Sitting of 5 April 1905

Preamble
The House met at Two of the Clock.

PRIVATE BILL BUSINESS.
Birmingham Corporation Bill; Brentwood Gas Bill; Great Berkhampstead Gas Bill; Hitchin and District Gas Bill; Swansea Corporation Bill. As amended, to be considered To-morrow.
Cordoba and Rosario Railway Bill [Lords]; Entre Rios Railways Bill [Lords]; Malvern Water Bill. To be read a second time To-morrow.
Chelsea Electricity Supply Bill (by Order); Epping Gas Bill (by Order); Great Eastern Railway Bill (by Order); Higham and Hundred of Hoo Water Bill (by Order); Loughborough Corporation Bill (by Order); Norwich Union Life Insurance Society (by Order); Weybridge and Walton-upon-Thames Electric Supply Bill (by Order). Third Reading deferred till To-morrow (Evening Sitting).
Local Government Provisional Orders (No. 2) Bill (by Order); Local Government Provisional Orders (No. 3) Bill (by Order); Local Government Provisional Orders (Poor Law) Bill (by Order). Second Reading deferred till To-morrow (Evening Sitting).
Great Western Railway (New Railways) Bill. Reported, with Amendments; Report to lie upon the Table, and to be printed.
Colne Corporation Bill. Reported, with Amendments, from the Police and Sanitary Committee [Section B]; Report to lie upon the Table, and to be printed.

PETITIONS.
  FRANCHISE AND REMOVAL OF WOMEN'S DISABILITIES BILL.
  Petition from West Bristol, in favour; to lie upon the Table.
  LIQUOR TRAFFIC LOCAL VETO (SCOTLAND) BILL.
  Petitions in favour; from Bathgate; and Catrine; to lie upon the Table.
  MARRIAGE WITH A DECEASED WIFE'S SISTER BILL.
  Petitions against; from Chipping Ongar; Cuckfield; Durham (two); Gamlingay; Highlands; Newcastle-on-Tyne; Richmond (two); and Woodham; to lie upon the Table.
  SALE OF INTOXICATING LIQUORS (SUNDAY) BILL.
  Petition from Birmingham, in favour; to lie upon the Table.
RETURNS, REPORTS, ETC.
  AGRICULTURAL RATES ACT, 1896 (GRANTS TO LOCAL AUTHORITIES).
  Return [presented April 4th] to be printed. [No. 111.]
  COAL EXPORTS, ETC.
  Return presented, relative thereto [ordered March 2nd; Mr. David Alfred Thomas]: to lie upon the Table, and to be printed. [No. 112.]
  VACCINATION EXEMPTION CERTIFICATES.
  Return presented, relative thereto [Address March 27th; Mr. Weir]; to lie upon the Table, and to be printed. [No. 113.]
  POLLING DISTRICTS (COUNTY OF MIDDLESEX).
  Copy presented, of Order made by the County Council of the County of Middlesex rearranging the Polling Districts in the Uxbridge Parliamentary Division [by Act]; to lie upon the Table.
  PEACE PRESERVATION (IRELAND) ACT, 1881 (ORDERS).
  Copy presented, of an Order in Council, dated April 1st, 1905, adding Wicklow to the ports at which Explosives may be landed [by Act]; to lie upon the Table.

  CROWN'S NOMINEE ACCOUNT.
  Abstract Account presented, of Receipts and Payments of the Treasury

  439
  Solicitor, in the year ended December 31st, 1904, in the Administration of Estates on behalf of the Crown, and Alphabetical List of Intestates' Estates in respect of which Letters of Administration were granted to the Treasury Solicitor as Crown's Nominee, and of other cases (partial Intestacies, etc.), in which accounts were opened in the books of the Treasury Solicitor in the same year in respect of moneys received by him as Crown's Nominee [by Act]; to lie upon the Table, and to be printed. [No. 114.]

  TRADE REPORTS (ANNUAL SERIES).
  Copy presented, of Diplomatic and Consular Reports, Annual Series, No. 3334 [by Command]; to lie upon the Table.

  Name.

  Description.

  Price realised.

  £

  Simoom

  3rd Class Battleship

  14,550

  Warspite

  1st Class Cruiser (Armoured)

  18,150

  Northampton

  1st Class Cruiser (Armoured)

  15,800

  Arethusa

  2nd Class Cruiser

  7,600

  Galatea

  1st Class Cruiser

  11,150

  Australia

  1st Class Cruiser

  10,950

  Severn

  2nd Class Cruiser

  7,100

  Mersey

  2nd Class Cruiser

  7,200

  Archer

  3rd Class Cruiser

  4,850

  Cossack

  3rd Class Cruiser

  4,800

  Mohawk

  3rd Class Cruiser

  4,850

  Racoon

  3rd Class Cruiser

  4,150

  Barracouta

  3rd Class Cruiser

  5,000

  Exmouth

  Training Ship

  4,100

  Renard

  1st Class Torpedo Gunboat

  2,900

  Gleaner

  1st Class Torpedo Gunboat

  2,600

  Pigmy

  1st Class Gunboat

  2,000

  Redwing

  Coastguard Boat

  1,256

  Starling

  2nd Class Gunboat

  1,600

  Bouncer

  3rd Class Gunboat

  740

  Royal Adelaide

  Hulk

  3,500

  Victoria

  Coastguard Sailing Cruiser

  665

  Beaver

  Coastguard Sailing Cruiser

  465

  Adder

  Coastguard Sailing Cruiser

  365

  Frances

  Coastguard Sailing Cruiser

  365

  Neptune

  Coastguard Sailing Cruiser

  320

  Margaret

  Coastguard Sailing Cruiser

  345

  Delight

  Coastguard Sailing Cruiser

  370

  Squirrel

  Sailing Cutter

  205

  Mary

  Sailing Cutter

  185

QUESTIONS AND ANSWERS CIRCULATED WITH THE VOTES.

  Sale of Obsolete War Vessels at Chatham —Names and Prices.
  MR. J. H. LEWIS: To ask the Secretary to the Admiralty what are the names of the obsolete vessels offered for sale by auction at Chatham this day; which of them have been sold; and what was the price realised in each case.
  (Answered by Mr. Pretyman.) The names of the vessels offered for sale at Chatham, all of which were sold, and the prices realised, are as follows:—

  Discharge of Dockyard Employees at Portsmouth.
  MR. TANKERVILLE CHAMBERLAYNE: To ask the Civil Lord of the Admiralty whether the proposed discharge of dockyard employees at Portsmouth can be deferred until the commencement of the summer, when it will be easier for unemployed men to obtain work than it is at present.
  (Answered by Mr. Arthur Lee.) Although it would not be possible, in the interests of the service, to adopt the hon. Member's suggestion, the discharges will be carried out as gradually as possible, and every care has been taken to effect such reductions as are necessary with the least possible amount of hardship. It is hoped that the number of discharges will not at any time exceed twenty-five in a week at Portsmouth.

  Maximum Wages of Provincial Sorting Clerks, Telegraphists and Postmen.
  MR. PRIESTLEY: To ask the Postmaster-General if in the fixing of the maximum wages of sorting clerks and telegraphists regard has been had to the relative cost of living in the different towns; and, if so, why the maximum of this class in Lincoln, Boston, and Peterborough is 48s. and in Grantham, where the cost of living is higher than in those towns, the maximum is only 44s.; and why the Lincoln postmen are 2s. higher in their maximum than Grantham.
  (Answered by Lord Stanley.) Hitherto the wages of sorting clerks and telegraphists in the provinces have been based solely on the volume of business transacted at the particular office, but the cost of living also will in future be taken into consideration. If the sorting clerks and telegraphists or the postmen at Grantham desire to make any representations to me respecting their pay I will consider whether any increase is warranted.

  Maximum Salary of London Telegraphists.
  CAPTAIN NORTON: To ask the Postmaster-General whether he is aware that the Civil Service Commissioners
  442
  for a number of years immediately following the Fawcett revision of salaries in the telegraph service published notices offering the prospect of a salary of £190 to London telegraphists; and, if so, whether he will state the number of officials who entered the service under these terms of service, and the number of persons receiving this paper of the Civil Service Commissioners who are now in receipt of £190 per annum in London.
  (Answered by Lord Stanley.) I am fully aware of the circumstance to which the hon. Member refers, but I do not think that any useful purpose would be served by giving the information for which he asks. The prospect of rising to £190 a year by promotion to the senior class still exists, with the difference that the maximum has now been raised to £200 a year. Access to the class is obtained in the same manner as heretofore, namely, by promotion on the occurrence of vacancies.

  Pay of Learners in Enniskillen Telegraph Department.
  Ms. JAMES O'CONNOR: To ask the Postmaster-General whether he is aware that learners in the telegraph department, Enniskillen, over the age of nineteen years, were paid 15s. to 18s. per week during last summer for substituting the staff on leave; that, while considering the question of improving the pay of this class, he has decided, as dating from 1st April, that alterations were to take place; and that, as a result of his changes, the learners have been offered 8s. 6d. and 10s. per week for the work previously recompensed by 15s. and 18s.; and, if so, whether he will explain the reason for this reduction.
  (Answered by Lord Stanley.) I am aware that there are cases of the kind to which the hon. Member refers, and I have already issued general instructions that learners already employed as substitutes may be given the option of retaining their present varying rates of pay as learners and as substitutes in lieu of the constant rates for learners with two years service and upwards indicated in my announcement of the 28th ultimo.

  Sick Leave in the Post Office—Case of Mr. Bullamore.
  SIR WALTER FOSTER: To ask the Post master-General whether he is aware that a telegraphist named Bullamore submitted a certificate from a private doctor at Brixton, stating that he was suffering from post influenzal debility, and reeded further rest; that the official medical adviser certified that Bullamore's health was as usual, and no rest was required; that subsequently a specialist certified that Bullamore's symptoms were genuine, and that he could only expect to get relief by prolonged rest and quiet, and that the medical department decline to act upon the advice of the specialist; and, if so, will he state the attitude that his Department adopts towards the certificates of private practitioners.
  (Answerea by Lord Stanley.) I have received special reports respecting Mr. Bullamore's health from his private medical attendant and from a specialist, as well as from the Chief Medical Officer of the Post Office, and an aural surgeon whom that gentleman consulted. I have decided, at the suggestion of the Chief Medical Officer, to lay the whole matter before the Medical Referee to the Treasury. As regards certificates from private practitioners, full consideration is given to them, but I am bound to be guided by the opinion of the medical officers of the Department in such matters. In cases of doubt the Medical Referee is consulted.

  Telegram handed in at Clones Rail Office.
  MR. JAMES O'CONNOR: To ask the Postmaster-General whether he has made his promised inquiry into the circumstances connected with the telegram handed in at Clones rail office on 4th of March; and, if so, will he state the result of his inquiry.
  (Answered by Lord Stanley.) The reply is in the affirmative, and I have communicated the result to the hon. Member.

  Tuberculosis—Loss Incurred by Butchers During 1904.
  MR. BRIGG: To ask the President of the Board of Agriculture can he give an approximate
  444
  statement of the loss incurred by butchers in 1904 from tuberculosis; and will he favour the introduction of a Bill on the subject this session.
  (Answered by Mr. Gerald Balfour.) I am not in possession of the information desired by the hon. Member, and, whilst recognising the importance of the subject to which the Question refers, I am afraid that I could not hold out any promise that the Government would introduce a Bill this session dealing with it.

  Sale of Adulterated Foreign Butter—In spection in England.
  MR. BRIGG: To ask the President of the Board of Agriculture what foreign nations have inspectors in this country to detect adulteration of their butter; and how many inspectors are there belonging to each nation.
  (Answered by Mr. Ailwyn Fellowes.) So far as I am aware, no foreign nations have inspectors in this country to detect adulteration of their butter. Several countries, including Denmark, Norway, Sweden, Hungary, Germany, and the United States have appointed agricultural, representatives here, but their duty is rather to find fresh markets for their country's produce, and to supply information as to the state of trade, than to detect adulteration.

  Income-Tax Assessments.
  MR. BRIGHT:To ask Mr. Chancellor of the Exchequer what were the number of assessments upon which income-tax was collected in each of the years ending 31st March, 1903, 1904, and 1905.
  (Answered by Mr. Victor Cavendish.) I am not prepared to go to the very large extra expense which would be entailed by the preparation of a Return showing the number of assessments collected by the 31st of March in the years mentioned, but the hon. Member will, I think, obtain sufficient information for any purpose he has in view from the Return promised by the Chancellor of the Exchequer to the hon. Member for East Edinburgh.

  Cultivation of Sugar Beet in Ireland.
  MR. FIELD: To ask the Chief Secretary to the

  445
  Lord-Lieutenant of Ireland whether he is aware that a scheme has been outlined for the growth of sugar beet in the South of Ireland; and whether, seeing that foreign beet growers generally obtain 9 per cent. of saccharine matter and a tonnage of twelve per acre, whilst it has been proved that beet grown in county Cork showed 19 per cent, of saccharine and a tonnage of twenty per acre, in view of these circumstances he will recommend the Department of Agriculture to support the commencement of sugar beet growing in Ireland.
  (Answered by Mr. Walter Long.) The Department are aware that a scheme has been formulated for the growth of sugar beet and the manufacture of sugar in the South of Ireland. They are informed that the percentage of sugar in beet and the yield per acre on the Continent are much in excess of the figures quoted for foreign sugar beet in the Question. Roots with as much as twenty-four per cent of sugar have been grown on the Continent; and in some districts in Germany the whole crop will average seventeen to twenty per cent. of sugar. For the reasons given in answer to previous Questions on this subject, the Department are not prepared to recommend the growing of sugar beet in Ireland.

  Irish Fisheries—Scarcity of Fish.
  MR. FIELD: To ask the Chief Secretary to the Lord-Lieutenant of Ireland whether his attention has been directed to the complaints of the decline in the supply of fish around the Irish coast due to the destruction or disturbance of the young fish in the breeding waters, and also to the incursion of steam trawlers within the prescribed limits and to the absence of any close season; and, if so, whether he will have inquiries instituted into this question.
  (Answered by Mr. Walter Long.) Complaints of the general decline of the supply of fish around the Irish coast have not been made, and would not, having regard to the quantities of fish landed, be justified. The question of trawling around the Irish coast has been most extensively dealt with, and at present there are about fifty by-laws in
  446
  force restricting or prohibiting that mode of fishing in Irish bays and inshore waters. These by-laws are, on the whole, well observed. Breaches of their provisions have occasionally taken place, but since 1899 about fifty prosecutions have been instituted resulting, in most cases, in the infliction of substantial penalties. Although no actual close season has been fixed for any kind of sea fish, nevertheless certain regulations have in some instances been made which have the same effect as the establishment of a close time. If the decline of fish in any particular locality around the Irish coast be brought under the notice of the Department of Agriculture, an inquiry will be held if the circumstances are deemed to warrant it.

  Identification of Frozen Meat Imported into Ireland.
  MR. FIELD: To ask the Chief Secretary to the Lord-Lieutenant of Ireland whether he has received copies of resolutions from the Irish Cattle Traders and Stock Owners Association and the Dublin Victuallers Association asking him to introduce a Bill to identify frozen meat imported into Ireland; and whether he will confer with the Vice-President of the Department of Agriculture respecting this measure.
  (Answered by Mr. Walter Long.) A communication, dated March 27th, on the subject of the marking of imported meat has been received from the Irish Cattle Traders and Stock Owners Association, but no recent communication appears to have been received from the Dublin Victuallers Association on the subject. No promise can be given as to the introduction this session of legislation of the kind suggested.

  Evicted Tenants Reinstated in County Kerry.
  MR. THOMAS O'DONNELL: To ask the Chief Secretary to the Lord-Lieutenant of Ireland whether he will give the names of the nineteen evicted tenants in county Kerry restored to their farms since the passage of the Land Act, 1903; the estates on which they are situated; and whether their restoration is due to the action of the landlord or of the Estates Commissioners.

  447
  (Answered by Mr. Walter Long.) The appended list gives the information asked for. The evicted tenants were reinstated by the landlords.

  Name of Evicted Tenant.

  Estate of.

  Patrick J. Cronin

  Edward Murphy.

  Michael Dwyer

  John C. Hurley.

  Mary Curran

  C. W. Warden,

  Michael Hussey

  C. W. Warden,

  Jeremiah Sheehan

  C. W. Warden,

  Patrick Neill

  C. W. Warden,

  Tobias Delahunty

  C. W. Warden,

  Bridget Doyle

  C. W. Warden,

  Mary Cronin

  C. W. Warden,

  Patrick Mahony

  C. W. Warden,

  Laurence O'Sullivan

  C. W. Warden,

  Timothy Sullivan

  C. W. Warden,

  Patrick Shea

  C. W. Warden,

  Michael Sullivan

  C. W. Warden,

  Kate Sullivan

  C. W. Warden,

  Michael Sheehan

  C. W. Warden,

  David Sheehan

  C. W. Warden,

  Daniel Casey

  D. C. Coltsman.

  Denis Healy

  McCartie.

  Police Patrol Duty in Ireland.
  MR. BRIGG: To ask the Chief Secretary to the Lord-Lieutenant of Ireland under what circumstances is the rule relaxed in Ireland which allows for the patrol duty to be carried out singly and not in couples.
  (Answered by Mr. Walter Long.) The one-man day patrol system was extended to the country generally in June, 1904. In a few localities, however, two-men day patrols have been allowed owing to unrest in the neighbourhood or for other special reasons, such as the preservation of order on fair and market-days or the detection of particular offences.

  Steamship Subsidies to the West Indies.
  MR. BRIGG: To ask the Secretary of State for the Colonies to what extent is the steamship subsidy of £40,000 per annum, which is given to the West Indies by England, applied for cheapening the cost of shipments of fruit to American ports.
  (Answered by Mr. Secretary Lyttelton.) No subsidy is granted by this country to
  448
  any steamer service between the West-Indian Colonies and the United States ports.

  Newry Training Ground—Transfer of 2nd West Yorks Regiment from Belfast.
  MR. SLOAN: To ask the Secretary of State for War if he can state why the 2nd West Yorks battalion, stationed at Belfast, was divided and sent to Newry for field training; for what reason has the Black Mountain training, near Belfast, been abolished; and what is the cost of the training ground at Newry.
  (Answered by Mr. Secretary Arnold-Forster.) The General Officer Commanding-in-Chief, Ireland, reports that this regiment was ordered to Newry owing to the absence of sufficient barrack accommodation at Belfast and difficulty of obtaining suitable ground for company training within reasonable distance of Belfast; that the Black Mountain is not suitable and is strictly preserved; and that nothing is paid at Newry for the ground, worked over.

  Grievances of Pensioned Reserve Officers.
  MR. PIKE PEASE: To ask the Secretary of State for War why it was that the Committee appointed by the late Secretary of State to inquire into the grievances of the pensioned officers of the Reserve did not, as promised by the late Lord Hardwicke in the House of Lords, 11th May, 1901, inquire into the whole subject, and did not take evidence from the Reserve of officers; and whether, in view of the fact that his predecessor admitted the existence of a grievance under which the pensioned officers of the Reserve are suffering, and that under the terms of the Royal Warrant in force in 1899 junior officers of the Reserve who had retired with gratuities were more highly recompensed for their mobilised services than their pensioned seniors, he will say what steps he proposes to take to redress the alleged grievance resulting from this difference of treatment.
  (Answered by Mr. Secretary Arnold-Forster.) There appears to be some misapprehension on the matter. The Committee in question was appointed to consider the terms on which retired officers are

  449
  required to serve. This Committee had all necessary information before them, and reported that it would be quite impossible to make the proposals they recommended retrospective. In these circumstances it will be undertood that no further steps in the direction suggested in the Question are possible. I may also call the hon. Member's attention to a further statement by Lord Hardwicke on 7th August†, 1903, in which he corrected his previous statement and explained that the Committee found themselves unable "to recommend the idea of redressing the grievances of any particular officer."

QUESTIONS IN THE HOUSE.

  Training of Seamen.
  GENERAL LAURIE: I beg to ask the Secretary to the Admiralty whether he can state the actual number of efficient seamen of twenty years of age obtained from each 1,000 lads entered at ordinary enrolling age; whether he can state the actual amount expended directly or indirectly on such 1,000 youths, including all expenditure on those who do not attain the age of twenty as able seamen, and can thus ascertain the total cost of each able seaman becoming fit for active service; and whether he has compared such cost with the expense incurred by the War Office in enrolling immature youths from civil life for the Army with the object of developing them into efficient soldiers.
  THE SECRETARY TO THE ADMIRALTY (Mr. PRETYMAN, Suffolk, Wood-bridge): The number of seamen of twenty years of age obtained from 1,000 entrants as boys is about 800. The total cost of a man to date of becoming A.B. is estimated at about £240. This figure includes cost of training, pay, victualling, and clothing, both for those who attain the rating of A.B. and those who do not. The Admiralty have no data which would enable any such comparison to be made as that suggested in the last part of the hon. Member's Question.
  † See (4) Debates, cxxvii., 380.

  Newfoundland Fisheries—British Cruisers on the French Shore.
  GENERAL LAURIE: I beg to ask the Secretary to the Admiralty whether any vessels of the Royal Navy are to be employed this season on the so-called French shore of Newfoundland; and, if so, whether they will be cruisers detached from the North American and West Indian Squadron, or whether they will be vessels specially commissioned for the purpose.
  MR. PRETYMAN: The reply to the first part of the hon. Member's Question is in the affirmative. As regards the latter part of the Question, the vessels detailed for the duty referred to are not drawn from the North American and West Indian Squadron but are detached from other services.

  Army Enlistment Statistics.
  MR. CHARLES HOBHOUSE: I beg to ask the Secretary of State for War what number of men have been enlisted during each month from October to April in 1897–8 and 1902–3.
  *THE SECRETARY OF STATE FOR WAR (Mr. ARNOLD-FORSTER, Belfast, W.): The numbers, excluding Colonial enlistments, were as follows:—

  1897–8.

  1902–3.

  October

  3,443

  5,901

  November

  3,165

  5,527

  December

  2,608

  3,930

  January

  4,077

  6,105

  February

  2,991

  4,561

  March

  3,054

  3,414

  April

  2,459

  2,404

  Highland Light Infantry.
  MR. WEIR: I beg to ask the Secretary of State for War whether, with a view to induce Highlanders to join the Highland Light Infantry, he will consider the practicability of grouping the regiment with other Highland regiments with headquarters at Perth.
  *MR. ARNOLD-FORSTER: The Highland Light Infantry has been open for recruiting in all Scotland for more than three years, and therefore the suggested grouping with other Highland Regiments

  451
  would not appear likely to affect the recruiting in any respect.
  MR. WEIR: Is there not a difficulty in getting Highlanders to enlist?
  *MR. ARNOLD-FORSTER: I am informed that a large number of Highlanders do join in the Lowlands.
  MR. WEIR: A few days ago the right hon. Gentleman said the majority were Lowlanders!
  *MR. ARNOLD-FORSTER: No, of the recruits obtained in the Lowlands the great majority are Highlanders.

  Royal Military College, Sandhurst.
  MR. CHARLES ALLEN; I beg to ask the Secretary of State for War when he proposes to proceed with the enlargement of the Royal Military College, Sandhurst.
  MR. ARNOLD-FORSTER: I am not in a position at the present moment to say when it will be possible to proceed with the enlargement of the Royal Military College.

  Sales of Infantry Regulation Boots.
  MR. GEORGE WHITE: I beg to ask the Secretary of State for War whether he will inform the House how many infantry regulation boots were sold, by tender or otherwise, after the close of the South African War; in what quantities the lots were offered; and the average price obtained.
  THE FINANCIAL SECRETARY TO THE WAR OFFICE (Mr. BROMLEY DAVENPORT, Cheshire, Macclesfield): No infantry regulation boots have been sold from store by tender or otherwise since the close of the South African War. A certain number of boots, mostly part worn, whose owners could not be traced, were recovered in South Africa and sold.

  Distress at Enfield.
  CAPTAIN NORTON: I beg to ask the Secretary of State for War whether, in view of the distress prevailing at Enfield through the postponement of the carrying out of the
  452
  decision of the Army Council, he will consider the advisability, pending the decision of the Departmental Committee now sitting, of giving sufficient work to the Enfield factory to prevent any increase of distress.
  MR. BROMLEY DAVENPORT: Every effort will be made to prevent any increase of distress, but it is not possible to give work to Enfield beyond the money available for payment of wages. All the men are at present working short time, and the factory will continue to be closed on Saturday and Monday until the programme of manufacture for the year is definitely ascertained.

  North Randfontein Mine—Coolie Dis turbances.
  MR. HERBERT SAMUEL: I beg to ask the Secretary of State for the Colonies if he will state how many Chinese coolies were concerned in the riot which took place at the North Randfontein Mine on April 1st; what was the cause of the disturbance; what were the casualties among the coolies and among the police; how many coolies were arrested; and, if their trial has already taken place, what sentences have been inflicted.
  THE SECRETARY OF STATE FOR THE COLONIES (Mr. LYTTELTON, Warwick and Leamington): I have made inquiry but have not yet received a reply.

  Transvaal Constitution.
  MR. BLACK: I beg to ask the Secretary of State for the Colonies when he expects that the new Constitution of the Transvaal will be promulgated; and whether, along with the Constitution, he will lay Papers and correspondence relating to its adjustment.
  MR. LYTTELTON: I would refer the hon. Member to my reply of yesterday† to the hon. Member for Poplar. I propose to lay, at the same time as the Letters Patent, such Papers as can be suitably given.
  † See page 310.

  War Material Factories in India.
  MR. WEIR: I beg to ask the Secretary of State for India if he will ascertain how many factories in India are at present engaged in the manufacture of war material, and the number of Europeans and natives respectively employed in these factories.
  THE SECRETARY OF STATE FOR INDIA (Mr. BRODRICK, Surrey, Guild-ford): I informed the hon. Member on March 23rd† that there are at present eleven factories in India engaged in the manufacture of war material. I will inquire of the Government of India as to the number of Europeans and of natives employed in the factories.

  Aliens in British and Irish Gaols.
  MR. FORDE RIDLEY: I beg to ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department if he can state the number of convicted prisoners of foreign birth who have been received in His Majesty's prisons in Great Britain and Ireland during the year 1904.
  *THE SECRETARY OF STATE FOR THE HOME DEPARTMENT (Mr. AKERS-DOUGLAS, Kent, St. Augustine's): The numbers are:—In England and Wales, 4,396; Scotland, 342; Ireland, 95; Total, 4,833.
  In reply to Mr. Keir Hardie's Question as to proportion of aliens to prisoners of the native population, Mr. Akers-Douglas said:—The number of convicted prisoners increased by 22 per cent. between 1899 and 1903. But the number of aliens among them increased during that period by 68 per cent.

  Committals to Industrial Schools— Parents' Liabilities.
  MR. CROOKS: I beg to ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department how many orders have been made by the London magistrates against parents whose children have been committed to industrial and truant schools during the last five years, and the amount of arrears still standing against such parents on the books of the department responsible for the collection of this money.
  † See (4) Debates, cxliii., 939.
  *MR. AKERS-DOUGLAS: I regret that I am unable to give the figures for five years; but during the last three years the total number of orders made in the Metropolitan district against parents whose children have been committed to industrial and truant schools was 3,171. The amount of the parental contributions still outstanding in respect of these orders could not be given without a detailed examination of the books, which would involve very great labour. I can, however, give the total amount of parental contributions written off as irrecoverable during that period, which was £10,936: while the amount which was collected was £13,544. These two latter figures do not include the amounts collected and written off respectively by the London County Council in respect of cases at the Feltham Industrial School and at the three day industrial schools in London, viz., Drury Lane, Brunswick Road, and Penton Road.

  Licensing Compensation Authorities' Procedure.
  *MR. LEIF JONES: I beg to ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department whether, in the case of a licence which, after objection by a member of the public, is reported to the compensation authority by the renewal authority as not required, he has yet taken any steps to secure that the objecting member of the public shall be heard by the compensation authority before that body comes to any decision as to whether the licence in question shall or shall not be renewed; and, if not, whether he will consider the desirability of immediately taking such steps, seeing that the preliminary meetings of compensation authorities are in some counties already being held.
  *MR. AKERS-DOUGLAS: No, Sir. It appears to me, that, under the procedure prescribed by the Licensing Rules, 1904, there is every opportunity for the proper consideration of the public requirements in the execution of the duty imposed on the compensation authority by the Act. I have nothing to add to my previous Answer.
  *MR. LEIF JONESsaid the whole point was that the licensing authority, before

  455
  they could refuse a licence, must hear the licensee who is affected, but they may renew a licence without hearing the member of the public who has raised the objection. It is not at all the same thing.

  Expiring Annuities.
  MR. McCRAE: I beg to ask Mr. Chancellor of the Exchequer whether the Chancery Fund Annuities, amounting to £2,324,516 a year, and the Converted Annuities, amounting to £684,000 a year, expire in 1906; and if it is proposed to follow the precedent of 1884 by creating fresh annuities for the purpose of cancelling an equivalent capital amount of Consols.
  MR. AKERS-DOUGLAS (for Mr. AUSTEN CHAMBERLAIN): The Annuities in question will expire in the course of next year. I cannot anticipate the arrangements to be made in future Budgets.
  *MR. McCRAE: Is it not necessary for the Government to proceed by legislation previous to the time the annuities expire?
  MR. AKERS-DOUGLASasked for notice of that Question.

  Irish Land Stock.
  SIR JOSEPH DIMSDALE: I beg to ask Mr. Chancellor of the Exchequer whether he can inform the House why Irish Land Stock, redeemable in 1921, is domiciled only at the Bank of Ireland, whereas the stock, redeemable in 1933, is domiciled at both London and Dublin, with the result that the earlier issue stands about two points below the later issue owing to its having a more restricted market.
  MR. AKERS-DOUGLAS (for Mr. AUSTEN CHAMBERLAIN): Guaranteed Land Stock under the Purchase of Land Act, 1891, was issued by the Irish Land Commission direct to Irish landowners, and was most conveniently inscribed in the books of the Bank of Ireland. Guaranteed 2¾ per cent. stock under the Land Act, 1903, was issued for public subscription and inscribed partly at the Bank of England and partly at the Bank of Ireland. Any holder of the earlier
  456
  stock who desires to have it inscribed in the Bank of England can effect the transfer by the procedure provided in the National Debt Act, 1870. I do not think the difference of price of the two stocks is owing to this cause, but to the fact that very little of the Guaranteed Land Stock ever comes into the market.

  Hanley Telegraph Staff and Duties at Stoke.
  MR. SHAW: I beg to ask the Postmaster-General whether he is aware that the telegraph staff at Hanley are frequently required to travel to Stoke to perform telegraph duties, a distance of two miles; that the practice has been to allow the men thirty minutes for the purpose of journey from office to office; and that the Department, as dating from 25th March, has declined to continue the custom; and, if so, whether, seeing that a duty of divided attendances is completed in two different towns, he will explain why the alteration has been made.
  THE POSTMASTER-GENERAL (Lord STANLEY,): I am inquiring into the matter, and I will communicate the result to the hon. Member.

