Sitting of 5 July 1904

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

  PRIVATE BILLS [LORDS] (STANDING OKDEKS NOT PREVIOUSLY INQUIRED INTO COMPLIED WITH).
  Mr. SPEAKERlaid upon the Table Report from one of the Examiners of Petitions for Private Bills, That, in the case of
  618
  the following Bills, originating in the1 Lords, and referred on the First Reading thereof, the Standing Orders not previously inquired into, and which are applicable thereto, have been complied with, viz.:— Belfast Corporation (Tramways) Bill [Lords]; Manchester Corporation (General Powers) Bill [Lords]. Ordered, That the Bills be read a second time.
  Minehead Urban District Council Water Bill [Lords]. Read the third time, and passed, with Amendments.
  St. Mary Woolnoth Bill [Lords]. Read the third time, and passed, without Amendment.
  Filey Improvement Bill [Lords]. As-amended, considered; to be read the third time.
  Maidenhead Bridge Bill [Lords]. As-amended, considered; an Amendment made; Bill to be read the third time.
  Leith Burgh Order Confirmation Bill. Lords Amendment considered, and agreed to.
  Local Government Provisional Orders (No. 9) Bill. Consideration, as amended, deferred till Friday.
  Glasgow Corporation (Police) Order Confirmation Bill. Read a second time; to be considered upon Thursday.
  Gas Orders Confirmation (No. 2) Bill [Lords]. Read a second time, and committed.

  STANDING ORDERS.
  Resolution reported from the Select Committee; "That, in the case of the County of Suffolk Bill, the Standing Orders ought to be dispensed with:— That the Bill be permitted to proceed, provided that the consent of the holders of securities given by the Joint Committee of the Counties of East and West Suffolk be proved before the Committee on the Bill, and that the notices for the

  619
  Bill be published in the London Gazette and in the local newspapers.
  Resolution agreed to.
  Loch Leven Water Power Bill. Reported, with Amendments; Report to lie upon the Table, and to be printed.
  Local Government Provisional Orders (No. 11) Bill. Reported, with Amendments [Provisional Orders confirmed]; Report to lie upon the Table.
  Bill, as amended, to be considered upon Friday, and to be printed. [Bill 258.]

  PRIVATE BILLS (GROUP L).
  Mr. AGG-GARDNERreported from the Committee on Group L of Private Bills; That, for the convenience of parties, the Committee had adjourned till Thursday, at half-past Eleven of the clock.
  Report to lie upon the Table.

  MESSAGE FROM THE LORDS.
  That they have agreed to—London County Council (Money) Bill, with Amendments.
  Amendments to—Matlock and District Gas Bill [Lords]; Ticehurst and District Water and Gas Bill [Lords], without Amendment.
  Leith Corporation Tramways Order Confirmation Bill. Reported from the Joint Committee, without Amendment [Provisional Order confirmed]; Report to lie upon the Table, and to be printed.
  Minutes of Proceedings to be printed. [No. 240.]
  Bill to be read the third time upon Thursday.

PETITIONS.

  LICENSING BILL.
  Petitions against; from Aberdeen; Aldcliffe; Alston; Barnsley; Barnstaple;
  620
  Beaminster; Bethnal Green (two); Blackburn; Bournbrook; Bradford; Brentwood; Bridport; Brierclifie; Broome; Burgh St. Peter; Carlisle (fourteen); Cheadle; Clifton; Colne; Cripplegate; Crook; Dewsbury; Dilhorne; Gillingham; Hackney (three); Hailing; Halstead; Hardley; Hetton-le-Hole; Hitchin; Hornsey; Hoxton; Huby; Hucknall; Huggate; Hugglescote; Ipstones; Ipswich; Kidderminster; Kirby Cane; Kiveton Park; Lambton Park; Leigh on Mendip; Leven; Lewes; Lidlington; Lodge Lane; London; Lye; Manchester; Morecambe; Moreton Morrell; Motherwell; Mount Gretna; Nelson (eight); Newcastle - on - Tyne; Newport; New Row; North Hill; North Walsham; Nottingham (two); Nuneaton; Oldham; Padiham (two); Pendleton; Pitsmoor; Potton; Puncknowle; Richmond; Sheerness; Sheffield; Sneinton; Stamford Hill; Stantonbury; Ston Easton; Stratford on Avon; Stromness; Sunderland; Tannochside; Tean; Toxteth; Trowbridge (two); Upper Clapton; Uppermill; Upper Tooting; Wellesbourne; Whalley; Widcombe; Wiltshire; Winnothdale; Woodburn; and Woollfold; to lie upon the Table.

  LICENSING BILL.
  Petitions for alteration; from Chichester; and King's Lynn; to lie upon the Table.
  SALE OF BUTTER BILL.
  Petition from Dumfries, for alteration; to lie upon the Table.
  SALE OF WHISKEY BILL.
  Petition from Dumfries, in favour; to lie upon the Table.
  TUBERCULOSIS (ANIMALS) COMPENSATIN BILL.
  Petition form the Roya., Parliamentary, and Police Burghs of Scotland, against; to lie upon the Table.
  TEINDS (SCOTLAND) BILL.
  Petition from Dumfries, in favour; to lie upon the Table.
  VALUATION BILL.
  Petitions for alteration; from Chertsey; Dudley; Hoo; Lancaster; and New-haven; to lie upon the Table.
RETURNS, REPORTS, ETC.
  ST. LOUIS EXHIBITION (STATISTICAL TABLES).
  Copy presented, of Charts (reduced in size) illustrating the Statistics of Trade, Employment, and Conditions of Labour in the United Kingdom prepared for the St. Louis Exhibition by the Commercial, Labour, and Statistical Department of the Board of Trade [by Command]; to lie upon the Table.
  ELECTRIC LIGHTING PROVISIONAL ORDERS (No. 5) BILL.
  Return presented, relative thereto [ordered 4th July; Mr. Bonar Law]; to lie upon the Table, and to be printed. [No. 239.]
QUESTIONS AND ANSWERS CIRCULATED WITH THE VOTES.
QUESTIONS AND ANSWERS CIRCULATED WITH THE VOTES.

  Pension of William Welsford, Devonport Shipwright.
  MR. KEARLEY: To ask the Secretary to the Admiralty whether he is able to state the reason why
  622
  William Welsford, shipwright, His Majesty's Dockyard, Devonport, has not been assigned his pension under the Workmen's Compensation Act, seeing that he is permanently and totally disabled, and that his injury was sustained more than a year ago.
  (Answered by Mr. Pretyman.) On the 13th January last, Welsford was granted a pension of £38 14s. 3d. for life in respect of his service, and on 13th February an allowance of £27 12s. 1d. (10s. 7d. a week) for one year as compensation for injury. These allowances are not, as a rule, granted permanently in the first instance, but are reviewed after a sufficient interval has elapsed to allow of the real effects of the injury being ascertained. The compensation allowance in this case dates from November, 1903, Welsford having received hurt pay up to that date. He has been informed that his case will be further considered at the expiration of the present award when, if his disablement is found to be permanent and total, he will receive compensation accordingly.

  Chairman of an Urban District Council—Powers of Voting.
  MR. PARROTT: To ask the President of the Local Government Board whether that Board has had occasion to consider whether or no the chairman of an urban district council, elected from outside the council, has an original as well as a casting vote; and what conclusion the Local Government Board has come to thereon.
  (Answered by Mr. Walter Long.) The Question has been considered on several occasions, and the view taken by the Department has been that in the circumstances mentioned the chairman of an urban district council has an original as well as a casting vote.

  Purchase of Estates in Sligo by the Congested Districts Board.
  MR. O'DOWD (Sligo, S.): To ask the Chief Secretary to the Lord-Lieutenant of Ireland whether he will give the names of the two estates recently purchased by the Congested Districts Board in Sligo for resale to tenants; also the acreage of tenanted and untenanted land; the

  623
  amount of purchase money; gross rental; and number of years purchase paid the landlord in each case.

  Name of Estate.

  Acreage of land.

  Purchase money.

  Rental of tenanted land.

  Poor Law Valuation of entire estate.

  Number of years purchase of the valuation.

  Tenanted.

  Untenanted.

  £

  £

  s.

  d.

  £

  s.

  d.

  Miss Margin son.

  506

  405

  4,412

  171

  13

  6

  333

  17

  0

  13¼

  Capt Armstrong.

  3,524

  326

  44,000

  1,899

  11

  2

  1,783

  11

  0

  24¾

  Cost of Collection of Taxes in Ireland.
  MR. LOUGH (Islington, W.)To ask the Secretary to the Treasury whether the whole of the expenditure of £246,000, shown in the Treasury Return issued the 4th of July, 1903 as the cost of the collection of taxes in Ireland, is incurred in that country, and how the total is made up, setting out the details of £66,000 for Customs and the £180,000 for Inland Revenue separately.
  (Answered by Mr. Victor Cavendish.)
  Customs.
  The sum of £66,000 is made up as follows:—

  (a) £47,000 for effective Services, representing the actual cost of the Customs Staff in Ireland;

  (b) £5,000 for general superintending Staff and Law Charges (Salaries);

  (c) £14,000 for general non-effective Services (Superannuations)

  The two sums (b) and (c) were not actually incurred in Ireland, but they represent the Irish share of these general charges which are divided, for the purposes of the Annual Return, between England, Scotland, and Ireland in the ratio of the amounts of revenue collected in each country.

  Inland Revenue.
  The approximate net cost of the collection of Inland Revenue Taxes in Ireland for the year 1802–3 was as follows:—

  £

  Salaries, Wages, etc.

  125,000

  Poundage to Collectors of Income-tax and Copies of Poor Rates

  15,600

  (Answered by Mr. Wyndham.) The information is given in the following table:—

  Salaries, etc. to Distributors of Stamps

  2,500

  Non-effective Charges (Pensions, etc)

  26,000

  Other Charges (Travelling, Post age, Carriage, Law Expenses, Rewards, etc.)

  12,700

  181,800

  Deduct:

  Appropriations in Aid (Law Costa and Penalties recovered, etc.)

  1,300

  180,500

  The whole of this expenditure was-incurred in Ireland.

  Issue of South African Clasps to Yeomanry.
  SIR. CHARLES DILKE: To ask the Financial Secretary to the War Office how it comes that correspondence is-still going on with regard to the issue of South African clasps in cases where it is admitted that Yeomanry privates are entitled to them, but that the date of issue is not yet fixed; and whether steps; will be taken to put an end to the delay.
  (Answered by Mr. Bromley Davenport.)Correspondence is still going on as owing to the mass of rolls to be checked it has not yet been found possible to complete all issues. The delay has been due to-the supplementary rolls required for the extra clasps granted in October, 1902; 122 extra clasp Yeomanry rolls have been dealt with and the remainder will, it is hoped, be soon cleared off. It must be pointed out that 1,458,440 clasps, in all have been issued up to date.

  Religious Instruction in Non Provided Schools.
  MR. H. C. RICHARDS (Finsbury, E.): To ask the Secretary to the Board of Education upon what date and in what manner he proposss to communicate to the House and to the managers of non-provided schools the instructions which nave been given to His Majesty's inspectors, not to sanction time-tables in Church of England schools where provision is made for the attendance of children with their parents' consent at such services; and if the Board of Education intend to treat the timetables of the Roman Catholic schools in the same manner.
  (Answered by Sir William Anson.) The Board have decided that, as the instructions to be given to their inspectors in the matter referred to in the Question relate to an interpretation of the Education Acts on a particular point, which is of some general interest, they will make the said instructions public. It is hoped that they will be issued very shortly. The action of the Board turns upon the interpretation of the Education Acts, and I am not aware that these afford preferential treatment to one kind of voluntary schools over another.

  Fees for Medical Men called in by the Police.
  DR. AMBROSE (Mayo, W.): To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department whether his attention has been called to complaints made by medical practitioners within the Metropolitan area of the inadequacy of the fees paid by the police for medical services, and the difficulty and expense incurred before obtaining those fees; and, if so, whether, in view of the time involved in these police calls, which are generally cases of injury or poisoning, he can arrange that the fees shall be increased and shall be paid on demand at the local police station from which a medical man is called.
  (Answered by Mr. Secretary Akers-Douglas.) This matter has not yet come before me, but I understand that the Commissioner of Police has received representations with regard to the amount
  626
  of certain fees paid by the police for medical services, and that these representations are now receiving his consideration.

  Bunker Capacity of "Scout" Class of Boat -Maintenance of Speed.
  SIR JOHN COLOMB: To ask the Secretary to the Admiralty whether he can state what is the average bunker capacity of the "Scout" class; and whether it is contemplated that these vessels will be able to maintain a sea-speed of 25 knots when loaded to that capacity.
  SIR JOHN COLOMB: To ask the Secretary to the Admiralty whether the coal capacity at load draught of the "Scout" class is correctly stated in the Navy Estimates this year, pp. 225 and 227, at 150 tons; and, if so, whether these vessels will be required to attain a speed of 25 knots at the contractor's trials when loaded with sufficient coal for 3,000 miles at 10 knots.
  (Answered by Mr. Pretyman.) The average bunker capacity of the "Scout" class is 485 tons. The sea speed expected from these vessels when loaded to their full capacity, carrying 485 tons, is not 25 knots, but 24·6 knots, and this speed will increase as the coal is expended. I regret that there was an inaccuracy in my statement to the House of Commons on this subject on Thursday last, as I find that only half and not the full amount of coal required for steaming 3,000 miles at 10 knots is required to be carried on full speed contractors' trials, and this amount does not differ materially from the 150 tons mentioned in the Estimates, and quoted in the recent article in The Times.

  Customs Duty on Tobacco Strips.
  MR. CHARLES McARTHUR: To ask Mr. Chancellor of the Exchequer whether he will furnish an estimate of the amount of Customs duty which will, according to the proposed differential duties on tobacco, be payable per pound on imported strips and on strips produced from imported leaf by stripping in this country, respectively, instancing the

  627
  case of Bright Virginia, and giving the grounds of his estimate.
  (Answered by Mr. Austen Chamberlain.) According to the proposed differential duties on tobacco it is estimated that the Customs duty paid on a pound of imported strips of Bright Virginia tobacco

  Bright Virginia Strips produced in this County.

  lbs.

  £

  s.

  d.

  lbs.

  £

  s.

  d.

  100

  entire leaf containing 15·85%

  19·43

  Stalks (a) Containing 16·95% moisture became at the rebate standard of 14% moisture—

  (a) of moisture @ 3s. per lb. =

  15

  0

  0

  Interest 5% for 2 weeks (b)

  0

  0

  7

  lbs.

  Interest 5% for 3 weeks

  0

  0

  2

  18·76 standard lbs. @ 3s. 1d. per lb. =

  2

  17

  10

  Contingencies and revenue restrictions @ ½d. per lb. (c)

  0

  4

  2

  ·67 loss of rebate by excessive moisture on these stalks

  Total

  19·43 stalks

  73·97 strips produced (d)

  4·04 sand loss (e)

  2·56 moisture loss (f)

  Balance

  12

  7

  1

  100 lbs.

  Total

  £15

  4

  11

  Total 100·00

  Total

  £15

  4

  11

  £12

  7s.

  1d.

  =3s.

  4d. per lb.

  73·97

  Explanatory Notes.
  In the above table no allowance has been made for loss of material involved in the operation of stripping.

  (a) These figures represent averages of four samples of Bright Virginia whole leaf as analysed at the Government Laboratory.

  (b) Two weeks allowed as a fair average for stripping 100 lbs. of this class of tobacco. The interest is calculated on the £15 of duty paid by importer. Three weeks allowed for depositing analysing stalks, and waiting to receive the rebate thereon. The interest is calculated on the £2 17s. 10d. rebate paid.

  will be 3s. 3d., and on a pound of strips produced from imported Bright Virginia leaf by stripping in this country will be approximately 3s. 4d. The appended calculation, together with explanatory notes, shows the grounds on which the estimate is based.
  (c) Having regard to the increased quantity of leaf tobacco to be stored, the attendant heavier charges for storage and handling, the additional insurance, licence duty, waste, etc., the sum of ½d. per lb. is a fair one to allow for contingencies.
  (d) Calculated thus—

  Imported strips.

  Average moisture

  13·50%

  Average sand

  2·08%

  Total

  15·58

  Absolutely dry and sandless

  84·42

  Total

  100·00

  Virginian leaf consists of—

  lbs.

  19·43

  of stalks containing moisture

  16·95%

  80·57

  of strips containing moisture=12·55 lbs. moisture

  15·58

  Total

  100·00

  15·85%

  Average sand found by analysis in Virginian leaf 6·12%.
  Average sand found by analysis in Virginian stalk=2·87%.
  As the sand naturally adhering to the stalk will receive the rebate of 3s. 1d. per lb., this sand should be deducted thus:—

  lbs.

  Sand on 100 lbs. leaf

  =

  6·12

  Deduct sand in 19·43 lbs. of stalk

  =

  ·55

  5·57

  = sand left in 80·57 lbs. of strips produced in this country or loston stripping.

  Total sand and moisture on 80·57 lbs. of strips

  =

  18·12

  Dry sandless to bacco

  =

  62·45

  Total

  80·57

  But it has been shown above that 84·42 lbs. of dry sandless tobacco represents 100 lbs. of imported strips.
  Therefore 62·45 lbs. of dry sandless tobacco represents 73·97 lbs. of strips.
  (e) These 73·97 lbs. of strips contain 2·08% sand the same as imported strips, therefore 2·08% of 73·97 lbs. = 1·53 lbs. This deducted from 5·57 lbs.—the total quantity of sand present in 80·57 lbs. —leaves 4·04 lbs.

  lbs.

  (f) o al moisture in 80·57 strips produced in this country

  =

  12·55.

  Average moisture imported strips=13·50%and 13·50% of 73·97 of net strips produced.

  =

  9·99

  Difference

  2·56.

  Income of Teacher of Ballynaclosha National School.
  MR. P. A. MCHUGH (Leitrim, N.): To ask the Chief Secretary to the Lord-Lieutenant of Ireland whether, in accordance with the recognised principle of special consideration in special circumstances, he will request the Commissioners of National Education in Ireland to revise the figures on which the present income of the principal teacher of Ballynaclosha National School was fixed; is he aware that in fixing this teachers' income no allowance was made by the Commissioners for the fact that owing to the prevalence of disease in his district in 1898 and 1899 his income fell considerably below the figure at which it stood before these years; and will he see that this teacher is not penalised through a misfortune which he had no power to-avert.
  (Answered by Mr. Wyndham.) I answered a similar Question yesterday by the hon. Member for West Kerry.†

  Contribution by Irish National Teachers to Upkeep of Schools.
  MR. P. A. MCHUGH:: To ask the Chief Secretary to the Lord-Lieutenant of Ireland whether he can grant a Return showing the amount contributed by the National Teachers of Ireland during the five years ended 31st March, 1904, towards the equipment and general upkeep of their schools.
  (Answered by Mr. Wyndham.) The Commissioners have no materials from which they could furnish this Return.

  Burtonport Railway Agreement.
  MR. McFADDEN (Donegal, E.): To ask the Chief Secretary to the Lord-Lieutenant of Ireland whether, in view of
  †See page 449.

  631
  the charges made by William H. Boyd, D.L., Ballymacool, Letterkenny, as to unauthorised changes made by the solicitor to the Lough Swilly Railway Company in the draft making agreement between the Board of Works and the railway company for the making of the Burtonport Railway, a direction will be given to the Board of Works to publish the whole of the correspondence between the Board's solicitor and the solicitor of the Lough Swilly Railway Company as to the agreement entered into for making the Burtonport Railway.
  (Answered by Mr. Victor Cavendish.) No, Sir.

  Ballinascarthy and Timoleague Light Railway.
  MR. McFADDEN: To ask the Chief Secretary to the Lord-Lieutenant of Ireland whether the county council of the county of Cork took over the making of the Ballinascarthy and Timoleague Light Railway in the year 1902, and have since the 31st December, 1902, declined to levy a rate to pay the shareholders the dividend on the 5 per cent, county guarantee of the company, and, if so, the reason of the refusal; whether any steps have been taken to prosecute the late secretary of the company for misappropriation of the sum of £500 drawn by him out of the company's funds in the Munster and Leinster Bank; and whether any proceedings were taken by the county council against the bank for the recovery of the said sum of £500.
  (Answered by Mr. Wyndham.) By Order of His Excellency the Lord-Lieu-tent of Ireland, dated 7th July, 1896, the Ballinascarthy and Timoleague Railway was vested in a committee of management of the county council. No application has been made by the county council for the Treasury recoupment of two per cent, on the dividend for the half-year ended 30th June, 1903. I am unable to give any further information.

  Longford Drainage.
  MR. J. P.FARRELL (Longford, N.): To ask the Chief Secretary to the Lord-Lieutenant of Ireland whether the attention of the Commissioners of Works in Ireland has been called to the failure of
  632
  the Longford District Drainage Board to drain the tributary from Mullagharowmeen to the Camlin River which, owing to its neglected condition, is flooding the lands of the riparian occupiers; and, if not, will attention now be directed to it.
  (Answered by Mr. Wyndham.) No representations to this effect have been recently made to the Commissioners of Public Works. The trustees of the drainage district are responsible for the maintenance of the drainage works in good order. Complaints of neglect should be made in the first instance to the trustees through their secretary. If complaints so made are without effect, a complaint would then properly lie to the Commissioners.

  Deportation to Longford of English and Scotch Paupers.
  MR. J. P. FARRELL: To ask the Chief Secretary to the Lord-Lieutenant of Ireland to state by what authority pauper inmates of English and Scotch unions have recently been deported to Longford Union; and will an inquiry be made as to whether the provisions of the Act passed to prevent such deportation have been complied with.
  (Answered by Mr. Wyndham.) The attention of the Local Government Board has not been called to any recent case of deportation of English or Scotch paupers to the Longford Union. If any specific instance is brought under the notice of the Board, in which it is alleged that the law has been violated, it will investigate the matter.

  Money for Donegal under the Marine Works Act.
  MR. O'DOHERTY: To ask the Chief Secretary to the Lord-Lieutenant of Ireland whether any arrangement has yet been arrived at between the Irish Government and the Donegal County Council as to the allocation of the money ear-marked for the county of Donegal under the Marine Works Act; and, if so, what works do the Government propose to carry out under the Act, and the sums of money they intend to spend on each.
  (Answered by Mr. Wyndham.) Works have been approved at Gortnasate at an

  633
  expenditure of £5,000, of which £4,480 will be provided under the Marine Works Act, £500 by the Congested Districts Board, and £20 from local sources. On the 27th June the County Council forwarded the necessary resolutions with respect to works proposed at Portnoo, Cladnageragh, and Downing's Bay. These resolutions are at present before the Commissioners of Public Works for report. An expenditure of £3,000 is contemplated at Portnoo out of funds provided by the Marine Works Act, £1,500 at Cladnageragh, and £4,500 at Downing's Bay. The Congested Districts Board will also make a contribution in each case.

  Construction of Sea Wall and Boat Slip at Portasantal, County Donegal.
  MR. O'DOHERTY: To ask the Chief Secretary to the Lord-Lieutenant of Ireland whether the attention of the Congested Districts Board, and of the Irish Government, has been called to the necessity for the construction of a sea wall and boat slip at Portasantal, Glen-gad, county Donegal; whether the fishery experts of the Board are of opinion that the proposed work would be of utility to the fishermen of the district, and save them labour and loss in the discharge of fish from their boats and the beaching thereof; and whether a grant will be made for this purpose out of the moneys voted by Parliament under the Marine Works Act.
  (Answered by Mr. Wyndham.) The attention of the Congested Districts Board has been directed to the requirements of the fishermen at this place. There are no funds available for undertaking the proposed works there under the Act of 1902.

  Expenditure from Army Votes on Brennan Torpedo Establishments.
  SIR JOHN COLOMB: To ask the Secretary of State for War whether he can state what, if any, portion of the £32,000 expenditure out of Army Votes for 1903–4 upon Brennan torpedo establishments is for interest upon the capital expenditure upon them of £483,000.
  (Answered by Mr. Secretary Arnold-Forster.) No portion of this sum of
  634
  £32,000 was for interest on the capital expenditure of £483,000.

  Terms of Retirement of Paymasters of Army Pay Department.
  MR. MOON (St. Pancras, N.): To ask the Secretary of State for War whether, in view of the changes now taking place in the Army Finance Department, he proposes to offer special terms of retirement, as has been done under similar circumstances in the past, to chief paymasters and staff paymasters of the Army Pay Department, who might elect to retire in preference to serving under new conditions.
  (Answered by Mr. Secretary Arnold-Forster.) The scheme for the formation of the Army Accounts Branch is at present under consideration, and I regret that I am, therefore, unable to make any announcement on the subject of the retirement of officials at the present time.

  Sale of Government Stores by Colonel Morgan in South Africa.
  MR. CHARLES HOBHOUSE (Bristol, E): To ask the Secretary of State for War whether he has yet received any answer to his inquiry as to the sale of Government stores in South Africa by Colonel Morgan, of the Army Service Corps.
  (Answered by Mr. Secretary Arnold Forster.)A report on this subject has just been received from the General Officer Commanding in South Africa, but, in view of the fact that Colonel Morgan has instituted proceedings against the London newspaper which commented on the remarks made by the Chief Justice of the Transvaal in connection with this matter, no action will be taken by the War Office until the case is decided in Court.

  Cost of Report of Army Medical Department—Delay in Publication.
  MR. CHARLES HOBHOUSE: To ask the Secretary of State for War what is the cost of preparing the Annual Report of the Army Medical Department; at what date the Report is generally presented; what is the cause of the delay in its presentation to Parliament; and whether it would be possible to expedite it in future.

  635
  (Answered by Mr. Secretary Arnold-Forster.) The cost of the printing and paper of the Army Medical Department Report falls upon the Stationery Office Votes. It naturally depends on the size of the Report, but I have ascertained that the cost of the Report recently published may be taken as about £180. The Report is generally presented eighteen months after the year to which the Returns refer. It was explained to the hon. Member last year, in reply to a Question, that many of the Returns do not reach this country till the late autumn, owing to the labour of compilation, and that a considerable period is required for the elaboration of the Report from these Returns. I am afraid, therefore, that it is not practicable to expedite its publication.

  Resolutions of Inter-Colonial Council as to Railway Administration in South Africa.
  MR. BUCHANAN (Ferthshire, E.): To ask the Secretary of State for the Colonies what were the resolutions finally arrived at by the Inter-Colonial Council for the improvement of railway administration and securing a stricter financial control; whether they have been accepted by Lord Milner and the Government; and whether in coneequence it will be necessary to alter the Orders in Council.
  (Answered by Air. Secretary Lyttelton.) I have not yet received from Lord Milner the final proceedings of the Inter-Colonial Council on this subject. Lord Milner has informed me by telegraph that he will submit to me shortly his proposals arising out of those proceedings.

  QUESTIONS IN THE HOUSE.

    Flogging in the Navy.
    MR. SWIFT MACNEILL (Donegal, S.): I beg to ask the Secretary to the Admiralty whether, in accordance with the King's Regulations, official patterns of canes and birches are kept in the home dockyards for comparison in the purchase at these dockyards of canes and birches supplied to the ships of the Royal Navy and naval training ships for the flogging of boys and youths under eighteen, in
    636
    these ships; whether specimens of the canes and birches thus approved will be produced by the Admiralty for the inspection of Members of the House of Commons.
    THE SECRETARY TO THE ADMIRALTY (Mr. PRETYMAN,): The reply to the first part of the Question is in the affirmative, and to the second part in the negative.
    MR. SWIFT MACNEILL: Can we not see these tools, as approved by the Admiralty.
    MR. SPEAKER: Order, order! The hon. Member is not entitled to ask whether they will be produced.
    MR. FLAVIN (Kerry, N.): Will the hon. Gentleman place a sample of the canes in the tea room.
    [No answer was returned.]

    Caning Statistics in the Navy.
    MR. SWIFT MACNEILL: I beg to ask the Secretary to the Admiralty on how many boys in the years 1901, 1902 and 1903, were canings inflicted on ships of the Royal Navy and naval training ships; if there is any return of the number of canings inflicted and the offences for which this punishment was awarded.
    MR. PRETYMAN: There is no such Return as that mentioned in the latter part of the hon. Member's Question. The only information available is that contained in the daily record of punishments for each ship in the Navy.
    MR. SWIFT MACNEILL: Cannot we have a summary of the daily records?
    MR. PRETYMAN: It would be a tedious and expensive task to get one out, and I do not think it worth while.
    MR. SWIFT MACNEILL: The canings are dangerous to the boys.

    Chatham Military Railway.
    MR. SWIFT MACNEILL: I beg to ask the Financial Secretary to the War Office whether he is aware that a military railway to connect Fort Durland, near Chatham, with Chatham Barracks,

    637
    planned to run through War Department land for the greater part of its length, had been constructed till it reached, in the immediate vicinity of Fort Durland, a strip of land belonging to the Naval authorities, who had not been consulted in the construction of the railway, and that the refusal of the consent of these authorities to the building of the line on their land has led to the suspension of the work; that near the Chatham end of the railway portions of a bridge were erected at a great cost, with massive piers, to take the line over the main road, when it was discovered that a company had rights to run an electric tramway on the overhead system along this road, so that it was impossible to raise the bridge sufficiently high to clear the wires without altering the level of the railway for hundreds of yards, the result being that the portions of the bridge already erected have been destroyed, and the work on that side brought to a standstill; and will he state what is the sum which it is calculated has been lost by these mistakes, and under what Vote in the Estimates will it come; and whether the War Office has any, and, if so, what explanation of this waste of public money.
    THE FINANCIAL SECRETARY TO THE WAR OFFICE (Mr. BROMLEY DAVENPORT,): I am informed that the work in question was not suspended on account of any non-agreement with the Naval authorities, but for reasons which were stated in reply to a Question on the 11th June, 1903.† The construction of the line, which was partly undertaken for the purpose of the instruction of the Railway Companies and other Royal Engineer units, was suspended on the introduction of an improved scheme of decentralised training, which rendered the line unnecessary. There was no difficulty connected with an electric tramway running under the line. The whole cost of the work done was comparatively small, as military labour of men under instruction was utilised, and the materials will to a very great extent be made use of elsewhere. The sum may be stated approximately at £2,000, and was included in the amount voted under Vote X. on page 70 of the
    † See (4) Debates, cxxiii., 635.
    638
    Estimates for the years 1901–2, 1902–3, 1903–4, under the item "Chatham. Acquisition of land and erection of torpedo factory, etc."

    Bitterne Remount Depot.
    MR. LAMBERT (Devonshire,): I beg to ask the Secretary of State for War whether any land has been bought by the Government at Bitterne, near Southampton, for the purpose of a remount depôot; if so, what was the area bought and the price paid.
    MR. BROMLEY DAVENPORT: No land has yet been bought at Bitterne, but negotiations for purchase are in progress.

    Transvaal Explosives Tax.
    MR. WHITLEY: I beg to ask the Secretary of State for the Colonies if the saving on explosives in the Transvaal in 1903, as compared with 1899, was is. 3½d. per ton milled; and if the saving on the total tons milled was £408,533 during the year in which the receipts from the gold mine profit tax were £162,573.
    THE SECRETARY OF STATE FOR THE COLONIES (Mr. LYTTELTON,): I am aware that the saving has been estimated at 1s. 3½d. as stated by competent mining authorities. For the explanation of the amount received under the 10 per cent, profit tax, which represents something over 1s. per ton, I must refer the hon. Member to Lord Milner s despatch of 18th June last in the Parliamentary Paper Cd. 2102 just published.
    MR. WHITLEY: Are the figures in my Question correct?
    MR. LYTTELTON: Yes, as far as I can gather from the authorities I have been able to consult.
    MR. MARKHAM: Can the right hon. Gentleman say what the saving would have been, both to the mining industry and the Transvaal, if a new dynamite monopoly had not been granted to the De Beers Company of South Africa?
    MR. SPEAKER: Order, order! That does not arise out of the Answer.

    Transvaal Legislative Council.
    MR. BUCHANAN (Perthshire, E.): I beg to ask the Secretary of State for the Colonies what alterations in the constitution of the Legislative Council of the Transvaal the Government propose to make when the term of office of the present council expires; and whether a representative system will be introduced.
    MR. LYTTELTON: As I stated yesterday, in answer to a Question by the lion. Member for South Molton†, I am not prepared to make any statement on the subject at present.
    MR. BUCHANAN: Have any communications passed with the Transvaal Government.
    MR. LYTTELTON: I cannot go beyond the Answers I have already given.
    MR. LAMBERT: Will the right hon. Gentleman be in a position to make any statement before the session is over?
    MR. LYTTELTON: I cannot say.

    Transvaal Finance.
    MR. BUCHANAN: I beg to ask the Secretary of State for the Colonies whether, before the debate on Transvaal finance is taken, he will lay before the House a Report of the proceedings of the Inter-Colonial Council in June; and whether he will also obtain from Lord Milner the final figures of actual revenue and expenditure for the year ending 30th June.
    MR. LYTTELTON: There has not yet been time to receive from Lord Milner a full Report of the proceedings, but I am including in the Papers which will be published this week the text of his opening address as President. I will ask Lord Milner to supply me with the final figures as soon as he is in a position to do so.
    MR. BUCHANAN: The right hon. Gentleman has not answered the second part of my Question: may I further ask if he will be able to tell us before the Vote comes on what modifications have
    † See page 465.
    640
    been accepted by the Home Government in regard to the constitution, etc.
    MR. LYTTELTON: I must ask for notice of that.

    British Consular Representation in Turkey.
    MR. STEVENSON: I beg to ask the Under-Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs whether His Majesty's Government will enter into friendly conference with the Governments of France and Italy with a view to the early augmentation of the Consular staff in the European and Asiatic provinces of Turkey, by the appointment of travelling Consular Attachés and assistants to the existing Consulates in those vilayets.
    THE UNDER-SECRETARY OF STATE FOR FOREIGN AFFAIRS (Earl PERCY,): The Consular staff which His Majesty's Government maintain in the European and Asiatic provinces of Turkey is, in their opinion, sufficient for the protection of British interests, and as at present advised they see no reason for increasing it.

    Administration of the East Africa Protectorate—Dismissal of Mr. Hopton.
    MR. CATHCART WASON: I beg to ask the Under-Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs if he can state on what grounds Mr. Hop-ton was dismissed by telegraph from the service of the East Africa Protectorate, and why his repeated demands for reasons for his dismissal have not been acceded to; who the gentleman is who has been appointed to his place; and whether he has any practical knowledge of agriculture and knowledge of native language and customs that qualify him for the post.
    EARL PERCY: Mr. Hopton was relieved of his duties in the East Africa Protectorate at the request of Sir C. Eliot on the grounds of his unsuitability for the appointment. He was informed of the reasons on three occasions by His Majesty's Commisioner. Mr. J. K. Hill has been appointed to succeed Mr. Hopton. He has practical knowledge of farming and agriculture in Great Britain and South Africa, and was recommended for the post by Sir C. Eliot.

    East Africa and Uganda Finances.
    MR. CATHCART WASON: I beg to ask the Under-Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs if copies of the Estimates for the service of the East Africa and Uganda Protectorate are to be obtained by Members of Parliament.
    EARL PERCY: The Estimates for the Protectorates are given under Class V., Vote II.

    Spirit Distillation in England.
    MR. WILLIAM McKILLOP (Sligo, N.): I beg to ask Mr. Chancellor of the Exchequer if he will state the total quantity of spirit distilled in England during the year 1903, and how much was used for methylation, rectifying, and compounding purposes; whether any English spirit is used as whisky in Customs warehouses in Leith; and, if so, what is the total quantity despatched thereto from distilleries in England; whether he has any official information showing the materials from which English spirit is usually distilled; and if any beet molasses from abroad is used in its manufacture.
    THE CHANCELLOR OF THE EXCHEQUER (Mr. AUSTEN CHAMBERLAIN,): The total quantity of spirits distilled in England during the year ended 31st March, 1904, was 11,694,851 proof gallons. The quantity of home-made spirits used for methylation during the same period was 4,398,002 proof gallons. I have no means of knowing the quantities used for rectifying and compounding. 33,300 proof gallons of British spirits were despatched to Customs warehouses at Leith from English distilleries during the twelve months ended the 30th of June, 1904. The materials commonly used in the distillation of English spirits are malt, unmalted grain, molasses, sugar, glucose and rice. No doubt beet molasses is used to some extent, but I have no means of knowing the quantities.

    Tobacco and the Budget.
    MR. LAMBERT: I beg to ask Mr. Chancellor of the Exchequer if, having regard to the inconvenience to the commercial interests of the country, he can state whether he intends to continue or
    642
    modify his Budget proposals for the taxation of tobacco.
    MR. AUSTEN CHAMBERLAIN: I propose to proceed with the Finance Bill as early as possible. I must defer any further statement as to the tobacco duties until the discussion is resumed.
    MR. LAMBERT: Cannot the right hon. Gentleman give a more precise indication of the date than is conveyed in the expression "as early as possible." Does he mean next week?
    MR. AUSTEN CHAMBERLAIN: I must refer the hon. Member to the Answer given by the Prime Minister.
    MR. LAMBERT: What was it?
    MR. MCCRAE (Edinburgh, E.): Will the right hon. Gentleman follow the example of the right hon. Gentleman the Member for West Bristol when dealing with the cheque tax, and make a statement before the discussion is resumed?
    MR. AUSTEN CHAMBERLAIN: I have just answered that Question.

    Telephonic Communication between Country Villages and Market Towns.
    CAPTAIN BAGOT: I beg to ask the Postmaster-Genera' whether, in view of the fact that if post office telephone call offices were established in country village post offices, callers would not be able to communicate with subscribers to the National Telephone Company in the nearest or any adjacent town, in which the exchange? was under the National Telephone Company, he will state if this hindrance to an extension of the telephone system between rural districts and country towns is owing to statute law or some agreement between the Postmaster-General and the Telephone Company; and, if so, will he take steps to remedy this state of affairs with a view to placing country villages in telephonic communication with their market and other towns.
    THE POSTMASTER-GENERAL (Lord STANLEY,): The absence of the right of intercommunication between call offices and exchanges

    643
    of the the post office in any provincial exchange area and the system of the National Telephone Company in the same area, is not due to any statutory provision or to any agreement between the Postmaster-General and the Company. It arises from the fact that the Postmaster-General has no power to require the Company to give such intercommunication, glad as I should be if such an arrangement could be brought about.

    Ankylostomiasis.
    MR. JOHNSON: On behalf of the hon. Member for Mid-Durham, I beg to ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department whether he has taken or will take steps to ensure that in the event of miner's disease (known as ankylostomiasis) arising in any coal or metal-liferous mine, a notification thereof should be forthwith sent to the medical officer of health and the mines' inspector of the district in which such mine is situate, and that the isolation of cases that may arise should be secured; and whether, if the administrative powers of the Home Office be not adequate for the purpose, he will introduce the necessary legislation.
    THE UNDER-SECRETARY OF STATE FOR THE HOME DEPARTMENT (Mr. COCHRANE,): I have not yet learnt the results of the conferences between owners and men which were to be arranged in each district to discuss this subject generally, and until I do so any statement as to the precise steps to be taken for the prevention of the disease would be premature, but I doubt whether, from the nature of the case, it is practicable to require notification and isolation of every case of the disease. I am glad to say that no case has yet been found in a coal mine.

    Prosecutions for Palmistry, etc., Frauds
    MR. JOHN CAMPBELL (Armagh, S.): I beg to ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department whether his attention has been called to the frauds perpetrated in connection with the practice of palmistry, crystal-gazing, clairvoyance, and other species of fortune telling in the West End; and, if so, whether he will instruct the police to institute prosecutions without further delay.
    MR. COCHRANE: I have very little to add to the Answer given by my predecessor to a similar Question put by the hon. Member some three years ago.† It was stated then that the police had instructions to watch suspicious cases of the nature indicated by the hon. Member and to take proceedings when there was good ground for believing that fraud or imposition was being practised. Those instructions stand; and a prosecution has been instituted whenever satisfactory evidence of fraud or imposition was available.
    MR. FLAVIN: Is the right hon. Gentleman aware that the residents of Park Lane take a very deep interest in this question?
    [No Answer was returned.]

    Calf Lymph—Disposal of the Calves.
    MR. FIELD (Dublin, St. Patrick): I beg to ask the President of the Local Government Board whether the Government hire live calves for the purpose of vaccinating for lymph; whether he can state at what cost and how long those calves are kept; what becomes of them after being returned to the owner; whether this class of meat is sold as veal for public consumption; whether he has any reports on its fitness for human food by local medical officers of health; and whether it is identified when being sold as "lymph veal."
    THE PRESIDENT OF THE LOCAL GOVERNMENT BOARD (Mr. WALTER LONG, Bristol, S.): Calves are hired at a cost of from 20s. to 25s. a week for the purpose mentioned. The number of calves used varies. At present the average number is approximately fifteen weekly. The calves are kept for about two weeks. After the lymph has been collected from them, they are slaughtered, and their carcases are thoroughly examined by a veterinary expert. Sound carcases are delivered to the contractor by whom the animals are supplied, to be disposed of as he thinks fit. The concern of the Department in the matter then ceases. I am not aware that any medical officer of health has made a report on the subject, but I am advised
    … See (4) Debates, lxxxix., 683.

    645
    that, when the carcases are found to be sound, there is no reason why they should not be sold for food. I have no information as to the practice with regard to the sale of the carcases as meat. The number of the carcases delivered to the contractor in 1903–4 was about 1,000. This is above the average.
    MR. FIELD: I beg to ask the President of the Local Government Board whether he can state how many calves are kept by the Local Government Board as reservoirs of lymph for vaccination purposes; how many animals so used are sold annually as food for the people; and where the sales usually take place.
    MB. WALTER LONG: I may refer the hon. Member to my reply to his other Question in the Paper to-day on this subject.

    Traffic Regulations in the Parks.
    MR. SCOTT-MONTAGU: I beg to ask the hon. Member for Chorley, as representing the First Commissioner of Works, whether, if steps are taken to enforce the ten-mile limit for motor-cars in the Mall and elsewhere in the Parks, the police will equally be instructed to prosecute all drivers of horse-drawn vehiclesexceeding that speed.
    LORD BALCARRES: The reply is in the negative, as the First Commissioner has already the power, under the Parks Regulation Act of 1872, to limit the speed of carriages to ten miles an hour or to any such speed as may be considered necessary to protect the public from annoyance. The First Commissioner has always taken steps to secure that traffic shall be regulated so as to preserve the enjoyment of the Parks for all classes of the public.
    MR. SCOTT-MONTAGU: Does the noble Lord not think it desirable to treat all classes of traffic on the same basis?
    LORD BALCARRES: That is precisely what we propose to do.

