Sitting of 3 November 1902

Preamble
The House met at Two of the Clock.
UNOPPOSED PRIVATE BILL BUSINESS.

  WATER PROVISIONAL ORDER BILL.
  Reported with an Amendment [Provisional Order confirmed]; Report to lie upon the Table.
  Bill, as amended, to be considered tomorrow.

PETITIONS.
  CANADIAN CATTLE (IMPORTATION).
  Petitions for abolition of restrictions: from Dumbarton; and St, Ives; to lie upon the Table.
  EDUCATION (ENGLAND AND WALES) BILL.
  Petitions for alteration: from Dumbarton; and St. Ives; to lie upon the Table.
  EDUCATION (ENGLAND AND WALES) BILL.
  Petitions from St. Aidans, in favour; to lie upon the Table.
  MERCHANT SHIPPING (LIGHTHOUSES) BILL.
  Petition from Cardiff, in favour; to lie upon the Table.
  PREVENTION OF CORRUPTION IN TRADE.
  Petition forlegislation: from Edinburgh; Dumbarton; and St. Ives; to lie upon the Table.
RETURNS, REPORTS, ETC.
  IRISH LAND COMMISSION (PROCEEDINGS).
  Copy presented, of Returns of Proceedings during the month of September 1902 [by Command]; to lie upon the Table.
  RAILWAYS (CONTINUOUS BRAKES).
  Copy presented, of Return by the Railway Companies of the United Kingdom on the progress made in the use of Continuous Brakes, etc., for the six months ending 30th June, 1902 [by Command]; to lie upon the Table.
  MERCANTILE MARINE (SEAMEN EMPLOYED).
  Copy presented, of Return of the number, ages, ratings, and Nationalities of the seamen employed on the 31st March, 1901, on vessels registered under Part I. of the Merchant Shipping Act, 1894, in the British Islands [by Command]; to lie upon the Table.
  CIVIL SERVICES (ADDITIONAL ESTIMATE, 1902–03).
  Estimate presented of the amount required in the year ending 31st March, 1903, as a Grant-in-Aid to the Transvaal and the Orange River Colony for Expenses consequent upon the termination of the War [by Command]; to lie upon the Table, and to be printed. [No. 365.]
  LOCAL GOVERNMENT BOARD.
  Copy presented, of Supplement to the Thirtieth Annual Report of the Local Government Board, 1900–1901, in continuation of the Report of the Medical Officer for 1900–1901, on Lead Poisoning and Water Supplies [by Command]; to lie upon the Table.
  LOCAL GOVERNMENT BOARD.
  Copy presented, of Supplement to the Thirty-first Annual Report of the Local Government Board, 1901–02, containing the Report of the Medical Officer for 1901–02 [by Command]; to lie upon the Table.

  CENSUS (ENGLAND AND WALES), 1901.
  Copy presented, of Census of England and Wales, 1901 (Counties of Suffolk,

  1381
  Leicester, and Somerset [by Command]; to lie upon the Table.

  COLONIAL REPORTS (ANNUAL).
  Copy presented, of Colonial Report, No. 370 (Cocos Islands, Annual Report for 1902) [by Command]; to lie upon the Table.
ORAL ANSWERS TO QUESTIONS
  QUESTIONS AND ANSWERS CIRCULATED WITH THE VOTES.

    Aird (Stornoway) School Playground.
    MR. WEIR: To ask the Lord Advocate whether he is aware that although 300 children attend Aird School, in the parish of Stornoway, the playground is devoid of shelter; and will he ascertain whether some kind of protection from the weather can be provided.
    (Answered by Mr. A. Graham Murray.) The Department does not in all cases require that outside shelters should be provided in the playgrounds, nor is opinion unanimous as to the advantage of such shelters for use in severe weather. As at present advised, my Lords hold that it is a matter which may be left to the School Board with such suggestions as His Majesty's inspector may make.

    Lewis Local Government Board Inquiry.
    MR. WEIR: To ask the Lord Advocate if he will state when the inspecting officers of the Local Government Board last visited the Island of Lewis for the purpose of inquiring into questions affecting the public health.
    (Answered by Mr. A. Graham Murray.) The Board's inspecting officer was last in the Island of Lewis for the purpose referred to in May of the present year.

    Standard of Ventilation for Cottonweaving Sheds.
    MR. SHACKLETON: To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department whether he will consider the advisability of prescribing, under Clause 7, Section 2. of the Factory and Workshops Act, 1901, a standard of sufficient ventilation in cotton-weaving sheds, other than those in which the humidity of the atmosphere is artificially produced.
    1382
    (Answered by Mr. Secretary Akers Douglas.) The question is one which I shall have to consider at an early date. The subject of ventilation in factories and workshops has been for some time under inquiry; and a very important Report has been laid before Parliament, which will be published within a few days.

    Indian Railway Contracts with German Firms.
    COLONEL DENNY: To ask the Secretary of State for India if the price of locomotives recently ordered in Germany by the East India Railway Company included delivery in India, or are they delivered f.o.b. at a German port: in the latter case will he recommend that they be shipped by British liners whose rates are similar to those current in German companies trading to India.
    (Answered by Secretary Lord George Hamilton.) I am afraid that I must refer the hon. Member to the East India Railway Company for the information which he desires on the subject of the locomotives ordered in Germany by that Company. With regard to the latter part of the Question, I may say that the Government Director will undoubtedly use his influence, so far as it may be compatible with a due regard for the interests of the India taxpayer, in favour of the employment of British firms.

    Navy Contracts—Preserves.
    MR. KEIR HARDIE: To ask the Secretary to the Admiralty, whether he can state what firms have been entrusted with contracts for the supply of preserves for seamen, and the quantity contracted for by each firm; whether the contracts contain a fair wages clause; whether any part of the supply has yet been sent in; and whether any of the supplies have been rejected as not being up to the standard in weight or quality.
    (Answered by Mr. Arnold-Farster.) It is not considered to be for the public interest to furnish the names of the successfu tenderers. Contracts for preserves, in common with all other Admiralty contracts, contain a Fair Wages Clause. O

    1383
    the total quantity of preserves sent in, a small portion, representing about 3 per cent, of the whole, has been rejected as not in accordance with the requirements of the contract.

    Naval Shipbuilding—Designs of Scouts.
    SIR JOHN COLOMB: To ask the Secretary to the Admiralty what progress has been made in determining the designs and arrangements for building the Scouts; and whether he can give particulars as to their dimensions, speed, armament, and coal carrying capacity.
    (Answered by Mr. Arnold-Forster.) Designs have been received from several firms, and orders for four ships of the new Scout Class have been placed with four of them, conditional upon certain modifications being accepted by them. I speed of 25 knots will be obtained. The armament will consist of ten 12-pounder and eight small automatic guns. The coal supplied will be sufficient for 3,000 knots at 10 knots speed. The exact dimensions of the displacements have not been, determined finally.

    Fatal Gun Accident at Portsmouth.
    MR. LEVY: To ask the Secretary to the Admiralty whether his attention has been called to the circumstances attending the death of Seaman Cosham, which occurred during the firing of a Royal salute at Portsmouth in August last; whether there was. a commissioned officer in charge of the men engaged in firing the salute when the accident occurred; and, if so, will he state why he was not required to give evidence at the inquest which was subsequently held; was the position occupied by Cosham at the time of the accident, viz., astride the muzzle of the gun, in accordance with the regulations laid down by the Admiralty for such occasions; whether there were sufficient warrant officers present to keep all the men engaged under observation; if he can state how many accidents have occurred during the last ten years to men engaged in firing salutes; and what steps the Admiralty have taken, or intend to take, to ensure the observance of regulations on such occasions in future.
    (Answered by Mr. Arnold-Forster.) A Court of Inquiry has investigated the
    1384
    circumstances attending the accident referred to. There was no commissioned officer in charge of the saluting party, which was placed in charge of a gunner, in accordance with the regulations laid down by the Admiralty for firing salutes. As the men composing a saluting party have always had previous training in their duties, it is not considered that the presence of other warrant officers is necessary. The position astride the muzzle of the gun occupied by Able Seaman Cosham was not in accordance with the regulations, which require that the gun shall be run in for sponging, and orders have been given for the strict observance of this rule in future. I am unable without longer notice to state what accidents have occurred during the last ten years to men engaged in firing salutes; but if the hon. Member will repeat this inquiry next week I will endeavour to give him the information.

    Athlone Income Tax Appeals.
    MR. KENNEDY: To ask Mr. Chancellor of the Exchequer whether he can state the number of appeals from income tax assessments in the Athlone district which have been lodged this year, also the increased amount assessed over the past year; and whether he is aware that dissatisfaction exists among traders in the Athlone district at the manner in which the surveyor is increasing their assessments.
    (Answered by Mr. Ritchie.) The number of appeals for 1902–3 has been 184. The amounts of profits assessed has been £211,160, as against £208,682 in 1901–2, an increase of about £2,500. The Board of Inland Revenue are not aware of any dissatisfaction among the traders of Athlone at the way in which the surveyor has increased their assessments.

    Railway Carriage of Inflammable Liquids.
    MR. SCOTT MONTAGU: To ask the President of the Board of Trade whether he has yet approached the railway companies with reference to the carriage of petroleum spirit and other inflammable liquids; and, if so, with what result.
    (Answered by Mr. Gerald Balfour.) I have been in communication with the Railway Companies' Association in this

    1385
    matter, and am informed that a meeting to discuss the questions involved has been arranged for tomorrow between the general managers of the several railways and a deputation, representing those interested in this traffic.

    Lurgan Post Office.
    COLONEL SAUNDERSON: To ask the Postmaster General whether he can state when a commencement will be made in the erection of the new Post Office in Lurgan.
    (Answered by Mr. Austen Chamberlain). It is intended to commence the building in the course of next year.

    London Post Office —Holiday Allowances.
    MR. CLAUDE HAY: To ask the Postmaster General whether he is aware that officers of the London Post Office, working on Bank Holiday, 25th instant, have been refused by the Heads of the Department payment in lieu, and are only allowed leave under such restrictions as to lessen considerably the value of the holiday; and whether he will give instructions for carrying out the recommendations of the Tweedmouth Committee, which lays down that an officer that cannot be spared on a Bank Holiday shall have the choice of remuneration or leave in lieu.
    (Answered by Mr. Austen Chamberlain.) I have no reason to think that my directions on this matter are not being properly carried out. If any officer feels aggrieved by them, he should memorialise. me in the usual way, and his case will receive my attention.

    Postal Arrangements with the United States.
    MR. SEYMOUR KING: To ask the Postmaster General whether he is aware that the Express Companies in the United States have declined to facilitate the arrangements made between the British Post Office and the American Express Company; whether loss will be incurred on many parcels forwarded under the new arrangement; and will he say whether the British Post Office bears any, and. if so, what portion of this loss; and, seeing that the British
    1386
    Post Office undertakes free delivery of parcels to the consignees in the United States, including payment of the United States customs duty, will he say how it protects itself from loss, should the required 10 per cent, deposit prove in-sufficient; and, seeing that the United States customs duty is in nearly all cases far in excess of the amount which would be covered by a 10 per cent, deposit, has the British Post Office arranged for any special facilities to be given for the transit of goods through the United States customs.
    (Answered by Mr. Austen Chamberlain.) I am not aware that the Express Companies in the United States have declined to facilitate the arrangements made with the American Express Company for the exchange of parcels with the United States, nor have I any reason to suppose that the Company will be unable to carry out the obligations into which it has entered. I do not know whether any of these obligations will involve the Company in loss; but they will entail none on the British Post Office. The senders of parcels which are to be delivered free in the United States sign an undertaking which makes them legally responsible for the customs charges. It is this legal responsibility which protects the Post Office in this case, as in others of the same kind. Proper facilities have been secured for the transit of British postal parcels through the United States Customs.

    Enniskillen Postal Staff's Grievances.
    DR. THOMPSON: To ask the Postmaster General if he has received a petition from the sorting clerks and telegraphists at Enniskillen, dated 11th September, praying for a revision of their attendances on the ground of the number of early morning duties consequent upon the number of female appointments at that office; and seeing that such duties have since been made divided, and the necessity for the meal relief so avoided, will he seek to provide a remedy by placing Enniskillen on the same basis as other similar towns by reducing the number of female appointments.
    (Answered by Mr. Austen Chamberlain.) The memorial has been received and

    1387
    duly considered. It is not found practicable to make any further improvement in the attendances required of the staff at Enniskillen. The men rotate monthly on the early morning duty, and there is nothing unusual in the arrangements at present in force. The circumstances do not call for a reduction of the number of appointments for women.

    Dublin-Mullingar Railway Rates.
    MR. KENNEDY: To ask the Chief Secretary to the Lord Lieutenant of Ireland whether the attention of the Department of Agriculture and Technical Instruction has been called to the fact that the directors of the Midland Great Western Railway Company of Ireland have reduced their rates for freight of coal between Dublin and Mullingar by rail to a rate per ton less than the tolls paid by boat owners to the same Company for each ton of coal carried on the canal; and whether the Department will; exercise its power of appearing before the Railway and Canal Commissioners to have the Canal tolls revised with a view to preserving for the public competition between the two lines of traffic.
    (Answered by Mr. Wyndham.) Representations have been made to the Department in this matter and are at present under consideration.

    South African War—Transport—Over crowding on the "Drayton Grange."
    MR. H. C. RICHARDS: To ask the Secretary of State for War if he has received any telegraphic summary or information from the Colonial authorities representative of the Army as to the overcrowding of the "Drayton Grange;" if so, will he lay it upon the Table; and whether he will undertake to do the same with the Report whenever it may be received by him from Australia.
    (Answered by Mr. Secretary Brodrick.) No official Report has yet been received from the Colonial authorities as to the inquiry into the case of the "Drayton Grange." I cannot undertake to make any pledges in respect of such Report until I have seen it.

    Volunteer Artillery Armament.
    MR. LODER: To ask the Secretary of State for War whether he can state what steps are being taken to put the heavy batteries of the Volunteer force on a footing of efficiency; what progress has been made towards re-arming these batteries; how many 40-pounder guns have been replaced by 4 7 guns, and how many 16-pounder guns by 15-pounder B. L. guns; and whether any 15-pounder guns have either been issued or promised to any corps of Volunteer artillery.
    MR. LODER: To ask the Secretary of State for War whether the new 15-pounder B. L. guns, when issued, will be horsed as R.F.A. guns; and whether he can state whether Volunteer batteries, at present horsed as mobile position batteries, but not attached to any Army corps, will have to give up their present method of horsing their guns, and revert to the employment of heavy horses led by drivers on foot.
    (Answered by Mr. Secretary Brodrick.) Twenty-two batteries of 4 7-inch guns have been issued to Volunteers, and a considerable number are on order. The guns of eleven 40-pounder R. B.L. batteries have been replaced by 4'7-inch guns. No 16-pounder guns have been replaced by 15-pounder guns. Two batteries of 15-pounder B. L. guns have been issued to the Honourable Artillery Company. As regards field guns, the whole question of their issue to the Volunteers and the method of draught is under consideration.

    Hong Kong Building Ordinances.
    MR. WEIR: To ask the Secretary of State for the Colonies whether any arrangements have yet been made to meet the increase in building in Hong Kong by the appointment of additional inspectors; and, if so, will he say how many inspectors are now appointed.
    (Answered by Mr. Secretary Chamberlain.) The Colonial Government have asked that two additional overseers may be sent out from this country to assist in performing the duties imposed upon the Public Works Department by the building ordinances. Candidates for these

    1389
    posts are under consideration, and it is hoped to send out two overseers at an early date.

    West Africa—Importation of Over-Proof Spirits.
    COLONEL WELBY: To ask the Secretary of State for the Colonies whether he is aware that over-proof spirits, containing from l-26 to 4.31 per cent, of fusil oil, while -5 per cent, of that oil is injurious, are being imported into West Africa; and will he say what steps are being taken to prevent this importation.
    (Answered by Mr. Secretary Chamberlain.) The figures quoted by the hon. Member are based on a statement made by the Governor of Lagos, Sir William MacGregor, in his message to the Legislative Council in March last. The over-proof spirits in which a deleteriously high proportion of fusil oil was found were not gin, rum, brandy, or whisky (which the Government chemist, after a long series of analyses, has found to be free from injurious ingredients) but alcohol The Governor is of opinion that alcohol containing a noxious substance like fusil oil in deleterious quantity should be seized and dealt with in such a way that it should not reach the public; but fresh legislation is required to give the Government the necessary powers, and the Governor has informed his Council that a Bill for this purpose will be introduced for their consideration. Inquiry will be made of the Governor as to the progress of the measure referred to.

    North Nigeria—Importation of Liquors.
    COLONEL WELBY: To ask the Secretary of State for the Colonies whether he is aware that two years ago Sir F. Luard publicly stated that steps would be taken to prevent by prohibition rates the importation of liquors into the African Interior via the Lagos Railway; and whether he can say if these rates have been imposed, and with what result.
    (Answered by Mr. Secretary Chamberlain.) The importation into Northern Nigeria of spirituous liquors for sale to natives is absolutely prohibited. The present terminus of the Lagos Railway is some seventy miles from the boundary of Lagos and Northern Nigeria, so that,
    1390
    even apart from the general prohibition, the question of direct importation by railway does not arise. The rates at present charged for the conveyance of spirits on the railway are high; higher in fact than the charges for conveyance by other means (carriers and canoes). For instance, the railway rate for spirits from Lagos to Ibadan (the terminus) is 47s. a ton, and the charge for conveyance by carriers, etc., is 40s. 4½d.

    Taxation of Personal Property—Foreign and Colonial Systems.
    SIR EDWARD STRACHEY: To ask the First Lord of the Treasury if ho can say when the Return (Personal Property Contribution to Local Taxation Abroad), ordered by the House, August, 1901, will be presented.
    (Answered by Mr. A. J. Balfour.) The Return referred to is one setting out the system under which personal property is made to contribute towards local taxation by means of a local income tax or local death duty in the following countries: France, Germany, Austria-Hungary, Belgium, Holland, United States of America, and in all British self-governing Colonies and the Channel Islands. The particulars required for the Return have been asked for by the Foreign and Colonial Offices. Reports have been received by the Foreign Office from France, Prussia, Austria, Belgium, Holland, and United States. These were sent by the Foreign Office to the Local Government Board, who, in returning them, suggested the desirability of further information being obtained on certain points from His Majesty's representatives abroad. The Foreign Office have taken steps for this purpose. The Colonial Office have sent to the Board Reports from all the self-governing Colonies except Cape Colony, Victoria, Tasmania, and New Zealand. These Reports are in course of examination, and will be sent on to the Foreign Office at an early date. A Report as to Jersey has also been forwarded to the Foreign Office. The Return will be made as soon as the information is complete.

    Spalding Grammar School.
    MR. MANSFIELD: To ask the Secretary to

    1391
    the Board of Education whether the Spalding Grammar School, No 8050, is recognised under the Board of Education as a secondary day school, Division B, for grants from 16th September last.
    (Answered by Sir William Anson.) The managers are being informed that the scheme of work has been approved; but that the formal recognition of the school for grants cannot be given until a satisfactory report has been received from the inspector.

  (2.15.) QUESTIONS IN THE HOUSE.

    Compensation to Boers for War Losses.
    MR. WEIR: I beg to ask the Secretary of State for the Colonies whether any limit of time is fixed within which applications for compensation must be lodged by the Boers who suffered through the military operations in the Transvaal or Orange River Colony; and will he state the nature of the regulations on the subject, and in what manner they have been made known.
    THE FINANCIAL SECRETARY TO THE WAR OFFICE (Lord STANLEY,: A limit of time was fixed by successive notices in the Transvaal and Orange River Colony Gazettes in regard to claims lodged with the military authorities. It has been agreed to waive the time limit where the claimant can show that his failure to comply with the provisions of the notices was due to no negligence of his own. Relief in respect of the war losses, other than those arising from requisitions, suffered by the Boers through the military operations, is being given under Article 10 of the Terms of Surrender, and no time has so far been fixed within which claims in respect of such war losses should be submitted.

    Army Commissions—Age Regulations.
    COLONEL BAIN: I beg to ask the Secretary of State for War if his attention has been called to the position of the officers of Militia and Yeomanry who were given commissions in the Army for services in
    1392
    the field, and who, on account of age, are placed at a disadvantage as regards their future career in the Army; and, if so, will he state what steps he proposes to take to place them on an equal footing with officers gazetted to the Army from Sandhurst.
    LORD STANLEY: Those officers who, on first appointment to commissions granted as rewards for active service, were placed at a disadvantage in respect of age will be considered, after they have served at least three or four years, for promotion to the rank of captain in vacancies which would not be filled by regimental promotion in the ordinary course. Regard will be given to age as well as to efficiency. Four officers have been given captaincies in the garrison regiment, and seven have been appointed lieutenants.

    New Cunarders.
    SIR. WILLIAM ALLAN: I beg to ask the Secretary to the Admiralty whether the designs for the two twenty-five-knot vessels to be built by the Cunard Company, for which the Government is to find the money, and also to subsidise, are to be subject to the approval of the Admiralty.
    THE SECRETARY TO THE ADMIRALTY (Mr. ARNOLD-FORSTER,: Yes, Sir. So far as naval requirements are concerned, the answer is in the affirmative.
    SIR WILLIAM ALLAN: Is it the intention to fit these ships with water-tube boilers, of which the Admiralty so much approve?
    MR. ARNOLD-FORSTER: I am not aware that that arises out of the Question.
    SIR WILLIAM ALLAN: Certainly it does.

    Madras Railway—Preference for German Steamship Owners.
    MR. NORMAN: I beg to ask the Secretary of State for India, whether the Madras Railway Company is a Company guaranteed by the Indian Government; whether it has on its board an official of the India

    1393
    Office acting as Government director; whether all tenders for materials and goods consigned to India and for freight are submitted to the approval of the India Office through him; whether payments by the Company for the same are sanctioned by the India Office before payment; whether the India Office takes one-half of the surplus profits of the railway; and whether the Government has the right to take over the railway on 1st April, 1907; and is he aware that about 660 tons of railway material for the Madras railways were shipped from Middles-borough by the German steamship "Rudesheimer" on 4th July, and about 1,280 tons by the German steamship "Goldenfels" on 25th June; can he state whether all the locomotives shipped from Middlesborough for the Madras railways since 1886 have been carried by German steamships, and whether tenders for this freight have been asked from British shipowners, as in the case of other guaranteed Indian railways; if not, can he state why this preference has been given by an Indian Government railway to German firms; and will he take steps to give British steamship owners the opportunity of tendering for such freight in future.
    THE SECRETARY OF STATE FOR INDIA (Lord G. HAMILTON,: I am afraid that in my recent answer to the hon. Member on this subject, I failed to convey to him the difference between a Government railway on the one hand, and a Company's railway on the other. Both classes of railways exist in India, and the Madras Railway belongs to the latter class. It is therefore managed by a Board of Directors, and all tenders for stores and freight are dealt with by them, and are not submitted for the approval of the India Office. It is true that the payment of interest is guaranteed by the Government of India, and that the Government Director of Railways has a seat at the Board; and his influence has been, and will be, used in favour of British industries, so far as may be consistent with a due regard for the interests of the Indian taxpayer. Beyond this, and except for the purpose of safeguarding Indian interests, I cannot undertake to interfere
    1394
    in the management of the Company in these matters unless I have specific evidence to show that partiality or undue preference has been shown either to those tendering, or in the manner of inviting tenders. In the present case, I am informed that tenders were invited in the usual way.

    Delagoa Bay.
    MR. LAMBERT: I beg to ask the Under Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs, whether any negotiations have recently been or are now in progress with a view to securing British management for the harbour of and railway from Delagoa Bay.
    THE UNDER SECRETARY OF STATE FOR FOREIGN AFFAIRS (Lord GRANBORNE,: No such negotiations have recently been or are now in progress.

    Appropriation of Supply—Terminal Charges for South Africa.
    MR. M'CRAE: I beg to ask Mr. Chancellor of the Exchequer, on what authority expenditure is being incurred and issues are made1 from the Treasury for Terminal charges for South Africa, including transport for returning troops and gratuities to the soldiers; and, seeing that no sums were included in the Estimates for the current year for these purposes, will he say what opportunity will be given for consideration of the necessary Votes in Supply.
    THE CHANCELLOR OF THE EXCHEQUER (Mr. RITCHIE,: The expenditure on terminal services is being incurred with the full cognisance of the Treasury out of the aggregate of existing Army Votes, in accordance with the power conferred by the 5th Section of the annual Appropriation Act. I understand that a Paper will be laid before the House at once purporting to show the anticipated redistribution of funds.
    MR. M'CRAE: Do I understand the right hon. Gentleman to say that the practice of transferring Votes from one head to another applies in this case, where the amount so transferred is

    1395
    about ten millions; and does he think that that is a proper system of controlling the national expenditure?
    MR. RITCHIE: It is the usual practice, and is authorised by Act of Parliament.
    MR. GIBSON BOWLES: Is it not a fact that the practice authorised by Parliament is that the Treasury may only transfer what is saved on one Vote to another Vote in the same class?
    MR. RITCHIE: If the hon. Member desires any further information he should put down a Question on the Paper.

    Mayoral Silver Coronation Medals.
    SIR JOHN LENG: I beg to ask the Secretary of State for the Homo Department, how many silver medals have been issued since His Majesty's Coronation to the heads of municipalities in the United Kingdom; and what was the cost of each medal.
    THE SECRETARY OF STATE FOB THE HOME DEPARTMENT (Mr. AKERS DOUGLAS,: These Medals are the personal gift of the King, and have been bestowed on such municipal officers as it has pleased His Majesty to direct. My knowledge in the matter does not go beyond the fact that I have, by His Majesty's commands, been the medium of distributing the medals to all the Mayors of the Boroughs of England and Wales.

    Workmen's Compensation Act—Hartlepool County Court Medical Referee.
    MR. BELL: I beg to ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department, whether he is aware that Dr. Frederick Morrison, the Medical Referee for the Hartlepool County Court Circuit, appointed by the Home Office under the Workmen's Compensation Act, 1897, appeared as a medical witness for the respondent employers in a case under the Act entitled Peart v. Furness, Withy & Co., and in two similar cases tried at the West Hartlepool County Court, on 17th October; that, in consequence of Dr. Morrison so appearing, the Judge sitting as Arbitrator had to
    1396
    call in another medical practitioner as medical referee; and will he say whether it is in accordance with the rules under the Act for a medical referee so to act; and, if so, will he take steps to amend such rules so as to avoid a repetition of such a state of things, and, if it is not in accordance with the rules, will he take steps to remove the name of Dr. Morrison from the list of medical referees.
    MR. AKERS DOUGLAS: The conditions on which a Medical Referee holds his appointment under the Workmen's Compensation Act preclude his holding any appointment from an employer or body of employers or workmen which would involve attendance on workmen who come within the provisions of the Act. But it must occasionally happen that a referee, in the course of his ordinary practice, attends a case in which a claim under the Act afterwards arises; and when that happens the rule is that he must not act as referee in that case, but that another referee must be called in. I understand that this is what occurred in the cases mentioned in the hon. Member's Question, and I am assured by the Judge that Dr, Morrison acted with perfect independence and integrity.

    Abertysswg Miners' Gallantry.
    SIR CHARLES M'LAREN: I beg to ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department if his attention has been called to the gallantry of four men, who, in order to save life after the colliery explosion at Abertysswg, at once descended the pit, notwithstanding the risk from afterdamp, and to the fact that by their efforts nearly twenty lives were ultimately saved; and will he say whether the Albert Medal is given in such cases; and, if not, whether he will consider whether it may be awarded to miners who voluntarily risk their lives in rescuing others.
    MR. WILLIAM ABRAHAM: At the same time may I ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department if his attention has been called to the successful efforts to save life after the recent explosion at the Abertysswg Colliery in South Wales,

    1397
    resulting from the action of certain miners, who at once descended the pit, and at the risk of their lives began the work of rescuing the men still living from the firedamp, to the injury of their health; will he say whether such cases are within his power to recognise by the award of the Albert Medal; and, if so, whether he will give it to those first down the pit, if the facts are laid before him.
    MR. AKERS DOUGLAS: The suggestion made by hon. Members has already been before me, and I have looked very carefully into the facts of; the case. I fully appreciate the praiseworthy and courageous conduct of each one of the men referred to; but I do ‡ not find—and I say it with regret—that the case is one which I should feel justified in submitting to the King for an award of the Albert Medal.

    Canadian Store Cattle—Restrictions on Importation.
    SIR JOHN LENG: I beg to ask the ‡ President of the Board of Agriculture whether his attention has been called to a statement made by Mr. Colmer, Secretary to the High Commissioner for Canada, that during the last ten years not a single case of pleuro-pneumonia has been discovered among cattle in the Dominion, and that about 1,000,000 Canadian cattle have been imported into this country in that period, and that Mr. Sewell Bead has pronounced Canadian cattle the healthiest in the world; whether, in view of the diminution in the supply of British stores he will take steps to abrogate the embargo on the sale of Canadian live stores in English and Scottish markets.
    THE PRESIDENT OF THE BOARD OF AGRICULTURE (Mr. HANBURY,: The answer to the first paragraph is in the affirmative. Not only Canadian stores, but those of all countries alike are prohibited from entering this country by the provisions of the Act of 1896, and I have no intention of proposing to repeal them.
    MR. ARCHDALE: Can the right hon. Gentleman say what is the estimated amount of loss suffered by the farmers of this country through
    1398
    the last attack of foot and mouth disease caused by the importation of cattle from abroad?
    MR. SPEAKER: Order, order: That does not arise out of the Question.

    House Sites for Shetland Crofters.
    MR. WEIR: I beg to ask the Lord Advocate, in view of the difficulty experienced by cottars in the Sandwick district of Shetland, and throughout the Highland crofting counties, in obtaining land for house sites, will the Government consider the desirability of introducing legislation such as will give the local authority compulsory powers to obtain land at fair rentals for the requirements of the people.
    THE LORD ADVOCATE (Mr. A. GRAHAM MURRAY,: No representation has been received from the cottars of the Sandwick district of Shetland. The Government do not consider it desirable to introduce legislation in the sense contemplated by the hon. Member.
    MR. WEIR: Is the right hon. Gentleman aware that the Shetland fishermen have to pay at the rate of£8 per acre for house sites? I hope he will bring it under the notice of the Secretary for Scotland.

    Scottish Congested Districts Board — Expenditure on New Holdings.
    MR. WEIR: I beg to ask the Lord Advocate if he will state the amount expended by the Congested Districts Board, since its formation, in the acquisition of land in each of the six crofting counties for the purpose of creating new holdings.
    MR. A. GRAHAM MURRAY: The hon. Member's question does not admit of any categorical answer which would not be in a sense misleading. I may, however, state that the amount expended in actual purchase of land has been for Syre (Sutherland), £10,546, and for Barra (Inverness), £7,500; and, further, that all the operations in the direction of extending small holdings, including purchase, have cost up to date nearly £39,000. This includes loans

    1399
    and other repayable sums, but is exclusive of liabilities of considerable amount which have not yet matured.

    Scottish Fishermen and the Three Mile Limit.
    MR. WEIR: I beg to ask the Lord Advocate whether, in view of the feeling amongst fishermen in the north of Scotland that the three-mile limit should be extended, he will state on what ground he declines to recommend that the signatories to the North Sea Convention be approached on the subject.
    MR. A. GRAHAM MURRAY: The hon. Member raises a point of policy in regard to negotiations with Foreign Powers into which I must decline to enter in reply to a Question.

    Congestion in the Island of Lewis.
    MR. WEIR: I beg to ask the Lord Advocate if the Secretary for Scotland will consider the expediency of deputing an inspector of the Local Government Board to visit the Island of Lewis, for the purpose of inspecting congested districts and conferring with the local authority, the medical officers of health, and the sanitary inspector, with a view to the removal of hovels such as that in which a man named Mackay recently died of typhus fever, in the district of Ness, Island of Lewis.
    MR. A. GRAHAM MURRAY: The general question of the sanitary condition of the Lewis is receiving the consideration of the Local Government Board. Certain aspects of the question are dealt with in the special Report on the Lewis by the Crofter's Commission which has just been presented to Parliament, and if the Secretary for Scotland thinks further information is required, he will consider what course it is expedient to pursue. I understand the local authority have already taken action, with a view to the destruction of the house in which Mackay dwelt.
    MR. WEIR: Is the right lion. Gentleman aware that the Local Government Board have not taken the trouble to send a single inspector of that Board to the Island of Lewis — the most congested district in the Highlands of Scotland.

    Portness Harbour, Island of Lewis.
    MR. WEIR: I beg to ask the Lord Advocate whether the Congested Districts Board have yet been able to obtain from Sir John Wolfe Barry, C.E., a report on the condition of Portness Harbour, Island of Lewis; and, if not, will he say when the question is likely to receive that gentleman's attention.
    MR. A. GRAHAM MURRAY: Sir John Wolfe Barry intimated, on 17th October, his regret that his engagements will not permit of his visiting Port Ness Harbour. The Congested Districts Board are considering as to another engineer.

    Consignments of Arms to Ireland— Circular to Birmingham Manufacturers.
    MR. LONSDALE: I beg to ask the Chief Secretary to the Lord Lieutenant of Ireland whether he is aware that quantities of small arms and ammunition are being despatched from Birmingham to Ireland, and that a circular on the subject has been issued to Birmingham manufacturers by the chief constable of that city; and will he state what steps are being taken, under the Peace Preservation Act of 1881, to prevent such arms and ammunition from falling into the hands of unauthorised persons.
    THE CHIEF SECRETARY FOR IRELAND (Mr. WYNDHAM,: Small arms and ammunition are consigned from Birmingham in the ordinary course of trade. The Act of 1881 and Orders in Council issued thereunder, prescribe the conditions upon which arms and ammunition shall be admitted into Ireland. A few firms in Birmingham had omitted, from ignorance of the law, to comply with these conditions, and the Circular in question was issued to direct their attention to these statutory requirements. The police are aware of the names and addresses of persons in Ireland to whom arms are consigned by manufacturers and dealers, and all necessary precautions are taken to ensure that only authorised persons shall keep arms. The provisions of the Act of 1881 and of the regulations issued thereunder are clear and stringent, and there is no reason whatever to suppose that they are ineffectual for the purposes for which they were designed.
    MR. TULLY: Is it not a fact that the great bulk of these arms have been sent to Belfast for the Orange rioters?
    MR. SPEAKER: Order, order‡ That is not a proper Question to put.

    Irish Congested Districts Board— Purchases of Land.
    MR. TULLY: I beg to ask the Chief Secretary to the Lord Lieutenant of Ireland whether he can state how many acres of land have been purchased by the Congested Districts Board from January, 1900, to the present date; how many acres have been divided amongst tenant purchasers, and how many acres remain undivided in the hands of the Board.
    MR. WYNDHAM: I hope to have this information by Thursday next, when I will communicate it to the hon. Member.

