Sitting of 23 October 1902

Preamble
The House met at Two of the Clock.

A QUESTION OF PRIVILEGE.
MR. SWIFT MACNEILLdrew attention to a Question on the Paper standing in the name of the hon. Member for North Antrim, asking the Home Secretary if he was in a position to make a statement on the precedence of the Moderator of the General Assembly of the Presbyterian Church in Ireland, and contended that, although it was not actually beyond the practice of this House, yet it was a most objectionable departure from ordinary Parliamentary usage. The question did not come within the province of the Home Secretary, except in a technical sense.
MR. SPEAKERsaid the Home Secretary himself could take objection to the Question when it was put to him.
MR. SWIFT MACNEILLadded that it was within the hon. Member's own knowledge, as he had raised the question on the Vote for the Irish Secretary's salary. The hon. Member was the Parliamentary Secretary of the Chief Secretary, and it was a put-up Question between the two.
MR. SPEAKERsaid the hon. Member was now making more or less a personal attack.
MR. SWIFT MACNEILL: Oh no, Sir.
MR. SPEAKER: The hon. Member's first objection seems to be that the Question has been addressed to the wrong Minister. That is a matter that can be dealt with by the Minister himself. The other objection is apparently that the hon. Member who has given notice of the Question is Parliamentary Private Secretary to the Minister who is asked the Question. As to that, I dare say that the hon. Member is quite right in saying that it is unusual. It is unusual because it is not usually found to be necessary. If an hon. Member puts such a Question down he is perfectly within his rights.
MR. WILLIAM MOORE: This is a mare's nest. I am Parlimentary Secretary to the Chief Secretary, and my Question is addressed to the Home Secretary. I may add that I am not surprised at the hon. Member attacking me in my absence.
MR. SPEAKER: If I had known what the hon. Member's point was I should have stopped him sooner.
MR. SWIFT MACNEILL: As a personal explanation, I think I was more than justified in bringing the matter forward, inasmuch as the hon. Member on 23rd July actually raised this point on the Vote for the Chief Secretary's salary.

NEW WRIT.
New Writ for the County of York, North Riding (Cleveland Division), in the room of Alfred Edward Pease, Esquire (Manor of Northstead).—(Mr. Herbert Gladstone.)
UNOPPOSED PRIVATE BILL BUSINESS.

  GREAT NORTHERN RAILWAY COMPANY v. THE LONDON COUNTY COUNCIL.
  Petition of Mr. R. Hill Dane, solicitor for the Great Northern Railway Company, praying for leave for the proper officer to attend at an Arbitration and produce documents.
  Leave given to the proper officer to attend accordingly.—(Mr. Caldwell.)

  PICCADILLY, CITY AND NORTH-EAST LONDON RAILWAYS BILL [LORDS].
  Reported, with Special Report [Preamble not proved.]
  Report and Special Report to lie upon the Table, and to be printed.

PETITIONS.

  CANADIAN CATTLE (IMPORTATION).
  Petitions for the abolition of restrictions: from Lennoxtown; Bridgwater:

  591
  Banbury; Chipping Norton; Glasgow; Sittingbourne; Faversham; Kilnhurst; Paisley; Bonnybridge; Camelon; Teynham; Coalville; Buckley; Ewlse Place; Ilkeston; Stockton-on-Tees; West London; Willington Quay; Walker; Harwood; Darwen; Wallsend; Chepstow; Seaham; Skelton; Guisborough; Skinningrove; Amble; Loftus; Cambois; and Buckfastleigh; to lie upon the Table.

  EDUCATION (ENGLAND AND WALES) BILL.
  Petitions against: from Strathbogie; Highbridge; Puriton; Bridgwater (two); North Petherton; Scarborough; North Staffordshire; Clophill; Suffolk; West Cranmore; and Bradford; to lie upon the Table.
  EDUCATION (ENGLAND AND WALES) BILL.
  Petitions for alteration: from Buckley; Ewlse Place; Ilkeston; Stockton-on-Tees; West London; Great Harwood; Wallsend; Chepstow; Seaham Harbour; Willington Quay; Skelton; Guisborough; Amble; Skinningrove; Loftus; Udding-ston; Dalziel: Newarthill; and Buckfastleigh; to lie upon the Table.
  EDUCATION (ENGLAND AND WALES) BILL.
  Two Petitions from Kirkdale, in favour; to lie upon the Table.
  HOSPITALS (EXEMPTION FROM RATES) (RECOMMENDATION OF SELECT COMMITTEE).
  Petition from Liverpool, for legislation; to lie upon the Table.
  HOUSING OF THE WORKING CLASSES (REPAYMENT OF LOANS) (RECOMMENDATIONS OF SELECT COMMITTEE).
  Petition from Liverpool, for legislation; to lie upon the Table.

  PREVENTION OF CORRUPTION IN TRADE.
  Petitions for legislation: from Buckley; Ewlse Place; Ilkeston; Great Harwood; Newington Green; West London; Stockton-on-Tees; Walker; Wallsend; Willington Quay; Darwen; Chepstow;
  592
  Seaham Harbour; Skelton; Guisborough; Skinningrove; Amble; Loftus; Cambois; and Buckfastleigh; to lie upon the Table.

  SALE OF INTOXICATING LIQUORS ON SUNDAY BILL.
  Petition from Wolverhampton, in favour; to lie upon the Table.
  SALE OF TOBACCO TO JUVENILES.
  Petition from Edinburgh, for legislalation; to lie upon the Table.
RETURNS, REPORTS, ETC.
  COLONIAL STATISTICS.
  Copy presented, of Statistical Tables relating to the Colonial and other Possessions of the United Kingdom. Part XXV. for the year 1900 [by Command]; to lie upon the Table.
  STATISTICAL ABSTRACT (COLONIES).
  Copy presented, of Statistical Abstract for the Colonial and other Possessions of the United Kingdom in each of the last fifteen years from 1887 to 1901, Thirty-ninth Number [by Command]; to lie upon the Table.
  IRISH LAND COMMISSION (PROCEEDINGS).
  Copy presented, of Return of Proceedings during the month of August, 1902 [by Command]; to lie upon the Table.
  TECHNICAL INSTRUCTION ACT, 1889.
  Copy presented, of Minutes sanctioning the Subjects to be taught under Clause 8 of the Act, for the following counties:—County of Huntingdon (Second Minute), dated 11th September, 1902; County of East Suffolk (Seventh Minute), dated 29th July, 1902; County of Southampton (Tenth Minute), dated 11th September, 1902; County of Oxford (Eighth Minute), dated 11th September, 1902; County of Leicester (Seventh Minute), dated 11th September 1902 [by Act]; to lie upon the Table.

  CONGESTED DISTRICTS (IRELAND) (POPULATION).
  Return ordered, "giving the population (1891 and 1901) valuation, according to

  Electoral Division.

  Poor Law Union.

  County.

  Valuation.

  Population, 1891.

  Population, 1901.

  Number of house-holders under £5 Valuation.

  (Mr. Thomas O'Donnell.)

QUESTIONS AND ANSWERS CIRCULATED WITH THE VOTES.

  Indian Mutiny—Confiscated Estate of the Dewan of Dhar.
  MR. WEIR: To ask the Secretary of State for India, seeing that the property belonging to Ramchandra Rao, one of the six sons of Bapu Raghunath, Dewan of Dhar, was confiscated in November, 1857, on account of Ramchandra's alleged complicity in the Mutiny, will ho ascertain what has become of the property belonging to the other sons of Bapu Raghunath, and why the claims of his other descendants, viz., Krishna Rao Raghunath, son of a younger brother of Ramchandra, and Shanka Rao Bhagwant, grandson of another brother of Ramchandra, are not recognised by the Dhar State.

  1880.

  1901.

  Food crop area.

  Produce of food grains.

  Food crop area.

  Produce of food grains.

  Acres†

  Tons.

  Acres.†

  Tons.

  Madras

  26,244

  8,897

  27,532

  10,206

  Bombay and Sindh

  21,500

  4,086

  23,223

  6,092

  Bengal

  48,500

  17,460

  50,596

  24,407

  N. W. Provinces and Oudh

  31,450

  11,322

  35,912

  12,250

  Punjab

  88,900

  5,446

  21,316

  5,966

  Central Provinces

  13,000

  2,750

  14,000

  3,000

  Lower Burma, Assam, etc.

  6,920

  4,347

  9,850

  6,266

  Total

  166,514

  54,308

  182,429

  68,187

  * See(4) Debates, CVII., 1342;CN., 1372.

  †(The figures are in thousands, 000 omitted.)

  counties and poor law unions, of the various districts scheduled as congested in Ireland, in the following form:—
  (Answered by Secretary Lord George Hamilton.) I must refer the hon. Member to my previous answers in May and July last to his questions on the subject.*

  Indian Food Crops Statistics.
  MR. WEIR: To ask the Secretary of State for India, in view of the statement contained in his Budget speech last year to the effect that the yield of food crops per acre in India had increased from 730 lbs. in 1880 to 840 lbs. in 1900, will ho give the statistics on this point for each province of India.
  (Answered by Secretary Lord George Hamilton.) The statement made in my Budget speech last year repeated certain estimates of produce prepared in India from data collected by the Famine Commission of 1898. The detailed figures, as I have received them from India, are as follow:——

  Commission on Indian Police Administration.
  MR. WEIR: To ask the Secretary of State for India whether a Commission has yet been appointed to inquire into the Police Administration in India; and, if so, will the treatment of third class native passengers on Indian Railways by the police be inquired into.
  (Answered by Secretary Lord George Hamilton.) A Commission has been appointed to inquire into Police Administration in India. One of the subjects to be inquired into is whether the existing organisation of the Railway Police is in a satisfactory condition; and, if not, what improvements can be effected. If there are any complaints regarding the treatment of native passengers by the police, they will doubtless be brought to the notice of the Commission.

  Auxiliary Postmen, E. C. District— Holiday Pay.
  MR. KEIR HARDIE: To ask the Postmaster General whether the temporary and auxiliary postmen employed at the E.C. district office received the same pecuniary consideration for duties performed on 9th August (Coronation Day) as that received by the other members of the staff; and, if not, what are the reasons for the different treatment.
  (Answered by Mr. Austen Chamberlain.) Temporary postmen employed in the Eastern Central District on full duties received the same extra payment for their attendance on the Bank Holiday of 9th August as the established staff. On inquiry I fear that there has been some misapprehension as regards the payment of auxiliary postmen in the Eastern Central District for Bank Holidays, but I have received no representations on the subject from the men concerned. I am having the matter investigated.

  Ballina Post Office.
  MR. CONOR O'KELLY: To ask the Postmaster General if he has received any communication from the Ballina Urban Council relating to the proposed change of the post office in that town to a new site.
  (Answered by Mr. Austen Chamberlain.) I have received a communication from the
  596
  urban district council of Ballina maintaining their objection to the removal of the post office from Knox Street to King Street, and suggesting the purchase of a site in Knox Street and the erection of a new building. This, however, is an arrangement which would be more expensive than the circumstances justify; the King Street scheme has therefore been sanctioned.

  Ballymoney Post Office.
  MR. WILLIAM MOORE: To ask the Postmaster General if he will state the position of the negotiations by the Department towards acquiring a site for a post office in Ballymoney.
  (Answered by Mr. Austen Chamberlain.) No negotiations are going on at present for the acquisition of a site for a new post office at Ballymoney. The office there has recently been enlarged, and no difficulty is experienced in carrying on the business in the present building.

  Education Bill—Control of Local Authority.
  MR. HERBERT LEWIS: To ask the Secretary to the Board of Education whether the local education authority to be established under the Education Bill will have control over the selection and arrangement of furniture, the granting of holidays, the imposition and remission of fees, the provision of certificates and prizes, and the provision of school libraries.
  (Answered by Sir William Anson.) It is not convenient to answer questions as to the interpretation of a Bill which is under discussion in Committee. But, so far as secular instruction is concerned, the control of the local authority over the expenditure required for maintaining public elementary schools is complete.

  China Operations, 1900—Gratuities.
  MR. REGINALD LUCAS: To ask the Secretary to the Admiralty whether any gratuity is to be given to the men who were engaged in operations in China in 1900; and, if so, what conditions are to be observed.
  (Answered by Mr. Arnold-Forster.) A gratuity will be granted to the Naval

  597
  and Marine forces engaged in the operations in North China and in the Yangtse Valley from June, 1900, to 31st December, 1900, similar to that awarded to His Majesty's land forces. The Army unit of 24 rupees a share will be adopted and the gratuity paid, as in the case of the troops, to all employed, irrespective of the nature of the services rendered by them, subject only to the proviso that no person shall receive the gratuity in addition to the Pekin prize money unless his share of the prize money be less than his share of the gratuity, in which case the difference between the two amounts will be paid to him. It is expected that the distribution of the gratuity will commence about the beginning of November.

  Licensing Act, 1902.—Home Office Regulations.
  MR. HENRY HOBHOUSE: To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department, if he intends to make and issue, for the guidance of police authorities, any model regulations for the purpose of securing the giving of information and the identification of convicted persons under Section 6 (3) of the Licensing Act, 1902.
  (Answered by Mr. Secretary Akers-Douglas.)—I have now under consideration the regulations to be made by me under Section 6 (3) of the Licensing Act, 1902, as police authority for the Metropolitan Police District; and I hope to be able, in a few days time, to forward copies of these regulations to the various police authorities, to whom they may be of assistance.

  Stranding of the "Islay."
  MR. BAIRD: To ask the President of the Board of Trade, why no inquiry has been held into the loss of the steamship "Islay" off Port Ellen on 15th September; and whether he will have an investigation made into the circumstances attending the loss and the causes of the delay in lowering the boats after the vessel struck.
  (Answered by Mr. Gerald Balfour.) A preliminary inquiry, which was held in the case to which my hon. friend refers disclosed the fact that the cause of the
  598
  stranding was the density of the fog, and, possibly, a slight error of judgment on the part of the master. The crew and passengers were safely landed by the ship's boats without any mishap, and the weather being still and the sea smooth there was no necessity for undue haste in lowering the boats, which were reported by the Board of Trade Surveyor as being in good order and easily handled when last surveyed.

  Lighthouse Authorities Accounts.
  MR. CHARLES M'ARTHUR: To ask the President of the Board of Trade if he will say when the accounts of the General Lighthouse Fund for the year ending 31st March, 1902, will be presented to this House; when each of the three lighthouse authorities rendered its accounts for the year ending 31st March, 1902, to the Board of Trade; when these accounts were sent by the Board of Trade to the Auditor General; when the Board of Trade received his certificate; and, if it has not yet been received, when the Board of Trade expects to receive it.
  (Answered by Mr. Gerald Balfour.) The lighthouse authorities render their accounts quarterly. Those for the quarter ending 31st March, 1902, were received at the Board of Trade at different dates during the months of May and June. The accounts are forwarded by the Board of Trade to the Auditor General in instalments so soon as they have been examined, the first instalment having been sent on the 26th May and the last on the 4th September. The full annual account is sent when the Board hear that the Comptroller and Auditor General has completed his examination of the last instalment.

  Hours of Railway Servants Return.
  MR. BELL: To ask the President of the Board of Trade if he can state when the Return of Hours Worked by Railway Servants, now in course of preparation, will be presented to the House.
  (Answered by Mr. Gerald Balfour.) This Return was presented on the 14th instant. I understand that it will be circulated very shortly.

  Port of London Commission Report.
  SIR ALBERT ROLLIT: To ask the President of the Board of Trade whether he proposes to take any, and, if so, what course of action in reference to the Report of the Royal Commission on the Port of London; and whether he will use his influence to obtain facilities for a discussion of the subject upon the Motion of which notice appears upon the Vote Paper.
  (Answered by Mr. Gerald Balfour.) This subject is at present engaging the attention of the Government, and I am not yet in a position to make any statement with regard to it.

  Lehud (Kerry) Fishing Harbour.
  MR. BOLAND: To ask the Chief Secretary to the Lord Lieutenant of Ireland whether his attention has been called to the statement of the necessity for improving the entrance to the harbour at Lehud, County Kerry, lately submitted by the local fishermen to the Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs, who resides in the district, and

  Roman Catholics

  Presbyterians.

  Episcopalians and other Denominations.

  Total.

  Commissioner

  …

  …

  …

  —

  —

  1

  1

  District Inspectors

  …

  …

  …

  2

  1

  3

  6

  Head Constables

  …

  …

  …

  11

  2

  9

  22

  Sergeants

  …

  …

  …

  50

  30

  61

  141

  Acting Sergeants

  …

  …

  …

  10

  2

  12

  24

  Constables

  …

  …

  …

  380

  110

  277

  767

  Total

  …

  …

  …

  453

  145

  363

  961

  On the 30th June the force was increased by 100 men, of whom fifty were Roman Catholics, forty-one Episcopalians, and nine Presbyterians.

  Newry Police.
  MR. SLOAN: To ask the Chief Secretary to the Lord Lieutenant of Ireland if he will state the number of head constables, sergeants, and men of the Royal Irish Constabulary stationed in Newry, and to what particular denomination do they separately belong.
  whether the Congested Districts Board will allocate a portion of the funds at its disposal in the next financial year for the necessary improvements, seeing that the application has been before the Board for a considerable period.
  (Answered by Mr. Wyndham.) If a suitable scheme for the proposed works be submitted to the Congested Districts Board by the County Council, the Board will consider the question of making a contribution towards the cost.

  Belfast Police.
  MR. SLOAN: To ask the Chief Secretary to the Lord Lieutenant of Ireland if he will state the number of officers, head constables, sergeants, and men of the Royal Irish Constabulary stationed in the City of Belfast, and to what particular denomination do they separately belong.
  (Answered by Mr. Wyndham.) The religious distribution of the force in Belfast on the 31st December was as follows:——
  (Answered by Mr. Wyndham.) One district inspector, two head constables, two sergeants, three acting sergeants, and twenty-six constables. The district inspector and five constables are Episcopalians, two constables Presbyterians, and the remainder are Roman Catholics.

  Piers and Harbours in North Mayo.
  MR. CONOR O'KELLY: To ask the Chief Secretary to the Lord Lieutenant of Ireland whether any decision has yet been come to in connection with the

  601
  claims of North Mayo to grants from the new piers and harbours fund; and, if not, if he is in a position to say when a decision may be come to.
  (Answered by Mr. Wyndham.) No decision has yet been arrived at. The Government hopes to be in a position to give effect to the provisions of the recent Act at an early date.

  Irish Railway and Harbour Guarantees Return.
  MR. THOMAS O'DONNELL: To ask the Chief Secretary to the Lord Lieutenant of Ireland whether the Return granted on the 6th August, dealing with Railway and Harbour Guarantees (Ireland) is yet ready; and, if not, what is the cause of the delay.
  (Answered by Mr. Wyndham.) There has been no avoidable delay in the preparation of the Return, which, it is hoped, will be completed in the course of a fortnight.

  White Estate, Bantry.
  MR. GILHOOLY: To ask the Chief Secretary to the Lord Lieutenant of Ireland whether he can explain the cause of delay in the sale of the White Estate (near Bantry); and whether he can state approximately when it will be sold.
  (Answered by Mr. Wyndham.) The Report made to the Land Judge in the matter of this estate deals with a very large number of holdings. In the case of many of these, the Land Commission have required amendments to be made in the rental, and this cannot be done without the consent of, or on notice to, the tenants whose interests would be affected It is not possible, at present, to say when the property will be offered to the tenants.

  Irish Agricultural Statistics.
  MR. LONSDALE: To ask the Chief Secretary to the Lord Lieutenant of Ireland if the Report of the Agricultural Board (Ireland) for the year ending 31st March, 1902, may be expected before the end of the Session, and if there is any reason for the delay in its publication; if he can state the
  602
  aggregate amount of the grants made by the Board, in respect of agricultural purposes during the year ending 31st March, to the counties of Armagh, Down, Antrim, and Derry; and also, for like purposes, the aggregate to the province of Connaught, and also theaggragate amounts raised or guaranteed locally in those counties for such purposes, and also in the province of Connaught.
  (Answered by Mr. Wyndham.) It is hoped that the Department's Report for the year ended 31st March, 1902, will be ready for issue in the course of next month. The Report for the previous year was issued in the same month. The other information asked for is being prepared, and will be communicated to my hon. friend when received.

  Cost of Cavalry and Imperial Yeomanry Outfits.
  MR. PIRIE: To ask the Secretary of State for War can he state the average cost of clothing of a private of Imperial Yeomanry in January, 1900, compared with that of a private of cavalry at the same date.
  (Answered by Mr. Secretary Brodrick.) The value of the South African outfit of a cavalry private in January, 1900, was £7 19s. 2½d., and of an Imperial Yeoman was £9 4s. 5½d.

  Remounts Inquiry—Costs.
  MR. PIRIE: To ask the Secretary of State for War, with reference to the Court of Inquiry into the Remount Department, if he will state what allowance has been made to General Truman for counsel, and what has been that for the assessor appointed by the War Office to assist the Court.
  (Answered, by Mr. Secretary Brodrick.) The sum of £660 has been paid to General Truman for counsel, and a further claim is under consideration. The sum of £2,163 has been paid to the assessor.

  Case of Private Perry, 12th Lancers.
  MR. HARTLEY: To ask the Secretary of State for War whether his attention has been called to the case of N. Perry, late of the 12th Lancers; whether he is aware that this

  603
  man was discharged from the Army on the 2nd July, 1896, and underwent an operation on his leg rendered necessary from an accident whilst he was in the 12th Lancers; that, although not allowed to rejoin that regiment, he joined the 34th Middlesex Company of Yeomanry, and went to the war with the 8th Division, but had enteric, and was sent home in October, 1900; that when well again he joined the 21st Sharpshooters, and went again to the front, where he was again injured by an accident in the field; and whether he is not eligible for an allowance as his leg is still bad, in accordance with the recommendations of the recent Committee of both Houses.
  (Answered by Mr. Secretary Brodrick.) No application for pension has been received from this man; if he will furnish full particulars of the illness and the recent injury mentioned the case will be considered. It appears from his documents that he was discharged from the Middlesex Yeomanry at his own request, and from the Sharpshooters on termination of his engagement.

  Army Reservists' Grievances.
  SIR CHARLES M'LAREN: To ask the Secretary of State for War if his attention has been called to the case, stated by the Secretary of the Army Reservists Fund, of a time-expired man, two of whose children have died of starvation and who is himself in the workhouse, although £40 is due to him for arrears of pay; and to the case of another man, with £30 due to him, who had to pawn his medal to obtain money to support his children; and whether he will, if details of the above cases are brought before him, cause an inquiry into the whole circumstances.
  SIR CHARLES M'LAREN: To ask the Secretary of State for War whether his attention has been called to the statement, made on behalf of the Committee of the Army Reservists Fund, that numbers of time-expired men are still without arrears of pay due to them; that the Secretary of the Committee was not paid for eight months, though he called at the War Office to urge his claims; that the Chairman did not receive any of his pay until eight weeks after his return
  604
  home with his papers in order, and until he had twice written to the Commander-in-Chief and had a personal interview with Sir Edward Ward; that in this last case £10 only has been paid, and the balance retained until the middle of November; and what explanation he can give of these circumstances.
  (Answered by Mr. Secretary Brodrick.) The statements referred to by the hon. Baronet only reached me this morning. I will have them inquired into. Without wishing to cast any doubt on these particular statements, it is right I should mention that I inquire carefully into every grievance which reaches me and hitherto the great majority have not been borne out by the facts.

(2.15.) QUESTIONS IN THE HOUSE.

  Naval Shipbuilding Programme for 1901.
  SIR CHARLES DILKE: I beg to ask the Secretary to the Admiralty whether he will inform the House what is the date of commencement of work on the latest ship of the 1901 programme, and when the two battleships and two armoured cruisers of the 1902 programme are to be begun.
  THE SECRETARY TO THE ADMIRALTY (Mr. ARNOLD-FORSTER,: The orders for the armoured cruisers for the 1901 programme were despatched on the 29th March last, and letters confirming the telegraphic orders were sent to the contracting firms on the 12th April, when the work was proceeded with immediately. As already explained in the House, the date of commencement of these ships was delayed owing to the necessity for improving their protective armour and modifying their boiler installation. One of the battleships of the 1902 programme has been ordered, and work has been commenced upon her on the Clyde. The second ship will be laid down at Portsmouth dockyard as soon as the "Suffolk" is launched, and it is anticipated that the whole of the money voted for the ship for the current year will be expended on her.

  Return of Fleets.
  SIR CHARLES DILKE: I beg to ask the Secretary to the Admiralty if he will say why, in the Return of Fleets, the

  605
  order of the ships, and especially in the case of cruisers and destroyers, has been changed from the chronological order previously in most cases adopted, so that easy comparison with former Returns is rendered difficult; and whether the Admiralty will adopt in future an order of ships such as to make reference and comparison more simple.
  MR. ARNOLD-FORSTER: The Return has been re-arranged in the manner explained in the Prefatory Memorandum. Ships of the same class have been grouped together, and it is believed that this arrangement will prove more convenient, and will give more information to hon. Members than that previously adopted. It is proposed to issue any future Return in the same form as that now presented. I ought to add, however, that the Return being furnished for the information of the House of Commons, it is desirable that it should be compiled in such a manner as to meet the views of hon. Members. If, therefore, the right hon. Baronet will submit to me any suggestions with respect to Amendment in the form of the Return I will undertake to submit them to the Department responsible for the compilation and to ascertain how far they can be incorporated in similar Returns in the future.

  Volunteers and the New Musketry Regulations.
  SIR HOWARD VINCENT: I beg to ask the Secretary of State for War, if, before the final approval of any new musketry regulations for the Volunteer force, he will consult with the Council of the Commanding Officers Association as to their details.
  THE SECRETARY OF STATE FOR WAR (Mr. BRODRICK,: I shall be glad to take the opinion of some representative Volunteer Officers before issuing the new regulations which are however very elastic. But I should prefer proceeding through the General Officers Commanding Districts and the Advisory Board.

  Remount Inquiry.
  MR. PIRIE: I beg to ask the Secretary of State for War, with
  606
  reference to the Court of Inquiry on the Remount Department, and in view of its being the usual practice that the opinion of the convening officer accompanies the report of such a court, will he state whether such an opinion has been recorded in the present case by the Commander-in-Chief; and, if so, when it will be published; and, if not, will he explain why.
  MR. BRODRICK: The opinion of the Commander-in-Chief has been recorded on the report of the Court of Inquiry. He considered the report inconsistent, and therefore unsatisfactory. The remarks of the Commander-in-Chief bear upon the future as well as upon the past, and therefore I do not propose to publish his minute, the future of the Remount Department being still under discussion.
  MR. PIRIE: Will the Report eventually be published?
  MR. BRODRICK: I cannot make any promise on the subject.

  Remount Department.
  MR. PIRIE: I beg to ask the Secretary of State for War, in view of the expansion of the duties of the Remount; Department, and of the intention in July, 1900, to move the office of that Department to Pall Mall, will he say why the Department is still lodged in Victoria Street, where it is sometimes obliged to wait for four days before being able to obtain War Office papers it may require; and can he explain, in view of these facts, why the Yeomanry Committee was lodged during the war in spacious rooms close to the War Office, and is now occupying more central offices than the Remount Department; and will he state why no administrative increase was made to the headquarters staff of that Department till May, 1900, more than six months after the outbreak of the war.
  MR. BRODRICK: The War Office suffers great inconvenience from its work being carred on in a number of different buildings, and various branches, including the Intelligence Department, have with great difficulty and at considerable

  607
  expense been housed in buildings adjacent to Pall Mall. Repeated efforts were made to obtain more central accommodation for the Remount Department in buildings adjacent to the War Office, but the difficulties of procuring such accommodation on reasonable terms proved insuperable. The Yeomanry Committee had already secured rooms in Cleveland House before the War Office was in treaty for it. As regards the Remount Staff, no increases were asked for until March, 1900, when the Department was required to take over the provision of horses for the Imperial Yeomanry, and the demands by the Inspector General of Remounts for additional staff in London or in the districts, were in all cases acceded to.
  MR. PIRIE: HOW was it the Yeomanry Committee were able to procure rooms, while the Remount Department could not?
  MR. BRODRICK: Because they were already in possession of that particular building.

  Cost of South African War.
  MR. MCCRAE: I beg to ask Mr. Chancellor of the Exchequer whether he can state the amount incurred on war expenditure in South Africa to the termination of the war; the amount incurred since that date for transport, terminal charges, and gratuities to the troops; the amount incurred since the termination of the war for military charges other than above; and the amount estimated as required to meet all charges on account of South Africa, other than civil charges, till 31st March next.
  THE CHANCELLOR OF THE EXCHEQUER (Mr. RITCHIE,: In the absence of final accounts, no better estimate can be framed of the total expenditure incurred in connection with the war than the figures contained in Table I. of the Return moved for by the hon. Member for Poplar in April last (No. 155 of 1902), if the supplementary provision of £17,000,000 in 1902–3, made on the assumption that the war would continue, be omitted.
  MR. MCCRAE: Perhaps the right hon. Gentleman will say what amount has been disbursed by the Treasury if he cannot give the actual figures incurred?
  MR. RITCHIE: No, Sir. If I gave these figures it would be misleading. I must wait for the final accounts before I can state what the cost of the war has been.

  Customs Arrangements with the South African Colonies.
  SIR HOWARD VINCENT: I beg to ask the Secretary of State for the Colonies if, having regard to the expenditure due to the South African War, the fiscal regulations of the new colonies will provide for the preferential treatment of British goods compared to foreign goods.
  THE SECRETARY OF STATE FOR THE COLONIES (Mr. J. CHAMBERLAIN,: I anticipate that the South African Colonies will shortly hold a Customs Conference, and it would be premature to make any statement on the subject at the present time.

  Repatriation of the Boers.
  MR. THOMAS BAYLEY: I beg to ask the Secretary of State for the Colonies if he will say how much of the three million pounds granted for the rebuilding and restocking of the Boer farms at the signing of the terms of peace has been spent up to the present time on the purposes for which it was granted.
  MR. J. CHAMBERLAIN: I am not in a position to say the exact amount, but I have asked Lord Milner to supply a rough estimate, as far as he can do so.
  MR. PIRIE: Is the fund being used to pay the expenses of sending the Boer prisoners back to South Africa?
  MR. J. CHAMBERLAIN: I must ask for notice.

