Sitting of 4 August 1899

PRIVATE BILL BUSINESS.
  DERWENT VALLEY WATER BILL.
  Lords Amendments considered, and agreed to; Amendments made; and a consequential Amendment made to the 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.
    Lords Amendments considered, and agreed to.

    PORTSMOUTH CORPORATION BILL [Lords].
    As amended considered.
    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.

    STANDING ORDERS.
    THE CHAIRMAN OF COMMITTEES (Mr. J. W. LOWTHER,): I have to move a series of Amendments to the Standing Orders of the House, but I hope it will not be expected that I shall make a statement on each, or that a Division shall be taken. I may explain that a great majority of the Amendments are merely drafting Amendments, with the purpose of bringing the Standing Orders of the House of Commons into accordance with those of the House of Lords. A certain number relating to Ireland are made necessary by the Local Government (Ireland) Act, the county council having to be substituted for the grand jury. Other Amendments extend the time for the completion of tramways, it having been found in practice that three years is not long enough for the completion of tramways, when the purchase of land is included in the Bill, especially now that electric traction is so generally adopted. We propose to cut out of the Standing Orders the word "subway" as a term of art. It was originally intended to cover such works as the underground railway, but it has never been used in that sense. The only matter which can in any sense be regarded as an Amendment of substance are two clauses relating to the provision of dwellings for occupiers of the working-class who are displaced. The most important change in this respect is the introduction for the first time of a definition of the word

    1453
    "house." It was thought that now, when so many of the working-classes are housed in big buildings accommodating 100 or 500 people, the term "house" should not cover the whole of such a building. It is proposed, therefore, to define "house" as "a tenement separately occupied by any person or persons." This will, for the present, only apply to London. Words are to be inserted which will enable the Committee to provide against the Standing Orders being evaded in this matter. Cases have recently occurred in which promoters have got round the Standing Orders by not taking all the houses required in one Bill, but spreading their net over several sessions, so that in no session are twenty houses taken. The Amendments on the Paper would enable the Committee to take into consideration the whole scheme, and whether under it more than twenty houses in London or ten houses in other towns are to be taken. There is one Amendment on the Paper which I do not propose to move. It is the 4th on page 16, and it embodies a proposal to make some fresh arrangement with regard to the delivery of notices. But the Post Office have not seen their way to fall in with our proposal, and therefore I do not press it. I hope, however, next session, to be able to simplify matters.
    SIR WALTER FOSTER: Has the right hon. Gentleman, with reference to the number of houses in regard to which the provisions as to re-housing the displaced occupiers of the dwellings will be enforced, borne in mind that for every house taken the amount of population disturbed will be much greater in London than elsewhere?
    MR. J. W. LOWTHER: That was so; but for some time the provision in the Standing Orders has referred to twenty houses in London, and ten houses 'elsewhere, and it has not been thought well to make a change in that respect at present.
    MR. T. M. HEALY: Although there is no Standing Order to that effect, may we take it there is an understanding that in future Irish Bills will be initiated in the House of Commons?
    MR. J. W. LOWTHER: That matter is not within the province of the Standing Orders. At the beginning of the session the Chairmen of the two Houses meet and arrange what Bills shall be initiated in each House.
    MR. GALLOWAY: Cannot the right hon. Gentleman, before next session, consider the desirability of increasing the number of dwellings to be replaced in the larger towns from ten to fifteen?
    MR. J. W. LOWTHER: I shall be glad to consider representations from the larger towns as to the advisability of varying the provision in regard to the number of houses taken. My only anxiety has been not to proceed too quickly. This is a matter on which we should have to consult the Local Government Board.
    Standing Order 1 was read and amended:—
    In line 39, in the second column, by leaving out the words after the word "subway" to the word "rails," in line 43.
    Part II., Heading, in line 1, by leaving out the words "(3 to 68 inclusive)."
    In line 8, by leaving out the words from the word "tenant" to the end of line 11, and inserting the words "the term 'London,' except where the City of London is expressly mentioned, means the administrative County of London."
    In line 12, by leaving out the word "district," and inserting the words "sanitary authority."
    In lines 12 and 13, by leaving out the words "the administrative county of."
    In line 13, by leaving out the words from the word "any" to the end of line 15, and inserting the words "sanitary authority for the purposes of The Public Health (London) Act, 1891."
    In line 15, by adding at the end thereof the words "the term 'mechanical power' includes steam, electrical, and every other motive power not being animal power.
    Other expressions defined in The Interpretation Act, 1889, have the same meanings in these Orders as if these Orders were an Act of Parliament passed after the commencement of that Act."
    Standing Order 6 was read and amended, in line 9, by leaving out the words from the word "and" to the word "tramway," in line 11, inclusive, and inserting the words "the motive power to be employed."
    Standing Order 6A was read and repealed.
    Standing Order 6B was read and amended, in line 3, by leaving out all the words after the word "employed."
    Standing Order 10 was read and amended:—
    In line 3, by leaving out the words "or subway."
    In line 11, after the word "tramway," by inserting the word "or."
    In line 48, by leaving out the words "or subway."
    Standing Order 20 was read and amended:—
    In line 4, by leaving out the words "post in."
    In line 5, by leaving out from the word "letter," to the word "appointed," inclusive, in line 6.
    Standing Order 22 was read and amended:—
    In line 9 by leaving out from the word "authorities," to the words "Schedule A," in line 10, inclusive, and inserting the words "for the purposes."
    In line 11, by leaving out the words from the word "of," to the second word "vestry," in line 15, inclusive, and inserting the words "a rural district in England the rural district council shall be deemed to be the local authority."
    In line 16, by inserting after the word "be," the words "deemed to be, "and leaving out the words "the Grand Jury of"; and leaving out the words after the word "county," to the word "1860," in line 23, inclusive, and inserting the words "and district councils."
    Standing Order 24 was read and amended in line 19, by leaving out the words from the word "mile," to the word "(mile)," in line 22, inclusive.
    Standing Order 25 was read and amended in line 3, by leaving out the word "said" and the words "or published."
    Standing Order 25A was read and amended:
    In lines 1 and 2, by leaving out the words "a published," and inserting the words "an ordinance."
    In line 3, by leaving out the words after the word "mile," to the word "obtainable," in line 4, inclusive.
    Standing Order 26 was read and amended in lines 11 and 12, by leaving out the words "or published."
    Standing Order 26A was read and amended in lines 10 and 11, by leaving out the words "or published."
    Standing Order 27 was read and amended:—
    In line 1, by leaving out the word "subway."
    In line 41, by leaving out the word "said" and the words "or published."
    Standing Order 28 was read and amended:—
    In line 1, by leaving out the words from the word "situate," to the word "of," in line 2, inclusive, and inserting the word "in."
    In line 3, by leaving out the words "within the said county," and inserting the words "in London."
    In lines 4 and 5, by leaving out the words "lands within the said county," and inserting the word "London."
    Standing Order 29 was read and amended:—
    In line 11, by leaving out the words "the administrative county of."
    In lines 12 and 13, by leaving out the words "Vestry or District
    Board, as the case may be," and inserting the words "sanitary authority."
    In line 23, by leaving out from the word "council," to the word "included," in line 31, both inclusive, and inserting the words—
    (g) any burgh in Scotland, with the town clerk or clerk to the burgh commissioners, as the case may be;
    (h) any parish in Scotland, outside a burgh, with the clerk of the parish council.
    In line 32, by leaving out the words "sanitary authority," and inserting the words "or rural district."
    In line 33, by leaving out the words "sanitary authority," and inserting the words "district council."
    Standing Order 33 was read and amended:—
    In line 1, by inserting after the word "copy," the words "shall be deposited."
    In line 2, by leaving out the words "shall be deposited."
    In line 3, by leaving out the words "printed copy," and inserting the words "of every local Bill relating to Scotland or Ireland at the Office of the Secretary for Scotland or the Irish Office, as the case may be."
    In line 4, by leaving out the word "subways."
    In line 6, by leaving out the words "shall be deposited."
    In lines 6 and 7, by leaving out the words "a printed copy."
    In line 8, by leaving out the words "shall be deposited."
    In line 10, by leaving out the words "a printed copy."
    In line 12, by leaving out the words "shall be deposited."
    In line 13, by leaving out the words "a printed copy."
    In lines 14 and 15, by leaving out the words "and of every Bill."
    In line 18, by inserting after the word "Land" the words "or in which provisions are contained re-
    1458
    lating to the labouring class in London; or promoted by municipal and other local authorities, by which it is proposed to create powers relating to police or sanitary regulations which deviate from, or are in extension of, or repugnant to, the General Law."
    In line 19, by leaving out the words "a printed copy."
    In line 21, by leaving out the words from the word "Colonies," to the word "copy," inclusive, in line 23.
    In line 25, by leaving out the words "or to which Standing Order 38 applies."
    In line 26, by leaving out the words "a printed copy."
    In line 31, by leaving out the words "a printed copy."
    In line 34, by leaving out the words "a printed copy."
    In line 37, by leaving out the words "a printed copy."
    In line 39, by leaving out the words "a printed copy."
    At the end thereof, by adding the words—
    Of every local Bill which relates to the drainage of land in England or Wales, or which relates to the improvement of land in England, Wales, or Scotland, or to the erection, improvement, repair, maintenance, or regulation of any market or market place at which cattle are exposed for sale, or to any matter within the jurisdiction of the Board of Agriculture, or which proposes to alter the boundary of any county, urban or rural district, parish, or any other administrative area in the United Kingdom, or whereby power is sought to take any common or commonable land, at the Office of the Board of Agriculture.
    Standing Orders 33A and 33B were read, and repealed.
    Standing Order 34 was read and amended, in line 2, by leaving out the word "whereby," and inserting the words "which proposes to authorise," and in

    1459
    line 2, by leaving out the words from the word "work" to the second word "of," in line 3, inclusive, and inserting the word "in."
    Standing Order 37 was read and amended in line 2, by leaving out the word "Subway."
    Standing Order 38 was read and repealed.
    Standing Order 45A was read and repealed.
    Standing Order 57 was read and amended:—
    In line 1, by inserting, after the first word "Bill," the word "or," and by leaving out the words "or Subway Bill."
    In line 3, by inserting, after the first word "Company," the word "or," and by leaving out the words "or Subway Company."
    In line 4, by inserting, after the word "Railway," the word "or."
    In line 5, by leaving out the words "or subway."
    In line 12, by inserting, after the first word "Bills," the word "and," and by leaving out the words "and Subway Bills."
    Standing Orders 60 and 60A were read and repealed.
    Standing Order 63 was read and amended, in line 3, by inserting after the word "or" the word "otherwise," and by leaving out the words from the word "constituted" to the word "Trustees," in line 6, inclusive.
    Standing Order 65 was read and amended, in line 4, by inserting after the second word "or" the word "otherwise," and by leaving out the words from the word "constituted" to the word "Trustees," in line 8, inclusive.
    Standing Order 67 was read and amended:—
    In line 3, by leaving out the words "Grand Jury Cess," and inserting the words "the poor rate."
    In line 9, by leaving out the words "grand jury" and inserting the
    1460
    words "county council," and by leaving out the words from the word "present" to the word "or," in line 10, inclusive.
    In line 10, by leaving out the word "local."
    In line 12, by leaving out the words "at large," and by leaving out the words from the word "more" to the word "Baronies" in line 13, inclusive, and inserting the words. "urban or rural districts."
    In line 14, by leaving out the words "presentment sessions," and inserting the words "county council."
    In line 15, by leaving out the words "at large," and by leaving out the words "for such barony or baronies," and inserting the words "to the district council for such district," and by leaving out the words in lines 16 to 18, inclusive.
    In line 19, by leaving out all the words after the second word "such," to the word "guardians," in line 21, inclusive, and inserting the words "county or district council."
    In line 22, by leaving out all the words after the word "such," to the word "guardians," in line 23, inclusive, and inserting the word "council."
    In line 26, by inserting after the word "published," the words "or circulating," and after the word "county," the words "or district," and by leaving out from the word "which," to the word "which," in line 27, inclusive.
    In line 28, by leaving out the words, from "charge," to the end of the paragraph.
    In line 34, by leaving out the words from the second "the," to the word "respectively," in line 36, inclusive, and inserting the word "council."
    In line 36, by leaving out the words "presentment or."
    In line 37, by leaving out the words "each of the said bodies," and. inserting the words "every council."
    In line 39, by leaving out the word "foreman," and by leaving out the words "or other person."
    In line 40, by leaving out the words "presentment was made, or such."
    Standing Order 76 was read and amended, in line 4, by leaving out the words "to administer," and inserting the word "for," and by leaving out the words "in the Supreme Court of Judicature."
    Standing Order 142 was read and amended, in line 5, by leaving out the words "to administer," and inserting the word "for," and by leaving out the words "in the Supreme Court of Judicature."
    Standing Order 145 was read and amended, in line 2, by leaving out the words "public carriage," and inserting the word "main," and by leaving out the words from the word "or" to "1845," in line 3, inclusive.
    Standing Order 153 was read and amended:—
    In line 1, by leaving out the word "No, and inserting the word "A;" and by inserting after the word "shall" the word "not."
    In line 3, by leaving out the word "and," and inserting the word "or."
    In line 4, by leaving out the words "it shall not be in the power of the company."
    In line 8, by leaving out the word "tramway."
    In line 8, after the word "or," by inserting the word "tramway."
    In line 9, by leaving out the word "subway."
    Standing Order 155 was read and amended:—
    In lines 2 and 3, by leaving out the words "steam or by any."
    In line 4, by leaving out the words "including cable power."
    Standing Order 158 was read and amended:—
    In line 7 of Paragraph D, by inserting after the word "railway," the words "tramroad or tramway."
    In line 8, by leaving out the words from the beginning thereof to the word "years," in line 9.
    In line 9, by leaving out from the word "not" to the word "line," inclusive, in line 10.
    In line 10, by leaving out from the first word, "years," to the word "year," in line 11.
    Standing Order 170A was read and amended, in line 16, by leaving out from the words "period of," inclusive, to the end thereof, and inserting the words "Committee may, if they think fit, in the special circumstances of the case, substitute shorter periods for the periods mentioned in that section."
    Standing Order 173 was read and amended, in line 2, by leaving out the words "municipal corporation, municipal commissioners," and inserting the words "urban district council."
    Standing Order 183A was read and repealed.
    New Standing Order, to follow Standing Order 37. (Deposit of statement relating to labouring class houses.)
    Ordered, That where any Bill contains or revives or extends power to take compulsorily or by agreement any land in any local area as defined for the purposes of this Order, and such taking involves or may involve the taking in any local area in London of 20 or more houses, or in any other local area of 10 or more houses occupied either wholly or partially by persons of the labouring class, whether as tenants or lodgers, the promoters shall deposit in the Private Bill Office and at the office of the Central Authority on or before the 31st December a statement of the number, description, and situation of all such houses, and the number (so far as can be ascertained)of persons residing therein, and also a copy of so much of the plan (if any) as relates thereto.
    This Order shall not apply where a statement in pursuance of this Order was deposited in respect of this Act, the powers of which are proposed to be revived or extended.
    For the purposes of this Order—
    The expression "local area"meansߞ

    (1) as respects London the City of London, and the district of any

    1463
    sanitary authority within the meaning of The Public Health (London) Act, 1891;

    (2) as respects England and Wales (outside London), any borough, or other urban district, and elsewhere, any parish;

    (3) as respects Scotland, any district within the meaning of The Public Health (Scotland)Act, 1897; and

    (4) as respects Ireland, any urban district;

    The expression "house" means any tenement separately occupied by any person or persons;
    The expression "labouring class" means mechanics, artisans, labourers, and others working for wages, hawkers, costermongers, persons not working for wages but working at some trade or handicraft without employing others except members of their own family, and persons, other than domestic servants, whose income does not exceed an average of thirty shillings a week, and the families of any of such persons who may be residing with them;
    The expression "Central Authority" means as regards London the Secretary of State for the Home Department, and as regards England and Wales (outside London) the Local Government Board, as regards Scotland the Secretary for Scotland, and as regards Ireland the Local Government Board for Ireland;
    The expression "Bill" includes a Bill confirming a Provisional Order.
    New Standing Order, to follow Standing Order 59 (Deposit Bills brought from House of Lords):—
    Ordered, That a copy of every Local Bill brought from the House of Lords shall, not later than two days after the Bill is read a first time, be deposited at every Office at which it was deposited under Orders 33, 33A, and 38, or would be required to be deposited under those Orders, if it had been originally introduced as brought from the House of Lords.
    New Standing Order, to follow Standing Order 183 (Provisions with respect to houses occupied by labouring class):—
    Ordered, That, in the case of every Bill which gives, revives, or extends power to take land compulsorily or by agreement, clauses shall be inserted—

    (1) Providing that the promoters, shall not in the exercise of such power purchase or acquire in any local area in London twenty or more houses, or, in any other local area, ten or more houses, occupied either wholly or partially by persons belonging to the labouring class, as tenants or lodgers, unless and until

    (a) They shall have obtained the approval of the central authority to a scheme for providing new dwellings for the persons residing in such houses, or for such number or proportion of such persons as the central authority shall, after enquiry, deem necessary, having regard to the number of persons residing in the houses liable to be taken and working within one mile there from, and to the amount of vacant suitable accommodation in the immediate neighbourhood of the houses liable to be taken, or to the place of employment of such persons, and all the other circumstances of the case; and

    (b) They shall have given security to the satisfaction of the central authority for the carrying out of the scheme.

    (2) Imposing adequate penalties on the promoters in the event of houses being acquired or appropriated for the purposes of the Bill in contravention of the foregoing provisions;

    (3) Providing that the expenses or any part of the expenses incurred by the central authority under this Order shall be defrayed by the promoters of the Bill, or out of moneys to be raised under the Bill; and

    (4) Conferring on the promoters, and on the central authority respectively any powers that may

    1465
    be necessary to enable full effect to be given to the said scheme.

    The Committee may provide that any house purchased or acquired by the promoters in any local area in London for or in connection with any of the purposes of the Bill, whether purchased or acquired in the exercise of the powers of the Bill or otherwise, and whether before or after the passing of the Bill, shall be deemed, for the purposes of the clauses so to be inserted, to have been purchased or acquired in exercise of the powers of the Bill.
    Expressions defined in Order 38 have the same meanings in this Order.
    Ordered, That the said Standing Orders be Standing Orders of this House.—(The Chairman of Ways and Means.)

    EDUCATION DEPARTMENT PROVISIONAL ORDER CONFIRMATION (LONDON) BILL [Lords].
    Read the third time, and passed, with Amendments.
  PETITIONS.
    PETROLEUM BILL.
    Petition from West Ham, in favour; to lie upon the Table.
    POOR LAW AMENDMENT (SCOTLAND) ACT, 1845.
    Petitions for alteration of Law, from Barrie, Middlebie, and Troqueer; to lie upon the Table.
  RETURNS, REPORTS, &c.
    RAILWAYS (GENERAL REPORT).
    Copy presented,—of General Report to the Board of Trade on the Capital, Traffic and Expenditure of the Railway Companies of the United Kingdom for the year 1898 [by Command]; to lie upon the Table.
    STATISTICAL ABSTRACT (UNITED KINGDOM).
    Copy presented,—of Statistical Abstract for the United Kingdom in each of the last fifteen years from 1884 to 1898, Forty-sixth Number [by Command]; to lie upon the Table.
    STATISTICAL ABSTRACT (COLONIES).
    Copy presented,—of Statistical Abstract for the Colonial and other Possessions of the United Kingdom in each of the last fifteen years from 1884 to 1898, Thirty-sixth Number [by Command]; to lie upon the Table.
    COMPANIES (WINDING-UP).
    Return presented,—relative thereto [ordered 13th June; Mr. Charles M'Arthur]; to lie upon the Table, and to be printed. (No. 328.)
    BREWERS' CASKS.
    Return presented,ߞrelative thereto [ordered 27th July; Mr. Broadhurst]; to lie upon the Table, and to be printed. (No. 329.)
    BANKRUPTCY.
    Copy presented,—of Sixteenth General Annual Report by the Board of Trade under the Bankruptcy Act, 1883 [by Act]; to lie upon the Table, and to be printed. (No. 330.)
    COMPANIES (WINDING-UP).
    Copy presented,—of Eighth General Annual Report by the Board of Trade [by Act]; to lie upon the Table, and to be printed. (No. 331.)
    RAILWAY SERVANTS (HOURS OF LABOUR).
    Copy presented,—of Report by the Board of Trade of their Proceedings under the Railway Regulation Act, 1893 during the year ended 27th July, 1899 [by Act]; to lie upon the Table, and to be printed. (No. 332.)
    WEIGHTS AND MEASURES.
    Copy presented,—of Report by the Board of Trade of their Proceedings and Business under the Weights and Measures Acts [by Act]; to lie upon the Table and to be printed. (No. 333.)
    SUPERANNUATION ACT, 1887.
    Copy presented,—of Treasury Minute, dated 29th July, 1899, granting to Mr. G. F. Long, formerly a second division clerk in the Office of Public Works, Dublin, a retired allowance under the Act [by Act]; to lie upon the Table.
    IRISH LAND COMMISSION (PROCEEDINGS).
    Copy presented,—of Return of Proceedings of the Commission during the months of March, April, and May, 1899 [by Command]; to lie upon the Table.
    TUNIS (No. 1, 1899).
    Copy presented,—of Return of Exports from Great Britain and France to Tunis during the years 1880, 1885, 1890, 1895, and 1897 [by Command]; to lie upon the Table.
    EGYPT (No. 6, 1899).
    Copy presented,—of Papers relating to the Contract for the Atbara Bridge [by Command]; to lie upon the Table.
    TRADE REPORTS (ANNUAL SERIES).
    Copies presented,—of Diplomatic and Consular Reports, Annual Series, Nos. 2326 to 2328 [by Command]; to lie upon the Table.
    EDUCATION DEPARTMENT (EVENING CONTINUATION SCHOOLS).
    Copy presented,—of Minute of the Committee of Council on Education, dated 4th August, 1899, modifying Articles 15 and 15* of the Evening Continuation Schools Code, 1899 [by Command]; to lie upon the Table.
    EDUCATION (ENGLAND AND WALES).
    Copy presented,—of Report of the Committee of Council on Education (England and Wales), with Appendix, 1898–9 [by Command]; to lie upon the Table.
    EDUCATION (ENGLAND AND WALES).
    Copy presented,—of Statement showing (1) Schools in receipt of Parliamentary Grants; (2) Grants paid to School Boards under Section 97, Elementary Education Act, 1870; and (3) School Board Accounts and List of Loans for the year 1898–9 [by Command]; to lie upon the Table.

    FACTORY AND WORKSHOP (PREVENTION OF ACCIDENTS FROM MACHINERY IN THE MANUFACTURE OF COTTON).
    Copy presented of Report to the Secretary of State for the Home Department by W. A. Beaumont, Esquire, and H. S. Richmond, Esquire, two of Her Majesty's Superintending Inspectors of Factories,
    1468
    on the Prevention of Accidents from Machinery in the Manufacture of Cotton [by Command]; to lie upon the Table.

    DEATHS FROM STARVATION OR ACCELERATED BY PRIVATION (LONDON).
    Return presented relative thereto [Address, 15th February, Mr. Talbot]; to lie upon the Table, and to be printed. (No. 334.)
    INTOXICATING LIQUORS (LICENCES REFUSED).
    Return presented relative thereto [Address, 18th April, Mr. Henry J. Wilson]; to lie upon the Table, and to be printed. (No. 335.)
    EXPENDITURE ON CAPITAL ACCOUNT RECENTLY AUTHORISED BY PARLIAMENT.
    Return ordered, "showing the amounts of expenditure authorised since the 1st day of April, 1888, by Acts of Parliament and by the Bills of the present session, to be incurred on various public services and to be charged to Capital Account; the several heads of such expenditure; the amounts of expenditure incurred in each year to the 31st day of March, 1899, under each head; the amounts borrowed to meet the requirements of spending Departments to that date; the amounts of the loans repaid under each head by the same date; and the amounts then outstanding."—(Sir Henry Campbell-Bannerman.)
QUESTIONS.

  NAVAL STORES
  COMMANDER YOUNG: I beg to ask the Secretary to the Admiralty whether the delivery of stores under contract, apart from those required for ship construction, during the financial year 1898–99, was satisfactory.
  THE SECRETARY TO THE ADMIRALTY (Mr. MACARTNEY,): Deliveries have been generally satisfactory. Certain firms, however, who were in arrear in the year 1897–8 and were specially warned on that account, have again failed to make satisfactory deliveries, and have consequently been removed from the list of contractors.

  NAVAL COURTS-MARTIAL.
  MR. H. D. GREENE: I beg to ask the First Lord of the Admiralty whether the Criminal Evidence Act, 1898, has been applied to Courts-Martial under the Naval Discipline Act.
  MR. MACARTNEY: The answer is in the negative.

  ARMY CHAPLAINS.
  CAPTAIN NORTON: I beg to ask the Under Secretary of State for War whether he can state if it is intended to take from Army chaplains the benefit of the Royal Warrantunder which they served from 1894 to 1898.
  THE UNDER SECRETARY OF STATE FOR WAR (Mr. WYNDHAM,): Until 1894 the ride was that chaplains should retire at sixty unless specially retained till a later age. In 1894 the rule was altered so that sixty-five became the compulsory age, power being taken to place any chaplain on retirement at or after the age of sixty. Last year it was considered desirable for the good of the Service, and on the advice of the Chaplain-General, to revert to sixty as the age for compulsory retirement subject to retention in special cases. Three years' notice was given to chaplains who would be affected within that time.

  MILTARY HONOURS AT VOLUNTEER FUNERALS.
  CAPTAIN NORTON: I beg to ask the Under Secretary of State for War whether he can now state what decision, if any, has been arrived at as regards permitting military honours at Volunteer funerals.
  MR. WYNDHAM: It has been decided to permit military honours at Volunteer funerals. A paragraph defining the conditions of this permission will be published in the next edition of the Volunteer Regulations.

  YEOMANRY RIFLE RANGES.
  MR. H. D. GREENE: I beg to ask the Under Secretary of State for War whether annual musketry drills are enforced upon the Yeomanry without provision by the Government of ranges or the cost of transport to ranges; whether, as in the case of Shrewsbury, the squadron officers have themselves to incur all the
  1470
  expenses in connection with the use of the ranges fired on, and also the cost of transport of the men to and fro; and whether this can be remedied or removed by the provision of suitable ranges or otherwise.
  MR. WYNDHAM: Yeomanry corps are expected to provide for the hire of ranges out of the contingent allowance of £3 a man given for efficiency in drills and musketry. Further, a sum of 3s 6d. is allowed for each man who makes himself efficient, to meet expenses in attending at the range. I am informed that the Shropshire Yeomanry are sending a statement of their case to the War Office. If so, it will be considered when it is received.

  PENSIONS FOR ORDNANCE FACTORY EMPLOYEES.
  LORD HUGH CECIL: I beg to ask the Financial Secretary to the War Office whether the War Office would give consideration to further suggestions from those in employment in ordnance factories, &c, in regard to pensions; and, whether the War Office would now be prepared to grant a scheme on the lines submitted to the workmen in 1889, and then rejected by them.
  THE FINANCIAL SECRETARY TO THE WAR OFFICE (Mr. J. POWELL-WILLIAMS,): The Secretary of State would not decline to give consideration to any further suggestions; but, as regards the workmen, their rejection of the scheme submitted to them in 1889 was so decisive that he is not prepared to re-open the matter as far as they are concerned.

  INDIA—POLICE FORCE IN NORTH-WESTERN PROVINCES AND OUDH.
  MR. HAZELL: I beg to ask the Secretary of State for India whether he is aware that during the year 1897 four charges of torture were preferred against the police force of the North-Western Provinces and Oudh, all of which ended in convictions; and that it was officially reported that during the same year the conduct of the police force in the Province of Coorg was unsatisfactory; and whether, owing to the low rates of pay offered, it is difficult to get suitable recruits to join these forces, and, if so, whether the Government of

  1471
  India is taking any steps to improve the position of these men and so attract a better class in order to avoid a recurrence of the scandals referred to.
  THE SECRETARY OF STATE FOR INDIA (Lord G. HAMILTON,): I am aware that in 1897 four cases of police torture ended in conviction in the police of the North-Western Provinces and Oudh. In two of these cases the torture appears to have been inflicted under the orders of a superior and well-paid officer. As regards Coorg, which is a very small district, I find that for 1897 the Chief Commissioner in his review mentions "a decided improvement" as having taken place in police work, and also that he is preparing a scheme to remedy what he considers the disadvantage of insufficient pay. That cases of misconduct by the police should occur is a matter for very great regret; but there is reason to hope that a gradual improvement in this respect is taking place. The subject of improving the position and quality of the police generally has constantly occupied the attention of the Government of India, and large sums of money have been devoted during recent years to this purpose.

  SULTAN MUHAMMAD.
  SIR. ANDREW SCOBLE: I beg to ask the Secretary of State for India whether he is aware that Sultan Muhammad, described as an Afghan General, and a near relative of the Amir of Afghanistan, resident in England, has been recognised as the official representative of the Ameer; and whether there is any truth in the statement?
  LORD G. HAMILTON: There is no representative or relative of his Highness the Ameer in this country. The gentleman referred to is a British subject, who was once in the Ameer's service, but is not known to have held any office in the Ameer's army.

  VACCINATION STATISTICS.
  SIR WALTER FOSTER: I beg to ask the President of the Local Government Board, if he can state the amount of vaccination which has been performed during the first six months of this year under the provisions of the Vaccination Act of last year, as compared with the amount of vaccination
  1472
  performed during the first six months of last year.
  THE PRESIDENT OFTHE LOCAL GOVERNMENT BOARD (Mr. CHAPLIN,): The Returns, which I have obtained show that the total number of certificates of successful primary vaccination received by the, vaccination officers during the first six months of the present year was 353,992, as against 277,821 in the first six months of 1898. It thus appears that notwithstanding the difficulties of securing a. simultaneous alteration of method throughout the country, involving amongst other things a system of domiciliary instead of stational vaccination, there has been an increase of 76,000 primary vaccinations or of more than 27 per cent in the first six months of the present year as compared with the corresponding period of 1898.