    Board of Agriculture Leaflets.
    MR. A. K. LOYD: I beg to ask the hon. Member for North Huntingdonshire, as representing the President of the Board of Agriculture,
    646
    whether the demand for Nos. 7, 17, 37, 59, and 71 of the leaflets issued by the Board has caused these leaflets to be out of print f and whether the Board will consider the desirability of having them reprinted.
    MR. AILWYN FELLOWES: The leaflets to which my hon. friend refers are out of print and we do not propose, at any rate for the present, to re-issue them separately, the time when they were of general interest having passed. They will, however, be included in the volume of leaflets about to be published in book form. All leaflets of present or permanent interest are reprinted so soon as there is any sign of an edition being exhausted.

    Strokestown Drainage District.
    MR. JAMES O'KELLY (Roscommon, N.): I beg to ask the Chief Secretary to the Lord-Lieutenant of Ireland whether he is aware that the Strokestown Rural District Council recently passed a resolution calling the attention of the Board of Works to the state of the rivers in the Strokestown Drainage District, and complaining that this neglect was the cause of floods and injury to the local farmers in recent years; and, if so, will he say whether it is the intention of the Board of Works to take the necessary steps in the matter.
    THE CHIEF SECRETARY FOR IRELAND (Mr. WYNDHAM, Dover): The resolution was received. The trustees of the drainage district are responsible for the maintenance of the drainage works in good order. The Board of Works informed the district council that complaints of neglect should be made in the first instance to the trustees through their secretary. If complaints so made are without effect a complaint would then properly lie to the Board of Works.

    Irish School Teachers' Remuneration—Kilrusheighter Teacher's Claim.
    MR. P. A. MCHUGH (Leitrim, N): I beg to ask the Chief Secretary to the Lord-Lieutenant of Ireland whether he is aware that the principal teacher of Kilrusheighter (county Sligo) National School taught agriculture for the period commencing in October, 1899, and ending in July, 1900, and was paid £12 17s. 6d. in February,

    647
    1901, on account of such tuition in that period, and that the Commissioners of National Education in calculating the consolidated income of this teacher refused to take into account the portion of that sum (£7 14s. 6d.) which was earned by him for the period from 1st October, 1899, to 31st March, 1900, and assigned as the ground of their refusal the fact that the payment for his tuition in agriculture for the period from October, 1899, to July, 1900, was not made until February, 1901; and, if so, whether, seeing that under Rule 200 the Commissioners were bound to include all emoluments actually earned from State sources within the three years ended 31st March, 1900, the application of the manager, Very Rev. John Melvin, P.P., for a revision of this teacher's salary will be granted.
    ME. WYNDHAM: The claims of this teacher have formed the subject of a correspondence between myself and the Rev. Mr. Melvin, a copy of which I recently communicated to the hon. Member. As already pointed out, the Commissioners had no power to take into account, when fixing the consolidated income of the teacher, a payment made subsequently to the 31st March, 1900. But even if payment had been made before that date, it was never contemplated by the rules that grants covering, as in this case, services rendered for a period of only six months should be continued in perpetuity under the form of consolidated income.

    1.

    2.

    3.

    4.

    5.

    6.

    7.

    8.

    Name.

    Description of office.

    Qualification, giving University degrees, the College attended, and time spend.

    Salary.

    Date of appointment.

    Previous employment.

    Tenure of office.

    Nationality.

    Munster Dairy School.
    MR. MURPHY (Kerry, E.): I beg to ask the Chief Secretary to the Lord-Lieutenant of Ireland whether the
    MR. THOMAS O'DONNELL (Kerry, W.): Does not the Rule specifically state that all moneys actually earned by the teacher for the three years should be brought into the calculation?
    MR. P. A. MCHUGH: And is it not the fact that this £7 14s. 6d. was earned in the period ending the 31st March, 1900?
    MR. WYNDHAMwas understood to reply that it was never contemplated to include money earned for a purely temporary duty.

    Technical Instruction Act-of Officials.
    MR. JOYCE: I beg to ask the Chief Secretary to the Lord-Lieutenant of Ireland whether he will grant a Return dealing with officials employed by the various county boroughs in Ireland in carrying out the provisions of the Technical Instruction Act.
    ME. WYNDHAM: I am prepared to give a Return in the form proposed, with the exception of the information indicated in Columns 3 and 8. For the reasons already explained, I cannot consent to this information.
    Appended is the Return asked for.
    Technical Instruction (Ireland) (Officials). Return of Officials employed upon the 1st day of June, 1904, by the various County Boroughs and Urban Councils in Ireland in carrying out the provisions of the Technical Instruction (Ireland) Act, in the following form:—
    Department of Agriculture now propose to utilise the £10,000 set aside for the enlargement and improvement of the Munster Dairy School; and what is the

    649
    reason for the delay in carrying out these improvements for which money was granted under the Act of 1889.
    MR. WYNDHAM: The hon. Member does not appear to have seen my reply to the similar Question of 4th May by the hon. Member for North Cork.† I have no further statement to make at present.

    Irish Intermediate Education-System of Inspection.
    MR. FLYNN (Cork, N.): I beg to ask the Chief Secretary to the Lord-Lieutenant of Ireland whether his attention has been called to the Report of the Intermediate Education Board for Ireland for 1903, dealing with the subject of the establishment of a system of permanent inspection of the working of intermediate education; whether he is aware that the Board, in June, 1903, forwarded a resolution to the Under-Secretary to the effect that they desired to impress on the Lord-Lieutenant the great urgency of appointing permanent inspectors as a necessary part of the reforms aimed at by the Act of 1900; and, if so, what is the cause of delay in the adoption of a system of inspection declared to be urgent by the Board responsible for the working of secondary education in Ireland.
    MR. WYNDHAM: Yes, Sir. The Government has not refused to provide for a system of inspection. It has only refused to establish, at the present moment, a system of inspection conducted by a staff of permanent Civil servants; and both on financial and educational grounds it adheres to that position until the question of the parts which examination and inspection are respectively to play in the distribution of State aid to the schools has been settled. This is one of the matters now under investigation by the Committee of Inquiry into Intermediate Education in Ireland.
    MR. FLYNN: Is the right hon. Gentleman not aware that the Commissioners of Intermediate Education fifteen years ago reported against the present system and a supplementary system was set up.
    † See (4) Debates, cxxxiv., 394.
    MR. WYNDHAM: Yes; but I have said the whole matter is now under investigation.

    Blakeney Estate, County Galway.
    MR. ROCHE (Galway, E.): I beg to ask the Chief Secretary to the Lord-Lieutenant of Ireland whether he can state if the Blakeney Estate, Abbert, county Galway, is in the Land Judge's Court; if so, for how long; whether he can state the name of the agent or receiver; whether he has been instructed to take advantage of the Land Purchase Act; and whether he will be directed to supply to the tenants any necessary information to enable them to make an offer for the property.
    MR. WYNDHAM: The estate is in the Land Judge's Court. A petition for sale was filed by the late owner in 1883, but little has been done to effect a sale. There is no receiver over the lands, and the estate is solvent. The provisions of Section 40 of the Act of 1896 are not, therefore, applicable in the case. The Land Judge cannot compel a sale, but it is understood that when the matter comes again before him in November, the parties having carriage of the estate must either elect to sell or have the proceedings dismissed from the Court.

    Irish Development Grant Bill—Petty Sessions Clerks Fund.
    MR. O'SHEE (Waterford, W.): I beg to ask the Chief Secretary to the Lord-Lieutenant of Ireland whether [he is aware that the County Waterford County Council has passed a resolution urging that he should withdraw the clause in the Irish Development Grant Bill, which proposes to transfer to the Treasury the sum of £150,000 standing to the credit of the Petty Sessions Clerks Fund; and whether he will re-consider the matter, and adopt the course suggested.
    MR. WYNDHAM: No Sir; the resolution does not appear to have been brought under my notice, In reply to the second part of the Question I would refer to my reply to the similar Question of 20th June by the hon. Member for South Tyrone.‡
    † See (4) Debates, cxxxiv., 490.

    Kerry Rent Appeals.
    MR. THOMAS O'DONNELL: I beg to ask the Chief Secretary to the Lord-Lieutenant of Ireland whether he is aware that tenants in county Kerry who served their landlords with rent-fixing notices six years ago are still waiting to have their appeals heard; whether, under these circumstances, steps will be taken to have those appeals heard during the coming autumn.
    MR. WYNDHAM: The Land Commissioners sat in Killarney for the hearing of appeals in July, 1903. The list then for hearing contained all appeals lodged prior to May, 1901. It is however, a fact that in some cases in which appeals were lodged since that date and which are still pending, the originating notices were originally lodged as far back as the period mentioned in the Question. It is not at present possible to say when the Commissioners will hold their next sitting for the disposal of appeals from Kerry.
    MR. THOMAS O'DONNELL: Seeing that six years have elapsed since the notices were served can the right hon. Gentleman hold out any hope that a decision will be arrived at in the next ten years?
    MR. WYNDHAM: Yes, I think I can promise that.
    MR. T. W. RUSSELL (Tyrone, S.): May I say that I propose on Thursday next to raise the whole question of the collapse of the Appeal Court.
    MR. FLAVIN: Is the right hon. Gentleman aware that the tenants pending the decision of the Court are compelled to pay the whole rent, and is not that a great burden on them?
    [No Answer was returned.]

    Amalgamation of Offices of Antrim and Belfast Clerks of the Peace.
    MR. JOSEPH DEVLIN (Kilkenny, N): I beg to ask the Chief Secretary to the Lord-Lieutenant of Ireland whether he can state the nature of the arrangements made by the Lord-Lieutenant with reference to the amalgamation of the offices of the Clerk of the Peace for Belfast, Clerk of the Peace for county Antrim,
    652
    and Clerk of the Crown for county Antrim; what saving will be effected to the Treasury by the new arrangements; and whether the saving thus effected will be devoted to Irish purposes.
    MR. WYNDHAM: These offices are united in the same person under the provisions of Section 8 of the County Court and Officers Act, 1877, and Section 69 of the Local Government Act, 1898. The amount of the salary, and of the allowance for clerical assistance, has not yet been fixed. When fixed it will be paid out of moneys voted by Parliament. As a set-off, to some small extent, to this charge the fees hitherto received by the Clerk of the Peace and Clerk of the Crown will be paid into the Exchequer. In the result a burden not hitherto borne by the Treasury will be transferred to Imperial Funds to the relief of local rates.
    MR. MACVEAGH (Down, S.): Is it not calculated that a very large saving will be effected by the amalgamation.
    MB. WYNDHAM: At any rate it is a bargain resting upon a statutory provision.

    Westropp Estate, County Clare.
    MR. SHEEHY (Meath, S.): I beg to ask the Chief Secretary to the Lord-Lieutenant of Ireland whether his attention has been called to a request lodged with the Land Commissioners by the tenants on the Westropp Estate, county Clare, under the seventh Section of the Land Act of 1803; and, if so, whether he will take steps to expedite the sale of this property.
    MR. WYNDHAM: The Estates Commissioners have issued a request to the Land Judge for particulars of this estate under Section 7 of the Act of 1903.

    Police Constable Molloy, Royal Irish Constabulary.
    MR. MACVEAGH: I beg to ask the Chief Secretary to the Lord-Lieutenant of Ireland whether he can state on what date the conduct of Police Constable Molloy, in connection with the Coleraine Petty Sessions, was reported to the Inspector-General; and on what date the censure was conveyed to him.
    MR. WYNDHAM: On the 29th June in each case.

    Greencastle Police Force.
    MR. JOSEPH DEVLIN: I beg to ask the Chief Secretary to the Lord-Lieutenant of Ireland whether, in view of the pledges given last year that the removal of Sergeant Gallagher from the charge of Greencastle, county Antrim, police district, and the substitution for him of Head Constable Moore was only a temporary arrangement, he will say whether any circumstance has arisen in the meantime to cause a reconsideration of that promise; and, if so, what is its nature; and, if nothing detrimental to the character of Sergeant Gallagher has taken place since then, he will be reinstated in his old position.
    MR. WYNDHAM: The question of the retention of the head constable at Greencastle is entirely a matter for the consideration of the Constabulary authorities. He was transferred to that station in August last in the interests of the public. The Commissioner of Police at Belfast reports that he has the confidence of all classes and that he is aware of no reasons for transferring him from Greencastle. The Inspector-General concurs in the views of the Commissioner, and I do not propose to intervene in the matter.
    MR. JOSEPH DEVLIN: Is not the retention of Head Constable Moore looked upon as an insult to Sergeant Gallagher?
    ME. WYNDHAM: The hon. Member will see that the employment of an officer at a particular place cannot and does not reflect on any other officer's character. It is a matter of discipline and administrative convenience with which the Inspector-General is competent to deal.
    MR. SLOAN (Belfast, S.): Have the inhabitants of Greencastle made any complaint as to this head constable being there.
    MR. WYNDHAM: I do not think so.
    MR. MACVEAGH: Did not the right hon. Gentleman last session say that the head constable was only stationed there temporarily, and did not the Police Commissioner for the city of Belfast promise a deputation subsequently that the appointment should be permanent?
    MR. WYNDHAM: I cannot say, but at any rate it does not alter my view that this is a matter for the Inspector-General.
    MR. MACVEAGH: Has the Belfast Commissioner superior jurisdiction to the right hon. Gentleman.
    [No answer was returned.]

    Administration of the Arms Act at Maryborough.
    MR. DELANY: I beg to ask the Chief Secretary to the Lord-Lieutenant of Ireland whether he can state by whom a gun, the property of Mr. Peter Dowling, Straboe, was given into the possession of the police at Maryborough; and whether the gun has been returned to the owner.
    MR. WYNDHAM: The gun was handed to the police by the owner of the property on which it was found. On the 16th June† I stated I had been informed that the gun had been identified by Mr. Dowling as belonging to him; that he had undertaken to make a declaration to this effect, and that the weapon was taken out of his possession without his knowledge or approval; and that when this declaration had been made it would be restored to him. He has not yet made the declaration, however, and has informed the police he is not now sure that the gun is his.
    MR. DELANY: Who was the owner of the property.
    MR. WYNDHAM: I confess I cannot fathom the mystery of the gun. I hope it will get back to the right man.

    Comyn Kenny Estate, County Galway.
    MR. ROCHE: I beg to ask the Chief Secretary to the Lord-Lieutenant of Ireland whether he can now state if the tenant purchasers under Acts previous to 1903, in the neighbourhood of the Comyn Kenny Estate, county Galway, which has been purchased recently by the Congested Districts Board, may have their uneconomic holdings increased without requiring them to resell their purchased holdings to the Congested Districts Board.
    † See (4) Debates, cxxxiv., 288.
    MR. WYNDHAM: The tenant purchaser is not bound to resell his holding. The outstanding balance of the loan already made must be consolidated with the new advance and a new annuity becomes payable in respect of the enlarged holding, which is thenceforth treated as one holding. Some administrative difficulties exist when the advances are made under different statutes. These are under consideration.
    In reply to a further Question by Mr. KILBRIDE,
    MR. WYNDHAMsaid that when an addition was made to a holding which had been purchased the two were merged into one holding and the instalments were consolidated; but, where the first holding was purchased under a former Act and the addition under the present Act, there were technical difficulties for which he hoped a solution would be found.

    Miltown-Malbay Petty Sessions Clerk.
    MR. PATRICK O'BRIEN: I beg to ask the Chief Secretary to the Lord-Lieutenant of Ireland whether, in view of the fact that Head Constable Allingham was recently elected petty sessions clerk at Miltown-Malbay, he can say what special qualifications beyond being a police officer he had over local civilian candidates which induced the local magistrates to appoint him; was Head Constable Allingham in the police service when elected; and, if not, when did he leave the force for the purposes of his candidature, and was it by leave; whether he is still in the police force; and can he give the date when he is to take up the duties of petty sessions clerk.
    MR. WYNDHAM: The head constable was stationed at Miltown-Malbay for twenty years prior to his transfer on promotion to another district in November last. He was consequently well known to the magistrates who elected him to the position of petty sessions clerk, for which he was consideied the best qualified. The Inspector-General granted him permission to become a candidate. He will qualify for a pension from the police force on the 14th inst., and he cannot enter on his new duties
    656
    until after that date. Before his appointment is confirmed he will undergo an examination to test his fitness for the office.
    MR. PATRICK O'BRIEN: Is the right hon. Gentleman aware that there is great dissatisfaction in the district as to the way in which this appointment was made, seeing that some of the magistrates were not summoned to the meeting. Has the right hon. Gentleman any power to insist on a new election?
    MR. WYNDHAM: I am not aware of the matters referred to, and I doubt if I have any power, but I will inquire.

    Land Purchase by Congested Districts Board in County Sligo.
    MR. O'DOWD (Sligo, S.): To ask the Chief Secretary to the Lord-Lieutenant of Ireland whether he will give the names of the two estates recently purchased by the Congested Districts Board in SligO for resale to tenants; also the acreage of tenanted and untenanted land; the amount of purchase money; gross rental; and number of years purchase paid the landlord in each case.
    MR. WYNDHAM: It will be more convenient to give a written reply to this Question, and with the hon. Member's permission the desired information will be printed with to-day's Votes.

    Harlech Estate, County Sligo.
    MR. O'DOWD: I beg to ask the Chief Secretary to the Lord-Lieutenant of Ireland whether he is aware that the fee simple of the Leitrim Hill grazing farm, situate on the Harlech Estate, in Tobercurry Union, county Sligo, has recently been purchased by a landlord named Phibbs, without the knowledge of the small tenants of the district, who have been using it as an accommodation farm for a number of years; if so, will he say if such sale was sanctioned by the Land Commission; and, if not, will this matter be inquired into with the view of having the farm utilised for the enlargement of small holdings, should the estate be sold to the tenants at any future time.
    MR. WYNDHAM: The estate comprising the farm referred to has not been offered to the Estates Commissioners. I

    657
    am also informed that it has not been offered to the Congested Districts Board.
    MR. O'DOWD: IS the right hon. "Gentleman aware that negotiations are pending between the landlord and tenants on the Harlech Estate?
    MR. WYNDHAM: I am not.

    River Owenmore Drainage.
    MR. O'DOWD: I beg to ask the Chief Secretary to the Lord-Lieutenant of Ireland whether, in view of the fact that the River Owenmore in the county Sligo takes its rise in, and flows through, a scheduled congested district; and that a scheme for the drainage of this river under the Arterial Drainage Acts is, under existing circumstances, impracticable, he will advise the Congested Districts Board or the Board of Agriculture to allocate a certain sum by way of grant in aid to local effort for the carrying out of the work of draining this river.
    MR. WYNDHAM: There are no funds at the disposal of the Congested Districts Board or Department of Agriculture out of which to contribute towards the cost of drainage works.
    MR. O'DOWD: If the people in the locality take the initiative in the work will they be encouraged with a grant from public funds?
    MR. WYNDHAM: I do not think-there is any fund available for the purpose.

    Congested Districts Board—Examinations for Temporary Clerkships.
    MR. FIELD: I beg to ask the Chief Secretary to the Lord-Lieutenant of Ireland if he will explain why the system of examinations for temporary clerkships in the Congested Districts Board, Ireland, has been abolished; whether, in making future appointments, the Board will have preference for those men whose names were registered on their books to compete at the examinations; whether in the meantime the Board are filling vacancies by selecting men of good character and education, or who have had experience in public or commercial offices; whether
    658
    a sub-committee has been selected to make these appointments; and, if so, will he state how long it is intended to continue this system.
    MR. WYNDHAM: The Board is in correspondence with the Treasury on the subject of the mode of making appointments to its staff. Should it be found necessary to hold examinations for appointment of temporary clerks, pending a settlement of the question, the Board will endeavour to procure the services of the best men available.

    Irish National School Teachers' Pay.
    MR. FIELD: I beg to ask the Chief Secretary to the Lord-Lieutenant of Ireland whether the Government intend to take measures so that the payment of Irish national teachers shall be increased so as to place them upon an equality with English teachers.
    MR. WYNDHAM: In any comparison between the incomes of Irish national school teachers and teachers in England, regard must be had to the burden on the State and on local sources. The incomes paid to teachers in Ireland represent a payment from the State of £2 8s. 11d. for each child in average daily attendance. In England and Wales, the cost of maintenance of the schools is £2 13s. 2d. per pupil, of which only £1 10s. 8d. was derived from the State in the case of Board schools.

    Irish Congested Districts Board Staff.
    MR. FIELD: I beg to ask the Secretary to the Treasury whether he will explain why the Congested Districts Board (Ireland) have asked the Treasury to allow their staff to be recruited from the regular permanent Civil Service men who have entered through the Civil Service Commissioners' Examination; and whether this suggestion will be adopted by the Treasury.
    THE FINANCIAL SECRETARY OF THE TREASURY (Mr. VICTOR CAVENDISH,): The Congested Districts Board, through the Irish Government, have asked whether the Treasury would be disposed to consider favourably a proposal to appoint a certain number

    659
    of permanent clerks to their staff. Correspondence on the subject is still proceeding, but no decision has yet been arrived at.
    ME. SWIFT MACNEILL: Can the right hon. Gentleman say what is the Irish Government? We do not know.
    [No Answer was returned.]

    BILLS OF EXCHANUE ACT (1882) AMENDMENT BILL [LORDS].
    Read the first time; to be read a second time upon Monday next and to be printed. [Bill 257.]
    NEW MEMBER SWORN.
    John Sharpe Higham, esquire, for the County of York, Northern part of the West Riding (Sowerby Division).

LICENSING BILL (PROCEDURE).
Order read, for resuming adjourned debate on Question [1st July], "That the proceedings in Committee and on Report of the Licensing Bill shall be brought to a conclusion in the manner hereinafter mentioned on six allotted days:

(a) The proceedings in Committee on Clause 1 on the first allotted day;

(b) The proceedings in Committee in Clauses 2 and 3 on the second allotted day;

(c) The proceedings in Committee on Clause 4 on the third allotted day;

(d) The proceedings in Committee on the remaining clauses of the Bill, and on any new Government clauses, and on schedules and any new Government schedules, and any other proceedings necessary to bring the Committee stage to a conclusion on the fourth allotted day;

(e) The proceedings on Report on any new clauses and on Amendments to Clauses 1, 2, and 3 of that Bill, be brought to a conclusion on the fifth allotted day; and

(f) The proceedings on Report be concluded on the sixth allotted day.

After this Order comes into operation, any day shall be considered an allotted day for the purposes of this Order on which the Licensing Bill is put down as the first Order of the Day.
At 11 p.m. on the said allotted days, or if the day is a Friday at 4.30 p.m., the Chairman or Speaker shall put forthwith the Question or Questions on any Amendment or Motion already proposed from the Chair, and shall next proceed successively to put forthwith the Question on any Amendments moved by the Government of which notice has been given (but no other Amendments) and on every Question necessary to dispose of the allotted business to be concluded on the allotted day.
In the case of Government Amendments, or of Government new clauses or schedules, he shall put only the Question that the Amendment be made, or that the clause or schedule be added to the Bill, as the case may be.
At 12 midnight on the day on which the Third Reading of the Bill is put down as first Order, or, if that day is a Friday, at 5.30 p.m., the Speaker shall put forthwith any Question necessary to conclude the proceedings on that stage of the Bill.
Proceedings to which this Order relates shall not be interrupted (except at an Afternoon Sitting at 7.30 p.m.), under the provisions of any Standing Order relating to Sittings of the House.
After the passing of this Order, on any day on which any proceedings on the Licensing Bill stand as the first Order of the Day, no dilatory Motion on the Bill, nor under Standing Order No. 10, nor Motion to postpone a clause, shall be received unless moved by the Minister in charge of the Bill, and the Question on any such Motion shall be put forthwith. Nor shall any opposed Private Business be set down at the Evening Sitting for consideration on any of the allotted days or on the day on which the Third Reading of the Bill is put down as first Order.
If Progress be reported the Chairman shall put this Order in force in any subsequent sitting of the Committee."—(Mr. A. J. Balfour.)
Question again proposed.
MR. LLOYD-GEORGE (Carnarvon Boroughs)moved as an Amendment the omission from line two of the words "in Committee and." This was, he said, really in the nature of a protest against the destruction of the Committee stage of the Bill. He could have quite understood a proposal from the Government to limit the discussion on the Report stage, for they might have pointed out that questions having been fully threshed out in Committee it was rather unfair to go over them again on the Report stage. It would have been much more reasonable to give six days to the Report stage than to confine the Committee stage to that period. The Committee stage was the most important stage, and he did appeal to the Government to confine their guillotine Motion to the Report stage. He supposed it was quite futile for him to make the appeal, but he did not think the Opposition would be doing its duty if it did not protest on every possible opportunity against the virtual destruction of the Committee stage. He had gone through the Amendments thoroughly, and his Parliamentary experience enabled him to gather that the number of substantial ones on the Paper was so large that if they merely divided on each and did not attempt to discuss them, the Resolution did not allow sufficient time to deal with all of them. It was therefore perfectly preposterous to attempt to confine the discussion to six days; it was reducing their work to an absolutely absurd farce.
Amendment proposed—
"In line 2, to leave out the words 'in Committee and."—(Mr. Lloyd-George.)
Question proposed, "That the words 'in Committee and' stand part of the Question."
MR. DAVID MACIVERsaid that as one of the supporters of the Licensing Bill, which he believed to be a thoroughly good one, he objected to seeing it wrecked by a side wind. In his opinion the proposal of the Prime Minister would afford amply sufficient time for the honest consideration of the measure. He had no wish to say anything about obstruction, but hon. Members knew very well that in the Committee stage, as one Amendment was disposed of, another technically in order, and raising exactly
662
the same point, was put on the Paper. Therefore he felt that unless the Government Resolution was agreed to in its entirety, there was considerable probability of the Bill being smothered in talk. He could not help feeling that in the interest of fair debate it was better the closure Resolution should be agreed to as it stood.
ME. SPEAKER: Order! order, the hon. Member is now dealing with the whole Question. The Amendment only raises a very small point.
MR. DAVID MACIVERsaid, as he understood it, the point was whether or not the Government Resolution should apply to the Committee stage. That was the point he was endeavouring to argue.
ME. SPEAKER: But the hon. Member was expressing his opinion that the whole Motion should be passed.
MR. DAVID MACIVERsaid he did think so. Continuing, the hon. Member said the question was whether the Committee stage should be prolonged indefinitely. Now his view was that it would be a great advantage if the speeches were terse and to the point, without being unreasonably prolonged. If that were secured there was a probability that reasonable Amendments would be carefully argued, and that the speeches would be listened to. The tendency was to reiteration, and the Government Resolution would prevent that. There was another point to be considered. Some hon. Members of that House had occupations outside, and it ought not to be made impossible for those who were not merely professional politicians to attend to those occupations. He for one looked on the House of Commons as the great Council of the Nation, and they ought to be able to listen to real debates, to argue real Amendments, and to have them discussed impartially. Too many of the Amendments now brought forward were mere repetition, and that afforded ample justification for closuring the debate on the Committee Stage.
ME. GIBSON BOWLESsaid he viewed with considerable apprehension the application of this Resolution, which practically superseded the Rules recently adopted for the conduct of the

663
business of the House. In his opinion the most useful stage in the progress of a Bill was the Committee stage; it was at that stage that the suggestions were made the adoption of which made a measure practicable and workable. Useful and fruitful work was done in Committee. But he desired to point out what would be one effect of the adoption of the Resolution as it now stood. It provided that the Committee stage on the Licensing Bill should be brought to a conclusion after so many days. Did hon. Members quite apprehend what that meant? What not unfrequently happened in the case of other Bills was not unlikely to happen on this measure. It might become necessary to recommit the Bill, and he doubted whether, supposing the Resolution were carried, Mr. Speaker would put a Motion for recommittal, inasmuch as there would be no Committee to which the Bill could be recommitted, because by the Resolution the Committee stage would have been concluded. His view was that in voting for this Amendment the House would be voting for the curtailment of its powers on the Report stage, and would deprive itself of the useful power of recommittal. In view of the fact that no plea either of urgency or of obstruction had been advanced in support of the Resolution, he deplored that the Government should, so soon after the new Rules had been passed, come before the House with a proposal of this nature.
THE PRIME MINISTER AND FIRST LORD OF THE TREASURY (Mr. A. J. BALFOUR,)said he would venture to point out that this Amendment really contradicted in substance the conclusion at which the House arrived at midnight last night. There was no speech which was made in favour of the Resolution which could not, with equal propriety of course, be made against this modification. The hon. Gentleman who moved must be perfectly aware, indeed he rather judged from his speech that he was aware, that to carry his Amendment would nullify the whole effect they might anticipate from the passage of the Resolution. It was on the Committee stage that they had the sixty-five pages of Amendments, it was on the Committee stage that they saw before them the actual means by which
664
the proceedings on this Bill might be indefinitely postponed. And he had not the smallest doubt, when they had waded I through the sixty-five pages of Amendments, and the additions which the ingenuity of hon. Gentlemen would doubtless prompt before the end of the Committee stage, that all this would have to be gone through again on the Report stage. This Amendment, in truth, was not an Amendment, but the destruction of the Resolution; and he thought everybody who supported the Resolution last night was bound in common consistency to support the Government now in resisting it. This was substantially the question which was discussed yesterday, and under the circumstances he did not doubt that the House could without very prolonged debate come to the same conclusion as that at which it arrived a few hours previously on the main question.
MR. MIDDLEMORE (Birmingham, N.)said the Prime Minister had parenthetically dealt with the question of the extension of the time for the Committee stage.
MR. SPEAKER: Order, order! That point will arise on a future Amendment.
MAJOR JAMESON (Clare, W.)declared that the House if it accepted this Amendment would nullify all the decisions at which it had arrived by huge majorities on the various stages of the Licensing Bill. The Amendment asked for more time for the consideration of the Bill. But he would like to draw the attention of the House to the time that had been already expended. More time was asked for the discussion of Clause 1, that clause dealt with the question of quarter sessions, and he would like to point out that the First and Second Reading debates were concentrated on the subject of the powers of quarter sessions.
MR. SPEAKER: Order, order! That question does not now arise. The point now is whether the Committee stage shall be expunged from the Resolution.
MAJOR JAMESONsaid he of course bowed to the ruling of the Chairman. What he was particularly anxious about was that the decisions arrived at by huge

665
majorities should not now be nullified. The House must not stultify itself, and he hoped that the Government would rigidly adhere to their Resolution.
Question put.
The House divided:—Ayes, 220; Noes, 160. (Division List No. 189.)

AYES.

Agg-Gardner, James Tynte

Fison, Frederick William

MacIver, David (Liverpool)

Allhusen, Augustus Henry Eden

FitzGerald, Sir Robert Penrose

Maconochie, A. W.

Anson, Sir William Reynell

Fitzroy, Hn. Edward Algernon

M'Iver, Sir Lewis (Edinburgh,W

Arnold-Forster, Rt. Hn. Hugh O

Flower, Sir Ernest

M'Killop, James (Stirlingshire)

Arrol, Sir William

Forster, Henry William

Malcolm, Ian

Atkinson, Rt. Hon. John

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

Manners, Lord Cecil

Bagot, Capt, Josceline FitzRoy

Galloway, William Johnson

Massey-Main waring, Hn. W.F.

Bailey, James (Walworth)

Gardner, Ernest

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

Bain, Colonel James Robert

Garfit, William

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

Baird, John George Alexander

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

Melville, Beresford Valentine

Balcarres, Lord

Goschen, Hon. George Joachim

Meysey-Thompson, Sir H. M.

Beldwin, Alfred

Goulding, Edward Alfred

Mildmay, Francis Bingham

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

Graham, Henry Robert

Milvain, Thomas

Balfour, Capt. C. B. (Hornsey)

Greene, Henry D.(Shrewsbury)

Mitchell, William (Burnley)

Balfour, Rt, Hn GeraId W. (Leeds

Greene, W. Raymond (Cambs.)

Molesworth, Sir Lewis

Balfour, Kenneth R. (Christch.

Grenfell, William Henry

Montagu, G. (Huntingdon)

Banbury, Sir Frederick George

Gretton, John

Moon, Edward Robert Pacy

Barry, Sir Francis T. (Windsor)

Groves, James Grimble

Moore, William

Bartley, Sir George C. T.

Gunter, Sir Robert

Morpeth, Viscount

Bathurst, Hon. Allen Benjamin

Halsey, Rt, Hon. Thomas F.

Morrell, George Herbert

Bignold, Arthur

Hamilton, Marq of(L'nd'nderry

Morrison, James Archibald

Bigwood, James

Hardy, Laurence (Kent Ashford)

Morton, Arthur H. Aylmer

Bill, Charles

Hare, Thomas Leigh

Mount, William Arthur

Blundell, Colonel Henry

Harris, F. Leverton (Tynem'th

Mowbray, Sir Robert Gray G.

Bond, Edward

Hay, Hon. Claude George

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

Brassey, Albert

Heath, James (Staffords., N.W.

Murray, Charles J. (Coventry)

Brodrick, Rt. Hon. St. John

Heaton, John Henniker

Murray, Col. Wyndham (Bath)

Brown, Sir Alex. H.(Shropsh.)

Helder, Augustus

Newdegate, Francis A. N.

Bull, William James

Hermon-Hodge, Sir Robert T.

Nicholson, William Graham

Burdett-Coutts, W.

Hoare, Sir Samuel

Parker, Sir Gilbert

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

Hogg, Lindsay

Peel, Hn. Wm. Robert Wellesley

Carson, Rt. Hon. Sir Edw. H.

Hope, J.F.(Sheffield, Brightside

Pemberton, John S. G.

Cautley, Henry Strother

Horner, Frederick William

Percy, Earl

Cavendish, V. C. W. (Derbyshire

Hoult, Joseph

Pierpoint, Robert

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

Houston, Robert Paterson

Pilkington, Colonel Richard

Chapman, Edward

Hozier, Hn. James Henry Cecil

Platt-Higgins, Frederick

Charrington, Spencer

Hudson, George Bickersteth

Plummer, Walter R.

Clive, Captain Percy A.

Hunt, Rowland

Pretyman, Ernest George

Coates, Edward Feetham

Jameson, Major J. Eustace

Pryce-Jones, Lt.-Col. Edward

Cochrane, Hon. Thos. H. A. E

Jeffreys, Rt. Hon. Arthur Fred.

Purkis, Robert

Cohen, Benjamin Louis

Jessel, Captain Herbert Merton

Quilter, Sir Cuthbert

Colston, Chas. Edw. H. Athole

Johnstone, Heywood, (Sussex)

Rankin, Sir James

Corbett, T. L. (Down, North)

Kennaway, Rt. Hn. Sir John H.

Rasch, Sir Frederic Carne

Craig, Charles Curtis (Antrim, S.)

Kenyon, Hon. Geo. T.(Denbigh)

Ratcliff, R. F.

Cross, Herb. Shepherd (Bolton)

Kenyon-Slaney, Col. W.(Salop.

Reid, James (Greenock)

Crossley, Rt. Hon. Sir Savile

Kerr, John

Remnant, James Farquharson

Dalkeith, Earl of

Knowles, Sir Lees

Richards, Henry Charles

Dalrymple, Sir Charles

Law, Andrew Bonar (Glasgow)

Ridley, S. Forde (Bethnal Green

Davenport, William Bromley-

Lawrence, Wm. F. (Liverpool)

Ritchie, Rt. Hn. Chas. Thomson

Denny, Colonel

Lawson, J. Grant (Yorks., N.R.

Roberts, Samuel (Sheffield)

Dickson, Charles Scott

Lee, A. H. (Hants., Fareham)

Robinson, Brooke

Dixon-Hartland, Sir Fred Dixon

Legge, Col. Hon. Heneage

Ropner, Colonel Sir Robert

Dorington, Rt. Hn. Sir John E.

Llewellyn, Evan Henry

Round, Rt. Hon. James

Doughty, George

Lockwood, Lieut.-Col. A. R.

Royds, Clement Molyneux

Douglas, Rt. Hon. A. Akers

Loder, Gerald Walter Erskine

Rutherford, John (Lancashire)

Doxford, Sir William Theodore

Long, Col. CharlesW.(Evesham)

Sackville, Col. S. G. Stopford-

Durning-Lawrence, Sir Edwin

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

Sadler, Col. Samuel Alexander

Dyke, Rt. Hn. Sir William Hart

Lowe, Francis William

Samuel, Sir Harrys.(Limehouse

Egerton, Hon. A. de Tatton

Lowther, C. (Cumb., Eskdale)

Scott, Sir S. (Marylebone, W.)

Faber, Edmund B. (Hants, W.)

Loyd, Archie Kirkman

Sharpe, William Edward T.

Fardell, Sir T. George

Lucas, Col. Francis (Lowestoft)

Smith, Abel H. (Hertford, East)

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

Lucas, Reginald J.(Portsmouth

Spear, John Ward

Finch, Rt. Hon. George H.

Lyttelton, Rt, Hon. Alfred

Spencer, Sir E. (W. Bromwich)

Finlay, Sir Robert Bannatyne

Macdona, John Cumming

Stanley, Hn. Arthur (Ormskirk

Stanley, Edward Jas.(Somerset

Valentia, Viscount

Wilson, John (Glasgow)

Stanley, Rt. Hon. Lord (Lancs.)

Walker, Col. William Hall

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

Stewart, Sir Mark J. M'Taggart

Warde, Colonel C. E.

Wolff, Gustav Wilhelm

Stirling-Maxwell, Sir John M.

Webb, Colonel William George

Worsley-Taylor, Henry Wilson

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

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

Wrightson, Sir Thomas

Thorburn, Sir Walter

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

Wyndham, Rt. Hon. George

Tollemache, Henry James

Whiteley, H.(Ashton und. Lyne

Tomlinson, Sir Wm. Edw. M.

Williams, Colonel R. (Dorset)

TELLERS FOR THE AYES—Sir

Tritton, Charles Ernest

Willoughby de Eresby', Lord

Alexander Acland-Hood and

Tuff, Charles

Wills, Sir Frederick

Mr. Ailwyn Fellowes.

Tufnell, Lieut.-Col. Edward

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

NOES.

Ainsworth, John Stirling

Gurdon, Sir W. Brampton

Parrott, William

Allen, Charles V.

Hain, Edward

Partington, Oswald

Ashton, Thomas Gair

Harwood, George

Paulton, James Mellor

Barlow, John Emmott

Hayden, John Patrick

Pease, J. A. (Saffron Walden)

Barran, Romland Hirst

Helme, Norval Watson

Power, Patrick Joseph

Blake, Edward

Hemphill, Rt. Hon. Charles H.

Price, Robert John

Boland, John

Henderson, Arthur (Durham)

Rea, Russell

Bowles, T. Gibson (Kind's Lynn

Higham, John Sharpe

Reckitt, Harold James

Brigg, John

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

Redmond, John E. (Waterford)

Broadhurst, Henry

Holland, Sir William Henry

Reid, Sir R. Threshie (Dumfries

Brunner, Sir John Tomlinson

Hutchinson, Dr. Charles Fredk.

Rigg, Richard

Bryce, Rt. Hon. James

Jacoby, James Alfred

Roberts, John H. (Denbighs.)

Buchanan, Thoma Ryburn

Johnson, John (Gateshead)

Roche, John

Burke, E. Haviland

Joicey, Sir James

Rose, Cuarles Day

Buxton, Sydney Charles

Jones, D. Brynmor (Swansea)

Runciman, Walter

Caldwell, James

Jordan, Jeremiah

Russell, T. W.

Cameron, Robert

Joyce, Michael

Samuel, Herbert L. (Cleveland)

Campbell, John (Armagh, S.)

Kennedy, Vincent P.(Cavan, W.

Schwann, Charles E.

Campbell-Bannerman, Sir H.

Kilbride, Denis

Shackleton, David James

Causton, Richard Knight

Kitson, Sir James

Shaw, Thomas (Hawick B.)

Channing, Francis Allston

Lambert, George

Sheehan, Daniel Daniel

Churchill, Winston Spencer

Langley, Batty

Sheehy, David

Condon, Thomas Joseph

Law, Hugh Alex. (Donegal, W.)

Shipman, Dr. John G.

Corbett, A. Cameron (Glasgow)

Lawson, Sir Wilfrid (Cornwall)

Slack, John Bamford

Craig, Robert Hunter (Lanark)

Layland-Barratt, Francis

Sloan, Thomas Henry

Crean, Eugene

Leese, Sir Joseph F.(Accrington)

Smith, Samuel (Flint)

Cremer, William Randal

Leng, Sir John

Soames, Arthur Wellesley

Crombie, John William

Levy, Maurice

Stanhope, Hon. Philip James

Cullinan, J.

Lewis, John Herbert

Stevenson, Francis S.

Dalziel, James Henry

Lough, Thomas

Strachey, Sir Edward

Davies, Alfred (Carmarthen)

Lundon, W.

Sullivan, Donal

Daives, M. Vaughan (Cardigan)

Lyell, Charles Henry

Taylor, Theodore C. (Radcliffe)

Delany, William

Macnamara, Dr. Thomas J.

Tennant, Harold John

Devlin, Chas. Ramsay(Galway)

MacVeagh, Jeremiah

Thomas, Sir A.(Glamorgan, E.)

Devlin, Joseph (Kilkenny, N.)

M'Arthur, William (Cornwall)

Thomas, J. A. (GlamorganGower

Dilke, Rt. Hon. Sir Charles

M'Crae, George

Tomkinson, James

Donelan, Captain A.

M'Fadden, Edward

Toulmin, George

Doogan, P. C.

M'Hugh, Patrick A.

Trevelyan, Charles Philips

Douglas. Charles M. (Lanark)

Mansfield, Horace Rendall

Wallace, Robert

Elibank, Master of

Mappin, Sir Frederick Thorpe

Wason, Eugene (Clackmannan)

Ellice,Capt E.C.(SAndrw'sBghs

Markham, Arthur Basil

Wason, John Cathcart(Orkney)

Ellis, John Edward (Notts.)

Mitchell, Edw. (Fermanagh, N.)

White, George (Norfolk)

Evans, Sir Fran. H. (Maidstone

Mooney, John J.

White, Luke (York, E.R.)

Evans, Samuel T. (Glamorgan)

Morgan, J. Lloyd (Carmarthen)

Whitley, J. H. (Halifax)

Farquharson, Dr. Robert

Murphy, John

Williams, Osmond (Merioneth)

Field, William

Nolan, Joseph (Louth, South)

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

Fitzmaurice, Lord Edmond

Nussey, Thomas Willans

Wilson, John (Falkirk)

Fla in, Michael Joseph

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

Woodhouse, Sir J. T (Huddersf'd

Flynn, James Christopher

O'Brien, K. (Tipperary, Mid.)

Young, Samuel

Fowler, Rt. Hon. Sir Henry

O'Brien, Patrick (Kilkenny)

Yoxall, James Henry

Fuller, J. M. F.

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

Gladstone, Rt. Hn. Herbert John

O'Doherty, William

TELLERS FOR THE NOES—Mr.

Goddard, Daniel Ford

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

Lloyd - George and Mr.

