berks, E.)

    Maple, Sir John Blundell

    Sidebotham, J. W. (Cheshire)

    TELLERS FOR THE AYES—Sir William Walrond and Mr. Anstruther.

    Mildmay, Francis Bingham

    Sidebottom, Wm. (Derbysh.)

    Milward, Colonel Victor

    Simeon, Sir Barrington

    NOES.

    Abraham, William (Cork, N. E.)

    Jameson, Major J. Eustace

    Palmer, Sir Charles M. (Durham

    Austin, M. (Limerick, W.)

    Joicey, Sir James

    Pearson, Sir Weetman D.

    Billson, Alfred

    Jones, William (Carnarvonsh.

    Provand, Andrew Dryburgh

    Burns, John

    Kearley, Hudson E.

    Rickett, J. Compton

    Caldwell, James

    Kilbride, Denis

    Roberts, John Bryn (Eifion)

    Cameron, Sir Charles (Glasgow)

    Lawson, Sir W. (Cumb'land)

    Roberts, John H. (Denbighs.)

    Channing, Francis Allston

    Lewis, John Herbert

    Robson, William Snowdon

    Crilly, Daniel

    Lloyd-George, David

    Runciman, Walter

    Curran, Thomas (Sligo, S.)

    Macaleese, Daniel

    Souttar, Robinson

    Dalziel, James Henry

    MacDonnell, Dr. M. A. (Q. C.)

    Steadman, William Charles

    Dilke, Lt. Hon. Sir Charles

    M'Dermott, Patrick

    Sullivan, Donal (Westmeath)

    Donelan, Captain A.

    M'Leod, John

    Trevelyan, Charles Philips

    Fenwick, Charles

    Maden, John Henry

    Ure, Alexander

    Gourley, Sir Edw. Temperley

    Mendl, Sigismund Ferdinand

    Warner, Thomas Courtenay T.

    Griffith, Ellis J.

    Morgan, W. P. (Merthyr)

    Whittaker, Thomas Palmer

    Hayne, Rt. Hon. C Seale-

    Morton, Edw. J. C. (Devonport)

    Williams, John Carvell (Notts)

    Hazell, Walter

    Moss, Samuel

    Woodhouse, Sir J T (Huddersf'd

    Healy, Timothy M. (N. Louth)

    Moulton, John Fletcher

    TELLERS FOR THE NOES—Captain Norton and Mr. Pirie.

    Holland, W. H. (York. W. R.)

    O'Connor, Jas. (Wicklow, W.)

    Horniman, Frederick John

    Oldroyd, Mark

    65. £100, for Ordnance Factories.
    Resolutions to be reported To-morrow.

    WAYS AND MEANS.
    Considered in Committee.
    (In the Committee.)
    Resolvod—
    "That, towards making good the Supply granted to Her Majesty for the service of the
    1420
    year ending on the 31st day of March, 1900, the sum of £55,858,263 be granted out of the Consolidated Fund of the United Kingdom."—(Mr. Hanbury.)
    Resolution to be reported to-morrow.
    In pursuance of the Order of the House of the 17th day of July last, Mr. Speaker adjourned the House without Question put.
    House adjourned accordingly at five minutes after One o'clock.

SAT FIRST.
THE EARL OF WINCHILSEA AND NOTTINGHAMsat first in Parliament after the death of his brother.
PRIVATE BILL BUSINESS.
  HASTINGS HARBOUR BILL [H.L.]
    OYSTERMOUTH RAILWAY OR TRAM-ROAD BILL [H.L.]
    Commons Amendments considered, and agreed to.
    NEWCASTLE-UPON-TYNE TRAMWAYS AND IMPROVEMENT BILL.
    Read 3a, with the Amendments, and passed, and returned to the Commons.
LONDON IMPROVEMENTS BILL.
  HARROW AND UXBRIDGE RAILWAY BILL.
    UXBRIDGE AND RICKMANSWORTH RAILWAY BILL.
    Read 3a, with the Amendments; further Amendments made; Bills passed, and returned to the Commons.

    DUBLIN CORPORATION BILL.
    Commons Amendments and reasons for disagreeing to several of the Lords Amendments considered (according to Order).
    LORD TWEEDMOUTH: My Lords, I beg to move that this House do not insist upon the first Amendment of the Commons, striking out the extension of the city limits so as to include the townships of Rathmines and Rathgar, Pembroke, Drumcondra, Clonliffe and Glasnevin and Clontarf. I am afraid it will be considered that I have a somewhat uphill task to induce your Lordships' House, at this time of the session, and as at present composed, to go back on a decision of a Committee of this House; but I enter on the task with a light heart, having com-
    1210
    plete confidence in the strength of the case I have to put before your Lordships, and being certain that I shall gain my case, even though it be that somewhat tasteless fruit—a moral victory. It is true that I am asking you to overthrow a decision of a Committee of your Lordships' House, presided over by a Peer of such great knowledge and influence as the Duke of Northumberland. I know that both Houses of Parliament are exceedingly loth to set aside decisions of Committees, and rightly so, but, at the same time, an occasion does occur sometimes when the decisions arrived at by Committees are set aside by the later decisions of this or the other House of Parliament. I will call your Lordships' attention to a case which occurred this session—the case of a Committee presided over by my noble friend Lord Ribblesdale. That Committee inserted in the London Water Companies Bill a Sinking Fund Clause, which had in its favour the whole weight of recent Parliamentary precedent, but which, nevertheless, in the exercise of your judgment, your Lordships decided to throw out. There was a great difference between the position in the case of that Committee and the present position, for in throwing over the decision of Lord Ribblesdale's Committee your Lordships had the support of the action of the House of Commons, who, both in Committee and in the full House, declined to insert a Sinking Fund Clause in that Bill. Moreover, you also had the support of the deliberate judgment of the Executive Government of the day, who expressed the opinion that the Sinking Fund Clause should not be inserted in that Bill. The conditions of the present case are different. You are now flying in the face of the repeated decisions of the House of Commons. When this Bill went before that House, in the first instance, there was no opposition raised to it, not even on the Second Reading, at which stage any opposition, if it existed, would have been raised. The Bill went to a Committee of that House, where it was carefully examined, and it passed through the ordeal of an examination which extended over seventeen days. When it went back to the House of Commons the exceptional course was taken of opposing it on the Third Reading, and, in a large House of 424 Members, there was a majority of 160 in favour of the Bill, the numbers being 291

    1211
    for, and 129 against. The Bill then came to this House, and was not opposed on the Second Reading. It went to a Committee, and the most important part of the Bill was excised in that Committee. The Bill went back in that form to the House of Commons, and the House of Commons, by an enormous majority, affirmed its original decision, and decided that the proposals of the Bill, as presented to your Lordships in the first instance, were desirable and expedient. In the second Division, which took place on Tuesday last, there was, in a House of 216, a majority of 108, the figures in the Division Lobbies being 160 for, and 52 against. As I have already said, your action had the support in the case of Lord Ribblesdale's Committee of the Government of the day. On this occasion, the Government of the day remained neutral. It seems to me that their neutrality, as displayed in the House of Commons, was a very favourable and a very friendly one, for when I examine the Division List in the other House, I find that there voted in the majority 15 members of the Government, including two Cabinet Ministers, whilst in the minority there voted one Irish Anti-Nationalist Member, and four of the Whips. That is the extent to which the Government was represented against this Bill in the House of Commons on Tuesday last. So much for the recent Parliamentary history of the Bill. Let me now come to the proposals of the Bill itself. In the year 1840 the boundaries of the City of Dublin were settled. Since that day there has been no extension of those boundaries; but, curiously enough, by the settlement of 1840 two of these townships which it is now desired to include within the city boundaries were cut out of it. I refer to the townships of Pembroke and Clontarf. So matters went on till the year 1879, when a Boundary Commission was appointed, which went closely and carefully into the whole circumstances of the boundaries of the City of Dublin, and the possibility of adding to the extent of the city's domains. That Commission reported, and this Bill follows exactly the lines of the Report of that Commission; it is upon that Report that its provisions are founded. The City of Dublin is a very densely-populated district. It has but a small area—3,800 acres—and its population is as high as 64 per acre. This congestion of the City of
    1212
    Dublin has served to encourage the migration from within the city boundaries of the richer and more well-to-do inhabitants, who have gone into the suburbs. Around the City of Dublin have grown up a series of townships in which the professional and better-to-do inhabitants of Dublin dwell, but they are essentially wrapped up in the interests of the City of Dublin. The inhabitants of those townships make their money from operations within the boundary of the city, and what this Bill desires is to bring the townships within the general government of the city, and to make the city and the townships one municipality, enjoying the benefit of one form of municipal government. That is very desirable, if on sanitary grounds alone. I cannot refrain from quoting a summary of some of the evidence which was given on that point before the Committee in the other House by men of the highest authority—such as Sir Francis McCabe and Mr. T. W. Russell. Sir Francis McCabe was from 1878 to 1888 the Inspector of the Dublin District under the Local Government Board of Ireland. From 1888 to 1898 he was the Medical Commissioner of the Local Government Board of Ireland. The summary of his evidence may be given thus: He said the sanitary staff of Dublin is one of the most efficient in the United Kingdom, that the maintenance of separate sanitary staffs for the five separate townships was both extravagant and inefficient, that three out of the five townships had not even adopted the Notification of Infectious Diseases Act; and, lastly, he said he had no hesitation in affirming that it was impossible for the sanitary condition, and, therefore, for the health of Greater Dublin, to be made what it ought to be unless the whole district was merged into one, and placed under the supervision of the medical officer of health for Dublin, so as to secure one uniform system of sanitary supervision for the whole district. These words, coming from such an authority, ought to have great weight with your Lordships. Mr. T. W. Russell, a member of the present Government and a gentleman whose political opinions do not agree with my own, has given very important evidence on this point. Mr. Russell is now Parliamentary Secretary to the Local Government Board, and has especially to take charge of matters of health and of local government. His

    1213
    reasons for an extension of the boundary were, first, that the interests of the city and townships are common interests; secondly, that the present condition under which the rich go out of the city and leave the poor to bear the burdens is essentially unjust to the city; thirdly, that the rate of mortality in the city is excessive; fourthly, that the disposal of the sewage is a scandal; and, fifthly, that the maintenance of several sanitary staffs leads to inefficient and extravagant expenditure. In contiguous districts, which practically form separate towns, it is desirable that you should have your work done in as simple and as efficient a manner as possible, and that you should give the various officers enough work to occupy their time, so that they may really earn the money they cost the ratepayers. That does not apply merely to sanitary matters. There are many subjects which can only be effectually dealt with in the case of towns and cities adjoining one another by a single service. Take such questions as the water supply, the fire brigade, and many other local duties that have to be performed by municipalities for the benefit of the community. It is desirable to cover as much ground as possible by these services. Then there is a further point, and it is this—that, owing to these richer townships growing up round the City of Dublin, the Corporation of the City have found very great difficulty in getting land in these townships to relieve the congested districts. The land in the townships has been taken by speculative builders, who have laid themselves out to build for the richer and middle-classes, and one of whose objects is to exclude houses for the poorer classes. This is the state of affairs in Dublin, and it was to remedy this state of affairs that the Corporation moved in the direction of this Bill. It is always rather difficult to meet arguments before they are made, but I take it that there are three principal arguments which will be used against this Bill. The first is that the proposals under this Bill are against precedent; the second is, that they inflict financial harm and grievance on the townships; and the third is, that they inflict unfair political disabilities on the townships also. I will, endeavour, my Lords, very briefly to deal with these points. As to the matter of precedent, I cannot at all admit that the proposal under this Bill is against pre-
    1214
    cedent or against custom. You find, throughout England and Scotland, that the great cities have extended their boundaries. It is said, on behalf of the opponents of this Bill, "That may be true enough, but when they have extended their boundaries they have done so with the consent of the districts to be included, and not against their wish." That is not my experience, and it is not my reading of the proceedings which have taken place in this and the other House with reference to schemes for the extension of municipalities. I think you will find it almost an invariable fact that the new areas which were to be merged in the older and bigger ones have always protested. They always prefer to be kings in their own little kingdoms, rather than to find themselves swamped in larger and bigger areas. It has been the same thing with regard to Parliamentary areas. I think I can give the noble Duke a case in a district which he knows, and which I know very well. Prior to 1885 the town of Berwick-on-Tweed had two members, and it was a borough of exceptional interest and exceptional position. It was decided that the borough should lose its two members, and be merged into the north division of Northumberland. The voters of Berwick-on-Tweed protested, but it was for the benefit of the district and for the country at large that such an amalgamation should take place, and it was carried out. It is exactly the same thing with regard to the merging of contiguous areas. I think, if your Lordships will study the history of the proceedings in connection with the extension of municipalities either in England or in Scotland you will find that in almost every case the municipality has got its way, and has swallowed up the smaller townships which have been close to it, and dependent upon it. Take, for instance, the case of Glasgow. There you have had successive extensions. One district of Glasgow was for a long time successful in standing out against the Corporation, but it had to give way in the end, and the Glasgow Corporation now covers by far the greater part of the inhabited districts which surround it, to the benefit both of those districts and itself. An argument has been adduced against this Bill from the case of London. Well, I think London may be quoted essentially in favour of this Bill. The

