Sitting of 14 December 1900

Preamble
Two Members took and subscribed the Oath.

QUEEN'S SPEECH (ANSWER TO ADDRESS).
The Comptroller of the Household reported Her Majesty's Answer to the Address, as followeth:—
"I have received with satisfaction the loyal and dutiful expression of your thanks for the Speech with which I opened the present Parliament."

NEW WRIT.
For the County of Monaghan (North Monaghan Division), in the room of Daniel Macaleese, esquire, deceased.— (Mr. T. M. Healy.)
PETITIONS.
  INHABITED HOUSE DUTY AND INCOME TAX.
  Petition from Ealing and Acton, for alteration of Law; to lie upon the Table.
RETURNS, REPORTS, ETC.
  LOCAL GOVERNMENT ACT, 1888.
  Copies presented, of Orders made by the County Councils and County Borough Councils of various Counties in England and Wales under Sections 57 and 59 of the Act, and confirmed by the Local Government Board [by Act]; to lie upon the Table.
  EAST INDIA (EXAMINATIONS FOR THE CIVIL SERVICE).
  Copy presented, of Regulations for Examinations for the Civil Service of India [by Act]; to lie upon the Table.
  RAILWAY ACCIDENTS.
  Copy presented, of Returns of Accidents and Casualties as reported to the Board of Trade by the several Railway Companies in the United Kingdom during the nine months ending 30th September, 1900, together with Reports of the Inspecting Officers and Sub-Inspectors of the Railway Department to the Board of Trade upon certain Accidents which were inquired into [by Command]; to lie upon the Table.
  SEAMEN'S SAVINGS BANKS (MONEY ORDERS AND TRANSMISSION OF WAGES).
  Accounts presented, of all Deposits received and repaid during the year ended 20th November, 1899, and Statement as to Money Orders issued and paid from 1855 to 31st March, 1900, and of Receipts and Payments in connection with the transmission of Seamen's Wages from 1878 to 31st March, 1900 [by Act]; to lie upon the Table, and to be printed. [No. 388.]
  FOREIGN JURISDICTION ACT, 1890.
  Copy presented, of Order in Council of 26th November, 1900, entitled, "The Siam (Registration) Order in Council, 1899" [by Act]; to lie upon the Table.

  MERCHANT SHIPPING ACT, 1894.
  Copy presented, of Order in Council of 26th November, 1900, fixing an increase

  819
  of salary for a clerk in the establishment of the Commissioners of Northern Lighthouses [by Act]; to lie upon the Table.
  Copy presented, of Order in Council of 26th November, 1900, making Rules concerning the Lights and Signals to be carried by Vessels when within the Harbour of Galway [by Act]; to lie upon the Table.

  NEWCASTLE CHAPTER ACT, 1884.
  Copy presented, of Order in Council of 26th November, 1900, establishing two Residentiary Canonries in the Cathedral Church of Newcastle [by Act]; to lie upon the Table.
  GOVERNMENT OF INDIA ACT, 1858.
  Copy presented, of Order in Council of 26th November, 1900, approving a Statement of proposed new and revised Appointments, alterations of Salaries, and abolition of appointment in the, Establishment of the Secretary of State for India in Council [by Act]; to lie upon the Table.
  PRIVATE LEGISLATION PROCEDURE (SCOTLAND) ACT, 1899.
  Copy presented, of General Order for the Regulation of Proceedings under and in pursuance of the Private Legislation Procedure (Scotland) Act, 1899, amending General Orders Nos. 70 and 71 already issued [by Act]; to lie upon the Table, and to be printed. [No. 389].
  UGANDA RAILWAY (CONTRACTS FOR BRIDGES).
  Address for "Return of the names of the British and American firms who tendered for the erection of bridges for the Uganda Railway, and the amounts of the various tenders."—(Mr. Cremer.)

  ROYAL PATRIOTIC FUND.
  Address for Return for (1) Account of the Net Moneys or Securities paid over or transferred to the Commissioners of the Royal Patriotic Fund on behalf of and for the relief of the Families, or Near Dependents, of the Officers and Men of Her Majesty's Forces, including the Colonial troops, who have lost their lives in, or in consquence of, the war operations in South Africa; (2) Schedule of the Widows, Children, or Near Dependents, or other Cestui-que-trusts, ascertainable up to date, entitled to benefit under such
  820
  Scheme, and the amounts and conditions of their relief in the following form:—

  Schedule of Beneficiaries.

  Name and rank of husband, father, or decreased.

  Name of Widow.

  Amount of allowances or other relief.

  Names of Children.

  Dates of their births.

  Amount of allowance.

  Name of other Cestui-que-Trusts.

  (Mr. Kearley.)

QUESTIONS.
MR. PIERPOINT: I beg to ask the Under Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs whether any, and, if any, what progress has been made regarding the Conversion of the Turkish 1885 Guaranteed (Crimean) Loan, as to which a Convention was signed in August, 1898, or whether the Convention has entirely lapsed.
VISCOUNT CRANBORNE: The negotiations on this subject are still suspended. I am unable to make any further statement in regard to them.

QUESTIONS.

  SOUTH AFRICAN WAR-SOLDIERS DEPENDENTS AND GOVERNMENT SITUATIONS.
  MR. KEARLEY: I beg to ask the First Lord of the Treasury whether Her Majesty's Government, in appointing to vacancies in the various Government departments, would preferentially consider the cases of the dependents of officers and soldiers who had been killed in action or died from wounds or disease contracted on active service, before selecting other candidates for clerkships, typewriterships, and messengerships in the public service.
  THE FIRST LORD OF THE TREASURY (Mr. A. J. BALFOUR,): Other things being equal, any appointed authority would be anxious to find suitable employment for the dependents of men who have died in the service of their country. But, of course, I cannot hold out the possibility of upsetting the basis on which appointments throughout the service generally rest.

  MR. MERRIMAN'S LETTER.
  MR. PIRIE: I beg to ask the Secretary of State for the Colonies if he can state, without detriment to the public interests, why no reparation can be made to Mr. Merriman for the want of consideration shown to him in withholding from him any opportunity of passing observations on his letter published in August by Her Majesty's Government.
  THE SECRETARY OF STATE FOR THE COLONIES (Mr. J. Chamberlain,): I am not aware that Mr. Merriman has suffered any injury, and I do not see that any reparation is required.
  MR. PIRIE: Is it intended to remove in any way the impression in the public mind——
  MR. SPEAKER: Order, order !
  MR. PIRIE: Then I shall call attention to this matter to-morrow.

  "SEAT SOLD TO THE BOERS" INCIDENT—MR. CHAMBERLAIN'S TELEGRAM.
  MR. COURTENAY WARNER: With reference to the speech which the Colonial Secretary made in the House and in which he said that a mistake had been made in coding the telegram and the words "sold to the Boers" had been substituted for "gained by the Boers," may I ask the right lion. Gentleman if his attention has been called to a statement in the Civil Service Times as follows—
  MR. SPEAKER: Order, order ! The hon. Member cannot read the paper.
  MR. COURTENAY WARNER: The statement is that the right hon. Gentleman's memory had failed him. [Cries of "Order !"]
  MR. SPEAKER: The hon. Member must not put such a statement forward on the authority of a newspaper.
  MR. COURTENAY WARNER: Is the statement true?
  MR. J. CHAMBERLAIN: I shall be glad to have an opportunity of replying to the question which the hon. Gentleman wished to put to me, because it evidently is calculated to cause misapprehension. Whatever may have been said outside the House to a contrary effect is certainly the result of misinformation. The statement I made was that I applied to the postmaster, and the postmaster admitted that a, mistake had been made in the office, and no doubt the orginal telegram was in the office. That is the fact. A mistake was made in the office. If I had had notice I would have brought down the letter of the postmaster and read it to the House.

  LORD ROBERTS'S PROCLAMATIONS.
  MR. CHANNING: I beg to ask the Secretary of State for
  822
  War whether any of the proclamations issued by Lord Roberts, besides the proclamations of annexation of the two Republics, were drawn up in this country and issued by Lord Roberts on the instructions of the War Office or the Colonial Office; and, if so, which of the proclamations issued as a Parliamentary Paper were drawn up in this country.
  THE SECRETARY OF STATE FOR WAR (Mr. BRODRICK,): I cannot answer that question in detail, but I may say that Her Majesty's Government accept full responsibility for all Lord Roberts's proclamations.
  MR. CHANNINGasked a supplementary question, which was inaudible in the Gallery.

  PROGRESS OF THE WAR—THE NOOCTGEDACHT REVERSE.
  Sir E. ASHMEAD-BARTLETT: I beg to ask the Secretary of State for War whether he is in a position to give the House any further information with regard to a mishap at Magaliesberg, and whether he can state whether the four companies of the Northumberland Fusiliers have been captured, and to what battalion they belonged.
  MR. T. M. HEALY: Will the Secretary of State say whether this is guerilla warfare, or actual warfare?
  MR. BRODRICK: I have communicated to the papers the whole of the information received from Lord Kitchener with regard to the action in question. We have no reason to suppose from anything Lord Kitchener has said that any troops have been captured. We only know we have to regret the loss by death of four British officers.

  HIRE OF TRANSPORTS.
  MR. ALFRED DAVIES: I beg to ask the First Lord of the Treasury if he can give the lowest and highest prices paid per ton for the hire of transports during the African war, the names of the steamers, their owners, size, speed performed, and the dates on which they were chartered.
  THE CIVIL LORD OF THE ADMIRALTY (Captain PRETYMAN,): It would be quite impossible to give the information asked for by the hon. Member within the limits of an answer to a question without running the risk of giving a misleading impression,

  823
  but if the hon. Member will call at the Admiralty every endeavour will be made to give him the information he desires.

  WAR OFFICE ADMINISTRATION— APPORTIONMENT OF RESPONSIBILITY.
  MR. YERBURGH: I beg to ask the Secretary of State for War whether he can state who is responsible for advising the Secretary of State as to the Military requirements of a probable campaign; and, whether such advice is voluntarily tendered, or does it await inquiry by the Secretary of State.
  The following questions on the same subject were also asked:—
  COLONEL WELBY: I beg to ask the Secretary of State for War whether, by the memorandum showing the duties of the principal officers of the War Office, dated 7th March, 1899, the Secretary of State or the Commander-in-Chief is held responsible for the Military efficiency and preparedness for war of our Military forces.
  COLONEL WELBY: I beg to ask the Secretary of State for War whether the Commander-in-Chief, who is charged with the collection and compilation of military information, and has in his department the Director of Military Intelligence, who deals with the collection and distribution of information relating to the military geography, resources, and armed forces of foreign countries and of the British Colonies and possessions, was responsible for an efficient military survey of those parts of the frontiers of Natal and Cape Colony presumably likely to become a theatre of war in case of invasion by the Transvaal or Orange Free State; or whether the Secretary of State for War was responsible for the authorising and making of that survey.
  COLONEL WELBY: I beg to ask the Secretary of State for War whether the Adjutant-General who is charged with the military education and training of the officers, warrant officers, non-commissioned officers, and men of the Regular and Reserve forces and Militia of the United Kingdom was responsible to the Secretary of State for War, or to the Commander-in-Chief, that the military training and education of those who sailed from this country for the South African war were efficient.
  MR. BRODRICK: No change has taken place in the responsibility of the Secretary of State for War to Parliament for the military efficiency and preparedness for war of our military forces. The Commander-in-Chief is the chief military adviser of the Secretary of State, and has the general supervision of all military departments of the War Office. All orders to the Army, whatever department they affect, are submitted to and signed by him. It is the duty of the Commander-in-Chief to tender any advice which he thinks necessary for the proper conduct of a campaign.
  Colonel WELBY: Was the Commander-in-Chief or the Secretary of State responsible for the survey referred to in my second question?
  MR. BRODRICK: That point is covered by the answer I have given.
  COLONEL WELBY: Will the right hon. Gentleman explain in what way?
  MR. BRODRICK: I am responsible to Parliament, and the Commander-in-Chief is responsible for the Army. My hon. and gallant friend must adjust any responsibility which he thinks may result with one or the other according to this statement.
  COLONEL WELBY: But who was responsible for the military surveying of Natal and Cape Colony? Am I to take it it was the Secretary for War?
  MR. BRODRICK: The responsibility to Parliament rests with the Secretary for War, and I shall not endeavour to divest myself of any portion of it.

  WAR OFFICE ADMINISTRATION— SUPERANNUATION REGULATIONS.
  CAPTAIN NORTON: I beg to ask the Secretary of State for War whether he is able to communicate to the House the steps which he has taken, or proposes to take, in reference to the reconstruction of the military and civil departments of the War Office, in accordance with the recommendations of the Committee presided over by the Financial Secretary to the War Office; and whether he will accelerate the superannuation of officials who have already reached the age of sixty years and completed forty years service.
  MR. BRODRICK: I am giving this subject close consideration, but am not in a position to make a statement. There

  825
  are seven members of the higher division civil department of the War Office over sixty years of age. Three of them retire within a few months.

  ARTILLERY FOR SOUTH AFRICA— PURCHASES ABROAD.
  MR. YERBURGH: I beg to ask the Secretary of State for War, whether any batteries of artillery have been procured from abroad for use in South Africa; if so, how many, and whether such batteries are uniform in any respect with those in the service; and whether he can state how many different kinds of artillery have been employed in South Africa.
  MR. BRODRICK: One battery of howitzers was purchased abroad of a different type to the other howitzers in the service. Sixteen different types of ordnance were employed in South Africa. Three of these were naval guns, and two were supplied from private sources to Volunteers.
  MR. YERBURGH: Was that the only battery purchased abroad?
  MR. BRODRICK: Yes, for use in South Africa.

  DECEASED SOLDIERS' EFFECTS AND DEFERRED PAY.
  MR. LOUIS SINCLAIR: I beg to ask the Secretary of State for War whether he will cause an inquiry to be made in the case of the widow of Private J. Hasler, of 2nd Somerset Light Infantry, who died of enteric fever at Kimberley 9th November (Mrs. Hasler wrote on 16th November to the commanding officer of the said regiment asking for the effects and deferred pay of the said J. Hasler, but no reply has been vouchsafed to her); and whether the Secretary of State for War will expedite matters so that Mrs. Hasler and her two children are not compelled to go to the workhouse.
  MR. J. POWELL-WILLIAMS: I have no information as to the case, but will be very glad to make inquiry into it.

  WAR GRATUITIES.
  Sir HERBERT MAXWELL: I beg to ask the Secretary of State for War whether the gratuities granted to officers and men of the Army for war service in South Africa, will be extended
  826
  to include those Militia battalions which, having volunteered for active service, have been employed in garrison duty abroad during the war.
  MR. BRODRICK: The gratuity will only be issued to the officers and men, whether Imperial or colonial, who have served in the South African command from the 10th October, 1899, to such date as may hereafter be notified in Army Orders.

