Sitting of 27 April 1904

Preamble
The House met at Two of the Clock.

UNOPPOSED PRIVATE BILL BUSINESS
New Zealand Loan and Mercantile Agency Company Bill [Lords]. Read the third time, and passed, without Amendment.
Barry Railway (Extension of Time, etc.) Bill [Lords]. Considered; to be read the third time.
London County Council (Money) Bill. Read a second time, and committed.
Strabane, Raphoe, and Convoy Railway Bill. Reported, with Amendments; Report to lie upon the Table, and to be printed.

PRIVATE BILLS (GROUP F).
Sir JOSEPH LEESE reported from the Committee on Group F of Private Bills; That Mr. Platt-Higgins, one of the members of the said Committee, was not present during the sitting of the Committee this day.
Report to lie upon the Table.
Local Government Provisional Order (Poor Law) Bill. Reported, without Amendment [Provisional Order confirmed]; Report to lie upon the Table.
Bill to be read the third time tomorrow.
Plymouth Corporation Bill, Reported, with Amendments; Report to lie upon the Table, and to be printed.
Surrey Commercial Dock Bill: Hudders-field Corporation Act, 1902 (Amendment) Bill [Lords]. Reported, with Amendments; Reports to lie upon the Table.

PETITIONS.

  LICENCES (RENEWAL).
  Petitions against alteration of Law; from Killyleagh; Carlisle (two); Nant-
  1286
  wich; Teddington; Croydon; Southampton; Bolton; Reading; Stockton-on-Tees; Haslingden; Windsor; Nanty-ffynllon Maesteg(two); Garth; Banbury.; Southall; Port Tennant; Westminster; Wandsworth; Dover; Newbury; and Lewisham (two); to lie upon the Table.

  LICENSING BILL.
  Petitions against; from Patricroft (two); Southend-on-Sea; Farnworth: Pontyberem; Eccles; and Gwynfe; to lie upon the Table.
  PUBLIC LIBRARIES BILL.
  Petition from Croydon, in favour; to lie upon the Table.
  RE-VACCINATION BILL.
  Petition from Bury, in favour; to lie upon the Table.
RETURNS, REPORTS, ETC.
  EDUCATION (SCOTLAND) BILL.
  Copy presented, of Return showing (1) the proposed new School Board Districts, the existing School Board Districts comprised therein, with the Population, the number of Public and Voluntary Schools on the Annual Grant List, and the Average Attendance of Scholars in these Schools; and (2) the Area, Population, and Valuation of proposed new School Board Districts [by Command]; to lie upon the Table.
  EXCHEQUER BALANCES.
  Return presented, relative thereto [ordered 26th April; Mr. McCrae]; to lie upon the Table, and to be printed. [No. 143.]
  PUBLIC INCOME AND EXPENDITURE.
  Account presented, of the Gross Public Income and Expenditure in the- year ended 31st March, 1904, together with the Balances in the Exchequer at the commencement and at the termination of the year, and the amounts received into or issued from the Exchequer in respect of Funded and Unfunded Debt created or redeemed in the said year [by Act]; to lie upon the Table, and to be printed. [No. 144.]
  TRADE REPORTS (ANNUAL SERIES).
  Copies presented, of Diplomatic and Consular Reports, Annual Series, Nos. 3146 and 3147 [by Command]; to lie upon the Table.
  PUBLIC REVENUE (INTERCEPTION).
  Return ordered, "of the amounts of all Public Revenue derived from taxes levied by Parliament, and from any other sources, which are not paid into His Majesty's Exchequer, for the years 1901–2, 1902–3, 1903–4, with the totals in each case (in continuation of Parliamentary Paper, No. 148, of Session 1902)."—(Mr. Gibson Bowles.)
  EMIGRATION AND IMMIGRATION.
  Copy ordered, "of Statistical Tables relating to Emigration and Immigration from and into the United Kingdom in the year 1903, and Report to the Board of Trade thereon."—(Mr. Gerald Balfour.)
QUESTIONS AND ANSWERS CIRCULATED WITH THE VOTES.

  Supply of Stationery for Irish Public Offices.
  MR. FIELD: To ask the Secretary to the Treasury whether he can state the average annual amount for the last ten years paid out of the Vote for Stationery and Printing for the supply of various Irish offices in Dublin; the names of the contractors who furnished this supply; and (he amounts paid to each.
  (Answered by Mr. Victor Cavendish.) The average annual amount is £40,379. The following are among the most important firms who have during the ten years either executed work or furnished supplies for Irish offices:—A. Thom and Co.; Cahill and Co.; Browne and Nolan; J. Falconer; Hely's, Limited; A. Armstrong and Co.; Hodges, Figgis, and Co.; E. Ponsonby; J. Duffy and Co.; Mrs. Davidson; J. McDonnel and Co.; all of Dublin; W. and G. Baird, of Belfast; Quinnell and Sons, of Tralee. A complete list of all contractors from whom supplies have been received, for Irish as distinguished from other services, could not be given, even for one year, without considerable labour. The average amount
  1288
  paid to each for the ten years could not now be exactly ascertained, the records of detail for the earlier years being no longer in existence.

  Unclaimed Dividends and Balances.
  SIR JOHN LENG: To ask Mr. Chancellor of the Exchequer what will be the total amount of unclaimed dividends on Government stocks, after deducting the £1,000,000 appropriated according to his Budget statement, and the amount in each class of stock; what are the unclaimed balances in the Post Office savings banks and trustee savings-banks; and what methods, if any, are adopted to inform the holders of unclaimed dividends and balances, or those entitled to them, of their existence.
  (Answered by Mr. Austen Chamberlain.) The balance of stock remaining on the Unclaimed Dividend Account, after deducting £1,000,000 cash appropriated according to the Budget statement, will be about £700,000. I am unable at present to say what amount of Consols and 2½ percent, annuities respectively will remain after providing this £1,000,000 in cash, since that must depend on the amounts of the respective stocks which may be most advantageous to realise under the circumstances. The amount of unclaimed balances in the trustee and Post Office savings banks cannot be given. The banks, of course, continue liable in respect of the deposits without limit of time. I do not believe that an examination of the many millions of accounts would show that any large amount of money remains unclaimed; it would give enormous trouble, and entail expense out of all proportion to the result which would be obtained. Before unclaimed stocks and dividends are transferred to the National Debt Commissioners every effort is made by the Bank of England to trace the stockholders.

  Joint Stock Banks Unclaimed Dividends and Balances.
  SIR JOHN LENG: To ask Mr. Chancellor of the Exchequer whether any estimate has been made, and can be given, of the amount of unclaimed dividends and balances in the joint stock banks of the United Kingdom.
  (Answered by Mr. Austen Chamberlain.) There is no information before the

  1289
  Treasury on which to make an estimate of the amount of unclaimed dividends and balances in the joint stock banks of the United Kingdom.

  Yield of Direct and Indirect Taxation.
  MR. TOULMIN: To ask the Chancellor of the Exchequer

  Classified as Indirect.

  Classified as Direct.

  £

  £

  Customs:—

  Excise:—

  Corn

  100,000

  Licences, etc.

  4,716,000

  Coffee etc

  520,000

  Estate Duty

  17,196,000

  Dried Fruits

  460,000

  Stamps

  7,500,000

  Spirits

  4,648,000

  Land Tax.

  725,000

  Sugar

  5,710,000

  Inhabited House Duty

  1,925,000

  Tea

  6,595,000

  Income-Tax

  30,800,000

  Tobacco

  12,560,000

  Wine.

  1,330.000

  Other Customs

  80,000

  Excise:—

  Beer.

  13,541,000

  Spirits

  18,609,000

  Glucose

  80,000

  Total

  64,233,000

  Total

  62,862,000

  Customs and Excise Duties.
  MAJOR COATES: To ask Mr. Chancellor of the Exchequer if he will state what sum of money has been received by His Majesty's Exchequer in each year since the 18th April, 1890, in respect of the local taxation (Customs and Excise) duties levied by Sections 6 and 7 of the Customs and Inland Revenue Act, 1890, specifying the amounts of the annual division of those duties between England, Scotland, and Ireland, respectively.
  (Answered by Mr. Austen Chamberlain.) The duties to which the hon. Member refers are not received into the Exchequer but are paid over by the collecting Departments direct to the local taxation accounts. Full particulars of the amounts collected under each head of duty and of the amounts allocated to the respective local taxation accounts are given annually in the finance accounts. The latest figures will be found on pp. 106 and 107 of the Finance Accounts for 1902–3.
  if he will state the yield for the year 1903–4 of each direct and indirect tax separately in such a way as to indicate the method of classification.
  (Answered by Mr. Austen Chamberlain.) Approximate net receipts in 1903–4 (including local taxation revenue, but excluding the proceeds of the coal duty):—

  Return in continuation of White Paper No. 155 of 1902.
  MR. HUMPHREYS-OWEN: To ask Mr. Chancellor of the Exchequer if he will give a Return in continuation of White Paper, No. 155, of 24th April, 1902.
  (Answered by Mr. Austen Chamberlain.) The Return in question was continued to the close of the war in the House of Commons Paper No. 130, of 1903.

  Post Office Savings Bank—Transfer of Government Stock to Bank of Ireland.
  MR. FIELD: To ask the Postmaster-General whether he can state under what Act of Parliament the regulations of the Post Office Savings Bank for the transfer of Government stock to the Bank of England are framed; and whether he will take steps to render possible the transfer of such stock to the Bank of Ireland.
  (Answered by Lord Stanley.) The regulations to which the hon. Member refers

  1291
  were formed under The Savings Bank Act, 1880 (43 and 44 Vic. cap. 36) and The Savings, Bank Act, 1887 (50 and 51 Vic. cap 40). Transfers of Government Stock from the Post Office Savings Bank to the books of the Bank of Ireland could not be made without an alteration in the regulations. I am quite ready to consider any evidence that such an alteration is required; but, so far as can be ascertained, the number of Irish depositors who would be likely to make use of any facilities of this nature that might be granted is exceedingly small.

  Corporal Punishment in Poor Law Institutions.
  SIR WALTER FOSTER: To ask the President of the Local Government Board whether his attention has been called to a case of flogging at the Cottage Homes at Wednes-field, in which the medical officer described the back of the boy as covered with weals and abrasions from the nape of the neck to the back of the knees; whether he can state the character of the birch rod used, and if it was of the regulation pattern and weight; and whether steps will be taken to prevent such punishments being inflicted on young persons in Poor Law institutions in future.
  (Answered by Mr. Waller Long.) My attention has been called to this case and I have communicated with the guardians of the Wolverhampton Union with respect to it. The Cottage Homes Committee of the guardians have investigated the matter, and I understand that at the inquiry held by them the police medical officer, acting for the Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to Children, described the condition of the boy's back in the sense stated in the Question. I am informed that the birch used was similar to that used by the police and that the weight of the instrument is four and a half ounces. The regulations made by the Local Government Board with respect to these homes, whilst allowing corporal punishment in the case of boys, provide that no punishment shall be inflicted with any instrument which has not been approved by the guardians or the committee, but it would seem that there is no record of the approval having been given to the birch used in the present
  1292
  instance. The guardians have censured the officer by whom the punishment was given, and have adopted the report of the committee, which recommends that the use of the birch as an instrument of punishment shall be abolished, and which contains other suggestions with a view to preventing excessive chastisement in future. The action taken by them will, I hope, have the effect desired.

  Metropolitan Police—Extra Pensions for Special Service.
  MR. CLAUDE HAY: To ask the Secretary of State for the Homo Department whether, in the case of three ex-superintendents of the A Division now receiving pensions in respect of special allowances of £75 per annum, and in the case of ex-inspectors formerly employed in the Houses of Parliament and the various Palaces, also pensioned on their extra allowances, steps were taken by the authorities to constitute these allowances pay; whether such allowances were certified in advance as pay by the Home Secretary; and, if the extra allowances to the superior officers were so certified to be pay, will he explain why similar allowances to the ordinary constables were not also certified as pay so as also to become pensionable.
  (Answered by Mr. Secretary Akers-Douglas.) The Superintendent of the A Division receives £50 a year in addition to the ordinary pay of his rank, and he is also in receipt of one of the "good service allowances" of £25 a year mentioned in the answer given by me to my hon. friend on Monday.† Both these sums were granted as additional pay, and rateable deductions for the superannuation fund are levied on them. Extra pay of this nature is not drawn by any officer of the rank of constable. No inspector employed at the Houses of Parliament or at a Royal Palace has been pensioned on his extra allowance.

  Imperial Yeomanry Training—Use of Motor Cycles.
  MR. ALLHUSEN: To ask the Secretary of State for War whether he will sanction the use of a limited number of motor cycles in lieu of horses for despatch carrying, orderly work, and other purposes
  †See page 1033

  1293
  by Imperial Yeomanry regiments during their annual training; and, if so, whether the owners will be permitted to draw the equivalent of the existing horse and forage allowances.
  (Answered by Mr. Secretary Arnold-Forster.) Provided that the proper training of Yeomanry in the use of horses is not in any way interfered with there would not appear to be any objection to the use of a very limited number of motor cycles in the manner suggested. The grant however, of allowances as proposed in the second part of the Question cannot be sanctioned.

QUESTIONS IN THE HOUSE.

  Southampton Military Disturbance.
  CAPTAIN NORTON: I beg to ask the Secretary of State for War whether, seeing that the draft of soldiers overpowered by the police at Southampton on Friday last were men enlisted for three years only, he will consider the desirability of desisting from sending such men to India, as their foreign service must necessarily be short and the expense to the taxpayer great.
  THE SECRETARY OF STATE FOR WAR (Mr. ARNOLD-FORSTER.): As the present trooping season is over the question of the desirability of sending three-years men to India cannot arise until the next trooping season, and I am not prepared to say now whether such a contingency is likely to recur.

  British Indian Traders in East London, South Africa.
  SIR MANCHERJEE BHOWNAG-GREE: I beg to ask the Secretary of State for the Colonies if he has received any reply to his telegram calling for information as regards the order of the town council of East London, requiring British Indian tradespeople and storekeepers to vacate the town in fourteen days; and will he state what further steps he has taken to prohibit the enforcement of the order.
  THE SECRETARY OF STATE FOR; THE COLONIES (Mr. LYTTELTON, War-wick and Leamington): The Governor
  1294
  has replied that Ministers inform him that special and urgent inquiry has been instituted, the result of which will be at once communicated to him. Ministers explain that the Municipal Council of East London is taking action under a regulation framed under Sub-section 30 of Section 5 of the Cape Act, No. 11, of 1895, and state that they will not support any arbitrary or unreasonable interpretation of the regulation on the part of the municipality, whose powers in this matter are limited by the proviso to Section 5 of the Act.
  MR. GIBSON BOWLES: Will these tradesmen be expelled in the meantime?
  MR. LYTTELTON: I am afraid I cannot answer that Question; but I should imagine that in the meantime they will not be expelled.
  CAPTAIN NORTON: Has the right hon. Gentleman agreed to the order or not?
  MR. LYTTELTON: No sanction is required.

  The Chinese Government and the Trans vaal Labour Ordinance.
  SIR JOHN LENG: I beg to ask the Secretary of State for the Colonies whether the negotiations with the Chinese Government relative to the Transvaal Labour Ordinance are now concluded; whether the exportation of labourers from China under the Ordinance has begun; and what number are likely to reach the Transvaal during the months of May and June.
  MR. LYTTELTON: The negotiations are practically concluded, but the Convention is not yet signed and the exportation of labourers has not begun. I am unable to say what number will arrive in any particular month.

  Gilbert Islands.
  MR. CATHCART WASON: I beg to ask the Secretary of State for the Colonies if he will say when the inquiry into alleged cases of injustice and maladministration in the Gilbert Islands was held; by whom it was held; and if he will lay a Report of

  1295
  the proceedings on the Table of the House.
  MR. LYTTLETON: I can only refer the hon. Member to the answer given to his previous Question of the 14th February, 1902. I see no reason for laying the Report of the proceedings on the Table of the House, but the hon. Member is at liberty to see it if he wishes.
  MR. CATHCART WASON: Has there been any inquiry?
  MR. LYTTELTON: Yes.

  Crown Agents' Commission.
  MR. AUSTIN TAYLOR: I beg to ask the Secretary of State for the Colonies if he can now state the total business handled by the Crown Agents for the Colonies in the year 1903 (including loans), the total commission charged, and the separate total debited and commission charged to each colony and protectorate.
  MR. LYTTELTON: The information for which my hon. friend asks was promised in the Answer which I gave to his Question on the 12th April. A statement giving the information is in course of preparation, but as very large masses of figures have to be dealt with, it will not be ready for a few days. Meanwhile, as it will be impossible to give so lengthy and complicated a document in the form of an oral reply to a Question. I would suggest to my hon. friend that he should move for it as a Return.
  MR. AUSTIN TAYLOR: Do I understand the right hon. Gentleman is willing to give a Return for previous years?
  MR. LYTTELTON: The labour is very great, and I am willing to give a Return for a reasonable number of years, say three or five.
  MR. AUSTIN TAYLOR: Let it be a quinquennial period.

  Smuggling of Arms on the Arabian Coast.
  MR. SWIFT MACNEILL: I beg to ask the President of the
  †See (4) Debates, ciii.,40.
  ‡ See page 18.
  1296
  Board of Trade whether inquiries are being made as to the places of origin, shipment, and intended destination of a number of rifles found amongst bags of rice at Makalen, on the south-east coast of Arabia, recently seized there by the Indian marine steamer "Dalhousie."
  THE SECRETARY OF STATE FOR INDIA (Mr. BRODRICK,): I have no information as to a seizure of arms at Makalla by the "Dalhousie," except what I have seen in the newspapers. The Government of India will be asked to furnish a report.

  Coopers Hill Engineering College
  SIR MANCHERJEE BHOWNAG-GREE: I beg to ask the Secretary of State for India if he has arrived at any decision on the Report of the Committee appointed to inquire as to the necessity or otherwise of maintaining any longer the Royal Indian Engineering College at Coopers Hill; whether his Council is unanimously in favour of continuing it, or any members dissent; and whether, if it is decided to maintain the institution, will he issue instructions for the entire removal of the restrictions which at present limit the admission of the natives of India to the college and their full enjoyment of its privileges.
  MR. BRODRICK: I propose shortly to lay Papers on the Table relating to the question of the further maintenance of Coopers Hill College, including the Report of the Committee which sat last year. In consequence of the strong recommendation of that Committee and the evidence brought before them that efficient candidates for the Public Works Department in India can be provided by other engineering colleges at a less cost to the candidates and to the Indian Government, it has been decided to close the college. No decision, however, has yet been arrived at as to the date of closing, and all possible consideration will be shown to those concerned.
  SIR MANCHERJEE BHOWNAG-GREE: Did any members of the Council dissent from the decision?
  MR. BRODRICKwas understood to reply in the negative.

  Tweedmouth Committee and Sorters' Duties.
  CAPTAIN NORTON: I beg to ask the Postmaster-General if he is aware that certain of the Tweed-mouth Committee's recommendations have not yet been carried into effect inasmuch as there are now over one hundred sorters' duties in the East Central Office alone which involve not only a split attendance but also a performance of more than sixteen hours in forty-eight; and whether steps will be taken at an early date to alter these attendances in accordance with the Committee's recommendations.
  THE POSTMASTER-GENERAL (Lord STANLEY,: I am aware that there are such duties as the hon. Member describes, but they occur on Friday only—being necessary for the despatch of the heavy foreign and colonial mails on that day. It is not practicable at present to abolish those split duties altogether, but every effort is made to reduce them as opportunity permits, in accordance with the recommendation of the Tweedmouth Committee. The officers who perform duties occupying move than sixteen hours in forty-eight have the privilege of counting each hour in excess of sixteen as an hour and a quarter towards the total of their week's attendance, as provided under the Tweedmouth scheme.

  Post Office Windows—Objectionable Publications.
  MR. JOHN CAMPBELL: I beg to ask the Postmaster-General whether he is aware that the Post Office, 61,Trafalgar Road, Greenwich,displays in its window certain publications reflecting upon Roman Catholics; and. if so, whether he will take steps to ensure their removal. In putting the Question the hon. Member complained that the word "Roman" had been interpolated in it, and asked who was responsible.
  MR. SPEAKER: I do not know, but will make inquiries.
  MR. JOHN CAMPBELL: I think it is a piece of gross impertinence.
  MR. SPEAKER: That is not a proper observation.
  LORD STANLEY: As soon as attention was drawn to the matter it was pointed out to the sub-postmistress (who is a stationer) that the exhibition of the publications referred to was undesirable in a shop connected with the Post Office, and she at once withdrew them.

  Transit Facilities at North Wall Station, Dublin.
  MR. J. P. FARRELL: I beg to ask the President of the Board of Trade whether any complaint has recently been made to his Department as to the inadequacy of the transit facilities at the North Wall Station of the Midland Great Western Railway, Dublin, whereby quantities of goods are being delayed for days and their condition injured to the loss of both vendor and purchaser; and can he undertake to make any representation to the Railway and Canal Commissioners on this subject with a view to some action being taken in the public interest.
  THE PRESIDENT OF THE BOARD OF TRADE (Mr. GERALD BALFOUR,): No complaints appear to have been recently received of the inadequacy of transit facilities at the station referred to. If ground for complaint exists it is for the parties aggrieved to make application for remedy to the Railway and Canal Commissioners. I will, however, consider, if particulars are furnished to the Board of Trade at the instance of the hon. Member by any trader who has been injured, whether the matter is one on which the Department could usefully communicate with the railway company concerned.
  MR. J. P. FARRELL: With reference to the latter part of the Question, is not the right hon. Gentleman aware that application to the Railway and Canal Commission is a most costly process which small traders in Ireland really cannot undertake?
  [No answer was returned.]

  Glyn-Traian National School, Denbighshire.
  MR. HERBERT ROBERTS: I beg to ask the Secretary to the Board of Education whether the draft final order suggested in the case of

  1299
  the Glyn-Traian (Pontfadog) National School, Denbighshire, is in accordance with the terms of the later trust deed governing such school; whether the Board has decided to accede to the application of the inhabitants for a local inquiry for the purpose of investigating the matter; and, if so, whether he can state when such inquiry will be held.
  THE PARLIAMENTARY SECRETARY TO THE BOARD OF EDUCATION (Sir WILLIAM ANSON,): The Board have now examined both trust deeds. The later trust deed is unusual in character and not altogether consistent in its provisions. If both parts of the schools are to be comprised in a single order, some amendment of the draft order already issued is necessary. The Board will direct a local inquiry to be held as soon as the pressure of work permits. I may take this opportunity of stating that the Board are carefully considering the objections received to draft final orders for schools in Wales, and are in communication with local authorities on the subject with a view to holding inquiries where it is necessary to do so before the confirmation of an order. A series of such inquiries is now being arranged in Carnarvonshire.

  London Voluntary Schools' Managers.
  DR. MACNAMARA: I beg to ask the Secretary to the Board of Education whether the Board is satisfied that the London County Council and the London borough councils, respectively, have appointed their shares of the managers of the voluntary schools; and. if not, whether he will advise the Board to delay the operation of Part III. of the Act until these appointments have been made.
  SIR WILLIAM ANSON: The Board have no reason to suppose that either the County Council or the borough councils will find any difficulty in making the appointments in question; under these circumstances there seems no reason for postponing the operation of Part III. of the Act.

  London Education Act—Section 2.
  DR. MACNAMARA: I beg to ask the Secretary to the Board of Education
  1300
  whether the Board have appointed a date later than 1st May for Section 2 (1) of the Education (London) Act, to come into operation; and whether he will state the reasons for agreeing to the putting of the rest of the Act into operation before the borough councils are able to take their appointed share in its administration.
  SIR WILLIAM ANSON: The answer to the first part of the Question is in the affirmative. The Board of Education see no reason for postponing the appointed day for the operation of the rest of the London Education Act. The County Council have expressed no desire for such postponement.

  London Education Act—Section 7.
  DR. MACNAMARA: I beg to ask the Secretary to the Board of Education whether he is aware that the Education Committee of the London County Council has reported to the Council that, owing to the shortness of time at the disposal of the Council, it is obviously impossible for the Council to satisfy itself before 1st May that the conditions specified in Section 7 are being complied with; and, if so. will he therefore advise the Board of Education to appoint a later date for this portion of the Act, so that the London County Council may have all the time they need.
  SIR WILLIAM ANSON: It is not usually possible for a local education authority to satisfy themselves before the appointed day as to the fulfilment of the conditions specified in Section 7, nor have local authorities the legal right to make all the investigations which may be necessary for this purpose. No local authority is required to maintain a school which does not come within the definition of a public elementary school on the appointed day. Under these circumstances there seems no reason for my offering the advice suggested.

