Sitting of 17 May 1901

PRIVATE BILL BUSINESS.

  DUBLIN CORPORATION (MARKETS, ETC.) BILL. (BY ORDER).
  MR. T. M. HEALY, in moving to recommit the Bill in respect of a new clause (Pensions to Fire Brigade men), thanked the Chairman of Committees and Officers of the House for the great consideration they had given him in endeavouring to repair a very small slip in the Committee on this Bill. The motion was approved by the Dublin Corporation, as the clause was quite accidentally omitted.
  MR. HARRINGTON: I beg to accept the motion on behalf of the promoters of the Bill.
  Order of the 14th instant for Consideration of the Bill, as amended, read, and discharged:—Bill re-committed to the former Committee; Committee to have leave to sit and proceed forthwith.—(Mr. T. M. Healy.)

INCLOSURE (SUTTON) PROVISIONAL ORDER BILL (BY ORDER).
Order for Second Reading read.
Motion made, and Question proposed, "That the Bill be now read a second time."
MR. PURVISopposed the Second Reading of this Bill, the object of which was, he explained, to confirm a Provisional Order to enclose 477 acres of open fields and 133 acres of open heath, situated about six miles from Peterborough. As representative of that city he desired to give some explanation of the matter. As regarded the enclosure of 477 acres of open fields, he had no objection to offer, for he and those on behalf of whom he was speaking willingly allowed that to hedge in fields hitherto unhedged meant at least better cultivation. If nobody else cried "Hold," he certainly was not going to do so. But the inhabitants of Peterborough did object most strongly to the proposed enclosure of 133 acres of open heath. Peterborough was a most important railway centre, and its suburbs had grown to an extraordinary extent within the last few years. A large number of extensive brick works, employing very many working men, had been established, and, in short, the whole place had become an active, swarming, growing community. Now, the heath which it was proposed to enclose was close to the railway station of Wansford Road, connecting it with Peterborough. Moreover, in these days of cycling, a distance of six miles was as nothing, and if the heath were let alone it would year by year grow a more popular resort for botanising, picnicing, and other modes of recreation and healthy pastime for the working classes. Such pleasant places as now remained open to the public of Peterborough and neighbourhood were already far too few, and he took leave to say that they ought not to be made fewer. It would be a serious loss to the whole district if this heath were enclosed. The only compensation which it was even alleged was to be made to the people for the shutting up of the heath was to be the making of a road across it to connect Sutton with Stamford. But Stamford ay away from Peterborough. It was situated N.W. from Sutton, while Peterborough was east of that place. Stamford and Peterborough thus, in this matter, had nothing whatever to do with each other, and the proposed road would be no imaginable recompense to Peterborough for the enclosure of so

425
large a common to which the public had hitherto had access. The gentleman who sought to enclose the whole land in question was the lord of the manor, the Rev. William Hopkinson, a clergyman and gentleman for whom he, like everyone else who knew him, entertained the sincerest respect. He said that the 133 acres he proposed to enclose for his own use and behoof were to be Compensation for the expense he incurred in making the road. But the public never asked for the road to be made. They did not want it. The thing was not good enough, and they preferred to keep the land open for all comers. Moreover, if the rev. gentleman made the road, he himself would reap the advantage, in so far as it would afford easier access from his own property to Stamford Town by the Great Northern road. It might be said that the municipal corporation of Peterborough, the members of which had unanimously requested him to oppose the Bill, and had under their common seal petitioned against it, were afraid of the expense, and were, consequently, not taking the proper steps, a course of procedure which was of course rank heresy and sacrilege in the eyes of the Parliamentary Bar, and all their belongings. It was true that the corporation were late in taking action in opposing, but they were not too late, or he would not be in order in addressing the House at that moment. Again, tardiness in action constituted no reason for depriving the people of the use of the common, and one function of the House of Commons was to secure that, where any of its Standing Orders were deficient by reason of their generality, right should be done in accordance with the merits of each particular case. He therefore begged to move that the Bill be read a second time this day six months.
Amendment proposed—
"To leave out the word 'now,' and at the end of the Question to add the words 'upon this day six months.'"—(Mr. Purvis.)
Question proposed, "That the word 'now' stand part of the Question."
MR. CHANNINGsaid he had great pleasure in
426
supporting the Amendment. This seemed to be one of the cases which the House might very well be asked to postpone for consideration to another year. Peterborough had been accidentally excluded from having a locus standi before the Committee, and consequently only one side of the case had apparently been heard. He had no wish to pass any criticism on the action of the lord of the manor, who, he believed, was a most excellent landlord. But undoubtedly the passing of this Bill would confer solid advantages on his estate. He wished to take this opportunity of entering a caveat against the way in which public rights seemed to be disappearing, and against the gradual absorption in private estates of common lands and open fields. This was a matter which deserved the consideration of the House. There was one fact which had not yet been alluded to, and that was that of the number of cottages which had common rights in respect of these open fields and heath (five in all) a short time since, three had been allowed to fall into disrepair, and as the tenants had given up possession the common rights had fallen through. He thought it was lamentable that rights with regard to the user of common lands should be allowed to lapse in that way. He had a theory with regard to all these lands that power should be given to county councils to acquire them in the public interest.
MR. JEFFREYS, as chairman of the Committee before which the Provisional Order came, explained that it was a very large Committee and that there was a good attendance of Members on the day on which the Inclosure Award was considered. Had it been an ordinary Select Committee, evidence would not have been taken, because there was no opposition to the scheme, and when his hon. friend suggested that possibly the absence of opposition in this case was due to unwillingness to incur expense, he was afraid he was not aware that there was no expense either for parliamentary fees or lawyers beyond that of railway fares incurred in appearing before such a Committee. Although there was no opposition to the Order, the Committee went carefully through the whole of the evidence which

427
had been taken in regard to it, asking questions on particular points in order to make sure that there was no mistake about the award. It might be well to explain that when an Inclosure Award was asked for, the Board of Agriculture sent down an inspector, who held public meetings in the parish, and notices of such meetings were circulated over a radius of six miles, so that everybody who felt that they had any concern in the matter might attend and protest against the enclosure if they thought it desirable. He particularly asked the inspector at the outset if due notice were given of these meetings and if the gatherings took place. He was told in reply that the meetings both morning and evening were held after full notice, and that no opposition whatever was offered to the scheme. The witness was also asked about existing common rights, and replied that there were none in the ordinary sense of the word so far as the open fields were concerned, while as to the heath the Committee were told that although there were originally five cottages possessing such rights, three had been pulled down and the others belonged to Mr. Hopkinson, who, as owner of the land, let the cottages together with the right. His hon. friend had described the heath as a charming place for the people of Peterborough to visit. But the witness the Committee had before them said the only time he could remember the heath being resorted to for recreative purposes was when the London and North Western Railway was being laid forty-five years since, and then the navvies used to resort to the place on Sundays to fight out their battles. Nobody in Peterborough or neighbourhood ever used the land as a recreation ground, and undoubtedly according to the evidence the making of the road across the heath would be a great advantage to the inhabitants of Sutton and other parishes. Although nobody offered any opposition before the Committee, a gentleman did, towards the close of the proceedings, say he was a member of the Peterborough town council, and would like to give evidence. But he admitted that he had no representative authority, and that the Peterborough Town Council, although notice had been duly received by its clerk, had
428
not considered the award and had not deemed it worth while to attend before the Committee. As this gentleman had not given any notice of opposition or of his intended appearance before the Committee, the chairman decided that, according to the Rules of Committee, he had no locus standi, and therefore could not be heard. It should be remembered that the heath was only just within six miles of Peterborough. The Committee were unanimous in approving the Order, and he must observe that the hon. Member for Peterborough was that day adopting a most unusual course in asking the House to dissent from their decision. He would be very much surprised if it did so.
LORD EDMOND FITZMAURICEsaid that in former years he had the honour of being a member of the Committee which dealt with these Orders, and, indeed, he took some humble part in framing the procedure on which it now acted. There were always two aspects to a question of this nature, however, one technical and the other a broader one. As for the technical aspect, his hon. friend the chairman of the Committee had got an unanswerable case. Proper notices had been served, and meetings had been held, no opposition had been offered at the local inquiry, and the Provisional Order had been made in the usual course. But, looking at the matter from the broader aspect, he hoped the House would be induced to postpone the question for another year. In so doing it would not imply any kind of censure either on the Committee or on its chairman. It had been shown by the hon. Member for Peterborough that the corporation and other public bodies of Peterborough were not represented at the local inquiry, and should the House decide to send the Bill over for another year it might accompany its decision with an expression that the Peterborough Corporation should "execute" its own town clerk for his lack of zeal in the matter. The House had to consider was it right or fair that a great number of working men should suffer because of a lack of duty on the part of the town clerk, who had not thought it worth his while to bring the matter before the corporation. It was his business to have seen that the town

429
council were represented at the inquiry, of which he had due notice. But he did nothing of the kind, and, therefore, would it not be reasonable for the House to postpone the Bill another year and give the public of Peterborough a full opportunity of placing their views before the commissioners and before Parliament? The House should not forget that under the Act of 1876, which was passed at the termination of a long controversy, they had to consider, not merely the interests of owners of land, but also those of the neighbourhood generally, and of the public at large. That was distinctly set forth in the preamble of the Act. He thought it was desirable that the House should postpone the matter another year.
THE PRESIDENT OF THE BOARD OF AGRICULTURE (Mr. HANBURY,): As long as I am connected with the Board of Agriculture I shall take care that no common is enclosed without sufficient reasons. It struck me as peculiar that the noble Lord, who was so much interested in the preservation of commons at the time the Bill on that subject was before the House, and who is responsible for the special form of procedure adopted in regard to these Bills, should now come forward and ask that the Committee, which he was instrumental in establishing, should be treated as practically of no consequence. No Bills, except money Bills, are treated with the same solemnity of procedure in this House. No Bill referring to a Provisional order for the enclosure of a common can be passed without the appointment ad hoc of a Committee of a particular character to consider whether there is good reason for the enclosure being made. What happened in this case? Such a Committee was set up, and took evidence. There was no opposition before that Committee, and they were unanimous on the subject. There was no opposition at any other stage of the proceedings, and it is all very fine for the noble Lord to say that the Town Clerk of Peterborough did not give notice to the Town Council of Peterborough; but that city is only six miles off, and is presumed to have a great interest in this common. It is said that they knew nothing whatever about it. There was not only one oppor-
430
tunity offered to the Town Council of Peterborough to protest against the enclosure, but they had no less than four opportunities. Notices were sent to them formally, but they never once took any notice of them. After all, it is only by a mere technicality that Peterborough comes into the matter at all, because the law presumes that no place beyond six miles from a common proposed to be enclosed has any interest in it. A portion of the parish of Sutton is within six miles, so that it is by a mere technicality that Peterborough comes in. It so happens that Mr. Hopkinson, the lord of the manor, is the owner practically of the whole of this parish. There are no common rights at all, except one, and even in regard to this the Committee had grave doubts whether it should be dealt with by the Board of Agriculture; but it was decided ultimately that certain rights might arise if Mr. Hopkinson sold his property. When Mr. Hopkinson took the procedure he has taken, it was understood that certain conditions would be imposed on him, which he was perfectly willing to accept, and I am bound to say that the conditions imposed on him will certainly more than recoup the parish for the enclosure of the common. In the first place, the whole of the district round about is perfectly satisfied with this proposal. No objection has come from any other place than Peterborough, which did not think it worth while to take notice of any of the notices sent. We have had representatives from every parish round about in support of this Bill, and for this reason. Mr. Hopkinson is going to give five acres of his own land for a recreation ground, and six acres more for allotments for the cottages in the parish, which have already a quarter of an acre attached to each. He is going to spend nearly £1,000 in making a road through the heath, which will be a great advantage, not only to the parish, but to the whole district round. The commissioner informs me that Mr. Hopkinson could have enclosed the whole property without having conditions of any kind imposed on him. He need not have given a recreation ground or spent. £1,000 on a road Therefore, it is by a mere technicality that the whole procedure has come before the Board of Agriculture in this matter. What are the

431
facts? Peterborough is six miles off, and is just at the extreme limit of distance which is supposed to qualify a district for having an interest in a common. This, after all, is a place where, as the Chairman of the Committee has said, practically nobody goes; no picnics take place there, and it is never used for the purpose of recreation. On the whole, therefore, I think that Peterborough's interest is exceedingly small in this common. On the other hand, we have the great advantages I have mentioned accruing to the whole parish. Mr. Hopkinson is conferring a great boon on the neighbourhood, and therefore I ask the House to pass the Bill.
MR. ROBERT SPENCERsaid the right hon. Gentleman had tried to dazzle the House with the munificent liberality of Mr. Hopkinson, but had quite omitted to state the cause of the whole dispute, namely, that Peterborough wished to have this common as a recreation ground. He asked the House to reject the Bill.
MR. SACKVILLEsaid he had the honour to represent the district of Sutton, and he believed that not a single dissentient note had been raised there with respect to the scheme of the present Bill. His recollection of the House of Commons went back to 1876, when the Commons Bill became law. He asked the House whether they would not be reversing previous legislation if they reversed the decision of the Committee appointed ad hoc. In the present day there was too much tendency to revise and reverse
in the House itself small questions which had been before Committees. He knew the whole circumstances of this case. Mr. Hopkinson had shewn the utmost liberality in the matter. He had increased the original offer with respect to the recreation ground and the allotments, and he was going to spend a sum of money in improving communication between the village of Sutton and the city of Peterborough.
MR. THOMAS BAYLEYsaid the House had not received such information from the Government as they ought to have got. They had been told that five acres were to be given for recreation purposes, but they had heard nothing as to what the county council said on this question. Five acres out of 130 to be enclosed was only about 4 per cent. for recreation grounds. Something was also said about certain allotments, but had the people who had rights in this common been put on these allotments? They must look round with suspicion when the rights of the public were being invaded without the knowledge of the county council. It was quite time that the House should look at this question of commons enclosure seriously, and he thought more time should be given to the county council and the local authorities for consultation with the borough of Peterborough as to whether this was a fair and reasonable bargain.
Question put.
The House divided:—Ayes, 151; Noes, 144. (Division List No. 191.)

AYES.

Acland-Hood, Capt. Sir Alex. F.

Bowles, Capt. H. F. (Middlesex)

Cross, Herb. Shepherd (Bolton)

Agnew, Sir Andrew Noel

Bowles, TGibson (King's Lynn

Dalrymple, Sir Charles

Allsopp, Hon. George

Brassey, Albert

Dickson, Charles Scott

Anstruther, H. T.

Brookfield, Colonel Montagu

Dickson-Poynder, Sir John P.

Arnold-Forster, Hugh O.

Campbell, Rt Hn J. A. (Glasgow

Digby, John K. D. Wingfield-

Arrol, Sir William

Carew, James Laurence

Dimsdale, Sir Joseph Cockfield

Bain, Col. James Robert

Cavendish, B. F. (N. Lancs.)

Douglas, Rt. Hon. A. Akers-

Baldwin, Alfred

Cavendish, V. C. W. (Derbysh.

Doxford, Sir William Theodore

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

Chamberlain, Rt. Hon. J. (Birm.

Duke, Henry Edward

Banbury, Frederick George

Chamberlain, J Austen (Worc'r

Durning-Lawrence, Sir Edwin

Barry, Sir Francis T. (Windsor)

Chapman, Edward

Fellowes, Hon. Ailwyn Edw.

Bartley, George C. T.

Coghill, Douglas Harry

Fergusson, Rt Hn Sir J. (Manc'r

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

Cohen, Benjamin Louis

Fielden, Edward Brocklehurst

Bill, Charles

Colomb, Sir John Chas. Ready

Fisher, William Hayes

Blundell, Colonel Henry

Colston, Chas. Edw. H. Athole

Fletcher, Sir Henry

Boscawen, Arthur Griffith

Corbett, A. C. (Glasgow)

Flower, Ernest

Boulnois, Edmund

Cranborne, Viscount

Forster, Henry William

Galloway, William Johnson

Lucas, Reginald J. (Portsmouth

Rolleston, Sir John F. L.

Garfit, William

Macartney, Rt Hn. W G Ellison

Rollit, Sir Albert

Godson, Sir Augustus Fredk.

M'Calmont, Col. J. (Antrim, E.)

Ropner, Colonel Robert

Gordon, J. (Londonderry, S.)

M'Iver, Sir L. (Edinburgh, W.)

Royds, Clement Molyneux

Gordon, Maj Evans- (T'rH'ml's

M'Killop, James (Stirlingshire)

Samuel, Harry S. (Limehouse

Goschen, Hon. George Joachim

Malcolm, Ian

Saunderson, Rt. Hn Col. Edw. J.

Goulding, Edward Alfred

Mellor, Rt. Hon. John William

Seely, Charles Hilton (Lincoln)

Green, Walford D. (Wednesb'ry

Meysey-Thompson, Sir H. M.

Sharpe, William Edward T.

Greene, Sir E W (B'ry S Edm'nds

Montagu, G. (Huntingdon)

Shaw-Stewart, M. H. (Renfrew)

Grenfell, William Henry

Moore, William (Antrim, N.)

Simeon, Sir Barrington

Greville, Hon. Ronald

Morrell, George Herbert

Smith, H C. (North'd., Tyneside

Hain, Edward

Morris, Hon. Martin Henry F.

Smith, James Parker (Lanarks

Hamilton, Rt Hn. Ld. G (Midd'x

Morton, Arthur H. A. (Deptford

Spear, John Ward

Hanbury, Rt. Hon. Robt. Wm.

Mount, William Arthur

Stanley, Hn. Arthur (Ormskirk

Hardy, Laurence (Kent Ashfrd

Muntz, Philip A.

Stanley, Lord (Lancs.)

Hay, Hon. Claude George

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

Stewart, Sir Mark J M'Taggart

Hope, J. F. (Sheffi'ld, Brightside

Myers, William Henry

Stroyan, John

Howard, John (Kent, Faversh.

Nicholson, William Graham

Thomas, F. Freeman- (Hastings

Howard, J. (Midd., Tortenham)

Nicol, Donald Ninian

Thorburn, Sir Walter

Hozier, Hn. Jas. Henry Cecil

Nussey, Thomas Willans

Tuke, Sir John Batty

Johnstone, Heywood (Sussex)

O'Neill, Hon. Robert Torrens

Valentia, Viscount

Kay-Shuttleworth, Rt Hn Sir U

Orr-Ewing, Charles Lindsay

Walrond, Rt Hn. Sir William H.

Kenyon, Hon. Geo. T. (Denbigh

Parker, Gilbert

Wason, John Cathcart (Orkney)

Kenyon, James (Lancs., Bury)

Pease, Herbt. P. (Darlington)

Welby, Lt.-Col. A C E (Taunton)

Lawrence, Wm. F. (Liverpool

Peel, Hn. Wm. Robt. Wellesley

Williams, Rt Hn J Powell (Birm

Lawson, John Grant

Pemberton, John S. G.

Wilson-Todd, Wm. H. (Yorks)

Lee, Arthur H (Hants, Fareham

Penn, John

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

Legge, Col. Hon. Heneage

Platt-Higgins, Frederick

Wolff, Gustav Wilhelm

Leveson-Gower, Frederick N. S.

Plummer, Walter R.

Wrightson, Sir Thomas

Loder, Gerald W. Erskine

Randles, John S.

Younger, William

Lonsdale, John Brownlee

Rankin, Sir James

Lowther, Rt. Hon. Jas. (Kent

Ratcliffe, R. F.

TELLERS FOR THE AYES—Mr. Jeffreys and Colonel Stopford-Sackville.

Lowther, Rt Hn JW (Cum. Penr.

Reid, James (Greenock

Loyd, Archie Kirkman

Renshaw, Charles Bine

Lucas, Col. Francis (Lowestoft)

Ridley, Hn. M.W. (Stalybridge

NOES.

Abraham, William (Cork, N.E.

Dillon, John

Leamy, Edmund

Allan, William (Gateshead)

Donelan, Captain A.

Leng, Sir John

Allen, Chas. P. (Glouc., Stroud

Doogan, P. C.

Lough, Thomas

Ambrose, Robert

Duncan, J. Hastings

Lundon, W.

Asher, Alexander

Dunn, Sir William

MacNeill, John Gordon Swift

Ashton, Thomas Gair

Edwards, Frank

M'Cann, James

Austin, Sir John

Emmott, Alfred

M'Crae, George

Barry, E. (Cork, S.)

Esmonde, Sir Thomas

M'Laren, Charles Benjamin

Bayley, Thomas (Derbyshire)

Farquharson, Dr. Robert

Mansfield, Horace Rendall

Beoumont, Wentworth C. B.

Farrell, James Patrick

Mooney, John J.

Big wood, James

Ffrench, Peter

Morgan, J. Lloyd (Carmarthen)

Blake, Edward

Fitzmaurice, Lord Edmond

Murphy, J.

Boland, John

Flavin, Michael Joseph

Nannetti, Joseph P.

Boyle, James

Flynn, James Christopher

Nolan, Joseph (Louth, South)

Brand, Hon. Arthur G.

Foster, Sir Walter (Derby Co.)

Norman, Henry

Brigg, John

Fuller, J. M. F.

Norton, Capt. Cecil William

Brunner, Sir John Tomlinson

Gilhooly, James

O'Brien, Kendal (T'pp'rary Mid

Bryce, Rt. Hon. James

Goddard, Daniel Ford

O'Brien, Patrick (Kilkenny)

Burke, E. Haviland-

Gurdon, Sir W. Brampton

O'Brien, P. J. (Tipperary, N.)

Caldwell, James

Hardie, J. K. (Merthyr Tydvil)

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

Campbell, John (Armagh, S.)

Harwood, George

O'Donnell, John (Mayo, S.)

Campbell-Bannerman, Sir H.

Hayden, John Patrick

O'Donnell, T. (Kerry, W.)

Carvill, Patrick Geo. Hamilton

Hayne, Rt. Hon. Chas. Seale-

O'Dowd, John

Cawley, Frederick

Healy, Timothy Michael

O'Kelly, Conor (Mayo, N.)

Channing, Francis Allston

Hemphill, Rt. Hon. Chas. H.

O'Shaughnessy, P. J.

Clancy, John Joseph

Hobhouse, C. E. H. (Bristol E.)

O'Shee, James John

Colville, John

Holland, William Henry

Palmer, Sir C. M. (Durham)

Condon, Thomas Joseph

Hope, John D. (Fife, West)

Partington, Oswald

Craig, Robert Hunter

Horniman, Frederick John

Paulton, James Mellor

Crean, Eugene

Jacoby, James Alfred

Philipps, John Wynford

Crombie, John Willian

Jameson, Major J. Eustace

Power, Patrick Joseph

Cullinan, J.

Joicey, Sir James

Price, Robert John

Daly, James

Jones, Dav. Brynmor (Swansea)

Rea, Russell

Davies, M. Vaughan- (Cardigan

Joyce, Michael

Reddy, M.

Delany, William

Kinloch Sir John George Smyth

Redmond, John E. (Waterford)

Dewar, J. A. (Inverness-shire)

Lambert, George

Rickett, J. Compton

Dilke, Rt. Hn. Sir Charles

Layland-Barratt, Francis

Rigg, Richard

434

435

Roberts, John H. (Denbighs.)

Taylor, Theodore Cooke

White, Luke (York, E. R.)

Robertson, Edmund (Dundee)

Tennant, Harold J.

White, Patrick (Meath, North

Roche, John

Thomas, J A (Glamorgan, Gow'r

Whitley, J. H. (Halifax)

Schwann, Charles E.

Thomson, F. W. (York, W.R.)

Williams, Osmond (Merioneth)

Scott, Chas. P. (Leigh)

Tomkinson, James

Wilson, John (Durham. Mid)

Shaw, Thomas (Hawick B.)

Trevelyan, Charles Philips

Wilson, J W (Worcestershire N.

Shipman, Dr. John G.

Tully, Jasper

Woodhouse, Sir J T (Hudders'fd

Sinclair, Capt. J. (Forfarshire

Wallace, Robert

Young, Samuel (Cavan, East)

Soames, Arthur Wellesley

Walton, Joseph (Barnsley)

Yoxall, James Henry

Soares, Ernest J.

Warner, Thomas Courtenay T.

TELLERS FOR THE NOES—

Strachey, Edward

Wason, Eugene (Clackmannan

Mr. Purvis and Mr. Chas. Spencer.

Sullivan, Donal

White, George (Norfolk)

Bill read a second time, and committed.

PRIVATE BILLS [Lords] (STANDING ORDERS NOT PREVIOUSLY INQUIRED INTO COMPLIED WITH)
Mr. SPEAKER Mr. SPEAKER laid upon the Table Report from one of the Examiners of Petitions for Private Bills, That, in the case of the following Bill, originating in the Lords, and referred on the First Reading thereof, the Standing Orders not previously inquired into, and which are applicable thereto, have been complied with, viz.:—
Sutton-in-Ashfield Urban District (Water) Bill [Lords].
Ordered, That the Bill be read a second time.

PRIVATE BILLS (PETITION FOR ADDI- TIONAL PROVISION) (STANDING ORDERS NOT COMPLIED WITH.)
Mr. SPEAKER Mr. SPEAKER laid upon the Table Report from one of the Examiners of Petitions for Private Bills, That, in the case of the Petition for additional Provision in the following Bill, the Standing Orders have not been complied with, viz.:—
Cromer Water Bill.
Ordered, That the Report be referred to the Select Committee on Standing Orders.

BEXLEY TRAMWAYS BILL.
  MANSFIELD CORPORATION BILL.
  Read the third time, and passed.
  ARLESEY GAS BILL [Lords].
  As amended, considered; to be read the third time.
  BRITISH GAS LIGHT COMPANY BILL.
  As amended, considered; an Amendment made; Bill to be read the third time.
GLASGOW AND SOUTH WESTERN RAIL- WAY BILL.
  LANCASHIRE AND YORKSHIRE RAIL- WAY (DEARNE VALLEY JUNCTION RAILWAYS) BILL.
    SWANAGE GAS AND WATER BILL.
    As amended, considered; to be read the third time.
    TOTTENHAM AND HAMPSTEAD JUNC- TION RAILWAY BILL.
    As amended, considered; Amendments made; Bill to be read the third time.
    PEMBROKE URBAN DISTRICT COUNCIL (COUNTY OF DUBLIN) BILL (BY ORDER.)
    As amended, considered; to be read the third time.
    DUBLIN (EQUALISATION OF RATES) BILL (BY ORDER.)
    As amended, considered; to be read the third time.
    DERBY CORPORATION BILL.
    Ordered, That the Minutes of Evidence taken before the Committee on the Derby Corporation (Extension of Borough, &c.) Bill, of Session 1877, be referred to the Committee on Group L in respect of the Derby Corporation Bill.—(Mr. Caldwell.)
    LOCAL GOVERNMENT PROVISIONAL ORDER (PORT).
    Bill to confirm a Provisional Order of the Local Government Board relating to the Port of Manchester, ordered to be brought in by Mr. Grant Lawson and Mr. Long.

    LOCAL GOVERNMENT PROVISIONAL ORDER (PORT) BILL.
    "To confirm a Provisional Order of the Local Government Board relating to the Port of Manchester," presented accordingly, and read the first time; to be referred to the Examiners of Petitions

    437

    for Private Bills, and to be printed. [Bill 192.]

    METROPOLITAN WATER COMPANIES (AMENDMENT OF ACTS) BILL.
    Reported, without Amendment; Report to lie upon the Table.
    METROPOLITAN ELECTRIC SUPPLY BILL
    Reported, with Amendments; Report to lie upon the Table.
    MOND GAS BILL.
    Reported, with Amendments; Report to lie upon the Table, and to be printed.
    CLYDE VALLEY ELECTRICAL POWER (SUBSTITUTED) BILL.
    Reported, with Amendments; Report to lie upon the Table.

    LOCAL GOVERNMENT PROVISIONAL ORDERS (No. 3) BILL.
    Reported, without Amendment [Provisional Orders confirmed]; Report to lie upon the Table.
    Bill to be read the third time upon Monday next.

    IRISH PRESBYTERIAN CHURCH BILL.
    Reported, without Amendment; Report to lie upon the Table.
    Bill to be read the third time.

  CAMBRIAN RAILWAYS BILL.
    ALDEBURGH CORPORATION (WATER) BILL.
    Reported, with Amendments; Reports to lie upon the Table, and to be printed.

    LONDON COUNTY COUNCIL (MONEY) [BILL.
    Reported, without Amendment; Report to lie upon the Table.
    Bill to be read the third time.

  TORRINGTON AND OKEHAMPTON RAILWAY BILL.
    ALFRETON GAS BILL [Lords].
    Reported, with Amendments; Reports to lie upon the Table, and to be printed.
    OMAGH GAS BILL [Lords].
    Reported, with Amendments; Report to lie upon the Table.
    SHEFFIELD DISTRICT RAILWAY BILL [Lords].
    Reported, with an Amendment; Report to lie upon the Table, and to be printed.

    BRISTOL, CLIFTON, AND WEST OF ENGLAND ZOOLOGICAL SOCIETY BILL [Lords].
    Reported, without Amendment; Report to lie upon the Table.
    Bill to be read the third time.

    DUBLIN CORPORATION (MARKETS, ETC.) (RE-COMMITTED) BILL.
    Reported, with an Amendment; Report to lie upon the Table, and to be printed.

  MESSAGE FROM THE LORDS.
  That they have passed a Bill, intituled, "An Act to confer further powers upon the Lord Mayor, Aldermen, and Citizens of the City of Manchester, with reference to the construction of tramways and streets, and the acquisition and appropriation of lands, and with respect to children trading in the streets, and other matters affecting the health and good government of the city, and for other purposes." Manchester Corporation Bill [Lords].
  Also, a Bill, intituled, "An Act for incorporating and conferring powers on the Faversham Water Company." Faversham Water Bill [Lords].
  Also, a Bill, intituled, "An Act to empower the Urban District Councils of Cowes and East Cowes to take on lease the existing Royal Perry across the River Medina between their respective districts, and to work and manage the same; and for other purposes." Cowes Ferry Bill [Lords].
  And, also, a Bill, intituled, "An Act to enable the South Eastern Railway Company to make new works; to acquire additional lands; to provide for the application of capital of the South Eastern and London, Chatham, and Dover Railway Companies; to make further provisions as to the Managing Committee of those Companies; and for other purposes." South Eastern and London, Chatham, and Dover Railways Bill [Lords].

MANCHESTER CORPORATION BILL [Lords].
  FAVERSHAM WATER BILL [Lords].

    COWES FERRY BILL [Lords].
    SOUTH EASTERN AND LONDON, CHATHAM, AND DOVER RAILWAYS BILL [Lords].
    Read the first time; and referred to the Examiners of Petitions for Private Bills.

PETITIONS.
  FINANCE BILL.
  Petition from Faversham, for alteration; to lie upon the Table.
  HOUSING OF WORKING CLASSES (RE- PAYMENT OF LOANS) BILL.
  Petitions, in favour, from South-molton; Plymouth; and Halifax; to lie upon the Table.
  LOCAL AUTHORITIES OFFICERS' SUPERANNUATION BILL.
  Petition from Stoke-upon-Trent, in favour; to lie upon the Table.
  MARRIAGE WITH A DECEASED WIFE'S SISTER BILL.
  Petition from Fulham, against; to lie upon the Table.
  MINES (EIGHT HOURS) BILL.
  Petition from Werndda, in favour; to lie upon the Table.
  SALE OF INTOXICATING LIQUORS ON SUNDAY BILL.
  Petitions, in favour, from West Kensington; Benson; Loughborough; Dewsbury Moor; Birmingham; Hingham; Sheffield; Holbeach (four); Scarborough (two); Whaplode; Scalby and Whaplode St. Catherine's; to lie upon the Table.

  SALE OF INTOXICATING LIQUORS TO CHILDREN BILL.
  Petitions, in favour, from Launceston (six); Longton; Barrow-in-Furness; Barrow; Cardiff; Prestwich; Brentwood; Walkden; Clydach; Bays water; Woburn Sands; Portsmouth (two); Notting Hill; Plymouth; Weardstone; Halifax; Highgate Hill; Dunfermline;
  440
  Blackheath; Driffield; Chelsea; Traw-; den; Seven Kings; Yorkshire; Ilford (two); Little Ilford: York; East London;. Moulton; Holbeach (five); and Whaplode St. Catherines; to lie upon the Table.

  SALE OF INTOXICATING LIQUORS TO CHILDREN (SCOTLAND) BILL.
  Petitions, in favour, from Biggar; Tarves; Longside; Peebles (two); Kirkmichael; Comrie; and Logicrait; to lie upon the Table.
  SOVEREIGN'S OATH ON ACCESSION BILL.
  Petition from Stirling, against; to lie upon the Table.
RETURNS, REPORTS, ETC.
  TRADE REPORTS (ANNUAL SERIES).
  Copies presented, of Diplomatic and Consular Reports, Annual Series, Nos. 2599 to 2601 [by Command]; to lie upon the Table.