Grant, Corrie

O'Kelly, Jas. (Roscommon, N.)

M'Kenna.

Griffith, Ellis J.

O'Shaughnessy, P. J.

MR. YOXALLmoved to omit from the Resolution the words "and on Report." He submitted
668
that in view of the number of Amendments to be moved in Committee by the Home Secretary, and of The suggestions

669
which had already been partially accepted by the Government, more than two days would be necessary for the revision of the Bill on the Report stage. Anybody who had been a Member of the House for any length of time would know that the Report stage was very essential in order to revise the patchwork legislation done in Committee. The Committee stage he looked upon as a work in mosaic, Amendments were suggested and forms of words brought forward and accepted hurriedly, and they certainly required prolonged examination on Report, so as to make the Bill a workmanlike piece of legislation.
Amendment proposed—
"In line 2, to leave out the words 'and on Report.' "—(Mr. Yoxall.)
Question proposed, "That the words and on Report' stand part of the Question."
MR. A. J. BALFOURexpressed surprise that it should have been thought necessary to move the Amendment. The main object of the Resolution was to deal with the Committee and Report stages.
DR. MACNAMARA (Camberwell, N.): And the Third Reading.
MR. A. J. BALFOURsaid that to accept the Amendment would be to stultify the decision at which the House had already arrived. In support of the contention of the Opposition that there had been no obstruction, it was urged that the debates in Committee had been carried on practically under Report rules; that the same Member had not thought it necessary to exercise his right to speak more than once on the same Amendment. That only showed that the same time might be expended on the Report stage as on the Committee stage, and that the sixty-six pages of Amendments now down for the Committee stage might be transferred bodily and without modification to the Report stage without any Member suffering the least inconvenience from the fact that he could only speak once on each Amendment. In these circumstances he hoped the House would not accept the Amendment, which would not make a merely superficial change in
670
the Government proposal but would absolutely destroy it.
MR. DALZIELthought the House would note with surprise the attitude taken up by the right hon. Gentleman. It was not reasonable for him to say that there was no case to be made o t for eliminating the Report stage which might not equally well have been urged in favour of the cutting out of the Committee stage. There could be no doubt that the feeling of the House in regard to the Resolution was far from unanimous, and during the debate some of the most respected Members on the Government side of the House had expressed themselves in favour of some extension of the time to be devoted to the Bill. If they were to have more time, obviously it could best be given in connection with the Report stage, and therefore he should support the Amendment. If the Report stage was entirely eliminated the House would gain the opportunity of compromise. The Report stage was obviously the stage when a measure could be reconsidered and compromise arrived at. As the Resolution now stood there would not be any possibility of that because when it was reached the whole of that stage might be occupied in considering second-rate Amendments. This was one of those cases where it was of the utmost importance that the well-considered opinion of the House should be recorded. As the matter stood who would say that the Report stage would be anything but a farce. He therefore suggested that as some of the supporters of the Government desired more elasticity this was the time that they ought to bring pressure to bear on the Prime Minister. If this Amendment were carried it would leave the House a full opportunity to consider the Bill on Report, and if there were any conciliatory spirit shown on the Treasury Bench he ventured to say the Report stage would not occupy the time which the right hon. Gentleman anticipated; that only a few important Amendments would be taken. If there was to be no conciliation at any cost he could only say it would not redound to the credit of the Government or to the advantage of the Bill, and it was a ridiculous farce to occupy the time in discussing this Resolution if the right

671
hon. Gentleman had made up his mind to shut his ears to every argument in favour of the Amendment. He, however, hoped that it was not yet too late to appeal to the right hon. Gentleman to pay some heed to the unanimity of opinion in favour of this extension of time, and that the right hon. Gentleman would view with some favour this Amendment.
MR. McKENNA (Monmouthshire, N.)expressed the opinion that in curtailing the limits of debate in this House, the right hon. Gentleman was not entitled to go one step beyond what was necessary. One ground for the Resolution of the right hon. Gentleman was that there were sixty-six pages of Amendments on the Paper for the Committee stage, and it was because the right hon. Gentleman did not see the possibility of getting through those Amendments at an early date that he moved this Resolution. But the right hon. Gentleman could not possibly know what Amendments would come up on Report and he submitted that the right hon. Gentleman ought not to adopt this drastic procedure with regard to Report until he saw how he stood. He asserted that if the Report stage was not curtailed the right hon. Gentleman would find that the Amendments put down would be inconsiderable and only deal with important phases of the Bill, and he contended that the House ought not to consent to the proposal to confine the discussion on Report to two days until they had seen what would happen in Committee. They did not know what the Bill was that would be brought before the House on Report. And if the right hon. Gentleman found he was being badly treated in the matter of Amendments he had two courses open to him, both effective. He could either move a Motion of this kind or move that all words down to a certain point stand part. This was a defence of the rights of the House which all private Members were entitled to claim. They were asked to limit the time for discussion before they knew what the Bill was they were to be asked to discuss and, having regard to the fact that only three lines of the Bill had been dealt with in Committee, he submitted that the proposal of the right hon. Gentleman was entirely without precedent, and that the right hon.
672
Gentleman was going further than he was entitled to go. By consenting to the Amendment the right hon. Gentleman would give the House that opportunity to consider the various clauses of the Bill which they would be denied in Committee, without which the public at large would not accept the Bill in its final form as the considered judgment of the House of Commons.
Me. SAMUEL EVANSthought that both the Committee and the Report stage should have been dealt with in this matter, but as the proposal with regard to the Committee had been carried he now submitted that the Amendment put down to keep the Report stage in the hands of the House without limitation was a reasonable Amendment. Only two days were to be allowed on Report, on new clauses as well as on all clauses amended in Committee. A full Report stage ought to be allowed for the new clauses alone, and for that very reason the Report stage ought to be extended. One very remarkable thing was that more than half the new clauses had been put down by supporters of the Government. The hon. Member for Hackney had one; the hon. Member for Wakefield had one, and the hon. Member for Hammersmith, who was a thick-and-thin supporter of the Government, also had one. There was actually one in the name of the hon. Member for North Kensington. What would he say when it was said that the Report stage was to be limited. If the Committee stage was to be swept away it was obviously the more important that the Report stage of the Bill should be carried out in accordance with the ordinary forms and rules of the House. As his hon. friend had pointed out they did not yet know what Amendments would be put down for Report. His hon. friend also suggested two remedies to the right hon. Gentleman for dealing with them; he would suggest another easy remedy. If it was found that there would have to be much discussion the right hon. Gentleman might suspend the operation of the twelve o'clock rule. That was always done at the end of a session in order to expedite business, and if the plan were adopted on the

673
Report stage of this Bill it would eb passed in a short time because although men were willing to stay in the House until two or even three o'clock in order to conduct business they would not wait for the mere purpose of obstruction. Rather than the Report stage should be curtailed he would suggest that the Third Reading stage of a Bill, which had been contested as this had been, was, in his opinion, perfectly useless. They only had stale speeches which were of no value, and he thought an hour should be quite sufficient to dispose of the Third Reading. They would then have a brilliant oration from the Home Secretary replied to by an eloquent twenty-minutes speech from the other side and then the division might be taken. In his own interests the Prime Minister would do well to make some concession. Putting aside mere newspaper opinion, there was the opinion of the solid and respectable members of the community to the effect that the Prime Minister had been forced to bring forward this closure Resolution at the behest of the brewers.
MR. SPEAKERintimated that that question could not be rediscussed upon every Amendment.
MR. SAMUEL EVANSsaid he was merely trying to urge a reason why, having got the Committee stage, the Prime Minister should exempt some portion of the proceedings from the Resolution in order to indicate his contention that he was acting in the interests of eternal justice and not of the brewers.
SIR ROBERT REIDreferring to the Prime Minister's complaint that first a Motion was made to exempt the Committee stage and then another to exempt the Report stage, said the reason was that six days were not too much for the Committee and might not be too much for Report, and that so long as the right hon. Gentleman remained inflexible, those who thoroughly disapproved of the proposed limitation would have to attempt to secure the exemption first of one stage and then of another. It would be much more pleasant to leave the Bill, and look forward to another Parliament to deal with the matter, but
674
that was not really the duty of the Opposition. Their duty was to make the best of the existing circumstances, and so long as the right hon. Gentleman remained obdurate they were bound to try in turn to get every relaxation of the Resolution that was possible. If the Government intended to make any addition to the number of days allotted it would be advisable that they should say so at once.
MR. WHITLEYthought the House had already been played with to a considerable extent. Even to-day the Prime Minister had put up one of his supporters to delay the division. ["No."] The noble Lord the Member for Chorley approached the hon. Member for the Kirkdale Division obviously to prevail upon him to speak.
MR. J. P. HOPEsaid the conversation to which the hon. Member referred had reference to a private Bill.
MR. WHITLEYsaid he would be satisfied if the hon. Member for the Kirkdale Division denied that the noble Lord asked him to speak on the Amendment.
MR. DAVID MACIVERsaid the noble Lord spoke to him with reference to the Mersey Docks and Harbour Bill, and nothing else.
MR. WHITLEYasked whether he was to understand that the noble Lord said nothing with reference to taking part in the debate.
MR. DAVID. MACIVER: The noble Lord asked me how long the Mersey Docks and Harbour Bill was likely to take. The conversation had nothing whatever to do with any other matter.
MR. WHITLEYsaid that on that statement he was quite willing to withdraw his remark, though he thought there must be some connection between the Mersey Docks Bill and the celebrated warming pan in "Pickwick."
MR. SPEAKER: This is really not relevant to the question before the House.
MR. WHITLEYasked whether, inasmuch as time had on various occasions been wasted by deliberate obstruction on the other side, the Prime Minister would guarantee that nothing of the kind would be allowed during the short period allotted to the Report stage. The right hon. Gentleman appeared to be quite willing to cut down the time, and at the same time to allow hours to be wasted by his own supporters at the commencement of the sitting and immediately after dinner. Many Members were perfectly prepared to sit after midnight to discuss the Bill, and that, he thought, was a very fair offer to make. But there was not much chance of the offer being accepted, as they all knew what happened in connection with the Budget when arrangements had been made for a late sitting. The Prime Minister's own supporters failed him—
MR. SPEAKER: I hope the hon. Member will address himself in a business-like way to the question before the House.
MR. WHITLEYsaid that when there were other methods by which business could be got through it made one feel very strongly with reference to the course of action adopted by the right hon. Gentleman. However, it was no good arguing the matter with the Government; they had made up their minds that the Bill should not be discussed, but he thought the Opposition had given clear notice that they would not recognise any Parliamentary title whatever in the decisions come to under such circumstances.
MR. LLOYD-GEORGEpointed out that in connection with the Home Rule Bill two closure Resolutions were proposed—one dealing with Committee, and the other, moved when the Committee stage was concluded, with Report. That, he thought, was the more businesslike way of proceeding, because until the Committee stage had been dealt with, it was impossible to say how long was required for the consideration of questions left undiscussed. For instance, on Clauses 2 and 3, the most important Amendments would be at the end of Clause 2 and the beginning of Clause 3. They would all
676
be left over, because the questions to be dealt with at the beginning of Clause 2 were of such substance that they could not be passed unnoticed. The Prime Minister was too apt to forget that, in addition to being the Leader of a Party, he was also the Leader of the House of Commons, in which position it was his duty, after the conclusion of the Committee stage, to go through the questions undiscussed, and to allot to their consideration such a period of time as, based upon an impartial consideration of their importance, would suffice for their proper discussion. But that could not be done until the Committee stage was concluded, and one could see what questions remained untouched. It was found in connection with the Home Rule Bill that a separate Resolution for the Report stage did not involve a great expenditure of time, but it enabled a much better use to be made of the period allotted to discussion, as the House knew exactly the questions they had still to consider. The Prime Minister said that the Opposition were making contradictory Resolutions, but the right hon. Gentleman appeared to forget that the Amendment to omit the Committee stage had been rejected. Consequently they were entitled to plead for freedom of debate at some stage of this Bill. If the Government had resolved that there should be no discussion on the Committee stage, surely they ought to allow ample discussion upon the Report stage. Even the hon. and gallant Member for Clare suggested that if the Members of the Opposition would wait until the Report stage the Government might consider it advisable to allow more time for that stage of the Bill. Seeing that the Government had not responded to that appeal, all they could do now was to protest at every stage of this Resolution and take the opinion of the House upon it with a view of afterwards taking the opinion of the country.
DR. HUTCHINSONsaid he was returned as a Member of the House of Commons about fifteen months ago, and a licence was then given to h m to take part in the debates in the House. That licence was now being taken away from him by this Resolution for no ill-conduct, and he wanted to know what compensation the Prime Minister was

677
going to give him for taking away his licence. A great many important sections of the community had been heard upon this Bill, including the representatives of the Bishops, the clergy, and also the teetotalers, sitting on the Opposition side of the House.
MR. SPEAKER: Order, order! The hon. Member must confine himself to the Amendment, and he is not at liberty to make a speech upon the Bill generally.
DR. HUTCHINSONsaid that he had no intention of discussing the Bill generally, and all he wanted to bring in at the end was that there was another small section of the community in this country who had not had their say in regard to this Bill—he meant the medical profession. [MINISTERIAL laughter.] Hon. Members opposite laughed now at the mention of the medical profession,
but the moment would come to every Member of the House when he would not want either Prime Ministers or Colonial Secretaries, and when the one man he would want would be a medical man. Hon. Members would probably remember the lines of the poet:—
God and the doctor men adore,
When sickness conies, but not before
When health returns and ills are righted,
God is forgotten, the doctor slighted.
If there was one body of men more than another who were brought face to face with this question it was the medical profession, and he thought that ample time ought to be given so that the voice of that section of the community for whom he spoke could be heard upon this Bill.
Question put.
The House divided:—Ayes, 258; Noes, 188. (Division List No. 190).

AYES.

Agg-Gardner, James Tynte

Cecil, Lord Hugh (Greenwich)

FitzGerald, Sir Robert Penrose-

Allhusen, Augustus Henry Eden

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

FitzRoy, Hon. Edward Algernon

Anson, Sir William Reynell

Chaplin, Rt. Hon Henry

Flannery, Sir Fortescue

Arnold-Forster, Rt. Hn. Hugh O

Chapman, Edward

Flower, Sir Ernest

Arrol, Sir William

Charrington, Spencer

Forster, Henry William

Atkinson, Rt. Hon. John

Clive, Captain Percy A.

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

Aubrey-Fletcher, Rt. Hn. Sir H.

Coates, Edward Feetham

Galloway, William Johnson

Bagot, Capt. Joseeline FitzRoy

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

Gardner, Ernest

Bailey, James (Walworth)

Coddington, Sir William

Garfit, William

Bain, Colonel James Robert

Coghill, Douglas Harry

Gibbs, Hon. A. G. H.

Baird, John George Alexander

Cohen, Benjamin Louis

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

Balcarres, Lord

Colomb, Rt. Hn. Sir John C. R

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

Baldwin, Alfred

Colston, Chas. Edw. W. Athole

Goschen, Hon. George Joachim

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

Corbett, T. L. (Down, North)

Goulding, Edward Alfred

Balfour, Capt. C. B. (Hornsey

Craig, Charles Curtis (Antrim, S.

Graham, Henry Robert

Balfour, Rt. Hn. Gerald W. Leeds

Cross, Herb. Shepherd (Bolton)

Greene, Henry D.(Shrewsbury)

Balfour, Kenneth R. (Christch.

Crossley, Rt. Hn. Sir Savile

Greene, W. Raymond-(Cambs.)

Banbury, Sir Frederick George

Dalkeith, Earl of

Grenfell, William Henry

Barry, Sir Francis T. (Windsor)

Dalrymple, Sir Charles

Gretton, John

Bartley, Sir George C. T.

Davenport, William Bromley-

Greville, Hon. Ronald

Bathurst, Hon. Allen Benjamin

Denny, Colonel

Groves, James Grimble

Beach, Rt. Hn. Sir Michael Hicks

Dewar, Sir T.R,(TowerHamlets

Gunter, Sir Robert

Bhownaggree, Sir M. M.

Dickinson, Robert Edmond

Hall, Edward Marshall

Bignold, Arthur

Dickson. Charles-Scott

Halsey, Rt. Hon. Thomas F.

Bigwood, James

Digby, John K. D. Wingfield-

Hamilton, Marq. of (L'nd'nderry

Bill, Charles

Disraeli, Coningsby Ralph

Hardy, Laurence(Kent Ashford

Blundell, Colonel Henry

Dixon-Hartland, Sir Fred Dixon

Hare, Thomas Leigh

Bond, Edward

Dorington, Rt. Hon. Sir John E.

Harris, F. Leverton (Tynem'th

Boscawen, Arthur Griffith-

Doughty, George

Hay, Hon. Claude George

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

Douglas, Rt. Hon. A. Akers

Heath, James (Staffords. N. W.

Brassey, Albert

Doxford, Sir William Theodore

Heaton, John Henniker

Brodrick, Rt. Hon. St. John

Durning-Lawrence, Sir Edwin

Helder, Augustus

Brown, Sir Alex. H. (Shropsh)

Dyke, Rt. Hn. Sir William Hart

Henderson, Sir A. (Stafford. W.)

Burdett-Coutts, W.

Egerton, Hon. A. de Tatton

Hermon-Hodge, Sir Robert T.

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

Faber, Edmund B. (Hants, W.)

Hickman, Sir Alfred

Carson, Rt. Hon. Sir Edw. H.

Fardell, Sir T. George

Hoare, Sir Samuel

Cautley, Henry Strother

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

Hogg, Lindsay

Cavendish, V.C.W. (Derbyshire

Finch, Rt. Hon. George H.

Hope, J.F.(Sheffield, Brightside

Cayzer, Sir Charles William

Finlay, Sir Robert Bannatyne

Horner, Frederick William

Cecil, Evelyn (Aston Manor)

Fison, Frederick William

Hoult, Joseph

Houston, Robert Paterson

Moore, William

Seton-Karr, Sir Henry

Hozier, Hon. James Henry Cecil

Moigan, David J.(Walthamstow)

Sharpe, William Edward T.

Hudson, George Bickersteth

Morpeth, Viscount

Sinclair, Louis (Romford)

Hunt, Rowland

Morrell, George Herbert

Smith, Abel H. (Hertford. East)

Jameson, Major J. Eustace

Morrison, James Archibald

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

Jeffreys, Rt. Hn. Arthur Fred.

Morton, Arthur H. Aylmer

Spencer, Sir E.(W. Bromwich)

Jessel, Captain Herbert Merton

Mount, William Arthur

Stanley, Hn. Arthur (Ormskirk)

Johnstone, Heywood (Su ex)

Mowbray, Sir Robert Gray

Stanley, Edward Jas. (Somerset

Kennaway. Rt. Hn. Sir Tohn H.

Murray, Rt. Hn. A. Graham (Bute

Stanley, Rt. Hon. Lord (Lancs.)

Kenyon, Hon. Geo. T.(Denbigh)

Murray, Charles J. (Coventry)

Stewart, Sir Mark J. M'Taggart

Kenyon-Slaney, Col. W. (Salop.

Murray, Col. Wyndham (Bath)

Stirling-Maxwell, Sir John M.

Kerr, John

Myers, William Henry

Stock, Jame Henry

Knowles, Sir Lees

Newdegate, Francis A. N.

Stroyan, John

Law, Andrew Bonar (Glasgow)

Nicholson, William Graham

Strutt, Hon. Charle Hedley

Lawrence, Wm. F. (Liverpool)

Parker, Sir Gilbert

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

Lawson, John Grant(Yorks N.R.)

Peel, Hn. Wm. Robert Wellesley

Thorburn, Sir Walter

Lee, Arthur H.(Hants. Fareham)

Pemberton, John S. G.

Thornton, Percy M.

Lees, Sir Elliott (Birkenhead)

Percy, Earl

Tollemache, Henry James

Legge, Col. Hon. Heneage

Pierpoint, Robert

Tomlinson, Sir Wm. Edw. M.

Llewellyn, Evan Henry

Pilkington, Colonel Richard

Tritton, Charles Ernest

Lockwood, Lieut.-Col. A. R.

Platt-Higgins, Frederick

Tuff, Charles

Loder, Gerald Walter Erskine

Plummer, Walter R.

Tufnell, Lieut. Col. Edward

Long. Col. Charles W.(Evesham)

Pretyman, Ernest George

Valentia, Viscount

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

Pryce-Jones, Lt.-Col. Edward

Walker, Col. William Hall

Lowe, Francis William

Purvis, Robert

Warde, Colonel C. E.

Lowther, C. (Cumb., Eskdale)

Quilter, Sir Cuthbert

Webb, Colonel William George

Loyd, Archie Kirkman

Rankin, Sir James

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

Lucas, Col. Francis (Lowestoft)

Rasch, Sir Frederic Carne

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

Lucas, Reginald J.(Portsmouth

Ratcliff, B. F.

Wharton, Rt, Hon. John Lloyd

Lyttelton, Rt. Hon. Alfred

Reid, James (Greenock)

Whiteley, H.(Ashton und Lyne

Macdona, John Cumming

Remnant, James Farquharson

Whitmore, Charles Algernon

Maclver, David (Liverpool)

Renshaw, Sir Charles Bine

Williams, Colonel R. (Dorset)

Maconochie, A. W.

Renwick, George

Willoughby de Eresby, Lord

Mr. Iver, Sir Lewis(Edinburgh)

Richards, Henry Charles

Wills, Sir Frederick

M'Killop, James (Stirlingshire)

Ridley, S. Ford (Bethnal Green

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

Malcolm, Ian

Ritchie, Rt. Hn. Chas. Thomson

Wilson, John (Glasgow)

Manners, Lord Cecil

Roberts, Samuel (Sheffield)

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

Martin, Richard Biddulph

Robinson, Brooke

Wolff, Gustav Wilhelm

Massey-Mainwaring, Hon. W. F.

Ropner, Colonel Sir Robert

Worsley-Tavlor, Henry Wilson

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

Round, Rt. Hon. James

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

Maxwell, W.J.H (Dumfresshire)

Royds, Clement Molyneux

Wrightson, Sir Thomas

Melville, Beresford Valentine

Rutherford, John (Lancashire)

Wyndham, Rt. Hon. George

Meysey-Thompson, Sir H. M.

Rutherford, W. W. (Liverpool)

Milvain, Thomas

Sackville, Col. S. G. Stopford-

TELLERS FOR THE AYES—

Mitchell, William (Burnley)

Sadler, Col. Samuel Alexander

Sir Alexander Acland-Hood

Molesworth, Sir Lewis

Samuel, Sir Harry S.(Limehouse)

and Mr. Ailwyn Fellowes.

Montagu, G. (Huntingdon)

Sassoon, Sir Edward Albert

Moon, Edward Robert Pacy

Scott, Sir S. (Marylebone, W.)

NOES.

Abraham, William (Cork, N.E.)

Caldwell, James

Douglas, Charles M. (Lanark)

Ainsworth, John Stirling

Cameron, Robert

Dunn, Sir William

Allen, Charles P.

Campbell-Bannerman, Sir H.

Edwards, Frank

Ashton, Thomas Gair

Causton, Richard Knight

Elibank, Master of

Asquith, Rt. Hn. Herbert Henry

Channing, Francis Allston

Ellice. Capt EC(S. Andrw's Bghs

Atherley-Jones, L.

Churchill, Winston Spencer

Ellis, John Edward (Notts.)

Barlow, John Emmott

Condon, Thomas Joseph

Emmott, Alfred

Barran, Rowland Hirst

Corbett, A. Cameron (Glasgow)

Evans,Sir FrancisH (Maidstone

Beaumont, Wentworth C.B.

Craig, Robert Hunter (Lanark)

Farquharson, Dr. Robert

Bell, Richard

Crean, Eugene

Fenvick, Charles

Black, Alexander William

Cremer, William Randal

Ferguson, B.C. Munro (Leith)

Blake, Edward

Crombie, John William

Field, William

Boland, John

Cullinan, J.

Fitzmaurice, Lord Edmond

Brigg, John

Dalziel, James Henry

Flavin, Michael Joseph

Broadhurst, Henry

Davies, Alfred (Carmarthen)

Flynn, James Christopher

Brunner, Sir John Tomlinson

Davies, M. Vaughan-(Cardigan

Foster, Sir Walter(Derby Co.)

Bryce, Rt. Hon. James

Delany, William

Fowler, Rt. Hon. Sir Henry

Buchanan, Thomas Ryburn

Devlin, Charles Ramsay (Galway)

Fuller, J. M. F.

Burke, E. Haviland

Dilke, Rt, Hon. Sir Charles

Furness, Sir Christopher

Burt, Thomas

Donelan, Captain A.

Gladstone. Rt. Hn. Herbert J.

Buxton, Sydney Charles

Doogan, P. C.

Goddard, Daniel Ford

680

681

Grant, Corric

M'Crae, George

Shackleton, David James

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

M'Fadden, Edward

Shaw, Charles Edw. (Stafford)

Griffith, Ellis J.

M'Hugh, Patrick A.

Shaw, Thomas (Hawick B.)

Gurdon, Sir W. Brampton

M'Kenna, Reginald

Sheehan, Daniel Daniel

Ham, Edward

Mansfield, Horace Rendall

Sheehy, David

Harcourt, Lewis V.(Rossendale

Mappin, Sir Frederick Thorpe

Shipman, Dr. John G.

Harcourt, Rt Hn Sir W (Monm'th)

Markham, Arthur Basil

Sinclair, John (Forfarshire)

Harwood, George

Mitchell, Edw.(Fermanagh, N.)

Slack, John Bamford

Hayden, John Patrick

Mooney, John J.

Sloan, Thomas Henry

Hayter, Rt. Hn. Sir Arthur D.

Morgan, J. Lloyd (Carmarthen)

Smith, Samuel (Flint)

Helme, Norval Watson

Murphy, John

Soames, Arthur Wellesley

Hemphill, Rt. Hn. Charles H.

Norton, Capt. Cecil William

Stanhope, Hon. Philip James

Henderson, Arthur (Durham)

Nussey, Thomas Willans

Stevensonl Francis S.

Higham, John Sharpe

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

Strachey, Sir Edward

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

O'Brien Kendal(Tipperary, Mid

Sullivan, Donal

Holland, Sir William Henry

O'Brien, Patrick (Kilkenny)

Taylor, Theodore C. (Radcliffe)

Horniman, Frederick John

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

Tennant, Harold John

Hutchinson, Dr. Charles Fredk.

0'Connor,James (Wicklow,W.)

Thomas, Sir A.(Glarnorgan, E.)

Jacoby, James Alfred

O'Doherty, William

Thomas, David Alfred(Merthyr

Johnson, John (Gateshead)

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

Thomas, J A (Glamorgan, Gower

Joicey, Sir James

O'Dowd, John

Tomkinson, James

Jones, David Brynmor (Swansea

O'Kelly, James (Roscommon, N

Toulmin, George

Jordan, Jeremiah

Parrott, William

Trevelyan, Charles Philips

Joyce, Michael

Partington, Oswald

Wallace, Robert

Kennedy, Vincent P.(Cavan, W.

Paulton, James Mellor

Walton, John Lawson(Leeds, S.

Kitson, Sir James

Pease, J. A. (Saffron Walden)

Walton, Joseph (Barnsley)

Lambert, George

Power, Patrick Joseph

Wason, Eugene (Clackmannan

Langley, Batty

Price, Robert John

Wason, John Cathcart(Orkney)

Law, Hugh Alex.(Donegal, W.)

Rea, Russell

White, George (Norfolk)

Lawson, Sir Wilfrid (Cornwall)

Reckitt, Harold James

White, Luke (York, E.R.)

Layland-Barratt, Francis

Redmond, John E. (Waterford)

Whiteley, George (York, W.R.)

Leamy, Edmund

Reid, Sir R. Threshie (Dumfries

Whitley, J. H. (Halifax)

Leese,Sir Joseph F.(Accrington

Rickett, J. Compton

Williams, Osmond (Merioneth)

Leng, Sir John

Rigg, Richard

Wilson, Chas, Henry(Hull, W.)

Levy, Maurice

Roberts, John H. (Denbighs.)

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

Lewis, John Herbert

Robertson, Edmund (Dundee)

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

Lloyd-George, David

Robson, William Snowdon

Wilson, John (Falkirk)

Lough, Thomas

Roche, John

Woodhouse, Sir RT.(Huddersf d

Lundon, W.

Rose, Charles Day

Young, Samuel

Lyell, Charles Henry

Runciman, Walter

Macnamara, Dr. Thomas J.

Russell, T. W.

TELLERS FOR THE NOES—

MacVeagh, Jeremiah

Samuel, Herbert L.(Cleveland)

Mr. Yoxall and Mr. Samuel

M'Arthur, William (Cornwall)

Schwann, Charles E.

Evans.

MR. SPEAKERstated that a number of Amendments of which notice had been given proposing alterations in line 2 of the Resolution were not in order. The next Amendment which was in order stood in name of the hon. Member for North-West Lanarkshire.
MR. CHARLES DOUGLAS (Lanarkshire, N.W.),who had given notice of an Amendment to leave out "on six allotted days" in line 3, asked if he might move to leave out the word "on," reserving other questions to be dealt with by subsequent Amendments.
MR. SPEAKERsaid the object of the hon. Member's Amendment, and also of several others, was really to get rid of the word "six."
MR. CHARLES DOUGLASsaid there was a more general object in the Amend-
682
ment, namely, not to decide at this stage how many days were to be occupied, but to reserve that point for a later period.
MR. SPEAKER: The hon. Member's Amendment is to leave out "on six allotted days." The other Amendments are to leave out "six" and to substitute certain other numbers. In each case the object is to get rid of the word "six."
MR. CHARLES DOUGLASsaid he would not move his Amendment.
DR. MACNAMARAmoved to leave out "six" in line 3, and insert "eighteen." He was most anxious that they should have an opportunity of pressing the Prime Minister to make some extension of the number of days. He would remind the right hon. Gentleman that many of his supporters had very great

683
misgivings in voting with him for closure by compartments, and with the exception of two they had strongly urged him to widen the scheme of compartments. The right hon. Gentleman had based his proposal to some extent on precedents set by his own and preceding Governments. But there was nothing in these precedents anything like so drastic as the scheme now proposed. In connection with the Crimes Bill of 1887 they had fifteen days in Committee before the closure by compartments scheme was brought forward. The Home Rule Bill had been twenty-eight days in Committee before closure by compartments was proposed. On the Education Bill of 1902 they were thirty-eight days in Committee before closure by compartments was enforced, and then seven days in Committee alone were given, and four days on Report, while the Third Reading was left entirely out of the time limit. After citing these facts he thought the right hon. Gentleman would see that there was no case in which the closure by compartments had been moved so soon and so closely, and with so short an amount of time between the Committee and Report stage. And there was no precedent for taking the closure on the Third Reading. In regard to this Bill, they had been told that it had been thirty-four hours in Committee. He thought that that was not quite correct. It had been only thirty hours in Committee. The right hon. Gentleman proposed to give four days more, one of which must be a Friday—which would only be five hours for that day—and two days for Report, and one of these days would also be a Friday, which would amount to twelve and a half hours. That would mean that thirty-seven and a half hours would be given for discussion under closure by compartments. Then, on the Third Reading there was to be one day, or seven and a half hours. The total time, therefore, occupied by the Bill from beginning to end, with the closure by compartments and prior to its being enforced, would, roughly speaking, be seventy-five hours. Could the Prime Minister honestly say that that was enough?
ME. A. J. BALFOUR: Do you include the First and Second Readings?
DR. MACNAMARAsaid no. But he would take twenty-five hours for the First and Second Readings and that would make 100 hours. Did the Prime Minister tell the House that 100 hours for all the stages for this Bill was anything approaching a reasonable time in which to discuss it? He moved his Motion because substantially every speaker, with the exception of two on the right hon. Gentleman's own side of the House, was in favour of a more generous extension of the time limit, and no precedent had been put forward for so drastic a scheme as this. He begged to move.
Amendment proposed—
"In line 3, to leave out the word 'six,' and insert the word 'eighteen."— (Dr. Macnamara.)
Question proposed, "That the word 'six' stand part of the Question."
MR. EMMOTTsaid he desired to second the Amendment. He was very glad to find that the hon. Member had increased the time of his proposal from ten to eighteen days, which made the Amendment equivalent to what he himself intended to have moved. The hon. Member had talked about precedents, but he was afraid that this was not so much a matter of precedent, as that the Government imagined that for their own sakes they must pass this Bill into law under conditions which would limit the session to the 12th of August. The conditions could leave no doubt in the mind of any clear-minded person that this discussion was to be crowded into an altogether inadequate period. The questions which had been raised were of enormous importance, and the idea of suppressing the discussion on Clauses 2 and 3 into one day was perfectly absurd. The questions arising on these clauses were of such far-reaching importance that the House ought to have several days in which to discuss them adequately. If the time fixed were ten days it would even then be inadequate, but if it were eighteen days it would give them a much better chance of adequate discussion.
MR. COHEN (Islington, E.)said he had listened to the speech of the hon. Member for North Camberwell, with admiration, because the hon. Member had

685
suggested what he thought would have been a valuable argument for a reasonable Amendment. But it was ridiculous to suggest that the extension of the time limit should be not from six to ten days, but to eighteen days. He himself hoped that the Prime Minister would extend the time limit proposed, but the Amendment of the hon. Member, if he insisted upon it, was calculated to defeat the end he had in view.
MR. LAMBERT (Devonshire,)said they ought not to be afraid to ask the House of Commons to sit for twelve more days. They ought to understand really what they were passing. He did not believe that anyone who read the Bill through knew what it meant. The senior Member for Oldham had spoken of the discussion on Clauses 2 and 3 being pressed into one day. He had made a calculation as to how many hours they would have to discuss these two clauses of this revolutionary measure. They would have from three o'clock to 7.30, which was four and a half hours for the most important clause in the Bill, because it endeavoured to show what amount of compensation would be obtained for the refusal of a licence. It was perfectly evident to any fair-minded and reasonable man that it was absolutely impossible for the House to discuss that important clause in four and a half hours. Speeches might be limited as much as they pleased, but not half of the Amendments, even from the Government side of the House, would be reached. Seventeen of the Amendments on Clause 2 were proposed by hon. Gentlemen opposite. If each Gentlemen occupied a quarter of an hour the whole of the time would have been exhausted. He asked the Prime Minister himself if he quite knew how much this Bill was going to increase the value of the licensed property of the country. Nobody had been able to tell them. They had had various estimates ranging from £100,000,000 to over £300.000;000. The vital Amendment which would give some information as to the amount of compensation that was to be paid ought certainly not be scamped. Many good supporters of the Government, including its most pathetic supporters, the Member for Plymouth, the right hon. Member for
686
Oxford, the hon. and learned Member for Stretford, and the right hon. Member for East Somerset, one of the most reasonable Members of the House, wanted an extension of time. But it was impossible for their Amendments to be reached if the Prime Minister's proposal to devote only four and a half hours to this compartment were carried. The whole thing was a mockery and a sham. He asked the Prime Minister in the interests not only of his own Bill but of the dignity of the House to give a fair amount of time for the discussion of this important matter. He was sure the right hon. Gentlemen's own constituents would not blame him if he said that he was going to make the House of Commons sit from the 12th to the 24th August in order to get me Licensing Bill discussed in a proper and workmanlike fashion. He therefore trusted the right hon. Gentleman would assent to the Amendment of his on. friend.
MR. A. J. BALFOURsaid that when the hon. Member talked about the absurdity of asking the House to pass such a Resolution, it showed that he was a very young Member of the House. He could not have taken part in the proceedings in regard to the closure on the Home Rule Bill.
MR. LAMBERT: Certainly I did.
MR. A. J. BALFOUR: Do my ears deceive me? Does the hon. Gentleman say he was present and yet talk about the dignity of the House and the absurdity of the present discussion of two clauses in one day?
MR. LAMBERTsaid he did not think the right hon. Gentleman would find a precedent in the Home Rule Bill discussion which compressed a single clause into four and a half hours.
MR. A. J. BALFOURsaid that when the hon. Gentleman talked about the dignity of the House of Commons and of the absurdity of asking the House to discuss the questions which would be included in these compartments within the limit of time proposed, he certainly could not have taken part in the proceedings on the great closure of the Home Rule Bill by Mr. Gladstone.
MR. LAMBEET: Oh, yes I did, and I voted for it.
MR. A. J. BALFOUR: And yet the hon. Member talks about the dignity of the House and the absurdity of compressing Clauses 1 and 2 of the Licensing Bill into one day.
MR. LAMBERT: I do not think the right hon. Gentleman will find a single precedent in the Home Rule Bill closure for compressing a single clause into four hours and a half.
MR. A. J. BALFOURsaid he thought the hon. Gentleman had quite forgotten what the closure on the Home Rule Bill did. He would remind the hon. Gentleman that the Home Rule Bill proposed to give a new Constitution not only to this country but to Ireland, and that among the things which were not discussed because they were stopped by closure was the composition of the Irish Legislative Chamber, and of the Irish Legislative Council, and what was to be done in the case of disagreements between those two hypothetical bodies. All that was in the first compartment. He had described yesterday what happened in the second compartment, in which no less than eighteen clauses, each one of which was a Bill in itself, were compressed into five days. The hon. Gentleman might truly say that that was a different arrangement from this. Mr. Gladstone, naturally enough, and he thought he should have done the same thing in his place, thought it more convenient to have big batches of clauses stuck into compartments of four or five days, rather than, as he had now done with a very limited Bill, to have the compartments more restricted in length and the subjects much smaller. But if the hon. Gentleman would do the simple sum in arithmetic to which he had called attention yesterday, he would see that to discuss eighteen clauses in five days was to require the discussion of more than three clauses per diem on an average, and those clauses were not unimportant; they were not machinery clauses, but clauses connected with the constitution of a wholly new organic law.
MR. LAMBERT: We had a mandate and you have not.
MR. A. J. BALFOUR: Does the hon Gentleman say that his Party had a mandate for squeezing all these clauses into five days?
MR. LAMBERT: A mandate for the Home Rule—
MR. A. J. BALFOUR: That is not what we are arguing; but whether the House can discuss a given subject in a given time. On that point, which was the only one before them, the hon. Gentleman was good enough to say that the Government had been totally regardless of the dignity of the House, and had made utterly absurd proposals. He was pointing out that if the dignity of the House was affected by this proposal ten thousand times more was Mr. Gladstone's closure open to the same charge.
MR. LAMBERT: We sat till September.
MR. A. J. BALFOURsaid the hon. Gentleman's point, as he understood it, was that they were restricting discussion, but he did not think he need deal with that part of the subject at greater length. In the speech in which he introduced this Motion he had even hinted that he thought this method of closure by compartments an extremely clumsy method of procedure, and it was his firm conviction that some day this question would have to be taken in hand, and they would have to find some more flexible and more convenient method by which the time of the House should be allocated as between the different elements of the Government programme. The difficulties were obviously enormous, because, to start with, they must have a Government programme which was reasonable in dimensions; he did not mean to say, of course, reasonable in substance, because to an Opposition no Government programme was reasonable in substance. Then they would have to find some mechanism for allocating the debates so that every question of importance should be debated and no trivial question debated. Alas, they were far from that now, and he did not deny that the evils inherent in this method of dealing with business affected the proposals he had made to the House, as they had

689
affected the other proposals of a similar kind made in the past, and as they doubt-less would affect other proposals of that kind made in the future. Until that great reform or alteration which he had adumbrated was accepted by that Assembly, which he supposed was in some respects, as regarded its rules, the most conservative Assembly in the world, and, while admitting frankly that his proposals were open to objection, he asked whether they should not under the circumstances be passed. He had considered and reconsidered the matter, and he sympathised with the desire of some hon. Members that there should be an extension of time, though not to the extent proposed in the Amendment, which was extreme even to absurdity. Given that the House had already decided that there should be a time limit to this Bill, on the whole he was inclined to think that the House would be well-advised to adhere to the limits originally laid down by the Government. By the addition of a few hours he did not believe any advantage would be secured to the Opposition, who had already announced their intention of not feeling themselves bound by this Bill. He did not think that in any circumstances they would be bound, but at all events no change in their attitude could be expected in return for anything in the nature of a slight modification of the scheme, which, after careful thought, he had laid on the Table of the House. They must have regard to the whole circumstances of the session. As far as he was concerned he certainly did not wish to overburden the House, but. even with any diminution which he might be able to make in the Government programme, he did not think it would be possible for them to rise before the day on which as a rule they had been able to rise during the last eight years, and even then he thought he was understating the case. Having regard to all those circumstances, much would be lost and nothing gained by any attempt to modify the Resolution he had moved. He had come to the conclusion with reluctance, but he hoped at all events his friends on that side would feel that it was through no desire for rash and arbitrary proceedings that he had taken the course he had. He was convinced it was the course which, on the whole,
690
would be most useful in the public interests, and in the interests of the House and of the Members.
SIR ROBERT REIDsaid he would not follow the Prime Minister into his forecast as to the period of the session, nor with regard to the precedent of the Home Rule Bill. The right hon. Gentleman at the time expressed his disapproval in warm terms of that precedent; and what was the use of bringing it forward now, unless, as he did not believe, the Prime Minister was stating deliberately what he thought to be unjust, wrong, and unfair. The right hon. Gentleman apparently indicated, just now, that there might be some possible willingness on his part to make a concession, if an indication were given of any change of temper and disposition on the part of the Opposition. He had two thoughts in reference to the Licensing Bill in connection with the Prime Minister. The first was that, with all his avocations, the right hon. Gentleman had not been able to penetrate to the core of the Bill. It was only after considerable study of its voluminous and important innovations that one could understand how deep it struck, and how dangerous it might be. His other thought with regard to the Prime Minister was that he did not realise the state of feeling in reference to the Bill. It appeared to be an axiom with regard to licensing legislation that every teetotaler was an extreme man; but many who were not tetotalers regarded the Bill as full of the gravest possible dangers. If the right hon. Gentleman realised that, he would not have talked about a few days more or less in comparison with the convenience of the House. No one wanted to overwork Ministers, or to deprive Members generally of the opportunity of enjoying some part of the summer in the country; but nothing of that kind was comparable to the vast questions involved in the Bill. It touched the liquor traffic and the licensing system at every point, as all experts could assure the right hon. Gentleman. The question was whether the time proposed was sufficient to allow the House to properly discuss the Bill. The Prime Minister did not say that it was sufficient. He did not think that the Prime Minister, as a gentleman of honour and as one responsible to the

