Sitting of 12 November 1902

Preamble
The House met at Two of the Clock.
PETITIONS.
  CANADIAN CATTLE (IMPORTATION).
  Petitions for abolition of restrictions: from Stafford; New Brancepeth; and Pittington; to lie upon the Table.
  EDUCATION (ENGLAND AND WALES) BILL.
  Petitions against: from Falkirk; Bradford; Duns; and South Shields; to lie upon the Table.
  EDUCATION (ENGLAND AND WALES BILL.)
  Petitions for alteration: from Stafford; Pittington; New Brancepeth; and Durham (two); to lie upon the Table.
  PATENT LAW AMENDMENT BILL.
  Petition from Scottish Trade Protection Society, for alteration; to lie upon the Table.
  PREVENTION OF CORRUPTION IN TRADE.
  Petitions for legislation: from Stafford; New Brancepeth; and Pittington; to lie upon the Table.
  REGISTRATION OF MOTOR VEHICLES BILL.
  Petition from Scottish Trade Protection Society, in favour; to lie upon the Table.
  TRADE MARKS BILL.
  Petition from Scottish Trade Protection Society, against; to lie upon the Table.
QUESTIONS AND ANSWERS CIRCULATED WITH THE VOTES.

  Navy—Accidents when Firing Salutes.
  MR. LEVY: To ask the Secretary to the Admiralty if he will state how many accidents have occurred during the last ten years to men in the British Navy engaged in firing salutes; and what steps
  742
  the Admiralty have taken or intend to take to ensure the observance of regulations on such occasions in future in order to avert such accidents.
  (Answered by Mr. Arnold-Forster.) So far as can be ascertained, the recent accident in the "Victory" is the fourth that has occurred to saluting parties in His Majesty's ships during the last ten years. Each of these accidents was made the subject of a court of inquiry, and such additional instructions as were considered necessary by the Board of Admiralty were issued to the Fleet. The regulations already contained in the Gunnery Drill Book are considered to be quite sufficient to ensure safety in the firing of salutes, and the responsibility for the proper observance of these Regulations rests with the gunner in charge of the saluting party. It is not proposed to issue any further instructions in consequence of the accident in the "Victory."

  Position of Seamen Pensioners Re-engaged.
  MR. KEARLEY: To ask the Secretary to the Admiralty whether any modification of the conditions has been arrived at affecting those seamen pensioners who re-engage for a further period of five years after completion of time for pension, and who have earned the good conduct medal and gratuity, which hitherto have been liable to forfeiture during this period of extra service.
  (Answered by Mr. Arnold-Forster.) The Admiralty have decided that in future when a man who is entitled to the maximum good conduct gratuity on completion of his second period of continuous service re-engages for a third period, he may be paid the good conduct gratuity to which he is entitled instead of waiting until he is discharged to pension. The good conduct medal, to which the hon. Member also refers, has always been awarded as soon as earned.

  Postal Orders—Office of Payment.
  SIR JAMES HASLETT: To ask the Postmaster General, in view of the inconvenience caused by the rule that postal orders made payable at a town or city are payable only at the central office of that town or city to persons

  743
  living at a distance from the central office, will he alter this rule so that such postal orders may be payable at sub-offices.
  (Answered by Mr. Austen Chamberlain.) It is the practice to cash postal orders made payable at a town, without the mention of any particular office in it, either at the head office of the town or at any branch office. But I fear that an extension of this practice to all sub-post offices in a large town would be likely to facilitate fraud, and would render it very difficult to comply with a remitter's request to stop payment of an order.

  American Locomotives on Uganda Railway.
  MR. M'KENNA: To ask the Under Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs, whether his attention has been called to the fact that in 1899 and 1900 only American locomotives were purchased for use on the Uganda Railway; whether he can state the reason of the change from the previous practice of purchasing English and Indian locomotives only; and whether any examination has been made of the comparative scale of locomotive expenses in connection with the various kinds of locomotives used.
  (Answered by Lord Cranborne.) The answer to the hon. Gentleman's Question is to be found in Sir Guilford Moles-worth's Report (Africa, No. 5, 1899, p. 14). The locomotives referred to were ordered in the United States in October, 1898, because they were urgently wanted, and works in England were too congested orders to give delivery within reasonable time. To have waited until English firms could guarantee delivery would have greatly delayed the construction of the railway, and thus caused heavy additional expense. No engines were at the time to he obtained from India. A detailed comparison between the various classes of engine shown upon page 3 of the Report has not been possible, but if the hon. Gentleman wishes it I will cause inquiry to be made.

  Loans under the Small Dwellings Acquisition Act.
  MR. M'KENNA: To ask the President of the Local Government Board whether he can state the number of loans sanctioned in respect of the forty-four applications to the Local Government
  744
  Board from local authorities in England and Wales for sanction to loans under the Small Dwellings Acquisition Act, the total amount borrowed, and the number of houses actually bought by any persons under the Act.
  (Answered by Mr. Walter Long.) The Local Government Board have sanctioned loans in respect of forty of the applications referred to, the amount sanctioned being £42,797. The greater part of this amount was sanctioned for advances in respect of 155 specified houses, and the remainder is to be used in making advances in other cases, particulars of which have not yet been given. I am not able to state the number of houses actually bought by reason of advances under the Act.

  Alleged Grievances of Customs Boatmen.
  MR. LUKE WHITE: To ask the Secretary to the Treasury whether an early reply will be given as to the grievances of Customs boatmen, as the result of the recent inquiry by the Board of Customs.
  (Answered by Hr. Hayes Fisher.) The answer to the boatmen's representations was postponed because it was considered that the question might be affected by the result of an inquiry now in progress into the duties of the waterguard generally. This inquiry will probably be concluded in a few weeks.

  War Office—Clerical Employment of Ex-Soldiers.
  COLONEL BROOKFIELD: To ask the Secretary of State for War whether he can state the principle upon which clerical employment at the War Office is given to applicants for such employment; and with whom the duty of selecting candidates rests.
  (Answered by Hr. Secretary Brodrick.) My hon. and gallant friend presumably refers to the employment of officers and ex-soldiers in the War Office. The selection of officers depends on their qualifications, combined with any special claims, and is therefore by merit. The candidate is recommended by the Commander-in-Chief to the Secretary of State for approval. The selection of ex-soldiers depends on their qualifications,

  745
  preference being as far as possible given to men who have suffered in health from wounds, or other Meets of active service, provided that they have the requisite clerical experience.

  Militia—Strength and Recruiting Statistics.
  LORD CHARLES BERESFORD: To ask the Secretary of State for War if he can inform the House the difference between the present strength of the Militia and that of the Establishment, exclusive of officers and permanent staff, laid down for 1902–3, and if he has any official Reports showing the present state of recruiting for the Militia, and whether the deficiency in numbers will soon be made good.
  (Answered by Mr. Secretary Brodrick.) The Establishment is 123,016, and the strength on the 1st October was 104,380. The deficiency is considerably less than in preceding years, the recruiting showing a marked improvement. If the Bill for establishing a new Militia Reserve becomes law in the present session, I hope that next year will see great progress towards making up the Establishment.

  Volunteer Establishment Statistics.
  LORD CHARLES BERESFORD: To ask the Secretary of State for War whether he can inform the House of the number by which effective Volunteers are short of the number laid down as the establishment for 1902–03, and the number of resignations in all ranks that has taken place during the last three months.
  (Answered by Mr. Secretary Brodrick.) The establishment has gradually risen during the war to 346,450, but it was not contemplated this would be permanent. The strength on the 1st October was 272,957. The number who voluntarily quitted the force between 1st July and 1st September was 4,261; the details for the month of October are not yet reported. It is probable that the numbers of the force will gradually assimilate themselves to those before the war, which averaged about 225,000, which the Military authorities consider fully adequate to all needs on mobilisation, provided they are really efficient.

(2.15.) QUESTIONS IN THE HOUSE.

  South African War—Commissions for Volunteer Officers.
  SIR JOHN LENG: I beg to ask the Secretary of State for War whether it has been brought to his notice that there is dissatisfaction among the officers commanding Volunteer Active Service Companies in the late war, some of whom were mentioned in despatches, owing to the fact that they have been, with one or two exceptions, excluded from the marks of appreciation given to officers in the Regular Army, and will he state why those officers who have been recommended by their Commanding Officers for permanent commissions in the rank in which they have served during the campaign have not been admitted to such regular service; and whether he will take steps to remove the alleged grievance.
  THE SECRETARY OF STATE FOR WAR (Mr. BRODRICK, Surrey, Guildford): I regret that there should be any dissatisfaction among the officers named, whose services are highly appreciated, but no such dissatisfaction has reached me. Out of 589 Volunteer officers employed in South Africa, seventy were mentioned in despatches, and of these sixteen received rewards. No promise was made of regular commissions—these have only been given in exceptional cases. The hon. Member is probably aware that many Militia Officers who did good service in South Africa, and who wished for line commissions, have not obtained them. In so long a war, where so much good service has been done, it is impossible to reward everyone, and nearly 5,000 officers were mentioned in despatches.

  New Garrison Regiments.
  MR. BECKETT: I beg to ask the Secretary to State for War whether he has any official report as to the conduct and efficiency of the new garrison regiments at Malta and elsewhere, and as to the result of the experiment of their employment.
  MR. BRODRICK: Official reports have been received from Malta. The scheme is working satisfactorily, despite its having been necessary to start it during the war, when the selection of officers and noncommissioned officers was necessarily

  747
  limited. The privates are a fine body of men, who can shoot and march well. A steady improvement is expected by the Commander-in-Chief, now that special attention can be given to the composition of these regiments.

  Railway Brakes.
  MR. BELL: I beg to ask the President of the Board of Trade whether, in view of the meeting of railway officials held at the Railway Clearing House during last month (October) to consider the question of either side brakes on railway waggons, he can say if the brakes are of uniformity in application, and if they have been approved by the Board of Trade.
  THE PRESIDENT OF THE BOARD OF TRADE (Mr. GERALD BALFOUR, Leeds, Central): The Board of Trade have not at present received from the Railway Companies any report of the proceedings at the meeting referred to.

  Railway Servants' Hours of Labour—L. C. and D. Railway.
  MR. BELL: I beg to ask the President of the Board of Trade whether his attention has been called to the case of an assistant guard at Hither Green Station, on the South Eastern and Chatham Railway, who was called on duty on Sunday, 2nd November, at 10.30 a.m., after completing one shift of duty at 8 a.m., and having worked 84 hours that week; and whether he will take steps to prevent the employment of guards for so prolonged a period, and to provide for proper intervals for rest.
  MR. GERALD BALFOUR: No representations on behalf of the railway servant referred to have reached the Board of Trade. Such representations, if made, would be dealt with in accordance with the Act of 1893.

  Railway Crossing Fatality at Thames Ironworks.
  MR. BELL: I beg to ask the President of the Board of Trade whether his attention has been called to a fatal accident which occurred to Henry lade at the Thames Ironworks level crossing on the Great Eastern Railway, on the 6th instant, through the gates not being locked from the signal cabin;
  748
  and will he take steps to get the interlocking system put into operation at this place.
  MR. GERALD BALFOUR: Yes, Sir; this sad accident was duly notified to the Board of Trade, and they have received the Coroners Return. The crossing in question is stated to he a private or occupation crossing, and the requirements as to public road crossings are therefore not applicable, but I am informed that a gatekeeper is in attendance. I shall be happy, however, to put the hon. Member's suggestion before the railway company.

  Roads in Mid-Ross.
  MR. WEIR: I beg to ask the Lord Advocate whether the Congested Districts Board are aware that the Mid-Ross District Committee report that the proposed road from the Dundonnell Road to Badluachrach cannot be proceeded with owing to the grant offered by the Congested Districts Board being insufficient; and, seeing that the people of the district have already constructed part of the mad, will the Congested Districts Board consider the expediency of increasing their grant.
  THE LORD ADVOCATE (MR. A. GRAHAM MURRAY, Buteshire): The Congested Districts Board intimated to the County Council of Ross and Cromarty that they were prepared to make a grant of 75 per cent. of the estimated cost of the road in question, and in the opinion of the Congested Districts Board no case for an increase of the grant has been made out.

  Island of Lewis—Hospital Accommodation.
  MR. WEIR: I beg to ask the Lord Advocate whether the Secretary for Scotland is aware that the Lewis District Committee report that, in consequence of the public health assessment for the Lewis district for the past year being at the maximum rate of 1s. per £, they are unable to borrow the money required for the construction of a hospital at Carlo-way, the plans of which have been approved by the Local Government Board; and, in view of the fact that this hospital is urgently needed for cases of infectious diseases, will he state whether the Secretary for Scotland proposes to

  749
  take any steps, by legislation or otherwise, to enable local authorities to provide hospital accommodation for infectious diseases in the congested districts of the Island of Lewis.
  MR. A. GRAHAM MURRAY: I would refer the hon. Member to my reply to his Question of yesterday.†
  MR. WEIR: The right hon. Gentleman has not, evidently, read the Question. The latter part of it is not referred to in the answer I got yesterday—viz., does the Secretary for Scotland propose to take any steps, by legislation or otherwise, to enable local authorities to provide hospital accommodation.
  MR. A. GRAHAM MURRAY: I said that we could not take steps at this present moment.
  MR. WEIR: I am quite aware of that, but—
  MR. SPEAKER: Order, order! The right hon. Gentleman has fully answered the Question.
  MR. WEIR: No, Sir; the Question is—
  MR. SPEAKER: Order, order! I cannot enter into any argument whether or not the answer is satisfactory.
  MR. WEIR: But—
  MR. SPEAKER: Order, order!
  MR. WEIR: I must take another opportunity of dealing with this question.

  Applecross (Ross) Road and Bridge.
  MR. WEIR: I beg to ask the Lord Advocate, seeing that the Western District Committee for the county of Ross and Cromarty report that a road and bridge at Applecross are urgently necessary, will he state on what ground the Congested Districts Board have declined to provide a grant in aid of the work.
  MR. A. GRAHAM MURRAY: On the ground that the local authorities have more than once altered, and have so much enlarged their plans in comparison with the original proposal placed before the Congested Districts Board, and that the
  † See page 594.
  750
  Board are not satisfied that the public benefit to be gained would be commensurate with the expenditure now suggested.

  Island of Lewis Fisheries.
  MR. WEIR: I beg to ask the Lord Advocate, whether the petition to His Majesty the King, signed by over 2,000 crofters, cottars, fishermen, and others of the island of Lewis, has reached the hands of the Secretary for Scotland; and, if so, will he state what action it is proposed to take in the matter.
  MR. A. GRAHAM MURRAY: I can only refer the hon. Member to my reply Ito his similar Question of yesterday.†

  Typhus Fever at Ness.
  MR. WEIR: I beg to ask the Lord Advocate whether the Secretary for Scotland is aware that the entrance to the house in the district of Ness, island of Lewis, in which a man named Mackay died of typhus fever on the 14th September last, is so near other houses that it was impossible to get a coffin inside the house, and that the body of Mackay had to be taken out before it could be coffined; will he state whether the Local Government Board for Scotland have approved any bye-laws such as will admit of the early destruction of similar insanitary houses in the island of Lewis; and, if not, will he state what steps the Local Government Board propose to take in the matter.
  MR. A. GRAHAM MURRAY: The Secretary for Scotland is not aware of the facts as stated by the hon. Member. On the contrary, the Secretary for Scotland is informed that the body of Mackay was coffined in the room where he, Mackay, died. The Local Government Board has no bye-laws, or power to make such bye-laws, as the hon. Member suggests. In this particular ease, however, permission has been obtained from the heirs of deceased to destroy the house in question.
  MR. WEIR: I can only say that the information supplied to the right hon. Gentleman is absolutely false.
  MR. SPEAKER: Order, order!
  † See page 595.
  MR. WEIR: I was on the spot and saw it.

  Scottish Fishery Board—Mr. McIloy.
  MR. WEIR: I beg to ask the Lord Advocate if he will state the qualifications of Mr. McIloy, ironmonger, of Rothesay, Buteshire, for appointment as a member of the Scottish Fishery Board.
  MR. A. GRAHAM MURRAY: The qualifications of the gentleman in question are the same now as they were when he was appointed more than five years ago. He is a native of, and exceptionally well acquainted with, the Western Highlands adjoining the Firth of Clyde; he has a large acquaintance with the local fishermen; and is an ex-Provost of Rothesay. I ought to add that his services to the Board, of which he is an unpaid member, have been unremitting; and he has by those services given complete satisfaction to his colleagues and to the Secretary for Scotland.
  MR. WEIR: And a good Tory.
  MR. A. GRAHAM MURRAY: The hon. Member asked me as to his special qualifications for appointment to the Fishery Board; I did not think it necessary to add my testimony to his general good sense, which is well known.

  Ireland—Labourers' Cottages at Roscrea.
  MR. CAREW: I beg to ask the Chief Secretary to the Lord Lieutenant of Ireland whether his attention has been directed to the action of certain district councillors in the Roscrea No. 3 Rural District, in respect of applications of labourers for cottages and plots under the Labourers (Ireland) Acts; and whether he will direct the inspectors of the Local Government Board to insist on suitable sites being selected in this district.
  THE CHIEF SECRETARY FOR IRELAND (Mr. WYNDHAM,): The Inspector who held the recent inquiry into the scheme proposed by the District Council, states that the Council gave very intelligent consideration to the various representations, and selected the sites with much judgment. The result of the inquiry will shortly be communicated to the Council.

  Mutoscopes at Longford.
  MR. TULLY: I beg to ask the Chief Secretary to the Lord Lieutenant of Ireland, whether his attention has been directed to complaints as to the nature of the living pictures exhibited in mutoscopes at Longford and in public places at other railway stations in Ireland; and whether he will direct the Royal Irish Constabulary to institute prosecutions in any of these cases.
  MR. WYNDHAM: No complaints have been made to the Constabulary in this matter, either in County Longford or elsewhere in Ireland.
  MR. TULLY: Why don't the Constabulary look after these things, instead of the public having to direct attention to them?

  Dr. Starkie and Irish Primary School Managers.
  MR. TULLY: I beg to ask the Chief Secretary to the Lord Lieutenant of Ireland whether his attention has been called to the resolutions of the clerical managers of national schools in the diocese of Dromore, and in the diocese of Ardagh, as to the continuance of Dr. Starkie as Resident Commissioner of National Education; and whether he is prepared to take any action in the matter.
  MR. WYNDHAM: I have seen the resolutions referred to. I have nothing to add to the reply given by me on Wednesday last, to a similar Question of the hon. Member.†
  MR. TULLY: Is the right hon. Gentleman not aware of the agitation caused in Ireland by this gentleman's conduct?

  Trade of the Port of Limerick.
  MR. TULLY: I beg to ask the Chief Secretary to the Lord Lieutenant of Ireland, whether he has received resolutions from the Limerick Chamber of Commerce and Limerick Harbour Board, complaining that the Congested Districts Board have, to the detriment of the Port of Limerick, subsidised the Clyde Company at Cork; and whether he can state on what grounds the Board have refused a subsidy to a Limerick steamer trading with the south and south-west ports.
  †See page 147.
  MR. WYNDHAM: This matter received the very careful consideration of the Congested Districts Board, and the conclusion come to was that a case for subsidising two lines of steamers on the same coast was not made out. The payment of the subsidy to the Clyde Company has been continued for a further period of one year, as a tentative measure.

  Illegal Fishing in Dublin Bay.
  MR. TULLY: I beg to ask the Chief Secretary to the Lord Lieutenant of Ireland, whether complaints have been received as to the destruction caused in Dublin Bay to line fishermen by trawlers; and whether instructions will be given to the Commander of the "Helga," in Kingstown Harbour, to safeguard the rights of line fishermen in Dublin Bay.
  MR. WYNDHAM: Every precaution is taken to prevent illegal fishing in these waters, both by the new Department's cruiser and the coastguard.

  Sligo and the Canadian Mail Service.
  MR. TULLY: I beg to ask the Chief Secretary to the Lord Lieutenant of Ireland whether he has received resolutions from the Sligo Corporation and Sligo Harbour Board as to the adoption of Sligo as a port of call for the fast Atlantic mail service with Canada; and if he can state whether he proposes to give effect to these resolutions.
  MR. WYNDHAM: I have no power to give effect to such resolutions. But any representations made to me in the matter of harbour facilities in the west of Ireland I will receive the consideration of the Government.
  MR. TULLY: Will the right hon. Gentleman consent to receive a deputation from the Sligo Corporation on the subject?
  MR. WYNDHAM: I will consider that.

  Resignation of Sir David Harrel—The New Under Secretary—Government Land Purchase Policy.
  MR. TULLY: I beg to ask the Chief Secretary to the Lord Lieutenant of Ireland whether he can indicate the grounds upon which the resignation has been accepted of Sir David Harrel as Under Secretary; and if he can state when he will be in a position to announce
  754
  the change of Irish policy connected with the appointment of Sir Antony M'Donnel to that position.
  MR. WYNDHAM: The first query is unusual. In reply, I have to say that the sole ground for accepting Sir David Harrel's resignation was that it is impossible to persist in asking a public servant to re-consider a resignation tendered after prolonged, exacting, devoted and distinguished service, upon the sole ground of ill-health. May I add that I cannot, within the compass of an answer, express my gratitude to Sir David Harrel for the assistance he has given me, or my admiration of the work he has done for his country. In reply to the second Question, I would refer the hon. Member to the speech which I made in the House on Monday, 27th October†, and to the announcement, more than once repeated, that a Land Purchase Bill will be the principal measure of next session.
  MR. TULLY: Was not that speech a coercion speech?
  MR. BRYCE: When the right hon. Gentleman says "principal" measure next session, does he mean principal Government measure or principal Irish measure?
  THE PRIME MINISTER AND FIRST LORD OF THE TREASURY (Mr. A. J. BALFOUR,): I think it is premature to discuss the exact hierarchical precedence of measures at this stage.
  MR. BRYCE: My Question merely arose out of the expression used by the right hon. Gentleman, which seemed to me to be ambiguous.
  MR: TULLY: Will the right hon. Gentleman say whether he is prepared to drop the policy of coercion?

  Prosecutions of Ladies under the Crimes Act.
  MR TULLY: I beg to ask the Chief Secretary to the Lord Lieutenant of Ireland whether he can state how many ladies have been prosecuted for newspaper offences since the passing of the Criminal Law and Procedure (Ireland) Act, 1887, how many ladies have been
  † See preceding volume, page 914.

  755
  imprisoned under the operations of that Act, and what is the nature of the prison treatment in their cases.
  MR. WYNDHAM: There have been two such prosecutions. One was dismissed. In the other case the defendant was called upon to give sureties for good behaviour, or to go to prison in default. The conviction was confirmed by the Superior Court. Persons committed to prison in default of entering into sureties are subject to the rules prescribed for prisoners awaiting trial. These rules will be found in Parliamentary Papers Nos. 129 and 189 of this Session.
  MR. T. M. HEALY: Will the right hon. Gentleman look into the case he has referred to. It is one which excites a great amount of sympathy all over Ireland, and everybody believes this laity to be the victim of circumstances. She is not in good health.
  MR. WYNDHAM: Of course the question of the health of a prisoner always receives careful consideration.
  MR. TULLY: Then let her off.

  Carlow—Prosecutions under the Sanitary Laws.
  MR. CAREW: I beg to ask Mr. Attorney General for Ireland whether his attention has been directed to the prosecutions at the last Carlow Petty Sessions for breaches of the sanitary laws, which were dismissed, although the offences complained of still continue; and whether he will take steps to have the sanitary laws enforced in these cases.
  THE ATTORNEY-GENERAL FOR IRELAND (Mr. ATK INSON,): The prosecutions, which were instituted at the suit of the District Council, were dismissed without prejudice, owing, I believe, to some technical informality in the framing of the summons. Fresh proceedings are, I understand, about to be instituted. It is the duty of the local sanitary authority, not of the Crown, to enfore the sanitary laws in the district.

  Londonderry Postal Arrangements.
  MR. O'DOHERTY: I beg to ask the Postmaster General whether his
  756
  attention has been directed to resolutions passed by the Londonderry Corporation requesting Inns to establish a Sunday morning delivery of letters in that city, and will he grant this request.
  THE POSTMASTER GENERAL (MR. AUSTEN CHAMBERLAIN,): The Corporation were informed on the 29th ultimo that their request for a house to house delivery of letters in the Londonderry Town District on Sundays, in place of the present delivery to callers at the Post Office, will be complied with if they will furnish me with an assurance that the inhabitants generally are in favour of the change.
  MR. O'DOHERTY: But has not the right hon. Gentleman received an assurance from the Corporation, by way of resolution passed by that body, informing him that the inhabitants are in favour of the change?
  MR. AUSTEN CHAMBERLAIN: I think not.
  MR. O'DOHERTY: I happened to be present at the meeting at which it was passed.
  MR. AUSTEN CHAMBERLAIN: It has not reached me personally.
  MR. O'DOHERTY: Will the right hon. Gentleman further inquire?
  MR. AUSTEN CHAMBERLAIN: Yes, of course I will.