  SOLDIERS' AND SAILORS' ASSOCIATION—LOCAL FUNDS.
  MR. CHANNING: I beg to ask the Secretary of State for War if he is aware that many of the local funds of the Soldiers' and Sailors' Association are exhausted, or nearly exhausted, with the result of serious reduction in the help given to the wives and children of men at the front; and whether Her Majesty's Government will now make provision from the Treasury to meet these cases.
  MR. J. POWELL-WILLIAMS: I understand that the Soldiers' and Sailors' Association are making great efforts to maintain their grants. The Government grant to the married women is 1s. 1d. a day separation allowance, with 2d. for each child, while the allotment of pay by the soldier amounts to 4d., and a further 1d. a day for each child up to 6d. In the case of men in public employ before the war began the wife is granted half wages. Her Majesty's Government do not think it desirable to ask Parliament to raise the provision further from public funds.

  ENGLISH PURCHASES OF ARTILLERY IN GERMANY.
  SIR HOWARD VINCENT: I beg to ask the Secretary of State for War if his attention has been called to the statement, on 12th December, of Baron von Richthofen, the Imperial German Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs, that a large number of field batteries of German guns have been ordered by the British War Office of the Rhenish Machine and Metal Goods Company, and that the Imperial Government had stopped the further execution of the order until the guns were no longer needed; whether he will state what steps were taken by the War Office to ascertain if similar guns could be made in Sheffield or elsewhere in the United Kingdom or British Empire under royalty or other

  827
  business arrangements as to patents; and whether, having regard to the danger of being dependent upon foreign manufacturers, controlled by foreign Governments, for munitions of war, he will encourage industrial enterprise and the laying down of the necessary plant in the Queen's Dominions by a guarantee that the Government will place its orders with its own taxpayers and not with foreigners.
  MR. BRODRICK: Yes, Sir. I have seen the statement. Early this year it became necessary to give large additional orders for field guns for early delivery. The ordnance factories and the only gun-making firms in the United Kingdom received orders for more field guns and carriages than they could execute within the current year, and an order, about equivalent to that given to each English firm, was placed in Germany a month later. The ordnance factories have at this date completed their order. The German firm has delivered the whole order and the guns are available for issue; one of the English firms has delivered one-third of the order, and the other has delivered nothing at all. The Government have every desire to give priority to British manufactures. Every encouragement has been given to gun-making firms in this country to lay down plant by giving orders to the value of several millions sterling, and I will take care that everything is done which foresight can suggest to secure continuity of orders. But in view of the figures quoted above and the absolute necessity of securing prompt delivery, I can give no guarantee that orders will not be placed abroad when the public interest requires it.
  SIR HOWARD VINCENT: Was the delivery of batteries ordered in Germany stopped by the German Government?
  MR. BRODRICK: No, on the contrary, they were received hero, but, unfortunately, the batteries which ought to have been delivered by English firms were not delivered. As I read the speech of the German Secretary of State, an order was issued to stop further delivery, but the guns had been delivered.
  MR. EDMUND ROBERTSON: Can the Return of warlike material
  828
  purchased abroad which was refused earlier on grounds of public policy now be given?
  MR. BRODRICK: Possibly it might be given at the close of the year, or some convenient date. Of course, it will take some time to prepare, as a certain amount of research will be required.
  MR. BRYN ROBERTS: Is there any objection to giving the names of the contractors who failed to fulfil their contracts?
  MR. BRODRICK: I would rather not give the names now; I am having investigation made in reference to each factory and case of non-delivery. It may be necessary to take further steps.
  MR. T. M. HEALY: Was it since the Anglo-German Convention was entered into that these guns were stopped?

  MILITARY TOURNAMENT OF 1900— APPORTIONMENT OF PROFITS— ALDEKSHOT SWIMMING BATH.
  MAJOR RASCH: I beg to ask the Secretary of State for War whether the profits of the Military Tournament for 1900 amounted to £7,600 and were paid to the Commander-in-Chief in July; whether £2,000 of this amount was allocated for a swimming bath at Aldershot; and, if so, will he explain why this expense should not fall on the Estimates instead of on funds hitherto available for military charities.
  MR. BRODRICK: The profits amounted to £7,500. The disposal of the moneys rests entirely with the Commander-in-Chief, and Lord Wolseley considered it expedient to spend £4,000 on the soldiers' swimming bath at Aldershot.
  MAJOR RASCH: Why should not this fall on the Estimates?
  MR. BRODRICK: I am not entirely cognisant of the precise amount of demand there was for the swimming bath, but I presume Lord Wolseley considered it was a purpose to which these funds were applicable.
  SIR JOHN COLOMB: Is Lord Wolseley or the Secretary of State responsible for this?
  MR. BRODRICK: I do not know whether the Secretary of State has any power over the Military Tournament which is not held under the statutes under which the War Office is conducted. It has been conducted by the Commander-in-Chief; the proceeds are administered by him, and applied to such purposes as he considers desirable for the Army.
  MR. PAULTON: Has the Secretary of State authority to see that a swimming bath is provided at Aldershot?
  GENERAL LAURIE: In whom does the title to the swimming bath rest?
  MR. BRODRICK: I presume it rests with the Crown, like other property administered by the War Office.

  ROYAL ARTILLERY LIEUTENANCIES.
  MR. NEWDIGATE: I beg to ask the Secretary of State for War whether he is aware that there are at present in the Royal Artillery only 130 first lieutenants serving as against 435 second lieutenants; whether the second lieutenants in question often have to perform the duty of first lieutenants, but only receive second lieutenant's pay; and whether the military authorities will now be willing to alter the rule which precludes second lieutenants in the Royal Artillery and Engineers from receiving promotion till they have served for three years in the Army, whereas no such rule is in force as regards cavalry and infantry.
  MR. J. POWELL-WILLIAMS: In the horse, field, and garrison artillery there are 221 first lieutenants and 808 second lieutenants. The first and second lieutenants perform the same duties. It is, however, manifestly of importance that the senior subalterns who frequently perform captains' duties should have higher rank. The question of the promotion of second lieutenants, referred to in the third paragraph, is under consideration.

  1ST GORDON HIGHLANDERS VOLUNTEER CORPS.
  DR. FARQUHARSON: I beg to ask the Secretary of State for War whether he can state the finding of a court of inquiry assembled to
  830
  investigate certain statements recently made with reference to the alleged use of abusive language to the Volunteer Corps 1st Gordon Highlanders at Lemiston, on 3rd July, by an officer of that battalion.
  MR. J. POWELL-WILLIAMS: No detailed report of the court of inquiry which Lord Roberts ordered to assemble has yet reached the War Office. Lord Roberts, however, stated in a telegram that from the evidence of the court he considered that the words of the officer had been grossly misrepresented, and that the reprimand administered by the officer commanding the battalion was necessary.

  MILITIAMEN'S CLOTHING.
  MR. COURTENAY WARNER: I beg to ask the Secretary of State for War if he will state what has been done in reference to improving the clothing of Militiamen of those battalions serving in the United Kingdom or abroad who, being embodied, have the same duties as Regulars to perform, but have up to the present had inferior clothing to the Regulars.
  MR. J. POWELL-WILLIAMS: The clothing of the Militiaman differs in scale, but not in quality, from that of the Regular soldier. During embodiment the Militia have been allowed to retain time-expired garments for fatigue duties, and to condemn and replace with new garments those considered by a board of officers to be in bad condition, though not time-expired. The whole question of Militia clothing is under consideration.
  MR. COUETENAY WAENEE: What is the meaning of "scale"? Is it a difference between the cloth and serge?
  MR. J. POWELL-WILLIAMS: The meaning is that the garments issued are precisely the same.

  PIERSHILL BARRACKS, EDINBURGH.
  MR. WEIR: I beg to ask the Secretary of State for War whether his attention has been called to the nature of the hospital accommodation at Piershill Barracks, Jock's Lodge, near Edinburgh; and will he give instructions for better arrangements to be made for the comfort of the patients, and arrange for the medical officers to be supplied with modern surgical instruments.
  MR. J. POWELL-WILLIAMS: The accommodation in this hospital is considered ample—twenty-seven beds constitute the normal provision for an establishment of 447 soldiers in barracks, and thirty-two beds are provided in this case. The surgical instruments are of a modern pattern, and can readily be supplemented from the district equipment store. No complaints have been received as to the comfort and welfare of the patients. The buildings are in a satisfactory condition.
  MR. WEIR: I shall take an early opportunity of calling attention to this matter, and of moving a reduction of the salary of the official concerned.

  INSPECTION OF FORTIFICATIONS— GRIEVANCES OF CIVIL STAFF.
  MR. PIRIE: I beg to ask the Secretary of State for War whether he has received a memorial from the civil staff of the department of the Inspector General of Fortifications drawing attention to their treatment and praying for a redress of their grievances; whether the memorial was recommended to the Secretary of State's consideration by General Sir Richard Harrison and other military officers under whom the petitioners had served; and whether any reply has been, or will be, sent to the Inspector General.
  MR. J. POWELL-WILLIAMS: The memorial will receive consideration, with the general question of War Office organisation.

  WAR OFFICE—SECOND DIVISION CLERKS.
  CAPTAIN NORTON: I beg to ask the Secretary of State for War whether he will favourably reconsider the cases of assistant clerks and abstractors who had been recommended for advancement to vacant clerkships of the Second Division of the War Office by the principal clerks in charge of their respective branches, and whose recommendations had not been acted upon.
  MR. J. POWELL-WILLIAMS: Only so recently as August last six promotions by selection were made from twenty-four eligible clerks of this class to the position of second division clerk. The question of further promotions will be considered.
  CAPTAIN NORTON: I beg to ask the First Lord of the Treasury whether the Lords Commissioners of Her Majesty's Treasury have declined to approve of the promotion to the higher division of the Civil Service of second division clerks serving in the War Office on the ground that the men recommended had attained the age of forty years; whether he could hold out any hope of the rule in question being rescinded; and whether their Lordships would reconsider the cases of second division clerks who had already suffered in consequence of the operation of the forty years rule at the War Office.
  MR. A. J. BALFOUR: I am assured that there is no general rule of the service fixing a limit of age above which a clerk of the second division cannot be appointed to the first division. The recommendation in each case is in the discretion of the head of the department when a vacancy occurs. At the same time it must be taken into account that the first consideration is the fitness of candidates for the duties to be done, and it is obvious that as a man advances in middle life he becomes less qualified for the post of junior clerk.

  WAR OFFICE CONTRACTS IN BELFAST—WAGES RATES.
  MR. KEIR HARDIE: Has it come to the knowledge of the Government that Messrs. Wilson and Co., of Belfast, who are engaged on a War Office contract, have reduced the wages of their men from 32s. to 22s.; that those who refused the lower sum have been dismissed; that their places have been filled with unskilled labour, and is not this a violation of the conditions under which the contract was given out?
  MR. J. POWELL-WILLIAMS: I have only just received notice of this question, but I will make further inquiry into the new allegations, which, I believe, are made under a misapprehension.
  MR. KEIR HARDIE: I will repeat the question to-morrow.
  MR. POWELL-WILLIAMS: That will not give me time to make inquiries at Belfast.

  WAR OFFICE CONTRACT DEPARTMENT REORGANISATION.
  MR. FABER: I beg to ask the Secretary of State for War whether it is

  833
  proposed to reorganise the Contract Department of the War Office, in consequence of the investigations of the Select Committee.
  MR. BRODRICK: I am afraid I cannot at present answer any questions of this kind, the whole subject of War Office organisation is under consideration.

  CITY IMPERIAL VOLUNTEERS—LACK OF EMPLOYMENT FOR RETURNED MEN.
  MR. KEIR HARDIE: I beg to ask the Secretary of State for War whether his attention has been called to the complaint of members of the City Imperial Volunteers who now find it impossible to find employment, and whether the War Office proposes taking any action in the matter.
  MR. J. POWELL-WILLIAMS: I am not aware that such is the case, but I believe that those who left employment to serve abroad have been received back by their employers.

  VOLUNTEERS—FURTHER DRAFTS FOR SOUTH AFRICA.
  SIR HOWARD VINCENT: I beg to ask the Secretary of State for War if the condition of affairs in South Africa remains such as to postpone the return of the Volunteers, Imperial Yeomen, Militia, and married Reservists until far into the new year, whether he will consider the desirability of making a further appeal to the Volunteer force for drafts to take the place of such of the 10,000 members of that force still at the seat of war, who may find themselves compelled to take their discharge if possible, either by sickness, or the calls of their civil occupation in the United Kingdom.
  MR. BRODRICK: I should wish to consult Lord Roberts on this question before arriving at a decision.

  COMPENSATION FOR SHORT RATIONS.
  MR. EUGENE WASON: I beg to ask the Secretary of State for War whether any compensation is given to troops during a campaign when they have short rations in lieu of the rations which are ordinarily issued.
  MR. BRODRICK: No, SIR. There is no regulation granting compensation in
  834
  such a case, nor is it apparent on what principles such compensation could be granted the only remedy seems to be a more liberal treatment of the soldier when supplies are available. This is left entirely to the discretion of the General Officers commanding, whose first object is the well-being of the troops.

  COST OF TELEGRAPHING CASUALTIES.
  MR. SOAMES: I beg to ask the Secretary of State for War whether he is aware that the officers in command of battalions in South Africa have frequently been put to great expense in telegraphing the news of the deaths of soldiers to their relations after actions in the war; and whether the Government propose to refund such sums of money.
  MR. J. POWELL-WILLIAMS: No, SIR. I have not heard of such cases the deaths of soldiers have all been communicated from the seat of war to the War Office at the public expense and forthwith published. Any direct communications from the officers commanding battalions to the relations of the soldiers are of the nature of private messages, and would not be a charge on public funds.

  BRITISH TROOPS FROM INDIA FOR SOUTH AFRICA AND CHINA SERVICE.
  MR. FABER: I beg to ask the Secretary of State for War if he will state what is the total number of British troops withdrawn from India for service in South Africa and China; and whether men of more than eight years colour service have been retained in India.
  MR. BRODRICK: The number of British troops withdrawn from India for service in South Africa amounts to about 8,500 and in China to about 450. Men of over eight years service are detained in India under the terms of the Royal Proclamation.
  MR. CAINEMay I ask whether a number of Indian troops have not been stationed at Mauritius and other places to relieve British soldiers now serving in South Africa?
  MR. BRODRICK: Those are Indian and not British troops, and they are paid for by the War Office.

  ENTERIC FEVER—INOCULATION, ETC. —STATISTICS.
  MR. EUGENE WASON: I beg to ask the Secretary of State for War whether he can now give to the House any particulars of the number of soldiers who were inoculated against enteric and who have died from that disease; and whether, in any case, it has been proved that inoculation has in any degree mitigated the severity of the disease.
  MR. J. POWELL-WILLIAMS: No, Sir. I am afraid that statistics for the war in South Africa are not yet available.

