Sitting of 3 August 1905

Preamble
The House met at Two of the Clock.

PRIVATE BILL BUSINESS.
Ealing Corporation Bill; Malvern Water Bill. Lords Amendments considered, and agreed to.
Bangor (County Down) Water and Improvement Bill [Lords] (King's Consent signified). Read the third time, and passed, with Amendments.
Central Electric Supply Bill [Lords] (King's Consent signified). Read the third time, and passed, with Amendments.
Preston Corporation (Ribble Navigation) Bill [Lords] (King's Consent, on behalf of the Duchy of Lancaster, signified). Read the third time, and passed, with Amendments.
Rhymney and Aber Valley Gas and Water Company Bill [Lords]. Read the third time, and passed, with Amendments.

PRIVATE BILLS.
Ordered, That Standing Orders 220 and 246, relating to Private Bills, be suspended for the remainder of the session.
Ordered, That as regards Private Bills to be returned by the House of Lords with Amendments, such Amendments (if unopposed) be considered forthwith.
Ordered, That as regards Private Bills to be returned by the House of Lords with Amendments, such Amendments (if opposed) shall be considered at such times as the Chairman of Ways and Means may determine.
Ordered, That when it is intended by the Promoters to propose any Amendments thereto, a copy of such Amendments shall be deposited in the Private Bill Office, and notice given on the day on which the Bill shall have been returned from the Lords.—(The Chairman of Ways and Means.)
South Barracas (Buenos Ayres) Gas and Coke Company Bill [Lords]. Ordered, That, in the case of the South Barracas (Buenos Ayres) Gas and Coke Company Bill [Lords], Standing Order 211 be suspended, and that the Committee on the Bill have leave to sit and proceed on Monday next.—(The Chairman of Ways and Means.)

SANDGATE URBAN DISTRICT COUNCIL BILL [LORDS].
*MR. H. J. WILSONsaid the circumstances connected with this Bill were peculiar and,

51
indeed, unique. Sandgate was a district in which there were an unusual number of hospitals and convalescent homes, and the Police and Sanitary Committee had given the urban council very remarkable powers—powers, in fact, without precedent—powers to license hospitals and to prohibit and, indeed, close hospitals not so licensed. He was not suggesting that the Police and Sanitary Committee's reason was wrong; no doubt something of the kind was needed under the special circumstances, and he would not detain the House by discussing whether greater safeguards against abuse of the powers might not have been inserted in the Bill. He only wanted to make two points; the first was that the Police and Sanitary Committee would have done well to have drawn the special attention of the House to the proposals, instead of merely using the formal and stereotyped phrase, and, secondly, be desired to urge the undesirability of allowing the powers granted in this case to be used as a precedent, with the results of shutting out the poorer classes from the smaller health resorts on our coast and elsewhere. All alike were entitled to the benefit of fresh air, and local authorities ought not, except under extraordinary circumstances, to be allowed to exclude sick people from their districts.
Bill read the third time, and passed with Amendments.

MESSAGE FROM THE LORDS.
That they have agreed to—Compensation for Damage to Crops Bill, without Amendment.
London County Council (General Powers) Bill; Bolton Corporation Bill; Acton Sewage Bill; Halifax Corporation Bill, with Amendments.
Amendments to—Esk Valley Power-Gas Order Confirmation Bill [Lords]; Rhymney and Aber Valley Gas and Water Company Bill [Lords]; Bristol Blind Asylum Bill [Lords]; Blackpool Improvement Bill [Lords]; Newcastle-upon-Tyne Corporation Bill [Lords];
52
Corbett Estate Bill [Lords]; County of London Electric Supply Company Bill Lords]; Gosport and Fareham Tramways Bill [Lords]; Nottingham Corporation Bill [Lords]; North Metropolitan Electric Power Supply Bill [Lords]; Humber Conservancy Bill [Lords]; Littlehampton Urban District Council Bill [Lords]; Shepton Mallet Gas Company (Electric Lighting) Bill [Lords]; Southport, Birkdale, and West Lancashire Water Board Bill [Lords]; Great Central Railway Bill [Lords]; The Central Electric Supply Bill [Lords]; Sandgate Urban District Council Bill [Lords], without Amendment.
That they have passed a Bill, intituled, "An Act to confirm a Provisional Order under the Private Legislation Procedure (Scotland) Act, 1899, relating to Fraserburgh Harbour." [Fraserburgh Harbour Order Confirmation Bill [Lords.]
Fraserburgh Harbour Order Confirmation Bill [Lords]. Ordered, under Section 7 of The Private Legislation Procedure (Scotland) Act, 1899, to be considered upon Monday next.

PETITIONS.
  UNEMPLOYED WORKMEN BILL.
  Petition from Leeds, in favour; to lie upon the Table.
RETURNS, REPORTS, ETC.
  FLAX AND LINEN FACTORIES.
  Return presented, relative thereto [Address 18th May; Mr. Wolff;] to lie upon the Table, and to be printed. [No. 290.]

  INTERNATIONAL CONFERENCE ON LABOUR.
  Return presented, relative thereto [Address 28th March; Mr. Herbert

  53
  Samuel]; to lie upon the Table, and to be printed. [No. 291.]

  QUEEN'S COLLEGE, CORK.
  Copy presented, of Report of the President for the Session 1904–5, with Appendices [by Command]; to lie upon the Table.
  LOCAL TAXATION ACCOUNT, 1904–5.
  Return presented, relative thereto [ordered 28th July; Mr. Jeffreys]; to lie upon the Table, and to be printed. [No. 292.]
  TRADE REPORTS (ANNUAL SERIES).
  Copies presented, of Diplomatic and Consular Reports, Annual Series, Nos. 3469 to 3470 [by Command]; to lie upon the Table.

  PAPERS LAID UPON THE TABLE BY THE CLERK OF THE HOUSE.
  1. Inquiry into Charities (County of Wilts). Further Return relative thereto [ordered 9th August, 1901; Mr. Griffith Boscawen]; to be printed. [No. 293.]
  2. Inquiry into Charities (County of Berks). Further Return relative thereto [ordered 28th March; Mr. Griffith Boscawen]; to be printed. [No. 294.]

  COAL TABLES, 1904.
  Copy ordered, "of Statistical Tables relating to the production, consumption, and imports and exports of Coal in the British Empire and the principal Foreign Countries in each year from 1883 to 1904, as far as the particulars can be stated; together with Statements showing the production of Lignite and Petroleum in the principal producing countries for a series of years (in continuation of Parliamentary Paper, No. 295, of Session 1904)."—(Mr. Bonar Law.)
  Copy presented accordingly; to lie upon the Table, and to be printed. [No. 295.]

  IRON AND STEEL, 1904.
  Copy ordered, "of Memorandum and Statistical Tables showing the production and consumption of Iron Ore and Pig Iron, and the production of Steel in the United Kingdom and the principal Foreign Countries in recent years, and the Imports and Exports of certain classes of Iron and Steel Manufactures (in continuation of Parliamentary Paper, No. 244, of Session 1904)."—(Mr. Bonar Law.)
  Copy presented accordingly; to lie-upon the Table, and to be printed. [No. 296.]

  MERCHANT SHIPPING, 1904.
  Copy ordered, "of Tables showing the progress of Merchant Shipping in the United Kingdom and the principal Maritime Countries."—(Mr. Bonar Law.)
  Copy presented accordingly; to lie upon the Table, and to be printed. [No. 297.]

  NATIONAL SCHOOL TEACHERS (IRE- LAND) (ATTENDANCE AT MEETINGS).
  Copy ordered, "of Circular issued by the Commissioners of National Education, Ireland, to Teachers of National Schools in Ireland regarding Attendance at Meetings, etc., together with the Correspondence, etc., relative thereto."—(Mr. Walter Long.)
  TECHNICAL EDUCATION (LOCAL AUTHORITIES).
  Return ordered, "showing the extent to which and the manner in which Local Authorities in England and Wales have applied funds to the purposes of Technical Education and of other forms of Education other than Elementary, during the year 1904–5 under the following Acts: Local Taxation (Customs and Excise) Act, 1890; Technical Instruction Acts, 1889 and 1891; Welsh Intermediate Education Act, 1889; Public Libraries and Museums Acts; and Education Act, 1902."—(Sir William Anson.)

  NAVY (PERSONNEL).
  Return ordered, "of the Personnel of

  On the 25th day of September, 1904.

  On the 25th day of June, 1905.

  Total numbers borne in harbour-ships, shore establishments, and ships in reserve,

  Portsmouth

  Do.

  do.

  Chatham—Sheerness

  Do.

  do.

  Plymouth

  Grand total

  Number in gunnery schools

  Number in torpedo schools

  Number in general depôts

  Number in signal schools

  Number of stokers under training in harbour

  Number in depôt ships for submarines

  Total

  Number in nucleus crews of ships in Commission in reserve

  Portsmouth

  Do.

  do.

  Chatham—Sheerness

  Do.

  do.

  Plymouth

  Total

  —(Mr. Edmund Robertson.)

QUESTIONS AND ANSWERS CIRCULATED WITH THE VOTES.

  St. Jame's Park
  SIR SAMUEL SADLER): To ask the hon. Member for Chorley, as representing the First Commissioner of Works whether his attention has been called to the crowded state of the grass used largely by children in St. James's Park; and whether he will reopen the adjoining ground on which the new grass has now become thoroughly established, at any rate during the summer school holidays.
  (Answered by Lord Balcarres.) During the month of August the ground in question will be thrown open to children only.
  the Navy in shore establishments and ships in reserve, in the following form:—

  Property Tax on Residences of the Irish Clergy.
  COLONEL MCCALMONT: To ask the Secretary to the Treasury whether property tax is charged on the residences of the clergy of all denominations in Ireland; if not, what exceptions are made, and what is the reason for such charge not being made.
  (Answered by Mr. Victor Cavendish.) Property tax is assessed on the residences of the clergy of all denominations in Ireland. No exceptions are made to this assessment, but the Schedule A assessment is discharged (except in so far as it covers any head rent or other annual charge from which, the income-tax can be deducted) in those cases where the residence is occupied rent free, and without the power of letting, by a clergyman or minister whose total income, exclusive

  57
  of the annual value of the house, does not exceed £160 per annum.

  Deer Forest Return and Dr. Dettner's Report on the Island of Lewis.
  MR. WEIR: To ask the Secretary to the Treasury if he will state why the Government printers in Scotland have not yet completed the printing of the Deer Forest Return and Dr. Dettner's Report on the Public Health and Insanitary Gondition of the Island of Lewis.
  (Answered by Mr. Victor Cavendish.) Copies of the Deer Forest Return were delivered to the Vote Office this morning. I am informed that Dr. Dettner's Report is now in proof.

  Reafforestation of Ireland.
  MR. FIELD: To ask the Secretary to the Treasury whether he can arrange that, with a view to assist in reafforesting Ireland in conjunction with Government effort, planting for profit, or reclamation and partial planting of uncultivated land shall be one of the purposes for which loans may be made under the Land Improvement Acts.
  (Answered by Mr. Victor Cavendish.) Loans for purposes of planting to afford shelter can be made under the Land Improvement Acts. Loans for planting for other purposes can be made to owners of land, leaseholders, and occupiers, but it will require legislation to place tenants for life in the same position. Such legislation cannot be contemplated at this period of the session.

  Infant Mortality.
  SIR JOHN GORST: To ask the President of the Local Government Board whether he is aware that according to the Returns of the Registrar-General the infant mortality per 1,000 births has increased in the year 1904 as compared with the average of 1901–3: in Fulham from 143 to 152; in St. Pancras from 145 to 150; in Bethnal Green from 150 to 157; and in Southwark from 161 to 174; while in Poplar the rate has decreased from 158 to 154: whether in Poplar much
  58
  more out-relief is given to nursing mothers than in other parishes, and whether the decreased death-rate is attributable to this cause; whether Southwark had last year the highest infant mortality in London; whether the Local Government Board will inquire in those districts in which infant mortality is on the increase as to what obstacles are placed by boards of guardians in the way of parents seeking medical relief for their infant children, and in particular whether it is the practice to grant such relief as a loan; and whether the parents who apply are required to appear before the board of guardians or a committee.
  (Answered by Mr. Gerald Balfour.) I believe that the figures are substantially as stated in the Question. I am unable to say whether more outdoor relief is given to nursing mothers in Poplar than elsewhere. The place in London which in 1904 had the highest infant mortality, according to the annual Return of the Registrar-General, was Shoreditch. There is no evidence, so far as I am aware, that guardians are unwilling to afford medical relief to necessitous parents who are unable to provide such relief for their children. From inquiries which have been made it would appear that it is not the usual practice in London to give medical relief on loan, or to require parents to appear before the guardians or a committee. Even where this is done, the information before me does not point to the conclusion that persons properly entitled to receive relief are thereby deterred from applying for it.

  Licences issued to Drivers of Motor-Cars.
  MR. WEIR: To ask the President of the Local Government Board if he will consider the expediency of arranging for a Return to be kept of the number of licences issued to professional chauffeurs and to male and female motorists respectively.
  (Answered by Mr. Gerald Balfour.) I presume that the hon. Member desires that when persons apply for licences they should give information on the points referred to, and that the particulars should be recorded in the

  59
  registers kept by the local authorities. The arrangement would involve some difficulty, and I am not at present aware of any sufficient reason for adopting it.

  Action by Local Authorities under the Licensing Act.
  MR. TALBOT: To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department whether he can inform the House what action has been taken by the various local authorities under the Licensing Act, 1904; what number of licences have been reported to the confirmation authorities; and what number of licences have been refused and what number renewed by these authorities.
  {Answered by Mr. Secretary Akers-Douglas.) I am not yet in possession of the information desired. I have, however, made arrangements for collecting it as soon as it is available, with a view to tabulating it and presenting it to the House in due course.

  Protection of Imported Labourers Em- ployed by Messrs. T. and J. Harrison at Liverpool Docks.
  MR. H. D. GEEENE: To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department whether he is aware that, owing to the absence of protection for the men imported to work for Messrs. T. and J. Harrison, shipowners, of the port of Liverpool, from molestation and intimidation by union pickets, these men are unable to venture into the streets of Liverpool, several having already been assaulted when attempting to do so, and that in consequence it has been found necessary to provide food and lodging for them on the dock premises; and whether he will direct such steps to be taken as will enable these men to pursue their lawful avocations.
  (Answered by Mr. Secretary Akers-Douglas.) The responsibility for the protection of the men employed by Messrs. T. and J. Harrison rests with the local police authorities of Liverpool. I have communicated with the chief constable of Liverpool, and he reports that extra police have been employed in the neighbourhood since the strike began on 28th June; that they have prevented all interference with the men at or near
  60
  their work, and that though more than half the men now employed by Messrs. Harrison are not housed in the docks the number of assaults at a distance from the dock has been, in his opinion, small.

  Redirection of Letters.
  MR. SAMUEL YOUNG: To ask the Postmaster-General whether the Department undertakes to redirect letters to travellers on business or pleasure on receiving notice; or whether the practice is confined to householders.
  (Answered by Lord Stanley.) The Post Office does not undertake the redirection of correspondence for a person temporarily leaving home, with whatever object and whether a householder or not, unless the house be left uninhabited, not, as a general rule, in any case where private redirection can be arranged. The regulations on the subject will be found at page 22 of the Post Office Guide. If the hon. Member has any specific case in view and will be good enough to give me particulars, I will have inquiry made.

  Rewards for Postmen.
  MR. PIKE PEASE: To ask the Postmaster-General whether he will consider the advisability of issuing to those postmen who have served for twenty - one years, with unblemished character, a similar decoration to that granted to members of the Army and Navy after completing twenty one years service, and similar to the service badge granted to the various police forces throughout the country.
  (Answered by Lord Stanley.) Established postmen who have served for twenty years, with unblemished character, are entitled to four good-conduct stripes, each carrying increased pay of 1s. a week, awarded at intervals of five years. Moreover, after twenty-five years unblemished service, they are eligible, on retirement, for the award of the Imperial Service medal, granted by His Majesty the King. It does not appear to me that any further decorations or badges are needed.

  Site for a New Post Office at Wapping.
  SIR THOMAS DEWAE: To ask the Postmaster-General whether he has yet

  61
  been able to secure premises in Wapping suitable for the establishment of a post office west of Wapping Bridge.
  (Answered by Lord Stanley.) I regret to say that the circumstances are still the same as they were a year ago, when I informed the hon. Member that no suitable premises were available.

  Issue of Report of Postmaster-General.
  MR. WEIR: To ask the Postmaster-General if he will state when the Report of the Postmaster-General will be issued, and can arrangements be made for the Report to be issued earlier in the session in future.
  (Answered by Lord Stanley.) My Report for the year ended March 31st, 1905, is in the hands of the printers, and will, I hope, be issued early next week. Every effort is made to issue the Report as early as possible; but the preparation of the elaborate series of statistics on which the Report is based necessarily occupies some time after the completion of the financial year.

  The Imperial Institute.
  SIR MANCHERJEE BHOWNAG-GREE: To ask the Secretary to the Board of Trade whether, in view of the fact that some £115,000 was subscribed by the princes and people of India towards the erection of the Imperial Institute as a memorial of the reign of Her Majesty the late Queen Victoria, and considering that the purposes for which it was originally erected have been modified and are liable to alterations in the future, he will take steps to secure that the memorial character of the building shall be expressly preserved by means of a prominent inscription on its front adequately setting forth in English and Hindustani the circumstances which the Institute was intended to perpetuate.
  (Answered by MR. Bonar Law.) The matter of affixing a suitable inscription on the Imperial Institute building is at present engaging the attention of the Advisory Committee of the Imperial Institute.

  Agricultural Employment in Great Britain and Abroad.
  MR. PARTINGTON: To ask the Secretary to the Board of Trade if he can give the number of people employed in agriculture in the following countries:—England, Scotland, France, Germany, Austria, Italy, Belgium, and United States of America.
  (Answered by Mr. Bonar Law.) The census classifications adopted by the various countries named are not on a comparable basis, and any figures that could be stated with regard to the number of persons employed in agriculture would be subject to so many qualifications that it is not practicable to give the particulars in answer to a Question. The hon. Member will find certain figures with regard to some of the countries named in [Cd. 2337] of 1904, pp. 436–8.

  Navy—Cost and Date of Warships being put in Commission.
  MR. LAMBERT: To ask the Secretary to the Admiralty what was the total initial cost and when were commissioned the following warships: "Orlando," "Iris," "Hector," "Fearless," "Magicienne," "Blanche," "Blonde," "Barosa," "Boomerang," "Karrakatta," "Grasshopper," "Jaseur," "Pincher," "Beagle," "Nautilus," and "Fancy."
  (Answered by Mr. Pretyman) I must refer the hon. Member to the Return of vessels struck off the effective list, issued in March last, No. 74–1.

  Sinking of "Afghanistan"—Settlement of Claims.
  MR. HARMOOD-BANNER: To ask the Secretary to the Admiralty, with reference to the sinking of the Liverpool sailing ship "Afghanistan" by H.M.S. "Cæsar," on June 3rd last, if he is in a position to communicate the details of the result of the naval inquiry; and it the necessary instructions will be given to bring about a speedy settlement of all life claims.
  (Answered by Mr. Pretyman.) The proceedings and results of Naval Courts

  63
  of Inquiry are always treated as confidential, and this course is especially necessary when legal proceedings are pending or possible. The reply to the last part of the Question is in the affirmative.

  Scotch General Aid Grant.
  SIR CHARLES RENSHAW: To ask the Lord-Advocate whether, seeing that a sum of about £110,000 out of the general aid grant was carried to suspense account on March 31st this year, and that a further sum from the same source will be accumulated this year, he will say whether, under the Education (Scotland) Bill introduced this session, these sums would have been made available for educational purposes; and whether, in view of the fact that this Bill is not to be proceeded with, the Government propose to deal with this money by amending the Minute of June, 1897, as amended by that of April 30th, 1900, and place these additional sums at the disposal of the county committees, or what course it is intended to pursue.
  (Answered by Mr. Scott Dickson.) The balances in question would have been made available for educational purposes under the Education (Scotland) Bill introduced this session. They will now be dealt with by further Minutes of the Department, as directed by Clause 3 of the General Aid Grant Minute of April 25th, 1904, and Clause 5 of the corresponding Minute of February 16th, 1905, and these Minutes will be laid before Parliament in due course. It is not proposed to apply these balances to augmenting temporarily the sums dealt with by the Minute of June 10th, 1897, and the amending Minute of April 30th, 1900, or to any other purpose of annual maintenance expenditure, but to reserve them for the purpose of aiding certain forms of capital expenditure for educational purposes. On reference to Clause 32 of the Education (Scotland) Bill, it will be seen that this is the purpose for which these balances were destined under the Bill.

  Printing and Stationery for County Courts.
  MR. MARKHAM: To ask Mr. Chancellor of the
  64
  Exchequer whether he will state the reason why a circular was issued by the Treasury on July 25th to the Registrars of County Courts stating that all stationery and printing material would, on and after April 1st, 1906, be supplied by the Controller of the Stationery Office; whether he is aware that many country printers would be affected if this work was taken from them; and will he state what saving, if any, he estimates will be made if this change be carried out.
  (Answered by Mr. Victor Cavendish.) A considerable saving of public money is expected to result from transferring to the Stationery Office the control of the supplies of stationery and printing required for the County Courts. The exact amount of the saving cannot be stated until the new arrangements have been completed, but I think it may amount to as much as £8,000 or £10,000. A large proportion of the County Courts are supplied by London firms; but where the work is now done locally there is no reason why this method of supply should not continue if satisfactory arrangements can be made as to price.

  Sale of Salt to Native States in India.
  MR. WEIR: To ask the Secretary of State for India whether he has arranged to obtain from the Government of India a Return showing the quantity of salt sold annually to each of the Native States of India entitled to receive salt from the British Government on privileged terms under special treaty engagements; and will he arrange for the nature of the terms to be indicated in the Return.
  {Answered by Mr. Secretary Brodrick.) The Government of India have been requested to have the Return prepared which I promised in my Answer to the hon. Member's Question of June 20th, † 1905. I will ask that Government to add the further information desired by the hon. Member, if this can be conveniently done.

  Sale of Holdings of Evicted Ryots in India.
  MR. WEIR: To ask the Secretary of State for India, having regard to the fact that in the year 1900–1901 the holdings
  † See (4) Debates, cxlvii., 1093.

  65
  of 14,760 ryots in the Madras Presidency were sold in default of payment of land revenue, will he state whether the Madras Government, before resorting to these extreme measures, considered to what extent the difficulties of these ryots might be attributable to the preceding years of famine.
  (Answered by Mr. Secretary Brodrick.) I have no reason to suppose that the Madras Government failed to treat impoverished ryots with due consideration in collecting the land revenue in 1900–1. In the Memorandum prefixed to the Return made in connection with the hon. Member's Question of March 24th, † 1904, it is shown that the land sales in Madras are due to a great extent to causes other than stringency in coercive processes. In the year preceding 1900–1 remissions of land revenue to the extent of 29½ lakhs of rupees were given to ryots whose circumstances required relief.
  MR. WEIR: To ask the Secretary of State for India, having regard to the fact that the number of defaulting ryots in the Madras Presidency whose holdings were sold fell from 14,760 in the year succeeding the famine to 4,946 last year, will he arrange for defaulting ryots to be granted a longer period before their property is dealt with, in order that they may have more opportunities for recuperation from the effects of famine.
  (Answered by Mr. Secretary Brodrick.) There are rules in force in the Madras Presidency for the suspension and remission of the land revenue which provide for the protection of ryots whose crops have failed, and prevent the premature sale of land for arrears of land revenue. It has frequently been explained by the Government of Madras that a large proportion of the recorded sales represent the voluntary abandonment of land by holders, and that the process of sale is not resorted to until ample opportunity has been given to the defaulter to pay the dues of the State. I feel sure that the Madras Government may be trusted to see that impoverished cultivators are treated with every consideration.
  † See (4) Debates, cxxxii., 606.

  The Indian Railway Loan.
  MR. BRIGHT: To ask the Secretary of State for India what approximate margin will be left out of the proposed loan of £20,000,000 after the purchase of the Bengal Central Railway and the Bombay, Baroda, and Central India Railway.
  MR. BRIGHT: To ask the Secretary of State for India whether the balance of the proposed loan for £20,000,000 after the purchase of the Bengal Central Railway and the Bombay, Baroda, and Central India Railway will be used solely for the construction of new railways; and, if so, what is the estimated annual capital expenditure; or, if not, to what purpose such balance, or portion of balance, will be applied.
  MR. BRIGHT: To ask the Secretary of State for India whether any provision is made in the proposed loan of £20,000,000 for the purchase in 1907 of the Southern Mahratta Railway, the Madras Railway, or any other railway; and, if so, the amount of such provision.
  (Answered by Mr. Secretary Brodrick.) These three Questions can be most conveniently dealt with in one Answer. The Bill now before the House proposes to give power to borrow £20,000,000, "as and when necessary," for certain specified purposes or to issue stock for some of those purposes instead of borrowing direct. It is extremely improbable that any one loan for the whole £20,000,000 will at any time be issued uuder the proposed powers; there is certainly no present intention of issuing such a loan. As I explained in my reply to my hon. Member for East Perthshire on 5th June, ‡ the practice had been to give to the Secretary of State for India in Council borrowing power sufficient to enable him to borrow for some time the sums that may be required for capital expenditure and other purposes without applying to Parliament on each separate occasion. As regards the purposes for which it is intended to use the proposed powers, I am able to give the following information:—The Bengal Central Railway has already
  ‡ See (4) Debates, cxlvii., 701.

  67
  been purchased, so that its purchase price cannot be provided out of loans raised under the present Bill. The purchase price payable to the shareholders of the Bombay, Baroda, and Central India Railway (which may possibly be provided under the powers proposed in the Bill) will exceed £10,000,000. It has not yet been decided whether the Southern Mahratta Railway and the Madras Railway shall be purchased, nor in what manner purchase (if decided on) shall be effected. The text of the Bill shows clearly that money borrowed under it may be applied to (1) the construction of new railways, (2) the improvement of existing railways, (3) the discharge of bonds, etc., of guaranteed railway companies, (4) payments required to be made by the Secretary of State in Council on taking over railways from companies. It is contemplated that the powers under the Bill will, in various years, be used for all these purposes. The capital expenditure on State and guaranteed railways is now at the rate of about £8,000,000 a year, but only a portion of the money is provided by direct sterling borrowing by the Secretary of State in Council such as is proposed to be authorised by the present Bill.

  Deficit on Working of Dublin and Blessington Steam Tramways.
  MR. JAMES O'CONNOR: To ask the Chief Secretary to the Lord-Lieutenant of Ireland whether he can state the amount of the deficit for the last ten years on the working of the Dublin and Blessington steam tram line, which the guaranteeing counties of Dublin and Wicklow have been obliged to make good out of the rates, showing the loss to each of the two counties separately.
  (Answered by Mr. Walter Long.) The deficit in the working expenses in the last ten years was £363 7s. 2d., which was made good by the counties of Dublin and Wicklow in equal shares. In addition, the counties respectively contributed in aid of dividends in the same period:—

  £

  s.

  d.

  County Dublin

  2,933

  14

  0

  County Wicklow

  2,933

  14

  2

  68
  Thus the total loss made good out of the rates was:—

  £

  s.

  d.

  County Dublin

  3,115

  7

  7

  County Wicklow

  3,115

  7

  9

  Irish Manual Instructresses.
  MR. SAMUEL YOUNG: To ask the Chief Secretary to the Lord-Lieutenant of Ireland whether, in the case of a school in which a manual instructress is at present at work qualifying by attendance for the services of an assistant, the manual instructress will be allowed to retain her position or to qualify, if competent, for the position of assistant mistress.
  (Answered by Mr. Walter Long.) Manual instructresses are, on passing the King's scholarship examination, eligible for appointment as assistant teachers in schools where the average attendance warrants the employment of an assistant, provided (a) that they have given three years service as manual instructresses, (b) that during that time their work has been very favourably reported upon by the inspector, and (c) that they have satisfied the inspector as to their skill and capacity in the practice of teaching (Rule 76b, 5).

  Purchase of the King-Harman Estate,
  MR. COGHILL: To ask the Chief Secretary to the Lord-Lieutenant of Ireland whether the Estates Commissioners have concluded the purchase of the King-Harman Estate; what was the total price paid for it; how many years purchase did the price obtained represent; and what was the amount of the bonus on the sale received from the Exchequer.
  (Answered by Mr. Walter Long.) The sale of the entire estate has not yet been concluded. The purchase money of that portion of the estate which has been purchased is £402,012, which represents 22·9 years purchase of the rental. This amount includes cash payments, amounting to £231, on which no bonus was payable. The bonus paid in respect of the sold portion was £48,213 14s. 4d.

  Catholic Officials of Veterinary Branch of Irish Board of Agriculture.
  MR. REDDY: To ask the Chief Secretary to the Lord-Lieutenant of Ireland whether he will reconsider the need of granting independent inquiry into the case of the Catholics employed in the Veterinary Branch of the Agricultural Department, so that they may be afforded the opportunity of submitting evidence, documentary and otherwise, as to their treatment.
  (Answered by Mr. Walter Long.) I have repeatedly stated that no further inquiry will be granted. The suggestion that the question of religion enters into the treatment of officials is wholly unfounded.

  Recruiting of Native Labourers for the Transvaal from British Central Africa.
  MR. WEIR: To ask the Secretary of State for the Colonies if he will state how many natives recruited from the British Central Africa Protectorate for labour in the Transvaal have, up to the present time, arrived at the mines; how many have succumbed to disease, and how many have returned home.
  (Answered by Mr. Secretary Lyttelton.) The latest particulars in my possession show that up to February, 1905, of 2,118 natives recruited in British Central Africa, who proceeded to the Transvaal during the years 1903 and 1904, 179 succumbed to disease. I have not the separate figures as to those who have returned home. I have recently discussed the subject of this recruiting with. Sir A. Sharpe, the Commissioner for British Central Africa. He informs me that the local mortality is very high and that those who are recruited are eager to go.

  Summer Headdress for Soldiers.
  DR. THOMPSON: To ask the Secretary of State for War if he will explain why the troops in the British Isles have been deprived during the present summer of any proper headdress to protect them from the effects of the sun; if numbers of the men have suffered from sunstroke; and if he will state by whose authority the felt hat has been abolished.
  (Answered by Mr. Secretary Arnold-Forster.) The new service dress cap,
  70
  which supersedes the cap with cover and the sun hat, has been issued generally. This cap is considered sufficient protection from the effects of the sun in this country. The medical reports show very few cases of sunstroke during the last three months. The felt hat was abolished by authority of the Army Council.

  Teaching of History in Scotch State-aided Schools.
  MR. BLACK: To ask the First Lord of the Treasury whether the Government has received a representation from the Convention of Royal Burghs in Scotland, dated 19th July, 1905, complaining of breaches of the Treaty of Union between England and Scotland committed in the teaching of history in State-aided schools; and whether he will take steps to see that, as a condition of their receiving national funds, all such schools in England, Scotland, and Ireland shall not in their teaching contravene the treaty obligations of the component parts of the United Kingdom.
  (Answered by Mr. A. J. Balfour.) The Secretary for Scotland has received a representation from the Convention of Royal Burghs complaining of certain inaccuracies in text books used in elementary schools. The matter is now engaging the attention of the Secretary for Scotland.

  Claims for Sinking of British Steamers by Russian Cruisers.
  MR. HARMOOD-BANNER: TO ask the First Lord of the Treasury whether he is yet in a position to give to the House any assurance that the claims on the Government of Russia in connection with the sinking of British steamers have been duly acknowledged and will be paid in due course; and, if not, what steps His Majesty's Goverment intend to take to obtain redress for the owners of the destroyed steamers.
  (Answered by Mr. A. J. Balfour.) I think the best Answer to my hon. friend's Question is to refer him to the speech delivered by the Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs on Monday last, in which it was stated that claims for compensation in respect of all these cases

  71
  have been or will be presented to the Russian Government irrespective of any decision by a Prize Court.

  The Colonial Conference.
  SIR WILLIAM HOLLAND: To ask the First Lord of the Treasury whether, in view of the fact that it is to be open to the colonial representatives at a free and unfettered conference to suggest changes in the fiscal system of the United Kingdom, it will be equally open to the British representatives at that conference to suggest changes in the fiscal systems of the Colonies.
  (Answered by Mr. A. J. Balfour.) As I have more than once stated, the Government do not propose any limitation upon the discussions of the members of the conference. The hon. Member will no doubt note the terms of the Answer I gave in the House this afternoon.

  Salaries of Secretaries of State for Trade and Local Government.
  MR. ATHERLEY-JONES: To ask the First Lord of the Treasury whether it is contemplated, in the event of the Secretaries of State for Trade and Local Government both being enacted, that the salaries of the respective Secretaries of State for Trade and Local Government will be the same amount as those now received by the present Secretaries of State; and whether the salaries of the permanent officials will be increased to the standard of those obtaining in offices to which Secretaries of State pertain.
  (Answered by Mr. A. J. Balfour.) If the Bill becomes law the salaries of the present holders of the two offices in question will not be raised during the present Parliament. After the present Parliament, or in the event of a fresh appointment to the office, the salaries will presumably be raised to the usual salaries of a Secretary of State; but that will rest with the Administration to propose, and with Parliament to decide. It is intended, if the Bill becomes law, that, generally speaking, the salaries of the permanent officials should be raised to the scale obtaining in the office of a Secretary of State.

QUESTIONS IN THE HOUSE.

  Flogging in the Navy.
  MR. SWIFT MACNEILL: I beg to ask the Secretary to the Admiralty whether the Admiralty authorities are aware that there is no corporal punishment of men or boys in the French Navy; and whether, during the time the French ships of war are in British waters, the caning and flogging of boys on board the King's ships will be discontinued.
  THE SECRETARY TO THE ADMIRALTY (Mr. PRETYMAN,): I have nothing to add to previous Answers I have given on this subject.
  MR. SWIFT MACNEILL: I must repeat this Question, because I never asked this Question before.
  MR. PRETYMAN: I must repeat my Answer, because I have been asked it before.
  MR. SWIFT MACNEILL: Cannot I have an Answer, Yes or No, to the last part of the Question?
  MR. PRETYMAN: It is obvious that the same regulations will continue in force.
  MR. SWIFT MACNEILL: Then the flogging will go merrily on.

  Volunteer Artillery.
  *MR. SEYMOUR ORMSBY-GORE: I beg to ask the Secretary of State for War what is the classification of the following brigade divisions of Volunteer Artillery: the 1st Lanark, the 1st Monmouth, the 1st Lincolnshire, the 4th Yorks, and the 3rd Kent; what would be their various purposes and objectives in accordance with their mobilisation orders in case of a raid by a foreign force on the United Kingdom; and whether he intends to fulfil the pledges given by the Secretary of State for India and himself that they would be re-armed with the discarded 15-pounder guns of the Royal Field Artillery when the latter are re-armed with the new modern 18-pounder quick-firing armament.
  *THE SECRETARY OF STATE FOR WAR (Mr. ARNOLD-FORSTER,): A revised scheme for the utilisation of the Volunteer forces for home defence is now being considered, and I am not, therefore, in a position to give my hon. friend the information he desires. As regards the last part of the Question, I have no information to give beyond that which has already been communicated to the House.
  *MR. SEYMOUR ORMSBY-GOREasked whether it was the intention of the War Office to destroy these brigade divisions by the want of encouragement, or to alter the whole character of the force.
  *MR. ARNOLD-FORSTER: That is a very wide Question. It is the desire of the War Office to apply the energy and goodwill of these brigade divisions to a purpose that would be useful in time of war, and the question how they can be made useful in time of war under the new conditions arising out of the Prime Minister's statement of military policy is now under consideration.
  MR. CHARLES ALLEN: Will that revised scheme be published?
  *MR. ARNOLD-FORSTER: No, Sir.
  MR. C. R. SPENCER: Will the right hon. Gentleman say why it is not to be published?
  *MR. ARNOLD-FORSTER: We have to consider the allocation of the Volunteer forces in view of the policy which has been laid before the House by the Prime Minister. That is a very delicate and difficult matter, and I am not sure that it is advisable to set out the whole strategical disposition of the British Army in a public document.
  *MR. SEYMOUR ORMSBY-GORE: Is the right hon. Gentleman aware that there have been very specific mobilisation orders issued to these Volunteer corps?
  *MR. ARNOLD-FORSTER: I am perfectly aware of that; but there
  74
  must be a change in those orders. For example, a large number of Volunteer artillery corps were appropriated to the fixed defences of London; but the whole of that scheme is now considered to be unnecessary. In view of the present strength and disposition of the Fleet, that arrangement is considered unnecessary, and therefore it is necessary to have a reallocation of the Volunteer artillery corps.
  MR. SAMUEL ROBERTS: Is the right hon. Gentleman aware that these brigade divisions have hitherto been trained as field artillery, and encouraged to be so trained by the War Office?
  *MR. ARNOLD-FORSTER: No, Sir, that is not a correct statement of the facts. I have over and over again, in many Answers, told the hon. Gentleman what are the facts.
  *MR. SEYMOUR ORMSBY-GORE: Then why are they given horse allowance?

  Officers on Extra Regimental Work.
  MR. MOSS; I beg to ask the Secretary of State for War if he is aware that officers in His Majesty's Army, before they are considered eligible to join the Egyptian Army, or to go out to Japan to learn the language, or to serve on the staff, must, if lieutenants, pass the promotion examination for the rank above the one they hold; and that officers who are appointed adjutants and assistant adjutants of battalions at home are not obliged, if lieutenants, to have passed this examination; and whether he will take any, and what, steps to place adjutants and assistant adjutants at home on the same footing as officers seeking appointment in the Egyptian Army, or desirous of going to Japan, or wishing to serve on the Staff.
  MR. ARNOLD-FORSTER: The conditions as to passing examination are imposed when officers leave their regiments for extra regimental work, because they may be serving where examinations are not held, or where facilities for attending examinations are difficult, and because the special work

  75
  on which they are engaged may cause only limited time to be available for study for the examination. In the case of adjutants' appointments the above contingencies do not appear. As regards the Egyptian Army the rules are made by the Sirdar.

  Officers' Promotions.
  MR. CROMBIE: I beg to ask the Secretary of State for War if he will explain on what grounds Mr. G. D. Baillie-Hamilton, late of the Royal Garrison Regiment, has been promoted captain to the Royal Scots over the heads of nineteen officers who have had longer service in the Army than he has, and eleven of whom have had two or three years active service in South Africa, whilst he was in Africa only for the last four months of the war.
  MR. ARNOLD-FORSTER: On the reduction of the Garrison Regiment, the Army Council decided to offer to certain captains and all lieutenants and second lieutenants transfer to the Line as juniors of their rank in the corps to which transferred. Every effort was made to ensure that captains so transferred should be either senior in total service or older than the senior lieutenants of the corps to which transferred. This officer was promoted captain before transfer, and is considerably older than the senior lieutenant in the Royal Scots.
  MR. CROMBIE: Had not the senior lieutenant nearly double this officer's service?
  MR. ARNOLD-FORSTER; I think it would be better if questions with regard to the promotion of individual officers were referred to the commanding officer or to the War Office.

  Wages of Chinese Coolies in the Transvaal.
  MR. HERBERT SAMUEL: I beg to ask the Secretary for the Colonies whether he will inquire what number of Chinese coolies employed in the Transvaal at piecework rates are now receiving leas than 1s. 6d. a day.
  THE SECRETARY OF STATE FOR THE COLONIES (Mr. LYTTELTON,): I have no reason to believe that any Chinese coolies are earning less than 1s. 6d. a day on piecework. If the hon. Member has any evidence which he thinks trustworthy and on which he has based his Question and will communicate it to me, I shall be able to judge of the necessity of inquiring.
  MR. LEIF JONES: I beg to ask the Secretary of State for the Colonies if he will state how many of the Chinese on the Rand are now working at piecework rates; and how many of these are actually earning less than the guaranteed minimum of 1s. 6d. a day.
  MR. LYTTELTON: I will ask Lord Selborne to supply me with the numbers, if he is able to do so. In reply to the latter part of the Question, I would refer the hon. Member to the Answer I have just given to the hon. Member for Cleveland.
  MR. WHITLEY: In view of the promise made by the right hon. Gentleman, is it not his business to see that the coolies do get the minimum of 1s. 6d. per day?

  Chinese Piecework Contracts.
  MR. WHITLEY: I beg to ask the Secretary of State for the Colonies if any steps are taken to explain to the Chinese coolies, when after six months service they are offered the alternative of a piecework contract, that the acceptance of the alternative entails the abrogation of the minimum of 1s. 6d. per day which was promised them when they were first engaged.
  MR. LYTTELTON: The hon. Member is mistaken in supposing that the acceptance of the piecework contract entails any such abrogation as he refers to. The coolie by undertaking piecework secures the opportunity of earning considerably more than 1s. 6d. a day. But at any time after the expiry of his piecework contract he can abandon piecework and secure the minimum wage of 1s. 6d. for a day's work. As I have already stated to the House, Lord Selborne reports that

  77
  in the case of the North Randfontein Mine the offer was carefully explained to the coolies and that they had ten days in which to consider it. I have no reason to doubt that similar precautions were taken in other cases and that the coolies fully understand the position.
  MR. WHITLEY: Will the right hon. Gentleman get a copy of this contract?
  MR. LYTTELTON: Yes, Sir.

  The Colonial Conference.
  MR. CROMBIE: I beg to ask the Secretary of State for the Colonies whether any communications have passed between him and the Colonial Premiers as to the meeting of a Colonial Conference next year.
  MR. LYTTELTON: No, Sir. Such communications as have passed have been of quite a general character, based on the assumption that the Resolution of 1902 would lead to the reassembly of a Colonial Conference.
  MR. CROMBIE: Will you lay them on the Table?
  MR. LYTTELTON: Not at present.
  MR. BUCHANAN: Has no invitation yet been issued?
  MR. LYTTELTON: No, Sir.
  MR. LLOYD - GEORGE (Carnarvon Boroughs): Will a formal invitation be issued, or will it be assumed that the Premiers will come?
  MR. LYTTELTON: An invitation was, I think, issued on a previous occasion several months before the holding of the Colonial Conference.
  MR. LLOYD-GEORGE: And no formal invitation has yet been sent?
  MR. LYTTELTON: No.
  MR. LOUGH: How many mouths was it sent out beforehand?
  [No Answer was returned.]

  Van Ryn Mine Riots.
  MR. HERBERT SAMUEL: I beg to ask the Secretary of State for the Colonies if he has yet received the report on the riot among the Chinese coolies at the Van Ryn Mine in the Transvaal, which took place on May 14th; and, if so, whether he will state what were the circumstances which gave rise to that disturbance.
  MR. LYTTELTON: I have not yet received the report, but I have telegraphed to inquire when I may expect it.

  Gibraltar Mole.
  MR. BILL: I beg to ask the Secretary of State for the Colonies whether any decision has been come to as to handing over the commercial mole now being completed at Gibraltar to the control of the Admiralty for naval purposes; and, if this change has been decided upon, how it is proposed to satisfy the long-delayed claims of the commercial community for improved coaling and other harbour facilities.
  MR. LYTTELTON: No decision has yet been arrived at; the question is being considered by an Inter-Departmental Committee.

