Sitting of 15 March 1904

Preamble
The House met at Two of the Clock

UNOPPOSED PRIVATE BILL BUSINESS.
London United Tramways Bill. Read a second time, and committed.
Bexhill Water and Gas Bill. Reported, with Amendments; Report to lie upon the Table, and to be printed.

STANDING ORDERS.
Resolutions reported from the Select Committee.

1. "That, in the case of the St, Marylebone Electric Lighting Bill, Petition for Additional Provision, the Standing Orders ought to be dispensed with. That
1118
the parties be permitted to introduce their additional Provision if the Committee on the Bill think fit."

2. "That, in the case of the Marylebone Chapels (St. James', Westmoreland Street) I Bill [Lords], the Standing Orders ought I to be dispensed with. That the parties be permitted to proceed with their Bill."

3. "That, in the case of the Acton Improvement Bill, Petition for dispensing with Standing Order 128 in the case of the Petition of the Brentford Gas Company, against the Bill, the said Standing Order ought to be dispensed with."

Resolutions agreed to.
North Staffordshire Railway Bill. Reported, with Amendments; Report to lie upon the Table, and to be printed.

RAILWAY BILLS (GROUP No. 1).
Mr. KIMBER reported from the Committee on Group No. 1 of Railway 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.

RAILWAY BILLS (GROUP No. 4).
Mr. RUSSELL REA reported from the Committee on Group No. 4 of Railway Bills, That the parties opposing the Charing Cross, Euston, and Hampstead Railway Bill had stated that the evidence of Superintendent Horace J. Bantick, D Division, Metropolitan Police, Marylebone Lane, was essential to their case; and, it having been proved that his attendance could not be procured without the intervention of the House, he had been instructed to move that the said Horace J. Bantick do attend the said Committee Tomorrow, at half-past Eleven of the clock.
Ordered, That Superintendent Horace J. Bantick do attend the Committee on Group No. 4 of Railway Bills To-morrow, at half-past Eleven of the clock.

MESSAGE FROM THE LORDS.
That they have passed a Bill, intituled, "An Act for rendering valid certain Letters Patent granted to William Young; and Alexander Bell in respect of an invention for Improvements in the decomposition of mineral oils for the production

1119
of illuminating gas, and to William Young in respect to Inventions (1) for Improvements in the production of illuminating gas from mineral oils and in apparatus therefor and for producing water gas and (2) for Improvements in the production of illuminating gas and bye-products from liquid hydrocarbons and in apparatus therefor." [Young and Bell's Patents Bill [Lords.]
Also a Bill intituled, "An Act to enable the London, Chatham, and Dover Railway Company to raise further capital." [London, Chatham, and Dover Railway Bill [Lords.]
Also, a Bill, intituled, "An Act to confer further powers on the Provost, Magistrates, and Councillors of the Burgh of Govan in connection with their electricity undertaking; and for other purposes." [Govan Burgh (Electricity) Bill [Lords.]
And, also, a Bill, intituled, "An Act to empower the Corporation of Appleby to purchase the undertaking of the Appleby Gas Light and Coal Company, and to supply gas within the borough; and for other purposes." [Appleby Corporation Gas Bill [Lords.]
Young and Bell's Patents Bill [Lords]; London, Chatham, and Dover Railway Bill [Lords]; Govan Burgh (Electricity) Bill [Lords]; Appleby Corporation Gas Bill [Lords]. Read the first time; and referred to the Examiners of Petitions for Private Bills.

PETITIONS.
  LANDS VALUATION (SCOTLAND) BILL.
  Petition from Falkirk, against; to lie upon the Table.
  LAND VALUES (TAXATION) (SCOTLAND) BILL.
  Petition from Falkirk, against; to lie upon the Table.

  LICENCES (RENEWAL).
  Petitions against alteration of Law; from South Durham; Kiveton Park; Devonport; Llangarnech; St. Ives; North
  1120
  Finchley; Bingley; Hyde; Bishops Stort ford; Failsworth; Willesden; Gloucester' Warrington; Moss Side; Manchester (four); Middlesbrough; Doncaster; Cheetham Hill; Crumpsall; Litlington;; Croydon; Llanbadarn (two); Bala; Kennington Park; Hereford; Kington; Skegness; and Cinderford; to lie upon the Table.

  PARLIAMENTARY FRANCHISE.
  Petition from Wrington, for extension to women; to lie upon the Table.
  SALE OF BUTTER BILL.
  Petitions against; from Gloucester; Hove; Brighton; and Salisbury; to lie upon the Table.
  TRANSVAAL (CHINESE LABOUR ORDINANCE).
  Petition from Donside, for withdrawal; to lie upon the Table.
  VIVISECTION.
  Petition from Bristol, for prohibition; to lie upon the Table.
RETURNS, REPORTS, ETC.
  NAVY (DOCKYARD EXPENSE ACCOUNTS, 1902–3).
  Annual Accounts presented, for 1902–3, of Shipbuilding and Dockyard Transactions, etc., with Report of the Comptroller and Auditor- General thereon [by Act]; to lie upon the Table, and to be printed. [No. 100.]
  LOCAL GOVERNMENT (SCOTLAND).
  Copy presented, of Return of the Areas, Population, and valuation of Counties, Burghs, and Parishes in Scotland [by Command]; to lie upon the Table.
  RAILWAYS ABANDONMENT.
  Copy presented, of Report by the Board of Trade respecting the West Metropolitan Railway (Abandonment) Bill and the objects thereof [pursuant to Standing Order 158B]; referred to the Committee on the Bill.

  HARBOUR, ETC., BILLS (HUMBER COMMERCIAL RAILWAY AND DOCK BILL).
  Copy ordered, "of Report of the Board of Trade on the Humber Commercial Railway and Dock Bill."—(Mr. Gerald Balfour.)
  Copy presented accordingly; to lie upon the Table, and to be printed. [No. 101.]

  MAGISTRACY (IRELAND)
  Copy ordered, "of Correspondence between the Lord Chancellor of Ireland and Mr. Thomas M'Donagh, J.P., since the 3rd day of September, 1903."—(Mr. Wyndham.)
  Copy presented accordingly; to lie upon the Table, and to be printed. [No. 102.]

  ALIENS.
  Address for "Return showing the names of all Aliens to whom certificates of naturalisation have been issued, and who have taken the oath of allegiance, between the 1st day of January, 1903, and the 31st day of December, 1903, giving the country and place of residence of the person naturalised, and including information as to Aliens who have, during the same period, obtained Acts of Naturalisation from the Legislature (in continuation of Parliamentary Paper, No. 86, of Session 1903)."—(Mr. Corhrane.)
  SUGAR DUTIES.
  Return ordered, "showing the weight entered for home consumption at each degree of the polariscopic scale and the gross revenue received thereon since the re-imposition of the sugar duties in each month of the calendar year, with the total for each year and the average gross duty received per cent. of sugar, the number of analyses made and the total cost to the revenue of analysing the imports of sugar."—(Mr. Lough.)
QUESTIONS AND ANSWERS CIRCULATED WITH THE VOTES.

  Volunteer Active Service Companies— Offices and Army Rank.
  SIR LEES KNOWLES: To ask the Secretary of State for War if, in view of the fact that three active service
  1122
  companies from the three Volunteer battalions of the Lancashire Fusiliers were raised in succession, each under an Army Order identical in every respect as to conditions and period of service, the length of service being for the duration of the war in South Africa or for one year, and that honorary Army rank has been granted to the officers of the first two companies upon retirement from the Regular Army, he will reconsider the recent War Office ruling that, although they served till the end of the war, the officers of the third company are ineligible for honorary Army rank because their actual service in South Africa did not exceed six months.
  (Answered by Mr. Secretary Arnold-Forster.) When the grant of honorary Army rank to officers of the Imperial Yeomanry and Volunteer companies was approved it was decided that it should be based on a minimum qualifying service in South Africa, and a period of six months was accordingly fixed as the limit. No relaxation of this rule has been made. There are many officers affected and several with longer service in South Africa than those mentioned in the Question, who only served three and a half months there, but I am not aware of any sound grounds for reconsidering the rule.

  Cottage Homes Bill.
  MR. JOHN HUTTON: To ask the President of the Local Government Board whether his attention has been called to Paragraph IX. of the Special Report from the Select Committee on the Aged Pensioners Bill, recommending the extension of the system of cottage homes; if so, will he say whether he proposes to bring in a Bill to carry such recommendation into effect, or will give assistance to enable the Cottage Homes Bill, which was brought in on the 19th February in the present session, to become law; and whether he will also introduce legislation to provide for the removal of imbeciles from the workhouses, as recommended by the Select Committee on the Cottage Homes Bill of 1899 and the Select Committee on the Aged Pensioners Bill, 1903.
  (Answered by Mr. Walter Long.) I am aware of the paragraph mentioned; but I

  1123
  am afraid that I cannot make any promise of proposing legislation during the present session on the subjects referred to in the Question, nor do I think that I can give any pledge with respect to the Cottage Homes Bill, which was brought in on the 19th February last.

  Housing of the Working Classes—Repayment of Loans by Local Authorities.
  MR. HERBERT SAMUEL: To ask the President of the Local Government Board if he will say what is the maximum period, provided under statute by order of the Board, for the repayment of loans contracted by local authorities for the purposes of the Housing of the Working Classes Acts; and what is the maximum period of repayment permitted by the Public Works Loan Commissioners in respect of money lent by them for those purposes.
  (Answered by Mr. Walter Long.) The maximum period for which local authorities can borrow for these purposes is eighty years, and is fixed by The Housing of the Working Classes Act, 1903; but if any such loan is advanced by the Public Works Loan Commissioners, the maximum period allowed by law for its repayment is fifty years.

  Parcels Post—Cash-on-delivery System
  SIR JOHN ROLLESTON: To ask the Postmaster-General whether he proposes to introduce the cash-on-delivery system in connection with the parcel post; and, if so, whether, before proceeding further with the scheme, he will lay upon the Table copies of the speeches of the deputations to him and of the correspondence upon the subject.
  (Answered by Lord Stanley.) I must beg to refer the hon. Member to an answer which I gave on the 22nd February to a Question on this subject asked by the hon. Member for North Tyrone.† I do not think that anything would be gained in the present juncture by laying on the Table of the House copies of the voluminous correspondence which has taken place.
  †See (4) Debates, cxxx., 564.

  Carriage of Mails at Dungloe, County Donegal.
  MR. HUGH LAW: To ask the Postmaster-General whether it is proposed to substitute carriage of mails by the new light railway for the existing mail car service to and from Dungloe, county Donegal; and whether he can arrange that there shall be a longer interval than at present between the arrival and departure of the mails.
  (Answered by Lord Stanley.) The question of forwarding the mails for Dungloe by the new light railway instead of by mail car is under consideration, and when a decision is arrived at I shall have pleasure in communicating the result to the hon. Member.

  Promotion in the Inland Revenue (Excise Branch).
  MR. PATRICK O'BRIEN: To ask the Secretary to the Treasury whether he will state what percentage of assistants entering the Excise branch of the Inland Revenue service can pass beyond the rank of first class officer; and if he will instruct the Civil Service Commissioners to insert this information in the papers supplied to candidates for appointments in the service.
  (Answered by Mr. Victor Cavendish.) To determine the percentage of assistants entering the Excise branch of the Inland Revenue service who can pass beyond the rank of first class officer would demand an actuarial calculation. It can only be said that of places open to persons entering the Excise as assistants, the number of posts carrying a salary in excess of £250 (the maximum pay of a first class officer) at present stands to the number of posts carrying salaries not exceeding £250 in the proportion of 1.5. The proportion is, of course, subject to variation from time to time. I think it would not be desirable to publish this information in the notices issued to candidates by the Civil Service Commissioners.

  Promotion of Senior Assistant Clerks, Abstractor Class.
  MR. YOXALL: To ask the Secretary to the Treasury whether he can state the number of, and offices wherein senior assistant clerks, abstractor

  1125
  class, have been promoted to positions other than that of second division clerks (with the usual certificate from the Civil Service Commissioners), together with the minimum and maximum salary, and annual increment in each case.
  (Answered by Mr. Victor Cavendish.) The numbers are—Admiralty three, Colonial Office four, Customs five, Board of Education one, Home Office two, Inland Revenue two, Patent Office five, Post Office five, Prisons Department (England) five, Reformatories Office (England) one, Treasury one, Office of Woods one. I will communicate the further details asked for to the hon. Member.

  Pensions of Assistant Clerks, Abstractor Class, Compulsorily Retired.
  MR. YOXALL: To ask the Secretary to the Treasury whether, in view of the recent compulsory retirements at the General Post Office and other Departments of assistant clerks (abstractor class) of over thirty years' service, on pensions of about 12s. per week, the Government will take steps to bring these men within the terms of a Treasury Minute which allows a gratuity, not exceeding one year's salary, to officers who have not earned a pension equal to one-half of their salary at the time of their compulsory retirement at sixty-five years of age.
  (Answered by Mr. Victor Cavendish.) The Minute in question refers to officers appointed to established situations before retirement at sixty-five was made compulsory by Order in Council. It was part of the original conditions of the appointment of clerks of the abstractor class that they should be subject to compulsory retirement at that age, and the Minute, therefore, does not apply to their cases.

  Civil Service Estimates—Votes on Account.
  SIR BRAMPTON GURDON (Norfolk, N.): To ask the Secretary to the Treasury whether, having regard to the fact that in several Civil Service Votes a Vote on Account has been taken for almost the entire sum required for the service of the year, whereby the Vote in question has been practically removed
  1126
  from the control of the House, he will give some explanation of the reasons for which it was necessary to obtain such large grants in the case of the Votes for Osborne; Secretary for Scotland; Dublin Metropolitan Police; Merchant Seamen's Fund Pensions; Miscellaneous Charitable and other Allowances; Hospitals and Charities, Ireland; Miscellaneous Expenses; St. Louis Exhibition; and Ireland Development Grant.
  (Answered by Mr. Victor Cavendish.) Osborne. The progress of expenditure is uncertain, and a round sum is taken. Secretary for Scotland. The statutory Grant in Aid (£20,000) to the Congested Districts Board is paid in April. Dublin Metropolitan Police. The Dublin Police Tax, which is the chief item of the Appropriations-in-Aid, is not received within the period of the Vote on Account. Merchant Seamen's Fund Pensions. Taken in round thousands. Two quarters have to be provided for. Miscellaneous Charitable and other Allowances. Round thousand. The bulk of the payments fall early in the year. Hospitals and Charities, Ireland. The grants to hospitals are paid early in the year. Miscellaneous Expenses. Some large payments have to be made early in the year, others at uncertain dates. St. Louis Exhibition. The Exhibition takes place this summer. Ireland Development Grant. The grant is applicable in the first instance to statutory purposes under the Irish Land Act, 1903.

  Fees to Medical Witnesses in Metropolitan Police Courts.
  DR. RUTHERFOORD-HARRIS: To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department whether he is aware that, although the allowances to medical witnesses in criminal cases in Courts throughout England and Wales have, in accordance with the recommendations or the Departmental Committee which reported on the subject last year (as stated in the Memorandum prefixed to the new Scale and dated 12th November, 1903), been considerably increased, there is no such increase in the fees allowed to medical witnesses in the Metropolitan Police Courts; and, if so, whether, seeing that under the statutory rules and orders establishing the new

  1127
  scale, all the previous rules and regulations made under Section 5 of the Criminal Justice Administration Act, 1851, have been revoked, he will explain why the regulations made for the Metropolitan Police Courts on 31st July, 1875, remain in force.
  (Answered by Mr. Secretary Akers-Douglas.) I think the Question is based on a misapprehension. The old regulations under the Criminal Justice Administration Act, 1851, have been revoked, and the new regulations, which increase the fees allowed to medical witnesses, have been fully brought into force in the Metropolitan Police Courts. There is no difference between their application in the Metropolitan Police Courts and their application in other Courts. The Act of 1851, however, does not provide for the payment of fees to witnesses in all cases; but only where the prosecution is for certain denned offences (including all felonies and the more serious misdemeanours). In the case of minor misdemeanours, the law makes no provision for the payment of witnesses. In those minor cases for which the law does not provide it has been the practice for many years in the Metropolitan Police Courts to pay certain fees to medical witnesses from police funds. These fees are not affected by the new regulations under the Act of 1851, and continue to be regulated by a different scale from that governing the statutory fees.

  Native Labour in the Transvaal—Commission for Recruiting in Central Africa.
  SIR BRAMPTON GURDON: To ask the Under-Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs whether the British Central African Administration receive a commission on every native recruited for employment in the Transvaal, and, if so, what is the amount.
  (Answered by Earl Ferry.) No, Sir. The 10s. fee alluded to in Major Pearce's telegram of 25th March, 1903 (Africa, No. 2, 1903, p. 2), has never been enforced, and the Administration has received no money on account of recruitments for South Africa.

  Payment of Temporary Medical Officer at Enniskillen.
  MR. JORDAN (Fermanagh, S.): To ask the Chief Secretary to the Lord-Lieutenant of Ireland if his attention has been called to the action of Mr. Considine, a Local Government Board auditor, in surcharging three members of the Enniskillen Board of Guardians on 2nd February last in the sum of two guineas, part of an amount paid by the guardians to Dr. J. E. Johnston for two weeks, as locum tenens for Dr. Tate, in the Hally-well division of the Enniskillen Union; is he aware that, after advertising and making other efforts, the guardians were unable to procure the services of any medical man at four guineas a week, and were compelled to pay five guineas rather than deprive the poor of the division of medical attendance, and that, owing to letters from the Local Government Board, the guardians refused to pay the full amount agreed on until legal proceedings were initiated; and whether, seeing that no other action was open to the guardians under the circumstances, and that the three members surcharged only officially signed the treasurer's authority of the ordinary sheet of payments, he will take steps to remove the surcharge.
  (Answered by Mr. Wyndham.) The Local Government Board cannot express an opinion in respect of the legality or equity of this surcharge until the matter comes before it in the manner prescribed by Statute, namely, on appeal from the persons aggrieved.

  Preparation of Jurors' and Voters' Lists by Clerks of Unions.
  MR. HUGH LAW: To ask the Chief Secretary to the Lord-Lieutenant of Ireland whether his attention has been called to resolutions of the Boards of Guardians of Glenties and Innishowen, county Donegal, urging a repeal of Section 83 (7), of the Local Government (Ireland) Act, 1898, in order to restore to the clerks of unions the duty of preparing the jurors' and voters' lists; and what action he proposes to take in the matter.
  (Answered by Mr. Wyndham.) I have nothing to add to my reply to the similar Question addressed to me on the 25th

  1129
  February by the hon. Member for Mid Cork.†

  The Licensing Bill.
  MR. SAMUEL ROBERTS: To ask the First Lord of the Treasury whether his attention has been called to the number of refusals to renew licences at the recent Brewster Sessions, notably at Scarborough, Swansea, Whitby, and Keighley, arising through no misconduct on the part of the licence holders; and whether, in view of these facts, he is prepared to expedite the introduction of the Government Licensing Bill, or to make its provisions retrospective.
  (Answered by Mr. A. J. Balfour.) It is premature at the present time to make any statement as to the provisions of the promised Licensing Bill.

QUESTIONS IN THE HOUSE.

  Volunteer Active Service Companies— Officers and Army Rank.
  *SIR LEES KNOWLES (Salford, W.): I beg to ask the Secretary of State for War if, in view of the fact that three active service companies from the three Volunteer battalions of the Lancashire Fusiliers were raised in succession, each under an Army Order identical in every respect as to conditions and period of service, the length of service being for the duration of the war in South Africa, or for one year, and that honorary Army rank has been granted to the officers of the first two companies upon retirement from the regular Army, he will reconsider the recent War Office ruling that, although they served till the end of the war, the officers of the third company are ineligible for honorary Army rank because their actual service in South Africa did not exceed six months.
  THE FINANCIAL SECRETARY TO THE WAR OFFICE (Mr. BROMLEY DAVENPORT,): When the grant of honorary Army rank to officers of Imperial Yeomanry and Volunteer companies was approved, it was decided that it should be based on a minimum qualifying service in South Africa, and a
  †See (4) Debates, cxxx., 1,000.
  1130
  period of six months was accordingly fixed as the limit. No relaxation of this rule has been made. There are many officers affected, and several with longer service in South Africa than those mentioned in the Question, who only served three-and-a-half months there, but I am not aware of any sound grounds for reconsidering the rule.
  *SIR LEES KNOWLESasked if the rule was made after the officers had accepted the conditions of service?
  MR. BROMLEY DAVENPORTreplied in the affirmative, adding that, on the other hand, when the officers accepted the conditions of service there was no undertaking that they should have honorary Army rank.

  Welsh Smokeless Coal.
  *SIR LEES KNOWLES: I beg to ask the Secretary to the Admiralty if he will state the annual consumption by the Navy, and the cost, in each of the past ten years, of smokeless steam coal, distinguishing in each year the amount and the cost of the coal from Wales; and if he will state the amount of smokeless steam coal for naval purposes in the possession of the Government.
  THE SECRETARY TO THE ADMIRALTY (Mr. PRETYMAN,): The details asked for in the first part of the Question are not immediately available. With regard to the second part of the Question, it is not considered desirable in the public interest to state the amount of steam coal for naval purposes in the possession of the Government, but care is taken that adequate reserves are maintained.
  *MR. LEES KNOWLES: Is the hon. Gentleman aware that at the time of a recent international scare the possible enemy of this country was buying every ton of output of Welsh smokeless steam coal, in order to prepare for war with Great Britain?

  West Indian Exports.
  MR. BRIGG: I beg to ask the Secretary of State for the Colonies whether he will grant a Return of the exports of fruit and sugar

  1131
  from Jamaica and the West Indies to England, Canada, and to all other countries, for the year previous to the granting of steamship subsidies, and for the year 1903.
  *THE SECRETARY OF STATE FOR THE COLONIES (Mr. LYTTELTON,): A Return giving as nearly as possible the information asked for by the hon. Member will be laid almost immediately, but details for the year 1903 are not yet available.

  Transvaal Labour Ordinance
  MR. LOUGH: I beg to ask the Secretary of State for the Colonies whether he is aware that under the laws governing Asiatic immigration into Trinidad and British Guiana it is made a special criminal offence for any employer, manager or officer to assault, or in any way ill-use, an indentured immigrant; whether the Transvaal Ordinance contains any such provision for the protection of the Chinese labourers; and, if not, whether he will insist on such protection being provided for in the Ordinance.
  *MR. LYTTELTON: There is no such provision in the Ordinance; the offences referred to are sufficiently dealt with by the existing law of the Transvaal.
  MR. LOUGH: I beg to ask the Secretary of State for the Colonies, whether he is aware that provision is made by the laws governing Asiatic immigration into Trinidad arid British Guiana enabling indentured labourers to absent themselves from their labour in order to obtain redress summarily in the Colonial Courts for ill-treatment complained of by them, or for wages withheld from them; whether there is any provision in the Transvaal Ordinance enabling Chinese labourers to obtain such redress in the Courts of the Transvaal; and, if not, whether he will secure the insertion in the Ordinance of provisions giving like protection to Chinese labourers.
  *MR. LYTTELTON: There is no special provision of this nature in the Transvaal Ordinance, but under Section 3 it is the duty of the superintendent to act on behalf of the labourer in bringing before the Courts any complaints as to the matters therein referred to.
  MR. LOUGH: Cannot the right hon. Gentleman promise that the labourer shall have some liberty to protect himself and not depend entirely on the superintendent?
  *MR. LYTTELTON: They will have every liberty, but the superintendent will probably be able to act for them more effectually.

  Government Sanction to the Transvaal Labour Ordinance.
  MAJOR SEELY: I beg to ask the Secretary of State for the Colonies if he can state whether it has been finally decided to sanction the Ordinance for the importation of Chinese indentured labour into the Transvaal; and, if so, when such sanction will be given. May I further ask, whether the statement published in newspapers that the proclamation which makes the Ordinance definitely operative has been issued, is correct, and whether it has been issued with the authority of His Majesty's Government.
  *MR. LYTTELTON: The Ordinance has been sanctioned. I have no information as to the proclamation.
  MR. SWIFT MACNEILL: Is not the Ordinance sanctioned when it receives the assent of the Governor, subject to the King's right to disallow it?
  *Mr. LYTTELTON: Under the suspensory clause, the operation of the Ordinance is suspended until the King's pleasure in giving or withholding his sanction has been signified.

  Transvaal Opinion on the Labour Ordinance.
  MAJOR SEELY: I beg to ask the Secretary of State for the Colonies if he can now state what reasons he has for supposing that the majority of the inhabitants of the Transvaal are in favour of the importation of Chinese indentured labour into that colony; and what is the total estimated number of adult male whites in that colony.
  *MR. LYTTELTON: Until the figures of the census are obtained it will not be possible to give any estimate on which my hon. and gallant friend can safely rely.

  White Labour for Gold Mining.
  MAJOR SEELY: I beg to ask the Secretary of State for the Colonies if he can now state what proportion of the total annual output of gold, elsewhere than in the Transvaal, is produced by white labour; and whether he has any official information showing that the conditions are more favourable to the employment of white labour in the case of such mines as employ white labour, than in the mines of the Transvaal; and, if not, in what districts conditions are less favourable.
  *MR. LYTTELTON: I cannot say what proportion of the output of the world, outside the Transvaal, is produced by white labour, nor do I receive the detailed information which would enable me to compare one mine with another. But broadly speaking, wherever there is no coloured population the conditions for the employment of white labour are more favourable than they are in the Transvaal.
  MR. SYDNEY BUXTON: Why not refer the matter to a small Commission for inquiry?
  [No answer was returned.]

  Quebec Legislative Assembly and Irish Home Rule.
  MR. CHARLES DEVLIN: I beg to ask the Secretary of State for the Colonies whether his attention has been called to the fact that in the despatch of the right hon. Member for West; Birmingham, when Colonial Secretary, acknowledging receipt of the resolution of the Legislative Assembly of the Province of Quebec, dated 25th April, 1903, approving of land legislation then before the House of Commons, and expressing the hope that in the near future the j Parliament of Great Britain would grant self-government to Ireland, acknowledgment is made by reference only to the portion of the resolution dealing with land legislation; and, if so, can he explain the omission of any reference in the Colonial Secretary's despatch dated 23rd June, 1903, which suggested self-government for Ireland; and whether he proposes to send an amended reply.
  *MR. LYTTELTON: There is no intention of sending any further reply.
  MR. PATRICK O'BRIEN: Why was no reference made to that part of the despatch which referred to self-government for Ireland?
  *MR. LYTTELTON: That Question should be addressed to my predecessor on his return.

  Convicts in South African Mines.
  MR. LEVY: I beg to ask the Secretary of State for the Colonies whether he can now state the number of convicts employed in the mines in South Africa, and the terms of the contracts whereby they are employed, and especially whether any payment is made for the services of the convicts employed other than that required by the Act of Cape Colony, No. 28, 1888, for their safe custody and maintenance.
  *MR. LYTTELTON: I am unable at present to give these particulars, for which I have asked by a despatch by mail.

  Whisky Adulteration.
  MR. WEIR: I beg to ask the President of the Board of Trade if he will consider the expediency of instructing revenue officials to prohibit the mixing of raw grain whisky with malt whisky in Government warehouses under their supervision.
  THE CHANCELLOR OF THE EXCHEQUER (Mr. AUSTEN CHAMBERLAIN, Worcestershire, E.): Perhaps I may be allowed to answer this Question. There is no power to issue such instructions.

  Canadian Pig-Iron.
  SIR CHARLES McLAREN: I beg to ask Mr. Chancellor of the Exchequer if his attention has been called to the increase in the export of pig-iron from Canada to this country; whether he is aware that this iron enjoys a bounty of 12s. a ton; and whether the Government propose to take any steps to protect the iron trade of this country against colonial bounty-fed competition.
  MR. AUSTEN CHAMBERLAIN: The hon. Baronet's Question appears to be founded on a misapprehension of the

  1135
  facts. The imports of pig-iron from Canada, which rose to over 50,000 tons in each of the years 1901 and 1902, fell last year to under 4,000 tons. There is a rise in the first two months of the present year, but the figures are still far below the average of the two years 1901 and 1902. I should add that these figures include American iron shipped through Canada. I am aware that a bounty on export is given by Canada on a scale diminishing year by year. It now amounts to about 12s. 5d. per ton of pig-iron produced from Canadian ore, and to about 8s. 3d. on pig-iron produced from foreign ore, and is subject to a reduction each year till 1906–7, when it will be 35 per cent. of the original figures. The abolition or modification of these bounties would be a proper subject for consideration whenever our fiscal and commercial relations with our Colonies come under review.
  MR. HERBERT SAMUEL: Do these figures include Canadian pig-iron coming from American ports?
  SIR CHARLES McLAREN: Is the right hon. Gentleman aware that the Canadian ports are closed during the winter?
  MR. AUSTEN CHAMBERLAIN: I am not certain whether the figures I have given include Canadian shipments from American ports, but I will, if the hon. Baronet puts down a specific Question, make inquiries on the subject.