  London Education Act—Grouping of Provided Schools.
  DR. MACNAMARA: I beg to ask the Secretary to the Board of Education whether he is aware that the Education Committee of the London County Council reported to the Council on 13th April

  1301
  that, having regard to the shortness of the time now remaining before 1st May, it appears probable that the Board of Education will have no other course open than to appoint a different date for the corning into operation of the Act as regards the grouping of provided schools and the appointment of managers therefor; and whether he is aware that on 20th April the Committee reported that the Board of Education had postponed the date; and. if so, will he say whether this step was taken by the Board of Education at the request of the London County Council.
  SIR WILLIAM ANSON: The Board have every reason to believe that the statements contained in the first part of the Question are correct, and as regards the last paragraph, the Board have no reason to doubt that the London County Council approves the step taken.

  The Licensing Bill.
  DR. MACNAMARA: I beg to ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department whether the phrase "the persons interested in the licensed premises," for whom it is proposed to provide due compensation under the Licensing Bill, is intended to include barmen, barmaids, and other employees in licensed houses.
  THE SECRETARY OF STATE FOR THE HOME DEPARTMENT (Mr. AKERS-DOUGLAS,): No, Sir. I do not think that the servants employed in licensed premises can be said, in the ordinary sense of the words, to be "interested" in those premises.
  DR. MACNAMARA: Then if these unfortunate people lose their occupation through the extinction of licences for which the owners are to be paid, they will have no compensation.
  MR. AKERS-DOUGLAS: They would be in exactly the. same position as employees in a building taken for public purposes.
  MR. BAYLEY: Does that apply to the servant of a brewery company which holds a licence?
  MR. AKERS-DOUGLAS: I cannot debate the point here, but if the hon. Member will put down a Question I shall: be delighted to answer it.

  English Trawlers under the Norwegian Flag.
  CAPTAIN ELLICE: I beg to ask the Secretary for Scotland whether he is aware that many of the 170 trawlers of Scandinavian origin, stated to have been observed fishing in the Moray Firth in 1903, are in reality English trawlers registered and fishing under the Norwegian flag; and whether he will cause inquiries to be made with a view to putting a stop to these practices.
  THE LORD ADVOCATE (Mr. SCOTT DICKSON,): I am aware that certain trawlers, about twelve in number, flying the Scandinavian flag have been repeatedly observed fishing in the protected waters of the Moray Firth in 1903; also that these boats are said to be only pro forma of Norwegian origin. Inquiries have been made, and are still being made, about these boats, and the Foreign Office are in communication with His Majesty's representatives at Christiania on the subject.

  Telephonic Communication between Dublin and Galway
  MR. CHARLES DEVLIN: I beg to ask the Postmaster-General whether any, and, if so, what arrangements are being made for the establishment of a telephone trunk line between Dublin and Galway.
  LORD STANLEY: The construction of a circuit connecting Galway with the general telephone system of the country would be very expensive, and I fear it could not be undertaken except under guarantee. Neither the Galway County Council nor the National Telephone Company have yet seen their way to give the requisite guarantee; but I am making further inquiry on the subject, and if any practical scheme can be arranged I will let the hon. Member know.

  Cost of Extra Police in Ireland.
  MR. DELANY: I beg to ask Mr. Attorney-General for Ireland whether he can

  1303
  state under what Statute the county councils are called upon to pay for extra police; whether such demands can be enforced; and whether any penalty attaches to a refusal to pay or to an incitement to refuse to pay.
  THE ATTORNEY-GENERAL FOR IRELAND (Mr. ATKINSON,): The Statutes are: the 6 & 7 Will. IV. cap. 13; 2 & 3 Vic, cap. 75; 9 & 10 Vic, cap. 97; 11 & 12 Vic, cap. 72; 29 & 30 Vic, cap. 103; 37 & 38 Vic, cap. 80: and Local Government (Ireland) Act, 1898. If the hon. Member will look into these Acts he will find all the information he requires. Several modes exist by which these bodies can be compelled to fulfil their [legal obligations.
  MK. LONSDALE: Arising out of that Question I beg to ask the right hon. Gentleman whether it is not a fact that a claim was made on the City of Limerick for extra police: that the Corporation refused to pay the charge, and that subsequently the claim was withdrawn.
  MR. ATKINSONwas understood to reply that the cases were not the same.
  MR. KILBRIDE: Is the right hon. Gentleman aware that the hon. Member for Mid Armagh has incited the Armagh County Council not to pay.
  MR. DELANY: And what is the penalty for such incitement?
  MR. ATKINSON: It depends on the nature of the incitement whether there is any penalty.
  MR. LONSDALE: I deny that I have incited the Armagh or any other county council to commit an illegal act. I should like to know if it is in order for an hon. Member to make such a charge.
  MR. SPEAKER: I did not hear any such charge.

  Cusack Estate, County Longford.
  MR. J. P. FARRELL: I beg to ask the Chief Secretary to the Lord-Lieutenant of Ireland to state whether any attempt was made by the Estates Commissioners to acquire the Cusack (county Longford) Estate for the settlement of the evicted tenants' applications in county Longford; whether he is aware that the block of land recently offered for sale would have given twenty-three families a farm of twenty acres each; and whether, if the matter of this sale has not been definitely closed, steps will be now taken in this direction.
  MR. ATKINSON (for Mr. WYNDHAM): So far as the Estates Commissioners are aware, there are not, at present, any untenanted lands on this estate. Application was made to the Commissioners to purchase a portion of the property comprising some 388 acres, heretofore let to grazing tenants, and proposed to be sold to the latter under Land Court tenancies. Amongst the proposed purchasers were four evicted tenants or their representatives. The Commissioners refused, however, to regard this portion of the property as an estate, and are now considering the question of the advisability of issuing a request for the purchase of the entire property under the 7th Section of the Act of 1903.

  Galway Docks.
  MR. CHARLES DEVLIN: I beg to ask the Chief Secretary to the Lord-Lieutenant of Ireland whether, in view of the closing of the entrance to the docks at Galway by the accumulation of sand and the consequent loss to business and interference with shipping, he can say when a dredger will be available and lent to the Harbour Board of Galway.
  MR. ATKINSON (for Mr. WYNDHAM): The Commissioners of Public Works have, at present, no dredger which could be placed at the disposal of the Harbour Board, on loan or hire. On the subject of the provision of a dredger. I would refer to the reply given on the 28th March† by my right hon. friend the Chief Secretary to a Question addressed to him by the hon. Member for South Kerry. To that reply I have nothing to add.
  † See (4) Debates., exxxii., 848.

  Tredennick Estate, County Donegal.
  MR. SWIFT MACNEILL: I beg to ask the Chief Secretary to the Lord-Lieutenant of Ireland what explanation can be given of the fact that, notwithstanding the possession by the Congested Districts Board for upwards of three years of two grass farms on the C. I. Tredennick Estate, St. John's Point, county Donegal, no steps have been taken to divide these farms into suitable plots for the fishermen who now hold no land, and to build houses on them for these fishermen, who arc ready to pay a reasonable price for such houses, but that, on the contrary, grazing cattle are taken on these grass ranches; whether he is aware that, at a specially convened branch of the Killaghtee branch of the United Irish League held on the 17th instant, a resolution was unanimously carried and directed to be forwarded to the Congested Districts Board, protesting against the continued inaction of that Board in not applotting the Tredennick grass farms among the fishermen of St. John's Point, and the posting up of notices that grazing cattle will be taken on these lands on the 21st instant; what reply has been sent by the Congested Districts Board to that communication; and, having regard to the delay in applotting these farms and the discontent produced by that delay, what course does the Congested Districts Board propose to adopt.
  MR. ATKINSON (for Mr. WYNDHAM): The works originally contemplated by the Congested Districts Board were postponed in consequence of the difficulty of obtaining labour at the usual rates. The Board will shortly be in a position, however, to undertake the works, but in the meantime they have decided that the lands must be grazed. A reply to this effect has been sent to the communication referred to in the Question.
  MR. SWIFT MACNEILL: Is the right hon. Gentlemen aware that the public in the locality have decided that the lands shall not be grazed?
  [The answer was inaudible.]

  Youghal Bay Salmon Fisheries.
  CAPTAIN DONELAN: I beg to ask the Chief Secretary to the Lord-Lieutenant of Ireland whether he is aware that hardship will be inflicted upon 120 fishermen of Youghal, county Cork, and their families, in consequence of a notice served upon them by the agent of the Lismore Estates to the effect that their licences will be extinguished next year unless they cease to fish for salmon in Youghal Bay for twenty-four days. namely, from 18th April to 12th May; and whether, in view of the fact that these fishermen are duly licensed by the conservators, steps will be taken to prevent them from being deprived of their means of livelihood for such a lengthened period.
  MR. ATKINSON (for Mr. WYXDHAM): After several years of litigation, the Duke of Devonshire established his title to several fishery rights in the River Black-water, and of course has the right to give or withhold permission to fish within the limits of the fishery. The licence granted by the conservators is in the nature of a game licence; it does not entitle the licensee, however, to invade private property. The answer to the concluding inquiry is in the negative.
  CAPTAIN DONELAN: Is the right hon. Gentleman aware that these poor fishermen are to be deprived of their livelihood—
  MR. SPEAKER: Order, order!
  CAPTAIN DONELAN: In order that there may be good sport for the King?
  MR. SPEAKER: Order, order! It is not in order for the hon. Member to persist in standing when I have called him to order.
  CAPTAIN DONELAN: Is it disorderly, Mr. Speaker, to expose injustice even though the King is concerned?
  MR. SWIFT MACNEILL: You can wire that to the King.

  Lough Corrib Toll Collector.
  MR. CHARLES DEVLIN: I beg to ask the Chief Secretary to the Lord-Lieutenant of Ireland whether he is

  1307
  aware that Daniel Sweeney, who for over twenty years was lock keeper and toll collector at Lough Corrib and who retired in October, 1899, was refused a pension or retiring gratuity by the Board of Works under whom he acted through the Navigation Trustees; and, if so, whether he will request the Board of Works to reconsider this decision.
  THE FINANCIAL SECRETARY OF THE TREASURY (Mr. VICTOR CAVENDISH,): Daniel Sweeney was not in the employment of the Board of Works, and could not therefore be recommended by that Board for a pension or gratuity.

  Irish Bills.
  MR. JOHN REDMOND: I beg to ask the First Lord of the Treasury when it is intended to take the Second Reading of the Irish Land Act Amendment Bill and the Irish Labourers' Bill.
  THE PRIME MINISTER AND FIRST LORD OF THE TREASURY (Mr. A. J. BALFOUR.): I am afraid I am not in a position at present to name a day for taking the Bills referred to by the hon. Member.
  MR. JOHN REDMOND: Will they be taken before Whitsuntide?
  MR. A. J. BALFOUR: I do not think the prospect is such that it is likely to be possible.

  Civil Servants and Party Politics.
  MR. SWIFT MACNEILL: I beg to ask the First Lord of the Treasury whether his attention has been directed to the recommendation to the Unionist electors of the constituency of West Down of a candidate for the Parliamentary representation of that constituency at the next general election by the Deputy-Master of the Mint; and whether it is in consonance with practice and the rules regulating the conduct of members of the Civil Service, that a permanent official in that Civil Service should take action of this character in Party politics; and what course, if any, does the Executive Government propose to take with reference to this case.
  MR. MACVEAGH: Is the right hon. Gentleman aware that the intervention of the Deputy-Master of the Mint in the affairs of West Down has operated—
  MR. SPEAKER: Order, order! The hon. Member had better await the reply to the Question on the Paper.
  MR. A. J. BALFOUR: I understand that at a meeting in the constituency to which the hon. Gentleman refers there was a reference made to the opinion of the Deputy-Master of the Mint as to the candidate whom it would be desirable to select. I also understand that this statement attributed to the Deputy-Master of the Mint was based upon a casual conversation held in a railway carriage some months before, and was entirely unauthorised by the gentleman in question. I am as anxious as any hon. Member of this House to keep the Civil Service outside the sphere of controversial politics, but I imagine the hon. Gentleman who put the Question and every man will agree that we cannot pursue Civil Servants into clubs and railway carriages.
  MR. SWIFT MACNEILL: Will you ask Mr. Macartney to be more careful in future?
  MR. A. J. BALFOUR: No, Sir.
  MR. EDMUND ROBERTSON: Is not this matter regulated by a Treasury Minute? Could not that be re-issued?
  MR. A. J. BALFOUR: There appears to be nothing in this charge. Every Civil Servant of course is acquainted with the Minute, which does not refer to casual conversations in railway carriages or clubs.
  MR. MACVEAGH: Is the right hon. Gentleman aware that the action of the Deputy-Master of the Mint has operated to the detriment of a Member of this House, the hon. Member for Oswestry, who was recommended for the same constituency.
  MR. SWIFT MACNEILL: Inasmuch as Mr. Macartney says he has been misrepresented, why did he not contradict

  1309
  the statement when it appeared in the public Press?
  MR. SPEAKER: Order, order! How-can the First Lord of the Treasury answer such a Question? The hon. Member must choose some other opportunity to raise this question.

BUSINESS OF THE HOUSE.
SIR H. CAMPBELL-BANNERMAN: I beg to ask the Prime Minister if he has any further statement to make about business?
MR. A. J. BALFOUR: As the House knows, the first Votes of Class I. of the Civil Service Estimates to be taken tomorrow are the Vote for the House of Commons Buildings, and the Vote for Harbours of Refuge, after which the remaining Votes will be taken in their regular order. On Monday I propose to ask the House to take the Second Reading of the Scotch Education Bill, on Tuesday the Valuation Bill, and on Wednesday the Bishoprics of Southwark and Birmingham Bill.
SIR H. CAMPBELL-BANNERMAN: Does the right hon. Gentleman expect to conclude the present stage of the Budget proposals to-night?
MR. A. J. BALFOUR: Yes. I quite anticipate doing that.

WAYS AND MEANS [19TH APRIL] REPORT.
Order read, for resuming adjourned debate on Amendment proposed [26th April] to First Resolution. "That, in lieu of the duty of Customs now payable on tea, there shall be charged, on and after the 20th day of April. 1904. until the first day of August. 1905. the following duty (that is to say):—
Tea, the pound…Eight pence."—
Which Amendment was—
"To leave out the words 'Eight pence,' and insert the words 'Six pence.'"—(Mr. Lough.)
Question again proposed, "That the words 'Eight pence' stand part of the said Resolution."
MR. WEIRsaid that at twelve o'clock on the previous night, when under the Rules of the House the debate stood adjourned, he was referring to the great hardships which would be suffered by people in his own constituency in consequence of the increased duty on tea, and he had referred to the hundreds of thousands of struggling widows, sempstresses, young girls. and others employed in various occupations at small wages who would be prejudiced by this additional burden. These people, it ought to be remembered, lived to a very large extent on bread and tea, and therefore this extra duty on tea was nothing else than a cruel tax. He had pointed out that poor people were in the habit of buying their tea by the ounce, for which they had to pay a penny, and if they were still to obtain tea of the same quality the price would necessarily go up to five farthings. Now, it was not likely that they would be able to pay that increased price, and the result would be that they would have palmed off upon them an inferior quality of tea. Their duty was to encourage people to drink a better quality of tea, and the Chancellor of the Exchequer ought to do all he could to prevent the common tea coming into the market, because it was a well-known fact that bad tea had a most injurious effect. In the Highlands, especially, it was the custom to keep the teapot all day long in the midst of burning peats, and the result of having a commoner quality of tea would be that the tannin would be extracted to the utmost grain to the injury of the digestive organs of those who consumed the liquor. He was afraid the Chancellor of the Exchequer knew practically nothing about the miseries of the poor. He did not understand what it was to have a family treasury without a penny in it. He could not realise what a gift of a penny or twopence represented to some families, and how they looked upon it as a godsend. Supposing they suddenly came into possession of twopence, what occurred? The little boy who was fleetest of foot was at once despatched to the local grocery store to get a halfpennyworth of tea or a pennyworth of bread, while possibly the other halfpenny had to be spent on a candle. Could the right

1311
hon. Gentleman appreciate what life was under such circumstances?
There was another class of people who were likely to be injuriously affected by this additional duty, the working men who. in the very early hours of the morning, were accustomed to get a cup of tea at the stalls in the street on their way to work. He had himself personal experience of what occurred at these stalls, and he knew how much a good cup of tea was appreciated by the men. He feared, however that under the new conditions the stall-keepers would be forced to provide tea of a commoner quality, with the effect that the men's digestive organs would suffer, and that they would be driven to the public-house to purchase spirits in order to get rid of the bad effects. He wished the Chancellor of the Exchequer would extend his sympathies to the suffering poor, that he would endeavour to gain some personal experience of how the poor lived, and he was sure that, if he would undertake that he would seek other means of raising the revenue he desired, cither by taking the deer forests, the salmon fisheries, land values, etc., whence he could, if he liked, obtain millions of money.
He thought that the remark made by the right hon. Gentleman in his Budget speech about the people being "saturated" with tea was an extremely unkind one. Why had the right hon. Gentleman not referred to the fact that The monied classes were "saturated" with champagne, old port, and costly liqueurs. They did not want to drive the poor people to the public -house, but undoubtedly that would be the effect if they forced them to drink bad tea. What they should do was to encourage the cultivation of the better classes of tea. He wanted to seethe common teas which were grown in the lower latitudes forced out of use. It was better to have the tea from the Darjeeling district of the Himalayas. In that region tea cultivation was rapidly extending towards the Sikkim frontier. Large estates had been laid out in these districts. and it was a well-known fact that teas grown in the lower latitudes were coarse and most injurious to the stomach and digestive organs of those who drank them.
1312
He was not ashamed to state his personal experience in the consumption of tea. When he was a lad of fifteen he was in lodgings in the country earning but a few-shillings a week, and he allowed himself half-an-ounce of tea per week and two. ounces of coffee. That went on for four months. At that time tea cost 4s. a lb., and there was a high duty upon it. Had the duty been lower he would have been able to double or treble his allowance, but, as it was. he had to be careful of his bawbees—he wanted to save money, and therefore he punished himself in the matter of tea. On the previous night he had reminded the right hon. Gentleman how the people in his own constituency were likely to suffer from the increased duty. Many thousands there depended for their dinner on salt herrings and potatoes, and they necessarily required something with which to wash down their meal. They were in the habit of drinking tea, but if they were forced to pay this additional duty the tea which they would have to consume would do them more harm than good.
There was another point from which this matter might be reviewed. Many millions-had been invested in tea estates in India and Ceylon, and what an injustice was being inflicted on those who had invested their capital by injuring their industry through putting on this increased duty. He himself was neither share nor debenture holder in any of these tea estates, but he quite sympathised with the shareholders. He would like also to draw attention to the fact that the Indian financial statement recently published in Calcutta had declared that the trade with Great Britain had not made the progress it might have been expected to do simply because of the heavy duty on tea. So much for the state of matters in India. Large public meetings have been held in Calcutta to protest against the imposition of this extra duty on tea. and he hoped the Viceroy, who always considered these matters very carefully himself and did not leave them to his subordinates, would let the India Office know his views upon this question. There was a very strong feeling against this tax in India, and they ought in this matter to pay some regard to the extreme poverty of that country. The vast majority of the people of India

1313
had to live on three farthings a day. Instead of checking a great industry in this way India needed more industries and then she would flourish. To impose a tax upon a great industry in this way was not the way to build up an Empire, but it was. on the contrary, striking a blow at the pioneers of the tea industry who had spent £30,000,000 in India and Ceylon. That was not the manner in which this great Empire had been built up. They ought to do all they could to promote the welfare of all their colonies. If the tax on tea was taken off that industry India would flourish and the people there would be happier: and in course of time India would produce a better quality of tea, and less of that vile, black, soupy rubbish would be sold as tea which was so injurious to the health of the poor.
MR. ALEXANDER CROSSagreed that there were difficulties in regard to this tax. but he thought it would be admitted that there were difficulties in regard to the imposition of any form of taxation. In saying a few words in defence of this tax he hoped it would not be supposed that he was wanting in sympathy for that large class of the population upon whom this tax would fall most heavily. He also sympathised with the right hon. Gentleman who had had the wisdom and courage to bring forward a most unpopular tax, but which, in his opinion, was well conceived in the interests of the finances of the country. The Chancellor of the Exchequer had been placed in circumstances of enormous difficulty in bringing in his Budget. During the past twelve months a state of depression had existed in all our principal industries, agriculture had suffered a great loss through a bad harvest, the cotton industry had been in a state of collapse, the shipping industry was depressed, and the working classes had been greatly affected by the war. Under these circumstances the Chancellor of the Exchequer had to decide whether he was to propose a new tax or increase the old taxes, If he had proposed a new tax there would have been a great cry out and the difficulty would have been infinitely increased. Therefore he complimented the right hon. Gentleman upon
1314
the prudence he had shown in increasing this tax.
He wished to point out that those who had opposed this tax had made no serious attempt to suggest an alternative tax. Hon. Members opposite spoke as if the income-tax was intended only for the wealthy, but they must be aware that the great bulk of income-tax payers were poor persons. The great majority of income-tax payers were professional men clergymen, clerks, and widows, with fixed salaries and incomes, and hon. Members should remember that a tax of Is. in the £ upon all these people was 5 per cent, upon their entire receipts. The average consumption of tea per head of the population was 61bs., so that the average individual would only pay Is. a year in consequence of this extra tax. In a family of five that meant a payment of 5s. a year, or little more than Id. per week He did not think any working man was unable to pay that amount. The Chancellor of the Exchequer was to be congratulated on imposing this addition to the tax so as to put the revenue derived from direct and indirect taxation on the same percentages as prevailed before the war. There were one or two considerations which showed that tea was a singularly fortunate choice in connection with the raising of the revenue required. The price of tea was much cheaper than it was a few years ago when there was no tax on it at all. Tea had gone steadily down in price, and he did not think the proposed imposition would be felt at all. It was an article which could be taxed without doing injury to any particular industry. That was a great advantage. It was said that one advantage of a direct tax was that the payer knew of it. Here was an indirect tax, and the consumer of tea would know about it, because he would have to pay 2d. per lb. more, and, as a consequence, he would be induced to take a keener interest in watching national expenditure, 'and in public affairs generally.
MR. EMMOTTsaid the hon. Member for Camlachie had challenged them to suggest what they would tax instead of tea. He could, of course,

1315
only speak for himself, and he would suggest that there should be more economy in the public service. He entirely agreed with the hon. Member who the other day said "Magnum vectigal est parsimonia." Allowing that the present taxation was necessary, he thought that as between the taxing of tea and the taxing of something else there was a strong case made out for some other form of taxation. An additional penny on the income - tax would have been a less evil than this additional taxation of tea. He appreciated all the arguments against increasing the income-tax. He thought that a high income-tax or at least a sudden increase of the income-tax tended to make wealthy people diminish their savings, and, of course, if there was less saving that must react on the poor as much as on the rich. He did not argue for a high income-tax as being good in itself. Quite the opposite. Last year £10,000,000 was taken off the income-tax and only £2,500,000 off indirect taxation. From the standpoint of last year if, twopence were added to the income-tax this year the Chancellor of the Exchequer would have taken off as much direct as indirect taxation. There was one other reason why he thought the income-tax was valuable. It was more difficult to find out who had the real political power in this country than to trace out the incidence of taxation, but he thought the real political power in this country lay with the middle class rather than any other. If that was the case he believed it was necessary to bring the middle class to feel that they had to pay. and to make them dissatisfied with the expenditure if they were going to reintroduce the old spirit of economy from which they had so much departed. For that reason it would have been better to increase the income-tax by another penny rather than add to the enormous taxation on tea.
They would now be taxing tea to the tune of 100 per cent. of its untaxed value. That was far too great a burden of taxation on the one luxury of the very poor. He thought it would lead to deterioration of quality and do great harm in that way. His hon. friend the Member for West Islington
1316
had handed him two telegrams received from Manchester stating what was thought of the new taxation by men in the tea trade. One said—
"Manchester tea trade disgusted with additional duty. Consider it outrage on Colonies, trade, and poor."
The other telegram dealt with the question of which he had spoken—deterioration of quality. It said—
"Strongly support your resolution re tea duty. Wholesale dealers burdened in collecting. Sixpence duty already very heavy. Trade disorganised in view of eight pence. Workers will be driven to use lower qualities."
He believed that lower qualities would go into use. He was told that the effect of the tax put on now was that the value of duty-paid tea had increased not 2d. but 2¼d., and that there was a larger demand for the lower qualities. It had often been argued of late, and statistics had been brought forward to show, that when a tax was put upon an article the price was not always increased quite as much as the tax would suggest. But in the case of an article like tea that was very often due to the fact that a lower quality was used, and that the lower quality was worth less money. Therefore the incidence of the tax was hidden by that fact. When the taxation on such an article was increased there was always a tremendous effort made to produce an article which as far as possible looked like it at the same old price, and that could only be done by producing a lower quality. It was easy to push the argument too far that this fresh taxation would not diminish the consumption of tea. He was not sure that it would diminish the consumption for this reason. Tea had become almost a necessity for a great portion of the population, especially the poorer portion. I the same quantity of tea was consumed it was evident that less money would be available for other purposes such as furniture and clothing, and those trades would suffer rather than the tea trade itself.
One aspect of the question which appealed to him more powerfully than any other was the way in which the tax-affected Ireland. That country was already over-taxed in proportion to her ability to pay. Ireland was essentially a tea-drinking country. He was told that the consumption of tea per head