  MORTALITY AMONG HORSES IN THE SOUTH AFRICAN CAMPAIGN.
  COLONEL WELBY: I beg to ask the Secretary of State for War whether he can see his way to publish a Return of the number of horses purchased for the South African campaign, showing the countries where they were bought, the average price paid, and the number that died in transport to the Cape; also a Return showing the number of horses belonging to the forces in South Africa at different times during the war, and the death casualties that occurred amongst them.
  MR. J. POWELL-WILLIAMS: I am afraid such a Return must wait for a time till we have done purchasing, and have fuller information from South Africa.

  LOSS OF the "MEXICAN"—SOLDIERS' REMITTANCES.
  SIR JAMES FERGUSSON: I beg to ask the Secretary to the Treasury, as representing the Postmaster General, whether certain remittances of money from soldiers serving in South Africa, through the Post Office, were lost in the wreck of the steamer "Mexican;" whether, though more than six months have since elapsed, those sums have not been recovered; and what reason exists for that difficulty.
  THE FINANCIAL SECRETARY TO THE TREASURY (MR. AUSTEN CHAMBERLAIN,): It is the case that many letters containing remittances from soldiers serving in South Africa were lost in the wreck of the "Mexican." So far as these remittances
  836
  consisted of money orders and postal orders, duplicates have been issued in all cases in which proof of sending could be supplied. It is believed that the banknotes sent in registered letters have been made good by the banks. A certain amount of coin remitted is actually lost the Cape Government, which provided the sea conveyance, does not accept responsibility for such losses; but the Postmaster General has undertaken certain legal proceedings, which, if successful, may possibly enable him to replace some portion of the lost coin and give compensation for other valuable articles lost in the mails.

  HONG KONG DEFENCES.
  MR. COURTENAY WARNER: I beg to ask the Secretary of State for War if he can say what is being done towards putting Hong Kong in a proper state of defence, especially the arming of the forts with modern breech-loading guns, providing the Volunteers with breech-loading guns, and providing smokeless ammunition.
  MR. BRODRICK: The re-armament of Hong Kong is making steady progress, but it would not be expedient to give any details.

  CROMARTY FIRTH—NAVAL STATIONS.
  MR. WEIR: I beg to ask the First Lord of the Treasury whether he is aware that there is excellent anchorage for Her Majesty's Fleet in Cromarty Firth opposite the towns of Invergordon and Cromarty, Ross-shire; and, in view of the fact that no such good anchorage or shelter is available for the fleet elsewhere on the east coast of Scotland, will he consider the expediency of fortifying the two headlands known as the Sutors at the entrance to the Firth.
  CAPTAIN PRETYMAN: The anchorage in Cromarty Firth is well known as a good one, but is not superior to other anchorages in Scottish waters. The question of fortifications must be considered as a whole by the Admiralty and War Office.

  H.M.S. "THUNDERER'S" GUNS.
  SIR CHARLES DILKE: I beg to ask the representative of the Admiralty if the

  837
  recent breakdown of the guns of H.M.S. "Thunderer" has been investigated; and, if so, with what result.
  CAPTAIN PRETYMAN: The facts relating to the explosion in question have been referred to the Ordnance Committee for opinion, but no reply has yet been received.

  ROYAL NAVAL CHIEF GUNNERS— VACANCIES.
  COMMANDER YOUNG: I beg to ask the First Lord of the Treasury, as representing the First Lord of the Admiralty, if he can state when the two vacancies in the chief gunners, Royal Navy, list are likely to be filled up; and whether, in future, vacancies occurring in the chief warrant officers' ranks will be filled up by the Admiralty with the same promptitude as occurs when vacancies take place in the Admirals' and other lists of the Royal Navy.
  CAPTAIN PRETYMAN: The merits of the gunners eligible for promotion are under consideration, and replies are awaited to references that have been made respecting their qualifications. With the exception of flag vacancies, the executive lists are not necessarily filled as vacancies occur, but no delay takes place in making promotions.

  FRANCE AND SUBMARINE BOATS.
  MR. EDMUND ROBERTSON: I beg to ask the First Lord of the Treasury whether the attention of the Admiralty has been called to the provision for eighteen additional submarine boats said to be contained in the new French naval programme; and whether there has been any modification in the policy of the Admiralty in this matter.
  CAPTAIN PRETYMAN: The provision of additional submarine boats in the new French naval programme has received the attention of the Admiralty. A statement will be made on the subject when the Estimates are laid before Parliament.
  MR. EDMUND ROBERTSON: Have any experiments been made or are any to be made by the Admiralty?
  CAPTAIN PRETYMAN: I cannot say.

  WEST INDIA DOCK NAVAL STORE AND DEPTFORD VICTUALLING YARD—EMPLOYEES.
  CAPTAIN NORTON: I beg to ask the First Lord of the Treasury whether his attention has been drawn to the number of men who have left the West India Dock Naval Store and Deptford Victualling Yard since March 31st, 1899, in consequence of the conditions under which they are employed; and whether he will cause inquiry to be made into this matter.
  CAPTAIN PRETYMAN: There has been no abnormal change in the usual numbers of men joining and leaving the Naval departments referred to, and consequently there are no circumstances which call for any special action on the part of the Admiralty, All complaints by the men put forward in the recognised manner will naturally receive the careful attention of the Board.
  CAPTAIN NORTON: If I furnish the hon. Gentleman with a statement showing that the information furnished to him is incorrect, will he reconsider his answer?
  CAPTAIN PRETYMAN: Anything the hon. Member forwards will have careful consideration.

  PEMBROKE DOCK.
  GENERAL LAURIE: I beg to ask the Civil Lord of the Admiralty, of which private notice has been given, what is the reason for the delay in the completion of the Carr Rocks Jetty at Pembroke Dockyard; whether any means can be adopted to expedite the work, as it is understood the facilities the jetty will afford will materially reduce the time required for completion of, as well as the cost of fitting out, vessels at Pembroke.
  CAPTAIN PRETYMAN: The Admiralty are so dissatisfied with the rate of progress at which this work is being executed by the contractors that special measures are being taken to deal with the situation.

  COMMISSIONS TO PROMOTED BLUEJACKET BOYS.
  MR. HERBERT LEWIS: I beg to ask the First Lord of the Treasury whether his attention

  839
  has been drawn to a recent statement by Lord Charles Beresford that during the last twenty years only three commissions have been offered to Naval men who entered service as bluejacket boys; and whether the Government intend to take any steps to remedy this state of things.
  CAPTAIN PRETYMAN: The statement as to the number of men promoted to commissioned rank during the period referred to is correct the question of such promotions is one to which the Admiralty have given much attention, and though no bar has been placed upon the promotion of deserving men, the great difficulties surrounding the question have limited the number made.

  RESPONSIBILITY FOR NAVAL ADMINISTRATION.
  MR. HERBERT LEWIS: I beg to ask the First Lord of the Treasury whether the First Lord of the Admiralty is solely responsible to the country for the efficiency of naval administration, or whether his responsibility is shared to any, and, if so, what extent with the Naval Lords.
  CAPTAIN PRETYMAN: The First Lord of the Admiralty is responsible to Her Majesty and Parliament for all the business of the Admiralty, but all members of the Board are necessarily concerned by virtue of the Royal Patent under which they act in the efficient administration of the Navy.

  CHINA—ANGLO-GERMAN AGREEMENT—SPHERES OF INTEREST.
  MR. YERBURGH: I beg to ask the Under Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs whether the Anglo-German Agreement nullifies the agreement of the 2nd September, 1898, made between the representatives of certain British and German corporations, defining the respective spheres of interest of Great Britain and Germany as regards railway concessions; and, if not, whether such agreement applies only to the parties immediately concerned in it, or whether it represents an understanding arrived at by the Governments of Great Britain and Germany; and whether the Anglo-German Agreement in any way affects the agreement of the 28th April, 1899, between Great Britain and Russia defining the respective spheres of each country for railway concessions.
  THE UNDER SECRETARY OF STATE FOR FOREIGN AFFAIRS (VISCOUNT CRANBORNE,): The agreement of the 2nd September, 1898, between the British and German syndicates was concluded with the cognisance and approval of the two Governments, and is in no way prejudiced by the Anglo-German Agreement of the 16th October last the answer to the second question is in the negative.

  CHINA—TERMS OF SETTLEMENT.
  SIR E. ASHMEAD BARTLETT: I beg to ask the First Lord of the Treasury whether he is in a position to inform the House as to the terms of a settlement in China, and especially as to whether the Chinese Sovereigns are about to return to Pekin.
  MR. A. J. BALFOUR: Her Majesty's Government hope the cases to be determined before negotiations can be entered upon are on the point of being agreed upon by the Powers. I have no information as to the last part of my hon. friend's question.

  EAST AFRICA PROTECTORATE— TRADE STATISTICS.
  MR. WEIR: I beg to ask the Under Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs whether he is aware that the Report of the Trade of the East Africa Protectorate for the year ending 31st March, 1900, does not show the approximate tonnage of the imports and exports; and will he consider the advisability of arranging for this information to be given in future Reports.
  VISCOUNT CRANBORNE: The attention of the Commissioner will be called to the matter, and he will be instructed to arrange that the desired information is included in next year's Report.

  BRITISH CENTRAL AFRICA PROTECTORATE—NYASA RAILWAY.
  MR. WEIR: I beg to ask the Under Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs whether he is aware that Commissioner Sharpe, in his Report on the British Central Africa Protectorate for the year ending 31st March, strongly urges the construction of the proposed Nyasa Railway, especially the portion between Chiromo and Blantyre; and in view of the fact that the imports for the

  841
  Protectorate show an increase of £69,551 17s. 4d. over the previous year, and the exports an increase of £41,383 14s. 7d., will he state whether the Government have yet determined to construct the proposed railway at an early date.
  VISCOUNT CRANBORNE: The answer to the first paragraph of the question is in the affirmative. With regard to the second paragraph Her Majesty's Government have noted the gratifying increase in the trade returns, but the answer to the question must be in the negative.

  NICARAGUA CANAL.
  MR. NORMAN: I beg to ask the Under Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs whether Her Majesty's Government has any reason to believe that other European Governments would agree to regard as neutral a ship canal in Central America occupied and fortified by the United States Government; whether Her Majesty's Government has reason to believe that the Republic of Nicaragua accepts the view expressed by the United States Senate Committee on Foreign Relations, that the relationship between the United States and Nicaragua is analagous to that between Turkey and Egypt at the time of the construction of the Suez Canal, namely, the relationship between suzerain and vassal; and whether Her Majesty's Government understands that the United States Government associates itself with the protocol signed by all the Great Powers of Europe at the London Conference on 13th March, 1871, to the effect that it is an essential part of the law of nations that no Power can liberate itself from the engagements of a Treaty except with the assent of the contracting parties, by means of an amicable arrangement.
  VISCOUNT CRANBORNE: With regard to the first paragraph of the question no communication whatever has passed between Her Majesty's Government and other European Governments upon the subject. We think that no useful purpose will be served by dealing with paragraphs 2 and 3 at the present moment.

  SUGAR BOUNTIES.
  COLONEL MILWARD: I beg to ask the
  842
  Under Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs whether he can give the House any information as to the Conference recently held in Paris to further the abolition of the sugar bounties; and whether Her Majesty's Government adheres to the statement of policy contained in the instructions to the British delegates at the Brussels Conference, 1898, that it is the earnest desire of Her Majesty's Government to secure the suppression of all bounties on sugar, which they consider to be prejudicial to the general interests of the British Empire.
  VISCOUNT CRANBORNE: Her Majesty's Government have not been officially informed of what passed at the recent meeting at Paris between representatives of the French Government and delegates of Germany and Austria-Hungary. Her Majesty's Government still adhere to the statement of policy referred to by the hon. and gallant Member.

  UGANDA RAILWAY BRIDGES.
  SIR ALFRED HICKMAN: I beg to ask the Under Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs whether he will take steps to insure that tests of the materials to be used in the Uganda bridges shall be made, and that there shall be a thorough inspection of the bridges when erected at makers' works before being sent away, in the same manner as would be the case if the bridges were made in this country; whether he has seen a book published by Professor Vose, the eminent American engineer, entitled "Bridge Disasters in America"; and, whether he is aware that on the average about twenty bridges break down in that country every year.
  VISCOUNT CRANBORNE: The materials and work on the Uganda viaducts will be inspected in the same way as if they were built in England, and by an English engineer of large experience in ironwork. Inasmuch as the contractors have undertaken the erection of the bridges in situ, it is not probable that they will erect the girders in their yard in America in the same way as is customary for bridges in this country where the conditions are commonplace. We have no information as to the circumstances under which the failures mentioned in the question have taken place, but the risks referred to were no doubt carefully con-

  843
  sidered. In the present instance the bridges have been designed in England.
  MR. BARTLEY: Will there be any inquiry to see that these contractors pay the trades' union scale of wages, as British firms have to do?
  [No answer was given.]

  REVISION OF TENDERS FOR GOVERNMENT WORKS—UGANDA RAILWAY BRIDGE TENDERS.
  MR. CREMER: I beg to ask the Under Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs whether there is any rule in the Foreign Office precluding the department from affording contractors an opportunity of revising their tenders, and whether such rule is as invariably observed as it was in the recent case of the British and American firms who tendered for the erection of bridges for the Uganda Railway.
  VISCOUNT CRANBORNE: I stated yesterday what the practice in respect of asking firms to revise their tenders has hitherto been. We do not think it possible to depart from this practice as a general rule. Whether this rule should invariably be observed is a matter for consideration. I need not say that the Government would be very glad if they were able to place their work with British firms with due regard to economy and rapidity of delivery.
  MR. CREMER: Then there is no such rule in connection with the Foreign Office?
  VISCOUNT CRANBORNE: Practically not.

CIUDAD BOLIVAR—MURDER OF MR. LYALL.
MR. PIKE PEASE: I beg to ask the Under Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs whether the murderer of Mr. James Lyall, Vice Consul at Ciudad Bolivar, has been tried; and, if so, with what result; and whether Her Majesty's Government will consider the question of compensating Mr. Lyall's family.
VISCOUNT CRANBORNE: According to the latest accounts received from Caracas in the course of the present month the trial of Mr. Lyall's murderer was still proceeding. Her Majesty's Chargé d' Affaires, in accordance with his instructions, has not failed to impress continually upon the Venezuelan Government the interest with which this case is watched by Her Majesty's Government, and the attention which it has attracted in this country. Further steps in this matter are at present under consideration, the question of compensation to Mr. Lyall's family cannot be considered until the trial is concluded.

FLINTSHIRE COUNTY COUNCIL AND GOVERNMENT BLUE BOOKS.
MR. HERBERT LEWIS: I beg to ask the Under Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs whether a copy of certain correspondence relating to China was sent by the Foreign Office to the clerk of the Flintshire County Council during the autumn of this year; and whether there is any precedent for sending to county councils despatches relating to Foreign affairs.
VISCOUNT CRANBORNE: I have no information of any correspondence relating to China having been communicated to the clerk of the Flintshire County Council, but if the hon. Member will give further particulars I will make inquiries.
MR. HERBERT LEWIS: I will forward the noble Lord the information he asks for.

