Sitting of 15 July 1903

Preamble
The House met at Two of the Clock.

UNOPPOSED PRIVATE BILL BUSINESS.
Alexandra Park and Palace Bill (by Order). Read the third time, and passed.
Bury and District Joint Water Board Bill [Lords]; Scottish Ontario and Manitoba Land Company Bill [Lords]. Read a second time, and committed.
Sutton Coldfield Corporation Bill [Lords]. Reported from the Police and Sanitary Committee, with Amendments; Report to lie upon the Table, and to be printed.

PETITIONS.
  CRUELTY TO ANIMALS BILL.
  Petition of the Scottish Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals, in favour; to lie upon the Table.
  LICENCES.
  Petition from Carlisle, for alteration of Law; to lie upon the Table.
  LICENSING (SCOTLAND) ACTS AMENDMENT BILL.
  Petition from St. Andrew's, Johnstone, for alteration; to lie upon the Table.
RETURNS, REPORTS, ETC.
  HORSE BREEDING (ROYAL COMMISSION).
  Copy presented, of Ninth Report of the Royal Commission on Horse Breeding, with Appendices [by Command]; to lie upon the Table.
  IMPERIAL REVENUE (COLLECTION AND EXPENDITURE) (GREAT BRITAIN AND IRELAND).
  Return presented, relative thereto [ordered 31st March; Mr. Joseph A. Pease]; to lie upon the Table, and to be printed. No. 256.]
  SUPERANNUATION ACT, 1887.
  Copy presented, of Treasury Minute, dated 11th July, 1903, granting to Louis Charles Lepts, Sorting Clerk and Telegraphist, Liverpool Post Office, a retired allowance under the Act [by Act]; to lie upon the Table.
  PUBLIC HEALTH ACTS AMENDMENT ACT, 1890.
  Copy presented, of Regulations made by the Local Government Board for Ireland as to issue of Stock by Urban Authorities [by Act]; to lie upon the Table.
  ALLOTMENTS (SCOTLAND).
  Return presented, relative thereto [ordered 25th May; Mr. Eugene Wason]; to lie upon the Table, and to be printed. [No. 257.]
QUESTIONS AND ANSWERS CIRCULATED WITH THE VOTES.

  Laundry and Cookery Lessons for Female Prisoners—Female Prison Inspectors.
  MR. FLOWER: To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department whether, in view of the fact that over 70 per cent. of the female prisoners in the gaols of this country have been previously convicted, he will consider the desirability of augmenting the lectures given by lady visitors last winter by practical teaching in laundry, cookery, and hygiene, which would fit the prisoners on leaving to earn their living; also whether he would again consider the advantages to be gained by the appointment of a female prison inspector.
  (Answered by Mr. Secretary Akers Douglas.) The industries carried out under skilled instruction as a part of the regular prison routine for female prisoners furnish practical teaching in laundry work and cooking, and with regard to "hygiene," as much as is possible is done by including "sanitation" as one of the subjects of a course of lectures which have now for some months past been delivered by lady visitors to female prisoners in the Metropolis according to a regular and approved plan. It is hoped to extend, in due course, the good work that is being done by lady visitors in London in this

  687
  respect to other prisons throughout the country. As regards the second paragraph of the Question. I have seen no reason to differ from the adverse view expressed by my predecessor in answer to a similar suggestion from the hon. Member on the 31st January, 1902.†

  Distribution of Non Resident Out-door Relief.
  MR. HERBERT SAMUEL: To ask the President of the Local Government Board whether, in view of the practice of some boards of guardians of refusing to allow their officers to dispense non-resident out-door relief on behalf of other unions, he will take such steps as may be necessary to make it obligatory on all unions to distribute such relief.
  (Answered by Mr. Walter Long.) There are certain objections to the system of non-resident relief, and I am not prepared to adopt the course suggested by the hon. Member. If a board of guardians refuse to distribute non-resident relief, it is open to the guardians who desire to grant it to make arrangements for its distribution through some other channel.

  Exports and Re-Exports Carried by British Ships.
  COLONEL DENNY: To ask the President of the Board of Trade whether figures recently furnished by the Board of Trade, showing the value of the exports of British produce and re-exports of foreign and colonial produce, include the freights to ports of destination; if not, can he furnish an estimate of what such freight would amount to in each of the periods, and how much of it was earned by the British ships; and would he also say whether such freight, where earned by British ships, should be regarded as an export from this country.
  (Answered by Mr. Gerald Balfour.) As stated in the official trade accounts, the recorded values of our exports of British produce and of re-exports of foreign and colonial produce are the "free on board" values, and consequently do not include the cost of freight from United Kingdom ports to the ports of destination. The answer to the second part of the Question is in the negative. In my opinion, the earnings of British shipping must be
  † See (4) Debates, cii., 28.
  688
  regarded as an offset in considering the apparent excess of our imports over our exports, but the question is one on which my hon. friend is in as good a position to form a judgment as I am.

  British Colonies—Revenue from Import Duties.
  MR. ALFRED DAVIES: To ask the President of the Board of Trade if he will state the amounts received respectively by our colonies from duties on imports in the years 1882, 1892, and 1902, and their population at those periods.
  (Answered by Mr. Gerald Balfour.) The information as to revenue from import duties only cannot be supplied at short notice, but the hon. Member will find particulars of the Customs revenue of the various colonies for a period of years in Table 8 of the Colonial Abstract [Cd. 1325–1902]. In some cases a relatively small proportion of this revenue represents receipts from export dues. The figures for 1902 are not yet available.

  Savings Bank Deposits in Great Britain and Abroad.
  MR. MARKHAM: To ask the President of the Board of Trade whether he can state the amount deposited in the savings bank per head of the population in the following countries: Great Britain, France, Sweden, Austria-Hungary, United States of America, Belgium, Australia, Norway, Germany, Switzerland, and Denmark.
  (Answered by Mr. Gerald Balfour.) The preparation of these figures would entail a considerable amount of labour, and the result would give a very incomplete indication of comparative thrift in the countries named, owing to the omission of friendly societies and other thrift agencies not included under the title of savings banks.

  Increase in Coal Exports.
  SIR JOSEPH LAWRENCE: To ask the President of the Board of Trade how much of the increased exports for the first six months

  689
  of 1903, compared with the figures of last year and for the periods 1873–1882, 1883–1892, and 1893–1902 is due to coal and coke; and how much have been the increases of the same class of exports to British possessions.
  (Answered by Mr. Gerald Balfour.) The increase of the value of the exports of coal and coke during the past six months, compared with the corresponding period of last year, was £388,870. The rest of the Question cannot be answered without longer notice.

  American All-Rail Export Rates for Wheat.
  MR. HUGH SMITH: To ask the Secretary to the Board of Trade if he can say what were the all-rail export rates for wheat per 100 lbs from Chicago and Milwaukee, during 1900 and 1901, to Boston, New York, Philadelphia, and Montreal and Baltimore.
  (Answered by Mr. Gerald Balfour.) The average "all-rail" freight rates for wheat per bushel from Chicago to New York during 1900 and 1901 are stated by the New York Produce Exchange to have been 9·98 cents and 9·92 cents respectively. I have no information as to the rates to the other ports mentioned.

  Competitive Examinations for Postal Appointments at Dublin.
  MR. NANNETTI: To ask the Postmaster-General if he can say why the scheme for filling clerical duties in the Dublin and other offices by competitive examination amongst the members of the staff recommended by the Tweedmouth Commission has not been carried out; and can he see his way to bring the scheme into force at the earliest possible moment.
  (Answered by Mr. Austen Chamberlain.) The scheme mentioned in evidence before the Tweedmouth Committee was not adopted, so far as the clerical offices in Dublin and Edinburgh are concerned. The sorting clerks and telegraphists in Dublin are, in common with other officers of the Post Office, eligible to compete for clerkships in several of the London offices.

  Management of Male Dining-Room at Dublin Telegraph Office.
  MR. NANNETTI: To ask the Postmaster - General if he received two petitions some time ago from the staff of the telegraph office in Dublin dealing with the management of the male dining-room; if so, can he state why the decisions bearing his signature were not shown either to the staff or committee of club.
  (Answered by Mr. Austen Chamberlain.) Two memorials, dated respectively the 4th of March and the 18th of April last, were duly considered, and the decision upon them was communicated to the staff through the usual channel. Only the second of these petitions, dated the 18th April last, was addressed to me, and my decision upon it was communicated to the petitioners in the usual way early in May.

  Gordon-Bennett Cup—Breakdown of Telegraphic Arrangements at Dublin.
  MR. NANNETTI: To ask the Postmaster-General whether he is aware that the arrangements made by the telegraph authorities to cope with counter duty in the Dublin Office were inadequate on the Sunday previous to the Gordon-Bennett motor race; and, seeing that a number of French tourists were expected to arrive in Dublin on that day, can he explain why arrangements were not made to cope with the extra pressure, and why a junior member of the staff, who had no previous experience of counter duty, was employed at the Dublin telegraph counter during portion of the Gordon-Bennett week.
  (Answered by Mr. Austen Chamberlain.) At one period of the day on Sunday, 28th June, there was considerable and unforeseen pressure at the counter of the Dublin post office, owing to the unexpected arrival of a special steamer conveying a number of French motorists. Arrangements were made to meet the exceptional pressure with as little delay as possible. An officer who had had no previous experience of counter work was employed at the Dublin telegraph counter on Monday 29th June, and performed the duty satisfactorily; but,

  691
  as the following days were likely to be busy, he was replaced by an experienced officer after that date.

  Wages of Agricultural Labourers.
  MR. D. A. THOMAS: To ask the President of the Board of Agriculture whether he is aware that an official of the Board of Trade has stated that the average weekly cash wages of ordinary agricultural labourers employed on certain farms in different parts of England and Wales increased by over 50 per cent. between 1850 and 1900, concurrently with a fall of over 30 per cent. in the price of wheat; and whether he has any official information tending to show what the agricultural wages generally in England and Wales have been during the past fifty years.
  (Answered by Mr. Ailwyn Fellowes.) We are aware of the statement to which the hon. Member refers. There are, unfortunately, no official records of the course of agricultural wages during the last half century to which reference can be made. The statement was therefore based upon information relating to particular farms and does not cover a sufficiently large area whereon to found a confident conclusion that it accurately represents the movements of agricultural wages generally.

  Crown v. Stapleton, Delaney, and Carroll—Notice of Change of Venue—Jury Challenging.
  MR. DILLON: To ask the Chief Secretary to the Lord Lieutenant of Ireland whether notice of the motion to change the venue and fix a special jury in the case of the Crown against Stapleton, Delaney, and Carroll, of Borrisoleigh, Tipperary, was served on the defendants; and whether it is proposed to exercise the right of unlimited challenge in selecting the jury before which the accused are to be tried in Cork.
  (Answered by Mr. Wyndham). No notice of the application was given because none is required to be given, but the copy of the order when made was served on the accused as provided by the statute. It is intended to use
  692
  such powers as the Crown possess, when necessary, to secure an impartial trial.
  MR. P. J. O'BRIEN: To ask the Chief Secretary to the Lord Lieutenant of Ireland whether the Irish Government formed the opinion that a fair trial by a special jury in the case against Stapleton, Delaney, and Carroll, of Borrisoleigh could not have been had at the recent assizes held at Nenagh; and, if so, will he state upon what grounds that opinion was based.
  (Answered by Mr. Wyndham.) The Attorney-General, with all the materials before him, formed the opinion that a more fair and impartial trial could be obtained in Cork than in Tipperary, and in exercise of the powers vested in him by statute made the application for a change of venue and a special jury. The grounds on which that opinion and belief were formed cannot be stated, the more especially as the trial is proceeding.

  District Contracts for Regimental Institutes.
  SIR THOMAS DEWAR: To ask the Secretary of State for War whether he is aware that, under Paragraph 5 of the Army Order, dated 22nd June, 1903, relative to the management of regimental institutes, General Officers commanding Army Corps are forbidden to make district contracts for beer supplies to regimental institutes; and, seeing that other supplies for the Army are made under contract, and that the system of district contracts which has been in force during recent years has admitted of soldiers being supplied with malt liquors of improved quality at a reduced cost, will he state under what circumstances the new Order has been made, and whether he can arrange to have it re-considered.
  (Answered by Mr. Secretary Brodrick.) This alteration was advisedly adopted after full consideration of the evidence taken, and the unanimous recommendation of the Military Authorities was in favour of the abolition of district contracts. I fear I cannot undertake to reconsider the matter.

  South African War Medal for 2nd Royal Scots Fusiliers.
  MR. PIRIE: To ask the Secretary of State for War can he explain why, on 8th July, at the review of the 1st Army Corps by His Majesty, the 2nd Battalion Royal Scots Fusiliers were not wearing the King's South African medal, although this battalion was one of the first to proceed to South Africa, where it remained throughout the war. Have the medal rolls been sent in by the Corps; and, if so, when, and what is the cause of delay.
  (Answered by Mr. Secretary Brodrick.) The medal rolls of this battalion were sent in on 26th March, 1903, but it has not yet been found possible to dispose of them, as only a certain number of rolls can be dealt with at a time, and it would not be equitable to take those of this battalion out of their turn.

  Recommendations of Committee on Army Veterinary Department.
  MR. WINGFIELD - DIGBY: To ask the Secretary of State for War if the Committee on the Army Veterinary Department finished its sittings last February; what its recommendations are; and when they will be brought into force.
  (Answered by Mr. Secretary Brodrick.) This Committee did not complete their Report until the 8th April. The recommendations are being carefully considered.

  Suggested Royal Commission on Physical Training in England and Wales.
  MR. PRIESTLEY: To ask the First Lord of the Treasury, in view of the Report of the Royal Commission on Physical Training in Scotland, will His Majesty's Government consider the desirability of appointing a similar Commission for England and Wales, or take steps to introduce into all national elementary schools a system of scientific physical training.
  (Answered by Mr. A. J. Balfour.) This question is engaging the attention of the Government, but the particular form which an inquiry should take is one
  694
  which cannot be determined without further consideration. I may refer the hon. Member to statements made on this subject by the Secretary to the Board of Education in this House,† and by the Lord President of the Council in another place.‡

QUESTIONS IN THE HOUSE.

  Young Officers and Indian Service.
  MR. ORR-EWING: I beg to ask the Secretary of State for War whether he will explain why young officers are sent out to join their regiments in India for the first time during the summer months; and whether the same consideration can be extended to commissioned officers as exists for the rank and file, who only embark during the trooping season.
  THE FINANCIAL SECRETARY TO THE WAR OFFICE (Lord STANLEY,): It has been decided to send young officers to India during the trooping season only.

  Post Office Employees and Volunteer Camps.
  MR. CROMBIE: I beg to ask the Postmaster General whether he is aware that, while private employers of labour in Aberdeen have responded to the appeals made to them to allow their employees leave of absence for fourteen days in order to go to camp with the 1st Volunteer Battalion Gordon Highlanders, who have been selected to form part of the 34th Field Army Brigade, leave of absence to attend this camp has been refused to all volunteers in this corps employed in the General Post Office in Aberdeen; and whether, as the latter form an important part of the corps, he will grant them the leave of absence required.
  THE POSTMASTER-GENERAL (Mr. AUSTEN CHAMBERLAIN,): I have no in ormation upon this subject and no complaint has reached me from the staff in regard to it; but I will make enquiry into the facts. I am anxious to afford all the facilities in my
  † See page 246.
  ‡ See (4) Debates, cxxiv., 1346.

  695
  power to volunteers in the Postal Telegraph Service to go into camp, and instructions were issued in May last upon the subject; but the exigencies of the service sometimes render it impossible to give leave when required for this purpose, and the efficient discharge of the Department's duty to the public must be the first consideration.

  Devonport and Portsmouth Dockyards.
  *SIR CHARLES DILKE: I beg to ask the Secretary to the Admiralty what was the number of persons in receipt of wages at Devonport Dockyard and at Portsmouth Dockyard on the 1st July last, as compared with the 1st July, 1902, and the 1st July, 1901; what number of slips on which a first-class battleship or armoured cruiser can be laid down are vacant in Devonport and Portsmouth Dockyards, or will be vacant before 1st January next, with regard to which there is no present intention on the part of the Admiralty of laying down other ships before that date.
  THE SECRETARY TO THE ADMIRALTY (Mr. ARNOLD FORSTER,): The number of persons in receipt of wages at the Devonport Dockyard on 1st July, 1901, was 8,116; 1st July, 1902, 8,528; and on the 1st July of the present year it was 9,475, an increase over 1901 of 1,359. The corresponding figures for Portsmouth Dockyard are:—1st July, 1901, 9,756; 1st July, 1902, 9,896; 1st July, 1903, 10,282, an increase over 1901 of 526. No slip on which a first-class battleship or armoured cruiser can be laid down is vacant at Portsmouth. There is one such slip now vacant at Devonport, and a second will become vacant on the launch of the "King Edward VII." on the 23rd July. It is proposed to lay down a new ship in each of the three principal Yards in April next.

  Rosyth.
  MR. EDMUND ROBERTSON: I beg to ask the Civil Lord of the Admiralty in what respect the powers of compulsory purchase conferred on the Admiralty by The Naval Works Act, 1895, were announced to be
  696
  defective; and what was the estimate of the cost of providing by that method in the case of Rosyth.
  THE CIVIL LORD OF THE ADMIRALTY (Mr. PRETYMAN,): I am not aware that the powers referred to in the first part of the hon. Member's Question have been announced to be defective for the purposes for which they were granted by Parliament. It does not, however, follow from this that these powers could have been enforced over the whole area which has now been acquired by the Admiralty at Rosyth. It is obvious that no accurate forecast could be made of the sum an arbitrator might have awarded under the compulsory purchase clauses supposing them to have been enforceable, but the Admiralty were advised that it might probably exceed the amount agreed to by private treaty.

  Annual Cost of Portsmouth Dockyard.
  MR. BUCHANAN: I beg to ask the Civil Lord of the Admiralty what is the total annual cost of Portsmouth Dockyard.
  MR. PRETYMAN: It is not practicable to give the approximate cost of Portsmouth in 1902–1903 with any approach to accuracy without considerable labour. If the hon. Member will refer to the Dockyard Expense Accounts, which is issued as a Parliamentary Paper, he will find there, on page 197, the cost of the establishment and incidental charges at Portsmouth for the past ten years, the total for 1901–1902 being £362,253.

  Transvaal Diamond Ordinance.
  MR. MARKHAM: I beg to ask the Secretary of State for the Colonies whether, seeing that the Attorney-General, on 17th June, stated in the Transvaal Legislative Council that the Government of Lord Milner had framed the Precious Stones Ordinance with a view of keeping the diamond mines of the Transvaal as much as possible under one control, on the ground that the policy of the late Mr. Rhodes saved the diamond industry by limiting the output of diamonds, he will say, in view of the fact that the price of diamonds is artificially maintained by

  697
  the De Beers Company 500 per cent. above their natural value, if he will cable to Lord Milner that he cannot assent to legislation having as its object the creation of artificial prices to benefit a monopolist syndicate of financiers.
  THE SECRETARY OF STATE FOR THE COLONIES (Mr. J. CHAMBERLAIN,): I do not know what the natural price of diamonds is—I should not have thought they had any—and I do not believe that the object of Lord Milner is to benefit a monopolist syndicate of financiers. I am not prepared to prejudge the questions raised by the proposed legislation, and I propose to wait till I receive the Ordinance in its final form together with Lord Milner's observations before I form or express any judgment upon it.
  MR. MARKHAM: I beg to ask the Secretary of State for the Colonies whether he has received from Lord Milner, Sir A. Lawley, or any other Transvaal official, any despatch, report, letter, or any communication whatsoever relating to the new Diamond Ordinance.
  MR. J. CHAMBERLAIN: I have telegraphed on the subject to Lord Milner, and I am awaiting a full report by mail.

  Assam Excise Administration.
  MR. HERBERT ROBERTS: I beg to ask the Secretary of State for India whether he has received the Report of the Inquiry into the Excise administration in Assam; and, if not, whether he will be in a position to give the House information as to the general results of the inquiry before the close of the session.
  THE UNDER SECRETARY OF STATE FOR INDIA (Earl PERCY,): I have ascertained from the Viceroy that the Report on the Inquiry has not yet been received from the local administration, and that it therefore cannot reach me before the close of the session.

  Brussels Sugar Convention.
  MR. LOUGH: I beg to ask the Under Secretary of State for
  698
  Foreign Affairs whether he can now state what steps have Austria and Hungary taken to meet the demand of the other signatories to the Brussels Convention that the legislation of the empire and kingdom should be altered; what modifications, if any, has the Permanent Commission agreed to make in the charges to be levied on Russian sugar; what are the reasons for any such modification; whether the Government have decided to publish the proceedings of the Permanent Commission; and, in view of the inconvenience to trade of further concealment, when will the resolutions be published, and Papers laid.
  THE UNDER SECRETARY OF STATE FOR FOREIGN AFFAIRS (Lord CRANBORNE,): I am not aware that the countries referred to have taken any steps to alter the legislation to which the hon. Member alludes, but it is to be presumed that the requisite measures will be adopted. The answers to the Questions as to the charges on Russian sugar will be found in the Papers which I hope will be in the hands of the hon. Gentleman this week.

  Uganda Railway.
  MR. SAMUEL EVANS: I beg to ask the Under Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs if he will lay before the House annually a statement of accounts of the Uganda Railway in the same form and detail as those published by English railway companies, and in addition showing ton mileage and passenger mileage as shown by American railways; whether during the construction of the railway or since it was opened for public traffic any members of the Railway Committee of the Foreign Office have visited the line; if so, did they submit a report or reports to the Secretary of State, and can copies of any such report or reports be furnished to the House.
  LORD CRANBORNE: The answer to the first part of the Question is in the affirmative. The statement of account, corresponding in form and detail with those published by English railway companies, and ton-mileage and passenger-mileage figures will be found in the

  699
  Reports on the Uganda Railway presented annually to Parliament. The following members of the Uganda Railway Committee have visited the line: Sir Clement Hill in November and December, 1900; Colonel Gracey before he joined the Committee, from December, 1900 to February, 1901; Sir Francis O'Callaghan March and April, 1902; and Sir John Kirk in January, 1903. Reports were submitted by Colonel Gracey and Sir Francis O'Callaghan, and that by the former was presented to Parliament as Africa, No. 6, of 1901.

  Comparative Statistics.
  MR. HERBERT ROBERTS: I beg to ask the President of the Board of Trade whether he can state when the Memorandum of the comparative statistics of population, industry, and commerce in the United Kingdom and some leading foreign countries, prepared by the Board of Trade for 1903, will be issued to Members.
  THE PRESIDENT OF THE BOARD OF TRADE (Mr. GERALD BALFOUR,): The Memorandum in question is not an annual publication, and it would not be advisable to prepare a Memorandum in continuation thereof during the present year.

  Prices of Wheat in France and the United Kingdom.
  MR. HARRIS: I beg to ask the President of the Board of Trade if he can state what were respectively the average prices per quarter of 480 pounds of wheat in France and in the United Kingdom for the five years ending the 31st December, 1882, and for the five years ending the 31st December, 1902; and what was the amount of duty per quarter on imported wheat imposed in France during each of these periods.
  MR. GERALD BALFOUR: The average price of wheat per quarter in France in the five years 1878–1882 was 49s. 10d., and in the five years 1898–1902, 37s. 3d. The Gazette average price of British wheat in England and Wales in the first period was 45s. per quarter, and in the second 28s. 3d. During the
  700
  five years 1878–1882 the French import duty on wheat was at the rate of 0·60 fr. per 100 kilogs (1s. 0½d. per quarter), and in the five years 1898–1902 7 frs. per 100 kilogs. (12s. 2d. per quarter)
  SIR EDGAR VINCENT: Is the price given for France the official price?
  MR. GERALD BALFOUR: Yes.
  MR. WINSTON CHURCHILL: I hope this answer will be circulated in the Press.

  Cold Storage for Fish.
  MR. WEIR: I beg to ask the President of the Board of Trade, in view of the large quantity of fresh caught fish annually destroyed owing to lack of facilities to secure prompt transit and ready sale, more especially at the week end, will he consider the expediency of calling for the opinion of experts as to the practicability of establishing cold storage chambers for fish at our leading fishing ports and on steamers employed in the fishing trade; and will the question of devising any other than the present means for the preservation of fresh caught fish be also considered.
  MR. GERALD BALFOUR: I am in communication with the Fishmongers Company on the subject of the hon. Member's Question. That body takes great interest in the subject referred to, and exercises important functions in relation thereto. The provision of cold storage chambers is, of course, a matter for private enterprise; but I understand that a large proportion of the fish which is destroyed in hot weather is of little value, and is of such a nature that it could not be advantageously dealt with in the way suggested.

  Vaccination Officers and Local Government Board Inspectors.
  MR. WEIR: I beg to ask the President of the Local Government Board if he will state where the rules relating to the conduct of medical inspectors under the Local Government Board are laid down; and will he say whether these

  701
  inspectors have power to threaten vaccination officers with dismissal.
  THE PRESIDENT OF THE LOCAL GOVERNMENT BOARD (Mr. WALTER LONG,): The medical inspectors visit different parts of the country and carry out the particular directions given to them. There are no fixed rules on the subject. As regards the last part of the Question, the inspectors report to me as to the manner in which vaccination officers carry out the duties of their office, and, in certain cases where it is found that important duties are wilfully neglected, they have been instructed to point out to the officers that similar neglect has been considered by the Department a reason for requiring the resignation of the officer concerned.

  Wicklow Land Cases.
  MR. JAMES O'CONNOR: I beg to ask the Chief Secretary to the Lord Lieutenant of Ireland whether he can state when the land cases of tenants residing at Kilbaylet, Kilcoagh, and other districts in West Wicklow, which were to be heard when the Carlow list was gone through two months ago, will be taken up by the Commissioners; and can he explain the cause of the delay in regard to these cases which were entered for hearing eighteen months ago.
  THE CHIEF SECRETARY FOR IRELAND (Mr. WYNDHAM,): All applications received from this district, prior to 1st May, 1902, have been disposed of. Applications received since that date will be listed at the first opportunity.

  Labourers (Ireland) Acts.
  MR. THOMAS O'DONNELL: I beg to ask the Chief Secretary to the Lord Lieutenant of Ireland what he intends doing with the £50,185 lying to the credit of counties in Ireland in which little or nothing has been done under the Labourers Acts; and whether, considering the needs of the labourers for better houses and more land, and the extent to which certain councils have taxed the ratepayers for this purpose, he would consider the advisability of distributing this sum amongst the counties which have used all the available Exchequer contribution.
  MR. WYNDHAM: No portion of this amount could be diverted in the manner suggested, without an amendment of the law. The question of its re-allocation could be raised in any fresh legislation dealing with labourers' cottages.

  The Irish Land Bill.
  MR. JOHN REDMOND: I wish to ask the Prime Minister if we may take it as settled that Friday will be devoted to the Report stage of the Irish Land Bill, and whether in the improbable event that that stage is completed that day, he will take the Third Reading on Monday. I see a statement was made in another place that the Third Reading is not to be taken till the 27th, and I may say that such a long interval would be a source of the greatest inconvenience to the Irish Members.
  THE PRIME MINISTER AND FIRST LORD OF THE TREASURY (Mr. A. J. BALFOUR,): I propose to take the Report stage of the Irish Land Bill on Friday. If that stage is disposed of then I will consider whether I can take the Third Reading of the Bill on Monday next. There are obvious difficulties in the way, but I will do my best to make an arrangement as convenient to the House as I can.

  The Indian Budget.
  MR. HERBERT ROBERTS: I beg to ask the First Lord of the Treasury whether he is in a position to state the date upon which the Indian Budget will be discussed; and whether, having regard to the limited opportunities hitherto afforded this session for the discussion of Indian questions, he will arrange for this debate to take place at as early a date as possible.
  MR. A. J. BALFOUR: I am afraid I am not in a position to name the date, nor am I in a position, in view of the general position of business, to promise an earlier day than is customary for this subject.

  Forth and Clyde Canal.
  MR. PIRIE: I beg to ask the First Lord of the Treasury whether His Majesty's Government propose, on strategic grounds alone, that the question of a ship canal between the

  703
  Firths of Forth and Clyde should come before the Committee of Defence; and, if so, has it been considered by that Committee; and, seeing that Colonel Exham is shortly to report on Rosyth as a naval base, whether, on national public grounds, he will cause him to include that question in his Report.
  MR. A. J. BALFOUR: The Admiralty are perfectly clear, so far as they can form a judgment, that the strategical advantages would not be commensurate with the cost. The inquiry cannot be undertaken at the present moment while much more pressing matters require attention.
  MR. GIBSON BOWLES: Is that the view of the right hon. Gentleman only, or is it the view of the Committee of Defence?
  MR. A. J. BALFOUR: It is the view of the Admiralty and my view, shared, I believe, by the Committee of Defence.
  MR. PIRIE: The right hon. Gentleman has not stated if the matter has been before the Committee of Defence?
  MR. A. J. BALFOUR: I do not know that it should be regarded as a matter of course that I should say what has or has not been before the Committee of Defence; that was the only reason why I refrained from answering.
  The following Question, also on the Paper, was not pressed—
  MR. EUGENEWASON: I beg to ask the First Lord of the Treasury whether, when Mr. Exham goes to Rosyth to report as to the works to be constructed there, he will be instructed to consider the feasibility of a canal being made between the Firths of Forth and Clyde, with a view to his reporting to the Committee on National Defence; and, in the event of the reply being in the affirmative, whether Arrochar or Dumbarton should be chosen as the junction of the canal on the west coast.

  The Patriotic Fund.
  MR. GALLOWAY: I beg to ask the First Lord of the Treasury whether he is aware that the secretary of the Patriotic Fund has sent out an invitation to the various committees throughout the country, formed for the purpose of collecting money for the benefit of the wives and widows of the soldiers during the late war, to attend a conference in order to discuss a proposal for entrusting the money raised by these committees to the Patriotic Fund Commission or to a new central organisation; whether the Government intend to pass the Bill this session dealing with the Patriotic Commission which was promised in His Majesty's gracious speech at the opening of Parliament; if so, when do the Government propose to proceed with the Bill.
  MR. A. J. BALFOUR: My attention has not been called to the action of the secretary of the fund. The Civil Lord of the Admiralty will introduce the promised Bill on Monday next.
  MR. GALLOWAY: And will every effort be made to pass it?
  MR. A. J. BALFOUR: I have every hope that the Bill will prove an uncontroversial measure, as it has no Party aspect, and that it will meet with general approval on both sides of the House.