691
House and the country for such an important change in the law, would say that he really believed that the time proposed was sufficient. The right hon. Gentleman, however, seemed to think that there was some overwhelming necessity for curtailing discussion in order to wind up the session. That was neither a statesmanlike nor a fair attitude on the part of the Leader of the House. In the first clause there were sixteen points of far-reaching importance, and they would have to be discussed in one day. Supposing the Committee wished to divide on these points, the divisions alone, without any discussion whatever, would take three hours. He excluded any suspicion, although he did not know why he should, that those who wished to prevent any changes in the tenor of the Bill would occupy their time in discussing earlier and less important points. That was a danger that had to be faced. All this had to be dealt with in one day, and the same observation might be made with regard to the other clauses as a whole. The whole Bill from beginning to end was to be passed through the Report stage in two days. Discussion was impossible under such conditions. The Prime Minister had, however, refused to make any concession, although for his part he thought eighteen days would be very usefully occupied in discussing the measure. He felt that there was at stake something even more serious than the Bill. The House of Commons would not remain a deliberative assembly of any practical value if a limitation of this kind upon its time was imposed. The Prime Minister had not said that he believed the time allowed was sufficient, and he had given no reason for his proposal other than the convenience of Members of the House. He ventured to submit that that was not an attitude which the Prime Minister ought to take up.
MR. HENRY HOBHOUSE (Somersetshire, E.)agreed that the Prime Minister was not likely to win gratitude from the Opposition, no matter how much time he might give for the discussion of the Bill. But there was something else than the gratitude of the Opposition; there was the decency of debate and the satisfaction of the country. The majority of the people of the country consisted of moder-
692
ate men, who would be much better satisfied with the Bill if they knew that it had been adequately discussed in the House of Commons. It would greatly assit hon. Members to explain to their constituents the attitude taken up by the Government if more time were allowed for discussion. Assuming that the Resolution were passed that day, to-morrow would be the first allotted day and Friday next would be the second allotted day, and they would have to dispose of Clauses 2 and 3 in four and a half hours. When Estimates were before the House Friday was never considered a whole day, and he submitted that it would not be fair to make it an allotted day in this case. Clauses 2 and 3 covered the whole question of compensation, a most debateable question, on which strong feelings were held throughout the country, and a question on which great doubt and obscurity prevailed in the House as to what the Bill itself actually meant. He asked whether the Prime Minister could not give one or two full days for that most important subject.
MR. MCKENNAsaid the right hon. Gentleman who had just sat down had spoken in so moderate and temperate a manner that in an ordinary case they might have hoped that the right hon. Gentleman the Prime Minister would have made the concession for which he had been asked, but the House had to remember that the most important parts of the Bill had not been discussed, and when the right hon. Member for Somerset pointed out that Clauses 2 and 3 would be discussed on Friday next, he put his finger not on the weak but on the strong spot. They were not intended to be discussed. There was on the Paper an Amendment put down on the part of the Government in respect of compensation. Why was not that in the Bill itself? They could pretty well gather the reason why it was put down now. It was put down because of an election that was now taking place. In the request he had made, the right hon. Gentleman was asking the Government to forego the main ground for their proposal. The Prime Minister had guaranteed that the difficult question which might divide the publican from the brewer should not be raised, and that it should

693
only be from bitter experience of the working of the measure, after the general election, that the publican should find out that it was disastrous to him. Six days only were to be given to the House to dispose of a great public property. A property estimated at £300,000,000 was to be given away to the trade, and the right hon. Gentleman suggested that that was a reasonable proposal to make. What sort of a title were the brewers to get under this Bill? The right hon. Gentleman quoted the precedent of the Home Rule Bill, but the right hon. Gentleman and his friends then relied on another place to reject the measure on the ground that it had not been adequately discussed. They could not rely on another place on this occasion, but they would ask the judgment of the people upon the Parliamentary title which the Prime Minister was giving the brewers to a great public property estimated at £300,000,000 sterling. He was satisfied that the right hon. Gentleman was doing a bad day's business for the brewers by this procedure, because he was giving the country, and a future Government, a reason for upsetting that Parliamentary title. The Prime Minister was going beyond all precedents; he was limiting discussion, taking away the liberties of Members, and transferring public property; and the effect of his action would be to destroy the value which had hitherto attached to a Parliamentary title.
MR. GIBSON BOWLESexpressed his regret that the debate had started and was being continued on the lines of Party recrimination. The Prime Minister had spoken of the proceedings of the House becoming "wearisome and nauseous." Personally, when he heard these accusations bandied about from one side to the other he felt not weariness, but attenuation, and not nausea, but the next disagreeable stage which sometimes followed upon it. He began to doubt whether, in any discussion whatever, it would be possible to keep Ministers to the merits of the question at issue; certainly these Party recriminations were not relevant, and they did not add to the usefulness of the debates. He was sorry to hear the Prime Minister predict another dose of new rules. He would have thought the right hon. Gentleman's ex-
694
perience in that direction would have deterred him from making another attempt. It was because the new rules had failed in their purpose that the present Resolution had been brought forward. The proposal before the House was no ordinary "closure by compartments." No dates whatever were fixed; the days were to be chosen by the right hon. Gentleman himself, and might be sandwiched in wherever the Prime Minister pleased. There was no security that the allotted days would not go beyond even the sacred 12th August, which the right hon. Gentleman appealed to worship in his most secret devotions The Amendment proposed to treble the number of days on which Members were to be placed absolutely at the command of the Government; therefore he would prefer six to eighteen. If the word "six" were agreed to, it would be useless to urge any subsequent extension of time for a particular stage of the Bill, as whatever was added to one portion would have to be taken from another. But it was evident that the Prime Minister had finally determined that the number of days should be six and no more. Friday was not likely to be one of the allotted days, as the right hon. Gentleman's supporters were usually in the country on that day golfing or motoring. Monday also was likely to be exempt, as hon. Members were not generally in attendance with sufficient strength to save the Government without the assistance of the Peckham janissaries. The determination to adhere to the proposed number of days, and to the system of scattering those days at will over the remainder of the session, was an absolute avowal that there was no urgency for the passing of the Bill.
SIR EDWARD GREYshared the impatience of the hon. Member for Lynn Regis with i regard to the use 3 of the tu quoque argument, especially on the part of I the Prime Minister. The tu quoque argument, to be effective at all, should compare like with like, but there was no comparison whatever between the Home Rule Bill, to which the right I hon. Gentleman had referred, and the measure now concerned. In the former I case the Opposition had made it perfectly clear that they would not seriously

695
debate the measure before the House; in the present case nothing of the sort had happened. The speech of the hon. Member the present Parliamentary Secretary to the Local Government Board alone was a justification for strong measures in connection with the Home Rule Bill. The Prime Minister persistently ignored the fact that so far as the Committee stage in the Licensing Bill had gone, the division of speeches was nearly equal between the two sides of the House, and that certainly was not the case with the Home Rule Bill. He had little hope of influencing the Prime Minister, as the Bill was not really in his mind. It was not the convenience of the House, but the convenience of his own side of the House, that the right hon. Gentleman was considering. The Bill had to be forced through while he could count on their support. It was that fact that created the great gulf between the Opposition and the Prime Minister. The right hon. Gentleman had not gauged what the opposition to the Bill really was. The measure filled the minds of many Members with despair. Its scope was not merely large; it was eternal; and for the consideration of such a measure a fixed limit of six days was to be allotted. If there was to be any discussion at all, six days was an absurdly inadequate period. The right hon. Gentleman the Member for East Somersetshire had made an appeal as a moderate man. Now, if ever, was the opportunity for moderate men to assert themselves. The country was beginning to feel that appeals from "moderate men" had fallen rather flat. The "moderate men" were coming to be looked upon as those who contented themselves with expressing their opinion but never enforcing it. One man might play a useful part, as the right hon. Gentleman the Member for East Somersetshire had often done but moderate men were of no use unless they acted in bulk. Never had moderate men been at such a discount in public life as at present. Let them show the House what they could do in the way of securing time for the adequate discussion of this Bill. It was true that the Prime Minister would not gain the gratitude of the Opposition by extending the period by two or three days, but that was because he had shown
696
no disposition to accept reasonable Amendments to the Bill. Further discussion was useless unless it was to be accompanied by a reasonable spirit in the conduct of the Bill. The rigid and ruthless attitude taken up by the Prime Minister made any gratitude on the part of the Opposition impossible. If the Government used their majority to pass this Bill as it stood in order to secure immunity from discussion, he agreed that under those circumstances the Opposition would not consider themselves bound by this Bill.
MR. A. J. BALFOURsaid his right hon. friend the Member for East Somersetshire addressed an appeal to him not to make Friday one of the allotted days.
MR. HENRY HOBHODSE: Not to make Friday the second allotted day.
MR. A. J. BALFOURsaid there were certain Amendments on the Paper raising this question in which the right hon. Gentleman took a great interest. If it would meet the general views of the House, he would undertake that Friday should not be one of the allotted days.
MR. LOUGH (Islington, W.)said this was the most important Amendment they had got to discuss. With regard to the precedent of the Home Rule Bill, which had been quoted by the Prime Minister, he wished to point out that that was the twenty-sixth Home Rule Bill passed* by the House of Commons. There were twenty-five other Home Rule Bills before that, and none of them were closured. The effect of the last closure moved by the Prime Minister in regard to the Education Bill ought not to be overlooked. It had caused so much commotion in the country that they might almost say that they had been plunged into a small revolution. In consequence of the discussion having been cut short on the Education Bill 22,000 summonses had been issued under that Act, 1000 seizures of goods had been made, and twenty or thirty people had been sent to prison. He invited the Prime Minister to look at the important results which had been achieved by the discussion which had already taken place upon the first three lines of the Bill. During that

697
discussion the character of the public-house as a place of refreshment had been entirely altered, and there had also been an Amendment put down by the Government dealing with the distribution of compensation. Every argument brought forward by the Opposition on these questions was rejected at first, and after the debate when the country and the Government came to consider the question they found a long Amendment down on the Paper which entirely altered the position. That result showed that large issues might arise when they came to a close discussion of the Bill. They were being asked to dispose of the whole Committee stage in four days, and he appealed to the right hon. Gentleman to allow more time for the discussion of the details. He was aware that the right lion. Gentleman had to do his duty by the Party which supported him, but he had almost admitted that he was forcing matters too much and that the time was too short. Finally the right hon. Gentleman stated that his reason for not making any concession was that the Opposition would not be grateful. Why should they be grateful because they were constantly being around down by the Government. If the Prime Minister felt that the time he was allowing was too short and the speeches would be too long he owed it to the position he occupied to widen that time.
SIR JOHN GORSTpointed out that if the six allotted days were adhered to there would be one matter which would not be discussed at all and that was the amount of compensation. That was a very vital question in the Bill, because it was giving away what was the property of the people themselves. Therefore, this was a question which ought not to be settled without adequate discussion. As matters stood now this important question would never be discussed at all. There were numerous Amendments down and nobody appeared to know what the Government proposal really meant. He was quite sure that few lawyers would be able to interpret what the clause meant. The Amendments put down to Clause 2 came at the end, and therefore they had no chance of being readied. This method of closure by compartments was a clumsy
698
one; it did not secure that the time allotted for discussion should be devoted to the more important Amendments, and the whole of the time might be wasted upon Amendments of less importance. That was the usual result of the operation of the closure. On the first allotted day of the Report stage, the new clauses, and then Clauses 1, 2, and 3, were to be taken, and under those circumstances what chance was there of Amendments relating to compensation being discussed? If those Amendments were not discussed, the Bill would part with a valuable property belonging to the people of this country, and would vest that property in the trade — [MINISTERIAL cries of "No, no!"] —and they would do that without the representatives of the people having had the opportunity of discussing or considering this question. That was what would happen, and it would be a perfect scandal. What the value of the property was which was going to be disposed of in this way nobody was able to say. Some eminent gentlemen estimated its value at £3,000,000, but, at any rate, the rise in the value of brewery shares, in consequence of the expectation that this Bill would pass, amounted to more than £1,000,000. Therefore, they might take it that the property at stake amounted to several millions, which was to be divided between the trade and the people, and the latter had a right to expect that their representatives would be heard upon it. He asked the Prime Minister to so modify the terms of this Resolution as to secure that part of the allotted time should be devoted to the discussion of this most important question, which he did not think the Government, or those who represented the interests of the brewers in this House, would deny was a matter of extreme importance. He had always supported the idea of doing perfect justice to those engaged in the trade, but surely the question of how much was to be given was one which ought to be discussed and upon which the representatives of the people ought to have the opportunity of expressing their views.
MR. ELLIS GRIFFITHsaid that the discussion which had already

699
taken place must have convinced everybody that the case against the Government was overwhelming. He did not think that the Prime Minister for a moment would suggest that the Bill could be adequately discussed in the time placed at their disposal under this Resolution. The issue they had to discuss now was whether there was any necessity to limit the discussion to six days. The speeches from both sides of the House must have convinced the right hon. Gentleman that the Bill could not be adequately discussed in the time at their disposal. He was not going to take part in the argument about precedents, except to say that the Prime Minister had used strong language on that subject. In 1894, speaking upon a similar Resolution, the right hon. Gentleman said—
"Indulge in this petty and sordid trafficking for votes if you like, but do not ask ns to help you to make the honour and the dignity and the traditions of this House counters in the sorry game you are playing for political support."
Was this Bill not a petty sordid trafficking for votes? Why should the right hon. Gentleman expect them to assist him in arriving at a satisfactory agreement with brewers for whom this Bill was intended? There was no necessity resting upon the Prime Minister to compress the discussion into six days. His complaint against the Prime Minister was twofold—first of all that he did not begin the Bill early enough, and, secondly, that he would not go on late enough. The discussion was to be bounded on one side by Ascot, and on the other side by grouse shooting. That was the necessity which compelled him to limit the discussion to six days. There was really no necessity that the House should rise on the 12th of August. He noticed that in 1894 the present Prime Minister spoke of there being something more important than personal ease and convenience. He had not heard the right hon. Gentleman speak of anything so important as the ease and convenience of his own followers. He submitted that if the Prime Minister was in earnest in wanting a serious discussion of this measure the only way he could have it was to let the House sit a week or so beyond the usual allotted time. If he could get his own followers to do that he need not trouble about the
700
Opposition side of the House in the event of his granting that concession. The right hon. Gentleman might depend upon their being at their posts.
MR. TRITTONsaid many hon. Members thought six days too short a time for the discussion of this measure, and he would ask the Prime Minister to consider the appeal made to him by the hon. Member for East Somerset and to see whether he could not give one or two more days.
MR. CHARLES DOUGLASsaid he was afraid they must give up hope of getting any concession from the Prime Minister. The right hon. Gentleman had founded himself on what he was pleased to call precedent, and he had done so wisely because there was nothing in which he was happier than in defending the attitude he had taken up. Possibly he believed it made it right if he showed how it was parallel to actions which at other times he had condemned in the strongest terms. The Prime Minister said at an earlier stage of the discussion that they should take each case entirely on its merits. They had not got clearly from the Prime Minister what his opinion was of the merits of this case. The right hon. Gentleman had never argued throughout his speeches that this Bill could be adequately discussed in the time he had allotted for its discussion. They must make clear the ground on which they opposed his action. It was impossible for them to discuss the Bill in the time allowed to them. He would name a few of the subjects which still remained to be discussed. They were still discussing the delimitation of the spheres of the two licensing authorities. They had to consider a matter which in the Licensing Act for Scotland last year the Government did not think unworthy of attention—the introduction of a representative element into the licensing authority. They had to consider a matter which in the minds of temperance reformers had always been connected with any question of compensation—that was the statutory reduction of licences and the establishment of a maximum ratio of licences to population. Reference had already been made to the

701
quite inadequate time allowed for the discussion of compensation. Nobody knew precisely what the proposal of the Bill was. They would certainly not have time to approach, in the days allowed by the Prime Minister, the questions that had to be dealt with under compensation, for the compensation method which this Bill adopted could not, as had already been made quite apparent in the discussion, be isolated, and taken by itself, and separated from the larger questions in relation to licences. The moment the question of compensation was introduced they came at once into contact with large social questions raised by our licensing system. The Bill raised questions which could not be settled within the narrow limits set down in the Resolution. Another set of questions on which there had been practically no discussion were those raised by Clause 4 as to the treatment and disposition of new licences. Under the Resolution these questions were to be dealt with in a single day. It was impossible to maintain that that was adequate time for their discussion. Then there were questions as to whether there should be a system of high licence, or whether a system of disinterested public management was to be adopted—questions which ought to be dealt with in a Bill which was to revolutionise and set up side by side with the old licences a different tenure for new licences. These were questions which the Government proposed they should deal with in perhaps four-and-a-half hours. It was impossible to legislate properly on these matters in the time allowed for discussion by the Resolution. On these grounds they felt bound to press for very different limits from those which were suggested.
On the Opposition side of the House they could not hope for concessions from the Prime Minister, but supporters of the Government should endeavour to obtain from him some concessions, for they had said in plain terms that they did not believe the time allowed to be adequate. Their methods were not sufficiently active to be successful with the Prime Minister. On the Opposition side of the House they had often regarded the supporters of the Government as good men struggling with adversity, but the complaint they felt bound to make
702
now was that in the present instance they were not even struggling. They had object lessons before their eyes as to how the Prime Minister could be moved. They knew how different was the treatment accorded to hon. Members from Ireland and Scotland in matters relating to the management of the business of the House. He would take another instance. Let them compare the treatment accorded to tariff reformers with that given to free-traders. Let them remember the great precedent of what perhaps he might be allowed to call the "Wharton Amendment," when 112 staunch men sent a stern message to the Prime Minister and got their way. He did not know whether there were 112 temperance reformers on the other side, but a much smaller number would serve. He was quite sure that if they would let their minds be clearly known and make it appear that they had wills they would also get a little of their own way. He was afraid that they still harboured the delusion that the Prime Minister was amenable to kindness. Many of the lower animals were ruled by kindness, but the teaching of history; was that very few Prime Ministers indeed, and certainly not the present Prime Minister, responded to such treatment. He urged his hon. friends opposite not to be satisfied with the two hours they had already obtained so far, but to push for very much more in the direction of what was required.
MR. T. W. RUSSELL (Tyrone, S.)said he did not rise for the purpose of making any appeal to the Prime Minister. This debate had been left to moderate men, and he should be very anxious to see the result of it. He rose for the purpose of calling attention from the historical aspect to the futility of all these proceedings. Let them take the precedent of the Evicted Tenants Bill. The precedent of the Evicted Tenants Bill had been quoted. The Prime Minister resisted the closure of that Bill in 1895. It would be interesting for hon. Gentlemen who expended a great deal of eloquence against the closuring of that Bill to remember that this Government had as the result of that closuring settled the evicted tenants question nine years afterwards on far more liberal terms than

703
had been proposed by the right hon. Member for Montrose. Take the Parnell Commission. That was closured by the right hon. Gentlemen on his own side of the House. It was discussed at great length—far longer than this Bill had been discussed—and those extreme proposals discussed at inordinate length he admitted did not serve any good purpose whatever. They settled nothing. They left everything unsettled and Mr. Parnell emerged from that scene absolutely triumphant. Take the Home Rule Bill. It was discussed for eighty-two days. This Bill had been discussed thirty-four hours. It was closured and the present Ministerialist Party resisted the closure. Could hon. Gentlemen devise a better means of bringing about Home Rule than by making that House into a machine. That was all they got by passing those closuring Resolutions. Take the Education Bill, discussed for thirty-eight days and closured at the end of that time. Did hon. Members on the Government side believe that the education question was settled by that closure? Did not everybody know that the education question would rise at the next general election and Members would have to answer for what they did? Not one of those violent measures produced the result that people thought they produced, and they might depend upon it that in this case it would be the same thing.
What was the plain statement made by right hon. Gentlemen sitting on the Front Opposition Bench? It was said that afternoon by one of the ablest and most far-seeing men who sat on the Bench that this Bill in itself was bad enough, but disposed of as it had been and was proposed to be disposed of further by this Resolution, they owed it no allegiance whatever. Why should hon. Members on the Government Benches proceed to those methods of throttling debate without sufficient discussion? Why should they resort to those methods when the whole history of those things told them that they were absolutely futile and that the people of England could not be controlled as the Government controlled their obedient majority. For his part he had no reason to make any appeal to the right hon. Gentleman, and he rejoiced to think that none of those who were
704
called extreme temperance men had risen that afternoon to make any. He thought the time allotted to the Bill inadequate. He did not believe any Member of the House would contend that six days was adequate for the discussion in Committee. And what followed? Hon. Gentleman were taking upon themselves now, with the funeral knell tolling at every by-election, the responsibility of closuring a Bill without adequate discussion, and they imagined that the people of England were not looking on. What better evidence could the people of England give than they were giving that the Government had outstayed their welcome and that the Government had no moral right to do what they were doing? When the people spoke out like that, not once or twice, but for twelve long months, whenever they got a chance, the best thing the Government could do was to closure themselves and make way for other people.
SIR J. STIRLING-MAXWELLsaid that this debate was the most dismal he had ever heard in the House. The Prime Minister had no concession to make and there was no expectation of any. In these circumstance, he would like to know whether, if the debate closed now, the Prime Minister would allow them this evening in addition to the six allotted days for the Committee stage. He was quite certain that the right hon. Gentleman had done everything for what he thought was the best, but it was quite impossible to vote for the Resolution for six days, which he believed was quite inadequate for a discussion of that importance.
MR. LLOYD-GEORGEsaid he was glad that the hon. Gentleman opposite had come to the conclusion that it was useless to make any further appeals to the Prime Minister on this point, for the simple reason that the right hon. Gentleman was not considering for a moment the time that ought to be allotted from the point of view of the merits of the Bill. The right hon. Gentleman was allowing external considerations to influence him. The Prime Minister was giving the House the number of days in which the whole clauses of the Bill were to be discussed; but had the right hon.

705
Gentleman really discovered how much time he was giving to the discussion of each clause? He could hardly think so. Take the last day of all in Committee. What was proposed to be discussed was five clauses and two schedules—one of which was in the Bill, and one to be moved by the Home Secretary, which was down on the Amendment Paper. That was practically seven clauses, and how long did the House get to discuss them? Six-and-a-half hours. Supposing they had only one division on each of these clauses—there would be at least one Amendment on each clause—that left five hours for discussion, after one-and-a-half hours had been spent in divisions. Five hours for seven clauses was under fifty minutes' for each clause. The right hon. Gentleman worked himself up into a pitch of righteous indignation because the late Government only allowed a day for each clause. What did he think of himself for only allowing fifty minutes for each clause There was no comparison. He thought they were entitled to ask the Prime Minister, did he mean, upon his authority as Leader of the House, to say that, in his judgment, fifty minutes per clause was adequate? Clause 3 was in the same position. The right hon. Gentleman allowed two or three hours for discussion of Clause 2, and two or three hours for discussion of Clause 3, and for each of the rest of the clauses fifty minutes. They were entitled to ask one simple question. Did the right hon. Gentleman mean sincerely to say that in his judgment fifty minutes was sufficient and adequate? Perhaps the right hon. Gentleman was exercising a wise discretion in refusing to give an answer. He took it by the silence of the Prime Minister that the right hon. Gentleman admitted that there was no answer to be given; but he was entitled to an answer to the question.
MR. A. J. BALFOUR: No, no! I do not think the hon. Gentleman is entitled to an answer. It is not a question to be answered across the floor of the House.
MR. LLOYD-GEORGE: They were not entitled to ask the one question which was relevant to the whole discussion! Surely
706
that was the whole point they were discussing. Were these six days adequate or were they not? The Prime Minister said not merely must they not discuss the point, but that they had no right to ask the question whether the right hon. Gentleman thought the time was adequate or not. He thought that was treating the House of Commons with a measure of contempt that certainly no Leader of the House had ever treated it with before. The only thing he could say was that the mere fact that the House of Commons had stood this sort of thing for session after session, and year after year, showed that the Prime Minister had taken the right measure of the House he led, and it deserved the contempt with which its Leader treated it.
MR. MALCOLMsaid he thought that the House of Commons had a right to say that if the question of the hon. Member for Carnarvon Burghs was the only revelant question, it ought to have been asked earlier in the afternoon. He was in complete agreement with the Prime Minister in the action he had taken. He thought he had a right to tell hon. Gentlemen opposite how much they were responsible for the impasse in which they found themselves at the present time. The hon. Gentleman made a great deal of the fact that Clauses 2 and 3 would have to be discussed on Friday afternoon; but supposing the present Motion had been finished last night, as had been expected, then Clauses 2 and 3, could have been discussed to-morrow. Another way in which hon. Gentlemen opposite were responsible was by not taking trivial Amendments off the Order Paper, and then proceeding to the discussion of the more important Amendments. He agreed with the right hon. Gentleman the Member for the Berwick Division, who said that all this recrimination was unnecessary. Experience showed that if a Party were determined to kill a Bill, they would succeed, even if thirty days were allowed for the Committee stage. He congratulated his right hon. friend on his Motion; and he hoped he would not accept any Amendments to it. It was perfectly obvious that whether the Opposition had three days, or thirty days, or three months their only desire was to bury the Bill.

707
They had no desire to better it. They had proclaimed that in the parks; their newspapers were full of their undying hostility to the measure; and yet they now asked the Prime Minister for three or four days more, with which, forsooth, they would be satisfied. It seemed to him that it was all the utmost cant. Hon. Gentlemen opposite wanted to kill the Bill; its promoters wanted to pass it into law. He most earnestly hoped that, that being the position, his right hon. friend would stick to his guns. The speeches on the other side had been very businesslike; but the business was to kill the Bill. The only Amendment he should like to see accepted was the Amendment suggested by the junior Member for Oldham, to strike out six days and substitute one day.
MR. SAMUEL EVANSsaid that the hon. Gentleman who had just spoken had mistaken the position of hon. Gentlemen on that side. They did not ask for three or four more days; they demanded proper time for the discussion of the Bill. The Prime Minister would get no gratitude for doing what they considered to be his duty as Leader of the House. The right hon. Gentleman had taken away all their privileges and he expected gratitude because he might offer a few more days. The right hon. Gentleman would not get it. The hon. Gentleman who had just spoken refrained from discussing the only test as to whether he was doing his duty; and that was whether the days allotted were enough. The Prime Minister refrained from saying anything on that point. In these allotted days, six new clauses put down by the Government, and twenty other new clauses, eleven of which were put down by supporters of the Government, would have to be discussed. The hon. Gentleman did not appear to know that. He had not even attended the debate, because he himself had stated the fact previously. The right hon. Gentleman the Member for Cambridge University was the only Member on the other side who had taken a right attitude on this question. But he did not put the case against the Government as strongly as it could have been put. The right hon. Gentleman said that the Amendments to Clause 2 could not
708
be completed; but Clause 3 was also to be taken on the same day; and, therefore, Clause 3 could not be discussed at all, although it contained the financial clauses. They were getting tired of the moderate speeches which were being delivered on the other side. There should be a little mutiny. It was no use asking: for days. Why not sit to the end of August, or else resume in September or October. Personally, he derived very little comfort from what had been said by his right hon. friend the Member for the Berwick Division. If they allowed the Government of the day with its sheep-like, servile majority, to act in this way, the next Liberal Government would have nothing to do but to repeal statutes. That was a very serious situation. It would not suffice to have to undo the wrongs of the present Government. Another matter was that the Liberal Party did not know whether it would or would not be supported by the Irish Members. If the Liberals tried to repeal this Bill, they would not be supported by the Irish Members. Considerations such as that ought to be taken into account when they were discussing the period of time to be allowed. Every hon. Member who had the right spirit should demand from the Prime Minister an adequate extension of time.
SIR J. FERGUSSON (Manchester, N.E.)said he thought that opinion outside the House would be that instead of discussing the number of days to be allotted, they had better get on with the business and not have speeches delivered over and over again. Thirty years ago, having returned from foreign service, he was told by a leading Member of the Party opposite that they would have to do away with the twelve o'clock rule if they wanted to get business through.
MR. SPEAKER: Order, order! The question before the House is whether the number of days should be six or eighteen.
SIR J. FERGUSSONsaid he would only say in conclusion that if they were to get to business, in his opinion six days were quite sufficient to discuss this Bill.
MR. RENWICKsaid he had no hesitation in saying that

709
six days were ample for the discussion of this Bill. Hon. Members opposite did not think so, but he thought he could suggest a means whereby six days would be found adequate and that was by all lawyers keeping quiet during the debate on the Bill, leaving the discussion to business men. Business men would then acknowledge that six days were long enough. One of the Members of the Opposition twitted some of the supporters of the Government with having gone to Ascot. But all of them did not deserve that taunt. He did not go to Ascot. [Loud ironical cheers.] The fact that he did not go to Ascot deserved no cheering. Instead of going to Ascot he remained in the House and attended to his duties. What was more, he entered the House yesterday morning at 11.30 and did not leave it until 12.30 that morning. Thirteen hours he remained in the House listening to speeches, and at the end of it no business had been done. The House was suffering from a plethora of speeches. [Ironical cheers.] It might be that that ironical cheer arose because it was thought he intervened often in debate, but he had never said a word in regard to the Licensing Bill. He spoke very rarely in the House and whenever he did he never exceeded fifteen minutes. He ventured to say, as a business man, that if the business of the House were conducted on business lines, and the speeches restricted to fifteen or twenty minutes, six days would be ample to deal with the Bill in Committee and on Report.
SIRCHARLESDILKEprotested against the hon. Member's doctrine that no lawyers should take part in this debate. The only Government speeches that were of value in this Bill, when they were allowed to discuss it, were those of the hon. and learned Solicitor-General, who all, friend and foe alike, would admit had conducted this Bill so far as it had been left in his charge with great mastery of detail and great courtesy. The hon. Member for Stowmarket and other hon. Members who had spoken seemed to think that the whole object of the scheme of the right hon. Gentleman was to obtain a reasonable discussion on the Bill. The scheme of the right hon. Gentleman on the contrary made a reason able discussion of the vital portions of
710
this Bill an impossibility, as was seen if they took the example of Clauses 2 and 3 which were grouped together all through the Bill. Those were the clauses dealing with that important question compensation. The end of Clause 2 dealt with the question of who was to get compensation, and the beginning of Clause dealt with the question of who was to pay it, and the Resolution of the right hon. Gentleman made it impossible to discuss these vital questions, and one reason why an extension of time was asked for was to enable Clause 3 to have a day to itself.
MR. THEODORE TAYLORcontended it would be absolutely impossible to discuss the Bill within the time suggested by the Prime Minister. They had the same experience two years ago on the Education Bill, the result being that that Act was unworkable and required amendment. He ventured to say there never was a greater exhibition of the impotence of Parliament to do its work than what was then going on. He had described to his children that the House of Commons was engaged in talking about what they should talk about. It only showed the absolute necessity, if Parliament was to regain control of its business, of having some means of ascertaining the general sense of the House. If there was necessity for closure by compartments there could be smaller compartments than those proposed by the Prime Minister. It was said that many Members of the Opposition were opposed to the main provisions of this Bill, but that was no legitimate reason why the Opposition should be closured. If that were legitimate it would be a reason for closuring all contentious Bills. If they we e to pass good practical legislation they would have to find out the general feeling of the House, and, to do that Bills must be properly discussed. To have no better means of carrying on its business than the system of closuring proposed by the Government reflected upon the intelligence of the House of Commons.
MR. TOMKINSONwhile admitting that it was the hope of the Opposition that this Bill might yet be defeated, absolutely denied that they were

711
averse to any amendment of the measure. There were innumerable provisions which required the closest investigation, such for instance as the manner in which the compensation should be decided, and the procedure to be adopted when the whole of the licences were in the hands of one owner; and Amendments were necessary to make the Bill less objectionable. The absolute refusal of the Prime Minister to extend the allotted time justified the suspicion that there were causes for this Resolution which did not appear on the
surface. The truth was that the Government were afraid of a full discussion of the Bill; they shrank from a thorough investigation of details, and the Opposition would fail in their duty if they did not make every possible protest against the manner in which the Bill had been brought forward, and the means by which it was being forced through against the manifest will of the country.
Question put.
The House divided:—Ayes, 260; Noes, 202. (Division List No. 191.)

AYES.

Agg-Gardner, James Tynte

Colomb, Rt. Hon. Sir John C.R.

Hardy,Laurence (Kent, Ashford

Agnew, Sir Andrew Noel

Colston, Chas. Edw. H. Athole

Hare, Thomas Leigh

Aird, Sir John

Corbett, T. L. (Down, North)

Harris, F. Leverton(Tynem'th)

Allhusen,Augustus Henry Eden

Cox, Irwin Edward Bainbridge

Harris, Dr. Fredk. R. (Dulwich)

Anson, Sir William Reynell

Craig, Charles Curtis (Antrim, S.

Hay, Hon. Claude George

Arnold Forster,Rt.Hn.Hugh O.

Cross, Herb. Shepherd (Bolton)

Heath, Arthur Howard(Hanley)

Arrol, Sir William

Crossley, Rt. Hon. Sir Savile

Heath, James (Staffords.N.W.

Atkinson, Rt. Hon. John

Cust, Henry John C.

Heaton, John Henniker

Aubrey-Fletcher,Rt.Hn. Sir H.

Dalkeith, Earl of

Holder, Augustus

Austin, Sir John

Dalrymple, Sir Charles

Henderson, Sir A. (Stafford,W.)

Bagot, Capt. Josceline FitzRoy

Davenport, William Bromley-

Hermon-Hodge, Sir Robert T.

Bailey, James (Walworth)

Davies,Sir HoratioD.(Chatham

Hickman, Sir Alfred

Bain, Colonel James Robert

Dewar,Sir T.R.(TowerHamlets

Hoare, Sir Samuel

Balcarres, Lord

Dickinson, Robert Edmond

Hogg, Lindsay

Baldwin, Alfred

Dickson, Charles Scott

Hope, J.F. (Sheffield, Brightside

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

Digby, John K. D. Wingfield-

Horner, Frederick William

Balfour, Capt. C. B. (Hornsey)

Disraeli, Coningsby Ralph

Houldsworth, Sir Wm. Henry

Balfour,RtHnGerald W.(Leeds

Dixon-Hartland,Sir FredDixon

Hoult, Joseph

Balfour, Kenneth R. (Christch.

Dorington.Rt.Hn. Sir John E.

Houston, Robert Paterson

Banbury, Sir Frederick George

Doughty, George

Howard, John(Kent, Faversh'm

Barry, Sir Francis T.(Windsor)

Douglas, Rt. Hon. A. Akers

Howard, J. (Midd., Tottenham)

Bathurst, Hon. Allen Benjamin

Doxford,Sir William Theordore

Hozier, Hon. James HenryCecil

Beach, Rt.Hn.Sir Michael Hicks

Duke, Henry Edward

Hudson, George Bickersteth

Bentinck, Lord Henry C.

Durning-Lawrence, Sir Edwin

Hunt, Rowland

Bhownaggree, Sir M. M.

Dyke, Rt.Hon. Sir WilliamHart

Jameson, Major J. Eustace

Bignold, Arthur

Egerton, Hon. A. de Tatton

Jebb, Sir Richard Claverhouse

Bigwood, James

Faber, Edmund B. (Hants,W.)

Jeffreys, Rt. Hn. Arthur Fred.

Bill, Charles

Fardell, Sir T. George

Johnstone, Hey wood (Sussex)

Bond, Edward

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

Kennaway, Rt.Hn.Sir John H.

Boscawen, Arthur Griffith-

Finch, Rt. Hon. George H.

Kenyon,Hon.Geo. T.(Denbigh)

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

Finlay, Sir Robert Bannatyne

Kenyon-Slaney, Col. W. (Salop)

Brassey, Albert

Fison, Frederick William

Kerr, John

Brodrick, Rt. Hon. St. John

FitzGerald,Sir Robert Penrose.

Keswick, William

Brotherton, Edward Allen

Fitzroy, Hon. Edward Algernon

Knowles, Sir Lees

Bull, William James

Flannery, Sir Fortescue

Law, Andrew Bonar (Glasgow)

Butcher, John George

Flower, Sir Ernest

Lawrence, Wm. F. (Liverpool)

Campbell, Rt.Hn.J.A (Glasgow

Forster, Henry William

Lawson, John Grant(Yorks.NR

Carson, Rt. Hon. Sir Edw. H.

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

Lee,Arthur H. (Hants, Fareham

Cautley, Henry Strother

Galloway, William Johnson

Legge, Col. Hon. Heneage

Cavendish, V.C.W. (Derbyshire)

Gardner, Ernest

Llewellyn, Evan Henry

Cayzer, Sir Charles William

Garfit, William

Lockwood, Lieut.-Col. A. R.

Cecil, Evelyn (Aston Manor)

Gibbs, Hon. A. G. H.

Loder, Gerald Walter Erskine

Cecil, Lord Hugh (Greenwich)

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

Long, Col. Chas. W. (Evesham)

Chamberlain,RtHn.J.A (Wore.

Goschen, Hon. George Joachim

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

Chamberlayne, T. (S'thampton

Goulding, Edward Alfred

Lonsdale, John Brownlee

Chaplin, Rt. Hon. Henry

Graham, Henry Robert

Lowe, Francis William

Chapman, Edward

Greene, Henry D.(Shrewsbury)

Loyd, Archie Kirkman

Charrington, Spencer

Gretton, John

Lucas, Reginald J.(Portsmouth

Clive, Captain Percy A.

Groves, James Grimble

Lyttelton, Rt. Hon. Alfred

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

Gunter, Sir Robert

Macdona, John Cumming

Coddington, Sir William

Hall, Edward Marshall

Maclver, David (Liverpool)

Cohen, Benjamin Louis

Hamilton, Marq. of (L'nd'derry

Maconochie, A.W.

M'Iver,SirLewis(Edinburgh,W

Quitter, Sir Cuthbert

Stock, James Henry

M'Killop, James (Stirlingshire)

Rankin, Sir James

Stroyan, John

Majendie, James A. H.

Rasch, Sir Frederic Carne

Strutt, Hon. Charles Hedley

Malcolm, lan

Ratcliff, R. F.

Talbot, Lord E. (Chichester)

Martin, Richard Biddulph

Reid, James (Greenock)

Talbot, Rt.Hn.J.G(Oxf'dUniv.

Massey-Mainwaring, Hn. W. F.

Remnant, James Farquharson

Thorburn, Sir Walter

Melville, Beresford Valentine

Renwick, George

Thornton, Percy M.

Milvain, Thomas

Richards, Henry Charles

Tollemache, Henry James

Mitchell, William (Burnley)

Ridley, S.Forde(Bethnal Green

Tomlinson, Sir Wm. Edw. M.

Molesworth, Sir Lewis

Ritchie, Rt.Hn.Chas. Thomson

Tuff, Charles

Montagu, G. (Huntingdon)

Roberts, Samuel (Sheffield)

Tufnell, Lieut.-Col. Edward

Moore, William

Robinson, Brooke

Valentia, Viscount

Morgan, D. J. (Walthamstow)

Rollit, Sir Albert Kaye

Vincent, Sir Edgar (Exeter)

Morpeth, Viscount

Ropner, Colonel Sir Robert

Walker, Col. William Hall

Morrell, George Herbert

Round, Rt. Hon. James

Warde, Colonel C. E.

Morrison, James Archibald

Royds, Clement Molyneux

Webb, Colonel William George

Morton, Arthur H. Aylmer

Rutherford, John (Lancashire)

Welby, Sir Charles G.E.(Notts.

Mount, William Arthur

Rutherford, W. W. (Liverpool)

Wharton, Rt. Hon. John Lloyd

Mowbray, Sir Robert Gray C.

Sackville, Col. S. G. Stopford

Whiteley, H.(Ashton und.Lyne

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

Sadler, Col. Samuel Alexander

Whitmore, Charles Algernon

Murray, Charles J. (Coventry)

Samuel, Sir HarryS.(Limehouse

Williams, Colonel R. (Dorset)

Murray, Col. Wyndham (Bath)

Sassoon, Sir Edward Albert

Willoughby de Eresby, Lord

Myers, William Henry

Scott, Sir S. (Marylebone, W.)

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

Nicholson, William Graham

Seely, Charles Hilton (Lincoln)

Wilson, John (Glasgow)

O'Neill, Hon. Robert Torrens

Seton-Karr, Sir Henry

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

Peel, Hn.Wm. Robert Wellesley

Sharpe, William Edward T.

Wolff, Gustav Wilhelm

Pemberton, John S. G.

Simeon, Sir Barrington

Worsley-Taylor, Henry Wilson

Percy, Earl

Sinclair, Louis (Romford)

Wortley, Rt. Hon. C. B. Stuart

Pierpoint, Robert

Smith, Abel H.(Hertford,East)

Wrightson, Sir Thomas

Pilkington, Colonel Richard

Smith,H.C(North'mb.Tyneside

Wyndham, Rt. Hon. George

Platt-Higgins, Frederick

Smith, James Parker(Lanarks.)

Wyndham-Quin, Col. W. H.

Plummer, Walter R.

Spencer, Sir E. (W. Bromwich)

Powell, Sir Francis Sharp

Stanley, Hn. Arthur(Ormskirk)

TELLERS FOR THE AYES—Sir

Pretyman, Ernest George

Stanley, Edward Jas.(Somerset

Alexander Acland-Hood and

Purvis, Robert

Stanley, Rt. Hon. Lord(Lancs.)

Mr. Ailwyn Fellowes.

Pym, C. Guy

Stewart, Sir Mark J. M'Taggart

NOES.

Abraham, William (Cork, N.E.)

Dalziel, James Henry

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

Ainsworth, John Stirling

Davies, Alfred (Carmarthen)

Griffith, Ellis J.

Allen, Charles P.

Davies, M. Vaughan (Cardigan)

Gurdon, Sir W. Brampton

Ashton, Thomas Gair

Delany, William

Hain, Edward

Asquith,Rt.Hn.Herbert Henry

Devlin, Chas. Ramsay(Galway)

Haldane, Rt. Hon. Richard B.

Barlow, John Emmott

Dilke, Rt. Hon. Sir Charles

Harcourt, Lewis V.(Rossendale)

Barran, Rowland Hirst

Donelan, Captain A.

Harcourt,RtHnSir W(Monm'th

Bayley, Thomas (Derbyshire)

Doogan, P. C.

Harwood, George

Beaumont, Wentworth C. B.

Douglas, Charles M. (Lanark)

Hayden, John Patrick

Black, Alexander William

Duncan, J. Hastings

Hayter, Rt. Hon. Sir Arthur D.

Blake, Edward

Dunn, Sir William

Helme, Norval Watson

Boland, John

Edwards, Frank

Hemphill, Rt. Hon. Charles H.

Bolton, Thomas Dolling

Elibank, Master of

Henderson, Arthur (Durham)

Brigg, John

Ellis, John Edward (Notts.)

Higham, John Sharpe

Broadhurst, Henry

Emmott, Alfred

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

Brown, George M. (Edinburgh)

Esmonde, Sir Thomas

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

Bryce, Rt. Hon. James

Evans, Sir Fran.H. (Maidstone

Hope, John Deans (Fife, West)

Buchanan, Thomas Ryburn

Evans, Samuel T. (Glamorgan)

Horniman, Frederick John

Burt, Thomas

Eve, Harry Trelawney

Hutchinson, Dr. Charles Fredk.