  Native Labour Recruiting for the Transvaal.
  MR. BRIGHT: I beg to ask the Secretary of State for the Colonies what were the terms and conditions upon which able-bodied natives were recruited in Basutoland and Orange River Colony before February, 1905; what was the commission paid upon such recruiting; whether his attention has been called to the alteration of those terms and conditions in the circular of the Witwatersrand Native Labour Association, Limited, dated 17th March last; and what is the commission now paid.
  MR. LYTTELTON: Natives from Basutoland and the Orange River Colony were recruited on contracts of four months duration, but practically no natives were obtained from the Orange River Colony, as there is little or no

  79
  surplus population there available for work outside the colony. The fee charged by the Witwatersrand Native Labour Association to its members for natives on a four months contract was £2. The latest information in my possession is the despatch from Lord Selborne printed at p. 49 of Cd. 2563, in which a copy of the circular is enclosed. The fee for natives recruited for twelve months, the period now fixed, was, and I believe still is, £5.

  Convict Labour in the Transvaal Mines.
  MR. BRIGHT: I beg to ask the Secretary of State for the Colonies when the practice of employing coloured convict labour in the gold mines of the Transvaal was first commenced; what is the number of such convicts now employed; what are the names of the mines in which and the conditions upon which they are employed; whether they work side by side with non-convicts; and whether he will consider the desirability of discontinuing this practice and employing the convicts upon Government work for the future.
  MR. LYTTELTON: I would refer the hon. Member to Answers which I gave on this subject to the hon. Member for Halifax in considerable detail on February 15th † and February 17th ‡ of last year. The practice has been in vogue since 1901. The number employed on the gold mines at the end of May of this year was 603; in 1904 there were 850, and they were employed on the Cinderella Mine and the Consolidated Main Reef Mine, and I assume are still employed there. The Transvaal Government will no doubt consider, when the accommodation in the prisons has been enlarged, whether the practice should be discontinued.
  MR. BRIGHT: Is the right hon. Gentleman aware that these powers were recorded for the first time in the last Blue-book?
  MR. LYTTELTON: I think that is not so, for in February I answered Questions about the practice throughout South
  † See (4) Debates, cxxix., 1320
  ‡ See (4) Debates, cxxx. 14.
  80
  Africa, and that was long before the last Blue-book.

  India—Appointment of Director of Public Instruction, Bengal.
  MR. HUGH LAW: I beg to ask the Secretary of State for India whether his attention has been called to the answer given on 8th July, 1905, by the Hon. MR. Carnduff in the Bengal Legislative Council to a series of questions asked by the Hon. Mr. Chandhuri, from which it is understood that the Government of Bengal contemplates appointing a member of the Indian Civil Service to the post of Director of Public Instruction as soon as it shall become vacant by the retirement of Mr. Pedler in March, 1906; and whether, in view of dissatisfaction caused by this announcement among the members of the Educational Service, and in all sections of society in India, he will state what action His Majesty's Government propose to take in the matter, in view of the effect which such an appointment would be likely to have upon recruiting for the Indian Educational Service.
  THE SECRETARY OF STATE FOR INDIA (Mr. BRODRICK,): I am aware that the Government of Bengal propose to appoint a member of the Indian Civil Service to succeed Mr. Pedler as Director of Public Instruction in March next. That office is not reserved for the Educational Service, and local Governments and Administrations have full discretion to fill it as may seem most for the advantage of the public service. I am not aware that the proposal has caused dissatisfaction in all sections of society in India; as regards the Educational Service, the Government of India has been informed by the Lieutenant-Governor that the arrangement contemplated will be for a period of from two to three years at most, and that he looks forward to a return at no distant date to the practice of selecting a Director from the Indian Educational Service. I do not propose to take any action in the matter.

  Macedonia—The Mürzsteg Programme.
  MR. BOND: I beg to ask the Under-Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs whether any, and

  81
  what, steps have been taken to provide for a reorganization of administrative and judicial institutions in Macedonia, as proposed in the Murzsteg programme.
  THE UNDER - SECRETARY OF STATE FOR FOREIGN AFFAIRS (Earl PERCY,): Article 4 of the Mürzsteg scheme provides for the eventual reorganisation of the administrative and judicial institutions in Macedonia, but no steps were to be taken in the matter pending the pacification of the country. It has throughout the negotiations been held by His Majesty's Government that a reform of the financial administration was necessarily the first step towards a reorganisation of the judicial and other administrative institutions, and the measures which are now being urged upon the Sultan must be regarded as a necessary preliminary to such reorganisation.

  Monastir Tithe Experiment.
  MR. MOON: I beg to ask the Under-Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs whether the Foreign Office and the other Powers regard the tithe experiment carried out last autumn in thirty villages in the vilayet of Monastir as completely satisfactory, and when it is proposed to extend it to the other villages of the three vilayets.
  EARL PERCY: According to the report received by His Majesty's Government the experiment seems to have proved a marked success. It is intended gradually to extend the new system to the three vilayets, and to apply it this year to seven cantons.

  Macedonian Papers.
  MR. MOON: I beg to ask the Undersecretary of State for Foreign Affairs when further Papers as to Macedonia will be laid; and whether the Austro-Hungarian Government have yet appointed, or whether they intend to appoint, a successor to Herr von Müller as their civil agent, jointly with the surviving Russian civil agent.
  EARL PERCY: The Papers are being prepared and will be published as soon as possible, but I cannot state the precise date on which they will be ready. With
  82
  regard to the second paragraph, His Majesty's Government have not as yet been informed when the appointment of a successor to Herr von Müller will be made.

  Macedonian Financial Reforms.
  MR. MOON: I beg to ask the Undersecretary of State for Foreign Affairs whether the Porte has now consented to accept Lord Lansdowne's financial scheme for Macedonia; and, if not, whether any steps are being taken to obtain that consent within a short time.
  EARL PERCY: The Porte has not yet accepted the proposals jointly made to it by the Ambassadors of all the five Powers. As these proposals embody reforms which do not admit of modification or postponement, a further communication has been made in this sense to the Turkish Government.

  Martial Law in Crete.
  MR. FLYNNasked whether it was a fact that martial law had been proclaimed in Candia, where British troops were now garrisoned, and whether telegrams to newspapers were subject to censorship.
  EARL PERCY: Yes, Sir. In consequence of an attack which has been recently made on British troops His Majesty's Government have authorised the proclamation of martial law in the Candia district, on the understanding that the civil administration and the tribunals shall be as little as possible interfered with. As regards Press censorship, we understand that it will only apply to foreign telegrams, and not to ordinary matter. I am not aware that martial law has been proclaimed in any of the other foreign spheres.
  MR. FLYNN: Have the representatives of the other Powers taken similar action?
  EARL PERCYreplied that he had no information on that point.

  Norwegian Trawlers in Scottish Waters.
  CAPTAIN ELLICE: I beg to ask the Under-Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs whether

  83
  he will lay upon the Table the correspondence which has taken place between His Majesty's representative at Christiania on the subject of illegal trawling in Scottish waters by trawlers registered in Norway.
  EARL PERCY: There is no correspondence between the Foreign Office and His Majesty's Consul-General at Christiania respecting trawling in waters off the coast of Scotland outside the three-mile limit which could be laid with any useful result.

  Liverpool Smallpox Hospital.
  LIEUT. - COLONEL PRYCE - JOKES: I beg to ask the President of the Local Government Board whether his attention has been called to the recently published report of the medical officer of health for Liverpool upon smallpox hospitals, in which this officer rejects the conclusions arrived at by the Local Government Board's inspector, Dr. Reece, that smallpox has been spread by means of these hospitals; and whether, in view of the importance of the question, the Local Government Board proposes to issue any further report or observations on the subject of the Liverpool smallpox hospitals.
  THE PRESIDENT OF THE LOCAL GOVERNMENT BOARD (Mr. GERALD BALFOUE,): I have seen the report of the medical officer of health. The Local Government Board propose shortly to address a communication to the Liverpool Town Council on the subject of their smallpox hospitals.

  County Licensing Committees.
  MR. HELME: I beg to ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department whether, having regard to the difficulties that have arisen as to the powers of the additional members of the county licensing committees through their not having been summoned to the preliminary meeting as members of the compensation authority, with reference to the determination of any question as to the refusal of the renewal of a licence under the Licensing Act, 1904, Section 5, Sub-section 5, he will
  84
  consider the advisability of issuing a rule defining their powers in this respect.
  THE UNDER-SECRETARY OF STATE FOR THE HOME DEPARTMENT (Mr. COCHRANE,): No cases have come to my knowledge of failure to summon the borough additional members to the preliminary meeting of the compensation authority with reference to questions as to the refusal of the renewal of a licence. The right of those members to act with the authority for those purposes is clearly denned by the enactment quoted; and, as at present advised, I see no reason for making any rule in the matter.

  Workmen's Compensation Bill.
  MR. FENWICK: I beg to ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department whether he can state, approximately, the number of persons whose position will be affected by the provisions of the Workmen's Compensation Bill now before the House.
  MR. COCHRANE: The Bill, of course, affects both employers and workmen, but I presume the hon. Member's Question refers only to workmen. The Departmental Committee on Workmen's Compensation calculated that the employments which are wholly or partially covered by the existing Compensation Act represent perhaps about 7,250,000 of workmen, and I estimate that the workmen employed in the new employments which it is proposed to include by the Bill might number approximately 1,250,000 to 1,500,000, but only a very rough calculation can be made.

  Equitable Life Assurance Society of the United States.
  MR. J. P. FARRELL: I beg to ask the Secretary to the Board of Trade whether his attention has been called to allegations of fraud against the Equitable Life Assurance Society of the United States; whether any return is made under the Insurance Acts by this society to his Department; whether, in order to enable this society to operate in Great Britain and Ireland, any guarantee sum has been lodged under the Insurance Acts in this country; if so, where, and

  85
  the names of the trustees, if any; and whether, with a view to protecting policy holders in Great Britain and Ireland, the Board of Trade will require the lodgment of this guarantee sum if the same has not been already lodged.
  THE PARLIAMENTARY SECRETARY TO THE BOARD OF TRADE (Mr. BONAR LAW,): My attention has been called to the case of the Equitable Life Assurance Society of the United States. The returns required by Sections 5, 7, and 8 of the Life Assurance Companies Act, 1870, from companies transacting life business in the United Kingdom have been duly deposited and are included in the Life Assurance Companies Return presented annually to Parliament. The society commenced business in the United Kingdom in 1869 and did not make any deposit, such deposit being required only from companies commencing business in the United Kingdom after the passing of the Act of 1870.
  MR. J. P. FARRELLasked whether there was any power now to require this company to make a deposit.
  MR. B0NAR LAW: No, there is no such power.

  Irish Provident Assurance Company.
  MR. THOMAS O'DONNELL: I beg to ask the Secretary to the Board of Trade whether he has now been able to come to a conclusion as to the status and financial position of the Irish Provident Assurance Company; whether it is intended to take steps to safeguard the rights of policy holders; and whether he will lay upon the Table an account of his investigations, giving the history of the company.
  MR. BONAR LAW: I am not able to add anything to the Answer I gave to the hon. Member on the 27th ultimo.†

  Preferential Railway Freights for Foreign Traders.
  MR. LOUIS SINCLAIR: I beg to ask the Secretary to the
  † See (4) Debates, cl., 619.
  86
  Board of Trade whether he has taken steps to check the misstatements made to him by the Great Eastern Railway Company to the effect that they have no through rate for pianos from Germany to Cardiff, having regard to the fact that Messrs. Thompson & Shackell, pianoforte dealers, of Cardiff, hold a consignment note which shows they were charged a rate of 43s. 4d. per ton for conveyance of a piano weighing 7 cwts. 7 lbs. from Germany to Cardiff; and whether, seeing that the rate charged to the same firm by the London and North-Western Railway Company for conveying a piano weighing 5 cwts. 2 qrs. from London to Cardiff was 57s. 9d. per ton, and also that Messrs. Flint Brothers, Limited, of Cardiff, have been charged a rate of 46s. 8d, per ton for the conveyance of fifteen casks of butter weighing 15 cwts. 3 qrs. from Parkeston to Cardiff, whereas the through rate from Rotterdam to Cardiff is only 43s. 4d. per ton, he will also grant an inquiry into the question of railway rates as operating to the advantage of the foreign trader in regard to all goods and merchandise not comprised in the inquiry already prosecuted by the Board of Agriculture.
  MR. BONAR LAW: The Board of Trade are in communication with the Great Eastern Railway Company on the subject of the rates to which my hon. friend refers. I may point out that the question of the rates on butter from Parkeston and Rotterdam to Cardiff might have been dealt with by the Committee appointed by the Board of Agriculture had it been brought before them, and the Board of Trade will await the Report of this Committee before considering whether any further inquiry is necessary.

  Distribution of the Education Grant.
  MR. SOARES: I beg to ask the Secretary to the Board of Education what are the grounds on which the Board of Education propose to alter, after this year, the dates of the payment of the annual grants payable to education authorities in respect of the elementary schools maintained by them; and whether he is aware that if such alteration be made it will cause local

  87
  authorities inconvenience by having to raise sums out of the current rates previous to the receipt of the annual grant.
  THE PARLIAMENTARY SECRETARY TO THE BOARD OF EDUCATION (Sir WILLIAM ANSON,): The hon. Member does not seem to be aware that the system of advanced payment of annual grant by quarterly instalments is only a very partial one, and covers but a small portion of the grant. The system has only been in force since the beginning of the financial year 1903–4. Long notice has been given of the discontinuance of the practice after the end of the current financial year, and I do not anticipate that local authorities will have any serious difficulty in making the small change in their financial arrangements which will be necessitated.
  SIR ALBERT ROLLIT: Is the hon. Baronet aware that municipalities, almost without exception, are desirous of maintaining the system of quarterly payments. While they appreciate the concession already made for the present year they desire it to be made permanent?
  SIR WILLIAM ANSON: I am quite aware that some of the local authorities do desire it.

  St. James's Park.
  SIR SAMUEL SADLER: I beg to ask the hon. Member for Chorley, as representing the First Commissioner of Works, whether his attention has been called to the crowded state of the grass used largely by children in St. James's Park; and whether he will reopen the adjoining ground on which the new grass has now become thoroughly established, at any rate during the summer school holidays.
  LORD BALCARRES: During the month of August the ground in question will be thrown open to children only.

  Portmagee Fishing Industry.
  MR. BOLAND: I beg to ask the Chief Secretary to the Lord-Lieu-
  88
  tenant of Ireland whether he is aware that shortly after the Congested Districts Board was constituted an application was made for an extension of the pier at Portmagee, county Kerry, where the curing of mackerel for the American market has been carried on continuously on a large scale; whether he is aware that, owing to insufficient pier accommodation, the fish has frequently to be sent by road to Cahirciveen, a distance of ten miles; and whether, in view of the fact that the extension of the pier was fully approved by the Board, steps will be taken to carry out the work.
  THE CHIEF SECRETARY FOR IRELAND (Mr. WALTER LONG,): In October, 1894, the Board decided that they would not undertake the extension of this pier without a substantial local contribution. No offer of assistance has been made, and the Board have, therefore, taken no further action.

  Attendance at Irish National Schools.
  MR. BOLAND: I beg to ask the Chief Secretary to the Lord-Lieutenant of Ireland how many national schools in Ireland have an average daily attendance of between twenty-five and thirty pupils; how many of these have been reported by the inspectors in their reports for the year 1903 as fair, and how many as good, or with some mark higher than good.
  MR. WALTER LONG: The number of schools with an average attendance of between twenty-five and thirty is not recorded; but the number with average attendance between twenty and thirty was 1,740 on 31st December last. The Return asked would involve the expenditure of much time and labour, and the Commissioners do not see that any useful object would be served by preparing it.

  Publication of Results of Trinity College Examinations.
  MR. BOLAND: I beg to ask the Chief Secretary to the Lord-Lieutenant of Ireland if the arrangement recently made with the authorities of Trinity College, Dublin, by which the Commissioners of Intermediate Education in Ireland have reversed their regulation against publishing the results of their

  89
  annual examinations was voted unanimously by the Commissioners; and, if not, will he state the numbers that voted against it, and also publish the Minutes of the meeting of the Commissioners at which it was discussed.
  MR. WALTER LONG: I will at the same time reply to the Question of the hon. Member for North Dublin. The arrangement referred to applies to the exhibition and prize lists only. The privilege mentioned is not limited to Trinity College, but will be afforded to all educational bodies which offer prizes to intermediate students on the results of the Board's examinations. The offer to furnish the written answers of the students was made by the Assistant Commissioners on the authority of the Board. There has been no precedent, as no similar proposal had previously come before the Board. The question of disclosing the proceedings at the Board's meetings is one for the Board to deal with. It will be submitted to the next meeting of the Board.
  The following is the Question of the hon. Member for North Dublin:—
  MR. CLANCY: To ask the Chief Secretary to the Lord-Lieutenant of Ireland whether his attention has been directed to the correspondence between the Board of Intermediate Education in Ireland and the authorities of Trinity College, Dublin, in the course of which the former body offers to place at the disposal of the latter not only the marks obtained at the intermediate examinations by the most distinguished students and the subjects in which they have been examined, but also the written answers of the students; whether any resolution was passed authorising the secretaries of the Board to offer, in the name of the Board, to furnish those answers; whether there is any precedent for such an offer; and whether he will lay upon the Table of the House copies of the Minutes of the meeting or meetings of the Board of Intermediate Education at which this matter was discussed and dealt with.
  MR. CLANCY: Is it the right hon. Gentleman's view that Trinity College should be specially favoured?
  MR. WALTER LONG: No, certainly not.
  MR. SWIFT MACNEILL: It is, all the same.

  Ballinasloe Lands.
  MR. ROCHE: I beg to ask the Chief Secretary to the Lord-Lieutenant of Ireland whether he can now state when the Congested Districts Board intend to distribute the lands they have on hand in the neighbourhood of the division of Annagh, Ballinasloe; how long have they been in possession of the land; and whether he is aware that the great majority of the tenants in the district are under £5 valuation.
  MR. WALTER LONG: These lands have not yet been vested in the Board, who have no power in the meantime to distribute them.

  Irish School Teachers at Fairs.
  MR. JAMES O'CONNOR: I beg to ask the Chief Secretary to the Lord-Lieutenant of Ireland whether Rule 94 (III.) of the National Board of Education, which commands Irish national school teachers to avoid fairs and markets, applies to teachers resident in rural districts who rent small farms or land, and who have stock and crops to sell at fairs or markets; and, if so, will he advise the Commissioners of National Education to withdraw the rule.
  MR. WALTER LONG: The rule applies to all the teachers without exception. I understand, however, that if a teacher finds it necessary to attend a fair for the disposal of his stock the Commissioners do not take a serious view of the matter unless such attendance is of a recurrent nature and interferes with the proper discharge of the teacher's duties. The Commissioners regard the rule as a most useful one, and do not intend to withdraw it.

  Sunday Trading in Sligo.
  MR. SLOAN: I beg to ask the Chief Secretary to the Lord-Lieutenant of Ireland whether he is aware that the attention of the county inspector of the Royal Irish Constabulary in Sligo has been called to the fact that the Sunday Closing Act is practically ignored in that

  91
  town; and whether he will communicate with the Inspector-General with the view of having the Act enforced throughout Ireland.
  MR. WALTER LONG: The police in Sligo, as elsewhere in Ireland, pay particular attention to the enforcement of the Sunday Closing Act. During the past five years the police prosecuted forty-two cases of breaches of that Act in Sligo, and convictions were had in twenty-nine cases.
  MR. SWIFT MACNEILL: What about Sunday motoring?

  Kerry Fishing Industry.
  MR. THOMAS O'DONNELL: I beg to ask the Chief Secretary to the Lord-Lieutenant of Ireland whether he is aware that the Congested Districts Board have been appealed to by the fishermen of Ballydavid and Brandon Creek, county Kerry, for grants for the extension of their piers; and whether, seeing that fishing is the principal industry of the people of this district, the Board will send down an inspector to report on the fishing industry along the coast of the Dingle peninsula.
  MR. WALTER LONG: The Board cannot provide funds for the extension of these piers. It is not considered necessary to send an inspector to report on the fishing industry on the Dingle peninsula, as to which the Board are fully informed.
  MR. THOMAS O'DONNELL: As the Congested Districts Board does nothing for Kerry, will the right hon. Gentleman give this matter favourable consideration?
  MR. WALTER LONG: The general question is engaging the attention of the Board, and if the hon. Member can indicate any way in which assistance can be given practically, I shall be very glad to consider it.
  MR. FLAVIN; Give Kerry a member on the Congested Districts Board, and then Kerry interests will be looked after.

  Trinity College Lands in Kerry.
  MR. THOMAS O'DONNELL: I beg to ask the Chief Secretary to the Lord-Lieutenant of Ireland whether it is proposed to take any steps to carry out the suggestions of the Trinity College Commissioners for the purpose of facilitating the sale of Trinity College land; what rental does Trinity College receive annually from Kerry land; what price has Trinity College demanded of landlord lessees for the redemption of head rents; and will he explain what has been done with the £5,000 per annum voted for Trinity College at the passage of the Land Act of 1903.
  MR. WALTER LONG: I have already said that the questions raised in the Report of the Commission are receiving the most careful consideration of the Government. The Report shows that the rental of the college estates in Kerry is £10,699. I have no information as to the third inquiry, but in the absence of an agreement between the parties the Judicial Commissioner has power to fix the redemption price. The three yearly sums of £5,000 have been invested as prescribed by Section 39.
  MR. THOMAS O'DONNELL: How soon do you expect the Board to come to a decision?
  MR. WALTER LONG: I am afraid I cannot say.
  MR. FLAVIN: Is not Trinity College demanding from their tenants 27½ years purchase in addition to the three years bonus?
  MR. WALTER LONG: I think that is incorrect.
  MR. FLAVIN: I have seen a public communication to that effect. It is known, too, all over the country.

  Veterinary Branch, Irish Agricultural Department.
  MR. T. M. HEALY: I beg to ask the Chief Secretary to the Lord-Lieutenant of Ireland whether, in view of the repeated demands, the latest being an unanimous resolution of the Dublin

  93
  Corporation, for independent inquiry into the case of the Catholic gentlemen in the Veterinary Branch of the Agricultural Department, who, after eleven years service on high-class duties, receive salaries of £97 10s. per annum, he will now direct the Department to consent to such inquiry.
  MR. WALTER LONG: The resolution of the Dublin Corporation was one asking for the Department's observations on the resolution of the King's County Council passed at the instance of the hon. Member for the Ossory Division. The Department do not discuss questions relating to their staff with local bodies which have no functions in the matter. I have repeatedly stated that there are no grounds for any further inquiry

  Inspection of Irish Intermediate Education.
  MR. FLYNN: I beg to ask the Chief Secretary to the Lord-Lieutenant of Ireland whether he is aware that the Under-Secretary for Ireland, replying to the communications from the Commissioners of Intermediate Education in regard to their request for the appointment of permanent inspection, stated in December, 1902, that the Irish Government was entirely in favour of a system founded mainly on inspection as distinguished from a system founded mainly on examination; whether he can state on what grounds His Excellency refused to recommend the scheme to the Treasury; and when the change, legalised by the amending Act of 1900, will be carried into effect.
  MR. WALTER LONG: Yes, Sir; but the letter in question proceeded to refer to the fact that the statutes governing the intermediate system required the continuance of examination as the principal factor in regulating the distribution of grants to schools, and the question therefore arose as to whether the resources available for education in Ireland were so great as to justify the simultaneous existence of the two methods—examination and inspection—of testing results in one department. As to the concluding inquiries of the Question, I beg to refer to my reply to
  94
  the Question of the hon. Member for North Dublin yesterday.†

  Irish Fisheries Report.
  MR. FLYNN: I beg to ask the Chief Secretary to the Lord-Lieutenant of Ireland whether the Report of the Department of Agriculture on the Sea and Inland Fisheries of Ireland for 1902 and 1903 has been brought to his notice; whether his attention has been called to the fact that pages 1 to 214 are occupied with scientific investigations, diagrams, and plates dealing with marine fauna, with noctiluca miliaris, muggiæ atlantica, pleurobrachia pileus, echinodermata, and other specimens of marine life interesting to naturalists, and only two pages to the questions of shoal fish, the present destruction of immature mackerel on the South Coast, and other matters of great practical importance to working fishermen; and whether he will advise the Department to recommend the inspectors of fisheries to give more attention to the practical side of Sea and Inland Fisheries in their next annual Report, and, if necessary, to give the scientific side in a more condensed form.
  MR. WALTER LONG: The Department's annual Reports on Fisheries are divided into two parts, Part I. being the general report of the inspectors, and Part II. the technical report of the scientific adviser. The hon. Member's attention appears to have been directed to the latter Report only. The destruction of immature mackerel off the South Coast is engaging the attention of the Department.
  MR. FLYNN: Our complaint is that so much space is devoted to marine biology and so little to the improvement of the South of Ireland fisheries. We want something more practical.

  Illegal Fishing in the Barrow.
  MR. DELANY: I beg to ask the Chief Secretary to the Lord-Lieutenant of Ireland whether he is aware that Constable Guinlivan, Royal Irish Constabulary, Kilmalogue, Portarlington, requested two boys, named Cummins and Foran,
  † See (4) Debates, cl., 1341.

  95
  whom he met on the banks of the River Barrow, to catch him some gudgeons; that the constable took the fish for his own use, and subsequently instituted a prosecution which came before the petty sessions at Portarlington on July 26th; and whether, seeing that one of the boys, aged twelve years, was sent to Tullamore Gaol for fourteen days, and the other fined 10s. 6d., he will say what steps he proposes taking in this case.
  MR. WALTER LONG: This prosecution was at the suit of the Fishery Conservators. There is no foundation for the suggestion that the constable who detected the offence asked the young men to fish. The offenders were fined 10s. 6d. each. One paid the fine, and the other, who is nineteen, not twelve, years of age, was sent to prison in default of payment.
  MR. T. M. HEALY: What was the offence of these boys?
  MR. WALTER LONG: I suppose illegal fishing,
  MR. T. M. HEALY: Under what circumstances?
  MR. DELANY: Who was the informer?
  MR. WALTER LONG: How can I answer that?
  MR. EUGENE WASON: Is fishing for gudgeons legal in other parts of the United Kingdom and not in Ireland?
  [No Answer was returned.]

  Irish Arterial Drainage Commission.
  MR. VINCENT KENNEDY: I beg to ask the Chief Secretary to the Lord-Lieutenant of Ireland if he can now state the names of the gentlemen who it is proposed are to constitute the Commission to inquire into arterial drainage in Ireland; and will he state the terms of reference.
  MR. WALTER LONG: I refer to the reply which I gave yesterday to
  96
  the similar Question of the hon. Member for North Dublin.‡
  MR. T. M. HEALY: As the Government never acts on the Reports of these Commissions, why keep on appointing them?

  Rent Reductions by the Irish Land Com- missioners.
  MR. MURPHY: I beg to ask the Chief Secretary to the Lord-Lieutenant of Ireland if the Land Commissioners can give any explanation of the reductions granted by them on first-term and second-term fair rent applications for the year ended 31st March, 1905, in comparison with previous years; and how it occurs that rents fixed on the reports of their own valuers, but which do not come before the Court, are considerably lower than those fixed by the Court on the reports of the same valuers.
  MR. WALTER LONG: The percentages of reduction in rents fixed by the Sub-Commissioners or, on appeal, by the Land Commissioners, vary with the varying circumstances of cases, holdings, and districts. The rents so fixed are judicially determined, and it is not competent to me to ask the Commissioners to give any explanation of their action.

  Sales of Charity Estates in Ireland.
  MR. MURPHY: I beg to ask the Chief Secretary to the Lord-Lieutenant of Ireland if the policy adopted by the Commissioners of Charitable Donations and Bequests in connection with the sale of estates vested in them is to secure a price that will increase the annual income on each estate sold; and, if so, if he can take any steps to prevent a public body by such action giving an inflated value to land in Ireland at the present time.
  MR. WALTER LONG: I am informed by the Commissioners that no negotiations for the sale of estates vested in them have taken place.

  Irish Police Rifle Drill.
  MR. ROCHE: I beg to ask the Chief Secretary to the Lord-Lieutenant of
  † See (4) Debates, cl., 1340.

  97
  Ireland whether he can state the two counties in Ireland in which the new drill in connection with the Lee-Metford rifle is practiced by the police.
  MR. WALTER LONG: Wexford and Tipperary, South Riding.

  Fallon Estate, County Galway.
  MR. ROCHE: I beg to ask the Chief Secretary to the Lord-Lieutenant of Ireland what price the Congested Districts Board paid for the Fallon Estate, county Galway.
  MR. WALTER LONG: £16,037.
  MR. KILBRIDE: How many years purchase is that? Can the right hon. Gentleman say?
  MR. WALTER LONG: No.
  MR. SWIFT MACNEILL: It is too hard a sum.

  Dungannon Labourers' Cottages.
  MR. DOOGAN: I beg to ask the Chief Secretary to the Lord Lieutenant of Ireland whether he is aware that after an inquiry into the failure of the Rural District Council of Dungannon to make an improvement scheme under the Acts, the council were informed by the Local Government Board on March 22nd last that the eighteen applicants whose names were set out in the letter had established their claims for the erection of cottages; can he say how many of these cottages have yet been built; and, if none, will he take steps to cause the work to be begun at once.
  MR. WALTER LONG: The fact is as stated in the first inquiry. On May 4th the council decided upon a scheme for forty-one cottages, including the eighteen referred to. There is no reason to believe there will be any undue delay in the erection of the cottages.

  Baltimore Mails.
  MR. GILHOOLY: I beg to ask the Postmaster-General whether he is aware that a letter posted in Skibbereen, for Baltimore, in time for the down train leaving Cork at noon is
  98
  not delivered until the following morning. I though postal officials meet the train at 2.8 p.m., and could deliver a bag for Baltimore without additional expense; and that a letter posted at Baltimore, for Skibbereen, in time for the 11.30 a.m. train is taken to Cork and sent back to Skibbereen in the evening, notwithstanding the fact that postal officials meet the train at Skibbereen and could with, out further expense take a bag from there to the post office; and whether, in view of the fact that towns of less importance than Baltimore in the neighbourhood have a mid-day mail, he will have the existing one continued during the year in Baltimore.
  THE POSTMASTER-GENERAL (Lord STANLEY,): The facilities asked for could not be given without expense, and, as I informed the hon. Member on 7th ult., I regret that the cost of the existing posts is so high in proportion to the amount of correspondence as to preclude further expenditure Apart from considerations of expense, the correspondence available for the suggested bags between Baltimore and Skibbereen is too small to justify their institution.

  Bangor (Down) Post Office.
  MR. T. L. CORBETT: I beg to ask the Postmaster-General whether he is now in a position to make any statement as to the provision of a new post office for Bangor, county Down.
  LORD STANLEY: In response to the advertisements which I caused to be issued several offers of sites and premises for a new post office have been received and are now under consideration.

  North of Ireland Mails.
  DR. THOMPSON: I beg to ask the Postmaster-General if any arrangement has yet been made which will facilitate the despatch of the English mails via Greenore from Derry and the surrounding counties, cities, and towns by the train leaving the city of Londonderry at 5.15 p.m.; is he aware of the convenience an extension of postal time such as proposed would afford a large part of the North of Ireland; and if he has received any

  99
  representations from the districts served by the Great Northern Railway Company pressing upon his attention the desirability of the suggested postal extension.
  LORD STANLEY: The hon. Member is no doubt aware that I recently received a deputation on the question of establishing a mail service from the North of Ireland to England by the Greenore route. I undertook to make further inquiries on the subject, but these are not yet completed. I regret that I am not in a position to state whether or not such a service can be established.
  DR. THOMPSON: Does the noble Lord well understand the importance of this question to those who reside in the North-West of Ireland?
  LORD STANLEY: Yes, Sir, the deputation made that quite clear.

  Unionist Members and Labour Legislation.
  MR. HUNT: I beg to ask the First Lord of the Treasury whether his attention has been called to the desire of a number of Unionist Members that the less contentious part of the Unemployed Bill and the Workmen's Compensation Bill should be passed into law this session; and whether he will take steps, by prolonging the session or otherwise, to attain this object.
  MR. T. M. HEALY: May I ask you, MR. Speaker, whether the term "a number of Unionist Members" in the Question should not be "a number of Christian Members"; and whether there is any precedent for allowing Members to be described in a particular manner in a Question?
  *MR. SPEAKER: The phrase "members of the Unionist Party" has been frequently used; and I see no objection to it.
  MR. SWIFT MACNEILL: There is no such Party.
  THE PRIME MINISTER AND FIRST LORD OF THE TREASURY (Mr. A. J. BALFOUR,): In reply to the Question, I have to say that I have every hope of seeing the Unemployed Bill, in its present uncontroversial form, passed into law in the course of the present session. But I do not see any possibility of passing the second Bill. I shall consider myself fortunate if I get the first.
  MR. LOUGH: Why not prolong the session?
  MR SWIFT MACNEILL: Or have a Saturday sitting?

  The Colonial Conference.
  MR. SOARES: I beg to ask the First Lord of the Treasury whether he can state whether the British representatives at the Colonial Conference to be held in 1906 will have power to discuss the advisability of mutual preferential trading based on the taxation of food and raw material imported into this country; and, if he cannot give this information, will he say whether his refusal is based on the ground that it would be injurious to the public service to do so. The hon. Gentleman added: In putting the Question may I remind the right hon. Gentleman of the ruling of Mr. Speaker last Tuesday?
  MR. A. J. BALFOUR: I do not know to what the hon. Gentleman refers.
  MR. SOARES: I wish to remind the right hon. Gentleman of Mr. Speaker's ruling last Tuesday in regard to the answering of Questions by the Prime Minister.
  MR. A. J. BALFOUR: I do not think it is the business of the hon. Gentleman to remind me of any ruling of Mr. Speaker. The House is aware that we have repeatedly said that in no circumstances shall we deal with the fiscal question in the present Parliament; but I am not prepared to lay down any 1 mitations as to what the Colonial Conference may discuss during the course of the present Parliament.
  MR. SOARES: Does that mean that the right hon. Gentleman refuses to answer my Question?
  MR. A. J. BALFOUR: No, Sir; it means that I have answered it.

  Lord Roberts' Speech on Army Defects.
  MR. LAMBERT: I beg to ask the First Lord of the Treasury what steps are to be taken by the Government to remedy the defects in the military strength of the country as indicated by Lord Roberts.
  MR. A. J. BALFOUR: I think the hon. Gentleman will feel that his Question must be put in rather more precise terms before I can answer it. Lord Roberts' speech consists of a series of propositions, and to answer in regard to each one of them what has been or can be done is impossible. If the hon. Gentleman will ask me a precise Question on a precise point I will do my best to answer him.
  MR. PIRIE: Is the Government responsible for the views of lord Roberts?
  MR. A. J. BALFOUR: No, Sir; the {government is in no sense responsible for the statements of Lord Roberts.
  MR. PIRIE: Does the speech of Lord Roberts represent the views of the Defence Committee, of which he is a member?
  MR. A. J. BALFOUR: A member of the Defence Committee may make a speech without committing the Defence Committee. Lord Roberts spoke on his personal responsibility.

  The General Election—Voters Lists.
  MR. BENN: I beg to ask the First Lord of the Treasury whether, to meet the contingency of a general election in November next, he will take steps to make the registers of voters which come into force on 1st November for municipal purposes available for a Parliamentary election.
  MR. A. J. BALFOUR: It is difficult to imagine what exceptional circumstances would justify the procedure which
  102
  the hon. Gentleman recommends. Certainly, in my judgment, no such exceptional circumstances exist at the present moment.

  BUSINESS OF THE HOUSE.
  SIR ERNEST FLOWERasked the First Lord of the Treasury the meaning of the Resolution which he had placed on the Paper for that day.
  The Motion was as follows:—
  1. Business of the House (Supply). That on this day, notwithstanding anything in Standing Order 15, Business other than Business of Supply may be taken before Midnight.—(Mr. A. J. Balfour.)
  MR. LOUGH: And can the right hon. Gentleman give us some indication as to the business for next week?
  MR. A. J. BALFOURsaid he was not surprised at the Question of the hon. Member for West Bradford for the Motion was not one which was familiar to the House. The explanation was that if hon. Members should elect not to repeat on the Report stage of Supply the divisions taken in Committee, the proceedings which commenced at ten p.m. would be concluded long before midnight; and, if this Resolution were not carried, the House would have to remain idle until twelve midnight, before it could take other business. Everybody would agree that that would be a lamentable waste of time. He therefore would ask the House to pass his Resolution. In order to expedite business, they must get through the Committee stage of the Expiring Laws Continuance Bill before going to work on the Unemployed Bill, and he did not think it would be fair to ask the House to begin on the latter Bill very late at night. If they got through the former Bill at a reasonable hour, he would ask the House to take the Unemployed Bill at noon on Friday. In answer to the hon. Member for Islington, he had to say that he had more than once told the House that unless he was able to get the Third Reading of the Unemployed Bill on Monday, which necessitated the Committee stage being finished to-morrow,

  103
  there would be very little prospect of getting the Bill through both Houses of Parliament.
  MR. LLOYD-GEORGE: Nothing else will betaken after the Unemployed Bill?
  MR. A. J. BALFOUR: Oh, yes; the Public Works Loans Bill and the Isle of Man Customs Bill, both of which are uncontroversial. [OPPOSITION cries of "No."] Well, the latter must be passed by this House, and it has almost always been treated as uncontroversial.
  MR. JOHN REDMONDsaid that, as he was anxious to facilitate the progress of the Unemployed Bill, he would not oppose the Motion of the Prime Minister.
  MR. KEIR HARDIE: Will the right lion. Gentleman take the Unemployed Bill first to-morrow?
  MR. A. J. BALFOURsaid that he would be quite content if he got the Expiring Laws Continuance Bill to-night, and in that case he would take the Unemployed Bill as the first order tomorrow (Friday). He had some reason to fear that the evening sittings on Monday and Tuesday would be largely occupied with private Bills over which be had no control. He could not, therefore, give a pledge as to Monday.
  MR. LLOYD-GEORGE: How about the Appropriation Bill?
  MR. A. J. BALFOURreplied that he hoped to take the Second Reading of the Appropriation Bill on Tuesday.
  MR. WHITLEY: Is it the intention of the Government to ask the House to approve the Telephone Agreement?
  MR. A. J. BALFOURsaid he had pledged himself to give some opportunity for the discussion of the Report of the Telephone Committee, and he would consider with his noble friend the Postmaster-General whether the House should be asked to say "Aye" or "No" to the Agreement.

  HOUSE OF COMMONS (KITCHEN AND REFRESHMENT ROOMS).
  Report brought up, and read.
  Report to lie upon the Table, and to be printed. [No. 298.]

  REVENUE (EXCISE DUTY).
  Committee to consider of authorising the imposition of an Excise Duty on licences to be taken out by manufacturers for sale of British wines, in pursuance of any Act of the present session to amend the Law relating to Customs and Inland Revenue, and for other purposes connected with Finance (King's Recommendation signified), Tomorrow.—(Mr. Chancellor of the Exchequer.)
NEW BILL.
  LOCAL AUTHORITIES' ACQUISITION OF UNDERTAKINGS BILL.
  "To enable Local Authorities to acquire existing undertakings by agreement," presented by Mr. Higham; supported by MR. Binn, Dr. Shipman, Mr. Shackleton, and MR. Baker; to be read a second time upon Monday next, and to be printed. [Bill 305.]
  BUSINESS OF THE HOUSE (SUPPLY).
  Ordered, That on this day, notwithstanding anything in Standing Order No. 15, Business other than Business of Supply may be taken before Midnight.—(Mr. A. J. Balfour.)
  SUPPLY [20TH ALLOTTED DAY] [2ND AUGUST] REPORT.
  Resolutions reported.
CIVIL SERVICES AND REVENUE DE- PARTMENTS ESTIMATES, 1905–6.

  CLASS II.
  1. "That a sum, not exceeding £108,629, be granted to His Majesty, to complete the sum necessary to defray the Charge which will come in course of payment during the year ending on the 31st day of March, 1906, for the Salaries and Expenses of the Office of His Majesty's

  105
  Secretary of State for the Home Department and Subordinate Offices."

  CLASS I.
  2. Resolved, That a sum, not exceeding £1,528,761, be granted to His Majesty, to defray the Charge which will come in course of payment during the year ending on the 31st day of March, 1906, for Expenditure on the following Services included in Class I. of the Estimates for Civil Services, viz.:—

  £.

  3.

  Royal Parks and Pleasure Gardens

  62,400

  4.

  Houses of Parliament Buildings (Supplementary)

  3,150

  5.

  Miscellaneous Legal Buildings, Great Britain

  33,960

  6.

  Art and Science Buildings, Great Britain

  29,000

  7.

  Diplomatic and Consular Buildings

  40,900

  8.

  Revenue Buildings.

  433,700

  9.

  Public Buildings, Great Britain

  284,000

  10.

  Surveys of the United Kingdom

  117,650

  11.

  Harbours under the Board of Trade.

  16,565

  12.

  Peterhead Harbour

  22,000

  13.

  Rates on Government Property

  356,295

  14.

  Public Works and Buildings, Ireland

  104,509

  15.

  Railways, Ireland

  24,632

  £1,528,761"

  CLASS II.
  3. "That a sum, not exceeding £1,319,058, be granted to His Majesty, to defray the Charge which will come in course of payment during the year ending on the 31st day of March, 1906, for Expenditure in respect of the following Services included in Class II. of the Estimates for Civil Services, viz.:—

  £

  1.

  House of Lords Offices

  10,051

  2.

  House of Commons Offices

  20,500

  3.

  Treasury and Subordinate Offices

  58,595

  5.

  Foreign Office

  40,103

  106

  £

  6.

  Colonial Office

  28,920

  7.

  Privy Council Office.

  6,370

  9.

  Mercantile Marine Services

  69,919

  10.

  Bankruptcy Department of the Board of Trade

  5

  11.

  Board of Agriculture and Fisheries

  65,605

  12.

  Charity Commission

  15,689

  13.

  Civil Service Commission

  24,905

  14.

  Exchequer and Audit Department

  40,155

  15.

  Friendly Societies Registry

  4,680

  16.

  Local Government Board

  146,954

  17.

  Lun cy Commission, England

  10,458

  18.

  Mint, including Coinage

  48

  19.

  National Debt Office

  7,063

  20.

  Public Record Office

  14,560

  21.

  Public Works Loan Commission

  19

  22.

  Registrar-General's Office, England

  22,895

  23.

  Stationery and Printing

  413,283

  24.

  Woods, Forests, and Land Revenues, etc., Office

  12,633

  25.

  Works and Public Buildings Office

  43,395

  26.

  Secret Service

  25,000

  Scotland.

  28.

  Fishery Board

  14,786

  29.

  Lunacy Commission

  3,384

  30.

  Registrar-General's Office

  2,781

  Ireland.

  32.

  Household of Lord-Lieutenant of Ireland.

  2,822

  33.

  Chief Secretary for Ireland, Offices

  13,950

  34.

  Department of Agriculture and Technical Instruction

  111,692

  35.

  Charitable Donations and Bequests Office

  1,042

  36.

  Local Government Board

  39,097

  37.

  Public Record Office, Ireland

  3,359

  38.

  Public Works Office

  23,111

  39.

  Registrar-General's Office

  7,510

  40.

  Valuation and Boundary Survey

  13,719

  £1,319,058"

  CLASS III.
  4. "That a sum, not exceeding £1,997,391, be granted to His Majesty, to defray the Charge which will come in course of payment during the year ending on the 31st day of March, 1906, for Expenditure in respect of the following Services included in Class III. of the Estimates for Civil Services, viz.:—

  £

  1.

  Law Charges

  32,202

  2.

  Miscellaneous Legal Expenses

  21,516

  3.

  Supreme Court of Judicature

  181,574

  4.

  Land Registry

  26,102

  5.

  County Courts

  6,000

  6.