1317
was 81bs per annum there as against a very little over 61bs in the whole of the United Kingdom. Therefore this tux must press more heavily on Ireland than on any other portion of the United Kingdom. It was creating profound dissatisfaction in Ireland He was sure he was speaking for hon. Members on both sides of the House when he said that they were all anxious to do what they could for Ireland although they saw Irish questions from a different standpoint. Last year they spent a good deal of time, usefully he thought, in passing a great measure with respect to the purchase of land in Ireland. Last year they were very generous to Ireland and they did appeal to Irish hearts, but by the imposition of this addition to the tea duty he thought they were undoing all that they had done. For the reasons he had stated he would certainly support the Amendment.
MR. COGHILLsaid that if the Chancellor of the Exchequer wished to bring home to the people of the country the condition of national finance, he could not have devised a better device than the one which was now being debated. He did not see why they should have an addition to a tax of this kind in a state of profound peace. If any ordinary person found that he was spending more money than he received, he must reduce his expenses. The real remedy was more public economy. That was where the Government had failed. They had not enforced economy in the great spending Departments. He, for one, did not wish to diminish the amount of money spent on the Navy; and he was not prepared to say that we spent too much on the Army; but he said most emphatically that under the head of the Civil Service they spent enormous sums of money for which they received no return whatever. The Chancellor of the Exchequer resisted every proposal of hon. Members for reduction in that Department. The right hon. Gentleman always preferred the feeling of the permanent officials rather than the feeling of the general taxpayer; and that was what ought to be put an end to. Let him give an example of how money was wasted. A short time ago a Committee sat on the
1318
Officials of the House of Lords. That Committee recommended that when a vacancy occurred in a certain office it should not be filled up. A vacancy did occur, but it had been filled up and a new official appointed at a salary of £900 a year. Surely that £900 a year ought to have been saved to the country. He did not think that the Chancellor of the Exchequer ought to come to the House and ask for any additional taxation. He felt certain that the tea duty would be unpopular in this country, and it would be extremely unpopular in our great dependency of India and in Ceylon. He was one of those who wanted to extend trade within the Empire, but it was a rather curious way to do that by putting this tax on tea which would be felt so much in India and elsewhere. Strongly as he felt on this point he would have had great reluctance in giving a vote against the Government, but he knew that, whichever way he voted, there were on the opposite side of the House nineteen Gentlemen with warm and compassionate hearts who. if any emergency arose, would come to the assistance of the Government, and, therefore, he might go into the lobby against the tax perfectly regardless of the consequences.
SIR ROBERTREIDsaid that the hon. Gentleman who had just sat down alleged that the real remedy for the constant complaints which were made in regard to this and every other tax was economy. Well, in the first place, he wished to point out that, although often urged, that doctrine had only recently met with any general acceptance. He remembered four or five years ago it was pointed out as an answer to that argument that really this country was very wealthy and why should we grudge spending public money? On both sides of the House and in the country the statement was made that we were a very rich people and ought to do things liberally. He was not one of the nineteen referred to by the hon. Member, nor was he going to pass an encomium on any Chancellor of the Exchequer. Having been for a good long time in the House, he thought that every Chancellor of the Exchequer, on both sides, had been entitled to complain that the influence of the House of

1319
Commons had not been used to reduce expenditure, but to increase it. Everyone clamoured for this and the other thing on particular Votes; and then, when it was asked where retrenchment was to come in. they were unable to reply. The hon. Gentleman himself had given an illustration of that. He told the House that he would not support any diminution in the cost of the Navy. But the expenditure on the Navy had increased from £18.000,000 in 1895 to £42,000.000 in the present year. He said the same in regard to the Army, the cost of which had increased, quite apart from the war and military works, from £18,000,000 in 1895 to £30,000,000 in the present year. There was another charge which could not be diminished—that for the service of the Debt. But the hon. Gentleman was one of those who had contributed by his support of the Government policy to the immense increase on that charge. The Debt had now been increased by £159,000,000 more than it was five years ago; and who was responsible for that? Hon. Members on both sides of the House who supported the Government policy, and this ought to he repeated on every occasion until the country realised it. Somebody had to pay for it. Of course, all these taxes were objectiorable. The income-tax, discussed the previous night, was as all the other taxes, except those which had a sumptuary result.
He sympathised with the hon. Gentleman in his opposition to the tea tax, which was the most cruel of all. It was a tax which pressed really upon the poorest of the poor in the community. It fell largely on poor-widows with children, of whom there were a great many who were hardly able to find subsistence for themselves and their families, who had been left destitute and were unable to find work. Everybody felt for them and was sorry for them: and yet, on account of all this extravagance of the Government, the House had to impose taxation on all of these poor people. It was a most cruel tax. He contended that it would have been butter to have put another penny on the income-tax, although that, too, would bear hardly on the middle classes. But by preference, although he did not wish to offer him elf as a Chancellor of the
1320
Exchequer in Opposition, he thought it would have been better to have increased the stale of death duties. These could have been graduated so as to come upon the richer people. He would ask the question, "Did the bulk of hon. Members in the House of Commons really feel the pinch of taxation at this moment?" They did not. They might have to save a little less, or pay a trifle more for their luxuries; but they had no real suffering in consequence of taxation.
MR. COGHILE: We are not all ex-law officers of the Crown.
SIR ROBERT REIDsaid that he did not think his observations were offered in a personal spirit, and he would say nothing in regard to the hon. Member's interruption. He said again, "Let us, each one of us, ask this question plainly: do we ourselves feel the pinch of this taxation?" He was taking the bulk of the Members of the House. He did not believe that any one of them would say that they did. Hut would any one say that no working man would feel it?
MR. COGHILL: I say so.
SIR ROBERT REID: The hon. Gentleman might say so, but he thought the bulk of hon. Members in the House would agree with him that, however necessary this tax might be in present circumstances, it was deplorable that it had to be imposed. Did not that rather point to this; that they were not imposing a fair class of taxation? Unless they stripped a man of the middle and upper classes of a great deal, they would not make him feel the pinch. There should be something more proposed to secure equality or parity of sacrifices in taxation than was clone by this Budget. He thought it really came to this: that that could not be accomplished until they did two things. First, they must really observe economy, and not by merely taking one particular instance of extravagance, of which there were plenty, but economy through adopting a wiser and more judicious policy. Second, when they imposed taxation, they should see that it was done on a principle somewhat more corresponding to similarity of sacrifices between those who were well-off and those who were poor; and they should not discharge themselves of that duty which

1321
was encumbent upon them of being just to all classes in the community.
MR. WYLIEsaid he wished to say a few words in support of the tea duty, which he thought one of the ablest features of the Budget. His right hon. friend who had just spoken had referred to the large expenditure on the Army and Navy; but he would remind him that a very large amount of that expenditure had been imposed upon this country by the action of other countries. Most hon. Gentlemen in their speeches had gone upon the assumption that tea was an absolute necessity of life—as much a necessity as bread. His contention was that it was essentially a luxury. and should not be regarded as a part of the diet of the people. He hoped his hon. friend opposite, who was such an admirer of tea, would not be shocked when he mentioned the fact that the component parts of tea were precisely similar to those of strychnine—only with a very little difference in their proportions. Strychnine killed by accelerating the motion of the heart to such an extent as to put it out of gear. The stimulus of tea accelerated the action of the heart in a gentler manner. Therefore, it was a very dangerous luxury and not a necessity and should be kept in its proper place. The Chancellor of the Exchequer said that the consumption of tea was increasing in this country, and that it was now four times as great as the consumption in either Belgium or the United States. The dietary of the country had been entirely revolutionised by the introduction of tea, sugar, and jam; and the good old simple dietary of another generation had been changed very much for the worse. In Scotland a very great deal of the strength of the people was derived from a superior diet of porridge and milk. broth, beef, and potatoes; but now, not only in Scotland, but also, according to the testimony of the Irish Members, in Ireland, that diet had been entirely changed and a very much inferior diet substituted. In some of the large towns in Scotland, at present, twenty tons of sugar were used as against one ton of oatmeal. The consumption of tea affected all classes of the community, especially ladies, who were probably more
1322
susceptible to luxuries than the male sex. The ladies went in for a tea diet to an injurious extent; and he was afraid many members of the male sex were following their example. Many hon. Members had tea served in their bedrooms the first thing in the morning; and hon. Members had told him that they would rather lose anything else during the day than their five o'clock tea. That was shown by the number of hon. Members who left the House for the tea rooms in the afternoon even when an eloquent debate was in progress. He was sorry to admit that in his own country the working classes were now using an enormous quantity of tea. The old dietary had been abandoned, and the tea diet was affecting a revolution in the habits and digestions of the people. That applied not only to Scotland but also to England and Ireland. The hon. Member for Oldham stated that in Ireland among the working classes the consumption of tea amounted to 81bs. per head per annum. He would strongly advise his Irish friends to devote a larger proportion of their influence to advocating the substitution of a diet other than tea, which was a most injurious luxury. The hon. Member for Connemara and his hon. friend the Member for Ross and Cromarty stated that the very poorest of the people indulged to a very large extent in a tea diet. They would be making much better use of their money if they spent it on the good old porridge and milk diet of Scotland. A tea diet had an injurious effect physically, and he. was not sure that it had not also an injurious effect morally. On those grounds, therefore, he entirely approved of the action of the Chancellor of the Exchequer in deriving a considerable portion of his income from this deleterious stimulant, which he was sorry to hear eulogised, but which when examined in the light of testimony now available was shown to be injurious. He was quite sure that the action of the Chancellor of the Exchequer would meet with general approbation.
MR. JOHN WILSONsaid he did not very often interfere in Budget debates; but as a member of the Labour group he wished to say a few words on the question. He did not plead

1323
guilty to the indictment framed by the hon. Member who had just spoken about taking tea in his bedroom in the morning. He had no time, and even if he had, he thought it would he an unwise proceeding. Neither did he agree with the dictum laid down by the hon. Member that tea was a poison, because he believed that the increase in the consumption of tea had resulted in prolonging life. At any rate, he had lived longer than he ever did before. Speaking from the Irish Benches, the bull might be excusable. He thought, however, he was corroborated by the experience of the country that life was longer than it ever had been before, even in the so-called good old days. The hon. Member for the Camlachie Division stated that many hon. Members spoke to the reporters. He did not speak to the reporters. He spoke because he knew something of the difficulty of getting half a pound or even a quarter of a pound of tea. He happened to know the homes of the people as intimately as any man, and that intimacy led him to think that this question should not be treated in the light manner in which it had been treated that afternoon. The hon. Member spoke of the depression in trade; he was stating an elementary economic truth when he stated that the prosperity of the country-depended on the spending power of the poor, and that, therefore, whatever they did to restrict the spending power of the poor would interfere with the prosperity of the country. Twopence a pound did not appear a very large sum as an individual item; but taken in the aggregate, it was a very important matter to a working-class family. The hon. Gentleman who had just spoken referred to the nineteen saviours of the Government last night. He was not one of them. He found himself in the Lobby where he generally found himself. He believed, in the language of Micawber, that if they spent a penny more than their income they were on the way to ruin, whereas if they spent a penny less they were on the way to prosperity. If they lived within their income, were not reckless in expenditure, and did not rush into rash proceedings, there would be no necessity to impose extra burdens of taxation. The hon. Member for the Camlachie Division spoke of the war; he congratulated him-
1324
self that he was one of the men who dared to censure the war; and who, although he was maligned and called a traitor, had endeavoured to keep the country out of the war for which they were now paying.
There were two aspects of the question to which he wished to refer. One was the incidence of the tax and the other was the principle contained in it. As regards the incidence he only wished to say that it depended very largely upon the view they took of the position in which they stood when they spoke of the incidence of this or any other tax. The burthen was only heavy in proportion to the strength of the person who had to carry it. It was all very well to talk glibly, as some hon. Members had talked, about the tax being only 2d. a pound, but a pound of tea was a fiction in many working-class families in this country. The poor purchased their tea in very small quantities; and if they could buy a pound at a time the tax would not bear so heavily on them. Everyone who watched the process of taxation knew that beyond the tax itself the people had nearly always to pay an extra burthen. A man's ability to purchase an ounce of tea only was no disgrace to him. It was the circumstance of the wages he received that was the disgrace; it was the surroundings and the conditions among which he found himself that was the disgrace and not his spending power. Those who had only 15s. or 16s. a week coming in had probably to depend upon tea for their food. He thought the Chancellor of the Exchequer had fixed his mind too much on the word "proportion." He had sat at the feet of the right hon. Gentleman the Member for West Birmingham in his Radical days and was-a great disciple of the right hon. Gentleman. He had obtained all the great Radical truths from the teaching of the right hon. Gentleman, and he was sure the Chancellor of the Exchequer would not dispute this right hon. Gentleman's authority. In a speech he made in 1885, the right, hon. Member for West Birmingham dealt with a statement that in a village in Northamptonshire there were 120 people whose average income was 16s. on which they had taxation to-the extent of 7½ percent. This was

1325
astounding to the right hon. Member, who compared it with his own case. He found it difficult to estimate what he paid in taxation, because, as he said, a good deal of taxation was very successfully hidden. but he came to the conclusion that he could not pay more than 6 per cent. of his total income, and he said—
"I, with all my worldly advantages, pay 1½ percent. less than is extracted from the scanty earnings of those poor peasants. I say it is unfair, and the sooner it is altered the better."
The case of this village, the hon. Member pointed out, was not alone or singular. and with the increase there had been since 1885 in the sugar duty and the tea duty, this proportion had. he said, been widely altered to the disadvantage of the poor. He contended that there were other sources of taxation to which the Chancellor of the Exchequer might have turned his attention, and he again quoted the Member for West Birmingham as his authority. That hon. Member in 1885 said—
"Then there is the taxation of unoccupied land, of sporting land, of ground rents, and of mineral royalties. I advocate all these methods of taxation."
These words, Mr. Wilson declared, were still sound in principle; they were true to the core, though politicians might have altered their political faith. These things ought to have been taxed before the tea of the poor people, but tea was, he supposed, the line of least resistance.
MAJOR SEELYagreed that this duty would bear heavily on the poor, but the money having been spent the nation must pay the bill; therefore, so long as the proposal was not in itself outrageous, and was more or less in accordance with established custom, he felt bound to support the tax. It was impossible not to sympathise with the hon. Member for the Ludlow Division who had presumed that another system of taxation was to be resorted to. Wicked though it might be, if it was possible, to tax the foreigner it would be extremely difficult to withstand the temptation. But if a more reasonable frame of mind had been come to, if at last all believed that, as we had spent the money, we ourselves, and not the foreigner, must pay, the House ought to be thankful for small mercies and support the Budget as they found it. He
1326
did not, however, consider the taxation altogether necessary, because he did not believe all the expenditure to be necessary. The expenditure on the Army, for instance, could be reduced by at least the amount that would be raised by this tea duty. He was supporting the tax this year, but he would find it impossible to do so another year, because there was being maintained for the defence of this country, and as an expeditionary force, a much larger number of men than was reasonable or necessary. This contention had frequently been urged, but no signs of½ reduction could be seen. To enable, such a reduction to be made. it was absolutely essential that the Volunteer force should be fostered and maintained. The danger most to be feared was that in time of peace a reduction of the Regular Army might be decided upon, and then in a time of panic expenditure on a far larger scale incurred. It was mainly because that had been done before that this extra 2d. on tea was rendered necessary. Therefore, while he urged the Chancellor of the Exchequer to endeavour to secure reduction in Army expenditure, he begged him to see that the one guarantee against panic, viz. the maintenance of a proper spirit of military responsibility amongst the masses of the people, was not impaired.
MR. BLACKsaid that one good effect of the debate was that it had induced the Chancellor of the Exchequer to make the clear declaration that taxation of the character of the tea duty fell upon not the producer, but the consumer, and he hoped the right hon. Gentleman would remember the point if at any time in the future a re-imposition of the corn duty was suggested. It was necessary in this matter to remember the history of direct and indirect taxation, especially in relation to the landed interest. The basis upon which the landed interest acquired the land was through undertaking to bear the whole cost of national defence.
MR. SPEAKER: The hon. Member is now entering upon a point which is extremely remote from the Resolution before the House.
MR. BLACKsaid his object was to call attention to the disproportion already existing between indirect and direct taxation, and to the intention of the Government still further to increase that disproportion to the injury of the indirect taxpayer. By degrees the burden of taxation had been thrown off the landed interest on to the shoulders of the people, and a continuation of that process could be seen in the Budget proposals of the present year. In 1902–3, the high-water period of the war, the amount raised by indirect taxation was£66,500,000; this year it was £67.950.000. an increase of £1.150.000. and in the same period, the amount of direct taxation had been reduced from £59.300.000 to £53.200,000. a decrease of £6.100.000. In the face of those figures how could the Chancellor of the Exchequer claim to have restored the two classes of taxation to a position of equality? Whatever differences of opinion there might be as to the incidence of direct and indirect taxation, it could not be disputed that the poorer classes of the community bore practically the whole burden of indirect taxation and yet, after a period of abnormal prosperity and in a time of peace, the Chancellor of the Exchequer was piling up the burden of the indirect and lightening that of the direct taxpayer. Throughout their career the present Government had entirely ignored the question of the taxable margin, their idea apparently being that the minimum wage in the country was £2,000 a year. It might be asked what alternatives there were to the present proposals. He would suggest that the Chancellor of the Exchequer should obtain payment of the £30,000,000 due from the Transvaal, or, if that were impossible, that the interest on the money should be secured. That would, at any rate, yield £1,000.000, which might be applied to the reduction of taxation. Another possible course was to obtain from the Colonies a fair contribution towards the cost of Imperial defence. No less than £8,000,000 of the increase in our military expenditure was due to the number of troops that were scattered about the Empire outside India. He hoped the Government would see their way to adopt one of these suggestions.
MR. MURNAGHANsaid the Chancellor of the Exchequer appeared to have ranged over all possible subjects of taxation and to have selected the one which bore hardest on the people of Ireland. A Royal Commission had proved that Ireland already paid far in excess of her fair proportion, but instead of relieving that overburdened country the new Chancellor of the Exchequer was proposing to increase the tax on a staple article of subsistence among a large class of the people. The hon. Member for Dumbartonshire told them in one sentence that tea was poison, and in another that it was a luxury, and the only object of his speech seemed to be to make a soft bed for the right hon. Gentleman to lie down upon. Ireland was going to suffer very heavily by this extra duty upon tea. The average consumption of tea in Ireland was 81bs. per head of the population, but in England and Scotland it was only 4 or 51bs. per head. The result was that the greatest proportion of this tax would have to be paid by Ireland, which was the poorest, and was a country that never gave any encouragement to this vast expenditure for which this extra taxation was required.
MR. SPEAKER: Order, order! That subject cannot be discussed on the question of the tea duty.
MR. MURNAGHANsaid there was a deficit in the Exchequer, and to meet it extra taxation had been placed upon tea; and he submitted that he had a right to say that in incurring all that expenditure Ireland did no share.
MR. SPEAKER: That subject is not in order.
MR MURNAGHANsaid it seemed to him that the line was drawn rather strictly in regard to some hon. Members. but not in regard to others.
MR. SPEAKER: Order, order! That observation is not in order. If the hon. Member does not think I am doing my duty he has his remedy.
MR. MURNAGHANsaid he would at once withdraw his remark as he had no idea whatever of being discourteous. It did seem to him that Irish Members had

1329
a right to protest against a tax which they felt was a great injustice. The right hon. Gentleman might have taxed wines instead of tea, and there were many other commodities which he might have chosen and left tea alone. This tax upon tea was not a fair burden upon the Irish people, who paid far in excess of the proper proportion of the taxes of the United Kingdom, and the right hon. Gentleman did not use any sound argument when he put forward this proposal. The only reason given for imposing this tax was that it followed the line of least resistance. That might be so in Great Britain but it was not so in Ireland, and Irish Members would fail in their duty if they did not protest against, and take every means in their power to try to remove, an impost upon a commodity which the people of Ireland could hardly do without. Ireland had been looking forward to a remission and not an addition to taxation, and if any other commodity had been selected Ireland would have been affected less. If they had taxed maize or flour they would not have hurt Ireland so much. The Chancellor of the Exchequer knew that a tax upon cereals was a tender subject amongst those of his own political household likely to arouse opposition, and therefore he said. "I will go for tea because it is not a duty in regard to which the English and the Scotch take much interest, and as for the Irish they do not count." The resistance of the Irish Members might not count on this Budget but it would count upon other matters. It was an unfortunate day for Ireland when the right hon. Gentleman took it into his head to impose a duty of 33 per cent, upon an article which was mostly used by the people of Ireland. The result of this tax would be that the poor people of Ireland would consume an inferior quality of tea, for they could not afford to buy better tea. He was sorry that the Chancellor of the Exchequer showed no signs of giving way on this point, and he regretted the right hon. Gentleman could not make up his mind to withdraw this tax and put it upon some other article in less general use in the dietary of the Irish people. Tea, as far as Ireland was concerned, was not a fit subject for increased taxation, and he wished to enter a strong protest against it.
THE CHANCELLOR OF THE EXCHEQUER (Mr. AUSTEN CHAMBERLAIN.)With the permission of the House I venture to appeal to hon. Members to bring this discussion to a close. This subject of tea has been fully discussed in all its aspects, and I think hon. Members are somewhat repeating what has already been said. The debate has been conducted in a good temper, and I appeal to the House to bring this discussion to a conclusion at the earliest possible moment.
SIR H. CAMPBELL-BANNERMAN: I fully recognise the spirit in which the right hon. Gentleman has intervened in this debate, but at the same time I do not think he is entitled to express any astonishment at all at the length to which this discussion has run, because this is a matter which vitally affects the comfort and health of the constituencies of hon. Members who have spoken. I think it is rather a remarkable circumstance that so many hon. Members from all parts of the three kingdoms have got up and given from their own personal knowledge and acquaintance so strong a testimony to the evil effect of this proposed duty. The right hon. Gentleman did not complain, but I think that any attempt, even by the moral effect of his interference, to stop the expression of this general opinion which is felt so strongly would be a mistake. The matter is of such importance in regard to this particular duty that I think the House may very well be left to itself to give expression to its strong feelings.
MR. BUCHANANsaid he thought when the right hon. Gentleman rose he was going to ask the special leave of the House to reply to some of the observations which had been made. He did not think the speeches which had been made in regard to this tax deserved the sweeping condemnation passed upon them by the Chancellor of the Exchequer who spoke very early in the debate and since that time considerations had been laid before the House which he thought demanded some reply. After all, this was one of the most important proposals in the Budget. There were one or two points in connection with this question which he thought he might dwell upon.