  REVENUE AND EXPENDITURE (ENG- LAND, SCOTLAND, AND IRELAND).
  Copy ordered, "of Provisional Statement showing for the year ended the 31st day of March, 1901; (1) the Estimated Amount contributed by England, Scotland, and Ireland respectively to the-Revenue collected by Imperial Officers; (2) the Estimated Expenditure incurred, on English, Scottish, and Irish Services, chargeable against such Revenue; and (3) the Consequent Balances of Revenue which were available for Imperial Expenditure."—(Mr. Austen Chamberlain.)
  Copy presented accordingly; to lie; upon the Table, and to be printed. [No-182.]

QUESTIONS.

  SOUTH AFRICAN WAR-FARM BURNING.
  MR. FLAVIN: I beg to ask the Secretary of State for the Colonies whether the Government intend on the restoration of peace or at any other time to rebuild the 600 farmhouses approxi-

  441
  mately stated to have been burnt in the Transvaal and Orange Free States in the Return recently published.
  THE SECRETARY OF STATE FOR THE COLONIES (Mr. CHAMBERLAIN,): No, Sir.
  MR. FLAVIN: May I ask whether the right hon. Gentleman would approve of Mr. De Wet burning Highbury?
  MR. SPEAKER: Order, order!

  SOUTH AFRICAN CONCESSIONS COMMITTEE-REPORT.
  MR. THOMAS BAYLEY: I beg to ask the Secretary of State for the Colonies whether he can state when the Report of the South African Concessions Committee will be laid upon the Table of the House.
  MR. J. CHAMBERLAIN: I am not able at present to fix the date.

  WAR HONOURS—WARRANT OFFICERS OF THE NAVY.
  MR. KEARLEY: I beg to ask the Secretary to the Admiralty whether he can now state whether any decision has been arrived at as to the participation of warrant officers of the Navy in the promotions and honours recently awarded and officially announced in connection with the South African campaign; and whether the statutes of the orders governing the Distinguished Service Order have been so revised as to enable naval warrant officers to be eligible for this distinction, and so place them upon a similar footing to non-commissioned officers and men in the Army.
  THE SECRETARY TO THE ADMIRALTY (Mr. ARNOLD-FORSTER,): The question of a decoration for officers of warrant rank in the Royal Navy has now been settled, and steps will be taken at the earliest possible opportunity to give effect to the decision. The arrangements made do not affect the statutes of the Distinguished Service Order.

  ROYAL ARMY MEDICAL CORPS.
  SIR JOHN TUKE: I beg to ask
  442
  the Secretary of State for War whether he proposes to adopt the suggestion contained in the Report of the Royal Commission appointed to consider and report upon the care and treatment of the sick and wounded during the South African campaign to appoint a departmental or other Committee of experts to inquire into and report upon the steps needed to effect certain reforms in the Royal Army Medical Corps; and, if so, whether he is prepared to state the composition of such Committee.
  THE FINANCIAL SECRETARY TO THE WAR OFFICE (Lord STANLEY, Lancashire, Westhoughton): The Secretary of State is preparing various proposals to submit to a Committee of experts, but the composition of the Committee cannot be at present stated.

  VOLUNTEER SERVICE COMPANY, WELSH REGIMENT—REGIMENTAL PETS.
  LIEUTENANT-COLONEL PRYCE-JONES: I beg to ask the President of the Board of Agriculture whether he will grant a dispensation entitling the goat recently presented to the Volunteer Service Company of the Welsh Regiment in South Africa, and now quarantined on board the "Tagus" at Southampton, to be handed over to the officer commanding, notwithstanding the restrictions laid down in the Foreign Animals Order of 1896.
  THE PRESIDENT OF THE BOARD OF AGRICULTURE (Mr. HANBURY,): An exception can only be made if the War Office recognise the goat as a regimental pet, in the same way as the goats of the Regular battalions.

  NORTH QUEENSFERRY FORTIFICA- TIONS.
  MR. JOHN HOPE: I beg to ask the Secretary of State for War whether it is proposed to Carry the north boundary fence of the proposed fortifications at Carlingnose, North Queensferry, down to the sea at Port Laing; and whether he is aware that such boundary fence would be an interference with a public right of way from Cruickness to North Queensferry.
  LORD STANLEY: There is no intention of interfering with any right of way from Cruickness to North Queensferry, nor have any instructions been given to carry a continuous boundary fence along the north limit of the War Department property.
  LORD BALCARRES: Will steps be taken to fence in the fortification, seeing that the public now Lave access, and can make drawings and measurements of the work as it proceeds?
  LORD STANLEY: I cannot answer that without notice, but I think that what the noble Lord says tends to show that there is a necessity for doing something of the kind.

  WEST SOMERSET YEOMANRY TRAINING.
  COLONEL WELBY: I beg to ask the Secretary of State for War why the special permission granted to the West Somerset Yeomanry on 9th May to go into lodgings at Taunton and do their training from there was revoked by telegram on 13th May, forty-eight hours before the regiment was to assemble; and whether he is aware that this sudden change at the last has caused the regiment much expense, and the inhabitants of Taunton expenditure in preparations of welcome, and whether he can see his way to granting the officers and men a special allowance to cover the unusual expense they have been put to.
  LORD STANLEY: I am afraid I can not at the present moment give an answer to this question. The matter is under consideration, and I hope to be able to give a favourable reply in the course of the next two or three days.

  EXPORTS OF MUNITIONS OF WAR AND WAR SHIPS.
  MR. JACOBY: I beg to ask the President of the Board of Trade if the Government will grant a Return showing the exportation of munitions of war and war ships during the last five years.
  THE PRESIDENT OF THE BOARD OF TRADE (Mr. GERALD BALFOUR,): The most complete informa-
  444
  tion available as to the exports from the United Kingdom of "Arms, ammunition and military and naval stores" during the last five years is contained in the recently published "Annual Statement of the Trade of the United Kingdom" for 1900, Vol. 1 (Parliamentary Paper, Cd. 549), at pages 307–321, as regards exports of the produce or manufacture of the United Kingdom, and at pages 569–570 as regards exports of foreign and colonial produce. There are no separate particulars as to the value of war ships exported; but figures as to the number and tonnage of such vessels built in the United Kingdom for foreigners are given in the volumes of the "Annual Statement of the Navigation and Shipping of the United Kingdom" for each year. In these circumstances I do not think it necessary that a separate Return should be prepared dealing with this subject.

  BURMESE RUBBER-PRODUCING TREES.
  MR. SHARPE: I beg to ask the Secretary of State for India whether he can state what steps, if any, the Indian Government is taking to develop the cultivation of rubber-producing trees in Burma; is he aware that in Ceylon and other eastern colonies attempts are being made by private proprietors to develop the same cultivation; and will he say what precautions, if any, it is proposed to take to prevent the results of the Government operations interfering with the success of private enterprise.
  THE SECRETARY OF STATE FOR INDIA (Lord G. HAMILTON, Middlesex, Ealing): The Government of India have recently authorised an extensive experimental plantation of the Para-rubber tree in the Tenasserim Division of Burma, where the climate and the other conditions are believed to be favourable. I am aware that attempts are being made to develop the production of rubber in Ceylon and elsewhere by private enterprise, but I do not think that this is a reason why the Government of India should not do their best to develop the resources of that country and encourage private enterprise by showing that this tree can be profitably cultivated in parts of India.

  INDIAN TELEGRAPH RATE—THE GERMAN EMDEN-IRELAND CABLE.
  SIR EDWARD SASSOON: I beg to ask the Secretary to the Treasury, as representing the Postmaster General, whether, in view of the fact that the reduction in the Indian telegraphic rate is being delayed in consequence of the obstruction offered by Germany, he would state the reasons which militate against the grant to the German Post Office of the right to land their Emden-New York cable at Waterville.
  THE FINANCIAL SECRETARY TO THE TREASURY (Mr. AUSTEN CHAMBERLAIN,): The cable of the German Post Office from Emden to the West of Ireland at present lands at Valentia. Germany has no cable of its own between Ireland and New York. The question of the transfer of the landing place from Valentia to Waterville is at present the subject of negotiation, and it would not be expedient that any statement should be made on the subject.

  EDUCATION IN TRINIDAD.
  MR. COMPTON RICKETT: I beg to ask the Secretary of State for the Colonies whether he is aware that it has been proposed by the Committee of Education in Trinidad to close eight of the Government schools, to transfer fifteen others to Roman Catholic, seven to Church of England, and one to Presbyterian management, and to only maintain the remaining twenty-six Government schools for the present; whether this change in educational policy has been discussed and approved by the inhabitants of the colony; whether it has received the sanction of the Colonial Office; and whether the correspondence on the subject can be produced.
  MR. J. CHAMBERLAIN: I am aware of the proposals referred to by the hon. Member. Objections to these proposals have now been raised in the Legislative Council, and I am awaiting a further report by the Governor before arriving at a final decision in the matter.

  TURKEY—MASSACRES OF CHRISTIANS AT MOSUL.
  MR. YOXALL: I beg to ask the Under Secretary of State
  446
  for Foreign Affairs if information has reached the Foreign Office concerning a massacre of Christians by Kurds in the Tiyari district, vilayet of Mosul; whether a Kurdish chief named Reschid Bey, after murdering fifteen Christians in the said district, has, with 1,000 Kurds, withdrawn to the mountains, with the object of attacking other Christians; and whether any representations to the Porte have been or will be made.
  THE UNDER SECRETARY OF STATE FOR FOREIGN AFFAIRS (Viscount CRANBORNE, Rochester): The British Consular Agent at Mosul reported towards the end of April that 10,000 Kurds had gone to the Tiyari mountains with the intention of robbing and killing Christians, of whom fifteen were said to have been already massacred. His Majesty's Ambassador at Constantinople at once brought the matter to the notice of the Porte, and was informed that peremptory instructions had been sent to the local authorities to hold the Kurds in check, and to prevent outrages. Sir N. O'Conor has since been informed by the Turkish Government that there had been a long-standing feud between the people of Tiyari and some neighbouring tribes, and that on learning recently that there was danger of an outbreak the Vali of Mosul had taken steps to prevent a collision. He had also addressed a warning to the Kurdish Chief, which had resulted in the removal of the cause of dispute between the two parties. The reported massacre of fifteen Christians was denied.
  MR. FLYNN: On the occasion referred to were any Kurds massacred?
  VISCOUNT CRANBORNE: I do not know.

  FOREIGN POST OFFICES IN CON- STANTINOPLE.
  MR. GIBSON BOWLES: I beg to ask the Under Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs whether he is aware of any treaty or any other international document giving either to Great Britain or to any other foreign nation the right of maintaining its own post office in Turkey; if not, by virtue of what

  447
  authority is the British post office maintained there; does the maintenance of foreign post offices in Turkey deprive the Turkish Government of any portion of the postal revenues which would otherwise accrue to it; is he aware that the mails consigned to these foreign post offices, and distributed by them, often convey packets of watches and other valuable articles, which thus evade the Turkish customs duties; and do His Majesty's Government propose themselves to continue to maintain in Turkey a system of foreign post offices which lends itself to an evasion of duties and a diminution of a portion of the securities pledged to foreign bondholders.
  VISCOUNT CRANBORNE: In pursuance of the provisions of the treaty of 1783 the Russian mails have been distributed by a special Russian post office in the Consulate General for many years. French, British, and German post offices were subsequently established on the ground that those countries are entitled under their Treaties with the Porte to the same privileges as are enjoyed by others. These arrangements, therefore, are of long standing, and have been necessitated by the absence of any secu ty that the Turkish Government can efficiently replace the foreign post offices. No doubt the Turkish revenue suffers to some extent in consequence, but it is quite understood that articles which would otherwise be liable to Turkish Customs dues are not transmissible by letter post through our post office in Constantinople, and articles sent by parcel post are delivered through the Turkish Custom House. In accordance with what I have said above, His Majesty's Government are not prepared to admit that any portion of the securities pledged to the bondholders are infringed. With regard to the continued maintenance of the foreign post offices, I have nothing to add to my answers of the 9th and 13th instant, in which the attitude of His Majesty's Government was fully explained.†

  MOREA—IMPORTS OF BRITISH GOODS
  MR. BRIGG: I beg to ask the Under Secretary
  @† See preceding volume, pages 1152 and 1457.;
  448
  of State for Foreign Affairs if he will kindly request the British Consul at Patras to supply, if possible, some details, of the imports into Morea of British-made goods.
  VISCOUNT CRANBORNE: Some information on this subject is contained in the Report No. 2,573, Annual Series, issued last month. If the hon. Member desires further particulars, and will specify them, I shall be happy to endeavour to procure them.

  CHINA—YANG-TSZE PROVINCES—TRIENNIAL LITERARY EXAMINATIONS.
  MR. HERBERT ROBERTS: I beg to ask the Under Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs whether, owing to disquieting rumours, of possible disturbances in the Yang-tsze provinces, the usual triennial literary examinations to be held this summer are to be abandoned by Imperial decree; and whether the Government have any further information as to the source of the expected trouble.
  VISCOUNT CRANBORNE: We have not heard of the issue of any Imperial decree to the effect mentioned. With regard to the last paragraph of the question, I would refer the hon. Member to the answer which I gave him on this subject on the 6th instant†—we have no later information.

  ANGLO-RUSSIAN DISPUTE AT TIENTSIN.
  MR. HERBERT ROBERTS: I beg to ask the Under Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs whether he is in a position to make a statement as to the settlement of the question of ownership of the land at Tientsin which occasioned the recent Anglo-Russian railway dispute; whether, despite the temporary agreement agreed to by the two Governments to suspend work on the land referred to, the Russians are proceeding to make roads through the land claimed by the railway company; and whether, in view of the grave issues, at stake, the Government are able to give an assurance to the House that a speedy settlement will be arrived at and that the rights of the railway company will be fully maintained.
  @† See preceding volume, page 749.
  VISCOUNT CRANBORNE: No settlement has yet been arrived at with regard to the ownership of the land referred to; but under the agreement with the Russian Government all questions of title and propri tary rights are reserved for discussion between that Government and ourselves; and the claim of the railway administration cannot be prejudiced by any work carried on by the Russian authorities meanwhile.
  SIR CHARLES DILKE: Was it not stated there was to be some kind of arbitration on this matter?
  VISCOUNT CRANBORNE: I have no information beyond that contained in my answer.

  CHEEFOO—WEI-HAI-WEI CABLE.
  SIR EDWARD SASSOON: I beg to ask the Secretary to the Treasury, as representing the Postmaster General, whether a public tender for the construction of the Chefoo—Wei-hai-wei cable was asked for; and whether he can explain why, in the interests of the public service and in view of the terms granted to the contracting company, the Government did not undertake the construction and working of the cable.
  MR. AUSTEN CHAMBERLAIN: (1) The question of calling for public tenders was carefully considered, but it was found that the arrangements between the Chinese Government and the Eastern Extension and Great Northern Telegraph Companies as to landing rights in China, etc., rendered competition impossible. (2) The Chefoo—Wei-hai-wei cable forms a spur to the existing system of the Eastern Extension Company in China, and the advantages of having it worked by them, under due restrictions as to the nationality of the staff, etc., are held to greatly outweigh any disadvantages resulting therefrom. The agreement provides for the termination of the working agreement at any time at short notice if the arrangement is found unsatisfactory. (3) At the time the cable was laid the need for communication was urgent, and the Eastern Extension Company were in an exceptionally good condition to do
  450
  the work expeditiously on behalf of His Majesty's Government. I should like to add that we have every reason to be satisfied with their readiness to meet our wishes.

  SUGAR DUTY—INCREASED CHARGES BY DEALERS.
  MR. YOXALL: I beg to ask Mr. Chancellor of the Exchequer whether he is aware that the London Wholesale Sugar Dealers Association, a body of influence upon the trade, has decided to add an extra charge of 6d. per cwt. to the 4s. 2d. duty per cwt. placed on sugar by the Budget resolution, and whether he is prepared to allow rebate on contracts, made under the rules of this association which were current before the duty was imposed.
  THE CHANCELLOR OF THE EXCHEQUER (Sir M. HICKS BEACH.): I have no knowledge of any such extra charge as that indicated in the question; but, if such addition were made, it would be outside the letter of the law, and its payment must depend upon the free will of the contractees. I see no ground whatever for allowing any such rebate as suggested.

  LEAD POISONING RETURNS.
  SIR CHARLES DILKE: I beg to ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department whether the increase in the more serious forms of lead poisoning, and decrease in the less serious, shown by the Return Lead Poisoning (Parliamentary Paper, No. 126), can be accounted for by any reasons which can be stated to the House in reply to a question.
  THE SECRETARY OF STATE FOR THE HOME DEPARTMENT (Mr. RITCHIE,): I cannot accept without qualification the hon. Baronet's statement that the more serious cases of lead poisoning have increased. The most serious cases—the fatal ones—have, as appears from the Return, been reduced by one half—from sixteen in 1899 to eight in 1900. In the current year, up to the present only two deaths, have been reported. With regard to other serious cases, there was an increase among males and a decrease among

  451
  females of cases of paralysis; a decrease among males and an increase among females of cases presenting brain symptoms. These are the accidental fluctuations which will always occur in dealing with small numbers. The truth seems to be that, owing to the greater precautions now adopted, there has been a general decrease of lead poisoning, which in the more serious cases is qualified to some extent by the effects of conditions extending back to former years.

  CONVEYANCE OF PRISONERS—DEATH IN A PRISON VAN.
  DR. FARQUHARSON: I beg to ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department whether his attention has been called to a recent death in a prison van, and whether he will consider the propriety of abolishing or improving this method of conveyance.
  MR. RITCHIE: No death, so far as I am aware, has occurred in a prison van. I presume, however, that the hon. Member is referring to the case of James Atkin, who died in Holloway Prison on the 2nd instant. This man, who was suffering from delirium tremens, had a violent struggle with the police in the prison van while being conveyed from the police court to prison, and died in prison from syncope on the same day; but his death does not appear to have been in any way due to the construction of the van, and I see no reason for making any alteration in the present arrangements.

  TRUCK ACTS—SQUIRE v. SWEENEY.
  MR. TENNANT: I beg to ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department whether he is aware that in the case of Squire v. Sweeney, Under the Truck Acts, the judgment of the Irish court was based upon the decision in Ingram v. Barnes; and, as this was an English case, whether he is advised that his Department may safely continue to take proceedings, if necessity arise, in circumstances similar to those recently found in Cornwall.
  MR. RITCHIE: The course which, in answer to the hon. Member some days ago,† I indicated my intention of pursuing
  † See preceding volume, page 429.
  452

  in regard to proceedings under the Truck Acts in England was deliberately adopted after full consideration of the whole question and all the cases bearing on it, and to that course I propose to adhere.

  BUTTER ADULTERATION.
  MR. O'SHAUGHNESSY: I beg to ask the President of the Board of Agriculture whether his attention has been called to the fact that new milk, heavily charged with boracic acid, is forced by means of a spiral machine into butter to defraud the consumer by greatly increasing its weight and bulk; that a prosecution against Pearks, Ginston, and Lee, Limited, at Bath, for selling fresh butter containing 24·2 per cent. of water failed because the added water might have found its way into the butter by means of milk; and whether, under these circumstances, he will take steps to prevent such practices in the future.
  MR. HANBURY: The facts as stated in the question are, I believe, accurate. At Longton, on the day following the Bath decision, a conviction was obtained against the same firm—and I understand that it is to be appealed against. Other prosecutions are being held over until the decision on appeal has been given.

  BUTTER STANDARDS.
  MR. O'SHAUGHNESSY: I beg to ask the President of the Board of Agriculture will he explain why the Board of Agriculture have not yet fixed the standard of water in butter which they have been empowered to do by legislation.
  MR. HANBURY: The power of fixing what is somewhat inaccurately described as a standard of milk and butter was first given to the Board in January of last year. It was then decided that a Committee should first inquire into the question of milk, and that Committee was appointed 29th January, 1900, and reported in January of this year. We are now working in concert with the Irish Department in preparing the necessary evidence to submit to a Committee dealing with butter.

  AGRICULTURAL LABOUR CONTRACTS.
  MR. LLOYD MORGAN: I beg to ask the President of the Board of Agriculture whether he has received a copy of a resolution, passed by the members of the Carmarthen Chamber of Agriculture, calling attention to the difficulties in which farmers in the county of Carmarthen and elsewhere are frequently placed owing to agricultural servants in breach of their contract leaving the service of their masters after the winter months are over and before the harvest begins; and whether, owing to the fact that such servants are always engaged by the year, and that they refuse to sign any written agreement, he will consider the question of introducing a Bill to amend the fourth section of the Statute of Frauds so as to make it unnecessary (in order to recover damages for breach of contract) for any agreement of service between farmer and servant to be in writing, even though it be an agreement which cannot be performed within a year of the time of the making thereof.
  MR. HANBURY: I do not think that Parliament can reasonably be asked to place contracts for agricultural labour on a different footing to other contracts in respect of the evidence required to prove the contracts by the Statute of Frauds.

  LOCAL TAXATION—AID FROM IMPERIAL SOURCES.
  MR. ASHTON: I beg to ask the Secretary to the Treasury will he state what sums, during the last financial year, were contributed out of revenue derived from Imperial taxation in relief of local taxation, and through what channels were they paid; and in particular, what payments in relief of local taxation were made otherwise than through the local taxation accounts.
  MR. AUSTEN CHAMBERLAIN: I am not sure that I quite understand the hon. Gentleman's question, but I think he will find the information he requires in the Return of National Public Income and Expenditure annually presented to Parliament. The figures for last year are not yet available.

  SCOTTISH CONGESTED DISTRICTS— ISLAND OF CAVA.
  MR. CATHCART WASON: I beg to ask the Lord
  454
  Advocate if the Congested Districts Board will inquire into the circumstances of the Island of Cava, with the view of affording some relief to the parish of Orphir, of which the said island forms a part, the charges borne by the parish in respect of the said island amounting to £86 19s. 10d., the total gross rent of the island being only £31 5s.
  THE LORD ADVOCATE (Mr. A. GRAHAM MURRAY,): I am informed by the Local Government Board for Scotland, within whose province the matter primarily rests, that in 1891 the population of the island was thirteen—five males and eight females, and there are only three inhabited houses;—the island being only a mile long. Without further information as to the data on which the figures stated in the question are based I am unable to give any reply; but the Local Government, Board's general superintendent will make inquiry into the circumstances when he next visits the parish.

  NATIONAL GALLERY—FIRE PRECAUTIONS.
  DR. FARQUHARSON: I beg to ask the First Commissioner of Works, whether he can state to the House the precise nature of the steps he intends to take, by the acquisition of adjacent land or otherwise, to ensure the collection of pictures in the National Gallery from a repetition of the dangerous fire referred to in the last report of the trustees.
  THE FIRST COMMISSIONER OF WORKS (Mr. AKERS DOUGLAS,): I am taking steps for the acquisition of the premises immediately adjacent to the National Gallery, so as to secure the isolation of that building. Parliamentary powers are needed for this purpose, and a Bill has been for some weeks before the House awaiting Second Reading.

  LOANS TO IRISH FARMERS.
  MR. DALY: I beg to ask the Chief Secretary to the Lord. Lieutenant of Ireland whether he can state if the Department of Agriculture and Technical Instruction would be prepared to advance money to farmers; in Ireland to help them to purchase

  455
  machinery for either crop saving or dairying purposes; and, if so, whether he can state the terms of repayment of such advances.
  THE CHIEF SECRETARY FOR IRELAND (Mr. WYNDHAM,): The question of granting loans to farmers for either of the purposes mentioned is under consideration by the Department.
  MR. DALY: When is the right hon. Gentleman likely to be in a position to make an announcement of the point?
  MR. WYNDHAM: I hope shortly. I am in communication with the Department.

  BALLIVOR PETTY SESSIONS—HEDGE -CUTTING PROSECUTIONS.
  MR. CAREW: I beg to ask Mr. Attorney General for Ireland whether he can explain why the magistrates at petty sessions held in Ballivor, county Meath, on 12th January last, dismissed four summonses brought by Toad contractors, acting under the county surveyor's instructions, to compel the defendants to cut and trim their hedges along the roadside; is he aware that, while the small occupiers obey the surveyor's orders, some of the largest owners neglect to do so, to the injury of the roads in the district; and whether he will take steps, by legislation or otherwise, to empower magistrates to enforce obedience to the surveyor's orders by both occupiers and owners.
  THE ATTORNEY GENERAL FOR IRELAND (Mr. ATKINSON,): The four summonses referred to were brought against two defendants, one of whom is a landowner and the other a tenant farmer. Both defendants had endeavoured to comply with the road contractor's requirements to a certain extent. The summonses were dismissed on technical grounds and mainly because the notices which the moving party is bound to serve, and upon which the preceedings were founded, were informal. The law is clearly laid down in such cases in Section 9, Sub-section 8, of the 14 & 15 Vict., cap. 92, and no further legislation is called for.

  IRISH INTERMEDIATE EDUCATION EXAMINATIONS.
  MR. WILLIAM JOHNSTON: I beg to ask the Chief Secretary to the Lord Lieutenant of Ireland whether he can explain why the programme and rules for the intermediate examinations of 1902, due about 1st April, are not published yet, though the announcement of some important changes, and the prospect of others, makes ample notice particularly necessary; and whether, as the delay in this and previous years has been complained of as causing inconvenience, the introduction of changes will be deferred until notice can be given.
  MR. WYNDHAM: The programme and rules for 1902 required very careful consideration by the Intermediate Education Board. They are now, I understand, practically settled, and will shortly be made public.

  VESEY STONEY'S ESTATE, CO. MAYO.
  DR. AMBROSE: I beg to ask the Chief Secretary to the Lord Lieutenant of Ireland whether he is aware that the estate of Mr. Vesey Stoney, of Rosturk Castle, county Mayo, has been sold to the Congested Districts Board; and that, since the purchase, Mr. Stoney has prevented the tenants taking seaweed off the shore adjoining to and part of the estate; whether such action has been taken with the knowledge or by the authority of the Board; and whether the Board will take steps to prevent such action in the future.
  MR. WYNDHAM: The Congested Districts Board is negotiating for the acquisition of the seaweed rights on this property, already purchased, and until these rights have been acquired the Board could not intervene as suggested.

  LABOURERS' COTTAGES IN THE RATH- DRUM UNION.
  MR. JAMES O'CONNOR: I beg to ask the Chief Secretary to the Lord Lieutenant of Ireland whether he is aware that a sworn inquiry was, twelve months ago, held in Rathdrum (county Wicklow) Union into a scheme for the erection of labourers'

  457
  cottages, and that no arbitrator has yet been sent down by the Local Government Board; that an inquiry into a second scheme has been held, and that a third inquiry is pending; and whether he will advise the Local Government Board to remove the block in the way of erecting labourers' cottages in the Rathdrum Union by sending an arbitrator to complete the necessary preliminaries.
  MR. WYNDHAM: A Provisional Order was made by the Local Government Board on the 28th February last confirming the scheme which formed the subject of inquiry in July, 1900. An arbitrator can only be appointed upon the application of the district council, and no such application has yet been made. A second inquiry was held in March last; a third inquiry is not pending. The responsibility for delay in appointing an arbitrator does not rest with the Local Government Board.

  ROYAL IRISH CONSTABULARY PENSIONS.
  MR. TULLY: I beg to ask the Chief Secretary to the Lord Lieutenant of Ireland whether he can state the number of police officers and head constables of the Royal Irish Constabulary in receipt of pensions, and amounts paid respectively to each.
  MR. WYNDHAM: The numbers and amounts are:—Officers, 99, £27,207; head constables, 588, £46,320.

  CENSUS—IRISH SPEAKERS IN IRELAND.
  MR. THOMAS O'DONNELL: I beg to ask the Chief Secretary to the Lord Lieutenant of Ireland whether the Returns regarding the number of Irish speakers in Ireland, as disclosed by the last Census, could be laid before the House before Tuesday next.
  MR. WYNDHAM: I am informed that it would be quite impossible to give this information before Tuesday next.

  LAND PURCHASE IN COUNTY WEXFORD.
  MR. FFRENCH: I beg to ask the Chief Secretary to the Lord Lieutenant of Ireland whether, as the
  458
  sale of land is blocked in Wexford for want of funds, and as he has promised to bring in a Bill to make special arrangements for such cases, he can inform the House when he will be able to bring in the Bill.
  SIR THOMAS ESMONDE: I beg also to ask the Chief Secretary to the Lord Lieutenant of Ireland if he can state what are the intentions of the Government with regard to facilitating land purchase in county Wexford; and when he proposes to introduce a Bill to deal with the situation in that county.
  MR. WYNDHAM: The Government has framed a Bill to remove the existing obstruction to further sales in county Wexford, and to provide against similar contingencies in the event of their arising elsewhere. I propose to ask leave to introduce the Bill on Monday at the commencement of public business.
  MR. FFRENCH: Are there any funds at present available?
  MR. WYNDHAM: There are some funds available, which the Bill will release.

  GREAT SOUTHERN AND WESTERN RAIL WAY OF IRELAND—THROUGH RATES FOR IRISH PRODUCE.
  MR. MOONEY: On behalf of the hon. Member for the St. Patrick Division of Dublin, I beg to ask the Chief Secretary to the Lord Lieutenant of Ireland whether he is aware that, owing to the Great Southern and Western Railway Company omitting to carry out their statutory obligations to put through rates in force viâ Dublin, Irish produce from that district is debarred from the most expeditious and safe service; and whether he will take steps to remedy this state of affairs.
  I beg also to ask the President of the Board of Trade whether his attention has been called to the question of the provision of facilities by the Great Southern and Western Railway Company, Ireland, under Section 34, 63, and 64 Vic, of 1900, for through traffic to and from stations on what was originally

  459
  the Waterford, Limerick, and Western Railway, through the port of Dublin and port of Waterford respectively; whether he can state what facilities are being provided by the Great Southern and Western Railway Company for the stations aforesaid, and whether he is aware that the Port of Dublin is being injuriously affected; and whether he will take any steps to have the Act of Parliament duly carried into effect.
  MR. GERALD BALFOUR: I will answer these questions together. If the hon. Member will be good enough to read Sub-section 5 of the section to which he refers he will see that a special remedy is provided and can be applied at the instance of the Dublin Port and Docks Board or other persons or bodies named therein.

  KILRUSH POSTMASTERSHIP
  MAJOR JAMESON: I beg to ask the Secretary to the Treasury, as representing the Postmaster General, with reference to the vacancy for a postmaster or postmistress in Kilrush, will he state whether any appointment has yet been made; and, if so, who has been appointed; if not, can he say whether it is intended to fill the office by appointing the person now in the employment of the postal service.
  MR. AUSTEN CHAMBERLAIN: No appointment has yet been made to fill the vacancy for a postmaster at Kilrush, nor can it yet be stated who will be appointed.

  CORK POST OFFICE—PROVINCIAL CLERKS IN CHARGE.
  MR. J. F. X. O'BRIEN: I beg to ask the Secretary to the Treasury, as representing the Postmaster General, whether the grade of provincial clerk in charge is still in existence at Cork post office; whether the duties of this class are confined to the same portion of the staff; and what are the qualifications necessary to entitle one of the staff to those duties; and whether he will have the names of those possessing the necessary qualifications placed on a list, and the list posted in the office, and the qualified officers deputed to fill those duties in turn.
  MR. AUSTEN CHAMBERLAIN: The class of provincial clerks in charge is being allowed to die out, and no new appointments are made to it. There are officers of the Cork staff who still retain the title. The duties of the class are performed by those persons who still remain on it, and also by any other officer who may be selected by the surveyor from time to time to take charge of an office, and a list of suitable officers is kept by the surveyor. Those persons, are selected for the duty whose character and knowledge of the duties to be performed are held to justify their selection. It is not proposed to make any alteration in the existing system.

  EDUCATION BILL—EFFECT OF REPEAL CLAUSE ON IRISH TECHNICAL EDU- CATION.
  MR. LOYD: I beg to ask the Vice-President of the Committee of Council on Education whether the exclusion of Ireland from the extent of the Bill in Clause 11 (1) of the Education Bill will suffice, under the general rule for construing a statute by its intent, to keep alive the Technical Instruction Acts, 1889 and 1891, in Ireland, notwithstanding the unqualified terms in which those Acts are repealed by Clause 10 and the Schedule.
  THE SECRETARY TO THE LOCAL GOVERNMENT BOARD (Mr. GRANT LAWSON,) (for Sir J. GORST): My right hon. friend wishes me to say that the answer to this question is in the affirmative.

  AGRICULTURAL RATING AND TITHE- RENT ACTS.
  MR. HERBERT ROBERTS: I beg to ask the First Lord of the Treasury whether he will state whether it is the intention of the Government to ask the House to renew the Agricultural Rating Act and the Tithe-Rent (Rates) Act this session in one Bill, or will separate measures be introduced for this purpose.
  THE FIRST LORD OF THE TREASURY (Mr. A. J. BALFOUR,): I hope the hon. Gentleman will wait till the Bill is introduced. It is not very convenient to give a preliminary account of the form which legislation is

  461
  to take. The proper occasion is when the Minister brings in the Bill and declare the policy of the Government.