  The Fiscal Inquiry.
  *MR. BLACK: I beg to ask the First Lord of the Treasury whether the Government has determined to give the public the whole facts, statistics, and information collected by His Majesty's Ministers with regard to the inquiry now being undertaken by them.
  MR. A. J. BALFOUR: I cannot give the pledge the hon. Gentleman desires.
  *MR. BLACK: May I ask whether any information that is published will be selected independently, of whether or not it supports the divergent views of—
  MR. SPEAKER: Order, order!
  *MR. BLACK: My Question has no been answered.
  MR. SPEAKER: The right hon. Gentleman has answered, though, perhaps, not to the hon. Member's satisfaction.
  SIR WILFRID LAWSON: I beg to ask the First Lord of the Treasury whether the Government can arrange to take the evidence of representatives of the great co-operative societies in the fiscal inquiry which is now being carried on.
  MR. A. J. BALFOUR: Any observations that representatives of co-operative societies may furnish to His Majesty's Government will be most carefully considered.
  MR. THEODORE TAYLOR: I beg to ask the First Lord of the Treasury whether the proposed inquiry into the fiscal policy of the country will include the question of the desirability of retaliating upon colonial tariff's upon British goods whenever those tariffs are as high or higher than the tariff's levied by foreign countries.
  MR. A. J. BALFOUR: If any hon. Gentleman desires to make any proposal for retaliatory duties upon colonial tariffs he will have ample opportunity for doing so before any practical steps are taken for carrying out a change in our fiscal policy; but I believe no such proposal will emanate from any Gentleman on this side of the House.
  MR. WEIR: I beg to ask the First Lord of the Treasury, in view of a possible change in the fiscal policy of the country, and the consequent importance of raising, in the United Kingdom, as large food supplies as possible, will he state what steps the Government propose to take in order to secure the cultivation of a larger area of land.
  MR. A. J. BALFOUR: I do not see quite clearly the connection between the fiscal inquiry and steps to secure larger cultivation of land.
  MR. WEIR: The policy as a whole.
  MR. A. J. BALFOUR: Perhaps the hon. Gentleman will explain?
  MR. WEIRwas understood to say that he did not refer to the general fiscal inquiry which was to be held.
  [No answer was returned.]
  MR. WEIR: I will put down another Question.
  SIR M. HICKS BEACH: I rise to ask my right hon. friend the First Lord of the Treasury a Question on the business of the House, of which I have given him private notice—whether before the close of the session he will afford an opportunity for the full discussion in this House of the changes proposed by the Colonial Secretary in the fiscal policy of the country, in order that this House may aid the country in that inquiry and discussion to which it has been invited by His Majesty's Ministers, and whether he will do this by granting facilities to my right hon. friend the Member for East Somerset (Mr. H. Hobhouse) to bring forward the Motion which he has placed on the Paper. Perhaps I may, in explanation of the reasons for my Question, remind my right hon. friend that the discussion of this most important subject was precluded by our rules on the Finance Bill, and that Motions for adjournment cannot be held to afford an adequate occasion for the discussion of a matter of this importance.
  MR. A. J. BALFOUR: In answer to my right hon. friend I have to say that I do not think that any useful purpose would be served by the discussion which he desires to initiate or see initiated—a discussion which would be addressed to no particular Motion on which a vote of Aye or No would carry any direct relation to the subject of debate, and which, therefore, apart from the speeches with which the Motion was accompanied, would not be of much guidance or value to the country. As regards the speeches, I may remind my right hon. friend that, though no doubt it is true that observations on this question on the

  707
  Second Reading of the Budget were to a certain extent, and in some cases, hampered by the rules of debate, no one can say that the subject was not dealt with in the lengthy two days' discussion which we had on that subject; and in addition to that we had a debate upon the rising of the House for the Whitsuntide holidays and a subsequent debate on the Motion for the adjournment of the House. These were all occasions on which hon. Gentlemen had an opportunity, and used the opportunity—[Cries of "No, no"]—and used the opportunity—[Cries of "No"]—for making their opinions heard; and I really do not think anything would be gained by adding another to the abstract discussions we have already had on this subject.
  SIR H. CAMPBELL-BANNERMAN: Are we to understand that the Government do not wish to afford an opportunity to the House for that full discussion—full discussion—of the whole subject to which they were, in express terms, invited by the Colonial Secretary—a subject also which the right hon. Gentleman himself has said has no Party significance; and is the Government of opinion that those absolutely partial and inadequate opportunities to which he refers are all that the House of Commons deserves or will obtain?
  MR. A. J. BALFOUR: What I said was that I did not think that an abstract discussion directed to no specific Motion would have any practical results, it is always in the right hon. Gentleman's power to see that it is directed to a specific Motion, and if he chooses to take steps to that end I will make it my business to second his efforts.
  MR. HENRY HOBHOUSE: I should like to ask my right hon. friend whether he means by a specific Motion a Motion which can be construed as a Vote of Censure, and whether he considers that that is a form in which a Motion should be put down by his own supporters who desire a discussion on a subject which he has himself assured us is not to be made a test of Party loyalty.
  MR. A. J. BALFOUR: I never suggested that my right hon. friend should put down a Vote of Censure, nor can I conceive it possible that he could ever contemplate such a course. I made the suggestion to the right hon. Gentleman opposite.
  MR. GIBSON BOWLES: May I ask will the right hon. Gentleman give facilities for the discussion of a Motion condemning the imposition of a protective tax on the food of the country?
  LORD HUGH CECIL: May I ask my right hon. friend what is meant by the invitation to the House "to discuss and inquire" into this subject? We are accepting that invitation.
  MR. A. J. BALFOUR: Perhaps my noble friend will read out the terms in which the invitation to the House was made?
  LORD HUGH CECIL: It was made on the Motion for the adjournment of the House for the Whitsuntide holidays by the Colonial Secretary in express terms.
  SIR H. CAMPBELL-BANNERMAN: I can relieve the mind of the Prime Minister by reading the exact terms of the invitation. The words of the Colonial Secretary were these—
  "It is because it is of immense importance that I ask the House to join eagerly in the discussion."
  LORD HUGH CECIL: May I now ask for an answer to my Question?
  MR. A. J. BALFOUR: I was waiting until the enthusiasm which the Question has aroused had ceased. As I understand the matter, that was stated on the Motion for the adjournment on the holidays. There have been many days' discussion since then. I see no reason to abandon the views I have already taken as to the proper course of conducting the business of this House during the short remainder of the session.
  SIR H. CAMPBELL-BANNERMAN: May I ask the right hon. Gentleman on a question not so large as that with which we have been dealing what

  709
  opportunity he suggests that the House should have, or may have, for discussing the correspondence which has been placed on the Table relating to the fiscal concerns of Canada and Germany?
  MR. A. J. BALFOUR: I do not wish to give an opinion on a point of order, but I should imagine that it would be germane to some of the Votes which we have still to discuss.
  SIR WILFRID LAWSON: If we are not to discuss this fiscal matter, may I ask the right hon. Gentleman whether he will lay before this House the same information which has been already promised to the House of Lords?
  MR. A. J. BALFOUR: Yes, of course.
  SIR WILFRID LAWSON: When?
  MR. A. J. BALFOUR: The two Houses will not be treated differently in this matter.

  BURGH POLICE (SCOTLAND) BILL.
  Reported, with Amendments, from the Standing Committee on Law, etc.
  Report to lie upon the Table, and to be printed. [No. 258.]
  Minutes of the Proceedings of the Standing Committee to be printed. [No. 258.]
  Bill, as amended (in the Standing Committee), to be considered upon Monday next, and to be printed. [Bill 277.]

  SELECTION (STANDING COMMITTEES).
  MR. HALSEYreported from the Committee of Selection: That they had discharged the following Member from the Standing Committee on Law, and Courts of Justice, and Legal Procedure, Mr. Haldane; and had appointed in substitution, Mr. Munro Ferguson.
  Report to lie upon the Table.

  STANDING COMMITTEES (CHAIRMEN'S PANEL).
  Sir JAMES FERGUSSON reported from the Chairmen's Panel; That they had appointed Lord Edmund Fitzmaurice to act as Chairman of the Standing Committee for the consideration of Bills relating to Law, and Courts of Justice, and Legal Procedure, in the place of Mr. John Edward Ellis.
  Report to lie upon the Table.

NEW BILL.
  EXPIRING LAWS CONTINUANCE BILL.
  "To continue various Expiring Laws," presented by Mr. Arthur Elliot; to be read a second time upon Monday next, and to be printed. [Bill 278.]

  SITTINGS OF THE HOUSE (EXEMPTION FROM THE STANDING ORDER).
  Motion made, and Question put, "That the proceedings on consideration of the London Education Bill, as amended, if under discussion at Twelve o'clock this night, be not interrupted under the Standing Order (Sittings of the House)."—(Mr. A. J. Balfour.)
  The House divided:—Ayes, 185; Noes, 91. (Division List No. 105.)

  AYES.

  Agg-Gardner, James Tynte

  Bentinck, Lord Henry C.

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

  Agnew, Sir Andrew Noel

  Bigwood, James

  Chapman, Edward

  Anson, Sir William Reynell

  Bond, Edward

  Churchill, Winston Spencer

  Arnold-Forster, Hugh O.

  Brassey, Albert

  Clive, Captain Percy A.

  Atkinson, Rt. Hon. John

  Brodrick, Rt. Hn. St. John

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

  Aubrey-Fletcher, Rt. Hn. Sir H.

  Bull, William James

  Cohen, Benjamin Louis

  Bailey, James (Walworth)

  Burdett-Coutts, W.

  Collings, Rt. Hon. Jesse

  Bain, Colonel James Robert

  Campbell, Rt. Hn. J. A. (Glasg.)

  Colston, Chas. Edw H. Athole

  Balcarres, Lord

  Campbell, J. H. M. (Dublin Univ

  Craig, Charles Curtis (Antrim S.

  Baldwin, Alfred

  Carew, James Laurence

  Cranborne, Viscount

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

  Carson, Rt. Hon. Sir Edw. H.

  Cross, Alexander (Glasgow)

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

  Carvill, Patrick Geo. Hamilton

  Cross, Herb. Shepherd (Bolton)

  Balfour, Kenneth R. (Christch.

  Cavendish, V. C. (Derbyshire

  Crossley, Rt. Hon. Sir Savile

  Bathurst, Hon. Allen Benj.

  Cecil, Lord Hugh (Greenwich)

  Denny, Colonel

  Beach, Rt. Hon. Sir M. Hicks

  Chamberlain, Rt. Hon. J. (Birm

  Dickinson, Robert Edmond

  Dimsdale Rt. Hn. Sir Joseph C.

  Kemp, Lieut.-Col. George

  Rasch, Major Frederic Carne

  Dixon-Hartland, Sir Fred Dixon

  Kennedy, Patrick James

  Rattigan, Sir William Henry

  Doughty, George

  Kenyon, Hon. G. T. (Denbigh

  Reid, James (Greenock)

  Douglas, Rt. Hon. A. Akers

  Kenyon-Staney, Col. W. (Salop

  Remnant, Jas. Farquharson

  Doxford, Sir Wm. Theodore

  Keir, John

  Renshaw, Sir Charles Bine

  Duke, Henry Edward

  Keswick, William

  Renwick, George

  Egerton, Hon. A. de Tatton

  Knowles, Lees

  Ritchie, Rt. Hn. Chas. Thomson

  Elliot, Hon. A. Ralph Douglas

  Lambton, Hon. Fredk. Wm.

  Roberts, Samuel (Sheffield)

  Fardell, Sir T. George

  Law, Andrew Bonar (Glasgow

  Royds, Clement Molyneux

  Fellowes, Hon. Ailwyn Edward

  Lawson, John Grant (Yorks, N. R.

  Rutherford, John (Lancashire)

  Fielden, Edward Brocklehurst

  Lees, Sir Elliott (Birkenhead)

  Sackville, Col. S. G. Stopford

  Finch, Rt. Hon. George H.

  Legge, Col. Hon. Heneage

  Sadler, Col. Saml. Alexander

  Finlay, Sir Robert Bannatyne

  Lockwood, Lieut.-Col. A. R.

  Samuel, Harry S. (Limehouse)

  FitzGerald, Sir Robt. Penrose-

  Loder, Gerald Walter Erskine

  Scott, Sir S. (Marylebone, W.)

  Flannery, Sir Fortescue

  Long, Col. Chas. W. (Evesham

  Seely, Chas. Hilton (Lincoln)

  Flower, Ernest

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

  Simeon, Sir Barrington

  Forster, Henry William

  Lowe, Francis William

  Smith, Abel H. (Hertford, East

  Fyler, John Arthur

  Lowther, C. (Cumb., Eskdale)

  Smith, Jas. Parker (Lanarks)

  Galloway, William Johnson

  Lucas, Col. Francis (Lowestoft

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

  Gardner, Ernest

  MacIver, David (Liverpool)

  Stanley, E. Jas. (Somerset)

  Gibbs, Hn. Vicary (St. Albans

  Maconochie, A. W.

  Stanley, Lord (Lancs.)

  Godson, Sir Angustus Frederick

  M'Iver, Sir Lewis (Edinburgh W.

  Stone, Sir Benjamin

  Gordon, Hn. J. E. (Elgin and N'rn

  M'Killop, James (Stirlingshire

  Talbot, Lord E. (Chichester

  Gordon, Maj Evans (Tr. Hmlts

  M'Killop, W. (Sligo, North)

  Taylor, Austin (East Toxteth)

  Goulding, Edward Alfred

  Meysey Thompson, Sir H. M.

  Tollemache, Henry James

  Greene, Sir E. W. (Bury St. Ed.

  Milvain, Thomas

  Tomlinson, Sir Wm. E. M.

  Greene, Henry D. (Shrewsbury

  Montagu, G. (Huntingdon)

  Valentia, Viscount

  Greene, W. Raymond (Cambs

  Morgan, David J. (Walthamstow

  Vincent, Sir Edgar (Exeter)

  Grove, James Grimble

  Morton, Arthur H. Aylmer

  Walrond, Rt. Hn. Sir Wm. H.

  Guest, hon. Ivor Churchill

  Mount, William Arthur

  Wanklyn, James Leslie

  Gunter, Sir Robert

  Mowbray, Sir Robt. Gray C.

  Webb, Col. William George

  Guthrie, Walter Murray

  Murray, Rt. Hn. A. Granham (Bute

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

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

  Murray, Col. Wyndham (Bath)

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

  Hare, Thomas Leigh

  Nicholson, William Graham

  Willoughby de Eresby, Lord

  Harris, Frederick Leverton

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

  Wilson, John (Falkirk)

  Hatch, Ernest Frederick Geo.

  Orr-Ewing, Charles Lindsay

  Wilson, John (Glasgow)

  Heath, James (Staffords., N. W.

  Palmer, Walter (Salisbury)

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

  Helder, Augustus

  Peel, Hn. Wm. Robert Wellesley

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

  Hobhouse, Rt. Hn. H. (Somrst E

  Pemberton, John S. G.

  Wolff, Gustav Wilhelm

  Hogg, Lindsay

  Penn, John

  Worsley-Taylor, Henry Wilson

  Hoult, Joseph

  Percy, Earl

  Wortley, Rt. Hn. C. B. Stuart

  Howard, John (Kent, Faversh'm

  Pierpoint, Robert

  Wylie, Alexander

  Howard, J. (Midd., Tottenham

  Pilkingon, Colonel Richard

  Wyndham, Rt. Hon. George

  Hudson, George Bickersteth

  Platt-Higgins, Frederick

  Wyndham-Quin, Major W. H.

  Jameson, Major J. Eustace

  Plummer, Walter R.

  Jeffreys, Rt. Hn. Arthur Fred

  Pretyman, Ernest George

  TELLERS FOR THE AYES—

  Jessel, Captain Herbert Merton

  Pym, C. Guy

  Sir Alexander Acland-

  Johnstone, Heywood

  Randles, John S.

  Hood and Mr. Anstruther.

  NOES

  Allen, Charles P. (Glouc., Stroud

  Duncan, J. Hastings

  Kitson, Sir James

  Asher, Alexander

  Edwards, Frank

  Labouchere, Henry

  Asquith, Rt. Hon. Herbt. Hy.

  Elibank, Master of

  Lawson, Sir Wilfrid (Cornwall

  Beaumont, Wentworth C. B.

  Ellis, John Edward

  Layland-Barratt, Francis

  Black, Alexander William

  Emmott, Alfred

  Leng, Sir John

  Broadhurst, Henry

  Evans, Sir Francis H. (Maidstone

  Levy, Maurice

  Bryce, Right Hon. James

  Evans, Saml. T. (Glamorgan)

  Lewis, John Herbert

  Buchanan, Thomas Ryourn

  Fenwick, Charles

  Lloyd-George, David

  Burt, Thomas

  Ferguson, R. C. Munro (Leith

  Macnamara, Dr. Thomas J.

  Buxton, Sydney Charles

  Foster, Sir Michl. (Lond. Univ

  M'Laren, Sir Charles Benj.

  Caldwell, James

  Fowler, Rt. Hon. Sir Henry

  Markham, Arthur Basil

  Cameron, Robert

  Fuller, J. M. F.

  Mellor, Rt. Hn. John William

  Campbell-Bannerman, Sir H.

  Goddard, Daniel Ford

  Mitchell, Edw. (Fermanagh, N.

  Causton, Richard Knight

  Harwood, George

  Morgan, J. Lloyd (Carmarthen

  Cawley, Frederick

  Hayne, Rt, Hn. Charles Seale-

  Palmer, Sir C. M. (Durham)

  Channing, Francis Allston

  Hemphill, Rt. Hn. Charles H.

  Partington, Oswald

  Crombie, John William

  Hobhouse, C. E. H. (Bristl, E

  Paulton, James Mellor

  Crooks, William

  Hope, John Deans (Fife, West)

  Pirie, Duncan V.

  Davies, Alfred (Carmarthen)

  Humphreys-Owen, Arthur C.

  Priestley, Arthur

  Davies, M. Vaughan (Cardigan

  Hutchinson, Dr. Charles Fredk

  Rea, Russell

  Dewar, John A. (Inverness-sh.)

  Hutton, Alfred E. (Morley)

  Rickett, J. Compton

  Dilke, Rt. Hon. Sir Charles

  Jacoby, James Alfred

  Roberts, John H. (Denbighs.)

  Douglas, Charles M. (Lanark)

  Jones, Wm. (Carnarvonshire)

  Robertson, Edmund (Dundee)

  712

  713

  Roe, Sir Thomas

  Tennant, Harold John

  White, George (Norfolk)

  Russell, T. W.

  Thomas, Sir A. (Glam., E.)

  Whitley, J. H. (Halifax)

  Samuel, Herbt. L. (Cleveland)

  Thomas, David A. (Merthyr)

  Williams, O. (Merioneth)

  Shipman, Dr. John G.

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

  Yoxall, James Henry

  Sinclair, John (Forfarshire)

  Tomkinson, James

  Soares, Ernest J.

  Toulmin, George

  TELLERS FOR THE NOES—

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

  Wason, E. (Clackmannan)

  Mr. Lough and Mr.

  Stevenson, Francis S.

  Wason, J. Cathcart (Orkney)

  Mansfield.

  Taylor, Theodore C. (Radcliffe

  Weir, James Galloway

  LONDON EDUCATION BILL.
  As amended, further considered.
  On the second proviso to Sub-section 1 of Clause 2 (Provision as to management and sites of provided schools)—"Provided also that due regard shall be had to the inclusion of women on the said bodies of managers."
  MR. PEELmoved to leave out "Provided also that," and insert "but." He added that it was a purely drafting Amendment.
  Amendment proposed to the Bill—
  "In page 1, line 15, to leave out the words 'provided also that' and insert the word 'but.'—(Mr. Peel.)
  Amendment agreed to.
  MR. SYDNEY BUXTON, on behalf of the hon. Member for East Nottingham, moved to leave out all the words after "that" and insert "not less than one-third of the managers appointed by each appointing authority shall be women." He said he thought this Amendment better than the one he had himself put on the Paper. This question had been discussed several times, and there appeared to be a general consensus of opinion, from which the hon. Gentleman in charge of the Bill had not dissented, that there should be some security provided in the Bill for a considerable proportion of women to be members of the Managing Committees. At the present moment, of the 1,700 managers, 550 were women. It was important to secure that a large proportion of women should be appointed to the boards of management. Not only were two-thirds of the teachers women, but two-thirds of the children were girls and infants who should come under the care of women managers. Some statutory provision was all the more necessary by reason of the fact that certain local bodies had interpreted the
  714
  Act of last year to mean that one woman member only was necessary.
  Amendment proposed to the Bill—
  "In page 1, line 15, to leave out from the last Amendment to the end of line 16, and insert the words "not less than one-third of the managers appointed by each appointing authority shall be women."—(Mr. Sydney Buxton.)
  Question proposed, "That the words 'due regard shall be had' stand part of the Bill."
  SIR JOHN GORSTsupported the Amendment. He said it was a proposal of a practical character; and had the strong recommendation that it would perpetuate the existing state of things. The London School Board had been in existence for thirty-three years, and under it there had grown up a system of management in which about one-third of the managers were women. It was most essential that that state of things should be preserved. During his official experience he had always thought that the number of women engaged in the management of schools was far too few. A large proportion of our so-called schools were not schools at all, but nurseries in which the children of the poor were taken care of and amused, and a certain amount of intellectual exercise was given to them. The care of those nurseries was essentially women's business, and they would not allow a state of things to prevail—as did now in some cases—in which these poor little children of three, four or five years, were put through a course of reading, writing and arithmetic much more suitable for older children. The House ought also to consider the case of girls' schools, which were presided over almost entirely by women teachers. There were various things in connection with those schools, such for instance as sanitation, with which only women managers could properly deal

  715
  Certainly in girls' schools it was most essential for the superintendence of the schools and the wise spending of money that they must insist on a considerable number of women being appointed as managers. On all these grounds, he hoped the hon. Baronet would give a definite answer to the proposal to insert in the Bill some provision which would secure a definite number of women on the boards of management.
  *SIR WILLIAM ANSONsaid that the right hon. Gentleman had been preaching to the converted. There was no question in any part of the House as to the desirability of securing the presence of women on the boards of management. He, however, objected to any fixed proportion or number being put into the Bill. The number of one-third as a minimum would almost inevitably become the maximum, and one-third might turn out to be extremely inconvenient. Something had been said as to the impossibility of women being chosen by the local educational authority, but it was a very different matter to ask women to attend meetings of the Education Committees of the County Council where they would have to make periodically long journeys. The conditions were so different that no conclusion could be drawn as to the number of women who should be placed on the boards of management of Borough Council schools. He understood that the right hon. Gentleman wanted to perpetuate the existing system. He desired to do the same thing, and they would better attain that purpose by adopting the Amendment of the hon. Member for South Manchester. In the case of any difference between the two local authorities reference could be made to the Board of Education. There was no compulsion on the School Board to appoint women, and no one would deny that the School Board made very fair and reasonable provision for women being on the boards of management; and was there any doubt that the London County Council would not do the same? He, himself, had no doubt whatever. The old practice would go on, and if there was a difference of opinion — he thought that the local education authority would be more insistent than the Borough Councils on having women on the boards of management—an appeal could be made to the
  716
  Board of Education which was now, and always would be, in sympathy with the idea that women should be largely represented on the boards of management, and which would give them the necessary guidance. He would oppose the Amendment of the hon. Member for Poplar and support that of the hon. Member for South Manchester.
  MR. BRYCEsaid he regretted the decision of the hon. Baronet. He did not think that the hon. Gentleman's arguments, when examined, would be proved to be sound. The hon. Gentleman began by asking, "Why not give the same latitude to the local authorities as was given to the present School Board?" But it should be remembered that the School Board had always had women as elected members, and elected members had a position of authority and a status which co-opted members never had. Moreover, the number of elected women members had tended to increase, which showed how necessary and efficient was the system. They could not have the same reliance on a body like the Borough Councils, which contained no women, securing the due presence of women on the boards of management, as they had had in the case of the School Board. Therefore, there was a very clear and strong distinction between the experience of the past, to which the Parliamentary Secretary appealed, and the case of the future. Then, the hon. Baronet said that a reason why women would not be appointed more frequently on the boards of management was because of the long journeys they would have to make; but surely that was a question for the women themselves to decide. When, after all the pious expressions of opinion last year as to the necessity of women being on the boards of management, they found that so little had been done by the County Councils and the Borough Councils in that direction, that was the strongest proof that they should have something far more than the Board of Education proposed to give them. The House should remember that as two-thirds of these managers would be chosen by the Borough Councils, and as the Borough Councils would have no women upon them, there was far less chance now of women being appointed. He did not like the suggestion that it should be left to

  717
  the Board of Education to impose compulsion on the two local authorities. Suppose one authority did not want any women, and that the other authority said they wanted so many, why bring in this bone of contention between the two authorities, and between both of them and the Board of Education? He thought it was far better for the House to lay down an irreducible minimum: and no one could say that the minimum proposed in the Amendment was too large. He could not for a moment accept the suggestion of the Parliamentary Secretary, and he hoped the hon. Member for Poplar would divide on the matter. It ought to be put on record that they were not satisfied with what was suggested by the Government.
  MR. HENRY HOBHOUSEsaid he quite agreed with the right hon. Gentleman the Member for Aberdeen South. His experience of the working of last year's Act rendered it necessary that there should be something more in the Bill than was proposed by the hon. Member for South Manchester. They knew that the schemes sanctioned by the Board of Education simply resulted in one woman being appointed on a board of forty or sixty persons. It should be remembered that the great proportion of the new managers would be appointed by the Borough Councils. The Borough Councils were excellent bodies in their way, but they had strenuously resisted any women being admitted into their ranks. He remembered the hard fight for the admission of women into the Borough Councils in the debates on the London Local Government Act a few years ago, when it was decided in the other House, and afterwards accepted in this House, that no women should be put on the Borough Councils. If women had been admitted to these Councils it would not have been found nearly so necessary, in the present circumstances, to press for a minimum number of women being made school managers. He would remind the Parliamentary Secretary, who was so sympathetic on this subject, that there would have to be consultations between the two local authorities, and there would not be the least difficulty in their arriving at a conclusion as to which of them was to put the women on the boards of
  718
  management. He did not feel so strongly in regard to the exact proportion; but if no substantial concession was made by the Government, he should be bound to vote for the Amendment, which embodied the principle that women should be, in the future as in the past, managers. As the right hon. Gentleman the Member for Cambridge University had said, many of the schools were nurseries, and a large proportion of the teachers were women, and it was far better that the women teachers should bring their grievances to a woman than to a man.
  MR. YOXALLsaid he ventured to compliment the Parliamentary Secretary on the facility and case he had acquired in giving Ministerial answers in the negative. The hon. Baronet preferred an Amendment by tire hon. Member for South Manchester which did not specifically mention women, but which gave the Board of Education the right to interfere in cases where women were not elected. The Act of last year expressly mentioned women, but, as had been shown, the Board of Education in their schemes only approved of one woman.
  *SIR WILLIAM ANSONsaid that although the schemes only mentioned one woman as necessary, there were generally various other persons whose sex was not mentioned. There was, therefore, no reason to suppose that the presence of women was not desired by the Board of Education.
  MR. YOXALLsaid that although there were two women on several Committees, and three on others, and even as many as five on some, still it was a very small proportion out of a total number of sixty or seventy. Having regard to the fact that the bulk of the teachers belonged to the sex they were now discussing, the bulk of the managers ought to belong to the same sex. But for business and other reasons that could not be obtained, and therefore the House ought to lay down in set terms that there should be a minimum proportion of women Every attempt in this direction in the past had failed, because the matter had been left to the good sense of the appointing authority or the overruling powers of the Board of Education. If the Parliamentary Secretary was

  719
  anxious—and he believed he was—that women should be represented, he did not see any good reason why he should not now say that a certain proportion of the managers should be women.
  MR. BONDsaid that he had put an Amendment on the Paper making the proportion of women one-third of the managers, because he was informed, and he believed correctly, that the women on the boards of managers under the London School Board were about one - third of the whole number. He thought one-third was not at all an undue proportion. On the one hand it would enable them to render the services they very efficiently could, and on the other hand it would satisfy the natural desires of those who had been associated with work of this kind to continue to take their proper share in the work. Having regard to the services rendered by them in the past to the School Board, it would be a good thing for the education of London if it were made quite plain in the Bill that there should be a due proportion of women managers in the future. The hon. Baronet said that the proportion of one-third would be a minimum which might become a maximum; but he ventured to think that women would be satisfied with it, and would not be likely to ask for more. If any other proportion than one-third were suggested he would be prepared to consider it. Unless, however, a fixed proportion were provided in the Bill, a great deal of red tape would be introduced. He thought the House was much too regardless of the effect of the legislation which it passed. For himself, whenever he got an opportunity, he was always anxious to put things as clearly as possible; and in that way to avoid the supererogatory work which indefinite legislation brought about. For that reason he preferred that a definite proportion should be specified; and he hoped his hon. friend would be able to accept the Amendment.
  MR. J. H. LEWISsaid he hoped the Government would see their way to respond to the appeal which had been made in regard to this question. The feeling was strongly shared on both sides of the
  720
  House that women should have a definite sphere of work assigned to them. Unless some proportion were definitely mentioned in the Bill, he was afraid that women would not be able to obtain that share in the work of education to which they were justly entitled. The Parliamentary Secretary said that it would be dangerous to put in a precise proportion in the Bill; but it would be equally dangerous to leave it out. When the Act of last year was in Committee, he moved an Amendment providing that at least one member of the local managing body should be a woman; but that was opposed by the Prime Minister, principally on the ground that it might as well be proposed that at least one member of the managing body should be a man. They, however, knew, as a matter of fact, that the proportion of women on the Local Education Committees was disgracefully small; and in some cases women were excluded altogether from the management of the schools, although one-half of the scholars were girls, and a considerable proportion of the boys were infants. Men understood very little about the education of infants; whereas, women were entitled to the consideration of the House for the share they had already taken in the educational work of the country. Women were better workers in the educational field than men. They attended the meetings better, and did their work more conscientiously. He had obtained statistics to support that view. The average number of the attendances of the women members of the London School Board in 1901 was 163, the average attendance of the male members being 115. At the thirty-four meetings of the Board the attendances of the nine women members were thirty-four, thirty-four, thirty-three, thirty-two, thirty-two, thirty-two, thirty-three, twenty-nine, and twenty-four. That showed that the lady members of the Board paid very close attention indeed to their work. The House had decided that a certain number of members should be appointed by the Borough Councils. But the Borough Councils had not that experience with reference to the educational work of women which the London School Board and the London

  721
  County Council had; and a considerable amount of prejudice would exist, with the result that a small number of women would be appointed. He thought it was absolutely necessary, in such circumstances, that the House should lay down a definite proportion as to the number of women to be appointed.
  *MR. COHENsaid he was surprised that most of the hon. Members who had spoken had addressed the greater part of their arguments to the necessity — it was more than expediency—of having women on the boards of management. No one objected to that; and, therefore, the only question before the House was how the object which they all desired could be best achieved. The point at issue was whether it was necessary, or even advisable, to lay down a hard and fast rule. He submitted that it would not only be not advisable, but would be extremely inadvisable, to fetter the local education authority by any scheme obliging them to appoint a certain proportion of women members, and not allow them full liberty of choice in a matter about which, he believed, no apprehension need be entertained. His right hon. friend the Member for East Somerset said that it would be advisable to support the Amendment in order to secure the perpetuation of the existing system, and he had apprehensions about women being appointed on the ground that the Borough Councils would be disinclined to act in that direction. He felt bound to protest against that groundless reflection on the Borough Councils.
  MR. J. H. LEWISsaid that the statement was based on the action of the Borough Councils in the country.
  *MR. COHENsaid that the Borough Councils in the country might have imperfectly discharged their duties; but was that any reason for making a statement concerning the Borough Councils of London based, not on past neglect, but on possible future neglect? There was no body so directly interested in the managerial machinery of the schools of their own district as the Borough Councils, and the House need not be apprehensive that their action
  722
  would be against the presence of these women; their influence would be in the exactly opposite direction. The influence of the Borough Councils in this matter was the most perfect guarantee they could have in favour of securing this provision. The hon. Member for South Manchester seemed to think the London Borough Councils would not have the same view as the London County Council as to the value of these women, but he was quite sure that they had a perfect conviction of the necessity of the presence of women on these bodies, and as regards experience the London County Council and the Borough Councils stood in identically the same position. Whatever doubt might be entertained as to the Borough Councils, the same doubt must be entertained with regard to the London County Council. He thought, in the interest of the people, the provision with regard to the presence of women ought to be left to the free and unfettered discretion of the Borough Councils.
  MR. EMMOTTwas unable to see, if the Borough Councils were such extraordinarily enlightened bodies, and if they agreed to the proposition that women should become members of these Committees, why they should not be tied down to the terms of the Amendment. Those who supported this Amendment were very disappointed with the number of women who were put on these Committees under the Act of last year, and they desired to amend that point so far as London was concerned. The question they had to consider was, whether a hard and fast line would be better than that an inadequate number of women should be on these boards. He did not think, if this matter was left to the discretion of Borough Councils, an adequate number of women would be put on, and therefore he desired to have a hard and fast line. He did not care very much what the proportion was; if "one-third" was too much let them make it "one-fourth." He objected to a new bone of contention being thrown down for the Board of Education to decide. The hands of the Board of Education were pretty full already, and he did not know why they should be so greedy of having