Buxton, Sydney Charles

Farquharson, Dr. Robert

Hutton, Alfred E. (Morley)

Caldwell, James

Fenwick, Charles

Jacoby, James Alfred

Cameron, Robert

Ferguson, R. C. Munro (Leith)

Johnson, John (Gateshead)

Campbell-Bannerman, Sir H.

Field, William

Joicey, Sir James

Causton, Richard Knight

Fitzmaurice, Lord Edmond

Jordan, Jeremiah

Channing, Francis Allston

Flavin, Michael Joseph

Joyce, Michael

Condon, Thomas Joseph

Flynn, James Christopher

Kennedy,Vincent P.(Cavan,W.

Corbett, A. Cameron (Glasgow)

Foster, Sir Walter (Derby Co.)

Kilbride, Denis

Craig, Robert Hunter (Lanark)

Fowler, Rt. Hon. Sir Henry

Kitson, Sir James

Crean, Eugene

Freeman-Thomas, Captain F.

Lambert, George

Cremer, William Randal

Fuller, J. M. F.

Langley, Batty

Crombie, John William

Furness, Sir Christopher

Law, Hugh Alex. (Donegal, W.

Crooks, William

Goddard, Daniel Ford

Lawson, Sir Wilfrid (Cornwall)

Cullinan, J.

Grant, Corrie

Layland-Barratt, Francis

714

715

Leamy, Edmund

O'Kelly, Jas. (Roscommon, N.)

Stanhope, Hon. Philip James

Leese, Sir Jos. F. (Accrington)

O'Malley, William

Stirling-Maxwell, Sir John M.

Leigh, Sir Joseph

O'Shaughnessy, P. J.

Strachey, Sir Edward

Leng, Sir John

Parrott, William

Sullivan, Donal

Lewis, John Herbert

Partington, Oswald

Taylor, Theodore C. (Radeliffe)

Lloyd-George, David

Pease, J. A. (Saffron Walden)

Tennant, Harold John

Lough, Thomas

Perks, Robert William

Thomas, Sir A. (Glamorgan, E.)

Lundon, W.

Philipps, John Wynford

Thomas, D. Alfred (Merthyr)

Macnamara, Dr. Thomas J.

Power, Patrick Joseph

Thomas,J.A.(Gl'morgan,Gower

MacNeill, John Gordon Swift

Price, Robert John

Tillet, Louis John

MacVeagh, Jeremiah

Priestley, Arthur

Tomkinson, James

M'Crae, George

Rea, Russell

Toulmin, George

M'Fadden, Edward

Reckitt, Harold James

Trevelyan, Charles Philips

M'Hugh, Patrick A.

Redmond, John E. (Waterford)

Tritton, Charles Ernest

M'Kean, John

Reid, Sir R. Threshie( Dumfries

Ure, Alexander

M'Kenna, Reginald

Rickett, J. Compton

Wallace, Robert

Mansfie,d, Horace Rendall

Rigg, Richard

Walton, J. Lawson (Leeds, S.)

Mappin, Sir Frederick Thorpe

Roberts, John Bryn (Eifion)

Walton, Joseph (Barnsley)

Markham, Arthur Basil

Roberts, John H. (Denbighs.)

Wason, Eugene (Clackmannan)

Middlemore, In. Throgmorton

Robertson, Edmund (Dundee)

Wason,John Cathcart (Orkney)

Mitchell, Edw. (Fermanagh,N.)

Robson, William Snowdon

White, George (Norfolk)

Mooney, John J.

Roche, John

White, Luke (York, E.R.)

Morgan, J. Lloyd (Carmarthon)

Rose, Charles Day

Whiteley, George (York, W.R.)

Moss, Samuel

Russell, T. W.

Whitley, J. H. (Halifax)

Moulton, John Fletcher

Samuel, Herbert L. (Cleveland)

Williams, Osmond (Merioneth)

Newnes, Sir George

Schwann, Charles E.

Wilson, Chas. Henry (Hull, W.)

Nolan, Joseph (Louth, South)

Shackleton, David James

Wilson, Fred. W.(Norfolk,Mid.

Nussey, Thomas Willans

Shaw, Charles Edw. (Stafford)

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

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

Shaw, Thomas (Hawick B.)

Wilson, John* (Falkirk)

O'Brien, K. (Tipperary, Mid.)

Sheehan, Daniel Daniel

Woodhouse,Sir J.T(Huddersf'd

O'Brien, Patrick (Kilkenny)

Sheehy, David

Yoxall, James Henry

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

Shipman, Dr. John G.

O'Connor, James (Wicklow, W.

Slack, John Bamford

TELLERS FOB THE NOES—Mr.

O'Doherty, William

Sloan, Thomas Henry

Herbert Gladstone and Mr.

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

Smith, Samuel (Flint)

William M'Arthur.

O'Dowd, John

Soames, Arthur Wellesley

Main Question again proposed.
MR. BALFOURrose in his place, and claimed to move, "That the Question be now put."
Question put, "That the Question be now put."
The House divided:—Ayes, 265; Noes, 201. (Division List No. 192.)

AYES.

Agg-Gardner, James Tynte

Bigwood, James

Cohen, Benjamin Louis

Agnew, Sir Andrew Noel

Bill, Charles

Colomb, Rt. Hn. Sir John C. R.

Aird, Sir John

Bond, Edward

Colston, Chas. Edw. H. Athole

Allhusen, Augustus Henry Eden

Boscawen, Arthur Griffith-

Corbett, T. L. (Down, North)

Anson, Sir William Reynell

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

Cox, Irwin Edward Bainbridge

Arnold-Forster,Rt.Hn.Hugh O.

Brassey, Albert

Craig, Charles Curtisf Antrim,S.

Arrol, Sir William

Brodrick, Rt. Hon. St. John

Cross, HerbertShepherd(Bolton

Atkinson, Rt. Hon. John

Brotherton, Edward Allen

Crossley, Rt. Hon. Sir Savile

Aubrey,Fletcher,Rt.Hon.SirH.

Bull, William James

Cust, Henry John C.

Austin, Sir John

Butcher, John George

Dalkeith, Earl of

Bagot, Capt. Josceline Fitz Roy

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

Dalrymple, Sir Charles

Bailey, James (Walworth)

Carson, Rt. Hon. Sir Edw. H

Davenport, William Bromley.

Bain, Colonel James Robert

Cautley, Henry Strother

Davies,Sir HoratioD.(Chatham

Balcarres, Lord

Cavendish, V.C.W. (Derbyshire

Dewar, Sir T.R.(Tower Hamlets

Baldwin, Alfred

Cayzer, Sir Charles William

Dickinson, Robert Edmond

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

Cecil, Evelyn (Aston Manor)

Dickson, Charles Scott

Balfour, Capt. C. B. (Hornsey)

Cecil, Lord Hugh (Greenwich)

Digby, John K. D. Wingfield-

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

Chamberlain, Rt Hn.J.A(Worc.

Disraeli, Coningsby Ralph

Balfour, Kenneth R. (Christch.

Chamberlayne, T. (S'thampton

Dixon-Hartland,Sir Fred Dixon

Banbury, Sir Frederick George

Chaplin, Rt. Hon. Henry

Dorington, Rt.Hn. Sir John E.

Barry, Sir Francis T.(Windsor)

Chapman, Edward

Doughty, George

Bathurst, Hon. Allen Benjamin

Charrington, Spencer

Douglas, Rt. Hon. A. Akers

Beach,Rt.Hn.Sir Michael Hicks

Clive, Captain Percy A.

Doxford, Sir William Theodore

Bentinck, Lord Henry C.

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

Duke, Henry Edward

Bhownaggree, Sir M. M.

Coddington, Sir William

Durning-Lawrence, Sir Edwin

Bignold, Arthur

Coghill, Douglas Harry

Dyke, Rt. Hn. Sir William Hart

Egerton, Hon. A. de Tatton

Lee, A. H. (Hants., Fareham)

Rollit, Sir Albert Kaye

Faber, Edmund B. (Hants.,W.)

Legge, Col. Hon. Heneage

Ropner, Colonel Sir Robert

Fardell, Sir T. George

Llewellyn, Evan Henry

Round, Rt. Hon. James

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

Lockwood, Lieut.-Col. A. R.

Royds, Clement Molyneux

Finch, Rt. Hon. George H.

Loder, Gerald Walter Erskine

Rutherford, John (Lancashire)

Finlay, Sir Robert Bannatyne

Long, Col.CharlesW.(Evesham)

Rutherford, W. W. (Liverpool)

Fison, Frederick William

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

Sackville, Col. S. G. Stopford.

FitzGerald, Sir Robert Penrose

Lonsdale, John Brownlee

Sadler, Col. Samuel Alexander

Fitzroy, Hn. Edward Algernon

Lowe, Francis William

Samuel,Sir HarryS.(Limehouse

Flannery, Sir Fortescue

Loyd, Archie Kirkman

Sassoon, Sir Edward Albert

Flower, Sir Ernest

Lucas, Reginald J.(Portsmouth

Saunderson, Rt. Hn.Col.Edw. J.

Forster, Henry William

Lyttelton, Rt. Hon. Alfred

Scott, Sir S. (Marylebone, W.)

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

Macdona, John Gumming

Seton-Karr, Sir Henry

Galloway, William Johnson

Maclver, David (Liverpool)

Sharpe, William Edward 1.

Gardner, Ernest

Maconochie, A. W.

Simeon, Sir Barrington

Garfit, William

MTver,Sir Lewis(Edinburgh,W

Sinclair, Louis (Romford)

Gibbs, Hon. A. G. H.

M'Killop, James (Stirlingshire)

Skewes-Cox, Thomas

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

Majendie, James A. H.

Smith, Abel H.(Hertford,East)

Goschen, Hon. George Joachim

Malcolm, Ian

Smith.H. C. (Nort'mb.Tyneside

Goulding, Edward Alfred

Martin, Richard Biddulph

Smith, James Parker(Lanarks.)

Graham, Henry Robert

Massey-Mainwaring, Hn. W. F.

Spencer, Sir E. (W. Bromwich)

Greene, Henry D.(Shrewsbury)

Middlemore, Jn. Throgmorton

Stanley, Hn. Arthur (Ormskirk

Greene, W. Raymond (Cambs.)

Milvain, Thomas.

Stanley, Edward Jas,(Somerset

Gretton, John

Molesworth, Sir Lewis

Stanley, Rt. Hon. Lord(Lancs.)

Groves, James Grimble

Montagu, G. (Huntingdon)

Stewart, Sir Mark J. M'Taggart

Hall, Edward Marshall

Moon, Edward Robert Pacy

Stirling-Maxwell, Sir John M.

Hamilton, Marq of(L'nd'nderry

Moore, William

Stock, James Henry

Hardy, Laurence (Kent, Ashford

Morgan, D. J. (Walthamstow)

Stroyan, John

Hare, Thomas Leigh

Morpeth, Viscount

Strutt, Hon. Charles Hedley

Harris, F. Leverton (Tynem'th

Morrell, George Herbert

Talbot, Lord E. (Chichester)

Harris, Dr. Fredk. R.(Dulwich)

Morrison, James Archibald

Talbot, Rt.Hn.J.G(Oxf'dUniv.

Hay, Hon. Claude George

Morton, Arthur H. Aylmer

Thorburn, Sir Walter

Heath, Arthur Howard(Hanley

Mount, William Arthur

Thornton, Percy M.

Heath, James (Staffords., N.W.

Mowbray, Sir Robert Gray C.

Tollemache, Henry James

Heaton, John Henniker

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

Tomlinson, Sir Wm. Edw. M.

Helder, Augustus

Murray, Charles J. (Coventry)

Tritton, Charles Ernest

Henderson, Sir A. (Stafford, W.

Murray, Col. Wyndham (Bath)

Tuff, Charles

Hermon-Hodge, Sir Robert T.

Myers, William Henry

Tufnell, Lieut.-Col. Edward

Hickman, Sir Alfred

Newdegate, Francis A. N.

Valentia, Viscount

Hoare, Sir Samuel

Nicholson, William Graham

Vincent, Sir Edgar (Exeter)

Hogg, Lindsay

O'Neill, Hon. Robert Torrens

Walker, Col. William Hall

Hope, J.F.(Sheffield, Brightside

Peel, Hn.Wm. Robert Wellesley

Warde, Colonel C. E.

Horner, Frederick William

Pemberton, John S. G.

Webb, Colonel William George

Houldsworth, Sir Wm. Henry

Percy, Earl

Welby, Sir Charles G.E.(Notts.

Hoult, Joseph

Pierpoint, Robert

Wharton, Rt. Hon. John Lloyd

Houston, Robert Paterson

Pilkington, Colonel Richard

Whiteley, H.(Ashton und.Lyne

Howard, Jn.(Kent, Faversham

Platt-Higgins, Frederick

Whitmore, Charles Algernon

Howard, J. (Midd.,Tottenham)

Plummer, Walter R.

Williams, Colonel R. (Dorset)

Hozier, Hn. James Henry Cecil

Powell, Sir Francis Sharp

Willoughby de Eresby, Lord

Hudson, George Bickersteth

Pretyman, Ernest George

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

Hunt, Rowland

Purvis, Robert

Wilson, John (Glasgow)

Jameson, Major J. Eustace

Pym, C. Guy

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

Jebb, Sir Richard Claverhouse

Quilter, Sir Cuthbert

Wolff, Gustav Wilhelm

Jeffreys, Rt. Hon. Arthur Fred.

Rankin, Sir James

Worsley-Taylor, Henry Wilson

Johnstone, Heywood (Sussex)

Rasch, Sir Frederic Carne

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

Kennaway, Rt. Hn.Sir John H.

Ratcliff, R. F.

Wrightson, Sir Thomas

Kenyon, Hn. Geo. T. (Denbigh)

Reid, James (Greenock)

Wyndham, Rt. Hon. George

Kenyon-Slaney, Col. W.(Salop.

Remnant, James Farquharson

Wyndham-Quin, Col. W. H.

Kerr, John

Renwick, George

Keswick, William

Richards, Henry Charles

Tellers for the Ayes—Sir

Knowles, Sir Lees

Ridley, S.Forde(Bethnal Green

Alexander Acland-Hood and

Law, Andrew Bonar (Glasgow)

Ritchie, Rt. Hn.Chas. Thomson

Mr. Ailwyn Fellowes.

Lawrence, Wm. F. (Liverpool)

Roberts, Samuel (Sheffield)

Lawson, J. Grant (Yorks., N.R

Robinson, Brooke

NOES.

Abraham, William (Cork, X.E.)

Barlow, John Emmott

Blake, Edward

Ainsworth, John Stirling

Barran, Rowland Hirst

Boland, John

Allen, Charles P.

Bayley, Thomas (Derbyshire)

Bolton, Thomas Dolling

Ashton, Thomas Gair

Beaumont, Wentworth C. B.

Bowles, T.Gibson(King's Lynn

Asquith, Rt. Hn.Herbert Henry

Black, Alexander William

Brigg, John

718

719

Broadhurst, Henry

Hayter, Rt. Hon. Sir Arthur D.

Partington, Oswald

Brown, George M. (Edinburgh)

Helme, Norval Watson

Pease, J. A. (Saffron Walden)

Bryce, Rt. Hon. James

Hemphill, Rt. Hon. Charles H.

Perks, Robert William

Buchanan, Thomas Ryburn

Henderson, Arthur (Durham)

Philipps, John Wynford

Burke, E. Haviland-

Higham, John Sharpe

Power, Patrick Joseph

Burt, Thomas

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

Price, Robert John

Buxton, Sydney Charles

Hope, John Deans (Fife, West)

Priestley, Arthur

Caldwell, James

Horniman, Frederick John

Rea, Russell

Cameron, Robert

Hutchinson, Dr Charles Fredk.

Reckitt, Harold James

Campbell-Bannerman, Sir H.

Hutton, Alfred E. (Morley)

Reddy, M.

Causton, Richard Knight

Jacoby, James Alfred

Redmond, John E.(Waterford)

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

Johnson, John (Gateshead)

Reid, Sir R. Threshie (Dumfries

Channing, Francis Allston

Joicey, Sir James

Rigg, Richard

Condon, Thomas Joseph

Jordan, Jeremiah

Roberts, John Bryn (Eifion)

Corbett, A. Cameron (Glasgow)

Joyce, Michael

Roberts, John H. (Denbighs.)

Craig, Robert Hunter (Lanark)

Kennedy, Vincent P.(Cavan,W

Robertson, Edmund (Dundee)

Crean, Eugene

Kilbride, Denis

Robson, William Snowdon

Cremer, William Randal

Kitson, Sir James

Roche, John

Crooks, William

Labouchere, Henry

Rose, Charles Day

Cullinan, J.

Langley, Batty

Russell, T. W.

Dalziel, James Henry

Law, Hugh Alex.(Donegal,W.)

Samuel, Herbert L.(Cleveland)

Davies, Alfred (Carmarthen)

Lawson, Sir Wilfrid (Cornwall)

Schwann, Charles E.

Davies, M. Vaughan (Cardigan)

Layland-Barratt, Francis

Shaw, Charles Edw.(Stafford)

Delany, William

Leamy, Edmund

Shaw, Thomas (Hawick B.)

Devlin, Chas. Ramsay(Galway)

Leigh, Sir Joseph

Sheehan, Daniel Daniel

Devlin, Joseph (Kilkenny, N.)

Leng, Sir John

Sheehy, David

Dilke, Rt. Hon. Sir Charles

Lewis, John Herbert

Shipman, Dr. John G.

Donelan, Captain A.

Lloyd-George, David

Slack, John Bamford

Doogan, P. C.

Lough, Thomas

Sloan, Thomas Henry

Douglas, Charles M. (Lanark)

Lundon, W.

Smith, Samuel (Flint)

Duncan, J. Hastings

Macnamara, Dr. Thomas J.

Stanhope, Hon. Philip James

Dunn, Sir William

MacNeill, John Gordon Swift

Strachey, Sir Edward

Edwards, Frank

MacVeagh, Jeremiah

Sullivan, Donal

Elibank, Master of

M'Crae, George

Tayler, Theodore C.(Radchffe)

Ellis, John Edward (Notts.)

M'Fadden, Edward

Tennant, Harold John

Emmott, Alfred

M'Hugh, Patrick A.

Thomas, Sir A. (Glamorgan, E.)

Evans, Sir Fran. H. (Maidstone

M'Kean, John

Thomas, David Alfred (Merthyr

Evans, Samuel T. (Glamorgan)

M'Kenna, Reginald

Thomas, JA (Glamorgan, Gower

Eve, Harry Trelawney

M'Laren, Sir Chas. Benjamin

Tillet, Louis John

Farquharson, Dr. Robert

Mansfield, Horace Rendall

Tomkinson, James

Fenwick, Charles

Mappin, Sir Frederick Thorpe

Toulmin, George

Ferguson, R. S. Munro (Leith)

Markham, Arthur Basil

Trevelyan, Charles Philips

Field, William

Mitchell, Edw. (Fermanagh, N.)

Ure, Alexander

Fitzmaurice, Lord Edmond

Mooney, John J.

Wallace, Robert

Flavin, Michael Joseph

Morgan, J. Lloyd (Carmarthen)

Walton,John Lawson(Leeds,S.)

Flynn, James Christopher

Moss, Samuel

Walton, Joseph (Barnsley)

Foster,Sir Walter (Derby Co.)

Moulton, John Fletcher

Wason, Eugene (Clackmannan

Fowler, Rt. Hon. Sir Henry

Murphy John

Wason, John Cathcart(Orkney

Freeman-Thomas, Captain F.

Newnes, Sir George

White, George (Norfolk)

Fuller, J. M. F.

Nolan Joseph (Louth, South)

White, Luke (York, E.R.)

Furness, Sir Christopher

Nussey, Thomas Willans

Whiteley, George (York.W.R.)

Goddard, Daniel Ford

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

Whitley, J. H. (Halifax)

Grant, Corrie

O'Brien, Kendal (Tipperary Mid

Williams, Osmond (Merioneth)

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

O'Brien, Patrick (Kilkenny)

Wilson Chas. Henry (Hull, W.)

Griffith, Ellis J.

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

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

Guest, Hon. Ivor Churchill

O'Connor, James(Wicklow,W.)

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

Gurdon, Sir W. Brampton

O'Doherty, William

Wilson, John (Falkirk)

Hain, Edward

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

Woodhouse,SirJT. (Huddersf'd

Haldane, Rt. Hon. Richard B.

O'Dowd, John

Yoxall, James Henry

Harcourt,Lewis V.(Rossendale)

O'Kelly, James (Roscommon, N

Harcourt,Rt.Hn.SirW(Monm'h

O'Malley, William

TELLERS FOR THE NOES—

Harwood, George

O'Shaughnessy, P. J.

Mr. Herbert Gladstone and

Hayden, John Patrick

Parrott. William

Mr. William M'Arthur.

Question put accordingly.
As the House was being cleared for the division,
MR. CROOKSseated, said; I do not want to seem unruly, Sir, or
720
disobedient to the rules of the House. I feel that the best thing I can do is to ask you to suspend me from the service of the House. If I am to be closured in this manner without an opportunity of speaking, I think it would be better if it

721
were done forthwith. I shall be rejoiced to be relieved of the responsibility of marching through the Lobby and doing nothing at all.
MR. SPEAKER: The hon. Member is asking me to do what I have no power to do. I cannot suspend him. It is for the House to suspend him if he does what I hope he will not do, and that is to show disrespect to the rules of the House. The hon. Member has made his protest openly, and no doubt notice will be taken of the fact; and if he goes through the Lobby he will make his protest in a legitimate and proper way.
MR. CROOKS: I agree, Mr. Speaker, that is the proper way. But what can one do when we are closured down? I want to be respectful to you and to the House, but this is the only way in which, one has a chance of bringing before the public the iniquitous act of the Government over this Bill.
MR. SPEAKER: I hope the hon. Member will see that what he is doing is really not in the nature of a protest; it is merely acting obstructively to the House.
The House divided; Ayes, 262; Noes, 207. (Division List No. 193.)

AYES.

Agg-Gardner, James Tynte

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

Graham, Henry Robert

Agnew, Sir Andrew Noel

Coddington, Sir William

Gray, Ernest (West Ham)

Aird, Sir John

Cohen, Benjamin Louis

Greene, Henry D.(Shrewsbury)

Allhusen,Augustus Henry Eden

Colomb, Rt. Hn. Sir John C. R.

Greene, W. Raymond-(Cambs.)

Anson, Sir William Reynell

Colston, Chas. Edw. H. Athole

Gretton, John

Arnold-Forster, Rt. Hn. Hugh O.

Cook, Sir Frederick Lucas

Groves, James Grimble

Arrol, Sir William

Corbett, T. L. (Down, North)

Hall, Edward Marshall

Atkinson, Rt. Hon. John

Cox, Irwin Edward Bainbridge

Halsey, Rt. Hon. Thomas F.

Aubrey-Fletcher, Rt. Hn. Sir H.

Craig, Charles Curtis (Antrim,S.

Hamilton, Marq of (L'donderry

Austin, Sir John

Cross, Herb. Shepherd (Bolton)

Hardy, Laurence( Kent, Ashford

Bagot, Capt. Josceline FitzRoy

Crossley, Rt. Hon. Sir Savile

Hare, Thomas Leigh

Bailey, James (Walworth)

Dalkeith, Earl of

Harris, F. Leverton(Tynem'th)

Bain, Colonel James Robert

Dalrymple, Sir Charles

Harris, Dr. Fredk. R.(Dulwich)

Balcarres, Lord

Davenport, W. Bromley-

Hay, Hon. Claude George

Baldwin, Alfred

Davies, Sir Horatio D.(Chatham

Heath, Arthur Howard(Hanley

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

Dewar, Sir T.R.(TowerHamlets

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

Balfour, Capt. C. B.(Hornsey)

Dickinson, Robert Edmond

Heaton, John Henniker

Balfour, Rt Hn Gerald W.(Leeds

Dickson, Charles Scott

Helder, Augustus

Balfour, Kenneth R.(Christch.

Digby, John K. D. Wingfield-

Henderson, Sir A.(Stafford,W.)

Banbury, Sir Frederick George

Disraeli, Coningsby Ralph

Hermon-Hodge, Sir Robert T.

Barry, Sir Francis T. (Windsor)

Dixon-Hartland, Sir Fred Dixon

Hickman, Sir Alfred

Bathurst, Hon. Allen Benjamin

Dorington,Rt. Hn. Sir John E.

Hoare, Sir Samuel

Beach, Rt. Hn Sir Michael Hicks

Doughty, George

Hogg, Lindsay

Bentinck, Lord Henry C.

Douglas, Rt. Hon. A. Akers

Hope,J.F.(Sheffield,Brightside)

Bhownaggree, Sir M. M.

Doxford, Sir William Theodore

Horner, Frederick William

Bignold, Arthur

Duke, Henry Edward

Houldsworth, Sir Wm. Henry

Bigwood, James

Durning-Lawrence, Sir Edwin

Hoult, Joseph

Bill, Charies

Dyke, Rt. Hon. Sir William Hart

Houston, Robert Paterson

Blundell, Colonel Henry

Egerton, Hon. A. de Tatton

Howard, J. (Kent, Faversham

Bond, Edward

Faber, Edmund B. (Hants, W.)

Hozier, Hon. James Henry Cecil

Boscawen, Arthur Griffith.

Fardell, Sir T. George

Hudson, George Bickersteth

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

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

Hunt, Rowland

Brassey, Albert

Finch, Rt. Hon. George H.

Jameson, Major J. Eustace

Brotherton, Edward Allen

Finlay, Sir Robert Bannatyne

Jebb, Sir Richard Claverhouse

Bull, William James

Fison, Frederick William

Jeffreys, Rt. Hon. Arthur Fred.

Butcher, John George

FitzGerald, Sir Robert Penrose-

Johnstone, Hey wood (Sussex)

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

Fitzroy, Hon. Edward Algernon

Kennaway,Rt. Hon. Sir John H.

Carson, Rt. Hon. Sir Edw, H.

Flannery, Sir Fortescue

Kenyon, Hon. Geo. T. (Denbigh

Cautley, Henry Strother

Flower, Sir Ernest

Kenyon-Slaney. Col. W. (Salop.

Cavendish, V.C.W. (Derbyshire

Forster, Henry William

Kerr, John

Cayzer, Sir Charles William

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

Keswick, William

Cecil, Evelyn (Aston Manor)

Galloway, William Johnson

Knowles, Sir Lees

Cecil, Lord Hugh (Greenwich)

Gardner, Ernest

Law, Andrew Bonar (Glasgow)

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

Garfit, William

Lawrence, Wm. F. (Liverpool)

Chamberlayne, T. (S'thampton

Gibbs, Hon. A. G. H.

Lawson, J. Grant (Yorks. N.R.

Chaplin, Rt. Hon. Henry

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

Lee, Arthur H.(Hants. Fareham

Chapman, Edward

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

Legge, Col. Hon. Heneage

Charrington, Spencer

Goschen,Hon.George Joachim

Llewellyn, Evan Henry

Clive, Captain Percy A.

Goulding, Edward Alfred

Lockwood, Lieut.-Col. A. R.

Loder, Gerald Walter Erskine

Pemberton, John S. G.

Smith,Abel H. (Hertford, East)

Long, Col. Chas. W. (Evesham

Percy, Earl

Spencer, Sir E. (W.Bromwich)

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

Pierpoint, Robert

Stanley,Hn. Arthur(Ormskirk

Lonsdale, John Brownlee

Pilkington, Colonel Richard

Stanley, Edward Jas(Somerset)

Lowe, Francis William

Platt-Higgins, Frederick

Stanley,Rt.Hon. Lord (Lanes.)

Lowther, C. (Cumb., Eskdale)

Plummer, Walter R.

Stewart, Sir Mark J. M'Taggart

Loyd, Archie Kirkman

Powell, Sir Francis Sharp

Stock, James Henry

Lucas,Reginald J.(Portsmouth

Pretyman, Ernest George

Strutt, Hon. Charles Hedley

Lyttelton, Rt. Hon. Alfred

Purvis, Robert

Talbot, Lord E. (Chichester)

Macdona, John Cumming

Pym, C. Guy

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

Maclver, David (Liverpool)

Quilter, Sir Cuthbert

Thorburn, Sir Walter

Maconochie, A. W.

Rankin, Sir James

Thornton, Percy M.

M'Iver,SirLewis(Edinburgh W.

Rasch, Sir Frederic Carne

Tollemache, Henry James

M'Killop, James (Stirlingshire'

Ratcliff, R. F.

Tomlinson, Sir Wm. Edw. M.

Majendie, James A. H.

Reid, James (Greenock)

Tuff, Charles

Malcolm, lan

Remnant, James Farquharson

Tufnell, Lieut.-Col. Edward

Martin, Richard Biddulph

Renwick, George

Valentia, Viscount

Massey-Mainwaring, Hn. W.F.

Richards, Henry Charles

Walker, Col. William Hall

Milvain, Thomas

Ridley,S.Forde{Bethnal Green)

Warde, Colonel C. E.

Molesworth, Sir Lewis

Ritch'ie,Rt,Hn.Chas. Thomson

Webb, Colonel William George

Montagu, G. (Huntingdon)

Roberts, Samuel (Sheffield)

Welby.Sir Charles G. E. (Notts.

Montagu, Hon J. Scott (Hants.

Robinson, Brooke

Wharton, Rt. Hon. John Lloyd

Moore, William

Rollit, Sir Albert Kaye

Whiteley,H.(Ashton und.Lyne

Morgan,David J.(Walthamst'w

Ropner, Colonel Sir Robert

Whitmore, Charles Algernon

Morpeth, Viscount

Round, Rt. Hon. James

Williams, Colonel R. (Dorset)

Morrell, George Herbert

Royds, Clement Molyneux

Wiiloughby de Eresby, Lord

Morrison, James Archibald

Rutherford, John (Lancashire)

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

Morton, Arthur H. Aylmer

Rutherford, W. W. (Liverpool)

Wilson, John (Glasgow)

Mount, William Arthur

Sackville, Col. S. G. Stopford-

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

Mowbray, Sir Robert Gray C.

Sadler, Col. Samuel Alexander

Wolff, Gustav Wilhelm

Murray,RtHn A.Graham(Bute

Samuel, Sir H. S. (Limehouse)

Worsley-Taylor, Henry Wilson

Murray, Charles J. (Coventry)

Sassoon, Sir Edward Albert

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

Murray, Col. Wyndham (Bath)

Saunderson, Rt.Hn.Col.Edw.J.

Wrightson, Sir Thomas

Myers, William Henry

Scott, Sir S. (Marylebone, W.)

Wyndham, Rt. Hon. George

Newdegate, Francis A. N.

Seton-Karr, Sir Henry

Wyndham-Quin, Col. W. H.

Nicholson, William Graham

Sharpe, William Edward T.

O'Neill, Hon. Robert Torrens

Simeon, Sir Barrington

TELLERS FOR THE AYES—

Parker, Sir Gilbert

Sinclair, Louis (Romford)

Sir Alexander Acland-Hood

Peel, Hn.Wm.Robert Wellesley

Skewes-Cox, Thomas

and Mr. Ailwyn Fellowes.

NOES.

Abraham, William (Cork,N.E.)

Crean, Eugene

Foster, Sir Walter (Derby Co.)

Ainsworth, John Stirling

Cremer, William Randal

Fowler, Rt. Hon. Sir Henry

Allen, Charles P.

Crooks, William

Freeman-Thomas, Captain F.

Ashton, Thomas Gair

Cullinan, J.

Fuller, J. M. F.

Asquith,Rt.Hn.Herbert Henry

Dalziel, James Henry

Furness, Sir Christopher

Barlow, John Emmott

Davies, Alfred (Carmarthen)

Goddard, Daniel Ford

Barran, Rowland Hirst

Davies, M. Vaughan-(Cardigan

Grant, Corrie

Bayley, Thomas (Derbyshire)

Delany, William

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

Beaumont, Wentworth C. B.

Devlin, Chas.Ramsay(Galway

Griffith, Ellis J.

Black, Alexander William

Devlin, Joseph (Kilkenny, N.)

Guest, Hon. Ivor Churchill

Blake, Edward

Dilke, Rt. Hon. Sir Charles

Gurdon, Sir W. Brampton

Boland, John

Donelan, Captain A.

Hain, Edward

Bolton, Thomas Dolling

Doogan, P. C.

Haldane, R. Hon. Richard B.

Bowles,T.Gibson(King's Lynn

Douglas, Charles M. (Lanark)

Harcourt, Lewis V.(Rossendale

Brigg, John

Duncan, J. Hastings

Harcourt,Rt Hn.SirW.(Monm't

Broadhurst, Henry

Dunn, Sir William

Harwood, George

Brown, George M.(Edinburgh)

Edwards, Frank

Hayden, John Patrick

Bryce, Rt. Hon. James

Elibank, Master of

Helme, Norval Watson

Buchanan, Thomas Ryburn

Ellis, John Edward (Notts.)

Hemphill, Rt. Hon. Charles H.

Burke, E. Haviland-

Emmott, Alfred

Henderson, Arthur (Durham)

Burt, Thomas

Evans,SirFraneisH.(Maidstone

Higham, John Sharpe

Caldwell, James

Evans, Samuel T. (Glamorgan)

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

Cameron, Robert

Eve, Harry Trelawney

Hope, John Deans (Fife,West)

Campbell-Bannerman, Sir H.

Farquharson, Dr. Robert

Horniman, Frederick John

Causton, Richard Knight

Fenwick, Charles

Hutchinson, Dr.CharlesFredk.

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

Ferguson, R. C. Munro (Leith)

Hutton, Alfred E. (Morley)

Channing, Francis Allston

Field, William

Jacoby, James Alfred

Condon, Thomas Joseph

Fitzmaurice, Lord Edmond

Johnson, John (Gateshead)

Corbett, A. Cameron (Glasgow

Flavin, Michael Joseph

Joicey, Sir James

Craig, Robert Hunter (Lanark)

Flynn, James Christopher

Jones, D. Brynmor(Swansea)

724

725

Jordan, Jeremiah

O'Brien,Kendal(Tipperary Mid

Slack, John Bamford

Joyce, Michael

O'Brien, Patrick (Kilkenny)

Sloan, Thomas Henry

Kennedy,Vincent P.(Cavan,W

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

Smith,H.C(North'mb.Tyneside

Kilbride, Denis

O'Connor, James(Wicklow, W.)

Smith, Samuel (Flint)

Kitson, Sir James

O'Doherty, William

Soames, Arthur Wellesley

Labonchere, Henry

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

Stanhope, Hon. Philip James

Langley, Batty

O'Dowd, John

Strachey. Sir Edward

Law, Hugh Alex.(Donegal,W.)

O'Kelly, James(Roscommon,N

Sullivan, Donal

Lawson,Sir Wilfrid (Cornwall)

O'Malley, William

Taylor, Theordore C.(Radcliffe

Layland-Barratt, Francis

O'Shaughnessy, P. J.

Tennant, Harold John

Leamy, Edmund

Parrot, William

Thomas, Sir A. (Glamorgan, E.)

Leigh, Sir Joseph

Partington, Oswald

Thomas, David Alfred(Merthyr

Leng, Sir John

Pease, J. A. (Saffron Walden)

Thomas,JA(Glamorgan, Gower

Levy, Maurice

Perks, Robert William

Tillet, Louis John

Lewis, John Herbert

Philipps, John Wynford

Tomkinson, James

Lloyd-George, David

Power, Patrick Joseph

Toulmin, George

Lough, Thomas

Price, Robert John

Trevelyan, Charles Philips

Lundon, W.

Priestley, Arthur

Tritton, Charles Ernest

Macnamara, Dr. Thomas J.

Rea, Russell

Ure, Alexander

MacNeill, John Gordon Swift

Reckitt, Harold James

Wallace, Robert

MacVeagh, Jeremiah

Reddy, M.

Walton, John Lawson(Leeds,S)

M'Crae, George

Redmond, John E.(Waterford)

Walton, Joseph (Barnsley)

M'Padden, Edward

Reid, Sir R. Threshie(Dumfries

Wason, Eugene (Clackmannan

M'Hugh, Patrick A.

Rickett, J. Compton

Wason,John Cathcart(Orkney)

M'Kean, John

Rigg, Richard

White, George (Norfolk)

M'Kenna, Reginald

Roberts, John Bryn (Eifion)

White, Luke (York, E.R.)

M'Laren, Sir CharlesBenjamin

Roberts, John H. (Denbighs.)

Whiteley, George (York,W.R.)

Mansfield, Horace Kendall

Robertson, Edmund (Dundee)

Whitley, J. H. (Halifax)

Mappin, Sir Frederick Thorpe

Robson, William Snowdon

Williams, Osmond (Merioneth)

Markham, Arthur Basil

Roche, John

Wilson.Charles Henry(Hull,W.

Middlemore, John Throgmorton

Rose, Charles Day

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

Mitchell, Edw. (Fermanagh, N.)

Runciman, Walter

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

Mooney, John T.

Russell, T. W.

Wilson, John (Falkirk)

Morgan, J. Lloyd (Carmarthen)

Samuel, Herbert L. (Cleveland)

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

Moss, Samuel

Schwann, Charles E.

Yoxall, James Henry

Moulton, John Fletcher

Shackleton David James

Murphy, John

Shaw, Charles Edw. (Stafford)

TELLERS FOR THE NOES—

Newnes, Sir George

Shaw, Thomas (Hawick, B.)

Mr. Herbert Gladstone and

Nolan, Joseph (Louth, South)

Sheehan, Daniel Daniel

Mr. William M'Arthur

Nussey, Thomas Willans

Sheehy, Davin

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

Shipman, Dr. John G.

Ordered, That the proceedings in Committee and on Report of the Licensing Bill shall be brought to a conclusion in the manner hereinafter mentioned on six allotted days.

(a) The proceedings in Committee on Clause 1 on the first allotted day.

(b) The proceedings in Committee on Clauses 2 and 3 on the second allotted day.

(c) The proceedings in Committee on Clause 4 on the third allotted day.

(d) The proceedings in Committee on the remaining clauses of the Bill, and on any new Government clauses, and on schedules and any new Government schedules, and any other proceedings necessary to bring the Committee stage to a conclusion on the fourth allotted day.

(e) The proceedings on Report on any new clauses and on Amendments
726
to Clauses 1, 2, and 3, of that Bill, be brought to a conclusion on the fifth allotted day; and

(f) The proceedings on Report be concluded on the sixth allotted day.

After this Order comes into operation, any day shall be considered an allotted day for the purposes of this Order on which the Licensing Bill is put down as the first Order of the Day.
At 11 p.m. on the said allotted days, or if the day is a Friday at 4.30 p.m., the Chairman or Speaker shall put forthwith the Question or Questions on any Amendment or Motion already proposed from the Chair, and shall next proceed successively to put forthwith the Question on any Amendments moved by the Government of which notice has been given (but no other Amendments) and on every Question necessary to dispose of the allotted business to be concluded on the allotted day.
In the case of Government Amendments, or of Government new clauses or schedules, he shall put only the Question that the Amendment be made, or that the clause or schedule be added to the the Bill, as the case may be.
At 12 midnight on the day on which the Third Reading of the Bill is put down as first Order, or if that day is a Friday, at 5.30 p.m., the Speaker shall put forthwith any Question necessary to conclude the proceedings on that stage of the Bill.
Proceedings to which this Order relates shall not be interrupted (except at an Afternoon Sitting at 7.30. p.m.) under the provisions of any Standing Order relating to Sittings of the House.
After the passing of this Order, on any day on which any proceedings on the Licensing Bill stand as the first Order of the Day, no dilatory Motion on the Bill, nor under Standing Order No. 10, nor Motion to postpone a clause, shall be received unless moved by the Minister in charge of the Bill, and the Question on any such Motion shall be put forthwith. Nor shall any opposed Private Business be set down at the Evening Sitting for consideration on any of the allotted days or on the day on which the Third Reading of the Bill is put down as first Order.
If Progress be reported, the Chairman shall put this Order in force in any subsequent sitting of the Committee.

EVENING SITTING.

  LICENSING BILL.
  Considered in Committee.
  (In the Committee.)
  [Mr. J. W. LOWTHERin the Chair.]
  Clause 1:—
  MR. HELMEsaid the word he asked the Committee to insert after the word unsuitable would make it perfectly clear in the future that the magistrates could exercise their discretion in the matter of the renewal of licences quite apart from the structure
  728
  itself. Under the unusual circumstances in which the Committee at present found itself by the closure Motion just adopted he gathered that it was not the wish of the Government that he should occupy the time of the Committee by giving his reasons for moving this Amendment and he therefore asked the Committee to accept it on the ground that its meaning was manifest, and its object was good and it was of the very greatest practical importance. If the Government would not have discussion he would throw on them the responsibility of recording their votes to destroy the effective control of the justices if that was their desire. He begged to move.
  Amendment proposed—
  "In page 1, line 7, after the word 'unsuitable,' to insert the word 'otherwise."—(Mr. Helme.)
  Question proposed, "That the word 'otherwise' be there inserted."
  MR. H. C. RICHARDS (Finsbury, E.),who was continually interrupted by cries? of "Divide," said the Committee was being treated with scant courtesy by his hon. friend who, speaking as a magistrate, had moved this Amendment without giving the House his reasons for so doing. He, as a lawyer, wanted to know what it was the hon. Member was asking the Committee to do. He thought the Committee had already settled this principle. There had been three days discussion upon it, and he thought it was quite clear that, while they had no intention of giving unsuitable tenants and tenants of unsuitable premises a fresh lease of life, there was no intention to inflict on the present licence-holders a new disqualification. If this Amendment was carried it would be extremely difficult for the various benches of magistrates to know what the alteration in the law was if the words "otherwise unsuitable" were put into the Bill. A bench of magistrates for any reason or lack of reason, for personal pique because they did not like the man, would be able to dispossess him without compensation. How unfair that would be after what had been said with regard to the ante-1869 licences that, although the houses were inmost cases unsuitable, the holders of those licences should have

  729
  compensation. If this Amendment were carried there was a chance of their losing their licences without compensation. The question had been raised as to the house being unsuitable because it was next to a chapel, church or school, but if that house was carrying on its business in accordance with the existing law it could not be said it was unsuitable because of its position in a neigh-bourhood which in all probability had grown up around it. Another thing they had to consider was that premises which might have been suitable fifty or sixty years ago might not in the altered circumstances of to-day be regarded as suitable, and it would be a monstrous thing if the old licences were taken away without any reason and without any compensation. He appealed to the Government not to accept the Amendment.
  SIR ROBERT REIDin supporting the Amendment, said they were fighting this Bill, with a very strong feeling against it, under very exceptional conditions. All this Amendment meant was that the local justices were to keep in their own hands the discretion of renewals or non-renewals on the ground of structural deficiencies or of premises unsuitable otherwise, as the Bill stood the word "unsuitable" was governed by the word "structural." This should not be so, it ought to be unsuitability of any legal kind. Was it fair to attenuate the small space of time at their disposal either by the absence of Gentlemen who might be present or by speaking against time for the purpose of preventing other Amendments from being considered? He appealed to every right-minded man not to act in that way.
  THE SOLICITOR-GENERAL (Sir EDWARD CARSON,)did not think there was any occasion for the outburst of his hon. and learned friend. There had been only one speech from the Unionist side of the House, and he did not suppose his hon. and learned friend would go so far as to say that not a word was to be said from that side of the House. He did not know how he was to treat this as a serious Amendment when the hon Member who introduced it said he did not think it necessary to give any reasons in
  730
  support of it. He could not accept the Amendment because by so doing he would take away the whole foundation of the argument with which he successfully resisted the Amendment to leave out the word "unsuitable," which the hon. and learned Member for Shrewsbury moved on a previous occasion. To put in this word "otherwise" would be to leave it open to the magistrates, through no default whatever on the part of the licence-holder, to confiscate the licence and the compensation for which he had subscribed. Suppose that a church or school were built near an old-established licensed house, and the magistrates came to the conclusion that, owing to such proximity, that was no longer a suitable place for the licensed house, what default was there on the part of the licence-holder? The truth was this Amendment, small as it might seem, would strike at the foundation of the Bill; for the whole principle upon which the Bill had been framed was that of allowing people to insure their premises if those premises were to be taken for the public benefit. It had been assumed that because a man got compensation, therefore he would be anxious to have his licence taken away. No such thing would follow at all. In many cases the compensation might not be anything like as much as was made out of the premises; and there was also an additional hold over a man who had a licence of this kind, for if he did not keep the premises in a condition of which the magistrates approved he might be put into one of the categories under the Bill which would deprive him of compensation altogether. Surely a man who knew that in order to get compensa-everything depended on the way in which he conducted the premises was far more likely to strive to carry out the wishes of the magistrates than a man who practically lost nothing when his premises were taken away. Under the circumstances they could not possibly accept the Amendment.
  MR. H. D. GREENEsaid he was glad to hear that the Government did not intend to accept this Amendment. At the same time he thought there was abundant justification for the Amendment being moved. There was an ambiguity in the language of the

  731
  Bill in respect to this matter which the Government ought to clear up. This Clause was framed to provide a very pretty law suit for the benefit, no doubt, of a very deserving class. It would be far better for the Solicitor-General to deal with the matter now. As to whether the word "structural" governed the word "unsuitable" the Solicitor-General interpreted the clause one way and another hon. Member on his side of
  the House interpreted it another. The same diversity of opinion existed on the other side. As it stood the question must be raised either on a case stated for the High Court or at quarter sessions. He held that the word structurally ought to be inserted.
  Question put.
  The Committee divided:—Ayes, 125; Noes, 177. (Division List No. 194.)