    1215
    boundaries of the City of London have not been extended, but I maintain that to the fact that the city boundaries have not from time to time been extended so as to include the whole of the metropolis is due to a great many of our difficulties in regard to London government. That became the opinion of Parliament itself: for what did it do? In 1855 it determined to establish the Metropolitan Board of Works, which was to perform certain duties on behalf of London as a whole; and later on the London County Council was formed. It has been recognised that it is necessary that certain duties which are performed for these great crowded areas must be performed by one central authority for the whole area, and that principle has been given effect to again and again. There is the case of the London Government Bill of the present session. In that Bill you included in one area the City of Westminster and a number of great local governing areas. The Strand, St. James's, St. George's, and St. Martin's were included, and every one of these separate local areas protested strongly against their inclusion. They protested that they had a history of their own, that they were carrying on their work of local government in an excellent manner, but Parliament decided that it was desirable they should be included within the new borough of Westminster. This, I think, affords an admirable precedent for the inclusion of these townships in the area of the City of Dublin. Then I come to the question of finance. It is said that it will be hard on these townships to compel them to bear their share of the responsibility of the debt which now lies on the Corporation of the City of Dublin. It seems to me, on the other hand, that the proposals in this matter are extremely fair. The valuation of the City of Dublin at this moment is£720,000. The debt is about£1,600,000. The Corporation of the City of Dublin have an income from other sources than the rates amounting to£80,000. Their population is between 245,000 and 250,000. Take now the case of the townships. Their valuation is£313,000, their debt£450,000, and their population 85,000. If you take the proportion between the population of the townships and the proportion between the debt of the townships, and that of the population and the debt of the City of Dublin, you
    1216
    will find that they work out almost exactly the same. There are£450,000 of debt in the one case to £1,600,000 of debt in the other, and 85,000 population in the one case to 250,000 population in the other, and I think the townships will have somewhat the best of it, because by being merged they will get the benefit of the property in the hands of the Corporation, which, as I have already said, amounts to something like£80,000 a year. Therefore I cannot admit that in the matter of the taking over of debt there is any hardship to the townships. On the other hand, they will get the best of the bargain. At this moment the total rate in the City of Dublin is 9s. 4d. in the£,but the municipal rate, which alone can be properly compared with the rate in the townships, is 6s. 4d. in the£. I find that in the townships the rate runs from 3s. 6d. to 4s. 10d. in the£, an average of something like 4s. in the£; but it is a well-known fact, and it is provided for in this Bill, that at this moment the valuation of the City of Dublin is exceedingly low. The Commissioner, Mr. Barton, said that if a revaluation occurred—as it will occur under this Bill—the increase will be 25 per cent., whereas the increase in the valuation of the townships will not amount to more than 10 per cent. Taking the increase in the city as only equal to 20 per cent., and that in the townships to 10 per cent., the average rate would be 5s. 2d. in the city and about 4s. 1d. in the townships, or 1s. 1d. in the £ above that of the townships. I think that it is only fair that there should be a certain increase in the rate to be borne by the townships, because at the present moment they are getting the advantage of several municipal institutions without paying for them. They are getting the advantage of the fire brigade service, they are getting the advantage of technical schools, and they are also getting the advantage of the hospitals, owing to their proximity to the City of Dublin, without paying for them, or, at any rate, without paying their proper share. But so anxious were the promoters of this Bill that there should be no hardship imposed in this matter of rates on the townships that it has been provided in the Bill that there shall be no increase in the rate levied in the townships for ten years from the passing of this Bill. That surely is a sufficient safeguard, and one which should, in conjunction with

    1217
    what I have already said, relieve your Lordships from any apprehension that in the matter of rating you are going to inflict any injury on the inhabitants of the townships. I come now to the political aspect of the question. That was very frankly stated in the House of Commons by Mr. Carson and Colonel Saunderson. They said:
    "We do not like the Corporation of the City of Dublin because it is Nationalist, while we in the townships are Unionists. We do not like the idea of our affairs being dealt with by this Nationalist body."
    It certainly does seem to me that this is a funny argument to raise in the case of Irish affairs. We all know that the political feeling in Ireland, with the exception of one corner in the north-west, is overwhelmingly Nationalist. This is instanced in the House of Commons by the enormous number of Nationalist Members who are returned, and who will continue to be returned to represent Irish constituencies in that House. You have to deal with the fact that a very large proportion of the inhabitants hold Nationalist views, and I always understood that it was the view of the Party opposite that their only safe course was to disregard that fact, and give the Irish people exactly the same privileges as are given to the inhabitants of England and Scotland, without regard to their political opinions. As I understand, the fear is that the Unionist views of the townships will be swamped in the new corporation as proposed under the Bill. It is proposed in the Bill to add twenty-eight members to the Corporation, to make the number eighty-eight instead of sixty, and under that arrangement Pembroke will have eight members, Rathmines eight members, and Clontarf four members. The promoters of this Bill are most anxious to meet the views of their Unionist neighbours as fully and frankly as possible, and I am prepared to say, on behalf of the promoters, that they are willing to agree to any reasonable increase in the number of representatives that should be sent to the Dublin Corporation from the townships. I propose, and I have the authority of the promoters in so doing, to say that they are willing to increase the number of representatives in the case of Pembroke and Rathmines from eight in each case to twelve, and in the case of
    1218
    Clontarf from four to eight; that is to say, to add twelve more to the representatives of the townships. That will bring the total number of the representatives of the townships up to thirty-two, out of a total on the Corporation of 100. If the townships in the newly-added portions of the municipality are to have one-third of the whole number of the representatives on the Council, surely they may feel pretty confident that they will be able to maintain their own views, and secure that justice should be done to the districts they represent. I should have thought it would have proved an attraction to the Unionists of the townships to think that by so entering into the local government of their metropolis they would be able to have a great influence in leavening the Corporation and bringing it into harmony with their views. I can assure your Lordships that there is no intention on behalf of the promoters of this Bill to tyrannise politically over the districts proposed to be brought within the purview of the Corporation, and I hope your Lordships' Amendment will not be insisted upon. I think I have stated the principal points in support of this Bill. They are capable of considerable extension, and in the interests of good municipal government and of fair and equal treatment to the inhabitants of Ireland I appeal to your Lordships to agree to the Commons Amendment.
    Moved, "That this House do not insist upon the first Amendment, to which the Commons have disagreed."—(The Lord Tweedmouth.)
    THE DUKE OF NORTHUMBERLAND: My Lords, I am afraid it falls to my lot, as I had the honour of being Chairman of the Select Committee which considered this Bill, to reply to the noble Lord opposite. At the outset I feel compelled to say that it is rather an unfortunate circumstance that the duty of moving that the Commons Amendment should be agreed to should have been imposed upon an ex-Cabinet Minister sitting upon the Front Opposition Bench, for it has been the object of the Committee, and of almost everyone who appeared before them, to keep

    1219
    political considerations out of the question. I should have thought that someone less connected with Party questions could have been found to undertake the duty. Noble Lords must have been struck with the pleasure which the noble Lord derived, at the conclusion of his speech, from dwelling on the political side of the question. He offers increased representation to these townships in order that they may not be politically swamped. If your Lordships will condescend to take my advice, you will not increase the representation of these townships. The proposal to increase the representation of the townships has been considered by the Committee, not upon political grounds, for we were not dealing with a political question, but in the light simply of the population and rateable value of the townships, and we came to the conclusion, on the basis mentioned, that the townships have been generously dealt with, and that an increase in their representation would be unjustifiable. There is another objection to the noble Lord assuming this duty. He has no knowledge of the subject with which he deals, and he has been, if I may be allowed to say so, uncommonly badly coached. He told your Lordships that it was the usual thing to divide in the House of Commons on the Second Reading of a Private Bill. I venture to say that that is a very unusual course, and one which is seldom resorted to. When the noble Lord came to deal with this Bill he made a most amazing statement. He told us that the Bill was drawn upon the lines of the Report of the Boundary Commission of 1879. I can only give him a direct contradiction. I will not weary your Lordships by going into this point, but the Bill differs considerably from the proposals of the Commission. The noble Lord said the interests of these townships were inseparably mixed up with the Council of the City of Dublin; but we came to the conclusion that this was not proved. I am prepared to challenge any noble Lord to show that the interests of these townships are inseparably connected with the City of Dublin. The noble Lord said they benefited by the hospitals. That is true, but they contribute rather more liberally to their support than does the City of Dublin. With regard to the fire brigade service, the City of Dublin can charge what it likes for that service. I
    1220
    cannot ask your Lordships to follow me through the evidence taken before the House of Commons Committee, which lasted seventeen days, and through the evidence which was taken before your Lordships' Committee, which lasted fourteen days. I would rather put the question generally before you, and there is one point which I should specially urge before I go any further. It is the question of precedent. The noble Lord tried to quote some precedents for the inclusion in the city of authorities on the outskirts. I think, without conceit, I may say that I know something about this question, because we had two of the most eminent Parliamentary counsel who practise before your Lordships' Committees dealing with these precedents for the greater part of a whole day, and I think that on either side they brought up every possible precedent they could. I admit that they did not bring up some of the precedents which the noble Lord has quoted. But the noble Lord is apparently unaware that the proposals of this Bill do not touch the political representation or the Parliamentary representation at all. He actually quoted Berwick-on-Tweed having lost its two Members, as if that had anything whatever to do with this question, or was in any way a precedent of a local authority absorbing another local authority for purely local purposes. The noble Lord also quoted the City of London. I trust, my Lords, that the noble Lord, who is one of the Party who believe in the unification of London, intends to absorb the surrounding authorities of the City of London and make the Lord Mayor the head, not only of the Corporation of the City, but also of the vestries which are shortly to become borough councils. I have never heard that that was the idea they had in view in the unification of London. If London is a parallel case, it proves exactly the reverse of what the noble Lord contended. You have left the City exactly within its own boundaries, and you have erected around it authorities which will be much more on an equality with the City than the present bodies. That action is the reverse to what is proposed in this Bill. I should like to take your Lordships through what I think will be a little more correct history of this Bill. The Bill has been spoken of as if it had come to your Lordships' House in the condition in which it was originally introduced, but that is a