    Mohill Rural District Finance.
    MR. TULLY: I beg to ask the Chief Secretary to the Lord Lieutenant of Ireland whether the attention of the Local Government Board has been called to the statement of Mr. Thomas Mahon, at the last quarterly meeting of the Mahon, District Council, that an unexpended balance of £3,000 to the credit of the Mohill Rural District has been appropriate‡ I by the county at large; anil whether, in view of the unanimous resolution of the District Council on this subject, the Local Government Board will direct a sworn inquiry into the matter.
    MR. WYNDHAM: The statement in question has been referred by the Board to the auditor of the county accounts with a view to his investigating the matter, and, if necessary, taking such steps as will safeguard the interests of the Rural Distiict Council.
    MR. TULLY: Why not have a sworn inquiry at which evidence can be taken?
    MR. WYNDHAM: I am investigating the matter.

    Cork Exhibition—The Chief Secretary's Visit.
    MR. TULLY: I beg to ask the Chief Secretary to the Lord Lieutenant of Ireland, whether any disturbance took place in the City of Cork on the occasion of
    1402
    his visit to the Exhibition; and whether, in view of the present state of that city and the recommendation of the Lord Mayor, he is prepared to name the date when the proclamation of Cork under the Crimes Act will be withdrawn.
    MR. WYNDHAM: The reply to this Question is in the negative.
    MR. TULLY: I think there must be some misapprehension. Was not Mr. William O'Brien there at the head of 10,000 men?
    MR. SPEAKER: Order, order‡ The Question has been answered, and the hon. Member must not proceed to argue.
    MR. TULLY: But we were told that Mr. O'Brien was there at the head of 10,000 men.

    Westport Rural District Council and the Land Question.
    MR. TULLY: I beg to ask the Chief Secretary to the Lord Lieutenant of Ireland whether he has received from the Westport Rural District Council a report setting forth a solution of the Land Question on the lines of compulsory purchase, and an equitable division of the waste grazing lands, and whether he can state if he is prepared to give effect to the recommendations in this report.
    MR. WYNDHAM: I have nothing to add to my repeated repudiations of compulsory purchase and impracticable projects for taking away the property of large farmers.
    MR. TULLY: Will the right hon. Gentleman undertake to introduce into his Land Bill a Clause dealing with waste grazing lands?
    [No answer was returned.]

    Suir Bridge Tolls.
    MR. TULLY: I beg to ask the Chief Secretary to the Lord Lieutenant of Ireland whether his attention has been directed to the loss occasioned to the city of Waterford by the system of charging tolls on passengers and goods crossing the bridge over the Suir; and whether he intends to promote legislation in this session to remedy this state of matters.
    MR. WYNDHAM: The matter is engaging attention. On the representation of the Corporation of Waterford, inquiry has been directed under 4 and 5 Will. IV., c. 61.
    MR. TULLY: Will the Government grant any relief in this case?
    MR. WYNDHAM: I do not imagine that that question arises at all. It is a question of two counties combining to have a bridge across the river.

    Crime in Cavan and Leitrim.
    MR. TULLY: I beg to ask the Chief Secretary to the Lord Lieutenant of Ireland whether, in view of the presentation of white gloves to the County Court Judge in Cavan and Leitrim, he is prepared to withdraw the Crimes Act proclamations in these counties.
    MR. WYNDHAM: No, Sir.

    Irish Poor Law Audits.
    MR. TULLY: I beg to ask the Chief Secretary to the Lord Lieutenant of Ireland whether he is aware that the Poor Law Association of Ireland have sent resolutions to the Local Government Board asking to have inspectors and auditors appointed in future from members of the Poor Law Service; and whether the request contained in these resolutions has been complied with.
    MR. WYNDHAM: Such resolutions have been passed. In filling vacancies on its staff, the Board proceeds on the principle of selecting the persons whom it considers best qualified for these positions.
    MR. TULLY: Is the Poor Law Service to be the only service in which promotions are not given to the officials?
    [No answer was returned.]

    Local Government (Ireland) Bill.
    MR. TULLY: I beg to ask the Chief Secretary to the Lord Lieutenant of Ireland whether he can state if he will proceed forthwith with the Local Government (Ireland) Bill, having regard to the wishes of Irish ratepayers on the subject.
    MR. WYNDHAM: I must refer the hon. Member to a recent reply of the Prime Minister.†
    MR. TULLY: The hon. Gentleman can get the Bill through now in ten minutes. It means a saving of £25,000 a year to the taxpayers.

    Unlawful Assemblies in Belfast.
    MR. TULLY: I beg to ask the Chief Secretary to the Lord Lieutenant of Ireland whether he can state how many prosecutions for unlawful assembly have taken place during the last two years under The Criminal Law and Procedure (Ireland) Act, 1887, in the city of Belfast.
    MR. WYNDHAM: It has not been found necessary to institute proceedings under this provision of the Act in Belfast. Persons who break the law I there are made amenable under the ordinary law, and receive exemplary punishment.
    MR. TULLY: Are not the assemblies in Belfast, every Sunday, just as un-lawful as the one for which I was sent to gaol?
    [No answer was returned.]

    Martello Tower at Brighton Vale
    MR. TULLY: I beg to ask the I Secretary of State for War whether he can state how much was realised by the sale of the martello tower at Brighton Vale, in the Blackrock district; and how much of the proceeds has been refunded to the Urban Council.
    LORD STANLEY: The reply to the first part of the Question is £300; the reply to the second part is, None.
    MR. TULLY: Is the noble Lord prepared to sell as a job lot the rest of the fortifications?

    Brussels Sugar Convention.
    MR. LOUGH: I beg to ask the First Lord of the Treasury whether, as Article XII. of the Brussels Convention provides that the fulfillment
    † See page 828.

    1405
    of the convention is subordinated to the completion of the formalities and requirements established by the constitutional laws of each of the contracting parties, and Article IV. imposes the countervailing duties, and that provision is made for the convention not being completed by one of the contracting parties before February, 1903, he will consider the desirability of introducing any Bill that may be necessary in connection with this matter before the convention is ratified.
    THE PRIME MINISTER AND FIRST LORD OF THE TREASURY (Mr. A. J. BALFOUR,: As the hon. Gentleman is no doubt aware, the sanction of Parliament is not required for the ratification of this Treaty. I should have preferred to bring in legislation to give effect to it in the course of the present session, but that is quite out of the question, and, therefore, legislation must be deferred to a more convenient season.
    MR. BRYCE: Am I right in understanding that the right hon. Gentleman does not intend either to introduce any legislation or to submit any resolution which would give the House an opportunity of expressing its opinion on this matter?
    MR. A. J. BALFOUR: I think I have clearly said that we do propose to introduce a resolution.
    MR. GIBSON BOWLES: Will it be a financial resolution?
    MR. A. J. BALFOUR: It will not be a financial resolution in the sense of being required to be brought in in Committee of the House.

BUSINESS OF THE HOUSE.
MR. BRYCE: I should like to ask for information as to the business to be taken this week, and this day week after the Indian Budget. I am inclined to assume that the Indian Budget will occupy the whole of the evening as well as the morning sitting, but some uncertainty seems to exist on the subject.
MR. A. J. BALFOUR: I rather agree with the anticipation of the right hon. Gentleman that the Indian Budget will occupy the morning sitting and possibly a good part, at all events, of the evening sitting. However that may be, I shall put down either the Expiring Laws Continuance Bill or the Militia and Yeomanry Bill as the second Order. In other words, I should not propose to take the Education Bill on Monday. During this week, I propose, as at present advised—it may be subject to alterations—to take the Education Bill every afternoon. Some of the evening sittings, I anticipate, will be occupied with business connected with the Transvaal Vote.
MR. BRYCE: Which will be the first evening given to that subject?
MR. A. J. BALFOUR: I understand that my right hon. friend the Chancellor of the Exchequer, who has charge of this Vote, proposes to move tomorrow that the Vote be taken on Wednesday.
SIR CHARLES DILKE: It will be a Motion, I presume, "that Mr. Speaker leave the Chair."
MR. LOUGH: Will Papers be distributed before the Transvaal Vote is taken?
MR. RITCHIE: Tomorrow it is proposed to move that on the following day the House resolve itself into Committee: and the Paper itself will be distributed tomorrow.
SIR CHARLES DILKE: Will the Motion be made at two o'clock?
MR. RITCHIE: No, at nine o'clock.
MR. GIBSON BOWLES: When that Motion is made, I shall oppose it. May I ask whether there is to be any demand for money on the part of the Crown, through the medium of a Message or Speech? That is invariably the first step in granting Supply in this House.
MR. RITCHIE: I think my hon. friend had better wait till tomorrow.
MR. BARTLEY: I suppose the Local Authorities (Bills, in Parliament) Bill will not be taken this week. It is a very contentious measure.
MR. A. J. BALFOUR: NO, Sir.
MR. DALZIEL: Does the right hon. Gentleman propose to take it this session?
MR. A. J. BALFOUR: I am afraid we are not yet near the end of the session.
MR. TULLY: When will the right hon. Gentleman take the Irish Local Government Bill? It means a relief of £25,000 a year to the rates.
MR. A. J. BALFOUR: I cannot say at present.
MR. TULLY: Will you take it tonight, seeing that you can get it through in ten minutes?
MR. A. J. BALFOUR: No, Sir, I will not.

EAST INDIA REVENUE ACCOUNTS.
Ordered, That the several Accounts and Papers which have been presented to the House in this Session of Parliament relating to the Revenues of India be referred to the consideration of a Committee of the whole House.—(Secretary Lord George Hamilton.)
Resolved, That this House will, upon Monday next, resolve itself into the said Committee.—(Secretary Lord George Hamilton.)

OSBORNE ESTATE BILL.
MR. CHANCELLOR OF THE EXCHEQUER, by His Majesty's Command, informed the House that His Majesty placed his interests in the Osborne Estate at the disposal of Parliament.
Bill, "to make provision with respect to the disposition and management of His Majesty's Osborne Estate, in the Isle of Wight," presented by Mr. Chancellor of the Exchequer, under Standing Order No. 31; to be read a second time upon Monday next, and to be printed. [Bill 301.]

EDUCATION (ENGLAND AND WALES) BILL.
Considered in Committee.
(In the Committee.)
[Mr. J. W. LOWTHER (Cumberland, Penrith) in the Chair.]
Clause 9:—
MR. M'KENNA(2.40.) MR. M'KENNA (Monmouth shire, N.) moved that the consideration of the Clause should be postponed. He said his reason for doing so was very simple. The Clause deals with the provision of new schools. As the Bill originally stood, finance was dealt with in a sub-Section of Clause 8; but it had now beer postponed. Before they considered the provision of new schools they ought tc: know what financial arrangements the Government proposed to make to assist the local authority in providing the schools, and consequently Clause 9, he thought, ought to be postponed until the question of financial arrangements had ‡ been considered. Moreover, the Committee had not yet on the Paper the alterations in Clause 9, which, it was obvious from the Prime Minister's reference at Manchester to the power which Nonconformists would have of building schools out of public funds, would be required. He was sorry to have again to quote that speech, but the right hon. Gentleman, in that part of it dealing with the large number of advantages which Nonconformists were going to derive from the Bill, asked if they (the Nonconformists) would not hail with acclamation a Bill which enabled them, for the first time in ‡ our history, to build, out of public funds, schools according to their own views or even their own prejudices. But according to the Bill, as it stood, the cost of the buildings was to be provided by the Nonconformist bodies themselves. Did the First Lord intend to adhere to the policy which he thus set out at Manchester? It was quite clear that the Clause, as it stood, did not carry out that policy, and that something very different must be substituted for it. Hence he suggested the postponement of the consideration of the Clause, to enable the Government to produce their Amendments. He was aware that the right hon. Gentleman had put down an Amendment to Clause

1409
13 which would enable the local authority to find a certain portion of the funds required for building new voluntary schools, but it was absurd to say that a denomination should have the power to set up a denominational school, until the financial intentions of the Government were fully before them.
Motion made and Question proposed, "That Clause 9 be postponed."—(Mr. M'Kenna.)
THE PRIME MINISTER AND FIRST LORD OF THE TREASURY (Mr. A. J. BALFOUR,said he could not, of course, accept the proposal of the hon. Gentleman. With regard to the financial point of view, the policy of this Clause was quite irrespective of any decision that might be come to with regard to the financial Clause, which they would have to discussiater. With regard to the second point, as to the view he expressed at Manchester, he did not know whether it was his fault, but lie had heard statements on that matter with which he could not agree. He had not seen that portion of the report which the hon. Member had quoted, but what he intended to express was quite clear. Like the case of a town like Preston, where the whole place was covered by voluntary schools; it was impossible to lay down a general rule and say that there should be no rate-provided schools at all. If the Nonconformists objected, for instance, to the teaching in the denominational schools, they would be wholly without a remedy, and that remedy was proposed by this Bill. He hoped the hon. Member would not press the Motion.
MR. LLOYD-GEORGEthought there was a good deal to be said in favour of the postponement of the Clause. The Government proposed to give £900,000 yearly towards educational purposes in addition to the grants already made, and it was exceedingly important before Parliament parted with that money they should ensure that it should be used for the reduction of rates and to secure increased efficiency. They were now coming to, he would not say the most important Clause of the Bill, but certainly the most obnoxious part of it. If the Government wanted to pass a
1410
good Bill surely they would put the interests of education generally throughout the country before those of sects. Could they not allocate a portion of this sum for the purpose of getting rid of the miserable, squalid little schools which now covered the country districts? He would remind the Committee that when the whisky money was given, the first thing that was done in the Welsh counties, under the wise guidance of Mr. Acland, was to pool the money for the purpose of creating a building fund. It was now within the power of the Government to do more for education in certain poor districts than had been done for thirty years. Would the Government now agree to allocate part of the money to be voted under the Bill for the purposes of Clause 9, and see that it was devoted to building purposes. What was the difficulty now in rural districts? It was not that the people failed to realise that the present state of the schools was detrimental to the interests of education, but it was the fact that any attempt to provide new buildings crushed the ratepayers oven more than the maintenance rate. The cost of building was prohibitive. Let the Prime Minister face this problem now, and introduce into the Clause a provision allocating a portion of the, £900,000 for building purposes. Let him agree to set aside £200,000 or £300,000 with the object of building new schools in rural districts and in the poorer districts of large towns. That would do far more for the cause of education than the present Clause, which was calculated to embitter and extend the area of sectarian strife. As he had said, the whisky money in the Welsh counties enabled the creation of a building fund out of which substantial grants were made to assist in the building of new schools. He hoped the Prime Minister would not treat this as a dilatory Motion, but look on it as one which was calculated to convert a pernicious into a fairly good working Clause.
MR. BRYNMOR JONES, as another reason for postponing the consideration of the Clause, pointed out that they had not yet determined the constitution of the Education Committee. That was to be done by Clause 12, which was of a most extraordinary

1411
character, because the local education authority, about which they heard so much in the debates on Clause 8, was only to act in certain cases of its own motion. According to Clause 9, as he construed it, the local education authority would only be able to act through the local committee, and the Clause evidently contemplated disputes, and even litigation, between the local education authority and persons who
wished a new school to be provided. Surely, then, they ought to determine the constitution of the Education Committee before deciding how the new schools were to be provided.
(2.55.) Question put.
The Committee divided:—Ayes, 64; Noes, 115. (Division List, No. 455.)

AYES.

Allan, Sir William (Gateshead

Gurdon, Sir W. Brampton

Robertson, Edmund (Dundee

Allen, Charles P. (Glouc., Stroud

Hayne, Rt. Him. Charles Seale-

Robson, William Snowdon

Asquith, Rt. Hn. Herbert Henry

Hemphill, Rt. Hon. Charles H.

Shackleton, David James

Atherley-Jones, L.

Holland, Sir William Henry

Shaw, Thomas (Hawick B.

Bell, Richard

Horniman, Frederick John

Shipman, Dr. John G.

Brand, Hon. Arthur G.

Humphreys-Owen, Arthur C.

Sinclair, John (Forfarshire)

Brunner, Sir John Tomlinson

Jacoby, James Alfred

Sloan, Thomas Henry

Bryce, Rt. Hon. James

Jones, David Brynmor(Sw'nsea

Spencer, Rt Hn. C. R (Northants

Burt, Thomas

Kearley, Hudson E.

Strachey, Sir Edward

Buxton, Sydney Charles

Kinloch, Sir John GeorgeSmyth

Thomas, Abel (Carmarthen, E.

Caine, William Sproston

Labouchere, Henry

Thomas, Sir A. (Glamorgan, E.

Caldwell, James

Lambert, George

Thomas, David Alfred (Merthyr

Cameron, Robert

Leese, Sir Joseph F. (Accrington

Wallace, Robert

Causton, Richard Knight

Leng, Sir John

Wason, Eugene

Channing, Francis Allston

Lewis, John Herbert

Weir, James Galloway

Dalziel, James Henry

Lloyd-George, David

White, Luke (York, E. R.)

Davies, Alfred (Carmarthen)

Lough, Thomas

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

Davies, M. Vaughan-(Cardigan

M'Crae, George

Woodhouse, Sir J. T (Huddersf'd

Dilke, Rt. Hon. Sir Charles

Morgan, J. Lloyd (Carmarthen

Farquharson, Dr. Robert

Nussey, Thomas Willans

Fenwick, Charles

Price, Robert John

TELLERS FOR THE AYES.—

Foster, Sir Walter (Derby Co.

Rea, Russell

Mr. M'Kenna and Mr. Trevelyan.

Grey, Rt. Hon. Sir E. (Berwick

Roberts, John H. (Denbighs.)

NOES.

Agg-Gardner, James Tynte

Colomb, Sir John Charles Ready

Heaton, John Henniker

Agnew, Sir Andrew Noel

Cox, Irwin Edward Bain bridge

Hobhouse, Henry (Somerset. E.)

Anson, Sir William Reynell

Cranborne, Viscount

Hope, J. F. (Sheffield, Brightside

Archdale, Edward Mervyn

Cross, Alexander (Glasgow)

Horner, Frederick William

Arkwright, John Stanhope

Crossley, Sir Savile

Kenyon, Hon. Geo. T. (Denbigh

Arnold-Forster, Hugh O.

Denny, Colonel

Lee, Arthur H (Hants., Fareham

Atkinson, Rt. Hon. John

Douglas, Rt. Hon. A. Akers-

Legge, Col. Hon. Heneage

Bain, Col. James Robert

Durning-Lawrance, Sir Edwin

Loder, Gerald Walter Erskine

Baldwin, Alfred

Elliot, Hon. A. Ralph Douglas

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

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

Fellowes, Hon. Ailwyn Edward

Loyd, Archie Kirkman

Balfour, Rt Hn Gerald W. (Leeds

Finlay, Sir Robert Bannatyne

Lucas, Reginald J. (Portsmouth

Bartley, George C. T.

Fisher, William Hayes

Macdona, John Cumming

Bathurst, Hon. Allen Benjamin

Fitzroy, Hon. Edward Algernon

Malcolm, Ian

Bignold, Arthur

Flannery, Sir Fortescue

Maple, Sir John Blundell

Blundell, Colonel Henry

Flower, Ernest

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

Bolnois, Edmund

Forster, Henry William

Middlemore, John Throgmort'n

Bowles, T. Gibson (King's Lynn

Gardner, Ernest

Montagu, G. (Huntingdon)

Brookfield, Colonel Montagu

Garfit, William

Mount, William Arthur

Campbell, Rt. Hn. J. A (Glasgow

Gorst, Rt. Hon. Sir John Eldon

Murray, Rt Hn A. Graham (Bute

Carew, James Laurence

Goschen, Hon. George Joachim

Orr-Ewing, Charles Lindsay

Carson, Rt. Hon. Sir Edw. H.

Goulding, Edward Alfred

Parker Sir Gilbert

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

Gray, Ernest (West Ham)

Percy, Earl

Cavendish, V. C. W (Derbyshire

Greville, Hon. Ronald

Plummer, Walter R.

Cayzer, Sir Charles William

Hain, Edward

Powell, Sir Francis Sharp

Cecil, Evelyn (Aston Manor)

Halsey, Rt. Hon. Thomas F.

Pretyman, Ernest George

Chamberlain, Rt. Hon. J. (Birm.

Hamilton, Rt Hn Lord G (Midd'x

Pryce-Jones, Lt.-Col. Edward

Chapman, Edward

Hanbury, Rt. Hon. Robert Wm.

Purvis, Robert

Clive, Captain Percy A.

Hare, Thomas Leigh

Rattigan, Sir William Henry

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

Harris, Frederick Leverton

Ridley, Hn. M. W. (Staly bridge)

Cohen, Benjamin Louis

Haslett, Sir James Horner

Ritchie, Rt. Hon. Chas. Thomson

Roberts, Samuel (Sheffield)

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

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

Rothschild, Hon. Lionel Walter

Stanley, Edward Jas. (Somerset

Welby, Sir Charles G. E. (Notts.

Royds, Clement Molyneux

Stanley, Lord (Lancs.)

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

Rutherford John

Thorburn, Sir Walter

Worsley-Taylor, Henry Wilson

Samuel, Harry S. (Limehouse)

Tomlinson, Sir Wm. Edw. M.

Wyndham, Rt. Hon. George

Seely, Charles Hilton (Lincoln)

Valentia, Viscount

Seton-Karr, Henry

Vincent, Sir Edgar (Exeter)

Sharpe, William Edward T.

Walker, Col. William Hall

TELLERS FOR THE NOES. —

Simeon, Sir Barrington

Walrond, Rt. Hn Sir William H.

Sir Alexander Acland-

Smith, James Parker (Lanarks.

Warde, Colonel C. E

Hood and Mr. Anstruther.

THE CHAIRMAN: The first Amendment, standing in the name of the hon. Member for West Carmarthen, seems to me to be already provided for, because the Committee has handed over to the now local authority the powers of the School Boards under Section 18 of the Act of 1870, one of which is to provide such school accommodation as is necessary. The only distinction is that between the words "adequate" and "necessary." The next Amendment standing in the name of the hon. Member for the Flint Boroughs is not necessary. The Amendment in the name of the hon. Member for North Camberwell seems to me to raise the same point as the Amendment of the hon. Member for West Carmarthen.
DR. MACNAMARAsaid that the Amendment he desired to move simply set out the preparatory statement in the Act of 1870, before the scheme was set forth. He thought it was highly desirable that that statement should be inserted before they proceeded to the discussion of the Clause. The greater part of Section 18 of the Act of 1870 was repealed, and what remained referred only to the provision of schools by School Boards; whereas the Bill contemplated the provision of schools by the local education authority "or any other persons." He therefore thought it desirable that the preparatory statement should be inserted.
THE CHAIRMAN: I think that is provided for by the third schedule of the Bill, which states—
"(5) The following provision shall have effect in lieu of Section 5 of the Elementary Education Act, 1891."
DR. MACNAMAEAsaid it was now proposed to repeal that part of the Act of 1870 which made it incumbent on the Local authority to carry out its powers.
THE CHAIRMAN: The hon. Member will see that the way in which it is proposed will re-enact Section 5; and he can move to alter that when we get to the schedule. The Amendment in the name of the hon. Member for the Saffron Walden Division stands on the same ground; and the Amendment of the hon. Member for Rugby seems to me to be a negation of the Clause, besides being contrary to what the Committee has already passed in Clause 8.
MR. LOUGHsaid he wished to move an Amendment to omit "where," the first word in the Clause, in order to insert "It shall be the duty of."
THE CHAIRMAN: That would not read.
MR. LOUGHsaid he proposed to move subsequent Amendments which would make it quite in order. He would move to omit "or any other persons," and also all the words after "provide," and to insert a "sufficient amount of public school accommodation."
THE CHAIRMAN: That is provided for in the third schedule. It is perfectly clear.
MR. TREVELYANsaid that the governing words in the schedule were "without payment of fees," which did not refer to school accommodation at all.
THE CHAIRMAN: If the hon. Member does not like these words, he can propose to strike them out when the schedule is reached.
DR. MACNAMARAsaid the position was that they desired that new school accommodation should be provided by the local authority, whereas the scheme in the Bill proposed it should be provided

1415
by the local authority, "or any other persons." Surely, therefore, the Amendment of his hon friend to insert "It shall be the duty of," was in order.
THE CHAIRMAN: Those words are already in the Bill. By Clause 6, the Committee has incorporated Section 18 of the Act of 1870, which says that a School Board shall provide such school accommodation as is necessary.
MR. M'KENNA: In their opinion
THE CHAIRMAN: Yes, in their opinion. The words are as clear as possible. If the hon. Member objects to the words "or any other persons," he can move to strike them out when they are reached.
MR. LOUGHsaid he attached importance to his Amendment.
THE CHAIRMAN: I attach importance to my ruling. The Amendment of the hon. Member for West Denbighshire is in order.
MR. HERBERT ROBERTS MR. HERBERT ROBERTS (Denbighshire, W.) moved to omit the words "the local education authority or any other," and to insert "any." The object of the Amendment would be perfectly clear. He was glad it had been laid down from the Chair that Clause 6 of the Bill, as amended, made it perfectly clear that the local education authority would be responsible for the provision of adequate public elementary school accommodation. The Amendment did not in any way affect any other persons taking the initiative; that would be raised by a later Amendment, but he wished to make it clear at the outset that his Amendment, taking it for granted that the local education authority would be responsible for providing adequate school accommodation, and that any other persons had the right of initiating new school accommodation, laid it down that the local education authority should be withdrawn from rivalry and competition, and be made the sole arbitrator in the case of any conflict or dispute. He did not think his Amendment was in any way out of harmony with the spirit and the tenour of the Bill, so far as it had
1416
proceeded. What was the present position? The denominational schools were to remain, for the present at all events, in our educational system; and a bargain had been arrived at by which the supporters of the denominational schools received certain advantages, certain local Government grants being given to the counties. But when they came to the question of providing new school accommodation, he thought a new issue was raised; and he did not think that it was out of harmony with the sprit of the Bill that, in that matter, the local education authority should be the supreme judge and sole arbitrator in all questions of dispute. So far as they had gone, it had been laid down that the local education authority was to have complete control of secular education; that it was to prescribe a standard of excellence in the schools; and that it was to be responsible for raising and spending the education rate. He put it to the Committee, was it unnatural, given that condition of things, that the local education authority should be the authority to decide in a case of dispute with regard to the necessity of providing further school accommodation? He proposed the Amendment on one or two main grounds. First of all, if it were accepted he thought it would avoid a great deal of friction which might arise under this Bill between the education authority on the one hand and the managers of schools and other persons who might desire to build schools on the other. Under the operation of Clause 8 as at present drafted they would have the spectacle of competition between the local education authority and private persons; there might be the ten ratepayers brought in, and finally the appeal to the High Court. Must that not be a somewhat humiliating position for any local authority constituted such as those under the Bill? The real crux of the question was, was the local education authority in these matters to be trusted or not? The hon. and learned Attorney General had stated that the desire of the Government was to trust the local education authority. The point therefore was whether the local education authorities were to be only a kind of magnified School Board, or were they to be bodies which, by reason of their responsibility, would draw to their service the most experienced elements of public life

1417
in this country. His object all along had been to strengthen the hands and heighten the responsibility of these local education authorities, and that was the object which underlay all the Amendments he had moved. In his opinion the success of the Bill when passed would largely depend upon the success that would be attained in bringing good men to the service of the local education authorities. If these authorities were to be the representation of the best judgment, the best experience of the life of the counties, then they must be given such powers as would make it impossible for them to be led into competition with bands of private individuals who desired to build schools. He moved the Amendment with the sole object of making it clear, whatever the form of the Clause might eventually be, that it would not be possible for such authorities as this to be brought into rivalry with private individuals. He begged to move.
Amendment proposed—
"In page 3, line 36, to leave out the words, 'the local education authority or any other,' and insert the word 'any.'"— (Mr. Herbert Roberts.)
Question proposed, "That the words 'the local education authority' stand part of the Clause."
THE ATTORNEY GENERAL (Sir ROBERT FINLAY,said he cordially agreed with the desire the hon. Member had expressed that the services of the best men should be available for these local education authorities, but he did not think there was anything in the Clause as it stood which would conflict with the attainment of that object. The Clause dealt with the provision of new schools, and it was quite obvious that it must depend on the circumstances of the locality what class of schools should be provided. It might be that in some districts what was now called a board school would be built, and in others what was now termed a voluntary school. What the hon. Gentleman proposed was to do away with all check in the provision of new board schools, and leave it
simply at the option of the local authority to provide new board schools, whatever the effect might be upon the voluntary schools of the district. He could not agree, and hoped the Committee would not agree, with the object set before it. As a matter of fact, this Amendment would not carry out the object of the hon. Member, because the "persons" would include the local authority. So that even if the Amendment were passed it would be futile.
DR. MACNAMARA, upon a point of order, asked whether, if this Amendment were disposed of, it would invalidate an Amendment on the next page to strike out "All other persons."
THE CHAIRMAN: I do not think it would strike out that Amendment.
MR. HERBERT LEWISsaid he understood the object of the Amendment was to prevent friction between the local education authority and the managers. His hon. friend pleaded that if the local authority, the ruling authority of the district, thought fit to make provision, it should not be affected by the recommendations that were laid down in Clause 9. He thought the Government might meet the Committee to that extent, because so far as existing voluntary schools were concerned, they were placed in a stronger and more unassailable position than they were be-fore. They pleaded for a little more liberty for the extension of the public system of elementary schools. It was not a Nonconformist system. Many of the teachers of the School Boards were Churchmen. They pleaded for a system like that in vogue in Scotland, and he hoped the Government would consider the advisability of meeting them a little in that way, and of giving more freedom to the local education authorities in the provision of new public elementary schools.
(3.28.) Question proposed.
Committee divided:—Ayes, 145 Noes, 87. (Division List, No 456.)

AYES.

Agg-Gardner, James Tynte

Archdale, Edward Mervyn

Atkinson, Rt. Hon. John

Agnew, Sir Andrew Noel

Arkwright, John Stanhope

Bailey, James (Walworth)

Anson, Sir William Reynell

Arnold-Forster, Hugh O

Bain, Colonel James Robert

Baldwin, Alfred

Fletcher, Rt. Hon. Sir Henry

Orr-Ewing, Charles Lindsay

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

Flower, Ernest

Parker, Sir Gilbert

Balfour, Rt Hn Gerald W. (Leeds

Forster, Henry William

Percy, Earl

Bartley, George C. T.

Galloway, William Johnson

Plummer, Walter R.

Bathurst, Hon. Allen Benjamin

Gardner, Ernest

Powell, Sir Francis Sharp

Bignold, Arthur

Garfit, William

Pretyman, Ernest George

Bill, Charles

Gore, Hn G. R. C. Ormsby-(Salop

Pryce-Jones, Lt.-Col. Edward

Blundell, Colonel Henry

Gore, Hon. S. F. Ormsby-(Linc.)

Purvis Robert

Boulnois, Edmund

Gorst, Rt. Hon. Sir John Eldon

Rankin, Sir James

Bowles, Capt. H. F. (Middlesex)

Goschen, Hon. George Joachim

Rasch, Major Frederic Carne

Brookfield, Colonel Montagu

Goulding, Edward Alfred

Rattigan, Sir William Henry

Brymer, William Ernest

Gray, Ernest (West Ham)

Ridley, Hn. M. W. (Stalybridge

Bull, William James

Greville, Hon. Ronald

Ritchie, Rt. Hn. Chas. Thomson

Burdett-Coutts, W.

Hain, Edward

Roberts, Samuel (Sheffield)

Campbell, Rt Hn J. A. (Glasgow

Halsey, Rt. Hon. Thomas F.

Rothschild, Hon. Lionel Walter

Carew, James Laurence

Hamiiton, Rt Hn Lord G (Midd'x

Royds, Clement Molyneux

Carson, Rt. Hon. Sir Edw. H.

Hanbury, Rt. Hon. Robert Wm

Rutherford, John

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

Hare, Thomas Leigh

Samuel, Harry S. (Limehouse

Cavendish, V. C. W. (Derbyshire

Harris, Frederick Leverton

Seely, Charles Hilton (Lincoln)

Cayzer, Sir Charles William

Heaton, John Henniker

Sharpe, William Edward T.

Cecil, Evelyn (Aston Manor)

Helder, Augustus

Simeon, Sir Barrington

Cecil, Lord Hugh (Greenwich)

Hobhouse, Henry (Somerset, E.

Smith, James Parker (Lanarks.

Chamberlain, Rt. Hon. J. (Birm.

Hogg, Lindsay

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

Chapman, Edward

Hope, J. F. (Sheffield, Brightside

Spencer, Sir E. (W. Bromwich)

Clive, Captain Percy A.

Hozier, Hon. James Henry Cecil

Stanley, Edward Jas. (Somerset

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

Hudson, George Bickersteth

Stanley, Lord (Lancs.)

Cohen, Benjamin Louis

Johnstone, Heywood

Sturt, Hon. Humphry Napier

Colomb, Sir John Charles Ready

Kemp, George

Talbot, Lord E. (Chichester).

Cox, Irwin Edward Bainbridge

Kenyon, Hon. Geo. T. (Denbigh

Thorburn, Sir Walter

Cranborne, Viscount

Lee, Arthur H. (Hants, Fareham

Tomlinson, Sir Wm. Edw. M.

Cross, Alexander (Glasgow)

Legge, Col. Hon. Heneage

Valentia, Viscount

Crossley, Sir Savile

Loder, Gerald Walter Erskine

Vincent, Sir Edgar (Exeter)

Denny, Colonel

Long, Col. Charles W. (Evesham

Walker, Col. William Hall

Dickson-Poynder, Sir John P.

Long, Rt Hn. Walter (Bristol, S.

Walrond, Rt Hn. Sir William H.

Dimsdale, Sir Joseph Cockfield

Loyd, Archie Kirkman

Warde, Colonel C. E.

Dorington, Rt. Hon. Sir John E.

Lucas, Reginald J. (Portsmouth

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

Douglas, Rt. Hon. A. Akers-

Macdona, John Cumming

Welby, Sir Charles G. E. (Notts.

Durning-Lawrence, Sir Edwin

M'Arthur, Charles (Liverpool)

Wharton, Rt Hon. John Lloyd

Dyke, Rt. Hon. Sir William Hart

M'Iver, Sir Lewis (Edinburgh W

Williams, Rt HnJ Powell-(Birm

Elliot, Hon. A. Ralph Douglas

Malcolm, Ian

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

Fardell, Sir T. George

Maple, Sir John Blundell

Worsley-Taylor, Henry Wilson

Fellowes, Hon. Ailwyn Edward

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

Wyndham, Rt. Hon. George

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

Morgan, D. J. (Walthamstow)

Finlay, Sir Robert Bannatyne

Morton, Arthur H. Aylmer

Fisher, William Hayes

Mount, William Arthur

TELLERS FOR THE AYES.—

FitzGerald, Sir Robts. Penrose-

Murray, Rt Hn A. Graham (Bute

Sir Alexander Acland-Hood and Mr. Anstruther.

Fitzroy, Hon. Edwd. Algernon

Myers, William Henry

NOES.

Allan, Sir William (Gateshead)

Fenwick, Charles

M'Crae, George

Allen, Chas. P. (Glouc., Stroud

Fitzmaurice, Lord Edmond

M'Kenna, Reginald

Ashton, Thomas Gair

Foster, Sir Walter (Derby Co.)

Mansfield, Horace Rendall

Asquith, Rt. Hn. HerbertHenry

Fuller, J. M. F.

Mappin, Sir Frederick Thorpe

Atherley-Jones, L.

Gladstone, Rt. Hn. Herbert John

Mellor, Rt. Hon. John William

Beaumont, Wentworth C. B.