  Income Tax on Bank Dividends.
  MR. WEIR: I beg to ask Mr. Chancellor of the Exchequer whether he is aware that the London and Westminster Bank, Limited, as agents for the Cape Government, deducted from dividends paid 15th April, 1903, a sum in excess of the amount due for income-tax; and, if so, will he state what sum in excess of the income-tax was thus paid, and how much has been returned by the Inland Revenue to stockholders.
  MR. AUSTEN CHAMBERLAIN: The distribution of the dividends in question was made prior to the Resolution of the House of Commons fixing the rate of income-tax for the year 1903–4, and the
  1136
  bank, therefore, on paying the dividends deducted tax at the rate in force for the previous year, i.e., at 1s. 3d. in the £., or 4d. in excess of the rate subsequently imposed. The bank declined to undertake the adjustment of the excess deduction except upon conditions which the Board of Inland Revenue were unable to accept, and it was therefore left to the individual stockholders to apply to the Board for a refund of the duty overpaid upon their dividends. Repayment has been granted in every case in which application was made.
  MR. WEIR: Will the right hon. Gentleman answer the last two Questions?
  MR. AUSTEN CHAMBERLAIN: The money has been returned in every case in which it has been claimed, and if any further claims are made they will be paid.
  MR. WEIR: How much has been repaid?
  MR. AUSTEN CHAMBERLAIN: I am unable to say.
  MR. WEIR: I will put another Question down. It has been a case of swindling right and left.

  East African Trade—Steamer Subsidies.
  MR. NUSSEY: I beg to ask the Under-Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs whether the Government propose to grant a subsidy to a line of steamers trading with the East Coast of Africa; if so, whether tenders will be advertised for, in order to ensure the service being done at lowest cost to the taxpayer; and further, if, before adopting this course, time will be given for the matter to be discussed in the House.
  THE UNDER-SECRETARY OF STATE FOR FOREIGN AFFAIRS (Earl PERCY,): No decision has been arrived at in regard to the question of granting a subsidy to steamers trading with the East Coast of Africa.

  Overcrowding on London Railways.
  MR. WEIR: I beg to ask the President of the Board of Trade whether he is

  1137
  aware that the third class carriages of trains on the Metropolitan Railway Extension are frequently so overcrowded that passengers are compelled to stand; and, if so, will he communicate with the railway company on the subject with a view to the provision of more accommodation on this line.
  THE PRESIDENT OF THE BOARD OF TRADE (Mr. GERALD BALFOUR,): I have communicated with the railway company on the subject of the hon. Member's Question and in reply they write as follows:—"With the trains as at present composed of coaches of three classes it may happen, at certain periods of the day, that some particular class is for a short time inconveniently full, but the company are now constructing corridor coaches which will obviate this, and as soon as they are able to work trains electrically considerably more accommodation will be given."

  Return Railway Tickets.
  MR. WEIR: I beg to ask the President of the Board of Trade, having regard to the fact that several of the leading railway companies have extended the period during which return tickets are available, will he make representations to the Metropolitan and Metropolitan District Railway Companies with a view to secure similar concessions.
  MR. GERALD BALFOUR: I see no reason at present for interfering, in this matter, with the discretion of the railway companies referred to.

  Royal Commission on Trade Disputes.
  SIR CHARLES DILKE (): I beg to ask the Secretary to the Treasury if he can state the date of the note appended to the Estimate for the Royal Commission on Trade Disputes, in which it is said that the Commission appointed 6th June last has held three meetings; and why it is that the Commission is not expected to finish its work before the end of 1904.
  THE FINANCIAL SECRETARY OF THE TREASURY (Mr. VICTOR CAVENDISH,): The note was dated 20th November, 1903. I understand that the Commissioners have not vet decided
  1138
  as to the number of witnesses they will call, and that the duration of their labours cannot yet be forecasted with greater certainty.
  MR. SHACKLETON: Is the right hon. Gentleman aware that the trades unions refused to give evidence before the Commission?

  Highland Crofters—Supply of Seed Oats.
  MR. WEIR: I beg to ask the Secretary for Scotland, having regard to the nature of the harvest in the Highland crofting counties, will the restrictions which have been placed on the supply of seed oats to some of the congested districts be withdrawn; and will he state what quantity of oats has been supplied by the Congested Districts Board this year, and at what price.
  THE SECRETARY FOR SCOTLAND (Mr. A. GRAHAM MURRAY,): The Board are not prepared to vary the conditions which they have adopted as a matter of policy after full consideration. 2241 quarters have been supplied, carriage paid, at 21s. per quarter.

  Irish Development Grant—National School Requirements.
  MR. JOHN REDMOND: I beg to ask the Chief Secretary to the Lord-Lieutenant of Ireland whether he intends to make any provision out of the Development Grant Fund for changing the limit of attendance in National schools in Ireland and providing the additional teachers required.
  THE CHIEF SECRETARY FOR IRELAND (Mr. WYNDHAM,): The question of reducing the existing average required for assistant teachers received my earnest consideration. It was not, however, found possible to effect the desired change in the Development Grant Estimate prior to a consideration of Mr. Dale's Report.

  Irish Land Judges Court.
  MR. T. W. RUSSELL: I beg to ask the Chief Secretary to the Lord-Lieutenant of Ireland if he will state the number of estates that have been removed from the Land Judges Court since the passing of the Act of 1896, the number of estates sold within the same

  1139
  period, and the amount of the purchase money.
  MR. WYNDHAM: It is not possible to give the number of estates sold or removed, because many estates dealt with have in part been sold and in part removed from the Court. Advances amounting to £3,811,321 have been sanctioned for the purchase of lands administered by the Court to the 31st December, 1903. The greater portion of this amount, namely, £2,880,528, has been advanced since the passing of the Act of 1896. In addition, there have been large cash sales and sales of non-agricultural hereditaments. I have already stated that the gross rental under Receivers has been reduced by 50 per cent. since 1895.

  Congestion in Castlebar.
  DR. AMBROSE (Mayo, W.): I beg to ask the Chief Secretary to the Lord-Lieutenant of Ireland whether, seeing that the inhabitants of the district of Keelogues, near Castlebar, county Mayo, labour under disadvantage owing to its not being a scheduled congested district as specified under the Congested Districts Board (Ireland) Act, while in reality there are several congested villages in it, he will see that it is made a scheduled congested district, thereby enabling them to partake of the benefits of the Act.
  MR. WYNDHAM: No, Sir, I do not propose to legislate on the lines suggested. Congestion outside the scheduled districts can be dealt with under the Land Acts.

  Sligo Motor Service.
  MR. WILLIAM McKILLOP: I beg to ask the Chief Secretary to the Lord-Lieutenant of Ireland whether a motor service will be established under the Iveagh and Pirrie scheme between Sligo and Ballina, and whether it will be worked in connection with the service between Ballina and Belmullet.
  MR. WYNDHAM: No, Sir; it is not proposed to establish a service between Sligo and Ballina.

  Mr. P. Chevenix Trench.
  MR. P. A. MCHUGH: I beg to ask the Chief Secretary to the
  1140
  Lord-Lieutenant of Ireland whether he is aware that Mr. P. Chevenix Trench, one of the six land agents appointed arbitrators by the Local Government Board for Ireland since the passing of The Local Government (Ireland) Act, 1898, is officially described as a Fellow of the Surveyors' Institute; and will he explain what is the Surveyors' Institute, what are the qualifications for membership, by whom are the qualifications tested, and is the Institute officially recognised by the Irish Government.
  MR. WYNDHAM: I am aware of the fact stated in the first part of the Question. The Surveyors' Institute of the United Kingdom was founded in 1868, and incorporated by Royal Charter in 1881. Information in respect of membership can be obtained from the officials of the Institution; the address of the Irish branch is 110, Grafton Street, Dublin. The Institution receives no special recognition from the Irish Government.

  Eyrecourt Convent Schools.
  MR. ROCHE (Galway, E.): I beg to ask the Chief Secretary to the Lord-Lieutenant of Ireland whether plans and specifications for the building of the Convent National Schools at Eyrecourt, county Galway, were lodged at the Education Office and approved by the Board's officers more than two years ago; whether, in view of the present condition of the old schools, immediate steps will be taken to sanction the grant required, so that the building may be proceeded with.
  MR. WYNDHAM: I understand the manager has consented to wait until the new building plans have been approved. In respect of these plans I would refer to my reply, on Friday last, to the Question of the hon. and learned Member for North Louth.†

  Irish Development Grant.
  MR. CLANCY: I beg to ask Mr. Chancellor of the Exchequer from what dates, respectively, did the additional grant for education in England and Wales, consequent on the Education Act of 1902, and the Irish
  †See page 855.

  1141
  Development Fund Grant, begin to accrue, and what was the amount paid on account of each grant in the financial year 1903–4.
  MR. AUSTEN CHAMBERLAIN: The Aid Grant under the Education Act, 1902, begins to accrue from different dates in different localities. The amount that will be paid in respect of the grant in the present financial year cannot yet be stated. The Ireland Development Grant Act provided that two-thirds of a full year's grant should be paid in the current year.

  St. Patrick's Day.
  MR. NANNETTI: I beg to ask the hon. Member for North Huntingdonshire, as representing the President of the Board of Agriculture, whether, seeing that St. Patrick's Day is a legal holiday in Ireland, all the employees engaged on ordnance survey in that country are to be granted a holiday on the 17th March.
  MR. AILWYN FELLOWES: The reply to the hon. Member's Question is in the affirmative.

NEW BILL.
  MERCHANT SHIPPING BILL.
  "To amend The Merchant Shipping Act, 1894," presented by Mr. Runciman; supported by Sir Charles Cayzer, Sir Robert Ropner, Mr. Russell Rea, Colonel Denny, and Mr. Austin Taylor; to be read a second time upon Monday, 16th May, and to be printed. [Bill 128.]

  SUPPLY.
  Considered in Committee.
  (In the Committee).
  [Mr. JEFFREYS (Hampshire, N.) in the Chair.]

  CIVIL SERVICES AND REVENUE DEPARTMENTS (SUPPLEMENTARY) ESTIMATES, 1903–4.

    CLASS IV.
    1. Motion made, and Question proposed, "That a Supplementary sum, not exceeding £29,500, be granted to His Majesty, to defray the Charge which will
    1142
    come in course of payment during the year ending on the 31st day of March, 1904, for the Expenses of the Commissioners of National Education in Ireland."
    MR. JOHN REDMONDrenewed the Motion of the Member for West Kerry on a recent occasion for a reduction of the Vote by £100, the debate not having been brought to a conclusion by reason of the Rules of the House. He proposed, therefore, to again raise the question of the action of the National Board of Education in issuing a circular, the effect of which was to limit the teaching of Irish in certain National schools in the country. He did not propose to traverse the ground travelled by his hon. friend; it was sufficient for him to say that there was on those Benches a strong opinion as to the effect of this circular, and that opinion was shared almost universally in Ireland. From every part of Ireland he had himself received resolutions from all sorts of elective bodies protesting against the action of the National Board; and it was not too much to say that there was a feeling of intense indignation at this circular, the effect of which was to diminish the opportunity of Irish children for learning Irish in the schools of the country. It took away the teaching of Irish from the younger class of scholars, who were just the scholars who ought to be taught it. He considered they would be wanting if they did not make a formal protest, and for that reason he begged to move a reduction in the Vote of £100.
    Motion made, and Question proposed. "That a sum, not exceeding £29,400. be granted for the said service."—(Mr. John Redmond.)
    THE CHIEF SECRETARY FOR IRELAND (Mr. WYNDHAM,)said the hon. Member had reminded him that Supply prevented him rising on the Motion of the Member for West Kerry; and he would therefore say now what he should have said then. The hon. Member was pressing him to give some assurance that he would give his attention to this circular. He would say now what ho could not say then. He had given special attention to this circular. He had

    1143
    addressed a number of inquiries to the National Board of Education with respect to the document; and he had received a reply, the contents of which were communicated by him in reply to a Question by the hon. Member for West Kerry. He did not know whether that reply was quite satisfactory, or whether it was only partly satisfactory; but he hoped to show that it went a very long way to remove the apprehensions to which the circular might give rise. Under the old results system no special fee was payable for Irish in any class lower than Fifth. Under the new regulations a fee would be payable in classes as low as the Fourth. A competent teacher unconnected with a school would be eligible to earn fees and would not be penalised in any way as might be assumed from the terms of the circular, because of the failure of the school teacher to conduct his school in such a manner as to earn a "good" report. Moreover, it was intended to give Inspectors a discretionary power to recommend that a teacher of a school should be allowed to earn fees in extra branches under exceptional circumstances even though the teacher failed to secure a "good" report at his school. And Inspectors would be required in their reports to take into account the social condition and ages of the pupils, as well as the locality of the school and any other circumstances that might require or suggest exceptional treatment. The National Board
    admitted these were points of importance and they were prepared to modify the circular in these directions. He had given this matter his personal attention, and clearly Irish children ought not to be excluded by the circular from obtaining instruction in Irish, and hon. Members might rest assured that it would be his part to endeavour to see that no undue restrictions were imposed.
    MR. JOHN BEDMONDsaid the right hon. Gentleman had spoken of his own views on the subject. They were very well known, and he freely admitted that he had expressed again and again sympathetic views. He said they might rest assured that it would be his part to see no undue restrictions were imposed, but he himself had repeatedly told them that he had no power to see anything of the kind. He had no control over these gentlemen. They issued their circulars and regulations quite irrespective of him, and when they had issued a circular such as the present one he had to go, suck was the absurd system, to them, cap in hand, and beg them to modify it. In this instance, he hoped to induce them to do so; but this was not a satisfactory explanation, and he should certainly press his Motion to a division.
    Question put.
    The Committee divided:—Ayes, 141; Noes, 130. (Division List No. 54.)

    AYES.

    Allen, Charles P.

    Craig, Robert Hunter (Lanark)

    Freeman-Thomas, Captain F.

    Ambrose, Robert

    Crombie, John William

    Gladstone, Rt Hn. Herbert John

    Ashton, Thomas Gair

    Crooks, William

    Goddard, Daniel Ford

    Atherley-Jones, L.

    Cullinan, J.

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

    Barry, E. (Cork, S.)

    Dalziel, James Henry

    Gurdon, Sir W. Brampton

    Bayley, Thomas (Derbyshire)

    Davies, M. Vaughan (Cardigan

    Hammond, John

    Black, Alexander William

    Delany, William

    Harmsworth, R. Leicester

    Blake, Edward

    Dewar, John A. (Inverness-sh.

    Hayden, John Patrick

    Boland, John

    Dilke, Rt. Hon. Sir Charles

    Hemphill, Rt. Hon. Charles H.

    Brigg, John

    Doogan, P. C.

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

    Brown, George M. (Edinburgh)

    Douglas, Charles M. (Lanark)

    Holland, Sir William Henry

    Bryce, Rt. Hon. James

    Duncan, J. Hastings

    Hope, John Deans (Fife, West.)

    Buchanan, Thomas Ryburn

    Ellice, Capt E C (S. Andrw's Bghs

    Humphreys-Owen, Arthur C.

    Burke, E. Haviland

    Ellis, John Edward (Notts.)

    Hutchinson, Dr. Charles Fredk,

    Buxton, Sydney Charles

    Emmott, Alfred

    Hutton, Alfred E. (Morley)

    Caldwell, James

    Evans, Sir Francis H (Maidstone

    Jacoby, James Alfred

    Cameron, Robert

    Farquharson, Dr. Robert

    Joicey, Sir James

    Campbell, John (Armagh, S.)

    Fenwick, Charles

    Jones, David Brynmor (Swansea

    Campbell-Bannernman, Sir H.

    Ffrench, Peter

    Jones, William (Carnarvonshire

    Causton, Richard Knight

    Fitzmaurice, Lord Edmond

    Joyce, Michael

    Cawley, Frederick

    Flavin, Michael Joseph

    Kitson, Sir James

    Clancy, John Joseph

    Flynn, James Christopher

    Lambert, George

    Condon, Thomas Joseph

    Foster, Sir Walter (Derby Co.)

    Layland-Barratt, Francis

    Leese, Sir Joseph F (Accrington

    O'Brien Kendal (Tipperary Mid

    Soames, Arthur Wellesley

    Leng, Sir John

    O'Brien, Patrick (Kilkenny)

    Soares, Ernest J.

    Levy, Maurice

    O'Connor, T. P. (Liverpool)

    Spencer, Rt Hn C R (Northants

    Lloyd-George, David

    O'Dowd, John

    Stevenson, Francis S.

    Lough, Thomas

    O'Shee, James John

    Strachey, Sir Edward

    Lundon, W.

    Partington Oswald

    Sullivan, Donal

    Macnamara, Dr. Thomas J.

    Paulton, James Mellor

    Toulmin, George

    MacNeill, John Gordon Swift

    Pease, J. A. (Saffron Walden)

    Trevelyan, Charles Philips

    MacVeagh, Jeremiah

    Perks, Robert William

    Wason, Eugene (Clackmannan

    M'Crae, George

    Priestley, Arthur

    Wason, John Cathcart (Orkney

    M'Hugh, Patrick A.

    Reckitt, Harold James

    Weir, James Galloway

    M'Kean, John

    Reddy, M.

    White, George (Norfolk)

    M'Kenna, Reginald

    Redmond, John E. (Waterford

    White, Luke (York, E. R.)

    M'Killop, W. (Sligo, North)

    Redmond, William (Clare)

    Whiteley, George (York, W.R.

    M'Laren, Sir Charles Benjamin

    Robertson, Edmund (Dundee)

    Whitley, J. H. (Halifax)

    Mansfield, Horace Rendall

    Roche, John

    Williams, Osmond (Merioneth)

    Mitchell, Edw. (Fermanagh N.

    Rose, Charles Day

    Wilson, John (Durham, Mid.)

    Mooney, John J.

    Runciman, Walter

    Woodhouse, Sir J T (Huddersf'd

    Morley, Charles (Breconshire

    Russell, T. W.

    Young, Samuel

    Murnaghan, George

    Samuel, Herbert L. (Cleveland)

    Yoxall, James Henry

    Nannetti, Joseph P.

    Schwann, Charles E.

    Nolan, Col John P. (Galway, N.

    Shackleton, David James

    TELLERS FOR THE AYES—Sir

    Nolan, Joseph (Louth, South)

    Shaw, Thomas (Hawick B.)

    Thomas Esmonde and Captian Donelan.

    Norman, Henry

    Sheehan, Daniel Daniel

    Norton, Capt. Cecil William

    Sinclair, John (Forfarshire)

    Nussey, Thomas Willans

    Slack, John Bamford

    NOES.

    Agg-Gardner, James Tynte

    Elliot, Hon A. Ralph Douglas

    Malcolm, Ian

    Agnew, Sir Andrew Noel

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

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

    Aird, Sir John

    Fitz Gerald, Sir Robert Penrose

    Morton, Arthur H. Aylmer

    Anson, Sir William Reynell

    Forster, Henry William

    Mount, William Arthur

    Arnold-Forster, Rt Hn Hugh O

    Foster, Philips.(Warwick S W.

    Murray, Rt Hn. A. Graham (Bute

    Arrol, Sir William

    Gardner, Ernest

    Murray, Charles J. (Coventry)

    Atkinson, Rt. Hon. John

    Garfit, William

    Murray, Col. Wyndham (Bath)

    Aubrey-Fletcher, Rt Hn Sir H.

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

    Newdegate, Francis A. N.

    Bain, Colonel James Robert

    Gordon Maj Evans-(T'r H'mlets

    O'Neill, Hon. Robert Torrens

    Baird, John George Alexander

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

    Palmer, Walter (Salisbury)

    Balcarres, Lord

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

    Peel, Hn. Wm. Robert Wellesley

    Baldwin, Alfred

    Graham, Henry Robert

    Percy, Earl

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

    Greene, Henry D. (Shrewsbury)

    Platt-Higgins, Frederick

    Balfour Rt Hn Gerald W(Leeds

    Greene, W. Raymond (Cambs.)

    Powell, Sir Francis Sharp

    Bartley, Sir George C. T.

    Gretton, John

    Pretyman, Ernest George

    Bignold, Arthur

    Halsey, Rt. Hon. Thomas P.

    Pryce-Jones, Lt.-Col. Edward

    Blundell, Colonel Henry

    Hamilton Marq. Of (L'nd'nderry

    Rankin, Sir James

    Bousfield, William Robert

    Harris, P. Leverton (Tynem'th

    Reid, James (Greenock)

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

    Haslett, Sir James Horner

    Ridley, Hn. M. W. (Stalybridge

    Bowles, T. Gibson (King's Lynn

    Hay, Hon. Claude George

    Ridley, S. Forde (Bethnal Green)

    Brodrick, Rt. Hon. St. John

    Hermon-Hodge, Sir Robert T.

    Roberts, Samuel (Sheffield)

    Brotherton, Edward Allen

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

    Rollit, Sir Albert Kaye

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

    Hope, J. F. (Sheffield, Brightside

    Ropner, Colonel Sir Robert

    Carson, Rt. Hon. Sir Edw. H.

    Horner, Frederick William

    Royds, Clement Molyneux

    Cavendish, V. C. W. (Derbyshire

    Howard J. (Midd Tottenham

    Rutherford, W. W. (Liverpool)

    Chamberlain, Rt Hn. J. A. (Worc

    Hunt, Rowland

    Sadler, Col. Samuel Alexander

    Chapman, Edward

    Jeffreys Rt Ron Arthur Fred.

    Sharpe, William Edward T.

    Churchill, Winston Spencer

    Simeon, Sir Barrington

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

    Kenyon-Slaney, Col. W.(Salop.

    Spear John Ward

    Coghill, Douglas Harry

    Kerr, John

    Stanley, Rt. Hon. Lord (Lancs.)

    Cohen, Benjamin Louis

    Knowles, Sir Lees

    Stewart, Sir Mark J. M'Taggart

    Collings, Rt. Hon. Jesse

    Laurie, Lieut.-General

    Stock, James Henry

    Colston, Chas. Edw. H. Athole

    Law, Andrew Bonar (Glasgow)

    Stone, Sir Benjamin

    Crossley, Rt. Hon. Sir Savile

    Lawson John Grant (Yorks. N R

    Cubitt, Hon. Henry

    Lees, Sir Elliott (Birkenhead)

    Taylor, Austin (East Toxteth)

    Davenport, William Bromley

    Legge, Col. Hon. Heneage

    Thornton, Percy M.

    Denny, Colonel

    Llewellyn, Evan Henry

    Tuke, Sir John Batty

    Dickson, Charles Scott

    Long, Col. Chas. W. (Evesham)

    Valentia, Viscount

    Dorington, Rt. Hon Sir John E.

    Long, Rt. Hn. Walter (Bristol S)

    Walker, Col. William Hall

    Douglas Rt. Hon. A. Akers

    Lucas, Col. Francis (Lowestoft)

    Walrond, Rt Hn Sir William H.

    Durning-Lawrence, Sir Edwin

    Lyttelton, Rt. Hon. Alfred

    Warde, Colonel C. E.

    Egerton, Hon. A. do Tatton

    Maconochie, A. W.

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

    1146

    1147

    Wharton, Rt. Hon. John Lloyd

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

    TELLERS FOR THE NOES—Sir

    Willoughbyde Eresby, Lord

    Wolff, Gustav Wilhelm

    Alexander Acland-Hood

    Wilson, John (Glasgow)

    Wyndham, Rt. Hon. George

    and Mr. Ailwyn Fellowes.

    MR. JOHN REDMOND MR. JOHN REDMOND moved that Progress be reported. It was unnecessary to fortify the Motion with any words, for it was evident to the House that discussion in Committee of Supply could not now be continued.
    Motion made, and Question proposed, "That the Chairman do report Progress; and ask leave to sit again."—(Mr. John Redmond.)
    THE PRIME MINISTER AND FIRST LORD OF THE TREASURY (Mr. A. J. BALFOUR,: I see no great object——
    MR. SWIFT MACNEILL: In continuing the Government.
    MR. A. J. BALFOUR: I see no great object in assenting to the Motion of the hon. and learned Member. I understand he has succeeded in reducing a grant to Ireland by £100.
    MR. JOHN REDMOND: In defeating the Government at a cost of £100 to Ireland. It is money well spent.
    MR. SWIFT MACNEILL: It is an end of the farce.
    MR. A. J. BALFOUR: I do not know why the hon. Member for South Donegal is so very excited over it. The hon. Gentleman who moved the reduction and succeeded in carrying it, objected to my statement that he had induced the Committee to reduce the Vote proposed by the Government by £100. He has truly said that, as the Vote was proposed by the Government, in so far he has had his way in defeating the Government. That is obvious on the face of the transaction. Why on that account we should be unable to go on with Supplementary Estimates I am unable to see.
    MR. DALZIEL: Are you going to take it lying down?
    MR. A. J. BALFOUR: We have to get through a considerable amount of financial business before 31st March, and I do not
    1148
    think it is expedient or desirable that one of the too few days remaining should be wasted in discussion in the lobby or elsewhere, which the hon. and learned Gentleman seems to think should be the consequence of the incident that has just occurred.
    MR. J. F. HOPEthought hon. Members should be well satisfied with the result, and he could not understand why they should not go on to discuss other items in the Supplementary Estimates. He admitted that the question of the teaching of the Irish language was an interesting one and that the debate on it was too short. But there had been a reduction of the Vote, and he supposed the advocates of the study of Irish would thereby gain an accession of strength for their movement. What, he asked, was the next business in Supply?
    *THE CHAIRMAN: The next Supplementary Vote for Savings Banks.
    MR. J. F. HOPEsaid it was important that they should proceed to discuss the Vote for the Savings Banks' and Friendly Societies' Deficiencies in view of the fact that on Friday next the Bill dealing with that subject would come up for discussion.
    MR. SWIFT MACNEILL: Has the Savings Bank Vote anything to do with the Motion to report Progress?
    *THE CHAIRMAN: The hon. Member is entitled to point out what will be the next business in case Progress is not reported.
    MR. J. F. HOPEsaid he desired to call attention to the fact that they were going to discuss the savings bank's deficiences. Next Friday there was a Bill to be brought forward to deal with savings banks, and no doubt then there would be a great deal of elucidation of the subject. As they all knew, the Supplementary Estimates had to be got through before the 31st of March. He thought they ought to discuss the question of the

    1149
    savings banks in a business-like and sensible way.
    MR. DALZIELasked if the Prime Minister was going to ignore the decision of the Committee? Did his remarks mean that he was going to take no notice of the decision of the House? [An HON. MEMBER: The Amendment has been adopted.] He wished to know if the right hon. Gentleman proposed to accept the decision just arrived at, or did he propose to reverse it. Would he reverse the Government policy in Ireland upon which the division was taken? Was he going to think Imperially with regard to this decision? If he proposed to ignore this decision he would not be following precedents.
    MR. A. J. BALFOUR: The hon. Member mistakes the position. It is not in the power of the Government to ignore the decision of the House, except by the reintroduction of the original Estimate. I hardly think it will be worth that, and therefore we shall acquiesce in the decision of the House.
    MR. WILLIAM REDMONDadvised the Prime Minister to wire to Peckham.
    MR. GIBSON BOWLESsaid he extremely regretted the defeat which His Majesty's Government had just sustained. All the free-fooders supported the Government in the lobby, and therefore he could only attribute the defeat of the Government to the abstention of those protectionists who ground them under their heel on Wednesday last. He trusted His Majesty's Government would now see what a
    broken reed these protectionists were to them in a moment of danger. What the right hon. Gentleman had said as to this being a binding decision of the House was quite true, because what had been voted was the reduced sum. This sum had been absolutely and completely voted, and not even on Report could the original sum be put in again. They could only do it by re-introducing the Estimate or another Estimate for £100, and he did not think the Government would consider it would be worth their while to do that. The only occasion upon which he ever marched up to the Table a winner was when, in conjunction with Mr. Hanbury, they reduced the salaries of the House of Lords by £500, and that amount had been saved to the country annually ever since. The present decision would be accepted, and he trusted this would be a lesson to the Government not to rely upon their protectionist friends in a moment of emergency, but rather turn to the gay and gallant and generous spirits who sat below the gangway, who, although they felt bound to express their convictions occasionally, when they found their friends drowning were ready to extend to them the straw. Under these circumstances, as the Government had accepted this economy of £100, ha thought the Motion to report Progress might be withdrawn.
    MR. WHITLEYasked how many defeats would the Government require before they resigned.
    Question put.
    The Committee divided:—Ayes, 146; Noes, 171. (Division List No. 55.)