  LONDON ROAD-CAR COMPANY AND THE POLICE REGULATIONS.
  MR. HAZELL: I beg to ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department whether his attention has been called to the action of the Commissioner of Police for the Metropolis in relation to the London Road-Car Company; whether he is aware that the Commissioner has served notices upon the company that several metropolitan stage carriages are unfit for public use, and are therefore not to be used, although in perfect condition, merely because they have a packet of handbills suspended inside them; whether he is aware that those handbills simply indicate an alteration in the route, and are necessary announcements to the public which the company are not permitted to put on the outside of their carriages; and, whether he will cause the prohibition to be revoked.
  THE SECRETARY OF STATE FOR THE HOME DEPARTMENT (SIR M. WHITE RIDELY,): The answer to the second paragraph is in the affirmative. The Secretary of State's Order forbids any matter to appear inside or outside the carriage by way of advertisement except with the approval of the Commissioner. In the present case the approval of the Commissioner had not been asked for or obtained. The Bills in question did not relate to the route of the carriages in which they were exhibited,

  1473
  and were, I understand, advertisements within the meaning of the Order. They have now been withdrawn, and the technical objection to the fitness of the carriages has consequently been removed.

  FIND OF ROMAN COINS AT EASTBOURNE.
  ADMIRAL FIELD: I beg to ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department whether he will cause inquiry to be made of the Chief Constable at Eastbourne as to why certain Roman copper coins (over 2,000 in number) recently found on land near Beachy Head by a farm labourer named Jones, and not claimed by the authorities as treasure trove, have not been restored to him as the finder, although applied for repeatedly by him, or by persons on his behalf; whether it is alleged that the coins are of no intrinsic value; and, if so, will he direct that the same be handed to the man Jones, who is very poor, with a large family, and is anxious to sell them to visitors coming to Eastbourne; and will he state under what Statute the Chief Constable claims to retain them in his custody, and to what other person, if any, it is proposed to deliver them, and will he prohibit such delivery; or, if Jones be not the owner in law, will the Home Secretary indicate the amount he should receive as the finder under circumstances by way of reward.
  SIR M. WHITE RIDLEY: The Chief Constable of the Eastbourne Borough Police reports that, having received information as to the finding of these coins by Jones, he sent an officer to obtain possession of the coins, pending inquiries as to their ownership by the Crown as treasure trove. Having ascertained that the Treasury did not claim the coins, he communicated with the agent of the Duke of Devonshire, on whose land the coins were found, and that gentleman claimed them and rewarded the finder. The Chief Constable also reports that neither Jones nor any other person has repeatedly applied to him for the coins, and that the finder is aware of the manner in which they have been disposed of. The matter is not one in which I could interfere.
  ADMIRAL FIELD: Well, they might return to the man the neckerchief in which he wrapped the coins.

  PAY TO INJURED METROPOLITAN POLICEMEN.
  CAPTAIN NORTON: I beg to ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department whether he can state if Metropolitan police constables are entitled to full pay whilst suffering from severe injuries received in the execution of their duty; and if so, why Police Constable York, of the Peckham division, who had his left cheek-bone fractured by a kick from a violent prisoner in March last, is now on ordinary sick pay though still unable to resume duty.
  SIR. M. WHITE RIDLEY: The regulations provide for a deduction of 1s. per diem from the pay of police while on the sick-list, but this deduction is not usually made when an officer is suffering from the results of injuries received in the execution of his duty. Police Constable York was on the sick-list for ninety-seven days in consequence of the injuries he received, and during that time no deductions were made from his pay. He resumed duty on the 12th June last, but again went sick on the 19th June. In the opinion of the chief surgeon, who is the responsible medical officer, there were no circumstances connected with this renewed period of sick leave to justify its being treated in an exceptional manner so far as the usual deductions are concerned, and he is of opinion that the police constable has practically recovered from his injuries.

  ACCOMMODATION FOR CRIMINAL LUNATICS.
  MR. ARTHUR O'CONNOR: I beg to ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department if he has yet had an opportunity of considering the representations of the Lunacy Commissioners with regard to the increasing numbers of criminal lunatics in county and borough asylums, and to the hardship which the practice inflicts upon the ordinary patients, and the indiscipline and danger which it involves; whether Broadmoor is fully occupied; and whether further accommodation could be furnished so as to enable criminal lunatics to be treated elsewhere than in ordinary asylums.
  SIR M. WHITE RIDLEY: The question of providing additional accommoda-

  1475
  tion for criminal lunatics is engaging my serious attention, and inquiries are now in progress with a view to obtaining a site for the building of a new criminal lunatic asylum. I propose, in the course of the autumn, to make the necessary application to the Treasury. The male accommodation at Broadmoor is fully occupied, but there are still vacancies for females at that establishment. It is intended that accommodation in the new asylum shall be provided both for male convicts becoming insane as well as the other more serious cases of criminal lunatics, but, of course, it will in no case be possible to relieve altogether county and borough asylums from their statutory obligation to receive criminal lunatics.

  WELSH PRISONERS AND PRISON RULES.
  MR. MOSS: I beg to ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department whether he is aware that in some of Her Majesty's prisons in the Principality of Wales the notices which are expected to be read by the prisoners are in English only, that in some cases the prisoners are monoglot Welshmen, and in other cases illiterate Englishmen; and whether, under these circumstances, he will take the necessary steps for having the notice sprinted in future both in English and Welsh, and that in every case they shall be explained to the prisoners.
  SIR. M. WHITE RIDLEY: The old notices were printed in Welsh and issued thus to prisons in Wales. As soon as the new notices, rendered necessary by the Act of 1898 and the new rules made by me, had been printed in English, they were sent for translation into Welsh. The final revision of the proofs by the translator has just been received, and the notices are going to press to-day. The notices are read to all prisoners on reception.

  SUNDAY TRADING AT SHEERNESS.
  MR. BARNES: I beg to ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department whether his attention has been called to the reports of recent proceedings in the Sheerness Police Court, with the written authority of the Chief Constable of Kent, against small shopkeepers under the Sunday Observance Act (29 Car. 2, c. 7); whether he is aware
  1476
  that the defendants were convicted and fined sums varying from 6d. to 5s. for selling cakes, ice creams, tobacco, lemonade, fruit, and milk on Sunday; whether his attention has been called to the fact that the police magistrate characterised the proceedings as most imprudent and absurd, and expressed the opinion that the Home Secretary might very properly remit most of the penalties, which he was bound by law to inflict; and whether he would give the matter his careful consideration, with a view to the remission of these penalties.
  SIR. M. WHITE RIDLEY: I have obtained a report on this case, the. facts of which are substantially as stated in the question. The Sunday Observance Act of 1871 provides that no prosecution shall be instituted without the consent in writing of the chief officer of police of the district or of the magistrates. The Chief Constable of Kent has chosen to exercise the discretion vested in him by the Statute by consenting to the prosecutions. It would not in my opinion be a proper exercise of the prerogative to use it for the remission of penalties which are allowed by the Statute and where no special circumstances justifying that course are brought forward.

  VALUE OF PUBLICANS' LICENCES.
  MR. EDMUND ROBERTSON: I beg to ask Mr. Chancellor of the Exchequer if he is aware that both the Reports of the Licensing Commission agree in attributing an enormous monopoly value to publicans' licences under the present scale of duties; and whether he will now undertake that an inquiry shall be made during the recess with a view to determine as nearly as possible the relation between the existing duties and the actual annual value of the licences.
  THE CHANCELLOR OF THE EXCHEQUER (Sir M. HICKS-BEACH,): I have not had time as yet to study the Report referred to; but, assuming the statement of the hon. Member to be accurate, I will consider his suggestion. I must remind him, however, that the matter is one affecting local, rather than Imperial, taxation.
  MR. EDMUND ROBERTSON: I shall call attention to this matter on the

  1477
  Second Reading of the Appropriation Bill.

  ALIEN IMMIGRATION.
  SIR HOWARD VINCENT: I beg to ask the President of the Board of Trade if his attention has been called to the immigration during the current year of upwards of 35,000 aliens at eastern ports, mainly for settlement in this country, a large increase of those coming in during the same period in 1898; and having in view the competition in the labour market when the present period of industrial prosperity passes away, if Her Majesty's Government will bear in mind the pledges they are under to introduce controlling legislation upon the question during the present Parliament.
  THE PRESIDENT OF THE BOARD OF TRADE (Mr. RITCHIE,): The number of alien immigrants not stated to be en route to places abroad that arrived at East Coast ports in the first seven months of 1899 was 29,670, or an increase of 5,000 over the corresponding period of 1898. Considerable increases are, however, shown in the emigration of foreigners from this country to places out of Europe, and also in the number of sailors included in the alien immigrants. The Government always bear in mind their pledges.
  MR. JAMES LOWTHER: Will the right hon. Gentleman give the figures comparing them with the time when he issued his election address, and described the question as urgent, and the time when the Government promised legislation?
  MR. DILLON: Will the right hon. Gentleman consult President Kruger before he introduces any Bill?
  MR. RITCHIE: I have not the figures now, but I shall be glad to give them.

  AGRICULTURAL EDUCATION GRANTS.
  MR. HERBERT ROBERTS: I beg to ask the President of the Board of Agriculture whether he will arrange that in future the Annual Report of the Board of Agriculture, as to the distribution of the grants for agricultural education, will be issued before the close of the Parliamentary session; whether
  1478
  his attention has been drawn to the very satisfactory results achieved through the distribution of the grants in Wales by the two collegiate centres at Bangor and Aberystwith; and whether, in view of the great interest manifested in Wales in this branch of agricultural education and the pressing necessity for an extension of such educational facilities, he will consider whether the Welsh grants can in future be increased.
  THE PRESIDENT OF THE BOARD OF AGRICULTURE (Mr. LONG,): Every effort will be made to expedite the issue of the Report to which the hon. Member refers; but I am afraid that it cannot always be published before the close of the Parliamentary session. The work of the collegiate centres at Bangor and Aberystwith is certainly of a very satisfactory character; but the same observation applies to the English centres, and I am afraid that increased grants in the one case would be followed by demands for a similar favour in the other, with a result which would be somewhat serious from a Treasury point of view. But I will, of course, carefully consider any representations I may receive on the subject.

  NELSON CHARITY, WIGTON, CUMBER LAND.
  MR. CARVELL WILLIAMS: I beg to ask the hon. Member for Thirsk, as representing the Charity Commissioners, whether representations have been made to the Charity Commissioners expressing the dissatisfaction which prevails in the localities interested with the mode in which the large sum of money bequeathed by Mr. Joseph Nelson, of Moor Row, near Wigton, Cumberland, for charitable purposes, has been appropriated; and whether they will institute an inquiry into the administration of such charities.
  THE PARLIAMENTARY CHARITY COMMISSIONER (Mr. GRANT LAWSON,): (1) The only representation made to the Commissioners in the sense stated is one in general terms by an unsuccessful candidate for the headmastership of the Nelson Grammar School endowed out of the charity, for which a scheme has been made under the direction of the Chancery Division. (2) A letter

  1479
  of the Commissioners inviting him to state the grounds of his complaint has not as yet received any answer, and without this information the Commissioners are unable to say whether an inquiry is wanted.

  COAST TELEPHONIC COMMUNICATIONS.
  SIR CAMERON GULL: I beg to ask the Secretary to the Treasury, as representing the Postmaster-General, whether, in cases where local lifeboat committees determine upon surprise practices, either by day or night, they are entitled to use or to request the Coastguard to use the coast telephonic communications for purposes connected with such practices.
  THE FINANCIAL SECRETARY TO THE TREASURY (Mr. HANBURY,): The Post Office is at all times desirous of facilitating as far as possible the work of the Royal National Lifeboat Institution. No communication has, however, been received from that institution on the subject of the hon. Member's question, and the need for making use of the coast telephonic lines for the purpose of surprise practices is not apparent. The possibility of making suitable arrangements will readily be considered in any case of the kind in which application is made to the Department.

  POSTMEN'S HOURS OF DUTY.
  MR. STEADMAN: I beg to ask the Secretary to the Treasury, as representing the Postmaster-General, if he is aware that in many offices, notably in Yorkshire, the daily duties of postmen are so arranged that the men are unable to benefit by the recommendation of the Tweedmouth Committee, that they should be enabled to have nine clear hours at home; and whether he will take steps to remedy the grievance complained of.
  MR. HANBURY: Every endeavour is being made to carry out the recommendations of the Tweedmouth Committee as regards postmen being enabled to have nine clear hours' rest at home. The Postmaster-General is not aware that there are many offices in Yorkshire or elsewhere where this arrangement has not been carried out; but enquiry will be made in the matter, if the hon. Member
  1480
  will be good enough to specify the offices to which he refers.
  COLONEL DALBIAC: I beg to ask the Secretary to the Treasury, as representing the Postmaster-General, whether the sorters in the letter branch of the Paddington district office are to have imposed upon them a form of split duties extending from 12.15 a.m. to 5.15 a.m., and from 7.15 p.m. to 9.15p.m.; whether he is aware that such hours will preclude the possibility of a proper night's rest, and whether the fact has been considered that this practically compels men to spend the time from 9.15 p.m. to 12.15 a.m. in the streets or in the nearest public-house, and that rule 14 forbids any officer off duty remaining in post office buildings; and whether, in view of the recommendations of the Tweedmouth Committee, he can see his way to prevent such arrangements coming into force.
  MR. HANBURY: It will be necessary for five sorters in the Paddington District Office to attend at about the times stated by the hon. Member in order to carry on the work, and no other arrangement of the duties is practicable without undue expense or waste of force. The men can remain in the building during the interval mentioned if they wish to do so, there being no rule against this. Rule 14, to which reference is made, deals with an entirely different subject, but Rule 44, which is probably intended, prohibits sleeping on the premises without permission. The recommendation of the Tweedmouth Committee that, wherever it is necessary for split duties to be performed, the officer should have nine clear unbroken hours at his own home during each twenty-four hours will be complied with in this case, inasmuch as the five sorters in question will be off duty from 5.15 a.m. to about 7.15 p.m.

  POSTMEN'S PETITIONS.
  MR. STEADMAN: I beg to ask the Secretary to the Treasury, as representing the Postmaster-General, for what reason G. S. Johnston, an unappointed postman of Edinburgh, was directed by Inspector Ross to look out for another situation, after being asked why he had signed the petition to the Postmaster-General requesting official recognition of the federation; and is he aware that a

  1481
  practice prevails at Edinburgh, especially on the part of this inspector, of questioning unappointed men as to their reasons for signing petitions.
  MR. HANBURY: Johnston was unable to pass the medical examination for appointment to the establishment in 1898, and he was informed that he would be allowed to remain on duty for a month to give him an opportunity to look for other employment. Afterwards, at Johnston's earnest request, this temporary employment was continued till the 24th of April last. The inspector says that he is not in the habit of questioning unappointed men as to their reasons for signing petitions, and in Johnston's case he merely told the young man that he did not think he should sign the petition in question as he was not on the establishment.

  ABBREVIATED TELEGRAPHIC ADDRESSES.
  MR. TREVELYAN: I beg to ask the Secretary to the Treasury, as representing the Postmaster-General, whether he is aware of the existence of discontent owing to the stricter enforcement by the Post Office of full addresses for telegraph messages, even where there has been hitherto no doubt or ignorance as to the person named in the incomplete address; and whether the Postmaster-General can see his way either to a modification of the rule which insists on full addresses or to the reduction of the fee for registered addresses, which now stands at a guinea.
  MR. HANBURY: The Postmaster-General is aware of the existence, here and there, of discontent, owing to the requirement by the Post Office of a sufficient address for telegrams, but he has no reason to think that, except perhaps in a few isolated cases, this has been done where there has been an address which enabled the Department to effect delivery without difficulty or delay and without reference to directories. Otherwise telegrams cannot be transmitted and delivered with due expedition, and there is risk of those bearing sufficient addresses also being delayed through the time of the officers of the Department being taken up in making inquiries. The Post Office does not recommend the registration of an abbreviated address. It would be much
  1482
  the best if in all cases a full address were used. The Postmaster-General does not, however, regard the present fee as excessive, and he cannot see his way to reduce it.

  CORK POST OFFICE STAFF.
  MR. MAURICE HEALY: I beg to ask the Secretary to the Treasury, as representing the Postmaster-General, whether it is intended to appoint a member of the Cork telegraph staff to the new position of assistant superintendent, included in the revision of the Cork indoor force, which was recently sanctioned by the Treasury; and why the vacancy is not to be filled from the postal side, considering that the major portion of the duties applicable to the new appointment are postal, and that the entire duties, postal and telegraph, have been hitherto performed by the postal staff.
  MR. HANBURY: No decision has yet been come to.

  ART BRANCH, SOUTH KENSINGTON MUSEUM.
  MR. MAURICE HEALY: I beg to ask the Secretary to the Treasury whether his attention has been called to the action of the Civil Service Commissioners in connection with the recent appointment of Mr. Andrews to the position of assistant in the South Kensington Museum (Art Branch), and their refusal to appoint Mr. Donovan, a duly qualified candidate, to that position; whether he is aware that an examination was held to fill two vacancies in June, 1898; that at this examination three candidates qualified; and that another vacancy occurred shortly after the examination, to which the third qualified candidate (Mr. Donovan) applied to be appointed; whether it has been hitherto the rule that an examination is held not merely with a view to existing vacancies, but also with a view to vacancies arising within six months of the examination; and why Mr. Donovan was not appointed to the vacancy according to that practice; whether Mr. Andrews was a candidate at the same examination, and also at a previous one, and was unsuccessful at both; and whether the Civil Service Commissioners subsequently gave Mr. Andrews a certificate without any examination, and appointed him to the position which they

  1483
  refused to Mr. Donovan, though the latter had got the third place at the examination in June, 1898.
  MR. HANBURY: Open competitions for situations in the Civil Service have reference either to existing vacancies or to the number of vacancies estimated to occur within any period not exceeding six months after the commencement of the examination or to both. The open competition held in June, 1898, had reference, as was stated in the notice announcing it, to the number of assistantships vacant at the time, viz., two. The candidates who obtained the first two places were appointed and no other candidate had any claim to any appointment. In this competition Mr. Andrews and Mr. Donovan were both unsuccessful. Mr. Donovan was third and qualified, but his marks were considerably below those of the first two candidates. Accordingly when another vacancy occurred it was decided to offer it for competition, and notice was given that an examination would be held in December, 1898. Mr. Andrews entered and Mr. Donovan did not. As the only other candidate besides Mr. Andrews withdrew, and as he had qualified at two previous examinations, the vacant Assistantship was given to him. To have re-examined him under such circumstances would clearly have been superfluous.

  SUPREME COURT CLERKS' RETIREMENT.
  ADMIRAL FIELD: I beg to ask the Secretary to the Treasury whether, in view of the answer given by him on 9th April, 1897, in reply to a question by the hon. Member for the Norwood Division of Lambeth relative to the retirement of clerks in the Probate and other law offices, he can now state the nature of the regulations alluded to as then being about to be issued dealing with the grievances in question, and whether they were ever issued; whether he is aware that there are at this moment four clerks with over twenty years' service, six clerks with over fifteen years' service, and fifteen clerks with over ten years' service, all of whom are in the same class as when they entered the office, and at the maximum salary of their class, the average time in the third class being upwards of twenty
  1484
  years; whether clerks remain in the office till they are over seventy years of age, and why the rules for their compulsory retirement at sixty-five, recommended by the Ridley Commission, are not complied with; whether the President of the Probate, Divorce, and Admiralty Court has brought the subject under the notice of the Treasury repeatedly, but without result; whether he is aware that clerk of twenty years' service are still serving on the small salary of £200, owing to the non-retirement of old men, and whether the existing arrangements can be abolished; and can he inform the House of the number of clerks who will reach sixty-five years and upwards by the end of the present financial year in the probate and Admiralty Court who are not under the compulsory retirement rules.
  MR. HANBURY: The clerks of the departments of the Supreme Court are not persons in the permanent Civil Service within the definition of the Superannuation Acts. The Order in Council of 15th August, 1890, does not therefore apply to them, and the Treasury is powerless to enforce retirement at the age usual in the Civil Service. This retirement could only be enforced by an order made by the authorities of the Supreme Court, and I understand that the Lord Chancellor is unable to obtain the assent of all the chiefs of the several Divisions of the Court. I am unable to answer the questions as to the ages of the clerks in the several Divisions of the Court. In fact, I understand that the ages of several are not known.

  SOUTH TIPPERARY MAILS.
  MR. ARTHUR MOORE: I beg to ask the Secretary to the Treasury, as representing the Postmaster-General, whether his attention has been called to the fact that the mails have missed the connection at Limerick Junction on four days last week and three days this week, thereby disorganising the postal service over the greater part of South Tipperary and the important towns of Clonmel, Cahir, and Carrick-on-Suir; and what steps the Post Office intend to take in this matter.
  MR. HANBURY: The mails from England on three occasions last week, and on three occasions this week, missed the

  1485
  connection at Limerick Junction. In one case the delay was caused by the breakdown of the engine of the London and North-Western mail train. In the other cases it was due to the large amount of passenger traffic for Ireland, which rendered it necessary for the train to Holyhead to be run in two parts. The duplication of this train has been much more frequent since third-class passengers have been conveyed by it, and whenever it is duplicated the second part is always late in arriving at Holyhead. The railway company have been urged to further consider the matter and provide a remedy.

  COLONEL VANDALEUR AND KILRUSH PIER.
  MR. T. M. HEALY: I beg to ask the Secretary to the Treasury whether the Department of Woods and Forests are considering the advisability of making over any portion of the foreshore or pier at Kilrush to Colonel Vandaleur; and, before taking any step to confer a title on the latter, will the views of the county and district councils be ascertained.
  MR. HANBURY: The Department of Woods and Forests, I understand, are prepared to consider the advisability of making over the portion of the foreshore on which the pier stands, if Colonel Vandaleur obtains a satisfactory Provisional Order regulating the pier dues. Before any such Order is granted, the Board of Trade will, in ordinary course, hear objections from any of the parties interested. Notice must be given both in the London Gazette and in the local papers of the application for the Order, and I will see that the attention of the local authorities is specially called to its insertion.
  MR. T. M. HEALY: Will the right hon. Gentleman undertake, on behalf of the Treasury, that nothing shall be done in this matter until Parliament has had some opportunity of considering it?
  MR. HANBURY: I do not think the matter presses.
  MAJOR JAMESON: Is the right hon. Gentleman aware that Colonel Vandaleur never paid anything for this pier, and——
  MR. SPEAKER: Order, order! This is a mattere which cannot be argued by means of questions put across the floor of the House.

  THE NEW FOREST.
  MR. SCOTT-MONTAGU: I beg to ask the Secretary to the Treasury whether he has received a Report from Mr. Stafford Howard, one of the Commissioners of Woods and Forests, with reference to the old woods of the New Forest, accompanied by a Report of three old residents in the New Forest; and if he would issue the same with a short covering Report of the Commissioners of Woods and Forests as a Parliamentary Paper.
  MR. HANBURY: The question dealt with in these Reports is still under consideration; and I cannot at present undertake to issue the Parliamentary Paper suggested.

  AUXILIARY SERVICE AND PENSIONS IN THE POST OFFICE.
  MR. JAMES O'CONNOR: I beg to ask the Secretary to the Treasury, as representing the Postmaster-General, if it has been the rule in the past for auxiliary service in London to be admitted for pension when paid at the rate of at least 10s. a week.
  MR. HANBURY: No, Sir, not in the case of any person appointed after the Superannuation Act of 1859.

  DOUBLE INCREMENTS IN THE POST OFFICE.
  MR. JAMES O'CONNOR: I beg to ask the Secretary to the Treasury, as representing the Postmaster-General, in view of the recommendation of the inter-Departmental Committee on Post Office Establishments to the effect that those provincial officers, not below the age of twenty-four, who have proved themselves qualified and ready to serve on both the postal and telegraph sides of the Department should be granted a double increment in lieu of the next ordinary single increment, will he explain why sorting clerks and telegraphists who have been transferred from offices scheduled B, C, D, and E, to offices scheduled A are not being permitted to obtain the additional increment.
  MR. HANBURY: The reason is that sorting clerks and telegraphists at B, C, D, and E Offices were required to possess the dual qualification as a condition of their appointment.

  ALLEGED REDUCTION OF WAGES IN THE POST OFFICE.
  MR. JAMES O'CONNOR: I beg to ask the Secretary to the Treasury, as representing the Postmaster-General, will he explain why a number of sorting clerks and telegraphists employed at provincial post offices had on being placed on the establishment their wages reduced; and whether he will take such steps as will result in the re-adjustment of the wages of officers so affected.
  Mr. HANBURY: The Postmaster-General is not aware of the cases referred to; but if the hon. Member furnishes particulars of them inquiry shall be made on the subject.

  NORWICH AND GREAT YARMOUTH TELEPHONIC SERVICE.
  SIR HARRY BULLARD: I beg to ask the Secretary to the Treasury, as representing the Postmaster General, whether he is aware that serious inconvenience is occasioned in consequence of the inefficient trunk line telephone communication between Norwich and Great Yarmouth; and whether he will take steps to remedy the same.
  MR. HANBURY: An additional circuit between those places was opened in March last, and at present more than 50 per cent. of the calls are effected within five minutes. The electrical working of the wires is satisfactory. The traffic, however, is growing, and the Postmaster-General has at present under consideration the provision of additional facilities.

  ORDNANCE SURVEY STAFF.
  MR. CLANCY: I beg to ask the Secretary to the Treasury whether the Government have arrived at any determination as to the claim of the civil assistants of the Ordnance Survey for superannuation; and, if so, whether he would have any objection to state it to the House.
  MR. HANBURY: Certain new proposals have within the last few days been received at the Treasury, but I have not
  1488
  yet had the opportunity of properly considering them.

  QUEENSTOWN RURAL POSTMEN.
  CAPTAIN DONELAN: I beg to ask the Secretary to the Treasury, as representing the Postmaster-General, whether any decision has yet been arrived at relative to the case of the Queenstown rural postmen.
  MR. HANBURY: The Postmaster-General regrets that it has not been possible to arrive at a decision on this application.

  COLLINSTOWN POSTAL ARRANGEMENTS.
  MR. HAYDEN: I beg to ask the Secretary to the Treasury, as representing the Postmaster-General, whether complaints have been made by persons resident in Kilpatrick and adjoining townlands in the Parish of Collins-town, County Westmeath, as to the inadequacy of the postal delivery as affecting them; whether he is aware that two messengers leave the Collinstown and Drumcree sub-offices in the morning, one taking the Castlepollard and the other the road leading to Kilpatrick; that the returning points of both are distant by about half a mile, and connected by a public road, along which line nine families, constantly in receipt of letters, are deprived of the house-to-house delivery extended to the rest of the parish; and whether steps will be taken to secure a delivery of letters to these persons, and relieve them of the necessity of sending private messengers two miles to the post office to get their letters.
  MR. HANBURY: The Postmaster-General cannot trace the receipt of any complaints as to the postal delivery in Kilpatrick and adjoining townlands in the Parish of Collinstown, County Westmeath. There are two messengers leaving the Collinstown and Drumcree sub-offices in the morning, as stated in the hon. Member's question, and there is a section of road which neither of them traverses. A new post has, however, been authorised to commence on Monday next, by means of which a delivery will be afforded over this undelivered section every weekday.

  PROCURATOR-FISCAL OF ORKNEY.
  MR. HEDDERWICK: I beg to ask the Lord Advocate whether he is aware that the Procurator-Fiscal of Orkney was, by the Sheriff Substitute of Caithness, Orkney, and Shetland, at Kirkwall, appointed auditor of the accounts of the Commissioners of the Burgh of Kirkwall for the year ending in May, and that he accepted the appointment; and whether the terms of the commission under which the Procurator-Fiscal was appointed exclude him from undertaking any work outside the strict limits of the duties of his office; and, if so, whether he will take steps to ensure their future observance.
  THE LORD ADVOCATE (Mr. A. GRAHAM MURRAY,): Upon inquiry I find that the Sheriff Substitute of Caithness, Orkney, and Shetland had good and sufficient reasons for appointing the Procurator-Fiscal of Orkney to audit the burgh accounts of Kirkwall, as well as those of Stromness; and I do not consider that, having regard to the matter of the appointment, the Procurator-Fiscal went outside the terms of his appointment in accepting it.

  BELFAST DISTURBANCES—CONSTABLE NULTY.
  MR. FIELD: I beg to ask the Chief Secretary to the Lord Lieutenant of Ireland whether he is aware that, during the recent Belfast riots, a magistrate of that city objected to Constable Nulty doing point duty in his neighbourhood; that shortly afterwards he wrote a private letter to the constabulary authorities requesting that the constable be transferred; and that the constable, with a large family, was accordingly transferred, at great inconvenience, at one day's notice to a distant station; and whether any charge was made against the policeman; and, if so, what it was; and why was it not publicly investigated in the manner provided by the Constabulary Act, so that the constable might have had an opportunity of offering an explanation or making a defence.
  MR. MACALEESE: I beg at the same time to ask the Chief Secretary to the Lord Lieutenant of Ireland will he explain why Constable Nulty has been removed from Belfast, and upon whose complaint; whether on the repre-
  1490
  sentation of a local justice or an alderman, without official inquiry and against the wish of the town commissioners, a policeman may be removed from Belfast; and will he communicate with the Inspector-General, Sir Andrew Reed, to the end that an inquiry may be held into the removal of Constable Nulty.
  THE CHIEF SECRETARY FOR IRELAND (Mr. G. W. BALFOUR,): It is true that on the occasion of the recent disturbances in Belfast a magistrate of that city communicated with the Commissioner of Police relative to the constable named in the question. The matter was closely inquired into by the Commissioner, who was of opinion that it was expedient in the interests of the service and of the public to remove the constable from Belfast. He was accordingly transferred to an adjoining county, so as to put him to as little inconvenience as possible. The Commissioner and the Inspector-General have full power to remove a member of the force from his station whenever it may appear to them expedient from sufficient cause to take this step. The decision to remove Constable Nulty was only arrived at after careful investigation, and upon the strong recommendation of the Commissioner.

  IRISH LOCAL GOVERNMENT ORDERS,
  MR MAURICE HEALY: I beg to ask the Chief Secretary to the Lord Lieutenant of Ireland whether, in view of the great multiplicity of the rules and orders issued under the Local Government Act, and that some of them are out of print and cannot be obtained from the Queen's printers, the Local Government Board will arrange to issue an official publication of the Local Government Act, the Local Government Registration Act, and all Orders in Council, rules, orders, rules of court, and all regulations of every kind issued under or in consequence of the Local Government Act.
  MR. G. W. BALFOUR: I propose to move for a Return on the general lines suggested in the question; but I do not think it would be expedient to set out in full all the orders and rules issued by the

  1491
  Local Government Board, some of which were of a purely temporary or local character. In such cases an enumeration would appear to be sufficient.