Grey, Rt. Hon. Sir E. (Berwick)

Middlernore, John Throgmort'n

Bell, Richard

Gurdon, Sir W. Brampton

Morgan, J. Lloyd (Carmarthen)

Brand, Hon. Arthur G.

Hayne, Rt. Hon. Charles Seale-

Morley, Rt. Hn. John (Montrose

Brunner, Sir John Tomlinson

Hayter, Rt. Hon. Sir Arthur D.

Newnes, Sir George

Bryce, Rt. Hon. James

Hemphill, Rt. Hon. Charles H.

Nussey, Thomas Willans

Burt, Thomas

Holland, Sir William Henry

Palmer, Sir Charles M. (Durham

Buxton, Sydney Charles

Horniman, Frederick John

Price, Robert John

Caine, William Sproston

Humphreys-Owen, Arthur C.

Priestley, Arthur

Caldwell, James

Jacoby, James Alfred

Rea, Russell

Cameron, Robert

Jones, David Brynmor (Swansea

Robertson, Edmund (Dundee)

Campbell-Bannerman, Sir H.

Kearley, Hudson E.

Robson, William Snowdon

Causton, Richard Knight

Kinloch, Sir John George Smyth

Shackleton, David James

Channing, Francis Allston

Lambert, George

Shaw, Thomas (Hawick B.)

Dalziel, James Henry

Leese, Sir Joseph F. (Accrington

Shipman, Dr. John G.

Davies, Alfred, (Carmarthen)

Leng, Sir John

Sinclair, John (Forfarshire)

Davies, M. Vaughan-(Cardigan

Lewis, John Herbert

Sloan, Thomas Henry

Dilke, Rt. Hon. Sir Charles

Lloyd-George, David

Soames, Arthur Wellesley

Dunn, Sir William

Lough, Thomas

Spencer, Rt Hn. C. R. (Northants

Evans, Sir Francis H (Maidstone

Macnamara, Dr. Thomas J.

Strachey, Sir Edward

Farquharson, Dr. Robert

M'Arthur, William (Cornwall)

Thomas, Abel (Carmarthen, E.)

1420

1421

Thomas, Sir A. (Glamorgan, E.)

Weir, James Galloway

Thomas, David Alfred (Merthyr

White, Luke (York, E. R.)

TELLERS FOR THE NOES—

Trevelyan, Charles Philips

Whitley, J. H. (Halifax

Mr. Herbert Roberts and

Wallace, Robert

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

Mr. Edwards.

Warner, Thomas Courtenay T.

Woodhouse, Sir J T. (Hudd'rsf'd

Wason, Eugene

Yoxall, Henry James

MR. TREVELYAN, in moving the omission of the words "or any other persons,'" said the Amendment was one of the most important that could be moved inasmuch as its object, with certain consequential Amendments, was to secure that all new schools provided out of public funds under the Act would be built by the public authority. The scheme of the Government was nominally to give equal facilities to different sects to provide new schools. The various Churches were to be permitted under certain circumstances, if they could find the funds, to build schools in different districts- He wished to dwell upon one minor evil of that proposal. The Church of England was already complaining that she would not be able to find the money for the repairs to her existing schools as required by the Bill. Eight hundred voluntary schools had not a single penny of subscriptions, while 700 more had subscriptions only to the amount of 1s. per child, and yet upon the shoulders of these schools was to be imposed for all time the duty of providing for repairs. Surely it was a very dangerous thing, in addition to this obligation, to permit the Church to build schools in districts where she did not now possess them. The only way in which the Church could provide for repairs at present was by calling in aid from other districts, so that the result of this proposal of the Bill would be that, in order to build new schools—which would be one of her main objects—the Church would draw upon those very resources which ought to be tapped for the purpose of repairs for existing schools. That, however, was a minor evil. The chief consideration was that, if the Clause were passed in its present form, it would instantly become the ambition of the clergymen of every religious community to find funds to build schools wherever they could get the permission of the Board of Education to do so, and in every little village there would be a competition between the different sects. It had already been stated that if the Church of England built schools under
1422
this Clause the Wesleyans might find it necessary to compete with them, and possibly would build several hundred schools. The prospect opened up by that statement was anti-National and odious. Children ought not to be separated into little lots of different sects brought up in schools in which they were taught to dislike the children in other schools—
LORD HUGH CECIL: Can the hon. Member give an instance of a school in which the children are taught to dislike the children in another school?
MR. LLOYD-GEORGE: I have a case which I will give by-and-bye.
MR. TREVELYANcontended that the mere fact of the children being segregated into different sets according to their religion was practically bound to foster such a feeling. In an earlier debate he cited the case of a village in which the Nonconformists and the Church clergyman quarrelled over the appointment of a teacher, with the result that the Nonconformists set up a separate school of their own. Up to that time the village had been perfectly united so far as the goodwill of the people was concerned and no ill-feeling had existed between the different religious sects; but the very fact of two schools having been established—as would be done in dozens of villages under this Clause—had set up a denominational rivalry, and the village was torn from top to bottom with religious differences. That was bound to happen. If they gave this permission it would involve building, in numbers of parishes, schools by different denominations. Further, they objected because, as the law stood under the administrative conditions under which it must work, there was no doubt that special advantages were given to the sectarian schools as against schools provided by the public. In the first place, it would be to the advantage of the local authority to allow the different sects

1423
to build schools in preference to themselves because they would not then have to provide them out of the rates. That was a direct bribe to erecting sectarian schools in preference to erecting schools by the public. Further, the Education Department, by the very words of the Bill in the 10th Clause, would be bound rather to prefer sectarian schools to schools erected by the public authority, because one of the things which the Board of Education had to take into consideration was the economy of the rates, and if it could get schools built by a religious community instead of out of the public purse that would be economy of the rates, and if there was a question of bias in the mind of the Education Department it would clearly be in favour of the sectarian schools. For these reasons it appeared to him that not only were they to have a system perpetuated under which more and more sectarian schools would spring up all over the country, but they were actually to have an advantage given to the building of sectarian schools as against schools built by the public. He thought this was an altogether wrong system. They believed in a national system of education under which the schools were in the hands of the public, and they did not look forward to having England breaking out into a sort of rash of sectarian schools which the denominationalists could scratch until the whole system was in a state of irritation. They saw in this part of the Bill another encouragement to the setting up of sectarian schools, and this was protested against prior to 1870, when it was alleged that special facilities were being given for the building of sectarian schools. One of those who denounced that policy vigorously at that time was the Colonial Secretary, who protested against the giving of public grants for the building of these schools. The Government were not now proposing public grants but a far more insidious thing, for they were asking denominationalists to subscribe money for the building of sectarian schools and promising to maintain them ever afterwards out of the public funds. He hoped the House would seriously consider this question before consenting to an increase of this dual system.
Amendment proposed—
"In page 3, line 36, to leave out the words, 'or any other persons.'"—(Mr. Trevelyan.)
Question proposed, "That the words proposed to be left out stand part of the Clause."
MR. A. J. BALFOUR: I think the hon. Gentleman opposite was not far wrong when he said that the issue raised by this Amendment was a clear and important one, indeed, it cuts very deep into the fundamental question underlying the scheme on which the system of education is carried on, and probably we shall have to go into the Division Lobby because we entertain a different view as to the principle upon which religious teaching should be carried out in our elementary schools. The hon. Gentleman's proposal is quite simple. It is that even if voluntary schools are to be tolerated where they exist now new voluntary schools are not to be tolerated in the future, and that every provision for future education must be made out of the rates by the local authority, and must, of course, be subject to those limitations which affect the schools. In other words, the hon. Gentleman lays it down as a fundamental principle that, at all events, in all cases of future provision we should only provide them under the limitation of the Cowper-Temple Clause. This is a significant speech to listen to, after the statement made by a colleague of the hon. Member from Wales on the last Amendment, seeing that he desired to see the Scotch system adopted. The view taken now by the hon. Member is precisely the opposite, for he wishes to see the English School Board system, which is profoundly contrasted with the Scotch system in this respect, made the universal system, so far as the provision of new schools is concerned. I think the hon. Member will admit that that accurately represents what he proposes. So strong was the hon. Member upon this point that he thought it fit and proper to describe any system which tempered the English form of rate-provided schools with an admixture of voluntary schools as anti-national and odious. I absolutely differ from the hon. Member, for reasons which I believe very fundamental, and which I will state in a very few words. I have to repeat

1425
here words which I have uttered before on the platform and elsewhere, and say that, in my view, it is a tolerable and even a good system to say what we do in Scotland, that the public shall provide elementary schools for the community, but in providing those schools they are not to be hampered by any restrictions as to the religious teaching in those schools, which should be left to their own discretion and to their judgment to see that the teaching shall be suitable to the children of the district.
DR. MACNAMARA: Yes, give us that.
MR. A. J. BALFOUR: The English system of providing schools is that, where there is a deficiency not to be met in any other way it shall be met by rate-provided schools, but that in those schools the education authority for the district whether School Boards, as it is now, of County or Borough Councils, as under this Bill, are to be limited in their discretion as to the education to be provided, and however much the parents of those children, or large sections of them, desire a particular kind of religious education, they are not to have it unless it is in conformity with the Cowper-Temple Clause. I hold that system as an absolutely intolerable one, unless you temper it with the voluntary schools, and holding that view as regards the whole scheme of English education, it is as clearly necessary to provide scope and room for the voluntary school education of the future as it is to preserve the voluntary schools already erected for the purpose of meeting this peculiar need. That, Sir, is the whole case in a nutshell. If I am to be told that the view of hon. Gentlemen opposite is that the Cowper-Temple Clause to which, I understand, they attach such great importance, is to be abandoned as far as all rate-provided schools are concerned, I admit that the force of my contention would be largely in the air. Is that the view we are to have pressed upon us, and is that what would be given by the general body of hon. Gentlemen opposite without any undue delay or prolonged discussion?
SIR EDWARD GREY: You must give us the
1426
Scotch system as a whole. I understand the right hon. Gentleman is offering us only a morsel of the Scotch system.
MR. A. J. BALFOUR: We are now providing that schools will have to be provided in future for the growing needs of the child population. If all schools to be provided out of the rates are to be limited by the Cowper-Temple Clause, then you must give room in this future provision for the voluntary schools; but if you say that this future provision is to be made out of the rates, and not under the limitation of the Cowper-Temple Clause, then I admit that the argument I have addressed to the House loses a great deal of its force. I do not believe that that is the view of the great body of Nonconformist opinion in this country or of hon. Gentlemen opposite. I have always understood that they attach something almost in the nature of superstitious veneration to the Cowper-Temple Clause, that they had invented something in the nature of a new orthodoxy under the shadow of that Clause, and that they regarded every form of religion outside it as anti-national and odious and verging upon superstition. If I am assured on authoritative grounds that the whole Nonconformist body have turned right round in the twinkling of a moment and abandoned the Cowper-Temple Clause altogether as regards rate-provided schools, I shall be very glad to consider the development of a situation which, to me, is so new and so unexpected.
MR. BRYCEthought there were many other objections to this Clause, and many other arguments in favour of this Amendment, which would be sufficient to condemn the Clause, without bringing in the religious question at all. He must say one word about the way the Prime Minister brought in the case of Scotland. It seemed to him that the right hon. Gentleman was playing fast and loose in this matter. He was always asking, "Will you have the Scotch system?" and when they asked, "Will you give the Scotch system?" he immediately escaped. There were good and sufficient reasons why the Scotch system was not given. He was not entitled to say what the Nonconformists in England, or the English laity collectively, as against the

1427
clerical body, thought of it. He was not prepared to say whether the laity generally, or the Nonconformist section of them, would accept the Scotch system instead of the Cowper-Temple Clause, but he thought he might safely say that they would not accept the abolition of the Cowper-Temple Clause except upon the condition that the Scotch system was brought in in its entirety; that was to say, that everywhere, in town and country, it should be within the reach of every child, and that there should be a popularly elected body, like the School Board, to administer the schools of the country. He was quite prepared, for his own part, to believe that if that was the case the religious difficulty would come to an end, because that difficulty was a plant which did not thrive in the atmosphere of popularity. The open sun and air of a popularly elected body would put an end to those troubles, quarrels jealousies, suspicions and animosities which thrive under a sectarian system. The Scotch Members would be able to confirm what he said when he stated that there were practically no difficulties, quarrels, and troubles arising under their system in Scotland. The reason was that it was all public. The School Boards were responsible to the electorate, and if there was any attempt to abuse the power given to them to give instruction according to what was called "use and wont," that would be immediately rectified by the asking of questions of the elected members of the School Boards, and all those troubles and difficulties would disappear. The right hon. Gentleman disliked the Cowper-Temple Clause. It was disliked because it corresponded to the facts of the case, namely, that ninety-nine out of every 100 English parents of the laity desired that their children should read the Bible and receive religious instruction based on the Bible, and that they desired nothing more. [An Hon. MEMBER: "HOW do you propose to prove that?"] Of course it was one of those assertions that might be made on one side or the other. He had never seen a particle of evidence produced that English parents desired anything more. There had been every opportunity, occasion and motive during the last six months to produce that
1428
evidence, but it had not been forthcoming. He would give his hon. friend another illustration. At the present moment there were more than a million Anglican children in board schools. Most of these children had within their reach sectarian schools, where they could obtain definite and distinct dogmatic instruction if they wanted it, but they preferred board schools. He supposed that everyone in this House who had taken the trouble to inquire could find places within his own knowledge, in which a very large proportion of the children in board schools and unsectarian schools were the children of Anglican parents. He remembered a case of a very large unsectarian school where one-third of the children were of Church of England parents, and where there were large numbers of voluntary schools within very short reach of the homes of these parents. He had not the slightest doubt that he was within the mark in saying that ninety-nine out of every 100 English lay parents preferred, or, at any rate, were well satisfied, that their children should receive religious undogmatic instruction under the Cowper-Temple Clause. The same thing was put by the Secretary to the Board of Education when he said, on Friday last, that English parents who had not the Scotch keen eye for differences in doctrine were willing to take the theology as they found it. He thought the English parents were right. Why? Because, like sensible people, it was Bible instruction they wanted for their children in elementary schools.
MR. JAMES HOPE: Are not the Scotch parents who desire the Shorter Catechism sensible people?
MR. BRYCE: Scotch parents care very little whether it is taught or not. He could give instances from his own city where it was not taught at all in schools, and no complaint was made. In most cases in Scotland the old habit of teaching was followed, but no trouble ever arose. In many cases where it was not taught, compared with cases where it was taught, equal satisfaction and peace prevailed. That went to confirm what he had stated, that everything

1429
worked well where there was a popular elective system. He passed from the religious aspect of the subject, into which he had only been led by the remarks which fell from the right hon. Gentleman. He could not let the remarks about the Cowper-Temple Clause pass without saying that the reason why that was followed was because it corresponded to the facts of the case. It gave the children what the parents wanted, and what the children were able to profit by. If they wanted dogmatic instruction superseded at a later stage by all means let that be done. They were dealing here with children under fourteen years of age. There were three grounds which he thought were sufficient to recommend the Amendment to the House. The first was that the Clause as it stood was in the last degree disparaging and injurious to the local education authority. They were calling a new local education authority into being. They were purposing to give it great and wide powers. They were endeavouring to induce persons of influence, importance, and public spirit, to enter its service. In the last Clause the Committee inflicted great indignity upon them by subjecting them to an appeal to the Board of Education on a large number of questions in which they differed from the managers. They were now carrying that further, because they were asked by this Clause to say that the local authority should have no privilege, advantage, or preference in proposing to provide schools over a number of people in the locality who might desire to do it. They could not pay a worse compliment to the local authority than by not giving them the right of being the persons to provide the schools. His second objection to the scheme of the Clause was that it was proposed to multiply small schools, and to aggravate one of the greatest evils of the existing system. On this side of the House they had not ceased since the Bill was introduced to dwell upon the inconvenience in any national system of education of having two sets of schools over a whole town, standing in different relations to the local authority, and which, because kept up independently of each other, must tend to weaken one another. In how many parts of the
1430
country had they not at this moment two or three schools within a radius of two miles, each of which was weak and imperfectly staffed, each of which had deficient buildings, and where what was wanted was consolidation? One reason why the board schools in the town had been so much more efficient than the schools in the country was that they could be equipped on a larger scale. If by this Clause they allowed a certain number to say that there was a necessity to provide a new school for sectarian purposes—instead of enlarging the existing school, and in that way strengthening it, giving it better financial support, and a better staff—they perpetuated the existing evil. He appealed to hon. Members, whatever their opinion on the religious question, and whatever they might think of the value of giving sectarian dogmatic instruction, to remember at any rate that on the educational side the case against this scheme was very strong. They wanted to bring the schools together rather than to keep them apart. They wanted to organise them on a comprehensive plan. They wanted each in an area to subserve a common purpose, but it was proposed to drive them farther from that great aim by the multiplication of small schools. Really he could not convey sufficiently to the Committee his sense of the inefficiency, waste, and needless expense which would be incurred if they followed out this plan. He was bound to say that he thought this proposal threw a very sinister light on the whole purpose and motive of the Bill. They had been constant told that the great reason for the Bill was that the denominations were already in possession of the schools and that they could not ask the ratepayers to incur the great expense of building a large number of new schools, and that they could not take the existing schools without compensation, which would be a ruinous expense to impose on the rates. That was put forward as the main justification of the Bill. But surely that justification entirely failed when they came to this Clause, because here it was proposed to do the thing afresh and make it more difficult than ever by creating new vested interests, and raising up further obligations. Therefore, when he looked at this Clause he thought he saw the true purpose, motive, and origin of the Bill. He thought the argument about

1431
vested interests was a fictitious one put forward to conceal the motive behind, which was to strengthen the hold of sectarian sm on the country. By this Clause the Government were multiplying vested interests, and multiplying all those difficulties which were to come up in the future. It was not the way to get rid of them. For his part he did not think this system could last. If the right hon. Gentleman and those who agree with him succeed in getting rid of the Cowper-Temple Clause he believed they would be doing the worst possible service to the religious education of the people. He believed the Cowper-Temple Clause was the sheet-anchor of religious education in the schools in this country. He was just as much attached as the right hon. Gentleman or the noble Lord the Member for Greenwich to the desirability and importance of retaining a religious atmosphere in the schools, but he was sure that if this contest on the religious difficulty was kept alive, and if they were to have the same strife for the next thirty years as they had had for the past thirty years the issue would be the complete secularisation of the schools. In the United States and in the British Colonies that was the solution of the problem at which they had arrived. The Cowper-Temple Clause afforded a common basis for religious education in the board schools—a common basis in this sense: that under it the common truths of Christianity were imparted to the children. And archbishops and bishops had declared that the religious education given in the board schools had been of the utmost possible value and afforded the best possible foundation for the Christian life.
LORD HUGH CECILwas understood to dissent.
MR. BRYCEsaid he could only maintain that the testimony seemed to him conclusive, because if these eminent prelates had shared the opinion of the noble Lord they could not have spoken as they did about the religious teaching in the board schools. He repeated that the best chance of preserving a religious atmosphere in our schools was the preservation of the Cowper-Temple Clause, and that if it fell it would be followed
1432
by the secularisation of the schools altogether. He would set forth in a few words his objections to the Clause and his reasons for supporting the Amendment. It was a disparagement of the local authorities by placing them on a level with private persons, and by denying them the function of meeting the growing necessities of public education in the localities, the wants and feelings of which they understood. It was a perpetuation of sectarian strife, and an aggravation of the tendency that existed to divide children into groups upon no other ground than the religious opinions of their parents—and he believed that in that respect it was an injury to the minds of the parents themselves. And, lastly, it was educationally objectionable because it would put a national system of education further out of sight, for it would multiply vested interests and involve unnecessary expense, while it would waste the efforts of men zealous for educational reform in keeping up the number of small weak schools instead of devoting their best energies to concentration.
SIR JOHN GORSTsaid he could assure the right hon. Gentleman the Member for South Aberdeen that the profound religious peace and excellent religious instruction in the schools were not due in any way to the Cowper-Temple Clause. That was not operative in the schools; it was a dead-letter. What did secure religious peace and excellent religious instruction was the common sense exercised by the teachers and managers notwithstanding the interference of Parliament to give to the children in the schools under their authority that sort of religious instruction which the parents of the children desired. He entirely agreed with the statement made the other day by the First Lord that provisions such as those in this Clause are absolutely unnecessary. The religious difficulty would disappear from Parliament and the platform, as it had done from the schools, if the House would consent to trust the new education authority with the power and the duty to make dispositions that all the children in the country were given the religious instruction desired by their parents.
MR. BRYCEsaid he did not really differ from the right hon. Gentleman; but he had never heard that offer made.
MR. A. J. BALFOURasked what the right hon. Gentleman meant by saying that the Cowper-Temple Clause was the sheet-anchor of religious instruction in the schools?
MR. BRYCEsaid that his contention was that the Cowper-Temple Clause was the sheet-anchor of religious instruction in the board schools as things stood at present.
SIR JOHN GORSTsaid that the right hon. Gentleman had maintained that this Clause was a dark conspiracy on the part of the Government to promote sectarian interest. Perhaps the right hon. Gentleman would be surprised to know that the procedure which took place at the present time in many parts of the country was in exact accordance with the provisions of this Clause which had filled the mind of the right hon. Gentleman who had moved the Amendment with such gloomy views. It was generally supposed that the School Board had the proper right to provide additional accommodation and to decide at what cost the alterations or additions were to be made. There was the conspicuous case, some years ago, of the Barry Docks, where the population had rapidly increased on account of the docks, and a very large portion of that population was Roman Catholic. The School Board of Barry Docks, which was an excellent body and had done its work supremely well, in the exercise of its right to supply all the schools which were under the sheet-anchor of religious instruction, were not able to make any provision whatever for the Roman Catholic population. That did not, however, prevent the Roman Catholics from building a school of their own, but they had to provide the whole cost of the school from their own contributions and subscriptions. By the Act of 1870, the Board of Education determined, when there was a deficiency of accommodation, how that deficiency should most advantageously be supplied, and from that time the system had gone on without any friction. It must be remembered that
1434
England and Wales were now covered with schools, and the necessity for new schools only arose from the natural increase of population in the large centres of population and from the shifting of population from the centres of the town to the suburbs. It might be more convenient in such cases to extend the existing accommodation by enlarging the school than to build a new school altogether; and very seldom had the action of the Board of Education caused any friction with the local education authority. It was an experiment which worked without any friction whatever, and which certainly was not open to the strong denunciations which the right hon. Gentleman the Member for South Aberdeen and the hon. Member who moved the Amendment thought fit to utter. One point in the speech of the right hon. Gentleman opposite deserved the attention of the Committee. Nothing could be more mischievous than the multiplication of small schools, but the operation of this system did not create small board schools, and if the Board of Education was as vigilant in the future as it had been in the past the right hon. Gentleman might dismiss from his mind the idea that this system would ever lead to the multiplication of small board schools. He could not see how it would be possible to do what was eminently desirable—consolidate the number of small schools- but if this Bill did not amend the law in that respect, it at all events would make it no worse. The new schools which would be created by this Clause would never in any case add to the number of small schools at present existing. Only in those very rare cases where denominational bodies were competing for the erection of a school would such schools be erected, and in those cases such schools would not add to the multiplication of small schools.
DR. MACNAMARAsaid the hon. Member who proposed the Amendment desired to set up the clear issue that the provision of school places should be national and not sectional. He argued that the Act of 1870 took many steps in that direction, but it had three very serious shortcomings. It did not create the authority necessary for this purpose,

1435
and when it did create the authority the area was very small. What the Act of 1870 ought to have said was— "We will give generously and handsomely to all existing voluntary school places, but from this time forward every new school place provided shall be provided by the public authority only." What the Act of 1870 did say, and the right hon. Gentleman below the gangway seemed to think that this Bill would leave things where they were, was— "There shall be a school place suitable and efficient for every child." That Clause was repealed under this Bill, so that this Bill did not leave things where they were.
MR. A. J. BALFOURsaid that had been dealt with by a Government Amendment.
DR. MACNAMARAsaid the Amendment was not sufficient.
MR. A. J. BALFOURsaid the Amendment should be made sufficient.
SIR JOHN GORSTsaid that it had been stated since this Bill had been brought in, over and over again, that there was a mistake made in the repeal section, that that mistake would be set right, and that the duty of providing school places for every child would be thrown on the local authority.
DR. MACNAMARAsaid he was very glad to hear the statement of the First Lord of the Treasury that if the right hon. Gentleman's Amendment did not cover it it should be made to cover it. Ho pointed out that the Act of 1870 further said that if volunteers wished to make provision they should be allowed to do so, but that if they did not make provision within a specified time a public authority should be called into being which should do so, and, further, that if the public authority did not carry out this duty the authority should be declared in default and that a new authority should be elected and the locality charged with the expense. That was also to be repealed. Therefore, on the face of it, it was inaccurate to say that this Bill left the matter where it was. The substantial difference was this: both before and after the Barry School Board
1436
incident the position was that the local authority and other persons were on equal terms with regard to the administration of schools under the Act of 1870. In this case they were not on equal terms. The preference under the scheme contained in Clauses 9, 10, 11, was given to the voluntary schools. Why could not they adopt the Scotch system as it stood with regard to this matter? Lord Young's Act of 1872 laid down definitely that if there was a deficiency of school places in a particular district the local authority should provide them. Why could not that be adopted? Why should it not be a public duty? The scheme was set out in great detail in the Act, and the remarkable thing was that, in Clause 28, if the School Board on making its provision for school places did not go the length which the Scotch Board of Education thought it ought, the Board of Education could propose a larger scheme. That shewed the very wide difference between the systems.
MR. A. J. BALFOURasked whether the hon. Gentleman meant the Scottish system in its true and full sense. Did he propose to throw upon the public education authority provided in this Bill the duty of providing new accommodation, and that they should not be subject to anything in the nature of the Cowper-Temple Clause?
DR. MACNAMARAsaid if the scheme was that nobody had a right to meet the deficiency but the public authority, that system would satisfy him.
MR. A. J. BALFOURsaid it was essential to know, in order to understand the hon. Gentleman's argument, when a new school was provided by the local authority was it to be under the Cowper-Temple Clause or not?
DR. MACNAMARAsaid he had several times expressed the opinion that the Cowper-Temple Clause should be modified. Let them have popular control, and the Cowper-Temple Clause, which was more or less a hedge which the Nonconformists had set up against the Church, might be swept away. As an instance of the great delay which would arise by allowing provision for new

1437
schools to be made by persons other than the local authority, he would instance a case that took place at Streatham—a case which, in his opinion, might be multiplied over and over again. Religious bodies in their zeal desired to stake out a claim which they were unable to work thoroughly—to cover areas which they had no power to cover. In March, 1895, the School Board for London, after many years, obtained sanction to provide school places at Streatham, and early in 1896 the School Board Committee came to the House for powers. In June, 1896, a deputation from the managers of the St. Leonard's school at Streatham waited upon the School Board Committee and asked them not to build a school, as they were themselves prepared to build it. The School Board consented to wait till October, l896, and undertook if this particular body had begun to build the school to withdraw all their sanctions. October, 1896, came and the school was not begun. These people, with all their zeal for missionary work, were unable to find the money. By Christmas, 1896, nothing had been done. The School Board then consented to wait until October, 1897, to see if these persons could build the school, and finally in 1898, after three years delay, the school had to be built by the School Board. Since 1870 the denominational system had doubled the accommodation for children in schools, but for the reason he had given they had not done their work thoroughly—they had not properly cultivated the area marked out. Under the Act of 1870 the voluntary subscribers had doubled their contributions, but instead of those contributions being, as they were in 1870, half the cost of the children educated, they were now only one-seventh. Clause 5 of the Act of 1870 was now to be repealed, also Clause 18, and in their place they were to have Clause 9 of this Bill. In his opinion the provision of new schools by other than the local authority was a bad and vicious system; it should be a national obligation. The religious question could be arranged, and should not be mixed up with the provision of new schools. It was preposterous that a public authority should have to wait for provision of
1438
public schools until they found that nobody else desired to provide them. No limit of time was fixed within which those estimable people were to discharge the obligations they entered into, and he repeated the question he had so often asked during these debates—Where did the educational interests of the children come in? He invited attention to an extremely able article which appeared in The Times last April, in which the writer, who appeared to be intimately acquainted with the whole administrative system, showed that the provisions in Clauses 8, 9, and 10 struck deep at the roots of efficiency, and appeared to be drafted to give volunteers the first chance of providing accommodation, in order that control of religious instruction might be retained by them. He strongly objected to reliance on private agency before the public authority could act.
MR. MALCOLMsaid the Bill did not provide that.
DR. MACNAMARAread Clauses 9 and 10 as containing direct incentives to the authority to favour the voluntary proposals out of regard to economy of rates. It was essential that from that day forth the provision of school places should not be left to volunteers, and that all new places should be a public charge, provided for out of public funds.
MR. BARTLEYsaid it had constantly been stated that one of the great hardships connected with education, especially in villages, was the practical impossibility of Non conformists having a school such as they desired in their religious interest. This Clause enabled such schools to be established, thus doing away with that grievance, and he was therefore greatly surprised that the Opposition should object to the proposal. Surely it was only reasonable, if there was a bonâ fide desire in a particular place for a Church of England, Roman Catholic, or other school, that the persons desiring it should be allowed to provide it if they were prepared to pay the expenses themselves. The position taken up by the hon. Member for North Camberwell, that every new school-place should be provided by the

1439
local authority, would mean in practice that if a few more places were required in any district a new school would have to be built, because it would be impossible to expand or increase the size of the existing voluntary schools. That, he thought, would he a most unreasonable restriction. The Clause carried out the avowed desire of the Government to provide as fairly as possible for all denominations, and, bearing in mind the extensive and violent attacks which had been made with reference to the single school parishes, the Government in this proposition were entitled to expect the support rather than the opposition of the other side.
MR. ROBSONasked where was the necessity for this Clause if, as stated by the right hon. Gentleman the Member for Cambridge University, the substance of the scheme proposed thereby had already been in operation for six years, and was therefore in conformity with the existing law.
SIR JOHN GORST: I said in practice.
MR. ROBSONapprehended that the practice of the right hon. Gentleman had not been against the law. If then the Clause was unnecessary why was it in the Bill at all? By looking at the Clause one could see why it was there, and it gave a very pertinent and complete answer to the query of the hon. Member for the Stowmarket Division, viz., what was the preference given to voluntary schools by Clause 9? According to the right hon. Gentleman the Member for Cambridge University, the existing system enabled any denomination to appeal to the Board of Education and to get a denominational school. But it did not permit any denomination to hamper the local authority in the provision of a school which according to its judgment, checked and inspired by the popular will, was necessary, and that was what this Clause would invite and provoke a denomination to do. Where ever the local authority proposed to discharge its most elementary function and provide a new school in any district, it was to be at the mercy of ten sectarian
1440
ratepayers, who would have power to hang up a scheme for at least three months, and for some further indefinite period until the Board of Education had held an inquiry, the children in the meantime going uneducated—or, as was more likely, Clause 10 coining into operation, by which another singular preference was given to denominational schools. He spoke with some uncertainty as to the construction of that Clause, but at the end there was a provision that any school in existence containing thirty scholars should not be deemed to be unnecessary. So that in practice, without proposing to found an elementary school, a denomination might establish a school and get thirty scholars into it, with the result that it would be a school on the ground, and would have to be taken as necessary, the provision of a school by the local authority under Clause 9 being thus prevented. That observation would fall to the ground if the Clause was intended to mean schools in existence at the passing of the Act—not at the date of the inquiry under the Clause—but if his instruction was correct it was clear that the local authority would never have to provide a school at all. In the past it might have been difficult, as the right hon. Gentleman had stated, to induce members of a denomination to provide an elementary school, as they would have had to maintain it, but when they were relieved of the burden of maintenance a very different state of things would probably obtain, and there was much more likelihood of a rush of persons desirous of occupying the ground to the exclusion of the local authority. After the observations of the right hon. Gentleman, the Committee were more than ever entitled to demand a clear statement as to what, under existing circumstances, the necessity for this Clause really was. A further point was that the First Lord of the Treasury had again and again challenged the Opposition to say whether or not they desired the adoption of the Scottish system, and, if so, to what extent, and to what proportion of the schools they desired to see its principle applied. That was a very fair question, but it justified the inquiry—What did the Government think of the

1441
Scottish system? Were they prepared to offer it? The right hon. Gentleman the Member for Cambridge University had declared that the system really operated in England, that the Cowper-Temple Clause was a mere form, and had practically no substantial application. And why? Because the common sense of the English people had so arranged matters that they did—Cowper-Temple Clause or no Cowper-Temple Clause—succeed in giving to the children the religious teaching their parents desired. That apparently was what was done in the board schools. If that was the case, they had the Scottish system in the board schools. But if it was applicable and applied there, and the parents were satisfied with the religious teaching so given, it became yet more important to know what the Prime Minister thought of the Scottish system, because that system—which the right hon. Gentleman was understood to favour to a certain extent—entirely superseded the denominational system; it did not supersede religious teaching, but it did supersede sectarian control, and that was the position of the Liberal Party.
MR. HERBERT ROBERTSONcontended that for the purpose of the hon. and learned Member's argument it was immaterial which construction he placed upon Clause 10, because if a school was in existence before it became a school at all it must have been authorised under Clause 9.
MR. ROBSONsaid that was not so unless it was built as a proposed elementary school. If, without being proposed as such, it was simply built and peopled with thirty scholars, it became, under Clause 10, a school already in existence, and as such had to be deemed necessary by the Board of Education.
MR. HERBERT ROBERTSONsaid that such a school could not be one "actually in existence" having the necessary average attendance "as computed by the Board of Education;" it would be absolutely outside the system. In reply to the argument that delay would be caused by others than the local authority being allowed to build new schools, he would quote a case in which much delay
1442
was prevented. In Basingstoke there happened to be a school built for use as a Sunday school, but also with a view to its becoming, if necessary, an ordinary elementary day school. The Basingstoke School Board required further school accommodation, and the Church of England, to which this school belonged, immediately offered the building to the Board, by whom it was gladly accepted. If the present Amendment were accepted such an arrangement would be made impossible, and the children would have to wait a year, or perhaps two years, before the necessary accommodation could be provided.
MR. LLOYD-GEORGEsaid that so far as Wales was concerned the Welsh Members would close with the Prime Minister, if he would give them the Scotch system. He did not think that the control of religious teaching should be in the hands of the County Councils, covering as they did considerable areas, but that that power should be given to parish authorities. They had heard it said that the Cowper-Temple Clause was a great safeguard for the Nonconformists. It was said to have been introduced originally in the interest of the Nonconformists, and notably it was said by the Prime mister and the Colonial Secretary that it was introduced to protect the Nonconformist minority. He was glad, however, that the Prime Minister, for the first time, made no pretext of that kind now, but if this was something to protect Nonconformists he did not think the Prime Minister should thrust upon them a blessing which they repudiated, It was perfectly clear that the Clause under debate was not introduced on behalf of the Nonconformists but simply and purely to promote a system of sectarianism which they protested against. It was only part and parcel of a system which the Bill was intended primarily to promote, namely, the sectarian system. The right hon Gentleman the Member for Cambridge University said there was no religious difficulty in the board schools.—
SIR JOHN GORSTsaid he applied that remark to all schools. He had challenged the House many times to name a single instance where a