1331
It had been a source of satisfaction to many hon. Members that there had been from so many quarters in the House statements made in favour of economy. He and others had advocated that in dark as well as in bright days, and they rejoiced now to find support from unexpected quarters where they did not find it in past days. He would not make any reservations. Some had reserved the Army, others the Navy, and others had reserved both. An hon. Member had limited himself to the salaries of certain officials of the House of Lords. The tea duty pointed to the fact that during past years the country had been living beyond its means, and they must do as a nation what individuals had to do—cut their coat according to their cloth. They must cut down the great spending Departments, and he was prepared to vote against any of the additional taxes now proposed. He did so on perfectly logical grounds. Some of them had done their best to prevent the great increase of expenditure which had taken place. Their next line was to try to prevent the Government from being able to carry out what they believed to be pernicious and extravagant expenditure. He would vote against any other taxes that might be proposed to carry out what he believed, to be a most pernicious policy which would tend only to the ultimate ruin of this country if long continued. He would certainly not follow the. example of those who had made alternative proposals. That was not his business or that of any other Member of the House. What they had to do was to criticise the proposals of the Government. They were responsible for putting before the country the taxes which should be imposed, and prominent amongst them was the Chancellor of the Exchequer.
There was one aspect of the tea tax which had not been suffciently dwelt upon. When the duty was raised from 4d. to 6d. in 1900 the right hon. Gentleman the Member for West Bristol used these words—
"The extra 2d. is purely, in my opinion, an exceptional tax levied for the purpose of the present war."
The 2d. put on for the special and exceptional purpose of the war was not only not to be taken off but was being added to by another 2d. Yesterday
1332
they had from the Chancellor of the Exchequer a most important statement to the effect that, while he recognised that theadditional spirit and beer duties were originally imposed for the purpose of the war, the permanent peace expenditure had so increased that they must be retained permanently as part of the financial system of the country to meet that expenditure. That was an absolute abandonment of all hope for this country that it would within a limited time—at any rate under the auspices of the present Government—get rid of any of the burdens imposed on it for the purposes of the war. In past years the right hon. Gentleman the Member for West Bristol and other Ministers had promised that when the war came to an end one of the first duties of the Chancellor of the Exchequer would be to survey the situation and endeavour to see by what means the additional burdens which had been placed on the people might be diminished, or taken off, if not within a single year, at any rate within a limited period. They had good reason to anticipate that this would have been done last year by the right hon. Gentleman the Member for Croydon, and still more had they a right to expect it from the present Chancellor of the Exchequer in the current year. But there was no attempt to do this at all. The Chancellor of the Exchequer had gone a step backward and told them that they must abandon the prospect of being able to do this in the immediate future, and must be content to consider the charges imposed as temporary war taxes as permanent peace taxes for time to come. He hoped the House would take note of this and see what they had been led into by the Government.
As to the economic side of the tea tax it could not be denied that the consumer would have to pay it. He had received a copy of a circular issued by a firm of tea dealers in which they drew the attention of their customers to the fact that the price would be increased 2d. per lb. on account of the additional duty imposed by the Chancellor of the Exchequer. As his hon. friend the Member for Durham had pointed out the poorer classes in the country would have to pay more than the extra 2d, because they bought not a pound of tea at a time, but a pennyworth or two penny worth. An inquiry made some

1333
years ago at the instance of Lord Goschen, when Chancellor of the Exchequer, showed that poor people who bought tea in such small quantities paid at the rate of 3s. 5d., 3s. 8d., and 3s. 9d. per lb. The estimate given by the Chancellor of the Exchequer last night as to the yield of this tax seemed to him to be slightly sanguine. He did not say that the right hon. Gentleman's figures were wrong, but he gave the statistics in groups of periods of three years, pointing out that the consumption of tea per head per annum of the population in the last three years had gone up to 6.05 lbs. from 5.9 lbs. in the penultimate period of three years. That small increase for a period of six years naturally made him think that the consumption of tea was really still increasing. On referring to a table in the Report of the Commissioners of Customs giving the consumption of tea in the United Kingdom for the last ten years he found that the figures were:—In 1893, 208.000.000 lbs.; 1894, 2U.000.000 lbs.; 1895, 221.000.000 lbs.; 1896. 227,000,000 lbs.; 1897. 231,000,000 lbs.; 1898. 235,000,000 lbs.; 1899,242.000,000 lbs.; 1900. 249,000,000 lbs.; 1901. 255.000, 000 lbs.; 1902. 254,000.000 lbs. The rate of the increase had begun to go down more than two years ago, and last year there was actually a small decrease. Therefore he thought the right hon. Gentleman was not entitled to lead the House to believe that the proceeds of this tax were in a buoyant position, that year after year we were consuming more tea. and that we might expect a continuously increasing return from the tax with the proposed increase. When Mr. Gladstone dealt with the tea duty in 1863 he reduced it from Is. 5d. to Is., and in 1865 from Is. to 6d.; he contrasted the claims of sugar and tea, and practically decided in favour of tea because of the large proportion the tax on tea bore to the value of the commodity. If that was true then it was equally true now, because it brought it up to a great deal more than 100 per cent.
He had been disappointed that while the Chancellor of the Exchequer had without an effort put on a tax which affected the, poorest of the poor, he had been some what slow and shy in endeavouring to hit one section of the community which ought to bear increased
1334
taxation. That was not the well-to-do working classes, or the middle classes, but the richest of the rich. That was a distinct defect in his Budget. They were justified in comparing the easiness with which the right hon. Gentleman proposed to impose this tax on the poor, and the reluctance he showed the previous day even to consider the possibility of altering the incidence of the income-tax to make it bear on the richest of the rich. He thought that this tax had, to a certain degree, besides its economic aspect, also a political aspect. There was no doubt that the members of the richer classes certainly supported Gentlemen on the other side of the House, and that those who sat on his side of the House derived their support from the poorer classes of the community. Without elaborating that point at any great length, one could say that, at any rate, the Chancellor of the Exchequer and the Ministry of which he was a member were not less willing to put their hands on this tax, because the incidence of it would not press on the majority of their own supporters. He would quote an authority which would be listened to with deference by the majority of the House, and especially by the Chancellor of the Exchequer. Shortly after the Liberals had been defeated over Mr. Childers' Budget in 1885, which imposed extra beer and spirit duties, the right hon. Gentleman the Member for West Birmingham, in a speech delivered at Holloway on 17th June, 1885, drew attention to the then position of affairs, and contrasted two sets of taxation as proposed by the Liberals and by the Conservatives. In that speech the right hon. Gentleman the Member for West Birmingham used these words—
"The Tories have got £13,000,000 to find, and how are they going to do it? Sir M. Hicks Beach, the new Chancellor of the Exchequer, told them that the Tories would pay their way. All I can say is that that is in entirely new departure in Conservative finance. But how are they going to pay their way? According to Sir M. Hicks Beach by raising a tax on tea. That is to say, he will spare the beer barrel and tax the teapot. He will relieve the Tory publican at the expense of the Radical teetotaller."
That put the political aspect of this question in a nutshell in much more forcible language than he could use.
MR. BARRANsaid that the House recently discussed the problem that a large number of children were being sent to school in such a physical condition that they could not gain the benefit of the education that was offered them. Now, this tax on tea would fall with a heavy weight on that particular portion of the population of our large cities whose children came to the schools unfed. In his speech the previous night the Chancellor of the Exchequer took exception that they, on that side of the House, had raised an objection not only to the tea tax, but to the tax on corn and sugar. There was no inconsistency in that. It appeared to him to be consistent. They were discussing the large question of taxes on articles which were absolutely necessary for that large class of the population for whom he spoke. It was not simply the question whether this extra 2d. on tea was to be added. If the taxes on tea and sugar could be taken away altogether it would materially alter the position of the whole working-class population. He did not lose sight of the fact that if these taxes were abolished altogether an enormous amount of revenue would be withdrawn from the Exchequer. But he would remind the House that had the normal rate of increase of taxation gone on in this country instead of an abnormal rate, it would have been quite possible to have relieved the people from all taxation on the necessaries of life within the last ten years. An hon. Member opposite had dealt, from a scientific point of view, with the question as to whether tea was a necessity of life or a luxury. He would not follow the hon. Gentleman in that argument; but the people had decided very emphatically that, in their opinion tea was a necessary of life. Apart from that was it wise, as a matter of policy, that so large an amount of taxation should, in time of peace be allowed to fall heavily on that part of the population which both sides of the House admitted should be enabled to live in more comfort than in the past; and, what was more important, should be enabled to send their children to school in a state to be physically and mentally developed? Whatever taxes might have to be levied otherwise, it
1336
would be TO the direct profit of the country to assist that class of children by reducing taxation on all the necessaries of life, so that there might be no danger of their physical deterioration.
SIR JOHN GORSTsaid he wished to express the great reluctance and deep regret with which he yielded to the necessity for this tax being imposed by His Majesty's Government. In the first place, everyone who had studied the social condition of the United Kingdom must have a strong objection to indirect taxation of every kind which was levied on the necessaries of life. The hon. Gentleman who had just spoken expressed what he was sure was the opinion of every hon. Member that nothing was more disadvantageous from a large Imperial point of view at the present moment than to attempt to increase the cost of the necessary food of the people of this country. Although a very large number of the people in this country were well and amply fed. there was a very large section of the people—the exact percentage, 30 per cent., 20 per cent., or 10 per cent., might be disputed—who were unable to provide their children with the nutrition necessary for them to go through the physical and mental instruction provided for them in the schools, and to enable them to develop into strong men and women capable of performing their part in the battle of life. Therefore, everyone who had any knowledge of the social condition of the people must feel the greatest reluctance in imposing any tax on any article of the food of the people. But in this case, the taxes upon food which now pressed upon the narrow means of the people were imposed for war purposes; the sugar duty was proposed for war purposes; the corn duty, which was taken off last year, was proposed for war purposes; and the additional duties on tobacco, beer, and spirits were also proposed professedly for war purposes. Now he thought it was a very good thing that the expense of the war should be felt by every class of the people of this country, that everyone should know that if the country indulged in the luxury of going to war it must be paid for by the denial of the conveniences, the comforts, and even the necessaries

1337
of life. It was quite true that the war was over; but the payment for the war was not over. They still continued to pay for the war, and they would continue to pay for it, directly or indirectly, for several years still to come. Therefore there was some excuse for still keeping on the war taxes, because the war was not yet paid for, and, until the cost of the war had been paid, taxation could not be reduced. An hon. Member opposite said that the Irish Party were opposed to the war, and that, therefore, it was rather hard that they should be called upon to pay for it. But as long as these countries were a United Kingdom they could not make a distinction between one part of it and another, and as the majority of the people of the United Kingdom were in favour of the war, the United Kingdom as a whole would have to pay for it.
In the case of this particular tax on tea, he was unable to say whether the Government might not have found some other mode of raising the money, but, having decided to raise the money on tea, there were several peculiarities connected with the tax which were well worth the attention of the House. The first was, that it was a very great object lesson as to the effect produced throughout the country by taxation on one of the necessaries of life. The price rose immediately; every grocer in the country put up the price of tea by the amount of the tax, and probably in the case of retailers who sold tea by the ounce, or the half ounce, by a great deal more than the tax, and that not only on the tea which would come into the country hereafter but on the tea which was in stock. What the mass of the people had to pay was not only the tax imposed by the Chancellor of the Exchequer, but a considerable profit which went into the pockets of the retailers. Another consequence which would naturally follow, and which the people of the country would no doubt appreciate, was that there would be a check on the consumption of tea. People would not be able to buy so much tea, and that would be a direct injury to the growers who were British subjects in our own dependencies. A few days ago the right hon. Gentleman the Member for West Birmingham twitted an hon. Member
1338
opposite because he stated that tea growers in India and Ceylon would be adversely affected. But it was perfectly obvious that an injury would be inflicted on both the consumer and the producer, because the consumer would have to pay a higher price for the article, and as regarded the producer because the market would be, to a certain extent, spoiled, and there would not be the same demand as if there had been no tax put on.
There was another consolation for putting on this tax, and that was that it would press so hardly on the people of the whole of the United Kingdom—Irishmen as well as Englishmen—that it would, he hoped, cause the people seriously to reflect how taxation of this kind could be avoided in time to come. It would be a hard and a cruel lesson for the people, but it would be a lesson; and he hoped that the people of the country would lay to heart the obvious reflection which they were always repeating in this House but never laying to heart, and that was that the only way to avoid taxation of this kind on the conveniences and necessaries of the people was to direct the policy and conduct the affairs of the nation in such a way that such demands on the people would be no longer necessary. If they made up their minds that they were going to be a great military Empire, that they were going to have always a great force ready to strike at their enemies in any part of the world, they must pay for it. It was no use holding out to the people of the United Kingdom any prospect of economy if they were going to pursue a policy which would make a great military Empire of the British Empire of to-day. Let him not be denounced as a Little Englander. He claimed to be an Imperialist of the true sort, because he rejoiced over the extension of the influence of this country in the world. But he looked to the extension of that influence as more likely to result from a just, firm, and benevolent policy towards other nations than from a policy of maintaining soldiers and munitions of war by which force could be exercised against other nations. If this country was to have a small expenditure it must make up its mind to be a model Empire. He hoped

1339
that the people of this country would consider between now and next year how the expenditure of the country could be brought within the means of the country without having to resort to taxation of this kind—taxation on corn, sugar, tea, and the other materials which the people of this country consumed, and on the cheapness of which their happiness, to a great extent, depended. The only way of doing that was for them to be content with defending themselves against foreign attack and with maintaining the Navy to preserve their shores from invasion, giving up the idea of keeping a striking force at enormous expenditure in order to intermeddle with affairs in other parts of the world. The great country which was their best ally and which was the product of their own people, the United States, did not keep a great striking force, but contented themselves with adequate provision for the defence of their own territory.
MR. SPEAKER: The right hon. Gentleman is now, I think, entering on topics which cannot be entered on on each Resolution. It may be that, when the whole scheme is before the House on the Second Reading of the Finance Bill, the question of excessive expenditure may be discussed, but on the tea duty it is impossible to allow a discussion on the whole policy which leads to expenditure.
SIR JOHN GORSTsaid he strongly regretted having been betrayed into matters which he now saw were beside the Resolution. He would reserve any further remarks on the subject until the Second Reading of the Finance Bill, when no doubt they would be in order.
MR. J. P. FARRELLsaid the opposition of the Irish Members to this increase in the tax upon tea was based upon the Report of the Financial Relations Committee, which stated that Ireland was already over-taxed to the extent of some £3,000,000 or £4,000,000 a year. The additional tax upon tea would add to that over-taxation some £300.000. It was a very grievous burden, and from that point of view he associated himself with everything which had been said in opposition to the imposition of this extra twopence. This
1340
tax would inevitably lead, also, to the deterioration of tea. It was not the rich man who suffered, but the poor man: and he held strong opinions on this question of the adulteration of tea, for that was what it came to. The lunacy statistics of Ireland were a lamentable spectacle. When he occupied the position of a magistrate in Ireland he was frequently called upon to commit lunatics, and in most cases the doctors stated that the lunacy was due to the excessive use of tea, owing to the practice among the poor of having the teapot stewing on the fire all day long and extracting the tannin, which was a positive poison, from the tea. The poor people who had to live to a very large extent upon this product would naturally suffer, because the tea supplied would not be so good as before. He opposed this extra duty not only upon that ground but also on the ground that it was the result of a war to which the Irish people gave no countenance and for which, therefore, they should not be made to pay. This tax was a grave injustice to the poorest in Ireland.
MR. LABOUCHEREregretted that the right hon. Member for the Cambridge University was interrupted in his very interesting remarks with regard to the foreign policy of the Government, but was glad to hear of the right hon. Member's intention to revert to that subject on the Second Reading of the Finance Bill. The right hon. Gentleman was one, whom he could welcome as a brother as his opinions were sound. But unfortunately, in common with other Members of the Party opposite, although his head was sound his legs were weak and his arguments did not carry him into the proper lobby. He warned the right hon. Gentleman and those who thought with him that they would never induce their own side to take up a policy which [hey advocated until they impressed on their leaders the fact that until they did they would not vote for them. One, strong characteristic of hon. Gentlemen opposite was that they seemed to have a hatred of the word "free": directly they heard of "free labour" it was "slavery," they would not hear of "free trade," and when a "free breakfast table" was spoken of would not listen. The tax

1341
on the breakfast table had been reduced under Liberal Administrations, but under this Government it had been continually added to. and if it was not now put a stop to where was it to end? They had taxed the sugar; they had taxed the tea; they would tax the cup into which the tea was poured and the spoon with which it was stirred. The Government seemed to be under the impression that they could humbug and hoodwink poor men to such an extent that they would be not only content but pleased at every tax put upon them, so long as they knew that the money was going to be spent; that they would say, "My tea is taxed, thank God. My sugar is taxed, thank God. Everything I have is taxed, thank God, because the Government is going to spend the money in running after Tibetans in Tibet or Mad Mullahs in Somaliland." That was a mistake; the English people would have no taxation of the commodities of the breakfast table.
What was the reason of this tax? The reason was that the Government, like a silly woman out shopping, wanted to buy two ships from the Chilian Government because they thought they had a bargain. The amount paid for those two ships just equalled the amount to be raised by this tax on tea. It was true that tea in one sense was not a necessity, but then a great many things we used were not necessaries. The clothes we wore in summer were not a necessity; the roof that covered us was not a necessity, we could perch in trees. All these things were comforts to which we had become so accustomed as to become necessary to our existence. Tea in that way had become a necessity. Let the House reflect how women enjoyed themselves over a cup of tea. In this House there was a special room called the tea room, to which hon. Members retired when debates were dull and cheered themselves up with a cup of tea. One hon. Member practically ascribed the fact of his being so useful and able a Member of this House to the effect of the tea he used to drink. Look at what the House might have lost! Moreover, if the tax on tea had been less, so that he could have purchased more, his hon. friend might have been—if it were possible—an even more useful and able Member. The extraordinary theory of the Chancellor of the Exchequer as to the consumption
1342
of tea having reached saturation point had been effectively disposed of by the hon. Member for West Islington. To a large class of people who had to struggle for existence tea was a practical necessity, and a rise in the price must inevitably either diminish the quantity or lower the quality of the tea they were able to buy.
Advocates of the new fiscal creed contended that import duties fell on the producer. The tea duty would certainly not fall on the Chinese producer, for he could not produce more cheaply than at present, and if he lost his market it simply meant that land would have to go out of cultivation. The same was true of India. And this was from a Government who were supposed to be in favour of assisting the Colonies! Indirect taxes were a mean fraud on the community, because they enabled the Chancellor of the Exchequer to skin the people without their knowledge. He would like to see nothing but direct taxation, and that should begin where the struggle for existence ended. That was his idea of a sound fiscal system. The Liberal Party when in office might, certainly, have done better than their record proved to have been the case. This he would say—that if only a Radical Ministry were placed in office they would give Members such a Budget and such a scheme of finance as would surprise them. They would act on the principle so ably advocated by the right hon. Gentleman the Member for West Birmingham—the principle of "ransom"; they would place the burden on the shoulders best able to bear it; they would effect economies, and do away with the wild and reckless foreign policy which rendered necessary the present huge armaments; and every farthing of taxation would be spent for the benefit of the people of this country. He was not ashamed to call himself a "Little Englander" and a parochial politician. A man could not go far wrong if he devoted himself as a legislator to the welfare of the 40,000,000 of people who inhabited this country, and whose interests would never be properly looked after until there was in power a sound Radical Government, who would bring in a system of Radical finance under which hon. Members opposite would simply writhe.
MR. THEODORE TAYLORsaid the difference between many Members on the Government side of the House and Members of the Opppsition was that the former, although they believed this tax to be far too high, were going to vote in favour of it, while the latter, with the same belief, were going to vote against it. The only way in which the expenditure of the country could be reduced was by voting in the House, and he hoped that Members on both sides would endeavour by that means to lessen the Estimates even in the present year. There was one branch of expenditure in regard to which many Members seemed absolutely afraid of suggesting any reduction. The word "Navy" was very like the blessed word "Mesopotamia," and immediately a reduction was moved on any Navy Vote Members ran like rabbits out of the House. It was high time this fear of words was discarded, and some real economy attempted. He hoped that if ever the Liberal Party got into power, and he supposed they would do some day, they would retain the love for economy, and that they would be reinforced by many Members on the other side of the House.
His main objection to the present tea duty was that it was a poll-tax on poverty. It was almost as much a capitation tax in its effect as that levied in the time of Wat Tyler, and everybody knew what happened then. He hoped the time would come when every taxpayer would be given a slip of paper containing a résumé of the Budget, so that they would know the amount they were paying and the objects for which it was required. If such a system had been in force he doubted whether any Chancellor of the Exchequer would have dared to propose this increase in the tea duty. The spirits and beer duties were not to be increased because they were alleged to have reached the limit of productiveness. But had not another limit been more than reached, viz., that of the productiveness and happiness of the very poor? A large class of the community were only just above the minimum of subsistence. The only charm political life possessed for him was the hope that he might be able to do something for those who were unable to help themselves, and the motive he
1344
claimed for himself he freely conceded to all others. But what better way was there of helping these poor people than by laying as small a burden as possible upon them? Already the income-tax was graduated in regard to exemptions, and if it was right that incomes of less than £160should escape that impost, why should not indirect taxation be so devised as to pass over the sheer necessaries of bare existence? The price of sugar had already been increased by at least ½d. per lb. as a result of the Government policy. Many poor widows in the country really lived on bread, butter, sugar, and tea. Tea was already taxed 75 per cent., and now they were going to increase it to 100 per cent. This was a serious matter to them. As expressed in halfpennies the tax looked small, but if they placed themselves in the position of these people, whether in London, Scotland, or Ireland, they would refuse to put any more burdens upon them. There was a remarkable economic difference between a tax on wealth and a tax on poverty. If they taxed the rich man he saved rather less. If the middle classes or better class of the working people, they would do without luxuries, but if they taxed the very poor they would do without things which were generally regarded as essential. Not only had the classes who were just above the Poor Law relief line, and those brought within that line, to pay more for their sugar and tea, but they had to do without some other article manufactured by other classes of the community, and so not only would these people suffer by this tax but various trades would suffer as well. They had to buy less food and less clothing.
He believed from the economic point of view, apart from the philanthropic point of view, that taxation of the poor was the most wasteful kind of taxation. The right hon. Gentleman the Member for West Bristol said in 1901 that this was a tax on an article produced not mainly by the foreigner but by our fellow - subjects in India and Ceylon. He heard the Chancellor of the Exchequer say last night that hon. Members had challenged him to enter upon that aspect of the taxation question raised by his right hon. relative, upon which, however, the Members of the Government had entered into a compact

1345
of silence. But hon. Members were not bound by any such compact of silence as that. It was perfectly proper in discussing this tax to bear in mind the possible effect of it in the future. It had been said on rather high authority that tea was as much a necessity of life as bread, and therefore they were quite entitled to point out that if the tea tax was raised from 75 per cent, cd calorem to 100 per cent., which was the present proposal, this might be made use of in the future as a kind of equalisation all round of the taxation on necessities. Therefore he objected to it on that ground. It seemed to him that this was a perfectly appropriate and proper argument for free-traders to urge against any further taxation upon tea. Our fellow-subjects in India and Ceylon were taking very decided action in this matter. The Chamber of Commerce in Ceylon on Thursday last passed a resolution, which he hoped the Chancellor of the Exchequer had received, protesting against any increase in the tea duty and declaring that this crushing burden, amounting to over 100 per cent, on the staple produce of Ceylon, was calculated to imperil very seriously the prosperity and welfare of that colony. The right hon. Gentleman the Member for West Bristol told them three years ago that the trade of tea production in India and Ceylon was not then doing very well, but it was even in a worse condition now. The right hon. Gentleman then told them that the trade of India, owing largely to over-production, was by no means in a satisfactory condition, and he did not think they ought to increase the duty on tea. In the interests of their fellow-subjects in those dependencies as well as in the interests of the consumers, who he believed would be injured by this tax, he should vote | against the addition of twopence to the tea duty.
SIR HENRY FOWLERsaid there was one peculiarity about this debate which was worthy of observation, and it was that hon. Members on the Government side representing large constituencies of the working classes had, almost all of them, remained absolutely silent during the discussion.
MR. AUSTEN CHAMBERLAIN: And I am very grateful to them.
SIR HENRY FOWLERsaid his point was that their constituencies would not be grateful to them, because the Resolution before the House was a tax imposing an extraordinary, unexpected, and a very heavy burden upon the working classes of this country. In regard to such a proposal, whether hon. Members opposite supported or opposed it, he thought the men of all others who were entitled to speak upon this question were those who represented the working classes. He should like to hear some such Conservative Member stand up and say he believed the working classes would not object to pay this tax, and that the Chancellor of the Exchequer had rightly apportioned this burden upon them. To such an argument and to such a statement the House would be bound to attach the weight it would deserve. There was another peculiarity about this debate. The Chancellor of the Exchequer, at any rate, had settled a question which had been very much in dispute during the last twelve months. The country had been told in impassioned speeches, elaborate articles, and pamphlets and leaflets of every description, that where a tax was imposed upon an article which was produced abroad and imported into this country that tax was paid by the producer, the foreigner. He should like to hear the hon. Member for Sheffield, who had been the eloquent and consistent advocate of that theory for many years, or some other supporter of the new fiscal policy, say that in this case this tax upon tea producers would fall upon the Chinese, and that the British consumer would be entirely exempt. They could not have a better illustration than this. There was a very small amount of tea imported from China, he believed the proportion was nearly 95 per cent, from India and only 5 per cent, from China, but every man in the House knew that within twenty four hours of the Resolution imposing this tax being passed the price of tea was raised practically throughout the United Kingdom, by the full amount of the tax. There had been no recognition of the argument of which so much had been heard that when they put a tax upon an article of this description the burden was distributed among the producers, the carriers, the merchants, and the consumers. Nothing of the sort. Every shilling of the additional tax was already charged to the working