  AYES.

  Ainsworth, John Stirling

  Henderson, Arthur (Durham)

  O'Dowd, John

  Atherley-Jones, L.

  Higham, John Sharpe

  O'Shaughnessy, P. J.

  Barran, Rowland Hirst

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

  Parrott, William

  Bayley, Thomas (Derbyshire)

  Hope, John Deans (Fife, West)

  Perks, Robert William

  Black, Alexander William

  Horniman, Frederick John

  Power, Patrick Joseph

  Bolton, Thomas Boiling

  Jacoby, James Alfred

  Rea, Russell

  Brigg, John

  Johnson, John (Gateshead)

  Reid,Sir R.Threshie(Dumfries)

  Broadhurst, Henry

  Jones, Davies Brynmor(Swansea

  Rigg, Richard

  Burke, E. Havilend-

  Jordan, Jeremiah

  Roberts, John H. (Denbighs.)

  Burt, Thomas

  Joyce, Michael

  Roche, John

  Caldwell, James

  Kennedy, Vincent P.(Cavan,W.

  Russell, T. W.

  Cameron, Robert

  Kilbride, Denis

  Shackleton, David James

  Campbell, John (Armagh, S.)

  Langley, Batty

  Shaw, Charles Edw. (Stafford)

  Channing, Francis Allston

  Lawson, Sir Wilfrid (Cornwall)

  Shaw, Thomas (Hawick, B.)

  Condon, Thomas Joseph

  Layland-Barratt, Francis

  Sheehan, Daniel Daniel

  Corbett, A. Cameron (Glasgow)

  Leigh, Sir Joseph

  Sheehy, David

  Cremer, William Randal

  Levy, Maurice

  Shipman, Dr. John G.

  Crooks, William

  Lewis, John Herbert

  Slack, John Bamford

  Cullinan, J.

  Lloyd-George, David

  Sloan, Thomas Henry

  Dalziel, James Henry

  Lundon, W.

  Smith, Samuel (Flint)

  Davies, Alfred (Carmarthen)

  MacNeill, John Gordon Swift

  Stanhope, Hon. Philip James

  Davies, M. Vaughan-(Cardigan)

  MacVeagh, Jeremiah

  Strachey, Sir Edward

  Delany, William

  M'Arthur, William (Cornwall)

  Sullivan, Donal

  Devlin, Joseph (Kilkenny, N.)

  M'Crae, George

  Taylor, Theodore C. (Radcliffe)

  Dilke, Rt. Hon. Sir Charles

  M'Fadden, Edward

  Thomas, Abel (Carmarthen, E.)

  Donelan, Captain A.

  M'Hugh, Patrick A.

  Thomas, Sir A. (Glamorgan, E.)

  Doogan, P. C.

  M'Kean, John

  Thomas,David Alfred(Merthyr)

  Douglas, Charles M. (Lanark)

  M'Kenna, Reginald

  Thomas, JA (Glamorgan, Gower

  Edwards, Frank

  M'Killop, W. (Sligo, North)

  Tomkinson, James

  Evans, Samuel T. (Glamorgan)

  Mansfield, Horace Rendall

  Toulmin, George

  Eve, Harry Trelawney

  Markham, Arthur Basil

  Wallace, Robert

  Farquharson, Dr. Robert

  Mitchell,Edw.(Fermanagh, N.)

  Walton, Joseph (Barnsley)

  Fenwick, Charles

  Morgan, J. Lloyd (Carmarthen)

  Wason, John Cathcart(Orkney)

  Ferguson, R. C. Munro (Leith)

  Moss, Samuel

  White, George (Norfolk)

  Fitzmaurice, Lord Edmond

  Moulton, John Fletcher

  Whiteley, George (York, W.R.)

  Flavin, Michael Joseph

  Murphy, John

  Whitley, J. H. (Halifax)

  Foster, Sir Walter (Derby Co.)

  Newnes, Sir George

  Williams, Osmond (Merioneth)

  Fuller, J. M. F.

  O'Brien,Kondal(Tipperary Mid

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

  Gladstone,Rt.Hn.HerbertTohn

  O'Brien, Patrick (Kilkenny)

  Yoxall, James Henry

  Goddard, Daniel Fora

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

  Grant, Corrie

  O'Connor, James (Wicklow,W.)

  TELLERS FOR THE AYES—Mr.

  Griffith, Ellis J.

  O'Doherty, William

  Helme and Mr. Trevelyan.

  Guest, Hon. lvor Churchill

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

  NOES.

  Agnew, Sir Andrew Noel

  Bain, Colonel James Robert

  Bignold, Arthur

  Allhusen, Augustus HenryEden

  Balcarres, Lord

  Bigweod, James

  Anson, Sir William Reynell

  Baldwin, Alfred

  Bill, Charles

  Arnold-Forater.Rt.Hn.HughO.

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

  Blundell, Colonel Henry

  Arrol, Sir William

  Balfour, Capt. C. B. (Hornsey)

  Bond, Edward

  Atkinson, Rt. Hon. John

  Balfour,RtHn.GeraldW.(Leeds

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

  Aubrey-Fletcher, Rt.Hn. Sir H.

  Banbury, Sir Frederick George

  Brassey, Albert

  Austin, Sir John

  Beach,RtHn.SirMichael Hicks

  Brodriek, Rt. Hon. St. John

  Bailey, James (Walworth)

  Bhownaggree, Sir M. M.

  Brotherton, Edward Allen

  Bull, William James

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

  Reid, Tames (Greenock)

  Carson, Rt. Hon. Sir Edw. H.

  Hogg, Lindsay

  Remnant, James Farquharson

  Cavendish, V.C.W. (Derbyshire

  Hope, J.F.(Sheffield,Brightside

  Renwick, George

  Cecil, Evelyn (Aston Manor)

  Houston, Robert Paterson

  Richards, Henry Charles

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

  Hozier, Hon. James Henry Cecil

  Ridley, S.Forde (Bethnal Green

  Chapman, Edward

  Hudson, George Bickersteth

  Roberts, Samuel (Sheffield)

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

  Hunt, Rowland

  Robertson, Herbert (Hackney)

  Colston, Chas. Edw. H. Athole

  Jebb, Sir Richard Claver house

  Ropner, Colonel Sir Robert

  Cook, Sir Frederick Lucas

  Teffreys, Rt. Hon. Arthur Fred.

  Rutherford, John (Lancashire)

  Cox, Irwin Edward Bainbridge

  Kenyon-Slaney, Col. W. (Salop)

  Rutherford, W. W. (Liverpool)

  Crean, Eugene

  Kerr, John

  Sackville, Col. S. G. Stopford-

  Cross, Herb. Shepherd (Bolton)

  Kimber, Henry

  Sadler, Col. Samuel Alexander

  Crossley, Rt. Hon. Sir Savile

  Law, Andrew Bonar (Glasgow)

  Sharpe, William Edward T.

  Dalkeith, Earl of

  Lawrence, Wm. F. (Liverpool)

  Simeon, Sir Barrington

  Davenport, W. Bromley-

  Lawson, JohnGrant( Yorks.N.R

  Sinclair, Louis (Romford)

  Davies,Sir HoratioD.(Chatham

  Lee,Arthur H.(Hants.Fareham

  Skewes-Cox, Thomas

  Denny, Colonel

  Legge, Col. Hon. Heneage

  Smith, Abel H. (Hertford, E.)

  Dickson, Charles Scott

  Llewellyn, Evan Henry

  Spear, John Ward

  Digby, John K. D. Wingfield-

  Lockwood, Lieut.-Col. A. R.

  Spencer, Sir E. (W. Bromwich)

  Dimsdale,Rt.Hon.Sir JosehhC.

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

  Stanley, Edw. Jas. (Somerset)

  Disraeli, Coningsby Ralph

  Lowe, Francis William

  Stanley, Rt.Hon. Lord (Lanes.)

  Doughty, George

  Loyd, Archie Kirkman

  Stock, James Henry

  Douglas, Rt. Hon. A. Akers

  Lyttelton, Rt. Hon. Alfred

  Strutt, Hon. Charles Hedley

  Doxford, Sir William Theodore

  Macdona, John Cumming

  Taylor, Austin (East Toxteth)

  Duke, Henry Edward

  Maconochie, A. W.

  Thorburn, Sir Walter

  Durning-Lawrence, Sir Edwin

  M'Iver,SirLewis(Edinburgh,W.

  Tollemache, Henry James

  Dyke, Rt.Hon.Sir William Hart

  Majendie, James A. H.

  Tomlinson, Sir Wm. Edw. M.

  Eardell, Sir T. George

  Massey-Mainwaring, Hn. W. F.

  Tritton, Charles Ernest

  Finch, Rt. Hon. George H.

  Maxwell,W.J.H.(Dumfriesshire

  Tuff, Charles

  Finlay, Sir Robert Bannatyne

  Milvain, Thomas

  Valentia, Viscount

  Fitzroy, Hon. Edward Algernon

  Moore, William

  Walker, Col. William Hall

  Flannery, Sir Fortescue

  Morgan, David J.(Walthamstow

  Warde, Colonel C. E.

  Forster, Henry William

  Morpeth, Viscount

  Webb, Colonel William George

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

  Morrison, James Archibald

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

  Galloway, William Johnson

  Morton, Arthur H. Aylmer

  Welby, Sir Charles G.E. (Notts.

  Gardner, Ernest

  Mount, William Arthur

  Wentworth, Bruce C. Vernon-

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

  Mowbray, Sir Robert Giay C.

  Wharton, Rt. Hon. John Lloyd

  Goulding, Edwara Alfred

  Murray,Rt.Hn. A.Graham(Bute

  Whiteley, H.(Ashton und.Lyne

  Gray, Ernest (West Ham)

  Murray, Charles J. (Coventry)

  Willoughby de Eresby, Lord

  Greene, Henry D. (Shrewsbury)

  Nolan, Joseph (Louth, South)

  Wilson, John (Glasgow)

  Gretton, John

  Peel, Hn.Wm.Robert Wellesley

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

  Groves, James Grimble

  Percy, Earl

  Worsley-Taylor, Henry Wilson

  Hamilton,Marq. of (L'donderry

  Pier point, Robert

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

  Hardy,Laurence(Kent, Ashford

  Pilkington, Colonel Richard

  Wrightson, Sir Thomas

  Hare, Thomas Leigh

  Platt-Higgins, Frederick

  Wyndham, Rt. Hon. George

  Harris, F. Leverton(Tynem'th)

  Plummer, Walter R.

  Wyndham-Quin, Col. W. H.

  Harris, Dr. Fredk. R (Dulwich)

  Powell, Sir Francis Sharp

  Heath, Arthur Howard (Hanley

  Pretyman, Ernest George

  TELLERS FOR THE NOES—Sir

  Helder, Augustus

  Pym, C. Guy

  Alexander Acland-Hood

  Henderson, Sir A. (Stafford, W.)

  Rankin, Sir James

  and Mr. Ailwyn Fellowes.

  Hermon-Hodge, Sir Robert T.

  Rasch, Sir Frederic Carne

  Hickman, Sir Alfred

  Ratcliff, R. F.

  MR. J. H. LEWISmoved an Amendment with the object of preserving the administrative discretion of the magistrates in order that they might continue to bring pressure to bear to prevent frequent changes of tenancy. The constant transfer of licences, particularly in the case of tied houses, constituted, he said, one of the scandals of the licensing system. It had been calculated that no fewer than 20,000 transfers were effected per annum. In Hertfordshire 423 houses changed hands more than three times during five years; in Hull there were nearly 400 transfers a
  734
  year; in Lincoln the average tenancy of tied houses was two and a half years; in Leeds out of 379 tied houses there were 165 transfers in one year, and in Birmingham out of 2,300 licences there were 800 transfers per annum. In a large number of these cases tenant after tenant was ruined owing to the exorbitant terms imposed by the brewers, and it was desirable that the magistrates should be able to bring pressure to prevent these constant changes from taking place. He submitted that in these cases the words "ill-conducted" did not cover the ground.
  Amendment proposed—
  "In page 1, line 7, after the word "unsuitable," to insert the words "or have been subject to frequent changes of tenancy.'"— (Mr. J. H. Lewis.)
  Question proposed, "That those words be there inserted."
  THE SECRETARY OF STATE FOR THE HOME DEPARTMENT (Mr. AKERS-DOUGLASpointed out that if changes of tenancy were due to ill - conduct the magistrates already had power to take away the licence without compensation. But if
  the changes were due to mortality, illness, or any other circumstances, then, if the licence was taken away, compensation ought to follow. There might be evils connected with constant changes of tenancy, but, on the other hand, anything that tended to prevent a brewer from sending away a bad tenant ought not to be encouraged. The Government could not accept the Amendment.
  Question put.
  The Committee divided:—Ayes, 123; Noes, 194. (Division List No. 195.)

  AYES.

  Ainsworth, John Stirling

  Grant, Corrie

  Parrott, William

  Atherley-Jones, L.

  Griffith, Ellis J.

  Perks, Robert William

  Barran, Rowland Hirst

  Guest, Hon. Ivor Churchill

  Power, Patrick Joseph

  Bayley, Thomas (Derbyshire)

  Gurdon, Sir W. Brampton

  Reid, Sir R.Threshie(Dumfries)

  Black, Alexander William

  Helme, Norval Watson

  Rigg, Richard

  Bolton, Thomas Dolling

  Henderson, Arthur (Durham)

  Roberts, John H. (Denbighs.)

  Brigg, John

  Higham, John Sharpe

  Roche, John

  Broadhurst, Henry

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

  Russell, T. W.

  Brown, George M.(Edinburgh)

  Hope, John Deans (Fife,, West)

  Shackleton, David James

  Burke, E. Haviland-

  Horniman, Frederick John

  Shaw, Charles Edw. (Stafford)

  Burt, Thomas

  Jacoby, James Alfred

  Shaw, Thomas (Hawick B.)

  Caldwell, James

  Johnson, John (Gateshead)

  Sheehy, David

  Cameron, Robert

  Jones,David Brynmor(Swansea

  Shipman, Dr. John G.

  Campbell, John (Armagh, S.)

  Jordan, Jeremiah

  Slack, John Bamford

  Campbell-Bannerman, Sir H.

  Joyce, Michael

  Sloan, Thomas Henry

  Channing, Francis Allston

  Kennedy, Vincent P.(Cavan,W.

  Smith, Samuel (Flint)

  Condon, Thomas Joseph

  Kilbride, Denis

  Stanhope, Hon. Philip James

  Corbett, A. Cameron (Glasgow)

  Langley, Batty

  Strachey, Sir Edward

  Cremer, William Randall

  Lawson, Sir Wilfrid (Cornwall)

  Sullivan, Donal

  Crooks, William

  Layland-Barratt, Francis

  Taylor, Theodore C. (Radcliffe)

  Cullinan, J.

  Leigh, Sir Joseph

  Thomas, Abel (Carmarthen, E.

  Dalziel, James Henry

  Leng, Sir John

  Thomas, Sir A. (Glamorgan, E.

  Davies, Alfreg (Carmarthen)

  Levy, Maurice

  Thomas.David Alfred(Merthyr)

  Davies, M. Vaughan (Cardigan

  Lloyd-George, David

  Thomas, JA (Glamorgan, Gower

  Delany, William

  Lundon, W.

  Tomkinson, James

  Dilke, Rt. Hon. Sir Charles

  MacVeagh, Jeremiah

  Toulmin, George

  Dobbie, Joseph

  M'Arthur, William (Cornwall)

  Trevelyan, Charles Philips

  Donelan, Captain A.

  M'Crae, George

  Walton, Joseph (Barnsley)

  Doogan, P. C.

  M'Kenna, Reginald

  Wason, JohnCathcart (Orkney)

  Douglas, Charles M. (Lanark)

  Mansfield, Horace Rendall

  White, George (Norfolk)

  Duncan, J. Hastings

  Markham, Arthur Basil

  Whiteley, George (York, W.R.)

  Edwards, Frank

  Mitchell, Edw.(Fermanagh, N.)

  Whitley, J. H. (Halifax)

  Evans, Samuel T. (Glamorgan)

  Morgan, J. Lloyd (Carmarthen)

  Williams, Osmond (Merioneth)

  Eve, Harry Trelawney

  Moss, Samuel

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

  Farquharson, Dr. Robert

  Moulton, John Fletcher

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

  Fenwick, Charles

  Murphy, John

  Wilson, John (Falkirk)

  Ferguson, R. C. Munro (Leith)

  Newnes, Sir George

  Yoxall, James Henry

  Fitzmaurice, Lora. Edmona

  0'Brien,Kendal(Tipperary Mid

  Flavin, Michael Joseph

  0'Connor,James(Wicklow W.)

  TELLERS FOB THE AYES—Mr.

  Foster, Sir Walter (Derby Co.)

  O'Doherty, William

  Herbert Lewis and Mr.

  Fuller, J. M. F.

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

  Robert Wallace.

  Gladstone,Rt.Hn. Herbert John

  O'Dowd, John

  Goddard, Daniel Ford

  O'Shaughnessy, P. J.

  NOES.

  Agnew, Sir Andrew Noel

  Arrol, Sir William

  Bagot, Capt.Josoeline FitzRoy

  Allhusen, Augustus HenryEden

  Atkinson, Rt. Hon. John

  Bailey, James (Walworth)

  Anson, Sir William Reynell

  Aubrey-Fletcher,Rt.Hn.SirH.

  Bain, Colonel James Robert

  Arnold-Forster, Rt.Hn.Hugh O.

  J Austin, Sir John

  Balcarres, Lord

  Baldwin, Alfred

  Hardy,Laurence(Kent, Ashford

  Pierpoint, Robert

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

  Hare, Thomas Leigh

  Pilkington, Colonel Richard

  Balfour, Capt. C. B. (Hornsey)

  Harris, F. Leverton (Tynem'th)

  Platt-Higgins, Frederick

  Balfour,Rt.Hn.GeralaW(Leeds

  Harris, Dr.Fredk. R. (Dulwich)

  Plummer, Walter R.

  Banbury, Sir Frederick George

  Heath,ArthurHoward (Hanley)

  Powell, Sir Francis Sharp

  Beach, Rt. Hn. Sir Michael Hicks

  Heaton, John Henniker

  Pretyman, Ernest George

  Bhownaggree, Sir M. M.

  Helder, Augustus

  Pym, C. Guy

  Bignold, Arthur

  Henderson.'Sir A. (Stafford,W.)

  Rankin, Sir James

  Bigwood, James

  Hermon-Hodge, Sir Robert T.

  Rasch, Sir Frederic Carne

  Bill, Charles

  Hickman, Sir Alfred

  Ratcliff, R. F.

  Blundell, Colonel Henry

  Hobhouse,RtHn.H.(Somers't,E

  Reid, James (Greenock)

  Bond, Edward

  Hogg, Lindsay

  Remnant, James Farquharson

  Boscawen, Arthur Griffith-

  Hope,J.F.(Sheffield,Brightside)

  Renwick, George

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

  Houston, Robert Paterson

  Richards, Henry Charles

  Brassey, Albert

  Howard, J. (Kent, Faversham)

  Ridley,S.Forde (Bethnal Green)

  Brodrick, Rt. Hon. St. John

  Hozier, Hn. James Henry Cecil

  Roberts, Samuel (Sheffield)

  Brotherton, Edward Allen

  Hudson, George Bickersteth

  Robertson, Herbert (Hackney)

  Bull, William James

  Hunt, Rowland

  Ropner, Colonel Sir Robert

  Carson, Rt. Hon. Sir Edw. H

  Jebb, Sir Richard Claverhouse

  Rutherford, John (Lancashire)

  Cautley, Henry Strother

  Jeffreys, Rt. Hn. Arthur Fred.

  Rutherford, W. W. (Liverpool)

  Cavendish,V.C.W. (Derbyshire

  Kenyon,Hn. Geo. T. (Denbigh)

  Sackville, Col. S. G. Stopford-

  Cecil, Evelyn (Aston Manor)

  Kenyon-Slaney,Col.W.(Salop.

  Sadler, Col. Samuel Alexander

  Ghamberlain,RtHn.J.A. Wore.

  Kerr, John

  Scott, Sir S. (Marylebone, W.)

  Chapman, Edward

  Kimber, Henry

  Sharpe, William Edward T.

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

  Law,Andrew Bonar (Glasgow)

  Sheehan, Daniel Daniel

  Colston, Chas. Edw. H. Athole

  Lawrence, Win. F. (Liverpool)

  Simeon, Sir Barrington

  Cook, Sir Frederick Lucas

  Lawson,J. Grant (Yorks.N.R.)

  Sinclair, Louis (Romford)

  Cox, Irwin Edward Bainbridge

  Lee,ArthurH.(Hants.Fareham)

  Skewes-Cox, Thomas

  Crean, Eugene

  Legge, Col. Hon. Heneage

  Smith,Abel H.(Hertford, E.)

  Cross,Herb. Shepherd (Bolton)

  Llewellyn, Evan Henry

  Spear, John Ward

  Crossley, Rt. Hon. Sir Savile

  Lockwood, Lieut.-Col. A. R.

  Spencer, Sir E. (W. Bromwich)

  Dalkeith, Earl of

  Loder, Gerald Walter Erskine

  Stanley,EdwardJas.(Somerset)

  Dalrymple, Sir Charles

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

  Stanley,Rt. Hon. Lord (Lanes.)

  Davenport, W. Bromley-

  Lowe, Francis William

  Stock, James Henry

  Davies,Sir HoratioD.(Chatham

  Loyd, Archie Kirkman

  Strutt, Hon. Charles Hedley

  Dickson, Charles Scott

  Lyttelton, Rt. Hon. Alfred

  Taylor, Austin (East Toxteth)

  Digby, John K. D. Wingfield-

  Macdona, John Gumming

  Thorburn, Sir Walter

  Dimsdale,Rt.Hon.Sir JosephC.

  Maconochie, A. W.

  Tollemache, Henry James

  Disraeli, Coningsby Ralph

  M'Fadden, Edward

  Tomlinson, Sir Wm. Edw. M.

  Doughty, George

  M'Iver,SirLewis( Edinburgh,W.

  Tritton, Charles Ernest

  Douglas, Rt. Hon. A. Akeis

  Majendie, James A. H.

  Tuff, Charles

  Doxford, Sir William Theodore

  Massey-Mainwairing, Hn.W.F.

  Valentia, Viscount

  Duke, Henry Edward

  Maxwell,W.J.H.( Dumfriesshire

  Walker, Col. William Hall

  Durning-Lawrenee, Sir Edwin

  Middlemore,John Throgmorton

  Warde, Colonel C. E.

  Dyke,Rt,Hon.Sir WilliamHart

  Milvain, Thomas

  Webb, Colonel William George

  Fardell, Sir T. George

  Moore, William

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

  Finch, Rt. Hon. George H.

  Morgan, David J.(Walthamstow

  Welby, Sir Charles G.E. (Notts)

  Finlay, Sir Robert Bannatyne

  Morpeth, Viscount

  Wentworth, Bruce C. Vernon-

  Fitzroy, Hn. Edward Algernon

  Morrison, James Archibald

  Wharton, Rt. Hon. John Lloyd

  Flannery, Sir Fortescue

  Morton, Arthur H. Aylmer

  Whiteley,H.(Ashton und.Lyne)

  Forster, Henry William

  Mount, William Arthur

  Willoughby de Eresby, Lord

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

  Mowbray, Sir Robert Gray C.

  Wilson, John (Glasgow)

  Galloway, William Johnson

  Muntz, Sir Philip A.

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

  ?Gardner, Ernest

  Murray, Rt.Hn.A.Graham(Bute

  Worsley-Taylor, Henry Wilson

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

  Murray, Charles J. (Coventry)

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

  Gore,Hn.S.E.Ormsby-(Linc.)

  Myers, William Henry

  Wrightson, Sir Thomas

  Goulding, Edward Alfred

  Nolan, Joseph (Louth, South)

  Wyndham, Rt. Hon. George

  Gray, Ernest (West Ham)

  O'Brien, Patrick (Kilkenny)

  Wyndham-Quin, Col. W. H.

  Greene, Henry D. (Shrewsbury)

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

  Gretton, John

  Palmer, Walter (Salisbury)

  TELLERS FOB THE NOES—Sir

  Groves, James Grimble

  Peel,Hn.Wm.Robert Wellesley

  Alexander Acland-Hood and

  Hamilton,Marq.of (L'donderry

  Percy, Earl

  Mr. Ailwyn Fellowes.

  MR. HERBERT ROBERTS (Denbighshire, W.)moved a drafting Amendment to make it perfectly clear that one ground with regard to unfitness would be sufficient to enable the magistrates or local justices to exercise their full discretion.
  Amendment proposed—
  "In page 1, line 7, after the third word 'or' to insert the words 'on any ground or.'"—(Mr. Herbert Roberts.)
  Question proposed, "That those words be there inserted."
  MR.AKERS DOUGLASsaid there was no necessity for the Amendment, because according to Section 1 of the Interpretation Act, 1889, the singular included the plural, and the plural the singular.
  Amendment, by leave, withdrawn.
  MR. HERBERT ROBERTSmoved an Amendment to the first sub-section giving power to the justices of the licensing district, in considering the question of the renewal of any licence, to take into account not only the character or fitness of the incoming tenant, or proposed holder of the licence, but the character or fitness of the outgoing tenant. The discretion of the justices in such a case was, as the Bill stood, limited to the point whether or not the premises had been "ill-conducted." He thought his point might best be put by stating an imaginary concrete case. Supposing the outgoing tenant was either a poacher himself in a country district or was known to have received poachers upon his licensed premises. It might be held in considering the renewal of the licence in such a case that the local justices had no right to consider the question of the fitness of the character of the outgoing licensee. As the section was drawn at present it was doubtful whether the local justices could exercise a full discretion in reference to that case. With regard to the Amendment referring to reasonable refreshment, he acknowledged that the section withdrew a certain power of pressure under this Bill. It was in order to safeguard the full discretion of the local justices that he moved this Amendment. The hon. Member opposite had said that there was so much vagueness in this Bill that it was impossible to tell what it meant, and that state of things made it all the more necessary with regard to the renewal of licences that every care should be taken to make it perfectly clear that the justices had precisely the same powers of discretion as they had now. The Solicitor-General said there had been many fallacies as to the effect of this clause upon the discretion of the local justices. He did not suppose that anybody would contend that this section would give to the justices any discre-
  740
  tionary power with regard to the conduct and character of the outgoing tenants. It was of the utmost importance that it should be made plain that the local justices retained their full powers of discretion, and he begged to move his Amendment.
  Amendment proposed—
  "In page 1, line 8, after the word 'character,' to insert the words 'or conduct of the actual holder of the licence.'"—(Mr. Herbert Roberts.)
  Question proposed, "That those words be there inserted."
  MR. AKERS-DOUGLASsaid the hon. Member was dealing with the case of the outgoing tenant, but what they were more deeply interested in was the incoming tenant, because, so far as the outgoing tenant was concerned, his case could be dealt with under the words in the Bill as to the ill - conduct of the premises. If this Amendment were accepted he was afraid it would put it into the power of a tenant wilfully to misbehave himself in order that those interested in the licensed premises should not be able to obtain compensation. The conduct of the outgoing tenant was so far as necessary dealt with by the earlier words of the clause, and they could not accept the Amendment.
  MR. BROADHURSTsaid the objection of the Home Secretary was an imaginary one, and was, to say the least of it, far-fetched. This Amendment dealt with the class of tenants engaged at very short notice to quit, and they would have very little opportunity of entering into a conspiracy to damage the property of the brewers by doing something to injure the house in order to prevent full compensation being given. His experience was, that if they had a bad tenant with a bad record he was generally succeeded by a person with a similar character, because the house got a bad name, and no man with money to lose could be found to become the tenant of a house with a reputation of this kind. His hon. friend's Amendment dealt with a very important point, and one which was well worthy of the consideration of the Committee, and well worth inserting in the Bill. He remembered one case in which a tenant came before the court

  741
  with a pile of recommendations, nearly all from clergymen in the Church of England, and they appalled the court, and they had to accept the applicant. The man had been recently accused of horse-stealing, and he suspected something of the kind when he saw such a long list of recommendations from members of the Church of England. [MINISTERIAL cries of "Oh."] He was saying this without prejudice. The ministers in his Church and Free Churches generally did not write characters for men going as tenants into public-houses. In this particular case the result was that for three or four succeeding tenancies no one conducted that house upon satisfactory principles. One
  man who attempted to carry on the business in a highly respectable manner became bankrupt, and was kicked out by the brewers after a very few days notice. He thought this Amendment was one which would commend itself to all hon. Members who had had any lengthy experience at brewster sessions, examining into the character of the men who came into those houses, and who often went out of them hastily. It was an Amendment of considerable importance, and could not be disposed of by the reasons given by the Home Secretary.
  Question put.
  The Committee divided:—Ayes, 132; Noes, 226. (Division List No. 196.)

  AYES.

  Ainsworth, John Stirling

  Hemphill, Rt. Hon. Charles H.

  Reddy, M.

  Allen, Charles P.

  Henderson, Arthur (Durham)

  Reid, Sir R. Threshie(Dumfries

  Asquith, Rt.Hn.Herbert Henry

  Higham, John Sharpe

  Rickett, T. Compton

  Atherley-Jones, L.

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

  Rigg, Richard

  Barran, Rowland Hirst

  Hope, John Deans (Fife, West)

  Roberts, John Bryn (Eifion)

  Bayley, Thomas (Derbyshire)

  Horniman, Frederick John

  Roche, John

  Black, Alexander William

  Jacoby, James Alfred

  Russell, T. W.

  Bolton, Thomas Dolling

  Johnson, John (Gateshead)

  Shackleton, David James

  Brigg, John

  Joicey, Sir James

  Shaw, Charles Edw. (Stafford)

  Brown, George M. (Edinburgh)

  Jones, D. Brynmor (Swansea)

  Shaw, Thomas (Hawick B.)

  Burke, E. Haviland

  Jordan, Jeremiah

  Sheehy, David

  Burt, Thomas

  Joyce, Michael

  Shipman, Dr. John G.

  Caldwell, James

  Kennedy,Vincent P.(Cavan,W.

  Slack, John Bamford

  Cameron, Robert

  Kilbride, Denis

  Smith, Samuel (Flint)

  Campbell, John (Armagh, S.)

  Langley, Batty

  Stanhope, Hon. Philip James

  Campbell-Bannerman, Sir H.

  Law, Hugh Alex. (Donegal,W.)

  Strachey, Sir Edward

  Channing, Francis Allston

  Lawson, Sir Wilfrid (Cornwall)

  Sullivan, Donal

  Corbett, A. Cameron (Glasgow)

  Layland-Barratt, Francis

  Taylor, Theodore C. (Radcliffe)

  Craig, Robert Hunter (Lanark)

  Leigh, Sir Joseph

  Thomas, Abel (Carmarthen, E.)

  Cremer, William Randal

  Leng, Sir John

  Thomas, Sir A.(Glamorgan,E.)

  Crooks, William

  Levy, Maurice

  Thomas, D. Alfred (Merthyr)

  Dalziel, James Henry

  Lewis, John Herbert

  Thomas,J A(Glamorgan,Gower

  Davies, Alfred (Carmarthen)

  Lloyd-George, David

  Tillet, Louis John

  Danes, M. Vaughan (Cardigan)

  Lough, Thomas

  Tomkinson, James

  Delany, William

  Lundon, W.

  Toulmin, George

  Dilke, Rt, Hon. Sir Charles

  MacNeill, John Gordon Swift

  Trevelyan, Charles Philips

  Dobbie, Joseph

  MacVeagh, Jeremiah

  Wallace, Robert

  Donelan, Captain A.

  M'Arthur, William (Cornwall)

  Walton, Jn. Lawson(Leeds, S.)

  Douglas, Charles M. (Lanark)

  M'Crae, George

  Walton, Joseph (Barnsley)

  Duncan, J. Hastings

  M'Kenna, Reginald

  Wason, John Cathcart(Orkney)

  Edwards, Frank

  Mansfield, Horace Rendall

  White, George (Norfolk)

  Ellis, John Edward (Notts.)

  Markham, Arthur Basil

  White, Luke (York, E. R.)

  Evans, Samuel T. (Glamorgan)

  Mitchell, Edw. (Fermanagh,N.)

  Whiteley, George (York, W.R.)

  Eve, Harry Trelawney

  Morgan, J. Lloyd (Carmarthen)

  Whitley, J. H. (Halifax)

  Farquharson, Dr. Robert

  Moss, Samuel

  Williams, Osmond (Merioneth)

  Fenwick, Charles

  Moulton, John Fletcher

  Wilson, Fred. W.(Norfolk,Mid.

  Ferguson, R. C. Munro (Leith)

  Murphy, John

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

  Fitzmaurice, Lord Edmond

  Newnes, Sir George

  Wilson, John (Falkirk)

  Foster, Sir Walter (Derby Co.)

  O'Brien, K. (Tipperary, Mid.)

  Woodhouse, Sir J.T(Huddersf'd

  Gladstone, Rt.Hn.HerbertJohn

  O'Doherty, William

  Yoxall, James Henry

  Goddard, Daniel Ford

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

  Grant, Corrie

  O'Shaughnessy, P. J.

  TELLERS FOR THE AYES—Mr.

  Griffith, Ellis J.

  Parrott, William

  Herbert Roberts and Mr.

  Guest, Hon. Ivor Churchill

  Perks, Robert William

  Broadhurst.

  Gurdon, Sir W. Brampton

  Power, Patrick Joseph

  Helme, Norval Watson

  Rea, Russell

  NOES.

  Agnew, Sir Andrew Noel

  Fison, Frederick William

  Morrell, George Herbert

  Allhusen, Augustus Henry Eden

  Fitzroy, Hn. Edward Algernon

  Morrison, James Archibald

  Anson, Sir William Reynell

  Flannery, Sir Fortescue

  Morton, Arthur H. Aylmer

  Arnold-Forster,Rt.Hn.HughO.

  Flavin, Michael Joseph

  Mount, William Arthur

  Arrol, Sir William

  Forster, Henry William

  Mowbray, Sir Robert Gray C.

  Atkinson, Rt. Hon. John

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

  Muntz, Sir Philip A.

  Aubrey-Fletcher,Rt. Hn. Sir H.

  Galloway, William Johnson

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

  Austin, Sir John

  Gardner, Ernest

  Murray, Charles J. (Coventry)

  Bagot, Capt. Joseeline FitzRoy

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

  Myers, William Henry

  Bailey, James (Walworth)

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

  Newdegate, Francis A. N.

  Bain, Colonel James Robert

  Goulding, Edward Alfred

  Nolan, Joseph (Louth, South)

  Baird, John George Alexander

  Gray, Ernest (West Ham)

  O'Brien, Patrick (Kilkenny)

  Balcarres, Lord

  Greene, Henry D.(Shrewsbury)

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

  Baldwin, Alfred

  Gretton, John

  O'Dowd, John

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

  Greville, Hon. Ronald

  Palmer, Walter (Salisbury)

  Balfour, Capt. C. B. (Hornsey)

  Groves, James Grimble

  Parker, Sir Gilbert

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

  Hall, Edward Marshall

  Peel, Hn.Wm.Robert Wellesley

  Balfour, Kenneth R. (Christeh.

  Hamilton, Marq of(L'nd'nderry

  Pemberton, John S. G.

  Banbury, Sir Frederick George

  Hardy, L. (Kent, Ashford)

  Percy, Earl

  Beach, Rt.Hn.SirMichaelHicks

  Hare, Thomas Leigh

  Pierpoint, Robert

  Bhownaggree, Sir M. M.

  Harris, F. Leverton(Tynem'th)

  Pilkington, Colonel Richard

  Bignold, Arthur

  Harris, Dr. Fredk. R.(Dulwich)

  Platt-Higgins. Frederick

  Bigwood, James

  Heath, Arthur Howard(Hanley

  Plummer, Walter R.

  Bill, Charles

  Heaton, John Henniker

  Powell, Sir Francis Sharp

  Blundell, Colonel Henry

  Henderson, Sir A.(Stafford,W.)

  Pretyman, Ernest George

  Bond, Edward

  Hermon-Hodge, Sir Robert T.

  Pryce-Jones, Lt.-Col. Edward

  Boscawen, Arthur Griffith

  Hickman, Sir Alfred

  Pym, C. Guy

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

  Hobhouse,RtHn H(Somers't,E

  Rankin, Sir James

  Brassey, Albert

  Hogg, Lindsay

  Raseh, Sir Frederic Carne

  Brodrick, Rt. Hon. St. John

  Hope, J.F.(Sheffield,Brightside

  Ratcliff, R. F.

  Brotherton, Edward Allen

  Houston, Robert Paterson

  Reid, James (Greenock)

  Bull, William James

  Howard, Jn.(Kent, Faversham)

  Remnant, James Farquharson

  Butcher, John George

  Hozier, Hn. James Henry Cecil

  Renwick, George

  Carson, Rt. Hon. Sir Edw. H.

  Hudson, George Bickersteth

  Richards, Henry Charles

  Cautley, Henry Strother

  Hunt, Rowland

  Ridley, S.Forde(Bethnal Green

  Cavendish, V.C.W. (Derbyshire

  Jebb, Sir Richard Claverhouse

  Roberts, Samuel (Sheffield)

  Cecil, Evelyn (Aston Manor)

  Jeffreys, Rt. Hon. Arthur Fred

  Robertson, Herbert (Hackney)

  Chamberlain, RtHn.J.A(Worc.

  Kenyon, Hn. Geo. T.(Denbigh)

  Ropner, Colonel Sir Robert

  Chaplin, Rt. Hon. Henry

  Kenyon-Saney, Col. W.(Salop.

  Round, Rt. Hon. James

  Chapman, Edward

  Kerr, John

  Rutherford, John (Lancashire)

  Clive, Captain Percy A.

  Keswick, William

  Rutherford, W. W. (Liverpool)

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

  Kimber, Henry

  Sackville, Col. S. G. Stopford

  Colston, Chas. Edw. H. Athole

  Law, Andrew Bonar (Glasgow)

  Sader, Col. Samuel Alexander

  Condon, Thomas Joseph

  Lawrence, Wm. F. (Liverpool)

  Scott, Sir S. (Marylebone, W.)

  Cook, Sir Frederick Lucas

  Lawson, J.Grant (Yorks., N.R.

  Sharpe, William Edward T.

  Cox, Irwin Edward Bainbridge

  Lee, A. H. (Hants., Fareham)

  Sheehan, Daniel Daniel

  Craig, Charles Curtis(Antrim,S.)

  Legge, Col. Hon. Heneage

  Simeon, Sir Harrington

  Crean, Eugene

  Llewellyn, Evan Henry

  Sinclair, Louis (Romford)

  Cross, HerbertShepherd(Bolton

  Lockwood, Lieut.-Col. A. R.

  Skewes-Cox, Thomas

  Crossley, Rt. Hon. Sir Savile

  Loder, Gerald Walter Erskine

  Smith, Abel H.(Hertford,East)

  Dalkeith, Earl of

  Long, Col.CharlesW.(Evesham)

  Spear, John Ward

  Dalrymple, Sir Charles

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

  Spencer, Sir E. (W. Bromwich)

  Davenport, William Bromley

  Lonsdale, John Brownlee

  Stanley, Hn. Arthur (Ormskirk

  Davies,Sir HoratioD.(Chatham

  Lowe, Francis William

  Stanley, Edward Jas.(Somerset

  Denny, Colonel

  Loyd, Archie Kirkman

  Stanley, Rt. Hon. Lord(Lancs.)

  Devlin, Joseph (Kilkenny, N.)

  Lyttelton, Rt. Hon. Alfred

  Stewart, Sir Mark J. M'Taggart

  Dickson, Charles Scott

  Macdona, John Cumming

  Stirling-Maxwell, Sir John M.

  Digby, John K. D. Wingfield-

  Maconochie, A. W.

  Stock, James Henry

  Dimsdale, Rt. Hn. Sir JosephC.

  M'Arthur, Charles (Liverpool)

  Strutt, Hon. Charles Hedley

  Disraeli, Coningsby Ralph

  M'Fadden, Edward

  Talbot, Rt.Hn.J.G(0xf'dUniv.