  Post Office and the Irish Language.
  MR. CAREW: I beg to ask the Postmaster General whether he is aware that complaints have been made in Navan, county Meath, as to the delay and non-delivery of letters addressed in Irish characters to the secretary of the Navan Branch of the Gaelic League; and whether he will arrange that post office officials in. Ireland shall acquire a knowledge of the Irish language so as to prevent a repetition of these complaints.
  MR. AUSTEN CHAMBERLAIN: No such complaint has reached me. As regards the general Question, I can add

  757
  nothing to the answer given by me to the hon. Member for South Leitrim on the 10th instant.†
  MR. TULLY: Why will the right hon. Gentleman carry on this boycotting of the Irish language?

  Newry Railway Accident.
  MR. BELL: I beg to ask the President of the Board of Trade whether an accident which occurred to a fireman named Bernard Smith, at Newry on the Great Northern Railway (Ireland) on kith September last, has been reported to the Board of Trade; and, if so, will he state when it was reported.
  MR. GERALD BALFOUR: No, Sir. The accident referred to has not been notified to the Board of Trade, and inquiry is being made of the Railway Company concerned.

  Wreckage off the Donegal Coast.
  MR. O'DOHERTY: I beg to ask the President of the Board of Trade what steps have been taken by the Irish Lights Commissioners to have removed the wreck, already reported to them, from the Channel, off Burtonport, County Donegal, and thereby remove a source of danger to the shipping frequenting that coast.
  MR. GERALD BALFOUR: I am informed by the Commissioners of Irish Lights that they are not aware of the existence of any wreck in the Channel off Burtonport. The attention of the Board of Trade and of the Commissioners was called last September to a letter in a newspaper stating that the writer had seen a wreck seven miles from the west end of Tory Island, but all attempts to trace the writer of the letter have failed. During the present month the Board of Trade has received a letter from the gentleman who originally forwarded the newspaper saying that he, too, had found it impossible to trace the writer, and that he had come to the conclusion that the letter was a hoax.
  MR. T. M. HEALY: Will the right hoe. Gentleman instruct the Irish Lights Commissioners to make a search for the wreckage?
  † See page 462.
  MR. GERALD BALFOUR: So far as can be learned, it has not been seen by anybody.
  MR. O'DOHERTY: But have von not received a letter from a county councillor and local magistrate stating that the wreck had been seen?
  MR. GERALD BALFOUR: I am not aware of it.
  MR O'DOHERTY: You acknowledged the receipt.
  MR. GERALD BALFOUR: Oh, it was an anonymous letter, I believe.

  Armagh Income Tax Appeals.
  MR. LONSDALE: I beg to ask the Chief Secretary to the Lord Lieutenant of Ireland whether he is aware that the Commissioners of Income Tax do not now sit for the hearing of Appeals in the city of Armagh as formerly, and that, in consequence, appellants from Armagh and the neighbouring district are put to cost and inconvenience by having to go to Portadown; and whether, seeing that Armagh is central for the county, also the County town, he will direct that sittings of the Court shall he held there in future.
  THE FINANCIAL SECRETARY TO THE TREASURY (Mr. HAYES FISHER,): The Special Commissioners of income Tax have not sat at Armagh since 1900, but they would be ready to do so in any year in which the amount of business there may make it desirable.
  M LONSDALE: There were no fewer than forty Appeals at the last sittings, and the appellants had to travel from Armagh to Portadown.
  MR. HAYES FISHER: I was not aware of that, but it seems to point to the desirability of holding the sittings at Armagh in such a case.

  Londonderry Shipbuilding Yard.
  MR. O'DOHERTY: I beg to ask the Secretary to the Admiralty whether the Londonderry Shipbuilding Yard has been lately examined by Admiralty experts with a view to the placing of work in that yard; and whether the Admiralty will consider the advisability of having repairs executed in Londonderry to His Majesty's ships stationed in or off the Irish coast.
  THE SECRETARY TO THE ADMIRALTY (Mr. ARNOLD-FORSTER,): The Londonderry Shipbuilding Yard was inspected in April, 1901, and, as a result of that inspection, was placed on the Admiralty Shipbuilding List for small vessels, and the Company has been invited to tender for several orders. A later inspection has taken place during the present year, and, in consequence of the reports received as to its capabilities, the Yard has now been placed on the List for the repair of hulls of vessels up to and including third class cruisers. The Admiral Superintendent of Naval Reserves has been so informed.

  Port Erlin (Lough Swilly) Boat Slip.
  MR. O'DOHERTY: I beg to ask the Secretary of State for War whether any arrangement has as yet been arrived at by the War Department with the Congested Districts Board of Ireland with reference to the construction of a boat slip for fishermen at Port Erlin, Leenan Head, Lough Swilly.
  MR. BRODRICK: In October, 1901, the Congested Districts Board asked and received permission to make a preliminary survey for the purpose of erecting a breakwater at Port Erlin. The survey is understood to have been made in March, 1902. No further communication, however, has been received from the Congested Districts Board.

  London Street Traffic—Proposed Royal Commission.
  SIR J. DICKSON POYNDER: I beg to ask the First Lord of the Treasury if he can state what action the Government intend to take in connection with schemes for London locomotion; whether he will consider the advisability of appointing a Royal Commission to inquire into the question of London locomotion generally, and specially as to the advisability of appointing a body with statutory powers to deal with it; and if so, whether he will, pending the Report of the Commission, defer any action being taken in the matter. I may say that I only ask today particularly with regard to the latter part of my Question. The remaining Portion was replied to yesterday.
  MR. A. J. BALFOUR: I do not imagine that it would be possible to appoint a body with statutory powers except by Act of Parliament. That would be a rather formidable undertaking, and I should not like to go beyond what I said yesterday in answer to the right hon. Gentleman opposite.†

NEW BILL.

  Electric Lighting Acts Amendment (Scotland).
  THE LORD ADVOCATE (Mr. A. GRAHAM MURRAY, Buteshire)in bringing in a Bill to amend the borrowing provisions of the Electric Lighting Act, 1882, and the Electric Lighting (Scotland) Act, 1890, explained that its object was to get over a difficulty which had arisen under the existing Electric Lighting Acts, and which was calculated to press hardly on local authorities. Under these Acts it was provided that the provisions as to borrowing powers should be on the same lines as in the Gas Acts, and unfortunately it had been ruled that where money had already been borrowed for gas purposes the amount must be taken into account with regard to powers for borrowing for electric lighting. That certainly was not the intention of the Act, and hence a short Act was necessary to remedy the difficulty.
  Bill to amend the borrowing provisions of the Electric Lighting Act, 1882, and the Electric Lighting (Scotland) Act, 1890, ordered to be brought in by the Lord Advocate and Mr. Solicitor General for Scotland.

  ELECTRIC LIGHTING ACTS AMENDMENT (SCOTLAND) BILL.
  "To amend the borrowing provisions of The Electric Lighting Act, 1882, and The Electric Lighting (Scotland) Act, 1890," presented accordingly, and read the first time; to be read a second time tomorrow, and to be printed. [Bill 301]

  IRISH VALUATION ACTS.
  Report from the Select Committee, with Minutes of Evidence and an Appendix, brought up, and read [Inquiry not completed].
  †See page 601.
  Report to lie upon the Table, and to be printed. [No. 370.]

  EDUCATION (ENGLAND AND WALES) [GRANTS].
  Committee to consider of authorising the payment, out of moneys to be provided by Parliament, of certain Annual Grants to Local Education Authorities in pursuance of any Act of the present. Session to make further provision with respect to Education in England and Wales (King's recommendation signified), tomorrow.—(Mr. A. J. Balfour.)

  EDUCATION (ENGLAND AND WALES) BILL.
  Considered in Committee.
  (In the Committee.)
  [Mr. J. W. LOWTHER (Cumberland, Penrith) in the Chair.]
  Clause 12:—
  MR. LUKE WHITEsaid the matter referred to in the Amendment he rose to move had been to a certain extent dealt with by the alterations made in a former Clause; still he considered, with regard to joint committees dealing with two districts having matters relating to education, those committees should receive the direct attention and control of the education authorities. He believed that at the present time in county boroughs it was necessary that all the proceedings of the Education Department authority should be brought before the Council for adoption, but in the counties a different method of procedure was adopted, the Councils having power to delegate their authority to any committee, with such powers as they thought fit. If his Amendment were carried it would leave the law in regard to Education Committees to be appointed under this Section in the same position in all respects as it now stood.
  Amendment proposed—
  "In page 5, line 15, at the end, to insert the words '(6) The meetings and proceedings of any Education Committee constituted under this section shall be subject in all respects to the same provisions and regulations as those which now affect any ordinary or joint committees of any Council.'"—(Mr. Luke White.)
  Question proposed, "That those words be there inserted."
  THE PRIME MINISTER AND FIRST LORD OF THE TREASURY (Mr. A. J. BALFOUR,)said he gathered that the hon. Member's object had been more or less met by modifications already introduced into the Bill. Did he care to press the Amendment under the circumstances The matter could, if necessary, be further dealt with in the schedule, but he was not convinced that it would not be better to leave it to the local authorities to deal with the point in the schemes they presented. He preferred the latter course, as it would leave room for such elasticity of arrangements as might be rendered expedient by the varied circumstances of the different localities.
  SIR CHARLES DILKEsaid that when the Committee discussed the question of the frequency of meetings and certain other connected subjects, it was understood—although the Government did not absolutely pledge itself—the matter should be raised on the schedule. If, however, his hon. friend preferred to press his Amendment to a division, he would suggest that the words "or joint" should be omitted from it.
  MR. WHITLEYasked the Prime Minister if he could not expedite the presentation of the schedule dealing with the question of the frequency of meetings both of committees and managers. Since the point was last under discussion he had received letters from schoolmasters stating that their managers seldom if ever met. In one case there had been no meeting for twelve years, and in another for five years. As they had to deal with the remainder of the Bill in a hurry, it was desirable that right hon. Gentlemen should have the Government proposals without delay.
  MR. A. J. BALFOURreplied that the request of the hon. Gentleman was not at all unreasonable, and due expedition would be shown in putting the schedule on the Paper. The statement as to the

  763
  non-meeting of managers was, he believed, perfectly correct. As to the Amendment, he was still far from convinced that it would not be much better to leave it to the local authorities to arrange this matter by scheme. He could not, however, give any pledge.
  MR. SAMUEL EVANSwas very sorry to hear that, especially as they were to have a limited time for the discussion of the schedule. He urged the hon. Member to press the Amendment, in order that they might have sense of the House. He also suggested that the words "or joint" should be left out, otherwise he would
  fell it this duty to move an Amendment to the Amendment.
  MR. LUKE WHITEsaid he would adopt the suggestion to omit the words "or joint."
  Amendment amended—
  "By leaving out the words ' or joint.'"—(Mr. Luke White.)
  (2.13.) Question put, "That those words, as amended, be there inserted."
  The Committee divided:—Ayes 95; Noes, 150. (Division List No. 499.)

  AYES.

  Abraham, William (Rhondda)

  Gordon, Sir W. Brampton

  Roberts, John H. (Denbighs.)

  Allan, Sir William(Gateshead

  Harcourt, Rt. Hon. Sir William

  Robertson, Edmund (Dundee)

  Allen, Charles P(Glouc., Stroud

  Hayne, Rt. Hon. Charles Seale-

  Roe, Sir Thomas

  Bayley, Thomas (Derbyshire)

  Halme, Norval Watson

  Samuel, Herbert L (Cleveland)

  Bell, Richard

  Hemphill, Rt. Hon. Charles H.

  Shackleton, David James

  Brigg, John

  Holland, Sir William Henry

  Shaw, Thomas (Hawick B.)

  Broadhurst, Henry

  Horniman, Frederick John

  Shipman, Dr. John G.

  Brunner, Sir John Tomlinson

  Humphreys-Owen, Arthur C.

  Sinclair, John (Forfarshire)

  Bryce, Rt. Hon. James

  Hutton, Alfred E. (Morley)

  Sloan, Thomas Henry

  Burns, John

  Jacoby, James Alfred

  Soares, Ernest J.

  Burt, Thomas

  Jones, David Brynmor (Swansea

  Spencer, Rt. Hon. C. R. (N'thants

  Caldwell, James

  Langley, Batty

  Strachey, Sir Edward

  Cameron, Robert

  Layland-Barratt, Francis

  Taylor, Theodore C. (Radcliffe

  Campbell-Bannerman, Sir H.

  Leese, Sir Joseph F.(Accrington

  Thomas, Sir A. (Glamorgan, E.

  Causton, Richard Knight

  Leigh, Sir Joseph

  Thomas, David Alfred (Merthyr

  Cawley, Frederick

  Leng, Sir John

  Thomas, JA (Glamorgan Gower

  Channing Francis Allston

  Levy, Maurice

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

  Davies, Alfred (Carmarthen)

  Lewis, John Herbert

  Tomkinson, James

  Davies, M. Vaughan-(Cardigan

  Lloyd-George, David

  Toulmin, George

  Dewar, John A. (Inverness-sh.

  Macnamara, Dr. Thomas J.

  Trevelyan, Charles Philips

  Dilke, Rt. Hon. Sir Charles

  M'Arthur, William (Cornwall)

  Warner, Thomas Courtenay T.

  Douglas, Charles M. (Lanark)

  M'Crae, George

  Watson, Eugene

  Duncan, J. Hastings

  M'Kenna, Reginald

  Weir, James Galloway

  Edwards, Frank

  Mansfield, Horace Rendall

  White, George (Norfolk)

  Elibank, Master of

  Mather, Sir William

  Whitley, J. H. (Halifax)

  Ellis, John Edward

  Moss, Samuel

  Williams, Osmond (Merioneth

  Emmott, Alfred

  Nussey, Thomas Willans

  Wilson, John (Durham, Mid.)

  Evans, Samuel T. (Glamorgan

  Palmer, Sir Charles M.(Durham

  Woodhouse, Sir J.T(Huddersf'd

  Fenwick, Charles

  Palmer, George Wm. (Reading

  Yoxall, James Henry

  Fitzunaurice, Lord Edmond

  Pease, J. A. (Saffron Walden)

  Goddard, Daniel Ford

  Philipps, John Wynford

  TELLERS FOR THE AYES—

  Grant, Corrie

  Rigg, Richard

  Mr. Luke White and Mr.

  Griffith, Ellis J.

  Roberts, John Byrn (Eifion)

  Henry J. Wilson.

  NOES.

  Agg-Gardner, James Tynte

  Bignold, Arthur

  Champman, Edward

  Anson, Sir William Reynell

  Blundell, Colonel Henry

  Charrington, Spencer

  Arkwright, John Stanhope

  Brodrick, Rt. Hon. St. John

  Cocharne, Hon. Thos. H.A.E

  Arnold-Forster, Hugh O.

  Brown, Alexander H. (Shropsh.

  Cohen, Benjamin Louis

  Arrol, Sir William

  Brymer, William Ernest

  Collings, Rt. Hon. Jesse

  Atkinson, Rt. Hon. John

  Bull, William James

  Carnborne, Viscount

  Bailey, James (Walworth)

  Campbell, Rt Hn J.A. (Glasgow

  Dalrymple, Sir Charles

  Bain, Colonel James Robert

  Carew, James Laurence

  Denny, Colonel

  Balcarres, Lord

  Carson, Rt. Hon. Sir Edw H.

  Dickson-Poyner, Sir John P.

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

  Cavendish, V.C.W. (Derbyshire

  Disraeli, Coningsby Ralph

  Balfour, Rt. Hn. Gerald W (Leeds

  Chamberlain, Rt Hon. J. (Brim.

  Doughty, George

  Barry, Sir Francis T. (Windsor)

  Chamberlain, Rt Hn J.A. (Worc.

  Douglas, Rt. Hon. A. Akers-

  Beckett, Ernest William

  Chaplin, Rt. Hon. Henry

  Doxford, Sir William Theodore

  Duke, Henry Edward

  Kennedy, Patrick James

  Reid, James (Greenock)

  Fgerton, Hon. A. de Tatton

  Kenyon, Hn. Geo. T. (Denbight)

  Ridley, Hn. M. W (Stalybridge

  Fellowes, Hon, Ailwyn Edward

  Knowles, Lees

  Roberts, Samuel (Sheflield)

  Fergusson, Rt Hn Sir J (Manch'r

  Law, Andrew Bonar (Glasgow)

  Rolleston, Sir John F. L.

  Fielden, Edward Brocklehurst

  Lawson, John Grant

  Ropner, Colonel Robert

  Finch, George H.

  Legge, Col. Hon. Heneage

  Royes, Clement Molyneux

  Finlay, Sir Robert Bannatyne

  Leigh-Bennett, Henry Currie

  Rutherford, John

  Fishier, William Hayes

  Loder, Gerald Walter Erskine

  Sadler, Col. Samuel Alexander

  Fison, Frederick William

  Long, Col. Charles W. (Evesham

  Samuel, Harry S. (Limehouse)

  Fitzroy, Hon. Edward Algernon

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

  Seely, Charles Hilton (Lincoln

  Flannery, Sir Fortescue

  Lonsdale, John Brownlee

  Seely, Maj. J. E. B.(Isle of Wight

  Fletcher, Rt. Hon. Sir Henry

  Lowther, Rt. Hon. James (Kent

  Sharpe, William Edward T.

  Flower, Ernest

  Lucas, Col. Francis (Lowestoft)

  Smith, James Parker (Lanarks.

  Forster, Henry William

  Lucas, Reginald J.(Portsmouth

  Stanley, Lord (Lancs.)

  Gibbs, Hon. Vicary (St. Albans)

  Macartney, Rt Hn. W.G. Ellison

  Strutt, Hon. Charles Henley

  Godson, Sir Augustus Frederick

  Macdona, John Cumming

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

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

  M'Killop, James (Stirlingshire

  Taylor, Austin (East Toxteth)

  Gray, Ernest (West Ham)

  Maxwell, W J H (Dumfriesshire

  Thompson, Dr EC (Monagh'n, N

  Greene, Sir E. W. (B'ry SEdm'nds

  Middlemore, John Throgmort'n

  Tollemache, Henry James

  Gretton, John

  Milvain, Thomas

  Tomlinson, Sir. Wm. Edw. M.

  Groves, James Grimble

  Morrell, George Herbert

  Tuke, Sir John Batty

  Halsey, Rt. Hon. Thomas. F.

  Mount, William Arthur

  Tully, Jasper

  Hamilton, Rt Hn Lord G (Midd'x

  Mowbray, Sir Robert Gray C.

  Welby, Lt.-Col. ACE (Taunton

  Hanbury, Rt. Hon, Robert Wm.

  Murray, Rt. Hn A. Graham (Bute

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

  Hardy, Laurence (Kent, Ashf'rd

  Murray, Col. Wyndham (Bath

  Wharton, Rt. Hon. John Lloyd

  Hare, Thomas Leigh

  Myers, William Henry

  Whiteley, H (Ashton un Lyne

  Harris, Frederick Leverton

  O'Dohercy, William

  Williams, Rt Hn J Powell-(Birm

  Haslett, Sir James Horner

  Orr-Ewing. Charles Lindsay

  Wodehouse, Rt Hon. E.R. (Bath

  Healy, Timothy Michael

  Palmer, Walter (Salisbury)

  Worsley-Taylor, Henry Wilson

  Health, Arthur Howard (Hanley

  Pemberton, John S. G.

  Wortley, Rt. Hon. C.B. Stuart

  Higginbottom, S.W.

  Pilkington, Lieut.-Col. Richard

  Wrightson, Sir Thomas

  Hoare, Sir Samuel

  Platt-Higgins, Frederick

  Wyndham, Rt. Hon. George

  Hobhouse, Henry (Somerset, E.)

  Plummer, Walter R.

  Wyndbam-Quin, Major W.H.

  Hope, J.F. (Sheffield, Brightside

  Powell, Sir Francis Sharp

  Horner, Frederick William

  Pretyman, Ernest George

  Hoult, Joseph

  Purvis, Robert

  TELEERS FOE THE NOES—

  Hudson, George Bickerteths

  Pym, C. Guy

  Sir Alexander Acland-

  Jebb, Sir Richard Claverhouse

  Randles, John S.

  Hood and Mr. Ansturhter.

  Johnstone, Heywood

  Rattigan, Sir William Henry

  Question, "That those words be there inserted," put and agreed to.

  SIR ALFRED THOMASmoved to leave out sub-Section (6), which is as follows—
  "In wales and Monmouthshire any county governing body constituted under a scheme Made in pursuance of the Welsh Intermediate Education Act, 1859, shall he the education committee under this Act of the council of the county or county borough, unless any other scheme is proposed by the council."
  and to insert the new sub-Section standing in his name. Those with whom he was closely identified fully appreciated the compliment paid them by the Government in respect of the admirable work done by the existing bodies in Wales, so far as the administration of the Technical Instruction Act was concerned, but he wished strongly to urge that they preferred that all education in Wales should come under one authority. The object of the Amendment was to avoid dual control. In Wales they should have one authority-dealing with every section of education.
  766
  Amendment proposed—
  "In page 5, line 16, to leave out sub-Sect ion (6), and insert: (6) 'Any scheme for establishing an education committee of the council of any county or county borough in Wales or of the county of Monmouth or county borough of New port, s provide that the county governing body constituted under The Welsh Intermediate Education Act, 1589, for any such county or county borough shall cease to exist, and shall make such provision as appears necessary or expedient for the transfer of the powers, duties, property and liabilities of any such body to the local education authority under this Act, and for making the provisions of this section applicable to the exercise by the local education authority of the powers so transferred.'"—(Sir Alfred Thomas.)
  Question proposed "That sub-Section (6) stand part of the Clause."
  MR. A. BALFOURsaid that as the Committee was aware, and as the hon. Gentleman had stated, sub-Section (6) was inserted in order to meet what were supposed to be the views of the Welsh Members in regard to bodies that had done admirable service for education in Wales in the past. Of course, the Government could not but welcome any

  767
  change in the Bill that would put Wales in the same position as England in regard to education; and in the circumstances he would be glad, on behalf of the Government, to accept the Amendment.
  MR. HUMPHREYS-OWENsaid he was sorry to have to introduce a discordant note. The change, however, which was proposed was of a much more serious character than many hon. Members imagined. The constitution of the bodies to which the right hon. Gentleman had referred in such generous terms, and which would be endorsed by all who were acquainted with the Welsh system, differed from the constitution of the education committees to be established by the Bill. The Committee might perhaps remember that he moved the omission of sub-Section (b) of Clause 12, which provided for the appointment by the council, on the nomination, where it appeared desirable, of other bodies, of persons of experience in education, and of persons acquainted with the needs of various kinds of schools. The county governing body in Wales which carried out the Welsh Intermediate system was constituted on somewhat similar lines; but there was one serious difference. The appointing bodies under the Welsh Intermediate Education Act were all of an undenominational unsectarian character. From a Return recently issued on the Motion of his hon. friends the Member for Denbigh Boroughs, it would be seen that the great majority of the members of the county governing bodies were appointed by the County Councils, the minority, representing other interests, being appointed by the educational bodies or by public bodies; and, in every case, with two or three exceptions, the educational body was the University College, the School Board, and not the manages of non-provided schools. It came out very clearly in the discussion on Clause 12 that it was the intention of the Government to have representatives of denominations on the education committees, as well as representatives of denominations on the education committees, as well as representatives of public bodies; whereas, under the Welsh system, which entirely excluded anything like sectarianism, there was absolutely no religious test
  768
  whatever imposed. This had not prevented harmonious co-operation between Churchmen and Non-conformists. Indeed, the Bishop of St. David's had rendered most valuable services educationally, not only on the body with which he was connected, but also generally. Under the Welsh system, all denominational trouble was excluded from the schools; but now that policy was about to be reversed by the Government. If he had anything to do with the new Act, he would say frankly that he would gladly do his best to work it; but he looked forward with the gravest apprehension to working a denominational, system, in that way. It might work well in Wales. The number of denominational institutions was considerable; and if the policy of subsidising one religious body were adopted, the claims of other religious bodies would be irresistible. He could conceive no worse fate for education than that. He would not discuss the larger question as to how far undenominational education was hostile to religion. The question did not arise in Wales, because, whatever else might be said of that country, it could not be denied that it was predominantly religious; and no such trouble as was apprehended by hon. Gentlemen opposite would occur there. To abolish bodies with such a record, and which, not merely by the members who composed them, but by the manner in which they were constituted, were admirably suited for educational work would, he thought, be a very great mistake. He would conclude with an appeal to the Prime Minister. They all recognised the right hon. Gentleman's courtesy, and the manner in which he had conducted the debates on the Bill. They had had a few differences of opinion, which, however, did not interfere with their mutual respect. He was quite certain that the right hon. Gentleman did not desire to cause more friction or more trouble, or more administrative inconvenience than was absolutely necessary, and he therefore appealed to his hon. friend the Chairman of the Welsh Party, to whom he was sorry to find himself in opposition, to allow the

  769
  withdrawal of the Amendment, and to the right hon. Gentleman to withdraw his acceptance of it. The withdrawal of the Amendment would still leave the County Councils with the fullest control of the county governing bodies. If a County Council felt that a county governing body was not capable of carrying out the additional work would be imposed on it under the Bill, they had only to go to the Board of Education; and if, on the other hand, the Council were satisfied that the county governing body could administer elementary as well as secondary education, then the Bill would operate in the way that it now proposed. He would appeal to his hon. friend and to the right hon. Gentleman to allow the Amendment to be withdrawn.
  MR. BRYNMOR JONESsaid he need hardly state that any observations with regard to Welsh education, and to the system now in existence for some years, which were made by his hon. friend the Member for Montgomery, would be listened to with the utmost respect by hon. Members on that side of the House, and, he believed, by hon. Gentlemen opposite also. His hon. friend had, since the Central Board was set up under the Welsh Intermediate Education Act, ably presided over it; and the recent Report which was published showed what admirable strides had been made in regard to secondary and higher education in Wales during the last few years. But he thought his hon. friend was hardly justified in some of the observations which he had made with regard to the Amendment. The matter was not free from complexity and difficulty, and he admitted that it was only with reluctance that he would support the Amendment of his hon. friend the Member for East Glamorgan. As the matter was one of some complexity, he might be allowed to ask the Attorney General whether the construction he would put on sub-Section 6 as it stood, and upon its effect, was or was not correct. The sub-Section stated that in Wales and Monmouthshire any county governing body constituted under a scheme made in pursuance of the Welsh Intermediate Education Act, 1889, should be the education committee, under the Act, of the Council of the County or
  770
  County Borough, unless any other scheme was proposed by the Council. Therefore, if the sub-Section were allowed to stand there would be two alternatives. One was that the county governing body became automatically the education committee under the Act. These bodies were made under the Act of 1889 conjointly with the Endowed Schools Act of 1869, and they dealt not simply with the rate that the County Councils were empowered to levy under the Act of 1889, but with schemes in reference to endowed schools and also considerable property under an arrangement with the Charity Commissioners. All these schemes went through the proceedings involved by the Endowed Schools Act; and had virtually the force of statutes. These county governing bodies were arranged not for elementary education but for secondary education. They were bodies which were not adapted to deal with the work which the education committees under this Bill would have to do. As he understood the effect of Clause 12 and the preceding Clauses of the Bill, the education committees would be practically doing the work which the School Board did at the present time. They would did at the present time. They would have to appoint the teachers, and in South Wales and Monmouthshire there were no fewer than 2,591 teachers in elementary schools who objected to be placed under the control of the county governing body. So much for the first alternative. He did not doubt that the county governing bodies would do their duty to elementary education, as they had done it to secondary education, but if he was asked whether they would do the work the School Boards were doing now, his answer would be in the negative. The other alternative was that if "any other scheme" was proposed by the county governing body—that was a scheme under this Bill—there would be a new education committee, which would deal not only with elementary but also with higher or secondary education. Thus there would be a double authority. Therefore Wales was placed in a dilemma. His original view was that it would be better to leave out sub-Section 6, but there were grave objections to taking that course, and he thought the Amendment of the hon.