1347
classes, and that would not be confined, as had already been shown, to the amount of the tax. His right hon. friend the Member for the University of Cambridge in a very powerful speech pointed out that the addition to this tax would not only be the actual amount of the duty levied, but would be based upon the attendant consequences of levying such an additional tax, which would make it an additional burden.
There was another feature of the debate for which they were also indebted to the Chancellor of the Exchequer. He had not convinced the House, though he had convinced himself, that it was absolutely necessary to levy this taxation. It was a singular Budget, and they had not had an opportunity yet, as no doubt they would have, of discussing it in all its aspects. There was a Chancellor of the Exchequer who produced five or six Budgets, and who was alleged to have under-estimated what the revenue would produce in order that he might have an enormous surplus at the end of the year. He alluded to Mr. Lowe, whose estimates for a succession of years, whether intentionally or unintentionally, were much below what the taxes actually did produce. He was not going to charge the present Chancellor of the Exchequer with that; but he did think the right hon. Gentleman was under-estimating the produce of the revenue next year when he contemplated a surplus of nearly £750,000. That was a large sum to take from the country if it was not absolutely necessary. He thought the true test of sound finance, and the course which the Chancellor of the Exchequer should pursue, was to take as little from the taxpayers as he possibly could, of course keeping on the safe side. Of course the right hon. Gentleman must keep within the lines of safety and that he quite admitted. The Chancellor of the Exchequer was called upon to prove that it was absolutely necessary for the expenditure of the country that this sum should be raised. He was not now going to discuss the expenditure of the country, for the Chairman had ruled that that could not be done at present, but it was impossible to keep out of their minds that they were really putting on additional taxation because of additional expenditure which a large number of
1348
Members of the House believed to be unnecessary. That question would. of course, arise on another occasion.
This was an addition to a war tax. No other war tax had been increased. The' Chancellor of the Exchequer was now asking the working classes to pay a tax of 8d. on tea, in a time of peace, under a peace Budget, though during the last peace Budget the people were only paying 4d. He thought that was a very serious feature in this proposal. The right hon. Gentleman in his Budget speech said that beer and spirits would not stand any more taxation because there was a danger point beyond which they could not endure further burdens. He had been rather disposed to agree with the Chancellor of the Exchequer that the point had very nearly been reached; but within ten days of that statement the Home Secretary proposed a compensation tax on those articles of £1,000,000 per annum on the sellers of beer and spirits, and that tax would practically fall on the consumers of these commodities. The right hon. Gentleman did not contemplate dealing in this increase of taxation with the taxation of luxuries. It was simpler and easier to put the tax on necessaries. What the Chancellor of the Exchequer was proposing was to increase permanently the taxation of the country through an article of universal consumption. This tea tax fell with excessive severity on the poorest of the poor. He thought that every expedient should have been adopted before a tax on one of the prime necessaries of life to the working people was imposed. He believed that the food of a large number of working people, especially in Ireland, for the great bulk of the week was bread and tea, and this was the class which ought to receive special consideration in this matter. He agreed with his hon. friend the Member for Edinburgh as to what was the true policy that ought to be followed in all these cases. He agreed also with his right hon. friend the Member for the University of Cambridge, who spoke of the need for teaching a lesson to the country, and that the working people should be taught to feel the burden of the increased expenditure. He agreed also with the view of his right hon. friend the Member for the Montrose Burghs, that where a great military

1349
operation was undertaken in which all classes were interested and were responsible it was desirable that the burden should be spread over the whole community. But where was the lesson going to begin with respect to the other classes of the community? The income-tax during the war was Is. 3d., it was reduced last year to l1d., and it was raised this year to Is.; so that the class of the community possessing the greatest influence and power in the House would not feel the keenest effect of the Budget. He doubted very much whether it was necessary for the expenditure of the country in a time of peace, under the conditions in which we were now living, and with the knowledge that money was being wasted.
THE PRIME MINISTER AND FIRST LORD OF THE TREASURY (Mr. A. J. BALFOUR,): On what?
SIR HENRY FOWLER: On every department of public expenditure. He made no exception; money was being wasted all round, and he believed that expenditure could be reduced in every department. But if the Chancellor of the Exchequer had proposed, in order to maintain the existing expenditure in time of peace, to add 3d. to the income-tax, he did not think that the Government would have remained in office twenty-four hours after the proposal had been made. The pressure of the House would have been too powerful.
MR. SWIFT MACNEILL: Outside influence.
SIR HENRY FOWLERsaid he regretted that the Chancellor of the Exchequer had selected the article of tea for increased taxation. It was liable to all the objections raised against any form of indirect taxation. Taxation of this kind ought not to be resorted to except under the gravest emergency. When in a time of peace it had been reduced to 4d., and then raised in a time of war to 6d., the first thing the Chancellor of the Exchequer should do was to bring the tax back again to 4d. He should record his vote against the increase of the tax.
MR. GIBSON BOWLESsaid there were many Departments of the
1350
State which cost far more than they should do, but this was not the time to protest against the charges. It was when the Estimates were being discussed, or when Bills and Resolutions authorising loans and expenditure on public works were submitted. He had endeavoured to stop expenditure of this kind, and on one occasion he did his best to stop the granting of £2,000 a year to the Incorporated Law Society, which the right hon. Gentleman the Member for Wolverhampton strongly supported. He hoped that on the next occasion when he endeavoured to save a little money to the country he would have his support. The right hon. Gentleman talked of the working men of the country living on bread and tea. He himself knew many working men and he did not believe there was one in a thousand in this country at the present time who lived on bread and tea. There was, perhaps, a time when that was the case, but that was long gone by. The right hon. Gentleman put another test which was hardly fair when he asked whether working people were anxious to pay this tax. He never knew anyone, rich or poor, who was anxious to pay any tax whatever. He did not agree with the right hon. Gentleman when he said that the Chanceller of the Exchequer had budgeted for too large a surplus. In his opinion the Chancellor of the Exchequer had over-estimated the income which he would receive from this extra duty on tea. The inevitable result of the increased duty would be a fall in the con sumption of tea, and there certainly was no question here that the tax would fall on the consumer. Millions of pounds of tea that had not paid the increased duty were being sold at the higher figure, so that the consumer was paying considerably more now than the extra duty. Four per cent, of our tea came from China and 93 per cent, from India and Ceylon, but while the tariff reformer professed an enormous affection for the Colonies it was an extraordinary thing in all the tariff question that India was left entirely out of account. That was one reason, perhaps, why tea was selected for this extra burden. From that point of view he thought that the tea duty would disappoint the expectations of the right hon. Gentleman. He did not know if there would be a

1351
surplus left to the right hon. Gentleman after he had had a few interviews with the tobacco trade, and representatives of the tea merchants, and the tea planters of India and Ceylon. As he had said before, the Chancellor of the Exchequer was the victim of a situation created by this House. When the House voted the Estimates, it must expect fro be called upon to pay them. Nevertheless, there was a right left to the House to criticise the manner in which the revenue was to be raised. He could not regard tea as a food. It was less a food than beer, and very much less than sugar. He had not the same delicate feeling about tea as a bout sugar; but he felt that this extra tax upon tea would press very hardly upon the poor because too many of these poor people had discarded their ancient beverage of beer for tea.
MR. WHITLEYsaid he was surprised that no hon. Member on the Government Benches had ventured to rise in response to the challenge of his right hon. friend. He noticed that the Prime Minister had immediately gathered up his skirts and fled, and did not venture on a reply. He was sure that the House would have been intensely interested if they had had from the right hon. Gentleman some "economic notes" as to whether this tax would fall on the consumer or producer. He ventured to ask the understudy of the hon. Member for West Birmingham —he meant the hon. Member for Tunbridge—whether he could give the House a little enlightenment on that particular point. They really ought to hear the hon. Gentleman's views on this tax on tea. He objected very strongly to this proposed additional tax on tea, because it was a tax graduated as badly as a tax could be; graduated, that was to say, in exactly the wrong direction; and it pressed most heavily on the smallest incomes. He objected to it also because of its secondary effects upon the trade of the country. The Chancellor of the Exchequer in his Budget speech gave a gloomy, and he was afraid a true, account of the trade of the country during the last twelve months. What was the reason why our trade has so sadly fallen off? So far as his own experience went, the decline was not in
1352
foreign trade, but in the home trade; and the falling off in the home demand was due to the reduced spending power of the great masses of the people, owing to the heavy demands that were being made upon them by the Chancellor of the Exchequer. The margin which lay between the absolute necessaries of life and the small luxuries was becoming narrower, and, therefore, the working classes had less to spend. The great textile industries of the country, which depended so largely on the home demand, were specially affected. He was convinced that this tax was not only bad. but that any addition to indirect taxation, which fell heavily on the working classes, meant a less demand for clothing and other necessaries, and had, therefore, a very farreaching effect on the whole industries of the country. He ventured to hope that the House would not agree with the Resolution.
MR. McKENNAsaid that his hon. friend had expressed a wish to hear the views of the right hon. Member for West Bristol on this tea tax. A speech by the late Chancellor of the Exchequer delivered in 1901 had been referred to; but since then the right hon. Gentleman had made another speech, in 1902, in which he expressed a very remarkable opinion about the tea tax. The right hon. Gentleman then said—
"I come to tea. Well, I have listened to the pitiable cry of our fellow subjects, the tea producers of India and Ceylon. Bear in mind that tea, which is almost a necessary of life, is already taxed to 75 per cent, of its value. I acknowledge I would be very sorry to increase that tax."
Now, the right hon. Gentleman was bound to find new taxes to meet the war expenditure, and he passed by tea; and he found satisfactory reason why he should not increase the tax upon sugar, and turned to corn, and instituted the Is. duty on corn. Why did not the present Chancellor of the Exchequer propose a duty on corn now, instead of on tea? What was good for hon. Gentlemen opposite two years ago, one would have thought was good enough to-day; and as a Is. duty on corn would bring in exactly the same amount as the proposed addition to the tax on tea, he was astonished that the hon. Member for Tunbridge and his friends

1353
did not insist to-day, as they insisted on a recent occasion in this House, upon the Chancellor of the Exchequer abandoning this duty on tea, and going back to the Is. duty on corn, which they found so satisfactory two years ago. Of course, they had this advantage that, according to their theory, the Is. duty on corn was paid by the railway companies of the United States. After that duty had been passed, the hon. Gentleman the hon. Member for Tunbridge had proved that by facts and figures. He thought he had seen a publication, not altogether unconnected with the hon. Gentleman, in which it was stated that every penny of that corn tax was paid by the American railways and by the shipping firms, and that not one farthing of it fell on the taxpayers of this country. And yet, believing that, hon. Members opposite, representing British constituencies, were willing to support the imposition of an additional tax of 2d. in the lb. on tea instead of a Is. duty on American railways! That was political consistency and political courage! If hon. Members opposite, after such an exhibition as that, imagined that the British people believed in the sham agitation for tariff reform he would be very much surprised.
If they were to have the tax on tea, why should it not be imposed in such a way as would not raise the price of tea to the poorest classes? The right hon. Member for West Bristol spoke of tea being taxed on the average at 75 per cent, of its value and the proposed addition to the tax would increase that to 100 per cent. He was told that tea was sold at present as low as 6d. per lb., but that the average price of all teas was 8d. per lb. If the right hon. Gentleman, the Chancellor of the Exchequer, was to impose a duty of, 100 per cent, ad valorem, he would raise exactly the same amount. The effect of an ad valorem duty of 100 per rent, would be that the cheapest tea would be sold as at present at 6d. per lb. while the consumption of the higher class of Chinese and Ceylon teas would not be decreased. If 2d. per lb., as suggested by the Chancellor of the Exchequer, were added to the price of the cheapest teas, it would immediately diminish the consumption of these: but
1354
if the right hon. Gentleman were to put 100 per cent, ad valorem duty on all teas, he would leave the consumption of these cheap teas exactly as it was, and yet would obtain the revenue which he anticipated. He therefore suggested that the right hon. Gentleman should withdraw his Resolution from the consideration of the House, and introduce a duty of 100 per cent, ad valorem. It was surprising to think that our working classes should be taxed on tea more heavily than those in any other country in Europe. In Denmark the duty was only 4d. per lb., in Germany 5½ d., Holland 2½d., in Belgium it was free, in France it was 9d., in Italy, l1d.—but there tea was very little drunk—and in Switzerland it was as low as 1¾d. It was a pity that in this country, where tea was so largely drunk and where, in the words of the late Chancellor of the Exchequer, it was almost a necessary of life, that we should now add 2d. per lb. to the duty, and so diminish its consumption.
MR. AINSWORTHsaid that as representing a Highland constituency, he might be allowed to refer to the hardship which the tax would inflict on the Highland districts. He thought he might make a special appeal to the House, because there were very few hon. Members who did not hope to spend a portion of their holidays in the North and West of Scotland. Hon. Members knew how the crofters and the fishermen lived. The fishermen were not so badly off in the fishing season; but the only luxury a crofter and his family had was a cup of tea. He would remind the House of some correspondence which appeared in the Standard newspaper a few days ago, in which it was pointed out that one of the results of the tax would undoubtedly be to divert the trade in the direction of cheaper and inferior China teas, and everyone knew how injurious that would be. It was said that having voted for the Estimates they were now bound to vote for these taxes; but the Chancellor of the Exchequer was looking forward to a surplus at the close of the year, and he should like to encourage the right hon. Gentleman to increase it on the way in which any business firm

1355
would act, namely, by decreasing expenditure. That was the reason why they not only voted against the Estimates but would vote with equal persistency against this taxation. He should like to suggest to the Chancellor of the Exchequer how expenditure might be reduced. What was the large permanent garrison in South Africa for?
MR. SPEAKER: The question as to the mode of expenditure will not be in order on this Resolution.
MR. AINSWORTHsaid he would, of course, bow to the ruling of the Chair. He would only add that he hoped the Chancellor of the Exchequer would be able to increase his balance at the end of the year.
MR. HARWOODsaid he wished to say a word in reference to what had fallen from the hon. Member for King's Lynn. As an employer of labour his experience was that tea was being more and more largely consumed in substitution for beer. He was not a teetotaller; but he was bound to say that he had noticed, he believed as a result of the change, an enormous increase in the sobriety of
the workpeople, and an increase in the effectiveness of their labour, so much so that regular facilities were now provided for the workers to have tea at all their meals. It certainly was the fact that the workers did depend largely on tea, especially the poorer classes. In reply to the philosophy propounded by the right hon. Gentleman the Member for Cambridge University, he rather advocated the tax from a punitive point of view; the people, he said, were extravagant and the tax would bring home to them the result of their extravagance. Taking the South African War as an example, he would remind the right hon. Gentleman that the people did not urge on the war, or the extravagant expenditure connected with it, but they loyally supported the decision of the House. It was not for the people to decide; and, therefore, they should not be punished as they did not take the initiative. It was rather hard that those who loyally supported the decision of the House should now be punished.
Question put.
The House divided:—Ayes, 239; Noes, 202. (Division List No. 97.)

AYES.

Agg-Gardner, James Tynte

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

Doughty, George

Allsopp, Hon. George

Carlile, William Walter

Douglas, Rt. Hon. A. Akers

Anson, Sir William Reynell

Carson, Rt. Hon. Sir Edw. H.

Doxford, Sir William Theodore

Arkwright, John Stanhope

Cautley, Henry Strother

Duke, Henry Edward

Arnold-Forster, Rt.Hn. Hugh O.

Cavendish, V.C.W. (Derbyshire)

Durning-Lawrence, Sir Edwin

Atkinson, Rt. Hon. John

Cayzer, Sir Charles William

Dyke, Rt. Hn. Sir William Hart

Aubrey-Fletcher, Rt. Hon. Sir H.

Cecil, Evelyn (Aston Manor)

Egerton, Hon. A. de Tatton

Bagot, Capt. Josceline FitzRoy

Cecil, Lord Hugh (Greenwich)

Elliot, Hon. A. Ralph Douglas

Bain, Colonel James Robert

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

Faber, Edmund B. (Hants, W.

Baird, John George Alexander

Chapman, Edward

Faber, George Denison (York)

Balcarres, Lord

Charrington, Spencer

Fardell, Sir T. George

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

Clare, Octavius Leigh

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

Balfour, Rt. Hn. Gerald W (Leeds

Clive, Captain Percy A.

Fielden, Edward Brocklehurst

Balfour, Kenneth R. (Christch.

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

Finch, Rt. Hon. George H.

Banbury, Sir Frederick George

Cohen, Benjamin Louis

Finlay, Sir Robert Bannatyne

Barry, Sir Francis T. (Windsor)

Collings, Rt. Hon. Jesse

Fisher, William Hayes

Bartley, Sir George C. T.

Corbett, T. L. (Down, North)

Fison, Frederick William

Bathurst, Hon. Allen Benjamin

Cox, Irwin Edward Bainbridge

FitzGerald, Sir Robert Penrose

Beach, Rt. Hon Sir Michael Hicks

Craig, Charles Curtis (Antrim, S.

Fitzroy, Hon. Edward Algernon

Bignold, Arthur

Cripps, Charles Alfred

Flannery, Sir Fortescue

Bigwood, James

Cross, Alexander (Glasgow)

Flower, Sir Ernest

Blundell, Colonel Henry

Crossley, Rt. Hon. Sir Savile

Forster, Henry William

Boscawen, Arthur Griffith

Cust, Henry John C.

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

Brassey, Albert

Dalrymple, Sir Charles

Fyler, John Arthur

Brodrick, Rt. Hon. St. John

Davenport, William Bromley

Galloway, William Johnson

Bull, William James

Denny, Colonel

Garfit, William

Burdett-Coutts, W.

Dickson, Charles Scott

Godson, Sir Augustus Frederick

Butcher, John George

Disraeli, Coningsby Ralph

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

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

Dorington, Rt. Hn. Sir John E.

Gordon, Maj Evans- (T'rH'mlets

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

Lucas, Reginald J.(Portsmouth

Rutherford, W. W. (Liverpool)

Gorst, Rt. Hon. Sir John Eldon

Lyttelton, Rt. Hon. Alfred

Sackville, Col. S. G. Stopford

Goschen, Hon. George Joachim

Macdona, John Cumming

Sadler, Col. Samuel Alexander

Graham, Henry Robert

MacIver, David (Liverpool)

Samuel, Sir Harry S. (Limehouse)

Green, Walford D. (Wednesbury

Maconochie, A. W.

Sandys, Lt.-Col. Thos. Myles

Greene, Sir E. W (B'ryS Edm'nds

M 'Arthur, Charles (Liverpool)

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

Greene, W. Raymond (Cambs.)

M'Calmont, Colonel James

Seton-Karr, Sir Henry

Gretton, John

Majendie, James A. H.

Sharpe, William Edward T.

Groves, James Grimble

Malcolm, Ian

Simeon, Sir Barrington

Gunter, Sir Robert

Martin, Richard Biddulph

Sloan, Thomas Henry

Hamilton, Rt. Hn Lord G (Midd'x

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

Smith, H C (North'mb Tyneside

Hamilton, Marq. of (L'nd'nderry

Maxwell, W.J.H. (Dumfriessh.)

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

Hare, Thomas Leigh

Meysey-Thompson, Sir H. M.

Spear, John Ward

Harris, F. Leverton (Tynem'th)

Middlemore, John Throgmorton

Spencer, Sir E. (W. Bromwich)

Haslam, Sir Alfred S

Mildmay, Francis Bingham

Stanley, Edward Jas.(Somerset)

Heath, James (Stafford, N. W.

Milner, Rt. Hn. Sir Frederick G.

Stanley, Rt. Hon. Lord (Lancs.

Heaton, John Henniker

Mitchell, Edw. (Fermanagh, N.

Stewart, Sir Mark J. M' Taggart

Helder, Augustus

Mitchell, William (Burnley)

Stirling-Maxwell, Sir John M.

Henderson, Sir A. (Stafford, W.

Molesworth, Sir Lewis

Stone, Sir Benjamin

Hickman, Sir Alfred

Morpeth, Viscount

Stroyan, John

Hoare, Sir Samuel

Morrell, George Herbert

Strutt, Hon. Charles Hedley

Hobhouse, Rt Hn H. (Somers't, E

Morrison, James Archibald

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

Hope, J. F. (Sheffield, Bright-side

Morton, Arthur H. Aylmer

Taylor, Austin (East Toxteth)

Hoult, Joseph

Mowbray, Sir Robert Gray C.

Thornton, Percy M.

Houston, Robert Paterson

Muntz, Sir Philip A.

Tollemache, Henry James

Howard, J. (Midd., Tottenham

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

Tritton, Charles Ernest

Hozier, Hn. James Henry Cecil

Murray, Col. Wyndham (Bath)

Tuff, Charles

Hunt, Rowland

Nicholson, William Graham

Tufnell, Lieut.-Col. Edward

Jebb, Sir Richard Claverhouse

O'Neill, Hon. Robert Torrens

Tuke, Sir John Batty

Jeffreys, Rt. Hon. Arthur Fred.

Parkes, Ebenezer

Valentia, Viscount

Jessel, Captain Herbert Merton

Peel, Hn. Wm. Robert Wellesley

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

Johnstone, Heywood (Sussex)

Pemberton, John S. G.

Walrond, Rt. Wn. Sir William H

Kennaway, Rt. Hon. Sir John H.

Percy, Earl

Warde, Colonel C. E.

Kenyon, Hon. Geo. T. (Denbigh)

Pierpoint, Robert

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

Kenyon-Slaney, Col. W. (Salop.

Plummer, Walter R.

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

Kimber, Henry

Powell, Sir Francis Sharp

Whiteley, H.(Ashton und.Lyne

King, Sir Henry Seymour

Pretyman, Ernest George

Whitmore, Charles Algernon

Knowles, Sir Lees

Pryce-Jones, Lt.-Col. Edward

Williams, Colonel R. (Dorset)

Laurie, Lieut.-General

Pym, C. Guy

Willoughby de Eresby, Lord

Law, Andrew Bonar (Glasgow)

Quilter, Sir Cuthbert

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

Lawson, John Grant (Yorks, N. R

Rankin, Sir James

Wilson, John (Glasgow)

Lee, Arthur H. (Hants.,Fareham

Remnant, James Farquharson

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

Legge, Col. Hon. Heneage

Renshaw, Sir Charles Bine

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

Leveson-Gower, Frederick N.S.

Renwick, George

Worsloy-Taylor, Henry Wilson

Llewellyn, Evan Henry

Ridley, S. Forde (Bethnal Green

Wortley, Rt. Hn. C. B. Stuart

Loder, Gerald Walter Erskine

Ritchie, Rt. Hn. Chas. Thomson

Wrightson, Sir Thomas

Long, Col. Chas. W. (Evesham)

Roberts, Samuel (Sheffield)

Wylie, Alexander

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

Robertson, Herbert (Hackney)

Wyndham-Quin, Col. W. H.

Lonsdale, John Brownlee

Ropner, Colonel Sir Robert

Lowe, Francis William

Round, Rt. Hon. James

TELLERS FOR THE AYES—Sir Alexander Acland - Hood and Mr. Ailwyn Fellowes.

Loyd, Archie Kirkman

Royds, Clement Molyneux

Lucas, Col. Francis (Lowestoft)

Rutherford, John (Lancashire)

NOES.

Abraham, William (Cork, N.E.)

Brigg, John

Crean, Eugene

Ainsworth, John Stirling

Brown, George M. (Edinburgh

Cremer, William Randal

Allen, Charles P.

Brunner, Sir John Tomlinson

Crombie, John William

Ambrose, Robert

Buchanan, Thomas Ryburn

Crooks, William

Asher, Alexander

Burke, E. Haviland

Cullinan, J.

Ashton, Thomas Gair

Burt, Thomas

Dalziel, James Henry

Asquith, Rt. Hn. Herb. Henry

Buxton, Sydney Charles

Davies, Alfred (Carmarthen)

Atherley-Jones, L.

Caldwell, James

Davies, M. Vaughan (Cardigan

Austin, Sir John

Campbell, John (Armagh, S.)

Delany, William

Barran, Rowland Hirst

Campbell-Bannerman, Sir H.

Devlin, Chas. Ramsay (Galway

Barry, E. (Cork, S.)

Causton, Richard Knight

Devlin, Joseph (Kilkenny, N.)

Bayley, Thomas (Derbyshire)

Cawley, Frederick

Dewar, John A. (Inverness-sh.

Beaumont, Wentworth C. B.

Channing, Francis Allston

Dilke, Rt. Hon. Sir Charles

Black, Alexander William

Coghill, Douglas Harry

Donelan, Captain A.

Blake, Edward

Condon, Thomas Joseph

Doogan, P. C.

Roland, John

Corbett, A. Cameron (Glasgow

Douglas, Charles M. (Lanark)

Bolton, Thomas Dolling

Craig, Robert Hunter (Lanark

Duncan, J. Hastings

1358

1359

Dunn, Sir William

Leigh, Sir Joseph

Redmond, William (Clare)

Edwards, Frank

Leng, Sir John

Rickett, J. Compton

Elibank, Master of

Levy, Maurice

Rigg, Richard

Ellice, Capt. E C (S. Andrw'sBghs

Logan, John William

Roberts, John H. (Denbighs.)

Ellis, John Edward (Notts.)

Lough, Thomas

Robertson, Edmund (Dundee)

Emmott, Alfred

Lundon, W.

Robson, William Snowdon

Esmonde, Sir Thomas

MacNeill, John Gordon Swift

Roche, John

Evans, Sir Francis H. (Maidstone

MacVeagh, Jeremiah

Roe, Sir Thomas

Evans, Samuel T. (Glamorgan)

M'Crae, George

Russell, T. W.

Eve, Harry Trelawney

M'Fadden, Edward

Samuel, Herbert L. (Cleveland

Farquharson, Dr. Robert

M'Hugh, Patrick A.

Samuel, S. M. (Whitechapel)

Farrell, James Patrick

M'Kean, John

Schwann, Charles E.

Fenwick, Charles

M'Kenna, Reginald

Shaw, Charles Edw. (Stafford)

Ferguson, R. C. Munro (Leith)

M'Killop, W. (Sligo, North)

Shaw, Thomas (Hawick B.)

Ffrench, Peter

Mansfield, Horace Kendall

Sheehy, David

Fitzmaurice, Lord Edmond

Mappin, Sir Frederick Thorpe

Shipman, Dr. John G.

Flynn, James Christopher

Markham, Arthur Basil

Sinclair, John (Forfarshire)

Foster, Sir Walter (Derby Co.)

Mooney, John J.