1443
single Nonconformist child was excluded from the teaching profession, and he had never been able to find one.
MR. LLOYD-GEORGE: I have given repeated instances.
SIR JOHN GORST: No.
MR. LLOYD-GEORGEsaid he had asked the late Vice-President of the Council for a return showing how many Nonconformists were head teachers in the Church of England schools. He could point out these instances in the advertisements in the Church Time. All that could be said about it was that these teachers were members of one persuasion, and that was according to the trust deeds of the school. The Prime Minister had said that this was simply legalising the practice of the Education Department in the past. If it were the practice it was illegal, and therefore this Clause was simply legalising an illegal practice. Not long ago it was declared illegal for the School Boards to carry on evening schools and higher grade schools. The Committee could consider the difference between the attitude of the Government towards the illegal practice in helping sectarianism and an illegal practice when it helped education. Instead of carrying out an illegal practice which would be of benefit to the country, they brought in a Bill to destroy the power of board schools and put an end to the beneficent system. When it was an illegal practice in the interests of sectarianism, the Government brought in a Bill which not only legalised but extended the sectarianism. This was a very dangerous and pernicious Clause. The hon. Member for South Shields had pointed out the danger that in the future the burden of these schools would fall upon the rates, and this would be an inducement for them to go on establishing more sectarian schools. Take a rural parish with a population of about 1,000 or 1,200, with about 100 children in the school. In future, in such a parish it would be possible for a sect to say that that school did not represent their views, and therefore they could set up a school of their own at the other end of the parish. Where would the building come from? Hon. Members were aware that there was hardly a Nonconformist
1444
chapel or a Church of England where there was not a little schoolroom attached, and all they had got to do was to adapt that schoolroom for a day school. In this way there could be set up an in numerable number of little schools which would destroy education and promote sectarian strife. In the parish he had given as a typical concrete case, forty children would go to one school and sixty to the other. That appeared to be a direct inducement to set up rival schools for sectarian purposes. But what would happen to education? Instead of having one fairly good schoolmaster at £120 a year—it might not be a good salary, but it was fairly good in the rural districts—they would get two second or third rate masters or mistresses who would each receive £70, £75 or £80 a year, bringing up the amount paid altogether to £l60. This would mean that the equipment fund would be impoverished and education would suffer. On the whole, the children of the parish would suffer for the benefit of the two rival religious communities. That was a very bad system which was being promoted by the Bill. Supposing there was abundant accommodation at the present moment for all the children of the parish, and one of the sects said, "Our children are not fairly taught the doctrines of their parents in the school," could they go to the Education Department and say, "We want another school set up"?
MR. ERNEST GRAY: Yes, if they can get the requisite number of children.
MR. LLOYD-GEORGEsaid if it ought to be done it should be done, and if it ought not to be done it should not be I done. They had to make one of two elements predominate. If it was the educational interest the sectarian interest ought to go down, and if they considered the sectarian interest was the more important, then the educational interest ought to go to the wall, but the Government could not run both. It was frankly neither one thing nor the other, and the result would be that education must suffer. In such a case as that which he had described they would get poorer teachers and equipment, and they would throw a greater burden on the rates of the parish, but the

1445
sectarian interest would benefit. Which was to be predominant in the Bill? They had a right to know. It seemed to him from the Bill as if it were the sectarian interest. Something had been said by the right hon. Gentleman the Member for the University of Cambridge about the fact that there was no religious difficulty in the schools, and that they should trust to the common sense of the managers and teachers. He agreed that as a rule the teachers taught the catechism in the way least offensive to the Nonconformist children in the school. He made that admission frankly, but that would not be the case if this Clause got into operation. Why? The Low Church moderate clergyman would not want to set up a rival sectarian institution. He would be satisfied with the kind of teaching given in the parish school. It was the aggressive new man who was not satisfied at all with what was going on. As a matter of fact the clergyman of the low moderate type did not bother very much about it. He would give a quotation from the Report of the National Society, which showed really how little clergymen of that type worried about it. Dr. Reynolds, reporting on a school which he inspected, said this question was put to a pupil, "What instruction have you had in religious knowledge?" and the answer was "None;" the child was further asked "By whom was it given?" and the answer was, "By the vicar." That really represented the only definite dogmatic religious instruction given in thousands of these schools. He was not referring now to what the schoolmaster did. As a rule he confined himself to the reading of Scripture, and explaining the historical aspect of the passages read. In a good number of those schools these dogmas which they heard so much about were not thrust upon the children, but hon. Gentlemen opposite said, "You must teach these dogmas, otherwise the religious instruction given is no good." He had received a pamphlet written by Canon Moberly. When the pamphlet was first alluded to, he had thought it was written by Mr. Moberly Bell, but he had found that Mr. Moberly Bell had not exchanged thunder for theology. After reading that pamphlet it had struck him that this was Canon
1446
Moberly's Clause. It was true that at present the Church did not teach dogma in the schools, because she preferred dominion to dogma, and knew that the moment she thrust it upon the country that dominion would be withdrawn. This gentleman, who had three or four schools under his charge in a district, had advised the people not to be led by the satellites of Satan and enticed into joining leagues. But here was Clause 9, which would give the opportunity to the Canon Moberlys in the future. The result would be strife in the parish, not between High Church and Nonconformity, but between High Church and Low Church, which disliked each other more than they disliked the Nonconformists. The moderate Low Church clergyman would not set up a school to create strife, but the strong aggressive sacerdotalist would. He appealed to the Government not to destroy the efficiency of the schools by further endowing theology.
MR. MIDDLEMOREsaid he did not entirely like the Amendment as it stood, but he was quite prepared to welcome it. The Clause as it stood seemed to him to be an altogether amazing one. It conferred the right of appeal on any ten ratepayers whoever they might be. It called in the Board of Education to judge in the matter. Ho could not help calling that dethroning the local authority and enthroning the Board of Education in its place. That was a very grave matter indeed. What was the local authority for? Surely it existed to build its own schools, and control its own money, certainly to say what its own people wanted, and to carry the wishes of its own people into action. What functions were they going to leave to it? It would have to finance the new schools which the Board of Education permitted or compelled it to build. It would also have to finance the schools which were built against its own wishes. The Government had not brought forth an authority; they had brought forth an abortion. He doubted whether the local authorities would bear this, and he did not think they ought to do so. If they refused to administer the Act, and tore off this blister placed upon their body, he, for one, should not blame them. The Clause

1447
would, in his opinion, create very great discord in the community to which it applied. Why? There would always be an appeal when a new school was wanted—it could not be otherwise—and there would probably be a society formed for the purpose. When the appeal was made the grandmother in London would put on her clogs and shawl, and go down to them and tell them what schools they ought to have, what were their own personal wishes, and how to spend their money. She ought never to have left London. The late Vice-President of the Council had said that the local authorities knew their own business far better than the Board of Education could tell them. Now the Government seemed to have got rid of his views and to have adopted precisely opposite principles. He believed the chief result would be to set the local authority and the voluntary schools by the ears and to make co-operation difficult, or even impossible, in the future. It would drive moderate Churchmen like himself to believe that the only way of establishing a national system of education was to supersede the denominational schools. It would bring the voluntary schools and the local authority into collision; it would bring the weaker into collision with the stronger, and the weaker would be destroyed. He dreaded extreme Churchmen far more than he dreaded the hon. Member for Carnarvon. The hon. Member for Carnarvon made a direct attack on the Church schools, but those extreme gentlemen made a direct attack on the State. The risk of danger seemed to be that moderate men like himself would be compelled to join their forces with men like the hon. Member for Carnarvon and make common cause with them. That certainly was not his wish, but profoundly as he differed from the hon. Gentleman in all matters of Unionism and Imperialism, he was being driven from his own side. It was not on the question of Unionism but on educational matters that he was being driven from his moorings, utterly against his will. He heartily hoped that if the Government did not accept the Amendment they would make such radical alterations in the Clause as would make it possible for him—which it was not now—to vote for the Third Reading of the Bill.
SIR EDWARD GREYsaid he thought the discussion of the Clause and the Clause itself were very good illustrations, if the Government would only think of it, of how the determination of the Government to secure, and even increase dogmatic teaching was imperilling the real interests of education. He could not make out whether the new Clause was a new departure or not. The right hon. the First Lord spoke of it as a new departure, but the right hon. Gentleman the Member for Cambridge University said that it only allowed to be done what was done already. If it was so, there was no concession in it. There had been unanswerable speeches showing that in so as far this Clause operated at all it would operate in the direction of making it easy for a district to have two bad schools instead of the one good one which now existed. That would make things worse for the future of educational reform. To multiply the two sets of schools with two sets of staffs would be to increase the intolerable controversy which must exist as long as they had two sets of schools side by side. What he wanted to point out was that the First Lord seemed to be fencing with the Scottish system. The whole course of the discussion pointed the moral in the direction of the Scotch system. But they could not have the Scotch system in half-a-dozen pieces. It could not be applied to one set of schools and not to another. The two great principles in the Scotch system were liberty in religious teaching everywhere and public control and management everywhere. These things should always go together, and he thought that the right hon. Gentleman should reconsider his opinion that the Scottish system was not suited to the English people. There would be no real progress in educational reform until they got rid of the religious difficulty, and it was only by a Government bold enough to adopt the Scotch system in its integrity that they would get rid of the religious difficulty. The right hon. Member for Cambridge University said that the religious peace in the schools was owing to the common sense of the teachers, but that was because the teachers softened the dogmatic teaching imposed upon them.

1449
He agreed with the right hon Gentleman the Member for South Aberdeen, that the great majority of the parents of this country would be content with plain Bible teaching for their children. [An Hon. MEMBER: "HOW do you know?"] How did the hon. Gentleman opposite know that the majority of the parents wanted denominational teaching? It was because the children were in denominational schools, but then the parents had no other choice at present than to send them there. As long as they bad denominational control of the schools so long should they have the Cowper-Temple Clause. The right hon. Member for Cambridge University had given an instance where the religious difficulty had arisen at Barry Docks, and where the Board of Education had to intervene. A Roman Catholic school had to be established, but it was not recognised for some time. He would remind the right hon. Gentleman that some time ago he had quoted the case of Barra, in the Hebrides, where the Scotch system had solved the religious difficulty at once. The right hon. the First Lord should adopt the logical conclusion of his own scheme. There were side by side in this country two systems which were intolerable from the point of view of a great many people The First Lord said that the School Board system under the Cowper-Temple Clause would be intolerable without the denominational system alongside it. On the other hand, many people thought that the denominational system would be intolerable without the schools under the Cowper-Temple Clause. [Mr. BALFOUR: "Hear, hear."] But these two intolerable systems did not make one tolerable system; and this Clause would tend to perpetuate the existing difficulties by multiplying the two different kinds of schools. Until it was recognised that the dual system must go it was impossible to make progress with educational reform.
MR. A. J. BALFOURsaid that the right hon. Baronet seemed to share the delusion of the Member for North Birmingham that this Clause was aimed simply at multiplying denominational and voluntary schools. The Clause was not intended to have that effect, and it
1450
would not have that effect. It was intended to give, and what it did give, was a liberty which did not now exist—a liberty of establishing a denominational school or a provided school in districts where, under the present system, they could not be erected. Whatever the requirements of the district might be, if voluntary schools were available no other kind of school was possible. If this Bill were not passed they could not have a provided school at all. So long as the voluntary schools could provide accommodation they could not get a provided school. Even if there were a School Board it could do nothing, however much the population might prefer a board school, so long as there were a sufficient number of places in the existing schools. The system which imposed such arbitrary limitations was not good. There was a well - known case in which the school was Roman Catholic and adequate for the wants of the whole population, though the majority of that population was Protestant. It was not in the power of the Education Department or any one else to provide other school accommodation for the Protestant children of that district. In Preston at present the whole school accommodation was provided in voluntary schools, and, except for this Clause, the new education authority under the Bill would have no power to provide a school, however much the people of Preston might desire it.
SIR WALTER FOSTER: All the powers of the School Boards are to be transferred.
MR. A. J. BALFOUR: That made no difference where the whole ground was already covered. His hon. friend the Member for North Birmingham had got it into his head that this Clause was put into the Bill to please extreme Churchmen. He could assure his hon. friend that he held no brief for extreme Churchmen, who were perfectly well able to defend themselves, but he wished to destroy the absurd limitations to existing powers, and this Clause did that with fairness to the voluntary system and to the provided school system. Both had their freedom of action increased by this Clause, and there was no reason why it should act more in

1451
favour of one system than the other. He hoped it would operate to provide such a system of education as would suit the general wishes of the parents.
MR. YOXALLThought the remarks of the right hon. Gentleman were based on a misconception. The right hon. Gentleman's argument was based upon future accommodation rather than the present. What the right hon. Gentleman said was that where the ground was covered by a School Board or voluntary school, a school of another type could not be set up. But the Committee must have regard to the future; to the growth of population and the new school places to be provided. While the plan of the right hon. Gentleman would relieve the present difficulty it would do so only by creating a greater difficulty for the future.
MR. A. J. BALFOUR: Not a greater difficulty than now.
MR. YOXALL: Those who wished to establish a denominational school in an area already covered by board schools could do so already, because the right hon. Gentleman below the gangway had told the Committee this afternoon that no power rested with the Education Department under the Act of 1870 to veto the erection of a denominational school in these areas, although all former presidents and vice-presidents, and all former legal authorities, held the contrary opinion. The disability was only in the establishment of board schools. There was no demand to justify this Clause, which had been inserted at the bidding of a few clerical persons and a few lay persons more clerical than the clerics. If this Clause were passed the few difficulties now experienced would be reproduced all over the land in an aggravated form. With regard to the adoption of the Scotch system he pointed out that the reason why the system acted so well in Scotland was because among the Protestants of Scotland the difference of dogma was very slight. They differed as to Church government but not with regard to dogma. The Protestants of this country differed interminably in a way quite different to what was the case in Scotland. The Scotch system would if adopted greatly increase the difficulties, and for that reason he preferred to adhere to the Cowper-Temple
1452
Clause. The friction set up by the new Clause would cause in every locality a warfare between the clericals and the local authority, which in the end would be bound to end in the nullification of this new Clause.
SIR WILLIAM MATHERasked the Prime Minister how he could reconcile a statement made in his speech at Manchester with the principle involved in this Clause and in Clause 10. The statement made at Manchester was to the effect that the Bill would give a power to the people, never enjoyed before, should the circumstances of the district require it, to build out of public funds a school which should suit those whom the voluntary and denominational schools of the district did not suit. That was a very specific statement, and one which, if not contravened by Clause 10, would be a very satisfactory settlement of the dispute. But under Clause 9 it would be impossible for the local education authority to proceed at once, in compliance with a demand to supply this educational want, if it had to adopt the tedious method provided. No doubt it was the intention of the Prime Minister to constitute an education authority based on public opinion absolutely responsible for the secular education of the children. But under the Clause the local authority could not build a school without consulting some other bodies, and eventually going to the Education Department, and if they could not do so without these restrictions, that was certainly not progressive education. This could not be a national system of education. He advocated that the local authority should be given power without any limitation whatever as to new schools, leaving the existing denominational schools to be dealt with on their own merits.
MR. PERKSpointed out that, as far as the Wesleyan Methodists were concerned, the proviso enabling them to erect small denominational schools in the little towns and villages was directly opposed to the educational policy of that Church, although it was true that a small section of the officials of that Church had been completely misleading the Education Department as to the feeling of the great

1453
body of the Methodist Church. The proviso might, if passed, unquestionably be used with rather startling effect against the voluntary schools established throughout the country under the control of the Anglican Church. In a village in Kent, near which he formerly lived, he had to tell the clergyman of the parish, the vicar of Bickley, that he might find it necessary to build a Wesleyan school because the clergyman had improperly treated a boy who attended that school, and also the Wesleyan Sunday school. But no sooner had he told the clergyman that he would build a school than the difficulties disappeared; the boy was re-instated, and matters went on as before. In a village in Lincolnshire the Conscience Clause had been abused. Opposite the national school there was a vacant piece of land which was put up for auction. He bade for the ground, and it was conveyed to him. No sooner did the vicar of the parish hear that he had bought the land for the purpose of building a competing Free Church school than there was a complete change in that school as to the operation of the Conscience Clause It was clear, therefore, that the existence of this proviso would to some extent help the Free Churches, who could threaten to put up competitive schools, and so bring to book the Anglican clergy, and people of hat class, who had brought great discredit on the cause of education. In the village of Dorchester, in Oxford-shire, there was only one school, with about seventy Dissenting children. These children were made to bow down to the crucifix which was erected in the school, and they were marched to Mass. There were two methods of dealing with that state of things. It the Government retained this provision in the Bill the method by which the Free Churches could bring that clergyman to book was by erecting a Free Church school, running it for twelve months, gathering into it more than thirty children, and saving to the Department, "You must now recognise us as a Nonconformist school under the Bill."
MR. A. J. BALFOUR: The Education Department would do it.
MR. PERKSsaid it would be far better for the community not to have a sectarian wrangle between different sects in the village. It would be preferable for the local education authority, who had already the control of secular education, to set up that competitive school rather than that there should be a public inquiry, involving serious sectarian strife, to decide whether the school should be Wesleyan, Roman Catholic, or Anglican. One ot the largest denominations in the country—the Wesleyan Methodists—did not desire this Clause. The overwhelming majority of that body wished the new schools to be provided, not under the control of a sectarian authority, but under the control of the local public authority.
MR. M'KENNAasked what would be the effect if this Amendment were ac-accepted? Would it be that the local education authority would alone be able to provide the school? He thought the effect of the Amendment, if accepted, would be that the local education authority would have the decision as to whether it, or some other persons, should provide the school. The only issue was as to who should decide by whom the new school was to be established. That was a very simple issue, and. if really understood, he believed the Committee would come to the conclusion that the Amendment ought to be accepted. Why should the local authority rather than the Board of Education decide? Because the local authority represented the locality and the parents, and was a better judge of the needs of the locality than the Board of Education could be. The Board of Education had to decide the matter according to the three conditions in Clause 10, and these conditions had been shown to favour the "other persons" as against the local authority. But that was not the worst point. If the Board of Education decided in favour of the "other persons" there was absolutely no provision in the Bill to compel them to carry out the decision of the Board, although it was proposed by an Amendment to Clause 11 to render it obligatory an the local authority to provide a school if ordered by the Board. The consequence of the want of such a power with regard to the "other persons"

1455
would be months, perhaps years, of delay, and meanwhile the school provision in the district would be insufficient and inefficient. The sufficiency of the supply was not to be determined by the Board of Education, consequently small schools would be multiplied. Under these circumstances it was surely far better to leave the local authority, if it was to be an authority at all, to decide questions of this sort. In the interest of the Education of the locality he urged that that the Amendment should be accepted.
MR. WHITLEYsaid that this Amendment was practically the Clause; on its acceptance or otherwise depended the whole meaning of the Clause. When introducing the Bill, the First Lord of the Treasury laid great stress on Clauses 9 and 10, as remedying the Nonconformist grievance in the villages; it was therefore necessary that the right hon. Gentleman should understand why the Nonconformists did not like the Clause under consideration. In the first place, they preferred good education to sectarian division. They would rather have their children educated in a Church school, with all its Church atmosphere, than in a less efficient sectarian school, such as might be provided under this Clause. A village with just over sixty children might be equally divided between Church and Nonconformity, and it would be possible to have there two schools with only one teacher in each. Personally he would
rather his child ran the risk of the Church atmosphere in one school with two teachers, because it would be a more efficient school, than have such an unfortunate division in the village. As far as the grievance of the Nonconformists was concerned, this Clause, as a remedy for that grievance, might be eliminated from consideration altogether. As to the provision of Church schools in a district in which there were only publicly provided schools, what did the Clause amount to? In such a case there were no vested interests, and there was no question of great sacrifices having been made by Churchmen in the past. It simply put it into the power of a denomination, by merely building the shell of a new school, not necessarily required, to plant the entire cost of maintenance on the ratepayers. That was not good either for the Church or for education. He supported the Amendment, not from the point of view of the Church or of Nonconformity, but because he desired to have thoroughly good education in the villages. The Clause, as it stood, distinctly tempted any fraction of the community, whether Anglican or Nonconformist, to spoil the education of a district in the interest of their particular sect, and for that reason he should vote for the Amendment.
(6.43.) Question put.
The Committee divided: Ayes, 225; Noes, 111. (Division List No. 457).

AYES.

Agg-Gardner, James Tynte

Blundell, Colonel Henry

Chamberlain, Rt. Hon. J. (Birm

Agnew, Sir Andrew Noel

Bond, Edward

Chaplin, Rt. Hon. Henry

Aird, Sir John

Boscawen, Arthur Griffith-

Chapman, Edward

Allhusen, Augustus Henry Eden

Boulnois, Edmund

Charrington, Spencer

Anson, Sir William Reynell

Bousfield, William Robert

Clare, Octavius Leigh

Archdale, Edward Mervyn

Bowles, Capt. H. F. (Middlesex

Clive, Captain Percy A.

Arkwright, John Stanhope

Bowles, T. Gibson (King's Lynn

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

Arnold-Forster, Hugh O.

Brodrick, Rt. Hon. St. John

Cohen, Benjamin Louis

Atkinson, Rt. Hon. John

Brookfield, Colonel Montagu

Collings, Rt. Hon. Jesse

Bailey, James (Walworth)

Brown, Alexander H. (Shropsh.

Colomb, Sir John Charles Ready

Bain, Colonel James Robert

Brymer, William Ernest

Compton, Lord Alwyne

Balcarres, Lord

Bull, William James

Cox, Irwin Edward Bainbridge

Baldwin, Alfred

Burdett-Coutts, W.

Cripps, Charles Alfred

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

Butcher, John George

Cross, Alexander (Glasgow)

Balfour, Capt. C. B. (Hornsey)

Campbell, Rt. Hn J. A. (Glasgow

Cross, Herb. Shepherd (Bolton)

Balfour, Rt. Hn. Gerald W. (Leeds

Carew, James Laurence

Crossley, Sir Savile

Banbury, Frederick George

Carson, Rt. Hon. Sir Edw. H.

Cubitt, Hon. Henry

Bartley, George C. T.

Carvill, Patrick Geo. Hamilton

Davenport, William Bromley-

Bathurst, Hon. Allen Benjamin

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

Davies, Sir Horatio D. (Chatham

Bhownaggree, Sir M. M.

Cavendish, V. C. W (Derbyshire

Denny, Colonel

Bignold, Arthur

Cayzer, Sir Charles William

Dickson-Poynder, Sir John P.

Bigwood, James

Cecil, Evelyn (Aston Manor)

Dixon-Hartland, Sir Fred Dixon

Bill, Charles.

Cecil, Lord Hugh (Greenwich

Dorington, Rt. Hon. Sir John E.

Douglas, Rt. Hon. A. Akers-

Jebb, Sir Richard Claverhouse

Rankin, Sir James

Duke, Henry Edward

Johnstone, Heywood

Rasch, Major Frederic Carne

Durning-Lawrence, Sir Edwin

Kemp, George

Remnant, James Farquaharson

Dyke, Rt. Hon. Sir William Hart

Kenyon, Hon Geo. T. (Denbigh)

Ridley, Hon M. W. (Stalybridge

Elliot, Hon. A. Ralph Douglas

Keswick, William

Ritchie, Rt. Hn. Chas. Thomson

Fardell, Sir T. George

King, Sir Henry Seymour

Roberts, Samuel (Sheffield)

Farquharson, Dr. Robert

Lambton, Hon Frederick Wm.

Robertson, Herbert (Hackney)

Fellowes, Hon. Ailwyn Edward

Lecky, Rt. Hn. William Edw. H.

Robinson, Brooke

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

Lee, Arthur H (Hants., Fareham

Rothschild, Hon. Lionel Walter

Finch, George H.

Lees, Sir Elliot (Birkenhead)

Royds, Clement Molyneux

Finlay, Sir Robert Bannatyne

Legge, Col. Hon. Heneage

Rutherford, John

Fisher, William Hayes

Leigh-Bennett, Henry Currie

Samuel, Harry S. (Limehouse)

Fison, Frederick William

Loder, Gerald Walter Erskine

Seely, Charles Hilton (Lincoln

Fitz Gerald, Sir Robert Penrose-

Long, Col. Charles W. (Evesham

Seton-Karr, Henry

Fitzroy, Hon. Edward Algernon

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

Sharpe, William Edward T.

Flannery, Sir Fortescue

Lonsdale, John Brownlee

Simeon, Sir Barrington

Fletcher, Rt. Hon. Sir Henry

Lowe, Francis William

Sinclair, Louis (Romford)

Flower, Ernest

Loyd, Archie Kirkman

Smith, James Parker (Lanarks

Forster, Henry William

Lucas, Reginald. J. (Portsmouth

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

Galloway, William Johnson

Macdona, John Cumming

Spencer, Sir E. (W. Bromwich

Gardner, Ernest

Maconochie, A. W.

Stanley, Lord (Lancs.)

Garfit, William

M'Arthur, Charles (Liverpool)

Stewart, Sir Mark J. M'Taggart

Godson, Sir Augustus Frederick

M'Iver, Sir Lewis (Edinburgh W

Stone, Sir Benjamin

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

Malcolm, Ian

Strutt, Hon. Charles Hedley

Gore, Hn G R. C. Ormsby-(Salop

Maple, Sir John Blundell

Sturt, Hon. Humphry Napier

Gorst, Rt. Hon. Sir. John Eldon

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

Talbot, Lord E. (Chichester)

Goschen, Hon. George Joachim

Meysey-Thompson, Sir H. M.

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

Goulding, Edward Alfred

More, Robt. Jasper (Shropshire

Thorburn, Sir Walter

Graham, Henry Robert

Morgan, David J (Walthamst' w

Thornton, Percy M.

Gray, Ernest (West Ham)

Morrell, George Herbert

Tomlinson, Sir Wm. Edw. M.

Grenfell, William Henry

Morrison, James Archibald

Tritton, Charles Ernest

Greville, Hon. Ronald

Morton, Arthur H. Aylmer

Tufnell, Lieut.-Col. Edward

Guthrie, Walter Murray

Mount, William Arthur

Valentia, Viscount

Hain, Edward

Mowbray, Sir Robert Gray C.

Vincent, Col. Sir C. E H (Sheffield

Hall, Edward Marshall

Muntz, Sir Philip A.

Walker, Col. William Hall

Halsey, Rt. Hon. Thomas F.

Murray, Rt Hn A. Graham (Bute

Walrond, Rt Hon Sir William H.

Hambro, Charles Eric

Murray, Charles J. (Coventry)

Wanklyn, James Leslie

Hamilton, Rt Hn Lord G (Middx

Murray, Col. Wyndham (Bath

Warde, Colonel C. E.

Hanbury, Rt. Hon. Robert Wm.

Myers, William Henry

Webb, Col. William George

Hardy, Laurence (Kent, Ashf'rd

Nicholson, William Graham

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

Hare, Thomas Leigh

Nicol, Donald Ninian

Welby, Sir Charles G. E. (Notts.

Harris, Frederick Leverton

Nolan, Col. John P. (Galway N.)

Wharton, Rt. Hon. John Llovd

Hay, Hon. Claude George

Orr-Ewing, Charles Lindsay

Wilson, A. Stanley (York, E. R.)

Heaton, John Henniker

Peel, Hon Wm Robert Wellesley

Wilson-Todd, Wm. H. (Yorks)

Helder, Augustus

Pemberton, John S. G.

Worsley-Taylor, Henry Wilson

Henderson, Sir Alexander

Percy, Earl

Wortley, Rt. Hon C. B. Stuart-

Hobhouse, Henry (Somerset, E

Pierpoint, Robert

Wylie, Alexander

Hogg, Lindsay

Platt-Higgins, Frederick

Wyndham, Rt. Hon. George

Hope, J. F. (Sheffield, Brightside

Plummer, Walter R.

Horner, Frederick William

Powell, Sir Francis Sharp

Houston, Robert Paterson

Pretyman, Ernest George

TELLERS FOR THE AYES—

Howard. J. (Midd., Tottenham

Pryce-Jones, Lt.-Col. Edward

Sir Alexander Acland-Hood and Mr. Anstruther.

Hozier, Hon. James Henry Cecil

Purvis, Robert

Hudson, George Bickersteth

Pym, C. Guy

NOES.

Allan, Sir William (Gateshead)

Campbell-Bannerman, Sir H.

Grey, Rt. Hon. Sir E. (Berwick

Allen, Charles P. (Glouc., Stroud

Causton, Richard Knight

Griffith, Ellis J.

Ashton, Thomas Gair

Channing, Francis Allston

Gurdon, Sir W. Brampton

Asquith, Rt Hon. Herbert Henry

Cremer, William Randal

Harmsworth, R. Leicester

Atherley-Jones, L.

Dalziel, James Henry

Harwood, George

Bayley, Thomas (Derbyshire)

Davies, Alfred (Carmarthen)

Hayne, Rt. Hon. Charles Seale-

Beaumont, Wentworth C. B.

Davies, M. Vaughan-(Cardigan

Hayter, Rt. Hon. Sir Arthur D.

Bell, Richard

Dilke, Rt. Horn Sir Charles

Hemphill, Rt. Hon. Charles H.

Broadhurst, Henry

Dunn, Sir William

Holland, Sir William Henry

Brunner, Sir John Tomlinson

Edwards, Frank

Horniman, Frederick John

Bryce, Rt. Hon. James

Evans, Sir Francis H (Maidst'ne

Humphreys-Owen, Arthur C.

Burns, John

Fenwick, Charles

Jacoby, James Alfred

Burt, Thomas

Fitzmaurice, Lord Edmond

Jones, David Brynmor (Swansea

Buxton, Sydney Charles

Foster Sir Walter (Derby Co.

Kearley, Hudson E.

Caine, William Sproston

Fuller, J. M. F.

Kinloch, Sir John George Smyth

Caldwell, James

Furness, Sir Christopher

Labouchere, Henry

Cameron, Robert

Goddard, Daniel Ford

Lambert, George

1458

1459

Leese, Sir Joseph F. (Accrington

Partington, Oswald

Thomas, Sir A. (Glamorgan, E

Leng, Sir John

Pearson, Sir Weetman D.

Thomas, David Alfred (Merthyr

Lewis, John Herbert

Perks, Robert William

Thomas, F. Freeman-(Hastings

Lloyd-George, David

Philipps, John Wynford

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

Lough, Thomas

Pickard, Benjamin

Trevelyan, Charles Philips

Macnamara, Dr. Thomas J.

Price, Robert John

Walton, John Lawson (Leeds, S.

M'Crae, George

Rea, Russell

Warner, Thomas Courtenay T.

M'Kenna, Reginald

Roberts, John H. (Denbighs)

Wason, Eugene

Mansfield, Horace Rendall

Robson, William Snowdon

Weir, James Galloway

Mappin, Sir Frederick Thorpe

Sandys, Lieut.-Col. Thos. Myles

White, George (Norfolk)

Mather, Sir William

Schwann, Charles E.

White, Luke (York, E. R.)

Mellor, Rt. Hon. John William

Shackleton, David James

Whitley, J. H. (Halifax)

Middlemore, John Throgmorton

Shaw, Charles Edw. (Stafford)

Whittaker, Thomas Palmer

Morgan, J. Lloyd (Carmarthen)

Shaw, Thomas (Hawick B.)

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

Morley, Charles (Breconshire)

Shipman, Dr. John G.

Woodhouse, Sir J. T (Huddersf'd

Morley, Rt. Hn. John(Montrose

Sinclair, John (Forfarshire)

Yoxall, James Henry

Moulton, John Fletcher

Sloan, Thomas Henry

Newnes, Sir George

Soames, Arthur Wellesley

Norman, Henry

Soares, Ernest J.

TELLERS FOR THE NOES—

Norton, Capt. Cecil William

Spencer, Rt Hon C. R (Northants

Mr. Herbert Gladstone and

Nussey, Thomas Willans

Strachey, Sir Edward

Mr. William M'Arthur

Palmer, Sir Charles M. (Durham

Thomas, Abel (Carmarthen, E.)

DR. MACNAMARAsaid the Amendment he desired to move was to insert after the word "school," in line 37, the words "or to enlarge any existing public elementary school." He admitted that these words would cover the enlargement of a voluntary school or of a provided school, but what he was anxious to secure was that, if the denominationalists desired to enlarge a public elementary school, as no doubt they would do under this scheme, they should go through the whole process of appeal, examination, and investigation, the same as any other body. The new scheme of this Bill would set up a new basis for providing school places. While there might be a deficiency of places of a certain kind, there might be a large excess of places in other schools, but the question which would determine the point would be whether there was a need of places of a particular kind.
Amendment proposed—
"In page 3, line 37, after 'school,' insert ' or to enlarge any existing public elementary school.' "—
Question proposed, "That those words be there inserted."
SIR ROBERT FINLAY: I understand that the point is that, without building a new school, in the popular sense, there might be such a considerable enlargement in existing schools as to put a burden upon the rates for maintenance That is a matter which must be dealt with in some form, and what I
1460
would suggest is, that it might be better to introduce at the end of the Clause some words to provide that, in case of enlargement, the Board of Education should determine whether, for the purposes of this section, the enlargement is such that it ought to be treated as a new school. The hon. Gentleman is perfectly right when he says that the present Bill produces a new condition of things with regard to enlargements, and he contends that the operation of the Clause in regard to the provision of new schools might be evaded by enlarging existing schools. I would suggest that it would be better to say that the case of the enlargement of a school should be dealt with by the Board of Education, and if they are of opinion that the enlargement is such that it should be treated as a new school, then they could take that course. I think that would meet the hon. Gentleman's contention. In that case I hope the hon. Member will withdraw his Amendment.
SIR CHARLES DILKEpointed out that there was ample power now to enlarge schools, and therefore putting in these words would simply limit the enlargement of the schools by the provisions of this Clause. He certainly could not support his hon. friend's Amendment.
MR. SYDNEY BUXTONsaid it seemed to him that this was just one of the cases in which the local authority ought to have power to enlarge its schools without going to all this trouble. The Attorney

1461
General had made a suggestion on this point, but the First Lord of the Treasury now appeared to withdraw that suggestion. This appeared to him to be a fast and loose way of doing things. [MINISTERIAL cries of "Oh. oh," and "No, no."] This Bill was so drawn that a very great deal of the time which they had had to spend discussing it had been due to the extraordinary way in which the Bill was drafted, and the want of information which those interested in the measure displayed in regard to all questions connected with elementary education.
DR. MACNAMARAsaid that what he wanted to prevent was the unnecessary enlargement of voluntary schools, and he understood that the Attorney General agreed that something would have to be done in this respect.
SIR ROBERT FINLAY: No, I made that suggestion as one likely to meet the views of the hon. Member.
DR. MACNAMARAsaid he gathered from the remarks of the Attorney General that something would have to be done. He did not want the local education authority to have any veto of an un-reasonable character put upon it, but he did want to prevent the unnecessary multiplication by enlargements of denominational schools. He appealed to the Attorney General to do something in this matter, and in the meantime he asked leave to withdraw his Amendment.
MR. M'KENNAsaid they were all agreed that there ought to be power to restrain the unnecessary enlargement of voluntary schools. As the Clause stood at present they could increase them to any size they liked, and in this way they might attract from the provided schools the children who would otherwise have continued to attend those schools. On the Opposition side of the House,
they thought the provisions should apply to the non-provided schools also. He understood the Attorney-General to say that if his hon. friend proposed an Amendment dealing with the non-provided schools the Government would be disposed to accept it. If that was not understood he would much prefer to go to a division on this Amendment. Before the Amendment was withdrawn he desired to know if the Government would accept an Amendment at the end of the Clause which would allow of an increase of a building amounting practically to the provision of a new school.
SIR ROBERT FINLAYsaid he, had made a suggestion with a view to shortening debate which had been made an excuse for prolonging it.
MR. M'KENNAsaid that answer would not be likely to shorten debate He asked the hon. Member for North Camberwell if he would at the end of the Clause move an Amendment to allow of discussion. ["No, no."]
Amendment, by leave, withdrawn.
MR. A. J. BALFOURrose in his place, and claimed to move, "That the Question 'That the words of the Clause from the word" propose, 'in page 3, line 37, to the word "school,'' inline 40, both inclusive, stand part of the Clause' be now put."
Question put, "That the Question 'That the words of the Clause from the word "propose" in page 3, line 37, to the word "school," in line 40, both inclusive, stand part of the Clause ' be now put."
The Committee divided:—Ayes, 222: Noes 107. (Division List No. 458.)