  British Policy as to the Mediterranean and the Adriatic.
  MR. JAMES O'KELLY: I beg to ask the Under Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs whether the policy of maintaining the status quo in the Mediterranean, announced by His Majesty's Government to Parliament last session, applies equally to the status quo in the Adriatic; and whether His Majesty's Government has received any information of an agreement between France

  609
  and Italy looking to a contingent disturbance of the status quo, and referred to publicly by M. Delcassé and, if so, whether he will inform Parliament of the nature and effect of the agreement between France and Italy, especially with regard to Trieste and Dalmatia.
  THE UNDER SECRETARY OF STATE FOR FOREIGN AFFAIRS (Lord CRANBORNE,: The answer to the first Question is in the affirmative. His Majesty's Government are not aware of any agreement between France and Italy involving a disturbance of the status quo in the Mediterranean.

  Uganda Railway.
  MR. THOMAS BAYLEY: I beg to ask Mr. Chancellor of the Exchequer whether, before a Vote is taken for any further money for the Uganda Railway, he will lay upon the Table a Balance Sheet, showing the capital and the trading profit and loss of this railway, in accordance with the course adopted by directors of railway companies to their shareholders.
  LORD CRANBORNE: The Annual Parliamentary Report by the Uganda Railway Committee, which is to be laid in a few days will, I think, be found to contain all the information desired by the hon. Member so far as the circumstances of the line correspond with those of an English railway.

  The Operations in Somaliland.
  MR. GIBSON BOWLES: Have the Government any further information as to events in Somaliland?
  LORD CRANBORNE: A further telegram from General Manning, relating to the operations in Somaliland, has been communicated to this day's evening papers as follows:—
  "Arrived Berbera 10 this morning.
  "Swayne has reached Bohotle in safety. Force was not attacked during retirement; situation consequently more satisfactory, but do not cancel orders warning Punjab Regiment from India for service, in case they have been given, as further developments must be awaited.
  "Wounded all doing very well; no anxiety concerning wounded officers need be felt. Howard's wound slight, Everett's wound severe (shoulder), but able to ride.
  "Aden attachment will arrive today and go forward to posts tomorrow morning."
  610
  I may perhaps say in explanation that the Aden attachment, to which reference is made, is about 300 strong, but of course these are not the only reinforcements which the Government have ordered, though we may hope they will not be so much required now. There is a battalion and a half under orders from India—not the Punjab but the Bombay regiment—and besides that we have ordered 600 more African troops from the other protectorates, who are specially useful in Somaliland owing to the local conditions. I need not say that if the news does not continue to be equally satisfactory, if bad news should come, the Government would be prepared to supply even further troops.

  North Sea Fisheries Investigation.
  MR. WEIR: I beg to ask the Under Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs, in view of the fact that, under the International Scheme for North Sea Fisheries Investigation, this country's share of the joint international expenditure will amount to £42,000, will he state the amount to be expended by the other countries interested.
  THE PRESIDENT OF THE BOARD OF TRADE (Mr. GERALD BALFOUR,: My noble friend has asked me to reply to this Question. The only joint international expenditure will be the annual sum of £4,800 for the maintenance of the central organisation at Copenhagen, towards which it is proposed that Great Britain, Germany and Russia should each contribute £1,250 and the other countries £262 10s. The sum of £42,000 represents the amount which will be required by Great Britain to meet our own expenditure during the next three years, inclusive of our contribution to the joint expenditure.

  Dingwall and Cromarty Railway.
  MR. WEIR: I beg to ask the President of the Board of Trade if he will state what progress has been made with the scheme for a light railway between Dingwall and Cromarty.
  MR. GERALD BALFOUR: An Order under the Light Railways Act, authorising the construction of the line in question, was confirmed by the Board of Trade on the 1st August last. I have no

  611
  information as to the steps that may have been taken under the powers so conferred.

  Conviction of Metropolitan Policeman for Perjury
  MR. MACVEAGH: I beg to ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department whether he can state what sentence has been passed upon the London policeman who was recently convicted of perjury, and what witnesses were examined for the prosecution.
  THE SECRETARY OF STATE FOR THE HOME DEPARTMENT (Mr. AKERS DOUGLAS,: The sentence passed on ex-Police Constable Rolls is five years penal servitude. The prosecutor was Joseph Wheelerbread, and his evidence was supported by twelve private persons and six police officers.
  MR. MACVEAGH: Will the right hon. Gentleman undertake that copies of the depositions and a transcript of the shorthand notes of the remarks made by the judge in passing sentence will be forwarded to the Chief Secretary for Ireland?
  MR. WILLIAM O'BRIEN: May I ask if the Crown counsel in this case was instructed to state that the aggrieved party——
  MR. SPEAKER: Order, order! Notice should be given of this.
  MR. WILLIAM O'BRIEN: But it arises directly out of the Question.
  MR. SPEAKER: The Question on the Paper is what sentence was passed and what witnesses were examined. That has been answered.
  MR. DELANY: Did the Treasury bear the cost of this policeman's defence?
  MR. SPEAKER: Order, order! The hon. Member must give notice.
  MR. MACVEAGH: I beg to ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department whether the levy made in the different police barracks of London for the defence of the London policeman recently convicted for perjury was approved by the authorities; whether it is
  612
  a fact that his bailsmen were London police officers; whether the constable was afforded an opportunity of resigning from the force before dismissal; and whether it is intended to award the constable any compassionate allowance from public funds.
  MR. AKERS DOUGLAS: I have no knowledge of any such levy. The bailsmen for ex-Police Constable Rolls were not police officers. He was not allowed to resign, nor did he ask to do so. His dismissal followed as a matter of course on the result of the trial. A police constable on dismissal forfeits all claim to compassionate or other allowance.
  MR. WILLIAM O'BRIEN: Was the aggrieved person in this case told that it was his duty to bring the police perjurer to justice, and was he obliged to pay his own expenses in doing so?
  MR. AKERS DOUGLAS: I cannot answer that Question without notice.
  MR. WILLIAM O'BRIEN: Then I give notice of it.
  MR. MACVEAGH: The Question itself asks whether a collection was taken.
  MR. SPEAKER: And that has been answered.
  MR. SWIFT MACNEILL: Will the right hon. Gentleman give this valuable constable as a present to the Irish Secretary?
  MR. MACVEAGH: Make him a removable magistrate in return for his valuable services.

  Crime in London.
  MR. FLYNN: I beg to ask Mr. Attorney General whether his attention has been directed to the charge of the Recorder at the Central Criminal Court on the 20th inst., and to his remarks respecting the calendar, and the number of prisoners, and the offences; and will he state how many prisoners out of the 116 names on the calendar are charged with murder or attempts to murder; what interval has elapsed since the last sessions; and, in view of the learned Recorder's statement, do the

  613
  Government intend to propose legislation of an exceptional character for the metropolitan area.
  THE ATTORNEY GENERAL (Sir ROBERT FINLAY,: I have made inquiries on this subject. Seven persons out of a calendar of 116 were charged with murder or attempted murder.
  MR. FLYNN: Do I understand that 116 cases occurred since 9th September?
  SIR ROBERT FINLAY: I cannot say when they occurred.
  MR. FLYNN: Does not the hon. Gentleman consider that in the circumstances some exceptional legislation such as a Crimes Act is necessary.
  SIR ROBERT FINLAY: Not in England: not in the slightest degree. The sittings of the Central Criminal Court are sufficiently frequent to cope with the business.

  Congested Areas in the Western Highlands.
  MR. WEIR: I beg to ask the Lord Advocate whether, in view of the creation of new holdings in Barra that took place in the early part of the year, he will take steps to encourage the creation of similar holdings in the Island of Lewis and other congested areas of the Western Highlands; and will he state whether he will arrange to open negotiations with the proprietor of the Island of Lewis and other landlords with a view to the acquisition of the necessary land.
  THE LORD ADVOCATE (Mr. A. GRAHAM MURRAY,: The circumstances now existing in the Island of Lewis are not in all respects parallel to those in the Island of Barra. It does not follow that the experiment tried in the latter island by the Congested Districts Board for ameliorating the condition of the people, and which they hope in course of time will be successful in attaining that object, would be equally suitable to the Island of Lewis. They do not at present think they can usefully open negotiations of the kind suggested by the hon. Member.

  International Fishery Conference.
  MR. WEIR: I beg to ask the Lord Advocate whether the question of closing
  614
  areas such as the Moray Firth was brought before the International Fishery Conference which recently met at Copenhagen; and, if so, with what result; and will he say when the Report of the proceedings will be published.
  MR. A. GRAHAM MURRAY: I understand that the question referred to was not formally under discussion at the recent meeting of the International Fishery Council. The question of the publication of the Report is now under consideration.

  Rates on Government Hereditaments.
  MR. T.M. HEALY: I beg to ask Mr. Chancellor of the Exchequer will he grant a Return of the hereditaments in England, Ireland, and Scotland respectively held by the Crown in respect of which Treasury Bounty in lieu of rates is paid, and the amount in each case; can he say whether the amount of contribution is determined on the principle of what a hypothetical tenant would pay in each case; and, if so, what Treasury Official decides how much the hypothetical tenant would pay in the case of arsenals and dockyards.
  THE FINANCIAL SECRETARY TO THE TREASURY (Mr. HAYES FISHER,: The preparation of a Return giving each hereditament would be a very laborious matter; but if the hon. Member will move for a Return in continuation of Parliamentary Paper No. 221 of 1900, I shall be happy to grant it. Treasury contributions in lieu of rates are made as a matter of grace and favour. The valuations are based as far as practicable on the same principles as the valuations of private property. They are fixed in Ireland by the Commissioner of Valuation; in England, Wales, and Scotland by the Treasury, after personal negotiation between the Treasury Valuer and Inspector of Rates and the local rating authorities.

  Treasury Contributions for Royal Parks.
  MR. T. M. HEALY: I beg to ask Mr. Chancellor of the Exchequer whether he will state what amounts respectively have been stopped by the Treasury in England, Ireland, and Scotland, and from what bodies, in respect of contributions in lieu of rates

  615
  for Royal Parks, and in what year did the deductions begin; is he aware that in the case of the Phoenix Park there is an annual income from grazing, averaging nearly £600 a year, and as the legal test of rateability has been defined to be what a hypothetical tenant would give, can he suggest any reason why the grazing rents of Phoenix Park are not rateable.
  MR. HAYES FISHER: I shall be happy to give the hon. Member privately, or as an answer to an unstarred Question, the details asked for in the first paragraph. The receipts from the Phoenix Park for grazings, etc. (which average £700, not £600, per annum) are more than counterbalanced by the cost of maintaining the Park, which amounts to over £7,000 per annum. In view of the judgments in the case of the Churchwardens of Lambeth v. the London County Council, reported in The Times of 20th July, 1897, the Treasury would not be justified in making any contributions in respect of them.
  MR. T. M. HEALY: But surely the hon. Gentleman can give me the amount stopped for England, Scotland and Ireland respectively.
  MR. HAYES FISHER: Yes, I have said I will give the information privately or in answer to an unstarred Question. It would be too long an answer to be read in the House.

  Mr. John Bright's Statue.
  MR. POWELL WILLIAMS: I beg to ask the Secretary to the Treasury whether the new statue of Mr. Bright has been placed in the position which it is proposed it shall permanently occupy; and, if so, whether he will consider the desirability of removing it to a better position in the outer lobby, such as was occupied by the first statue erected to the memory of the deceased statesman.
  MR. AILWYN FELLOWES(for the First Commissioner of Works): The answer to the first part of the Question is in the affirmative. The position was selected with the assent of the donor and the sculptor. With regard to the second part of the Question, the
  616
  position occupied by the first statue erected to the memory of Mr. Bright has, since its removal, been assigned to the statue of the late Mr. Gladstone, and it is not proposed to alter that arrangement.
  MR. POWELL WILLIAMS: May I ask my hon. friend whether he will consider the propriety of removing the statue of Earl Granville to a suitable position in another place, and, in that way, of leaving that space available for the statue of Mr. Bright?
  MR. AILWYN FELLOWES: I will make inquiries on behalf of my right hon. friend, but I think the whole matter is under the consideration of the First Commissioner of Works. I will certainly call his attention to the suggestion of my right hon. friend.
  MR. GIBSON BOWLES: Will the consideration extend to the statue of Cromwell?
  (No answer was given.)

  London and Paris Telephone Service.
  MR. HENNIKER HEATON: I beg to ask the Postmaster General, whether he will state how long the high rate levied for a telephone message between London and Paris,—viz. eight shillings for three minutes time, and sixteen shillings for six minutes consecutive time—has been in existence, and the estimated cost of construction of the telephone between London and Paris, the annual revenue, and the estimated expenditure for the Paris—London telephone.
  THE POSTMASTER GENERAL (Mr. AUSTEN CHAMBERLAIN,: The present rate of charge for telephonic communication between London and Paris has been in force since the 1st April 1891. I have no information as to the cost of construction or maintenance of the French section of the line, nor is it possible to separate accurately the cost of working this line from other telegraph expenditure.
  MR. HENNIKER HEATON: Does the telephone pay?
  MR. AUSTEN CHAMBERLAIN: Yes, I think it does.

  Telephonic Communication with Brussels and Berlin.
  MR. HENNIKER HEATON: I beg to ask the Postmaster General whether there is telephonic communication between London and Brussels, and London and Berlin; and, if not, whether any steps are being taken to establish direct communication between the cities named.
  MR. AUSTEN CHAMBERLAIN: A new cable has been laid to Belgium, and telephonic communication between London and Brussels will be opened as soon as the necessary arrangements can be completed. The establishment of communication between London and Berlin is not at present feasible.

  Telegraphic Communication with Scotland.
  MR. JOHN HOPE: I beg to ask the Postmaster General if he is aware that on Wednesday, 3rd September last, telegraphic communication between England and Scotland was almost entirely suspended, causing inconvenience and loss; and whether, looking to the frequency of such breakdowns in the telegraph wires, will he give some assurance that the underground system will be extended to the principal commercial centres of Scotland.
  MR. AUSTEN CHAMBERLAIN: I am aware that telegraphic communication with Scotland was seriously interrupted on the 3rd ultimo, with the result, I regret to say, that the traffic was considerably delayed. I fully recognise the importance of an extension of the underground system, and shall make as much progress with it this year as the funds voted by Parliament for that purpose admit of.

  Labourers (Ireland) Acts Amendment (No. 2) Bill.
  MR. KENDAL O'BRIEN: I beg to ask the Chief Secretary to the Lord Lieutenant of Ireland whether he intends to introduce legislation for the better housing of the labouring classes in Ireland during the present session, or will he give facilities for the Bill introduced by the hon. Member for South Louth.
  THE CHIEF SECRETARY FOR IRELAND (Mr. WYNDHAM,: The extent to which the Government is prepared to go in this matter is disclosed by an Amendment which I have put down on the Paper to the Bill of the hon. Member for South Louth.
  A NATIONALIST MEMBER: But the right hon. Gentleman promised to introduce a Bill. Will he not keep his promise?
  MR. WYNDHAM: I did not promise to bring in a Bill. [VOICES: You did.]
  MR. SPEAKER: Hon. Members are not entitled to enter into an argument as to whether the right hon. Gentleman is fulfilling his pledges.
  MR. PATRICK O'BRIEN: He never does.

  Tipperary and the Labourers Act.
  MR. KENDAL O'BRIEN: I beg to ask the Chief Secretary to the Lord Lieutenant of Ireland whether he is aware that Tipperary No. 1 Rural District Council included in their recent improvement scheme under the Labourers Acts the extension of existing half-acre plots to one acre; and, seeing that the power is vested in the District Councils to grant what is termed the additional half-acre, will he say on what legal grounds the Local Government Board rejected several applications of this nature in connection with this improvement scheme.
  MR. WYNDHAM: The scheme proposed the acquisition of the additional allotments to 130 existing cottages. Fifty-one cases were withdrawn by the District Council at the Inquiry. The inspector recommended forty-five and disapproved of thirty-six. These latter were rejected because in some cases the applicants were not agricultural labourers; or were unable to cultivate the land if granted; or because the land was unsuitable; or the applications were not supported by the District Councillors.

  Cork Rural District Improvement Scheme.
  MR. SHEEHAN: To ask the Chief Secretary to the Lord Lieutenant of Ireland whether he will state why the Improvement Scheme

  619
  which is being promoted by the Cork Rural District Council has not yet been sanctioned by the Local Government Board, seeing that the District Council has completed all the necessary forms enjoined on them under the Labourers Acts.
  MR. WYNDHAM: The scheme is at present the subject of correspondence between the Board and the District Council. It will be sanctioned upon the satisfactory settlement of certain matters at issue.
  MR. SHEEHAN: Will the right hon. Gentleman state what are the matters which require adjustment?
  MR. WYNDHAM: I have not the information here.
  MR. SHEEHAN: Is it not the eviction of a certain number of labourers from their cottages?

  Convictions of Irish Councillors under the Crimes Act.
  MR. O'DOWD: I beg to ask the Chief Secretary to the Lord Lieutenant of Ireland if he will state the number of county and district councillors convicted in Ireland during the past twelve months, under the provisions of the Criminal Law and Procedure (Ireland) Act, 1887, and of these how many have been sentenced to terms of imprisonment with hard labour.
  MR. WYNDHAM: Thirty-two, of whom sixteen were sentenced by the Court of First Instance to imprisonment with hard labour. In five cases the haul labour was remitted on appeal; and appeals are pending in six other cases.
  MR. O'DOWD: May I ask whether the sentence of hard labour does not disqualify these gentlemen from acting on their respective councils for five years?
  MR. Wyndham did not answer.
  MR. MACVEAGH: Arising out of the answer is it not the fact that these councillors are disqualified for five years, and was not that the object of the sentences?
  MR. SPEAKER: Order, order! That is not a proper Question.
  MR. DELANY: Will the right hon. Gentleman lay on the table the instructions he has given to the removable magistrates on the subject?
  MR. SPEAKER: Order, order!

  Dingle Harbour.
  MR. THOMAS O'DONNELL: I beg to ask the Chief Secretary to the Lord Lieutenant of Ireland whether an application has been made by the Dingle Harbour Board for a grant, under the provisions of the Marine Works Bill; seeing that the Local Harbour Board is prepared to give £500 contribution, and that the work will benefit a congested district, whether he will take steps to secure that the necessary help will be given.
  MR. WYNDHAM: The application has been received and will be considered with others. I am not at present in a position to make any further statement in the matter.

  Ireland and the Local Taxation Account.
  MR. THOMAS O'DONNELL: I beg to ask the Chief Secretary to the Lord Lieutenant of Ireland whether he has come to any decision as to the distribution of the balance accumulated from the Local Taxation Account.
  MR. WYNDHAM: I have been giving this matter full consideration, but I am not yet in a position to announce a decision.
  MR. THOMAS O'DONNELL: When may we expect a decision?
  MR. WYNDHAM: When I have had an opportunity of conferring with other Departments concerned.

  Dingle Railway and Fenit Pier.
  MR. THOMAS O'DONNELL: I beg to ask the Chief Secretary to the Lord Lieutenant of Ireland whether he has taken into consideration the burden of taxation which the Dingle Railway and the Fenit Pier are to a congested county; whether he proposes to make a grant for the purpose of carrying out those structural alterations in this railway recommended by the Local Government Board

  621
  inspector, with a view of making the line financially successful; and whether he will take steps to reduce the charge paid annually on the loan for the construction of Fenit Pier to the rate at which the Treasury can borrow the money.
  MR. WYNDHAM: I have considered these questions, in so far as they affect the Irish Government. They are closely related to other questions of a similar character, and can only be decided after a careful consideration of the whole matter in conference with other Departments.
  MR. THOMAS O'DONNELL: When will the right hon. Gentleman confer with the other Departments?
  MR. WYNDHAM: I am in communication with them already.

  Sergeant Sullivan, R.I.C.
  MR. WILLIAM O'BRIEN: I beg to ask the Chief Secretary to the Lord Lieutenant of Ireland what was the amount paid out of public funds with reference to the defence of Sergeant Sullivan at the criminal trial in Sligo; what was the amount paid in his defence in the civil action in Dublin; and will the Government pay Sergeant Sullivan's expenses in any further proceedings that may be taken against him.
  MR. WYNDHAM: My right hon. and learned friend has undertaken to reply to this question. [NATIONALIST cries of "Why don't you?" "Where is he?"]
  MR. WILLIAM O'BRIEN: This is not a legal question.
  MR. SPEAKER: The hon. Member can put the Question again.
  MR. WILLIAM O'BRIEN: I beg to submit to you, Sir, that I am entitled to an answer from the responsible Chief Secretary of the country. This is not in any respect a legal question, but a question of the highest and deepest national policy.
  MR. SPEAKER: It is not an uncommon course for a Minister to ask another Minister to reply, and if he says that he has done so, it is the usual courtesy of the House to a wait that Minister's answer.
  622
  Subsequently, the Attorney General for Ireland being present,
  MR. WILLIAM O'BRIENsaid: I beg again to ask this Question of the Chief Secretary, but I must decline to ask such a question of a Castle lawyer.
  (No answer was given.)

  Arrest of Irish Members—Communications to the Speaker.
  MR. MACVEAGH: I beg to ask the Chief Secretary to the Lord Lieutenant of Ireland whether any communications, verbal or written, have passed between Dublin Castle and any resident magistrate or magistrates in Ireland on the subject of reporting to Mr. Speaker any prosecution, arrest, detention, or conviction of any Member of this House; and if so, what was the tenour of such communications.
  MR. WYNDHAM: In 1888 and 1889 written instructions were issued requesting resident magistrates to notify to Mr. Speaker the fact of the committal to prison of a Member of this House, or his arrest and remand whether on bail or otherwise. Telegraphic instructions were sent in particular cases during the last Session. I have directed that general instructions of similar purport to those of 1888 and 1889 be reissued to resident magistrates.
  MR. MACVEAGH: Were any communications made to the resident magistrates after the last discussion in this House? Was Mr. Brown's recent communication to Mr. Speaker a result of communications from Dublin Castle?
  MR. WYNDHAM: I have given the hon. Member the facts. I have directed the general instructions to be sent out again.
  MR. MACVEAGH: Have they been sent out?
  MR. WYNDHAM: I directed them to be sent out three days ago.
  MR. SWIFT MACNEILL: After I raised a debate.

  Use of Irish Court Houses for Political Meetings.
  MR. MACVEAGH: I beg to ask the Chief Secretary to the Lord Lieutenant of Ireland, whether he can state if any political meetings are allowed to be held in Court houses in County Down; and whether any instructions have been issued to the Sheriff of that county to disperse such gatherings by force.
  MR. WYNDHAM: A general instruction was issued on 1st August to High Sheriffs advising them that—
  "The custody of the County Court Houses is given High Sheriffs for the purpose, mainly and primarily, of providing for the administration of justice, and that, so far as is consistent with that provision, the High Sheriff should allow the County Council to use the Court House for the execution of their duties, but for no other purpose whatever."
  It was also pointed out that the High Sheriff, in the discharge of his duty in this connection, is entitled to call for and receive the assistance of the police.
  MR. SHEEHAN: Is it not the fact that meetings are being held in Court houses to promote an agitation on the licensing question?
  MR. WYNDHAM: I am not aware of that.
  MR. MACVEAGH: The right hon. Gentleman has not said whether political meetings have been held in Down Court houses.
  MR. WYNDHAM: I have no knowledge of that. The High Sheriff is responsible for the custody of the Court house.
  MR. MACVEAGH: Will the right hon. Gentleman inquire whether meetings of the local Orange Lodge are held regularly in the Court house at Newcastle, County Down?
  MR. SPEAKER: Order, order! If the hon. Member wishes to call attention to a particular case he must give notice.
  MR. DELANY: Who is the authority to decide whether a meeting is political?
  MR. SWIFT MACNEILL: The re-movables.
  CAPTAIN DONELAN: Do the High Sheriffs pay for the maintenance of the Court houses?
  MR. SPEAKEE: Order, order!

  Congested Districts in Ireland.
  MR. THOMAS O'DONNELL: I beg to ask the Chief Secretary to the Lord Lieutenant of Ireland, whether he will grant the Return on the Paper relative to Congested Districts (Ireland) (Population, etc.)
  MR. WYNDHAM: Yes, Sir.

  Mr. Martin O'Dwyer.
  MR. KENDAL O'BRIEN: I beg to ask the Chief Secretary to the Lord Lieutenant of Ireland whether his attention has been directed to the case of Mr. Martin O'Dwyer, county councillor since the passing of the Local Government Act, who was sentenced, at a Court constituted under the Criminal Law and Procedure (Ireland) Act, to two months imprisonment with hard labour for a speech delivered at Templemore on the 11th September; and seeing that hard labour entails on Mr. O'Dwyer disqualification as a county councillor, and the resident magistrate refused to remit the extra penalty, will he say what steps he proposes to take in the matter.
  MR. WYNDHAM: The hon. Member has overlooked the fact that Mr. O'Dwyer has appealed against the sentence imposed upon him by the magistrates. The appeal will be heard at Thurles Quarter Session in January.
  MR. SHEEHAN: Is it not a fact that hard labour has been imposed?
  MR. CULLINAN: And has not a full meeting of the County Council unanimously condemned the sentence?
  (No answer was returned.)

  Preaching on the Custom House Steps at Belfast.
  MR. DEVLIN: I beg to ask the Chief Secretary to the Lord Lieutenant of Ireland whether, in view of the fact that the meetings held every Sunday on the Custom House steps at

  625
  Belfast lead to riot and disorder, and the statements of Protestant clergymen that they are the direct cause of drunkenness amongst the Protestant working class, instructions will be given to have the Custom House railed in, as in the case of the Dublin Custom House.
  MR. WYNDHAM: The question has been previously considered by me. The expediency of enclosing the steps of the Custom House in Belfast, with the object of prohibiting, or otherwise regulating meetings, is, as I have already stated, very doubtful. The circumstances which led to the enclosure of the steps of the Custom House in Dublin were of a different character.
  MR. DEVLIN: Is the right hon. Gentleman aware that on Sunday last scandalous scenes took place on the Custom House steps of Belfast, and that an old man was knocked down and nearly murdered? I will further ask him whether he is going to allow these riotous scenes, held under the auspices of a so-called religious organization, to continue from Sunday to Sunday.
  MR. WYNDHAM: I cannot discuss the use made of my discretion by way of Question and answer, but if the hon. Gentleman objects to it he can call attention to it in Committee of Supply. I do not know whether the hon. Gentleman thinks it would conduce to good order in Belfast to put up a railing, which, in all probability, would be pulled down, thus increasing the disorder.
  MR. SLOAN: Arising out of the Question, I beg to ask the right hon. Gentleman whether he will consider the advisability of railing in the Nationalist Benches, for the same reason.
  MR. SPEAKER: Order, order! The Question on the Paper was whether the Chief Secretary would consider the advisability of railing in certain steps. He says he has considered it and does not think it advisable. There really is nothing more to be asked on this Question.
  Several Nationalist Members rose to ask further Questions.
  MR. SPEAKER: I must ask hon. Members to remember that there is a limited time for Questions, and there are others which have to be answered. If hon. Members have other Questions to ask which cannot arise directly out of this Question, they must give notice of them in the ordinary way, and let other Members take their turn.
  Several Nationalist Members again rose.
  MR. SPEAKER: I must ask hon. Members to pay attention to my ruling. I assure hon. Members that I have every desire, in proper turn and time, that every Question should be answered. But there are some Questions that ought not to be asked as supplementary, and ought to be put down as fresh Questions, and I think really that this Question has been completely answered. I trust hon. Members will accept that statement. I have stated what I consider to be the rule.
  MR. PATRICK O'BRIEN: On a point of order, Sir, I propose to submit a Question arising out of the Question.
  MR. SPEAKER: That is not a point of order.
  MR. PATRICK O'BRIENagain rose.
  MR. SPEAKER: I know that hon. Members, in one sense, might ask many questions arising out of the Question on the Paper, but that is not the sense in which the word is used here. A supplementary Question must mean one that is necessary for the complete explanation of the answer actually given, or to supplement an omission in the answer. This Question has been fully answered, and I must ask hon. Members to accept that.
  MR. MACVEAGH: On a point of order, Mr. Speaker——
  MR. SPEAKER: Is the hon. Gentleman going to submit another Question?
  MR. MACVEAGH: No, Sir, I am not. I propose to ask you whether, when you are satisfied in your own mind that a Question on the Paper has been fully

  627
  answered, we are to understand that it is not competent for any Member of this House to put a Question arising out of that answer?
  MR. SPEAKER: It is not a Question arising out of the answer in the sense in which those words are used here. If the Question has been fully answered, and the proposed supplementary Question does not arise out of the answer, it must be treated as a new Question.

  Sergeant Anderson, R.I.C.
  MR. SWIFT MACNEILL: I beg to ask the Chief Secretary to the Lord Lieutenant of Ireland, whether he will state the name of the constable of the Royal Irish Constabulary, at present discharging the duties of his office in the depôt of the Royal Irish Constabulary, Phoenix Park, Dublin, who has given perjured testimony resulting in the conviction of innocent men; and whether he will direct his dismissal from the Royal Irish Constabulary.
  MR. WYNDHAM: The hon. Member will find the information for which he asks in the reply given to a question put by the hon. Member for the Ossory Division of Queen's County on 15th July. The reasons for retaining this constable were stated by me in Committee of Supply on July 23rd.†
  MR. SWIFT MACNEILL: The only answer I will take is "Yes" or "No." Will the right hon. Gentleman instantly dismiss this constable or not?
  MR. Wyndham remaining silent,
  MR. SWIFT MACNEILL: I must make him say "Yes" or "No."
  MR. SPEAKER: I must ask the hon. Member to sit down."
  MR. SWIFT MACNEILL: Now, sir—I know the previous answer. The right hon. Gentleman was never asked categorically whether ho would dismiss this man or not. If the right hon. Gentleman says he will not dismiss this man, I shall bring the matter to his notice in a very pointed way.
  † See (4) Debates, exi. 254, 1073.
  MR. WYNDHAM: I gave my reasons for retaining this man. Those reasons are still convincing to me—and therefore I still retain him.
  MR. WILLIAM O'BRIEN: He would have got five years in England.
  MR. MACVEAGH: And compassionate allowances in Ireland.
  MR. WILLIAM REDMOND: It's an English outrage.
  MR. SPEAKER: Order, order!