  IRISH INDUSTRIAL SCHOOLS.
  MR. T. M. HEALY: I beg to ask the Chief Secretary to the Lord Lieutenant of Ireland who is responsible for supplying him with the information as to the action of the mothers of the children from Nenagh, whose discharge he ordered from the industrial schools; and if he is not satisfied of its accuracy, will he permit those of the children who are still retained at Birr School to remain there, seeing that otherwise they may have to enter the workhouse.
  MR. G. W. BALFOUR: I presume the first paragraph refers to the date at which the mothers of the children referred to left Nenagh. In my reply to the hon. and learned Member's previous question of the 7th July, I stated that these women disappeared when the Order for the discharge of the children was issued on the 10th April. It has since been represented to me that they left Nenagh at a date antecedent to the order of discharge, although the actual date was not given by my correspondent. Without knowing the actual date I am not in a position to say how far this correction has any relevancy; but in any case it would form only one element in the considerations which have led to the discharge of the children.
  MR. T. M. HEALY: I hope that during the Recess the right hon. Gentleman will look into this matter and see whether, in mercy to the children, they cannot be left at the Birr School.

  GRANARD UNION DISPENSARY DOCTOR.
  MR. BLAKE: I beg to ask the Chief Secretary to the Lord Lieutenant of Ireland whether he is aware that an objection has been raised by the Local Government Board to the scale of remuneration proposed to be paid to the dispensary doctor of the Granard Union as inadequate, although two well-qualified gentlemen have applied for the appointment upon the terms stated in the advertisement; and whether the Local Government Board have power to fix the salaries of dispensary doctors.
  MR. G. W. BALFOUR: In the case referred to in the first paragraph, the late medical officer was paid a salary of £120 a year, and the guardians proposed to reduce this salary to £80. The Local Government Board have pointed out that the late medical officer had been in receipt of a salary of £120 since the year 1876, that the area under his charge was 22,146 acres, with a population of 4,452, that the medical relief tickets are more numerous than in any other dispensary district of the union except Granard, and that the Board were not prepared to approve of the permanent reduction of the salary as proposed. The Board have now, with my approval, fixed £100 as the Dispensary salary. Unless reasonable salaries are given, I do not see how the Board can hold medical officers strictly responsible for the prompt and efficient discharge of their duties in large and populous areas where the provision of the necessary means of locomotion entails heavy outlay and expense. The Board have full power, under Section 8 of the Medical Charities (Ireland) Act, 1851, to regulate the salaries and allowances of dispensary medical officers, and possibly this fact, was taken into consideration by the candidates applying for the position.

  PROSPECTIVE PARLIAMENTARY WORK.
  MR. H. S. FOSTER: I beg to ask the First Lord of the Treasury whether the Government will consider, during the Recess, the introduction of a short amending Bill to enable the bishops to pronounce sentence of deprivation upon clergymen in a much shorter period than the three years prescribed by Section 17 of the Public Worship. Regulation Act, 1874, in the case of continuing disobedience.
  SIR THOMAS LEA: I beg at the same time to ask the First Lord of the Treasury if he is aware that the Reports of both sections of the Liquor Commission practically approve of the Sale of Intoxicating Liquor (Ireland) Bill; and whether the Government will introduce a Bill next session, or give the necessary facilities for passing the Sale of Intoxicating Liquors (Ireland) Bill.
  THE FIRST LORD OF THE TREASURY (Mr. A. J. BALFOUR,: In answer to my hon. friends, I have to say that the Government fully recognise the importance of both the subjects alluded to in the questions, but we do not think it desirable to give any pledge as to legislation for next session at the present time.

  REPORT OF SUPPLY.
  SIR CHARLES DILKE: I wish to ask the First Lord of the Treasury whether he proposes to take the resolutions as they appear on the Paper, or to follow the precedent of last year and to postpone the Votes which were discussed last night, in order that we may discuss those which were not discussed.
  MR. A. J. BALFOUR: If my memory serves me right, the action I took last year was in response to a demand made that I should bring in certain specific Votes at an early hour on the last day. No such demand has reached me on this occasion, and therefore I have made no special arrangements. But perhaps I may. appeal to the House to pass lightly over the Votes already discussed, in order that the time at its disposal might be devoted to Votes on which nothing has been said.
  SIR CHARLES DILKE: Will the right hon. Gentleman, before next year, consider whether, by some modification of the rules, he cannot give the House an option in the matter?
  MR. A. J. BALFOUR: I think that some change as that suggested by the right hon. Baronet would be extremely convenient. At present the Government are bound to put down the Votes on the Report stage precisely in the order in which they are discussed in Committee. That is a restriction on our natural liberties which is not necessary for the conduct of business, and if I can make any change I shall be glad to do so.

  IMPROVEMENT OF LAND BILL.
  Lords Amendment to be considered forthwith; considered, and agreed to.

  COMPANIES BILL. [Lords.]
  Ordered, That a Message be sent to the Lords to request that their Lordships
  1494
  will be pleased to communicate to this House a Copy of the Report from the Select Committee appointed by their Lordships on the Companies Bill [Lords], with the Proceedings of the Committee, Minutes of Evidence, &c.—(Mr. Ritchie.)

  COPYRIGHT BILL [Lords] AND COPYRIGHT ARTISTIC BELL. [Lords.]
  Ordered, That a Message be sent to the Lords to request that their Lordships will be pleased to communicate to this House a Copy of the Report from the Select Committee appointed by their Lordships on the Copyright Bill [Lords] and the Copyright Artistic Bill [Lords], with the Proceedings of the Committee, Minutes of Evidence, &c.—(Mr. Solicitor-General.)
MESSAGE FROM THE LORDS.
That they have agreed to—
MESSAGE FROM THE LORDS.
  METROPOLITAN POLICE BILL.
    ELECTRIC LIGHTING (CLAUSES) BILL.
    Without Amendment.
  PRIVATE LEGISLATION PROCEDURE (SCOTLAND) BILL.

    BRADFORD TRAMWAYS AND IMPROVEMENT BILL.
    With Amendments.
    Amendments to—

COMMONS AND OPEN SPACES BILL [Lords].
  HASTINGS HARBOUR BILL [Lords].

    OYSTERMOUTH RAILWAY OR TRAM-ROAD BILL [Lords].
    CLYDE NAVIGATION BILL [Lords].
    Without Amendment.
    That they have passed a Bill intituled "An Act to amend the Companies Acts." [Companies Bill [Lords.]

    PRIVATE LEGISLATION PROCEDURE (SCOTLAND) BILL.
    Lords Amendments to be considered upon Monday next, and to be printed. (Bill 303.)

    LICENSED PREMISES (HOURS OF SALE) (SCOTLAND).
    Bill to alter the Law relating to the Hours during which Premises licensed for

    1495
    the Sale of Excisable Liquors may be open in Scotland, ordered to be brought in by Mr. Provand, Captain Sinclair, Mr. Colville, and Mr. Ure.

    LICENSED PREMISES (HOURS OF SALE) (SCOTLAND) BILL.
    "To alter the Law relating to the Hours during which Premises licensed for the Sale of Excisable Liquors may be open in Scotland," presented accordingly, and read the first time; to be read a second time upon Monday next, and to be printed. (Bill 304.)
    SUPPLY [23RD ALLOTTED DAY] [3RD AUGUST].
    Resolutions reported.
  CIVIL SERVICE ESTIMATES, 1899–1900.

    CLASS I.
    1. "That a sum, not exceeding £2,303 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 maintaining certain Harbours under the Board of Trade."
    2. "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."

    Class II.
    3. "That a sum, not exceeding £329,579, 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 stationery, printing, paper, binding, and printed books for the public service, and for the salaries and expenses of the Stationery Office; and for sundry miscellaneous services, including Reports of Parliamentary Debates."
    MR. JAMES LOWTHER: I should like to ask the Secretary to the Treasury a question on this Vote, not with regard to matters which were talked over yesterday, but rather
    1496
    opening up a new phase in connection with the publication of Hansard's Debates. I wish to point out that many hon. Members who ordered copies of the Debates and did not show that lack of precaution displayed by other hon. Members, but instead withheld payment are apparently still unable to get the contract fulfilled. I come within that category. I received some time ago the volumes for 1898 from, the contractor, but as they were not bound according to sample I returned them. I have not yet received them back, but a bill has been sent to me charging for thirteen volumes with binding for 1898, £11 odd. Naturally I object to paying until I get the volumes. I did expect, when the arrangements passed into other hands, order would be evolved from chaos; but on, applying to the trustee in bankruptcy I was told he had only seven of the thirteen volumes in his possession, and that they could be seen at his offices at Old Jewry Chambers. I went there this afternoon, climbed to the top of the building, and found I had been wasting my time as there was nobody there who knew anything about the matter and my volumes could not be produced. I do wish to urge that after the discreditable history of this matter it is highly desirable that care should be taken that the person who has charge in future shall be capable of carrying out his arrangements.
    THE FINANCIAL SECRETARY TO THE TREASURY (Mr. HANBURY,): I am glad to know that my right hon. friend is not one of those incautious people who paid for their volumes before they received them. My right hon. friend asks me to bear the blame, not only of the late contractor, but also of the trustee in bankruptcy. It is a little hard on the Government to be made responsible for that official, for we had nothing whatever to do with the appointment of that gentleman, who acts, I believe, under the direction of the court. My right hon. friend's only grievance, so far as I can see, is that his thirteen volumes are not forthcoming; but he has the satisfaction of knowing also that his £11 has not been forthcoming either. Therefore I do not. see that he has much to complain of at present.
    Vote agreed to.
    4. "That a sum, not exceeding £3,454, be granted to Her Majesty, to complete

    1497
    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 Lunacy in Scotland."
    5. "That a sum, not exceeding £2,829, 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 the Registrar-General of Births, etc., in Scotland."

    CLASS IV.
    6. "That a sum, not exceeding £381,793, 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 Science and Art, and of the various Establishments connected therewith, including sundry Grants in Aid."
    MR. CHANNING: The House will be aware that by a Bill which has just passed through Parliament powers hitherto exercised by the Science and Art Department are merged in the new Board of Education, and therefore, a new situation is being created. Now, the policy of the Science and Art Department since 1897 has been to create local authorities without any statutory right, simply by order, memorandum or circular, advising that such authorities or committees be formed in particular localities for the purpose of distributing the Science and Art grant, and to superintend, classify, and regulate the education given in the classes in connection with that Department. The point I wish to raise is as to whether the new Education Board will continue the same policy of forming these local committees; whether we are to go on adding to the existing confusion of jurisdiction and authorities, or are we to hold our hands until the Bill promised by the Lord President of the Council, and by the right hon. Gentleman the Vice-President, constituting local authorities, has passed through Parliament? Or, again, is any effort in the meantime to be made by the Board of Education to simplify and regulate the present confused system? I have
    1498
    always entered my protest on behalf of the School Boards in a number of our great towns against Article 7, under which these local committees have been appointed by the Science and Art Department. I have always lamented myself the form in which the Technical Instruction Act of 1889 was framed, however laudable its intentions, and however good its practical results to the students through the action of the various local authorities. I have always held that the effective control and development of secondary education, as well as elementary education, should be on the lines laid down by Mr. Acland in his Resolution of 1890, which he had no opportunity of moving, viz., that the simplification of all the issues in question lay in the formation of elective authorities deriving their authority from the people of the several districts. I have always held that the whole system of education—elementary, secondary, and technical—should be linked together and carried out on one broad general principle. Thus, by a system of direct election, education would be much more closely associated with the inhabitants of each area, so as to enlist the greatest enthusiasm and most active support of the largest number of persons, and especially of the working-classes. In short, the true solution lay in the direction pointed out by Mr. Acland years ago—the encouragement of the direct, as opposed to the indirect, election of the authorities. But the policy of the Science and Art Department, for two years past, has placed serious barriers all over the country against the true and natural development of the School Board system. The policy of Article 7, like the policy of the Bill of 1896, was distinctly directed to oust popular control permanently from those new branches of education towards which such popular control would naturally move forward if left alone to work itself out in its own way. I have protested against that policy in the past and shall continue to protest against it in the interests of our School Boards. I thank the Government for having introduced a Bill creating a Board of Education to deal, not merely with secondary and technical education, but with the whole subject. I thank the Vice-President also for having refused to accept Amendments which would have separated one branch from the other, and would have destroyed unity of administration. I trust that we shall not see in the

    1499
    action of the new educational authority the policy persisted in of multiplying these nondescript authorities, illegal in their constitution and absolutely artificial in their construction, and not representative in any true sense of the word. However useful the work of some of them may be, they rest upon a wholly unsound basis, which we in this House, in the interests of the education of the people, ought to resist. This is not a new opinion, nor is it the opinion of specially advanced men, who would deal with these questions rather by theory than by practice. The right hon. Gentleman is well aware that the. Report of the Schools Inquiry Commission long ago recommended the development of the control of these branches of education through directly-elected authorities as opposed to anything such as is now being carried out by the Science and Art Department. The Report pointed out that no school or organisation could do so much for education as the earnest co-operation of the people. I want to see enlisted the sympathies and active help of the largest number of people. I am speaking with some knowledge of the working of this question in my own division, for there, through the organisations of the working-classes in co-operative and friendly and trade societies, we have secured a body of representative working-men who are doing work of the highest possible importance. Of course, it is possible by nomination to secure the assistance of educational enthusiasts and experts, but it is far better to obtain their help by the method of direct election, for then they have behind them a force of popular opinion such as you cannot get behind nominated bodies. These nondescript bodies were patched together on no plan or principle, and there might be favouritism in selection. There ought to be a distinct Board elected on a representative basis. The recommendation of the Commission had been that half should be thus directly elected. It seems to me that the policy of the Education Bill of 1896 upon this question was——
    MR. SPEAKER: Order, order! The hon. Member appears to me to be dealing with matters of legislation, which are, therefore, not pertinent to the Resolution.
    MR. CHANNING: I fear, Sir, I have failed to convey my meaning. I was arguing that the exercise up to the present moment of the powers of the Science
    1500
    and Art Department in arbitrarily constituting local authorities, which have no direct basis in popular election, was not only undesirable but was opposed to what was recommended by an important Education Commission. But I need not pursue that subject further. All I ask is that the new Board of Education should adopt what seems to me to be a broader, more generous, and more popular view, and that it should not use the powers handed over to it by the Science and Art Department by continuing to create these local committees without any statutory basis whatever, but that it should rather suspend its action in this direction until the Bill constituting local authorities to deal with these questions passes through Parliament. In conclusion, I will only say that I have regarded, and do regard, in the same sense, I believe, as the present Lord President of the Council did in 1876, direct authority as the only proper solution of these complicated issues, and the only solution which will bring to bear upon them the forces which tend most strongly to the highest possible development of education. And, in order to emphasise the expression of that opinion on behalf of those who are interested in the great School Boards of the country, I now move the reduction of the Vote by £100.
    Amendment proposed—
    "To leave out '£381,793,' and insert '£381,693.'"—(Mr. Channing.)
    Question proposed, "That '£381,793' stand part of the Resolution."
    MR. JAMES LOWTHER: I think the hon. Gentleman has certainly shown that the present state of affairs with regard to the administration of the Science and Art Department is very unsatisfactory, although there is some hope for us to be found in the fact that this body is to be largely abolished, and some steps are to be taken to mitigate the evils of which complaint is justly made. May I ask my right hon. friend if he can hold out any expectation that one very mischievous policy of the Department will henceforth cease to be enforced? It has, in pursuance of powers which have been handed over to it under the head of technical manual instruction, provided for instruction in Latin and Portuguese,

    1501
    amongst other subjects which appear wholly outside technical or manual instruction. I warned my colleagues upon the county council of which I am a member not to allow the Science and Art Department to mismanage affairs, and succeeded in getting Latin and Portuguese struck of the list of subjects which might be taught at the public expense; but there are still many absurd subjects remaining, and I fear the abuse is one which prevails in many other parts of the country. The Science and Art Department appears to be a body which is, to a large extent, independent; for when we call attention to its vagaries the right hon. Gentleman tells us that the matters are not within his official cognisance. But he also assures us that he exercises personal superintendence, and therefore I hold he must be responsible for the schedule to which I have just called attention. It is evidently clear that money intended by Parliament to be devoted to technical education has been improperly used by school boards, and notably the London School Board, for other purposes, and I did hope that when this practice of breaking the law was brought under his notice, the right hon. Gentleman would have given us some assurance that it would be put a stop to. I think we ought to expect that my right hon. friend, who has acknowledged his responsibility to this House for the action of the bodies on whose behalf he speaks, should insist on the law being obeyed. The school boards of this country have undoubtedly made themselves extremely unpopular in various ways, but that they should deliberately break the law, and that the official representative of the Department in Parliament should confess his inability to make them observe the law is, I think, a public scandal. I hope my right hon. friend will give us an assurance that if it is brought to his knowledge that any public body over which he exercises official control is breaking the law, he will take steps to see that the law is observed.
    SIR ALBERT ROLLIT: I always listen with interest and respect to the criticisms which my right hon. friend passes on matters of this kind. As I understand him, he enters a protest against the teaching of foreign languages in our public schools.
    MR. JAMES LOWTHER: Oh, no. I was only referring to the schedule of subjects issued by the Science and Art Department for the guidance of County Councils.
    SIR ALBERT ROLLIT: In whatever direction my right hon. friend's criticisms were directed, I venture to say that the teaching of foreign languages in our schools is a matter which demands most careful consideration.
    MR. JAMES LOWTHER: What about Latin?
    SIR ALBERT ROLLIT: I do not include Latin, although it is very advantageous as a basis for acquiring other languages. Take Portuguese. Some people may regard Portuguese as an out-of-the-way language, but my knowledge of the demands of commercial education tells me that three languages are of especial importance—Spanish, Italian, and Portuguese. Anyone who is familiar, for instance, with the demands of the South American trade must be perfectly well aware that unless our people are very much better equipped with the instruments of international trade they will lose ground, as they are doing now to some extent, in the commercial competition of the world. I know of no language which is more useful, and which is more practically and peculiarly advantageous to the person who knows it than Spanish. In the City, a person who has a thorough knowledge of Spanish can command a considerably higher salary than a person knowing almost any other language. In teaching French and other foreign languages in our Board schools, we are performing a national and absolutely necessary duty. It maybe said that a knowledge of French, Spanish, and Portuguese would be unnecessary in many cases, but we have to teach all those things that suit the people generally, and then let the individual make practical use of them. I distinctly approve of the suggestion of teaching foreign languages in our schools, as the want of knowledge of them frequently hampers our trade with other nations.
    MR. YOXALL: I quite agree with the right hon. Gentle-

    1503
    man that Portuguese is a very important language, and that instruction in foreign languages and other commercial subjects is quite as important to this country as technical and manual instruction. We have in this country, shops, factories, and mills, with an admirable and practical system of instruction in technical and manual subjects, but we have no system of instruction in commercial subjects; whereas in Switzerland, France, and Belgium there are well-equipped commercial schools. I rejoice to know that England and Wales are at last doing something in this direction also. On this Vote I had intended to indulge in many strictures on the administration of the Science and Art Department, but I feel that we are at the outset of a new era, as a result of the passing of the Board of Education Bill. The administration of the Department will probably be transformed, and we shall obtain a new charter for science and art teaching in this country. Under the circumstances, I will not trouble the House with the observations I had intended to make. I hope that there will be a proper development of really artistic teaching, and also of technical and manual teaching; and if we are prepared for that, I do not think in a few years we shall regard our country as so far behind in educational matters as it is at present.
    MR. LEWIS: I only wish to ask the right hon. Gentleman, in any re-organisation that may be made in the Department, not to forget the claim of Wales to a museum grant. The right hon. Gentleman has treated us with great courtesy in the matter, and it is therefore not necessary for me to say anything further.
    THE VICE-PRESIDENT OF THE COMMITTEE OF COUNCIL ON EDUCATION (Sir J. GORST,): I hope the hon. Member for East Northamptonshire with excuse me if I do not follow him at length in the speech he made on the conduct of the Science and Art Department with reference to Section 7. I have often explained in this House what has been done The Science and Art Department make use of the Technical Instruction Committees and other local bodies to distribute grants. The system prevents overlapping and has proved otherwise
    1504
    effective, and I am very glad that the policy of Section 7 is making steady progress, and that a number of county and borough councils are coming into the scheme. As far as I know, the present Department has no intention of modifying that policy.
    MR. CHANNING: Do I understand the right hon. Gentleman to admit that the Science and Art Department has taken it upon itself to delegate the duty of distributing these grants to locally created bodies which have no statutory basis?
    SIR J. GORST: The Science and Art Department has power to do that. It is doing what it has a perfect right to do, in a manner which it thinks most economical and wise. With regard to the speech of the right hon. Gentleman the Member for Thanet, the Department has never sanctioned Latin. As regards Portuguese, the Science and Art Department has no control in the matter at all. The right hon. Gentleman was very severe on the Department because it had not prevented the illegal expenditure of money by the London School Board in teaching science and art. I explained to the House on a previous occasion that it has pleased Parliament to entrust the control of school board expenditure, not to the Education Department, but to the Local Government Board. The Science and Art Department cannot interfere with the London School Board, and has no right to say whether a particular item of expenditure is right or wrong. As to the legality of the expenditure, the decision is with the Local Government Board. I have no power to make school boards observe the law, but while on this particular case, I am very glad of the opportunity of stating how the matter stands. No doubt the auditor of the School Board for London has decided that its expenditure upon science and art teaching is illegal, and his general decision is expressed in every case in these words:
    "School boards have no legal authority to use, expend, or apply any portion of the school funds in or about the instruction or examination of day schools or classes in science and art."
    The decision of the auditor has not been appealed against.
    MR. FLOWER: The School Board for London has applied to the Local Government Board on two or three occasions for permission to appeal against the decision of the auditor.
    SIR J. GORST: At any rate, there is the ruling laid down by the auditor. This is not the first time that a decision of that kind has been given; it has never been upset, and I have no doubt whatever that that expresses the law. What is the Science and Art Department to do in these circumstances? It is quite clear that it cannot abruptly withdraw all its grants, and it must assume that the School Board will now bring itself within the law. But we could hardly expect a change of that kind to be made in a week or a fortnight, especially if the School Board are appealing against the decision. As to the question of a museum grant for Wales, I have no doubt that it will receive most favourable consideration from the new Board of Education.
    MR. FLOWER: With regard to the question of the science and art money, there has been a conflict of authority and great difficulty in ascertaining what is, and what is not, the law on the subject. My right hon. friend says the decision arrived at by the Local Government Board was not a new decision, but was in confirmation of previous decisions. As far as I know, the last case was decided in 1889—ten years ago—and since that time the School Board has gone on establishing schools and classes which have been to a very large extent successful, and which have undoubtedly played a very important part in the work of public education. The right hon. Gentleman the Member for the Isle of Thanet spoke about the action of the School Board for London, and drew attention to the fact that a part of the expenditure had been surcharged by the Local Government Board. The right hon. Gentleman wanted to know what the London School Board are going to do. As a member of that distinguished body, I should like to assure my right hon. friend that we are going to obey the
    1506
    law, but we wish to ascertain what the, law really is. That is a very important, matter, and one which affects not, London only, but all interested in education throughout the country, and I am bound to say that I think if the School Board for London appeals, as I believe they intend to, they will take the right course in the matter. My right hon. friend knows that so far as one of the chief sources of our overlapping is concerned, the School Board for London have entered into amicable and convenient, working arrangements with the Technical Instruction Board and the London County Council, which will, I trust, prevent these evils in the future. With regard to the local authorities, I sympathise a great deal with the theory held by the hon. Member for East Northamptonshire. I think that the school boards have established, by long and consistent service, the right to claim some representation on these new authorities. The Royal Commission offered very fair and practicable terms, and I hope that the Department will, so far as they can, see that those school boards in the country have a fair and adequate representation.
    SIR W. HART-DYKE: As the hon. Member for East Northamptonshire laid a rather heavy hand on an offspring of mine—the Technical Instruction Act—I should, like to say one word with regard to it. In framing that measure I was met with some difficulty at every point. But the operation of the Act has grown, and spread a veritable network of technical instruction throughout the country. I believe that in future it will assist to solve the remaining difficulties of our educational system, by leading to the formation of local authorities for secondary education.
    Question put.
    The House divided:—Ayes, 99; Noes, 36. (Division List, No. 358.)

    AYES

    Arnold, Alfred

    Dyke, Rt. Hn. Sir William Hart

    Malcolm, Ian

    Ashmead-Bartlett, Sir Ellis

    Fellowes, Hon. Ailwyn Edwd

    Milward, Colonel Victor

    Atkinson, Rt. Hon. John

    Field, Admiral (Eastbourne)

    Monk, Charles James

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

    Finlay, Sir Robert Bannatyne

    Moore, William (Antrim, N.)

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

    Fisher, William Hayes

    Morton, A. H. A. (Deptford)

    Barnes, Frederick Gorell

    Fison, Frederick William

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

    Barton, Dunbar Plunket

    Flower, Ernest

    Murray, Col. Wyndham (Bath)

    Bathurst, Hon. A. Benjamin

    Galloway, William Johnson

    Nicol, Donald Ninian

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

    Gilliat, John Saunders

    O'Connor, Arthur (Donegal)

    Bethell, Commander

    Gladstone, Rt. Hon. H. J.

    Parkes, Ebenezer

    Bhownaggree, Sir M. M.

    Goldsworthy, Major-General

    Pierpoint, Robert

    Bigwood, James

    Gordon, Hon. John Edward

    Purvis, Robert

    Blundell, Colonel H.

    Gorst. Rt. Hon. Sir John Eldon

    Ridley, Rt. Hn. Sir Matthew W.

    Boulnois, Edmund

    Gray, Ernest (West Ham)

    Ritchie, Rt. Hon. Chs. Thomson

    Brassey, Albert

    Gull, Sir Cameron

    Robertson, Herbert (Hackney)

    Campbell, J. H, M. (Dublin)

    Hanbury, Rt. Hon. R. W

    Rollit, Sir Albert Kaye

    Causton, Richard Knight

    Hayne, Rt. Hon Chas. Seale-

    Russell, T. W. (Tyrone)

    Chaloner. Captain R. G. W.

    Howard, Joseph

    Scoble, Sir Andrew Richard

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

    Hozier, Hon. Jas. Henry Cecil

    Sharpe, William Edward T.

    Chamberlain, J. Austen (Worc'r

    Jeffreys, Arthur Frederick

    Sidebotham, J. W. (Cheshire)

    Chaplin, Rt. Hon. Henry

    Johnston, William (Belfast)

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

    Charring, on Spencer

    Kimber, Henry

    Spencer, Ernest

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

    Knowles, Lees

    Stanley, Hon. A. (Ormskirk)

    Coghill, Douglas Harry

    Lawrence, Sir E. Durning-(Corn

    Stanley, Lord (Lancs.)

    Collings, Rt. Hon. Jesse

    Lawrence, Wm. F. (Liverpool)

    Stone, Sir Benjamin

    Cook, Fred. Lucas (Lambeth)

    Lawson, John Grant (Yorks.)

    Tomlinson, Wm. Edw. Murray

    Cooke, C. W. R. (Hereford)

    Lea, Sir Thos. (Londonderry)

    Valentia, Viscount

    Cox, Irwin Edwd. Bainbridge

    Leigh-Bennett, Henry Currie

    Vincent, Col. Sir C. E. Howard

    Curzon, Viscount

    Llewelyn, Sir Dillwyn- (Swans.

    Williams, Joseph Powell-(Birm

    Davies, Sir H. D. (Chatham)

    Loder, Gerald Walter Erskine

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

    Doughty, George

    Long, Col. Chas. W. (Evesh'm)

    Wyndham, George

    Douglas, Rt. Hon. A. Akers-

    Long, Rt. Hon. W. (Liverpool)

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

    Drage, Geoffrey

    Lowtber, Rt. Hon. Jas. (Kent)

    Drucker, A.

    Maclure, Sir John William

    NOES.

    Ambrose, Robert

    Hedderwick, Thomas Charles H

    Palmer, Sir C. M. (Durham)

    Asher, Alexander

    Horniman, Frederick John

    Pirie, Duncan V.

    Ashton, Thomas Gair

    Jones, William (Carnarvonsh.)

    Roberts, John H. (Denbighs.)

    Austin, M. (Limerick, W.)

    Kearley, Hudson E.

    Souttar, Robinson

    Bainbridge, Emerson

    Kilbride, Denis

    Steadman, William Charles

    Caldwell, James

    Labouchere, Henry

    Sullivan, Donal (Westmeath)

    Curran, Thomas (Sligo, S.)

    Lawson, Sir W. (Cumberland)

    Ure, Alexander

    Dalziel, James Henry

    Macaleese, Daniel

    Whittaker, Thomas Palmer

    Dillon, John

    M'Ewan, William

    Williams, John Carvell(Notts.)

    Donelan, Captain A.

    Mappin, Sir Frederick Thorpe

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

    Foster, Sir Walter (Derby Co.)

    Moss, Samuel

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

    Harwood, George

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

    Healy, Timothy M. (N. Louth

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

    7. "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".
    8. "That a sum, not exceeding £6,149, 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
    1508
    of March, 1900, for the Salaries and Expenses of the National Gallery, and of the National Gallery of British Art, Millbank, including a Grant in Aid for the purchase of Pictures."
    9. "That a sum, not exceeding £2,981, 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 National Portrait Gallery, including a Grant in Aid for the purchase of Portraits."
    10. "That a sum, not exceeding £6,000, be granted to Her Majesty, to complete

    1509
    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 Wallace Collection (Hertford House)."
    11. "That a sum, not exceeding £67,700, 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 Grants in Aid of the Expenses of certain Universities and Colleges in Great Britain, and of the Expenses under the Welsh Intermediate Education Act, 1889."
    12 "That a sum, not exceeding £4, 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 University of London."
    13. "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."
    14. "That a sum, not exceeding £2,000, 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 a Grant to the Board of Trustees for Manufactures in Scotland in aid of the maintenance of the National Gallery, School of Art, and Museum of Antiquities, Scotland."
    15. "That a sum, not exceeding £621,117, 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 Commissioners of National Education in Ireland, including a Grant in Aid of the Teachers' Pension Fund, Ireland."
    16. "That a sum, not exceeding £560, 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 Office of the Commissioners for manag-
    1510
    ing certain School Endowments in Ireland."
    17. "That a sum, not exceeding £l;300,. 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 National Gallery of Ireland, including a Grant in Aid for the purchase of Pictures."
    18. "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 day of March, 1900, for a Grant in Aid of the Expenses of the Queen's Colleges in Ireland."