FIJI.
MR. CATHCART WASON: I beg to ask a question of which I have given private notice—namely, to ask the Secretary of State for the Colonies whether, in view of

845
THE irritation caused in New Zealand by a speech alleged to have been made by the Governor of Fiji to the natives, the Government will call upon the Governor of Fiji for some explanation.
MR. J. CHAMBERLAIN: I telegraphed on the 30th November to ascertain if the statement attributed to the Governor of Fiji was correctly reported. As there is no cable communication between Sydney and Fiji, it will probably be some time yet before an answer can reach me.

ALIEN IMMIGRATION.
SIR HOWARD VINCENT: I beg to ask the President of the Board of Trade if he is aware that his predecessor announced, on the 10th of February, 1897, that Her Majesty's Government were pledged to some legislation regulating the immigration of aliens, upon the lines of Lord Salisbury's Bill of 1894, which has since passed the Upper House, and that the Government had no desire to depart from such pledges; and, if, having regard to the arrival at eastern ports between the 1st of January, 1897, and the 30th of November, 1900, of nearly 190,000 pauper aliens, exclusive of foreign sailors, for settlement in this country, upwards of fifty per cent, being Russians, Poles, and Italians, for the east end of London, and to the increase in the numbers of one-fourth this year, he will take steps to obtain the fulfillment of these promises, bearing especially in mind the hardships it would inflict upon the Reservists in South Africa if their places at home were taken by foreigners whilst they were fighting.
THE PRESIDENT OF the BOARD OF TRADE (Mr. GERALD BALFOUR,): I am aware that my predecessor stated on 10th February, 1897, that the Government were pledged to some legislation on the subject of alien immigration. Between January 1st, 1897, and November 30th, 1900, about 190,000 aliens arrived in the United Kingdom from the Continent, exclusive of seamen and of persons staged on the Alien Lists to hold through tickets to other countries. The great majority of These aliens are, however, incorrectly described as "paupers, "and There is no reason to suppose that the bulk of Them settle per-
846
manently in this country, a considerable number being known, from other sources of information, to have subsequently proceeded abroad. The other figures stated in the question are correct. As my predecessor stated in answer to the hon. Member for Southampton on March 26th, the forthcoming census is likely to give more accurate information than is now available as regards the permanent residence here of aliens. I am not at present in a position to make any statement with respect to legislation.
SIR HOWARD VINCENT: I beg to give notice that in the event of no legislation being proposed on this subject by the Government next session, I shall move an Amendment of the Address and divide the House upon it.
MR. KEIR HARDIE: Is it proposed to prohibit the importation under contract of foreign workers?
[No answer was given.]
MR. FORDE RIDLEY: I beg to ask the President of the Board of Trade if it is the intention of Her Majesty's Government to introduce next session any legislation to place restrictions upon the immigration of pauper aliens.
MR. GERALD BALFOUR: As I have already stated in my reply to my hon. and gallant friend the Member for the Central Division of Sheffield, I am not at present in a position to make any statement with respect to legislation on this subject.

SHUNTING OPERATIONS—WERNETT GOODS YARD, OLDHAM.
MR. SCHWANN: I beg to ask the President of the Board of Trade whether his attention has been drawn to the dangerous character of shunting operations carried on at the Wernett Goods Yard, Oldham, situated in close proximity to a tunnel, in which the operation of hooking off has to be performed, and in which the noise and smoke are so great as to prevent trains approaching from the other end of the tunnel on the opposite line being noticeable; and whether he would ascertain if the fixing of an automatic gong or bell would warn shunters of their danger in time and obviate risk to life and limb.
MR. GERALD BALFOUR: No, Sir; but I will write to the railway company concerned, and thereafter communicate with the hon. Member.

BRITISH SEAMEN IN AMERICAN PORTS—"BLOOD-MONEY."
MR. TREVELYAN: I beg to ask the President of the Board of Trade whether the Board have any information as to the demand for the payment of what is known as "blood-money" in respect of seamen shipped on British ships in Portland, Oregon; and whether such demand is in accordance with recent American shipping legislation.
MR. GERALD BALFOUR: Yes, Sir, the Board of Trade have received several communications with regard to the exaction of what is known as "blood-money" at Portland, Oregon, and are in communition with the Foreign Office on the subject. I am not prepared the present moment to say exactly to what extent the legality of these demands is affected by recent American legislation.

LUNATIC ASYLUM WARDERS' PENSIONS.
MR. ALFRED DAVIES: I beg to ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department whether it is his intention in the ensuing session to legislate with a view to secure pensions to those permanently employed in public lunatic asylums.
THE SECRETARY OF STATE FOR the HOME DEPARTMENT (Mr. RITCHIE,): I cannot make any statement as to the possibility of legislation in the ensuing session on this matter.

PROTECTION OF ALBATROSSES.
MR. KEIR HARDIE: I beg to ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department whether his attention has been directed to the torture of albatrosses by starvation, freezing, and strangling on passenger ships en route for Australia and elsewhere; and whether there exists any law for the protection of these birds.
MR. RITCHIE: No, Sir, my attention has not been drawn to the occurrences referred to. Though I am not in a position to say whether the Act would
848
apply to the case, I may, perhaps, draw the hon. Member's notice to the Wild Animals in Captivity Protection Act of last session.
MR. KEIR HARDIE: Is the Act operative on board an outward bound British vessel?
MR. RITCHIE: The hon. Gentleman had better refer to the Act. He will there get more accurate information.

DETENTIONS IN GAOL AWAITING TRIAL
MR. BRYNMOR JONES: I beg to ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department whether he is aware that a prisoner, tried and acquitted at the recent Chelmsford Assizes, had been detained in gaol awaiting trial for more than four months; and whether there is often undue delay in the trial of persons committed for trial at the assizes, and whether he will take steps to remedy such grievances.
MR. RITCHIE: My attention had not been previously called to the case to which the question refers, and there has not been time to ascertain the particulars of it. As to the second paragraph I must refer the hon. Member to an answer to a similar question given on July 23rd last by my hon. friend the Attorney General.*

DELETERIOUS MATTERS IN BEER.
MR. COURTENAY WARNER: I beg to ask the President of the Board of Trade if he intends to take some further action to stop the sale of poisonous beer, I as fresh cases of poisoning are still being reported.
THE PRESIDENT OF the LOCAL GOVERNMENT BOARD (Mr. LONG,): My right hon. friend has asked me to reply to this question, the Local Government Board have no power to stop the sale of any particular beer, but I may state that there is reason for believing that the cases of illness which are now coming under observation for the first time are in the main those of persons who received the poison some time since.
MR. CHAPLIN: I beg to ask the President of the
*See The Parliamentary Debates [Fourth Series], Vol. lxxxvi., page 875.

849
Local Government Board if he can state what steps have been taken to ascertain the facts with regard to the alleged poisoning by beer, into which an inquiry has been instituted by the Local Government Board; if he has yet received any information as to the number of persons who have been affected and the number of deaths which are alleged to have been caused by it; and, if not, whether he will make public the information obtained by the Local Government Board as early as may be after he receives it.
MR. LONG: As this matter has excited considerable public interest, perhaps I may be allowed to state somewhat fully the course which has been adopted with respect to it. As regards the steps which have been taken by the Local Government Board, I would repeat what was stated by my right hon. friend the First Lord of the Treasury on Tuesday last, namely, that from the first outbreak of the epidemic the Board have had the matter under observation. Dr. Buchanan, one of the most experienced of their medical inspectors, is visiting the places affected, and has been instructed to obtain all possible information on the subject, including the action taken by those interested in the breweries and manufactories of brewers' sugar concerned, and by the local authorities for detecting arsenic in beer or other substances, which contain chemically manufactured sugar. Moreover, an expert committee, consisting of Sir Lauder Brunton and Drs. Stevenson and Luff (the Analysts to the Home Office), Mr. Gordon Salamon, Dr. Buckley, and the hon. Gentleman the Member for the Launceston Division have made a careful investigation on behalf of the Manchester Brewers' Central Association. The brewers and manufacturers have given them every possible access to their premises and facilitated in every way their inspection and investigation. The Board's inspector has been in communication with members of the committee, and cordial co-operation and assistance have been rendered both to the committee and the inspector by the Medical Officers of Health for Manchester and Salford. The House may rest assured that everything practicable is being done to ascertain the facts. I am informed that the association has pledged itself to recall
850
or destroy all beer in the brewing of which the implicated substances have been used, and that instructions to this effect have been sent to all the brewers of the association. The obtaining of information as to the number of persons who have been affected and the number of deaths alleged to have been caused forms part of Dr. Buchanan's inquiry, which is not yet complete. His report will be made public as early as practicable after its receipt. I may add that the Board have issued a circular to local authorities recommending them to cause samples to be analysed both of beer and of articles of food in which chemically manufactured sugars may enter.

KIRKDALE INDUSTRIAL SCHOOLS.
MR. DAVID MACIVER: I beg to ask the President of the Local Government Board whether the Kirkdale Industrial Schools, which have long been registered as a place of worship, and in which religious services are held four times weekly, are not, in common with all other charities in a like position, by reason of such registration entitled to claim the same exemption from local rating which is enjoyed by churches and places of worship generally.
MR. LONG: I presume that these schools are not exclusively used for public worship, and unless they are so used they would not appear to be entitled to the exemption to which my hon. friend refers.

MOTOR CARS—TRAFFIC REGULATIONS.
MR. ARTHUR WILSON: I beg to ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department whether, having regard to the motor car accidents that have taken place, Her Majesty's Government will take steps to provide for the safety of the public by framing regulations to ensure that all drivers of motor cars shall submit to a test and hold a certificate as competent drivers.
MR. LONG: Various suggestions have been made to the Local Government Board for the alteration of the regulations with regard to motor cars, both by the local authorities on the one hand and by those interested in the use of

851
these vehicles on the other. These suggestions will receive my consideration but I am afraid that I cannot give any promise in the direction desired by my hon. friend.
MR. ARTHUR WILSON: Is it not the fact that regulations are enforced in France?
MR. SPEAKER: Order, order ! That does not arise out of the question.

HOSPITALS—EXEMPTION FROM RATES.
MR. HORNER: I beg to ask the First Lord of the Treasury whether, in view of the circumstances under which hospitals and institutions of a like kind have to raise funds necessary to carry on their charitable work, it is the intention of Her Majesty's Government to initiate legislation to give effect to the Report of the Select Committee of the House of Commons, dated 30th July, 1900, by which it was recommended that the principle of exemption from rates should be applied to hospitals and kindred institutions not carried on for profit or gain, and supported wholly or in part by voluntary contributions or endowments; and whether Her Majesty's Government propose in any way to give effect to the recommendations of that Report.
MR. LONG: Perhaps my hon. friend will allow me to answer this question. The matter to which it relates is one of considerable difficulty, and forms part of the subject now under the consideration of the Royal Commission on Local Taxation. I cannot at present give any promise as to its being dealt with by the Government.

BETHNAL GREEN ELECTRTC LIGHTING STATION—PROVISION FOR WORKMEN DISHOUSED.
SIR MANCHERJEE BHOWNAG-GREE: I beg to ask the President of the Local Government Board whether, in case of his sanctioning the erection of the electric light station in Bethnal Green on the site proposed in the scheme of the local borough council, he will make provision for the housing in the same neighbourhood of about 200 silk weavers, who would be displaced thereby, and for the erection of their looms.
MR. LONG: I have within the last day or two received representations from some of the silk weavers on this subject, and I am in communication with the borough council with regard to it.

WIMBLEDON EDUCATION DISPUTE.
MR. TREVELYAN: I beg to ask the Vice-President of the Committee of Council on Education whether, on the receipt of the resolution passed at a statutory meeting of Wimbledon ratepayers on 9th July in favour of the establishment of a School Board for Wimbledon, the Board of Education informed those responsible for forwarding the resolution to the Board of Education that exception was taken to the validity of the notice convening the meeting at which the resolution was passed, or whether the Board of Education merely acknowledged the receipt of the resolution.
THE VICE-PRESIDENT OF the BOARD OF EDUCATION (Sir JOHN GORST,): The resolution was forwarded to the Board of Education by the chairman of the meeting. The clerk of the Kingston Union was asked, in the usual course, whether the meeting was duly summoned, and from his reply it did not appear that the notice convening the meeting was published in the manner required by the Act. Objection to the validity of the notice was taken by certain ratepayers at the meeting, and afterwards it was well known to all parties concerned that the Board of Education were not prepared to act upon the resolution.
MR. TREVELYAN: Did the Board of Education send any intimation to the conveners of the meeting?
SIR JOHN GORST: I believe no actual letter was sent, but everybody in Wimbledon knew the notice was contrary to the Act.

MURDER PLEAS—SCOTTISH AND ENGLISH PRACTICE.
MR. CALDWELL: I beg to ask Mr. Attorney General whether there exists in England, as in Scotland, a settled practice of the judges in charges of murder not to accept a plea of guilty tendered by an accused, so as to ensure that sentence of death should only pass after trial before, and verdict of, a

853
jury; and, if not, whether the Government will take steps by legislation or otherwise to bring the practice of England in accord with the practice of Scotland in such cases.
THE ATTORNEY GENERAL (Sir ROBERT FINLAY,): In England there exists no such settled practice as that stated in the question of the hon. Member to exist in Scotland. Every precaution is taken to prevent any danger of miscarriage, and there is no occasion for legislation.

INCOME TAX RETURNS.
MR. SOAMES: I beg to ask Mr. Chancellor of the Exchequer if he is aware that a number of persons who are liable to income tax fail year after year to make any returns of profits under Schedule D; I whether there is any penalty attaching to such an evasion if so, why it is never enforced, and whose duty it is to take proceedings in such cases; and whether he will draw the attention of the persons charged with that duty to the desirability of taking action in the matter.
THE CHANCELLOR OF the EXCHEQUER (Sir M. Hicks BEACH,): It is true that some persons who ought to make returns for assessment under Schedule D of the income tax fail to do so, and thereby incur a penalty for neglect, or render themselves liable to be charged in default of a return in such a sum as the additional commissioners of income tax may deem they ought to be charged. It is not the fact that proceedings for not making a return are never initiated, though as a rule in such cases assessments are made by the additional commissioners, and it is not doubted that the revenue is thereby adequately secured. If the hon. Member can give me any particular instance of default I will inquire into it.

NEW SILVER COINAGE FOR CHRISTMAS DEMAND.
MR. BECKETT: I beg to ask Mr. Chancellor of the Exchequer whether he is aware that the Mint is either unable or unwilling to supply more than a small proportion of the new silver required by the public at Christmas time; and whether he will take steps to induce the Mint to provide such an amount as will more nearly meet the public demand.
SIR M. HICKS BEACH: The arrangements for the distribution of silver coin to meet public wants in England and Wales are made through the Bank of England, the amount of new silver coin estimated by the Bank as necessary to meet the Christmas demand this year was £445,000, and the whole of this has been issued by the Royal Mint. The Bank has a large stock of silver coin in hand to meet trade requirements.