AYES.

Agg-Gardner, James Tynte

Bain, Colonel James Robert

Bhownaggree, Sir M. M.

Agnew, Sir Andrew Noel

Balcarres, Lord

Bignold, Arthur

Allhusen, Augustus H'nry Eden

Baldwin, Alfred

Bigwood, James

Anson, Sir William Reynell

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

Bill, Charles

Archadale, Edward Mervyn

Balfour, Capt. C. B. (Hornsey)

Blundell, Colonel Henry

Arkwright, John Stanhope

Balfour, Rt Hn Gerald W (Leeds)

Bond, Edward

Arnold-Furster, Hugh O.

Banbury, Frederick George

Boscawen, Arthur Griffith-

Atkinson, Rt. Hon. John

Bartley, George C. T.

Bousfield, William Robert

Bailey, James (Walworth)

Bathurst, Hon. Allen Benjamin

Bowles, Capt. H. F. (Middlesex)

Bowles, T. Gibson(King's Lynn)

Grenfell, William Henry

Parker, Sir Gilbert

Brodrick, Rt. Hon. St. John

Greville, Hon. Ronald

Peel, Hn Wm Robert Wellesley

Brookfield, Colonel Montagu

Guthrie, Walter Murray

Pemberton, John S. G.

Brown, Alexander H. (Shropsh.

Hain, Edward

Percy, Earl

Brymer, William Ernest

Hall, Edward Marshall

Pierpoint, Robert

Bull, William James

Halsey, Rt. Hon. Thomas F.

Platt-Higgins, Frederick

Burdett-Coutts, W.

Hambro, Charles Eric

Plummer, Walter R.

Butcher, John George

Hamilton, Rt Hn Lord G (Midd'x

Powell, Sir Francis Sharp

Carew, James Laurence

Hanbury, Rt. Hon. Robert Wm.

Pretyman, Ernest George

Carson, Rt. Hon. Sir Edw. H.

Hardy, Laurence (Kent, Ashf'rd

Pryce-Jones, Lt.-Col. Edward

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

Hare, Thomas Leigh

Purvis, Robert

Cavendish, V. C. W. (Derbyshire

Harris, Frederick Leverton

Pym, C. Guy

Cayzer, Sir Charles William

Hay, Hon. Claude George

Randles, John S.

Cecil, Evelyn (Aston Manor)

Heaton, John Henniker

Rankin, Sir James

Cecil, Lord Hugh (Greenwich)

Helder, Augustus

Rasch, Major Frederic Carne

Chamberlain, Rt. Hon. J. (Birm.

Henderson, Sir Alexander

Remnant, James Farquharson

Chapman, Edward

Hobhouse, Henry (Somerset, E.

Ridley, Hn. M. W. (Stalybridge

Charrington, Spencer

Hogg, Lindsay

Ritchie, Rt. Hn. Chas. Thomson

Clare, Octavius Leigh

Hope, J. F. (Sheffield, Brightside

Roberts. Samuel (Sheffield)

Clive, Captain Percy A.

Horner, Frederick William

Robertson, Herbert (Hackney)

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

Howard, J.(Midd., Tottenham

Robinson, Brooke

Cohen, Benjamin Louis

Hozier, Hon James Henry Cecil

Rothschild, Hon. Lionel Walter

Collings, Rt. Hon. Jesse

Hudson, George Bickersteth

Royds, Clement Molyneux

Colomb, Sir John Charles Ready

Jebb, Sir Richard Claverhouse

Rutherford, John

Compton, Lord Alwyne

Johnstone, Heywood

Samuel, Harry S. (Limehouse)

Cork, Sir Frederick Lucas

Kearley, Hudson, E.

Seely, Charles Hilton (Lincoln)

Cox, Irwin Edward Bainbridge

Kenyon, Hon. Geo. T. (Denbigh

Seton-Karr. Henry

Cranborne, Viscount

Keswick, William

Sharpe, William Edward T.

Cripps, Charles Alfred

King, Sir Henry Seymour

Simeon, Sir Barrington

Cross, Alexander (Glasgow)

Lambton, Hon. Frederick Wm.

Sinclair, Louis (Romford)

Cross, Herb. Shepherd (Bolton)

Lecky, Rt. Hn. William Edw. H.

Smith, James Parker (Lanarks.

Crossley, Sir Savile

Lee, Arthur H. (Hants, Fareham

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

Cubitt, Hon. Henry

Lees, Sir Elliott (Birkenhead)

Spencer, Sir E. (W. Bromwich

Davenport, William Bromley-

Legge, Col. Hon. Heneage

Stanley, Edward Jas. (Somerset

Davies, Sir Horatio D (Chatham

Leigh-Bennett, Henry Currie

Stanley, Lord (Lancs.)

Denny, Colonel

Loder, Gerald Walter Erskine

Stewart, Sir Mark J. M' Taggart

Dickson-Poynder, Sir John P.

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

Stone, Sir Benjamin

Dixon-Hartland, Sir Fred Dixon

Lonsdale, John Brownlee

Strutt, Hon. Charles Hedley

Dorington, Rt. Hn. Sir John E.

Lowe, Francis William

Sturt, Hon. Humphry Napier

Douglas, Rt. Hon. A. Akers-

Loyd, Archie Kirkman

Talbot, Lord E. (Chichester)

Duke, Henry Edward

Lucas, Reginald J. (Portsmouth

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

Durning-Lawrence, Sir Edwin

Lytteton, Hon. Alfred

Thorburn, Sir Walter

Dyke, Rt. Hn. Sir William Hart

Macdona, John Cumming

Thornton, Percy M.

Elliot, Hon. A. Ralph Douglas

Maconochie, A. W.

Tomlinson, Sir Wm. Edw. M.

Fardell, Sir T. George

M'Arthur, Charles (Liverpool)

Tritton, Charles Ernest

Fellowes, Hon. Ailwyn Edward

M'Iver, Sir Lewis(Edinburgh W

Tufnell, Lieut.-Col. Edward

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

Malcolm, Ian

Valentia, Viscount

Finch, George H.

Maple, Sir John Blundell

Walker, Col. William Hall

Finlay, Sir Robert Bannatyne

Maxwell, Rt Hn Sir H E(Wigt'n

Walrond, Rt. Hn. Sir William H

Fisher, William Hayes

Meysey-Thompson, Sir H. M.

Wanklyn, James Leslie

Fison, Frederick William

Middlemore, John Throgmort'n

Warde, Col. C. E.

FitzGerald, Sir Robert Penrose-

More, Robt. Jasper (Shropshire

Webb, Colonel William George

Fitzroy, Hon. Edward Algernon

Morgan, David J (Walth'mstow

Welby, Lt.-Col. A. C. E (Taunt'n

Flannery, Sir Fortescue

Morrell, George Herbert

Welby, Sir Charles G. E. (Notts

Fletcher, Rt. Hon. Sir Henry

Morrison, James Archibald

Wharton, Rt. Hon. John Lloyd

Flower, Ernest

Morton, Arthur H. Aylmer

Wilson, A. Stanley (York, E. R.)

Forster, Henry William

Mount, William Arthur

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

Galloway, William Johnson

Mowbray, Sir Robert Gray C

Worsley-Taylor, Henry Wilson

Gardner, Ernest

Muntz, Sir Philip A.

Wortley, Rt. Hon C. B. Stuart-

Garfit, William

Murray, Rt Hn A. Graham (Bute

Wylie, Alexander

Godson, Sir Augustus Frederick

Murray, Charles J. (Coventry)

Wyndham, Rt. Hon. George

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

Murray, Col. Wyndham (Bath)

Gore, Hn GR. C. Ormsby-(Salop

Myers, William Henry

Gorst, Rt. Hon. Sir John Eldon

Nicholson, William Graham

TELLERS FOR THE AYES—

Goschen, Hon. George Joachim

Nicol, Donald Ninian

Sir Alexander Acland-Hood and Mr. Anstruther.

Goulding, Edward Alfred

Nolan, Col. John P. (Galway, N.)

Gray, Ernest (West Ham)

Orr-Ewing, Charles Lindsay

NOES.

Allan, Sir William (Gateshead

Bayley, Thomas (Derbyshire)

Bryce, Rt. Hon. James

Allen, Charles P. (Glouc., Stroud

Beaumont, Wentworth C. B.

Burns, John

Ashton, Thomas Gair

Bell, Richard

Burt, Thomas

Asquith, Rt. Hn. Herbert Henry

Broadhurst, Henry

Buxton, Sydney Charles

Atherley-Jone, L.

Brunner, Sir John Tomlinson

Caldwell, James

1464

1465

Cameron, Robert

Kearley, Hudson E.

Robertson, Edmund (Dundee)

Campbell-Bannerman, Sir H.

Kinloch, Sir John George Smyth

Schwann, Charles E.

Causton, Richard knight

Labouchere, Henry

Shackleton, David James

Channing, Francis Allston

Lambert, George

Shaw, Charles Edw. (Stafford)

Cremer, William Randal

Leese, Sir Joseph F. (Accrington

Shaw, Thomas (Hawick B.)

Dalziel, James Henry

Leng, Sir John

Shipman, Dr. John G.

Davies, Alfred (Carmarthen)

Lewis, John Herbert

Sinclair, John (Forfarshire)

Davies, M. Vaughan-(Cardigan

Lloyd-George, David

Soames, Arthur Wellesley

Dilke, Rt. Hon. Sir Charles

Lough, Thomas

Soares, Ernest J.

Dunn, Sir William

Macnamara, Dr. Thomas J.

Spencer, Rt Hn. C. R (Northants

Edwards, Frank

M'Crae, George

Strachey, Sir Edward

Evans, Sir Francis H. (Maidst'ne

M'Kenna, Reginald

Thomas, Abel (Carmarthen, E.)

Farquharson, Dr. Robert

Mansfield, Horace Rendall

Thomas, Sir A. (Glamorgan, E.)

Fenwick, Charles

Mather, Sir William

Thomas, David Alfred (Merthyr

Fitzmaurice, Lord Edmond

Morgan, J. Lloyd (Carmarthen)

Thomas, F. Freeman-(Hastings

Foster, Sir Walter (Derby Co.)

Morley, Charles (Breconshire)

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

Fuller, J. M. F.

Morley, Rt. Hn. John (Montrose

Trevelyan, Charles Philips

Furness, Sir Christopher

Moulton, John Fletcher

Walton, John Lawson(Leeds, S.

Goddard, Daniel Ford

Newnes, Sir George

Warner, Thomas Courtenay T.

Grey, Rt. Hon. Sir E. (Berwick)

Norman, Henry

Wason, Eugene

Griffith, Ellis J.

Norton, Capt. Cecil William

Weir, James Galloway

Gurdon, Sir W. Brampton

Nussey, Thomas Willans

White, George (Norfolk)

Harmsworth, R. Leicester

Palmer, Sir Charles M. (Durham

White, Luke (York, E. R.)

Harwood, George

Partington, Oswald

Whitley, J. H. (Halifax)

Hayne, Rt. Hon. Charles Seale-

Pearson, Sir Weetman D.

Whittaker, Thomas Palmer

Hayter, Rt. Hon. Sir Arthur D.

Perks, Robert William

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

Hamphill, Rt. Hon. Charles H.

Philipps, John Wynford

Woodhouse, Sir J. T (Huddersf'd

Holland, Sir William Henry

Pickard, Benjamin

Yoxall, James Henry

Horniman, Frederick John

Price, Robert John

Humphreys-Owen, Arthur C.

Priestley, Arthur

TELLERS FOR THE NOES—

Jacoby, James Alfred

Rea, Russell

Mr. Herbert Gladstone and

James, David Brynmor (Swansea

Roberts, John Bryn (Eifion)

Mr. William M'Arthur.

(7.16.) Question put accordingly.
The Committee divided:—Ayes, 222; Noes, 107. (Division List No. 459.)

AYES.

Agg-Gardner, James Tynte

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

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

Agnew, Sir Andrew Noel

Cavendish, V. C. W. (Derbyshire

Finch, George H.

Allhusen Augustus Henry Eden

Cecil, Evelyn (Aston Manor)

Finlay, Sir Robert Bannatyne

Anson, Sir William Reynell

Cecil, Lord Hugh (Greenwich)

Fisher, William Hayes

Archdale, Edward Mervyn

Chamberlain, Rt. Hon. J. (Birm.

Fison, Frederick William

Arkwright, John Stanhope

Chapman, Edward

FitzGerald, Sir Robert Penrose-

Arnold-Forster, Hugh O.

Charrington, Spencer

Fitzroy, Hn. Edward Algernon

Atkinson, Rt. Hon. John

Clare, Octavius Leigh

Flannery, Sir Fortescue

Bailey, James (Walworth)

Clive, Captain Percy A.

Fletcher, Rt. Hon. Sir Henry

Bain, Colonel James Robert

Cochrane Hon. Thos. H. A. E.

Flower, Ernest

Balcarres, Lord

Cohen, Benjamin Louis

Forster, Henry William

Baldwin, Alfred

Collings, Rt. Hon. Jesse

Galloway, William Johnson

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

Colomb, Sir John Charles Ready

Gardner, Ernest

Balfour, Capt. C. B. (Hornsey)

Compton, Lord Alwyne

Garfit, William

Balfour, Rt Hn. Gerald W. (Leeds

Cook, Sir Frederick Lucas

Godson, Sir Augustus Frederick

Banbury, Frederick George

Cox, Irwin Edward Bainbridge

Gordon, Maj Evans (T'rH'mlets

Bartley, George C. T.

Cranborne, Viscount

Gore, Hn G. R. C. Ormsby-(Salop

Bathurst, Hon. Allen Benjamin

Cripps, Charles Alfred

Gorst, Rt. Hn. Sir John Eldon

Bhownaggree, Sir M. M.

Cross, Alexander (Glasgow)

Goschen, Hon. George Joachim

Bignold, Arthur

Cross, Herb. Shepherd (Bolton)

Goulding, Edward Alfred

Bigwood, James

Crossley, Sir Savile

Gray, Ernest (West Ham)

Bill, Charles

Cubitt, Hon. Henry

Grenfell, William Henry

Blundell, Colonel Henry

Dalrymple, Sir Charles

Greville, Hon. Ronald

Bond, Edward

Davenport, William Bromley-

Guthrie, Walter Murray

Boscawen, Arthur Griffith-

Davies, Sir Horatio D (Chatham

Hain, Edward

Bousfield, William Robert

Denny, Colonel

Hall, Edward Marshall

Bowles, Capt. H. F. (Middlesex

Dickson-Poynder, Sir John P.

Halsey, Rt. Hon. Thomas F.

Brodrick, Rt. Hon. St. John

Dixon-Hartland Sir Fred Dixon

Hambro, Charles Eric

Brookfield, Colonel Montagu

Dorington, Rt. Hon. Sir John E.

Hamilton, Rt Hn Lord G (Midd'x

Brown, Alexander H. (Shropsh.

Douglas, Rt. Hon. A. Akers-

Hanbury, Rt. Hon. Robert Wm.

Brymer, William Ernest

Duke, Henry Edward

Hardy, Laurence (Kent, Ashf'rd

Bull, William James

Durning, Lawrence. Sir Edwin

Hare, Thomas Leigh

Bundett-Coutts, W.

Dyke, Rt. Hn. Sir William Hart

Harris, Frederick Leverton

Butcher, John George

Elliot, Hon. A. Ralph Douglas

Hay, Hon. Claude George

Carew, James Laurence

Fardell, Sir T. George

Heaton, John Henniker

Carson, Rt. Hon. Sir Edw. H.

Fellowes, Hon. Ailwyn Edward

Helder, Augustus

Henderson, Sir Alexander

Mowbray, Sir Robert Gray C.

Simeon, Sir Barrington

Hobhouse, Henry (Somerset, E.

Muntz, Sir Philip A.

Sinclair, Louis (Romford)

Hogg, Lindsay

Murray, Rt Hn A. Graham (Bute

Smith, James Parker (Lanarks)

Hope, J. F. (Sheffield, Brightside

Murray, Charles J. (Coventry)

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

Howard, J. (Midd., Tottenham

Murray, Col. Wyndham (Bath)

Spencer, Sir E. (W. Bromwich)

Hozier, Hon. James Henry Cecil

Myers, William Henry

Stanley Edward Jas. (Somerset)

Hudson, George Bickersteth

Nicholson, William Graham

Stanley, Lord (Lancs.)

Jebb, Sir Richard Claverhouse

Nicol, Donald Ninian

Stewart, Sir Mark J. M' Taggart

Johnstone, Heywood

Nolan, Col. John P. (Galway, N.)

Stone, Sir Benjamin

Kemp, George

Orr-Ewing, Charles Lindsay

Strutt, Hon. Charles Hedley

Kenyon, Hon. Geo. T. (Denbigh)

Parker, Sir Gilbert

Sturt, Hon. Humphry Napier

Keswick, William

Peel, Hn Wm. Robert Wellesley

Talbot, Lord E. (Chichester)

Lambton, Hon. Frederick Wm.

Pemberton, John S. G.

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

Lecky, Rt. Hn. William Edw. H.

Percy, Earl

Thorburn, Sir Walter

Lee, Arthur H (Hants., Fareham

Pierpoint, Robert

Thornton, Percy M.

Lees, Sir Elliott (Birkenhead)

Platt-Higgins, Frederick

Tomlinson, Sir Wm. Edw. M.

Legge, Col. Hon. Heneage

Plummer, Walter R.

Tritton, Charles Ernest

Leigh-Bennett, Henry Currie

Powell, Sir Francis Sharp

Tufnell, Lieut.-Col. Edward

Loder, Gerald Walter Erskine

Pretyman, Ernest George

Valentia, Viscount

Long, Col. Charles W. (Evesham

Pryce-Jones, Lt,.-Co1. Edward

Vincent, Sir Edgar (Exeter)

Long, Rt Hn. Walter (Bristol, S.

Purvis, Robert

Walker, Colonel William Hall

Lonsdale, John Brownlee

Pym, C. Guy

Walrond, Rt. Hn. Sir William H.

Lowe, Francis William

Randles, John S.

Wanklyn, James Leslie

Loyd, Archie Kirkman

Rankin, Sir James

Warde, Colonel C. E.

Lucas, Reginald. J. (Portsmouth

Rasch, Major Frederic Carne

Webb, Colonel William George

Lyttelton, Hon. Alfred

Remnant, James Farquharson

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

Macdona, John Cumming

Ridley, Hn. M. W. (Stalybridge)

Welby, Sir Charles G. E. (Notts.)

Maconochie, A. W.

Ritchie, Rt. Hn. Chas. Thomson

Wharton, Rt. Hon. John Lloyd

M'Arthur, Charles (Liverpool)

Roberts, Samuel (Sheffield)

Wilson, A. Stanley (York, E. R.

M'Iver Sir Lewis (Edinburgh W

Robertson, Herbert (Hackney)

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

Malcolm, Ian

Robinson, Brooke

Worsley-Taylor, Henry Wilson

Maple, Sir John Blundell

Rothschild, Hon. Lionel Walter

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

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

Round, Rt. Hon. James

Wylie, Alexander

Meysey-Thompson, Sir H. M.

Royds, Clement Molyneux

Wyndham, Rt. Hon. George

More, Robt. Jasper (Shropshire)

Rutherford, John

Morgan, David. J (Walth'mstow

Samuel, Harry S. (Limehouse)

Morrell, George Herbert

Seely, Charles Hilton (Lincoln)

TELLERS FOR THE AYES.—

Morrison, James Archibald

Seton-Karr, Henry

Sir Alexander Acland-Hood and Mr. Anstruther.

Morton, Arthur H. Aylmer

Sharpe, William Edward T.

Mount, William Arthur

Shaw-Stewart, M. H. (Renfrew)

NOES.

Allan, Sir William (Gateshead)

Fuller, J. M. F.

Morley, Charles (Breconshire

Allen, Charles P. (Glouc., Stroud

Furness, Sir Christopher

Morley, Rt. Hn. John (Montrose

Ashton, Thomas Gair

Gladstone, Rt Hn. Herbert John

Moulton, John Fletcher

Asquith, Rt Hn. Herbert Henry

Goddard, Daniel Ford

Newnes, Sir George

Atherley-Jones, L.

Grey, Rt. Hon. Sir E. (Berwick)

Norman, Henry

Bayley, Thomas (Derbyshire)

Griffith, Ellis J.

Norton, Capt. Cecil William

Beaumont, Wentworth C. B.

Gurdon, Sir W. Brampton

Nussey, Thomas Willians

Bell, Richard

Harmsworth, R. Leicester

Palmer, Sir Charles M. (Durham

Broadhurst, Henry

Harwood, George

Partington, Oswald

Brunner, Sir John Tomlinson

Hayne, Rt. Hon. Charles Seale-

Pearson, Sir Weetman D.

Bryce, Rt. Hon. James

Hayter, Rt. Hon. Sir Arthur D.

Perks, Robert William

Burns, John

Hemphill, Rt. Hon. Charles H.

Philipps, John Wynford

Burt, Thomas

Holland, Sir William Henry

Pickard, Benjamin

Buxton, Sydney Charles

Horniman, Frederick John

Price, Robert John

Caldwell, James

Humphreys-Owen, Arthur C.

Priestley, Arthur

Cameron, Robert

Jacoby, James Alfred

Rea, Russell

Campbell-Bannerman, Sir H.

Jones, David Brynmor (Swansea

Roberts, John Bryn (Eifion)

Causton, Richard Knight

Kearley, Hudson E.

Roberts, John H. (Denbighs.)

Channing, Francis Allston

Kinloch, Sir John George Smyth

Schwann, Charles E.

Cremer, William Randal

Labouchere, Henry

Shackleton, David James

Dalziel, James Henry.

Lambert, George

Shaw, Charles Edw. (Stafford)

Davies Alfred (Carmarthen)

Leng, Sir John

Shaw, Thomas (Hawick B.)

Davies M. Vaughan (Cardigan

Lewis, John Herbert

Shipman, Dr. John G.

Dilke, Rt. Hon. Sir Charles

Macnamara, Dr. Thomas J.

Sinclair, John (Forfarshire)

Dunn, Sir William

M'Arthur, William (Cornwall)

Soames, Arthur Wellesley

Edwards, Frank

M'Crae, George

Soares, Ernest J.

Evans, Sir Francis H (Maidstone

M'Kenna, Reginald

Spencer, Rt. Hn. C. R (Northants

Farquharson, Dr. Robert

M'Laren, Sir Charles Benjamin

Strachey, Sir Edward

Fenwick, Charles

Mansfield, Horace Rendall

Thomas, Abel (Carmarthen, E.)

Fitzmaurice, Lord Edmond

Mather, Sir William

Thomas, Sir A. (Glamorgan, E.

Foster, Sir Waller (Derby Co.)

Morgan, J. Lloyd (Carmarthen)

Thomas, David Alfred (Merthyr

1468

1469

Thomas, F. Freeman-(Hastings

Weir, James Galloway

Woodhouse, Sir J T (Huddersf'd

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

White, George (Norfolk)

Yoxall, James Henry

Trevelyan, Charles Philips

White, Luke (York, E. R.)

Walton, John Lawson (Leeds, S.

Whitley, J. H. (Halifax)

TELLERS FOR THE NOES—

Warner, Thomas Courtenay T.

Whittaker, Thomas Palmer

Sir Joseph Leese and

Wason, Eugene

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

Mr. Lough.

Committee report Progress; to sit again this evening.

EVENING SITTING.

  EDUCATION (ENGLAND AND WALES) BILL.
  Considered in Committee.
  (In the Committee.)
  [Mr. J. W. LOWTHER (Cumberland, Penrith) in the Chair.]
  Clause 9:—
  MR. HERBERT ROBERTS(9.0.) MR. HERBERT ROBERTS moved to leave out from the Clause the words, "any ten ratepayers in the area for which it is proposed to provide the school.' These words, he said, gave the right of appeal to any ten ratepayers to go to the Board of Education against the erection of a school within the area in which they were interested. The point was one which did not require much argument on one side or the other. As long as the power rested with the local authorities he did not see why a few ratepayers should he allowed to intervene. He could not conceive how any useful purpose could be served by such a provision.
  Amendment proposed—
  "In page 3, line 40, to leave out the words 'and any ten ratepayers in the area for which it is proposed to provide the school.'"—
  Question proposed, "That the word 'and' stand part of the Clause."
  THE SECRETARY OF THE BOARD OF EDUCATION (Sir WILLIAM ANSON,said the proposal of the Government was that the right of appeal in the case of a new school should not be limited to the local authority which had in view the general educational interests of the area. While the local education authorities took a comprehensive view of the general educational requirements of their area, there were others who were interested. The managers of the existing school might object to the rivalry of the new school. There was another body of persons interested, and these were the ratepayers of the district in which it was proposed that a school should be established. Surely the ratepayers might be supposed to have a special knowledge of their district, and it was only fair that those interested in the locality should have an opportunity of making their voices heard.
  MR. BOUSFIELDsaid that, seeing there were no other speakers on the Opposition side, he concluded that Members on that side were prepared to accept Sir William Anson's statement. Under those circumstances he would not trouble the Committee with any further observations.
  (9.8.) Question put.
  (9.10.) The Committee divided:—Ayes. 87: Noes, 70. (Division List No. 460.)

  AYES.

  Anson, Sir William Reynell

  Charrington, Spencer

  Denny, Colonel

  Arkwright, John Stanhope

  Clare, Octavius Leigh

  Douglas, Rt. Hon. A. Akers-

  Arnold-Forster, Hugh O.

  Clive, Captain Percy A.

  Duke, Henry Edward

  Bailey, James (Walworlh)

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

  Fardell, Sir T. George

  Bain, Colonel James Robert

  Cohen, Benjamin Louis

  Fellowes, Hon. Ailwyn Edward

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

  Colomb, Sir John Chas. Ready

  Finch, George H.

  Bigwood, James

  Cook, Sir Frederick Lucas

  Finlay, Sir Robert Bannatyne

  Bond, Edward

  Cox, Irwin Edward Bainbridge

  FitzGerald, Sir Robert Penrose-

  Bousfield, William Robert

  Cranborne, Viscount

  Flower, Ernest

  Brookfield, Colonel Montagu

  Cross, Alexander (Glasgow)

  Forster, Henry William

  Bull, William James

  Cross, Herb. Shepherd (Bolton)

  Gardner, Ernest

  Cayzer, Sir Charles William

  Dalrymple, Sir Charles

  Godson, Sir Augustus Frederick

  Chapman, Edward

  Davies, Sir Horatio D (Chatham

  Gorst, Rt. Hon. Sir John Eldon

  Gray, Ernest (West Ham)

  Morrell, George Herbert

  Stewart, Sir Mark J. M' Taggart

  Hanbury, Rt. Hon. Robert Wm.

  Muntz, Sir Philip A.

  Stone, Sir Benjamin

  Heaton, John Henniker

  Murray, Rt Hn A. Graham (Bute

  Tomlinson, Sir Wm. Edw. M.

  Helder, Augustus

  Murray, Col. Wyndbam (Bath)

  Valentia, Viscount

  Hermon-Hodge, Sir Robert T.

  Orr-Ewing, Charles Lindsay

  Walrond, Rt Hn. Sir William H.

  Hope, J. F. (Sheffield, Brightside

  Percy, Earl

  Warde, Colonel C. E.

  Hudson, George Bickersteth

  Pierpoint, Robert

  Webb, Colonel William George

  Johnstone, Heywood

  Plummer, Walter R.

  Wharton, Rt. Hon. John Lloyd

  Keswick, William

  Powell, Sir Francis Sharp

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

  Legge, Col. Hon. Heneage

  Purvis, Robert

  Worsley-Taylor, Henry Wilson

  Loder, Gerald Walter Erskine

  Pym, C. Guy

  Wylie, Alexander

  Long, Col. Charles W, (Evesham

  Randles, John S.

  Wyndham, Rt. Hon. George

  Loyd, Archie Kirkman

  Rasch, Major Frederic Carne

  Lucas, Col. Francis (Lowestoft)

  Round, Rt. Hon. James

  M'Iver, Sir Lewis (Edinburgh W

  Rutherford, John

  TELLERS FOR THE AYES—

  Manners, Lord Cecil

  Sharpe, William Edward T.

  Sir Alexander Acland-Hood and Mr. Anstruther.

  Maxwell, W J H (Dumfriesshire

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

  More, Robt. Jasper (Shropshire)

  Stanley, Lord (Lancs.).

  NOES.

  Allan, Sir William (Gateshead)

  Griffith, Ellis J.

  Rea, Russell

  Allen, Charles P (Glouc., Stroud

  Gurdon, Sir W. Brampton

  Roberts, John Bryn (Eifion)

  Bayley, Thomas (Derbyshire)

  Hayne, Rt. Hon. Chas. Seale-

  Runciman, Walter

  Bell, Richard

  Hemphill, Rt. Hon. Charles H.

  Schwann, Charles E.

  Brigg, John

  Holland, Sir William Henry

  Shackleton, David James

  Broadhurst, Henry

  Horniman, Frederick John

  Shaw, Thomas (Hawick B.)

  Brunner, Sir John Tomlinson

  Humphreys-Owen, Arthur C.

  Shipman, Dr. John G.

  Bryce, Rt. Hon. James

  Lambert, George

  Sinclair, John (Forfarshire)

  Burt, Thomas

  Langley, Batty

  Soames, Arthur Wellesley

  Buxton, Sydney Charles

  Leese, Sir Joseph F. (Accrington

  Soares, Ernest J.

  Caldwell, James

  Lewis, John Herbert

  Spencer, Rt Hn C. R. (Northants

  Cameron, Robert

  Lloyd-George David

  Stevenson, Francis S.

  Campbell-Bannerman, Sir H.

  Macnamara, Dr. Thomas J.

  Thomas, Sir A. (Glamorgan, E.)

  Channing, Francis Allston

  M'Arthur, William (Cornwall)

  Trevelyan, Charles Philips

  Cremer, William Randal

  M'Crae, George

  White, George (Norfolk)

  Davies, Alfred (Carmarthen)

  M'Kenna, Reginald

  White, Luke (York, E. R.)

  Davies, M. Vaughan-(Cardigan

  Mansfield, Horace Rendall

  Whitley, J. H. (Halifax)

  Dunn, Sir William

  Morgan, J. Lloyd (Carmarthen)

  Whittaker, Thomas Palmer

  Edwards, Frank

  Moulton, John Fletcher

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

  Evans, Sir Francis H. (M'dstone

  Newnes, Sir George

  Yoxall, James Henry

  Fenwick, Charles

  Norton, Capt. Cecil William

  Fitzmaurice, Lord Edmond

  Nussey, Thomas Willans

  Furness, Sir Christopher

  Perks, Robert William

  TELLERS FOR THE NOES.—

  Gladstone, Rt Hn. Herbert John

  Philipps, John Wynford

  Mr. Herbert Roberts and Mr. Dalziel

  Goddard, Daniel Ford

  Price, Robert John

  MR. M'KENNA(9.20.) MR. M'KENNA moved an Amendment to omit the words "any ten ratepayers," and insert "a majority of the ratepayers." He said that to give to ten ratepayers the right of appeal to the Board of Education against the decision of the local education authority to provide a new school was not merely to promote, but to invite, sectarian conflict. Societies would be formed for the express purpose of urging ratepayers to combine in order to harass the local education authority in its work of providing undenominational schools. Nothing was so easy as for members of a denomination to get ten of their own faith in their own district to appeal against the local authority to the Board of Education and so hang up the whole progress of building new schools for a period of not less than three months. Was it reasonable that
  1472
  any ten ratepayers should have that power? Did not the managers of existing schools afford sufficient protection for denominational interests? The number certainly ought to be larger than ten.
  Amendment proposed—
  "In page 4, line 1, to leave out the words 'any ten,' and insert the words 'a majority of the.' "—(Mr. M'Kenna.)
  Question proposed, "That the words 'any ten' stand part of the Clause."
  SIR ROBERT FINLAYsaid that hon. Gentlemen who protested against this right of appeal being given to ten ratepayers had evidently forgotten that an analogous power was given to ten ratepayers under the Act of 1870—a measure which seemed to be the object of the adoration of hon. Gentlemen opposite.