  Belfast Police Promotions.
  MR. SWIFT MACNEILL: I beg to ask the Chief Secretary to the Lord Lieutenant of Ireland, whether he is aware that a Return giving information regarding the number and nature of prosecutions instituted by each candidate of the Royal Irish Constabulary in Belfast for the P (promotion) examination for the past twelve months has been called for by the Commissioner of Police in Belfast; and whether, with a view of preventing a system under which promotion is grounded on the success of prosecutions, directions will be given to the Belfast Commissioner to withdraw this circular.
  MR. WYNDHAM: Such a Return was called for. But there is no foundation whatever for the statement that the I system of promotion is grounded on the success of prosecutions. This is only one element for consideration in determining a man's fitness for promotion. Other elements are his general qualifications—length of service, the possession of favourable or unfavourable records. As a matter of face some men were rejected who had instituted a large number of prosecutions, whilst others with only two or three were admitted to the examination.
  MR. SWIFT MACNEILL: But as a matter of fact, was the total number of prosecutions instituted by each man given in the Return?
  MR. WYNDHAM: I said so.
  MR. SWIFT MACNEILL: And the Constabulary Gazette denounced this system.
  MR. SPEAKER: Order, order!

  Irish Presbyterian Church—Position of Moderator of the General Assembly.
  MR. WILLIAM MOORE: I beg to ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department if he is yet in a position to make a statement on the precedence of the moderator of the General Assembly of the Presbyterian Church in Ireland.
  MR. AKERS DOUGLAS: No, Sir. The matter is still under consideration.
  MR. SWIFT MACNEILL: Will you consult the Chief Secretary?
  (No answer was returned.)

  Irish Railways—Transport of Troops.
  MR. T. M. HEALY: I beg to ask the Secretary of State for War has his attention been called to the accident on the Northern Counties Railway to a train containing a detachment of the 17th Lancers, and to the fact that the squadron left Ballincollig, county Cork, the previous day for Edinburgh, and had travelled to Dublin, and thence via Dundalk, Lisburn, and Antrim, by the Great Northern Railway, where they joined the Northern Counties line to go on to Larne; will he say who is responsible for the selection of such a route; will he ascertain how travellers not in His Majesty's service usually proceed from Cork to Edinburgh; and will he state the cost of the transport in question, and the amount of damage caused by the accident, and say whether any efforts are made beforehand to ascertain the comparative costs of transport by alternative routes in such cases.
  MR. BRODRICK: My attention has been drawn to this accident. The route described is correct, and the Quartermaster General is responsible for its selection. The comparative cost of transport is considered before routes are made, and such routes necessarily largely depend on the arrangements for reduced rates made with the railway companies. In this case the cost of the transport was about £710, and the cost of transport by the only alternative route would have been over £100 more. The question of the route usually selected by travellers has, therefore, nothing to do with the case. The amount of the damage caused by the railway accident was about £250.
  MR. T. M. HEALY: The point has been cut out of my Question. I do not think it out of order to ask why the southern railroads are boycotted and round-about routes on the northern lines selected. Were tenders obtained beforehand?
  MR. BRODRICK: The arrangements were made long beforehand, and the whole matter was carefully gone into.
  MR. T. M. HEALY: I say it was all guess work.

  Irish Parks—Tenders for Bulbs.
  MR. T. M. HEALY: I beg to ask the Secretary to the Treasury whether tenders are invited from the Dublin seed houses for the bulbs required by the Irish Board of Works for the people's park (Phoenix Park), Stephen's Green Park, and Leinster Lawn, and are the orders for the same given to the firm sending in the lowest tender; if tenders are not invited, will he say why the practice of the Board to get tenders for all other classes of goods is departed from.
  MR. HAYES FISHER: Yes, Sir; tenders are invited from selected Dublin firms, and the Board accept that which is on the whole the most advantageous. In the case of bulbs—which cannot be tested by conformity to a sample—it would be difficult to adopt universally the principle of open competition and the acceptance of the lowest tender, but, in point of fact, the lowest tender was accepted this year.
  MR. T. M. HEALY: DO I understand that the firms selected are exclusively Protestant, and that Catholic firms are boycotted?
  MR. SPEAKER: Order, order!

  Irish Affairs—Nationalist Demand for a General Discussion.
  MR. WILLIAM O'BRIEN: Mr. Speaker, I wish to ask the Prime Minister whether he has noticed the Motion of which I have given notice on behalf of my colleagues, and whether he will now tell us definitely, "Yes," or "No," whether we are to have a day for its discussion?

  631
  And I would ask him also kindly to remember that, as this Motion refers to the struggle for the abolition of dual ownership of land in Ireland, on this question we are entitled to speak, not for eighty, but for ninety-five, out of the 103 representatives of Ireland, and for a considerable section of the landlord minority as well.
  THE PRIME MINISTER AND FIRST LORD or THE TREASURY (Mr. A. J. BALFOUR,: I will not deal with the question of the section or the proportion of the Irish population for which the hon. Gentleman is entitled to speak; it does not seem to me to have any direct bearing on the principle which I have laid down as having in the past governed the proceedings of this House, and which, I believe, ought to be maintained if its future proceedings are to be of a convenient and orderly character. I have nothing to add to what I said yesterday, but if I am given to understand that the Resolution standing in the hon. Gentleman's name is endorsed and accepted by the Opposition, and will be supported by them as a Vote of Censure, I will give a day for it.
  SIR H. CAMPBELL BANNERMAN: I do not know on what authority the right hon. Gentleman makes any supposition of the kind.
  MR. A. J. BALFOUR: I did not make any supposition.
  SIR H. CAMPBELL BANNERMAN: The right hon. Gentleman said he assumed.
  MR. A. J. BALFOUR: No. I said "if I were given to understand." I did not make any assumption or supposition.
  SIR H. CAMPBELL BANNERMAN: Well, who is to give the right hon. Gentleman to understand? (MINISTERIALIST cries of "You.")
  MR. WILLIAM REDMOND: Might I ask the right hon. Gentleman the Prime Minister whether we are given to understand that he is laying down a new rule in this matter, which is to be the order of the future—that no time is to be
  632
  given to the Irish Members for discussion unless the subject which they propose to discuss is endorsed by the Leader of the Opposition? and also I desire to ask the right hon. Gentleman whether it is not well within his recollection that repeatedly, upon the demand of the Irish Members alone, he himself has set apart time for the discussion of Irish affairs?
  MR. A. J. BALFOUR: I have laid down no new rule at all. I have, expressed what I believe to be the practice. We must really remember that this question of the extension of the Crimes Act has been debated at length in the course of the present session, and that any particular incidents connected with that can in all probability be raised on the adjournment of the House. I am asked as a right to give a day. I do not think I could admit that right without practically violating principles universally accepted.
  MR. DALZIEL: With regard to the question of custom, is it not the case in regard to the question of financial relations that a day was asked for and was granted to the Irish Members without consultation with the regular Opposition?
  MR. A. J. BALFOUR: I have never denied that.
  MR. WILLIAM REDMOND: Will the right hon. Gentleman kindly answer the question whether it is not a fact that on the question of financial relations and other questions the demand of the Irish Members, and of the Irish Members alone, has been granted? If that is so, why is it only to be granted now if endorsed by the Leader of the Opposition?
  MR. A. J. BALFOUR: The hon. Gentleman must see that the fact that for Irish or any other representatives in this House a day has been set apart to discuss a question has nothing whatever to do with the demand that a day should be given for discussing a question. I shall not grant the demand unless it is made on behalf of the Opposition as a whole, or unless the Opposition as a whole accept and endorse it.
  MR. CAINE: Is it not the case that last session, at my own sole request, a day was given to me for the discussion of an important Indian question?
  MR. DELANY: Arising out of the right hon. Gentleman's various replies to the Irish Members, may I ask whether he will give a day for the consideration of the affairs of Timbuctoo?
  MR. WILLIAM O'BRIEN: We are entitled to a final answer, Mr. Speaker. Are we to have a day, or is the right hon. Gentleman determined to stick to his policy of sitting on the safety valve?
  MR. A. J. BALFOUR: That is not my policy.
  MR. WILLIAM REDMOND: May I ask the right, hon. Gentleman, a sa final inquiry, whether weare clearly to understand that when eighty Irish Members ask for a day for the discussion of the affairs of their country the demand is to be refused unless endorsed by the Liberal Party in this House?
  MR. A. J. BALFOUR.: Whether they are eighty Irish Members, or eighty Scotch Members, or eighty English Members, it is all the same. It has nothing whatever to do with nationality.

MOTION FOR ADJOURNMENT. SERGEANT ANDERSON, R.I.C.
MR. SWIFT MACNEILL: I beg to ask leave to move the adjournment of the House for the purpose of calling attention to a definite matter of urgent public importance—namely, the refusal of the Irish Government to dismiss a constable at the present ime discharging constabulary duties in the depôt of the Royal Irish Constabulary, Phoenix Park, who has by the admission of the Chief Secretary given perjured evidence, resulting in the conviction of innocent men in courts of justice in Ireland, and the danger to the moral of the Royal Irish Constabulary and to the personal liberty of the subject involved by the retention of this man's services.
MR. SPEAKER: I am obliged to examine these questions before I put them to the House. The hon. Member speaks of this as an urgent matter. I understand it is a matter which took place in -July last, while the House was sitting, and was then discussed.
MR. WILLIAM REDMOND: It is going on now.
MR. SPEAKER: Attention must be brought to these matters at once. The whole object of this Rule is not that something which happened a long time back and has continued since, but that some comparatively recent matter which there has not been an opportunity otherwise of raising, should be made the subject of debate as an urgent public matter. This matter was discussed in the House.
MR. SWIFT MACNEILL: No, Sir.
MR. WILLIAM O'BRIEN: May I point out that it is only today that the Chief Secretary has refused to dismiss this man?
MR. MACVEAGH: At Question time I today the Home Secretary announced that an English policeman in the same position got five years penal servitude.
MR. SWIFT MACNEILL: Will you allow me to say that to have a man of this kind in the public service is a continuing danger? This day only was the matter brought to actuality. I have read all the debates in reference to it, and in no case has the right hon. Gentleman refused to dismiss this man. On the contrary, he has dismissed two of his confederates. I was amazed at hearing that he was still in the force. I have not sprung this matter on the House, for I communicated with the right hon. Gentleman in regard to it some days ago.
MR. WYNDHAM: On the point of order. On the 15th July, in reply to a Question. I stated that the names asked for were Sergeant Keegan and Constables Anderson and Reid. Anderson remained at the depôt; the others accepted the alternative of resigning. The alternatives were discussed in this House in Committee of Supply two whole days.
MR. SWIFT MACNEILL: I most positively deny that the dismissal was discussed.
MR. SPEAKER: The matter was brought to the notice of the House by a Question and an Answer which showed that this man was retained in the service of the Crown. That was so far back as the 15th July, and it also appears that there were opportunities for discussing the matter after that date. I do not think that it is one of the things that can be the subject of a Motion of this sort. It cannot be contended that it is an urgent matter.
MR. SWIFT MACNEILL: Fresh incidents alter the case. I would remind the House what took place in the courts of justice in London yesterday, when a sentence of five years penal servitude was passed on a perjured policeman.
MR. SPEAKER: I cannot allow this to be discussed. What took place in London at another trial cannot affect my judgment. If this were admitted as an urgent matter, then any matter that had happened three months before, and which the House has had an opportunity of discussing, might be brought forward as an urgent matter.
MR. SWIFT MACNEILL: I am amazed at the action of right hon Gentlemen opposite. The First Lord invites us to move the adjournment, and yet we are refused permission. Let me remind you, Sir, that since the discussion nine counties in Ireland have been proclaimed, and the police swearers have been let loose on the people. Let us suppose a constabulary viper were let loose on the House——
MR. SPEAKER: Order, order! The hon. Member has addressed himself to the point, and said all that could be said upon it. He is now addressing himself to other matters. I must ask the hon. Member to accept my ruling.
MR. SWIFT MACNEILL: I accept your ruling fully, but I wish to call attention to a MotionmadeonMarch23rd, 1893, when Mr. Dunbar Barton moved the adjournment of the House to call attention to the danger to public peace
636
and the security of property in Ireland caused by the condonation of serious crime by the Executive.
MR. SPEAKER: I cannot inquire into the history of all these cases. I have stated what my ruling is.
MR. WILLIAM REDMOND: I desire to ask a Question——
MR. SPEAKER: I have already heard the hon. Member who proposed the Question. He is satisfied that I have given him a patient hearing, and I cannot allow this to go on. There must be order.
MR. WILLIAM REDMOND: With great respect, Mr. Speaker——
MR. SPEAKER: I cannot allow the hon. Member to proceed, unless it is on a point of order.
MR. WILLIAM REDMOND: I do rise to a point of order, Sir. I simply desire to put one Question as to your decision.
MR. SPEAKER: Has the Question reference to a matter on which I have not yet given my decision?
MR. WILLIAM REDMONDrose again.
MR. SPEAKERwas understood to call on Mr. Brodrick, who accordingly came to the Table.
MR. WILLIAM REDMOND: I wish to assure you, Sir, that my only object is to speak on a point of order.
MR. SPEAKER: What is the point of order? Has the Question of the hon. Member anything to do with a matter already decided?
MR. WILLIAM REDMOND: No, Sir, it has no reference to your decision in this matter. I simply, with great respect—[cries of "Name"]—I assure you, Mr. Speaker, that it is not my intention to dispute your ruling. I merely rise to a point of order. Surely I may do that.
MR. SPEAKER: I assure the hon. Member I am as jealous as he can be for the privileges of the House. But the hon. Member must know that it is

637
contrary to order, after I have given a decision, that that decision should be challenged. If the hon. Member were allowed to rise and argue the matter over again, of course that would be contrary to order. If the hon. Member rises to a point of order for the purpose of calling in question my ruling——
MR. WILLIAM REDMOND: I have not tried to do so.
MR. SPEAKER: If the hon. Member assures me that he is not going to question my ruling on the point of order already decided, and that he is going to raise some other point of order, of course I shall hear him.
MR. WILLIAM REDMOND: My object, Mr. Speaker, in rising to ask the Question was simply to assure myself of what your ruling was. At present, Sir, I do not understand your ruling, and I submit with great respect that I am entitled, respectfully and in an orderly manner, to ask you a Question in explanation of the ruling which you have given, in order that I myself may fully understand what that ruling was. The Question I desire to put is—and this ends the whole matter—do I understand that your ruling is that a Motion, under the Rules of the House, cannot be accepted as urgent raising the question of the action of the Irish Government with regard to an officer, who is admittedly a perjurer?
MR. SPEAKER: The hon. Member has hardly acted up to the pledge which he gave.
MR. WILLIAM REDMOND: I think I have.
MR. SPEAKER: This in my opinion is not a definite matter of urgent importance which can be raised on a Motion of this kind. I have gone to the verge of patience and forbearance. If the hon. Member persists—[the remainder of the sentence was inaudible, in the great uproar on the Irish Benches].
MR. WILLIAM REDMOND: This is quite another matter on which we are entitled to be heard.
MR. SPEAKER: I have decided the matter.

DISTURBANCE AT THE BELFAST CUSTOM HOUSE STEPS—MOTION FOR ADJOURNMENT.
MR. DEVLIN, Member for North Kilkenny, rose in his place, and asked leave to move the Adjournment of the House for the purpose of discussing a definite matter of urgent public importance, viz., "the riotous proceedings on Sunday last at the Custom House Steps in Belfast, and the neglect and refusal of the Government to take steps to prohibit the holding of such meetings on Government property in that city;" but the pleasure of the House not having been signified, Mr. Speaker called on those Members who supported the Motion to rise in their places, and not less than forty Members having accordingly risen,
The Motion stood over, under standing Order, No. 17, until the Evening Sitting, this day.
MR. WILLIAM O'BRIEN: If we cannot have a day we will have a night.

NEW BILL.
THE SECRETARY OF STATE FOR WAR (Mr. BRODRICK,in asking leave to introduce a Bill for establishing reserves of the Militia and Yeomanry, said that Parliament had already accepted the principle of establishing a reserve for the Militia which should not be liable to annual training, but as the law stood, Militiamen could not be exempted from raining. The same held good of the Yeomanry. The House had also voted in this year's Estimates a sum for establishing a Special Service Section of the Yeomanry, liable, if they volunteered to do so, to serve abroad with the regular forces in case of mobilisation. Power was taken in this Bill to call out this section. The Bill introduced no new principle, but merely made effective the proposals for which funds had already been voted by Parliament.
Bill to amend the Law relating to the Militia and Yeomanry, ordered to be brought in by Mr. Secretary Brodrick and Lord Stanley

MILITIA AND YEOMANRY BILL.
"To amend the law relating to the Militia and Yeomanry," presented accordingly, and read the first time; to be read a second time upon Monday next, and to be printed. [Bill 300.]

EDUCATION (ENGLAND AND WALES) BILL.
Considered in Committee.
(In the Committee.)
[Mr. J. W. LOWTHER (Cumberland, Penrith) in the Chair.]
Clause 8:—
MR. ALFRED HUTTONsaid he would not move the last two lines of the Amendment of which he had given notice. The effect of his proposal was that in case the local education authority could not find any means to carry out the directions they desired in connection with the school in regard to secular education, they should have power to declare the managers at fault, and appoint other managers. The question which arose was, where did the ultimate power lie. The First Lord of the Treasury had put down an Amendment which he supposed was intended to cover this matter, but it seemed very much like the declaration of a pious opinion, and in a great many important matters this Bill contained a recital of a great many pious opinions. This proposal was no novel proceeding. This power was taken out of the Elementary Education Act of 1870, and was now in the hands of the Education Department, and might be used by them in regard to any School Boards in the country refusing to perform their duty. This power had not often been enforced, but the power to put this into force against School Boards, whether large or small, had enabled them to deal satisfactorily with the schools. If the education authority was to have power over these managers, they must have the same power which the Education Department had had in the past. This power was withdrawn from the Education Department by this Bill, and therefore it was doubly important that if the managers failed to carry out the directions of the local education authority, they should be able to replace or suspend the managers
640
of the school. It might be said that, if the local authority proceeded to any such measures, such a proceeding would undenominationalise the school, and interfere with the rights of the managers to control religious instruction in that school. The effect of such a sub-Section would not undenominationalise the school. The First Lord of the Treasury had divided the subject into religious and secular education, but he ventured to assert that there was no sub-Section or words in the Bill which placed any such power in the hands of the managers. Take the trust deed drawn up by the National Society. This deed reserves to the clergyman or his substitute, all the rights to control the religious education, and there was nothing in the Bill to interfere with that under the trust deeds of the National Society. His proposal would not interfere with any rights preserved by trust deeds to control and manage their religious training and denominational teaching. It would not even subject those schools to the Cowper-Temple Clause. He did not see that the First Lord of the Treasury could have any objection to this clear and definite way of allowing the local authority to have this power, and of being able to use it in case of urgent necessity, thereby keeping the managers up to their duties. He moved this Amendment in order to abolish the possibility of friction between the two bodies, for in case there was a struggle between the managers and the local authorities, the body which had the appointment of the teachers was bound to win unless some concession was made of the kind he suggested. His Amendment would once for all give power to enable the education authority to see that the managers who did not carry out their instructions should cease to have the power.
Amendment proposed—
"In page 3, line 10, at end, insert 'and if the managers fail to carry out such directions the local education authority shall have power to declare such managers in default and to appoint new managers.'"—(Mr. Alfred Hutton.)
MR. A. J. BALFOURventured to think that the Amendment standing in his name was far better suited for the purpose. He would not discuss it now, but when it was reached on the Paper it would be quite possible to show that his Amendment was not open to the

641
same objection as that proposed by the hon. Member, and it would give the local authority absolute control over all matters of secular education. The proposal of the hon. Member did interfere with the managers who were entrusted with the religious education of the school. The hon. Gentleman's argument was that in the case of some trust deeds the control of religious education was in the hands of the clergyman of the parish. In his opinion one of the great merits of this Bill was that it introduced a large lay element into every question connected with the management of the schools. The managers, as a whole, should be responsible for all that came within tire purview of their duties. The Amendment divides them into two sections, to one of which was entrusted a certain class of duties, and to the other a different class. That was not the view of the Government.
MR. SYDNEY BUXTONsaid he thought the proposal of his hon. friend was in substance very much better than that proposed by the Government. The Government proposed that the local authority should step in and see that this particular matter was carried out. This would be somewhat difficult. In the first place, the local authority might be a long way from the school, and unless they had managers they had no machinery by which this particular matter could be carried out. The simple and only way which he could see in case of dispute, was to give temporary power to put other managers in their place. It would interest him a good deal to see what was the actual practical way in which the right hon. Gentleman proposed that the local education authority should have power to carry out their directions. The Attorney General said the other night that it was easy to find ingenious arguments, but practical difficulties would arise in a considerable number of cases. There would be cases in which the managers and the local authority would come into conflict, and they would have to consider the easiest way of getting over that difficulty. Therefore, he should support the Amendment of his hon. friend as the most practical measure.
DR. MACNAMARAsaid that if the managers refused to carry
642
out the orders of the local education authority, he understood the Prime Minister's intention was the local authority would take over the management of the school.
MR. A.J. BALFOUR: That is going too far. There would have to be a new school built, and the local authority would take over the management soon enough to see their orders carried out.
DR. MACNAMARAtook it that the local authority would have power to carry out the direction as if they were the managers. In that event, would this particular school in which the managers refused to carry out the order then become a provided school? If so, under Clause 7 they had power to appoint whatever managers they thought fit. If that was the case, then some Amendment of this kind was necessary He gathered from what the First Lord had said, that his interpretation was not correct.
MR. A. J. BALFOURsaid the true interpretation was this. If the power given by his Amendment, or by the hon. Gentlemen's Amendment, were exercised, the school would be made what it was now—a voluntary school—but if the managers refused to carry out the directions of the education authority within the sphere of secular education, the local authority would, of course, have the power of refusing to pay for that school, and another school would have to be provided.
DR. MACNAMARAsaid he under stood it would then be within the right of the local authority to strike out the school from any share of the Treasury grant, and to refuse to aid it from the local rate. It seemed to him that that was a considerable power, and that it would meet the whole situation This was not in the Bill, but they hoped to get it definitely laid down by the Prime Minister's Amendment when they came to it. If hon. Members would look at the Bill they would see that all financial aid was to be received upon the carrying out of the orders of the local authority. If the managers refused to carry out these orders the school would be absolutely without any money whatever. The old Treasury grants were

643
gone, but there was to be a general grant paid to the local authority to be handed over to a particular school on the understanding that the managers carried out the instructions of the local authority with regard to secular instruction. The school, if the managers refused to carry out the instruction, could go on as a private adventure school, but the local authority would have to consider the need of providing proper school accommodation for the district. In that case the school would be a provided school. He thought this Amendment should not be pressed, because it would exclude the discussion of this question when they came to the Prime Minister's Amendment.
MR. BRYCEsaid they had great difficulty in discussing this Amendment without knowing what was meant by the Prime Minister's Amendment which would be moved later on. He thought the Rules might be so far suspended as to allow the right hon. Gentleman to give the Committee some indication of what his Amendment meant. The difficulty he felt on reading the right hon. Gentleman's Amendment was as to how it was to be carried out. The Committee did not understand what machinery was to be given to the local authority to enable them to step in and supersede the school managers. If there should be a body of managers so obstinate, dogged, and recalcitrant as to refuse to obey the injunctions of the local authority, surely the remedy of coming in and carrying out these particular directions ought to be an adequate remedy. Owing to the changes made in Clause 7 the Committee unfortunately did not at present know how the foundation managers were to be appointed. He understood his hon. Friend's Amendment to provide that if the local authority found the managers obstinately refusing to carry out their directions there would be a new set of managers appointed who would be in accord with the local authority and willing to carry out their directions. If that was his hon. Friend's intention, he thought it was a reasonable way of carrying out the object in view. Unless the right hon. Gentleman gave some clearer indication than he had yet given of the way his Amendment was to be worked in order to enable the Committee
644
to judge whether it would be an effective remedy, he would support his hon. Friend's Amendment.
MR. M'KENNAsaid that according to the Bill money was to be granted to a school by the local authority on condition that the managers complied with certain conditions. Under sub-Section 2 there would be a specific remedy in the case of the conditions not being complied with. The managers would have the power to appeal, and the appeal would have to be decided. That meant that the power of imposing the financial condition was not in the hands of the local education authority, but in the hands of the Education Department. It would be found impossible to proceed by mandamus against a local authority that refused to carry out the provisions of the Bill, because the procedure was slow and tedious. A mandamus could only be got to carry out a particular provision of the Bill. No mandamus could be got from the court to carry out the general objects of the Bill. That was the power this Amendment proposed to give. When managers refused to carry out the instructions of the local authority, the only way of dealing with them was to declare them in default. Otherwise there must be delay, and possibly the closing of the school and the leaving of hundreds of children without education at all.
MR. A. J. BALFOURsaid the Government could not accept the Amendment, because it would cut out other Amendments which possibly the Committee would like to see put in the Bill. He suggested with the view of shortening the debate that the present Amendment should be withdrawn, and that the hon. Member for the Morley Division should move it as an Amendment to the plan which he himself would propose later on. That or some equivalent scheme could be adopted, so that the Committee could discuss both plans at the same time.
MR. ALFRED HUTTONaccepted the suggestion, and asked leave to withdraw the Amendment.
Amendment, by leave, withdrawn.
MR. HELMEsaid that after the expression of the willingness on the part of the Prime Minister to consider the possibility of really amending some of these regulations, he appealed to the Government, with some little confidence, to assist them in improving the working of the Act by accepting the Amendment standing in his name, which he thought was calculated to secure the better working of the elementary school system. It was generally understood that public elementary schools were conducted week by week throughout the year, except for ordinary holidays, for the purpose of giving a system of ordinary education to the children of all sorts who were compelled to attend. Now, in discussing the relations of the local education authority with the managers, they were face to face with a totally new situation compared with that held in the past. Hence it was that he thought the House ought to consider very carefully how best to strengthen their arrangements, so as to secure entire control on the part of the local authority in the matter of secular instruction. A case arose which illustrated the necessity of, and need for, defining the powers of the local authority and the managers, in regard to the important matter of interfering with the regular course of instruction by closing the school. For instance, in St. Luke's School, in Lancaster, the ordinary work of the school was given up for a week, notice being forwarded in the usual way to His Majesty's Inspector, but the school met. and the efforts of the teaching staff were centred upon the Diocesan syllabus of religious education. It might be asked how that could be done, as it was well known that all religious instruction must be given at the time specified in the time-table. He would remind the Committee that there were regulations that affected the opening and the closing of voluntary schools, and that Article 83 of the Code stated that the school must be opened not less than 400 times in the year, power being left to managers to give holidays—for the purpose of meeting local conditions such as the harvest in agricultural districts. Now, in the official returns of the
646
school to which he referred, the entry was made that the school was closed, and the register was not marked during that week. The children whose parents objected to this religious teaching were not obliged to go; but at the same time, in a voluntary school, attended by children of all denominations, under cover of the provision he had mentioned, the school was so far disbanded in order that the whole attention of the teachers should be given to the teaching of the children in the syllabus adopted by the Diocesan Board, including the Church Catechism. It was to prevent such miscarriages of justice that he contended that the local authority should be supreme in all matters of secular instruction. It was not within the spirit of the elementary system of education that the time of the schools should be broken into for the purpose of centreing on religious and sectarian instruction. He was glad to believe that this was an odd case, but the exceptions proved the rule. If that was done in a populous town, what might be done in a rural parish? In an administrative county like Lancashire, where there were a thousand schools, it was literally impossible for the education authority to deal with each case and itself do all the work thrown upon it by this Clause, but whilst devolving on others the oversight it could control their action. The local authority should be possessed of all power, and only those things left to the managers which were specified in the Bill. He urged the Government in the interests of the good working of a good system of secular instruction throughout the country to accept his Amendment which he now moved.
Amendment proposed—
"In page 3, line 10, after the word 'school' to insert the words 'including the number of days the school must be open during the year"—(Mr. Helme.)
Question proposed, "That those words be there inserted."
THE SECRETARY OF THE BOARD OF EDUCATION (Sir WILLIAM ANSON,said he could assure the hon. Member for Lancaster that he should not oppose his Amendment if he did not feel that it was unnecessary.