  BUSINESS OF THE HOUSE.
  SIR THOMAS ESMONDE: I beg to ask the First Lord of the Treasury if he will state when he proposes to conclude the debate on the Second Reading of the Finance Bill, and whether he proposes to have a morning sitting of the House on Friday next. Perhaps the right hon. Gentleman will also say what will be the course of business next week.
  MR. A. J. BALFOUR: It is not possible to forecast accurately the course of business next week. We propose to begin on Monday the discussion of the Finance Bill, and I think, from such inquiries as I have been able to make, that there ought to be no difficulty in arriving at a decision on the Amendment to be moved from the front Opposition bench at or before the conclusion of the morning sitting on Tuesday. If the House would be content to allow the Second Reading to be taken at the same time, it would be, I think, for the general convenience of Members. With regard to the remainder of the week I propose to take the motion for the holiday adjournment as first Order on Thursday; and I hope before we separate to get the Second Reading of the Civil List Bill, the very small fragment of the Committee stage of the Demise of the Crown Bill which still remains to be taken, and Vote 10, and, if possible, the Ordnance Vote for the Army. The House will rise on Friday, but I do not know whether it will be possible to have a morning sitting on that day. There is an intention, I believe, on the part of the Irish Members to raise the question of the financial relations upon the Second Reading of the Finance Bill. That would not be a very convenient opportunity for taking issue upon that subject, because the possibility of dividing on an Amendment will be exhausted by the division which will take place on the Amendment of the right hon. Member for East Wolverhampton. But this is a new Parliament, and I think that an opportunity should be given for the discussion of the question. I therefore propose to a find a day for that discussion before the end of the session.
  SIR CHARLES DILKE: Will the Army Votes be taken on Friday?
  MR. A. J. BALFOUR: On Thursday or Friday.
  MR. GIBSON BOWLES: Is it proposed to continue the discussion on the Finance Bill after twelve o'clock on Friday night?
  MR. A. J. BALFOUR: I do not contemplate a long sitting, but I do not think the debate need stop when the clock strikes twelve.
  MR. FLOWER: Can we have notice when the Local Government Board Vote will be taken?
  MR. A. J. BALFOUR: I will endeavour to give notice. I suppose the hon. Member will be content with the ordinary notice at the commencement of the week, when I usually state the business for the following Friday.

NEW BILLS.
  COUNTY COUNCILS (LEGISLATION).
  Bill to enable County Councils to promote Legislation, ordered to be brought in by Mr. Bigwood, Mr. Joseph Howard, Sir John Dorington, Mr. Henry Hobhouse, Mr. Broadhurst, and Lord Edmond Fitzmaurice.
  COUNTY COUNCILS (LEGISLATION) BILL.
  "To enable County Councils to promote Legislation," presented, and read the first time; to be read a second time upon Wednesday next, and to be printed. [Bill 193.]
  BURGH POLICE AND PUBLIC HEALTH (SCOTLAND).
  Bill to amend the Law relating to the Police and Public Health Administration of Burghs in Scotland, ordered to be brought in by Mr. Asher, Sir Robert Reid, Sir Herbert Maxwell, Mr. Parker Smith, Mr. M'Crae, and Mr. John Dewar.

  BURGH POLICE AND PUBLIC HEALTH (SCOTLAND) BILL.
  "To amend the Law relating to the police and Public Health Administration of Burghs in Scotland," presented, and read the first time; to be read a second

  463
  time upon Wednesday, 19th June, and to be printed. [Bill 194.]

  STEAMSHIP SUBSIDIES SELECT COMMITTEE.
  Ordered, That Mr. William Field be discharged from the Select Committee on Steamship Subsidies.
  Ordered, That Mr. William Redmond be added to the Committee.—(Sir Thomas Esmonde.)

SUPPLY. [7TH ALLOTTED DAY.]
Considered in Committee:—
(In the Committee.)
[Mr. J. W. LOWTHER (Cumberland, Penrith) in the Chair.]

SUPPLY. [7TH ALLOTTED DAY.]
  CIVIL SERVICE AND REVENUE DEPART- MENTS ESTIMATES, 1901–2.

    CLASS II.
    1. Motion made, and Question proposed, "That a sum, not exceeding £7,300, be granted to His Majesty, to complete the sum necessary to defray the Charge which will come in course of payment during the year ending on the 31st day of March, 1902, for the Salaries and Expenses of the Department of His Majesty's Most Honourable Privy Council."
    MR. GODDARDsaid he desired to move a reduction of the Vote by £1,000 for several reasons, the first of which was that of economy. In these days of very large Estimates one could not reduce the expenditure of the country by great sums, and it was therefore their duty to scrutinise the Votes, and especially the smaller ones, very closely, in order to see if there were money now being expended which could be saved. This Vote afforded a reasonable opportunity of doing that. The office to which it referred was more or less a sinecure. The President of the Council had very little work to do, and while, formerly, no doubt, it was a very important position, at the present time the duties were of a very slight character. When the last Liberal Government was in office it was held that the office was so little required, and the duties were so light, that they might be performed by the Secretary of State for India. Lord Kimberley accordingly
    464
    filled the two posts, but he drew no salary in respect of this particular office. That was an example which might well be followed now. He knew it was argued in 1893 that this was an ancient office and ought not, therefore, to be abolished. But that surely was no reason for maintaining it, and spending £2,000 a year on it. The Lord President of the Council was supposed to be answerable for all Orders in Council, but there was no reason why the heads of respective Departments should not be made answerable for such Orders as affected their respective Departments. The Lord President of the Council, too, was head of the Education Department. It was not at all clear what duties he rendered to the State in that capacity. Their experience in this House was that when the Vice-President was driven into a corner, he found it convenient to hide himself behind the broad back of his noble friend. But no one would maintain that it was reasonable to pay £2,000 a year merely in order to provide such a defence for the Vice-President. They ought to have some explanation of the duties of the Lord President, because really the practical work was carried out by the Vice-President. He hoped the Committee would agree to the reduction of the Vote which he advocated, on the ground that this was an unnecessary office, and that the occupier of it, having little to do, should require no salary from the State.
    Motion made, and Question proposed, "That Item A (Salaries) be reduced by £1,000, in respect of the Salary of the President of the Council."—(Mr. Goddard.)
    THE FINANCIAL SECRETARY TO THE TREASURY (Mr. AUSTEN CHAMBERLAIN,)said the reduction of the Vote had been moved on the ground that the office of Lord President was a sinecure, and that the occupant of it did no public work in return for the salary he received. Now, whatever might be said of former Lord Presidents, he did not think it could be asserted of the present holder of the office that he was in such a position. He had, indeed, very important duties in connection with the education of the country, and the interest he had shown and the trouble he had taken in regard to that

    465
    were well known to all Members of the House. Besides that, the Lord President was responsible for many other most important matters to which he was compelled to give his personal attention, and he did not think, therefore, it could be seriously contended that the salary placed on the Votes in accordance with practice for an office held in connection with another high office was not deserved.
    MR. FLYNNsaid the Lord President of the Council was President of the Committee of Council on Education, a body which constituted one of the greatest absurdities of the day. There was, in fact, no Committee of Council. All the work was done by the Lord President and by the Vice-President, and he ventured to assert that, in view of the great necessity for economy in these days, there were many public men in this House who would gladly fill the position with advantage to the highest educational interests of the country, without asking a salary for the performance of the duties. Why should the Lord President get £2,000 a year for carrying out merely nominal duties? Men in high places were very apt to decry the Radical idea of economy, that money should only be paid for work done. It was not surprising, for whenever there was a fat salary to be obtained without good work being done for it they were the very ones to secure the posts. He hoped that those who, sitting above the gangway on that side of the House, had during the last few weeks been loud in their demands for retrenchment, would assist the hon. Member for Ipswich in getting a reduction of the Vote for a large sum of money for an office which practically had no duties attached to it.
    MR. WHITLEYsaid he had intended to move the reduction of the Vote in order to raise another question, but it would save time perhaps if, on the present motion, he brought forward the subject in which he was more particularly interested—an item in the second line of the Vote, as to the salary of the Clerk of the Council.
    THE CHAIRMAN: Order, order! It is not my business to save time. I have to see that the rules of the House are observed. That point must be reserved until the present Amendment has been disposed of.
    MR. LABOUCHEREsaid he thought that there were a good many salaries which might be cut down with more advantage than that of the Lord President of the Council. The Financial Secretary to the Treasury had stated that the Lord President showed an interest in education. They all showed an interest in education, but they had no opportunity of developing it. He imagined that the real business of the Lord President was to look after the Vice-President. He was paid a salary because he was one of the odd men of the Cabinet who was ready to make speeches in the House of Lords and the country, and to receive deputations. An hon. friend reminded him that the Lord President was a sleeping partner—and certainly he was not a very wakeful partner—but still he fulfilled the duties expected of him by the Cabinet. There was a good deal to be said for the view expressed by his hon. friend that all these salaries should be cut down. He had, however, observed in history that, at the time of the war with Napoleon, Ministers of the Crown contributed a considerable part of their salaries to relieve the burdens of the people, and he believed that the present Ministers were doing the same. They were modest men, and did not like it known, but when he saw conscience money acknowledged in the newspapers he believed it came from one or other of them. No doubt even the Vice-President contributed a part of his modest salary in the form of conscience money to wards the relief of the taxpayers. He mew it would be an agreeable task for the Vice-President to defend the Lord President, and he would listen with the greatest pleasure to him.
    Question put.
    The Committee divided:—Ayes, 128; Noes, 178. (Division List No. 192.)

    AYES.

    Abraham, William (Cork, N.E.

    Barry, E. (Cork, S.)

    Boyle, James

    Allen, Charles P (Glouc., Stroud)

    Bayley, Thomas (Derbyshire)

    Brigg, John

    Ambrose, Robert

    Blake, Edward

    Brunner, Sir John Tomlinson

    Asher, Alexander

    Boland, John

    Burke, E. Haviland-

    Burns, John

    Healy, Timothy Michael

    Partington, Oswald

    Caine, William Sproston

    Hemphill, Rt. Hon. Charles H.

    Power, Patrick Joseph

    Caldwell, James

    Holland, William Henry

    Rea, Russell

    Campbell, John (Armagh, S.)

    Hope, John Deans (Fife, West)

    Reddy, M.

    Carvill, Patrick Geo. Hamilton

    Horniman, Frederick John

    Redmond, John E. (Waterford)

    Cawley, Frederick

    Jacoby, James Alfred

    Redmond, William (Clare)

    Channing, Francis Allston

    Jones, D. Brynmor (Swansea)

    Rickett, J. Compton

    Clancy, John Joseph

    Jones, William (Carnarvonsh.)

    Rigg, Richard

    Colville, John

    Joyce, Michael

    Roberts, John H. (Denbighs.)

    Condon, Thomas Joseph

    Kinloch, Sir John George Smyth

    Roche, John

    Craig, Robert Hunter

    Lambert, George

    Schwann, Charles E.

    Crean, Eugene

    Layland-Barratt, Francis

    Shaw, Thomas (Hawick B.)

    Crombie, John William

    Leamy, Edmund

    Shipman, Dr. John G.

    Cullinan, J.

    Leng, Sir John

    Sinelair, Capt John (Forfarshire

    Daly, James

    Lundon, W.

    Soames, Arthur Wellesley

    Davies, M. Vaughan- (Cardigan

    MacDonnell, Dr. Mark A.

    Soares, Ernest J.

    Delany, William

    M'Arthur, William (Cornwall)

    Sullivan, Donal

    Dewar, John A. (Inverness-sh

    M'Cann, James

    Taylor, Theodore Cooke

    Dillon, John

    M'Crae, George

    Tennant, Harold John

    Donelan, Captain A.

    Mooney, John J.

    Thomas, Alfred (Glamorgan, E.

    Doogan, P. C.

    Morgan, J. Lloyd (Carmarthen

    Thomas, F. Freeman- (Hastings

    Duncan, J. Hastings

    Morton, Edw. J.C. (Devonport

    Thomson, F. W. (York, W. R.)

    Dunn, Sir William

    Murphy, J.

    Trevelyan, Charles Philips

    Edwards, Frank

    Nannetti, Joseph P.

    Tully, Jasper

    Emmott, Alfred

    Norman, Henry

    Ure, Alexander

    Esmonde, Sir Thomas

    Norton, Capt. Cecil William

    Wallace, Robert

    Farquharson, Dr. Robert

    Nussey, Thomas Willans

    Walton, Joseph (Barnsbury)

    Farrell, James Patrick

    O'Brien, Kendal (Tipperary Md

    Warner, Thomas Courtenay T.

    Ffrench, Peter

    O'Brien, Patrick (Kilkenny)

    Wason, Eugene (Clackmannan

    Flavin, Michael Joseph

    O'Brien, P. J. (Tipperary, N.)

    White, Luke (York, E. R.)

    Flynn, James Christopher

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

    White, Patrick (Meath, North)

    Foster, Sir Walter (Derby Co.

    O'Donnell, John (Mayo, S.)

    Whitley, J. H. (Halifax)

    Fuller, J. M. F.

    O'Donnell, T. (Kerry, W.)

    Williams, Osmond (Merioneth)

    Gilhooly, James

    O'Dowd, John

    Wilson, John (Durham, Mid.)

    Gurdon, Sir W. Brampton

    O'Kelly, Conor (Mayo, N.)

    Young, Samuel (Cavan, East)

    Harmsworth, R. Leicester

    O'Malley, William

    Yoxall, James Henry

    Harrington, Timothy

    O'Mara, James

    Harwood, George

    O'Shaughnessy, P. J.

    TELLERS FOR THE AYES—

    Hayden, John Patrick

    O'Shee, James John

    Mr. Goddard and Mr. Charles Hobhouse.

    Hayne, Rt. Hon. Chas. Seale-

    Palmer, Sir Chas. M. (Durham

    NOES.

    Acland-Hood, Capt. Sir Alex. F

    Chamberlain, Rt. Hon. J. (Birm.

    Gordon, J. (Londonderry, S.)

    Agnew, Sir Andrew Noel

    Chamberlain, J. Austen (Worc.

    Gordon, Maj Evans- (T'rH'ml'ts

    Allsopp, Hon. George

    Chaplin, Rt. Hon. Henry

    Gorst, Rt. Hon. Sir John E.

    Arkwright, John Stanhope

    Chapman, Edward

    Goschen, Hn. George Joachim

    Arnold-Forster, Hugh O.

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

    Goulding, Edward Alfred

    Arrol, Sir William

    Coghill, Douglas Harry

    Grenfell, William Henry

    Atkinson, Rt. Hon. John

    Cohen, Benjamin Louis

    Hamilton, Rt. Hn Lord G (Mid'x

    Austin, Sir John

    Collings, Rt. Hon. Jesse

    Hamilton, Marq.of (L'd'nd'rry)

    Bagot, Capt. Josceline FitzRoy

    Colomb, Sir John Charles Ready

    Hanbury, Rt. Hn. Robert W.

    Bain, Col. James Robert

    Colston, Chas. Edw. H. Athole

    Hardy, Laurence (Kent, Ashfd.

    Baird, John George Alexander

    Corbett, A. Cameron (Glasgow)

    Hay, Hon. Claude George

    Balcarres, Lord

    Cranborne, Viscount

    Hayter, Rt. Hn. Sir Arthur D.

    Baldwin, Alfred

    Cross, Herb. S. (Bolton)

    Heath, Arthur H. (Hanley)

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

    Cubitt, Hon. Henry

    Heath, James (Staffs., N. W.)

    Balfour, Rt Hn Gerald W. (Leeds

    Dalrymple, Sir Charles

    Heaton, John Henniker

    Balfour, Maj. K. R. (Christch.)

    Dickson, Charles Scott

    Hickman, Sir Alfred

    Banbury, Frederick George

    Dilke, Rt. Hon. Sir Charles

    Hobhouse, Henry (Somerset, E.

    Barry, Sir Francis T. (Windsor)

    Dixon-Hartland, Sir Fred. D.

    Hope, J. F. (Sh'ffield, Brightside

    Bartley, George C. T.

    Douglas, Rt. Hon. A. Akers-

    Howard, John (Kent, Faversh.)

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

    Doxford, Sir William Theodore

    Hozier, Hon. James Henry Cecil

    Beaumont, Wentworth C. B.

    Durning-Lawrence, Sir Edwin

    Johnston, William (Belfast)

    Bhownaggree, Sir M. M.

    Dyke, Rt. Hon. Sir Wm. Hart

    Johnstone, Heywood (Sussex)

    Big wood, James

    Elliot, Hon. A. Ralph Douglas

    Kay-Shuttleworth, Rt Hn Sir U

    Bill, Charles

    Fellowes, Hon. Ailwyn Edw.

    Kenyon, James (Lancs. Bury)

    Blundell, Col. Henry

    Fergusson, Rt. Hn. SirJ.(Manc.

    Kimber, Henry

    Boscawen, Arthur Griffith-

    Fielden, Edward brocklehurst

    Law, Andrew Bonar

    Boulnois, Edmund

    Finlay, Sir Robert Bannatyne

    Lawrence, Wm. F. (Liverpool

    Bowles, Capt. H. F. (Middlesex)

    Fisher, William Hayes

    Lawson, John Grant

    Bowles, T. Gibson (King's Lynn

    Fitzmaurice, Lord Edmond

    Lee, Arthur H (Hants, Fareham

    Brassey, Albert

    Fletcher, Sir Henry

    Legge, Col. Hon. Heneage

    Campbell, Rt. Hn J. A (Glasgow

    Flower, Ernest

    Leveson-Gower, Fredk. N. S.

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

    Foster, Sir M. (Lond. Univ.)

    Lockwood, Lt.-Col. A. R.

    Cayzer, Sir Charles William

    Garfit, William

    Long, Rt. Hn. Walter (Bristol, S

    Cecil, Evelyn (Aston Manor)

    Godson, Sir Augustus Fredk.

    Lonsdale, John Brownlee

    468

    469

    Lowe, Francis William

    Peel, Hon. Wm. Robert W.

    Simeon, Sir Barrington

    Loyd, Archie Kirkman

    Platt-Higgins, Frederick

    Smith, H C (North'mb. Tyneside

    Lucas, Col. Francis (Lowestoft)

    Plummer, Walter R.

    Smith, James P. (Lanarks.)

    Lucas, Reginald J. (Portsmouth

    Purvis, Robert

    Stanley, Lord (Lancs.)

    Macartney, Rt. Hn. W G Ellison

    Pym, C. Guy

    Stirling-Maxwell, Sir John M.

    Macdona, John Cumming

    Quilter, Sir Cuthbert

    Thorburn, Sir Walter

    Maconochie, A. W.

    Randles, John S.

    Tomlinson, Wm. Edw. Murray

    M'Calmont, Col. J. (Antrim, E.)

    Rankin, Sir James

    Tritton, Charles Ernest

    M'Iver, Sir L. (Edinburgh, W.)

    Ratcliffe, R. F.

    Tuke, Sir John Batty

    M'Killop, James (Stirlingsh.)

    Reid, James (Greenock)

    Valentia, Viscount

    Majendie, James A. H.

    Remnant, James Farquharson

    Wason, John Cathcart (Orkney)

    Malcolm, Ian

    Renshaw, Charles Bine

    Welby, Lt.-Col. A. CE(Taunt'n

    Maxwell, W.J.H(Dumfries-sh.

    Rentoul, James Alexander

    Whiteley, H (Asht'n-und Lyne

    Mellor, Rt. Hon. John Wm.

    Ridley, Hn. M. W. (Stalybridge

    Whitmore, Charles Algernon

    Meysey-Thompson, Sir H. M.

    Ridley, S. Forde (Bethnal Green

    Williams, Colonel R. (Dorset)

    Moore, William (Antrim, N.)

    Ritchie, Rt. Hn. Chas. Thomson

    Williams, RtHnJ Powell-Birm.

    Morrell, George Herbert

    Rolleston, Sir John F. L.

    Wilson, J. W. (Worcestersh, N.

    Morris, Hon. Martin Henry F.

    Rollit, Sir Albert Kaye

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

    Morton, Arthur H. A. (Deptford

    Ropner, Col. Robert

    Wolff, Gustav Wilhelm

    Murray, Rt Hn A. Graham (Bute

    Royds, Clement Molyneux

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

    Nicholson, William Graham

    Sackville, Col. S. G. Stopford-

    Wyndham, Rt. Hon. George

    Nicol, Donald Ninian

    Samuel, Harry S. (Limehouse)

    Younger, William

    Orr-Ewing, Charles Lindsay

    Saunderson, Rt. Hn. Col Edw. J.

    Palmer, Walter (Salisbury)

    Scott, Sir S. (Marylebone, W.)

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

    Parker, Gilbert

    Seely, Charles Hilton (Lincoln)

    Parkes, Ebenezer

    Sharpe, William Edward T.

    Pease, Herbert P. (Darlington

    Shaw-Stewart, M. H. (Renfrew)

    Original Question again proposed.
    MR. WHITLEYsaid he desired to call attention to an item with regard to which he thought the Committee was entitled to some explanation. He noticed in the Estimates an item of £1,250, salary for the Clerk to the Council. This gentleman was appointed at a salary of £1,200, rising at the end of five years to £1,500; but it appeared to him the Committee was being asked before the five years had expired to vote an amount of £50 in excess of his salary. Another item with regard to which he should like some explanation was "Private Secretary to the Lord President, £300." The Committee would notice that that amount was paid to a senior examiner of the Board of Education. He objected to the multiplying of offices in this manner, which he thought was most undesirable. The Estimates showed that there were nine senior examiners, but there was nothing to show which of these gentlemen was the one referred to. He understood that it was the rule when a gentleman occupied a dual appointment to put a star against his name, but that had not been done in this case. There was another item on page 56—"A temporary acting allowance of £100" For all he knew, that might be a third salary for this particular gentleman. He thought the Vice-President of the Council should give some explanation of these items, and say how it came about that this senior examiner had so little to do that he was enabled to
    470
    take up this additional duty. He also hoped that the right hon. Gentleman would undertake that in future the names of any persons receiving extra salaries should be properly starred. The salaries of the senior examiners were by no means small. These gentlemen started at £650, and rose to £800 a year. He moved the reduction of the vote by £300.
    Motion made, and Question proposed, "That Item A (Salaries) be reduced by £300, in respect of the salary of the Private Secretary to the Lord President."—(Mr. Whitlaw.)
    THE VICE-PRESIDENT OF THE BOARD OF EDUCATION (Sir J. GORST,): The hon. Gentleman is, perhaps, unaware that a few years ago the House of Commons sanctioned the appointment of a private secretary to the Lord President. I can assure the Committee that the office of President of the Board of Education is no sinecure. The noble Lord who at present fills that office has very responsible duties to perform, and requires the assistance of officials cognisant of the whole of the intricate system known as the Education Department of this country. For many years past the noble Lord, as President of the Council, has had a private secretary from among the examiners of the Education Department. This is not the only duty the noble Lord has to perform. A very onerous part of his duty is to preside at the Council and do such work as that con-

    471
    nected with the periodical examinations. He also has to read a great quantity of papers and consider minutes and questions of considerable importance, and it is absolutely essential that he should have this assistance. The gentleman referred to is one of the examiners, and, from personal knowledge, I can say he is extremely well versed in the intricacies of the Department. Without this assistance my noble friend would be quite incapable of conducting the affairs of the Board in the manner in which it is necessary to conduct them. [Ironical cheers.] I know why hon. Members cheer in that ironical fashion. It is because it has been said in comic papers that the Lord President of the Council has nothing to do as President of the Board of Education. If hon. Members opposite would take my place for a week they would find that the Lord President has a great deal to do. The position is by no means the dignified sinecure which it is the fashion to represent it to be, and it would be unfortunate for the Board of Education and for the interests of the country if this salary were cut off and the President deprived of the assistance of an expert official.
    MR. BLAKEsaid he agreed that the position of the President of the Board of Education was not a sinecure. The President had to manage the Vice-President, and that was a task which, prima facie, it was difficult to perform. The gentleman who had been put in this high position, who inspired the President and helped him to manage the Vice-President, should not be allowed to blush unseen—what was his name?
    MR. AUSTEN CHAMBERLAIN: Mr. Walrond.
    MR. EDMUND ROBERTSONasked whether this gentleman, while acting as private secretary, continued his duties as a senior examiner.
    SIR J. GORSTsaid he did not act as an examiner. He could not attend to two duties. There was not a Minister on the front bench who had not as his private secretary an official of the Department with which he was connected.
    MR. EDMUND ROBERTSON: Then I understand he has no other duties to perform?
    SIR J. GORST: No; he could not do anything else.
    SIR BRAMPTON GURDONregretted that an old rule seemed to have fallen into abeyance which prohibited a senior clerk from acting as private secretary. It was not a good thing that senior officials should be allowed to act as private secretaries, and the old rule was that if they were permitted to do so, it was only upon the condition that they gave up a part of their salaries.
    MR. GODDARDthought the reply which had been given did not meet the point of the objection. This gentleman held two positions; he appeared in the Vote under consideration as receiving £300 a year; he was "starred," and the star referred to the Education Department. In the Vote for that Department, however, he was not "starred." It might be a small matter, but it was an offence against one of the regulations which had been laid down by the House to prevent the plurality of offices which had been such a mistake in times gone by. This gentleman received a large salary as one of the examiners under the Education Department, but the Committee were now told that he did no work for that salary, because the whole of his time was taken up by his secretarial duties. The explanation was not at all satisfactory, and if the reduction was pressed to a division he should vote for it.
    SIR J. GORSTsaid that this officer certainly ought to be "starred" in the Education Estimates, and he would take care that that was done next year.
    MR. FLYNNcomplained that the Committee were discussing on the Privy Council Vote an item which really ought to be discussed on the Education Vote. This official was described as senior examiner in the Education Office, and he ought, therefore, to be paid by that Office. He should have thought that an intelligent shorthand writer and typist would have been very well able to do the work required of a private secretary, but if an educational specialist was required his salary should be borne on the Educational Vote. The accounts were hopelessly entangled, and the mover of the reduction would be justified in going to a division as a protest.
    MR. GIBSON BOWLESthought that as the President of the Council was also President of the Board of Education and President of the National Defence Committee of the Cabinet, he was thoroughly entitled to a private secretary. But he never had before heard of a private secretary getting as much as £300 a year on one Vote and £800 on another. A private secretary at £1,100 was too costly a luxury, and probably the Financial Secretary of the Treasury, who, as a guardian of the public purse, was always ready to prevent excessive expenditure, would be prepared, if the Amendment was withdrawn, to reconsider the ease. The usual salary of a private secretary was, at the outside, £200 or £300 a year all told, and if the salary was more than that the gentleman was not a private secretary, but an official secretary or a permanent official.
    MR. AUSTEN CHAMBERLAIN: This gentleman is a permanent official.
    MR. GIBSON BOWLES: If that is so he should appear as such, and not as private secretary.
    MR. AUSTEN CHAMBERLAIN: I think the hon. Member is under some misapprehension. This is the way in which on every Vote private secretaries of the same class as this gentleman appear. They are permanent civil servants of the Crown, who are taken away from the ordinary routine of office duties in order to act as private secretaries to Ministers. They are not personal private secretaries who come and go with the Ministers in the sense in which the hon. Member
    is speaking; they are official private secretaries.
    MR. GIBSON BOWLESthought the Financial Secretary was in error. These private secretaries did come and go with Ministers. If a new Lord President of the Council took office he might or might not, as he pleased, reappoint this private secretary; it was a purely personal office. He strongly objected to these dual appointments. If they had no other inconvenience, they frequently forced Members to discuss the merits of a gentleman upon a Vote to which it really did not belong. That was the case in the present instance. If this particular private secretary was a necessity for the Lord President of the Council in respect of education, the salary ought to be on the Education Vote. It was inconvenient that a public servant should be on two Votes at all, but if he had to be, he should be on the Vote to which he most properly belonged. This gentleman evidently did not belong to the Privy Council, because he did no Privy Council work whatever, and yet the Committee were discussing his salary on the Privy Council Vote. While he certainly hoped the reduction would not be pressed, he as certainly thought the Financial Secretary of the Treasury should reconsider in the first place the salary of this private secretary, and in the second place, whether this sum of £300 should not be placed on the Education Vote.
    Question put.
    The Committee divided:—Ayes, 141; Noes, 187. (Division List No. 193.)

    AYES.

    Abraham, William (Cork, N. E.

    Channing, Francis Allston

    Farquharson, Dr. Robert

    Allan, William (Gateshead)

    Clancy, John Joseph

    Farrell, James Patrick

    Allen, Charles P (Glouc., Stroud

    Colville, John

    Ferguson, R. C. M. (Leith)

    Ambrose, Robert

    Condon, Thomas Joseph

    Ffrench, Peter

    Asher, Alexander

    Craig, Robert Hunter

    Flavin, Michael Joseph

    Barry, E. (Cork, S.)

    Crean, Eugene

    Flynn, James Christopher

    Bayley, Thomas (Derbyshire)

    Crombie, John William

    Foster, Sir Walter (Derby Co.)

    Beaumont, Wentworth C. B.

    Cullinan, J.

    Gilhooly, James

    Blake, Edward

    Daly, James

    Gurdon, Sir W. Brampton

    Boland, John

    Davies, M. Vaughan- (Cardigan

    Harmsworth, R. Leicester

    Bolton, Thomas Dolling

    Delany, William

    Harrington, Timothy

    Boyle, James

    Dewar, John A. (Inverness-sh.)

    Harwood, George

    Brigg, John

    Dilke, Rt. Hon. Sir Charles

    Hayden, John Patrick

    Brunner, Sir John Tomlinson

    Dillon, John

    Hayne, Rt. Hon. Charles Seale-

    Bryce, Rt. Hon. James

    Donelan, Captain A.

    Healy, Timothy Michael

    Barke, E. Haviland-

    Doogan, P. C.

    Hobhouse, C. E. H. (Bristol, E.)

    Burns, John

    Duncan, J. Hastings

    Holland, William Henry

    Caine, William Sproston

    Dunn, Sir William

    Hope, John Deans (Fife, West)

    Caldwell, James

    Edwards, Frank

    Horniman, Frederick John

    Campbell-Bannerman, Sir H.

    Emmott, Alfred

    Jacoby, James Alfred

    Carvill, Patrick Geo. Hamilton

    Esmonde, Sir Thomas

    Joicey, Sir James

    Cawley, Frederick

    Evans, S. T. (Glamorgan)

    Jones, Dav. Brynmor (Swansea

    Jones, William (Carnarvonsh.)

    O'Donnell, John (Mayo, S.)

    Soames, Arthur Wellesley

    Joyce, Michael

    O'Donnell, T. (Kerry, W.)

    Soares, Ernest J.

    Kay-Shuttleworth, Rt Hn Sir U.

    O'Dowd, John

    Strachey, Edward

    Kinloch, Sir John Geo. Smyth

    O'Kelly, Conor (Mayo, N.)

    Sullivan, Donal

    Lambert, George

    O'Malley, William

    Taylor, Theodore Cooke

    Layland-Barratt, Francis

    O'Mara, James

    Tennant, Harold John

    Leamy, Edmund

    O'Shaughnessy, P. J.

    Thomas, Alfred (Glamorgan, E.

    Leng, Sir John

    O'Shee, James John

    Thomson, F. W. (York, W.R.)

    Lundon, W.

    Palmer, Sir C. M. (Durham)

    Trevelyan, Charles Philips

    MacDonnell, Dr. Mark A.

    Partington, Oswald

    Tully, Jasper

    M'Cann, James

    Pease, Sir Joseph W. (Durham)

    Ure, Alexander

    M'Crae, George

    Power, Patrick Joseph

    Wallace, Robert

    M'Kenna, Reginald

    Rea, Russell

    Walton, John Lawson (Leeds, S.

    Mooney, John J.

    Reddy, M.

    Walton, Joseph (Barnsley)

    Morgan, J. L. (Carmarthen)

    Redmond, J. E. (Waterford)

    Warner, Thomas Courtenay T.

    Morton, E. J. C. (Devonport)

    Redmond, William (Clare)

    Wason, Eugene (Clackmannan

    Murphy, J.

    Rickett, J. Compton

    White, Luke (York, E. R.)

    Nannetti, Joseph P.

    Rigg, Richard

    White, Patrick (Meath, North)

    Nolan, Joseph (Louth, South)

    Roberts, John H. (Denbighs.)

    Whittaker, Thomas Palmer

    Norman, Henry

    Robertson, Edmund (Dundee)

    Williams, Osmond (Merioneth

    Norton, Capt. Cecil William

    Roche, John

    Wilson, John (Durham, Mid.)