Slack, John Bamford

Fowler, Rt. Hon. Sir Henry

Morgan, J. Lloyd (Carmarthen)

Smith, Samuel (Flint)

Freeman-Thomas, Captain F.

Moss, Samuel

Spencer, Rt. Hn. C. R (Northants

Fuller, J. M. F.

Moulton, John Fletcher

Strachey, Sir Edward

Furness, Sir Christopher

Murnaghan, George

Sullivan, Donal

Gilhooly James

Murphy, John

Taylor, Theodore C. (Radcliffe

Goddard, Daniel Ford

Nannetti, Joseph P.

Thomas, Abel (Carmarthen, E.

Griffith, Ellis J.

Newnes, Sir George

Thomas, Sir A. (Glamorgan, E.

Gurdon, Sir W. Brampton

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

Thomas, David Alfred (Merthyr)

Harcourt, Lewis V. Rossendale

Nolan, Joseph (Louth, South)

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

Harmsworth, R. Leicester

Norman, Henry

Tomkinson, James

Harwood, George

Norton, Capt. Cecil William

Toulmin, George

Hayden, John Patrick

Nussey, Thomas Willans

Trevelyan, Charles Philips

Hayter, Rt. Hn. Sir A. D.

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

Ure, Alexander

Helme, Norval Watson

O'Brien, Kendal (Tipperary Mid

Waldron, Laurence Ambrose

Hemphill, Rt. Hon. Charles H.

O'Brien, Patrick (Kilkenny)

Walton, Joseph (Barnsley)

Henderson, Arthor (Durham)

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

Warner, Thomas Courtenay T.

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

O'Connor, James (Wicklow,W.

Wason, Eugene (Clackmannan)

Holland, Sir William Henry

O'Donnell, John (Mayo, S.)

Wason, John Cathcart (Orkney)

Horniman, Frederick John

O'Dowd, John

Weir, James Galloway

Humphreys-Owen, Arthur C.

O'Kelly, James (Roscommon, N.

White, George (Norfolk)

Jacoby, James Alfred

O'Malley, William

White, Luke (York, E. R.)

Joicey, Sir James

O'Shaughnessy, P. J.

Whiteley, George (York, W.R.)

Jones, David Brynmor(Swansea

Palmer, Sir Chas. M. (Durham)

Whitley, J. H. (Halifax)

Jones, William (Carnarvonshire

Parrott, William

Whittaker, Thomas Palmer

Joyce, Michael

Paulton, James Mellor

Wilson, Fred, W. (Norfolk, Mid.)

Kearley, Hudson E.

Pearson, Sir Weetman D.

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

Kilbride, Denis

Perks, Robert William

Wilson, John (Durham, Mid.)

Kitson, Sir James

Pirie, Duncan V.

Wilson, John (Falkirk)

Labouchere, Henry

Power, Patrick Joseph

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

Lambert, George

Price, Robert John

Law, Hugh Alex. (Donegal, W.)

Priestley, Arthur

TELLRS FOR THE NOES—Mr. Herbert Gladstone and Mr. William M Arthur.

Lawson, Sir Wilfrid (Cornwall)

Rea, Russell

Layland-Barratt, Francis

Reddy, M.

Leamy, Edmund

Redmond, John E (Waterford)

Question put, "That this House doth agree with the Committee in the said Resolution."
The House divided:—Ayes, 236; Noes 192. (Division List No. 98.)

AYES.

Agg-Gardner, James Tynte

Balfour, Rt Hn. Gerald W.(Leeds

Brodrick, Rt. Hon. St. John

Allsopp, Hon. George

Balfour, Kenneth R. (Christch.)

Bull, William James

Anson, Sir William Reynell

Banbury, Sir Frederick George

Butcher, John George

Arkwright, John Stanhope

Barry, Sir Francis T. (Windsor)

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

Arnold-Forster, Rt. Hn. Hugh O.

Bartley, Sir George C. T.

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

Atkinson, Rt. Hon. John

Bathurst. Hon. Allen Benjamin

Carlile, William Walter

Aubrey-Fletcher, Rt. Hon. Sir H.

Beach, Rt. Hn. Sir Michael Hicks

Carson, Rt. Hon. Sir Edw. H.

Bagot, Capt. Josceline FitzRoy

Bignold, Arthur

Cautley, Henry Strother

Bain, Colonel James Robert

Bigwood, James

Cavendish, V.C.W. (Derbyshire

Baird, John George Alexander

Blundell, Colonel Henry

Cayzer, Sir Charles William

Balcarres, Lord

Boscawen, Arthur Griffith

Cecil, Evelyn (Aston Manor)

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

Brassey, Albert

Cecil, Lord Hugh (Greenwich

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

Hickman, Sir Alfred

Pretyman, Ernest George

Chapman, Edward

Hoare, Sir Samuel

Pryce-Jones, Lt.-Col. Edward

Charrington, Spencer Clive, Captain Percy A.

Hobhouse, Rt Hn H (Somers't, E

Pym, C. Guy

Hope, J.F (Sheffield, Brightside

Quilter, Sir Cuthbert

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

Hoult, Joseph

Rankin, Sir James

Cohen, Benjamin Louis

Houston, Robert Paterson

Remnant, James Farquharson

Collings, Rt. Hon. Jesse

Howard, J. (Midd., Tottenham)

Renshaw, Sir Charles Bine

Corbett, T. L. (Down, North)

Hozier, Hn. James Henry Cecil

Renwick, George

Cox, Irwin Edward Bainbridge

Hunt, Rowland

Ridley, S. Forde (Bethnal Green

Craig, Charles Curtis (Antrim, S.

Jebb, Sir Richard Claverhouse

Ritchie, Rt. Hon. Chas. Thomson

Cripps, Charles Alfred

Jeffreys, Rt. Hon. Arthur Fred.

Roberts, Samuel (Sheffield)

Cross, Alexander (Glasgow)

Jessel, Captain Herbert Merton

Robertson, Herbert (Hackney)

Crossley, Rt. Hon. Sir Savile

Johnstone, Heywood (Sussex)

Ropner, Colonel Sir Robert

Cust, Henry John C.

Kenyon, Hn. Geo. T. (Denbigh)

Round, Rt. Hon. James

Dalrymple, Sir Charles

Kenyon-Slaney, Col. W. (Salop

Royds, Clement Molyneux

Davenport, William Bromley

Kimber, Henry

Rutherford, John (Lancashire)

Denny, Colonel

King, Sir Henry Seymour

Rutherford, W. W. (Liverpool)

Dickson, Charles Scott

Knowles, Sir Lees

Sackville, Col. S. G. Stopford

Disraeli, Coningsby Ralph

Laurie, Lieut.-General

Sadler, Col. Samuel Alexander

Dorington, Rt. Hon. Sir John E.

Law, Andrew Bonar (Glasgow)

Samuel, Sir Harry S. (Limehouse

Doughty, George

Lawson, John Grant (Yorks, N. R

Sandys, Lieut.-Col. Thos. Myles

Douglas, Rt. Hon. A. Akers

Lee, Arthur H. (Hants.,Fareham

Scott, Sir S. (Marylebone, W.)

Doxford, Sir William Theodore

Legge, Col. Hon. Heneage

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

Duke, Henry Edward

Leveson-Gower, Frederick N.S.

Seton-Karr, Sir Henry

Durning-Lawrence, Sir Edwin

Llewellyn, Evan Henry

Sharpe, William Edward T.

Dyke, Rt, Hn. Sir William Hart

Loder, Gerald Walter Erskine

Simeon, Sir Barrington

Egerton, Hon. A. de Tatton

Long, Col. Charles, W. (Evesham

Sloan, Thomas Henry

Elliot, Hon. A. Ralph Douglas

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

Smith, H C. (North'mb. Tyneside

Faber, Edmund B. (Hants, W.)

Lonsdale, John Brownlee

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

Faber, George Denison (York)

Lowe, Francis William

Spear, John Ward

Fardell, Sir T. George

Lloyd, Archie Kirkman

Spencer, Sir E. (W. Bromwich)

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

Lucas, Col. Francis (Lowestoft)

Stanley, Edward Jas. (Somerset)

Fielden, Edward Brocklehurst

Lucas, Reginald J.(Portsmouth

Stanley, Rt. Hon. Lord (Lanes.

Finch, Rt. Hon George H.

Lyttelton, Rt. Hon. Alfred

Stewart, Sir Mark J. M'Taggart

Finlay, Sir Robert Bannatyne

Macdona, John Cumming

Stirling-Maxwell, Sir John M.

Fisher, William Hayes

MacIver, David (Liverpool)

Stone, Sir Benjamin

Fison, Frederick William

Maconochie, A. W.

Stroyan, John

FitzGerald, Sir Robert Penrose

M'Arthur, Charles (Liverpool)

Strutt Hon. Charles Hedley

Fitzroy, Hon. Edward Algernon

M'Calmont, Colonel James

Talbot, Lord E. (Chichester)

Flannery, Sir Fortescue

Majendie, James A. H.

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

Flower, Sir Ernest

Malcolm, Ian

Taylor, Austin (East Noxteth)

Forster, Henry William

Martin, Richard Biddulph

Thornton, Percy M.

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

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

Tollemache, Henry James

Fyler, John Arthur

Maxwell, W. J. H. (Dumfriessh.

Tritton, Charles Ernest

Galloway, William Johnson

Meysey-Thompson, Sir H. M.

Tuff, Charles

Garfit, William

Middlemore, John Throgmorton

Tufnell, Lieut.-Col. Edward

Godson, Sir Augustus Frederick

Mildmay, Francis Bingham

Tuke, Sir John Batty

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

Milner, Rt. Hon. Sir Frederick G.

Valentia, Viscount

Gordon, Maj Evans-(T'rH'mlets

Mitchell, Edw. (Fermanagh, N.)

Vincent. Col. Sir C.R H (Sheffield

Gorst, Rt. Hon. Sir John Eldon

Mitchell, William (Burnley)

Walrond, Rt. Hn. Sir William H.

Goschen, Hon. George Joachim

Molesworth, Sir Lewis

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

Graham, Henry Robert

Morpeth, Viscount

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

Green, Walford D (Wednesbury

Morrell, George Herbert

Whiteley, H (Ashton-und. Lyne)

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

Morrison, James Archibald

Williams, Colonel R. (Dorset)

Greene, W. Raymond (Cambs.)

Morton, Arthur H. Aylmer

Willoughby de Eresby, Lord

Gretton, John

Mowbray, Sir Robert Gray C.

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

Groves, James Grimble

Muntz, Sir Philip A.

Wilson, John (Glasgow)

Gunter, Sir Robert

Murray, Rt Hn. A. Graham (Bute

Wilson-Tod. Sir W. H. (Yorks.)

Hamilton, Rt Hn Lord G (Midd'x

Murray, Col. Wyndham (Bath)

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

Hamilton, Marq. of (L'nd'nderry

Nicholson, William Graham

Worsley-Taylor, Henry Wilson

Hare, Thomas Leigh

O'Neill, Hon. Robert Torrens

Wortley, Rt. Hon. C. B. Stuart

Harris, F. Leverton (Tynem'th)

Parkes, Ebenezer

Wrightson, Sir Thomas

Haslam, Sir Alfred S.

Peel, Hn. Wm. Robert Wellesley

Wylie, Alexander

Haslett, Sir James Horner

Pemberton, John S. G.

Wyndham-Quin, Col. W. H.

Heath, James (Staffords, N.W.

Percy, Karl

Heaton, John Henniker

Pierpoint, Robert

TELLERS FOR the AYES—Sir Alexander Acland-Hood and Mr. Ailwyn Fellowes.

Helder, Augustus

Plummer, Walter R.

Hendenson, Sir A. (Stafford, W.)

Powell, Sir Francis Sharp

NOES.

Abraham, William (Cork, N.E.)

Allen, Charles P.

Asher, Alexander

Ainsworth, John Stirling

Ambrose, Robert

Astruith, Rt. Hon. Herbert Henry

1362

1363

Atherley-Jones, L.

Gilhooly, James

O'Dowd, John

Austin, Sir John

Goddard, Daniel Ford

O'Kelly, James (Roscommon, N.

Barran, Rowland Hirst

Griffith, Ellis J.

O'Malley, William

Barry, E. (Cork, S.)

Gurdon, Sir W. Brampton

O'Shaughnessy, P. J.

Bayley, Thomas (Derbyshire)

Harcourt, Lewis V. (Rossendale

Palmer, Sir Charles M. (Durham)

Beaumont, Wentworth C. B

Hayden, John Patrick

Parrott, William

Black, Alexander William

Hayter, Rt. Hon. Sir Arthur D.

Pirie, Duncan V.

Blake, Edward

Helme, Norval Watson

Power, Patrick Joseph

Boland, John

Hemphill, Rt. Hon. Charles H.

Price, Robert John

Bolton, Thomas Dolling

Henderson, Arthur (Durham)

Priestley, Arthur

Brigg, John

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

Rea, Russell

Brown, George M. (Edinburgh)

Holland, Sir William Henry

Reddy, M.

Brunner, Sir John Tomlinson

Horniman, Frederick John

Redmond, John E. (Waterford;

Buchanan, Thomas Rybum

Humphreys-Owen, Arthur C.

Redmond, William (Clare)

Burke, E. Haviland

Joicey, Sir James

Rickett, J. Compton

Burns, John

Jones, David Brynmor (Swansea

Rigg, Richard

Burt, Thomas

Jones, William (Carnarvonshire

Roberts, John H. (Denbighs.)

Caldwell, James

Joyce, Michael

Robertson, Edmund (Dundee)

Campbell, John (Armagh, S.)

Kearley, Hudson E.

Robson, William Snowdon

Campbell-Bannerman, Sir H.

Kilbride, Denis

Roche, John

Causton, Richard Knight

Kitson, Sir James

Roe, Sir Thomas

Cawley, Frederick

Labouchere, Henry

Russell, T. W.

Channing, Francis Allston

Lambert, George

Samuel, Herbert L. (Cleveland)

Coghill, Douglas Harry

Law, Hugh Alex. (Donegal, W.)

Samuel, S. M. (Whitechapel)

Condon, Thomas Joseph

Lawson, Sir Wilfrid (Cornwall)

Schwann, Charles E.

Corbett, A. Cameron (Glasgow)

Layland-Barratt, Francis

Shaw, Charles Edw. (Stafford)

Craig, Robert Hunter (Lanark;

Leamy, Edmund

Shaw, Thomas (Hawick B.)

Crean, Eugene

Leigh, Sir Joseph

Sheehy, David

Cremer, William Randal

Leng, Sir John

Shipman, Dr. John G.

Crombie, John William

Levy, Maurice

Sinclair, John (Forfarshire)

Crooks, William

Logan, John William

Slack, John Bamford

Cullinan, J.

Lough, Thomas

Smith, Samuel (Flint)

Dalziel, James Henry

Lundon, W.

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

Davies, Alfred (Carmarthen)

MacNeill, John Gordon Swift

Strachey, Sir Edward

Delany, William

MacVeagh, Jeremiah

Sullivan, Donal

Devlin, CharlesRamsay(Galway

M'Crae George

Taylor, Theodore C. (Radclilfe)

Devlin, Joseph (Kilkenny, N.)

M'Fadden, Edward

Thomas, Abel (Carmarthen, E.)

Dewar, John A. (Inverness-sh.

M'Hugh, Patrick A.

Thomas, Sir A. (Glamorgan, E.)

Dilke, Rt. Hon. Sir Charles

M'Kean, John

Thomas, David Alfred (Merthyr)

Donelan, Captain A.

M'Kenna, Reginald

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

Doogan, P. C.

M'Killop, W. (Sligo, North)

Tomkinson, James

Douglas, Charles M. (Lanark)

M'Laren, Sir Charles Benjamin

Toulmin, George

Duncan, J. Hastings

Mansfield, Horace Rendall

Trevelyan, Charles Philips

Dunn, Sir William

Mappin, Sir Frederick Thorpe

Ure, Alexander

Edwards, Frank

Markham, Arthur Basil

Waldron, Laurence Ambrose

Elibank, Master of

Mooney, John J.

Walton, Joseph (Barnsley)

Ellice, Capt EC (S.Andrw'sBghs

Morgan, J. Lloyd (Carmarthen)

Warner, Thomas Courtenay T.

Ellis, John Edward (Notts)

Moss, Samuel

Wason, Eugene (Clackmannan

Emmott, Alfred

Moulton, John Fletcher

Wason, John Cathcart (Orkney)

Esmonde, Sir Thomas

Murnaghan, George

Weir, James Galloway

Evans, Sir Francis H. (Maidstone

Murphy, John

White, George (Norfolk)

Evans, Samuel T. (Glamorgan)

Nannetti, Joseph P.

White, Luke (York, E. R.)

Eve, Harry Trelawney

Newnes, Sir George

Whitley, J. H. (Halifax)

Farquharson, Dr. Robert

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

Whittaker, Thomas Palmer

Farrell, James Patrick

Nolan, Joseph (Louth, South)

Wilson, Fred. W. (Norfolk, Mid.)

Fenwick, Charles

Norman, Henry

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

Ferguson, R. C. Munro (Leith)

Norton, Capt. Cecil William

Wilson, John (Durham, Mid.)

Ffrench, Peter

Nussey, Thomas Willans

Wilson, John (Falkirk)

Fitzmaurice, Lord Edmond

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

Flynn, James Christopher

O'Brien, Kendal (Tipperary Mid

TELLERS FOR THE NOES— Mr. Herbert Gladstone and Mr. William M'Arthur.

Foster, Sir Walter (Derby Co.)

O'Brien, Patrick (Kilkenny)

Fowler, Rt. Hon. Sir Henry

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

Fuller, J. M. F.

O'Connor, James (Wicklow, W.)

Furness, Sir Christopher

O'Donnell, John (Mayo, S.)

Main Question, as amended, put, and agreed to.

Ordered, That it be an Instruction to the Gentlemen appointed to bring in a Bill upon the Resolution reported from the Committee of Ways and Means on the 26th day of April last and then agreed
1364
to by the House, that they do make provision therein pursuant to the said Resolution.—(Mr. Chancellor of the Exchequer.)
Further consideration of Second Resolution deferred till To-morrow.

SAVINGS BANKS ACTS AMENDMENT (DEFICIENCY ANNUITY.)
Order read, for resuming adjourned debate on Question [25th April], "That this House doth agree with the Committee in the Resolution, 'That it is expedient to authorise the continuance of the payment of the terminable annuity payable under Section 1 of the Savings Banks Act, 1880, in each year up to the end of the half-year ending on 20th May, 1917, in pursuance of any Act of the present session to amend the Savings Ranks Acts.'"
Question again proposed.
MR. DALZIELexpressed his pleasure that this matter had been brought on at an hour when information could be asked for concerning the proposals of the Government. It was the duty of private Members to see that such Motions as this were not passed without an opportunity for discussion having been afforded. This Resolution was connected with a Bill which had been almost completely changed in character since it left this House. Why did not the Chancellor of the Exchequer, when the Bill was under discussion, consider it his duty to state—
THE CHANCELLOR OF THE EXCHEQUER (Mr. AUSTEN CHAMBERLAIN,) (intervening)said that when the Bill was discussed he announced his intention of moving certain Amendments, and he understood both sides of the House to approve of the course he proposed.
MR. DALZIELwas fully aware that a statement was made, but no explanation had been offered in justification of the extended proposals the right hon. Gentleman had made upstairs. He hoped the Chancellor of the Exchequer would even now explain fully why he was asking for this Resolution.
MR. AUSTEN CHAMBERLAINsaid he had moved the Resolution in pursuance of a pledge given on the Second
1366
Reading of the Bill that in Committee he would propose certain Amendments to bring the Bill into harmony with the recommendations of the Select Committee on Savings Banks, presided over by the right hon. Gentleman the Member for West Bristol two years ago, with the single exception that under the altered circumstances of the case he would not propose to reduce the rate of interest paid to depositors. In order to avoid the necessity of reducing the rate of interest it was necessary to carry out the recommendation of the Committee that the interest on the deficiency annuity should no longer be accumulated, but should be treated as part of the income of the trustee banks. That could have been carried out without such a Resolution as that under discussion. But, the interest on the invested funds of the deficiency annuity being handed over to the income account of the banks, it became necessary that the annuity itself should be prolonged, in order to find for the banks the amount of capital it was originally intended to produce, and such a prolongation could not be effected without a Resolution. The sole object was to enable the Committee to insert in the Bill a clause prolonging the annuity a certain number of years so that it would produce the sum originally intended for the benefit of the banks.
MR. WEIRsaid he had no desire to hinder the progress of any Bill of a really satisfactory character, but he felt very keenly that the right hon. Gentleman should have attempted to get this Resolution without giving any explanation of its purport. Even now he had not given the pith of the matter. For the next ten years there was to be provided a sum of £80,000 over the amount arranged for by Mr. Gladstone in 1880. Why was not that explained? The House ought to know what they were discussing, and he strongly objected to measures of this kind being rushed through without explanation.
And, it being half-past Seven of the clock, the debate stood adjourned till this Evening's Sitting.

EVENING SITTING.

  COTTON GROWING (AFRICA).
  MR. RUTHERFORD: By the fortune of the ballot I have been enabled to put a Motion on the Paper regarding a question which is national in its character and vital to the people in the county of Lancaster, in which my own constituency is situated, my constituency containing within its area a quarter of the whole of the looms in Lancashire and a considerable number of spindles. And this being the first opportunity I have had of bringing the question before the House, I consider that I should have failed in my duty to my constituents if I had not done so. I do not propose to go into technicalities, or to take the House through a labyrinth of figures in regard to the cotton industry. It is merely my intention to touch upon the broad issues that are raised by my Resolution. I claim it as national in its character, because here is one of the greatest of the manufacturing industries of the nation passing through a time amounting to a period of great adversity, and the condition of this industry was recognised in the Gracious Speech from the Throne, on the 2nd February, in the following words—
  "The insufficiency of the supply of the raw material upon which the great cotton industry of this country depends has inspired Me with deep concern. I trust that the efforts which are being made in various parts of My Empire to increase the area under cultivation may be attended with a large measure of success."
  That reference in the Speech from the Throne. Mr. Speaker, was a recognition that those in authority were cognisant of the serious depression that existed, and is existing, in Lancashire, and that recognition was greatly appreciated by the people of that county. Every Member of the House who comes from Lancashire knows the importance of this great industry, but I think, Sir, I had better state, for the sake of my case, the position which it holds.
  According to the Blue-book issued on British and foreign trade and industry, it stands fourth on the list of the number of persons employed, there being some 582,000, or in round figures, 600,000 persons occupied in the industry; but,
  1368
  of course. Sir, that does not include other trades that are incidentally affected by the depression of this great industry. I should say there are no less than 4,000,000 of' people, one-tenth of the population of these islands, directly or indirectly affected by the cotton trade. It is estimated that in Lancashire no less a sum than £100,000.000 of capital is invested with a weekly wage bill of £400,000. It is the greatest of all our manufacturing industries, with an expos trade of £72,000,000 sterling, which is within a very few million pounds of the whole of the trade of this country that is done with France, which I believe is £90.000,000. During last year and up to the present time a great amount of that capital has been unremunerative. and an enormous loss has taken place also in wages. It is estimated, and I give the figures supplied to me by the chairman of the North and North - East Lancashire Employers Association; it is estimated that £150,000 has been lost weekly in wages to the workers since November last, or about £3,000,000 in all. But, Sir, I think to make it more understood, and no doubt everyone in this House will sympathise with the operative—an operative, with a wife and family, receiving 25s. a week, has that sum reduced by the action of short time to 15s. or 10s. per week. That fact is reflected in cases in the industrial co-operative societies in my own constituencies, whose returns show that there has been a diminution in the purchasing power for the common necessaries of life. There is one gratifying feature about all this, namely, that there has been no serious dispute between capital and labour. The operatives recognising fully the difficulties which the masters have had to contend with through the fluctuations and high price of cotton, have loyally supported them in their difficulties, submissively agreeing to 9 long period of short time.
  The great disturbances of this industry have been traceable to two causes—shortness of the cotton crop of America, and the operations of the speculator and gambler in futures. The American crop lends itself specially to the gambler. The great gambling has taken place on the American side of the Atlantic, but it