  771
  Member for East Glamorgan would be the best course to pursue, in order to preserve the Welsh system.
  MR. KENYONsaid he was happy to think there was no very great difference of opinion between hon. Members on this question. The Prime Minister had tried to meet the wishes of hon. Gentlemen opposite, and the course he proposed would obviate any difficulty that might arise under the sub-Section as it now stood. It was said the sub-Section should be deleted altogether. He did not think there was much to choose between the two courses, but whichever was adopted, it should go forth that it was not adopted from any feeling that the county governing bodies should cease to exist by reason of their failure to do the work which had been entrusted to them. There could be but one opinion as to those bodies which had done their work admirably. That statement might not commend itself to the noble Lord the Member for Greenwich, whose appreciation of the Celtic fringe was not Ins strong point, but, with the exception of the noble Lord, there was no person who could say that, from first to last, these county governing bodies had not devoted themselves entirely to the improvement of education. He hoped in the future that would be put to their credit, and that whatever happened many members of these bodies might become members of the new bodies to be created by this Bill.
  MR. MOSSsaid several reasons had been advanced in favour of this Amendment. First of all, it was said that there would be a double authority, and secondly, that these authorities would have to do the work of the present School Boards. He did not think there would be a divided authority, neither did he anticipate—there would be any difficulty in the county governing-bodies discharging the duties of the School Boards, because by Section 15, the education committee had power to delegate to district or parish councils or other local bodies, the duties which it would have to discharge under this Bill. He saw no difficulty in the way of the county governing bodies of Wales discharging their duties under this Bill,
  772
  and therefore he hoped his hon. friend would see his way to withdrawing his Amendment. No one who had any knowledge at all of the constitution and work of the county governing bodies could wish to see them destroyed, but if another body under this Bill was introduced into Wales and the county governing bodies were eliminated, an element would be introduced which would be altogether different from the Act of 1889. He thought if this Amendment were accepted, it would be contrary to the opinion of the great majority of the people of Wales, and that it would introduce into the Councils those denominational elements which would be very irritating to the people of the Principality. It was suggested that under the Amendment the County Councils would have the selection of the new bodies, but nothing in sub-Section (6) deprived the Welsh County Councils of the powers conferred on English County Councils by the Bill. The county governing authorities were only to be the education committees in the event of the County Councils not deciding otherwise, so that if the County Councils chose they could at once exercise all the powers and duties given under this Clause, so that the Amendment was comparatively valueless. If this Amendment were carried, and the Act of 1889 was permitted to remain in force, he did not know but what there might be two bodies in conflict. They knew exactly where they were with the county governing-bodies, but they did not know where they would be under the Bill. Upon the education committee were to be persons nominated by bodies which were not defined, but which might be denominational, whereas there were no representatives of purely religious bodies on the county governing bodies in Wales. Those authorities had done excellent work for ten or twelve years; people of all shades of political and religious opinion acknowledged that the present arrangement had worked harmoniously, and it would be a great pity to abolish bodies which had done such excellent work.
  MR. BRYN ROBERTS (Carnarvonshire,)appealed to his hon. friend to withdraw the Amendment. At

  773
  first he was enamoured of the proposal to have one authority, but on further consideration he was convinced of its dangers. The present system had worked exceedingly well. He did not say there had never been criticism on the constitution of any of the county governing bodies, but there was certainly no strong body of opinion at all hostile to them or to the way in which they had administered the Welsh intermediate Education Act. Under this proposal they were not exchanging one animal tested and examined for another similarly tested and examined; they were exchanging one tested for a pig in a poke, and as yet they did not know what shape the creature would eventually assume. If the scheme was to be framed primarily by the County Council, he would be disposed to accept it, but it was to be approved by the Education Department, and if the Department disagreed with the County Council, it was to be framed exclusively by the Department. It would be better not to make such a vast experiment so suddenly. Further, the schemes for the carrying out of the Act would be subject to the education committee, and in the last resort to the control of the County Council. That was a great safeguard so far as elementary education was concerned, because, even if a bad scheme were adopted and unsuitable persons pitch-forked on to the committee, that committee would be subject, in regard to matters of elementary education, to revision and control in every respect by the County Council. But the action of that same committee would not be subject so far as the Intermediate Education Act of 1889 was concerned. That point had been completely overlooked. They were not so much afraid of the proposal as affecting elementary education, because they had confidence in their County Councils, but to make the Education Committee supreme in the other matters would be going much too hurriedly, and he therefore asked his hon. friend to withdraw the Amendment so that the matter might be further considered.
  Question put, and negatived.
  Question proposed, "That Clause 12 as amended stand part of the Bill."
  MR. WHITLEYsaid that since the discussion on the early part of the Clause he had taken the opinion of those most qualified to speak on matters of municipal and county government with respect to the effect of the provision that questions should "stand referred" to the education committee, and they confirmed his contention that the words would deprive the municipal or county authority of the power of dealing with any educational question except through the education committee. If a member gave notice of a desire to raise some broad question of educational policy, such as that insufficient attention was given to manual training in the schools, the words "stand referred" would compel the chairman of the authority to rule the resolution out of order. There would be nothing to compel the education committee to present a report upon such a question as that. With the words "stand referred" in the Clause the authority had no power at all, for it could only act by means of its education committee, and any group of ratepayers could not have direct access to the ear of the supreme authority. He thought the Attorney General might give further consideration to that matter and bring up some modification of the phrase, so that the authority should be supreme and not handicapped in that way. Then there was the question of nomination where it appeared desirable. In the composition of Technical Instruction Committees that plan had been tried and failed. There was no possibility of drawing any reasonable line as to what bodies should have a right of nominating. When the Chamber of Commerce claimed the right to nominate a member, the Labour Trades Council would also claim a similar right, and the thing would grow, to such an extent that every local body would demand a representative, and the Council would be compelled to say that they would not appoint anybody except individuals qualified for the work, and refuse to have any outside nominations. This system of nomination had been tried and failed.
  SIR WILLIAM HARCOURTsaid that before they parted from Clause 12 he wished to make an appeal to the Government to alter its present shape before they came to the Report stage. If this Bill passed, he was sure that everybody would desire that it should he made workable. Setting aside the general principles for which they had contended, it was, in his opinion, impossible that the constitution of the committee of the County Councils could work if the provision stood as it remained at present. These County Councils would be called upon to form their schemes for their own committees, which would be the executive body of the County Council. They would form their scheme, and no doubt they would form it in accordance with their own judgment and the wishes of their constituencies, and they would have the right and power under their own scheme to carry out their own work according to their own view. That would be the natural condition of things. But what was to become of this scheme when it was formed? It was to he sent to an outside body, namely, the Education Department in Whitehall, for review and to obtain their consent; and what was this body going to do with the scheme of the County Council? Under the Bill they were to have an inquiry. The Council would nominate such persons as they thought desirable. But the Council might not desire to appoint. In this case there must be a conflict between the two bodies. They started with a dual authority. They had heard a good deal about a single authority, but the moment this Council met, it made its scheme and another authority was brought in to revise. They had totally changed the character of that body.
  Let them consider how the thing worked, because really this was a question as to whether or not this scheme was going to be workable. They started by inviting the County Council to appoint its own committee. It would form its scheme and then it would be subject to revision and possibly to the overruling of another authority in respect to its constitution. If it appeared desirable to the Board of Education they would settle whom the rest of the committee was to consist of. He could not help saying again that this
  776
  would be a great indignity to the Council, and they were starting their plan in a shape which was absolutely unworkable. No County Council would accept a scheme of that character. What was going to happen to their scheme? The words were that the Board of Education "may" have an inquiry. An inquiry for whom? What character was that inquiry to be? Was anybody to be able to come before the inquiry and say, "I have a right to be on the committee of the County Council?" This Inquiry was to be initiated not by the County Council, but by the Board of Education, and yet it was to overrule the County Council. They had entrusted technical instruction to the County Council, and they had not in the past imposed upon them conditions of that character, hut judgment. They were to have co-optation at the option of the County Council, but who was going to judge as to who were to he co-opted? It was quite plain under this Clause that it was not County Council who would have the power of co-opting outside members. They would have a number of competing sects coming forward, all claiming to he upon the committee under the scheme, and the Board of Education would have to hold an inquiry into the matter. It would then, as he understood, be for the Education Department to amend the scheme, or to insist on the scheme being altered by the County Council according to their view of the various bodies claiming to be put on the committee. He ventured to urge upon the Government that before the Bill became law they should alter this condition of things, for he was perfectly certain that if the Board of Education forced on to the committee denominational representatives who were not desired by the local education authority, they would embroil the authority in religious difficulties at the very starting point. If the First Lord would tell the Committee that he did not mean that an outside authority should insist upon putting denominational representatives on this committee whether the County Council desired them or not, the objection he had made would be removed to a certain degree, but so sure as an outside authority

  777
  attempted to put denominational representatives on the committee without the consent of the Council so surely would they cause a conflict at once and make the carrying out of the scheme impossible.
  There were many members of the County Councils who were not favourable to undertaking this work at all. On the 5th of November this year the Right Hon. Lord Tredegar was in the Chair at a meeting of the County Council of Monmouth, when, by a large majority, a motion with reference to this Bill was carried, the concluding words being "that they respectfully inform the Government that if passed in its present shape, this Council cannot be responsible for its administration." Surely it was of interest to disarm this hostility so far as they could on the part of the County Councils. If this Bill were presented to them in a shape which practically took away from them the authority they were in the habit w exercising in the selection of their own committees, and if they were exposed to having their schemes overruled, they would not be very willing to undertake the work proposed to be imposed upon them by the Bill. He read sub-Section (b) as con erring a power to impose on them that which they had not chosen, they did not wish, and that which they would be very likely to resist. What would be the situation then of the education authority? There was no secret about it. What this meant was that denominational people were to be put on the committee, possibly against the wish of a Council which was not denominational. That was a most dangerous thing, and it was a thing which would make the Bill unworkable. He hoped that before the Clause came up again on Report the Government would reconsider the matter.
  There was one other point he should like to refer to, and that was the way in which the Council were placed with regard to their authority, which the Government said was supreme. In this it would be very well if the Government thought fit to make some modification. The Clause provided that the County Council, which was the supreme authority, should not exercise any of the powers it possessed until it had consulted this Committee, except in cases of urgency.
  778
  That was limiting the authority of the Council. Why was the Council not to have the power this House had of instructing its Committees? They should have power to instruct the committee in the general principles on which they desired the committee to act, leaving the details to the committee If the Councils were to be supreme, how could Parliament say that they were not to have authority to instruct their committees? It seemed to him that in this Clause they were cribbing and confining the Council to a degree which would destroy their authority and deprive them of the representative character which was claimed for them. The real representative authority should do the work which was confided to them. He believed the Government would make the Bill a great deal more workable if they took the shackles off the County Council which the Bill in its present shape imposed on them. That would do a great deal to remove the difficulties and objections which were strongly felt to the Bill. Above all, he implored the Government not to throw out this apple of religious discord at the beginning of the proceedings by imposing denominational nominees on the education committee.
  Mr. A. J. BALFOUR: I feel that it is due to the right hon. Gentleman to say a few words in answer to the speech he has made, and I will make these words as few as possible, partly because we have really discussed in Committee all the points he has raised in the speech we have just heard, and also because I think there are gentlemen in the House who are anxious to pass on to the consideration of the next Clause. I, of course, echo the wish with which the right hon. Gentleman concluded his speech. With him I earnestly deprecate the intrusion of religious controversy in these questions of education. I have kept them out as much as I can, but it cannot be done completely, I am afraid. I really do think, though I am not over sanguine, that if this Bill is given a fair chance it will be found by everybody, whatever the prevailing colour of his religious opinion, to work without any undue friction, or causing any undue religious bitterness. The right hon. Gentleman had a right to suppose that

  779
  everybody concerned in this matter would be as unreasonable as possible. I agree that it is legitimate to put forward an extreme case. Let the Committee remember that it is an extreme case which the right hon. Gentleman has put forward. He supposed that the education authority would go to loggerheads with the Education Department; that they would send up scheme after scheme to the Education Department for approval, and that the Education Department would time after time refuse that approval until the machinery of a Provisional Order was called in, and the assent of this House was asked to a scheme not proposed by the education authority but initiated from Whitehall. I do not think that will happen. That is an extreme, and, I venture to say, an extravagant case; but even if we do assume it, remember that this Clause, in its present form, makes it perfectly clear that however recalcitrant the education committee may be it is the education authority that will be supreme. Suppose that it did happen that a scheme was forced on them unwillingly by the House of Commons; the County Council are supreme. They may not listen to the advice of the education committee; they need not take their counsel; they are the judges of whether a case is one of urgency and whether the education committee are to be permitted to deal with it at the beginning. In these circumstances it does seem to me that the supremacy of the popularly elected body is absolutely secured by the Bill in its present form, and I trust when that is realised more completely than now, in those districts of the country where this Bill is looked upon with the greatest hostility, they will feel that popular control in its full sense is a great reality, and that they will endeavour, as Englishmen usually do endeavour, to make the best of the scheme, even if it is not the scheme which they themselves would desire.
  SIR WILLIAM HARCOURT: May I ask one question? Would it not be in the power of the County Council to constitute the committee entirely from its own members to carry out their own work, without any other persons being foisted upon them? That, I think, would be a fair test of their supremacy.
  MR. A. J. BALFOUR: No, Sir, they would not, because a friend of the right hon. Gentleman put in a sub-Section which makes it absolutely obligatory that we should not rely upon the casual charity of County Councils, but should insist that one woman should be on the committee.
  SIR WILLIAM HARCOURT: I except the woman. Apart from that, might they appoint a committee exclusively of their own members?
  MR. A. J. BALFOUR: Barring the woman! That seems to me to be rather a large exception. No doubt they could send to the Education Department a scheme which included only members of the County Council.
  SIR WILLIAM HARCOURT: Could they insist?
  MR. A. J. BALFOUR: Of course they would not; I do not think that they would ever do it. [OPOSITION cries of "Look at sub-Section (b)"] If the Committee asks me whether that is a very desirable plan, I should not be prepared to say, and what view the Education Department would take of it, I cannot, of course, say; but in that respect I think the matter is perfectly clear. I hope I will not be considered to have treated the right hon. Gentleman with scant courtesy. I have given a sufficient reply for the moment, considering the occasion, and I hope the Committee will consent to embody the scheme, as amended, in this Bill.
  MR. BRYCEsaid he would point out a matter which was of the greatest importance—viz., that sub-Section (b) was imperative. It said that every—
  "such scheme would provide…for the appointment by the Coup on the nomination, where it appears desirable, of other bodies, of persons of experience in education, and of persons acquainted with the needs of the various kinds of schools in the area for which the Council acts."
  These words seemed to impose on the Board of Education that in making a scheme in accordance with the requirements of the Bill the committee must contain persons appointed by the local

  781
  body. He must remark, in regard to what the right hon. Gentleman had said, that he did not think any difficulty would incur, that the right hon. Gentleman should remember that in these schemes the last word was with the Board of Education. It was they that were to decide. It was all very well for the County Council to make suggestions, but the Board of Education could overrule. There were some important parts of this Clause which had never been discussed at all. One of these was the provision for the creation of "other bodies, of persons experienced in education, and of persons acquainted with the needs of various kinds of schools in the area for which the Council acts." Now, that proposal was justified on the ground that experts were wanted on these committees; but there were good experts mid bad experts. The worst kind of expert, however, was the expert who had an axe to grind, and that kind of expert seemed to be contemplated by this Clause. What they gathered from the attitude of the Government that day, was that persons were to be put on the committee to represent particular interests of their own. Could any simpler method be employed of importing dissensions into these bodies than that persons were to be appointed on them, not to promote a common object, but a particular object which he was sent to promote? The County Councils had many faults, but they had one merit, that the members were elected on general considerations because they were the men who commended themselves to their fellow-citizens. That was a principle which this Clause denied and over-ruled, and on that ground alone the Committee should object to it. There was another part of the Clause which had passed without discussion, and that was the provision for passing a scheme by means of a Provisional Order. He thought that that method was eminently unsuited to the case. Still more important was the provision of sub-Section 3, which directed that any scheme might provide for the constitution of separate education committees for any area within a county. Now, that was a provision which would he largely taken advantage of, but how would it work? The right hon.
  782
  Gentleman took refuge in the argument that the deciding voice would rest with the County Council and not with the local committees. Take the case of Devonshire. Any one who knew that county must be aware that it would be quite impossible for the County Council at Exeter to exercise a direct and constant supervision over the whole of that county. He apprehended that the County Council would appoint a local committee for the north-west district Okehampton, for the south-east district another committee at Bampton, and for the south-west district still another committee at Kings-wear or Dartmouth. How would that work in with the system which the right hon. Gentleman contemplated under this Clause? They could not find a sufficient number of county councillors to constitute a majority on these local committees, and the consequence would be that the County Councils would practically have to devolve on these local committees the great bulk of its work, and that work would be very heavy. It would be impossible for the County Council at Exeter to keep abreast with what was being done by these local committees, to nave that knowledge of their proceeding, or of the local requirements of the separate areas which would enable them to deal with all the questions constantly arising. The consequence would be that the County Council would be obliged to ratify the decisions of the local committees, and that these local committees would do the work which, in the view of the right hon. Gentleman, the County Council was set to do. He felt that if they tried to body forth the actual working of the system proposed by the right hon. Gentleman, it would he found that it must be entirely different from that which was in the too sanguine mind of the right hon. Gentleman. He felt very strongly that if the Committee had been able to discuss this subsequent Clause relating to the local committees they would have introduced most valuable and important Amendments into it. They had, however, lost that opportunity. Wherever they had had the opportunity of discussion they had succeeded in transforming a Clause, or of bringing in a new Clause altogether, which, by the common consent of the Committee, was a great deal better than the original

  783
  Clause. They would be deprived of that opportunity now, and in the future, and therefore he parted with this Clause not, he was afraid, in a very sanguine spirit. He parted with it with a sense of the imperfection which the Bill would have if it did not receive that thorough, complete, and searching investigation in Committee which its importance required. He believed that from time to time they should have more and more occasion to regret that proper time had not been given for the discussion of this crude and imperfect measure.
  MR. BRIGGpointed out that, though the County Council would have a very large amount of new work placed upon them under this Bill, there was no provision of money for that purpose. They were now called upon to deal with evening schools and the education of teachers, and no provision had been made for that. It would be impossible in his opinion to carry out these duties unless there was money provided. He also suggested the desirability of the local education authority having power under the Charitable Trusts Act, with regard to, the submission of schemes.
  MR. .SAMUEL EVANSdid not think that the Prime Minister or the Committee could complain of the short discussion on this Clause. It was the turning point of the whole Bill, and if the Clause was not workable the Bill would hot be workable. No doubt the intention of the right hon. Gentleman the Prime Minister was that under this Clause the .new education authority, should be supreme, and if that was the real state of things no, one would be dissatisfied but nothing of that kind was provided in the Clause. As the Clause now stood, the position was this, that the education, committee was a committee which had been created for the first time, and for yfIrch0ere no precedent. There were all kinds of, committees under our system of local government, the powers, of which ranged from something very nominal and advisory to practical in dependence, in relation to the authorities out of which they were carved. There was nothing in this Clause to say in what position this Committee stood, yet this
  784
  was the machine that was to work the Bill. There was nothing to show how the machinery was to work. It was impossible to show where there was any control over these committees except in, the power to raise a rate. It had been said that the power of spending money would remain with the County Council, but that did not appear to be so in this Clause. The local education authorities could not delegate the power of making a rate or raising money, but there was nothing in the Clause which vested the spending power entirely in them. The education committee could still spend the money and call upon the County Council to raise a rate for the purpose of paying it. He challenged the Attorney General to point out where there was any indication at all of any power over these committees. There was no doubt that the Bill, when drafted, contemplated very much greater power being given to these committees, than it was now suggested they should possess. It was intended that the drafting should be so vague as to enable these committees to have the great power that it was desired they should have, but the opinion of the Government had been changed owing to the pressure put upon them. They had an instance of how these committees were going to work, because an Amendment had been moved which provided that these education committees should stand upon the same basis as all other County Council Committees, but the Government refused to accept it. If a pledge had been given that they should not be able to spend money, where was the difficulty in accepting that Amendment? The right hon. Gentleman had expressed his opinion that something of the kind ought to be done, but he said it ought to be done in the schedules. The-right hon. Gentleman was asked to pledge himself that it should be done in the schedules, but he declined, to do so. That alone should make the House pause before accepting the Clause as it stood, and if they accepted it they should consider it very seriously before they came to the Report stage. As to the constitution of the, committee, the plan of the Government was not co-optation. It simply forced the County Council to go outside their own body in order to get people to administer the Act as members