    Nussey, Thomas Willans

    Samuel, S. M. (Whitechapel)

    Young, Samuel (Cavan, East)

    O'Brien, Kendal (Tipperary M'd

    Schwann, Charles E.

    Yoxall, James Henry

    O'Brien, Patrick (Kilkenny)

    Shaw, Thomas (Hawick B.)

    TELLERS FOR THE AYES—Mr. Whitley and Mr. Goddard.

    O'Brien, P. J. (Tipperary, N.)

    Shipman, Dr. John G.

    O'Connor, James (Wicklow, W.

    Sinclair, Capt. J. (Forfarshire)

    NOES.

    Acland-Hood, Capt. Sir A. F.

    Cripps, Charles Alfred

    Kimber, Henry

    Agnew, Sir Andrew Noel

    Cross, H. Shepherd (Bolton)

    Law, Andrew Bonar

    Allsopp, Hon. George

    Cubitt, Hon. Henry

    Lawrence, Joseph (Monmouth)

    Anson, Sir William Reynell

    Dairymple, Sir Charles

    Lawrence, Wm F. (Liverpool)

    Arkwright, John Stanhope

    Dewar, T R. (T'rH'mlets, S. Geo.

    Lawson, John Grant

    Arnold-Forster, Hugh O.

    Dickson, Charles Scott

    Lee, Arthur H (Hants, Fareham

    Arrol, Sir William

    Dixon-Hartland, Sir Fred Dixon

    Legge, Col. Hon. Heneage

    Atkinson, Rt. Hon. John

    Douglas, Rt. Hon. A. Akers-

    Leveson-Gower, Fred. N. S.

    Austin, Sir John

    Doxford Sir William Theodore

    Lockwood, Lt.-Col. A. R.

    Bagot, Capt. Josceline FitzRoy

    Durning-Lawrence, Sir Edwin

    Long, Col. Charles W (Evesham

    Bain, Colonel James Robert

    Dyke, Rt. Hon. Sir Wm. H.

    Lonsdale, John Brownlee

    Baird, John George Alexander

    Elliot, Hon. A. Ralph Douglas

    Lowe, Francis William

    Balcarres, Lord

    Fellowes, Hon. Ailwyn Edw.

    Loyd, Archie Kirkman

    Baldwin, Alfred

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

    Lucas, Col. Francis (Lowestoft)

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

    Fielden, Edward Brocklehurst

    Lucas, Reginald J. (Portsm'th)

    Balfour, Rt Hn Gerald W. (Leeds

    Finlay, Sir Robert Bannatyne

    Lyttelton, Hon. Alfred

    Balfour, Maj K R (Christchurch

    Fisher, William Hayes

    Macartney, Rt. Hon. W. G. E.

    Banbury, Frederick George

    Fitzroy, Hon. Edward A.

    Macdona, John Cumming

    Barry, Sir Francis T. (Windsor

    Flannery, Sir Fortescue

    Maconochie, A. W.

    Bartley, George C. T.

    Fletcher, Sir Henry

    M'Calmont, Col. J. (Antrim, E.)

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

    Flower, Ernest

    M'Iver, Sir Lewis (Edinburgh W

    Bell, Richard

    Forster, Henry William

    M'Killip, James (Stirlingshire)

    Bentinck, Lord Henry C.

    Foster, Sir Michael (Lond. Univ.

    Majendie, James A. H.

    Bhownaggree, Sir M. M.

    Garfit, William

    Malcolm, Ian

    Bigwood, James

    Godson, Sir Augustus Fred.

    Maxwell, W J H (Dumfriesshire

    Blundell, Colonel Henry

    Gordon, J. (Londonderry, S.)

    Meysey-Thompson, Sir H. M.

    Boscawen, Arthur Griffith-

    Gordon, Maj Evans- (T'rHmlets

    Milton, Viscount

    Boulnois, Edmund

    Gorst, Rt. Hon. Sir John Eldon

    Moore, William (Antrim, N.)

    Bowles, Capt. H. F. (Middlesex

    Goschen, Hon. George Joachim

    Morrell, George Herbert

    Bowles, T. Gibson (King's Lynn

    Goulding, Edward Alfred

    Morton, A. H. A. (Deptford)

    Bull, William James

    Hain, Edward

    Mowbray, Sir Robt. Gray C.

    Campbell, Rt. Hn. J A (Glasgow

    Hamilton, Rt Hn Lord G (Mid'x)

    Murray, Rt Hn A. Graham (Bute

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

    Hamilton, Marq. of (L'nd'nd'y)

    Nicholson, William Graham

    Cayzer, Sir Charles William

    Hanbury, Rt. Hon. Robt. W.

    Nicol, Donald Ninian

    Cecil, Evelyn (Aston Manor)

    Hardy, L. (Kent, Ashford)

    O'Neill, Hon. Robert Torrens

    Chamberlain, Rt.Hon. J. (Birm.

    Hay, Hon. Claude George

    Orr-Ewing, Charles Lindsay

    Chamberlain, J Austen (Worc'r

    Heath, Arthur H. (Hanley)

    Palmer, Walter (Salisbury)

    Chaplin, Rt. Hon. Henry

    Heath, Jas. (Staffords., N.W.)

    Parker, Gilbert

    Chapman, Edward

    Heaton, John Henniker

    Parkes, Ebenezer

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

    Henderson, Alexander

    Pease, Herb. Pike (Darlington)

    Coghill, Douglas Harry

    Hobhouse, Hy. (Somerset, E.)

    Pilkington, Lt.-Col. Richard

    Cohen, Benjamin Louis

    Hope, J. F. (Sheffi'ld, Brightside

    Platt-Higgins, Frederick

    Collings, Rt. Hon. Jesse

    Howard, John (Kent, Faversh.

    Plummer, Walter R.

    Colomb, Sir John Charles R.

    Hozier, Hon James Henry Cecil

    Pretyman, Ernest George

    Colston, Chas. Edw. H. A.

    Hudson, George Bickersteth

    Purvis, Robert

    Corbett, A. C. (Glasgow)

    Johnston, William (Belfast)

    Pym, C. Guy

    Cox, Irwin Edward B.

    Johnstone, Heywood (Sussex)

    Quilter, Sir Cuthbert

    Cranborne, Viscount

    Kenyon, James (Lancs., Bury)

    Randles, John S.

    476

    477

    Rankin, Sir James

    Scott, Sir S. (Marylebone, W.)

    Welby, Lt.-Col. A C E (Taunton).

    Ratcliffe, R. F.

    Seely, Charles H. (Lincoln)

    Whitley, H. (Ashton-u.-Lyne)

    Reid, James (Greenock)

    Sharpe, William Edward T.

    Whitmore, Charles Algernon

    Remnant, James Farquharson

    Simeon, Sir Barrington

    Williams, Col. R. (Dorset)

    Renshaw, Charles Bine

    Smith, James Parker (Lanarks.

    Williams, Rt Hn J. Powell. (Bir.

    Rentoul, James Alexander

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

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

    Ridley, Hon. M. W. (St'lybridge

    Spear, John Ward

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

    Ridley, S. F. (Bethnal Green)

    Stanley, Lord (Lancs.)

    Wolff, Gustav Wilhelm

    Ritchie, Rt. Hn. Chas. Thomson

    Stirling-Maxwell, Sir John M.

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

    Rolleston, Sir John F. L.

    Stroyan, John

    Wyndham, Rt. Hon. George

    Rollit, Sir Albert Kaye

    Thorburn, Sir Walter

    Younger, William

    Ropner, Col. Robert

    Tomlinson, Wm. Edw. Murray

    Royds, Clement Molyneux

    Tritton, Charles Ernest

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

    Sackville, Col. S. G. Stopford-

    Valentia, Viscount

    Samuel, Harry S. (Limehouse)

    Warde, Colonel C. E.

    Saunderson, Rt. Hn. Col. Edw J.

    Wason, John Cathcart (Orkney

    Original Question again proposed.
    MR. SOAMEScalled attention to the salary of the chief clerk in the Judicial Department. His commencing salary was £500 a year, rising by annual increments of £20 until £650 was reached. In the last column but one it was stated that this official was to have a rise of £50 and not £20. He thought this point required a little explanation.
    THE CHAIRMAN: Order, order! The hon. Member is going back to an item before that upon which the Committee has just pronounced an opinion.
    MR. SOAMES: No. Sir, it is lower down.
    THE CHAIRMAN: I beg the horn Member's pardon. I thought he was referring to an item higher up in the list.
    MR. COGHILLthought £600 a year was a very large sum for the work which the chief clerk was called upon to perform. The salary of the registrar of the Privy Council was £1,500, and he did not think they could afford to pay such large salaries to the registrar, and to the clerk to the Privy Council as well. The Chancellor of the Exchequer was very fond of lecturing them upon economy, but he wished the right hon. Gentleman would carry his principles out in his own Department. Each year they cheerfully voted large sums for the Army and Navy, and as regarded the Civil Service Estimates he thought they ought to have a very considerable reduction this year. So long as they had these heavy demands made upon them by the Army and Navy he did not think they could do better than begin economising upon the Vote for the Privy Council Office. He begged
    478
    to move a reduction of the salary of the registrar of the Privy Council by £100; for it was clear that in the Privy Council Office there was a large number of gentlemen enjoying large salaries with very little to do.
    Motion made, and Question proposed, "That Item A (Salaries) be reduced by £100, in respect of the Salary of the Registrar of the Privy Council."—(Mr. Coghill.)
    MR. CHARLES HOBHOUSEsaid the registrar of the Privy Council, like all other civil servants, ought to enter his name in the book when he commenced work in the morning and when he finished work in the evening. It was laid down that in any Government Department, whether it was the lowest clerk or the Permanent Under Secretary of State, he had to write his name in the book, put down the time he commenced duties at the office, and the time he finished his work. His vote would be very much influenced by the amount of time this official devoted to his duties.
    MR. AUSTEN CHAMBERLAIN: I cannot say whether that is the practice or not in regard to this official, but I think such a regulation is entirely unnecessary in this case. The registrar has entirely separate and distinct duties to perform, mostly connected with the judicial work of the Council. I think it will be apparent to hon. Members that it is not necessary for this official to record in a book the time of his arrival and departure, as is done in the case of junior clerks.
    MR. CHARLES HOBHOUSE: But it is done in the case of Permanent Under Secretaries of State also. I believe I am right in this statement.
    MR. JOHN BURNSsaid he did not object to the hon. Member knowing what time this official entered upon his business and left it, and he thought every State officer ought to sign the book, as every other public official did. But the mere fact of signing the book at ten or eleven o'clock in the morning, or when he left at four or five in the evening, was no indication whatever of his capacity for work in the interval. He might be reading three-volume novels or The Times, or taking a long luncheon hour. He wanted to know what the official did between signing the book in the morning and leaving at night. They ought to have a little more information from the Minister responsible to the House as to whether the Registrar of the Privy Council earned his salary. There might be a satisfactory explanation, but so far they had not received it. What did he do? If they were doing this officer an injustice unintentionally, some information should be given with regard to his duties, so that he might be reinstated in the good opinion of the House.
    MR. AUSTEN CHAMBERLAIN: This gentleman is in attendance on the Privy Council whenever it sits as a judicial body. He is responsible for the
    records of the court, and has to discharge duties similar to those performed in the high court by the masters. He is a very important official, charged with very important and responsible work.
    MR. COGHILLasked what duties were performed by another gentleman in the same Department, who received a salary of £450.
    MR. AUSTEN CHAMBERLAINsaid these officers assisted the Registrar in keeping the records of the court, and for the performance of their duties they required some legal knowledge.
    MR. TAYLORasked how many months of the year these officials were occupied. Was the Privy Council always exercising judicial functions, and if not, what duties were these officials performing during the intervals?
    MR. AUSTEN CHAMBERLAINsaid they were employed only when the Privy Council discharged judicial functions. The duties attached to the offices were, in his opinion, quite sufficient to justify the salaries paid.
    Question put.
    The Committee divided:—Ayes, 136; Noes, 203. (Division List No. 194.)

    AYES.

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

    Dalziel, James Henry

    Jacoby, James Alfred

    Allan, William (Gateshead)

    Davies, M. Vaughan-(Cardigan

    Joicey, Sir James

    Allen, Chas. P. (Glouc.,Stroud

    Delany, William

    Jones, Wm. (Carnarvonshire)

    Ambrose, Robert

    Dewar, John A. (Inverness-sh.

    Joyce, Michael

    Asher, Alexander

    Dilke, Rt. Hon. Sir Charles

    Kinloch, Sir John George S.

    Barry, E. (Cork, S.)

    Dillon, John

    Lambert, George

    Bayley, Thomas (Derbyshire)

    Donelan, Captain A.

    Layland-Barratt, Francis

    Beaumont, Wentworth C. B.

    Doogan, P. C.

    Leamy, Edmund

    Bell, Richard

    Duncan, J. Hastings

    Leng, Sir John

    Boland, John

    Dunn, Sir William

    Lundon, W.

    Bolton, Thomas Dolling

    Esmonde, Sir Thomas

    MacDonnell, Dr. Mark A.

    Boyle, James

    Evans, Samuel T. (Glamorgan)

    M'Cann, James

    Brigg, John

    Farrell, James Patrick

    M'Crae, George

    Brunner, Sir John Tomlinson

    Ffrench, Peter

    M'Kenna, Reginald

    Burke, E. Haviland-

    Flavin, Michael Joseph

    M'Laren, Charles Benjamin

    Burns, John

    Flynn, James Christopher

    Markham, Arthur Basil

    Caine, William Sproston

    Foster, Sir Walter (Derby Co.)

    Mooney, John J.

    Caldwell, James

    Gilhooly, James

    Morgan, J. L. (Carmarthen)

    Campbell, John (Armagh, S.)

    Goddard, Daniel Ford

    Morton, E. J. C. (Devonport)

    Carvill, Patrick Geo. Hamilton

    Gurdon, Sir W. Brampton

    Murphy, J.

    Cawley, Frederick

    Harrington, Timothy

    Nannetti, Joseph P.

    Channing, Francis Allston

    Harwood, George

    Nolan, Joseph (Louth, South)

    Clancy, John Joseph

    Hayden, John Patrick

    Norman, Henry

    Colville, John

    Hayne, Rt. Hon. Charles Seale-

    Norton, Capt. Cecil William

    Condon, Thomas Joseph

    Healy, Timothy Michael

    Nussey, Thomas Willans

    Craig, Robert Hunter

    Hemphill, Rt. Hon. Charles H.

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

    Crean, Eugene

    Hobhouse, C. E. H. (Bristol, E.)

    O'Brien, Kendal (Tipper'y, Mid

    Cremer, William Randal

    Holland, William Henry

    O'Brien, Patrick (Kilkenny)

    Crombie, John William

    Hope, John D. (Fife, West)

    O'Brien, P. J. (Tipperary, N.)

    Cullinan, J.

    Horniman, Frederick John

    O'Connor, James (Wicklow, W

    O'Donnell, John (Mayo, S.)

    Roberts, John H. (Denbighs.)

    Wallace, Robert

    O'Donnell, T. (Kerry, W.)

    Robertson, Edmund (Dundee)

    Walton, Joseph (Barnsley)

    O'Dowd, John

    Roche, John

    Warner, Thomas Courtenay T.

    O'Kelly, Conor (Mayo, N.)

    Samuel, S. M. (Whitechapel)

    Wason, Eugene (Clackmannan

    O'Malley, William

    Schwann, Charles E.

    White, Luke (York, E. R.)

    O'Mara, James

    Shaw, Thomas (Hawick B.)

    White, Patrick (Meath, North)

    O'Shaughnessy, P. J.

    Shipman, Dr. John G.

    Whitley, J. H. (Halifax)

    O'Shee, James John

    Sinclair, Capt. J. (Forfarshire)

    Whittaker, Thomas Palmer

    Palmer, SirCharlesM (Durham

    Soames, Arthur Wellesley

    Williams, Osmond (Merioneth)

    Partington, Oswald

    Soares, Ernest J.

    Wilson, John (Durham, Mid.)

    Power, Patrick Joseph

    Sullivan, Donal

    Young, Samuel (Cavan, East)

    Priestley, Arthur

    Taylor, Theodore Cooke

    Yoxall, James Henry

    Rea, Russell

    Tennant, Harold John

    Reddy, M.

    Thomas, Abel (Carmarthen, E.)

    TELLERS FOR THE AYES—Mr. Strachey and Mr. Coghill.

    Redmond, J. E. (Waterford)

    Thomson, F. W. (York, W. R.)

    Redmond, William (Clare)

    Tully, Jasper

    Rickett, J. Compton

    Ure, Alexander

    NOES.

    Acland-Hood, Capt. Sir Alex. F.

    Durning-Lawrence, Sir Edwin

    Lowe, Francis William

    Agnew, Sir Andrew Noel

    Elliot, Hon. A. Ralph Douglas

    Loyd, Archie Kirkman

    Allsopp, Hon. George

    Emmott, Alfred

    Lucas, Col. Francis (Lowestoft

    Anson, Sir Wm. Reynell

    Farquharson, Dr. Robert

    Lucas, R. J. (Portsmouth)

    Arkwright, John Stanhope

    Fellowes, Hon. Ailwyn Edward

    Lyttelton, Hon. Alfred

    Arnold-Forster, Hugh O.

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

    Macartney, Rt. Hn. W. G. E.

    Arrol, Sir William

    Fielden, Edward Brocklehurst

    Macdona, John Cumming

    Atkinson, Rt. Hon. John

    Finlay, Sir Robert Bannatyne

    Maconochie, A. W.

    Austin, Sir John

    Fisher, William Hayes

    M'Arthur, William (Cornwall)

    Bagot, Capt. Josceliue FitzRoy

    Fitzroy, Hn. Edward Algernon

    M'Calmont, Col. J. (Antrim, E.)

    Bain, Colonel James Robert

    Flannery, Sir Fortescue

    M'Iver, Sir Lewis (Edinb'gh, W.

    Baird, John George Alexander

    Fletcher, Sir Henry

    M'Killop, J. (Stirlingshire)

    Balcarres, Lord

    Flower, Ernest

    Malcolm, Ian

    Baldwin, Alfred

    Forster, Henry William

    Martin, Richard Biddulph

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

    Garfit, William

    Maxwell, W. J. H (Dumfriessh.)

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

    Gibbs, Hn. A. G H (CityofLond.

    Meysey-Thompson, Sir H. M.

    Balfour, Maj. K R (Christchurch

    Gladstone, Rt Hn. Herbert John

    Milton, Viscount

    Banbury, Frederick George

    Godson, Sir Augustus Frederick

    Moon, Edward Robert Pacy

    Barry, Sir F. T. (Windsor)

    Gordon, J. (Londonderry, S.)

    Moore, William (Antrim, N.)

    Bartley, George C. T.

    Gordon, Maj Evans-(TrH'mlets

    Morrell, George Herbert

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

    Gorst, Rt. Hon. Sir John E.

    Morton, A. H. A. (Deptford)

    Bentinck, Lord Henry C.

    Goschen, Hon. George Joachim

    Mowbray, Sir Robert Gray C.

    Bhownaggree, Sir M. M.

    Goulding, Edward Alfred

    Murray, Rt Hn A. Graham (Bute

    Blundell, Colonel Henry

    Hain, Edward

    Nicholson, William Graham

    Boscawen, Arthur Griffith-

    Haldane, Richard Burdon

    Nicol, Donald Ninian

    Boulnois, Edmund

    Hamilton, Rt Hn Lord G. (Mid'x

    O'Neill, Hon. Robert Torrens

    Bowles, T. Gibson (King's Lynn)

    Hamilton, Marq. of (L'nd'derry)

    Orr-Ewing, Charles Lindsay

    Butcher, John George

    Hanbury, Rt. Hn. Robert Wm.

    Parker, Gilbert

    Campbell, Rt. Hn. J. A (Glasg'w

    Hardy, Laurence (Kent, Ashf'd

    Parkes, Ebenezer

    Campbell-Bannerman, Sir H.

    Harmsworth, R. Leicester

    Pearson, Sir Weetman D.

    Cautley, Henry Strother

    Hay, Hon. Claude George

    Pease, Herb. Pike (Darlington)

    Cavendish, R. F. (N. Lancs.)

    Heath, Arthur Howard (Hanley

    Pease, Sir J. W. (Durham)

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

    Heath, James (Staffords, N. W.

    Pemberton, John S. G.

    Cayzer, Sir Charles William

    Heaton, John Henniker

    Pilkington, Lt.-Col. Richard

    Cecil, Evelyn (Aston Manor)

    Henderson, Alexander

    Platt-Higgins, Frederick

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

    Hobhouse, Henry (Somerset, E.

    Plummer, Walter R.

    Chamberlain, J Austen (Worc'r

    Hope, J. F. (Sheffield, Brightside

    Pretyman, Ernest George

    Chapman, Edward

    Houldsworth, Sir Wm. Henry.

    Purvis, Robert

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

    Howard, J. (Kent, Faversham

    Pym, C. Guy

    Cohen, Benjamin Louis

    Hozier, Hon. James Henry Cecil

    Quilter, Sir Cuthbert

    Collings, Rt. Hon. Jesse

    Hudson, Geo. Bickersteth

    Randles, John S.

    Colston, Charles Edw. H. A.

    Jessel, Captain Herbert Merton

    Rankin, Sir James

    Corbett, A. Cameron (Glasgow)

    Johnston, William (Belfast)

    Ratcliffe, R. F.

    Corbett, T. L. (Down, North)

    Johnstone, Heywood (Sussex)

    Remnant, James Farquharson

    Cox, Irwin Edw. Bainbridge

    Jones, Dav. Brynmor (Swansea

    Renshaw, Charles Bine

    Cranborne, Viscount

    Kay-Shuttleworth, Rt Hn Sir U

    Rentoul, James Alexander

    Cripps, Charles Alfred

    Law, Andrew Bonar

    Ridley, Hn. M. W. (Stalybridge

    Cross, Herbert S. (Bolton)

    Lawrence, Joseph (Monmouth

    Ridley, S. F. (Bethnal Green)

    Cubitt, Hon. Henry

    Lawrence, Wm. F. (Liverpool)

    Rigg, Richard

    Dairymple, Sir Charles

    Lawson, John Grant

    Ritchie, Rt. Hn. Chas. Thomson

    Dewar, T. R. (T'rH'mlts, S. Geo.

    Lee, Arthur H (Hants, Fareham

    Rolleston, Sir John F. L.

    Dickson, Charles Scott

    Legge, Col. Hon. Heneage

    Rollit, Sir Albert Kaye

    Dixon-Hartland, Sir F. Dixon

    Leveson-Gower Frederick N. S

    Ropner, Colonel Robert

    Douglas, Rt. Hon. A. Akers-

    Lockwood, Lt.-Col. A. R.

    Royds, Clement Molyneux

    Doxford, Sir William Theodore

    Long, Rt. Hn. Walter (Bristol, S

    Sackville, Col. S. G. Stopford-

    Duke, Henry Edward

    Lonsdale, John Brownlee

    Sadler, Col. Saml. Alexander

    482

    483

    Samuel, Harry S. (Limehouse)

    Stirling-Maxwell, Sir John M.

    Whitmore, Charles Algernon

    Sassoon, Sir Edward Albert

    Thomas, Alfred (Glam organ, E.

    Williams, Colonel R. (Dorset)

    Saunderson, Rt. Hon. Col Edw J

    Thorburn, Sir Walter

    Williams, Rt Hn J Powell- (B'rm.

    Scott, Sir S. (Marylebone, W.)

    Thornton, Percy M.

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

    Seely, Charles Hilton (Lincoln)

    Tomlinson, Wm. Edw. Murray

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

    Sharpe, William Edward T.

    Tritton, Charles Ernest

    Wodehouse, Rt. Hon E R (Bath)

    Simeon, Sir Harrington

    Tuke, Sir John Batty

    Wolff, Gustav Wilhelm

    Sinclair, Louis (Romford)

    Valentia, Viscount

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

    Smith, H C (N'rth'mb., Tyneside

    Walton, John L. (Leeds, S.)

    Wyndham, Rt. Hon. George

    Smith, James Parker (Lanarks.

    Warde, Colonel C. E.

    Smith, Samuel (Flint)

    Wason, John C. (Orkney)

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

    Spear, John Ward

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

    Stanley, Lord (Lancs.)

    Whiteley, H. (Ashton-u. Lyne)

    Original Question put, and agreed to.

    2. Motion made, and Question proposed, "That a sum, not exceeding £21,650, be granted to His Majesty, to complete the sum necessary to defray the charge which will come in course of payment during the year ending on the 31st day of March, 1902, for the salaries and expenses of the Charity Commission for England and Wales."
    SIR WALTER FOSTERcalled attention to the new scheme of the Charity Commissioners for the Hospital of St. Cross, near Winchester. He said this hospital was a very ancient foundation, dating back to the middle ages. It was a foundation started in pre-Reformation times. Under the wise guidance of the trustees this foundation was becoming a scheme for giving old-age pensions to deserving persons. The policy of the Charity Commissioners in using the funds for that purpose was one which ought to receive the support of the House. For many years the Charity had been managed by a board of fourteen trustees—five of whom were ex officio, and nine of whom were co-opted. It was a growing charity; in a few years its income would be between £8,000 and £10,000 a year. An increasing number of persons were supported out of the funds in the shape of pensioners and brethren who lived in the hospital. The first fault he had to find with the Charity Commissioners was that when they drew up the new scheme, which came into force at the beginning of the year, they did not increase the number of representative trustees. The five ex officio trustees under the old scheme were the Master of the hospital, the Warden of the college of Winchester, the Dean, the Rector of a neighbouring parish, and the Mayor of Winchester. Under the old scheme the Mayor of Winchester was obliged to be a
    484
    member of the Church of England. A year or so ago the mayor for the time being was a Nonconformist, and so was disfranchised. That was regarded at the time as a hardship, and the town, council felt that it should be remedied for the future. Those distinctions were not only injurious to the Church of England, but entirely out of harmony with the spirit of the times, especially as the recipients of this charity were not limited to the Church of England, but were persons of any religious denomination. It would have done no harm if the Mayor of Winchester had been able to take his seat as a trustee, but there was a statute which prevented him from doing so. A Select Committee of this House in 1884 was appointed to consider these questions, and they unanimously recommended that in future the Charity Commissioners should give more attention to the representative element in drawing up schemes for the administration of charities, but in this case that recommendation had not been followed, for the scheme gave only one additional member to a body consisting of fourteen. That member was to be selected by the town council of Winchester, and there still remained nine co-opted members. He did not think that was in accordance with modern views, and it certainly was not in accordance with the recommendation of the Select Committee of 1884, who were especially anxious, in order to give the public confidence in the administration of such charities, that the representative element should be increased, so as to secure men of wide experience and knowledge of public affairs. The Chairman of the Select Committee, Mr. Shaw-Lefevre, criticised this scheme when it was first promulgated, but unfortunately his objections were handed in rather late. The Charity Commissioners practically ignored his representations by retaining

    485
    the scheme in the form in which it was issued. Mr. Shaw-Lefevre suggested that in a charity managed by fifteen trustees certain county and town councils should have representation, instead of retaining so many co-opted members. If this new scheme had provided five or six representative trustees—three from the county council, one from the council of the city of Winchester, and two others from representative bodies in the area of the county of Hampshire—they would have had a more efficient body of trustees. He believed at the present time the trustees elected by co-option were very good men, but if they were more representative and elected every three or four years, instead of being chosen for life, they would take a keener interest in the charity. Mr. Shaw-Lefevre had put forward another suggestion, that the Charity Commissioners should do away with the restrictions which they had put on the only new representative they gave, namely, that he should be a member of the Church of England. He thought that that restriction, embodied in a new scheme, was its second fault. In this new century we ought to rise above an unnecessary restriction which was an insult to the Nonconformist Churches. It was recognised by those who had petitioned the Charity Commissioners on the subject that it was a slight upon them, and it was also resented by the town council of Winchester as a slight upon them. It should be remembered that this charity dated back to pre-Reformation times, and it showed a petty spirit of exclusion to disqualify as trustees the very people who might claim to represent the religion of the people which prevailed when the charity was founded. They had done away as far as they could with all religious tests. These tests no longer existed in the universities or the governing bodies in the universities, which were open to Roman Catholics and Nonconformists, and which had to perform duties similar to those of the trustees of this charity, perhaps more serious, since they had to do with education. Surely, it would not have mattered very much in the administration of the charity if one Nonconformist were present in a body of fifteen, and he thought it would have been a wise concession. He spoke as a member of the
    486
    Church of England who loved his Church, and who had sought to do all he could or it. He believed the Church of England would have an infinitely greater chance of rising to that great position of being the Church Universal of this country if they could do away with the spirit of petty exclusiveness in the administration of bodies like this. The two faults he had to find with this scheme was that it failed to carry out the two great principles laid down by the Select Committee, namely, a sufficiently large proportion of the representative element in the government of the charity, and, in the second place, it continued the old spirit of petty exclusiveness in the qualification of trustees by requiring that the new member to be elected by the town council of Winchester should be obliged to subscribe himself a member of the Church of England before he obtained office. They had seen how the Mayor of Winchester, who had the confidence of the whole city, could not be a trustee of the charity of of St. Cross because he happened to be a Dissenter. In fact, by this rule they might put aside the best men from the office because they happened to be Nonconformists. That was a bad condition of things for the charity; and because the Charity Commissioners had not risen to take a higher, broader, and more liberal view of the scheme he moved to reduce the vote by £100.
    Motion made, and Question proposed, "That a sum, not exceeding £21,150, be granted for the said service."—(Sir Walter Foster.)
    MR. EUGENE WASONsaid he felt grateful to the right hon. Gentleman who had brought this question before the House. He referred more especially to the clause in the scheme that no trustee could be a Nonconformist. Now, the majority of the members of that House became Nonconformists when they crossed the border of Scotland, and when Members from Scotland crossed the Tweed southward they were equally Nonconformists. Under this very narrow action of the Charity Commissioners it might so happen that a Scotchman who went to Winchester—and he had no doubt there were Scotchmen in Winchester—might possibly become

    487
    mayor of that city. That man might be a member of the Church of Scotland, as established by law, and yet under this narrow clause he would not be able to give his services to the hospital of St. Cross. He spoke as a member of the Church of England, but he asked what in the world did it matter to any human being to what faith, or creed, or nationality a trustee belonged so long as he was an honest man. The Charity Commissioners spoke of heretics and schismatics, but he did not know in what category they would put a member of the established Church of Scotland. He did not say that the trustees had done anything but what was right; but he protested against the Charity Commissioners having broken the spirit of the agreement entered into in 1884, and by so doing having deprived the hospital from getting the services of possibly the best man in the place, simply because he happened to be, in England, a Nonconformist.
    MR. GRIFFITH BOSCAWENsaid he could not help thinking that the hon. Gentleman who had brought forward this most interesting question, and his supporters, were under a complete misunderstanding in regard to it. The matter looked very simple at first sight. It was all very well to say "What did it matter what faith, creed, or nationality a trustee might be"; but the whole question was, "What were the Charity Commissioners allowed to do by law?" It must be judged, not by an ideal scheme, but by the existing circumstances as to whether the Charity Commissioners had taken the right course or not. The two great points made against the Charity Commissioners were, in the first place, that they did not increase the number of representative trustees, and in the second place that they required that the one additional trustee given should be a member of the Church of England. He had a complete answer to both these points. As to the first, it was perfectly true that in 1884 evidence was given before a Select Committee of the House that it was desirable that the principle of representative trustees should be introduced into schemes, and that the Committee reported in favour of that proposal. But that evidence and that recommendation applied only to
    488
    local trusts. But St. Cross Hospital at Winchester was not a local trust; its benefits extended all over the kingdom, and when the hon. Gentleman said, "Why not put on local representatives?" he was advocating the localising of the trust. The hon. Gentleman said, "Put on representatives of the county council and other local bodies in Hampshire"; but if they did that they would turn the trust into a local Hampshire charity, which would be absolutely contrary to the spirit of the original foundation. There was another point in connection with this matter. The Charity Commissioners, in the case of charities of fifty pounds annual value and upwards, could not act unless application was made by the trustees themselves for an alteration of the scheme. Now the trustees in this instance did not ask for any great alteration in their trust; all they asked for were minor alterations and the consolidation of the various, schemes under which they acted. It would not have done to have forced on the trustees, against their will, a new scheme which would have entirely changed the character of the trust. He passed to the second point, which was really the gravamen of the charge, namely, that in adding one additional trustee they required that he should be a member of the Church of England. The hon. Member opposite told them that it was not in accordance with present practice to do so; but they had got to look not only to present practice in general, but to the character of the trust itself in particular. What was the character of the trust? The trust had always been held in connection with the Church of England. The Master of the hospital must, by the trust deed, be a clergyman in priest's orders; he must be the incumbent of the parish appointed by the Bishop of Winchester, and subject in all respects to the jurisdiction of the Ordinary. Provision was also made for the maintenance of the fabric of the parish church and for divine services being carried on in it according to the rites of the Church of England. In other words, a great and important part of the duties of these trustees was absolutely concerned with the maintenance of worship according to the rites of the Church of England.