    AYES.

    Abraham, William (Cork N. E.)

    Burke, E. Haviland

    Cullinan, J.

    Allen, Charles P.

    Buxton, Sydney Charles

    Dalziel, James Henry

    Ambrose, Robert

    Caldwell, James

    Davies, M. Vaughan-(Cardigan

    Ashton, Thomas Gair

    Cameron, Robert

    Delany, William

    Atherley-Jones, L.

    Campbell, John (Armagh, S.)

    Dewar, John A. (Inverness-sh.

    Barry, E. (Cork, S.)

    Campbell-Bannerman, Sir H.

    Dilke, Rt. Hon. Sir Charles

    Bayley, Thomas (Derbyshire)

    Carvill, Patrick Geo. Hamilton

    Doogan, P. C.

    Black, Alexander William

    Causton, Richard Knight

    Douglas, Charles M. (Lanark)

    Blake, Edward

    Cawley, Frederick

    Duncan, J. Hastings

    Boland, John

    Clancy, John Joseph

    Ellice Capt E C (S. Andrew's Bghs

    Brigg, John

    Condon, Thomas Joseph

    Ellis, John Edward (Notts.)

    Brown, George M. (Edinburgh)

    Craig, Robert Hunter (Lanark)

    Emmott, Alfred

    Bryce, Rt. Hon. James

    Crean, Eugene

    Evans, Sir Francis H. (Maidstone

    Buchanan, Thomas Ryburn

    Crombie, John William

    Farquharson, Dr. Robert

    Fenwick, Charles

    MacNeill, John Gordon Swift

    Reid, Sir E Threshie (Dumfries

    Ferguson, R. C. Munro (Leith)

    MacVeagh, Jeremiah

    Robertson, Edmund (Dundee)

    Ffrench, Peter

    M'Crae, George

    Roche, John

    Fitzmaurice, Lord Edmond

    M'Hugh, Patrick A.

    Rose, Charles Day

    Flavin, Michael Joseph

    M'Kean, John

    Runciman, Walter

    Flynn, James Christopher

    M'Kenna, Reginald

    Russell, T. W.

    Foster, Sir Walter (Derby Co.)

    M'Killop, W. (Sligo, North.)

    Samuel, Herbert F. (Cleveland)

    Gladstone Rt Hn. Herbert John

    M'Laren, Sir Charles Benjamin

    Schwann, Charles E.

    Goddard, Daniel Ford

    Mansfield, Horace Rendall

    Shaw, Thomas (Hawick, B.)

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

    Mooney, John J.

    Sheehan, Daniel Daniel

    Gurdon, Sir W. Brampton

    Morley, Charles (Breconshire)

    Shipman, Dr. John G.

    Hammond, John

    Morley, Rt. Hn. John (Montrose)

    Sinclair, John (Forfarshire)

    Harmsworth, B. Leicester

    Murnaghan, George

    Slack, John Bamford

    Hayden, John Patrick

    Nannetti, Joseph P.

    Soames, Arthur Wellesley

    Hemphill, Rt. Hon. Charles H.

    Nolan, Col. John P. (Galway N)

    Soares, Ernest J.

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

    Nolan, Joseph (Louth, South)

    Spencer Rt. Hn. C R. (Northants

    Holland, Sir William Henry

    Norman, Henry

    Stevenson, Francis S.

    Hope, John Deans (Fife West)

    Norton, Capt. Cecil William

    Strachey, Sir Edward

    Humphreys-Owen, Arthur C.

    Nussey, Thomas Willans

    Sullivan, Donal

    Hutchinson, Dr. Charles Fredk

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

    Trevelyan, Charles Philips

    Hutton, Alfred E. (Morley)

    O'Brien Kendal (Tipperary Mid)

    Warner, Thomas Courtenay T.

    Jacoby, James Alfred

    O'Brien, Patrick (Kilkenny)

    Wason, Eugene (Clackmannan)

    Joicey, Sir James

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

    Weir, James Galloway

    Jones David Brynmor (Swansea

    O'Connor, T. P. (Liverpool)

    White, George (Norfolk)

    Jones, William (Carnarvonshire

    O'Dowd John

    White, Luke (York, E. R.)

    Joyce, Michael

    O'Shaughnessy, P. J.

    Whiteley, George (York W. R.)

    Kitson, Sir James

    O'Shee, James John

    Whitley, J. H. (Halifax)

    Lambert, George

    Partington, Oswald

    Williams, Osmond (Merioneth)

    Layland-Barratt, Francis

    Paulton, James Mellor

    Wilson, John (Durham, Mid.)

    Leese Sir Joseph F. (Accrington

    Pease, J. A. (Saffron Walden)

    Woodhouse Sir J. T. (Huddersf'd

    Leng, Sir John

    Perks, Robert William

    Young, Samuel

    Levy, Maurice

    Priestley, Arthur

    Yoxall, James Henry

    Lloyd-George, David

    Reckitt, Harold James

    Lough, Thomas

    Reddy, M.

    TELLERS FOR THE AYES—Sir

    Lundon, W.

    Redmond, John E. (Waterford)

    Thomas Esmonde and

    Macnamara, Dr. Thomas J.

    Redmond, William (Clare)

    Captain Donelan.

    NOES.

    Agg-Gardner, James Tynte

    Chapman, Edward

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

    Agnew, Sir Andrew Noel

    Churchill, Winston Spencer

    Goulding, Edward Alfred

    Aird, Sir John

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

    Graham, Henry Robert

    Allhusen Augustus Henry Eden

    Coghill, Douglas Harry

    Greene, Henry D. (Shrewsbury)

    Anson, Sir William Reynell

    Cohen, Benjamin Louis

    Greene, W. Raymond-(Cambs.

    Arnold-Forster, Rt. Hn. Hugh O

    Collings, Rt. Hon. Jesse

    Gretton, John

    Arrol, Sir William

    Colston, Chas. Edw. H. Athole

    Halsey, Rt. Hon. Thomas F.

    Atkinson, Et. Hon. John

    Cripps, Charles Alfred

    Hamilton, Marq. of (L'nd'nderry

    Anbrey-Fletcher Kt. Hon. Sir H.

    Crossley, Rt. Hon. Sir Savile

    Hare, Thomas Leigh

    Bain, Colonel James Robert

    Cubitt, Hon. Henry

    Harris, E. Leverton (Tyhem'th

    Baird, John George Alexander

    Dalkeith, Earl of

    Haslam, Sir Alfred S.

    Balcarres, Lord

    Davenport, William Rromley

    Haslett, Sir James Horner

    Baldwin, Alfred

    Denny, Colonel

    Hay, Hon. Claude George

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

    Dickson, Charles Scott

    Heath, James (Staffords N W.

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

    Dorington, Rt. Hon. Sir John E.

    Helder, Augustus

    Balfour Rt Hn. Gerald W (Leeds

    Douglas, Rt. Hon. A. Akers

    Hermon-Hodge, Sir Robert T.

    Bartley, Sir George C. T.

    Durning-Lawrence, Sir Edwin

    Hobhouse, Rt Hn. H (Somers't E

    Bathurst Hon. Allen Benjamin

    Dyke, Rt. Hn. Sir William Hart

    Hogg, Lindsay

    Beach Rt Hn Sir Michael Hicks

    Egerton, Hon. A. de Tatton

    Hope, J. F.(Sheffield Brightside

    Bignold, Arthur

    Elliot, Hon. A. Ralph Douglas

    Howard, J. (Midd., Tottenham

    Bigwood, James

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

    Hudson, George Bickersteth

    Blundell, Colonel Henry

    Finch, Rt. Hon. George H.

    Hunt, Rowland

    Bousfield, William Robert

    Fitz Gerald, Sir Robert Penrose

    Jeffreys, Et, Hn. Arthur Fred.

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

    Fitzroy, Hn. Edward Algernon

    Jessel, Captain Herbert Merton

    Bowles, T. Gibson (King's Lynn

    Flower, Sir Ernest

    Kenyon-Slaney, Col. W. (Salop

    Brassey, Albert

    Forster, Henry William

    Kerr, John

    Brodrick, Rt. Hon. St. John

    Foster, Philip S. (Warwick S. W.

    Knowles, Sir Lees

    Brotherton, Edward Allen

    Fyler, John Arthur

    Laurie, Lieut.-General

    Brown, Sir Alex. H. (Shropsh.)

    Gardner, Earnest

    Law, Awdrew Bonar (Glasgow)

    Campbell, Rt. Hn. J. A (Glasgow

    Garfit, William

    Lawrence, Win. F. (Liverpool)

    Carson, Rt. Hon. Sir Edw. H.

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

    Lawson, John Grant (Yorks N R

    Cavendish, V. C. W.(Derbyshire

    Gordon Maj Evans-(T'rH'mlets

    Lees, Sir Elliott (Birkenhead)

    Chamberlain Rt. Hn. J. A. (Worc

    Gore, Hn. C. R. C. Oimsby-(Salop

    Legge, Col. Hon. Heneage

    1152

    1153

    Leveson-Gower, Frederick N S.

    Plummer, Walter R.

    Stock, James Henry

    Llewellyn, Evan Henry

    Powell, Sir Francis Sharp

    Stone Sir Benjamin

    Long, Col. Chas. W. (Evesham)

    Pretyman, Ernest George

    Talbot, Lord E. (Chichester)

    Long, Rt. Hn. Walter (Bristol S.

    Pryce-Jones, Lt.-Col. Edward

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

    Lucas, Col. Francis (Lowestoft

    Rankin, Sir James

    Taylor, Austin (East Toxteth)

    Lyttelton, Rt. Hon. Alfred

    Ratcliff, R. F.

    Thorburn, Sir Walter

    Maconochie, A. W.

    Reid, James (Greenock)

    Thornton, Percy M.

    Malcolm, Ian

    Ridley, Hn. M. W. (Stalybridge

    Tufnell, Lieut.-Col. Edward

    Manners, Lord Cecil

    Ridley, S Forde (Bethnel Green

    Tuke, Sir John Batty

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

    Ritchie, Rt. Hn. Chas Thomson

    Valentia, Viscount

    Maxwell, W. J. H (Dumfriesshire

    Roberts, Samuel (Sheffield)

    Walker, Col. William Hall

    Mildmay, Francis Bingham

    Rollit, Sir Albert Kaye

    Walround, Rt. Hn. Sir William H

    Mitchell, Edw. (Fermanagh N.)

    Ropner, Colonel Sir Robert

    Warde, Colonel C. E.

    Morpeth, Viscount

    Rothschild Hon. Lionel Walter

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

    Morton, Arthur H. Aylmer

    Royds, Clement Molyneux

    Wharton, Rt. Hon. John Lloyd

    Mount, William Arthur

    Rutherford, W. W. (Liverpool

    Willoughby de Eresby, Lord

    Murray, Rt Hn A. Graham (Bute

    Sackville, Col. S. G. Stopford

    Wilson, John (Glasgow)

    Murray, Charles J. (Coventry)

    Sadler, Col. Samuel Alexander

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

    Murray, Col. Wyndham (Bath)

    Samuel, Sir H. S. (Limehouse)

    Wolff, Gustav Wilhelm

    Newdegate, Francis A. N.

    Seely, Charles Hilton (Lincoln

    Wyndham, Rt. Hon. George

    O'Neill, Hon. Robert Torrens

    Sharpe, William Edward T.

    Palmer, Walter (Salisbury)

    Simeon, Sir Barrington

    TELLERS FOR THE NOES—Sir

    Parker, Sir Gilbert

    Spear, John Ward

    Alexander Acland-Hood

    Peel, Hn Wm. Robert Wellesley

    Stanley, Edward Jas (Somerset)

    and Mr. Ailwyn Fellowes.

    Percy, Earl

    Stanley, Rt. Hon. Lord (Lancs.)

    Platt-Higgins, Frederick

    Stewart, Sir Mark J. M'Taggart

    CLASS VI.
    2. £197,677 (Supplementary), Savings Banks and Friendly Societies Deficiencies.
    SIR ALBERT ROLLITsaid the deficiency in respect of trustee savings banks and friendly societies arose, according to the note on the Estimate, from the—
    "amounts by which the interest accrued in the year ended 20th November, 1903, from securities held by the National Debt Commissioners on account of the 'Fund for the Banks for Savings' and the Fund for Friendly Societies was insufficient to meet the interest which the said Commissioners are obliged by statute to pay and credit to trustees of savings banks and to friendly societies."
    The amount payable to trustee savings banks and friendly societies was 2¾ per cent. in order to enable them to pay a maximum interest of 2½ per cent. to the depositors. In the case of the Post Office Savings Bank the interest was also 2½ per cent. The deficiency was caused by expenses of management and the like. The Committee had had no opportunity really of discussing the matter on the Estimate itself because the deficiency could not be ascertained until the close of the year in respect of which the deficiency arose. He noticed that the original Estimate this year was merely a nominal sum, the amount being copied apparently from that of the preceding year with the full
    1154
    knowledge that the Estimate for the present year must be, as compared with previous years, completely different.
    THE CHANCELLOR OF THE EXCHEQUER (Mr. AUSTEN CHAMBERLAIN,)said the sum taken in the original Estimate this year was for the deficiency of the preceding year. The sum now asked was for the deficiency this year.
    SIR ALBERT ROLLITsaid the original Estimate could not possibly provide for the real deficiency which would arise at the close of the year. His object in drawing attention to the matter was not to reduce the Vote, though he admitted that it showed a considerable increase on revious Estimates and one regretted always any increase in national expenditure. He ventured to say with some knowledge of the subject that savings banks were both directly and indirectly a source of saving to the State, that they prevented many who would otherwise be in that position from making any demand on the rates, and that they encouraged habits which were conducive to the welfare of the State, and were calculated to reduce the obligations likely to come upon it. The primary cause of the increase in the Vote was the automatic reduction in April last of the interest on Consols from 2¾ to 2½ per cent. A Select Committee considered this subject in 1902, and at that time

    1155
    there was another element of difficulty to the Chancellor of the Exchequer in the abnormal price of Consols, which were then something like 113,114, or 115. [Cries of "No."] At any rate they were at an abnormally high price. At the present time they might be taken, he hoped, to be abnormally low. In order to enable the House to form a judgment on the sums to be dealt with in this matter, he should like to draw attention to the number of deposit accounts and to the amount of the deposits in the savings banks, because not only had there been differences of opinion as to these matters, but he had recently read a leaflet which spoke of them in a way which, he thought, did not indicate the advantage they were to the nation. It depreciated both the amount and the consequences of our savings. The total number of deposit accounts was now 11,117,700. That was a very large proportion of the total population of the country, being nearly a quarter of the whole. It was, however, a much larger proportion of the adult population. The cash deposits amounted to £198,240,000, while in stock there was to the credit of the depositors £18,248,300. The total deposits were, therefore, no less than £216,488,300. He should like to add that as compared with Great Britain the statistics of the Irish banks were very nearly equally satisfactory. The deposits in the Irish savings banks had in the last twenty years increased from £4,000,000 to £12,000,000; and the number of depositors in the last fifteen years—for which alone he had figures—had increased from 186,000 to 451,000. These figures from an economic point of view were, to say the least, satisfactory and acceptable.
    MR. LOUGHasked what the hon. Member meant by satisfactory.
    SIR ALBERT ROLLITsaid the figures indicated the saving habits of the people, and he hoped, what they all hoped, the increasing prosperity of Ireland. He should say that the management of the banks both in Great Britain and Ireland, and their disposition to give facilities for saving, had materially improved. The increase in the number of depositors and the amount of depositors had been
    1156
    continuous at any rate since 1893. He should like to observe that previous to that year there was a period which for savings banks was marked by collapses, and that, worst of all crimes, a great deal of plunder of the poor. That had apparently ceased, because there had practially been no similar case since, and that was a change which justified the legislation of 1891. He thought that carried with it a tribute to the manner in which the hon. trustees and the managers of savings banks had readily comformed to the requirements of the Legislature. There was at first some little friction and difficulty, but he was bound to say that there had been a disposition to meet all the reasonable requirements of the Statute, to revise the rules, and to bring them up to date. Beyond some comparatively trivial cases of complaint which had generally been recognised, there was nothing but praise to give to those trustees and managers whose services, in his opinion, were a great national asset. Whatever might be said as to the value of the Post Office Savings Bank there was room for both these and the trustee banks, and he was sure that the facilities given by the latter were a source of great advantage to the country. The Act of 1891, instead of increasing, on the contrary, rather tended to stem the decrease of the deficiency by requiring more efficiency. The opening of banks was much more frequent, and branches were established in a large number of instances, bringing opportunities of saving to the poor. The cost of management had been reduced to a comparatively low point, and the interest had been raised in a large number of cases to the maximum. As the result of long observation, aided by expert opinion on the subject, he believed that the banks served substantially the classes which were in the contemplation of Parliament. The users of the banks were wage earners and domestic servants, and those classes who had no other opportunity of investing their savings. These were circumstances which made a claim on Parliament for this really economic expenditure. The leaflet to which he had referred had done an injustice to the savings banks, British and Irish, in comparing them to their disadvantage with the savings banks in other countries. In that leaflet Great

    1157
    Britain was put at the bottom of the list, leading to the inference that thrift and saving were declining in this country; and that these qualities were promoted more thoroughly in other countries. There was no basis for these statistics when it was said that the British savings only amounted to £4 2s. 5¾d. per head of the population. He maintained that the figures should be £6 8s. 7¾d. The fact was these matters were incomparable. There could be no true comparison when there was such a diversity of conditions. Take the case of Prussia. In that country there was no general limitation either in the amount deposited or the amount to be deposited, and the conditions of deposit were most variable, being fixed by each locality and not by the central Government; and there were also lotteries, which were most attractive to business, but which were most derogatory to the principle of savings banks and disadvantageous to those who availed themselves of them. In Sweden, the maximum interest paid was something between 4 and 5 per cent., which placed that country outside the pale of comparison. Then in the United States the savings banks did a commercial business at the same time. Account must also be taken in this country of such institutions, not mentioned in the leaflet, as the Yorkshire Penny Savings Bank, which had £15,000,000 in deposits, and of benefit and building societies, whose contributions were only another form of thrift.
    Another difficulty discussed in the Committee was the abnormal price at which Consols were at that time. That had disappeared for the moment and would probably do so for some period. Of course it was obvious that at the price Consols then were, the Chancellor of the Exchequer had a difficult problem to contend with. He spoke with diffidence, because the Committee had witnesses who assured them that the condition of affairs was likely to be more or less permanent. They were, however, indebted to the late Chancellor of the Exchequer, the right hon. Member for West Bristol, for having appointed the Committee over which he so ably presided, and for having given to it a great amount of time and thought in dealing with a very difficult and complex problem.
    1158
    Ultimately that Committee, after large discussion and some difference of opinion, arrived at the conclusion that the circumstances of the day demanded a reduction in the rate of interest paid by the State by one-eighth per cent. He was bound to add that that was, to some extent, a compromise; and in dealing with the matter and all its surrounding difficulties, there was no indisposition, but on the contrary, on the part of the Chancellor of the Exchequer, to recognise the economic result of these social institutions. But he submitted that circumstances had now materially changed, and these had modified the conclusions at which the Committee had arrived; and he had no doubt the Chancellor of the Exchequer would see his way now not to press the lowering of the rate of interest—a change which, he believed, would be an economic and social disadvantage to a large number of the population, and would re-act very materially on our national character and habits. As a reason for not taking such a course, he would suggest that the time would come when the deficiency in the case of the trustee savings banks would be materially reduced. When the Annuity Act of 1880 had served its purpose, which would be in 1911, there would be a capital fund, once more bearing interest, which would make a large contribution towards the deficiency; and therefore he hoped that help would be given in tiding over the time when the House would not have to vote the large deficiency which at present existed. He consequently ventured to urge a reconsideration of the settlement of the programme under the altered circumstances, and that the Chancellor of the Exchequer, in the interests of the banks and of the depositors, would now dispel, once for all, all uncertainty about this matter. He did so because the announcement in His Majesty's Speech last year led to a considerable withdrawal of a large number of deposits; and although there was no similar announcement this year, a cloud overhung the horizon, which was most oppressive not only to the management of the banks but deterrent to depositors, who cared not only for the safety of their deposits but for the interest to be paid them thereon. For

    1159
    those reasons, and also in acknowledgement of the honorary services of the trustees and managers, which were of great national value, he hoped that consideration would be given to this matter. He would repeat that the banks were of the greatest service to the country, and that it would be a most retrograde and unfortunate step if, in the absence of the necessities of the recent past, such a change as was proposed were made. He desired to say again to the Chairman of the Select Committee that for working the administrative reforms recommended by the Committee into shape they were all greatly indebted to him. He hoped that they would not only have a settlement of the question of interest, but that they would also have administrative improvements which would make the work easier, better, and less onerous on the part of trustees and managers.
    MR. YOXALLsaid that as the manager of one of the largest trustee savings banks in London he should like to join in the appeal to the Treasury to take no steps whatever in the direction of reducing the interest on the money invested in the savings banks. He submitted to the present Chancellor of the Exchequer that he of all men, could not propose, on economic grounds, to reduce the rate of interest on those small deposits. During the present session they had heard again and again from the Prime Minister denunciation of the policy of laisser faire. The reduction of the statutory rate of interest on deposits in the savings banks would be resorting to a policy of laisser faire. He submitted to the Chancellor of the Exchequer that he should not adopt that doctrine, which would not be in consonance with his own view, or in consonance with the interests of the country. The right hon. Gentleman should do all he could to foster those banks by enabling them pay more interest than would be paid if the money were invested in the open market, even if the cost of the deficit were to be paid by this House. Two or three years ago the right hon. Gentleman the Member for West Bristol brought the matter before the House. At that time the right hon. Gentleman's difficulties were exceptionally great. Ho had to face the investment of money
    1160
    supplied by those savings banks year by year in proper, sound, trustee funds, principally Consols, and he was in exceeding difficulty, because Consols were at that time particularly high. That difficulty had, however, now passed away. Consols did not stand as high now as they did then; and, therefore, the only factor in the problem which remained to be discussed was whether or not a higher rate of interest should be paid to depositors in those banks, in order to encourage action on the part of subjects of the King which would be not only good for them but which would be good, for the country as a whole, at a slight additional cost. He submitted that the question should not be argued on a purely economic basis. Those banks were to encourage people in this country; they were to encourage thrift among the working classes, which was by no means exhausted; and, in that respect, he hoped the Chancellor of the Exchequer would not be deceived by the leaflet which had been circulated. That leaflet showed that, in spite of the efforts of the Treasury and the labours of philanthropic persons to encourage thrift, deposits were smaller per head in this country, and smaller, on the whole, than in most other, countries. It said that £4 2s. 6d. represented the investments per head in this country. In Denmark, however, the amount exceeded £10, and it decreased for various countries, leaving England at the bottom of the list. His hon. friend had pointed out some of the fallacies which underlay a comparison in this matter between England and some other countries. In some other countries there was no maximum per annum, and no total maximum, and there were not so many ways of investment as there were in this country. In the countries to which the leaflet referred, trustee or private savings banks, building societies, friendly societies, co-operative societies, and trades union accumulation of funds; had not attained to anything like the scope and extent they had in this country. Therefore any comparison was unreliable and wholly fallacious; and he hoped the Chancellor of the Exchequer would not attach importance to it such as might lead him to propose that interest on deposits in those banks should be reduced. They ought to continue to encourage, even at the cost of a few thousands, or

    1161
    a few hundred of thousands, per annum, the deposits in savings banks by the class of people who used them. Every care was taken that those deposits did not interfere with the ordinary course of business by other banks. A great deal of good had been done in the past by the system, and he hoped it would continue for many years.
    SIR GEORGE BARTLEYsaid he did not suppose that anyone would think for a moment that he was not keenly interested in savings banks, and in their success. He had spent a great many years of his life in the promotion of thrift, and he had striven in every way he could to encourage those banks. He agreed with his hon. friend that the exercise of thrift very largely depended on the facilities which were afforded for its exercise. If the facilities were increased, and if people were put in the way of depositing their money, and, above all, if the deposits were readily withdrawable without friction or trouble, then he was sure they would encourage the habit of thrift throughout the country. He thought that the savings banks had achieved an incalculable amount of good. They stimulated thrift and made people see the value of small savings, and he believed that the Savings Bank Act was one of the most beneficial ever passed. He should like to say a few words on the problem they were now discussing. Of course, it was extremely easy and extremely pleasant to say that they did not want to reduce the interest, that it was very desirable it should be increased, and so on; but he would ask the Committee to consider what would be the practical effect of supplementing by taxation the interest that was earned. That was really the question. He was quite sure that if Mr. Gladstone had been asked, when the savings banks were established, whether money should be voted to supplement the interest earned by deposits he would have been the very first to object. The principle was that the banks should be carried on as a business undertaking and that the State should guarantee its security, the great element being that the security should be absolute. That was now assured; and he ventured to say, as one who had given the matter great personal
    1162
    attention, that the amount of interest payable to the depositors was quite a secondary matter. He did not say it was not an important matter, because it was, but the great question was that the money should be saved. The £250,000 they were now asked to vote represented just one-eighth per cent, on the money invested. That was to say that they were to give 2s. 6d. percent, more to every depositor in a savings bank who had deposited £100 for a whole year than that amount would fairly earn in the market. He did not say that 2s. 6d. per cent, was not a consideration, bat he wished to ask whether it was the first consideration to the comparatively few men who had £100 in the Post Office for a year as compared with the other advantages offered by the Post Office. The maximum holding was £200; and, therefore, the maximum grant that could be given to any individual was 5s. Was it desirable that they should take away the self-supporting and independent character of those banks when the maximum amount any individual could get was 5s.? But the average holding was under £20. That meant only an extra 6d. His experience was that if they desired to foster thrift it was the smallest men who should be encouraged. He had always found that the difficulty lay in the beginning in inducing a man to pay in the first sixpence. When that habit had been acquired the rest was easy. But he did not believe that to tell such a man that when he had saved £100 he would get £2 10s. a year instead of £2 7s. 6d. would have any influence on him whatever.
    The great work of these institutions was to promote thrift in the beginning and persuade them to pay small sums into the bank, but he looked with some alarm at this sum of £250,000 to supplement the savings bank interest. Although he desired to see the utmost amount of interest paid to the depositors, he thought the very small increase they were giving would not promote thrift. It seemed to him that these institutions should be carried on in such a way as not to cast additional burdens on the State. There was a danger of a reaction setting in if they increased taxation for this purpose. It was not reasonable that a man who had saved £200 should have 5s. given to him out of taxation, and to the

    1163
    small depositors having £8 to £10 in the bank the difference would be absolutely nothing. It was far better to inculcate the idea that these banks should be carried on on business lines, and that no burden should be thrown on the State although the State gave every security. Although he could not object to the present Vote, he urged upon the Chancellor of the Exchequer the necessity of these banks in aid of thrift being made sell-supporting institutions. When Mr. Gladstone fixed the rate of interest at 2½ per cent., Consols were at 95 and paying 3 per cent., and there was an ample margin of profit in carrying on these institutions, and although the country had benefited largely by the large sum deposited, still it was never the intention of the founders of these institutions that they should form a charge on the State. That was most emphatically the view of Mr. Gladstone, who fixed the interest at 2½ per cent., and it was a wise view, because it was an encouragement to the men who had large holdings to draw their money and put it into Consols, so that they might obtain a greater amount of interest on it, and if that were done that was a good step in the right direction. It was, therefore, desirable to regulate the interest fairly and liberally, but at such a rate as to give inducements to persons with holdings of £100 and £200 to withdraw their money from the bank and put it in Consols. It was for these reasons that he had made the remarks he had. His desire was to treat the depositor generously, but looking at this matter from a larger point of view, he thought, in the interests of the country, it was not wise of them to build up a great rate of interest at the expense of the taxpayers, but that these banks should be carried on in a business-like way, as was originally intended by their founder.
    MR. JOHN ELLISsaid they were discussing a matter of very great interest, not so much with regard to the amendment involved, but as to the principle. They all agreed that these trustee savings banks were very useful, and they all hoped they would go on and prosper in the future. The point before the Committee was surely whether the taxpayers of this
    1164
    country were to be called upon to pay artificially, a rate of interest which the depositors of the savings banks enjoyed. At the moment there was a statutory obligation upon them and they must take the obligation upon themselves, there being no option. But he would be very glad to learn from the right hon. Gentleman the Member for West Bristol or the late Chancellor of the Exchequer, who had given a great deal of attention to this matter, what their opinions were upon the whole subject. Of course the present Chancellor of the Exchequer had entered into his high office under circumstances of exceptional difficulty, and he had not had quite the experience which his predecessors had enjoyed. He himself (Mr. Ellis) took very much the same view as the hon. Member for North Islington. He had listened almost with amusement to the speech of his hon. friend the Member for West Nottingham, and to the cavalier way in which he talked about it being a matter of only a few hundred thousand pounds. The time was coming when they would have to scrutinise very carefully items of one or two hundred thousand pounds. Besides that, it was rather placing the matter upon a sentimental basis. He took the view that those banks should be self-supporting institutions, and he believed that thrift would be very much better promoted by teaching men exactly where they stood. They should not have an artificial rate of interest beyond what the money would earn, by means of that small Vote. He would therefore urge the Chancellor of the Exchequer, so far as he could, to take a severer view than had hitherto been taken on this matter. He felt that the time was coming when the whole subject must be overhauled. They ought no longer to go on burdening the taxpayers with those grants, and he had yet to hear any good reason why they should be called upon, year after year, to vote money for that particular purpose.
    MR. AUSTEN CHAMBERLAINexplained that as this was a Vote to make good deficiences arising on the savings bank account, it obviously could I not be framed until the savings bank year was closed and the amount of the