  The Government and the National Tele- phone Company's Employees.
  LORD BINGHAM: I beg to ask the Postmaster-General whether his attention has been called to the dissatisfaction existing among the staff of the National Telephone Company as to the uncertainty of their position under the recent agreement with the company as regards their transfer to the Post Office service in the event of the purchase of the company's system in 1911; whether he has received any representations on the subject; and what action he proposes to take in the matter.
  LORD STANLEY: I am aware that some anxiety exists among the staff of the National Telephone Company, and I have received two memorials from different classes of the staff pointing out the difficulties of their position in view of the fact that the agreement for the purchase of the company's system imposes no definite obligation on the Government to

  457
  offer them employment in the Post Office service after 1911, and asking that deputations may be received to make further representations on the subject. These memorials are receiving my careful consideration, and I hope to be able shortly to receive the proposed deputations. In the meantime I may, perhaps, say, without in any way pledging my successor, that, in view of the extent and nature of the business of the company to be taken over, I think it only reasonable to suppose that it may probably be found necessary to transfer to the Post Office service all efficient members of the executive staff previously required by the company for its proper performance. Those persons who are appointed to the established staff of the Post Office will at once benefit by the conditions as to pension which apply to that staff, but I cannot hold out any hope that operators and other classes who are not entitled to any pension under the conditions of their present employment in the company's service can be allowed to have the period of that service taken into account in reckoning their Post Office pensions. In the case of those members of the staff who contribute to the present pension fund, it is expressly stipulated in the agreement that any obligation arising out of their service previous to the transfer falls to be met by the company. It will be open to the Committee which will, I hope, soon be appointed to consider the agreement to hear representations of the company's staff, if they think it desirable to do so; but I ought to add that the agreement with the company has been signed, and cannot now be modified in any respect.
  MR. KEIR HARDIEasked if the noble Lord would agree to the appointment of a special labour representative on the Committee so as to make sure that the interests of the employees were properly safeguarded?
  LORD STANLEY: No, Sir. The Committee has been nominated in the usual way. I had representations made to me as to placing certain representatives on it and I at once acceded to the request. I think the Committee will fairly represent all sections in the House.

  Australian Mail Contracts.
  MR. HENNIKER HEATON: I beg to ask the Postmaster-General whether he is now in a position to make a statement in regard to the Australian mail contracts; and, in view of the inconvenience to Australian merchants and others, whether he will urge an early settlement of the question by the Australian Government.
  LORD STANLEY: The hon. Member will have seen, as I have, a statement in the Press that an arrangement has been arrived at between the Australian Government and the Orient Line for a fortnightly service. No confirmation of this contract has as yet reached either the Post Office or the Colonial Office, but I sincerely hope the report will turn out to be true.

  Cost of Telephonic Communication between London and Paris.
  MR. HENNIKER HEATON: I beg to ask the Postmaster-General whether he can see his way to reduce the present charges for telephone messages, eight shillings for three minutes conversation from London to Paris, to two shillings and sixpence for three minutes conversation over the same line; what is the estimated loss on such a reduction; and whether the line is now fully employed.
  LORD STANLEY: The charges for telephonic conversations between London and Paris are fixed by International agreement, and I do not feel able to propose any reduction. The service is necessarily a costly one, owing to the exceptional nature of the land lines and cables required, and the limited amount of traffic which each line will carry. At night conversations for six minutes at the charge of eight shillings are now allowed to regular subscribers, and this arrangement, which may work out at a good deal less than a farthing a word, has been found useful to journalists in both cities. I do not think the demand for conversations is restricted by the present charges, as the lines are fully employed during business hours. If the charge were reduced from eight shillings to two shillings and sixpence per conversation there would therefore, I think, be a proportionate reduction of revenue.
  MR. HENNIKER HEATON: Is not a very large profit made at the present rate?
  LORD STANLEY: I do not know if it is large, but I believe there has been a profit.

  London and Paris Post Office Orders.
  MR. HENNIKER HEATON: I beg to ask the Postmaster-General whether he is aware that a money order for 5s. obtained in a Paris post office and payable in London costs less than 1d. (10 centimes) for commission, whereas a Post Office money order from London to Paris for the same amount is charged 6d. commission; and whether he can see his way to make a reduction in this charge.
  LORD STANLEY: The hon. Member is under a misapprehension as to the commission charged in this country for the issue of a money order for 5s. payable in Paris. It would be 4d. only, as in the case of any money order for a sum not over £1 payable abroad. The rates of commission for such orders were reduced last year after exhaustive consideration; and I am not prepared to make further reductions.

  Egyptian Postal Rates.
  MR. HENNIKER HEATON: I beg to ask the Postmaster-General whether he is aware that penny postage is in operation from this country to Malta and Aden; and whether he will open negotiations with the Egyptian authorities for the extension of the penny post to Egypt.
  LORD STANLEY: I am fully aware that the penny rate of postage applies to letters sent from this country to Malta and Aden. That rate was specially established as a means of facilitating postal communication within the British Empire; and Egypt is not in the same position as the Colonies and Protectorates included in the scheme.

  Savings Bank Deposits.
  MR. HENNIKER HEATON: I beg to ask the Postmaster-General whether he is aware that two halfpenny postage stamps in lieu of a penny stamp will not be received on the savings bank's forms for
  460
  deposits up to a shilling, and if he will, for the convenience of children who are depositors, give instructions that halfpenny stamps may also be received in numbers not less than two.
  LORD STANLEY: Although the stamp deposit forms were intended to bear twelve penny stamps, it is not the practice to refuse them when stamps of other values are affixed in the proper spaces, provided the total value of the stamps on a form is one shilling.

  London Boards of Guardians and the Unemployed.
  MR. CROOKS: I beg to ask the President of the Local Government Board whether he can inform the House of the amount expended by each board of guardians in London out of the local rates for the relief of distress caused by lack of employment for the last four months.
  THE PRESIDENT OF THE LOCAL GOVERNMENT BOARD (Mr. GERALD BALFOUR,): I am not at present in a position to give this information, but I will see what particulars of the kind desired can be furnished in connection with other information which I propose to obtain with reference to the relief of distress during the past winter.
  MR. BENN: Does the right hon. Gentleman propose to present any Report on the work of the Unemployed Committee?
  MR. GERALD BALFOUR: I understand that a Report is being drawn up by the Committee, and when I have seen it I will consider whether it shall be laid on the Table.

  Borrowing Powers of Municipalities.
  SIR FREDERICK BANBURY: I beg to ask Mr. Chancellor of the Exchequer if he will consider the advisability of placing a limit upon the borrowing powers of municipalities.
  MR. GERALD BALFOUR: The Chancellor of the Exchequer has asked me to reply to this Question. I am

  461
  afraid that I could not undertake to propose legislation with the object which my hon. friend has in view; but I may mention that the greater part of the loans raised under the general law by the councils of municipal boroughs and urban and rural districts are raised under the Public Health Acts, and that these Acts place a limit on the borrowing powers which they confer on local authorities.

  Nitrogen-Producing Bacteria.
  SIR WALTER PALMER: I beg to ask the President of the Board of Agriculture whether his attention has been drawn to experiments which have been carried on in America with a view to the propagation and use upon the land of nitrogen-producing bacteria; whether he is aware that certain rights relating to the method of preparation of these bacteria are the property of the United States Government, and that that Government is distributing packets of these bacteria free of charge to any farmers who apply for them, and that the result of such distribution has been beneficial for farming; and, if so, can he say whether any rights relating to the preparation of these nitrogen-producing bacteria would prevent His Majesty's Government from adopting a similar course; and, if not, whether he is prepared to recommend that a similar free distribution be adopted in this country.
  *THE PRESIDENT OF THE BOARD OF AGRICULTURE (Mr. AILWYS FELLOWES,): Yes, my attention has been directed to the interesting experiments to which my hon. friend refers, and we have published some articles on the subject in our monthly journal, with copies of which I shall be happy to supply him. Experiments as to the value of nitrogen-producing bacteria are now being carried out under our auspices by several of the agricultural colleges in this country, and so soon as the results are known we shall consider what further action in the matter can be taken in the interest of British agriculturists. I understand that the process of producing and cultivating the bacteria has been patented by the United States Department of
  462
  Agriculture, but I gather that the Department do not propose indefinitely to continue its gratuitous distribution. There appears to be nothing to prevent the manufacture and sale of the material in this country.
  MR. LONSDALE: Will the benefit of the experiments extend to Ireland?
  *MR. AILWYN FELLOWES: Yes, Sir.

  Members Smoking-Room
  MR. BIGWOOD: I beg to ask the hon. Member for Chorley, as representing the First Commissioner of Works, whether he is aware of the difficulty Members of this House frequently find in procuring seats in the smoking-room; and whether he could see his way to recommend some improvement in the accommodation now provided.
  LORD BALCARRES: The First Commissioner is quite aware of the limited accommodation at the House for hon. Members wishing to smoke, and much regrets that more space is not available. Additional chairs have lately been provided; but there seems no way at present of finding extra room.
  MR. GIBSON BOWLES: Will the noble Lord represent to the First Commissioner the desirability of utilising one of the rooms of the Library?
  LORD BALCARRES: I do not think the First Commissioner would accede to that suggestion.
  MR. SWIFT MACNEILLWhy not take one of the rooms from the House of Lords which are not used at all?
  LORD BALCARRES: Those rooms do not come within the province of the First Commissioner.

  Scottish Fisheries—Cruisers for Police Duty.
  MR. WEIR: I beg to ask the Lord-Advocate whether he is aware that the Board of Admiralty are now offering for sale obsolete war vessels;

  463
  and will he consider the desirability of securing one or more such vessels for sea police duties in the Moray Firth and on the seaboard of the Western Highlands and Islands of Scotland.
  *THE LORD-ADVOCATE (Mr. SCOTT DICKSON,): The Secretary for Scotland does not think that obsolete war vessels could be either competently or economically employed in the service referred to by the hon. Member.

  Scottish Congested Districts Board.
  MR. WEIR: I beg to ask the Lord-Advocate, seeing that, the Prime Minister has expressed the opinion that more funds are desirable and could be usefully employed for the purposes of the Congested Districts Board (Scotland), will he arrange to confer with Mr. Chancellor of the Exchequer with a view to secure the allocation of additional funds.
  *MR. SCOTT DICKSON: The Secretary for Scotland does not propose at present to apply to the Chancellor of the Exchequer for additional funds for the purposes referred to by the hon. Member.

  Irish Agricultural Department Endowment Fund.
  MR. DELANY: I beg to ask the Chief Secretary to the Lord-Lieutenant of Ireland whether he will furnish a Return showing, with dates, the names and positions of any officers who have received payments out of the Endowment Fund of the Irish Agricultural Department since its inception, stating in each case the reasons for such payment.
  THE CHIEF SECRETARY FOR IRELAND (Mr. WALTER LONG,): This information will be collected and communicated to the hon. Member; but, for the reason stated yesterday†, I do not propose to lay the Return on the Table of the House.

  Untenanted Lands in County Waterford.
  MR. POWER: I beg to ask the Chief Secretary to the Lord-Lieutenant
  † See page 319.
  464
  of Ireland whether the Estates Commissioners have entered into negotiations for the purchase of any untenanted lands in the county Waterford; and whether they have already acquired any tract of such land, and how much, with a view to providing new holdings for evicted tenants.
  MR. WALTER LONG: The Commissioners are negotiating for the purchase of about 300 acres of untenanted land in the county.

  Iveagh-Pirrie Motor Scheme.
  MR. DELANY: I beg to ask the Chief Secretary to the Lord-Lieutenant of Ireland whether he can state what is the cause of delay in putting the Iveagh-Pirrie motor scheme into operation at Clonaslee, Queen's County, the inhabitants having petitioned in favour of its adoption in the district.
  MR. WALTER LONG: This Question is one entirely for the promoters of the scheme. I have no information on the subject.

  Mountmellick Petty Sessions Clerkship.
  MR. DELANY: I beg to ask the Chief Secretary to the Lord-Lieutenant of Ireland whether Sergeant Fitzsimons is candidate for the position of petty sessions clerk at Mountmellick; and whether it is in accord with the Police Code and the rules an dregulations of the Royal Irish Constabulary that a member of the force should canvass magistrates for their votes in connection with an appointment not yet declared vacant.
  MR. WALTER LONG: Sergeant Fitzsimons is not a candidate for this appointment, and has not canvassed the magistrates for it.
  MR. DELANY: I beg to ask the Chief Secretary to the Lord-Lieutenant of Ireland whether, as Section 6, 14 and 15 Vic. (1851), prescribes that upon the suspension of any clerk of petty sessions the sub-inspector of constabulary or the head constable of the district shall take charge of the books and papers, he will state why Sergeant Fitzsimons was appointed to substitute the petty

  465
  sessions clerk of Mountmellick who has been suspended.
  MR. WALTER LONG: The section provides that either of the officers mentioned "or such other person as the Justices shall authorise" shall take over the books, etc., on the suspension of the clerk. Sergeant Fitzsimons was duly authorised by the Justices under that provision.

  Irish Teachers' Grievances.
  MR. THOMAS O'DONNELL: I beg to ask the Chief Secretary to the Lord-Lieutenant of Ireland whether he is aware that the Secretary to the Irish National Education Board has written to a teacher stating that, under the operation of the new rule 127 (b), the teacher's salary may be reduced from £140 to £56 per annum; whether there is any other branch of the public service in which, when reforms are being effected, the men who have spent their lives in the service are so sacrificed; and whether, in the working of this rule, steps will be taken to insure that no teacher at present in the service will be injuriously affected.
  MR. WALTER LONG: The manager of the Aughrim Boys' and Girls' National Schools was informed on the 21st March that if the average attendance at the boys' school fell below thirty-five the salary of the principal teacher would be reduced from £130 to £116 per annum, and that if the average fell below twenty it would be reduced to £56 per annum; but he was told at the same time that rule 127 (b) applied only to future enrolments, and it was suggested that the best course to adopt would be to amalgamate the boys' and girls' schools, making the master the principal of the combined school. If this were done the salary of the master would not be reduced, but, on the contrary, would be increased, and he would become eligible for promotion to the highest grade of teachers, as the average attendance at the combined school would be over seventy. The salary of the mistress would remain, as at present, under special Treasury sanction. I may add that I will take the earliest opportunity of thoroughly investigating this matter,
  466
  and I would ask hon. Members to be good enough to defer any further Questions on the subject until after the Easter recess.
  MR. THOMAS O'DONNELL: Is it not the fact that 160,000 children under eight years of age will be transferred under this rule, and that the Treasury will thus effect a saving of £75,000 yearly.
  MR. WALTER LONG: The duty of the Treasury is to see that the public money is properly spent without injustice either to the public or to the employed.

  Irish Public Bodies Order—Mayo Protests.
  MR. O'KELLY: I beg to ask the Chief Secretary to the Lord-Lieutenant of Ireland whether he has received resolutions from the Mayo County Council and the Mayo District Asylum pointing out the inconvenience and expense that would be involved in putting the new Public Bodies Order into practice, and the unworkable character of many of its provisions, especially in regard to district asylums; and whether, in view of the fact that the Orders now in force, which were devised by the Local Government Board itself, have given satisfaction generally, the new Order will be withdrawn.
  MR. WALTER LONG: The resolution of the county council merely asked permission to adopt a special form of book, and this application will receive consideration. The resolution of the district asylum committee was to the effect stated, but the Board pointed out in reply that no changes had been made in the system of asylum accounts which were not rendered necessary by recent legislation or were not suggested by experience. It is not intended to withdraw the Order.

  Killasser (Swinford) Unemployed.
  MR. PATRICK O'BRIEN: On behalf of the hon. Member for East Mayo, I beg to ask the Chief Secretary to the Lord-Lieutenant of Ireland why the men whose names have been sent in to the Local Government Board from the parish of Killasser, Union of Swinford, have not yet been put on relief works.
  MR. WALTER LONG: The Board have authorised the employment of the representatives of sixty-five families in this parish.

  Kilmeedy National Schools, Limerick.
  MR. O'SHAUGHNESSY: I beg to ask the Chief Secretary to the Lord-Lieutenant of Ireland whether he is aware that the manager of the national schools in Kilmeedy, county Limerick, applied to the Board of National Education in Ireland for a grant-in-aid to build new schools there, which was promised in December, 1903; that subsequently, in 1904, the Board made it a condition that the boys under eight years of age attending the schools must be sent to the girls' school, and that, in the event of the average daily attendance in the boys' school not warranting the appointment of an assistant, the boys' and girls' schools should be amalgamated, to which conditions the manager refused to comply; if he can state what was the reason for insisting on these conditions after the promise to give the grant-in-aid had been made; what was the character of the inspector's report of the present schools for three years previous to the application for the grant-in-aid; whether, between that time and the date on which the aforesaid conditions were made for the obtaining of the grant, did any change for the worse take place in the character of the schools; and whether he will take steps to remove these conditions to enable the schools to be built,
  MR. WALTER LONG: The manager applied for a building grant, but no premise to accede to it was made by the Commissioners. He was informed that, in the event of his application being favourably entertained, the infant boys should be sent to the girls' school; and, further, that it was expected that he would amalgamate the boys' and girls' schools if the average attendance of boys did not warrant, within a reasonable time, the appointment of an assistant teacher. The character of the inspector's report on the instruction imparted in these schools for the three years previous to the receipt of the application for a building grant was satisfactory, and no falling off in the efficiency of the teachers has since been reported.
  MR. O'SHAUGHNESSY: I beg to ask the Chief Secretary to the Lord-Lieutenant of Ireland if he can state whether, if the conditions required by the Board of National Education in Ireland for obtaining; a grant-in-aid for the building of the Kilmeedy National Schools were complied with by the manager and the male and female schools amalgamated, in the event of the boys' school not warranting the appointment of an assistant, would the principal teacher of the female school be reduced to the position of assistant; and what effect would that have on her present position as teacher.
  MR. WALTER LONG: If the conditions referred to were complied with and the male and female schools were amalgamated, the principal teacher of the female school would be reduced to the position of assistant teacher; but, under special regulations sanctioned by the Treasury, she would retain her present grade salary.

  Irish Railway Goods Rates.
  MR. O'SHAUGHNESSY: I beg to ask the Chief Secretary to the Lord-Lieutenant of Ireland whether he is aware that, under the Act amalgamating the Waterford and Limerick Railway with the Great Southern and Western Railway Company, the latter were bound to give facilities to the public equal to those enjoyed by them previous to the amalgamation, and that, since the amalgamation, the rate per ton for tea from London to Rathkeale, viâ Waterford, has been raised from 44s. 10d. per ton to 53s. 4d. per ton, or 8s. 6d. per ton more; and whether he will take steps to see that the terms of the Act in this respect are carried out.
  MR. WALTER LONG: The Act provides that the actual rates charged on 30th June, 1900, shall not be increased without the consent of the Railway and Canal Commissioners. The Department are not aware of any instance, in which this provision has been contravened.
  MR. O'SHAUGHNESSY: Will the right hon. Gentleman inquire if the facts stated in the Question are not correct?
  MR. WALTER LONG: Certainly but if they are it seems to me that the people aggrieved have the power of appeal open to them. If they prefer, however, to open communications through the Government I will consider it.

  Limerick Malicious Damage Claims.
  MR. LONSDALE: I beg to ask the Chief Secretary to the Lord-Lieutenant of Ireland whether he is aware that upon the hearing of two claims by farmers for compensation for malicious destruction of hay, at Limerick Quarter Sessions last week, Head-Constable Doherty expressed the opinion that the hay was burned on behalf of the applicant, whereas County Court Judge Adams rejected that opinion, which he said was unsupported by any tittle of evidence, and awarded the claimant compensation; and whether, with the view of preserving the independence of the Constabulary, he will direct a full inquiry to be made into the circumstances under which the police officer made these unfounded allegations.
  MR. WALTER LONG: The reports that I have received in this matter are not sufficient to enable me to reply to my hon. friend's Question to-day, and I would ask him to defer it until Monday next.

  Moher Relief of Distress Scheme.
  MR. VINCENT KENNEDY: I beg to ask the Chief Secretary to the Lord-Lieutenant of Ireland if he can state why the solicitors acting for Lord Charles Beresford refused to allow the construction of the proposed Moher relief of distress road in county Cavan.
  MR. WALTER LONG: The reason given by the solicitors was that the consent of their client to the construction of the road had not been obtained, and that the road would only benefit a few people.
  In reply to a further Question by Mr. VINCENT KENNEDY—
  MR.WALTER LONGsaid the consent of the landlord was very properly required before these works could be undertaken. The relief of distress had been dealt with with great liberality.
  MR. MACVEAGH: Will you make representations to Lord Charles Beresford on the subject?
  MR. WALTER LONG: been made direct.

  Belfast and London Mail Service.
  MR. SLOAN: I beg to ask the Postmaster-General if he can say how long have the negotiations between himself and the railway companies in reference to the proposed change in the mail between Belfast and London already taken; and when he thinks they will be completed.
  LORD STANLEY: I have for some time past been in communication with the railway companies respecting an improvement in the mail service from Belfast to England, but I am afraid I cannot say when a decision will be arrived at. I should perhaps explain that I am endeavouring to arrange for a later despatch of the present mail by the Larne and Stranraer route, as the improvement which could thus be effected would be more general than that to be gained by the establishment of a new service viâ Greenore. As the hon. Member is aware, several companies are concerned in the service by this route, and more time is therefore occupied in the negotiations.
  MR. SLOAN: How long have the communications been going on?
  LORD STANLEY: Since November last year.

  Local Authorities (Qualification of Women) Bill.
  MR. BENN: I beg to ask the First Lord of the Treasury whether, in view of the majority of the House in favour of the Second Reading of the Local Authorities (Qualification of Women) Bill on Friday last, he will give facilities for the further progress of the measure this session.
  THE PRIME MINISTER AND FIRST LORD OF THE TREASURY (Mr. A. J. BALFOUR,): I am afraid I cannot hold out any hope of special facilities. As the hon. Gentleman is no

  471
  doubt aware, it is not usual to promise them to private Members except in the case of non-contentious Bills, and these cases are exceedingly rare.

  The Aliens Bill.
  MR. FORDE RIDLEY: I beg to ask the First Lord of the Treasury whether he can now state the date of the introduction of the Aliens Bill.
  MR. A. J. BALFOUR: I think I can promise that this Bill will be introduced the week after next, at all events I see no obstacle at present in its way.

  Vaccination of Public Servants.
  MR. WEIR: I beg to ask the First Lord of the Treasury whether he is aware that candidates for the public service are not allowed to take up appointments unless they have been vaccinated; and, seeing that this regulation penalises candidates who object to vaccination, will he so amend the regulations as to make it competent for such persons to secure their appointments. I hope the Question is now in the understanding of the right hon. Gentleman.
  MR. A. J. BALFOUR: Oh, yes, Sir; I have always understood the hon. Gentleman's Questions on this subject, but I have had some doubts as to whether he always understood my Answers. All I can say in reply to the hon. Geatleman's Question is that, in the opinion of the authorities, vaccination is a surgical or medical operation which ought to be performed. Until that decision is reversed, I do not see any reason for altering the rule which at present exists in the Civil Service.
  MR. WEIR: Then will the right hon. Gentleman induce the Local Government Board to see that a supply of pure glycerinated calf lymph is afforded to every medical man?
  MR. A. J. BALFOUR: I believe that is being done.
  MR. WEIR: It is not.
  MR. A. J. BALFOUR: At any rate, the supply of pure vaccine lymph is quite sufficient for the Civil Service.

  Scottish Congested Districts Amendment Bill.
  MR. WEIR: I beg to ask the First Lord of the Treasury, seeing that the Congested Districts (Scotland) Amendment Bill is supported by all Highland Members, will he make arrangements with a view to secure its Second Reading before Easter.
  MR. A. J. BALFOUR: I am afraid that I cannot find the time asked for.

  Ministers and Company Directorships.
  MR. SWIFT MACNEILL: I beg to ask the First Lord of the Treasury whether Mr. Gerald Loder, the newly appointed Junior Lord of the Treasury, who is a director of four companies, of which one is the London, Brighton, and South Coast Railway Company, and another the Standard Bank of South Africa, will retain these directorships or any, and, if so, which of them in conjunction with his position of a Minister of the Crown in the Finance Department of the Government; and, if so, on what grounds can the retention of these directorships, or any of them, by Mr. Gerald Loder be justified.
  MR. A. J. BALFOUR: I think the hon. Gentleman asked substantially the same Question on a previous occasion. I do not think I have anything to add to the Answer I then gave.
  MR. SWIFT MACNEILL: Cannot the right hon. Gentleman say "yes" or "no" to my Question.
  *MR. SPEAKER: I must say when I read the Question on the Paper this morning it appeared to me to be the same Question as was pat yesterday.
  MR. SWIFT MACNEILL: No, Sir, it is not the same Question.
  *MR. SPEAKER: Will the hon. Member point out the difference.
  MR. SWIFT MACNEILL: In the former Question I asked about four directorships In this I refer to two specific ones, the holding of which I contend is not consistent with his position.
  *MR. SPEAKER: The four included the two. The Question, is the same as the previous one, but if the hon. Gentleman thinks there is something in it, not covered by the Answer, he had better frame another and more specific Question.
  MR. SWIFT MACNEILL: Yes, Sir, I will.

  Sale of Butter Bill.
  MR. O'SHAUGHNESSY: I beg to ask the First Lord of the Treasury whether, having regard to the fact that the Sale of Butter Bill has been discussed during the last two sessions of Parliament, he will take the Second Reading of it an an early day, with the view of having it passed into law this session.
  MR. A. J. BALFOUR: Although I cannot name a day for the Second Reading, I hope the Bill will be passed this session.
  MR. O'SHAUGHNESSY: Will the right hon. Gentleman undertake to have the Second Reading before Easter?
  MR. A. J. BALFOUR: I can make no promise.

  Early Closing (Saturday) Intoxicating Drinks (Ireland) Bill.
  MR. WOLFF: I beg to ask the First Lord of the Treasury whether he will give facilities, this session, to pass the Early Closing (Saturday) Intoxicating Drinks (Ireland) Bill.
  MR. A. J. BALFOUR: I must ask the hon. Gentleman to accept as an Answer to this Question the reply I have just given to the hon. Member for Devonport.

  Sparkbrook and Enfield Factories.
  CAPTAIN NORTON: I beg to ask the First Lord of the Treasury if he can state when the Departmental Committee upon the Sparkbrook and Enfield Small Arms Factories is likely to report.
  MR. A. J. BALFOUR: There was no Departmental Committee on these factories, but there was an Inter-Departmental Committee on a larger question with which the factories are connected.
  474
  I cannot promise any day for their Report.

  Royal Commission on Church Disorders.
  MR. SLOAN: I beg to ask the First Lord of the Treasury if he can state when the Report of the Royal Commission now sitting on Church Disorders will be issued.
  MR. A. J. BALFOUR: A similar Question was addressed to me on 21st February†. The Committee will report, I believe, in the course of the year, but I have no power either to retard or hasten their deliberations.

  The Prime Minister and the Retaliation Resolution.
  MR. LLOYD-GEORGE: I desire to ask the First Lord of the Treasury a Question as to which I have communicated with him privately—whether his attention has been called to the statement made last night by the Patronage Secretary to the Treasury, in reply to a Question put by an hon. Member on this side of the House as to the Retaliation Resolution passed by the House last week, that he had communicated to the Prime Minister what passed, and whether the right hon. Gentleman wishes in any way to, modify or withdraw the statement he made in the House last week that the sole knowledge he had of that Resolution was derived from the Question put to him by the hon. Member for Oldham on the subject.
  MR. A. J. BALFOUR: I have asked my right hon. friend the Patronage Secretary what passed last night, and I think the hon. Gentleman opposite may be under some misapprehension. The Question of the hon. Member for Oldham related to the terms of the Resolution and what passed in regard to it. [OPPOSITION cries of "No."] I was not acquainted with its terms, and my right hon. friend did not inform me of its terms. He was not himself aware of the fact that the Resolution was passed nemine contradicente, and therefore he could not give me information which was not in his possession. He did tell
  † See (4) Debates, cxli., 780.

  475
  me that there had been a debate, and he also informed me that my conduct had been the subject of animadversion in a conversation that arose after twelve o'clock at night. He did not tell me what had been said about me, because he knows I have no interest in that subject.
  MR. LLOYD-GEORGE: May I ask the right hon. Gentleman whether he still adheres to his statement that his sole knowledge as to what appeared to have taken place was derived from the Question of the hon. Member for Oldham?
  MR. A. J. BALFOUR: It was the sole knowledge relative to the Question of the hon. Member for Oldham. I have told the House what my right hon. friend the Patronage Secretary did give me information about. If the House thinks that that was relative to the Question of the hon. Member, then I misled the House; but I do not think it was relative to it.
  CAPTAIN DONELAN: Does the right hon. Gentleman live up in a balloon?
  MR. BRYCE: Will the right hon. Gentleman tell us, as he says he did not know the terms of the Resolution, whether it is not his habit to read the Order-book of the House?
  MR. A. J. BALFOUR: I did not know the terms of the Resolution, because there was really no reason why I should make myself acquainted with them.
  MR. SWIFT MACNEILL: There was.
  MR. A. J. BALFOUR: There was not. I am sure that the hon. Gentleman, if he had been Leader of the House, would have made himself acquainted with them. I did what I thought was necessary in the circumstances in which I was placed. And what were those circumstances? They were these, that I had explained, at great length, to the House that in my judgment these continued Motions on one question brought our proceeding into some ridicule and that I meant to have no more to do with them. That being the case, what was there blameworthy in my conduct?
  MR. BRYCE: If I may venture to say so, I will not trouble the right hon. Gentleman with any further Question, being quite satisfied with things as they stand.

  SELECTION (STANDING COMMITTEES).
  Mr. HALSEYreported from the Committee of Selection; That they had discharged the following Member from serving on the Standing Committee on Trade (including Agriculture and Fishing), Shipping, and Manufactures, in respect of the Coal Mines (Weighing of Minerals) Bill: Sir Charles Dilke; and had appointed in substitution: Sir Thomas Roe.
  Mr. HALSEYfurther reported; That they had discharged the following Member from serving on the Standing Committee on Trade (including Agriculture and Fishing), Shipping, and Manufactures;— Mr. Tennant; and had appointed in substitution: Mr. Herbert Samuel.
  Reports to lie upon the Table.

  PREVENTION OF CORRUPTION BILL [LORDS].
  Read the first time; to be read a second time upon Monday next, and to be printed. [Bill 142.]
  MARRIED WOMEN'S PROPERTY ACT (1882) AMENDMENT BILL [LORDS].
  Read the first time; to be read a second time upon Monday next, and to be printed. [Bill 143.]
  PRIZE COURTS BILL [LORDS].
  Read the first time; to be read a second time upon Monday next, and to be printed. [Bill 144.]
NEW BILLS.

  PUBLIC HEALTH (No. 2) BILL.
  "To amend the Law relating to the qualification and tenure of office of Medical Officers of Health and Inspectors; and for other purposes," presented by Dr. Hutchinson; supported by Mr.

  477
  William Abraham, Sir Walter Foster, Mr. Ernest Gray, Colonel Legge, Mr. Whittaker, Mr. Fenwick, Major Jameson, and Sir John Tuke; to be read a second time upon Monday next, and to be printed. [Bill 146.]