  723
  points to decide which might be very well dealt with by this House. He heartily supported the Amendment.
  THE PRESIDENT OF THE LOCAL GOVERNMENT BOARD (Mr. WALTER LONG,)said there was no difference of opinion between the different speakers on the main question as to the advantage to be derived from the presence of women on these boards. The only question was, whether they should leave it to the local authority to elect women, and as many as they thought fit, or whether they should be compelled to elect a statutory number. It was suggested that one-third of these bodies should be women. That seemed to be undesirable from two points of view. What they wanted to do was to get a fair proportion of the most experienced and best women available for the whole area. As it was undesirable to prolong the debate, he would suggest as a compromise that instead of being one-third of each of the appointed bodies, they should be one-third of the Committee as a whole. As a matter of drafting, he thought it ought to come a little lower down in the clause. The Government would leave it to the House to say whether the number should be fixed in the Bill, or left to the discretion of the Borough Councils.
  DR. MACNAMARAthought that such a suggestion could be agreed to without going to a division.
  Amendment, by leave, withdrawn.
  Amendment proposed to the Bill—
  "In page 1, line 16, after the word 'women,' to insert the words 'in the proportion of not less than one-third of the whole body of managers.'"—(Mr. Bond.)
  Amendment agreed to.
  MR. PEELsaid the next Amendment was only a verbal one. He begged to move.
  Amendment proposed to the Bill—
  "In page 1, line 15, after the word 'had' to insert the words 'in selecting managers.'"—(Mr. Peel.)
  Amendment agreed to.
  DR. MACNAMARAsaid the last word of the clause was now "managers," and he desired to insert after managers, "and members chosen from the existing body of managers." He hoped the Government would accept this, as it was consonant with the frequently expressed desires of the Government.
  Amendment proposed to the Bill—
  "After the last Amendment to insert the words 'and members chosen from the existing body of managers.'"—(Dr. Macnamara.)
  Question proposed, "That those words be there inserted in the Bill."
  *SIR WILLIAM ANSONthought the object of the hon. Member would be better met by the Amendment to be proposed by the hon. Member for South Manchester.
  DR. MACNAMARAsaid that if the hon. Baronet preferred the form of words suggested by the hon. Member for South Manchester, he would withdraw his Amendment.
  Amendment, by leave, withdrawn.
  MR. PEELthought it unnecessary to detain the House by speaking in support of the Amendment of which he had given notice, and therefore formally moved.
  Amendment moved to the Bill—
  "After the last Amendment to insert the words 'and, in the case of the first body of managers, also of members chosen from the then existing bodies of managers, and the Borough Council and the local education authority shall carry out any directions given by the Board of Education for the purpose of giving effect to this provision.'"—(Mr. Peel.)
  Amendment agreed to.
  MR. LOUGHthought it possible that a deadlock might arise in certain cases unless some such proviso as he suggested were inserted. He therefore moved.
  Amendment proposed to the Bill—
  "After the words last inserted to insert the words 'provided also that until new groups are arranged and new managers are appointed the existing groups of schools and the existing manager's shall be continued.'"—(Mr. Lough.)
  Question proposed, "That those words be there inserted in the Bill."
  *SIR WILLIAM ANSONhesitated to accept the Amendment, as it would put an inducement before the authorities not to bring the provisions of the Bill into operation as quickly as they might. There would be no difficulty in preparing before the appointed day to appoint bodies of managers, nor was there any danger of a deadlock. However, if the hon. Member would withdraw the Amendment, he would undertake to look carefully into the matter, and if such a danger existed, to see that words were inserted.
  MR. BRYCEthought there was a possibility of difficulty arising, unless such a proviso as was suggested by the Amendment were inserted. If people were not ready it would be a reason for making the appointed day later.
  MR. LOUGH, in view of the hon. Baronet's promise, asked leave to withdraw the Amendment.
  Amendment, by leave, withdrawn.
  MR. LOUGHmoved to omit Sub-action (2). He thought it would be much better to drop the sub-section than to attempt to amend it. The Government evidently thought it was not in a satisfactory condition, as the hon. Baronet had a substantial Amendment on the Taper in reference to it. The Borough Councils had their share of authority in the appointment of managers; why then should they be brought into the question of the selection of sites? It was a most difficult matter, and one that should be carried on secretly, so that there was no chance of jobbery; consequently it was very undesirable that it should be discussed between several bodies. He believed the consensus of opinion was against the sub-section, and he hoped the Government would agree to drop it.
  Amendment proposed to the Bill—
  "In page 1, line 17, to leave out Sub-section (2)."—(Mr. Lough.)
  Question proposed, "That the words proposed to be left out to the word 'be' in line 23, stand part of the Bill."
  *SIR WILLIAM ANSONthought the sub-section with the Amendment he would subsequently propose could do no harm, and might do a considerable amount of good. There was no doubt that the question of sites excited a great deal of interest, but if the hon. Member read the clause carefully he would see that there was no possibility of jobbery such as he had suggested. All that was required was that a site should not be determined upon until the Borough Council had been consulted, and that in the case of compulsory purchase if there was difference of opinion the Board of Education should not make an order authorising the purchase unless they were satisfied that the concurrence of the Borough Council should be dispensed with. He thought this was really a matter in which the opinion of the locality ought to be consulted, though it did not necessarily follow that that opinion would carry the day or be accepted by the local authority or the Board of Education.
  MR. SYDNEY BUXTONregretted the decision of the hon. Baronet. This proposal was part of the original scheme under which the local bodies were to have the management of the schools, and under such circumstances there was much to be said in favour of the Borough Councils having a considerable voice in the selection of sites. But the Councils were no longer in that position, and the reason for them having a voice in the matter had disappeared. He hoped, therefore, the Government would agree to drop the sub-section. The acquisition of sites involved large expenditure, and the School Board by private negotiations had frequently been able to secure sites at 20, 30, or 50 per cent. less than they would have had to pay had their intentions been publicly announced. If the Borough Councils had to be consulted secrecy would be impossible, and the knowledge that a certain site was wanted would certainly enhance the price. The London County Council were in touch with the Borough Councils, and, in the event of any dispute as to a site, could invite local members to attend the Committee privately, and thus avoid the matter becoming public. Unless this sub-section disappeared from the

  727
  Bill there was every probability of the ratepayers being mulcted in a much larger sum than would otherwise be the case.
  MR. WHITMOREsaid he hoped the Government would adhere to this sub-section. He thought the Borough Councils should be consulted in regard to the selection of sites for new public elementary schools. This subsection certainly made it clear that in a matter of this kind in which local knowledge was of great importance the site should not be determined upon until alter consultation with the Borough Council
  DR. MACNAMARAsaid that as the Bill originally stood the Borough Council had to select the site, but the Government saw that would be unworkable, and they provided that the Borough Council should be consulted and in case the Borough Council disagreed with the education authority the Board of Education had power to substitute any other site proposed by the Borough Council. What the hon. Member for Chelsea put forward as reasonable was done at the present time. Since the existence of the Borough Councils there was not a case where they had not been consulted as to the best place for erecting a school. There were, however, words in the last part of the hon. Baronet's proposed Amendment which he did not quite understand and which he was afraid would lead to interminable delay. The words he alluded to were—
  "And in such a case shall make a special report to Parliament, stating their reasons for dispensing with that concurrence."
  An interminable debate would then take place, promoted by the Borough
  Council. At the present time it took four or five years to provide a new school, and if this new procedure were adopted it might run to an interminable number of years.
  MR. HARRY SAMUELthought the hon. Member for North Camberwell was quite right in saying that there had been communications with the Borough Councils in all cases in reference to the selection of sites since the Councils were called into existence. He wished to say, however, that he had not found that kind consideration for the wishes of the locality indicated by the hon. Member opposite, because in his constituency the School Board had ridden rough shod over the Borough Council, and they had selected sites which were of the greatest importance for the accommodation of the poor people when others might have been chosen. It was quite right that the Borough Council should have some voice in the matter.
  CAPTAIN JESSELsaid that in regard to sites, all sorts of communications passed between the central and the local authority, but the matter was dealt with by the various committees and. the Council knew nothing about it until it was practically settled. He did not attach much importance to the proposed Amendment of the Secretary to the Board of Education, because it was only a matter of machinery. He thought, however, that the local authorities ought to be consulted.
  Question put.
  The House divided:—Ayes, 201; Noes, 104. (Division List No. 166.)

  AYES.

  Agg-Gardner, James Tynte

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

  Carson, Rt. Hon. Sir Edw. H.

  Agnew, Sir Andrew Noel

  Balfour, Rt. Hn. Gerald W. (Leeds

  Cavendish, V. C. W. (Derbyshire

  Aird, Sir John

  Banbury, Sir Frederick George

  Cayzer, Sir Charles William

  Anson, Sir William Reynell

  Bathurst, Hn. Allen Benjamin

  Cecil, Evelyn (Aston Manor)

  Arnold-Forster, Hugh O.

  Bentinck, Lord Henry C.

  Cecil, Lord Hugh (Greenwich)

  Atkinson, Rt. Hon. John

  Bill, Charles

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

  Aubrey-Fletcher, Rt. Hn. Sir H.

  Blundell, Colonel Henry

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

  Bagot, Capt. Josceline FitzRoy

  Bond, Edward

  Chapman, Edward

  Bailey, James (Walworth)

  Brassey, Albert

  Churchill, Winston Spencer

  Bain, Colonel James Robert

  Brown, Sir Alx. H. (Shropsh.)

  Clive, Captain Percy A.

  Baird, John George Alexander

  Campbell, Rt. Hn. J. A. (Glasg.)

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

  Balcarres, Lord

  Campbell, J. H. M. (Dublin Univ

  Coghill, Douglas Harry

  Baldwin, Alfred

  Carew, James Laurence

  Cohen, Benjamin Louis

  Collings, Right Hon. Jesse

  Hogg, Lindsay

  Rattigan, Sir William Henry

  Colomb, Sir John Chas. Ready

  Hoult, Joseph

  Redmond, Jn. E. (Waterford)

  Colston, Chas. Edw. H. Athole

  Howard, John (Kent, Faversh'm

  Reid, James (Greenock)

  Cox, Irwin Edward Bainbridge

  Hudson, George Bickersteth

  Remnant, James Farquharson

  Cranborne, Viscount

  Jessel, Captain Herbert Merton

  Renshaw, Sir Charles Bine

  Cross, Herb. Shepherd (Bolton

  Johnstone, Heywood

  Renwick, George

  Crossley, Rt. Hon. Sir Savile

  Kennedy, Patrick James

  Ritchie, Rt. Hn. Chas. Thomson

  Denny, Colonel

  Kenyon, Hon. G. T. (Denbigh

  Roberts, Samuel (Sheffield)

  Dewar, Sir T. R. (Tower Hamlets

  Kenyon-Slaney, Col. W. (Salop

  Robertson, Herbert (Hackney)

  Dickinson, Robert Edmond

  Kerr, John

  Rutherford, John (Lancashire

  Dimsdale, Rt. Hn. Sir Joseph C.

  Knowles, Lees

  Sackville, Col. S. G. Stanford-

  Dixon-Hartland, Sir Fred Dixon

  Lambton, Hn. Frederick Wm.

  Sadler, Col. Samuel Alexander

  Donelan, Captain A.

  Law, Andrew Bonar (Glasgow)

  Samuel, Harry S. (Limehouse)

  Doughty, George

  Lawson, John Giant (Yorks, N. R

  Sassoon, Sir Edward Albert

  Douglas, Rt. Hon. A. Akers

  Legge, Col. Hon. Heneage

  Scott, Sir S. (Marylebone, W.)

  Doxford, Sir Wm. Theodore

  Llewellyn, Evan Henry

  Seely, Chas. Hilton (Lincoln)

  Duke, Henry Edward

  Lockwood, Lieut-Col. A. R.

  Sharpe, William Edward T.

  Elliot, Hn. A. Ralph Douglas

  Loder, Gerald Walter Erskine

  Shaw-Stewart, M. H. (Renfrew

  Faber, George Denison (York

  Long, Col. Charles W. (Evesham

  Simeon, Sir Barrington

  Fardell, Sir T. George

  Long, Rt. Hn. Walter (Bristol, S

  Sinclair, Louis (Romford)

  Fellowes, Hon. Ailwyn Ed.

  Lonsdale, John Brownlee

  Smith, Abel H. (Hertford, East

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

  Lowe, Francis William

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

  Fielden, Edward Brocklehurst

  Lowther, C. (Cumb., Eskdale)

  Smith, James Parker (Lanarks)

  Finch, Rt. Hn. George H.

  Lowther, Rt. Hn. James (Kent

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

  Finlay, Sir Robert Bannatyne

  Lucas, Col. Francis (Lowestoft

  Stanley, Lord (Lancs.)

  Fisher, William Hayes

  Lucas, Reg'ld J. (Portsmouth)

  Stone, Sir Benjamin

  FitzGerald, Sir Robert Penrose

  Macdona, John Cumming

  Stroyan, John

  Flannery, Sir Fortescue

  M'Iver, Sir Lewis (Edinburgh W

  Talbot, Lord E. (Chichester)

  Flower, Ernest

  M'Killop, James (Stirlingshire

  Tomlinson, Sir Wm. E. M.

  Forster, Henry William

  Malcolm, Ian

  Tritton, Charles Ernest

  Galloway, William Johnson

  Melville, Beresford Valentine

  Valentia, Viscount

  Gardner, Ernest

  Meysey-Thompson, Sir H. M.

  Vincent, Sir Edgar (Exeter)

  Gibbs, Hn. Vicary (St. Albans

  Milvain, Thomas

  Walrond, Rt. Hn. Sir Wm. H.

  Godson, Sir Augustus Frederick

  Mitchell, William (Burnley)

  Webb, Colonel William George

  Gordon, Hn. J. E. (Elgin & Nairn

  Moon, Edward Robert Pacy

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

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

  Morgan, David J. (Walth'mstow

  Welby, Sir Charles G. E. (Notts

  Gore, Hn. S. F. Ormsby- (Linc

  Morton, Arthur H. Aylmer

  Whiteley, H. (Ashton und. Lyne

  Goschen, Hon. Geo. Joachim

  Mount, William Arthur

  Whitmore, Charles Algernon

  Goulding, Edward Alfred

  Murray, Rt. Hn. A. Graham (Bute

  Willoughby de Eresby, Lord

  Graham, Henry Robert

  Murray Col. Wyndbam (Bath

  Willox, Sir John Archibald

  Greene, Sir E. W. (Bury St. Ed.

  Mve's, William Henry

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

  Greene, W. Raymond- (Cambs

  Nicholson, William Graham

  Wilson, John [Falkirk)

  Grenfell, William Henry

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

  Wilson, John (Glasgow)

  Groves, James Grimble

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

  Wilson-Todd, Wm. H. (Yorks)

  Guest, Hon. Ivor Churchill

  Orr-Ewing, Charles Lindsay

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

  Gunter, Sir Robert

  Palmer, Walter (Salisbury)

  Worsley-Taylor, Henry Wilson

  Gutbrie, Walter Murray

  Peel, Hn. Wm. Robert Wellesley

  Wylie, Alexander

  Hardy, Laurence (Kent, Ashfd

  Pemberton, John S. G.

  Wyndham, Rt. Hon. George

  Hare, Thomas Leigh

  Percy, Earl

  Wyndham-Quin, Major W. H.

  Harris, Frederick Leverton

  Pierpoint, Robert

  Young, Samuel

  Haslam, Sir Alfred S.

  Pilkington, Col. Richard

  Hatch, Ernest Frederick Geo.

  Plummer, Walter R.

  TELLERS FOR THE AYES—

  Hay, Hon. Claude George

  Pretyman, Ernest George

  Sir Alexander Acland-

  Heath, James (Staffords, N. W.

  Randles, John S.

  Hood and Mr. Anstruther.

  Heaton, John Henniker

  Rasch, Major Frederic Carne

  Helder, Augustus

  Ratcliff, R. F.

  NOES.

  Allen, Chas. P. (Glouc. Stroud

  Channing, Francis Allston

  Farquharson, Dr. Robert

  Asher, Alexander

  Cremer, William Randal

  Fenwick, Charles

  Atherley-Jones, L.

  Crombie, John William

  Ferguson, R. C. Munro (Leith

  Barlow, John Emmott

  Crooks, William

  Fitzmaurice, Lord Edmond

  Beaumont, Wentworth C. B.

  Davies, Alfred (Carmarthen)

  Foster, Sir Michl. (Lond. Univ

  Black, Alexander William

  Davies, M. Vaughan (Cardigan

  Foster, Sir Walter (Derby Co.

  Broadhurst, Henry

  Dilke, Rt. Hon. Sir Charles

  Fuller, J. M. F.

  Bryce, Rt. Hon. James

  Douglas, Charles M. (Lanark)

  Gladstone, Rt. Hn. Herbert J.

  Burt, Thomas

  Duncan, J. Hastings

  Goddard, Daniel Ford

  Buxton, Sydney Charles

  Dunn, Sir William

  Gurdon, Sir W. Brampton

  Caldwell, James

  Edwards, Frank

  Harwood, George

  Cameron, Robert

  Elibank, Master of

  Hayne, Rt. Hon. Chas. Seale-

  Campbell-Bannerman, Sir H.

  Ellis, John Edward

  Hayter, Rt. Hon. Sir Arthur D.

  Causton, Richard Knight

  Evans, Sir Francis (Maidstone

  Hemphill, Rt. Hon. Chas. H.

  Cawley, Frederick

  Evans, Samuel T. (Glamorgan

  Hobhouse, C. E. H. (Brist'l, E

  730

  731

  Holland, Sir William Henry

  Mappin, Sir Fredk. Thorpe

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

  Hope, John Deans (Fife, West

  Markham, Arthur Basil

  Stevenson, Francis S.

  Horniman, Frederick John

  Mellor, Rt. Hn. John William

  Taylor, Theo. C. (Radcliffe)

  Humphreys-Owen, Arthur C.

  Morgan, J. Lloyd (Carmarthen

  Tennant, Harold John

  Hutchinson, Dr. Charles Fredk.

  Newnes, Sir George

  Thomas, Sir A. (Glamorgan, E.

  Hutton, Alfred E. (Morley)

  Palmer, Sir Charles M. (Durham

  Thomas, David Alfred (Merthyr

  Jacoby, James Alfred

  Partington, Oswald

  Tomkinson, James

  Jones, David B. (Swansea)

  Paulton, James Mellor

  Toulmin, George

  Jones, William (Carnarvonsh.

  Pirie, Duncan V.

  Wallace, Robert

  Kitson, Sir James

  Price, Robert John

  Wason, Eugene (Clackmannan

  Langley, Batty

  Rea, Russell

  Weir, James Galloway

  Lawson, Sir Wilfrid (Cornwall

  Rickett, J. Compton

  Whiteley, George (York, W. R.

  Layland-Barratt, Francis

  Roberts, John H. (Denbighs)

  Whitley, J. H. (Halifax)

  Leng, Sir John

  Roe, Sir Thomas

  Williams, O. (Merioneth)

  Levy, Maurice

  Russell, T. W.

  Wilson, F. W. (Norfolk, Mid)

  Lewis, John Herbert

  Samuel, Herbert L. (Cleveland

  Wilson, John (Durham, Mid.)

  Lloyd-George, David

  Shackleton, David James

  Yoxall, James Henry

  Macnamara, Dr. Thomas J.

  Shaw, Charles Edw. (Stafford)

  M'Arthur, William (Cornwall

  Shipman, Dr. John G.

  TELLERS FOR THE NOES—

  M'Laren, Sir Charles Benj.

  Sinclair, John (Forfarshire)

  Mr. Lough and Mr.

  Mansfield, Horace Rendall

  Soares, Ernest J.

  Trevelyan.

  *SIR WILLIAM ANSONsaid Subsection (2) as it stood provided that in a case where a Borough Council did not concur with the local education authority in a proposed compulsory acquisition of a school site—
  "The Board of Education shall be empowered, as a condition of its approval of the Provisional Order, to require, if it thinks fit, the substitution in the Order of any other site proposed by the council of the metropolitan borough for that inserted by the local education authority."
  Amendment proposed to the Bill—
  "In page 1, line 23, after the word 'shall,' to leave out to end of clause, and insert the words 'not make the order authorising the purchase unless they are satisfied that, the concurrence of the council of the borough should be dispensed with.'"—(Sir William Anson.)
  MR. BRYCEsaid this was a substantial improvement of the sub-section.
  Amendment agreed to.
  MR. BRYCEmoved an Amendment to provide that a site required for the enlargement of a public elementary school should not be deemed a new site within the meaning of Sub-section (2). He hoped the Government would see that this Amendment was needed. He did not say that it was absolutely needed in point of law, but he thought it was better that the Amendment should be added in order to make the matter perfectly plain. There was no reason why a site for the enlargement of
  732
  a school should come within the subsection.
  Amendment proposed to the Bill—
  "In page 1, line 26, at end, to add the words 'Provided that the site required for the enlargement of a public elementary school shall not be deemed to be a site required for a new public elementary school within the meaning of this sub-section and of Section eight of the principal Act.'"—(Mr. Bryce.)
  Question proposed, "That those words be there inserted in the Bill."
  *SIR WILLIAM ANSONsaid the enlargement of a school might require a very substantial addition to the existing site, and if such an enlargement could not be dealt with as a matter of consultation, sometimes the character of a neighbourhood might be almost changed, and some of the objects of the subsection would thereby be frustrated. He thought there were cases in which the enlargement would be so substantial that the Borough Council ought to be consulted.
  DR. MACNAMARAsaid they were now dealing with a very important matter. The hon. Baronet's fears that they might change a small school into a very large one were absolutely groundless, because the rules of the Education Department prevented the building of a school for more than 1,200 scholars. The existing law provided for all sorts of inquiries when it was proposed to enlarge a school, and these inquiries took a long time, the

  733
  effect being that all interests were adequately safeguarded. If an additional piece of land had to be bought compulsorily, the authority had to come to Parliament for a Provisional Order which had to stand the fire of criticism. He was convinced that if the Parliamentary Secretary looked into the matter he would see that he already had in the regulations and powers of the Department the most complete, and, he might say, tedious safeguards. It would be highly detrimental if a mere enlargement would have to run through all the gamut of Clauses 7 and 8 of last year's Act, and Sub-section (2) of Clause 2 of this Bill. The Amendment was absolutely necessary for the reasonable carrying out of the provisions of the Act of last year.
  MR. LOUGHsaid the hon. Baronet could not have thought out this matter when he gave such a blank refusal to the Amendment. There would be continual conflicts if this Amendment were not accepted. The Amendment only spoke of the enlargement of existing schools. An existing school was not a new public elementary school. If the Bill was left without this Amendment it would not be clear that the local education authority could proceed without going to the Borough Councils.
  *SIR WILLIAM ANSONsaid he would accept the Amendment in the following shape—
  "In Clause 2, page 1, line 26, to insert 'Provided that, except in the case of compulsory acquisition, the site required for the enlargement of a public elementary school shall not be deemed to be a site required for a new public elementary school within the meaning of this sub-section.'"
  MR. SYDNEY BUXTONsaid he would rather have had the Amendment he had proposed on behalf of his hon. friend; but they had better take what they could get.
  Amendment, by leave, withdrawn.
  Amendment proposed to the Bill—
  "In page 1, line 26, at end, to insert the words "Provided that, except in the case of compulsory acquisition, the site required for
  the enlargement of a public elementary school shall not be deemed a site required for a new public elementary school within the meaning of this sub-section.'"—(Sir William Anson.)
  Amendment agreed to.
  MR. BRYCEsad he thought that the words "and of Section 8 of the principal Act," should be added to the Amendment. It was intended to have an open Held as between provided and non-provided schools. But this particular section referred only to provided schools, which made all the difference in the world. These words were necessary, and he begged to move their insertion.
  Amendment proposed to the Bill—
  "After the words last inserted to insert the words 'and of Section 8 of the principal Act.—(Mr. Bryce.)
  Question proposed, "That those words be there inserted in the Bill."
  *SIR WILLIAM ANSONsaid he could not help thinking that these words should not be inserted here, for though they seemingly referred to an enlargement of a school with reference to consulting Borough Councils under certain conditions, they really repeated in the case of London a provision of the principal Act.
  DR. MACNAMARAsaid that if these words were not put in, the matter would be left entirely to the Board of Education. His experience of the Board of Education since 1895, was that it had been under considerable denominational influence, though he did not say it was under the hon. Baronet. All sorts of delays had been caused by the pressure of the managers and friends of denominational schools, who thought the enlargement of a school, or the provision of a new school would do injury to their schools. He certainly thought the addition of the words was necessary in order to prevent long delays, and 300 or 400 children being kept waiting for places.
  Question put.
  The House divided:—Ayes, 111; Noes, 212. (Division List No. 167.)

  AYES.

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

  Ashton, Thomas Gair

  Barran, Rowland Hirst

  Asher, Alexander

  Barlow, John Emmott

  Beaumont, Wentworth C. B.

  Black, Alexander William

  Hayter, Rt. Hon. Sir Arthur D.

  Roberts, John H. (Denbighs.)

  Broadhurst, Henry

  Hemphill, Rt. Hon. Charles H.

  Roe, Sir Thomas

  Brown, George M. (Edinburgh)

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

  Russell, T. W.

  Bryce, Rt. Hon. James

  Holland, Sir William Henry

  Samuel, Herbert L. (Cleveland

  Burns, John

  Hope, John Deans (Fife, West)

  Sehwann, Charles E.

  Burt, Thomas

  Horniman, Frederick John

  Shackleton, David James

  Buxton, Sydney Charles

  Hutchinson, Dr. Charles Fredk.

  Shaw, Charles E. (Stafford)

  Caldwell, James

  Hutton, Alfred E. (Morley)

  Shipman, Dr. John G.

  Cameron, Robert

  Jacoby, James Alfred

  Sinclair, John (Forfarshire)

  Campbell-Bannerman, Sir H.

  Jones, David Brynmor (Sw'nsea

  Soares, Ernest J.

  Causton, Richard Knight

  Jones, William (Carnarvonshire

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

  Cawley, Frederick

  Langley, Batty

  Stevenson, Francis S.

  Channing, Francis Allston

  Lawson, Sir Wilfrid (Cornwall)

  Strachey, Sir Edward

  Cremer, William Randal

  Layland-Barratt, Francis

  Taylor, Theodore C. (Radcliffe)

  Crombie, John William

  Leigh, Sir Joseph

  Tennant, Harold John

  Crooks, William

  Leng, Sir John

  Thomas, A. (Carmarthen, S.)

  Davies, Alfred (Carmarthen)

  Levy, Maurice

  Thomas, Sir A. (Glamorgan, E.)

  Davies, M. Vaughan- (Cardigan

  Lewis, John Herbert

  Thomas, David Alfred (Merthyr

  Dilke, Rt. Hon. Sir Charles

  Lloyd-George, David

  Tomkinson, James

  Douglas, Charles M. (Lanark)

  Lough, Thomas

  Toulmin, George

  Dunn, Sir William

  Macnamara, Dr. Thomas J.

  Trevelyan, Charles Philips

  Edwards, Frank

  M'Kenna, Reginald

  Wason, Eugene (Clackmannan)

  Elibank, Master of

  M'Laren, Sir Charles Benjamin

  Wason, John Cathcart (Orkney

  Evans, Samuel T. (Glamorgan)

  Mansfield, Horace Rendall

  Weir, James Galloway

  Farquharson, Dr. Robert

  Mappin, Sir Fredk. Thorpe

  Whitley, J. H. (Halifax)

  Fenwick, Charles

  Markham, Arthur Basil

  Whittaker, Thomas Palmer

  Fitzmaurice, Lord Edmund

  Mellor, Rt. Hn. John William

  Williams, Osmond (Merioneth)

  Foster Sir Michael (Lond. Univ.

  Morgan, J. Lloyd (Carmarthen)

  Wilson, Chas. H. (Hull, W.)

  Foster, Sir Walter (Derby Co.)

  Monlton, John Fletcher

  Wilson, F. W. (Norfolk, Mid)

  Fuller, J. M. F.

  Newnes, Sir George

  Wilson, John (Durham, Mid.)

  Furness, Sir Christopher

  Palmer, Sir Charles M. (Durham

  Yoxall, James Henry

  Goddard, Daniel Ford

  Partington, Oswald

  Grey, Rt. Hn. Sir E. (Berwick

  Paulton, James Mellor

  Gurdon, Sir W. Brampton

  Pirie, Duncan V.

  TELLERS FOR THE AYES—

  Hardie, J. Keir (Merthyr Tyd

  Price, Robert John

  Mr. Herbert Gladstone and

  Harwood, George

  Rea, Russell

  Mr. William M'Arthur.

  Hayne, Rt. Hon. Charles Seale-

  Rickett, J. Compton

  NOES.

  Agnew, Sir Andrew Noel

  Chaplin, Right Hon. Henry

  Forster, Henry William

  Aird, Sir John

  Chapman, Edward

  Foster, Philip S.

  Anson, Sir William Roynell

  Churchill, Winston, Spencer

  Galloway, William Johnston

  Arnold-Forster, Hugh O.

  Clive, Captain Percy A.

  Gardner, Ernest

  Atkinson, Rt. Hon. John

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

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

  Aubrey-Fletcher, Rt. Hn. Sir H.

  Coddington, Sir William

  Gibbs, Hn. Vicary (St. Alhans

  Bagot, Capt. Josceline FitzRoy

  Coghill, Douglas Harry

  Godson, Sir Augustus Fredk.

  Bailey James (Walworth)

  Cohen, Benjamin Louis

  Gordon, Hn. J. E. (Elgin & Nairn

  Bain, Colonel James Robert

  Collings, Right Hon. Jesse

  Gore, Hn. S. F. Ormsby- (Linc

  Baird, John George Alexander

  Colston, Chas. Edw. H. Athole

  Gorst, Rt. Hon. Sir John Eldon

  Balcarres, Lord

  Cook, Sir Frederick Lucas

  Goschen, Hon. George Joachim.

  Baldwin, Alfred

  Cox, Irvin Edwd Bain bridge

  Goulding, Edward Alfred

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

  Cross, Herb. Shepherd (Bolton)

  Graham, Henry Robert

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

  Crossley, Rt. Hon. Sir Savile

  Greene, Sir E. W. (Bury St. Ed.

  Balfour, Kenneth R. (Christch.

  Denny, Colonel

  Grenfell, William Henry

  Banbury, Sir Frederick George

  Dewar, Sir T. R. (Tr. Haml'ts

  Groves, James Grimble

  Bathurst, Hon. Allen Benj.

  Dimsdale, Rt. Hn. Sir Joseph C.

  Guest, Hon. Ivor Churchill

  Beckett, Ernest William

  Disraeli, Coningsby Ralph

  Gunter, Sir Robert

  Bentinck, Lord Henry C.

  Doogan, P. C.

  Guthrie, Walter Murray

  Bill, Charles

  Douglas, Rt. Hon. A. Akers

  Hardy, Laurence (Kent, Ashfd

  Blundell, Colonel Henry

  Doxford, Sir Wm. Theodore

  Hare, Thomas Leigh

  Bowles, Lt.-Col. H. F. (Middlesex

  Duke, Henry Edward

  Harris, Frederick Leverton

  Brassey, Albert

  Egerton, Hon. A. de Tatton

  Haslam, Sir Alfred S.

  Brown, Sir Alex. H. (Shropsh.)

  Elliot, Hon. A. Ralph Douglas

  Hatch, Ernest Frederick Geo.

  Burdett-Coutts, W.

  Faber, George Denison (York)

  Hay, Hon. Claude George

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

  Fardell, Sir T. George

  Heath, James (Staffords, N. W.

  Campbell, J. H. M. (Dublin Univ

  Fellowes, Hon. Ailwyn Ed.

  Helder, Augustus

  Campbell, John (Armagh, S.)

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

  Hogg, Lindsay

  Carson, Rt. Hon. Sir Edw. H.

  Fielden, Edward Brocklehurst

  Hoult, Joseph

  Cavendish, V. C. W. (Derbyshire

  Finch, Rt. Hon. George H.

  Howard, Jno (Kent, Faver'hm

  Cayzer, Sir Charles William

  Firbank, Sir Joseph Thomas

  Hudson, George Bickersteth

  Cecil, Evelyn (Aston Manor)

  Fisher, William Hayes

  Jessel, Capt. Herbert Merton

  Cecil, Lord, Hugh (Greenwich)

  Fitzroy, Hon. Edw. Algernon

  Johnstone, Heywood

  Chamberlain, Rt. Hon. J. (Birm

  Flannery, Sir Fortescue

  Kenyon-Slaney, Col. W. (Salop.