    1165
    deficiencies were known. Those deficiencies could be made good either by a Supplementary Estimate in the current financial year or by an original Estimate in the next financial year. The original Estimate this year was for the deficiency in the last savings bank year, but, being desirous that the question should come before the Committee as early as possible this session, in view of the fact that upon the views expressed by the House depended the decision of the Treasury as to the future rate of interest to be paid on savings bank deposits, he had brought in as a Supplementary Estimate this year the Vote which might have been introduced as an original Estimate next year. He hoped that that explanation would satisfy the hon. Member for West Islington that there had not been any loose or reckless estimating. As the hon. Member for the Rushcliffe Division had rightly said, the Committee had no alternative but to vote this money. They were bound by Statute to pay a certain rate of interest, and this Vote was merely to enable that statutory obligation to be fulfilled. The question the Committee had really to consider was whether they ought to continue to make good the deficiencies on these accounts, or whether the rate of interest allowed to depositors ought not to be so altered as to eliminate the necessity for future Grants in Aid. The difficulty had arisen in its present form in consequence of the reduction of the rate of interest on Consols. The difficulty was foreseen by the right hon. Gentleman the Member for West Bristol, at whose instance, in March, 1902, there was appointed a Select Committee which had presented a valuable Report on the subject. With regard to trustee banks, the Committee pointed out that in only six years between 1876 and 1901 had there been a surplus on their income account, and that the total net deficit which had had to be made good by the taxpayers during that period amounted to £503,615. In the same years, however, the Post Office Savings Bank had paid to the Exchequer a net surplus of no less than £1,601,285. Against this had to be set the deficiency of the trustee banks to which he had referred, and the Deficiency Annuity, established in 1880, to run for twenty-seven years, for the purpose of making good the deficiency on the capital of the savings
    1166
    banks caused by their income having; been insufficient in their earlier stages pay the interest directed by Parliament, and by their having had to spend capital to pay that interest. The result during those six years was to leave a net charge on the taxpayers of £617,000. The Committee pointed out that owing to the increase in the maximum sum which any person was permitted to deposit in a given year, from £30 to £50, and to the great cheapness of money, the total deposits were exceptionally large in the years from 1894 to 1897, while the price of Consols was abnormally high. For instance, the increase of the balance due to depositors in the Post Office Savings Bank, which between 1888 and 1892 had averaged from £4,000,000 to £4,500,000 a year, rose in 1894 and 1895 to £8,500,000 in each year, and in 1896 it actually exceeded £10,000,000; and the Committee then proceeded—
    For this reason and because of the gradual extinction of loans made at comparatively high rates, the rates of interest earned by the Commissioners' investments fell from £3 0s. 9d. in 1887 to £2 15s. 2d. in 1901. Of these investments, £19,284,606, on behalf of trustee savings banks, and £64,915,818 on behalf of Post Office Savings banks, were on 31st May, 1902, in Consols"
    the rate of interest on which was reduced from 2¾ to 2½ per cent, from 5th April last year—
    "and the loss on this, together with a similar loss on the amounts of Consols which remains to be replaced by terminable annuities will involve an annual loss of income to the trustee hanks of £67,500, and to the Post Office banks of £181,000."
    The Committee also estimated the financial effect of this loss upon the income account of the two funds for the next six years, their anticipations, briefly stated, being that on trustee banks there would be a deficiency in 1903 of £85,735 rising to £128,479 in. 1907, and the falling again to £85,862 in 1908, as to interest on the fund accumulated by the Deficiency Annuity was set free for income account, and rising subsequently as deposits increased; and that on Post Office Savings Banks there would be a deficiency in 1903 of £136,811, rising to £237,133 in 1908, and continuing to increase thereafter. That was the serious prospect which the Committee had to face. The figures were

    1167
    calculated upon the assumption that certain amounts of new money would be placed on deposit in these banks every year, and that interest would be attainable on all new deposits at the rate of 2⅝ per cent. The Committee then went on to state—
    "It may be observed that such a rate could not be obtained from Consols which stood at 90 on 16th July, 1902, unless they were purchased at an average rate of 95¼, and that Mr. Daniell, the broker of the National Debt Commissioners, is doubtful whether it can be safely anticipated;"
    and on the facts before them the Committee suggested that unless something was done the deficiencies to which he had referred might actually be exceeded.
    Under these circumstances the Committee set to work to consider what might be done. They examined and rejected various proposals which had been made, and which were set forth in the Committee's Report. They considered and rejected the suggestion that the area of investments should be enlarged. They examined into the question of the expenses of management, and decided that the expenses were very moderate, and could not be further reduced—a view with which all who had watched the transactions with the banks would agree. They also considered whether there was any force in the contention which had been put forward in the course of the debate to some extent by the hon. Member for South Islington, and in a more uncompromising form by the hon. Member for the Rushcliffe Division. The Committee were of opinion that what the depositors mainly had regard to was the security for their money and the readiness with which it could be made available when required, and they gave reasons for not believing that a trifling reduction in the rate of interest would seriously discourage thrift. In this matter he was wholly of the opinion of the hon. Member for North Islington, that if they desired to encourage thrift it was at the beginning that the encouragement was most important. Whilst he agreed with the promotion of thrift as a matter of great national importance, both from a social and political point of view, he was bound to say that he did not think the subsidising of these trustee or Post Office savings banks was the best way to promote thrift, even if
    1168
    money was available for the purpose of promoting thrift. It was not the best way, because it might be withdrawn at any moment. A good deal might be said for assisting people to make provision for illness and old age, but they had no kind of security that the money would be reserved for those conditions, for it might be withdrawn at any moment. He thought it was a great mistake to assume that the money in these banks was wholly the money of poor people. On the contrary, a great part of it was the money of the well-to-do, who had taken advantage of the raising of the amount that might be deposited in one year. In the course of 1903 there was an increase of less than £100,000 in the case of trustee banks as compared with an annual increase of £500,000, which the Committee presided over by the right hon. Gentleman the Member for West Bristol thought it fair to take as the basis of the calculation, and the money due to the depositors in the Post Office Banks increased by £1,395,000 in the same year, as against an increase when securities fell, and money was cheap, in one year of £10,000,000.
    *MR. McCRAEasked if the right hon. Gentleman would give the number of depositors?
    MR. AUSTEN CHAMBERLAINsaid he could not, but that had no bearing on his figures.
    *MR. McCRAE: But that is an important point.
    MR. AUSTEN CHAMBERLAINsaid it did not matter from his point of view whether the money was deposited by a great or a small number of people.
    *MR. McCRAEthought the number had a great bearing upon the point as to whether the poorer classes were continuing to deposit or not.
    MR. AUSTEN CHAMBERLAINsaid he did not doubt that fewer people were continuing to put money in the savings banks. What he stated was that the money in the savings banks was by no means confined to the poor people. Hon. Members had quoted from a

    1169
    pamphlet which compared the amount of savings per head in savings banks in this country with foreign countries. He did not think simple comparisons of that kind led to any satisfactory results as to the state of the prosperity of the people, because they left out of consideration a great number of circumstances which must be considered before any fair conclusion could be drawn from them. He had put before the Committee the state of affairs as foreshadowed by the Select Committee, and he had told the Committee of the remedies for that state of affairs which the Select Committee had examined and rejected. Having rejected their alternatives the Committee proceeded—
    "For these reasons they consider that such a reduction in the rate of interest to depositors in savings banks as would suffice to meet the deficits that may be caused by the fall in the interest on Consols might be carried out without diminishing the inducements to thrift or injuring the trustee savings banks."
    They estimated the sum required for the reduction at one-eighth per cent, (assuming the amount of earnings of new money for the next six years to be as already given), provided that certain other charges were made. This would turn the deficiency previously anticipated into a small surplus and place them in a solvent position independent of any annual grant from Parliament. The expenses of management were moderate and could not be reduced. The legislation which they recommended was not carried through, but he thought everyone would desire to see it carried and he intended to introduce a Bill to deal with it. The Committee recommended—
    "(1) That the income of the Trustee Banks Fund should be increased by the interest on the securities purchased by the Deficiency Annuity, the annuity being extended for about ten years in consequence.
    "(2) That the expenses of the Post Office Savings Banks should be diminished by making the entry in the depositors' pass book a legal acknowledgment by the Postmaster-General of the receipt of deposits under £1, the Central Office ceasing to send an acknowledgment by post to the depositor.
    "(3) That both trustee and Post Office banks should be relieved of the obligation to send a notice to depositors whose balance exceeds £200, that such balance will be invested in Government stock unless otherwise directed, the balance being allowed to remain without
    1170
    earning interest until the depositor otherwise directs."
    As to these three recommendations he thought there would probably be no difference of opinion, and he hoped they might be treated in a non-controversial spirit. The proposal for a reduction in the rate of interest was more contentious and more likely to give rise to debate in the House. He had already expressed the opinion that there ought not to continue, as a permanent condition of affairs, a state of things in which the taxpayer had annually to vote a Grant in Aid on account of these funds to make good the difference between the interest that was paid to the depositors and the interest which the State was able to earn by investing the depositor's money. The question arose whether that was going to be permanently the condition of things or was it merely a temporary state of affairs which was diminishing year by year and which might possibly, within a reasonable time, pass away altogether. The Select Committee said it would be impossible to anticipate that it would be otherwise than permanent, but circumstances had changed very materially. Consols were now about 86¾ and were not likely to see a great rise. But that was not all. It was perfectly clear now that all the new money in the savings banks could be invested so as to pay certainly 3 per cent, or over in annuities under loans, local loans, stock, etc. They had to provide a considerable amount of terminable annuities which formed a very satisfactory investment, and he thought that for the next six years there were good prospects for all new money paying 3 per cent. Under these circumstances he had had the calculations of the Select Committee remade. They had been able to invest their money already on better terms than the Committee thought possible. The result of the recalculation was to show that in 1903 the deficiency on trustee savings banks account was £76,000 instead of £86,000, as anticipated by the Select Committee, and on the Post Office banks £108,000 odd, instead of nearly £137,000. That was to say that on the two funds they were nearly £38,000 less badly off than the Select Committee anticipated, and in future years he anticipated no difficulty in investing new money at 3 per cent.
    MR. LOUGH: Will that be a progressive increase?
    MR. AUSTEN CHAMBERLAINsaid the hon. Gentleman would perhaps have patience and allow him to pursue his argument. In order to make it clear he must be allowed to state the considerations which the Committee would have to bear in mind. The Select Committee's calculation was based on the rate at which they could invest new money and the amount of new money which would be received. He anticipated no difficulty in getting a higher rate on the new money; but, on the other hand, he did not think it safe to allow for as much money as the Committee thought it reasonable to anticipate. They made their calculation on the supposition that new money in trustees' banks would increase by £500,000 a year and Post Office bank's by £2,000,000 in 1902 and 1903, by £2,500,000 in 1904 and 1905, and by £3,000,000 in each subsequent year. Any estimate of this kind was very speculative, and, as a matter of fact, the actual increase in 1902 in trustees' banks was £643,585 and in Post Office banks £4,212,172. In 1903 the increase in trustees' bank was £93,479 and in Post Office banks £1,394,912. So that it was more than the Select Committee estimated in each case in 1902 and less than they estimated in each case in 1903. This year there had been special circumstances to induce withdrawals or to cause money to be invested elsewhere owing to the great cheapness of high-class securities and in the extent to which municipalities were taking money on deposit—not, he thought, an altogether commendable proceeding. Under all the circumstances he had recalculated the deficiencies on the assumption that the present rate of interest was maintained to depositors and that new money was invested at 3 per cent. On this assumption a deficiency on trustee banks would be £95,000 in 1904, would fall to £11,000 in 1905, to £2,000 in 1907, and by 1908 would have rounded the corner and would have become a surplus of £3,000; and that in the case of Post Office banks the deficiency would be £118,000 in 1904, and would fall in the course of six years to £71,000. The Committee would see that these figures were much more favourable than
    1172
    the anticipations which were placed before the Select Committee. Of course, the doubtful element in the calculation was the amount of new money they were going to receive. In taking the figure for the two banks at the average of £1,500,000 a year he had been, he thought, rather under-sanguine than over-sanguine; and, though he admitted it was pure speculation, and he had no right to speak with any authority, if he had been under-sanguine the figures of the accounts would be even more favourable and the deficiency would be still further and more quickly reduced than he had anticipated. Under all these circumstances, and after giving the matter the most anxious consideration he could, he had come to the conclusion that he would not be justified in proposing, under these entirely altered conditions and with entirely different prospects now, to reduce the rate of interest paid to depositors. He repeated his concurrence with the Committee and with his right hon. friend the Member for West Bristol that they were not called upon permanently to subsidise these banks or permanently to pay the depositors a rate of interest which the Government could not earn themselves. But he thought it would be admitted that they ought not, especially when they had regard to the large surplus paid into the Exchequer on account of Post Office savings banks during many years, to lower the rate of interest unless there was a permanent necessity for doing so. They ought not to do it merely upon a temporary difficulty, and that argument would be strengthened when he reminded the Committee that the lowest reduction they could make, one-eighth, would even in the first year take from the depositors more money than they needed to balance the accounts, and in every subsequent year a great deal more than was needed. Under all these circumstances, he had come to the conclusion that, while it was necessary for the Government to introduce a Bill in order to carry out the other recommendations of the Select Committee, it was not his intention to propose any reduction in the rate of interest. He hoped that, in the altered circumstances, the deficiency would be rapidly reduced, and that before very long it might be altogether abolished. When the Bill came before the House he

    1173
    hoped he should have the general support of Members on both sides.
    SIR M. HICKS BEACHsaid he desired to congratulate his right hon. friend on the extremely clear and able statement he had just made to the Committee, and he thought there would be general satisfaction with the attention which he had devoted to a difficult and complicated, but most important, subject. Two years ago this subject gave him very great anxiety as Chancellor of the Exchequer. He felt that the income of both classes of savings banks would be reduced by something like £250,000 in April, 1903, by the reduction of the rate of interest on Consols, in which so much of the money of the depositors in those banks had necessarily been invested. The calculations of the Select Committee were based on the best evidence that was obtainable from the experts at the Treasury and the National Debt Office, from the Government broker, and from other sources as to the probabilities of the future in this matter. Any one could see now that those expectations had been entirely falsified. He hoped the expectations of his right hon. friend the Chancellor of the Exchequer might be more fortunate for the benefit of the savings banks, though whether that would be a fortunate thing for the country, when Consols were standing at such a figure as 86½, was a matter on which a good deal might be said from different points of view. To-day, however, they were only dealing with the position of the savings banks. He wished to dissociate himself as strongly as he could from the doctrine laid down by the hon. Member for Nottingham that these banks ought to be subsidised by the State. They were a great advantage to the country, but they were, after all, only one form of thrift, and he did not think it was a form of thrift that ought to be subsidised. He did not think the taxpayers should be called upon to bolster up the rate of interest paid to the depositors in this class of banks beyond the point which their deposits could earn when properly and safely invested on behalf of the taxpayers in whose hands they were placed as bankers, and not as trustees. Therefore, if he thought that the prospects held out by the evidence taken by the Committee, and summarised in their report,
    1174
    were likely to be fulfilled, he could not agree with the decision of his right hon. friend not to reduce the rate of interest as the Committee recommended. But he must frankly say, having presided over that Select Committee, and having devoted very great care and attention to the matter, that, if they had known, if they could have foreseen, what had actually happened in this matter, he did not think they would have arrived at the recommendation to reduce the rate of interest by one-eighth per cent. His right hon. friend, in his closing remarks, had given a very strong argument against any such proposal at the present time. One-eighth per cent, did not seem much, but one-eighth per cent, on the enormous amounts of deposits that were held by the State in behalf of the depositors in connection with these banks came to a very large annual sum; and to reduce the rate of interest paid to these depositors by a sum which was obviously greater than the loss which, in a few years to come, it was probable the taxpayers would sustain by paying the present rate of interest, would, to his mind, be a policy which would not be justified.
    He did not wish to quote any of the figures which the Chancellor of the Exchequer had placed before the Committee in regard to the calculation of what was likely to happen in the future. That right hon. Gentleman, of course, had gone to the best authorities—he had no doubt gone to precisely the same authorities as had been drawn upon by the Committee. He did not wish, he had no right, to question these authorities or the calculations and estimates of the position at which the right hon. Gentlemen had arrived with the best advice at his command; but he could only say—and this was the sole object with which he addressed the Committee—that he thought the right hon. Gentleman was justified in the conclusion at which he had arrived, that he did not intend, in the present session, to reduce the rate of interest. But he hoped his right hon. friend, should he remain long enough in his office, would keep this question in his mind. He was glad to hear his right hon. friend state strongly his opinion that the depositors ought not to be subsidised at

    1175
    the cost of the taxpayers; and should the right hon. Gentleman occupy his present position next year, and should he find at that time that his calculations, either as to the price of Consols or the new money which the savings banks would receive, had been falsified, he hoped the right hon. Gentleman would have the courage to come down to the House and state that he proposed to decrease the interest, although that day he had held his hand in the interests of the depositors. He himself did not doubt that there were two sides to this question of the position of the depositors in the savings banks. No doubt a very large number—a large majority—consisted of the very class for whom the savings banks were intended. No doubt those banks did an enormously valuable work in promoting the beginning of thrift; but they were also used—especially the trustee banks, in connection with which his right hon. friend the Member for Islington, had taken such an active part—as a mere means of investment by not a few persons who were perfectly capable of looking after their own affairs, and who did not want to be urged to thrift, or to any inducement to thrift. That had been absolutely proved, as was manifest to anybody who looked at the Report of the Committee, by the fact that when the rate of interest had been for a time increased, or when either through investments in corporation securities, or in any other way, the were able to obtain a better interest for their money, there had been large withdrawals from the savings banks in order that such investments might be made. He believed it was largely due to that fact that less money had gone into the savings banks in the last few years than in previous years, when the rate of interest was very low in the country. But there was another reason. He was afraid that all of them had not as much money as they had some years ago; and he hoped the Chancellor of the Exchequer would consider that matter also, and likewise consider whether from the decrease in new investments in the savings banks he might not learn lessons, in the future, of economy in national expenditure.
    Mr. SYDNEY BUXTONsaid he need only offer a few
    1176
    words on this matter. The Chancellor of the Exchequer had made out a perfectly unanswerable case for not dealing with the question at this moment. Under present conditions, and looking to the short future, the deficiency to fall on the taxpayers would not be equal to any reduction that might be made on the interest, and therefore the reduction on interest would be to the profit of the taxpayers at the expense of the depositors. But he was bound to say that he thought the statement of the Chancellor of the Exchequer was very depressing indeed, when the right hon. Gentleman stated that the average deposits in the savings banks were not increased in the proportion he had hoped. The right hon. Gentleman had based his figures on a low estimate of the new money to be deposited; and the right hon. Gentleman said that if the deposits were decreased he would be able to make a larger profit. He had heard with considerable alarm that the right hon. Gentleman had based that estimate on the suspicion that the price of Consols would be very low for some years to come. He desired to enforce what had fallen from the late Chancellor of the Exchequer, the right hon. Member for West Bristol, that they ought to look to any Government in office to turn their principal attention to the question of national economy, so that the burden of taxation on the people should be relieved. He believed the present Chancellor of the Exchequer could have done nothing else than he had promised to do; although the Committee could have come to no other conclusion than that at which they arrived, in the circumstances under which they met. Unfortunately the circumstances were now different, because they (the Committee) based their Report on the then price of Consols, and the limited area of investments. The only good which had arisen out of the present financial condition was that investors in the savings banks would be able to receive their current rate of interest for some time to come.
    *MR. BRIGGsaid he was glad the Chancellor of the Exchequer did not see any necessity for lowering the rate of interest in the saving banks. This decision would be received

    1177
    with great satisfaction indeed in his con stituency. He was glad the late Chancellor of the Exchequer, although he did not agree entirely in all the present Chancellor had stated, confirmed what he had said as to the grounds on which he looked at this question. Circumstances which had arisen had no doubt given a large amount of anxiety to those gentlemen who took an interest in this subject; for it appeared that if a lower rate of interest was obtained from Government securities it would not be possible that small investors could receive the same rate of interest as at present, and something would have to be done. Happily, they were saved at the present time from that position, by virtue of having dear money. They must bear in mind that they were dealing, in connection with these banks, with the poorer class of people, and it would be a great satisfaction to them to think that they could make their investments with confidence, believing they had the power of the Government behind them. There were other savings banks besides the banks they were now considering. He himself knew a local savings bank with an accumulated capital of £13.000,000. It paid a fair rate of interest but its investments were of a very different kind to the investments of the Post Office Savings Bank. He was rather surprised that the Chancellor of the Exchequer should not have suggested that the Commission might consider the question of extending the area of the investments of the Post Office Savings Bank. As far as the large number of people who were saving money in small sums were concerned, it was a matter of the greatest importance that they should have confidence in the savings banks; and as long as the investments remained as they were that confidence would be maintained.
    MR. GIBSON BOWLESsaid he trusted that the Committee or Chancellor of the Exchequer would not entertain the idea of extending the area of the investments of the savings banks. The principal if, not the only, thing that a depositor in the savings banks looked to was the safety of his money. The rate of interest was a secondary matter. What the depositor wanted was
    1178
    to feel that the strong box into which he put his money was strong; and it would be most unsafe and, in his opinion, most improper for a State savings bank to extend the area of its investments beyond the limits already reached. In his opinion, those limits were already too large and he was in favour of reducing them rather than increasing them. As to the manner in which the savings banks were to be treated, he confessed he was still of opinion that the recommendations of the Committee were sound. The ex-Chancellor of the Exchequer admitted that the circumstances were now so changed that the recommendations were not at present fully applicable. He did not agree, he thought on the whole that the views of the Committee were founded on considerations which were likely to be permanent; and they were more likely to be sound than the views of the present Chancellor of the Exchequer. He supposed the right hon. Gentleman derived his information from the Government broker, who had already shown himself not quite certain in his predictions. His own opinion was that whatever happened the State ought not to pay any considerable amount for the upkeep of savings banks. He passed from that to what he considered to be rather a serious feature in the Estimates. He did not know whether the Committee realised that they were now asked to pay two years deficits in one year on the trustee savings banks and the friendly societies. In the present year's Estimates, a sum of £48,619 was taken for trustee savings banks and friendly societies. Now they were asked, to vote in the same financial year a further sum of £76,287 for the trustee savings banks and £13,003 for the friendly societies. Consequently they had in the same year one year's deficiency on the Estimates and another year's deficiency as a Supplementary Estimate. He thought the right way would be to put the deficiency either on the year's Estimates or to leave it out of the year's Estimates and put it on the Supplementary Estimates. His opinion was that it ought to be put on the year's Estimates, because, firstly, he was dead opposed to Supplementary Estimates of any kind; and, secondly, because he did not think the reason assigned for putting it on the

    1179
    Supplementary Estimates was sufficient. That reason was that they could not exactly ascertain the precise amount of the deficiency until after the Estimates had been made up. But an attempt in that direction was made last year, and he did not think it was very far out. They had no explanation as to why they were now asked to provide two years deficiencies in one year.
    MR. AUSTEN CHAMBERLAINsaid he gave a full explanation on the point but the hon. Gentleman was not in his place. He came in later.
    MR. GIBSON BOWLESsaid he was very sorry that he missed the explanation of the right hon. Gentleman, and he only trusted it was satisfactory. Certainly as a general rule it could not be right to put two years charges into one year's Estimates, and he hoped in future that the deficiency would be put either in the year's Estimates or in the Supplementary Estimates.
    MR. BUCHANANsaid he was present when the Chancellor of the Exchequer made his explanation; but the right hon. Gentleman's justification was confined to his action in bringing forward the Supplementary Estimate. The right hon. gentleman said that it was for the convenience of the House that the matter should be considered at the present time, possibly with a view to legislation; but the right hon. Gentleman did not make any attempt to deal with the point raised by the hon. Gentleman the Member for King's Lynn as to why the Committee was asked to vote services for two years in one Supplementary Estimate. As regarded the ensuing year he observed that there was no Estimate for this purpose. That might be the natural consequence of the fact that they were now voting services for two years in one Supplementary Estimate. It was another instance of the way in which the Estimates were introduced. It led to confusion both at the moment and in the future when any comparison of expenditure over a series of years was attempted. The Estimate before the Committee was put down under Class 7 although it should be under Class 6. He assumed that was a misprint.
    THE FINANCIAL SECRETARY OF THE TREASURY (Mr. VICTOR CAVENDISH,)said it was a misprint. His attention had been called to it.
    MR. BUCHANANsaid, as far as he could gather from the Chancellor of the Exchequer, there would undoubtedly be a deficiency in the ensuing year and for several years to come. Surely, the right hon. Gentleman ought to be able to give an Estimate.
    MR. AUSTEN CHAMBERLAINsaid, as far as he knew, an Estimate had never been presented to the House of Commons until after the savings bank year had ended. Then an Estimate was presented for the sum required to make good the deficiency during the savings bank year. Therefore it was only possible to make provision for the deficiency within the current financial year by means of a Supplementary Estimate or by an original Estimate at the beginning of the next financial year. If the hon. Gentleman wanted a sum to appear on the original Estimates next year it would be the sum he was now asking for. It had been the practice during the whole of the time that his right hon. friend the Member for West Bristol was Chancellor of the Exchequer and during the whole of the time that he was Secretary of the Treasury to provide the sum by a Supplementary Estimate. He thought it desirable to bring the matter before the House at the earliest opportunity.
    SIR M. HICKS BEACHexplained that when he came into office he found it was the practice to take the Vote for the deficit of the trustee savings bank—in those days there was no deficit in the Post Office Savings Bank—in the original Estimates of the year; but as it was impossible to tell the actual result until the close of the savings bank financial year he gave directions to have the Vote for the purpose included in the Supplementary Estimates, and that had been done during the time he was Chancellor of the Exchequer. For some reason which he could not understand that practice had not been followed last year.
    MR. BUCHANANsaid he quite understood, but he still maintained that they

    1181
    ought not to be asked to vote the two items in one year. The advantage of the practice adopted by the right hon. Gentleman to himself was plain. The right hon. Gentleman saved in the Estimate £250,000. He was glad to be assured that there was no immediate urgency for the reduction of the interest, and that it was possible by a temporary measure to avoid it in the immediate future. As he understood, the 2½ per cent, interest was guaranteed by the Government, for no particular fixed term, and it being a Government guarantee could not be altered until altered by Parliament.
    MR. AUSTEN CHAMBERLAINsaid he proposed to revert to the practice of his right hon. friend, which he thought the wiser course, Why it had not been followed last year he was unable to explain.
    SIR FREDERICK BANBURYhoped the Chancellor of the Exchequer would not extend the investments in savings bank securities. Depositors in savings banks desired two things—security for their money, and power to be able to realise their deposits at any moment. If the savings banks were allowed to extend their investments in order to obtain a higher rate of interest they might find it difficult to realise when they desired to, with the result that the depositor might be unable for a long time to withdraw his money.
    MR. AINSWORTHthrew out for the consideration of the Chancellor of the Exchequer the suggestion that when a depositor's account in the Post Office Savings Bank reached £100 everything over and above that amount should be automatically invested in Consols in the name of the depositor. Such a system, he thought, would mean a saving to the ratepayers.
    *SIR EDGAR VINCENTcongratulated the Chancellor of the Exchequer in having come to what he considered was a wise decision. In a matter of this kind it was extremely difficult to foresee what a few years would bring forth. Throughout the world there had been a fall in the level of all first-class
    1182
    securities, and it was highly probable that in a few years, instead of showing a deficit, the Post Office Savings Bank account would show a surplus. He objected to the criticism of the Vote as something in the nature of a subsidy. This payment of interest was a guarantee by Act of Parliament. Even if it were a subsidy there was no purpose for which he would sooner vote money than to encourage thrift among the working classes. [Hear, hear!] As sums like £20,000,000 sterling were voted freely for non-remunerative purposes, it seemed somewhat pedantic to criticise in a tone of virtuous indignation a Vote of £150,000 or £200,000 which might possibly lead to a considerable increase in national thrift, and as a consequence, to a considerable increase in national wealth. There was a lack of preparation in such an attitude. A further point in respect of which these banks were entitled to consideration at the hands of the Treasury was that they had been very good clients in the past. Not only had the rate of interest been less than the rate at which money could be raised elsewhere, but the large sum in the hands of the Government had greatly facilitated the operations of the Treasury in respect of Debt Commissioners. For these reasons he would be sorry to see too niggardly a spirit displayed by the Treasury towards depositors in the various savings banks.
    MR. LOUGHsaid that in this matter the Chancellor of the Exchequer was following a course which for seven years past he had strenously advocated in the face of much opposition. The whole of the agitation in favour of reducing the rate of interest arose from the cheapness of money during certain years, and his contention had always been that in a matter of so much importance they ought to take, not the experience of a few years, but the experience of the whole country over a long period. He entirely agreed with the decision at which the right hon. Gentleman had arrived. The other recommendations of the Committee were most reasonable, and everybody would agree as to the desirability of carrying them into effect, but any proposal to reduce the rate of interest would be received with great displeasure in the country. It should not be forgotten that

    1183
    with a population of 40,000,000 or 42,000,000, there were more than 11,000,000 depositors in these banks; and that consequently, if any deficiency had to be made good, these 11,000,000 depositors would bear a large share of taxation, so that it was merely putting money into one pocket and taking it out of the other. The Estimate itself, however, he regarded as very unsatisfactory, and no good reason had been given for the form in which it was presented. He desired to know whether the note at the bottom was strictly accurate—that the Estimate provided for the deficit only to 30th November, in the case of the friendly societies, and to 31st December in the case of the savings banks.
    MR. AUSTEN CHAMBERLAINexplained that the Estimate was to make good the deficiencies for the last completed year of each class of bank. Their respective financial years ended on the dates given.
    MR. LOUGHcontended that it was not a satisfactory Estimate to deal with. The Estimates were supposed to be for the expenditure of the State for the year ending 31st March.
    *THE CHAIRMANpointed out that the point to which the hon. Member was referring had been already fully discussed.
    MR. LOUGHsaid he had no desire to repeat anything which had been discussed. He had been compelled to leave the House for a short time, and was not aware the matter had been dealt with. A further point was that there was not a Vote at all in the new Estimates.
    *THE CHAIRMANsaid that that point had been fully discussed and dealt with, he believed to the general satisfaction of the Committee. The hon. Member was not entitled to take advantage of his absence to inflict upon the Committee arguments which had already been dealt with.
    MR. LOUGHsaid he had no desire cither to cake advantage of his absence or to raise matters which had been satisfactorily explained.
    Resolutions to be reported upon Thursday; Committee to sit again to-morrow.