  785
  of the education committee. He contended that the "other bodies" intended in this Clause were the diocesan as sociations. In the event of a County Council refusing to alter a scheme, in accordance with the directions of the Education Department, recourse would be had to a Provisional Order, so that by this procedure the last word would not be with the Department, as they had been told it would be, but with the House of Lords. By this means might be enforced against the wish of the local authority, giving rise to constant friction undesirable in the interests of education.
  MR. A. J. BALFOURmade an appeal to the Committee that the debate upon this Clause should be reduced into the narrowest compass, in order that the Committee might get to Clause on which he understood many hon. Members desired to speak.
  SIR JOHN BRUNNERsaid it was inherent in the constitution of a Committee of a local governing authority that it had power to appoint sub-committees; the education committee, therefore, would have that power. Many County Councils would find it would be infinitely more convenient to appoint one education committee than a number of such committees.
  MR. A. J. BALFOUR: They can do that under this Bill.
  SIR JOHN BRUNNERasked whether that being so, it was in the power of an education committee to co-opt for the sub-committees. The amount of extra work thrown on County Councils by this Bill was very large, and would be found to be irksome unless they were allowed to bring to the service of the sub-committees, through the power of co-optation, all the local experience and local goodwill possible.
  MR. EDMUND ROBERTSONasked the Secretary to the Board of Education, assuming that the Clause would give the Education Department the power to insist on the representation of
  786
  diocesan or other bodies, what policy the Department proposed to pursue? The hon. Gentleman was after all, the gentleman who would have to see to the working of this Measure, and, that being so, be (Mr. Robertson) would like to know what he intended to do. Had he considered this question? Would the Department force sectarian representation, or would they leave a Council a free hand?
  SIR WILLIAM MATHERsaid the Committee had been informed by the Prime Minister that the School Board system was, so far as the authority was concerned, a very complicated system. The right hon. Gentleman had referred in strong language to the absurdity of the Cumulative Vote, and he had claimed for this Bill a simpler form of administration. By the present proposals there would be more circumlocution and more processes to go through before the authority was constituted than had ever been connected with the School Board system. He could not but believe that there was some other ground for the Government proposing so difficult a plan than the simple question of the administration of education as a whole. There was not that motive power in the Clause which would enable education to be carried on in the future so well as in the past. A process of filtration through all these bodies was to go on, with the result, he feared, that no one would be responsible for efficient education in any school area in the country. Up to the present the School Boards had been so responsible, and because there had been a great motive power at the back of their working—pride in the knowledge of the subject and the determination to make their schools the glory of the district—they had erected a standard of education which had been the admiration of the world. Where, under this Clause, was there any motive power to cause such a condition of things to continue? The Government appeared to have mistaken altogether the purpose of the Bill in this Clause. What was required was a greater motive power than before—in fact, an inspiration on the part of some to raise the quality of our education—at any rate to a standard equal to that prevailing in many other countries. While the Committee were

  787
  speaking so much about provisos and checks they were whittling away the only force now existing—the sense of responsibility and the knowledge of the subject—and constituting a local education authority which would be a myth or shadow, having no power over its committee when constituted, nor that motive force which would enable it to do its work well. He was unable to conceive why the Government, from an administrative point of view, should have so complicated the constitution of the authority. In the Netherlands the system was simplicity itself. They had there the same vexed question as here; the denominational feeling was very strong; but the law provided that schools should be found for all the children without distinction, and the whole of the system was carried out by the mayor of the town, an alderman of the Council, two or three councillors and a secretary. That was the whole administrative authority, and at its discretion it could constitute sub-committees and delegate to them certain powers with regard to details. He should despair of ever arriving at that state of things under this Bill; there would be no motive force at the back of education, and on these administrative grounds he strongly protested against the Clause.
  MR. LLOYD-GEORGE (Carnarvon)asked, supposing provision was made in each county in Wales, on the nomination of the representatives upon the joint body, for the purpose of supervising primary education throughout the whole of Wales, whether that would come within sub-Section (3). Could the provisions of the Central Board be extended for primary education under that sub-Section, and representation upon that body provided for?
  THE SECRETARY OF THE BOARD OF EDUCATION (Sir WILLIAM ANSON,): That would be possible under sub-Section (3).
  MR. LLOYD-GEORGEthen pointed out that, with regard to the county governing bodies now to be abolished, there was a provision for the representation of School Boards, and he asked how
  788
  the School Boards as constituent bodies would be represented now the School Boards were to be abolished? On the advisory body there would be, say, twenty-seven members, of whom fourteen would be appointed by the County Council, who would represent the School Boards or the provided schools in nominating their quota of the remaining Board members Provision was made for the representation of the voluntary schools. But voluntary schools were in a minority in Wales, and was provision to be made for the representation of the minority while none was made for that of the majority?
  SIR WILLIAM ANSONwas understood to say that the local education authority would have to make provision for the representation of persons interested in the education of the children within the area. They would choose their own method, and if the School Board managers thought it was not the best that could be suggested they would make their suggestion, first to the local authority, and then, if necessary, to the Board of Education, who would bring the matter back to the local authority and ask them to reconsider their decision.
  MR. LLOYD-GEORGEsaid that was rather important. He wanted to know the view of the hon. Gentleman because powers of legislation were being entrusted to him with regard to these schemes. Would the representatives of the local authority he regarded in the future as the representatives of the provided schools, because if so, popular representation was being cut down in favour of the denominational schools. As he understood the hon. Gentleman, in addition to the representatives of the local authority, he would insist on the provided schools being represented—
  SIR WILLIAM. ANSON: I must not be understood as saying I would insist on anything.
  MR. LLOYD-GEORGEsaid that was just the difficulty. The Committee were passing a clause without knowing exactly what was in the mind of the hon. Gentleman. The representation of the voluntary schools was to be insisted on, and the

  789
  Committee were entitled to know whether the hon. Gentleman would insist also on the representation of the provided schools. Then there was the question of proportion. Was it the intention to swamp the county authorities with representatives of the sectarian schools? What was the notion of the Government with regard to the respective proportions? As the education committee had been converted into a committee of the County Council it was essential for the success of any scheme that there should be confidence between the committee and the body to which it had to report.
  MR. HELMEsaid if it was to he understood that the Board of Education must have the final voice in the constitution of the scheme appointing the Education Committee instead of the County Council, then in that case under heading (b) of sub-Section 2, if the Government would consent to alter the words they would thereby very materially lessen the opposition to this Clause. He asked the Government to consider whether, on the Report Stage, they could not rearrange the words to read—
  "For the appointment by the Council, where it appears to it desirable, on the nomination of other bodies."
  That would give to the Council the right to decide how far it was necessary to go outside its own body to secure a fair and real representation of those interests which it I was the object of the Government to include. He would refer to the statement just made by the Prime Minister that a scheme might be presented by a local authority almost entirely composed of members of the County Council, and this, if representative of other bodies, might be approved by the Board of Education, so he would ask that the words, "Appointment by the Council of at least a majority of the committee," should be so amended as to convey clearly that the County Councils might exercise their own discretion and choose how many co-opted members it should have. Take the Lancashire County Council, which had over 100 members. There the Technical Instruction Committee had worked well together in the past. They had on the committee the Ven. Archdeacon of Blackburn and also a well-known parish clergyman who was Chairman of the Agricultural Committee. Where they
  790
  could secure a bonâ fide representation of that sort of sectarian interests from amongst themselves, it was well that the authority should have the power to do so. On the Lancashire County Council they had gentlemen elected by the people from various walks of life, many of them with university degrees, and yet occupied in commerce. They had representatives who were members of the Church of England, and others who were Nonconformists, as well as Roman Catholics, working side by side, and so all the interests they desired to consider in the working out of the education scheme were represented. He appealed to the Government to say that on the Report Stage they would clear away this difficulty. If the Government would recognise the strong feeling both inside and outside of the House to give the local authority the right and power to determine who should serve on their own Education Committee and alter the Clause by introducing the words "to it desirable," he thought they would be doing a great deal to ensure the successful working of the Clause.
  SIR WILLIAM ANSONsaid he was sorry to add anything to the length of the debate. Appeals had been made to him by hon. Members on the other side upon a matter to which it was practically impossible for him to give an answer, namely, the policy of the Board of Education in respect of these schemes. He read this Clause to mean that the object of the scheme was, that all the educational interests of the area should be represented. Sub-Clause (b) required that two sorts of persons should be on the committee representing education, one class being "persons of experience in education" and the other "persons acquainted with the needs of the various kinds of schools in the area for which the Council acts." It was possible that the Council might contain such persons within its own body. If it did not they might be provided from elsewhere and selected by the Council, or they could be appointed upon the nomination of other bodies. He had been asked what would the Board of Education do if the Council did not put on a proper proportion of representatives of various educational interests. His view was the Board of Education should act by way of suggestion rather than of constraint, but

  791
  there was no doubt that the Bill gave power to act to the Board of Education, and if such action was called for the Board would have to deal with each case according to the circumstances attending it.
  MR. M KENNAsaid that in the framing of these schemes it appeared to have been overlooked that there would be two education authorities in many counties, side by side, namely, that of the county and that of the non county boroughs of over 10,000 population, and urban districts with a population of over 20,000 Under this proposal there would be no representation of the county authority, and they would have two education authorities dealing with education, within the area of the county. Instead of taking care that experts and sectarians should have been represented, the Government should have taken care that the education authority of the non-county boroughs and the county boroughs should have had interchangeable members. In Lancashire there were no less than thirty non-county boroughs of over 10,000 inhabitants, and urban districts of over 20,000. Consequently there would be an education authority representing the County Councils, and thirty different authorities representing non-county boroughs and urban districts. Absolutely no provision was made to prevent the very evil which they were told this Bill was designed to put and end to. Surely the Government could not be really proposing that this Clause should leave the Committee in this form without any assurance that they intended to alter this state of things. Nobody who had studied the Bill could have the slightest doubt that this Clause, as it stood, would be productive of the most hopeless confusion. Even in the county of Cornwall there were some ten or eleven subsidiary education authorities, all acting through independent committees, and no single
  member of the County Council or any representative of the central education authority was made compulsorily a member of any of those subsidiary committees. Under those circumstances he submitted, even at this late stage, that the Committee would be unwise in allowing this Clause to go through in its present form.
  MR. YOXALLsaid he wished to remind the Committee that perhaps the most important provision which ought to be made in this Claues was the co-ordination of elementary and secondary education. The Secretary to the Board of Education put down on the Paper an Amendment to the effect that the Board of Education were not to give their consent to a scheme unless they were satisfied that due regard had been had to the importance of co-ordinating elementary and secondary education. So far as it Vent that was sufficient to meet what could be done in this Clause, but owing to the operation of the Closure the hon. Member did not move his own Amendment. He desired to ask the hon. Gentleman whether between now and the Report stage he could see his way to devise some plan which would give more elasticity to the Clause in this respect. Since by an unfortunate accident that agreement had not been given effect to in this Clause, he thought he might hold himself free to ask that before the Report stage of the Bill was reached the Government would consider whether some form of words could be adopted which would make sure that co-ordination would be carried out.
  (5.28.) Question put, "That Clause 12 as a mended stand part of the Bill."
  Committee divided:—Ayes, 259; Noes, 138. (Division List No.500.)

  AYES.

  Agg-Gardner, James Tynte

  Baird, Sir John George Alexander

  Bignold, Arthur

  Aird, Sir John

  Balearres, Lord

  Blundell, Colonel Henry

  Anson, Sir William Reynell

  Baldwin, Alfred

  Bond, Edward

  Arkwright, John Stanhope

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

  Boscawen, Arthur Griffith-

  Arnold-Forster, Hugh O.

  Balfour, Capt. C. B. (Hornsey)

  Bousfield, William Robert

  Arrol, Sir William

  Balfour, Rt Hn Gerald W. (Leeds

  Bowles, Capt, H.F. (Middlesex

  Atkinson, Rt. Hon. John

  Barry, Sir Francis T.(Windsor)

  Brassey, Albert

  Bagot, Capt. Josceline FitzRoy

  Bartley, George C. T.

  Brookfield, Colonel Montagu

  Bailey, James (Walworth)

  Beres, or Lord Charles William

  Brown, Alexander H. (Shropsh-

  Bain, Colonel James Robert

  Bhownaggree, Sir M. M.

  Bull, William James

  Bullard, Sir Harry

  Hare, Thomas Leigh

  Murray, Rt Hn A. Graham (Bute

  Burdett-Coutts, W.

  Harris, Frederick Leverton

  Murray, Charles J. (Coventry)

  Butcher, John George

  Hadlett, Sir James Horner

  Murray, Col. Wyndham (Bath)

  Carew, James Laurence

  Hatch, Ernest Frederick George

  Myers, William Henry

  Carson, Rt. Hon. Sir Edw. H.

  Hay, Hon. Claude George

  Newdegate, Francis A. N.

  Carvill, Patrick Geo. Hamilton

  Healy, Timothy Michael

  Nicholson, William Graham

  Cautley, Henry Strother

  Heath, Arthur Howard (Hanley

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

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

  Heaton, John Henniker

  O' Doherty, William

  Cavendish, V.C.W. (Derbyshire

  Henderson, Sir Alexander

  Orr-Ewing, Charles Lindsay

  Cecil, Evelyn (Aston Manor)

  Hermon-Hodge, Sir Robert T.

  Palmer, Walter (Salisbury)

  Cecil, Lord Hugh (Greenwick)

  Hickman, Sir Alfred

  Pemberton. John S. G.

  Coamberlain, Rt. Hon. J. (Birm.

  Higginbottom, S. W.

  Percy, Earl

  Chamberlain, Rt Hn J.A. (Worc

  Hoare, Sir Samuel

  Pierpoint, Robert

  Chamberlayen, T.(S'thampton)

  Hobhouse, Henry (Somerset, E.

  Pilkington, Lieut-Col. Richard

  Chaplin, Rt. Hon. Henry

  Hogg, Lindsay

  Platt-Higgins, Frederick

  Chapman, Edward

  Hope, J.F. (Sheffield, Brightside

  Plummer, Walter R.

  Charrington, Spencer

  Horner, Frederick William

  Powell, Sir Francis Sharp

  Churchill, Winston Spencer

  Houldsworth, Sir Wm. Henry

  Pretyman, Ernest George

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

  Hoult, Joseph

  Pryce-Jones, Lt.-Col. Edward.

  Coildington, Sir William

  Howard, John (Kent, Fav'rsh'm

  Purvis, Robert

  Coghill, Douglas Harry

  Howard, J (Midd., Tottenham)

  Randles, John S.

  Collings, Rt. Hon. Jesse

  Hozier, Hon. James Henry Cecil

  Rankin, Sir James

  Colston, Chas. Edw. H. Athole

  Hudson, George Bickersteth

  Rasch, Major Frederic Carne

  Cor ett, A. Cameron (Glasgow)

  Hutton, John (Yorks, N. R.)

  Ratcliff, R. F.

  Cox, Irwin Edward Bainbridge

  Jebb, Sir Richard Claverhouse

  Rattigan, Sir William Henry

  Cripps, Charles Alfred

  Jessel, Captain Herbert Merton

  Reid, James (Greenock)

  Camp, Hon. Henry

  Johnstone, Heywood

  Renmant, James Farquharson

  Dalrymple, Sir Charles

  Kemp, George

  Renshaw, Charles Bine

  Davenport, William Bromley-

  Kennaway, Rt. Hon. Sir John H.

  Renwick, George

  Davies, Sir Horatio D. (Chatham

  Kennedy, Patrick James

  Ridley, Hn. M.W. (Stalybridge.

  Denny, Colonel

  Kenyon, Hon. Geo. T. (Denbigh)

  Ritchie, Rt. Hn. Chas. Thomson

  Dickinson, Robert Edmond

  Kimber, Henry

  Roberts, Samuel (Sheffield)

  Dickson-Poynder, Sir John P.

  King, Sir Henry Seymour

  Robertson, Herbert (Hackney)

  Disraeli, Coningsby Ralph

  Lambton, Hon. Frederick Wm.

  Ropner, Colonel Robert

  Dorington, Rt. Hon. Sir John E.

  Law, Andrew Bonar (Glasgow)

  Round, Rt. Hon. James

  Douglas, Rt. Hon. A. Akers-

  Lawrence, Sir, Joseph (Monm'th

  Royds, Clement Molyneux

  Doxfort, Sir William Theodore

  Lawrence, Wm. F. (Liverpool)

  Rutherford, John

  Duke, Henry Edward

  Lawson, John Grant

  Sadler, Col. Samuel Alexander

  Dyke, Rt. Hon. Sir William Hart

  Lecky, Rt Hon. William Edw. H.

  Samuel, Harry (Limehouse)

  Egerton, Hon. A. de Tatton

  Lee, Arthur H (Hants, Fareham

  Sassoon, Sir Edward Albert

  Elliot, Hon. A. Ralph Douglas

  Legge, Col. Hon. Heneage

  Seely, Charles Hilton (Lincoln)

  Faber, Edmund B. (Hants, W.)

  Leigh-Bennett, Henry Currie

  Seton-Karr, Henry

  Faber, George Denison (York)

  Leveson Gower, Frederick N.S.

  Sharpe, William Edward T.

  Fardell, Sir T. George

  Llewellyn, Evan Henry

  Sinclair, Louis (Romford)

  Fellowes, Hon. Ailwyn Edward

  Loder, Gerald Walter Erskine

  Smith, James Parker (Lanarks.

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

  Long, Col. Charles W.(Evesham

  Spencer, Sir E. (W. Bromwich)

  Fielden, Edward Brocklehurst

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

  Stardey, Edward Jas. (Somerset

  Finch, George H.

  Lowe, Francis William

  Stirling-Maxwell, Sir John M.

  Finlay, Sir Robert Bannatyne

  Lowther, C. (Cumb., Eskdale)

  Stuck, James Henry

  Fisher, William Hayes

  Lowther, Rt. Hon, James(Kent)

  Strutt, Hon. Charles Hedley

  Fison, Frederick William

  Loyd, Archie Kirkman

  Start, Hon. Humphry Napier

  Fitzroy, Hon. Edward Algernon

  Lucas, Col. Francis (Lowestoft)

  Talbot, Lord E. (Chichester)

  Flannery, Sir Fortescue

  Lucas, Regmald J (Portsmouth

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

  Fletcher, Rt. Hon. Sir Henry

  Macartney, Rt Hn. W.G. Ellison

  Taylor, Austin (East Toxteth)

  Flower, Ernest

  Macdona, John Cumming

  Thompson, Dr. E.C (Monagh'n N

  Forster, Henry William

  MacIver, David (Liverpool)

  Tomlinson, Sir Wm. Edw. M.

  Gardner, Ernest

  W'Arthur Charles (Liverpool)

  Tritton, Charles Ernest

  Garfit, William

  M'Killop, James (Stirlingshire)

  Tufnell, Lieut.-Col. Edward

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

  Majendie, James A. H.

  Take, Sir John Batty

  Gibbs, Hon. Vicary (St. Albans)

  Malcolm, Ian

  Tully, Jasper

  Godson, Sir Augustus Frederick

  Massey-Mainwaring, Hn. W.F.

  Valentia, Viscount

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

  Maxwell, WJH (Dumfriesshire

  Gorst, Rt. Hon. Sir John Eldon

  Meysey-Thompson, Sir H. M.

  Vincent, Col. Sir CEH (Sheffield

  Goschen, Hon. George Joachim

  Middlemore John Throginorton

  Warde, Colonel C. E.

  Goulding, Edward Alfred

  Mildmay, Francis Bingham

  Welby, Lt. -Col. ACE. (Taunton

  Graham, Henry Robert

  Milvain, Thomas

  Welby, Sir Charles G. E. (Notts.

  Greene, Sir EW (B'rys. Edm'nds

  Montagu, G. (Huntingdon)

  Wharton, Rt. Hon. John Lloyd

  Gretton, John

  Montagn, Hon. J. Scott (Hants.

  Whiteley, H(Ashton-und. Lyne

  Groves, James Grimble

  Moon, .Edward Robert Pacy

  Whitmore, Charles Algernon

  Guest, Hon. Ivor Churchill

  More, Robt. Jasper (Shropshire)

  Williams, Rt. Hon. John Lloyd

  Halsey, Rt. Hon. Thomas F.

  Morrell, George Herbert

  Williams, Rt. Hn J Powell-(Birm

  Hambro, Charles Eric

  Morrison, James Archibald

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

  Hamilton, Rt. Hn Lord G(Midd'x

  Morton, Arthur H. Aylmer

  Wilson, John (Glasgow)

  Hanbury, Rt Hon. Robert Wm.

  Mount, William Arthur

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

  Hardy, Laurence(Kent, Ashf'rd

  Mowbray, Sir Robert Gray C.

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

  794

  795

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

  Wrighton, Sir Thomas

  TELLERS FOR THE AYES.—

  Worsley-Taylor, Henry Wilson

  Wyndham, Rt. Hon. George

  Sir Alexander Acland-

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

  Hood and Mr. Anstruther.

  NOES.

  Abraham, William (Rhondda)

  Hayter, Rt. Hon. Sir Arthur D.

  Roberts, John H. (Denbighs.)

  Allan, Sir William (Gateshead

  Helme, Norval Watson

  Robertson, Edmund (Dundee)

  Allen, Charles P. (Glouc., Stroud

  Hemphill, Rt. Hon. Charles H.

  Robson, William Snowdon

  Ashton, Thomas Gair

  Holland, Sir William Henry

  Roe, Sir Thomas

  Asquith, Rt Hon Herbert Henry

  Horniman, Frederick John

  Runciman, Walter

  Atlierley-Jones, L.

  Humphreys-Owen, Arthur C.

  Samuel, Herbert L. (Cleveland)

  Barlow, John Emmott

  Hutton, Alfred E. (Morley)

  Shackleton, David James

  Bayley, Thomas (Derbyshire)

  Jacoby, James Alfred

  Shaw, Charles Edw. (Stafford)

  Bell, Richard

  Jones, David Brynmor (Swansea

  Shaw, Thomas (Hawick B.)

  Bolton, Thomas Dolling

  Kearley, Hudson E.

  Shipman, Dr. John G.

  Brigg, John

  Kitson, Sir James

  Sinclair, John (Forfarshire)

  Broadhurst, Henry

  Lambert, George

  Sloan, Thomas Henry

  Brunner, Sir John Tomlinson

  Langley, Batty

  Soames, Arthur Wellesley

  Bryce, Rt. Hon. James

  Layland-Barratt, Francis

  Soares, Ernest J.

  Barns, John

  Leese, Sir Joseph F. (Accrington

  Spencer, Rt Hn. C R (Northants

  Burt, Thomas

  Leigh, Sir Joseph

  Strachey, Sir Edward

  Caldwell, James

  Leng, Sir John

  Taylor, Theodore C. (Radcliffe)

  Cameron, Robert

  Levy, Maurice

  Tennant, Harold John

  Campbell-Bannerman, Sir H.

  Lewis, John Herbert

  Thomas, Abel (Carmarthen, E.)

  Causton, Richard Knight

  Lloyd-George, David

  Thomas, Sir A. (Glamorgan, E.)

  Cawley, Frederick

  Logan, John. William

  Thomas David Alfred (Merthlr

  Channing. Francis Allston

  Macnamara, Dr. Thomas J.

  Thomas, JA (Glamorgam, Gower

  Craig, Robert Hunter

  M'Crae George

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

  Cremer, William Randal

  M'Kenna, Reginald

  Tomkinson, James

  Dalziel, James Henry

  M'Laren, Sir Charles Benjamin

  Tonlmin, George

  Davies, Alfred (Carmarthen)

  Mappin, Sir Frederick Thorpe

  Trevelyan, Charles Philips

  Davies, M. Vaughan-(Cardigan

  Markham, Arthur Basil

  Walton, John Lawson (Leeds, S)

  Dewar, John A. (Inverness-sh.

  Mather, Sir William

  Walton, Joseph (Barnsley)

  Dilke, Rt. Hon. Sir Charles

  Mellor, Rt. Hon. John William

  Warner, Thomas Courtenay T.

  Douglas, Charles M. (Lanark

  Morley, Charles (Breconshire)

  Wason, Eugene

  Duncan, J. Hastings

  Modes, Rt Hon. John (Montrose

  Weir, James Galloway

  Dunn, Sir William

  Moss, Samuel

  White, George (Norfolk)

  Edwards, Frank

  Moulton, John Fletcher

  White, Luke (York, E. R.)

  Elibank, Master of

  Newvnes, Sir George

  Whiteley, George (York. W. R.)

  Emmott, Alfred

  Norton, Capt. Cecil William

  Whitley, J. H. (Halifax)

  Evans, Samuel T. (Glamorgan)

  Nussey, Thomas Willans

  Whittaker, Thomas Palmer

  Fenwick, Charles

  Palmer, Sir Charles M. (Durham

  Williams, Osmond (Merinoneth)

  Ferguson, R. C. Munro (Leith)

  Palmer, George Wm. (Reading)

  Wilson, Fred. W. (Norfolk, Mid.

  Fitzmaurice, Lord Edmond

  Parrington, Oswald

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

  Foster, Sir Walher (Derby Co.

  Paulton, James Mellor

  Wilson, John (Durham, Mid.)

  Furness. Sir Christopher

  Pease, J. A. (Saffron Walden)

  Woodhouse, Sir. J T. (Huddersf'd

  Goddard, Daniel Ford

  Philipps, John Wynford

  Yoxall, James Henry

  Grant, Corrie

  Pickard, Benjamin

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

  Ririe, Duncan V.

  Gurdon, Sir W. Brampton

  Price, Robert John

  TELLERS FOR THE NOES—

  Harcourt, Rt Hon. Sir William

  Priestley, Arthur

  Mr. Herbert Gladstone and

  Harwood, George

  Reid, Sir R. Thre-hie (Dumfries)

  Mr. William M'Arthur.