  LUNACY ACT AMENDMENT (LONDON) BILL.
  "To authorise the London County Council to provide receiving houses for the reception of persons mentally afflicted or alleged to be of unsound mind, and to authorise the detention of such persons in such houses, and for other purposes connected therewith," presented by Sir John Tuke; supported by Mr. Burns, Mr. Benn, Mr. Claude Hay, Mr. Cohen, Mr. Brigg, and Dr. Hutchinson; to be read a second time upon Tuesday next, and to be printed. [Bill 147.]
  PARLIAMENTARY VOTERS (REGISTR ATION) BILL.
  "To amend the Law relating to the qualification and registration of Parliamentary Voters, and for other purposes relating to Elections," presented by Mr. Cremer; supported by Mr. Bell, Mr. Broadhurst, Mr. Burt, Mr. John Burns, Mr. Crooks, Mr. Fenwick, Mr. Arthur Henderson, Mr. John Johnson, Mr. Parrott, Mr. Shackleton, and Mr. John Wilson (Durham); to be read a second time upon Tuesday next, and to be printed. [Bill 148.]
  REGISTRATION OF FIRMS BILL.
  "To provide for the Registration of Firms and Persons carrying on business under trade names," presented by Mr. Emmott; supported by Sir James Heath, Sir William Holland, and Sir Walter Palmer; to be read a second time upon Friday, May 12th, and to be printed. [Bill 149.]
  COUNTY COURTS BILL.
  "To amend the Law relating to County Courts," presented by Sir Albert Rollit; supported by Sir James Woodhouse, Sir William Holland, Mr. Brynmor Jones, and Mr. J. A. Thomas; to be read a second time upon Friday, and to be printed. [Bill 150.]

  BUSINESS OF THE HOUSE (REPORTS OF MONEY COMMITTEES).
  Motion made, and Question proposed, "That the Proceedings on the Reports of the Committee of Ways and Means and Committees authorising the expenditure of Public Money, other than the Committee of Supply, may be entered upon at any hour after Midnight, though opposed, and shall not be interrupted under the provisions of the Standing Order, Sittings of the House."—(Mr. A. J. Balfour.)
  MB. GIBSON BOWLESsaid he felt bound to offer opposition to the Motion, and he would like to point out that no reasons whatever had been advanced for that infraction, as he might call it, of the Standing Orders of the House. Nothing had been alleged to warrant the Motion which the right hon. Gentleman had just made, neither had he told them for what purpose the Order was required or whether there was any Bill of such a pressing character which rendered it desirable or necessary to pass it. He would like the House to bear in mind that they were now living under the Standing Orders of 1902, which seriously curtailed the opportunities of private Members, and which enabled the Government to monopolise nearly the whole of the time of the House. It has been calculated that last session the Government took no less than seven-eighths of the time of the House, leaving only the remaining eighth for private Members, and now they were proposing a Rule which would still further limit the opportunities of private Members. Again, it should not be forgotten that the House agreed to meet at two o'clock—an early hour and extremely inconvenient to many Members—on the condition that as a rule they should not be kept in the House after midnight. He therefore looked upon this proposal which would keep Members after twelve o'clock as an infraction of the contract under which their proceedings were now governed, and he did think that before they passed such a Resolution some reasons should be advanced in support of it.
  Under the Standing Orders the Twelve O'clock Rule could be suspended only for business which came

  479
  within four categories, namely, Bills which originated in Committee of Ways and Means, proceedings in pursuance of Acts of Parliament, proceedings in pursuance of Standing Orders, and proceedings excepted by special Motion made by a Minister of the Crown. Again, there was a provision rendering it necessary that a Bill so dealt with should be under consideration at the time of the interruption of business, but this it was now proposed to do away with by a Sessional Order, and he ventured to suggest it constituted a very strong departure from the spirit of the original agreement. When the Standing Orders of 1902 were introduced they were led to believe in their finality, but, as a matter of fact, there was no finality, and both last year and the year before a similar Motion to this was made which further restricted the rights of the House, further interfered with the convenience of Members, and at the same time considerably enlarged the powers of the Government. The Prime Minister had given the House to understand that he did not intend to stay after midnight, and if he went a large number of Members would naturally follow his example, with the result that these important questions would be discussed in a depleted House.
  He would like to ask one or two Questions. Why was this Resolution required? What sort of Bills was it intended to refer to? Was it intended to facilitate the further creation of irregular debt which was concerned with public works? If so, then he thought that the House should strongly resist it. He wished to put the matter as strongly as possible, and he complained, first, that no reason was given for this Motion; secondly, that, if there was a reason, the objects or nature of the Bills to come under it should be specified; and thirdly, his suggestion was that the proposal constituted a very serious infraction of the bargain made with the House when the Standing Orders of 1902 were passed. He hoped the right hon. Gentleman would, before the debate closed, give them some explanations on those points.
  MR. JOHN REDMONDsaid he certainly thought that the House was bound to make a protest not only
  480
  against the Resolution, but against the way in which it had been proposed. The right hon. Gentleman had moved it simply by a nod of his head as if it were a mere matter of course. But it was nothing of the kind; and the right hon. Gentleman, having spent so much time in the year 1902 on a brand-new set of Standing Orders, certainly ought now, when he was proposing, without explanation and without any justification whatever, a new Sessional Order, to be called upon to state his reasons. Before a vote was taken he ought to tell them for what particular business it was desired to suspend the Twelve O'clock Rule. This was a Sessional Order which would entirely override the new Standing Orders parsed after so much discussion only two years ago. In 1903 this Sessional Order was Carried by a majority, but in opposition to the wishes of a very considerable minority. In 1904 it was again proposed, but it was unanimously rejected by the House of Commons, and, therefore he did not think the right hon. Gentleman was in a position to quote any precedent for his present proposal. One of the chief arguments raised in the House in support of the Twelve O'clock Rule was that it would prevent Supply and other financial business coming on after midnight, and it certainly had been a perfect scandal that business of that nature should be dealt with in the early hours of the morning when the House was depleted, when proper discussion could not take place, and when there was no probability of the proceedings being reported. Now the right hon. Gentleman was proposing, almost at the beginning of the session, a Sessional Order which would operate for the whole session, and which would enable him to take very important business after midnight. He was making this proposal without a single word of explanation, and hon. Members who wished to safeguard the rights of private Members, especially in regard to the discussion of financial matters, should most vigorously protest against this proceeding. He would not, indeed, be surprised if the Motion were defeated as last year, but whatever its fate, he hoped that the hon. Member for King's Lynn, who had done most valuable service in the past in protecting the rights of disscussion in that House, especially on financial

  481
  matters, would receive the support which he deserved.
  THE PRIME MINISTER AND FIRST LORD OF THE TREASURY (Mr. A. J. BALFOUR,)said he hoped there would be no opposition to the passing of the Order, which he was sure was for the convenience not merely of the present or of future Governments, but of the House itself. It was perfectly true he did not introduce the Resolution, by any statement of reasons, and why did he not do so? The right hon. Gentleman who had just spoken had referred to it as if it had never been, heard of before, and he had not dealt with its antecedent history.
  MR. GIBSON BOWLES: I said it was passed in 1903 and was again brought forward last year and defeated.
  MR. A. J. BALFOURsaid that the right hon. Gentleman certainly had carried the history back to 1903, but the Resolution was one which in substance, and even in terms, had been passed, he believed, without any discussion, debate, or objection by different Administrations over a long period of years.
  MR. JOHN REDMOND: We are now under new rules.
  MR. A. J. BALFOURsaid it was perfectly true that new rules had been brought in and they were not yet finished. They were never intended to be a complete settlement of the regulations regarding the business of the House for all time. He was not asking the House to make this a Standing Order, because that would necessarily involve a longer debate. He would like to point out that this Order differed from its predecessors in one important respect. Under its old form Reports of Supply were taken away from the operation of the Twelve O'clock Rule, but now Reports of Supply were left under it. It would be in the memory and experience of many hon. Members how Reports of Supply had had to be dealt with in the small hours of the morning, but now the greater part of the financial business of the House was altogether outside the purview of this Sessional Order. The Budget Bill was
  482
  exempted from the Twelve O'clock Rule, but most of the financial business, and especially Reports of Supply, was not touched by it.
  MR. CALDWELL: No, but then you have automatic closure for Reports of Supply.
  MR. A. J. BALFOUR, in conclusion, said he was sure that all sections of the House would desire that this Sessional Order should be passed. It would not be to the advantage of either one Party or the other, bus it would be for the convenience of the whole House, and, under the circumstances, he trusted that they would not further occupy time which it was desired to allocate for the discussion of other business.
  MR. BUCHANANsaid the Prime Minister had not answered a single one of the Questions put by the hon. Member for King' Lynn. Everything depended on the Bills involving money which the Government intended to introduce during this session. Undoubtedly, some important Money Bills were to be introduced. They had had it from the Government that it would be necessary to have a Military Works Bill, and a Naval Works Bill this session, and it was within their memory that these Bills were usually introduced very late in the session, and that the most important portion of the discussion on them always took place on the Report of the Resolution on which they were founded. Now, this Sessional Order would enable that step to be entered upon after midnight, and he thought that would seriously militate against the proper consideration of these questions. Those Bills were, after all, kind of supplementary military and naval budgets, and it was most important that the House should have full and ample opportunity of discussing the financial bearing of the Bills at a reasonable hour of the evening. He, therefore, hoped that the Prime Minister would be able to exempt from the operation of this Sessional Order those important subjects.
  MR. GIBSON BOWLESasked if the Prime Minister would state what Bills he intended to deal with under this rule.

  483
  He presumed they would be the Consolidated Fund Bill, the Appropriation Bill, the Naval Works Bill, and the Military Works Bill.
  MR. A. J. BALFOURsaid that the Resolution would undoubtedly apply to all four of those Bills, and he did not think there was anything wrong in that. He would like to point out that there were very full and ample opportunities of discussing the Military and Naval Works Loans Bills on their various stages. In his opinion the Motion was in the interests of public business, and was for the convenience of hon. Members.
  MR. EDMUND ROBERTSONsaid it was quite clear that the number of measures affected by the passing of this Resolution would be unusually large this year.
  MR. A. J. BALFOUR: I do not think so.
  MR. EDMUND ROBERTSONsaid three more Bill would be affected than last year. There would be the extra Consolidated Fund Bill—and in passing he should like to ask the right hon. Gentleman when he proposed to introduce it—and there would be the Loan Bills for Naval and Military Works. The right hon. Gentleman had stated that there were full opportunities of discussing Bills founded upon Resolutions in the Committee of Ways and Means, but he would remind the House that in the discussion of all Bills founded on such Resolutions, they had found themselves at every subsequent stage hampered and tied by the terms of the Resolution itself. In view of that he thought it was desirable that there should be an opportunity for discussion before midnight.
  MR. A. J. BALFOUR: It does not touch the Committee stage of the Resolutions at all.
  MR. EDMUND ROBERTSONsaid it touched the Report stage, which was equally important. This was another illustration of the policy of the right hon. Gentleman in treating all financial Bills as mere formalities. If the Report stage
  484
  were unimportant let it be cut away altogether, but if they were going to maintain the rights of the House let them maintain them to their full extent.
  MR. LOUGHsaid that not one of the Questions put to the Prime Minister in regard to the Motion had been satisfactorily answered by the right hon. Gentleman, and if he had exhausted his right of speech in that debate it was to be hoped that the Secretary to the Treasury would be put up to give further explanations. He would like, in the first place, to ask how it was that last year they got through so well after defeating unanimously a Resolution of this kind. Did not that experience show that the Resolution was quite unnecessary? Then, again, why had it been put down for that day Was there some reason in regard to the discussions on the War Office Votes which rendered it necessary that it should be taken that afternoon? Thirdly, he would like to know why the Resolution was so widely drawn. The Resolution was much too widely drawn. The House was willing to give all necessary facilities for specific business, and not one of the hon. Members who had spoken on that point but had admitted in principle that it might be necessary with regard to some of their business to take some step of this kind. But this Resolution would include anything. It would include a new transaction like the Cunard Agreement that they had a year or two ago, and was rather too widely drawn to receive the assent of the House. This Resolution was a bad example of the hustling of money business which the Prime Minister had adopted on every occasion. All discussion of money business had either been greatly abridged or entirely destroyed, and he thought the House ought to draw the line. This would, he considered, be a very good occasion upon which to do it, and he asked the Prime Minister to withdraw this Resolution altogether and bring in one in more moderate terms.
  MP. DALZIELsaid he begged to offer his humble protest against any proposal—especially one of this kind—which violated the sanctity of the Twelve O'clock Rule,

  485
  When the new rules under which they met at two o'clock were submitted to the House, the strong argument of the Prime Minister was that they would be able to get away at twelve o'clock, and they would know if they were going to be kept late. At the time, some of them expressed the opinion that the old system would go on, and that they would never be sure when the business of the House was going to end. If hon. Members looked at the Business Paper it was practically impossible to say when they could get away at twelve o'clock at night, and here they had the Prime Minister actually recommending this proposal to the House because certain Bills could not be commenced until after twelve o'clock at night—a most preposterous suggestion. He thought they had a right to complain that in every possible way, and session after session, raids were being made upon the time of the House and upon the time of hon. Members. Were hon. Members on the other side aware that they were supporting a Resolution which would be taken full advantage of, probably before many sessions were over. What would hon. Members do then? Would they support the Government of the day? As far as he was concerned, he should, even if he was alone, vote against any proposal that the House should sit after twelve o'clock at night. His experience was that sitting after twelve o'clock was not good for the temper of the House, nor was it good for public business, and he ventured to say that no Leader of the House, who gave an impartial opinion, would be inclined to support late sittings. There was no reason why they should, without any notice at all, be called upon to sit after twelve o'clock of Supply after twelve o'clock. At night on any occasion when the Patronage Secretaty or the First Lord of the Treasuy decreed the they should do so It was the uncertainty against which he protested, because it necessitated hon. Members going to the trouble of inquiring whether or not the Government were going to take the Report stage of a money Bill. He was surprised at the light-heartedness with which the right hon. Gentleman the Prime Minister talked of the Report stage, which had always been regarded as being equal in
  486
  importance to the Committee stage. In the first place it was the reconsideration by the House of the proposals before the committee, and in the second place, it gave hon. Members an opportunity of replying to the case which was put forward by the Minister. It would be a very bad day for the House when the Report stage was looked upon as merely a mechanical matter and as being of no importance at all. The right hon. Gentleman said it did not apply to Supply, but would he undertake that at a later period of the session he would not include Supply in a similar Motion.
  MR. A. J. BALFOUR: Yes, Sir.
  MR. DALZIEL: Yes, but the right hon. Gentleman will guillotine, and the right hon. Gentleman, if I am not mistaken, included Supply at a later period of the session last year.
  MR. A. J. BALFOUR: That was done under the Standing Order.
  MR. DALZIELwent on to say that, as far as the Report stage of Supply last session was concerned, they had no Report stage. What happened was that they had the Committee stage, and then, week after week and month after month, the Report stage was postponed only to be taken under the operation of the guillotine.
  MR. A. J. BALFOUR: The hon. Member asked me for an undertaking that I will not take the Report stage of Supply after twelve o'clock. I will give the undertaking.
  MR. DALZIELsaid the right hon. Gentleman gave that undertaking with the proviso that he would take it when the guillotine stage was reached, which was a very ingenious way of saying that he would postpone the Report stage until it could be taken after twelve o'clock without discussion. What they were doing on that occasion was in the first place to Twelve O'clock Rule, and in the second place they were practically doing away with the Report stage of these measures, because, although at the present moment only money Bills might be involved, they

  487
  knew that in the long run this Resolution would be carried session after session until the Report stage was always taken after twelve o'clock at night. Really no case had been presented to the House for this proposal. There was no urgency, and the right hon. Gentleman was not so anxious to get forward legislation as to entitle him to ask them to sit after twelve o'clock at night to deal with these money Bills. He had an idea that perhaps the right hon. Gentleman intended to clear up the money business as soon as possible on top of the Budget, and then go to the country and ask for a fresh lease of power. He did not know whether that was in the right hon. Gentleman's mind in bringing forward this Resolution at the present time. If the right hon. Gentleman stated that he had that notion he would get the Resolution passed without the slightest opposition on that side of the House. His point was as to the uncertainty on the part of Members on that side of the House in regard to whether the Government were going to take money Bills or not. The Government ought to give them some pledge that they would indicate the time when these stages would be taken, or when they intended that the House should sit after twelve o'clock, so that they might have an opportunity of expressing their opinion on that point. In order to secure that some public attention should be given to the Report stage of these, measures, he would move as an Amendment to insert in line 4 of the Resolution after the word ''may" the following words: "At least two days notice having previously been publicly given." If the right hon. Gentle man would undertake to give them at Question time, two days before, notice when the Report stage would be taken, he would not consider it necessary to press his Amendment, but he considered that the House should at all events have forty-eight hours notice.
  MR. COURTENAY WARNERseconded the Amendment.
  Amendment proposed—
  "After the word 'may,' to insert the words 'at least two days notice having previously been publicly given.'"—(Mr. Dalziel.)
  Question proposed, "That those words be there inserted."
  MR. A. J. BALFOUR: I think the hon. Gentleman is reasonable when he asks that these matters should not be suddenly sprung upon the House late at night without any knowledge on the part of hon. Members that we were going to ask them to sit beyond midnight, but I think he is unreasonable when he asks for forty-eight hours notice. I should be quite prepared to say I would not take the Report stage on any one of these Bills in reply to a Question. Will hon. Members undertake to put a Question forty-eight hours beforehand?
  MR. DALZIEL: I would rather the right hon. Gentleman undertook to announce and give notice the day before.
  MR. A. J. BALFOUR: I will endeavour to do that.
  MR. DALZIEL: If we set down a Question he might not be in a position to give an Answer.
  MR. A. J. BALFOUR: Very well, I will endeavour to give twenty-four hours notice.
  MR. DALZIEL: Then I beg to withdraw my Amendment.
  Amendment, by leave, withdrawn.
  Main Question put.
  The House divided:—Ayes, 241; Noes, 174. (Division List No. 102.)

  AYES.

  Agg-Gardner, James Tynte

  Arnold-Forster, Rt. Hn. Hugh O

  Balcarres, Lord

  Agnew, Sir Andrew Noel

  Arrol, Sir William

  Baldwin, Alfred

  Allhusen, Augustus Henry Eden

  Atkinson, Rt. Hon. John

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

  Allsopp, Hon. George

  Bagot, Capt. Josceline Fitz Roy

  Balfour, Rt Hn Gerald W(Leeds)

  Anson, Sir William Reynell

  Bailey, James (Walworth)

  Banbury, Sir Frederick George

  Arkwright, John Stanhope

  Baird, John George Alexander

  Banner, John S. Harmood-

  Barry, Sir F. T. (Windsor)

  Gray, Ernest (West Ham)

  Mount, William Arthur

  Bartley, Sir George C. T.

  Green, Walford D.(Wednesbury

  Mowbray, Sir Robert Gray C.

  Bentinck, Lord Henry C.

  Greene, Sir EW (B'rySEdm'nds)

  Muntz, Sir Philip A.

  Bhownaggree, Sir M. M.

  Greene, W. Raymond (Cambs.)

  Murray, Col. Wyndham (Bath)

  Bignold, Sir Arthur

  Groves, James Grimble

  Myers, William Henry

  Bigwood, James

  Hain, Edward

  Nicholson, William Graham

  Bill, Charles

  Halsey, Rt. Hn. Thomas F.

  Palmer, Sir Walter (Salisbury

  Bingham, Lord

  Hamilton, Marq. of (L'nd'ndery

  Parker, Sir Gilbert

  Blundell, Colonel Henry

  Hare, Thomas Leigh

  Parkes, Ebenezer

  Bond, Edward

  Harris, F. Leverton (Tynem'th

  Peel, Hn. W. Robert Wellesley

  Boscawen, Arthur Griffith

  Haslam, Sir Alfred S.

  Pemberton, John S. G.

  Boulnois, Edmund

  Hay, Hon. Claude George

  Percy, Earl

  Brassey, Albert

  Heath, Sir Jas. (Staffords. N. W

  Pilkington, Colonel Richard

  Brodrick, Rt. Hn. St. John

  Heaton, John Henniker

  Platt-Higgins, Frederick

  Bull, William James

  Helder, Augustus

  Plummer, Sir Walter R.

  Burdett-Coutts, W.

  Hermon-Hodge Sir Robert

  Pretyman, Ernest George

  Butcher, John George

  Hickman, Sir Alfred

  Pryce-Jones, Lt.-Col. Edward

  Campbell, Rt. Hn J A Glasgow)

  Hoare, Sir Samuel

  Purvis, Robert

  Campbell, J. H.M(Dublin Univ.

  Hogg, Lindsay

  Pym, C. Guy

  Carson, Rt. Hn. Sir Edw. H.

  Hope, J.F(Sheffield, Brightside

  Quilter, Sir Cuthbert

  Cautley, Henry Strother

  Hornby, Sir William Henry

  Randles, John S.

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

  Horner, Frederick William

  Rasch, Sir Frederic Carne

  Cavendish, V.C.W(Derbyshire)

  Hoult, Joseph

  Ratcliff, R. F.

  Cayzer, Sir Charles William

  Howard, J. (Kent, Faversham)

  Reid, James (Greenock)

  Cecil, Evelyn (Aston Manor)

  Howard, J. (Midd.,Tottenham)

  Renshaw, Sir Charles Bine

  Chapman, Edward

  Hozier, Hon. Jas. Henry Cecil

  Ridley, S. Forde

  Clive, Captain Percy A.

  Hudson, George Bickersteth

  Ritchie, Rt. Hn. Chas. Thomson

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

  Hunt, Rowland

  Roberts, Samuel (Sheffield)

  Coddington, Sir William

  Jebb, Sir Richard Claverhouse

  Robertson, Herbert (Hackney)

  Coghill, Douglas Harry

  Jeffreys, Rt. Hn. Arthur Fred

  Robinson, Brooke

  Cohen, Benjamin Louis

  Jessel, Captain Herbert Merton

  Rolleston, Sir John F. L.

  Collings, Rt. Hon. Jesse

  Kenyon, Hn. Geo. T. (Denbigh

  Rollit Sir Albert Kaye

  Colston, Chas. Edw. H. Athole

  Kenyon-Slaney, Rt. Hn.Col.W.

  Ropner, Colonel Sir Robert

  Corbett, T. L. (Down, North)

  Kerr, John

  Round, Rt. Hon. James

  Craig, Chas. Curtis (Antrim, S.

  Keswick, William

  Royds, Clement Molyneux

  Cripps, Charles Alfred

  Kimber, Sir Henry

  Rutherford, John (Lancashire)

  Crossley, Rt. Hn. Sir Savile

  Knowles, Sir Lees

  Sackville, Col. S. G. Stopford

  Cubitt, Hon. Henry

  Lambton, Hon. Frederick Wm.

  Sadler, Col. Samuel Alexander

  Dalrymple, Sir Charles

  Laurie, Lieut.-General

  Samuel Sir H. S. (Limehouse)

  Davenport, William Bromley

  Law, Andrew Bonar (Glasgow)

  Scott, Sir S. (Marylebone, W.)

  Denny, Colonel

  Lawson, Hn. H. L. W.(Mile End

  Sharpe William Edward T.

  Dickinson, Robert Edmond

  Lawson, John Grant (Yorks N R

  Shaw-Stewart, Sir H (Renfrew)

  Dickson, Charles Scott

  Lees, Sir Elliott (Birkenhead

  Sinclair, Louis (Romford)

  Dimsdale, Rt. Hn. Sir J. C.

  Legge, Col. Hon. Heneage

  Skewes-Cox, Thomas

  Dixon-Hartland, Sir Fred Dixon

  Leveson-Gower, Frederick N.S

  Sloan, Thomas Henry

  Doughty, Sir George

  Llewellyn, Evan Henry

  Smith, H. C(North'mbTyneside

  Douglas, Rt. Hn. A. Akers-

  Lockwood, Lieut.-Col. A. R.

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

  Doxford, Sir Wm. Theodore

  Long, Col. Chas. W. (Evesham

  Spear John Ward

  Egerton, Hon. A. de Tatton

  Long, Rt. Hn Walter) Bristol, S.

  Spear, john Ward

  Faber, Edmund B. (Hants, W.)

  Lonsdale, John Brownlee

  Spencer, Sir E (W. Bromwich)

  Faber, George Denison (York)

  Lowe, Francis William

  Stanley Rt. Hn. Arthur (Ormskirk)

  Fellowes, Hn. Ailwyn Edward

  Lowther, C. (Cumb. (Eskdale)

  Stanley, Rt Hn. Lord (Lancs.)

  Fergusson, Rt Hn. Sir J(Manc'r

  Loyd, Archie Kirkman

  Stone, Sir Benjamin

  Fielden, Edward Broeklehurst

  Lucas, Col. Francis (Lowestoft)

  Stoyan, John

  Finch, Rt. Hn. George H.

  Lucas, Reginald J. (Portsm'th)

  Taylor, Austin (East Toxteth)

  Finlay, Sir R. B(Inv'rn'ssB' ghs

  Lyttelton, Rt. Hon. Alfred

  Thorburn, Sir Walter

  Fisher, William Hayes

  MacIver, David (Liverpool)

  Thornton, Percy M.

  Flower, Sir Ernest

  Maconochie, A. W.

  Tollemache, Henry James

  Forster, Henry William

  M'Arthur, Chas. (Liverpool)

  Tomlison, Sir Wm. Edw. M.

  Foster, Philip S (Warwick S. W.

  Majendie, James A. H.

  Tuff, Charles

  Galloway, William Johnson

  Malcolm, Ian

  Tuke, Sir John Batty

  Gardner, Ernest

  Maxwell, Rt Hn Sir HE(Wigt'n)

  Turnour, Viscount

  Garfit, William

  Maxwell, W. J. H(Dumfriessh.

  Walrond, Rt. Hn. Sir Wm. H.

  Godson, Sir Augustus Fredk.

  Meysey-Thompson Sir H. M.

  Warde, colonel C. E.

  Gordon, Hn. J. E (Elgin&Nairn

  Mildmay, Francis Bingham

  Warde, Colonel C.E.

  Gordon, J. (Londonderry S.)

  Milvain, Thomas

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

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

  Montagu, Hn. J. Scott (Hants)

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

  Gore, Hon. S. F Ormsby

  Moon, Edward Robert Pacy

  Whiteley, H. (Ashton UndLyne

  Gorst, Rt. Hn. Sir John Eldon

  Moore, William

  Whitemore, Charles Algernon

  Goschen Hn. George Joachim

  Morpeth, Viscount

  Williams, Colonel R. (Dorset)

  Goulding, Edward Alfred

  Morrell, George Herbert

  Willoughby de Eresby, Lord

  Graham, Henry Robert

  Morton, Arthur H. Aylmer

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

  490

  491

  Wilson, John (Glasgow)

  Wortley, Rt. Hon. C. B. Stuart

  TELLERS FOR THE AYES—Sir

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

  Wrightson, Sir Thomas

  Alexander Acland-Hood and

  Wodehouse, Rt. Hn. E.R(Bath

  Yerburgh, Robert Armstrong

  Viscount Valentia.

  Wolff, Gustav Wilhelm

  Younger, William

  NOES.

  Abraham, William (Cork, N.E.

  Harrington, Timothy

  Partington, Oswald

  Abraham, William (Rhondda)

  Harwood, George

  Paulton, James Mellor

  Ainsworth, John Stirling

  Hayden, John Patrick

  Pease, J. A. (Saffron Walden)

  Allen, Charles P.

  Hayter, Rt. Hn. Sir Arthur D.

  Pirie, Duncan V.

  Ashton, Thomas Gair

  Healy, Timothy Michael

  Power, Patrick Joseph

  Barry, E. (Cork, S.)

  Hemphill, Rt. Hn. Charles H.

  Price, Robert John

  Benn, John Williams

  Henderson, Arthur (Durham)

  Priestley, Arthur

  Black, Alexander William

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

  Reddy, M.

  Blake, Edward

  Holland, Sir William Henry

  Redmond, John E.(Waterford)

  Boland, John

  Horniman, Frederick John

  Reid, Sir R. Threshie(Dumfries

  Brigg, John

  Hutchinson, Dr. Chas. Fredk.

  Richards, Thos. (W.Monm'th)

  Bright, Allan Heywood

  Hutton, Alfred E. (Morley)

  Rickett, J. Compton

  Broadhurst, Henry

  Jacoby, James Alfred

  Roberts, John H. (Denbighs.)

  Bryce, Rt. Hn. James

  Johnson, John

  Robertson, Edmund (Dundee)

  Burke, E. Haviland

  Jones, David Brynmor(Swansea

  Roche, John

  Burt, Thomas

  Jones, Leif (Appleby)

  Roe, Sir Thomas

  Buxton, Sydney Charles

  Jones, William (Carnarvonshire

  Rose, Charles Day

  Caldwell, James

  Joyce, Michael

  Runciman, Walter

  Cameron, Robert

  Kennedy, Vincent P.(Cavan,W

  Samuel, Herb. L. (Cleveland)

  Campbell, John (Armagh, S.)

  Kilbride, Denis

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

  Causton, Richard Knight

  Labouchere, Henry

  Shackleton, David James

  Cawley, Frederick

  Lambert, George

  Shaw, Thomas (Hawick, B.)

  Cheetham, John Fredk.

  Lamont, Norman

  Sheehy, David

  Clancy, John Joseph

  Langley, Batty

  Shipman, Dr. John G.

  Condon, Thomas Joseph

  Law, Hugh Alex(Donegal, W.)

  Sinclair, John (Forfarshire)

  Crean, Eugene

  Lawson, Sir Wilfrid (Cornwall)

  Soames, Arthur Wellesley

  Crombie, John William

  Layland-Barratt, Francis

  Spencer, Rt Hn CR(Northants)

  Crooks, William

  Leese, Sir J. F. (Accrington)

  Stanhope, Hon. Philip James

  Cullinan, J.

  Leigh, Sir Joseph

  Stevenson, Francis S.

  Dalziel, James Henry

  Levy, Maurice

  Strachey, Sir Edward

  Davies, M. Vaughan (Cardigan)

  Lewis, John Herbert

  Sullivan, Donal

  Delany, William

  Lloyd-George, David

  Taylor, Theodore C. (Radcliffe)

  Devlin, Joseph (Kilkenny, N.)

  Lough, Thomas

  Tennant, Harold John

  Dilke, Rt. Hn. Sir Charles

  Lundon, W.

  Thomas, Sir A. (Glamorgan, E.

  Dobbie, Joseph

  MacNeill, John GordonSwift

  Thomas,J.A (Glamorgan, Gower

  Donelan, Captain A.

  MacVeagh, Jeremiah

  Tomkinson, James

  Doogan, P. C.

  M'Crae, George

  Trevelyan, Charles Philips

  Douglas, Chas. M. (Lanark)

  M'Kenna, Reginald

  Walton, Joseph (Barnsley)

  Duffy, William J.

  M'Killop, W. (Sligo, North)

  Warner, Thomas Courtenay T.

  Edwards, Frank

  Mansfield, Horace Rendall

  Wason, Eugene (Clackmannan)

  Ellice, CaptEC(S. Andrw'sBghs

  Moulton, John Fletcher

  Wason, John Cathcart(Orkney)

  Ellis, John Edward (Notts)

  Murphy, John

  Weir, James Galloway

  Emmott, Alfred

  Nannetti, Joseph P.