  SUPPLY [25TH FEBRUARY.]
  Resolution reported.

  ARMY (SUPPLEMENTARY) ESTIMATES. 1903–4.
  "That a Supplementary sum, not exceeding £2,700,000, be granted to His Majesty, to defray the charge which will come in course of payment during the year ending on the 31st day of March, 1904, for Additional Expenditure, in respect of the following Army Services, viz.:—

  £

  Vote 1. Pay, &c. of the Army

  2,000,000

  Vote 6. Transport and Remounts

  2,100,000

  Vote 7. Provisions, Forage, and other Supplies

  2,030,000

  Total

  £6,130,000

  Excess Appropriations in Aid (Votes 1, 6, 7, 9, and 10)

  3,430,000

  £2,700,000

  Resolution read a second time.
  *MR. McCRAEsaid that various explanations had been given regarding the sum of £900,000 included in this Resolution in respect of the Imperial military railways in South Africa, but each explanation had made the matter more involved, and he hoped the Secretary of State for War would take advantage of the present, opportunity to give a final and logical explanation on the subject. The Financial Secretary to the War Office had fold them that "this item of £900,000 was only a matter of book-keeping. Then he said it was part of the price of the railways amounting to £1,250,000. They now found it was neither of these, and that this £900,000 had been spent on the maintenance of the railways while in military occupation, and that the balance of £350,000 was made up of stores taken out of stock. He understood that that £350,000 had been repaid; if that was the case he hoped the Secretary of State would say where the money had gone. According to the South African Loan and War Contribution Act, it was to go to the redemption of debt. If it had been so applied, the right hon. Gentleman would

  1185
  surely require, on the same footing as the £900,000, a Supplementary Estimate for the £350,000. The right hon. Gentleman admitted that the £900,000 had not been repudiated by the colonies, but it was said they had a counterclaim against the War Office. In that case he failed to see why the War Office Estimates should be charged with the sum at all. In any case the expenditure was part of the war expenditure; it was made out of the Army Votes, and so charged. What the House wanted to know was when the money was expended, and whether it was paid out of loans or out of revenue. He understood, however, from an answer given by the Chancellor of the Exchequer on another matter, that the £900,000 was the balance of the £4,000,000 payable by the Transvaal and Orange River Colonies to this country. It ought to be dealt with in a different way altogether. He commended the Secretary of State for his reforming zeal, and he felt sure it was with the greatest possible pleasure that the House heard him say that it was desirable that the finances of the War Office should be put upon a basis beyond criticism. The year before last he complained that £10.000,000 sterling had been spent for a certain purpose without the authority of Parliament. That was not the way in which the finances of this great country should be carried on. That was only an instance of how they got into a habit of extravagance without realising where they were going. The time had come for this House to realise the necessity for economy, and he hoped the Secretary of State for War would give such an explanation as would satisfy the House upon this particular point. After reading over the proceedings when this matter was discussed in Committee, he must say that the position was a very involved one, and he hoped the right hon. Gentleman would he able to throw some light upon the question. He begged to move a reduction of the Vote by £900,000.
  Amendment proposed—
  "To leave out £2,700,000' and insert '£1,800,000.'—(Mr. McCrae.)
  Question proposed "That '£2,700,000' stand part of the said Resolution."
  THE FINANCIAL SECRETARY TO THE WAR OFFICE (Mr. BROMLEY DAVENPORT,)said
  1186
  that perhaps a good deal of misunderstanding had been caused by a mistake made on his own part. He wished to remind the House that an explanation had been given on this point. A sum of £1,250,000 had been expended by the Government in the repair and maintenance of the line. The item of £900,000 was expended in cash, and had not been charged against the Estimates; £350,000, on the other hand, had been charged against the Estimates in the past, out of stores.
  *MR. McCRAEsaid that surely the £900,000 was in the same position.
  MR. BROMLEY DAVENPORTsaid that was not so, for the £900,000 had not been charged against the Estimates at all. He assumed that the money was going to be repaid because it had been expended upon a certain service, namely, the reconstruction and improvement of the railway.
  *MR. McCRAEasked if the £350,000 had been repaid.
  MR. BROMLEY DAVENPORT: No. Inasmuch as there was some doubt as to whether the money was to be repaid he was sorry that he had spoken of the matter as one of book-keeping; but it, as he hoped, it would be repaid that description would be a perfectly correct one.
  MR. WINSTON CHURCHILLasked whether the British Government was held, responsible for all the damage done to the railway while it was in the possession of the military authorities.
  MR. BROMLEY DAVENPORTsaid the Government had repaired the damage, and they considered that they had placed the line in a better condition then it was in when they found it. Therefore they contended that the colonies should repay the amount. If the money were repaid it would not go to the Army Votes, but, under the Act, to the relief of the National Debt.
  MR. WHITLEYsaid the hon. Member had made the point as to how and when the money was

  1187
  spent quite clear, but he had not told them what steps were being taken to obtain the repayment of this money which was clearly due from the colonies. The railways ought not to have been handed over until it was perfectly clear that this money would he repaid. The Transvaal Government had now got possession of this asset, and by a counterclaim they were attempting to cancel their liability. When our troops took possession of the country the railway was in our possession, and they were in a position to say to the Civil Government upon what terms they could acquire the railways. The actual money which had been put into the railways in the way of new and improved bridges, rolling stock, and stores were obviously matters for purchase on the part of the Civil Government when the railways were handed over. Twelve months ago the Colonial Secretary informed them what a splendid property these railways were, and he based his estimate for raising £65,000,000 of debt on the profit-making value of these particular railways. He actually declared that Lord Milner estimated a profit of £2,500,000 on the working of these railways. Surely a business in a position to make a profit of that kind ought not to object to paving a sum like that which was contained in this Estimate. If they were making this profit it was rather too much of a good thing that the very first thing repaid should not be the money due to the taxpayers, and in default of that we ought to have possession of these railways. He wished to press his request, to which no answer had been made, that the correspondence between the Government and Lord Milner as to the nature of the counterclaim, and the excuses by which the payment of this money had been either challenged or postponed, should be laid on the Table. It was on that point that the Committee was not satisfied when this Vote was closured, and they ought to be satisfied before they allowed the money to be charged to the British taxpayer. This was much too shadowy a basis upon which to put off a claim of £900,000 due to the British taxpayer. Surely the hon. Member opposite would not contest this fact, for he understood him to assent to the statement that a large amount of profit was being made
  1188
  on the railways, and surely any concern making a large profit ought to pay its just debts. They had handed over the railways, which he understood were valued at between £11,000,000 and £13,000,000, and yet the colonies hesitated to repay this small sum of £1,500,000. He did not think the Government were taking a strong attitude, and unless they stiffened their backs and stood up to Lord Milner they would not get this money repaid. There were three items in this Vote which, in his opinion, ought to have been placed on the taxpayers of the colony, and not on the British Exchequer, and they amounted to £1,500,000. The House would remember that twelve months ago, when £3,000,000 was voted, they were distinctly promised that that would be absolutely the final sum and they were told the same thing with regard to the South African Constabulary. It appeared now that after having made that bargain the Transvaal Government was to be allowed to run off without paying its share. He thought the House ought to strongly protest against this sort of thing.
  MR. COURTENAY WARNERsaid he should like to ask what was being done towards establishing our claim to this money. He was entirely in favour of railways being owned by the Government of the country where that was possible. That was a good principle, provided the Transvaal Government could pay for the railways. The result in this case was that we had already spent £350,000 on the railways, a sum which, for the present, was practically lost. They were told that there was some possibility of getting it, but the Government was entirely to blame for handing over the railways in the way they had done. There was no doubt as to the railways being a paying concern. Apparently the Transvaal Government was an insolvent purchaser, If this transaction had not been carried out in this way there would have been about £1,000,000 less capital to be raised by the Government. The harm that was being done to the country by this careless financial system was incalculable. He hoped the Chancellor of the Exchequer would be able to give the House an

  1189
  assurance that negotiations were in progress, and something was being done towards getting a pledge out of the Colonial Government that we were to get our money back again in cash, and to get it back quickly. It was quite true that the colony was in a very bad way, but if the colony was too poor to pay, the railway ought to have been sold to some one who could afford to pay for it.
  MR. WINSTON CHURCHILLsaid he understood that the position was this. We took over the railways during the war, and, having got them into our hands, we repaired them and handed them over to the Transvaal and the Orange River Colonies, and that now a claim was made by us for £1,200,000. The Transvaal Government and the Orange River Colony Government said,—"It is quite true that you have spent money on the railways, but in the meantime you have injured the rolling stock and you have damaged the railways." It seemed to him that we had a very real claim. He asked the Committee to remember that the great bulk of the damage done to the railways was done before we got them. The Boers tore up everything they could tear up. He could understand that we were responsible for making good the damage to the railways after they came into our hands, but the responsibility for making good the damage which was done before then was quite another question. The damage done to the railways while in our hands could not be anything like so great as the damage which was done before that time. The condition in which the railways left our hands was at least £900,000 better thin when they came into our hands. The Financial Secretary to the Treasury had pointed out that we had in some cases put in bridges which would accommodate a double line of rails. These bridges were superior to the old bridges. He should like to know what were the items of the counterclaim, for £900.000 seemed a large amount for any tear and wear there could have been. The House should be put in possession of some of the correspondence dealing with this subject. He thought we should not count on getting this £900,000. His own opinion was that we would not get it. But we should not abandon our claim, so
  1190
  that in the future it could be regarded as a gift to the colonies which could definitely take its place in the profit and loss account between them and ourselves.
  MR. BUCHANANsaid there was a saying in Scotland, "ye canna tak' the breeks aff a Hielan'man," and that might be said in regard to the recovery of this money from the Transvaal. He thought the House ought to know a little more in regard to this absurd counterclaim put forward by the Transvaal. The Secretary of State for War had said that the counterclaim was for deterioration of the line and rolling stock while the railways were in military use. They were now discussing the fact that £1,250,000 had been spent on improving the line and the rolling stock. Considering all the circumstances of the case the counterclaim was absurd. All this money was spent before 31st March, 1902. The Financial Secretary told them that £350,000 had been voted by the House in previous years, but he had not told them the year's Estimates in which it was contained. He himself had looked through the Estimates of 1901–2 and 1902–3 and he had failed to find any item which in any specific degree referred co this charge. The statements of previous Chancellors of the Exchequer came to this, that there was necessity for the expending of about £1.000,000 on new sidings and bridges, and otherwise improving the lines for military purposes, and that the Treasury agreed that advances should be made out of Exchequer balances. A Suspense Account for that amount was opened. The then Chancellor of the Exchequer told them that when it came to his notice he was of opinion that a Suspense Account of such magnitude ought to be closed as speedily as possible. The substance of the statement made by the right hon. Gentleman the Member for West Bristol was that, if he had imagined that the Suspense Account was to continue so long as it had done, he never would have allowed it. This was a very serious flaw in the control the House of Commons possessed over the expenditure of public money. The same thing was going on, although on a smaller scale, in respect of China. On

  1191
  the same page of the Appropriation Account there was a sum of £90,000 for railways in Northern China, with an explanatory foot-note, from which it appeared that this money was from a suspense account during the Chinese war. It had been kept in the suspense account in the hope that it would be recovered from the Chinese Indemnity. He thought they had a right to obtain a still further explanation of the way in which this large sum of money was originally issued, and how it was allowed to remain in the suspense account for a considerable period, without being brought to the consideration of Parliament. He should like also the Chancellor of the Exchequer to make some statement in regard to procedure in the future.
  *THE SECRETARY OF STATE FOR WAR (Mr. ARNOLD-FORSTER,)said that he had already given an explanation in regard to this matter, but he would now endeavour to repeat it. He agreed with his hon. friend that it was most desirable to place this charge on record as being one which the Government believed they could equitably make against the Transvaal Government; that they considered it to be a debt due from the Transvaal; and that they entertained a hope at the same time that it might be repaid. His hon. friend did not appear sanguine on that point, and that expression of opinion would not help in the payment of the money. The hon. Member for East Perth had spoken of the long continuance of suspense accounts as very unusual and very undesirable. He himself did not think that the practice was open to ail the blame which was alleged against it. It seemed to be looked upon as normal by so high an authority as the Comptroller and Auditor-General, who made no comment at all on the irregularity which was said to attach to the system. But, from a strictly financial point of view, he personally saw great inconvenience in allowing these amounts to be carried on, whether in suspense accounts or otherwise, for such long periods. He supposed that the only justification for it was that cited by the Chancellor of the Exchequer as being the sole and adequate explanation for the present instance, viz., that war was being carried on, and Estimates for this land of expenditure
  1192
  were made which were not in harmony with the ordinary financial practice of the country. There could be only one opinion, that it was not desirable that these enormous sums should be carried over for two years. There was no mystery about the debt. When the railways were taken over by the military, a portion of the money was spent on stores, such as roiling stock, railways, and machinery. The amount had been written off, as if paid for out of the Army Votes. Though it was believed that this sum, and a further sum, would be received by way of credit from the Transvaal Government, it had not been received, and as far as the War Office was concerned, the transaction was at an end. The Colonial Office had been in communication with the Transvaal Government, and a counterclaim had been lodged. He was not in a position to give the details of the counterclaim; but, whatever its nature, it must be obvious that it was not a question upon which the Government could sue the Transvaal in the County Court. The subject was one for negotiation and correspondence between the two Administrations; but the authorities at home had been informed that, until the counterclaim was adjusted, payment would not be made by the Transvaal Government.
  MR. RITCHIEsaid the real question was whether the country should wipe off this large amount of expenditure or not. He had no doubt that his right hon. friend had said all that it was possible for him to say; but, having regard to the great help which this House had given to the Transvaal and the Orange River Colony, and the enormous amount of money which the House had freely voted to assist them, he thought that they had a right to expect at least fair treatment in a matter of this kind, where the money had been spent for their benefit, and would largely increase the value of their assets. The word "counterclaim" was not used in what he should call its ordinary acceptation. When he was in office, and engaged in controversy with the Colonial Office on this matter, he must say that he had never seen what he should call a "counterclaim"—that was to say, something set out in figures. As far as that kind of

  1193
  "counterclaim" was concerned, it had not existed while he was responsible for the finances of the country. It was perfectly true that the Transvaal Government said that they ought not to be called upon to pay this sum because of the damage which our troops had inflicted. But the claim was never a substantial one; it was rather in the nature of an afterthought. The Government ought to be really very firm with the Transvaal Government in maintaining that this claim should be paid. They ought not to be put off with the mere assertion of a "counterclaim," but should insist on facts and figures which could be tested and considered. Having regard to all the circumstances of the case, the Government ought really to be very firm in maintaining that this claim should be paid. He hoped that the War Office and the Treasury would be able to get greater assistance from the Colonial Office in this matter, and that the Government would not cease to push the claim and endeavour to get some definite facts and figures which would enable them to judge the value of the counterclaim.
  MR. SYDNEY BUXTONsaid this was the third time that the Committee had discussed the item, and every time it was discussed it became more serious both as regarded finance and also with regard to the prospects of getting payment. After what had fallen from the Secretary of State for War he hoped that the Committee would have some information from the Chancellor of the Exchequer or the Secretary of the Treasury as to what the actual position was. They now knew that the War Office had washed its hands of the matter altogether and did not care two straws whether the money was paid or not.
  *MR. ARNOLD-FORSTERsaid he did not say that.
  MR. SYDNEY BUXTONsaid that the right hon. Gentleman stated that the War Office had nothing more to do with the matter.
  *MR. ARNOLD-FORSTERsaid what he said was that the War Office had nothing to do with the money as it would not come to them.
  MR. SYDNEY BUXTONsaid that at all events, as far as the War Office was concerned they had practically no interest in the matter. The two Departments that were now practically interested were the Colonial Office and the Treasury, and the Committee would like to hear something regarding the matter from the latter Department. After what had been said by the right hon. Gentleman who had just spoken it was quite evident that if they were to depend on the Colonial Office they would be leaning on a very broken reed, and, therefore, they would have to depend on the Treasury. He was sorry the Chancellor of the Exchequer was not present. He did not blame the right hon. Gentleman, because he did not know the matter was coming on; but perhaps the Secretary to the Treasury would be able to answer this point. When they were discussing this question the other day, the Committee was not aware that the claim was in such a parlous condition; and, therefore, they did not pay the same attention as they otherwise would to what fell from the Chancellor of the Exchequer. Now they found that the War Office was not interested in the claim, and that the Colonial Office was in favour of the Colonies. The Chancellor of the Exchequer said the other day that the figures of the claim were agreed on as between the Colonies and the Home Government and were accepted by both as final. Subsequently, he said, a counterclaim was raised; and he added that correspondence was still proceeding on the subject, and that at present the Treasury was supporting the War Office in its claim. What did the right hon. Gentleman mean by "at present?" What was the point on which the Treasury were weakening? What guarantee had the Committee that the claim would be pressed? He remembered when the matter of the claim was first raised, there was then no counterclaim. It was raised on the financial report of Lord Milner in which he explained the grounds on which he based his proposal for lending the Transvaal £35,000,000, and this was one of the items to be regarded as part of the loan. It was put down as a disputed claim to a certain extent but not to the full extent. It might be a little more or a little less, but the general claim was not disputed. Why was not

  1195
  the amount stopped from the loan before handing it over to the Transvaal? If the matter were in dispute the amount could be put on one side and need not be applied to any other purpose. That would be a simple way of obtaining the money if the claim were upheld; whereas, at present, there was very little chance of getting it. As had been stated by the hon. Member for Oldham the Committee was absolutely entitled to information as to the nature of this counterclaim. The right hon. Gentleman the Member for Croydon said it was of a most nebulous description; and that, as far as he was concerned, it was a sort of a general idea that this country having claimed £1,000,000 the Transvaal should also claim £1,000,000. He wished to know whether the Government had got any particulars with reference to this counterclaim, and whether they considered it of any real substance. He was entitled to press for information on this point, especially having regard to what fell from the Chancellor of the Exchequer a few days ago. If the Committee voted £900,000 now the claim would probably be lost to the country for ever.
  MR. GIBSON BOWLESsaid he had no hesitation in saying that these Supplementary War Office Estimates were the most monstrous that had ever been presented to the House of Commons, and this particular item was the most monstrous item of all. It now appeared that this was a matter of responsibility as between the Colonial Office the War Office, and the Treasury. It would be remembered that the late Colonial Secretary said that this £900,000 would be a first charge on the railway. Was it a first charge on the railway? If it were, undoubtedly they would get the money, no matter what the counterclaim might be. But, with the Secretary of State for War washing his hands of it, no one knew what were the particulars of the counterclaim, and they had it gravely before them as a serious definite matter which they ought to take into consideration in estimating the propriety of voting this £900,000. He thought that was not treating the House of Commons seriously, and it seemed to him that the Committee ought not to vote the money until they had a satisfactory and complete explanation from either the Chancellor of
  1196
  the Exchequer or the Secretary of the Treasury. What was the character of this counterclaim? Why did it exist? What was it for? Was it for the construction of railways or loss of rolling stock, or was it, as some of them suspected, a purely bogus claim set up to meet the just claim £900,000. The Secretary of State for War said that the Comptroller and Auditor-General made no reference to this matter. The right hon. Gentleman did the Comptroller and Auditor-General a very great injustice, because he did remark on this very item. Referring to outstanding questions, of which this was one, he said that, in view of the very exceptional pressure, he considered it preferable not to suggest disallowances with regard to expenditure still the subject of inquiry, but to treat such expenditure as subject to later substantiation in full and adjustment. Therefore the Comptroller and Auditor-General was by no means blind to the existence of this matter; and although he allowed the item he did it under the impression that further explanation would be forthcoming. The Government now, however, asked the Committee to vote this £900,000 before the item was substantiated. It appeared to him that such a demand had never been previously made. If there was a counterclaim they ought to know its nature and what it consisted of, and then they could judge whether it was well founded. The Committee was entitled before voting this money to have a full explanation from the Treasury Bench, and he thought the debate had proceeded sufficiently long to permit of the presence of some official of the Treasury who would be able to give that explanation.
  *SIR JOSEPH LEESEsaid that on previous occasions when the item was discussed he had asked for particulars of the counterclaim, and he was glad that the House now demanded those particulars. If the particulars could no be given surely the correspondence on the subject, which the Chancellor of the Exchequer said the other day was proceeding, might be laid on the Table, so that the House could judge for itself in what position the country was as to this acknowledged debt. Let the House see the correspondence before they took over this bad debt of £900,000. If

  1197
  it was a good debt the country must have the benefit of it, if not they ought to have some information as to whether it was completely cancelled by the counterclaim or only in part, and, if so, to what extent.
  MR. AINSWORTHsaid that when we took possession of the country the railways passed into the hands of the Government. We spent something like £900,000 upon them to put them in good order. Against that we handed them over to the Transvaal Government for £1,250,000. We ought to have held them until we got the money. Unfortunately we did not do that, but there was a definite statement from Lord Milner that the £900,000 was an indebtedness, and what he asked now was whether we were going to get anything out of that £900,000 and how the £1,250,000 was to be recovered by this country.
  THE CHANCELLOR OF THE EXCHEQUER (Mr. AUSTEN CHAMBERLAIN,)said the reason why the Vote asked for was only £900,000 and not £1,250,000 was because the item of £350,000 had already been voted and it would be an absurd proceeding to ask the House to vote one amount twice over. This was money which we claimed to recover from the Transvaal Government, but it was notorious that the Transvaal Government, at the present time, were not in a position to pay.
  MR. WINSTON CHURCHILLhere interjected a remark which did not reach the Gallery.
  MR. AUSTEN CHAMBERLAIN: The hon. Member for Oldham need not have been in such a hurry to interrupt.
  MR. WINSTON CHURCHILLsaid he only wished to state that inability to pay had nothing to do with the validity of the claim.
  MR. AUSTEN CHAMBERLAINsaid it had a good deal to do with the pressing of it. This was a valid claim which we had against the Transvaal Government, and that was admitted by the right hon. Member for West Bristol and the right hon. Member for Croydon.
  MR. RITCHIEsaid his view was that if there was a counterclaim the House ought to be told what that counterclaim was; the general statement that there was a counterclaim meant nothing at all.
  MR. AUSTEN CHAMBERLAINsaid both his predecessors and himself held this to be a valid claim, which they ought to recover from the Transvaal Government when it was in a position to pay, but admittedly that Government was not now in that position, and therefore he did not think it was a matter of immediate urgency. Coming to the counter claim, which had been described by the right hon. Member for Croydon as nebulous, and which the right hon. Gentle man said they ought to know the details of, that counterclaim was in respect to damage done to the old rolling stock and old works, while the railways were in our possession, in distinction from the new rolling stock and new works which we had provided and for which we claimed £900,000. The details of the counterclaim had not reached him, but he had disputed it on principle quite apart from the details, as it did not seem to him to be well founded. The correspondence was still proceeding between the Transvaal and the home Government in I respect to this matter, and he could not safely enter into the details of that correspondence while it was still un-finished. Under the circumstances he hoped the House would not press for further details at present.
  MR. ASQUITHasked I whether the counterclaim had ever been formulated in figures?
  MR. AUSTEN CHAMBERLAIN: No.
  MR. ASQUITH: Not even approximately?
  MR. AUSTEN CHAMBERLAIN: No, Sir. So far as I know we are not in possession of any details of the counterclaim.
  MR. McCRAEasked whether it was not the case that the £1,250,000 which included the £900,000 was to be paid out of the £35,000,000 loan. If that were so it disposed of the question of ability to pay.
  MR. AUSTEN CHAMBERLAINsaid that that did not disprove the point. In any case, the Transvaal had not yet got the £35,000,000, as there were still £5,000,000 of the loan unissued. He had already told the House that he could give them no details as to the counterclaim at the present time, and had promised to give full information on the arrival of a promised communication from South Africa. He had also explained that his objection to the counterclaim was one of principle and not of detail. An hon. Member had asked whether the Government would insist on getting this money, and had suggested that it was absurd to talk about a matter in dispute or in negotiation between this Government and the Government of the Transvaal, because after all the Government of the Transvaal were the Gentlemen sitting on the Treasury Bench. No doubt as long as the Transvaal remained a Crown colony the Government in the House of Commons could exercise considerable influence over it, but immediately it became a self-governing colony, which he understood to be the policy of hon. Members opposite, that influence would become less. In any case, lie did not intend to depart from the position he had taken up, viz. that we ought to recover this money when the Transvaal was in a position to pay, and the fact that the House voted this money in order to place its own books in a proper condition would not, or at least ought not, in any way to prejudice our power to recover the money from the Transvaal. If anything prejudiced that recovery it would be the speeches which had been made during the debate. [Cries of "Oh, oh."] One Gentleman after another had expressed to the House his conviction that the money would never be recovered and that we were on a fool's errand in attempting its recovery. He deprecated language of that kind. It afforded some justification for the course pursued by the right hon. Gentleman the Member for Croydon in delaying the presentation of this Estimate. Probably the right hon. Gentleman's reason for taking that course was that he did not think discussion in that House would assist him to recover the debt, and the debate had shown how well founded that view was.
  MR. DALZIELregretted that the Chancellor of the Exchequer should have thought fit to lecture the House on the manner in which its debates should be conducted, especially in view of the fact that although a matter vitally affecting own Department had been under discussion, the right hon. Gentleman had been so discourteous as to come in only at the fag end of the debate. The more this matter was examined into the more absurd appeared the position of the Government. The suggestion of a counterclaim was treated by ex-Chancellors of the Exchequer as a "put-up" job or an afterthought. The fact that after two years correspondence, a despatch containing full particulars was said to be on the way to this country was surely a reason for postponing the Vote for a few weeks. The truth was that the counterclaim was a mere bogey and could not be sustained. When the money was wanted there was no suggestion that the colonies would be unable to pay, and it was very ungracious on their part that they should suggest any counterclaim against expenditure incurred on their behalf during the war. No reason whatever had been shown why the matter should not be cleared up before the Vote was agreed to.
  MR. TOULMINsaid that what the House desired was a complete and clear statement on behalf of the Cabinet concerning this matter. The question should not be decided out of any feeling of charity towards the Transvaal. The present financial position of that colony had no bearing whatever on the justice or injustice of the claims it had made. If money was to be given to the Transvaal it should be by a direct Vote. The matter had passed through the hands of three Chancellors of the Exchequer, and surely it was time the question of liability was settled. There ought not to be any difficulty with regard to laying before Parliament the correspondence on the subject, as it was not a matter of negotiation with some foreign Power where delicate international questions had to be considered; it was a matter concerning a colony for the government of which this country was

  1201
  responsible, and no harm could possibly be done by placing Parliament in possession of all the facts. The House had not yet sufficient information to justify the granting of this money, and the matter might very well be postponed for
  a little longer in order that the necessary details might be given.
  Question put.
  The House divided:—Ayes, 226; Noes, 128. (Division List No. 56.)