  Police, England and Wales

  26,945

  7.

  Prisons, England and the Colonies

  406,443

  8.

  Reformatory and Industrial Schools, Great Britain

  119,799

  9.

  Broadmoor Criminal Lunatic Asylum

  23,806

  Scotland.

  10.

  Law Charges and Courts of Law

  51,841

  11.

  Register House, Edinburgh

  27,481

  12.

  Crofters' Commission

  2,545

  13.

  Prisons

  50,750

  Ireland.

  14.

  Law Charges and Criminal Prosecutions

  32,416

  15.

  Supreme Court of Judicature and other Legal Departments

  58,025

  17.

  County Court Officers, etc.

  65,423

  18.

  Dublin Metropolitan Police

  37,906

  19.

  Royal Irish Constabulary

  699,413

  20.

  Prisons

  68,430

  21.

  Reformatory and Industrial Schools

  55,281

  22.

  Dundrum Criminal Lunatic Asylum

  3,493

  £1,997,391"

  CLASS IV.
  5. "That a sum, not exceeding £7,619,937, be granted to His Majesty,
  108
  to defray the Charge which will come in course of payment during the year ending on the 31st day of March, 1906, for Expenditure in respect of the following Services, included in Class IV. of the Estimates for Civil Services, viz.:—

  £

  1.

  Board of Education

  5,652,548

  2.

  British Museum

  100,501

  3.

  National Gallery

  9,014

  4.

  National Portait Gallery

  2,619

  5.

  Wallace Collection

  3,593

  6.

  Scientific Investigation, etc., United Kingdom

  29,900

  7.

  Universities and Colleges, Great Britain, and Intermediate Education, Wales

  137,300

  8.

  Public Education, Scotland

  1,047,290

  9.

  National Gallery, etc., Scotland

  405

  Ireland.

  10.

  Public Education

  631,721

  11.

  Endowed Schools Commissioners

  510

  12.

  National Gallery (including a Supplementary Sum of £1,390)

  1,986

  13.

  Queen's Colleges

  2,550

  £7,619,937"

  CLASS V.
  6. "That a sum, not exceeding £1,032,445, be granted to His Majesty, to defray the Charge which will come in course of payment during the year ending on the 3lst day of March, 1906, for Expenditure on the following Services included in Class V. of the Estimates for Civil Services, viz.:—

  1.

  Diplomatic and Consular Services

  303,847

  2.

  Colonial Services

  671,703

  3.

  Telegraph Subsidies and Pacific Cable

  41,645

  4.

  Cyprus (Grant in Aid)

  1,000

  5.

  Treasury Chest Fund

  14,250

  £1,032,445"

  CLASS VI.
  7. "That a sum, not exceeding £497,002, be granted to His Majesty, to defray the Charge which will come in course of payment during the year ending on the 31st day of March, 1906, for Expenditure in respect of the following Services included in Class VI. of the Estimates for Civil Services, viz.:—

  £

  1.

  Superannuation and Retired Allowances

  348,378

  2.

  Merchant Seamen's Fund Pensions

  800

  3.

  Miscellaneous Charitable and other Allowances

  572

  4.

  Hospitals and Charities, Ireland

  263

  5.

  Savings Banks' and Friendly Societies' Deficiencies

  146,989

  £497,002"

  CLASS VII.
  8. "That a sum, not exceeding £137,772, be granted to His Majesty, to defray the Charge which will come in course of payment during the year ending on the 31st day of March, 1906, for Expenditure in respect of the following Services included in Class VII. of the Estimates for Civil Services, viz.:—

  1.

  Temporary Commissions

  12,804

  2.

  Miscellaneous Expenses

  6,308

  3.

  Repayments to the Local Loans Fund

  698

  4.

  Ireland Development Grant

  85,000

  5.

  Their Royal Highnesses the Prince and Princess of Wales (Visit to India)

  20,000

  6.

  Repayment to Civil Contingencies Fund

  12,962

  £137,772"

  NAVY ESTIMATES, 1905–6.
  9. "That a sum, not exceeding £9,399,300, be granted to His Majesty, to defray the Charge which will come in course of payment during the year ending on the 31st day of March, 1906, for
  110
  Expenditure on the following Navy Services, viz.:—

  £

  2.

  Victualling and Clothing for the Navy

  2,256,600

  3.

  Medical Establishments and Services

  277,500

  4.

  Martial Law, etc.

  14,000

  5.

  Educational Services

  161,900

  6.

  Scientific Services

  69,300

  7.

  Royal Naval Reserves

  420,600

  9.

  Naval Armaments

  2,986,000

  11.

  Miscellaneous Effective Services

  454,000

  12.

  Admiralty Office

  336,400

  13.

  Half-pay, Reserved, and Retired Pay

  800,900

  14.

  Naval and Marine Pensions, Gratuities, and Compassionate Allowances

  1,233,900

  15.

  Civil Pensions and Gratuities

  388,200

  £9,399,300

  ARMY ESTIMATES, 1905–6.
  10. "That a sum, not exceeding £15,082,100, be granted to His Majesty, to defray the Charge which will come in course of payment during the year ending on the 31st day of March, 1906, for Expenditure on the following Army Services, including Army (Ordnance Factories), viz.:—

  2.

  Medical Establishment, Pay, etc.

  482,000

  3.

  Militia: Pay, Bounty, etc.

  817,000

  4.

  Imperial Yeomanry: Pay and Allowances

  438,000

  5.

  Volunteer Corps: Pay and Allowances

  1,220,000

  6.

  Quarterings, Transport, and Remounts

  2,190,000

  8.

  Ordnance Department Establishments, and General Stores

  838,000

  9.

  Armaments and Engineer Stores

  2,489,000

  10.

  Works and Buildings

  2,330,000

  11.

  Establishments for Military Education

  130,000

  12.

  Miscellaneous Effective Services

  72,000

  13.

  War Office and Army Accounts Department

  545,000

  111

  £

  14.

  Retired Pay, Half Pay, and other Non-Effective Charges for Officers, etc.

  1,677,000

  15.

  Pensions and other Non-Effective Charges for Warrant Officers, Non-Commissioned Officers. Men, and others.

  1,673,000

  16.

  Civil Superannuation, Compensation, Compassionate Allowances and Gratuities

  181,000

  Ordnance Factories

  100

  £15,082,100"

  REVENUE DEPARTMENTS ESTIMATES, 1905–6.
  11. "That a sum, not exceeding £12,005,475, be granted to His Majesty, to defray the Charge which will come in course of payment during the year ending on the 31st day of March, 1906, for Expenditure in respect of the following Services included in the Estimates for Revenue Departments, viz.:—

  £

  1.

  Customs.

  574,600

  2.

  Inland Revenue

  1,406,000

  3.

  Post Office

  6,920,538

  4.

  Post Office Packet Service

  531,790

  5.

  Post Office Telegraphs

  2,572,547

  £12,005,475"

  Resolutions read a second time.
  First two Resolutions postponed.
  Third Resolution:—
  *SIR CHARLES DILKEsaid he thought it only right that the House should take some notice of the claim set up on behalf of the Government by injudicious supporters of the Government in and out of the House and in the newspapers that supported the Unionist Party, that the country would resent the resignation of the Government at this time when foreign affairs made it absolutely essential
  112
  at any cost to themselves that they should stay in office. It was well to examine if there was any foundation for that belief prevailing on the other side of the House. Hon. Gentlemen opposite seemed to be firmly and honestly persuaded that their tenure of office was necessary to the proper conduct of foreign affairs, but it was natural enough that the Opposition should refuse to share this belief and that they should enter a caveat against its being fostered. True enough, the supporters of the Government did not urge that doctrine in the House itself, but they preached it among themselves all the same.
  As far as he could judge, the claim rested on two or three bases. The doctrine suggested at the Foreign Office meeting was different from the doctrine suggested in the Conservative Press of last week, when there was a question of the resignation of Ministers. The view that prevailed at the Foreign Office meeting was that the dangerous state of Europe exacted their retention of office. But the opinion of all the best informed diplomatists invariably was that the state of Europe was always dangerous, in fact, he had never known them think it was perfectly sound and peaceful, except when war broke out. But the view of the outside public that nothing was going to happen in Europe of the kind indicated was a sounder and truer belief. Certainly the extraordinary panic that prevailed recently in this country and on the Continent as to the condition of European; affairs was not justified by the facts. The country had been told that there was a great chance of one great European Power making an attack on another Power. He was convinced that, if there had been any such intention, the country would have heard, not of the intention, but of the attack itself. It was the common opinion throughout the world outside this country a short time ago that we were meditating an attack on a great military Power; and, though that belief seemed to us incredible, it was the fact that there was an honest belief prevailing on the Continent of Europe to this effect.
  But a definite statement had been made with reference to the Japanese Treaty. He was one of those who had always held the

  113
  strongest possible doctrine against what were called peace alliances, but he believed that there were many persons who would say now, starting where we now were, that it was not possible entirely to ignore the war alliance with Japan. That we should not have an interest in the terms of peace by which the war was concluded seemed to him to be in the circumstances impossible. But when it was claimed that the Government must remain in office to sign the treaty with Japan, he thought that the House would be right in believing that the lines of the future arrangement with Japan were already laid down in a form which the overwhelming majority of both Parties in the State would support. It was impossible under the circumstances to contemplate a wild scheme of absolute offensive and defensive alliance in all parts of the world. The lines of any understanding which had been come to must evidently concern the preservation of the status quo in Asia. But the notion that we needed a military alliance with a foreign Power for the defence of the Indian frontier was one that ought to be repudiated at once. Any alliance in support of the status quo in Asia against possible disturbance from any quarter must have the effect of a virtual guarantee to the position of certain Powers who were no parties to that alliance. Any guarantee of the status quo must be a virtual guarantee of the occupation of Kiao-chau by Germany as of Tonking by France. Therefore an understanding or alliance for the maintenance of the status quo in Asia must tend to the preservation of permanent peace in that part of the world. Delicate questions were bound to arise, but this great fact was assured—that a profound desire for peace was now as strong in this country as in France itself. The tendency of the debates in the French Chamber on the Anglo-French Convention was towards common action by France, the United States, and ourselves in support of the maintenance of peace—an understanding to which, even in face of the Russian alliance, almost all the speakers in the French Chamber admitted our alliance with Japan might contribute. There was every reason to hope that, when the present war was ended, common action by the Powers mentioned would
  114
  secure peace for a long time. The notion that we should think of outraging the feelings of the world by going out of our way to attack for any fancied interest a possible rival naval Power was preposterous. Such a policy of digging up dangers would be fatal to an Empire like ours. But some people seemed to think that we ought to anticipate dangers which were foreseen, perhaps, in the distant future, but which might never arise; and that we should, by a state of perpetual war, bring about an eventual peace.
  There was a third claim apt to be made by the Party opposite—that they had produced the good understanding with the United States and France, in which all rejoiced. It might be necessary to point out that this result represented a very sharp and recent change of policy of some Gentlemen opposite; but all Parties in this country were united now in favour of this understanding, and there was no chance of its being jeopardised by any change of Government. There were some subjects which the delicacy of the present situation made it only possible to mention. The war and the state of anarchy that paralysed one of the great Powers must suspend a large number of questions It was useless to discuss them when everyone was waiting for peace. Such were questions of neutrality and the British claims for compensation; of the neglect of China to carry out official promises; and of Germany's activity in the province of Shantung. All the arrangements of the great Powers between themselves were, of course, affected by the present position of affairs. The balance of power, which had a certain reality, was disturbed by the temporary disappearance of one of the great Powers. In ordinary circumstances the House would have heard a good deal of what was happening in Crete. British, Italian, French, and Russian troops were all in garrison there, and these forces had recently been engaged in operations against the Christian inhabitants. If in consideration of the delicate relations of the great Powers the Government were not pressed on this matter, they must not mistake forbearance for indifference. For the same reason, the state of the Balkans was

  115
  a topic to be avoided. Though some had thought that the elimination of Russia would be Austria's opportunity, the very contrary had proved to be the case; and the temporary extinction of Russia's influence had paralysed that of Austria. At present no progress with reforms was possible until beneficent peace had put an end to the war.
  The one question on which he wished to press the Government was one in which the honour of this country was deeply concerned—the question of the Congo. He would not go back to any circumstances except such as were beyond dispute, and were revealed in the published despatches. Last year the Under-Secretary admitted the overwhelming case for searching and impartial inquiry. He admitted, too, our responsibility to see that the Congo State carried out their obligations, and he suggested that they had violated the free-trade provision of the Berlin Act and that they appeared to be concerned not with the native administration but only with the collection of rubber. The Congolese Government had promised to find a tribunal to inquire if the position had been abused and the trust betrayed. The Report of that inquiry, which they hoped would satisfy the average man, if not those who held extreme views on the question, had been kept back. He could not help thinking that it might have been ready a long time ago. The Commission was out in the Congo State for a very short time and visited very few places, though it did hold a detailed investigation into some particular cases. It took so short a time over the inquiry that it was difficult for our official, who was deputed to attend its meetings, to reach it in time, in spite of the fact that Lord Lansdowne, in his despatch to the Congo Government, impressed on them the necessity for ample time for investigation, and the Congo Government in reply admitted that necessity.
  The territory investigated by the Commission was chiefly that of one of the concessionnaire companies, and though the inquiry was almost restricted to that territory, the secretary of the Commission had written stating that the evidence had disclosed many irregularities. The
  116
  connection between this company and the Government was very close, and light had been thrown upon the intentions of the Government with regard to the execution of any reforms which the Commission might have recommended by the fact that since the Commission had returned the former Governor-General, who had held office four times before, had returned to the Congo for the fifth time, although he was very deeply compromised in some of the abuses previously disclosed. Furthermore, since the Commission had returned to Brussels, His Majesty's Government had become aware of the existence of slavery quite of the old kind in the southern portion of the State, Katanga. That Katanga was now mined by slavery he had no doubt, and he did not think the Government had any doubt either.
  If the Congo State was guilty of a violation in this portion of its territory of the Brussels General Act, and if it failed to redeem its pledge to make known to us, at the earliest possible period, the results of this solemn inquiry which it had promised, then it became the duty of His Majesty's Government to make further inquiry on their own account. Had the two Vice-Consuls who were to be under the Consul at Boma been appointed and gone to their posts? As regarded other portions of the territory, especially those which had been the subject of debate in Italy and those adverted to by Lord Cromer in his Report, an inquiry might be made from other British quarters. It would be possible to utilise some of Lord Cromer's excellent staff from Darfur and the Bahr-el-Ghazal, and to employ our staff from Unyoro and some of the staff of the Administrator of Barotseland. The Government ought also to be prepared, as suggested by Sir Harry Johnston, to revive our Consular jurisdiction in the Congo State, the right to which, under the Convention of 1884, was only temporarily waived by Lord Salisbury, and to take into our own hands the cases of British subjects and British-protected subjects. It was impossible to stand still in regard to this question in view of the facts which had been officially obtained and supported, and he pressed the Government to take further action, either in the sense which

  117
  he had indicated or in a sense which would seem better to themselves.
  Amendment proposed—
  "To leave out '£1,319,058,' and insert '£1,318,958.'"—(Sir Charles Dilke.)
  Question proposed, "That' £1,319,058' stand part of the said Resolution."
  *MR. EMMOTTsaid that the speech of the right hon. Gentleman the Member for the Forest of Dean showed the right hon. Gentleman's great knowledge of every aspect of this subject. He did not propose to follow the right hon. Gentleman in many of the topics he had touched upon. He, however, desired to ask the noble Lord a Question of considerable importance to his county. His right hon. friend the Member for the Forest of Dean had mentioned the somewhat delicate question that had arisen in regard to the seizures of ships and the goods on our ships during the present war. He wanted to ask the noble Lord as to the Russian view of whether cotton was to be regarded as conditional or as absolute contraband of war. He wanted full information on that point, as it was of the most enormous importance to this country that cotton should be treated as conditional contraband of war. Would they, in course of time, have full information placed before them about the judgment of the Russian Appeal Court, as obviously to the part of the country which he had the honour of representing this matter was of enormous importance.
  On the subject of the Congo Free State one was obliged to speak at the present moment with a certain reserve, because the Commission of Inquiry had not yet issued its Report. He acknowledged the care and patience with which the Commissioners had investigated some of the complaints put before them. It was true that they had only covered a very small portion of the territory of the Congo Free State, and that some of the grounds through which they passed had been specially prepared for their visit. But the Commission would in time report, and one was obliged to wait until one saw that Report in order that one
  118
  might be in a position to judge how far they had satisfactorily investigated the questions put before them. If the Commission had merely investigated the question of whether cruelties had been committed and had not gone behind that in order to consider whether those cruelties had not inevitably arisen from the system existing in the country, he feared that whatever Report they wrote would not satisfactorily deal with the facts lying at the root of the situation.
  A new feature of the situation was that in Italy, he was glad to say, there had been a great deal of discussion owing to the revelations that had been made in that country. He had seen it stated in the Press that France was anxious to enter into a conference with us and the other Powers in regard to the whole question of the Congo Basin. He wanted to know if that was true. It was perfectly true that in some places in the Congo there appeared to have been some improvement during the last twelve or eighteen months. He was glad to acknowledge that. He should be only too glad if this subject could disappear from the debates in the House. He drew attention to a district in which there had been a reduction in taxation from four thousand rods per fortnight to two hundred rods per fortnight. That was a curious illustration of how enormously the people must have suffered from over-taxation before the reduction was made.
  He expressed his regret at the action of the Congo Government in objecting as long as they could to the representative of this Government attending the meetings of the Commission of Inquiry. He thought it was on September 6th that the Congo Free State Government definitely refused, so far as they had the power, to allow representatives to attend the meetings of the Commission. Lord Lansdowne very properly made a very grave protest a few weeks later to the Congo Free State Government in regard to it. But suddenly a new idea appeared to have occurred to the Government, and on November 2nd they wired out to the Acting Consul asking if the Commission itself had any objection to a representative of this Government attending the meetings of the Commission.

  119
  The Commission was up the River at the time and had already taken a large part of the evidence. It took a month to get the reply, and Mr. Mackie, who at that time was in Portugal, was ordered by the Government to go out in order that he might act as a representative of the Government on the Commission. He did not suppose, however, Mr. Mackie himself ever attended any of the meetings of the Commission. He only wished the Government had taken this course at an earlier date and asked the Commission whether it had any objection to the Government being directly represented at all the meetings.
  He associated himself with the remarks made by the right hon. Baronet in regard to the appointment of Baron Wahis as Governor-General of the Congo Free State. His predecessor committed suicide; and he did not think there was any part of the world where so many officials had put an end to their lives. The record of that baron was not a happy one in regard to the Congo Free State, but it did show that he could have no great desire to effect any reforms in the government of that country. He asked whether the Government had any information as to what was going on in the Abir territory. MR. Harris had reported that atrocities as horrible as had ever been perpetrated before were now going on. He wanted to to know whether that report had been confirmed. In the debate on June 9th the noble Lord said that instructions had been sent to the Abir authorities that freedom of commerce should obtain throughout that territory. He should like to know what result had followed these instructions. Again, he stated that a High Commissioner had been appointed to inquire into the state of affairs in the Abir territory, with power to remove officials and set right abuses. The Commissioner appointed was M. Malfeyt, and when he went to inquire he stated that he had no power to remove officials, but had only power to see and hear.
  His right hon. friend had alluded to the new slave-raiding in Katanga and Kasai, and he had nothing to add to what his right hon. friend had said, but he wanted to ask one or two Questions about the French Congo. The French
  120
  Congo Administration had unfortunately adopted some of those principles in regard to land which had produced such deplorable results in the Congo Free State; but the French officials had not carried them out to their logical completeness, because they had not called in the aid of force to compel the collection of rubber. Even so trouble had arisen, and it showed the bona fides of the French that their Government had sent out one of the most eminent colonial statesmen in France to inquire into what was taking place in that colony. He asked whether any advance had been made in the negotiations with the French Government as to the grievances of the British traders owing to the commencement of the French concessionnaire regime. He did not want to say one word which would wound the feelings of our French allies. He attached the greatest importance to the entente cordiale, and he believed that it really arose from the desire of the people of both countries to live in amity with each other. That was of more importance than that the diplomatists of the two countries should be on friendly terms. But there was a great injustice in regard to the case of the English traders in the French Congo—few though these were—and that had been admitted. The trouble was two - fold, firstly the violation of free trade in the free - trade zone, and secondly the forcible confiscation of our traders' goods. He had seen a report that the French Government were very willing to enter into a conference on the question. He hoped it was true, for he and those interested in this matter believed that they had a solid grievance as to the violation of the free - trade clauses of the Berlin and Brussels Acts. The English traders had been trading there for many years, but they not only had their factories closed but their goods confiscated. This was not a matter of a grievance of a private trader, but a question of a great principle. The French were a great and a generous nation, and he could not think that they would leave this sore spot rankling in the relations between this country and France.
  *MR. J. F. HOPEsaid he could not help observing

  121
  with regard to the French Congo that the hon. Member who had just sat down had made out an excellent case for retaliation, but he would not pursue that subject. With regard to the Congo Free State he fully agreed with the right hon. Baronet the Member for the Forest of Dean that the greatest possible light should be thrown upon these charges. There was some danger, however, in generalising too freely with regard to the Congo Free State, because, although the evidence extant with regard to certain portions of it showed that the state of things was as bad as it could be, there were other portions of the Congo Free State in which it was exactly the reverse. But with regard to the substantial point raised by the right hon. Baronet he quite agreed that too much light could not be thrown upon these matters. When it was suggested that Belgium should take over the administration of the Congo Free State it was found to be a matter of some difficulty, and although the matter was mooted the feeling of the Belgian people was found to be against it.
  He joined in the hope that had been expressed that his noble friend would be able to say something as to the progress of our efforts with regard to Macedonia, and would be able to tell the House whether the hands of our Ambassador at Constantinople had been strengthened.
  He desired to protest also against the tendency, rather too common in the Press, to assume that when we made friends with one country we were committed to a policy of active hostility to another. Some writers seemed to think we ought not only to have a standing Army but a standing enemy. In the course of past history there had been at different times rulers and Ministers of foreign States who had attracted special attention and suspicion of the English people. They might have been the most dangerous of men, or they might have desired to impress this country with the fact that they were more formidable than they really were. However that might be, the diplomacy of such individuals had never been hindered, nor had our diplomacy ever been helped, by wild articles in the public Press. Such articles could not, and did not, really
  122
  affect the immediate course of diplomacy, but what they could and did do was to sow the seeds of distrust, which caused indefinite mischief later on when other matters came up. The Anglo-French Convention was a most admirable convention. It removed many causes of danger, but he thought there was a tendency to expect too much from it. It was, after all, only an excellent business arrangement founded on common interests. If the community of interests ever ceased no amount of sentiment, however genuine, would supply its place. Therefore, whatever benefit we derived from it now gave us no title to provoke enmities elsewhere.
  *MR. JOSEPH WALTONsaid the House must, on both sides, feel with profound satisfaction that the outlook, so far as foreign affairs were concerned, was much more reassuring at this time than it was twelve months ago. They all rejoiced to know that at length there was a prospect of the plenipotentiaries of the two Powers engaged in war in the Far East meeting to consider the possibilities of arriving at terms of peace, and they must all hope, in the interests of civilisation and the progress of the world, that those efforts might be fruitful in their results and that a durable and honourable peace might be arrived at.
  The right hon. Gentleman the Member for the Forest of Dean, in his most statesmanlike, interesting, and instructive speech, made reference to the attitude of the Liberal side of the House towards the Anglo-Japanese Agreement and its renewal. They all felt assured that the existence of the agreement during the last two years had been a powerful influence in preventing other nations being dragged into this dreadful war. The agreement, amounting as it did to an agreement to preserve the equal rights of all nations trading in the Far East, and inflicting no injustice on any nation, was an agreement which should be viewed without suspicion by any foreign nation. The noble Lord the Secretary of State, in a recent speech in connection with this matter, said that the only practical question for consideration was whether means should

  123
  not be sought to strengthen and consolidate the alliance. Within twenty-four hours of the utterance of those words by the Secretary of State his right hon. friend the Leader of the Opposition, speaking in the country, stated that any Liberal Government would follow out faithfully and zealously the line of policy which Lord Lansdowne had assumed. The overwhelming opinion on both sides of the House was that it would be of advantage to the whole world to have a more extended alliance, and if the Secretary of State, before the Government left office, succeeded in rearranging that agreement with Japan, he would receive the support and the hearty congratulations of men of all Parties through-out the country. In the Far East this country had an unselfish object in view. Our only desire was to secure equal opportunities for all nations to trade in the Far East.
  In regard to foreign affairs no one would desire to utter one word which would be against the public interest, but he certainly did hold that we had important commercial interests in the Far East which ought to be vigorously safeguarded. They rejoiced that an entente cordiale between this country and France, such as we had not been able to arrive at for generations, existed, but at the same time he would like to know whether the Government were taking advantage of the present state of feeling existing to secure facilities for British trade. In Southern China we had an agreement with France, dated 1896, by which each nation agreed with the other that in the provinces of Yunnan and Tzechuen all the privileges and advantages of any nature conceded to France in the agreement of 1895, and which might be in the future conceded either to Great Britain or to France, should, as far as rested with them, be extended and rendered common to both Powers and their nationals and dependents, and each engaged to use; their influence and good offices with the Chinese Government for that purpose. Therefore he ventured to hope there would be opportunities of commerical co-operation on the lines of the agreement of 1896, though at present our trade was somewhat hindered in these pro-
  124
  vinces by the transit duty of 10 per cent. on goods sent through French Tonquin.
  Another quarter of the Empire in which our interests would seem to be in great danger was in the province of Shantung, with its 30,000,000 of population. There seemed to be a danger that Germany would do in Shantung what Russia did in Manchuria. He remembered when for some time our commercial interests in Manchuria were considered as past praying for; but the situation to-day in North China was very much altered. He believed that ultimately the sovereignty of Manchuria would be restored to China, and that in common with other nations, including Russia, we should enjoy the fullest facilities for trade in that region. On the whole, the outlook was encouraging, and the Government should use every effort to prevent the creation in Shantung of a state of things similar to that which had existed in Manchuria. It was true that Germany had Kiaw-chau, and a small district round it, but under the Anglo-German Agreement the contracting parties undertook to endeavour to secure that China should remain free and open to trade and every other legitimate form of economic activity on the part of all nations without distinction, and it was noteworthy that the United States, Japan, Austria, Italy, and France had unreservedly given in their adhesion to the principles of that agreement, which might be summed up as that of the "open door" for all nations throughout the Chinese Empire. If Japan and England, with the cooperation of the United States, and, he hoped, of France, resolutely adopted that line of policy, there would be unlimited possibilities of the expansion of trade in that, the greatest of all markets, in the world. But British trade with China was at present declining. The Germans in Shantung appeared not to be fully adhering to the terms of the Anglo-German Agreement. The German Ambassador had said that Germany had acquired—
  "A special position in Shantung, whereas Great Britain not having occupied any place in the Yang-tsze region, that region is still unreservedly open to German enterprise."
  We did not object to the Yang-tsze region being unreservedly open to German

  125
  enterprise equally with British, but we claimed equal freedom for British enterprise in Shantung. It was reported that the German Government had insisted upon the three new Customs officers in Shantung being Germans. As to mining rights, there were new and extended arrangements giving the Germans an absolute monopoly of all minerals for fifteen miles on each side of the railways they were constructing, and preventing the Chinese from employing machinery and modern methods in the mines already opened. Those arrangements, he submitted, were a violation of the principle both of the Anglo-German Agreement and of the "open door." A policy which secured for Germany exclusive preferential rights would meet with disapproval of other great Powers, and it was the duty of the Government to uphold as far as they could the principle of the "open door" in the province of Shantung.
  He hoped the noble Lord would give the House any information he could about the Mackay treaty. In reference to that treaty seventy leading merchants at Shanghai had sent a telegram to the following effect:—
  "The British merchants draw the Government's attention to the fact that China ignores the Mackay treaty, rendering the same ineffective in most essentials. China actively opposes the currency, mining, taxation, and navigation stipulations. We beg the British Government to insist on the treaty being made immediately operative."
  That telegram was laid before Lord Lansdowne, but no instructions regarding it appeared to have been issued. The Under-Secretary had, however, stated that a telegram had been addressed to His Majesty's Minister at Peking requesting him to obtain from the signatories a detailed statement of the matters which formed the subject of their complaint, and that the statement would receive the careful attention of the Government. He would have imagined that the Foreign Office ought to be posted up to date with all that was necessary to give effect to the provisions of the Mackay treaty. The treaty should have come into force in January, 1904. Had any progress been made towards obtaining the necessary assent of the other Powers to the abolition of likin? It would be interesting to know
  126
  also how far China had given effect to her engagement to remove obstruction, in the inland waterways, in the Whang-po leading to Shanghai, and in the river leading to Tientsin. Then, instead of providing a uniform national coinage, as she promised, China had begun to manufacture a debased coinage of sixty different sorts, which would yield large profits to the local authorities but was bound to be disastrous to the financial future of the Empire. As to mining regulations, the Chinese Government undertook—
  "With all expedition and earnestness to go into the question of mining rules, and—selecting from the rules of Great Britain, India, and other countries regulations which seem applicable to China—to initiate and conclude the revision of her existing regulations"
  —within a year. Up to two months ago nothing whatever had been done in this most important matter; on the contrary, native officials in the interior had issued proclamations forbidding the opening of mines in which foreigners were interested. In the matter of the navigation of inland waterways, according to a communication from Shanghai within the last month the regulations were unworkable, every obstacle being thrown in the way, and a protest addressed to Lord Lansdowne expressly named this as one of the stipulations which the Chinese authorities "actively oppose."
  There were other provisions of the Mackay treaty which up to the present had been a dead letter; he would not dwell upon them, but simply ask the noble Lord to make such a statement as would show that His Majesty's Government were fully alive to the importance of getting that treaty carried into effect. The need for this was shown by the fact that British trade with China was declining. Between 1896 and 1903 there was a fall in British trade with China from one-fourth to one-sixth, and, whereas in 1903 as compared with 1902 our exports to China fell more than £800,000, the exports from Japan to China went up by £2,000,000. With a Government in power which claimed to be intensely interested in the promotion and expansion of British trade, it was only reasonable to demand that they should show themselves more active in upholding British commercial interests in the Far East. Between 1896 and 1901 there

  127
  was a decline of 11 per cent, in British shipping in the Far East, while German shipping went up 10 per cent. and Japanese 9 per cent. He submitted, therefore, that our interests required to be more actively pushed.
  There seemed to be a tendency on the part of the Government to take a back seat in the Yang-tsze region. He alluded to the changes which had been made in the patrolling of the Yang-tsze by British gunboats and sloops with regard to which he had received the following communication from one of the best informed men in Shanghai—
  "I venture to say that there is as great, if not a greater, disappointment in the withdrawal of the sloops and gunboats from the Yang-tsze which have hitherto acted as guardships to the principal ports on that river."
  The noble Lord, in reply to a Question, led him to understand that the control of the Yang-tsze River was being continued as heretofore, but he had in his hand a list of at least twelve sloops and gunboats which used to patrol the Yang-tsze River but which had now been withdrawn. At the present moment they had only six small gunboats in the whole of the Yang-tsze region, whereas Germany, with only a tithe of our trade, was represented by a larger number and larger gunboats. He did not know what defence the Government would offer for this course, but he thought it was certainly "penny wise and pound foolish" to effect a trifling saving that such a change should take place.
  With regard to Shanghai, he thought our prestige had been considerably lowered there by the change made in the title of the Lord Chief Justice. He had received a telegram upon this matter which ran—
  "Abolition of title of Chief Justice a ruinous mistake; pray urge retention."
  This title had been given to the head of the Court at Shanghai for forty years, ever since the Court was founded in 1864. This title had a great effect in enhancing the status and prestige of this official in the eyes of Chinese and foreigners alike. No other Power had ever had a Court at Shanghai apart from its Consulate, and this fact had given great prestige to the British Court and the presiding Judge. The Court at Shanghai
  128
  was the appellate Court for the whole of China as far as British interests were concerned, as well as possessing jurisdiction in every treaty port. Therefore, to change the title of the Lord Chief Justice appeared to him to be a totally unnecessary step, and one which was opposed to British interests. He had received a very strong remonstrance in regard to the state of chaos that had resulted from the withdrawal of the rules and regulations governing the procedure of the Court. It stated that—
  "A new Order in Council has been sent out which came into force on the 1st instant. It repeals previous Orders in Council, including all the rules governing the practice of the supreme Court here and the Consular Courts throughout China, which had been in force for forty years. No new rules have been sent, and consequently the whole practice is in a state of complete chaos."
  He apologised to the House for having taken up so much time, but this was practically the only opportunity they had had of raising these questions.
  Then there was the question of the interest on the arrears on the Chinese indemnity. He trusted that they would hear from the noble Lord that the influence of this country had been exercised with the object of securing fair treatment and justice for the Chinese in this matter. China had agreed to pay the interest in gold, and they had deposited £1,200,000 in the bank from January 1st ready to hand over. The Powers, however, could not agree as to how they were to receive it, and they were still insisting that China should pay £250 a week in interest upon the money in the bank which was ready to be handed over.
  With regard to British interests in Persia the Prime Minister on May 11th said—
  "With regard to Persia, I did not deal with Persia; but, of course, the question of Persia has engaged our most anxious attention, and necessarily will do so. But I do not think that it is so important a matter as that which I did discuss in connection with India. I do not think it probable that the main attack on India will be through Persia. I do not at all deny that subsidiary and collateral dangers might be apprehended from the regions to the west and south of Afghanistan itself; and I indicated that in my speech. But I rightly confined myself to the two lines of advance which all military critics are agreed are those which would be the principal lines along which dangerous invasion is likely to take place."

  129
  In that House a debate on British interests in Persia took place on January 22nd, 1902, on which occasion, in moving an Amendment to the Address, he had the satisfaction of having that Amendment seconded by the noble Lord to whom he was now addressing these Questions, and they were then in agreement practically as to British interests in Persia. There was, in his opinion, no question which was less of a Party question than that of upholding British interests in Southern Persia and on the Persian Gulf for the safeguarding of India. There was an agreement which had been affirmed and reaffirmed between England and Russia to maintain the independence and integrity of Persia, and he thought the attention of the Russian Government should be drawn to the violation of her repeated declaration to maintain the independence and integrity of Persia involved in debarring Persia from granting railway concessions or borrowing money except from Russia. He did not know whether the noble Lord could give them any information as to the present situation in Persia. The declaration of the Under-Secretary for Foreign Affairs was quite satisfactory on January 22nd, 1902, and he would not repeat it to the House. He thought, however, it would be more satisfactory if they had an assurance from the noble Lord that our policy in regard to the Persian Gulf and British interests in Persia had in no respect been altered. The Prime Minister seemed to think that there was no danger whatever of any advance on India through Persia, but he did not think that was the opinion of all the authorities. The opinion was held by a good many people that if Russia were allowed to come down the Persian Gulf with a line of railway, she would be able to turn the flank of our North-West Frontier of India, and it would not be through Afghanistan but through the plains of Beluchistan that the danger would come. He was not making these remarks in any alarmist sense, and his sole object was to have a definite understanding in regard to preserving the independence and the integrity of Persia. They did not desire more than that. He hoped the Government were doing all they could to improve the caravan routes, and also to increase
  130
  and improve the Consular service. He hoped the noble Lord would be able to make a reassuring statement as to the position of British interests in Persia, and that the policy declared in 1902 remained unchanged.
  *MR. MOONhoped his noble friend would regard the small attendance of Members as a tribute to the confidence the House felt in His Majesty's Government, and more especially in that part of it which he so ably represented in that House. He thought the House of Commons and the country were satisfied with the conduct of affairs in the Foreign Department, and they might congratulate themselves that no very urgent topics had been brought forward by those who had so far taken part in the debate. He did not propose to follow the hon. Member opposite in all the points he had raised upon Chinese questions, although he thought it was exceedingly useful that British interests in the Far East should have been raised so fully. With regard to the future, he hoped the Foreign Office was watching closely the movements of Germany in Shantung. He was not aware of the particular words which the hon. Gentleman opposite had attributed to the German Ambassador, but if a special position was claimed for Germany in the whole province of Shantung based, upon the fact that the Emperor of Germany happened to own a small tract round Kiao-chau then he thought this country might claim special privileges over the whole province adjacent to Hong-Kong.
  Another matter not so much of present but of future interest was the navigation not of purely Chinese waterways but of waterways in the North of China which many years ago were restricted by agreements entered into between Russia and China to the use of the ships of one or other of those two nations. Russia redressed the balance of losses in one part of the world by advances and additions in another, and it was very shortly after the unsuccessful result of the Crimean War that Russia acquired from China various provinces on the Pacific coast, alleging that Russian, interests were affected because this

  131
  country was engaged in a joint expedition to Pekin. By this means Russia not merely acquired fresh territory but also induced China to enter into an agreement by which the Amur and the adjacent rivers Sungari and Ussuri should be restricted to the use of Russian and Chinese ships. The Sungari River was solely in Chinese territory, and it was unreasonable that that great waterway should be shut to the commerce and ships of other nations. It was true that the Amur at the mouth was bordered on both sides by Russian territory, but considering the length and size of the river, he could not but think that when the peace negotiations to which the right hon. Baronet the Member for the Forest of Dean had referred would be the subject of negotiation we should not stand aloof. If China desired to do what Russia did in 1870 in regard to the Black Sea Clause of the Treaty of Paris of 1856, and to revise the Treaty of Aigun of 1858, by which these rivers were shut to the commerce and ships of other nations, this country would do well to support China.
  As to the state of affairs in the Balkan Peninsula, it appeared to him that the policy of His Majesty's Government this year had been marked by a considerable change. The King's Speech had a paragraph on the subject, and the question of the importance of the financial treatment of that part of the world was brought before the British public, he thought, for the first time. From a Blue-book issue at the beginning of May, it appeared that Lord Lansdowne, as far back as December 20th, drew attention in a despatch addressed to our Ambassadors at Vienna and St. Petersburg to the importance of that consideration. In that despatch Lord Lansdowne said that financial regularity was the first indispensable element in good government, and that upon it must depend the improvement which was so sadly needed in the administration of Turkey. That was repeated in not very different language in speeches which Lord Lansdowne made in another place on February 15th and March 28th, and the prominence given to that aspect of the question culminated in a speech made
  132
  by him on July 18th, in which he gave what was stated to be the substance of the Note presented by all the Powers to the Porte on May 8th last. Certain words in the official report followed in inverted commas, but he did not know whether they were intended as a résumé of the contents of the Note or as part of the text. It was nowhere explained what these schemes were, and perhaps the Under-Secretary would enlighten the House as to the precise nature of the financial scheme which was to he superintended and carried out by these delegates. It was true that early in the month of March it was stated by the Wiener Neuer Tagblatt, a paper of some position, that the Porte had entered into an agreement with the Ottoman Bank on lines somewhat similar to the proposals which were known to have been made jointly by Austria-Hungary and Russia. Apparently, as far as he could make out, the revenues of the three vilayets were to be paid into some central fund in the Imperial Ottoman Bank. When there, the money would be controlled by the financial delegates. The Note said—
  "The budgets must be submitted to the Commission before being Dually adopted. The Commission will have the right to modify any proposals dealing with the receipts or expenditure which may not be in conformity with the laws or with the economical and financial wants of the country."
  These last words gave wide power and scope to the financial delegates. The Note still further said—
  "With a view to facilitating their mission, the Commission will have the right of nominating in each vilayet an inspector to superintend the agents employed in the various duties connected with the collection of taxes."
  They had all heard that on July 12th the Porte had given a categorical refusal. In answer to a Question the Under-Secretary for Foreign Affairs had stated that the Powers were insisting and The Times correspondent telegraphed that on Monday the Dragoman of the Austro-Hungarian Embassy at Constantinople presented a Note from the Powers insisting on these terms. The House would agree that the patting of the financial considerations first was a new departure. Besides being a new departure in itself, it had the further feature that

  133
  the control so devised was internationalised. That was to say, we appeared to have broken with the principle of the mandate which introduced the experiment dealing with the settlement of Macedonia by two Powers. We had reintroduced the principle of what might be called the steam-roller of all the Powers being jointly represented on the board which was to have so much power.
  He thought everyone would be disappointed that progress in two directions had been so slow. A year ago it appeared to him when in that country that the work which had been so well done by the Gendarmerie in the British sphere and also in the French sphere would by this time be equally well done in the other spheres. Whether it was owing to the disorderly internal condition of Austria - Hungary and of Russia that the two Governments had not made their sections of the Gendarmerie more efficient he could not say, but so far as he could hear no more vigorous action had been taken by them than when the Gendarmerie scheme was first started. As to tithe, his noble friend, replying to a Question to-day, stated that the experiment had been so thoroughly successful that it was intended to introduce the scheme gradually. Why should the introduction of it be gradual? Having taken up the question of financial reform, which lay at the bottom of judicial and administrative reform, and having internationalised the body which was to supervise the reform, the Governments had taken a most important step, and one which would go very far to improve the conditions in that unfortunate and unhappy country called Macedonia.
  CAPTAIN ELLICEsaid he wished to call the attention of the Committee to the question of affairs in Crete. A critical condition of affairs arose in the beginning of April, when the peasants began to sympathise with the insurgents, and endeavours were made by the authorities to prevent contact between the gendarmes and the insurgents. Troops were lauded from His Majesty's ships, and constant skirmishes had taken place since that time. In the beginning of May the Mohammedans were leaving the
  134
  island for Asia Minor, and it was suggested that a plenary amnesty should be offered to the insurgents—the Powers undertaking not only to examine the financial relations, but to carry out a revision of the Constitution and to remedy all genuine grievances. On May 27th, the situation was growing worse when the Sussex regiment arrived, and on June 7th the revolutionaries again urged administrative and financial reforms and advised the people to maintain order, protect the Mussulmans, and leave their arms at home. When the British troops were landed in Crete, objection was made in the Greek Chamber, and the Greek Premier informed the Chamber that Prince George had told the Greek Government that the reinforcements sent to the island by the English were not asked for by him but by the British Admiral who had promised to protect the Mohammedan inhabitants. The Premier added that he had declared to the Powers that the Greek Government alone would be able to restore order. What he wanted to ask was what the Government were now doing in Crete; how many British troops were employed there now; had any collisions occurred between them and the insurgents; and what they proposed to do when the island was pacified. Would the destitute Cretans who arrived in this country be considered as political refugees, or would they be sent back to Crete to continue the insurrection?
  *LORD HENRY BENTINCKsaid he wished to bring to the notice of the noble Lord a matter which had aroused a great deal of feeling among his constituents, particularly among those who were engaged in the lace trade. He referred to the piracy of British industrial designs by foreign competitors. The foreign manufacturer had complete protection here under British law for his designs, but the British manufacturer had none at all for his abroad, particularly in Germany and Austria, unless he set up machinery abroad for the manufacture of his designs. This was an impossibility for any one engaged in a trade depending on frequent changes of fashion. The consequence was that British designs were completely at the mercy of any un-