  White, George (Norfolk)

  Esmonde, Sir Thomas

  Nolan, Col. John (Galway, N.)

  White, Luke (York, E.R.)

  Evans, Sir F. H. (Maidstone)

  Nolan, Joseph (Louth, South)

  Whiteley, George (York,W.R.)

  Fen wick, Charles

  Norton, Capt. Cecil William

  Whitley, J. H. (Halifax)

  Ferguson, R. C. Munro (Leith)

  Nussey, Thomas Willans

  Whittaker, Thomas Palmer

  Ffrench, Peter

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

  Wills, Arthur Walters(NDorset

  Findlay, Alex. (Lanark, N.E.)

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

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

  Flynn, James Christopher

  O'Brien, Patrick (Kilkenny)

  Wilson, John (Durham, Mid.)

  Freeman-Thomas, Captain F.

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

  Wilson, J.W(Worcestershire,N

  Fuller, J. M. F.

  O'Connor, James (Wicklow, W.

  Woodhouse, Sir J. T (Huddersf'd

  Gilhooly, James

  O'Donnell, John (Mayo, S.)

  Young, Samuel

  Gladstone, Rt Hn. Herb. John

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

  Yoxall, James Henry

  Goddard, Daniel Ford

  O'Dowd, John

  Grant, Corrie

  O'Kelly, Conor (Mayo, N.)

  TELLERS FOR THE NOES—Mr.

  Guest, Hn. Ivor Churchill

  O'Malley, William

  Gibson Bowles and Mr

  Gurdon, Sir W. Brampton

  O'Shaughnessy, P. J.

  Buchanan.

  Harcourt, Lewis

  O'Shee, James John

  Hardie, J. Keir(MerthyrTydvil

  Parrott, William

  Ordered, that the proceeding on the Report of the Committee of Ways and Means and Committees authorising the
  expenditure of public money, other than the Committee of Supply, may be entered upon at any hour after midnight, though
  opposed, and shall not be interrupted under the provisions of the Standing Order, Sittings of the House.

  SUPPLY.
  Considered in Committee.
  (In the Committee.)
  [Mr. J, W. LOWTHER (Cumberland, Penrith) in the Chair.]

  ARMY ESTIMATES, 1905–6.
  Motion made, and Question proposed, ''That a sum, not exceeding £10,101,000, be granted to His Majesty, to defray the charge for the pay, &c., of His Majesty's Army (including Army Reserve) at home and abroad (exclusive of India), which will come in course of payment during the year ending on the 31st day of March, 1906."
  Whereupon Motion made, and Question proposed, "That a sum, not exceeding £10,100,500, be granted for the said Service."—(Mr. Malcolm).
  *MR. AINSWORTHsaid he wished to refer briefly to the question raised by the hon. Member for Stow-market in regard to the position of the Highland Light Infantry. The main point of the matter had been hardly understood. It referred to the disability which the regiment was under in being brigaded with Lowland battalions. One result of that was that in future the officers and men of the Highland Light Infantry which, after all, was a Highland regiment, and hitherto had been linked with the other Highland regiments, would be interchangeable with the Lowland battalions with which they were brigaded. It would be seen that that would strike a serious, almost a vital, blow at the esprit de corps of a Highland regiment, and he was quite sure that the recruiting for the regiment would suffer. While on this subject he also wished to put the case of the Argyll and Sutherland regiment, now stationed at Aldershot. That distinguished regiment had been for a long number of years on foreign service, and immediately on their return home they were sent out to the South African
  494
  War. On their return from South Africa, instead of being sent to Scotland, they were transferred to Aldershot, where they had been ever since. There they were stationed at Longmoor, which was an unreclaimed swamp, and the ground was so bad that the men could not even get a suitable place to play football. He dared say that it was accidental that the regiment was stationed in so unsuitable a place; but what he wanted to know was why Scotch regiments, and specially Highland regiments, were not stationed in the Highlands. He had been rather surprised to hear his right hon. friend say that it was always easy to get Highland recruits, no matter where Highland regiments were quartered all over the United Kingdom. Unfortunately, the population of the Highlands was not what it used to be, but something might be done to improve that state of things; and certainly the Highland regiments should have every opportunity of getting recruits in those parts of the country with which they had been identified for so very many years.
  His right hon. friend said that there was not barrack accommodation in the Highlands for the Highland regiments and that it would be an expensive matter to provide it, an expense which could not be faced at the present moment. Everybody knew that; but the Government were spending £3,500,000 in providing barrack accommodation in South Africa. Now, it was common knowledge that self-government was to be shortly given to the new South African Colonies; and what did the Imperial Government want with barrack accommodation there for between 20,000 and 30,000 troops. Surely some of the money spent in South Africa for barracks might be far better spent in the United Kingdom, especially in the Highlands. Ideas had changed enormously as to what barrack accommodation should be. Formerly it was thought that barracks should be put up only at the headquarters of a regiment; but they should be put up in a healthy part of the country, economically, with every convenience for the troops and where recruiting could be carried on. He was sure that suitable sites could be obtained for such barracks in

  495
  the Highlands. The Highland regiments had so much to recommend them for their great services, their prestige, and their historical associations that every opportunity should be taken to encourage them—and not run counter to their traditions.
  *THE SECRETARY OF STATE FOR WAR (Mr. ARNOLD-FORSTER,)thought hon. Members were labouring under a misconception. There seemed to be an idea that a change had been made, or was in contemplation, which would result in the movement of officers or men from one battalion to another. That was a mistake. He was fully alive to the importance of maintaining the traditions which were inseparably associated with the Highland battalions, and if he were not a competent guardian of those traditions, there were plenty of Scottish officers at the War Office who would be quick to express the view the hon. Member for the Stowmarket Division had expressed. The compulsory transfer of officers or men from the Highland Light Infantry to another battalion, Lowland or Highland, would be against the law, and was absolutely outside the contemplation of the War Office. There had never been any suggestion of the kind, and nothing of the kind came within the terms of the Order.
  The Appendix to the Army Order referred to regimental districts grouped geographically for the purposes of administration. As far as the Army Order was concerned, there was no intention of grouping the regiments therein referred to into corps or brigades, nor transforming regimental depots into large depots. The Army Order did not deal with regimental depots, but with geographical districts which were placed under the command of brigadiers for more economical and better military supervision. The facts were that under the Report of the Esher Committee it was decided to institute a new administrative officer who was charged with duties which were not connected with training and command, and a certain number of administrative districts had been formed in the United Kingdom, and, naturally, they had been formed on geographical considerations. He would not go into the question
  496
  whether it was wise or not in 1881 to place the depot of the Highland Light Infantry at Hamilton; but they had to deal with the existing buildings and accommodation. They had to appoint two general officers for Scotland for administrative purposes, and districts had been assigned to them. He did not think that any one, however anxious he might be about the reputation, solidarity, and uniformity of the Highland regiments, could seriously object to their depot which was in the Lowlands being administered by a general officer quartered in the Lowlands. Beyond that the War Office did not go. He trusted the Committee would accept this explanation in good faith, because it was really the whole story.
  If he was pressed as to whether it would be desirable to have Highland regiments quartered in the Highlands, all he could say was that that was a part of the proposal he had desired to submit to the House. He would like to see territorial regiments quartered in every part of the United Kingdom, and he believed the time would come when they would see that. Hon. Members might accept his assurance that there was no intention whatever to make any change to the detriment of the Highland regiments, but he could not give a promise that the buildings which had existed at Hamilton since 1881 should be taken away and placed elsewhere.
  *SIR HERBERT MAXWELLsaid that although he felt considerable sympathy with the speech of the hon. Member for Stowmarket Division, he would appeal to him on more than one ground not to divide the House on this question. In the first place, it was hardly consistent with the record of the Highland Light Infantry that all these administrative details should be discussed in the House. The officers and men of the Highland Light Infantry were not children; they would doubtless be content if their sentiments were understood by the House, and would do their duty in whatever part of the Kingdom they were called upon to serve. After all, it was not these Highland battalions, but the depot that was involved, and, as the right hon. Gentleman had stated, the Order would not affect the

  497
  brigading of the battalions upon active service; it was merely for administrative purposes.
  Another reason why he thought a division undesirable was that there were limits beyond which the interference of this House with administrative details might be rather mischievous than otherwise. No doubt advantage did sometimes arise from such discussions, as was seen when the Cardwell scheme was on the Table in 1881, and the absurdity of brigading the Cameronian regiment with the Cameron Highlanders was pointed out, with the result that the arrangement was cancelled. He might remind the Committee that when the territorial scheme was instituted considerable liberties were taken with the Scottish Lowland Regiments. He was not a Highlander, but a Lowlander, and if he had been speaking 150 years ago he would probably have had to thank God he was not a Hignlander. But the feeling between the Highlands and the Lowlands was very different now, and he believed that nothing had contributed to bring about that change and to unite the Highlands and Lowlands of Scotland so much as the action of the Highland regiments on the field of Assaye and the sands of Egypt, and in those seven years of war which began at Vimiera and ended at Waterloo. Considerable changes were made in the Scottish Lowland regiments. All the regiments were put into trews—in spite of the opposition of the Scottish Members. There was nothing more alien to a Lowlander than tartan trousers, and those regiments had worn the trews ever since.
  He trusted enough had been said and that the Committee would accept the assurance of the Secretary of State that there was no intention whatever of doing what some had feared, viz., transferring officers and men from one battalion to another in the Hamilton depot. The right hon. Gentleman might bear in mind, however, that there was a strong desire on the part of this gallant regiment, which was second to none in its roll of victories, to be more closely associated with the Highlands; and if by any means, with reasonable economy,
  498
  it was found possible to provide depot accommodation for the Highland Light Infantry north of the Highland Line, it would give the greatest satisfaction to all concerned. The question of ethnology and ethnography must not be pushed too far, but as it had been stated that the Highland Light Infantry did not consist in great part of Highlanders, he might say that, according to a return of the recruits enlisted at Hamilton during the present quarter, out of eighty-seven recruits three were English, and four were Irish; one was born in India, and one in Australia; the remaining seventy-eight were born in Scotland, and twenty-seven of them in the Highlands. He trusted, however, the right hon. Gentleman would consider the susceptibilities of the Scottish people, a somewhat irritable race, holding very strongly to their old traditions, but easily conciliated if consideration was shown to their feelings.
  *MR. WEIRsaid the hon. Baronet had spoken a great deal about kilts and trews, but that was not the question before the Committee. The question of kilts was settled the other day by the Prime Minister announcing that it was not the intention of the War Office to make any change. The question now at issue was one, not of clothing, but of officers and men. He might say that on the maternal side he was a Highlander. The hon. Baronet, who declared himself a Lowlander, had spoken about the feeling between Highlanders and Lowlanders as though they would now fall on one another's neck. The hon. Baronet evidently did not know the Highland character. That, however, was not the matter before the Committee. What they had to discuss was the attitude of the War Office towards the Highland Light Infantry by grouping the Regiment in the Lowlands of Scotland. The Secretary of State had said he had no intention to remove officers or men from one battalion to another. There was not sufficient barrack accommodation in Scotland for Highland and Lowland regiments. It was a disgraceful state of affairs that there was only one Highland Regiment, quartered in the Highlands of Scotland, viz., the 1st

  499
  Boyal Highlanders, whose Strength is 591 of all ranks. Money had been squandered in South Africa and in erecting barracks at Hong-Kong, but the War Office should look at home first, and not wander over the face of the earth to throw away money on costly barracks. The country was led to suppose some time since that the territorial system would be adopted, and the system would, no doubt, have facilitated recruiting in the Highlands. Highlanders fought better with Highlanders than with a mixture of Highlanders and Lowlanders, or with a mixture of Englishmen or Irishmen. On the 29th of last month, in reply to a Question which he put, the right hon. Gentleman the Secretary of State for War said that very few of the Highland Light Infantry were Highlanders. What did the right hon. Gentleman say last night in reply to the hon. Member for Stowmarket? He said that the majority of them were Highlanders. How did the right hon. Gentleman reconcile those two statements. Apparently he knew nothing about it. To say that very few of them were Highlanders was all the more disgraceful. At first it was understood that the grouping of the Highland Light Infantry at Hamilton would be only a temporary arrangement, but now it was proposed to make it permanent. Only that day he asked the Secretary of State for War whether, with a view to induce Highlanders to join the Highland Light Infantry, he would consider the practicability of grouping the regiment with other Highland regiments with head-quarters at Perth. The right hon. Gentleman replied—
  "The Highland Light Infantry has been open for recruiting in all Scotland for more than three years, and therefore the suggested grouping with other Highland regiments would not appear likely to affect the recruiting in any respect."
  He should be very much surprised if Scottish Members quietly accepted the statement made by the Secretary of State for War that this matter would receive every consideration. It would never receive consideration. This year the right hon. Gentleman led the House to believe that this was only a temporary arrangement but now he had made it a permanent arrangement. The right hon. Gentleman had suggested
  500
  changing the nomenclature of Hamilton, but was that course likely to satisfy a Highlander? Let the Highland Light Infantry be grouped, say, at Perth or Fort George with other Highland regiments. It was not essential that they should be grouped at Hamilton. Surely that was a small request to make, and that was all they were asking for. If Highlanders were to be treated in this fashion the sooner they left off enlisting in the British Army the better. The advisers of the War Office knew nothing about the sentiment of the Scottish or the Highland people. A few years ago when special efforts were made to recruit Highlanders the recruiting sergeants, after marching through the country, only succeeded in recruiting half a dozen at a cost of £95 each. The hon. Member for Stowmarket had said that recruiting had been kept up on account of agricultural depression and poverty amongst the Highlanders, but he denied that. That argument might apply to Stowmarket and Suffolk, but it did not wholly apply to the Highlands of Scotland. The real reason was that Government after Government had failed to redress the grievances of the Highland people, and this had led to a vast increase of the deer forest area, where in former years large families lived in comfort.
  *THE CHAIRMAN: Order, order! The hon. Member is getting rather far away from this Vote.
  *MR. WEIRsaid all he desired to do was to put the hon. Member for Stow-market right in a statement which he had been allowed to make as to the keeping up of recruiting being due to poverty and agricultural depression. Would the Secretary of State for War consent to make an arrangement of the kind he had suggested? It was so simple that he could only suppose the right hon. Gentleman had been badly advised in his present proposal by some would-be reformer at the War Office, of whom he had been told there were far too many. What difference could it possibly make if the Highland Light Infantry were grouped at Perth or Fort George? People must be born and brought up in Scotland in order to know the Scottish line of thought and Scottish sentiment. The

  501
  right hon. Gentleman would never have sanctioned a course of this kind if he had known anything about Scottish or Highland sentiment. He sincerely trusted that the right hon. Gentleman would consider the error of his ways, or else the War Office would find increasing difficulty each year in recruiting Highlanders. He, for one, would not advise them to join the Army if Highland regiments were treated in this way.
  *SIR ANDREW AGNEWsaid he was quite sure they would fully accept all the assurances which had been given by the Secretary of State for War. It was very satisfactory to have had those assurances to-day in which they had been told that there was no intention of altering the status of the Highland Light Infantry as a Highland regiment, and also that it would be brigaded with the other Highland regiments in case of war. It was not at all surprising that there should have been a little anxiety on the subject. The authorities at the War Office had sometimes shown a tendency to forget the origin and history of the regiment, and there was a fear that they were doing this at the present time. They were, therefore, very glad to have the right hon. Gentleman's assurances that this was not so. They understood that the right hon. Gentleman considered grouping had gone too far and that he could not go back upon the arrangements which had been made. [An HON. MEMBER: Nonsense.] But could not some other means be found of getting over the difficulty? Could some means not be found of establishing a visible link between the Highland regiments at Perth and the isolated unit at Hamilton which would make it clear to everybody that their connection was being maintained? He need not suggest any particular way because his right hon. friend, with the full knowledge he had of military organisation, would know far better how it could be carried out than he did; but if he could find a way of that kind he felt sure that it would give very great satisfaction, not only to the regiment concerned, but to a large number of people in Scotland who took an interest both personal and historical in this regiment.
  MR. PIRIEsaid he thought the House had been rather misled by the speeches which had been made that afternoon, and he did not think the Committee had grasped the real point. There existed a very legitimate grievance which was felt by the officers of the Highland Light Infantry, not because they had been brigaded with a Lowland regiment, but owing to the fact that whilst other Highland regiments had been grouped together the Highland Light Infantry had been isolated from the Highland battalion. He urged the Secretary of State for War to give this scheme a little reconsideration. By leaving out altogether the Highland Light Infantry whilst the other regiments had been grouped together a distinct grievance had arisen, and he trusted that that would be a sufficient ground to induce the Secretary for War to reconsider his scheme. He merely brought forward the consideration of Aberdeen as a suitable centre for the grouping of the Highland regiments. Aberdeen possessed large barracks which could be easily extended; it was a seaport town close to Orkney and Shetland, from whence a great many of the recruits came; and also a shipping part between Leith and London; it was a very suitable city for a centre of this kind, and he hoped the Government would take his suggestion into consideration.
  SIR CARNE RASCHsubmitted that too much might be made of these historical distinctions and regimental fashions. A colonel of the Connaught Rangers once said that as brave a heart existed under the frieze of the Irish peasant as under the kilt of the Highlander. In this case, however, he thought the demands made by his hon. friend were reasonable. Surely, in deference to the wishes of this distinguished corps, the War Office, which had spent enormous sums on Salisbury Plain, might spend a small sum to build a barrack for a depot for the Highland Light Infantry at Perth.
  MR. DOBBIEasserted that this question was one which undoubtedly caused a considerable amount of feeling in Highland centres. Reference need only be made to the meeting recently

  503
  held in Glasgow to protest against what was considered to be the unwise treatment threatened towards the Highland Light Infantry. He could assure the right hon. Gentleman that a more enthusiastic non-Party meeting was never held in Glasgow. He would like to say with the hon. Member for Ross that this was not a question merely of clothes or a change of depot. They would not mind things so much, although in the matter of barracks Scotland, and the Highlands in particular, had suffered greatly under the present and previous Governments. What he and other Scottish Members said was that in view of the regrouping of the regiments, the scheme might be made to embrace the Highland Light Infantry, even though it continued its base at Hamilton. He thought that if that small concession could be made by the Secretary for War it would have a most excellent effect on the future recruiting of this famous regiment.
  *MR. HOZIERasked what was to become of the 3rd and 4th battalions of Highland Light Infantry, two battalions of the Lanarkshire Militia, which had for twenty-five years been connected with the Highland Light Infantry, if the 1st and 2nd battalions were to be moved to Perth or Aberdeen? Speaking as the senior Member for Lanarkshire he could say that they in that county were proud of their association with this gallant regiment, and that the regiment had never complained of being associated with them. He should be very sorry if there were added to the many other decorations of this regiment the order of the boot, as far as Lanarkshire was concerned.
  MR. MALCOLMthought the Secretary for War's scheme for grouping the Scottish regiments was unfortunate. Nothing should be done to interfere with the Highland status of the Highland Light Infantry. He trusted that the Secretary for War would give them no more Modder River incidents, so far as the dissociation of the Highland Light Infantry from its friends and colleagues in the Highland Brigade was concerned. There ought to be a War Office apology for that dissociation.
  504
  He thought it would be a golden bridge out of the difficulty if the right hon. Gentleman could see his way to leave the Highland Light Infantry at Hamilton as a depot, but under the Perth command, with six Highland regiments in Perth and four Lowland regiments in Hamilton. That was a simple thing to do and would absolutely solve the difficulty. He hoped the right hon. Gentleman would consider the matter with General Douglas. Perhaps the right hon. Gentleman would tell the Committee what regimental depots were to go and what was to happen to them afterwards. Scottish Members would object to the grouping of this regiment with Lowland regiments far away from their comrades in the Highlands.
  *MR. ARNOLD-FORSTERwas understood to say he did not think he should be called upon to speak as to the future, which he could not possibly control. His own desire was perfectly well known, but he could not give any definite pledges.
  Motion, by leave, withdrawn.
  Original Question again proposed.
  MR. McCRAEmoved a reduction of the Vote by £100 for the purpose of raising the question of the Auxiliary Forces as a clear and distinct issue. Without distinction of Party there was a consensus of opinion upon both sides of the House that the proposals of the Secretary for War with regard to the Volunteers would be very detrimental to that force. The right hon. Gentleman was a great military theorist, but as yet there was no practical evidence that the scheme he had proposed was a good one. So far as the proposal for the Army was concerned the right hon. Gentleman had conducted a masterly retreat such as would have done justice to the distinguished Russian General in Manchuria. As far as could be discovered the right hon. Gentleman's scheme had been thrown over by the Cabinet, and the only part that remained was a proposal which would further discourage and disorganise the Volunteer force. The Army scheme of the right hon. Gentleman was a paper scheme. They had

  505
  a proposal for two Armies, a short and a long-service Army, and for months to come the short-service Army would be as nebulous as the defunct six Army Corp. The right hon. Gentleman deserved credit, however, for having done his best to repair the damage done to the Army organisation by his predecessor. The right hon. Gentleman the Secretary of State at Edinburgh condemned the three years system put forward by his predecessor, and pointed out that although the result of the scheme should have been the furnishing of 16,000 men as drafts for India, the actual number produced was only 900, and that if that system was continued the British infantry would have ceased to exist for fighting purposes in a few years. The foundation of the right hon. Gentleman's long-service system was that recruits were to be enlisted at nineteen and a-half years of age in order that after six months training they might be sent to India. Was that what was now being done? Because, if so, the scheme was a fatal one.
  The right hon. Gentleman had claimed that with regard to the Volunteers he was supported by nine-tenths of the Volunteer officers. It was a curious thing that at the War Office they appeared to have a special brand of Volunteer officers, a kind of deathless Army, who were never seen in the light of day. The present position reminded him of the story of the American who, when shown a mummy which was said to be 2,000 years old, said that he did not want to see, but if the guide had any live corpses let him trot them out. That was similar to the request which they made to the right hon. Gentleman. The opinions of Volunteer officers to which the right hon. Gentleman appealed in his Report, they had not had in a tangible form. He made bold to say that the right hon. Gentleman did not understand the Volunteers; at least he did not appreciate the part they could be made to play in our military organisation. The primary duty which might be devolved upon the Volunteers was that of home defence, and in this connection he thanked the right hon. Gentleman for the fact that he had treated the Volunteer force as a serious factor. But there was another duty which could be devolved upon the Volunteers, and that was that they should be a large national
  506
  Reserve which could be called upon in case of national emergency. He thought the right hon. Gentleman had utterly failed to grasp this part of the scheme. He had entirely misread the lesson of the South African War so far as the Volunteers were concerned, and he thought he had been unjust to them, both as regarded the services they had rendered and their willingness to volunteer. He thought the right hon. Gentleman had put the matter in such a way as really to mislead the House. The Volunteers never had the opportunity of offering their unrestricted services, and the invitation extended to them was not a serious invitation but a restricted one offered in such a way that it did not appeal to the esprit de corps of the Volunteers as the individual regiments and battalions were only allowed to send a few men to a mixed company.
  As to the general question he thought that the right hon. Gentleman had proceeded upon wrong lines altogether. In his judgment we wanted more Volunteers instead of less; we wanted to get as near as possible to universal service without conscription. We should at least give the Volunteers the opportunity that every man capable of bearing arms should be allowed to do so and to undergo a certain amount of training for the defence of his country. He did not speak of the physical training advantage which would result if his proposals were adopted, though that alone was worth all the money in view of its importance to the race, but looking at it from the purely military point of view the Volunteer force would form a very great Reserve in time of danger. He had heard the Volunteers spoken of as the raw material for the Army, but he said that that was wrong. He said the Volunteer at his worst was the half-manufactured article which could easily be made into the efficient soldier. The Volunteers played an important part in the late war, and they enabled the War Office practically to denude this country of trained troops. He thought the right hon. Gentleman forgot that in 1900 the Volunteers were mobilised and a majority of them went under canvas for a month. Did not the right hon. Gentleman realise the great effect that

  507
  that had upon foreign nations, and did it not relieve the Regular Forces for service abroad.
  The proposal of the right hon. Gentleman with regard to the reduction of numbers was put in such a way as to be entirely misleading, and it appeared that he had thrown dust in the eyes of such an astute Member as his hon. friend the Member for Oldham. The right hon. Gentleman said that the reduction he proposed this year was a reduction of the strength by 15,000 men, which was five per cent, of the present strength, but what the right hon. Gentleman really was proposing was a reduction of 33 per cent., amounting to 114,000 men, and he did this by mixing up establishment and strength, which in the case of the Volunteers were two very different things. The present establishment of Volunteers was 344,000, but the strength was only 245,000, therefore we had at present only about seventy per cent. of the establishment, and what the right hon. Gentleman was doing was reducing the establishment by 114,000 men, and then saying that it was only a reduction of 15,000 on the strength of the Volunteer force. If the right hon. Gentleman reduced the establishment he would proportionately reduce the strength, and if he reduced the establishment to 230,000 he was very likely to reduce the strength in the same proportion, viz., to 161,000, or if the reduction did not go to that figure, at least it would be the figure which the right hon. Gentleman estimated in his speech of July, and he would reduce the Volunteers to 180,000 men, which was a reduction, according to his own showing, of 65,000. This part of the matter was very much more serious than the House had been led to believe, because they had been made to confuse the two things, the establishment of the Volunteers and the present strength of the force. He asked the right hon. Gentleman how he proposed to carry out this reduction, and he said that the proposed reduction of the establishment was only preliminary and would make way for a very much larger reduction. How was the right hon. Gentleman going to do it? Was he going to abolish battalions, was he going to reduce the numbers of companies, or, in the third place, to have
  508
  resort to a process of strangulation by making impossible conditions which would disrupt the force.
  The right hon. Gentleman said that his proposals would ameliorate the condition of the Volunteers. He had heard of death being a welcome relief, and in that sense he could understand that the right hon. Gentleman was going to ameliorate the condition of the Volunteers, but in no other sense could he, as a Volunteer officer, look upon these proposals as otherwise than disastrous. If they were carried into effect they would have the result of abolishing the Volunteer force altogether. He thought millions were wasted on the Army, and if the right hon. Gentleman would turn his attention to the question of practical organisation so as to prevent these stores scandals which they had had before them, he would do a great deal more good than he would by this fancy scheme of reform.
  So far as schemes of reform were concerned, the right hon. Gentleman was not a missionary of Empire, but he was the apostle of economy. The right hon. Gentleman said last year that unless he was able to produce Estimates on a totally different system, which he indicated would involve considerable economies, he would not again stand at that box. Those were brave words, but the system was unchanged. The right hon. Gentleman's economies had not been effected, and the right hon. Gentleman was still on the Treasury Bench. The ordinary expenditure on the Army was £28,600,000, of which £1,200,000 was spent upon the Volunteers, and if the cost of the Militia were excluded, roughly speaking the cost of the Army was £26,000,000. The Secretary of State, in a statement he issued in August last, showed economies which his scheme was to bring about apart from the Militia, in effective charges of £1,000,000 sterling. Out of that £1,000,000, £300,000 was deducted from the expenditure on the Volunteers out of a total Vote of £1,200,000, and the paltry sum of £700,000 was to come from the Army out of the £26,000,000. He said that these proposals were farcical and were not such as could be upheld on the ground of economy. He had wondered where the right hon.