POST OFFICE TELEPHONE EXTENSION—BREAKING UP OF LONDON STREETS.
GENERAL LAURIE: I beg to ask the Secretary to the Treasury, as representing the Postmaster General, whether the Postmaster General could arrange to expedite the work in connection with the extension of the telephone service (which is stated to be the cause of the excavations in the public highways), both by insisting on the workmen being continuously employed and further by the use of relief gangs, so that the work may be carried on day and night, so that the streets may as soon as practicable be available for the purpose for which they were constructed, that is for the locomotion of the public.
MR. AUSTEN CHAMBERLAIN: The Postmaster General is using every effort to expedite the underground work now in progress in connection with the establishment of a telephone exchange service in London, as well as to minimise the inconvenience to the public. It is not possible, however, to carry on all the work by night as well as day. There is no difficult as regards the work of excavation and filling in, but the laying of the ducts must be carried on by day in order to ensure the proper execution of the work. In all important thoroughfares night shifts have been employed on excavation wherever the number of ducts to be laid admitted of the duct-laying keeping pace with the excavation work. The hon. Member must not assume that all the excavations are being made by the Post Office, the electric light companies being engaged in similar operations.
MR. CAUSTON: May I ask whether the hon. Gentleman is aware that the Old Jewry and other important thoroughfares in the City have been completely blocked for a fortnight,

855
and that no carts or conveyances of any kind can get up or down?
MR. BAETLEY: Parts of the city of Westminster are also impassable.
MR. AUSTEN CHAMBEELAIN: I have no information as to particular streets, but if any particular cases of undue delay are brought under my notice I will call the attention of the Postmaster General to them.
GENERAL LAURIE: Cannot it be arranged to continuously employ men at Ludgate Circus, where there are only two men on the excavations from end to end?
[No answer was given.]

BIRKENHEAD POSTMEN'S PAY.
MR. HOULT: I beg to ask the Secretary to the Treasury, as representing the Postmaster General, if he is aware that the maximum pay of new entrants into the town postmen's class at Birkenhead and district has been reduced from 30s. per week to 28s.; and seeing that Birkenhead is practically a residential suburb of Liverpool and forms part of the Port of Liverpool, the cost of living and labour being the same in both towns, can he state on what grounds the reduction has been made.
MR. AUSTEN CHAMBEELAIN: The Postmaster General has decided that the maximum pay of new entrants to the town postmen's class at Birkenhead shall be 28s. instead of 30s. a week, because the lower sum more nearly corresponds with the scale of wages paid at other towns of similar size and importance to Birkenhead.

WALLACE COLLECTION, HERTFORD HOUSE—EXPENDITURE.
MR. BECKETT: I beg to ask the First Commissioner of Works whether he will have a statement prepared of the total sums spent in the reconstruction and decoration of Hertford House, and in the housing, arranging, and cleaning of the Wallace Collection.
THE FIRST COMMISSIONER OF WORKS (Mr. AKERS DOUGLAS,): The expenditure for which I am responsible is limited to the purchase and adaptation of Hertford House, and has amounted to £124,000. I am unable to give the cost of the
856
arranging and cleaning of the collection, as these matters were under the control of the trustees, who have been supplied with funds under a separate Vote for which the Treasury is responsible.

ABERDEEN POST OFFICE BUILDINGS.
MR. PIEIE: I beg to ask the First Commissioner of Works if he can state what sums will be inserted in the Estimates for next year for the new post office buildings in Aberdeen, and whether the building operations could be commenced during this winter, more especially as money has already been voted and that delay has taken place in commencing the work.
MR. AKERS DOUGLAS: The amount to be taken in next year's Estimates for the Aberdeen Post Office is not yet settled, but the work will not be delayed by financial conditions. My hon. friend the Secretary to the Treasury explained the situation on Monday,† and I would again point out that building has not been commenced owing to the difficulty of coming to terms with the town authorities, who, at the last moment, put forward a proposal for widening the street. After long negotiation the town authorities have agreed to provide the necessary equivalent in land, but the shape of the site is altered so that fresh plans and specifications have to be drawn up; and with every desire to push matters on, I cannot undertake that the work can be commenced before the middle of next year.

ROAD CONSTRUCTION IN THE ISLAND OF LEWIS.
MR. WEIR: I beg to ask the Lord Advocate if he will state what progress has been made with the proposed road between Gravir and Cromore, in the Park District of the Island of Lewis.
THE LORD ADVOCATE (MR. A. GRAHAM MURRAY,): The Congested Districts Board made an offer some time ago of a subsidy for this road, and they are now awaiting the reply of the county council.

CROMARTY—EVICTION OF MARY ROSS.
MR. WEIR: I beg to ask the Lord Advocate if he will state under what cir-
† See page 349.

857
cumstances Mary Ross, aged ninety-one, of Church Street, Cromarty, was evicted from her house in August last. And was the house sold by order of the Crown; if so, will he state the price it realised, and the amount received by the Crown after payment of all expenses.
MR. A. GRAHAM MURRAY: The house referred to did not belong to the Mary Ross mentioned, but to Mrs. Margaret Peter. Mary Ross resided in the house as a pauper in receipt of outdoor relief. Mrs. Margaret Peter was illegitimate and died intestate. The house, therefore, fell to the Crown as ultimus hœres, and was sold. It was of small value; I am informed that the net amount accruing to the Crown was £18 11s. 5d.
MR. WEIR: What was the total sum realised?
MR. A. GRAHAM MURRAY: About £40.
MR. WEIR: Not more than half the value of the property.

SOUTH UIST—REPORT ON OUTBREAK OF INFECTIOUS DISEASE.
MR. JOHN DEWAR: I beg to ask the Lord Advocate whether the Government will publish, or allow to be copied, the full text of the Report, dated 28th December, 1897, by Sheriff Campbell, Stornoway, and the papers and proceedings of the inquiry on which the Report was based, in regard to an outbreak of infectious disease in South Uist, in Inverness-shire, which are referred to in the Fourth Animal Report (year 1898) of the Local Government Board of Scotland.
MR. A. GRAHAM MURRAY: The matter referred to is dealt with by the Board in their Fourth Annual Report, pages 23 and 45, and a very full summary of the Report is further given in the Appendix, pages 37–39. There therefore appears to be no occasion for further publication.

TYPHUS FEVER IN INVERNESS-SHIRE.
MR. JOHN DEWAR: I beg to ask the Lord Advocate whether the Local Government Board for Scotland was aware of an epidemic of typhus fever, involving twenty cases (of which six were
858
fatal) between 1st October, 1899, and 12th February, 1900, in the locality between Finsbay and Scadabay, in the parish of Harris, in Inverness-shire, having a congested crofter and cottar population of about 1,000; and whether the Local Government Board, the County Medical Officer, and the District Medical Officer of Health failed to visit the locality or to take any steps to check or to assist in checking that epidemic; and, whether a public inquiry will be made into the circumstances attending that outbreak.
MR. A. GRAHAM MURRAY: The figures given by the hon. Member are, I believe, correct, but the Local Government Board had no special intimation of the outbreak, the existence of which they learned from the regular reports of the medical and sanitary officers, the County Medical Officer did not visit the locality between the dates specified, but he was in constant communication with the District Medical Officer, who did, and who reports as follows:—"The Local Authority acted very promptly, and gave every assistance. "On the whole matter I am satisfied that no more could have been done in the absence of an isolation hospital, and I do not see any reason for ordering a public inquiry.

SCOTTISH SCHOOL BOARD TEACHERS —APPEALS AGAINST DISMISSAL.
MR. NICOL: I beg to ask the Lord Advocate whether a measure giving the right of appeal to teachers in Scotland in cases of their alleged wrongful dismissal by School Boards will be introduced by the Government during the session of 1901.
SIR MARK STEWART: I beg also to ask the Lord Advocate if it is the intention of the Government, next session, to introduce legislation in order to give teachers in Scotland a right of appeal in cases of wrongful dismissal, also to give to old teachers the same right to superannuation allowances as are enjoyed by those who have become teachers at a comparatively recent date.
MR. A.GRAHAM MURRAY: With regard to the first part of the question, the subject is under consideration, and there will be a conference between the

859
English and Scotch Education Departments, but I am not prepared to give any definite pledge at the present time. In regard to superannuation, the allowances to old teachers under the Superannuation Act are fixed by the terms of the Act, and while certain advantages are offered to those teachers, I am not prepared to say that they can establish a claim to superannuation on the same scale as teachers who have paid the contributions under the Act for the whole period of their service.

SCOTTISH UNIVERSITY FEES RETURN.
MR. THOMAS SHAW: I beg to ask the Lord Advocate if he can say when the Return of the fees payable at the Universities of Scotland is expected to be issued.
MR. A. GRAHAM MURRAY: The Secretary for Scotland is still awaiting the Return from the University of St. Andrews, which is promised, however, within a few days. As soon as it is received the figures will be arranged and the Return issued.

ILLEGAL TRAWLING OFF THE HIGHLANDS AND ISLANDS.
MR. CATHCART WASON: I beg to ask the First Lord of the Treasury whether, in view of the fact that the attention of the Government has been repeatedly called to the violations of the law by persons and companies engaged in the pursuit of trawling within forbidden limits, the Government will take into consideration during the recess adequate measures for protecting the property of the coast fishermen round Shetland and Orkney and the Highlands and Islands of Scotland.
MR. A. GRAHAM MURRAY: As regards illegal trawling the Government have taken measures to prevent trawling within the enclosed areas, as has been privately explained to the hon. Member, and it is not at present possible to come under any further obligations on the subject, but any practical suggestions made to the Government will receive their most careful consideration. I ought to say that I cannot wholly understand or admit the propriety of the use of the word "property" in the question.

ILLEGAL TRAWLING IN MORAY FIRTH.
MR. BLACK: I beg to ask the Lord Advocate whether his attention has been called to the case of a foreign trawler, convicted a few weeks ago of trawling within the three-mile limit near Burghead in the Moray Firth; whether he is aware that the fine of £50 imposed in that case was less than the value of the trawler's catch, and thus afforded no practical deterrent against a repetition of the offence; whether the Government have considered as to an increase of the maximum fine of £100 and forfeiture of nets at present exigible; and whether it is the intention of the Government to introduce a measure for the better enforcement of the restrictions against trawling within forbidden areas.
MR. A. GRAHAM MURRAY: The Fishery Board have no official information as to the value of the catch in question, but they cannot assume that the judge who had the whole circumstances before him and imposed a penalty short of the maximum, did not keep in view the adequacy of the penalty as a deterrent to a repetition of the offence. The Government have not at present under consideration any increase of the maximum penalties. As regards further measures it is not clear what class of measure the hon. Member suggests. But it is to be observed that while up to 1898 the Fishery Board had only one cruiser at their disposal they have now three, and will shortly have four.

SCOTTISH SHERIFFS' SALARIES.
MR. WEIR: I beg to ask the Secretary to the Treasury whether the Report of the Committee appointed to inquire into the question of increasing the salaries of sheriff's in Scotland has yet been considered; and, if so, will he state the character of the decision.
MR. AUSTEN CHAMBERLAIN: The Report is now under the consideration of the Treasury.

ORANGE DISTURBANCES AT STEWARDSTOWN.
MR. T. M. HEALY: I beg to ask the Chief Secretary to the Lord Lieutenant of Ireland whether he is aware that on the night of 26th October an Orange drumming party, numbering according to

861
the police about 200, marched through Stewardstown, county Tyrone, and without provocation broke the windows in seventeen Roman Catholic houses, including that of the parish priest; that the mob also assaulted and stoned Roman Catholic inhabitants and the police; that one policeman has lodged a claim for £1,000 in consequence of the injuries he received from the Orangemen; and that the riot lasted from 8 p.m. to 4 a.m., although fifteen extra police were drafted in in aid of the local force; can he say why no batons were drawn during the riot nor arrests made, and whether inquiry will be made into the conduct of the head constable who was in charge of the force as to why the rioters were allowed to remain undispersed; is he aware that at the subsequent hearing of the summonses against the accused parties the Crown Solicitor only asked for a rule of bail against them; and that the Crown Solicitor allowed the magistrate to adjudicate without protest, although the Orange Lodge is kept in his house, and a constable swore the rioters went there for torches; and did the resident magistrate who presided at the trial say the men were only out for a night's amusement; and will the Government take any steps to restore amongst Roman Catholics some confidence in the administration of the law.
THE CHIEF SECRETARY FOR IRELAND (Mr. WYNDHAM,): The facts are substantially as stated in the first paragraph. Evidence, however, was also given to the effect that bottles were thrown at the Orange party, numbering some 400, from the house of one of the opposite party. The police on duty used every possible exertion to quell the disturbances. The head constable, in my opinion, acted with discretion in not ordering the police to use their batons. Owing to the darkness of the night it was impossible to detect the actual stone-throwers. Proceedings were taken against six persons who formed part of the riotous crowd, and they were bound to the peace. It is not proposed to hold an inquiry into the conduct of the head constable the Crown Solicitor asked the Bench to place the accused under a rule of bail. It is the fact that an Orange Lodge meets in an outhouse belonging to one of the magistrates who
862
adjudicated. So far as I am aware there was nothing in the evidence to connect him in any way with the accused, and therefore the Crown Solicitor took no exception to his presence on the Bench. The Resident Magistrate, who presided, stated that—
"The persons in the crowd were out for amusement, and were within their rights so long as they conducted themselves, but as soon as stones were thrown they became members of an unlawful assembly."
MR. T. M. HEALY: How is it that for eight hours the riot was allowed to continue without a single arrest being made by the police?
MR. WYNDHAM: I think the constables acted with great discretion. They were a relatively small force, and the numbers of the opposing party were very great.
MR. T. M. HEALY: Will the right hon. Gentleman give instructions that the same discretion shall be shown in the rest of Ireland whenever a riot goes on?
[No answer was returned.]

IRISH SCHOOL TEACHERS—GRADES AND PENSION RIGHTS.
MR. T. M. HEALY: I beg to ask the Chief Secretary to the Lord Lieutenant of Ireland whether the teachers appointed before the 1st April, 1900, and who will be graded higher than their present classes according to the new system of grading, will get the pension rights of the grades to which they will be promoted by paying increased premiums.
MR. WYNDHAM: It will not be possible for some time to say whether any changes will be needed in the Pension Rules owing to the new system of grading of National Teachers, but the rights of teachers who were in the service before 1st April, 1900, under the Pension Rules then in force, will be safeguarded.

CATTLE DISEASE—IRISH REMOVAL REGULATIONS.
SIR JAMES RANKIN: I beg to ask the Chief Secretary to the Lord Lieutenant of Ireland whether, in view of the fact that Great Britain is free from cattle disease

863
of any kind, it would be possible for the Irish Government to remove the restrictions at present existing upon the importation of cattle for breeding purposes from Great Britain into Ireland.
MR. WYNDHAM: The restrictions upon the importation of cattle from Great Britain into Ireland have been relaxed, but in consequence of the existence of disease amongst cattle in this country it is felt that the restrictions cannot at present be entirely removed.