  135
  scrupulous foreign manufacturer, who could pirate them without let or hindrance. This was a great and genuine grievance. The production of a successful design was an expensive business, for he was told that out of, say twelve designs, only two or three were as a rule successful. It was also necessary to make five or six different widths of each design, and a large stock had also to be made, and the hard part of it was that, as often as not, the British manufacturer found that when he had produced a successful design, the foreign manufacturer had pirated that design and forestalled him in the market.
  Now as to the remedy. In 1892 Germany, Italy, and Switzerland came to an agreement as to the protection of designs. Under that agreement a Swiss manufacturer, for instance, had protection for his designs in Germany, although he might have only manufactured his design in Switzerland. Great Britain, in common with most European countries, belonged to the International Union for the protection of Industrial Properties. The best solution of the difficulty would be for the Government of this country to induce the Governments of Germany, Italy, and Switzerland to extend their agreement to the entire Union. He did not go so far as to suggest that the Government should threaten the use of the loaded revolver, but his noble friend had a most effective weapon if he cared to use it, for it would not be difficult for the Government to alter the patent law so as to allow to foreign designs that amount of protection, and that amount only, as was accorded to British designs abroad. But whatever course the Government adopted, he appealed to the noble Lord to push this matter as vigorously as possible, for the present state of the law was a serious handicap to one of our oldest staple trades, and if he succeeded he would confer a great benefit on British industry and British labour.
  LORD EDMUND FITZMAURICEsaid that the question of the Congo government, or he might say misgovernment, of these enormous regions was a subject on which the Members of that House could give a
  136
  definite opinion; but at the same time it was a pleasure to all, irrespective of Party, to be able to acknowledge that the course pursued by His Majesty's Government in reference to the Congo had been one of conciliation coupled with firmness. It was necessary to remember that the Congo Free State, so-called, was an artificial creation, and what international agreement had made under the Berlin Statute of 1884 it could also unmake. The supporters of the Free State in Belgium also needed to be reminded that the situation of some of the State's most important situations was such that it would not be difficult for Europe to exercise judicious pressure, should such pressure be thought desirable.
  In the matter of the Balkan Peninsula he did not speak as a critic; but he hoped the noble Lord would not do as he did earlier in the session, and speak in a sense wholly different from that of his chief, the Foreign Secretary. On that occasion the noble Lord uttered a laboured defence, if not a panegyric, of the Government of the Porte; but it was to be hoped that later experience of the conduct of the Turkish Government would now cause the Under-Secretary to speak in a spirit more in accordance with the lead given by the Foreign Secretary in another place. It was very desirable indeed, acknowledging all the difficulties of the situation, that there should be no flinching in regard to the attitude of the Government and the House of Commons; because the House was still the appellate tribunal of the oppressed nationalities of Europe. It should be understood that there was still a strong hope that the day was not distant when in these oppressed regions something like a civilised form of government might be found. It was clear, and it was not unnatural, that the Government of the Porte believed Russia to be unable to take a strong course of action. When this country was able to take a more active line in the Near East he believed that it would either be as a member of the European Concert or as the mandatory of that body.
  Turning to our relations with Japan and the question of the renewal of the Japanese alliance, he said he had seen with regret the attacks which

  137
  had been made upon his right hon. friend the Member for Stirling Burghs for his utterances on this subject, and the attempt which had been made in some organs of the Press to draw a distinction between the speeches made by his right hon. friend and those made by the right hon. Baronet the Member for Northumberland. In a speech made within forty-eight hours of a speech delivered on the same question by the Foreign Secretary, his right hon. friend the Member for Stirling Burghs declared distinctly that, in regard to this matter, there was no difference of opinion between the two sides of the House, and he endorsed what the Foreign Secretary had said. The right hon. Baronet the Member for the Forest of Dean also had said that he considered it would be most unwise if the alliance with Japan was not renewed. The absolute necessity for continuity in the foreign policy of this country seemed to him to be an even stronger argument for the renewal of the alliance than the very strong arguments which could be alleged for the original conception of that alliance. The alliance had been justified by results. It was absolutely necessary to have continuity of foreign policy in this country, and that a change of Government should not become a counter, as it were, in the calculations of foreign Powers, and that the policy of Great Britain should be a policy, not of a Party, but of Great Britain. It would be an absolutely fatal thing if, in an important matter of this kind, after we had encouraged others to act on the assumption that the alliance was likely to continue, we were suddenly to retire from it.
  The favourite count in the indictment of German writers and professors against the British Foreign Office was that in times past there had been occasions when this country had encouraged other nations to act in a particular manner and then suddenly left them in the lurch. He would not discuss whether or not the charge was true, but no one who had watched recent developments in Germany could deny that it was the favourite charge of those writers who desired to create and foster ill-feeling between the two countries, and it would be absolutely fatal at such a time to do anything
  138
  which would appear to justify those who raked about with an historical muck-rake in the records of the distant past to find occasions when such a charge could be made, and to use it for the purpose of embittering present relations. This was no fanciful argument. It was true that too much attention should not be paid to the statements in certain reviews and newspapers, but he thought the hon. Member for the Brightside Division struck a sympathetic chord when he asked writers in reviews to bear in mind their great responsibility when they wrote on foreign affairs, and not to use their brilliant literary abilities in pouring out ink to foul the fair waters of peace and amity between nations. We might undoubtedly think that we had a grievance against certain foreign writers, but we ought to make sure that there were no English writers against whom foreigners might feel they had a similar grievance. The fact that we were very friendly at one moment with a particular country seemed to lead some minds to the illogical conclusion that we must be on bad terms with another, and that gave rise to the idea that our foreign policy might be unreliable. This impression was not limited to writers in the Press. One of the most important chapters in Prince Bismarck's own Memoirs was that headed "The Unreliable Character of British Foreign Policy," in which he argued that this country could not be depended upon to pursue a coherent and consistent course. Now was the time to show that such a notion was wrong, but to throw over the Anglo-Japanese alliance would immensely strengthen the impression which obtained abroad. A great Austrian statesman, now departed, said the next European war would be made, not by statesmen, but by writers in the Press. He hoped that would not come true, but in view of the writing that now want on on both sides of the Channel, a special debt was owing to those writers who kept their heads in times of crisis. It was the bounden duty of all to do nothing, to increase the difficulties of the Foreign Secretary.
  There were moments when it was exceedingly difficult for anybody not in the Foreign Office to judge of a situation, but so far as he could

  139
  form an opinion his view of the present situation was the same as that of the right hon. Baronet the Member for the Forest of Dean. A great wave of excitement and alarm had been passing over Europe, but he did not think we had been within measurable distance of a real breach of the peace. During the last twenty years there had been movements accompanied by an imminent risk of a breach of the peace. He alluded to the settlement of Europe which followed the peace between Germany and France. Those who had to deal with foreign affairs knew that in 1874–5 it was believed there was a serious danger of a breach of the peace of Europe, a catastrophe which was averted largely by the wise policy of the late Lord Derby, and the high infiuerce of Her late Majesty in the Councils of Europe. In 1884–5 there was another moment of great difficulty. He was then Undersecretary of State for Foreign Affairs. Although there was great excitement it was not believed, and the belief proved to be well founded, that it would or was intended to lead to a disturbance of the peace, or that it was anything more than a diplomatic campaign. Some diplomatic campaigns were intended to end in war; others were merely meant as diversions in a period of peace. His reading of the present situation was hat a diplomatic campaign was going on, and that the peace of Europe was not, and had not, been threatened. He hoped the noble Lord held the same view. In any case, however, when the balance of power had been disturbed, the events of the next year or two were bound to be of grave moment, and at such a time it would be felt throughout the country that in foreign affairs there should be no difference between patriotic Englishmen, but that, whatever their quarrels might be over domestic affairs, on foreign policy they were a united nation.
  SIR MARK STEWARTsaid the noble Lord had emphatically enunciated the constitutional position that ought to be taken with regard to foreign policy, but unfortunately the position was not always adopted. In his opinion, individual Members of either political Party who
  140
  paraded their constituencies and recklessly introduced the names of foreign nations were far more to blame than the writers of journalistic articles. Continuity of policy was certainly required; that had always been the view of the Party to which he belonged, and he had often noticed that when a general election was approaching the opposing Party, from patriotic motives, fell into line on foreign affairs with the Party going out. Continuity of policy was now a popular idea, and it was said that the present policy was to be continued during the next five years. He hoped that would be so, but it could not be forgotten that some politicians had not viewed very favourably the Anglo-French alliance, and that many others equally disapproved of the Japanese alliance, which had been so highly lauded in the course of the present debate.
  With regard to Macedonia, they knew the terrible distress and anxiety that prevailed there. In view of the winter which would speedily be upon them and. all the terrors of the climate and the cruelties which might possibly again prevail, he was sure they would all be most anxious to mitigate those dangers and try to secure better government for the people. He felt sure that his noble friend would do his best in the matter. The procedure was very slow, but what they wanted was to show the people there that there were a great many people in this country behind them. No Government could move in this matter unless the public pulse was beating strongly, and if there was a large body of resolute opinion against Macedonian cruelties and demanding better government, then the Government might act with a firmer hand and be more resolute than they could otherwise be. This consideration made them all the more anxious to secure better government for the people of those parts. He thought that when the Austrian-Russian mandate came to an end it should not be renewed, for it had done practically nothing. The Gendarmerie, it was true, had been appointed, and assessors, but there was no authority to enforce real reforms; that was the plain English of the matter. The foreign officers were powerless, and

  141
  the Turkish Government were opposed to any reform.
  He would give the House two illustrations of their utter inability to do anything. In Feburary last Captain Cimetierre, a Russian officer, was despatched by the commandant of the Salonika section to report on what he saw. He reported that the town had been sacked, and that thirty-eight persons had been killed, including two women and an infant of eleven months, whose brains were dashed out. This officer gave a good and reliable report, which showed far more than he needed to trouble the House with. It stated that the place was ruthlessly sacked by the soldiers and Bashi-bazouks, and sixty-four out of 104 houses were burned down. A protest was made, but no punishment followed, and nobody was likely to be punished for these outrages. On March 27th similar excesses occurred when the troops and Bashi-bazouks fell upon the village of Zervi. In this case twenty-three were killed, including nine women and two children, and even an outrage like this was taken as a matter of course. There appeared to have been no punishment whatever for this occurrence, and the wrong was done with impunity. He especially wished to draw the noble Lord's attention to these massacres. The foreign officers were absolutely powerless, and there was no doubt whatever about it. The native population had very little confidence in either Austria or Russia. Surely our Foreign Office should insist on the financial scheme being at once accepted. It would be ridiculous and impossible for this country to go into the matter alone, there must be agreement between the nations, but it the present scheme did not succeed another one would have to be tried. Winter was approaching, and bad times were in store for Macedonia. The condition of the people was very bad indeed at this moment, not only from fear of the revolutionary party, but from many other causes, and there was not likely to be peace unless a firm Government was established in the country.
  *SIR EDGAR VINCENTexpressed his pleasure at the declaration of the noble Lord the Member for
  142
  Cricklade regarding the Japanese alliance and the necessity of continuity in our foreign policy. In no case could that continuity be more desirable as in that of the Anglo-Japanese all ance which had borne excellent fruit. It had localised the present war and modified the balance of power in a sense not unfavourable to this country. The noble Lord's declaration would do much to confirm the confidence of our allies and of European nations in the continuity of this country's policy. He regarded with less approval the suggestion that the House of Commons should be considered the appellate tribunal of the Christian population of South-Eastern Europe. This country had no such jurisdiction, and the prevalence of the idea that they could appeal to us to interfere effectually in the Government of Turkey might have the most unfortunate results. However much they deplored the unfortunate occurrences in Macedonia, to encourage agitations in the belief that this country would intervene by force of arms in their disputes would be to raise hopes which would not be justified by our future action, and would lead to acts of rebellion which could not but result in terrible disaster and grave massacres. He ventured, therefore, to say that this country, although sincerely sympathising with the lot of these unfortunate people, was not prepared to act alone or embroil our military forces in an enterprise where they could not and should not play a decisive part.
  It was worthy of consideration whether recent even's affecting Russia and the recent absorption of Austria-Hungary in internal discussions might not possibly exercise a favourable influence upon affairs within the Ottoman Empire. There could be no question that the origin of much of the trouble which had occurred during the last century had proceeded from centres outside Turkey, and had been produced by ambitious schemes—he would not say intrigues—promoted by politicians, in countries who desired either to extend their territory or to increase their influence among the Christian populations of the Turkish Empire. He was not far from hoping that the concentration of the attention of Russia in other parts might

  143
  possibly inaugurate a more peaceful and a more progressive period for Turkey. He believed that the lot of the Christian population still remaining under the rule of the Sultan would not be rendered more hard than it had been in the past.
  Mention had been made in this debate of the financial scheme which had been, prepared, and which had, he believed, received the sanction of the Powers of Europe in regard to the three vilayets of Macedonia. He hoped the noble Lord in his reply would give the House whatever information it was in his power to give, without danger to the public interest, regarding the details of the financial arrangement which it was proposed to introduce. He had great confidence in the favourable working of private organisation connected with financial administration, and he would draw the attention of the House to this historical fact, that the only really successful reform which hid been introduced in the Ottoman Empire in the course of the last twenty-five years had been the establishment of the Council of the Public Debt. He would also draw attention to the fact that in Egypt at a previous period the origin of the administrative reforms which we had perfected and which had been such a magnificent success lay in the international administration established under financial auspices. In a third country in Southeastern Europe, namely, Servia, he believed also that administrative reform had been largely advanced by similar international administration. He hoped, therefore, the experiment which had been initiated of confining a large portion of the three vilayets of Macedonia to the Ottoman Bank, under some sort of international control, would be as successful as in the case of similar experiments in the past in Turkey, Egypt, and Servia.
  *THE UNDER - SECRETARY OF STATE FOR FOREIGN AFFAIRS (Earl PERCY,)said he should be wanting in courtesy and gratitude if he did not recognise, on behalf of himself personally and on behalf of the Government, the very friendly tone of the seeches of the right hon. Baronet the Member for the Forest of Dean and the other speakers
  144
  in the debate. These speeches were a striking evidence of the recognition by the House of the ability and success which marked the administration of foreign affairs by the present Secretary of State, and they were also a proof to other nations of greater continuity in the foreign policy of this country than some of them might be inclined to credit.
  He did not propose to deal with all the questions of foreign policy on which the right hon. Baronet had touched, nor did he think the right hon. Gentleman would expect him to do so. It would serve no useful public purpose to discuss at the present juncture the changes in the situation in the Far East which might be effected eventually by the war between Japan and Russia, or the modifications which it might be desirable to introduce into the Anglo-Japanese alliance when, in the opinion of the Government, the time for considering the question of its renewal arrived. But he noticed with satisfaction the declarations of the right hon. Baronet and the noble Lord opposite that there was no difference of opinion on that side of the House as to the desirability of renewing that alliance.
  He associated himself with what had fallen from the right hon. Baronet with regard to the general state of Europe. The situation in Europe presented no special cause for anxiety; and he agreed that it would present even less cause for anxiety were it not for the unnecessary ingenuity of irresponsible persons who were perpetually attributing to this country Machiavelian motives of which we were quite innocent, and who were always imagining that we could not enter into arrangements with one country for our mutual convenience without having a hostile intent against some other country.
  He would pass on, then, to the question of reform in the administration of the Congo State. This was the third debate that had taken place on the subject. He did not regret that it should have been raised once more; because, although it was impossible in the circumstances that a discussion should be otherwise than inconclusive, the fact that the question had been placed in the forefront of their debate that afternoon

  145
  emphasised the importance which they attached to it, and showed that they were not only agreed in their objects, but in the pursuit of those objects were animated by purely philanthropic and humanitarian motives. At the public meeting which was held in London, the other day, presided over by Sir Harry Johnston, a resolution was passed declaring that the proper solution of the problem was the resumption by the Belgian Parliament of direct responsibility for the administration of the Congo. It would not be becoming in him, as the representative of His Majesty's Government, to express any opinion in favour of or against that particular suggestion; but, as everyone knew who had studied the question, it was a policy which had been for years constantly present in the minds of the founders of the Congo State, and would, no doubt, be one of the alternatives which they would consider in connection with any recommendations the Commission might make. The resolution, at all events, showed that the agitation ii this country was animated by no political motive, but only by a desire to see an improvement in the condition of the subjects of the Congo State. As far as His Majesty's Government were concerned, the main object they had in view was achieved. That was to induce the Congo Government to recognise that there was a case for inquiry. An inquiry had been instituted; and it only remained for His Majesty's Government to express an earnest hope that it might be followed by action as prompt and as effective as possible, and that it would not be made the excuse for unnecessary delay, much less for shelving altogether the question of reform.
  He wished to remind the House how matters stood last year. His Majesty's Government had made two propositions to the Congo Government. The first related to the trading system which prevailed in the Congo State, and which we had always said was diametrically opposed to the provisions of the Berlin Act. The Government had asked that that question should be referred to the Hague Tribunal. To that request they had never received a definite answer;
  146
  and if they had not pressed for one it was because they recognised that the question was one which did not concern the Congo State alone, but affected other Powers, notably France, and that it would be infinitely more satisfactory that the question should be decided by a Tribunal before which all the signatories of the Berlin Act would be represented and whose decision would be recognised as binding upon all, than by a suit which would take the form of a litigation between two parties only. As the House knew, the system which obtained in the territories of the French Congo was one which had resulted in serious injury to the British firms who were established there long before the concessions to the French firms were given. His Majesty's Government were under the impression last year that they were within measurable distance of arriving at a satisfactory agreement with the French Government, but unfortunately their hopes were doomed to disappointment. The French Government then expected that the firms might arrive at an amicable settlement between themselves, but they were not unwilling to consider favourably the question of submitting to an arbitral tribunal the interpretation of the free-trade clauses of the Berlin Act as bearing on the practice actually followed by the signatories of that Act in their African possessions. After prolonged negotiations, the French firms and the British had failed to come to an agreement. The matter could only be settled, so far as he could see, by arbitration; and the French Government, while willing to accept arbitration, held that a tribunal which was suitable to decide on private differences between individual companies was not the best fitted to decide on the interpretation of an international instrument. The French Government recognised that the British firms were entitled to compensation if it could be shown that they had suffered material injury from the concessions granted to the French firms; and as regarded the wider issue it should not be impossible to discover some satisfactory solution to a controversy which, while it lasted, must tend to throw great doubts on the value of international conventions, and be a constant,

  147
  irritating, and unnecessary source of friction between neighbouring countries which desired to live in friendly relations with one another.
  The second proposal which they had made to the Congo Government was in regard to its administrative system. They asked that that system should be examined by a conference of the Powers which signed the Berlin Act That request was refused by the Congo Government, but at the same time an inquiry was promised. He expressed no opinion with regard to that inquiry because at that time he did not know what was to be its scope or who were to be the agents by which it was to be carried out. Since then a Commission had been appointed; and he thought there were satisfactory indications that the Congo Government had been actuated by a sincere desire to meet to some extent the wishes of His Majesty's Government. The Commission was not an International one, nor did it represent the signatories of the Berlin Act; but at all events it included one eminent representative of a foreign State in the person of M. Schumacher, head of the Department of Justice at Lucerne, and a well-known exponent of the doctrines and principles of free trade, while the other two members, M. Jaassens and Baron Nisco, were both men of recognised legal weight, and though connected more or less with the administration of justice in Belgium and the Congo State, neither was responsible for the executive system which formed the subject of their inquiry.
  Another point which he thought was satisfactory was that the decree appointing the Commission conferred upon them "complete liberty, autonomy and initiative," and enabled them to take voluntary evidence as well as to compel the attendance of witnesses. The local authorities were enjoined to afford them every facility, they were allowed complete discretion in regard to the scope and duration of the inquiry, and at the same time the most stringent penalties were enacted against all those who attempted in any way to intimidate witnesses. In these circumstances the Government felt themselves justified in communicating to the Congo Government the full text of Consul
  148
  Casements report, but with the express proviso that it should not be published until after the inquiry was concluded, and, of course, not communicated to the officials whose conduct was in dispute. There was one unsatisfactory feature, namely, the secrecy with which the earlier part of the inquiry was conducted. His Majesty's Government had from the first pressed that the inquiry should be a public one and that they should be allowed to depute a representative to watch the proceedings. Mr. Cuvelier was opposed to these suggestions on the ground that publicity would facilitate collusion between the witnesses and defeat the objects of cross-examination. But the matter was left to the final decision of the Commission itself, and the Commission eventually decided in favour of our views. Unfortunately they did not arrive at that, decision for some time and they omitted to communicate it to His Majesty's Government.
  As soon as it was made known, in answer to our inquiries, Mr. Mackie, Acting Consul at Dakar, was appointed as the representative of His Majesty's Government to attend the proceedings. He could not leave before the close of December, and was unable to catch up the Commission before the beginning of February, but he attended four of the sittings and accompanied the Commissioners on a tour among some of the villages. He did not think it proper to discuss the reports which had been sent either by Mr. Mackie or by the missionaries during the last few months. The Government had preferred not to publish them until the Commission reported. Mr. Mackie stated that the Commission sat 138 days and examined 650 witnesses. It traversed a considerable portion of the territory, though not the whole of it. It left Boma on October 6th, and returned on February 23rd. Mr. Mackie was not allowed to see the earlier depositions made by the missionaries, but he had sent home extracts from some of the evidence given at the later sittings.
  The impression left upon his mind by the attitude of the Commission was that the evidence which had been taken had corroborated to a large extent the truth

  149
  of the allegations made, and that the principal reason why it had spent so short a time in the Abir territory was that the evidence it had already received was sufficient to prove that hundreds of natives had fallen victims to the system there in force There were other indications of the serious view which the Commissioners took of the situation. No sooner had they arrived than a special decree was issued that the old system which had been so justly criticised of paying the employees of the Administration in kind instead of specie was to be discontinued. Inspectors-General had been appointed to examine the stations and report atrocities, and Mr. Malfeyt had been sent as Royal Commissioner to the Abir district after the Commission had left. A judge had also been appointed—and this was an important point in view of the mortality among witnesses brought down to give evidence at Boma—specially to reside at Basankusu, the headquarters of the district. Four persons accused of atrocities against the natives had also been committed for trial. Another indication that the whole system of administration in the Free State had shown a tendency to improvement owing largely to the friendly representations which we had addressed to the Congo Government was that Lord Cromer and Sir Reginald Wingate both reported a marked improvement in the Lado enclave.
  The right hon. Baronet suggested that the Government might take steps to obtain information with regard to other parts of the Congo State where there was some reason to suppose that the slave trade was rife. A report had been received recently from one of our Consuls on the subject which gave the impression that the state of things was far less serious than was supposed. The bulk of the slave trade was carried on by revolted Congo soldiery, and he believed that steps were being taken to check it. The hon. Member for Oldham asked whether he could give any information as to the state of affairs on the Upper Congo since the Commission left the country. The reports of the missionaries contained many allegations of a kind with which we were already familiar, but it was not very easy to extract from them a
  150
  connected story. They all said that the state of things at present was not better—possibly it was worse than before the Commission arrived. Armed sentries were being employed as before, outrages were being perpetrated on the natives which had produced a serious state of exasperation, so that the safety of the missionaries themselves was in danger, while in several cases there had been attempts to intimidate or to punish those who gave evidence before the Commission. It was impossible for the Government at this distance, and without any means of sifting the evidence, to judge how far those accounts were accurate or not. The Congo Government had been earnestly pressed to take every step in their power to make a recurrence of such incidents impossible.
  A suggestion had been made as to the action which His Majesty's Government might take independently of what the Commission might report. The proposal was that the Government should reassert their claim to extraterritorial jurisdiction, but it should be remembered that those who had been the subjects of oppression had been natives who were not British subjects, and that the claim to extra-territorial jurisdiction would not be reasonable unless they could prove that adequate provision for the administration of justice did not exist already. He did not dispute the contention of the right hon. Baronet that we had the right if we chose to assert this claim, but he did not think it would be fair to do so unless we could prove a miscarriage of justice. Mr. Nightingale stated that since he arrived at Boma no case had been brought to his notice by a British subject to which any particular exception could be taken except in those of Silvanus Jones and John Brown, and that petty complaints were settled, fairly by the Director of Justice. But the uneducated West African natives, who formed the great proportion of British subjects, required special measures of protection, and in deference to their representations the Congo Government had arranged that in future due notice should be given to the British Consul of oases in which British subjects were concerned and of the dates on which they

  151
  might come before the Law Courts. There were very nearly 3,000 British subjects in the Congo State, and they were widely scattered about the country. Consequently, His Majesty's Government thought there were good grounds for increasing our machinery for supervision, and had decided to appoint two new Vice Consuls, one at Leopoldville and one at Stanleyville. One of them was already on his way to his post.
  Several hon. Members had addressed to him Questions in regard to the present position of affairs in Macedonia. He did not think that the criticisms which had been made contained much that was new, and certainly he had not much that was new to say in reply to them. The burden of the complaint was that more had not been done. He did not deny that His Majesty's Government also were much disappointed that the progress had not been greater. But some allowance should be made for the special difficulties with which the Powers were confronted in trying to introduce administrative reform into a country where there was no element of union between the various subject nationalities. It was never contemplated by the authors of the Mürzsteg programme that reform could be carried out in a day; and they expressly provided that the regrouping of administrative areas and judicial reform should be postponed till pacification had further progressed. But some progress had been made. It was something that the great majority of Bulgarian refugees had been re-established in their homes; that £60,000 had been distributed in relief, besides relief in kind; and that the abolition of the tithe-farming system, which had been one of the chief causes of oppression hitherto, had been attended with complete success and was to be applied throughout the whole of the three vilayets. In these matters it was necessary to proceed by steps. It was impossible, and it would be useless, to carry out a sweeping reform of this kind unless there were the machinery of supervision on the spot, and, therefore, the new system was to be applied, in the first instance, to seven more cantons.
  152
  It was satisfactory that during the last few months salaries had been punctually paid, and that there had been an addition to the number of examining magistrates for the purposes of criminal jurisdiction. The reorganisation of the Gendarmerie had been conspicuously successful in the British sphere and the French sphere; and there was no reason why the same good results should not be obtained in other spheres, despite their larger areas and greater admixture of races, if zeal and energy were shown.
  With regard to finance, three schemes had been put forward. First was the Turkish scheme for a 3 per cent, increase in the Customs. That was for the moment in abeyance, because His Majesty's Government had pointed out that they could not assent to such an increase—seeing that this country had the largest share in the trade with Turkey—without proof positive that it was required, and that a proper administration of the Customs would not produce the necessary revenue. They must also insist on sufficient guarantee that the additional money raised would be devoted entirely to the reforms in these provinces. Then there was the general scheme of financial reform presented by the Austrian and Russian Governments, and an alternative scheme presented by Turkey. Both were alike in contemplating control by the Ottoman Bank. But they differed in this—that the Turkish scheme did not provide for any control by the Powers. In principle His Majesty's Government thought the Austrian and Russian scheme a good one, though it certainly was not a new one. The Ottoman Bank by its original charter was authorised to receive the revenue of the whole Empire. The Austrian and Russian scheme authorised the bank to receive only that residuum of the revenues of the three vilayets which remained over after obligatory and administrative expenditure had been met. His Majesty's Government had urged that such an arrangement would provide no guarantee against undue interference from headquarters and local misappropriations; and from that point of view the Turkish scheme was undoubtedly superior, because it provided that the payments should be made into

  153
  the bank at an earlier period, and that all expenditure was to be viséd by the Ottoman Bank.
  There were two points to which His Majesty's Government attached special importance. In the first place they were anxious that this scheme of financial reform, which they had long advocated, should be placed at once on that footing of permanence which it would not have as long as the control was vested exclusively in the two civil agents who were not financial experts, and whose mandate would, in the ordinary course of things, expire next October. They wished that this scheme should be given at once an international character by being placed under the control and supervision of all the Powers. That suggestion commended itself to the Austrian and Russian Governments, and in consequence a Note was drawn up intimating to the Porte that the Powers would accept the Turkish scheme on condition that they were represented by four financial delegates to be associated with the civil agents and the Inspector-General on the Board of Control, and that these should have the power to appoint three inspectors, one for each vilayet. The Board would supervise the budgets and object to any expenditure or taxation which was not in accordance with the economic requirements of the country. The Turkish Government had for the moment rejected this demand of the Powers.
  The noble Lord the Member for Crioklade had delivered a rather heated and unmerited invective against a speech he had made earlier in the session. The noble Lord seemed to think that the language which he had used was calculated to encourage the Turkish Government to reject the good advice of the Powers, and that he had rather underrated the responsibility which attached to the Turkish Government for the state of things in Macedonia. He did not think that was fair. He did not think he had ever said one word in extenuation of the conduct of the Turkish Government. But he had said that a certain responsibility also rested on the Christian races and the insurgent bands in Macedonia, and he gladly took
  154
  that opportunity of saying that during the last few months there had been fewer reports of crimes perpetrated by Bulgarians, though a very horrible outrage was committed a few days ago. Unfortunately their methods had been imitated to some extent by the newly-formed Greek bands. No one would deny that a certain degree of blame rested upon them, and it was obvious that insistence on the exclusive responsibility of Turkey must tend to divert attention from the responsibility of the Powers themselves. The chief responsibility rested, he thought, with them. They had invented the machinery which in their opinion was adequate to effect the results which they wished to produce in Macedonia, and it was for them—
  LORD EDMUND FITZMAURICE, interposing, said that what he had complained of was the difference in tone and, to some extent, in matter between the speech of the noble Lord and that of the Foreign Secretary in another place.
  *EARL PERCYsaid he was afraid he could not discuss the question of tone. He could discuss what he said, and he did not think he said anything which was in the least degree contrary, which was not in fact identical in spirit, with the statements repeatedly made by Lord Lansdowne himself. So far as the responsibility of the Turkish Government was concerned, he thought it was unnecessary to insist upon it, if for no other reason than that the Turkish Government never seemed to lose an opportunity of emphasising it itself. There was nothing more provocative of despair to those who wished to see an improvement in Turkey carried out under the auspices of the existing Government than the inveterate tendency of that Government on every occasion to resist reforms which in themselves were reasonable, which, were obviously inevitable in the long run, and which, if accepted at once, would enable them to claim a certain amount of credit for good intentions. There was complete unanimity among the Powers as to the absolute necessity and urgency of these financial proposals, and the Government viewed with especial pleasure the fact that in this

  155
  matter Germany had taken as strong a view as those who hitherto had been more prominently associated with the introduction of reforms.
  There was another point to which he must allude before he passed from this subject, and that was the question of the application of the scheme to other areas. His Majesty's Government were anxious that as this finance scheme was admittedly a new departure and an enlargement of the Murzsteg programme it should be given as wide an extension as possible, and should include, if possible, at least the vilayet of Adrianople. They thought that desirable, both in the interests of the population, who might otherwise imagine that their interests, not less urgent than those of other portions of the Turkish Empire, were being altogether overlooked, and also in the interests of the Turkish Government itself, whose prestige must inevitably suffer by the existence side by side of two finance systems, one immeasurably superior to the other owing its initiation to European pressure, and serving as a constant contrast and reminder of the necessity for foreign intervention. The other Powers, however, did not take that view. It was not that they did not think that the remaining areas eventually should be included, but they did think that to mix up the question of the extension of the programme of reform with the question of the extension of the area to which the reforms were to apply was to offer an unnecessary encouragement to opposition on the part of the Porte. His Majesty's Government adhered to their opinion. But, on the other hand, they could not say, in the light of what had happened since—the refusal of the Turkish Government to accept even the moderate scheme put before it—that the attitude of the Powers was entirely without justification; and they certainly were not prepared to incur the charge in the future of having made the prospects of reform more difficult by insisting on a course which they were warned beforehand would hamper the efforts of diplomacy at Constantinople.
  It was manifest, however, that if the Turkish Government persisted in its decision, a very serious situation would be
  156
  created, and His Majesty's Government would have to reconsider their position. He sincerely hoped that that situation would not arise. Circumstances had changed since the Murzsteg programme was first presented to the Porte. It was not unreasonable then that the Turkish Government should view with a certain amount of suspicion reforms which had never been tried, but they had been tried now, and it was hoped that the result might have convinced the Sultan and his Ministers that those suspicions were ill founded. His Majesty's Government took as a hopeful augury the fact that the Sultan had recently appointed a Commission on his own initiative to consider the applicability of the scheme for the reform of the Gendarmerie to the province of Adrianople. They trusted it was an indication that he recognised that the reforms could have no other object or result than to strengthen his own authority as well as to promote the cause of good government as it was understood in Western Europe. So far as His Majesty's Government were concerned they had emphasised the importance which they attached to the question by reappointnig a British Consul at Adrianople and by impressing on the Turkish Government their view that the time was ripe and over-ripe for an extension of, at all events, a modicum of reform to the Adrianople vilayet. He could only say in conclusion that if the Sultan decided of his own accord to include the Adrianople vilayet in the area to which these reforms would apply the measure would certainly not lose in value because it came as a spontaneous concession from the Sovereign himself, and not at the instance and under the pressure of Western diplomacy.
  An hon. Member opposite had asked what view His Majesty's Government took of the situation in Crete. The Powers were all agreed that the demand for union with Greece was obviously inadmissible in view of the pledges they had given to Turkey; but, on the other hand, they had never concealed their belief that the administration and the financial condition of the island did require very careful examination. As long ago as April 3rd they presented a

  157
  Note to the High Commissioner in which they offered to guarantee a prolongation of the surtax with a view to paying the indemnities, five millions of which would go to the Cretan and Greek claimants and one million to foreign claimants, and also, as a special concession, to waive their claim to interest on the 4,000,000 francs loan which was advanced to Prince George for the expenses of administration when he first took over the government of the island. Further, the Powers had given a collective pledge to the Cretans that in no circumstances would they ever annex the island or allow its annexation by any other Power against the wishes of the inhabitants. The number of British troops in the island was, he believed, 920, and there had only been one collision which resulted in fatalities between them and the insurgent troops. The necessity for proclaiming martial law, however, had been impressed on His Majesty's Government by the commander of the military detachment in the Candia district, in view of the unprovoked attack which was made on the troops, the general insecurity prevailing in the district, and the difficulty of affording adequate protection to the Mussulman population, whose lives and property the Powers undertook to safeguard when they induced the Turkish Government to withdraw their garrison from the island.
  In reply to the hon. Member for Barnsley, he did not think any fresh declaration of policy was required in regard to Persia. He could see no contradiction between the speech of the Prime Minister on the Committee of Defence and the declaration made by Lord Lansdowne two years ago with reference to the view which the Government would take of any encroachment by a foreign Power in the Persian Gulf. The Government adhered to that declaration.
  He would now pass on to the specific Questions which had been addressed to him in regard to China. The hon. Member expatiated at some length upon the violation by the Germans of the principle of the open door in Shantung. He did not know on what evidence that charge was made. It was certainly not true that the German Government had entirely monopolised mining enter-
  158
  prise in Shantung, and until the Government received positive evidence of a violation of the principle of the open door in that quarter of the world he did not see that any steps on their part were required. It was quite true that the Germans had made rapid strides in the development of the leased territory. It was not surprising, considering the vast amount of money they had spent upon it, and the energy which they had displayed. That should be rather a spur to similar exertions on our own part than a cause for complaint.
  He believed it was true in the course of the past year that British trade in China had fallen off. So had the trade of almost every country in Europe. The truth was that almost the only country which was rapidly increasing its trade with China was Japan, and there was no doubt whatever that an extension of railway enterprise in China, desirable as it was from the British point of view, would lead to the same competition by Japan in the inland markets as on the sea board. It would not be reasonable to quote as a proof that the British Government was not paying sufficient attention to the protection and development of British commerce the fact that our trade like that of Europe generally was not increasing in proportion to that of Japan, which had special advantages of cheapness of labour and proximity to which we could not lay claim. The Government were fully alive to the importance of obtaining fresh markets in the interior of China for British enterprise, and the necessity of railway development with that object. Unfortunately British capitalists were not as ready to put their money into railway construction in China as the capitalists of some other countries. That was not, however, a matter that was within the control or competence of the British Government. All they could do was to press for those concessions which they believed to be valuable—the construction of railways which would benefit British trade—and having done that the rest, of course, must necessarily be left to private enterprise.
  In regard to the principal railway they were anxious to see constructed—the railway from the Yang-tsze valley up to the

  159
  Red sandstone basin of Szechwan—the Chinese Government had given them a definite promise that if this line could not be built by Chinese capital the Chinese Government would apply in the first instance to British and American capital. His Majesty's Government fully shared the views which had been expressed by the hon. Member as to the importance of acting so far as possible in concert with the French for the promotion of our common interests in that part of the world. They had been in negotiation with the French Government on the subject of the joint construction of this line for some weeks past. And he hoped that, in a very short time, a satisfactory arrangement would be arrived at by which this railway into the heart of the richest and most populous province of China, would be built under the auspices of the two Powers on that footing of equality contemplated by the Treaty of 1896.
  He was reported to have said in answer to a Question the other day that the British Government had no knowledge that any infractions by China of the Mackay treaty were alleged, and he saw that that had produced consternation in Shanghai. What he said was that the British Government had no evidence to support the allegations. He was well aware, of course, that such allegations had been made by the mercantile community at Shanghai who had been invited to forward any evidence in their possession to the Government, and they were still waiting a despatch from Sir E. Satow on the subject. So far as the Government were aware the main stipulation of the Mackay treaty which had not been yet carried out were those which related to the mining regulations and currency reform. Most of the charges made by the merchants of Shanghai in their memorial, even if the facts were as stated, had no connection with the Mackay treaty at all, They might involve breaches of the provisions of the Final Protocol of 1901 or of the earlier treaty of Tientsin, but not of the Mackay treaty. Complaints had been made as to irregularity in the levying of the likin. The only complete remedy for such abuses was that provided by Article 8 of the Mackay treaty—the total abolition of
  160
  likin. But Article 8 was not to come into operation until all the Powers had agreed to the increase of the customs-tariff, and hitherto the United States, Japan, and Portugal were the only States which had made commercial treaties assenting to such an increase. As regarded the mining regulations, the Chinese Government did issue new regulations some time ago, but they only applied to Chinese or joint Chinese and foreign enterprise, and not to enterprise exclusively foreign. The regulations were, therefore, referred back to the Chinese Government, because they did not fulfil the condition that mining regulations were to be drafted so as not to offer any impediment at all to foreign capital. The rules for inland navigation were published long ago. All the ports of call on the Yang-tsze and West River had been opened for more than a year, and of the five treaty ports which were to be eventually opened under Article 8, two—Changsha and Uongmoon—were already opened, one under Article 10 of the Mackay treaty, and the other under the treaty between China and Japan. The reform of the currency was engaging the attention of the Chinese Government, and the office of Financial Administration had memorialised the Throne in favour of the establishment of a central mint at Tientsin. They could not expect that the Chinese Government would carry through at once such a vast change as that involved by the adoption of a gold standard. Professor Yenks' scheme, which was put forward with that object, involved the immediate raising of a loan of at least £4,000,000. It was not unreasonable that the Chinese Government should take some time to consider the methods by which a reform in the currency was to be brought about, provided that nothing was done meanwhile to prejudice its future chances of success.
  A question had been addressed to him with regard to the protection of lace patterns; it was quite true that the system, for the protection of patents in this, country did give the foreigner an advantage not enjoyed by British subjects in other countries. In this country it was only necessary in order to get protection to prove within six months of registration

  161
  that they had used or sold the design. In foreign countries it was necessary after registration that they should actually manufacture the design abroad. The German Government had already concluded treaties with Italy, Switzerland, and Servia, by which the reproduction of a design in one of the contracting States was sufficient to secure protection in the others. His Majesty's Government were at the present moment in communication with all the States included in the Union for the protection of industrial property with a view, if possible, to securing a general application of this principle
  MR. HARWOGDsaid the noble Lord had referred to the advisability ofr enewing the Japanese alliance. This was a delicate subject, and he knew that it would be improper to enter into details, or to say anything which would make the position of our Government difficult. At the same time, he must claim that the House of Commons was not to be continually considered as a place which strained at a gnat and swallowed a camel. He did not think they were called upon to hold their tongues about great subjects which might completely alter the future history of our country and probably the history of the world. He did not think it was just to the Government that the enormous responsibility should be left upon them by this House of dealing with such a question without their having the advantage of hearing what were the views of the country in regard to the great step which they contemplated in the renewal of the Japanese alliance. It would not become him to enter into details in such a delicate matter, but if what the noble Lord foreshadowed was at all true, they might be on the eve of important political changes affecting the whole shaping of the world within the next fifty years. Therefore, if the House of Commons was to be anything more than a mere register, if it was to be the governing body of this great Empire, it was called upon to say something about a matter of this weight, and not skirk it, as he thought it had been shirked that afternoon. He thought the word "alliance" which the noble
  162
  Lord had used, was going a little too far with reference to the present treaty.
  And, it being half-past Seven of the clock, the debate stood adjourned till this Evening's Sitting.
  Subsequent and postponed Resolutions to be further considered at this Evening's Sitting.

EVENING SITTING.