    489
    He asked whether it was not rather a tall order that on such a trust Nonconformists should claim to have a trustee appointed? The hon. Member opposite tried to persuade them that it should not be exclusively a Church of England trust because it was a pre-Reformation trust. Well, he was not there on the present occasion to discuss religious questions with the hon. Member; but it was a new light to him to be told that a pre-Reformation trust was founded by a different Church from the Church of England. Certainly he had always believed that the Charity Commissioners, acting according to law, must follow the practice that there was a perfect legal continuity of the Church of England with the pre-Reformation Church. He passed from the question of the character of the trust, and the express provision of the trust deed, to the present practice. They were asked by the hon. Member that, in accordance with the present practice, they should allow one or more of the trustees to be people who did not belong to the Church of England. Now he ventured to say that the hon. Member, in declaring that that was the invariable present practice, had not really studied the precedents. There were plenty of precedents in connection with all sorts of charities.
    SIR WALTER FOSTER: Modern charities?
    MR. GRIFFITH BOSCAWENsaid he could not say whether they were all modern charities; but he had got the case of the Springhill College with twenty-four trustees elected in various ways. The trust deed provided that not only should the trustees be members of a particular denomination, but they had actually to sign a declaration that they belonged to the denomination of Protestant Dissenters called Independents.
    SIR WALTER FOSTERsaid he knew that college. It was founded for Nonconformist students and was limited for their use. It was not like St. Cross Hospital, which was to give relief to no particular class or creed.
    MR. GRIFFITH BOSCAWENsaid most emphatically that St. Cross was a charity founded in connection with the Church of England. It was only those
    490
    funds which were over—he admitted that they were large—which were to be devoted to pensioners from any part of England. What they had got to consider was, what it was legal to do. The hon. Member opposite said that they ought not to have made the provision that the additional trustee should be a member of the Church of England. He ventured to say that, if the Charity Commissioners had not made that provision, it was probable that the new scheme could have been upset by the Court of Chancery. There was a very remarkable case in the law reports in the year 1873. A voluntary school at Sandhurst-Ulph, Norfolk, had ceased to carry on its work and it was about to be transferred to the school board. In order to obtain the transference it was necessary to appoint three new trustees. These three trustees, who were appointed by the Charity Commissioners, agreed to the transfer, but they were all members of the Church of England. Objection was taken to the scheme and appeal made on the ground that the effect of it was to convert a Church of England school into an undenominational school, and that that was contrary to the expressed declaration of the original trust deed, and therefore prohibited by the 46th section of the Act of 1853. The matter came before the Master of the Rolls, Sir George Jessel, who said that the appeal would not be valid because it was not the fact that under the 46th section of the Act of 1853 there were restrictions which prevented trustees from being appointed who might use their powers to the prejudice of the Church of England, but that the real restriction was on the appointment of any trustees who were not actually members of that Church themselves, and he added that the action of the Charity Commissioners would have been invalid if the trustees had not been members of the Church of England. He ventured to say that that case was on all fours with the present. If the Charity Commissioners had not appointed trustees all of whom were members of the Church of England, their scheme could have been upset. They were bound to consider precedents, and what was the proper thing to do, quite irrespective as to whether their

    491
    action would be popular or approved of by hon. Gentlemen opposite. He thanked the hon. Gentleman opposite for the exceedingly courteous manner in which he had brought forward this matter, but he ventured to think that there had been a complete misunderstanding of the duty of the Charity Commissioners and of the nature of the charity; and, therefore, he thought the action of the Charity Commissioners was fully justified.
    MR. CHARLES HOBHOUSEsaid that the objection raised to placing a Nonconformist on this board of trustees were of a double character—legal and ethical. The hon. Gentleman told them that when the trustees sent this scheme to the Charity Commissioners they did not ask for much change in the constitution of the trust. He had never yet heard of existing trustees who did want much change. They always considered themselves absolutely superior to any possible successors, and naturally they were disinclined to mistrust their own powers to deal with property. The hon. Member who was responsible for the Charity Commissioners had told them that this was a Church of England scheme, but he had omitted to tell them anything about the religion of the beneficiaries or whether any religious test was put on these beneficiaries.
    MR. GRIFFITH BOSCAWENsaid it was true that, so far as the out-patients went, they need not be members of the Church of England, or of any particular denomination; but the in patients were obliged to attend Church of England services.
    MR. CHARLES HOBHOUSE: Quite so; but he was acquainted with that fact, for he knew something about this charity. But surely the presence of one Nonconformist on a governing body of fifteen trustees was not going to proselytise in any way the out-patients? And surely, if he might say so, the trustees or any body of this sort were more concerned with the property of the trust than with the religion of the people who received the benefits of the trust. If some local body such as the county council or the district council were represented on this trust they would always have within a short distance of
    492
    the trust men who would attend the business meetings of the trust, which really controlled the property, and that was the most important part of their duty. If the proposal of his hon. friend had been to include anything like a change of religion on the part of the Master of this charity, that would have been a different thing. It was the duty of the Master, and not of the trustees, to see that the religious exercises of the Church of England were properly carried out in the hospital at stated intervals; but it was not the business of the trustees to go down to the hospital to see whether the patients attended the services of the Church of England. The hon. Gentleman opposite took objection to the proposal of the hon. Member for Ilkeston on the ground that this was not a modern charity; but the whole reason for a change in these charities was to bring them up to date and make their government and administration more in accordance with modern opinion and thought. He did not know what the proportion of the inhabitants of the city of Winchester was of Members of the Church of England to Nonconformists. But say that the proportion of Nonconformists was one third or a half, why should they not allow one Nonconformist to take a practical interest in the scheme of the charity as a representative trustee?
    MR. GODDARDsaid he joined with his hon. friends who had already expressed the opinion that the answer of the hon. Gentleman was most inadequate. He had never listened to a weaker answer to such a strong case. The hon. Gentleman said that a new scheme was not wanted, and that only one or two alterations were required, but the Parliamentary Paper referred to a new scheme, and gave the Charity Trustees an opportunity of making alterations in accordance with modern thought. Then the hon. Gentleman referred to the suggestion of his hon. friend as an attempt to localise what was now a general charity; that the charity opened its doors to people from all parts of the country, and that it was wrong to suggest that someone on the Town Council of Winchester, or the County Council of Hampshire, should be elected to the Board. But all the trustees were local men, and it would be

    493
    no departure from principle to appoint a representative of the people from either the county council or the borough council a trustee. He understood that under the existing scheme the trustees were limited to residents in the county. It might appear a strong point to the hon. Gentleman, but it appeared a very weak point to him that the charity was a Church of England charity. They had had that explanation before, and they knew the value of it. He himself had been elected to serve in a charity trust where formerly all the trustees were members of the Church of England. The practice had been in all modern alterations for the Charity Commissioners to open the doors so that a charity should have a more representative body of trustees not only in regard to the general population, but also in regard to the different religious denominations. The hon. Gentleman said that the charity was a Church of England charity, and that the recipients had to attend services in that Church, but there were a great many charities in the country where the recipients had to attend Church of England services, but where the trustees were not necessarily members of that Church. In these old charities bread and other things were given out at the church doors after certain services, not because the donor was an attendant at the church necessarily, but because the church doors were the only places where such gifts could be distributed. Surely the time had arrived when the old barriers of intolerance should be broken down, and when they should widen their views in regard to representation on public charities. The hon. Gentleman said that the recipients should be members of one particular Church, but no question at all was raised with reference to out-patients at the hospitals, although the in-dwellers had to attend Church of England services, but that did not make it a Church of England trust. The answer of the hon. Gentleman was altogether inadequate, and the views he expressed were not the kind of views hon. Members were in the habit of expressing when they addressed their Nonconformist constituents.
    MR. COURTENAY WARNERsaid it was certainly not the idea of the original trust that
    494
    Nonconformists should be debarred, because there could have been no question of Nonconformists when it was established, as there was only one Church in the country. The comparison which had been made between this charity and a denominational school was utterly fallacious. A denominational school was established at a time when there were many sects in the country, and when money was allocated to a particular purpose, whereas this charity dated back to an epoch when the Church was the national Church of the country, and there was no question of any denominational differences at all. The charity was distinctly a local charity, because even under the revised scheme the trustees must be local men, and therefore the objection of the hon. Gentleman to elected trustees because they would be local men fell to the ground. The claim of his hon. friend was that there should be more elected trustees, and that they should not be limited to members of the Church of England. That was a very moderate demand. It was necessary to keep up the popularity of these charities, and if they were made to appear to be Church charities, which in reality they were not, they would be unpopular with Nonconformists. The charity would not be injured in the least by having a few elected trustees on the board, and he hoped some better explanation would be given of the very curious position which had been taken up by the Charity Commissioners in the matter.
    MR. CREMERsaid he hoped the hon. Member who moved the reduction would proceed to a division, as it was the only chance they had of protesting against the proposed action of the Charity Commissioners. The charity had a singular and very interesting history. He lived in the neighbourhood when he was a boy, and he remembered very well the tremendous scandal connected with it, and the statement he was about to make would, he thought, afford conclusive evidence that where the whole of a governing body belonged to a particular denomination they had no guarantee that the recipients of the charity would be any other than members of that denomination. A clerical peer was many years ago the Master of St. Cross Hospital.

    495
    How he was appointed to the office no one was able to understand, and he was also the Vicar of one or two parishes. For a long series of years that interesting institution was shorn of its useful proportions, and it became a public scandal. After a great deal of agitation upon the subject an inquiry was instituted by the Government of the day, and the result was that the clerical peer was made to disgorge a great part of the funds he had been appropriating for years, and he was dismissed from his office, although he was not prosecuted, as he should have been, for the frauds he had committed. He was a member of the Church of England and a spiritual guide, and it would have been thought when a man of such distinction in the clerical world had been appointed that would have been a guarantee that the charity would be honestly and honourably administered, but it was not. He hoped the Charity Commissioners would see their way to have all sorts and conditions of men on the governing bodies of these charities, because it was the only guarantee that could be afforded them that members of all denominations who were entitled to be recipients should not be excluded. He remembered in his boyhood that every traveller who went to the hospital
    was entitled according to the will of the pious founder to a loaf of bread and a jug of beer. Now all that was given was a piece of bread about an inch and a-half square and a tumbler full of weak beer. When the clerical peer was Master no bread or beer was to be had at all. He objected to the governing body being members of one denomination, not because they were members of the Church of England, because he believed that if they were Methodists or Congregationalists, or members of any other section, a similar result would follow. A member of the Endowed Schools Committee informed him that his experience led him to the conclusion that wherever a body of men had to administer a charity or an endowment for educational purposes, and belonged to one particular section, there was no chance of anyone getting anything out of it unless he were a member of the same sect. After all, it was human nature, and he did not complain of it at all, but he wanted to avoid it. He hoped the result of the division would be to induce the Charity Commissioners to place at least one Nonconformist in the position of a trustee.
    Question put.
    The Committee divided:—Ayes, 132; Noes, 157. (Division List No. 195.)

    AYES.

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

    Cullinan, J.

    Hayter, Rt. Hon. Sir Arthur D.

    Allan, William (Gateshead)

    Daly, James

    Hemphill, Rt. Hon. Charles H.

    Allen, Chas. P. (Glouc., Stroud)

    Dalziel, James Henry

    Holland, William Henry

    Asher, Alexander

    Davies, Alfred (Carmarthen)

    Hope, John Deans (Fife, West)

    Asquith, Rt. Hn Herbert Henry

    Davies, M. Vaughan- (Cardigan

    Jones, David Brynmor (Swans'a

    Austin, Sir John

    Delany, William

    Jones, William (Carnarvonsh.)

    Barry, E. (Cork, S.)

    Dewar, John A. (Inverness-sh.

    Joyce, Michael

    Bayley, Thos. (Derbyshire)

    Dilke, Rt. Hon. Sir Charles

    Kinloch, Sir John George Smyth

    Bell, Richard

    Dillon, John

    Lambert, George

    Black, Alexander William

    Donelan, Captain A.

    Layland-Barratt, Francis

    Blake, Edward

    Doogan, P. C.

    Leamy, Edmund

    Boland, John

    Duncan, J. Hastings

    Leese, Sir Joseph F. (Accrington

    Bolton, Thomas Dolling

    Edwards, Frank

    Leng, Sir John

    Boyle, James

    Emmott, Alfred

    Lloyd-George, David

    Brigg, John

    Esmonde, Sir Thomas

    Lundon, W.

    Brunner, Sir John Tomlinson

    Evans, Samuel T. (Glamorgan)

    MacDonnell, Dr. Mark A.

    Burke, E. Haviland-

    Farquharson, Dr. Robert

    M'Crae, George

    Burns, John

    Farrell, James Patrick

    M'Dermott, Patrick

    Caine, William Sproston

    Ffrench, Peter

    Mooney, John J.

    Caldwell, James

    Flavin, Michael Joseph

    Morgan, J. L. (Carmarthen)

    Campbell, John (Armagh, S.)

    Flynn, James Christopher

    Morton, Edw. J.C. (Devonport)

    Campbell-Bannerman, Sir H.

    Foster, Sir Walter (Derby Co.)

    Murphy, J.

    Channing, Francis Allston

    Gilhooly, James

    Nannetti, Joseph P.

    Clancy, John Joseph

    Gladstone, Rt. Hn Herbert John

    Nolan, Joseph (Louth, South)

    Colville, John

    Goddard, Daniel Ford

    Norton, Capt. Cecil William

    Condon, Thomas Joseph

    Hardie, J Keir (Merthyr Tydvil

    Nussey, Thomas Willans

    Craig, Robert Hunter

    Harmsworth, R. Leicester

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

    Crean, Eugene

    Harwood, George

    O'Brien, Kendal (Tipper'ry Mid

    Cremer, William Randal

    Hayden, John Patrick

    O'Brien, Patrick (Kilkenny)

    Crombie, John William

    Hayne, Rt. Hon. Chas. Seale-

    O'Brien, P. J. (Tipperary, N.)

    O'Connor, James (Wicklow, W.

    Reddy, M.

    Tully, Jasper

    O'Donnell, John (Mayo, S.)

    Redmond, John E. (Waterford)

    Wallace, Robert

    O'Donnell, T. (Kerry, W.)

    Redmond, William (Clare)

    Walton, John Lawson (Leeds, S

    O'Dowd, John

    Roberts, John H. (Denbighs.)

    Wason, Eugene (Clackmannan

    O'Kelly, Conor (Mayo, N.)

    Roche, John

    White, Luke (York, E. R.)

    O'Malley, William

    Schwann, Charles E.

    White, Patrick (Meath, North)

    O'Mara, James

    Shaw, Thomas (Hawick B.)

    Whitley, J. H. (Halifax)

    O'Shaughnessy, P. J.

    Shipman, Dr. John G.

    Whittaker, Thomas Palmer

    O'Shee, James John

    Sinclair, Capt. John (Forfarsh.

    Williams, Osmond (Merioneth

    Palmer, Sir Chas. M. (Durham

    Soares, Ernest J.

    Wilson, John (Durham, Mid.)

    Partington, Oswald

    Strachey, Edward

    Young, Samuel (Cavan, East)

    Pearson, Sir Weetman D.

    Sullivan, Donal

    Yoxall, James Henry

    Power, Patrick Joseph

    Taylor, Theodore Cooke

    TELLERS FOR THE AYES—Mr. Charles Hobhouse and Mr. Warner.

    Priestley, Arthur

    Tennant, Harold John

    Rea, Russell

    Thomson, F. W. (York, W. R.)

    NOES.

    Acland-Hood, Capt. Sir Alex. F.

    Gordon, J. (Londonderry, S)

    Palmer, Walter (Salisbury)

    Agnew, Sir Andrew Noel

    Gordon, Maj Evans (T'rH'mlets

    Pease, Herb. Pike (Darlington

    Allsopp, Hon. George

    Gorst, Rt.Hon. Sir John Eldon

    Pemberton, John S. G.

    Arkwright, John Stanhope

    Goulding, Edward Alfred

    Platt-Higgins, Frederick

    Arnold-Forster, Hugh O.

    Hamilton, Rt Hn Ld G. (Midd'x

    Plummer, Walter R.

    Arrol, Sir William

    Hanbury, Rt. Hon. Robert Wm

    Pretyman, Ernest George

    Atkinson, Rt. Hon. John

    Hardy, Laurence (Kent Ashf'rd

    Purvis, Robert

    Bain, Colonel James Robert

    Harris, Frederick Leverton

    Randles, John S.

    Baird, John George Alexander

    Hay, Hon. Claude George

    Remnant, James Farquharson

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

    Heath, Arthur Howard (Hanl'y

    Renshaw, Charles Bine

    Balfour, Capt. C. B. (Hornsey)

    Heath, Jas. (Staffords N. W.)

    Rentoul, James Alexander

    Balfour, Rt Hn Gerald W (Leeds

    Heaton, John Henniker

    Ridley, Hn. M. W. (Stalybridge

    Balfour, Maj K. R. (Christch'ch.

    Henderson, Alexander

    Ridley, S. Forde (Bethnal Green

    Banbury, Frederick George

    Hermon-Hodge, Robt. Trotter

    Rigg, Richard

    Bartley, George C. T.

    Hope, J. F. (Sheffield, Brightsd.

    Ritchie, Rt. Hn. Chas. Thomson

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

    Hudson, George Bickersteth

    Rolleston, Sir John F. L.

    Bentinck, Lord Henry C.

    Hutton, John (Yorks, N. R.)

    Ropner, Colonel Robert

    Bhownaggree, Sir M. M.

    Jebb, Sir Richard Claverhouse

    Royds, Clement Molyneux

    Bigwood, James

    Jessel, Captain Herbert Merton

    Sackville, Col. S. G. Stopford-

    Blundell, Colonel Henry

    Kenyon, Hn. Geo. T. (Denbigh)

    Sadler, Col. Samuel Alexander

    Boscawen, Arthur Griffith-

    Law, Andrew Bonar

    Scott, Sir S. (Marylebone, W.)

    Bowles, Capt. H. F. (Middlesex)

    Lawrence, Wm. F. (Liverpool

    Sharpe, William Edward T.

    Cautley, Henry Strother

    Lawson, John Grant

    Simeon, Sir Barrington

    Cavendish, R. F. (N. Lancs.)

    Legge, Col. Hon. Heneage

    Sinclair, Louis (Romford)

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

    Leveson-Gower, Fredk. N. S.

    Smith, H C (North'mb Tyneside

    Cayzer, Sir Charles William

    Lockwood, Lt.-Col. A. R.

    Smith, Jas. Parker (Lanarks.)

    Cecil, Evelyn (Aston Manor)

    Loder, Gerald Walter Erskine

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

    Cecil, Lord Hugh (Greenwich)

    Long, Rt. Hn. W. (Bristol, S.

    Stanley, Lord (Lancs.)

    Chamberlain, Rt. Hn. J. (Birm.

    Loyd, Archie Kirkman

    Stewart, Sir M. J. M'Taggart

    Chamberlain, J Austen (Worc')

    Lucas, Reginald J. (Portsmouth

    Talbot, Lord E. (Chichester)

    Chapman, Edward

    Lyttelton, Hon. Alfred

    Thorburn, Sir Walter

    Clare, Octavius Leigh

    Macartney, Rt. Hon. W. G. E.

    Thornton, Percy M.

    Coghill, Douglas Harry

    Macdona, John Cumming

    Tomlinson, Wm. Edw. Murray

    Collings, Rt. Hon. Jesse

    Maconochie, A. W.

    Tritton, Charles Ernest

    Colston, Chas. Edw. H. Athole

    M'Calmont, Col. J. (Antrim E.

    Valentia, Viscount

    Cook, Sir Frederick Lucas

    M'Iver, Sir Lewis (Edinb'rgh, W

    Vincent, Sir Edgar (Exeter)

    Corbett, T. L. (Down, North)

    M'Killop, Jas. (Sterlingshire)

    Warde, Colonel C. E.

    Cox, IrwinEdwardBainbridge

    Majendie, James A. H.

    Wason, John Cathcart (Orkney

    Cranborne, Viscount

    Malcolm, Ian

    Webb, Col. William George

    Cripps, Charles Alfred

    Martin, Richard Biddulph

    Welby, Lt. CIA. C. E. (Taunton)

    Cross, Herb. Shepherd (Bolton)

    Maxwell, W. J. H. (Dumfriessh

    Whiteley, H. (Ashton-u.-Lyne

    Dickson, Charles Scott

    Meysey-Thompson, Sir H. M.

    Whitmore, Charles Algernon

    Douglas, Rt. Hon. A. Akers-

    Milton, Viscount

    Williams, Col. R. (Dorset)

    Doxford, Sir William Theodore

    Montagu, G. (Huntingdon)

    Willox, Sir John Archibald

    Duke, Henry Edward

    Moore, William (Antrim N.)

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

    Durning-Lawrence, Sir Edwin

    Morgan, Dvd. J (Walthamstow

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

    Fellowes, Hon. Ailwyn Edward

    Morrell, George Herbert

    Wolff, Gustav Wilhelm

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

    Morton, Arthur H. A. (Deptford

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

    Finch, George H.

    Mowbray, Sir Robt. Gray C.

    Wyndham, Rt. Hon. George

    Finlay, Sir Robert Bannatyne

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

    Fisher, William Hayes

    Nicholson, William Graham

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

    Fitzroy, Hon. Edward Algernon

    Nicol, Donald Ninian

    Fletcher, Sir Henry

    O'Neill, Hon. Robert Torrens

    Flower, Ernest

    Orr-Ewing, Charles Lindsay

    Question put, and agreed to.

    Original Question again proposed.
    SIR WALTER FOSTERdesired to call attention to the large amount
    498
    of landed property belonging to various charities which had been sold during the year. He felt that land ought as

    499
    far as possible to be retained by the charities. The conversion of land into consols was not in his opinion in the interests of the charities or the country, which lost by the transaction. He brought the question before the Committee because he saw that last year a sum of £530,000 had been realised this way, and although that was less by a large amount than was realised in the previous year, the amount somewhat alarmed him. He would like to hear from the hon. Gentlemen responsible for the Vote how that sum had been realised, whether by the sale of town property or property in the rural districts, and what kind of charity property had been sold by the trustees to private individuals. He understood the explanation given last year was that a good deal of money had been realised by the sale of church sites and public-house property, and he would like to know whether any of the £530,000 appearing in the Report of the Charity Commission represented money derived from any such properties.
    LORD BALCARREScalled attention to the action of the Commissioners with regard to the ancient leper hospital at Cowley, near Oxford. The property belonged to Oriel College. The buildings in question were only a small group near Oxford, which were, however, not very well known, because they lay a little off the high road, but they were unusually beautiful. According to the scheme of the Commissioners the property was now being opened up for building, for the profits of Oriel College, and it was to be hoped that the buildings which were to replace this group would not be as ugly as the addition which had been made to the Charity Commissioners' office. Some of the best of the buildings of this interesting group would be destroyed. The Charity Commissioners were a powerful body, and when Oriel College came forward and asked permission for this scheme he thought the Commissioners might have done more than they did for the preservation of these interesting buildings. One rood of land and the chapel was the only part to be saved from destruction. The chapel was almost intact, and therefore valuable,
    500
    and although he congratulated the Commissioners on having saved that, he thought they might have gone further and preserved more than thirty yards of land and the chapel.
    MR. GRIFFITH BOSCAWENsaid that, with regard to the sale of lands, that question was decided on its merits. In some cases it was better that the investment of the charity fund should be in land, and in others that it should be in stock. The principle on which the Commissioners acted was this—they judged each case on its merits. When a charity possessed lands which could be opened up for building, and which would realise a large sum of money, it was obviously better for the charity to sell the land for building purposes. But in all cases the Commissioners were bound to do the best they could for a charity. With regard to a question put by the noble Lord, he admitted that this was a beautiful old chapel, and he thought the Commissioners were to be congratulated on having: succeeded in preserving it, and the rood of land with which it was surrounded. The property was, as it happened, not charity property at all, but belonged! to Oriel College, which had the right to deal with it as it chose—except the chapel. Acompromise had been arranged between the Charity Commissioners and the college whereby the chapel and the rood of land were preserved for such uses as the Commissioners might direct, and it could not now be sold without the consent of the Commissioners, and there was no chance of their giving their consent.
    MR. HOLLANDexpressed the opinion that it was time that the item for the Endowed Schools Commission was removed from the Estimates, though the amount, £3,000, was not a large one. When the Commission was formed in 1869, Mr. Forster said he thought four years would be sufficient time to complete the work, yet the Commission still existed, although thirty-two years had expired since that time. He desired to know whether the Commission could not now be closed. He also wished to know how many schemes had been dealt with by the Commission

    501
    in the last year, and how many deeds revised.
    MR. GRIFFITH BOSCAWENpointed out that very large economies had already been effected in connection with the Commission, and said there were now only three Chief Commissioners for both branches. But so long as the Charity Commissioners had a certain amount of endowed school work to do, it was necessary they should have assistant commissioners for that branch of the work and the necessary staff. It was intended shortly to transfer the work to the Board of Education, and then he had no doubt this item would disappear.
    MR. CREMERmoved the reduction of the Vote by £100 for the purpose of calling attention to the appropriation of the funds of St. Katharine's Hospital, which, he said, had been more than once described as little short of a public scandal. He admitted that the Commissioners had a great deal of difficulty in dealing with this institution because it was under Royal patronage; but he did not believe that Her late Majesty knew how the funds were misappropriated, and he felt assured that, if the matter were brought under the notice of the King, His Majesty would decline to sanction it. Had anything been done to endeavour to get rid of this scandal since he brought the subject before the House two years ago? This charity, which was one of the most ancient institutions of the land, was founded in 1273 by Queen Matilda. For a time its funds were insignificant, and the site it occupied was the one now occupied by St. Katharine's Docks. When the promoters of St. Katharine's Docks took the site they paid this institution £127,000 for the little building which then occupied the site, and the institution immediately became a wealthy one, and was removed to the Regent's Park, where it still remained. In 1886 the income was £7,097, and since that period it had doubled. What was done with that money? Many inquiries had been made as to how the money was expended. In 1893 he asked whether any effort had been made to give effect to the recommendations contained in the report prepared by a Charity Com-
    502
    missioner, Andrew Skerrow. He also asked whether the master received £1,200, and lived in the house assigned to him as his official residence, or whether he let it, as his predecessor did, for £700 a year. What were the duties of his office? How many boys and girls were being educated at the institution out of the funds? How much of the fund was spent in education, and how much was spent in management, and why none of the various schemes which had been prepared by eminent men for the reform of the institution had been carried into effect. The answer he received from the Charity Commissioners was that the expenditure of the endowment in 1892 was apportioned as follows: education, £561; salaries, £3,209; gifts, £190; expenses of management; £3,193. Such a state of things appeared to him to be a very great scandal, and he had moved the reduction for the purpose of asking the Commissioners whether anything had been done to check it, and if not whether the hon. Gentleman would give a guarantee that something would be done to stop such a shameful waste of charitable funds.
    Motion made, and Question proposed, "That a sum not exceeding £21,150 be granted for the said service."—(Mr. Cremer.)
    MR. GRIFFITH BOSCAWENcomplained that he had had no notice that this question was going to be asked, and that he therefore had had no chance of going into this particular case. The Committee would understand that there were 70,000 or 80,000 charities under the Charity Commissioners, and it was impossible to answer off-hand with regard to any particular one. He had, however, made such inquiries as were possible in this particular case, and he believed that an unsatisfactory state of affairs had been alleged to exist at this institution, but it was one of those charities over which the Charity Commissioners had no jurisdiction, unless the governing body applied to them for a scheme. The only other course open to the Commissioners in such cases was to certify them to the Attorney General.
    SIR CHARLES DILKEasked why the

    503
    Attorney General was not instructed in the matter many years ago, and who were the present trustees.
    MR. GRIFFITH BOSCAWENsaid he would make an inquiry into the matter, and if the case was of the nature which the hon. Member described he would consider what steps could be taken.
    MR. CREMERsaid he would withdraw his Amendment, having regard to what had been said, but before doing so he expressed the hope that the Charity Commissioners would inquire whether the Master of this institution received at present £1,600 a year—£1,200 salary and £400 for a house which he did not occupy; and how many sermons he preached during the year. He had inquired over and over again whether he had done anything more, and he had never got any satisfactory answer.
    Original Question again proposed.
    MR. WHITLEYsaid he had been looking through the Report of the Charity Commissioners, and was rather surprised to find the nature of some of the securities in which some trust funds were invested. For instance, there were investments in the Aerated Bread Company, the Bodega Company, the Calico Printers' Association, the New Zealand Shipping Company, the Mexican Central Company, Ransome and Napier, Limited, the Salt Union, Limited. He was not a financial man himself, but with a modest knowledge of business matters it did seem to him that these were very curious investments for trustees to hold. He knew that if he were a trustee he should be very nervous in dealing with such securities. He could only suppose that these securities had been left by some pious benefactors, and that there had not been time to convert them into more satisfactory securities. He hoped that as soon as possible these trustees would have their money invested more nearly in accordance with what were regarded as trust securities.
    MR. GRIFFITH BOSCAWENsaid that the hon. Gentleman was quite correct. The Charity Commissioners never made such investments as those he
    504
    mentioned. These securities represented funds transferred by trustees.
    MR. WHITLEYsaid the hon. Member must be aware that private trustees were compelled as soon as might be to convert the funds into trust securities.
    MR. GRIFFITH BOSCAWENsaid that was perfectly true. But he had never heard of a case in which money had been lost in the way suggested through the carelessness of the Charity Commissioners, and he thought they might be trusted to look after the money. In the case of each charity they considered whether it were better to retain the investments or to change them on the application of the trustees. The matter really was whether the investments were changed in accordance with the desire of the trustees. Sometimes the trustees wished that the investments should not be changed, and if that were so, and the investments seemed to be desirable ones, they did not insist on their being changed.
    3. £5,019, to complete the sum for Friendly Societies Registry.
    4. £9,962, to complete the sum for Lunacy Commission, England.
    5. Motion made, and Question proposed, "That a sum, not exceeding £91, be granted to His Majesty, to complete the sum necessary to defray the Charge which will come in course of payment during the year ending on the 31st day of March, 1902, for the Salaries and Expenses of the Mint, including the Expenses of Coinage."
    MR. WHITLEYsaid there were several matters which ought to be discussed on this motion. First of all, he wanted to know the reason for the addition of two to the clerical staff. But he wished more particularly to call the attention of the Committee to the extraordinarily complicated way in which the Estimates were presented. If hon. Members would look at the bottom of the page in the Estimates, they would see certain very puzzling references by letters from "a" down to "k," explaining how clerks, managers, chemists, etc., got additions to their salaries in all sorts of peculiar ways. He

    505
    must protest against the figures being presented to the House in that most unsatisfactory way. Why could they not be told, before they voted these salaries, what the total salaries were? For instance, they found in the second Vote the letter "b" attached to no fewer than six employees in this department of the Royal Mint; and the letter "b" meant "with official residence, some of which will not be continued when vacancies arise." Now, his experience had been short, but he found that the tendency was that these frequent promises were not fulfilled. Any business man who looked at that page of the Estimates must feel that there was a need for a new spirit in this Government Department. A little further down the page there was a salary for "chemist and assayer for the Mint," with two letters after his name—"b," which meant that he had an official residence, and "d," which meant that he was also the professor of metallurgy and metallurgist at the Royal College of Science at a salary of £300 a year. That was just one of the pluralists of which his hon. friend complained. It was most objectionable that these salaries should be divided in that way; and they ought to have an assurance from the Financial Secretary to the Treasury that he would look into the matter and present the Estimates in a simpler form for the future. For example, the chemist and assayer's salary began at £700, rising to £900, which was the amount he at present received. He did not know what the qualifications of that gentleman were, but he should have thought that £900 would have been sufficient salary, even if it included the lectureship in the Royal College of Science. Until they got the proper assurance that these Estimates would be simplified they ought to try and get this Vote reduced, and for that purpose he moved that it be reduced by £300 in respect of the salary of the chemist and assayer to the Mint as professor of metallurgy in the Royal College of Science.
    Motion made, and Question proposed, "That Item A be reduced by £300, in respect of the Salary of Chemist and Assayer of the Mint."—(Mr. Whitley.)
    MR. AUSTEN CHAMBERLAINsaid that the hon. Gentleman was a little
    506
    difficult to please, hit high or hit low. He complained at one moment that he was anxious for information, and that the accounts were not explained by notes, and when supplied with notes he complained the next moment of complications, The hon. Gentleman must make up his mind as to which course he ought to run. He was very ready to receive suggestions from hon. Members as to the form in which the Estimates were presented, but it was for the convenience of the Committee that all the Votes should be arranged in the same way and on the same system. It would not tend to give the information to the Committee which the hon. Gentleman desired if one Vote were marked in one way and another Vote marked in another way. The hon. Gentleman asked in respect to the salary of the assayer and chemist of the Mint, which at the present time had reached the maximum of £900, and had moved a reduction of £300 a year in respect of his salary as professor of metallurgy at the Royal College of Science. The gentleman who discharged those duties—Sir W. Roberts-Austen—was a very distinguished man, and it was of the utmost importance that for such a position as that we should have a gentleman of the very highest reputation and scientific attainments. But while the work was of a very responsible kind, it was not such as to occupy the whole of his time, and the Government were very glad to take advantage of his services at the Royal College of Science. He did not think the hon. Member would consider the remuneration given under these two heads was too much for the work which Sir W. Roberts-Austen had done, and for the attainments which that distinguished gentleman brought to bear upon his labours at the Mint and the Royal College of Science. He trusted that the hon. Member would not press his motion to a division, and he was sure the advocates of economy would not advance their cause by moving such a reduction.
    SIR WALTER FOSTERthought the hon. Member who had moved the reduction deserved credit for the careful analysis to which he had subjected the Estimates. The way to get Estimates through the Committee was to be courteous and good tempered towards critics. During his fifteen

    507
    or sixteen years experience of the House, he had watched the action of many Secretaries of the Treasury, and had always noticed that a kindly word turned away criticism.
    MR. AUSTEN CHAMBERLAIN: I hope the hon. Member does not suggest that I have been other than courteous. If I have been discourteous to anyone I should desire to apologise at once, as certainly it is very far from my wish to be so.
    SIR WALTER FOSTERsaid it was a question of manner rather than words to which he referred. The Financial Secretary was somewhat severe on the hon. Member for Halifax, who, as a new Member of the House, ought to be encouraged rather than discouraged in going through these matters so carefully. The hon. Member had shown very fair grounds for criticism, and had studied the Estimates, not only carefully and industriously, but also very ably. He had, however, in this instance, moved a reduction in an unfortunate place. The distinguished man who filled this scientific post at the Mint was well worth the salary he was paid, and the extra £300 which he received for acting as a professor in the Royal College of Science was doubtless equally well earned. At the same time, it naturally struck as peculiar an hon. Member actuated with a desire for economy that there should be so many cases of individuals holding more than one appointment. Such things ought always to be criticised, but when a fair explanation was given, as in this instance, it was only right that the hon. Member who made the criticism should withdraw his motion for a reduction of the Vote, and he hoped that that would be done.
    MR. WHITLEYhoped the Financial Secretary would understand that he chose this particular item merely to bring the matter before the Committee, and to get a reply to the question he had raised. The reply on this point was perfectly satisfactory, and he had no charge of discourtesy to make. With the permission of the Committee he would withdraw the Amendment, and simply move a reduction of the whole Vote
    508
    by £100, without referring to any specific item.
    Amendment, by leave, withdrawn.
    Original question again proposes.
    THE CHAIRMAN: The hon. Member cannot move a reduction of £100, as the Vote is only for £91.
    SIR CHARLES DILKEasked on what principle the artistic part of the work of the Mint was done. The work on the whole was disgracefully bad, as compared with that of almost any other country. Not only the great artistic countries, but even the new countries, turned out much better artistic work than our Mint. The medals were even more disgraceful than the coins. The coins had not been very successful of recent years, but the medals were absolutely beneath contempt. The medals were struck at the Mint, but the charge for them was borne by the various Departments requiring them. If the Admiralty or the War Office required medals, who was responsible, as between the Department and the Mint, for the design?
    MR. AUSTEN CHAMBERLAINthought the designs were prepared by the Mint and submitted to the Departments concerned.
    SIR CHARLES DILKEsaid that every country was now beginning again to realise, as in the seventeenth century, that there was no higher form of art than the medallists' art, and the medallists' art was a specialists' art. Painters and sculptors were not medallists; they required to be specially trained. In foreign countries, especially in France, the art had revived almost to the height at which it stood in the seventeenth century, but we in this country were absolutely and conspicuously behindhand in the matter.
    MR. TAYLOR,referring to the increase of £20,000 in regard to the loss on worn silver coin withdrawn from circulation, asked whether it was in consequence of more being in circulation, or because of the adoption of a higher standard.