  AYES.

  Agg-Gardner, James Tynte

  Dorington, Rt. Hon. Sir John E.

  Knowles, Sir Lees

  Agnew, Sir Andrew Noel

  Douglas, Rt. Hon. A. Akers

  Laurie, Lieut.-General

  Allhusen, Augustus Henry Eden

  Doxford, Sir William Theodore

  Law, Andrew Bonar (Glasgow)

  Anson, Sir William Reynell

  Duke, Henry Edward

  Lawrence, Wm. F. (Liverpool)

  Arkwright, John Stanhope

  Durning- Lawrence, Sir Edwin

  Lawson, John Grant (Yorks, N. R

  Arnold-Forster, Rt. Hn. Hugh O.

  Dyke, Rt. Hon. Sir William Hart

  Lee, Arthur H. (Hants., Fareham

  Arrol, Sir William

  Egerton, Hon. A. de Tatton

  Legge, Col. Hon. Heneage

  Atkinson, Rt. Hon. John

  Faber, George Denison (York)

  Leveson-Gower, Frederick N. S.

  Aubrey-Fletcher, Rt. Hon. Sir H.

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

  Llewellyn, Evan Henry

  Bain, Colonel James Robert

  Finch, Rt. Hon. George H.

  Loder, Gerald Walter Erskine

  Baird, John George Alexander

  Finlay, Sir Robert Bannatyne

  Long, Rt. Hn. Walter Bristol, S.

  Balcarres, Lord

  Firbank, Sir Joseph Thomas

  Lucas, Col. Francis (Lowestoft)

  Baldwin, Alfred

  Fison, Frederick William

  Lyttelton, Rt. Hon. Alfred

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

  Fitz Gerald, Sir Robert Penrose

  Macdona, John dimming

  Balfour, Capt. C. B. (Hornsey)

  Fitzroy, Hon. Edward Algernon

  Maconochie, A. W.

  Balfour, Rt. Hn Gerald W. (Leeds

  Flannery, Sir Fortescue

  Manners, Lord Cecil

  Balfour, Kenneth R. (Christch.)

  Flower, Sir Ernest

  Martin, Richard Biddulph

  Banbury, Sir Frederick George

  Forster, Henry William

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

  Bartley, Sir George C. T.

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

  Mildmay, Francis Bingham

  Bathurst, Hon. Allen Benjamin

  Fyler, John Arthur

  Milner, Rt. Hon. Sir Frederick G.

  Bignold, Arthur

  Gardner, Ernest

  Mitchell, Edw. (Fermanagh, N.)

  Blundell, Colonel Henry

  Garfit, William

  Morgan, David J. (Walthamstow

  Bond, Edward

  Gibbs, Hon. A. G. H.

  Morpeth, Viscount

  Boscawon, Arthur Griffith

  Godson, Sir Augustus Frederick

  Morrell, George Herbert

  Boulnois, Edmund

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

  Morrison, James Archibald

  Brassey, Albert

  Gordon, Maj Evans-(T'rH'inlets

  Morton, Arthur H. Aylmer

  Brodrick, Rt. Hon. St. John

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

  Mount, William Arthur

  Butcher, John George

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

  Mowbray, Sir Robert Gray C.

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

  Goschen, Hon. George Joachim

  Murray, Rt Hn. A. Graham (Bute

  Carson, Rt. Hon. Sir Edw. H.

  Graham, Henry Robert

  Murray, Charles J. (Coventry)

  Cautley, Henry Strother

  Greene, Henry D. (Shrewsbury)

  Murray, Col. Wyndham (Bath)

  Cavendish, V. C. W. (Derbyshire)

  Greene, W. Raymond (Cambs.)

  Myers, William Henry

  Cecil, Lord Hugh (Greenwich)

  Greville, Hon. Ronald

  Newdegate, Francis A. N.

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

  Halsey, Rt. Hon. Thomas F.

  Nicholson, William Graham

  Chapman, Edward

  Hamilton, Marq. of (L'nd'nderry

  O'Neill, Hon. Robert Torrens

  Charrington, Spencer

  Hardy, Laurence (Kent, Ashford

  Palmer, Walter (Salisbury)

  Churchill, Winston Spencer

  Hare, Thomas Leigh

  Peel, Hn. Wm. Robert Wellesley

  Clare, Octavius Leigh

  Harris, F. Leverton (Tynem'th)

  Percy, Earl

  Clive, Captain Percy A.

  Haslam, Sir Alfred S.

  Platt-Higgins, Frederick

  Coates, Edward Feetham

  Haslett, Sir James Horner

  Plummer, Walter R.

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

  Hatch, Earnest Frederick Geo.

  Powell, Sir Francis Sharp

  Cohen, Benjamin Louis

  Heath, James (Staffords, N.W.

  Pretyman, Ernest George

  Collings, Rt. Hon. Jesse

  Heaton, John Henniker

  Pryce-Jones Lt.-Col. Edward

  Colomb, Sir John Charles Ready

  Helder, Augustus

  Pym, C. Guy

  Colston, Chas. Edw. H. Athele

  Hermon-Hodge, Sir Robert T.

  Randles, John S.

  Compton, Lord Alwyne

  Hickman, Sir Alfred

  Rankin, Sir James

  Cook, Sir Frederick Lucas

  Hoare, Sir Samuel

  Ratcliff, R. F.

  Craig, Charles Curtis (Antrim, S.)

  Hogg, Lindsay

  Reid, James (Greenock)

  Cripps, Charles Alfred

  Hope, J. F. (Sheffield, Brightside

  Remnant, James Farquharson

  Cross, Alexander (Glasgow)

  Houston, Robert Paterson

  Ridley, Hon. M. W. (Stalybridge)

  Crossley, Rt. Hon. Sir Savile

  Howard, J. (Midd., Tottenham)

  Robertson, Herbert (Hackney)

  Dalkeith, Earl of

  Hozier, Hon. James Henry Cecil

  Rolleston, Sir John F. L.

  Dalrymple, Sir Charles

  Hudson, George Bickersteth

  Rollit, Sir Albert Kaye

  Davenport, William Bromley

  Hunt, Rowland

  Ropner, Colonel Sir Robert

  Davies, Sir Horatio D. (Chatham

  Jebb, Sir Richard Claverhouse

  Rothschild, Hon. Lionel Walter

  Denny, Colonel

  Jessel, Captain Herbert Merton

  Round, Rt. Hon. James

  Dewar, Sir T. R. (Tower Hamlets)

  Kennaway, Rt. Hon. Sir John H.

  Royds, Clement Molyneux

  Dickson, Charles Scott

  Kenyon, Hon. Geo T. (Denbigh)

  Sackville, Col. S. G. Stopford

  Dickson-Poynder, Sir John P.

  Kerr, John

  Sadler, Col. Samuel Alexander

  Dimsdale, Rt. Hon. Sir Joseph C.

  Keswick, William

  Sandys, Lieut-Col. Thos. Myles

  Disraeli, Coningsby Ralph

  Kimber, Henry

  Sasson, Sir Edward Albert

  Saunderson, Rt Hn.Col. Edw. J.

  Stone, Sir Benjamin

  Wharton, Rt. Hon. John Lloyd

  Scott, Sir S. (Marylebone, W.)

  Talbot Lord E. (Chicester)

  Whiteley, H.(Ashton und. Lyne

  Seely, Charles Hilton (Lincoln)

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

  Whitmore, Charles Algernon

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

  Thorburn, Sir Walter

  Willoughby de Eresby, Lord

  Seton-Karr, Sir Henry

  Thornton, Percy M.

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

  Sharpe, William Edward T.

  Tollemache, Henry James

  Wilson, John (Glasgow)

  Simeon, Sir Barrington

  Tomlinson, Sir Wm. Edw. M.

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

  Sinclair, Louis (Romford)

  Tufnell, Lieut.-Col. Edward

  Wolff, Gustay Wilhelm

  Skewes-Cox, Thomas

  Tuke, Sir John Batty

  Wortley, Rt. Hon. C. R. Stuart

  Sloan, Thomas Henry

  Valentia, Viscount

  Wyndham, Rt. Hon. George

  Smith, H. C (North'mb. Tyneside

  Vincent, Sir Edgar (Exeter)

  Wyndham-Quin, Major W. H.

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

  Walker, Col. William Hall

  Spear, John Ward

  Walrond, Rt. Hn. Sir William H.

  TELLERS FOR THE AYES—

  Stanley, Edward Jas. (Somerset)

  Warde, Colonel C. E.

  Sir Alexander Acland-Hood,

  Stanley, Rt. Hn. Lord (Lancs.)

  Webb, Colonel William George

  and Mr. Ailwyn Fellowes.

  Stock, James Henry

  Welby, Sir Charles G. E(Notts.

  NOES.

  Abraham, William (Cork, N. E.)

  Hammond, John

  Partington, Osward

  Ainsworth, John Stirling

  Hayden, John Patrick

  Paulton, James Mellor

  Allen, Charles P.

  Hemphill, Rt. Hon. Charles H.

  Price, Robert John

  Ashton, Thomas Gair

  Holland, Sir William Henry

  Rea, Russell

  Asquith, Rt. Hon Herbert Henry

  Hope, John Deans (Fife, West)

  Reddy, M.

  Barran, Rowland Hirst

  Horniman, Frederick John

  Redmond, John E.(Waterford)

  Barry, E. (Cork, S.)

  Humphreys-Owen, Arthur C.

  Redmond, William (Clare)

  Bell, Richard

  Hutchinson, Dr. Charles Fredk.

  Reid, Sir R. Threshie (Dumfries

  Boland, John

  Jones, William (Carnarvonshire

  Rickett, J. Compton

  Brigg, John

  Joyce, Michael

  Roberts, John H. (Denbighs.)

  Brown, George M. (Edinburgh)

  Kearley, Hudson E.

  Robertson, Edmund (Dundee)

  Buchanan, Thomas Ryburn

  Kitson, Sir James

  Robson, William Snowdon

  Burke, E. Haviland

  Lambert, George

  Roche, John

  Burns, John

  Lawson, Sir Wilfrid (Cornwall)

  Roe, Sir Thomas

  Buxton, Sydney Charles

  Layland-Barratt, Francis

  Runciman, Walter

  Caldwell, James

  Leese, Sir Joseph F. (Accrington

  Samuel, Herbert L. (Cleveland)

  Campbell, John (Armagh, S.)

  Leng, Sir John

  Shackleton, David James

  Causton, Richard Knight

  Lloyd-George, David

  Shaw, Charles Edw. (Stafford)

  Cawley, Frederick

  Lundon, W.

  Shaw, Thomas (Hawick B.)

  Clancy, John Joseph

  Macnamara, Dr. Thomas J.

  Sheehan, Daniel Daniel

  Condon, Thomas Joseph

  MacNeill, John Gordon Swift

  Shipman, Dr. John G.

  Craig, Robert Hunter (Lanark)

  MacVeagh, Jeremiah

  Sinclair, John (Forfarshire)

  Crean, Eugene

  M'Arthur, William (Cornwall)

  Soames, Arthur Wellesley

  Crombie, John William

  M'Hugh, Patrick A.

  Spencer, Rt. Hn. C R. (Northants

  Cullinan, J.

  M'Kean, John

  Strachey, Sir Edward

  Dalziel, James Henry

  M'Killop, W. (Sligo, North)

  Sullivan Donal

  Davies, Alfred (Carmarthen)

  Mooney, John J.

  Thomas, Sir A. (Glamorgan, E.)

  Delany, William

  Moulton, John Fletcher

  Toulmin, George

  Dewar, John A. (Inverness-sh.)

  Murnaghan, George

  Trevelyan, Charles Philips

  Dilke, Rt. Hon. Sir Charles

  Nannetti, Joseph P.

  Wallace, Robert

  Donelan, Captain A.

  Nolan, Joseph (Louth, South)

  Walton, John Lawson (Leeds, S.

  Douglas, Charles M. (Lanark)

  Norman, Henry

  Walton, Joseph (Barnsley)

  Duncan, J. Hastings

  Nussey, Thomas Willans

  Wason, Eugene (Clackmannan)

  Ellice, Capt E. C(S. And'w'sBghs

  O'Brien, Kendal (Tipperary Mid

  Wason, John Cathcart (Orkney

  Emmott, Alfred

  O'Brien, Patrick (Kilkenny)

  Weir, James Galloway

  Esmonde, Sir Thomas

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

  White, George (Norfolk)

  Eve, Harry Trelawney

  O'Connor, James (Wicklow, W.

  White, Luke (York, E. R.)

  Ffrench, Peter

  O'Connor, T. P. (Liverpool)

  Whiteley, George (York, W, R.)

  Flynn, James Christopher

  O'Dowd, John

  Wilson, John (Durham, Mid.)

  Furness, Sir Christopher

  O'Kelly, James (Roscommon N.

  Young, Samuel

  Gladstone, Rt. Hn. Herbert John

  O'Malley, William

  Goddard, Daniel Ford

  O'Mara, James

  TELLERS FOR THE NOES—Mr. M'Crae and Mr. Whiteley

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

  O'Shaughnessy, P. J.

  Gurdon, Sir W. Brampton

  Parrott, William

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

  Question proposed, "That this House doth agree with the Committee, in the said Resolution."
  And, it being after half-past Seven of the clock, the debate stood adjourned.
  Debate to be resumed To-morrow.

EVENING SITTING.

  ST. MARYLEBONE ELECTRIC LIGHTING BILL (BY ORDER).
  MR. GODDARDsaid in moving the Instruction standing in his name he might perhaps be allowed to deal shortly with the history of the Bill. The borough of St. Marylebone had been supplied by the Metropolitan Electric Supply Company for some years, but the local authority in 1901 obtained a Provisional Order for the purpose of supplying electric light in competition with that company. In order to do that they had to buy out the company, and under an arbitration the borough council had to pay about £1,250,030 for the undertaking. Up to that time the arrangements had been made without any general sanction from the ratepayers. Having obtained these powers the council failed to carry out the contract, and the company brought an action against them by means of which they obtained an order for the amount of the arbitration award. That was suspended in order to enable them to obtain a Bill in Parliament to borrow money for the purpose. That Bill had now passed its Second Reading, and it provided not only for the arbitration award but for a further expenditure of £500,030 for the purpose of constructing a generating station. The Instruction on the face of it was a very reasonable one, and was one that had been inserted in several previous Acts of Parliament. The first part of it laid down the principle that there ought to be supplied, annually, a statement of affairs and a balance-sheet showing the trading profit and loss. No one could raise any objection to that, as any ratepayer ought to be able to see it he was to be charged with a rate to make up some deficiency on the trading of the corporation. The second part suggested that the borough council should fix, annually, the charge to be made for the supply of the electrical energy, so that the revenue of the undertaking should cover the expenditure for the manufacture of the light, the interest on the money borrowed, and the sinking fund. Without such an Instruction it would be possible for the borough council to charge less than the cost and mike up the loss so incurred out of the general rate, and against such
  1206
  a thing as that the ratepayers ought to be safeguarded. Electric light was more of a luxury than a necessity, and it could only be used in this case by the wealthier portion of the community in their private houses and by tradesmen in a large way of business. In Marylebone 25 per cent, of the ratepayers were supplied with electric light, and it would not be fair or just for the remaining 75 per cent, to have a rate put upon them in order that the remaining 25 per cent, might enjoy this luxury at a low price. The Metropolitan Electric Lighting Company had been supplying this district at a profit, as was shown by the award of the arbitrators, and therefore it was perfectly obvious that the Marylebone Corporation ought to be able to supply electric light at a profit at present prices. With regard to fixing the price after one year he was not tied to that particular time, but thought there would be no difficulty in so doing owing to the number of consumers that existed in the borough. This matter could not be left to the Committee to deal with, and if it were not settled by the House, it in all probability would not be settled at all, because all those who could have raised the question in Committee hid now no locus standi. His observation led him to suppose that, in the future there would be a far large: number of municipal councils which would undertake trading concerns of this kind, especially those which in some way or other interfered with the management of the roads. He was rather in favour of that view, but he asserted that the credit of public life demanded that these undertakings should at least be carried out in the most fair, open, and straightforward way possible.
  *MR. KIMBERsaid he did not support this Instruction on any grounds personal to the Marylebone scheme, with which he had no acquaintance. He supported it because the question raised by it was one of principle, Parliament in its wisdom having thought fit to give local authorities power to use the ratepayers' money for the purpose of manufacturing electric light and competing in industrial enterprises. He was against committing to local authorities general powers of trading, but he

  1207
  was prepared to admit that public lighting should be committed to the charge of the local authority, and if in this case it was a question of public lighting no one would complain. But when it came to supplying light to private consumers it was important that accounts should be kept which would show that the benefits conferred on the few were not conferred at the expense of the many. If powers of competition were given to local authorities they should be compelled to render accounts that the ratepayers might see that they were not paying for the light supplied to consumers. They should render a balance-sheet and a profit and loss account, showing not only how much of the ratepayers' money was expended but what the return was, and the profit and loss account should show that the revenue from the consumers was sufficient to pay the expense to which the local authority was put in the manufacture and supply. In this case, inasmuch as the Metropolitan Electric Lighting Company was already supplying this district at a profit, it followed that the local authority should have no difficulty in rendering an account at the end of each year after the one year granted to them for making the transfer. It was bad enough for the ratepayers to have to find the capital for these undertakings, but it would be still worse if the non-consumers, to assist consumers, were mulcted in a rate to make up a deficit. He would not labour the point; it was a business matter and one that should occur to a business community. He begged to second the Resolution.
  Motion made, and Question proposed, That it be an Instruction to the Committee to insert provisions in the Bill to the effect that the council shall, once in every year after the first year's working of i he electric lighting undertaking, cause to be laid before them a statement and balance-sheet of the accounts of the electric lighting undertaking drawn up in accordance with the form of accounts prescribed by the Board of Trade for a local authority under the Electric Lighting Acts, 1882 and 1888, and the council shall thereupon fix annually the charges to be made for the supply of electrical energy in the then ensuing year at such rates (not exceeding the maximum rates
  1208
  specified in the Order of 1901) so that so far as is reasonably practicable, the revenue for that year shall not be less than the estimated amount of the expenditure and of the charges for interest and sinking fund for that year." —(Mr.. Goddard.)
  MR. BOULNOISsaid he had always been opposed to municipal trading of every kind and had done everything in his power to prevent the council from entering into such a mad project as the purchase of a hugh undertaking under the Lands Clauses Act. He went so far as to refuse to allow his name to be put on the purchase Bill but the ratepayers of Marylebone having decided by a considerable majority to proceed with the Bill to provide purchase-money, he was anxious to help them to get through a bad bargain in the best manner they could. He hoped the House would not make the burden harder to bear, as it would be if the Instruction were passed. In his opinion such Instructions tied the hands of the Committee when the matter came before them. While he agreed that there might possibly be excellent reasons why some such clause as this should be inserted, on the other hand there might be reasons why it should not be inserted, and he maintained that the House was not the proper tribunal to decide such questions off-hand. The hon. Member for Ipswich claimed that the ratepayers would not be represented, but this Instruction had been put down at the instigation of the Gas; Light and Coke Company, and that company presented a petition against the Bill before the Standing Committee to which the borough council did not object. He agreed that this proposal might be an excellent one in principle. It might be right to argue that those who did not use the electric light ought not to be compelled to pay a rate in aid of it, but he could not help thinking that this Instruction would hamper the Borough Council of Marylebone to such an extent that it would render it almost incapable of carrying out the undertaking and it would create a ridiculous and ludicrous position. He agreed that the borough council was bound to keep regular and accurate accounts, but that question did not enter into the discussion

  1209
  at all, for the proposal was that the charge for electricity in each area should be based on the balance-sheet of the previous year. The certainty would be that in the first two or three years the price would have to be raised to the consumer every year if this Instruction were carried. He did not think that would tend to an extension of business and it would lead to an enormous amount of irritation and dissatisfaction amongst the consumers. He thought something might be said in favour of a revision of prices every three years, but to do it every year would cause confusion and render it almost impossible to carry on the undertaking. It was well known that these companies entered into special contracts with large consumers and gave them a reduction in price, but contracts of that kind were not made for one year for they invariably extended over a number of years. He hoped such a clause as that which was suggested would not be inserted, and he trusted the House would insist upon a full inquiry before adopting such an Instruction. It was impossible that the undertaking could be made to pay immediately after it-had been taken over, and this instruction might prevent the borough council making it a prosperous concern in years to come. He hoped the House would not impose such an Instruction without inquiry for it might throw an additional burden upon his Borough.
  *MR. MOULTONsaid he happened to have an intimate personal acquaintance with the circumstances of this case by reason of his having acted as Counsel in the Arbitration which fixed the price at which the Marylebone Corporation acquired the undertaking. He was not going to inflict upon the House his views in regard to municipal trading, but he thought hon. Members would agree with him that the question the House should decide was whether they should allow municipal trading or not, and if they allowed it they ought to do so fully and not with one hand take away the power of trading while with the other they gave authority to trade. In electric lighting the most important thing was that a company or municipal body should have
  1210
  a perfectly free hand as to the business management of the concern. Of all the large supply businesses he knew of none in which the cost of the article supplied was so enormously diminished by the scale of supply as electricity. To give to a body the power to supply electricity and then to say that if at any moment they found they were not making a profit they must raise their price was practically to drive them into bankruptcy. If they were losing money the best course would probably be to drop the price and not to raise it. An Instruction such as the present one could only be proposed in the interests of the gas companies, the trade rivals of electric lighting. The Legislature compelled local authorities to repay their capital, which was a very severe term to impose, and one from which trading companies were free, and to add to it the suicidal condition that when there was a deficit they must raise their prices would be treatment so unjust as to be wholly unworthy of the past traditions of the House. Ho gathered from the speech of the hon. Member who moved this Instruction that there were such questions on foot as that of compelling Marylebone to buy electricity in bulk from some particular company. As this House could not go into the actual circumstances of the case surely it was not going to commit itself to an Instruction which might have the effect of practically giving back to a company the full value of an undertaking for which it had been paid. He thought this was a matter of a kind which the House ought never to meddle with by such Instructions as this. But, in addition to these general considerations, there were special features in the legislation as to Marylebone which would render it little less than a scandal if, at this stage of the matter, the Instruction were passed. Two years ago the Legislature passed a Bill which not only permitted, but made it the duty of, the Marylebone Corporation to purchase this electric lighting undertaking. The present Bill was simply for the purpose of enabling the corporation to borrow the money that was necessary to carry out what the Legislature had put upon them. It would not be fair now, when it came to ask for the necessary power to borrow the money, to put these new and onerous terms upon the Corporation.
  THE PARLIAMENTARY SECRETARY TO THE BOARD OF TRADE (Mr. BONAR LAW,)said several requests had been made to the Board of Trade to insert this clause in Electric Lighting Provisional Orders, but the Board of Trade had always refused to do so. As far as he could see, the object of the Instruction was, in the first place, to protect private interests—in this case a gas company—against what was said to be unfair competition, and, in the second place, to protect the ratepayers. There could be no doubt whatever chat the Instruction would fully achieve the first object. It would protect private interests, but at this cost that it would impose upon the local authority, that was upon the ratepayers, conditions of competition which were altogether unfair. General considerations of municipal trading had nothing whatever to do with the matter as it now came before the House. Arguments of that kind should be considered when it was to be decided whether or not certain powers should be given to a local authority. But once those powers had been given, as was the case here, it was obviously the duty of the House to see that the local authority was put in a position to enable them to trade on as good terms as any private individual. To lay down that the way to turn a loss into a profit was to increase the charge, was contrary to the experience of almost every commercial undertaking in the world, and there was no commercial undertaking in which this was more true than in regard to electric lighting. It was constantly urged that municipalities should be made to carry on their business upon general commercial lines, but could anyone imagine the private individual carrying on his business upon the principle laid down in this Instruction. The same principles which applied to ordinary commercial dealings applied more strongly to electric lighting, the success of which depended largely upon the number of consumers.
  MR. JOHN BURNSsaid the Secretary to the Board of Trade had covered the ground in so pertinent a manner that he had left little for anyone to add in opposing the Instruction. The hon. Member who moved the Instruction
  1212
  laid great stress on the desirability of publicity. He only rose for the purpose of satisfying the hon. Member on that particular point. Under the Borough Funds Act the ratepayer had access to all the information any reasonable ratepayer should require. In addition to that, the hon. Member would find that there were conditions prescribed by the Board of Trade in connection with electric lighting undertakings which would secure what the hon. Member desired when he said that everything should be open and above board. Where these rules did not apply, the Local Government Board could interpose to prevent anything of a secret or collusive character, such as the hon. Member feared. If this onerous Instruction were imposed, he believed the Borough Council of St. Marylebone would have the greatest possible difficulty in making the undertaking a financial success. The ratepayers had by two to one spoken in favour of the Bill, and the only interest opposed to it was the Gas Light and Coke Company, who were rivals in the sphere of illumination. It seemed to him to be a gratuitous impertinence on their part to ask Parliament to take their side and to handicap the borough council in the way proposed.
  Question put, and negatived.