647
It must be borne in mind that the Code required the school to be opened for a certain number of days in the year, but it would be seen from the words of the Section already passed that the managers of the school were bound to carry out the directions of the education authority as to secular instruction. If the local authority chose to require that the school should be open more than 400 times in the year the managers must obey. With the powers conferred by the Bill on the local authority such a thing as had been mentioned by the hon. Member could never happen if the local authority chose to prevent it. The powers which the hon. Gentleman wished to confer on the local authority were contained in the Bill. Moreover, the Amendment would have a bad effect, for it would limit the general powers the Government wished to confer.
MR. LLOYD-GEORGEsaid he quite saw the force of the argument of the hon. Gentleman that if they specified certain duties in the Bill they would rather limit the power of the local education authority. But was there not the further danger of limiting the powers of the local authority too much? He was not so sure but that the powers were too generally expressed, and that some of them would be challenged by the managers, if attempted to be enforced; and with some show of reason. He suggested that some of these powers should be set forth, in the present Clause or later on in the Schedule. If they were left entirely to general words it would lead to litigation. In other Bills certain specific powers were imposed on the local authority, and then there was a general power vested in them; but here there was not a specific instance of powers which would be a guide to the courts or the Education Department with which it was intended to vest the managers and over which the county authority would have control. The danger was this: that the Prime Minister had had simply the Parliamentary situation in his mind, and he had given instructions to the draftsman of the Bill to compress it as much as possible. Twenty clauses were better than fifty clauses from the point of view of the Leader of the House, who was responsible for getting the Bill through. There was a good deal too much legislation by reference to previous Acts, and to orders and rules of Departments; and
648
was not the Prime Minister carrying that principle too far in this Bill? The Bill had been compressed to such an extent that the moment it was put into water it swelled. All these matters referred to were practical difficulties which each and all of them had encountered in their experience in managing local affairs in County Councils; and he asked the Prime Minister and the Government whether they could not see their way to specify in the schedule a little more the kind of things that would fall upon the county authorities and on the managers? He was sure that if they did so, discussion would be curtailed in the long run. They were having a sort of Bill constructed by cross-examination. It would be better if the Government could see their way to put into a schedule the class of things over which they were to exercise control. Then the right hon. Gentleman could add general words. The right hon. Gentleman had told them that they fixed the salaries of the teachers. No doubt the right hon. Gentleman had got this in his mind but it was not clear in the Act, and if the matter went before a legal tribunal, difficulties would arise in interpreting the Bill. There never had been an Act so productive of litigation as the Employers Liability Bill, He had been told by a judge, that with regard to this Act it was purely a toss up whether he gave a verdict for the plaintiff or the defendant. It seemed to him that the Government were sacrificing the efficient working of their Bill in order to save a few days of Parliamentary time. In the interests of the smooth working of the Bill was it not better that the Prime Minister should take into consideration the desirability of giving some indication of the kind of thing which he thought ought to be left to the county authority.
SIR. JOHN GORSTsaid he entirely agreed with the concluding observations of his hon. friend the Secretary to the Board of Education, and he trusted that the Committee would follow his advice and not the advice given them by the hon. and learned. Member opposite. Powers were conferred upon local authorities in this Bill by general words, and in conferring them by general words they could only be cut down by Amendments like this which the Committee were

649
discussing, and if the Committee would refrain from adopting the schedule which the hon. Member opposite had placed before them; and if the Prime Minister would not propose such a schedule or state any specific powers, then the local authority would possess all those general powers which were conferred upon it. But if the Committee embarked upon a schedule of this kind, then the local authority would only have those which were stated in the schedule, or those powers which lawyers called ejusdemgeneris, and they would not have those wide and general powers which he hoped the Committee would agree to.
SIR WILLIAM HARCOURTsaid he agreed with the hon. Member for Carnarvon that they might carry those general rules a great deal too far. It would be very hard upon the country that this Bill should become—as it would inevitably become—a measure in which a number of these questions would be litigated throughout. His hon. friend had referred to a very typical example in the Compensation to Workmen Bill. The way that Bill was drawn, and the expense everybody had been put to to bring it into operation, had been a great hardship upon the workpeople. In this Bill they had a very complicated machinery, there were many complicated relations interse, and unless they denned what were their powers to a certain degree—they did not need to go into great detail—to see what were the respective functions of the numerous bodies who would have to administer almost every part of this Bill, they would be sure to raise a number of very difficult questions. He know that the Attorney-General thought they were not as intelligent as they ought to be in understanding this Bill, and therefore when they raised objections which might arise, he said those were purely the sort of things which never would arise. He did not think that was the case. He understood the Prime Minister to say that he would consider the point which was raised at the end of the discussion yesterday.
THE CHAIRMAN: The discussion has been taking rather a wide tarn, and I would recall it to the exact wording of the Amendment.
MR. GEORGE WHITEsaid these Amendments
650
would be quite unnecessary if they could get some promise from the Prime Minister that he would deal with these details in some general form. If they could have some assurance that some such words as "it shall be the duty of the local authority to issue general instructions to the managers that all matters affecting the secular duties of the managers" would be added, that would cover a great many of the Amendments which were now being introduced. This sub-Section having been defined to a certain extent, there was great danger that many other important matters would not be considered to be in the hands of the local authority in their relation to the managers. He hoped some such general instruction as that which he had suggested would be passed.
MR. M'KENNAcontended that it would be better if such words were inserted in the schedule. With reference to the remarks, of the late Vice-President of the Council, to whose opinion he always gave the greatest deference, he regretted that upon this occasion he could not agree with him. He said that if they introduced any words of that sort they would cut down the general powers of the Bill. The words were so general as to be almost useless. The words were general as to the control of secular education, and yet they did not exclude the appointment of teachers for secular instruction. What was a court of law to do in that case? The judges were bound to say that those words had not got the general meaning, otherwise they must have included the appointment of teachers. He hoped that before the Committee stage was over they would insert item after item in the schedule, giving the local education authority control over the education which he submitted they had not got under the Bill as it stood.
SIR JOSEPH LEESEpointed out that at an earlier stage of the Bill he ventured to move that such a schedule should be inserted, but the Committee refused his proposal. He thought the Secretary to the Board of Education had made a very important statement. He had stated that the words in sub-Section (a) carried

651
with them great authority, and were practically supreme. In regard to the extension of hours would the same supreme authority extend to the curriculum?
MR. HELMEsaid that relying on the assurances which the Secretary to the Board of Education had been kind enough to give, for he had taken down his words "that fixing the number of days for the school to be open is in the power of the local authority, and that managers cannot close the school without consent of the local authority," would be secured by the Government. He now begged leave to withdraw his Amendment.
Amendment, by leave, withdrawn.
MR. CHARLES MCARTHURsaid in order that public control might be made fully effective in respect of secular instruction in denominational schools, it would be necessary that certain words should be inserted. In the discussion on the last Amendment, reference was made to the danger of inserting specific words, but he thought there was an equal danger of omitting to insert words where they referred to important matters of principle. He had no doubt it was the intention of the framers of the Bill that the words in sub-Section (a) applied not only to the course of instruction, but to the persons by whom the instruction was to be given. But he thought the words were capable of a much narrower interpretation than that. They might be confined to the subject matter of the teaching and the manner in which it was given, and might not extend to the organisation of the teaching staff. One of the objects of this Bill was to place all schools on the same educational level. If that was to be done it was clear that the local authority would have to be armed with full powers to deal with the composition of the teaching staff; they would have to prescribe what number of teachers should be appointed in relation to the number of scholars; whether all the teachers were to be certificated or only some, and what was to be the proportion between the certificated and un certificated teachers; whether pupil teachers were to be reckoned part of the staff, and the scale of remuneration. As his Amendment was originally drafted, the word "remuneration"
652
was inserted, but he had been assured on high authority that, having regard to the insertion in the Bill of words which gave the local authority complete control over public funds, it would be superfluous for that word to be inserted. At the same time it would have to be understood that the local authority had the power to fix the general scale of teachers' salaries, otherwise it would be open to the managers of one school to be more generous at the public expense than the managers of another school. As to the dismissal of teachers, he thought it was evident that if there was to be public control, the local authority must have the same voice as regarded dismissal as it had regarding the appointment of teachers. If that was not done, the teacher, after having been appointed, would stand in an independent position with reference to the local authority, and would even be able to set the directions of the local authority at defiance. Therefore he submitted that the right of dismissal must be given to the local authority, and indeed the local authority ought to have the power, in case of need, to step over the heads of the managers and dismiss teachers who were proved by the inspector, or on examination, to be entirely inefficient. They had to remember that teachers under this Bill would not be entirely the servants of the local authority. As regarded religious teaching, the local authority would have no control, and, therefore, they ought to define very exactly what extent the control of the local authority was to be. It would not do that because a man was a capable religious teacher, because he might play the organ well, because he sang in the choir, or was an admirable superintendent of the Sunday school, it was to make up for any deficiency in his capacity in secular education. Therefore, he thought it was clear that this power, although it might not be readily exercised, was to be given to the local authority. It was not necessary to go into details. A great deal had to be left to the discretion of the managers. If gentlemen of position were to undertake these duties they could not be mere puppets. At the same time they knew the local authority would have the power to supervise, and, if necessary, correct any

653
action of the managers; and, over and above that, he submitted that it would he necessary to regard this all-important matter, and that distinct intimation should be given to the local authorities that they had a positive duty to deal with these matters, and to lay down lines necessary for the guidance of the managers. Only in this way would they obtain the unity of system they so desired.
Amendment proposed—
"In page 3, line 10, at end, to insert the words 'including any directions with respect to the, number and educational qualifications of the teachers to be employed for such instruction, and with respect to the dismissal of any teacher on educational grounds.'"—(Mr. Charles M'Arthur.)
Question proposed, "That those words be there inserted."
MR. TREVELYANasked whether the last words of the Amendment would put out of order subsequent Amendments to place the appointment or dismissal of teachers in the hands of the local authorities.
THE CHAIRMAN: I should think it would affect the question of dismissal. It probably would not affect the question of appointment.
MR. A. J. BALFOURsaid he confessed he had some hesitation with respect to the Amendment of his hon. friend; but only on the ground that they ought to be cautious in putting into the sub-Section any words which, while aiming at extending its character, might have precisely the opposite effect of limiting it. However, he was well aware that the Amendment, even if it were not absolutely necessary to make the Bill clear, touched a point of controversy in the country as to the intention of the Government or the effect of the Bill. He would not argue whether the Bill, as originally drawn, carried out the intention of the Government with respect to the teachers. Personally, he thought it did. But there was no doubt that that intention was entirely in conformity with his hon. friend's Amendment. It might be held that the dismissal of teachers was not included in the general phrase about
654
the control of secular education being vested in the local authority; and, therefore, in order to remove that misconception and place the matter beyond doubt, he would accept the Amendment.
MR. M'KENNAsaid that he wished to move an Amendment to the Amendment. The hon. Member for the Exchange Division had already referred to the desirability of the teachers not being chosen on the ground of their efficiency in playing the organ at church, or leading the choir, or superintending the Sunday School. What he desired to secure was that when the teachers were appointed they should not have these duties put upon them. He thought the local education authority should regulate the duties of the teachers, and that the teachers should, have an appeal to the local education authority as against the managers. Unless some words were introduced to govern that there would be no such power in the Bill. He therefore begged to move.
Amendment proposed to the proposed Amendment—
"After the first word 'the,' to insert the words "regulation of the duties and the'"—(Mr. M'Kenna)
Question proposed, "That those words be there inserted in the proposed Amendment."
THE ATTORNEY GENERAL (Sir ROBERT FINLAY,said the object of the hon. Member was clearly covered by the Bill as it stood, and therefore the Amendment could not be accepted. There was no use in piling up words. The words "with regard to secular instruction" simply meant power to give instructions to the teacher as such.
MR. ELLIS GRIFFITHthought the Amendment hardly raised the question his hon. friend had in mind. It would be better to raise it at a later stage in a more specific form.
DR. MACNAMARAappealed to his hon. friend not to press the Amendment in its present general form.

655
The specific questions referred to constituted a serious public scandal, with which both sides would be ready to deal in the proper way at the proper time. A school teacher, when appointed, ought to be at absolute liberty in his own time to do as he pleased, always provided that what he did was not inconsistent with his duty as a public school teacher. He hoped that matter would be raised in a specific form later on, but in the meantime he suggested the Amendment should be withdrawn.
Amendment to the proposed Amendment, by leave, withdrawn.
Question again proposed, "That those words be there inserted."
MR. CORRIE GRANTthought there ought to be in the hands of the local authority power to dismiss a teacher on many other than educational grounds. He suggested the Committee were somewhat out of order in discussing the question on the present Amendment, because if the Amendment were accepted as it stood the teacher would be dismiss-able only on educational grounds.
SIR ROBERT FINLAYsaid the hon. Member was mistaken. It was not the intention that a teacher should be dismissible only on educational grounds, but the proposal was to give the local authority power to require on educational grounds the dismissal of a teacher. He certainly might be dismissed on other grounds.
MR. BRYCEthought the point of his hon. friend was that it might be inferred from the Amendment when they came to sub-Section (c) that the local authority would not have power to direct a teacher's dismissal on other than educational grounds. The reference was probably to questions of character, which wore questions neither of religious nor of secular instructions.
SIR ROBERT FINLAYinstanced the extreme case of a teacher who attended school drunk. That would be misconduct which, on educational grounds, warranted dismissal. Any misconduct which affected his position as a teacher would, he thought, be "educational grounds."
SIR WILLIAM HARCOURTsaid questions of character might arise which would make it undesirable that a particular man should remain a teacher. But would such a dismissal be on educational grounds? He thought the Amendment might very well stand in the present sub-Section, but it was important to know whether they would be able to move an Amendment of an enlarged character on sub-Section (c). Surely they might say there that the appointment and dismissal should rest, not upon religious grounds, but upon any other grounds which the local authority thought sufficient.
MR. GEORGE WHITELEYcontended that if the Committee accepted the Amendment their liberty of action would be largely curtailed when they came to sub-Section (c). The unfortunate teacher would be in the position of having to serve two masters—the local authority and the managers, the former having the right to dismiss him on educational grounds, and the latter on general grounds. It would be much better to leave the question alone until they could deal with it thoroughly. The logical position seemed to be that both appointment and dismissal should be in the hands of the local authority, with a veto, to be exercised only on religious grounds, in the hands of the managers. Probably 95 per cent, of the teaching would concern secular instruction, and yet it was proposed to give the power of dismissing the teacher into the hands of the managers who had the right to deal only with the remaining 5 per cent. of school instruction, while the power of the local authority would be reduced to dismissing the teacher on educational grounds. He hoped the Amendment would not be accepted, so that the judgment of the Committee might be left unfettered.
SIR WILLIAM HARCOURTasked in what position they would stand on sub-Section (c). Would it be open to them then to deal with the larger question?
MR. M'KENNAchallenged the Attorney General to say where the managers were given the power to dismiss a teacher at all.
MR. A. J. BALFOURreminded the hon. Member that on the previous day he had quoted a speech of his as having cleared up that point.
MR. M'KENNAasked where the managers would get power to dismiss a teacher except by inference from this sub-Clause, which they were now asked to accept as a concession. Would the Attorney General point to a Clause which gave the managers power to dismiss a teacher?
SIR ROBERT FINLAY: I have nothing to add to what the First Lord of the Treasury has said.
MR. LLOYD-GEORGEsaid he understood the right hon. Gentleman to say that he would require the consent of the local authority to the appointment and dismissal.
THE CHAIRMAN: I think these two are different points. In this case the dismissal would be by the local education authority who give instructions to the managers; in the other case the dismissal would originate with the managers and would require the consent of the local education authority.
MR. A. J. BALFOUR: My belief is in accordance with your ruling Personally I should be disposed to think that the two questions were different.
MR. MOSS MR. MOSS (Denbighshire, E.) moved to leave out the last three words of the Amendment "on educational grounds."
MR. CORRIE GRANT: I have an Amendment, Mr. Chairman, which comes before that. It is after "number" to insert "salaries."
MR. A. J. BALFOURrose in his place, and claimed to move that the Question be now put.
MR. MOSS,on a point of order, asked if the Closure could be moved after he had moved his Amendment to the Amendment.
THE CHAIRMAN: Yes, because the Amendment has not been put from the Chair.
(5.6.) Question put, "That the Question be now put."
The Committee divided: Ayes, 250; Noes, 125. (Division List No. 412).

AYES.

Agnew, Sir Andrew Noel

Brotherton, Edward Allen

Dalrymple, Sir Charles

Aird, Sir John

Brown, Alexander H.(Shropsh.

Denny, Colonel

Anson, Sir William Reynell

Brymer, William Ernest

Dickinson, Robert Edmond

Arkwright, John Stanhope

Bullard, Sir Harry

Dickson-Poynder, Sir John P.

Arnold-Forster, Hugh O.

Burdett-Coutts, W.

Digby, John K. D. Wingfield-

Atkinson, Rt. Hon. John

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

Disraeli, Coningsby Ralph

Bagot, Capt. Josceline Fitzroy

Carew, James Laurence

Dorington Rt. Hon. Sir John E.

Bain, Colonel James Robert

Carson, Rt. Hon. Sir Edw. H.

Doughty, George

Baird, John George Alexander

Carvill, Patrick Geo. Hamilton

Douglas, Rt. Hon. A. Akers-

Balcarres, Lord

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

Doxford, Sir William Theodore

Baldwin, Alfred

Cavendish, V.C. W. (Derbyshire

Duke, Henry Edward

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

Cecil, Evelyn (Aston Manor)

Durning-Lawrence, Sir Edwin

Balfour, Capt. C. B. (Hornsey)

Cecil, Lord Hugh (Greenwich)

Elliot, Hon. A Ralph Douglas

Balfour, Rt Hn Gerald W (Leeds

Chamberlain, Rt. Hon. J. (Birm.

Fardell, Sir T. George

Banbury, Frederick George

Chamberlain, Rt Hn. J.A.(Worc.

Fellowes, Hon. Ailwyn Edward

Barry Sir Francis T. (Windsor

Chamberlayne, T. (S'thampton

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

Bartley, George C. T.

Chaplin, Rt. Hon. Henry

Finch, George H.

Bathurst, Hon. Allen Benjamin

Chapman, Edward

Finlay, Sir Robert Bannatyne

Beckett, Ernest William

Clare, Octavius Leigh

Fisher, William Hayes

Bhownaggree, Sir M. M.

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

Fison, Frederick William

Bignold, Arthur

Coddington, Sir William

Fitz Gerald, Sir Robert Penrose-

Bill, Charles

Cohen, Benjamin Louis

Fitzroy, Hon. Edward Algernon

Blundell, Colonel Henry

Collings, Rt. Hon. Jesse

Flannery, Sir Fortescue

Bond, Edward

Colomb, Sir John Charles Ready

Fletcher, Rt. Hon. Sir Henry

Boscawen, Arthur Griffith-

Colston, Chas. Edw. H. Athole

Flower, Ernest

Boulnois, Edmund

Corbett, A. Cameron (Glasgow)

Forster, Henry William

Bowles, T. Gibson,(King's Lynn

Cox, Irwin Edward Bainbridge

Foster, Philip S. (Warwick, S. W

Brodrick, Rt. Hon. St. John

Cripps, Charles Alfred

Gardner, Ernest

Brookfield, Colonel Montagu

Cubitt, Hon. Henry

Garfit, William

Godson, Sir Augustus Frederick

Lee, Arthur H (Hants, Fareham

Ritchie, Rt. Hn. Chas. Thomson

Gordon, Maj. Evans-(T'r H'mlts

Lees, Sir Elliott (Birkenhead)

Roberts, Samuel (Sheffield)

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

Legge, Col. Hon. Heneage

Robertson, Herbert (Hackney

Gorst, Rt. Hon. Sir John Eldon

Leigh-Bennett, Henry Currie

Rollit, Sir Albert Kaye

Goulding, Edward Alfred

Llewellyn, Evan Henry

Ropner, Colonel Robert

Graham, Henry Robert

Lockwood, Lt.-Col. A. R.

Royds, Clement Molyneux

Gray, Ernest (West Ham)

Loder, Gerald Walter Erskine

Sackville, Col. S. G. Stopford

Greene, Sir E W (B'rySEdm'nds

Long, Col. Charles W.(Evesham)

Sadler, Col. Samuel Alexander

Greene, Henry D. (Shrewsbury)

Long, Rt. Hn. Walter (Bristol, S

Samuel, Harry S. (Limehouse

Greene, W. Raymond-(Cambs.

Lowe, Francis William

Sassoon, Sir Edward Albert

Grenfell, William Henry

Loyd, Archie Kirkman

Scott, Sir S. (Marylebone, W.)

Greville, Hon. Ronald

Macartney, Rt Hn. W.G Ellison

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

Groves, James Grimble

Macdona, John Cumming

Seton-Karr, Henry

Gunter, Sir Robert

MacIver, David (Liverpool)

Sharpe, William Edward T.

Hain, Edward

M'Arthur, Charles (Liverpool)

Shaw Stewart, M. H. (Renfrew

Hall, Edward Marshall

M'Killop, James (Stirlingshire)

Simeon, Sir Barrington

Halsey, Rt. Hon. Thomas F.

Middlemore Jhn. Throgmorton

Sinclair, Louis (Romford)

Hamilton, Rt Hn Lord G (Midd'x

Mildmay, Francis Bingham

Smith, HC (North'mb, Tyneside

Hanbury, Rt. Hon. Robert Wm.

Milner, Rt. Hon. Sir Frederick G

Smith, James Parker(Lanarks.)

Hardy, Laurence (Kent, Ashf'rd

Milvain, Thomas

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

Hare, Thomas Leigh

Moon, Edward Robert Pacy

Spear, John Ward

Harris, Frederick Leverton

More, Robt. Jasper (Shropshire

Stanley, Ed. Jas. (Somerset)

Hay, Hon. Claude George

Morgan, David J (W'lthamstow

Stanley, Lord (Lancs).

Healy, Timothy Michael

Morrell, George Herbert

Stewart, Sir Mark J. M. 'Taggart

Heath, Arthur Howard (Hanley

Morrison, James Archibald

Stone, Sir Benjamin

Heath, James (Staffords. N. W.

Morton, Arthur H. A. (Deptford

Stroyan, John

Heaton, John Henniker

Mount, William Arthur

Strutt, Hon. Charles Hedley

Hermon-Hodge, Sir Robert T.

Mowbray, Sir Robert Gray C.

Talbot, Lord E. (Chichester)

Hickman, Sir Alfred

Murray, Rt Hn A. Graham (Bute

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

Higginbottom, S. W.

Myers, William Henry

Thorburn, Sir Walter

Hobhouse, Henry (Somerset, E)

Nicholson, William Graham

Thornton, Percy M.

Hogg, Lindsay

Nicol, Donald Ninian

Tomlinson, Sir Wm. Edw. M.

Hope, J. F. (Sheffield, Brightside

Parker, Sir Gilbert

Tritton, Charles Earnest

Hornby, Sir William Henry

Peel, Hn. Wm. Robert Wellesley

Tufnell, Lieut.-Col. Edward

Horner, Frederick William

Pemberton, John S. G.

Valentia, Viscount

Hoult, Joseph

Percy, Earl

Walrond, Rt. Hn. Sir William H

Houston, Robert Paterson

Pierpoint, Robert

Wanklyn, James Leslie

Howard, Jno.(Kent, Faversh'm

Pilkington, Lieut.-Col. Richard

Warde, Colonel C. E.

Hozier, Hon. James Henry Cecil

Platt-Higgins, Frederick

Webb, Colonel William George

Hudson, George Bickersteth

Plummer, Walter R.

Welby, Lt.-Col. A. C. E (T'unton

Hutton, John (Yorks N.R.)

Powell, Sir Francis Sharp

Whitmore, Charles Algernon

Jebb, Sir Richard Claverhouse

Pretyman, Ernest George

Williams, Rt. Hn. J Powell-(Birm

Johnstone, Heywood

Pryce-Jones, Lt.-Col. Edward

Willox, Sir John Archibald

Kemp, George

Purvis, Robert

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

Kennaway, Rt. Hon. Sir John H.

Pym, C. Guy

Wilson, John (Glasgow)

Kennedy, Patrick James

Quilter, Sir Cuthbert

Wilson-Todd, Wm. H. (Yorks)

Kenyon, Hon. Geo. T. (Denbigh

Randles, John S.

Wrightson, Sir Thomas

Kenyon-Slaney, Col, W. (Salop

Rankin, Sir James

Wylie, Alexander

Kimber, Henry

Ratcliff, R. F,

Wyndham, Rt. Hon. George

King, Sir Henry Seymour

Rattigan, Sir William Henry

Yerburgh, Robert Armstrong

Knowles, Lees

Reid, James (Greenock)

Younger, William

Law, Andrew Bonar (Glasgow)

Remnant, James Farquharson

Lawrence, Wm. F. (Liverpool)

Renwick, George

TELLERS FOR THE AYES—

Lawson, John Grant

Richards, Henry Charles

Sir Alexander Acland Hood and Mr. Anstruther

Lecky, Rt. Hon. William Edw. H

Ridley, Hon. M. W. (Stalybridge

NOES.

Allan, Sir William (Gateshead)

Caine, William Sproston

Emmott, Alfred

Allen, Charles P. (Glouc. Stroud

Caldwell, James

Earquharson, Dr. Robert

Ashton, Thomas Gair

Campbell-Bannerman, Sir H.

Fenwick, Charles

Asquith, Rt Hon Herbert Henry

Causton, Richard Knight

Foster, Sir Walter (Derby Co)

Barlow, John Emmott

Cawley, Frederick

Fuller, J. M. F.

Barran, Rowland Hirst

Craig, Robert Hunter

Goddard, Daniel Ford

Bayley, Thomas (Derbyshire)

Crombie, John William

Grant, Corrie

Beaumont, Wentworth C. B.

Dalziel, James Henry

Griffith, Ellis J.

Bell, Richard

Davies, Alfred (Carmarthen)

Gurdon, Sir W. Brampton

Black, Alexander William

Davies, M. Vaughan-(Cardigan

Harcourt, Rt. Hon. Sir William

Brigg, John

Dewar, John A. (Inverness-sh.

Harwood, George

Broadhurst, Henry

Dilke, Rt. Hon. Sir Charles

Hayne, Rt. Hn. Charles Seale-

Brown, George M. (Edinburgh

Duncan, J. Hastings

Hayter, Rt. Hon. Sir Arthur D.

Bryce, Rt. Hon. James

Dunn, Sir William

Helme, Norval Watson

Burt, Thomas

Edwards, Frank

Hemphill, Rt. Hon. Charles H.

Buxton, Sydney Charles

Ellis John Edward

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

660

661

Holland, Sir William Henry

Newnes, Sir George

Stevenson, Francis S.

Hope, John Deans (Fife, West)

Norman, Henry

Strachey, Sir Edward.

Horniman, Frederick John

Norton, Capt. Cecil William

Taylor, Theodore Cooke

Hutton, Alfred E. (Morley)

Nussey, Thomas Willans

Thomas, Sir A. (Glamorgan, E.

Jacoby James Alfred

Palmer, Sir Charles M. (Durham)

Thomas, David Alfred (Merthyr

Jones, David Brynmor (Swans'a

Partington, Oswald

Tomkinson, James

Jones, William (Carn'rvonshire

Paulton, James Mellor

Toulmin, George

Kinloch, Sir John George Smyth

Pease, J. A. (Saffron Walden)

Trevelyan, Charles Philips

Labouchere, Henry

Perks, Robert William

Wallace, Robert

Langley, Batty

Philipps, John Wynford

Walton, John Lawson (Leeds S.)

Layland-Barratt, Francis

Pickard, Benjamin

Warner, Thomas Courtenay T.

Lees, Sir Joseph F. (Accrington)

Pirie, Duncan V

Wason, Eugene

Leng, Sir John

Price, Robert John

Weir, James Galloway

Levy, Maurice

Priestley, Arthur

White, George (Norfolk)

Lewis, John Herbert

Rea, Russell

White, Luke (York, E.R.)

Lloyd-George, David

Reid, Sir R. Threshie (Dumfries

Whiteley, George(York, W. R.)

Lough, Thomas

Rickett, J. Compton

Whitley, J. H. (Halifax)

Macnamara, Dr. Thomas J.

Roberts, John H. (Denbighs)

Whittaker, Thomas Palmer

M'Crae, George

Robertson, Edmund (Dundee)

Williams, Osmond (Merioneth)

M'Kenna, Reginald

Runciman, Walter

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

M'Laren, Sir Charles Benjamin

Schwann, Charles E.

Wilson, John (Durham, Mid.)

Mappin, Sir Frederick Thorpe

Shackleton David James

Woodhouse, Sir J T. (Huddersf'd

Markham, Arthur Basil

Shaw, Charles Edw. (Stafford)

Yoxall, James Henry

Mather, Sir William

Shipman, Dr. John G.

Morgan, J. Lloyd (Carmarthen

Sinclair, John (Forfarshire)

TELLERS FOR THE NOES—

Morley, Charles (Breconshire)

Soares, Ernest J.