  509
  Gentleman had got this inspiration with regard to Volunteer finances, but he thought he had found out. He evidently had got his ideas from Lord Esher, of whose Committee they had heard a great deal in regard to Army reform. Lord Esher, speaking at Callander in August last, said that at the present time there was too great a tendency, when the Volunteer force was taken into consideration, to apply to the State for funds, and he should like to state his opinion that that was not a desirable way of obtaining funds for the Volunteers. His idea was, therefore, that the Volunteers should be kept up by voluntary subscriptions. To a certain extent that was evidently the view of the right hon. Gentleman.
  The right hon. Gentleman asked were they to reduce the expenditure on the Army and the Militia and not to reduce the expenditure on the Volunteers, and said that by the ashes of his fathers and the temple of his gods he could do no such thing. But did he understand what the proposal meant? The Volunteers were quite willing that their expenditure should be reduced in ratio with the reductions made with regard to the Army, but if the right hon. Gentleman made a reduction in the Army equal to that which he proposed for the Volunteers, it would mean that he would reduce the expenditure of the Army by £6,500,000. The real fact was that the War Office did not understand the Volunteers, and would not take advice from those who had practical experience, although the right hon. Gentleman said he had every sympathy with the Volunteers. He thought the proposal of the right hon. Gentleman as put before the House would be fatal to the existence of the Volunteer force. Though the present Secretary of State differed from his predecessor in many things they were at one in that they had adopted a scientific method of flouting the Volunteer force. They were going to strangle a force they could not openly kill. He hoped the right hon. Gentleman would get out of this haze of wordy platitudes and tell the House in a few simple words what he was going to do. He asked the right hon. Gentleman to give a pledge that for the present year, at any rate, there should be no reduction
  510
  in the Volunteer force, and that he would allow his proposals to germinate in the public mind so that the public could understand the proposal which at present the House did not. Parliament was moribund, and he hoped the right hon. Gentleman would consider this suggestion and would give up his proposal, which so far as the Volunteers were concerned would have the effect of discouraging, disorganising, and probably disbanding the force. He appealed to the Prime Minister, who was the last man to press upon the House any scheme which was likely to harm the Volunteer force, to take the advice of those who had given their time and money to serve the country in this regard, and listen to the proposal they made that this scheme should be reconsidered.
  Motion made, and Question proposed, "That a sum, not exceeding £10,100,900, be granted for the said Service:—(Mr. M'Crae.)
  *MR. PEELsaid he did not share the extreme views held by some hon. Members with regard to the Volunteers. He did not, for instance, share the view of the hon. Member for the Isle of Wight that the State should receive from all quarters of the United Kingdom all sorts of service from all kinds of people. He did not think that was at all a practical policy. He did not object to more stringent regulations being made with regard to physique, but he certainly did object to the rigidly military spirit which the right hon. Gentleman seemed to cast over these forces. The right hon. Gentleman did not seem to recognise that they were Volunteers, who of necessity were rather different from regularly organised military forces. The right hon. Gentleman had, as the Committee was well aware, studied military matters very deeply in Continental countries where conscription prevailed, and had perhaps too often adopted the ideas and methods of the German drill-sergeant. In another respect the right hon. Gentleman was too like a Frenchman. He was too fond of logic, and was apt to introduce into a discussion logic which had no application. The right hon. Gentleman, for instance, would come and say: "I come before you in

  511
  this way, and you ask me to make a reduction in the Regular Army. I cannot do that unless I make a reduction also in the Militia and the Volunteers." That was a logic which did not apply in the least, because, although all these forces had to be considered in relation to each other, he could not see why, if a reduction was made in one, it should be made in all. Each one must be considered not only in relation to other forces, but as to what it was in itself. In the Volunteers we had a force quite different from both the others, and a force which was extremely cheap, and the proposition of the right hon. Gentleman, so far from being simple, seemed to throw the whole burden of proof upon its proposer. As he understood, we were going to rely entirely on the Volunteers for home defence, and that being so it was very unwise on the part of the right hon. Gentleman to make all these rather too sweeping statements as to the slight use of the Volunteers in war. They were the only force we had at home to depend on in case of war.
  *MR. ARNOLD FORSTERchallenged the hon. Member to quote a single instance of where he had ever made such an observation.
  MR. PEELsaid it was difficult to quote a particular instance, but he would refer the right hon. Gentleman to the remarks he had made as to what the Volunteers did in the late war.
  *MR. ARNOLD-FORSTERexplained that in every case he was quoting from competent authorities. He had made no sweeping statements of any kind.
  *MR. PEELpointed out that whatever the authority might be on which they were made and supported, the idea given to the public must be that the Volunteer force would be rather a broken reed to lean upon in case of an invasion. The right hon. Gentleman said that money would be required to reorganise them, that there must be transport for them, and it might be that they would have to be divided into brigades and divisions. The Volunteers were organised for home defence, but everybody knew that in time of war there must be in the last resort
  512
  this reserve of men to fall back upon. It was quite true that the Volunteers did not go to South Africa as units. But that did not really touch the question, because when these troops were being considered as Reserves the great point was not whether they could be sent out as units, but whether the force would supply men, trained to some extent, to take their place in the fighting line and to make good the great waste of war. That was a totally different thing from sending out men organised as units, and for such a purpose all the arrangements for organising into brigades or divisions were unnecessary. The right hon. Gentleman was not always alive to the very great difference which existed between many of the Volunteers and the ordinary recruits for the Regular Army. The class from which the Regulars were largely drawn required considerable training to bring them up to the standard at which most Volunteers started. The latter already knew the value of obedience and could learn discipline far more rapidly than the others, and if they were called out for two or three months training the enormous improvement that would be effected in a very short time would greatly surprise many of their critics. Rigidity of standard was a thing upon which it would be a mistake to insist. Different standards would suit different parts of the world. A man who would fight extremely well in South Africa or in this country might collapse utterly in the different climate of India. In a force so flexible as the Volunteers what was wanted was rather a variety of standards. The right hon. Gentleman too often forgot what a considerable contribution the Volunteers themselves made in time of peace to the Militia and the Line, and that in the Volunteers there were many old soldiers who had served in the Army and who made excellent Volunteers. It was customary to say that men who had served nine years in the Regulars and three in the Reserve were no longer capable of performing military duties, but many Members of the House were of opinion that men of thirty-one were not altogether worn out.
  The general attitude of the right hon. Gentleman gave rise to the suspicion, which might be unfounded, that he really desired to go further than he

  513
  had yet done in the matter of, he would not say the destruction, but of the reduction of the Volunteers. The tone in which the Secretary of State had spoken of the Volunteers had certainly greatly discouraged that force in many parts of the country. Employers of labour were not extremely ready to take Yeoman or Volunteers into their employ, and it would give them a tremendous argument if they were able to say to intending Volunteers that the force was being reduced, and that they were considered by the authorities as being of very little use. Cases were known in which men had been dismissed for joining the Volunteers, and if these additional discouragements were to be put in their way the War Office would get a much smaller number of men than even they expected. To a force so delicate and flexible as the Volunteers it was impossible to apply the same rigid standard as to the Regular Army. There would be a good Volunteer battalion in one place, and a battalion not so good in another, there could not be the same standard throughout the country. The right hon. Gentleman had not yet definitely said whether he intended to abolish cadres as well as numbers, if he did, still stronger objections would be raised by many hon. Members. He appealed to the right hon. Gentleman to reconsider the question, and not to say that because there was to be a reduction in one part, therefore there must be a reduction in all. Further, in view of the great difficulties the force had had to contend with, the want of sympathy with which it had been treated by the War Office, and also its cheapness, he hoped the right hon. Gentleman would not proceed with the reduction he had proposed.
  THE PRIME MINISTER AND FIRST LORD OF THE TREASURY (Mr. A. J. BALFOUR,): My hon. friend who has just sat down has made a speech in moderate language in which, although the language was moderate, he has levelled at my right hon. friend near me some criticisms to which my right hon. friend certainly is not open. For example, he attributed to my right hon. friend the strange theory that because a reduction was asked for in the Army, therefore a reduction ought to take place in the
  514
  Volunteers, or because a reduction was asked for in one portion of our military force therefore a reduction ought to take place in another portion of our military force. That is not the view of my right hon. friend, nor, I need hardly say, of the Government. Cost does come in, and must come in, when we discuss Vote A of the Army and the general burden which the military expenditure throws on the taxpayers of the country. But what we have to do is to make that heavy burden—for a heavy burden it undoubtedly is—as useful as we can for the purposes of Imperial defence at home and abroad; and while the argument attributed to my right hon. friend is one for which he has never made himself responsible and is in itself intrinsically absurd, there is a cognate argument which is sound. It is that if and when the country insists upon a reduction it is the duty of the Government and of the Secretary of State for War to see how this reduction can be effected with the least loss to the efficiency of the Army, taken as a whole—the Volunteers, the Militia, the troops serving abroad, the troops serving at home, the troops on whom we have to call for foreign service, and the troops on whom we must rely for the purpose of home defence. I hope the hon. Gentleman will see, therefore, that the position we take up in this matter is not open to the charges that he has levelled against us, and that no such form of reduction as he has attributed to us has ever entered into our minds.
  My hon. friend said that the War Office were in the habit of approaching the problem of the Volunteers too much from the standpoint of the Regular Army. I do not at all deny that the natural failing of an officer who has served in the Regular Army would be to criticise the less highly-trained troops in an unfavourable manner, and his tendency would be to undervalue rather than overvalue the services which such imperfectly-trained troops could render to the country. That would be the natural effect of military training upon any officer, whether he belongs to this country or any other country. But when my right hon. friend went on to suggest that the present Secretary of State for War, or his predecessors, or the present Government have

  515
  been unsympathetic to the Volunteers, I think, if he will cast his mind back over the series of reforms we have made—which we have made at the request of the Volunteers, in order to please them, to render them more efficient as a fighting force and to render the service less onerous to all concerned—I think, if he looks at what has been done, he will acquit us of that unsympathetic and over-critical attitude which he attributed, I unjustly as I think, to my right lion, friend and the Government of which he is a member. I can assure him, as far as I am concerned, and as far as the Government are concerned, that we not only sympathise with the Volunteers and regard them as an interesting exhibition of patriotism, but we regard them as an essential part of the fighting force of the country.
  I believe there has been a profound misconception of the rôle that is to be played by the Volunteers in connection with home defence. I think it was the hon. Member for Oldham who told us a few days ago that, if we really believed half we said about the impossibility of a serious invasion, the Volunteers were a perfectly useless force. I do not mean to go into that argument at the present time, because it is more appropriate to a Vote which is not an Army Vote which will come on shortly, and it cannot be adequately treated in a few sentences; but I can assure the Committee and the hon. Member for Oldham that that is not an accurate representation of the views of the Committee of Defence or of the Government. On the contrary, while we do not believe that in existing conditions a serious invasion of these islands is possible, one of those existing conditions is the Volunteer force; and I certainly should never contemplate with equanimity the abolition of that force from the point of view of national safety. The propositions that the Volunteer force is necessary and that invasion is impossible are not mutually contradictory assertions. They are mutually complementary truths; and it would be a total misconception of the view which I have from time to time expressed on behalf of the Committee of Defence if it were supposed that we considered the Auxiliary Forces of this country a
  516
  kind of ornamental but perfectly useless adjunct of the Regular Army.
  While that would be a profound error, I think there have been indications in the course of this debate that there is another error obtaining far too great currency in this House which belongs to the opposite extreme of military theory. It is the view that all you have got to do is to have enough men who can shoot or know something about the rifle and something about the rudiments of company drill, and that you immediately have all the elements necessary to form an Army at home or abroad. That really is not so. There are Gentlemen who seem to think that if you only multiply your Volunteers enough, you make a corresponding reduction in your Regular organised units. I am not going to develop it now, but I can assure the Committee that, to the best of my belief that would be a disastrous policy for this country. I agree with my hon. friend that such training as the Volunteers have, such skill as they may attain in the use of their weapons, such knowledge of drill, and such extended knowledge as many of them possess of the higher branches of military work, would make them of invaluable assistance not as units, but as individuals in the case of a great war, let us say, on the frontier of India. But it means that you must have the necessary units in which the individuals are to be drafted; and it is folly really to suppose that you can cut down without limit, or to any very serious extent, the units on which you will have to rely when, if ever, the hour of trial comes. The question of Indian defence is one which, I hope, the Committee will allow me to postpone till another occasion; but I thought it necessary to enter this caveat, as I have seen a tendency, not to overrate the value of the individual, but to fail to realise that the individual without the organisation into which he is to fit is absolutely useless.
  There is one other point which I would venture to suggest to my hon. friend and to others who look upon the Volunteers as an adequate and sufficient source from which to draw all the supplies of men we might require to fill up the cadres in the case of a great foreign war. That they will be valuable for that purpose I

  517
  do not doubt for a moment; but they would be but inadequate to supply what I believe is the greatest need of the British Army at this moment—that is, officers. One great difficulty in trying to diminish the number of organised units in your Army is that by so doing, apart from diminishing the number of men, you do what is, or may be, much more dangerous—you diminish the number of available officers. That is a point that has to be borne in mind.
  There is one other observation I desire to make. My hon. friend says, and I think with great measure of truth, that you must be careful not to treat the Volunteers in too Procrustean a fashion that you must not be too arbitrary and symmetrical in all the provisions you make with regard to them; that you should give as great elasticity to your system as possible; that you should meet, as far as possible, the wants of the different districts and the needs of the different regiments. But when he deduces from that general proposition, with which I am in perfect agreement, the conclusion that you ought really never to lay down regulations as to the magnitude of the force, may I remind him that the limits of establishment which have been imposed on the Yeomanry have really worked exceedingly well—at all events, that under them the Yeomanry is more efficient, that it has reached its full standard, and it is a standing proof of what can be done by a Volunteer force; I do not think there is any reason to believe that a procedure which has succeeded, or, at all events, has not failed, when applied to the mounted branch of the Volunteer service must necessarily be defective if applied to the infantry.
  I really think with regard to the Volunteers the House will ultimately have to choose between two policies. I think they will find that if we keep up the requisite number of the Regular units, and I believe it to be absolutely necessary for the force that we require to send abroad, the cost of the Army amounts to such a figure that they cannot allow the expense on the Volunteer force to be absolutely unlimited in every direction. If it is to be limited in one direction or another the House will have to choose in which direction they wish to limit it. But if you are
  518
  going to say both that the strength of the Volunteers shall be unlimited and that the training shall be on the higher standard with all the cost which the higher standard involves, then I am afraid you will find that the cost of the Volunteers reaches a point which, with all the other necessary obligations you are under with regard to the Army, will put too great a burden on the back of the taxpayer. I think it is perfectly arguable that we should not aim, at a great cost, at increasing the efficiency of the Volunteers as a field army, but that we should insist upon certain qualifications, a certain knowledge of drill, and a certain excellence of shooting, and, saving money in that way, you should allow the numbers to run up to a much higher figure than the 180,000 or 200,000 at which it has been suggested they should be fixed. But I do not believe you can fairly have both policies unless you are prepared to see your Estimates run to an impossible figure; and I should very much desire that those who know most about the Volunteers and those who are most interested in them should make up their minds in which direction they desire to see the limitation take place. There is much to be said for the numerical limitation; but I believe that the trend of opinion among the Volunteers themselves is rather in the other direction—that they wish to have this training in camp, this training as part of a field army, this training in combination with other forces, all of which costs a great deal of money, excellent as it it.
  I am fully in accord with those who think that the Volunteers do a great deal to encourage a military spirit and to provide half-manufactured goods which may be in time of stress turned into completely manufactured goods for warlike purposes. But I do warn the House that we must not discuss this question in isolation. We cannot consider the Volunteer question apart from the question of Army expenditure as a whole. If the House thinks that I am right, that my right hon. friend and the Committee of Defence are right, in holding the view that we cannot greatly diminish the units of our Regular Army, and that if we keep up those units the margin on which we can work in the reduction of expense is necessarily a

  519
  limited margin, then they must feel, as I feel, that we cannot say of the Volunteers, and the Volunteers alone, "Here we will entertain no question of pounds, shillings, and pence; they are a cheap force, a patriotic and a voluntary force; let us not be so mean-spirited as to count pounds, shillings, and pence when we have to deal with them." That is not—I hope the Committee will believe me—the proper way to look at the question, and I am sure it is not the way they will deal with it when they come to consider the subject in all its bearings. Therefore I would say that the view I have arrived at is that the theory of my hon. friend who has just sat down is one with which I largely agree, but it is a variation of a much wider theory with which I do not agree—namely, that we can carry on the business of this Empire in security with a very small Regular Army, trusting as a supplement to that Regular Army merely to the miscellaneous efforts of an unlimited body of Volunteers, for which we have not provided the proper organisations in which they could work supposing we were to ask the individuals of which the Volunteer regiments are composed to come forward and in some great hour of national stress and danger to throw in their lot with the Regular Army fighting on some distant frontier. That is the general view which I would venture to lay before the Committee in connection with the Volunteers; and I hope, at all events, that with regard to what I have said the charge will not be levelled against me that I have treated the Volunteers in an unsympathetic spirit.
  *MR. McCRAE: You propose to reduce the Vote by one-fourth.
  MR. A. J. BALFOUR: The Vote is the same as last year.
  *MR. McCRAE: The Vote is the same, but the right hon. Gentleman pointed out that that referred to the grant of last year, and he proposes now to reduce the Volunteers to such an extent that the expenditure would be reduced by £300,000, according to his own statement.
  MR. A. J. BALFOUR: No, Sir, it is not the expenditure which is reduced, it is the privileges which are increased. If
  520
  you are to keep the expenditure what it was, and increase the privileges, that carries with it a diminution of numbers, no doubt.
  MR. CHURCHILLsaid the right hon. Gentleman had not answered the Question which was the one essential point now before the Committee. He made a great number of observations of a very friendly character with regard to the Volunteers, but he did not tell the Committee whether it was the intention of the Government to reduce the force by 15,000, and to continue that policy until it was reduced to 200,000. That, after all, was the object with which this debate had been raised. The Volunteers had had a great deal of abuse of late, and also a great deal of perfunctory statement about them. What the Committee wanted to know was whether the numbers were to be arbitrarily reduced as the regular policy of His Majesty's Government until they stood at a figure not exceeding 200,000. That was a Question which could be answered very simply and very shortly, and, after all, it was the one question on which they did feel very great interest. Of course the Prime Minister had a great many other things to attend to, but if he had been present during the whole of the last three days debates he would not have been so ready to excuse the Secretary of State for War for having discouraged the Volunteers. What had been the feature of these debates? The right hon. Gentleman had poured out buckets of cold water on the Volunteers, and described all the shortcomings he could possibly collect under which they lay. He pointed out that they were medically unfit, and that whole battalions were inefficient; he had infuriated the Volunteer officers in this House by repeated attacks made upon the force; and he had spoken contemptuously of the Auxiliary Forces. The Committee had listened to a perfect stream of deprecation, of criticism, and even of abuse of the Volunteers from the Secretary of State for War. It was all very well to say that the right hon. Gentleman did not mean to discourage them; he did discourage them. That was not a thing to be argued about.

  521
  All over the country they were very much discouraged and incensed, and their representatives in this House, most of whom were among the loyal supporters of the Government, had been forced, quite against their will, and against their instincts, to get up in their places and make reasonable, earnest, and weighty complaints. The Prime Minister got up in his place, and said, "We do not desire to discourage the Volunteers."
  "'I weep for you,' the walrus said,
  'I deeply sympathise.'"
  Meanwhile the Volunteers were to be steadily reduced until they did not exceed 200,000 men. Of course, nobody would say for a moment that the expenditure on the Volunteers should be unlimited. That was a proposition which this House ought not for a moment to entertain, but they did submit for the attention of the Prime Minister the proposition that, when it was considered how extraordinarily cheap an efficient Volunteer was, both from the material and moral point of view, it was a great pity to refuse the services of men who would come forward and make themselves efficient. If it were true that there were a great number of useless men in the Volunteers, the War Office were entitled to raise the standard and to insist upon the standard being strictly observed. In that way, no doubt, some sort of reduction might be effected. Of course it was easy for the War Office to draw the standard with a malevolent purpose. It was quite easy to draw conditions with which the Volunteers could not conform, but if they were considerately drawn there would be no great opposition on the part of the Volunteer officers to the strict enforcement of medical fitness, rifle-shooting, and the like. But to fix an arbitrary number, and that number greatly less than the establishment, must discourage the whole force. It not only left out bad men, but it prevented good men from coming forward and joining the force. It greatly impaired the efficiency of the force. He saw the right hon. Gentleman the Member for West Birmingham in his place. He was not going to say anything controversial. The right hon. Gentleman made a speech four years ago on the
  522
  Boer War in which he said that the great lesson of the war was the enormous power which a citizen force could develop in defence of their own country, and he added that he thought this on the whole made for the peace of the world. The hon. Member most earnestly hoped under those circumstances that they, who had supported, as far as they possibly could, the cause of the Volunteers, were not going to be accused of Jingoism and Militarism, because they would rather see this country in a greater measure dependent on voluntary forces than on the professional forces who had to be kept in barracks and devote their whole life to their profession. He rose to ask the Prime Minister this particular Question: What is the policy of the Government with regard to the Volunteers? Let them put aside, on the one hand, all the abuse the Secretary of State for War had levelled at them, and let them put aside, on the other hand, all the sympathy and kind words which the Prime Minister had spoken about them. The question was not what they were going to say, but what they were going to do. If the Government were going to reduce the Volunteers to 200,000 men, he earnestly hoped the Committee would express their disapproval.
  *MR. ARNOLD-FORSTER: The hon. Member asked what is the policy of the Government with regard to the Volunteers, and I will endeavour to give an answer. I must, however, first protest against the accusations that the hon. Member thought fit to bring against me. I recognise none of the statements he has made as to my attitude towards the Volunteers. I have served many years in the Volunteers, I know the Volunteers well, and I think upon no occasion have I failed to express my appreciation of the merits of the Volunteers and the services they have rendered. It is perfectly true, and I make no apology for it, that when I was told that Volunteers were available for a certain purpose I was compelled, in the discharge of the duties of my office, to examine how far that proposition was correct; and in doing so I did quote statements in regard to the Volunteers, not made by the War Office, but by Volunteers officers, which were strictly

  523
  relevant to the question, and which it was necessary that the House should be in possession of in order that they might understand whether we could or could not rely on the Volunteers in time of foreign war, and if we could not, to what extent. Apart from that, I have said no word either in this House or out of it, which in any way could be construed, directly or indirectly, as a reflection on the Volunteers. So far from such an idea being present to my mind, my efforts have been directed, during the time I have been in my present office, solely to promote the interests of Volunteers in the way I believe they themselves would desire to see them promoted.
  Let me go back to what the Prime Minister said in regard to the question of cost. I am in the recollection of the House when I say that if there has been one subject more than another insisted on in our debates—it has been that there must not be an increase of expenditure. If I am allowed to assume that, I deduce from it that I am not taking a wrong course in suggesting to the House that we should follow the policy we now propose in regard to the Volunteers. We are proposing to reduce the strength of the Volunteers by 15,000 men.
  *MR. McCRAE: The establishment by 114,000 men.
  *MR. ARNOLD-FORSTER: The hon. Gentleman is quite correct, but that number is illusory. It is an entire mistake to suggest that a reduction of that kind, even apart from anything else at all, is necessarily detrimental to the force. So far from that being the case, we have done precisely the same thing with regard to the Imperial Yeomanry. The War Office was blamed for reducing the establishment of Yeomanry, we were blamed for altering the numbers of the Yeomanry regiments. As we acted in that instance we are acting now. And what has been the result? The Yeomanry are within 500 of that reduced standard. The regiments are of a uniform size. The condition of the force leaves nothing to be desired. They are in the happy position that numbers of men are being
  524
  refused for the Yeomanry instead of being invited to come in. Hon. Gentlemen laugh, but I think that is a very happy condition of affairs; for the officers, instead of accepting every one who presents himself, are able to select the men best qualified to make their regiments efficient.
  The question now is—Are the Volunteers to be an immense, unlimited force with little training and imperfect equipment, or are they to be a smaller, compact force, well-drilled and well-equipped? I may be wrong, but my judgment is that the prevailing feeling in the force is in favour of the latter alternative. Supposing we accept that position, what are the steps it entails upon us to take? I have endeavoured to ascertain from the Volunteers themselves what are the things they consider necessary to be done in order that they may be made efficient, and that the burdens which hamper them may be lifted from their shoulders. We have been told that arrangements should be made for allowing a larger number of men to go into camp for a fortnight. Last year 21,000 men were allowed to go into camp for a fortnight, and they received 5s. a day. We desire to make it possible for a larger number of men to go into camp. Last year a total of 175,000 men went into camp, of whom all but 21,000 went in for one week only. If all those men were allowed to go into camp for a fortnight, the Estimates would have to be increased by nearly £600,000 for camp allowances alone. We have been told that the officers should receive a larger payment when in camp on account of expenses. They receive 11s. 6d., and it has been represented to us that it ought to be increased to 14s. We desire to give the officers that amount. We have been told that a very heavy expense falls upon mounted officers for saddlery and horse furniture and that a grant-in-aid of £5 would be reasonable. We desire to give that grant-in-aid. We have been told that it is most important that non-commissioned officers should receive proper instruction. We desire to establish classes for the instruction of noncommissioned officers. We have been told that there should be some addition

  525
  to Volunteer transport. We desire to make that addition.
  MR. CHURCHILL: Is the transport for this country or for foreign service?
  *MR. ARNOLD-FORSTER: Of course, the Volunteer force is, by law organised for service in this country.
  MR. CHURCHILL: Then do I understand that the right hon. Gentleman proposes to provide transport for the Volunteers in this country, although he believes that in no circumstances could this country be invaded? [MINISTERIAL cries of "Order."]
  *MR. ARNOLD-FORSTER: It is transport for service in this country undoubtedly. We have been told that it is desirable that there should be, at any rate, the embryo of a higher organisation for the Volunteers. We desire that there should be some divisional organisation for the Volunteers. We have been told that it is a great strain on the men to have to pay travelling expenses. We desire to relieve them of that expense. We have been told that more ammunition ought to be allowed the Volunteer artillery for practice. We desire to place more ammunition at the disposal of the Volunteer artillery.
  When we came to total up all these various items of additional expenditure we found that they represented a very large amount. I adhere to the opinion that we cannot ask Parliament now for the large sum which would enable us to give these additional advantages to the Volunteers. Then comes the question whether we shall have a large number of men without these advantages, or a slightly smaller number of men to whom we could give these advantages. To supply 245,000 men with all the additional advantages which I have set out would be a very costly matter indeed. Do the Committee really think it would be a practical step for the Government to ask for an additional grant of over £500,000 for capitation allowances alone? I do not think I should have got it had I asked for it. On the contrary, I should
  526
  have been blamed for making such a large addition to the Army Estimates. It is said that it is a great discouragement to the Volunteers to ask them to submit to a reduction of their numbers. If I thought so, I would not have asked for the reduction. We ask for a reduction of 15,000 on the strength. I maintain that, without injuring the Volunteer force in the least, we can consolidate and reduce its numbers. I Know the Volunteer point of view very well, and a very important point of view it is. It is this—that, if you merely reduce numbers and do not give any corresponding advantages, you will absolutely destroy many of the Volunteer battalions. But we want to obviate anything of the kind. I have gone through the figures representative of every battalion in every part of the United Kingdom, and I say that no battalions will suffer at all, but, on the contrary, will gain by our proposals. That being so, I cannot see that I am guilty of any great dereliction of duty in trying to impress this view upon the House.
  We have made no change in regard to the Volunteers this year. We might have made some change if I had had a Fortunatus purse at my disposal. I should like to have been able to provide for all expenses. But we do expend £15,000 more for travelling expenses, and we give an additional £5,000 worth of ammunition to the artillery for practice. Changes of this kind must be made very slowly. I quite admit that the full reduction does not take place this year. Two alternatives are before Parliament—either to vote more money to the Volunteers, which I do not think it is at all likely to do, or to withhold the advantages for the provision of which there is no money. I believe that this very small reduction in numbers can and will be made without any sort of pressure upon the Volunteers at all. I believe it will be made with the approval of the Volunteer officers and the officers commanding in the districts, and in a way that it will be a pure gain to the Volunteers.
  *MR. McCRAE: Do you still propose to reduce the Volunteer grant by £300,000?
  *MR. ARNOLD-FORSTER: There is practically no saving at all on a reduction to £200,000 men.
  MR. CHURCHILL: Pure waste.
  *MR. ARNOLD-FORSTER: The whole of the money is to be spent in providing these advantages for the Volunteers.
  I think that if we get the officers' question settled, as it ought to be settled, the Volunteer force will be not only improved, but doubled in value. The whole intention of Parliament is to make the position of the Volunteer officer easier—the commanding officer, in the first place, on whom the chief burden lies; and the junior officer also must receive great relief. I believe if we make the regiments compact and effective there will be practically no difficulty in getting officers at all. It is not correct to suggest that our proposals have had a deleterious effect upon the Volunteer force. There has been a steady decline in officers of late years, I know, and it is attributable to many causes, but there has been no special decline of late. There has been no all in the number of the men I want to arrest the falling off in the number of officers, and I believe that the proposals which I have suggested will arrest that more effectually than any other way. I do hope after this explanation that hon. Members will acquit me of any want of sympathy with the Volunteer force and also credit me with an earnest desire to improve the quality of that force. If hon. Members will guarantee that I shall have £500,000 additional a year which would enable me to give the camp allowances desired, and if they will guarantee me all the money required for other necessaries then I am bound to say the question will have to be reopened. That is the position. We are doing the very best we possibly can with the means at our disposal, and we are filling in, line by line, the recommendations which we have received from the Volunteers themselves as to the objects which they most desire and which they most greatly need.
  *MR. C. R SPENCERsaid he could not understand
  528
  what the proposal of the Minister for War was. He objected to using phrases which might cause hon. Members to consider him egotistical, but he thought he must express his regret, first, that he could not understand what the right hon. Gentleman who had just sat down meant by his proposal, and secondly, that he could not agree with all that the Prime Minister said. The Prime Minister bespattered the Volunteer officers of that House with ointment, but he confessed that his wounds had not been healed and he still felt sore and disappointed with regard to the action which the Secretary for War had taken in regard to the Volunteers and in supplying their requirements. He was perfectly certain that the Secretary of State for War was in days gone by happier than he was at that moment. Then the right hon. Gentleman was thoroughly in favour of helping the Volunteers and understood their power. It was owing to the right hon. Gentleman's unfortunate association with fossils in the War Office that he had changed his opinions and had come down to the House and rather hurt his feelings and the feelings of others. [Laughter.] Hon. Members laughed but he did not know that it was very pleasant to be told even by a gallant soldier that one belonged to a force the majority of which were crippled idiot or diseased.
  The right hon. Gentleman had asked them certain Questions which he did not think they were in the least called upon to answer, but he did want to know how he was going to reduce the number of Volunteers. If the right hon. Gentleman were in command of a county company, as he was, he would be sick and disheartened if in recruiting the villages he was told "what is the use of joining the Volunteers when the Minister for War is going to reduce the force." The right hon. Gentleman had said that he thought it absolutely necessary to reduce the force, but he had given them one hope in saying that it was not to be reduced this year. He took particular note of that phrase because he hoped that if it was not to be reduce this year it would not be reduced at all. He asked that the Volunteer force should not be looked upon

  529
  as an opera comique business but should be looked upon as taking part, and a serious part, in the defences of the country, and should be dealt with in accordance with its requirements and its needs. He thought it would be inimical to the force if a cut-and-dried rule were made that both, county and town battalions should be similar in all respects. They should be similar in efficiency but not in all other respects. He should; deeply regret if they were made so. He could not get from his mind the feeling that the right hon. Gentleman and those who worked with him at the War Office did not understand that Volunteers were Volunteers and could not be made into Regulars by a stroke of the pen. They were, however, an essential part of the forces of this country. He asked the right hon. Gentleman once more to keep himself free from that unfortunate position which his predecessor once took up, I that the Volunteers and their supporters throughout the country were a negligible quantity. He would invite him to say generally how he proposed to reduce the Volunteers, and might he say that when the right hon. Gentleman had done that he hoped he would not have the opportunity of reducing the force
  COLONEL PILKINGTON: The right hon. Gentleman on a former occasion was not so sympathetic as he has been to-night; and I and those who feel strongly about the Volunteer force, are very glad indeed that the Prime Minister has said what he has. Of course, it must be remembered that the first time we heard of the scheme of the Secretary of State for War we were told that 60,000 were to come off the Volunteer force, that it was to be reduced to 180,000. Well, we have to make the best we can of the circumstances in which we are, and I do think that this evening there has been some yielding to the pressure that has been brought to bear for many months. I should like to emphasise what has been said. It appears that the Prime Minister is sympathetic, and I think the Secretary of State for War is also sympathetic; but it is not clear how these reductions are going to be made. I think he did say on a former occasion, however, that he was going to proceed in consultation
  530
  with the commanding officers of the Volunteer units.
  I want to point out that the two Reserves—the Regular Reserve and the Militia Reserve—are very, very low, at least, in my opinion they are very, very low. The actual numbers of the Regular Reserves, according to the latest Return, is 77,000, and the Militia Reserve was 7,000. In passing, I ask what about the Militia Reserve. I believe the late Secretary of State for War, the present Secretary for India, did say that he hoped to get a very large Reserve for the Militia, and he hoped to raise the total force of the Militia to 150,000. Now. Sir, that question of the Militia Reserve, it seems to me, is well worth the attention of my right hon. friend, and for this reason. Supposing we have a great war, and supposing that we take the Secretary of State for War at his word—that he has to rely upon the Regular Army and the Militia—where does he get his Reserve from for times of war? If we refer back to the South African War, we shall there have a standard that, at any rate, he has to come up to if a war of a similar character is waged between this country an I some hostile power. In that war there were 448,000 troops employed. The Regular troops were 256,000, and the Auxiliary troops that went to South Africa were 192,000. Very well. Where is the Reserve, where is the reinforcement to come from? I say he would have to go again to exactly the same resources he had to draw upon before. It does appear to me that, until his scheme as regards the long-service Army and the short-service Army has had time to develop, he ought not to reduce any of the Auxiliary Forces. The Volunteer force only "costs £1,200,000 out of nearly £30,000,000 of the whole cost, and, practically speaking, it is a very small figure, and it is hardly worth troubling about. Well, now, it seems to me he will not get very many Reserve men out of the nine years service. For the present, the enlisting and recruiting of the short-service men is discontinued; it is in abeyance, and it will be in abeyance for some considerable time. As far as I can see, the Reserve will grow very, very slowly.