  Hayne, Rt. Hon. Charles Seale-

  Rigg, Richard

  Clause 13:—
  THE CHAIRMAN: In regard to the Amendment of the right hon. Member for Sleaford I would like to ask how he proposes to meet the deficiency which would arise if his Amendment were carried?
  MR. CHAPLIN: My proposal is to limit the burden on the rates; and it is not for me to say how the deficiency is to he met.
  THE CHAIRMAN: If the right hon. Gentleman confines himself to arguing that the expenditure should be kept so low that one-fourth only should be raised from the rates, and that the remainder should be obtained from Parliamentary grants, then the right hon. Gentleman would be in order; but if he goes on to say that the Parliamentary grant should be increased in order to meet the new charges under the Bill, then he would not be, in order.
  MR. CHAPLINsaid that in moving his Amendment, which proposed to limit the expenditure out of the rates to one-fourth of the whole expenditure on education by the education authority and the expenses of the authority, he wished to recall to the minds of hon. Members that it deputation, representing a great number of bodies in the country, waited on the Leader of the House on the 15th of June last, in order to urge upon him that the cost of national education should be borne from the national Exchequer, and not from the local rates. His right, hon. friend on the 24th June made a financial statement to this House, during which he said that the Government were prepared to make an additional grant of £900,000 for the purposes of education. In making that grant elementary education was solely contemplated, and in no case, it was said, should the Exchequer pay more than three-fourths of the cost of education. That was a recognition of the justice of the case presented to the right hon. Gentleman, and they, were duly grateful for it. But since that time very considerable changes had been made in Clause 2, which provided for secondary education. Not only that; the further information on the subject which had been developed during the progress of these debates has led to the belief in his mind and in that of others, that unless they were to be weighted in the future with a much larger burden on the rates than they had ever contemplated, that provision would be altogether inadequate.
  He hoped the House would allow him to say a word both on secondary and elementary education. He would take the question of secondary education first. The position of secondary education seemed to him to be the weakest and most unsatisfactory part of the whole Bill. It might be contended that the creation of a very effective system of secondary education was probably of more importance than any of the questions they had been so long discussing. They were all agreed that such a system should be established, but where they differed—and he desired to say this particularly—was as to the provision which was to be made for the expense of secondary education and the sources from which it was to come
  798
  This was really very important when they came to consider what secondary education meant. What was meant by secondary education, as he understood it, was to give to all the more promising of the rising generation the opportunity, after they had gone through the elementary course, of extending their studies in higher education. Of course, in the great centres of population, that was comparatively easy, but take the case of the county he represented, Lincolnshire, formerly one of the most prosperous counties in the kingdom, but now, owing to the agricultural depression, the most impoverished of all. That county contained a very large number of villages, widely scattered, and with few centres of population. How were they going to provide secondary education usefully in a county like that? They would want buildings, as a matter of course, and buildings, too, of some importance. But how many of them? for, after all, they would be of very little advantage unless they were reasonably, near to those who are going to use them. And if they were going to provide this education entirely out of the rates they would wish that the schools should be within reach of the people; otherwise they would be favouring one locality to the disadvantage of another. If they were going to set up efficient secondary education in such districts as he had been describing, it was certain that the outlay must be very considerable indeed. He asked again where was the money to come from? It must be remembered that what was called the whisky money was nearly all spent already, so that, as a matter of fact, anything additional which was to be spent on secondary education in the future must come out of the rates. Well, then, there was the question of the training of teachers. Nothing was more necessary or more important, as he could, not see how they could have an efficient system of education without that. But why should the cost of training teachers be placed on the rates? He would turn to another point. The right hon. Gentleman said the previous night, in the course of debate in reference to Clause 2, that that Clause, winch was originally purely permissive, had emerged out of these debates practically mandatory

  799
  both in regard to powers and expenditure. Now, he thought that was right, but he should like further information on the point. If his right hon. friend was right in saying that the Bill imposed a very definite duty in regard to secondary education on the local authority, he wanted to ask—did the local authority as regarded secondary education, come under the powers of the Board of Education, as laid down by Clause 11 of the Bill? That Clause ran as follows—
  "If the local education authority fail to fulfil any of their duties under the Elementary Act. 1870 to 1900, or this Act, in any part of their area, the Board of Education may, after holding a public inquiry, make such order as they think necessary or proper for the purpose of compelling the authority to fulfil their duty, and any such order may be enforced by mandamus."
  If the local authority was to be subject to the Department of Education in this way, then he maintained that even in regard to secondary education they were imposing an added grievance, and an added burden on the local authority Either this Clause was compulsory or it was not. If compulsory, they were imposing something which would be intolerable from the ratepayers' point of view. If not compulsory, then he held that the best part of the whole hill was likely to be an absolute dead letter, and they would be no better off than they were before.
  But whatever might be the case in regard to secondary education, there was no doubt in the world that this Clause applied to elementary education. Well, the Education Department had very great powers, and the local authorities as regarded elementary education had very distinct and definite duties to perform. They would have to maintain all the public elementary schools within their area in an efficient state. But who were to be the judges of that efficiency? The Education Department were to be the judges; it rested with thorn to fix the standard of efficiency, and if they were dissatisfied they were to step in and insist on further action being taken by the local authority whenever they pleased. That duty would devolve on his hon. friend the Secretary to the Board of Education. He was a. new broom, and they knew that new brooms swept pretty clean, and he might he very reasonable, but some day the position might be very
  800
  different. When that did come he should thank his stars that he was not a member of the Lincolnshire County Council; otherwise it might not be long before he found himself in Lincoln jail by a mandamus of the Education Department because he did not feel it his duty to inflict a sufficiently heavy rate upon the county. It seemed to hint that there were some districts in which great difficulties would arise—districts in which there were a great number of schools, Board schools practically, with insufficient buildings. There was no real power to compel the owners of denominational schools to meet the requirements of the Board of Education with regard to buildings. True, the grant could be withheld, and the school converted into a provided school; then the cost maintaining the school and providing the buildings would also fall upon the rates; but if that process was often repeated in one district there would be a tremendously serious addition to the rates. It might be that it was rather more likely that this Bill, instead of having the results that it was hoped and intended it should have, would ring the death knell of a great number of denominational schools throughout the country, rather than prolong their existence, as was intended. That would mean unlimited burdens upon the rates. This Bill should have contained more ample provision from Imperial funds. The Government were pledged against introducing measures which would increase the burdens on agricultural land, but that would be the effect of this Bill. They were making the ratepayers the milch cow for education, but sometimes the milch cow turned restive and kicked over the pail. He had not heard what these increased burdens were to be. He had heard that they would range from 4d. to 9d., but he had made no calculation, because to him that was no real criterion of what was going to happen in the future. He was apprehensive, and they had had many warnings in the past with regard to this matter. Mr. Forster in his Bill had declared that the rate would never be more than 3d., and now in some eases it was 2s. 9d., and that was under Mr. Forster's Act. The tendency of expenditure was to increase, and he wished to place a definite limit upon the burden. The Government proposed that

  801
  the Imperial contribution should in no case exceed three-fourths of the whole expenditure. He wished to propose that the rates should in no case exceed a quarter of the whole expenditure. That was the only satisfactory safeguard against an indefinite increase of the burden upon the rates in future. The burden upon the rates for a great national purpose such as education should not exceed a fixed limit in the Bill.
  Amendment proposed—
  "In page 5, line 21, to leave out the words 'expenses of a Council under this Act,' and insert the words expenditure out of rates under this Act shall in no case exceed one-fourth of the whole expenditure on education by the education authority, and the expenses of that authority.'"—(Mr. Chaplin.)
  Question proposed, "That the words 'expenses of a Council' stand part of the Cause."
  MR. A. J. BALFOURsaid it was probably owing to the ruling of the Chairman before his right hon. friend rose to speak that he did not fully understand what plan it was desired to substitute for the plan proposed by the Government. His right hon. friend's speech really resolved itself, so far as he could gather, into a lamentation over the Bill in consequence of the additional cost that it appeared to throw upon the rates. It was a general statement of his right hon. friend's feelings upon the subject of local burdens. He had great sympathy for him and for those for whom he spoke. It had never been denied in any quarter of the House, never on the Government side of the House, and least of all by the From Government Bench, that the rate-the payers of this country did in many respects suffer from the present position of the law, and that many burdens were thrown upon them which might, from the abstract point of view of strict equity, have a wider distribution among all classes of the community. If his right hon. friend wished to impress that fact on the Committee, he had nothing to say against him. He felt, however, that his right hon. friend had been a little inclined to forget how much had been done by the Party to which both he and the Government belonged to relieve the burden of the rates out of the general funds of the community. Without attempting to
  802
  give full and accurate details of the great contributions to local rates out of the Exchequer made since 1887, it was sufficient to say that the State contributed £6,000,000 additional to the Local Taxation Account, £1,300,000 in respect of the Agricultural Rates Act, about £600,000 in respect of the Voluntary schools, and about £200,000 in respect of board schools. Further, the Chancellor of the Exchequer, or his predecessor, had promised between £900,000 and£1,000,000 in order not merely to make up for any losses which the general community might have to bear under this Bill owing to the drying up of a certain proportion of voluntary subscriptions which were now some £600,000 or£7,00,000, but to more than make up for those losses by a great deal. If the right hon. Gentleman had remembered that all these forms of assistance to the rates had been devised and carried out by the Party to which he and the Government belonged, he would not have thought the Government open to the charge of indifference to the interests of the ratepayers, whether agricultural or otherwise. The Government had even received a great deal of obloquy from the fact that part of the relief it to that class of the community for which the right hon. Gentleman spoke. The hostility to that measure of hon. Gentlemen opposite was, he understood, by no means exhausted; and they meant to go to the country with the non-renewal of the Agricultural Rates Act as the principal plank in their platform. He only drew attention to the fact the Government had a right to recognition of the fact that they had shown themselves in the most practical sense to be the friends of the ratepayers in this matter, and he rather thought that the right hon. Gentleman would find in the election address from which he had quoted a very specific reference to the interests of voluntary schools.
  As to the right hon. Gentleman's specific proposal, he was a little puzzled, for it mad no appearance in the right hon. Gentleman's speech, and if it had done it would at once have been ruled out of order. He did not know how to answer an Amendment which was either out of order or without meaning. The Government in this Clause could not alter the obligations which it found already imposed on the ratepayer for the purpose

  803
  of education. The right hon. Gentleman seemed to think that the Government had invented in this Bill the responsibility of the ratepayers for elementary education. That was not so. The obligation was there already. The need for improved and organised education was admitted on all hands; and what could the Government do more that accept the situation created for them, and aid the ratepayers by a large and generous subvention? The right hon. Gentleman might have treated the efforts of the Government in a more generous spirit. He seemed to think that the gift of £1,000,000 more, in addition to the £9,000,000 which was already given to elementary education, was a relatively small contribution. It was neither small nor insignificant, but the Government would like to see it made even greater, if it were practicable; and the fact that a certain sum had been put down in the new Clause by no means precluded the possibility of making a larger contribution from the Exchequer to the cost of this national duty. He could not pledge himself on a matter such as that; but the Committee would take it as sufficient if he said that Government were anxious to increase the very large grant they were already making. Whether they could or could not carry out that intention must depend on general circumstances which it would be improper to refer to at the moment. The expression of this hope, which was something more than a merely pious hope, should convince the right hon. Gentleman that the Government were by no means indifferent to the great interests on behalf of which he had spoken. The Amendment, however, was wholly impracticable. The earlier portions of the Bill threw a duty on the ratepayers, and it was impossible to do that and say that the funds for carrying out the duty should be rigidly and artificially limited.
  SIR EDWARD STRACHEY (Somersetshire, S.)said the right hon. Gentleman had stated that this was not a practical Amendment, and that if it were, it would have been out of order. But the Prime Minister might have made the proposal himself, in which case it would not have been out of order. The right hon. Gentleman further said
  804
  that the Government were in great sympathy with the agricultural rate-payers in this matter, but although they sympathised with their position, there was no means of giving relief. No doubt something in the past had been done to relieve the inequalities of taxation, but the right hon. Gentleman now proposed to impose a fresh and heavier burden on these very people. Relief was given under the Agricultural Rates Act. He supported the Third Reading of that measure, on the ground that at that time of great depression, the agriculturists were suffering very heavily indeed, and had the first claim to consideration. But he only voted for the proposal after the operation had been limited to five years, in order that the whole incidence of local taxation should be revised there in the interest of all classes of ratepayers. The whole question of local taxation was then to be considered, and a Royal Commission was appointed. What, however, was the right hon. Gentleman doing? He was increasing the burden on the occupiers of land and houses, and it was made the worse because, under the Agricultural Rates Act, any increase of local taxation would fall more heavily on the men living in the small towns. He, therefore, strongly urged on their behalf the absolute necessity of this additional rate being limited to one-fourth of the total amount that they would have to pay for national education. Another point was that the clergy had been relieved also. In their case the money did not come out of Imperial Exchequer contributions, but out of the Local Taxation Account. Here the same thing would happen, and what the Government had given with one hand they would taken away with the other. The Prime Minister had not attempted to defend the imposition. He assured the right hon. Gentleman there was a very strong feeling on the part of Liberals and Conservatives that the Bill placed an unfair burden upon the ratepayers, and that the very least that should be done was to lay it down in the Bill that in no case should the ratepayer have his rates raised by more than one-fourth of the total coast of education in any area. Members had not the slightest idea what this rate might be, and those who opposed the Amendment

  805
  might have cause hereafter to regret having done so if the rates increased considerably. It was useless to say they ought to be grateful because they would be relieved of their voluntary subscriptions. As a voluntary subscriber he had no wish to be relieved of the payment of his voluntary subscriptions.
  MR. A. J. BALFOUR: I did not say that.
  SIR EDWARD STRACHEYsaid he understood that to be put forward as a. reason for gratitude on the part of voluntary subscribers, but if the right hon. Gentleman disclaimed it he would withdraw that remark. He desired, most strongly to support the Amendment on behalf of every class of ratepayer.
  MR. JAMES LOWTHERconfessed that he was much troubled as to the future of our educational system. His right hon. friend had at any rate made it clear that the Bill would not tend in the direction of economy, although he was not an advocate of cheese-paring economy, he would point out in regard to Clause 11 that certain obligations were thrown upon the ratepayers, but if they attempted to exercise economy the central authority would come down upon them and force them to spend the money. A great deal was heard about subventions and contributions of the State to supplement local resources. He had always objected to the principle of such grants. Imperial funds were handed over to a local body; in other words, other people's money was given. That was an unsound system, and one that was fatal to economy. When right hon. friend committed himself to the policy of giving to the local authorities the charge of education in their districts, he was in hopes that there would be a chance of retrenchment and economy. The sums spent were enormous. In addition to over £9,000,000 contributed by the taxpayers, there was, according to one Return, over £3,000,000 from the rates, and certainly £800,000 from voluntary sources. How were those enormous sums apportioned? All Members desired
  806
  to maintain the Army and Navy in an efficient condition, but they did not call in experts like the noble Lord the Member for Woolwich to determine the amount of the Navy Estimates. But in regard to education they allowed enthusiasts— he would not use the stronger terms that were often employed, such as "faddists," "doctrinaires," and so on—to fix the price the ratepayers were to pay. What his right hon. friend the Member for the Sleaford Division appeared to want was almost equally dangerous. According to him, if the local authority found themselves in financial straits, they were to go to Downing Street arid get whatever balance they required. Economy was knocked on the head, and it was time the House set itself to work to institute some kind of effective control over the enormous sums annually raised for educational purposes. He would not go into the question of whether the State aimed at too much in its educational programme. He would, however, be sorry to commit himself to the view that we got value for our money. Many of the subjects taught were not suited to the position in life of those being educated; that had been admitted over and over again by the most ardent educationalists. The status quo was pre-eminently bad; he only hoped this Bill would not make it a great deal worse.
  DR. MACNAMARAthought that most Members would agree that education was a national service, and ought, therefore, to be treated, in the main at any rate, as a national charge. But he would not go the length of the First Lord, who apparently suggested that we might ultimately arrive at a stage at which the whole cost of education would be a national charge.
  MR. A. J. BALFOUR: No.
  DR. MACNAMARAwas glad the right hon. Gentleman dissented from that view, because he thought it was desirable that a margin of cost should be met by the locality, as otherwise they gave themselves over to bureaucratic government and did not allow the locality any voice in a matter which was distinctly a local concern. He would

  807
  consider for a moment the Amendment of the right hon. Gentleman the Member for Sleaford. Although it might not involve any additional Treasury grants, it was reactionary to a large degree. This Amendment did not cast any obligation upon any locality to rate itself at all, and if it were carried a number of localities would get off very well indeed, for they would be able to wipe off all their voluntary contributions. If this Bill was to do any good at all they must make this rate universal, otherwise the schools would suffer. At the present time there was a very large area without any local rate, indeed, there were seventeen boroughs, ninety-two urban districts, and 5,000 parishes with no rate at all. Only that morning he had read an account of a meeting of the district Chamber of Agriculture, where one of the speakers said he regarded it as a hardship in being called upon to help to educate other people's children after he had educated his own. [MINISTERIAL cries of "Hear, hear."] If that was the view of hon. Gentlemen opposite he would remind them that this Bill insisted upon that as a communal obligation. That was the position taken up by the representatives of agriculture. The same speaker at the meeting of the Chamber of Agriculture declared that it was all very well to tell the farmer that he would probably have a seat on the Board of Management, but that would not help him to pay the rate. The chairman of that meeting also spoke in similar terms. That was a fair and reasonable description of the attitude of the agriculturists. Perhaps he might be allowed to quote the opinion of the late Vice-President of the Council upon this point. By way of answer to the fears of the agricultural interest that the Bill would impose a heavy burden upon farmers, he recommended some words uttered by the late Vice-President of the Council, where he suggested whether the "better education of the people would not tend more to the relief of agricultural depression than remedies like bimetallism or Protection." "The understandings of all those who are connected with the cultivation of the soil," the late Vice-President added, "appear to be dark."
  808
  The first thing they had to do was to take care that districts which had not been rated before should now be rated everywhere, and he suggested that the only statesmanlike policy to be adopted was that to which he had referred. The Amendment of the right hon. Gentleman the Member for Sleaford imposed no obligation upon these authorities to rate themselves, and it left them a chance of escape. The proposal was that they were not, under any circumstances, to raise more than one-fourth of the entire charge of education by way of the local rates. He did not know whether that one-fourth was to include all charges. If it included the amount of liabilities which were now outstanding, amounting to £20,000,000, and all other sorts of capital and loans, then the contrast he Lad to make was even more striking. He would assume that with regard to maintenance, they would never have to meet more than one-fourth out of the local rate. He understood that it was not the intention to reduce the efficiency of Board Schools. The rates for Board Schools were about £3,750,000, or 45 per cent. of the maintenance charge in those schools. The Imperial Exchequer grants amount to £3,500,000 or about 50.8 per cent. The £1,000,000 promised by the Government would reduce the proportion contributed by the rates to about 35 per cent. Then they had got to bring in the fact that they were going to double the number of children who would be educated out of the rates, but he did not in the least complain of that. That would bring the proportion back again to about 45 per cent. of the entire cost. Now the right hon. Gentleman the Member for Sleaford proposed that this proportion should never be more than 25 per cent. Therefore this Amendment would reduce it in a most material way. Was that the intention of hon. Members I opposite under a Bill which professed to make further provision for education? This policy would be disastrous to; education. He thought he had proved that in a rough sort of way. It would dry up at the very outset any development of higher education; and, although; they were all desirous to get the great bulk of the money from the Imperial Treasury, they must not put the cart before the horse in this matter. If

  809
  this Amendment were carried, it would reduce enormously the amount available for educational purposes, and he there fore preferred the more wise and liberal proposal of the Government. What the Government said was, "We will make you spend one fourth all over the country, and if you do not we will reduce your Government grants until that proportion is reached. "That was a policy in accordance with wise statesmanship.
  (MR. CRIPPSsaid the point that was now being discussed was one of the most important in the Bill. From the educational point of view, nothing could be worse than to lay down such conditions that they were not likely to have a good educational system. The right hon. Gentleman the Member for Sleaford took, as an illustration, the proposal to put on the rates the charge for the provision of training colleges for teachers. Could they have any better method devised than this for not having colleges properly provided and equipped. It was impossible to say that this was a local matter. If there was one matter which more than another was national as against local, it was the training of teachers for the national schools. Therefore, from the educational aspect, it was extremely important that some alteration should be made with regard to the proposals of the Government in dealing with the expenses both of secondary and primary education. He would deal first of all with the question of principle. The Report of the Royal Commission on Local Taxation had been quoted with approbation by the hon. Member for North Camberwell, but if he had really appreciated what that Report meant, he would never have made a speech advocating that, as between the rates and Imperial sources, there should be an obligation on the ratepayers to find a quarter, and if they did not find it, there should be no contribution from the Imperial Treasury.
  DR. MACNAMARAsaid that what he stated was that the service being national, the great bulk of the money should come from Imperial sources, but that there should be a margin to secure economy of administration to be raised by a rate levied locally.
  MR. CRIPPSsaid he did not disagree with what the hon. Member said now, but that was entirely inconsistent with his advocacy of what he said was the Government proposal. What was the problem? He did not agree with his right hon. He did not agree with his right hon. friend the Member for Sleaford that this was a matter which interested agricultural members particularly. It was a ratepayers' question, and ratepayers were found in towns as well as in agricultural districts. There was a universal feeling in the urban districts that it was unfair to put what he might call the additional risks of education upon the rates. The provision of primary education was admittedly a national service; and when a national service was to be administered locally the delicate and complex question arose, how much of the cost should be provided from the national Exchequer and how much from local resources? What the Royal Commission on Local Taxation said, referring to education, was that where a national service was administered locally the ratepayers at the present moment had to pay more than their fair share of the cost. What was proposed in this Bill with regard to the risks to the rates in future? He did not find fault with the part which distributed the old School Board rates over the country districts, because he quite agreed with the Prime Minister when he said that the these rates already settled that liability, and that it was only a question of distribution over the larger area. So far as the distribution over a larger area was concerned he thought that was one of the greatest improvements of the present Bill, because they could not have anything more unjust than the placing of a local charge for a national service on such a small area as a country parish. That was manifestly unfair.
  He came now to what the Bill really did with regard to imposing possibly new burdens on the ratepayers. All the additional expenditure for education under the Bill would be incurred entirely at the risk of the ratepayers, and that was absolutely in the teeth of the opinion of the Royal Commission on Local Taxation. Parliament not only placed this national service upon the local authorities, but determined the amount of the expenditure upon that service. There was no doubt that this Bill properly placed on the local authorities a minimum standard of education which was settled in this

  811
  House through the Education Code. Where there was a national service, and the expenditure upon it determined by Parliament, surely the funds, apart from the question of margin, ought to be provided by the national Exchequer. What was the present principle on this point? It was said that they could only guarantee that result in future by placing on the body responsible for the increased expenditure, the burden of finding the additional necessary cost. That was a true principle. If, of course, the minimum standard of education was to be fixed locally very much might be said for allowing the people who fixed the standard to declare also what ought to be the price. They not only compelled the people to carry out a national service, but proposed the additional hardship of making them pay for it, whether they liked it, or wanted it, or not. The real principle was that which was laid down in this Amendment—that the risk of the additional expenditure should be thrown on the shoulders of those liable for its being incurred, and not on the shoulders of those who were bound to incur it whether they liked it or not. It should be borne in mind that, while 1d. in the pound on the rate produced only £700,000, 1d. in the pound on property liable to the income-tax produced £2,500,000. This meant that as much as £430,000,000 of what he might call the ascertained property of the country escaped all contribution towards the local burden of taxation for education. The ratepayer could not feel keen about education when he knew that he had to contribute 4d. for a national service which if placed upon the national Exchequer would cost the taxpayer only ld. What they were wrong in doing was in putting this new charge, which would be created for the first time, on the localities; and now was the time for those who believed in the principles laid down by the Royal Commission to make their protest. The matter had been very carefully considered, and after that careful consideration there was an unanimous recommendation on this point. There was a time when that recommendation ought to have been regarded and enforced by the Government, but they had put it on one side, and had placed
  812
  an undue burden on a class already excessively burdened both in town and in country.
  MR. PHILIPPSsaid he wanted just to say a word or two with reference to the attitude of the hon. Member for North Camberwell, who had been very ably representing the interests of the elementary teachers throughout the country. The hon. Member had not been representing, and could not claim to represent, the interests of the ratepayers. In speech after speech the hon. Gentleman had said that he did not mind whether the rates went up or not, and he hoped that the ratepayers would feel the burden. What he wanted was sufficient education. But the hon. Gentleman was a London Member, and. his constituents were not going to pay one farthing of this increased burden.
  DR. MACNAMARAsaid the hon. Member was not representing him by any means correctly, but he would say precisely the same thing in regard to London as he had said in regard to the provinces
  MR. PHILIPPSsaid that what he had to consider was the interests of his constituents. The right hon. Member for the Sleaford Division proposed to put a certain amount o f this burden on the taxpayers. They all knew that education had got to be paid for somehow, and the right hon. Gentleman was in a difficulty owing to the forms of the House. If his Amendment were carried the Chancellor of the Exchequer would have to find the money next March, and directly it came to taking a farthing from his constituents the hon. Member for North Camberwell was against it. It was to be hoped that some of the agricultural Members would make it uncomfortable for the hon. Gentleman with his constituents. He did not share the views of the right hon. Gentleman, the Member for the Isle of Thanet. He was in favour of educational efficiency. He was an enthusiast on the subject of education, and wanted to see more money devoted to it. But they all admitted that the expenditure under this Bill for education was going to be a great deal heavier than ever before. The right hon. Gentleman, the First Lord, said that the