    509
    He also alluded to the fact that this year there was undoubtedly a larger demand for coins bearing her late Majesty's imprint, and asked whether it was not perfectly legitimate for the Mint to take advantage of that fact and to issue as large a quantity as possible of coins of all kinds.
    MR. AUSTEN CHAMBERLAINsaid that the issue by the Mint was regulated by the demand, so that if there was the special demand to which the hon. Member had referred, it would be met, as it were, automatically. As to the loss on worn silver coin withdrawn from circulation, a larger sum was asked for on the present occasion, because last year they were not able to withdraw from circulation as much as they had expected to do.
    MR. J. P. FARRELLasked why, when the amount in the Estimate was given as £101, the question put from the Chair was for only £91. Frequent complaints had been made as to the manner in which the Estimates were prepared, and of insufficient information being given to enable Members to understand why particular increases were asked for. He also inquired whether there was any profit on the gold and silver purchased in bulk and subsequently coined. There ought, surely, to be particulars given, so that the Committee might know whether the Mint was worked at a loss or a profit. If such information was given, it would greatly simplify matters, and frequently render unnecessary the criticism which the Financial Secretary seemed to resent. Personally, he had generally found the hon. Gentleman very courteous in his replies, and therefore he was rather surprised to find a disposition on his part to resent the criticism of the hon. Member for Halifax. Members, whether on the Government or the Opposition benches, being present as the custodians of the public purse, were entitled to the amplest information, and Ministers should be prepared to give it when asked in a fair and reasonable way.
    MR. WHITLEYdesired to raise a point of order. The reduction of £100
    510
    which he wished to move was a reduction of the expenditure which, if carried, would result in a profit instead of a loss to the Mint. If the incomings of a Department were greater than the outgoings, the Committee would have no check whatever, as the Minister concerned would not require to come to Parliament for a Vote. He submitted that as a point of order it would be a very serious matter as affecting the control of the House of Commons if it was not competent to move a reduction of £100 on a total expenditure of no less than £134,000, although it was perfectly true that the incomings nearly balanced the outgoings.
    THE CHAIRMAN: I do not think there is any point of order in that. It is the practice of this House to have what are known as "token" Votes. If the hon. Member will look at the Estimate he will see that the gross total is £134,401, whereas the amount of the appropriations in aid is £134,300. In order to bring the Vote under the competence of the House, the total Vote is taken at £101. Of that sum £10 has already been voted, and that leaves £91 to be voted. If the hon. Member objects to that sum he can vote against it, but he cannot move to reduce a Vote of £91 by £100.
    MR. AUSTEN CHAMBERLAIN: The hon. Member for North Longford asks for some information as to whether there has been a loss or a profit upon the working of the Mint. At the bottom of page 152 of the Estimates he will find the estimated extra receipts, which are in addition to this Vote. They are set down as £665,700, and that is the estimated profit on the Mint in addition to the £134,300 which is taken to meet the expenses.
    MR. J. P. FARRELLsaid there was not a word in the Estimate about profit. It said, "Estimated Extra Receipts (Cash)" and he could not gather from that that it was profit. Why could it not be put down as "estimated extra profit"?
    Question put.
    The Committee divided:—Ayes, 126; Noes, 84. (Division List No. 196.)

    AYES.

    Acland-Hood, Capt. Sir Alex. F.

    Fellowes, Hn. Ailwyn Edward

    Morton, Arthur H. A. (Deptford

    Arkwright, John Stanhope

    Finch, George H.

    Mowbray, Sir Robert Gray C.

    Arnold-Forster, Hugh O.

    Finlay, Sir Robt. Bannatyne

    Nicholson, William Graham

    Arrol, Sir William

    Fisher, William Hayes

    O'Neill, Hon. Robert Torrens

    Atkinson, Rt. Hon. John

    Fitzroy, Hn. Edw. Algernon

    Orr-Ewing, Charles Lindsay

    Austin, Sir John

    Fletcher, Sir Henry

    Palmer, Walter (Salisbury)

    Bagot, Capt. Josceline FitzRoy

    Flower, Ernest

    Parkes, Ebenezer

    Bain, Colonel James Robert

    Gordon, J. (Londonderry, S.)

    Platt-Higgins, Frederick

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

    Gorst, Rt. Hon. Sir John E.

    Pretyman, Ernest George

    Balfour, Capt. C. B. (Hornsey

    Grenfell, William Henry

    Purvis, Robert

    Balfour, Rt Hn Gerald W. (Leeds

    Hamilton, Rt. Hn. Ld G (Midd'x

    Pym, C. Guy

    Balfour, Maj. K. R. (Christch'h)

    Hanbury, Rt. Hon. Robert W.

    Randles, John S.

    Banbury, Frederick George

    Heath, Arthur Howard (Hanley

    Rentoul, James Alexander

    Bartley, George C. T.

    Heath, Jas. (Staffords., N.W.

    Ridley, Hn. M. W. (Stalybridge

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

    Henderson, Alexander

    Ridley, S. Forde (Bethnal Green

    Bentinck, Lord Henry C.

    Hope, J. F. (Sheffield Brightside

    Ritchie, Rt. Hon. Chas. T.

    Bigwood, James

    Hudson, George Bickersteth

    Ropner, Colonel Robert

    Bill, Charles

    Hutton, John (Yorks, N.R.)

    Sackville, Col. S. G. Stopford

    Bond, Edward

    Jebb, Sir Richard Claverhouse

    Sharpe, William Edward T.

    Boscawen, Arthur Griffith-

    Johnstone, Heywood (Sussex)

    Sinclair, Louis (Romford)

    Bowles, Capt. H.F. (Middlesex)

    Law, Andrew Bonar

    Smith, H. C. (North'mb. Tynes'd

    Bull, William James

    Lawson, John Grant

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

    Cautley, Henry Strother

    Legge, Col. Hon. Heneage

    Spear, John Ward

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

    Leveson-Gower, Frederick N. S

    Stanley, Lord (Lancs.)

    Cayzer, Sir Charles William

    Loder, Gerald Walter Erskine

    Stewart, Sir Mark J. M'Taggart

    Cecil, Lord Hugh (Greenwich)

    Long, Rt. Hn. Walter (Bristol, S.

    Thorburn, Sir Walter

    Chamberlain, Rt Hn. J. (Birm.

    Lowe, Francis William

    Tomlinson, Wm. Edw. Murray

    Chamberlain, J Austen (Worc'r

    Loyd, Archie Kirkman

    Tritton, Charles Ernest

    Chapman, Edward

    Lucas, Col. Francis (Lowestoft)

    Tuke, Sir John Batty

    Clare, Octavius Leigh

    Macartney, Rt. Hn. W G Ellison

    Valentia, Viscount

    Coghill, Douglas Harry

    Macdona, John Cumming

    Vincent, Sir Edgar (Exeter)

    Collings, Rt. Hon. Jesse

    Maconochie, A. W.

    Walker, Col. William Hall

    Colston, Chas. Edw. H. Athole

    M'Calmont, Col. J. (Antrim, E.

    Wanklyn, James Leslie

    Corbett, T. L. (Down, North)

    M'Iver, Sir Lewis (Edinb'rgh W.

    Warde, Col. C. E.

    Cox, Irwin Edward Bainbridge

    M'Killop, Jas. (Stirlingshire)

    Webb, Col. William George

    Cranborne, Viscount

    Majendie, James A. H.

    Whiteley, H. (Ashton un.Lyne

    Cross, Herb. Shepherd (Bolton)

    Maxwell, Rt Hn Sir H. E (Wigt'n

    Willox, Sir John Archibald

    Dickson, Charles Scott

    Maxwell, W J H (Dumfriesshire

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

    Dilke, Rt. Hon. Sir Charles

    Molesworth, Sir Lewis

    Wyndham, Rt. Hon. George

    Dorington, Sir John Edward

    Montagu, G. (Huntingdon)

    Douglas, Rt. Hon. A. Akers-

    Moore, William (Antrim, N.)

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

    Doxford, Sir William Theodore

    Morgan, David J. (Walthams'w

    Duke, Henry Edward

    Morrell, George Herbert

    Durning-Lawrence, Sir Edwin

    Morris, Hon. Martin Henry F.

    NOES.

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

    Flavin, Michael Joseph

    O'Dowd, John

    Allan, William (Gateshead)

    Flynn, James Christopher

    O'Kelly, Conor (Mayo, N.)

    Asher, Alexander

    Gilhooly, James

    O'Malley, William

    Bell, Richard

    Harwood, George

    O'Mara, James

    Black, Alexander William

    Hayden, John Patrick

    O'Shaughnessy, P. J.

    Blake, Edward

    Holland, William Henry

    O'Shee, James John

    Boland, John

    Jones, William (Carnarvonsh.)

    Power, Patrick Joseph

    Boyle, James

    Joyce, Michael

    Rea, Russell

    Brigg, John

    Kinloch Sir John George Smyth

    Reddy, M.

    Burke, E. Haviland-

    Layland-Barratt, Francis

    Redmond, John E. (Waterford)

    Caldwell, James

    Leamy, Edmund

    Redmond, William (Clare)

    Campbell, John (Armagh, S.)

    Leese, Sir Joseph F. (Accrington

    Roche, John

    Clancy, John Joseph

    Leng, Sir John

    Schwann, Charles E.

    Colville, John

    Lundon, W.

    Shaw, Thomas (Hrwick B.)

    Condon, Thomas Joseph

    MacDonnell, Dr. Mark A.

    Shipman, Dr. John G.

    Crean, Eugene

    M'Dermott, Patrick

    Sinclair, Capt John (Forfarshire

    Cremer, William Randal

    Mooney, John J.

    Soares, Ernest J.

    Cullinan, J.

    Morgan, J. Lloyd (Carmarthen)

    Sullivan, Donal

    Daly, James

    Morton, Edw. J. C. (Devonport)

    Taylor, Theodore Cooke

    Delany, William

    Murphy, J.

    Tully, Jasper

    Dewar, John A. (Inverness-sh.

    Nannetti, Joseph P.

    Wason, Eugene (Clackmannan

    Dillon, John

    Nolan, Joseph (Louth, South)

    White, Luke (York, E. R.)

    Donelan, Capt. A.

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

    White, Patrick (Meath, North)

    Doogan, P. C.

    O'Brien, K. (Tipperary, Mid)

    Whittaker, Thomas Palmer

    Esmonde, Sir Thomas

    O'Brien, Patrick (Kilkenny)

    Wilson, John (Durham, Mid.)

    Evans, Samuel T. (Glamorgan)

    O'Brien, P. J. (Tipperary, N.)

    Young, Samuel (Cavan, East)

    Farquharson, Dr. Robert

    O'Connor, James (Wicklow, W.

    TELLERS FOR THE NOES—Mr. Goddard and Mr. Whitley.

    Farrell, James Patrick

    O'Donnell, John (Mayo, S.)

    Ffrench, Peter

    O'Donnell, T. (Kerry, W.)

    6. Motion made, and Question proposed, "That a sum, not exceeding £7,107, be granted to His Majesty, to complete the sum necessary to defray the Charge which will come in course of payment during the year ending on the 31st day of March, 1902, for the Salaries and Expenses of the National Debt Office."
    MR. J. P. FARRELLmoved a reduction of £1,000. The total Vote showed a decrease for the year of £990, but he held that the decrease should be a great deal more if the National Debt Office was managed on more economical principles. Of course, the hon. Gentleman in charge of the Vote would offer the official explanation which was always given, namely, that these officials were appointed at certain fixed salaries and that the salaries had to be provided according to arrangements made by the Treasury at the time of the appointment. But, apart from the fixed salaries, there were other expenses which required some explanation. The details given in the Vote were not at all sufficient. The sum asked originally was £13,107, of which £6,000 had already been voted. There were various sub-heads showing how the balance of £7,107 was made up, but it seemed to him that, if the Department responsible for the preparation of the Vote would give an explanatory schedule, a great deal of criticism would be obviated. The Comptroller General received a salary of £1,500, but no particulars were given as to who the gentleman was. The hon. Member had just been to the library endeavouring to get some particulars of the terms of the appointment, and to find out whether this official was appointed as the result of examination or as the nominee of some Government; but the officials of the library, who were always most obliging, could not supply him with any particulars, except the skeleton Reports. He could not find out where the office was, who the Comptroller was, or, in fact, any particulars about the office. There was an assistant with a salary of £800, rising, by annual increments of £50, to £1,000. There were four principal clerks with salaries of £550, rising by annual increments of £25 to £700, and one of these clerks, who was described as "actuary," received in addition £250 a year. There were four
    514
    assistant principal clerks at £400 a year, and another assistant principal clerk at £350 a year. The most extraordinary thing was that there was a "senior clerk (redundant)" who received a salary of £340 a year. He never saw such a description of an official before. In addition to his salary, the senior clerk redundant received "an allowance of £10 7s. 6d. for assessing income tax on life annuities, included in the sum taken for temporary salaries." He flattered himself that he understood the English language fairly well, but he could not understand what was meant by that explanation at all. He asked the Secretary to the Treasury to explain the meaning of the word "redundant" after "senior clerk." If the official was redundant it would be proper to say that he was altogether unnecessary. The Nationalist Members had a right to object to this Vote. The National Debt Commissioners were a body of whose existence they knew nothing at all. Ireland had no part in the creation of the National Debt, and the Nationalist Members, who were a minority in the House, were totally ignored when they opposed the national expenditure. On that ground alone they were entitled to protest against these salaries. Dealing with the question of management, he asked whether any money was to be voted for rent. They were given to understand that the public offices in London were Crown property, but there was a charge in the Estimates of £4,370, and he wanted to know how it was accounted for.
    THE CHAIRMANpointed out that this sum was not in the Vote now under consideration. The hon. Member would be able to criticise that when it was asked for under another class.
    MR. J. P. FARRELLsaid he bowed to the ruling of the Chairman. This was an evidence of how the Estimates were prepared. If this belonged to another class it was misleading. He noticed that the humble office of "temporary pensioner messenger" was held by a man who received 21s. a week and an army pension of 1s. 1d. a day. It might be said that it was a small thing to attack the salary of a man in such a position. He did not wish to do the man any harm, but he objected to the

    515
    policy which lay at the bottom of the appointment. That policy was being enforced in Ireland, and young men who applied to the post office for positions as rural messengers were refused, while pensioners who had been employed in South Africa and elsewhere were sent down to fill the positions although they knew nothing of the localities. The young men who knew the district had to go to America and elsewhere for employment. It was the principle which underlay the appointment of this man, or any similar appointment, which made him call attention to it. He seriously appealed to the hon. Gentleman the Financial Secretary to take a note of this objection from Ireland, and to take steps to remedy the state of things as regarded this particular grievance. He would like to know why £300 a year was paid to the Bank of England as agents for the National Debt Office and only £100 to the Bank of Ireland; and whether these sums were paid direct to the banks or to persons in their employment. He had no interest in the Bank of Ireland and did not know much about its standing except that he understood that it occupied in Ireland the same position which the Bank of England occupies in England. Was it because the volume of business in connection with the National Debt was relatively greater in England than in Ireland? On broad principle he objected, as an Irish representative, to voting this money. He was quite aware, of course, that hon. Gentlemen might reasonably maintain that English Members had a direct personal interest in the question, but Members from Ireland had no such interest. They never assented in any degree to the principle on which the National Debt had been created; but while Irish Members were out-voted when they protested against the creation of the National Debt for war on the Continent and in South Africa, they had been arguing for financial economic reform. Moreover, they had no representation on this Board. It was his duty as an Irish representative to move the reduction of this Vote by the sum of £1,000.
    Motion made, and Question proposed, "That a sum not exceeding £6,107 be
    516
    granted for the said service."—(Mr. J. P. Farrell.)
    MR. TULLYwished to ask the Secretary to the Treasury two questions. He found the salary of the Actuary to the Pensions Commutation Board was £250. Was that the Mr. Dynham who was responsible for the breaking down of the National Teachers' Pension Scheme? He understood the gentleman was not now an officer; but was the gentleman who discovered the error, Mr. Finlaison, still in office?
    MR. AUSTEN CHAMBERLAIN: No; he is retired.
    MR. TULLYsaid he was sorry the Gentleman was retired. Was the actuary available for constructing tables in connection with the police pension scheme in Ireland as well as in Scotland? It was very important when they were asked to vote money of this kind to know the scope of these gentlemen's duties. He thought this gentleman's salary appeared to be rather small considering the great responsibility thrust upon him. Could the hon. Gentleman give him any assurance as to what would be the effect of the superannuation of the poor law officers in Ireland?
    MR. DALYsupported the hon. Member who had just sat down in thinking that this officer was underpaid, and that it was on account of that underpay that he was liable to make mistakes. He objected to £1,000 being paid to a broker in the National Debt Office. He did not know that Stock Exchange business was carried on in the National Debt Office, although he supposed that every man in a Government Department was more or less of a gambler. The hon. Gentleman the Financial Secretary to the Treasury might explain what duty the broker discharged. Then he saw that the Comptroller General received a salary of £1,500 a year, but he had actually an assistant secretary. He did not know whether the Comptroller General did any amount of work at all, but why should he require an assistant secretary, when he had an Assistant Comptroller, a chief clerk, an

    517
    actuary, and principal clerks, receiving in all £2,800 a year? It struck him that this was a most extravagantly overpaid office, and that there were quite too many officials in it. He hoped his hon. friend would be successful in carrying his motion to reduce this Vote. It would at the same time be a check on extravagance and a protest against the manner in which the accounts were placed before the Committee. It was the duty of Members on that side of the House to get the Estimates reduced as much as possible, and he thought it was unfortunate that the Estimates in the past had not been scrutinised more closely by hon. Gentlemen on the Liberal benches.
    MR. AUSTEN CHAMBERLAIN: The hon. Gentleman who spoke first asked me who was the present Comptroller General, what was his name, and how he entered the service. His name is Hervey; he entered the service in the usual way through the Treasury. He rose after years of continuous service to the post of Assistant Comptroller, and from that post was appointed Comptroller General.
    MR. J. P. FARRELL: Did this Gentleman enter the service in the usual way by examination?
    MR. AUSTEN CHAMBERLAIN: Yes; it is probable that he did not enter the service under the examination now in force, because he entered many years ago, but he entered under the examination then in vogue. The hon. Gentleman then asked me as to the senior clerk. An enquiry has been made with regard to this office, and it has been found that there has been an unsatisfactory record, and we have come to the conclusion that whenever there is a vacancy in this division we should replace the senior clerk by a second-class clerk. A senior clerk was marked "redundant" when he was in excess of the staff, and to show that when his post is vacated that a man of lower position and lower salary is to take his place. I do not think it would be economical to let this clerk retire at once, but when he does retire the office will be filled up in the way I have stated.
    MR. J. P. FARRELL: Can the hon. Gentleman say when that will be?
    MR. AUSTEN CHAMBERLAIN: I cannot say without notice; it depends upon the age and other considerations. I was further asked as to the temporary messenger. The objection, as I understand it, is that we have taken a soldier instead of a civilian, and that possibly thereby a civilian has been displaced. Is it suggested that the Government is to lay down a rule that because a man has been in the Army or the Navy he should be debarred from serving the Government? I cannot lay down any rule of that kind. Over and over again this House has expressed its opinion that it is the duty of the Government, it is obligatory on the Government, to see that men who have served in the Navy or the Army, having due regard to their ability to perform the work to be done, shall be given special preference in the Civil Service. I can hold out no hope that this Government will depart from a practice so just in itself, and which commends itself so much to the House. I pass then to the item of agents at the Banks of England and Ireland. It was formerly unnecessary to have agents in Ireland, the business being transacted in England, but in 1881 it was found necessary to appoint agents in Ireland. Their salaries are placed lower than those in England because their work is less, and we did not think it would be just to pay them at the same rate. Then as to the brokers. The hon. Member for South Leitrim asked me whether the actuary referred to in this Vote was connected with the calculation about which he asked a question the other day in this House, and whether he would be available to make the investigation. No, Sir; his duties at the National Debt Commissioners would not enable him to give any time to any such investigation. If the Irish Government think it desirable to obtain this assistance it will be necessary to obtain it altogether outside. We shall not be able to ask it of the gentleman whose salary has been referred to. The brokers to the National Debt Commissioners have to deal with the whole civil funds, and discover means of reducing the National Debt, and other matters. There is nothing of a gambling nature in their transactions.
    MR. JOHN WILSONsaid he should not have risen but for the

    519
    statement which had been made by the hon. Gentleman as to employing soldiers in preference to civilians. The assumption of the hon. Gentleman was too large. It was not the unanimous opinion of the House that a soldier should be employed simply because he had been a soldier; if a civilian showed himself to be qualified for the office it was unjust to pass him over and prefer a soldier as a sort of reward for his having served in the Army. Everybody admired the gallantry of our Army, but there were heroes also in our industrial life, and in the ordinary way they underwent more dangers than the class whom the Government preferred. Many lives were annually lost in the mines of this country, and upon the railways a sort of eternal sacrifice was going on every day, and there were many dangers to be faced in factories. These men also served the State by the work they did, and he thought that they should be considered and have an equal chance of any appointment which the Government had to give.
    MR. AUSTEN CHAMBERLAIN: The hon. Gentleman on this particular point raises a discussion ranging over a wide field. But the hon. Gentleman a little misunderstood me. I do not claim that all posts should be reserved for soldiers, or that where there are two different competitors, one a soldier and another a civilian, the soldier should have the post merely because he was a soldier. The first thing that has to be considered is that a man should be got who is able to discharge satisfactorily the duties of the post to which he is appointed, and that fact alone disqualifies a soldier from filling many appointments. The hon. Member asked, Why should preference be given to the soldier? I think where a man has served his country, and another has given no service to his country, the man who has served his country should have the preference. By taking soldiers young, and by discharging them young, we make it difficult for them to get employment, and consequently more difficult for them to earn a living, than it is to a man who has always been in employment. That the civilians who labour in the great industries of this country are useful to the country nobody will deny, but their
    520
    labour brings its own reward. To the miner and the skilled worker the skill which they have acquired is a valuable asset which they can sell; but we take the soldier and teach him no trade which will be useful to him in after life. We require his service for the country, and he having given his service deserves some consideration of the country. It is not a great number of posts which can be offered to these men, but when there is a post which they can fill it is the express desire of this House and of the country that the Government should remember, so far as possible, the men who have served in the Army or the Navy, and upon their being found clearly fitted for the place to give it to them in preference to a civilian who has rendered no direct service to the country.
    MR. O'MARAasked for information concerning the duties of the broker referred to in the Vote. Did this gentleman advise the Chancellor of the Exchequer as to the conditions of the money market, and at what price he should issue his loans, and through whom he should issue them?
    MR. AUSTEN CHAMBERLAIN: No, Sir.
    MR. O'MARA: What I really want to know is, is he what is called a bucket-shopkeeper or a; member of the Stock Exchange? I think the Committee should have a good deal more information as to the duties of this broker.
    MR. AUSTEN CHAMBERLAIN: May I add one word to what I said just now with regard to its being the wish of the House that the Government should make all possible provision for employing Reserves and time expired soldiers. On April 1st, 1896, the House passed a resolution to that effect by 136 to 24. The name of the brokers is Messrs. Mullens, Marshall and Company; it is their duty to advise the Chancellor of the Exchequer when he requires their advice, but he does not act on their advice alone in such matters as the hon. Gentleman mentioned.
    MR. O'MARA: I should like to know whether they advised the Chancellor of

    521
    the Exchequer, and, if they did not, who did, with regard to the issue of the last loan.
    THE CHAIRMAN: Order, order! The issue of the loan does not arise on this Vote.
    MR. JOHN WILSONcontended that a vote of the House of Commons did not make the employment of soldiers by the State just, and, besides, only 160 out of 670 Members voted upon it.
    MR. DILLONsaid that the ear-marking of certain positions in the
    Post Office for soldiers was a development of militarism which the country would protest against when the present war feeling had subsided—
    THE CHAIRMAN: I think this discussion is going a great deal beyond the point. It arises on the employment by the Department of one temporary messenger.
    Question put.
    The Committee divided:—Ayes, 104; Noes, 151. (Division List No. 197.)

    AYES.

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

    Gladstone, Rt Hn Herbert John

    O'Kelly, Conor (Mayo, N.)

    Allan, William (Gateshead)

    Goddard, Daniel Ford

    O'Malley, William

    Allen, Chas. P. (Glouc., Stroud)

    Harmsworth, R. Leicester

    O'Mara, James

    Bayley, Thomas (Derbyshire)

    Harwood, George

    O'Shaughnessy, P. J.

    Bell, Richard

    Hayden, John Patrick

    O'Shee, James John

    Black, Alexander William

    Hobhouse, C. E. H. (Bristol, E.)

    Partington, Oswald

    Blake, Edward

    Holland, William Henry

    Pearson, Sir Weetman D.

    Boland, John

    Hope, John Deans (Fife, West)

    Power, Patrick Joseph

    Bolton, Thomas Dolling

    Jones, William (Carnarvonsh.)

    Priestley, Arthur

    Brigg, John

    Joyce, Michael

    Reddy, M.

    Brown, George M. (Edinburgh

    Kinloch, Sir John George Smyth

    Redmond, John E. (Waterford)

    Burke, E. Haviland-

    Lambert, George

    Redmond, William (Clare)

    Caldwell, James

    Layland-Barratt, Francis

    Rigg, Richard

    Campbell, John (Armagh, S.)

    Leamy, Edmund

    Roche, John

    Channing, Francis Allston

    Leese, Sir Joseph F. (Accrington

    Schwann, Charles E.

    Clancy, John Joseph

    Leng, Sir John

    Scott, Chas. Prestwich (Leigh)

    Colville, John

    Lloyd-George, David

    Shaw, Thomas (Hawick B.)

    Condon, Thomas Joseph

    Lundon, W.

    Shipman, Dr. John G.

    Craig, Robert Hunter

    MacDonnell, Dr. Mark A.

    Sinclair, Capt. John (Forfarsh'e

    Crean, Eugene

    M'Cann, James

    Soares, Ernest J.

    Cremer, William Randal

    M'Crae, George

    Sullivan, Donal

    Cullinan, J.

    M'Dermott, Patrick

    Tennant, Harold John

    Daly, James

    M'Govern, T.

    Tully, Jasper

    Delany, William

    Mooney, John J.

    Walton, Joseph (Barnsley)

    Dewar, John A. (Inverness-sh.)

    Morgan, J. Lloyd (Carmarthen)

    Warner, Thomas Courtenay T.

    Dillon, John

    Morton, Edw. J. C. (Devonport)

    Wason, Eugene (Clackmannan)

    Donelan, Captain A.

    Murphy, J.

    White, Luke (Yorks, E. R.)

    Doogan, P. C.

    Nannetti, Joseph P.

    White, Patrick (Meath, North)

    Duncan, J. Hastings

    Nolan, Joseph (Louth, South)

    Whitley, J. H. (Halifax)

    Esmonde, Sir Thomas

    O'Brien, Kendal (Tipperary Mid

    Williams, Osmond (Merioneth)

    Evans, Samuel T. (Glamorgan)

    O'Brien, Patrick (Kilkenny)

    Young, Samuel (Cavan, East)

    Ffrench, Peter

    O'Brien, P. J. (Tipperary, N.)

    Yoxall, James Henry

    Flavin, Michael Joseph

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

    Flynn, James Christopher

    O'Donnell, John (Mayo, S.)

    TELLERS FOR THE AYES—Mr. J. P. Farrell and Mr. John Wilson (Durham).

    Foster, Sir W. (Derby Co.)

    O'Donnell, T. (Kerry, W.)

    Gilhooly, James

    O'Dowd, John

    NOES.

    Acland-Hood, Capt. Sir Alex. F.

    Bentinck, Lord Henry C.

    Chamberlain, Rt. Hn. J. (Birm.

    Arkwright, John Stanhope

    Bigwood, James

    Chamberlain, J. Austen (Worc.

    Arnold-Forster, Hugh O.

    Bill, Charles

    Chapman, Edward

    Atkinson, Rt. Hon. John

    Bond, Edward

    Clare, Octavius Leigh

    Austin, Sir John

    Boscawen, Arthur Griffith-

    Coghill, Douglas Harry

    Bagot, Capt. Josceline FitzRoy

    Brodrick, Rt. Hon. St. John

    Collings, Rt. Hon. Jesse

    Bain, Col. James Robert

    Bull, William James

    Colston, Chas. Edw. H. Athole

    Balfour, Capt. C. B. (Hornsey)

    Cautley, Henry Strother

    Compton, Lord Alwyne

    Balfour, Rt Hn Gerald W (Leeds

    Cavendish, R. F. (N. Lancs.)