    1221
    great mistake. As it was drawn by the Corporation of Dublin it included a large part of the County of Dublin, but the House of Commons Committee could not stand that, and they cut out a considerable portion of the County of Dublin before the Bill reached your Lordships' House. They made other alterations, but they did keep within the Bill these five townships, four of which your Lordships' Committee have struck out. But how was that done? It was done by the casting Vote of the chairman, and your Lordships are, no doubt, aware that there is a great difference between the treatment of a Private Bill in the House of Lords and the treatment which is accorded to it in the House of Commons. The Private Bill Committee in the House of Commons consists of four individuals, and the Chairman has a casting vote. In the House of Lords it consists of five members, and the Chairman has no casting vote. Therefore the net support which up to that time the House of Commons had given to this Bill was that of two of its members. Very foolishly, as I think, a Division was challenged on the Third Reading in the House of Commons, who very properly, in my opinion, refused to throw out the Bill on the Third Reading. I have myself in former days repeatedly voted in favour of the Third Reading of a Private Bill when it has been challenged in the House of Commons, simply on the ground that the House of Commons must support its own Committees, and as a general rule Members will be found to vote against the rejection of a Private Bill on the Third Reading. It was all the more reasonable in this case because the House of Commons was the House in which the Bill was introduced, and those who voted knew perfectly well that the Bill was coming before your Lordships, and would be reconsidered. I think it would have been a monstrous thing that a Bill of this importance, promoted by the Corporation of the metropolis of Ireland, should, after it had passed through Committee, be rejected on the Third Reading in the House of Commons before the opportunity of considering it had been given to your Lordships. Therefore, in so far as the sanction of the House of Commons was given to this Bill, the Bill came to your Lordships' House with the approval of only two members of a Committee. It is not for me to defend the con-
    1222
    duct of the Committee over which I had the honour to preside. I can only say that I believe it exercised great impartiality and great patience, and I am not aware that any evidence was suppressed, that any undue haste was exercised, or that any material details were left unconsidered, and after sitting for fourteen days we came to the conclusion of which your Lordships are aware. This is not a personal matter. If your Lordships doubt the judgment or capacity of the Committee, if you take exception to anything in the manner in which the inquiry was conducted, if you think evidence which should have been heard was not permitted, or that undue haste was exercised in coming to a decision, then reverse our decision; and if your Lordships feel sufficiently in possession of all the facts, and if you feel that the decision of the Committee was wrong, by all means reverse it. But, my Lords, I submit, in the first place, that if you do so consider, a better time would have been on the Third Reading, before the Bill left your Lordships' House. I think the noble Lord who was so well informed of all the arguments might have raised these objections on the Second Reading; but the question now is, are you going to reverse your verdict at the bidding of two Members of the House of Commons, supported by a Division taken on the 1st of August at the fag end of a long session? I believe such a course is almost, if not quite, without precedent, and I would ask your Lordships to consider whether, in not insisting upon your Amendment, you would not strike a very serious blow at the independence of this House in dealing with Private Bill legislation, and fetter the action of Committees. I hardly know how to proceed, because I feel that your Lordships are entitled to know something of the pros and cons of the case, especially after what has been said by the noble Lord opposite, but at the same time I am quite incapable of boiling down the evidence into any reasonable space. I would ask your Lordships to remember that scarcely any precedent has been brought forward, or can be brought forward for dealing with townships in the way proposed in this Bill. Because these places are called townships it must not be supposed that they are two penny-half-penny places; these townships are urban authorities. Rathmines has the sixth

    1223
    largest population of any urban authority in Ireland, and it is the sixth or seventh largest township in the whole of Ireland. The rateable value of Rathmines is the fourth highest, and that of Pembroke the fifth highest, of any urban authority in Ireland. They are practically corporations, with all the powers of corporations, and with everything that tends to make corporations, with the exception that they have not mayors and aldermen. The inhabitants of these townships are practically unanimous against inclusion. It has not been pretended that they would get any benefit from being included, except the fact that they would have the honour and glory of being part of the Corporation of Dublin—an honour and a glory which they do not appreciate. Many attempts were made to show that these townships had failed in their duties. We had a lot of evidence showing that the roads of Rathmines were worse than the roads of Dublin, and so on; but as to mismanagement none was shown, except in one particular—we were not convinced that the drainage of some of these townships was perfect. The City of Dublin has poured the sewage of 240,000 people down the Liffey for fifty years past, and it was quite impossible for the Committee to judge for how much of the pollution of the Bay of Dublin the townships, and for how much the city was responsible. I entirely repudiate the idea that the townships will benefit in any way by their inclusion. However bad the position of the City of Dublin may be, and Mr. Russell himself said it was in a slough out of which it could not get without the inclusion of the townships, I could show that that slough is not as bad as it at first sight seems. The Corporation had two causes of complaint. One was that they had exhausted their borrowing powers, and that they wished for more. Well, they have got that now. We have, by a clause in another Bill, increased their borrowing power by £600,000, and they also have the power of getting a revaluation of the city. It is valued 25 or 30 per cent. below what it ought to be, and the richer parts are most under-valued, some parts being considered to be as much as 40 per cent. below their valuation. The reason assigned for not revaluing before was that the income-tax was paid on valuation, and that by not revaluing they defrauded the Imperial Exchequer of a great amount of income-tax which they
    1224
    would otherwise have had to pay. The other complaint was that they were hemmed in and wanted more room. They have now got more room, for 2,700 acres are added to the City of Dublin; and, as soon as this Bill passes, the city will have the largest area of any town in Ireland. I am sorry to have detained the House so long, but I did not think it would have been respectful to your Lordships not to have given some of the reasons which led us to come to the conclusion at which we arrived. I would urge your Lordships to insist upon your Amendment, chiefly upon the ground that no reason has been shown for upsetting the decision of the Committee which spent so much time in the consideration of this subject. If you do upset that decision, I cannot see how similar decisions are to be upheld in future.
    THE EARL OF KIMBERLEY: My Lords, I feel considerable diffidence in rising to address the House on this occasion, for it seems, according to what the noble Duke has said, that if one happens to sit on the Front Opposition Bench one is precluded from having an opinion. I know nothing whatever about the political question which seems to be involved; I approach this question as one which involves purely municipal matters. There is a difference between the two Houses about Amendments, and the only matter that is to be decided is whether we shall now agree with the House of Commons. That is a very different position to that of simply reversing the decision of one of our Committees. I have no doubt whatever that the Committee of this House performed its duty admirably, and that the Committee of the other House also performed its duty extremely well. We are told that the Bill was carried in the Committee of the other House by the casting vote of the Chairman. I have been told, and the noble Duke will correct me if I am wrong, that the Amendments were only carried in your Lordships' Committee by three to two. Am I right?
    THE DUKE OF NORTHUMBERLAND: No.
    THE EARL OF KIMBERLEY: What were the figures?
    THE DUKE OF NORTHUMBERLAND: I think, my Lords, that it is generally understood that it is not a very good thing to say whether a Committee was unanimous or not, but I do not mind, when challenged, saying that there was only one point—whether the townships should be included or not—upon which there was a difference of opinion. One noble Lord thought it would be well to include all the townships, and for the moment he found himself in a minority, but on every other question connected with the Bill we were unanimous.
    THE EARL OF KIMBERLEY: I should not have referred to that point but for what the noble Duke said about the numbers by which the Bill was carried in the Committee of the House of Commons. I thought it was only right that we should know precisely what was the case with regard to our own Committee. To my mind this matter should be looked at somewhat broadly. As to the appeal to precedent, I am lost in astonishment to hear that there are no precedents for the extension of large towns to districts adjoining them. I would have thought there were numerous precedents.
    THE DUKE OF NORTHUMBERLAND: Not against the will of the people.
    THE EARL OF KIMBERLEY: Against their will precisely. I have no doubt the ingenious counsel who appeared before the Committee showed that it was a most outrageous proceeding to annex these districts to the City of Dublin, and that such a proceeding was unprecedented. Is it not a fact that every effort that is made to increase cities and towns meets with strong opposition? It is always a matter of the greatest difficulty to persuade the districts in the neighbourhood of a large town to consent to come in, but on grounds of public policy it is frequently done, and I firmly believe it is always most desirable, even against the will of those districts. I am rather surprised,
    1226
    seeing that the Committee entertained, in common with the noble Duke, such views against annexation, that they brought themselves to agree that even one district should be annexed. Why is Kilmainham sacrificed? Some ill-natured people say it is because it has a poor population, but I do not know whether that is true or not. At any rate, the Committee succeeded in persuading themselves that one district should be sacrificed. I have not the slightest doubt whatever that these districts will eventually become part of Dublin. It only means that if this motion is rejected there will be more controversy, larger expense, and more trouble to all parties concerned. The advantages of uniting the whole district are considerable, especially in regard to sanitary matters. I agree with the noble Duke as to the state of the Liffey, than which I cannot conceive anything more objectionable; but I cannot imagine how you can have a satisfactory system of drainage for Dublin and the adjoining districts unless it is conducted by the central authority. I think the argument of my noble friend (Lord Tweedmouth) with regard to the City of London was a fair one. What he said was that the difficulties in London had arisen through the City of London in olden times not being enlarged. The measures which have been taken no doubt have not been now completely to unify London, but they have all been in the direction of giving London a central authority for those special purposes for which everyone is agreed that a central authority is necessary. I think it is to be deprecated, looking at the remarkably strong opinion which undoubtedly exists in the other House in regard to this Bill, that we should not be content to allow the Bill to pass and bring this long-standing controversy to an end I do not suppose that it is possible to induce your Lordships to alter the decision of your Committee, but as in my opinion this House is about to take an unwise decision, I shall, if my noble friend goes to a Division, vote with him.
    THE DUKE OF NORTHUMBERLAND: I should like to point out that there is hardly any precedent for taking over a local authority against its will, except in cases where that local authority is such that it constitutes a danger.
    THE CHAIRMAN OF COMMITTEES (The Earl of MORLEY): My Lords, I do not at all desire to enter into the merits of this important question, but I do not think it would be right for me to give a silent vote. The questions involved in the extension of large towns are exceedingly difficult and complicated. There are, no doubt, ample precedents for the extension of towns, and for the absorption of the surrounding districts against their will. But this is never done except after very careful investigation into all the circumstances of the case. This question is unusually complicated, and it is still further complicated by the position in which your Lordships find yourselves in respect to the other House of Parliament. It is not my duty, nor, indeed, have I the knowledge sufficiently to enable me, to go into the intricacies of the case which has been stated clearly to your Lordships. Those statements are the statements admittedly of advocates on both sides. The House has had no opportunity of hearing the evidence weighed and sifted, which it has taken two
    The said Amendment insisted on accordingly: The remaining Amendments insisted on; and the Commons Amendments and consequential Amendments disagreed to: A Committee appointed to prepare reasons for the Lords insisting on their Amendments, and for disagreeing to the
    Committees seventeen and fourteen days respectively to discuss and investigate. No one would for a moment dispute the perfect right the House has to revise the decisions of its own Committees. In some cases it may be right to do so, especially in cases where sufficient evidence may not have been taken, and where the Committee may be held to have neglected to hear the evidence that has been brought before it, or where other matters may have occurred which constituted a failure of justice. But in this case the Committee is admitted to have heard the case before it with the greatest patience, and the noble Duke is admitted to have presided over its deliberations with great ability and patience. Under the circumstances, I think it would not be right for the House to reverse the decision given by the Committee after a great deal of investigation and patience, and I feel myself bound to vote in favour of upholding the decision of the Committee.
    On Question, their Lordships divided:—Contents, 7; Not-Contents, 55.

    CONTENTS.

    Norfolk, D. (E. Marshal.)

    Coleridge, L [Teller.]

    Tweedmouth, L. [Teller.]

    Greville, L.

    Welby, L.

    Kimberley, E.