    CLASS V.
    19. "That a sum, not exceeding £277,335, 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."
    Resolutions agreed to.
    20. "That a sum, not exceeding £154,463, be granted to Her Majesty, to complete the sum necessary to defray the Charge which will come in course of payment during the year 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."
    SIR CHARLES DILKE: I gave notice to move in Committee of Supply a reduction upon two particular items in this Vote: Item (a) in respect to Uganda, which includes the Martyr Expedition, and Item (c) in respect to British East Africa, which includes the Juba Expedition. I propose to take the two together at this present stage of Report, and to move a reduction of £200. I shall be very brief, in accordance with the general desire that we have to discuss as many as possible of the Votes to-day which were not discussed yesterday or

    1511
    previously. We have a certain difficulty in discussing this Vote in the absence of the Under Secretary, because the few words we wish to say are chiefly on points as to which he has full information, which is probably not in the possession of other members of the Government. But I have no doubt he will be here directly. The Martyr Expedition, which is provided for in this Vote, is an expedition which was despatched from Uganda down the Nile, in the direction of Fashoda, to put it generally. It has continued, and is still upon the Nile at the present time, and it has followed the course of the Nile, and not left it for any considerable distance. The Martyr Expedition found the Congolese forces on the Congo side of the Nile, outside that district to which it was supposed they were confined. The Congolese, by an arrangement with this country, received two leases of territory which we claimed as being a portion of the British sphere of influence, which has since been called the Anglo-Egyptian sphere of influence upon the Nile. One lease dealt with a strip of land along the Nile bank, and the other lease concerned the whole of the territory at the back of that strip, and is generally called the Bahr-el-Ghazal country. The two leases together covered the whole, or nearly the whole, of the Egyptian province of Bahr-el-Ghazal. These leases were denounced by France, acting in concurrence with Germany, Germany not being herself concerned in these particular leases, and the result of the action of France and Germany was that the King of the Belgians renounced to France, without any negotiations with this country, the whole of one of those two leases and a half of the second. The King of the Belgians promised the French Government he would withdraw his troops and his officers from the whole of the Bahr-el-Ghazal country, and from a point about the middle of the other strip along the Nile, and he withdrew his forces into what is commonly called the Lado enclave. Our Government took no action in this matter, but left the King of the Belgians to make his own agreement with France. I have put questions twice this session to the Government with regard to what is to be the future of these territories. At one moment the Government have spoken of these territories as though they were of great potential or great future value. On
    1512
    two occasions recently they have told us that they cannot make any statement with regard to the future of these territories, that at present the country is too unsettled and there is too little known about it, and that it is impossible at present to make any definite statement with regard to the future. Now, Sir, the King of the Belgians or his friends in Brussels have been stating repeatedly of late that he is the inheritor of this country, that the leases are still existent, and that the whole of the Bahr-el-Ghazal territory which was at one time in dispute between the Anglo Egyptians on the one side and the French on the other will fall to him. The Government here have very carefully abstained from denying that statement. They have twice been asked about it, and they have only said that they could say nothing at present with regard to what is to be the future of this country. Now, we have at least once debated in this House the character of Congolese rule; some of us have made strong statements based upon the knowledge that is before the different geographical societies, and which is given to us by the formal documents of the Congo State itself, with regard to the nature of the rule of the Congo State. I think it may be said without the slightest fear of contradiction that the Congolese rule is the worst of the rules to which any portion of the African peoples are subject. Some of us have always attacked this policy of leases to the Congo State. I am one of those who do not believe in the value of the interior of Africa, or in the likelihood of our getting back the money we spend there, But we are there; we have incurred an immense responsibility by being there, and, being there, the worst thing we can possibly do for the territories is to hand them over to the Congo State. Therefore the reduction which I have moved with regard to the expenditure on the Martyr Expedition is intended to elicit from the Government some statement as to what is to be the future of these territories, as to whether the King of the Belgians is right in stating that these leases to him still continue and that he is to be the ruler of the whole of the Bahr-el-Ghazal territory. In the absence of the Under Secretary we shall not be able, I suppose, to get any assurances from the Government, and it is a little difficult to debate the matter at all in his absence.

    1513
    The only other remark I will make upon item (a) is that the cost of the Uganda Protectorate is very great, in spite of a distinct statement to this House at the time that Protectorate was entered upon that the cost to this country would not exceed £50,000 a year. When we are asked to engage upon other operations of a similar kind, and when we are told that the cost of those operations will be very small, and when we get Bills like the Bill we were debating a few days ago and are told that the net cost of certain operations will be but a very small sum, it is interesting to remember how enormous the expenditure on Uganda has been against the definite statement that the total expenditure would not exceed £50,000 a year. With regard to the reduction on the other item I have named—item (c)—that concerns the Juba Expedition. I have never known any case in the whole course of my experience of this House where the House has been so completely misled by a Government as in the case of the Juba Expedition. When that expedition was first sent out the very name of it suggested that it was an expedition in the direction of the River Juba, a river the first 200 miles of which have been frequently traversed by small British men-of-war, and the upper course of which have been followed by three distinguished British travellers, and which is as well known as any of the African rivers. The object of the expedition, however, was explained to us in a Blue Book, and there was a curious phrase in that Blue Book which went to show that its real object was to anticipate the French at Fashoda. It is now admitted by the Prime Minister that that was the case, that the expedition never was intended to go anywhere in the direction of the Juba, and that it was intended to go in the direction I have specified. Colonel Macdonald, the head of the expedition, has recently read a paper before the Geographical Society, and has given a full and complete account of the expedition. [At this point the Under Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs entered the House.] I am glad to see the Under Secretary now in his place. I was just saying that the House had been entirely misled originally with regard to the Juba Expedition, and that the extent to which they had been misled had been now shown by the Prime Minister's speech in another place, and by the paper which Colonel
    1514
    Macdonald has recently read before the Geographical Society, and the map which accompanies that paper. Of course, we know that the Juba Expedition was virtually stopped by the rising in Uganda, and that it only succeeded in reaching a point twenty miles to the north of Lake Rudolph, which had been passed by three previous travellers, and of which we had complete surveys and full information, and then it went off in another direction straight towards the Nile. There it got within about 100 miles of Lado, a point on the Nile which was occupied by Congolese forces, and about which, also, everything is known. The discoveries made by Colonel Macdonald's Expedition within 100 miles of the Nile are of some geographical interest; they add to our knowledge about the country, but they are entirely outside the scope of the operations which it was pretended this Expedition was to undertake; and instead of being in the direction of the River Juba, they are in exactly an opposite direction, as we always said they were intended to be. I merely mention that to show how absolutely the House was misled when it was asked to incur expenditure on the Juba Expedition. [The right hon. Gentleman then briefly re-stated that portion of his speech which he had delivered in the absence of the Under Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs, and moved the reduction of the Vote by £200.].
    Amendment proposed—
    "To leave out '£154,463,' and insert '£154,263.' "—(Sir Charles Dilke.)
    Question proposed, "That '£154,463' stand part of the Resolution."
    THE UNDER SECRETARY OF STATE FOR FOREIGN AFFAIRS (Mr. BRODRICK,)was understood to say that the right hon. Baronet asked for information as to a divergence of opinion of which he had also complained in March last, when the matter was discussed. The complaint amounted to this, that Colonel Macdonald was sent on an Expedition to Lake Rudolph, the Expedition was afterwards diverted in the direction of the Nile, but the House was not originally told that the Expedition would be sent in that direction.
    SIR CHARLES DILKE: We were told differently by the Government.
    MR. BRODRICKsaid the whole matter could be divided into two parts. The late Under Secretary made a statement a year and a half ago, and the right hon. Baronet now complained that it did not tally with a statement made some months afterwards. The primary object of Colonel Macdonald's Expedition was of an exploring nature, but months afterwards further possibilities undoubtedly did present themselves, and Colonel Martyr, six months after the late Under Secretary made his statement, did start with the object of going down the Nile. He had never been able to see on what the right hon. Baronet's grievance was based. His grievance was that he was not taken fully into counsel at the earliest possible moment as to what might possibly be the ultimate result of Colonel Macdonald's Expedition. But when the troops were sent to the Nile, it was announced at the earliest possible date after the meeting of Parliament, and he (the speaker) could not see that the right hon. Baronet had any serious grievance. With regard to the leases to the Congo State, they were made subject to rights of Egypt. Those rights, which were then dormant, were now revived, and obviously in any negotiations those rights would have to be considered. The right hon. Baronet had said he did not believe in the value of this territory——
    SIR CHARLES DILKE: I said that, personally, I had my doubts as to the value of the country. But putting that aside altogether, I say we are morally responsible for its future, and we ought not to hand it over to so bad a Government as that of the Congolese.
    MR. BRODRICKthought a great deal of the value must depend upon the results of the surveying which would be undertaken, but until it was known what works might at some future date be undertaken with regard to the White Nile, it was obviously impossible to make any statement on the subject. The right hon. Baronet had also said that the cost of the Uganda Protectorate ought not to exceed £50,000 a year.
    SIR CHARLES DILKE: No. I alluded, in passing, to the fact that £50,000 was named as the outside sum when the Uganda Protectorate was taken over. I was using that fact as showing how greatly the House is deceived by estimates of that kind.
    MR. BRODRICKpointed out that estimates were liable to change, but the Foreign Office were sanguine that the estimates now put before the House would be ultimately brought within narrower limits. Sir Henry Johnston, an administrator of great experience, had been sent out, and it was hoped that both civil and military administrations would be put on a basis suitable to carry on the work, and at the same time reduce the expenditure. The House must guard itself from believing that in such cases as these the exact future expenditure could be foretold, but the Estimates were very carefully prepared. With regard to the condition of the Uganda Protectorate, it was a greal deal better than it was four or five months ago. The mutiny had completely died out, and there was no doubt whatever that the work of administration would be proceeded with greater experience, and might be expected to assimilate to the work in East Africa, where revenue was coming in and the expenditure was being brought within reasonable limits.
    MR. LABOUCHERE: The hon. Gentleman reminds me of a duty which I have no intention of performing. The hon. Gentleman expects me to say something as to the railroad in Uganda, but as I cannot enter into that subject in the way I desire I will only say this. The hon. Gentleman insists that we shall be able to finish that railroad at the estimated cost. If the railroad is finished at the amount of the estimate, I will frankly admit that I am in the wrong; if it is not, then the hon. Gentleman, with that candour for which he is famed, will admit that he is wrong. We have always been told that we may anticipate that expenditure will be less in the future; the hon. Gentleman is of a somewhat sanguine mind if he thinks it will be so in this case. It will be found that Uganda does not pay its way, and the result will be that we shall gradually

    1517
    retire from, that country. The ultra-Jingo persons will grumble, but the Government will withdraw from places like Uganda. The Chancellor of the Exchequer usually takes sound financial views in these matters, and it will become more and more difficult to obtain money from him, and we shall retire from that country. I certainly think my right hon. friend has a grievance with regard to this Juba Expedition. The House was told that the object of the Expedition was to explore the sources of the Juba river—why, I do not know; but money having been obtained for that specific purpose, the Expedition never went near the Julia
    river. The money, I believe, has been entirely thrown away. With regard to the Bahr-el-Ghazal, it is common knowledge that commercially it is entirely valueless, and my own impression is that, just as in the end we shall retire from Uganda, so in the end we shall withdraw from the Bahr-el-Ghazal. Because I believe this will be the result with these territories, I have always been against the expenditure of money on these expeditions. They do no good, and simply waste money.
    Question put.
    The House divided:—Ayes, 103; Noes, 47. (Division List, No. 359.)

    AYES.

    Arnold, Alfred

    Doughty, George

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

    Ashmead-Bartlett, Sir Ellis

    Douglas', Rt. Hon. A. Akers-

    Maclure, Sir John William

    Atkinson, Rt. Hon. John

    Drage, Geoffrey

    M'Arthur, Charles (Liverpool)

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

    Drucker, A.

    Malcolm, Ian

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

    Dyke, Rt. Hn. Sir William Hart

    Milward, Colonel Victor

    Barnes, Frederic Gorell

    Fellowes, Hon. Ailwyn Edwd.

    Monk, Charles James

    Barton, Dunbar Plunket

    Field, Admiral (Eastbourne)

    Moore, William (Antrim, N.)

    Bathurst, Hon. A. Benjamin

    Finlay, Sir Robert Bannatyne

    More, R. Jasper (Shropshire)

    Beach, Rt. Hn. Sir. M. H. (Br'st'l)

    Fisher, William Hayes

    Morton, Arthur H. A. (Deptford

    Bentinck, Lord Henry C.

    Fison, Frederick William

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

    Bethell, Commander

    Flower, Ernest

    Murray, Charles J. (Coventry)

    Bhownaggree, Sir M. M.

    Galloway, William Johnson

    Murray, Col. Wyndham (Bath)

    Bigwood, James

    Gilliat, John Saunders

    Nicol, Donald Ninian

    Bill, Charles

    Goldsworthy, Major-General

    Pierpoint, Robert

    Blundell, Colonel Henry

    Gordon, Hon. John Edward

    Purvis, Robert

    Boulnois, Edmund

    Gorst, Rt. Hon. Sir John Eldon

    Ridley, Rt. Hn. Sir Matt. W.

    Brassey, Albert

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

    Ritchie, Rt. Hn. Chas. Thomson

    Brodrick, Rt. Hon. St. John

    Gray, Ernest (West Ham)

    Robertson, Herbert (Hackney)

    Bullard, Sir Harry

    Gull, Sir Cameron

    Rollit, Sir Albert Kaye

    Campbell, J. H. M. (Dublin)

    Hanbury. Rt. Hon. Robert Wm

    Russell, T. W. (Tyrone)

    Carlile, William Walter

    Howard, Joseph

    Scoble, Sir Andrew Richard

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

    Hozier, Hon. James Henry Cecil

    Sharpe, William Edward T.

    Chaloner. Captain R. G. W.

    Jeffreys, Arthur Frederick

    Sidebotham, J. W. (Cheshire)

    Chamberlain, Rt. Hon. J. (Birm

    Johnston, William (Belfast)

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

    Chamberlain, J. Austen (Worc'r

    Kimber, Henry

    Spencer, Ernest

    Chaplin, Rt. Hon. Henry

    Knowles, Lees

    Stanley, Hn. A. (Ormskirk)

    Charrington, Spencer

    Lawrence, Sir E Durning-(Corn

    Stanley, Lord (Lanes.)

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

    Lawrence, Wm. F. (Liverpool)

    Stone, Sir Benjamin

    Coghill, Douglas Harry

    Lawson, John Grant (Yorks.)

    Tomlinson, Win. E. Murray

    Colling, Rt. Hon. Jesse

    Lea, Sir T. (Londonderry)

    Valentia, Viscount

    Cook, Fred. Lucas (Lambeth)

    Leigh-Bennett, Henry Currie

    Williams, Jos. Powell- (Birm.)

    Cook, C. W. R. (Hereford)

    Llewelyn, Sir Dillwyn- (Swans.

    Wyndham, George

    Cox, Irwin Edw. Bainbridge

    Lockwood, Lt.-Col. A. R.

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

    Curzon, Viscount

    Loder, Gerald Walter Erskine

    Davies, Sir Horatio D (Chath'm)

    Long, Col. C. W. (Evesham)

    NOES.

    Ambrose, Robert

    Donelan, Captain A.

    Macaleese, Daniel

    Asher, Alexander

    Foster, Sir Walter (Derby Co.)

    M'Ewan, William

    Atherly-Jones, L.

    Gourley, Sir Edward T.

    Maddison, Fred

    Austin, M. (Limerick, W.)

    Griffith, Ellis J

    Mappin, Sir Frederick Thorpe

    Bainbridge, Emerson

    Harwood, George

    Moss, Samuel

    Caldwell, James

    Hayne, Rt. Hon. Charles Seale-

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

    Cameron, Robert (Durham)

    Healy, Timothy M. (N. Louth)

    O'Connor, Arthur (Donegal)

    Charnning, Francis Allston

    Hedderwick. Thomas C. H.

    O'Connor, James (Wicklow, W.

    Crilly, Daniel

    Horniman, Frederick John

    Palmer, Sir C. M. (Durham)

    Curran, Thomas B. (Donegal)

    Kearley, Hudson E

    Pickersgill Edward Hare

    Curran, Thomas (Sligo, S.)

    Kilbride, Denis

    Pirie, Duncan V.

    Dalziel, James Henry

    Lawson, Sir W. (Cumberland)

    Randell, David

    Dillon, John

    Lewis, John Herbert

    Steadman, William Charles

    Sullivan, Donal(Westmeath)

    Whittaker, Thomas Palmer

    TELLERS FOR THE NOES—Sir Charles Dilke and Mr. Labouchere

    Trevelyan, Charles Philips

    Williams, John Carvell (Notts)

    Wallace, Robert

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

    Whiteley, George (Stockport)

    Yoxall, James Henry

    21. "That a sum, not exceeding £l,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 a Grant in Aid of the Revenue of the Island of Cyprus."
    SIR ALBERT ROLLIT: I desire to offer my very cordial acknowledgment to the right hon. Gentleman, the Secretary of State for the Colonies, for what he has done for the island of Cyprus since he came into office. I had an opportunity of visiting the island in the early part of this year, and I found in every way, both material and economic, evidence of material improvement. The roads are very much better than they used to be. Good and substantial bridges have replaced fords which formerly were almost impassable, and land drains have been made which are the means of carrying off the occasional floods which sometimes do a great deal of devastation. The great difficulty of the island has always been the droughts to which it has been subjected. On one occasion, I believe, a drought lasted for thirty years; but, happily, recently there has been great improvement owing to the afforestation which has taken place, and the droughts now are neither so great or so frequent as they used to be. One of the chief ways in which the right hon. Gentleman has served the island is by meeting the great physical difficulty of the island, which consists in the steepness of the descent to the sea from mountains very near the coast. This led to the rain water rapidly passing away, thus producing the droughts. At Famagusta a great reservoir for irrigation purposes has been constructed, and that I think will be the means of preventing the effects of drought to a large extent. As in Egypt, the result of irrigation will be to increase the productive powers of the island, and, consequently, very greatly increase the prosperity of the inhabitants. Anyone who has been in Cyprus knows the difficulty of either landing on or getting away from the island. That has to be done in an open roadstead, and frequently travellers have been detained on the island for a considerable period, owing to
    1520
    steamers not being able to get close in shore. An improved service of steamers has been arranged for. All goods have to be trans-shipped into lighters at considerable cost, and risk at times; but, in spite of these difficulties, there has been great growth in the shipping industry and regular communication has been established between the island and Liverpool, Hull, and other British ports. That communication is greatly stimulating the production of the island, particularly as regards the fruit of the carob tree, which is the principal ingredient in the manufacture of feeding stuffs. There has also been a considerable stimulus of the local industries of the island, owing to the general improvements that have taken place. The wine production has considerably increased. When the Chancellor of the Exchequer proposed to increase the wine duties, I wrote him a letter pointing out the effect that would have on this industry. Even, he was not aware how great was the recent growth of the wine industry of the island, both for actual consumption, and as a basis for the wines of other countries. The methods of manufacture are greatly improved, and I believe the industry will speedily attain to very considerable importance. Not only has the right hon. Gentleman the Secretary for the Colonies done excellent work in improving external communication, but he is making a railway from Famagusta to Nicosia, which will cross the most fertile plain in the island, and which will be found to be a distinctly reproductive and remunerative work. I had a conversation with Lieutenant Richards, R.E., who told me there are no engineering difficulties, and that in all likelihood the railway will be extremely useful. The silk industry, in which I know the right hon. Gentleman takes a great interest, has been advanced, and the planting of mulberry, trees has greatly increased of recent years. There are some old and some new textile industries, which, to say the least, are very promising. Perhaps the best feature in the present condition of the island is the collective and co-operative agriculture which has been established. That system, which has done so much for

    1521
    Denmark, and, to a less extent, for Ireland, promises to be distinctly useful to the trade of the island. The stock and the character of the seeds have been very much improved, owing to the measures taken by the right hon. Gentleman. Even in municipal mattes there has been progress. At Limasol, the water supply, sanitation, and education are conducted under municipal auspices. For these things I am able to convey to the right hon. Gentleman the assurances of the gratitude of the Cypriotes, and the firm belief that, in doing what he has done, he has promoted the prosperity of the island, and of the Empire of which it forms a part. The present proposal is for a new grant in aid. Grants in aid are acceptable, but I am bound to add that the feeling in the island, which is well founded, is that these grants in aid would be wholly superfluous and unnecessary if the island were dependent on its own financial resources. If the tribute to Turkey had not to be paid, there would be a large surplus, and that surplus could be devoted to public works. The feeling in the island is very strong against the tribute, and is a source of very great discontent. I have had the opportunity of seeing many of those who take an active interest in the affairs of the island, and one and all protest against the payment of the tribute, because it prevents the execution of public works out of the island's own resources, and also because it is a very great limitation on the reproductive powers of the island, owing to the high taxation, having regard to the means of the inhabitants. Various causes have been attributed to the origin of the tribute. One is that our Ambassador was not fully aware of the facts, that the amount paid to Turkey in the past was exaggerated, and not properly collected, that it was paid very irregularly and in paper currency, and was not equivalent to the sum the island is now called upon to pay. If the original proposals of this country had been carried out; if, as was first intended, Cyprus had been made a place of arms, and if great public works had been constructed there, the tribute might have become a matter of comparatively less importance. But now we have changed our whole policy, and these great public works will probably never be carried out. Yet the island is called upon to pay a very large sum, in the fixing of which it had no part. I do think that
    1522
    there is a claim on the consideration of this country, and that the strong feeling which exists in the island on the subject is not without some foundation. I am quite aware that the association of the tribute with the guaranteed loan of 1855, is accidental. At the same time, it is a very singular circumstance that the amount of the tribute and the interest on that loan closely coincide, and one theory is, that the fixture of the amount of the tribute was a very convenient mode of dealing with that financial matter. I know that this is a matter with which the Chancellor of the Exchequer is primarily concerned, but it is one on which some change should be made. One other subject I must mention, and that is that the wharf age dues, which were intended to be temporary, have been made permanent, and no considerable portion of them is devoted, as the islanders think they should be, to the construction of piers, harbours, and like works. Another complaint is that articles of general antiquarian interest have been removed from the island to this country, America, and elsewhere, instead of being left on the island for the attraction of travellers, and the education of its own people. I repeat, that from my own observation, from the results which are already apparent, from the cordial feeling of the islanders themselves, the greatest obligation is felt to the right hon. Gentleman the Secretary for the Colonies for his policy of development in this, as in other colonial possessions of the Empire.
    MR. CHANNING: As I had a motion for the reduction of this Vote, which I was unable to move yesterday, I should like to say a few words on this subject. I should wish to associate myself with what the hon. Member for Islington has said as to the wisdom of the right hon. Gentleman in developing the resources of Cyprus. My own opinion is that Cyprus should form part of the Hellenic kingdom of the future, and I hope that may be a happy solution of the problem in the Eastern part of the Mediterranean. Undoubtedly, as long as Cyprus is under the control of British power, it should be treated in the spirit of the kindly and wise administration of the right hon. Gentleman. The only question I wish to bring before the House is that of the tribute, on the grounds of the interest of

    1523
    the taxpayers of this country, as well as in the interest of the inhabitants of Cyprus. It is perfectly clear that if it were not for the tribute there would be a considerable surplus in the revenues of Cyprus, even if taxation were reduced, which might be applied to useful public works in the island. That is impossible now, because the tribute paid to Turkey creates a deficit which in some years amounts to a considerable sum. This tribute is connected with the guarantee of the payment of certain loans advanced to the Sultan in 1855 by various speculators in England and France, with whom I have but slender sympathy. It seems to me that the financial genius of the British Government should be devoted to meet the views of the inhabitants of Cyprus, and that some reasonable compromise should be come to as to the payment of the tribute. I would invite the right hon. Gentleman to indicate whether some means may not be arrived at, if not to extinguish the whole of the tribute, at any rate, to reduce it to something like the proportion which it ought to have been when the undertaking was given in connection with the Cyprus Convention. I should like, if I were in order, to enter on the wider topic, whether we have not the right to deal with this tribute in connection with the terms of the Cyprus Convention. We have done nothing within the whole of these years to insist on the Sultan performing his part of the contract, in regard to the protection of the Christian population of the East from barbarous cruelties. It seems to me not beyond the reach of statesmanship to make this question of the tribute a means by which we can enforce on the Sultan the carrying out of these obligations.
    MR. PIERPOINT: I desire to associate myself entirely with all which my hon. friend the Member for South Islington has said concerning the good work done by the right hon. Gentleman the Secretary of State for the Colonies for the inhabitants of Cyprus. I think it would be a small thing to say that the right hon. Gentleman has done more for the island than all the other Colonial Secretaries since the occupation of the island. I wish he could see his way, in consultation with the Chancellor of the Exchequer, to provide for further public works on the island. I have had the opportunity
    1524
    lately of suggesting to the right hon. Gentleman that Famagusta should be a free port, so that merchants, instead of taking their goods to Beirut, where they have to pay very heavy customs duties, should bring them to Famagusta, where they would be able to draw from their stocks as orders came in from Asia Minor and Syria. They would therefore have only to pay duties on such stock as was required for immediate sale. Then, Famagusta could be made into a commercial harbour. There can be no doubt that the existing harbour is too small to accommodate any but very small ships, and I hope that the success of the experiment which the right hon. Gentleman is now making will justify the enlargement of the harbour at Famagusta, and that the time may even come when the First Lord of the Admiralty shall establish a naval arsenal there, for nature has provided it with accommodation which would allow of the swinging of twelve ironclads. As to the wharfage dues, touched on by the hon. Member for South Islington, this question affects Limasol and Larnaca, where particularly the grievance is felt that these dues are not devoted to the improvement of the harbours. Larnaca is only an open roadstead with a very small harbour, and if the serf happens to be running, it is impossible to land men or goods. I hope the right hon. Gentleman will take into consideration the claims of merchants, both in Larnaca and Limasol, to improve the harbour accommodation there. The money might be provided or a grant-in-aid. I have great hopes of the future of the island under its present enlightened administration. For taking the figures since its occupation in 1878, the whole of the revenues amounted, up to 31st March, 1898, to nearly three and a-half millions, and the expenditure on the island during that period has only been about two and a-quarter millions, leaving an excess of revenue over expenditure of £1,193,000. I think everyone must see that if the island were only left to spend its own money, it would be exceedingly prosperous; and, instead of coming to this House for loans or grants in aid, there would be such a balance in the local exchequer as to reduce the too hard taxation of the inhabitants. I ask the right hon. Gentleman whether he is prepared now to make any statement concerning the Convention signed between

    1525
    Turkey and England yesterday a year ago. We know nothing about it, excepting for one paragraph which appeared in The Times on the 5th August last. What are the conditions of the Convention? The Leader of the House spoke a few days ago of a Bill to ratify that Convention, but no Bill has appeared. I should like to know what are the conditions of that Convention, and whether it will be a relief to the Imperial Treasury, or a relief to Cyprus itself. I should like to press upon the right hon. Gentleman that, whatever views he may have held upon this matter, the Cypriotes are certainly deserving of great sympathy from himself, and from everyone else, because they have been paying this large amount of money. It may be that this money is properly paid, or it may not be; but, at all events, we make them pay it according to the Convention with Turkey in 1855. According to the Convention, the interest on the guaranteed loan of 1885 was to be paid from the residue of the Egyptian tribute, and after that from the customs dues of Smyrna and Syria. I have not been able to find that any serious attempt has ever been made to get hold of these customs dues. After taking possession of the island of Cyprus in 1878, I suppose it was seen that it would be an easier way to pay the creditors of the loan out of the revenues of Cyprus. I should like to mention that the country which benefits most from our possession of Cyprus is France. Because its liabilities have been paid to the last penny, from the default of Turkey, by Great Britain, and France has had to simply ask for their money to get it, and give a receipt. It is interesting to note that while France gets with punctual regularity the payment of £41,000 of interest on the guaranteed loan, England has occasionally got off with a loss of £50,000 a year by the occupation of Cyprus; for when the finances of the island are bad we have to make grants in aid, with the result that France benefits at our expense. I hope that some day we may be able to do something substantial for the benefit of those people, who were intended to be an object lesson in the Eastern Mediterranean of the beneficence and justice of English rule.
    THE SECRETARY OF STATE FOR THE COLONIES (Mr. J. CHAMBERLAIN,: I am obliged to all the hon. Gentlemen who have spoken for the kind appreciation which has been expressed of the efforts of the Colonial Office to improve the condition of the island, and without making any invidious claim for myself, as compared with my predecessors, I think that the English Government have some right to congratulate themselves on the immense improvements which they have carried out. Very recently, not only have the roads of the island been placed in good repair, but surveys have been made with a view to proceeding with a railway across the island. It is also intended to improve the state of the harbour at Famagusta, and, most important of all, a large experiment in irrigation is also being undertaken. I am advised by the experts that it is likely to be financially successful, and in that case we may look forward to still further improvement. The question of the taxation raised in the island has also been under consideration, and a number of changes, all to the advantage of the taxpayers, have been made. With regard to much of the produce chiefly grown by the small cultivators, we have abolished the tithe—a very irritating tax and difficult to collect; and with regard to olives and olive oil, it is hoped that it will be possible to substitute an export duty for the tithe. There are many other matters in which careful attention has been given to the wants of the islanders, and in which there has been a material improvement of their condition. I am glad to hear that they recognise the good-will of the British Government, and are grateful for what has been done. One result has been that the revenue of the island has greatly increased. Last year it amounted to no less than £210,000, which is the largest sum ever raised in the island during the British occupation,, except for one abnormal year, 1891, when the harvest was exceptionally productive, and consequently the revenues went up. The expenditure has been £135,000, and the difference is, of course, accounted for by the tribute. Hon. Members have expressed the wish that the island could be relieved of this obligation. So do Her Majesty's Government; but it is not an obligation which the Government have placed on the island, it is an obligation which we took over with the island. Without adopting the very drastic suggestion of the hon. Member