  531
  Well, now, about the Volunteers. How is he going to reduce them? A great deal of what he said showed that he has a certain amount of sympathy, but there is no doubt about it that he did say he was going to reduce them something like 60,000. Now this year he is going to reduce them 15,000. Well, now, as far as the medical tests go and as far as efficiency tests go I do not think the Volunteers object at all, and I would suggest to my right hon. friend that no Volunteer unit should be interfered with except as regards efficiency and as regards bringing it up to some reasonable physical standard. If my right hon. friend restricts his reduction to that I do not think he will find that there will be very much reduction, because I admit that, of course, as you improve the force in efficiency and their physical standard, making the standard of health better, you will there again improve the force and you will attract recruits, and I believe also you will attract officers, But I notice he is going to reduce the grant to 15s in regard to those men who do not attend camp, and by that means he is going to save some money, but I suggest to him that he should increase the grant to those who do go into camp, because the cost of the battalion is heavy, for they have the expense of their band and other things, and the grant does not cover everything; it has to come out of subscriptions. Therefore, I would suggest to the right hon. Gentleman that in that particular he should raise the grant to men who attend camp by the money that he saves by taking it off the men who do not go into camp.
  I think, if my right hon. friend had taken up the position he has taken to-night, there would not have been as much opposition and agitation. There is no doubt about it. Volunteers have to a great extent had careless, hasty, and unkind things said about them, and they feel it deeply; but if in consultation with the commanding officers the efficiency of the force is raised in every respect, then I do not think there is very much to complain of, But what is the reduction. It is a mere nothing. What I would suggest is that this is a tentative
  532
  year, that the Secretary of State for War should not make up his mind, but that he should see, during the next year, what effect the gradual improving of efficiency and the gradual improving of the standard of the men who are enlisted will have not only upon reducing the numbers of the force, but upon the general position of the force in every way.
  Finally, I will point shortly to the history of the Volunteer force from the beginning. It has existed for nearly forty-four years, and every year it has been, better than it was the year before; and this sudden cold frost that has come on the force through no fault of its own has done harm. But if the War Office and the Prime Minister look with sympathy upon the force, and if they act with the Volunteers themselves during the next year, and if the reductions of the force are not made by units, or in a drastic way, but are simply made by weeding out the totally unfit and those who do not come up to a sufficient physical standard, then I believe we shall not only improve the force in efficiency and in health, but that we shall probably keep up the numbers as well. If we find that during the next twelve months the numbers keep up, then I should say let the force continue to grow slowly as it has done in the past. The force rose in the Boer War to 345,000. It has fallen to 245,000, a decrease of 100,000. I would say let the natural rise and fall go on, subject to the treatment I have suggested—efficiency of men, efficiency in officers and noncommissioned officers, a full standard of health, and action in thorough sympathy with the Volunteer officers during the next twelve months—and let us see whether the rather unkind things that have been said in various quarters, are justified, and whether the drastic condemnation in this House has not gone too far. I trust my right hon. friend will be able to continue to enlarge his ideas so as to help the Volunteers in every way.
  *MR. LLEWELLYNsaid a great deal had been heard about the cheapness of the Volunteers.

  533
  His opinion was that a good Volunteer was certainly very cheap, but that a useless Volunteer was exceedingly dear. He asked hon. Members opposite, some of whom commanded Volunteer battalions, which they would prefer to command—a battalion of 500 men of good physique, thoroughly trained and well disciplined, or a battalion of 750 men such as were to be found in many battalions to-day. That really was the question that had to be answered in the division to-night. One of the main causes of a number of inefficient men being retained was the system upon which the grant was given. The capitation grant was a great mistake. The grant should be given to units, and the commanding officer held responsible for the expenditure of the money. At present commanding officers were frequently put in a position of great difficulty in the matter of getting rid of undesirable men. It was very important that they should be relieved of all anxieties with regard to money payments. Two Members of the House who were commanding officers, in giving evidence be-fore the Royal Commission, stated, one that when he took over the command of his battalion he was responsible for £4,000, and the other that his camp cost him in one year £250 out of his own pocket. That was not a satisfactory state of affairs. These facts gave greater point to his remarks about the capitation grant, as there was a great temptation to officers responsible for the finances of the company or battalion when they were called upon to decide whether or not a man should be kept on the roll. The hon. and gallant Member for South Sheffield had waxed very indignant because, as he said, the Secretary of State intended to get rid of such men as did service in South Africa. Nobody had ever made such a suggestion. The men who went to South Africa were splendid fellows; they were not the men that were to be got rid of. If every battalion consisted of men able to pass the examination those men did and possessing similar qualifications, no War Minister in his senses would ever suggest the reduction of a single man.
  One mistake had been to allow the multiplication of branches of Volunteers in the same place. For instance, often in a
  534
  comparatively small town there were Rifle Volunteers, Engineer Volunteers, Artillery Volunteers, and Submarine Volunteers. It was perfectly impossible under such circumstances for corps to flourish either numerically or financially, or to secure a supply of proper officers. Ho hoped the right hon. Gentleman would give his attention to that matter. So much, had been said as to inability to understand the Secretary of State's scheme that he hardly liked to say that he understood it perfectly so far as the Volunteers were concerned. The right hon. Gentleman's object was to reduce the number of Volunteers by the physically inefficient and insufficiently trained, and to apply the money so saved to perfecting those who remained. Unless hon. Members opposite were prepared to answer the question he had put as to which kind of battalion they would prefer to command they had no right to throw any doubt on the proposition of the Secretary of State for War.
  MR. FREEMAN-THOMASsaid he wished to address his remarks to the question of the Militia and the Volunteers. He entirely disagreed with the right hon. Gentleman in regard to his proposals with reference to those forces. The right hon. Gentleman said that although he proposed to reduce the number of the Volunteers his object was to render more efficient the remaining number. It was notorious that for a considerable number of years the War Office had very much neglected and had not given encouragement to the Volunteer force in this country. His own belief was that the Volunteer force should be increased rather than reduced, and be believed that if sufficient encouragement was given by the War Office they would be able to get a very fine and effective force for the defence of this country. He did not think in the past that that Militia had ever received any satisfactory encouragement at the hands of the War Office. He had himself served in a garrison artillery regiment something like fifteen years, and he could say that during the whole of that time neither the men nor the officers of the regiment which he belonged to had ever seen the outside of a breech-loading gun, but had been obliged to do the whole of their drill

  535
  and practise at old 64 prs. and 9-in muzzle-loading guns. He left that regiment in despair because he thought he might do more useful service in the Yeomanry force. He thought this showed clearly that the Militia had not been encouraged. As far as he could understand the Secretary of State for War, it seemed that he wished to level up the Militia, give them more training, and attach to them a certain number of Regular officers. He hoped he might be able to get the men to do the extra amount of training. With regard to the second part of the scheme for the Militia, namely, that any new recruit whenever he joined should be bound to sign on for compulsory foreign service, he had very grave doubts as to its success. Although he knew that the right hon. Gentleman had most excellent and high authority for believing that this arrangement would be a satisfactory thing with regard to the Militia, it seemed to him that he was endangering very seriously the recruiting possibilities by undertaking this scheme. He could not help feeling that there was a rooted objection in the mind of any recruit who joined a Volunteer force to sign on for any compulsory foreign service. He had no doubt that in an emergency of any sort they would volunteer to undertake any obligation for their country, but he did not think it was a wise thing to insist upon this compulsory foreign service or the Militia.
  As far as he could understand it the whole scheme of the Secretary of State for War seemed to be of a temporising and temporary character. He understood that the right hon. Gentleman advocated the extreme blue-water theory. Notwithstanding what the Prime Minister said, he could not see that, if the extreme blue-water theory was carried out to its logical conclusion, there should be any need for any Militia or Volunteers in this country. The right hon. Gentleman was of opinion that public opinion was not quite ready for his particular scheme, and he brought this in rather as an interim report, and hoped to do rather more in the future with the Volunteer forces. Personally he was no believer in the extreme blue-water theory or the extremes of exaggeration as to the danger upon the North-West frontier
  536
  of India. He was, however, very anxious for Army reform, and he was convinced that the views of the right hon. Gentleman both with regard to the Volunteers and the Militia were unsound and detrimental to both those branches of the service. For those reasons he should certainly vote for the reduction.
  LIEUTENANT-COLONEL PRYCE-JONESthought they should have some guarantee that if the numbers in the Volunteer battalions were reduced they would get greater efficiency. [Cries of "Speak up."] He quite agreed with what the Secretary of State for War had said as to reducing the number of the Volunteers and making them more efficient. If those promises were carried out, and bigger allowances were given to both officers and men and other facilities were offered them, he was perfectly sure that the Volunteer forces throughout the country would not grumble in the least. But the right hon. Gentleman had never given them that assurance before, and he was pleased that on this occasion he had pledged himself in that direction. Another hon. friend of his had referred to the difference between corps in country districts and in big towns. It often happened that country corps were much more difficult to keep up than town corps. They only wanted differential treatment where it was more expensive to maintain Volunteer corps.
  MR. CHARLES HOBHOUSEsaid the Secretary of State for War stated that afternoon that, after consulting a great number of Volunteer and Imperial Yeomanry officers, he had come to the conclusion that it was absolutely necessary to reduce the Volunteer force, as he had had to reduce the Imperial Yeomanry. Then he went on to use these extraordinary words—
  "It is a happy condition that men should be refused for an Imperial Yeomanry regiment."
  That, he thought, was the most extraordinary statement ever made in the House of Commons by a Secretary of State for War. It was not desirable that a Yeomanry regiment should be in a position to refuse men. It was not a good thing for the country that men who were willing to come forward with sufficient physique to make good soldier

  537
  should be turned away by regimental authorities because the Minister in charge of the War Office for the time being thought there were too many Volunteer soldiers in the country. The Prime Minister in connection with this point made an almost equally extraordinary statement when he said that they had in the Army increased efficiency in numbers and a diminution in the establishment. The hon. Member supposed the Secretary of State for War intended to apply the same theory to the Volunteers. Having commanded a Volunteer regiment for some years, it was quite clear to him that a diminution of the establishment would not tend to increase the numbers or the efficiency. He was in the happy position of having had an excess of numbers over the establishment, and that had enabled him to turn away men under the standard who did not make desirable recruits. There were, however, commanding officers who would have taken on these men because they had to recruit up to a certain number. He would suggest to the right hon. Gentleman that if he had decreased the establishment by a certain percentage, say from 345,000 to 300,000, he would have got rid of the excessive establishment while encouraging officers to get more men. The Volunteer officers could have insisted upon a greater test of efficiency and a greater standard of physique without the putting of difficulty in the way by the War Office.
  The Secretary of State for War gave three alternatives—to refuse numbers, to refuse facilities, or to raise the Estimates. If these were the only three alternatives, he would have preferred to vote for an increase of the Estimates. The right hon. Gentleman had told them that he wished to act in accordance with the views of the majority of the Volunteer officers. He had from time to time consulted them, and he had always modified the programme. If he would give a further consultation he would still further modify the programme, and would not come
  back to the House with proposals which discouraged men from enlisting in a valuable portion of the home forces. The hon. Member and a great number of others thought the Estimates for the Volunteer force ought to be increased in order to provide a sufficient home force to ensure the security of these islands.
  *COLONEL WILLIAMSsaid that as an old Volunteer he wished to thank the Secretary of State for what he said that afternoon with regard to the Volunteer force. He was not one of those thin-skinned Volunteers who took offence at everything. He had felt disappointment at some things which had been said, but the speech of the right hon. Gentleman that day had in a considerable measure taken away that feeling. If they had to choose between going on as they were or getting more advantages with reduced numbers, he should prefer the latter as offered by the Secretary of State for War. He believed the proposal of the right hon. Gentleman would have the effect of giving higher efficiency with the reduced numbers. He thought that if they submitted to the reduction this year, and if they got next year from the War Office the further advantages promised by the right hon. Gentleman, they should be satisfied. As to the large sums of money that were to be given to the Volunteers, he rather thought that the time for receiving them was much farther off than hon. Gentlemen opposite seemed to imagine. In the meantime, as a bird in the hand was better than a bird in the bush, he thanked the right hon. Gentleman the Secretary of State for War for what he had already done; and he only hoped that the right hon. Gentleman would give them a few more 15s. men if they could recruit them.
  Question put.
  The Committee divided:—Ayes, 187; Noes 218. (Division List No. 103.)

  AYES.

  Abraham, William (Cork, N.E)

  Barlow, John Emmott

  Bolton, Thomas Dolling

  Abraham, William (Rhondda)

  Barry, E. (Cork, S.)

  Brigg, John

  Ainsworth, John Stirling

  Beaumont, Wentworth C.B.

  Bright, Allan Heywood

  Allen, Charles P.

  Benn, John Williams

  Broadhurst, Henry

  Asher, Alexander

  Black, Alexander William

  Brown, George M (Edinburgh)

  Ashton, Thomas Gair

  Blake, Edward

  Bryce, Rt. Hon. James

  Atherley-Jones, L.

  Boland, John

  Buchanan, Thomas Ryburn

  Burke, E. Haviland

  Horniman, Frederick John

  Pease, J. A. (Saffron Walden)

  Burt, Thomas

  Hutchinson, Dr. Chas. Fredk.

  Perks, Robert William

  Buxton, Sydney Charles

  Hutton, Alfred E. (Morley)

  Power, Patrick Joseph

  Caldwell, James

  Jacoby, James Alfred

  Price, Robert John

  Cameron, Robert

  Johnson, John

  Reddy, M.

  Campbell, John (Armagh, S.)

  Jones, David Brynmor (Swansea

  Redmond, J. E. (Waterford)

  Campbell-Bannerman, Sir H.

  Jones, Leif (Appleby)

  Reid, Sir R. Threshie (Dumfries

  Causton, Richard Knight

  Jones, William (Carnarvonshire

  Richards, Thos. (W. Monm'th)

  Cawley, Frederick

  Joyce, Michael

  Rickett, J. Compton

  Cheetham, John Frederick

  Kennedy, Vincent P. (Cavan, W

  Roberts, John Bryn (Eifion)

  Clancy, John Joseph

  Kilbride, Denis

  Roberts, John H. (Denbighs)

  Condon, Thomas Joseph

  Kitson, Sir James

  Robertson, Edmund (Dundee)

  Craig, Robert Hunter (Lanark)

  Labouchere, Henry

  Robson, William Snowdon

  Crean, Eugene

  Lament, Norman

  Roche, John

  Cremer, William Randal

  Langley, Batty

  Roe, Sir Thomas

  Crombie, John William

  Law, Hugh Alex (Donegal, W.

  Runeiman, Walter

  Cullinan, J.

  Lawson, Sir Wilfrid (Cornwall)

  Samuel, Herb. L. (Cleveland)

  Dalziel, James Henry

  Layland-Barratt, Francis

  Schwann, Charles E.

  Davies, M. Vaughan (Cardigan)

  Leese, Sir J. F. (Accrington)

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

  Delany, William

  Leigh, Sir Joseph

  Shackleton, David James

  Devlin, Joseph (Kilkenny, N.)

  Levy, Maurice

  Shaw, Thomas (Hawick B.)

  Dilke, Rt. Hon. Sir Charles

  Lewis, John Herbert

  Sheehy, David

  Dobbie, Joseph

  Lloyd-George, David

  Shipman, Dr. John G.

  Donelan, Captain A.

  Lough, Thomas

  Sinclair, John (Forfarshire)

  Doogan, P. C.

  Lundon, W.

  Slack, John Bamford

  Douglas, Chas. M. (Lanark)

  Macnamara, Dr. Thomas J.

  Soames, Arthur Wellesley

  Duffy, William J.

  MacNeill, John Gordon Swift

  Spencer, Rt Hn. C R (Northants

  Edwards, Frank

  MacVeagh, Jeremiah

  Stanhope, Hn. Philip James

  Elibank, Master of

  M'Arthur, William (Cornwall)

  Strachey, Sir Edward

  Ellice, Capt E C(SAndrw'sBghs

  M'Kean, John

  Sullivan, Donal

  Ellis, John Edward (Notts)

  M'Kenna, Reginald

  Taylor, Theodore C. (Radeliffe)

  Emmott, Alfred

  M'Killop, W. (Sligo, North)

  Tennant, Harold John

  Esmonde, Sir Thomas

  M'Laren, Sir Charles Benjamin

  Thomas, Sir A. (Glamorgan, E.

  Eve, Harry Trelawney

  Mansfield, Horace Rendall

  Thomas, JA (Glamorgan, Gower

  Fenwick, Charles

  Mooney, John J.

  Tomkinson, James

  Ferguson, R. C. Munro (Leith)

  Morley, Rt. Hn. John (Montrose

  Trevelyan, Charles Philips

  Ffrench, Peter

  Murphy, John

  Ure, Alexander

  Findlay, Alex. (Lanark, N.E.)

  Nannetti, Joseph P.

  Wallace, Robert

  Fitzmaurice, Lord Edmond

  Nolan, Joseph (Louth, South)

  Walton, Joseph (Barnsley)

  Flynn, James Christopher

  Norton, Capt. Cecil William

  Warner, Thomas Courtenay T.

  Fuller, J. M. F.

  Nussey, Thomas Willans

  Wason, Eugene (Clackmannan

  Gilhooly, James

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

  Wason, J. Cathcart (Orkney)

  Gladstone, Rt. Hn. Herb. John

  O'Brien, K. (Tipperary Mid)

  Weir, James Galloway

  Goddard, Daniel Ford

  O'Brien, Patrick (Kilkenny

  Whiteley, George (York, W.R.

  Grant, Corrie,

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

  Whitley, J. H. (Halifax)

  Gurdon, Sir W. Brampton

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

  Williams, Osmond (Merioneth)

  Harcourt, Lewis

  O'Connor, John (Kildare, N.)

  Wills, Arthur Walters (NDorset

  Hardie, J. Keir (Merthyr Tydvil

  O'Connor, T. P. (Liverpool)

  Wilson, Fred W (Norfolk, Mid.)

  Harrington, Timothy

  O'Donnell, John (Mayo, S.)

  Wilson, John (Durham, Mid.)

  Harwood, George

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

  Woodhouse, Sir JT (Huddersf' d

  Hayden, John Patrick

  O'Dowd, John

  Young, Samuel

  Hayter, Rt Hn. Sir Arthur D.

  O'Kelly, Conor (Mayo, N.)

  Yoxall, James Henry

  Healy, Timothy Michael

  O'Malley, William

  Hemphill, Rt. Hn. Charles H.

  O'Mara, James

  TELLERS FOR THE AYES—

  Higham, John Sharpe

  O'Shaughnessy, P. J.

  Mr. McCrae and Captain

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

  O'Shee, James John

  Freeman-Thomas.

  Holland, Sir William Henry

  Parrott, William

  540

  NOES.

  Agg-Gardner, James Tynte

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

  Bingham, Lord

  Agnew, Sir Andrew Noel

  Balfour, Rt Hn Gerald W(Leeds)

  Blundell, Colonel Henry

  Allhusen, Augustus Henry Eden

  Balfour, Kenneth R. (Christch.

  Bond, Edward

  Allsopp, Hon. George

  Banbury, Sir Frederick George

  Brassey, Albert

  Anson, Sir William Reynell

  Banner, John S. Harmood-

  Bull, William James

  Arkwright, John Stanhope

  Barry, Sir Francis T. (Windsor

  Burdett-Coutts, W.

  Arnold-Forster, Rt. Hn. HughO

  Bartley, Sir George C. T.

  Butcher, John George

  Arrol, Sir William

  Bentinck, Lord Henry C.

  Campbell, Rt. Hn. J. A (Glasgow

  Atkinson, Rt. Hon. John

  Bhownaggree, Sir M. M.

  Campbell, J. HM (Dublin Univ.)

  Bailey, James (Walworth)

  Bignold, Sir Arthur

  Carson, Rt. Hon. Sir Edw. H.

  Baird, John George Alexander

  Bigwood, James

  Cautley, Henry Strother

  Balcarres, Lord

  Bill, Charles

  Cavendish, V. C W (Derbyshire

  541

  Cecil, Evelyn (Aston Manor)

  Heath, Sir Jas. (Staffords N.W.

  Parkes, Ebenezer

  Cecil, Lord Hugh (Greenwich)

  Holder, Augustus

  Pease, Herb. Pike (Darlington

  Chamberlain, Rt. Hn. J. (Birm.

  Hoare, Sir Samuel

  Percy, Earl

  Chapman, Edward

  Hogg, Lindsay

  Pierpoint, Robert

  Clive, Captain Percy A.

  Hope, J. F. (Sheffield, Brightside

  Pilkington, Colonel Richard

  Coates, Edward Feetham

  Horner, Frederick William

  Plummer, Sir Walter R,

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

  Hoult, Joseph

  Powell, Sir Francis Sharp

  Collings, Rt. Hon. Jesse

  Howard, J. (Kent, Faversham

  Pretyman, Ernest George

  Colston, Chas. Edw. H. Athole

  Hozier, Hn. James Henry Cecil

  Pryce-Jones, Lt.-Col. Edward

  Cook, Sir Frederick Lucas

  Hudson, George Bickersteth

  Purvis, Robert

  Corbett, T. L. (Down, North)

  Hunt, Rowland

  Randles, John S.

  Cross, Herb. Shepherd (Bolton)

  Jebb, Sir Richard Claverhouse

  Renshaw, Sir Charles Bine

  Crossley, Rt. Hn. Sir Savile

  Jeffreys, Rt. Hn. Arthur Fred.

  Ridley, S. Forde

  Cubitt, Hon. Henry

  Jessel, Captain Herbert Merton

  Roberts, Samuel (Sheffield

  Dalrymple, Sir Charles

  Kenyon-Slaney, Rt. Hn. Col.W.

  Robertson, Herb. (Hackney)

  Davenport, William Bromley

  Kerr, John

  Rolleston, Sir John F. L.

  Denny, Colonel

  Kimber, Sir Henry

  Rollit, Sir Albert Kaye

  Dewar, Sir T. R (Tower Hamlets

  King, Sir Henry Seymour)

  Ropner, Colonel Sir Robert

  Dickson, Charles Scott

  knowles, Sir Lees

  Round, Rt. Hn. James

  Dimsdale, Rt Hn. Sir Joseph C.

  Lambton, Hn. Frederick Wm.

  Royds, Clement Molyneux

  Dixon-Hartland, Sir Fred Dixon

  Laurie, Lieut-General

  Rutherford, John (Lancashire)

  Doughty, Sir George

  Law, Andrew Bonar (Glasgow)

  Sackville, Col. S. G. Stopford

  Douglas, Rt. Hn. A. Akers-

  Lawrence, Sir Joseph (Monm'h

  Sadler, Col. Samuel Alexander

  Doxford, Sir William Theodore

  Lawson, Hn. H. L. W. (Mile End

  Samuel, Sir Harry S (Limehouse

  Duke, Henry Edward

  Lawson, John Grant (Yorks N.R

  Sharpe, William Edward T.

  Egerton, Hn. A. de Tatton

  Lees, Sir Elliott (Birkenhead)

  Shaw-Stewart, Sir H (Renfrew

  Faber, Edmund B. (Hants, W.)

  Legge. Col. Hn. Heneage

  Skewes-Cox, Thomas

  Faber, George Denison (York)

  Leveson-Gower, Frederick N.S

  Sloan, Thomas Henry

  Fellowes, Hn. Ailwyn Edward

  Llewellyn, Evan Henry

  Smith, H. C. (North'mb Tyneside

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

  Lockwood, Lieut.-Col. A. R.

  Spear, John Ward

  Fielden, Edward Brocklehurst

  Long, Col Chas. W. (Evesham)

  Spencer, Sir E. (W. Bromwich)

  Finch, Rt. Hn. George H.

  Long, Rt, Hn. Walter (Bristol, S

  Stanley, Rt. Hn. Lord (Lancs)

  Finlay, Sir R B (Inv'rn'ssB'ghs)

  Lonsdale, John Brownlee

  Taylor, Austin (East Toxteth)

  Fisher, William Hayes

  Lowe, Francis William

  Thorburn, Sir Walter

  FitzGerald, Sir Robert Penrose

  Lowther, C. (Cumb., Eskdale

  Thornton, Percy M.

  Flannery, Sir Fortescue

  Lucas, Reginald J. (Portsmouth

  Tomlinson, Sir Wm. Edw. M.

  Flower, Sir Ernest.

  Lyttelton, Rt, Hn. Alfred

  Tritton, Charles Ernest

  Forster, Henry William

  Macdona, John Cumming

  Tuff, Charles

  Foster, Philip S (Warwick, S.W

  MacIver, David (Liverpool)

  Tuke, Sir John Batty

  Galloway, William Johnson

  Maconochie, A. W.

  Turnour, Viscount

  Gardner, Ernest

  M'Arthur, Charles (Liverpool)

  Walker, Col. William Hall

  Garfit, William

  Majendie, James A. H.

  Walrond, Rt Hn. Sir William H

  Godson, Sir Augustus Fredk.

  Malcolm, Ian

  Warde, Colonel C. E.

  Gordon, Hn. J. E (Elgin & Nairn

  Martin, Richard Biddulph

  Welby, Lt.-Col A. CE (Taunton)

  Gordon, J. (Londonderry, S

  Maxwell Rt Hn Sir H.E (Wigt'n

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

  Gordon, Maj. Evans-(T'rH'm'ts

  Maxwell, W. J. H. (Dumfriessh.

  Whiteley, H. (Ashton und Lyne

  Gore, Hon. S. F. Ormsby-

  Meysey-Thompson, Sir H. M.

  Whitmore, Charles Algernon

  Goschen, Hn. George Joachim

  Mildmay, Francis Bingham

  Willoughby de Eresby, Lord

  Goulng, Edward Alfred

  Milvain, Thomas

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

  Graham, Henry Robert

  Molesworth, Sir Lewis

  Wilson, John (Glasgow)

  Gray, Ernest (West Ham)

  Montagu, Hn. J. Scott W (Hants

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

  Green, Walford D(Wednesbury

  Moon, Edward Robert Pacy

  Wolff, Gustav Wilhelm

  Greene, Sir E W(B'rySEdm'nd's

  Moore, William

  Wortley, Rt. Hn. C. B. Stuart

  Greene, W. Raymond (Cambs)

  Morgan, D. J. (Walthamstow)

  Wrightson, Sir Thomas

  Guthrie, Walter Murray

  Morpeth, Viscount

  Yerburgh, Robert Armstrong

  Hain, Edward

  Morrell, George Herbert

  Younger, William

  Halsey, Rt. Hn. Thomas F.

  Morton, Arthur H. Aylmer

  Hambro, Charles Eric

  Mount. William Arthur

  Hamilton, Marq of (L'nd'nderry

  Mowbray, Sir Robert Gray C.

  TELLERS FOR THE NOES—

  Hare, Thomas Leigh

  Murray, Col. Wyndham (Bath)

  Sir Alexander Acland-Hood

  Harris, F. Leverton (Tynem'th

  Myers, William Henry

  and Viscount Valentia.

  Haslam, Sir Alfred S.

  Nicholson, William Graham

  Hay, Hon. Claude George

  Palmer, Sir Walter (Salisbury)

  Question put, and agreed to.

  And, it being after half-past Seven of the clock, the Chairman left the Chair to make his Report to the House.
  Resolution to be reported To-morrow; Committee to sit again To-morrow.

EVENING SITTING.

  ACCRINGTON CORPORATION BILL (BY ORDER).
  ACCRINGTON DISTRICT GAS AND WATER BOARD BILL (BY ORDER).
  CLAY CROSS RAILWAY (ABANDONMENT) BILL (BY ORDER).
  Read the third time, and passed.

  SOUTH SUBURBAN GAS BILL (BY ORDER).
  Read the third time, and passed. [New Title.]
  WREXHAM GAS BILL (BY ORDER).
  Read the third time, and passed.
  ACTON SEWAGE BILL (BY ORDER).
  As amended, considered; an Amendment made; Bill to be read the third time.
  ILFRACOMBE HARBOUR AND IMPROVEMENT BILL (BY ORDER).
  As amended, considered; to be read the third time.
  NOTTINGHAM AND RETFORD RAILWAY BILL (BY ORDER).
  [Not amended], considered; to be read the third time.
  OTLEY IMPROVEMENT BILL (CHANGED FROM "OTLEY GAS AND IMPROVEMENT BILL") (BY ORDER).
  As amended, considered; to be read the third time.
  SEAHAM GAS BILL (BY ORDER).
  As amended, considered; Amendments made; Bill to be read the third time.
  SUNDERLAND AND SOUTH SHIELDS WATER BILL (BY ORDER).
  As amended, considered; to be read the third time.

  COTTON SUPPLY (BRITISH DEPEND ENCIES).
  *SIR WILLIAM TOMLINSONsaid he need make no apology for bringing a subject of such great interest as that of the cotton-growing industry before the House. The cotton trade was one of the largest industries in the country. In fact, the number of persons employed in and dependent upon it was so great that it ranked next to the great industry of agriculture in importance. The Resolution he proposed to move was not framed in any hostile spirit to any section of the community or any one concerned in the industry of cotton growing in any part of the world. He had no reason, therefore to apprehend any hostile action being taken towards his Motion. To those connected with Lancashire this subject must be of very vast importance, having regard to the fact that during the past three years this great industry had suffered from very great depression, the effect of which had been seen not only in the distress directly caused among the operatives engaged in it, but amongst all classes and all parts of the country concerned in its prosperity. He had had a very lively impression recently of the effects of the depression, and the consequent deficiency in receipts of the operatives engaged in this industry. There were towns in Lancashire which depended for their prosperity upon the power of the operatives every now and then to take a few days of well earned rest from their labour, and only recently he had been informed by a justice of the peace for the county that in the last few weeks forty-seven distress warrants had been issued in a town frequented for pleasure by operatives of the cotton trade.
  It was hardly necessary to emphasise the importance of this industry, because only last year it formed the subject of a few words in His Majesty's most Gracious Speech at the opening of Parliament. Those words were—
  "The insufficiency of the supply of the raw material upon which the great cotton industry of this country depends has inspired Me with deep concern. I trust that the efforts which are being made in various parts of My Empire to increase the area under cultivation may be attended with a large measure of success."