  1473
  He could scarcely imagine that the Amendment asking that the appeal should only be allowed to a majority of the ratepayers had been moved seriously. The question involved was whether the ratepayers should have any voice in a matter which so vitally concerned them as the provision of a new school. Some arrangement must be made for that voice being heard; but if the Amendment were adopted it would be impossible that it could be heard, owing to the difficulty of ascertaining the views of the majority. He asked the House to reject the Amendment.
  MR. FLETCHER MOULTONthought the Attorney General had failed to grasp the meaning of the Clause. He had said that the interests of the ratepayers must be protected, but surely the local education authority was the very body to which ratepayers had delegated the duty of protecting their interests. It was not ten of the county ratepayers — not ten of the people who would have to pay the rates for the school—but simply ten of the ratepayers of the area of the provided school, that were to be given this power of appealing against the decision of the local education authority. They would thus be put in a position to hinder educational development.
  MR. ERNEST GRAYsaid the hon. and learned Gentleman seemed to have forgotten the fact that the capital charge for the school was to be levied on the parish to be served by the proposed school.
  MR. M'KENNA: Not the whole, but one-third.
  MR. ERNEST GRAYsaid that, even SO, the fact was a direct refutation of the argument of the hon. Gentleman. It was alleged that ten ratepayers in the district to be served by the school had no more interest in the question than the ratepayers of the county as a whole. That would be true if the building charge were spread over the whole county like the maintenance charge, but in fact it was to be levied on the particular district. It had been alleged that the Clause was designed to multiply small schools in the
  1474
  interests of denominations, and obviously if that were so, every check against multiplication ought to be welcomed by those who objected to the proposal of the Government. Seeing that any two persons interested in a charity could set the Charity Commission to work to produce a scheme for securing an educational rearrangement in their area, it was not unreasonable, surely, to ask that ten persons should in this matter have a power of appeal to the Board of Education. In passing, he might say he did not know where the denominations were going to find funds for the erection of schools up and down the country. It might be suggested that a claim for a particular school had been worked up by one or two interested clergymen without consulting the interests of the ratepayers who would have to bear the burden of maintaining the school, and in such a case, surely the ratepayers ought to have the right of being heard. He hoped the Amendment would be rejected.
  MR. LLOYD-GEORGEsaid he did not think the Clause was quite as clear as the Prime Minister seemed to imagine. The point was, whether the ten ratepayers might be from the whole area, that was to say, the whole jurisdiction, or from the parish or parishes to be served by the proposed school. In his opinion, it was exceedingly unfair that ten ratepayers—it might be ten out of ten thousand—should be able to stop. the educational machinery for three or four months, when it was a question of providing schools for the children in the district. He wished to refer to another point, which was one of substance. The Government had placed the schools provided by the local authority on the same level as the schools provided by private persons. Now, local authorities would be very slow to provide schools which were not absolutely necessary, and the expense of which would be thrown on the ratepayers. Public representatives must give an account of their stewardship, and if they imposed unnecessary rates they would be called to account. The Committee might come to the conclusion that a local authority was not likely to impose a burden of this kind unless there was the strongest demand for it. Why not leave the appeal to the local representatives?
  DR. MACNAMARAsaid that this matter was much more serious than the Attorney General imagined. The Clause said that, subject to certain conditions, any ten ratepayers might appeal to the Board of Education against the proposed new school within a period of three months. Then the Board of Education might take any time whatever for determining a proposal. The Attorney General said that this was all analogous to the Act of 1870. He ventured to submit, with great respect, that it was nothing of the sort. According to the Act of 1870 the ten ratepayers might make a representation to the Education Department, but it must be within one month, and then the Board of Education must issue the notices determining the appeal within six months. The scheme of the Clause now under discussion was far more cumbrous and dilatory than that of the Act of 1870, and far more time was wanted to put it into operation, whereas it should be more prompt. The Act of 1870 left the voluntary schools as they were, only supplementing their numbers, But this Bill did not leave the voluntary schools as they were; it revolutionised them and put them on the public rates. Now, what would happen? Many of these schools wore in a hopelessly dilapidated condition, and there would be interminable haggling between the local authority and the managers on many points — the furniture, the teachers' salaries, the rental for the teachers' house, the number of the staff, and the apparatus to be provided—and the local authority might say to the managers, "We cannot come to terms with you; we will build a new school." That would happen in hundreds of cases. The arrangements for building the new school were most cumbrous, and the children might be left out of the school at a critical time of their life for many many months.
  SIR FRANCIS POWELLsaid ho held that the machinery provided in the present Bill was much more favourable than that in the Act of 1870. It seemed to him that it was only reasonable, if there was to be an appeal at all, that it should be a real appeal. He believed that it was the contention of all his legal friends that there should be an easy access to the Courts, that this should not be hedged round about by
  1476
  impediments and restrictions. In drafting this Clause the Government had acted in accordance with the policy of Parliament in making easy access to a Court of Appeal. It appeared to him to be altogether a retrograde course to set up cumbrous and difficult machinery, which was slow to work and always excited considerable antagonism and involved much cost. On these grounds he thought the Government were fully justified in the course which they had adopted.
  MR. HERBERT LEWISsaid he hoped the Attorney General would give his opinion of what constituted a school area from which the ten ratepayers were to be drawn. Was it to be a county area, a school district area, or a parish area?
  SIR ROBERT FINLAY: The area encircling the schools.
  MR. HERBERT LEWISasked what that meant.
  SIR ROBERT FINLAY: The area from which the pupils would be drawn.
  MR. HERBERT LEWISsaid that that was about the vaguest possible explanation which the hon. and learned Gentleman could have given. In some places the children walked seven miles to school. They yet did not know from where the ten ratepayers were to be drawn. The Attorney General quoted a precedent from the Act of 1870, but surely they had moved since then. The effect of all the restrictions on the public authority in regard to education since the Act of 1870 accounted for the fact that we had been outstripped by the United States and Germany. What other civilised country in the world would tolerate for a day those blocks against the free provision of adequate education. The words in the Clause were aimed against the publicly provided schools, and he protested against that policy. The publicly provided schools should be managed by all and for the benefit of all.
  MR. CHARLES MCARTHURexpressed the hope that the Government would see their way to

  1477
  modify their proposal. It seemed to him to be impractical that any ten ratepayers could object successfully to a school being formed. It was nothing short of putting a premium on obstruction. There would always be two parties in every district, one in favour of a provided school and the other in favour of a non-provided school; and it would be perfectly easy to get ten ratepayers as objectors to any proposal whatever. He quite agreed that the ratepayers ought to have some say in the matter, and he supported the suggestion of an hon. Member that that might be done by a parish meeting.
  MR. BRYCEsaid that the Attorney General had declared that an area meant, or implied, the district from which the children came. He never heard of such loose drafting. In the interest of good drafting, and of the correct reading of the Act, some more precise terms should be used. As it stood, whatever way they looked at it, the expression seemed to him to be extremely vague and uncertain, and there could be nothing more unsatisfactory than the whole of the Clause. He suggested an Amendment which, in the interests of avoiding trouble, would make the language more precise. If they introduced the word "parish" they would bring in the Parish Council; but the Clause, as it stood, was so vague that it was certain to cause trouble. The majority of the ratepayers proposed by his hon. friend went perhaps rather too far; but ten was too small a number. It invited captiousness, and would cause trouble; and if the Committee desired that there should be a more substantial expression of opinion from the ratepayers they should provide a larger number.
  MR. HENRY HOBHOUSEsaid that the area need not necessarily be a parish. It might be a district in a large town, or a combination of parishes. Surely the way to meet the difficulty as to the area was to provide subsequently that the persons who gave public notice of their intention to provide a school must state in that notice the area which it was intended to serve. That would define the area out of which the
  1478
  ten ratepayers who appealed should come With regard to the number of ratepayers ten was a very usual number in Local Government Acts; and it was also the number in the Act of 1870. There would be no advantage in increasing it, as ratepayers would always be found to appeal once the appeal was started. Ten, twenty, or a hundred would not make any difference.
  MR. CHANNINGsaid that the First Lord of the Treasury stated in the discussion on a previous Amendment that he was emancipating the local authority from the restrictions in the Act of 1870, by enabling them to provide schools on conditions under which the existing School Boards could not provide them. He ventured to suggest that in retaining this form of words borrowed from the Act of 1870, the right hon. Gentleman was cheeking the action of the local authority in providing schools, and was taking away the good effect which his own proposal reasonably and logically carried with it. There was no special advantage in the introduction of the ratepayers into the matter. The hon. Member for Wigan proceeded to argue from the Act of 1870 a fortiori for giving the right to the ratepayers to protest against the provision of a school; but it seemed to him that the argument was all the other way. The argument was perhaps strong when it was a question of the creation of a School Board, with all its liabilities of rating and otherwise. That was a matter on which the right might reasonably be given to the ratepayers to lay their case before the Board of Education; but with regard to the carrying out of the plain duty of the education authority which the First Lord of the Treasury boasted he was emancipating from the restrictions of the Act of 1870, in giving greater freedom to provide unsectarian schools, whether there was any proved deficiency of accommodation or not —it seemed unfortunate that such a restriction should be introduced. He did not agree with the Amendment. He would sooner see the whole of thes words struck out without any word being put in their place. The Committee

  1479
  were giving quite enough in granting the right of appeal to the representatives of any existing school whose interests or usefulness might be impared.
  (10.3.) Question put.
  The Committee divided:—Ayes, 176; Noes, 95. (Division List, No. 461.)

  AYES.

  Agg-Gardner, James Tynte

  Fellowes, Hon. Ailwyn Edward

  Muntz, Sir Philip A.

  Agnew, Sir Andrew Noel

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

  Murray, Rt Hn. A. Graham (Bute

  Allhusen, Augustus H'nry Eden

  Finch, George H.

  Murray, Charles J. (Coventry)

  Anson, Sir William Reynell

  Finlay, Sir Robert Bannatyne

  Murray, Col. Wyndham (Bath)

  Arkwright, John Stanhope

  Fisher, William Hayes

  Myers, William Henry

  Arnold-Forster, Hugh O.

  Fison, Frederick William

  Nicol, Donald Ninian

  Atkinson, Rt. Hon. John

  FitzGerald, Sir Robert Penrose-

  Orr-Ewing, Charles Lindsay

  Badey, James (Walworth)

  Fitzroy, Hon. Edward Algernon

  Parker, Sir Gilbert

  Bain, Colonel James Robert

  Fletcher, Rt. Hon. Sir Henry

  Percy, Earl

  Baird, John George Alexander

  Flower, Ernest

  Platt-Higgins, Frederick

  Balcarres, Lord

  Forster, Henry William

  Plummer, Walter R.

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

  Galloway, William Johnson

  Powell, Sir Francis Sharp

  Balfour, Capt. C. B (Hornsey)

  Gardner, Ernest

  Pretyman, Ernest George

  Balfour, Rt Hn Gerald W. (Leeds

  Garfit, William

  Purvis, Robert

  Banbury, Frederick George

  Godson, Sir Augustus Frederick

  Pym, C. Guy

  Bartley, George C. T.

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

  Quilter, Sir Cuthbert

  Bathurst, Hon. Allen Benjamin

  Gore, Hn. G. R. C. Ormsby-(Salop

  Randles, John S.

  Bignold, Arthur

  Gore, Hon. S. F. Ormsby-(Linc.)

  Rankin, Sir James

  Bigwood, James

  Gorst, Rt. Hn. Sir John Eldon

  Rasch, Major Frederic Carne

  Bill, Charles

  Goschen, Hon. George Joachim

  Remnant, James Farquharson

  Blundell, Colonel Henry

  Gray, Ernest (West Ham)

  Ridley, Hon M. W. (Stalybridge

  Bond, Edward

  Halsey, Rt. Hon. Thomas F.

  Roberts, Samuel (Sheffield)

  Boscawen, Arthur Griffith-

  Hambro, Charles Eric

  Robinson, Brooke

  Bousfield, William Robert

  Hanbury, Rt. Hon. Robert Wm.

  Rothschild, Hon. Lionel Walter

  Brookfield, Colonel Montagu

  Hardy, Laurence (Kent, Ashf'rd

  Round, Rt. Hon. James

  Brown, Alexander H. (Shropsh.

  Hare, Thomas Leigh

  Royds, Clement Molyneux

  Brymer, William Ernest

  Harris, Frederick Leverton

  Rutherford, John

  Bull, William James

  Heaton, John Henniker

  Samuel, Harry S. (Limehouse)

  Butcher, John George

  Helder, Augustus

  Sharpe, William Edward T.

  Carson, Rt. Hon. Sir Edward H.

  Henderson, Sir Alexander

  Simeon, Sir Barrington

  Cavendish, V. C. W. (Derbyshire

  Hermon-Hodge, Sir Robert T.

  Skewes, Cox, Thomas

  Cecil, Evelyn (Aston Manor)

  Hobhouse, Henry (Somerset, E.

  Smith, James Parker (Lanarks.

  Cecil, Lord Hugh (Greenwich)

  Hogg, Lindsay

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

  Chamberlain, Rt. Hon. J. (Birm.

  Hope, J. F. (Sheffield, Brightside

  Stanley, Edward Jas. (Somerset

  Chapman, Edward

  Hudson, George Bickersteth

  Stanley, Lord (Lancs.)

  Charrington, Spencer

  Johnstone, Heywood

  Stewart, Sir Mark J. M'Taggart

  Clare, Octavins Leigh

  Kemp, George

  Stone, Sir Benjamin

  Clive, Captain Percy A.

  Keswick, William

  Strutt, Hon. Charles Hedley

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

  Lambton, Hon. Frederick Wm.

  Talbot, Lord E. (Chichester)

  Cohen, Benjamin Louis

  Lecky, Rt. Hn. William Edw. H.

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

  Colomb, Sir John Charles Ready

  Lee, Arthur H. (Hants. Fareham

  Thornton, Percy M.

  Colston, Chas. Edw. H. Athole

  Legge, Col. Hon. Heneage

  Tomlinson, Sir Wm. Edw. M.

  Cook, Sir Frederick Lucas

  Leigh Bennett, Henry Currie

  Valentia, Viscount

  Cox, Irwin Edward Bainbridge

  Loder, Gerald Walter Erskine

  Walker, Col. William Hall

  Cranborne, Viscount

  Long, Col. Charles W. (Evesham

  Walrond, Rt Hon Sir William H.

  Cripps, Charles Alfred

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

  Warde, Colonel C. E.

  Cross, Alexander (Glasgow)

  Loyd, Archie Kirkman

  Webb, Colonel William George

  Cross, Herb. Shepherd (Bolton)

  Lucas, Col. Francis (Lowestoft)

  Welby, Lt-Col. A. C. E. (Tannt'n

  Crossley, Sir Savile

  Lyttelton, Hon. Alfred

  Welby, Sir Charles G. E (Notts.

  Cubitt, Hon. Henry

  Macdona, John Cumming

  Wharton, Rt. Hon. John Lloyd

  Dalrymple, Sir Charles

  M'Iver, Sir Lewis (Edinburgh W

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

  Davenport, W. Bromley-

  Macolm, Ian

  Worsley-Taylor, Henry Wilson

  Davies, Sir Horatio D (Chatham

  Manners, Lord Cecil

  Wortley, Rt. Hn. C. B. Stuart

  Denny, Colonel

  Maxwell, W J. H (Dumfriesshire

  Wylie, Alexander

  Dorington, Rt. Hon. Sir J. E.

  More, Robt. Jasper (Shropsh.)

  Wyndham, Rt. Hon. George

  Douglas, Rt. Hon. A. Akers-

  Morrell, George Herbert

  Wyndham-Quin, Major W. H.

  Duke, Henry Edward

  Morrison, James Archibald

  Durning Lawrence, Sir Edwin

  Morton, Arthur H. Aylmer

  TELLERS FOE THE AYES.—

  Dyke, Rt. Hon, Sir William Hart

  Mount, William Arthur

  Sir Alexander Acland-Hood and Mr. Anstruther.

  Fardell, Sir T. George

  Mowbray, Sir Robert Gray C.

  NOES.

  Allan, Sir William (Gateshead)

  Bayley, Thomas (Derbyshire)

  Broadhurst, Henry

  Allen, Charles P (Glouc., Stroud

  Bell, Richard

  Brunner, Sir John Tomlinson

  Ashton, Thomas Gair

  Brigg, John

  Bryce, Rt. Hon. James

  Burns, John

  Horniman, Frederick John

  Shaw, Charles Edw. (Stafford)

  Burt, Thomas

  Humphreys-Owen, Arthur C.

  Shaw, Thomas (Hawick, B.)

  Buxton, Sydney Charles

  Kearley, Hudson E.

  Shipman, Dr. John G.

  Caldwell, James

  Langley, Batty

  Sinclair, John (Forfarshire)

  Cameron, Robert

  Leese, Sir Joseph F. (Accrington

  Soames, Arthur Wellesley

  Campbell-Bannerman, Sir H.

  Leng, Sir John

  Soares, Ernest J.

  Causton, Richard Knight

  Lewis, John Herbert

  Spencer, Rt Hn C. R. (Northants

  Channing, Francis Allston

  Lloyd-George, David

  Stevenson, Francis S.

  Cremer, William Randal

  Lough, Thomas

  Strachey, Sir Edward

  Dalziel, James Henry

  Macnamara, Dr. Thomas J.

  Thomas, Abel (Carmarthen E.)

  Davies, Alfred (Carmarthen)

  M'Arthur, William (Cornwall)

  Thomas, Sir A. (Glamorgan E.

  Davies, M Vanghan-(Cardigan

  M' Crae, George

  Thomas, David Alfred (Merthyr)

  Dilke, Rt. Hon. Sir Charles

  Mansfield, Horace Rendall

  Thomas, F. Freeman-(Hastings

  Edwards, Frank

  Morgan, J. Lloyd (Carmarthen)

  Trevelyan, Charles Philips

  Evans, Sir Francis H (Maidstone

  Morley, Charles (Breconshire)

  Wallace, Robert

  Farquharson, Dr. Robert

  Moulton, John Fletcher

  Walton, John Lawson (Leeds, S.

  Fenwick, Charles

  Newnes, Sir George

  Warner, Thomas Courtenay T.

  Fitzmaurice, Lord Edmond

  Norton, Capt. Cecil William

  Wason, Eugene

  Foster, Sir Walter (Derby Co.)

  Nussey, Thomas Willans

  White, George (Norfolk)

  Fuller, J. M. F.

  Perks, Robert William

  White, Luke (York, E. R.)

  Furness, Sir Christopher

  Philipps, John Wynford

  Whitley, J. H. (Halifax)

  Gladstone, Rt Hn Herbert John

  Price, Robert John

  Whittaker, Thomas Palmer

  Goddard, Daniel Ford

  Priestley, Arthur

  Williams Osmond (Merioneth)

  Grant, Corrie

  Rea, Russell

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

  Griffith, Ellis J.

  Rickett, J. Compton

  Woodhouse, Sir. J T (Huddersf'd

  Gurdon, Sir W. Brampton

  Roberts, John Bryn (Eifion)

  Yoxall, James Henry

  Harmsworth, R. Leicester

  Roberts, John H. (Denbighs.)

  Hayne, Rt. Hn. Charles Seale-

  Robertson, Edmund (Dundee)

  TELLERS FOR THE NOES.—

  Hemphill, Rt. Hon. Charles H.

  Runciman, Walter

  Mr. M'Kenna and Mr. Lambert.

  Holland, Sir William Henry

  Sehwann, Charles E.

  MR. A. J. BALFOURrose in his place, and claimed to move, "That the Question 'That the words of the Clause from the word "ratepayers" in page 4, line 1, to the word "required,'' in line 4, both inclusive, stand part of the Clause,' be now put."
  (10.13.) Question put, "That the Question 'That the words of the Clause from the word "ratepayers," in page 4, line 1, to the word "required," in line 4, both inclusive, stand part of the Clause,' be now put."
  The Committee divided:—Ayes, 184; Noes, 98. (Division List, No. 462.)

  AYES.

  Agg-Gardner, James Tynte

  Burdett-Coutts, W.

  Dorington, Rt. Hon. Sir John E.

  Agnew, Sir Andrew Noel

  Butcher, John George

  Douglas, Rt. Hon. A. Akers-

  Allhusen, Augustus H'nry Eden

  Carson, Rt. Hon. Sir Edw. H.

  Duke, Henry Edward

  Anson, Sir William Reynell

  Cavendish, V. C. W. (Derbyshire

  Durning-Lawrence, Sir Edwin

  Arkwright, John Stanhope

  Cecil, Evelyn (Aston Manor)

  Dyke, Rt. Hon. Sir William Hart

  Arnold-Forster, Hugh O.

  Cecil, Lord Hugh (Greenwich)

  Fardell, Sir T. George

  Atkinson, Rt. Hon. John

  Chamberlain, Rt. Hn. J. (Birm.

  Fellowes, Hon. Ailwyn Edward

  Bailey, James (Walworth)

  Chapman, Edward

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

  Bain, Colonel James Robert

  Charrington, Spencer

  Fincn, George H.

  Baird, John George Alexander

  Clare, Octavius Leigh

  Finlay, Sir Robert Bannatyne

  Balcarres, Lord

  Clive, Captain Perry A.

  Fisher, William Hayes

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

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

  Fison, Frederick William

  Balfour, Capt. C. B. (Hornsey)

  Cohen, Benjamin Louis

  Fitz Gerald, Sir Robert Penrose-

  Balfour, Rt Hn Gerald W. (Leeds

  Collings, Rt. Hon. Jesse

  Fitzroy, Hon. Edward Algernon

  Banbury, Frederick George

  Colomb, Sir John Charles Ready

  Flannery, Sir Fortescue

  Bartley, George C. T.

  Colston, Chas. Edw. H. Athole

  Fletcher, Rt. Hn. Sir Henry

  Bathurst, Hon. Allen Benjamin

  Compton, Lord Alwyne

  Flower, Ernest

  Bignold, Arthur

  Cook, Sir Frederick Lucas

  Forster, Henry William

  Bigwood, James

  Cox, Irwin Edward Bainbridge

  Galloway, William Johnson

  Bill, Charles

  Cranborne, Viscount

  Gardner, Ernest

  Blundell, Colonel Henry

  Cripps, Charles Alfred

  Garfit, William

  Bond, Edward

  Cross, Alexander (Glasgow)

  Godson, Sir Augustus Frederick

  Boscawen, Arthur Griffith-

  Cross, Herb. Shepherd (Bolton

  Gordon, Maj Evans-(T'rH'mlets

  Bousfield, William Robert

  Crossley, Sir Savile

  Gore, Hn G. R. C Ormsby-(Salop

  Bowles, Capt. H. F. (Middlesex

  Cubitt, Hon. Henry

  Gore, Hon. S. F. Ormsby-(Linc.)

  Brookfield, Colonel Montagu

  Dalrymple, Sir Charles

  Gorst, Rt. Hn. Sir John Eldon

  Brown, Alexander H. (Shropsh.

  Davenport, William Bromley-

  Goschen, Hon. George Joachim

  Brymer, William Ernest

  Davies, Sir Horatio D (Chatham

  Gray, Ernest (West Ham)

  Bull, William James

  Denny, Colonel

  Halsey, Rt. Hon. Thomas F

  Hambro, Charles Eric

  More, Robt. Jasper (Shropshire

  Samuel, Harry S. (Limehouse)

  Hanbury, Rt. Hon. Robert Wm.

  Morrell, George Herbert

  Sharpe, William Edward T.

  Hardy, Laurence (Kent, Ashford

  Morrison, James Archibald

  Simeon, Sir Barrington

  Harris, Frederick Leverton

  Morton, Arthur H. Aylmer

  Skewes-Cox, Thomas

  Heaton, John Henniker

  Mount, William Arthur

  Smith, James Parker (Lanarks.

  Helder, Augustus

  Mowbray, Sir Robert Gray C.

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

  Henderson, Sir Alexander

  Muntz, Sir Philip A.

  Stanley, Edward Jas. (Somerset

  Hermon-Hodge, Sir Robert T.

  Murray, Rt Hn A. Graham (Bute

  Stanley, Lord (Lancs.)

  Hobhouse, Henry (Somerset, E.

  Murray, Charles J. (Coventry)

  Stewart, Sir Mark J. M'Taggart

  Hogg, Lindsay

  Murray, Col. Wyndham (Bath)

  Stone, Sir Benjamin

  Hope, J. F. (Sheffield, Brightside

  Myers, William Henry

  Strutt, Hon. Charles Hedley

  Hudson, George Bickersteth

  Nicol, Donald Ninian

  Talbot, Lord E. (Chichester)

  Johnstone, Heywood

  Orr-Ewing, Charles Lindsay

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

  Kemp, George

  Parker, Sir Gilbert

  Thornton, Percy M.

  Keswick, William

  Percy, Earl

  Tomlinson, Sir Wm. Edw. M.

  Lambton, Hon. Frederick Wm.

  Platt-Higgins, Frederick

  Valentia, Viscount

  Lawrence, Wm. F. (Liverpool)

  Plummer, Walter R.

  Walker, Col. William Hall

  Lecky, Rt Hon William Edw. H.

  Powell, Sir Francis Sharp

  Walrond, Rt. Hn. Sir William H.

  Lee, Arthur H. (Hants, Fareham

  Pretyman, Ernest George

  Warde, Colonel C. E.

  Legge, Col. Hon. Heneage

  Pryce-Jones, Lt.-Col. Edward

  Webb, Colonel William George

  Leigh-Bennett, Henry Currie

  Purvis, Robert

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

  Loder, Gerald Walter Erskine

  Pym, C. Guy

  Welby, Sir Charles G. E. (Notts.

  Long, Col. Chas. W. (Evesham)

  Quilter, Sir Cuthbert

  Wharton, Rt. Hon. John Lloyd

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

  Randles, John S.

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

  Lnyd, Archie Kirkman

  Rankin, Sir James

  Worsley-Taylor, Henry Wilson

  Lucas, Col. Francis (Lowestoft

  Rasch, Major Frederic Carne

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

  Lucas, Reginald J. (Portsmouth

  Remnant, James Farquharson

  Wylie, Alexander

  Lyttelton, Hon. Alfred

  Ridley, Hn. M. W. (Stalybridge

  Wyndham, Rt. Hon. George

  Macdona, John Cumraing

  Roberts, Samuel (Sheffield)

  Wyndham-Quin, Major W. H.

  M'Arthur, Charles (Liverpool)

  Robinson, Brooke

  M'Iver, Sir Lewis (Edinburgh W

  Rothschild, Hon. Lionel Walter

  Malcolm, Ian

  Round, Rt. Hon. James

  TELLERS FOR THE AYES,—

  Manners, Lord Cecil

  Royds, Clement Molyneux

  Sir Alexander Acland-Hood and Mr. Anstruther.

  Maxwell, W J H (Dumfriesshire

  Rutherford, John

  NOES.

  Allan, Sir William (Gateshead)

  Harmsworth, R. Leicester

  Robertson, Edmund (Dundee)

  Allen, Charles P. (Glouc., Stroud

  Hayne, Rt. Hon. Charles Seale-

  Runciman, Walter

  Ashton, Thomas Gair

  Hemphill, Rt. Hn. Charles H.

  Schwann, Charles E.

  Bayley, Thomas (Derbyshire)

  Holland, Sir William Henry

  Shackleton, David James

  Bell, Richard

  Horniman, Frederick John

  Shaw, Charles Edw. (Stafford)

  Brigg, John

  Humphreys-Owen, Arthur C.

  Shaw, Thomas (Hawick, B.)

  Broadhurst, Henry

  Kearley, Hudson E.

  Shipman, Dr. John G.

  Brunner, Sir John Tomlinson

  Lambert, George

  Sinclair, John (Forfarshire)

  Bryce, Rt. Hon. James

  Langley, Batty

  Soames, Arthur Wellesley

  Burns, John

  Leese, Sir Joseph F. (Accrington

  Soares, Ernest J.

  Burt, Thomas

  Leng, Sir John

  Spencer, Rt Hn. C. R. (Northants

  Buxcon, Sydney Charles

  Lewis, John Herbert

  Stevenson, Francis S.

  Caldwell, James

  Lloyd-George, David

  Strachey, Sir Edward

  Cameron, Robert

  Lough, Thomas

  Thomas, Abel (Carmarthen, E.)

  Campbell-Bannerman, Sir H.

  Macnamara, Dr. Thomas J.

  Thomas, Sir. A (Glamorgan, E.)

  Causton, Richard Knight

  M'Crae, George

  Thomas, David Alfred (Merthyr

  Channing, Francis Allston

  M'Kenna, Reginald

  Thomas, F. Freeman-(Hastings

  Cremer, William Randal

  M'Laren, Sir Charles Benjamin

  Trevelyan, Charles Philips

  Dalziel, James Henry

  Mansfield, Horace Rendall

  Wallace, Robert

  Davies, Alfred (Carmarthen)

  Mather, Sir William

  Walton, John Lawson (Leeds, S.

  Davies, M. Vaughan-(Cardigan

  Morgan, J. Lloyd (Carmarthen)

  Warner, Thomas Courtenay T.

  Dilke, Rt. Hon. Sir Charles

  Morley, Charles (Breconshire)

  Wason, Eugene

  Edwards, Frank

  Moulton, John Fletcher

  White, George (Norfolk)

  Evans, Sir Francis H. (Maidst'ne

  Newnes, Sir George

  White, Luke (York, E. R.)

  Farquharson, Dr. Robert

  Norton, Capt. Cecil William

  Whitley, J. H. (Halifax)

  Fenwick, Charles

  Nussey, Thomas Willans

  Whittaker, Thomas Palmer

  Fitzmaurice, Lord Edmond

  Perks, Robert William

  Williams, Osmond (Merioneth

  Foster, Sir Walter (Derby Co.)

  Philipps, John Wynford

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

  Fuller, J. M. F.

  Price, Robert John

  Woodhouse, Sir J. T (Huddersf'd

  Furness, Sir Christopher

  Priestley, Arthur

  Yoxall, James Henry

  Goddard, Daniel Ford

  Rea, Russell

  Grant, Corrie

  Rickett, J. Compton

  TELLERS FOR THE NOES—

  Griffith, Ellis J.

  Roberts, John Bryn (Eifion)

  Mr. Herbert Gladstone and Mr. William M'Arthur.

  Gurdon, Sir W. Brampton

  Roberts, John H. (Denbighs.)

  (10.25.) Question put accordingly.
  The Committee divided:—Ayes, 188; Noes, 100. (Division List, No. 463.)

  AYES.

  Agg-Gardner, James Tynte

  Fardell, Sir T. George

  Muntz, Sir Philip A.

  Agnew, Sir Andrew Noel

  Fellowes, Hn. Ailwyn Edward

  Murray, Rt Hn A. Graham (Bute

  Allhusen, Augustus H'nry Eden

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

  Murray, Charles J. (Coventry)

  Anson, Sir William Reynell

  Finch, George H.

  Murray, Col. Wyndham (Bath)

  Arkwright, John Stanhope

  Finlay, Sir Robert Bannatyne

  Myers, William Henry

  Arnold-Forster, Hugh O.

  Fisher, William Hayes

  Nicholson, William Graham

  Atkinson, Rt. Hon. John

  Fison, Frederick William

  Nicol, Donald Ninian

  Bailey, James (Walworth)

  FitzGerald, Sir Robert Penrose-

  Nolan, Col. John P. (Galway, N.

  Bain, Colonel James Robert

  Fitzroy, Hon. Edward Algernon

  Orr-Ewing, Charles Lindsay

  Baird, John George Alexander

  Flannery, Sir Fortescue

  Parker, Sir Gilbert

  Balcarres, Lord

  Fletcher, Rt. Hon. Sir Henry

  Percy, Earl

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

  Flower, Ernest

  Platt-Higgins, Frederick

  Balfour, Capt. C. B. (Hornsey)

  Forster, Henry William

  Plummer, Walter R.

  Balfour, Rt Hn Gerald W. (Leeds

  Galloway, William Johnson

  Powell, Sir Francis Sharp

  Banbury, Frederick George

  Gardner, Ernest

  Pretyman, Ernest George

  Bartley, George C. T.

  Garfit, William

  Pryce-Jones, Lt.-Col. Edward

  Bathurst, Hon. Allen Benjamin

  Godson, Sir Augustus Frederick

  Purvis, Robert

  Bignold, Arthur

  Gordon, Maj Evans-(T'rH'mlets

  Pym, C. Guy

  Bigwood, James

  Gore, Hn G. R. C Ormsby-(Salop

  Quilter, Sir Cuthbert

  Bill, Charles

  Gore, Hon. S. F. Ormsby-(Linc.)

  Randles, John S.

  Blundell, Colonel Henry

  Gorst, Rt. Hn. Sir John Eldon

  Rankin, Sir James

  Bond, Edward

  Goschen, Hon. George Joachin

  Rasch, Major Frederic Carne

  Boscawen, Arthur Griffith-

  Gray, Ernest (West Ham)

  Remnant, James Farquharson

  Bousfield, William Robert

  Halsey, Rt. Hon. Thomas F.

  Ridley, Hn. M. W. (Stalybridge

  Bowles, Capt. H. F. (Middlesex

  Hambro, Charles Eric

  Roberts, Samuel (Sheffield)

  Brookfield, Colonel Montagu

  Hanbury, Rt. Hon. Robert Wm.

  Robinson, Brooke

  Brown, Alexander H. (Shropsh.

  Hardy, Laurence (Kent, Ashfo'd

  Rothschild, Hon. Lionel Walter

  Brymer, William Ernest

  Harris, Frederick Leverton

  Round, Rt. Hon. James

  Bull, William James

  Heaton, John Henniker

  Royds, Clement Molyneux

  Burdett-Coutts, W.

  Helder, Augustus

  Rutherford, John

  Butcher, John George

  Henderson, Sir Alexander

  Samuel, Harry S. (Limehouse)

  Carew, James Laurence

  Hermon-Hodge, Sir Robert T.

  Sharpe, William Edward T.

  Carson, Rt. Hon. Sir Edw. H.

  Hobhouse, Henry (Somerset, E.

  Simeon, Sir Barrington

  Cavendish, V. C. W. (Derbyshire)

  Hogg, Lindsay

  Sinclair, Louis (Romford)

  Cecil, Evelyn (Aston Manor)

  Hope, J. F. (Sheffield, Brightside

  Skewes-Cox, Thomas

  Cecil, Lord Hugh (Greenwich)

  Hudson, George Bickersteth

  Smith, James Parker (Lanarks.

  Chamberlain, Rt. Hn. J. (Birm.

  Johnstone, Heywood

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

  Chapman, Edward

  Kemp, George

  Stanley, Edward Jas. (Somerset

  Charrington, Spencer

  Keswick, William

  Stanley, Lord (Lancs.)

  Clare, Octavius Leigh

  Lambton, Hon. Frederick Wm.

  Stewart, Sir Mark J. M'Taggart

  Clive, Captain Perry A.

  Lawrence. W. M. F. (Liverpool)

  Stone, Sir Benjamin

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

  Lecky, Rt. Hn. William Edw. H.

  Strutt, Hon. Charles Hedley

  Cohen, Benjamin Louis

  Lee, Arthur H. (Hants, Fareham

  Talbot, Lord E. (Chichester)

  Collings, Rt. Hon. Jesse

  Legge, Col. Hon. Heneage

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

  Colomb, Sir John Charles Ready

  Leigh-Bennett, Henry Currie

  Thornton, Percy M.

  Colston, Chas. Edw. H. Athole

  Loder, Gerald Walter Erskine

  Tomlinson, Sir Wm. Edw. M.

  Compton, Lord Alwyne

  Long, Col. Chas. W. (Evesham

  Valentia, Viscount

  Cook, Sir Frederick Lucas

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

  Walker, Col. William Hall

  Cox, Irwin Edward Bainbridge

  Loyd, Archie Kirkman

  Walrond, Rt. Hn. Sir William H.

  Cranborne, Viscount

  Lucas, Col. Francis (Lowestoft)

  Warde, Colonel C. E.

  Cripps, Charles Alfred

  Lucas, Reginald J. (Portsmouth

  Webb, Colonel William George

  Cross, Alexander (Glasgow)

  Lyttelton, Hon. Alfred

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

  Cross, Herb. Shepherd (Bolton

  Macdona, John Cumming

  Welby, Sir Charles G. E. (Notts.

  Crossley, Sir Savile

  M'Arthur, Charles (Liverpool)

  Wharton, Rt. Hon. John Lloyd

  Cubitt, Hon. Henry

  M'Iver, Sir Lewis (Edinburgh W

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

  Dalrymple, Sir Charles

  Malcolm, Ian

  Worsley-Taylor, Henry Wilson

  Davenport, W. Bromley-

  Manners, Lord Cecil

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

  Davies, Sir Horatio D (Chatham

  Maxwell, W J H (Dumfriesshire

  Wylie, Alexander

  Denny, Colonel

  More, Robt. Jasper (Shropshire

  Wyndham, Rt. Hon. George

  Dorington, Rt. Hon. Sir John E.

  Morrell, George Herbert

  Wyndham-Quin, Major W. H.