  1369
  is not entirely confined to that side, for, although we are ready to condemn the cotton ring in America, we must remember there are those in this country, who. even if they speculate to a less degree—yet it all goes to assist in raising the price. Of course, I do not wish to be misunderstood with regard to them; legitimate buying for manufacture is a totally different mutter from speculating to pocket differences. Of course, a speculator does not in any way want the cotton. As I have said, he does it for the sake of pocketing differences and finds no money. So, if we could produce the cotton ourselves and force delivery the gambler and speculator would, to a very large extent, be baffled. The shortness of the cotton crop enabled the speculator and the gambler in futures to manipulate the American market, which market regulates the price of cotton, as it is from America where the great bulk of the cotton crop comes. Perhaps the House is not aware what a; large sum of money is involved when cotton rises or falls one half-penny per pound. Taking a bale of cotton to weigh 480 lbs., one half-penny per pound means £1 per bale, if the crop is estimated at 10,000.000 bales £10,000,000, and if the price rises 4d., £80,000,000.
  I pass now to the importation of cotton into this country, and I take my figures from Professor Dunstan's Report to the Board of Trade which was issued on Saturday last. The importation of cotton into the United Kingdom amounted to 1,361,000,000 lbs. from the United States, 82,000,000 from India, including Ceylon and the Straits Settlements; 296,000,000 from Egypt; and 54,000,000 from other countries. That Report further sets forth that—
  "the British cotton industry is now almost entirely dependent on the United States for supplies of raw cotton,"
  and it also appears that no attempt has been made to obtain increased supplies from other sources excepting when there has been a scarcity of American cotton. And can we depend upon this supply in the future? I think that we cannot. With regard to this the Report says—
  "The continual extension of cotton manufacture in the southern portions of the United States is likely to lead, in the near future, to a
  1370
  greater utilisation of the raw material in the country of its production and to a fall in exports to this and other countries. This may be illustrated by the fact that the consumption of cotton in the Southern States has increased more than eightfold during the last twenty years."
  I can only say that the increase of consumption of its own cotton by the United States is commendable, because it means a great increase of commerce, and I have no doubt it is the ambition of the States to, at some time, consume the whole of that production We also learn from the Report how the States values and fosters the growth of cotton. Here are the words of the Report—
  "The present paramount position of the United States in cotton cultivation is largely due to the operations of the well organised and splendidly equipped experiment stations of the Department for Agriculture, which are continually engaged in the scientific investigation of the innumerable problems winch arise, and in the collection and dissemination of information,"
  Those words I commend to our own Government.
  I notice that Mr. Arthur Hutton, Vice-Chairman of the British Cotton Growing Association, in an excellent paper given before the Manchester Statistical Society on 10th February of this year, and which is now published in pamphlet form, states that the normal annual increase in the consumption of cotton is about 400,000 to 500,000 bales of cotton per annum, and, taking the world's production at the present, time at 16.000,000 bales, and if the increase should continue at the same ratio, we should require in five years time 18.500,000 bales, and in ten years 21,000,000 bales. I notice that my hon. friend opposite the senior Member for Oldham, in an interesting paper read at the Society of Arts, puts the prospective consumption somewhat higher than this.
  Now, Sir, I have stated the importance of the cotton industry of this country, and I believe if it languishes or decays we shall not hold the same position in the commercial world as we have hitherto done. Is it wise in the face of the prospective increase of consumption, and our past experience, that we should be dependent upon one source of supply? I can only say that those engaged in the industry, and therefore most likely to know, think that it is not but that we should set about to find out a new source

  1371
  of supply. I agree with them. The outcome of this is the establishment of the British Cotton Growing Association for the purpose of discovering and experimenting as to new sources of supply of the raw material, and there are many hon. Gentlemen in this House who are members of that association and think highly of it. The initiative of that Association came from the Oldham Chamber of Commerce. The work of the British Cotton Association is one in which I think the whole of Lancashire, when its object was understood and brought before the people, took great interest and to which it gave hearty support. I cannot too strongly commend the work of that association. The North and North-East Lancashire Cotton Manufacturers' Association, for example, subscribed £10.000, and was prepared to give more if required; and the operatives, animated by the same feeling and spirit, also contributed most liberally. I cannot give the actual figures, but you can take it that they were liberal. I recollect at a meeting on this subject, which I attended in Blackburn on the 16th of January of the present year, it was stated that the operatives in that district had contributed £2,300, and it must be borne in mind that both the contributions of the masters as well as of the employees were given at a time when the trade was in a very depressed condition and un-remunerative.
  The British Cotton Growing Association has proved that cotton can be grown in various parts of the world, South Africa, Central Africa, East Africa, and West Africa. I am sorry that my Resolution is confined to Africa. But hon. Members will sympathise with me in the reason why it is so confined. When you, Sir, call a name from the ballot, a Member has to make his mind up suddenly, and on the spur of the moment I said Africa. That is the real reason why it is confined to Africa. I believe there is a great field for cotton cultivation in the Egyptian Soudan, but if the cultivation is to be prosecuted it is necessary to complete the construction of the Suakim and Berber railway. Professor Dunstan goes further than that; he says in his Report—
  "Among the most promising of these experimental districts are the British Central Africa
  1372
  Protectorate, Uganda, the West African Colonies and Protectorates, the West Indies, and perhaps Fiji, British North Borneo, and Cyprus."
  Here is a field of great possibilities for this Empire for the production of cotton. and one which I believe, with some assistance from the Government in the way of transit, can and will be developed. British possessions which the Cotton Growing Association has centred its immediate attention upon are Sierra Leone, Lagos, and Southern Nigeria. In Lagos the best of the cotton land is in the Hinterland; this is confirmed in the Report, and it is necessary that the railway should be extended beyond Ibadan, the present terminus, to Horin, and so open up the Yoruba country. I believe it is calculated that cotton can be grown commercially, for the question of labour and the difficulties of transport have been considered. With regard to Lagos this Report says—
  "They (the inhabitants) have been somewhat discouraged by their past experience in coffee growing, prices having gone down after they had succeeded in obtaining excellent crops of this product. It has been explained to them that cotton, if cultivated carefully, will always realise a remunerative price. They have agreed to plant largely, and in the Egba country alone 4,000 acres will be planted out shortly."
  There is also a great field in Southern Nigeria. Concerning this district it is. stated in the Report that—
  "Samples of cotton grown on the experimental plantation at Onitsha have recently been received in Manchester, and are said to. be equal to 'fully good middling' American, and exactly of the quality ordinarily required by the manufacturer. A power gin has been set up at Onitsha."
  and also—
  "It is stated that labour can be arranged for and that transport is easy."
  In submitting this Resolution to the House, I believe that those engaged in the cotton industry are able and willing to meet their own difficulties. Lancashire does not come at all cap in hand. But there are things which they cannot do; they want Government help in providing transit, and where the Government cannot see their way to construct a railway or to extend any existing railways, they might guarantee a loan for that purpose. Sir, I have said nothing with regard to experimenting or establishing model plantations, or what other countries are doing for their Colonies,

  1373
  but they do vote large sums of money for experimental purposes. I venture to think that it might be to the advantage of this country if some money were to be voted for experiments in cotton cultivation in Africa. I should have liked to have said a word on India, for India is Lancashire's greatest customer, and if more cotton could be cultivated in that dependency of ours it would be as good for them as it would for Lancashire. Indian cotton is not at present suitable for Lancashire trade, but Sir George Watt, in a note appended to his report on the improvement of Indian cotton. says—
  "That with the prosperity and education of Indian cultivators as fine cotton as any produced in America could be grown in India."
  My object in putting this Resolution has been for the purpose of bringing before the House the position of the cotton industry in this country, and the absolute necessity of not being dependent on one source of supply for the raw material. Sir, the Resolution is not in any hostile spirit to the Government, because I approve entirely of what the Government has done. It was stated in a market report the other day that the American crop was likely to be a large one this year. If that turned out to be the case, the situation might not be so acute as at present; but I would urge upon the Government not under any considerations to relax their efforts in aiding the production of new sources of supply of raw cotton. I should be prepared to accept the Amendment of the hon. Member for Islington, which I think would cover the Amendment of the hon. Member for South Manchester. Thanking the House for its courtesy. I humbly and confidently submit this Resolution to the acceptance of the House.
  MR. FIELDENsaid he wished it had fallen to the lot of some other Member more capable than himself to have seconded this Resolution, but as the representative of a constituency, the large majority of the workers in which were employed in either cotton spinning or manufacturing, he naturally took a very great interest in the subject. As a cotton spinner and manufacturer carrying on business in the same locality in which it was carried
  1374
  on by his great-grandfather more than a 100 years ago, he perhaps knew a little bit about this question and the way in which it was affecting the people in Lancashire. He thought it was generally admitted that there was very considerable distress in that county, and that that distress was largely due to the shortage of cotton. If any evidence were required on that subject it was only necessary to refer to the Labour Gazette. In the February issue of that publication describing the state of the cotton trade during 1903 it was stated—
  "Employment in the cotton industry was fairly good during the first four months of 1903. It then rapidly declined owing to the sharp upward movement in the price of the raw material and a prolonged period of short time ensued. Some recovery took place, however, towards the end of October and continued towards the end of the year. On the whole, however, the year 1903 was an extremely bad one for the cotton industry."
  That was the general tenor of the statement in that publication with regard to the state of the trade during the past year. In April the report in the Labour Gazette was—
  "Employment in March continued bad in both spinning and weaving branches and much worse than a year ago. Owing to the continued high price of American raw cotton, short time continued to be worked in the majority of spinning mills using it. The quantity of all kinds of American cotton forwarded from English ports to inland towns in the first quarter of 1904 was 585,000 bales or 257,000 bares less than in the corresponding period of 1903."
  If any further evidence was desired with regard to the state of trade in that district, it could be very easily furnished by the decreased railway receipts both in goods and passengers, showing that the state of that county at the present time was far from satisfactory.
  What was the cause of this? There could be very little doubt on the part of anyone who had given any attention to the subject that the cause arose from the fact that during the last few years the world's consumption of cotton had overtaken the world's production. The publication of Messrs. Lathom, Alexander & Co., set out very fully the production of cotton and the consumption of cotton during the four years ending 1902-3 and although in some of those years the production was greater than the consumption, the net result was that the consumption had exceeded the production by over

  1375
  a million bales, or something more than 2 per cent, of the total cotton grown. What the result of the present year was going to be they could not tell. There could be very little doubt in the mind of anyone who had any connection with the trade that it would show that a still greater inroad had been made into the stocks of raw material that were held in the various parts of the globe. This was a very serious matter for Lancashire, or while the consumption of cotton in the Lancashire mills had remained stationary, or practically stationary, during the last four years—excluding the present year, which he thought would show a falling off—on the Continent of Europe and in the United States the consumption had considerably increased. The increased consumption in America was due to the enormous prosperity, which had been evident to everyone, in that part of the world during the last few years, for there the people could well afford to purchase what were, comparatively speaking, expensive goods. The same argument, to a large extent, explained the reason why on the Continent of Europe the same thing had taken place. This country formerly supplied Europe with large quantities of that material. Owing to the. fiscal policy on the Continent, and the fact they had equipped themselves with mills and machinery to produce what they required, we had been excluded from that market, and the fact that the price of the finished article had risen had not prevented the people of those countries from purchasing the full requirements. With our trade it was different. Only 20 per cent, of the production of our spindles and looms was consumed in this country, the remaining 80 per cent, being exported abroad very largely to countries in the East where labour was paid for upon a silver basis. They all knew that the value of silver for a period of years had shown a tendency steadily to fall while cotton had shown a tendency steadily to rise. After the people in those countries had provided themselves with the absolute necessaries of life he was afraid that the balance left for them to spend was very small indeed, and it was a lather remarkable thing what an extremely small amount of cotton clothing
  1376
  appeared to be included in what were called the necessaries of life in the countries in the East. Consequently, owing to the rise in the price of the raw material, the mills in Lancashire had been unable, to obtain orders, and the manufacturers, speaking generally, had been wise enough to refuse to go into the cotton market to buy cotton at high prices until they were certain that they would have orders which they could turn out at a profit.
  That being the position of the trade in Lancashire and in other countries, and it being clearly attributable to the shortage of the world's supply of cotton, the question arose, could anything be done whereby the grievance under which Lancashire was suffering at the present time could be removed. The United States of America at the present time produced 72 per cent, of the world's production of cotton, and in the last seventeen years America had increased her acreage under cotton from 18,000,000 to 27,000,000 acres. But with all their ingenuity in the United States they did not appear to be able to largely increase the yield of cotton per acre, and as they had failed to do this-in the past he very much doubted whether they could look forward in the future to any increased yield of cotton per acre in the United States of America. Then came the question, if they were to have greater quantities of cotton grown was it possible that the acreage under cotton in the United States could be very largely increased? He had been told by those who knew something about the business of cotton growing in that part of the world that if the acreage under cotton was largely increased it was very doubtful indeed whether it would be possible to pick the cotton after it was grown, because the labour supply in that part of the world at the present time was not equal to picking more than 12,000,000 acres. Whether this statement was right or wrong, he thought that in this country they would be very unwise if they looked in the future for any large increase of cotton production from that source. Therefore he thought they were right in turning their attention to other parts of the world, and especially to those parts which were under the Union Jack.
  A very great work had been carried out in the last two years by the

  1377
  British Cotton Growing Association, and those who were interested and connected with the trade in Lancashire felt that to that Association, and to all those who had taken an active part in its work, they owed a very great debt of gratitude. They had supplied a certain amount of money for the work of that Association, and the results undoubtedly proved that the money had been well spent, and he was quite convinced that they would be able to raise very much larger funds for the work of the Association and thereby largely increase its area of benefit. The work of this Association hitherto had largely been one of inquiry, or distribution of machinery, the selection and distribution of seeds, and the appointment of experts to visit the different parts of the world to ascertain where cotton could be best and most easily grown. The different parts of the world that had been generally referred to were India, and they had had cotton from India for many years. Personally, he very much doubted whether they would be able to receive in future any very large additional supply of cotton from India. At any rate if they did, Indian cotton would have to be of a very much better quality than had hitherto been sent to this country from that great dependency. Without labouring the question of India, although he should be glad to see the cotton growing industry developed there, he should be very much surprised if in the future it was found that India could send them very much larger quantities of cotton than she had been sending them in the past. In Egypt, however, they had a field to which they might undoubtedly look for a large increase in their cotton supply. They should remember, however, that the cotton grown in Egypt was not the cotton they were at the present moment suffering from the want of in Lancashire. No doubt those who used Egyptian cotton would be better off if there was a good deal more of it grown, and the Cotton Growing Association, and those responsible for the Government of Egypt, were doing everything they could to increase the supply of Egyptian cotton. He could assure hon. Members that where American cotton was used the suffering that had been going on in Lancashire almost continuously for the
  1378
  last twelve months was very acute and very great. Could they find any other source where they could get cotton of the character that they received from the United States of America? In the very excellent Blue-book which appeared only a couple of days before, they had the evidence of Professor Dunstan that within the Empire and within Africa there were districts which gave every hope that the desire they had in view might be fulfilled. The professor said—
  "In Northern Nigeria, to some extent in Southern Nigeria and in the Lagos hinterland there is a vast field. The native population is numerous, intelligent and thoroughly familiarised with the cultivation of cotton, which has been carried on in several localities for hundreds of years in a primitive yet effective manner."
  Again, a little further on, speaking of Northern Nigeria, the professor said—
  "The most serious difficulty is the question of transport and it seems doubtful whether cotton can be economically exported from the interior of the protectorate-unless a railway is constructed from the Niger to Kano."
  He (the speaker) looked to something being done without loss of time by the Government in this direction. He thought that they in Lancashire had a fair reason to ask them to do something—something more than they had already done and to do it as quickly as possible. It might be said that Lancashire had no right to ask that a large expenditure of money should be made by the Government in order to relieve the distress. If he thought that this expenditure was doubtful as to the return it would bring he should hesitate, but it appeared to him that where we had undertaken the protectorate of a people who were civilised to a much larger extent than the people in other parts of Africa, and where cotton had been grown for centuries, it was not asking too much that that country should with the least possible delay be connected with the ocean, so that a free exchange might take place between them and the people of this country. He believed that there were many districts where cotton could be grown, but none where all the elements abounded so fully as in this one place to give the same promise of success. It was because the population of Lancashire thought that delay in this matter was of the most serious nature to them that they asked the Government

  1379
  to push it forward rapidly. It was in no spirit of antagonism to what the Government were doing in the matter that this Motion was moved. He would be the last to flog a willing horse in the person of the Colonial Secretary. But new times had come, and the man who did not put himself abreast of the times was soon left behind. An institution called the "hustler" had recently been imported from the United States. It was in the character of a "hustler" that he seconded the Motion.
  Motion made, and Question proposed, "That, in the opinion of this House, it is incumbent upon His Majesty's Government to use every endeavour to encourage the growth of cotton in those districts in Africa which are under British Government or British influence, and to cooperate as far as possible with such commercial associations as may be organised to secure this end."—(Mr. J. Rutherford)
  MR. EMMOTTsaid there was only one remark which fell from the seconder of the Motion with which he disagreed. According to his own information there had been a good deal of short time and stoppage of work, not only on the Continent of Europe but also in America as well as here. He. was no carping critic of the Party system, but it was a relief occasionally on a night like this for both Parties to he able to join hands in order to further an object which was meant not only for the benefit of Lancashire and the United Kingdom, but of the Empire at large. It was fortunate that even the ubiquitous fiscal question did not enter into this matter that they had to consider, for he did not know that anybody had been found so stupid as to propose that a tax should be put upon raw cotton wherever that raw cotton might come from. Nor was this a question of a self-contained Empire—an Empire that should necessarily grow all the cotton that it required—for although that might be a desirable thing it was certainly a thing that we should not obtain, however quickly we progressed, for a great many years to come. Most certainly the cotton trade would buy its cotton wherever it could get it of a satisfactory quality
  1380
  and at a satisfactory price. It had been calculated that in ten years from the present time it would be necessary to have another 25,000,000 acres employed in the growth of cotton above what we had in the world to-day, that was to say, an area equal to about one-third of the area of the United Kingdom. It was the fact that we depended more and more in this country on the supplies of cotton from America. We depended more to-day upon the supply from America than we did at the time when the Civil War in America broke out, and it was the fact that the kind of cotton that we wanted was not the kind that we could get from India, but the kind that we got from the United States and from Egypt. So that being the case, and we having in the British Empire endless territory which was suitable for the growth of the kind of cotton that we required, it was surely our duty if we could, by a combination of private enterprise with Government aid, to grow more of the increased quantities of cotton that we required within the borders of the British Empire itself.
  He wanted to emphasise in the strongest possible way that the British Cotton Growing Association, with which he had the honour to be connected, had no complaint to make in any general way of what the Government was doing, but rather desired to thank the Government for the great assistance it had given to it. That remark applied not only to the late Colonial Secretary but to the present Colonial Secretary, and in reference to this particular question he thought he ought to mention the Under-Secretary for the Colonies, the Duke of Marlborough, who had taken, ever since he came into office, a very lively and active interest in the furtherance of this question. In this matter it was the British Cotton Growing Association that represented private enterprise. He believed they were going to apply for a Royal Charter —they were certainly going to attempt to raise a sum of £500,000, mostly from the trade itself —and they would undertake, if the Royal Charter was given, that any profits that were made, at any rate for a period of years, should not be paid to the members of the Association, but should be devoted to the purpose of

  1381
  increasing the growth of cotton in the British Empire. The hon. Member for the Darwen Division had pointed out that it was rather his misfortune than his desire that the actual Motion put down on the Paper related to Africa alone. He quite agreed with him that it might be applied more generally—perhaps it would before the close of the evening. But at any rate Africa alone presented a sufficiently large field of discussion in the time that they had before them that night. One point in connection with the question of cotton-growing—a point of great interest -was the extraordinary change that had taken place as to the parts of the world whence the chief supply of cotton came. He believed it was a fact that in the year 1784, a ship came from the United States with fourteen bales of cotton on board, and that of those fourteen bales eight bales were seized by the authorities because it was stated that the United States of America certainly could not have produced at the time fourteen bales of cotton. A rather different state of affairs from a time like the present, when we were grumbling so much because the United States only produced a little over 10,000,000 bales, whereas we should like them to produce at least 12,000,000 ! At that time three-quarters of our supply came from the West Indies—about 45,000 bales a year. During the last few years we had not obtained more than 1,000 bales from the West Indies. The large supplies of cotton that we now obtained from Egypt were of course comparatively new. The growing of cotton only began in Egypt in the year 1828, and several other countries had grown cotton during the last century, and had ceased to grow it simply because they could not produce it at the price at which the market would take it.
  This question of the changes of the sources of the supply of cotton was a point of interest because it showed, in the first place, that the production of cotton was possible in a very great many parts of the world; and in the second place a study of the question showed that it was principally in the United States and in Egypt, where the greatest scientific concentration had been exercised in regard to the question that the great advance in the production of cotton had taken place.
  1382
  In India, wherever the same scientific treatment had not been accorded to it the quality of the cotton had actually deteriorated in the last fifty years. Sir George Watt, in his interesting addition to the Blue-book which had been so much quoted that night, pointed out that in investigating the Report of Dr. Hove, made in 1785, and comparing the Reports which he gave of the various kinds of cotton grown in different parts of India at that time with the cotton grown in the same districts to-day he found that a great many better kinds of cotton grown in India then were not grown there at all at the presentday. Indeed, he believed it was a fact that the famous Indian muslins of many years ago could not be made at all out of any cotton that was produced in India at the present time. In the Blue-book, Professor Dunstan and Sir George Watt showed that failures in regard to the growth of cotton had been due to what they called ignorant experiment. They said that the agricultural chemistry of the growth of cotton was even still comparatively in its infancy. They stated that the whole literature, botanically and commercially, dealing with cotton was in a state of chaos, and that there was a very great deal still to be learnt as to the process of the selection of seed, and as to the most suitable manure, for the purpose of growing cotton. And they pointed out that the problem was a different problem in each place where they attempted to grow cotton, different both as to the seed that was required, as to the character of the cultivation, and different of course, also, as to the very important question of the labour required, and the transport that was necessary in order to make it a commercial success. He mentioned these points because he thought it was most important that not only Members of the House, but the country at large, should understand that no enormous results could be expected within a year or two. It could not be done very quickly. He was sure everybody who was interested in Lancashire must be pleased at the interest that was taken in this question throughout the whole country at the present time. But what he wanted to beg was that that interest should not be a mere fleeting interest but should be

  1383
  kept up through a series of years, because only by such interest being kept up. and by suitable people devoting their time and attention and abilities to this question, could any real success be obtained in the direction of growing that large extra quantity of cotton that we required. He would take the instance referred by his hon. friend opposite as an example. Experiments were being made in the Soudan as to the best kind of seeds and as to cultivation in general. When these questions were decided they would still have to teach the people who were going to grow the cotton. But all this would be of no avail until the railway from Suakim was completed to Berber, for until proper transport facilities were provided they would not be able to get the full advantage of the cotton grown in Egypt. In regard to the cotton grown in the Soudan they had at any rate one great thing for which they ought to be thankful. Operations would be carried on under the supervision of one of the best and greatest servants of the British Crown, Lord Cromer, who had taken a lively interest in this matter.
  The Motion asked the Government to help in this question of cotton growing. He wanted to put one or two questions to the right hon. Gentleman the Colonial Secretary so that when he replied he might give some information about them. The points that required to be considered in regard to this matter were in the first place the selection of the seed, the suitability of manures to the chemical qualities of the soil, and the peculiarities of the climate of whatever district they were dealing with. The Government had already given considerable assistance in regard to these matters, and he was quite sure that the British Cotton Growing Association had a lively sense of gratitude for what the Government had done and were doing. But he desired especially to ask the Colonial Secretary a question with regard to the most important matter of labour. He had a very firm conviction that nothing considerable could be done unless they interested the natives of whatever district they were concerned with to undertake the cultivation of
  1384
  cotton themselves. They must let them have the profits so far as was possible, and they must not, if they could avoid it, merely employ them as labourers at so much a day. So far as the Soudan was concerned, Lord Cromer's last Report on Egypt mentioned how much the population of that province had been depleted. He did not know how much land there was in the Soudan capable of growing cotton; but the question he wished to put to the Government for subsequent consideration was this—that if there was a large territory suitable for the purpose and there was not a sufficient population, the question of the immigration of Indian coolies, if it could be satisfactorily done, might be considered. He said Indian coolies; he did not say Chinese coolies. [Ironical MINISTERIAL cheers.] Hon. Members cheered ironically, but he was going to add that the Indian coolies need not be kept in compounds.
  Another matter he wanted to mention was in connection with labour in British Central Africa. In that country there was a very sore feeling in regard to recruiting labour for the South African mines. In the wet season labour was short there, although it was plentiful in the dry season. He was aware that the men got more wages in the mines than when engaged in agriculture at home, but the mortality in the mines was very heavy. It was rather hard that the people who were trying to develop British Central Africa should have their labour taken away from them to supply the South African mines. The last question to which he wished to refer was that of transport. He wished to ask the Colonial Secretary whether anything was being done to lengthen the railway in Lagos from Ibadan to Illorin. He understood that the country between these two towns was peculiarly suitable for the growth of cotton. Another question he had to put was, what was going to be done as to a railway in Northern Nigeria. That was a matter of enormous importance. At present they were paying a subsidy of £400,000 a year to the Government of that territory; and he ventured to say that trade could never be developed to pay for that subsidy without a railway. He hoped that the