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

  Flower, Ernest

  Kerr, John

  736

  737

  Knowles, Lees

  Myers, William Henry

  Smith, Abel H. (Hertford, E.)

  Lambton, Hon. Fredk. Wm.

  Nicholson, William Graham

  Smith, H. C. (North'mb Tyeside

  Law, Andrew Bonar (Glasgow)

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

  Smith, James Parkers (Lanarks.

  Lawrence, Sir Joseph (Monm'th

  Orr-Ewing, Charles Lindsay

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

  Lawrence, Wm. F. (Liverpool)

  Palmer, Walter (Salisbury)

  Stanley, Lord (Lancs.)

  Lawson, John Grant (York, N. R.

  Peel, Hn. Wm Robert Wellesley

  Stroyan, John

  Legge, Col. Hon. Heneage

  Pemberton, John S. G.

  Talbot, Lord E. (Chichester

  Leveson-Gower Frederick N. S.

  Percy, Earl

  Talbot, Rt. Hn. J. G. (Oxfd Univ

  Llewellyn, Evan Henry

  Pierpoint, Robert

  Thornton, Percy M.

  Lockwood, Lieut-Col. A. R.

  Pilkington, Colonel Pilchard

  Tomlinson, Sir Wm. Edw. M.

  Loder, Gerald Walter Erskine

  Plummer, Walter R.

  Tritton, Charles Ernest

  Long, Col. Charles W. (Evesham

  Pretyman, Ernest George

  Valentia, Viscount

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

  Pryce-Jones, Lt.-Col. Edward

  Vincent, Sir Edgar (Exeter)

  Lowe, Francis William

  Purvis, Robert

  Walrond, Rt. Hn. Sir William H.

  Lowther, C. (Cumb. Eskdale)

  Pym, C. Guy

  Wanklyn, James Leslie

  Lowther, Rt. Hon. Jas. (Kent)

  Randles, John S.

  Warde, Colonel C. E.

  Lucas, Col. Francis (Lowerstoft

  Rasch, Major Frederic Carne

  Webb, Colonel William George

  Lucas, Reginald, J. (Portsmouth

  Ratcliff, R. F.

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

  Lyttelton, Hon. Alfred

  Rattigan, (Sir William Henry

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

  Macdona, John Cumming

  Reid, James (Greenock)

  Whiteley, H. (Ashton und. Lyne

  Maconochie, A. W.

  Remnant, Jas. Farquharson

  Whitmore, Charles Algernon

  M'Iver, Sir Lewis (Edinburgh W.)

  Renshaw, Sir Charles Bine

  Willoughby de Eresby, Lord

  M'Killop, James (Stirlingshire)

  Renwick, George

  Willox, Sir John Archibald

  Malcolm, Ian

  Ritchie, Rt. Hn. Chas. Thomson

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

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

  Roberts, Samuel (Shefield)

  Wilson, John (Falkirk)

  Melville, Beresford Valentine

  Robertson, Herbert (Hackney)

  Wilson, John (Glasgow)

  Meysey-Thompson, Sir H. M.

  Round, Rt. Hon. James

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

  Milvain, Thomas

  Rutherford, John (Lancashire)

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

  Mitchell, William (Burnley)

  Sackville, Col. S. G. Stopford

  Worsley-Taylor, Henry Wilson

  Montagu, G. (Huntingdon)

  Sadler, Col. Samuel Alexander

  Wylie, Alexander

  Moon, Edward Robert Pacy

  Samuel, Harry S. (Limehouse)

  Wyndham, Rt. Hon. George

  Morgan, David J. (Walthamstow

  Sassoon, Sir Edward Albert

  Wyndham-Quin, Major W. H.

  Morgan, Hn. F. (Monm'thsh.)

  Scott, Sir S. (Marylebone, W.)

  Young, Samuel

  Morton, Arthur H. Aylmer

  Sharpe, William Edward T.

  Mount, William Arthur

  Shaw-Stewart, M. H. (Renfrew

  TELLERS FOR THE NOES—

  Murray, Rt. Hn. A. Graham (Bute

  Simeon, Sir Barrington

  Sir Alexander Acland-

  Murray, Col. Wyndham (Bath)

  Sinclair, Louis (Romford)

  Hood and Mr. Anstruther.

  Question put, and agreed to.

  *SIR WILLIAM ANSONsaid he moved this Amendment in pursuance of an undertaking he had given at an earlier stage.
  Amendment proposed to the Bill—
  "In page 1, line 26, at end, to add the words '(3) Schools provide by the local education authority for blind, deaf, epileptic, and defective children, and any other schools which, in the opinion of the Board of Education, are not of a local character, shall not be treated for the purposes of the section as public elementary schools.'"—(Sir William Anson.)
  Question proposed, "That those words be there inserted in the Bill."
  DR. MACNAMARAadmitted the necessity of moving this now, but he suggested it would perhaps be as well to insert after the word "opinion" of the local education authority and."
  CAPTAIN JESSELsaid he attached considerable importance to the subsection of the London Government Act of 1899 having relation to the transference
  738
  of, powers, and therefore moved the Amendment standing in his name. The history of this clause was that it was moved late in the evening by the hon. Member for West Islington. It was not in the original Bill. The hon. Member in moving the clause pointed out that at the time the London Government Act was passed it was never intended to give the administration of education to the London County Council and the Borough Councils. He thought it would-be a pity to stereotype for all time the system laid down by this Act. If the clause was struck out it would be quite simple by an agreement of the majority of the Borough Councils and the London County Council, with the consent of the Local Government Board, to make any change they desired, and he did not see what objection there could be to an arrangement of that kind. He begged to move.
  Amendment proposed to the Bill—
  "In page 1, line 27, to leave out Clause 3."—(Captain Jessel.)
  Question proposed, "That the words of Clause 3, to the word 'proceedings' in line 28, stand part of the Bill."
  MR. LOUGHexpressed his amazement that such a suggestion should be made by the hon. Member. Clause 3 was a very small clause, but it was one which he regarded with some affection because it was the only one which he succeeded in persuading the Government to accept. When he thought of the arduous struggle he made in support of the clause he thought the hon. Member ought not to grudge him the one crumb he had extracted from the Government. The hon. Member evidently thought because the clause was short it was of little use, but he might point out that when the London Government Act was passed there was no thought of entrusting education to municipal bodies. Under the clause in that Act great changes might be made between the Borough Council and the London County Council without the Board of Education being consulted at all, and without any one knowing anything about them. He thought this clause was absolutely necessary, and he hoped the Government would stick to the Bill as it was and not allow the clause to be struck out.
  MR. WHITMOREadmitted that the fact that the clause had reference to the Local Government Board and not to the Board of Education might present some little difficulty, but inasmuch as after the sanction of the Local Government Board was obtained a Provisional Order was necessary it would be convenient to omit this clause.
  MR. WALTER LONGsaid it was the invariable practice when one Department of the Government was asked to do something closely affecting another Department for that Department to ask for the views of the Department affected and follow out those views and adopt the suggestions made. The Local Government Board in this case would be a purely administrative Department and would adopt the views and carry out the suggestions of the Board of Education. They adopted the Amendment in the Committee stage of the Bill because they were then in a fatigued condition. The hon. Member pressed it on the Government—it was his one child, his ewe lamb, and it was
  740
  accepted. But he thought on the whole the best course now would be to leave it out of the Bill.
  MR. SYDNEY BUXTONthought the House was not being fairly treated in this matter. The Amendment was accepted without protest as a safeguard against possible contingencies, and, the Government having accepted it, it would be rather ungracious of them now to throw it over.
  MR. HERBERT ROBERTSONsaid although he should strongly object to any large powers being thrust upon the Borough Councils by this clause he could not congratulate the hon. Member on his ewe lamb. The hon. Member objected to powers being transferred to the Borough Councils, but he did not object to powers being transferred to the Corporation of London which was done by a subsequent clause of the Act of 1899. He could conceive that it might bedesirable to make changes with regard to secondary and technical education, and he therefore asked the House to allow the law to stand as it was and not make a special exception in this case.
  *SIR CHARLES DILKEdid not think the Government were acting fairly in leaving this matter to be decided by the House, which meant rejection, without giving notice of its intention to do so. He gathered that there had been some discussion as to an Amendment which the Government proposed to move in the clause, and therefore their present action was discourteous to the author of the clause.
  *SIR WILLIAM ANSONsaid he should be sorry to leave this point unanswered. What really happened was that a month ago a list of necessary Amendments to the Bill was brought before him; among them was one to the clause of the hon. Member. He called the attention of the hon. Member to the fact that the Amendment was necessary, and it never occurred to him that by doing so he was doing anything unfair one way or the other or pledging himself to retain the clause. He was sorry that his action had led to any misapprehension. He had no intention of misleading the hon. Member

  741
  or the House, and he still said if this clause remained the Amendment was necessary.
  MR. BRYCEthought in a case of this kind the Government ought to stand by the Bill. It was not treating the House quite fairly for the Government, after having accepted this clause, to fall down and surrender to the Member who moved the Amendment. The Amendment was accepted as a compromise.
  MR. WALTER LONG: No.
  MR. BRYCEsaid that as the debate was proceeding the Government thought they could give satisfaction by accepting the Amendment, so that it might fairly be described as a compromise. Now, without the lightest notice, that compromise was being abandoned. He really thought that was not the way in which these things should be done. If the Government thought the balance of argument was in favour of the clause being dropped, they ought themselves to have proposed its omission. If powers of such importance were to be transferred to the Borough Councils, it ought to be done by statute, and go through all the forms which such proceedure involved.
  MR. SAMUEL EVANSthought the Government ought to adhere to the decision at which they arrived, perhaps hurriedly, during the debates in Committee. Possibly his hon. friend's Amendment did not go far enough, but that could easily be remedied. It was true there were safeguards against the powers of devolution being exercised, but the objection was to the possibility of the Local Government Board or the Board of Education, or both, allowing the devolution of such important powers as
  was possible under the section. It ought to be made clear that Parliament did not intend that any such application should be successfully made by the County and Borough Councils, and that no Provisional Order would be obtainable.
  DR. MACNAMARAsaid the ultimate effect might be very serious financially. The present County Council were not likely to devolve much, but, without any great stretch of imagination, he could conceive a County Council with a majority of such a character that it would be the easiest thing in the world to pass a resolution devolving powers to such an extent as to confer practical autonomy for educational purposes upon each Borough Council. It would also be possible to devolve upon each Borough Council the right to raise a differential rate for elementary education, and it would be to the interest of a majority of the Borough Councils to petition for such a devolution of powers, because they would get off with a smaller rate. What would be the result? With its rateable value and the number of children to be provided for, Westminster could manage with a ¾d. rate (the rate for the whole of London was 14d.), whereas in Bethnal Green it would be 30½d., in Poplar, 34½d., in Camberwell, 37d., and in Battersea, 29d. Apart from educational administration, such a result would be financially disastrous to the poorer parts of the Metropolis. In the interests of a unified rate and of wise administration the provision ought to remain in the Bill.
  Question put.
  The House divided:—Ayes, 120; Noes, 214. (Division List, No. 168.)

  AYES.

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

  Burns, John

  Crombie, John William

  Asher, Alexander

  Burt, Thomas

  Crooks, William

  Asquith, Rt. Hon. Herbt. Hy.

  Buxton, Sydney Charles

  Davies, Alfred (Carmarthen)

  Atherley-Jones, L.

  Caldwell, James

  Davies, M. Vaughan (Cardigan

  Barlow, John Emmott

  Cameron, Robert

  Dewar, John A. (Inverness-sh.)

  Barran, Rowland Hirst

  Campbell-Bannerman, Sir H.

  Dilke, Rt. Hon. Sir Charles

  Black, Alexander William

  Causton, Richard Knight

  Douglas, Charles M. (Lanark)

  Bolton, Thomas Dolling

  Cawley, Frederick

  Dunn, Sir William

  Broadhurst, Henry

  Channing, Francis Allston

  Edwards, Frank

  Bryce, Rt. Hon. James

  Cox, Irwin Edward Bainbridge

  Elibank, Master of

  Buchanan, Thomas Ryburn

  Cremer, William Randal

  Emmott, Alfred

  Evans, Samuel T. (Glamorgan

  Levy, Maurice

  Sinclair, John (Forfarshire)

  Farquharson, Dr. Robert

  Lewis, John Herbert

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

  Fenwick, Charles

  Lloyd-George, David

  Soares, Ernest J.

  Fitzmaurice, Lord Edmund

  Macnamara, Dr. Thomas J.

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

  Foster, Sir Michl. (Lond. Univ

  M'Arthur, William (Cornwall)

  Stevenson, Francis S.

  Foster, Sir Walter (Derby Co.

  M'Kenna, Reginald

  Taylor, Theodore C. (Radcliffe)

  Fuller, J. M. F.

  M'Laren, Sir Charles Benj.

  Thomas, A. (Carmarthen, E.)

  Furness, Sir Christopher

  Mansfield, Horace Rendall

  Thomas, Sir A. (Glamorgan, E.

  Gladstone, Rt. Hn. Herbert John

  Mappin, Sir Fredk. Thorpe

  Thomas, David Alfred (Merthyr

  Goddard, Daniel Ford

  Markham, Arthur Basil

  Tomkinson, James

  Grey, Rt. Hn. Sir E. (Berwick

  Mellor, Rt. Hn. John William

  Toulmin, George

  Griffith, Ellis J.

  Morgan, J. Lloyd (Carmarthen

  Trevelyan, Charles Philips

  Gurdon, Sir W. Brampton

  Moss, Samuel

  Tritton, Charles Ernest

  Hardie, J. Keir (Merthyr Tyd

  Moulton, John Fletcher

  Wason, Eugene (Clackmannan

  Harmsworth, R. Leicester

  Newnes, Sir George

  Wason, John Cathcart (Orkney

  Harwood, George

  Palmer, Sir Charles M. (Durham

  Weir, James Galloway

  Hayne, Rt. Hon. Charles Seale-

  Partington, Oswald

  Whiteley, George (York, W. R.

  Hayter, Rt. Hn. Sir Arthur D.

  Paulton, James Mellor

  Whitley, J. H. (Halifax)

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

  Philipps, John Wynford

  Whittaker, Thomas Palmer

  Holland, Sir William Henry

  Pirie, Duncan V.

  Williams, O. (Merioneth)

  Hope, John Deans (Fife, West)

  Price, Robert John

  Wilson, Chas. H. (Hull, W.)

  Howard, J. (Midd., Tottenham)

  Rea, Russell

  Wilson, F. W. (Norfolk, Mid)

  Hutchinson, Dr. Charles Fredk.

  Rickett, J. Compton

  Wilson, John (Durham, Mid.)

  Jacoby, James Alfred

  Roberts, John H. (Denbighs.)

  Wilson, John (Falkirk)

  Jones, David Brynmor (Swansea)

  Roe, Sir Thomas

  Yoxall, James Henry

  Jones, William (Carnarvonsh.)

  Runciman, Walter

  Labouchere, Henry

  Samuel, Herbert L. (Cleveland

  TELLERS FOR THE AYES—

  Langley, Batty

  Schwann, Charles E.

  Mr. Lough and Mr. Alfred

  Lawson, Sir Wilfrid (Cornwall)

  Shackleton, David James

  Hutton.

  Layland-Barratt, Francis

  Shaw, Charles E. (Stafford)

  Leigh, Sir Joseph

  Shipman, Dr. John G.

  NOES.

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

  Charrington, Spencer

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

  Acland-Hood, Capt. Sir A. F.

  Churchill, Winston Spencer

  Gibbs, Hn. Vicary (St. Albans

  Agnew, Sir Andrew Noel

  Clive, Captain Percy A.

  Gilhooly, James

  Aird, Sir John

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

  Godson, Sir Augustus Frederick

  Anson, Sir William Reynell

  Coddington, Sir William

  Gordon, Hn. J. E. (Elgin & Nairn

  Anstruther, H. T.

  Coghill, Douglas Harry

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

  Arnold-Forster, Hugh O.

  Cohen, Benjamin Louis

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

  Aubrey-Fletcher, Rt. Hn. Sir H.

  Collings, Rt. Hon. Jesse

  Goschen, Hon. George Joachim

  Bagot, Capt. Josceline FitzRoy

  Colston, Chas. Edw. H. Athole

  Goulding, Edward Alfred

  Bailey, James (Walworth)

  Cripps, Charles Alfred

  Graham, Henry Robert

  Bain, Colonel James Robert

  Cross, Herb. Shepherd (Bolton

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

  Baird, John (George Alexander

  Crossley, Rt. Hon. Sir Savile

  Grenfell, William Henry

  Balcarres, Lord

  Dalkeith, Earl of

  Groves, James Grimble

  Baldwin, Alfred

  Denny, Colonel

  Guest, Hon. Ivor Churchill

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

  Dewar, Sir T. R. (Tower Hamlets

  Gunter, Sir Robert

  Balfour, Rt. Hn. Gerald W. (Leeds

  Dimsdale, Rt. Hn. Sir Joseph C.

  Guthrie, Walter Murray

  Balfour, Kenneth R. (Christch.

  Disraeli, Coningsby Ralph

  Haldane, Rt. Hon. Richard B.

  Banbury, Sir Frederick George

  Doughty, George

  Hall, Edward Marshall

  Bathurst, Hon. Allen Benjamin

  Douglas, Rt. Hon. A. Akers-

  Hardy, Laurence (Kent, Ashfd

  Bentinck, Lord Henry C.

  Doxford, Sir Wm. Theodore

  Hare, Thomas Leigh

  Bhownaggree, Sir M. M.

  Duke, Henry Edward

  Harris, Frederick Leverton

  Bill, Charles

  Dyke, Rt. Hn. Sir William Hart

  Haslam, Sir Alfred S.

  Blundell, Colonel Henry

  Egerton, Hon. A. de Tatton

  Hatch, Ernest Frederick Geo.

  Bowles, Lt.-Col. H. F. (Middlesex

  Elliot, Hon. A. Ralph Douglas

  Hay, Hon. Claude George

  Brassey, Albert

  Faber, George Denison (York)

  Heath, James (Staffords, N. W.

  Brown, Sir Alx. H. (Shropsh.)

  Fardell, Sir T. George

  Helder, Augustus

  Burdett-Coutts, W.

  Fellowes, Hon. Ailwyn Ed.

  Henderson, Sir Alexander

  Campbell, Rt. Hn. J. A. (Glasgow

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

  Hickman, Sir Alfred

  Campbell, J. H. M. (Dublin Univ

  Fielden, Edward Brocklehurst

  Hogg, Lindsay

  Campbell, John (Armagh, S.)

  Finch, Rt. Hon. Goorge H.

  Houldsworth, Sir Wm. Henry

  Carson, Rt. Hon. Sir Edw. H.

  Finlay, Sir Robert Bannatyne

  Howard, Jno (Kent, Faver hm

  Cavendish, V. C. W. (Derbyshire

  Firbank, Sir Joseph Thomas

  Hudson, George Bickersteth

  Cayzer, Sir Charles William

  Fisher, William Hayes

  Johnstone, Heywood

  Cecil, Evelyn (Aston Manor)

  Fitzroy, Hon. Edw. Algernon

  Kenyon-Slaney, Col. W. (Salop

  Cecil, Lord Hugh (Greenwich)

  Flannery, Sir Fortescue

  Kerr, John

  Chamberlain, Rt. Hn. J. (Birm.

  Flower, Ernest

  Knowles, Lees

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

  Forster, Henry William

  Lambton, Hon. Frederick Wm.

  Chamberlayne, T. (Southmptn

  Foster, Philip S. (Warwick, S. W.

  Law, Andrew Bonar (Glasgow

  Chaplin, Right Hon. Henry

  Galloway, William Johnson

  Lawrence, Wm. F. (Liverpool

  Chapman, Edward

  Gardner, Ernest

  Lawson, John Grant (Yorks N. R.

  744

  745

  Legge, Col. Hon. Heneage

  Nicholson, William Graham

  Scott, Sir S. (Marylebone, W.)

  Leveson-Gower, Frederick N. S.

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

  Simeon, Sir Barrington

  Llewellyn, Evan Henry

  Orr-Ewing, Charles Lindsay

  Sinclair, Louis (Romford)

  Lockwood, Lieut-Col. A. R.

  Palmer, Walter (Salisbury)

  Smith, James Parker (Lanarks.

  Loder, Gerald Walter Erskine

  Peel, Hn. Wm. Robert Wellesley

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

  Long, Col. Charles W. (Evesham

  Pemberton, John S. G.

  Stanley, Lord (Lancs.)

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

  Percy, Earl

  Stroyan, John

  Lonsdale, John Brownlee

  Pilkington, Colonel Richard

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

  Lowe, Francis William

  Plummer, Walter R.

  Thornton, Percy M.

  Lowther, C. (Cumb. Eskdale)

  Pretyman, Ernest George

  Tomlinson, Sir Wm. Edw. M.

  Lowther, Rt. Hon. James (Kent

  Pryce-Jones, Lt.-Col. Edward

  Valentia, Viscount

  Lucas, Col. Francis (Lowestoft

  Purvis, Robert

  Walrond, Rt. Hn. Sir Wm. H.

  Lucas, Reginald J. (Portsmouth

  Pym, C. Guy

  Wanklyn, James Leslie

  Lyttelton, Hon. Alfred

  Randles, John S.

  Warde, Colonel C. E.

  Macdona, John Cumming

  Rasch, Major Frederic Carne

  Webb, Colonel William George

  M'Arthur, Charles (Liverpool

  Ratcliff, R. F.

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

  M'Iver, Sir Lewis (Edinburgh W.

  Rattigan, Sir William Henry

  Welby, Sir Charles G. E. (Notts.

  M'Killop, James (Stirlingshire

  Reid, James (Greenock)

  Whiteley, H. (Ashtonund, Lyne

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

  Remnant, James Farquharson

  Whitmore, Charles Algernon

  Melville, Beresford Valentine

  Renshaw, Sir Charles Bine

  Willoughby de Eresby, Lord

  Meysey-Thompson, Sir H. M.

  Renwick, George

  Willox, Sir John Archibald

  Milvain, Thomas

  Ridley, S. Forde (Bethnal Green

  Wilson, John (Glasgow)

  Mitchell, William (Burnley)

  Ritchie, Rt. Hn. C. Thomson

  Wilson-Todd, Wm. H. (Yorks.

  Montagu, G. (Huntingdon)

  Roberts, Samuel (Sheffield)

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

  Moon, Edward Robert Pacy

  Robertson, Herbert (Hackney)

  Worsley-Taylor, Henry Wilson

  Morgan, David J. (Walthamstow

  Rolleston, Sir John F. L.

  Wylie, Alexander

  Morgan, Hn. Fred. (Monm'thsh.

  Round, Rt. Hon. James

  Wyndham, Rt. Hon. George

  Morton, Arthur H. Aylmer

  Rutherford, John (Lancashire

  Young, Samuel

  Mount, William Arthur

  Sackville, Col. S. G. Stopford-

  Murray, Rt. Hn. A. Graham (Bute

  Sadler, Col. Samuel Alexander

  TELLERS FOR THE NOES—

  Murray, Col. Wyndham (Bath

  Samuel, Harry S. (Limehouse)

  Captain Jessel and Mr.

  Myers, William Henry

  Sassoon, Sir Edward Albert

  Bull.

  MR. MANSFIELDmoved an Amendment with the object of postponing the date for the Act coming into operation from 1st May, 1904, as proposed, to 1st May, 1907. By delaying the commencement of the Act, the people of London would be given an opportunity of declaring whether they wanted it or not. This Amendment raised the question of the mandate of the Government for the passing of the Act. It was notorious that at last election not a single constituency was asked whether they desired the School Boards to be extinguished. Not a single elector suspected, when he voted for a Conservative candidate that he was voting for the abolition of the School Boards. The only mandate the Government professed to have was the mandate of necessity. The Prime Minister said that the Act was brought in because the necessities of the case demanded that education should be dealt with. If necessity was the mandate surely they ought to have started with the War Office instead of education. Seeing that the Government had absolutely no mandate from the people of London in regard to the Act he proposed that the date for its coming into operation should be so extended that they would have an opportunity of
  746
  saying, in other parts than Hyde Park and the Albert Hall, whether they wanted the measure or not. He believed that practically nobody in London wanted it. The School Board of London, which had been doing the work admirably for years, did not want to be extinguished, and no serious objection had been made to the manner in which they had carried out their duties.
  *MR. SPEAKER: The hon. Member can hardly make a Second Reading speech upon a Motion to postpone the date upon which the Bill is to come into operation.
  MR. MANSFIELDsaid it was difficult to know exactly where the Government had taken their instructions from. They were constantly told that the people had never asked for the Bill. The object of his Amendment was to give the people of London an opportunity of considering the matter which affected not only their children but the future of London. He begged to move.
  Amendment proposed to the Bill—
  "In page 2, line 10, to leave out the word 'four' and insert the word 'seven.'"—(Mr. Mansfield.)
  Question proposed, "That the word 'four' stand part of the Bill."
  *SIR WILLIAM ANSONsaid he would not follow the hon. Member into the general discussion as to whether the Bill was wanted or not, because he was not disposed to make a speech on the general merits of the measure such as he had had to make before and might have to make on the Third Reading. He would rather reply to any general reflections on the Bill when it came to be read a third time. This was an Amendment for the postponement of the date of the commencement of the Bill for three years beyond the date contemplated. The hon. Member had not assigned any reason for that change. His whole speech was directed to the undesirability of bringing in the Bill at all. He could not accept the Amendment.
  DR. MACNAMARAsaid he would vote for the Amendment readily, but he really thought that it did not matter very much, because before the first of April, 1904, a certain event would have happened. In the first week of March there would be a County Council election. The people of London would settle all this, and he had not a shadow of a doubt that they would return to Spring Hardens an overwhelming majority on three issues. The first was—We will not administer this Act because we have too much to do, and you are putting on us work which will break the whole machinery down.
  *MR. SPEAKER: I think this is matter for the Third Reading. If this line of argument were allowed upon this Amendment, the whole merits of the Bill might be discussed.
  DR. MACNAMARAsaid he did not wish to discuss the whole merits of the Bill. He thought the date of commencement ought to be postponed until the voice of the people could be heard. He had not a shadow of a doubt that there would be a more effective postponement than the change from 1904 to 1907, because before it came into operation it would have to be drastically altered.
  MR. LLOYD-GEORGEagreed that they ought to postpone the commencement of the Act. A similar Motion was made with regard
  748
  to last year's Act and he supported it. It was true that the County Councils were then with a majority of Conservatives who were in sympathy with the Government The line they took was that as the County Councils were to frame schemes and to have the whole direction of the general policy of their particular areas the operation of the Act ought to be postponed so that the County Councils might consider the general lines on which it ought to be administered. Now they were dealing with a County Council which was Progressive and in general sympathy with Liberal views. They were not taking this course purely and simply because of the political complexion of the Councils. They said, as a general proposition, that Parliament was casting on the authority work which, when that authority was brought into existence, it had not the remotest idea that anything of the kind would be proposed. The County Councils were elected in England and Wales three years ago. They had not the faintest notion that before the end of their term of office functions of this kind would be cast upon them. He was sure the electors had no idea of it, and, therefore, they had no opportunity of selecting men qualified for this purpose. The functions to be cast by this Bill on the London County Council were greater in their financial magnitude than anything they had got at the present moment. The amount of money they had to distribute and the work they had to do under this Bill was of a higher quality. He had every regard for the work of the County Council, but he did not think it was so important as that which was to be cast upon it by the Bill in connection with the training of the young of London. They were not legislating entirely by this Bill. The County Council would begin to legislate by means of schemes. What were the schemes throughout the country? They were so many little Education Acts for each local authority, and anyone who looked at them would see the great diversity of educational ideals which existed. He thought the local electors ought to be consulted as to the general lines of policy and as to the kind of men who ought to be entrusted with the work. He was not sticking up for 1907, but he thought the Act should

  749
  not be put into operation until the Parliamentary electors were consulted as well. It was perfectly obvious that they were legislating against the wish of the people. They had not been consulted upon it at all. He was certain that nobody in the House believed that this was an Act or Parliament which would be in operation inside or outside London three years hence. What he found taking place in Wales was what he was certain would take place throughs out the whole country. Men on both sides were beginning to realise that this was not an Act of Parliament that would work, and they were coming together and practically framing an Act of Parliament of their own by general agreement. If the Government postponed this Act for a year or two he believed that a
  general agreement would be arrived at in London as to the lines on which educational administration ought to be carried on in future. It seemed to him that the Government were acting in a very head strong way. It was quite incomprehensible to him. They must see that they were legislating against the force of public opinion. What possible chance did they imagine education would get in the country? The whole country was rent by sectarian disputes. He said postpone the Bill for a year or two until they got something more in consonance with the general view of the people of the country.
  Question put.
  The House divided:—Ayes 221; Noes 111. (Division List No. 169.)

  AYES.

  Agnew, Sir Andrew Noel

  Coddington, Sir William

  Gosehen, Hon. George Joachim

  Aird, Sir John

  Coghill, Douglas Harry

  Goulding, Edward Alfred

  Anson, Sir William Reynell

  Cohen, Benjamin Louis

  Graham, Henry Robert

  Arnold-Foster, Hugh O.

  Collings, Rt. Hon. Jesse

  Gray, Ernest (West Ham)

  Atkinson, Rt. Hon. John

  Colston, Chas. Kdw. H. Athole

  Greene, Sir E. W. (Bury St. Ed.

  Aubrey-Fletcher, Rt. Hn. Sir H.

  Cox, Irwin Edward Bainbridge

  Grenfell, William Henry

  Bagot, Capt. Josceline FitzRoy

  Cripps, Charles Alfred

  Groves, James Grimble

  Bailey, James (Walworth)

  Cross, Herb. Shepherd (Bolton

  Guest, Hon. Ivor Churchill

  Bain, Colonel James Robert

  Crossley, Rt. Hon. Sir Savile

  Gunter, Sir Robert

  Baird, John George Alexander

  Cust, Henry John C.

  Guthrie, Walter Murray

  Balcarres, Lord

  Dalkeith, Earl of

  Hall, Edward Marshall

  Baldwin, Alfred

  Denny, Colonel

  Hardy, Laurence (Kent, Ashfd

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

  Dimsdale, Rt. Hon. Sir Joseph C.

  Hare, Thomas Leigh

  Balfour, Capt. C. B. (Hornsey)

  Disraeli, Conningsby Ralph

  Harris, Frederick Leverton

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

  Dixon-Hartland, Sir Fred Dixon

  Haslam, Sir Alfred S.

  Balfour, Kenneth R. (Christch.

  Douglas, Rt. Hon. A. Akers

  Hatch, Ernest Frederick George

  Banbury, Sir Frederick George

  Doxford, Sir Wm. Theodore

  Hay, Hon. Claude George

  Bathurst, Hon. Allen Benjamin

  Duke, Henry Edward

  Heath, James (Staffords., N. W.

  Bentinck, Lord Henry C.

  Dyke, Rt. Hon. Sir William Hart

  Holder, Augustus

  Bnownaggree, Sir M. M.

  Egerton, Hon. A. de Tatton

  Henderson, Sir Alexander

  Bill, Charles

  Elliot, Hon. A. Ralph Donglas

  Hobhouse, Rt. Hn. H. (Somrst E

  Blundell, Colonel Henry

  Faber, George Denison (York)

  Hogg, Lindsay

  Bousfield, William Robert

  Fardell, Sir T. George

  Houldsworth, Sir Wm. Henry

  Brassey, Albert,

  Fellowes, Hon. Ailwyn Edward

  Howard, Jno (Kent, Faver'hm

  Brown, Sir Alx. H. (Shropsh.)

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

  Howard, J. (Miss., Tottenham

  Bull, William James

  Fielden, Edward Brocklehurst

  Hudson, George Bickersteth)

  Burdett-Coutts, W.

  Finch, Rt. Hon. George H.