  Doogan, P. C.

  M'lver, Sir Lewis(Edinburgh,W

  Taylor, Austin (East Toxteth)

  Doughty, George

  M'Killop, James (Stirlingshire)

  Thorburn, Sir Walter

  Douglas, Rt. Hon. A. Akers

  M'Killop, W. (Sligo, North)

  Tollemache, Henry James

  Doxford, Sir William Theodore

  Majendie, James A. H.

  Tomlinson, Sir Wm. Edw. M.

  Duke, Henry Edward

  Malcolm, Ian

  Tritton, Charles Ernest

  Durning-Lawrence, Sir Edwin

  Massey-Mainwaring, Hn. W. F.

  Tuff, Charles

  Dyke, Rt.Hn.Sir William Hart

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

  Valentia, Viscount

  Egerton, Hon. A. de Tatton

  Milvain, Thomas

  Walker, Col. William Hall

  Fardell, Sir T. George

  Moore, William

  Warde, Colonel C. E.

  Finch, Rt. Hon. George H.

  Morgan, DavidJ.(Walthamst'w

  Webb, Colonel William George

  Finlay, Sir Robert Bannatyne

  Morpeth, Viscount

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

  744

  745

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

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

  Young, Samuel

  Wentworth, Bruce C. Vernon-

  Worsley-Taylor, Henry Wilson

  Wharton, Rt. Hon. John Lloyd

  Wortley, Rt. Hon. C. B. Stuart

  TELLERS FOB THE NOES—Sir

  Whiteley, H.(Ashton und.Lyne

  Wrightson, Sir Thomas

  Alexander Acland-Hood and

  Willoughby de Eresby, Lord

  Wyndham, Rt. Hon. George

  Mr. Ailwyn Fellowes.

  Wilson, John (Glasgow)

  Wyndham-Quin, Col. W. H.

  MR, LAWRENCEsaid he desired to move the Amendment standing in his name on the Paper. The point he wished to raise was whether this clause did or did not limit the discretion of the magistrates. He held the opinion that under the words "ill-conducted" the discretion of the magistrates was unduly limited. He therefore suggested that after the word "character" the words "conduct of his business by" should be inserted. The question was whether the word "ill-conducted" modified the power of the magistrate in seeing that a business was properly carried on. The best way would be to show by concrete instances how the discretion of the magistrates hitherto had operated. In Liverpool, under the present system, they had put down the long pull, and forbidden the offering of sweets to children who were sent to public-houses. Neither of those things could be described as ill-conduct, and they were no more illegitimate than the conduct of shipping companies in carrying people across the Atlantic below cost price. He wished to know, if this Bill was passed, how the magistrates would stand with regard to customs which, although they were undesirable in themselves, were not strictly illegitimate. He had suggested these words because he thought it would enlarge the powers of the Bill, and leave the magistrates somewhat freer. He quite recognised that the magistrates had not always shown the proper discretion, and that they had now and then tried to impose
  limitations which were to be deprecated. In some cases they had almost attempted to legislate instead of merely administering the law. He begged to move.
  Amendment proposed—
  "In page 1, line 8, after the word 'character,' to insert the words ' conduct of his business by.' "—(Mr. Latvrence.)
  Question proposed "That those words be there inserted."
  SIR EDWARD CARSONsaid the Government could not possibly accept the Amendment. It referred not merely to the particular business with which the magistrates were dealing, but to any business in which the applicant, was previously concerned. Anything that was to be gained by the Amendment was already provided for in the Bill. If the Amendment referred only to the fitness of a person to hold a licence that was already in the Bill. He ventured to say that the interests of the public were sufficiently protected by the clause as it now stood. On the other hand, if the proposed words were inserted they might leave it open to an extreme bench of justices to judge a man, not on his own merits, or in relation to the premises in which he actually conducted the business, but in relation to something else.
  Question put.
  The Committee divided:—-Ayes, 150; Noes, 228. (Division List No. 197.)

  AYES.

  Ainsworth, John Stirling

  Brown, George M. (Edinburgh

  Cremer, William Randal

  Allen, Charles P.

  Bryce, Rt. Hon. James

  Crooks, William

  Ashton, Thomas Gair

  Burke, E. Haviland

  Dalziel, James Henry

  Asquith,Rt.Hon.Herbert Henry

  Burns, John

  Davies, Alfred (Carmarthen)

  Atherley-Jones, L.

  Burt, Thomas

  Davies, M. Vaughan (Cardigan)

  Barran, Rowland Hirst

  Caldwell, James

  Delany, William

  Bayley, Thomas (Derbyshire)

  Cameron, Robert

  Denny, Colonel

  Bonn, John Williams

  Campbell, John (Armagh, S.)

  Dilke, Rt. Hon. Sir Charles

  Black, Alexander William

  Campbell-Bannerman, Sir H.

  Dobbie, Joseph

  Boland, John

  Channing, Francis Allston

  Doogan, P. C.

  Bolton, Thomas Dolling

  Condon, Thomas Joseph

  Douglas, Charles M. (Lanark)

  Brigg, John

  Corbett, A. Cameron (Glasgow)

  Duncan, J. Hastings

  Broadhurst, Henry

  Craig, Robert Hunter (Lanark)

  Edwards, Frank

  Ellis, John Edward (Notts.)

  Lough, Thomas

  Sheehy, David

  Emmot, Alfred

  Lunaon, W.

  Shipman, Dr. John G.

  Evans, Samuel T. (Glamorgan)

  MacNeill, John Gordon Swift

  Slack, John Bamford

  Eve, Harry Trelawney

  MacVeagh, Jeremiah

  Smith, Samuel (Flint)

  Farquharson, Dr. Robert

  M'Arthur, Charles (Liverpool

  Spear, John Ward

  Fenwick, Charles

  M'Arthur, William (Cornwall)

  Stanhope, Hon. Philip James

  Ferguson, R. C. Munro (Leith)

  M'Crae, George

  Strachey, Sir Edward

  Fitzmaurice, Lord Edmond

  M'Kenna, Reginald

  Sullivan, Donal

  Flavin, Michael Joseph

  Mansfield, Horace Rendall

  Taylor, Austin (East Toxteth)

  Foster, Sir Walter (Derby Co.)

  Markham, Arthur Basil

  Taylor, Theodore C. (Radcliffe)

  Fuller, J. M. F.

  Middlemore, John Throgmorton

  Tennant, Harold John

  Gladstone, Rt.Hn. Herbert John

  Mitchell, Edw. (Fermanagh, N.)

  Thomas, Abel (Carmarthen, E.)

  Goddard, Daniel Ford

  Morgan, J. Lloyd (Carmarthen)

  Thomas, Sir A. (Glamorgan, E.)

  Grant, Corrie

  Moss, Samuel

  Thomas,David Alfred (Merthyr

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

  Moulton, John Fletcher

  Thomas, JA(Glamorgan,Gower

  Griffith, Ellis J.

  Murphy, John

  Tomkinson, James

  Gurdon, Sir W. Brampton

  Newnes, Sir George

  Toulmin, George

  Helme, Norval Watson

  Nussey, Thomas Willans

  Trevelyan, Charles Philips

  Hemphill, Rt. Hon. Charles H.

  O'Brien, Kendal(Tipperary,Mid

  Ure, Alexander

  Henderson, Arthur (Durham)

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

  Wallace, Robert

  Higham, John Sharpe

  O'Malley, William

  Walton, John Lawson(Leeds,S.

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

  Parrott, William

  Walton, Joseph (Barnsley)

  Horniman, Frederick John

  Perks, Robert William

  Wason, Eugene (Clackmannan)

  Houston, Robert Paterson

  Power, Patrick Joseph

  Wason, John Cathcart (Orkney

  Jacoby, James Alfred

  Rea, Russell

  White, George (Norfolk)

  Johnson, John (Gateshead)

  Reekitt, Harold James

  White, Luke (York, E.R.)

  Joicey, Sir James

  Reddy, M.

  Whiteley, George (York, W.R.)

  Jones, David Brynmor(Swansea

  Reid, Sir R. Threshie (Dumfries

  Whitley, J. H. (Halifax)

  Jordan, Jeremiah

  Rickett, J. Compton

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

  Joyce, Michael

  Rigg, Richard

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

  Langley, Batty

  Roberts, John Bryn (Eifion)

  Wilson, John (Falkirk)

  Law, Hugh Alex. (Donegal, W.)

  Roberts, John H. (Denbighs.)

  Woodhouse, Sir JT.(Huddersf'd

  Lawson, Sir Wilfrid (Cornwall)

  Robson, William Snowdon

  Yoxall, James Henry

  Layland-Barratt, Francis

  Roche, John

  Leigh, Sir Joseph

  Rose, Charles Day

  TELLERS FOR THE AYES—Sir-

  Leng, Sir John

  Russell, T. W.

  W. F. Lawrence and Mr.

  Levy, Maurice

  Shackleton, David James

  Osmond Williams.

  Lewis, John Herbert

  Shaw, Charles Edw. (Stafford)

  Lloyd-George, David

  Shaw, Thomas (Hawick B.)

  NOES.

  Agg-Gardner, James Tynte

  Brassey, Albert

  Douglas, Rt. Hon. A. Akers-

  Agnew, Sir Andrew Noel

  Brodrick, Rt. Hon. St. John

  Doxford, Sir William Theodore

  Allhusen, Augustus Henry Eden

  Brotherton, Edward Allen

  Duke, Henry Edward

  Anson, Sir William Reynell

  Bull, William James

  Durning-Lawrence, Sir Edwin

  Arnold-Forster,Rt.Hn.Hugh 0.

  Butcher, John George

  Egerton, Hon. A. de Tatton

  Arrol, Sir William

  Carson, Rt. Hon. Sir Edw. H.

  Faber, Edmund B. (Hants, W.)

  Atkinson, Rt. Hon. John

  Cautley, Henry Strother

  Fardell, Sir T. George

  Aubrey-Fletcher,Rt,Hn. Sir H.

  Cavendish,V.C.W. (Derbyshire

  Finch, Rt. Hon. George H.

  Austin, Sir John

  Cecil, Evelyn (Aston Manor)

  Finlay, Sir Robert Bannatyne

  Bagot, Capt. Josceline FitzRoy

  Chamberlain,Rt.HnJ.A.(Worc.

  Fison, Frederick William

  Bailey, James (Walworth)

  Chapman, Edward

  Fitzroy, Hn. Edward Algernon

  Bain, Colonel James Robert

  Clive, Captain Percy A.

  Flannery, Sir Fortescue

  Baird, John George Alexander

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

  Forster, Henry William

  Balcarres, Lord

  Colston, Chas. Edw. H. Athole

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

  Baldwin, Alfred

  Cook, Sir Frederick Lucas

  Galloway, William Johnson

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

  Cox, Irwin Edward Bainbridge

  Gardner, Ernest

  Balfour, Capt. C. B. (Hornsey)

  Craig, Charles Curtis (Antrim,S.

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

  Balfour.RtHnGerald W.(Leeds

  Crean, Eugene

  Gore, Hn. S. F. Ormsby- (Line.)

  Balfour, Kenneth R.(Christch.

  Cripps, Charles Alfred

  Goschen, Hon. George Joachim

  Banbury, Sir Frederick George

  Cross, Herb, Shepherd (Bolton)

  Goulding, Edward Alfred

  Bathurst, Hon. Allen Benjamin

  Crossley, Rt. Hon. Sir Savile

  Gray, Ernest (West Ham)

  Beach,Rt.Hn.SirMichael Hicks

  Dalkeith, Earl of

  Greene, Henry D. (Shrewsbury)

  Bhownaggree, Sir M. M.

  Dalrymple, Sir Charles

  Gretton, John

  Bignold, Arthur

  Davenport, William Bromley-

  Greville, Hon. Ronald

  Bigwood, James

  Davies,Sir HoratioD.(Chatham

  Groves, James Grimble

  Bill, Charles

  Dickson, Charles Scott

  Hall, Edward Marshall

  Blundell, Colonel Henry

  Digby, John K. D. Wingfield-

  Hamilton,Marq.of (L'nd'nderry

  Bond, Edward

  Dimsdale, Rt.Hn. Sir Joseph C.

  Hardy,Laurenee (Kent, Ashford

  Boscawen, Arthur Griffith-

  Disraeli, Coningsby Ralph

  Hare, Thomas Leigh

  Bowles, Lt. Col. H.F (Middlesex

  Doughty, George

  Harris, F. Leverton (Tynem'th)

  748

  749

  Harris, Dr. Fredk. R. (Dulwich)

  Milvain, Thomas

  Scott, Sir S. (Marylebone, W.),

  Hatch, Ernest Frederick Geo.

  Montagu, Hon. J.Scott (Hants.)

  Sharpe, William Edward T.

  Heath, Arthur Howard (Hanley

  Moore, William

  Sheehan, Daniel Daniel

  Heaton, John Henniker

  Morgan, David J.(Walthamstow

  Simeon, Sir Barrington

  Helder, Augustus

  Morpeth, Viscount

  Skewes-Cox, Thomas

  Henderson, Sir A. (Stafford W.)

  Morrell, George Herbert

  Smith, Abel H. (Hertford, East):

  Hermon-Hodge, Sir Robert T.

  Morrison, James Archibald

  Smith, James Parker (Lanarks.)

  Hickman, Sir Alfred

  Morton, Arthur H. Aylmer

  Spencer, Sir E. (W. Bromwich)

  Hobhouse,RtHnH,(Somers't,E

  Mount, William Arthur

  Stanley,Hon.Arthur (Ormskirk

  Hogg, Lindsay

  Mowbray, Sir Robert Gray C.

  Stanley,Edward Jas.(Somerset'/

  Hope, J.F. (Sheffield, Brightside

  Muntz, Sir Philip A.

  Stanley, Rt. Hon. Lord (Lanes.)

  Hoult, Joseph

  Murray, Rt. Hn.A.Graham (Bute

  Stewart, Sir Mark J. M'Taggart

  Howard, Tohn(Kent,Faversham

  Murray, Charles J. (Coventry)

  Stirling-Maxwell, Sir John M.

  Hozier, Hn. James Henry Cecil

  Myers, William Henry

  Stock, James Henry

  Hudson, George Bickersteth

  Newdegate, Francis A. N.

  Strutt, Hon. Charles Hedley

  Hunt, Rowland

  Nolan, Joseph (Louth, South)

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

  Jebb, Sir Richard Claverhouse

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

  Tollemache, Henry James

  Jeffreys, Rt.Hon. Arthur Fred.

  O'Doherty, William

  Tomlinson, Sir Wm. Edw. M.

  Kenyon, Hon.Geo. T. (Denbigh)

  O'Dowd, John

  Tritton, Charles Ernest

  Kenyon-Slaney, Col. W. (Salop.

  Palmer, Walter (Salisbury)

  Tuff, Charles

  Kerr, John

  Peel,Hn.Wm.Robert Wellesley

  Valentia, Viscount

  Keswick, William

  Pemberton, John S. G.

  Vincent, Sir Edgar (Exeter)

  Kimber, Henry

  Percy, Earl

  Walker, Col. William Hall

  Law, Andrew Bonar (Glasgow)

  Pierpoint, Robert

  Warde, Colonel C. E.

  Lawson JohnGrant(Yorks.N.R

  Pilkington, Colonel Richard

  Webb, Colonel William George

  LeeArthurH.(Hants.,Fareham)

  Platt-Higgins, Frederick

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

  Legge, Col. Hon. Heneage

  Plummer, Walter R.

  Welb'y,Sir Charles G.E.(Notts.)

  Llewellyn, Evan Henry

  Powell, Sir Francis Sharp

  Wentworth, Bruce C. Vernon-

  Lockwood, Lieut.-Col. A. R.

  Pretyman, Ernest George

  Wharton, Rt. Hon. John Lloyd

  Loder, Gerald Walter Erskine

  Pryce-Jones, Lt. -Col. Edward

  Whiteley, H.(Ashton und.Lyne

  Long, Col.CharlesW.(Evesham)

  Pym, C. Guy

  Whitmorc, Charles Algernon

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

  Rankin, Sir James

  Willough by de Eresby, Lord

  Lonsdale, John Brownlee

  Rasch, Sir Frederic Carne

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

  Lowe, Francis William

  Ratcliff, R. F.

  Wilson, John (Glasgow)

  Lowther, C. (Cumb., Eskdale)

  Reid, James (Greenock)

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

  Loyd, Archie Kirkman

  Remnant, James Farquharson

  Worsley-Taylor, Henry Wilson

  Lyttelton, Rt. Hon. Alfred

  Renwick, George

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

  Macdona, John Cumming

  Richards, Henry Charles

  Wrightson, Sir Thomas

  Maconochie, A. W.

  Ridley,S. Forde (Bethnal Green

  Wyndham, Rt. Hon. George

  M'Fadden, Edward

  Roberts, Samuel (Sheffield)

  Wyndham-Quin, Col. W. H.

  M'Iver,Sir Lewis (Edinburgh W

  Robertson, Herbert (Hackney)

  Young, Samuel

  M'Killop, James (Stirlingshire)

  Rolleston, Sir John F. L.

  Younger, William

  Majendie, James A. H.

  Ropner, Colonel Sir Robert

  Malcolm, Ian

  Round, Rt. Hon. James

  TELLERS FOR THE NOES—

  Manners, Lord Cecil

  Rutherford, John (Lancashire)

  Sir Alexander Acland-Hood

  Martin, Richard Biddulph

  Rutherford, W. W. (Liverpool)

  and Mr. Ailwyn Fellowes.

  Massey-Mainwaring, Hn. W. F.

  Sackville, Col. S. G. Stopford-

  Maxwell,W.J.H.(Dumfriesshire

  Sadler, Col. Samuel Alexander

  MR. HERBERT ROBERTShad given notice of an Amendment to insert in Clause 1, line 8, after "fitness" the words "or status as regards the licensed premises."
  THE CHAIRMAN: I believe this Amendment really raises the same question as the Amendment proposed by the hon. Member for West Denbighshire and recently discussed.
  MR. HERBERT ROBERTS: It raises the question of status.
  THE CHAIRMAN: I suppose that means bona fide tenancy.
  MR. HERBERT ROBERTS: The-object of the Amendment is to ensure that the local justices shall have under this section the same rights which they now enjoy under Section 16, Sub-section 1, of the Licensing Act, 1902, to ask for the perusal of agreements between a brewery company and a landlord.
  THE CHAIRMAN: The object is to see whether a man is a bona fide tenant

  751
  or not. [Opposition cries of "No."] I do not know what the object is unless it is to find out whether it is a bona fide tenancy.
  MR. HERBERT ROBERTS: It is to see under what conditions he carries on the tenancy.
  THE CHAIRMAN: Surely the conditions of the tenancy are to show whether the tenancy is bona fide. [OPPOSITION cries of "No."] What else does it show? I think it really raises the same point.
  MR. HERBERT ROBERTS: May I move the Amendment in order to ask a question of the Government, namely, whether this clause will enable the justices to ask for the perusal of any agreement there is between the landlord or a brewery company and the licence-holder? It is a question of great administrative importance, as I know from long experience on the Bench.
  THE CHAIRMAN: I really cannot see that this raises any question except that of the bona fides of the tenant. The fact that the licence-holder has some agreement of the kind indicated by the hon. Member would only make the premises come under the name of a tied house. [OPPOSITION cries, of "No."] Well, I cannot conceive any other, and the hon. Member has not suggested any other.
  MR. HERBERT R0BERTS: I will suggest it at once. It is a question of the length of the tenancy.
  THE CHAIRMAN: The point the hon. Member has mentioned has already been
  752
  discussed. We have had Amendment8 dealing with the length of the tenancy.
  MR. LLOYD - GEORGE: Supposing there is a condition in connection with the tenancy which affects the proportion of the contribution, that has nothing to do with a tied house at all. It may be between an ordinary landlord and an ordinary tenant. That has nothing whatever to do with the length of the tenancy or with the purchasing of goods from certain people. The only point which my hon. friend wishes to raise is whether the magistrates shall, have the right to see the agreement and consider these points before they arrive at a decision. We have not discussed the point at all.
  MR. T. W. RUSSELL (Tyrone, S.): Supposing the agreement contracts the tenant out of the rights to be conferred on him by this Bill, what would be the position of the tenant?
  THE CHAIRMAN: Then he is not a bona fide tenant. That is a question which has already been discussed.
  MR. LLOYD-GEORGE: I beg your pardon.
  THE CHAIRMAN: If the hon. Member will bring forward an Amendment raising the specific point he has put, I will consider it, but the word "status" covers bona fides,and it covers the position of a tenant as regards a tied house. Both of these points have already been discussed.
  MR. LLOYD-GEORGE: The magistrates have a right to know what the

  753
  status of a tenant really is with regard to this question.
  MR. EMMOTTsaid there was a recent case in which the licence holder gave a power of attorney to a brewery company. It was most important that the magistrates should have power to get information in cases of that kind. It worked out in this way. At any moment the brewery company could step in and use the power of attorney and turn the man out without compensation of any kind.
  THE CHAIRMAN: The hon. Gentleman may move the Amendment if he will undertake not to raise the tied house question. I do not know whether the word "status"is known to English law. It is a Latin word which may cover a good deal.
  MR. ASQUITH (Fifeshire, E.): I would suggest to my hon. friend that instead of the words in the Amendment he should move the insertion of the words "or contracted rights or liabilities as regards the licensed premises."
  MR. HERBERT ROBERTSsaid he would move the Amendment in the way suggested by the right hon. Gentleman. His only wish was to obtain the view of the Government as to whether under this section local justices would have the same power of examining documents as they now possessed.
  Amendment proposed—
  "In page 1, line 8, after the word 'fitness,' to insert the words 'or contracted rights or liabilities as regards the licensed premises.'"— (Mr. Herbert Roberts.)
  Question proposed, "That those words be there inserted."
  SIR EDWARD CARSONsaid the mover of the Amendment had asked whether under this clause the magistrates would continue to have the powers which were vested in them by the Licensing Act of 1892 as to calling for certain documents. There was nothing in this Bill to take away these powers from the local licensing justices. It was quite plain that the procedure before the local licensing justices would be exactly the-same as at present.
  MR. LLOYD-GEORGE: Can they refuse the licence if they consider the conditions unfair?
  SIR EDWARD CARSON: They have the same power of calling on parties to produce agreements.
  SIR ROBERT REIDsaid the magistrates might call for the production of documents, but when they had got them, they could do nothing. The virtue of the Amendment was that it enabled them, not merely to call for the documents, but, if they were unsatisfactory, to act on the documents by refusing the renewal of the licence if necessary. It was perfectly idle for the Solicitor-General to say that if the words of the Amendment were not inserted the powers of the justices would be the same as at present.
  Question put.
  Committee divided: — Ayes, 151. Noes, 251. (Division List, No. 198).

  AYES.

  Ainsworth, John Stirling

  Gurdon, Sir W. Brampton

  Reckitt, Harold James

  Allen, Charles P.

  Harcourt,Lewis V. (Rossendale

  Reddy, M.

  Ashton, Thomas Gair

  Harwood, George

  Reid, Sir R. Threshie(Dumfries

  Asquith, Rt. Hn.HerbertHenry

  Hayter, Rt. Hn. Sir Arthur D.

  Rickett, J. Compton

  Atherley-Jones, L.

  Helme, Norval Watson

  Rigg, Richard

  Barran, Rowland Hirst

  Hemphill, Rt. Hon. Charles H

  Roberts, John Bryn (Eifion)

  Bayley, Thomas (Derbyshire)

  Henderson, Arthur (Durham)

  Robson, William Snowdon

  Bell, Richard

  Higham, John Sharpe

  Roche, John

  Benn, John Williams

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

  Rose, Charles Day

  Black, Alexander William

  Horniman, Frederick John

  Runciman, Walter

  Boland, John

  Jacoby, James Alfred

  Russell, T. W.

  Bolton, Thomas Dolling

  Johnson, John (Gateshead)

  Schwann, Charles E.

  Brigg, John

  Joicey, Sir James

  Shackleton, David James

  Broadhurst, Henry

  Jones,DavidBrynmor(Swansea

  Shaw, Charles Edw. (Stafford)

  Brown, George M. (Edinburgh)

  Jordan, Jeremiah

  Shaw, Thomas (Hawick B.)

  Bryce, Rt. Hon. James

  Joyce, Michael

  Sheehy, David

  Burke, E. Haviland-

  Kennedy, Vincent P.(Cavan,W.

  Shipman, Dr. John G.

  Burt, Thomas

  Kitson, Sir James

  Slack, John Bamford

  Caldwell, James

  Langley, Batty

  Smith, Samuel (Flint)

  Cameron, Robert

  Law, Hugh Alex.(Donegal,W.)

  Stanhope, Hon. Philip James

  Campbell, John (Armagh, S.)

  Lawson, Sir Wilfrid (Cornwall)

  Strachey, Sir Edward

  Campbell-Bannerman, Sir H.

  Layland-Barratt, Francis

  Sullivan, Donal

  Channing, Francis Allston

  Leese,SirJoseph F.(Accrington

  Taylor, Theodore C. (Radcliffe)

  Condon, Thomas Joseph

  Leigh, Sir Joseph

  Tennant, Harold John

  Corbett, A. Cameron (Glasgow)

  Leng, Sir John

  Thomas, Abel (Carmarthen,E.)

  Craig, Robert Hunter (Lanark)

  Levy, Maurice

  Thomas, Sir A. (Glamorgan,E.)

  Cremer, William Randal

  Lewis, John Herbert

  Thomas,DavidAlfred(Merthyr)

  Crooks, William

  Lloyd-George, David

  Thomas, J A(Glamorgan,Gower

  Dalziel, James Henry

  Lundon, W.

  Tillet, Louis John

  Davies, Alfred (Carmarthen)

  MacNeill, John Gordon Swift

  Tomkinson, James

  Davies,M.Vaughan-(Cardigan

  MacVeagh, Jeremiah

  Toulmin, George

  Delany, William

  M'Arthur, William (Cornwall)

  Trevelyan, Charles Philips

  Dilke, Rt. Hon. Sir Charles

  M'Crae, George

  Ure, Alexander

  Dobbie, Joseph

  M'Kenna, Reginald

  Wallace, Robert

  Douglas, Charles M. (Lanark)

  M'Laren, Sir Charles Benjamin

  Walton, John Lawson( Leeds,S.)

  Duncan, J. Hastings

  Mansfield, Horace Rendall

  Walton, Joseph (Barnsley)

  Edwards, Frank

  Markam, Arthur Basil

  Wason, Eugene (Clackmannan)

  Ellis, John Edward (Notts.)

  Mitchell,Edw.(Fermanagh, N.)

  Wason, John Cathcart(Orkney)

  Emmott, Alfred

  Morgan, J. Lloyd (Carmarthen)

  White, George (Norfolk)

  Evans, Samuel T.(Glamorgan)

  Moss, Samuel

  White, Luke (York, E.R.)

  Eve, Harry Trelawney

  Moulton, John Fletcher

  Whiteley, George (York,W.R.)

  Farquharson, Dr. Robert

  Murphy, John

  Whitley, J. H.(Halifax)

  Fenwick, Charles

  Newnes, Sir George

  Williams, Osmond (Merioneth)

  Ferguson, R. C. Munro (Leith)

  Nussey, Thomas Willans

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

  Fitzmaurice, Lord Edmond

  0'Brien,Kendal (TipperaryMid

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

  Foster, Sir Walter (Derby Co.)

  O'Malley, William

  Wilson, John (Fa kirk)

  Fuller, J. M. F.

  O'Shaughnessy, P. J.

  Woodhouse,SirJ.T.(Huddersf'd

  Gladstone.Rt.Hn. Herbert John

  Parrott, William

  Goddard, Daniel Ford

  Partington, Oswald

  TELLERS FOR THE AYES—

  Grant, Corrie

  Perks, Robert William

  Mr. Herbert Roberts and

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

  Priestley, Arthur

  Mr. Lough.

  Griffith, Ellis J.

  Rea, Russell

  NOES.

  Agg-Gardner, James Tynte

  Austin, Sir John

  Balfour, Capt. C. B. (Hornsey

  Agnew, Sir Andrew Noel

  Bagot, Capt. Josceline FitzRoy

  Balfour,Rt Hn GeraldW.(Leeds

  Allhusen,Augustus HenryEden

  Bailey, James (Walworth)

  Balfour, Kenneth R. (Christch.

  Anson, Sir William Reynell

  Bain, Colonel James Robert

  Banbury, Sir Frederick George

  Arnold-Forster.Rt. Hn. HughO.

  Baird, John George Alexander

  Bathurst, Hon. Allen Benjamin

  Arrol, Sir William

  Balcarres, Lord

  Beach, Rt.Hn. Sir MichaelHicks

  Atkinson, Rt. Hon. John

  Baldwin, Alfred

  Bhownaggree, Sir M. M.

  Aubrey-Fletcher,Rt.Hon.SirH.

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

  Bignold, Arthur

  756

  757

  Bigwood, James

  Hamilton,Marq. of (L'nd'nderry

  Murray, Charles J. (Coventry)

  Bill, Charles

  Hardy,Laurence(Kent, Ashford

  Myers, William Henry

  Blundell, Colonel Henry

  Hare, Thomas Leigh

  Newdegate, Francis A. N.

  Bond, Edward

  Harris, F. Leventon(Tvnem'th)

  Nolan, Joseph (Louth, South)

  Boscawen, Arthur Griffith-

  Harris, Di. Fredk. R.(Dulwich)

  O'Brien, Patrick (Kilkenny)

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

  Hatch,.Ernest Frederick Geo.

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

  Brassey, Albert

  Hay, Hon. Claude George

  O'Doherty, William

  Brodrick, Rt. Hon. St. John

  Heath, Arthur Howard(Hanley

  O'Dowd, John

  Brotherton, Edward Allen

  Heath, James (Staffords.N.W.

  Palmer, Walter (Salisbury)

  Butcher, John George

  Heaton, John Henniker

  Peel, Hn. Wm.RobertWellesley

  Carson, Rt. Hon. Sir Edw. H.

  Helder, Augustus

  Percy, Earl

  Cautley, Henry Strother

  Henderson,SirA.(Stafford, W.)

  Pierpoint, Robert

  Cavendish,V. C. W.(Derbyshire

  Hermon-Hodge, Sir Robert T.

  Pilkington, Colonel Richard

  Cecil, Evelyn (Aston Manor)

  Hickman, Sir Alfred

  Piatt-Higgins, Frederick

  Chamberlain Rt.Hn. J.A.(Wore

  Hoare, Sir Samuel

  Plummer, Walter R.

  Chaplain, Rt. Hon. Henry

  Hobhouse,RtHnH.(Somers't,E

  Powell, Sir Francis Sharp

  Chapman, Edward

  Hogg, Lindsay

  Pretyman, Ernest George

  Churchill, Winston Spencer

  Hope, J.F(Sheffeld, Brightside

  Pryce-Jones, Lt.-Col. Edward

  Clive, Captain Percy A.

  Hoult, Joseph

  Rankin, Sir James

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

  Houston, Robert Paterson

  Rasch, Sir Frederic Carne

  Colston, Chas Edw. H. Athole

  Howard, John( Kent,Faversham

  Ratcliff, R. F.

  Cook, Sir Frederick Lucas

  Hozier, Hon. James HenryCecil

  Reid, James (Greenock)

  Cox, Irwin Edward Bainbridge

  Hudson, George Bickersteth

  Remnant, James Farquharson

  Craig, Charles Curtis(An trim,S.

  Hunt, Rowland

  Renwick, George

  Crean, Eugene

  Jebb, Sir Richard Claverhouse

  Richards, Henry Charles

  Cross, Herb. Shepherd (Bolton)

  Jeffreys, Rt.Hon. Arthur Fred.

  Ridley,S. Forde (Bethnal Green

  Crossley, Rt. Hon. Sir Savile

  Kennaway, Rt. Hn. Sir JohnH.

  Roberts, Samuel (Sheffield)

  Dalkeith, Earl of

  Kenyon, Hn. Geo.T. (Denbigh)

  Robertson, Herbert (Hackney)

  Dalrymple, Sir Charles

  Kenyon-Slaney, Col. W. (Salop.

  Rolleston, Sir John F. L.

  Davenport, William Bromley.

  Kerr, John

  Ropner, Colonel Sir Robert

  Davies.Sir HoratioD. (Chatham

  Keswick, William

  Round, Rt. Hon. James

  Dickson, Charles Scott

  Kimber, Henry

  Rutherford, John (Lancashire)

  Digby, John K. D. Wingfield-

  Law, Andrew Bonar (Glasgow)

  Rutherford, W. W. (Liverpool)

  Dimsdale, Rt.Hn.Sir Joseph C.

  Lawrence, Wm. F. (Liverpool)

  Sackville, Col. S. G. Stopford-

  Disraeli, Coningsby Ralph

  Lawson, JohnGrant(Yorks.N.R

  Sadler, Col. Samuel Alexander

  Doogan, P. C.

  Lee, Arthur H.(Hants.Fareham

  Sassoon, Sir Edward Albert

  Dorington, Rt. Hn. Sir John E.

  Legge, Col. Hon. Heneage

  Scott, Sir S. (Marylebone, W.)

  Doughty, George

  Llewellyn, Evan Henry

  Sharpe, William Edwara T.

  Douglas. Rt. Hon. A. Akers

  Lockwood, Lieut.-Col. A. R.

  Sheehan, Daniel Daniel

  Doxford, Sir William Theodore

  Loder, Gerald Walter Erskine

  Simeon, Sir Barrington

  Duke, Henry Edward

  Long, Col.Charles W.(Evesham

  Sinclair, Louis (Romford)

  Durning-Lawrence, Sir Edwin

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

  Skewes-Cox, Thomas

  Dyke, Rt. Hon.SirWilliamHart

  Lonsdale, John Brownlee

  Smith,AbelH.(Hertford, East)

  Egerton, Hon. A. de Tatton

  Lowe, Francis William

  Smith,James Parker (Lanarks.)

  Paber, Edmund B. (Hants.W.)

  Lowther, C. (Cumb., Eskdale)

  Spear, John Ward

  Fardell, Sir T. George

  Loyd, Archie Kirkman

  Spencer, Sir E.(W. Bromwich)

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

  Lyttelton, Rt. Hon. Alfred

  Stanley, Hn. Arthur (Ormskirk

  Fielden, Edward Brocklehurst

  Macdona, John dimming

  Stanley, Ed ward Jas.(Somerset)

  Finch, Rt. Hon. George H.

  Maclver, David (Liverpool

  Stanley, Rt. Hn. Lord (Lanes.)

  Finlay, Sir Robert Bannatyne

  Maconochie, A. W.

  Stewart, Sir Mark J. M' Taggart

  Fison, Frederick William

  M'Arthur, Charles (Liverpool)

  Stirling-Maxwell, Sir John M.

  FitzGerald,Sir RobertPenrose-

  M'Fadden, Edward

  Stock, James Henry

  Fitzroy, Hon.EdwardAlgernon

  M'Iver,SirLewis (Edinburgh W

  Strutt, Hon. Charles Hedley

  Flannery, Sir Fortescue

  M'Killop, James (Stirlingshire)

  Talbot, Lord E. (Chichester)

  Flavin, Michael Joseph

  Majendie, James A. H.

  Talbot, Rt.Hn. J. G.(Oxf'dUniv.

  Forster, Henry William

  Malcolm, Ian

  Thornton, Percy M.

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

  Manners, Lord Cecil

  Tollemache, Henry James

  Galloway, William Johnson

  Martin, Richard Biddulph

  Tomlinson, Sir Wm. Edw. M.

  Gardner, Ernest

  Massey-Mainwaring. Hon.W.F.

  Tritton, Charles Ernest

  Gibbs, Hon. A. G. H.

  Maxwell,W. J.H(Dumfriesshire

  Tuff, Charles

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

  Milvain, Thomas

  Valentia, Viscount

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

  Montagu, Hon. J.Scott (Hants.)

  Vincent, Sir Edgar (Exeter)

  Goschen, Hon. George Joachim

  Moore, William

  Walker, Col. William Hall

  Goulding, Edward Alfred

  Morgan, David J. (Walthamstow

  Warde, Colonel C. E.

  Gray, Ernest (West Ham)

  Morpeth, Viscount

  Webb, Col. William George

  Greene, Henry D.(Shrewsbury)

  Morrell, George Herbert

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

  Gretton, John

  Morrison, James Archibald

  Welby, Sir CharlesG.E.(Notts.)

  Greville, Hon. Ronald

  Morton, Arthur H. Aylmer

  Wentworth, Bruce C. Vernon-

  Groves, Tames Grimble

  Mount, William Arthur

  Wharton, Rt. Hon. John Lloyd

  Hall, Edward Marshall

  Mowbray, Sir Robert Gray C.

  Whiteley, H.(Ashton und.Lyne

  Halsey, Rt. Hon. Thomas F.

  Muntz, Sir Philip A,

  Whitmore, Charles Algernon

  Hamilton,RtHnLordG.(Midd''x

  Murray,Rt.Hn A.Graham(Bute

  Williams, Colonel R. (Dorset)

  758

  759

  Willoughby de Eresby, Lord

  Wortley, Rt. Hon C. B. Stuart-

  Younger, William

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

  Wrightson, Sir Thomas

  Wilson, John (Glasgow)

  Wyndham, Rt. Hon. George

  TELLERS FOB THE NOES—

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

  Wyndham-Quin. Col. W. H.

  Sir Alexander Acland-Hood

  Worsley-Taylor, Henry Wilson

  Young, Samuel

  and Mr. Ailwyn Fellowes.

  MR. WHITLEYsaid he wished to move the omission of the word "proposed," so as to keep within the purview of the magistrates not only the character or fitness of the "proposed holder of the licence," but the continued methods in which the particular house had been conducted. If the word "proposed" were retained in the clause, it appeared to him that it would be possible for any offence against the licensing laws to be absolutely wiped out by bringing forward a new tenant. As a matter of fact that was a practice not unknown in some districts. Some owners of licensed premises were so keen to get a maximum of profits that they had a system of bringing in a succession of licence-holders, and winking at malpractices of the tenant until he was dropped upon by the police. He could not think that it was the object of the Government to encourage a practice of that kind, but unless the word "proposed" was left
  out, the magistrates would have no control whatever over the licence-holder.
  Amendment proposed—
  "In page 1, line 8, to leave out the word, 'proposed.'"—(Mr. Whitley.)
  Question proposed, "That the word 'proposed' stand part of the clause."
  SIR EDWARD CARSONsaid that the Amendment would make the Bill utterly unworkable. It would compel the magistrates to inquire, not into the character or fitness of the man who was going to carry on the business but of the man who had been put out, probably because he did not carry it on properly. He hoped the House would not agree to the Amendment.
  Question put.
  The Committee divided:—Ayes, 245; Noes, 151. (Division List No. 199.)

  AYES.

  Agg-Gardner, James Tynte

  Beach, Rt.Hn.Sir Michael Hicks

  Colston, Chas. Edw. H. Athole

  Agnew, Sir Andrew Noel

  Bhownaggree, Sir M. M.

  Cook, Sir Frederick Lucas

  Allhusen, Augustus Henry Eden

  Bignold, Arthur

  Craig, Chas. Curtis (Antrim, S.

  Anson, Sir William Reynell

  Bigwood, James

  Crean, Eugene

  Arnold-Forster,Rt.Hn.Hugh O.

  Bill, Charles

  Cross, Herb. Shepherd (Bolton)

  Arrol, Sir William

  Blundell, Colonel Henry

  Crossley, Rt. Hon. Sir Savile

  Atkinson, Rt. Hon. John

  Bond, Edward

  Dalkeith, Earl of

  Aubrey-Fletcher,Rt. Hn. Sir H.

  Boscawen, Arthur Griffith-

  Dalrymple, Sir Charles

  Austin, Sir John

  Bowles Lt.Col.H.F.(Middlesex

  Davenport, William Bromley-

  Bagot, Capt. Josceline Fitz Roy

  Brassey, Albert

  Davies, Sir Horatio D.(Chatham

  Bailey, James (Walworth)

  Brodrick, Rt. Hon. St. John

  Denny, Colonel

  Bain, Colonel James Robert

  Butcher, John George

  Dickinson, Robert Edmond

  Baird, John George Alexander

  Carson, Rt. Hon. Sir Edw. H.

  Dickson, Charles Scott

  Balcarres, Lord

  Cautley, Henry Strother

  Dimsdale, Rt.Hon.Sir JosephC.

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

  Cavendish, V.C.W.(Derbyshire

  Disraeli, Coningsby Ralph

  Balfour, Capt. C. B. (Hornsey)

  Cecil, Evelyn (Aston Manor)

  Doogan, P. C.

  Balfour, Rt Hn.Gerald W. (Leeds

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

  Dorington, Rt.Hon. Sir JohnE.

  Balfour, Kenneth R. (Christch.

  Chapman, Edward

  Doughty, George

  Banbury, Sir Frederick George

  Clive, Captain Percy A.

  Douglas, Rt. Hon. A. Akers

  Bathurst, Hon. Allen Benjamin

  Cochrane, Hon. Thos. H. A. E

  Doxford, Sir William Theodore

  Duke, Henry Edward

  Lawson, JohnGrant( Yorks.N.R

  Remnant, James Farquharson

  Durning-Lawrence, Sir Edwin

  Lee, Arthur H.( Hants,Fareham

  Renwick, George

  Dyke,Rt. Hon. SirWilliamHart

  Legge, Col. Hon. Heneage

  Richards, Henry Charles

  Egerton, Hon. A. de Tatton

  Llewellyn, Evan Henry

  Ridley.S.Forde (BethnalGreen)

  Faber, Edmund B. (Hants, W.)

  Lockwood, Lieut.-Col. A. R.

  Roberts, Samuel (Sheffield)

  Fardell, Sir T. George

  Loder, Gerald Walter Erskine

  Robertson, Herbert (Hackney)

  Fergusson, Rt.Hn.SirJ.(Manc'r

  Long, Col. Chas. W. (Evesham)

  Rolleston, Sir John F. L.

  Fielden, Edward Brocklehurst

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

  Ropner, Colonel Sir Robert

  Finch, Rt. Hon. George H.

  Lonsdale, John Brownlee

  Round, Rt. Hon. James

  Finlay, Sir Robert Bannatyne

  Lowther, C. (Cumb., Eskdale)

  Rutherford, John (Lancashire)

  Fison, Frederick William

  Loyd, Archie Kirkman

  Rutherford, W. W. (Liverpool)

  FitzGerald, SirRobert Penrose-

  Lucas, Reginald J. (Portsmouth)

  Sackville, Col 'S. G. Stopford-

  Fitzroy, Hn. EdwardAlgernon

  Lyttelton, Rt. Hon. Alfred

  Sadler, Col. Samuel Alexander

  Flannery, Sir Fortescue

  Macdona, John Cumming

  Sassoon, Sir Edward Albert

  Forster, Henry William

  MacIver, David (Liverpool)

  Scott, Sir S. (Marylebone, W.)