Mr. Herbert Gladstone and

Moss, Samuel

Spencer, Rt. Hn. CR. (Northants

Mr. William M'Arthur

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

SIR FRANCIS POWELL*(5.22.) SIR FRANCIS POWELL (Wigan) moved the insertion of words at the end of line 10, Clause 8, providing that the directions given by the local authority to the managers should be such as not to interfere with reasonable facilities for instruction in religious subjects, He did not anticipate that there would be frequent interference by the local authority with the managers in regard to these facilities, but cases might occur, and probably would occur, especially where passions ran fiercely and where the personal element prevailed. Such interference would not necessarily be designed, it might arise from inadvertence. The National Society had, with great care, framed an agreement for transfer of schools during the hours for secular instruction; but that agreement had caused so much difficulty and friction that the use of it had been abandoned. He thought he was making a just and fair claim on behalf of the trustees and managers of voluntary schools when he asked that there should be some definite declaration on the face of the Act that no direction given by the local authority should interfere with reasonable facilities for instruction in religious subjects.
Amendment proposed—
"In Page3, line 10, at end, to insert the words But no such directions shall be such as to interfere with reasonable facilities for instruction in religious subjects.;"—(Sir Francis Powell.)
Question proposed, "That those words be there inserted."
SIR WILLIAM ANSONsaid the Amendment appeared to be a reasonable one, and it did not in any way conflict with the powers to be given to the local authority to issue directions in respect of secular instruction. The Amendment would do no more than remind the local authority that the religious instruction given in the denominational schools was an important part of the instruction, and was in fact the raison d'être for such schools. On behalf of the Government he was prepared to accept the Amendment.
MR. BRYCEsaid he was surprised that the hon. Gentleman should think the Amendment necessary to remind local authorities that there were such things as denominational schools. He should have thought that there was no line in the Bill which did not remind them in the most painful way that they were to be "cribbed, cabined, and confined" by denominational managers. He could see no object for the Amendment but one, namely, to suggest a new ground of dispute between the managers and the local authorities. What possible need could there be for declaring that religious instruction was to be safeguarded when the whole function of the managers was to safeguard it? He thought the Amendment ought to be

663
resisted on the ground that it was provocative and likely to cause friction and trouble.
SIR WILLIAM HARCOURTasked who was to determine whether the facilities were "reasonable" or not.
MR. A. J. BALFOURsaid that would be determined under the powers in sub-Section 2.
SIR WILLIAM HARCOURTsaid he did not know whether sub section 2 existed or not. It had not been passed. If it existed this Amendment was unnecessary. If sub Section 2 was operative, and if there was a dispute on the question whether there was sufficient time given for religious instruction, it would be referred to the Board of Education. If that was not so, was the question to be determined by a court of law? The Committee should know how the word "reasonable" was to be interpreted and by whom.
MR. CHARLES HOBHOUSEsaid it was a little startling to find the Government accepting this Amendment when during the past three or four days they had been rejecting as mere surplusage Amendments which were proposed for the purpose of making the Bill practical and easy to work. They were asked practically to define what were religious subjects. Surely that was to introduce discord into the practical working of the Act. The managers would be anxious to forward religious instruction, the education authority would be anxious to keep the children up to the mark in their secular education in order to obtain the grants, and there would be endless squabbles about what were "reasonable facilities" for religious education. The members of the education authority were to be generally elected to the County Council for a far different purpose than discussing religious dogmas—practical business-men who would not want to be bothered with these debatable questions. He would gladly have adopted quite a different method of the treatment of this subject, and would have allowed representatives of every denomination to come into the schools and teach their own children their own doctrine.
DR. MACNAMARAsaid that no one objected to reasonable facilities for religious instruction, but the Amendment did not touch the provided schools. It simply permitted reasonable facilities in the denominational schools, and their case surely was met by Article 4, sub-Section 2, of the Whitehall Code, which provided that religious instruction must be given either at the beginning or at the end of the time-table, or at both, in accordance with the regulations of the Board of Education. What more did they want than that? The Government would be well advised, he thought, to let the matter remain where it was.
SIR WILLIAM ANSONsaid that the Act of 1870 provided for religious instruction or religious observances at the beginning or end of the school hours subject to certain provisions. All the Amendment provided was that, inasmuch as the local authority had unlimited power of issuing directions, they should not issue directions to such an extent as to occupy the whole of the school hours and so prevent the giving of religious instruction.
DR. MACNAMARAasked whether the local authority would have to obey the Education Code.
SIR WILLIAM ANSONsaid that that was so. But they wished to avoid any difficulty by putting it down in express terms that these directions were limited to this extent that time must be allowed for religious instruction.
DR. MACNAMARAasked whether it was not the fact that the Code provided full facilities for religious instruction.
SIR WILLIAM ANSONsaid that that was so.
LORD HUGH CECILthought there was a good deal to be said for not accepting this Amendment, at any rate at the present moment. The Government had laid down, in connection with secular education, that limiting words did not add clearness to what was done, but did add an element of confusion. It was difficult not to apply that argument to this case. He did not feel quite certain that the words suggested by his hon. friend the Member for

665
Wigan were the best, even if any words were necessary, and he thought this was an opportunity when the Government might have considered the feeling of the Opposition and have postponed the matter, at any rate until the Report stage, for further consideration.
MR. A. J. BALFOURsaid that if everybody in every quarter of the House was opposed to the Amendment it was not worth while fighting about it. The Government had not for a moment suggested that it was of very great importance. It was, he thought, just within the bounds of possibility that they might have an education authority so misguided, or so enthusiastic, about the preponderating demands of secular as compared with religious education, that they might use the great powers given them under this Bill as regarded secular education to squeeze out, at both ends of the school time-table, the element of religious instruction. If that were done, of course gross injustice would be inflicted on the members of the denomination in whose interest the school was established. He thought, however, the possibility of an education authority so abusing its power was extremely remote.
Question put and negatived.
THE CHAIRMAN: The Amendment in the name of the hon. Member is in the wrong place. We are here laying down conditions of maintenance, and this Amendment advocates clothing the education authority with powers which could not come into the question of maintenance. The next Amendment is possibly surplusage, but at all events should not come into this sub-Section but in a subsequent sub-Section. The next Amendment on the Paper is, I think, already covered.
MR. MCKENNA: I do not move it. I withdraw it.
DR. MACNAMARAsaid the Amendment which he proposed dealt with a comparatively small matter of school management, and he hoped the Government would accept it. If he could get the assurance of the Prime Minister that this matter would be attended to be would not trouble the Committee
666
further. It was his desire that the control of the school buildings should be left for all purposes with the local authority. At present the school buildings were in the hands of the managers for all purposes, and it was to their interest to see that the schools were kept in a proper condition, but now there was going to be a divided authority, the local authority using the schools for certain hours of the day, and the managers using them at other hours, for other purposes. It was quite likely that the managers might use the schools for parochial teas and parochial and general meetings, and it was quite right that they should; but they might not feel now as they did in the past, and there was an obligation to put the building into a proper state for the local authority next morning. All he asked was that the denominational managers, who might use the school as they pleased in their own time, should leave it in such a state of order that the education authority, when they came in the morning, could get at once to work.
Amendment proposed—
"In page 3, line 10, after the word 'school,' to insert the words 'and shall, on all occasions when the school premises have been used for purposes over which the local education authority has no control, see that the school premises are immediately re-adapted to the educational purpose for which the local education authority requires them.'"—[Dr. Macnamara.]
Question proposed, "That those words be there inserted."
MR. A. J. BALFOURwas not certain whether the Amendment was not out of order, but it was inconveniently drafted. If however the hon. Member would consult with him upon the words to be used and move the Amendment as a subhead, he did not think there would be any difficulty in the matter.
DR. MACNAMARAgladly accepted the suggestion, and begged leave to withdraw his Amendment.
Amendment, by leave, withdrawn.
THE CHAIRMAN: I am doubtful about the next Amendment, but I think

667
it ought to come as a schedule to sub-Clause (b); sub-Clause (a) deals with secular instruction, and this Amendment deals rather more with management than with education.
MR. BLACKsubmitted, with respect, that the question had been raised on the previous day, and the first Lord of the Treasury had promised to deal with the matter on the schedule of the Bill relevant to this section. That being so, his Amendment was purely a drafting Amendment, and he submitted that this was the only place in which it could go in.
THE CHAIRMAN: The hon. Member has rather stated himself out of court. He has referred to a schedule which does not exist. He might move his Amendment later as a sub Clause. The next Amendment ought to come into the interpretation Clause, and then we go back to the first Amendment on the Paper.
MR. ALFRED HUTTONsaid in moving this Amendment he only wished to say he did not think the Amendment of the Prime Minister was one which it was possible for the education authority to carry out; because although it gave the power to the county authorities, it gave no machinery to enforce the will of the county authority, therefore it had no value. He urged that some concession must be made to enable the county authority to have some machinery to carry out the object under this sub-Section. He admitted that if the managers of a denominational school refused to carry out the instructions of the local authority, that authority could withhold the grant, and if the school was closed they most build another school to supply the want. This, however, was not a course which the local authority was likely to pursue, though probably they would prefer to provide a public school instead of a denominational school. If that was the alternative which the right hon. Gentleman would prefer he would have no objection to it, but this Bill said something quite different. It said the county authority should continue to provide the denominational school, and it would be remembered that if they built a provided school they would have to do so out of the local parish rates. His Amendment, therefore, suggested the less
668
drastic method of providing for the denominational school instead of having recourse to the building of a provided school. He submitted that his proposal was moderate, and far more practical than this suggested alternative, because the power of suspending the denominational managers would not interfere with the denominational teaching in the schools. The power of being able to use a threat would probably be sufficient to secure the carying out of the will of the authority.
Amendment proposed—
"After the last Amendment, to insert the words 'and if the managers fail to carry out such directions, the local education authority shall have power to declare such managers in default and to appoint new managers.'"—(Mr. Alfred Hutton.)
Question proposed, "That those words be there inserted."
SIR ROBERT FINLAYagreed that it was desirable the local education authority should have some power, in case the managers failed to carry out any direction which the local authority had power to give, which was less drastic than that of withdrawing the support of the schools. It was desirable that there should be some power less heroic than that, because a power so severe was not one that might be applied, but he did not think that the proposal of the hon. Member was in its precise form that which the Committee ought to accept. It would be much better to confer on the local education authority power themselves to do the act. He submitted that an Amendment which stood in the name of the Prime Minister on a later page of the Amendments proceeded on the lines which he had indicated. [This Amendment provided that where the managers of a school fail to carry out any direction of the local education authority, that authority shall have the power themselves to carry out the direction in question as if they were the managers,] The Government would be prepared to move that Amendment, and he trusted that the hon. Gentleman would see his way to accept it.
SIR WILLIAM HARCOURTsaid he thought it would be desirable if the First Lord of the Treasury could give

669
some idea as to the method and the meaning of the local authority carrying out the directions. The phrase surely meant that the existing Members were to be removed or disabled from acting in some way. Who was to step in and do this? How was the power to be exercised? He thought that the Amendment of his hon. friend suggesting the appointment of new managers was a better solution.
SIR ROBERT FINLAYthought that, if for one reason or another the managers had not complied with the direction of the local education authority, it would occasion great difficulty if the only remedy short of totally stopping the maintenance of the school was that of removing the managers altogether. If they removed the foundation managers and appointed other managers, the foundation managers would disappear altogether; and the effect of the Amendment would be to appoint permanently new managers by the local education authority. This was providing a remedy which was so heroic that it would be open to the objection advanced against the only other remedy suggested of withdrawing the maintenance from the school. The proper line of action with regard to the particular thing which ought to be done was that the local education authority should have the power to step in and do that thing. The work should be done by a person appropriately chosen, for the purpose.
LORD EDMUND FITZMAURICEpointed that under the Act of 1870. at any rate in certain cases, the education authority had particular authority for particular actions. The County Council issued an order to the local authority to do a particular thing; if the order was not obeyed within a specified time the Council stepped in, and, through their surveyor, completed the matter at the cost of the rural authority, whom they then reinstated in full possession. As the Attorney General had pointed out, they had to appoint an agent in all such cases. He therefore suggested that at the end of the Amendment or elsewhere there should be added some such words as, "and to appoint an officer or agent for
670
that purpose." That would remove all doubt and indicate a way by which this valuable addition could easily be carried into effect.
SIR WILLIAM HARCOURTsaid that what his noble friend had stated was perfectly feasible when dealing with brick or mortar or roads, but in the presen matter they were dealing with instructions, and the same procedure was no applicable. If a recalcitrant body of managers would not carry out the directions as to secular instruction, there was no course open except to appoint other managers who would carry out those directions. The stronger the remedy, the more likely were they to get obedience. If voluntary managers knew that in the event of their being recalcitrant they would be displaced altogether, they were not likely to be recalcitrant.
MR. ERNEST GRAYwas sorry the Prime Minister had accepted the Amendment at this particular stage. He understood that the Amendment the right hen. Gentleman himself placed on the Paper would be applicable to sub-Sections (a), (b), (c), and (d), and, in his judgment, it would be far more desirable in connection with (b), (c), and (d) than(a). It was almost impossible to conjure up any direction with regard to secular instruction which the local managers would be disposed to resist, but there might easily arise considerable dispute on the other sub-Sections. The intention of the Prime Minister obviously was that the Amendment should be applicable to the whole of the Clause, and he could not understand why the right hon. Gentleman had departed from that intention. Were they to have a repetition of this Amendment on sub-Section (b) and another on (c)? It was surely not possible that the words now being inserted would refer to that which had already been adopted, and to the sub-Sections that followed. The Amendment ought to remain as the Prime Minister himself had placed it on the Paper, and be applicable to the whole Clause. He agreed there ought to be some remedy less drastic than the entire withdrawal of funds from the school. Such a withdrawal would mean the destruction

671
of the denominational school, and the substitution of another at the expense of the ratepayers. He, and apparently both sides, desired to avoid that, and to find some means by which managers who would not carry out the instructions could be brought to book, and the school continued without incurring the expense of providing another. He was driven irresistibly to the conclusion that the recalcitrant managers must be replaced by others, and of the two Amendments he certainly preferred the one which enabled the authority to bring into existence another body of managers. If there arose a difficulty so serious as to justify the local authority in stepping in and doing the work itself, what chance was there of amicable relations being established between the two bodies? There would, no doubt, be a long series of irritations, until finally the obdurate managers revolted and refused to carry out the directions. There was the right to go to the Board of Education, but that meant the withdrawal of the grant, and something less than that was wanted. If the managers revolted, how could the school be carried on by sending down an officer, or by giving an order from a central department? His impression was that disputes were more likely to arise in connection with the appointment or dismissal of the teacher or some structural alteration of the building than in regard to anything else under the Bill. What board of managers would care sufficiently whether history or grammar was taken in the school to deny the right of the local authority to intervene? The control of secular instruction was regulated already by the Board of Education. The local authority would not depart to any considerable extent from the Day School Code, and what departure was made would be immediately accepted by the managers. But suppose friction arose in regard to some other sub-Section. The local authority, by the exercise of the power which it possessed, might secure the admission to the school of a person the managers were indisposed to retain. If they dismissed him there might be another appointment and another dismissal, or the person dismissed might be re-appointed, or a person of the same character appointed. There would be a long series of disputes until the local authority declined to stand it any longer
672
and said, "We must take over the control ourselves." It was not difficult to imagine such conflicts. The Board of Education had already had them with School Boards; there had been correspondence extending over years, threatening letters, inducements, visits of inspectors, and ultimately a resort to the law. The Board of Education in such a case did not send down an official to administer education in the district; it called upon the locality to form another School Board. One five-member board would be replaced by another five-member board, and in the event of another default, the existing law empowered the Board of Education to send down five clerks from Whitehall to entrust them with the duty of administering education in the area, and charge their expenses on the rates of the district. That was a very effective way of carrying out the decisions of the Board. He failed to see how, if the recalcitrant managers were to be retained, there was any chance of a satisfactory working. The managers might possibly be acting altogether contrary to the opinion of the great majority of the people in the district. Why should not the old subscribers or members of the Church with which the school was associated have the chance of substituting four other managers for those who would not carry out the instructions given them? Why should not the local authority have the chance of re-electing its own particular two if they were not among the offenders? The refusal to carry out the instruction would be a refusal of the majority; there might be a minority ready, willing, and anxious to comply. That minority might be retained in office, as was done under the existing law, but the majority who refused to carry out the instructions of the local authority should be cast aside and others put in their place. The present Amendment did not set up any machinery to enable that work to be carried out. It would leave the school suspended somehow, but he did not quite see under whose control. Personally, he would rather make it a provided school at once and for ever than allow the friction to go on, because if a school was to succeed it must have the sympathy and support of the surrounding people. Continued friction alienated that sympathy and support, disturbed the progress of education in

673
the school, and was a source of unalloyed evil. Let it be a provided school or a denominational school—one or the other—but let it be in a state of efficiency and not in a state of divided control, constant dispute, irritation and annoyance, in which, according to his judgment, this Amendment would leave it.
MR. A. J. BALFOURsaid there was only one sentence in the remarks of his hon. friend with which he cordially agreed, and that was the sentence in which he said that in all probability there would be no disputes on this subject between the local authorities and the managers, and that the powers given by the Amendment, or by the Amendment of the Government, would hardly ever require to be exercised. But he did not agree with the hon. Member in most of the observations he had made. In the first place, he thought he was wrong in saying that the Amendment ought to apply to (a), (b), (c), and (d). He could not understand how his hon. friend could think that it was m consonance with the framework of the Bill that they should give the education authority the entire management of the schools, for that would absolutely destroy the Bill. They I could never assent to the appointment by the education authority of the great body of the managers of denominational schools. That was a proposal which was totally unnecessary. His hon. friend asked—How on earth could they continue to work a school in which the general body of the managers were constantly setting themselves up against the control of the education authorities, and in which the education authority had to send someone down to see that their orders were carried out over the heads of the managers? He entirely agreed that if there was to be perpetual quarrelling between the Board of Education and the managers, there was one course which could be taken, and that was to refuse to maintain the provided schools and substitute others. That was the proper thing, and that was the remedy under the Bill. In accordance with the pledge he had given, the Amendment which he proposed to move upon this point was a less drastic measure, and it would provide machinery by which an officer—it might be a member of the managing body or somebody else—should be sent
674
down who would, in the case of a particular decision, override the managers and deal with the situation without destroying the denominational character of the school, or upsetting it as a permanent element in the education of the district. If that was not enough, and if the managers were going to set themselves up to perpetually thwart the education authority, he quite agreed that the proper course for the education authority to pursue was to abolish that voluntary school altogether and substitute for it a provided school. That was the plan of the Government, and he thought it was a proper plan. He accordingly begged to move to amend the Amendment after the word "shall" by inserting the words "in addition to their other powers have power themselves to carry out the direction in question as if they were the managers."
Amendment proposed to the proposed Amendment—
"To leave out all the words after the word 'shall' and insert the words 'in addition to their other powers have the power themselves to carry out the direction in question as if they were the managers.'"—(Mr. A. J. Balfour.)
Question proposed, "That the words proposed to be left out stand part of the proposed Amendment."
MR. LLOYD-GEORGEsaid that probably there would be very few disputes with regard to secular instruction, but he thought it would be an advantage to get some definite machinery in the Bill which could be put into operation in order to prevent disputes. He was glad that his hon. friend had moved the Amendment, because it raised distinctly the issue between him and the proposal of the Government. He agreed with the Prime Minister that there would be few disputes with regard to secular instruction, but he thought there would be all the fewer if the managers understood what would happen, He wished to point out the danger of the course which the right hon. Gentleman was taking. The Prime Minister said that if the Managers declined to carry out the provisions of the Bill they could then convert the school into a provided school. That would be very unfair to the locality and to the denomination itself. What would happen if his hon. friend's Amendment were carried? The ultimate result would

675
be the provided school, because if managers were appointed by the county authority they could say: "We will withdraw our school." The managers would take away their school, and then the locality would have to face the contingency of providing another school. Suppose the county authority appointed managers in sympathy with the denomination, as they probably would do? They would not appoint managers who were opposed to the teaching of the denomination, because they knew that the only result of that course would be that the denominational managers would take the school away and cast upon the parish the burden of building another school. Therefore they would endeavour to preserve the denominational character of the school by appointing men of that denomination as managers. All they asked from the Prime Minister was that he should not insist upon the extreme penalty of the law, as there would be no danger to the denominational character of the school because the managers had got the whip hand. Once they made it a provided school, it could never become a denominational school afterwards, and the denomination would suffer to that extent. The parish would suffer because it would impose an additional burden upon it. This was not an Amendment unfair to the denomination, but it was an intermediate course between the extreme sanction and the one which was provided in the Bill. He was very glad to hear the case of the defaulting School Board referred to. The provision proposed now was contained in the Act of 1870, and all they suggested now was that the power which the Education Department had of dealing with defaulting School Boards by superseding them should be given to the local authority with regard to dealing with recalcitrant managers. Why should any privilege be extended to these managers if they declined to do their duties? All they asked for was that the law provided for defaulting School Boards should be equally applied to defaulting managers. The Prime Minister said that the denominational character of the schools was not preserved by this Amendment. The National Society trust deed provided that the religious instruction to be given in the schools, and the entire control and management of that instruction, should be vested in the minister for the time
676
being, or in his absence in the officiating minister. There was nothing in the Act which divested the officiating minister of the control of religious instruction. He wished to know whether the Prime Minister proposed to amend the Bill, so as to give the control of religious instruction to the whole of the managers, and not merely to the officiating minister in the parish.
MR. A. J. BALFOURsaid he believed that was in the Bill now. In his view, the managers were to deal with all subjects, and it was for that reason that the Government had felt it necessary to have the denominational managers.
MR. LLOYD GEORGEsaid that while reserving his individual opinion as to the interpretation of the Act, he would accept the Prime Minister's statement that he intended religious instruction to be in the hands of the whole of the managers of the denominational schools, anything in the trust deed to the contrary notwithstanding. He was very glad of that statement. If the Prime Minister insisted that the only method of dealing with defaulting managers was to set up a provided school, what would happen in the interim? The provision of a school took eighteen months or two years. The sanction of the Education Department had to be obtained, plans had to be prepared and approved, and the building had to be erected. He would ask the Attorney General, or the Prime Minister, to say what would happen in the interval.
MR. A. J. BALFOUR: What happens now?
MR. LLOYD GEORGEsaid he thought this Bill was to improve the present system.
SIR. JOHN GORST: Use temporary buildings.
MR. LLOYD GEORGEsaid several applications were made to the right hon. Gentleman when he was at the Education Board but it was not easy to obtain sanction to use temporary buildings. His hon. friend's Amendment met the difficulty, because new managers would be put in and the school would be under

677
managers provided by the county authority, and, if necessary, at the end of eighteen months a new school could be set up.
MR. HENRY HOBHOUSEsaid there was no doubt that a non-provided school had great advantages over a provided school, but a remedy had to be found if the managers obstinately declined to carry out the directions of the local authority. Hon. Members opposite evidently considered that to turn a non-provided school into a provided school was an evil to be avoided if possible. [Cries of "No."] He did not consider that then was much need for any other remedy than the power of the purse, which would bring the most obstinate managers to their senses. He saw no objection to the remedy proposed by his right hon. friend, because if the managers declined to establish the curriculum desired by the education authority they could send down an inspector, who would tell the teachers that the curriculum was to be carried out whatever the view of the managers might be. He saw no difficulty in that, and no objection as regarded principle. He thought the Committee should accept the proposal of the First Lord, because it might be desirable to have a weapon to hold in terrorem over the managers which would not produce the evil that Members on both sides wished to avoid—namely, of turning a denominational school into a provided school.
DR. MACNAMARAsaid he understood that if the managers failed to carry out the directions of the local authority, that authority would then have the right to come in and carry our the directions themselves. The hon. Member for East Somerset said that was a Perfectly workable plan, He thought it was hopelessly impossible. The might be bitterly opposed to something the local authority desired to do. If the local authority came in from the county centre and executed the order over their heads they would still be bitterly opposed to it, but they would still go on in the capacity of managers, He could not imagine anything that would lead to more Squabbling and quarrelling in the conduct to the schools. His hon. friend's Amendment was far more practicable, because it swept the managers right away. If the managers did not obey the reasonable
678
direction of the education authority, with a reasonable right of appeal, he would give the education authority power to sweep the school away and to establish a provided school. He thought that was what it would have to come to, and he was not afraid of the cost.
SIR WILLIAM HARCOURTsaid that if a new and distinct school were provided where the managers of an existing school refused to obey the directions of the local authority, it must be a school provided at the cost of the ratepayers. It seemed to him that under this new scheme the trustees of the school came under a statutory obligation to obey the instructions of the education authority, and if they persisted in refusing to conform to that obligation why should they not declare that the existing school was a provided school? That could be done without any cost at all. In former days they were dealing with a private school, and the trustees were told that if they made default a public school would be established. Now these people, would be under public obligations, and therefore the education authority were entitled to say that if the managers of the school committed a breach of those obligations they would forfeit their rights, and the school would be treated as a provided school. If they did that they would have a remedy which would be certain to work.
MR. SPEARheartily supported the Amendment of the Prime Minister, because while he yielded to no one in desiring to be just to the voluntary schools he declined altogether to protect them in the case of their being recalcitrant. He believed that the Bill provided for a reasonable arrangement, and for conciliatory action between the local authority and the voluntary school managers. He was unable to support the suggestion about withdrawing from the local authority the power of declaring the school that of the local authority in the event of the managers proving recalcitrant. He was surprised at the argument used by the hon. Member for Carnarvon, who seemed to regard with great apprehension the Onus that would be thrown upon a locality by the suspension of recalcitrant managers of the voluntary schools. That surprised him, because he understood the hon.

679
Gentleman was the supporter of a system which would have cost the ratepayers of England fifty millions to suppress the voluntary schools. He trusted the Prime Minister would stick to his Amendment. He had every confidence that the local education authority and the managers would work amicably together, but it was due to the local authority that where the managers were not amenable to reasonable orders, the latter should be superseded.
MR. WHITLEYsaid that the proposed Amendment seemed to cover the case of a single act of default on the part of the managers. It appeared to him to be unreasonable to remove managers for a single default. The Amendment, however, did not deal with continuous default on the part of the managers, and he wished to make a suggestion to the Prime Minister which would enable them to come to an agreement. It was to add after the word "school," "and if these continue in such default, the education authority should have the power to appoint new managers." These words would apply to continuous defiance and default, but they also meant that the whole of the managers need not necessarily be removed; only those who continuously refused to carry out the directions of the local authority.
MR. A. J. BALFOURsaid he again repeated that he did not think the appointment of other managers was a remedy consistent with the particular character of the denominational schools. It might be a very appropriate system when they were dealing with board schools, but it was not really appropriate to voluntary schools. He could see that the suggestion was made in the interests of harmony, but he could not quite agree with it. The hon. Gentleman seemed to think that the Government plan would not deal with some continuous desire on the part of the managers to thwart the education authority. He did not think that that was so. Supposing that the managers refused to teach anatomy, that the education authority sent down a man, and that the order was given to a particular schoolmaster that anatomy should be taught in such and such hours on such and such days of the week. Of course, that order stood,
680
and if the teacher refused to carry it out, he would at once be suspended by the education authority. He ventured to make an appeal to the Committee to bring to a conclusion the discussion of this Amendment, which had been thoroughly thrashed out. There was no fundamental division between the two sides of the House as to the object, although he regretted that there was a difference as to the means.
MR. M'KENNAsaid that the object of the First Lord of the Treasury appeared to be confined to the point that the local managers to be appointed might alter the character of the schools. But the trust deeds under which these managers were appointed were not altered by this Bill. Any managers to be appointed by the local authority would only be appointed under the provisions of the trust deed. There could not be a doubt on that point. Bearing that in mind, he thought that the Amendment of his hon. friend was superior to that of the right hon. Gentleman.
MR. CORRIE GRANTsaid that they were all agreed with what had been said by the First Lord up to a certain point. The hon. Member for Somerset said that the power of the purse was sufficient; but the exercise of the power of the purse meant the closing of the schools, and that was what they were trying to prevent. He suggested to the First Lord that his Amendment only covered one set of circumstances, while they wanted to cover two. The local authority should have the option to call on the electors of the foundation managers to elect new managers, and if they refused, then to go on to elect some other managers themselves. The other power of which the hon. Member for Somerset spoke might afterwards be brought into action.
MR. ERNEST GRAYsaid that he wanted to repudiate the interpretation which the Prime Minister had put on his former remarks. He did not suggest that the Committee for the voluntary schools should be appointed outside the terms of the trust-deed, but that the Committee should be replaced by four others representing the denominational element.
(7.12.) Question put, "That the words proposed to be left out stand part of the proposed Amendment."
The Committee divided:—Ayes, 126; Noes, 249. (Division List No. 413.)

AYES.

Allan, Sir William (Gateshead

Griffith, Ellis J.

Price, Robert John

Allen, Charles P. (Glouc., Stroud

Gurdon, Sir W. Brampton

Rea, Russell

Ashton, Thomas Gair

Harcourt, Rt. Hon. Sir William

Rickett, J. Compton

Asquith, Rt Hon Herbert Henry

Harmsworth, R. Leicester

Rigg, Richard

Barlow, John Emmott

Hayne, Rt. Hn. Charles Seale-

Roberts, John Bryn (Eifion)

Bayley, Thomas (Derbyshire)

Hayter, Rt. Hon. Sir Arthur D.

Roberts, John H. (Denbighs.)

Beaumont, Wentworth C. B.

Heath, Arthur Howard (Hanley

Robertson, Edmund (Dundee)

Black, Alexander William

Helme, Norval Watson

Roe, Sir Thomas

Bolton, Thomas Dolling

Hemphill, Rt. Hon. Charles H.

Runciman, Walter

Brigg, John

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

Schwann, Charles E.

Broadhurst, Henry

Holland, Sir William Henry

Shackleton, David James

Brown, George M. (Edinburgh)

Hope, John Deans (Fife, West)

Shaw, Charles Edw. (Stafford)

Bryce, Rt. Hon. James

Horniman, Frederick John

Shipman, Dr. John G.

Burns, John

Jacoby, James Alfred

Sinclair, John (Forfarshire)

Burt, Thomas

Jones, William (C'rnarvonshire

Soares, Ernest J.

Buxton, Sydney Charles

Kinloch, Sir John George Smyth

Spencer, Rt. Hn. C. R (Northants

Caine, William Sproston

Langley, Batty

Stevenson, Francis S.

Caldwell, James

Layland-Barratt, Francis

Strachey, Sir Edward

Campbell-Bannerman, Sir H.

Leese, Sir Joseph F.(Accrington

Thomas, Sir A. (Glamorgan, E.

Causton, Richard Knight

Leng, Sir John

Thomas, David Alfred (Merthyr

Cawley, Frederick

Levy, Maurice

Toulmin, George

Craig, Robert Hunter

Lewis, John Herbert

Trevelyan, Charles Philips

Cremer, William Randal

Lloyd-George, David

Wallace, Robert

Crombie, John William

Lough, Thomas

Walton, John Lawson (Leeds, S.

Davies, Alfred (Carmarthen)

Macnamara, Dr. Thomas J.

Walton, Joseph (Barnsley)

Davies, M. Vaughan-(Cardigan

M'Arthur, William (Cornwall)

Warner, Tlhomas Courtenay, T.

Dewar, John A. (Inverness-sh.

M'Crae, George

Wason, Eugene

Dilke, Rt. Hon. Sir Charles

M'Laren, Sir Charles Benjamin

Weir, James Galloway

Duncan, J. Hastings

Mappin, Sir Frederick Thorpe

White, George (Norfolk)

Dunn, Sir William

Markham, Arthur Basil

White, Luke (York, E. R.)

Edwards, Frank

Mather, Sir William

Whiteley, George (York, W. R.)

Ellis, John Edward

Morgan, J. Lloyd (Carmarthen)

Whitley, J. H. (Halifax)

Emmott, Alfred

Morley, Charles (Breconshire)

Whittaker, Thomas Palmer

Evans, Samuel T. (Glamorgan

Moss, Samuel

Williams, Osmond (Merioneth

Farquharson, Dr. Robert

Moulton, John Fletcher

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

Fenwick, Charles

Newnes, Sir George

Wilson, John (Durham, Mid.)

Fitzmaurice, Lord Edmond

Norton, Capt. Cecil William

Woodhouse, Sir J T.(Huddersf'd

Foster, Sir Walter (Derby Co.)

Nussey, Thomas Willans

Yoxall, James Henry

Fowler, Rt. Hon. Sir Henry

Palmer, Sir Charles M. (Durham

Fuller, J. M. F.

Partington, Oswald

Gladstone, Rt Hn Herbert John

Pease, J. A. (Saffron Walden)

TELLERS FOR THE AYES—Mr. M'Kenna and Mr. Alfred Hutton.

Goddard, Daniel Ford

Perks, Robert William

Grant, Corrie

Philipps, John Wynford

Gray, Ernest (West Ham)

Pickard, Benjamin

NOES.

Agnew, Sir Andrew Noel

Bhownaggree, Sir M. M.

Cavendish, V. C. W (Derbyshire

Aird, Sir John

Bignold Arthur

Cecil, Evelyn (Aston Manor)

Anson, Sir William Reynell

Bigwood, James

Cecil, Lord Hugh (Greenwich)

Arkwright, John Stanhope

Bill, Charles

Chamberlain, Rt. Hon. J.(Birm.

Arnold-Forster, Hugh O.

Blundell, Colonel Henry

Chamberlain, Rt Hn. J. A (Worc

Atkinson, Rt. Hon. John

Bond, Edward

Chamberlayne, T. (S'thampton

Bagot, Capt. Josceline FitzRoy

Boscawen, Arthur Griffith-

Chapman, Edward

Bailey, James (Walworth)

Boulnois, Edmund

Clare, Octavius Leigh

Bain, Colonel James Robert

Bowles, T. Gibson, King's Lynn

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

Baird, John George Alexander

Brodrick, Rt. Hon. St. John

Coddington, Sir William

Balcarres, Lord

Brotherton, Edward Allen

Cohen, Benjamin Louis

Baldwin, Alfred

Brown, Alexander H. (Shropsh.

Collings, Rt. Hon. Jesse

Balfour, Capt. C. B. (Hornsey)

Brymer, William Ernest

Colomb, Sir John Charles Ready

Balfour, Rt Hn Gerald W (Leeds

Bullard, Sir Harry

Colston, Chas. Edw. H. Athole

Balfour, Kenneth R. (Christch.