  TRAINING OF TEACHERS.
  *MR. HENRY HOBHOUSE*MR. HENRY HOBHOUSE (Somersetshire, E.) moved a Resolution of which he had given notice, declaring that in the opinion of the House the cost of the training of teachers should be charged on the National Exchequer. He said there was no question in connection with education which was more looked to at the present moment than this, or which more required the attention of the Government. He supposed there would be general agreement that there was need for the provision of further facilities for training. It was not necessary for him to weary the House with figures, because those given by the Secretary of the Board of Education in a Paper distributed that morning sufficiently indicated the position. That information shortly came to this, that whereas there were every year between 6,000 and 7,000 persons who qualified for entering

  1213
  the training colleges, less than half could find admission. The pressure on the existing colleges was increasing daily. Although the residential colleges had been enlarged from time to time, they were practically full, and in the opinion of the best judges they could not be indefinitely enlarged without doing considerable damage to the standard of their education. On the other hand, the University colleges had latterly gathered to themselves a large number of teachers in training, and some of the colleges were beginning to be afraid that their non-professional students would be swamped by those who wished to enter their fortresses. Everybody who was conversant with the work of the local education authorities at the present moment knew that the demand for teachers was growing more pressing every day, and that many of them had to take teachers who had no training, to fill posts which ought to be filled by properly trained and qualified teachers. It was most essential in our great system of national education to keep up not only the quantity but the quality of the teachers. It was really bad economy, when spending £14,000,000 or£15,000,000 a year from the rates and taxes on salaries, buildings, apparatus, and the like, in connection with education, not to see that the schools were staffed with a full supply of well-trained teachers in order to secure a proper return for this great expenditure.
  Where did the responsibility to remedy the present difficulty primarily reside? He ventured to say that the Government of this country had really never faced this question, and had never recognised the duty laid upon it to take the principal step in supplying the deficiency in this part of our educational system. What was the history of the training of teachers in this country? It was left, up to very recent years, to the generosity of private persons, or to the enterprise of such societies as the National Society and the British Employment Society to establish training colleges. Up to 1860 these societies were largely aided by grants from the National Exchequer for building purposes, but since then he believed that no grants had been given by the State. Some ten or twelve years
  1214
  ago, when his friend Mr. Acland was at the Education Board, there was a new and useful departure whereby day training colleges were established in connection with the Universities, but it was not until yesterday that it was considered the duty of any local authority to establish colleges, or to put any substantial burden on the rates for this national purpose. A clause was inserted in the Education Act of 1902 giving the local education authorities power to train teachers, but it was an optional power, and the question was only discussed then from the denominational point of view. The cost of the training of teachers was now for the first time made a matter of local taxation, instead of a matter of Imperial taxation. In his view the training of teachers was a matter of national concern. He would try to justify that as briefly as he could. As a rule, putting aside a certain number of our large cities, it was impossible to treat the question of the training of teachers as a local question, and that for several reasons. In the first place there were about 130 different local education authorities, and those who had to deal with them knew how difficult it was to get them to agree to combined action for any purpose; and the difficulty would be increased in the matter of the training of teachers as the duty was not obligatory but optional. He did not think his hon. friend the Secretary to the Board would care to undertake the job of forcing the local authorities to do their share of the work in the training of teachers. But if the hon. Gentleman did so another difficulty would arise—a considerable grievance which he might call in classical language "Sic vos, non robis." Those who were conscientious would be training teachers, if they had the money, for other localities to which, possibly by higher salaries or other reasons, teachers would go and leave them in the lurch. They could not localise this work. There were some people who imagined that a teacher could be bound down to serve a long time in a very restricted locality. He ventured to say that if any system of that kind were tried there would be in a short time an agitation from some quarters which would overthrow the system of indentured work. If the country authorities did not do their duty

  1215
  in this matter it would be a misfortune, because there was what he would call excellent raw material in the country districts for the training of teachers, and it was desirable that they should get the country brain as well as the town brain. Lastly, there arose the difficulty of a higher education rate. This training was to be paid for, not out of the ordinary compulsory education rate, but out of another rate, and there were many ratepayers in this country who would hesitate to add to their present assessments a 4d. or a 6d. rate for this purpose. All those difficulties made it clear that little would be done by the local authorities for the training of teachers until the work was made easier for them by the central authority.
  Again, the regulations issued by the central authority for the improvement of the training of pupil teachers would, if carried out, be very costly to the local authorities. For instance, it was calculated that the regulations would impose an extra expense of £20,000 a year on the West Riding of Yorkshire. The local authorities were hit by these regulations in several ways. In the first place the restriction in regard to age swept away the monitor and probationer, and created a large number of vacancies which had to be filled by assistants. It was all very well to carry out this improvement in large towns with concentrated populations and good conditions; but it was a very different thing in scattered country districts, where they had to provide new buildings, boarding for many of the students, and travelling expenses as well. These regulations, it was true, were not to come fully into force until next year, but he did not know that that allowed too much time for the arrangements that had to be made. The Department had taken a rather serious step already in prohibiting teachers in voluntary schools from giving instruction; o pupil teachers out of school hours. That was done under cover of preventing what were called extraneous duties, but when that question was discussed in the House extraneous duties were understood to mean such things as playing the organ, or other non-educational duties. Of course the result of the action of the Department was obvious; it meant that educational
  1216
  teaching must only be given in pupilteacher centres which had to be provided by the local authorities. The general outcome of the matter was a three-fold burden on the rates for shortage of teachers, shortage of training colleges, and raising of the standard. It was no wonder that the over-burdened ratepayers cried out, and asked that, if the Government dictated a new policy, they should also pay for it. The County Councils Association passed a strong resolution in regard to the matter the other day; and he had had letters within the last few days from friends who demanded a national rather than a provincial system in order to secure a universal standard-His friend Mr. Acland wrote him recently—
  "We are far behind many other countries in this matter of training, and we shall remain behind unless a wholly new method is adopted. We surfer at present from a policy which has too often existed in this country of mis-spending millions for want of a prudent expenditure of a comparatively small additional sum. At present, only one-fourth of our elementary teachers have been to a training college. As long as this continues, a very large number of the children will seriously suffer."
  Now as to the Motion which he wished to put before the House. In the first place, it did not propose to relieve private persons but only aimed at recalling the central education authority to some sense of responsibility in this matter; and, in the second place, it did not propose to increase the public burdens further than such an increase was desired by the Education Department. No doubt national expenditure was heavy, but so was local expenditure; and there was no better way of swelling that expenditure than to allow Government Departments to force expenditure on the local authorities. He wished to credit the Government with certain larger grants. There was on the Estimates a sum of £10,500 towards the training of teachers. That was no doubt due to the increase in the number of teachers, and there was also an increase of £750 for hostels. The Government, however, had abolished 75 per cent, almost at the expense of the training schools and did not give a penny more for buildings. It might be said that they were going to give £40,000 more for training colleges, but what was that when a single riding of a county had to expend £20,000 on training colleges. If the

  1217
  regulations were to be carried out, these grants must be largely increased. He could not accept the Amendment of his hon. friend the Member for Camberwell, who proposed that only "the greater part" of the training of teachers should be charged on the national exchequer, because the Government would say that they accepted that at once, because they had already paid the greater part of the cost. He did not wish the present system to continue as it stood; he wished the Government to assume greater responsibility. He had no objection to large towns conducting experiments in regard to education, but there must be proper safeguards against extravagance. In a national matter of this kind the great bulk of the money should be found by the national exchequer, and they could not expect the local authorities to incur unpopularity and odium by raising large additional sums for national, not local, purposes. He begged to move.
  *SIR MICHAEL FOSTERsaid that in seconding the Resolution of his right hon. friend, he trusted he should not be weakening the force of his argument if he ventured to make a few observations from quite a different point of view from that taken by the right hon. Member for Somerset. There was a story that a German professor who had come to England for the first time, asked Mr. H. Sidgewick how it was that in this country there was no class of what was called in Germany gelehrte; and the answer was that we had the class but called them prigs. He was free to confess that he had the advantage of drawing the conclusion not only from observation, and also from introspection, that the people whose lives were attached to knowledge exclusively, either in acquiring or distributing it, were subject to the besetting sin of priggishness. It was very important that the teachers should be free from that influence. This was a matter of national importance, because he agreed with his right hon. friend that the elementary teacher belonged to no town, to no country; he belonged to the nation. It was necessary that he or she should not be a mere didactic machine, and that he or she should be trained to be a man or a woman, and he would say a man or
  1218
  woman of the world, so as to train up children to take their place in the world. Now to do that, and to prevent the introduction of priggism, they had to ask themselves what were the circumstances most helpful in producing that characteristic. It was to place a person, while he was being trained within a narrow circle, in the midst of those who were following the same pursuit, who did the same things in the same way, and who: talked of nothing but what was common to them all. He could not help thinking that the clergy of the Church of England had received untold benefit from the fact that, in the majority of cases, they had been brought up at the Universities in the midst of other people, shoulder to shoulder with those who had other objects and other views; and it was his wish that the other clergy of this country, the teachers of the country, should have the same advantage. That was much more likely to be brought about, ho thought, by throwing the cost, or at least the main cost, upon the national exchequer, because then there would be a greater likelihood of teachers taking advantage of the training of the Universities. He could not believe that there was any danger of those centres of learning being swamped by teachers, if they were made, as they should be, available for the training of all careers in life. It was for this, among other reasons, that he seconded the Motion.
  Motion made, and Question proposed, "That, in the opinion of this House, the Training of Teachers is a matter of national concern, and the cost of such training, so far as it falls on public funds, should be charged on the national exchequer."—(Mr. Henry Hobhouse.)
  DR. MACNAMARAsaid he was in agreement with the mover, and in particular with the seconder, of the Motion, and they would understand that the Amendment he had on the Paper was not hostile to the Motion just moved. His Amendment was to make the Motion read that the greater part of the cost of the training of teachers should be charged on the national exchequer. His position was chat if they were to provide further facilities for the training of

  1219
  adult teachers, then the State would have to pay the great bulk of the cost. It would be fatal to localise the teachers, who would become, as the hon. Member for the London University said, provincial professional prigs; but a margin of the cost should be left to be paid by the locality. The proposal that the whole cost should be paid by the State was utterly impossible since the Act of 1902. The position had changed since the Act of 1902, which provided that any local authority could on its own initiative build training colleges, and spend money right and left, and then, according to his right hon. friend's Motion, go to the Chancellor of the Exchequer and ask him to pay the bill. That was an absolutely impossible proposition. No Chancellor of the Exchequer could, under any circumstances, agree to that suggestion; and, as long as the Act of 1902 gave this free hand to the local authorities, so long must the locality find at least a smaller margin than at present of the cost of the institutions. There was a dearth of training facilities for teachers, and the present authorities could not do all that was required in respect of the training of adult teachers with the present grants from the Exchequer. As a proof of the dearth of present teaching facilities, he would take the result of the King's College Examination for scholarships. Only one in seventy male pupils, and one in a hundred female pupils, succeeded in gaining a scholarship; and the result was that 6,902 young people, having completed their apprenticeship and passed into the first or second class, had a right to complete their preparatory career in a training college. But there were only 2,813 places in these colleges, so that over 4,000 who had the right to a training college training, were unable to obtain it. To call that a provision for the training of teachers was an absolute sham, delusion, and snare. He knew the case of a young man who had taken a very high place in a provincial college, and who applied for admission to the Cheltenham Training College, which was almost entirely supported out of public funds. The answer he received to his application was—"Accept if Churchman, or willing to conform. Wire reply to the Principal of the college." The Motion of his right hon. friend would throw the entire cost of such
  1220
  an institution on the public exchequer. He did not know whether his right hon. friend considered that, or whether he considered that this gentleman ought to be placed in a position of being tempted to conform to the Church of England in order to utilise the scholarship he had earned by the distinguished position he won in the King's Scholarship Examination. With such a large number of successes and such a comparatively small number of places, many of which were set round with denominational tests, it must be clear that there must be greater provision for the training of teachers than there was at present. He thought it was obvious that such a telegram as he had read ought not to have been received as a preliminary to the enjoyment of a King's Scholarship. At any rate that King's scholar ought to have got admission under a conscience clause. But, apart from that, the question was whether the localities could find the money to provide the additional training accommodation that was necessary. He did not think they could. There must be more money from the Exchequer.
  He did not think that the Chairman of the Somerset Education Committee treated the local education authorities justly in this matter. He had been profoundly struck by the magnificent efforts made by the local authorities, under very great strain and under great difficulties, in the direction of securing means for the proper training of pupil teachers. He had a complete list of what had been accomplished in this particular direction, and it showed a remarkable desire, in Somerset particularly, by bursaries and other schemes to induce young people to become teachers; and he thought that the work of the local authorities, considering the struggles of the education committees to overtake the serious condition into which the voluntary schools had fallen, showed a most admirable advance. In Manchester they had one of the most remarkable schemes for the training of pupil teachers in this country. But what the local authorities could now do was to tackle the question of the training of adult teachers with the money at present at their disposal. Manchester would during the course of this year open two new

  1221
  colleges, one for men and the other for women. The eastern counties were now in conference with a view to devising a scheme for the opening of a training college for teachers; a training college for teachers would be opened in Hereford in September; Cambridge had also a scheme in hand; and Lancashire and Cheshire were in consultation with reference to the establishment of a training college. But they must have further aid from the State if the thing was to be done properly; and he would suggest to the Parliamentary Secretary that the local authorities should be given very large aid in regard to the building of new colleges. If the Board could see its way, after consultation with the Treasury, to provide further money for the building of colleges that would be a very considerable advance indeed.
  In addition, he would urge that there was a very great shortage as regarded male teachers. They would always be able to get plenty of girls, because the elementary school teaching profession was a first-class opening for any young girl, and the ultimate prospects was quite admirable. Not so, however, for boys. He himself put before the Parliamentary Secretary the other day a letter written by the corresponding manager of an education committee to an applicant for a head-mastership in a public elementary school, in which the applicant was asked if he knew anything of the organ. The letter added that the present master played the organ, and for that and for looking after the lamps he received a small annual payment of £4. That would also be open to his successor; the letter adding that it was a private matter and not a condition of employment. The letter also said that the wife of the present master acted as caretaker. They would have to get away from the idea of treating public elementary school teachers as trimmers of lamps. Of course the teacher's status would be what he himself made it; but if he were to be looked upon in the social fabric as a trimmer of lamps at £4 a year, with his wife as a caretaker, they would not get boys to enter the teaching profession. The boys would enter commercial life instead, and at the end of their careers they
  1222
  would be much more successful than if they had been pupil teachers. He thought that the local authorities themselves should resent that kind of communication and should insist on a different status being given to teachers. Then as to the question of emolument, even teachers had to live. In Somerset, a headmaster, college trained, and a certificated teacher, who was in control of a public elementary school with an attendance between fifty-one and 120 children, received £90 a year, and had the ultimate prospect of looking forward at the end of his career to a magnificent salary of £130 a year. They might spend what money they liked on the training of teachers, but they would not get the best material if at the early stages of their career teachers were placed on a plateau from which they could never rise beyond £3 a week. He would not press that. He had some delicacy in pressing it. He had been an elementary school teacher himself; and, therefore, he felt some difficulty in pressing the claims of his confrères, but he was assured of this, that no matter what facilities they offered, unless the status of the teacher were improved, and unless he were given a salary that would enable him to maintain the dignity which the Secretary to the Board of Education particularly desired to associate with the office of teacher, they would not get the right material for this great work. He agreed that greater facilities were needed; he agreed there was a great shortage; he agreed that the State ought to do more; he agreed that the State might very well find building grants for new colleges; but he entirely disagreed to giving the local authorities the right to open these institutions and then turn to the Chancellor of the Exchequer and ask him to find all the money. It was because of that and because he felt that in spirit he was with the mover of the Motion that he ventured to ask the House to accept the Amendment.
  MR. GEORGE WHITEsaid he desired to second the Amendment; and he did so not because there was any difference between his hon. friend and the right hon. Gentleman who moved the Motion but because he I thought the Motion should have indicated

  1223
  something in the direction of the Amendment. He was one of those who felt that anything almost that could be done by the national exchequer towards the erection and maintenance of training colleges should be done. At the same time he thought it was most desirable that the local authorities should contribute some small moiety of the expense, in order that any disposition to lavishness might be checked. He did not think anything was more important or more pressing in connection with education at the present moment than the question of additional facilities for the training of teachers. Under the Act of 1870 large provision was made for the extension of elementary education; but no corresponding provision was made for the training of the teachers which that extension required. The Act of 1902 did make some provision, and the Prime Minister anticipated great things from that Act, which had not yet been fulfilled, and consequently very little had been actually accomplished. He admitted, however, that there were movements on the part of the local authorities which had not yet taken effect to any great extent, and he did not anticipate that they would take any great effect in consequence of the enormous expenditure that would be likely to accrue. The position, therefore, was this. There was undoubtedly a scarcity of teachers for elementary schools. Every hon. Member who was concerned with education in any part of the country would know that there was not an adequate supply of trained teachers. In his own county he feared that they had a somewhat unenviable reputation for the employment of Article 68 teachers; but even when the local authorities were desirous of superseding these teachers by superior teachers they could not get them, and the expense on the locality of building and maintaining a training college was one which he thought the local authorities would not like to incur in many instances. His other point was that, even with a group of counties such as East Anglia, they could not locate the teachers, after going to the expense of training them. Other counties might get the advantage of that expense, and, consequently, with the
  1224
  pressure which primary education was now putting on the rates, he was quite sure that very few local authorities would have the spirit, he might almost say the hardihood, to impose on the rates the additional expense of a training college.
  Another reason which pressed on him quite as much as the educational reason was that they wanted national training colleges instead of denominational training colleges. If the colleges were built by the Exchequer, and were maintained under the Act of 1902, they would be free, of course, from the tests which so unfortunately hampered the training of teachers in these days. Within the last fortnight in his own constituency a case came to his knowledge similar to the case quoted by his hon. friend. A young girl who won a King's Scholarship was for some reason or other admitted to the Diocesan Training College at Norwich. She remained there a week, and was then dismissed, because she would not conform. The president of the college wrote to a local newspaper a letter in which, after sneering at Nonconformists, he said that he saved the girl from violating her own conscience. The blame in such cases attached to those who tempted young girls to enter chose colleges. Other girls who were inferior to the young girl in question were admitted to the college, and her prospects would suffer because she could not be trained in that college. Therefore, he thought it was desirable that they should receive some assurance from the Secretary to the Board of Education that at least the Board would consider this question as of very pressing importance in the educational interests of the nation. He was quite sure these educational interests would suffer very severely indeed. They were suffering at the present time, they would suffer more severely as interest in education increased, unless adequate provision were made for the training of teachers, and therefore he thought that the greater part of the expense should be a national charge. It would be to the greatest interests of education, and the Secretary to the Board would earn the gratitude of every educationist if he

  1225
  would use his great influence to secure that result.
  Amendment proposed—
  "In line 2, to insert after the word 'and' the words' the greater part of.'"—(Dr. Macnamara.)
  Question proposed, "That those words be there inserted."
  *THE PARLIAMENTARY SECRETARY TO THE BOARD OF EDUCATION (Sir WILLIAM ANSON,)said he thought hon. Members were all agreed that the Education Act had thrown a great burden upon the local educational authorities, not merely in administration, but in finance, and that they had grappled with that burden to the best of their power during the twelve or fifteen months for which the Act had been in operation. But he thought it would be unfortunate if, under the immediate pressure of these new burdens, they were tempted to cast aside responsibilities which they ought to undertake and opportunities which they might be unable to recall, such as the provision of the training of teachers within their area. Everyone admitted that there was a great dearth of training colleges. Hitherto these colleges had been founded by private enterprise in connection with denominations who interested themselves in elementary teaching; and that was the occasion of those denominational tests which hon. Gentlemen opposite regretted, and which he also regretted, because he desired to see opportunities of full training in teaching thrown open to members of all denominations. He regretted that those opportunities were limited, though he could not complain that those who had found the buildings and started the enterprise should require the conditions which had been read out. As regarded these training colleges, the right hon. Gentleman the Member for Somerset thought that the Board of Education had imposed new requirements, and that consequently further assistance would be necessary. He admitted that the Board of Education had imposed new requirements with regard to pupil teachers, but as regarded training colleges the matter stood precisely as it was when the Education Act came into force. What were the circumstances, and what was the amount of
  1226
  assistance which the Government gave to training colleges which were founded by local authorities or private enterprise? The Government paid 75 per cent, of the cost of the students, and that sum, paid by the Government, covered the students' instruction and board. There remained the upkeep of the building and the provision of the furniture. He thought he was right in saying that in every residential college the fees and the grant covered the whole expenditure apart from the provision of the fabric. He was not quite sure whether his right, hon. friend really suggested that the whole expenditure should be taken off the hands of the local authorities and be provided by the Government; but he would ask was it desirable to take this responsibility from the local authorities? Was it not desirable that they should have the margin indicated in the Amendment? The county of Hereford had started a training college, which would be thrown open in September, Lancashire and Cheshire were, he believed, combining in the matter of training teachers, and Manchester and the neighbouring towns were entering into a similar combination. He believed, also, that he was right in saying that the counties of Wales, were it not for the unfortunate differences over which the House spent so much time on the previous evening, were ready with a scheme for a joint committee, one of whose duties would be this particular duty of undertaking the training of teachers. It appeared to him to be of the utmost importance that this responsibility should still rest on the local authorities. What was wanted was variety of effort and experiment; and that could only be provided if the various local authorities developed their different views, out of which they might hope to obtain possibly an ideal system, or even more than one ideal system. His right hon. friend had suggested that the Board of Education contemplated forcing the local authorities to provide such colleges.
  MR. HENRY HOBHOUSE: I asked whether you were prepared to do so.
  *SIR WILLIAM ANSONsaid the Board of Education was certainly not prepared to do what the law did not justify and

  1227
  what common sense did not suggest; but they were urging the local authorities in every way to interest themselves in this matter by taking stock of the probable requirements of their area in respect of teachers and to prepare for the future by providing for a sufficient number of pupil teachers within their areas. They were also urging them to try to obtain promising boys and girls to enter the teaching profession. Let them use their local influence to induce boys and girls to enter a profession which he was afraid did not at present offer a sufficient inducement to the boys of this country. But turning from the purely educational side of the matter, he would point out that great difficulty might arise if the Resolution were adopted. The education authority must, from year to year, take stock of the requirements as regards teachers within their area, and apart from the automatic increase of the grant which would follow from the payment for the training of teachers, they would be able to come to the Treasury and say, "We want so much accommodation for teachers." It might be impossible to forecast from year to year the demands which might be made on the Treasury for the construction or improvement of buildings if the whole cost of the provision of colleges were thrown on the central Government. Further than that there was the difficulty, of retaining the services of the experienced teacher, by the person who paid for his training. As a matter of fact the Government now paid for the training of the teachers, and all the local authority had to do was to provide the buildings for training purposes. In order to retain the teachers, the local authorities should combine so as to have an area large enough to allow a teacher to move about, and not to spend the whole of his time in one small circle, narrowing himself by constant contact with the same individuals; that at any rate would help to retain them in the teaching profession. Another growing difficulty in the Board of Education was the wastage of teachers whom it was impossible to keep in the teaching profession, although the Exchequer paid for their training. If the local authorities took pains to find among the boys and girls in the combined area children who were likely to remain in the teaching
  1228
  profession and would bind them to remain in a certain area, there would be no hardship on the teacher so bound and no difficulty imposed on the local authority. The difficulty in his opinion was not so great as his right hon. friend suggested. The right hon. Gentleman included the whole pupil teacher system in his desire to throw the burden of payment on the Government.
  MR. HENRY HOBHOUSE: No, I quoted the regulations to show that they aggravated the difficulty of the whole training question.
  *SIR WILLIAM ANSONsaid there wag no doubt that the new regulations for pupil teachers had considerably raised the cost of the pupil teacher system. The hon. Member for the University of London had spoken of the danger of the teacher becoming affected with priggism. Well, the idea of these regulations was that the pupil teacher should be compelled to pass a certain portion of his time at a secondary school where he could mix with boys and girls not all entering the same profession, and that would go some way towards diminishing the danger of the evil referred to by his hon. friend. As to the amount of the contribution which would be made by the Board towards the cost of the training of the pupil teacher he might say that, whereas as the regulations now stood the boy or girl at a preparatory class received £2 a year for two years, he would hereafter receive £4 a year for two years. The meaning of a preparatory class extended to a secondary school which was not receiving the A or B grant under the secondary school regulations. The boy or girl at a recognised pupil teacher centre who now received £3 a year would receive £6 a year. In doubling these grants, the Board, it would be seen, were doing something to relieve the local bodies of the charge thrown upon them by the pupil teacher regulations. This pupil teacher question was the main difficulty of their education system, for unless they could prepare the children properly during the period of life between their leaving the elementary school and their entering the training college, they were wasting money at both ends, for if they were unfit to reap the benefit of the training

  1229
  college, when they came out of it they could not repay the country in teaching the enormous sums expended on their education. The problem of the training of pupil teachers was one of the most mportant which could engage local knowledge and interest; and he should be sorry to remove that interest from the local authority by throwing the whole thing into the hands of the Board of Education. He anticipated that his right hon. friend would not be satisfied with what he had said, and he might observe, in the presence of the Chancellor of the Exchequer, that this was not a good time for asking for any further contributions from the Treasury; but he could say that some assistance would be given in the matter of building grants. Further than that he could not go. Feeling so strongly as he did, on educational grounds, the extreme undesirability of removing this question from the purview of the local authorities, and taking away from the interest they now had in the training of pupil teachers, he must express his personal intention to vote against the Motion and in favour of the Amendment.
  SIR GEORGE BARTLEYsaid the discussion in which they were engaged was very typical of the House of Commons. They constantly heard pleas for greater economy, yet that day they had debated several questions, the object of which was to press upon the Government to spend enormously increased sums of money. In the afternoon they had before them a proposal to expend three or four hundred thousand pounds for one purpose only, and now they were inviting Ministers to throw upon Imperial taxation the whole cost of the training of teachers. He must say that, in his opinion, they were running to extreme lengths in this matter, because they were paying the dividends of private education companies. If they went on in this way he feared they would produce a reaction against education itself. He had spent the greater part of his life in the Education Department, and he was somewhat interested and amused to hear his right hon. friend talk about the objection of raising money from the rates because of the unpopularity and odium
  1230
  caused thereby. Why should they, for the simple reason that they feared unpopularity, throw their burden upon that unfortunate person, the Chancellor of the Exchequer? If that right hon. Gentleman really wished to be straightforward, he would tell hon. Members that he would grant their request, but they must be prepared in return to assent to a half-crown income-tax. Let them open their eyes to what their proposals would cost the country. 1c was of no use hon. Gentlemen accusing the Government of being extravagant when every time there was a possibility of spending money they came forward with demands for increased expenditure. The hon. Member for Camberwell had spoken of the teaching profession as a first-rate opening for girls, although he had suggested that it was not quite so good for boys. He ventured to differ from him on that point. But even if it were only a first-rate opening for girls surely it was reasonable that a profession which was becoming an enormous profession should do something for itself and not depend solely on being trained by the State. There were many other professions of great value to the community, such as the medical and the legal, the members of which trained themselves, and he could not see why the profession of teaching should continue to have a sort of eleemosynary system of training. It was time the profession was taught that it was its duty to pay for its own training. As he had previously stated, this debate constituted a typical example of the way in which the House of Commons continually urged increased expenditure, and, directly it was granted, turned round and accused the Government of the day of unduly swelling the Estimates. He protested against this proposed enormous increase of expenditure. He did not wish to say anything against the speech of the Secretary to the Board of Education, but he was bound to confess that to him it appeared to be a trimming sort of speech. The hon. Gentleman said he wished the locality to continue to pay some portion of the cost, but still they were going to throw some of the expense of building on the Government. That was a wobbly sort of idea, and he thought the hon. Gentleman ought to have had the pluck to say that, in the present state of the

  1231
  Exchequer, and in view of the enormous increase of taxation, the time was not ripe for increasing burdens of this sort, but that when it was possible to cut other expenditure down so as to leave a margin he might then perhaps think of trying to meet their views. He was afraid that the Chancellor of the Exchequer would be a much older man than he now was before he could find a margin for this purpose. In the name of economy he protested against throwing upon the Imperial Exchequer expenditure which should properly be met either out of local rates or by the individual directly benefited.
  MR. CHARLES ALLENcontended that to put sectarian tests on clever young men and women who were willing to serve the State as teachers was grossly unjust, and he ventured to assert that when the Liberal Party came into power it would have to do its best to alter that state of things. He gave two illustrations to bear out his argument. In the first place he pointed out that in the case of Culham College the total amount spent in the year 1901–2 was £5,797 18s. 11d. Of that amount the students of the college provided £1,110; the Government grant amounted to £4,453; the Diocesan Board found £180 only; the voluntary contributions amounted to £53, and 2s. was obtained from other sources. Yet to get into that college the pupils had to pass a religious test-a Church of England test. Then there was the case of the Women's College at Oxford. In the year 1901–2 the students found £510, the Government grant was £1,290, and the Diocesan Board only contributed £117. There, again, they had a religious test.
  *SIR W. HART DYKEsaid that although the House generally was in favour of economy there were considerations which should commend the present proposal to their attention. An Act had been passed throwing a heavy burden, both administrative and pecuniary, upon the local authorities. Probably not a single Member supposed that the initial training of pupil teachers would mean an expenditure of £14,000 or £15,000 to any single county; therefore the training question might be said to have been sprung upon the local authorities. Pupil teacher training was the most important part of the training of teachers, for if the supply of pupil teachers was checked die Act would break down. All he pleaded for was that, in view of the extreme importance of the question, and the fact that the matter had been forced upon the local authorities, some relief should be given, especially in the initial stages of the training. He agreed with the hon. Member for North Camber well that a portion of the charge should rest upon the locality, but they ought not to be asked to spend large sums of money unassisted when there was no guarantee that they would reap the result of that expenditure. In the interests of education and of the efficient working of the Act it was essential that some inducement should be offered to local authorities to take up this work. It came under the portion of the Act dealing with higher education, and there would be a great temptation to the local authorities not to administer those provisions of the Act unless some assistance was given to teacher training. A distinction should be drawn between pupil teacher training and training colleges themselves. Once a training college was established he believed that with

  1233
  the Government grant and the fees of students it could, if well administered, be made to pay financially, but the provision of sites and the building of the college was a great obstacle in the way. A sympathetic reply had been given and consideration promised, but what was wanted was a recognition of the principle that, in the present grave position of affairs, something more than sympathy should be given, and that a considerable addition to the help already granted should be made.
  *SIR E. DURNING-LAWRENCEsaid that if any county was endeavouring to carry out the Education Act in an equitable manner it was the County of Cornwall. The county contained a large number of dissenters, and while he had testimony that the Act was being carried out in the most admirable spirit, supporters and opponents alike looked to the Government to ensure that the children who had an aptitude for the teaching profession should be enabled to enter training colleges without having to submit to religious tests. He was pledged to do all he could to secure that the children of dissenters should have the right to be trained in a training college free from such tests, and he hoped the matter would not be lost sight of, as it really demanded the most earnest attention of the Government.
  MR. SPEARdesired, as a member of an education authority which was making liberal provision for the training of pupil teachers, to support the Resolution of the right hon. Gentleman the Member for East Somerset. The Secretary to the Board of Education had made some movement
  1234
  towards meeting the needs of the case, but, having regard to all the circumstances, he had not gone far enough. The requirements as to the non-employment of monitors and so forth, entailed upon the Board the necessity of giving further assistance in the provision of pupil teachers. The uncertainty of retaining pupil teachers when they had been trained would greatly deter local authorities from incurring serious outlay for equipment, and the fact that the teachers would freely pass from one district to another was a reason for a large share of the cost being paid out of Imperial rather than local funds. Education, being a national responsibility, should be paid for by the State. There might be some question as to the application of that principle to current expenditure, but certainly the equipment of teachers for the fulfilment of their duty was a matter of national concern and national responsibility and ought to be paid for by the nation. He desired to ask whether there was anything to prevent teachers, after they had been trained, leaving the teaching profession and entering other occupations; if not, that would be an additional deterrent to local authorities making the necessary outlay. He thought a good case had been made out for further concessions in this matter.
  *MR. BRIGGwas understood to urge that it would be a mistake to attempt to keep teachers to particular localities; they ought rather to change from district to district, and so come into touch with different descriptions of life and people. Pupil teacher centres, supported by the rates, were doing a good work, and supplying a want which had been long felt by the teaching world. But they were only partly

  1235
  fulfilling a national purpose; a national system of education was desired; and it was only fair that Government assistance should be given to render the efficiency of the teaching more complete. Uniformity, efficiency, and continuity were necessary in the training, so that when a teacher moved from one place to another it would not be necessary to upset the whole curriculum of the schools. There was a danger of officialism becoming too prominent in education; he hoped there would be sufficient interest taken in the question in the country to prevent such a misfortune. The Board of Education appeared hardly to realise the position of some of the county councils. Rightly or wrongly, Parliament had ordered them to take over the work of education, but no provision had been made for seeing that the teachers were properly qualified for their work. He cordially supported the Resolution.
  *MR. TALBOTexpressed satisfaction with the tone of the debate, and said the Secretary to the Board of Education had given them all the encouragement that he could be expected to give. Nobody desired to place unnecessary burdens on the Exchequer, but it was unjust for the State to impose heavy obligations upon the local authorities as they had done in this matter of providing for the training of teachers, and then to refuse to assist them to carry them out. That was his answer to his right hon. friend the Member for Bristol, who complained that too much demand was being made upon the Treasury. That being so, the claim of the right hon. Gentleman the Member for Ease Somerset was a very fair one. The hon. Member for North Camberwell was largely in agreement,
  1236
  but thought the right hon. Gentleman was going a little too far, and that some margin should be left for the local authority to provide. He entirely agreed with that view, and would suggest that his right hon. friend should accept the Amendment. He presumed the Government would not refuse the Motion as amended, and thus they would have it on record that this matter had a claim upon both rates and taxes. Training colleges in the past had been distinctly established as denominational institutions, and they could not be allowed to pass into the hands of the State without a recognition of chat fact.
  MR. HENRY HOBHOUSEsaid that after the statement of the Government he was prepared to accept the Amendment.
  Amendment put, and agreed to.
  Resolved, That, in the opinion of this House, the Training of Teachers is a matter of national concern, and the greater part of the cost of such training, so far as it falls on public funds, should be charged on the National Exchequer.