  Jessel, Captain Herbert Merton

  Butcher, John George

  Finlay, Sir Robert Bannatyne

  Johnstone, Heywood

  Campbell, Rt. Hn. J. A. (Glasgow

  Firbank, Sir Joseph Thomas

  Kennedy, Patrick James

  Campbell, J. H. M. (Dublin Univ.

  Fisher, William Haves

  Kenyon-Slaney, Col. A. W. (Salop)

  Campbell, John (Armagh, S.)

  FitzGerald, Sir Robert Penrose

  Kerr, John

  Carew, James Laurence

  Fitzroy, Hon. Edw. Algernon

  Knowles, Lees

  Carson, Rt. Hon. Sir Edw. H.

  Flannery, Sir Fortescne

  Lambton, Hon. Fredk. Wm.

  Cavendish, V. C. W. (Derbyshire

  Flower, Ernest

  Law, Andrew Bonar (Glasgow)

  Cayzer, Sir Charles William

  Forster, Henry William

  Lawrence, Wm. F. (Liverpool

  Cecil, Evelyn (Aston Manor)

  Foster, Philip S. (Warwick, S. W

  Lawson, John Grant (Yorks N. R.

  Cecil, Lord Hugh (Greenwich)

  Calloway, William Johnson

  Legge, Col. Hon. Heneage

  Chamberlain, Rt. Hon. J. (Birm.

  Gardner, Ernest

  Leveson-Gower, Frederick N. S.

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

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

  Llewellyn, Evan Henry

  Chamberlayne, T. (Southmptn

  Gibbs, Hn. Vicary (St. Albans

  Lockwood, Lieut.-Col. A. R.

  Chapman, Edward

  Godson, Sir Augustus Frederick

  Loder, Gerald Walter Erskine

  Charrington, Spencer

  Gordon, Hn. J. E. (Elgin & Nairn

  Long, Col. Charles W. (Evesham

  Churchill, Winston Spencer

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

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

  Clive, Captain Percy A.

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

  Lowther, C. (Cumb. Eskdale)

  Cochrane, Hon. Thomas H. A. E.

  Gorst, Rt. Hon. Sir John Eldon

  Lowther, Rt. Hon. Jas. (Kent)

  Lucas, Col. Francis (Lowestoft)

  Pryce-Jones, Lt.-Col. Edward

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

  Lucas, Reginald J. (Portsmouth

  Purvis, Robert

  Thornton, Percy M.

  Lyttelton, Hon. Alfred

  Pym, C. Guy

  Tomlinson, Sir Wm. Edw. M.

  Maconochie, A. W.

  Randles John S.

  Tritton, Charles Ernest

  M'Arthur, Charles (Liverpool)

  Ratcliff, R. F.

  Valentia, Viscount

  M'Iver, Sir Lewis (Edinburgh W

  Rattigan, Sir William Henry

  Walrond, Rt. Hn. Sir William H.

  M'Killop, James (Sttrlingshire)

  Remnant, James Farquharson

  Wanklyn, James Leslie

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

  Renshaw, Sir Charles Bine

  Warde, Colonel C. E.

  Meysey-Thompson, Sir H. M.

  Renwick, George

  Webb, Colonel William George

  Milvain, Thomas

  Ridley, S. Forde (Bethnal Green

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

  Mitchell, William (Burnley)

  Ritchie, Rt. Hn. Chas. Thomson

  Welby, Sir Chas. G. E. (Notts

  Montagu, G. (Huntingdon)

  Roberts, Samuel (Sheffield)

  Wharton, Rt. Hon. J. Lloyd

  Moon, Edward Robert Pacy

  Robertson, Herbert (Hackney)

  Whitely, H. (Ashton und. Lyne

  Morgan, David, J. (Walthamstow

  Robinson, Brooke

  Whitmore, Charles Algernon

  Morgan, Hn. Fred. (Monm'thsh.

  Rolleston, Sir John F. L.

  Willoughby de Eresby, Lord

  Morton, Arthur H. Aylmer

  Round, Rt. Hon. James

  Willox, Sir John Archibald

  Mount, William Arthur

  Rutherford, John (Lancashire)

  Wilson, John (Falkirk)

  Murray, Rt. Hn. A. Graham (Bute

  Sadler, Col, Samuel Alexander

  Wilson, John (Glasgow)

  Murray, Col. Wyndham (Bath)

  Samuel, Harry S. (Limehouse)

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

  Myers, William Henry

  Sassoon, Sir Edward Albert

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

  Nicholson, William Graham

  Scott, Sir S. (Marylebone, W.)

  Worsley-Taylor, Henry Wilson

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

  Seton-Karr, Sir Henry

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

  Orr-Ewing, Charles Lindsay

  Simeon, Sir Barrington

  Wylie, Alexander

  Palmer, Walter (Salisbury)

  Sinclair, Louis (Romford)

  Wyndham, Rt. Hon. George

  Peel, Hn. Wm. Robert Wellesley

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

  Wyndham-Quin, Major W. H.

  Pemberton, John S. G.

  Smith, Jas. Parker (Lanarks.)

  Young, Samuel

  Percy, Earl

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

  Pilkington Colonel Richard

  Stanley, Lord (Lancs.)

  TELLERS FOR THE AYES—

  Plummer, Walter R.

  Stone, Sir Benjamin

  Sir Alexander Acland-

  Pretyman, Ernest George

  Stroyan, John

  Hood and Mr. Anstruther.

  NOES.

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

  Gladstone, Rt. Hn. Herbert J.

  Palmer, Sir C. M. (Durham)

  Asher, Alexander

  Goddard, Daniel Ford

  Partington, Oswald

  Asquith, Rt. Hon. Herbt. Hy.

  Griffith, Ellis J.

  Paulton, James Mellor

  Barlow, John Emmott

  Gurdon, Sir W. Brampton

  Philipps, John Wynford

  Barran, Rowland Hirst

  Hardie, J. Keir (Merthyr Tydvil

  Pirie, Duncan V.

  Black, Alexander William

  Harmsworth, R. Leicester

  Price, Robert John

  Bolton, Thomas Dolling

  Harwood, George

  Rea, Russell

  Broadhurst, Henry

  Hayne, Rt. Hon. Charles Seale-

  Rickett, J. Compton

  Bryce, Rt. Hon. James

  Hayter, Rt. Hon. Sir Arthur D.

  Roberts, John H. (Denbighs.)

  Buchanan, Thomas Ryburn

  Hemphill, Rt. Hon. Chas. H.

  Runciman, Walter

  Burns, John

  Hobhouse, C. E. H. (Bristl, E

  Samuel, Herbert, L. (Cleveland

  Burt, Thomas

  Holland, Sir William Henry

  Schwann, Charles E.

  Buxton, Sydney Charles

  Hope, John Deans (Fife, West)

  Shackleton, David James

  Caldwell, James

  Humphreys-Owen. Arthur C.

  Shaw, Charles E. (Stafford)

  Cameron, Robert

  Hutchinson, Dr. Charles Fredk.

  Shipman, Dr. John G.

  Campbell-Bannerman, Sir H.

  Hutton, Alfred E. (Morley)

  Sinclair, John (Forfarshire)

  Causton, Richard Knight

  Jacoby, James Alfred

  Stevenson, Francis S.

  Cawley, Frederick

  Jones, David Brynmor (Swansea

  Taylor, Theodore C. (Radcliffe)

  Channing, Francis Allston

  Jones, William (Carnarv'nshire

  Thomas, Sir A. (Glamorgan, E.)

  Cremer, William Randal

  Kitson, Sir James

  Thomas, David A. (Merthyr)

  Crombie, John William

  Langley, Batty

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

  Crooks, William

  Layland-Barratt, Francis

  Tomkinson, James

  Davies, Alfred (Carmarthen)

  Leigh, Sir Joseph

  Toulmin, George

  Davies, M. Vaughan (Cardig'n

  Leng, Sir John

  Wason, Eugene (Clackmannan

  Dewar, John A. (Inverness-sh.)

  Levy, Maurice

  Wason, J. Cathcart (Orkney)

  Dilke, Rt. Hon. Sir Charles

  Lewis, John Herbert

  Weir, James Galloway

  Douglas, Charles M. (Lanark)

  Lloyd-George, David

  Whiteley, G. (York, W. R.)

  Dunn, Sir William

  Macnamara, Dr. Thomas J.

  Whitley, J. H. (Halifax)

  Edwards, Frank

  M'Arthur William (Cornwall)

  Whittaker, Thomas Palmer

  Elibank, Master of

  M'Kenna, Reginald

  Williams, O. (Merioneth)

  Ellis, John Edward

  Mappin, Sir Fredk. Thorpe

  Wilson, Chas. H. (Hull, W.)

  Emmott, Alfred

  Mellor, Rt. Hn. John William

  Wilson, F. W. (Norfolk, Mid)

  Evans, Samuel T. (Glamorgan)

  Morgan, J. Lloyd (Carmarthen)

  Wilson, John (Durham, Mid)

  Fenwick, Charles

  Morley, Rt. Hn. John (Montrose

  Yoxall, James Henry

  Fitzmaurice, Lord Edmund

  Moss, Samuel

  Foster, Sir Michael (Lond. Univ.

  Moulton, John Fletcher

  TELLERS FOR THE NOES—

  Foster, Sir Walter (Derby Co.

  Wewnes, Sir George

  Mr. Mansfield and Mr.

  Fuller, J. M. F.

  Norman, Henry

  Soares.

  Question put, and agreed to.

  COLONEL LEGGEsaid that the object of the Amendment he had on the Paper was to put London on the same footing as the rest of the country in regard to the rate for technical and secondary education. Under the Technical Instruction Act of 1889 the rate was limited to 1d. in the £. That Act was repealed last year and under the Education Act of last year the limit was raised to 2d. in the £ for higher education. In the County of London no rate for this purpose had ever been raised at all. The London County Council—and he did not say it in a spirit of hostility to that body, as he was a Member of it for five years—had not raised a penny of rates for their technical education work, which had been of the very best. They had not even spent the whole of the whiskey money on technical education. They had been able to spend as much money as was necessary for that purpose and at the same time to devote a certain amount of the money received from the whiskey account to the reduction of rates. It seemed to him that it was quite unnecessary that, in this Bill, London should be given the power to levy an unlimited rate for higher education. For the year ending 31st March, 1902, he found that the Beer and Wine duties amounted to £212,712, and that the County Council grant to the Technical Education Committee was only £180,000, leaving a sum of £32,712 for the reduction of rates. A rate of 2d. in the £ for London produced £338,256, which added to the Beer and Wine duties for the year 1902, made a total of £550,968. The London School Board spent in the same year, 1902, on the education of pupil teachers £25,732, and on Evening Continuation Schools £106,558, making a total of £132,290. There was also Lord Rosebery's scheme which had been launched, and in which his Lordship made a demand on the London County Council for the annual sum of £20,000. Adding all these amounts together—the two penny rate, the amount granted for technical education, for evening continuation schools, and for Lord Rosebery's scheme, there would be available for further expenditure a sum of £218,678. That being the case it seemed to him that there could be no
  754
  sufficient reason for not limiting the rate for London to the same limit as that throughout the country. He begged to move—
  "In page 3, to leave out lines 14 and 15."—(Colonel Legge.)
  Question proposed, "That the words proposed to be left out stand part of the Bill."
  DR. MACNAMARAsaid he did not think the 2d. would be wanted, and he was quite sure it would not be raised at once. But whether that was so or not the hon. Gentleman was entirely incorrect when he stated that his Amendment would put London in the same position as the rest of the country was under the Bill of last year. Surely what the Government intended to do for London was what it did for Leeds, Birmingham and other large towns in the country. The hon. Member could not have read Section 2, which allowed towns to raise anything they pleased but restricted the rate raised by the counties to 2d. The 2d. was put on for what were called the agricultural counties. It was never intended that that limit should apply to urban districts. Owing to the unfortunate fact of London being described as a county governed by a County Council it was thought to bring it under this restriction and restrict the rate to 2d. When this section was under discussion the whole debate turned on the necessity of leaving the great towns to raise exactly what they pleased whilst the limit so far as the agricultural counties were concerned was restricted to 2d. He appealed to the Parliamentary Secretary not to place London, simply because it was a county, on a different footing from Leeds, Manchester, Birmingham, and the other great urban communities of the country. The limit of 2d. was removed from those communities under the Act of last year, and was confined to Rural County Councils. He hoped that decision would be adhered to in the case of London.
  MR. WHITLEYhoped that, in the interests of education in London, the Government would not allow this matter to go by default but would stand

  755
  by their Bill, and would not be led away by the demands of their supporters.
  SIR FREDERICK BANBURYsaid he sincerely hoped that the Parliamentary Secretary would accept the Amendment. It seemed to him that there was already plenty of money for the purposes of higher education, and, indeed, the hon. Member for Camberwell admitted that there was an ample margin, because he said he did not think the 2d. would be raised in the first instance. The rates in London were very high as it was, and, in view of this fact, as well as of the circumstance that there was a sufficient margin to provide double the amount of higher education now given, he thought the views of London members on that side of the House, who were almost unanimous, might be respected in this matter.
  MR. BRYCEsaid he ventured to hope the Government would not take the course suggested by the hon. Baronet opposite. The acceptance of this Amendment would be tantamount to reversing one of the most important decisions arrived at last year. Last year the House deliberately resolved that the great towns should have power to rate themselves without any limit. He agreed that they must not be extravagant, but it would be an unheard-of thing if they were to deprive London of a power which all the other great communities in the country enjoyed. It was merely an accident that London was governed by a County Council, and he looked forward to the time when it would become a great city governed by a city council. He hoped the powers given to other great towns would be given to London.
  CAPTAIN JESSELdid not see why the same law which applied to other County Councils should not apply in his matter to the London County Council. Hon. Members could not have it both ways. London was either a town or a county, it could not be both. With regard to the two penny rate it had been conclusively shown that there was a margin of £250,000 so that they could expend exactly double the amount they
  756
  were now spending before they reached the limit. He thought the Amendment was a reasonable one. If the education authority of London had a free purse to draw upon, it might lead to reckless expenditure. Both in the interests of economy and of those who had to pay the rates, it was only fair that the safeguard provided by his hon. friend's Amendment should be adopted by the Government.
  *SIR WILLIAM ANSONsaid he was sorry to find himself in conflict with his hon. friends, but he could not possibly accept this Amendment. They were told by his hon. friends that London would not want all this money, that it had not spent the whole of the £250,000 applicable to secondary education, and that a two penny rate would produce as much as this again and leave a large margin. If that were so, what was it his hon. friends were afraid of? London had never yet raised any rate for secondary education; and as a two penny rate would produce the large sum mentioned by his hon. friend who moved the Amendment he could not see any grounds for the fear that London would be overburdened by rates for higher education. His hon. friends must bear in mind that secondary education was the part of their education which had been hitherto most starved, which needed money more than any other department of their education, and on which the country demanded that money should be spent. He would also remind them that there would be, when this Bill came into operation, a considerable sum taken off the charge for elementary education and thrown on to the charge for secondary education when the Cockerton schools all passed into the region of secondary education. His reason for not accepting the Amendment was that he felt he must save London from itself. Last year there was a limit proposed not only in the case of the agricultural counties but in the case of all the county boroughs. The county boroughs pressed to be allowed to deal freely with their own, and asked to have the limit taken away, and to be able to spend what they liked on secondary education. The limit was removed, and he should not be willing—

  757
  in fact, he could not consent—to take powers from London which were possessed by Manchester, Leeds, Birmingham, and other places in the country. For these reasons it was impossible for the Government to accept the Amendment, and he was sorry it had been moved and supported as strongly as it had been by friends with whom he had acted.
  SIR JOSEPH DIMSDALEsaid the Amendment he proposed to move was practically the same Amendment he moved in May last in connection with the secondary schools of the City of London. The hon. Baronet on that occasion accepted the Amendment, but subsequently withdrew his acceptance because, as he stated, he did not understand it to refer to elementary schools but to secondary schools. He hoped the Government would have no difficulty in accepting the Amendment now. Its object was to render it noncompulsory for the elementary schools of the City of London to come under the jurisdiction of the education authority should the governors other wise decide. In the City of London they had three Board Schools which, however, were on the confines of the east boundary, and educated children who came principally from the other side. On the other hand they had thirteen or fourteen Church, National, and Parochial schools, none of which, with one exception, received either aid from the Parliamentary grant or from the educational authority. He hoped, therefore, the hon. Baronet in charge of this Bill would be able to see his way to accept this Amendment.
  Amendment proposed to the Bill—
  "In page 3, at the end of line 15, to insert the words 'The provisions of Section 5 and Sub-section 2 of Section 6 of the principal Act shall not be construed so as to subject any endowed elementary school in the City of London not applying for a Parliamentary Grant or for aid from the local education authority to the control or management of the local education authority.'"—(Sir Joseph Dimsdale.)
  Question proposed, "That those words be there inserted in the Bill."
  *SIR WILLIAM ANSONpointed out that the provision was not necessary,
  758
  inasmuch as in the principal Act one of the conditions required to be fulfilled by an elementary school in order to obtain the Parliamentary grant was that it should be maintained under, or comply with, the provisions of Section 7, otherwise it was not entitled to the Parliamentary grant; if it was not entitled to receive the Parliamentary grant, then under Section 7 of the Act of 1870 it was not a public elementary school, and did not come under the control of the local education authority.
  SIR JOSEPH DIMSDALEsaid after the explanation of the hon. Baronet he would, with permission of the House, withdraw the Amendment.
  Amendment, by leave, withdrawn.
  Amendments proposed to the Bill—
  "In page 3, line 17, to leave out the words 'of Sub-section one'
  In page 3, line 19, to leave out the words 'enables the local authority to group,' and insert the words 'relates to.'
  In page 3, line 20, to leave out the word 'them,' and insert the words 'the local education authority.'"—(Sir William Anson.)
  Amendments agreed to.
  SIR JOSEPH DIMSDALEsaid the Amendment he now moved would recall to the House the Bill as it was originally introduced, of which very little if anything remained. He asked that what was offered to the City of London in the Bill, originally might be restored to the Bill and that the City of London might be placed in the position in which it had been placed by successive Governments in matters affecting the government of the Metropolis. In asking for direct representation for the City of London, he pointed out that special representation had been given to the City on the School Board by the Education Act of 1870, and on the County Council by the Local Government Act of 1888. In other Acts also special representation had been given to the City. The City of London had always had special recognition in matters relating to the Metropolis, the London Government Bill specially exempting the City of London from its provisions. He asked that they might have representation in the matter under discussion, first, because they claimed to be

  759
  a county in themselves, and secondly, what the City had done for education in the past, they having been practically the pioneers of education in this country, gave them a claim which might reasonably be looked upon with favour by the House. The Government could not plead that they were unaware of the feelings of the City on this matter, inasmuch as their views were clearly expressed to Lord Londonderry and the Parliamentary Secretary on the occasion of a deputation as far back as January last. The City desired nothing more than to be left alone, to be the education authority for the City of London; but, failing that, they strongly urged that they should have direct representation on the central body. He begged to move.
  Amendment proposed to the Bill—
  "In page 3, after line 20, at the end, to insert the words 'Any scheme made or approved under Section seventeen of the principal Act shall provide for the representation of the Mayor, Aldermen, and Commons of the City of London, in Common Council assembled, by at least two members on the Education Committee."'—(Sir Joseph Dimsdale.)
  Question proposed, "That those words be there inserted in the Bill."
  *SIR WILLIAM ANSONsaid he could only repeat very much what he had said yesterday in response to the appeal of hon. Members from the City that the City might be treated as a separate county. He then said that it was from no want of a sense of the value of the services of the City to education in the past that the Government found themselves unable to accede to that request. As this Bill was first presented there was a statutory Committee formed, and to representation on that Committee the City had a special claim, but that scheme was removed from the Bill. It was impossible now to go back to that principle of a statutory Committee and to introduce certain members on to the Committee perforce, however deserving and important they might be. Having framed the Bill as it now stood, leaving he London County Council in a position, like the other County Councils in the kingdom, to choose its own Committee, the Government could not now place on
  760
  that Committee persons who were not required to be there under the general terms of the principal Act. He regretted the City had not the place it was originally intended to occupy, but it was too late now to alter the character of the Committee.
  MR. ALBAN GIBBSpointed out that the position of the City of London greatly differed from that of other boroughs. As the hon. Member for Camberwell had pointed out, they spent about £100 for every child within its area, whereas the actual cost was only about £5, the remainder being the contribution of the City towards the general fund for education. No other borough was in that position. It might be true that one borough contributed as much as the City, but that borough had a great many more children, and so got more value for its money in that way. They did not complain of having to provide the money, but they thought that those who paid the piper should call the tune.
  SIR WILLIAM TOMLINSONregretted the Government had not seen their way to give the City of London a special position in this matter. He thought that some regard might have been had to the long connection of the City with education, and there was no doubt that that special representation would have been an element of great value. The changes the Bill had undergone had, to some extent, impaired the quality of the body to which the management of education was to be entrusted, as it would not now be necessary to consult those bodies which had every interest in putting on to the Education Committee the persons best qualified for the work.
  MR. SAMUEL EVANSsaid the request of the City representatives was tantamount to a declaration that they had not in the City any persons acquainted with the needs of the schools, or experienced in matters of education, because if they had such persons they could be brought in by the schemes which the County Council had to put forward. If the history of the City was as had been represented, it would be

  761
  quite competent for them to have representatives on the Committee.
  Question put, and negatived.
  *SIR WILLIAM ANSONmoved an Amendment providing that the Board of Education may, on the application of the trustees of an endowment, direct that any money which would be payable to the County Council under Section 13 of the principal Act shall be applied in manner provided by a scheme made by the Board of Education, if the Board consider that it is expedient to make such a scheme, with a view to preserving the benefits of the endowment to the locality for which those benefits were intended. He said it was quite clear that the endowment clause in the principal Act was not applicable to London. That clause provided that endowments should go in one of two ways, either for the purposes the managers had to meet or for purposes the local authority had to meet, and in the latter case the money came back in aid of the rates of the parish for which the endowment was given. This could not happen in London. Where the income of an endowment was of considerable magnitude, there was generally an opportunity of suggesting that in order to meet difficulties which might arise it would be better to frame a scheme under which some other purpose than the simple, ordinary purposes of the education authority or the repair of the fabric might be met and something done for the children outside the ordinary provision of a school. The object of the Act was that the endowment should go to the locality intended to be benefited, and from that principle the Government were not prepared to depart. But, as he had said, the clause was not applicable to London; hence this Amendment.
  His proposal was that—
  "The Board of Education may, on the application of the trustees of the endowment, direct that any money which would be payable under the said section thirteen to the County Council shall be applied in manner provided by a scheme made by the Board if the Board consider that it is expedient to make such a scheme with a view of preserving the benefits
  762
  of the endowment to the locality for which those benefits were intended."
  He wished to point out that the money which would otherwise go simply in aid of the rates might be diverted by this proposal to some of the higher purposes of education for the benefit of the locality. His right hon. friend the Member for Aberdeen had an Amendment on the Paper to insert after the word "endowment" the words "or of the local education authority." He should be quite willing to accept those words. He did not think, however, that it would be quite fair to accept the right hon. Gentleman's next Amendment, leaving out all words from the word "scheme."
  Amendment proposed to the Bill—
  "In page 3, line 23, at end, to insert the words 'but the Board of Education may, on the application of the trustees of the endowment, direct that any money which would be payable under the said section thirteen to the County Council shall be applied in manner provided by a scheme made by the Board if the Board consider that it is expedient to make such a scheme with a view of preserving the benefits of the endowment to the locality for which those benefits were intended.'"—(Sir William Anson.)
  Question proposed "That those words be there inserted in the Bill."
  SIR MICHAEL FOSTERsaid he was very gratified that the hon. Baronet had seen his way to introduce this Amendment. The great usefulness of this small concession would only become apparent when it was put into operation. Although the principle of the Bill was the co-ordination of secondary and elementary education, still the Bill had left many gaps between the two, and a provision of this kind would be a ready and easy method of bridging over that gap in very many cases. It would provide what he might call the luxuries for deserving children in the elementary schools, and he felt very much gratified that such a proposal had been added to the Bill. He was glad that the Secretary to the Board of Education had seen his way to accept the first Amendment standing in the name of the right hon. Gentleman, the Member for Aberdeen, and he should have been pleased if the hon. Baronet could have accepted the second

  763
  Amendment also. Undoubtedly the Board of Education in all their schemes would have due regard to the interests of the locality, but he could conceive of cases arising in which the whole of the endowments would not be spent to the best profit in what was spoken of as "the locality." The Amendment of the light hon. Gentleman the Member for Aberdeen gave the Board of Education the power in those unusual cases to bestow, for the benefit of districts other than the locality, money which, if spent upon the locality itself, might really be wasted.
  MR. CRIPPSsaid it was most important that they should not interfere with these endowments until they saw exactly what was going to be done. Although these endowments might, to a certain extent, be used in the way of saving the rates, yet he thought the principle should be to get the help of these endowments in order to give special advantages to education and encourage the poor children by means of scholarships and open to them the benefits of secondary education in country districts. It was a great defect in the principal Act that some scheme of that kind was not adopted, He protested against a proposal of this kind not being inserted in the Act of last year, and he had protested constantly against putting educational expense upon the ratepayers as against getting money from other sources. This proposal only dealt with those portions of endowments which would have gone in aid of the rates to the County Council, and it did not in any way touch those endowments which under the principal Act went to the local managers, and which would in the case of voluntary schools be used for their assistance. He agreed that instead of wasting an endowment it ought to be used in the real interests of education. He should most cordially support a proposal that this should be done, not only on the application of the trustees, but also, if necessary, on the application of the local education authority. After all, this proposal only enabled the local education authority to use this money in a particular way, instead of using it in aid of the ratepayers. What they wanted in education was access to sums of this kind, not necessarily very
  764
  large sums, but which were nevertheless of the utmost importance in order to give those incidental advantages to their educational system which gave opportunities which were not provided by the ordinary rate-aided schools. Both as regarded dealing with endowments and the probable use this money would be put to, he thought this provision was an enormous improvement on the original Bill of last session.
  MR. BRYCEsaid he was very glad that the Government had seen their way to introduce this clause, carrying out the undertaking which the Secretary to the Board of Education gave when the Bill was in Committee. He thought this was a very great improvement to the Bill, and he was sure that that would be the opinion of all those who knew the condition of endowments both in London and elsewhere. He did not think anyone in their time had done more for this branch of education than the eminent man they had just lost, Sir Joshua Fitch, and almost the last communication he received from that distinguished man was a request that he would bring this matter before the House. He begged to move the Amendment standing in his name.
  Proposed Amendment to the Bill amended by inserting—
  "in line 2, after the word 'endowment,' the words 'or of the local education authority.'"—(Mr. Bryce.)
  MR. BRYCEsaid he would now move his second Amendment, to leave out from the word "scheme" to the end of the Amendment. The Secretary to the Board of Education had expressed a disposition not to accept this Amendment, but he would venture to submit a few arguments which might perhaps affect the hon. Baronet's view in regard to his proposal. What was the alternative to the making of a scheme? The alternative would be to let money go back into the general fund to be used for the general relief of the ratepayers of London. That was no benefit to the locality although it might be an infinitesimal benefit to the ratepayers of London. He could not conceive how it could be fair to a locality to throw the money into a fund from which the locality

  765
  would not derive any benefit whatever. Upon his hon. friend's own showing it would be better for him to accept the Amendment. What was the result of the last words in his Amendment? It was that a scheme could only be made wherever it was possible to preserve the benefits of the endowment to a particular locality. There were places where it, could not be made available to the locality, because that locality might have become practically depopulated. That was the case in the City of London, where many localities had become so depopulated that Parliament passed the City Parochial Charities Act, which took away those charities and applied them all over London. Although that was chiefly the case with the City it was by no means confined to the City, and there were other parts of London outside the City where the same process of depopulation was going on; that was to say, where warehouses and manufactories were rapidly taking the place of inhabited houses. This process was going on, and had been going on for centuries. In cases of that kind it would be impossible to reserve the benefit of the endowment to that part of the country. The descendants of those who were the friends and neighbours of the pious founder some three centuries ago were living now outside London. Why should they not have the benefit of the endowment simply because they had not continued to reside in the particular locality? Why because they were living in West Ham or North Hackney, or farther out, should they not have the benefit the founder intended to give them? He submitted that a real desire on the part of Parliament to follow the wish of the testator would induce them to apply the benefit over the wider area. Might he put this point to the Government? The clause gave the Board of Education absolute discretion. They need not make a scheme unless they liked, and therefore the Government were needlessly tying their hands and limiting their power, and that of their successors, if they introduced the limitation which came at the end of his hon. friend's Amendment. All that they had to do was to satisfy themselves that the case was one in which educational good was to be done. The Government should remember that when the pious founder gave this
  766
  money he was thinking not only of the locality but of education. He had two objects—one to benefit education, and the other to benefit the locality. Because they could not carry out the object of benefiting the locality, was that any reason why they should not carry out the object of benefiting education? He should like to ask the Parliamentary Secretary to the Board of Education why it was he thought this action of the Board of Education should be entirely limited to a case in which the locality should continue to be specially benefited, and why the money should not also he applied where education was to be benefited. He hoped his hon. friend would reconsider his views and would feel that if the question was between helping education and the ratepayers, it was rather education than the ratepayers that ought to be the object of the pious founder's benefaction.
  Amendment proposed to the proposed Amendment to the Bill—
  "In line 5, to leave out from the word 'scheme' to the end of the proposed Amendment."
  Question proposed, "That the words proposed to be left out stand part of the proposed Amendment to the Bill.
  SIR WILLIAM ANSONsaid he would repeat now what he said before the right hon. Gentleman spoke—that the locality interested ought to be primarily considered. But it was doubtless true that there were some localities which might have grown out of the endowments, or rather the objects of the endowment would not be satisfied by being confined to the locality for which they were originally intended. He would be prepared to insert the following words—
  "In any such scheme due regard shall be had to the interests of the locality for which the benefits of the endowment were intended."
  MR. BRYCEsaid he was quite willing to accept that Amendment.
  Question put, and negatived.
  Amendment proposed to the proposed Amendment to the Bill—
  "After the word 'scheme' in line 5, to add the words 'in any such scheme due regard

  767
  shall be had to the interests of the locality for which the benefits of the endowment were intended.'"—(Sir William Anson.)
  Question proposed, "That those words be there added to the proposed Amendment."
  MR. CRIPPSmoved that the word "primarily" be inserted before the word "intended."
  Proposed Amendment to the proposed Amendment to the Pill amended—
  "By inserting after the word 'shall' the word 'primarily.'"—(Mr. Cripps.)
  Proposed words, as amended, added to the proposed Amendment to the Bill.
  Proposed words, as amended, there inserted in the Bill.
  DR. MACNAMARAmoved the insertion of a new paragraph in the first Schedule with the object of ensuring that six women would always be on the Education Committee. At the present time, under the London School Board, the teaching staff consisted of 4,368 men teachers and 8,967 women teachers The women showed a preponderance of two to one. The Government said that they should trust the London County Council to put a due proportion of women on the Education Committee. He was not prepared to trust the London County Council in that matter. At present they had a Technical Instruction Committee consisting of thirty-five members, of whom only two were women. Supposing this Board had seventy members, the proportion which the County Council would give would be four seats to women. He did not think that was enough. He thought the Parliamentary Secretary seriously, but quite unintentionally, misled the House as to the presence of women on the Committees throughout the country. On 20th May he said there was no reason to suppose that the London County Council would be less attentive in this matter than the others had been. There were, he said, councils which had elected five, four, three, and two women,
  768
  and that the cases in which only one woman was appointed were very few. The Parliamentary Secretary had provided a Return dated down to the end of May this year, which showed that statement to be entirely incorrect. There were sixty-four authorities mentioned, and not one of them had five women, and not one had four. There were two authorities each with three women, forty-five with two women, and seventeen with one woman.
  Amendment proposed to the Bill—
  "In page 4, line 6, at the end, to insert the words 'There shall always be at least six women upon the Education Committee of the local education authority.'"—(Dr. Macnamara.)
  Question proposed, "That those words be there inserted in the Bill."
  *SIR WILLIAM ANSONsaid he could explain the discrepancy between the statement he made in the House and the Return to which the hon. Member referred, but would not do so here. He did not mislead the House the other day. He was afraid he must say again what he said in the Committee stage of the Bill that there was no reason he could see for thinking that the London County Council would be less generous than other County Councils, It might be true that there were only two women on the Technical Instruction Committee of the London County Council. Now they were dealing with elementary education and he felt confident that the proportion observed on, the Technical Instruction Committee would be largely exceeded. He was not prepared to see the London County Council treated in a different way from the other County Councils of the country.
  MR. BRYCEsaid their experience of the other County Councils and Borough Councils since the passing of the Act of 1902, showed that they could not safely trust this to the mere benevolence and good will of bodies consisting mostly of men. It was necessary for this House to fix the statutory minimum in order

  769
  to secure an adequate attendance of women on those Boards.
  Question put.
  The House divided:—Ayes, 93; Noes, 176. (Division List No. 170.)