  SUPPLY [20TH ALLOTTED DAY] [2ND AUGUST] REPORT.
  Order read, for resuming adjourned debate on Amendment proposed [3rd August] on Consideration of Third Resolution, "That a sum, not exceeding £1,319,058, be granted to His Majesty, to defray the Charge which will come in course of payment during the year ending on the 31st day of March, 1906, for Expenditure in respect of the following Services included in Class II. of the Estimates for Civil Services."
  Which Amendment was—
  "To leave out '£1,319,058,' and insert '£1,318,958.'"—(Sir Charles Dilke.)
  Question again proposed, "That '£1,319,058' stand part of the said Resolution."
  MR. HARWOODsaid he would not have touched on the Japanese agreement but for the fact of the noble Lord having spoken of renewing it. He could not renew the Japanese treaty because it was made under certain conditions which would expire with the termination of the present war. The question before the House therefore was the creation of a new treaty which might have very serious consequences and which therefore was a matter for serious consideration. Although he admitted that this House was not the House to make treaties he claimed its right to discuss this matter—a matter of far greater importance than all the other subjects which the House had discussed to-day, put together—and to advise the Government as to what the real opinion of the country was in regard to it. Unless he

  163
  was misinformed a new treaty with Japan had been already drawn up, though it was not signed, and it was a matter which would shortly become an historical fact.
  Two proposals had been laid down that afternoon with which he thought all would agree. It was said that foreign policy should be kept free from Party politics. He thought in regard to this treaty that no one had said a word to throw cold water upon it. He believed that all cordially approved of the treaty, and it was one of the things for which he was grateful to the Government. But it did not follow that hon. Members should desert their duty. The noble Lord had spoken about the continuity of foreign policy; but he must remember that that principle carried grave consequences with it which made it necessary for hon. Members to speak out now, because once the treaty was signed there was no use in saying anything about it. The gravity of the circumstances would compel them to agree to it. He acknowledged that the last treaty with Japan had been a lucky one, and was popular in this country. The late Marquess of Salisbury once spoke about this country having put our money on the wrong horse; but he thought that in this case we had put our money on the right horse. The country had been very anxious as to our responsibility under that treaty, and had watched with intense interest the progress of events in the Far East. The poet talked of a new planet swimming into our ken. He begged the Government to remember that while they were making the new treaty ostensibly with the same Power with which we made the first treaty, it was really quite a different Power. Japan was not the Power she was when the first treaty was made. Japan was now a first-rate Power, and would have to be treated on different principles, and from a different point of view from the principles and point of view which prevailed when we made the first treaty.
  He thought a good many people in the country desired very strongly that in any obligations entered into with Japan in the future the Government should not forget the principles of the present obligations. Those principles were three in number. First, there was
  164
  the limitation of time. We had not undertaken responsibility indefinitely. It terminated at the end of a period of years. He thought that most important principle should be preserved in any future arrangements; also he thought he was right in saying that there was a definite limitation of responsibility. This was not a defensive and offensive alliance. It was a distinct treaty which could only come into operation under certain circumstances. Our responsibility could only come into play when some other Power intervened in certain circumstances. If no other Power intervened then our responsibility did not come into being. He begged the Government also not to make any treaty with Japan or anyone else in which responsibility was not limited and defined. There should not, moreover, be merely a limitation of time, but also a limitation of geographical area.
  Remarks had been made in that debate about the relationship of any such alliance to our Indian Empire. We should be approaching dangerous ground if in making a treaty with anyone we brought them into relationship with our Indian Empire. Anyone who knew India knew how peculiarly sensitive these Eastern people were. At the present moment there was a feeling of excitement all through Asia—a temperament of excitement to be compared with that which they sometimes saw in that House—a touchiness and suspiciousness which might be dangerous unless we acted fairly. Any treaty we made with Japan ought carefully to exclude the possibility or supposition that they could be brought into relationship with our Indian Empire or our position in Asia, He did not want to touch the question of the yellow peril in any way. But it must be remembered that we were dealing with an Eastern people whom we did not understand; an Eastern people flushed with victory; an Eastern people showing powers nobody expected them to show. All the East, from the Caucasus down to the Japanese Sea, was electric with anticipation and hope and unrest. Therefore the greatest possible caution must be taken by us in our relations with the greatest of Eastern Powers. He asked them to act upon the

  165
  motto expressed by Bismarck, Do ut des. If the English nation entered into serious obligations to Japan it would have a right to expect an adequate return for undertaking those great responsibilities. In making a treaty with the Japanese we were making a treaty with a people who were more or less an enigma to us. They were au enigma more or less to the civilised world. It was almost uncanny. He rejoiced in the qualities they had displayed, but it was not easy to understand their ideals. He had mixed amongst them a great deal. The Russian was easy to understand. There was something of blood relationship between him and ourselves which made him more easy to understand. But the Japanese was an absolute enigma to us, and therefore we should be careful about the bargain we entered into with him. We should take | great care to safeguard our interests, and especially our trade interests, in China. The Government was no doubt awake to that, but in his part of the country people were very anxious that the open door should be kept not merely in name but in reality. It was quite easy to see how one nation controlling another nation might keep the promise to the ear and break it to the heart. It was well known in business circles that while the code of honour of the Japanese in politics was above reproach, their code of honour in business was not so. He did not say which was the beat guide to the morale of the people, but he did not want our Government in the flush of successes to make a treaty which might bring regret to our children and disaster to the Empire of which we were all so proud.
  *MR. BRIGHTsaid he wished to ask whether it would be in order at that stage to bring up a subject concerning the Board of Agriculture.
  *SIR CHARLES DILKEsaid it might be convenient that he should first withdraw his Amendment, which he had desired to do after the speech of the noble Lord.
  Amendment, by leave, withdrawn.
  Question proposed, "That this House doth agree with the Committee in the said Resolution."
  *MR. BRIGHTdesired to call attention to the effect of what he could not but describe as the harsh and unsatisfactory action of the Board of Agriculture in reference to the prevention of sheep scab. From time to time he had placed his views before the President of the Board, who had met him with the greatest courtesy, but he had been unable to obtain any satisfaction with regard to the policy of the Department. The difficulty really arose through a clashing of authority between the local and the central bodies, which resulted in great confusion and no consistency of policy whatever.
  Oswestry was the market for Denbighshire, Montgomeryshire, and Shropshire, where Welsh farmers brought their sheep and English farmers bought them. Under the present arrangements no sheep could be moved from the scheduled areas, of which Denbighshire and Mon-gomeryshire were two, without being dipped before a policeman or other officer and then quarantined for fifty-six days. This provision had naturally destroyed the business of Oswestry. The only thing that had been done to mitigate the hardship was the permission of the Board of Agriculture to allow two markets to be established, one authorised, where sheep from the scheduled areas might go, and the other for sheep from Shropshire, but that permission had now been withdrawn, and, as a consequence, the market for Denbighshire and Montgomeryshire had been removed out of Shropshire. It was exactly as though a tariff had been imposed against the importation of sheep into Shropshire. One auctioneer, who was moving his market from Oswestry, protested against having to submit to this "buffoonery" on the part of the Board, and declared it to be a "scandalous shame" that farmers and dealers should not be allowed to do what they thought was best for themselves. Many buyers were getting disgusted and were ceasing to go to Oswestry, simply because they could not rely on finding there a regular supply as they used to do. The matter

  167
  had been warmly discussed in the Shropshire County Council, and strong feelings were entertained on the subject. Oswestry market was being damaged to the extent of 1,200 sheep a week by these absurd regulations.
  SIR FREDERICK BANBURY: For the protection of the rest of the country. Other sheep-owners do not wish to have sheep scab imported into their flocks.
  *MR. BRIGHTsaid he was stating the effect, and wished to show how it could be altered. There were two possible policies. One was compulsory dipping all round. There were, doubtless, difficulties connected with it, but it was a sensible and logical policy. The other was to make the scheduled areas very much smaller. To take an arbitrary area such as the whole county and dislocate the trade of the surrounding district was absolutely wanton and ineffective. He hoped the President of the Board of Agriculture would seriously consider whether there were not some means of getting rid of what he believed was a great detriment to the flock-masters and the sheep trade.
  MR. LLEWELLYNhoped no notice whatever would be taken by the Board of Agriculture of the speech of the hon. Member for Oswestry with reference to sheep scab, and that nothing would be done to remove the restrictions which were at present in force for the benefit of the farmer. Auctioneers and dealers were the worst obstacles to the keeping of flocks clear of disease, and for an auctioneer to make a speech complaining that the restrictions were hampering his trade, and for that speech to be quoted in that House, was altogether monstrous. It was impossible to calculate the sickness which might have ensued if the Board of Agriculture had not been firm in using the powers they possessed in that respect. Fortunately flocks were at present particularly free from the disease, and he hoped nothing would be done by the Board to change that state of things.
  MR. BUCHANANsaid that in Scotland they had had some experience of sheep scab and of the Orders of
  168
  the Board of Agriculture, and he agreed with the complaints which had been made, not only by auctioneers, but by farmers who were supporters of the Government, and who pointed out the unwise way in which the original Sheep Scab Order would affect the county of Perth and the centre of Scotland generally. The President of the Board would agree that the Order as originally issued was found, to be one which could not be enforced without serious damage to the interests of agriculture throughout the centre of Sootland. In response to the reasonable request made to the Board of Agriculture the Order was considerably modified, and he believed that now the administration of the amended Order was being carried out with satisfaction to the various parties concerned.
  He should like to refer to another subject which largely affected the centre of Scotland, namely, the exclusion of Canadian store cattle. That was a clear matter of protection. Nine years ago, the first year after the Government took office, they passed a Bill permanently prohibiting the importation of Canadian store cattle. In season and out of season they in Scotland had protested against that Act. They had said that there was no real ground, so far as disease was concerned, for permanently excluding these cattle by statute, and that the powers of the Board of Agriculture were perfectly adequate when there was any suspicion whatever of disease. The Government had maintained the Act although there had been no case made out for it, and only this session the President of the Board of Agriculture had acknowledged the fact. Constant representations on this point had been made, not merely by Members of that House, but also by those who represented important interests in Canada, asking for a relaxation of this exclusion. Strong representations had also been made by the Dominion Government, who naturally asked how could it be said that this country was in favour of free trade within the Empire when they were excluding the importation of Canadian cattle. The Act of 1896 was a protective statute, and large interests had grown up under it, and those interests were now too powerful for the Government, and consequently

  169
  they were not able to relax the restrictions. This exclusion was a serious blow to the most important of all their Colonies, and this exclusion of Canadian cattle ought not to be continued. He wished in conclusion that it should be noted that a Conservative Government, which professed so much regard for the interests of agriculture, had only allowed out of twenty days devoted to discussion of Supply about forty minutes for the discussion of matters affecting agriculture.
  SIR CARNE RASCHasked whether the President of the Board of Agriculture could give any information as to the freight charges on agricultural produce on English railways. They very seldom got a chance of discussing this question. The present Board of Agriculture had done more than its predecessors in this matter, but nobody could argue that tbe railway interest was feebly represented in that House. Parliament never granted railway companies this great monopoly in order that the might penalise the home producer and bolster up the foreign producer, which was what was now being done. If he had time he could give a striking object-lesson in regard to the injurious effect these differential and preferential railway rates were having in the Eastern counties. It was necessary to call attention to this matter when we had to grow corn at 40s. and eke out a precarious living by selling it at 30s. It was obvious that the farmers in the Eastern counties could not stand these preferential and differential rates. He hoped the President of the Board of Agriculture would not relax the regulations with regard to sheep scab, and with regard to swine fever he would like to know whether the right hon. Gentleman did not think that if there was no compensation there would be considerably less swine fever. He could give swine fever to a pig in twenty-four hours by feeding it on maize and letting it lie dirty. He would suggest that the young gentlemen who were called inspectors of swine might with advantage carry out their interesting duties with rather less red tape and rather more common sense.
  MR. KEIR HARDIEsaid he would like to take the House
  170
  away from the unsavoury topics which had been under discussion to a more pleasant subject. He wished to allude to the question of afforestation. He wished to know whether any steps had been taken towards carrying out the recommendations of the Select Committee which dealt with the question of forestry. He would remind the right hon. Gentleman that that Committee recommended that land should be secured on which pupils might be instructed in forestry. Upon this matter they were far behind other countries and more particularly Germany. The carrying out of a large scheme of afforestation would find permanent employment for between 25,000 and 50,000 men. Not only this, but such a scheme would add largely to the revenue of this country, and would ultimately lessen our dependence upon foreign countries for a supply of timber. From every point of view that would be advantageous, and surely when the House of Commons appointed a Committee to report upon this question they were entitled to ask the Government what had been done to give effect to the recommendations of that Committee, and what they intended to do in the future.
  *THE PRESIDENT OF THE BOARD OF AGRICULTURE (Mr. AILWYN FELLOWES,)was glad that there had been an opportunity for some discussion on this Vote, which had not been discussed for three years. He did not agree that the Government was to blame for not bringing on the Vote before. The order of Supply was generally arranged between the two sides of the House. As regarded the sheep-scab regulations, the Board were blamed on the one hand for not taking strong enough action, and on the other for taking too strong action. He thought, therefore, the Board might be considered to have taken a fair line.
  The House would remember that some two or three months ago the whole of the heather in Scotland was very nearly alight, and a great many influential men wrote to the Board to protest against the regulations. He was afraid then that things would not go very smoothly in that country, but later on a deputation

  171
  of the largest flockmasters in Scotland came to London, and the result was that arrangements were made which had been satisfactory to the flockmasters and others. It was only that afternoon that the Board had received a telegram from their chief inspector in Scotland stating that the whole of the compulsory dipping Orders which had been made on this question were being carried out with success. This was a question which had for years been brought before their notice by different chambers of agriculture, and they had been pressed to take action upon it. It was rightly said that there was an absolute lack of uniformity in the regulations made by local authorities in regard to this disease. It was only last year, after the Report of the Committee on Sheep Scab had been presented, that the Board took the action they were now taking, and it was on the advice of that Committee that they had taken over the responsibility of making regulations to deal with the disease. He must say, however, that if they had acted on the whole of the recommendations of the Committee they would have encountered much more opposition in the great sheep districts of the country than they had done up to the present moment. When regulations were first enforced in Scotland, the Board considered that the balance of advantages was in favour of their Regulation of Movement Order. At the request of the deputation, however, a compulsory dipping Order had been put in operation and had met with success. If the dipping was satisfactorily carried out this year, the restrictions on movement which were a source of complaint in Shropshire and elsewhere would very likely be removed. Next spring they would take very great care that the question should be considered in all its bearings, and every consideration would be given to the case of Shropshire.
  Long before he had anything to do with the Board of Agriculture
  he strongly supported the restrictions which were placed on the importation of Canadian stores. It was hardly necessary for him to tell the Committee what his own opinions were on this question. A few weeks ago, speaking at Norwich, he went into the different details on the question, and he was bound to say to the Committee that he was not prepared to alter one jot or tittle of the present policy of the Board, which he believed was the only policy consistent with a proper regard for the safety of our herds in this country. He acknowledged that there was no disease at present, but he was not going to run the risk of the importation of disease either from Canada. Argentina, or anywhere else. He remembered hearing when very young of the great loss which the farming interest of this country suffered in the years 1865–67 by cattle disease.
  The hon. Member for Essex had alluded to the question of railway rates. That had been a burning question with agriculturists for many years. He had taken action in regard to that question, and he hoped that in a very short time the Board would be able to arrange for conferences to take place at different centres in the country between agriculturists and the great railway companies. He trusted that a great deal of good would result.
  And, it being Ten of the clock, Mr. SPEAKER, in pursuance of Standing Order No. 15, proceeded to put the Question necessary to dispose of the Report of the Resolution then under consideration.
  Question put, "That this House doth agree with the Committee in the said Resolution."
  The House divided:—Ayes, 231; Noes, 127. (Division List No. 332.)

  AYES.

  Agg-Gardner, James Tynte

  Arrol, Sir William

  Baird, John George Alexander

  Allhusen, Augustus Henry Eden

  Atkinson, Rt. Hon. John

  Balcarres, Lord

  Anson, Sir William Reynell

  Aubrey-Fletcher,Rt.Hon. Sir H.

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

  Arkwright, John Stanhope

  Bagot, Capt. Josceline FitzRoy

  Balfour, Capt. C. B. (Hornsey)

  Arnold-Forster, Rt.Hn.Hugh O.

  Bailey, James (Walworth)

  Balfour, Rt.HnGerald W.(Leeds

  Balfour, Kenneth R.(Christch.)

  Gordon, Maj Evans (T'rH'mlets

  Morgan, David J. (Walthamstow

  Banbury, Sir Frederick George

  Gore, Hon. S. F. Ormsby-

  Morpeth, Viscount

  Banner, John S. Harmood-

  Gorst, Rt. Hon. Sir John Eldon

  Morrell, George Herbert

  Bathurst, Hon. Allen Benjamin

  Goschen, Hon. George Joachim

  Morrison, James Archibald

  Beach, Rt.Hn.Sir Michael Hicks

  Goulding, Edward Alfred

  Morton, Arthur H. Aylmer

  Bentinck, Lord Henry C.

  Gray, Ernest (West Ham)

  Mount, William Arthur

  Bhownaggree, Sir M. M.

  Greene, Henry D.(Shrewsbury)

  Murray, Charles J. (Coventry)

  Bigwood, James

  Grenfell, William Henry

  Murray, Col. Wyndham (Bath)

  Bill, Charles

  Gretton, John

  Nicholson, William Graham

  Blundell, Colonel Henry

  Groves, James Grimble

  O'Neill, Hon. Robert Torrens

  Bond, Edward

  Hall, Edward Marshall

  Palmer, Sir Walter (Salisbury)

  Boscawen, Arthur Griffith-

  Halsey, Rt. Hon. Thomas F.

  Pease, Herbert Pike(Darlington)

  Bousfield, William Robert

  Hamilton,Marq.of (L'nd'ndy).

  Pemberton, John S. G.

  Brassey, Albert

  Hardy, Laurence(Kent Ashford

  Percy, Earl

  Brodrick, Rt. Hon. St. John

  Harris, F.Leverton (Tynem'th)

  Pierpoint, Robert

  Brown, Sir Alex. H. (Shropsh.)

  Haslam, Sir Alfred S.

  Pilkington, Colonel Richard

  Brymer, William Ernest

  Hay, Hon. Claude George

  Platt-Higgins, Frederick

  Bull, William James

  Heath, Arthur Howard(Hanley

  Plummer, Sir Walter R.

  Butcher, John George

  Heath,Sir James(Staffords.NW

  Powell, Sir Francis Sharp

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

  Heaton, John Henniker

  Pretyman, Ernest George

  Carlile, William Walter

  Helder, Sir Augustus

  Pryce-Jones, Lt.-Col. Edward

  Carson, Rt. Hon. Sir Edw. H.

  Henderson, Sir A.(Stafford, W.)

  Purvis, Robert

  Cautley, Henry Strother

  Hermon-Hodge, Sir Robert T.

  Randles, John S.

  Cavendish, V.C.W.(Derbyshire)

  Hill, Henry Staveley

  Rankin, Sir James

  Cayzer, Sir Charles William

  Hope,J.F.(Sheffield, Brightside)

  Rasch, Sir Frederic Carne

  Cecil, Evelyn (Aston Manor)

  Hornby, Sir William Henry

  Ratcliff, R. F.

  Cecil, Lord Hugh (Greenwich)

  Hoult, Joseph

  Reed, Sir Edw.James (Cardiff)

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

  Houston, Robert Paterson

  Reid, James (Greenock)

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

  Howard,Jn.(Kent, Faversham)

  Remnant, James Farquharson

  Chamberlayne, T.(S'thampton)

  Howard, J. (Midd., Tottenham)

  Roberts, Samuel (Sheffield)

  Chapman, Edward

  Hozier, Hon. James Henry Cecil

  Robertson, Herbert (Hackney)

  Clare, Octavius Leigh

  Hudson, George Bickersteth

  Rolleston, Sir John F. L.

  Clive, Captain Percy A.

  Hunt, Rowland

  Round, Rt. Hon. James

  Coates, Edward Feetham

  Hutton, John (Yorks., N.R.)

  Rutherford, John (Lancashire)

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

  Jameson, Major J. Eustace

  Rutherford, W. W. (Liverpool)

  Coghill, Douglas Harry

  Jeffreys, Rt. Hon.Arthur Fred.

  Sackville, Col. S. G. Stopford-

  Collings, Rt. Hon. Jesse

  Jessel, Captain Herbert Merton

  Sadler, Col. Sir Samuel Alex.

  Colston, Chas. Edw. H. Athole

  Kenyon, Hon.Geo.T.(Denbigh)

  Samuel, Sir HarryS.(Limehouse

  Compton, Lord Alwyne

  Keswick, William

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

  Corbett, T. L. (Down, North)

  Kimber, Sir Henry

  Sharpe, William Edward T.

  Crossley, Rt. Hon. Sir Savile

  Knowles, Sir Lees

  Sinclair, Louis (Romford)

  Dalrymple, Sir Charles

  Laurie, Lieut.-General

  Skewes-Cox, Sir Thomas

  Davenport, William Bromley-

  Law, Andrew Bonar (Glasgow)

  Sloan, Thomas Henry

  Davies,Sir Horatio D.(Chatham)

  Lawrence, Wm. F. (Liverpool)

  Smith, Abel H.(Hertford, East)

  Dickson, Charles Scott

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

  Smith,Rt.HnJ.Parker(Lanarks

  Disraeli, Coningsby Ralph

  Lawson, John Grant (Yorks.,NR

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

  Dixon-Hartland,Sir Fred Dixon

  Lee, Arthur H. (Hants., Fareham

  Spencer, Sir E. (W. Bromwich)

  Dorington, Rt.Hon.SirJohn E.

  Legge, Col. Hon. Heneage

  Stanley, Hon. Arthur(Ormskirk)

  Doughty, Sir George

  Llewellyn, Evan Henry

  Stanley, Edward Jas.(Somerset

  Douglas, Rt. Hon. A. Akers-

  Long, Col.Charles W.(Evesham

  Stanley, Rt. Hon. Lord(Lancs.)

  Doxford, Sir William Theodore

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

  Stewart, Sir Mark J. M'Taggart

  Duke, Henry Edward

  Lonsdale, John Brownlee

  Stirling-Maxwell, Sir John M.

  Dyke,Rt.Hon.Sir William Hart

  Lowe, Francis William

  Stock, James Henry

  Faber, Edmund B. (Hants, W.)

  Loyd, Archie Kirkman

  Stone, Sir Benjamin

  Faber, George Denison (York)

  Lucas, Col. Francis (Lowestoft)

  Stroyan, John

  Fellowes, Rt. HnAilwynEdward

  Lucas, Reginald J.(Portsmouth)

  Talbot, Lord E. (Chichester)

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

  Lyttelton, Rt. Hon. Alfred

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

  Fielden, Edward Brocklehurst

  Macdona, John Cumming

  Thornton, Percy M.

  Finch, Rt. Hon. George H.

  MacIver, David (Liverpool)

  Tollemache, Henry James

  Finlay,Rt Hn SirR.B(Inv'rn'ss)

  Maconochie, A. W.

  Tomlinson, Sir Wm. Edw. M.

  Fisher, William Hayes

  M'Killop, James (Stirlingshire)

  Tuff, Charles

  Fitzroy, Hon.Edward Algernon

  Majendie, James A. H.

  Vincent, Col.SirCEH.(Sheffield)

  Flannery, Sir Fortescue

  Marks, Harry Hananel

  Vincent, Sir Edgar (Exeter)

  Flower, Sir Ernest

  Martin, Richard Biddulph

  Walrond,Rt.Hn.Sir William H

  Forster, Henry William

  Massey-Mainwaring, Hn. W. F.

  Warde, Colonel C. E.

  Gardner, Ernest

  Maxwell, W.J.H.(Dumfriesshire

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

  Garfit, William

  Mildmay, Francis Bingham

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

  Gibbs, Hon. A. G. H.

  Milvain, Thomas

  Whiteley, H. (Ashtonund.Lyne

  Godson, Sir Augustus Frederick

  Molesworth, Sir Lewis

  Whitmore, Charles Algernon

  Gordon, J. (Londonderry, S.)

  Moon, Edward Robert Pacy

  Willoughby de Eresby, Lord

  174

  175

  Wilson, John (Glasgow)

  Wrightson, Sir Thomas

  TELLERS FOR THE AYES—Sir

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

  Wylie, Alexander

  Alexander Acland-Hood and

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

  Yerburgh, Robert Armstrong

  Viscount Valentia.

  NOES.

  Atherley-Jones, L.

  Harrington, Timothy

  Priestley, Arthur

  Baker, Joseph Allen

  Harwood, George

  Read, Russell

  Barry, E. (Cork, S.)

  Hayden, John Patrick

  Redmond, John E.(Waterford)

  Bell, Richard

  Helme, Norval Watson

  Richards, Thomas

  Black, Alexander William

  Hemphill, Rt. Hon. Charles H.

  Rickett, J. Compton

  Bolton, Thomas Dolling

  Henderson, Arthur (Durham)

  Roberts, John Bryn (Eifion)

  Broadhurst, Henry

  Higham, John Sharp

  Roberts, John H. (Denbighs.)

  Bryce, Rt. Hon. James

  Hutchinson, Dr. Charles Fredk.

  Roe, Sir Thomas

  Buchanan, Thomas Ryburn

  Isaacs, Rufus Daniel

  Rose, Charles Day

  Burt, Thomas

  Jacoby, James Alfred

  Samuel, Herbert L.(Cleveland)

  Buxton, N.E(York,NR,Whitby

  Joicey, Sir James

  Samuel, S. M. (Whitechapel)

  Buxton,SydneyCharles(Poplar)

  Jones,David Brynmor(Swansea

  Seely,Maj.J.E.B.(Isle ofWight)

  Caldwell, James

  Jones, Leif (Appleby)

  Shackleton, David James

  Causton, Richard Knight

  Jones, William(Carnarvonshire)

  Shipman, Dr. John G.

  Channing, Francis Allston

  Jordan, Jeremiah

  Slack, John Bamford

  Clancy, John Joseph

  Kennedy, P. J.(Westmeath.N.)

  Smith, Samuel (Flint)

  Crean, Eugene

  Kitson, Sir James

  Soames, Arthur Wellesley

  Cremer, William Randal

  Lambert, George

  Soares, Ernest J.

  Crooks, William

  Lamont, Norman

  Spencer,Rt.Hn.C.R (Northants

  Cullinan, J.

  Langley, Batty

  Sullivan, Donal

  Delany, William

  Lawson, Sir Wilfrid (Cornwall)

  Taylor, Theodore C.(Radcliffe)

  Dilke, Rt. Hon. Sir Charles

  Leese, Sir JosephF.(Accrington)

  Thomas, Sir A.(Glamorgan,E.)

  Dobbie, Joseph

  Lloyd-George, David

  Thomas,David Alfred (Merthyr

  Doogan, P. C.

  Lough, Thomas

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

  Edwards, Frank

  Lundon, W.

  Toulmin, George

  Elibank, Master of

  Lyell, Charles Henry

  Ure, Alexander

  Ellice,Capt. EC(S.Andrw'sBghs

  MacNeill, John Gordon Swift

  Walton, John Lawson(Leeds,S.)

  Emmott, Alfred

  MacVeagh, Jeremiah

  Walton, Joseph (Barnsley)

  Evans,SirFrancis H.(Maidstone

  M'Fadden, Edward

  Wason, Eugene (Clackmannan)

  Eve, Harry Trelawney

  M'Kean, John

  Weir, James Galloway

  Fenwick, Charles

  Morgan, J. Lloyd (Carmarthen)

  White, Luke (York, E.R.)

  Findlay, Alexander(Lanark,NE

  Moss, Samuel

  Whiteley, George (York, W.R.)

  Flavin, Michael Joseph

  Moulton, John Fletcher

  Whitley, J. H. (Halifax)

  Flynn, James Christopher

  Murnaghan, George

  Whittaker, Thomas Palmer

  Fowler, Rt. Hon. Sir Henry

  Murphy, John

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

  Fuller, J. M. F.

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

  Wilson, John (Falkirk)

  Gladstone, Rt. Hn.Herbert John

  Norton, Capt. Cecil William

  Woodhouse,Sir J.T(Huddersf'd

  Goddard, Daniel Ford

  O'Briea,Kendal(TipperaryMid)

  Young, Samuel

  Grant, Corrie

  O'Connor,James (Wicklow, W.

  Yoxall, James Henry

  Guest, Hon. Ivor Churchill

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

  Haldane, Rt. Hon. Richard B.

  Parrott, William

  TELLERS FOR THE NOES—Mr.

  Hammond, John

  Partington, Oswald

  Bright and Mr. Charles Allen

  Harcourt, Lewis

  Pirie, Duncan V.

  Hardie,J.Keir(Merthyr Tydvil)

  Power, Patrick Joseph

  Question, "That this House doth agree with the Committee in the outstanding Resolution reported in respect of Class VI. of the Civil Services Estimates," put, and agreed to.

  MR. SPEAKER MR. SPEAKER then proceeded, in pursuance of Standing Order No. 15, to put forthwith the Questions, That this House doth agree with the Committee in the outstanding Resolutions reported in respect of each Class of the Civil Services Estimates, the Navy Estimates, the Army Estimates, and the Revenue Departments Estimates.

CIVIL SERVICE ESTIMATES, 1905–6.

  CLASS I.
  Question, "That this House doth agree with the Committee in the outstanding Resolutions reported in respect of
  176
  Class I. of the Civil Services Estimates," put, and agreed to.

  ARMY ESTIMATES, 1905–6.
  Question put, "That this House doth agree with the Committee in the outstanding Resolution reported in respect of the Army Estimates."
  The House divided:—Ayes, 232; Noes, 129. (Division List No. 333.)

  AYES.

  Agg-Gardner, James Tynte

  Chamberlain,Rt. Hon. J.(Brm.)

  Gordon,Maj.Evans(T'rH'mlets

  Allhusen,Augustus HenryEden

  Chamberlain, RtHn.J.A.(Worc.

  Gore, Hon. S. F. Ormsby-

  Anson, Sir William Reynell

  Chamberlayne, G.(S'thampton

  Gorst, Rt. Hon. Sir John Eldon

  Arkwright, John Stanhope

  Chapman, Edward

  Goschen, Hon. George Joachim

  Arnold-Forster,Rt. Hn. HughO.

  Clare, Octavius Leigh

  Goulding, Edward Alfred

  Arrol, Sir William

  Clive, Captain Percy A.

  Gray, Ernest (West Ham)

  Atkinson, Rt. Hon. John

  Coates, Edward Feetham

  Greene,Henry D.(Shrewsbury)

  Aubrey-Fletcher,Rt.Hn.Sir H.

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

  Grenfell, William Henry

  Bagot, Capt. Josceline FitzRoy

  Coghill, Douglas Harry

  Gretton, John

  Bailey, James (Walworth)

  Collings, Rt. Hon. Jesse

  Groves, James Grimble

  Baird, John George Alexander

  Colston, Chas. Edw. H. Athole

  Hall, Edward Marshall

  Balcarres, Lord

  Compton, Lord Alwyne

  Halsey, Rt. Hon. Thomas F.

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

  Corbett, T. L. (Down, North)

  Hamilton, Marq of(L'nd'nderry

  Balfour, Capt. C. B. (Hornsey)

  Crossley, Rt. Hon. Sir Savile

  Hardy, Laurence(Kent,Ashford

  Balfour,Rt HnGeraldW.(Leeds

  Dalrymple, Sir Charles

  Harris, F. Leverton (Tynem'th

  Balfour,Kenneth R. (Christch.

  Davenport, William Bromley-

  Haslam, Sir Alfred S.

  Banbury, Sir Frederick George

  Davies,Sir HoratioD.(Chatham

  Hay, Hon. Claude George

  Banner, John S. Harmood-

  Dickson, Charles Scott

  Heath,Arthur Howard (Hanley

  Bathurst, Hon. Allen Benjamin

  Disraeli, Coningsby Ralph

  Heath,Sir James(Staffords.NW

  Beach.Rt.Hn.Sir MichaelHicks

  Dixon-Hartland,Sir FredDixon

  Heaton, John Henniker

  Bentinck, Lord Henry C.

  Dorington,Rt.Hon.Sir John E.

  Helder, Sir Augustus

  Bhownaggree, Sir M. M.

  Doughty, Sir George

  Henderson, Sir A.(Stafford,W.)

  Bigwood, James

  Douglas, Rt. Hon. A. Akers-

  Hermon-Hodge, Sir Robert T.

  Bill, Charles

  Doxford, Sir William Theodore

  Hill, Henry Staveley

  Bingham, Lord

  Duke, Henry Edward

  Hope, J.F.(Sheffield, Brightside

  Blundell, Colonel Henry

  Dyke, Rt.Hon.Sir William Hart

  Hornby, Sir William Henry

  Bond, Edward

  Faber, Edmund B. (Hants, W.)

  Hoult, Joseph

  Boscawen, Arthur Griffith-

  Faber, George Denison (York)

  Houston, Robert Paterson

  Bousfield, William Robert

  Fellowes.Rt. Hn AilwynEdward

  Howard, Jn.(Kent,Faversham)

  Brassey, Albert

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

  Howard,J. (Midd. Tottenham)

  Brodrick, Rt. Hon. St. John

  Fielden, Edward Brocklehurst

  Hozier,Hon. James HenryCecil

  Brown, Sir Alex. H. (Shropsh.)

  Finch, Rt. Hon. George H.

  Hudson, George Bickersteth

  Brymer, William Ernest

  Finlay,RtHnSir R.B(Inv'rn'ss)

  Hunt, Rowland

  Bull, William James

  Fisher, William Hayes

  Hutton, John (Yorks., N.R.)

  Butcher, John George

  Fitzroy,Hon.Edward Algernon

  Jameson, Major J. Eustace

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

  Flannery, Sir Fortescue

  Jeffreys, Rt. Hon. ArthurFred.

  Carlile, William Walter

  Flower, Sir Ernest

  Jessel,Captain Herbert Merton

  Carson, Rt. Hon. Sir Edw. H.

  Forster, Henry William

  Kenyon, Hon. Geo.T.(Denbigh

  Cautley, Henry Strother

  Gardner, Ernest

  Keswick, William

  Cavendish, V.C.W.(Derbyshire

  Garfit, William

  Kimber, Sir Henry

  Cayzer, Sir Charles William

  Gibbs, Hon. A. G. H.

  Knowles, Sir Lees

  Cecil, Evelyn (Aston Manor).

  Godson, SirAugustus Frederick

  Laurie, Lieut.-General

  Cecil, Lord Hugh (Greenwich)

  Gordon, J. (Londonderry, S.)

  Law, Andrew Bonar (Glasgow)

  Lawrence, Wm. F. (Liverpool)

  O'Neill, Hon. Robert Torrens

  Smith,Rt HnJ.Parker(Lanarks

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

  Palmer, Sir Walter (Salisbury)

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

  Lawson,John Grant(Yorks.,NR

  Pease,Herbert Pike (Darlington

  Stanley,Hon.Arthur (Ormskirk

  Lee,ArthurH.(Hants., Fareham

  Pemberton, John S. G.

  Stanley, Edward Jas.(Somerset)

  Lees, Sir Elliott (Birkenhead)

  Percy, Earl

  Stanley,Rt. Hon. Lord (Lancs.)

  Legge, Col. Hon. Heneage

  Pierpoint, Robert

  Stewart,Sir Mark J.M'Taggart

  Llewellyn, Evan Henry

  Pilkington, Colonel Richard

  Stirling-Maxwell, Sir John M.

  Long, Col. Charles W.(Evesham)

  Platt-Higgins, Frederick

  Stock, James Henry

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

  Plummer, Sir Walter R.

  Stone, Sir Benjamin

  Lonsdale, John Brownlee

  Powell, Sir Francis Sharp

  Stroyan, John

  Lowe, Francis William

  Pretyman, Ernest George

  Talbot, Lord E. (Chichester)

  Loyd, Archie Kirkman

  Pryce-Jones, Lt.-Col. Edward

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

  Lucas,Col.Francis (Lowestoft)

  Purvis, Robert

  Thornton, Percy M.

  Lucas,Reginald J. (Portsmouth

  Randles, John S.

  Tollemache, Henry James

  Lyttelton, Rt. Hon. Alfred

  Rankin, Sir James

  Tomlinson, Sir Wm. Edw. M.

  Macdona, John Cumming

  Rasch, Sir Frederic Carne

  Tuff, Charles

  MacIver, David (Liverpool)

  Ratcliff, R. F.

  Vincent,Col.Sir C.EH(Sheffield

  Maconochie, A. W.

  Reed, Sir Edw. James (Cardiff)

  Vincent, Sir Edgar (Exeter)

  M'Killop, James (Stirlingshire)

  Reid, James (Greenock)

  Walrond, Rt.Hn. SirWilliam H.

  Majendie, James A. H.

  Remnant, James Farquharson

  Warde, Colonel C. E.

  Marks, Harry Hananel

  Renwick, George

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

  Martin, Richard Biddulph

  Roberts, Samuel (Sheffield)

  Welby, Sir CharlesG.E(Notts.)

  Massey-Mainwaring, Hn. W. F.

  Robertson, Herbert (Hackney)

  Whiteley,H.(Ashton und.Lyne

  Maxwell,W.J.H (Dumfriesshire

  Rolleston, Sir John F. L.

  Whitmore, Charles Algernon

  Mildmay, Francis Bingham

  Round, Rt. Hon. James

  Willoughby de Eresby, Lord

  Milvain, Thomas

  Rutherford, John (Lancashire)

  Wilson, John (Glasgow)

  Molesworth, Sir Lewis

  Rutherford, W. W. (Liverpool)

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

  Moon, Edward Robert Pacy

  Sackville, Col. S. G. Stopford-

  Wortley, Rt.Hon.C. B. Stuart

  Morgan,David J(Walthamstow

  Sadler, Col. Sir Samuel Alex.

  Wrightson, Sir Thomas

  Morpeth, Viscount

  Samuel,Sir HarryS.(Limehouse

  Wylie, Alexander

  Morrell, George Herbert

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

  Yerburgh, Robert Armstrong

  Morton, Arthur H. Aylmer

  Sharpe, William Edward T.

  Mount, William Arthur

  Sinclair, Louis (Romford)

  TELLERS FOR THE AYES—Sir

  Murray, Charles J. (Coventry)

  Skewes-Cox, Sir Thomas

  Alexander Acland-Hood and

  Murray, Col. Wyndham (Bath)

  Sloan, Thomas Henry

  Viscount Valentia.

  Nicholson, William Graham

  Smith,Abel H.(Hertford East)

  NOES.

  Allen, Charles P.

  Ellice,Capt EC(S.Andrw'sBghs

  Joicey, Sir James

  Atherley -Jones, L.

  Emmott, Alfred

  Jones,David Brynmor(Swans'a

  Baker, Joseph Allen

  Evans, SirFrancisH.(Maidstone

  Jones, Leif (Appleby)

  Barran, Rowland Hirst

  Eve, Harry Trelawney

  Jones,William (Carnarvonshire

  Barry E. (Cork, S.

  Fenwick, Charles

  Jordan, Jeremiah

  Bell, Richard

  Findlay,Alexander(Lanark,NE

  Kennedy,P.J. (Westmeath, N.

  Black, Alexander William

  Flavin, Michael Joseph

  Kitson, Sir James

  Bolton, Thomas Dolling

  Flynn, James Christopher

  Lambert, George

  Bright, Allan Heywood

  Foster, Sir Walter (Derby Co.)

  Lamont, Norman

  Broadhurst, Henry

  Fowler, Rt. Hn. Sir Henry

  Langley, Batty

  Bryce, Rt. Hon. James

  Gladstone,Rt.Hn.Herbert John

  Lawson, Sir Wilfrid (Cornwall)

  Buchanan, Thomas Ryburn

  Goddard, Daniel Ford

  Leese,Sir JosephF.(Accrington

  Burt, Thomas

  Grant, Corrie

  Lloyd-George, David

  Buxton,N.E.(York,NR Whitby

  Guest, Hon. Ivor Churchill

  Lough, Thomas

  Buxton,Sydney Charles(Poplar

  Haldane, Rt. Hon. Richard B.

  Lundon, W.

  Caldwell, James

  Hammond, John

  Lyell, Charles Henry

  Causton, Richard Knight

  Harcourt, Lewis

  MacNeill, John Gordon Swift

  Channing, Francis Allston

  Hardie,J. Keir(MerthyrTydvil

  M'Arthur, William (Cornwall)

  Clancy, John Joseph

  Harrington, Timothy

  M'Fadden, Edward

  Crean, Eugene

  Harwood, George

  M'Kean, John

  Cremer, William Randal

  Hayden, John Patrick

  Morgan, J. Lloyd (Carmarthen)

  Crooks, William

  Helme, Norval Watson

  Moss, Samuel

  Cullinan, J.

  Hemphill, Rt. Hon. Charles H.

  Moulton, John Fletcher

  Delany, William

  Henderson, Arthur (Durham)

  Murnaghan, George

  Dobbie, Joseph

  Higham, John Sharp

  Murphy, John

  Doogan, P. C.

  Hutchinson, Dr. Charles Fredk

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

  Edwards, Frank

  Isaacs, Rufus Daniel

  Norton, Capt. Cecil William

  Elibank, Master of

  Jacoby James Alfred

  O'Brien,Kendal(Tipperary Mid

  180

  181

  O'Brien, Patrick (Kilkenny)

  Samuel, S. M. (Whitechapel)

  Walton, Joseph (Barnsley)

  O'Connor, James (Wicklow, W.

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

  Wason, Eugene (Clackmannan)

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

  Shackleton, David James

  Weir, James Galloway

  Parrott, William

  Shaw, Thomas (Hawick B.)

  White, Luke (York, E.R.)

  Partington, Oswald

  Shipman, Dr. John G.

  Whiteley, George(York, W.R.)

  Pirie, Duncan V.

  Smith, Samuel (Flint)

  Whitley, J. H. (Halifax)

  Power, Patrick Joseph

  Soames, Arthur Wellesley

  Whittaker, Thomas Palmer

  Priestley, Arthur

  Soares, Ernest J.

  Wilson, HenryJ.(York, W.R.)

  Redmond, John E. (Waterford

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

  Wilson, John (Falkirk)

  Richards, Thomas

  Sullivan, Donal

  Woodhouse,Sir JT(Hudd'rsf' d

  Rickett, J. Compton

  Taylor, Theodore C. (Radcliffe)

  Young, Samuel

  Roberts, John Bryn (Eifion)

  Thomas, Sir A.(Glamorgan, E.)

  Yoxall, James Henry

  Roberts, John H. (Denbighs.)

  Thomas,David Alfred(Merthyr

  Roe, Sir Thomas

  Thompson,Dr.EC (Mon'gh'n,N

  TELLERS FOB THE NOES.—

  Rose, Charles Day

  Ure, Alexander

  Mr. Toulmin and Mr.

  Samuel, Herbert L.(Cleveland)

  Walton,John Lawson(Leeds,S.

  Slack.

  Question, "That this House doth agree with the Committee in the outstanding Resolution reported in respect of the Revenue Departments Estimates," put, and agreed to.

  NAVY AND ARMY EXPENDITURE, 1903–4.
  Resolutions reported.
  Whereas it appears by the Navy Appropriation Account for the year ended the 31st day of March, 1904, and the statement appended thereto, as follows, viz.:—

  (a.) That the gross expenditure for certain Navy Services exceeded the estimate of such expenditure by a total sum of £272,038 9s. 7d., as shown in Column No. 1 of the schedule hereto appended; while the gross expenditure for other Navy Services fell short of the estimate of such expenditure by a total sum of £174,087 14s. 2d., as shown in Column No. 2 of the said appended schedule, so that the gross actual expenditure for the whole of the Navy Services exceeded the gross estimated expenditure by the net sum of £97,950 15s. 5d.

  (b.) That the receipts in aid of certain grants for Navy Services fell short of the total estimated receipts
  182
  by the sum of £5,310 9s. 8d., as shown in Column No. 3 of the said appended schedule, while the receipts in aid of other Navy Services exceeded the estimate of such receipts by a total sum of £121,284 10s. 2d., as shown in Column No. 4 of the said appended schedule, so that the total actual receipts in aid of the grants for Navy Services exceeded the total estimated receipts by the net sum of £115,974 0s. 6d.

  (c.) That the resulting differences between the Exchequer Grants for Navy Services and the net expenditure are as follows, viz.:—

  £

  s.

  d.

  Total Surpluses

  255,627

  10

  3

  Total Deficits

  237,604

  5

  2

  Net Surplus

  £18,023

  5

  1

  And whereas by a Vote of Parliament during the present session (House of Commons Paper, No. 265, of 1905) a further sum of £100 has been granted for the expenditure of the year 1903–4, and the appropriation of additional receipts in aid of such expenditure has been sanctioned to the amount of £97,850 15s. 5d.
  And whereas the Lords Commissioners of His Majesty's Treasury have temporarily authorised the application of so much of the said total surpluses on certain grants for Navy Services as is necessary

  183
  to cover the said total deficits on other grants for Navy Services.

  Schedule.

  Number of Vote.

  Navy Services 1903–1904. Votes.

  Gross Expenditure.

  Appropriations in Aid.

  Excesses of Actual over Estimated Gross Expenditure.

  Surpluses of Estimated over Actual Gross Expenditure.

  Deficiencies of Actual as compared with Estimated Receipts.

  Surpluses of Actual as compared with Estimated Receipts.

  1.

  2.

  3.

  4.

  £

  s.

  d.

  £

  s.

  d.

  £

  s.

  d.

  £

  s.

  d.

  1

  ..

  Wages, etc., of Officers, Seamen, and Boys, Coastguard, and Royal Marines

  ..

  ..

  ..

  43,638

  16

  5

  ..

  271

  6

  3

  2

  ..

  Victualling and Clothing for the Navy

  ..

  ..

  ..

  ..

  82,112

  2

  7

  ..

  ..

  11,180

  16

  11

  3

  ..

  Medical Establishments and Services

  ..

  ..

  ..

  ..

  ..

  3,692

  4

  5

  ..

  601

  9

  10

  4

  ..

  Martial Law

  ..

  ..

  ..

  ..

  1,294

  15

  11

  84

  11

  8

  5

  ..

  Educational Services

  ..

  ..

  ..

  4,160

  17

  9

  ..

  940

  0

  0

  6

  ..

  Scientific Services

  ..

  ..

  ..

  654

  5

  3

  ..

  31

  7

  7

  7

  ..

  Royal Naval Reserves

  ..

  ..

  ..

  13,384

  3

  1

  3,337

  18

  11

  8

  ..

  Shipbuilding, Repairs, Maintenance, etc.:

  Sec. 1

  ..