    Rothschild, L.

    NOT-CONTENTS.

    Halsbury, E. (L. Chancellor.)

    Morley, E.

    Iveagh, L.

    Devonshire, D. (L. President.)

    Selborne, E.

    Ker, L. (M. Lothian.)

    Cross, V. (L. Privy Seal.)

    Waldegrave, E.

    Kintore, L. (E. Kintore.)

    Winchilseaand Nottingham E.

    Lawrence, L.

    Marlborough, D.

    Macnaghten, L.

    Northumberland, D. [Teller.]

    Hood, V.

    Middleton, L.

    Templemore, V. [Teller]

    O'Neill, L.

    Lansdowne, M.

    Wolseley, V.

    Plunket, L.

    Ponsonby, L. (E. Bessborough.)

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

    Manchester, L. Bp.

    Raglan, L.

    Rathmore, L.

    Camperdown, E.

    Ardilaun, L.

    Rosmead, L.

    Clarendon, E.

    Bagot, L.

    Rowton, L.

    De Montalt, E.

    Balfour, L.

    Silchester, L. (E. Longford.)

    Denbigh, E.

    Belper, L.

    Stalbridge, L.

    Doncaster, E. (D. Buccleuch and Queensberry.)

    Churchill, L.

    Stanley of Alderley, L.

    Clonbrock, L.

    Sudley, L. (E. Arran.)

    Dudley, E.

    Cloncurry. L.

    Templemore, L.

    Ellesmere, E.

    Colchester, L.

    Ventry, L.

    Ferrers, E.

    Harlech, L.

    Wemyss, L. (E. Wemyss.)

    Malmesbury, E.

    Harris, L

    Windsor, L.

    Commons Amendments and consequential Amendments: The Committee to meet forthwith: Report from the Committee of the reasons prepared by them read, and agreed to; and a message sent to the Commons to return the said Bill, with the reasons.

ELECTRIC LIGHTING PROVISIONAL ORDER (No. 20) BILL.
  BOOTLE CORPORATION BILL.

    DUBLIN CORPORATION (MARKETS) BILL.
    LONDON COUNTY COUNCIL (GENERAL POWERS) BILL.
    LONDON COUNTY COUNCIL (MONEY) BILL.
    Returned from the Commons with the Amendments agreed to.

    CLYDE NAVIGATION BILL [H.L.]
    Returned from the Commons agreed to, with Amendments: The said Amendments considered, and agreed to.
FYLDE WATER BOARD BILL [H.L.]
  NORTH-EASTERN AND HULL AND BARNSLEY RAILWAYS (JOINT DOCK) BILL [H.L.]

    SALFORD CORPORATION BILL [H.L.]
    WAKEFIELD CORPORATION BILL [H. L.].
    Returned from the Commons agreed to, with Amendments.

  RETURNS, REPORTS, ETC.
    ARMY (MEDICAL DEPARTMENT).
    Report for year 1898; Volume XL.

    COLONIES (ANNUAL).
    No. 264. Gambia: Annual Report for 1898.
    No. 265. St. Helena: Annual Report for 1898.

    INDIA (CANTONMENT REGULATIONS).
    Rules and applied enactments issued by the Government of India, 16th June, 1899.

    LOCAL GOVERNMENT BOARD.
    1. Twenty-eighth Annual Report, 1898–99.
    2. Supplement containing the Report of the Medical Officer, for 1898–99.

    Nineteenth Report of the Inspector of Retreats under the Inebriates Acts, 1879 and 1888, for the year 1898.
    REFORMATORY AND INDUSTRIAL SCHOOLS (GREAT BRITAIN).
    Forty-second Report, for the year 1898, of Her Majesty's Inspector of Reformatory and Industrial Schools.
    PRISONS (ENGLAND AND WALES).
    Report of the Commissioners of Prisons and the Directors of Convict Prisons, for the year ended 31st March, 1899.
    POLICE (METROPOLIS).
    Report of the Commissioner of Police of the Metropolis, for the year 1898.
    EVICTIONS (IRELAND).
    Return of evictions in Ireland, for the quarter ended 30th June, 1899.

    NATIONAL EDUCATION (IRELAND).
    Annual Report of the Commissioners, for the year 1898–99.
    Presented [by Command], and ordered to lie on the Table.

    COUNTY TREASURERS (IRELAND) (FEE FUND).
    Account for the year ended 25th March, 1899; laid before the House [pursuant to Act], and ordered to lie on the Table.
    BATHS AND WASHHOUSES ACTS AMENDMENT BILL.
    To be read 2a To-morrow.—(The Lord Harris.)
AGRICULTURE AND TECHNICAL INSTRUCTION (IRELAND) BILL.
  SALE OF FOOD AND DRUGS BILL.
    IMPROVEMENT OF LAND BILL.
    Amendments reported [according to Order]: then Standing Order No. XXXIX. considered [according to Order], and dispensed with. Bills read 3a, with the Amendments, and passed, and returned to the Commons.
  MANCHESTER CANONRIES BILL [H.L.]
    MARRIAGES VALIDITY (No. 2) BILL [H.L.]
    Returned from the Commons agreed to.
    COMMONS AND OPEN SPACES BILL [H.L.]
    Returned from the Commons agreed to, with Amendments.
BOARD OF EDUCATION BILL [H.L.] (No. 202).
  ELEMENTARY EDUCATION (DEFECTIVE AND EPILEPTIC CHILDREN) BILL [H.L.] (No. 203.)
    POOR LAW ACTS AMENDMENT BILL [H.L.] (No. 204.)
    Returned from the Commons agreed to, with Amendments; the said Amendments to be printed, and to be considered To-morrow.
    LINCOLNSHIRE CORONERS BILL [H.L.]
    Returned from the Commons agreed to, with Amendments; the said Amendments to be printed. (No. 205.)
  METROPOLITAN POLICE BILL.

    SECOND READING.
    Order of the Day for the Second Reading read.
    LORD BELPER: My Lords, this small Bill, which has come up from the other House, is practically a money Bill. It deals solely with the salaries of the Chief Commissioner of Police, the Assistant-Commissioner, and the Receiver. At present those salaries are fixed and limited by Act of Parliament, and are payable out of the Votes; but in order to make them at all adequate for present requirements they are supplemented by a considerable number of allowances, which are out of all proportion to the services for which they are given. This is a very unsatisfactory state of things, and one which it is not desirable should continue. The object of this Bill is to enable the Secretary of State, who has agreed on this point with the Treasury, to give adequate salaries to these officers, and arrange what proportion of their salaries shall be paid out of the Votes, and what proportion shall come out of the Police Fund. It is not thought that this will make any extra charge, or any substantial charge, on the Votes, but it will certainly be an improvement on the present state of things. I do not think, under the circumstances, this being a money Bill, that it is necessary for me to say any more with reference to it, and I beg to move that the Bill be read a second time.
    Bill read 2a(according to Order); Committee negatived; then Standing Order No. 39 considered (according to Order), and dispensed with; Bill read 3a, and passed.

    PUBLIC LIBRARIES BILL [H.L.]
    Amendments reported (according to Order).

    PRIVATE LEGISLATION PROCEDURE (SCOTLAND) BILL.
    Amendments reported (according to Order).
    Formal Amendments agreed to.
    Clause 9:—
    THE EARL OF CAMPERDOWN: My Lords, I beg to move to omit Clause 9, and to insert a new clause, which in some respects resembles the clause I proposed when the Bill was in Committee, but which I withdrew at the request of the noble Lord in charge of the Bill. I do not like the new clause as well as my own proposal, but I must make the best of what I can get. I should like to know if the Government will accept the clause standing in my name.
    Amendment moved—
    "To leave out Clause 9, and insert as a new clause:

    "1. If before the expiration of seven days after the introduction of Confirmation Bill under the immediately preceding section in the House in which it originates, a petition be presented against any Order comprised in the Bill, it shall be lawful for any Member to give notice that he intends to move that the Bill shall be referred to a Joint Committee of both Houses of Parliament. Any such motion may be debated on the Second Reading of the Bill, and immediately after the Bill is read a second time the question thereon shall be put without Amendment or further debate. If such motion is carried, the Bill shall stand referred to a Joint Committee of both Houses of Parliament, and the opponent shall, subject to the practice of Parliament, be allowed to appear and oppose by himself, his counsel, agent, and witnesses; and counsel, agents, and witnesses may be heard in support of the Order. The Joint Committee shall hear and determine any question of locus standi.

    "2. The report of the Joint Committee shall, subject to Standing Orders, be laid before both Houses of Parliament.

    1233

    "3. The Joint Committee may, by a majority, award costs, and such costs may be taxed and recovered, and shall be secured in the manner provided in the Parliamentary Costs Act, 1865, subject to any necessary modifications.

    "4. If no such motion as in Sub-section 1 of this section mentioned is carried, the Bill shall be deemed to have passed the stage of Committee, and shall be ordered to be considered as if reported by a Committee.

    "When such Bill has been read a third time and passed in the first House of Parliament, the like proceedings shall, subject to Standing Orders, be taken in the second House of Parliament."—(The Earl of Camperdown.)
    THE EARL OF MORLEY: Before the noble Lord answers the question whether he will accept the Amendment or not, I should like to say that I object to the clause, inasmuch as it renders absolutely necessary a Debate in the House on every Order to which there is opposition. My noble friend's clause provides that the reference to the Joint Committee of both Houses—that is, the rehearing before the Joint Committee—shall not be allowed unless it is moved for by some Member in either House.
    THE EARL OF CAMPERDOWN: In the House in which it originates.
    THE EARL OF MORLEY: Well, in whichever House it originates this clause makes it necessary, where there is opposition, that there should be a Debate on every Order, however small it may be. I do not anticipate, as I have said, that it will affect a large number of Orders, but the principle seems to me an objectionable one. There is one other point to which I should like to draw attention. It is that at the present time it is difficult to forecast what the character will be of the tribunal which will try these Orders in the first instance. I hope it will turn out to be a good tribunal, but it is possible that you will find great difficulty in getting Peers and Members to sit on these inquiries, which will, therefore, be entirely conducted by the extra-Parliamentary panel. I think everyone who appears before those tribunals should have the right, without asking leave of the House, to appeal to the Joint Committee. One of the safeguards against an abuse of this power is the question of costs.
    THE SECRETARY FOR SCOTLAND (Lord BALFOUR of BURLEIGH): I am quite
    1234
    sensible of the strength of the objection urged by the noble Earl the Chairman of Committees, but I think he went rather far in saying that this clause would involve a Debate in all cases. I venture to hope that will not be so, and that there will be some cases in which the right of a person to appear will be settled by the Chairman of Committees, and the House will, I hope, take his advice. I have never concealed my dislike to the changes that were made by the other House, but I know that to attempt to reverse their decision at the present stage of the session would be tantamount to losing the Bill. Therefore, although I do not like the tribunal so much as the one which was originally in the Bill, I think it would be a breach of faith, the Amendment having been accepted in the other House, to go back upon it. Having balanced the advantages and the disadvantages of all the courses open to us, the course suggested in the proposed new clause is the one which, we think, involves the least evil. The clause has been carefully adjusted by the officers of this House and the other House, and if the noble Earl at the Table does not very strongly persevere in his objection, I will accept the Amendment.
    LORD TWEEDMOUTH: My Lords, I hope the noble Lord at the Table will not press his objection to this clause, for it at any rate does something to reduce the chance of a second inquiry. My own personal view is that a single Parliamentary inquiry is the proper tribunal to which private Bills and Provisional Orders should be referred. The object of the noble Lord's Amendment is to make the second inquiry dependent upon a special vote of the House. I hope that—as the noble Lord anticipates—this will prove one more difficulty in the way of the second inquiry. For that reason, although I do not think the clause will be of very great service, I hope it will be inserted in the Bill in preference to Clause 9 as it at present stands.
    THE EARL OF MORLEY: I am placed in a very awkward position, but in view of the appeals which have been made to me from both sides of the House I can hardly take the responsibility of urging the objections which I feel very strongly to this clause.
    Amendment agreed to.
    Clause 11:—
    LORD BALFOUR OF BURLEIGH: I promised to consider Clause 11 on the last stage, and I now have to move the insertion of a new clause to take the place of Clause 11 in the Bill. As the clause now stands, it provides that any county council or town council or local authority connected with the locality to which any draft Provisional Order referred to Commissioners relates may make a report in writing to the Commissioners respecting the provision of the draft Order, and the Commissioners shall consider such report and any recommendations therein contained. This would limit the powers of county councils and town councils in regard to a Bill coming under the new procedure, and the object of the Amendment standing in my name is to leave their powers exactly as at present, which we consider the proper thing to do.
    Amendment moved—
    "To leave out Clause 11, and insert, as a new clause:

    "(1) County Councils shall have the same powers and be subject to the same restrictions in regard to proceedings under or in pursuance of this Act as they now have or are subject to under the provisions of Section 56 of the Local Government (Scotland) Act, 1889, in regard to Private Bills or Confirmation Bills.