    Cook, Sir Frederick Lucas

    Balfour, Maj K R (Christchurch

    Cavendish, V. C. W (Derbyshire

    Corbett, T. L. (Down, North)

    Banbury, Frederick George

    Cayzer, Sir Charles William

    Cox, Irwin Edward Bainbridge

    Bartley, George C. T.

    Cecil, Evelyn (Aston Manor)

    Cross, Herb. Shepherd (Bolton)

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

    Cecil, Lord Hugh (Greenwich)

    Dickson, Charles Scott

    Dorington, Sir John Edward

    Leveson-Gower, Frederick N. S

    Pretyman, Ernest George

    Douglas, Rt. Hon. A. Akers-

    Long, Rt. Hn Walter (Bristol, S.

    Purvis, Robert

    Doxford, Sir William Theodore

    Lowe, Francis William

    Pym, C. Guy

    Duke, Henry Edward

    Lowther, Rt. Hon. James (Kent

    Randles, John S.

    Durning-Lawrence, Sir Edwin

    Loyd, Archie Kirkman

    Ratcliffe, R. F.

    Fellowes, Hon. Ailwyn Edw.

    Lucas, Col. Francis (Lowestoft)

    Renshaw, Charles Bine

    Finch, George H.

    Macartney, Rt. Hn. W G Ellison

    Ridley, Hon. M. W (Stalybridge

    Finlay, Sir Robert Bannatyne

    Macdona, John Cumming

    Ridley, S. F. (Bethnal Green)

    Fisher, William Hayes

    Maconochie, A. W.

    Ritchie, Rt. Hn. Chas. Thomson

    Fitzroy, Hon. Edward A.

    M'Arthur, Charles (Liverpool

    Ropner, Colonel Robert

    Fletcher, Sir Henry

    M'Calmont, Col. J. (Antrim, E.)

    Sackville, Col. S. G. Stopford-

    Flower, Ernest

    M'Iver, Sir Lewis (Edinburgh W

    Sadler, Col. Samuel Alexander

    Forster, Henry William

    M'Killop, James (Stirlingshire)

    Sinclair, Louis (Romford)

    Gordon, J. (Londonderry, South

    Majendie, James A. H.

    Smith, H C (N'rth'umb Tynes'de

    Gorst, Rt. Hon. Sir J. Eldon

    Malcolm, Ian

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

    Gray, Ernest (West Ham)

    Martin, Richard Biddulph

    Spear, John Ward

    Green, Walford D (Wednesbu'y

    Maxwell, Rt. Hn Sir H E (Wigtn

    Stanley, Lord (Lancs.)

    Greene, Henry D. (Shrewsbury)

    Maxwell, W J H (Dumfriesshire

    Stewart, Sir M. J. M'Taggart

    Hamilton, Rt Hn Lrd G. (Midd'x

    Mildmay, Francis Bingham

    Stroyan, John

    Hamilton, Marqof (L'nd'nderry

    Molesworth, Sir Lewis

    Thorburn, Sir Walter

    Hanbury, Rt. Hn. Robert W.

    Montagu, G. (Huntingdon)

    Tollemache, Henry James

    Hardy, Laurence (Kent, Ashf'd)

    Moore, William (Antrim, N.)

    Tomlinson, Wm. Edw. Murray

    Harris, Frederick Leverton

    Morgan, David J. (Walthams'w

    Valentia, Viscount

    Hay, Hon. Claude George

    Morrell, George Herbert

    Walker, Col. William Hall

    Heath, Arthur H. (Hanley)

    Morris, Hon. Martin Henry F.

    Wanklyn, James Leslie

    Heath, James (Staffords, N.W.

    Morrison, James Archibald

    Warde, Colonel C. E.

    Heaton, John Henniker

    Morton, Arthur H. A. (Deptford

    Webb, Colonel William George

    Henderson, Alexander

    Mowbray, Sir Robert Gray C.

    Whiteley, H. (Aston und. Lyne

    Hope, J. F. (Sheffield Brightside

    Murray, Rt Hn A Graham (Bute)

    Whitmore, Charles Algernon

    Hudson, George Bickersteth

    Nicholson, William Graham

    Willox, Sir John Archibald

    Hutton, John (Yorks., N. R)

    Nicol, Donald Ninian

    Wills, Sir Frederick

    Jebb, Sir Richard Claverhouse

    Norton, Capt. Cecil William

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

    Johnston, William (Belfast)

    O'Neill, Hon. Robert Torrens

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

    Johnstone, Heywood (Sussex)

    Orr-Ewing, Charles Lindsay

    Wolff, Gustav Wilhelm

    Keswick, William

    Palmer, Walter (Salisbury)

    Law, Andrew Bonar

    Parkes, Ebenezer

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

    Lawrence, Wm. F. (Liverpool)

    Peel, Hn. Wm. Robert W.

    Lawson, John Grant

    Pemberton, John S. G.

    Legge, Col. Hon. Heneage

    Platt-Higgins, Frederick

    Original Question put, and agreed to.

    7. Motion made, and Question proposed, "That a sum, not exceeding £12,938, be granted to His Majesty, to complete the sum necessary to defray the charge which will come in course of payment during the year ending on the 31st day of March, 1902, for the Salaries and Expenses of the Public Record Office."
    SIR THOMAS ESMONDEsaid that the Vote was a very important one, and one which they had rarely an opportunity of discussing. It was some years since the interesting subjects connected with the Vote had been discussed. He desired to make a suggestion which he thought would meet with the approval of the Committee. Why should not the calendars and historical documents published by the Record Office be given to Members, as were the Reports of the Historical Manuscripts Committee? The calendars
    524
    did not stand on the same footing as the Reports of the Historical Manuscripts Committee because they were brought out under different auspices, and therefore Members could not claim to have them supplied free, but, inasmuch as the House of Commons voted the money for the publication of the calendars, hon. Members had a perfect right to say under what conditions they should be published, and also that they should be supplied to hon. Members as were the Reports of the Historical Manuscripts Committee. There was another point he wished to raise. These calendars were supplied gratis to a number of public institutions and to certain colleges and public libraries. He should like to know on what system the allocation was made, and what qualification entitled a public institution to obtain the calendars free. He thought the calendars ought to be given free to all college libraries, and to all schools above a certain standard. In Ireland, at all events, there was a

    525
    great desire on the part of a number of colleges to have the calendars, and several of them had applied to the gentleman at the head of the department to be supplied with them free, but the applications were refused. He thought that hon. Members had a perfect right to receive the calendars free, and that they also ought to be given to all public libraries. In Sub-head C a sum of money was taken for the investigation of documents in the archives of Rome. As to that he had nothing to say. An extremely able man, who worked with great industry and energy, was entrusted with the work, and the result of his labours was very satisfactory. Then there was the investigation of documents in the archives of Simancas, in Spain, for which £150 was allocated. The only complaint he had to make regarding it was that it was a very small sum indeed for the investigation of historical manuscripts in Spain, where there were many valuable collections which related to England as well as to Ireland, and he thought a larger sum should be devoted to their investigation. In the college of Salamanca there was on enormous mass of historical manuscripts which were untouched up to the present, and he thought it would be well worthy of the consideration of those responsible for the working of the Record Office whether a sum should not be allocated for their investigation. He was glad to see that a sum of £220 was allocated for the investigation of documents in the archives of Venice, and he should like to know when the next publication regarding them would be published. He observed that the publication of the State Papers of the time of William III. preceded the publication of the State Papers of the time of Henry VIII. It would be much better if the publications were carried out in sequence, so that all the information would be properly available. His principal grievance in connection with the Vote was, however, that the money allocated for the publication and calendering of Irish State Papers was extremely inadequate. Only £240 was devoted to that purpose. There was an enormous mass of most valuable historical Papers in Ireland which were not yet published. The request he would urge on the
    526
    Government, and he hoped the Secretary to the Treasury would consider it, was that there should be an Irish Record Commission, independent of the English Record Commission, which should have a certain sum of money allocated to it, and should be formed of men who took an interest in Irish historical documents and Irish history generally, and who would be entrusted with the work of publishing various Irish historical manuscripts and State Papers. At present Irish State Papers were only published occasionally, and the lion's share of the money was spent in publishing English records. In England there was a magnificent Record Office, where public documents were kept in an admirable way. In Ireland there was no such satisfactory arrangement, and Irish records had met with terrible losses from fire and other causes. He wanted to preserve them from similar losses in future, and he thought it was a matter of urgency that some definite steps should be taken in regard to the publication of Irish State records. He therefore urged the establishment of an Irish Record Commission, and to emphasise his request, and also his suggestion that the publications of the Record Office should be supplied gratis to hon. Members and also to college libraries, he would move the reduction of the Vote by £500.
    Motion made, and Question proposed, "That a sum, not exceeding £12,438, be granted for the said Service."—(Sir Thomas Esmonde.)
    MR. AUSTEN CHAMBERLAINsaid that everyone must recognise the interest the hon. Baronet took in the subject, as well as the interest of the subject itself, and also sympathise with his desire that these publications should proceed more rapidly. No doubt many hon. Members shared the desire of the hon. Baronet that these volumes should be obtainable in the same way as the publications of the Historical Manuscripts Commission. He was sorry that the hon. Baronet had not given him some indication beforehand of the points he intended to raise, because he would then have taken care to have prepared himself, and been able to speak with more confidence than he was. Not knowing the difference

    527
    between the publications of the Record Office and the Historical Manuscripts Commission, he did not like to pledge himself, but he would look into the matter. The same remark applied to the request of the hon. Baronet that the publications should be supplied free to college libraries. He would like to inquire as to the number of the volumes to be supplied. He was not able to answer the hon. Baronet's question as to the terms and conditions on which the present distribution was made, but he would inquire into that point also. The hon. Baronet would see that his demands tended in the opposite direction to all the criticisms they had heard during the evening. Hitherto the Government had been reproached for not being more economical, but the hon. Baronet's speech was the other side of the picture. He confessed he felt prima facie indisposed to establish a separate Record Commission for Ireland unless there were real necessity. He thought it would inevitably lead to greater expense for the same production. The sums allocated to the various investigations to which the hon. Baronet referred were framed so as to enable the work to be carried on on the lines on which it had hitherto been carried out. A considerable number of records had been published in recent years, and at present there were nine or ten sets of volumes, of which a
    certain number were expected to be issued during the present year. With reference to Irish State Papers, two volumes had been published relating to the period between 1310 and 1320, eight volumes relating to the period between 1370 and 1379, eight volumes relating to the period between 1509 and 1600, and five volumes relating to the period between 1606 and 1625. He should be very glad to hear any further representations that the hon. Baronet desired to make to him on the subject.
    SIR THOMAS ESMONDEsaid he was much obliged to the hon. Gentleman. The present system started very well in Ireland, but for some reason or other, whether it was the expense or the inability to decide on the documents to be published, it stopped short. He recognised the goodwill with which the Secretary to the Treasury had answered him, and he was sorry he had not given the hon. Gentleman notice of the points he intended to raise. In order, however, to emphasise the anxiety he felt for the establishment of an Irish Record Commission he would divide the Committee.
    Question put.
    The Committee divided. Ayes, 96; Noes, 166. (Division List No. 198.)

    AYES.

    Abraham, William (Cork, N. E.

    Edwards, Frank

    M'Dermott, Patrick

    Allen, Chas. P. (Glouc, Stroud

    Evans, Samuel T. (Glamorgan)

    M'Govern, T.

    Bayley, Thomas (Derbyshire)

    Farrell, James Patrick

    Mooney, John J.

    Black, Alexander William

    Ffrench, Peter

    Morgan, J. Lloyd (Carmarthen)

    Blake, Edward

    Flavin, Michael Joseph

    Morton, Edw. J. C. (Devonport)

    Boland, John

    Flynn, James Christopher

    Murphy, J.

    Bolton, Thomas Dolling

    Foster, Sir Walter (Derby Co.)

    Nannetti, Joseph P.

    Brigg, John

    Gilhooly, James

    Nolan, Joseph (Louth, South)

    Burke, E. Haviland-

    Goddard, Daniel Ford

    Nussey, Thomas Willans

    Caldwell, James

    Harmsworth, R. Leicester

    O'Brien, Kendal (Tipper'ry Mid

    Campbell, John (Armagh, S.)

    Harwood, George

    O'Brien, P. J. (Tipperary, N.)

    Cawley, Frederick

    Hayden, John Patrick

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

    Channing, Francis Allston

    Hayne, Rt. Hon. Charles Seale-

    O'Donnell, John (Mayo, S.)

    Clancy, John Joseph

    Holland, William Henry

    O'Donnell, T. (Kerry, W.)

    Condon, Thomas Joseph

    Jones, Wm. (Carnarvonshire)

    O'Dowd, John

    Craig, Robert Hunter

    Joyce, Michael

    O'Kelly, Conor (Mayo, N.)

    Crean, Eugene

    Lambert, George

    O'Malley, William

    Cremer, William Randal

    Layland-Barratt, Francis

    O'Mara, James

    Cullinan, J.

    Leamy, Edmund

    O'Shee, Jas. John

    Daly, James

    Leese, Sir Joseph F. (Accrington

    O'Shaughnessy, P. J.

    Delany, William

    Lloyd-George, David

    Partington, Oswald

    Dewar, John A. (Inverness-sh.

    Lundon, W.

    Pearson, Sir Weetman D.

    Dillon, John

    MacDonnell, Dr. Mark A.

    Power, Patrick Joseph

    Donelan, Captain A.

    Macnamara, Dr. Thomas J.

    Priestley, Arthur

    Doogan, P. C.

    M'Cann, James

    Reddy, M.

    Duncan, J. Hastings

    M'Crae, George

    Redmond, John E. (Waterford

    Redmond, William (Clare)

    Sullivan, Donal

    Williams, Osmond (Merioneth)

    Rigg, Richard

    Tennant, Harold John

    Wilson, John (Durham, Mid.

    Roche, John

    Tully, Jasper

    Young, Samuel (Cavan, East)

    Scott, Chas. Prestwich (Leigh

    Walton, Joseph (Barnsley)

    Yoxall, James Henry

    Shaw, Thomas (Hawick B.)

    White, Luke (York, E. R.)

    TELLERS FOR THE AYES—Sir Thomas Esmonde and Mr. Patrick O'Brien.

    Shipman, Dr. John G.

    White, Patrick (Meath, North)

    Soares, Ernest J.

    Whitley, J. H. (Halifax)

    NOES.

    Acland-Hood, Capt. Sir Alex. F.

    Gordon, Maj Evans- (T'rH'ml'ts

    Nicholson, William Graham

    Arkwright, John Stanhope

    Gorst, Rt. Hon. Sir John Eldon

    Nicol, Donald Ninian

    Arnold-Forster, Hugh O.

    Gray, Ernest (West Ham)

    Atkinson, Rt. Hon. John

    Green, Walford D (Wednesbury

    O'Neill, Hon. Rbt. Torrens

    Austin, Sir John

    Greene, Henry D. (Shrewsbury)

    Orr-Ewing, Charles Lindsay

    Grenfell, William Henry

    Bagot, Capt. Josceline FitzRoy

    Palmer, Walter (Salisbury)

    Bain, Colonel James Robert

    Hamilton, Rt Hn. Ld. G (Midd'x

    Parkes, Ebenezer

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

    Hamilton, Marqof (L'nd'nderry

    Peel, Hn. Wm Robert Wellesley

    Balfour, Capt. C. B. (Hornsey

    Hanbury, Rt. Hon. Robert Wm.

    Pemberton, John S. G.

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

    Hardy, Laurence (Kent, Ashf'd

    Platt-Higgins, Frederick

    Balfour, Maj K R (Christchurch

    Harris, Frederick Leverton

    Plummer, Walter R.

    Banbury, Frederick George

    Hay, Hon. Claude George

    Pretyman, Ernest George

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

    Heath, Arthur Howard (Hanley

    Purvis, Robert

    Bentinck, Lord Henry C.

    Heath, James (Staffords., N. W.

    Bigwood, James

    Henderson, Alexander

    Randles, John S.

    Bill, Charles

    Hickman, Sir Alfred

    Rankin, Sir James

    Bond, Edward

    Hobhouse, C. E. H. (Bristol, E.

    Ratcliffe, R. F.

    Boscawen, Arthur Griffith

    Hope, J. F. (Sheff'ld, Brightside

    Renshaw, Charles Bine

    Brodrick, Rt. Hn. St. John

    Howard, John (Kent, Faversh.

    Ridley, Hn. M. W. (Stalybridge

    Bull; William James

    Hudson, George Bickersteth

    Ridley, S. Forde (Bethnal Green

    Hutton, John (Yorks, N.R.)

    Ritchie, Rt. Hon. Charles T.

    Cautley, Henry Strother

    Rolleston, Sir John F. L.

    Cavendish, R. F. (N. Lancs.)

    Jebb, Sir Richard Claverhouse

    Ropner, Colonel Robert

    Cavendish, V. C. W. (Derbysh.

    Jessel, Capt. Herbert Merton

    Cayzer, Sir Charles William

    Johnston, William (Belfast)

    Cecil, Evelyn (Aston Manor)

    Johnstone, Heywood (Sussex)

    Sackville, Col. S. G. Stopford-

    Cecil, Lord Hugh (Greenwich)

    Sadler, Col. Samuel Alexander

    Chamberlain, Rt. Hn. J. (Birm.

    Keswick, William

    Seely, Charles Hilton (Lincoln)

    Chamberlain, J Austen (Worc'r

    Simeon, Sir Barrington

    Chapman, Edward

    Law, Andrew Bonar

    Sinclair, Louis (Romford)

    Clare, Octavius Leigh

    Lawrence, Joseph (Monmouth

    Smith, H. C (Northmb Tyneside

    Coghill, Douglas Harry

    Lawson, John Grant

    Smith, Jas. Parker (Lanarks.)

    Collings, Rt. Hon. Jesse

    Legge, Col. Hon. Heneage

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

    Colomb, Sir John Charles Ready

    Leveson-Gower, Frederick N. S

    Spear, John Ward

    Colston, Chas. Edw.H. Athole

    Lockwood, Lt.-Col. A. R.

    Stanley, Lord (Lancs.)

    Compton, Lord Alwyne

    Long, Rt. Hon. W. (Bristol, S.

    Stewart, Sir Mark J. M'Taggart

    Cook, Sir Frederick Lucas

    Lowe, Francis William

    Stroyan, John

    Corbett, T. L. (Down, North

    Loyd, Archie Kirkman

    Cox, Irwin Edward Bainbridge

    Lucas, Col. Francis (Lowestoft

    Talbot, Lord E. (Chichester)

    Cranborne, Viscount

    Tomlinson, Wm. Edw. Murray

    Cross, Herb. Shepherd (Bolton)

    Macartney, Rt. Hon. W. G. E.

    Macdona, John Cumming

    Valentia, Viscount

    Dairymple, Sir Charles

    Maconochie, A. W.

    Dickson, Charles Scott

    M'Arthur, Charles (Liverpool)

    Walker, Col. William Hall

    Dorington, Sir John Edward

    M'Calmont, Col, J. (Antrim, E.

    Warde, Colonel C. E.

    Douglas, Rt. Hon. Akers-

    M'Iver, Sir Lewis (Edinburgh W

    Warner, Thos. Courtenay T.

    Doxford, Sir William Theodore

    Majendie, James A. H.

    Webb, Col. Wm. George

    Duke, Henry Edward

    Malcolm, Ian

    Whiteley, H. (Ashton-u-Lyne

    Durning-Lawrence, Sir Edwin

    Martin, Richard Biddulph

    Whitmore, Charles Algernon

    Dyke, Rt. Hon. Sir Wm. H.

    Maxwell, Rt Hn Sir H E (Wigt'n

    Williams, Col. R. (Dorset)

    Maxwell, W. J. H. (Dumfriessh.

    Willox, Sir John Archibald

    Fellowes, Hon. Ailwyn Edw.

    Mildmay, Francis Bingham

    Wills, Sir Frederick

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

    Molesworth, Sir Lewis

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

    Finch, George H.

    Montagu, G. (Huntingdon)

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

    Finlay, Sir Robert Bannatyne

    Moore, William (Antrim N.)

    Wolff, Gustav Wilhelm

    Fisher, William Hayes

    Morgan, David J (Walthamst'w

    Wyndham, Rt. Hon. George

    Fitzroy, Hon. Edward Algernon

    Morrell, George Herbert

    Flower, Ernest

    Morris, Hon. Martin Henry F.

    Younger, William

    Forster, Henry William

    Morrison, James Archibald

    Morton, Arthur H A. (Deptford

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

    Galloway, William Johnson

    Mowbray, Sir Robert Gray C.

    Gordon, J. (Londonderry, South

    Murray, Rt Hn A Graham (Bute

    Question put, and agreed to.

    Original Question again proposed.
    MR. WILLIAM REDMONDasked for an explanation with regard to a footnote stating that certain officials received from £30 to £40 per annum out of the Vote for Temporary Commissions for calendaring the Cecil manuscripts. What exactly were these Cecil manuscripts, and would they give the record of the Cecil family up to date? For instance, would they show how many members of the family were in the present Government?
    MR. AUSTEN CHAMBERLAINreplied that these manuscripts were not modern documents. They were published by the Historical Manuscripts Commission, being Papers of great historical interest.
    8. £4, to complete the sum for Public Works Loan Commission.
    9. £36,430, to complete the sum for Registrar General's Office, England.
    10. £33,450, to complete the sum for Works and Public Buildings Office.
    MR. WILLIAM REDMONDcalled the attention of the First Commissioner of Works to the accommodation provided for the telegraph department in the House. That accommodation was outrageously bad, sixteen men and boys having to live, eat, and work for the greater part of the day and night in a small room which really was not fit for the accommodation of one person.
    THE CHAIRMANpointed out that the question should be raised on Vote 3, House of Commons Buildings.
    THE FIRST COMMISSIONER OF WORKS (Mr. AKERS DOUGLAS,): As a matter of courtesy, I may say that we are going to consider the matter referred to by the hon. Member.
    Resolutions to be reported upon Monday next; Committee to sit again upon Monday next.

ADJOURNMENT.
Motion made, and Question proposed, "That this House do now adjourn."—(Mr. Austen Chamberlain.)
MR. T. M. HEALYprotested against the motion, as there were a number of important Bills on the Paper, particularly the Roman Catholic Disabilities Removal Bill, the passage of which the Government had expressed themselves as specially anxious to facilitate. When the House united to give the Government a certain amount of Supply by an early hour, after discussions which were short and concentrated, the least that private Members could expect was that they should have the benefit of the remainder of the sitting. The present motion was a monstrous innovation; there was absolutely no precedent for it earlier than the present or the previous session. It was putting a premium on obstruction, as the result would be that, if Members were to gain no benefit by granting Supply at an early hour, they would talk up to midnight.
MR. AUSTEN CHAMBERLAINsaid that the motion was made in accordance with a pledge that, when an arrangement was entered into to give the Government a certain Supply, legislation would not afterwards be proceeded with. The next Order on the Paper was the Demise of the Crown Bill, and if the House continuedits sitting that was the Bill it would have to consider. To do that, however, would be a breach of the arrangement which had been entered into for the general convenience of the House.
Adjourned at a quarter after Eleven of the clock till Monday next.

EARL OF ARRAN
Ordered and directed, by the Lords Spiritual and Temporal in Parliament assembled, That a Certificate be sent by the Clerk of the Parliaments to the Clerk of the Crown in Ireland, stating that the Lord Chancellor of the United Kingdom has reported to the House of Lords that the right of the Earl of Arran to vote at the elections of Representative Peers for Ireland has been established to the satisfaction of him the said Lord Chancellor; and that the House of Lords has ordered such report to be sent to the said Clerk of the Crown in Ireland. And it is hereby also Ordered, That the said Report of the said Lord Chancellor be sent to the Clerk of the Crown in Ireland.

PRIVATE BILL BUSINESS.
The LORD CHANCELLOR acquainted the House that the Clerk of the Parliaments had laid upon the Table the Certificates from the Examiners that the further Standing Orders applicable to the following Bills have been complied with—

Horley District Gas.

Long Eaton Gas.

Tees Valley Water Board.

Wells Corporation Water.

Glasgow and Renfrew District Railway Transfer.

Also the Certificate that the Standing Orders applicable to the following Bill have been complied with:

Gas and Water Orders Confirmation [H.L.].

The same were ordered to lie on the Table.

LEEDS CORPORATION WATER BILL [H.L.]
A witness ordered to attend the Select Committee.
SOUTH LANCASHIRE TRAMWAYS BILL [H.L.]
Reported from the Select Committee with Amendments.
BROADSTAIRS AND ST. PETER'S WATER AND IMPROVEMENT BILL [H.L.]
Reported from the Select Committee with Amendments.
LONDON BRIDGE WIDENING BILL.
  RODGERS' PATENT BILL [H.L.]
  Reported with Amendments.
  RIPON CORPORATION BILL [H.L.]
  Report from the Select Committee, That the Committee had not proceeded with the consideration of the Bill, the opposition thereto having been withdrawn; read, and ordered to lie on the Table; the orders made on the 8th March and 2nd May last discharged; and Bill committed.
  MIDLAND RAILWAY BILL.
  Report from the Select Committee, That the Committee had not proceeded with the consideration of the Bill, the opposition there to having been withdrawn; read, and ordered to lie on the Table; the orders made on the 3rd and 6th May last discharged; and Bill committed for Monday next.
  CARDIFE RAILWAY BILL [H.L.]
  Committee (on Re commitment) to meet on Monday next; Leave given to the Committee, if they think fit, to insert certain agreed amendments.
DERWENT VALLEY WATER BOARD BILL.
  THAMES DEEP-WATER DOCK BILL
  Read 2a, and committed.
POULTON-LE-FYLDE GAS BILL [H.L.]
  CHESTER CORPORATION TRAMWAYS BILL [H.L.]
    LONDON, BRIGHTON, AND SOUTH COAST RAILWAY BILL [H.L.]
    Read 3a, and passed, and sent to the Commons.
ST. BARTHOLOMEW'S HOSPITAL BILL [H.L.]
  SOUTHPORT WATER (TRANSFER) BILL [H.L.]

    WESTON-SUPER-MARE GAS BILL [H.L.]
    GREAT SOUTHERN AND WESTERN RAILWAY BILL [H.L.].
    Read 3a, and passed, and sent to the Commons.

    HONLEY URBAN DISTRICT COUNCIL (GAS) BILL.
    Read 3a and passed.
ALDERSHOT GAS AND WATER BILL.
  CALEDONIAN RAILWAY BILL.

    CLEVELAND AND DURHAM COUNTY ELECTRIC POWER BILL.
    KETTERING URBAN DISTRICT WATER BILL.
    LANCASHIRE AND YORKSHIRE RAILWAY (VARIOUS POWERS) BILL.
    LLANDRINDOD WELLS URBAN DISTRICT COUNCIL WATER BILL.
    LONDON COUNTY COUNCIL, (GENERAL POWERS) BILL.
    LONDON RIVERSIDE FISH MARKET BILL.
    RICHMOND GAS BILL.
    STROUD GAS BILL.
    Brought from the Commons; read 1a; and referred to the Examiners.

GRANGEMOUTH WATER PROVISIONAL ORDER CONFIRMATION BILL [H.L.]
  SCOTTISH PROVIDENT INSTITUTION PROVISIONAL ORDER CONFIRMA- TION BILL [H.L.]
    FOLKESTONE CORPORATION BILL [H.L.]
    Returned from the Commons, agreed to.
  ELECTRIC LIGHTING PROVISIONAL ORDERS (No. 6) BILL [H.L.]
    ELECTRIC LIGHTING PROVISIONAL ORDERS (No. 7) BILL [H.L.]
    Committed; the Committees to be proposed by the Committee of Selection.
    EDUCATION BOARD PROVISIONAL ORDER CONFIRMATION (ACTON) BILL [H.L.]
    Committed to a Committee of the Whole House on Monday next.
FALKIRK AND DISTRICT TRAMWAYS ORDER CONFIRMATION BILL. (No. 81.)
  ARDROSSAN HARBOUR ORDER CONFIRMATION BILL (No 82.)

    AYR HARBOUR ORDER CONFIRMATION BILL. (No. 83.)
    HIGHLAND RAILWAY ORDER CONFIRMATION BILL. (No. 84.)
    Brought from the Commons; read 1a; to be printed; and (pursuant to the Private Legislation Procedure (Scotland)
    400
    Act, 1899, Section 9) deemed to have been read 2a; and reported from the Committee. Bills to be read 3a on Monday next.

  RETURNS, REPORTS, ETC.

    TRADE REPORTS (ANNUAL SERIES).
    No. 2595. Japan.
    No. 2596. France (Brest).
    No. 2597. Italy (Lombardy).
    No. 2598. Spain (Bilbao and District).
    No. 2599. Greece (the Cyclates).
    No. 2600. France (Nice).
    No. 2601. China (Hankow).

    Annual statement of navigation and shipping of the United Kingdom for the year 1900.

    ARMY.
    Return of Military Forces in South Africa, 1899–1901 (in continuation of [Cd. 462.]).
    Presented (by command), and ordered to lie on the Table.

    GAS AND WATER WORKS FACILITIES ACT, 1870.
    Reports by the Board of Trade as to dispensing with the consent—

    I. Of the Pinner Parish Council, in the case of the Pinner Gas Provisional Order.

    II. Of the Horsham Urban District Council, in the case of the Horsham Gas Provisional Order.

    Laid before the House (pursuant to Act), and ordered to lie on the Table.

  NEW BILLS.
    PRIVATE LEGISLATION PROCEDURE (IRELAND) BILL [H.L.]
    A Bill to provide for improving and extending the procedure for obtaining Parliamentary powers by way of Provisional Orders in matters relating to Ireland, was presented by the Earl of Mayo; read 1a and to be printed. (No. 77.)

    CONVOCATIONS OF THE CLERGY BILL [H.L.]
    A Bill to declare the law in regard to the reform of the Convocations of Canter-

    401
    bury and York, and to make provision for joint sittings of the said Convocations, was presented by the Lord Archbishop of Canterbury; read 1a; and to be printed. (No. 78.)