  AYES.

  Allen, Charles P. (Glouc., Stroud

  Griffith, Ellis J.

  Roberts, John H. (Denbighs.)

  Asher, Alexander

  Haldane, Rt. Hon. Richard B.

  Runciman, Walter

  Barlow, John Emmott

  Harmsworth, R. Leicester

  Samuel, Herbert L. (Cleveland

  Barran, Rowland Hirst

  Harwood, George

  Schwann, Charles E.

  Black, Alexander, William

  Hay, Hon. Claude George

  Shackleton, David James

  Bolton, Thomas Dolling

  Hobhouse, C. E. H. (Bristl, E

  Shaw, Charles Edw. (Stafford)

  Broadhurst, Henry

  Hope, John Deans (Fife West)

  Shipman, Dr. John G.

  Brown, George M. (Edinburgh

  Humphreys-Owen, Arthur C.

  Sinclair, John (Forfarshire)

  Bryce, Rt. Hon. James

  Hutchinson, Dr. Charles Fredk

  Smith, H. C. (North'mb Tyneside

  Buchanan, Thomas Ryburn

  Hutton, Alfred E. (Morley)

  Scares, Ernest J.

  Burns, John

  Jocoby, James Alfred

  Strachey, Sir Edward

  Buxton, Sydney Charles

  Jones, William (Carnarvonsh.

  Taylor, Theodore C. (Radclffe

  Caldwell, James

  Labouchere, Henry

  Thomas, Sir A. (Glamorgan, E.

  Cameron, Robert

  Langley, Batty

  Thomas, David Alfred (Merthyr

  Causton, Richard Knight

  Lawson, Sir Wilfrid (Cornwall)

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

  Cawley, Frederick

  Layland-Barratt, Francis

  Trevelyan, Charles Philips

  Channing, Francis Alston

  Leng, Sir John

  Walton, Joseph (Barnsley)

  Cremer, William Randal

  Levy, Maurice

  Wason, John Cathcart (Orkney

  Crombie, John William

  Lewis, John Herbert

  Weir, James Galloway

  Crooks, William

  Lloyd-George, David

  Whiteley, George (York, W. R.

  Davies, Alfred (Carmarthen)

  Macdonna, John Cumming

  Whitley, J. H. (Halifax)

  Dilke, Rt. Hon. Sir Charles

  M'Arthur, William (Cornwall

  Whittaker, Thomas Palmer

  Douglas Charles M. (Lanark)

  Markham, Arthur Basil

  Williams, Osmonde (Merioneth

  Dunn, Sir William

  Morgan, J. Lloyd (Carmarthen

  Wilson, F. W. (Norfolk, Mid)

  Elibank, Master of

  Moss, Samuel

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

  Fenwick, Charles

  Newnes, Sir George

  Wilson, John (Durham, Mid)

  Fitzmaurice, Lord Edmund

  Norman, Henry

  Yoxall, James Henry

  Foster, Sir Michael (Lond. Univ

  Partington, Oswald

  Foster, Sir Walter (Derby Co.

  Perks, Robert William

  TELLERS FOR THE AYES—

  Furness, Sir Christopher

  Philipps, John Wynford

  Dr. Macnamara and Mr.

  Gladstone, Rt. Hn. Herbert John

  Priestley, Arthur

  Mansfield.

  Goddard, Daniel Ford

  Rickett, J. Compton

  Gorst, Rt. Hn. Sir John Eldon

  Roberts, John Bryn (Eifion)

  NOES.

  Agnew, Sir Andrew Noel

  Cecil, Evelyn (Aston Manor.

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

  Anson, Sir William Reynell

  Cecil, Lord Hugh (Greenwich

  Finch, Rt. Hon. George H.

  Arnold-Forster, Hugh O.

  Chamberlain, Rt. Hn. J. (Birm)

  Finlay, Sir Robert Bannatyne

  Arrol, Sir William

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

  FitzGerald, Sir Robt. Penrose

  Atkinson, Rt. Hon. John

  Chamberlayne, T. (Southmptn

  Fitzroy, Hon. Edw. Algernon

  Aubrey-Fletcher, Rt. Hn. Sir H.

  Chapman, Edward

  Flannery, Sir Fortescue

  Bagot, Capt. Josceline KitzRoy

  Charrington, Spencer

  Flower, Ernest

  Bailey, James (Walworth)

  Churchill, Winston Spencer

  Forster, Henry William

  Bain, Colonel James Robert

  Clive, Captain Percy A.

  Foster, Philip S. (Warick, S. W.

  Baird, John George Alexander

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

  Galloway, William Johnson

  Baldwin, Alfred

  Coghill, Douglas Harry

  Gardner, Ernest

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

  Cohen, Benjamin Louis

  Godson, Sir Augustus Frederick

  Balfour, Capt. C. B. (Hornsey

  Collings, Rt. Hon. Jesse

  Gordon, Hn. J. E. (Elgin & Nrn.

  Balfour, Rt. Hn. Gerald W. (Leeds

  Colomb, Sir John Chas. Ready

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

  Balfour, Kenneth R. (Christch

  Cook, Sir Frederick Lucas

  Gore, Hn. S. F. Ormsby- (Linc.

  Banbury, Sir Frederick George

  Cripps, Charles Alfred

  Goulding, Edward Alfred

  Bathurst, Hon. Allen Benj.

  Cross, Alexander (Glasgow)

  Greene, Sir E. W. (B'ry S. Edm'nd

  Bentinck, Lord Henry C.

  Cross, Herb, Shepherd (Bolton)

  Grenfell, William Henry

  Bhownaggree, Sir M. M.

  Crossley, Rt. Hon. Sir Savile

  Groves, James Grimble

  Bigwood, James

  Cubitt, Hon. Henry

  Hall, Edward Marshall

  Blundell, Colonel Henry

  Cust, Henry, John C.

  Hare, Thomas Leigh

  Brodrick, Kt. Hon. St. John

  Dalkeith, Earl of

  Harris, Frederick Leverton

  Bull, William James

  Denny, Colonel

  Haslam, Sir Alfred S.

  Butcher, John George

  Doughty, George

  Hatch, Ernest Frederick G.

  Campbell, Rt. Hn. J. A. (Glasg.)

  Doxford, Sir William Theodore

  Heath, James (Staffords, N. W.

  Campbell, J. H. M. (Dublin Univ

  Duke, Henry Edward

  Helder, Augustus

  Carson, Rt. Hon. Sir Edw. H.

  Dyke, Rt. Hon. Sir Wm. Hart

  Henderson, Sir Alexander

  Cautley, Henry Strother

  Evans, Samuel T. (Glamorgan)

  Hogg, Lindsay

  Cavendish, V. C. W. (Derbyshire

  Faber, George Denison (York)

  Hoult, Joseph

  Cayzer, Sir Charles William

  Fardell, Sir T. George

  Houston, Robert Paterson

  Howard, Jno (Kent, Faver'hm

  Milvain, Thomas

  Sadler, Col. Samuel Alexander

  Hudson, George Bickersteth

  Mitchell, William (Burnley)

  Samuel, Harry (Limehouse)

  Jessel, Captain Herbert Merton

  Montagu, G. (Huntingdon)

  Sharpe, William Edward T.

  Johnstone, Heywood

  Montagu Hon. J. Scott (Hants)

  Skewes-Cox, Thomas

  Kemp, Lieut.-Colonel George

  Moon, Edward Robert Pacy

  Smith, James Parker (Lanarks.

  Kenyon, Hon. G. T. (Denbigh

  Morton, Arthur H. Aylmer

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

  Kenyon-Slaney, Col. W. (Salop

  Mount, William Arthur

  Stanley, Hon. A. (Ormskirk)

  Kerr, John

  Murray, Rt. Hn. A. Graham (Bute

  Stanley, Lord (Lancs.)

  Keswick, William

  Myers, William Henry

  Stirling-Maxwell, Sir Jn. M.

  Lambton, Hon. Fredk. Wm.

  Nicholson, William Graham

  Stone, Sir Benjamin

  Law, Andrew Bonar (Glasgow

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

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

  Lawrence, Wm. F. (Liverpool

  Palmer, Walter (Salisbury)

  Tomlinson, Sir Wm. Edw. M.

  Lawson, John Grant

  Percy, Earl

  Valentia, Viscount

  Legge, Col. Hon. Heneage

  Platt-Higgins, Frederick

  Walrond, Rt. Hn. Sir William H.

  Leveson-Gower, Frederick N. S.

  Plummer, Walter R.

  Warde, Colonel C. E.

  Llewellyn, Evan Henry

  Pretyman, Ernest George

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

  Lockwood, Lieut.-Col. A. R.

  Pryce-Jones, Lt.-Col. Edward

  Welby, Sir Charles G. E. (Notts

  Loder, Gerald Walter Erskine

  Purvis Robert

  Wharton, Rt. Hon. J. Lloyd

  Long, Col. Chas. W. (Evesham

  Pym, C. Guy

  Whiteley, H. (Ashton und. Lyne

  Long, Rt. Hn. Walter (Bristol, S

  Randles, John S.

  Willox, "Sir John Archibald

  Lowther, C. (Cumb. Eskdale)

  Ratcliff, R. F.

  Wilson, John (Glasgow)

  Lucas, Col. Francis (Lowestoft)

  Reid, James (Greenock)

  Worsley-Taylor, Hry. Wilson

  Lucas, Regl'd J. (Portsmouth)

  Remnant, James Farquharson

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

  MacIver, David (Liverpool)

  Renwick, George

  Wylie, Alexander

  M'Arthur, Charles (Liverpool)

  Ridley, S. F. (Bethnal Green)

  Wyndham, Rt. Hun. George

  M'Iver, Sir Lewis (Edinburgh W

  Ritchie, Rt. Hn. Chas. Thomson

  Young, Samuel

  M'Killop, James (Stirlingshire

  Roberts, Samuel (Sheffield)

  Majdndie, James A. H.

  Robertson, Herbert (Hackney)

  TELLERS FOR THE NOES—

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

  Rolleston, Sir John F. L.

  Mr. Anstruther and Mr.

  Meysey-Thompson, Sir H. M.

  Round, Rt. Hon. James

  Fellowes.

  And, it being after half-past Seven of the clock, further consideration of the Bill, as amended, stood adjourned till this Evening's Sitting.

EVENING SITTING.

  LONDON EDUCATION BILL.
  As amended, further considered.
  DR. MACNAMARAsaid he desired the Government to insert at the end of the schedule a proviso to the effect that the Education Committee of the local education authority should transact all its ordinary business in public. He wished that the representatives of the Press, and, as far as accommodation allowed, the ratepayers, should be admitted to the ordinary business of the Committee. That had been the policy of the great School Boards ever since the passing of the Act of 1870; no difficulty had arisen, for whenever a personal question, or some matter for which publicity was not desired, came up, the representatives of the Press and others had been asked to withdraw, and had withdrawn. They would be told, perhaps, that these new authorities were merely Committees of the great municipal authority, and therefore did no business which it was necessary should be transacted in public. He, however, denied
  772
  that suggestion; in reality they were great public boards. In the case of London the education authority would undertake work equal in magnitude to the whole education of Scotland, or three times greater than the education of Wales, and the financial responsibility amounted to very nearly £4,000,000. In the past London had suffered very severely from jobbery and malfeasance owing to the lack of such publicity as he now advocated. In reference to the Bill of last year the Prime Minister, on July 30, had said in answer to a Question, that—
  "Everything would be done in public,"
  and that—
  "Nothing henceforth could be done in secret nothing could be done except in the full light of day and in the blaze of publicity."
  As a matter of fact that statement was beside the mark; for in Surrey, Northumberland, and Somerset, and he believed in other localities, the education authority had recommended that its meetings should be private, and this had been agreed to by the County Council. The right hon. Member for East Somerset had suggested that if conducted in private the proceedings would be shorter; that might be so, and he rather imagined that if there were no reporters

  773
  the proceedings in the House of Commons would not be so lengthy, and that the popularity of this House, with Members, too, would not be so great. There was this great set-off, however, that the presence of the Press secured that the administration should be wise, sound, and above suspicion. He might be told by the Parliamentary Secretary, because there was no other answer, to trust to the County Council. But in this connection it should be remembered that the proceedings of the County Council's technical education board were not public; and its transactions were, practically, never canvassed in public. He begged to move.
  Amendment proposed to the Bill—
  "In page 4, line 6, at the end, to insert the words (10) The education committee of the local education authority shall transact all its ordinary business in public'"—(Dr. Macnamara.
  Question proposed, "That those words be there inserted in the Bill."
  *MR. COHENsaid the hon. Member for Camber well spoke with unrivalled authority in this House on the procedure of the London School Board. He himself spoke with less, but still with some, authority of the London County Council. Although he was not entirely in sympathy with the policy of the London County Council he was bound to admit that their work was conducted with business-like dispatch and regular procedure. In committee work no party spirit was imported, and everyone confined himself solely to the consideration of administrative and business matters which contrasted favourably with the oratorical and Party spirit that invariably was displayed on Tuesdays, when in the presence of the reporters members of the Council were apt to play to the gallery rather than to address themselves to the matters in question. The hon. Member had spoken of the necessity of protecting the administration of this large amount of money from the possibility of malfeasance and jobbery. Anyone who had done him (Mr. Cohen) the honour to follow what he had said when London County Council matters had been discussed in this House and he had always felt it his duty
  774
  to defend the London County Council from the many libellous statements that had been made in respect of it—would agree with him when he said if there was one body which was as free as the London School Board had always been from any amount of malfeasance, that body was the London County Council. He thought that any errors that might be committed in Committee could be put right, and would be put right, when the matter came before the supreme tribunal-the education authority. He did not know what the attitude of the hon. Baronet would be towards the Amendment, but he could assure him, speaking from experience, that if there was one body it was superfluous to protect against the accusation of corruption that body was the London County Council. He was sorry that there should be any hesitation on the part of his hon. friend the Member for Camberwell, or in any quarter, to trust the Education Committee of the London County Council because reporters were not present.
  *MR. YOXALLsaid he hoped they would brush away all this talk about corruption and malfeasance as being irrelevant. It was no question of corruption or malversation either of the London County Council or the School Board, nor was it a question of whether the London County Council should sit in public. It was a question of whether the Education Committee should sit in public. It was not a question of the length or brevity of speeches. The important thing was that the decisions to which those speeches led up should be arrived at in the full light of publicity, with the knowledge that they would be reported in the Press and therefore must be as wise as could be arrived at. He hoped this question would not be argued on the ground of the saving of time. It was not a question of the debates that would take place on a Technical Educational body, a body dealing with one branch of education alone and dealing with comparatively few schools. It was a question of whether that body, being replaced by one which would have a much wider purview and multifarious duties to perform and giving much more time to the subject in view, should, like that body, conduct its proceedings in private. The practice hitherto adopted by the London School Board was to conduct its proceedings in

  775
  the presence of the Press and he would hardly think the hon. Baronet would like to think there was any risk whatever that proceedings which had hitherto been conducted in public would now be conducted in private. It was not in the interest of peace or public tranquility that these proceedings should be conducted in private. They could not eliminate the denominational heat from these discussions so long as they had two classes of schools; and if the proceedings of this body were not reported, if there was the least suspicion of the suppression of them and their seclusion from the public eye, the suspicion outside would become tenfold more acute than it was at the present time. It could do no harm to specify in this Act that the Education Committee should meet in public, and if there was any danger of its not meeting in public it was the duty of this House to prevent any such thing taking place. For these reasons he hoped the Amendment would receive the favourable consideration of the hon. Baronet.
  *SIR WILLIAM ANSONsaid that the Amendment had been discussed as if the Government had a preference for private proceedings on the part of the Education Committee. No one had any desire that the proceedings should be in private; and the real question was whether the County Council should be allowed to regulate the procedure of its own Education Committee. With all their confidence in popularly-elected authorities, some hon. Members seemed never able to trust such authorities to do the thing they desired to be done unless they were constrained by an Act of Parliament. The London County Council was quite capable of regulating the proceedings of its own Committee. It was said that great financial operations would be dealt with and large sums of money would be spent, and that the public ought to know what was being spent; but after all the County Council was the financial authority, the Education Committee could not borrow money, and the County Council would publish their accounts and these education accounts would be published with the others. He did not think there was the slightest desire to conceal from the public their
  776
  proceedings; but there were a good many matters the initiation of which the members of the Committee would wish to discuss thoroughly in private. Any one who had taken part in municipal proceedings must be aware how striking was the difference between the proceedings which were private and those in which Members spoke to the gallery, and during which really little business was done. He thought it was better to leave the arrangement of this matter to the County Council which, he believed, was sufficiently alive to the wishes of the electorate in London to decide whether or not it was desirable in the interests of education in London that their proceedings should be conducted in public. He did not wish to make any distinction between the London County Council and the other County Councils in regard to the manner in which they should conduct their business. He was prepared to leave the matter to the good sense of the London County Council, and to the public opinion of the people of London.
  MR. CAUSTONsaid that as a London Member, he thought that the proceedings should be conducted in public. If Parliament thought it was right that the proceedings should be carried on in public, Parliament should say so; and he considered it would have been a great deal better had Parliament said so in the Bill of last year.
  MR. CROOKSsaid he wished to add his voice to the appeal for publicity. The hon. Baronet, in introducing the Bill to the House, said that there was the great lack of public interest in education in London. Was he going to make that interest still less by allowing the education authority to carry on its business behind closed doors? If there was any business which would be better discussed in private, that would not be prevented by accepting the Amendment. The private business could be carried on by means of sub-committees. The more the people of London and the world knew of this great business of education the better. As an educational power there was nothing in the world like the public Press. It kept administration

  777
  square. Their desire was for the betterment of education. Of course there were Members who thought that this Bill was for the worsement of education; but whether it was for the better or the worse they could only know if publicity was given to the proceedings of the education authority.
  MR. HERBERT SAMUELsaid that the hon. Baronet asked why a distinction should be made in this Bill, compared with that of last year, and why the London County Council should not be left free to make its own arrangements in this matter. The reply was obvious, that experience had shown that Parliament made a mistake last year, because several County Councils had conducted their business in private. The hon. Baronet said that that was the affair of the County Councils; he maintained that it was not the affair of the County Councils, but the affair of the public. The London School Board conducted their proceedings in public, and why should not the new authority do so also? The present County Council might be trustworthy, but that was even doubtful, because reporters were not admitted to the meetings of the Technical Education Committee. He thought that Parliament ought to express its mind clearly on this matter.
  SIR MICHAEL FOSTERsaid that his natural tendency would be to support the hon. Baronet in refusing this Amendment, because his own experience had proved to him that if business had to be done the public must be excluded, as far as possible, from a share in the proceedings. They were all human, and there was an invariable tendency to talk to the gallery, so that the more the public were admitted to proceedings of this nature the less chance was there for the real conduct of business. In spite of that, however, he distinctly recognised that the Education Committee was an agent for London, and for this reason there might be an instruction of the House on this occasion that it should conduct its official business in public. He thought that there was a difficulty about the word "ordinary." If the Amendment of the hon. Member for Camberwell provided the safeguard that the meetings of the Committee should be
  778
  public only for the general advantage of the children, then he would be disposed to support him.
  MR. WALTER LONGsaid he ventured very respectfully to appeal to the House to come to a decision on this question now. Surely the issue before the House was clear and distinct His hon. friend who had just spoken had some doubt as to the advisability of passing the Amendment, and the hon. Member for Woolwich, on the other hand, attached undue importance to the publicity of debate when he said that without publicity a good deal of the work done would not be so valuable. He was sure that a great deal of the work which the hon. Member had done, and by no means the least useful, had been work done without the presence of reporters. The London County Council was supreme on all matters of education, and could direct that in all matters of education there should be publicity. They were constantly told—"Why don't you trust the local bodies?" But when they proposed to trust them in this matter it was argued that they should be cribbed, cabined, and confined. Surely the greatest municipality in the world should have the right to say that their proceedings at certain times should be in private.
  MR. SYDNEY BUXTONsaid that there was no intention of hon. Members on that side of the House to delay business, but they regarded this as one of the most important Amendments that could be discussed that evening. He thought that the hon. Baronet in charge of the Bill had really misunderstood the proposal of the hon. Member for Camberwell. None of them wished that all business should be done in public. What they desired was that when the education authority arrived at a conclusion on any question an opportunity should be given to the ordinary citizens of London to know what had been done. In order to meet a point which had been made on the other side he suggested a verbal alteration in the Amendment by which it would read that the Committee should carry out its ordinary meetings in public. That would put it in the same position as the School Board, whose business was

  779
  carried on in public. Interest in education in London had not been so great as many of them wished, and this Bill would entirely destroy what interest there was if there was not some opportunity of keeping educational matters before the public.
  MR. HERBERT ROBERTSsaid that from personal experience he could testify that every meeting in Wales of the education authority had been for the past twelve years conducted in public in the presence of reporters, and no difficulties whatever had arisen, He failed to see what possible inconvenience could arise from accepting his hon. friend's Amendment. Past experience was in favour of it, and any inconvenience likely to arise could easily be obviated by going into Committee or requesting the reporters not to report the proceedings.
  LORD EDMUND FITZMAURICEagreed that occasionally matters were required to be dealt with in a confidential manner. At the same time he thought some County Councils might be inclined to go rather further in the direction of excluding reporters than was desirable Under the Act of 1902, all the business except financial business might be delegated to the Committee by the County Council did delegate came back as a matter of course to the County Council itself in full session for discussion when the reporters were present. He thought the reporters ought to be present as a matter of right in regard to matters where there was a complete delegation, but in regard to a large and important class of business not delegated to the Committee it should be reserved for the final decision of the Council. If the Government thought that this was a matter which could not be left to the decision of the London County Council itself, the Amendment should be framed so as to bear in mind the distinction in Section 17 between the business delegated and that which was not delegated.
  MR. HUMPHRYS OWENsaid that some time ago they heard complaints that they
  780
  talked a good deal about politics but very little about education. This was purely an educational matter, and it should not be made a question of Party politics. It was simply a matter of how the new bodies should carry on their business. Allusion had been made to the way the Welsh education authorities conducted their business. Quite apart from politics, he thought the members of any Welsh educational body would say that the present system under which the reporters were freely allowed to be present on the understanding that, when private business was brought on, they would cease to report, had worked to the complete satisfaction of those bodies, and there had never been a difficulty of any kind. This was a question of ordinary human nature, and he did not see why a system which worked well in Wales should not work in the Metropolis. There was always a certain amount of jealousy between the lay and the academic elements, and the latter, he thought, was sometimes a little too eager to get to business, and apt to neglect thorough discussion of all the aspects of a question. It was very important for the progress of education that details should be discussed and less appreciated, not only by the experts, but also by the rank and file of the elected bodies, and there was no better means of securing that than it being known that the speeches would be reported, and that public attention would be called to the business through the Press. He hoped that even now the Secretary to the Board of Education would accept the very reasonable Amendment moved by his hon. friend.
  MR. BRYCEasked the two representatives of the Government who were present whether, after what had been said by the noble Lord the Member for Wiltshire, they could not see their way to allow some modification of the Clause.
  MR. WALTER LONGsaid he was bound to say that nothing which had fallen from the noble Lord and other hon. Members had led them to change their mind. The London County Council could be very well trusted to deal with

  781
  this matter. [An HON. MEMBER: The Education Committees deal with it.] But the London County Council absolutely controlled the work of the Committees, and if the Council chose to lay down that the proceedings of the Education Committees should be held in public it was perfectly competent for it to do so. They had not done so in regard to the Technical Education Board. The hon. Member for North Camberwell had frequently said that it was because the London County Council had not adopted this course that he had felt it necessary to move this Amendment.
  MR. CAUSTON: Can we take it that the London County Council have that power?
  MR. WALTER LONG: Certainly, for they have absolute control over the proceedings of the Technical Education Board at present, and they would exercise the same power over the Education Committees. The proposal they were asked to accept was one which would involve enormous difficulties, because it invited the House to say there should be no distinction between the duties performed by the London County Council and the Committees. He thought this was a matter which must be left to the discretion of the local education authority.
  Question put.
  The House divided:—Ayes, 76; Noes, 156. (Division List, No. 171.)

  AYES.

  Abraham, William (Rhondda)

  Griffith, Ellis J.

  Reckitt, Harold James

  Allen, Charles P. (Glouc., Stroud

  Haldane, Rt. Hon. Richard B.

  Rickett, J. Compton

  Barlow, John Emmott

  Hayne, Rt. Hon. Charles Seale-

  Roberts, John Bryn (Eifion)

  Black, Alexander William

  Hobhouse, C. E. H. (Bristl, E

  Roberts, John H. (Denbighs.)

  Bolton, Thomas Dolling

  Hope, John Deans (Fife, West)

  Shackleton, David James

  Broadhurst, Henry

  Humphreys-Owen, Arthur C.

  Shaw, Charles Edw. (Stafford)

  Brown, George M. (Edinburgh)

  Hutchinson, Dr. Charles Fredk.

  Shipman, Dr. John G.

  Bryce, Rt. Hon. James

  Jacoby, James Alfred

  Soares, Ernest J.

  Burt Thomas

  Jones, David Brynmor (Swansea

  Taylor, Theodore C. (Radcliffe)

  Buxton, Sydney Charles

  Jones, William (Carnarvonsh

  Thomas, David Alfred (Merthyr

  Caldwell, James

  Langley, Batty

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

  Cameron, Robert

  Lawson, Sir Wilfrid (Cornwall)

  Walton, Joseph (Barnsley)

  Causton, Richard Knight

  Leigh, Sir Joseph

  Weir; James Galloway

  Cawley, Frederick

  Levy, Maurice

  White, George (Norfolk)

  Cremer, William Randal

  Lewis, John Herbert

  Whitley, J. H. (Halifax)

  Crooks, William

  Lloyd-George, David

  Whittaker, Thomas Palmer

  Davies, Alfred (Carmarthen)

  M'Arthur, William (Cornwall)

  Williams, Osmond (Merioneth)

  Davies, M. Vaughan (Cardigan

  Mansfield, Horace Rendall

  Wilson, F. W. (Norfolk, Mid)

  Douglas, Charles M. (Lanark)

  Markham, Arthur Basil

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

  Evans, Samuel T. (Glamorgan)

  Morgan, J. Lloyd (Carmarthen)

  Wilson, John (Durham, Mid)

  Fenwick, Charles

  Newnes, Sir George

  Woodhouse, Sir J. T. (Huddersf'd

  Fitzmaurice, Lord Edmund

  Norman, Henry

  Yoxall, James Henry

  Foster, Sir Michl. (Lond. Univ

  Partington, Oswald

  Foster, Sir Walter (Derby Co.)

  Perks, Robert William

  TELLERS FOR THE AYES—

  Fuller, J. M. F.

  Philipps, John Wynford

  Dr. Macnamara and Mr.

  Furness, Sir Christopher

  Plummer, Walter R.

  Herbert Samuel.

  Goddard, Daniel Ford

  Priestley, Arthur

  NOES.

  Agnew, Sir Andrew Noel

  Bhownaggree, Sir M. M.

  Coghill, Douglas Harry

  Anson, Sir William Reynell

  Bigwood, James

  Cohen, Benjamin Louis

  Arnold-Forster, Hugh O.

  Blundell, Colonel Henry

  Ceilings, Rt. Hon. Jesse

  Arrol, Sir William

  Brassey, Albert

  Cook, Sir Frederick Lucas

  Atkinson, Right Hon. John

  Brodrick, Rt. Hon. St. John

  Cox, Irwin Edward Bainbridge

  Aubrey-Fletcher, Rt. Hon. Sir H.

  Bull, William James

  Cross, Alexander (Glasgow)

  Bagot, Capt. Josceline Fitzroy

  Burdett-Coutts, W.

  Cross, Herb. Shepherd (Bolton)

  Bailey, James (Walworth)

  Butcher, John George

  Crossley, Rt. Hon. Sir Savile

  Bain, Colonel James Robert

  Campbell, J. H. M. (Dublin Univ.

  Cubitt, Hon. Henry

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

  Dautley, Henry Strother

  Dalkeith, Earl of

  Balfour, Capt. C. B. (Hornsey

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

  Denny, Colonel

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

  Cayzer, Sir Charles William

  Dewar, Sir T. R. (Tr. Hamlets

  Balfour, Kenneth R. (Christch.

  Chapman, Edward

  Dimsdale, Rt. Hn. Sir Joseph C.

  Banbury, Sir Frederick George

  Charrington, Spencer

  Doughty, George

  Bentinck, Lord Henry C.

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

  Douglas, Rt. Hon. A. Akers

  Doxford, Sir William Theodore

  Legge, Col. Hon. Heneage

  Ridley, S. F. (Bethnal Green)

  Elliot, Hon. A. Ralph Douglas

  Leveson-Gower, Frederick N. S.

  Roberts, Samuel (Sheffield)

  Faber, George Denison (York)

  Llewellyn, Evan Henry

  Robertson, Herbert (Hackney)

  Fardell, Sir T. George

  Lockwood, Lieut.-Col. A. R.

  Sackville, Col. S. G. Stopford-

  Fielden, Edward Brocklehurst

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

  Sadler, Col. Samuel Alexander

  Finch, Rt. Hon. George H.

  Lowther, C. (Cumb. Eskdale)

  Samuel, Harry S. (Limehouse)

  Firbank, Sir Joseph Thomas

  Lundon, W.

  Seely, Chas. Hilton (Lincoln)

  FitzGerald, Sir Robt. Penrose-

  Macdona, John Cumming

  Sinclair, Louis (Romford)

  Flannery, Sir Fortescue

  Maconochie, A. W.

  Skewes-Cox, Thomas

  Flavin, Michael Joseph

  M'Arthur, Charles (Liverpool)

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

  Flower, Ernest

  M'Killop, Jas. (Stirlingshire)

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

  Forster, Henry William

  Majendie, James A. H.

  Stanley, Hon. A. (Ormskirk)

  Fyler, John Arthur

  Meysey-Thompson, Sir H. M.

  Stanley, Lord (Lancs.)

  Godson, Sir Augustus Fredk.

  Milvain, Thomas

  Stewart, Sir Mark J. M. Taggart

  Gorst, Rt. Hon. Sir John Eldon

  Montagu, Hon. J. Scott (Hants.)

  Stone, Sir Benjamin

  Goulding, Edward Alfred

  Moon, Edward Robert Pacy

  Tollemache, Henry James

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

  Morgan, D. J. (Walthamstow)

  Tomlinson, Sir Wm. Edw. M.

  Grenfell, William Henry

  Mount, William Arthur

  Tritton, Charles Ernest

  Groves, James Grimble

  Mowbray, Sir Robert Gray C.

  Valentia, Viscount

  Guest, Hon. Ivor Churchill

  Murray, Rt. Hn. A. Graham (Bute

  Vincent, Sir Edgar (Exeter)

  Hall, Edward Marshall

  Murray, Chas. J. (Coventry)

  Walrond, Rt. Hn. Sir William H.

  Hare, Thomas Leigh

  Myers, William Henry

  Warde, Colonel C. E.

  Haslam, Sir Alfred S.

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

  Webb, Col. William George

  Heath, James (Staffords. N. W.