  Personnel

  ..

  ..

  ..

  ..

  589

  17

  2

  ..

  1,192

  15

  1

  Sec. 2

  ..

  Materiel

  ..

  ..

  ..

  17,715

  13

  4

  ..

  ..

  47,382

  6

  1

  Sec. 3

  ..

  Contract Work

  ..

  ..

  8,123

  18

  2

  ..

  ..

  2,053

  4

  5

  9

  ..

  Naval Armaments

  ..

  ..

  ..

  94,281

  12

  4

  ..

  46,759

  12

  11

  10

  ..

  Works, Buildings, and Repairs at Home and Abroad

  ..

  ..

  ..

  56,029

  18

  3

  ..

  5,770

  8

  6

  11

  ..

  Miscellaneous Effective Services

  ..

  ..

  ..

  ..

  92,483

  17

  9

  ..

  ..

  5,357

  15

  1

  12

  ..

  Admiralty Office

  ..

  ..

  ..

  3,477

  8

  9

  ..

  ..

  14

  13

  9

  13

  ..

  Half-Pay, Reserved and Retired Pay

  ..

  ..

  ..

  ..

  6,612

  11

  0

  ..

  704

  0

  0

  14

  ..

  Naval and Marine Pensions, Gratuities, and Compassionate Allowances

  ..

  ..

  ..

  4,590

  19

  11

  ..

  822

  1

  3

  15

  ..

  Civil Pensions and Gratuities

  6,818

  18

  4

  ..

  90

  11

  7

  Amount written off as irrecoverable

  ..

  ..

  ..

  ..

  6,464

  3

  4

  272,038

  9

  7

  174,087

  14

  2

  5,310

  9

  8

  121,284

  10

  2

  Add Excess Vote

  ..

  100

  0

  0

  272,038

  9

  7

  174,187

  14

  2

  5.310

  9

  8

  121,284

  10

  2

  Net Deficit, £97,850 15 5

  Net Surplus, £115,974 0 6

  Net Surplus. £18,123 5 1

  Whereas it appears by the Army Appropriation Account for the year ended the 31st day of March, 1904, as corrected in accordance with the Third Report of the Committee of Public Accounts of the present session, and the statement appended thereto, as follows, viz.:—
  (a.) That the gross expenditure for certain Army Services exceeded the estimate of such expenditure by a total sum of £742,114 16s. 1d., as
  2. "That the application of such sums be sanctioned."
  shown in Column No. 1 of the Schedule hereto appended; while the gross expenditure for other Army Services fell short of the estimate of such expenditure by a total sum of £1,079,388 0s. 9d., as shown in Column No. 2 of the said appended Schedule; so that the gross actual expenditure for the whole of the Army Services fell short of the gros3 estimated expenditure by the net sum of £337,273 4s. 8d.
  (b.) That the receipts in aid of certain Army Services fell short of the estimate of such receipts by a total sum of £405,336 0s. 2d., as shown in Column No. 3 of the said appended Schedule; while the receipts in aid of other Army Services exceeded the estimate of such receipts by a total sum of £309,669 1s. 6d., as shown in Column No. 4 of the said appended Schedule; so that the total actual receipts in aid of the Grants for Army Services fell short of the total estimated receipts by the net sum of £95,666 18s. 8d.
  (c.) That the resulting differences between the Exchequer Grants for Army Services and the net expenditure are as follows, viz.:—

  Schedule.

  Number of Vote.

  Army Services, 1903–1904. Votes.

  Gross Expenditure.

  Appropriations-in-Aid.

  Excesses of Actual over Estimated Gross Expenditure.

  Surpluses of Estimated over Actual Gross Expenditure.

  Deficiencies of Actual as compared with Estimated Receipts.

  Surpluses of Actual as compared with Estimated Receipts.

  1.

  2.

  3.

  4.

  £

  s.

  d.

  £

  s.

  d.

  £

  s.

  d.

  £

  s.

  d.

  1

  Pay, etc., of Army (General Staff, Regiments, Reserve, and Departments)

  ..

  180,560

  0

  0

  ..

  32,546

  17

  4

  2

  Medical Establishments: Pay, etc.

  ..

  69,254

  2

  7

  ..

  ..

  28,109

  15

  0

  3

  Militia: Pay, Bounty, etc.

  ..

  ..

  ..

  183,430

  8

  4

  ..

  1,100

  11

  10

  4

  Imperial Yeomanry: Pay and Allowances

  ..

  ..

  ..

  ..

  ..

  ..

  64,367

  12

  7

  ..

  135

  2

  6

  5

  Volunteer Corps: Pay and Allowances

  ..

  46,865

  3

  0

  ..

  1,465

  13

  5

  6

  Transport and Romounts

  ..

  ..

  318,972

  19

  3

  ..

  152,584

  19

  4

  ..

  7

  Provisions, Forage, and other Supplies

  ..

  104,383

  9

  4

  189,651

  6

  10

  ..

  8

  Clothing Establishments, and Services

  17,647

  7

  10

  ..

  ..

  78,317

  15

  4

  9

  Warlike and other Stores: Supply and Repair

  ..

  ..

  ..

  ..

  ..

  ..

  380,789

  2

  8

  ..

  132,296

  19

  10

  10

  Works, Buildings, and Repairs: Cost, including Staff for Engineer Services

  ..

  93,864

  16

  1

  53,918

  17

  3

  ..

  11

  Establishments for Military Education

  ..

  1,576

  13

  11

  4,715

  19

  5

  ..

  12

  Miscellaneous Effective Services

  ..

  65,778

  16

  4

  ..

  ..

  31,391

  14

  5

  13

  War Office: Salaries and Miscellaneous Charges

  ..

  ..

  ..

  ..

  18,848

  0

  10

  ..

  ..

  273

  7

  3

  14

  Non-effective Charges for Officers, etc.

  141,930

  10

  0

  ..

  ..

  4,031

  4

  7

  15

  Non-effective Charges for Men, etc.

  ..

  ..

  17,754

  9

  0

  4,452

  0

  5

  16

  Superannuation, Compensation, and Compassionate Allowances

  ..

  ..

  ..

  5,796

  5

  10

  12

  16

  11

  Balances irrecoverable

  ..

  ..

  ..

  109,682

  19

  3

  742,114

  16

  1

  1,079,388

  0

  9

  405,336

  0

  2

  309,669

  1

  6

  Net Surplus, £337,273 4 8

  Net Deficit £95,666 18 8

  Net Surplus … £241,606 6 0

  Resolutions read a second time.
  First Resolution.

  £

  s.

  d.

  Total Surpluses

  1,143,259

  15

  4

  Total Deficits

  901,653

  9

  4

  Net Surplus

  £241,606

  6

  0

  And whereas the Lords Commissioners of His Majesty's Treasury have temporarily authorised the application, in reduction of the net charge on Exchequer Grants for certain Army Services, of the whole of the sums received in excess of the estimated Appropriation-in-Aid, in respect of the same Services, and have also temporarily authorised the application of so much of the said total surpluses on certain Grants for Army Services as is necessary to cover the said total deficits on other Grants for Army Services.
  1. "That the application of such sums be sanctioned."
  Question put, "That this House doth agree with the Committee in the said Resolution."
  The House divided:—Ayes, 225; Noes, 125. (Division List No. 334.)

  AYES.

  Agg-Gardner, James Tynte

  Faber, George Denison (York)

  Lucas, Col. Francis(Lowestoft)

  Allhusen, Augustus Henry Eden

  Fellowes, Rt. Nn. AilwynEdward

  Lucas,ReginaldJ.(Portsmouth)

  Anson, Sir William Reynell

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

  Lyttelton, Rt. Hon. Alfred

  Arkwright, John Stanhope

  Fielden, Edward Broeklehurst

  Macdona, John Cumming

  Arnold-Forster,Rt Hn.Hugh O.

  Finch, Rt. Hon. George H.

  MacIver, David (Liverpool)

  Arrol, Sir William

  Finlay,Rt Hn Sir R.B.(Inv'rn'ss

  Maconochie, A. W.

  Atkinson, Rt. Hon. John

  Fisher, William Hayes

  M'Killop, James (Stirlingshire)

  Aubrey-Fletcher, Rt.Hn. SirH.

  Fitzroy, Hon. EdwardAlgernon

  Majendie, James A. H.

  Bagot, Capt. Josceline Fitz Roy

  Flannery, Sir Fortescue

  Marks, Harry Hananel

  Bailey,James (Walworth)

  Flower, Sir Ernest

  Martin, Richard Biddulph

  Baird, John George Alexander

  Forster, Henry William

  Massey-Mainwaring, Hn. W. F.

  Balcarres, Lord

  Gardner, Ernest

  Maxwell, W.J.H.(Dumfriesshire

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

  Garfit, William

  Mildmay, Francis Bingham

  Balfour, Capt. C. B. (Hornsey)

  Gibbs, Hon. A. G. H.

  Milvain, Thomas

  Balfour,Rt Hn Gerald W (Leeds

  Godson, Sir Augustus Frederick

  Molesworth, Sir Lewis

  Balfour, Kenneth R. (Christch.

  Gordon, J. (Londonderry, S.)

  Moon, Edward Robert Pacy

  Banbury, Sir Frederick George

  Gordon,MajEvans(T'r H'mlets

  Morgan,DavidJ.(Walthamstow

  Banner, John S. Harmood-

  Gore, Hon. S. F. Ormsby-

  Morpeth, Viscount

  Bathurst, Hon. Allen Benjamin

  Gorst, Rt. Hon. Sir John Eldon

  Morrell, George Herbert

  Beach,Rt.Hn.Sir MichaelHicks

  Goschen, Hon. George Joachim

  Morrison, James Archibald

  Bentinck, Lord Henry C.

  Goulding, Edward Alfred

  Morton, Arthur H. Aylmer

  Bhownaggree, Sir M. M.

  Gray.Ernest (West Ham)

  Mount, William Arthur

  Bigwood, James

  Greene, Henry D. (Shrewsbury)

  Murray, Charles J. (Coventry)

  Bill, Charles

  Grenfell, William Henry

  Murray, Col. Wyndham (Bath)

  Bingham, Lord

  Gretton, John

  Nicholson, William Graham

  Blundell, Colonel Henry

  Groves, James Grimble

  O'Neill, Hon. Robert Torrens

  Bond, Edward

  Hall, Edward Marshall

  Palmer, Sir Walter (Salisbury)

  Boscawen, Arthur Griffith

  Halsey, Rt. Hon. Thomas F.

  Pease,HerbertPike(Darlington)

  Bousfield, William Robert

  Hamilton,Marq.of(L'nd'nderry

  Pemberton, John S. G.

  Brassey, Albert

  Hardy, Laurence(Kent,Ashford

  Percy, Earl

  Brodrick, Rt. Hon. St. John

  Harris, F.Leverton (Tynem'th

  Pierpoint, Robert

  Brown, Sir Alex. H. (Shropsh.)

  Haslam, Sir Alfred S.

  Pilkington, Colonel Richard

  Brymer, William Ernest

  Hay, Hon. Claude George

  Platt-Higgins, Frederick

  Bull, William James

  Heath, Arthur Howard (Hanley

  Plummer, Sir Walter R.

  Butcher, John George

  Heath,Sir James(Staffords.NW

  Powell, Sir Francis Sharp

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

  Helder, Sir Augustus

  Pretyman, Ernest George

  Carlile, William Walter

  Henderson, Sir A. (Stafford, W.

  Pryce-Jones,Lt.-Col. Edward

  Carson, Rt. Hon. Sir Edw. H.

  Hermon-Hodge, Sir Robert

  Purvis, Robert

  Cautley, Henry Strother

  Hill, Henry Staveley

  Randles, John S.

  Cavendish,V.C.W. (Derbyshire

  Hope,J.F.(Sheffield,Brightside

  Rankin, Sir James

  Cayzer, Sir Charles William

  Hornby, Sir William Henry

  Rasch, Sir Frederic Carne

  Cecil, Evelyn (Aston Manor)

  Hoult, Joseph

  Ratcliff, R. F.

  Cecil, Lord Hugh (Greenwich)

  Houston, Robert Paterson

  Reed, Sir Edw.James (Cardiff)

  Chamberlain,Rt. Hn. J. (Birm.

  Howard, John(Kent,Faversh'm

  Reid, James (Greenock)

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

  Howard, J.(Midd., Tottenham)

  Remnant, James Farquharson

  Chamberlayne,T.(S'thampton

  Hozier, Hon. James HenryCecil

  Renwick, George

  Chapman, Edward

  Hunt, Rowland

  Roberts, Samuel (Sheffield)

  Clare, Octavius Leigh

  Hutton, John (Yorks. N.R.)

  Robertson, Herbert (Hackney)

  Clive, Captain Percy A.

  Jeffreys, Rt. Hon. Arthur Fred.

  Rolleston, Sir John F. L.

  Coates, Edward Feetham

  Jessel, Captain Herbert Merton

  Rutherford, John (Lancashire)

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

  Kenyon, Hn. Geo. T.(Denbigh)

  Rutherford, W. W. (Liverpool)

  Coghill, Douglas Harry

  Keswick, William

  Sackville, Col. S. G. Stopford-

  Colston, Chas. Edw. H. Athole

  Kimber, Sir Henry

  Sadler, Col. Sir Samuel Alex.

  Compton, Lord Alwyne

  Knowles, Sir Lees

  Samuel,SirHarryS.(Limehouse

  Corbett, T. L. (Down, North)

  Laurie, Lieut.-General

  Saunderson,Rt.Hn.Col. Edw.J

  Crossley, Rt. Hon. Sir Savile

  Law,Andrew Bonar (Glasgow)

  Sharpe, William Edward T.

  Dalrymple, Sir Charles

  Lawrence,Wm.F. (Liverpool)

  Sinclair, Louis (Romford)

  Davenport, William Bromley-

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

  Skewes-Cox, Sir Thomas

  Davies,Sir Horatio D(Chatham

  Lawson,John Grant(Yorks.NR

  Sloan, Thomas Henrv

  Dickson, Charles Scott

  Lee,Arthur H(Hants.,Fareham

  Smith, Abel H.(Hertford,East)

  Disraeli, Coningsby Ralph

  Lees, Sir Elliott (Birkenhead)

  SmithRtHnJ Parker(Lanarks

  Dixon-Hartland,Sir FredDixon

  Legge, Col. Hon. Heneage

  Stanley, Hon Arthur(Ormskirk

  Dorington,Rt.Hn. Sir John E.

  Llewellyn, Evan Henry

  Stanley, Rt Hon. Lord(Lancs.)

  Doughty, Sir George

  Long, Col. Charles W.(Evesham

  Stewart, Sir Mark J. M'Taggart

  Douglas, Rt. Hon. A. Akers-

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

  Stirling-Maxwell, Sir John M.

  Duke, Henry Edward

  Lonsdale, John Brownlee

  Stock, James Henry

  Dyke,Rt. Hn. Sir WilliamHart

  Lowe, Francis William

  Stone, Sir Benjamin

  Faber, Edmund B. (Hants, W.)

  Loyd, Archie Kirkman

  Stroyan, John

  188

  189

  Talbot, Lord E. (Chichester)

  Warde, Colonel C. E.

  Wrightson, Sir Thomas

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

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

  Wylie, Alexander

  Thornton, Percy M.

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

  Yerburgh, Robert Armstrong

  Tollemache, Henry James

  Whiteley,H.(Ashton und. Lyne

  Tomlinson, Sir Wm. Edw. M.

  Whitmore, Charles Algernon

  TELLERS FOE THE AYES—Sir

  Tuff, Charles

  Willoughby de Eresby, Lord

  Alexander Acland-Hood and

  Vincent, Col.SirC.E.H.(Sheffield

  Wilson, John (Glasgow)

  Viscount Valentia.

  Vincent, Sir Edgar (Exeter)

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

  Walrond,Rt.Hn. Sir William H.

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

  NOES.

  Allen, Charles P.

  Hayden, John Patrick

  Priestley, Arthur

  Asquith, Rt. Hon. Her. Henry

  Helme, Norval Watson

  Rea, Russell

  Atherley-Jones, L.

  Hemphill, Rt. Hon. Charles H.

  Reckitt, Harold James

  Baker, Joseph Allen

  Henderson, Arthur (Durham)

  Redmond, John E. (Waterford

  Barry, E. (Cork, S.)

  Higham, John Sharp

  Richards, Thomas

  Bell, Richard

  Hutchinson, Dr. Charles Fredk.

  Rickett, J. Compton

  Black, Alexander William

  Isaacs, Rufus Daniel

  Roberts, John Bryn (Eifion)

  Bolton, Thomas Dolling

  Jacoby, James Alfred

  Roberts, John H. (Denbighs)

  Bright, Allan Heywood

  Joicey, Sir James

  Roe, Sir Thomas

  Broadhurst, Henry

  Jones,DavidBrynmor(Swanse a

  Rose, Charles Day

  Burt, Thomas

  Jones, Leif (Appleby)

  Samuel, Herbert L. (Cleveland)

  Buxton, N. E. (York, NR, Whitby

  Jones, William (Carnarvonshire

  Samuel, S. M. (Whitechapel)

  Buxton, SydneyCharles (Poplar

  Jordan, Jeremiah

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

  Caldwell, James

  Kennedy, P. J. (Westmeath,N.)

  Shackleton, David James

  Causton, Richard Knight

  Kitson, Sir James

  Shaw, Thomas (Hawick B.)

  Cawley, Frederick

  Lambert, George

  Shipman, Dr. John G.

  Channing, Francis Allston

  Lamont, Norman

  Slack, John Bamford

  Clancy, John Joseph

  Langley, Batty

  Smith, Samuel, (Flint)

  Crean, Eugene

  Lawson, Sir Wilfrid (Cornwall)

  Soames, Arthur Wellesley

  Crooks, William

  Leese, Sir Joseph F.(Accrington

  Soares, Ernest J.

  Delany, William

  Lloyd-George, David

  Spencer,RtHn.C.R.(Northants)

  Dobbie, Joseph

  Lough, Thomas

  Sullivan, Donal

  Doogan, P. C.

  Lundon, W.

  Taylor, Theodore C. (Radcliffe

  Edwards, Frank

  Lyell, Charles Henry

  Thomas, Sir A. (Glamorgan, E.)

  Ellice,CaptEC(S.Andrw's Bghs

  MacNeill, John Gordon Swift

  Thomas, DavidAlfred(Merthyr

  Emmott, Alfred

  M'Arthur, William (Cornwall)

  Thompson,Dr.EC(Monaghan,N

  Evans,Sir FrancisH.(Maidstone

  M'Fadden, Edward.

  Toulmin, George

  Eve, Harry Trelawney

  M'Kean, John

  Ure, Alexander

  Fenwick, Charles

  Morgan, J. Lloyd (Carmarthen)

  Walton, John Lawson (Leeds, S.)

  Findlay,Alexander(Lanark,NE

  Moss, Samuel

  Weir, James Galloway

  Flavin, Michael Joseph

  Moulton, John Fletcher

  White, Luke (York, E.R.)

  Flynn, James Christopher

  Murphy, John

  Whiteley, George (York, W.R.)

  Foster, Sir Walter (Derby Co.)

  Murnaghan, George

  Whitley, J. H. (Halifax)

  Fowler, Rt. Hon. Sir Henry

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

  Whittaker, Thomas Palmer

  Fuller, J. M. F.

  Norton, Capt. Cecil William

  Wilson, Henry J. (York. W.R

  Gladstone, Rt.Hn. HerbertJohn

  O'Brien,Kendal(Tipperary Mid

  Wilson, John (Falkirk)

  Grant, Corrie

  O'Brien, Partick (Kilkenny)

  Woodhouse, Sir J.T(Huddersf'd

  Guest, Hon. Ivor Churchill

  O'Connor,James (Wicklow, W.)

  Young, Samuel

  Haldane, Rt. Hon. Richard B.

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

  Yoxall, James Henry

  Hammond, John

  Parrott, William

  TELLERS FOR. THE NOES—

  Harcourt, Lewis

  Partington, Oswald

  Mr. Cremer and Mr. Barran

  Hardie,J. Keir(Merthyr Tydvil)

  Pirie, Duncan V.

  Harrington, Timothy

  Power, Patrick Joseph

  Second Resolution.
  Question put, "That this House doth agree with the Committee in the said Resolution."
  The House divided:—Ayes, 221; Noes, 123. (Division List No. 335.)

  AYES.

  Agg-Gardner, James Tynte

  Arnold-Forster, Rt.Hn.HughO.

  Bagot, Capt. Josceline FitzRoy

  Allhusen,Augustus Henry Eden

  Arrol, Sir William

  Bailey, James (Walworth)

  Anson, Sir William Reynell

  Atkinson, Rt. Hon. John

  Baird, John George Alexander

  Arkwright, John Stanhope

  Aubrey-Fletcher, Rt.Hon SirH.

  Balcarres, Lord

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

  Gore, Hon. S. F. Ormsby-

  Mount, William Arthur

  Balfour,Rt Hn GeraldW.(Leeds

  Gorst, Rt. Hon. Sir John Eldon

  Murray, Charles J. (Coventry)

  Balfour, Kenneth R. (Christch.

  Goschen, Hon. George Joachim

  Murray, Col. Wyndham (Bath

  Banbury, Sir Frederick George

  Goulding, Edward Alfred

  Nicholson, William Graham

  Banner, John S. Harmood-

  Gray, Ernest (West Ham)

  O'Neill, Hon. Robert Torrens

  Bathurst, Hon. Allen Benjamin

  Greene, Henry D. (Shrewsbury)

  Palmer, Sir Walter (Salisbury)

  Beach, Rt.Hn.SirMichael Hicks

  Grenfell, William Henry

  Pease, HerbertPike(Darlington

  Bentinck, Lord Henry C.

  Gretton, John

  Pemberton, John S. G.

  Bhownaggree, Sir M. M.

  Groves, James Grimble

  Percy, Earl

  Bigwood, James

  Hall, Edward Marshall

  Pierpoint, Robert

  Bill, Charles

  Halsey, Rt. Hon. Thomas F.

  Pilkington, Colonel Richard

  Bingham, Lord

  Hamilton, Marq.of(L'donderry

  Platt-Higgins, Frederick

  Blundell, Colonel Henry

  Hardy, Laurence(Kent,Ashf'rd

  Plummer, Sir Walter R.

  Bond, Edward

  Harris, F. Leverton (Tynem'th

  Powell, Sir Francis Sharp

  Boscawen, Arthur Griffith-

  Haslam, Sir Alfred S.

  Pretyman, Ernest George

  Bousfield, William Robert

  Hay, Hon. Claude George

  Pryce-Jones, Lt.-Col. Edward

  Brassey, Albert

  Heath, ArthurHoward(Hanley)

  Purvis, Robert

  Brodrick, Rt. Hon. St. John

  Heath, SirJames(Staffords.NW

  Randles, John S.

  Brown, Sir Alex. H. (Shropsh.)

  Holder, Sir Augustus

  Rankin, Sir James

  Brymer, William Ernest

  Henderson, Sir A.(Stafford, W.)

  Rasch, Sir Frederic Carne

  Bull, William James

  Hermon-Hodge, Sir Robert T.

  Ratcliff, R. F.

  Butcher, John George

  Hill, Henry Staveley

  Reed,Sir Edw.James(Cardiff

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

  Hope, JF(Sheffield,Brightside

  Reid, James (Greenock)

  Carlile, William Walter

  Hornby, Sir William Henry

  Remnant, James Farquharson

  Carson, Rt. Hon. Sir Edw. H.

  Hoult, Joseph

  Renwick, George

  Cautley, Henry Strother

  Howard, John(Kent Faversham

  Roberts Samuel, (Sheffield)

  Cavendish, V. C. W.(Derbyshire

  Howard, J. (Midd.,Tottenham)

  Robertson, Herbert (Hackney)

  Cayzer, Sir Charles William

  Hozier, Hn. James Henry Cecil

  Rolleston, Sir John F. L.

  Cecil, Evelyn (Aston Manor)

  Hunt, Rowland

  Rutherford, John (Lancashire)

  Cecil, Lord Hugh (Greenwich)

  Hutton, John (Yorks., N.R.)

  Rutherford. W. W. (Liverpool)

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

  Jeffreys, Rt.Hon. Arthur Fred.

  Sackville, Col. S. G. Stopford-

  Chamberlain,Rt Hn JA.(Worc.)

  Jessel, Captain Herbert Merton

  Sadler, Col. Sir Samuel Alex.

  Chamberlayne, T.(S'thampton)

  Kenyon, Hon. Geo.T(Denbigh)

  Samuel,Sir HarryS.(Limehouse

  Chapman, Edward

  Keswick, William

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

  Clare, Octavius Leigh

  Kimber, Sir Henry

  Sharpe, William Edward T.

  Clive, Captain Percy A.

  Kuowles, Sir Lees

  Sinclair, Louis (Romford)

  Coates, Edward Feetham

  Laurie, Lieut.-General

  Skewes-Cox, Sir Thomas

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

  Law, Andrew Bonar (Glasgow)

  Sloan, Thomas Henry

  Coghill, Douglas Harry

  Lawrence, Wm. F. (Liverpool)

  Smith,Abel H. (Hertford,East)

  Colston, Chat. Edw. H. Athole

  Lawson, HnH.L.W.(Mile End)

  Smith, Rt HnJ.Parker(Lanark.

  Compton, Lord Alwyne

  Lawson, JohnGrant(YorksN.R

  Stanley, Hon.Arthur(Ormskirk

  Corbett, T. L. (Down, North)

  Lee, ArthurH(Hants.,Fareham

  Stanley, Rt. Hon. Lord (Lancs.

  Crossley, Rt. Hon. Sir Savile

  Lees, Sir Elliott (Birkenhead)

  Stewart, Sir Mark J.M Taggart

  Dalrymple, Sir Charles

  Legge, Col. Hon. Heneage

  Stirling-Maxwell, Sir John M

  Davenport, W. Bromley-

  Llewellyn, Evan Henry

  Stock, James Henry

  Davies, SirHoratioD.(Chatham

  Long, Col.CharlesW.(Evesham)

  Stone, Sir Benjamin

  Dickson, Charles Scott

  Long, RtHn.Walter(Bristol, S.)

  Stroyan, John

  Disraeli, Coningsby Ralph

  Lonsdale, John Brownlee

  Talbot, Lord E. (Chichester)

  Dorington, Rt.Hn. Sir John E.

  Lowe, Francis William

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

  Doughty, Sir George

  Loyd, Archie Kirkman

  Thornton, Percy M.

  Douglas, Rt. Hon. A. Akers-

  Lucas, Col. Francis (Lowestoft)

  Tollemache, Henry James

  Duke, Henry Edward

  Lucas, Reginald J.(Portsmouth

  Tomlinson, Sir Wm. Edw. M.

  Dyke, Rt.Hn. SirWilliam Hart

  Lyttelton, Rt. Hon. Alfred

  Tuff, Charles

  Faber, Edmund B. (Hants, W.)

  Macdona, John Cumming

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

  Faber, George Denison (York)

  MacIver, David (Liverpool)

  Vincent, Sir Edgar (Exeter)

  Fellowes, RtHn.AilwynEdward

  Maconochie, A. W.

  Walrond, Rt.Hn.Sir WilliamH.

  Fergusson, Rt Hn Sir J. (Manc'r

  M'Killop, James (Stirlingshire)

  Warde, Colonel C. E.

  Fielden, Edward Brocklehurst

  Majendie, James A. H.

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

  Finch, Rt. Hon. George H.

  Marks, Harry Hananel

  Whiteley, H.(Ashton und.Lyne

  Finlay, Rt Hn Sir RB.(Inv'rn'ss

  Martin, Richard Biddulph

  Whitmore, Charles Algernon

  Firbank, Sir Joseph Thomas

  Massey-Mainwaring, Hn. W. F.

  Willoughby de Eresby, Lord

  Fisher, William Hayes

  Maxwell,W.J.H (Dumfriesshire

  Wilson, John (Glasgow)

  Fitzroy, Hon Edward Algernon

  Mildmay. Francis Bingham

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

  Flannery, Sir Fortescue

  Milvain, Thomas

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

  Flower, Sir Ernest

  Molesworth, Sir Lewis

  Wrightson, Sir Thomas

  Forster, Henry William

  Moon, Edward Robert Pacy

  Wylie, Alexander

  Gardner, Ernest

  Morgan,David J. (Walthamstow

  Yerburgh, Robert Armstrong

  Gibbs, Hon. A. G. H.

  Morpeth, Viscount

  Godson, Sir AugustusFrederick

  Morrell, George Herbert

  TELLERS FOR THE AYES—Sir

  Gordon, J. (Londonderry, S'th

  Morrison, James Archibald

  Alexander Acland-Hood and

  Gordon, MajEvans (T'rH'mlets

  Morton, Arthur H. Aylmer

  Viscount Valentia.

  192

  193

  NOES.

  Allen, Charles P.

  Hemphill, Rt. Hon. Charles H.

  Pirie, Duncan V.

  Asquith, Rt. Hn. Herb. Henry

  Henderson, Arthur (Durham)

  Power, Patrick Joseph

  Atherley-Jones, L.

  Higham, John Sharp

  Priestley, Arthur

  Baker, Joseph Allen

  Holland, Sir William Henry

  Rea, Russell

  Barran, Rowland Hirst

  Hutchinson, Rr. Charles Fredk.

  Reckitt, Harold James

  Barry, E. (Cork, S.)

  Isaacs, Rufus Daniel

  Redmond, John E. (Waterford)

  Bell, Richard

  Jacoby, James Alfred

  Richards, Thomas

  Black, Alexander William

  Joicey, Sir James

  Rickett, J. Compton

  Bolton, Thomas Dolling

  Jones, D. Brynmor (Swansea)

  Roberts, John Bryn (Eifion)

  Bright, Allan Heywood

  Jones, Leif (Appleby)

  Roberts, John H. (Denbigbs.)

  Broadhurst, Henry

  Jones, William (Carnarvonshire

  Roe, Sir Thomas

  Burt, Thomas

  Jordan, Jeremiah

  Rose, Charles Day

  Buxton, NE(York,N.R,Whitby

  Kennedy, P.J.(Westmeath,N.)

  Samuel, Herbert L.(Cleveland)

  Buxton, Sydney Chas. (Poplar)

  Kitson, Sir James

  Samuel, S. M. (Whitechapel)

  Caldwell, James

  Lambert, George

  Seely,Maj.J.E.B.(Isleof Wight)

  Causton, Richard Knight

  Lamont, Norman

  Shackleton, David James

  Channing, Francis Allston

  Langley, Batty

  Shaw, Thomas (Hawick, B.)

  Clancy, John Joseph

  Lawson, Sir Wilfrid (Cornwall)

  Shipman, Dr. John G.

  Crean, Eugene

  Leese, Sir Jos. F. (Accrington)

  Sinclair, John (Forfarshire)

  Cremer, William Randal

  Lloyd-George, David

  Slack, John Bamford

  Crooks, William

  Lough, Thomas

  Smith, Samuel (Flint)

  Delany, William

  Lundon, W.

  Soares, Ernest J.

  Dobbie, Joseph

  Lyell, Charles Henry

  Spencer, Rt.Hn.C.R(Northants

  Doogan, P. C.

  MacNeill, John Gordon Swift

  Sullivan, Donal

  Edwards, Frank

  MacVeagh, Jeremiah

  Taylor, Theodore C. (Radcliffe)

  Emmott, Alfred

  M'Arthur, William (Cornwall)

  Thomas, D. Alfred (Merthyr)

  Eve, Harry Trelawney

  M'Fadden, Edward

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

  Fenwick, Charles

  M'Kean, John

  Toulmin, George

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

  M'Kenna, Reginald

  Ure, Alexander

  Flavin, Michael Joseph

  Morgan, J.Lloyd (Carmarthen)

  Walton, J. Lawson (Leeds, S.)

  Flynn, James Christopher

  Moss, Samuel

  Weir, James Galloway

  Foster, Sir Walter (Derby Co.)

  Moulton, John Fletcher

  White, Luke (York, E. R.)

  Fowler, Rt. Hon. Sir Henry

  Murnaghan, George

  Whiteley, George (York, W.R.)

  Gladstone, Rt. Hn. Herb. John

  Murphy, John

  Whitley, J. H. (Halifax)

  Guest, Hon. Ivor Churchill

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

  Whittaker, Thomas Palmer

  Haldane, Rt. Hon. Richard B.

  Norton, Capt. Cecil William

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

  Hammond, John

  O'Brien, K. (Tipperary Mid.)

  Wilson, John (Falkirk

  Harcourt, Lewis

  O'Brien, Patrick (Kilkenny)

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

  Hardie,J. Keir(Merthyr Tydvil)

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

  Young, Samuel

  Harrington, Timothy

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

  Hayden, John Patrick

  Parrott, William

  TELLERS FOR THE NOES—Mr.

  Helme, Norval Watson

  Partington, Oswald

  Corrie Grant and Mr.Cawley.

  Resolutions agreed to.

  WAYS AND MEANS [2ND AUGUST].
  Resolutions reported.
  1. "That, towards making good the Supply granted to His Majesty for the service of the year ended on the 31st day of March, 1904, the sum of £1,445 17s. 4d. be granted out of the Consolidated Fund of the United Kingdom."
  2. "That, towards making good the Supply granted to His Majesty for the service of the year ending on the 31st day of March, 1906, the sum of £66,495,748 be granted out of the Consolidated Fund of the United Kingdom."
  Bill ordered to be brought in by the Chairman of Ways and Means, Mr. Chancellor of the Exchequer, and Mr. Victor Cavendish.

  CONSOLIDATED FUND (APPROPRIA- TION) BILL.
  "To apply certain sums out of the Consolidated Fund to the service of the years ending on the 31st day of March, 1904 and 1906, and to appropriate the Supplies granted in this session of Parliament."
  Presented accordingly, and read the first time; to be read a second time to-morrow.

  EXPIRING LAWS CONTINUANCE BILL.
  Considered in Committee.
  (In the Committee.)
  [Mr. GRANT LAWSON (Yorkshire, N.R., Thirsk) in the Chair.]
  Clause 1:—
  MR. FLYNNsaid the effect of the Amendment he desired to move would be to continue the Acts mentioned in the schedule until May 1st next, with the result that, instead of having the Expiring Laws Continuance Bill brought in at the fag end of the session, it would have to be introduced earlier in the year, when memories were fresh and proper attention could be paid to it. It was absurd to attempt to deal with legislation in the manner proposed by these Bills. The Acts dealt with totally dissimilar subjects, and had been in operation for periods varying from seventy to seven years. If any of them was a good measure why should it not be placed permanently upon the Statute-book? He did not think it was right to introduce a measure of this kind during the last week of the session. If ever
  there was a session when such a Bill as this might have been brought in earlier it was this session. He protested against the system of legislating in this way at the fag end of the session, and he begged to move his Amendment.
  Amendment proposed—
  "In page 1, line 18, to leave out the words 'thirty-first day of December,' and insert the words 'first day of May.'"—(Mr. Flynn.)
  Question proposed, "That the words proposed to be left out stand part of the clause."
  THE ATTORNEY - GENERAL (Sir ROBERT FINLAY,) said he hoped the hon. Member would not press this Amendment to a division, because it would not have the effect which the hon. Member anticipated. The Government could not accept the Amendment, and he asked the House to pass the Bill in its present shape.
  Question put.
  The House divided:—Ayes, 204; Noes, 102. (Division List No. 336.)

  AYES.

  Agg-Gardner, James Tynte

  Butcher, John George

  Fergusson, RtHn.SirJ.(Manc'r)

  Allhusen, Augustus Henry Eden

  Campbell, J.H.M.(DublinUniv.

  Fielden, Edward Brocklehurst

  Anson, Sir William Reynell

  Carson, Rt. Hon. Sir Edw. H.

  Finch, Rt. Hon. George H.

  Arkwright, John Stanhope

  Cautley, Henry Strother

  Finlay, RtHnSirR.B.(Inv'rn'ss)

  Arnold-Forster, Rt Hn.HughO.

  Cavendish, V.C.W.(Derbyshire)

  Firbank, Sir Joseph Thomas

  Arrol, Sir William

  Cayzer, Sir Charles William

  Fisher, William Hayes

  Atkinson, Rt. Hon. John

  Cecil, Evelyn (Aston Manor)

  Fitzroy, Hn. Edward Algernon

  Aubrey-Fletcher, Rt.Hn. Sir H.

  Cecil, Lord Hugh (Greenwich)

  Flannery, Sir Fortescue

  Bagot, Capt. Josceline FitzRoy

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

  Flower, Sir Ernest

  Bailey, James (Walworth)

  Chamberlain, RtHnJ.A.(Worc)

  Forster, Henry William

  Baird, John George Alexander

  Chamberlayne, T.(S'thampton)

  Gardner, Ernest

  Balcarres, Lord

  Chapman, Edward

  Gibbs, Hon. A. G. H.

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

  Clive, Captain Percy A.

  Godson, Sir AugustusFrederick

  Balfour, RtHnGeraldW.(Leeds)

  Coates, Edward Feetham

  Gordon, J. (Londonderry, Sth.)

  Balfour, Kenneth R. (Christch.)

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

  Gordon, MajEvans-(Tr'H'mlets

  Banbury, Sir Frederick George

  Coghill, Douglas Harry

  Goulding, Edward Alfred

  Banner, John S. Harmood-

  Colston, Chas. Edw. H. Athole

  Gray, Ernest (West Ham)

  Bathurst, Hon. Allen Benjamin

  Compton, Lord Alwyne

  Greene, Henry D. (Shrewsbury)

  Beach, Rt.Hn.SirMichaelHicks

  Corbett, T. L. (Down, North)

  Greene, W. Raymond-(Cambs.)

  Bentinck, Lord Henry C.

  Crossley, Rt. Hon. Sir Savile

  Grenfell, William Henry

  Bhownaggree, Sir M. M.

  Dalrymple, Sir Charles

  Gretton, John

  Bigwood, James

  Davenport, William Bromley-

  Groves, James Grimble

  Bill, Charles

  Davies, SirHoratio D.(Chatham)

  Hall, Edward Marshall

  Bingham, Lord

  Dickson, Charles Scott

  Halsey, Rt. Hon. Thomas F.

  Blundell, Colonel Henry

  Disraeli, Coningsby Ralph

  Hamilton, Marq.of(L'donderry)

  Bond, Edward

  Doughty, Sir George

  Hardie, J. Keir (Merthyr Tydvil

  Boscawen, Arthur Griffith-

  Douglas, Rt. Hon. A. Akers-

  Hardy, Laurence(Kent,Ashford

  Brassey, Albert

  Duke, Henry Edward

  Harris, F. Leverton (Tynem'th)

  Brodrick, Rt. Hon. St. John

  Dyke, Rt.Hon.SirWilliamHart

  Haslam, Sir Alfred S.

  Brymer, William Ernest

  Faber, Edmund B. (Hants, W.)

  Hay, Hon. Claude George

  Bull, William James

  Fellowes, Rt.HnAilwynEdward

  Heath, Arthur Howard (Hanley

  Heath,SirJames(Staffords,NW)

  Massey-Mainwaring, Hn. W. F.

  Samuel, SirHarryS(Limehouse)

  Henderson, Sir A. (Stafford, W

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

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

  Hermon-Hodge, Sir Robert T.

  Mildmay, Francis Bingham

  Sharpe, William Edward T.

  Hill, Henry Staveley

  Milvain, Thomas

  Sinclair, Louis (Romford)

  Hope, JF. (Sheffield, Brightside)

  Molesworth, Sir Lewis

  Slona, Thomas Henry

  Hoult, Joseph

  Moon, Edward Robert Pacy

  Smith, Abel H. (Hertford, East)

  Howard, John(Kent, Faversham

  Morgan, David J. (Walthamstow

  Smith, Rt.Hn JParker(Lanarks

  Howard, J. (Midd., Tottenham)

  Morpeth, Viscount

  Stanley, Hn.Arthur (Ormskirk)

  Hozier, Hon. James Henry Cecil

  Morrell, George Herbert

  Stanley, Rt. Hn. Lord (Lancs.)

  Hunt, Rowland

  Mount, William Arthur

  Stewart, Sir Mark J. M Taggart

  Hutton, John (Yorks., N.R.)

  Murray, Charles J. (Coventry)

  Stirling-Maxwell. Sir John M.

  Jeffreys, Rt. Hon. Arthur Fred.

  Murray, Col. Wyndham (Bath)

  Stock, James Henry

  Jessel, Captain Herbert Merton

  Nicholson, William Graham

  Stroyan, John

  Kenyon, Hn. Geo. T.(Denbigh.)

  O'Neill, Hon. Robert Torrens

  Talbot, Lord E. (Chichester)

  Keswick, William

  Pease, HerbertPike(Darlington

  Thornton, Percy M.

  Knowles, Sir Lees

  Pemberton, John S. G.

  Tollemache, Henry James

  Laurie, Lieut-General

  Percy, Earl

  Tomlinson, Sir Wm. Edw. M.

  Law, Andrew Bonar (Glasgow)

  Pilkington, Colonel Richard

  Tuff, Charles

  Lawrence, Wm. F. (Liverpool)

  Platt-Higgins, Frederick

  Vincent, Col.SirC.E.H(Sheffield

  Lawson, Hn.H.L.W. (MileEnd)

  Plummer, Sir Walter R.

  Vincent, Sir Edgar (Exeter)

  Leel Arthur H.(Hants.,Fareham

  Powell, Sir Francis Sharp

  Walrond, Rt.Hn.Sir William H.

  Lees, Sir Elliott (Birkenhead)

  Pretyman, Ernest George

  Warde, Colonel C. E.

  Legge, Col. Hon. Heneage

  Pryce-Jones, Lt.-Col. Edward

  Welby, Lt.-Col.AC E.(Taunton)

  Llewellyn, Evan Henry

  Purvis, Robert

  Welby, Sir CharlesG.E.(Notts.)

  Long, Col.Charles W.(Evesham)

  Randles, John S.

  Whiteley, H.(Ashton und.Lyne)

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

  Rankin, Sir James

  Whitmore, Charles Algernon

  Lonsdale, John Brownlee

  Rasch, Sir Frederic Carne

  Willoughby de Eresby, Lord

  Lowe, Francis William

  Ratcliff, R. F.

  Wilson, John (Glasgow)

  Loyd, Archie Kirkman

  Reed, Sir Edw. James (Cardiff)

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

  Lucas, Col. Francis (Lowestoft)

  Reid, James (Greenock)

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

  Lucas,ReginaldJ.(Portsmouth)

  Remnant, James Farquharson

  Wrightson, Sir Thomas

  Lyttelton, Rt. Hon. Alfred

  Renwick, George

  Wylie, Alexander

  Macdona, John Cumming

  Roberts, Samuel (Sheffield)

  Yerburgh, Robert Armstrong

  MaCIver, David (Liverpool)

  Robertson, Herbert (Hackney)

  Maconochie, A. W.

  Rolleston, Sir John F. L.

  TELLERS FOR THE AYES—

  M'Killop, James (Stirlingshire)

  Rutherford, John (Lancashire)

  Sir Alexander Acland-Hood

  Majendie, James A. H.

  Rutherford, W. W. (Liverpool)

  and Viscount Valentia.

  Harks, Harry Hananel

  Sackville, Col. S. G. Stopford-

  Martin, Richard Biddulph

  Sadler, Col. Sir Samuel Alex.

  NOES.

  Allen, Charles P.

  Harrington, Timothy

  Murphy, John

  Baker, Joseph Allen

  Hayden, John Patrick

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

  Barran, Rowland Hirst

  Helme, Norval Watson

  Norton, Capt. Cecil William

  Barry, E. (Cork, S.)