DUBLIN CORPORATION BILL—EQUALISATION OF RATES.
MR. T. M. HEALY: I beg to ask the Chief Secretary to the Lord Lieutenant of Ireland if the undertaking, given by his predecessor on the Third Beading of the Dublin Corporation Bill last session,† has been complied with in reference to communicating the intentions of the Government to the corporation before November with regard to the introduction of an Equalisation of Bates Bill as between Dublin City and the townships of Rathmines and Pembroke in the form recommended by the Joint Committee of Lords and Commons last session.
MR. WYNDHAM: No, Sir. So soon as I arrived in Dublin after appointment to my present post I conveyed to the Corporation of Dublin an expression of regret that it had proved impossible to fulfil the undertaking owing to the General Election and changes in the Government. The Lord Mayor was good enough to accept the reasonableness of that explanation, and I am in communication with him on the subject.
MR. T. M. HEALY: Is the right hon. Gentleman aware that it was on the assurance of the then Chief Secretary that the Corporation Bill was allowed to pass?
MR. WYNDHAM: I do not derive that impression from studying the debate.

IRISH CUSTOMS AND EXCISE DUTIES —REMITTANCES TO LONDON.
COLONEL NOLAN: I beg to ask Mr. Chancellor of the Exchequer if he can state what sum was remitted by the Bank of Ireland to London in the last financial year, as representing the excess of Excise, Customs,
† See The, Parliamentary Debates [Fourth Series], Vol. lxxxvi., p. 1294.
864
taxes, and other imposts collected in Ireland over the civil expenditure in Ireland.
SIR M. HICKS BEACH: The amount remitted by the Bank of Ireland in the financial year 1899–1900 was £4,000,000; but this only approximately represents the excess of receipts over civil expenditure in Ireland as the balance left in the exchequer account in the Bank of Ireland varies according to circumstances, and the larger part of this excess of receipts is required to meet Army and Navy expenditure in Ireland, which is paid for here.

MINISTERS' SALARIES—THE LORD PRIVY SEAL.
SIR JOHN COLOMB: I beg to ask the First Lord of the Treasury whether, in view of the proposed revival of a salary attached to the office of Lord Privy Seal, he can give an assurance that before the Vote is taken an opportunity will be afforded to the House other than that under provisions of Standing Order No. 50, to discuss the expediency of rearranging the salaries of Ministers of the Crown, and of considering the existing circumstances under which the Lord President of the Privy Council, with a salary borne by Civil Service Estimates, is specially employed as President of the Defence Committee of the Cabinet in discharging duties of great importance in relation to the security of the Empire in war.
MR. A. J. BALFOUR: I am afraid I should hardly be justified in giving ray lion, and gallant friend the special facilities next session that he asks for in order to carry out the rather wide subject of discussion he proposes. I may point out, as regards the last part of this question, that the principle therein laid down is one that could hardly be accepted by the House, for it seems to be matter of unimportance upon what kind of Vote the salary is borne of a Minister who is asked to serve on the Committee of the Cabinet. The Defence Committee is only a Cabinet committee, as I have before explained to the House, and I think it should be treated as such.

DATE OF NEXT SESSION.
MR. CHANNING: I beg to ask the first Lord of the Treasury whether he

865
will consider the convenience of Members who may be going abroad, and announce now or before the end of the present sittings the approximate date at which the next session will begin.
MR. A. J. BALFOUR: Parliament will be prorogued till February 14, and I think we shall have to meet on that day. If it turns out to be possible the Government will be very glad if, after the labours of this session, the meeting can be delayed until the 19th, but I doubt whether that would be practicable.
MR. CHANNING: Can we understand that unless there is a great emergency Parliament will not be called before the 14th?
MR. A. J. BALFOUR: Unless some quite unexpected event occurs we shall not be called together before the 14th.

CLOSURE OF SUPPLY.
MR. HERBERT LEWIS: I beg to ask the First Lord of the Treasury whether in view of the number of Votes closured every year in Committee of Supply, the Government will in the early part of next session appoint a Grand Committee to consider the details of National expenditure without derogating from the existing rights of Members to criticise Votes in Committee of Supply.
MR. A. J. BALFOUR: I have no reason to think there is any general desire to make the innovation in procedure recommended by the hon. Gentleman. This question seems to assume that there was less discussion under the new rule than under the old system. As a matter of fact there is much fuller discussion.

SIR CHARLES DILKE'S SPEECH OF YESTERDAY—PERSONAL EXPLANATION.
SIR CHARLES DILKE: I wish to explain a report of words used by me which has led to a representation by a recognised public body with regard to those words. The statement reported is "that the value of the mineral rights under surface sites for the Rand alone had appeared in the report accepted by the late Chamber of Mines as 44 millions sterling. "That was so reported, and it is a mistake, the complaint is made on behalf of the Chamber of Mines that the words are incorrect. The reference which I made to the Chamber of Mines was at
866
an earlier point and on another matter the words which I used were these:—"That the various estimates taken of the value of these rights are:—Over £75,000,000, £75,000,000, £44,000,000, £40,000,000—that is the estimate, I understand, accepted by the late Ministry of Mines of the Transvaal Government "—the word chamber has been reported—"also as low as £7,500,000 and £1,000,000."A mistake has been made by my having been reported to have said in that place "Chamber of Mines" instead of the "late Ministry of Mines of the Transvaal Government."

SITTINGS OF the HOUSE.
Resolved, That this House do meet To-morrow, at Ten of the clock.—(MR. Balfour.)

SUPPLEMENTAL WAR LOAN (No. 2) BILL.
Considered in Committee.
(In the Committee.)
[Mr. J. W. LOWTHER (Cumberland, Penrith) in the Chair.]
Clause 1:—
MR. EDMUND ROBERTSON: There are one or two points of detail which I should like to submit very shortly for the consideration of the Chancellor of the Exchequer and of the Committee on the question that Clause 1 stand part of the Bill. This is, I think, the fourth of the series of War Loan Bills, and I do not suppose that it is the last. When the first Bill of this series was brought before the House in October, 1899, the Chancellor of the Exchequer made a statement in regard to his intention which was then received with much satisfaction from all parts of the House, and as to which, I think, some re-assurance would be now desirable, the question was as between permanent borrowing and taxation; and this is what the Chancellor of the Exchequer said on the 23rd October, 1899, on one of the stages of the first Loan Bill. He said—
"My intention is that this debt will not be of long duration. I think it ought to be provided for, if necessary, of course, by an addition to taxation, but I hope it may be paid oil' in the year next ensuing or even sooner."
Are we now to understand that as the cost of the war is much greater than the

867
right hon. Gentleman contemplated, the undertaking he then gave no longer holds good? Are we to understand that we are adding something to the debt which will not be subject to the declaration then made by the Chancellor of the Exchequer? I put a question to the Chancellor of the Exchequer the other day on another point. It is not the first time I have approached him on that subject. We were discussing yesterday the question of the Transvaal assets available for the cost of the war. I think there are other assets which may be made available, and which are now running to waste. The specific asset I have in contemplation, and which is not new made use of, is what is called the monopoly value of the publicans' sences arising from the present scale of duties.
THE CHAIRMAN: That question does not arise on the first clause of this Bill.
MR. EDMUND ROBERTSON: I understood that I should be in order in discussing any question relating to the raising of ways and means.
THE CHAIRMAN: The hon. Member will see that it would be quite impossible to frame an Amendment to cover the point he raises.
MR. EDMUND ROBERTSON: I understood that I would have been in order if I had raised this point on the Second Reading of the Bill, and that I would have been in order in raising it in Committee. If you rule that I am not in order, I have nothing more to say on that point. But I have another point which I can make relevant without any great strain on logic —and that is as to the extent to which Imperial contributions might be made towards the cost of the war. Without going further into the matter I hope that at some later stage some kind of assurance will be given that the self governing portions of the Empire outside the United Kingdom which have responded so loyally to the call of the Empire will show that they are equally willing to recognise their responsibilities in other directions.
MR. T. M. HEALYdesired to ask the Chancellor of the Exchequer whether he could give any reply with regard to the question he had asked previously as to the amount of the War Loan given to America. Considerable
868
dissatisfaction had been expressed at the amount of the last loan given to that country. Not only had America got the making of war-like stores, such ac bridges and so forth, but in addition to that a large portion of the loan as well.
THE CHANCELLOR or the EXCHEQUER (SIR M. Hicks - Beach,): I can make no promise whatever as to the means by which I shall raise this loan, except so far as they are laid down in this Bill, nor any action I may take as to the place where it will be raised. As I have already staged to the House, it may be more than six weeks before it is necessary to raise any money at all, and it is impossible for me to forecast what may be the state of the money market then, or in what manner it will be most useful to the public to raise the loan. As to the last loan, I found that in all probability I could not obtain in the London market such terms as a Chancellor of the Exchequer ought to accept. I therefore made inquiries in America; a part was taken there at a fair price, and the remainder was scrambled for in the money market here mainly, I believe, because part of the loan had been taken up in America. Having made inquiries since of persons well able to form an opinion, I am confident that my action in placing had a very fit of the here.
Clause 1 and remaining clauses agreed to.
Bill reported without amendment; to third time To-morrow.

CONSOLIDATED FUND (APPROPRIATION) BILL.
Considered in Committee.
(In the Committee.)
Clause 1: —
MR. T. M. HEALY: I desire to renew the protest I made in March last in regard to the amount asked for to provide for the purposes of this war. I do not believe that £16,000,000 is an adequate sum, and I believe that the Government, as I said last March, are unconsciously-deceiving themselves and misleading the taxpayers. We cannot expect Gentlemen in the position of the Chancellor of the Exchequer to do more in their personal

869
capacity than he has clone, for naturally he wishes to minimise the cost, and shrinks from facing realities. When the right hon. Gentleman stated in March last that he would only have to make provision up till September he must have been acting on information from the War Department, and the House went to a dissolution on that. I do not say that the political consequence of this miscalculation now is as grave as it was then or that the results can be so serious, because there will not be a dissolution between this and 31st March next, but the three Kingdoms have been misled by previous estimates, and the Government have been voted consequence. I think disasters occurring as are told it is mere guerilla warfare, it is not £16,000,000, but £60,000,000, that will be needed. These small amounts that are being asked for, lest you should frighten your own supporters, must prove of the greatest encouragement to the Boors. You say you want to put an end to the war, but you cannot do it on the cheap, and it would be far better to take your courage in both hands and confess the truth to the nation. To pretend the war is over, and that the Republics are conquered, is to foster a delusion. Having divided the House upon the Vote in former stages, I do not propose to divide the House now, because having by voice and vote made my protest against this unjust and ruinous war, I do not consider I am called upon to do more, but I seriously invite the attention of I he taxpayers to the fact that this, £16,000,000 is just as inadequate for the job which you have in hand as the amount you asked for in March last. I do not attach the least blame to the Chancellor of the Exchequer personally, because he has, I believe, never been in favour of the policy which provoked this train of misfortunes.
Clause 1 and remaining clauses agreed to.
Bill reported without amendment; to be read the third time To-morrow.

POST OFFICE (WEST INDIA MAIL CONTRACT).
Order read, for resuming Adjourned Debate on Question [13th December], "That the Contract, dated the 1st day of September, 1900, entered into with the Royal Mail Steam Packet Company for
870
the conveyance of the West India Mails for the period from the 1st day of July 1900, to the 30th day of June, 1905, be approved—(Mr. Austen Chamberlain.)
Question put, and agreed to.
Resolved, That the Contract, dated the 1st day of September, 1900, entered into with the Royal Mail Steam Packet Company for the conveyance of the West India Mails for the period from the 1st day of July, 1900, to the 30th day of June, 1905, be approved.
Whereupon, in pursuance of the Order of the House of the 7th day of this, instant December, Mr. Speaker adjourned the Mouse without Question put.
Adjourned accordingly at a quarter before Five of the clock.

TEMPORARY EXECUTION OF POWERS OF SPEAKER.
By virtue of an Act passed in the twenty-fourth year of the reign of His late Majesty King George the Third, intituled, "An Act to repeal so much of two Acts made in the tenth and fifteenth years of the reign of His present Majesty, as authorises the Speaker of the House of Commons to issue his Warrant to the Clerk of the Crown for making out Writs for the Election of Members to serve in Parliament, in the manner therein mentioned, and for substituting other provisions for the like purpose,"I do hereby nominate, appoint, and authorise—

The Right Hon. John William Mellor,

Sir John Edward Dorington, baronet,

The Right Hon. James Alexander Campbell,

Sir Thomas Henry Grattan-Esmonde, baronet,

Mr. Henry Hobhouse, and

Mr. John Edward Ellis,

being Members of the House of Commons, or any one or more of them, to execute all and singular the powers given to the Speaker of the House of Commons for the time being, for issuing Warrants to the Clerk of the Crown, in the cases as in the said Act specified.
Given under my hand and seal, this tenth day of December, in the year of our Lord One thousand nine hundred.
WILLIAM COURT GULLY,
Speaker.
14th December, 1900.

APPEAL COMMITTEE.
First Report from; read and agreed to.

ADDRESS.
The Queen's Answer to the Address of the 6th instant reported, and Address and Answer to be printed and published.
Several Lords took the Oath.

RETURNS, REPORTS, ETC.
  FISHERY BOARD FOR SCOTLAND.
  Manual of the Sea Fisheries (Scotland) Acts and Statutory Byelaws in force at 31st December, 1900.
  COLONIES (MISCELLANEOUS).
  No. 15. Canada (Memorandum on the legal status of British North American Indians).

  RAILWAY ACCIDENTS.
  Returns of accidents and casualties as reported to the Board of Trade by the several railway companies in the United s Kingdom during the nine months ending g 30th September, 1900, in pursuance of the Regulation of Railways Act (1871), 34th and 35th Victoria, chap. 78; together with reports of the inspecting officers and sub-inspectors of the Railway Department to the Board of Trade upon certain accidents which were inquired into.
  Presented [by Command], and ordered to lie on the Table.

  LOCAL GOVERNMENT ACT, 1888.
  Orders under Section 57 of the Act, as confirmed by the Local Government Board, of the following county councils—

  I. Brecon, for uniting the parishes of Aberystruth Brynmawr Urban, Llanelly Brynmawr Urban, and Llangattock Brynmawr Urban to form parish of Brynmawr.

  II. Bucks, for transferring part of the parish of Ashley Green from the Amersham Rural District to the parish and urban district of Chesham.

  800

  III. Bucks, for transferring parts o the parishes of Upton-cum-Chalvey and Eaton Wick from the Eton Rural District to the parish and urban district of Eton.

  IV. Bucks, for transferring parts of the parishes of Upton-cum-Chalvey, Stoke Poges, and Langley Marish from the Eton Rural District to the parish and urban district of Slough.

  V. Chester, for adding the parish of Kerridge to the Bollington Urban District and for uniting the parish of Kerridge with the township of Bollington.