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

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

  Helder, Augustus

  Orr-Ewing, Charles Lindsay

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

  Hogg, Lindsay

  Palmer, Walter (Salisbury)

  Whiteley, H. (Ashton und. Lyne

  Houston, Robert Paterson

  Pease, H. Pike (Darlington)

  Willoughby de Eresby, Lord

  Howard, Jno (Kent, Faver'hm

  Percy, Earl

  Willox, Sir John Archibald

  Hudson, George Bickersteth

  Platt-Higgins, Frederick

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

  Jameson, Major J. Eustace

  Pretyman, Ernest George

  Worsley-Taylor, Henry Wilson

  Jessel, Captain Herbert Merton

  Pryce-Jones, Lt.-Col. Edward

  Wylie, Alexander

  Kenyan, Hon. G. T. (Denbigh

  Purvis, Robert

  Wyndham, Rt. Hon. George

  Kenyon-Slaney, Col. W. (Salop

  Randles John S.

  Young, Samuel

  Kerr, John

  Ratcliff, R. F.

  Keswick, William

  Redmond, William (Clare)

  TELLERS FOR THE NOES—

  Knowles, Lees

  Reid, James (Greenock)

  Mr. Anstruther and Mr.

  Law, Andrew Bonar (Glasgow)

  Remnant, James Farquharson

  Fellowes

  Lawrence, Wm. F. (Liverpool

  Renshaw, Sir Charles Bine

  Lawson, John Grant (Yorks, N. R.

  Renwick, George

  Question put, and agreed to.

  MR. YOXALL, in moving the Amendment standing in his name, said that at the present time a ratepayer had the right to inspect documents such as the minutes and accounts of the School Board for London, and what he was asking for now was something less than that. He did not ask for an inspection of accounts, but the local Education Committee would have minutes and they had no guarantee that the proceedings would be conducted in public. Therefore, they had an additional right to ask that the minutes should be open to the inspection of any ratepayer. There were plenty of arguments which might be used, but he would only cite one particular case which went to show the danger of anything like privacy. The minutes would doubtless contain copies of reports by Government inspectors of denominational schools. It was now the practice to place upon the doors of denominational schools a copy of the inspectors' report, but in this Bill the Government did not insist upon
  784
  this practice, and therefore that safeguard had passed out of existence. If something of the same kind was not provided for in the future it would give rise to suspicion and the friction which already existed upon this subject would be increased instead of being diminished. For the sake of peace, educational efficiency, public right, conistency in local government, and other reasons he begged to move his Amendment.
  Amendment proposed to the Bill—
  "In page 4, line 6, at end, to insert the words '(10) The minutes of proceedings of the Education Committee of the local education authority shall be open to inspection by any ratepayer in London.'"—(Mr. Yoxall.)
  Question proposed, "That those words be there inserted in the Bill."
  MR. WALTER LONGsaid the real objection to this proposal was that it sought to make a distinction between the Education Committee of the London County Council and any other committee

  785
  of any other local governing body in the country. The section of the Act of 1870 which conferred this right of inspection was repealed in the Act of last year because it was felt that, in the changed circumstances, it had become altogether impracticable. If that was true of the ordinary County Councils in the provinces how much more must it be true of the London County Council, with its vast number of ratepayers. In his opinion the hon. Member in moving the Amendment had done so from a mistaken point of view. He had said it was desirable that these bodies should be open to public criticism. No doubt; but surely they were responsible bodies and were not likely to be influenced in their work because the minutes were open to inspection. He hoped the House would not spend too much time in discussing a matter which in his opinion was only of minor importance, but would proceed to deal with the more important questions still to be reached.
  DR. MACNAMARAdenied that this was a minor consideration, and held that the privilege was one of the most valuable the public had enjoyed since 1870.
  MR. WALTER LONG: I did not say it was a minor matter. I said it was minor compared with some of the questions remaining to be dealt with.
  DR. MACNAMARArepeated that it was a most important question, and reminded the right hon. Gentleman that the section in the Act of 1870 to which he had referred was repealed in the schedule of the Act of 1902, which was closured without a single word of discussion. If they had had the opportunity they would have most strenuously opposed its repeal, and it was adding insult to injury to tell them now that they must not discuss this Amendment because the question was settled last year. The Government were robbing the people of London of a priceless advantage they had enjoyed for thirty years, and he regarded this proposition as one of the most scandalous features of the educational policy of the Government. "The blaze of publicity," and "the full light of day," which were to
  786
  be the accompaniments of educational administration disappeared under the Act of 1902.
  MR. WALTER LONG: The hon. Gentleman seems to take this matter very much to heart.
  DR. MACNAMARAsaid he did.
  MR. WALTER LONGsaid he did not object to that. What he did object to was the proposal to discriminate between the Loudon County Council and the rest of the country.
  DR. MACNAMARAsaid his point was that the right of inspection was a great public privilege. It must be remembered that £1,000,000 of public money was now involved year by year.
  MR. SAMUEL EVANSsaid every ratepayer in the country ought to have the right of inspecting the minutes of proceedings of the local education authority and of its Committee in the same way that shareholders had a right to make copies of minutes of their companies. From 1870 onwards that elementary right had been conceded.
  MR. WALTER LONGsaid the ratepayers had the right to inspect the minutes of the London County Council.
  MR. SAMUEL EVANSsaid the business would be transacted by the Education Committee. What would be the use of having a right to inspect the minutes of the Council if they did not bear on the matter? This elementary right which had never been abused was now to be taken away, and he had heard no argument in support of that course. He hoped the House would give more time to the discussion of this matter. They ought not to shirk their responsibilities merely in order that hon. Members might go to their beds.
  MR. BULLpointed out that every Committee of the London County Council reported to the Council all the details of its work, and, as the meetings of the Council were public, it seemed to him that there was sufficient publicity.
  SIR JAMES WOODHOUSEsaid the law with regard to any municipal corporation was that any ratepayer might inspect the minutes, not only of the Council, but also of its committees. In the case of the Manchester Corporation, the Lord Chief Justice had decided that the ratepayers were entitled to see, not merely the resolutions of the Council, but the acts and proceedings of the Committees of the Council.
  MR. WALTER LONG: If the hon. Gentleman has given a correct interpretation of the law, perhaps he will tell us what is the object of this Amendment.
  SIR JAMES WOODHOUSEsaid the Amendment at least affirmed the principle contained in the Act of 1870. Surely there could be no objection to its acceptance.
  SIR JOHN GORSTsaid, if it was the law that the ratepayers had the right of inspection, that was a very good reason for the repeal of the section in the Act of 1870 by the Act of last year, because it became unnecessary. In the case of School Boards, it was necessary that ratepayers should have a statutory right to inspect the minutes, but that provision was no longer necessary when the minutes became the minutes of a committee of a municipal authority.
  SIR JAMES WOODHOUSEsaid the London County Council was not included in the Municipal Corporations Act.
  SIR JOHN GORSTsaid the proceedings of the Committees of the London County Council were reported to the Council and were now open to the public under the London County Council Act. The Amendment was as unnecessary as the clause which was repealed in the Act of last year.
  MR. LLOYD-GEORGEsaid they ought to know whether the ratepayers of London had this power or not. The Amendment was proposed on the assumption that they had not that power. The President of the Local Government Board had also replied on that assumption, and defended the repeal of the section on principle. He said it was a
  788
  wrong thing and that the power should not be given. The Government abolished the power of inspection last year, but now they were told that the ratepayers still had that power. It was a great pity that none of the law officers of the Crown were present. They were all agreed this power was desirable, and as it was clear there was a doubt whether there was the power, what possible harm could the Amendment do? Let the hon. Gentleman in charge of the Bill agree to the inclusion of words ensuring to ratepayers the right to inspect the minutes. That would save the time of the House. Such a power of the ratepayers ought not to be abolished unless it could be shown that it had been abused. A great deal of petty jobbery went on in different parts of the country in connection with contracts, and so forth, and the mere fact that the ratepayers possessed the right to inspect the minute-books was a check upon such practices. Reference had been made to the practice of the Committees of the London County Council in publishing a report every week. But this Committee would not be on the same basis at all. The disposition throughout the country was to delegate powers to the Education Committee, and practically to convert it into a separate and independent body. It would not report from week to week The decisions of an ordinary Committee had to be adopted by the County Council before they had any effect, but to the Education Committee no end of things would be delegated absolutely, and it was in the small matters that possibilities of jobbery arose. In the interests of municipal purity it was of the greatest importance that every conceivable check should be placed upon possibilities of that character. If the public were deprived of the right of examining documents and seeing what was going on, a blow would be struck against the dignity and usefulness of public institutions, and against the confidence which the public at present reposed in them.
  MR. WALTER LONGsaid he had already pointed out that it was very undesirable that there should be any distinction made between the Education Committee of the London County Council and

  789
  those of any of the other Councils. In the Local Government Act the Municipal Corporations Act was applied to the London County Council.
  SIR JAMES WOODHOUSE: Where in the provisions is the right of the ratepayers applied?
  MR. WALTER LONGsaid he was informed that under Section 233 of the Municipal Corporations Act the minutes of proceedings of a Council were open to the inspection of the burgesses. That section was applied to the County Councils by Section 75 of the Local Government Act, 1888. That was the information given to him, and he was confident it was correct. If the hon. Member for Huddersfield was correct the Amendment was unnecessary; if he was incorrect they reverted to the position to which the Government adhered viz., that there should be no distinction between this Committee and the Committee of any other local authority.
  MR. BRYCEsaid the House were in a most unsatisfactory position, the President of the Local Government Board having practically said that he did not know whether the minutes of the Committee of the London County Council would be open to inspection or not. Assuming the Committee not to be subject to the Municipal Corporations Act the minutes would not be open to inspection. Since the passing of the Act of 1870 every ratepayer had had a right to inspect the minutes, and no harm had ensued, but that right was now to be taken away.
  MR. WALTER LONGsaid that that was not the case. The right of inspection was conferred by Section 75 of the Local Government Act and Section 233 of the Municipal Corporations Act. The section which the House was discussing had nothing to do with either, and the right hon. Gentleman was wrong in thinking that the Government were seeking to alter the law.
  MR. BRYCEcontended that the House ought to be told positively whether or not the ratepayers would have the right
  790
  of inspecting the minutes of the Committee which would now correspond to the School Board. That right had been enjoyed hitherto; why then should it now be taken away?
  MR. WHITLEYthought the matter ought to be cleared up. The Government, althongh they were not seeking to alter the law, were seeking to alter the rights of the ratepayers.
  MR. WALTER LONG: No.
  MR. WHITLEYasked whether at present the ratepayers had not a right to inspect the minute-books of the education authority.
  MR. WALTER LONG: Only of the School Board.
  MR. WHITLEYsaid that that being so by this Bill the Government were ipso facto depriving the ratepayers of that right. How then could the right hon. Gentleman say that the Government were not proposing any alteration of the existing state of things? As the Government seemed not to know what the law really was he suggested that they should insert this Amendment, and, if it were found to be unnecessary, remove the superfluous clause in another place.
  MR. SAMUEL EVANSwas understood to read a section of the Act of 1888 by which it was provided that Committees need not report their proceedings to the Council. That being so, the provisions of the section to which reference had been made would not give the right asked for in the Amendment.
  MR. LOUGHasked why the people of London should be deprived of a right they had hitherto enjoyed? The argument was that no exception should be made to the general law. But London was just a case in which exceptions should be made, and departures from the general law were constantly being made in connection with the Metropolis. He suggested that the words should be now inserted, and if they were found to be surplusage they could be struck out in another place.
  MR. WALTER LONGsaid he could not agree to put in these words, holding the views which he had expressed, but he recognised fully that there was some element of doubt as to what the law exactly was. He was quite prepared to undertake on behalf of the Government that if there was any doubt which would leave this Committee, in consequence of this Amendment, in a position different from that occupied by the Committee of any other local authority—[Cries of "No, no," from the Opposition, and "We want the rights we now have in London."] Those rights applied solely to education accounts, and if that section were incorporated in this Bill it would alter the law as to the inspection of the whole of the accounts of the County Council. That was not what hon. Members wanted. It was said that the Lord Chief Justice had decided that the law would render the accounts open to inspection. If that was the case, and if this section affected that right, he would undertake on behalf of the Government to propose an Amendment in another place which would remove that difficulty.
  MR. BRYCEasked whether the right hon. Gentleman's undertaking would go the length that, if it should be found that the right of inspecting minutes of Committees was possessed in the case of municipal boroughs, he would assimilate the law to that relating to municipal boroughs.
  MR. WALTER LONG: Certainly.
  MR. WILLIAM JONESsaid the following had beeen placed in his hands—
  "As to the minutes of the Council, the inspection has been held to extend to the minutes of Committees which have been submitted to the Council for approval, whether approved or not."
  The question was, therefore, whether the minutes of the education Committee under this Bill would be submitted to the County Council; if so, they would come under the provision, and the public would have a right to inspect them.
  DR. MACNAMARAasked whether the right hon. Gentleman undertook
  792
  that the present right of the ratepayers of access to the minutes and accounts of the School Board would be perpetuated.
  MR. WALTER LONGthought that was rather a difficult question to answer. If it was perpetuated as it stood, it would cover other ground altogether. He thought the ground was very well covered by the point of the hon. Member for the Arfon division. If there was any limitation imposed by Section 82 upon the rights conferred by Sections 75 and 233 of the Municipal Corporations Act, the Government would take care that that limitation was removed.
  MR. YOXALLasked leave to withdraw the Amendment.
  Amendment, by leave, withdrawn.
  *MR. MANSFIELDsaid the idea of the Amendment he desired to move was that there should not be a fixity of tenure with regard to the managers of schools. There vas no provision in the parent act in any way fixing the term for which managers were appointed. That managers should be periodically re-elected was very important, as long terms of office were not conducive to efficiency. He begged to move.
  Amendment proposed to the Bill—
  "In page 4, line 6, at end, to add the words '(10) The managers of all public elementary schools shall not be elected for a longer period than three years, at the end of which period they shall be eligible for re-election.'"—(Mr. Mansfield.)
  Question proposed, "That those words be there inserted in the Bill."
  *SIR WILLIAM ANSONsaid the hon. member had called attention to an undoubted defect in the parent Act, and he was prepared to accept the Amendment if the word "appointed" was substituted for "elected".
  MR. MANSFIELDsaid he was quite prepared to make the alteration.
  Proposed Amendment amended by leaving out the word "elected" in line 2,

  793
  and inserting the word "appointed."—(Sir William Anson.)
  MR. MANSFIELDsaid the Amendment which he now desired to move proposed to give power to the local education authority to close any public elementary school which in their opinion on the grounds of economy or the inefficiency of the teaching or the premises was unnecessary. He thought it was desirable that this power should be giver, even though it might not be often used. It certainly would tend towards efficiency, and help to raise the non-provided schools to a higher standard. Many schools required a great deal of improvement; and that improvement would be carried out if the local authority had power to close such schools. He had no fear that the local authority would use its power in an arbitrary manner. It had been pointed out again and again in the course of the discussions that the London County Council was very favourable to voluntary schools; and if they had this power it would enable them to improve the standard of these schools. A school would not be closed where it could be avoided, because another school would have to be built. Therefore, there was no danger of the power being abused. In the interests of efficiency and economy, he asked leave to move his Amendment, which he hoped the Government would accept.
  Amendment proposed to the Bill—
  "After the words last inserted to insert the words '(11) The local education authority shall have power to close any public elementary school which in their opinion is unnecessary on the grounds of economy, or the inefficiency of the teaching or of the premises.'"—(Mr. Mansfield.)
  Question proposed, "That those words be there inserted in the Bill."
  *SIR WILLIAM ANSONsaid he believed that the Amendment was unnecessary. The schools would be bound to carry out the directions of the local education authority, and maintain a certain standard of efficiency; and if they failed in that they would lose their right to be maintained. Further, the local education authority and the
  794
  Board of Education could determine whether a school was or was not necessary; and there was ample security not only in the Act of 1870, but in the Act of last year that the local authority need not maintain any school which was not up to the proper standard.
  Question put, and negatived.
  MR. LOUGHsaid the Amendment which he was about to move provided that no teacher should be required, as a condition of being appointed or continuing a teacher in any school or college aided or maintained by the local education authority, to belong to any particular religious denomination, or to attend or abstain from attending any place of religious worship or religious observance or Sunday school. He thought such a provision was more required in London than in any other part of the country. The system of imposing tests on teachers was perhaps most objectionable of all the provisions in the Act of last year. All teachers in elementary schools, whether voluntary or provided, would now he civil servants; and it was very repugnant to the general feeling of the community that any religious test should be imposed upon them. There was, of course, no objection to a test as to the ability of a teacher to discharge his duties; but in London especially it was very obnoxious to the general feeling that any test of a religious character should be applied. A very strong feeling existed regarding the matter; and he hoped the Government would be able to remove it.
  Amendment proposed to the Bill—
  "After the words last inserted, to insert the words '(11) No teacher shall be required as a condition of being appointed or continuing a teacher in any school or college aided or maintained by the local education authority to belong to any particular religious denomination, or to attend or abstain from attending any place of religious worship, or religious observance, or Sunday school."—(Mr. Lough.)
  Question proposed, "That those words be there inserted in the Bill."
  *SIR WILLIAM ANSONsaid he was not prepared to alter the law as it now stood. The speech of the hon. Member suggested some misconception on the

  795
  matter. There was at present only one sort of teacher who in certain circumstances was subjected to any kind of test, and that was the head teacher of a school the trust deed of which required that the teachers should be members of a particular Church. The House decided that where there was such a trust deed the deed should not be interfered with, so far as the head teacher was concerned. The Act of last year, however, left it open to the managers to appoint the other teachers from persons of any denomination. The Government could not go further than that. The manager who wanted a teacher of a particular sort could not be prevented from ascertaining in one way or another which candidate was most likely to give the teaching required. I the teacher was considered unsuitable on educational grounds the local education authority could, under last year's Act, refuse to ratify the appointment, so that security was taken for the teacher's efficiency. With regard to the proposal that the teacher should not be required to attend any place of religious worship or observance, he would remind the House that last autumn they discussed for some time the question whether they should put into the Bill provisions which would make it impossible for the teacher to do any work or enter into obligation outside his teaching duties. The House was then satisfied that provisions of that nature should be inserted in the Code. The undertaking he gave to the House was carried out, and there was now a provision in the Code stating that every engagement of a teacher must contain the following clause—
  "A teacher shall not be required to perform or abstain from performing any duty outside the ordinary school hours or unconnected with the ordinary work of the school."
  Therefore a teacher could be under no obligation to his managers to attend a place of religious observance or a Sunday school.
  MR. BRYCEsaid he did not at all agree with the view presented by the hon. Baronet on this question. The hon. Baronet put it as if under the Act of last year all teacher ships were thrown open, and no test could be applied except in the case of a trust deed requiring the
  796
  head teacher to be a member of a particular religious denomination. But what the Act of last year really said was that in non provided schools assistant teachers and pupil teachers might be appointed, if it were thought fit, without reference to their religious denomination. That left all teachers subject to tests at the option of the managers. The only effective way to deal with tests was to adopt the plan employed in the Act of 1871, which forbade any tests in the Universities of Oxford and Cambridge. This was a very great grievance. It was a monstrous proposition, and inconsistent with the free institutions under which they claimed to live, that these sectarian tests should be imposed on a body of public servants. A large number of managers of denominational schools were pledged to support and maintain sectarianism; and, therefore, they would feel bound to impose sectarian tests. The only dispensation given was the paltry provision by which assistant teachers and pupil teachers might be relieved from such a restriction. To his mind, so far from this being a small grievance, it was a small exemption, all the rest being grievances. Nothing would satisfy those who strongly objected to the provisions of the Act of last year except the throwing open of all teacher-ships without their being subject to any religious test whatever. Previously, the voluntary schools were supported, to some extent at least, by members of a particular religious denomination; but now they were all public schools, and the teachers were just as much public servants as the members of any other branch of the public service. Under those circumstances, it was monstrous that a sectarian test should be imposed on a large body of public servants. His hon. friend did well in moving his Amendment, and he hoped he had succeeded in explaining to the Parliamentary Secretary to the Board of Education the ground and nature of the grievance.
  MR. GEORGE WHITEsaid he thought the House would be surprised at the manner in which the Parliamentary Secretary to the Board of Education had dealt with the Amendment. As the Bill only applied to

  797
  London, the Amendment raised a smaller question than that connected with the Bill of last year; but the hon. Baronet must be aware that no part of the Act of last year was more resented throughout the country that the imposition of tests on teachers. He was, therefore, very much surprised that the Government should propose to perpetuate so great an injustice which, to the credit of hon. Gentlemen opposite, was not defended by them. Formerly, the voluntary schools were supported to the extent of one third by private subscriptions; but now they were maintained solely from public funds. He would ask the Parliamentary Secretary to the Board of Education to justify a position which precluded a head teacher from being appointed unless he were a member of the Church of England. That was practically the position. There might be cases in which broad-minded clergymen would appoint teachers who were not members of the Church of England; but he was quite sure that there would not be very many under the permissive clause proposed in the Bill. He knew of instances where Nonconformist teachers in such schools were called upon to conform to the doctrines of the Church of England or to quit. He knew of two such cases already. Only a day or two ago there was an advertisement in The School muster which clearly showed that even the provision of the Act of last year was not being complied with. Teachers were advertised for who were expected to discharge extraneous duties, such as superintending Sunday schools, keeping order in church, and matters of that kind. He protested against such an injustice being perpetuated. Nothing caused more resentment and more opposition to the Act of last year than the imposition of tests on teachers; and that it should be carried into the Metropolis showed a great want of foresight and prudence on the part of the Government. He could assure the hon. Gentleman that he was bringing into London a condition of things which he would be sorry for before many months were over. He would ask whether any hon. Gentleman could justify the position that public servants paid entirely out of public funds should be prevented from reaching the highest
  798
  point in their profession, and, in many cases, from entering the profession at all, because they belonged to a certain Church. This was a principle that existed in the country generations ago, but it had remained for the present Government to perpetuate it in this new Act. It was a principle which he was sure no fair minded man would get up to defend.
  MR. LLOYD-GEORGEsaid he agreed with the hon. Member for North-West Norfolk in regard to the gravity of the question in the public mind. It had deeply stirred hundreds of thousands, he might say millions, of people in the country He did not think the Parliamentary Secretary had treated it with sufficient seriousness, He would give a concrete case which, he thought, was only one out of thousands that could be quoted in different parts of the country. Take a parish school in which ninety in 100 were Nonconformists. Probably the other ten might be the children of parents who were members of the Church of England. In that school the headmaster must be a communicant of the Church of the minority in the parish. It was true that the County Council could make Nonconformists pupil teachers, but when they went beyond the stage of pupil teachers the largest promotion they could receive was to the position of assistant teachers. They knew perfectly well that they could not be head teachers in their own parish school. That was a monstrous system. It was imposing a disqualification on good and loyal citizens. Practically all the farmers in the parish were Nonconformists.
  MR. WHITMOREsaid this was a London Bill.
  MR. LLOYD-GEORGEsaid there were many cases in London of a similar character. He was discussing the principle. If hon. Members opposite gave up the case with regard to the country he would have no more to say.
  MR. WHITMOREsaid he thought the hon. Member's argument was addressed to the case of this particular Bill. There were no farmers in London and the provisions of this clause could only apply

  799
  to the voluntary schools in London. He did not think the objections the hon. Member was raising to the principle of the Act of last year were applicable to this Bill.
  MR. LLOYD-GEORGEsaid he thought the hon. Member was wrong as to there being no farmers in London; at any rate the Agricultural Rating Act applied to London. This was a Bill to adapt and extend the Act of last year to London. The principle was in the Bill of last year and if the hon. Member for Chelsea regretted and apologised for supporting that Bill he was prepared to give that up. There were denominational schools in London to which children went very often, not so much because their parents were communicants of that particular Church but because there was no other school convenient. There were many districts in London where children of a tender age must go to the voluntary school because it was the only one within reasonable reach. Why should a privilege which was given to the children of one class of ratepayers be denied to the children of another class? It was a perfectly monstrous principle which was only applied to this branch of the Civil Service. The whole of the salaries, speaking roughly, in the voluntary schools of this country, amounted to £3,600,000. These salaries were paid by the State. Why should the State that employed these teachers draw a distinction between one man and another simply on account of creed? He was not surprised that there were millions of people who resented it as an insult to their religious faith. Did the hon. Gentleman approve of this sort of advertisement?—
  "Wanted, mistress, trained and certificated, must be confirmed, and communicant; require to attend Sunday school alternate Sundays, and every Sunday keep order among children in the church. Salary to be arranged in consultation with the County authorities."
  That salary would be paid by the County authorities out of the rates and money received from the Imperial Exchequer for the purpose of assisting a sectarian school, and for the purpose of keeping order in the church of one denomination. The test was that no one had a right to apply except a communicant in
  800
  a particular Church. This Amendment would make it clear that the Legislature disapproved of that, and considered it grossly unfair. He would not say unfair merely to the teachers who were ruled out, but unfair to the school itself, because, in the appointment of teachers, there ought to be the widest range of selection. There were 1,200 voluntary school appointments in London, and the whole of these were confined to men and women of one sect, although everybody contributed to the Treasury out of which they were paid. It was wrong in principle, and unfair to the children and the teachers. He thought the House of Commons ought to express its disapproval of the action of the Government.
  DR. MACNAMARAsaid this was a great question of public policy. There were in London 1,200 public servants in voluntary schools, every farthing of whose salaries was paid for out of rates and taxes. In the past they had been paid partly by private and charitable contributions, and that might be regarded as a good reason for superimposing on their other qualifications something in the nature of a religious test. Who was to settle the qualifications for those teachers? Would the hon. Member for Chelsea say that any private agency, religious or otherwise, had any right to superimpose any special qualification over and above that demanded by the authority which found the money? This thing could not be maintained. Of course the noble Lord the Member for Greenwich would at once turn round and ask—What are we to do for religious instruction? If religious instruction had to depend on religious tests imposed on public servants paid out of public funds, it was resting on a very rotten foundation. Teachers were only human, and nothing undermined their probity and independence like denominational tests. He should be the last man to say anything disparaging of them, but religious tests were a premium on hypocrisy. Those who desired the continuance of a particular form of religious instruction were ill serving their purpose when they imposed tests on public servants. He knew dozens of cases in which, in order to secure appointments in denominational schools, head teachers had changed their religion—as any human

  801
  being would do who had considerable obligations resting on him. He did not put teachers on a higher platform than the public generally. Those who desired for their children the religious instruction of a particular denomination must find other means of giving it than through public servants on whom religious tests were imposed.
  MR. SAMUEL EVANSsaid if the Government desired to make this Bill work smoothly it would be wise to have regard to the position which had been rendered perfectly plain by the proceedings in the country. Appeals had been made to the other side to get up and defend this monstrous proposal, but hon. Members could not do it. He would put the case from the point of view of expediency. Suppose a man who was a ratepayer in London applied for a position as head teacher in London, and he was informed that he could only get the appointment if he was a communicant of the Church of England and was willing
  to work in the Sunday school, but that otherwise he could not. That teacher might say, "If these positions are refused to me, I refuse to pay my rates." If the Government would abolish religious tests as they were now asked to do they would sweep away a great deal of the opposition to the Bill, and there would be a better prospect of its working smoothly.
  MR. MOONsaid hon. Members opposite had pressed for a reply to the question why head teacherships in voluntary schools should be reserved to those professing a particular creed. He thought they in return might be asked the question whether they did not think that some reasonable compensation should not be given to those who provided the fabrics.
  Question put.
  The House divided: Ayes, 88; Noes, 173. (Division List No. 172.)

  AYES.

  Abraham, William (Rhondda)

  Griffith, Ellis J.

  Roberts, John Bryn (Eifion)

  Allan Charles P. (Glouc. Stroud

  Gurdon, Sir W. Brampton

  Roberts, John H. (Denbighs.)

  Barran, Rowland Hirst

  Harmsworth, R. Leicester

  Roe, Sir Thomas

  Beaumont, Wentworth, C. B.

  Hayne, Rt. Hon. Charles Seale

  Rose, Charles Day

  Black, Alexander William

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

  Runciman, Walter

  Bolton, Thomas Dolling

  Humphreys-Owen, Arthur C.

  Samuel, Herbert L. (Cleveland)

  Broadhurst, Henry

  Hutchinson, Dr. Charles Fredk.

  Shackleton, David James

  Brown, George M. (Edinburgh

  Jacoby, James Alfred

  Shaw, Thomas (Hawich, B.)

  Bryce, Rt. Hon. James

  Jones, Wm. (Carnarvonshire)

  Shipman, Dr. John G.

  Buchanan, Thomas Ryburn

  Lambert, George

  Sinclair, John (Forfarshire)

  Caldwell, James

  Langley, Batty

  Soares, Ernest J.

  Campbell-Bannerman, Sir H.

  Lawson, Sir Wilfrid (Cornwall)

  Stevenson, Francis S.

  Causton, Richard Knight

  Leigh, Sir Joseph

  Taylor, Theodore C. (Radcliffe)

  Cawley, Frederick

  Levy, Maurice

  Tennant, Harold John

  Cremer, William Randal

  Lewis, John Herbert

  Thomas, Abel (Carmarthen, E.

  Dalziel, James Henry

  Lloyd-George, David

  Thomas, David Alfred (Merthyr

  Davies, Alfred (Carmarthen)

  Lough, Thomas

  Tomkinson, James

  Dewar, John A. (Inverness-shire

  Macnamara, Dr. Thomas J.

  Toulmin, George

  Dilke, Rt. Hon. Sir Charles

  M'Laren, Sir Chas Benjamin

  Walton, Joseph (Barnsley)

  Douglas, Charles M. (Lanark)

  Mansfield, Horace Rendall

  White, George (Norfolk)

  Duncan, J. Hastings

  Markham, Arthur Basil

  Whitley J. H. (Halifax)

  Edwards, Frank

  Morgan, J. Lloyd (Carmarthen)

  Wilson, F. W. (Norfolk, Mid)

  Elibank, Master of

  Moulton, George Fletcher

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

  Emmott, Alfred

  Newnes, Sir George

  Wilson, John (Durham, Mid.)

  Evans, Saml. T. (Glamorgan)

  Partington, Oswald

  Woodhouse, Sir J. T. (Huddersf'd

  Fenwick, Charles

  Philipps, John Wynford

  Yoxall, James Henry

  Ferguson, R. C. Munro (Leith

  Pirie, Duncan V.

  Foster, Sir Michael (Lond, Univ

  Price, Robert John

  TELLERS FOR THE AYES—

  Fuller, J. M. F.

  Priestley, Arthur

  Mr. Herbert Gladstone and

  Furness, Sir Christopher

  Rea, Russell

  Mr. William M'Arthur.

  Goddard, Daniel Ford

  Rickett, J. Compton

  NOES.

  Anson, Sir William Reynell

  Aubrey-Fletcher, Rt. Hn. Sir H.

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

  Arnold-Forster, Hugh O.

  Bagot, Capt. Josceline FitzRoy

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

  Arrol, Sir William

  Bailey, James (Walworth)

  Balfour, Kenneth R. (Christch

  Atkinson, Right Hon. John

  Bain, Colonel James Robert

  Banbury, Sir Frederick George

  Bhownaggree, Sir M. M.

  Grenfell, William Henry

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

  Bigwood, James

  Gretton, John

  Orr-Ewing, Charles Lindsay

  Bill, Charles

  Groves, James Grimble

  Palmer, Walter (Salisbury)

  Blundell, Colonel Henry

  Guest, Hon. Ivor Churchill

  Pease, Herbert Pike (Darlingt'n

  Bond, Edward

  Guthrie, Walter Murray

  Percy, Earl

  Bowles, Lt.-Col. H. F. (Middlesex

  Hall, Edward Marshall

  Pilkington, Colonel Richard

  Brassey, Albert

  Hamilton, Rt. Hn. Ld. G. (Midx

  Platt-Higgins, Frederick

  Bull, William James

  Hardy, Laurence (Kent, Ashf'd

  Pretyman, Ernest George

  Burdett-Coutts, W.

  Hare, Thomas Leigh

  Pryce-Jones, Lt.-Col. Edward

  Butcher, John George

  Heath, James (Staffords N. W.)