  Henderson, Arthur (Durham)

  O'Brien, Kendal(TipperaryMid

  Bell, Richard

  Higham, John Sharp

  O'Connor, James (Wicklow,W.)

  Black, Alexander William

  Holland, Sir William Henry

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

  Bolton, Thomas Dolling

  Hutchinson, Dr. Charles Fredk.

  Partington, Oswald

  Bright, Allan Heywood

  Joicey, Sir James

  Pirie, Duncan V.

  Broadhurst, Henry

  Jones, David Brynmor(Swansea

  Power, Patrick Joseph

  Buxton, N.E.(YorkNR,Whitby

  Jones, Leif (Appleby)

  Priestley, Arthur

  Buxton, SydneyCharles(Poplar

  Jones, William (Carnarvonshire

  Reckitt, Harold James

  Caldwell, James

  Jordan, Jeremiah

  Redmond, John E. (Waterford)

  Cawley, Frederick

  Kennedy, P. J. (Westmeath,N.)

  Richards, Thomas

  Channing, Francis Allston

  Lambert George

  Rickett, J. Compton

  Clancy, John Joseph

  Lamont, Norman

  Roberts, John Bryn (Eifion)

  Crean, Eugene

  Langley, Batty

  Roberts, John H. (Denbighs.)

  Cremer, William Randal

  Lawson, Sir Wilfrid (Cornwall)

  Roe, Sir Thomas

  Crooks, William

  Leese, SirJosephF.(Accrington)

  Rose, Charles Day

  Cullinan, J.

  Lloyd-George, David

  Samuel, Herbert L.(Cleveland)

  Delany, William

  Lough, Thomas

  Samuel, S. M. (Whitechapel)

  Dobbie, Joseph

  Lundon, W.

  Seely, Maj.J.E.B.(IsleofWight)

  Doogan, P. C.

  Lyell, Charles Henry

  Shackleton, David James

  Edwards, Frank

  MacNeill, John Gordon Swift

  Shaw, Thomas (Hawick B.)

  Fenwick, Charles

  MacVeagh, Jeremiah

  Shipman, Dr. John G.

  Findlay, Alexander (LanarkNE

  M'Fadden, Edward

  Sinclair, John (Forfarshire)

  Flavin, Michael Joseph

  M'Kean, John

  Slack, John Bamford

  Foster, Sir Walter (Derby Co.)

  M'Kenna, Reginald

  Grant, Corrie

  Morgan, J. Lloyd (Carmarthen)

  Soares, Ernest J.

  Guest, Hon. Ivor Churchill

  Moss, Samuel

  Sullivan, Donal

  Hammond, John

  Murnaghan, George

  Taylor, Theodore C. (Radcliffe)

  198

  199

  Thomas, David Alfred (Merthyr

  Whiteley, George (York, W.R.)

  Young, Samuel

  Thompson, DrEC(Monaghan N.

  Whitley, J.H. (Halifax)

  Toulmin, George

  Whittaker, Thomas Palmer

  TELLERS FOR THE NOES—

  Ure, Alexander

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

  Mr. Flynn and Mr. Patrick

  Weir, James Galloway

  Wilson, John (Falkirk)

  O'Brien.

  White, Luke (York, E.R.)

  Woodhouse, Sir JT(Huddersfi'd

  MR. SOARESmoved to omit Sub-section 2 of Clause 1, which proposed that amending Acts, even although not mentioned in the schedule, should be continued. He protested against being asked to renew laws of which they were not even told the name. He hoped the Attorney-General would be able to furnish them with a satisfactory reason as to why this was necessary.
  Amendment proposed—
  "In page 1, line 20, to leave out Sub-section 2."—(Mr. Soares.)
  Question proposed, "That the words proposed to be left out stand part of the clause."
  SIR ROBERT FINLAYsaid he did not think the hon. Member quite appreciated the importance of this sub-section. The proposal of the hon. Gentleman was preposterous, for the sub-section was necessary to continue Acts named in the schedule, and the words to which the hon. Gentleman referred were merely inserted lest any amending enactment might have been overlooked.
  MAJOR SEELYprotested against the looseness of this method, and said it ought to be certain that no amending enactment was overlooked. He should not have taken part in the debate but for the extraordinary reply given by the Attorney - General, which was certainly not the kind of reply to which the Committee had been accustomed. That reply had resolved itself
  200
  simply into a gross attack upon his hon. friend the Member for Donegal. [MINISTERIAL cries of "Oh, oh!"]
  MR. SWIFT MACNEILL,: And I have not recovered yet.
  MAJOR SEELYsaid he wished to defend the principle which had been put forward by the mover of this Amendment. The contention of the Attorney-General was a most absurd one.
  SIR ROBERT FINLAYsaid it was possible that some amending Act might have been overlooked, and it was important to continue not only those in the schedule, but also any Act that might have been omitted.
  MAJOR SEELYsaid that he himself had been called to the Bar, and he knew that, although the statutes filled several volumes, it was not beyond the industry of the Attorney-General to find out what they contained. The State paid £32,000 a year for the Law Officers of the Crown, and if they could not do this work themselves they might at least set others to look through the statutes to find out what amending Acts should be put in the schedule.
  MR. WEIRsaid he was not surprised at the Answer given by the Attorney-General, who had lately been engaged in the discussion of Church matters. Of course he fell back on what were called "consuetudina practices." When large salaries were paid to the Law Officers of the Crown,

  201
  why should not the work be done in a satisfactory manner? It was no satisfaction to him to be told that there might be some Acts overlooked. The Law Officers were well paid to do the work thoroughly, and the country was entitled to have it properly done, and not to have it treated in this shipshod manner.
  MR. SOARESasked leave to withdraw the Amendment.
  Amendment, by leave, withdrawn.
  Clause 1 agreed to.
  Schedule.
  MR. SHACKLETONmoved to omit the first Act mentioned, the Linen Manufacturers (Ireland) Act, 1835, and the amending Acts. He did not think many Members of the House had examined this particular Act, and he was certain that the Law Officers of the Crown had not gone into it carefully or they would never allow it to be in the list of Acts to be continued. He had read through the Act, and it was well that the House should know what kind of legislation they were continuing from time to time. This was a law in restriction of trade, and if it was obsolete it should not be allowed to remain on the Statute-book. It was absolutely impossible to carry out a single clause of the Act. One of the provisions required that all cloth exposed for sale should be of equal cleanliness and quality. How could any linen manufacturer comply with that condition? It was further enacted that all flax or linen yarn should be exposed for sale between eight o'clock in the morning and two o'clcck in the afternoon. It was absurd to restrict dealing to those hours. The reason for
  202
  passing the Act originally was, he believed, to restrict Irish trade, but he was glad to know that the linen industry of Ireland had withstood all the restrictions which the House had endeavoured to impose. The hon. Member referred to the requirements of the Act in regard to the way in which bundles of linen were to be made up, and the limitations as to widths, and stated that the whole thing was a farce. The Act also required that linen should be of equal fineness. It was impossible to spin linen or cotton of equal fineness throughout. He asked the Attorney-General or the Solicitor-General to say what position a manufacturer would be in if he bargained to sell 10,000 pieces at the market price ruling at the time the bargain was entered into, and if three months later the price went down and the buyer came forward and broke the bargain on the plea that the linen was not in conformity with the Act of Parliament. It was a fine point of law, and it had never been decided. The Act was an absurdity and should now be allowed to lapse.
  Amendment proposed—
  "In page 2, to leave out lines 7 to 10."—(Mr. Shackleton.)
  Question proposed, "That the lines proposed to be left out stand part of the schedule."
  THE CHIEF SECRETARY FOR IRELAND (Mr. WALTER LONG,)said the hon. Member who moved the Amendment had been unable to produce a single instance of practical injustice as the result of this enactment. The whole speech of the hon. Gentleman was

  203
  intended to show that this was an Act which seriously interfered with the trade carried on by linen manufacturers. He had asked a Question as to what would happen in a case where a buyer endeavoured to get out of a bargain three months after it was made when there had been a fall in price. This Act would not interfere in the smallest degree with the carrying out of the bargain. [Cries of "Yes."] The hon. Member was wrong. He ignored the fact that this Act only had to do with the sale of goods in the open market. How on earth did that effect the linen merchants in Belfast? With all his knowledge the hon. Member, when he referred to this Act of Parliament, did not represent either the manufacturers or the operatives themselves. He could not give a single instance of hardship. [An HON. MEMBER: The Act is obsolete.] If that allegation was correct why not leave it? If it was true that all the provisions were not enforced it did not follow that it was not desirable to maintain parts of the Act He submitted that, in the absence of any evidence that injustice was done, and in the absence also of any petition against the Act from the manufacturers or the operatives, the Act should be renewed, because, it contained some sections which might be of value.
  MR. CAWLEYobserved that the right hon. Gentleman had not told the Committee what parts of the Act would be of any use. The Act, if put in force, might do serious injury to many people in the textile trades. If any man wanted to get out of a bargain he could plead the Act, and could get out of it.
  MR. WALTER LONGsaid that was absolutely incorrect. This Act only applied to goods sold in the open market.
  MR. CAWLEYsaid the right hon. Gentleman did not specify any portion; of the Act which could be put in force with advantage to anybody. The Act was of no use at all.
  *MR. HIGHAMsaid there was not a single clause in the five Acts now to be continued that was operative to-day. The Act under discussion was full of absurdities, and the amending Acts, which had been stated to be improvements on the original Act, only make matters worse. For instance, in the Act of 1835 the provisions and penalties were directed principally at the linen trade. Perhaps the most absurb provision was that which compelled either the weaver or the manufacturer to write in full his name and residence at each end of each piece. The Act of 1840 repealed nothing but gave power to constables and other officers to search houses without warrants and to apprehend persons even in the streets on suspicion and to lock them up. The Act of 1842 extended the provisions to cotton, hemp, flax, jute, woollens, and silk. The Act of 1844 in creased the hours during which certain actions became violations of the law. The Act of 1867, though short, extended still more of the provisions to the kindred textile trades. Then again, there were three other Acts of Parliament not named in the schedule which affected the original Act by repealing certain of the clauses. The Act of 37 and 38 Vict, repealed seven clauses-The Act of 53 and 54 Vict, repealed

  205
  one clause, and the Act of 54 and 55 Vict, also repealed one clause. But in spite of all this he asserted that if a man with an obstinate turn of mind cared to take the matter up he could get convictions against every employer and every operative engaged in the textile
  trades of Ireland. It was preposterous that such Acts should be left on the Statute-book.
  Question put.
  The Committee divided:—Ayes, 186; Noes, 99. (Division List No. 337.)

  AYES.

  Agg-Gardner, James Tynte

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

  M'Killop, James (Stirlingshire)

  Allhusen, Augustus HenryEden

  Fielden, Edward Brocklehurst

  Majendie, James A. H.

  Anson, Sir William Reynell

  Finch, Rt. Hon. George H.

  Marks, Harry Hananel

  Arkwright, John Stanhope

  Finlay, Rt HnSir RB.(Inv'rn'ss

  Martin, Richard Biddulph

  Arnold-Forster,Rt.Hn.Hugh O.

  Firbank, Sir Joseph Thomas

  Massey-Mainwaring, Hn. W. F.

  Arrol, Sir William

  Fisher, William Hayes

  Maxwell, W.J.H.(Dumfriesshire

  Atkinson, Rt. Hon. John

  Fitzroy, Hon.Edward Algernon

  Mildmay, Francis Bingham

  Aubrey-Fletcher, Rt.Hon.Sir H

  Flannery, Sir Fortescue

  Milvain, Thomas

  Bagot, Capt. Josceline FitzRoy

  Flower, Sir Ernest

  Molesworth, Sir Lewis

  Bailey, James (Walworth)

  Forster, Henry William

  Moon, Edward Robert Pacy

  Baird, John George Alexander

  Gardner, Ernest

  Morgan, David J(Walthamstow)

  Balcarres, Lord

  Gibbs, Hon. A. G. H.

  Morpeth, Viscount

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

  Godson, Sir Augustus Frederick

  Morrell, George Herbert

  Balfour, Rt Hn Gerald W.(Leeds

  Gordon, J.(Londonderry,South

  Mount, William Arthur

  Balfour, Kenneth R. (Christch.

  Goulding, Edward Alfred

  Murray, Charles J. (Coventry)

  Banner, John S. Harmood-

  Gray, Ernest (West Ham)

  Murray, Col. Wyndham (Bath)

  Bathurst, Hon. Allen Benjamin

  Greene, Henry D.(Shrewsbury)

  Nicholson, William Graham

  Beach, Rt.Hn Sir Michael Hicks

  Greene, W. Raymond-(Cambs.)

  O'Neill, Hon. Robert Torrens

  Bentinck, Lord Henry C.

  Grenfell, William Henry

  Pease,HerbertPike(Darlington)

  Bhownaggree, Sir M. M.

  Gretton, John

  Pemberton, John S. G.

  Bigwood, James

  Groves, James Grimble

  Percy, Earl

  Bingham, Lord

  Hamilton, Marq. of (L'donderry)

  Pilkington, Colonel Richard

  Blundell, Colonel Henry

  Hardy, Laurence (Kent Ashford

  Platt-Higgins, Frederick

  Bond, Edward

  Harris, F. Leverton (Tynem'th

  Plummer, Sir Walter R.

  Boscawen, Arthur Griffith-

  Haslam, Sir Alfred L.

  Powell, Sir Francis Sharp

  Brassey, Albert

  Hay, Hon. Claude George

  Pretyman, Ernest George

  Brodrick, Rt. Hon. St. John

  Heath, Arthur Howard(Hanley

  Pryce-Jones, Lt. Col. Edward

  Brymer, William Ernest

  Heath, SirJames(Staffords. NW

  Purvis, Robert

  Bull, William James

  Henderson, Sir A. (Stafford, W.)

  Randles, John S.

  Butcher, John George

  Hermon-Hodoe, Sir Robert T.

  Rankin, Sir James

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

  Hill, Henry Staveley

  Rasch, Sir Frederic Carne

  Carson, Rt. Hon. Sir Edw. H.

  Hope,J.F.(Sheffield,Brightside)

  Ratcliff, R. F.

  Cautley, Henry Strother

  Hoult, Joseph

  Reed, Sir Edw. James (Cardiff

  Cavendish, V. C.W. (Derbyshire

  Howard, John(Kent, Faversham

  Reid, James (Greenock)

  Cayzer, Sir Charles William

  Howard, J. (Midd.,Tottenahm

  Remnant, James Farquharson

  Cecil, Evelyn (Aston Manor)

  Hozier, Hon. James HenryCecil

  Renwick, George

  Cecil, Lord Hugh (Greenwich)

  Hunt, Rowland

  Roberts, Samuel (Sheffield)

  Chamberlain, Rt.Hon.J.(Birm.

  Hutton, John (Yorks., N.R.)

  Robertson, Herbert (Hackney)

  Chamberlain, Rt Hn J.A.(Worc.

  Jeffreys, Rt. Hon. Arthur Fred.

  Rutherford, W. W. (Liverpool)

  Chamberlayne, T. (S'thampton

  Jessel, Captain Herbert Merton

  Sackville, Col. S. G. Stopford-

  Chapman, Edward

  Keswick, William

  Sadler, Col. Sir Samuel Alex.

  Clive, Captain Percy A.

  Knowles, Sir Lees

  Samuel,SirHarryS.(Limehouse)

  Coates, Edward Feetham

  Laurie, Lieut.-General

  Sharpe, William Edward T.

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

  Law, Andrew Bonar (Glasgow)

  Sloan, Thomas Henry

  Colston, Chas. Edw. H. Athole

  Lawrence, Wm. F. (Liverpool)

  Smith, Abel H. (Hertford, East)

  Compton, Lord Alwyne

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

  Smith,RtHn J Parker(Lanarks)

  Corbett, T. L. (Down, North)

  Lee, ArthurH.(Hants.,Fareham

  Stanley,Hon.Arthur(Ormskirk)

  Crossley, Rt. Hon. Sir Savile

  Lees, Sir Elliott (Birkenhead)

  Stanley, Rt.Hon. Lord (Lancs.)

  Dalrymple, Sir Charles

  Legge, Col. Hon. Heneage

  Stewart, Sir Mark J. M'Taggart

  Davenport, William Bromley-

  Long,Col. Charles W (Evesham)

  Stirling-Maxwell, Sir John M.

  Davies, Sir Horatio D.(Chatham

  Long, Rt.Hon.Walter(Bristol,S

  Stock, James Henry

  Dickson, Charles Scott

  Lowe, Francis William

  Stroyan, John

  Doughty, Sir George

  Loyd, Archie Kirkman

  Talbot, Lord E. (Chichester)

  Douglas, Rt. Hon. A. Akers-

  Lucas, Reginald J.(Portsmouth

  Thornton, Percy M.

  Duke, Henry Edward

  Lyttelton, Rt. Hon. Alfred

  Tollemache, Henry James

  Dyke, Rt.Hon.Sir William Hart

  Macdona, John Cumming

  Faber, Edmund B. (Hants, W.)

  MacIver, David (Liverpool)

  Tomlinson, Sir Wm. Edw. M.

  Fellowes,Rt. Hn. Ailwyn Edward

  Maconochie, A. W.

  Tuff, Charles

  Vincent, Col.Sir CEH(Sheffield)

  Whitmore, Charles Algernon

  Yerburgh, Robert Armstrong

  Walrond, Rt.Hon.SirWilliam H.

  Willoughby, de Eresby, Lord

  Warde, Col. C. E.

  Wilson, John (Glasgow)

  TELLERS FOR THE AYES—

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

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

  Sir Alexander Acland-Hood

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

  Wrightson, Sir Thomas

  and Viscount Valentia.

  Whiteley, H.(Ashton und.Lyne

  Wylie, Alexander

  NOES.

  Allen, Charles P.

  Hayden, John Patrick

  Rickett, J. Compton

  Baker, Joseph Allen

  Healy, Timothy Michael

  Roberts, John Bryn (Eifion)

  Barran, Rowland Hirst

  Helme, Norval Waston

  Roberts, John H. (Denbighs.)

  Bell, Richard

  Hemphill, Rt. Hon. Charles H.

  Roe, Sir Thomas

  Black, Alexander William

  Henderson, Arthur (Durham)

  Rose, Charles Day

  Bolton, Thomas Dolling

  Joicey, Sir James

  Samuel, Herbert L.(Cleveland)

  Bright, Allan Heywood

  Jones, David Brynmor(Swansea

  Samuel, S. M. (Whitechapel)

  Broadhurst, Henry

  Jones, Leif (Appleby)

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

  Buxton,NE.(York,NRWhitby

  Jones,William(Carnarvonshire)

  Shaw, Thomas (Hawick B.)

  Caldwell, James

  Jordan, Jeremiah

  Shipman, Dr. John G.

  Causton, Richard Knight

  Kennedy, P. J. (Westmeath.N.)

  Sinclair, John (Forfarshire)

  Cawley, Frederick

  Lamont, Norman

  Slack, John Bamford

  Channing, Francis Allston

  Langley, Batty

  Soares, Ernest J.

  Clancy, John Joseph

  Lawson, Sir Wilfrid (Cornwall)

  Spencer, RtHnC.R.(Northants)

  Crean, Eugene

  Lundon, W.

  Sullivan, Donal

  Cremer, William Randal

  Lyell, Charles Henry

  Taylor, Theodore C. (Radcliffe)

  Crooks, William

  MacNeill, John Gordon Swift

  Thomas, David Alfred(Merthyr)

  Cullinan, J.

  MacVeagh, Jeremiah

  Thompson, Dr.E.C(Monaghan N

  Delany, William

  M'Fadden, Edward

  Toulmin, George

  Disraeli, Coningsby Ralph

  M'Kean, John

  Ure, Alexander

  Dobbie, Joseph

  M'Kenna, Reginald

  Weir, James Galloway

  Doogan, P. C.

  Moss, Samuel

  White, Luke (York, E.R.)

  Edwards, Frank

  Murnaghan, George

  Whiteley, George (York, W.R.)

  Fenwick, Charles

  Murphy, John

  Whitley, J. H. (Halifax)

  Findlay, Alexander(LanarkNE)

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

  Whittaker, Thomas Palmer

  Flavin, Michael Joseph

  O'Brien, Kendal(TipperaryMid.

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

  Flynn, James, Christopher

  O'Brien, Patrick (Kilkenny)

  Wilson, John (Falkirk)

  Foster, Sir Walter (Derby Co.)

  O'Connor, James (Wicklow, W.

  Woodhouse, Sir J.T.(Huddrs'd.

  Gladstone, Rt.Hn.Herbert John

  Partington, Oswald

  Young, Samuel

  Grant, Corrie

  Pirie, Duncan V.

  Guest, Hon. Ivor Churchill

  Power, Patrick Joseph

  TELLERS FOR THE NOES.—

  Hammond, John

  Priestley, Arthur

  Mr. Shaekleton and Mr.

  Harcourt, Lewis

  Reckitt, Harold James

  Higham.

  Hardie, J.Keir(MerthyrTydvil)

  Redmond, John E. (Waterford

  Harrington, Timothy

  Richards, Thomas

  MR. FLYNN, in moving to omit the Peace Preservation Act from the schedule, said a similar Motion had often been made from the Nationalist Benches, and would continue to be made as long as this invidious and iniquitous Act remained on the Statute-book. By this Act there were applied to Ireland principles which the Government would not dare to apply to any other part of the British Empire. When the Act was passed in 1881, by a majority of 145 to 34, for the purpose of intimidating and affronting the tenantry, the promise was given that it should remain in force only five years, and the hope was held out
  208
  that it would not be necessary to retain it even for that period. Twenty year had elapsed since the supposed expiry of the Act, and still it remained for the permanent disarmament of the Irish people, inflicting upon them an indignity under which no other nation in Europe suffered.
  The Act empowered the Viceroy, on his own initiative, with the advice of such unteachable landlords as Lord Barrymore, Lord Clonbrock, and the rest of the gang who were hounding on the Government to a bootless coercion campaign, to proclaim any district in Ireland, and it became an offence to possess arms.

  209
  Persons might be arrested without a warrant on the suspicion of any constable. The Lord-Lieutenant might issue a search-warrant without the knowledge of the person against whom it was directed, and the people of the district were always at the mercy of the police. The Act was not only an anachronism, but a standing insult to the people of Ireland. The practical inconvenience of the measure was shown by the fact that no farmer could possess a gun, except under very severe restrictions, even for the protection of his crops or his household. Instances had been repeatedly given of farmers of good conduct who had been unable to obtain permission to have an ordinary shot-gun to protect their crops unless they were in good favour with the resident magistrate. The injustice was rendered greater by the long continuance of the Act, and it was no answer to say that because it had not been repealed, notwithstanding the promises of Ministers that it would not last more than five years, it might very well last another year. A distinguished soldier had receutly been endeavouring to impress upon the country the importance of training in rifle shooting. But if young Englishmen and Scotchmen were to receive such training, why should not a similar opportunity be given to Irishmen, who had proved themselves able to use offensive weapons as well as most populations. He entered an emphatic protest against the continuance of an Act which was not only an indignity to Ireland, but a lasting stigma on the honour and credit of British Ministers. He begged to move.
  Amendment proposed—
  "In page 4, to leave out lines 12 and 13."—(Mr. Flynn.)
  Question proposed, "That lines 12 and 13 stand part of the schedule."
  Mr. POWERsaid that when this Act was passed it was said that it would last only five years, and in their strong opposition to the Bill during the stormy debates which ensued the Irish Party had the active support of Lord Randolph Churchill. Ireland had had many Coercion Acts; as a rule they had been for a limited period, but the Arms Act had become a permanent Coercion Act. He did not believe the English Members had the slightest idea of how the Act was worked in Ireland, or of the process that had to be gone through to obtain a licence to carry even a fowling-piece. Resident magistrates, who were omnipotent in the matter, were selected for their antipathy to the Irish people, and consequently the people had no confidence whatever in their administration. The magistrates obtained all their information through the district inspectors, who were often the avowed enemies of the people. The average farmer objected to demean himself by approaching these officials, preferring to go without a gun even for the protection of his crops. Their action might be futile, but Irish Nationalists were bound to make their protest against this degradation of the people by such a statute.
  MR. T. M. HEALYasked the Committee to consider this matter from a constitutional point of view. A general election was imminent, and a new Ministry might soon come into power-Assuming that this Act was as essential a portion of the British Constitution as Magna Charta, as hon. Members opposite

  211
  appeared to think, what would be the position of the present Government if their successors next session refused to renew the Act, and omitted it from the schedule of the Expiring Laws Continuance Bill? For ten years the hon. Gentlemen opposite had been in office, but they had not taken the trouble to make permanent an Act which they declared to be of the essence of Irish administration. Did not that show the hollowness of the whole position? According to the Dames of the Primrose League, the Liberals, when they came in, would be under the thumb of the Fenians of Ireland. Assuming that to be so, and that the next Government were under the power of the assassin, the moonlighter, and all the rest of the phantasmagoria of the Primrose League orators, what would happen to the unfortunate landlords? What chance would there be for "King and country," according to the argument of hon. Members opposite, when this Act was repealed? And who would be to blame except the Party who had been in power for ten years and had not troubled to make the Act permanent? He appealed to the Government not to say something to-day which they would have to unsay to-morrow.
  MR. WALTER LONGsaid the fault of the hon. Member was that he declined to be guided by experience. He had drawn a picture of what might happen in the next Parliament, but he had over-looked the fact that the Liberal Party had been responsible for the maintenance on the Statute-book of this Act of Parliament. The right hon. Gentleman the Member for Montrose, when Chief Secretary for Ireland, made it clear that he
  212
  regarded the measure, not as a coercive Act, but as a police regulation. No justification whatever had been put forward for the assertion that the Act was an insult to the Irish people. As to the supposed hardship on farmers through their alleged inability to obtain licences to carry guns, he would only say that in 1905 there had been 6,100 licences issued and only 500 applications refused. That did not sound as though the crows had been enjoying immunity from molestation through the restrictive operation of this Act. In one breath the Party opposite objected to the continuance of the Act, and in the next they complained that it had not been made permanent. If hon. Members opposite believed what they said, they could not do better than leave the Bill alone this year, and look to their friends to expunge the measures to which they objected as soon as they came into power. He believed that the Act operated without hardship; it was a very useful restriction with regard to the bearing of arms, and, for his own part, he would like to see it applied, not only to Ireland, but to the United Kingdom generally.
  MR. DELANYsaid they were bound to resist the re-enactment of this measure, no matter by which Party it was proposed. It was not a matter of sentiment; it was a very real grievance to the farming class. The Act was a penal measure, as offenders were liable to three months imprisonment or a fine of £20, and these punishments were inflicted by resident magistrates, who were the paid servants of the Executive. No reason had been shown why the statute should be re-enacted, and the Irish Party would give it their most strenuous opposition.
  MR. T. HARRINGTONthought the Chief Secretary would pause long before he attempted to apply to England such a measure as he had said was so useful in Ireland. Personally, he objected to the Act, not because it prevented the farmer from getting a gun, but because it was a badge of degradation and slavery that the people should be permanently debarred from carrying arms. As long as it continued it was a confession that the English Government were unable to govern Ireland. All shades of opinion looked upon the Act as a degradation, and many Loyalists had endeavoured to get the right to the use of arms, but had been refused lest the permission should have to be extended to the rest of the people.
  MR. SWIFT MACNEILLsubmitted that under the Bill of Rights every citizen had a right to bear arms, but that right was denied to the people of Ireland, the reason being that the English Government, whose dealings with Ireland ever since the Union had teen one tissue of force and fraud, were afraid to allow the Irish people to have
  arms for fear they would use them to the advantage of their country. No less an authority than Lord Wolseley had declared that they had to take Irish regiments out of Ireland because they could not be trusted in their own land with arms in their hands. The continuance of this Act was a gross and fraudulent breach of faith, as he had shown on the Second Reading. As to the resident magistrates, by whom the Act was administered, it was known that one, appointed by the Prime Minister when Chief Secretary, was an officer who had been cashiered for fraud at the Cape. These were the gentlemen who had to decide whether or not licences should be given. It was a scandalous state of things from top to bottom. The Act was simply to disarm the Irish Catholics while the Orangemen were not disarmed. He protested against this infamous Act and asked that it should be removed from the Statute-book.
  Question put.
  The Committee divided:—Ayes, 157; Noes, 69. (Division List No. 338.)

  AYES.

  Agg-Gardner, James Tynte

  Carson, Rt. Hon. Sir Edw. H.

  Fielden, Edward Brocklehurst

  Allusen, Augustus Henry Eden

  Cautley, Henry Strother

  Finch, Rt. Hon. George H.

  Anson, Sir William Reynell

  Cavendish, V.C.W. (Derbyshire

  Finlay, RtHnSirRB.(Inv'rn'ss

  Arkwright, John Stanhope

  Cecil, Evelyn (Aston Manor)

  Fisher, William Hayes

  Arnold-Forster, Rt.Hn.Hugh O

  Cecil, Lord Hugh (Greenwich)

  Fitzroy, Hon. Edward Algernon

  Arrol, Sir William

  Chamberlain, RtHnJ.A.(Worc.

  Flower, Sir Ernest

  Atkinson, Rt. Hon. John

  Chapman, Edward

  Forster, Henry William

  Aubrey-Fletcher, Rt.Hn.SirH.

  Clive, Captain Percy A.

  Gardner, Ernest

  Bagot, Capt. Josceline FitzRoy

  Coates, Edward Feetham

  Gibbs, Hon. A. G. H.

  Bailey, James Walworth)

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

  Godson, Sir Augustus Frederick

  Baird, John George Alexander

  Colston, Chas. Edw. H. Athole

  Gordon, J. (Londonderry, S.)

  Balcarres, Lord

  Corbett, T. L. (Down, North)

  Gordon, MajEvans(T' H'mlets

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

  Crossley, Rt. Hon. Sir Savile

  Greene, Henry D.(Shrewsbury)

  Balfour, Rt.HnGeraldW(Leeds

  Dalrymple, Sir Charles

  Greene, W. Raymond-(Cambs.)

  Banner, John S. Harmood-

  Davenport, William Bromley-

  Grenfell, William Henry

  Bathurst, Hon. Allen Benjamin

  Davies, Sir HoratioD.(Chatham

  Gretton, John

  Bingham, Lord

  Dickson, Charles Scott

  Groves, James Grimble

  Blundell, Colonel Henry

  Disraeli, Coningsby Ralph

  Hamilton, Marq.of(L'nd'nderry

  Boscawen, Arthur Griffith-

  Doughty, Sir George

  Hardy, Laurence(Kent,Ashford

  Brassey, Albert

  Douglas, Rt. Hon. A. Akcrs-

  Harris, F. Leverton(Tynem'th

  Brodrick, Rt. Hon. St. John

  Duke, Henry Edward

  Hay, Hon. Claude George

  Brymer, William Ernest

  Dyke, Rt.Hn.Sir William Hart

  Heath, Arthur Howard(Hanley

  Bull, William James

  Faber, Edmund B. (Hants, W.)

  Heath, SirJames(Staffords.NW

  Campbell, J.H.M. (Dublin Univ

  Fellowes, RtHnAilwynEdward

  Henderson, Sir A. (Stafford,W.)

  Hermon-Hodge, Sir Robert T.

  Mildmay, Francis Bingham

  Sloan, Thomas Henry

  Hill, Henry, Staveley

  Milvain, Thomas

  Smith, AbelH.(Hertford, East)

  Hope, J.F.(Sheffield,Brightside

  Molesworth, Sir Lewis

  Smith, RtHnJ.Parker(Lanark)

  Howard, John(KentFaversham

  Morgan, DavidJ(Walthamstow

  Stanley, Hon.Arthur(Ormskirk

  Howard, J. (Midd., Tottenham

  Morpeth, Viscount

  Stanley, Rt.Hon.Lord(Lancs.)

  Hozier, Hon. James HenryCecil

  Morrell, George Herbert

  Stewart, Sir MarkJ.M'Taggart

  Hunt, Rowland

  Mount, William Arthur

  Stirling-Maxwell, Sir John M.

  Hutton, John (Yorks., N.R.)

  Murray, Charles J. (Coventry

  Stock, James Henry

  Jeffreys, Rt. Hon. Arthur Fred.

  Murray, Col. Wyndham (Bath)

  Stroyan, John

  Jessel, Captain Herbert Merton

  Nicholson, William Graham

  Talbot, Lord E. (Chichester)

  Keswick, William

  O'Neill, Hon. Robert Torrens

  Thornton, Percy M.

  Knowles, Sir Lees

  Pemberton, John S. G.

  Tollemache, Henry James

  Laurie, Lieut.-General

  Percy, Earl

  Tomlinson, Sir Wm. Edw. M.

  Law, Andrew Bonar (Glasgow)

  Pilkington, Colonel Richard

  Tuff, Charles

  Lawrence, Wm. F. (Liverpool)

  Platt-Higgins, Frederick

  Vincent, Col.SirCEH.(Sheffield

  Lawson.Hn. H.L.W. (MileEnd)

  Plummer, Sir Wralter R.

  Walrond, Rt.Hn.SirWilliam H.

  Lee, Arthur H.(Hants.,Fareham

  Powell, Sir Francis Sharp

  Warde, Colonel C. E.

  Lees, Sir Elliott (Birkenhead)

  Pretyman, Ernest George

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

  Legge, Col. Hon. Heneage

  Pryce-Jones, Lt.-Col. Edward

  Welby, Sir Charles GE. (Notts.)

  Long, Col. Charles W.(Evesham

  Purvis, Robert

  Whiteley, H.(Ashton und.Lyne

  Long, Rt.Hn.Walter(Bristol,S

  Rankin, Sir James

  Willoughby de Eresby, Lord

  Lucas, Reginald J.(Portsmouth

  Ratcliff, R. F.

  Wilson, John (Glasgow)

  Lyttelton, Rt. Hon. Alfred

  Reed, Sir Edw. James (Cardiff)

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

  Macdona, John Cumming

  Reid, James (Greenock)

  Wylie, Alexander

  Maconochie, A. W.

  Renwick, George

  Yerburgh, Robert Armstrong

  M'Killop, James (Stirlingshire

  Robertson, Herbert (Hackney)

  Majendie, James A. H.

  Rutherford, W. W. (Liverpool)

  TELLERS FOE THE AYES—

  Marks, Harry Hananel

  Sackville, Col. S. G. (Stopford-

  Sir Alexander Acland-Hood

  Massey-Mainwaring, Hn. W.F.

  Sadler, Col. Sir Samuel Alex.

  and Viscount Valentia.

  Maxwell, W.J.H.(Dumfriessh.

  Sharpe, William Edward T.

  NOES.

  Allen, Charles P.

  Jones, Leif (Appleby)

  Shackleton, David James

  Barran, Rowland Hirst

  Jones, William(Carnarvonshire

  Shaw, Thomas (Hawick B.)

  Bright, Allan Heywood

  Jordan, Jeremiah

  Shipman, Dr. John G.

  Caldwell, James

  Kennedy, P. J. (Westmeath.N.

  Sinclair, John (Forfarshire)

  Causton, Richard Knight

  Lamont, Norman

  Slack, John Bamford

  Cawley, Frederick

  Langley, Batty

  Soares, Ernest J.

  Channing, Francis Allston

  Lawson, Sir Wilfrid (Cornwall)

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

  Clancy, John Joseph

  Lundon, W.

  Sullivan, Donal

  Crean, Eugene

  MacNeill, John Gordon Swift

  Taylor, Theodore C. (Radcliffe)

  Cremer, William Randal

  MacVeagh, Jeremiah

  Thomas, David Alfred(Merthyr

  Cullinan, J.

  M'Fadden, Edward

  Thompson, Dr.EC(Managh'n,N

  Delany, William

  Murnaghan, George

  Toulmin, George

  Dobbie, Joseph

  Murphy, John

  Weir, James Galloway

  Doogan, P. C.

  Nolan, Col.JohnP.(Galway,N.)

  White, Luke (York, E.R.)

  Findlay,Alexander(Lanark,NE

  O'Brien, Kendal(TipperaryMid

  Whiteley, George (York, W.R.)

  Flavin, Michael Joseph

  Pirie, Duncan V.

  Whittaker, Thomas Palmer

  Gladstone, Rt.Hn.HerbertJohn

  Power, Patrick Joseph

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

  Hammond, John

  Priestley, Arthur

  Wilson, John (Falkirk)

  Harrington, Timothy

  Redmond, Johr E. (Waterford

  Woodhouse, SirJT.(Huddersf'd

  Hayden, John Patrick

  Rickett, J. Compton

  Young, Samuel

  Healy, Timothy Michael

  Roberts, John Bryn (Eifion)

  Hemphill, Rt. Hon. Charles H.

  Roberts, John H. (Denbighs.)

  TELLERS FOR THE NOES—

  Henderson, Arthur (Durham)

  Rose, Charles Day

  Mr. Flynn and Mr. Patrick

  Higham, John Sharp

  Samuel, Herbert L.(Cleveland)

  O'Brien.

  Jones, DavidBrynmor(Swansea

  Seely, Maj.J.E.B.(Isle ofWight

  Bill reported, without Amendment; to be read the third time To-morrow.

  NATIONAL GALLERIES OF SCOTLAND BILL.
  Order for Second Reading read, and discharged. Bill withdrawn.

  PREVENTION OF CORRUPTION BILL [LORDS.]
  Order for Second Reading read, and discharged. Bill withdrawn.
  Whereupon, in pursuance of the Order of the House of the 31st day of July, Mr. SPEAKER adjourned the House without Question put.
  Adjourned at sixteen minutes, after One o'clock.

PRIVATE BILL BUSINESS.
Humber Conservancy Bill [H.L.]; Littlehampton Urban District Council Bill [H.L.]; Shepton Mallet Gas Company (Electric Lighting) Bill [H.L.]; Southport, Birkdale, and West Lancashire Water Board Bill [H.L.]. Commons Amendments considered, and agreed to.
Thames Conservancy Bill. Reported from the Select Committee, without Amendment.
London Building Acts (Amendment) Bill. Moved, That the order made on the 16th day of March last, "That no Private Bill brought from the House of Commons shall be read a second time after the 27th day of June next," be dispensed with, and that the Bill be now read 2a; agreed to. Bill read 2a accord-
2
ingly, and committed. The Committee to be proposed by the Committee of Selection.
London County Council (General Powers) Bill. Read 3a, with the Amendments, and passed, and returned to the Commons.
Bolton Corporation Bill; Acton Sewage Bill; Halifax Corporation Bill. Read 3a, with the Amendments; further Amendments made; Bills passed, and returned to the Commons.
Glasgow Corporation Order Confirmation Bill [H.L.]; Glasgow Corporation (Tramways Consolidation) Order Confirmation Bill [H.L.]; Glasgow University Order Confirmation Bill [H.L.]; Paisley District Tramways Order Confirmation Bill [H.L.]. Returned from the Commons agreed to.
Rhymney and Aber Valleys Gas and Water Company Bill [H.L.]. Returned from the Commons agreed to, with an

3
Amendment. The said Amendment considered, and agreed to.
Pier and Harbour Provisional Orders (No. 1) Bill [H.L.]. Returned from the Commons agreed to, with Amendments. The said Amendments to be considered To-morrow.
Bangor (County Down) Water and Improvement Bill [H.L.]; Preston Corporation (Ribble Navigation) Bill [H.L.]. Returned from the Commons agreed to, with Amendments.
Central Electric Supply Bill [H.L.]; Sandgate Urban District Council Bill [H.L.]; Great Central Railway Bill [H.L.]. Returned from the Commons agreed to, with Amendments. The said Amendments considered, and agreed to.
Pier and Harbour Provisional Order (No. 3) Bill; Ealing Corporation Bill; Malvern Water Bill. Returned from the Commons, with the Amendments agreed to.
London Building Acts (Amendment) Bill. Report from the Committee of Selection, That the following Lords be proposed to the House to form the Select Committee for the consideration of the said Bill; (viz.)

E. Verulam,

L. Boston,

L. Kenyon,

L. Colchester,

L. Hylton (chairman);

agreed to; and the said Lords appointed accordingly. The Committee to meet To-morrow, at eleven o'clock; and all petitions referred to the Committee, with leave to the petitioners praying to be heard by counsel against the Bill to be heard as desired, as also counsel for the Bill.
Fraserburgh Harbour Order Confirmation Bill [H.L.]. Read 3a (according to order), and passed, and sent to the Commons.
Esk Valley Power-Gas Order Confirmation Bill [H.L.]. Commons Amendment considered (according to order), and agreed to.
London Government Scheme (London and Middlesex) Bill; London Government Scheme (Hackney and Edmonton Unions, Bill. House in Committee (according to order). Bills reported without Amendment. Standing Committee negatived; and Bills to be read 3a To-morrow.

RETURNS, REPORTS, ETC.
  CHINA, No. 1 (1905).
  Report by MR. A. Hosie, His Majesty's Consul-General at Chengtu, on a journey to the Eastern Frontier of Thibet (with a map).

  TRADE REPORTS: ANNUAL SERIES.
  No. 3469. Guatemala.
  No. 3470. Spain (Canary Islands).

  QUEEN'S COLLEGE, CORK.
  Annual Report of the President, for the session 1904–1905.
  Presented (by Command), and ordered to lie on the Table.

  REDEMPTION OF QUIT AND CROWN RENTS IN IRELAND.
  Return respecting. Laid before the House (pursuant to Order of July 20th last), and to be printed. (No. 162.)

  INDIA (ADEN).
  1. Report on Aden Harbour by Aden Commission appointed in August, 1901.
  2. Figures of recent trade in Aden, foreign, local, and Indian.
  3. Papers on boundary line between Yemen and Aden Protectorate.
  Laid before the House (pursuant to Address of July 11th last), and to be printed. (No. 163.)