  VI. Chester, for uniting the parish of Bosden and the townships of Bramhall Norbury, Offerton, and Torkington to form the parish of Hazel Grove-cum-Bramhall and the Hazel Grove and Bram-hall Urban District.

  VII. Hertford, for uniting the parishes of All Saints, Bengee Urban, Brickendon Urban, Saint Andrew Urban, and Saint John Urban to form the parish of Hertford.

  VIII. Kent, for transferring parts of the parish of Heme from the Blean Rural District to the parish and urban district of Heme Bay.

  IX. Pembroke, for the conversion of a portion of the parish of Llanstadwell into the parish and urban district of Neyland.

  X. East Suffolk, for the conversion of the parish of Saxmundham into the Sax-mundham Urban District.

  XI West Sussex, for transferring parts of the parishes of Bersted and Pagham from the Westhampnett Rural District to the parish and urban district of Bognor.

  INDIA (EXAMINATIONS).
  Regulations for examinations for Civil Service of India.
  NEWCASTLE CHAPTER ACT, 1884.
  Order in Council of the 26th November, 1900, establishing two Residentiary Canonries in the Cathedral Church of Newcastle.
  GOVERNMENT OF INDIA ACT, 1858
  Order in Council of the 26th of November, 1900, approving a statement of proposed now and revised appointments, alterations of salaries, and abolition of appointment in the establishment of the Secretary of State for India in Council.
  FOREIGN JURISDICTION ACT, 1890.
  Order in Council of the 26th of November, 1900, entitled "The Siam (Registration) Order in Council, 1900."

  MERCHANT SHIPPING ACT, 1894.
  Two Orders in Council of the 26th of November, 1900:—

  1. Fixing an increase of salary for a clerk in the establishment of the Commissioners of Northern Lighthouses.

  2. Making rules concerning the lights and signals to be carried by vessels when within the Harbour of Galway.

  SEAMEN'S SAVINGS BANKS, MONEY ORDERS, AND TRANSMISSION OF WAGES.
  Account of all deposits received and repaid by the Board of Trade, under the authority of the Merchant Shipping Act, 1894, during the year ended 20th November, 1899, and of the interest thereon. Statement showing the number and amount of seamen's money orders issued and paid, at ports in the United Kingdom and at ports abroad, from 1855 to 31st March, 1900. Also, statement showing; the receipts and payments in connection with the transmission of seamen's wages from 1878 to 31st March, 1900.

  PRIVATE LEGISLATION PROCEDURE (SCOTLAND) ACT, 1899.
  General Order for the regulation of proceedings under and in pursuance of the Act amending General Orders Nos. 70 and 71, already issued.
  Laid before the House (pursuant to Act), and ordered to lie on the Table.

  BUSINESS OF THE HOUSE.
  Standing Order No. XXXIX. to be considered To-morrow, in order to its being suspended for the day's sitting.

  LORD HARDWICKE AND LORD ROSE-BERY—PERSONAL EXPLANATION.
  THE UNDER SECRETARY of STATE for INDIA (The Earl of HARDWICKE): My Lords, I crave your Lordships' indulgence while I make a few remarks in reply to the comments made by the noble Earl, Lord Rosebery, in his speech on the Address, in reference to my appointment as Under Secretary
  802
  for India.* I have given the noble Earl private notice of my intention to make a statement this afternoon, a courtesy which he did not think fit to extend to me, or I should have been able at once to reply to his observations, and thus to have saved your Lordships' time this afternoon. I could hardly have been expected to foresee that the noble Earl would have included my humble name in the list of personalities he introduced into his versatile and entertaining speech. In making this statement this afternoon I have only one object in view, and that is, to place your Lordships and the public in full and entire possession of the whole of the facts in connection with my position in the City. It is, I think, a fourfold duty I owe to the noble Marquess the Prime Minister, to your Lordships, to the public, and, perhaps, to the noble Earl himself, who expressed the conviction that I had severed my connection with the London Stock Exchange before accepting office. But why, my Lords, if the noble Earl was so convinced, was it necessary to introduce the question of my appointment into his speech at all? Did the noble Earl mean, when he insisted on the perils arising from any connection between Her Majesty's Government and the Stock Exchange, that no man can serve in any Government who has ever been a member of the Stock Exchange? If that was the noble Earl's meaning there is very little I can say in answer to it. The facts, my Lords, with regard to myself are these. About a month ago the noble Marquess the Prime Minister offered me this appointment. I pointed out to him, through his private secretary, and personally to the Secretary of State for India, that though I could undertake to relinquish all active share in the conduct of the business of the firm of Messrs. Basil Montgomery and Co., in which I am a partner, I could not undertake to sever my connection with that firm; and, my Lords, I will explain why. Eighteen or twenty years ago a private Bill was passed through Parliament, known as the Hardwicke Estates Act. This Act transferred to trustees the administration of the estates, and it seems almost like the relentless irony of fate that after ten years those estates should have passed into the hands of the mortgagees, who became the possessors of all that that Act
  *See page 48.

  803
  was passed to secure to myself. I was left without a shilling, and I had to consider what I should do, and which way I should turn. I decided to embark on a career in the City, and it is eight years since my connection with my present firm commenced. I do not say, my Lords, that the course I elected to pursue was the only course open to a Peer who, early in life, finds himself involved in financial embarrassment. I am told there are pleasanter and easier methods of rehabilitating one's fortune than working for a living in the City. But, my Lords, however that may be, I took that course, and I am very glad of the connection I have had with the London Stock Exchange. In the City a man can gain an experience and a knowledge of men and matters that is not easily obtainable elsewhere. The plain fact of the matter is that I cannot afford to cut off my only means of livelihood for the sake of a few years of office—no, not even to oblige the noble Earl. What, therefore, I decided and have arranged is this. I remain a partner in my firm; I remain a member of the Stock Exchange, and I have the right in the future to return to it; but in the meantime I shall never enter the Stock Exchange, and I shall take no active part of any kind in the conduct of the business of the firm. Naturally, my Lords, this arrangement could not be carried out in a day, and I therefore asked that I might be allowed to defer taking up my duties at the India Office until the beginning of the new year, and to this request the Prime Minister and the Secretary of State acceded; and I have to thank the noble Earl the Under Secretary for the Colonies for having so kindly undertaken to discharge my duties in the meantime. Perhaps I may mention, to save the noble Earl a personal explanation if the question was raised, that though he is doing the duties of two Under Secretaries he is only receiving one salary. Seeing that the Opposition are making much of a personal line of attack I have been scrupulously careful to avoid even the most formal communication with the officials of the India Office. I have not even had the pleasure of being introduced to the heads of the Department. We have recently learned that the most harmless and natural acts can be made the pretext for unjust and unworthy insinua-
  804
  tions; and, further, in case the noble Marquess might have been convinced by the noble Earl's arguments, I took the earliest opportunity to offer to resign the appointment. Perhaps the noble Earl will be surprised to learn that the noble Marquess did not see the necessity. As regards the observations of the noble Earl, I am not ungrateful to him for his generous and kindly expression of pleasure at my appointment, apart from the dangerous principle he deems my appointment to involve. But I cannot help thinking that the noble Earl came down to this House, having taken as little trouble to consider my position as ho did that of Mr. Gerald Balfour. He insinuated that the right hon. Gentleman was a director of several companies, while, as a matter of fact, he is not a director of any company at all. I do not doubt that the noble Earl has already apologised for his mistake. Then, if the noble Earl had considered the past administration of the India Office, I think he would have left alone the question of my appointment, as he would undoubtedly have left alone the question of Mr. Gerald Balfour and his supposed directorships. Noble Lords are aware that the powers of the India Office in respect of finance are wholly in the hands of the India Council. Its members have it in their power to use any special knowledge they may have for their own personal advantage in the City through the medium of the Stock Exchange. Now my Lords, whom did Mr. Gladstone appoint as finance member of the India Council in 1880? Mr. Bertram Currie, a leading banker in active business, a member of the important bank of Messrs. Glynn, Mills, and Co. The noble Earl was a member of that Government. Did he protest against that appointment? And again, my Lords, in this same Administration whom did Mr. Gladstone appoint as Under Secretary for India? He appointed Mr. Kynaston Cross, a partner in a firm of cotton merchants; and it may not be uninteresting to your lordships to be reminded that the two principal questions which the India Office had to deal with during the life of that Government were the fall in silver and the cotton duties. I should like to know if the noble Earl pointed out to Mr. Gladstone that the purity of his Ministry was in question? However that may be, I do know that the practical commercial experience and

  805
  trained financial ability of Mr. Currie and Mr. Cross were of great value to the Secretary of State in one of the most serious economic crises through which India has passed. I do not for a moment mean to say, or even to suggest, that I shall be of any special value to my noble friend the Secretary of State for India, but I must say that I fail to see why any practical experience I may have gained in the City is to be considered a disqualification. To-day, my Lords, on the India Council there are two gentlemen, both of distinguished and conspicuous ability, both of unquestionable integrity, but they are both members of business firms in the City of London. From the noble Earl's speech we must assume that he has the merest, the simplest, knowledge of matters connected with the Stock Exchange, or he would know that it does not require a man to be a member of the Stock Exchange to make use of any special knowledge for speculative purposes. Anyone in the public service, from a Cabinet Minister to a Permanent Secretary, can in ten minutes send an order for the purchase or the sale of any security in the world without anyone being one whit the wiser. If, however, the noble Earl, on highly technical and moral grounds, holds that there is a danger in a member of the Stock Exchange, who, after all, is only the agent who executes the business of others, being a member of Her Majesty's Government, what are we to say of the stockbroker's client? Surely, if the stockbroker is to be debarred the client must be debarred also; and it comes to this. Does the noble Earl hold that a man who at any time has been engaged in financial or speculative operations is not worthy to be a Minister of the Crown, or even an Under Secretary? Does the noble Earl accept that proposition? Is he prepared to adhere to that principle? The noble Earl gives no sign of dissent or assent. I pass to the general public question raised in his speech, only to say that I think it would be almost an impertinence in me to discuss it. While I was made the peg on which to hang an argument, the argument was obviously directed against the noble Marquess the Prime Minister, for it was he, not I, who made the choice of an Under Secretary—a choice which the noble Earl thinks is so fraught with peril to Her Majesty's
  806
  Government. I have endeavoured plainly to place my position before the House, and, while thanking your Lordships for the indulgent hearing accorded me, I desire to express my regret at the unpleasant necessity which has compelled my first utterance at this Table to take the form of a personal explanation.
  THE EARL OF ROSEBERY: My Lords, I confess that the speech of the noble Earl has placed me in a position of considerable difficulty, because no one could have heard it without the liveliest sympathy at the position which he has described. I was aware of that position as far as regards the private Act of Parliament of which he spoke when I addressed your Lordships the other night; and it was my knowledge of the circumstances attending that Act and following upon that Act relating to himself that caused me to speak in terms which he, I think, acknowledges as warm and generous with regard to his career. In the circumstances I am, therefore, in a position of great delicacy, because, as the noble Earl has pointed out, though I spoke of him, as I felt, in warm and generous tones, I also asserted a public principle. Now I am sorry to say that there is nothing in what the noble Earl has said which shakes my maintenance of the public principle I laid down. He said: "Are we to understand that no one who has ever been connected with the Stock Exchange or with commercial pursuits is ever to be a Minister or to form part of the Government of the country?" Of course this is reducing my argument to an absurdity. My argument did not refer to the past, it referred to the present; and if the noble Earl asks me whether I maintain the principle that no member of a firm on the Stock Exchange should be a Minister of the Crown I am obliged to say that I maintain my opinion. I say it with the deepest regret. I do not mean in saying that to disparage the Stock Exchange. Many of my friends are connected with the Stock Exchange, and I know how high and honourable a pursuit it is, or it may be. But that is not the point. The point is whether connection with a firm on the Stock Exchange is or is not compatible with the position of a Minister of the Crown. It has never been so held in the past, and I hope it will never be so held in the future, because, though I am

  807
  perfectly certain that the noble Earl is as incapable of misusing his position as Minister of the Crown as any of those who have occupied that high and honourable position, yet it is unfitting in these days that there should be any circumstances connected with a Ministry of the Crown which should in any degree lend the slightest foundation to any suspicion affecting their honour as Ministers. The noble Earl has referred to past precedents. I do not thoroughly carry them in my mind. He has said that even now there are two members of the India Council who are connected with firms. But members of the India Council are not members, so to speak, of the current Administration of the country. They are in the position of permanent advisers for a fixed term to the Minister responsible for the Government of India. In these circumstances they do not fall in the same category as those more responsible Ministers who sit in this and the other House of Parliament. The Minister who makes these appointments is responsible for them, and behind that responsibility, where I know nothing of the case, I am not willing to inquire. The noble Earl also referred to a case which occurred twenty years ago—that of an Under Secretary for India appointed by Mr. Gladstone in 1880; and he says to me, "Were you not a member of that Government?" Well, in 1880 I was not. But there is a Member of this House who was Secretary of State for India at that time, and he can give every information to the noble Earl on that appointment—I mean the noble Duke the Lord President of the Council. It is, therefore, going over his head to seek information from a private Member of this House as to that appointment. Later on, no doubt, I did become an Under Secretary; but I do not think that it is a practice of Cabinet Ministers, and especially of Prime Ministers, to inquire of Under Secretaries their opinions as to appointments. I am not sure that it is a precedent which even now the noble Marquess would care to have set, because Under Secretaries are naturally apt to be critical of those who are placed over them. But, in any case, I had nothing more to do with the appointment of the Under Secretary for India in 1880 than the noble Earl himself. I am quite sure of this: that, according to the high and honourable tradition which inspired Mr. Gladstone, he made
  808
  himself perfectly clear that there was no actual connection between a firm doing business in India and Mr. Cross at the time of his appointment; and if Mr. Gladstone failed in that duty I am quite sure that the noble Duke himself very carefully made that inquiry. I do not know that I have anything more to say in pursuance of this ungracious and ungrateful task. Except this. The noble Earl charged me with having misrepresented the position of Mr. Gerald Balfour as regards being the director of a public company. It is quite true that I stated my belief the other night and expressed my regret that Mr. Balfour should have accepted the Presidency of the Board of Trade—a Ministry mainly concerned with companies and company matters—he being a director of public companies. I was delighted to receive the promptest contradiction of that statement from Mr. Gerald Balfour. Mr. Balfour, as I understand, had been a director of a public company, or of public companies, up to the time of his appointment to the Presidency of the Board of Trade, and had resigned his directorship on being appointed to that post. I am very glad to have elicited from Mr. Balfour the statement that he had done so; but I venture to think that as these appointments to directorships are published and public, and as much comment is naturally directed to these positions, it would be well if those who hold them and who are also Ministers of the Crown when they divest themselves of them should make their resignation as public as the fact of their appointment. We cannot be supposed to know that they have resigned these directorships unless they say so; and we are bound to go on the public information which is conveyed with regard to them. I must say that I feel less shame in my ignorance as it appeared to be shared by the noble Duke who replied to me, and, as far as any contradiction goes, by all the other Ministers on the Bench opposite. On that part of the case I have no more to say. I was told by the noble Earl that he was coming here to make a personal statement. It was a personal statement from two points of view. It was personal as regards himself, and perhaps a little personal as regards myself. But of that I cannot complain. I am very much obliged to him for giving me notice. I would have given him notice the other night if I had had the slightest