Butcher, John George

Compton, Lord Alwyne

Banbury, Frederick George

Campbell, Rt.Hn.J.A (Glasgow

Cox, Irwin Edward Bainbridge

Barry, Sir Francis T. (Windsor

Carew, James Laurence

Cranborne, Viscount

Bartley, George C. T.

Carson, Rt. Hon. Sir Edw. H.

Cripps, Charles Alfred

Bathurst, Hon. Allen Benjamin

Carvill, Patrick Geo. Hamilton

Cross, Alexander (Glasgow)

Beckett, Ernest William

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

Cubitt, Hon. Henry

Cust, Henry John C.

Hozier, Hon. James Henry Cecil

Ratcliff, R. F.

Dalrymple, Sir Charles

Hudson, George Bickersteth

Rattigan, Sir William Henry

Davies, Sir Horatio D (Chatham

Hutton, John (Yorks. N. R.)

Reid, James (Greenock)

Denny, Colonel

Jebb, Sir Richard Claverhouse

Remnant, James Farquharson

Dickson-Poynder, Sir John P.

Jeffreys, Rt. Hon. ArthurFred.

Renwick, George

Disraeli, Coningsby Ralph

Johnstone, Heywood

Richards, Henry Charles

Dixon-Hartland, Sir Fred Dixon

Kemp, George

Ridley, Hon. M. W. (Stalybridge

Dorington, Rt. Hon. Sir John E.

Kennaway, Rt. Hon. Sir John H.

Ritchie, Rt. Hn. Chas. Thomson

Douglas Rt. Hon. A. Akers-

Kennedy, Patrick James

Roberts, Samuel (Sheffield)

Doxford, Sir William Theodore

Kenyon, Hon. Geo. T. (Denbigh

Robinson, Brooke

Duke, Henry Edward

Kenyon-Slaney, Col. W. (Salop

Rollit, Sir Albert Kaye

Durning-Lawrence, Sir Edwin

Keswick, William

Ropner, Colonel Robert

Egerton, Hon. A. de Tatton

Kimber, Henry

Royds, Clement Molyneux

Fardell, Sir T. George

King, Sir Henry Seymour

Sackyille, Col. S. G. Stopford

Fellowes, Hon. Ailwyn Edward

Lambton, Hon. Frederick Wm.

Sadler, Col. Samuel Alexander

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

Law, Andrew Bonar (Glasgow)

Samuel, Harry S. (Limehouse)

Fielden, Edward Brocklehurst

Lawrence, Sir Joseph (Monm'th

Sassoon, Sir Edward Albert

Finch, George H.

Lawrence, Wm. F. (Liverpool)

Scott, Sir S. (Marylebone, W.)

Finlay Sir Robert Bannatyne

Lawson, John Grant

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

Fisher, William Hayes

Lee, Arthur H (Hants., Fareham

Sharpe, William Edward T.

Fison, Frederick William

Lees, Sir Elliott (Birkenhead)

Shaw Stewart, M. H. (Renfrew

Fitz Gerald, Sir Robert Penrose-

Legge, Col. Hon. Heneage

Simeon, Sir Barrington

Fitzroy, Hon. Edward Algernon

Leigh-Bennett, Henry Currie

Smith, HC (North'mb, Tyneside

Flannery, Sir Fortescue

Llewellyn, Evan Henry

Smith, James Parker(Lanarks.

Fletcher, Rt. Hon. Sir Henry

Loder, Gerald Waller Erskine

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

Flower, Ernest

Long Col. Charles W. (Evesham

Spear, John Ward

Forster, Henry William

Long, Rt Hn. Walter (Bristol, S)

Spencer, Sir E. (W. Bromwich)

Foster, Philip S (Warwick, S.W

Lowe, Francis William

Stanley, Hn. Arthur (Ormskirk

Galloway, William Johnson

Lowther, C. (Comb., Eskdale

Stanley, Edward Jas. (Somerset

Gardner, Ernest

Loyd, Archie Kirkman

Stanley, Lord (Lancs.)

Garfit, William

Lyttelton, Hon. Alfred

Stewart, Sir Mark J. M'Taggart

Godson, Sir Augustus Frederick

Macartney, Rt Hn. W G. Ellison

Stone, Sir Benjamin

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

Macdona, John (Cumming

Strutt, Hon. Charles Hedley

Gore, Hn. G R C Ormsby-(Salop

MacIver, David (Liverpool)

Talbot, Lord E. (Chichester)

Gorst, Rt. Hon. Sir John Eldon

M'Arthur, Charles (Liverpool)

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

Goulding, Edward Alfred

M'Killop, James (Stirlingshire

Thorburn, Sir Walter

Greene, Sir EW (B'rySEdm'nds

Malcolm, Ian

Thornton, Percy M.

Greene, Henry D. (Shrewsbury

Mildmay, Francis Bingham

Tollemache, Henry James

Greene, W. Raymond-(Cambs.

Milner, Rt Hon. Sir Frederick G.

Tomlinson, Sir Wm. Edw. M.

Grenfell, William Henry

Milvain, Thomas

Tritton, Charles Ernest

Greville, Hon. Ronald

Montagu, G. (Huntingdon)

Tufnell, Lieut-Col. Edward

Groves, James Grimble

More, Robt. Jasper (Shropshire

Valentia, Viscount

Gunter, Sir Robert

Morrell, George Herbert

Vincent, Col. Sir CEH (Sheffield

Hain, Edward

Morton, Arthur H. Aylmer

Vincent, Sir Edgar (Exeter)

Hall, Edward Marshall

Mount, William Arthur

Walrond, Rt Hn. Sir William H.

Halsey, Rt. Hon. Thomas F.

Mowbray, Sir Robert Gray C.

Wanklyn, James Leslie

Hamilton, Rt Hn Lord G (Midd'x

Murray, Rt Hn. A. Grah'm (Bute

Warde, Colonel C. E.

Hanbury, Rt. Hon. Robert Wm.

Murray, Charles J. (Coventry)

Webb, Colonel William George

Hardy, Laurence(Kent, Ashf'rd

Newdegate, Francis A. N.

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

Hare, Thomas Leigh

Nicholson, William Graham

Whitmore, Charles Algernon

Harris, Frederick Leverton

Nicol, Donald Ninian

Willox, Sir John Archibald

Hay, Hon. Claude George

Parker, Sir Gilberrt

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

Heath, James (Staffords, N.W.

Peel, Hn Wm. Robert Wellesley

Wilson, John (Glasgow)

Heaton, John Henniker

Pemberton, John S. G.

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

Henderson, Sir Alexander

Precy, Earl

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

Hermon-Hodge, Sir Robert T.

Pierponit, Robert

Wrightson, Sir Thomas

Hickman, Sir Alfred

Platt-Higgins, Frederick

Wylie, Alexander

Higginbottom, S. W.

Plummer, Walter R.

Wyndham, Rt. Hon. George

Hobhouse, Henry (Somerset, E.

Pretyman, Ernest George

Yerburgh, Robert Armstrong

Hogg, Lindsay

Pryce Jones, Lt.-Col. Edward

Younger, William

Hope, J.F.Sheffield, Brightside

Purvis, Robert

Hornby, Sir William Henry

Pym, C Guy

TELLERS FOR THE NOES—

Hoult, Joseph

Randles, John S.

Sir Alexander Acland Hood and Mr. Anstruther.

Houston, Robert Paterson

Rankin, Sir James

MR. A. J. BALFOURrose in place, and claimed to move, "That the Question be now put:"——
The Committee divided:—Ayes, 251;

AYES.

Agnew, Sir Andrew Noel

Anson, Sir William Reynell

Arnold-Forster, Hugh O.

Aird, Sir John

Arkwright, John Stanhope

Atkinson, Rt. Hon. John

Question put, "That the Question "That those words be there inserted' be now put."
Noes, 110. (Division List No. 414.)

Bagot, Capt. Josceline FitzRoy

Fison, Frederick William

Lyttelton, Hon. Alfred

Bailey, James (Walworth)

FitzGerald, Sir Robert Penrose-

Macartney, Rt Hn W. G. Ellison

Bain, Colonel James Robert

Fitzroy, Hon. Edward Algernon

Macdona, John Cumming

Baird, John George Alexander

Flannery, Sir Fortescue

MacIver, David (Liverpool)

Balcarres, Lord

Fletcher, Rt. Hon. Sir Henry

M'Arthur, Charles (Liverpool)

Baldwin, Alfred

Flower, Ernest

M'Killop, James (Stirlingshire

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

Forster, Henry William

Malcolm, Ian

Balfour, Capt,. C. B. (Hornsey)

Foster, Philip S. (Warwick, S.W

Milner, Rt. Hn. Sir Frederick G.

Balfour, Rt Hn Gerald W.(Leeds

Galloway, William Johnson

Milvain, Thomas

Balfour, Kenneth R. (Christch.

Gardner, Ernest

Montagu, G. (Huntingdon)

Banbury, Frederick George

Garfit, William

Montagu, Hon. J. Scott(Hants.)

Barry, Sir Francis T. (Windsor

Godson, Sir Augustus Frederick

More, Robt. Jasper (Shropshire

Bartley, George C. T.

Gordon, Maj Evans (T'rH'mlets

Morrell, George Herbert

Bathurst, Hon. Allen Benjamin

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

Morton Arthur H. Aylmer

Beckett, Ernest William

Gorst, Rt. Hon. Sir John Eldon

Mount, William Arthur

Bhownaggree, Sir M. M.

Goulding, Edward Alfred

Mowbray, Sir Robert Grav C.

Bignold, Arthur

Gray, Ernest, (West Ham)

Murray, Rt Hn A. Graham (Bute

Bigwood, James

Greene, Sir EW.(B'rySEdm'nds

Murray, Charles J. (Coventry)

Bill, Charles

Greene, Henry D. (Shrewsbury)

Newdegate, Francis A. N.

Blundell, Colonel Henry

Greene, W. Raymond-(Cambs.)

Nicholson, William Graham

Bond, Edward

Grenfell, William Henry

Nicol, Donald Ninian

Boscawen, Arthur Griffith

Greville, Hon Ronald

Parker, Sir Gilbert

Boulnois Edmund

Groves, James Grimble

Peel, Hn. Wm. Robert Wellesley

Brodrick, Rt. Hon. St. John

Gunter, Sir Robert

Pemberton, John S. G.

Brookfield, Colonel Montagu

Hain, Edward

Percy, Earl

Brotherton, Edward Allen

Hall, Edward Marshall

Pierpoint, Robert

Brown, Alexander H. (Shropsh.

Halsey, Rt. Hon. Thomas F.

Platt-Higgins, Frederick

Brymer, William Ernest

Hamilton, Rt Hn Lord G (Midd'x

Plummer, Walter R.

Bullard, Sir Harry

Hanbury, Rt. Hon. Robert Wm.

Pretyman, Ernest George

Butcher, John George

Hardy, Laurence (Kent, Ashf'rd

Pryce-Jones, Lt.-Col. Edward

Campbell, Rt. Hn. J. A (Glasgow

Hare, Thomas Leigh

Purvis, Robert

Carew, James Laurence

Harris, Frederick Leverton

Pym, C Guy

Carson, Rt. Hon. Sir Edw. H.

Hay, Hon. Claude George

Randles, John S.

Carvill, Patrick Geo. Hamilton

Heath, Arthur Howard (Hanley

Rankin, Sir James

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

Heath, James (Staffords. N. W.

Ratcliff, R. F.

Cavendish, V. C. W. (Derbyshire

Heaton, John Henniker

Rattigan, Sir William Henry

Cecil, Evelyn (Aston Manor

Henderson, Sir Alexander

Reid, James (Greenock)

Cecil, Lord Hugh (Greenwich)

Hermon-Hodge, Sir Robert T.

Remnant, James Farquharson

Chamberlain, Rt. Hon. J.(Birm.

Hickman, Sir Alfred

Renwick, George

Chamberlain, Rt Hn J.A. (Worc.

Higginbottom, S. W.

Richards, Henry Charles

Chamberlayne, T. (S'thampton

Hobhouse, Henry (Somerset, E.

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

Chapman, Edward

Hogg, Lindsay

Ritchie, Rt. Hn. Chas. Thomson

Clare, Octavius Leigh

Hope, J. F. (Sheffield, Brightside

Roberts, Samuel (Sheffield)

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

Hornby, Sir William Henry

Robertson, Herbert (Hackney)

Coddington, Sir William

Hoult, Joseph

Robinson, Brooke

Cohen, Benjamin Louis

Houston, Robert Paterson

Bollit, Sir Albert Kaye

Collings, Rt. Hon. Jesse

Howard, J.(Midd., Tottenham

Ropner, Colonel Robert

Colomb, Sir John Charles Ready

Hozier, Hon. James Henry Cecil

Royds, Clement Molyneux

Colston, Chas. Edw. H. Athole

Hutton, John (Yorks, N. R.)

Sackville, Col. G. S. Stopford-

Compton, Lord Alwyne

Jebb, Sir Richard Claverhouse

Sadler, Col. Samuel Alexander

Corbett, T. L. (Down, North)

Johnstone, Heywood

Samuel, Harry S. (Limehouse)

Cox, Irwin Edward Bainbridge

Kemp, George

Sassoon, Sir Edward Albert

Cranborne, Viscount

Kennaway, Rt. Hon. Sir. John H.

Scott, Sir S. (Marylebone, W.)

Cripps, Charles Alfred

Kennedy, Patrick James

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

Cross, Alexander (Glasgow)

Kenyon, Hon. Geo. T. (Denbugh

Sharpe, William Edward T.

Cubitt, Hon. Henry

Kenyon-Slaney, Col. W.(Salop.

Shaw-Stewart, M. H. (Renfrew

Cust, Henry John C.

Keswick, William

Simeon, Sir Barrington

Dalrymple, Sir Charles

Kimber, Henry

Skewes-Cox, Thomas

Davies, Sir Horatio D (Chatham

King, Sir Henry Seymour

Smith, HC (North'mb, Tyneside

Dickson-Poynder, Sir John P.

Law, Andrew Bonar (Glasgow)

Smith, James Parker(Lanarks)

Disraeli, Coningsby Ralph

Lawrence, Sir Joseph (Monm'th

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

Dixon-Hartland, Sir Fred Dixon

Lawreuce, Wm. F. (Liverpool)

Spear, John Ward

Dorington, Rt. Hon. Sir John E.

Lawson, John Grant

Spencer, Sir E. (W. Bromwich)

Douglas, Rt. Hon. A. Akers-

Lee, Arthur H. (Hants, Fareham

Stanley, Hn. Arthur (Ormskirk

Doxford, Sir William Theodore

Lees, Sir Elliott (Birkenhead)

Stanley, Edward Jas.(Somerset

Duke, Henry Edward

Legge, Col. Hon. Heneage

Stanley, Lord (Lancs.)

Durning-Lawrence, Sir Edwin

Leigh-Bennett, Henry Currie

Stewart, Sir Mark J. M 'Taggart

Egerton, Hon. A. de Tatton

Llewellyn, Evan Henry

Stone, Sir Benjamin

Fardell, Sir T. George

Loder, Gerald Walter Erskine

Strutt, Hon. Charles Hedley

Fellowes, Hon. Ailwyn Edward

Long, Col. Charles W.(Evesham

Talbot, Lord E. (Chichester)

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

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

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

Fielden, Edward Brocklehurst

Lowe, Francis William

Thorburn, Sir Walter

Finch, George H.

Lowther, C. (Cumb., Eskdale)

Thornton, Percy M.

Finlay, Sir Robert Bannatyne

Loyd, Archie Kirkman

Tollemache, Henry James

Fisher, William Hayes

Lucas, Col. Francis (Lowestoft)

Tomlinson, Sir Wm. Edw. M.

686

687

Tritton, Charles Ernest

Webb, Colonel William George

Wylie, Alexander

Tufnell, Lieut.-Col. Edward

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

Wyndham, Rt. Hon. George

Valentia, Viscount

Whitmore, Charles Algernon

Yerburgh, Robert Armstrong

Vincent, Col. Sir CEH (Sheffield

Willox, Sir John Archibald

Younger, William

Vincent, Sir Edgar (Essex)

Wilson, John (Glasgow)

Walrond, Rt. Hon Sir William H

Wilson-Todd, Wm H. (Yorks.)

TELLERS FOR THE AYES—

Wanklyn, James Leslie

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

Sir Alexander Acland Hood and Mr. Anstruther.

Warde, Col. C. E.

Wrightson, Sir Thomas

NOES.

Allen, Charles P. (Glouc., Stroud

Helme, Norval Watson

Rickett, J. Compton

Ashton, Thomas Gair

Hemphill, Rt. Hon. Charles H.

Rigg, Richard

Barlow, John Emmott

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

Roberts, John Bryn (Eifion)

Bayley, Thomas (Derbyshire)

Holland, William Henry

Roberts, John H. (Denbighs.)

Beaumont, Wentworth C. B.

Horniman, Frederick John

Roe, Sir Thomas

Black, Alexander William

Hutton, Alfred E. (Motley)

Runciman, Walter

Brigg, John

Jacoby, James Alfred

Schwann, Charles E.

Broadhurst, Henry

Jones, William (Carnarvonshire

Shackleton, David James

Bryce, Rt. Hon. James

Kinloch, Sir John George Smyth

Shaw, Charles Edw. (Stafford)

Burns, John

Langley, Batty

Shipman, Dr. John G.

Burt, Thomas

Layland-Barratt, Francis

Sinclair, John (Forfarshire)

Buxton, Sydney Charles

Leese, Sir Joseph F. (Accrington

Soares, Ernest

Caine, Sydney Sproston

Leng, Sir John

Spencer, Rt. Hn. C R (Northants

Caldwell, James

Levy, Maurice

Stevenson, Francis S.

Campbell-Bannerman, Sir H.

Lewis, John Herbert

Strachey, Sir Edward

Cawley, Frederick

Lloyd George, David

Thomas, David Alfred (Merthyr

Craig, Robert Hunter

Lough, Thomas

Thomas, Sir A. (Glamorgan, E.

Cremer, William Randal

Macnamara, Dr. Thomas J.

Toulmin, George

Crombie, John William

M'Arthur, William (Cornwall)

Trevelyan, Charles Philips

Davies, Alfred (Carmarthen)

M'Crae, George

Wallace, Robert

Dewar, John A. (Inverness-sh.

M'Kenna, Reginald

Warner, Thomas Courtenay T.

Dilke, Rt. Hon. Sir Charles

M'Laren, Charles Benjamin

Wason, Eugene

Duncan, J. Hastings

Mappin, Sir Frederick Thorpe

Weir, James Galloway

Dunn, Sir William

Markham, Arthur Basil

White, George (Norfolk)

Edwards, Frank

Mather, William

White, Luke (York, E. R.)

Emmott, Alfred

Morgan, J. Lloyd (Carmarthen

Whiteley, George (York, W. R.

Evans, Samuel T. (Glamorgan

Morley, Charles (Breconshire)

Whitley, J. H. (Halifax)

Farquharson, Dr. Robert

Newnes, Sir George

Whittaker, Thomas Palmer

Fenwick Charles

Norton, Capt. Cecil William

Williams, Osmond (Merioneth)

Fitzmaurice, Lord Edmond

Nussey, Thomas Willans

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

Foster, Sir Walter (Derby Co.)

Palmer, Sir Charles M (Durham)

Wilson, John (Durham, Mid.)

Fuller, J. M. F.

Partington Oswald

Woodhouse, Sir J T (Huddersfi'd

Gladstone, Rt. Hn Herbert John

Pease, J. A. (Saffron Walden)

Yoxall, James Henry

Goddard, Daniel Ford

Perks, Robert William

Gurdon, Sir W. Brampton

Philipps, John Wynford

Harmsworth, R. (Leicester)

Pickard, Benjamin

TELLERS FOR THE NOES—

Hayne, Rt. Hon. Charles Seale-

Price, Robert John

Mr. Corrie Grant and Mr. Moss.

Hayter, Rt. Hon. Sir Arthur D.

Rea, Russell

Words, as amended, inserted.
It being after half-past Seven of clock, the Chairman left the Chair to make his Report to the House.
Committee report Progress; to sit again this evening.

EVENING SITTING.

  DISTURBANCE ON BELFAST CUSTOM HOUSE STEPS—MOTION FOR ADJOURNMENT.
  MR. DEVLIN(9.0.) MR. DEVLIN (Kilkenny, N.) moved the adjournment of the House for
  688
  the purpose of discussing a definite matter of urgent public importance—viz., "the riotous proceedings on Sunday last at the Custom House steps in Belfast, and the neglect and refusal of the Government to take steps to prohibit the holding of such meetings on Government property in that city." In making this Motion he disclaimed any desire to display religious bigotry or Party feeling. He could claim for the Party to which he had the honour to belong that they were guided and inspired by the desire to allay religious passions, and in taking the action he did that night he was animated solely by a desire for the peace and good government of Belfast. On Sunday last a scene of indescribable disorder and tumult took place on the

  689
  Custom House steps in Belfast. That House had heard of the Custom House steps before. It was the arena in which the bigots and supporters of the present Government were engaged on Sunday after Sunday in using the most ribald and blasphemous language, not only about the Catholics and the Catholic Church, but against that portion of the Protestant Church whose ritual did not suit their æsthetic tastes. He might mention to the House that the Protestant Association of Belfast had been broken up into two parties—the Sloanites and the Trewites. The Sloanites were represented by the hon. Member for South Belfast, and the Trewites would later on be represented in that House, when Mr. Trew took the place of the hon. Member for North Belfast. There were two leaders in the camp. There was the hon. Member for South Belfast, and there was Mr. A. Trew, and the latter gentleman thought he was entitled to occupy the place now occupied by the hon. Member for South Belfast. The hon. Member for South Belfast, taking advantage of Mr. Trew's absence in one of His Majesty's prisons, entered into the arena, and, in the words of the right hon. Member for North Armagh, "climbed on the back of Mr. Trew into Parliament and then kicked Mr. Trew from under him." The be-all and end-all of the purposes for which the organisation was carried on to the detriment of the public order and peace of the city was the collection. That was at the bottom of the blasphemy and the ribaldry, and again quoting the hon. Member for North Armagh, "the louder the language and the more vituperative the oratory the larger the collections would be." The Chief Secretary, instead of expressing his willingness to take steps to put an end to the scenes of disorder, had in an airy and jaunty manner said the ordinary procedure was adopted, and declined to assent to the railing in of the steps, so that such meetings should be no longer permissible. The Rev. Mr. Peoples, a Protestant clergyman, settled at Ballymacarrett and exercised his legitimate religious functions there, but that did not, please the gentlemen who met at Customs House steps; and inspired by the orations of Mr. Trew and Mr. Sloan, at the close of the demonstration the audience filled themselves with drink at the nearest public
  690
  house, and marched to Mr. Peoples church, broke his windows, and locked him up in his church for nearly three hours. A mob of 5,000 followed him to his lodgings and kept him there two days. The result of it all was Mr. Peoples, who had been engaged in doing good work among the poor of Ballymacarrett, was compelled to leave Belfast, and was now engaged in missionary work in England. He invited the Chief Secretary the next time he attended a Unionist banquet in Belfast to visit Mr. Peoples' church, where every pane of glass was broken, and which remained standing as a monument of the love of civil and religious liberty. Mr. Trew, who had been twelve months in jail for inciting to religious riot, actually stated that during the week he would apply to the Commissioner of police, and the next week he would have a force of men there to keep order. Evidently this gentleman believed that he could get this assistance, because the Government granted him the Customs House steps as a platform from which every Sunday to rouse the passions of a most degraded portion of the community, and turn Belfast into a bear-garden. This pillar of the Unionist Party in Ireland, on a recent Sunday, said that if he had the chance he would make sausages of the Lord Chief Baron if he would come to the Custom House steps. The right hon. Gentleman should be frank and tell the House that South Belfast had frightened him. The hon. Member for South Belfast had been returned against the official candidate of the Tory Party. He threatened that after the next general election he would come back with three other Members to support him; and instead of a Member of the philosophic calm and great experience of the right hon Gentleman the Member for West Belfast, the hon. Member would bring back one of the gentlemen who had added so many choice phrases to their political vocabulary. That was why the right hon. Gentleman was afraid. An honest, courageous Chief Secretary would say, "Let justice be done, though the heavens fall." A man who was not afraid of the rowdyism and the organised power of the forces which returned the hon. Member for South Belfast would say, "Well, if the Irish Members are being hunted throughout the land, if they are being driven out of

  691
  their own court-houses, we will at least keep up a semblance of impartialitv." It used to be said that there were two Irelands—one the Ireland of the South and West, the other the Ireland of the North. Now there were three Irelands in the North—the Trewites, the Sloanites, and the Saundersonites. He trusted it would be an edifying spectacle to see the right hon. and gallant Gentleman the Member for North Armagh listening to the speeches of the hon. Member for South Belfast. He was not surprised that the right hon. Gentleman the Chief Secretary ran away from the Belfast Protestant Association. He was not aware whether the right hon. Gentleman had ever -received a military training; he knew that the right hon. and gallant Gentleman the Member for North Armagh had. The right hon. and gallant Gentleman came to Belfast to take part in the South Belfast election, but he could not get a platform on which to open his mouth—not even the Customs House steps. The right hon. and gallant Gentleman stated he would resign the Orange organisation if the hon. Member for South Belfast were returned. The right hon. and gallant Gentleman held very strong views on the war, but he did not go to the war. He had very strong views on the South Belfast election; he went there, and the attitude of the right hon. Gentleman reminded him of lines he had read—
  "The colonel a gallant fighter was,
  In battle most delighting,
  He fled full soon on the 1st o' June,
  And bade the rest keep fighting."
  The fight was fought out, and the hon. Member for South Belfast now sat in the House of Commons; there was no railing round the Custom House steps; the scenes of turbulence and disorder which had disgraced Belfast for three years went on; additional factions were fighting out the battle, and disturbing the public weal of the city, and all because the wary Gentleman on the Treasury Bench thought it unwise to finally break away from the rowdies and organised blasphemers who had been the principal factors in maintaining the policy of ascendency in Ireland for centuries.
  MR. O'SHEEformally seconded the Motion.
  Motion made and Question proposed, "That this House do now adjourn—
  MR. SLOANsaid he had very seldom enjoyed himself so much as he had during the last half hour. If the hon Gentleman was speaking on what he called an urgent matter of public importance, he himself must be of great importance in the hon. Gentleman's estimation, because he had not touched a little bit of the subject on which he moved the adjournment of the House, namely, the riot which was supposed to have taken place in Belfast last Sunday. The hon. Gentleman's speech was all about Sloanites, Trewities, and collections. But the hon. Gentleman forgot that he was sailing in that boat a great many years longer than he was; and the hon. Gentleman had yet to prove that he (Mr. Sloan) was sailing in that boat now. The hon. Gentleman made some scurrilous remarks about the right hon. and gallant Gentleman the Member for North Armagh, and his attitude in regard to the recent contest in South Belfast. He thought that when the hon. Gentleman did start his harangue he might at least have confined himself to the particular matter on which he had moved the adjournment; but like his confederate the hon. Member for South Down, when they happened to see the Member for South Belfast out of the House last night, they took the same opportunity to stab him in the: back. Conduct like that was becoming from Members on the Nationalist Benches. The demand was that the Government should rail in the Customs House steps. He had been in the habit of going to the Customs House steps for a good number of years, but he had seen more disorderliness and rowdyism in the House of Commons during the past week than he had ever seen on the Customs House steps. There was an old adage "Begin at Jerusalem." He would suggest to the Government, if they were to begin at all, it would be to the credit of the House and to the safety of Members of the Government that they should commence by railing in the Nationalist Benches. If that had been done the probability was that Mr. O'Donnell would not have been suspended. The Member for South Mayo was, however, of very little importance. He wanted

  693
  to repudiate some of the magnificent charges made by his hon. friend. He had referred to two leaders. He had not told the House that he was one of them. He referred to a Protestant clergyman repudiating the proceedings at the Custom House steps. He did not tell the House that the same Protestant clergyman repudiated the notorious League with which he had the great honour of identifying himself as the United Irish League. He also suggested that the Government should put a stop to the language which was not pleasant to him, and undoubtedly not acceptable to those who followed him. He did not associate himself with any particular language which had been used at the Custom House steps. He had quite enough to do to be responsible for what his own tongue said. He would like, however, to point out that there had never been any of the individuals who had figured as speakers on the platform at the Custom House steps sent to gaol for boycotting or intimidation, for the simple reason that all loyal subjects of His Majesty King Edward VII. did not believe in that sort of work. They left boycotting to those who were better able to do it, because at the present time, in the estimation of the Nationalist Members, it was the popular thing to go to gaol. It always had the tendency to keep the pot boiling for them, for if the excitement and rowdyism were abated in the House, and there were not a few suspensions during the session, the funds that they looked after would be very small at the end of the year. But they knew how their funds came, and they knew when funds were required, and they came into the House for——
  MR. SPEAKER: The hon. Member is developing an argument which is not relevant to the Motion.
  MR. SLOANsaid there had been so much talk about collections, so he thought he would have been in order in referring to those of hon. Members. He would have considered it would have been a matter of public importance if the hon. Gentleman had brought up the case of the late John Kensit. They would then have been identifying themselves with popular feeling, and would be working impartially in the interests of humanity and trying to get equal justice all
  694
  round, independent of creed or doctrine. He had no hesitation in saying, so far as the Custom House steps were concerned, that if the hon. Member the first time he was in Belfast would take a walk round to the place he had invited the Chief Secretary to.
  MR. DEVLIN: I was there and saw you there—
  MR. SLOANsaid then it was a wonder there was not a riot. If the same spirit animated the hon. Member there which animated him in this House undoubtedly there would have been. However, he just wanted to say on his own behalf that so far as he was personally' concerned he had no hesitation in saying that the question now before the House was meant to be an attack upon the Member who had been returned for South Belfast. [An HON. MEMBER: "We are glad to see you here."] He thought they might be glad to see him out before he went. He repeated that it was quite evident that the attack had been on the Member for South Belfast. [HON. MEMBERS: "No, no."] Well, he repeated that statement, and if it were imagined that any such attack made upon him there would in any way debar him from doing his duty as a loyal subject and a Protestant, those concerned in such an attack were labouring under a great mistake. The coupling of his name with others in the use of language which he deplored as much as any man was not only an injustice to him, but was ungentlemanly on the part of those who made the charges. He trusted that while he was in the House he should at least have an honourable opponent, and would have to listen no more to such scurrilous harangues as the one they had hoard that night. There had been a reference to a Mr. Flanagan, whom it was alleged the Irish Chief Secretary was responsible for sending to an asylum. Well, if the Irish Nationalists did not pursue a different course from what he had seen in the House of Commons during the past week, it seemed to him that the Irish Chief Secretary would have to build them an asylum. He advised the hon. Gentlemen on the Irish Benches to try and keep cool since they had had