  545
  He believed those efforts had been successful. In various parts of the Empire they had every reason to hope that gradually a cotton growing industry would be developed which would satisfy and make good the deficiency which from time to time arose. The depression of the last years had been caused by a succession of crops very much below the average. That of course affected prices; prices rose, and those who had to buy cotton for the purpose of carrying on their manufactures had to spend the same amount of money as in previous years for only about three quarters of the amount of cotton they then bought. This produced a considerable rise also in the cost of the manufactured article. Of a necessity the direct result of this was that the demand for so high a priced article was much restricted. They could congratulate themselves that, for the moment, the depression had passed away, and prosperity was smiling on those engaged in the industry. Nothing was more gratifying than to go through the cotton manufacturing districts and see the cheerful and pleasant appearance of all engaged in this trade, for which the conditions this year were very favourable.
  It might be said, "If we have a return to prosperity, why may we not hope that that prosperity will be continuous. Why should we trouble further about it?" That was amost short-sighted view to take, as would be seen if a closer and more comprehensive view was taken. The cotton supply coming from America this year would amount to 12,500,000 bales. Seventy per cent. of our raw material came from the American cotton growing districts, and while the abundant supply of the present year came from the exceptionally good American crop, it was from that source that the depression had mainly arisen. Looking closely at the facts, we found that not only had the deficiency of previous years been of very serious moment, but that a deficiency must always arise in future years with even an average crop, because the average supply a few years hence would be short of our requirements. An examination of the figures of the past ten years demonstrated
  546
  that we should require to obtain from other sources in the future cotton to be used in the mills in increasing quantities each year. The total American cotton crop for 1895–96 was 7,157,000 bales. Of that Great Britain took 2,302,000 bales; the Continent 2,262,000 bales, and America 2,593,000 bales. In 1903–4 the total American crop was 10,000,000 bales, of which Great Britain only received 2,500,000 bales, while the Continent took over 3,300,000 bales, and the American manufacturers over 4,234,000 bales. So that the problem was not only how to keep pace with our own requirements, but to allow for the increasing demand in America and on the Continent; and there was reason to believe that the possibility of increasing the area of American cultivation was small. He believed that our cotton industry now required a supply of 3,000,000 bales over our share of an average crop, with a probable increase of 400,000 bales a year, and this additional supply must be procurable at a reasonable price, for it did not matter how much cotton could be obtained, unless the price enabled the manufacturers to obtain a profit on what he produced, the conditions of the additional supply must be such as would enable the finished production to be sold at prices which would be remunerative under average conditions. Such arrangements would therefore have to be made, which would provide that the countries which produced raw cotton would be able to sell it to the manufacturer at a moderate price. The problem, therefore, was to find different parts of the world where cotton could be produced at such a price as would enable manufacture to be carried on. When times of prosperity come upon the people, they were too apt to consider that was going to be the normal condition of things, and were apt to relax their efforts and leave the future to chance. Cotton manufacturers in the past had been too regardless of the future, and that was the temptation which was especially likely to arise during a year of abundant prosperity. He suggested to those interested in the greater production of cotton that when their pockets

  547
  were full, that was the time to increase their subscription to the Cotton Growing Association, the object of which was to help the manufacturers to get a greater supply of cotton. No one who went into the facts could fail to see that whatever increase was made in the production of cotton, it would be a work of time to bring that production up to our real requirements.
  Where was this country to find its additional supplies? The greatest gratitude was due to the Cotton Growing Association for the efforts it had made to find out where suitable cotton could be grown, and the efforts they had made to foster the industry in those places where it could be grown. He expressed his greatest admiration for the hard work they had done and the self-sacrifice they had made. Especially was gratitude due to this association when one recollected that many of those who formed it were not directly interested in the manufacturing industry. Those engaged in the manufacture, he was sure, would be quite willing to admit the great good that had been done. The Association had stated as the result of careful examination that, with hardly one exception, cotton could be successfully grown in every British colony or protectorate with a tropical climate. It was feared that any great development could hardly take place in India of cotton of a quality which could compete with the American product in our mills. The next part of the world to which attention had been directed was the West Indies, and in Barbadoes, St. Vincent and other islands cotton cultivation had been successfully commenced and this season there had been a production of 5,000 bales, worth £100,000. He would not say more about that than that it was a most encouraging result. The first shipments had sold at 16½d. per pound, and the industry could be still more largely developed with plentiful funds. The next part of the world which was alluded to in the memorandum of the British Cotton Growing Association was South and East Africa, and perhaps he might congratulate the Colonial Secretary on the fact that East Africa had now come under the control of his Department.
  548
  There were found in Uganda districts in which cotton could be grown with advantage to the country as well as to our home markets. Owing to lack of funds very little had been done except to establish the fact that Egyptian cotton would grow well in East Africa. In Nyassaland machinery and seed had been supplied to the planters and some advances had been made. The growing crop was estimated at 10,000 bales of Egyptian cotton worth over £100,000. Three years ago cotton was unknown in this colony. With ample funds probably as good results could be obtained in British East Africa, Rhodesia, and South Africa, and if the capital was found there was every probability in a few years time this part of the Empire would produce annually 500,000 bales of long stapled cotton. He did hope that the attention of the Government and the cultivators would be devoted to the development of the cotton industry in these territories, and sufficient encouragement would be given to them to give the experiment a full chance of success. Last Friday he received a letter from a settler in the northern part of the Transvaal Colony who had a very strong belief, which was supported by those who knew the country well, that there were large tracts in South Africa which were capable of growing satisfactory cotton. This correspondent stated that his experimental crops of cotton were promising well, and he should send the samples when ripe for examination by the Agricultural Department of the Transvaal. There did, therefore, seem some hope that unless the price of cotton became uncertain they might establish in that Colony cotton-growing with successful prospects before it.
  He passed on to West Africa. It was well known by all who had taken any interest in this subject that the conditions of soil, climate, labour, and other things were very favourable to the production of cotton of good quality in many parts of the West African Colonies, and there seemed to be a very good prospect of our being able to satisfy a large part of our requirements from those regions. The difficulty existing there, and probably in other parts of our

  549
  territories, was that of the cost of transport. It could easily be ascertained what it would cost to grow cotton in particular districts, but the important question was what it would cost to bring the produce to the coast. He met, last autumn, a gentleman who was a Government official in one part of Nigeria. He was the son of a very respected former Member of this House, Sir Richard Temple, and he told him that in a large district in Nigeria everything was favourable to the growing of cotton, but it was quite impossible at present to bring it down to the coast at reasonable cost. There was a further difficulty, on getting the cotton to the coast, of finding the means of transport to this country, but if cotton was grown in sufficient quantities that difficulty would be got over. What the official in question said was wanted was probably a railway of some kind to bring the cotton from the district where it was grown to some point in the Niger where it could be transported to the coast during the three months of the year when the river was high enough to allow of the transportation being carried out. This was one of the points upon which they might fairly ask for the active co-operation of the Government, and that without dealing with the question from anything like a selfish or narrow point of view.
  The cotton trade was a trade of a very artificial kind. There was an element of artificiality in the fact that we had to bring the cotton from long distances to our manufacturers. Another element of artificiality was that 80 per cent. of our manufactures must be supplied for export. These things went hand in hand. We wanted cotton, and these territories if properly developed, would give us it. By this means we should civilise the undeveloped regions and turn them into much needed markets for our goods. Not only should we have helped these countries to develop their resources, but we should be able to make up the deficiency which was found even in average years in the supply of the American markets, and also provide for the increasing quantity which we required to make up for the growing amount which was consumed in America and on the Continent. He did not think
  550
  that a subject of greater interest, looking to the future welfare of this country, could have been brought before the House. He was very pleased that the opportunity had been given him of opening this discussion, and he had great pleasure in proposing the Resolution which stood in his name—
  "That, in view of the peril to which the industries of the United Kingdom using cotton as the principal raw material of their manufactures are exposed by their too great dependence on the United States of America as their source of supply, and the good results of the operations already undertaken by the British Cotton Growing Association, this House desires to express its appreciation of the benefits derived by the encouragement afforded by His Majesty's Government to the work of the association, and looks to a continuance of their good offices as one of the essential conditions of a speedy development of the resources of the Colonies, Dependencies, and Protectorates of the Crown as additional sources of supply of the cotton needed for the maintenance of regular and adequately remunerated employment in one of the greatest of the national industries."
  *MR. SHACKLETONseconded the Resolution, and said that both operatives and employers were very pleased that the hon. Baronet had had an opportunity of raising the question. The urgency in regard to the supply of cotton in Lancashire had gone on for four years, and it had reached a pitch at which they felt that something should be done and they were anxious to do it. Looking back four years, those of 1901 and 1902 were depressed, and 1903 saw many people idle, and it was estimated that the loss was not less than £2,000,000 in the way of short time, loss of wages, as well as of profit. Coming to 1904 the loss could not be estimated, but for the first six or eight months such a condition of things prevailed in Lancashire that none of them wished to see again. Short time was very general, and thousands of pounds were paid out of the operatives' funds. It had been said that the condition of things in some of their large towns, chiefly those dependent upon American cotton for their mills, had never been witnessed since the days of the cotton famine, and he was sure those who lived in those times did not wish to see them recur. That condition of matters had brought about a desire on the part of the trade to do something to remedy

  551
  the evil, and, as usual in their county, this was a matter which both sides could look at with similar interest, so the employees and employers decided to take joint action, and as the result, the British Cotton Growing Association was formed, which was bearing good fruit. That association was governed by representatives of the employers' associations, representatives of the operatives' association, and individuals in the county of weight and influence who gave valuable aid to the work of the association. Both employers and employed had contributed to the funds. The operatives had contributed money to the extent of £9,000 or thereabouts from the different trade unions, and some of the workpeople had contributed a day's wage. The co-operative societies had also contributed a large amount of money in shares towards the formation of this association. In 1901–3 they thought that £50,000 was sufficient to carry on this work, but in November of the following year they raised a sum of £100,000, and last year it was felt by those responsible for the movement that nothing less than £500,000 was required to give this scheme a thorough trial. This was the sum which they believed would enable them to obtain relief from the monopoly and risk from the cotton corners to which they had been subject during the last few years.
  The figures as to price showed the need for relief in regard to their dependence on America for 70 per cent. of their cotton supply, and encouraged them to widen the field of growth so that a sudden drought or a sudden demand in America might not send up prices. Mr. William Tattersall stated that in January, 1904, the price of cotton per lb. was 6·88d.; in March, 8·78d.; in May, 7·l2d.; in July, 6·18d.; in September, 5·80d.; in November, 5·08d.; and December, 3·77d.; showing a difference of something like 4d. per 1b., or 107 per cent. on the same article. They did not want these fluctuations, which were governed by the supply, to continue. Mr. Tattersall also stated that the cotton crop from America for 1898 was 11,181,000 bales and the average price that year was 3 5/16d.; in 1900 the crop was 9,440,000 and the average price 5 15/32d.; in 1901 the crop was 10,425,000 and the price 4¾d.,
  552
  while in 1904 it was 10,124,000 bales and the price was 6·6d. They had to include in that calculation the excepttional demand made in America for the cotton and a greater demand on the Continent, the result being that if the growth had only gone down 250,000 bales the price had gone up 2d. The large American crop this year—he thought it was estimated at over 13,000,000 bales—did not effect the urgency or the importance of this work, and the necessity of new sources of supply remained. In the words of the Report of the Cotton Growers' Association—
  ''A shortage may occur next year or the year after with the same disastrous results to the cotton trade as have been experienced recently. In any case, some few years must elapse before the cotton grown under the auspices of the association can be of sufficient quantity to have an appreciable effect on the market. In the meantime the requirements of the world are increasing year by year and the necessity for new sources of supply are as urgent as ever.''
  What had the association been doing? Their work had covered something like twelve or fourteen districts and they had excellent reports from many of them, although in a few they had only just started in their work. Experimental work was going on in India, the West Indies, West Africa, Gambia, Lagos, Southern Nigeria, and British Central Africa. As an example of the kind of work that was being done he would take the case of West Africa. The council stated that they had been advised that in order to encourage the natives to take up cotton it was essential that they should be able to depend on a ready market at a fixed price for their produce, and they had entered into an important agreement with the Government of West Africa whereby in consideration of certain grants being made to them by the Governments of Sierra Leone, Lagos, and Southern Nigeria, amounting on the aggregate to £6,500 a year, the association guaranteed to purchase all seed cotton offered at a fixed price of a 1d. a pound for three years. The association further undertook to provide efficient ginning and buying facilities and to provide experts for the instruction of the natives. The association further undertook to establish a model plantation and to spend the sum of £10,000 gross in each colony annually for the next three years. They

  553
  expected that the next three years would and show the possibilities of these districts, they anticipated, that as a consequence of this expenditure of £30,000, they would be assured of a constant supply from this part of the Empire.
  This was not merely a question affecting the cotton trade only; it extended to dyers, printers, bleachers, and finishers, the banks and railway companies, merchants, shippers, colliery owners, machine makers, and many others, not forgetting the workpeople employed in those trades. All these people were directly interested in the success of the movement. He had no complaint to make against the Government in the matter; the Colonial Office had given them the assistance of their influence as far as they could; but it was desired to impress upon the Government the necessity of there being no relaxation of effort or withdrawal of sympathy simply because a good spell of trade was being now experienced. Hay must be made while the sun shone, so as to ensure that when a cloud did come there would be means of coping with it. The association wished it to be clearly understood that what they were doing would benefit not only the trade of this country but also the colonies themselves. What they asked was that the Government should assist the development by encouraging the provision of transport facilities and railway communications. Their object in bringing forward this matter was to let it be seen that the movement was not dead, and that they did not mean to let it die; and also to ask the Government to continue their sympathy with the movement and, if possible, to give more assistance in the way of transport facilities. He begged to second the Motion.
  Motion made, and Question proposed, "That, in view of the peril to which the industries of the United Kingdom using cotton as the principal raw material of their manufactures are exposed by their too great dependence on the United States of America as their source of supply, and the good results of the operations already undertaken by the British Cotton Growing Association, this House desires to express its appreciation of the benefits derived by the encouragement
  554
  afforded by His Majesty's Government to the work of the association, and looks to a continuance of their good offices as one of the essential conditions of a speedy development of the resources of the Colonies, Dependencies, and Protectorates of the Crown as additional sources of supply of the cotton needed for the maintenance of regular and adequately remunerated employment in one of the greatest of the national industries."
  MR. SAMUEL SMITHsaid this matter had changed considerably since last year. Then the price of cotton was about 9d., and this year it was about 4d. Last year the crop in America was 10,000,000 bales, this year it was about 13,500,000 bales. It was true that only about 12,500,000 bales would be delivered, and 1,000,000 would be carried over to next season. The world's total consumption of American cotton was 11,500,000 bales, so there would be a surplus of 2,000,000 bales. The extraordinary scarcity of last year was due to a succession of unfavourable seasons, coupled with an insect pest which had done great harm. There had been an immense increase in cotton growing in America, but he could not agree that the land available for cotton growing was practically exhausted.
  SIR WILLIAM TOMLINSONsaid he did not intend to go so far as that, but probably the extent to which the area could be enlarged was inconsiderable.
  MR. SAMUEL SMITHsaid that, as an old cotton merchant who had been in the trade for forty-five years, and had had occasion to watch very closely the development in America during that time, his impression was that, if the labour could be found, the cotton-growing area could be doubled or trebled. The difficulty lay not in the land so much as in the question of labour. It was all a matter of price. At the prices of last year the labour difficulty largely disappeared as the growers could afford to pay higher rates, but with the price at 4d. it was difficult to make growing pay. This year there had been a very good crop, and he believed there would be a good supply

  555
  next year also. It was very desirable to expand the area of cotton growing, as we were far too dependent upon the United States where they had a perfect genius for manipulating prices by speculation, with the result that when there was a short crop prices went up to a greater degree than was really justified, but he had not much faith in enlarging our supply by artificial means. The Indian crop last year was about 3,000,000 bales, but it was nearly all consumed in India itself, the balance going to China and Japan. His own impression was that our best chance of increasing the supply lay in Egypt, in, the Sudan, on the one hand, and in Scinde on the other, where, in the course of the next few years, irrigation works would probably make a considerable difference. But in any case the price would bring the supply. If prices ruled high, we were sure to get the supply. If they ruled low, then the supply fell. With higher prices he thought the supply from America would go on increasing, but he doubted whether it would at a price of 4d. No doubt the price suited Lancashire very well; the present year would probably be the best Lancashire had had in the life of the present generation, and would go far to make up for last year, when for six months the operatives were on short time and the manufacturers made little or no profit. But it was not good for trade to have either excessively high or excessively low prices. His belief was that an average price of 5d. per pound was the price which paid the grower reasonably well and enabled the consumer to work with advantage. He wished God-speed to all the efforts of the Cotton Growing Association.
  MR. CRIPPSagreed that we ought, if possible, to make our cotton supply independent of a foreign country, and that, in our own Colonies and dependencies we should, as far as possible, provide against a recurrence of the unhappy events of last year. The points to which the Resolution called attention were, to his mind, exactly the points to which attention ought to be directed in regard to an important industry of this kind. In the first place, attention was called to the perils incident
  556
  to being so entirely dependent on a supply from one source. As long as the industry was so dependent there was likely to be a recurrence of the events of last year. The only effective remedy for the difficulties arising from shortage of crop and fluctuation of price was to have as large an area as possible from which to obtain supplies of raw material, so that under the doctrine of averages the total supply should be regular whatever might be the conditions in any one particular part of the world. It was unnecessary to emphasise that part of the Resolution. If a great industry carried on under somewhat artificial conditions, like the cotton industry, was to be maintained, every effort must be made to find a supply of the raw material which would be outside the fluctuations and perils to which attention has been called. There were undoubted perils in regard to the supply from the United States. Reference had been made to the growing demand on the Continent and elsewhere for the raw material of cotton, but the increased demand in the cotton-growing districts of the United States themselves constituted a still more serious menace to the textile industries of Lancashire. He did not believe in the prophecies of evil in which Mr. Carnegie sometimes indulged, or that in the long run the great industrial manufactures would have to be carried on where the raw material was produced. He was not an alarmist to that extent, but it was undoubtedly a most important duty of those who looked forward to the maintenance of the industries of this country and the interests of the operatives therein engaged, to make sure that those industries should not be imperilled in reference to their supplies of raw material, so far as it was possible to make arrangements to guarantee them against shortage.
  The Report of the Cotton Growing Association produced a hopeful expectation, as far as experiments had gone, that over a large area of the world cotton could be grown successfully at prices and under conditions suitable for the Lancashire industry, if only the opportunity were given. So far as the Cotton Growing Association was concerned it had done and was doing a very beneficial work; it had spent

  557
  its own money in a way which had already produced great results, and if its expectations were realised, there was no reason why, after a series of years, we might not get a sufficient supply from outside sources to guarantee the Lancashire industry against the fluctuations and shortage which must constantly occur so long as we relied on the United States alone. He entirely agreed with the hon. Member for Clitheroe as to the duties of the Government. There was no desire that the Government should undertake duties that could be properly carried out by private enterprise. The resources of Lancashire were sufficient so far as the matters were those that could be properly dealt with by private enterprise; but there were a large number of important matters with which private enterprise was not suited to deal. It was not suggested that railways should be constructed through deserts, but that in districts where a probability of success in cotton growing had been shown by experiment the Government should assist by providing railways and means of communication, and thus aiding the general development of the districts concerned. He did not complain of what had been done hitherto by the Government, but he thought it right that the extreme importance of this movement should be emphasised in the House, that the real advantages the association had already conferred should be pointed out, and that it should be known that this association, with all its expert knowledge, had formed the opinion that over these large areas cotton could be grown on remunerative terms. Under these circumstances they looked to the Government to give that additional assistance which private enterprise could not supply, but which must come from the Government themselves, and therefore he heartily supported the Resolution.
  *MR. EMMOTTsaid this question was of such enormous importance to the constituents whom he had the honour to represent in that House, and also to the British Cotton Growing Association of which he was an official, that he ventured very warmly on their behalf to welcome and support the Motion. He agreed with the view of the hon. Member
  558
  for Flintshire that it was not the shortage of suitable land in the United States that restricted the supply of cotton that we might receive from that country. The real difficulty was the question of labour. He had had a curious confirmation of that in two different ways recently. A friend of his received a letter from a prominent politician in the United States expressing the view that sooner or later—and sooner rather than later—the people of the United States would want to deport from their shores ten or eleven millions of negroes and send them back to Africa. He (Mr. Emmott) thought that was a rather impossible thing to do, but it showed what some politicians of the United States were thinking. If that happened it would at once take away from cotton-growing in the United States half-a-million of black farmers who grew cotton in the country. Another letter was shown to him from a gentleman in the Western States who expressed the opinion that the difficulty in increasing the crop of American cotton arose from the fact that they could not find sufficient labour; and the writer expressed the view that it would be necessary if they were going to increase the crop—which he said they might easily double—to import Chinese labour to do the picking. This showed how very uncertain it was whether our supplies from the United States would increase or not.
  It was clearly right that we should try as far as possible to help ourselves in regard to this matter. The earlier and initial stages of cotton-growing in a new country were very laborious and difficult; but when they had got over those difficulties and established the fact that cotton could be grown at a remunerative rate the industry became very profitable. That was shown in the case of the United States. It was shown even more strikingly in the case of Egypt, for in Egypt, although the crop was of necessity very much smaller it was so profitable that land often paid as much as £5 or £6 an acre in the way of rent, a scale which would make the mouths of many landowners in this country water. It was shown also in the case of Brazil, where the production of cotton had increased enormously, and also in the case of India. Obviously if they

  559
  could grow a larger quantity within the British Empire there would be a doubly beneficial result, for it would be beneficial to the trade of Lancashire, and be even more beneficial to the places where the cotton was grown.
  He would state one or two specific results which had resulted from the action of the British Cotton Growing Association. The quantity of sea island cotton grown in the West Indian Islands last year was about 1,000 bales of this particular kind of cotton, and this year the crop was expected to produce 5,000 bales. Not only in this instance had the quantity increased but the quality of the cotton had also improved. The inhabitants of the United States were becoming jealous of this success in the West Indies, and they were reconsidering the exportation of cotton seed, to diminish the risk of competition between the West Indian Islands and themselves. In the Soudan he believed there was a great field for an increase in the growth of cotton. The most encouraging results had been shown, for in 1902 the production was 800 Kautars, in 1903 7,000, and 1904 12,000 Kautars. In one portion of Central Africa last season, a season which proved to be unfavourable for cotton growing, 1,000 bales were produced, and the British Cotton Growing Association believed that 10,000 bales would be grown there this year, and they would be worth £100,000. The entire exports from British Central Africa only amounted to £30,000 at the present time, and it was therefore evident what a immense benefit might be done this colony by an increased growth of cotton. He might refer to Lagos and other places where, although the results had been slow, something had already been achieved, and if the Government would continue to help as they were helping, he felt sure that with patience, perseverance, and scientific aid, a great deal more might be done for the cotton industry and for our possessions across the seas.
  He wished to thank the Government for the assistance which the Colonial Office had given upon this question. He knew that the Colonial Secretary was deeply interested in this question, and he thought they also ought to give
  560
  their thanks to the Under-Secretary the Duke of Marlborough, who had taken such a continuous interest in this matter from the moment he took office down to the present time. The Colonial Office had helped them in many ways by providing scientific experts and to some extent paying for them. They had also helped the association by advice, and they had arranged to give free carriage to cotton grown in that area for a specified time. They had some grounds therefore to hope that in future there might be a very great increase in the growth of cotton in the British Empire.
  He had also indicated that there were very great and serious difficulties to be met. In the first place they must find suitable soil and suitable seed, and that was often a matter of careful experiment extending over many months, sometimes years before they achieved the most satisfactory results. In the second place they must interest the natives and the native chiefs in the growth of this commodity or else they could not get best results. In the third place they must be willing to offer, as the British Cotton Growing Association had agreed to offer, for a series of years a certain specified price. They must take the risk of loss and the chance of gain. In the last place it was necessary, if cotton was to be grown on a large scale, to arrange for roads and railways in order that they might carry to the coast and ship to England and elsewhere. Matters of this kind could best be done by cordial co-operation between such an association as the British Cotton Growing Association and the Government. They could not expect great results quickly. Patience and perseverance and, above all. scientific experiments were required to arrive at the best results. He was told that Germany, which country had for some years been experimenting in this matter, had not been put off by the fact that some of her earlier experiments were unsuccessful and had gone on experimenting with artificial manures and with different seeds. They had found out what was the best seed and the best soil for that purpose. That was the kind of work which the British Cotton Growing Association must go on with for many years if they were really to arrive at the result they desired.

  561
  Some money of, course, must be wasted. Some had already been wasted, but the association was learning Wisdom and buying its experience, and if the happy co-operation between it and the Government continued to exist—as he hoped it would—great results would be achieved. He thanked the Government for making the grant to the Imperial Institute for the purpose of experimenting in regard to cotton. He believed there would very shortly be opened in the institute an exhibition for the purpose of allowing anybody who was interested in the matter to see what was being done in various parts of the world in regard to cotton. But their gratitude to the Government was of the kind that looked for favours to come. He would like the Colonial Secretary to tell them when the British Central African railway to Blantyre was likely to be opened. A considerable quantity of cotton was being grown in that country, and it was very important that railways should be opened as soon as possible. He also wanted to know what the Government intended to do for the development of Northern Nigeria. It must be very difficult for the Colonial Office to extract from the Treasury any more money in regard to Northern Nigeria, and it was very natural when money was not plentiful that the Government should be afraid of public opinion not backing them up in any large expenditure there. Meanwhile he asked them to remember that the cotton trade was a trade of national importance, and to take care that we did nothing to injure it, but rather to increase the supplies of raw material from the British Empire, the production of which would benefit not only the Cotton trade of this country but also the colonies, dependencies, and protectorates where that cotton was grown.
  MR. CHARLES McARTHURsaid that as one of the Members representing Liverpool he desired to associate himself with the proposition now before the House. Up to the present most hon. Members who had taken part in the discussion were those whose constituencies were interested in the manufacture of cotton goods, but he wished to point out that Liverpool was doubly interested in the cotton trade,
  562
  because it was, in the first place, the port through which the cotton supplies reached the United Kingdom, and it was also the principal port from which the manufactured cotton goods were exported. It was also the principal market for the sale of cotton. Therefore, in Liverpool they naturally took a very great interest in this movement. It was evident from the discussion which had already taken place that this movement was viewed with favour on all sides of the House. This movement was promoted by the people engaged in the trade, including both employers and employed, merchants and spinners, who felt the necessity for securing a greater supply of raw cotton, and who had started this movement for the purpose of growing cotton in parts of the British Empire where the climate and soil were particularly adapted to the growth of cotton, but where there was a great necessity for some encouragement being given in order that the cotton-growing industry should be planted in those parts. Speaking as the representative of the merchants of Liverpool, he was authorised to inform the House that they felt very strongly upon the question of doing something to make this country less dependent upon the American cotton supply. They recognised that, at the present time, and for some considerable time in the future, the American supply of cotton must be the principal supply open to this country, but, at the same time, they were fully aware that the fact that they had only one supply made the market particularly susceptible to corners and other inconveniences detrimental to the cotton trade. They also knew that the demand for cotton in America was increasing faster than the supply, and they recognised that in a few years time the exports of cotton from the United States would begin to decrease owing to the increased demand for it in the United States itself. On these grounds, it was desirable that they should increase their sources of supply from various parts of the British Empire. The Imperial aspect of it was that they found in this movement a means of drawing the Colonies and the mother country closer together, and this was a method of accomplishing it which was approved by all Parties. While it was not desirable to

  563
  discourage individual initiative, the Government ought, in view of what was done in other countries, to do something to assist the trade of this country, and at all events to give it their hearty and sympathetic co-operation wherever possible.
  MR. BRYCEsaid he thought the debate which had taken place was likely to be a very useful one. There was a general concord of opinion, and although there was not a large attendance of Members that was no doubt due to the fact that it was felt that there was nothing controversial involved, and that those who were not present agreed that this subject was an appropriate one to which their attention should be directed, and one upon which the Government might very properly be invited to give such help as a Government could give. He thought the hon. Baronet the Member for Preston was entitled to their thanks for having brought a very important subject to the notice of the House. He wished to join in urging the Colonial Office and the India Office to take all such steps as they properly could to foster the growth of cotton in British dependencies and to obviate the necessity of our depending so largely for our supplies on the United States. It was clear, from the growing number of cotton mills in the United States, that they would absorb a greater and greater quantity of the cotton produced there; and when the cotton supplies were drawn almost entirely from one country it was more easy to organise rings and capture the market than when there were a number of sources of supply. These were two reasons for concluding that in this matter the interests of the whole British Empire coincided with the interests of the trade in Lancashire. Among the numerous places in the world where cotton could be grown, he had not heard much said that evening about Uganda and the East African Protectorate, where much cotton could be grown and where labour was comparatively abundant. From Burma, where there was a good deal of land still unoccupied, a considerable supply could be drawn. In joining other hon. Members in commending this subject to the benevolent consideration of the Colonial Office, he
  564
  did not suggest large direct expenditure, but rather that opportunities of growing cotton should be brought to the attention of growers, that communications should be developed, and that something should be done in the way of helping scientific production of the best kind, as had been done in the West Indies with regard to sugar production. Whatever the Colonial Office might do in this matter would have, the hearty sympathy of the House.
  *THE SECRETARY OF STATE FOR THE COLONIES (Mr. LYTTELTON, Warwick and Leamington)said it was a matter of great satisfaction to him that for once the Department over which he had the honour to preside had met with the approval of all sides of the House. Government aid had been invoked very freely from all quarters of the House, and the circumstances under which it was invoked marked an interesting change of opinion. The Continental nations who had colonies, and more particularly the French and the Dutch, had set us the example of developing the great estates under their charge, an example which it was almost necessary that we should follow to some extent. He thought even the strongest believers in private enterprise and freedom from State interference recognised that the conditions under which that maxim might be quite applicable in former days had altered in the present time. Nowadays it was almost hopeless for individuals to conduct undertakings that involved a very large expenditure, a return on which could not be expected for many years, for they found themselves confronted with the far-sighted and most formidable rivalry of States and cities. We spent immense sums in acquiring large territories, and very large sums were granted from the Exchequer for their administration. In the case of Northern Nigeria, as had been pointed out, £450,000 a year was annually granted for administration; and, personally, he held the view that it would be good business, when there was such an expenditure as that on administration, to spend also £5,000 to £10,000 a year in prospecting and discovering, so as to get more return to the country. His term of office, however, had been in the lean years, and

  565
  he thought hon. Members would recognise that to approach the Treasury in such years with a demand for large grants for these purposes would be useless. But he would like to point out what had been done at the Colonial Office, the India Office, and the Board of Trade for the assistance of the British Cotton-Growing Association.
  That association was formed in 1902, and they had co-operated with them with great promptitude. He thought he was accurate in saying that the production of cotton within the confines of the Empire since 1902 had been trebled. The best way of fostering the cotton industry within our Colonial Empire was in general to educate the natives in the production of that commodity. The greatest success which had taken place, so far as the operations with which we had been concerned went, was in the West Indies. Although the production in 1904 was very small, there was an estimated production for this year of 5,000 bales. The quality of the cotton produced there was, as had been pointed out, one which was specially desirable for Lancashire. A system of scientific superintendence had been in operation in the West Indies, and the Government had endeavoured to follow somewhat similar methods elsewhere. Since last year they had in West Africa agreed to appoint a scientific agricultural Commissioner, who would supervise all the cotton-growing operations, and would, so far as possible, superintend, educate, and instruct the natives. It was hoped that good results would be obtained there. In British Central Africa a very considerable result had been achieved. In 1904 the value of the cotton produced was not much more than £1,000; for 1905 the estimated production was some £50,000. In Sierra Leone, Lagos, and Southern Nigeria the colonial Governments had contributed to the Cotton Growing Association £2,500 a year. The railways in these States had carried free of charge all cotton which had been produced by the British Cotton Growing Association. Experiments had also been made in Gambia. He maintained that a good deal had been done by the Colonial Office for the association considering the time which had been available for the purpose. The Secretary of State
  566
  for India had made representations to the Indian Government, and that Government had undertaken, conjointly with the association, to bear the cost of an experiment which had been started in Bengal. Our best hopes in India were centred on Scinde, where operations had been going on very briskly, and where an officer who had had great experience in India was now making experiments with the seed of the Egyptian plant. He was sanguine that in Scinde this cotton might have a very great future. The increase in the acreage under cotton in that province was very considerable, and the output had nearly doubled in the last three years. He ought not to omit to mention what the Board of Trade had done also for the assistance of this great industry by granting another £500 a year to Professor Dunstan and his staff at the Imperial Institute for scientific investigation and selection of seeds. It had already been recognised how valuable a service had been rendered by these investigations. He did not wish unduly to glorify the Departments of which he had been speaking, but he wished to point out that they had not relaxed their efforts for a moment since last year. In conclusion, he would add an expression of his hopes that Lancashire itself would co-operate readily and liberally with the British Cotton Growing Association, which had worked so hard in the last three years in this great enterprise. It had been supported by some of the employers, but the present time was one in which surely a great effort ought to be made, and he trusted that out of its present prosperity Lancashire would contribute liberally to the magnificent work which the association was doing.
  MR. HARWOODsaid that as a member of the Cotton Growing Association, and one engaged in the cotton trade, he should not be suspected of opposing this Resolution, but he did regret the bringing forward of the Resolution because he thought it was quite unnecessary. It was really a testimonial to the right hon. Gentleman and the Colonial Department. If the Department had done everything they could have done and should have done, and were going to do everything they could