    1527
    opposite, which would be in defiance of our international obligations, we cannot say to the Sultan of Turkey at the present time that this tribute, which we engaged to pay, shall no longer be paid to him. But the islanders have been led by local people who are insufficiently acquainted with the real history of this matter to suppose that they have exceptional claims to relief; and these statements have been repeated so often that they begin to believe them. It is therefore necessary to go back once more to the way in which this obligation was incurred. To read some of these statements which come from Cyprus, one would suppose that the island was worse off under British rule than under the Turkish régime. Under the Turkish régime the tribute was paid just the same; but the amount of money which the Turks spent in Cyprus never exceeded £30,000; whereas we spend £135,000 a year. The fact is, the island is better off now than ever it was; there is now absolute equality between religions and classes, even-handed justice, peace and security; the people are not subject to Armenian or even Cyprian outrages, and all this constitutes a change which they are a little apt to forget. The hon. Gentleman opposite suggested that the island should be handed over to the Greeks. I have no doubt that in some respects that would appeal tothe sentiments of the Grecian population in the island; but I. have no reason to believe that the Mahomedans in the island, who are equally worthy of our good-will and care, would at all like any such transfer. I am not certain that even the Greeks themselves would, considering the financial disabilities under which they would immediately be placed, feel that these would be compensated for by sentimental considerations. The amount of the tribute payable by the Cypriotes to Turkey was settled by a Commission, of which Sir Robert Biddulph, who went to Constantinople for the purpose, was the head. The whole question was examined and criticised again and again. It is not the fact, as my hon. friend appears to have been informed, that the calculations for the tribute were based upon the paper currency, which, having depreciated 60 per cent., no longer represented the real value of the tribute. On the contrary, account was taken of that depreciation, and only the intrinsic value of the currency was reckoned in settling the
    1528
    tribute. Sir Robert Biddulph was unable to convince the Turks that they should reduce their claims; and a final settlements made by the British Government without the consent of Turkey. It was the British Government which decided that the present sum fairly and reasonably represented the annual tribute which had actually been paid by the island for five years or more previous to the British occupation. It may be alleged that Sir Robert Biddulph did badly, and that his views were wrong, and that his calculations were mistaken, but I do not think that Her Majesty's Government could listen to such representations. There is no proof of them whatever, and it is known that Sir Robert engaged in the work with every desire, as was natural, to reduce the tribute to the lowest point, because he then knew well, what has since turned out to be the fact, that if the tribute was placed at a high amount the British Government would in the long run be mulcted for a considerable proportion of it. The net result is, not only that the Cypriotes have to pay not more than they paid before, but that during the twenty years of the occupation they have been relieved of a portion of their obligation, averaging about £30,000 a year, at the expense of the British taxpayer. I need not say that the rumour to the effect that the amount of the tribute had any reference to the amount of the loan which had been hypothecated is utterly and entirely without the shadow of a shade of foundation. The fact is, that all the revenues of the island were hypothecated for the loan of 1855. No doubt the result of the hypothecation has been, I will not say a pecuniary advantage to France, for I have no doubt France would have been able to get the interest on the loan from other sources, but an immense advantage in the sense that it has relieved her from all trouble and anxiety; because France has always obtained the money by cheque from the British Government, without having to exert pressure on the Turk. My hon. friends ask whether any arrangement is likely to be made for the reduction of the tribute. I have very little to say on that point, but one thing I must say in order to prevent any false anticipations. We might be able to reduce the tribute; but if we did so, it would not benefit the Cypriotes, immediately, at any rate, but only the British taxpayer. Whatever reduction

    1529
    was secured would have to be set against the British grant in aid, which was this year £30,000. Therefore, although I am anxious to see this tribute reduced, the Cypriotes are not likely for a long time to get the benefit of a reduction.
    MR. HEDDERWICK: Cannot it be capitalised and paid off profitably?
    MR. J. CHAMBERLAIN: The debt might be paid off by a loan at a lower rate of interest, and there would be a saving to that extent. Efforts have been made by the Chancellor of the Exchequer and the Foreign Office to come to some arrangement with the Sultan in regard to this loan, and some considerable progress has been made in that direction. But the negotiations are not concluded; and I cannot say at the present time that a satisfactory agreement has been obtained. But I still hope that some transactions of the kind may be arranged, though I think it necessary to warn the inhabitants of the island that in the first instance, at any rate, the British taxpayer, and not they, would benefit.
    MR. DILLONsaid it could not be denied that the condition of Cyprus had improved very substantially during the last two or three years under the administration of the right hon. Gentleman the Colonial Secretary. At the same time, he confessed to a certain sense of disappointment at the announcement that had just been made, that the people of the island had nothing to expect from the increase in the revenue. The right hon. Gentleman, and those who took the same view, seemed to overlook altogether the political considerations of the case. This country took Cyprus under the impression that they were getting a great political advantage, and it was boasted of as a great stroke of policy. It was then represented to the Cypriotes that they had come into the possession of a great and wealthy Empire, and that it was the intention of the English Government to maintain, as in Malta, a large number of troops there. Of course, if that policy had been pursued there would never have arisen the slightest difficulty among the Cypriotes in paying their way. But for a long time the island was completely neglected, and nothing was
    1530
    done to improve the condition of the people, who were left entirely to their own resources. He fully admitted that, since the administration of the Secretary to the Colonies, a new leaf had been turned over in this regard, with the result that the revenue had immediately begun to rise. But there was a long time during which the complaints of the islanders met with no response, and they were subjected to an enormous and undue burden of taxation. He therefore thought it was ungenerous to propose, immediately there was a gleam of prosperity in Cyprus, that there should be a reduction in the grant in aid. He hoped the Colonial Secretary would come to recognise that the people of the island had at least a moral claim to a share in the increase in the revenue.
    Vote agreed to.
    22. "That a sum, not exceeding £36,241, 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."
    SIR CHARLESDILKE: I want to ask the Chancellor of the Exchequer, or the Secretary to the Treasury, three questions. It has been very strongly rumoured lately that the companies subsidised in this Vote are making of themselves an alternative route to the Cape, in order to anticipate possible competition. Two of the agreements which govern these subsidies expire this year, but they have already been extended in a new form by other agreements which were made a few years ago, and which will begin to run before we have this Vote again next year. I should like also to know whether the Government can give similar information to that contained in the White Book, which has been laid before the Cape Parliament, on the subject of the working of the lines subsidised in this Vote, of the proposal for an alternative line to the Cape, and of the opinions of the Home Government as to the strategic importance of the proposed line. It is now admitted that the enormous increase of trade in South Africa in recent years has made these subsidies wholly unnecessary, and this will have a considerable

    1531
    bearing, of course, on any future arrangements we have to make. I should also like to know whether the Chancellor of the Exchequer can tell us anything about the recent delays in Government messages from the Cape.
    THE CHANCELLOR OF THE EXCHEQUER (Sir M. HICKS-BEACH,): There have been proposals under the consideration of the Government from the telegraphic companies for a new cable between this country and the Cape, touching at St. Helena and Ascension. Negotiations have also been in progress for a considerable reduction in rates. I cannot say how far the matter has approached completion. I think the time is hardly ripe for laying Papers on the subject before Parliament, but there are proposals before us, and it is quite true that considerable strategic importance is attached by the Admiralty to the proposed communication. With regard to the alleged delay in transmitting messages from the Cape, I really know nothing at all about it.
    Vote agreed to.

    CLASS I.
    23. "That a Supplementary sum, not exceeding £4,000, be granted to Her Majesty, to defray the Charge which will come in course of payment during the year ending on the 21st day of March,1900, for Expenditure in respect of Royal Palaces and Marlborough House."
    24. "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."
    SIR CHARLES DILKE: I raised a question on this Vote last year, which the Secretary to the Treasury said he would bring to the knowledge of the officials, viz., the extraordinary carelessness shown in regard to the names in the Ordnance Survey. These names are of great antiquarian interest, and often have important historical bearings; but even in the
    1532
    Crown forests some of the official names are spelt differently. I would ask the Secretary to the Treasury whether this can be rectified.
    MR. HANBURY: The right hon. Gentleman is no doubt aware that this Vote is not out of the Treasury, but out of the Board of Agriculture. I will bring the matter before my right hon. friend the President of the Board of Agriculture.
    SIR CHARLES DILKE: The same thing happened last year—the right hon. Gentleman was present, but the President of the Board of Agriculture was not.
    Vote agreed to.
    25."That a sum, not exceeding £147,641 (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."

    CLASS II.
    26."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."
    MR. DILLON: I desire to move the reduction of this Vote. This is an extremely important Vote, and I think that a fuller opportunity ought to have been given to us of discussing it, in view of the peculiar circumstances which surround it. It will be in the recollection of the House, that early this year a message was received from the Lords to the effect that it was desirable that a Joint Committee of both Houses of Parliament should be appointed to inquire into the salaries of the permanent staff of both Houses of Parliament. I should be out of order if I entered, as I should like to do, upon the

    1533
    course of the proceedings connected with the appointment of that committee, but I may be permitted to remind the House that in spite of repeated protests, especially on the part of Scotch, Welsh, and Irish Members, who had been mainly instrumental in bringing about the appointment of that Committee——
    MR. SPEAKER: Order, order! I do not see how this is relevant.
    MR. DILLON: I will drop that part of my observation, and direct my attention to the question immediately raised, as to whether the sum provided for the salaries and expenses of the offices of the House of Lords should be reduced. This Committee, appointed upon a motion made on the 27th of February, has only reported within the last week or fortnight. I have in my hand a copy of the Report. Some very remarkable facts, which I shall allude to in a few moments, have been brought out in that Report. But what is still more remarkable to me than the facts which have been brought out, is the absence of any reference to certain matters which I should have thought the Committee would have reported upon. There is an extraordinary difference between the House of Lords and the House of Commons in the amount of the officers' salaries, which must have certainly come under the cognisance of the Committee, and in reference to which I should like to put a question to the Secretary to the Treasury, who was a member of the Committee, viz., whether the question was considered of whether at least a portion of the salary of the Gentleman Usher of the Black Rod might not have been saved by the amalgamation of the office with that of Sergeant-at-Arms in the House of Lords.
    MR. HANBURY: That question was ruled to be out of order by the Chairman.
    MR. DILLON: That is an extraordinary condition of things. In 1869–70,when the discussions on this subject commenced, there were twenty-seven clerks in the House of Lords, drawing salaries to the amount of £16,770 a year. In 1889–90 the number of clerks was nineteen, and the amount £12,357; and in 1899
    1534
    there is a further reduction to seventeen clerks, and the amount is now £10,730.So that in the twenty years since these annual discussions commenced a saving has been effected of ten clerks, the number having been reduced from twenty-seven to seventeen, and there has been a reduction in the total amount of the salaries from £16,770 down to £10,730, and thus a saving of £6,000 has been effected. All this has been achieved in face of the fact that if there has been any change in the amount of business it has been in the direction of an increase. This result is due to the industry and perseverance of those hon. Members who have engaged in these annual discussions, and it will act as a very great encouragement to us to persevere in this work, because, although much has been done, I am by no means certain that as much has been done as ought to be done. I do not intend to debate this question in all its bearings on the present occasion, but I desire to appeal to the right lion. Gentleman to put this Vote down earlier next session in order that it may be fully and fairly discussed. I desire very briefly to draw attention to one or two other points. It will be within the memory of everybody in this House that one of the points to which we have repeatedly drawn attention was the fact that the Clerk of Parliaments in the other House received £3,000 a year, while the Chief Clerk of the House of Commons only received £2,500. This reduction was strenuously resisted at first, but now the salary of the Clerk of Parliaments has been reduced to the same figure as that of the Clerk of this House. I have a strong opinion that in these matters the salary ought to bear some relationship to the amount and the quality of the work done. No doubt if that principle was carried out a great reform would take place amongst Her Majesty's Ministers as well as amongst the clerks in the House of Lords. I think all public offices which touch the honour of the nation and which set an example to the nation should be above criticism. I have never consciously adopted or supported the doctrine which, in my judgment, is the misfortune of America, and that is paying public men a grossly insufficient salary for public services; on the contrary, I believe it to be the cheapest plan, in the long run, to pay generous—and what might be supposed to be excessive—salaries, because you want to pick and

    1535
    choose from the best men in the country, and it is idle to expect that you can attract such men unless you give splendid salaries. But while the salary of the Clerk of Parliaments has been brought down to the same level as the salary of the Chief Clerk in this House, everyone will admit that the work of the Clerk of Parliaments is ridiculously small compared with the work of the Chief Clerk of this House. It is an old superstition which induced the House of Lords to resist with all its strength any attempt to level down the salary of the Clerk of Parliaments to the same level as that of the Clerk in this House, and it is a remnant of that old superstition which induces them now to hold out for the same salary. Under the present system a man who serves a higher assembly gets the same pay for about one-third the amount of work. I will give as an instance the case of the Gentleman Usher of the Black Rod, and I think we all know what his duties are. Nobody will accuse me of introducing any personal considerations, and no human being in debating these matters dreams of ever injuring the vested interest of any individual. What I am criticizing is simply the system. Now what is the present state of affairs? The Gentleman Usher of the Black Rod, when these Debates first commenced, had £2,000 a year and a house. That was a ridiculous and grotesque state
    of things, and yet it was defended with almost desperation, and when we criticised this state of things we were looked upon as little short of rebels against the constitution of this country, and we were told that the House of Lords was, like the island of Cyprus, a profitable institution to the country, which gave to the Treasury more than they got back, as if there was any force in that argument. In 1888, when these discussions commenced, the Gentleman Usher of the Black Rod had £2,000 a year and a house, but now his salary is £1,000 a year and no house. I think everyone will admit that even £1,000 a year for his functions is preposterous, and my contention is that duties of this kind could be discharged by the Serjeant-at-Arms, and that would effect a very substantial saving. I think that is a matter which ought to be investigated. I had intended to move a reduction of this Vote, but I think I shall better express my feelings by voting against it, and as no opportunity has been given us to adequately discuss this important matter at this stage I hope the right hon. Gentleman will give us a fair opportunity next session.
    Motion made, and Question put, "That this House doth agree with the Committee in the said Resolution."
    The House divided:—Ayes, 104; Noes, 41. (Division List, No. 360.)

    AYES.

    Arnold, Alfred

    Coghill, Douglas Harry

    Hozier, Hon. James Henry Cecil

    Ashmead-Bartlett, Sir Ellis

    Collings, Rt. Hon. Jesse

    Jeffreys, Arthur Frederick

    Atkinson, Rt. Hon. John

    Cook, Fred. Lucas (Lambeth)

    Johnston, William (Belfast)

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

    Cooke, C. W. R. (Hereford)

    Kimber, Henry

    Balfour, Rt Hn Gerald W. (Leeds

    Curzon, Viscount

    Knowles, Lees

    Barnes, Frederick Gorell

    Davies, Sir H. D. (Chatham)

    Lawrence, Sir E. Durning-(Corn

    Barton, Dunbar Plunket

    Doughty, George

    Lawrence, Wm. F. (Liverpool)

    Bathurst, Hon. Allen Benjamin

    Douglas, Rt. Hon. A. Akers-

    Lawson, John Grant (Yorks.)

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

    Drucker, A.

    Lea, Sir Thomas (Londonderry

    Bentinck, Lord Henry C.

    Duncombe, Hon. Hubert V.

    Leigh-Bennett, Henry Currie

    Bhownaggree, Sir M. M.

    Fellowes, Hon. Ailwyn Edward

    Llewelyn, Sir Dillwyn-(Sw'nsea

    Bigwood, James

    Field, Admiral (Eastbourne)

    Lockwood, Lt.-Col. A. R.

    Bill, Charles

    Finlay, Sir Robert Bannatyne

    Loder, Gerald Walter Erskine

    Blundell, Colonel Henry

    Firbank, Joseph Thomas

    Long, Rt Hn. Walter (Liverpool

    Brassey, Albert

    Fisher, William Hayes

    Maclure, Sir John William

    Bullard, Sir Harry

    Flower, Ernest

    M'Arthur, Charles (Liverpool)

    Burdett-Coutts, W.

    Galloway, William Johnson

    Malcolm, Ian

    Butcher, John George

    Gedge, Sydney

    Mellor, Colonel (Lancashire)

    Campbell, J. H. M. (Dublin)

    Gibbs, Hon. Vicary (St.Albans)

    Monk, Charles James

    Carlile, William Walter

    Gilliat, John Saunders

    Moore, William (Antrim, N.)

    Cavendish, V. C. W.(Derbysh)

    Gladstone, Rt. Hn. Herbert J.

    More, Robt. Jasper (Shropsh.)

    Chaloner, Captain R. G. W.

    Goldsworthy, Major-General

    Morton, Arthur H A (Deptford)

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

    Gordon, Hon. John Edward

    Murray, Rt Hn. A. Graham. (Bute

    Chamberlain, J. A. (Worc'r)

    Gorst, Rt. Hon. Sir J. Eldon

    Murray, Chas. J. (Coventry)

    Chaplin, Rt. Hon. Henry

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

    Murray, Col. Wyndham (Bath)

    Charrington, Spencer

    Gray, Ernest (West Ham)

    Nicol, Donald Ninian

    Clare, Octavius Leigh

    Gull, Sir Cameron

    Pierpoint, Robert

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

    Hanbury, Rt. Hn. Robt. Wm.

    Purvis, Robert

    Ridley, Rt. Hon. Sir M. W.

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

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

    Ritchie, Rt. Hn. Chas. Thomson

    Stanley, Hon. A. (Ormskirk)

    Williams, Jos. Powell (Birm.)

    Robertson, Herbert (Hackney)

    Stanley, Edw. Jas. (Somerset)

    Wyndham, George

    Russell, T.W. (Tyrone)

    Stanley Lord (Lancs.)

    Savory, Sir Joseph

    Stirling-Maxwell, Sir John M.

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

    Scoble, Sir Andrew Richard

    Strauss, Arthur

    Sharpe, William Edward T.

    Tomlinson, Wm. Edw. Murray

    Sidebotham, J. W. (Cheshire)

    Valentia, Viscount

    NOES.

    Abraham, William (Cork, N. E.)

    Hayne, Rt. Hon. C. Seale-

    Randell, David

    Atherley-Jones, L.

    Healy, Timothy M. (N. Louth)

    Steadman, William Charles

    Austin, M. (Limerick, W.)

    Hedderwick, Thomas C. H.

    Sullivan, Donal (Westmeath)

    Bolton, Thomas Dolling

    Hogan, James Francis

    Wallace Robert

    Caldwell, James

    Horniman, Frederick John

    Walton, John L. (Leeds, S.)

    Cameron, Robert (Durham)

    Lawson, Sir Wilfrid (Cumb'land

    Whiteley, George (Stockport)

    Channing, Francis Allston

    Lewis, John Herbert

    Whittaker, Thomas Palmer

    Curran, Thomas B. (Donegal)

    Macaleese, Daniel

    Williams, John C. (Notts.)

    Curran, Thomas (Sligo, S.)

    M'Leod, John

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

    Dalziel. James Henry

    Maddison. Fred.

    Wilson Jos. H. (Middlesbrough)

    Dilke, Rt. Hon. Sir Charles

    Moss, Samuel

    Yoxall, James Henry

    Donelan, Captain A.

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

    Foster, Sir Walter (Derby Co.)

    O'Connor, T. P. (Liverpool)

    TELLERS FOR THE NOES—Mr. Dillon and Mr. Kilbride.

    Gourley, Sir Edward T.

    Pickersgill, Edward Hare

    Griffith, Ellis J.

    Pirie, Duncan V.

    Resolution agreed to.

    27."That a sum, not exceeding £15,269, 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 in the Offices of the House of Commons."
    28."That a sum, not exceeding £59,300, 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 in the Department of Her Majesty's Treasury and Subordinate Departments."
    29 "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."
    SIR CHARLES DILKE: On a former occasion when this Vote was taken we had a full Debate on the Factory and Workshops Department, but we had no Debate at all upon anything else which is included in the Home Office Vote. I should like to draw attention to the insufficiency of the inspectorate in the Mines Department. I cannot put the matter better than it is put in a letter by
    1538
    a working miner in Scotland, who seems to have made himself thoroughly acquainted with the present state of things, and his view confirms what I hear from my own constituency and from other parts of the country. One of the strong points of the administration of the Secretary of State for the Home Department is that he has succeeded in making a considerable increase in the number of factory and workshop inspectors. I may point out that the work of the mining inspectors has been heavily increased by the inspection of quarries, which has been recently thrown upon them. I will now read a few lines from this working miner's letter which puts the case in a nutshell. He says:
    "What concerns us most is the fact that we rarely see the mine inspectors only when an accident happens. No complete inspection of a pit is ever made, and the fact is that no new inspectors have been appointed for Scotland since 1892, although the inspectors now have to look after the quarries as well as to attend all accident inquiries. No time is allowed for the proper inspection of collieries, and the inspectors only visit them once a year. Would you ask the Secretary of State to appoint more inspectors? The factory inspectors have done a great deal to prevent accidents by seeing that the Acts were carried out, and I think more mine inspectors would have the same effect."
    I think that letter puts the whole question in a nutshell, and I very much doubt whether the Secretary of State will deny the statements made in that letter. All I ask is that he should feel that the Committee will support him in any demand he should make upon the Treasury for the increase of the mines inspectorate. With regard to the Vote gener-

    1539
    ally, the grounds upon which we took exception to this Vote on a former occasion have not been weakened in the least degree by the Home Secretary's explanation. We complained most bitterly, and we shall complain again next session, of the extraordinary delay in the issuing of that most valuable document, the Annual Report of the Chief Inspector of Factories and Workshops. We always used to get that Report in the month of May, but it has recently been postponed till July, and this year till December, and we see no special reason for that delay.
    MR. CARVELL WILLIAMS: I avail myself of the opportunity afforded by this Vote of expressing my disappointment at the failure of the Home Secretary to introduce a measure relating to burial law reform, which the right hon. Gentleman told us a considerable time ago had actually been prepared. I would remind the House that had the right hon. Gentleman introduced the Bill, he would have done so under circumstances of a highly favourable character, inasmuch as the Committee appointed last session and the session before, at the instance of the Government, not only came to a unanimous conclusion that a Bill should be introduced consolidating and amending the burial laws, but they were also agreed with singular unanimity as regards the particular changes which ought to be made. Therefore, the right hon. Gentleman had the advantage of knowing that this measure would not have been of a highly contentious character, and would have received support on this side of the House as well as on the opposite side. No explanation has been vouchsafed as to the failure to introduce the measure, and I hope we may receive from the right hon. Gentleman an assurance that it will be introduced early next session. He knows, as well as I do, that the matter is pressing, for every year fresh churchyards are being closed and new cemeteries are being opened, and as long as the law remains in its present condition there will be bitter contention with regard to matters which should be wholly free from anything of so painful a character. I hope I shall receive from the right hon. Gentleman an assurance which will allay the uneasiness which prevails out of doors, and which will also make it unnecessary to adopt steps
    1540
    which may otherwise become incumbent upon those who desire to see an alteration in the law.
    MR. HAVELOCK WILSON: I desire to again make an appeal to the right hon. Gentleman the Home Secretary in reference to the case of two seamen, named William Jones and John Lynch, who were sentenced in 1897 to seven years' penal servitude for an offence for which, if they had been proved to be absolutely guilty without any doubt, I venture to say six weeks would have been a very severe sentence. It will be necessary for me just to go through the facts of the case very briefly. In 1897 there was a seamen's strike in the port of Cardiff. A number of men were congregated near a ship, and a dispute took place with regard to the amount of charges that three of these men had signed on board ship. After they had left the ship one of the three men used a knife, with the result that one of the men got two or three cuts on the head, given to him by some person with a piece of wire rope. The two men, Jones and Lynch, were arrested for this offence. They were committed to the assizes, where the judge sentenced them to seven years' penal servitude. In the case of John Lynch, there were very grave doubts indeed as to whether the man was guilty. There were only two witnesses in a position to swear that Lynch was present; but some nine or ten other witnesses swore on oath that at the time this fight took place Lynch was nowhere near the spot where the fight occurred; and yet, in spite of that, he was convicted. With regard to the case of Jones, judging from the evidence given, he was near the spot, and the policeman, who was the principal witness against Jones, swore that he found a large piece of wire rope in his pocket. This policeman was afterwards charged with perjury, and he was tried at the Cardiff Assizes, where he was acquitted. A number of witnesses, who were called in defence of the two men, were very clear on the point. They were perfectly independent witnesses, and were not connected with the dispute in any way. All these witnesses testified on oath that the policeman, who was the principal witness against Jones, had sworn falsely about this piece of wire rope; and another policeman swore that he found this wire rope in a

    1541
    field, and handed it over to a police constable. I think that point was made very clear at the trial in Cardiff; but, nevertheless, those men had to go back to finish their sentences. Since then the sentences have been reduced, and three years have been taken off, which shows that the judge was very extravagant in his sentences, and did not exercise that discretion which he ought to have shown.
    MR. SPEAKER: Order, order!
    MR. HAVELOCK WILSON: No doubt it is out of order to discuss the sentences passed by judges, but there are grave doubts indeed as to the guilt of these men. The man Lynch had received very serious injuries to both his legs, and had been very badly scalded, and I was present with this man at the shipping office at Penarth waiting to interview the second engineer of the vessel on which he had been scalded. I am thoroughly convinced that in the case of Lynch he is an innocent man suffering an unjust sentence. Admitting that the men were guilty without a shadow of doubt, I venture to say that the sentences were the most severe that have ever been passed on any men in this country, because the injuries which the man complained of having received did not incapacitate him from following his work. The fight occurred about one o'clock in the afternoon, and the injured man was doing his work next morning, and he would have gone on a voyage had not a policeman taken him on shore to prosecute him. That was in itself evidence that no serious injury was inflicted upon this man, and yet, in spite of that, this terrible sentence was inflicted.
    MR. SPEAKER: Order, order! The hon. Member is not in order in commenting upon the conduct of a judge in passing a particular sentence.
    MR. HAVELOCK WILSON: I only wanted to call attention to this very severe sentence. The Parliamentary Committee of the Trades Union Congress made an appeal to the right hon. Gentleman to reduce the sentence, but he declined to do so, and I am again compelled to take this opportunity of appealing to the right hon. Gentleman. These men have now suffered two years and two months of this sentence, and I do not think any harm would be
    1542
    done if, as a matter of mercy, the remainder of the sentence was remitted. Jones is an American citizen, with a wife and child dependent upon him living in the United States, and I understand that his people do not know his whereabouts. Jones does not care to have the fact sent to his wife that he is in prison, and at the present time she does not know where he is. Taking that into consideration I hope the right hon. Gentleman will seriously consider whether he cannot now liberate these men. With regard to the man Lynch, whom I have said all through is an innocent man, he is well advanced in years, and probably when he is liberated from prison he will not be able to follow his employment as a fireman on board ship. As a matter of mercy, seeing that there is some doubt about the guilt of these men, I hope the right hon. Gentleman will liberate them.
    THE SECRETARY OF STATE FOR THE HOME DEPARTMENT (SIR M. WHITE RIDLEY,): I strongly deprecate the bringing forward of criminal cases for review before this House, because it is quite impossible, however great may be my own shortcomings, that this House can be a competent judge in such matters. Therefore I decline to follow the hon. Gentleman in some of the details which he has put before the House. When this case was first brought to my notice I gave it careful and anxious consideration, and as the result of that consideration I was able to advise Her Majesty to remit three years of the sentence which had been imposed by the judge who tried the case. I did my best to take a lenient view, and I respectfully decline to go any further in that direction. I have done a great deal in the direction which the hon. Member wishes, and I think he ought not to press me to go further. With regard to the question of the Burial Laws, my hon. friend knows perfectly well that I was as anxious as he and his friends are to bring forward a measure which, as the hon. Member opposite has said, has been drawn mainly upon the lines of the recommendations of the Select Committee. I thought this was a good opportunity which might have been taken of settling some of the difficult questions connected with this subject; but, unfortunately, time has been against me, and it did not appear to the Government a desirable thing to introduce a Bill of

    1543
    that character which, under the pressure of other business, it seemed absolutely impossible to pass into law. I cannot give the hon. Gentleman any definite assurance or promise, but it will be a disappointment to myself if I do not take an opportunity of presenting the Bill to Parliament next session, which I have already drafted. As to the question of the insufficiency of the number of inspectors of mines, I have received no such complaint as the right hon. Baronet alludes to. The right hon. Gentleman seems to think that the Government inspectors ought to take charge of these mines, but that is not our idea of the duty of a Government inspector. I think it is extremely desirable that the inspectors should be fully cognisant of all that is going on in their district, and that they should not appear only in cases of lamentable accidents. They should upon all occasions know exactly what is going on and be able to give advice when their advice is sought. I can only say that if any representations are made to me to increase the number of inspectors, I shall be perfectly ready to consider them. This is a question which I have addressed more than once to the inspectors of mines, and I have received answers which are not altogether in support of the view of the right hon. Gentleman. The right hon. Baronet has also alluded to another subject which he brought forward when this Vote was before the Committee of Supply. In regard to the delay in issuing the Report of the Inspector of Factories, I am not prepared to give a definite undertaking as to when the Report will be produced, but I will take note of the fact that there is an evident feeling in the House that the earliest possible information should be given on these matters, although I do not think it will be possible early in the session to present an exhaustive and full resume and criticism of the various Reports given by the Chief Inspector in the same volume. I think it will be possible to present, at an early period of the session, the Reports of the various inspectors. At all events, I have got the consent of the Treasury to an increase of the staff of clerks in the Factories Department, and with regard to the bringing out of these Reports, I hope with this increased strength I may be able, to some extent, to satisfy the demands of the right hon. Gentleman.
    Motion made, and Question put, "That this House doth agree with the Committee in the said Resolution."
    The House proceeded to a Division, and Mr. Speaker 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 seven Members having stood up, Mr. Speaker declared that the Ayes had it.
    30."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 the31st day of March, 1900, for the Salaries and Expenses of the Department of Her Majesty's Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs."
    MR. ATHERLEY-JONES: I desire to avail myself of this opportunity to call attention to the failure of the Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs to make a declaration to his Imperial Majesty the Czar in respect of the abrogation of the change which has been recently affected in the constitution of Finland. I am sensible of the extreme difficulty of dealing with what seems to savour of intervention in the internal affairs of another empire, although there have been numerous precedents for such a thing, and representations have been effectively made in this respect, even when there was no intention of forcing them by armed intervention. I will promise to deal with this matter very shortly, because it is not a convenient period of the session to debate a question of such magnitude, but my justification for bringing it forward now is the total absence of previous opportunities. There are no treaty obligations on the part of Great Britain in relation to Finland, but there are treaty obligations in relation to that country of which Finland prior to the year 1808 was an integral part; and when the arrangement of 1808 was entered into it was understood that there was a recognition of the fact that the constitution of Finland as it existed in the time of its connection with Sweden was to be maintained. That constitution has been maintained ever