  SCHOOL BOARD ELECTORATE (SCOTLAND) BILL.
  [SECOND READING.]
  Order for Second Reading, read.
  Motion made, and Question proposed, "That the Bill be now read a second time."
  And, it being Midnight, the Debate stood adjourned.
  Debate to be resumed upon Tuesday next.
  Adjourned at five minutes after Twelve o'clock.

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 been complied with:—Blyth and Cowpen Gas. The same was, ordered to lie on the Table.
Ipswich Dock Commission Bill [H.L.]; Harlow and Sawbridgeworth Gas Bill [H.L.]; New Zealand Loan and Mercantile Agency Company Bill [H.L.]; Barry Rail-way (Extension of Time, &c.) Bill [H.L.]. Reported, with Amendments.
Preston and Lytham Tramways and Tramroad Bill [H.L.]. Report from the g Select Committee, That it is not expedient to proceed further with the Bill; read, s and ordered to lie on the Table.
Preston, Chorley, and Horwich Tramways Bill [H.L.]. Reported from the g Select Committee, with Amendments.
Marylebone Chapels (St. James', Westmoreland Street) Bill [H.L.]. Read 2a.
Weston-super-Mare Grand Pier Bill [H.L.]. Read 3a, and passed, and sent to the Commons.
Site for Duke of York's School Bill [H.L.]. Committed.
Great Northern and City Railway (Ex-tension of Time) Bill. Brought from the Commons; read 1a, and referred to the Examiners.
Matlock and District Gas Bill [H.L.]; Cambrian Railways Bill [H.L.]; Tyneside Tramways and Tramroads Bill [H.L.]; Newcastle-upon-Tyne Corporation Bill [H.L.]. Report from the Committee of Selection, That the Earl of Northesk be proposed to the House as a member of the Select Committee on the said Bills in the place of the Earl of Harrowby; read, and agreed to.

PETITIONS.
  WEIGHTS AND MEASURES (METRIC SYSTEM) BILL [H.L.]
  Petition in favour of; of the magistrates as the local authority of Glasgow; read, and ordered to lie on the Table.
RETURNS, REPORTS, ETC.

  TRADE REPORTS (ANNUAL SERIES).
  No. 3126. Greece (Finances for 1903).
  No. 3127. China (Trade of Tientsin for 1900–1903).
  Presented (by Command), and ordered to lie on the Table.

  BISHOPRIC OF BRISTOL BILL [H.L.]
  Reported from the Standing Committee without further Amendment. The Report of the Amendments made in Committee of the Whole House to be received on Thursday next.

  JUSTICES OF THE PEACE BILL [H.L.]
  [SECOND READING.]
  Order of the day for the Second Reading read.
  THE LORD CHANCELLOR (The Earl of HALSBURY): My Lords, this is one of a considerable number of Bills which your Lordships have passed through this House and which, when they go to the other House excite no great interest and attention, with the result that at the end of the session there is no one to urge their importance and they are forgotten. This Bill in its exact terms passed through your Lordships' House last session. It is mainly for the purpose of removing what I am sure all the Lords Lieutenant throughout the counties in England have recognised to be a great inconvenience. By a very ancient statute the Lord Chancellor is directed—and, of course, lie is bound to obey that direction —to only appoint persons resident in the county. It very often happens that there is an extreme want of justices in particular parts and that the residences of the persons most fitted to be appointed are just over the border, and in those circumstances the Lord Chancellor is obliged to

  1103
  refuse the recommendation of the Lord-Lieutenant. This is an inconvenience that has been recognised many times in the different counties, and which this Bill will remove. The Bill also provides that any person who is a justice of the peace by virtue only of holding or having held any office, may be excluded from the exercise of his functions as such justice by the same authority by which other justices can be removed from the commission of the peace; but the main purpose of the Bill is that which I have described. I have no loubt your Lordships will again read it a second time, and I trust that after it has passed this House it will meet with a better fate that it has hitherto done.
  Moved, "That the Bill be now read 2a"—(The Lord Chancellor.)
  EARL SPENCER: My Lords, last session, when the noble and learned Lord on the Woolsack brought forward this Bill, I ventured to express the hope that it would be carried. I am afraid I did not follow its career elsewhere, but daring the course of the winter, acting as His Majesty's Lord-Lieutenant in Northamptonshire, I recommended two or three gentlemen to the Lord Chancellor for appointment as justice who lived just over the border of the county. We had very few magistrates at two particular sessions, and it was very important, where there was a joint session, that there should be magistrates who could act for both counties. Not; being aware of the fate of this Bill in another place, I recommended these gentlemen to the Lord Chancellor, who was, of course, obliged to decline to appoint them. A very great inconvenience arises from the present state of the law on this point, and therefore I sincerely trust that His Majesty's Government will urge on those who represent them in another place the great desirability of passing this very small measure, which I am sure in my county, and no doubt in others, would greatly facilitate the proper administration of justice.
  On Question, Bill read 2a and committed to a Committee of the Whole House on Thursday next.

  PREVENTION OF CRUELTY TO CHILDREN (AMENDMENT) BILL [H.L.]
  [SECOND READING.]
  Order of the Day for the Second Reading read.
  *LORD ALVERSTONE: My Lords, I need not detain your Lordships more than a very few moments in moving the Second Reading of this Bill. So far as amendments of the law are concerned, the Bill is identical with that which was passed by your Lordships' House last year. It is extremely important that the Bill should be sent down to the House of Commons at as early a period as possible, because all the experience that has been collected since last year shows that the amendments proposed by the Bill are very much desired. I have not re-introduced into the Bill any of the clauses to which objection was taken in your Lordships' House or in the Standing Committee. The operative provisions are those which your Lordships approved last year. Objection was taken, when the Bill was under discussion on the last occasion, to its form, on the ground that it referred to the earlier sections of the Act of 1894. I recognised the objection, but pointed out that it was difficult to amend the law and consolidate; it at the same time. The discussion of last year has enabled me to accede to; the view of your Lordships on the; subject, and I have got over the difficulty this year by consolidating the law; The Amendments of the Act of 1894 will; be found in italics in the print of the Bill, and the parts that are cut out are shown by erased print. In order to follow the amendments proposed in the law, all that your Lordships need read are the parts of the Bill which are in italics, and the parts struck through. All the rest is merely re-enacting the Act of 1894. The result will be that if your Lordships give the Bill a Second Reading, and it passes into law, we shall have amended, and, at the same time, have consolidated, the law. I feel that if the Bill becomes law several grave defects in the Act of 1894 will be remedied.
  Moved, That the Bill be now read 2a.— (Lord Alverstone.)
  On Question, Bill read 2, and committed to a Committee of the Whole House on Monday next.

  BRITISH FORESTRY.
  *LORD BARNARD: My Lords, I rise to call attention to the Report of the Departmental Committee on British Forestry; and to ask the President of the Board of Agriculture and Fisheries whether His Majesty's Government propose to take any, and, if so, what steps to give effect to the recommendations of that Committee on the subject of education, instruction, and training in forestry. I am sure that many of your Lordships will agree with me that the growth of timber in this country is very far short of what it might be, and I think we are very much indebted to the late President of the Board of Agriculture, the late Mr. Hanbury, for the step he took in appointing this Committee. I think it is peculiarly appropriate that a subject such as this should be considered in your Lordships' House, so many Members of which are landowners. This is naturally a question which does not appeal primarily to the large proportion of farmers, and still less to townspeople. It is not in the position only of a landowner that I venture to address your Lordships on this subject. I have the honour to be Chairman of the Agricultural Committee of the Durham College of Science, which is situated in Newcastle-on-Tyne, forming part of the University of Durham, and is one of the educational establishments referred to in this Report.
  The Report contains a great many valuable recommendations, but I propose, on the present occasion, to confine myself entirely to such parts as refer to education. Mr. Hanbury obviously had in his mind this point when he constituted the Committee, because his reference to the Committee was that they were to inquire into the present position and future prospects of forestry, and to consider whether any measures might with advantage be taken, either by the provision of further educational facilities, or otherwise, for the promotion and encouragement of that industry. The Committee refer to a Report of a Select Committee of the House of Commons appointed in 1885, and reappointed in 1886 and
  1106
  1887, and they endorse the conclusions of the Select Committee as regards the neglected condition of forestry in Great Britain, the possibility of improvement, and the necessity for the provision of better means of education. The most important recommendations in the Report are, in my judgment, those which refer to education. They practically group themselves under three heads. It is suggested that in our Universities facilities for theoretical instruction and practical demonstration are required. What is already being done at Edinburgh University is quoted, and it is suggested that a similar course might be adopted at Oxford and Cambridge. The Committee also refer, I am happy to think, to a plot under the supervision of the University of Durham, where we are already doing some work of this character. They also suggest the possibility of the transference of the Forestry Department at Coopers Hill to a University centre, and they remind us that each University contains many students who could, with very great advantage, take up this subject. They also draw our attention to the fact that in our Colonies, as well as at home, the demand for experts in forestry science is certainly growing, and will continue to grow.
  The second recommendation, or croup o£ recommendations, which the Committee make refer to those gentlemen who are proposing to take up land agency or some other profession of that kind, who cannot afford to go through a long University course, but who desire instruction in that subject. The Committee state that they have had in evidence that comparatively few land agents possess a competent knowledge of forestry, and I think the experience of many of your Lordships will prove the accuracy of that assertion. In the third place, it is proposed that actual working foresters and woodmen should be provided with short courses or lectures at local centres, and should be given the means of obtaining some instruction, at any rate, in the subject. I do not suppose for one moment that technical instruction in any subject can make a man a really practical expert; but, on the other hand, technical instruction can raise the general level of knowledge on a

  1107
  subject, and vastly improve the general intelligence of those engaged in the practice of it. The Committee also state, and here I cordially agree with them, that they do not suggest any State loans for the purpose of forestry. I am very glad to see that, because I am perfectly sure that individual energy is far better developed in other directions. But, at the same time, they do advise that the State should concentrate any efforts it may make upon the provision of adequate facilities for instruction, and I beg to ask the noble Earl whether His Majesty's Government propose to take any steps to provide this educational instruction.
  I may say that the Committee of the Durham College of Science, of which I spoke just now and of which I am chairman, have, as the result of their consideration of this subject, come to the conclusion that, with the machinery we already have at hand in the way of buildings and professors in allied subjects, such as botany, and so on, and with our clerical staff, we could, in the Durham College of Science, for a very small sum, set to work immediately and appoint a lecturer or demonstrator in agriculture. The sum which we have estimated we should require for this purpose is about £300. We consider that the services of this expert might, perhaps, be made available for the landowners in the district, an I personally I think that, if landowners make use of him, they ought to pay for any advantage they get in that direction. Naturally, the fees from the class of persons who are to be instructed cannot be expected to amount to very much. The North-east of England has been in the past extremely generous and liberal in the sums which they have voted for technical instruction in the College of Science to which I have already referred, but the merchant princes of Tyneside cannot be expected to take very great, interest in this particular topic. I fear, too, that we cannot appeal to the landowners, and if the instruction is to be given I cannot see how it is to be obtained except through the generosity of the Treasury. Personally I should be prepared to assist in providing some financial means, and I dare say other
  1108
  landlords in the north of England would do the same. But it is to the Government that we must look for any real advance in this matter. I beg to ask the Question standing in my name.
  *THE PRESIDENT OF THE BOARD OF AGRICULTURE AND FISHERIES (The Earl of ONSLOW): My Lords, the subject to which the noble Lord has drawn the attention of your Lordships is undoubtedly one of very great importance. It is of importance, not only to Members of your Lordships' House, most of whom are landowners, but to the country at large. We are informed, on the authority of those who are experts in this matter, that the supplies of timber which we receive at present from foreign countries are diminishing in quantity, and that, in all probability in the future, if not in the near future, the value of timber is more likely to rise than to fall. At the same time it is common knowledge that there are very large areas, not only in England but also in Scotland, which yield but very little return.
  EARL SPENCER: And in Ireland.
  *THE EARL OF ONSLOW: Yes, and in Ireland, which yield but very little return, and which, if planted, might be expected to yield a much greater return than at present. The noble Lord asks me whether His Majesty's Government intend to take any steps, and, if so, what steps, to carry out the recommendations of the Departmental Committee which was appointed to inquire into this subject. Well, my Lords, Committees and Commissions are appointed for different purposes. It has been said that many Commissions are appointed with a view to shelving a question. That is not the practice of the Department over which I have the honour to preside. When the Board of Agriculture and Fisheries appoints a Departmental Committee it is in order that it may get its advice, and, having got its advice, that it may act upon it; and the Committee to which the noble Lord has called attention is no exception to the rule. I am happy to think that that Committee had the advantage of being presided over by a Member of the other House of Parliament who has always taken a very great interest in this

  1109
  question, and that upon this Committee was also one of the Commissioners of His Majesty's Woods and Forests, Mr. E. Stafford Howard, who also takes a very deep interest in the question of afforestation, and it is to his exertions and initiative that we owe the first steps which have already been taken in this matter.
  There are many areas of land belonging to the Crown which lend themselves to these purposes. There are the extensive Alice Holt Woods in Hampshire, which cover a large area of ground, but which, I believe, have not in time past been planted and worked on the most scientific principles; and although it was proposed by the Committee that the first experiment in this direction should be tried in these woods, it was found, on further consideration, that a more promising sphere of operations offered itself in the High Meadow Woods of the Forest of Dean. Without any assistance from the Treasury —an assistance which we always welcome, but do not always receive—the Commissioners of Woods and Forests have already established a school of forestry in the Forest of Dean. That school will be primarily for the purpose of educating men of the class of woodmen. They will pass through a course of instruction there which, it is believed, will fit them to become foremen on the large estates of those landowners who are prepared to devote time and money to this object. We have already a somewhat similar institution at Kew. We have an arrangement by which young men may come in and learn the business of gardening, and I think I may say that, without exception, every one of the young men who have passed through a training at Kew have secured for themselves excellent situations in private establishments. We fully hope that the experiment which Mr. Stafford Howard is trying in the Forest of Dean will result in training young woodmen in the same way that we are training young gardeners at Kew. The Department over which I have the honour to preside has no responsibility in regard to Scotland, but the Scottish Office has not been any more supine in this matter than has the Board of Agriculture and Fisheries, and I am informed that, again through the agency and assistance of the
  1110
  Office of Woods and Forests, communications have been entered into with certain Scottish landowners with a view to securing a suitable area of forest land for the purpose of planting in the manner suggested by the Departmental Committee. We have also been successful in obtaining from the Treasury the promise of assistance in the foundation of at least two schools of forestry in England. Where those schools shall be established I am not yet able to inform your Lordships; but we have had applications from the University of Bangor, with which my noble friend Lord Powis is intimately connected, from the South-Eastern College at Wye, from the University College of Wales at Aberystwyth, from the Durham College of Science, and the Royal Agricultural College at Cirencester, and the matter is also under the consideration of the Yorkshire College at Leeds, the University College at Reading, and the University of Cambridge. With regard to the University of Cambridge, I have been considering whether that University would not be one of the first at which such a school of forestry should be established; but, as your Lordships are probably aware, a Committee has been sitting for some time past to inquire into the condition of Coopers Hill College, which up to now has existed as a school for the training of those who go out to assist in forestry in India. I am not in a position to say what may be the final decision of the Secretary of State with regard to the continued existence of Coopers Hill College, but it is, I think, a matter of common knowledge among those interested, that in recent years suggestions have been more than once made for the removal of the Indian forestry students from Coopers Hill.
  I should like, naturally, to establish these schools in two localities, one of which would be devoted more particularly to the training of young woodmen, and the other to the training of young men who are themselves likely either to become landowners or to embrace the career of land agents, and I think that those two would be we found in a combination which should include either the school to which my noble friend Lord Barnard referred or the University of Bangor. Either of those would pro vide the requisite

  1111
  materials for the education of young woodmen, but I do not think they would to the same extent provide for the education of the young men who are themselves likely to become landowners. For that reason I should prefer that the second school of forestry should be attached to one of the great Universities. But that is a matter which still remains open, and until the decision of the Secretary of State for India has been arrived at as to the future of Coopers Hill College, I am not in a position to say where the second of those schools of forestry will be established.
  There were many other recommendations contained in the Committee's Report, all of which are under consideration; but I think the main recommendations are those to which I have referred. This matter is one which is exciting a good deal of attention in the country at the present moment, and I believe there is a growing feeling that we should not be behind foreign nations in our knowledge of woodcraft, that we have opportunities which have not been made the most of, and that the time is fast approaching when we ought to devote greater attention to the woodlands of this country than we have hitherto done. It is with a view to the development of that method of utilising the soil that my Department is most anxious to encourage the training of young men of the classes I have named in the science of forestry, and we believe that by making a small beginning now we may lead up in the course of years to great results, and that the time may come when this country will be far more reliant on its own resources for the production of timber than formerly.
  LORD AVEBURY: My Lords, as I had the honour of moving for the Select Committee which considered this question and of presiding for two years over its sittings, perhaps I may be allowed to express my pleasure that this subject has been brought forward, and the satisfaction with which I have listened to the speech of the noble Earl who has just sat down. When the question was brought before the House of Commons I made it my business to inspect several of
  1112
  the schools of forestry in various parts of Europe, and I found that it was a matter of intense surprise that we had no such schools in this country. We are the only country in Europe without forestry schools, and although our forests are not comparable, in point of dimensions, with those of many other countries in Europe, still they are larger than these of several countries which have flourishing schools of forestry. In Germany, particularly, they would hardly believe it when I told them that such a practical nation as Great Britain had no schools of forestry, and the opinion was generally expressed that if they were established here they would do a great deal to improve the value of the lands which are under wood and bring many thousands of acres now comparatively useless into cultivation. I therefore congratulate His Majesty's Government on the steps they are now taking, which I cannot help believing will be of great value to the agricultural interests of the country.
  *THE MARQUESS OF GRANBY: My Lords, I congratulate the noble Earl the President of the Board of Agriculture and Fisheries on the statement he has, just made with regard to the educational facilities which he hopes may be provided for the teaching of forestry. But there is one thing which must be remembered. It is this, that a very large portion of the land in this country which could be afforested is in the hands of private owners, and under the existing law there is not very much encouragement for landed proprietors to plant largely, such as there might be if some of the provisions existing in other countries were adopted here. In certain countries—in Russia particularly, if I am not mistaken—newly-planted plantations are charged neither Imperial nor local rates for thirty years after the time of their planting, provided nothing is cut down in them during that period. It is not likely that a man planting a large area of land will get much return during his lifetime. His successors may, possibly. But I would call your Lordships' attention in that respect to a paragraph in the Report of the Departmental Committee which touches on that most delicate and difficult subject—the

  1113
  estate duties. The Committee wind up by saying—
  "Moreover, the pressure of such a death duty on timber must both act as a bar to afforestation in districts most needing it, and compel the realisation of immature timber, thus preventing the practice of sound forestry. We feel that this irregularity in the incidence of the duties needs immediate revision."
  It is not, of course, within the province of this House to go into this particular matter, but it does seem to me that, if we are to induce private owners co take up any sound system of afforestation, something will have to be done in the direction I have indicated. The Report upon the condition of the forests and woodlands of the United States of America affords very remarkable reading indeed. You will see in it that even with the millions of uncut trees that there are in the United States there is not more than sixty years' supply extant, and it is quite impossible in that period to make good that supply. The same thing obtains in Sweden and Russia. One of the largest wood importers in the North of England has been dinning into my ears the importance of getting everybody to plant as much as possible, because he says it is extremely difiicult to get really good sound timber. The difficulties are becoming greater every day, and matters will get worse owing to the fact that large tracts of woodland in Russia, Sweden, North America, and Canada have been cut down regardless of the future. It is on those grounds that I was pleased to hear the statement of the noble Earl, for every little encouragement that can be given to the subject of forestry is of the greatest possible value to this country. I would suggest to those of your Lordships who have not read the reports of our representatives abroad respecting the forestry laws of other countries that it is quite worth their while to study them. They afford the most remarkable testimony of the extreme care, the great common sense, and the great national foresight which most of the European countries are now showing in respect of this matter, and in the very forefront of those countries is Germany, where perhaps the most scientific forestry is being practised.
  *LORD REAY: My Lords, as the noble Marquess who has just sat down has pointed out, we are very much behind
  1114
  Germany in this matter. In the University of Munich alone several years ago there were seven professors dealing with j forestry, and I think it is not an exaggeration to say that Germany is honeycombed I with schools of forestry of a higher and a lower degree. Then in France, as is well known, at Nancy they have an admirable forestry school. The question of training forest officers is extremely important with a view to India. In India we have I had for some time a scientific system of administration of the Government forests, and we are more advanced in India than we are in this country. Very satisfactory results have been obtained in India, also with regard to grazing areas. With reference to what the noble Earl said about the new schools, of which the foundation is, I hope, very near, I trust that, in I selecting sites for those schools care will be taken that the students should have opportunities for gaining practical experience in the laying out of forests and plantations. The great want felt at Coopers Hill has always been that there were no forests which the students could visit in order to obtain object lessons; and it is well known that the students at Coopers Hill have to be taken abroad in order to see the application of the theoretical teaching they have received. That undoubtedly ought not to be required, for we have in England and Scotland all the elements that are necessary for good practical teaching. The noble Earl has not alluded to a most important feature of forest administration—namely, the provision of experts who can give advice to landowners in the laying out of plantations. I believe that the Board of Agriculture has a gentleman, Mr. Eraser Storey, who is available for this purpose, who has been himself educated in Germany, at Eberswalde. It is essential that in the management of forest areas landowners should consult experts, and that they should be available in every district of the United Kingdom. We shall then have the laboratories which are needed to make the training in forest schools efficient. The authorities in England, Scotland, and Ireland should encourage estate agents to apply for this expert guidance. I am glad to see my noble friend the First Lord of the Admiralty in his place. I believe he has taken the initiative in

  1115
  laying out his woods according to scientific plans, as has also been done by my friend Mr. Munro Ferguson of Novar in Scotland. They have made a valuable contribution to the solution of a problem which hitherto has not been sufficiently recognised. Then we have heard nothing with regard to Scotland, which, of course, does not come under the control of the noble Earl. I hope that if England is to have two schools of forestry, we shall have at least one school in Scotland. At present very admirable lectures are given in die University of Edinburgh by Colonel Bailey who has had much experience in the administration of forests in India. But a forestry school in Scotland should be established in one of the many forest areas and there will be no lack of students. I trust that, the noble Earl will be able to carry out vigorously and without delay the schemes he has explained to us.
  *THE EARL OF POWIS: My Lords, I also wish to thank the noble Earl the President of the Board of Agriculture and Fisheries for the interest lie has taken in this matter. With regard, however, to one passage in his speech, I must say I feel great anxiety. The noble Earl was most kind in receiving a deputation from North Wales, and he also made a very interesting speech when he visited Bangor this year. The noble Earl then led the people of North Wales to believe that Bangor would be selected for one of these schools of forestry. I do not in any way wish to compete with my noble friend Lord Barnard, who has brought this subject before our Lordships to-night, but still I do feel very strongly that Wales is one of the best constituted parts of the country for the study of forestry. With regard to the ancient University of Cambridge, at which I had the honour to be educated, and which I should not in any; way wish to deprecate, I cannot myself see, so far as forestry itself is concerned, that the University of Cambridge is quite suited for such a school. No doubt it is desirable to educate young men in the University of Cambridge in forestry, but I should not regard the district of Cambridge as being one of the best districts for timber growing. I think it is most important that these
  1116
  schools of forestry should be situated where the students can have a practical opportunity of studying the formation of extensive plantations. My noble friend who initiated this discussion stated that this was not primarily a subject of interest to the working classes. I should have thought that if there was one subject of primary importance to the working classes, it would be the advancement of forestry in this country, which would provide considerable labour in the agricultural and hilly districts. If the large bare hillsides, which at present employ the very minimum number of hands, were under timber, they would constantly require attention, with the result that work would be provided for a large number of the working classes. I would press upon the Government that this is a matter of urgent importance. With regard to what the noble Earl said in his reply as to the timber of foreign countries running short, I would read to your Lordships the following extract from the Report of the Departmental Committee—
  "It will be found in our evidence that ex ports of high authority have recorded the opinion, already expressed in many reliable publications, that the world is rapidly approaching a shortage, if not actual dearth, in its supply of coniferous timber which constitutes between 80 and 90 per cent, of the total British timber imports."
  There is one other point to which I would draw the attention of the noble Earl—namely, to the fact stated in the Report that no individual effort is likely to cope with extensive afforestation. I think this difficulty could be overcome if some encouragement were given to landowners to plant—some such encouragement as that suggested by the noble Marquess below the Gangway. I would venture also to suggest to the noble Earl that he should approach the Treasury—I do not say immediately—with a view to money being advanced to landowners on easy terms to encourage them to plant large areas. The reason for this suggestion is that landowners, of course, cannot, especially in these days, lock up a large amount of capital for a long time, and if, as I would venture to suggest, it is of importance not only to landowners but to a great many other people in the country that land should be afforested, it is surely worthy of the consideration of the Department whether some method

  1117
  such as I have foreshadowed could not be adopted to render the afforestation of waste lands easy.
  *THE EARL OF ONSLOW: I desire, with your Lordships' permission, to say one or two words in reply. Of course, one of the main objects we have in view is the training of experts who may place their services at the disposal of those who wish to undertake planting. I ought to have expressed my thanks to the noble Lord who introduced the subject, and to the noble Lord who has just sat down for the great willingness they have shown to give every opportunity to the students of the schools of forestry of availing themselves of practical experience in the woods that they own. The noble Lord who has just sat down referred to what I said at Bangor. I can assure him that the University in which he is interested, as well as the college in which my noble friend Lord Barnard is interested, are prominent amongst those which will be considered by the Board of Agriculture and Fisheries for these two schools.
  The House adjourned at twenty minutes past Five o'clock, to Thursday next, half-past Ten o'clock.