  813
  Government were giving £900,000 extra under this Bill, and that would meet entirely the voluntary subscriptions which would be withdrawn. That might be so, but he believed that under this Bill the expenses of education in the country districts would go up enormously. At present the administration was local, and they all knew that under local administration expenditure could be cut down in a hundred different ways out diminishing efficiency. But now, under this Bill, they were to put the whole thing under one authority in the county. Up to the present time, supposing a teacher wanted an increase of salary he had to get it from the local School Board, who would have the fear of their constituents before them and of being beaten at the next election for extravagance. In the ease of Board schools and voluntary schools there was, therefore, a strong pressure in the direction of economy. But if all education were put under one authority it would be absolutely impossible that one authority would be as economical as many little authorities. He believed that under the Bill there would be a great deal of unnecessary expenditure on small items. Like the hon. Gentleman who spoke last, he believed that the increased expenditure ought not to come on the local authority, but should come from the general taxpayers of the country. Education was a national business, and the great part of the expenditure ought to be paid by the general taxpayers. For that reason he was entirely in favour of the Amendment. The Government were not making themselves popular with the ratepayers by this Bill; certainly not in the case of the Nonconformist ratepayers. But there were other ratepayers than Nonconformists who did not take much interest in ecclesiastical disputes, but who would be compelled to take an interest in this Bill, because their rates would increase under it for years to come.
  MR. DAVID MACIVERsaid the hon. Member for Stretford had put in clear and beautiful language all that he wished to say on this question; but he wanted to emphasise the view that this was not solely and agricultural question. Although he was not an agriculturist, he had the greatest sympathy with the views expressed by the right hon. Member for Sleaford. He
  814
  believed that the agriculturists in this country had had a very hard time, but there was no greater nonsense than to contend that the technical education of working men could be a remedy for agricultural distress. All that was utter rubbish. All that technical education could do as regards the agricultural labourer would be to turn an efficient working man into an indifferent clerk. There were many constituencies where the people were very poor, and these should not be called upon to find the money for what was really a good deal of what had fallen from the hon. Member for Tamworth. He thought that some part of the expenditure should fall on the rates, as it did at present, otherwise no motive would exist for economy; but where he especially agreed with his hon. friend was that the money should be so distributed between voluntary and other schools that each should have their shard of the rates already existing; and that no increased burden whatever should be cast on the ratepayers of the country. He was not an educational enthusiast. He believed that a majority in the House and in the country were education and, and those who were education mad and not the unfortunate local ratepayers ought to be made to pay the piper. To his mind their duty was to help the denominational schools, which taught the children their duty to God and man. For these reasons he was in hearty accord with what he conceived to be the general principles of the Bill, and he thanked the First Lord of the Treasury for his sympathetic speech.
  MR SOARES (Devonshire,)said that in his reply to the right hon. Member for Sleaford, the Prime Minister gave a promise that at some future time he would give a contribution in aid of the ratepayers out of the Imperial funds. To his mind, however, a bird in the hand was worth two in the bush, and he thought that if this Amendment had the effect of causing that contribution to be made immediately it would be a very good thing indeed. He supported the Amendment on the ground of educational efficiency. He was one of those people who thought that the more money that was spent on education the better, but at the same time he believed that the more

  815
  money provided out of the rates for education the worse it was for education. They had only to consider the complaints that had been made in days gone by in regard to the small rural School Boards.
  It being half-past Seven of the clock, the Chairman left the Chair to make his Report to the House.
  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 13:—
  Amendment proposed—
  "In page 5, line 21, to leave out the words expenses of a Council under this Act,' and insert the words 'expenditure out of rates under this Act shall in no case exceed one-fourth of the whole expenditure on education by the education authority, and the expenses of that authority.'"—(Mr. Chaplin.)
  Question again proposed, "That the words 'expenses of a Council' stand part of the Clause."
  MR. SOARES, continuing his speech, said that when the sitting was suspended he was pointing out that if a large proportion of the money to be expended on education was to come out of the rates, it would be a bad thing for education. He gave as an instance those "rural School Boards" which had, to his mind at any rate, been unjustly attacked in the House for their inefficiency. They had always been told these School Boards were inefficient, because the managers preferred low rates or no rates rather than educational efficiency. They did not wish to see those principles applied to the education committee about to be appointed. They must remember that County Council elections in the future would be very much more stiffly fought than
  816
  they had been in the past. He, for one, was very much afraid that if one candidate for the County Council had on his programme Low rates and Not so much education, and another High rates and. Good education, the first would succeed. In his opinion by far the greater portion of the money to be expended on education should be borne out of the Imperial. Exchequer. He quite agreed that the locality ought to bear some proportion. The locality ought to bear such a proportion as would ensure due economy. Education was a national subject. A clever, well-educated young man was, to his mind, a national asset, and not a local asset of any sort or description. If in a country district a young man received a good education and proved to be a clever fellow, unless he had capital it was no good his remaining there; he probably went to a town where he could get good opportunities of making a success in life, and the town got the benefit of the money expended on his education and not the country district. He was sure that if rates were materially increased by this Bill they would fall very hardly indeed on the agricultural, portion of the community. It was true that last year was a good year for the farmers, but as a matter of fact he knew-that farmers hardly made a bare living out of it, and many of them did not succeed in making interest on their capital. He would admit that under-the existing circumstances any increase-in the rates was bound eventually to fall on the landlord. For the first few years, however, he did not believe it would fall on the landlord. It in fact only fell on the landlord when there was a re-valuation for rental purposes or when there was a change of tenancy. They had proof of that in the working of the Agricultural Rating Act. Whenever there was a re-letting or re-valuation the whole benefit at once went to the landlord.
  MR. JOHNSTONE:How do you know that?
  MR. SOARES: I learnt it from the farmers in my constituency. He had also a very high authority for the statement as well, for the right hon. Gentleman the Member for Sleaford said

  817
  on one occasion that when rates were high rents were low, and when rates were low rents were high. After all this was one of the elementary rules of political economy. A farm could only produce a certain amount of profit per annum; a portion of that went to the landlord as rent, and the remainder went to the tenant its interest on his capital and as a reward for his skill and labour. But if they were going to increase the amount of the rates, who was to bear that loss? For the first few years it would be the tenant, and under the existing circumstances of agriculture the tenant coal not afford to pay. But after a time the landlord would have to bear the loss. Seeing that at the present time landlords had a majority in the County Councils, he thought everybody would admit these gentlemen would be against increasing the rates. He heartily supported the Amendment, and meant to vote for it.
  MR. DUKEsaid the discussion had been conducted with a view to finding a means of putting the cost of rural education upon the taxpayer in boroughs, transferring what ought to be the proper local share to a part of the country where it had not been incurred, and where it certainly ought not to be artificially raised. The first objection to this proposal was that it was totally inconsistent with the policy upon which the finance of education had teen conducted ever since State aid was given for education. Down to the present time the theory of the matter had been that education was a matter of local concern, and the contributions which were made by the Exchequer were contributions of assistance towards the discharge of the local duties. For the future, apparently that point of view was to be entirely ignored. The contribution of the State had increased during living memory first to one-third, then to half, and now to a sum not exceeding three-quarters, and this was an attempt to make the State the paymaster of the whole cost of education, for the sake of some districts where there was no sincere interest in education. In the towns there was an active and sincere interest in education. The ratepayers desired that education should be thorough. They believed it
  818
  was a national as well as a local interest. The proposal before the Committee was a retrograde one. The system heretofore had been that the national and local interest in education should be stimulated by contributions which were required for the purpose from the local authority, and to make local education efficient, first by providing a system of inspection, and then by providing substantial assistance out of public funds. If the present proposals were carried, the Clause would be accepted as a declaration of Parliament that the policy to be pursued in the matter was to prevent local authorities from indulging in any enthusiasm for education and to warn them that if they were enthusiasts, they should take care not to contribute more than a farthing in the penny.
  MR. SOARES: And get everything else necessary from the Imperial Exchequer.
  MR. DUKE: Of course they were to have confidence in the unlimited generosity of the Imperial Exchequer. He had no sort of sympathy with people who wanted education without paying for it, and he had a great deal of repugnance towards any tendency for charging the costs of education in one part in an unequal rate upon the taxpayers in another part of the country. If the burden was to be a national one, and there was to be no check upon local contributions, it should be an equal burden all over the country. That was not what was proposed by the right hon. Gentleman the Member for Sleaford. It was not fair that residents in boroughs and persons interested in commerce should be made to contribute more largely to Imperial taxation than dwellers in the country. Let them have a consistent policy in this matter. If education was to be a national burden, let them face it and impose safeguards, but do not let them have the local authority masquerading as enthusiasts for education, and procuring the benefits of education without any cost to themselves. The inevitable result of that would he extravagance in the local and rural authorities and dissatisfaction among the urban authorities, with consequent serious damage to the cause of education.
  MR. ALFRED DAVIESsaid he viewed education as a national question, and one that should be kept outside Party politics. The Prime Minister ought to bear in mind it was his duty to legislate for the whole nation, without consideration for any Party, religious or political. Referring to the speech the Prime Minister had delivered earlier in the evening, the hon. Member remarked that he rubbed his eyes when he heard the Prime Minister describe himself as a benefactor to the ratepayers. He thought at once of his own constituency. In the case of Llanelly, one of the two boroughs which he had the honour to represent, a calculation had been made for the year ending 29th September last, which showed that under this Bill on the poor-rate assessment there would be earned an aid-grant of £2,658, whereas under the present law there would be earned £3,041. Here was a loss of £383. How then could the Llanelly ratepayers regard the First Lord of the Treasury as a benefactor? He declined to accept the right hon. Gentleman as a benefactor until he knew of some action of his which would justify the title. If he wished to be a benefactor let him tax ground values and royalties for the purposes of education, and let him divert the three million doles from parsons and landlords to education. There would be severe punishment to the Tory Party at the next election on account of this Bill, but if the rates increased under its enactments, as there was every prospect of their doing, then the punishment would he still greater. Injustice marked every line of the Bill. He would not have the Prime Minister imagine that the feeling of the country against the Bill in this House was represented by the Opposition; on the contrary, the feeling in the country was ten times stronger than that shown upon this side of the House. The Bill might have been introduced and carried a hundred years ago—at the commencement of the nineteenth century—but it was lamentable that on the dawn of the twentieth century, in an enlightened age, such an unjust Bill should be forced through the House. He felt that there was never a better or stronger case for the Liberal Party to tight for. If only they could have William Ewart Gladstone with them for one week, the Liberals would drive the Tory Party out of office. He could
  820
  not understand why Members opposite did not make up their minds to appeal to the country on the question. The Colonial Secretary had stated on the previous night that he had no objection to appeal to the country if (there was always an "if") other duties did not prevent. He hoped it was clearly understood that many good and noble men would let their goods be sold and would suffer imprisonment rather than pay the rates. He therefore urged the Government to pause before it was too late rather than force through the House a Bill which would cause a revolution in the land.
  MR. JOHNSTONEsaid the hon. Member who last spoke had given them a discourse on the general iniquities of the Bill, but had hardly touched on the point under discussion. He very greatly regretted that this Amendment should have been moved by a right hon. Gentleman who had, in the past, identified himself so largely with the agricultural interest in that House. The right hon. Gentleman had done a great deal for the agricultural interest, but he could not think he was doing it a good service when he brought forward this Amendment. Some years ago, a Bill was introduced by the right hon. Member for Sleaford, which very much reduced the assessment of agricultural land for the Poor and other rates. He supported that measure, because be believed it to be one of absolute justice. But, having obtained justice, he did not think it behoved those who represented the interests of agriculture to come to the House continually and plead for sympathy or compassion. He would like to hear from the hon. Member for Barnstaple who were the wicked landlords who had put into their pockets advantages which the tenants ought to enjoy, or who had raised their rents on those advantages conferred by Parliament. He knew of no such case, and he doubted it one could be produced for the edification of Parliament. The rating of agricultural land was, to his mind, placed on a fair basis under the right hon. Gentleman's Act, of 1896 —a basis which he thought the House would never upset or interfere with. Having thus obtained justice, let them be satisfied, and not come to that House on every conceivable occasion and say they were ground down, that they were oppressed, and could not live on account

  821
  of the burden of rates on their shoulders. Curiously enough, on the preceding Sunday he was turning over the pages of a county history and he noticed that in 1801, in three parishes near where he lived new the parish rate was 9s., 6s., and 5s respectively. Nowadays the average rate in rural parishes in England does not exceed 5s., and seeing that agricultural land was assessed at halt its value, he did not think they ought to have that eternal cackle about the rates being too high. There were other things, no doubt, which pressed heavily on them, among them the facilities for borrowing which had been given to the spending authorities, who thus increased their burdens. When the question of education was at stake he did not think they ought to ask for any better bargain than they had got under this Bill. He could not altogether agree with the arguments of the hon. Member for Barnstaple that the benefit of the money spent on education in several districts was lost because a young man went off to the town to make a living. In many cases they came back to spend the money they bad earned, and therefore the expenditure on education was a good investment. County Council elections were not always to be turned by cries of low rates. Much depended on the candidate, and if Ire were a man who enjoyed the confidence of the people of the district he would get elected, so long as he declared for economy with efficiency. His opinion was they had very much overridden their horse of high rates. It certainly was not dignified or to their credit, and he did not think it was to the interest of agriculture to reiterate the plea that the rates were too heavy to he borne and should be placed on the shoulders of other persons.
  MR. GEORGE WHITEsaid that the debate, in some parts of it at least, had been on the incidence of taxation rather than on the Amendment before the Committee. The incidence of taxation was a very important question, which night to have been dealt with by the strongest Government of modern times before now: but it was not a proper topic to discuss on the present Amendment. He represented a purely agricultural district,
  822
  and he regretted that, therefore, he was compelled to dissociate himself from some if his hon. friends who found it incumbent on them to support the Amendment. He did not believe that if the Amendment were passed, it could possibly obtain one penny from the Imperial Exchequer. It was a law of Parliament that, no such Amendment would be in order or that under it a penny could he obtained from the Imperial Exchequer for the purpose of reducing the cost of education throughout the country and relieving the rates. Therefore, the result of the Amendment would be that less money would be spent on education, and that education would be less efficient in the country districts. Whatever view the agricultural interest might take on the question, he for one was not prepared to purchase votes by promoting inefficient education. That was the principle on which he stood. He felt, however, that the expense of carrying out one part of the Bill might very properly be borne by the Imperial Exchequer. He referred to the secondary education part. The Prime Minister said, on more than one occasion, that it was necessary to provide for the more effective training of teachers; and he felt that that, too, was, very properly, a national and not a local charge. But as regarded elementary education, he was quite sure that the principle in the Bill was a just one, and that, the locality should bear some, part of the expense. He was very anxious that no Amendment should be passed which would prevent efficient education in the rural districts. He was perfectly well ware that children in tire agricultural districts were placed at a considerable disadvantage already, through the want of proper educational facilities. The appliances rind the teaching staffs were very inefficient, as a rule, because of the want of sufficient expenditure, and his view of the Amendment vas that if it were carried less money would be spent on education. Therefore he was not prepared to support it, even thought it might be regarded is an attempt to relieve the rates. Before the introduction of the Education Act of 1870, the contribution from the Imperial Exchequer was fixed at one-third. It was afterwards advanced to one half, and now the right hon. Gentleman claimed

  823
  that not more than a fourth should be paid by the ratepayers in the locality. He was rather surprised that Ins hon. friend had not looked with greater suspicion on the Amendment, coming from the quarter it did. The right hon. Gentleman was not in favour of educational progress unless it could be obtained free of cost; and, looking at the character of the support which the Amendment had received, he was quite certain that its aim was not educational efficiency. In these circumstances, he hoped the Committee would negative it by a large majority. He was quite sure that if they put the advantages of education before the rural districts that they would find a response, although it might be slow. If the interests of agriculture could only be promoted by the means suggested in the Amendment, then, indeed, as an industry, it was very near its lowest ebb. He opposed the Amendment as one which could not possibly reduce the burden on the ratepayers, while it would, in some ways, prevent the spread of education on the lines they desired throughout the agricultural districts.
  SIR W. HART DYKEsaid he felt it difficult to give a silent vote in regard to the Amendment; and he made no apology for trespassing on the Committee for a few minutes, because, after all, the question was a very important one, which should not be put lightly aside. They were all agreed that some of the burden in connection with education should be put upon the locality; and it was perfectly obvious that, from an administrative point of view, there should be such a charge. In the first place, some of the chief powers would be taken away from the new authority if they had no funds to dispose of; and therefore, from a common-sense point of view, some charge must rest on the locality. His right hon. friend moved the Amendment to safeguard the agricultural interest in particular from the possibility of an indefinite charge on the rates. The Amendment was, in his opinion, an impossible Amendment as it stood. He had had the honour of carrying one or two Bills through the House connected with education; but he never, in his wildest
  824
  dreams, thought of placing a Clause such as the Amendment of his right hon. friend in any of them. They were dealing with the indefinite in connection with the rates which would have to be paid under the Bill. Neither those who framed the Bill, nor those who had given it the closest attention, could tell within 1d. or 2d. or 3d. what the ultimate cost would be. He would venture to suggest to his right hon. friend not to proceed to a division on the Amendment. He would give a practical reason for that suggestion. They had had a speech from the Prime Minister, who was in charge of the Bill, and if that speech had been unsympathetic, as regarded any proposal for a further charge on the Imperial Exchequer, he would have recommended his right hon. friend, as a protest, to divide on the Amendment; but that speech was sympathetic to a high degree, and although the Prime Minister, very properly, could not pledge himself that, in the future, further relief would be afforded, although he gave no direct promise, he at all events indicated that what had been already done would not be a bar towards further relief in the same direction. Surely, from the business point of view, they could not secure a better situation in connection with the question at issue. He was one of those who believed that the estimates made of what the cost would be under the Bill were much exaggerated. His right hon. friend the Member for Thanet, who looked upon him as a faddist in matters of education, said that the cost would be unlimited, and that there would be extravagance on the part of the local authorities. Nothing of the kind. The local authorities had been dealing with an education problem up to the present which was far more difficult than they would have to solve under the Bill. The Bill would do away with the foolish extravagance in the past, whereby money was spent on elementary education without any guarantee that that education would be continued. Extravagance such as that would be once and for all abolished. Then, with regard to the rate, it was perfectly true that there might be a rise, and even an abnormal rise, in some districts; but the increased rate would be an investment that would bear good fruit. When a school was improved, when a popular master and mistress were introduced, the immediate result was a considerable rise

  825
  in the attendance, and a consequent improvement in the grant; and that addition to the grant must be balanced against the rate before they came to the net result. He desired to point out to hon. Members who were puzzled as to how they would vote, to remember that a great deal of pressure would he put on the Government in the future to afford further relief where a very heavy charge had been incurred and serious injustice inflicted, and that that pressure would he irresistible. Therefore, looking at the whole situation, he was perfectly satisfied to let it rest as it was, coupling with the speech of the Prime Minister, the certain pressure which would follow if there was an undue increase of the rates in any district—pressure which would be so great that relief must come. Re believed that the whole result would be that there would be a fair balance between the charge from the Imperial Exchequer and that proper charge which ought to come from the local rates. If his right hon. friend went to a division he would vote against him, although he had the greatest possible sympathy with the cause he advocated against the piling up of rates to an unjust extent, whether in town or country.
  MR. GEORGE WHITELEYsaid he was extremely suspicious of the quarter from which the Amendment proceeded. He was also somewhat timid of the hon. Baronet the Member for South Somerset, and whenever he heard in the speeches of the hon. Baronet an allusion to the Central Chamber of Agriculture, it always threw him into a state of perturbation. The hon. Gentleman took as his text the Amendment, but the gist of his sermon referred to another matter altogether. The Amendment itself was fairly harmless and innocuous. He did not think that any hon. Gentleman would object to some limitation being placed on the rates; but the right hon. Gentleman argued the matter simply from the standpoint of the agricultural interest. The hon. Gentleman's argument was one which was somewhat familiar to the Committee. They had heard it previously, and it amounted to this—that although local burdens might increase, and although other people might be rated, the agricultural interest should go free. He
  826
  did not, however, think that the hon. Gentleman could argue that in agricultural districts rates bore with very great severity. The average rate on agricultural land was from 1s. to 1s. 3d. in the £ whereas rates in towns were from 6s. to 10s. in the £. The matter was one which affected all kinds of rating; and one which ought to be discussed simply from the standpoint of agriculture. The proper principle was that where they had increased local burdens, all rateable property should contribute equally. Surely the hon. Gentleman could not contend that a farmer, who only paid one-twentieth of his full rateable value, suffered more than a person who had to contribute one-half. The hon. and learned Member for the Stretford Division alluded to the Report of the Royal Commission on Local Taxation. The hon. and learned. Member took a prominent and eminent part in the deliberations of that Commission, and he was sure they would all support the hon. and learned Member if he could only persuade the Government to legislate on the lines of that Report. That was the real solution of the question; and until that was done, discussions such as the present would crop up from time to time and be as useful in the future as they had been in the past.
  MAJOR RASCHmuch regretted that the Amendment not the support of the right hon. Gentleman the Member for the Dartford Division, and could only suppose that the agricultural depression had not reached the somewhat suburban constituency he represented. He hoped it would not be long before it did.
  SIR W. HART DYKE: I have had twenty-seven years of it.
  MAJOR RASCHsaid in his constituency they always had it. He thanked the First Lord of the Treasury for permitting a certain amount of additional discussion of this Clause and for the sympathetic allusion he had made to what might possibly happen in a few days. If he might venture to suggest a fault in connection with his right hon. friend's management of the Bill, he thought that

  827
  his right hon. friend might have selected the principle of short speeches instead of that of closure by compartments. Things were very different now from what they were when the First Lord of the Treasury addressed them on the 26th of June, when he promised them a subvention in aid of the rates. They were in a very much worse position now than they were then; and, although it was only four months ago, it seemed almost pre-Adamite. Secondary education was then permissive; it was now going to be compulsory. [Mr. A. J. BALFOUR: Oh, no.] As far as his limited intelligence could guide him, he believed it was going to be compulsory, but he would drop that. With reference to the voluntary schools, by a sort of hocus-pocus which he could not understand, they were to be called "provided" schools in certain circumstances, in which case they too would come on the rates. That was another reason why they should have the sympathetic attention of the First Lord of the Treasury. They stood in a very different position now from that in which they did when the Bill was read a first time. Now they had a new Chancellor of the Exchequer, and there was a good deal in that. At that time, he himself was in the position of Athanasius against the world. He had no friend in the House from an educational point of view. Now things were different. The Times, which used to refer to himself and his friends as rustic individuals, harmless faddists in the matter of education, and all that, had come round to their side in reference to the rates on die land, and what The Times said today most sensible people, at any rate, thought tomorrow. That was his experience at all events. The right hon. Gentleman the Member for West Monmouth rendered valuable assistance on die Second Reading of the Bill with reference to this particular matter. He had never thought that the right hon. Gentleman was opposed to the agricultural interest, although he was charged with it. Another right hon. Gentleman, rather late in the day, at the eleventh hour, almost at a quarter to twelve—he alluded of course to the right hon. Gentleman the Member for the Sleaford Division—although he voted for the First and Second Readings of the Bill, now came and gave them what support he could. Of course, every little helped, and it was better late than never. He was reminded, with reference to the right
  828
  hon. Member, of the anecdote of Lord Chesterfield and. Dr. Johnson. Hon. Members would know to what anecdote he referred, and he need not pursue the reference. [HON. MEMBERS: Quote.] The anecdote was simply this. When the great lexicographer was struggling with the difficulties of bringing out his dictionary, he called on Lord Chesterfield, who kept him waiting in his ante-room a long time and did not after all give him a satisfactory answer. When the initial difficulties had been overcome Lord Chesterfield came to his assistance, and Dr. Johnson said he was not of as much use to him as if he had been there a little earlier. The support of the hon. Members for Oldham ought to be his, for, whether they knew it or not, they were the apostolic successors of one of the greatest of Englishmen—William Cobbett—who said in the House of Commons that he would never put a tax on agricultural land for the purpose of education. He wished to know why the Government could not give a grant of 42s. 6d. for each child; and if people were fools enough to spend more, that would be their fault, and not the fault of the Government. There was no reason why the agricultural interest should he slaughtered to make an educational holiday. He failed to understand the feeling of some hon. Gentlemen on this matter. The hon. Member for Wigan was an enthusiast, even a fanatic, on education. He believed the hon. Member would be quite satisfied if very farm in East Anglia went out of cultivation if he were allowed to put a denominational school on its site. The agricultural interest in this House was long-complaining and long-suffering. They did not make half as much noise as they might about their grievances. They did not ask for doles or loans, and, if they did, they knew perfectly well they would not get them. All they asked was that they should be treated fairly and honestly. He was afraid he had spoken too long on this particular question, and he hoped hon. Members would pardon him for having done so. He represented a constituency almost entirely agricultural; where his supporters were divided into two camps—those who were ruined and those who were going to be ruined: where the rates were absolutely crushing; and where