  Foster, PhilipS.(Warwick,S.W.

  Maconochie, A. W.

  Sharpe, William Edward T.

  Fuller, J. M. F.

  M'Fadden, Edward

  Sheehan, Daniel Daniel

  Calloway, William Johnson

  M'Iver, Sir Lewis(EdinburghW

  Simeon, Sir Barrington

  Gardner, Ernest

  M'Killop, James (Stirlingshire)

  Sinclair, Louis (Romford)

  Gibbs, Hon. A. G. H.

  Majendie, James A. H.

  Skewes-Cox, Thomas

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

  Malcolm, Ian

  Smith,Abel H.(Hertford, East)

  Gore, Hn. S.F.Ormsby-(Line.)

  Martin, Richard Biddulph

  Smith,James Parker (Lanarks.

  Goschen, Hon. George Joachim

  Massey-Mainwaring, Hn. W.F.

  Spear, John Ward

  Goulding, Edward Alfred

  Max well, W. J. H. (Dumfriesshire

  Stanley, Hn. Arthur (Ormskirk)

  Gray, Ernest (West Ham)

  Melville, Beresford Valentine

  Stanley, Edw. Jas. (Somerset)

  Greene, Henry 1). (Shrewsbury)

  Middlemore,John'Throgmorton

  Stanley, Rt. Hn. Lord (Lanes.)

  Gretton, John

  Mildmay, Francis Bingham

  Stewart,Sir Mark J.M'Taggart

  Greville, Hon. Ronald

  Milvain, Thomas

  Stirling-Maxwell, Sir John M.

  Groves, James (Grimble

  Molesworth, Sir Lewis

  Stock, James Henry

  Halsey, Rt. Hon. Thomas F.

  Montagu, Hn. J. Scott (Hants.)

  Strutt, Hon. Charles Hedley

  Hamilton, Marq.of(L'nd'nderry

  Moore, William

  Talbot, Lord E. (Chichester)

  Hardly, Laurence(Kent,Ashford

  Morgan,David J.(Walthamstow

  Talbot. Rt,Hn.J.G.(Oxf'dUniv.

  Hare, Thomas Leigh

  Morpeth, Viscount

  Taylor, Austin (East Toxteth)

  Harris, F. Leverton(Tynem'th)

  Morrell, George Herbert

  Thornton, Percy M.

  Harris, Dr. Fredk. R. (Dulwich)

  Morrison, James Archibald

  Tollemache, Henry James

  Hatch, Ernest Frederick Geo.

  Morton, Arthur H. Aylmer

  Tomlinson, Sir Wm. Edw. M.

  Hay, Hon. Claude George

  Mount, William Arthur

  Tritton, Charles Ernest

  Heath, Arthur Howard) Hanley

  Muntz, Sir Philip A.

  Tuff, Charles

  Heath, James (Staffords. N.W.

  Murray,Rt Hn. A.Graham(Bute

  Valentia, Viscount

  Heaton, John Henniker

  Murray, Charles J. (Coventry)

  Walker, Col. William Hall

  Henderson, Sir A. (Stafford,W.)

  Myers, William Henry

  Warde, Colonel C. E.

  Hermon-Hodge, Sir Robert T.

  Newdegate, Francis A. X.

  Webb, Colonel William George

  Hickman, Sir Alfred

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

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

  Hoare, Sir Samuel

  Nolan, Joseph (Louth, Sonth)

  Welby,Sir CharlesG.E. (Notts.)

  Hobhouse, RtHnH.(Somers't,E

  O'Brien, Kendal(Tipperary Mid

  Wentworth, Bruce C. Vernon

  Hogg, Lindsay

  O'Brien, Patrick (Kilkenny)

  Wharton, Rt. Hon. John Lloyd

  Hope, J. F.(Sheffield,Brightside

  O'Doherty, William

  Whiteley,H.(Ashton und.Lyne

  Hoult, Joseph

  O'Dowd, John

  Whitmore, Charles Algernon

  Houston, Robert Paterson

  Palmer, Walter (Salisbury)

  Willoughby de Eresby, Lord

  Howard, John(Kent,Faversham

  Peel,Hn.Wm. Robert Wellesley

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

  Hozier, Hn. James Henry Cecil

  Pemberton, John S. G.

  Wilson, John (Glasgow)

  Hudson, George Bickersteth

  Percy, Earl

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

  Hunt, Rowland

  Pierpoint, Robert

  Wolff, Gustav Wilhelm

  Jebb, Sir Richard Claverhouse

  Pilkington, Colonel Richard

  Worsley-Taylor, Henry Wilson

  Jeffreys, Rt. Hon. Arthur Fred.

  Platt-Higgins, Frederick

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

  Jessel, Captain Herbert Merton

  Plummer, Walter R.

  Wrightson, Sir Thomas

  Kennaway, Rt. Hn. SirJolm H.

  Powell, Sir Francis Sharp

  Wyndham, Rt. Hon. George

  Kenyon-Slaney, Col. W. (Salop

  Pretyman, Ernest George

  Young, Samuel

  Kerr, John

  Pryce-Jones, Lt.-Col. Edward

  Younger, William

  Keswick, William

  Rankin, Sir James

  Kimber, Henry

  Rasch, Sir Frederic Carne

  TELLERS FOR THE AYES—Sir

  Law, Andrew Bonar (Glasgow)

  Ratcliff, R. F.

  Alexander Acland-Hood and

  Lawrence, Win. F. (Liverpool)

  Reid, James (Greenock)

  Mr. Ailwyn Fellowes.

  NOES.

  Ainsworth, John Stirling

  Bayley, Thomas (Derbyshire)

  Boland, John

  Allen, Charles P.

  Beaumont, Wentworth C. B.

  Brigg, John

  Ashton, Thomas Gair

  Bell, Richard

  Broadhurst, Henry

  Atherley-Jones, L.

  Benn, John Williams

  Brunner, Sir John Tomlinson

  Barran, Rowland Hirst

  Black, Alexander William

  Burke, E. Haviland-

  762

  763

  Burt, Thomas

  Jacoby, James Alfred

  Reid,Sir R.Threshie(Dumfries)

  Caldwell, James

  Johnson, John (Gateshead)

  Rickett, J. Compton

  Cameron, Robert

  Joicey, Sir James

  Rigg, Richard

  Charming, Francis Allston

  Jones, David Brynmor( Swansea

  Roberts, John Bryn (Eifion)

  Churchill, Winston Spencer

  Jordan, Jeremiah

  Roberts, John H. (Denbighs.)

  Condon, Thomas Joseph

  Joyce, Michael

  Robson, William Snowdon

  Corbett, A. Cameron (Glasgow)

  Kennedy,Vincent P.(Cavan,W.

  Roche, John

  Craig, Robert Hunter (Lanark)

  Kitson, Sir James

  Rose, Charles Day

  Cremer, William Randal

  Lambert, George

  Runciman, Walter

  Crooks, William

  Langley, Batty

  Russell, T. W.

  Dalziel, James Henry

  Law, Hugh Alex. (Donegal,W

  Schwann, Charles E.

  Davies, Alfred (Carmarthen)

  Lawson, Sir Wilfrid (Cornwall)

  Shackleton, David James

  Davies, M. Vaughan- (Cardigan

  Layland-Barratt, Francis

  Shaw, Charles Edw. (Stafford)

  Delany, William

  Leese, Sir Joseph F. (Accrington

  Shaw, Thomas (Hawick B.)

  Dobbie, Joseph

  Leigh, Sir Joseph

  Sheehy, David

  Douglas, Charles M. (Lanark)

  Leng, Sir John

  Shipman, Dr. John G.

  Duncan, J. Hastings

  Levy, Maurice

  Slack, John Bamford

  Edwards, Frank

  Lewis, John Herbert

  Smith, Samuel (Flint)

  Elibank, Master of

  Lloyd-George, David

  Soames, Arthur Wellesley

  Ellis, John Edward (Notts.)

  Lough Thomas

  Stanhope, Hon. Philip James

  Emmott, Alfred

  Lundon, W.

  Strachey, Sir Edward

  Evans,SirFrancisH. (Maidstone

  Lyell, Charles Henry

  Sullivan, Donal

  Evans, Samuel T. (Glamorgan)

  Macnamara, Dr. Thomas J.

  Taylor, Theodore C. (Radeliffe)

  Eve, Harry Trelawney

  MacNeill, John Gordon Swift

  Tennant, Harold John

  Farquharson, Dr. Robert

  MacVeagh, Jeremiah

  Thomas, Abel (Carmarthen, E.)

  Fen wick, Charles

  M'Arthur, William (Cornwall)

  Thomas, Sir A. (Glamorgan, E.)

  Ferguson, R. C. Munro (Leith)

  M'Crae, George

  Thomas, David Alfred (Merthyr)

  Fitzmaurice, Lord Edmond

  M'Kenna, Reginald

  Tomkinson, James

  Flavin, Michael Joseph

  M'Laren, Sir Charles Benjamin

  Toulmin, George

  Foster, Sir Walter (Derby Co.)

  Mansfield, Horace Rendall

  Ure, Alexander

  Freeman-Thomas, Captain F.

  Markham, Arthur Basil

  Wallace, Robert

  Gladstone,Rt.Hn. Herbert; John

  Mitchell,Edw.(Fermanagh,N.)

  Walton,JohnLawson (Leeds,S.)

  Goddard, Daniel Ford

  Morgan, J. Lloyd (Carmarthen)

  Walton, Joseph (Barnsley)

  Grant, Corrie

  Moss, Samuel

  Wason, Eugene (Clackmannan

  Griffith, Ellis J.

  Moulton, John Fletcher

  Wason,John Cathcart (Orkney)

  Gurdon, Sir W. Brampton

  Murphy, John

  White, George (Norfolk)

  Haldane, Rt. Hon. Richard B.

  Nussey, Thomas Willans

  White, Luke (York, E.R.)

  Harcourt,Lewis V.(Rossendale

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

  Williams, Osmond (Merioneth)

  Harwood, George

  O'Malley, William

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

  Hayter,Rt. Hon. Sir Arthur D.

  Parrott, William

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

  Helme, Norval Watson

  Partington, Oswald

  Wilson, John (Falkirk)

  Hemphill, Rt. Hon. Charles H.

  Perks, Robert William

  Woodhouse,SirJ.T.(Huddersf'd

  Henderson, Arthur (Durham)

  Price, Robert John

  Higham, John Sharpe

  Priestley, Arthur

  TELLERS FOR THE NOES—Mr.

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

  Rea, Russell

  J. H. Whitley and Mr.

  Horniman, Frederick John

  Reckitt, Harold James

  Trevelyan.

  Hutton, Alfred E. (Morley)

  Reddy, M.

  Amendment proposed—
  "In page 1, line 9, after the word 'licence' to insert the words 'on the ground that the renewal would be void."—(Sir Edward Carton.)
  Amendment agreed to.
  MR. HERBERT ROBERTSsaid he wished to move an Amendment further adding the words "or that any conditions upon which the licence was granted have not been fulfilled." He said this was an important matter, and went to the root of the question of good conduct.
  764
  If it were not made perfectly clear in this section that the justices had the right to consider this vital point when they were asked to renew a licence, a serious weakening of their discretion would take place.
  Amendment proposed—
  "In page 1, line 9, after the word 'licence,' to insert the words 'or that any conditions upon which the licence was granted have not been fulfilled.'"—(Mr. Herbert Robert.)
  Question proposed, "That those wore be there inserted."
  SIR EDWARD CARSONsaid that, as far as the form of the Amendment was concerned, the Government could not accept it. As regarded the substance, there was a good deal to be said for it. Where a person had given an undertaking of any importance to a licensing bench in the past as a condition of obtaining his licence, and broke that undertaking, he ought not to have any compensation. He did not think anybody could dispute that proposition. His opinion was that any man who had given such an undertaking, and broken it, was guilty of misconduct in the carrying on of the business. He did not say that because he did not want to make the matter perfectly right in the Bill, but he was afraid that if in this place it were laid down that there was to be no compensation in the event of a breach of undertaking, it would be argued afterwards on the construction of the section that the words "ill-conducted" were not as wide as at first sight they seemed to be. He really thought that to put in the words proposed would be to weaken the significance of the term "ill-conducted."
  SIR ROBERT REIDsaid he understood that they were agreed as regarded the principle. That was a matter for satisfaction. The Solicitor-General appeared to be afraid of the familiar rule in law that the specification of particular instances would weaken the effect of general words. He did not agree. For instance, the opening of a bar where an undertaking was given that it would not be opened would be extremely bad conduct; but would it mean that the premises were ill-conducted? He would suggest that the Amendment be accepted now, subject to further consideration on Report.
  SIR EDWARD CARSONsaid he had the greatest possible regard for the opinion of the hon. and learned Gentleman; but he could not accept the words of the particular Amendment. He would, however, undertake to bring up words which would carry out the object to the fullest extent. He himself would prefer the Amendment of the hon. Gentleman the Member for Sheffield.
  MR. MOULTONsaid he thought the Amendment of the hon. Member for Sheffield would not meet the case. There were public-houses in the neighbourhood of the London markets that opened at very early hours. Such opening might be a breach of an undertaking; but would it mean that the house was ill-conducted?
  MR. HERBERT ROBERTSsaid he would accept the suggestion of the Solicitor - General and withdraw the Amendment.
  Amendment, by leave, withdrawn.
  SIR JAMES WOODHOUSEmoved to insert words excepting county boroughs from the scope of the clause, in order to call attention to the anomalous jurisdiction of county boroughs under this section. There was no doubt a great anomaly was created by the section. Whilst the full body of justices were to be competent under this Bill to deal with the question of structural fitness of the building, the conduct of the applicant, his fitness, and so forth, they would not be competent to deal with the question whether the house was required or not. Then there already existed a statutory committee, so that there would be under the Bill a full body

  767
  of justices and a new statutory committee and the existing licensing committee of seven members. The licensing justices would not view that with any satisfaction at all. If there were to be an alteration it ought to be in the direction of giving the committee in the first instance the consideration of the matter, and afterwards refer it to the full body of the justices. He hoped the Solicitor-Genera would give him an assurance that the anomalies which undoubtedly the section created would be removed.
  Amendment proposed—
  "In page 1, line 9, after the words last inserted, to insert the words 'except in county boroughs.'"—(Sir James Woodhouse.)
  Question proposed, "That those words be there inserted."
  SIR EDWARD CARSONsaid the Amendment was in the wrong place. Its proper place was in Clause 7. There was, however, a great deal in what the hon. Baronet had said, that there should be an appeal to the whole body of the magistrates; and he would undertake to have the matter considered, and some Amendment put down to meet his wishes.
  MR. AUSTIN TAYLORasked if that would mean retaining the Recorder as chairman.
  SIR EDWARD CARSONsaid it was intended to move an Amendment to omit the Recorder as chairman.
  And, it being Midnight, the Chairman left the Chair to make his Report to the House.
  Committee report Progress; to sit again to-morrow.

  REGISTRATION OF NURSES.
  Ordered, That Mr. Lyell be discharged from the Select Committee, and that Mr. Charles Hobhouse be added.—(Mr. Herbert Gladstone.)
  GAS ORDERS CONFIRMATION (No. 1) BILL.
  Copy ordered, "of Memorandum stating the nature of the Proposals contained in the Provisional Orders included in the Gas Orders Confirmation (No. 1) Bill."—(Mr. Bonar Law.)
  REGISTRATION OF NURSES.
  Ordered, That Mr. Malcolm be discharged from the Select Committee, and that Mr. Mount be added. — (Sir A. Acland-Hood.)

  BUSINESS OF THE HOUSE.
  THE PARLIAMENTARY SECRETARY OF THE TREASURY (Sir A. ACLAND - HOOD,),in moving the adjournment of the House, said that to-morrow the Licensing Bill would be first Order, and that it would, therefore, be the first allotted day.
  MR. ELLIS GRIFFITHasked if Friday would be an allotted day.
  MR. T.W. RUSSELL (Tyrone, S.)asked if there was any chance of the Land Bill being taken on Friday.
  SIR A. ACLAND-HOODsaid that the Prime Minister would make a statement to-morrow.
  Adjourned at four minutes after Twelve o'clock.

LORD HENNIKER.
Report made from the Lord Chancellor that the right of Charles Henry Chandos Henniker-Major, Baron Henniker in the Peerage of Ireland, to vote at the election of Representative Peers for Ireland has been established to the satisfaction of the Lord Chancellor; read, and ordered to lie on the Table.

PRIVATE BILL BUSINESS.
The LORD CHANCELLOR acquainted the House, That the Clerk of the Parliaments had laid upon the Table the Certificate from the Examiners that the further Standing Orders applicable to the following Bill have not been complied with:— London County Council (General Powers).
The same was ordered to lie on the Table.
Leyton Urban District Council Bill. Report from His Majesty's Attorney -General received, and ordered to lie on the Table.
Thurles Urban District Council Water Bill. Reported, with Amendments.
London United Tramways Bill. Report from the Select Committee, That the Committee had not proceeded with the consideration of the Bill, no parties having appeared in opposition thereto; read, and ordered to lie on the Table. The orders made on the 16th and 21st of June last discharged, and Bill committed for Thursday next.
Tramways Orders Confirmation (No. 1) Bill [H.L.]. Reported from the Select Committee, with Amendments, and committed to a Committee of the Whole House on Thursday next.
Water Orders Confirmation Bill [H.L.]. Report from the Select Committee, That the Committee had not proceeded with the consideration of the Bill, no parties having appeared in opposition thereto; read, and ordered to lie on the Table. The orders made on the
602
14th and 21st of June last discharged, and Bill committed to a Committee of the Whole House on Thursday next.
Leith Corporation Tramways Order Confirmation Bill. Report from the Joint Committee that the Bill ought to be allowed to proceed; read, and ordered to lie on the Table.
Melrose District Water Order Confirmation Bill. Brought from the Commons.
Education Board Provisional Order Confirmation (Birmingham) Bill [H.L.]; Pier and Harbour Provisional Order (No. 1) Bill [H.L.]. Returned from the Commons agreed to.
Baker Street and Waterloo Railway Bill; Brymbo Water Bill; Great Central and Midland Joint Railways Bill; Humber Commercial Railway and Dock Bill; Southend-on-Sea Gas Bill. Returned from the Commons with the Amendments agreed to.
Gas and Water Orders Confirmation Bill [H.L.]. House in Committee (according to order). The Amendments proposed by the Select Committee made. Standing Committee negatived. The Report of Amendments to be received on Thursday next.
Electric Lighting Provisional Orders (No. 4) Bill [H.L.]. House in Committee (according to order). The Amendments proposed by the Select Committee made; further Amendments made. Standing Committee negatived. The Report of Amendments to be received on Thursday next.
Electric Lighting Provisional Orders (No. 6) Bill [H.L.]; Electric Lighting Provisional Orders (No. 2) Bill [H. L.]. Amendments reported (according to order), and Bills to be read 3a on Thursday next.
Gas Orders Confirmation (No. 1) Bill [H.L.]. House in Committee (according to order). Amendments made. Standing Committee negatived. The Report of Amendments to be received on Thursday next.
Melrose District Water Order Confirmation Bill. Read 1a; to be printed; and (pursuant to the Private Legislation

603
Procedure (Scotland) Act, 1899), deemed to have been read 2a (The Lord Kintore (E. Kintore)), and reported from the Committee. (No. 130.)

PETITION.
  SUPPLY OF ELECTRICITY BILL [H.L.]
  Petition to be heard by Counsel for Amendment of; of Electric Supply Companies; read, and ordered to lie on the Table.
RETURNS, REPORTS, ETC.

  TRADE REPORTS (ANNUAL SERIES).
  No. 3202. United States (Chicago); No. 3203. Venezuela (Caracas).
  Presented (by Command), and ordered to lie on the Table.

  DEAN FOREST BILL.
  Order of yesterday referring the Bill to the Examiners discharged; and Bill to be printed. (No. 131.)
  RE-VACCINATION BILL [H.L.]
  Reported from the Standing Committee without further Amendment. The Report of the Amendment made in Committee of the Whole House to be received on Thursday next.

  RAILWAYS (PRIVATE SIDINGS) BILL.
  [SECOND READING.]
  Order of the day for the Second Reading read.
  LORD WOLVERTON: My Lords, this is a very short Bill containing only two clauses, and it has passed through all its stages in the other House. The general idea of the Bill is to put back the law into the position which we always thought it occupied. It has always been considered that it was the law that facilities should be granted by the railway companies to traders and others owning private sidings. This idea has been rather rudely shaken by two decisions of the Courts in England and Scotland, and this
  604
  Bill has been framed to put back the law into the position which we considered it previously occupied.
  Moved, "That the Bill be now read 2a."—(Lord Wolverton.)
  On Question, Bill read 2a and committed to a Committee of the Whole House, on Friday next.

  HALL-MARKING OF FOREIGN PLATE. BILL.
  [SECOND READING.]
  Order of the day for the Second Reading read.
  THE EARL OF LYTTON: My Lords, I need detain your Lordships but a very few moments in explaining this Bill. Its object briefly is to secure that the mark which is required by the existing law to be placed upon all articles of gold and silver plate imported from foreign countries shall be of so distinctive a character as to fulfil the purposes which it was originally intended to serve. A casual glance at this Bill might perhaps lead some of your Lordships to imagine that it was an attempt to give some advantage to British over foreign-made plate. Such an opinion as that would be altogether erroneous. The Bill, it is true, has the support of, and is, indeed, largely promoted by the traders of Birmingham and Sheffield; but, nevertheless, it has no connection, however remote, with the now famous fiscal policy of Birmingham, or even with the milder, though not less famous, policy of Sheffield. If it had, I should not now be asking your Lordships to give it a Second Reading.
  The law at the present moment is as follows. By an Act of Parliament passed in the year 1876 all gold and silver plate which is imported from foreign countries, and which is taken to an assay office to be stamped, has placed upon it the letter F in an oval shield to denote that it is of foreign origin. The Act which enforces this regulation distinctly laid down the objects for impressing this letter. It was stated that the object was to denote that such gold and silver plate was imported from foreign ports, and not wrought or made in the United Kingdom. But this letter

  605
  F has not been found to be sufficiently distinctive in character, because it is very easily confused with either the initial of the manufacturer of the plate, or even with the letter which denotes the year in which the plate was marked. Your Lordships will know that there are letters frequently placed upon gold and silver plate; this letter F is very easily confused with one of those letters, and the hall-mark which is placed upon articles of plate and was originally intended merely to denote the quality of the plate, has now been generally looked upon as an indication of British manufacture. The result of this is that large quantities of gold and silver plate of foreign origin have been imported into this country, and having received an hall-mark at an Assay Office in this country, have been sold in this country, and even exported to other countries and there sold, as plate of British manufacture. In other words, my Lords, the object of the Act of 1876 has not been carried out, and it is the intention of this Bill to remedy that particular matter.
  There is no new principle involved in this Bill. No plate which is not obliged to be marked at present will have to receive a mark in future. In fact, the only result of the passing of this Bill will be that what has in the past been done inadequately will in the future be done adequately. The precise mark which in future is to be placed upon imported gold and silver plate is to be decided by an Order in Council, because it is a very technical matter, and no doubt the decision will ultimately be arrived at after consultation with the Assay officers and the members of the trade. One word as to the history of the Bill. The Bill was introduced last year into the House of Commons, and in March of that year a very large and influential deputation, representing the traders of London, Birmingham, and Sheffield, waited upon the President of the Board of Trade to urge its claims. The principle was accepted by the Government, and the Bill has since been redrafted under the direct supervision of the Board of Trade. It has been introduced into the House of Commons again this year, and has passed through all its stages, and in its present form it receives the support of all the members engaged
  606
  in the gold and silver trade in this country. The Association of Chambers of Commerce has passed a resolution in its favour, as also have the trades unions in this country. In fact, the Bill has the support both of the masters and of the men. In those circumstances I feel sure your Lordships will not hesitate to read it a second time.
  Moved, "That the Bill be now read 2a.— (The Earl of Lytton.)
  On Question, Bill read 2a, and committed to a Committee of the Whole House on Friday next.

  YEOMANRY WEAPONS.
  LORD ASHBURTON: My Lords, I rise to ask the Under-Secretary of State for War whether in deciding upon a second weapon for the Yeomanry regiments due consideration will be given to the fact that, while fully armed for fighting on foot, they require a weapon for use when mounted and carrying out the work of scouting and patrolling, in the execution of which they would be liable to sudden attack by those of the enemy's forces engaged in the same duties.
  I have to ask your Lordships' indulgence on rising to address the House for the first time. About six weeks ago a Question was asked relating to the Yeomanry by a noble Lord who served with great distinction in South Africa, and who is now in command of one of the newly raised Scottish Yeomanry regiments. Out of that Question a somewhat long debate arose, in which the necessity for a second weapon for the Yeomanry was freely mentioned. I think the consensus of opinion in your Lordships' House was entirely in favour of such a weapon. I cannot help thinking at the same time that the main factor in deciding what that weapon should be was rather overlooked. The Yeomanry are now, like the Regular cavalry, trained to fight on foot, and for their foot work they cannot want a better weapon than the one they have got—the long-range magazine rifle. But they are taught other duties which I venture to think are even more important than their foot work—namely, those of scouting and patrolling.

  607
  The Yeomanry, though they are now a kind of mounted rifles, described by Sir John French as a "form of cavalry," are in reality, I think, the cavalry of the Auxiliary Forces, and on them, whenever the time should come for our Militia and infantry to be placed on the footing of active service, much of the scouting and patrolling would fall. If that patrolling is to be of the kind described by the present Inspector-General of Cavalry in India as "Blind-man's-dog scouting," then it is a waste of time to have it; but if, on the other hand, the scouting and patrolling is to be efficiently carried out, it will carry with it not the risk but the certainty of frequent hostile collisions with small bodies of the enemy. We cannot hope, I suppose, for the second time to be fighting a nation who will have no weapon except the rifle. You may take it for granted that whenever we are at war again the enemy's scouting will be done by men armed with other weapons than the rifle. In a wooded country the land lends itself to such fights; they will be short, and, if the Yeomanry are left as they are at present, I do not see what they can be expected to do.
  It is now nearly three years since the war ended, and the Yeomanry are in just the same position as they were then. They have only one weapon. When the noble and gallant Earl the late Commander-in-Chief spoke in the debate to which I refer, he told your Lordships that he was unable to remember why the issue of bayonets was discontinued to the Yeomanry. I think I may say with some confidence that 90 per cent, of the Yeomanry are deeply grateful to the person or the circumstances that caused that issue to cease, for a more unpopular weapon I do not think you could devise for the Yeomanry, and at the same time it would be an absolutely useless weapon. If it comes to bayonet work such as we have heard of in Manchuria, you cannot expect dismounted cavalry to compete with infantry. Masses of Yeomanry on foot would have very short shrift at the hands of trained infantry.
  The noble and gallant Earl seemed to be in favour of bayonets and against swords, but I should like to suggest that there are swords and swords. I am no advocate of the present sword. It is an
  608
  ill-balanced weapon, it has a cutting edge, and it requires no little skill to properly handle. It has the great disadvantage of requiring a considerable amount of instruction and an enormous amount of practice before a man can even be considered a fair swordsman; but because this particular type of sword is not a satisfactory one I fail to see that it is beyond the powers of the military authorities to design a weapon which, while being perfectly efficient, would be much simplified, and the use of which would be more easily acquired, The weapon that would be an ideal one for the Yeomanry would be one about the length, perhaps a trifle longer, of the present naval cutlass without a cutting edge and merely a point, but with the same hilt. It would only require very simple sword exercise, and if the Yeomanry were armed with such a weapon and with the rifle they have now they would be sufficiently armed for any work they might be called upon to do, I see no objection, if necessary, why that weapon should not be able to be fixed on the end of the rifle, provided that such means of attachment in no way interfered with its efficient use as a weapon for unmounted fighting for which it would, of course, be specially designed.
  The amount of dissatisfaction that exists in the Yeomanry now on the subject of their armament and equipment, I do not think is realised in quarters where it would be well that it should be. In common with many other Yeomanry I officers, I attach very serious importance? to our half-armed condition at present, and I hope the noble Earl the Under, Secretary of State for War will be able to ' give some assurance that the question of the helpless condition of the Yeomanry will receive that consideration at the hands of the authorities which I venture to think it deserves, and that no attempt will be made to turn the Yeomanry into a miserably bad mounted infantry by forcing that unpopular weapon, the bayonet, upon them.
  LORD WILLOUGHBY DE BROKE: My Lords, I desire to associate myself with the remarks which have just fallen from the noble Lord. I was one of those who were very pleased to hear, in the course of the debate the other day, that

  609
  the Yeomanry were going to be armed with a second weapon, but I must confess to a certain amount of alarm when I heard that it was going to take the shape of the bayonet, and for the same reason which the noble Lord has just brought forward. I should like, as a humble member of the Yeomanry, to join him in requesting the noble Earl the Under-Secretary to favourably consider the sword in preference to the bayonet. I venture to submit that the bayonet is not a weapon which can be used by a man on horseback. We were also told during the course of the debate on the Yeomanry not very long ago that the Yeomanry were not primarily intended for service abroad, and that in the event of invasion, which I suppose is improbable, their principal use would be in this country. I venture to submit that for a mounted man a sword in his hand would be a very much more useful weapon than anything else.
  It may be urged against the use of the sword by Yeomanry regiments that we should not have time to learn the sword exercise. Well, my Lords, in the old days before the Boer War, and before our swords were taken away from us, we used to cut the sword exercise. It was cut, you will say, with a blunt-edged weapon, but still the sword exercise was learnt with a considerable degree of efficiency, and I should like to call your attention to the fact that we now have almost three times the amount of training that we had before. We have fourteen working days in camp, and each officer and each man in our regiment, at any rate, attended five preliminary mounted drills before the Yeomanry assembled in camp. Therefore, I think we should have plenty of time in which to learn at any rate a modified form of the sword exercises. I should also like to ask the noble Earl the Under-Secretary if he could give us some kind of assurance as to the position as a mounted force that the Yeomanry are going to occupy, whether we are to be cavalry or mounted infantry, or something between the two.
  It may be that different conditions of service may be suitable to different regiments. For instance, Lord Lovat's Scouts may possibly desire to be treated
  610
  as mounted infantry, although I cannot speak for them. But there are certain Midland regiments which have always been cavalry ever since they were started, and which could produce a squadron of at least 100 or 120 men accustomed to ride across country, who I venture to assert would be quite equal to undertaking any of the functions of a cavalry regiment. The whole essence of these Midland regiments, is, in the first instance, their cavalry character. There are officers and men in those regiments who would never have dreamt of joining the Militia or Volunteers, but who joined the Yeomanry because it was mainly connected with horsemanship and riding, and because there was a prospect of doing the work mounted. For that reason I sincerely trust nothing more will be done to diminish the cavalry character of such regiments. I should like to respectfully assure the noble Earl that any attempt to whittle away the cavalry character of these regiments will be most unpopular with all ranks.
  THE EARL OF LONSDALE: My Lords, I do not wish to detain the House for many minutes, but on an occasion like this, when the weapon of the Yeomanry is concerned, I cannot refrain from asking your Lordships, as an Officer-in-Command of Yeomanry, to do all in your power to prevent the introduction of such a weapon as the bayonet into the Yeomanry. Anyone who is accustomed to the use of the rifle knows the absolute balance in its use, and anybody understanding horsemanship must realise that no one, however fine a horseman he may be, is capable of using a rifle with a bayonet attached to the end of it when it comes to lungeing. In fact I very much doubt if even a Sandow could use it. We have seen contests at various military competitions — sword versus lance, sword versus bayonet—but I do not know if any of your Lordships have ever witnessed a competition as between a rifle with a bayonet attached to it and a sword, the mounted competitor having the rifle. I have seen it twice, and each time it has ended in serious discomfort to the horseman, for it is absolutely impossible after lungeing for him to recover himself, and a defy even a Sandow to manipulate a horse with a rifle, having a

  611
  bayonet at the end of it, in his hand. When the whole secret of Yeomanry and Cavalry is dependent on the absolute balance of the man, whatever his weapon may be, with a view of remaining fixed in the saddle, it is obvious that such a weapon would be most prejudicial to Yeomanry, and it is for this reason I ask your Lordships to persuade the authorities not to introduce the bayonet as a second weapon into the Yeomanry.
  THE UNDER-SECRETARY OF STATE FOR WAR (The Earl of DONOUGHMORE): My Lords, I think your Lordships will have gathered from the character of the debate that I am not being asked by the three noble Lords who have addressed your Lordships to give a final decision on this subject to-night. The matter is under consideration. In fact, I spent some time discussing it with three of my colleagues this morning, and I can assure your Lordships that it has not been lost sight of. I hope a decision will be announced in another place at an early date. I can only repeat what I have said before. Although the three noble Lords who have addressed your Lordships this evening advocated the same view, I am sure your Lordships will admit that there are very many different opinions as to what the second arm for the Yeomanry should be. I addressed your Lordships at some length on that point the other day in the debate initiated by Lord Lovat, and I do not intend to repeat the arguments I then tried to lay before your Lordships. All sorts of weapons have been recommended to us, and all sorts of variations of every weapon have been recommended, and I sincerely hops we may be able to hit upon something which will be satisfactory, if not to all parties, at any rate to most parties, and I can assure the noble Lord who raised this question to-day that we are very anxious to come to a final settlement upon the point.
  I now come to the point raised by the noble Lord on the Cross Benches (Lord Willoughby de Broke). He is extremely anxious that nothing should be done, more especially in connection with the corps in the Midlands, to decrease what he calls their cavalry character. I can assure the
  612
  noble Lord that we have no intention of any action that could lead to that end. Your Lordships will, of course, understand that there are town corps and country corps of Yeomanry. The country corps generally consist of good riders, and not very good shots, when they are recruits, and the town corps generally consist of not very good riders and not very good shots, but still, as a rule, their shooting is better than their riding when they first come; and our desire is to train these two classss to reach as high a standard as thay possibly can in both these considerations. Our efforts naturally in the country corps are concentrated more on rifle shooting than on riding, and vice versa.
  LORD TWEEDMOUTH: My Lords, it may seem somewhat presumptuous in me to interpose in this discussion in a House where so many of your Lordships are professionally acquainted with the matter before us, but I do think this House will be doing a good service in turning its attention for a short time this evening to this question of how you are going to arm your mounted troops in the future, and how those arms are to be carried. For my own part, I quite agree with what has fallen from the noble Lords who have spoken, that as a weapon for mounted men the bayonet is ridiculous. It is all very well to have a bayonet, no doubt, for a man to use if he is acting as an infantry soldier, but it is ridiculous to say that a bayonet can be of any use to a man on horseback. I have seen a very ingenious invention by which the great part of the stock of the rifle was cut away in order that the man might get a better grip of the rifle and use it at arm's length as a lance, but I agree that it would require a Sandow to use a weapon of that sort with any success.
  The question we have to consider is, is it not right that mounted men, now that they are used so very much in a double capacity, sometimes on horseback and sometimes on foot, should at least have one weapon suitable for each position? I think most people will agree to that, and I think that the idea which we sometimes see portrayed in the illustrated papers, of a gallant mounted infantryman galloping full speed, with his reins loose on the horse's neek and his

  613
  rifle up to his shoulder taking aim, is quite impossible in modern warfare. It is possible to use the carbine on horseback, but if it is to be used effectively it must be sufficiently short to be used in one hand as a pistol. I remember many years ago, when there were still buffalo in the United States, that I killed a number of buffalo with a carbine used in that way; it is far better than any revolver that was ever invented. What is the weapon you are going to give to your mounted man? The two suggested are the lance and the sword. It seems to me that directly you give your mounted man a rifle the question of a lance drops out, because I do not see how a man can carry a rifle and a lance as well. Therefore, you are tied up at once to the sword. I believe that the sword should be such an one as Lord Ashburton suggested, and that it should be attached to the saddle so that it should be essentially a weapon which the man would rely upon on horseback to use from the horse.
  Then we come to the question of the rifle and how it is to be carried. It seems to me one of the most extraordinary incidents of the whole of the rearmament of our forces that a shortened rifle should have been adopted for the purpose of being handed to every mounted man— for that was the object of shortening the rifle—and that the manufacture of hundreds of thousands of shortened rifles should have been entered upon before any decision had been come to as to the manner in which that rifle was to be carried on horseback. All sorts of methods have been tried. A very distinguished general officer at Aldershot told me the other day that they were at their wits' ends to find a way of carrying this new rifle on horseback, and I have seen a number of the new rifles that have been so carried very much damaged by the operation. My Aldershot friend leans to carrying the rifle in a bucket on the saddle in the same way as the old carbine was carried, but that is not so easily done. Noble Lords who have tried it will not have found it so easy as in the case of the old carbine, and, if you fix your rifle in a bucket on the saddle, then, supposing your man is dismounted, both
  614
  his sword and his rifle are left on the saddle, and he is without any arm at all.
  I think a method of carrying the rifle or carbine should be decided upon which would allow of its being attached to the man, so that when he is dismounted he has a weapon with him, and that weapon the one which it is most convenient for him to use when on foot. I have another witness to call with regard to the question of carrying the rifle. A very capable cavalry officer writes to me—
  "We have not yet discovered how we are to carry the new rifle. We have been supplied with shoes to fit on the saddle, but the rifle is too short to carry with the sling and shoe."
  I understood that that was the great object of shortening the rifle, that you were to be able to carry it with a lance attachment and in a lance shoe. The extraordinary result of shortening the rifle has been that you cannot carry it in this way because the rifle is too short. This officer continues—
  "I hear the cavalry at Aldershot are carrying them slung on their backs with their butt in the shoe, which must be very dangerous and uncomfortable. They complain of having lost a lot of bolts. A bucket to carry the new rifle is too clumsy for words."
  My point is that it is an extraordinary thing that you should invent a new rifle for the express purpose of supplying to the cavalry, that you should shorten your rifle throughout the whole British Army and re-issue it to the cavalry, without making up your minds in which way it is to be carried by horsemen. I think the House may well give a little more time to this question, and I hope the result will be that our mounted men may be given an arm suitable to be used on horseback and another arm to be used on foot, and that both may be carried in a convenient way for man and beast.
  EARL ROBERTS: My Lords, as I have had something to say on this question of the rifle, the sword, and the bayonet, perhaps it will not be out of place if I make a few remarks on this occasion. When we went to South Africa the cavalry were armed with the carbine and sword or lance, as the case might be, or both. A very short time after I arrived out there I received a request from the officer commanding the 18th Hussars asking that his

  615
  men should be given the rifle. He said that the carbine was practically useless against the Boer Mauser, and he hoped that his regiment might be given rifles. I was able to meet the request, and in a very short time all the other officers commanding cavalry regiments followed this officer's example and begged that their men should be given rifles too. Consequently rifles were given to them. I cannot understand how, if the cavalry found the carbine useless when on service, anyone can possibly propose that they should be armed with it now.
  Before the war began a Committee was sitting to see whether the existing rifle could not be made a little handier for general purposes by being made lighter and a little shorter. That Committee did not conclude its proceedings until the war was over, but when I came back to England I remembered that the cavalry had all begged they might have the rifle. It seemed that if this proposal, which had been made before the war began, that the rifle should be shortened could be carried out, it would be as well to have a rifle which would do for infantry and cavalry alike. That was the origin of the shorter rifle. It is as effective in every respect as the long one; it has the advantage of being 5-in. shorter and a pound lighter; and for cavalry purposes, therefore, it is more convenient. As to the question of how the rifle should be carried, the carbine has now a sling attached to it, so that it can be worn across a man's shoulders when on service. It is, of course, only on service that it is necessary that it should be thus carried, but, as the noble Lord has said, it is then essential.
  In Afghanistan on one occasion I had about two squadrons of the 9th Lancers numbering about 195 men, and on 11th December, 1879, when we were fighting beyond Kabul, the 9th Lancers were a great deal engaged, and lost a great many horses and a fair number of men. But what surprised me was to find that they had lost more than forty carbines. On inquiry I found that this was due to the fact that the carbine was carried in the bucket, and that when the horse was shot and fell over the weapon was lost. I saw many of the men on foot in this pre-
  616
  dicament, their sword was dangling between their legs, their lance was in their hands, and they were trying to recover the carbine from the horse. I immediately gave orders that the swords should be attached to the saddle, and that the carbine should be carried on the trooper's back. That did not find favour for many years in this country, and has not up to the present moment; but I believe that it is now to be settled that the carbine shall be carried in the bucket in peace time and in a sling across the back in war time. The proper place for the sword is, no doubt, on the saddle. I would observe, however, that, if the Yeomanry are given the sword, it is essential that they should learn how to use it. I remember hearing a story in the war of some Yeomanry who were chasing a Boer. They overtook him, and the Boer fell down, and they began to slash at him with their swords. Not very much damage was done, and one officer said, "Shoot the poor devil." Then the Boer, who said nothing so long as they merely hacked at him with their swords, called out, "Don't shoot me, Sir." When they proposed to shoot him he begged for his life. Therefore, if the Yeomanry are given swords they should know how to use them, and unless they have sufficient time to learn their use it would be no good giving them swords. I only made these observations in order to tell your Lordships why the cavalry are now given the rifle and why it is difficult to give the sword to men unless they learn how to use it.

  THE CHINESE IN THE TRANSVAAL.
  LORD COLERIDGE: My Lords, I desire to ask the Under-Secretary of State for the Colonies how many Chinese labourers of those hitherto imported into-South Africa under the Chinese Labour Importation Ordinance can demand the importation of wife or children, under Clause 33 of the Regulations, and the numbers of such wives and children respectively. I would only remind the noble Duke that it was a week ago that he promised me this information. He said he would telegraph to Hong-kong to obtain it. I refrain from making any observations until I have heard the answer of my noble friend.
  THE UNDER-SECRETARY OF STATE FOR THE COLONIES (The Duke of MARLBOROUGH): MyLords, I do not think I need detain your Lordships more than a minute or two in replying to the Question of the noble and learned Lord. As the noble and learned Lord has reminded us, on 28th June he asked me to find out from Hong-kong the number of Chinese labourers who had registered their wives and families. In pursuance of my promise to the noble and learned Lord a telegram was sent off on the 29th ultimo to the Acting Governor of Hong-kong, and the reply we have received from him is to this effect, that out of the first batch of Chinese who went over to South Africa on the "Tweeddale," which I think had on board nearly 1,000, 308 had registered their names as being anxious to have their wives and families sent out to them; that is to say, over a third of the total number in the first ship registered their names and will be able to have their wives and families sent over to them at some future date. I think, in view of this fact, that the doubts and misgivings which I detected in the mind of the noble and learned Lord on the last occasion the subject was mentioned must be entirely removed.
  House adjourned at twenty minutes past Five o'clock, to Thursday next, half-past Ten o'clock.