    "(2) Town councils and burgh commissioners shall have the same powers and be subject to the same restrictions in regard to proceedings under or in pursuance of this Act as they now have or are subject to in regard to Private Bills or Confirmation Bills.

    "(3) In addition, any county council or town council or burgh commissioners connected with the locality to which any draft Provisional Order referred to Commissioners under this Act relates, may make a report to the Commissioners respecting the provisions of the draft order, and the Commissioners shall consider the recommendations contained in the Report."—(Lord Balfour of Burleigh.)

    Amendment agreed to.
    Clause 17:—
    LORD BALFOUR OF BURLEIGH: Clause 17 formed the subject of discussion at the last stage, and I am agreed that the Chairman should be relieved from the duty of considering objections to any draft Order on the ground that the under-
    1236
    taking proposed to be authorised by the Order would destroy or injure any building or other object of historical interest, or would injuriously affect any natural scenery. I have placed Amendments on the Paper transferring this duty to the Secretary for Scotland.
    Amendments moved—
    "In line 35, to leave out 'chairman' and insert 'Secretary for Scotland'; and in line 39, to leave out 'chairman' and insert 'Secretary for Scotland' and leave out from 'if' to 'who' in page 10, line 2, and insert 'he thinks fit to refer such objection to the Commissioners.' "—(Lord Balfour of Burleigh.)
    Amendments agreed to.
    Clause 18:—
    LORD BALFOUR OF BURLEIGH: This clause provides that the expression "agent" includes all law agents within the meaning of the Law Agents (Scotland) Act, 1873, any person entitled to practise as solicitor in any Court of Justice in England or Ireland, and any person entitled to practise as agent according to the practice and rules of either House of Parliament in cases of Private Bills and matters relating thereto. There seems to be a general consensus of opinion amongst the legal authorities in this House that the words "any person entitled to practise as solicitor in any court of justice in England or Ireland" should be omitted, and I beg to move the Amendment standing in my name.
    Amendment moved—
    "In line 10, to leave out from '1873' to 'and' in line 12."—(Lord Balfour of Burleigh.)
    LORD TWEEDMOUTH: I am glad that the noble Lord has acceded to the suggestion which I made on the last stage of the Bill. It will give satisfaction to the law agents of Scotland to know that their little trade union is by this means protected.
    Amendment agreed to.
    Bill to be read 3a To-morrow; and to be printed as amended. (No. 206.)

  SMALL HOUSES (ACQUISITION OF OWNERSHIP) BILL.

    THIRD READING.
    Order of the Day for the Third Reading read.
    Moved, "That the Bill be now read 3a."ߞ(The Earl of Selborne.)
    THE EARL OF WEMYSS: My Lords, the noble Earl (the Earl of Selborne), when he moved the Second Reading of this Bill, said the Bill was on the lines of the measure introduced by the noble Lord the Marquess of Londonderry. I should like to point out that it differs materially from the Bill that was brought in by the noble Marquess. To begin with, it has a different title. The title of Lord Londonderry's Bill was a remarkable one; it was "To Enable Working Men to Acquire Their Own Houses." I do not see why, if they had their own houses, it was necessary to give them money to acquire them. Lord Londonderry's Bill also differed from this Bill inasmuch as it was only for working men. This Bill is more general in its character. I object altogether to this kind of legislation, which compels people who do not want to buy their own houses to be taxed for those who do. There is a limit of expenditure in the Bill of a penny in the £, but we know what these limits eventually come to. We have an example in the School Board rate. This is the fourth or fifth of the seven lollipops promised by Mr. Chamberlain at the last General Election. I quite admit that opposition to anything proposed by the Government at the hands of Mr. Chamberlain is useless, but at any rate I shall enter my protest against the Bill.
    THE EARL OF SELBORNE: I am afraid the noble Earl has not read the Bill. There is no compulsion whatever in it, and there is not the slightest intention to lay any charge on the ratepayers. The penny limit is put in in case the local authority should so mismanage the affair that an expense is incurred; but the whole object of the Bill is that there shall be no expense at all.
    THE EARL OF WEMYSS: Whatever my noble friend may say, I dare him to deny that there is in the Bill, no matter
    1238
    for what purpose, a power of rating up to a penny in the £.
    On Question agreed to.
    Bill read 3a accordingly, with the Amendments; further Amendments made; Bill passed, and returned to the Commons.

  COMPANIES BILL [H.L.]

    THIRD READING.
    Order of the Day for Third Reading read.
    Moved, "That the Bill be now read 3a."—(The Earl of Dudley.)
    THE LORD CHANCELLOR (The Earl of HALSBURY): My Lords, there are one or two observations which I think it is desirable I should make to your Lordships. There were some clauses introduced in the Bill in Committee having relation to questions which I think are very interesting to medical men and pharmaceutical chemists. I have received a very large number of communications upon the subject, and I am fully alive to the necessity of guarding very carefully the language by which the intentions of the measure, as manifested by the amended form of the Bill, should be carried out. I am still very strongly convinced that a company ought not to be permitted to do what a private person is prohibited from doing, and that the public must be protected against practices of that sort. It is impossible to resist the propriety of subjecting those companies who are at present carrying on business as chemists and druggists to restrictions such as are proposed in the Bill. I daresay your Lordships will remember that cases have decided—and in my opinion rightly decided—that the language which calls upon a person to qualify in any of the professions does not in turn apply to companies, and that the word "person" in the Acts which form the code upon the subject must be constructed as meaning a natural person and not a company. The idea of an ideal personage, such as a company, practising and undergoing an examination is absurd, and cannot cohere with the language of the Statute. In my view the learned judges who came to the conclusion that that was the true construction of the Statute were

    1239
    perfectly right; and that decision left the law that a company could be formed to do the very thing which an individual is not permitted to do without examination as to qualifications. I think I may say that the Committee to whom this matter was referred were unanimously of opinion that the formation of companies to practise any profession, and which intended really to take advantage of company machinery to do that which an individual without qualification may not do, should be stopped. As I have said, I have received a large bulk of correspondence on the subject, and in some of the communications which have been sent to me it is suggested that this is an effort to prevent proper enterprise and so forth. As a matter of fact, I think the writers were not familiar with the state of the law. It is true to say that, although a company cannot be prosecuted for doing it, and a company cannot undergo an examination to enable them to do it, yet if an individual dispenses without qualification you can catch him and prosecute. And it was in view of the state of the law on the subject that the Committee to which this matter was referred came to their conclusion. I must say that I quite agree that if this matter is to come forward, as it probably will in another session, it is desirable that we should guard very carefully the language used, so as not to interfere with any proper vested interest; but, on the other hand, we should not allow the public generally to be exposed to the dangers of the practising of unqualified persons as dispensers. What I said on a former occasion, that the Committee were practically unanimous, appears to have given rise to controversy. I say so still. It is true there were certain divisions on matters of detail during the investigations, which lasted three years—some members of the Committee went one way and some the other—but they were not important questions. What I said before, and what I adhere to now, was that on the main lines of the Bill—the important matters under the Bill—the measure, as now presented, represents the practically unanimous decision of the Committee. I think, my Lords, that it is a subject of congratulation that on such a subject practical unanimity has been attained. At this period of the session I think it is perhaps not worth while that I should go through the whole clauses of
    1240
    the Bill. I have said all that is necessary on the Report of Amendments to the Bill. I can only add that I believe the Bill will be a very great improvement on the state of the law as it exists at present, and that it will in a great measure check the creation of fraudulent companies, which I think is the proper thing to do, and not enact a penal code against persons engaged in the conduct of such enterprises.
    THE EARL OF KIMBERLEY: My Lords, I certainly agree with the noble and learned Lord that the Committee deserve approbation for having given a great deal of attention to this extremely complicated and difficult subject. Not being either learned in the law or connected with companies, which is, perhaps, an advantage, I hold any opinions with regard to it with much modesty. But, having heard all the excellent evidence which was presented to us, I agree with the Lord Chancellor that in the main proposals the Committee were practically unanimous. The object of the Committee was to try and devise some system by which we might not interfere with honest directors or with the important system of companies having limited liability in this country, but at the same time check a certain amount of the fraud and malfeasance which undoubtedly exists. There seems to be a rather undue impatience to enact very strong penal laws, with the idea that such a code would remove some of the evils complained of. I do not think the history of our legislation teaches us that lesson. Frequently the most violent and stringent laws have failed in consequence of their extreme stringency. The law, to be really effective, must carry with it the general consent of the community, and if you make a law which touches unduly men who have embarked in these matters with nothing but honest intentions, you will make hard cases and create a prejudice against your legislation. It is much better in a very difficult subject of this kind to proceed cautiously, and where there is great doubt and great difference of opinion you should not hastily determine to legislate, but confine yourselves to those broad points on which there is general agreement. I think that was what mainly actuated the Committee. I earnestly hope, after the long time which has been spent on this subject, and in view of the anxiety which undoubtedly

    1241
    prevails for some legislation, that a Bill will be brought forward next session, and that Her Majesty's Government will give it every support in order that it may become the law of the land.
    THE EARL OF DUDLEY: After what has fallen from the noble Lords who have spoken, I do not think there is much necessity for me to enter into this discussion, but I should like to say that I quite agree with what the noble and learned Lord on the Woolsack said as to the Committee being practically unanimous on the main points of the Bill. Of course, as the noble and learned Lord said, there were details connected with the Bill on which we had differences of opinion, but I think it is quite true to say that on the main policy of the Bill the Committee were practically unanimous. There is no doubt that, as the Bill was originally introduced, its provisions were of too drastic a nature. I do not think it is too much to say that the evidence we had before us showed that these drastic provisions were in many cases undesirable, and the Committee were unanimously of opinion that we had better, in the interests of honest directors and of commercial life generally, soften down those drastic provisions, and attempt to make the Bill of a more workable character.
    On Question, agreed to.
    Bill read 3a accordingly, and passed and sent to the Commons.

    ROYAL NIGER COMPANY BILL.
    House in Committee (according to Order); Bill reported without Amendment; Standing Committee negatived; and Bill to be read 3a To-morrow.
    ELECTRIC LIGHTING (CLAUSES) BILL.
    Read 3a (according to Order), and passed.
  LAND TAX COMMISSIONERS' NAMES BILL.