  Purvis, Robert

  Campbell, J. H. M. (Dublin Univ

  Henderson, Sir Alexander

  Randles, John S.

  Cautley, Henry Strother

  Hogg, Lindsay

  Ratcliff, R. F.

  Cavendish, V. C. W. (Derbyshire

  Howard, Jn. (Kent, Faver'h'm

  Reid, James (Greenock)

  Cayzer, Sir Charles William

  Jessel, Capt. Herbert Merton

  Remnant, Jas. Farquharson

  Cecil, Evelyn (Aston Manor)

  Johnstone, Heywood

  Renshaw, Sir Charles Bine

  Cecil, Lord Hugh (Greenwich)

  Kenyon, Hon. G. T. (Denbigh

  Renwick, George

  Chamberlain, Rt. Hon. J. (Birm

  Kenyon-Slaney, Col. W. (Salop

  Ridley, S. F. (Bethnal Green)

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

  Kerr, John

  Roberts, Samuel (Sheffield)

  Chapman, Edward

  Keswick, William

  Robertson, H. (Hackney)

  Charrington, Spencer

  Kilbride, Denis

  Round, Rt. Hon. James

  Churchill, Winston Spencer

  Knowles, Lees

  Sackville, Col. S. G. Stopford-

  Clive, Captain Percy A.

  Lambton, Hon. Fredk. Wm.

  Sadler, Col. Samuel Alexander

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

  Law, Andrew Bonar (Glasgow

  Seely, Charles Hilton (Lincoln)

  Collings, Right Hon. Jesse

  Lawrence, Wm. F. (Liverpool

  Sinclair, Louis (Romford)

  Colomb, Sir John Chas. Ready

  Lawson, John Grant (Yorks, N. R.

  Smith, Abel H. (Hertford, East

  Colston, Chas. Edw H. Athole

  Lees, Sir Elliott (Birkenhead)

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

  Cox, Irwin Edwd. Bainbridge

  Legge, Col. Hon. Heneage

  Smith, James, Parker (Lanarks.)

  Cross, Alexander (Glasgow)

  Leveson-Gower, Frederick, N. S.

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

  Cross, H. Shepherd (Bolton)

  Llewellyn, Evan Henry

  Stanley, Lord (Lancs.)

  Crossley, Rt. Hon. Sir Savile

  Lockwood, Lieut.-Col. A. R.

  Stewart, Sir M. J. M'Taggart

  Cust, Henry John C.

  Loder, Gerald Walter Erskine

  Stirling-Maxwell, Sir Jn. M.

  Dalkeith, Earl of

  Long, Col. Chas. W. (Evesham

  Talbot, Lord E. (Chichester)

  Denny, Colonel

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

  Talbot, Rt. Hn. J. G. (Oxford Univ.

  Disraeli, Coningsby Ralph

  Lowther, C. (Cumb. Eskdale)

  Tomlinson, Sir Wm. Edw. M.

  Douglas, Rt. Hon. A. Akers

  Lucas, Col. Francis (Lowestof't

  Valentia, Viscount

  Doxford, Sir Wm. Theodore

  Lucas, Reginald J. (Portsmouth

  Walker, Col. William Hall

  Elliot, Hon. A. Ralph Douglas

  Lyttelton, Hon. Alfred

  Walrond, Rt. Hn. Sir William H.

  Faber, George Denison (York)

  Macdona, John Cumming

  Warde, Colonel C. E.

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

  Maconochie, A. W.

  Webb, Colonel William George

  Fielden, Edward Brocklehurst

  M'Killop, James (Stirlingshire

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

  Finch, Rt. Hon. George H.

  Majendie, James A. H.

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

  Finlay, Sir Robert Bannatyne

  Massey-Mainwaring, Hn. W. F.

  Wharton, Rt. Hon. J. Lloyd

  Fisher, William Hayes

  Meysey-Thompson, Sir H. M.

  Whiteley, H. (Ashton und. Lyne

  Flower, Ernest

  Milvain, Thomas

  Whitmore, Charles Algernon

  Forster, Henry William

  Montagu, G. (Huntingdon)

  Willoughby de Eresby, Lord

  Foster, P. S. (Warwick, S. W.

  Montagu, Hon. J. Scott (Hants.)

  Willox, Sir John Archibald

  Fyler, John Arthur

  Moon, Edward Robert Pacy

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

  Galloway, William Johnson

  Morgan, David J. (Walthamstow

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

  Godson, Sir Augustus Fredk.

  Morgan, Hn. F. (Monm'thsh.)

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

  Gordon, Hn. J. E. (Elgin & Nrn

  Morton, Arthur H. Aylmer

  Wylie, Alexander

  Gordon, Maj Evans (T'r Haml'ts

  Mount, William Arthur

  Wyndham, Rt. Hon. George

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

  Murray, Rt. Hn. A. Graham (Bute

  Goulding, Edward Alfred

  Murray, Charles J. (Coventry)

  TELLERS FOR THE NOES—

  Greene, Sir E. W. (Bury St. Ed.

  Myers, William Henry

  Mr. Anstruther and Mr.

  Greene, W. Raymond (Cambs

  Nicholson, William Graham

  Fellowes.

  MR. LLOYD-GEORGEsaid he wished to move the Amendment standing in the name of the hon. Member for Morley. He thought it was a perfectly fair proposition, and he could not see how anyone could complain of it. He begged to move—
  Amendment proposed to the Bill—
  "After the words last inserted, to insert the words, '(10) In every school for education other than elementary aided by the local authority the authority shall be represented on the governing body in such proportion as will, as nearly as
  804
  may be, correspond to the proportion which the aid given bears to the income from all other sources.'"—(Mr. Lloyd-George.)
  Question proposed, "That those words be there inserted in the Bill."
  SIR WILLIAM ANSONsaid that if a secondary school desired the assistance of the local educational authority, the local education authority were not bound to give it anything, but they might say they would give so much and would, as a condition of the grant, have

  805
  such and such representation on the governing body. It was better to leave the local education authority to make its own terms, because the school must accept those terms if it wanted the money. The hon. Member's Amendment might perhaps force on the local authority
  a representation which might be inconvenient.
  Question put.
  The House divided:—Ayes, 66; Noes, 152. (Division List No. 173.)

  AYES.

  Abraham, William (Rhondda)

  Jones, William (Carnarvonsh.

  Shackleton, David James

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

  Lambert, George

  Shaw, Charles E. (Stafford)

  Barran, Rowland Hirst

  Langley, Batty

  Shipman, Dr. John G.

  Beaumont, Wentworth C. B.

  Lawson, Sir Wilfrid (Cornwall

  Sinclair, John (For farshire)

  Black, Alexander William

  Leigh, Sir Joseph

  Soares, Ernest J.

  Bolton, Thomas Dolling

  Levy, Maurice

  Taylor, Theodore C. (Radcliffe)

  Broadhurst, Henry

  Lewis, John Herbert

  Tennant, Harold John

  Caldwell, James

  Lough, Thomas

  Thomas, A. (Carmarthen, E.)

  Causton, Richard Knight

  Macnamara, Dr. Thomas J.

  Thomas, David A. (Merthyr)

  Cawley, Frederick

  M'Laren, Sir Charles Benj.

  Tomkinson, James

  Cremer, William Randal

  Mansfield, Horace Rendall

  Toulmin, George

  Crooks, William

  Markham, Arthur Basil

  Trevelyan, Charles Philips

  Davies, Alfred (Carmarthen)

  Morgan, J. Lloyd (Carmarthen

  Walton, Joseph (Barnsley)

  Dilke, Rt. Hon. Sir Charles

  Philipps, John Wynford

  White, George (Norfolk)

  Duncan, J. Hastings

  Pirie, Duncan V.

  Whitley, J. H. (Halifax)

  Edwards, Frank

  Priestley, Arthur

  Wilson, F. W. (Norfolk, Mid)

  Elibank, Master of

  Rea, Russell

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

  Fenwick, Charles

  Rickett, J. Compton

  Wilson, John (Durham, Mid.)

  Fuller, J. M. F.

  Roberts, John Bryn (Eifion)

  Goddard, Daniel Ford

  Roberts, John H. (Denbighs.)

  Griffith, Ellis J.

  Roe, Sir Thomas

  TELLERS FOR THE AYES—

  Gurdon, Sir W. Brampton

  Rose, Charles Day

  Mr. Lloyd-George and Mr.

  Hayne, Rt. Hn. Charles Seale-

  Runciman, Walter

  Samuel Evans.

  Hutchinson, Dr. Charles Fredk.

  Samuel, Herbt. L. (Cleveland)

  NOES.

  Anson, Sir William Reynell

  Colston, Chas. Edw H. Athole

  Hogg, Lindsay

  Arnold-Forster, Hugh O.

  Cox, Irwin Edward Bainbridge

  Howard, John (Kent Faversham)

  Arrol, Sir William

  Cross, Alexander (Glasgow)

  Jessel, Captain Herbert Merton

  Atkinson, Rt. Hon. John

  Cross, Herb. Shepherd (Bolton

  Kenyon, Hon. G. T. (Denbigh

  Aubrey-Fletcher, Rt. Hn. Sir H.

  Crossley, Rt. Hon. Sir Savile

  Kerr, John

  Bagot, Capt. Josceline FitzRoy

  Dalkeith, Earl of

  Keswick, William

  Bailey, James (Walworth)

  Denny, Colonel

  Knowles, Lees

  Bain, Colonel James Robert

  Disraeli, Coningsby Ralph

  Lambton, Hon. Frederick Wm.

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

  Douglas, Rt. Hon. A. Akers-

  Law, Andrew Bonar (Glasgow)

  Balfour, Capt. C. B. (Hornsey)

  Doxford, Sir William Theodore

  Lawson, John Grant (Yorks. N. R.

  Balfour, Rt. Hn. Gerald W. (Leeds

  Elliot, Hon. A. Ralph Douglas

  Lees, Sir Elliott (Birkenhead)

  Bhownaggree, Sir M. M.

  Faber, George Denison (York)

  Legge, Col. Hon. Heneage

  Bigwood, James

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

  Leveson-Gower, Frederick N. S.

  Bill, Charles

  Fielden, Edward Brocklehurst

  Llewellyn, Evan Henry

  Blundell, Colonel Henry

  Finch, Rt. Hon. George H.

  Lockwood, Lieut.-Col. A. R.

  Bond, Edward

  Fisher, William Hayes

  Loder, Gerald Walter Erskine

  Bowles, Lt.-Col. H. F. (Middlesex

  Flower, Ernest

  Long, Col. Charles W. (Evesham

  Brassey, Albert

  Forster, Henry William

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

  Bull, William James

  Foster, P. S. (Warwick, S. W.

  Lowther, C. (Cumb. Eskdale)

  Burdett-Coutts, W.

  Fyler, John Arthur

  Lucas, Col. Francis (Lowestoft)

  Butcher, John George

  Galloway, William Johnson

  Lucas, Reginald J. (Portsmouth)

  Campbell, J. H. M. (Dublin Univ

  Gordon, Maj Evans- (T'r H'mlets

  Lyttelton, Hon. Alfred

  Cautley, Henry Strother

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

  Macdona, John Cumming

  Cavendish, V. C. W. (Derbyshire

  Gray, Ernest (West Ham)

  M'Killop, James (Stirlingshire

  Cayzer, Sir Charles William

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

  Majendie, James A. H.

  Cecil, Evelyn (Aston Manor)

  Greene, W. Raymond (Cambs

  Massey-Mainwaring, Hon. W. F.

  Cecil, Lord Hugh (Greenwich)

  Grenfell, William Henry

  Meysey-Thompson, Sir H. M.

  Chamberlain, Rt. Hon. J. (Birm

  Gretton, John

  Milvain, Thomas

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

  Groves, James Grimble

  Montagu, G. (Huntingdon)

  Chapman, Edward

  Guest, Hon. Ivor Churchill

  Montagu, Hon. J. Scott (Hants.

  Charrington, Spencer

  Guthrie, Walter Murray

  Morgan, David J. (Walthamst'w

  Clive, Captain Percy A.

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

  Morgan, Hn. F. (Monm'thsh.)

  Cochrane, Hn. Thos. H. A. E.

  Hardy, Laurence (Kent, Ashfd

  Morton, Arthur H. Aylmer

  Collings, Right Hon. Jesse

  Hare, Thomas Leigh

  Mount, William Arthur

  Colomb, Sir John Charles Ready

  Heath James (Staffords, N. W.

  Murray, Rt. Hn. A. Graham (Bute

  Murray, Charles J. (Coventry)

  Roberts, Samuel (Sheffield)

  Warde, Colonel C. E.

  Nicholson, William Graham

  Robertson, H. (Hackney)

  Webb, Colonel William George

  Nolan, Joseph (Louth, S.)

  Sackville, Col. S. G. Stopford-

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

  Orr-Ewing, Charles Lindsay

  Sadler, Col. Samuel Alexander

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

  Palmer, Walter (Salisbury)

  Seely, Charles Hilton (Lincoln

  Whiteley, H. (Ashton-und-Lyne

  Percy, Earl

  Sinclair, Louis (Romford)

  Whitmore, Charles Algernon

  Pilkington, Colonel Richard

  Smith, Abel., H. (Hertford, East

  Willoughby de Eresby, Lord

  Platt-Higgins, Frederick

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

  Willox, Sir John Archibald

  Pretyman, Ernest George

  Smith, James Parker (Lanarks

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

  Pryce-Jones, Lt.-Col. Edward

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

  Wortley, Rt. Hn. C. B. Stuart

  Purvis, Robert

  Stanley, Lord (Lancs.)

  Wylie, Alexander

  Randles, John S.

  Stirling-Maxwell, Sir John M.

  Wyndham, Rt. Hon. George

  Ratcliff, R. F.

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

  Reid, James (Greenock)

  Tomlinson, Sir Wm. Edw. M.

  TELLERS FOR THE NOES—

  Remnant, Jams Farquharson

  Valentia, Viscount

  Mr. Anstruther and Mr.

  Renwiek, George

  Walker, Col. William Hall

  Fellowes.

  Ridley, S. Forde (Bethnal Green)

  Walrond, Rt. Hn. Sir Wm. H.

  MR. LOUGHsaid he regarded the Amendment which he now proposed to move as of great importance. It dealt with the supplying of school places for all grades of education; and he particularly desired to raise the question of education other than elementary. In Section 16 of the Act of last year it was provided that if the local education authority did not provide a sufficient number of places for elementary education the Board of Education should be empowered to provide them. Therefore, he would not press the matter with regard to elementary education; but it was a matter of the greatest importance as regarded secondary education, as the demands of education were increasing every day. The School Board had had great difficulty in the matter owing to the Cockerton judgment; and the object of his Amendment was to provide machinery for, so to speak, "mandamusing" the local education authority in connection with higher grade education. He believed such a provision was more necessary in London than in any other part of the Kingdom. He did not know whether the whole of his Amendment was necessary or whether better words might not be suggested; but the matter was one of the greatest importance, and he hoped they would obtain satisfaction from the Government in connection with it.
  Amendment proposed to the Bill—
  "After the words last inserted, to insert the words, '(11) if at any time after the expiration of one year from the commencement of this Act it is represented to the Board of Education that there is in any district an insufficient amount of school accommodation under public management for any grade of education, and
  808
  the Board of Education are satisfied after inquiry that such is the case, the Board of Education shall direct the deficiency to be supplied in manner provided by Section sixteen of the principal Act.'"—(Mr. Lough.)
  Question proposed, "That those words be there inserted in the Bill."
  *SIR WILLIAM ANSONsaid that the hon. Gentleman must know that he was very fully alive to the needs of London in respect of secondary education, but the Amendment of the hon. Gentleman appeared to him to be impracticable. It was perfectly easy to say whether there was or was not a proper supply of school places for elementary education; but secondary education, unlike elementary education, was not compulsory; and the means of obtaining secondary education were extremely varied. In one particular area a different kind of secondary education might be desired to that in another, and the Board of Education would have to undertake an elaborate course of inspection and inquiry, at the end of which it would probably have no material at its disposal to justify it in putting compulsion on the local authority. The local authority would be better able to know the needs of any particular locality than the Board of Education, and he would ask the hon. Gentleman not to compel the Board of Education to put any such compulsion on the local education authority.
  MR. J. H. LEWISsaid when the principal Act was under discussion it was pointed out over and over again that unless something mandatory was done the local authority would not do their duty in regard to secondary education, as their time would be occupied

  809
  with the details of elementary education. Those prophecies had been borne out by the facts, as practically nothing in the direction of secondary education had been done, and there was no prospect of anything substantial being done for some time to come Secondary education was the crying need of the country; its proper organisation was even more important than that of elementary education, and the Amendment would ensure something, at any rate, being done in the right direction. The hon. Baronet had raised unnecessary difficulties. The Amendment could do no harm, while, on the other hand, it might be the means of promoting one of the most important branches of education which
  at present, in consequence of the pressure of other duties, was only too likely to be neglected.
  MR. SAMUEL EVANSpointed out that higher education now included, in addition to technical education, such matters as the training of pupil teachers and the provision of evening continuation and higher grade schools. It was, therefore, very desirable that some mandatory provision should be inserted in the Bill.
  Question put.
  The House divided:—Ayes, 65; Noes, 137. (Division List No. 174).

  AYES.

  Abraham, William (Rhondda)

  Hayne, Rt. Hon. Charles Seale-

  Samuel, Herbert L. (Cleveland)

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

  Hutchinson, Dr. Charles Fredk.

  Shackleton, David James

  Barran, Rowland Hirst

  Jones, Wm. (Carnarvonshire)

  Shaw, Charles E. (Stafford)

  Beaumont, Wentworth C. B.

  Lambert, George

  Shipman, Dr. John G.

  Black, Alexander William

  Langley, Batty

  Sinclair, John (Forfarshire)

  Bolton, Thomas Dolling

  Lawson, Sir Wilfrid (Cornwall

  Soares, Ernest J.

  Bryce, Right Hon. James

  Leigh, Sir Joseph

  Strachey, Sir Edward

  Caldwell, James

  Levy, Maurice

  Taylor, Theodore C. (Radcliffe)

  Causton, Richard Knight

  Lloyd-George, David

  Tennant, Harold John

  Cawley, Frederick

  Macnamara, Dr. Thomas J.

  Thomas, A. (Carmarthen, E.)

  Cremer, William Randal

  M'Arthur, William (Cornwall)

  Thomas, David A. (Merthyr)

  Crooks, William

  M'Laren, Sir Charles Benj.

  Toulmin, George

  Davies, Alfred (Carmarthen)

  Mansfield, Horace Rendall

  Trevelyan, Charles Philips

  Dilke, Rt. Hon. Sir Charles

  Markham, Arthur Basil

  Walton, Joseph (Barnsley)

  Duncan, J. Hastings

  Philipps, John Wynford

  White, George (Norfolk)

  Edwards, Frank

  Pirie, Duncan V.

  Whitley, J. H. (Halifax)

  Elibank, Master of

  Priestley, Arthur

  Wilson, F. W. (Norfolk, Mid)

  Evans, Saml. T. (Glamorgan)

  Rea, Russell

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

  Fenwick, Charles

  Rickett, J. Compton

  Wilson, John (Durham, Mid)

  Gladstone, Rt. Hn. Herbert J.

  Roberts, John Bryn (Eifion)

  Goddard, Daniel Ford

  Roberts, John H. (Denbighs.)

  TELLERS FOR THE AYES—

  Griffith, Ellis J.

  Roe, Sir Thomas

  Mr. Lough and Mr.

  Gurdon, Sir W. Brampton

  Rose, Charles Day

  Herbert Lewis.

  NOES.

  Anson, Sir William Reynell

  Cavendish, V. C. W. (Derbysh.

  Fielden, Edward Brocklehurst

  Arnold-Forster, Hugh O.

  Cecil, Evelyn (Aston Manor)

  Finch, Rt. Hn. George H.

  Arrol, Sir William

  Cecil, Lord Hugh (Greenwich)

  Fisher, William Hayes

  Atkinson, Rt. Hon. John

  Chamberlain, Rt. Hon. J. (Birm

  Forster, Henry William

  Aubrey-Fletcher, Rt. Hn. Sir H.

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

  Foster, Philip S. (Warwick, S. W.

  Bagot, Capt. Josceline Fitzroy

  Chapman, Edward

  Fyler, John Arthur

  Bailey, James (Walworth)

  Charrington, Spencer

  Galloway, William Johnson

  Bain, Colonel James Robert

  Clive, Captain Percy A.

  Gordon, Maj. Evans (Tr. Hmlts

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

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

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

  Halfour, Captain C. B. (Hornsey)

  Collings, Rt. Hon. Jesse

  Gray, Ernest (West Ham)

  Bhownaggree, Sir M. M.

  Colomb, Sir John Charles Ready

  Greene, Sir E. W. (Bury St. Ed.)

  Bigwood, James

  Colston, Chas. Edw. H. Athole

  Greene, W. Raymond- (Cambs

  Bill, Charles

  Cross, H. Shepherd (Bolton)

  Grenfell, William Henry

  Blundell, Colonel Henry

  Crossley, Rt. Hon. Sir Savile

  Gretton, John

  Bond, Edward

  Dalkeith, Earl of

  Groves, James Grimble

  Bowles, Lt.-Col. H. F. (Middlesex

  Disraeli, Coningsby Ralph

  Guest, Hon. Ivor Churchill

  Brassey, Albert

  Douglas, Rt. Hon. A. Akers-

  Guthrie, Walter Murray

  Burdett-Coutts, W.

  Doxford, Sir William Theodore

  Hamilton, Rt. Hn. Lord G. (Mid'x

  Butcher, John George

  Elliot, Hon. A. Ralph Douglas

  Hardy, Laurence (Kent, Ashfd

  Campbell, J. H. M. (Dublin Univ

  Faber, George Denison (York)

  Hare, Thomas Leigh

  Cautley, Henry Strother

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

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

  Hogg, Lindsay

  Montagu, G. (Huntingdon)

  Sinclair, Louis (Romford)

  Howard, Jno (Kent, Faver'hm

  Morgan, D. J. (Walthamstow)

  Smith, Abel H. (Hertford, East)

  Kemp, Lieut.-Colonel George

  Morgan, Hn. F. (Monm'thsh.)

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

  Kenyon, Hon. G. T. (Denbigh

  Morton, Arthur H. Aylmer

  Smith, James Parker (Lanarks.

  Kerr, John

  Mount, William Arthur

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

  Keswick, William

  Murray, Rt. Hn. A. Graham (Bute

  Stanley, Lord (Lancs.)

  Knowles, Lees

  Murray, Charles J. (Coventry)

  Stirling-Maxwell, Sir Jno. M.

  Lambton, Hon. Fredk. Wm.

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

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

  Law, Andrew Bonar (Glasgow)

  Orr-Ewing, Charles Lindsay

  Tomlinson, Sir Wm. Edw. M.

  Lawson, John Grant (Yorks, N. R.

  Palmer, Walter (Salisbury)

  Valentia, Viscount

  Lees, Sir Elliott (Birkenhead)

  Percy, Earl

  Walker, Col. William Hall

  Legge, Col. Hon. Heneage

  Pilkington, Colonel Richard

  Walrond, Rt. Hn. Sir William H.

  Leveson-Gower, Frederick N. S.

  Platt-Higgins, Frederick

  Warde, Colonel C. E.

  Lockwood, Lieut.-Col. A. R.

  Pretyman, Ernest George

  Webb, Colonel William George

  Loder, Gerald Walter Erskine

  Pryce-Jones, Lt.-Col. Edward

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

  Long, Col. Chas. W. (Evesham

  Purvis, Robert

  Whitely, H. (Ashton-und-Lyne

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

  Randles, John S.

  Willoughby de Eresby, Lord

  Lowther, C. (Cumb. Eskdale)

  Ratcliff, R. F.

  Willox, Sir John Archibald

  Lucas, Col. Francis (Lowstoft)

  Reid, James (Greenock)

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

  Lucas, Reginald, J. (Portsmouth)

  Remnant, James Farquharson

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

  Macdona, John Cumming

  Renwick, George

  Wylie, Alexander

  M'Killop, James (Stirlingshire

  Ridley, S. F. (Bethnal Green)

  Wyndham, Rt. Hon. George

  Majendie, James A. H.

  Roberts, Samuel (Sheffield)

  Massey-Mainwaring, Hn. W. F.

  Robertson, H. (Hackney)

  TELLERS FOR THE NOES—

  Meysey-Thompson, Sir H. M.

  Sackville, Col. S. G. Stopford

  Mr. Anstruther and Mr.

  Milvain, Thomas

  Sadler, Col. Samuel Alexander

  Fellowes.

  *MR. SOARESsaid the Amendment he had to propose raised a point of very considerable importance indeed, which had not been raised in the discussions on this Bill and wan only slightly alluded to in the discussions on the principal Act. The point was discussed on the question of powers and duties of the education authorities on the principal Act, but at the request of the Government discussion was deferred to a later stage which was however never reached owing to circumstances over which they on that side of the House had no control. What was the state of affairs he desired to remedy by this Amendment? In many districts throughout the country and in London there were cases in which the managers of denominational schools had transferred their schools to the School Board. They had found out that they did not receive the support they had expected from the denominationalists; consequently the strain was too much for them, and in days gone by they had handed over their schools to the School Board. The circumstances were entirely changed by this Bill and that strain was entirely removed. He wanted to know whether or not these denominations were to be allowed to take these schools back again and turn them into non-provided schools. An important point he desired the House to recollect was this, that all over the country members of the Government and their supporters had said over and over again that although the education policy
  812
  of the present Government destroyed School Boards not a single Board school would be affected, yet if this Amendment was not accepted many a Board school would be destroyed. The schools which had been transferred in the way he had indicated had been transferred under Section 23 of the Education Act of 1870 which set out the mode in which the transfer could be made. Section 24 of the same Act set out the manner of re-transfer, and by that section, in order that such a re-transfer could be made it required a resolution to be passed by two-thirds of the members of the School Board present at the time; and in the second place it required the consent of the Education Department. Under this Bill the powers of the old School Board were vested in the education authority, and therefore in order that a school might be re-transferred in the way he had indicated it would require in the first place the consent of two-thirds of the members of the education authority present at the time; and in the second place the consent of the Education Department. He thought if these transfers were permitted it would be grossly unfair because the conditions had entirely changed. The expenses for the maintenance of those schools were now borne by the public, and that was a very substantial change indeed. It must also be borne in mind that the teachers of those schools had hitherto been appointed by the public, but if a re-transfer were made they would

  813
  be appointed by the denomination and subject to all those religious tests which were so much disliked on this side of the House.
  This idea of a re-transfer was not by any means a chimerical one. There could be no doubt that the bishop in every diocese would proceed, as soon as he had a little leisure, to look about to see what further schools could be captured for the Church, and he would begin with those schools which had been transferred to the School Board. Although many a parson would be willing to see the status quo continued, unfortunately they would have, sooner or later, to climb down and consent to the demand of the Bishop. The hon. Baronet the Parliamentary Secretary to the Board of Education, speaking on this subject on 14th July last year said—
  "Quite apart from the difficulty of the two-thirds majority, which had been referred to, it had to be remembered that heretofore a school, when re-transferred, was tranferred to a body prepared to take over its maintenance, whereas now it would be transferred to a body which would continue to repair the buildings, but would not be responsible for the maintenance. Under these circumstances the position was so very different that he hoped the Government would promise favourably to consider the repeal of Clause 24 when the schedule was reached."
  On the same day the Prime Minister said:—
  "It was perfectly true that the policy of the Bill was that under certain circumstances new denominational schools might be built not at the expense of the denomination, but that was very different from a case in which a denomination was unwilling or unable to continue the cost of a school, and had transferred it to the local authority under conditions which made a re-transfer impossible unless there was some extraordinary change in local circumstances. It would be a rather strong order to say that there should be a transfer to a denomination when the burden of keeping up the schools had been so largely diminished. His own inclination would be to say that this power of re-transfer—which he thought was rarely if ever used—should not be continued, but that the denominations should be content with the very large powers given to them to erect denominational schools where there seemed to be a real necessity for them."
  He interpreted these speeches as amounting to a distinct pledge that the schools should not be transferred. He hoped the Government would see their way to redeem that pledge on this opportunity. It might be said that these schools had been leased at a nominal
  814
  rent. He was willing, if this power of re-transfer was done away with, that a substantial rent should be paid by the local education authority, or that the local education authority should buy the school at a fair price, making a deduction of all those moneys which had been provided by the country. He hoped the hon. Baronet in his reply would not say that this was a matter on which the County Council could be safely trusted because they had the power of veto. Although hon. Members on this side were entirely satisfied with the political composition of the London County Council at present, it was possible that some day that composition might change, just as the composition of the present Government was destined very speedily to change, and under those circumstances it might not be so satisfactory to them. He begged to move.
  Amendment proposed to the Bill—
  "After the words last inserted, to insert the words '(11) Notwithstanding anything contained in Section eight of the principal Act no school which was transferred to the School Board for London previous to the passing of this Act shall be so re-transferred under that section and under Section twenty-four of the Elementary Education Act of 1870, as to be treated under this Act or the principal Act as a non-provided school.'"—(Mr. Soares.)
  Question proposed, "That those words be there inserted in the Bill."
  *SIR WILLIAM ANSONsaid the Question of re-transfer would now be in the hands of the local authority, and except by resolution of a two-thirds majority proceedings for transfer could not even be initiated. He could not accept the Amendment, but he would look into this question, and if the position of London was found to be exceptional in respect of the number of schools which might be re-transferred, he would see whether it was possible to devise some preferential treatment for London.
  DR. MACNAMARAsaid he wished to express his own satisfaction with what the Parliamentary Secretary had just said. In regard to London, the case was very singular indeed. No

  815
  fewer than 354 denominational school departments had found themselves unable since 1870 to continue their work because they had to provide voluntary contributions to maintenances and these voluntary contributions were not forthcoming. Therefore they had asked the School Board to take over these schools and pay a rent for them. Now, the position was that they had no charge whatever for maintenance, and the denominational managers asked that these schools should be given back to them. These 354 schools had an average attendance of 200 children each, so that over 70,000 children had been sent to these common schools where they received undenominational teaching at the instance of the denominations themselves. Now, all of a sudden it was said that the schools should go back to the Church of England. There was the case of the 354 teachers in these schools who had all been appointed by the School Board of London without reference to creed at all. If these schools were re-transformed into Church of England schools, the teachers might be asked by the managers to give henceforth Church of England teaching. But he should say it was obviously unjust to ask these teachers, who might not be members of the Church of England, to give Church of England teaching on pain of dismissal. He hoped that the Government would look into this matter very carefully before the final stage of the Bill, and that something would be done to make these re-transfers very difficult, if not impossible.
  MR. BRYCEsaid it was clear to his mind that there ought to be no case in which a re-transfer should be allowed; and he could not understand how it was
  816
  that the hon. Baronet did not accept the Amendment at once. He would not dissuade his hon. friend from accepting the undertaking of the Baronet, for he was certain that that undertaking would be carried out.
  MR. SOARESsaid, having regard to the undertaking given by the hon. Baronet, he asked leave to withdraw his Amendment.
  Amendment, by leave, withdrawn.
  Bill to be read the third time on Monday next, and to be printed. [Bill 279.]

NEW BILL.
  TUBERCULOSIS (ANIMALS) COMPENSATION.
  Bill to provide for payment of compensation to the owners of carcases of animals condemned after slaughter and destroyed by order of a magistrate on account of Tuberculosis, ordered to be brought in by Mr. Ernest Cray, Sir Joseph Dimsdale, Mr. Field, Mr. Batty Langley, Mr. M'Arthur, Mr. Samuel Roberts, Sir Albert Rollit, Mr. William Rutherford, Mr. Schwann, and Mr. Tomkinson.

  TUBERCULOSIS (ANIMALS) COMPENSATION BILL.
  "To provide for the payment of compensation to the owners of carcases of animals condemned after slaughter and destroyed by order of a magistrate on account of Tuberculosis," presented accordingly, and read the first time; to be read a second time upon Wednesday next, and to be printed. [Bill 280.]
  Adjourned at ten minutes after One o'clock.