  829
  they were at their wits' end to make a living. The only way in which he could justify his continued existence as a Member of the House was by standing up, as best he could, for the men who sent him there.
  MR. A. J. BALFOURsaid he congratulated his hon. and gallant friend on having kept within his own rule as to a time limit, even on a subject, in which he knew he was deeply interested. It was the highest tribute he could pay to the value of the principle he had preached in the House. He only rose now to suggest to the Committee that the debate on this Amendment might now come to a conclusion. He thought his right hon. friend who moved the Amendment might he content with the interesting debate he had initiated debate winch had dealt adequately, he thought, with the important matters his right hon. friend had raised. He ventured to suggest that, as the terms of the Amendment were hardly of a kind which the House as a practical body of legislators could accept, his right hon. friend might consent to withdraw his Motion.
  MR. CHAPLINsaid he might he permitted to say a few words in reply to the appeal td his right hon. friend. His right hon. friend urged him not to press the Amendment on the other hand he had been urged by a great many people from all parts of the country to press it to the utmost. If he did not press it, what could he tell his friends and supporters? Had his right hon. friend offered anything specific I He did not think he had. Did his right hon. friend give any distinct promise of any further grant I He gave his sympathy, and he was perfectly sure that his right hon. friend was thoroughly sincere in that; and he thought he understood his right hon. friend to hold out some hope —[Mr. A. J. BALFOUR: Hear. Hear]—that he might be able to render assistance later. If his right hon. friend would tell the supporters of the Amendment that they might entertain a reasonable expectation that another year, if not this year, unless unforeseen circumstances arose which put difficulties in the way of the Chancellor of the Exchequer, he might be able to come forward with
  830
  some further help in the direction he had indicated, he would be ready to withdraw the Amendment.
  MR. A. J. BALFOURsaid he was, always very anxious on such occasions never to say anything that could be twisted into a pledge. It was absolutely necessary that pledges should be fulfilled, and he always endeavoured to fulfil them to the letter, and, that being so, he was anxious not, to use any terms which could give rise to misunderstandings. He thought the actual promise made by his right hon. friend the Chancellor of the Exchequer of £930,000 was exceedingly generous, and he thought it was sometimes forgotten that on a balance it meant several hundred thousand a year in the pockets of the ratepayers if education was kept, at its present level, inasmuch as that gift from the Exchequer was largely in excess of the amount to which voluntary, subscribers would be relieved. He quite. recognised, however, that, probably education would not be kept at its present level, and he did not disguise from the. House that probably there must be a, burden put, on ratepayers who did not now bear that burden. Moreover it, was possible, taking the ratepayers altogether as one corporate community, that they might not be gainers, but rather losers, by the Bill in the long-run. He also recognised that the ratepayers were overburdened, and he desired to repeat the hope which he-expressed earlier in the evening that the Chancellor of the Exchequer might lat no distant date be able to add something to the large and not ungenerous gift he had already made. He hoped that statement would satisfy his right hon. friend. It was not a pledge, and must not be taken as a pledge. It was a hope, an earnest and an honest hope, and one which he trusted the House won d see fulfilled.
  MR. CHAPLINfelt that his right hon. friend had said as much as a Minister in his position could say at present, and he the before asked leave to withdraw the Amendment.
  MR. M'KENNAsaid before the Amendment was withdrawn, he wished

  831
  to know whether the rate for the margin of the expense of education would be settled by representatives of people who did not themselves pay the rate.
  MR. A. J. BALFOURsaid that matter had been dealt with.
  (10.13).Question put.
  The CHAIRMANdeclared that the "Ayes" had it.
  The decision being challenged,
  The CHAIRMAN: I will ask the hon. members who challenge my decision to rise in their places.
  Several Hon. Members having risen,
  The Committee divided. Ayes 291;Noes, 14. (Division List No. 501.)
  MR. SOARESin moving an Amendment to provide for the payment of "the reasonable travelling expenses of the members of the education committee," said the object of his proposal was to promote efficiency in education, and so far as he knew it did not conflict with the political principles of either Party. It was, in fact, a logical result of the decision of the Committee as to the advisability of members of existing School Boards being appointed on the education committees. It would greatly conduce to the power and efficiency of the education committee if the poorer portion of the middle class, and also working men, were represented upon it. The former were
  834
  perpetually making great sacrifices in order to confer upon their children the great boon of a good education, and many of them were of an altruistic tarn of mind, and would care for the education not only of their own children but also of others. Then it must not be forgotten that it was the children of working men who were principally affected by the Bill, and therefore as a class they ought to have a voice in the application of the principles of the Bill. None would deny that the Labour Members of Parliament were an extremely valuable addition to the House, as they knew from practical experience what other Members knew only from

  835
  hearsay or in theory. One thing was perfectly clear, viz., that the larger the field for the selection of the education committee the better the education committee would be. They had fought for that principle with regard to the quest on of the appointment of teachers, but had been beaten on that point on denominational grounds. But there were no such grounds to be alleged against this Amendment. Unless some such Amendment as he had proposed was accepted, they would shut the door to the poorer portion of the middle class and to working men. As a matter of fact we found that County Councils consisted mainly of the squire and other wealthy men—not because the poorer men would not be elected if they put up, but because they could not stand as the expenses entailed were so heavy. The education committees at first, would have a considerable number of meetings, and, as the areas were very large, the travelling expenses would form a serious item. He was aware that there was no precedent for the course he was proposing, but there were several things in the Bill itself for which there was no precedent. He did not look upon the Amendment as verbally inspired, and so long as the principle was accepted he was prepared to accept any other form of words.
  Amendment proposed—
  "In page 5, line 21, after the word 'Council, to insert the words 'including the reasonable travelling expenses of the members of the education committee.'"—(Mr. Soares.)
  Question proposed, "That those words be there inserted."
  MR. BRYCEjoined earnestly in the appeal of his hon. friend that favourable consideration should be given to this Amendment. It would be difficult enough to induce many of those whom they would like to see on the Education Committee to give their time to the work, and if they removed the difficulty which the expense of travelling imposed it would be a great advantage to the new bodies. Clause 12 provided that persons with an experience of education and acquainted with the needs of the various kinds of schools should be added to the education committee. Among those schools were many which gave practical
  836
  or technical instruction, and it was very desirable that no consideration of expense for travelling should prevent persons who had a practical knowledge of the work done by the technical schools from being able to attend the committee. This was a valuable principle, and one that could easily be distinguished from the cases of other local authorities. It was a new case altogether. A new system was being started, and they ought to give that new system the best possible chance of enlisting the assistance of a class whose knowledge and interest ought to be in the service of education.
  THE PRESIDENT OF THE LOCAL GOVERNMENT BOARD (Mr. WALTER LONG,)said every one would share the general view of the right hon. Gentleman and the mover of the Amendment that every facility should be given for the attendance on these committees of as many as possible of the capable men whose services they desired to obtain. But no sound reason had been given why in this particular instance there should be a departure from the principle which had hitherto been consistently maintained in regard to all branches of local government. Generalities had been indulged in, but there had been no special evidence adduced to justify the Committee in believing that them would be any difficulties in the way of the attendance upon the education committee of representatives of the labouring class which were greater than those at present existining regard to County Councils, Boards of Guardians, or any other local governing bodies. As a matter of practice, what was it that obtained in their County Councils? There were on nearly every County Council excellent representatives, of the working classes. [OPPOSITION cries of Oh."]
  MR. BROADHURST: No.
  MR. WALTER LONGsaid he did not know whether the hon. Member disputed his statement as to the word. "excellent" or "representatives," but it was idle for the hon. Gentleman to contradict him, for he was speaking of what he knew.
  MR. BROADHURST: So am I.
  MR. WALTER LONGinsisted that there were excellent representatives of the working classes on many of their County Councils, and it had never yet been asserted that if working men were absent from County Councils it was because they could not afford to pay their travelling expenses. What had been said, and what was said, by the mover of the Amendment was that it was not the travelling expenses that prevented working men from attending on these bodies, but the fact that they could not spare the time necessary for the performance of these duties.
  MR. SOARES: I said it was the travelling expenses principally which caused them to be unable to be elected on these bodies.
  MR. WALTER LONGsaid it was not the travelling expenses alone that prevented working men joining public bodies. Everybody must know that men whose daily employment was a matter of money, in nine cases out of ten could not afford, unless they were paid for the work, to give up their employment to attend the meetings. If they justified the payment of travelling expenses on the ground that they wanted the presence of these men on the County Councils, why should they not go further and pay them their out-of-pocket expenses? That was a proposal which had never yet been assented to by Parliament, and he hoped the Committee would not in this particular instance, and on such insufficient grounds, take a departure from anything that had yet been found necessary in any branch of their local government.
  SIR FORTESCUE FLANNERYpointed out that on Urban District Councils travelling expenses were paid.
  MR. WALTER LONGsaid that that applied only to members who went outside the area of the Council on business connected with the Council, but it had nothing whatever to do with attendance at the meetings of the body itself within its area. The proposal would be a serious departure from a well recognised and hitherto generally accepted principle
  838
  which ought not to be made except on much stronger grounds than had been put forward.
  MR. BROADHURSTsaid if the right hon. Gentleman had confined his remarks about Labour representation to London he would have strengthened his position, for there were several most careful and powerful representatives of labour on the London County Council. If, however, the right hon. Gentleman meant that there was a good representation of labour by working men on County Councils generally, then he was entirely wrong, and it was on that point that he ventured to contradict the right hon. Gentleman. The difficulty was that many agricultural labourers and village tradesmen would not be able to give their services if their expenses were not allowed, although they would not mind losing a day's work occasionally. The expenses of an agricultural labourer attending meetings of this kind for one day would pro bably be six times as much as his loss in wages. Although it was quite true that County Councils were elected by popular vote, the expenses attaching to service on County Councils really constituted a property qualification, and although technically there was no such qualification, in practice a considerable qualification was necessary. He had served many years on a County Council, and to attend its meetings involved on an average a cost of 10s. per day. That was more than any working man could afford. He should like to do service on many of the committees of the County Council but he had been obliged to resign his membership of those committees on account of the heavy cost attaching to attendance at those meetings. There was no reason why they should not allow expenses in these particular cases. He thought the right hon. Gentleman opposite would remember that in the year 1888 this question was fought in several divisions, and what did they say at that time? Their argument was that in the overwhelming majority of County Councils, labour would be excluded by direct representation by Labour representatives unless reasonable travelling expenses were allowed. That had proved to he true. He did not suppose that they could find twenty real workingmen, representative of labour, on the County Councils in the whole of the kingdom outside London. Therefore

  839
  his hon. friend's Amendment was only a reproduction of a Motion which they made upon a former occasion with regard to reasonable travelling expenses being allowed. The hon. Member for the Shipley Division of Yorkshire was perfectly right in what he had said. It was an acknowledged fact that they prevented the direct representation of labour by refusing to pay their travelling expenses; and yet the members of the Council, by being appointed on deputations and instructed to undertake all sorts of investigations, experiments, and conferences, could have their expenses paid upon the most liberal, and sometimes the most lavish, scale. Therefore he thought the interjection of the hon. Member opposite was most valuable, and he did not think the President of the Local Government Board appreciated the course of that remark. If his hon. friend behind him would modify his Amendment in order to insert the words "where applied for "—[OPPOSITION cries of "No, no!"]—he was only endeavouring to do something which would ease the rash position which the right hon. Gentleman opposite had taken up. [An HON. MEMBER: That would be invidious.] Yes, it would, but there were some Members of this House who got pensions, and others who did not get them. There was no indignity in connection with that procedure in the House; at any, rate, if he had the opportunity he should not consider it beneath his dignity. He was only now taking a Conservative view of the matter. He was sure his hon. friend would not mind modifying his Amendment in this respect, if by that means they could induce the Government to meet them in regard to this matter. What they prophesied upon this subject in 1888 had come true, for labour had been excluded from direct representation by working men on account of the insurmountable expense, not so much in regard to the loss of wage earning, as in regard to the out-of pocket expenses in regard to travelling and other matters. Now the Government had the opportunity of rectifying the mistake they made in 1888. In that year the Chancellor of the Exchequer stated that no difficulty would arise, and that Labour representatives would find their way on to those Councils, but it had been proved that
  840
  this was not true, and this object could not be accomplished unless an Amendment, similar to the one now before the Committee was inserted in the Bill.
  MR. SHACKLETONsaid he thought this was a subject upon which a Member representing Labour interests could fairly claim the indulgence of the Committee for a few moments. The right hon. Gentleman representing the Government on this question said there was no precedent for such a proposal. The adoption of this proposal would not be the first precedent set in this house, and he was sure that it would be one of the best precedents that Parliament had ever set. It had been said that these expenses did not, debar working-men from joining public bodies. He thought he could show that the opposite was the case. He could prove that, in Lancashire, working-men were taking a great interest in public affairs. In the borough of Colne, one-third the members of the Council were Labour representatives, simply on account of the fact that there were no out-of-pocket expenses attached to their attendance at the meetings of that Council. In Nelson, there were three or four Labour members on the Council, and in Black-bum there were no less than eight Labour representatives. Those were all places where there were no out-of-pocket expenses entailed in regard to attendance. Those three instances would prove that working-men were anxious to attend on these public bodies in order to give what little intelligence and service they could when they had the opportunity. Probably hon. Members would say that this was not a very expensive business. Let them put the expense at 5s. per week. The trade with which he had been closely connected was one in which the average weekly wage was not more than 23s. or 24s. a week. He would ask hon. Members whose incomes were perhaps something like £50 a week whether they would like to sacrifice one-fourth of that income in order to attend the meetings of any public body? This 5s. a week to the class of men he had referred to would be a far more serious loss to them than the loss of £25 or £30 per week to some hon. Members of this House. The argument put forward in reference to the payment of these

  841
  expenses proved their case. If it was right to pay men when they left their homes as members of deputations and other such work, by the instruction of public bodies, surely it was right for any other kind of work in connection with those public bodies to pay out-of-pocket expenses with regard to attendance at those meetings. The right hon. Gentleman opposite, representing the Government, stated that there were a large number of working men on these County Councils, but he was very much mistaken. Take for example the County of Lancaster, which had over 100 members, not one of them being a working man. And why? If a Member had to attend the meetings of that Council from Darwen it would mean 3s. or 3s. 6d. railway fare. No working man earning the wages he had mentioned could afford to lose that amount of money out of his wages. He thought the Amendment of his hon. friend was a very moderate one, and this proposal gave the Government an opportunity which they ought to take immediate advantage of. If his hon. friend had asked that not only the travelling expenses but also a certain payment should be made he should have agreed with him. Surely when they were simply asking for out-of-pocket expenses that was a fair and a just demand, and no hon. Member ought to vote against it. He should support the Amendment which had been moved by his hon. friend.
  MR. CHARLES ALLENsaid the issues upon this Amendment seemed to be very clear on both sides of the House. On the Opposition side they wished to make it easier for working men to obtain representation on public bodies, while on the other side of the House hon. Members simply relied upon precedent. These education committees would have immense power in the counties for good or evil. Personally, he believed they would be the real education authority. Nominally, he was aware, they were only an advisory committee, but the work which the County Councils were already doing was so great that these education committees would become really the administrative bodies. That being so, they ought to make it easy for working men to serve, for
  842
  after all it was mostly their children who would be educated in those schools. Not only ought they to allow these out-of-pocket expenses, but they ought to do everything they could to encourage Labour representatives to take part in this educational work. The point referred to upon the Second Reading by the right hon. Gentleman the Member for South Aberdeen came up again in this discussion, namely, that if they had the enthusiasm of the people behind it a bad system of education was better than a good system with indifference behind it. It seemed to him that they ought to try by every means in their power to encourage the enthusiasm and interests of the working classes in education, and they would be accomplishing this if they made it possible for more Labour representatives to serve on the education committees. He did not quite understand what the right hon. Gentleman meant, when he said that there was no precedent for this Amendment. Perhaps there was not an exact precedent, but an intimate friend of his, who was a member of the London County Council, assured him that when he visited places on behalf of the Council he was allowed expenses and first-class fare.
  MR. WALTER LONG: That is exactly what I said. I stated that where members of the Council went outside their area they got their expenses.
  MR. CHARLES ALLENsaid the Government insisted upon sticking to the old precedent, and would not make a new one, although the distance to be travelled for the purpose of attending meetings was very often much greater than the distance to be travelled in reference to deputations and other matters. In Gloucestershire, for example, it took a councillor practically all day to attend the meetings from some of the outlying districts; therefore the attitude taken up by the right hon. Gentleman Was a very fine point indeed, and he felt that justice, and right, and good policy were on their side.
  LORD EDMUND FITZMAURICE (Crickdale),said he wished to say a few words from a County Council point of view. He confessed that he was a little astonished when he heard the President of the Local Government Board say, as he did at first, without any qualification, that

  843
  there were a considerable number of working men upon different County Councils of England. He did not think that was so. He admitted that here and there a working man had found his way on to a Comity Council, but on the whole this was an exceptional thing. In many of the English counties if seemed to him to stand to reason, considering the whole of the circumstances of the case, that it was almost impossible for working men, unless under favoured circumstances, to find their way on to the County Council. With regard to the Amendment they hid been told that it would establish till exceedingly dangerous precedent, and would open the door to an enormous extension of this principle. He could not help thinking that really this was an exaggeration. Why should they draw a distinction between the cases of those who were working, so to speak, at the very doors of the place of meeting, and those who lived close by? A suggestion had been made that the rule should not have general application, but that the onus should he thrown upon the individual to ask for payment. When the question of the payment of Members of Parliament came up Mr. Gladstone pointed out that he would be in favour of drawing some distinction of that kind, but great as was his authority the feeling was at that time that it would be a very dangerous thing to draw such a distinction, and the idea that was present in Mr. Gladstone's mind was fear of the expense which would be involved. Naturally it was felt at that time that it was not a desirable thing to increase public expenditure. He wished to ask whether there was any real danger of a great expense being incurred in this matter. He did not think the Amendment would entail any great expense. The County Councils met on an average only four times a year, though no doubt there would be more frequent meetings of the education authority. If they took the average number of meetings of the Country Council and what would likely be the number of meetings of the education committees and totalled them up, was disposed to think that there would be no such enormous expenditure in this respect as had been indicated by the
  844
  right hon. Gentleman. He would be willing to accept as a compromise the suggestion of his hon. friend behind him, thought it was open to the objection he had tried to state. He did not believe that a claim openly and honourably made by a man who desired to have his expenses paid would affect his standing as a member of the committee. The President of the Local Government Board had said that the difficulty was that a Labour member who was in somebody else's employment could not afford the time or would not be allowed by his employer to attend the meetings, But it should be borne in mind that there were a great many Labour representatives who were not in that position—men who, thought originally working men, had retired from the ranks of manual labourers, but had not ceased to be regarded by their follows as Labour representatives. He was inclined to think that those were precisely the men who were likely to be represented on the committee. It should be possible for those men to have their expenses paid and that they should not be placed under the great disadvantages they would undoubtedly suffer if they were obliged to travel, at their own expense, from the extreme end of the county to the county town in order to attend the meetings of the committee.
  MR. FENWICKsaid he hoped the Committee would not sanction the suggestion which had been made, that working men on the local authority might have their expenses paid if they claimed them. He would never like to be put in such an invidious position. Whenever an election took place the opponent of a candidate brought forward in the Labour interest would point out to the constituency that if he were elected he would do the work gratuitously. He had the honour to be one of the deputation that waited on Mr. Gladstone on the subject of the payment of Members. When the suggestion was made than an arrangement might be come to whereby Members might be paid if they were prepared to make a declaration that they required payment, he was glad

  845
  to say that all the Labour representatives repudiated the suggestion at once, and said that, so far as they were personally concerned, they would never tolerate being put in such an invidious position. The Amendment now before the Committee was one that deserved support. Labouring men who were members of Borough Councils at present had no out-of-pocket travelling expenses because they lived in the immediate vicinity of the places where the meetings were held. The case was vastly different so far as County Councils were concerned, because the men were often compelled to travel scores of miles to the place of meeting, paying their travelling expenses and losing a day's pay, except, as in the counties of Durham and Northumberland, where the Labour representatives had powerful trade unions behind them to pay the expenses, and also, in many cases, the wages which would otherwise be lost. Was it fair that the labouring classes of the country should have imposed on them financial disabilities when they desired to represent their fellow-workmen on the local institutions of the country? He believed that no hon. Member wished to exclude representative workingmen from serving on public bodies, but by the present system they had practically imposed upon them a financial test or financial disability. It was impossible for working men in all cases to bear the loss of travelling expenses and wages if they wished to represent their fellow-workers on local authorities, and he hoped the Committee would accept the Amendment which proposed that reasonable travelling expenses should be allowed. The children of the working classes were being educated in the schools. Working men were, therefore, directly interested in the management of the schools, and it seemed to him that they were fit and proper persons to be elected members of the education committee, but that in his judgment was impossible unless the Committee adopted the Amendment.
  MR JOHN WILSONsaid he was proud to be a member of Durham County Council, which last week did him the honour of electing him vice-chairman, He did not put forward a claim specially on behalf of the representation of labour on local administrative bodies, but his contention was
  846
  that these bodies were not so complete as they ought to be unless labour was represented. There were twenty-two or twenty-four working-men members of the Durham County Council, and four or five of them were Aldermen. The question he wished to ask was whether the Durham County Council, or any other local body, was or was not more effective for good by having working men upon it. He held that they were the better for having working men, and if that point was granted it was the duty of Parliament to facilitate their entrance to these bodies. But for the fact that he lived almost at the doorstep of the Durham County Council, he was not rich enough —and he was not ashamed to say so—to throw money away in that direction. He was willing to give his labour, knowedge and experience to the people, but he did not think he was in a position to take upon himself the burden of paying expenses such as must fall upon men who lived at a distance from the place of meeting. In view of the fact which had been pointed out by the hon. Member for the Wansbeck Division that it was largely, if not entirely, the children of working men who would have to be educated in the elementary schools, he thought the education committee should include men of that class. They should be allowed reasonable expenses to refund what they were out of pocket. He knew that the working men of the country, however poor they might be, had more regard for the principle involved in this proposal than they had for getting money into their pockets. If the House were to grant this demand to working men only, the working men would feel themselves insulted. Either all must have the concession, or none.
  MR. BUTCHERsaid he had considerable sympathy with the object of the Amendment, which appeared to him to indicate a legitimate means of facilitating the presence of representatives of the working classes on the education committees. But he very much doubted whether this was a suitable time for introducing a new principle into our system of local government, as they would

  847
  be undoubtedly doing if they were to accept this Amendment. The truth was that the question now before the Committee appeared to be only part of the very much larger question as to whether it would not be right that reasonable travelling expenses, and possibly other expenses, of County Councillors and members of other local bodies should be paid for them. That was a matter which might be fairly open to argument, and he should like to see it raised in debate in this House. But he could not sufficiently differentiate the position of the new education committees from that of other local bodies as to make it possible for him to say that they ought to pay the expenses of the one and not of the other.
  SIR H. CAMPBELLBAN-NERMANsaid he was glad, and not sorry, to hear the hon. and learned Gentleman say that he felt considerable sympathy with the arguments that had been urged in favour of this Amendment. The hon. Member said this was not the proper place or the proper time to introduce this great change. He hardly ever knew a time or place when it suited the Government of the day to introduce a proposed change of this kind. He differed entirely from the hon. Member for York, because if ever this proposal for enabling workingmen, and men of very limited means, to take part in the discharge of public dities—and all men had some sort of claim as citizens not to be out of pocket on account of discharging public duties—the best of all places to begin with were these education committees. It was the opportunity of admitting to those bodies the very men who of all others were interested in the work. If they had a number of co-opted superior persons on these committees, learned in their own accomplishments, they might be very useful, but not one of them would have a child in the schools controlled by the committee. The men for whom his hon. friends had spoken were those whose children's future would depend on the excellence of the education given in the public elementary schools. He should have thought that this was an occasion, of all others, to introduce a change when nobody could say a word against it on its merits.
  SIR JOHN GORSTsaid he would like to make a suggestion. He thought they were all agreed on having on these education committees men such as had been described by the right hon. Gentleman. It was quite certain, however, that some of these men would not be able to attend the committee meetings unless they had a reasonable allowance for expenses. He was one of the few persons in the House who rally trusted the local education authorities, and he would give them power to pay such part of the traveling expenses of the members of the education committee as they thought desirable.
  MR. BELLsaid he desired to contribute a few observations to this interesting debate, and he did so practically on the ground that the Prime Minister had stated the previous night that the number of those on the Opposition side of the House who had spoken against the Bill were very few. So far as this question was concerned he had been a silent Member; he had been content to look on and listen without reiterating what had been already said. So far as the Labour section of the Opposition was concerned he believed they heartily supported the Amendment. He could not altogether agree with the suggestion of the right hon. Member for Cambridge University, inasmuch as he would be the last man to allow any local authority to pay expenses in what was called "deserving cases." He should fell that he would not be a man to be pauperiesed.
  SIR JOHN GORSTsaid he did not mean that the committee should decide whether the members were to be paid or not their expenses, but that the committee was to decide what kind of expenses were to be paid.
  MR. BELLsaid if that were made general he could see no objection to it, but it should be inserted in the Bill. He thought that hon. Gentlemen in the House would agree, notwithstanding the abuse to which labour representatives on local bodies had been subjected in The Times lately, that it was desirable that working