    SECOND READING.
    Order of the Day for the Second Reading read.
    LORD BALFOUR OF BURLEIGH: My Lords, this a Bill which has to pass once during every Parliament, the object being
    1242
    to enable additions to be made to the list of the Land Tax Commissioners in each district. After the Bill is introduced in another place notification of that fact is sent to the Land Tax Commissioners' Clerk, and he furnishes names which are afterwards put into a schedule to be signed by the Clerk of the House of Commons. This Bill is really in the nature of an Expiring Laws Continuance Bill, and I beg to move that it be read a second time.
    Moved, "That the Bill be now read 2a."—(Lord Balfour of Burleigh.)
    LORD STANLEY OF ALDERLEY: Does the Bill apply to Land Commissioners in London, or to the Land Commissioners all over the country? If the latter, I was hoping that the authorities at Somerset House were going to put in more responsible persons. At the present moment these matters are under the control of magistrates, who neglect the duty and place it in the hands of the Income Tax Commissioners. The Inland Revenue Department say they have no authority in this matter, and refuse to refund money which has been unjustly collected.
    LORD BALFOUR OF BURLEIGH: This Bill refers to Land Tax Commissioners all over the country, and the Inland Revenue Department have no authority over these bodies; the whole of their power is derived direct from Parliament. I am not able to say how the matter came to be settled and arranged as it is, but this Bill makes no change in the existing law.
    On Question, agreed to.
    Bill read 2a accordingly; Committee negatived; and Bill to be read 3a To-morrow.

    NAVAL WORKS BILL.
    Read 2a(according to Order), and committed to a Committee of the Whole House To-morrow, and Standing Order No. XXXIX. to be considered in order to its being dispensed with.
  PATRIOTIC FUND BILL.

    SECOND READING.
    Order of the Day for the Second Reading read.
    THE SECRETARY OF STATE FOR WAR (the Marquess of LANDSDOWNE): My Lords, the object of this Bill is to amend the Patriotic Fund Act, 1881, which limits the application of the funds dealt with under it to the widows and children of officers and men. There is a surplus, and we take power under this Bill to apply that surplus to the relief of relatives other than widows and children.
    Moved, "That the Bill be now read 2a."—(The Marquess of Lansdowne.)
    On Question, agreed to.
    Bill read 2a accordingly; Committee negatived; and Bill to be read 3a To-morrow.

  RESERVE FORCES BILL.

    SECOND READING.
    Order of the Day for the Second Reading read.
    THE MARQUESS OF LANSDOWNE: This Bill amends the Reserve Forces Act, 1882. Under that Act the Reserve can only be maintained within the limits of the United Kingdom. This Bill enables a man serving in the colonies or in India to be passed to the Reserve at the expiration of his service without coming home. He would then be available for service in the colony in which he happens to reside. We do not expect that the Bill will affect more than a small number of men.
    Moved, "That the Bill be now read 2a."—(The Marquess of Lansdowne.)
    On Question, agreed to.
    Bill read 2a (according to Order); Committee negatived; and Bill to be read 3a To-morrow.

  TELEGRAPHS (TELEPHONIC COMMUNICATION, &c.) BILL.

    SECOND READING.
    Order of the Day for the Second Reading read.
    THE POSTMASTER-GENERAL (The Duke of NORFOLK): My Lords, this Bill is introduced with a view of extending the facilities for telephonic com-
    1244
    munication which already exist. There has been a growing feeling for some years that the facilities are not sufficient. A Committee of the House of Commons considered the matter in 1895, and they reported the evidence taken before them, but they did not produce any further Report. Last session a Committee was again appointed to inquire into the matter, and they reported that the facilities at present existing were not satisfactory from a general point of view, and were not likely to become so as long as the only medium of telephonic communication was the National Telephone Company, which had practically assumed a monopoly in this matter. They recommended that competition was desirable, and that it should take the form of more active competition on the part of the Post Office, and that municipalities, where they desired to do so, should have facilities for entering on telephonic work. This Bill empowers a loan of £2,000,000 to enable the Post Office to carry on competition where it is desirable, and if the Bill is passed the Post Office intend, as quickly as possible, to enter into active competition in London and in places where they have already got exchanges, such as Newcastle, Cardiff, &c. The Bill further enables corporations and urban authorities to use their rates for promoting telephonic work. Having that power, they have to obtain for the purpose a licence from the Postmaster-General, and that licence will only be given on the condition that no preference will be shown among those who come to them as users for the telephone. Their plant must be approved by the Postmaster-General, and the rates must be between a minimum and maximum, also to be approved by the Postmaster-General. If any municipality obtains a licence, the National Telephone Company may also receive a licence for the same term of years in the exchange in which that corporation exists, but they must come under the same conditions—the conditions I have just stated—except in cases in which they have no way-leave granted them by the municipality, and in those cases the minimum of their charges will be at their own discretion. If in any exchange in which the company are also granted a licence they have a grant of way-leave from the corporation, that grant is extended to them during the period of the licence, and cannot be taken away by the

    1245
    corporation. If the corporation in an exchange takes a licence, and the company elect to take a licence also, that licence will extend throughout the whole area of the exchange although the boundaries of the corporation may not be coterminous with the area of that exchange. If the licence extends to eight years beyond the present term of the licence, which is 1911, the company having that licence is bound, under certain rules to be drawn up by the Postmaster-General, to grant inter-communication to those who are on the municipal telephone, and the municipality, on the other hand, are bound to extend the same facilities of inter-communication to the company. The company is not permitted to create any fresh exchange without the sanction of the Postmaster-General, and no company may obtain a licence in any exchange without the sanction of the municipality within whose boundaries that company would work. We trust that this Bill will tend in the direction of bringing the boon of telephonic communication to certain wide classes of the community who hitherto have been unable to enjoy it; that it has been framed as far as possible to give great benefits to the community without infringing unduly the rights of the company, who have laboured for many years to promote telephonic communication; and that it will encourage municipalities to come forward and create the competition which we think is so desirable.
    Moved, "That the Bill be now read 2a."—(The Duke of Norfolk.)
    LORD HARRIS: My Lords, I should be grateful if I might be allowed to offer a few remarks on this Bill. It is not usual for a member of the Government to offer anything in the shape of criticism of a Government Bill, but my remarks are so very mildly critical that I hope they may be excused on that ground. Before venturing to criticise the Bill, I took the advice of the noble Marquess, who said that if it was necessary I certainly had his permission. This is a highly important Bill, apart from the fact that it involves an expenditure of£2,000,000. It is very much in the nature of an experiment, and believing that your Lordships are always anxious that important measures should be discussed as amply as possible, and
    1246
    especially by those who know something of the matter, I venture to offer a few remarks. I am a director of the National Telephone Company, and have learned something about telephones; but I approach the consideration of this Bill entirely from the point of view of a telephone user. I cannot help thinking that the noble Duke will not object if I offer a few remarks from that point of view. As the noble Duke has said, the object of the Bill is to promote telephonic communication and to make it of wider use. The groundwork of his proposal is, I fancy, the Report of the Committee of the House of Commons which sat last year, and which eventually found that the supply given by the National Telephone Company was insufficient and inefficient. What I have to observe on the use of those expressions is this, that the National Telephone Company is not the only body that supplies telephone service in this country. The Post Office also supplies a service. A very large proportion of England, Ireland, and Scotland is mapped out into exchange areas, and within each of those areas the Telephone Company supply the service. But if a subscriber in one area wishes to speak to a subscriber in another area he has to go upon the lines worked by the Post Office, which are called the trunk lines, and I can assure the noble Duke that if he would appoint a committee of impartial persons who use the telephone to report on the trunk service, that committee would report that that service was insufficient and inefficient. Only the other day a friend of mine, a Member of this House, who is on a telephone exchange in Yorkshire, and also in London, wanting to speak from his own house in Yorkshire to his house in London, was kept waiting an hour and a half. He complained bitterly, as if it was the fault of the Telephone Company. I made inquiries, and ascertained that the delay had nothing whatever to do with the company, the Post Office was responsible. As £2,000,000 are to be obtained under the Bill for the extension and improvement of the telephone service, I trust it will be possible for the noble Duke to utilise some portion of the money in improving and extending the trunk lines. If he would do that he would earn the gratitude of a very large number of telephone users. There is another point to which I would like to call attention. The Post Office has the power, or at any rate

    1247
    it claims the power, of refusing to allow the National Telephone Company's wires to cross railways, and the result is that not only in those towns where the Post Office is in competition with the company, but also in London, where it is not at the present time in competition—and I should doubt the possibility of its being able to come into thorough competition for two or three years at the earliest—a considerable number of people are unable to obtain telephone service at all. I submit that if these would-be subscribers are to be taxed, as they must be under this Bill, for the purpose of improving the telephone service of the country, it will be a hardship if the refusal of the Post Office as regards these wires crossing railways is continued, and these would-be subscribers prevented from coming on to the only service that can be given to them. At present the Post Office declines to put some towns on the trunk service; that is to say, it declines to extend its trunk wires to these particular towns unless the company will guarantee the Post Office against loss. Last year, if I remember rightly, the noble Duke reduced the amount of the guarantee which the Post Office had up till then demanded from such persons as required a private telegraph. Well, the telephone is a telegraph. It has been found so by the courts, but the noble Duke has not reduced the amount which is required from the National Telephone Company for guaranteeing against loss. Take the important and populous town of South end. That town would not at the present moment be on the trunk service if it were not for the National Telephone Company having guaranteed the Post Office against loss. As this large sum of money is being taken for improving the telephone service of the country, I trust it will be possible to find enough money to extend the trunk wires and relieve the company of this incubus. It is not for me to criticise the provisions of the Bill, which I think the noble Duke must admit is an experiment. The experience of nearly every country, including the United States, is that a monopoly can work the telephone best, just as a monopoly was found to work the telegraph best. The National Telephone Company has been held up to ridicule as supplying the worst and most expensive service in the world; but, curiously enough, the Government in
    1248
    their proposals to improve that state of things have made up their minds that it is wiser not to follow the example of other countries. We shall all look forward with considerable interest to the result of this experiment. As one who, apart altogether from his connection with the company or the system of supply, believes that the telephone is one of the most useful discoveries for the convenience of society, as well as of commerce, that has been brought into use for many years, I sincerely trust that the policy recommended in the Bill will be successful; but I am bound to say that those who know a great deal about the telephone system are by no means confident that the step taken by the Government in this matter is a wise one.
    On Question, agreed to.
    Bill read 2a accordingly, and committed to a Committee of the Whole House To-morrow, and Standing Order No. XXXIX. to be considered in order to its being dispensed with.

  MILITARY WORKS BILL.