  809
  intention of making any attack upon him, but, as he truly said, I made no such attack, and I had no fixed intention of speaking. If I had in any way intended to impugn his honour or to attack him in' any personal manner I should have thought it my duty to warn him beforehand of the course which I was about to take. But I had no such intention; and the noble Earl admitted that he had no fault to find with the way in which I spoke of him. I only ventured to lay down a public principle, and I lay it down again. A precedent of this kind, though it may involve no present inconvenience and no reflection on any Minister, is full of the gravest peril to the largest interests of the Government of this country.
  THE PRIME MINISTER AND LORD PRIVY SEAL: (The Marquess of: My Lords, I do not wish to pursue the personal aspect of this matter, so incautiously and so unfortunately raised. I can only assure my noble friend who sits beside me that nothing has passed that will diminish in any degree—rather will it increase— the very high esteem in which he is held by his party and his colleagues. But I rise not merely for the purpose of saying that, for I know that his position is too well established to be shaken by any action of this kind. I rise because I think that what the noble Earl was pleased to call a principle is not one of that clearness or certainty or advantage that, in the statement of it from his lips, no notice should be taken of it on the part of this House. The noble Earl has not stated any precedent for the doctrines which he laid down. As far as I know they rest at the present moment on his authority alone. I trust that nothing he has said will cause my noble friend beside me to alter his conduct in the slightest degree. I do not believe that the principles which are laid down are sound, and I think that if they are upheld they will rather be an excuse for gratuitous and wounding attack upon individuals than any advantage to the purity of the Government of the Queen. The noble Earl has given us no precedents in this matter I cannot exactly understand how, if the noble Earl were required to write down the new doctrine which he wishes to write into the code of public policy, it could be couched in Parliamen-
  810
  tary language. I understand a stockbroker to be a person who sells or buys stock on the order of somebody else. I have heard nothing to induce me to think that stockbrokers are in any special manner speculators in any public companies or funds. On the contrary, my belief is that there is far greater speculation among those who are clients of stockbrokers than in the ranks of the stockbrokers themselves. But what doctrine are you to lay down? My noble friend is a sleeping partner in a stock-broking firm. That is to say, he has invested money in the firm. Are you to lay it down that every one who invests money in the business of a British merchant, if that British merchant goes occasionally on the Stock Exchange, becomes unfit for the service of the Queen? It is an absolutely new doctrine. There is no sort of authority for it whatever. I cannot help feeling that, in thus raising this cry, the noble Earl has taken a superficial similarity of words as expressive of meanings which they do not really convey; and has made a sort of clap-trap cry against stockbrokers because their business is conducted on the Stock Exchange; as people have done against directors who are in no degree more guilty of any commercial sin than any other members of the mercantile community. There are directors and directors. There are directors of the most perfectly innocent kind; directors against whose business it would be impossible to raise any objection; directors whose business does not lead them to cross or to affect in any way the transactions of the Departments of the State. On the other hand, there are directors, undoubtedly, who are connected with the Departments of the State, and, as has been pointed out more than once, even of late, one or two of my colleagues have thought it right to retire from the position of director lest any suspicion should arise. But that does not give any licence generally to attack all directors: nor does the fact that stockbrokers conduct their business in a place where much speculation occurs give you a right to brand them as having naturally inherited such dishonesty that no one who is a stockbroker may be a servant of the Queen. It appears to me that these rash and headlong statements, which really can serve no other than a party purpose, are not of advantage to the public service, and will not maintain its purity against any

  811
  temptations which may attack it. After all, you must remember that the field of selection is small in our country. We are the only country where Ministers are chosen either from this or from the other House of Parliament; and if you add to the difficulty which that circumstance involves the further condition that no one who has any special connection with any form of commercial business is capable of being selected, then I believe that you not only inflict a very undeserved stigma upon a very honourable profession, but you diminish our power of finding servants who are capable of serving the Queen in her administrative offices. Remember that the difficulty in our Administration and the difficulty in Parliament is not that, on the whole, people know too much about business, but that they know too little, that they belong generally to classes of society not brought into contact with business; and I hold it to be a positive evil if you do anything which will discourage mercantile men of high standing from taking part in the service of the Crown. But, my Lords, I wish to protest against the doctrine which has been laid down, and for my part I do not subscribe to the language which the noble Earl has used, and I earnestly hope that neither my noble friend nor any other gentleman will conceive that this doctrine, lately invented and of no value for any practical purpose, ought to limit the freedom and the opportunity which men of knowledge and experience may have of entering into the political service of the Crown.
  THE EARL OF ROSEBERY: I only rise to make one remark. It is this:— The noble Marquess says there are no precedents for the principle I have laid down. There is a very recent principle—that laid down by Mr. Gladstone's Government in 1892, which required members of the Government to relieve themselves of their directorships. Those members did so, and did not remain in any respect less efficient men of business than they were before.
  THE MARQUESS OF SALISBURY: That is not the point. It is that people will not accept political offices if they are compelled to resign the means of livelihood which they previously possessed.
  THE EARL OF ROSEBERY: It is exactly the point. These gentlemen did accept office under these terms, and remained Ministers.

SOUTH AFRICAN WAR—INVALIDED COLONIAL SOLDIERS.
LORD EURGHCLERE: My Lords, in rising to ask Her Majesty's Government what official medical inspections, if any, of the wounded and invalided colonial troops returning to Australia in the Royal Mail steamers, Orient Line, took place before their embarkment, and what medical supervision was provided for them during the voyages by the War Office, I hope I may be permitted to remind your Lordships of the circumstances which led me to put the question on the Paper. On Monday last* my noble friend beside me, Earl Carrington, asked Her Majesty's Government for some explanation with regard to the treatment of certain colonial troops who had been invalided home from active service and were about to undertake the voyage back to their respective colonies. The action of my noble friend in ventilating this subject has been entirely and amply justified by the observations which were subsequently made by the Secretary of State for War in another place.† The gravamen of my noble friend's complaint did not lie so much in the fact that these men had been sent home as third-class passengers, though that obviously lends itself to very substantial criticism. What my noble friend rightly complained of was that, though the majority of them were recovering from wounds or from enteric fever, they were put upon third-class dietary during the voyage, without the slightest discrimination. I am well aware that the third-class fare of our great liners is of excellent quality, and no doubt admirably adapted to a normal stomach; but when a man is recovering from enteric fever his digestive organs are not strong enough to enable him to eat food which may be in every way suitable for a man in the best of health. When the noble Earl brought the matter before the House the other evening, and stated that one man who had been ordered to embark as a third-class passenger had a temperature of 104 degrees, I ventured to ask whether these men had been medically examined before their embarkment. I put that question on the spur of the moment. I did not think it necessary to give notice of it, because it seemed to me a question of so elementary a nature, and so obviously germane to the original ques-
* See page 326.
† See page 553.

813
tion put by the noble Lord, Earl Carrington, that the information would naturally have been in the possession of the noble Lord to whom had been given the duty of replying on behalf of Her Majesty's Government. No definite information, however, was given to me on the subject, and the noble Marquess the Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs, while expressing the opinion that such an examination had probably taken place, suggested that I should repeat the question in order to get a categorical answer. Since then, the Secretary of State for War has admitted in another place that there has been some omission or negligence with regard to the cases to which attention was called by the noble Earl beside me. That admission, I think, makes my question to-night even more necessary, because, if these troops were examined by a proper medical officer before they were embarked, the responsibility for any neglect that took place falls in great measure on that medical officer, and incidentally on those who selected him for the duty. If, on the contrary, these invalids home from the Cape, who had hardly recovered from fever or wounds, were about to be sent back to their respective colonies on third-class dietary, and with third-class accommodation, without any medical examination, then I venture to think some serious responsibility rests upon Her Majesty's Government. Official medical examination seems to me a matter of absolute necessity in all such cases, but I think even more care ought to have been taken in the case of invalided colonial volunteers, who for the first time in our history have been fighting side by side with the Regular army. It would be a matter of extreme regret to everyone if these gallant men returned to their homes with the feeling that there had been a want of that solicitude for their comfort and welfare in this country which their services to the Empire demanded. For my part I cannot believe it possible that no medical examination took place, and it is for the purpose of eliciting the truth on the subject that I have ventured to put the question standing in my name to Her Majesty's Government.
THE UNDER SECRETARY OF STATE FOR WAR (Lord RAGLAN): My Lords, wherever it was possible these men were sent direct to their own homes from
814
South Africa, but in certain eases the men were brought to England to relieve the convalescent depôts at the Cape. A depôt was formed at Shorncliffe for the invalided colonial soldiers, and at the request of the Secretary of State for War I myself visited the depot on Wednesday and thoroughly inspected it. I will come to that later on. A large number of these men were convalescent, and were considered well enough to undertake the long voyage from the Cape to this country, and the greater part of them arrived, I am glad to say, in a state of advanced convalescence. Sick furlough was granted to those men who applied for it to the extent of three months, and for any furlough beyond that period they had to produce a medical certificate. Many of them returned to Shorncliffe before finally embarking for their respective colonies. I can assure your Lordships that the medical examination was most carefully conducted at Shorncliffe, and that no man left that dep6t to undertake the voyage who was not in an absolutely fit state of health to travel. The cases mentioned by the noble Earl on Monday were of men who had been either on furlough or in convalescent homes in various parts of the country, and who went direct to the port of embarkation. The arrangements by which these men went from the convalescent homes or from wherever they happened to be living direct to the port of embarkation were originally made, I believe, to save them trouble, and it was considered that they would not leave their convalescent homes or their furlough if they were not in a fit state to travel. In certain cases, therefore, the men were not medically examined before they went on board the ship. That is a most unfortunate circumstance, which the War Office very much regret. In future arrangements will be made to remedy that mistake. With regard to the accommodation provided for these men, the noble Lord was informed on Monday that there are on these liners three classes of third-class accommodation. These men were provided with superior third-class accommodation—that is to say, they had only two berths in a cabin—and were provided with a liberal and varied dietary. I will read to your Lordships the third-class dietary table, which, I think, speaks for itself—
"Breakfast, 8 a.m.—Porridge, with milk, fish, chops, steaks, sausages, Irish stew, curried

815
meat with rice, cold meats, fresh bread, butter, jam, marmalade, tea.
"Dinner 1 p.m.—Soups, broths, fish, roast and boiled meats, fresh vegetables, puddings (various), stewed fruits, etc.
"Tea, 5 p.m.—Cold meats (various), with pickles or salad, cakes, buns, etc., bread, butter, jam, marmalade.
"Supper, 8 p.m.—Kread, butter, biscuits, and chesse."
In my opinion, therefore, there was some excuse for the War Office in thinking that these men, who were convalescent, were being provided with a sufficient dietary to thoroughly restore them to health. I can assure the noble Lord opposite that all possible care will be taken in the future with regard to their embarkation. In consequence of statements that have been made in reference to Shorncliffe, I myself visited the camp on Wednesday and found the aarangements of a satisfactory character. There were no colonial troops actually in mess on the day of my visit. Eight or ten, however, were living in the coffee shop, and seemed most comfortable. Men who are not there for more than two days are not put in mess, but live in the coffee shop. Practically they have no fatigue work of any sort to do, this work being done by defaulters in the provisional battalion. The bath accommodation is ample, there being eight baths for privates and five for non-commissioned officers. Hot water is available at all hours of the day. The difficulty has been very much increased owing to the sudden coming and going of men from a hundred different regiments, a great portion of them staying only for a short time. I can assure the House that the War Office are only too anxious that these men should receive the comfort and consideration to which their suffering and their services to the Empire entitle them.
LORD BURGHCLERE: I only rise to thank the noble Lord for his reply, and to point out to him that he has not entirely answered my question. I further asked what medical provision was provided for these men during the voyage. Judging from the menu which the noble Lord has read, medical supervision seems to be highly necessary, for cheese and pickles are not proper food to give men recovering from typhoid fever.
LORD RAGLAN: These liners all carry a qualified doctor, who would naturally be the person to whom the men would apply when they were unwell.
EARL CARRINGTON: My Lords, I desire to express the great satisfaction with which I have heard the statement of the noble Lord opposite. No doubt there was a very considerable grievance on the part of these men; but, as I said the other- night when I brought this subject before your Lordships, I was perfectly certain that it was not the wish of Her Majesty's Government to treat them in this way. I then expressed the opinion that it was due to departmental mismanagement. Your Lordships will remember that I was somewhat severely taken to task by the noble Marquess the Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs, who described my statement as exaggerated and misleading. I can assure you that it was very far from my desire to use exaggerated language. My only desire was to put the matter as plainly as I possibly could before the House. I have forwarded information of several cases to the Secretary of State for War, and I have to acknowledge the fairness and courtesy of the right hon. Gentleman, and the readiness with which he has listened to the representations made to him in regard to this matter. As I have been accused of exaggeration, I hope I may be permitted to refer to another case—the case of a man named Freeman. Trooper Freeman is the son of a New South Wales Government official, and was in the second contingent of the New South Wales Mounted Rifles. I knew the family very well in New South Wales. Freeman gave up a post worth £300 a year to fight for the Empire and the Queen. He was offered £350 a year if he would remain, but he declined, and went off to the front. I heard that this man was lying ill in Soho Square, and reported the matter to the Agent-General, who replied thanking me for bringing the case to his attention, and stating that when an official called at his lodging in Soho Square he was informed that Trooper Freeman had gone to see the Army doctor. On 10th November we received at the office of our fund, through the assistance of which every colonial returning to his home has been able to have the comforts of the second class, a letter from Freeman's late landlord in Soho Square to the effect that he had sailed on the previous day. He added—
"Trooper Freeman was very unwell, and really not fit to go, but his orders were im-

817
perative. I am grieved that a man in his state of health should have been sent steerage."
I mention this case in the hope that your Lordships will not think that in the statement I made on Monday I used exaggerated language. I hope I may take it from the noble Lord that for the future these men will be well cared for and provided with all the comforts of second-class travelling.
LORD RAGLAN: It is the case that these men will in the future be sent home with all the comforts of second-class travelling. The Lord Mayor's Fund, which so kindly came to their assistance before, will, I hope, not be called upon again. If the noble Earl will be good enough to send particulars of the case he mentioned it shall be inquired into. Any man who wishes it can obtain an extension of sick furlough if he sends a medical certificate. Of this fact probably the New South Wales trooper referred to by the noble Earl was not aware.
EARL CARRINGTON: Would a man be able to obtain an extension of furlough by sending a medical certificate from a country doctor?
LORD RAGLAN: A certificate from any qualified medical man would be accepted.
House adjourned at twenty-five minutes before Six of the clock till To-morrow, Twelve of the clock.