    1545
    since 1808 up to the present year, and upon the accession of each Czar to the throne this has been confirmed by a constitutional declaration. The constitution of Sweden is remarkable for the fact that almost free autonomy has been enjoyed by the people of Finland. They have their own legislature consisting of a House which represents the four States of the realm, and they have a Cabinet in many respects something of the nature of a Second Chamber. The Cabinet is composed of persons constitutionally selected, for the most part by the Imperial Government. In dealing with this matter I cannot help making a passing reference to a fact which seems to my mind to accentuate the gravity of this subject—I allude to the Peace Conference, the object of which is to secure the reduction of armaments. Immediately after the issue of the famous manifesto in which the Czar intimated his desire to reduce armaments, he introduced into the Diet of Finland a law by which the standing territorial army of the Duchy of Finland—which under no circumstances short of actual war was to be required to pass beyond the boundaries of Finland—was to be increased from 5,000 soldiers on the active list to about 36,000 men; and the reserve, which should be somewhere about 35,000 or 36,000 men, was to be increased with those on the active list to such an extent as to make it a force of 100,000 soldiers. The immunity which the army of Finland enjoyed from serving in any other parts of the Empire was also removed, and various other disabilities which I will not particularise now were imposed upon the people of Finland. The result of this measure was that a strong feeling of indignation was aroused among the people of Finland against serving in outside territories, and their opposition led to the famous rescript of February last, in which the Czar declared that henceforth it would lie within his sole discretion to decide whether or not any law which he chose to promulgate was one which should be applicable to the Duchy of Finland, and if he came to the conclusion that such a law affected those subjects of his outside the Duchy of Finland, then, whatever might be the attitude of the House of Representatives of Finland, and whatever might be the attitude of the States, that law should ipso facto come into force. That law was a direct infringement and violation of the
    1546
    constitution of Finland, and undoubtedly amounted to an abrogation of that constitution. I need not point out to the right hon. Gentleman the Under Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs that the passage of that law, and the issuing of that rescript, has produced a most profound exasperation not merely in Finland, but throughout the Scandinavian Peninsula. There is not only this feeling of exasperation, but there is a feeling that the increase of the army of the Czar by practically 100,000 upon the frontier of Scandinavia constitutes a menace to the peace of those regions and to European peace, because, as the right hon. Gentleman no doubt fully recognises, the trend of the policy of Russian Czars has been to seek to appropriate by force portions of what geographically is Scandinavian territory. I will not dilate upon the actual danger this would be to the peace and security of Europe, but that feeling of exasperation has found its echo in the general sympathy which has been extended to the people of Finland by all the civilised countries of Europe, and representations have been made to the Czar from various quarters to this effect. I feel the disadvantage under which I labour in appealing to the right hon. Gentleman upon a question of this kind, but at the same time I cannot help reflecting that it is scarcely in consonance with the best traditions of statesmanship in this country that the people of a great free State should quietly regard with indifference—and I might almost say with contempt—the extinction of the liberties of a people united to us by so many common ties.
    THE FIRST LORD OF THE TREASURY (Mr. A. J. BALFOUR,): I rise to order. I wish to ask you, Sir, whether it is consistent with the practice of the House that an hon. Member should initiate an elaborate discussion on the Foreign Office Vote in matters over which the Foreign Office has no control?
    MR. SPEAKER: Up to the present I have not found in the hon. Member's remarks anything that is relevant to the Vote before the House. I was waiting to see whether he was going to put himself in order by referring the same action on the part of the Government.
    MR. ATHERLEY-JONES: Inasmuch as I have practically reached the close of

    1547
    my remarks, the right hon. Gentleman's intervention is somewhat inopportune. On the point of order, I may say that I am not aware, subject to your ruling, that it is in any sense contrary to order for any Member of this House to challenge the conduct of a responsible Minister of the Crown for failure to intervene—I mean friendly intervention—in matters of this character, and those who may challenge that statement will find a precedent in the case of Poland in 1863, when a similar protest was made. Without further trespassing upon the time of the House, I will ask the right hon. Gentleman the Under Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs whether the Government have made any representations to the Czar of Russia with respect to the increase of the Army in Finland, and whether any communications have been received from the Russian Government in respect thereto.
    THE UNDER SECRETARY FOR FOREIGN AFFAIRS (Mr. BRODRICK,): I should not have risen at all had it not been for the questions put to me by the hon. Member opposite, because I consider that the whole scope of this discussion which the hon. Member seeks to raise is absolutely beyond the purview of the Foreign Office Vote. The hon. Member has brought forward a variety of questions which may be of great importance, but, as far as the British Parliament is concerned, we have nothing at all to do with them. The hon. Member asks whether any representations have been made to the Russian Government in regard to the change in the constitution of Finland. Undoubtedly no representations of the kind have been made, because, as a Government, we have no concern whatever with these matters, nor have we any locus standi to make any recommendations. No communications on the subject have passed between us and the Government of the Czar, and we have no intention of addressing any such communications to the Russian Government. I would remind the House that, with regard to this matter, as a country, we have nothing whatever to do with an improvement in the state of affairs in Finland. We have given no guarantee to Finland, we are not by treaty involved in the affairs of Finland, and we are not prepared to undertake to interfere in the affairs of that country. I do not think that such a discussion on the part of an
    1548
    assembly which has no concern in the matter is useful for the purpose which the hon. and learned Gentleman has in view, nor do I think its continuance will be in accordance with the traditions of the British House of Parliament.
    SIR CHARLES DILKE: I should like to put a question to the Chancellor of the Exchequer. I moved a reduction of the Foreign Office Vote on the first occasion on which it came before the House. In the latter part of that Debate the Chancellor of the Exchequer made a reply on the specific question on which a reduction was moved, namely, the claim against the Government of France in connection with the Waima affair. I should like to ask the right hon. Gentleman whether any progress has been made in this matter. Considering that it occurred in 1893, it ought not to be allowed to drag on until next session.
    SIR M. HICKS-BEACH: I am afraid I am unable to add anything to what has been said by the Under Secretary for Foreign Affairs.
    Vote agreed to.
    31. "That a sum, not exceeding £64,070, 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 certain Services transferred from the Mercantile Marine Fund."
    MR. HAVELOCK WILSON: I think I will be in order on this Vote in bringing to the notice of the House a question with reference to Lascar seamen. For some considerable time I have been asking the President of the Board of Trade to enforce the law with regard to the accommodation provided for seamen on board ship.
    MR. SPEAKER: Perhaps the hon. Member will satisfy me as to how this subject is connected with the Mercantile Marine Fund.
    MR. HAVELOCK WILSON: Certain surveyors are paid out of this fund to survey ships.
    MR. SPEAKER: The hon. Member is complaining, not of the conduct of the surveyors, but of the conduct of the Minister who has charge of these matters.
    MR. HAVELOCK WILSON: It is part of the duty of the surveyors of the Board of Trade to see that ships provide accommodation for seamen.
    MR. SPEAKER: The mode of performing that duty is regulated by the Board of Trade, and the hon. Member cannot bring it forward on this Vote.
    MR. HAVELOCK WILSON: Then I give notice that I will bring it forward on Monday.
    Vote agreed to.
    32. "That a sum, not exceeding £6, 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 meeting the Deficiency of Income from Fees, &c., for the requirements of the Board of Trade, under the Bankruptcy Acts, 1883 and 1890, and the Companies (Winding-up) Act, 1890."
    33. "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."
    MR. CHANNING: I do not wish to challenge this Vote to-day on Report, as I took a Division upon it last night, but I desire to put a question to the President of the Board of Agriculture on a matter which has been repeatedly brought before the House. I wish to enter my protest against the policy adopted by the President of the Board of Agriculture with regard to the essential point of the recommendations of the Tuberculosis Commission. The reply of the right hon. Gentleman yesterday to a question on the subject was apparently that until the whole of the agricultural community were agreed in demanding that the special recommendations of that Commission should be carried out he saw no reason for giving effect to them. This question is of very great importance in view of the health of the whole community, as well as in the interests of agriculture, and I think it is a very serious step on the part of the right hon. Gentleman to make his decision on this question dependent on the demands of the landowners and farmers whose immediate
    1550
    interests might be affected by carrying out the policy suggested by the Commission, and also consequently may take short-sighted views. I am most grateful to the right hon. Gentleman for his promise to consider the question of distributing literature in order to bring before the agriculturists of this country the results obtained in other countries by the adoption of scientific methods for stamping out this disease. But I must enter my protest against his repeated statements that the action of his Department is to be based, not on the opinion of men of science, but on the wishes of the agriculturists of this country. We have not only the opinion of the Royal Commission, the opinion of the most eminent veterinary surgeons in the country, and the opinion of the whole of the greatest medical authorities, unanimously demanding this action. We have a right to demand that the Board of Agriculture should not take a narrow and limited view of the subject, and should not wait until a number of agriculturists pronounce an opinion upon it. As a practical justification for insisting on this question, I may point out that the Estimates for the present year show a decrease of £2,500 in connection with the Diseases of Animals Act. That would be about half the sum required for initiating the Danish system of stamping out tuberculosis in this country, and I think we have a right to complain of the lack of sympathy with scientific methods which is displayed by the right hon. Gentleman on the subject.
    MR. LEWIS: There is one question which I have been requested to raise on this Vote by some of my constituents, who feel very strongly indeed the restrictions with regard to the removal of swine. During the last five years £724,000 has been sanctioned by this House for this purpose, and the question I should like to ask is whether the country has had anything like an adequate return for that enormous sum. My own impression is that it has had very small effect, but perhaps the right hon. Gentleman will be able to enlighten the House on the matter. All I know is that in the districts with which I am best acquainted the restrictions are as severely felt as ever. Apparently no progress has been made towards the extermination of the disease, and the hardship on the farmers and small cottagers has been very great. Another difficulty arising from the matter

    1551
    is the obtaining of licences for the removal of swine. When I brought this question before the House on a previous occasion the right hon. Gentleman said, I have no doubt quite correctly, that magistrates will not convict in cases of this kind. The magistrates know all the local circumstances, and the hardship which these regulations inflict; but whether they do their duty or not, it is evident that these swine Orders are very difficult to enforce, and unless they can be enforced with greater strictness, I would ask whether the immense sum of money spent on them may not just as well have been cast into the Thames. I am not laying responsibility on the right hon. Gentleman, because the House, by its own action, has imposed on the Board of Agriculture the duty of maintaining these restrictions and of spending this money; but I think the right hon. Gentleman will be responsible so far as the future is concerned, because we look to him for guidance in this respect; and I should like to know whether, in his opinion, it would not be better to sweep away these restrictions altogether, rather than that they should be inadequately enforced, as they arc at present. The result does not appear to me to be commensurate with the enormous amount of money which has been spent and with the great hardship which has been inflicted on farmers and cottagers. The right hon. Gentleman will, I am sure, understand my action. I do not approach the question in a spirit hostile to himself; I am sure he has done his very best to carry out these swine Orders with the least possible hardship, but I do ask him whether the time has not now come when these restrictions should be more severely enforced or swept away altogether. I would ask the right hon. Gentleman to take this question into his very serious consideration, and to give the House some guidance which would enable it to arrive at a more satisfactory state of affairs one way or the other than exists at present.
    THE PRESIDENT OF THE BOAED OF AGRICULTURE (Mr. LONG,): The two speeches to which we have just listened were very interesting. The hon. Member for East Northamptonshire started this Debate by suggesting that it was my duty, as the head of the Department, to stamp out
    1552
    the disease of tuberculosis in animals There is no necessity for the Department to act when the evidence we get from practical people shows that they can get tuberculin cheaply and readily. There is no tittle of evidence to show that the supply from the Veterinary College is not excellent and perfectly suitable to the work carried out by the veterinary surgeons. The hon. Gentleman talks about the disease having been stamped out abroad. I am not going to detain the House now, but I entirely dispute the assertion that Denmark has suceeded in stamping out this disease. Cattle exported from Demark, when tested by the tuberculin test, show practically the same tendency to tuberculosis as other cattle, and there is no evidence to show that the adoption of these methods in Denmark has led to the extermination of the disease. In this country public opinion has been aroused, and meetings have been held, to call attention to the desirability of preventing the spread of tubercular disease from animals to human beings. In the present state of the discovery of tuberculin I absolutely decline to make myself responsible for any attempt to enforce on the stock-owners in this country a system for eradicating tuberculosis, for which, undoubtedly, a great deal is to be said, but about which I am confident there is still a great deal to be learned. So far as the supply of tuberculin and the work of the veterinary surgeons are concerned, I believe there is very little room for improvement at the present time. That being so, I am not prepared to offer tuberculin which is not asked for, or to suggest that we should pay the fees of veterinary surgeons, a request which has not been made in this House. It is better to let the work proceed as it is proceeding now, and not force upon the people a system which, if it were very general, would involve very great inconvenience and possibly loss. With regard to the swine fever regulations, the hon. Member for the Flint Boroughs called attention to the very heavy expenditure incurred in connection with them. He suggested that those regulations should be more severely enforced or swept away altogether. It is not easy, however, to reduce the expenditure, because pressure is always put on the Department to pay generously and even lavishly for animals slaughtered in the public interest. It is no doubt desirable that such animals

    1553
    should be paid for at their full market value, otherwise it is quite evident that we cannot carry with us the people whose co-operation is necessary to make the operation of the regulations successful. We have sought to lessen the expenditure by reducing the number of animals condemned to be slaughtered and by carrying out in a larger degree the policy of isolation, and I hope that by the adoption of those means we shall not in any way diminish the success of our operations, while at the same time they will very sensibly diminish the cost. I do not think that we can impose more severe restrictions than exist at present. The inconvenience is now as great as it possibly can be, and no doubt to the small owner the loss of money and the disturbance of business are very severe indeed, and no one regrets it more than I do. But the House must recognise there is no middle course in dealing with this disease. It can only be stamped out successfully by the imposition of carefully arranged but rigorously enforced and sufficiently strict regulations. That has been our policy, and the hon. Gentleman will find that we have been more successful than he is inclined to give us credit for. If he will look up the statistics he will find that swine fever has decreased by nearly one half. But we have not yet succeeded in entirely clearing it out of the country. Still I am hopeful that we will meet with even greater success, as recent figures show a decided improvement. Twelve months ago I was quite hopeful that we had succeeded in stamping the disease out; but it broke out again. However, it is now showing signs of decrease. I do not admit that the money has been wasted. The loss to owners and consumers would have been greater if the disease had been allowed to run riot throughout the length and breadth of the land. I do not think there is any other point to which I need refer. I can assure the hon. Gentleman that I accept his remarks in the spirit in which he made them. I fully understand that he made them with a desire, if possible, to limit the area of the disease, and secure a clean bill of health for the country.
    Vote agreed to.
    34. "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
    1554
    31st day of March, 1900, for the Salaries and Expenses of the Local Government Board."
    SIR WALTER FOSTERsaid that the right hon. Gentleman the President of the Local Government Board, when referring on a previous occasion to the Sheffield Scattered Homes, was reported by The Times to have said that "the Local Government Board were always willing to give a full and fair trial to the Scattered Homes, but he could say that the reports received from Sheffield with regard to them were not encouraging. "In the official Report they found words even stronger, for there he was made to say, "In regard to Sheffield we have some very unsatisfactory Reports indeed." It was very natural that the Sheffield guardians should feel rather startled by those strong terms of indignation, and he hoped the right hon. Gentleman would be able to give some explanation of them, if correctly reported. When opening the Scattered Homes in Sheffield he had been particularly struck with the success of the guardians in perfecting that beneficent system, and pleased with the appearance of health, contentment, and general good condition presented by the children. A Report made in 1896 pointed out certain directions in which the scheme might be improved, but he could not understand why, after the system had been in operation in Sheffield for so long with such success, the words which had been attributed to the right hon. Gentleman should have been used. If there were any complaints with regard to the system, they should be ventilated in the House, and the Sheffield Guardians would be glad of any information which would enable them to make the system more perfect. He hoped the right hon. Gentleman would be able to tell the House how far the reports of his previous speech were inaccurate, and he felt perfectly certain that the right hon. Gentleman would be able to water down all condemnations of a system which, if carried out generally, would go very far to improve the condition of the poor children of the State, by eradicating every indication of poor law administration, and enabling them to grow up with self-respect and confidence and independence.
    MR. MADDISON, as a Sheffield man, deprecated the

    1555
    statements which had been reported as having been made by the right hon. Gentleman. They had caused great annoyance to the Sheffield Guardians, who had approached him (Mr. Maddison) to raise the question on the Appropriation Bill. When, however, he found so well-informed a gentleman as the hon. Gentleman who preceded him was going to raise it, he gladly left the matter to him. His object in rising now was to enable the right hon. Gentleman to inform the House as to what he did say on the former occasion. The Sheffield Guardians had inaugurated a new departure in poor law administration, and nobody could deny, whether they agreed with the scheme or not, that the guardians had thrown themselves heartily into the scheme and had worked very hard to make it a success. There were always difficulties in the way of reforming the poor laws, but these gentlemen had succeeded in reforming them, and the consensus of opinion in Sheffield was that the money which had been spent by the guardians on these Scattered Homes was well spent. He did not see that the Report of 1896 would justify the somewhat harsh words the right hon. Gentleman had used, because, although many little defects were pointed out—and minor defects were always existent in the experimental stages of any great scheme—the Report on the whole was favourable to the scheme. In conclusion, he asked the right hon. Gentleman to kindly tell the House what his views were upon the Scattered Homes, and he hoped the right hon. Gentleman's statement would be such as to encourage, and not discourage, the Sheffield Board of Guardians in the great work which they had undertaken.
    MR. CHAPLINwished to say, and he said it with perfect frankness, that if on a former occasion he said anything which had caused offence to the Sheffield Guardians he unreservedly withdrew it. Nothing of the kind was intended on his part, although it might be possible that, speaking as he did on the spur of the moment and entirely from memory, and having a recollection of some reports upon the question, he might have said—he could not charge his memory at this moment, as he had been invited to do by the hon. Member opposite, with the exact words he used on that occasion—something to the effect referred to. But if he
    1556
    had said anything offensive or injurious to the Sheffield Guardians, he entirely withdrew it. He thought it might be that he was referring to the Report to which the hon. Member had referred, in which it was stated that some improvements might be effected, and he thought he said that there had been Reports which were not so satisfactory as they might have been; but he was speaking entirely from memory and without seeing the Reports for many months; and now with the knowledge that he had since acquired and the researches that he had made into the subject, he could only say that he was in all probability entirely misled. He said that now, and he had been in correspondence with the Sheffield Board of Guardians upon the subject and had referred them to statements which he had previously made in the House of Commons, where he had referred to them as the pioneers of a movement which, in his opinion, ought to be encouraged. If he had known that his hon. friend had visited these places himself, or had been reminded of it in the Debate, he should certainly never have dreamed of passing any reflection upon them. He did not think there was anything more that he could say on this point except to express his regret that, in speaking as he did from memory, he said anything hurtful or offensive to the Sheffield Board of Guardians upon this matter.
    MR. H. J.WILSONas a Sheffield man thanked the right hon. Gentleman for his kind, friendly, and frank expressions, which would remove a misrepresentation that had caused great dissatisfaction in Sheffield.
    Vote agreed to.
    35. "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."
    36. "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."
    37. "That a sum, not exceeding £8,000, 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 Salaries and Expenses of the Local Government Board for Scotland, and for Expenses under the Vaccination Act, Infections Disease Notification Act, Local Government (Scotland) Act, 1889, Burgh Police (Scotland) Act,1894,Public Health (Scotland) Act, and Poor Law (Scotland) Act."
    38. "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."
    39. "That a sum, not exceeding £27,479, 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 in Ireland "

    CLASS III.
    40. "That a sum, not exceeding £60,806, he 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 Lord Advocate's Department, and other Law Charges, and the Salaries and Expenses of the Courts of Law and Justice in Scotland."
    41. "That a sum, not exceeding £29,565, 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 in Her Majesty's General Register House, Edinburgh."
    42. "That a sum, not exceeding £3,000,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 Expenses of the Establishment of the Crofters' Commission."
    43. "That a sum, not exceeding £53,180, 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 Prison Commissioners for Scotland, and of the Prisons under their control, including the Maintenance of Criminal Lunatics and the Preparation of Judicial Statistics."
    44. "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 the31st 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."
    45. "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."
    46. "That a sum, not exceeding £75,675, 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, Allowances, Expenses, and Pensions of various County Court Officers, of Commissioners, and of Magistrates in Ireland, and the Expenses of Revision."
    47. "That a sum, not exceeding £63,316, 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 Commissioner of Police, the Police Courts, and the Metropolitan Police Establishment of Dublin."
    48. "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."
    49. "That a sum, not exceeding £69,096, be granted to Her Majesty, to complete the sum necessary to defray

    1559
    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 General Prisons Board in Ireland, and of the Prisons under their control, and of the Registration of Habitual Criminals."
    50. "That a sum, not exceeding £54,669, 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 Reformatory and Industrial Schools in Ireland."
    51. "That a sum, not exceeding £4,044, 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 the31st day of March, 1900, for the Maintenance of Criminal Lunatics in the Dundrum Criminal Lunatic Asylum, Ireland."

    CLASS VI.
    52. "That a sum, not exceeding £7,497, 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 Hospitals and Infirmaries, and certain Miscellaneous, Charitable, and other Allowances in Ireland, including sundry Grants in Aid."

    CLASS VII.
    53. "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 the31st day of March, 1900, for certain Miscellaneous Expenses."
    54. "That a sum, not exceeding £20,000, be granted to Her Majesty, to defray the Charge which will come in course of payment during the year ending on the 31st day of March, 1900, for a Grant to the Congested Districts (Scotland) Fund constituted by the Congested Districts (Scotland) Act, 1897, in aid of expenditure in carrying out the purposes of the Act, and for other purposes."
    55. "That a sum, not exceeding £14,251, be granted to Her Majesty, to defray the Charge which will come in course of payment during the year ending
    1560
    on the 31st day of March, 1900, for the repayment to the Civil Contingencies Fund of certain Miscellaneous Advances."
    56. "That a sum, not exceeding £60,000, be granted to Her Majesty, to defray the Charge which will come in course of payment during the year ending on the 31st day of March, 1900,for a Grant in Aid of the Expenses of the Royal Commission for the British Section at the Paris International Exhibition,1900."

    ARMY ESTIMATES, 1899–1900.
    57. "That a sum, not exceeding £305,800, be granted to Her Majesty, to defray the Charge for the Pay, &c, of the Medical Establishment, and for Medicines, &c, which will come in course of payment during the year ending on the 31st day of March, 1900."
    58. "That a sum, not exceeding £571,000, be granted to Her Majesty, to defray the Charge for the Pay, Bounty, &c, of the Militia (to a number not exceeding 131,670, including 30,000 Militia Reserve), which will come in course of payment during the year ending on the 31st day of March 1900."
    59. "That a sum, not exceeding £75,000, be granted to Her Majesty, to defray the Charge for the Pay and Miscellaneous Charges of the Yeomanry Cavalry, which will come in course of payment during the year ending on the 31st day of March, 1900."
    60. "That a sum, not exceeding £624,200, be granted to Her Majesty, to defray the Charge for Capitation Grants and Miscellaneous Charges of Volunteer Corps, including Pay, &c, of the Permanent Staff, which will come in course of payment during the year ending on the 31st day of March, 1900."
    MR. CHANNING: I had put a motion down on this Vote, in order to raise certain points with regard to the financial treatment of the Volunteers, but at this period of the evening I am precluded from doing anything but put a question briefly to any of Her Majesty's Ministers present who may be able to deal with it, since the Minister who represents the War Office is not present. It is well known to all

    1561
    acquainted with these matters that the cost of providing ranges for the new rifle is very excessive, and I wish to know whether anything can be done in the way of providing further money than is provided out of the Capitation Grant to aid the Volunteer regiments throughout the country to provide themselves with ranges when the ranges of the Regular forces are not available for their use. I understand that a series of regulations have been prepared—I do not know whether they have been presented to the House—in which some further provision or arrangement is made which would facilitate the use by the Volunteers of the ranges available for the Regular forces, and would assign to them some pecuniary aid in taking advantage of these facilities. I may say that this question is a rather urgent one in my own neighbourhood, and so long ago as last autumn I was specially asked to draw attention to it in the House of Commons. The difficulty of obtaining the extra length of range required for the trajectory of the Lee-Metford rifle is very considerable, and the amount of money required in some of these cases by Volunteer regiments was quite beyond their means. I think, therefore, in the interests of the efficiency of the Volunteer force itself, it is only reasonable to press the Government to consider in a broader spirit the provision of further grants to Volunteer corps to meet these expenses. I would therefore ask the Secretary to the Treasury to bring the matter before the War Office, in order that it may be duly dealt with.
    SIR CHARLES DILKE: I think the Government ought, when they are running through Supply in this way, to have the members of the Government present who are concerned in the various matters under discussion. On three occasions this evening rather important Votes have been reached, when the Ministers who ought to have been here to answer for their respective Departments have not been present. It is not only an inconvenient arrangement, but it is almost a scandal. [At this point Mr. WYNDHAM entered the House.] I am very sorry that my remarks have not been heard by the Under Secretary for War, and I hope they may be communicated to him. Of course, it is almost useless, on the last day of Supply, to deal at all fully with any matters concerning the various De-
    1562
    partments, because we know that the House is very anxious to bring Supply to an end. But I think the whole treatment by this House of the Volunteer force really ought next session to receive attention. We spend a great deal of money on the Volunteers, and that money is very cheerfully provided by the country, under the impression that the Volunteers constitute a force of some value. The view that the War Office are more and more taking, however, is rather that the Volunteers are merely a means of advertising the Army and of obtaining recruits. Of course, if the Volunteers are to be considered as a force in themselves, that force is wanting in cavalry and artillery: it is a force of infantry only, unless in some cases the Yeomanry may be considered as the cavalry force of the Volunteer service. Of course, we cannot discuss these matters very fully to-night; all we can do is to give full notice to the War Office that we shall discuss them fully when the next opportunity presents itself.
    THE UNDER-SECRETARY OF STATE FOR WAR (Mr. WYNDHAM,): I would like, in the first place, to apologise to the hon. Member for East Northamptonshire for not being present when he addressed the House. I understand that he brought before the House the question of ranges for the Volunteers. I can assure the hon. Member that we are fully alive to the new difficulties which have been created by the introduction of a rifle with a longer range; and that we are endeavouring to see that the Volunteers do not suffer owing to the fact that they have been speedily armed with the same weapon as the Regular forces in this country. After the Bill which has now been passed by both Houses, under which a sum of £40,000will be devoted to existing Volunteers, I think we are entitled to take credit for the fact that this is the first Government which has ever ear-marked such a sum for this particular purpose. I believe that the new regulations in regard to travelling allowances is also a step in the right direction. Coming to the speech of the right hon. Baronet the Member for the Forest of Dean, I must be allowed to disclaim absolutely the view which he has ascribed to us, namely, that we regard the Volunteers merely as machinery for

    1563
    obtaining recruits for the Army. That is not the case. The Volunteers have never been treated more seriously than they are being treated at this moment. They are now an organised part of our military system, they have their proportionate place in any great national crisis, and we have to bring discipline to bear upon them in a manner which was not the case in days gone by. With regard to the Yeomanry, I would remind the House that they are now being inspected on their capacity to perform outpost duty, and I believe that there are in this country several Yeomanry regiments which could provide at least one squadron, if not two, able to undertake the duties of Divisional cavalry. If that be so, the Yeomanry force does not exist in vain.
    Vote agreed to.
    61. "That a sum, not exceeding£790,000, be granted to Her Majesty, to defray the charge for transport and remounts, which will come in course of payment during the year ending on the 31st day of March, 1900."
    SIR CHARLES DILKE: On this question the Government have succeeded in showing that they have now begun to increase the number of horses, but the addition has fallen far short of making up for the diminution in previous years, that is to say, although there is an increase over last year and the year before, there is a great diminutiou upon twenty or twenty-five years ago. The Government justify their position by saying that there was no reserve of horses in those days, and by pointing out that there is now a reserve, and that that reserve may be relied upon; the Government rely upon using in time of war the existing horses for cavalry and guns, and omnibus and other horses for waggons. I cannot but think that, looking at the shortness of field artillery, as compared with infantry, we ought not to be content with drill without waggons. A distinguished artillery colonel has stated that artillery officers in this country do not know what to do with waggons in time of war, because they never drill with them in times of peace. This matter is becoming more and more important every day in view of the certainty of the adoption of quick-firing guns, and it will be absolutely necessary, I think, to
    1564
    drill with waggons in times of peace. I cannot myself think that the Government have yet got a sufficiently high standard before them in regard to the number of horses they keep, either for the cavalry or the artillery. I recognise the fact that they have already made an increase, but it is small.
    MR. WYNDHAM: I cannot complain that the right hon. Baronet has revived his criticism on this subject in the earlier part of the session. At that time it was pointed out that there was an increase of 500 horses, and that the introduction of the quick-firing system had thrown this question back into the experimental stage. I may mention that experiments are about to be made in a few days at Okehampton, and this day week 100 guns will be worked together on Salisbury Plain, the Commander-in-Chief and Adjutant-General being present, and, until those who are charged with the responsibility of making recommendations to the Secretary of State have delivered to my noble friend the conclusions at which they arrive, I cannot add to the statement I made at the beginning of the session. I can, however, confirm the promise I then made—viz., that we shall be prepared to accept any conclusions that may be arrived at, and should they entail the necessity for increased expenditure on horses, a Vote will be submitted for the purpose next year.
    Vote agreed to.
    62. "That a sum, not exceeding£111,100, be granted to Her Majesty, to defray the Charge for Establishments for Military Education, which will come in course of payment during the year ending on the 31st day of March, 1900."
    SIR CHARLES DILKE: I desire to call attention to the limitation in the amount awarded for efficiency in foreign languages, seeming to indicate that this important branch of education is below the desired level. I trust the matter will have the attention of the Under Secretary for War.
    Vote agreed to.
    63. "That a sum, not exceeding £60,200, be granted to Her Majesty, to defray the Charge for Sundry Miscel-

    1565
    laneous Effective Services, which will come in course of payment during the year ending on the 31st day of March, 1900."
    64. "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."
    MR. PIRIE: I desire to draw attention to the question of recruiting, because I look upon it as the most important question connected with the success and future efficiency of the Army. The more we look into this question, the more unsatisfactory we must admit it to be. I need not recapitulate the grave statements made by both the former and the present Secretary for War. Nothing could be stronger than Lord Lansdowne's own statement as to the outlook. For my part, I have always put down the unsatisfactory state of the Army to the system by which we try to obtain our recruits. If you will only narrow the door by which men can enter the Army, you will create a greater desire to join the ranks than if you open the door to everyone. In other words, entrance to the Army should be restricted to men who can give some proof of good moral character. Instead of that, you open the door wide to men, irrespective of age and antecedents, and for that reason so little success has attended the effort to increase the strength of the Army. A most destructive report has been issued with regard to recruiting in the Army——
    MR. SPEAKER: Order, order! The hon. and gallant Member cannot bring forward this question now. Recruiting is specially dealt with in another Vote.
    MR. PIRIE: Then I will only press on the Under Secretary the necessity of looking very closely into this question. The facts which have come out are not at all creditable. They show the close
    connection there has been between the public-house and the recruiting agency.
    vote agreed to.
    65. "That a sum, not exceeding £100, be granted to Her Majesty, to defray the Charge for the Ordnance Factories (the cost of the Productions of which will be charged to the Army, Navy, and Indian and Colonial Governments), which will come in course of payment during the year ending on the 31st day of March 1900."