    SECOND READING.
    Order of the Day for the Second Reading read.
    THE MARQUESS OF LANSDOWNE: My Lords, under this Bill we take power to borrow a sum of£4,000,000 for military works in continuation of the Military Works Loans Act, 1897. A part of the expenditure to be incurred will be for defences; another—and by far the larger—part for barracks; and there is also a sum for providing ranges for Volunteers, a subject which was discussed in this House not many days ago. I think it is generally admitted that there are advantages in dealing with a large expenditure of this kind under loan, and not under the ordinary Estimates. I noticed the other day that my predecessor at the War Office admitted
    "That there is a great convenience in loans when you can contemplate a uniform, steady, and uninterrupted expenditure of money upon a particular service without being exposed to the freaks and vicissitudes of the Estimates."
    That is obviously one advantage of proceeding by loan. You can make your contracts beforehand, and carry out your

    1249
    programme steadily, deliberately, and methodically, and without the apprehension that supplies may be forthcoming one year and not the next. I am, of course, very far from suggesting that expenditure of this kind should be withdrawn from the scrutiny and surveillance of Parliament, and we shall every year present to both Houses a statement showing how much we have spent during the past and previous years, and how much we intend to spend during the coming year. It is, I think, fair to argue that when the Government of the day finds itself compelled to undertake a general revision of our defences, or a large scheme of barrack construction from which the Army will benefit for many years to come, the burden of the expenditure involved should not fall entirely upon the four or five years over which the execution of the works might be spread. This, at any rate, has been the policy adopted upon former occasions, and we have had loans of this kind in 1860, 1872, 1888, 1890, and 1897. I may be asked why, having borrowed, as we did, five and a-half millions in 1897 for this purpose, we come back to Parliament again so soon for a further loan. There is, I think, a sufficient answer to the question. In so far as defences are concerned, we have, since 1897, found it absolutely necessary to take up seriously the question of re-árming our defences, and we have come to the conclusion that both at home and abroad we can no longer put off the introduction of guns of a modern type, to take the place of the obsolete armament upon which, I am sorry to say, we are at present depending to an extent quite inconsistent with our national security. For these guns, which we are providing out of Estimates, suitable works will have to be provided, in most cases by the adaptation of works already in existence, and the £1,000,000 which we are borrowing for defences is for this purpose. As for barracks, Parliament, so lately as last year, sanctioned a large increase of the strength of the Army, and for this reason alone, apart from others of which I shall speak presently, it would be absolutely necessary that we should provide barracks in which to house the new troops, of which a considerable part has already been raised. Your Lordships have before you, in the first place, the Bill itself,
    1250
    which follows the model of the Bill of 1897. The schedule of the Bill shows how the £4,000,000 is to be apportioned to the different services which we are about to undertake; but, besides the Bill itself, we have presented a schedule which gives an account of what I may describe as the complete War Office scheme, the whole of which will have to be ultimately undertaken if the two great questions of our defences and our barracks are to be dealt with in a complete fashion, and with as near an approach to finality as is possible when we consider the constantly altering conditions with which we have to deal. We are at this moment asking only for authority to undertake those services which seem to us most pressing; but we have thought it desirable that Parliament should know that, when these services have been completed, it may be called upon for additional funds to make good the whole of the deficiencies of which we are aware. We owe it to Parliament that it should see the whole scheme. We owe it to ourselves that we should not be open to the imputation of presenting to Parliament an imperfect and insufficiently thought-out programme. For defences—that is, not for guns, but for the works in which the guns will be placed—we take £1,000,000. As to this, I desire to explain that this expenditure does not represent a fitful and ill-considered outburst of military activity; nor, again, is it a scheme which has been evolved by the War Office without the fullest consideration of the problem of Imperial defence as a whole, and the fullest consultation with the representatives of the Navy. There have been apprehensions in some quarters that we were going to undertake a wholesale fortification of all our commercial ports. I have even seen it suggested that we were going to fortify pleasure resorts and bathing places. I need not say that all this is pure imagination. The scheme is mainly a scheme of revision. We have reviewed the defences of the Empire one by one, and as parts of one great system of defence in which the Army and Navy are partners. I may, indeed, say that in providing for the defence of different categories of ports and harbours, we have followed the classification laid down by the Admiralty. We recognise that our Fleets must be our first line of defence, and we take comfort in the reflection that

    1251
    at no moment in the history of the country has the Navy been so powerful as it is at present; but, however strong our Navy, we cannot altogether dispense with fixed defences. The function of a powerful Navy is not to stand sentry over the coasts of the country to which it belongs, or over the stations and harbours upon which it has itself to depend. It must be mobile, it must be able to concentrate for a great and combined effort, even if such a concentration involves temporary denudation of the seaboard; but there are some points at home and abroad which are of such national importance, of such importance to the Navy itself, because, without them, the Navy, would have no place in which to renew its supplies of coal, or to refit or repair injuries, that we cannot allow an enemy to avail himself of their temporary exposure in order to attack them with a prospect of success. The damage done might, in some cases, be irreparable, or even if not irreparable, might inflict a ruinous shock upon public confidence. It follows that at all these points we must be strong enough to drive off any assailant whom we can reasonably expect, or, better still, to deter him from coming there at all. No battery might be more useful than that which was never called upon to fire a shot in anger, but the existence of which secured immunity for an important Imperial harbour, or even for a great commercial manufacturing centre. The places to be thus defended have been very carefully selected. We are far from saying that in all cases a port, once defended upon a certain scale, must always be defended upon that scale. There are gradations, and each place has been considered on its merits. We are concerned, first, with our dockyards and naval bases; secondly, with what are known to the Navy as secondary naval bases; thirdly, with our great strategic harbours such as Berechaven and Lough Swilly; and lastly, with commercial ports, to some of which—such, for example, as the Clyde and the Mersey—we think it absolutely necessary to give a moderate amount of defensive power. The House will understand that of the £1,000,000 which will now be spent upon the adaptation or reconstruction of defences, the whole will be spent upon works, and there will be no expenditure upon guns. These we shall provide for entirely on the annual Esti-
    1252
    mate. But our scheme of works cannot be considered apart from our scheme for guns. We have undertaken to substitute for the obsolete guns which now form so large a part of the armament throughout our fortresses, both at home and abroad, a much smaller number of modern guns, superior to them in rapidity of firing, in destructive effect, in range, and in accuracy. The expenditure to be made under this Bill will enable us to provide the works necessary for the reception of those guns. In another respect, I am glad to say we shall greatly gain by the substitution—I mean in respect of the saving of personnel which will result from the substitution of a smaller number of modern for a large number of old-fashioned guns. One of the reproaches to which we are, I think, most open, is that we have been apt to consider these questions of armament without sufficient reference to the personnel of our Artillery, and I hail with the greatest satisfaction the relief which will be given to us by the change which I have just described. I now pass to the question of barracks. As I have already pointed out, the main justification of this expenditure is to be found in. the recent increase of the Army. This alone, if we take the 25,000 men whom we are adding to the Army, at the usual figure per man, would involve an expenditure of about £3,000,000;but it must also be borne in mind that while we have been increasing the number of men—for whom we have to find accommodation—we have simultaneously been diminishing the amount of that accommodation. We have of late, and I am glad to think that we have done so, been condemning a number of old barracks. Some of these have been condemned because they were so in sanitary that we could not safely house our troops in them. If I were minded to do so, I could give the House a somewhat lurid description of the condition of things which has been found to exist in some of our most old-fashioned and worn-out barracks. In a few cases we propose to get rid of existing barracks, because they are, from a military point of view, in the wrong place, perhaps in neighbourhoods where no training ground is available, or, again, because the regiment or battalion, instead of being concentrated at one spot, has been scattered about in detachments here and there. In regard to barracks at home we find, upon a review of our requirements, of the

    1253
    number of barracks available, of the number under construction, and of the number which we have been obliged to condemn, that we are deficient in barrack accommodation for three regiments of Cavalry, eighteen batteries of Horse and Field Artillery, four companies of Garrison Artillery, and seven battalions of Infantry. But our liabilities do not end here, for there are, besides, a considerable number of barracks which are too good to be condemned, and which will not be replaced, but in the case of which a large expenditure of money will be necessary in order to provide accommodation for the eighty men whom we recently decided to add to each of our Infantry battalions. The whole of these deficiencies we hope ultimately to make good, and under the present Bill we shall make a very substantial commencement. The Bill also provides for additions to the depôts of regiments to which we have lately added new battalions, for the completion of work at various barracks in progress under the Act of 1897, for further improvements in our large camps at Alder shot, Colchester, the Curragh and Shorncliffe, and for barracks at various foreign stations, among which Gibraltar, Malta, and Wei-hai-wei are the most notable. There can be no doubt that the substitution of new barracks of a more modern and convenient type will bean immense gain to the Army, both in respect to the health of the troops, their efficiency, their comfort, and last, but not least, in respect of the popularity of the Service. We are being driven, not reluctantly, in this direction by several distinct causes. There is, in the first place, the higher sanitary standard which now obtains universally in all classes of the community. Its observance is insisted upon in the case of all human habitations, a standard below which we ought not to fall in dealing with the buildings in which our troops have to pass their lives. In our private dwelling-houses, in our farms and cottages, in our factories, we are required to provide healthy surroundings for the inmates. If we fail in our duty that inspector who looms so large in the foreground of our lives is there to remind us of our shortcomings, and to see that we make them good. In the case of our barracks, public opinion is, perhaps, the most efficient kind of inspector, and public opinion would, I am convinced, insist upon our
    1254
    taking these steps, even if we were not ready to do so of our own accord. Then, again, experience has shown us that nothing is so wasteful as the habit of constantly patching and tinkering these old buildings. I appeal to all of those who have had to do with house property of any kind, and I say, without hesitation, that in the long run I believe the public saves money by providing sound and properly-constructed buildings to take the place of some of the old fabrics which have for years past been so constant a drain upon the annual Estimates. I confess, however, that I do not defend our barrack proposals merely upon the ground that they will, in the long run, be economical, or because I wish to escape the condemnation of the sanitary experts. I hold very strongly that if voluntary service is to survive and succeed in this country, if we are to attract to the ranks of the Army men belonging to the class which we should like to see serving the Queen, it is our bounden duty, not only to divest what I might call the domestic life of the soldier of all squalid and repellent surroundings and associations, but to make it decent and as attractive as it can be made, consistently with sound economy. We have, I am glad to think, made considerable progress in these respects, and I do not think we have anything to be ashamed of in our most recently-constructed barracks, but we fully intend to travel further in the same direction. Our new barracks will contain one improvement which will, I think, be very acceptable to the troops. We intend to give them company dining-rooms, in which to take their meals, instead of compelling them, as now, to take them in the barrack rooms in which they sleep and clean and dry their clothes and accoutrements. We shall also be more liberal in such matters as drying-rooms, bath-rooms, and other minor conveniences. There is another question which I think requires an amount of consideration which has not yet been given to it. I refer to the sleeping accommodation of the private soldier. There is, I believe, in all classes of the community a growing desire for privacy. The soldier has none whatever in barracks. I think the time has come when we should, at all events, try an experiment in this direction by adapting our new barracks, or a part of the rooms in them, to the cubicle system, under

    1255
    which each man is given, not a separate room, but a section of a room divided from the adjoining section by a barrier which effectually screens the inmate of one compartment from that of another. That experiment has been tried with signal success in the case of the buildings well known by the name of a Member of this House—I mean Lord Rowton, whose exertions on behalf of the working classes will be gratefully remembered, and not by the working classes alone. There are, I know, special difficulties in carrying out this system in soldiers' bedrooms, difficulties mainly of discipline. Moreover, some of the arrangements which have worked so well in the Rowton Houses would, no doubt, be inapplicable in barracks, and I am aware that there is a considerable body of military opinion decidedly adverse to this innovation. It is, however, regarded with favour by the Commander-in-Chief, and we mean to try the experiment, certainly in the new barracks, and perhaps in one or two of the old ones. We shall proceed cautiously, and I hope we shall not have to retrace our steps. I have said enough to show the House that we have a good deal of leeway to make up, both in respect of the quantity and the quality of our barrack accommodation, and we are applying ourselves seriously to the task. There remains to be considered the question of selecting sites for the new barracks. In doing this, our main object will be to keep units of the different branches of the Army together, for the sake of discipline and training, and to build only at stations where proper training ground can be provided in the immediate neighbourhood. The want of such training ground has been a serious drawback in many of our stations, and there are obvious advantages in bringing considerable masses of troops together at the same place, and thereby affording the commanding officers an opportunity of handling a comparatively large number of men. For these reasons, we intend to build on Salisbury Plain the greater part of the new barracks which will ultimately be required. The House will see, by reference to the Schedule in the Bill, the various other stations, both at home and abroad, at which it is proposed to spend money on the construction or improvement of barracks, and I shall be happy to afford further information on any point on which it may
    1256
    be desired. I have already explained upon a recent occasion the nature of our proposal with regard to the rifle ranges for the Volunteers. The amount taken is a small one, but, if judiciously expended, will, I hope, be the means of materially alleviating the difficulty with which the Volunteer force has at present to contend in regard to range accommodation.
    Moved, "That the Bill be now read 2a."—(The Marquess of Lansdowne.)
    On Question, agreed to.
    Bill read 2a accordingly; Committee negatived, and Bill to be read 3a To-morrow.