  695
  their say. The hon. Member had delivered an amusing harangue. The performance of the gentleman who were sent from the South and West of Ireland [HON. MEMBERS: "And the North."] were undoubtedly an amusing "paragraph" in the scenes of Parliamentary debate, and it would be monotonous, and undoubtedly almost drive them to wonder why they were in this House, if they had not a few of the orators belonging to the United Irish League to entertain them. The rest of the remarks of the hon. Gentleman did not apply to him, and he would content himself by treating the rest of the harangue with the utmost contempt.
  THE CHIEF SECRETARY FOR IRELAND (Mr. WYNDHAM,said but for the fact that the Motion was one for the Adjournment of the House on a definite matter of urgent public importance, he should not have thought of intervening in the debate, which everyone had listened to with a considerable amount of satisfaction. There was in that House a pleasant custom of paying a tribute to the first speech an hon. Member made. That was often a mere custom; but he thought he would be carrying the whole House with him when he said that the hon. Gentleman to whom they had just listened, had earned such a tribute for the manly way in which he had made his appearance in that House, and for the self-restraint which he had shown under considerable provocation. But this was a Motion for the Adjournment of the House. That Motion raised two questions—one of fact, and one of policy. The question of fact consisted in the allegation that there was a riot on the Custom House steps at Belfast, last Sunday. There was no riot on the Custom House steps last Sunday. Some time ago an inhabitant of the city of Belfast was sent to prison for one year upon a charge of criminal conspiracy. When the sentence was over, he seemed to think he was thereby qualified and designated to represent an Irish constituency in that House, but the electors of South Belfast took a different view, and they returned the hon. Member to whom they had just listened with such satisfaction. When some minutes back the hon. Member who moved the Motion was descanting upon the effect of what he called the partiality of the Irish Government, he heard the hon. Member for
  696
  Battersea almost groaning at the iniquities of the Irish Government. Was the hon. Member aware of the fact that Mr. Trew was sent to prison for a year for the crime of criminal conspiracy, and that none of the persons sentenced under the Criminal Law and Procedure Act were, or could be, sentenced to more than six months? [HON. MEMBERS: "Yes; but he was tried by jury."] The question of fact, then consisted in the allegation of riot. What happened was that Mr. Trew, who was not elected to Parliament, although he suffered imprisonment, resented that action, and last Sunday some of those who agreed with him were upon the Custom House steps. He understood there was cheering and groaning, but there was no hissing; no arrests were made by the police; there were no threats to disturb the peace and no threats as to any person's liberty or business or employment, and the matter was one which would have passed unnoticed in this House. As to the question of policy, ought they to rail in the Custom House steps at Belfast? The suggestion was that there had been more than enough of "railing" there already. The view had been advanced that the Custom House steps at Belfast ought to be railed in because those at Dublin were railed in. Well, such little knowledge as he possessed of Ireland had not led him—although he had spent the greater part of seven years in that country—to think that one of the characteristics of the Irish nation was a passion for symmetry. It was best to take the Custom Houses at Dublin and Belfast upon their separate merits. That at Dublin was railed in some years ago to prevent refuse and pieces of paper being left about the building, but there was ample space for meetings to be held outside the railings. At Belfast there were no railings, and he understood that, in order to vindicate the liberty of the subject, and the right of public speech, it was considered by hon. Gentlemen opposite to be the immediate duty of the Irish Government to put railings up. Well, the Irish Government had no intention of doing anything of the kind. His predecessors had stated so in 1899, and he stated it in 1901, and again the other day, and in order to

  697
  settle this matter of urgent and public importance he would say he was still of the same opinion he expressed two days ago, and twice last year.
  MR. MACVEAGHregretted the Chief Secretary had adopted a tone that was absolutely unworthy of the occupant of the office he held. The allegation made was that not riots but riotous conduct had been indulged in, and that allegation was borne out by both the Orange newspapers of Belfast, whose reports of the proceedings were headed, "Riotous scenes at the Custom House steps. "The right hon. Gentleman had never given more complete proof of the fact that he knew very little about Ireland than when he stated that the Dublin Custom House steps were railed in because waste-paper was thrown upon them. A more ridiculous statement was never made by a representative man. Those steps were railed in because political meetings were being held there, and repeated protests were made against it being done. The hon. Member for South Belfast, in his entertaining speech, had contended that the Motion was intended as an attack upon him. Nothing was further from the thoughts of the Nationalist Members. They were delighted to see the hon. Member elected for South Belfast, because they recognised in him the first real representative the Orangemen of Ulster had ever had in the House of Commons. There were several Ulster representatives, some of them posing as Orangemen, but the House had never had the real article before. He was afraid, however, that the hon. Member's constituents would be somewhat disappointed at the character of their representative's maiden speech, as they had really believed that the first time the; hon. Member got up in the House of Commons it would be to impeach the Pope, or to submit a Motion ordering all the Jesuits in the country to be brought to the Bar of the House. He did, however, sincerely congratulate Mr. Speaker on the speech to which they had just listened, because the hon. Member announced on the Custom House steps in Belfast that if he did not catch the Speaker's eye he would kick up a row, that if he did not get what he wanted
  698
  he would make himself a nuisance, and that while he did not want to be dragged out of the House of Commons, he would be, if necessary.
  MR. SLOAN: I was not aware that there were so many nuisances in the House when I said that.
  MR. SPEAKER: I must remind the hon. Member that this is not a Motion on which to discuss the representation of Belfast.
  MR. MACVEAGHsaid the chief defence for permitting these meetings to continue was that they were of a so-called religious character. The best evidence as to the soundness of that defence would be to read a few extracts from the religious sermons delivered there from Sunday to Sunday. ["Oh !"] Really, hon. Members need not object to hearing a sermon.
  MR. SPEAKER: I would again remind the hon. Member that this is not a general discussion. The Motion refers specifically to the riotous proceedings alleged to have taken place last Sunday, and the failure of the Government to prevent them.
  MR. MACVEAGHpresumed he would be in order in showing the character of the speeches allowed to be delivered on Government property?
  MR. SPEAKER: That is not the subject-matter of the Motion. The hon. Member must confine himself to the alleged riotous proceedings on Sunday last.
  MR. MACVEAGHsaid he had no desire to transgress the ruling of the Chair. At these meetings Catholic bishops had been referred to as "ribald hypocrites," and "business men in the best paying business in the world," and when such utterances were allowed the Government were going perilously near to provoking scenes of riot in Belfast which would throw into the shade those occurrences which had previously formed the subjects of Royal Commissions of Inquiry. If an end were not put to this state of affairs, he could only express the hope that the Catholics of Belfast would

  699
  take the matter into their own hands and put a stop to the blackguardism that went on Sunday after Sunday. The hon. Member proceeded to road an extract from one of the speeches delivered.
  MR. SPEAKER: That does not refer, I understand, to the meeting of last Sunday. I have no doubt that the hon. Member, if he went back over the last ten years, would find an immense amount of bad language had been used in Belfast, but according to the rules of order he must confine himself to last Sunday.
  MR. MACVEAGHsuggested that the police-note takers, of whom the right hon. Gentleman had a large staff, could not be better employed than in attending at the Custom House steps in Belfast, where incitements to the assassination of the Lord Chief Baron had been delivered. The disturbances of the previous Sunday were between the Trewites and the Sloanites. He did not know what doctrinal or theological differences had produced the dissension in the Protestant ranks, but, according to the right hon. Gentleman the Member for North Armagh——
  MR. WOLFFasked whether the hon. Member was in order in the line of argument he was pursuing.
  MR. SPEAKER: The hon. Member is constantly getting away from the alleged riotous proceeding of last Sunday, and endeavouring to enter into a general discussion of the Belfast election and other matters. He really must confine himself to the matter before the House.
  MR. MACVEAGHsaid the hon. Member for East Belfast would be acting more courageously if, instead of rising to points of order and endeavouring to limit the discussion, he would get up and frankly identify himself with the blasphemy
  of these gatherings. He contended that the language used on the previous Sunday in reference to Catholics was so revolting and provocative as to be absolutely dangerous to the peace of the city. There were several ways in which the Government could put an end to the scenes. The first was to rail in the steps. What was the meaning of the Chief Secretary's declaration that that was inexpedient? Simply that mob law was to be allowed to prevail in Belfast as it had always prevailed. It was said that the mob would tear the railings down. Never since the advice "Do not nail his ears to the pump" had a more eloquent exhortation been given to pull the railings down if they were put up. Another way to put an end to the disturbances was to stop the collections which were taken every Sunday. Scenes of disorder from the same cause used to arise in Hyde Park, but the First Commissioner of Works had wisely prohibited the taking of the collections, and the disorder had ceased. That was an example the Chief Secretary would do well to follow, for he would then find that no one would want to preach on the Customs House steps. The attitude of the right hon. Gentleman exhibited not only gross partisanship but great cowardice. All parties in Ireland were absolutely agreed on one point, and that was in condemning the cowardice and general incompetence of the present occupant of the office of Chief Secretary.
  Mr. A. J. BALFOURrose in his place, and claimed to move, "That the Question be now put."
  Question put, "That the Question be now put."
  The House divided:—Ayes, 188; Noes 121. (Division List No. 415.)

  Colston, Chas. Edw. H. Athole

  Hobhouse, Henry (Somerset, E.)

  Pretyman, Ernest George

  Compton, Lord Alwyne

  Hogg, Lindsay

  Pryce-Jones, Lt.-Col. Edward

  Corbett, A. Cameron (Glasgow

  Hope, J. F. (Sheffield, Brightside

  Purvis, Robert

  Corbett, T. L. (Down, North)

  Hornby, Sir William Henry

  Randles, John S.

  Cox, Irwin Edward Bainbridge

  Hoult, Joseph

  Rankin, Sir James

  Cranborne, Viscount

  Howard, John (Kent, Faversh'm

  Ratcliff, R. F.

  Cross, Alexander (Glasgow)

  Howard, J. (Midd., Tottenham)

  Reid, James (Greenock)

  Cubitt, Hon. Henry

  Hozier, Hon. James Henry Cecil

  Richards, Henry Charles

  Dalrymple, Sir Charles

  Hudson, George Bickersteth

  Ridley, Hon. M. W (Stalybridge

  Davenport, W. Bromley-

  Hutton, John (Yorks, N. R).

  Ritchie, Rt Hon. Chas. Thomson

  Dimsdlale, Sir. Joseph Cockfield

  Johnstone, Heywood

  Roberts, Samuel (Sheffield)

  Disraeli, Coningsby Ralph

  Kennaway, Rt. Hon. Sir John H.

  Robertson, Herbert (Hackney)

  Dorington, Rt. Hon. Sir John E.

  Kenyon, Hon. Geo. T. (Denbigh)

  Robinson, Brooke

  Doughty, George

  Kenyon-Slaney, Col. W. (Salop

  Ropner, Col. Robert

  Douglas, Rt. Hon. A. Akers-

  Keswick, William

  Round, James

  Doxford, Sir William Theodore

  Lambton, Hon. Frederick Wm.

  Sadler, Col. Samuel Alexander

  Duke, Henry Edward

  Law, Andrew Bonar (Glasgow)

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

  Durning, Lawrence. Sir Edwin

  Lawrence, Wm. F. (Liverpool)

  Simeon, Sir Barrington

  Egerton, Hon. A. de Tatton

  Lawson, John Grant

  Skewes-Cox, Thomas

  Elliot, Hon. A. Ralph Douglas

  Lee, Arthur H (Hants., Fareham

  Sloan, Thomas Henry

  Faber, Edmund B. (Hants, W.

  Legge, Col. Hon. Heneage

  Smith, H. C (North'mb, Tyneside

  Faber, George Denison (York)

  Leigh-Bennett, Henry Currie

  Smith, James Parker (Lanarks.)

  Fellowes, Hon. Ailwyn Edward

  Long, Rt Charles W. (Evesh'm

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

  Fielden, Edward Brocklehurst

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

  Spear, John Ward

  Finch, George H.

  Lonsdale, John Brownlee

  Spencer, Sir E. (W. Bromwich)

  Finlay, Sir Robert Bannatyne

  Loyd, Archie Kirkman

  Stanley, Lord (Lancs.

  Fisher, William Hayes

  Lucas, Col. Francis (Lowestoft

  Stewart, Sir Mark J. M'Taggart

  Fison, Frederick William

  Macartney. Rt Hn W. Ellison

  Stone, Sir Benjamin

  FitzGerald, Sir Robert Penrose-

  Macdona, John Cumming

  Talbot, Lord E. (Chichester)

  Fitzroy, Hon Edward Algernon

  Maclver, David (Liverpoo1)

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

  Flannery, Sir Fortescue

  M'Arthur, Charles (Liverpool)

  Tollemache, Henry James

  Fletcher, Rt. Hon. Sir Henry

  M'Calmont, Col. H.L.B (Cambs.

  Tomlinson, Sir Wm. Edw. M.

  Flower, Ernest

  Malcolm, Ian

  Valentia, Viscount

  Forster, Henry William

  Milvain, Thomas

  Vincent, Col. Sir C. EH (Sheffi'ld

  Foster, Philips. (Warwick, S.W

  Montagu, Hon. J. Scott (Hants.

  Walrond, Rt. Hn. Sir William H.

  Galloway, William Johnson

  Moon, Edward Robert Pacy

  Wanklyn, James Leslie

  Gardner, Ernest

  Moore, William (Antrim. N.)

  Warde, Colonel C. E.

  Garfit William

  More, Robt. Jasper (Shropshire

  Webb, Colonel William George

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

  Morgan, David J.(Walth'mst'w

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

  Gorst, Rt. Hn. Sir. John Eldon

  Morrell, George Herbert

  Whitmore, Charles Algernon

  Gray, Ernest (West Ham)

  Morton, Arthur H. Aylmer

  Wilson, John (Glasgow)

  Greene, Sir E. W.(B'rySEdm'nds

  Mount, William Arthur

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

  Grenfell, William Henry

  Mowbray, Sir Robert Gray C.

  Wolff, Gustav Wilhelm

  Groves, James Grimble

  Murray, Rt Hn A. Graham (Bute

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

  Hamilton, Rt. Hn Lord G (Midd'x

  Nicholson, William Graham

  Wrightson, Sir Thomas

  Hamilton, Marq. of(L'nd'nderry

  Nicol, Donald Ninian

  Wyne, Alexander

  Hanbury, Rt. Hon. Robert Wm.

  O'Neill, Hon. Hobert Torrens

  Wyndham, Rt. Hon. George

  Hare, Thomas Leigh

  Peel, Hn. Wm. Robert Wellesley

  Younger, William

  Harris, Frederick Leverton

  Pemberton, John S. G.

  Heath, Arthur Howard (Hanley

  Percy, Earl

  Helder, Augustus

  Pierpoint, Robert

  TELLERS FOR THE AYES—

  Henderson, Sir Alexander

  Pilkington, Lieut.-Col. Richard

  Sir Alexander Acland Hood and Mr. Anstruther.

  Hermon-Hodge, Sir Robert T.

  Platt-Higgins, Frederick

  Higginbottom, S. W.

  Plummer, Walter R.

  NOES.

  Abraham, William (Cork, N. E.

  Cremer, William Randal

  Gilhooly, James

  Allen, Charles P.(Glouc., Stroud

  Crombie, John William

  Goddard, Daniel Ford

  Ambrose, Robert

  Cullinan, J.

  Grant, Corrie

  Barry, E. (Cork, S.)

  Dalziel, James Henry

  Griffith, Ellis J.

  Bayley, Thomas (Derbyshire)

  Delany, William

  Gurdon, Sir W. Brampton

  Black, Alexander William

  Devlin, Joseph

  Harmsworth, R. Leicester

  Brigg, John

  Dewar, John A. (lnverness-sh.)

  Harwood, George

  Brown, Geo. M. (Edinburgh)

  Doogan, P. C.

  Hayden John Patrick

  Burns, John

  Duncan, J. Hastings

  Helme, Norval Watson

  Caldwell, James

  Edwards, Frank

  Hemphill, Rt. Hon. Charles H.

  Campbell, John (Armagh, S.)

  Emmott, Alfred

  Holland, Sir William Henry

  Campbell-Bannerman, Sir H.

  Evans, Samuel T, (Glamorgan)

  Hope, John Deans (Fife, West)

  Carvill, Patrick Geo. Hamilton

  Fenwick, Charles

  Horniman, Frederick John

  Causton, Richard Knight

  Ffrench, Peter

  Jameson, Major J. Eustace

  Cawley, Frederick

  Flynn, James Christopher

  Jones, William (Carnarv'nshire

  Condon, Thomas Joseph

  Foster, Sir Walter (Derby Co.)

  Jordan, Jeremiah

  Crean, Eugene

  Fuller, J. M. F.

  Joyce, Michael

  702

  703

  Kennedy, Patrick James

  Nannetti, Joseph P.

  Roe, Sir Thomas

  Labouchere, Henry

  Nolan, Joseph, (Louth, South)

  Runcman, Walter

  Law, Hugh Alex. (Donegal, W.)

  Nussey, Thomas Willans

  Shackleton, David James

  Layland-Barratt, Francis

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

  Sheehan, Daniel Daniel

  Leamy, Edmund

  O'Brien, Kendal (Tipp'ary, Mid

  Soares, Ernest J.

  Leese, Sir Joseph F. (Accrington

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

  Spencer, Rt. Hn. C R (Northants

  Leigh, Sir Joseph

  O'Brien, William (Cork)

  Stevenson, Francis S.

  Leng, Sir John

  O'Connor, James (Wicklow, W.

  Sullivan, Donal

  Levy, Maurice

  O'Connor, T. P. (Liverpool)

  Taylor, Theodore Cooke

  Lloyd-George, David

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

  Thomas, Sir A. (Glamorgan. E.

  Lough, Thomas

  O'Dowd, John

  Thomas, David Alfred (Merthyr

  Lundon, W.

  O'Kelly, Conor (Mayo, N.)

  Tomkinson, James

  MacDonnell, Dr. Mark A.

  O'Kelly, James (Roscommon, N

  Trevelyan, Charles Philips

  MacNeill, John Gordon Swift

  O'Malley, William

  White, Luke (York, E. R.)

  MacVeagh, Jeremiah

  O'Shee, James John

  Whiteley, George (York. W.R)

  M'Crae, George

  Partington, Oswald

  Whitley, J. H. (Halifax)

  M'Kean, John

  Pease, J. A. (Saffron Walden)

  Williams, Osmond (Merioneth

  M'Kenna, Reginald

  Pirie, Duncan V.

  Wilson, John (Durham, Mid.)

  M'Killop, W. (Sligo, North)

  Power, Patrick Joseph

  Young, Samuel

  Markham, Arthur Basil

  Rea, Russell

  Yoxall, James Henry

  Mooney, John J.

  Reckitt, Harold James

  Morgan, J. Lloyd (Carmarthen

  Redmond, William (Clare)

  TELLERS FOR THE NOES—

  Moss, Samuel

  Rickett, J. Compton

  Captain Donelan and Mr. Patrick O'Brien.

  Moulton, John Fletcher

  Rigg, Richard

  Murphy, John

  Roberts, John Bryn (Eifion)

  (10.28.) Question put accordingly.

  AYES.

  Abraham, William (Cork, N.E.)

  Helme, Norval Watson

  O'Brien, William (Cork)

  Ambrose, Robert

  Hemphill, Rt. Hon. Charles H.

  O'Connor, James (Wicklow, W.

  Barry, E. (Cork, S.)

  Holland, Sir William Henry

  O'Connor, T. P. (Liverpool)

  Bayley, Thomas (Derbyshire)

  Hope, John Deans (Fife, West)

  O'Donnell, John (Mayo, S.)

  Brigg, John

  Horniman, Frederick John

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

  Burns, John

  Jameson, Major J. Eustace

  O'Dowd, John

  Caldwell, James

  Jordon, Jeremiah

  O'Kelly, James (Roscommon, N

  Campbell, John (Armagh, S.)

  Joyce, Michael

  O'Malley, William

  Carvill, Patrick Geo. Hamilton

  Kennedy, Patrick James

  O'Shee, James John

  Cawley, Frederick

  Labouchere, Henry

  Partington, Oswald

  Condon, Thomas Joseph

  Law, Hugh Alex.(Donegal, W.)

  Pease, J. A. (Saffron Walden)

  Crean, Eugene

  Leamy, Edmund

  Pirie, Duncan V.

  Cremer, William Randal

  Leigh, Sir Joseph

  Power, Patrick Joseph

  Crombie, John William

  Leng, Sir John

  Rea, Russell

  Cullinan, J.

  Levy, Maurice

  Reckitt, Harold James

  Dalziel, James Henry

  Lloyd-George, David

  Redmond, William (Clare)

  Delany, William

  Lough, Thomas

  Rickett, J. Compton

  Devlin, Joseph

  Lundon, W.

  Roberts, John Bryn (Eifion)

  Dilke, Rt. Hon. Sir Charles

  MacDonnell, Dr. Mark A.

  Roberts, John H. (Denbighs.)

  Doogan, P. C.

  MacNeill, John Gordon Swift

  Shackleton, David James

  Duncan, J. Hastings

  MacVeagh, Jeremiah

  Shaw, Charles Edw. (Stafford)

  Edwards, Frank

  M'Crae, George

  Sheehan, Daniel Daniel

  Emmott, Alfred

  M'Kean, John

  Sullivan, Donal

  Evans, Samuel T. (Glamorgan)

  M'Kenna, Reginald

  Taylor, Theodore Cooke

  Fenwick Charles

  M'Killop, W. (Sligo, North)

  Thomas, David Alfred (Merth'r

  Ffrench, Peter

  Markham, Arthur Basil

  Tomkinson, James

  Flynn, James Christopher

  Mooney, John J.

  White, Luke (York, E.R.)

  Gilhooly, James

  Moss, Samuel

  Wilson, John (Durham, Mid)

  Goddard, Daniel Ford

  Murphy, John

  Young, Samuel

  Grant, Corrie

  Nannetti, Joseph P.

  Griffith, Ellis J.

  Nolan, Joseph (Louth, South)

  TELLERS FOR THE AYES—

  Harmsworth, R. Leicester

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

  Captain Donelan and Mr. Patrick O'Brien.

  Harwood, George

  O'Brien, Kendal (Tipp'rary Mid

  Hayden, John Patrick

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

  NOES.

  Agnew, Sir Andrew Noel

  Atkinson, Rt. Hon. John

  Baird, John George Alexander

  Anson, Sir William Reynell

  Bagot, Capt. Josceline FitzRoy

  Balcarres, Lord

  Arkwright, John Stanhope

  Bailey, James (Walworth)

  Balfour, Rt. Hon, A. T. (Manch'r

  Arnold-Forster, Hugh O.

  Bain, Colonel James Robert

  Balfour, Rt Hn Gerald W (Leeds

  The House divided:—Ayes, 98; Noes, 200. (Division List No. 416.)

  Balfour, Kenneth R. (Christch.

  Gore, Hn. G R C Ormsby (Salop

  Nicholson, William Graham

  Banbury, Frederick George

  Gorst, Rt. Hn. Sir. John Eldon

  Nicol, Donald Ninian

  Bathurst, Hon. Allen Benjamin

  Gray, Ernest (West Ham)

  O'Neill, Hon. Robert Torrens

  Bhownaggree, Sir M. M.

  Greene, Sir E W. (B'rySEdm'nds

  Peel, Hn. Wm Robert Wellesley

  Bignold, Arthur

  Grenfell, William Henry

  Pemberton, John S. G.

  Bill, Charles

  Groves, James Grimble

  Percy, Earl

  Blundell, Colonel Henry

  Halsey, Rt. Hon. Thomas F.

  Pierpoint, Robert

  Boscawen, Arthur Grffith-

  Hamilton, Rt. Hon. L'rd G (Midd'x

  Pilking on, Lieut.-Col. Richard

  Brodrick, Rt. Hon. St. John

  Hamilton, Marqof (L'nd'nderry

  Platt-Higgins, Frederick

  Brookfield, Colonel Montagu

  Hanbury, Rt. Hon. Robert Wm.

  Plummer, Walter R.

  Brotherton, Edward Allen

  Hare, Thomas Leigh

  Pretyman, Ernest George

  Bullard, Sir Harry

  Harris, Frederick Leverton

  Pryce-Jones, Lt.-Col. Edward

  Butcher, John George

  Heath, Arthur Howard (Hanley

  Purvis, Robert

  Carson, Rt. Hon. Sir Edw. H.

  Helder, Augustus

  Randles, John S.

  Cavendish, V. C. W. (Derbyshire

  Henderson, Sir Alexander

  Rankin, Sir James

  Cecil, Evelyn (Aston Manor)

  Hermon-Hodge, Sir Robert T.

  Ratcliff, R. F.

  Cecil, Lord Hugh (Greenwich)

  Higginbottom, S. W.

  Reid, James (Greenock)

  Chamberlain, Rt. Hon. J. (Birm.

  Hobhouse, Henry (Somerset. E.)

  Richards, Henry Charles

  Chamberlain, Rt Hn J. A. (Worc.

  Hogg, Lindsay

  Ridley, Hn. M. W.(Stalybridge

  Chapman, Edward

  Hope, J. F (Sheffield, Brightside

  Ritchie, Rt. Hn. Chas. Thomson

  Clare, Octavius Leigh

  Hornby, Sir William Henry

  Roberts, Samuel (Sheffield)

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

  Hoult, Joseph

  Robertson, Herbert (Hackney)

  Cohen, Benjamin Louis

  Howard, John (Kent, Fav'rsh'm

  Robinson, Brooke

  Collings, Rt. Hon. Jesse

  Howard, J. (Midd., Tottenham

  Ropner, Colonel Robert

  Colomb, Sir John Charles Ready

  Hozier, Hon. James Henry Cecil

  Round, Rt. Hon. James

  Colston, Chas. Edw. H. Athole

  Hudson, George Bickersteth

  Sadler, Col. Samuel Alexander

  Compton, Lord Alwyne

  Hutton, John (Yorks, N. R.)

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

  Corbett, A. Cameron (Glasgow)

  Jeffreys, Rt. Hon. Arthur Fred.

  Seton-Karr, Henry

  Corbett, T. L. (Down, North)

  Johnstone, Heywood

  Shaw-Stewart, M.H.(Renfrew)

  Cox, Irwin Edward Bainbridge

  Kemp, George

  Simeon, Sir Barrington

  Cranborne, Viscount

  Kennaway, Rt. Hon. Sir John H.

  Skewes-Cox, Thomas

  Cross, Alexander (Glasgow)

  Kenyon, Hon. Geo. T.(Denbigh)

  Sloan, Thomas Henry

  Cubitt, Hon. Henry

  Kenyon-Slaney, Col. W. (Salop.

  Smith, HC (N'rth'mb. Tyneside

  Dalrymple, Sir Charles

  Keswick, William

  Smith, James Parker (Lanarks.

  Davenport, W. Bromley-

  Lambton, Hon. Frederick Wm.

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

  Dimsdale, Sir Joseph Cockfield

  Law, Andrew Bonar (Glasgow)

  Spear, John Ward

  Disraeli, Coningsby Ralph

  Lawrence, Wm. F. (Liverpool)

  Spencer, Sir E. (W. Bromwich)

  Dorington, Rt. Hon. Sir John E.

  Lawson, John Grant

  Stanley, Lord (Lancs.)

  Doughty, George

  Lee, Arthur H (Hants., Fareham

  Stewart, Sir Mark J. M'Taggart

  Douglas, Rt. Hon. A. Akers-

  Legge, Col. Hon. Heneage

  Stone, Sir Benjamin

  Doxford, Sir William Theodore

  Leigh-Bennett, Henry Currie

  Talbot, Lord E. (Chichester)

  Duke, Henry Edward

  Long, Col. Charles W. (Evesham

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

  Durning-Lawrence. Sir Edwin

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

  Tollemache, Henry James

  Egerton, Hon. A. de Tatton

  Lonsdale, John Brownlee

  Tomlinson, Sir Wm. Edw. M.

  Elliot, Hon. A. Ralph Douglas

  Loyd, Archie Kirkman

  Valentia, Viscount

  Faber, Edmund B. (Hants, W.)

  Lucas, Col. Francis (Lowestoft)

  Vincent, Col. Sir C E H (Sheffield

  Faber, George Denison (York)

  Lyttelton, Hon. Alfred

  Walrond, Rt. Hn. Sir William H

  Fellowes, Hon. Ailwyn Edward

  Macartney, Rt Hn W.G. Ellison

  Wanklyn, James Leslie

  Fielden, Edward Brocklehurst

  Macdona, John Cumming

  Warde, Colonel C. E.

  Finch, George H.

  MacIver, David (Liverpool)

  Webb, Colonel William George

  Finlay, Sir Robert Bannatyne

  M'Arthur, Charles (Liverpool)

  Welby, Lt.-Col. ACE (Taunton

  Fisher, William Hayes

  M'Calmont, Col. H.L.B.(Cambs

  Whitmore, Charles Algernon

  Fison, Frederick William

  Malcolm, Ian

  Wilson, John (Glasgow)

  FitzGerald, Sir Robert Penrose-

  Milvain, Thomas

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

  Fitzroy, Hon. Edward Algernon

  Montagu, Hon. J. Scott (Hants.)

  Wolff, Gustav Wilhelm

  Flannery, Sir Fortescue

  Moon, Edward Robert Pacy

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

  Fletcher, Rt. Hon. Sir Henry

  Moore, William (Antrim, N.)

  Wrightson, Sir Thomas

  Flower, Ernest

  More, Robt. Jasper (Shropshire

  Wylie, Alexander

  Forster, Henry William

  Morgan, David J.(Walthamsto.

  Wyndham, Rt. Hon. George

  Foster, Philips. (Warwick, S. W

  Morrell, George Herbert

  Younger, William

  Fowler, Rt. Hon. Sir Henry

  Morton, Arthur H. A. Aylmer

  Galloway, William Johnson

  Mount, William Arthur

  TELLERS FOR THE NOES—

  Gardner, Ernest

  Mowbray, Sir Robert Gray C.

  Sir Alexander Acland Hood and Mr. Austruther.