  849
  men should be represented on these local bodies by their fellow-workmen. He knew of a signalman on one of the trunk railways who had the honour of being elected as chairman of a School Board, and of his District Council; and there were many men of intelligence among the working classes fitted for these positions. The intelligence of working men was not to be measured by their grammar. They were the people who felt the disadvantage of not having had the best of education in their school days. In many local bodies working men were ably represented by their fellows, and he wished to see the system extended. After all, the working men had to fight their way to these offices on their merits, and he hoped the House and the Prime Minister would give them an opportunity of being chosen to the education committee by paying their reasonable travelling expenses when discharging public duties.
  MR. JOHNSTONEsaid he wished to support the suggestion of the right hon. Gentleman the Member for Cambridge University. Frankly speaking, he thought that labour had bulked much too largely in this Amendment. He was not a blind worshipper of labour, but he recognised that there were men of intelligence, but of small means, who would have to do a great deal of the general drudgery of the work in connection with this Education Bill; and he believed that the cause of education would be served if the education committees had the power to pay their reasonable expenses. The right sort of men would always be welcomed in these education committees, and it had been shown, in the course of the debate, that Labour members had no difficulty in securing places on the County Councils. He thought there should be no difficulty in having their expenses paid, as the labourer is worthy of his hire; but he was unable to support the Amendment in its present form.
  MR. SAMUEL EVANSsaid he was rather expecting the Government to declare what they were going to do with the suggestion of the right hon. the Member for Cambridge University. There appeared to be only one opinion in the House as to the absolute desirability of having Labour representatives
  850
  and men of limited means on these education committees. The right hon. Gentleman who voiced the opinion of the Government did not deny that, but he made the stock reply that this was not a good or convenient opportunity to make the change. What he wanted to point out was that if this Amendment were not accepted a disqualification would be placed upon poor men from which they had not suffered under the School Board system. Hitherto there had been no difficulty in having poor men on the School Boards. In his own parish it was considered so desirable to have men of limited means on the School Boards, that the meetings were held in the evening so as to meet the convenience of these members. It would be a hardship on persons of limited means who had to travel some distance to attend the Education committee meetings if they had to pay their own personal expenses. They had poor Members of Parliament who were an honour, and added dignity and power to the House. The hon. Member for Mid Durham, with his characteristic independence, had told the House that he would not be able to attend the House without some pecuniary recompense. Could anybody say that men of the character and experience of his hon. friend should not be represented on the education committees? Alter the speech of his hon. friend, especially when it was conceded that by the Clause as it stood they were placing a disqualification on men of his standing, nothing more need be said in favour of the Amendment. He hoped the Government would be in a hurry to reply. It would be no dishonour for the Government to say that a mistake had been made in this matter. It would be said that they were not weak, but strong, in admitting that they had been convinced that the position that they had adopted was one that could no longer be maintained, and that now was the time and opportunity for rendering this measure of justice to poor men.
  MR. LYTTELTONsaid he thought the Opposition had had the best of the argument on this matter. For his

  851
  part he desired to move an Amendment to the Amendment, in support of the position taken up by his right hon. friend the Member for Cambridge University. He thought the general principle, of which he was certainly a most cordial supporter, that members of public bodies should not, as a. rule, be paid, need not be infringed by the principle laid down by his right hon. friend. On the two grounds that the working classes were primarily interested in this matter, as it would be their children who attended the schools, and that it had been made compulsory that certain women should be members of these committees—both of which grounds made a clear distinction between this and ordinary cases—he moved to insert in the Amendment after the word "including" the words "such reasonable travelling expenses for members of the education committee as the local authority may think fit."
  Amendment proposed to the proposed Amendment—
  "To Leave out the first word 'the,' and insert the word 'such.'"—(Mr. Lyttelton.)
  Question proposed, "That the first word 'the' stand part of the proposed Amendment."
  It being Midnight, the Chairman left the Chair to make his Report to the House.
  Committee report Progress; to sit again Tomorrow.

  CONSOLIDATED FUND (APPROPRITION) (No. 2) BILL.
  Considered in Committee.
  (In the Committee.)
  MR. J. W. LOWTHER,in the Chair.
  Clause 1:—
  Motion made and Question proposed—
  "That Clause 1 stand part, of the Bill."
  MR. DALZIELsaid that hon. Members were surely not to be called upon to discuss a Bill of this importance after twelve o'clock. He would not, in the ordinary course, have objected to that procedure, because the Bill had been practically accepted by the House; but on the last two or three occasions on which the Bill was before the House several Members were anxious to hear details as to how the money was to be expended, but tire Colonial Secretary was not in his place, and they had been waiting apparently in the unfounded hope that the right hon. Gentleman would be present to make explanations. He knew that the Government could insist on their technical right to take a Financial Bill after midnight, but surely a Bill which raised important questions of policy and administration should not be taken at that late hour. He appealed to the Chancellor of the Exchequer whether he would not postpone the Bill so as to allow the Colonial Secretary to be present to discharge the duty for which he was paid by the House. He begged to move that the Chairman report progress.
  Motion made, and Question proposed—
  "That the Chairman do report Progress; and ask leave to sit again."—(Mr. Dalziel)
  THE CHANCELLOR OF THE EXCHEQUER (Mr. RITCHIE,),said he was astonished at the attitude taken by the Hon. Member, who must know that the essence of this Bill was that it should be passed quickly.
  MR. DALZIEL: Why does not the Minister concerned come and help you to pass it?
  MR. RITCHIEsaid that if his right hon. friend were present no question of policy in connection with South Africa could be raised at this stage of the Bill. It was most essential that this money should be voted by the House, and placed at the disposal of Lord Milner, and he hoped that the hon. Gentleman would not press his Motion.
  The Committee divided:—Ayes 23; Noes, 115. (Division List No. 502.)

  AYES.

  Abraham, William (Rhondda)

  Cohen, Benjamin Louis

  Hardy, Laurence (Kent, Ashf'rd

  Agg-Gardner, James Tynte

  Collings, Rt. Hon. Jesse

  Hare, Thomas Leigh

  Agnew, Sir Andrew Noel

  Colston, Chas. Edw. H Athole

  Harris, Frederick Leverton

  Allan, Sir William (Gateshead)

  Corbett, A. Cameron (Glasgow)

  Hay, Hon, Claude George

  Anson, Sir William Reynell

  Cox, Irwin Edward Bainbridge

  Hayter, Rt. Hon. Sir Arthur D.

  Ark wright, John Stanhope

  Craig, Robert Hunter

  Heath, Arthur Howard (Hanley

  Arnold-Forster, Hugh O.

  Cranborne, Vicount

  Helder, Augustus

  Arrol, Sir William

  Cripps, Charles Alfred

  Helme, Norval Watson

  Atkinson, Rt. Hon. John

  Cultitt, Hon. Henry

  Henderson, Sir Alexander

  Bailey James (Wahworth)

  Dalrymple, Sir Charles

  Hermon-Hodge, Sir Robert T.

  Bain, Colonel James Robert

  Davenport, William Bromley-

  Hickman, Sir Alfred

  Baird, John George Alexander

  Davies, Alfred (Carmarthen)

  Hoare, Sir Samuel

  Baldwin, Alfred

  Davies, Sir Horatio D. (Chatham

  Hobhouse, Henry (Somerset, E.)

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

  Denny, Colonel

  Holland, Sir William Henry

  Balfour, Rt Hn Gerald W (Leeds.

  Dewar, John A. (Inverness-sh.

  Hope, J.F. (Sheffield, Brightside

  Balfour, Kenneth R. Christch.

  Digby, John K. D. Wingfield-

  Horniman, Frederick John

  Bell, Richard

  Dorington, Rt. Hon. Sir John E.

  Houldsworth, Sir Wm. Henry

  Bhownaggree, Sir M. M.

  Doughty, George

  Hoult, Joseph

  Bignold, Arthur

  Douglas, Rt. Hon. A. Akers-

  Hozier, Hon. James Henry Cecil

  Biggwood, James

  Douglas, Charles M. (Lanark)

  Hudson, George Bickersteth

  Blundell, Colonel Henry

  Doxford, Sir-William Theodore

  Jacoby, James Alfred

  Bolton, Thomas Dolling

  Duke, Henry Edward

  Jebb, Sir Richard Claverhouse

  Bond, Edward

  Duncan, J. Hastings

  Jessel, Capt. Herbert Merton

  Boscawen, Arthur Griffith-

  Darning-Lawrence, Sir Edwin

  Johnstone, Heywood

  Brigg, John

  Dyke, Rt. Hon. Sir William Hart

  Kearley, Hudson E.

  Broadhurst, Henry

  Egerton, Hon. A. de Tatton

  Kemp, George

  Brodrick, Rt. Hon. St. John

  Evans, Samuel T. (Glamorgan)

  Kennaway, Rt. Hon. Sir John H.

  Brookfield, Colonel Montagu

  Eanlell, Sir T. George

  Kennedy, Patrick James

  Brotherton, Edward Allen

  Fellowes, Hon. Ailwyn Edward

  King, Sir Henry Seymour

  Brown, Alexander H (Shropsh.)

  Fenwiek, Charles

  Kitson, Sir James

  Bryce, Rt. Hon. James

  Ferguson, R. C. Munro (Leith)

  Langley, Batty

  Bull, William James

  Fielden, Edward Brocklehurst

  Law, Andrew Bonar (Glasgow

  Bullard, Sir Harry

  Finch, George H.

  Lawrence, Sir Joseph (Monm'th

  Burdett-Coutts, W.

  Finlay, Sir Robert Bannatyne

  Lawson, John Grant

  Burns, John

  Fisher, William Hayes

  Layland-Barratt, Francis

  Burt, Thomas

  Fison, Frederick William

  Lee, Arthur H. (Hants, Fareltam

  Butcher, John George

  Fitzmanrice, Lord Edmund

  Leese, Sir Joseph F. (Accrington

  Buxton, Sydney Charles

  Fitzroy, Hon. Edward Algernon

  Leigh, Sir Joseph

  Caldwell, James

  Flannery, Sir Fortescue

  Leigh-Bennett, Henry Currie

  Cameron, Robert

  Flower, Ernest

  Leng, Sir John

  Carson, Rt. Hon. Sir Edw. H.

  Forster, Henry William

  Leveson-Gower, Frederick N.S.

  Causton, Richard Knight

  Fowler, Rt. Hon. Sir Henry

  Levy, Maurice

  Cautley, Henry Strother

  Gardner, Ernest

  Loder, Gerald Walter Erskine

  Cavendish, V.C.W. (Derbyshire

  Gibbs, Hon. Vicary (St. Albans)

  Long, Col. Charles W. (Evesham

  Cawley, Frederick

  Gladstone, Rt Hn. Herbert John

  Long, Rt. Hn. Walter (Bristol, S

  Cayzer, Sir Charles William

  Goddard, Daniel Ford

  Lonsdale, John Brownlee

  Cecil, Evelyn (Aston Manor)

  Godson, Sir Augustus Frederick

  Lough, Thomas

  Cecil, Lord Hugh (Greenwich

  Gorst, Rt. Hon. Sir John Eldon

  Lowe, Francis William

  Chamberlain, Rt. Hon. J. (Birm.

  Goulding, Edward Alfred

  Loyd, Archie Kirkman

  Chamberlain, Rt Hn. J.A (Worc.

  Grant, Corrie

  Lucas, Col. Francis (Lowestoft)

  Channing, Francis Allston

  Greene, Sir EW (B'ryS Edm'nds

  Lucas, Reginald J. (Portsmouth

  Chapman, Edward

  Greene, Henry D. (Shrewsbury)

  Lyttelton, Hon. Alfred

  Charrington, Spencer

  Greene, W. Raymond-(Cambs.)

  Macdona, John Cumming

  Clare, Octayius Leigh

  Gretton, John

  Madver, David (Liverpool)

  Cochrane, Hon. Thomas H.A.E.

  Groves, James Grimble

  Macnamara, Dr. Thomas J.

  Coghill, Douglas Harry

  Hanbury, Rt. Hon. Robert Wm.

  M'Arthur, Charles (Liverpool)

  M'Arthur William (Cornwall)

  Rankin, Sir James

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

  M'Care, George

  Rasch, Major Frederic Carne

  Taylor, Austin (East Toxeth)

  M'Killop, James (Stirlingshire)

  Ratcliff R.F.

  Taylor, Theodore C. (Radcliffe)

  Markham, Arthur Basil

  Reid, James (Greenock)

  Thomas, Sir A. (Glamorgan, E.)

  Mather, Sir William

  Remnant, James Farquharson

  Thomas, David Alfred (Merthyr

  Maxwell, WGH (Dumfriesshire

  Renshaw, Charles Bine

  Thomas, J. A (Glamoroan, Gower

  Meysey-Thompson, Sir H. M.

  Renwick, George

  Thompson, Dr E C (Monagh'n, N

  Middlemore, John Throgmort'n

  Ritchie, Rt Hon. Chas. Thomson

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

  Mildmay, Francis Bingham

  Roberts, John Bryn (Eifion)

  Tomkinson, James

  Milvain, Thomas

  Roberts, John H. (Denbigh's.)

  Tomlinson, Sir Wm. Edw. M

  Montagu, G.(Huntingdon)

  Roberts, Samuel (Sheffield)

  Toulmin, George

  More, Robt. Jasper (Shropshire

  Robertson, Edmund (Dundee)

  Trevelyan, Charles Philips

  Morley, Rt. Hn. John (Montrose

  Robson, William, Snowdon

  Tritton, Charles Ernest

  Morrell, George Herbert

  Roe, Sir Thomas

  Valentia, Viscount

  Morrison, James Archibald

  Ropner, Colonel Robert

  Wallace, Robert

  Morton, Arthur H. Aylmer

  Round, Rt. Hon. James

  Wanklyn, James Leslie

  Moss, Samuel

  Royds, Clement Molyneux

  Warde, Colonel C. E.

  Mount, William Arthur

  Runciman, Walter

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

  Mowbray, Sir Robert Gray C.

  Rutherford, John

  Welby, Sir Charles G. E.(Notts.

  Murray, Rt Hn A. Graham (Bute

  Sadler, Col. Samuel Alexander

  Wharton, Rt. Hon-John Lloyd

  Murray, Charles J. (Coventry)

  Samuel, Harry S. (Limehouse)

  White, George (Norfolk)

  Murray. Col. Wyndham (Bath)

  Samuel, Herbert L. (Cleveland)

  Whiteley, George York, W. R

  Myers, William Henry

  Sandys, Lieut.-Col. Thos. Myles

  Whiteley, H (Ashton-und. Lyne

  Nicholson, William Graham

  Shackleton, David James

  Whitley, J. H. (Halifax)

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

  Sharpe, William Edward T.

  Whittaker, Thomas Palmer

  O'Doherty, William

  Shaw, Charles Ed W. (Stafford)

  Williams, Osmond (Merioneth)

  Orr-Ewing, Charles Lindsay

  Shaw, Thomas (Hawick B.)

  Willox, Sir John Archibald

  Palmer, George Wm. (Reading)

  Shipman. Dr. John G.

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

  Palmer, Walter (Salisbury)

  Sinclair, John (Forfarshire)

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

  Partington, Oswald

  Sinclair, Louis (Romford)

  Wilson, John (Durham, Mid.)

  Paulton, James Mellor

  Skewes-Cox, Thomas

  Wilson, John (Glasgow)

  Pearson, Sir Weetman D.

  Sloan, Thomas Henry

  Wilson, J. W. (Woreestersh. N.

  Pemberton, John S. G.

  Smith, HC (North'mb, Tyneside

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

  Percy, Earl

  Smith, James Parker Lanarks

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

  Pierpoint, Robert

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

  Woodhouse, .Sir J T. (Huddersf'd

  Pilkington, Lieut.-Col. Richard

  Spencer, Rt Hn C. R.(Northants

  Wylie, Alexander

  Pirie, Duncan V.

  Stanley, Lord (Lancs.)

  Wyndham, Rt. Hon. George

  Platt-Higgins Frederick

  Stock, James Henry

  Yoxall, James Henry

  Plummer, Walter R

  Stone, Sir Benjamin

  Powell, Sir Francis Sharp

  Strutt, Hon. Charles Hedley

  TELLERS FOR THE AYES—

  Pretyman, Ernest George

  Start, John Humphry Napier

  Sir Alexander Acland-

  Purvis, Robert

  Talbot, Lord E. (Chichester)

  Hood and Mr. Anstruther.

  Randles, John S.

  NOES.

  Allen, Charies P. (Glouc., Stroud

  M'Kenna, Reginald

  Rigg, Richard

  Cremer, William Randal

  Morley, Charles (Breconshire)

  White, Luke (York, E. R.)

  Harmsworth, R. Leicester

  Norton, Capt. Cecil William

  Humphreys-Owen, Arthur C.

  Pease, J. A. (Saffron Walden)

  TELLERS FOR THE NOES—Sir

  Lambert, George

  Philipps, John Wynford

  Edward Strachey and Mr.

  Lloyd-George, David

  Price, Robert John

  Soares.

  AYES.

  Abraham, William (Rhondda)

  Leigh, Sir Joseph

  Roe, Sir Thomas

  Brigg, John

  M'Kenna, Reginald

  Thomas, Sir A. (Glamorgan, E.)

  Caldwell, James

  Markham, Arthur Basil

  Toulmin, George

  Channing, Francis Allston

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

  Tully, Jasper

  Cremer, William Randal

  O'Doherty, William

  Whittaker, Thomas Palmer

  Evans, Samuel T, (Glamorgan)

  Paulton, James Mellor

  Goddard, Daniel Ford

  Pease, J.A. (Saffron Walden)

  TELLERS FOR THE AYES—

  Hayne, Rt. Hon. Charles Seale-

  Pixie, Duncan V.

  Mr. Dalziel and Mr.

  Humphreys-Owen, Arthur C.

  Price, Robert John

  Warner.

  NOES.

  Agg-Gardner, James Tynte

  Disraeli, Coningsby Ralph

  Lucas, Col. Francis (Lowestoft)

  Anson, Sir William Reynell

  Doxford, Sir William Theodore

  Lucas, Reginald J. (Portsmouth

  Arkwright, John Stanhope

  Durning, Lawrence, Sir Edwin

  Lyttelton, Hon. Alfred

  Atkinson, Rt. Hon. John

  Egerton Hon. A. de Tatton

  Macartney, Rt Hn W. G. Ellison

  Bain, Colonel James Robert

  Fellowes, Hon. Anlwyn Edward

  MacIver, David (Liverpool)

  Balcarres, Lord

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

  Majendie, James A. H.

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

  Fielden, Edward Brocklehurst

  Maxwell, WJH (Dumiriesshire

  Balfour, Capt. C. B. (Hornsey)

  Finch, George H.

  Milvain, Thomas

  Balfour, Kenneth R. (Christch.)

  Finlay, Sir Robert Bannatyne

  Montagu, Hon. J. Scott (Hants.

  Bigwood, James

  Fisher, William Hayes

  More, Robt. Jasper (Shropshire)

  Blundell, Colonel Henry

  Fitzroy, Hon. Edward. Algernon

  Morgan, David. J. (Walth'mst'w

  Bond, Edward

  Fletcher, Rt. Hon Sir Henry

  Morrell, George Herbert

  Boscawen, Arthur Griffith-

  Forster, Henry William

  Morrison, James Archibald

  Brassey, Albert

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

  Mowbray, Sir Robert Gray C.

  Brodrick, Rt. Hon. St. John

  Godson, Sir Augustus Frederick

  Murray, Rt Hn A. Graham (Bute

  Brookfield, Colonel Montagu

  Goulding, Edward Alfred

  Murray, Charles J. (Coventry)

  Bullard, Sir Harry

  Greene, W. Raymond-(Cambs.

  Pemberton, John S. G.

  Burdett-Coutts, W.

  Gretton, John

  Purvis, Robert

  Carlile, William Walter

  Hambro, Charles Eric

  Reid, James (Greenock)

  Carson, Rt. Hon. Sir Edw. H.

  Hay, Hon. Claude George

  Remnant, James Farquharson

  Carvill, Patrick Geo. Hamilton

  Heath, Arthur Howard (Hanley

  Renwick, George

  Cavendish, V.C W. (Derbyshire

  Helme, Norval Watson

  Ridley, Hon. M.W (Stalybridge

  Cecil, Evelyn (Aston Manor)

  Hermon-Hodge, Sir Robert T.

  Ritchie, Rt Hon. Chas. Thomson

  Cecil, Lord Hugh (Greenwich)

  Hope, J.F. (Sheffield, Brightside

  Robertson, Herbert (Hackney)

  Chapman, Edward

  Horniman, Frederick John

  Ropier, Col. Robert

  Churchill, Winston Spencer

  Howard, John (Kent, Faversh'm

  Sadler, Col. Samuel Alexander

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

  Hutton, John (Yorks, N. R).

  Sandys, Lient.-Col, Thos. Myles

  Collings, Rt. Hon. Jesse

  Kennedy, Patrick James

  Smith, Abel H. (Hertford, East)

  Corbett, A. Cameron (Glasgow)

  Keswick, William

  Smith, H.C (North'mb. Tyneside

  Cox, Irwin Edward Bainbridge

  Lawrence, Wm. F. (Liverpool)

  Stanley, Lord (Lancs.)

  Cranborne, Viscount

  Layland-Barratt, Francis

  Stirling-Maxwell, Sir John M.

  Dalrymple, Sir Charles

  Legge, Col. Hon. Heneage

  Talbot, Lord E. (Chichester)

  Davenport, William Bromley-

  Leigh-Bennett, Henry Currie

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

  Davies, Sir Horatio D (Chatham

  Leveson-Gower, Frederick N.S.

  Taylor, Austin (East Toxteth)

  Dickson-Poynder, Sir John P.

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

  Thompson, Dr EC (Monagh'n, N

  Digby, John K. D. Wingfield-

  Loyd, Archie Kirkman

  Thornton, Percy M.

  Tomlinson, Sir Win. Edw. M.

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

  TELLERS FOR THE—

  Valentia, Viscount

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

  Sir Alexander Acland-

  Warde, Colonel C. E.

  Wylie, Alexander

  Hood and Mr. Anstruther.

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

  MR. DALZIELsaid that the right hon. Gentleman must he aware that the hon. Member for Dundee intended to raise several questions in regard to the Bill, but postponed them till the Committee stage.
  (12.8.) Question put.
  Question again proposed, "That Clause 1 stand part of the Bill."
  MR. DALZIELsaid he did not intend to oppose the Bill, owing to the circumstances of the case; but he thought that the Government were not serving their own object or the interests of the House in asking hon. Members to sit and discuss matters of this important kind after twelve o'clock. They were in no way opposed to the principle of the Bill, which was the first in regard to South African affairs on which for many years there was a unanimous opinion. He asked the Government whether, if they got to the Committee stage tonight, they would postpone the Third Reading, so that hon. Members could get the information they desired.
  MR. RITCHIEsaid he should ask the House to take the Third Reading as soon as he possibly could. As he had already stated, it was essential that this Bill should pass quickly in order to place Lord Milner in funds.
  MR. DALZIELasked if the right hon. Gentleman would take the Third Reading tomorrow. If so, he would not further press his motion.
  MR. RITCHIE: Yes.
  MR. DALZIEL: That is all I wanted.
  Clauses 1 to 4 agreed to.
  Schedules agreed to.
  Bill reported, without Amendment; to be read the third time Tomorrow.

  BANKERS (IRELAND) ACT REPEAL BILL.
  Considered in Committee.
  (In the Committee.)
  [Mr. J. W. LOWTHER (Cumberland, Penrith), in the Chair.]
  Clause 1:—
  Motion made, and Question proposed "That Clause 1 stand part of the Bill."
  MR. CALDWELLmoved that Progress be reported.
  THE ATTORNEY GENERAL FOR IRELAND (MR. J. ATKINSON,)asked the hon. Member not to press his Motion. This was a most useful Bill, and only repealed an old Irish Act of George II.
  MR. CALDWELLsaid that that might be so, but it took away the security which the people of Ireland had under that old Act. He insisted upon Progress being reported.
  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 minutes after twelve o'clock.