    SUPPLY [28TH JULY].—REPORT.
    Postponed Resolution, "That a sum, not exceeding £31,405, 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 the Colonies, including a Grant in Aid of certain Expenses connected with Emigration," further considered.
    MR. HEDDERWICK: It was my intention upon this Resolution to raise the question of the policy of the Government in the Protectorate and Colony of Sierra Leone; but at this late hour of the night (9.55) it would be impossible to do so. I must say that we have not been treated very handsomely by the Government in regard to this Vote. I allude to the way in which it has been postponed. But I desire to intimate that I shall call the attention of the House to this question if I can find an opportunity upon the Second Reading of the Appropriation Bill. In the meantime, to mark my sense of the gravity of the subject, I beg to move the reduction of the Vote by £100.
    Amendment proposed—
    "To leave out '£31,405,' and insert '£31,305.' "—(Mr. Hedderwick.)
    Question put, "That '£31,405' stand part of the said Resolution."
    The House divided:—Ayes, 118; Noes, 29. (Division List No. 361.)

    AYES.

    Arnold, Alfred

    Bathurst, Hon. Allen Benjamin

    Blundell, Colonel Henry

    Atkinson, Rt. Hon. John

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

    Bond, Edward

    Bagot, Capt. Josceline FitzRoy

    Bentinck, Lord Henry C.

    Brassey, Albert

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

    Bethell, Commander

    Brodrick, Rt. Hon. St. John

    Balfour, Rt Hn Gerald W (Leeds

    Bhownaggree. Sir M. M.

    Bullard, Sir Harry

    Barnes, Frederic Gorell

    Bigwood, James

    Burdett-Coutts, W.

    Barton, Dunbar Plunket

    Bill, Charles

    Butcher, John (George

    Carlile, William Walter

    Gray, Ernest (West Ham)

    Murray, Chas. J. (Coventry)

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

    Greene, Henry D. (Shrewsbury)

    Murray, Col. Wyndham (Bath)

    Chaloner, Captain R. G. W.

    Greene, W. Raymond-(Cambs).

    Nicholson, William Graham

    Chamberlain, Rt. Hon. J. (Birm.

    Greville, Hon. Ronald

    Nicol, Donald Ninian

    Chamberlain, J Aus'en (Wor'r)

    Gull, Sir Cameron

    Pierpoint, Robert

    Chaplin, Rt. Hon. Henry

    Hanbury, Rt. Hon. Robert W.

    Pollock, Harry Frederick

    Charrington, Spencer

    Hozier, Hon. J. Henry Cecil

    Purvis, Robert

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

    Jeffreys, Arthur Frederick

    Ridley, Rt. Hon. Sir M. W.

    Coghill, Douglas Harry

    Jessel, Captain Herbt. Merton

    Ritchie, Rt. Hon. C. Thomson

    Collings, Rt. Hon. Jesse

    Johnston, Williaim (Belfast)

    Robertson, Herbert (Hackney)

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

    Keswick, William

    Russell, T. W. (Tyrone)

    Cox, Irwin Edward Bainbridge

    Kimber, Henry

    Scoble, Sir Andrew Richard

    Curzon, Viscount

    Lawrence, Sir E Durning-(Corn

    Sidebotham, J. W. (Cheshire)

    Davies, Sir Horatio D (Chatham

    Lawrence, Wm. F. (Liverpool)

    Stanley, Hn. Arthur (Ormskirk

    Douglas, Rt. Hon. A. Akers-

    Lawson, John Grant (Yorks.)

    Stanley, Edward J. Somerset)

    Drucker, A.

    Lea, Sir Thomas (Londonderry

    Stanley, Lord (Lancs.)

    Duncombe, Hon. Hubert V.

    Leigh-Bennett, Henry Currie

    Steadman, William Charles

    Dyke, Rt. Hn. Sir William Hart

    Lewelyn, Sir Dillwyn-(Swans.

    Stephens, Henry Charles

    Fellowes, Hon. A. Edward

    Lockwood, Lt.-Col. A. R.

    Strauss, Arthur

    Field, Admiral (Eastbourne)

    Loder, Gerald Walter Erskine

    Sturt, Hon. Humphry Napier

    Finlay, Sir Robert Bannatyne

    Long, Col. Charles W.(Eveshan

    Thornton, Percy M.

    Firbank, Joseph Thomas

    Long, Rt. Hon. W. (Liverpool)

    Tollemache, Henry James

    Fisher. William Hayes

    Lorne, Marquess of

    Tomlinson, W. E. Murray

    Fison, Frederick William

    Lowles, John

    Valentia, Viscount

    Flannery, Sir Fortescue

    Maclure, Sir John William

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

    Flower, Ernest

    M 'Arthur, Charles (Liverpool)

    Williams, J. Powell- (Birm.)

    Galloway, William Johnson

    Malcolm, Ian

    Wilson Todd, W. H. (Yorks.)

    Gedge, Sydney

    Maxwell, Rt. Hon. Sir H. E.

    Wyndham, George

    Gibbs, Hon. Vicary (St. Albans)

    Mellor, Colonel (Lancashire

    Wyndham-Quin, Major W. H.

    Gilliat, John Saunders

    Milward, Colonel Victor

    Goldsworthy, Major-General

    Monk, Charles James

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

    Gordon, Hon. John Edward

    More, Robt. Jasper (Shropshire

    Gorst, Rt. Hon. Sir J. Eldon

    Morton, A. H. A. (Deptford)

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

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

    NOES.

    Caldwell, James

    Lewis, John Herbert

    Souttar, Robinson

    Cameron, Robert (Durham)

    Macaleese, Daniel

    Sullivan, Donal (Westmeath)

    Channing, Francis Allston

    M'Leod, John

    Wallace, Robert

    Curran, Thomas B. (Donegal

    Maddison, Fred.

    Whittaker, Thomas Palmer

    Dilke, Rt. Hon. Sir Charles

    Morgan, W. Pritchard (Methyr)

    Williams, J. Carvell (Notts).

    Donelan, Captain A.

    Moss, Samuel

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

    Foster, Sir Walter (Derby Co.)

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

    Yoxall, James Henry

    Gourley, Sir Edward Temperley

    Pickersgill, Edward Hare

    Griffith, Ellis J.

    Pirie, Duncan V.

    TELLERS FOR THE NOES—Mr. Hedderwick and Mr. Trevelyan.

    Jones, Williaim (Carnarvonsh.)

    Randell, David

    Lawson, Sir Wilfrid (Cum'land)

    Roberts, John Bryn (Eifion)

    Adjournmen—Motion made, and Question, "That this House, at its rising, do adjourn till Monday next."—(Mr. Balfour)—put and agreed to.

    It being after Ten of the clock, Mr. Speaker, in pursuance of the Order of the House of the 23rd February last, proceeded to put the Question forthwith, "That this House doth agree with the Committee in the said Resolution," that being the only Question necessary to complete the proceedings on the Resolutions reported from the Committee of Supply.
    "That towards making good the Supply granted to Her Majesty for the service of the 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."
    Resolution agreed to:—Bill ordered to be brought in by Mr. James William Lowther, Mr. Chancellor of the Exchequer, and Mr. Hanbury.

    CONSOLIDATED FUND (APPROPRIATION) BILL.
    "To apply a sum out of the Consolidated Fund to the service of the year ending on the thirty-first day of March, one thousand nine hundred, and to appropriate the Supplies granted in this session of Parliament," presented accordingly, and read the first time; to be road a second time upon Monday next.
    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 at live minutes after Ten of the clock, till Monday next.

EARL OF LANDAFF.
Petition of Arnold Harris Mathew Earl of Landaff claiminga right to vote at the elections of Representative Peers for Ireland; read, and referred to the Lord Chancellor to consider and report thereupon to the House.
PRIVATE BILL BUSINESS.
  CROMER PROTECTION BILL [H.L.]

    OLDHAM CORPORATION BILL [H.L.]
    NORTH-EASTERN AND HULL AND BARNSLEY RAILWAYS (JOINT DOCK) BILL [H.L.].
    FYLDE WATER BOARD BILL [H.L.].
    SALFORD CORPORATION BILL [H L.].
    WAKEFIELD CORPORATION BILL [H.L.].
    Commons Amendments considered, and agreed to.

    STOCKPORT DISTRICT WATER BILL.
    The CHAIRMAN of COMMITTEESinformed the House, That the promoters do not intend to proceed further with the Bill: Ordered, that the Bill be not further proceeded with.
    BRADFORD TRAMWAYS AND IMPROVEMENT BILL.
    Read 3a, with the Amendments, and passed, and returned to the Commons.
BELFAST CORPORATION BILL.
  CITY AND BRIXTON RAILWAY BILL.

    GATESHEAD AND DISTRICT TRAMWAYS BILL.
    LONDON, WALTHAMSTOW, AND EPPING FOREST RAILWAY (No. 2) BILL.
    WEST METROPOLITAN RAILWAY BILL.
    Returned from the Commons with the Amendments agreed to.

    BEXHILL AND ROTHERFIELD RAILWAY BILL.
    Returned from the Commons with the Amendment agreed to.
    EDUCATION DEPARTMENT PROVISIONAL ORDER CONFIRMATION (LONDON) BILL [H.L.]
    Returned from the Commons agreed to, with Amendments.
BIRMINGHAM, NORTH WARWICKSHIRE, AND STRATFORD-UPON-AVON RAILWAY BILL [H.L.]
  LONDON AND SOUTH-WESTERN RAILWAY BILL [H.L.]

    MANCHESTER CORPORATION TRAMWAYS BILL [H.L.]
    PAISLEY AND BARRHEAD DISTRICT RAILWAY BILL [H.L.].
    PORTSMOUTH CORPORATION BILL [H.L.].
    ROCHDALE CANAL BILL [H.L.].
    SOUTHPORT AND LYTHAM TRAMROAD BILL [H.L.].
    WOLVERHAMPTON CORPORATION BILL [H.L.].
    WORKINGTON CORPORATION WATER BILL [H.L.].
    Returned from the Commons agreed to, with Amendments. The said Amendments considered, and agreed to.

  RETURNS, REPORTS, &c.

    EDUCATION DEPARTMENT.
    I.(1) Schools in receipt of Parliamentary grants;

    (2). Grants paid to school boards under Section 97, Elementary Education Act 1870;

    (3). School board accounts and list loans (1898–99).

    II. Report of the Committee of Council on Education (England and Wales), with Appendix (1898–99).
    III. Minute of the Committee of Council on Education, dated 4th August, 1899, modifying Articles 15 and 15* of the Evening Continuation Schools Code, 1899.

    EGYPT, No. 6 (1899).
    Papers relating to the contract for the Atbara Bridge.
    FACTORY AND WORKSHOP (PREVENTION OF ACCIDENTS FROM MACHINERY IN THE MANUFACTURE OF COTTON).
    Report to the Secretary of State for the Home Department, by W. A. Blaumont, Esquire, and H. S. Richmond, Esquire, two of Her Majesty's Superintending Inspectors of Factories, on the prevention of accidents from machinery in the manufacture of cotton.
    RAILWAYS.
    General report to the Board of Trade on the capital, traffic, and expenditure of the railway companies of the United Kingdom, for the year 1898.

    STATISTICS.
    I. Statistical Abstract for the United Kingdom in each of the last fifteen years, from 1884 to 1898. Forty-sixth Number.
    II. Statistical Abstract for the Colonial and other Possessions of the United Kingdom in each of the last fifteen years, from 1884 to 1898. Thirty-sixth Number.
    Presented [by Command], and ordered to lie on the Table.

    SUPERANNUATION.
    Treasury Minute, dated 29th July, 1899, granting a retired allowance to Mr. G. F. Long, formerly a second division clerk in the Office of Public Works, Dublin, under Section 2 of the Superannuation Act, 1887.
    Report by the Board of Trade of their proceedings and business under the Weights and Measures Acts.
    RAILWAY SERVANTS (HOURS OF LABOUR).
    Report of the Board of Trade respecting the proceedings of the Board of Trade under the Railway Regulation Act, 1893, during the year ended 27th July, 1899.
    BANKRUPTCY.
    Sixteenth general annual report by the Board of Trade.

    COMPANIES (WINDING-UP).
    Eighth general annual report by the Board of Trade, under Section 29 of the Companies (Winding-up) Act, 1890.
    Laid before the House [pursuant to Act], and ordered to lie on the Table.

  PETITION.
    MUNICIPAL CORPORATIONS (BOROUGH FUNDS) ACT, 1872.
    Petition for the Amendment of; of the Urban District Council of Petersfield; read, and ordered to lie on the Table.
    HOUSE OF LORDS OFFICES.
    Second Report from the Select Committee, made; to be printed; and to be considered on Monday next. (No. 212.)
    IMPROVEMENT OF LAND BILL.
    Returned from the Commons with the Amendments agreed to.
COMPANIES BILL [H.L.]
  COPYRIGHT BILL [H.L.]
    COPYRIGHT (ARTISTIC) BILL [H.L.]
    Message from the Commons for copies of Reports, &c., of the Select Committees: Ordered to be communicated accordingly.
COTTAGE HOMES BILL.
  METROPOLITAN GAS COMPANIES.
    AGED DESERVING POOR.
    Messages to the Commons for Reports, &c., of Select Committees.
    LINCOLNSHIRE CORONERS BILL [H.L.]
    Commons Amendments to be considered on Monday next.

    SALMON FISHERIES (SCOTLAND).
    THE SECRETARY FOR SCOTLAND (Lord BALFOUR of BURLEIGH): My Lords, I rise to call attention to the Report of the Royal Commission of 1895 on the Tweed Fisheries Acts; and to present a Bill to repeal the Tweed Fisheries Acts, and to provide for the application of the Salmon Fisheries (Scotland) Acts to the district of the River Tweed. I shall not detain the House very long in introducing this Bill,

    1425
    but I desire to say a few words of explanation in laying the Bill upon the Table of your Lordships' House, and in asking your Lordships to give it a First Reading. The object of now submitting the Bill is that its provisions may be considered during the months that are to come by those on the Tweed who will be affected by it, and who will be, in all probability, interested in what is proposed to be done. The Bill is founded entirely upon the leading recommendations of the long and exhaustive inquiry which was conducted by a Commission, under the Chairmanship of Mr. Stafford Howard, two or three years ago. The leading recommendation of the Commission, in which they were all unanimous, was that the special Acts which regulate salmon fisheries on the Tweed should be abolished, and that the Tweed should come under the general law which regulates salmon fisheries in Scotland. The Tweed is in a very peculiar position at the present time. The whole length of the river is a hundred miles, of which eighty are in Scotland. About seventeen form the boundary between England and Scotland, and the four miles above the mouth are wholly in England. The law which governs the fisheries in the Tweed are in a state of great confusion. There are two leading special TweedActs—the Act of 1857 and the Act of 1859; but, in addition, there are some Acts which apply to salmon fisheries throughout the whole of the United Kingdom, and these are applicable to the Tweed. There are some Acts which apply only to Scotland, and some which apply only to England. At present, in the case of some of these Acts, the English Acts apply to the English part of the Tweed, and the Scotch Acts in whole, or in part, to the Scottish part of the Tweed. But the confusion does not even stop there, because some of the Acts apply in part to the Tweed; some clauses and sections apply to the Tweed, and some do not. In one case, at least, a Scottish Act applies to the Tweed, but the amending Act of this Scottish Act does not. I think your Lordships will see that the present state of the law is one of great difficulty and confusion, and it has not been successful, because there have been complaints from time to time during the last thirty years that the take of salmon in the Tweed has been diminishing. There was an inquiry by Mr. Walpole and a
    1426
    colleague in 1874, and they came to that conclusion. Mr. Stafford Howard's Commission came to the same conclusion. They said that the annual take of salmon varies very much, but the figures of recent years show that, while the good years seem to be up to their former average, the bad years have fallen below their average, and the witnesses were practically unanimous in declaring, as regards the upper waters of the river, that the fish had greatly decreased. I am afraid that matters are worse at the present time than they were three or four years ago. The reasons which were assigned, first by Mr. Walpole and his colleague, and then by Mr. Howard's Commission, were three: First, that there is not such good access to the upper waters, on account of the rapidity with which the drainage of land causes the floods to run off; secondly, that there is greater pollution than there used to be; and, thirdly, that the decrease is due, to some extent, to the prevalence of poaching, and the fact that the sympathies of the population are unfortunately with the poachers. I am afraid that the first of these causes is not likely to be remedied. The second, I would hope, will receive the attention of Parliament. I believe, speaking for myself personally, there is nothing more urgently required than a more efficient means of preventing the pollution of rivers, whether by sewage or by manufacturing refuse, but it is obviously not within the scope of this Bill to deal with that matter. With regard to the other cause, the prevalence of poaching, there is a good deal to be said, and it is clearly proved by the evidence before this Commission that there is a great deal of illegal fishing, both at the mouth of the river and in the upper waters. The Commission say that the lawlessness in fishing in the close season appears to have been getting worse, being openly carried on by day as well as night. A good number of cases of assault on bailiffs had occurred, and the throwing of stones has been mentioned. The police, though sufficient for ordinary purposes, because the people were in sympathy with the ordinary law, were not sufficient to protect the bailiffs, as the people were entirely out of sympathy with the special Tweed Acts. The opinion was expressed that, if the body of the people could be turned into sympathy with the law, the bailiffs would have no trouble, or,

    1427
    at any rate, less trouble, and these attacks would be put down. There is much more to be said to the same effect, but the facts are of such common notoriety (and the state of matters has been going rapidly from bad to worse), that I do not dwell upon them at the present time, because I believe they are perfectly within the knowledge of all the noble Lords who are interested in salmon fisheries in this district, and probably many more besides. The end of it is, that the main recommendation of this Commission was to the effect that the special Tweed Acts should be abolished, and that the general law should be applied to the Tweed. In support of that opinion the Commissioners expressed their belief that if this was to be carried out the objection to some of the clauses, at any rate, of the Acts which have been referred to, would be met by their repeal. Section 45 of the Act of 1857, which forbids the use of nets in certain parts of the sea during the close season; Section 50, which forbids the possession of nets within five miles of the river by unauthorised persons, and especially Section 69, have given rise to a great deal of bad feeling, and I believe myself there is evidence for saying, a certain amount of injustice. The latter is known as the intent clause. It allows an attempt to take salmon illegally to be inferred under certain circumstances—not to be proved, but to be inferred. There is also that part of Section 82, which provides that persons accused before a court, if they do not appear, may be held as having confessed to being guilty, and be fined in their absence without proof being laid. These are only instances of some of the clauses of the Tweed Acts, which had led to the state of feeling which the Commission described. It is also the case that the repeal of the special Acts and the substitution of the general law will carry with it the abolition of the body called the Tweed Commission, and it will set up in its place a district board, subject in all respects to the general law. On account of the length of the river and the magnitude of the interests involved, we propose, by the Bill, that that board shall be rather more numerous in numbers than it would be under the general law. Apart from all these detailed changes, the broad advantage which I believe will be secured by the Bill will be that the feeling of fishermen, who believe that they are at
    1428
    present more unfairly dealt with than fishermen in other districts, will be removed by their being placed under the general law. I propose to allude to one other matter, and that is Section 8 of the Bill. Section 8 keeps the present annual close time of the Tweed. The present close time of the Tweed is, I understand, stereotyped by Act of Parliament, and cannot be altered. If the river is placed under the general law there would be power, under the procedure therein provided, upon the petition of persons interested, to have the particular dates altered, always provided that the maximum number of 168 days was retained. In addition to that, there would be power to alter the weekly close time, which at present is only thirty-six hours, or, at least, twelve hours shorter than what is usual under more recent Acts. There is one special provision also to which I should allude. At the present time, on the Tweed, it is not lawful to possess a "gaff" at any time of the year. Under the general law, as your Lordships know, that is not the case. We propose to maintain that prohibition. I was very much tempted to attempt to alter it, so far as the general law is concerned, and prevent the gaffing of kelts, which by law have to be returned into the river. It seems to me not only a wasteful and foolish, but a cruel practice, and I personally would be very glad to prohibit it if possible; but I do not wish to raise more objections to this particular Bill than are absolutely necessary. Therefore I avoid in it any attempt to amend the general law. I am far from thinking that this Bill will cure all the evils under which the river Tweed is suffering. I believe it will make a step if it is carried—a long step—towards a more satisfactory state of matters, and that it will make it more easy to introduce much-needed reforms. While I am not hopeful that the Bill will be accepted with unanimity, I have a great hope that a careful study of its provisions, and the full Memorandum which is attached to it, will clear away a great deal of opposition, and that in another session of Parliament we may hope to see it passed into law. I beg to move that the Bill be read a first time.
    THE MARQUESS OF LOTHIAN: I congratulate my noble friend on having.

    1429
    introduced this Bill. I have not had the pleasure of seeing the Bill, and I can only gather what will be the effect of it from the observations of my noble friend. I am more glad to see the Bill brought in now, because, when I was holding the office in 1888 of Secretary for Scotland, I introduced a Bill for the same object. Owing, however, to opposition in the House of Commons, that Bill failed to receive the sanction of Parliament, and did not become law. I have always felt very strongly that the provisions of the Tweed Acts have been anomalous. A difficulty, however, arose in the matter, which probably my noble friend has been able to get over. Some of the rivers which fall into the Tweed are on the English side, and therefore, if they were included under the general law, there might be a conflict of jurisdiction, as the English side might wish to be under the English general law. I have no doubt my noble friend has succeeded in getting over that difficulty, and I feel certain the Bill which he has introduced will be of great advantage to the fisheries on the Tweed. Before saying whether I altogether approve of the abolition of the Tweed Commissioners, and the placing of the powers of that body in the hands of a district board, I should like to see the details of the Bill. Under the Bill many of the restrictions now imposed, and many of the disadvantages which are experienced in the higher reaches of the Tweed, will be done away with, and the fishermen there will be put on a more equal footing with those in the lower reaches. When the Bill is before us, I shall give it my earnest consideration.
    LORD BALFOUR OF BURLEIGH: With regard to the point raised by the noble Marquess, I may say that it is the intention in this Bill that the Tweed and all its tributaries, whether in England or in Scotland, should be under the Scottish law.
    On Question, agreed to.
    Bill to repeal the Tweed Fisheries Acts, and to provide for the application of the Salmon Fisheries (Scotland) Acts
    1430
    to the district of the River Tweed—Was presented by the Lord Balfour; read la; and to be printed. (No. 213.)

    THE NEW WAR OFFICE—MODELS OF PUBLIC BUILDINGS.
    THE EARL OF WEMYSS: My Lords, I rise to move:
    "That, in the opinion of this House, it is desirable that models of all public buildings of importance that are about to be erected at the public cost should be made and publicly exhibited, and that this is more especially to be desired at the present time."
    I would ask the indulgence of your Lordships while I bring this resolution under, I hope, your favourable consideration. Those of your Lordships who may have chanced to go to the Victoria Gallery will have seen the plans that are exhibited there, and will have noticed, perhaps, some writing of mine attached thereto, to the effect that no wise man in private life builds without the aid of models; and that what is so desirable and sensible a practice in private buildings applies with greater force to public buildings erected by a public department at the public cost. A memorial has been presented to the Government, very numerously and very influentially signed, asking practically that what this Resolution proposes should be done by the Government, and that models of all intended public buildings of importance should be shown, more especially at the present time. This memorial was sent by me to the noble Marquess at the head of the Government, and the answer I got from him was that he would not interfere, an answer I received almost within twenty-four hours of the time the noble Marquess received that memorial. The system I propose is an almost universal custom abroad. Not only are models shown, but it is usual to put up sections of the building in the rough, and there is an architectural term that applies to that process. They talk in architecture of things being "offered up." This custom is adopted in France. In Italy they go to the extent of having a plébiscite on public intended improvements and art decorations. Thus, recently, when the faÇade of the Duomo at Florence was to be finished and decorated, casts of what was proposed were "offered up," and the opinion of the general public thereon was invited, with the happiest results. But what do the Office of Works and

    1431
    Her Majesty's Government do here? Drawings only are shown—and where? In the tea room of the House of Commons, to which, I believe, no one can gain admission unless personally conducted by a Member of that House. The plans were also shown for three days in the Victoria Gallery: such is the Government's view of an architectural art plébiscite. But in asking Her Majesty's Government to adopt the system of models I am not asking them simply to follow a private or foreign practice, for the system was successfully adopted in our own country when Sir Henry Layard was First Commissioner of Works. It was suggested to him that a model should be made of this part of Greater Westminster, showing all the existing public and other buildings, which were all made removable. The model was twice as large as the Table of your Lordships' House, costing£1,500, and the last occasion on which it was used was in that of the proposed Admiralty offices. At that time there was a design for a new Admiralty. The proposed building was shown in model, with a tower next the Horse Guards 300 feet high, and it so shocked the public who saw it that the plan was knocked on the head. How the present Admiralty Offices grew up I cannot say, with its towers and buildings springing up every day like mushrooms. Nobody has seen this building in model, and I contend that if these new Admiralty buildings had been thus shown in model like the designs for the previous one, they would have been equally condemned, and you would have had the site differently treated. The memorial which I had the honour of sending to Lord Salisbury pointed out that, in the opinion of the memorialists, the building of a new War Office on the historic site of the intended Whitehall Palace offered a unique and last opportunity of realising, at least in part, Inigo Jones's grand design for the said palace—of which the banqueting hall alone was built. The memorialists continue:
    "We pray Her Majesty's Government to have models made and publicly exhibited of the proposed War Office, and of a suggested adaptation of Inigo Jones's design—now on view in the Victoria Gallery—which, it is believed, might, without difficulty, be made to meet all War Office requirements, while it would present a more imposing symmetric and extended front—immediately facing the Horse Guards—than the design that has been
    1432
    officially adopted. In respectfully making this request we are only asking in the public interest, and for the sake of those who come after us, that all possible care and precautions should be taken to ensure the erection of a War Office building in all ways worthy of the site; and that by the public exhibition of models, as proposed, successful precedents established in the case of designs for public buildings by Her Majesty's Office of Works, should now be followed."
    As regards the design which has been officially adopted I do not like to speak strongly against it. I recommended Mr. Young, the architect to the Board of Works. He is a most able man, but I must say that in my opinion the plan which he has shown is not a satisfactory one, and the way in which he proposes to connect the main building with the banqueting hall is simply senseless—viz., by a statue in the centre of the roadway and meaningless obstructive archways over the foot-pavements. Now many objections have been made, and will be raised, against the suggested adaptation of part of Inigo Jones's design for Whitehall Palace to the proposed War Office. Let me anticipate them. The first objection is that Inigo Jones's design was for a palace and is not suited for a Government office. My answer is that Somerset House is a palace—the finest, most palatial building in London—and yet it is devoted to Government offices. Further, it is a libel on architects to say that given the suggested Inigo Jones frontage and the War Office site they could not adapt these to all needful requirements. Let it at least be tried. This has not yet been done. The second objection is that the banqueting hall would be overshadowed by the centre of the proposed Inigo Jones elevation. It will not be overshadowed more than it was in the original design of which they both formed part. The third objection is that the arches across the road that leads to the Whitehall Mansions would be dark tunnels. My answer is that they will be considerably wider, higher, and lighter in proportion than the present Horse Guards Arch, through which Her Majesty and the Jubilee procession managed to pass two years ago. The fourth objection is that rooms over archways are objectionable, and that Inigo Jones would not have dreamed of such a thing. My answer is that at Stanway, in Gloucestershire, there is a "gatehouse" by Inigo Jones. Further, his Whitehall