  HABITUAL DRUNKARDS BILL [H.L.]
  Order of the day for the House to be put into Committee read.
  THE LORD BISHOP OF WINCHESTER: My Lords, in moving that the House resolve itself into Committee on this Bill, I should like to explain my own position with reference to the measure of which I have hitherto been the sponsor. Whether I am to remain sponsor or not I do not very clearly understand. Your Lordships may remember that when, two months ago, I moved the Second Reading of the Bill I expressed an earnest hope that it might be possible for His Majesty's Government to take over the Bill, be responsible for it, and practically make it their own. I am exceedingly glad to find that the Government have found it possible to do this, and, though there are only a few lines remaining of the actual wording of the Bill I introduced, the changes are changes of form rather than of substance, and, on the whole, the measure as redrafted is, in my judgment, improved and not injured. Speaking generally, I desire to say that I gratefully accept the changes which have been made in the Bill, and especially the additional clauses inserted by the Government, though there are one or two verbal points upon which criticism may be desirable. It may not unnaturally be asked, however, why, if these changes and additions are regarded, as they are, by myself and those responsible for the old Bill as improvements, why were they not inserted by us in the first instance? I think I made that point clear on the Second Reading stage. Our intention was to follow the advice given, and to produce a short Bill, and to have burdened it with the additional clauses now contained in the Government Amendments would have been, for a private Member, to ruin the prospects of the measure. Again, some of these Amendments and additions are of a kind which no one could well draft unless he had the information and the other
  402
  facilities possessed by the Home Office. As they now stand I welcome them, and I trust that the Bill in its amended form, roughly speaking, may become law during the present session.
  Moved, That the House do now resolve itself into Committee on the said Bill.—(The Lord Bishop of Winchester.)
  VISCOUNT CROSS: My Lords, I am sure the House ought to be grateful to the right rev. Prelate for having brought this question forward in the practical shape of a Bill that can be discussed. I am glad to hear that His Majesty's Government are disposed to take charge of the Bill, and to improve it as far as it needs improving. I would call attention, however, to one fact in connection with the Bill, because I think that a new practice is being introduced which is inconvenient to the House and to the country. If your Lordships will look at the Bill you will see that the proposal of the Government is to strike out the whole of the first clause except the words "where a person is convicted," and to insert a perfectly new clause. The whole of Clause 2, with the exception of the words "where the husband of a married woman is an habitual drunkard," are to be deleted, and a totally new clause introduced. So it is with the third and fourth clauses. By their Amendments, the Government have left only about five lines of the original Bill intact. I think your Lordships will see the inconvenience of this practice. The original Bill has been before the country, has been discussed at quarter sessions and elsewhere, and now it is proposed in Committee practically to frame a new measure. It would be very much better if the Government had introduced a Bill of their own, and had not cut out the whole of the right rev. Prelate's Bill and substituted something entirely different. It would be most inconvenient if this practice became general.
  THE EARL OF MAYO: My Lords, I have hesitated, under the circumstances, to put down any Amendment to this Bill, but I hope that His Majesty's Government will consider the advisability of applying the Bill to Ireland. I think it would be of great benefit there.
  LORD MONTEAGLE OF BRANDON: I should like to support from this side of the House the suggestion of the noble Earl. In my judgment, there is no reason why the Bill should not be applied to Ireland. The law ought to be the same in both countries, and I hope His Majesty's Government will consider the suggestion.
  LORD BELPER: My Lords, in reply to the remarks of the right rev. Prelate and my noble friend Lord Cross, I will explain the position of the Government in regard to this Bill. It will be in the recollection of your Lordships that this subject was referred to in the King's Speech, and on behalf of the Home Secretary I have to say that in accordance with that announcement a Bill was prepared which my right hon. friend was anxious to introduce in the other House. When the Bishop of Winchester introduced his two Bills I then explained on behalf of the Government that the Government would accept the Bills with certain modifications, and that the Bills would be made not only to cover the ground which was covered by the right rev. Prelate's Bill, but in many respects would go considerably further. I also stated that, as far as procedure permitted, the Government were very anxious to introduce a Bill in the other House. Since that time the Home Secretary has not been able to get an opportunity of introducing the Bill, and I now acknowledge the courtesy shown by the right rev. Prelate in postponing the consideration of his Bill, so as to allow the proposals of the Government to be laid before Parliament as well as his own. But the state of public business not permitting the Government to introduce their own measure, it was decided, after full consideration, that it would be the most desirable and convenient course to graft the recommendations of the Government Bill on the right rev. Prelate's Bill applying to the same subject. It is quite true that the Amendments which I shall have to move practically cut out a great proportion of the right rev. Prelate's measure.
  VISCOUNT CROSS: They cut out the whole of it.
  LORD BELPER: But they do not affect the principle of the Bill. It would
  404
  have been quite possible to move Amendments which would have introduced the proposals of the Government without cutting out so much of the Bill as is now proposed; but, after consideration, the Home Secretary decided that it would be better to make the Bill a complete one, and to draft it in such a way as to carry out fully his proposals. The Amendments do not in any way touch the principle of the Bill. They alter the procedure in some respects and make it more complete; but, in addition, the Government propose clauses to which they attach very great importance, and which were not contained in the right rev. Prelate's Bill. If your Lordships adopt the Amendments which I have to make, it is the intention of the Government to take up the Bill in the other House as a Government measure and press it forward as their own. It does not he in my province to express any opinion as to whether or not it would have been better that the Bill should have been, reintroduced as a fresh Bill. All I can say is, that I shall be most happy to give every opportunity for Amendments to be moved to the Bill at a subsequent stage. I hope the House will agree that the course which the Government have pursued has at all events been in the true interests of the passing of the measure, and that the chances of this Bill will be more favourable in another place than would be the case if the Government had waited till a later period in the session to introduce a Bill of their own.
  EARL SPENCER: My Lords, I agree with the noble Viscount as to the inconvenience of the course followed by His Majesty's Government in their alterations of the Bill, which is most unusual, very remarkable, and which should not be accepted as a precedent. In the gracious Speech from the Throne His Majesty, on the recommendation of His Ministers, no doubt, stated that a Bill on this subject was to be introduced by his Government, but instead of introducing that Bill His Majesty's Government have entirely remodelled—not, perhaps, in principle, but in detail—the Bill of the right rev. Prelate. How will this Bill be described? Will it be called the right rev. Prelate's Bill or the Bill of the Government? I wish to know why the noble Marquess should not be content

  405
  with his own lay garments instead of assuming the lawn sleeves of the Episcopal Bench. The noble Lord who represents the Home Office said the Home Secretary would not have time to introduce the measure in another place.
  LORD BELPER: I said he had not yet had the opportunity.
  EARL SPENCER: It may be difficult for the Government to introduce a Bill in the other House; but that difficulty does not exist here. In the Speech from the Throne it is never stated in which House the Bill is to be introduced. I think it would have been much more dignified and more in accordance with precedent if the Government had introduced a Bill of their own instead of merely altering the Bill of the Bishop of Winchester.
  THE PRIME MINISTER AND LORD PRIVY SEAL (The Marquess of SALISBURY): The view of the noble Earl is somewhat punctilious. I have some difficulty in arguing with him, because I do not know precisely of what he complains. The point of difference seems to be very insignificant; and if the noble Earl wishes for an apology I will give him a bushel of them. I have no particular prejudice in favour of the course which has been pursued, though under the circumstances it seemed the more convenient one. I will acknowledge that I rather wished to push into the foreground the fact that, by a strange chance, I was able to find myself in agreement with the right rev. Prelate. It was rather a satisfaction to know that for once we could, if I may use a vulgar phrase, pull in the same boat. But if the noble Earl wishes for any reparation, I shall be very glad to give him it; and perhaps he would like some entry made upon the journals of this House to point out to future generations that this course which we have adopted is not to be taken as a precedent. I do not think it will have much effect, either upon the probability of this measure taking its place on the Statute-book or upon the destinies of His Majesty's subjects, if it is placed there. Beyond this expression of opinion I find no material for continuing the discussion with the noble Earl.
  On Question agreed to; House in Committee accordingly.
  Clause 1:—
  LORD BELPER: The main difference between the clause as proposed in the Bill and the words of the Amendment is that the Bill confines the power of making an order of detention to courts of summary jurisdiction, while the Amendment follows the scheme of the Inebriates Act of 1898, and would enable any court before whom the offender is tried to make an order and send the notice. The clause at present contains a list of offences connected with drunkenness, on conviction of which, after a specified number of times, an order may be made declaring the offender to be an habitual drunkard. The amended clause confines the order to cases in which the court is of opinion that an order of detention could be made under Section 1 or 2 of the Inebriates Act, 1898. It has been thought much more convenient to adhere, in a new matter of this sort to the limits of that Act, and not to make a new definition of the term "habitual drunkard." The Bill proposed that the court should determine within what area the offender should not be served by licence-holders. The Amendment does not specify any area, but leaves the serving of notices to licence-holders to the discretion of the police. The Bill provided for the serving of notices to holders of both on and off licences; but the amended clause will be confined to on-licences only. The Bill proposed a penalty for the publican who served an habitual drunkard; and the amended clause will extend the penalty also to the habitual drunkard who asks to be served. But, practically, the clause in the Bill and the Amendment of the Government proceed on the same lines.
  Amendment moved—
  "In Clause 1, page 1, line 5, to leave out from 'convicted,' to the end of the clause, and to insert' of any offence under circumstances in which the court is of opinion that an order of detention could be made under Section 1 or Section 2 of the Inebriates Act, 1898, then, whether an order of detention is made or not, the court shall order that notice of the conviction, with such particulars as may be prescribed by a Secretary of State, be sent to the police authority (within the meaning of the

  407
  Police Act, 1890) for the police area in which the court is situate.
  "(2) Where a court in pursuance of this Act orders notice of a conviction to be sent to a police authority, the court shall inform the convicted person that the notice is to be so sent; and—

  (a) if the convicted person within three years after the date of the conviction purchases or attempts to purchase any intoxicating liquor at any licensed premises on which intoxicating liquor is authorised to be consumed he shall be liable, on summary conviction, to a fine not exceeding, for the first offence, twenty shillings, and for any subsequent offence forty shillings; and

  (b) if the holder of any licence authorising the consumption of intoxicating liquor upon the premises within that period knowingly sells or allows any person to sell intoxicating liquor to, or for the consumption of, any such person, he shall be liable, on summary conviction, for the first offence, to a fine not exceeding ten pounds, and for any subsequent offence in respect of the same person twenty pounds.'"—(Lord Belper.)

  THE LORD BISHOP OF WINCHESTER: There is no difference between the views of the noble Lord and my own as to the substance of the clause, but there are one or two verbal Amendments which I should like to see made. I imagine that it would be better that verbal questions should be reserved for the Standing Committee, and I propose to take that course.
  On Question, Amendment agreed to.
  Clause 1, as amended, agreed to.
  Clause 2:—
  LORD BELPER: The object of this clause is to make habitual drunkenness a ground on which a separation order may be granted. The clause as it at present stands provides that where the husband of a married woman is an habitual drunkard within the meaning of the Act, the Summary Jurisdiction (Married Women) Act, 1895, shall apply in like manner as if he had been guilty of persistent cruelty to her. While the clause in the Bill only gives protection to the wife, the Amendment will extend the protection to the husband.
  Amendment moved—
  "In Clause 2, page 2, line 27, to leave out from 'drunkard' to the end of the clause, and to insert 'as defined by Section three of
  408
  the Habitual Drunkards Act, 1879, the married woman shall be entitled to apply for an order under the Summary Jurisdiction (Married Women) Act, 1895, and that Act shall apply accordingly.
  (2) Where the wife of a married man is am habitual drunkard as defined by Section three of the Habitual Drunkards Acts, 1879, the married man shall be entitled to apply to a court of summary jurisdiction for an order under this sub-section, and on any such application the court may make one or more orders containing all or any of the following particulars:—

  (a) A provision that the applicant be no longer bound to cohabit with his wife (which provision while in force shall have the effect in all respects of a decree of judicial separation on the ground of cruelty);

  (b) A provision for the legal custody of any children of the marriage;

  (c) A provision that the applicant shall pay to his wife personally, or for her use to any officer of the court or other person on her behalf, such weekly sum not exceeding two pounds as the court, having regard to the means both of the applicant and his wife, consider reasonable;

  (d) A provision for payment by the applicant or his wife, or both of them, of the costs of the court, and such reasonable costs of either parties as the court may think fit.

  Subject to the foregoing provisions, the Summary Jurisdiction (Married Women) Act, 1895, shall apply to an application and order under this sub-section in like manner as it applies to an application and order under that Act, except that for references to a married woman and her husband shall be substituted references to a married man and his wife.'"—(Lord Belper).
  THE LORD BISHOP OF WINCHESTER: The difference between the clause and the Amendment is very large; but the; promoters of the Bill not only accept, but most cordially welcome, the proposal to give protection to a husband who has the misfortune to have a wife who is an habitual drunkard. The addition is eminently right, and I have had letters from every part of the country asking for it. The proposal was not included in the Bill simply because it was beyond my wit or power, with the limited materials at my command, to devise phraseology which would carry out such an amendment of the law. I am exceedingly glad the clause has been extended by His Majesty's Government.
  On Question, Amendment agreed to.
  Clause 2, as amended, agreed to.
  Clause 3:—
  LORD BELPER: This clause authorises the arrest of any person found drunk while having the charge of a child under the age of six years. By the Amendment the age is extended to seven years, and the word "apparently" is introduced, because there would be no means of ascertaining at the time of arrest whether the child was under the age of seven or not. Of course, before any punishment was inflicted the age would have to be proved. It is thought desirable to give this power of arrest, even though it may turn out that the child was not under the age of seven.
  Amendment moved—
  "In Clause 3, page 2, line 33, to leave out after 'child' to the end of the clause, and to insert 'apparently under the age of seven years, he may be apprehended, and shall, if the child is under that age, be liable on summary conviction to a fine not exceeding forty shillings, or to imprisonment, with or without hard labour, for any period not exceeding one month. (2) If the child appears to the court to be under the age of seven, the child shall, for the purposes of this section, be deemed to be under that age unless the contrary is proved. (3) The offence under this section shall be included in the list of offences in the First Schedule to the Inebriates Act, 1898.'"—(Lord Belper.)
  THE EARL OF CAMPERDOWN: If the Amendment is adopted the clause will read: If any person is found drunk in any highway or other public place while having the charge of a child apparently under the age of seven years "he" may be apprehended. Is it intended to limit this penalty to males? The clause as it now stands refers to both sexes. I should like to ask a further question—namely, What will become of the child while the offender in undergoing imprisonment?
  LORD BELPER: I understand that the terms of the clause will include females in charge of children as well as males.
  THE EARL OF CAMPERDOWN: Surely "he" does not include a female?
  LORD BELPER: Under the General Interpretation Act "he" includes "she." I am not prepared to answer the noble Earl's second question, but I suppose
  410
  provision will be made for the child in the ordinary way.
  On Question, Amendment agreed to.
  Clause 3, as amended, agreed to.
  LORD BELPER: The object of the new clause standing in my name is to give effect to the recommendation of the Royal Commission, who suggested that there should be power of arrest in the case of a person who is merely drunk in a public place, and not, as now, only in the case of a person who is drunk and disorderly. Under the Act of 1872 it is an offence for a person to be drunk in a public place, but he can only be prose-cut by means of a summons. This clause; will give power of arrest.
  Amendment moved—
  "To insert as a new clause after Clause 3, If a person is found drunk in any highway or other public place, whether a building or not, or on any licensed premises, and appears to be incapable of taking care of himself, he may be apprehended and proceedings may be taken against him for the offence."—Lord Belper.)
  On Question, new clause agreed to.
  LORD BELPER: There has been some question as to whether persons convicted of drunkenness can be required to give security for good behaviour. Sir John Bridge, when chief magistrate of the metropolis, occasionally used this power with very great advantage, but other magistrates have taken a different view and have not considered that the power, existed. This clause has been introduced to make that matter clear.
  Amendment moved—
  "To insert as a new clause, 'Where a person is convicted of any offence mentioned in the list of offences contained in the First Schedule to the Inebriates Act, 1898, as amended by this Act, the court may, either in addition to or in substitution for any other penalty, order the offender to enter into a recognisance and find sureties to be of good behaviour."—(Lord Belper.)
  On Question, new clause agreed to.
  LORD BELPER: The next Amendment carries out the recommendation of both parties on the Royal Commission. Its object is to shift, to a certain extent,

  411
  the onus of proof. At present the prosecution has to show that the licensed person did not take all reasonable steps for preventing drunkenness on the premises; but the new clause will compel the licensed person to show that he took all reasonable steps.
  Amendment moved—
  "To insert as a new clause, 'Where a licensed person is charged with permitting drunkenness on his premises, and it is proved that any person was drunk on his premises, it shall lie on the licensed person to prove that he and the persons employed by him took all reasonable steps for preventing drunkenness on the premises.'"—(Lord Belper.)
  LORD HENEAGE: I should like to ask the noble Lord what he means by the words "took all reasonable steps for preventing drunkenness on the premises." Does he mean that the licensed person must prove that he did not serve the man with liquor after he believed him to be drunk, or that he did his best to have him removed? The clause might work very unjustly. There are a number of small public-houses and beer houses in the country in the hands of labourers who are at work all day. How is the wife, in such a case, to prove that she took all reasonable steps to prevent drunkenness on her premises if the police look in and find a man drunk there?
  LORD BELPER: I think it would be "very indiscreet on my part to attempt to define the word "reasonable" in all cases. The very object of using the word is that the justices before whom the case is brought may form their own opinion as to whether the steps taken "were reasonable or not.
  On Question, new clause agreed to.
  Clause 4:—
  LORD BELPER: It is the universal opinion that the existing system of endorsing convictions on licences has not proved successful, and my Amendment to Clause 4, by doing away with that system, gives effect to a recommendation of both parties on the Royal Commission. The Amendment proposes that a register shall be kept of all convictions, which shall always be before the magistrates when they have to come to a decision. Where
  412
  a licensed person is convicted before any court of any offence committed by him as such, it will be the duty of the clerk of the licensing justices to enter notice of every such conviction on the register, and on any application for the grant, renewal, or transfer of a licence, the licensing justices are to have regard to any entries in the register of convictions relating either to the person by whom, or to the premises in respect of which, the licence is to be held. There is a further proviso that if the number of registered convictions exceeds five within a period of five years, the licensing justices shall, if they grant the licence, record their reasons for so doing, and the police authority are given power to oppose the confirmation of the licence. I think it will be agreed that this is likely to work more fairly than the present system.
  Amendment moved—
  "In Clause 4, page 2, line 38, to leave out from 'convicted' to the end of the clause, and to insert 'before any court of any offence committed by him as such, it shall be the duty of the clerk of the licensing justices to enter notice of every such conviction in the register of licences kept by him, and if the clerk of the court is not the clerk of the licensing justices, he shall forthwith send notice of the conviction to the clerk of the licensing justices.
  (2) On any application for the grant, renewal, or transfer of a licence the licensing justices shall have regard to any entries in the register of convictions relating either to the person by whom, or to the premises in respect of which, the licence is to be held.
  (3) If the number of registered convictions relating to the person or to the premises, or either of them, exceeds five within a period of five years immediately preceding the licensing sessions, the licensing justices shall, if they grant, renew, or transfer the licence, record in writing on the register their reasons for so doing, and the police authority (within the meaning of the Police Act, 1890) for the police area in which the licensing sessions are held, may, in the case of a new licence, oppose the confirmation of the licence, and, in the case of renewal or transfer, appeal against the decision of the licensing justices.
  (4) It shall not be necessary to record any conviction on a licence.'"—(Lord Belper.)
  THE LORD BISHOP OF WINCHESTER: I think Sub-section 3 of the proposed new clause requires careful consideration. As it stands, it would seem to imply that a new licence might be given to a man who had been convicted four times, or a licence renewed to a public-house which had offended in a similar manner. I venture to think that no existing

  413
  bench of magistrates, without this clause, would think of granting or renewing a licence under those circumstances. But by this Amendment it would seem that five previous convictions are to be regarded as necessary in order to make it undesirable for the magistrates to grant the licence. Speaking of the clause as a whole, I welcome it with all my heart. One very important provision in the original clause, to which the noble Lord has not referred, is cut out by the Amendment—namely, the section which provides that—
  "When the court has power under this Act to impose a fine of twenty pounds on a licensed person, the court may, in its discretion, instead of imposing a fine, suspend the licence for any period not exceeding three months."
  I am quite aware that that would be a very drastic measure, but the majority as well as the minority of the Royal Commission distinctly recommended that the power of suspending licences should be given.
  EARL STANHOPE: I hope that my noble friend will agree to the omission of Sub-section 3, which does not improve the existing law, and is liable to misinterpretation. It would imply that the magistrates could not refuse the licence unless there had been five convictions.
  LORD HENEAGE: I entirely agree with what has been said by the noble Earl who has just sat down. There are several objections to the sub-section. If a publican committed an offence once a year for four years, and then missed a year, he would escape scot-free, because he would not have been convicted five times in five years. The number of five offences is, I think, too many, and if the clause is to remain in the Bill, I shall move to substitute three. It is a very inconvenient sub-section, and I think the Government would do well to drop it.
  LORD BELPER: The objections of the noble Lord opposite are based upon a misconception of the meaning of the clause. The object of the clause is to do away with the endorsement of licences, and to provide that there shall be a record of the conviction in the register of licences. The matter will be considered, as at present, on each occasion, but if the magistrates do grant the licence after
  414
  five offences they are to explain their reasons for so doing, and there is to be an appeal against their decision. I will consider the suggestion of my noble friend Earl Stanhope as to the omission of the sub-section at a later stage of the Bill, but for the present I must ask your Lordships to pass the clause in its existing form.
  THE EARL OF CAMPERDOWN: I do not know whether it is intended to do away with the endorsement of licences altogether.
  LORD BELPER: The clause says so.
  THE EARL OF CAMPERDOWN: If the noble Lord will look at the clause he will see that it provides that, where a man is convicted of an offence, it shall be the duty of the clerk to enter notice of the conviction in the register; but, with regard to the endorsement of the licence, all the clause says is that "It shall not be necessary to record any conviction on a licence." I do not gather that the endorsement of licences is thereby altogether abolished. I think it would be better to omit Sub-section 3 now, and bring up a new provision at a later stage. Under this sub-section five convictions would be necessary before the licensing justices could consider the matter.
  LORD BELPER: Not at all. In every case they consider the matter.
  THE EARL OF CAMPERDOWN: According to my reading of Sub-section 3, if would require five offences in the five years immediately preceding the licensing sessions in order to do away with the licence.
  LORD BELPER: Not at all.
  THE EARL OF CAMPERDOWN: Perhaps I am wrong, but I should certainly interpret it in that way.
  LORD BELPER: I am perfectly willing to consider the matter between this and the next stage of the Bill, but I cannot agree to cut out the sub-section now. With regard to the omission of the section giving power to s spend licences, I have to inform the right rev.

  415
  Prelate that, in the opinion of the Government, the original proposal was impracticable.
  On Question, Amendment agreed to.
  Clause 4, as amended, agreed to.
  Clause 5 amended, and agreed to.
  LORD BELPER: The Bill is not extended to Scotland and Ireland because, as the licensing laws in those countries differ in many respects from those of England, it is thought more expedient that they should be dealt with separately.
  Moved, "That the Bill, as amended' be reported to the House."—(Lord Belper.)
  LORD TWEEDMOUTH: I should like to ask whether the Government will how take charge of the measure. As introduced by the Bishop of Winchester the Bill consisted of four operative clauses and sixty-eight lines. Of those sixty-eight but four and a half remain, and they are merely the preambles of the four clauses. In these circumstances I wish to know whether the Government will accept it as a Government Bill in this House, and give it the advantages of a Government Bill in the other House.
  THE MARQUESS OF SALISBURY: I do not know what precisely are the advantages that would accrue to the Bill if it was called a Government Bill in this House. I quite agree, however, that there are distinct advantages to be gained by adopting that course in the House of Commons, and it is the intention, if the Bill is passed by your Lordships, that it shall be treated in the other House as a Government Bill.
  On Question, motion agreed to.
  Bill recommitted to the Standing Committee; and to be printed as amended. [No. 79.]

  LICENSING SESSIONS BILL [H.L.]
  Order of the Day for the House to be put into Committee read.
  THE LORD BISHOP OF WINCHESTER: My Lords, in moving that the House
  416
  resolve itself into Committee on this Bill, I should like to point out that, although the sheet of Amendments is a small one, and the apparent differences between the previous Bill and the Bill as it is to be amended are less than they were in the Habitual Drunkards Bill which has just passed through Committee, the real differences which the Government desires to bring about are very much greater than in the former case. In the case of the Habitual Drunkards Bill it was the wording rather than the substance that was altered; but it is proposed to alter this Bill in substance. The changes are very material indeed, and I do not quite understand in what position this Bill stands as compared with the Bill which has just passed through Committee. Perhaps the noble Lord who represents the Government will explain, so that I may know exactly how I stand.
  Moved, That the House do now resolve itself into Committee on the said Bill.—(The Lord Bishop of Winchester.)
  LORD BELPER: The Amendments I have to move on behalf of the Government are in line with the criticisms which I made when the Bill was read a second time, and it was subject to these Amendments that the Government accepted the Second Reading of the Bill. We do not propose to move additional clauses or deal in any other way with the Bill.
  On Question, agreed to.
  House in Committee accordingly.
  Clause 1:—
  THE LORD BISHOP OF WINCHESTER: The words "only of being interested," which I propose to substitute for "of his holding shares," correspond with the wording of Section 60 of the Licensing Act, 1872, and it is thought that they cover the ground better than the words as they now stand. The clause as amended will read as follows—
  "A justice shall not be disqualified to act for any purpose under the Licensing Acts by reason, only of being interested in a railway company owning or occupying licensed refreshment, rooms or hotels."
  Amendment moved—
  "In Clause 1, page 1, line 6, to leave out 'of his holding shares,' and to insert 'only of

  417
  being interested.'"—(The Lord Bishop of Winchester).
  LORD BELPER: The Government have no objection to this Amendment which they consider a proper one.
  On Question, Amendment agreed to.
  Clause 1, as amended, agreed to.
  Clause 2:—
  LORD BELPER: I have to move the deletion of Sub-sections (1) and (2), which provide—
  "(1) That no person who would be disqualified by Section 60 of the Licensing Act, 1872, to act under the Licensing Acts in a district shall be appointed a member of watch committee, or a clerk of the peace, petty sessions, borough justices, or watch committee in that district; (2) that no person shall be appointed to act in any such office as the aforesaid who is in partnership with any person holding a professional appointment under a brewery or distillery company or an association for the protection of the interests of persons engaged in the liquor trade."
  In the place of these sub-sections I move to insert a provision making Section 60 of the Licensing Act, 1872, as amended by this Act, apply to a clerk to justices in like manner as it applies to a justice. This Amendment, which the Government think is necessary, practically carries out the unanimous recommendation of the Royal Commission, for it provides that the same disqualification shall apply to clerks to justices as applies at present to the justices themselves. The clause as it stands goes very much further. As drawn, the measure would absolutely prevent a clerk of the peace, petty sessions, borough justices, or watch committee from being appointed who was disqualified to act as a justice under the Licensing Act of 1872. As to clerks of the peace, the only occasions on which their action comes in question are when they fulfil the duties of clerks of quarter sessions, and I do not think that in any matter of licensing appeal those courts are likely to act at the instigation of the clerk. They are in a much more independent position than one or two justices acting with their awn clerk. This is a Bill to alter the qualifications of licensing authorities and the time of holding licensing sessions, and its short title is the Licensing Sessions Act.
  418
  Watch committees are in no sense licensing authorities, and the Government do not think the Bill ought to deal with them.
  Amendment moved—
  "In Clause 2, page 1, line 6, to leave out sub-clauses (1) and (2) and to insert—(1) Section 60 of the Licensing Act, 1872, which relates to disqualifications of justices shall, as amended by this Act, apply to a clerk to-justices in like manner as it applies to a justice."—(Lord Belper.)
  THE LORD BISHOP OF WINCHESTER: I gladly accept the alteration proposed with regard to justices' clerks. The more one looks into the subject the more complicated it seems. I think the clause as now proposed—though I have some difficulty in judging how it will operate in practice—is better than the one I inserted in the Bill. But I feel great difficulty about the watch committees. This point is one on which great emphasis was laid by the witnesses, before the Royal Commission and by both parties in the Report of the Commission itself. I believe the noble Lord, with his knowledge of the affairs of the Home Office, will bear me out in saying, that recent months have not shown the alleged evil to be a fanciful one. It would in these circumstances be a very great loss to decline to deal with the matter. There has been abundant evidence of the grossness of the abuse in some places where the men who are disqualified from sitting as licensing justices are called upon to deal with the very same problem as members of the watch committee. Nothing would be more disappointing to us than the necessity, if it be a necessity, of striking; out the provision which deals with the watch committees. I admit that watch committees would not naturally fall within the title of the Bill, but I understand that when we postpone the title on going into Committee, we do so in order that, if any provision is carried which is contrary to the title as originally drafted, it may be altered. I should be very sorry if on so technical a point a great reform is to be postponed.
  EARL SPENCER: I hope the Government will carefully consider what has, been said by the right rev. Prelate, because there is no more important

  419
  part of the Report of the Royal Commission than that which deals with this subject Anybody who reads the Report of the Royal Commission will see that there are very grave cases indeed in which the watch committees have prevented the police from acting vigorously and properly. As to the clerks of the peace, it is suggested that they seldom, when licensing appeals are heard, advise the court. I cannot speak from actual experience, but what I have heard tends to show that in other cases which come before the courts the clerk of the peace is almost always consulted and gives advice. I trust the provision relating to clerks of the peace will be retained.
  LORD BELPER: I am assured that watch committees would be entirely outside the scope of the Bill, but after what has been said I will take care to again consult the Home Secretary. I can, however, give no pledge on the matter.
  EARL SPENCER: If the watch committee is included, the County Standing Joint Committee ought to be included, for it stands in the same position in the county as the watch committee does in the borough.
  LORD BELPER: I have never heard the same objections raised to the Standing Joint Committee of the county as are raised in the case of the watch committee, but undoubtedly they stand on the same footing. They are both purely police committees, and do not deal with licensing questions. I think that what the noble Earl has said shows how difficult it would be to deal with watch committees in this Bill.
  THE LORD BISHOP OF WINCHESTER: Do I understand that the question of the watch committee will be reconsidered?
  LORD BELPER: I cannot in the least say that it will be reconsidered, but I have promised to bring what has been said before the Home Secretary.
  LORD HENEAGE: This question of the watch committee is a very difficult one. I support the Government Amendment, because, if disqualification is to be
  420
  extended to the watch committee, it must be extended not only to the Joint Committee of the county, but to the chief constable of the county also. It seems rather a strong thing that a man who has been elected by the ratepayers as a fit and proper person to be returned to the town council should be debarred from doing his duty simply on account of his trade. I am myself connected with a borough in which the watch committee are entirely under the thumb of the extremest section of the temperance party, and the police complain quite as much of interference with their duty from those members as they do in other boroughs of interference from those connected with the trade. I cannot see why a man should be excluded from serving on the watch committee because he is interested in the sale of beer and spirits, any more than a man interested in the sale of soda-water and ginger-beer.
  On question, Amendment agreed to.
  LORD BELPER: Sub-section 3 of Clause 2 provides that no solicitor, being a clerk of licensing justices, or being in partnership with such clerk, shall, as solicitor for any person, conduct or act in any application for or in respect of a licence or any other proceedings whatsoever under the Licensing Acts, except so far as relates to the preparation of notices or forms. The Amendment standing in my name will render solicitors contravening this sub-section liable on summary conviction to a fine of £100.
  Amendment moved—
  "In Clause 2, page 1, line 27, after 'forms' to insert 'and if any solicitor contravenes this provision, he shall be liable, on summary conviction, to a fine not exceeding one hundred pounds.'"—(Lord Belper
  On question, Amendment agreed to.
  Amendment moved—
  "In Clause 2, page 2, line 1, to leave out Sub-clause 4."—(Lord Belper.)
  On Question, Amendment agreed to.
  Clause 2, as amended, agreed to.
  Clauses 3 to 5 agreed to.
  Clause 6:—
  THE LORD BISHOP OF WINCHESTER: I beg to move the Amendment standing in my name, altering the title of the Bill to "The Licensing Bill."
  Amendment moved—
  "In Clause 6, page 2, line 33, to leave out 'Sessions.'"—(The Lord Bishop of Winchester.)
  On Question, Amendment agreed to.
  Bill recommitted to the Standing Committee; and to be reprinted as amended. [No. 80.]

  LICENSING SESSIONS BILL [H.L.]
    PRISONS (SCOTLAND) BILL [H.L.]
    Amendment reported (according to order), and Bill to be read 3a on Monday next.
    MARRIAGES LEGALISATION BILL [H.L.]
    Amendment reported (according to order), and Bill to be read 3a on Monday next.
    ALKALI, ETC., WORKS REGULATION BILL [H.L.]
    Amendments reported (according to order), and Bill to be read 3a on Monday next.

  VOLUNTEER RANGES.
  THE EARL OF DARTMOUTH: I beg to ask the Under Secretary of State for War if he will state how much of the grant of £100,000 taken for Volunteer ranges last year has been expended, and how it has been applied; and whether the unexpended balance of £4,778 of the original grant of £40,000 taken for this purpose in the Military Works Loan Act, 1889 (Head 3, Sub-head 2) has yet been allocated, and in what manner. I do not propose to-day to do more than ask the question, but I hope to have an opportunity after the Whitsun recess of dealing more fully with this very important matter.
  LORD HARRIS: Before the noble Lord the Under Secretary replies I should like to call attention to the Report of the Committee over which I had the honour to preside, in which they suggested that
  422
  ranges which had been provided out of Government funds should be at the disposal of the Yeomanry equally with any other branch of His Majesty's forces. I have not observed that any reply has been made by the Secretary of State to that suggestion, either in his speeches or in any communication to officers commanding yeomanry regiments. This is a matter of vital importance to yeomanry regiments, because the contingent grant depends upon whether a yeoman has made himself efficient in musketry, as well as in other ways. The Yeomanry feel under the deepest obligation—I do certainly—to Volunteer corps who have put themselves to considerable inconvenience in order to assist neighbouring yeomanry regiments to obtain grants, as they have not the funds to obtain ranges for themselves. The large increase which is proposed in the Yeomanry will, of course, increase the difficulty, and I trust that the War Office will consider the matter.
  THE MARQUESS OF AILESBURYcalled attention to the great inconvenience caused by the closing of ranges at Swindon.
  THE UNDER SECRETARY OF STATE FOR WAR (Lord RAGLAN): I do not know that it is possible to ear-mark what actual portions of these separate sums have been expended, because they were lumped togother. But, as far as the expenditure has been made up to date, about £77,000 has been allotted out of £170,000, leaving a balance of £93,000, which we have still to deal with. I am sure the noble Earl will agree with me that it would be impossible, in the limits of an answer, to give details of the amounts that have been expended on the different ranges, but there will be no objection to a Paper being laid on the Table, similar to last year, giving the details. As to the use of the ranges by the Yeomanry, if the noble Lord will give notice of the question, I shall be glad to give him a reply on a future occasion. I was not aware that the ranges at Swindon had been closed. I fear, however, that this is not the only place where ranges have been closed in consequence of the improvement of the rifle. We have in

  423
  hand the sum of money I have mentioned, out of which we are prepared to assist any well-devised scheme brought forward.
  THE EARL OF DARTMOUTH: I should like to ask whether any conditions will be attached to the allocation of the money,
  LORD RAGLAN: I am afraid I am mot in a position to answer that question.
  House adjourned at five minutes past Six of the clock to Monday next, a quarter before Eleven of the clock.