  1385
  Government would favourably consider the building of a light railway there for the development of the country. The cost of a light railway would be comparatively small, and it could be built much sooner than a broad gauge railway. The British Cotton Growing Association were anxious to ascertain the amount of cotton received from our different colonies and possessions, and would like a Return of the exports of cotton from each of them for the last five years, stating the numbers of bags or bales, and their actual weight, and distinguishing between ginned and unginned cotton: and also showing the destination of the same, whether to Great Britain or elsewhere. If such a Return could be made monthly, or even every three months it would be of great interest, and bring before the country in a marked way the progress the Colonies were making in this matter. In conclusion, he had much pleasure in sup-portingthe Resolution, which was proposed not in the least hostility to the Government, but in the interests of the country and of the Empire.
  MR. SAMUEL SMITHsaid that he had visited most of the cotton-growing countries of the world. There could be no doubt that Lancashire had suffered very seriously, and the sole reason was the deficiency of supply. But for that we should have had a very good trade at the present time, for there was plenty of demand for cotton goods. There was a widespread idea that the main cause of the shortness of supply was the manipulation of the cotton markets in America. These speculations only aggravated but did not cause the short supply, which was really consequent upon a series of deficient crops in America. The crop last year only amounted to about 10.250.000 bales, whereas it required 11,500,000 bales to keep the mills of the world running full time. Again, there had been the great scourge of the cotton weevil, which had cut off the supply by 1.000.000 bales. It was an unfortunate thing that Lancashire depended so greatly on the American supply. There was a considerable supply from Egypt of good cotton, and now that they had the great dam at Assouan, that supply would be increased every year. He might state that he had visited the southern States of America forty-four
  1386
  years ago. At that time Lancashire consumed one half of all the cotton raised in America, whereas now it only consumed one-fourth. Before the Civil War in America, only 750,000 bales were manufactured in that country; now, they manufactured 4000.00O. Lancashire in 1860consumed 2,500.000 of bales; now the consumption was fully 3,000.000 bales, whereas the demand for cotton on the Continent had more than trebled since 1800. The position was a difficult one, and it was desirable that in the future we should depend less on America and more on other sources of supply. During the American War he visited India in order to see whether that country was capable of taking the place of America. At that time the price of American cotton was 2s. 6d. per lb., compared with 7d, a lb. before the war. The price of Indian cotton rose from 4d. or 5d. to 6d. 6d. or 2s. a lb. After careful inspection he came to the conclusion that India could not take the place of the United States; that the staple of Indian cotton was too short; that no amount of expense incurred in cultivation would much increase the staple; that the trial of American seed was not successful; and that the climate would prevent the production of a good and long-stapled cotton from India. As soon as the American War was over the Indian supply fell off: and the spinners in Lancashire had since never used Indian cotton to any great extent. Any expectation, therefore, that India would take the place of America as a source of cotton supply was certain to be disappointed. If we were to get a substitute for American cotton it must be from Africa. There were many parts of that continent where a good-stapled cotton could be grown But it must be done by the natives themselves. Large plantations would not answer. He believed that a trade could be carried on very profitably in African cotton on the basis of a price of 5d. or fid. per lb. He desired heartily to support the Motion of his hon. friend.
  MR. PEELsaid he had listened with very great interest to the observations of the last speaker, because they were based on a very long experience. He should like to make one or two re marks on the interesting speech of the senior Member for Oldham, who was very anxious to avoid trenching on any controversial matter. He supposed that

  1387
  it was that hon. Gentleman's misfortune, and not his fault, that he did trench on the fiscal question and on the question of Chinese labour. He could assure the hon. Member that he would endeavour to avoid both those difficult and knotty subjects. He agreed with the hon. Member for Oldham that we must not expect either from Africa, or other portions of the world where we were trying to develop cotton growing, any large scale of production for years to come. Considering the amount of time cotton had been grown, in the world, and the enormous dependence of this country upon it, and the number of people who were clothed in cotton, it was remarkable that a more thorough and scientific study of the matter had not been made. It was known in those countries in which cotton was grown what kind of seeds should be sown, and at what degree of temperature the plants should be cultivated, but there was no knowledge of the kind of plants most suitable to different soils, and which would produce the best kinds of cotton. What was more remarkable was that our information on those plants had actually retrograded, and we had lost some of the information we used to possess. In his interesting Report, Sir George Watt stated that he found that in the eighteenth century there were better results from cotton growing in India than now, but the great bulk of the information then possessed in regard to cotton cultivation had been entirely lost. The reason why he had placed his Amendment on the Paper was that he wished to emphasise the fact that cotton could be grown in other parts of the British Empire besides Africa. He hoped that in the future a great deal would be done in various parts of Africa, but, of course, the class of cotton which could be grown in Egypt was not the finest or most valuable. It came after the finest and most delicate cotton manufactured in this country. That was one of those articles in which we had in this country a natural monopoly from the advantages of our climate; and it was found that those finer classes of goods could leap over any tariff which had been placed
  1388
  against them, because people would have those classes. Neither France, Germany, nor America had the atmospheric conditions in which those very delicate kinds of cotton thread could be spun. If that were so, we must make what use we could of that natural monopoly.
  There were many reasons why we should look to the West Indies as a source of cotton supply of the finer kinds. First of all, the population of those Islands were accustomed and adapted to continuous labour. One of the greatest difficulties in West Africa was that, although there was a large population who were accustomed to commercial, and to some extent to agricultural, pursuits, they preferred gaining their living in an easy manner, such as by making palm oil. Furthermore, there would not be objection to subsidising cotton growing in the West Indies. We had spent a good deal of money in that direction already. Of course, it was quite possible that, in spite of the Sugar Convention, sugar growing would become a dying industry in the West Indies, for with more scientific processes applied to the manufacture of beet sugar that would compete successfully with cane sugar. Therefore, it was important in the interests, not only of Lancashire, but of the West Indies themselves, that we should find some substitute for the failing sugar industry. In days gone by a considerable amount of cotton used to be obtained from the West Indies, and within the last few years a class of cotton had been grown in those Islands which fetched from l0d. to Is. 2½d. per pound. It was quite as good a cotton as was produced on the sea islands off the coast of America. He attached the greatest importance to the second part of his Amendment, which called for the establishment of experimental farms in suitable cotton-growing districts. That was the root of all real progress in the matter of the development of cotton-growing in various parts of the world. Something of the kind had already been established in India, although he was sorry to say that the progress of the development of cotton-growing there

  1389
  had not been so satisfactory as could have been wished. It was very difficult to transport a particular variety of cotton from one country to another and grow it there, for cotton had an extraordinary tendency to revert to the type already existing in its new environment. It was, therefore, of enormous importance to examine the different classes of indigenous cotton growing in the various countries of the world and to submit them to examination and experiment. The observations upon this matter in the Report of the Government of India applied not only to India, but to Africa and other parts of the Empire, where it was hoped the Government would give some assistance in dealing with the problem. The matter had gone too long unattended to. We ought not to stop until we were not only less dependent on America, but had large supplies of the best class of cotton grown in the range of the British Empire. He moved to add after the word "Africa" in the Resolution the words, "And in other portions of the British Empire, and to establish or aid in the establishment of experimental farms in suitable cotton-growing districts."
  MR. SPEAKER: I understand there is no opposition to this Amendment, and in that case it would be better to put it at once and take the debate on the amended Resolution.
  Amendment made—
  "In line3, by inserting after the word 'Africa', the words 'and in other portions of the British Empire, and to establish or aid in the establishment of experimental farms in suitable cotton growing districts.'"—(Mr. Peel.)
  MR. HARWOODwished to emphasise the fact that Lancashire did
  1390
  not ask the Government to take any exceptional action. The Cotton Growing Association did not desire their Resolution to be brought forward.
  MR. RUTHERFORD: They sent telegrams out in favour of it.
  MR. HARWOODsaid he was aware of that, but the Association recognised that the Government had acted extremely well, and that business would not be greatly facilitated by academic discourses in the House of Commons. He believed that much harm might be done by the creation of a false impression that Lancashire and the cotton trade were pursuing a selfish policy. All that they wanted was that the Government should regard the Empire as an estate to be developed in the interests of the whole Empire. Lancashire did not desire that its cotton trade should be bolstered up, but they held that the Empire could not be fully developed unless they grew cotton, and they offered a large custom for cotton grown. One useful thing the Government might do, and that was, watch the growth of the seed. It was done in the case of tea in Ceylon, and the quality of cotton in Egypt had also been greatly improved by that means. He had not a great opinion of the advantage of bringing anything before the House of Commons. Once they begun chattering about a subject, it became a sort of football match between Liberals and Tories, both Parties trying to get the cheers of the spectators. That was not business. The Government were doing very well, and he did not see what good was to be secured by speeches in the House. He simply rose for the purpose of saying that Lancashire did

  1391
  not want anything done for them that would not be done for other interests and in the general interests of the Empire.
  THE SECRETARY OF STATE FOR THE COLONIES (Mr. LYTTELTON,: I agree with the hon. Gentleman who has just sat down that our business is cautiously and prudently to develop the great estate of which we are the stewards, but I do not agree with him in thinking that this discussion has been altogether out of place. On the contrary, I think that the House and the country are indebted to my hon. friend for having brought this question forward in order that we may, at any rate, become more fully acquainted with what the Government, through its various Departments—the Foreign Office, the Colonial Office, the Board of Trade, and the India Office—has done in connection with it. I do not think that anyone will dispute that Lancashire has a vast stake in this matter, and that to dislocate or impair the cotton industry of Lancashire would be to inflict a disaster on the nation. Formerly, it is true, the whole supply of cotton to this country came from India, and at a later stage —India having being displaced, nearly the whole supply came from the West Indies. I think that at the beginning of the last century 20,000,0001bs., and during the American War 26,000.0001bs., were exported to this country from the West Indies. In the last ten years the average supply of West Indian cotton has been practically nothing to speak of, only 400,0001bs., and India has also fallen out of the race. America has, of course, come to the fore. That has been due partly owing to the deterioration of Indian cotton, and partly also to the displacement of the cotton industry of
  1392
  the West Indies by the sugar industry, and the continual improvement in the quality of the United States product.
  As the House knows, our main supply now comes from America, though we obtain a considerable quantity from Egypt. With very much less knowledge than that possessed by the hon. Member for Flintshire and the senior Member for Oldham, I should be disposed from what study I have been able to make of the question and from the advice I have received to suppose that the Indian cotton, from the shortness of its staple, will not be of great service to Lancashire, at any rate in the immediate future. The point does not require labouring, but it, seems to me there is a genuine peril in the dependence of such an industry as the Lancashire cotton industry for its supply of raw material on practically one country, and that, though a great and friendly country, still a foreign country. To say nothing of the climatic disturbances which may affect one portion of the world, and of the speculative operations of citizens of the United States, there is a continual progress of manufacture in the United States, especially in the Southern States, and it is quite probable, as I am advised. that at no distant time they will require the whole of their raw material for themselves. That state of things is not only somewhat alarming, but really surprising, for within the British Empire itself a vast field is open suitable as we believe for cotton growing. The British Empire presents climates, soils, and populations well adapted to the cultivation of this great staple commodity, but even these advantages have been of no avail against the organised and scientific pressure of the United States. It is such organisation and direction that I venture to

  1393
  think is the real necessity for this country.
  It has been a characteristic of this country, I think until quite lately, that while we have thought it right and proper that we should spend vast sums on acquiring and maintaining great territories, we have grudged a few hundred pounds for ascertaining the sources of wealth which those territories contain. I venture to think that that great error is happily passing away. Much has been done in a tentative and cautious way, and. having regard to the financial position at the present time much is being done to remedy it. The Blue-book which has been quoted, compiled by Professor Dunstan, is an indication of the more enlightened ideas that are prevailing on these matters. Professor Dunstan with his small but enlightened and ably led staff have been taken over recently by the Board of Trade, and we have to thank them and the Department for a very interesting survey of the cotton-growing area of the Empire. It is very desirable and very important that we should consider what has been done with regard to this important question in various parts of the Empire. Passing by India, in Egypt we have already produced a considerable quantity of cotton such as is used in Lancashire, and under the energetic direction of Lord Cromer, a great deal has been done between Cairo and Assuan. From that extension of cotton-growing we have reason to anticipate considerable advantages. In the Soudan experiments have been made in the Berber districts, and Lord Cromer is sanguine that considerable results will be obtained there also. In the West Indies we have passed the
  1394
  experimental stage, and the best class of cotton is being developed there. The results were being carefully watched. In Rhodesia we are experimenting with every prospect of success and cotton growing on an extensive scale is looked forward to. In British Central Africa 4,000 acres are under cotton cultivation. The output is of the estimated value of £25.000 and cotton will probably be the staple product of that country.
  He had already under his consideration the question which had been brought to his notice by the Member for Oldham as to how far it was expedient to decrease the population of Central Africa for the purpose of mining in the Transvaal, having regard to the progress made in the cotton industry. He was not fully informed upon the matter, but he would obtain the best information possible on the subject because he quite admitted that it was an important feature. He would not further discuss these sources of supply in India. Egypt. Rhodesia. Central and East Africa, but would emphasise the fact that at present the greatest activity had been displayed in West Africa. They had the greatest expectations of immediate development from the three colonies of Lagos. Southern Nigeria, and Sierra Leone. In 1901 information was sought from the Governors of those Colonics by his predecessor. In 1902 the Cotton Growing Association, which was an influential and representative body in Lancashire, was formed to promote the growth of cotton in the colonies of the Empire. The work was warmly taken up by the Colonial Office, by the West African Governors, and by the High Commissioner, and they worked together for nearly two years experimenting in a

  1395
  tentative and cautious way in those Colonies. The Colonies paid in the first instance the salaries of the experts who were chosen to superintend the experimental work, the association paying the remainder of the cost. The Elder, Dempster Company provided free sea transit, and free railway transit was also provided. The result had been that after eighteen months of careful experiment it had been proved that large quantities of good serviceable cotton could be produced at remunerative prices in Lagos, Sierra Leone, and Southern Nigeria. In 1904, and since he came into office, it had been arranged that the Government should pay the cost of experiments, the association contributing 25 per cent. of the expenditure providing that expenditure did not exceed £500. Since then they had arrived at the opinion that the matter might now leave the experimental and enter the commercial stage. It would have been unwise to pass too rapidly into this stage; the field of experiment had to be carefully examined in the first instance. In the course of long consultation and negotiation with the Cotton Growing Association in which he desired to cordially recognise the great services of his noble friend the Under-Secretary for the Colonies,who had taken a very active part in the matter and had been of great assistance, they were convinced that they might now pass into the commercial stage. Only to-day it had been arranged between the Colonial Office and the Cotton Growing Association that for three years the association should contribute £30,000 a year. £10.000 to be spent in the Colonies of Lagos, Sierra Leone, and Southern Nigeria, and that these three Colonies should contribute £6.500 for three years. Southern Nigeria £3,000,
  1396
  Lagos, £2,000, and Sierra Leone £1,500. This was an earnest of the hearty desire of the Cotton Growing Association to help them selves and to help Lancashire, and in that desire the Government would cooperate. But they would not stop there. Land would be conveyed to the association on easy terms, railway facilities would be offered, at first free altogether, and for a time Elder, Dempster, and Co. had offered free transit for the cotton. The Cotton Growing Association for the first five years would take no profit out of the industry.
  He wished he could definitely say more than he had said. There was no doubt, a very natural desire on the part of those interested to have railway facilities increased, and especially there was a desire to extend the Lagos Railway to the district pronounced to be suitable for the growth of cotton. The extension would be only seventy miles in length, and apart from the cotton industry it would probably prove remunerative. Certainly in the interest of cotton growing and of the colony there was a strong desire that the line should be so extended. But even for seventy miles of line, the expenditure would be considerable. Many Members opposite had been not unjustly exhorting the Chancellor of the Exchequer to economy, and those familiar with financial matters would be aware of the inconvenience attending the floating of a loan at the present moment. Notwithstanding these truths, which the Chancellor of the Exchequer had not failed to impress on his colleagues, the Chancellor of the Exchequer looked with a favourable eye on the extension of the railway provided it could be shown likely to be profitable in itself, and that the contribution required would not be

  1397
  heavy. He did not wish to go any further than that, or to give any positive pledge to the House on the subject; but he thought that they might in the course of a few months give the House some earnest of their desire as well as of their ability to give practical shape to a proposal for the extension of the railway. With regard to the light railway to Kano, he recognised the importance of that in Northern Nigeria, but he thought the principle on which it was sounder to proceed in the matter of railways in these Colonies was this. There was a certain amount of waterway and a certain amount of railway already existing. There was a considerable amount of cotton area well worth exploiting near the railway and near the waterway; and it seemed obvious that those areas should be put under cultivation first before other areas were sought at a greater distance, to the cultivation of which the condition precedent would be the making of extensive railways. Even if they made a light railway in those climates of anything but the best material, money would have to be spent on maintenance and renewal which might as well have been spent at first. But he did not rule out light railways altogether. It might be necessary to put down this railway to Kano quickly, but at the present time he was not able to see any great urgency for it. The Government had. at any rate, met hon. Gentlemen opposite so far that a survey was now proceeding with a view to finding out the best route and the probable cost. Without repeating what he had ventured to put before the House he thought hon. Members would see that the Government of the country was endeavouring to bear in mind the necessity for cotton cultivation over a
  1398
  very wide field, and were prudently and cautiously advancing in the direction of procuring it. The advance made already, as had been proved by the Report before the House, had been such as to give very great hope for the future.
  SIR WILLIAM HOLLANDasked if the right hon. Gentleman could say whether the Uganda Railway could be utilised?
  MR. LYTTELTONsaid he had no report with regard to cotton growing in Uganda.
  MR. HERBERT WHITELEYsaid as a member of the Executive of the Cotton Growing Association, and as one engaged in the cotton industry, he wished to say a few words. He agreed entirely as to the desirability of regarding this matter as non-political, and he also agreed that this was not entirely a Lancashire question. Indeed Lancashire questions were not always popular in that Assembly. The question concerned one quarter of the whole population of this Kingdom, 10.000.000 persons being engaged directly or indirectly in the cotton industry, and a fourth of the manufactured goods sent out of the country being of cotton manufacture. Lancashire was doing all it could to help itself, and it would not go to others for help until it had done all it could for itself. Lancashire had already contributed £250,000 sterling, and it was hoped to make it £500,000, for the purposes mentioned, and the workpeople were just as enthusiastic as the employers and contributed huge sums through their organisations, and individually, according to their means. He had no right to speak for the Cotton Growing Association, although he was

  1399
  one of the Executive, but he was sure that the association would thank the Colonial Secretary for the sympathetic tone of his speech. He would only add that those engaged in the cotton trade were doing their best, and they asked the country for its cooperation.
  SIR BRAMPTON GURDONsaid he believed he was the only speaker who had ventured to address the House as representing not the cotton manufacturers but the cotton growers. He wished to thank the British Cotton Growing Association for the help they had given in connection with the cotton growing in British Central Africa. Last year a few bales were sent to this country as a sample, and this year—it was only a very small beginning —sixteen tons were sent, the bulk of which fetched 8sd. per lb. Some of the best fetched 9d. per lb. and some rather less. That was, he thought, proof that British Central Africa could grow cotton of good quality. He hoped that such a small beginning would develop into a large increase in growing, and that in the future they would be able to help the British Cotton Crowing Association. They did not really want encouragement from the Government. They wanted rather to be left alone. They were, however, very much in want of a railway in British Central Africa because the waterways were indifferent and lately had been almost impracticable. They felt it was lather hard when British Central Africa was endeavouring to get a railway for herself that it should be retarded by labour being taken away to work in the mines. The men were wanted not only for the railway but also
  1400
  to grow cotton on their own farms. He hoped the Government would take that into favourable consideration. They were greatly alarmed by a report which appeared in the papers last autumn about the dumping of tin from the Malay States. An hon. Member pointed out that the Malay States was not a colony, and that the policy adopted had no reference to colonial preference.
  MR. SPEAKER: I do not think that these observations are relevant to the growing of cotton.
  SIR BRAMPTON GURDONsaid what he wished to convey was that no such policy should be adopted in connection with the industry they were opening up in British Central Africa.
  MR. WHITE RIDLEYsaid that if the Motion of his hon. friend had no other result than to elicit the clear statement the House had heard from the Colonial Secretary with reference to the action of the Government it would not have been brought forward in vain. There was one point, however, to which the right hon. Gentleman did not allude. After a careful study of the various Blue-books nothing struck him more than the great need of the further experimental cultivation of cotton. That was agreed on by all the experts. As regarded cotton in India the whole question seemed to turn on the development of knowledge in the growing of the plant. As regarded the experimental part of the work, it would appear from the speech of the Colonial Secretary that the Government were not considering it with the same attention as they were other aspects of the question. The whole of England was looking with great concern on the situation in Lancashire, and he was

  1401
  perfectly certain that the hon. Member for Bolton need not be afraid that those who asked the Government to consider the matter would incur a charge of selfishness. The country at large knew the state of Lancashire and sympathised with it. It was universally agreed that the only way by which the shortage of cotton could be remedied was to develop cotton growing within the Empire, and that the operations of private individuals required the assistance of the State. One of the real reasons of the shortage was not that less was grown in the United States, but that the policy of the United States had enabled the manufacturers of that country to develop their industry to such an extent that they required for themselves the raw cotton which we used to obtain. It was a matter for serious consideration that their policy had had that effect, whereas the result of our own fiscalpolicy had been to keep our trade stationary. In reference to our old Colonial policy, it would have been a good thing if in the past we had been able to work out a policy which would have developed cotton growing in the Empire. Many of the practical considerations which lay at the very root of the ideal of a United British Empire were to be found in this question which all Parties were at one in pressing upon the attention of the House. It was necessary both that the sources of supply should be increased, and that the sources of supply within the Empire should be developed.
  MR. CAWLEYsaid it was beyond all doubt necessary to obtain cotton from a larger number of places. To be relying on the United States for 70 per cent, of our cotton was not a safe
  1402
  position for this country to be in. It was not difficult to imagine circumstances under which it would be impossible to obtain any cotton at all from the United States, and if that should ever happen the distress that would ensue in Lancashire was terrible to contemplate. All concerned would hail with gratitude the attitude the Government had adopted. Those who were specially interested in the cotton industry had done all they could to help themselves, and he was glad that their efforts had been recognised.
  MR. CHARLES McARTHURsaid that in Liverpool they would do everything they could to help forward the movement for the development of cotton-growing within the Empire. The remarks of the Colonial Secretary would be received with satisfaction by all concerned in the cotton industry. What was most desired at present was an increase in the supply of raw cotton, and the extension of the area from which that supply was drawn. The commercial aspect of the question was most important, but its Imperial aspect was almost equally important, because the development of our colonial estates must tend in the best way to draw the parts of the Empire together. One of the great merits of this movement was that all Parties, whether free-trade or protectionist, could unite in its furtherance, and certainly so far as the shipping interest of Liverpool was concerned, it would give all the assistance within its power.
  MR. HELMEsaid that upon a sufficient supply of raw cotton depended the prosperity of Lancashire and, to a large extent, the trade of the country generally. It was the

  1403
  shortage of the supply that had caused the present dislocation and wrought such havoc in the happiness and comfort of thousands of residents in Lancashire. The success of the gambling spirit in America had led to bolder anticipations of the crop of the present season, with the result that the control of the crop had been secured, much higher prices forced upon the industry, and the demand in the trade had suffered to a lamentable extent. The success of the trade in future, and its freedom from such harassing conditions depended upon the margin of supply between the amount used in one year and that of the next, but at present the country did not possess any such margin and had no prospect of securing it from the existing area of supply. It was. therefore, highly desirable that the area of supply should be enlarged, and for that reason he urged upon the Government the importance of the proposal embodied in the Resolution.
  MR. HUNTsaid he had received a statement from Burma that they could grow stacks of cotton there if only the mother country gave them the chance. He was unable to give any further opinions of the colonists, because they were not sufficiently polite to hon. Members on the other side to permit of quotation.
  COLONEL PILKINGTONlooked upon the matter as one of far wider concern than merely affecting the manufacturers and operatives in the cotton trade. The whole of the Northwest of England was concerned, because if the cotton trade was brought practically to a standstill all the trades in that district languished. In fact, the question was one of Imperial importance, in
  1404
  connection with which the strongest sympathies and efforts of the Government should be enlisted. The supply of cotton was too small, and it would tend to become smaller in comparison with the enormous amount of plant in the cotton trade, with the result that in the near future the position of the present year would be terribly aggravated. He hoped the result of the debate would be to strengthen public opinion, and so enable the Government to do far more than the Colonial Secretary at present hoped for.
  SIR WILLIAM TOMLINSONurged the Government not to lose sight of the desirability of giving a little encouragement to those places where the cultivation of cotton was being spontaneously taken up. He had in his hand a letter from South Africa, in which the writer said he was devoting a portion of his farm to the cultivation of cotton, and that if the experiment proved successful there was a very large tract of land in the neighbourhood that might be brought into cultivation.
  Resolved, That, in the opinion of this House, it is incumbent upon His Majesty's Government to use every endeavour to encourage the growth of cotton in those districts in Africa and in other portions of the British Empire, and to establish or aid in the establishment of experimental farms in suitable cotton-growing districts which are under British Government or British influence, and to co-operate as far as possible with such commercial associations as may be organised to secure this end.
  Adjourned at five minutes after Twelve o'clock.