    VALUATIONS AND ASSESSMENTS.
    LORD BALFOUR OF BURLEIGH: My Lords, I beg to move for a Return showing, with respect to each union in England and Wales:—

    (a.) The rateable value of (1) lands; (2) buildings; (3) railways; and (4) all other kinds of property, according to the valuation lists or other record of assessment last in force during the year ended Lady-day, 1870.

    (b.) The gross estimated rental and rateable value of (1) lands; (2) buildings; (3) railways; and (4) all other kinds of rateable property, according to the valuation lists in force in the Metropolis on the 6th day of April, 1894, and in the rest of England and Wales at Lady-day, 1894, and where there were no such lists in force, according to the last poor rate made before such dates respectively.

    (c.) The gross estimated rental and rateable value of (1) lands, distinguishing agricultural land from other lands; (2) buildings; (3) railways; and (4) all other kinds of rateable property, according to the valuation lists in force in the Metropolis on the 6th day of April 1899, and in the rest of England and Wales at Lady-day 1899, and where there were no such lists in force, according to the last poor rate made before such dates respectively.

    For the purposes of this Return—

    (1) "Agricultural land" means the land defined as agricultural land in section nine of the Agricultural Rates Act, 1896; "other lands" should include lands other than agricultural land as above defined, farmhouses and farm buildings, and tithe rent-charges and uncommuted tithes, but should

    1257
    exclude lands occupied as railways, canals, quarries, &c.:

    (2) "Buildings" should include houses (other than farmhouses), shops, ware-houses, mills, factories, docks, wharves, etc.:

    (3) "Railways" should include stations and depôts: And

    (4) "All other kinds of rateable property" should include quarries, mines, ironworks, gasworks, waterworks, canals, and all other rateable properties which do not properly come under headings (1), (2), and (3).

    The Local Government Board have agreed to this Return. It is wanted in connection with the inquiry which is being conducted by the Commission on Local Taxation, over which I have the honour to preside.
    On Question, agreed to; Return ordered to be laid before the House.

    HIGH COURT OF JUSTICE, CHANCERY DIVISION (ADDITIONAL JUDGE).
    THE EARL OF HALSBURY: My Lords, the main proposition contained in the motion which stands on your Lordships' Paper in my name—namely, that the state of legal business requires an additional Judge—was confirmed fourteen years ago by a strong Committee to whom the question was referred, and since that time the matter has become more urgent, arrears accumulating at an increasing rate. Your Lordships will probably entertain no doubt that such a motion should be made, and that is really the whole case so far as relevant matter is concerned; but I observe that in another place opportunity was taken advantage of to raise a great many other questions, on some of which I propose to say a few words. With regard to the number of circuits, I am prepared to admit that in the arrangement of civil cases by diminishing the number of circuits there would be convenience, and no doubt it would avoid waste of judicial time. Efforts to try the experiment have been made more than once, and have as often been successfully resisted. In the administration of criminal justice I am not in favour of any such change. I do not believe that anything gives greater popularity and confidence in the administration of justice than the fact that in turn Her Majesty's judges go on circuit. When it is suggested that less important cases might be dealt with
    1258
    by some other expedient, it should be remembered that, however humble a man's position, his liberty is as important as that of any other subject, and I do not believe that to get rid of trifling cases by remitting them to quarter sessions, or any other tribunal, would be a course that would command such confidence as is now entertained by the great bulk of Her Majesty's subjects in the administration of justice. Something like amalgamation of counties for civil trials might be arranged, and I once attempted to procure an Order in Council diminishing the number of places to which judges should go, but county after county resisted the alteration, and in the result I had to abandon the attempt. That with fewer circuits prisoners would be tried more rapidly is a proposition that cannot be maintained. Again and again during the past fourteen years I have noticed a strange reluctance of magistrates to admit prisoners to bail; why, I do not know. Until Jarvis's Act was passed the criminal law was such that for a large class of offences prisoners had a right to bail, and actions were brought against magistrates for refusing bail or exacting unduly high bail. There seems, however, to be a persistent determination not to admit to bail, and this has been remarked upon by the Lord Chief Justice and many other judges. It may be a question whether it will be necessary to revert to a state of the law in which prisoners would have a right to bail. Next session I hope to introduce a Bill to relieve to some extent the work of judges by a system whereby prisoners disposed to plead guilty can be sentenced at once and not be detained. The system now is that a judge, finding a prisoner has been a long time in prison, passes a comparatively light sentence because he takes the length of time he has already been in prison into account, but the effect is that people not taking account of this practice are sometimes startled at what seems an inadequate sentence. I contemplate by the Bill I have mentioned an avoidance of this. It has been suggested that a large number of the less important criminal cases might be remitted to quarter sessions, but admirable as the jurisdiction of these magistrates is, it is not desirable that the more serious classes of offences should be committed to that jurisdiction. Nor is it desirable to remit minor civil cases to county courts. Those

    1259
    courts are already overcrowded, and the many duties devolving upon county court judges are gradually squeezing out the original intention of those courts. I have a strong suspicion that the Chancellor of the Exchequer would find the alteration a source of considerable expense These matters are not altogether relevant to the motion, but discussion in the other House has led me to refer to them.
    Moved, "That an humble Address be presented to Her Majesty, representing that the state of business in the High Court of Justice is such as to require the appointment of an additional judge; and praying that Her Majesty will be graciously pleased to appoint a new judge of the said High Court in the Chancery Division thereof, in pursuance of the eighteenth Section of the Appellate Jurisdiction Act, 1876."—(The Lord Chancellor.)
    LORD COLERIDGE: My Lords, the fact that the noble Lord has gone beyond the terms of his motion tempts me to make a few observations. It will be seen that this motion appoints a judge for the Chancery Division. It is in that Division that the greatest block has occurred, and one of the chief reasons for it has been the fact that there are two scales of costs—one set on the Common Law side and another set on the Chancery side. Solicitors find that the scale of costs on the Chancery side is much more remunerative to them, and this has led to the Chancery Courts being blocked by a great number of actions that are in their nature Common Law actions which should be tried on the Common Law side. The noble and learned Lord on the Woolsack has spoken, without giving any very great hope of reform, of the various suggestions that have been made. I can assure the noble and learned Lord that something will have to be done. The block in the Law Courts is universally recognised. Some time ago it was suggested that everything could be put right if we had continuous sittings in London, but that scheme has hopelessly broken down. The theory was that throughout the legal year there should be always at least three courts sitting: one for special jury cases, one for common jury cases, and one for non-jury cases; but, as I have said, that has hopelessly broken down. Last week, day after day passed in this the metro-
    1260
    polis of the greatest Empire in the world without a single special jury court, or a single common jury court, or a single non-jury court sitting. If you are to have continuous sittings in London working with the circuit system you must, increase your judicial staff. I think the old system was best under which circuits were contemporaneous and under which, when the judges went on circuit, the courts in London were closed. When the judges returned they were all at full work until the circuit started again. It. is recognised that twelve judges will do far more work in a fortnight than six judges can perform in a month. When a number of courts are sitting and the judge has power to send a case over to another court, business is expedited, but under the present system it often happens that your case is putdown, your witnesses come up, everything is prepared for trial, you are in the list, and you find, when you ought to be called on, that your judge has gone off on circuit, and the whole thing is put back. With circuits and business in London going on at the same time neither is thoroughly well done. The general council of the Bar have made a most reasonable suggestion. They have recommended that a Commission should sit to inquire into the whole question, and I understand that Sir Edward Clarke in another place implied that Her Majesty's Government did not view unfavourably the communication from that body. The noble and learned Lord on the Woolsack has admitted that there is dissatisfaction with the present system, but I am afraid he does not give us much hope of immediate reform. I would suggest that the noble and learned Lord should consider whether or not some inquiry could be made with a view to a remedy being found for the present state of things, which is universally recognised to be thoroughly unsatisfactory.
    LORD TEYNHAM: There was a case called the Brinsmead piano case, in which judgment was delivered by Mr. Justice North. A leading article appeared the next morning in the Morning Post, in which the fact was commented upon that the action was tried in the autumn of last year, and the judgment only then delivered. I think that is an argument in favour of the noble and learned Lord's motion. There was another case, Shaw

    1261
    v. Holland and Others, in which the fair dealing of certain persons had been called into question, and in which large sums of money had become involved. The trial took place as long ago as July of last year, and not only has the judgment not been delivered, but the parties have not received any intimation from the learned judge that he will give judgment in the near future. I do not think I am going too far in saying that cases of this kind constitute a public scandal. The Chancery judges may be overworked, but I think it is hard to believe that Mr. Justice North has not had time between last year and now to give judgment in this case. I am glad that this motion has been moved, because it will render less excusable the scandals of which I have spoken.
    THE EARL OF HALSBURY: I admit that the effort to combine the circuit system and the London business has, to some extent, been a failure; but I think it is a mistake to say that it has completely broken down. It was felt that the delay which occurred often meant serious injury to commerce, and that some improvements might be made. The motion I have submitted to your Lordships, which is the result of a fourteen years' agitation, is a step in this direction. What the noble and learned Lord (Lord Coleridge) has pointed out as having occurred during the last week has been exceptional. It is exceptional to find no judge doing judicial work in London even dining the time of circuit. It is an observation constantly made, but inaccurate, that there are two scales of costs on the Chancery and Common Law side. I am bound to admit, however, that, though the scales of costs are the same, they are more charitably administered in one branch of the Court than another. That is true, and probably on that ground there is a greater preference for the Chancery side. But all the law can do is to lay down the scale of costs, and the scale as laid down by the law is the same in both cases. I think the suggestion as to an interchange of the Common Law and Chancery Taxing Masters might deserve consideration. I am not sufficiently aware of the cases mentioned by the noble Lord opposite (Lord Teynham) to say whether the delay which has taken place is justifiable, but I would point out that sometimes cases involve very long
    1262
    consideration. I think it is only just to the learned judge concerned to say that the delay is certainly not due to any want of industry or attention to his duties. A more hard-working judge than Mr. Justice North is not to be found, and I suppose that there must be some exceptional circumstance to account for the delay that has arisen.
    On Question, agreed to; and the said Address ordered to be presented to Her Majesty by the Lords with White Staves.

    COLONIAL LOANS BILL.
    Brought from the Commons; read 1a; to be printed; and to be read 2aTo-morrow; and Standing Order No. XXXIX. to be considered in order to its being dispensed with.—(The Earl of Selborne.) (No. 207.)
    EXPIRING LAWS CONTINUANCE BILL.
    Brought from the Commons; read 1a; to be printed; and to be read 2a To-morrow.—(The Marquess of Salisbury.) (No. 208.)
    INEBRIATES ACT (1898) AMENDMENT BILL.
    Brought from the Commons. Read la; to be printed; and to be road 2a To-morrow; and Standing Order No. XXXIX. to be considered in order to its being dispensed with.—(The Lord Belper.) (No. 209.)
    PUBLIC WORKS (LOANS) BILL.
    Brought from the Commons. Read 1a; to be printed; and to be read 2aTo-morrow.ߞ(The Marquess of Salisbury.) (No. 210.)
    TANCRED'S CHARITIES SCHEME CONFIRMATION BILL.
    Brought from the Commons; read 1a; to be printed; and to be read 2a To-morrow.—(The Lord Churchill.) (No. 211.)

    COMMONS AND OPEN SPACES BILL [H.L.]
    Commons Amendments considered (on motion), and agreed to.
    House adjourned at half-past Seven of the clock, till To-morrow, a. quarter past Four of the clock.