  Douglas, Rt. Hon. A. Akers-

  Morrison, James Archibald

  Duke, Henry Edward

  Morton, Arthur H. Aylmer

  TELLERS FOR THE AYES.—

  Durning-Lawrence, Sir Edwin

  Mount, William Arthur

  Sir Alexander Acland- Hood and Mr. Anstruther

  Dyke, Rt. Hon. Sir William Hart

  Mowbray, Sir Robert Gray C.

  NOES.

  Allan, Sir William (Gateshead)

  Beaumont, Wentworth C. B.

  Brunner, Sir John Tomlinson

  Allen, Charles P (Glouc., Stroud

  Bell, Richard

  Bryce, Rt. Hon. James

  Ashton, Thomas Gair

  Brigg, John

  Burns, John

  Bayley, Thomas (Derbyshire)

  Broadhurst, Henry

  Burt, Thomas

  1486

  1487

  Buxton, Sydney Charles

  Lambert, George

  Shaw, Charles Edw. (Stafford)

  Caldwell, James

  Langley, Batty

  Shaw, Thomas (Hawick B.)

  Cameron, Robert

  Leese, Sir Joseph F. (Accrington

  Shipman, Dr. John G.

  Campbell-Bannerman, Sir H.

  Leng, Sir John

  Sinclair, John (Forfarshire)

  Causton, Richard Knight

  Lewis, John Herbert

  Soames, Arthur Wellesley

  Channing, Francis Allston

  Lloyd-George, David

  Soares, Ernest J.

  Cremer, William Randal

  Lough, Thomas

  Spencer, Rt Hn C. R. (Northant

  Dalziel, James Henry

  Macnamara, Dr. Thomas J.

  Stevenson, Francis S.

  Davies, Alfred (Carmarthen)

  M'Crae, George

  Strachey, Sir Edward

  Davies, M. Vaughan-(Cardigan

  M'Kenna, Reginald

  Thomas, Abel (Carmarthen, E.

  Dilke, Rt. Hon. Sir Charles

  M'Laren, Sir Charles Benjamin

  Thomas, Sir A. (Glamorgan, E.)

  Edwards, Frank

  Mansfield, Horace Rendall

  Thomas, David Alfred (Merthyr

  Evans, Sir Francis H (Maidst'ne

  Mather, Sir William

  Thomas, F. Freeman-(Hastings

  Fanquharson, Dr. Robert

  Morgan, Lloyd (Carmarthen

  Trevelyan, Charles Philips

  Fenwick, Charles

  Morley, Charles (Breconshire)

  Wallace, Robert

  Fitzmaurice, Lord Edmond

  Moulton, John Fletcher

  Walton, John Lawson (Leeds. S.

  Foster, Sir-Walter (Derby Co.)

  Newnes, Sir George

  Warner, Thomas Courtenay T.

  Fuller, J. M. F.

  Norton, Capt. Cecil William

  Wason, Eugene

  Furness, Sir Christopher

  Nussey, Thomas Willans

  White, George (Norfolk)

  Goddard, Daniel Ford

  Perks, Robert William

  White, Luke (York, E. R.)

  Grant, Corrie

  Philipps, John Wynford

  Whitley, J. H. (Halifax)

  Grey, Rt. Hon. Sir E. (Berwick)

  Price, Robert John

  Whittaker, Thomas Palmer

  Griffith, Ellis J.

  Priestley, Arthur

  Williams, Osmond (Merioneth)

  Gurdon, Sir W. Brampton

  Rea, Russell

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

  Harmsworth, R. Leicester

  Rickett, J. Compton

  Woodhouse, Sir J. T (Huddersf'd.

  Hayne, Rt. Hon. Charles Seale-

  Roberts, John Bryn (Eifion)

  Yoxall, James Henry

  Hemphill, Rt. Hn. Charles H.

  Roberts, John H. (Denbighs.)

  Holland, Sir William Henry

  Robertson, Edmund (Dundee)

  Horniman, Frederick John

  Runciman, Walter

  TELLERS FOR THE NOES—

  Humphreys-Owen, Arthur C.

  Schwann, Charles E.

  Mr. Herbert Gladstone and Mr. William M'Arthur.

  Kearley, Hudson E.

  Shackleton, David James

  DR. MACNAMARA(10.42.) DR. MACNAMARA moved to omit all the words after "required" down to the words "to be provided" in order to insert the words ''to meet any deficiency in school places." At present, he said, the only ground on which new places might be provided was that there was a deficiency in school places. But under the Bill a new basis altogether was laid down, the scheme of the Bill being that, if the places were not satisfactory from the religious point of view, then the parents of thirty school children could come forward and ask for new places, While he sympathised with the desire of the Government to meet the wishes of people from a religious point of view, he opposed that new basis of school accommodation altogether; the only ground for supplying new places should be that there was an educational deficiency. The proposal of the Bill was extravagant from the business point of view, and grotesque from the educational point of view. If the Amendment were not accepted there would be the danger of small schools being multiplied, which would be expensive and very unsatisfactory—schools, too, which when they agreed (as he hoped they, would do), to a course of religious instruction which should be
  1488
  acceptable to every one would be left high and dry. Rather than multiply the small schools he would have the whole system of religious instruction revised from top to bottom. In any case he hoped the Government would agree that any scheme for the provision of new places should be based on the ground of the existence of an educational deficiency.
  Amendment proposed—
  "In page 4, line 4, to leave out from the word I 'required,' to the word 'and,' in line 6, and insert the words 'to meet any deficiencies in school places."'— (Dr. Macnamara.)
  Question proposed, "That the words 'or that' stand part of the Clause."
  MR. A. J. BALFOUR: The hon. Member has certainly put his point with commendable brevity; but the question has been discussed at great length earlier in the evening, and, therefore, it would be an impertinence on my part to do more than remind the Committee of the views of the Government on the matter. The hon. Gentleman wants to retain the existing system. Under that system it would be possible for a Protestant district to be served by a

  1489
  Roman Catholic school, a Non conformist district to be served by an Anglican school, and another locality to be served by a board school, in which, under the law as it stands, the religious teaching which the inhabitants desired cannot be given. The Government think that such a system needs elasticity. I do not think the fears of the lion. Gentleman with regard to the multiplication of schools are well founded, for the burden on the ratepayers will act as a check to any movement in that direction think this is quite sufficient to check any inordinate desire to multiply schools. On the other hand, the Government are of the opinion that if there be unreasonable action on the part either of the local authority or on the part of the managers of the denominational school in respect of religious teaching, it will find a very wholesome check in the possibility of another school being built I think it will be a great reform to retain the words to which the hon. Gentleman objects, and though understand the importance of his object from an educational point of view, I cannot go so far as to accept his suggestion.
  MR. COURTENAY WARNERsaid this Bill had already made great encroachments upon the ratepayers and taxpayers, and he thought it was time that some check ought to be put upon the expenditure under this Bill. This was a proposal which would be very severely felt, and the whole system of education would be made unpopular by the enormous expense to which the localities would be put. For that reason he thought that every safeguard ought to be put in the Bill to prevent extravagant expenditure. They had up to the present always objected to schools being built for the purpose of propagating any particular religion. [MINISTERIAL laughter.] This Bill was certainly a large encroachment upon the ratepayers and upon the taxpayers. [Renewed MINISTERIAL laughter.] He did not think hon. Members would be so anxious to laugh at the expenditure under this Bill when the country complained of it as they were at the present moment. The only people who would benefit by this Bill were those who were very rich and the poor man who had at a real grievance would not be
  1490
  assisted in the least. The large population of Nonconformists would not be able to get a school of their own denomination under this Bill, which would simply give to those who were very rich, enabling them to spend large sums of money out of the public funds. They ought to do everything they could to prevent these rich people spending the public funds on their own denomination, and the Amendment moved by his hon. friend would be a great step in that direction
  MR. FLETCHER MOULTONsaid it would be a very great assistance to the Committee if the Attorney General or the Prime Minister would assist them by defining what was meant by a necessary school. At the end of Section 10 there was a reference to "a school actually in existence," but those words were so ambiguous that he had not been able to discover what meaning should be placed noon them. He did not know whether those winds meant at the date of the passing of the Act or the time when the dispute came on. He found it very difficult to discuss the Amendment now before the House, without knowing which of those two interpretations they were to take as being that which the Government intended
  SIR ROBERT FINLAY: The words mean schools in existence at the time the question arises, and not at the passing of the Bill.
  MR. FLETCHER MOULTONsaid that interpretation made it certain that the greatest curse to educational organisation would be brought about by this Bill, namely, the multiplication of small schools—too large to Ineffectively taught by one teacher, and too small to have more than one. If they looked carefully at the provisions which they were now discussing and the provisions of Section 10, they would see that it was quite possible for persons desirous of having a denominational school, to start a small school, and carry it on for a time. They could do this without in any way contravening the provisions of this Section, and when they got to the number of thirty scholars that school could not be held by the Board of Education to be unnecessary, and therefore, it must be for ever saddled on the

  1491
  ratepayers, and it must always be maintained out of the public funds. That was a thing very much to be deplored. He understood that this was suggested as being a concession in favour of Dissenters and Nonconformists. As a matter of fact it was the very opposite. One could see at once that those who, for many years past, had borne by their subscriptions the expenses of the Church schools would now be relieved of all need to subscribe for anything but the maintenance of the fabric of the school, and they would, therefore, without any strain upon themselves have funds which could be applied at any place to start such schools, and, by supporting and keeping them for a short time, they could ever afterwards get them supported by the nation.
  SIR ROBERT FINLAY: But such a school must first run the gauntlet of Clause 9
  MR. FLETCHER MOULTONsaid the school could be started as a voluntary school without any grant, and if it got up to thirty scholars it became under the words of the Act, "a school actually in existence." Having once got it into existence they could give notice and the Board of Education was then precluded from saying that it was an unnecessary school, because it was a school actually in existence with thirty scholars. He should like to call the very serious attention of the Committee to the nature of these provisions. To his mind they were the most vital provisions in the Bill, and they were the conditions which made the prospect most gloomy. He was not the least of a fanatic with regard to how religious education should be given. On the question of religious teaching he would give the very greatest possible latitude of choice, so that he could speak with perfect freedom on the subject. What he said was that the provisions which they were now discussing and those in the following Clause were provisions not in favour of religious feeling and not in favour even of religious sacrifice, but they were provisions in favour of the richest sect. What was it that they all accepted as the consequence of denominational schools?. They accepted—and this was put forward as much on the Government side of the House as
  1492
  upon the other—that the consequence of a denominational school was what is called a "denominational atmosphere," and that it is sought to create this atmosphere in order that those who went to that school should be led to join a particular denomination. In other words, those who had the power over a denominational school were privileged to exercise an influence over all the children who came there to turn them into members of that particular denomination. It was conceded also that they would very largely be the children of parents who did not belong to that particular denomination, and thus, by allowing a public elementary school to be denominational in return for the building being provided, they were actually putting up for sale the privilege of influencing in favour of a particular denomination the children of the poorer classes as long as time lasted. And how did they purchase this? They purchased this privilege by mere wealth. What had been the history of the voluntary schools? When they were first established those who started them bore a very large portion of the cost. Gradually those persons had been relieved of that charge, but they had a claim on their attention which neither those who sat on this or the other side of the House could shut their eyes to, namely, their past history, which was to a great extent a record of self-denial and earnest religious work. But the schools which they were discussing now had got no such history. They were the schools of the future and by these provisions they said that that sect which was rich enough to come and offer a school-house should in all cases have the privilege of proselytising amongst the children who lived near that school and that was to be done with public money. He had read over and over again the directions to the Board of Education a; to how they were to decide the appeals which came before them and he found that they were framed in such a way that only one answer could ever be given. They were told that in deciding this question to which the Amendment related they were to consider the interests of secular education. Seeing that it was entirely in the hands of the local authority and done by public money, and it was the

  1493
  same whichever class of school they had. Then they had to consider the wishes of the parents. But these would in all cases be divided. One thing must always be in favour of the denominational school, and that was the economy of the rates. That must be so, and of these three criteria by which the arbiter was to decide, one influenced him neither way, the other was divided, and the third was always in favour of the denominational school. And just as if that was not sufficient, the Government in this Bill had made those expenses which went to the building of the school to fall heavily on small areas in order that they might be much felt. And now, as they had learned that day, the Government were going to give to these very people who would have this heavy burden placed upon them, the greatest possible inducement to appeal against a nationally provided school the right to appeal. They would get an offer to have the building expenses borne by some rich denomination and then they would have this right of appeal. When they came before the Board of Education what would the Board say? They would say, "We are bound to consider the economy of the rates. How can we decide against them?" Therefore they were now passing a scheme whereby the local education authority would be paralysed when it wanted to meet out of the national funds the national wants of the area. It could be stopped with ten ratepayers who would be the very first to smart from these building expenses, and it could require a decision to be given. Considering these things it was a certainty that any denomination which was rich enough to offer school buildings must get the privilege of denominational education as long as those schools lasted. He asked, was that fair? Had they any right to sell the religious influence over the children of the poor to the richer sects? They could not shut their eyes to this fact. They might say that they liked a religious atmosphere. To that he would say "Very well, get it." But they had no right to make wealth tell for one feathers weight in the balance. Take for example his own constituency, which contained a very large number of the smaller sects of the Methodists.
  1494
  They were very poor. The greater part of the land in his constituency was held by the rich people, in fact the whole of it was held by people who belonged to the Church of England. Those people could come forward and offer the land for a school building, and that would at once the "economy of the rates." A school building would be offered and the Board of Education must take the school building, and why should the children of those poor Methodists have to go day after day to a school where it was intended by the House of Commons that there should be a constant and perpetual proselytising influence at work. [MINISTERIAL cries of "No, no:"] He was not using the word in any abusive sense, but "proselytising" was the only English word that he knew of which would describe the taking of young people before their opinions were formed and subjecting them to influences which led them away from the natural influences of their homes. Why were these poor children obliged to go to those schools? Simply because the wealth was in the hands of the Church, and because these children belonged to the poorer sect. They could not go and offer school buildings because the fathers w ere too poor. Consequently, all the apparent freedom which was given by these Clauses to all sects was completely denied to the poor sects. The consequence was that these poor people had to send their children to the schools of other denominations simply because their fathers were too poor to provide school buildings. If an Education Bill was to work smoothly, it must be because it appealed to the sense of fairness of the English people. That was the deepest sense which was set in the heart of an Englishman. If they did what they were now proposing, he was perfectly certain that there would be a feeling of unfairness rankling in the minds of those people, and it would be a just feeling, and a feeling which they could not say was unreasonable; and that feeling would be detrimental to the working of this Bill, and make the work of education a source of strife as long as these provisions lasted. By the Amendment which had been proposed they were cutting all

  1495
  these dangers out and allowing the Board of Education to decide whether there were enough places or not. Surely what was proposed to be done by the Amendment had nothing whatever to do with denominational or undenominational teaching. Let the Board Of Education decide a thing which was only a matter of statistics, of which it had had some experience, and in such matters the Board would be a good arbiter.
  LORD HUGH CECILsaid the hon. Member had made one of the most unfair speeches to which he had ever listened. The hon. Member had repeated again—until, as he should have thought, the contradiction of it would have now become tedious—the old charge that the Church of England desired the use of these schools for the purpose, of converting people from their own way of thinking. [An HON. MEMBER: "So they do !"] That charge had over and over again been repudiated. The hon. Member went on to say that the only principle which was to guide the Board of Education in this matter was economy of the rates, and that with the Bill before him which said in express terms that the first consideration was to be the interests of secular instruction, and the second the wishes of the parents. It was perfectly clear that if this Amendment was carried the Board of Education would be entitled to consider neither the interests of secular education nor the wishes of the parents. The hon. Member opposite had just put forward an argument which ruled out the three considerations provided for in Clause 10
  MR. FLETCHER MOULTON: No, two out of the three
  LORD HUGH CECILsaid that one of those considerations was the wishes of the parents, and yet the hon. Member had the controversial audacity to come forward in the defence of parents' rights. He spoke on behalf of poor Methodists who were dragged into Church schools and proselytised against their wills. That was one of the very things the Board of Education were enjoined to consider. They had to
  1496
  consider the feelings of the parents before they considered the question of wealth, about which the hon. Member had poured forth a great deal of rhetoric intended to be pathetic, but which was I absolutely nauseous. If the controversy was to be carried on by imputing to opponents a desire to use their wealth in order to convert persons to their religious way of thinking, it would create a great sense of bitterness. He repudiated any such desire on the part of the Church of England. The Roman Catholics did succeed in providing their schools, and they were the denomination most anxious for this particular Clause. It was not a clause to which the Church of England attached great importance, but it was one to which the Roman Catholics attached great importance. They had poor districts, and they were reasonably anxious to provide for the wants of their people. He could not conceive why hon. Members opposite should persist in ignoring the fact that a great part of the population of this country, Roman Catholics and members of the Church of England, genuinely desired to have their children brought up in their own faith. The local authority was entitled to make provision to meet any case of difficulty. The only other part of the Clause to which the hon. Member took objection was that which provided that people who desired to make provision for children of their own faith should not be forbidden to do so
  MR. TREVELYANsaid the Attorney General had stated in reply to the hon. Member for the Launceston Division that by a school actually in existence was meant a school actually in existence at the time that a question arose. If, therefore, a school was found to be in existence, and there were thirty scholars in it, the managers might claim a public grant, and the local authority could not refuse it.
  SIR ROBERT FINLAYsaid if the school came into existence after the passing of the Act, it would be subject to the conditions imposed by Clause 9
  MR. TREVELYANsaid that was an important omission, and it was necessary

  1497
  to make that interpretation clear. Unless that was m de perfectly clear, numbers of small schools might be built, thirty children put into them, and grants claimed
  MR. LOUGHsaid the Amendment provided two things—that the State schools in this country should be provided in accordance with the number of children to be provided for, and that schools should not be provided if not required by the number of children for whom the State should care. He ventured to say that these two principles governed the action of the State in every civilised country in the world. What was the great reform suggested by the Prime Minister? It was that gradually each sect might build a separate school for its own purposes. He thought he had not described the system unfairly. There was not a country in the world where there were so many sects as in England, and each of these sects could now build a little school of its own in every parish. He supposed this was the right hon. Gentleman's way of meeting the grievances of the Nonconformists, who complained that in 8,000 parishes they were obliged to send their children to the school of another denomination over which the State had no control. The local education authority would have control over secular education, and it would have representation on the boards of management. What was proposed was that the children should be broken up into sets, and that small schools should be multiplied, with the result that the educational facilities of the country would be weakened and reduced. He regarded Clause 9 as the worst in the Bill. It swept away the solemn obligation resting upon the local authority to provide for every child. It was a Clause which would develop the sectarian differences from which already this country suffered more than any country in the world.
  MR. LLOYD-GEORGEsaid the noble Lord the Member for Greenwich had in the course of his speech indulged in language rather more discourteous than usual in his references to the learned Gentleman. The noble Lord had taken the case of the Roman Catholics. It was a very favourite
  1498
  controversial device of hon. Gentlemen opposite to cite the case of Roman Catholics. They knew very well that it was essentially different. There was no charge of proselytising brought against the Roman Catholics. The essential difference between the Roman Catholic and the Anglican schools was that the Catholic schools were really Catholic schools, while the Anglican schools were not Anglican schools. In Catholic schools they would not find more than one per cent, of the children who were not Catholic children. [An HON. MEMBER: "Yes."] He did not mean to say that they would not find a school here and there where there were not more, but taking these schools generally throughout the country they would not find more than one percent, who were not Catholics. How did that bear on proselytizing? It was all very well for the noble Lord to take a high line, but he either ignored or did not know the facts. It was within the knowledge of almost every Member that in Anglican schools inducements which were not spiritual were brought to bear on children to persuade them to quit the faith of their fathers and become members of the Anglican Church. In almost every school which he knew in Wales the teachers were Nonconformists who had been lured from the Nonconformist faith by the offer of a position in that school as a teacher. The teachers had been kidnapped. There were 60,000 of these teacherships, and they were used for proselytising by means which were not religious or spiritual, but purely temporal. The money of the State was used for the purpose of buying the children before they knew what they were about. Nothing but the efficiency of education ought to be considered Suppose there were five sects in a parish—he understood the Prime Minister was willing that each should have its school. Was that the noble Lord's view?
  LORD HUGH CECIL: It will depend on the circumstances of the case.
  MR. LLOYD-GEORGEasked what were the circumstances of the cases The Prime Minister was right and logical, and he did not talk about the circumstances of the case. If one sect had a

  1499
  right to a school, each of the five sects had an equal right. What would that mean in several parts of England and Wales if, where there were four or five sects, more or less equal, each demanded a school? The whole parish was just sufficient to provide one decent school, yet five little miserable seminaries would be run. But it was said some must make a sacrifice. Who would have to make the sacrifice? The poorest sect of the lot. As a rule, the richest sect, which insisted upon its pound of flesh, was the very sect which did not send its children to these schools. The fact was that everybody in the parish, for the sake of education, had got to make a sacrifice. What was wanted was equal sacrifice on the part of every denomination, and one school for all those districts instead of many. The Committee had heard a great deal from the Prime Minister about the Scottish system. Why had the reference to Scotland been dropped? Because hon. Members on the Opposition side had shown an inclination to accept it. The Scottish system was a dialectical "try on" by the Prime Minister. This was a case similar to the Scottish system which took into account how many schools were needed and their efficiency, and he therefore invited the Prime Minister to try the Scottish system in this Bill
  SIR WILLIAM ALLANsaid he should like the Prime Minister, who was a countryman of his own, to end the whole of the debate on the Education Bill by standing up and asking the House to accept the Scotch system. He had never attempted to interfere in the debates in any shape or form; but he had listened to all the speeches, and he could only say he was sorry to see so much sectarianism introduced into them. They in Scotland knew nothing of that whatever. Their education was as their sentiments were—free. It was an evidence of their freedom from the thralldom of ecclesiasticism and sacerdotalism. As a countryman of the Prime Minister, he wanted him to stand up and ask the Committee to accept the, Scottish system. He believed the Committee would accept it. By that means the whole controversy would be
  1500
  ended, and they would get away much sooner than they anticipated. He had heard hon. Gentlemen opposite arguing the claims of their sect at the expense of other sects. That was not fair or right. He objected to education being allied to religion or to politics. His principle was—and it was the Scottish system—that education should be national and entirely apart from religion or politics. On that ground alone, the Committee ought to rise to the occasion, and put education in England and Wales on the same lofty basis as it was in Scotland. The Prime Minister knew exactly what the Scottish system was. The right hon. Gentleman knew the freedom that was there; and that there was no sectarianism or quarrelling there Why had they it in England? Were they civilised in England yet? The Prime Minister knew Scotland better than he did, but he was an older Scotsman than the right hon. Gentleman. He was educated partly in a parish school, and he knew all about it. The Prime Minister knew all about it too. Let the right hon. Gentleman give the same system to England, and England would be happy. Why did he not do it? It would get over all the difficulty. There was no use in wasting the time of hon. Members when the issue was so simple. Why did the right, hon. Gentleman not do it? He would tell the Committee. It was because ministers had the Church influence prodding them on to courses which were antagonistic to the true principles of education. There was no doubt about that. He would appeal, as a Scotsman to a Scotsman, and he would ask the Prime Minister to say that he would introduce the Scottish system into the Bill; and then all this desultory debate would end. [HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear.] Hon. Members opposite cheered that; but would they support the Prime Minister if he did? They would not. Their sectarianism and churchmanism would prevent them voting for it; and the right hon. Gentleman knew that. He would ask the Prime Minister, however, to pass them by, and introduce, the Scottish system. Then the Bill would go through quickly. But if the right hon. Gentleman refused, Nonconformists and Scotsmen would fight it to the bitter end.
  MR. A. J. BALFOURrose in his place, and claimed to move, "That the Question be now put."
  Question put, "That the Question be now put."
  The Committee divided—Ayes, 187; Noes, 88. (Division List No. 464)

  AYES.

  Agg-Gardner, James Tynte

  Elliot, Hon. A. Ralph Douglas

  Morton, Arthur H. Aylmer

  Agnew, Sir Andrew Noel

  Fellowes, Hon. Ailwyn Edward

  Mount, William Arthur

  Allhusen, Augustus H'nry Eden

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

  Mowbray, Sir Robert Gray C

  Anson, Sir William Reynell

  Finch, George H.

  Muntz, Sir Philip A

  Arkwright, John Stanhope

  Finlay, Sir Robert Bannatyne

  Murray, Rt Hn A. Graham (Bute

  Arnold-Forster, Hugh O

  Fisher, William Hayes

  Murray, Charles J. (Coventry)

  Atkinson, Rt. Hon. John

  Fison, Frederick William

  Murray, Col. Wyndham (Bath)

  Bailey, James (Walworth)

  Fitz Gerald, Sir Robert Penrose

  Myers, William Henry

  Bain, Colonel James Robert

  Fitzroy, Hon. Edward Algernon

  Nicholson, William Graham

  Baird, John George Alexander

  Fletcher, Rt. Hon. Sir Henry

  Nicol, Donald Ninian

  Balcarres, Lord

  Forster, Henry William

  Nolan, Col. John P. (Galway, N.)

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

  Galloway, William Johnson

  Orr-Ewing, Charles Lindsay

  Balfour, Capt. C. B. (Hornsey)

  Garfit, William

  Peel, Hn. Wm. Robt. Wellesley

  Balfour, Rt Hn Gerald W (Leeds

  Godson, Sir Augustus Frederick

  Percy, Earl

  Banbury, Frederick George

  Gordon, Maj Evans-(T'rH'mlets

  Platt-Higgins, Frederick

  Bartley, George C. T

  Gore, Hn G. R. C. Ormsby-(Salop

  Plummer, Walter R

  Bathurst, Hon. Allen Benjamin

  Gore, Hon. S. F, Ormsby-(Linc.)

  Powell, Sir Francis Sharp

  Bignold, Arthur

  Gorst, Rt. Hon. Sir John Eldon

  Pretyman, Ernest George

  Bigwood, James

  Goschen, Hon. George Joachim

  Pryce-Jones, Lt.-Col. Edward

  Bill, Charles

  Goulding, Edward Alfred

  Purvis, Robert

  Blundell, Colonel Henry

  Gray, Ernest (West Ham)

  Quilter, Sir Cuthbert

  Bond, Edward

  Guthrie, Walter Murray

  Randles, John S

  Bowles, Capt. H. F. (Middlesex

  Hall, Edward Marshall

  Rankin, Sir James

  Brodrick, Rt. Hon. St. John

  Halsey, Rt. Hon. Thomas F

  Rasch, Major Frederic Carne

  Brookfield, Colonel Montagu

  Hambro, Charles Eric

  Remnant, James Farquharson

  Brymer, William Ernest

  Hanbury, Rt. Hon Robert Wm

  Ridley, Hon. M W. (Stalybridge

  Burdett-Coutts, W

  Hardy, Laurence (Kent, Ashf'rd

  Roberts, Samuel (Sheffield)

  Carew, James Laurence

  Hare, Thomas Leigh

  Robinson, Brooke

  Carson, Rt. Hon. Sir Edw. H

  Harris, Frederick Leverton

  Rothschild, Hon. Lionel Walter

  Cavendish, V. C. W (Derbyshire

  Hay, Hon. Claude George

  Round, Rt. Hon. James

  Cecil, Evelyn (Aston Manor)

  Heaton, John Henniker

  Royds, Clement Molyneux

  Cecil, Lord Hugh (Greenwich)

  Henderson, Sir Alexander

  Rutherford, John

  Chamberlain, Rt Hon. J. (Birm.

  Hermon-Hodge, Sir Robert T

  Simeon, Sir Barrington

  Chaplin, Rt. Hon. Henry

  Hobhouse, Henry (Somerset, E

  Sinclair, Louis (Romford)

  Chapman, Edward

  Hogg, Lindsay

  Smith, James Parker (Lanarks)

  Charrington, Spencer

  Hope, J. F. (Sheffield, Brightside

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

  Clare, Octavius Leigh

  Jebb, Sir Richard Claverhouse

  Stanley, Lord (Lancs.)

  Clive, Captain Percy A.

  Johnstone, Heywood

  Stewart, Sir Mark J. M' Taggart

  Cochrane, Hon. Thos. H. A. E

  Kemp, George

  Strutt, Hon. Charles Hedley

  Cohen, Benjamin Louis

  Keswick, William

  Talbot, Lord E. (Chichester)

  Collings, Rt. Hon. Jesse

  Lambton, Hon. Frederick Wm

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

  Colomb, Sir John Charles Ready

  Lawrence, Wm. F. (Liverpool)

  Thornton, Percy M.

  Colston, Chas. Edw. H. Athole

  Lee, Arthur H. (Hants. Fareham

  Tomlinson, Sir Wm. Edw. M

  Compton, Lord Alwyne

  Lees, Sir Elliott (Birkenhead)

  Valentia, Viscount

  Cook, Sir Frederick Lucas

  Legge, Col. Hon. Heneage

  Vincent, Col. Sir C. E. H. (Shef'ld

  Cox, Irwin, Edward Bainbridge

  Leigh-Bennett, Henry Currie

  Vincent, Sir Edgar (Exeter)

  Cranborne, Viscount

  Loder, Gerald Walter Erskine

  Walker, Col. William Hall

  Cripps, Charles Alfred

  Long, Col. Charles W (Evesham

  Walrond, Rt. Hn Sir William H

  Cross, Alexander (Glasgow)

  Long, Rt. Hn. Walter (Bristol, S

  Warde, Colonel C. E

  Cross, Herb. Shepherd (Bolton)

  Loyd, Archie Kirkman

  Webb, Colonel William George

  Crossley, Sir Savile

  Lucas, Col. Francis (Lowestoft)

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

  Cubitt, Hon. Henry

  Lucas, Reginald J. (Portsmouth

  Welby, Sir Charles G. E. (Notts.)

  Dalrymple, Sir Charles

  Lyttelton, Hon. Alfred

  Wharton, Rt. Hon. John Lloyd

  Davenport, W. Bromley

  Macdona, John Cumming

  Wilson, A. Stanley (York, E. R.)

  Davies, Sir Horatio D. (Chatham

  Maconochie, A. W

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

  Denny, Colonel

  M'Arthur, Charles (Liverpool)

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

  Dickson-Poynder, Sir John P

  M'Iver, Sir Lewis (Edinburgh W

  Wylie, Alexander

  Digby, John K. D. Wingfield

  Malcolm, Ian

  Wyndham, Rt. Hon. George

  Dixon-Hartland, Sir Fr'd Dixon

  Manners, Lord Cecil

  Wyndham-Quin, Major W. H

  Dorington, Rt. Hon. Sir John E

  Maxwell, W. J. H. (Dumfriessh.

  Douglas, Rt. Hon. A. Akers

  More, Robt. Jasper (Shropshire)

  Duke, Henry Edward

  Morgan, David J. (Walth'mst'w

  TELLERS FOR THE AYES—

  Durning-Lawrence, Sir Edwin

  Morrell, George Herbert

  Sir Alexander Acland-Hood and Mr. Anstruther.

  Dyke, Rt Hon. Sir William Hart

  Morrison, James Archibald

  NOES.

  Allan, Sir Wm. (Gateshead)

  Harmsworth, R. Leicester

  Roberts, John H. (Denbighs.)

  Allen, Charles P. (Glouc, Stroud

  Hayne, Rt. Hon. Charles Seale

  Runciman, Walter

  Bayley, Thomas (Derbyshire)

  Hayter, Rt. Hon. Sir Arthur D.

  Shackleton, David James

  Beaumont, Wentworth C. B

  Holland, Sir William Henry

  Shaw, Charles Edw. (Stafford)

  Brigg, John

  Horniman, Frederick John

  Shipman, Dr. John G

  Broadhurst, Henry

  Humphreys-Owen, Arthur C

  Sinclair, John (Forfarshire)

  Brunner, Sir John Tomlinson

  Kearley, Hudson E

  Soames, Arthur Wellesley

  Bryce, Rt. Hon. James

  Labouchere, Henry

  Soares, Ernest J

  Burns, John

  Lambert, George

  Spencer, Rt Hn. C. R. (Northants

  Buxton, Sydney Charles

  Langley, Batty

  Stevenson, Francis S

  Caldwell, James

  Leng, Sir John

  Strachey, Sir Edward

  Cameron, Robert

  Lewis, John Herbert

  Thomas, Abel (Carmarthen, E.)

  Campbell-Bannerman, Sir H.

  Loyd-George, David

  Thomas, Sir A. (Glamorgan, E.)

  Causton, Richard Knight

  Lough, Thomas

  Thomas, David Alfred (Merthyr

  Channing, Francis Allston

  Macnamara, Dr. Thomas J

  Thomas, F. Freeman- (Hastings

  Cremer, William Randal

  M'Crae, George

  Trevelyan, Charles Philips

  Dalziel, James Henry

  M'Kenna, Reginald

  Wallace, Robert

  Davies, Alfred (Carmarthen)

  M'Laren, Sir Charles Benjamin

  Walton, John Lawson (Leeds, S

  Davies, M. Vaughan-(Cardigan

  Mansfield, Horace Rendall

  Warner, Thomas Courtenay T

  Dilke, Rt. Hon. Sir Charles

  Mather, Sir William

  Wason, Eugene

  Edwards, Frank

  Morgan, J. Lloyd (Carmarthen)

  White, George (Norfolk)

  Evans, Sir Francis H (Maidstone

  Morley, Charles (Breconshire)

  White, Luke (York, E. R.)

  Fenwick, Charles

  Moulton, John Fletcher

  Whitley, J. H. (Halifax)

  Foster, Sir Walter (Derby Co.)

  Norman, Henry

  Whittaker, Thomas Palmer

  Fuller, J. M. F

  Norton, Captain Cecil William

  Williams, Osmond (Merioneth)

  Furness, Sir Christopher

  Pease, J. A. (Saffron Walden)

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

  Goddard, Daniel Ford

  Philipps, John Wynford

  Grant, Corrie

  Priestley, Arthur

  Grey, Rt. Hn. Sir E. (Berwick)

  Rea, Russell

  TELLERS FOR THE NOES—

  Griffiths, Ellis J.

  Rickett, J. Compton

  Mr. Herbert Gladstone and

  Gurdon, Sir W. Brampton

  Roberts, John Bryn (Eifion)

  Mr. William M'Arthur.

  (11.50) Question put accordingly, "That the words 'or that' stand part of the Clause."
  The Committee divided—Ayes, 183; Noes, 82 (Division List No. 465)

  AYES.

  Agg-Gardner, James Tynte

  Chapman, Edward

  Finch, George H.

  Agnew, Sir Andrew Noel

  Charrington, Spencer

  Finlay, Sir Robert Bannatyne

  Allhusen, Augustus H'nry Eden

  Clare, Octavius Leigh

  Fisher, William Hayes

  Anson, Sir William Reynell

  Clive, Captain Percy A.

  Fison, Frederick William

  Arkwright, John Stanhope

  Cochrane, Hon. Thos. H. A. E

  FitzGerald, Sir Robert Penrose

  Arnold-Forster, Hugh O.