  567
  do, why bring this matter before the House? He was quite prepared to join in a testimonial to the right hon. Gentleman and his Department on a proper occasion, but there was a danger about it of which he wished to warn the House. They in that House, knew quite well what the motives and feelings of the Government were, but what would outsiders say? They would reflect upon the reputation of Lancashire, and would say that the county was coming to the House of Commons in a selfish way. Lancashire had the reputation of being a selfish county, and he had heard it said that they looked keenly after their own interests. He wanted to warn the public and Members of the House that Lancashire did not want anything different in this matter from any other place. The people of that county were not coming cap in hand for any particular favour. He knew the fiscal question was, like King Charles's head, always bobbing up, and he did not want to frighten away the Prime Minister. The right hon. Gentleman was gallantly sticking to his position to-night as a Lancashire Member, even though some people thought he had not always done so. They had heard about Empire-grown cotton, and he could not help thinking of the parallel idea of Empire-grown corn. Lancashire was quite sound upon this matter, but it did not want anything contrary to the fiscal principles to which the county was so enthusiastically devoted. They did not want any Empire-grown cotton grown on false economic principles—grown by Government bolstering up of any kind whatever. During the American War Lancashire stuck faithfully to the North, though it suffered tremendously for its faithfulness. It would stick with equal faithfulness to its economic principles. They did not want Empire-grown cotton at the expense of sound fiscal principles. All they asked was that the Government should treat the Empire as an estate and develop it not for any particular trade.
  *MR. PEELsaid the very much regretted the tone of some of the hon. Member's remarks, because he remembered he made the same appeal on behalf of Lancashire last year when the matter was discussed.
  Mr. Harwood: What appeal? I have not made any appeal.
  *MR. PEELsaid the appeal was made when the hon. Gentleman asked the House not to imagine that Lancashire came cap in hand in order to get something out of the Government. The hon. Member said so last year. He himself was glad to see this sudden renewal of interest in the cotton-growing industry on the Opposition Benches. It was unfortunate that the hon. Member for Bolton should have insisted on bringing forward the fiscal question on which there had been a good many discussions during recent Tuesdays and Wednesdays. [An HON. MEMBER: How do you know?] The hon. Member seemed to object to a testimonial being offered to the Colonial Office in regard to this matter.
  MR. HARWOOD: What I said was that I did not like its being brought forward because I thought it might lead to a misunderstanding of the position of Lancashire.
  *MR. PEELsaid he did not think there was the slightest fear of any misunderstanding of the position of Lancashire by the bringing forward of the Motion. He wished to join in the congratulations to the Colonial Office, and the other Departments concerned, on the work which had been done during the past year for the development of cotton growing. He was glad that attention had been given first of all to West Africa, because it offered perhaps the best field within the British Empire for an increased production of cotton. The right hon. Gentleman opposite had spoken of the possibilities of East Africa and Uganda, pointing out, quite rightly, that there was a large native population whose labour was available for the growth of cotton. It should, however, be remembered that Uganda was a considerable distance from the sea, and that the cost of transport must for some time, at all events, militate against the production of cotton in marketable quantities. He did not know whether the right hon. Gentleman had read an interesting book by Sir Charles Elliot on East Africa, in which he indicated the opinion that he was not hopeful for the present that much could be done

  569
  in the way of cotton growing. In West Africa there was a very different position, ample opportunity being afforded for the production of cotton on a large scale. He need hardly remind the right hon. Gentleman, the distinguished historian opposite, that West Africa, especially the northern parts of Nigeria, had had for centuries a reputation for its supply of cotton and its fine cotton cloths. The population of the country had been accustomed for these centuries not only to the growth but to the manipulation of cotton in various ways. Therefore, there was the advantage of native labour, which had been disturbed when the slave trade was put an end to, but which was now reaching its old proportions since we had given the natives security of government. A great development of the cotton industry might consequently be expected, as the natives had a very strong commercial instinct, and as soon as they knew that there was a demand for it they would grow and deal in it most freely. In Northern Nigeria there was an immense extent of the very best class of cotton ground. He might remind his right hon. friend the Colonial Secretary that last year he had promised that experiments would be made in cotton growing and management, and also in supplying good seed to the natives. He did not think that the right hon. Gentleman had done that on a large scale.
  *MR. LYTTELTON: A good deal has been done.
  *MR. PEELsaid he had not heard every word of the right hon. Gentleman's speech, because there had been so much hilarity on the opposite side of the House. He was, however, extremely glad to hear what the right hon. Gentleman had said, because this was one of the cases where Government might co-operate with private enterprise. He was very much against setting up large plantations for cotton growing; his idea was small holdings cultivated by the natives themselves, and central ginning factories of the best type in each district. He had every confidence, from all the reports he had had from West Africa, that there would be a great development in the growth
  570
  of first-class cotton there, and that a sufficient quantity would be raised to make it marketable in Lancashire, and sufficient in amount to meet any shortage there might be in the American production, although it must be some time before their markets could be in any sense independent of the American supplies.
  Resolved, That, in view of the peril to which the industries of the United Kingdom using cotton as the principal raw material of their manufactures are exposed by their too great dependence on the United States of America as their source of supply, and the good results of the operations already undertaken by the British Cotton Growing Association, this House desires to express its appreciation of the benefits derived by the encouragement afforded by His Majesty's Government to the work of the Association, and looks to a continuance of their good offices as one of the essential conditions of a speedy development of the resources of the Colonies, dependencies, and protectorates of the crown as additional sources of supply of the cotton needed for the maintenance of regular and adequately remunerated employment in one of the greatest of the national industries.—(Sir William Tomlinson.)

  LOCAL TAXATION.
  MR. PURVISsaid that in bringing before the House the question of the incidence of local taxation, he hardly thought that any fault could be found with the subject as unimportant or inopportune. For some years they had been marking time while the Royal Commission was examining the matter and making up their minds upon it; but for more than four years the Report of that Commission had been in the hands of the public, and there was no reason for marking time any longer, but every reason for going forward. He hoped the Motion he was about to propose would not incur the stigma of being called an abstract Resolution, which was never a favourite with the House, although there was no

  571
  choice for a private Member but to proceed by way of abstract Resolution. He was not without hope that by the stimulus of public opinion caused by the Report of the Royal Commission, and the Resolutions passed by this House, the Government would not allow the matter to sleep, but give a promise to do something in a practical direction to carry out the object of the Resolution. He might add that on the previous Saturday at the meeting of the Association of Municipal Associations in the Guildhall, the question of the reform of local taxation and of its incidence was brought in directly or indirectly by every representative of those municipal associations.
  To return to the Royal Commission; there were several things on which the members differed, but on one thing they were all agreed. That was that no small part of the rates paid by any locality went to meet expenditure in which the locality had no especial interest beyond any other locality in the kingdom; and his Motion was designed to point out that when a locality was ordered to do something for the benefit of the community at large, then the State and not the locality ought to pay for it. For instance, education gave no special benefit to any particular locality, and therefore all orders by the State in regard to education ought to be paid for by the State. Then there was the relief of the poor, and the maintenance of main roads, the cost of which should be shifted from the rates to the Imperial Exchequer. The whole principle of his Resolution was expounded at page 11 of the final Report of the Royal Commission. It had been said that an attempt to distribute the burden which ought to be borne by the Imperial tax-payer and the local ratepayer in proportion to the direct money benefit each received, was like the riddle of the Sphinx. The test that a rate was justifiable was that it would add to the money value of the buildings or land assessed. In short, a rate properly imposed was a profitable investment, and not a burden at all, such as that for defraying the cost of lighting the streets and the removal of house refuse. Then, in regard to the name of Imperial grants, there were some services which were of the first importance to the nation, but which
  572
  were more likely to be wel carried out by local bodies. In such cases minute investigation was necessary, with a knowledge of personal character; and the best illustration of that was the relief of the poor. His argument was that such an expenditure ought not to be defrayed from the revenue derived from a particular rate, but from the Consolidated Fund. One reason for that was that assigned revenues from particular taxes were not suitable, because no one could foretell the exact amount required, and the local authorities could not frame their local budgets. Another reason was that assigned revenues from a particular district did not always correspond with the needs of that particular district. Where the service was national, by common consent it ought to be paid for by the nation just as much as the expenditure on the Army and the Navy. He hoped the Government would indicate some intention of bringing forward some legislation to carry out the findings of the Local Taxation Commission without any delay. He begged to move.
  MR. SPEAR (Devonshire, Tavistock)said he had great pleasure in seconding the Resolution, because he had no hesitation in saying that the allocation of the present burdens was unjust to the local ratepayers. Education, the maintenance of main roads, all sanitary matters, especially vaccination, should be borne more largely by the Imperial Exchequer than at present. Of late years personal property had grown immensely, and it was only just to the ratepayers that a larger share of the burden of local taxation should be put on the shoulders of the owners of personal property. The effect of the present system was to drive away capital from this country, and invest it in the development of other lands. He hoped the Government would undertake a general rearrangement of the local taxation. They had shown their sense of the inequality of that taxation by carrying out one of the recommendations of the Royal Commission in the passage of the Agricultural Rating Act.
  Motion made, and Question proposed, ''That, in view of the distinction,

  573
  affirmed in the main Report of the Royal Commission on Local Taxation, between services preponderantly national but generally onerous to the ratepayers and services preponderantly local which confer upon the ratepayers a direct and peculiar benefit, more or less commensurate with the burden, no arrangement of taxation is equitable which does not provide that local authorities have an amount assigned from the Imperial taxes fully representing the interest of the general community in local expenditure on onerous services."—(Mr. Purvis.)
  SIR FREDERICK BANBURYsaid they were all agreed with the mover and the seconder of the Resolution that this was a most important subject, and extremely interesting to dwellers in towns as well as those in the rural districts. He quite agreed that agriculture was so burdened with rates in this country that it could not compete with the agricultural industry in other countries where no such burdens existed. He was not sure, however, that the method proposed by the hon. Gentleman for the relief of local taxation would carry out what he desired. He wanted to know how personal property was to be brought in.
  And, it being Midnight, the Debate stood adjourned. Debate to be resumed to-morrow.

  THE BRIGHTON ELECTION.
  Motion made, and Question proposed," That this House do now adjourn." (Sir A. Acland-Hood).
  MR. LLOYD-GEORGEsaid he had intended to ask the Prime Minister what were the intentions of the Government in the face of the news which had arrived that night as to the fate which had befallen a member of his Administration. Notice was given to the Prime Minister that a question of that kind would be raised; the paper was handed to him and the right hon. Gentleman read it, and forthwith marched out of the House. The discourtesy with which the right hon. Gentleman was treating the House, of which he was still nominally
  574
  the Leader, was becoming absolutely offensive; it hid degenerated into personal rudeness. He thought it was about time the House of Commons should resent such behaviour. This was not merely a matter which affected Members on that side of the House. He was, certain that if the Leader of the House had happened to be a Liberal, there would have been scenes which would have, at any rate, brought an end to anything of that kind such as had occurred during; the past few weeks. He appealed to hon. Members opposite who were gentlemen to resent conduct which was I not worthy of an hon. Gentleman, leaving alone the Leader of the most famous Assembly in the world. The Prime Minister having thus treated the notice given him with wilful and deliberate disrespect, he could only proceed in the right hon. Gentleman's absence. Here was an election—not like the other elections which had occurred during the last three or four years—in which the constituencies of the country had been expressing; their opinion about the Government. The by-election at Brighton was not produced by a mere accident. The constituency was chosen by the Prime Minister, after a long deliberation, as the constituency the Member for which was sure of re-election on this appointment to office. At least, the right hon. Gentleman said, the air of Brighton was safe enough for the broken nerves and the broken reputation of Ministers. But even Brighton did not save them. The candidate of the Government was a thoroughly popular and a strong local man, and yet he had been rejected by a majority of over 800, while some years ago he was returned by a majority of 2,000. Nobody would say one disparaging word against the hon. Gentleman. He himself had been present at a meeting in Brighton when every speaker spoke in the highest terms of the Tory Candidate; and that was the case at every Liberal meeting. Every circumstance was in favour of the Government. But the confidence which the Government had placed in the gullibility of the electors of Brighton was treated with the contempt which it deserved. The Government was lost long ago to all self-respect. But he appealed to the followers of the Government to try to impress upon their leader

  575
  that it would be inconsistent with precedent and inconsistent with honour that they should continue in office after the overwhelming verdict which had been given against them at Brighton. He asked the Patronage Secretary to the Treasury, who was like the faithful sentinel at Pompeii, whether, in the absence of the Prime Minister, he ought not to move the adjournment of the House till Monday in order to give the Government an opportunity of reconsidering their position. The verdict of Brighton proved this, that it was not only education, fiscal reform, or the Sugar Convention of which the country disapproved, but that there was a general aid emphatic sense of disgust with the Ministry. This flouting and insult to the House and the country ought not to be tolerated any longer; and there never was a better proof of the self-restraint of the country that they had tolerated it so long.
  *MR. McCRAEsaid he thought the House was entitled to have from the Patronage Secretary to the Treasury some intimation of the intentions of the Government, because they met under peculiar circumstances. He understood that on Monday the Budget was to be introduced, and was it right or decent in the face of the remarkable expression of opinion that day that the Government should make preparations for carrying on the finances of the country for another year? Not only that; the House had been engaged for a week in considering what the Secretary for War was pleased to call a scheme of Army reform, but which hon. Members on both sides of the House believed to be a scheme for the destruction of the Volunteer force of this country. He asked the right hon. Gentleman the Patronage Secretary to send for the Prime Minister, if the First Lord of the Treasury was in the precincts of the House, and let him know that the House desired to be informed what his intentions were. Or, if the right hon. Gentleman wished, as he was entitled to do, to consult his colleagues in the Cabinet as to the procedure they were now to adopt in view of what had happened that evening, he ought to come to the House and explain that it was his intention to do so. The right hon.
  576
  Gentleman had shown great courage under very discouraging circumstances before, and surely he was not afraid to come and face the House of Commons in regard to the matter which had brought about this election to-day. He felt that an injustice had been done to Scotland in this matter. He saw on the Treasury bench the Secretary to the Board of Trade, who was the Minister that ought to have been offered as a sacrifice. That hon. Member, they all thought, was no doubt fit and suitable to fill a certain office, the vacancy of which had brought about the election in Brighton, the result of which they had just heard. But, the Blackfriars Division of Glasgow was evidently not considered a safe seat, and a post was given to the hon. Gentleman the Member for Brighton. But,, even in that part of the country there was hardly a voice which could say anything in favour of the present Government. In the interests of public decency and in the interests of this House, with all its great traditions, they were entitled to have more consideration than they had received from the Prime Minister. The right hon. Gentleman was present in the Chamber a few minutes ago, and he surely knew what had happened at Brighton, even if he did not know what occurred in the House the other evening.
  SIR CHARLES RENSHAWsaid he had listened to the hon Members opposite, and he was bound to say that he thought they had gone beyond the point to which they were entitled to go in their action—as a result, no doubt, of the exciting news which they had heard from Brighton. They seemed to suggest that it was the duty of the Patronage Secretary to produce the Prime Minister. That was an entirely novel view to take. No doubt the Brighton election had been very acutely contested. Hon. Members on the other side of the House had been deeply interested in the part they had taken in that election; and there had been great discussions as to what had been the deciding influence in bringing about the result of that election. He had appeared in that House in many characters.
  AN HON. MEMBERon the OPPOSITION Benches: Which character are you in now?.
  SIR CHAELES RENSHAWsaid he was sometimes spoken of as a Scotsman; but he was a Sussex man, and he knew perfectly well that there had been in Brighton an overweening opinion on the part of the Conservative organisation as to the strength of that organisation. That had caused him, as a Sussex man, considerable apprehension. It was always the case where there had been a great majority in a previous election. He thought hon. Members on the opposite side of the House would agree with him in that; because they knew themselves what injury had been caused to their Party from having too large a majority. There was another cause which had been of influence in this election, and which was of a purely local character; and that was the questions connected with the ecclesiastical position in the country.
  AN HON. MEMBERon the OPPOSITION Benches: You had that at the last election.
  SIR CHARLES RENSHAWsaid that there was a very strong feeling in regard to these Church questions in Brighton. Hon. Members opposite suggested that the result at Brighton was due to some dereliction of duty on the part of the Government; but he contended that it had far more to do with the state of the Party organisation owing to over-confidence, and with the state of things in that constituency in regard to Church matters.
  MR. GUESTsaid that perhaps in many Administrations the post of Junior Lord of the Treasury was not a very important office, but to the present Government the Whips' office was one of the most important departments on which they relied for their Parliamentary success; and the Government
  578
  had lost one of their men from that office. He dared say that the Prime Minister must sometimes regret that he had not yet been able to carry his cherished scheme of abolishing the re-election of a Minister after taking office. He thought, after what had happened that day, the House would be ill-advised in approving of such a scheme, because the value of re-election had been proved as well in the past as that day. The hon Baronet opposite thought that the result of the election in Brighton was largely owing to religious causes. He had the advantage of being present at a meeting in Brighton the previous night, and he could tell the hon. Baronet that, although he did not know the constituency so well as the hon. Baronet claimed to do, there was a tone and temper in the whole constituency which was quite unmistakable as to its Liberalism. The shams and shibboleths of the Government were nothing but cardboard defences when it came to an election. The country was not impressed with the ingenuous trickery of the Prime Minister, and if the Government had the courage of their opinions they would appeal to the country and then see what the result would be. He entirely repudiated the suggestion that this election had no significance. The country was sick of the Government, of their devices, their tricks, of their desertion of their posts, and of the way which they had treated the House. He told the hon. Gentlemen opposite that if they cherished the hope that this was nothing but a passing phase, a regrettable incident which would have no effect upon the total result of the general election then they were very much mistaken. They, on that side of the House, very much resented the absence of the Prime Minister, for they felt that in discussing this question they ought to have his presence. If the right hon. Gentleman

  579
  was not able to be present now, why was it that he still claimed to lead this Chamber? It seemed to him that the result of the Brighton election was one which the Prime Minister could not morally ignore, and therefore he entirely supported the view of the hon. Member for Carnarvon Boroughs in the remarks which he had made.
  MR. BROADHURSTsaid that the hon. Member for Renfrew seemed to think that the disaster to his Party had been caused by religious differences between the Protestant Party and the Tory Party in Brighton. Surely, if that were so, some respect should be paid to the religious opinions of so faithful a constituency as that of Brighton. He had been more than twenty-five years a Member of this House. Probably he was one of half-a-dozen present who had had so long an association with this great Chamber; but never before had he witnessed such continuous disrespect and insult to this House from any Government as had been shown recently. It was not only the religious opinions of the electors of Brighton which had disgusted them with the Government; the country could not but have noticed that night after night, and week after week, questions submitted to the consideration of the House had been ignored by the Prime Minister—questions on which the night hon. Gentleman knew perfectly well he would be defeated if he divided against them. The country had taken notice of all that, even if the Prime Minister had not. And if the Government were to try their hand again in some other constituency, no matter how safe it was supposed to be, depend upon it they would continue to meet with
  580
  these rebuffs. The action of the Prime Minister was not only an insult to the Opposition and to the Members of the House generally, but it showed scant respect to Mr. Speaker to leave him alone in the Chair night after night without the support or any attendance whatever of a leading representative of the Government. They had present, certainly, a respected Scotch Member who, he thought, was the Lord-Advocate. He knew they had not had a single English law officer in the present Government. They were all Scotchmen or Irishmen. England repudiated this Government from one end of the country to the other; and they could not find a lawyer to fill one of the law offices of the Crown. There was now only one of the Whips left. [Great laughter, during which Sir A. ACLAND-HOOD re-entered the Chamber and took his seat on the Treasury Bench.] He was very glad that the Chief Whip had returned. The right hon. Baronet, whom they all respected, was the one man of honour still left on the Ministerial Benches of the Tory Government.
  *MR. SPEAKER: Order, order! The hon. Member may use strong language with regard to political action, but he must not speak of members of the Government as men without honour.
  MR. BROADHURST: I am surprised to hear that I even suggested such a thing.
  *MR. SPEAKER: The hon. Member referred to the right hon. Gentleman on the Treasury bench as the one man of honour in the Government. That is a personal allusion to other Ministers which the hon. Member should not have used.
  MR. BROADHURSTsaid that if he had put it in that way he would with draw it. He regretted if he put in the "the," and he certainly withdrew it. He saw there was one hon. Member on the Treasury Bench who had a fellow Whip on his left who had had an extraordinarily narrow squeak for his appointment of a Lord of the Treasury. His feeling was that this was a condition of Parliament never before experienced in the life of any man sitting in the House. It was a disgrace to Parliament and to the Government, and the country required that the Government should surrender its trust of honour in order that the national well-being might be secured. They should submit themselves as a whole, and not one now and again, to the consideration and verdict of the country. If they did so, in his judgment, there would be a small handful of them left to occupy the Opposition Benches. He was sure that the Patronage Secretary had the courage of his convictions at all times. He had heard the right hon. Baronet, before he took office, make speeches which were an honour to the country, and which he himself would never forget. [MINISTERIAL ironical laughter]. Yes, when the Government were traducing officers on the field of battle, the right hon. Gentleman stood up in this House for their character, honour, and ability against the whole howling set which sat by his side, and before and behind him. Would the right hon. Baronet make a full, faithful, and complete report to the Prime Minister to-morrow of the proceedings of to-night and ask the Prime Minister whether he would be prepared to-morrow—or to-day rather, since it was after midnight—to make a statement to the House as to what he considered his position to be
  582
  after the lamentable and disastrous defeat at Brighton—a defeat such as had never been experienced by any Government since 1880, when the late Sir William Harcourt was defeated at Oxford. Surely the chief Whip would promise the House to make his report to the Prime Minister, and ask him to make a clean breast of his position and let the House know what his intentions were in regard to the future.
  MR. CHURCHILLsaid that they did not want to bully or assail the right hon. Gentleman on the Treasury Bench. That right hon. Gentleman had won the respect of his opponents for many reasons which he did not wish to enter into now. But he regretted to hear the hon. Member behind the right hon. Baronet endeavour to put up the lame explanation, which he did not really believe, as to the cause of this situation at Brighton. The hon. Member for Renfrew knew perfectly well that the Brighton election was not the result of over-confidence in the Party organisation, and was not the result of a particular religious controversy. He knew that it was the result of the general political situation, and very largely to the way in which the cause of free trade had been attacked. He could not help thinking that this election looked rather like the beginning of the end. It looked as if events were moving more rapidly than had been anticipated, and, to quote the words already used, "Did you think that the day of retribution would never come; it had come already." The Government were now doing penance for the disingenuousness of years. All their shams, all their shuffles, all their manœuvrings, all their scurrying from the House of Commons, all their ingenious

  583
  devices of the gag and the guillotine were of no avail. These worked very smoothly here. They enabled the Government to draw their salaries with great regularity, they enabled a Party Press to proclaim each shameful trick as a brilliant triumph and a new victory. But the people now understood it all. The great syndicated newspapers, pulled by one wire from London, would try to explain it all away to-morrow morning, but he did not envy them their task. They would sit up a long time before they could explain away Brighton. They knew perfectly well how to interpret events which had taken place during the last two years, and the conduct of political affairs in the House of Commons. What a career the Conservative Party had had during those years! When the present Prime Minister received the authority of the Conservative Party from the late Lord Salisbury he was possessed of the greatest governing instrument that had been known for a generation. What had he done with it? In the space of two years, not from any conviction which he had, or for the sake of any cause he desired to push forward, but simply by weak and vacillating action, by not having the courage to state his opinions boldly on great controversies, he had wrecked his Party lost his friends, and broken up his Government by methods which also were not unnoticed in the country, and now they got the news of an election, which was not singular, but which came as the culmination of a long succession of electoral disasters, and was in itself only the herald of a greater storm. He knew nothing of the man who had been lost to the Government, but he knew that one of the principal features in the election was the disgust expressed by the working men and other electors at the
  584
  treatment of the House of Commons by the Prime Minister.
  The House would recollect that on more than one occasion he had used language in the House which it was not pleasant to use, which no one liked to use, and hon. friends had told him he had gone beyond the limits of what was decent and what the country would approve. Had he? He knew that it was not possible within the limits of order to use the language in that House which would not be endorsed by the great majority of voters in the country. They were sick of the Government Why did they continue in office? Why did the Prime Minister continue? Office at any price was his motto, at the sacrifice of any friend or colleague, at the sacrifice of any principle, by the adoption of any manrœuvre, however miserable or contemptible. For whom? For his Party? No. The genius of his Party was not represented in his Government. But for his friends, his personal backers. Those were the men who filled the Government to-day, with no position whatever in the country except a position attained by virtue of having won the favour and smile. In some great crisis in this country, when the ship of State had to be steered through shoals and quicksands, it was usual in English public life to assume that Ministers of the Crown were pecuniarily disinterested. He was not quite so sure whether in practice that was always the case. If not for the emoluments of office, what conceivable reason was there for the Government continuing in their position? The servile majority of the Government was perfectly ready to vote for anything. Their leader was up to all the tricks of the game; he had got the Estimates in

  585
  rrears; he put on the closure at all hours? when a question came up for discussion which was likely to be awkward, he ran way from the House of Commons. And to the Government might drag on their existence longer, but the day would come surely and swiftly when it would be Brighton all over the country, and the people would express their detestation for the Government and their contempt for its character.
  MR. SWIFT MACNEILLsaid that the event of to-day had shown that the absconding Prime Minister was a good prophet. The right hon. Gentleman was reported to have said three or four weeks ago, and rightly, that, in his judgment, no seat in the whole country was safe for the Tory Party except the City of London and the University of Oxford. He deeply commiserated with the right hon. Gentleman the Patronage Secretary that he had not obtained any information from the Prime Minister. But he had in his possession the latest correspondence of the superior, absconding, and skulking statesman who led the House. He had made a special study of the Prime Minister for a great number of years. The right hon. Gentleman was rather a favourite of his when, in 1891, he fought him in Donegal. He liked him still more to-night when he was hunting him off the Treasury bench. At about 11.20, seeing that the Prime Minister was on the Treasury Bench, he went to the library and wrote him the following polite letter—
  "April 5th.
  "Dear Mr. BALFOUR,"—he was always courteous—" I intend to make some strong comments on your Administration on the adjournment of the House to-night. As I have some disgreeable things to say I put it to you that it
  586
  is incumbent on you to be present.—Yours truly."
  That letter was delivered to the Prime Minister, he read it, and it acted like a bomb-shell, for out he ran. The right hon. Gentleman had the pen of a ready writer; and he wondered the right hon. Gentleman did not discharge his duty by writing an account of the proceedings in the House to the King. A few minutes afterwards he received the following letter from the Prime Minister, which was equally courteous as his own, but more effusive—
  "Dear Mr. MAcNEILL,—The practice of making the usual moving of the adjournment at midnight the occasion for a general discussion is new. If I was asked I would add that I think it undesirable. The fact that you have, as you tell me, some disagreeable things to say is, I admit, a reason which, taking it by itself, would make me greatly desire to be present."
  that was pretty Fanny's way.
  "But if the mere fact that some Member of the House wanted to say disagreeable things,''
  —many Members wanted to say them—
  "were a sufficient reason for requiring the House itself, as well as the Government, to sit up beyond midnight, the Twelve O'clock Rule would be practically abrogated."
  This, from a right hon. Gentleman who that afternoon had carried a Resolution for the suspension of the Twelve O'clock Rule! The right hon. Gentleman added—
  "The desire to say disagreeable things is not so rare as you appear to imagine."
  Then the right hon. Gentleman gave him a Parthian shot before he ran away.
  "By the way," (that was the usual aristocratic prelude to saying a disagreeable thing) "I rather think that this afternoon you voted against the rule for relaxing the Twelve O'clock Rule on the rare occasions that it is required for the passage of money Resolutions on the Report stage."
  And so he did, but the right hon. Gentleman had the courage to say that

  587
  in the interest of the House, he should not stay up after twelve o'clock when his personal conduct, as head of the Government, was to be challenged. It was a great joy to him, this Brighton election, because it hastened to drive from office the most detestable statesman that had ever disgraced the Government of Ireland, The Government had become odious to the country and the House. He rarely made an apology, except when he could not help himself; but he pledged himself to put down another Question with reference to Mr. Gerald Loder's position in the Government. That gentleman was personally a kindly man, and, like Charles II., if he never did a wise thing he rarely did an unwise thing. He agreed that Mr. Gerald Loder would have been a much wiser man if he had not accepted the post of Junior Lord of the Treasury, and it was because he was weighted by the sins of the Administration that he lost his seat. The right hon. Gentleman opposite went down to Brighton, and with an eloquence which would have done credit to Demosthenes or Cicero, or the hon. Member for Peterborough, said, as the chosen vessel of the Government, that it would be a snub to the King if Mr. Gerald Loder were not returned. Would the right hon. Gentleman get up and dare to say such a thing in this House? He promised that if Mr. Gerald Loder did not get another seat, the Government would be in as bad a position as Mr. Gerald Loder was to day.
  MR. ERNEST GRAYsaid that when the late Sir William Harcourt was defeated at Oxford by a large majority the Government did not resign for some years afterwards. If
  588
  this Government did not now resign, it would merely follow the example set them more than twenty years ago.
  MR. McKENNA (Monmouthshire, N.)said he wished the right hon. Baronet, when he came to reply, would direct his answer to this one point—why did the Government stay in office? The one great question which the Prime Minister declared, at Sheffield, it was his duty to bring before the Government and the country had been rejected and repudiated by this House. The right hon. Gentleman, therefore, had now no policy. The Prime Minister would probably come down to the House to-morrow and challenge the Opposition to move a vote of censure upon him and His Government, and state that so long as he had a majority in the House he would not resign. He would make an appeal to those who were his accomplices in evasion and would get an acquittal from them. But the country had declared against him, and one of his own Administration had been rejected by his constituents. Hon. Members were entitled to ask the Patronage Secretary, who knew the temper of the House, whether this was not an occasion for him to tell the Prime Minister that the genuine feeling of the House of Commons was against him and that the time had come for him to resign.
  *SIR A. ACLAND-HOOD: In reply to the various Questions put to me I have nothing to add to the speech I made a few minutes after twelve o'clock in moving the adjournment of the House.
  Adjourned at five minutes before One o'clock.