    1433
    Palace consists of a series courts with archways leading to them, over which rooms are built; and how as to Somerset House, Buckingham Palace, St. James's Palace, the Palace of Westminster, the Foreign and India Offices, Windsor Castle, the Louvre, etc., including every house in Paris or elsewhere with a porte cochère? All these are liable to the same objection. But such an objection is childish, and I pass on to objection No. 5, which is that the proposed adaptation is "tampering" with Inigo Jones's work and "defaming" his memory. It is hard to see how Inigo Jones's work will be tampered with or his memory defamed by an endeavour—to use the words of the memorial—to "avail ourselves of this unique and last opportunity of realising, at least in part, Inigo Jones's grand design for Whitehall Palace, of which the banqueting hall alone was built; the proposed faÇade, moreover, being simply taken from Inigo Jones's design. As to the banqueting hall, with its splendid ceiling painted by Rubens, it is now used as a United Service Museum, containing old uniforms and arms. On the other hand it is proposed in the suggested adaptation scheme to utilise it as a fitting hall for War Office and Government official receptions, allotting a portion of the War Office site facing Whitehall Mansions to the Royal United Service Institution, which would be thus better accommodated than it now is. It may be said that the foundations for the new War Office are now laid. I was told that they were, but I recently walked over the site and I found that no foundations had yet been laid. I may also be told that the contract has been entered into. I do not care if it has. Any man with a knowledge of building knows that a contract consists of certain scheduled work at certain prices. If another plan is adopted you have only to hand the contract to the same man at the same scheduled rate of prices, and, if there are any differences, you can settle the matter by arbitration. I repudiate the idea that if the contract is taken it puts a stop to any other plans being adopted than the one the Government propose. If a model such as I have suggested had been prepared in connection with the new Government buildings in Whitehall the defects of the architect's design in relation to the surrounding buildings would at once have been apparent. Now all matters affecting
    1434
    public buildings are, we know, entirely in the hands of the Board of Works. I have had a long experience of Parliamentary life, beginning in the year 1841, and I have taken a great interest in these questions; been a member of Commissions thereon, and followed the action of the Office of Works with regard to public buildings and monuments, and I have no hesitation in saying that its career has been marked by many blunders. How can it be otherwise? How is the First Commissioner of Works appointed? Is he appointed because of any special aptitude with regard to buildings? Not at all. Sir Henry Layard was the only First Commissioner in my time who had any special aptitude in this line. The office is simply treated as a halfway house between an Under Secretaryship and a seat in the Cabinet. The present holder of the office happens to be in the Cabinet. But I suppose that is because he has been a Whip, for in these days, when politics rest not on principles but on bribes, it is necessary to have in the Cabinet a gentleman who can tell the best way to bait the political hook, whether with an old pensioner or a young shopgirl. Let me, then, now give some instances of the deplorable doings of the Board of Works in my time and generation. The Wellington statue on the Hyde Park Arch we owed to the Office of Works. Then, that same Office of Works proposed to make a carriage way—where there is now a footway—across the water of St. James' Park. That, happily, we stopped, They intended to maintain permanently the Exhibition building of 1862 along Cromwell Road. This they were forced by a vote of the House of Commons to pull down. A Commission decided, as regards the Kensington Museum, in favour of Captain Fowkes', R.E., design; this being selected in a competition to which many distinguished architects had sent drawings. Has this premeated design been followed? By no means. It was Classic in style. Mr. W. Cowper, then First Commissioner, approved it, but his successor, Lord John Manners, the present Duke of Rutland, was Gothic in his architectural tastes, threw it over, and to him we owe the present Natural History Museum in Cromwell Road. What the new Kensington Museum will be we only know through what appeared in the public prints on the day of the laying of its

    1435
    foundation stone by Her Majesty. Yet this new building will cost, it is said,£800,000!Again, when Sir B. Hall was head of the Office of Works he put down£1,000 in the Estimates for a red polished granite pedestal for Charles I. statue at Charing Cross; the present original pedestal being the work of G. Gibbons! Well, this was resisted, and the Gibbons' pedestal was grouted and saved. To Mr. Shaw-Lefevre we owe much when he was First Commissioner. It was he moved the Wellington Arch and placed it on the slope of Constitution Hill—thus giving it a long and short leg—a thing quite unique in arches. He was responsible for the flight of stairs and the griffons in Westminster Hall, that entirely alter the character of that grand old pile. When I first saw the stairs and griffons it was at the time of the Fenian excitement, and I said to the policeman on duty, "I do not think the Fenians could have done worse than this," and the policeman, who was evidently a man of taste, replied, "I do not think they could, my Lord." To Mr. Lefevre we owe also the Portrait Gallery at the back of the National Gallery—with which it is in immediate connection—and of which it may be said architecturally to form part, and yet it is in style wholly different. Lastly, it was Mr. Shaw-Lefevre who destroyed Sir C. Barry's St. Stephen's entrance to the Palace of Westminster by building up against one side of it a buttress of Westminster Hall. Again, was there ever a more dreadful building seen in this world than the United Service Institution building adjoining the banqueting hall? The Board of Works is responsible for that; but if the faÇade of Inigo Jones were taken, this and the banqueting hall would be included, and you would have a very beautiful building. Of the new Admiralty I have already spoken, and will say no more; save that with its many minarets it reminds one of the Water Court at Earl's Court, where Savage Africa is now located. But perhaps the most audacious, and I might say atrocious, thing done by the Office of Works was when Mr. Ayrton was First Commissioner. Do you know what he did to Kensington Gardens? He absolutely destroyed them, altering the whole symmetric plan. He actually stopped and planted up the Broad Walk half way, diverting it to the Albert Memorial, and to do this, cut
    1436
    down forty of the old Kensington elms. That was done without the knowledge of the public, and at the ipse dixit of the gentleman who for the time held the office of Chief Commissioner, and who had boasted, when he took office, that he was neither a mason nor a market gardener. I have thought it desirable to point to these things, for the reason that our experience of the Board of Works is not such as to justify giving that Department a blank sheet of paper whereon to write what they like—and not allowing those who pay for these things any voice in the matter. I have received a letter from the Duke of Abercorn, in which he says:—
    "I regret that, being in Ireland, I cannot support your motion for to-morrow (Friday). Had I been present, I should certainly have voted for it. He who pays should have some voice, or, at any rate, some eye in viewing, what he has to pay for. At the present time all these new public buildings are left entirely in the hands of some official, or whoever may for the moment be head of a public Department."
    I think, my Lords, I have said enough to justify my motion. I merely add that the memorial I had the honour of presenting to Lord Salisbury was one of the most weighty ever presented. It included among the 139 signatories, one archbishop, several bishops, six dukes, two field marshal—Lord Roberts and Lord Wolseley—and the names of peers on either side, including the Marquis of Ripon, the Earl of Kimberley, and Lord Tweedmouth, plus Lord Lorne. A memorial such as this deserves, I think, consideration, especially when all that the memorialists ask is that, for the sake of those who come after us, all possible care and precaution should be taken to ensure the erection of War Office buildings in all ways worthy of the site. On the strength of this memorial I speak and act.
    Moved, to resolve that, in the opinion of this House, it is desirable that models of all public buildings of importance that are about to be erected at the public cost should be made and publicly exhibited; and that is more especially to be desired at the present time.—(The Lord Wemyss, E. Wemyss)
    THE SECRETARY OF STATE FOR WAR (The Marquess of LANSDOWNE): My Lords, it requires some courage to gainsay the noble Earl, who comes here

    1437
    to-night, not only with all his usual ardour and conviction, but fortified by the moral, if not material, support of the noble Lords, a list of whose styles and titles he has read to the House. I can assure him that we are very far indeed from desiring to treat the memorial with any disrespect. On the contrary, I like to reflect that the object of the memorialists and our object are the same. We all of us desire that upon a site of this importance, and for a purpose of such importance, no building should be erected either unworthy of the site or inharmonious with its surroundings. Although I desire to treat the memorial with all possible respect, I must be allowed to scrutinise it a little closely. The noble Earl asks us for models. He proposes that a model should be exhibited whenever a public building is about to be erected, in order to protect the public against the erection of an unworthy or inartistic structure, and, above all, in order that there may be an appeal from the Government of the day to some other tribunal, the precise character of which he certainly failed to explain to the House.
    THE EARL OF WEMYSS: Public opinion, to which all Governments have to submit.
    THE MARQUESS OF LANSDOWNE:The noble Earl spoke of an old model made in the time of Sir Henry Layard. I have made inquires about that model, and find that it was a large model on a very small scale, and was constructed of very perishable materials. I believe a few fragments have been discovered, but it was constructed thirty or forty years ago, and it is not surprising that it should have paid the debt of nature. I fancy our ironclads do not last much longer, and it is scarcely surprising that this fragile structure of cardboard—
    THE EARL OF WEMYSS: I beg the noble Marquess's pardon. The model was made of wood.
    THE MARQUESS OF LANSDOWNE: At any rate, it was extremely fragile, and is, I am afraid, no longer available. I should like to ask your Lordships whether it is quite so clear, as the noble Earl would have us believe, that there is much
    1438
    instruction to be gained from the exhibition of the models of proposed buildings? A model on a table never by any chance presents the appearance of the actual building—you see the model as you might see the building from the top of the Duke of York's Column, a point of view from which the noble Earl on the cross benches is very fond of regarding men and things in general. We humbler individuals contemplate these structures from the pavement as we walk on our way to Westminster. Again, a model would enable you to regulate the size and proportion of buildings erected on Government ground, but what power does it give you of regulating buildings erected immediately alongside on ground which is not the property of the Government? Take the case of the proposed new War Office buildings. You might adjust the height of those buildings to the height of the surrounding Government buildings, but the huge building immediately behind it, Whitehall Court, might put out the whole scale of proportion. As regards the War Office buildings, it is impossible to comply with the request for a model, but in regard to buildings to be erected hereafter, the Chief Commissioner of Works will consider the suggestion; the right hon. Gentleman tells me that he regards the subject with a perfectly open mind. The greater part of the speech of the noble Earl was an indictment of the manner in which plans for new public buildings are designed and prepared, and those of your Lordships who signed the memorial may not be fully aware of the steps taken by Her Majesty's Government when the matter was dealt with. In the first place, we decided that we would not adopt the procedure of inviting competitive designs. It was this system of competition which led to the construction of several of those buildings of which the noble Earl spoke in terms of strong but, I must say, not wholly unmerited condemnation. The result of recourse to competitive designs is, I believe, generally admitted to be unsatisfactory, and there is also this to be remembered, that many of our best architects refuse altogether to take part in such competitions. Therefore, we put that procedure aside, and this is what we did. We invited the Institute of British Architects, which, after all, is a body whose professional reputation in regard to architectural matters is higher than that of any other

    1439
    body in the country, to recommend the names of a certain number of architects who, in their opinion, were well qualified to undertake a building of this sort. A list of names was sent in to Her Majesty's Government, and a Committee of the Cabinet considered those names, and also designs of work already carried out by the gentlemen in question. We selected from the list two gentlemen, Mr. Young and Mr. Brydon, both architects with a very considerable reputation. With regard to Mr. Young, the Committee were a good deal attracted towards him by the excellence of the work which he has carried out for the noble Earl himself at his seat in Scotland. These two gentlemen sent in designs for the new Public Offices, and these were examined by a Committee presided over by the President of the Institute of British Architects, who is Professor of Architecture to the Royal Academy. Then the designs were published in the month of March. The noble Earl seems to think that the publication consisted simply of hanging them up in the tea-room of the House of Commons, but they were published in all the architectural newspapers, and in various illustrated papers. They were commented upon in every direction, and I say, without hesitation, that on the whole the verdict of public opinion upon them was exceedingly favourable. That was in the month of March, and now, in August, the noble Earl comes down to this House and asks us to undo everything we have done. He spoke of the extent to which we had gone in the matter of contracts. I will tell the House exactly how we stand in that matter. The plans and specifications have all been prepared, and they are ready for the quantity surveyor. It is true that we have not laid any foundations, but the ground has been broken in order to test it for that purpose, and the work will proceed very shortly. To ask us now to hold our hands and begin again seems to be an altogether unreasonable proposal. The site alone, lying idle, costs the country£20,000 a year, and to my mind it has lain idle quite long enough. I speak rather feelingly on this subject, because one of the offices to be accommodated is the office with which I am connected. The War Office at this moment is scattered about in no less than eleven different buildings, an intolerable state of things, which interferes to an extent which I do
    1440
    not suppose anybody realises with the efficient conduct of business, and we protest against any further delay in supplying us with a suitable home. How is the noble Earl going to take a plébiscite on this matter of plans? He says by appealing to public opinion. Supposing that, as a result of the noble Earl'splébiscite, our plan had been condemned and another one substituted, what would there be to prevent some other self-constituted arbiter saying he must have another plébiscite on a different set of plans? To speak plainly, this is a case of spretœ injuria formœ. What is in the noble Earl's mind is a. preference for his own plan—Inigo Jones's plan, if you like—but the plan which he has fathered and put before the public as the rival to our plan. I admit, at the outset that in the noble Earl's plan there is a very beautiful faÇade, but the building is entirely unsuited for public offices.
    THE EARL OF WEMYSS: My point, is that it can be made so.
    THE MARQUESS OF LANSDOWNE: I will come to that in a moment. I do not think the noble Earl's building would stand the ordeal by model. It would completely dwarf and overshadow the Horse Guards; it would cut the site to waste in the most reckless manner; it would cost more money, and it would produce only 17,000 ft. of floor space, instead of 29,000 ft. as in the Government plan.
    THE EARL OF WEMYSS: I have a. right to ask how those figures are calculated.
    THE MARQUESS OF LANSDOWNE: They are the figures that were given to me, and I believe them to be the result of a trustworthy examination.
    THE EARL OF WEMYSS: They are absolutely worthless.
    THE MARQUESS OF LANSDOWNE: The noble Earl spoke of the bridge by which, in his plan, the banqueting hall is to be connected with the central building. Where you are obliged to have a bridge it may be harmless enough, but I cannot conceive anybody in their senses deliberately putting up a bridge of this kind as part of a public office. It may be a useful way of passing from one block of a hospital for infectious diseases to another block, but it cer-

    1441
    tainly is not a convenient way of passing from one part of a public office to another part of the same office. The noble Earl spoke airily of the expropriation of the United Service Institution. But the Institution would have to be reckoned with, and would, I presume, have to be provided with a home elsewhere, as would also the Charity Commissioners, who would be swept away by the destroying hand of the noble Earl. My main objection to the noble Earl's plan is the objection which he anticipated—namely, that his plan is the plan of a palace, and not of a public office. The noble Earl says in his memorial that it is believed that his plan could easily be adapted to the wants of the War Office. We believe nothing of the sort. We are convinced to the contrary. I submit that rooms thirty feet high are not the kind of rooms into which you want to put the clerks in a public office, and there is only one way in which the adaptation the noble Earl suggests could be carried out, and that is by dividing these lofty rooms horizontally by means of a floor, with the result that you would give one half of one of these big windows to the top floor and the other half to the lower floor. What would be the result? The men on the lower floor would get the bottom half of the window, and could not possibly see out of it; while the men in the room above would have the top half of the window, which would be close to the ground, with the result that it would throw no light into the room. In one or two of the existing offices an arrangement of that kind has been attempted, but it has proved most inconvenient and inconsistent with the proper discharge of the work of the offices. The fact is, the noble Earl begins at the wrong end. Instead of saying, "I want a public office containing such and such accommodation; give me a beautiful building to put it into," he says, "Here is a beautiful building, shove your public office into it; it has got to get in there somehow." The noble Earl is thinking entirely of the external appearance of these buildings; I am thinking not only of the outside, but of the occupants. When I say that, I trust your Lordships will not think that I am solicitous for future Secretaries of State or Under Secretaries of State. They are birds of passage who come and go, and who rarely stay for more than four or five years, and they generally
    1442
    take the best rooms. I am thinking of humbler people—the permanent officials—the War Office clerks, without whom the administration of the Army could not be carried on, who will inhabit these rooms. They are in for life, and I want them to have rooms of proper shape, properly ventilated, and with proper communication between one room and another. In that respect our plan gives us all that we could desire, and it is at that point that the plan of the noble Earl hopelessly breaks down, and no amount of adaptation will make it fulfil the requirements on which we insist. I know the noble Earl attaches great importance to symmetry in these matters, but it is too late to think of arranging all the approaches of Westminster on a symmetrical plan. The buildings are there; they are not ranged symmetrically in line, and I do not think the result of this trifling irregularity is otherwise than pleasing. I very much prefer an irregularity of that sort to a monotonous boulevard, symmetrical from end to end. At any rate, it is too late to think of arranging these buildings in symmetrical fashion, and we contend that our building, although it may not exactly front the Horse Guards, as the noble Earl would wish, will be a very useful and ornamental addition to the buildings which already surround Whitehall, and it is our fixed intention to go on with the construction of the building as rapidly as possible. I will not follow the noble Earl in the latter part of his speech, in which, after giving us a few ideas on the construction of public offices, he gave us hints on the subject of the construction of Cabinets. I am afraid that his notions upon the one subject are almost as unpractical as are his theories in regard to the others; at any rate, whenever a new Prime Minister is called upon to bring together a Government, I shall be very much surprised if it is found that he is able to do so upon the lines which the noble Earl has suggested for his guidance.
    LORD STANMORE: My Lords, I cannot refrain from expressing, though very shortly, the deep regret I feel that Her Majesty's Government should have met the motion of my noble friend in the manner they have done, for I fear it means that we must take it for granted that another grand opportunity is about to be lost, as so many grand opportunities

    1443
    have been lost before, of embellishing this metropolis by the erection of public buildings really worthy of the admiration of the country to which they belong. As it is, our buildings are too often a subject of derision to those who come to see them from afar, and Her Majesty's Government are mistaken if they think that the public are at all gratified by public buildings being erected at a cheap cost and in great haste. I fear, from the tone of the noble Marquess's speech, that it is quite impossible to get him to perceive even the spirit in which this matter is regarded by those who have a real love for art and architecture. The noble Marquess urges that the War Office wants immediate accommodation for its clerks, that there is no time to be lost in getting that accommodation, and that it must be provided at once. If that is so, why not build a temporary iron and glass shed? I am certain the public at large would rather that the War Office clerks should wait another year for the building than that one should be erected which should not be worthy of this great Empire. The noble Marquess says a palace will not do for a public office. I have known public offices in Paris, Vienna, Berlin, and in Amsterdam, which have very much the likeness of a palace, and are yet not unfit for use. You have an unequalled site, and a magnificent plan by a dead architect. It is quite natural that living architects should prefer a plan by one of themselves, but Her Majesty's Government, in my humble opinion, should have simply given instructions to adopt, as far as it could be adopted, the plan of Inigo Jones. How anyone, having the power to do that, and having that site in hand, should have thought of erecting anything upon it except the magnificent design planned by one of the greatest English architects for that very site I cannot conceive. I have not a word to say against Mr. Young's plans. These are, I believe, effective; but to compare Mr. Young with Inigo Jones is to compare the infinitely small with the infinitely great. I have only risen to express my surprise and deep regret at the apparent incapacity of Her Majesty's Government to see what is really the question at issue, and to express my strong belief that the country at large does desire to see buildings erected which shall be worthy of the Empire, and would certainly not demur
    1444
    to a larger expenditure being incurred for this purpose. I am sorry I cannot myself throw any light on the moot question, which the noble Marquess and my noble friend must fight out themselves, as to the temporary or permanent nature of the model. I have never seen it, but I have had the honour of being on intimate terms with Sir Henry Layard, and I know that in his opinion it was not a temporary model. He was of opinion that it was a model which might be preserved for a long time to come, and on which all buildings on that site should be exhibited. The noble Marquess says they are of no use at all, looked at from above. I would venture to suggest, with all submission, that this depends on the height of their pedestals.
    THE EARL OF WEMYSS: There were one or two points raised by the noble Marquess which require an answer. He objects to models, and he said you could only see models from a height, looking down on the chimneys. Is it not possible to conceive, without any great stretch of imagination on my noble friend's part, that there is a possibility of raising the model to the level of your eye? In that case his chimney-pot argument falls to the ground, and in his objections to models the noble Marquess is opposed to well known practice in this and other countries. It was the use of a model which settled the tower at the Admiralty. As regards the model in question, if it is destroyed its destruction is due to the way it has been taken care of. It was made of solid wood, and was perfectly sound ten years ago. The Board of Works have either lost it or broken it up, probably the latter, as they were afraid to show their work, having in view the good result which was attained by the exhibition of a model in regard to other places. With reference to the banqueting hall, there is no question of going from the lower ground of the War Office to the banqueting hall, because I expressly stated that the idea was that the banqueting hall should be reserved for the receptions of my noble friend. I repudiate and deny altogether the statement that you cannot turn Inigo Jones's palace into a public office. There are trade unions everywhere, even among architects, and they naturally stand by one another in this matter, and would not select the plan of a dead architect if they

    1445
    could help it. When I showed the President of the Institute of British Architects the plan for the adaptation of Inigo Jones's design, he could not deny that it was a beautiful building, but he remarked, "There would be nothing to show the architecture of the nineteenth century." What my reply was your Lordships may imagine. I blessed the architecture of the nineteenth century, and said I preferred Inigo Jones's. One thing is clear, viz., that my noble friend's views on architecture and his speech are taken from a recent article in the Builder. Now that was evidently not written by an architect, but by a hod-man, accustomed to the throwing of bricks and rubbish. Further, when the noble Marquess dies, which, for his family's sake, I hope will not be for many years to come, he will require no monument such as they put up to him for his good government of India, because he will leave the hospital for which he alone is responsible on the rock of Edinburgh Castle, and this building behind him. I venture to think that the action of the Government is nothing short of treason to posterity, a betrayal of a temporary trust, and an audacious act on the part of chance, temporary, self-sufficient authorities. These are my last words, but I shall certainly divide the House even if I vote alone.
    THE POSTMASTER-GENERAL(The DUKE of NORFOLK): My Lords, I venture to appeal to the noble Earl, having expressed his feelings with great vigour and strength, to consider whether he could not be content with the expression of opinion his motion has elicited. The thing having, unfortunately, gone so far, no good purpose will be served by a factious opposition. Personal experience has taught me that models of intended buildings are of great use, and I hope the Government will take into consideration whether, in future, when public buildings are to be erected, models cannot be provided.
    THE MARQUESS OF LOTHIAN: It has been said that it is too late now to raise the question, but I should like to say that two or three months ago I asked for a model of these new buildings.
    THE EARL OF WEMYSS: I asked for it more than six months ago.
    THE MARQUESS OF LOTHIAN: And that model was refused on behalf of Her Majesty's Government. I hope that the Government will take into consideration what has fallen from the noble Earl and the noble Duke, and that in future models will be exhibited of all proposed public buildings. I do not think it is at all fair that the taxpayers should be called upon to pay for buildings, which might be very bad, and which they have no opportunity of saying beforehand whether they like or not. I am glad this discussion has given the noble Marquess an opportunity of explaining how the Government plan was selected. I think on the whole the action of the Government was fairly satisfactory, but I hope that in future models will be exhibited. I hope that the banqueting hall will be put to another purpose than that to which it is at present devoted, and for which it is ill suited. The noble Marquess and a great many of your Lordships will recollect that before Mr. Stanhope left office the last thing he did was to give an entertainment in the banqueting hall, and the whole thing was done in a most splendid manner. Anyone who saw that hall, decorated as it was, must have left it with the firm conviction that it would be an immense national loss if it were used for any other purpose. It is, as I have said, unsuitable for the exhibition for which it is now used; the space is too great, and a much smaller room would be equally if not better adapted for the purpose. I would suggest that the noble Marquess should try and make some arrangement by which the hall should be used as a place in which public entertainments can be given by Her Majesty's Ministers.
    THE EARL OF WEMYSS: I wish to state that after the appeal which has been made to me, and which, I think, ought to have more effect with the Government than any Division, even if it went hostile to them, I do not intend to divide the House, but I hope the noble Marquess will take into consideration the words of his colleague.
    Motion (by leave of the House) withdrawn.

    COLONIAL LOANS BILL.
    Read 2a [according to Order]; Committees negatived: Then Standing Order

    1447
    no. XXXIX considered [according to Order], and dispensed with: Then Bill read 3a, and passed.

  INEBRIATES ACT (1898) AMENDMENT BILL.

    SECOND READING.
    Order of the day for the Second Reading read.
    LORD BELPER: My Lords, this small Bill applies to purely technical matters in the Inebriates Act of last year. The object of Clause 1 is to make the expenses of all prosecutions under Section 2 of the Inebriates Act, 1898, which provides for the detention of habitual drunkards, payable as in cases of felony. Under Section 6 of the Inebriates Act, 1898, the Secretary of State may make regulations with respect to Inebriate Reformatories, and may thereby impose a fine not exceeding £20, or imprisonment for a term not exceeding three months, with or without hard labour, for the breach of any such regulations. The object of Clause 2 is merely to make it clear that breaches of these regulations may, where they involve fine or imprisonment, be dealt with by Courts of Summary Jurisdiction.
    Moved, "That the Bill be now read 2a."—(Lord Belper.)
    On Question, agreed to.
    Bill read 2aaccordingly; Committees negatived: Then Standing Order No. XXXIX. considered [according to Order], and dispensed with: Then Bill read 3a, and passed.

  NAVAL WORKS BILL.
    TELEGRAPHS (TELEPHONIC COMMUNICATION) BILL.
    House in Committee [according to Order]: Bills reported without Amendment: Standing Committee negatived: Then Standing Order No. XXXIX. considered [according to Order], and dispensed with: Bills read 3a, and passed.
EXPIRING LAWS CONTINUANCE BILL.
  PUBLIC WORKS (LOANS) BILL.
    TANCRED'S CHARITIES SCHEME CONFIRMATION BILL.
    Read 2a [according to Order]: Committees negatived; and Bills to be read 3a on Monday next.

    BOARD OF EDUCATION BILL.
    Commons Amendments considered [according to Order].
    THE LORD PRESIDENT OF THE COUNCIL (The DUKE of DEVONSHIRE): The Commons Amendments to this Bill are not of any great importance. I do not observe on the other side a large number of noble Lords who appear to entertain any curiosity on the subject, and therefore, as there is no burning desire to hear any remarks from me, I beg to move that the Amendments made in another place be agreed to. I shall be prepared, however, to express my views if any noble Lord desires.
    Commons Amendments agreed to.

  ELEMENTARY EDUCATION (DEFECTIVE AND EPILEPTIC CHILDREN) BILL [H.L.]
    POOR LAW ACTS AMENDMENT BILL [H.L.]
    Commons Amendments considered [according to Order], and agreed to.
  BATHS AND WASHHOUSES ACTS AMENDMENT BILL.

    SECOND READING.
    Order of the Day for the Second Reading read.
    LORD BALFOUR OF BURLEIGH: My Lords, the object of this Bill is to assimilate the law in respect of baths and washhouses situated outside the metropolis to that of those which are situated within. During those months in the year when the baths are closed there is power, in the metropolis, to use them for public recreation. The proposal in this Bill is that this power should be given in connection with baths that are outside the metropolis, provided that a proper licence is obtained from the authorities in whose area the baths are situated.
    Moved, "That the Bill be now read 2a."—(Lord Balfour of Burleigh.)
    On Question, agreed to.
    Read 2a [according to Order], and committed to a Committee of the Whole House on Monday next, and Standings

    1449
    Order No. XXXIX. to be considered in order to its being dispensed with.

    PRIVATE LEGISLATION PROCEDURE (SCOTLAND) BILL.
    Read 3a, with the Amendments, and passed, and returned to the Commons.
ROYAL NIGER COMPANY BILL.
  LAND TAX COMMISSIONERS' NAMES BILL.

    PATRIOTIC FUND BILL.
    RESERVE FORCES BILL.
    MILITARY WORKS BILL.
    Read 3a [according to Order], and passed.

    EDUCATION DEPARTMENT PROVISIONAL ORDER CONFIRMATION (LONDON) BILL [H.L.]
    Commons Amendments considered [on motion], and agreed to.
QUESTIONS.

  THE CONVEYANCE OF MILITIA.
  THE MARQUESS OF LOTHIAN: I rise to ask the Secretary of State for War who was responsible for the arrangements made for the return of the 3rd Battalion the Royal Scots from Salisbury Plain to their depôt at Glencorse. The question may appear one of trivial importance, and one which might be considered unworthy of being referred to in your Lordships' House, but I think this impression will be removed when I state the facts. I was in active command of this battalion for some time, and I am now its honorary colonel. The battalion was ordered to Aldershot, and it accomplished the journey from Glencorse in the reasonable space of twelve hours. The battalion consisted of 500 men, and was divided into two trains; but on the return journey, for reasons, I presume, of economy, the whole battalion of 500 men, with their officers, arms, and accoutrements were conveyed in one train, drawn by a single engine, with the result that the journey occupied about twenty-three hours instead of twelve hours. When the train arrived at Clapham, it was an hour and a half late, and part of the further delay was caused by the discovery that the
  1450
  baggage and accoutrements had been placed in wagons which would not pass through the tunnels of the Underground Railway, and the trans-shipment of the loads, which was performed by twenty-two or twenty-three bricklayers, took some three hours. I have not heard what the damage to the accoutrements amounted to, but it must have been considerable. They eventually got to King's Cross, where they were detained for a considerable time. This enormous train then went on with one engine, and two of the couplings broke on the journey. If all this happened when it was known four weeks beforehand that these men, with their arms and accoutrements, were to be sent by a certain railway to Scotland, what would happen in the case of mobilisation in a hurry? One moral is that the War Office should see that either all tunnels are sufficiently high to enable all trucks to go through, or that the trucks, on which arms and accoutrements are likely to be placed, should be so constructed as to go under any tunnel in the United Kingdom. There is another point I wish to raise. The noble Marquess has done all in his power to make the Militia service more popular, and I tender him my hearty thanks for what he has done; but it must be remembered that during the whole of the twenty-three hours occupied by the journey the men were locked in the carriages, and not allowed to leave for any purpose whatever. The officers of the battalion had made arrangements for the men to get refreshments at York and other places on the way, but, owing to the delay, they got nothing to eat or drink the whole twenty-three hours. They may have been very happy at Salisbury Plain, but such incidents as this are bound to have a bad effect on recruiting. The dreadful treatment these men received will probably be related all over the country, and it is not likely to encourage recruiting in the district to which the men belong. I am sure the noble Marquess will do what he possibly can to see that such a state of things is not likely to occur again.
  THE MARQUESS OF LANSDOWNE: My Lords, I have not yet received any official information with regard to the very regrettable incident to which my noble friend has called attention. I had

  1451
  heard of it from a private source, and I had given directions to have the fullest possible inquiries made. I have reason to believe that an official representation upon the subject will reach the War Office before long, and I promise my noble friend it shall be thoroughly investigated. It is obvious that if what he says is correct, bad arrangements of this kind, producing as they do great suffering and inconvenience to the men, cannot but have an injurious effect upon recruiting. The responsibility for the arrangements for the conveyance of these Militia battalions rests with the Quartermaster-General's Department of the War Office, but those arrangements, of course, have to be carried out by the railway companies, and until I have received the official report it is impossible for me to say whether the blame rests with the War Office for unwisely planning the arrangements, or whether it is the railway authorities who deserve censure for having failed to carry out the programme arranged between them and the War Office. The matter shall be thoroughly investigated, and if the House is not sitting when I get the report I will undertake to communicate the substance of it to my noble friend.
  House adjourned at twenty-five minutes past Six of the clock, to Monday next, a quarter past Four of the clock.