  Cohen, Benjamin Louis

  Fitzroy, Hon. Edward Algernon

  Atkinson, Rt. Hon. John

  Collings, Rt. Hon. Jesse

  Fletcher, Rt. Hon. Sir Henry

  Bailey, James (Walworth)

  Colomb, Sir John Charles Ready

  Forster, Henry William

  Bain, Colonel James Robert

  Colston, Chas. Edw. H. Athole

  Galloway, William Johnson

  Baird, John George Alexander

  Compton, Lord Alwyne

  Garfit, William

  Balcarres, Lord

  Cook, Sir Frederick Lucas

  Godson, Sir Augustus Fr'derick

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

  Cox, Irwin Edward Bainbridge

  Gordon, Maj Evans- (T'rHml'ts

  Balfour, Capt. C. B. (Hornsey)

  Cranborne, Viscount

  Gore, Hn G. R.C Ormsby-(Salop

  Balfour, Rt Hn Gerald W. (Leeds

  Cripps, Charles Alfred

  Gore, Hon. S. F. Ormsby-(Linc.)

  Banbury, Frederick George

  Cross, Alexander (Glasgow)

  Goschen, Hon. George Joachim

  Bartley, George C. T

  Cross, Herb. Shepherd (Bolton

  Goulding, Edward Alfred

  Bathurst, Hon. Allen Benjamin

  Crossley, Sir Savile

  Gray, Ernest (West Ham)

  Bignold, Arthur

  Cubitt, Hon. Henry

  Guthrie, Walter Murray

  Bigwood, James

  Dalrymple, Sir Charles

  Hall, Edward Marshall

  Bill, Charles

  Davenport, Wm. Bromley

  Halsey, Rt. Hon. Thomas F.

  Blundell, Colonel Henry

  Davies, Sir Horatio D. (Chath'm

  Hambro, Charles Eric

  Bond, Edward

  Denny, Colonel

  Hanbury, Rt. Hon. Robert Wm.

  Bowles, Capt. H. F. (Middlesex

  Dickson-Poynder, Sir John P

  Hardy, Laurence (Kent, Ashf'rd

  Brodrick, Rt. Hon. St. John

  Digby, John K. D. Wingfield-

  Hare, Thomas Leigh

  Brookfield, Colonel Montagu

  Dixon-Hartland Sir Fred Dixon

  Harris Frederick Leverton

  Brymer, William Ernest

  Dorington, Rt. Hon. Sir John E

  Hay, Hon. Claude George

  Burdett-Coutts, W

  Douglas, Rt. Hon. A. Akers

  Heaton, John Henniker

  Carew, James Laurence

  Durning-Lawrence, Sir Edwin

  Henderson, Sir Alexander

  Carson, Rt. Hon. Sir Edw. H

  Dyke, Rt. Hon Sir William Hart

  Hermon-Hodge, Sir Robert T

  Cavendish, V. C. W. (Derbyshire

  Elliot, Hon. A. Ralph Douglas

  Hobhouse, Henry (Somerset, E

  Cecil, Evelyn (Aston Manor)

  Fellowes, Hon. Ailwyn Edward

  Hogg, Lindsay

  Cecil, Lord Hugh (Greenwich)

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

  Hope, J. F. (Sheffield, Brightside

  Jebb, Sir Richard Claverhouse

  Muntz, Sir Philip A.

  Smith, James Parker (Lanarks.

  Johnstone, Heywood

  Murray, Rt. Hn. A. Graham (Bute

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

  Kemp, George

  Murray, Charles J. (Coventry)

  Stanley, Lord (Lancs.)

  Keswick, William

  Murray, Col. Wyndham (Bath)

  Stewart, Sir Mark J. M'Taggart

  Lambton, Hon. Frederick Wm.

  Myers, William Henry

  Strutt, Hon. Charles Hedley

  Lawrence, Wm. F. (Liverpool)

  Nicholson, William Graham

  Talbot, Lord E. (Chichester)

  Lee, Arthur H. (Hants, Fareham

  Nicol, Donald Ninian

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

  Lees, Sir Elliott (Birkenhead)

  Nolan, Col. John P. (Galway N.

  Thornton, Percy M.

  Legge, Col. Hon. Heneage

  Orr-Ewing, Charles Lindsay

  Tomlinson, Sir William Edw. M.

  Leigh-Bennett, Henry Currie

  Peel, Hon. Wm. Robert Wellesley

  Valentia, Viscount

  Loder, Gerald Walter Erskine

  Percy, Earl

  Vincent, Col. Sir C. E. H. (Sheffield

  Long, Col. Charles W. (Evesham

  Platt-Higgins, Frederick

  Vincent, Sir Edgar (Exeter)

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

  Plummer, Walter R.

  Walker, Col. William Hall

  Loyd, Archie Kirkman

  Powell, Sir Francis Sharp

  Walrond, Rt. Hn. Sir William H.

  Lucas, Col. Francis (Lowestoft

  Pretyman, Ernest George

  Warde, Colonel. C. E.

  Lucas, Reginald J. (Portsmouth

  Pryce-Jones, Lt.-Col. Edward

  Webb, Colonel William George

  Lyttelton, Hon. Alfred

  Purvis, Robert

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

  Macdona, John Cumming

  Quilter, Sir Cuthbert

  Welby, Sir Charles G. E. (Notts

  Maconochie, A. W.

  Randles, John S.

  Wharton, Rt. Hon. John Lloyd

  M'Arthur, Charles (Liverpool)

  Rankin, Sir James

  Wilson, A. Stanley (York, E. R.)

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

  Rasch, Major Frederic Carne

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

  Malcolm, Ian

  Remnant, James Farquharson

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

  Manners, Lord Cecil

  Ridley, Hn. M. W. (Stalybridge

  Wylie, Alexander

  Maxwell, W. J. H (Dumfriesshire

  Roberts, Samuel (Sheffield)

  Wyndham, Rt. Hon. George

  More, Robert. Jasper (Shropshire)

  Robinson, Brooke

  Wyndham-Quin, Major W. H.

  Morgan, David J. (Walth'mst'w

  Rothschild, Hon. Lionel Walter

  Morrell, George Herbert

  Round, Rt. Hon. James

  Morrison, James Archibald

  Royds, Clement Molyneux

  TELLERS FOR THE AYES.—

  Morton, Arthur H. Aylmer

  Rutherford, John

  Sir Alexander Acland- Hood and Mr. Anstruther.

  Mount, William Arthur

  Simeon, Sir Barrington

  Mowbray, Sir Robert Gray C.

  Sinclair, Louis (Romford)

  NOES.

  Allen, Charles P. (Glouc., Stroud

  Harmsworth, R. Leicester

  Roberts, John H. (Denbigs.)

  Beaumont, Wentworth C. B

  Hayne, Rt. Hon. Charles Seale-

  Runcimen, Walter

  Brigg, John

  Hayter, Rt. Hon. Sir Arthur D.

  Shackleton, David James

  Broadhurst, Henry

  Holland, Sir William Henry

  Shaw, Charles Edw. (Stafford)

  Brunner, Sir John Tomlinson

  Horniman, Frederick John

  Shipman, Dr. John G.

  Bryce, Rt. Hon. James

  Humphreys-Owen, Arthur C.

  Sinclair, John (Forfarshire)

  Buxton, Sydney Charles

  Kearley, Hudson E.

  Soames, Arthur Wellesley

  Caldwell, James

  Lambert, George

  Soares, Ernest J.

  Cameron, Robert

  Langley, Batty

  Spencer, Rt. Hn. C. R. (Northants

  Campbell Bannerman, Sir H.

  Leng, Sir John

  Stevenson, Francis S.

  Causton, Richard Knight

  Lewis, John Herbert

  Strachey, Sir Edward

  Channing, Francis Allston

  Lough, Thomas

  Thomas, Abel (Carmarthen, E.

  Cremer, William Randal

  M'Arthur, William (Cornwall

  Thomas, Sir A. (Glamorgan. E)

  Dalziel, James Henry

  M'Crae, George

  Thomas, David Alfred (Merthyr

  Davies, Alfred (Carmarthen)

  M'Kenna, Reginald

  Thomas, F. Freeman-(Hastings

  Davies, M. Vaughan-(Cardigan

  M'Laren, Charles Benjamin

  Wallace, Robert

  Dilke, Rt. Hon. Sir Charles

  Mansfield, Horace Rendall

  Warner, Thomas Courtenay T.

  Edwards, Frank

  Mather, Sir William

  Wason, Eugene

  Evans Sir Francis H (Maidstone

  Morgan, J. Lloyd (Carmarthen)

  White, George (Norfolk)

  Fenwick, Charles

  Morley, Charles (Breconshire)

  White, Luke, (York, E. R.)

  Foster, Sir Walter (Derby Co.)

  Moulton, John Fletcher

  Whitley, J. H. (Halifax)

  Fuller, J. M. F.

  Norman, Henry

  Whittaker, Thomas Palmer

  Furness, Sir Christopher

  Norton, Capt. Cecil William

  Williams, Osmond (Merioneth

  Gladstone, Rt. Hon. Herbert John

  Pease, J. A. (Saffron Walden)

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

  Goddard, Daniel Ford

  Philipps, John Wynford

  Grant, Corrie

  Priestley, Arthur

  Grey, Rt. Hon. Sir E. (Berwick

  Rea, Russell

  TELLERS FOR THE NOES.—

  Griffith, Ellis J.

  Rickett, J. Compton

  Dr. Macnamara and Mr. Trevelyan

  Gurdon, Sir Wm. Brampton

  Roberts, John Bryn (Eifion)

  It being after Midnight, the Chairmen proceeded to interrupt the Business.
  Mr. A. J. BALFOURrose in his place, and claimed to move, "that the
  1506
  Question 'That the Clause stand part of the Bill' be now put,"
  Question put, "that the Question 'That the Clause stand part of the Bill' be now put."

  The Committee divided: Ayes, 181; Noes, 81. (Division List No. 466.)

  AYES.

  Agg-Gardner, James Tynte

  Fellowes Hon. Ailwyn Edward

  Mount, William Arthur

  Agnew, Sir Andrew Noel

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

  Mowbray, Sir Robert Gray C.

  Allhusen, Augustus H'nry Eden

  Finch, George H.

  Muntz, Sir Philip A.

  Anson, Sir William Reynell

  Finlay, Sir Robert Bannatyne

  Murray, Rt. Hn. A. Graham (Bute

  Arkwright, John Stanhope

  Fisher, William Hayes

  Murray, Charles J. (Coventry)

  Arnold-Forster, Hugh O.

  Fison, Frederick William

  Murray, Col. Wyndham (Bath)

  Atkinson, Rt. Hon. John

  FitzGerald, Sir Robt. Penrose-

  Myers, William Henry

  Bailey, James (Walworth)

  Fitzroy, Hon. Edward Algernon

  Nicholson, William Graham

  Bain, Colonel James Robert

  Fletcher, Rt. Hon. Sir Henry

  Nicol, Donald Ninian

  Baird, John George Alexander

  Forster, Henry William

  Nolan, Col. John P. (Galway, N.

  Balcarres, Lord

  Galloway, William Johnson

  Orr-Ewing, Charles Lindsay

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

  Garfit, William

  Peel, Hn. Wm. Robert Wellesley

  Balfour, Capt. C. B. (Hornsey)

  Godson, Sir Augustus Frederick

  Percy, Earl

  Balfour, Rt. Hn. Gerald W. (Leeds

  Gordon, Maj Evans-(T'rH'mlets

  Platt-Higgins, Frederick

  Banbury, Frederick George

  Gore, Hn G. R. C Ormsby-(Salop

  Plummer, Walter R.

  Bartley, George C. T.

  Gore, Hon. S. F. Ormsby-(Linc.)

  Powell, Sir Francis Sharp

  Bathurst, Hon. Allen Benjamin

  Goschen, Hon. George Joachim

  Pretyman, Ernest George

  Bignold, Arthur

  Goulding, Edward Alfred

  Pryce-Jones, Lt.-Col. Edward

  Bignold, James

  Gray, Ernest (West Ham)

  Purvis, Robert

  Bill, Charles

  Guthrie, Walter Murray

  Quilter, Sir Cuthbert

  Blundell, Colonel Henry

  Hall, Edward Marshall

  Randles, John S.

  Bond, Edward

  Halsey, Rt. Hon. Thomas F.

  Rankin, Sir James

  Bowles, Capt. H. F. (Middlesex

  Hambro, Charles Eric

  Rasch, Major Frederic Carne

  Brodrick, Rt. Hon. St. John

  Hanbury, Rt. Hon Robert Wm.

  Remnant, James Farquharson

  Brookfield, Colonel Montagu

  Hardy, Laurence (Kent Ashf'rd

  Ridley, Hn. M, W. (Stalybridge

  Brymer, William Ernest

  Hare, Thomas Leigh

  Roberts, Samuel (Sheffield)

  Burdett-Coutts, W.

  Harris, Frederick Leverton

  Robinson, Brooke

  Carew, James Laurence

  Hay, Hon. Claude George

  Rothschild, Hon. Lionel Walter

  Carson, Rt. Hon. Sir Edw. H.

  Henderson, Sir Alexander

  Round, Rt. Hon. James

  Cavendish, V. C. W. (Derbyshire

  Hermon-Hodge, Sir Robert T.

  Royds, Clement Molyneux

  Cecil, Evelyn (Aston Manor)

  Hobhouse, Henry (Somerset, E.

  Rutherford, John

  Cecil, Lord Hugh (Greenwich)

  Hogg, Lindsay

  Simeon, Sir Barrington

  Chamberlain, Rt. Hon. J. (Birm.

  Hope, J. F. (Sheffield, Brightside

  Sinclair, Louis (Romford)

  Chapman, Edward

  Jebb, Sir Richard Claverhouse

  Smith, James Parker (Lanarks.

  Charrington, Spencer

  Johnstone, Heywood

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

  Clare, Octavius Leigh

  Kemp, George

  Stanley, Lord (Lancs.)

  Clive, Captain Percy A.

  Keswick, William

  Stewart, Sir Mark J. M 'Taggart

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

  Lambton, Hon. Frederick Wm.

  Talbot, Lord E. (Chichester)

  Cohen, Benjamin Louis

  Lawrence, Wm. F. (Liverpool)

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

  Collings, Rt. Hon. Jesse

  Lee, Arthur H. (Hants, Fareham

  Thornton, Percy M.

  Colomb, Sir John Charles Ready

  Lees, Sir Elliott (Birkenhead)

  Tomlinson, Sir Wm. Edw. M.

  Colston, Chas. Edw. H. Athole

  Legge, Col. Hon. Heneage

  Valentia, Viscount

  Compton, Lord Alwyne

  Leigh-Bennett, Henry Currie

  Vincent, Col. Sir C. E. H. (Sheffield

  Cox, Irwin Edward Bainbridge

  Loder, Gerald Walter Erskine

  Vincent, Sir Edgar (Exeter)

  Cranborne, Viscount

  Long, Col. Charles W. (Evesham

  Walker, Col. William Hall

  Cripps, Charles Alfred

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

  Walrond, Rt. Hn. Sir William H

  Cross, Alexander (Glasgow)

  Loyd, Archie Kirkman

  Warde, Col C. E.

  Cross, Herb. Shepherd (Bolton)

  Lucas, Col. Francis (Lowestoft

  Webb, Colonel William George

  Crossley, Sir Savile

  Lucas, Reginald J. (Portsmouth

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

  Cubitt, Hon. Henry

  Lyttelton, Hon. Alfred

  Welby, Sir Charles G. E. (Notts.

  Dalrymple, Sir Charles

  Macdona, John Cumming

  Wharton, Rt. Hon. John Lloyd

  Davenport, William Bromley-

  Maconochie, A. W.

  Wilson, A. Stanley (York, E. R.)

  Davies, Sir Horatio D. (Chatham

  M'Arthur, Charles (Liverpool)

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

  Denny, Colonel

  M'Iver, Sir Lewis(Edinburgh W

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

  Dickson-Poynder, Sir John P.

  Malcolm, Ian

  Wylie, Alexander

  Digby, John K. D. Wingfield-

  Manners, Lord Cecil

  Wyndham, Rt. Hon. George

  Dixon-Hartland, Sir Fred Dixon

  Maxwell, W. J. H. (Dumfriesshire

  Wyndham-Quin, Major W. H.

  Dorington, Rt. Hon. Sir John E.

  More, Robt. Jasper (Shropshire)

  Douglas, Rt. Hon. A. Akers-

  Morgan, David J. (Walth'mst'w

  Durning-Lawrence, Sir Edwin

  Morrell, George Herbert

  TELLERS FOR THE AYES.—

  Dyke, Rt. Hon. Sir William Hart

  Morrison, James Archibald

  Sir Alexander Acland-Hood and Mr. Anstruther.

  Elliot, Hon. A. Ralph Douglas

  Morton, Arthur H. Aylmer

  NOES.

  Allen, Charles P (Glouc., Stroud

  Brigg, John

  Bryce, Rt. Hon. James

  Bayley, Thomas (Derbyshire)

  Broadhurst, Henry

  Buxton, Sydney Charles

  Beaumont, Wentworth C. B.

  Brunner, Sir John Tomlinson

  Caldwell, James

  1508

  1509

  Cameron, Robert

  Kearley, Hudson E.

  Shaw, Charles Edw. (Stafford)

  Campbell-Bannerman, Sir H.

  Lambert, George

  Shipman, Dr. John G.

  Causton, Richard Knight

  Langley, Batty

  Sinclair, John (Forfarshire)

  Channing, Francis Allston

  Leng, Sir John

  Soames, Arthur Wellesley

  Cremer, William Randal

  Lewis, John Herbert

  Soares, Ernest J.

  Dalziel, James Henry

  Lough, Thomas

  Spencer, Rt. Hn C. R. (Northants

  Davies, Alfred (Carmarthen)

  Macnamara, Dr. Thomas J.

  Strachey, Sir Edward

  Davies, M. Vaughan-(Cardigan

  M'Crae, George

  Thomas, Abel (Carmarthen, E.

  Dilke, Rt. Hon. Sir Charles

  M'Kenna, Reginald

  Thomas, Sir A. (Glamorgan. E)

  Edwards, Frank

  M'Laren, Charles Benjamin

  Thomas, David Alfred (Merthyr

  Evans, Sir Francis H (Maidst'ne

  Mansfield, Horace Rendall

  Thomas, F. Freeman- (Hastings

  Fenwick, Charles

  Mather, Sir William

  Trevelyan, Charles Philips

  Foster, Sir Walter (Derby Co.)

  Morgan, J. Lloyd (Carmarthen)

  Warner, Thomas Courtenay T.

  Fuller, J. M. F.

  Morley, Charles (Breconshire)

  Wason, Eugene

  Furness, Sir Christopher

  Moulton, John Fletcher

  White, George (Norfolk)

  Goddard, Daniel Ford

  Norman, Henry

  White, Luke, (York, E. R.)

  Grant, Corrie

  Norton, Capt. Cecil William

  Whitley, J. H. (Halifax)

  Crey, Rt. Hon. Sir E. (Berwick)

  Pease, J. A. (Saffron Walden)

  Whittaker, Thomas Palmer

  Griffith, Ellis. J.

  Philipps, John Wynford

  Williams, Osmond (Merioneth

  Gurdon, Sir W. Brampton

  Priestley, Arthur

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

  Harmsworth, R. Leicester

  Rea, Russell

  Hayne, Rt. Hon. Charles Seale

  Rickett, J. Compton

  Hayter, Rt. Hn. Sir Arthur D.

  Roberts, John Bryn (Eifion)

  TELLERS FOR THE NOES—

  Holland, Sir William Henry

  Roberts, John H. (Denbighs)

  Mr. Herbert Gladstone and Mr. William M'Arthur.

  Horniman, Frederick John

  Runciman, Walter

  Humphreys-Owen, Arthur C.

  Shackleton, David James

  (12.13) Question put accordingly.
  The Committee divided:—Ayes, 176; Noes, 78. (Division List No. 467.)

  Murray, Rt. Hn A Graham (Bute

  Rasch, Major Frederic Carne

  Valentia, Viscount

  Murray, Charles J. (Coventry)

  Remnant, James Farquharson

  Vincent, Col. Sir C E H. (Sheffield

  Murray, Col. Wyndham (Bath

  Ridley, Hon. M. W. (Stalybridge

  Walker, Col. William Hall

  Myers, William Henry

  Roberts, Samuel (Sheffield)

  Walrond, Rt. Hn. Sir William H

  Nicholson, William Graham

  Robinson, Brooke

  Warde, Colonel C. E.

  Nicol, Donald Ninian

  Rothschild, Hon. Lionel Walter

  Webb, Colonel William George

  Nolan, Col. John P. (Galway, N.)

  Round, Rt. Hon. James

  Welby, Lt. -Col. A. C. E (Taunt'n

  Orr-Ewing, Charles Lindsay

  Royds, Clement Molyneux

  Welby, Sir Charles G. E. (Notts.

  Peel, Hn. W. Robert Wellesley

  Rutherford, John

  Wharton, Rt. Hon. John Lloyd

  Percy, Earl

  Simeon, Sir Barrington

  Wilson, A. Stanley (York, E. R.)

  Platt-Higgins, Frederick

  Sinclair, Louis (Romford)

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

  Plummer, Walter R.

  Smith, James Parker(Lanarks.

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

  Powell, Sir Francis Sharp

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

  Wylie, Alexander

  Pretyman, Ernest George

  Stanley, Lord (Lancs.)

  Wyndham, Rt. Hon. George

  Pryce-Jones, Lt.-Col. Edward

  Stewart, Sir Mark J. M 'Taggart

  Wyndham-Quin, Major W. H.

  Purvis, Robert

  Talbot, Lord E. (Chichester)

  Quilter, Sir Cuthbert

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

  TELLERS FOR THE AYES—

  Randles, John S.

  Thornton, Percy M.

  Sir Alexander Acland-Hood and Mr. Anstruther.

  Rankin, Sir James

  Tomlinson, Sir Wm. Edw. M.

  NOES.

  Allen, Charles P (Glouc., Stroud

  Hayne, Rt. Hon. Charles Seale-

  Runciman, Walter

  Bayley, Thomas (Derbyshire)

  Hayter, Rt. Hon. Sir Arthur D.

  Shackleton, David James

  Beaumont, Wentworth C. B.

  Holland, Sir William Henry

  Shaw, Charles Edw. (Stafford)

  Brigg, John

  Horniman, Frederick John

  Shipman, Dr. John G.

  Broadhurst, Henry

  Humphreys-Owen, Arthur C.

  Sinclair, John (Forfarshire)

  Brunner, Sir John Tomlinson

  Kearley, Hudson E.

  Soames, Arthur Wellesley

  Bryce, Rt. Hon. James

  Lambert, George

  Soares, Ernest J.

  Buxton, Sydney Charles

  Langley, Batty

  Spencer, Rt. Hn C. R (Northants

  Caldwell, James

  Leng, Sir John

  Strachey, Sir Edward

  Cameron, Robert

  Lewis, John Herbert

  Thomas, Abel (Carmarthen, E)

  Campbell-Bannerman, Sir H.

  Lough, Thomas

  Thomas, Sir A. (Glamorgan, E.)

  Causton, Richard Knight

  M'Crae, George

  Thomas, David Alfred (Merthyr)

  Channing, Francis Allston

  M'Kenna, Reginald

  Thomas, F. Freeman-(Hastings

  Cremer, William Randal

  M'Laren, Sir Charles Benjamin

  Trevelyan, Charles Philips

  Dalziel, James Henry

  Mansfield, Horace Rendall

  Warner, Thomas Courtenay T.

  Davies, Alfred (Carmarthen)

  Mather, Sir William

  Wason, Eugene

  Davies, M. Vaughan-(Cardigan

  Morgan, J. Lloyd (Carmarthen

  White, George (Norfolk)

  Dilke, Rt. Hon. Sir Charles

  Morley, Charles (Breconshire)

  White, Luke (York, E. R.)

  Edwards, Frank

  Moulton, John Fletcher

  Whitley, J. H. (Halifax)

  Evans, Sir Francis H (Maidstone

  Norman, Henry

  Whittaker, Thomas Palmer

  Fenwick, Charles

  Norton, Capt. Cecil William

  Williams, Osmond (Merioneth

  Foster, Sir Walter (Derby Co.)

  Pease, J. A. (Saffron Walden)

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

  Fuller, J. M. F.

  Philipps, John Wynford

  Goddard, Daniel Ford

  Priestley, Arthur

  Grant, Corrie

  Rea, Russell

  TELLERS FOR THE NOES—

  Griffith, Ellis J.

  Rickett, J. Compton

  Mr. Herbert Gladstone and

  Gurdon, Sir W. Brampton

  Roberts, John Bryn (Eifion)

  Mr. William M'Arthur.

  Harmsworth, R. Leicester

  Roberts, John H. (Denbighs.)

  The CHAIRMAN left the Chair to make his Report to the House.
  Committee report Progress; to sit again Tomorrow.
  MR. SPEAKER MR. SPEAKER, in pursuance of the Order of the House of the 16th October last, adjourned the House without Question put.
  Adjourned at twenty-five minutes after Twelve o'clock.

SAT FIRST.
  THE LORD BRAYBROOKE
  Sat first in Parliament after the death of his brother.
  THE LORD CHEYLESMORE
  Sat first in Parliament after the death of his brother.
PRIVATE BILL BUSINESS.
  LANARKSHIRE (MIDDLE WARD DIS TRICT) WATER ORDER CONFIRMA TION BILL (No. 182).

    DUMBARTON CORPORATION (FURTHER POWERS) ORDER CONFIRMATION BILL No. 183).
    WICK BURGH EXTENSION ORDER CONFIRMATION BILL (No. 184).
    Brought from the Commons; read 1a, to be printed, and (pursuant to the Private Legislation Procedure (Scotland) Act, 1899), deemed to have been read 2a and reported from the Committee.

  RICHMOND HILL (PRESERVATION OF VIEW) BILL.
  Returned from the Commons with the Amendments agreed to.
  SOUTH-EASTERN AND LONDON, CHATHAM AND DOVER RAILWAYS BILL [H.L.]
  Returned from the Commons with the Amendments made by the Lords to the Amendments made by the Commons, agreed to.
  BAKER STREET AND WATERLOO RAILWAY BILL [H.L.],
    CHARING CROSS, EUSTON, AND HAMPSTEAD RAILWAY (Nos. 1 AND 3) BILL [H.L.], and

      CHARING CROSS, EUSTON, AND HAMPSTEAD RAILWAY (No. 2) BILL [H.L.], now
      CHARING CROSS, EUSTON, AND HAMPSTEAD RAILWAY BILL [H. L.],
      EDGWARE AND HAMPSTEAD RAIL WAY BILL [H. L.],
      NORTH-WEST LONDON RAILWAY BILL [H. L.].
      Returned from the Commons agreed to, with Amendments. The said Amendments considered, and agreed to.

  BROMPTON AND PICCADILLY CIRCUS RAILWAY (NEW LINES, ETC.,) BILL [H.L.]
  Returned from the Commons agreed to, with Amendments.
RETURNS, REPORTS, ETC.
THE LORD CHANCELLOR THE LORD CHANCELLOR acquainted the House that the following Papers having been commanded to be presented to this House by His Majesty had been so presented on the following dates by delivery to the Clerk of the Parliaments, pursuant to Standing Order No. CXI., viz.
RETURNS, REPORTS, ETC.

  ARMY (REMOUNTS).
  I. Minutes of evidence taken before the Court of Enquiry on the administration of the Army Remount Department; with appendices. (October 17.)

  II. Reports of officers appointed by the Commander-in-Chief to inquire into the working of the Remount Department abroad. (October 17.)

  NAVY (COURTS-MARTIAL).
  Returns of the number of courts-martial held, and summary punishments inflicted during the year 1901. (October 18.)
  MINES AND QUARRIES (GENERAL REPORT AND STATISTICS FOR 1901) (PART III. OUTPUT).
  General Report and Statistics relating to the output and value of the minerals raised in the United Kingdom, the amount and value of the metals produced, and the exports and imports of minerals. (October 18.)
  CHINA, No. 2 (1902).
  Despatch from His Majesty's Special Commissioner, enclosing the treaty between Great Britain and China, signed at Shanghai, 5th September, 1902. (October 21.)
  CROFTER HOLDINGS (SCOTLAND) ACTS, 1886–87.
  Report to the Secretary for Scotland by the Crofters Commission on the social condition of the people of Lewis in 1901 (October 23.)

  STATISTICS (COLONIES).
  I. Tables relating to the Colonial and other Possessions of the United Kingdom, Part XXV., for the year 1900. (October 24.)

  1375

  II. Abstract for the Colonial and other Possessions of the United Kingdom in each of the last fifteen years from 1887 to 1901. Thirty-ninth number. (October 24.)

  IRISH LAND COMMISSION (PROCEEDINGS).
  Return for the month of August, 1902. (October 24.)

  TRADE REPORTS (ANNUAL SERIES).
  No. 2907. China (Nanking). (October 18.)
  No. 2908. Japan (South Formosa). (Supplementary). (October 24.)
  No. 2909. United States (Cuba). (October 24.)
  No. 2910. Italy (Ancona). (October 24.)

  IRELAND (TYPHOID FEVER IN LIMERICK CITY AND PRISON, JULY , AUGUST, AND SEPTEMBER, 1902.
  Reports made by Stewart Wodehouse, Esq., M. D., Medical Member of the General Prisons Board for Ireland and by Sir J. Acheson MacCullagh, M. D., Medical Inspector to the Local Government Board for Ireland. (October 24.)
  AFRICA, No. 4 (1902).
  Report by the Mombasa-Victoria (Uganda) Railway Committee on the Progress of the Works, 1901–1902; with two maps and section. (October 27.)

  BOARD OF EDUCATION.
  I. Rules to be observed in planning and fitting up public elementary schools. (October 28.)

  II. Precedents of trust deeds settled for Church of England schools, British schools, Established Church of Scotland schools, Wesleyan schools, Free Church (Scotland) schools, Roman Catholic schools, Jewish schools, Episcopal Church (Scotland) schools, and undenominational schools referred to in the Revised Code of 1870. (October 30.)

  III. Statement under administrative counties and county boroughs of public; elementary schools which have received building grants, showing, in each case, the amount of such building grants and the amount subscribed by the promoters at the time (so far as records exist); also, in the case of schools which have been
  1376
  transferred to the School Board or closed, the year of transfer or closure; with explanatory memorandum and appendix. (October 31.)

  COLONIES (ANNUAL).
  No. 369. Hong Kong (1901). (October 28.)
  COLONIAL CONFERENCE, 1902.
  Conference between the Secretary of State for the Colonies and the Prime Ministers of the Self-governing Colonies, June to August, 1902. (October 28.)
  NAVAL PRIZE MONEY.
  Return showing the unclaimed shares of all prize money, slave and pirate bounties, salvage awards, Parliamentary grants, war gratuities, and other monies distributed by the Admiralty, from the 1st January, 1855, to 31st March, 1902. (October 30.)
  POLICE (METROPOLIS).
  Report of the Commissioner of Police of the Metropolis, for the year 1901. (October 31.)

  LAND LAW (IRELAND) ACT, 1887.
  Return of the number of eviction notices filed during the quarter ended 30th September, 1902. (November 1.)
  The same were ordered to lie on the Table.

  COLONIES (ANNUAL).
  No. 370. Cocos Islands, 1902.
  IRISH LAND COMMISSION (PROCEEDINGS).
  Return for the month of September, 1902.
  RAILWAYS (CONTINUOUS BRAKES).
  Return by the Railway Companies of the United Kingdom, for six months ended the 30th June, 1902.

  LOCAL GOVERNMENT BOARD.
  I. Thirtieth Annual Report, 1900–1901. Supplement containing Report of the Medical Officer for 1900–1901 on Lead Poisoning and Water Supplies.

  II. Thirty-first Annual Report, 1901–1902. Supplement containing Report of the Medical Officer for 1901–1902.

  CENSUS OF ENGLAND AND WALES.
  Area, houses and population, also population classified by ages, condition as to marriage, occupations, birthplaces, and infirmities for counties of—Suffolk; Leicester; Somerset.
  Presented (by Command), and ordered to lie on the Table.

  WINTER ASSIZES ACTS, 1876–1877.
  Seven Orders in Council of 11th August, 1902, relating to the ensuing winter assizes.

  FOREIGN JURISDICTION ACT, 1890.
  Five Orders in Council of 11th August, 1902, entitled respectively—

  The Cyprus Courts of Justice Amendment Order. 1902;

  The Uganda Order in Council, 1902;

  The British Central Africa Order in Council, 1902.

  The East Africa Order in Council, 1902; and

  The Eastern African Protectorates (Court of Appeal) Order in Council, 1902.

  MERCHANT SHIPPING ACT, 1894.
  Two Orders in Council of 11th August, 1902, approving Pilotage Bye-laws for the ports of Cardiff and Waterford respectively.
  EXTRADITION ACTS, 1870–1895.
  Order in Council of 15th September, 1902, giving effect to a Declaration, signed 26th June, 1901, supplementary to the Extradition Treaty of 3rd December. 1873, between Great Britain and Austria-Hungary.
  INEBRIATES ACTS, 1879–1899 (INEBRIATES COMMITTED UNDER SECTION 5 OF THE LICENSING ACT, 1902).
  Regulations made by the Secretary of State for the Home Department by virtue of Section 20 of the Inebriates Act, 1898, for carrying into effect the provisions of Section 5 of the Licensing Act, 1902, respecting the detention of inebriates committed to retreats.

  DISEASES OF ANIMALS ACT, 1894 AND 1896.
  Two Orders, dated the 1st day of September, 1902, entitled the Bristol (Cumberland and Tidal Basin) Foreign
  1378
  Animals Wharf Revocation Order of 1902 and the Bristol (Cumberland Basin) Foreign Animals Wharf Order of 1902.

  TECHNICAL INSTRUCTION ACT, 1899.
  Minutes sanctioning the subjects to be taught under Clause 8 of the Technical Instruction Act, 1889, for the counties of: Huntingdon (second minute); East Suffolk (seventh minute); Leicester (seventh minute); Oxford (eighth minute); Southampton (tenth minute).
  Laid before the House (pursuant to Act), and ordered to lie on the Table.

  UNIVERSITIES OF OXFORD AND CAMBRIDGE ACT, 1877.
  Statutes made by the University of Cambridge, and sealed on the 27th May, 1902, amending the statutes of the University. Laid before the House (pursuant to Act), and to be printed. (No. 179.)
  MARGATE PIER AND HARBOUR COMPANY (1812).
  Report and Statement of Accounts for the year ended 5th April, 1902. Delivered (pursuant to Act), and ordered to lie on the Table.
  PATENT LAW AMENDMENT BILL (No. 180).
    AGRICULTURAL AND TECHNICAL INSTRUCTION (IRELAND) (No. 2) BILL (No. 181).
    Brought from the Commons; read 1a: and to be printed.

  BUSINESS OF THE HOUSE.
  THE LORD PRESIDENT OF THE COUNCIL (The DUKE of DEVONSHIRE): My Lords. I understand that it is necessary or desirable that the House should meet for purely formal business in connection with a Provisional Order Bill on this day week. I understand, also, that the noble and learned Earl on the Woolsack, the Lord Chancellor, proposes that the House should meet for judicial business on the following Tuesday—namely, on the 11th instant. But as far as I am aware, there will not be any ordinary business taken before this day fortnight. I move, therefore,

  1379
  that the House on its rising stand adjourned till Monday next.
  On Question, Motion agreed to.
  House adjourned at twenty minutes before Five o'clock, to Monday next, a quarter past Four o'clock.