  Garfit, William

  Murray, Rt Hn A Graham (Bute

  EDUCATION (ENGLAND AND WALES) BILL.
  Considered in Committee:
  (In the Committee.)
  [Mr. J. W. LOWTHER (Cumberland, Penrith) in the Chair.
  Clause 8:—
  (10.42.) Amendment proposed—
  "In page 3, line 11, to leave out the words 'have power to,' and insert the word ' periodically.'"—
  Question proposed, "That the words proposed to be left out stand part of the Clause."
  SIR WILLIAM ANSONsaid he thought the Amendment put on the local education authority a very unnecessary obligation. That authority would be responsible for the maintenance and efficiency of the school. It would find the money, and as a matter of course it would take care that it got the worth of the money by I inspecting the school.
  MR. BRYCEsaid the Amendment did not add anything to the power of the local authority, but he thought it might be worth while considering whether the power should not be made an obligation. They certainly understood from the Government that it was intended that certain functions, hitherto discharged by the Board of Education, should be undertaken in practice by the local authority, which was to relieve the Board of Education of some of its work of inspection. He appealed to the right hon. Gentleman the Member for the University of Cambridge to state whether he did not express his views to that effect. Under these circumstances it seemed only natural that the Committee should express its opinion that the local authority should be allowed to exercise its right. Otherwise it was very likely they would take a rather lax view, of their duty and would not inspect as much as they ought to do. [MINISTERIAL, cries of "Oh, oh.") That was a possibility: they had to guard against possibilities. He could hardly conceive that any harm could be done by accepting this Amendment.
  SIR JOHN GORSTsaid there was no doubt whatever that the whole efficiency of the schools depended on a proper system of inspection—a system of inspection by one and not by two authorities. If there were two authorities giving contradictory orders, it was quite impossible that a school could be made efficient. Of all the functions the central authority could perform, that of inspection was the most important. The Board of Education ought to carry out the work of inspection. He quite granted that the present system of inspection was by no means efficient, and he hoped to have the opportunity on another occasion of giving the House his view of what the
  708
  system should be. It would be a mistake to transfer the work of inspection from the Board of Education to the local authority. To mention only one reason, the Board was capable of having much more impartial inspectors than the local authorities were. No doubt there would have to be a certain amount of administrative inspection by the local authorities, because, as they were to be masters of the finance and to give -directions as to the mode in which instruction in the schools was to be carried on, they must have a sufficient amount of inspection to secure obedience to their orders. Of all kinds of inspection the most mischievous and useless was periodic inspection, because under that system the teachers knew when the inspectors were coming. Preparation was made for the inspection, and the inspectors did not see the school in its normal but in its dressed up condition. The inspection should be in the way of surprise visits.
  MR. LOUGHthought the instructions they gave in this Bill to the local education authority should be definite. The first words of the Clause were that the local authority should maintain and keep efficient those schools, and the fear which some hon. Members entertained was that there was no real intention to enable the local authorities to be the real managers of the schools. The sub-Clauses did not carry out the words with which the Clause opened, and there was no sub-Clause that gave so much support to this condition as the one they were now considering. He thought what the Government meant on the subject of inspection ought to be made clear in the Bill. There should be no doubt left in the minds of those who might have to construe it hereafter. The right hon. Gentleman the Member for Cambridge University had said that there ought to be a certain amount of administrative inspection, but that was not provided for in the Bill. There was no desire to interfere with proper inspection through the Board of Education, but the local education authority could not possibly discharge the great duties placed upon it by this Clause unless it inspected the schools and was perfectly conversant with all the work that went on there.

  709
  It was absolutely necessary that the Clause should be made clear in regard to administrative inspection.
  MR. HENRY HOBHOUSEsaid the hon. Member for West Islington had used the expression "managers of the schools'' in referring to the functions of the local authority. They were not to manage but to control the schools, and these were two very different things. Nothing would be worse for the schools and the ratepayers than to have an unnecessary double inspection. It was quite true that they would want the local authority to inspect the schools occasionally when special points arose, but as a rule he was sure that His Majesty's inspectors would do the work well and efficiently, and if the Committee accepted the new Clause of which he had given notice, namely, that the inspectors should be directed to send their reports to the local authority as well as to the Board of Education, no difficulty would arise. If any difficulty arose then they could no doubt have an inspector down, but thev objected to a statutory obligation.
  MR. M'KENNAsaid hon. Gentlemen on the other side of the House seemed to forget that this Bill was a measure to establish a single authority which was to co-ordinate primary and secondary education both in the voluntary schools and the public and provided schools. The only official who could serve as a co-ordinating factor between the primary and the secondary schools would be the local inspector. If the local authority did not insist upon inspecting the schools they would have no means of obtaining a uniform standard of elementary education which was to form the groundwork of the secondary department. How were they going to co-ordinate the schools and prevent overlapping, which was the main object of this Bill, unless they had local inspection? It was absolutely essential that they should have a local inspection, but it was obvious they were departing from the original proposals of the Government and coming to the root and foundation of the Bill, the granting of rates for the voluntary schools. They would find, as they went on, the original pretences abandoned.
  LORD EDMUND FITZMAURICEsaid he was sorry that the Government had not seen their way to accept this Amendment. It was certainly one that would make the Bill clearer, and if there was a greater readiness to accept Amendments of this kind they might progress rather more rapidly than they were doing. The right hon. Gentleman had tried to place upon the Amendment before the Committee a sense which it did not quite bear. The word "periodical" did not necessarily mean fixed times. If it did, he might agree with the right hon. Gentleman that there might be a solid objection to the Amendment. He took it that periodical inspection meant from time to time. If the words "from time to time'" would recommend the Amendment more to the Government, he would suggest that these words might be substituted. He could not conceive that any self-respecting county authority would not insist upon carrying out inspection of the schools. He wanted to know what was to be the relation between the Government inspector and the county inspector, because that was a matter on which as yet they knew absolutely nothing. Subjection 2 provided that the grants in future were to be paid to the local authority and distributed by them to all the schools, whether denominational or provided. That being so, inspection by the distributing authority was absolutely necessary.
  SIR WILLIAM ANSONsaid they were dealing now with the conditions under which the denominational schools were to be maintained by the local authority, one of those conditions being that the schools should be open to inspection. The education authority would have the right when they pleased to inspect the denominational schools. If hon. Gentlemen on the other side wished to enforce inspection by the local authority by a general rule they must find some other place in the Bill to put it in. This was not the place at which to do it.
  MR. SAMUEL EVANSsaid the words "have power to" must be left in, otherwise the local authority would be committing a trespass every time they entered a voluntary school.

  711
  Unless they had the right to inspect they had no right to enter the premises at all. The duty of inspecting the schools periodically should be placed on the new education authority, but whether this was the right place in the Bill to impose that duty he was not quite sure.
  MR. BRYN ROBERTSsaid that unless the words "have power to" remained in the Clause the local authority would have no right to enter the school. The arguments of the right hon. Gentleman the Member for Cambridge University were against the Clause and not against the Amendment. The right hon. Gentleman endeavoured to evade the difficulty by suggesting that a certain kind of inspection should take place by the local authority with reference to finance. If that was so there was no force in his objection. If a certain kind of inspection was desirable, why not make it compulsory? They had been constantly-told that the Bill was to give the entire control of secular education to the local authority. If that was so the duty of inspection by the local authority was absolute.
  MR. GEORGE WHITEsaid that most Members of the House knew that the School Boards had inspectors who were extremely valuable. Their inspection was not confined to the quality of the teaching. They went into all the details of the school management. He was sure inspection of that kind would be absolutely necessary when the local authority had to deal with education in so wide an area as that of a county. In many cases the managers knew very little of the practical work of teaching, and there an inspectorship was found to be very valuable. From long experience he could say that he had never known a local inspector clash with His Majesty's inspectors.
  MR. A. J. BALFOURsaid he earnestly hoped the Committee would not continue the discussion when clearly the Amendment could not be inserted in this place. Hon. Members should recollect what they were at. The question was not the desirability of inspecting this or that class of schools. What was wanted was
  712
  that it should be made a condition precedent that the local authority should maintain their schools in an efficient state, and it was, if he might say so, verging on nonsense to say that they would not do so. He did not think they would add to their reputation as a business assembly by continuing the discussion.
  MR. FLETCHER MOULTONsaid he could fully assure the First Lord of the Treasury that they appreciated the force of his objection that this was not the place to insert a provision as to the duty of H. M.'s inspectors; but he was anxious that the Committee should not pass from this Clause without an undertaking that inspection should be a duty imposed on the local authority. If the Bill passed in its present form, which only gave a power to inspect, any court would say that inspection was by the Act not contemplated as a duty. What they were afraid of in connection with this Bill was that in regard to non-provided schools there should grow up an idea that the connection of the local education authority with them was not a genuine and business-like connection, and anything which made that dilettante, if he might use the phrase, was a thing they were rightly jealous of. They ought to have an assurance that the duty of inspection of all schools, and of auditing the accounts of all schools, should be proclaimed in the Bill.
  COLONEL PILKINGTONasked whether it was really to be understood that the new local education authority that was to have control over the secular education of these schools was not to inspect.
  MR. A. J. BALFOURsaid he wished to repudiate the interpretation which had been placed on his remarks. They were all in favour of inspection; but his point was that it was bad business to discuss the particular question now raised on a Clause where it would be out of place.
  COLONEL PILKINGTONsaid it was exceedingly difficult for a Member sitting on this side of the House to express his opinion on this question. This was the first time that he had risen during the

  713
  whole of the proceedings of the Committee, but he desired to follow up the suggestion of the hon. Member for Launceston, and he thought it right to suggest to the Committee that at the proper time it should be recognised that one of the first and most important duties of the local authority should be to inspect the schools regularly, and as often as possible. If they wanted work well done in any affair, whether in schools or in workshops, the most important and valuable thing was for the authority to regulate and inspect that work. He did not suppose that the Prime Minister had a more loyal supporter than he was. He had never voted against him, and did not intend to do so now, but he repeated that, at the proper time, the duty of inspection by the new education.

  AYES.

  Agnew, Sir Andrew Noel

  Cox, Irwin Edward Bainbridge

  Halsey, Rt. Hon. Thomas F.

  Anson, Sir William Reynell

  Cranborne, Viscount

  Hamilton Rt Hn Lord G (Midd'x

  Arkwright, John Stanhope

  Cross, Alexander (Glasgow)

  Hanbury, Rt. Hon. Robert Wm.

  Arnold-Forster, Hugh O.

  Cubitt, Hon. Henry

  Hare, Thomas Leigh

  Atkinson, Rt. Hon. John

  Dalrymple, Sir Charles

  Harris, Frederick Leverton

  Bagot, Capt. Josceline FitzRoy

  Davenport, W. Bromley-

  Hay, Hon. Claude George

  Bailey, James (Walworth)

  Dimsdale, Sir Joseph Cockfield

  Heath, Arthur Howard (Hanley

  Bain, Colonel. James Robert

  Disraeli, Coningsby Ralph

  Helder, Augustus

  Balcarres, Lord

  Dorington, Rt. Hon. Sir John E.

  Henderson, Sir Alexander

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

  Doughty, George

  Hermon-Hodge, Sir Robert T.

  Balfour, Capt. C. B. (Hornsey)

  Douglas, Rt. Hon. A. Akers-

  Higginbottom, S. W.

  Balfour, Rt Hn Gerald W.(Leed.

  Doxford, Sir William Theodore

  Hobhouse, Henry (Somerset, E.

  Balfour, Kenneth R. (Christchs

  Durning-Lawrence, Sir Edwin

  Hogg, Lindsay

  Banbury, Frederick George

  Egerton, Hon. A. de Tatton

  Hope, F.(Sheffield, Brightside

  Bathurst, Hon. Allen Benjamin

  Elliot, Hon. A. Ralph Douglas

  Howard, John (Kent Faversham

  Bhownaggree, Sir M. M.

  Faber, Edmund B. (Hants, W.)

  Hozier, Hn. James Henry Cecil

  Bignold, Arthur

  Faber, George Denison (York)

  Hudson, George Bickersteth

  Bill, Charles

  Fardell, Sir T. George

  Hutton, John (Yorks, N R.)

  Blundell, Colonel Henry

  Fellowes, Hon. Ailwyn Edward

  Jeffreys, Rt. Hon. Arthur Fred.

  Boscawen, Arthur Griffith-

  Fergusson, Rt Hn Sir J.(Manc'r

  Johnstone, Heywood

  Brodrick, Rt. Hon. St. John

  Fielden, Edward Brocklehurst

  Kemp, George

  Brookfield, Colonel Montagu

  Finch, George H.

  Kennaway, Rt. Hn. Sir John H.

  Brotherton, Edward Allen

  Finlay, Sir Robert Bannatyne

  Kennedy, Patrick James

  Bullard, Sir Harry

  Fisher, William Hayes

  Kenyon, Hon. Geo. T. (Denbigh)

  Butcher, John George

  Fison, Frederick William

  Kenyon-Slaney, Col. W. (Salop.

  Carew, James Laurence

  Fitzroy, Hon. Edward Algernon

  Keswick, William

  Carson, Rt. Hon. Sir Edw. H.

  Flannery, Sir Fortescue

  Law, Andrew Bonar (Glasgow)

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

  Fletcher, Rt. John. Sir Henry

  Lawrence, Wm. F. (Liverpool)

  Cavendish, V.C.W (Derbyshire

  Flower, Ernest

  Lawson, John Grant

  Cecil, Evelyn (Aston Manor)

  Forster, Henry William

  Lee, Arthur H (Hants, Fareham

  Cecil, Lord Hugh (Greenwich)

  Foster, Philip S. (Warwick, S. W

  Lees, Sir Elliott (Birkenhead)

  Chamberlain, Rt. Hon. J.(Birm.

  Galloway, William Johnson

  Legge, Col. Hon. Heneage

  Chamberlain, Rt Hn J. A. (Worc.

  Gardner, Ernest

  Leigh-Bennett, Henry Currie

  Chapman, Edward

  Garfit, William

  Long, Col. Charles W (Evesham

  Charrington, Spencer

  Godson, Sir Augustus Frederick

  Long, Rt. Hn Walter (Bristol, S.

  Clare, Octavius Leigh

  Gordon. Maj Evans-(T'rH'mlets

  Lowe, Francis William

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

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

  Loyd, Archie Kirkman

  Cohen, Benjamin Louis

  Gorst, Rt. Hon. Sir. John Eldon

  Lucas, Col. Francis (Lowestoft)

  Collings, Rt. Hon. Jesse

  Gray, Ernest (West Ham)

  Lyttelton, Hon. Alfred

  Colomb, Sir John Chas. Ready

  Greene, Sir E W (B'rySEdm'nds

  Macartney, Rt. Hn W. G Ellison

  Colston, Chas. Edw. H. Athole

  Grenfell, William Henry

  Macdona, John Cumming

  Compton, Lord Alwyne

  Greville, Hon. Ronald

  MacIver David (Liverpool)

  Corbett, A. Cameron (Glasgow)

  Groves, James Grimble

  M'Arthur, Charles (Liverpool)

  authority under this New Education Act should be laid down thoroughly and strongly in the Bill.
  MR. SYDNEY BUXTONsaid that the Prime Minister had complained of the prolongation of the debate, but if he would give the Committee a promise that in some other part of the Bill provision should be made that not only the provided but the non-provided schools should be compulsorily inspected, there would be no desire to discuss the Amendment further.
  (11.20.) Question put.
  Committee divided:—Ayes, 198; Noes, 88. (Division List, No. 417.)

  M'Calmont, Col. H. L. B (Cambs

  Randles, John S.

  Tollemache, Henry James

  Malcolm, Ian

  Rankin, Sir James

  Tomlinson, Sir Wm. Edw. M.

  Milvain, Thomas

  Reid, James (Greenock)

  Valentia, Viscount

  Montagu, Hon. J. Scott (Hants.

  Richards, Henry Charles

  Vincent, Col. Sir CEH (Sheffield

  Moon, Edward Robert Pacy

  Ridley, Hon M. W.(Stalybridge

  Vincent, Sir Edgar (Exeter)

  More, Robt. Jasper (Shropshire)

  Ritchie, Rt. Hn. Chas. Thomson

  Walrond, Rt. Hn. Sir William H

  Morgan David J (Walthamstow

  Roberts, Samuel (Sheffield)

  Warde, Colonel C. E.

  Morrell, George Herbert

  Robertson, Herbert (Hackney)

  Webb, Colonel Wm. George

  Morrison, James Archibald

  Ropner, Colonel Robert

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

  Morton, Arthur H. Aylmer

  Round, Rt. Hon. James

  Whitmore, Charles Algernon

  Mount, William Arthur

  Sackville, Col. S. G. Stopford-

  Willox, Sir John Archibald

  Mowbray, Sir Robert Gray C.

  Sadler, Col. Samuel Alexander

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

  Murray, Rt Hn A. Graham (Bute

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

  Wilson, John (Glasgow)

  Murray, Chas. J. (Coventry)

  Seton-Karr, Henry

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

  Nicholson, William Graham

  Shaw-Stewart, M. H. (Renfrew)

  Wortley, Rt. Hon. C. B. Stuart

  Nicol, Donald Ninian

  Smith, HC (North'mb, Tyneside

  Wrightson, Sir Thomas

  Peel, Hn. Wm. Robt. Wellesley

  Smith, James Parker (Lanarks.

  Wylie, Alexander

  Pemberton, John S. G.

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

  Wyndham, Rt. Hon. George

  Percy, Earl

  Spear, John Ward

  Younger, William

  Pilkington, Lieut-Col. Richard

  Stanley, Lord (Lancs.)

  Platt-Higgins, Frederick

  Stewart, Sir Mark J. M Taggart

  Plummer, Walter R.

  Strutt, Hon. Charles Hedley

  TELLERS FOR THE AYES—

  Pretyman, Ernest George

  Talbot, Lord E. (Chichester)

  Sir Alexander Acland Hood and Mr. Anstruther.

  Pryce-Jones, Lt.-Col. Edward

  Talbot, RtHn.J.G. (Oxf'd Univ.

  Purvis, Robert

  Thorton, Percy M.

  NOES.

  Allen, Charles P (Glouc., Stroud

  Grant, Corrie

  Rigg, Richard

  Ashton, Thomas Gair

  Griffith, Ellis. J.

  Roberts, John Bryn (Eifion)

  Bayley, Thomas (Derbyshire)

  Gurdon, Sir W. Brampton

  Roberts, John H. (Denbighs.)

  Beaumont, Wentworth C. B.

  Harmsworth, R. Leicester

  Roe, Sir Thomas

  Black, Alexander William

  Hayne, Rt. Hn. Charles Seale-

  Shackleton, David James

  Brigg, John

  Helme, Norval Watson

  Shaw, Charles Edw. (Stafford)

  Brown, George M. (Edinburgh

  Hemphill, Rt. Hon. Charles H.

  Shipman, Dr. John G.

  Brunner, Sir John Tomlinson

  Holland, Sir William Henry

  Sinclair, John (Forfarshire)

  Bryce, Rt. Hon. James

  Horniman, Frederick John

  Soares, Ernest J.

  Burns, John

  Hutton, Alfred E. (Morley)

  Spencer. Rt Hn C. R. (Northants

  Buxton, Sydney Charles

  Jones William (Carnarvonshire

  Stevenson, Francis S.

  Caldwell, James

  Labouchere, Henry

  Strachey, Sir Edward

  Campbell-Bannerman, Sir H.

  Langley, Batty

  Taylor, Theodore Cooke

  Causton, Richard Knight

  Layland-Barratt, Francis

  Thomas, Sir A. (Glamorgan, E.)

  Cawley, Frederick

  Leese, Sir Joseph F. (Accrington

  Thomas, David Alfred (M'rthyr)

  Cremer, William Randal

  Leigh, Sir Joseph

  Tomkinson, James

  Dalziel, James Henry

  Leng, Sir John

  Toulmin, George

  Davies, M. Vaughan-(Cardigan

  Lloyd-George, David

  Trevelyan, Charles Philips

  Dewar, John A. (Inverness-sh.

  Lough, Thomas

  Warner, Thomas Courtenay T.

  Dilke, Rt. Hon. Sir Charles

  M'Arthur, William (Cornwall)

  White, George (Norfolk)

  Duncan, J. Hastings

  M'Crae, George

  White, Luke (York, E. R.)

  Edwards, Frank

  M'Kenna, Reginald

  Whiteley, George(York, W. R.)

  Emmott, Alfred

  Markham, Arthur Basil

  Whitley, J. H. (Halifax)

  Evans, Samuel T. (Glamorgan)

  Morgan, J. Lloyd (Carmarthen)

  Williams, Osmond (Merioneth)

  Fenwick, Charles

  Moss, Samuel

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

  Fitzmaurice, Lord Edmond

  Moulton, John Fletcher

  Wilson, John (Durham, Mid.)

  Foster, Sir Walter (Derby Co.)

  Pease, J. A. (Salfron Walden)

  Fowler, Rt. Hon. Sir Henry

  Pirie, Duncan V.

  Fuller, J. M. F.

  Rea, Russell

  TELLERS FOR THE NOES—

  Gladstone, Rt Hn. Herbert John

  Reckitt, Harold James

  Mr. Levy and Mr. Charles Morley.

  Goddard, Daniel Ford

  Rickett, J. Compton

  DR. MACNAMARAsaid that the proposal to omit salaries was ruled out because the Prime Minister moved the closure; but now having entered on a definition of the appropriation of expenditure, he submitted it was in order to raise the question as to the appropriation of money in respect of salaries
  THE CHAIRMAN: If you have control of the expenditure, you can fix a scale of payment. The next Amendment is, I think, also covered by the words which have been inserted.
  MR. TREVELYANsaid the object of the Amendment he now moved was to make it perfectly clear that any member of the local authority or of the Education

  717
  Committee should have the same liberty to enter and inspect any school as the managers. In order to control the schools properly, it was essential that the members of the controlling authority should have perfectly free access to them; and unless it were legally certain that they would have that access under the Bill as it stood, the words ought to be inserted. He hoped the Government would accept a very simple and, he thought, natural Amendment.
  Amendment proposed—
  "In page 3, line 12, after the word 'school,' to insert 'any member of that authority, or of the Education Committee, shall have the same liberty to enter and inspect the school as any manager.'"—(Mr. Trevelyan.)
  Question proposed, "That those words be there inserted."
  SIR ROBERT FINLAYsaid he hoped that the hon. Gentleman would not press his Amendment. It was never intended that any individual member of the local education authority should be allowed to roam into a school and inspect it at his own pleasure. The local education authority might make provision for inspection; but would it be contended that it was advisable that every member of that body should have the right of inspection. The Amendment was not one which could possibly be accepted.
  MR. JOSEPH A. PEASEsaid he thought that the Education Committee might at least be allowed to go into the schools, even if the County Council as a whole might not. A similar provision had brought technical education work throughout the country into close sym-
  718
  pathy with the County Councils, because members of Technical Education Committees were allowed to inspect the schools from time to time, and the inspection was appreciated by the teachers, and brought the work of education into close harmony with the governing body.
  SIR ROBERT FINLAYsaid that of course the Education Committee might be useful for the purposes of inspection; but what was not desirable was that it should be laid down in an Act of Parliament that each individual member of the County Council, without any authority from that body, should have the right to enter and inspect a school.
  MR. LLOYD-GEORGEsaid that at present the members of every School Board had that right, however large the Board might be. The fifty-five members of the London School Board could enter any of their schools; but the Attorney-General really exaggerated the practice. He seemed to imagine that seventy or eighty members of the County Council might all wish to enter and inspect a school in a remote part of the county. That suggestion was perfectly ridiculous. The only practical value of the Amendment would be that the County Councillor for a particular district would have the right to enter any school in that district. There was not the slightest danger that a County Councillor would travel from one end of the county to the other in order to inspect a school; but it was desirable that a County Councillor for a district should have the right to inspect the schools in that district. Surely the Government might make that concession.
  MR. M'KENNAsaid that his hon. friend who had just spoken had forgotten one important fact, namely, that these were private schools, and that the only thing public about them was that the public paid for them. Of course the Government would not admit any inspection of the schools. The analogy of the School Boards did not apply; and, therefore, to ask the Government to allow the gentlemen who were elected on the County Council, and who knew all about the schools, or any person, other than a particular official inspector, to inspect the schools, was asking from the Government what they could not reasonably be expected to grant. He trusted, therefore, his hon. friend would not ask them to depart from the great principle of the Bill, which was to maintain the perfect privacy of the voluntary schools, although the public paid for them. He trusted his hon. friend would not press his Amendment.
  MR. HERBERT ROBERTSsaid he did not quite agree with his hon. friend who had just spoken. He thought that the opposition of the Government was based on a not very wide acquaintance with the facts of the case, and on a mistaken idea that what was desired was to allow the entire County Council to visit the schools in a body. That idea was preposterous. He was sorry to say that in his experience the great difficulty in the past had been not the number eager to inspect the schools but the difficulty of arousing any interest in certain bodies in the work of education. If the doors of the schools were open to the authority charged with maintaining them in an efficient condition, it would be an educational reform of considerable merit. He hoped remarks of his hon. friend would not be taken seriously.
  MR. TREVELYANsaid he was a member of the London School Board, and what happened had been described by his hon. friend the Member for Carnarvon Boroughs. All the members of the Board had access to the 450 schools which the Board managed. The member for a particular district generally visited the schools in that district, and informed the Board of what was going on. There were a few members on the Board who visited a great many schools in order to get special knowledge—men like Mr. Diggle and Mr. Lyulph Stanley, who were intensely useful to the Board, and whose value to the Board would not be anything like what it was, if they had not constant access to the schools, in order that they might know quite as much about them as the inspectors. That was simply what he desired. He would be perfectly ready to omit "and inspect" from the Amendment.
  MR. A. J. BALFOURsaid there appeared to be some confusion in the minds of hon. Gentlemen. The hon. Gentleman who had just spoken said that as a member of the London School Board he had a perfect right to enter any school under it: but he imagined that it would be perfectly within the competence of the education authority to do with regard to the schools in its area what the London School Board did with regard to the schools in its area; but no statutory; power was given to the members of any School Board for that purpose. The education authority under the Bill as it stood would be perfectly empowered to enter any school in its area, but that was quite different to laying down a statutory provision to the effect that any member of a County Council should enter any school in the county, irrespective of the wishes of the council itself.
  MR. SAMUEL EVANSsaid he was glad his hon. friend had limited his Amendment to the right of entry to the schools which the public would be bound to maintain. He would put a practical case, which would show the hardship which would be caused in many districts unless some such Amendment were accepted. Suppose that no power was delegated by the County Council to any particular person to enter the schools, and that there wore complaints as to the abuses in a particular school. The County Council need only meet every three months, and it might happen that three months would have to elapse before members of the local education authority could be given the right to enter the schools. Suppose, again, that some abuse was going on in a school with the connivance of the managers; it was only fair that power should be given to the county councillor for the district to enter that school, and he was perfectly certain that in no case would that power be abused.
  MR. A. J. BALFOURsaid that the local education authority could give power to their members to enter any school in their area.
  MR. SAMUEL EVANSsaid that if it was so the Amendment before the Committee sought to obtain a power which would be within the competence of every County Council to grant. It was necessary to elucidate the matter, because that was not the view of the Attorney General.
  SIR ROBERT FINLAYsaid he said exactly what had been said by the First Lord of the Treasury, and he hoped that hon. Members would try to understand him instead of trying to misunderstand
  722
  him. The authority to enter might either be by actual and express delegation or by the implied course of business.
  MR. SAMUEL EVANSsaid he quite followed that point, and was not trying to misunderstand the right hon. Gentleman. But the right hon. Gentleman stated in express terms that they could not be expected to allow the County Council to march into a school in a body; and that, therefore, they should delegate that right to some few persons. That would not meet the practical difficulty, which was that the representative of a particular district, on the County Council should not be allowed to enter the schools in that district unless the County Council had empowered all its members to visit all schools in its area. If the County Council had that power it would exercise it. Hut that, was no reason why the Amendment should not be accepted; and he did not think it would be seriously contended that a power of that kind would be abused.
  DR. MACNAMARAsaid it was desirable that every member of the local education authority, as well as the members of the education committee should have the right of entry into the schools. All the powers and duties of the School Boards were transferred to the new authorities, and it was in the competence of the School Boards at the present time to empower all their members under all circumstances to enter the schools in their areas at any time. He imagined that one of the first acts of the local education authority would be to pass a general resolution giving that power. That being so, he did not see the necessity for the Amendment.
  MR. MOSSsaid that the Attorney General in opposing the Amendment stated that it was surely not to be expected that all the Members of the County Council should be entitled to enter a school at any time; but the Prime Minister on the other hand stated that the Amendment was absurd because the County Councils would have power under the Act to do exactly what was now asked. He thought the Attorney General did not quite realise what the Bill proposed. The Bill proposed that the County Councils should be the local education authority acting through a Committee. A school might be fifty or sixty miles away from the town in which the County Council met, and he agreed with his hon. friend that it might be very important that the member of the County Council representing the particular district in which the school was situated should have the right to inspect that school. He did not know why it should be assumed that the first act of the County Council would be to pass a resolution expressly empowering its members to visit the schools in the county. He thought it was a somewhat remote possibility. He himself thought that if the County Councils were to have: the duty cast upon them of carrying out elementary education, they might, at any; rate, lie given power to enter the schools.
  MR. BRYCEsaid he thought his hon. friend had attained his object, and that it would not be necessary to press his Amendment to a division. The whole difficulty arose from the line taken up by the Attorney General; but what had been said by the Prime Minister removed his objection. It was perfectly true that the
  724
  powers of the School Boards to be transferred would include that power.
  Amendment, by leave, withdrawn.
  THE CHAIRMAN: The next Amendment is covered by what has already been inserted in the Bill. The Amendment after that is covered by the right of inspection; which also covers the Amendment of the hon. Member for West Nottingham. The right to inspect a school includes the right to inspect the minutes and other records.
  MR BRYCEsaid he hoped the Chairman would reserve his decision on that question, because he wished to bring forward a point of order.
  Committee report Progress.
  To sit again Tomorrow.

  AGRICULTURAL AND TECHNICAL INSTRUCTION (IRELAND) (No. 2) BILL.
  Considered in Committee.
  (In the Committee.)
  Clause 1
  Committee report Progress.
  To sit again Tomorrow.
  MR. SPEAKER, in pursuance of the Order of the House of the 16th October, adjourned the House without Question put.
  Adjourned at five minutes after Twelve o'clock.