  ALIENS BILL.
  House in Committee (according to order).
  [The Earl or ONSLOW in the Chair.]
  Clause 1:—
  EARL SPENCERmoved to amend the clause by providing that the immigrants should be inspected on the ship

  5
  or "at such other convenient place in the discretion of the immigration officer as he may appoint and provide." In his speech on the Second Reading of the Bill he had indicated that noble Lords on the Opposition side would have a few Amendments, and the Amendment he now moved was one of those of which he spoke. It did seem very hard that shipowners should have to pay the various expenses, and also for the maintenance of the rejected aliens. There could be no doubt that this Bill would affect the shipping interest very seriously, and it might affect it to such an extent as to entirely divert the trade in the carriage of aliens across the seas from British shipping to that of other countries. His Amendment was not a large one. As the clause originally stood, all inspection was to be made on board the ship. That was found to be exceedingly inconvenient, and a concession was made by the Government in the other House that under certain circumstances the inspection might take place on shore. But, as the Bill now stood, the expense of providing accommodation for the inspection of immigrants on shore would fall on the shipowners. As this was a public object, it seemed hard that an additional loss should be placed on shipowners in this way. He believed he could move the Amendment without in any way infringing the privileges of the other House.
  Amendment moved—
  "In page 1, line 11, to leave out the word 'elsewhere' and to insert the words, 'at such other convenient place in the discretion of the immigration officer as he may appoint and provide.'"—(Earl Spencer.)
  THE LORD CHANCELLOR (The Earl of HALSBURY)said the Government could not accept the Amendment. He would not have said anything about the last point referred to by the noble Earl if he had not himself mentioned it. Many of them thought it was not for the House of Lords to look after the privileges of the House of Commons. The House of Commons could look after that matter themselves. But this point had been the subject of adjudication in the other House, and the words "and provide" were held by the Speaker to be out of order on the Report stage
  6
  on the ground that they altered the financial provisions of the Bill. That objection applied in a still higher degree in their Lordships' House. The whole theory of the Bill was that the expense should be thrown upon the shipowners. That had been universally determined in the other House. The Government were prepared to stand by that principle, and therefore could not consent to the Amendment.
  LORD TWEEDMOUTHthought the noble and learned Earl had rather overstated his case when he said that this was universally agreed to in the House of Commons. His own idea was that it was the very point which was not agreed.
  THE LORD CHANCELLORsaid that perhaps he ought to have added the word "ultimately." He admitted that it was controverted for a time, but it was ultimately agreed to.
  LORD TWEEDMOUTHsaid he must again dispute that. The case of the shipowners was that it was a great hardship on them that they should have to bear the expense of taking aliens who were refused admission into this country back to the place from which they came. That was still more intensified by the fact that not only were the shipowners so obliged to take back alien immigrants as defined by the Bill, but they had also to take back at their own expense cabin passengers. It seemed to him a most extraordinary thing that while the Government, in this Bill, did not consent to hold, any examination of cabin passengers to see if they were undesirable persons under the Bill, still they threw on the shipowners the onus and expense of taking back cabin passengers supposing that within six months after their landing in the country they were found to be undesirable. The Government would not take the burden of deciding whether cabin passengers were undesirable or not, but when they were proved to be undesirable the burden of taking them back was thrown on the shipowners. He thought that a very great hardship. He hoped his noble friend would insist on his Amendment, and he would suggest the omission of

  7
  the words "and provide," so that no discussion with regard to privilege might arise.
  THE LOED CHANCELLOR: If you leave out those words there is no difference.
  EARL SPENCER: I am afraid I shall have to press my Amendment to a division.
  LORD COLERIDGEmoved to omit the appeal by the immigrant to the immigration board, and to substitute "to the Court of summary jurisdiction at the port, and that Court shall, if they are satisfied that leave to land should not be withheld under this Act, give leave to land, and any person aggrieved by an order, judgment, or determination of such Court may appeal in manner provided by the Summary Jurisdiction Acts to a Court of quarter sessions." The substance of this Amendment was to substitute a Court of summary jurisdiction for the immigration board. In
  THE LORD CHANCELLOR: Does the noble Earl adopt the suggestion to leave out the words "and provide?"
  EARL SPENCER: No, I do not.
  On Question, "That the word proposed to be left out stand part of the clause," their Lordships divided:—Contents, 60; Not-Contents, 15.

  CONTENTS.

  Canterbury, L. Abp.

  Eldon, E.

  Chelmsford, L.

  Lathom, E.

  Clonbrock, L.

  Halsbury, E. (L. Chancellor.)

  Lauderdale, E.

  Congleton, L.

  Vane, E. (M. Londonderry.)

  Mayo, E.

  De Saumarez, L.

  (L. President.)

  Osnslow, E.

  Ellenborough, L.

  Verulam, E.

  Estcourt, L.

  Argyll, D.

  Waldegrave, E. [Teller.]

  Forester, L.

  Portland, D.

  Hampton, L.

  Churchill, V. [Teller.]

  James, L.

  Ailesbury, M.

  Hood, V.

  Kenyon, L.

  Bath, M.

  Hutchinson, V. (E. Donoughmore.)

  Kilmarnock, L. (E. Erroll.)

  Lansdowne, M.

  Lawrence, L.

  Linlithgow, M.

  Knutsford, V.

  Ludlow, L.

  Macnaghten, L.

  Pembroke and Montgomery, E.

  Bangor, L. Bp.

  Mount Stephen, L.

  (L. Steward.)

  London, L. Bp.

  Newton, L.

  Clarendon, E. (L. Chamberlain.)

  St. Albans, L. Bp.

  Ramsay, L. (E. Dalhousie.)

  Rathmore, L.

  Abingdon, E.

  Abinger, L.

  Robertson, L.

  Camperdown, E.

  Amherst of Hackney, L.

  Somerton, L. (E. Normanton.)

  Carnwath, E.

  Ashbourne, L.

  Stalbridge, L.

  Chichester, E.

  Balfour, L.

  Windsor, L.

  Darnley, E.

  Belper, L.

  Wolverton, L.

  Denbigh, E.

  Biddulph, L.

  NOT-CONTENTS.

  Manchester D.

  Spencer, E.

  Davey, L.

  Monkswell, L.

  Overtoun, L.

  Ripon, M.

  Gordon, V. (E. Aberdeen.)

  Rosebery, L. (E. Rosebery.)

  Stanley of Alderley, L.

  Carrington, E.

  Burghclere, L. [Teller.]

  Tweedmouth, L. [Teller.]

  Portsmouth, E.

  Coleridge, L.

  Welby, L.

  that he was following the proposals of the Majority Report of the Commission in which they recommended that the alien immigrant who within two years of his arrival, was ascertained or was reasonably supposed to be under the various headings might be ordered by a Court of summary jurisdiction to leave this country. Under the Bill the decision, would lie first of all with the immigrant officer, who, of course, would be a man of no judicial experience. The only appeal then was to an immigration board, consisting of three persons appointed by the Secretary of State.
  The questions which, this board would have to decide were very grave and very intricate. They would have to decide on the supposed lunacy of an immigrant; they would have to decide on the very nice question as to whether the offence which was supposed to have been committed was or was not of a political character—a matter which called for the exercise of a judicial decision; they would also have to decide under the succeeding sub-section whether or not he was coming to this country to avoid prosecution on religious or political grounds, another very nice question. All these questions would have to be decided, according to the provisions of the Bill, by aboard which had no judicial character at all. There was no provision in the Bill to ensure the proceedings before this immigration board being on oath. They knew that the Secretary of State might provide rules, but they did not know what those rules would be. The Amendment would not in any sense interfere with the main object of the Bill. It was only an administrative alteration, and did not in any way go to the root and principle of the Bill; and as it had been recommended by the Commission he hoped the noble and learned Lord who presided over that body would give him his support. He thought that the alien, before he was prevented from landing, should know that he had been considered an undesirable alien by a proper Court judicially constituted.
  Amendment moved—
  "In page 1, line 19, to leave out from the word 'appeal' to the end of Sub-section (2) and insert the words 'to the Court of summary jurisdiction at the port, and that Court shall, if they are satisfied that leave to land should not be withheld under this Act, give leave to land, and any person aggrieved by an order, judgment, or determination of such Court may appeal in manner provided by the Summary Jurisdiction Acts to a Court of quarter sessions.'"—(Lord Coleridge.)
  LORD BELPERhoped the House would not accept the Amendment. The noble and learned Lord had stated that it was recommended by the Royal Commission that a Court of First Instance should deal with this matter, but the procedure which was recommended by the Royal Commission was not the same as the procedure under the Bill. That
  10
  was not a question of excluding the alien at the port of entry; but if there was anybody who was called attention to, the police were to get information, and subsequent proceedings were then to come before a Court of summary jurisdiction. But under this Bill they were dealing with immigrant aliens before they were landed, or, at all events, when they were only landed for the purpose of inspection, and the Court suggested by the Bill seemed to be a proper and an adequate one for dealing with the sort of matters that would have to be inquired into.
  LORD COLERIDGE: It is not a Court at all.
  LORD BELPERagreed. He had meant to call it a board. The board would have no question of law to deal with, but questions of fact, of which absolute legal proof might be impossible. The Secretary of State had ensured, as far as he could, that one of those who were appointed on the board should be a magistrate, and it was intended that as far as possible a magistrate should be the chairman. The two other members were to be, as far as could be arranged, men of business and administrative experience. If the Amendment of the noble and learned Lord were carried, it would make the Bill practically unworkable. In the first instance the matter would have to go to a Court of summary jurisdiction, but if there was to be an appeal to quarter sessions, as in all cases of dispute there would be, that might mean a delay of two or three months. What was to be done with the alien who was landed for the purpose of this inquiry during that time? It would make the Bill unworkable if the decision in his case were to be delayed for any such length of time as that. For that reason, and because His Majesty's Government thought the body suggested by the Bill would be a proper one for the purpose, he could not accept the Amendment.
  LORD COLERIDGEsaid the noble Lord was in error in stating that under the Bill one member of the immigration board must be a magistrate. Subsection 1 of Clause 2 provided that the

  11
  immigration board for a port should consist of three persons summoned in accordance with rules made by the Secretary of State under this Bill out of a list approved by him, comprising fit persons having magisterial, business, or administrative experience. Therefore, all three could be magistrates, or none.
  LORD BELPERsaid he did not state that that was so in the Bill. What he said was that the Secretary of State in the other House had given a promise that, as far as possible, he would arrange
  LORD BELPER, who had given notice to move the following Amendment—
  "In page 2, line 11, to leave out the words 'but in the case of an immigrant who' and insert the words 'provided that leave to land shall not be withheld in the case of any immigrant (a) On the ground merely of want of means or the probability of his becoming a charge on the rates if he'"
  that a magistrate should be the chairman.
  LORD COLERIDGEasked why, if it was intended that one of the members should be a magistrate, a provision to that effect should not be inserted in the Bill.
  On Question, "That the words proposed to be left out stand part of the clause," their Lordships divided:—Contents, 68; Not-Contents, 16.

  CONTENTS.

  Canterbury, L. Abp.

  Lauderdale, E.

  Colchester, L.

  Mayo, E.

  Congleton, L.

  Halsbury, E. (L. Chancellor.)

  Minto, E.

  Dunboyne, L.

  Vane, E. (M. Londonderry.)

  Onslow, E.

  Ellenborough, L.

  (L. President.)

  Stamford, E.

  Estcourt, L.

  Verulam, E.

  Forester, L.

  Argyll, D.

  Waldegrave, E. [Teller.]

  Hampton, L.

  Marlborough, D.

  Kenyon, L.

  Portland, D.

  Churchill, V. [Teller.]

  Kilmarnock, L. (E. Erroll.)

  Hood, V.

  Kintore, L. (E. Kintore.)

  Ailesbury, M.

  Hutchinson, V. (E. Donoughmore.)

  Lawrence, L.

  Bath, M.

  Ludlow, L.

  Lansdowne, M.

  Knutsford, V.

  Macnaghten, L.

  Linlithgow, M.

  Mount Stephen, L.

  Bangor, L. Bp.

  Newton, L.

  Pembroke and Montgomery, E.

  London, L. Bp.

  Ramsay, L. (E. Dalhousie.)

  (L. Steward.)

  St. Albans, L. Bp.

  Rathmore, L.

  Clarendon, E. (L. Chamberlain,)

  Robertson, L.

  Abinger, L.

  St. Oswald, L.

  Abingdon, E.

  Allerton, L.

  Somerton, L. (E. Normanton)

  Camperdown, E.

  Amherst, of Hackney, L.

  Stalbridge, L.

  Carnwath, E.

  Ashbourne, L.

  Suffield, L.

  Chichester, E.

  Balfour, L.

  Windsor, L,

  Darnley, E.

  Belper, L.

  Wolverton, L.

  Denbigh, E.

  Biddulph, L.

  Wynford, L.

  Eldon, E.

  Chelmsford, L.

  Lathom, E.

  Clonbrock, L.

  NOT-CONTENTS.

  Manchester, D.

  Gordon, V. (E. Aberdeen.)

  Overtoun, L.

  Ribblesdale, L.

  Ripon, M.

  Burghclere, L.

  Rosebery, L. (E. Rosebery.).

  Coleridge, L. [Teller.]

  Stanley of Alderley, L.

  Carrington, E. [Teller.]

  Davey, L.

  Tweedmouth, L.

  Portsmouth, E.

  Kinnaird, L.

  Spencer, E.

  Monskwell, L.

  —said this was a purely drafting Amendment, and he did not now propose to move it.
  LORD COLERIDGEmoved to leave out Sub-section 3 (a), which includes among "undesirable immigrants" any immigrant who cannot show that he

  13
  has in his possession, or is in a position to obtain, the means of decently supporting himself and his dependents, if any. The object of this Amendment was to omit what was called the poverty clause. The noble Lord in charge of the Bill had placed on the Paper an Amendment which to a certain extent met his (Lord Coleridge's) objection; but now that the noble Lord did not intend to proceed with that Amendment the Amendment standing in his (Lord Coleridge's) name became more imperative. His object was to secure that persons should not be excluded solely on the ground of poverty. The only excuse for objecting to an alien coming in on the ground of poverty would be if he was likely to become a charge on the rates. In the debate on the Second Reading Lord James of Hereford had shown that there was no case against aliens on the ground of their becoming chargeable on the rates. It could not be said that the incursion of aliens had led to the ratepayers having additional burdens put upon them. Indeed, they were looked after in an admirable manner by charitable organisations, and the Report of the Commission showed that even if they came in without any money they became in a very short time not only wage-earners, but persons of means. The Report of the Commission stated, in terms, that though the immigrant might come in in a state of poverty, as time proceeded he often entered on a different phase of existence, and with greater skill and increased knowledge was able to earn a substantial living. The Commission said—
  "The balance of evidence before us is in favour of the aliens when they reach this stage."
  An alien, if he came as a cabin passenger, could be as undesirable as he pleased. He might be a criminal; he might be diseased; he might be a lunatic; he might be everything that was objectionable, but let him once take a cabin passage and he could come in without the intervention or the leave of the immigration officer. Therefore it was strictly true to say that the object of the sub-section which he proposed to delete was not to exclude the alien because he might come upon the rates, because he was a criminal, because he
  14
  was a lunatic, or because he was in any sense undesirable, but simply and solely because he was poor. The noble Lord in charge of the Bill might refer to the cry of the alien coming in and underselling the British workman. If that was the case, why had the Government been so strenuous to resist any exclusion of persons imported by employers in the time of a strike, the object of whose introduction was to undercut and undersell British workmen? If the noble Lord excluded the poor alien in the one case, he logically ought to exclude him in the other. He (Lord Coleridge) protested against the exclusion of anybody because he had not a balance at the bank and because he came in in the steerage instead of in the cabin.
  Amendment moved—
  "In page 1, line 25, to leave out Sub-section (a)."—(Lord Coleridge.)
  THE EARL OF PORTSMOUTHthought that the argument of the competition of immigrants coming in poverty to undersell the labour of the poor at home was the strongest point made for the Bill. He would be quite unable to support the Amendment if his noble friend went to a division. In his opinion, if this sub-section was struck out they would be deleting the main and most valuable part of the Bill. He could not agree with his noble friend that aliens did not affect the question of the rates, and he was glad to note that in the other House a contrary view was taken most strongly by Mr. Sydney Buxton. It was a strong point how the importation of a large number of poor persons who were not skilled in labour, and who were by former surroundings accustomed to live in different conditions and work for less money—how the importation of these people into a small area could do otherwise than lead to acute competition with the trades carried on in that district. These people, speaking Yiddish or some other foreign tongue, were obliged to concentrate in particular districts, and therefore the competition set up in those particular districts was acute. The London County Council, at considerable expense, erected model dwellings in Boundary Street. Very

  15
  careful investigation was made as to the class of people inhabiting those dwellings, which were erected at the cost of the ratepayers; and it was ascertained that 25 per cent, of the occupiers were aliens. They were all sorry for these people, but he was bound to say that their first duty was to look after their own people in this matter. Having regard to the great difficulty that existed in the East End of London in the matter of employment, he really could not see why their Lordships should stand in the way of any measure which would alleviate that difficulty.
  LORD STANLEY OF ALDERLEYdid not think the speech which had just been delivered was a very satisfactory support to the Government, because it was repeating in this House the argument which Mr. Chamberlain tried to fix on the Government during the Second Reading in another place, and which was promptly repudiated by MR. Balfour, who protested that this was a Bill for dealing with aliens who were morally undesirable, and did not, even in an indirect way, affect the fiscal question. The noble Earl who spoke last had thrown in the question of concentration, which had nothing whatever to do with this Amendment. What they were considering was whether poverty or the inability to show that he had in his possession, or was in a position to obtain, the means of decently supporting himself and his dependents was to be a ground for the exclusion of the alien. He put it to the House whether it was not a hard thing in this case to put the affirmative on the immigrant, and to enact that a man should be presumed guilty unless he proved himself innocent. Take the case of a man coming from Poland who could not speak a word of English. He was met at the landing stage by some official who told him he had to prove to him affirmatively that he had the means of decently supporting himself and those dependent upon him. That seemed very unreasonable. He did not think the term "right of asylum" had anything to do with this. Right of asylum had reference to the protection given to a person who was flying from persecution in another country. At this
  16
  moment they were contending for the open door and not for asylum. Unless it was the intention that bona fide and proper Amendments were to be thrown aside and not considered owing to the exigencies of time, he thought they might fairly appeal to the Government whether at any rate the burden of proof should not be thrown on the people who wanted to keep out these decent men rather than on the aliens themselves.
  LORD TWEEDMOUTHprotested against the arguments of Lord Portsmouth. He believed the Bill to be a bad Bill, an unworkable Bill, and a Bill which would not effect the objects for which it was introduced. This was not meant to be a Bill to keep out a man because he was poor, and he would on that point quote the observations of the noble Marquess the Leader of the House, who distinctly said on the Second Reading that—
  "If a man was an able-bodied man and a healthy man, the fact of his poverty would not exclude him."
  He looked upon that as a very valuable admission from the Government. The object of the Bill was to exclude undesirable persons, and with that principle he, at any rate, was perfectly in agreement with the Government. He thought that any Government had a right to exclude undesirable persons, especially persons who were included in the categories in this particular clause. At the same time, the view of the Government being so strong that mere poverty was not to exclude, he held that the section was unnecessary. He would therefore vote in favour of Lord Coleridge's Amendment to delete it.
  LORD BELPERobjected to the definition given of the section by the noble and learned Lord who moved the Amendment. It was not a clause to exclude a man simply because he was poor. He did not think that an accurate definition of the section. The fact was the section excluded a man if he could not show that he was likely to be able to live decently in this country when he got in. If he had a trade and was sober and industrious, he would probably have every chance of showing the board that he had

  17
  the means of getting his living. Again, if his friends would undertake that during the first few days before he found employment he would have the means of livelihood, that no doubt would be sufficient for the board. But what the clause did say was that they should exclude a man if he could not show that he had in his possession, or was in a position to obtain, the means of decently supporting himself and his dependents, if any. Many of these people came in with no means whatever, and there was every chance that at first they would become a charge on the rates. At all events, it was shown that they settled down in districts of London which were all very much congested, and that they lived in an insanitary manner, large numbers crowding together in the same house; and he thought it was reasonable to say that when they came in they should be compelled to show that they had a reasonable chance of earning their living and would not become a burden on the ratepayers.
  Lord Coleridge had not only given his own reasons, but had put into his (Lord Belper's) mouth arguments which he never used on the Second Reading and had no intention of using. He referred to the argument about these people not being allowed to come in on the ground that they would cut prices or interfere with the employment of home workmen. That was not the ground on which this Bill had been drawn, and he thought noble Lords opposite should have been well aware of that by the fact that an Amendment was moved by the Opposition in the other House proposing to extend the Bill for the purpose of preventing workmen being brought in under contract to interfere with workmen in this country. That Amendment was resisted by the Prime Minister, who in unqualified terms stated that it was quite alien to the Bill to do anything of the sort, and that the Bill had nothing whatever to do with protection and was not framed for that purpose. He hoped the House would not adopt the Amendment.
  LORD JAMES OF HEREFORDsaid the question whether poverty should be a ground for exclusion was the subject
  18
  of grave consideration by the Commission and they took a considerable amount of evidence on that point. After full consideration they made a recommendation to this effect, that it was desirable to exclude certain persons, and, amongst others, those likely to become a charge on the rates; and, as he understood it, this sub-section carried out that recommendation in a particular form. He could not, therefore, do other than adhere to the proposal contained in the Bill. In Stepney, where there were 54,000 aliens, the percentage of those receiving Poor Law relief was only 3·5, and if they struck out medical relief the percentage was less than 1 per cent. Among the native population in Stepney, however, the percentage of those receiving Poor Law relief was 7·9, and when medical relief was deducted 3·7. The whole of the county of London was much the same. But he did not think this was a proper guide in the matter, for they had a great deal of poverty that never touched the rates. The Jewish community took charge of their own aliens in a way that kept them off the rates, and, therefore, the amount of poverty was not fully represented by the number of aliens on the rates. The evil through aliens living in overcrowded conditions was very detrimental to the public health, and there was also the serious question of their competing with the other workmen in the neighbourhood. These were the reasons why the Commissioners came to the conclusion that aliens ought to be excluded if they were in a state of poverty.
  An immense number of poor people came to this country to avoid religious and political persecution, and it would be a great cruelty to send them back again; but this was fully guarded against in the Bill, which provided that in the case of an immigrant who proved that he was seeking admission to this country solely to avoid prosecution or punishment on religious or political grounds, or for an offence of a political character, or persecution, involving danger of imprisonment or danger to life or limb, on account of religious belief, leave to land should not be refused merely on the ground of want of means or the probability of his becoming a charge on the rates. Therefore, the question remained in its barest aspect,

  19
  was it wise that aliens should be allowed to come into this country when it was clear that they had no means of supporting themselves? Lord Stanley of Alderley had spoken of the injustice of putting the burden of proof on the alien, who might not even be able to speak the English language; but there were always persons on board these vessels who spoke the language thoroughly. He had no fear on that account. He believed the House would be acting not harshly but wisely in accepting the clause as it stood.
  THE LORD BISHOP OF LONDONsaid he had great sympathy with the arguments of those who had spoken from the Opposition side, because he knew the thrift, sobriety, and good family life of the Jews in the East End of London. Yet there were facts on the other side which would induce him to vote with the Government. For instance, in Stepney, in 1881, the total population was 282,676. In 1890 the population had risen to 298,600, an increase of 15,924, but during that period the inhabited houses had decreased by 3,890. Therefore 15,924 more people were crowded into 3,890 fewer houses. There were 63,000 aliens in Stepney alone, and 107 streets in the borough of Stepney had been acquired by aliens in six years. This caused a great displacement of the native people, who had been driven to find a home elsewhere. It was estimated that 52,000 English people had left the district during the last decade. He felt that they were justified in passing a provision of this kind when he remembered the great mass of people unable to support themselves who were pouring into these districts, and making life almost intolerable for those who lived there.
  LORD TWEEDMOUTHthought the right rev. Prelate had immensely strengthened the case they were making on that side of the House for treating this question much more as a local than as a general one. These local over crowdings should be dealt with by local measures. They should be prevented locally, and he thought it was a mistake to deal with this thing as a national question, as if it applied to the whole of the country, whereas it only affected certain districts.
  *THE SECRETARY OF STATE FOR FOREIGN AFFAIRS (The Marquess of LANSDOWNE)said the argument of the noble Lord was directed rather to the principle of the Bill, and might perhaps better have been included in a speech against the Second Reading. He wished to say one word with reference to the point made by Lord Coleridge. He understood him to dwell upon what he believed to be the hardship of requiring these immigrants to prove affirmatively that they were in possession of means sufficient to enable them to support themselves decently. There would be a good deal of force in that argument if the Bill was what the noble and learned Lord desired to make it. In a previous Amendment, which had been disposed of, the noble and learned Lord had endeavoured to substitute for the immigration officer and the immigration board a Court of summary jurisdiction, with an appeal to quarter sessions. If that was the tribunal which had to decide the point he thought there would be great hardship in requiring these poor people to prove affirmatively that they did not come within the reservations contained in this clause; but that was not in the Bill.
  Under the Bill these questions would be dealt with, not by a Court, but by a board composed of persons with common sense and business experience, who should have no difficulty in deciding with fairness whether or not a particular immigrant was undesirable. He was assured that in some of the great Continental ports there had existed during the last ten years boards of this description, established, he believed, at the instance of the shipowners themselves, which had been entirely successful in a simple and rough-and-ready manner in distinguishing between those immigrants who were fit to be taken on board their ships and carried to America, and those who were not. This provision seemed to him to be essential to the Bill. He rather protested against the manner in which it had been described by the noble and learned Lord. The noble and learned Lord had described it as the poverty clause, as the clause which enabled persons to be excluded solely on account of poverty. That was not

  21
  how the clause was worded. It was aimed, not at mere poverty, but at a kind of destitution which made it evident that the destitute person was unfit to take his place in the community, and that if he attempted to do so he would become a charge on the rates, and would inevitably find his way to those collections of miserable people who herded together in parts of London, and became a regrettable and dangerous feature in the society of that city.
  LORD COLERIDGEdeclared his intention of pressing his Amendment. It was admitted that these people did not come to any very large extent upon the rates. The only public ground for excluding them was that they might become a charge upon the rates. The right rev. Prelate had talked of overcrowding, and said he was going to support the Government on that account. The right rev. Prelate did not object to the personnel of the people themselves but to the conditions under which they had to live owing to overcrowding in particular quarters. But the way to deal with that was to adopt the recommendations of the Royal Commission, which included this one—
  "That every effort should be made to enforce with greater efficiency the existing law dealing
  with overcrowding, and that increased power should be obtained for certain purposes, especially with the object of bringing all dwellings within specified areas under the operation of the by-laws made under the powers of the Public Health Act."
  That was a remedy for the disease so graphically described by the right rev. Prelate, and not the exclusion of the persons on the ground—and he repeated the statement—of poverty, and poverty alone. Therefore, if he obtained any support, he would press his Amendment to a division.
  THE LORD CHANCELLORsaid the noble and learned Lord had read the recommendation of the Commission imperfectly. He had forgotten to read the passage which contained the words—
  "Or likely to become a charge on public funds."
  That seemed to him to be very relevant to the matter they were discussing, but the noble and learned Lord had omitted it altogether.
  On Question, "That the words proposed to be left out stand part of the clause," their Lordships divided:—Contents, 78; Not-Contents, 17.

  CONTENTS.

  Halsbury, E. (L. Chancellor.)

  Lathom, E.

  Ashbourne, L.

  Vane, E. (M. Londonderry.)

  Lauderdale, E.

  Balfour, L.

  (L. President.)

  Mayo, E.

  Belper, L.

  Minto, E.

  Biddulph, L.

  Argyll, D.

  Morton, E.

  Bowes, L. (E. Strathmore and Kinghorn.)

  Marlborough, D.

  Onlsow, E.

  Portland, D.

  Portsmouth, E.

  Chelmsford, L.

  Shrewsbury, E.

  Cheylesmore, L.

  Ailesbury, M.

  Verulam, E.

  Clonbrock, L.

  Bath, M.

  Waldergave, E. [Teller.]

  Colchester, L.

  Lansdowne, M.

  Congleton, L.

  Linlithgow, M.

  Churchill, V. [Teller.]

  De L'Isle and Dudley, L.

  Hood, V.

  Dunboyne, L.

  Pembroke and Montgomery, E.

  Hutchinson, V. (E. Donoughmore.)

  Estcourt, L.

  (L. Steward.)

  Forester, L.

  Clarendon, E. (L. Chamberlain.)

  Knutsford, V.

  Hampton, L.

  Milner, V.

  Hare, L. (E. Listowel.)

  Abingdon, E.

  James, L.

  Camperdown, E.

  Bangor, L. Bp.

  Kenyon, L.

  Carnwath, E.

  London, L. Bp.

  Kilmarnock, L. (E. Erroll.)

  Chichester, E.

  St. Albans, L. Bp.

  Kintore, L. (E. Kintore.)

  Darnley, E.

  Lawrence, L.

  Denbigh, E.

  Abinger, L.

  Ludlow, L.

  Doncaster, E. (D. Buccleuch and Queensberry.)

  Addington, L.

  Macnaghten, L.

  Allerton, L.

  Mount Stephen, L.

  Eldon, E.

  Alverstone, L.

  Newton, L.

  Haddington, E.

  Amherst of Hackney, L.

  Ramsay, L. (E. Dalhousie.)

  Rathmore, L.

  Somerton, L. (E. Normanton.)

  Windsor, L.

  Robertson, L.

  Stalbridge, L.

  Wolverton, L.

  St. Oswald L.

  Suffield, L.

  Wynford, L.

  NOT-CONTENTS.

  Canterbury, L. Abp.

  Stamford, E.

  Kinnaird, L.

  Monkswell, L.

  Manchester, D.

  Gordon, V. (E. Aberdeen.)

  Overtoun, L.

  Ribblesdale, L.

  Ripon, M.

  Burghclere, L.

  Stanley of Alderley, L.

  Coleridge, L. [Teller.]

  Tweedmouth, L.

  Carrington, E. [Teller.]

  Davey, L.

  Spencer, E.

  Grimthrope, L.

  Clause 1 agreed to.
  Clause 2:—
  LORD DAVEYasked the indulgence of the House to move an Amendment which was not on the Paper, the object of which was to secure that one of the three members of the immigration board should always be a justice of the peace. The noble and learned Lord in charge of the Bill had told the House that the Secretary of State had promised, in the House of Commons, that one member of the board should always be a magistrate.
  LORD BELPER: No. I said that the Secretary of State had stated that as far as possible he would take care that a magistrate should be appointed, but there may be many cases in which that would not be possible.
  LORD DAVEYsaid this statement strengthened the necessity for the Amendment. The noble Lord must not think that noble Lords on the Opposition side of the House were so simple and so lacking in intelligence as to accept that promise as binding. He had every confidence in the word of the Secretary of State, but Secretaries of State came and Secretaries of State went, and the Secretary of State to-morrow might not be the Secretary of State of to-day, and might not feel himself bound by any such assurance. Either something was meant by that assurance or it was not, and if it was meant to induce them to accept the clause it ought to be put definitely in the Bill. If the Government meant that as a rule one member of the immigration board should be a magistrate, he could not for the life of
  24
  him see what the objection was to stating it in the Bill. If the noble Lord liked to add the words "as far as possible" he was master of the situation and he (Lord Davey) could not object; but, at any rate, they should have definitely in the Bill what the rule was to be instead of its depending merely on a promise given in debate by a Secretary of State who might be out of office when the question became vital. The clause was an extraordinary one. The noble Lord, he supposed, knew what was meant by "a person having magisterial experience," but he had the advantage of him (Lord Davey) if he did. Did it include the magistrate's clerk? Did it include the usher of the Court? Did anybody before ever hear of such an expression in or out of an Act of Parliament? To expect them to accept the Secretary of State's assurance as to what the nature of the composition of this board should be was, he must say, to exhibit rather a mean idea of the intelligence of noble Lords on that side of the House. He hoped the Government would accept the Amendment.
  Amendment moved—
  "In page 3, line 4, after the word "persons," to insert the words "one of whom shall always be a justice of the peace."—(Lord Davey.)
  THE LORD CHANCELLORsaid the objection to the Amendment was that the whole matter was one which demanded instant treatment, and it might not always be possible to find a magistrate. Certainly the Thames Police Court magistrate could not attend as he was very much overworked as it was. He could not follow what the noble and learned Lord meant when he said it was impossible to understand the words

  25
  "a person having magisterial experience." He supposed it meant a person who had had a magistrate's experience, not necessarily a man who was a magistrate at the time, but who had been a magistrate. The House of Commons had been content with the assurance which had been given. It was well, in a matter of this kind, not to bind themselves by hard and fast rubs, but to rely upon those who had to carry out the Act.
  LORD STANLEY OF ALDERLEYdid not doubt that the Government and their successors would endeavour in perfect good faith to carry out the pledge given, but he objected to the immigration board being appointed in the way he understood it would be appointed. He understood that the Home Secretary was to draw up a list of twelve names and someone was to go round and get three of these gentlemen to serve.
  LORD BELPERsaid that what was proposed was that in each port concerned there should be a panel from whom three gentlemen would be selected for the board when required. It was obvious that the same three gentlemen would not serve every time.
  LORD STANLEY OF ALDERLEY: Who will summon them?
  LORD TWEEDMOUTHdid not think the Lord Chancellor was justified in claiming for this clause the consent in the House of Commons which silence gave, because this was one of the clauses which were dealt with in the other House under the principle of compulsory silence. He could not see that there would be any hindrance caused by the insertion of the words proposed.
  LORD COLERIDGEasked what was to be the procedure before the immigration board? Was it to be open to the public who wished to attend? Would there be interpreters? Was the alien to be represented? or was it to be a tribunal before whom no one could appear except the immigrant who was to prove that he was not undesirable?
  LORD BELPERreferred Lord Stanley of Alderley, in answer to his Question, to Sub-section 1 of Clause 2, which provided that—
  "The immigration board for a port shall consist of three persons, summoned in accordance with rules made by the Secretary of State under this Act out of a list approved by him for the port comprising fit persons having magisterial, business, or administrative experience."
  With regard to the Questions asked by Lord Coleridge, he could not do better than refer the noble and learned Lord to Sub-section 2 of the same clause, which enacted that—
  "A Secretary of State may make rules generally with respect to immigration boards and their officers, and with respect to appeals to those boards, and with respect to the conditional disembarkation of immigrants for the purpose of inspection, appeals, or otherwise, and may by those rules amongst other things provide for the summoning and procedure of the board, and for the place of meeting of the board, and for the security to be given by the master of the ship in the case of immigrants conditionally disembarked. Rules made under this section shall provide for notice being given to masters of immigrant ships and immigrants informing them of their right to appeal, and also, where leave to land is withheld in the case of any immigrant by the immigration officer, for notice being given to the immigrant and the master of the immigrant ship of the grounds on which leave has been withheld."
  LORD COLERIDGEsaid this was the very reason why he asked the Question. The practice had grown up of legislating by rules which they never saw. He wanted to know what rules the Secretary of State was going to make. This was a very important matter, because he was empowered to make the proceedings secret or open, and to admit or exclude the Press. He wanted to know what the procedure was to be under the rules.
  THE LORD CHANCELLORsaid the object of all these rule-making powers was to enable them to facilitate a particular thing that was intended to be done. The noble and learned Lord's Question was a suggestion that the rules should be placed in the statute, which was most undesirable.
  THE MARQUESS OF RIPON: Will the rules, when they are made, be laid before Parliament?
  THE LORD CHANCELLOR: Yes, certainly.
  LORD BELPER, in reply to Lord Coleridge's further Question, said the question as to whether the proceedings before the board should be open or not, would be at the discretion of the immigration board. There might be a great number of cases in which it would be undesirable to have the public admitted.
  LORD STANLEY OF ALDERLEYasked for information as to what the right of appeal was, which was mentioned in Sub-section 2 of Clause 2. It was provided
  Moved, "That any rules made by the Secretary of State under this clause be laid before both Houses of Parliament."—(The Marquess of Ripon).
  that rules would be made informing immigrants of their right of appeal. Where was that right of appeal given?
  THE LORD CHANCELLOR: It is the appeal referred to in the Bill itself—the appeal from the immigration officer to the immigration board.
  LORD STANLEY OF ALDERLEY: I thought the immigration board was the first Court.
  On Question, "That those words be there inserted," their Lordships divided:—Contents, 16; Not-Contents, 75.

  CONTENTS.

  Manchester, D.

  Gordon, V. (E. Aberdeen.)

  Monkswell, L.

  Overtoun, L.

  Ripon, M.

  Burghclere, L.

  Ribblesdale, L.

  Coleridge, L. [Teller.]

  Stanley of Alderley, L.

  Carrington, E.

  Davey, L. [Teller.]

  Tweedmouth, L.

  Portsmouth, E.

  Grimthorpe, L.

  Spencer, E.

  Kinnaird, L.

  NOT-CONTENTS.

  Canterbury, L. Abp.

  Lauderdale, E.

  Bowes, L. (E. Strathmore and Kinghorn.)

  Mayo, E.

  Halsbury, E. (L. Chancellor.)

  Minto, E.

  Chemlsford, L.

  Vane, E. (M. Londonderry)

  Morton, E.

  Cheylesmore, L.

  (L. President.)

  Onslow, E.

  Clonbrock, L.

  Shrewsbury, E.

  Colchester, L.

  Argyll, D.

  Verulam, E.

  De L'Isle and Dudley, L.

  Marlborough, D.

  Waldegrave, E. [Teller.]

  Dunboyne, L.

  Portland, D.

  Ellenborough, L.

  Churchill, V. [Teller.]

  Estcourt, L.

  Ailesbury, M.

  Hood, V.

  Forester, L.

  Bath, M.

  Hutchinson, V. (E. Donoughmore.)

  Hampton, L.

  Lansdowne, M.

  Hare, L. (E. Listowel.)

  Linlithgow, M.

  Knutsford, V.

  James, L.

  Milner, V.

  Kenyon, L.

  Pembroke and Montgomery, E.

  Kilmarnock, L. (E; Erroll.)

  (L. Steward.)

  Bangor, L. Bp.

  Kintore, L. (E. Kintore.)

  Clarendon, E. (L. Chamberlain.)

  London, L. Bp.

  Lawrence, L.

  Peterborough, L. Bp.

  Ludlow, L.

  Abingdon, E.

  Macnaghten, L.

  Mount Stephen, L.

  Camperdown, E.

  Abinger, L.

  Newton, L.

  Carnwath, E.

  Addington, L.

  Robertson, L.

  Chichester, E.

  Allerton, L.

  St. Oswald, L.

  Denbigh, E.

  Alverstone, L.

  Somerton, L. (E. Normanton.)

  Doncaster, E. (D. Buccleuch and Queensberry.)

  Amherst, of Hackney L.

  Stalbridge, L.

  Ashbourne, L.

  Suffield, L.

  Eldon, E.

  Balfour, L.

  Windsor, L.

  Haddington, E.

  Belper, L.

  Wolverton, L.

  Lathom, E.

  Biddulph, L.

  Wynford, L.

  LORD BELPERsaid he understood that there would be some difficulty about this. It was desirable that the rules should come into operation at once, and

  29
  the delay in laying them on the Table of Parliament might seriously affect the operation of the Bill. He could not accept the Amendment.
  EARL SPENCERsaid this was only an example of the great inconvenience which the House was put to by having Bills brought up at so late a period of the session, when the Government felt it was impossible to make any Amendments at all. This was the second time that an Amendment had been moved from that side of the House which exactly corresponded with what the Government said was their intention. His noble friend Lord Ripon merely proposed the insertion of a provision which gave effect to the views of the Lord Chancellor. He protested against the position in which the House was placed, for it could not even move a wise and reasonable Amendment to carry out the views of the Government because of the difficulty that would be incurred in another place if the Bill were amended.
  LORD BELPERsaid that in justice to the Government he ought to say that this stage of the Bill would have been taken at an earlier period if the Second Reading stage had not been postponed to meet the convenience of the House generally, and, amongst others, that of noble Lords opposite. This made a delay of three days, and when the Committee stage was put down for Tuesday there was another postponement to meet the convenience of the noble Marquess Lord Ripon, who wished to bring on his Motion relating to India.
  THE MARQUESS OF RIPONexplained that he was not proposing that the rules should not have effect until they had been laid on the Table of Parliament. He was simply asking that the rules after they had been made, and possibly acted upon if Parliament was not sitting, should be laid on the Table when Parliament met.
  LORD TWEEDMOUTHsaid the Aliens Bill was the sole result of the session's work. It was the one little thing that had been saved out of a barren session. In those circumstances, surely they might have reasonably ex-
  30
  pected to have had the Bill sent up to their Lordships' House earlier in the session. The fact that its consideration in Committee was put off from Tuesday till Thursday made very little difference.
  LORD BELPER: It was twice put off.
  LORD TWEEDMOUTH: Yes, but the two postponements only made a difference of four days altogether.
  On Question, resolved in the negative.
  Clause 2 agreed to.
  Clause 3—
  LORD NEWTONsaid the object of this Amendment was to strengthen the sub-section. It would be observed that the sub-section only dealt with overcrowded aliens, whereas the cause of the overcrowding, or, if he might coin a word, the case of the overcrowder was omitted. What happened was this, that about a year after landing many of these aliens, although in many cases wretchedly poor, managed to get hold of houses and crowded them with newly-arrived aliens under conditions which were extremely detrimental to public health and which became so objectionable that British residents were driven out of the locality altogether. By his Amendment the persons who procured others to live in this condition would be reached. He was afraid he did not see much prospect, from what had passed, of his Amendment being accepted, but he believed it had obtained the approval of the Home Secretary, and he ventured to class it amongst those wise and reasonable Amendments which were alluded to by his noble friend opposite a moment ago.
  Amendment moved—
  "In page 4, line 12, to leave out the word 'living' and insert the words 'himself living or has procured others to live.'"—(Lord Newton.)
  LORD BELPERcould not agree with the statement that the Amendment had the approval of the Home Secretary. The provision in the clause was limited to aliens who had come into this

  31
  country within the year. He did not think there would be any landlord of these overcrowded dwellings who would not have been living in the country much longer than one year, and, therefore, the Amendment would be practically inoperative. The Amendment was intended to include the landlord with the aliens, but if the landlord was an alien who had not come in within the twelve months he would not be included. The Government thought that the actual words as they were in the Bill were quite sufficient to put a stop to the evil state of things which had arisen in particular parishes.
  Amendment, by leave of the Committee, withdrawn.
  LORD STANLEY OF ALDERLEYmoved to omit the words "or been living under insanitary conditions due to overcrowding." It seemed to him an unreasonable thing to go to an alien and because he happened to live in a crowded dwelling under conditions we did not consider sanitary to punish him by shipping him back to the place from whence he came. The person who should be proceeded against would be the owner of the house, who permitted the insanitary tenancy. Overcrowding by aliens was not more objectionable than overcrowding by Britons. He appealed to the Bishop of London whether it was not the case that overcrowding in the East End of London resulted in much less evil in the case of aliens than in the case of the native population. In equally unsuitable conditions they would find both the death-rate and the sick rate much lower among aliens than among Londoners. He did not like the Bill, but the Bill, at any rate, in many parts had a certain foundation. This clause, however, seemed to him to have no foundation at all. If it were made a police offence to live in an overcrowded room, and a fine of 5s. or 10s. imposed, that would be a trifling matter; but what was proposed in the Bill was that a man who had paid his passage over and had, perhaps, just got his head above water, should, merely because he was living in conditions not satisfactory to health, be driven out of the country. He felt that this pro-
  32
  vision in the Bill was so vicious that he should certainly divide against it.
  Amendment moved—
  "In page 4, lines 12 and 13, to leave out the words 'or been living under insanitary conditions due to overcrowding.'"—(Lord Stanley of Alderley.)
  LORD BELPERsaid the evil of overcrowding, especially in Stepney, was a very great one indeed, and it was enormously aggravated by the alien immigrants who came in and settled in these particular districts. He did not think he could add anything to the strength of what had been said by the right rev. Prelate with regard to the evil of the great congestion in these particular districts, and the insanitary mode of living adopted by a large number of aliens. Of course, it might be argued that the best way of dealing with that state of things was to enforce the present law, but it could not be dealt with under the present law without a perfect army of inspectors, and if anything was to be done the law must be strengthened. In the meantime, why should they not get in this Bill what was a most admirable provision, viz., that people who, after notice, were found living in insanitary conditions due to overcrowding should be liable to be expelled from the country? Why should they not be sent back in the same way as other undesirable aliens? Surely they did not want to encourage the poorest classes of aliens to further overcrowd the most crowded part of London and to live in a state of insanitation far beyond anything that obtained in the case of the ordinary inhabitants of the district. This provision in the Bill would be of great value in remedying present overcrowding. This was a way of dealing with the evil which, the Government thought could be very easily carried out, and they would be very sorry to see this useful provision left out of the Bill.
  THE LORD BISHOP OF LONDONsaid that among the virtues which he ascribed to the aliens in East London—their good family traditions, their thrift, and their sobriety—he had not been able to mention their cleanliness. He could

  33
  not say from his experience that the alien population added to the cleanliness of East London. It was quite the reverse. It must also be remembered that they made very bad landlords. Even the Chief Rabbi himself in a sermon quoted the remark of one of them, "Thank God I live under a Christian landlord." When these houses passed into the hands of aliens acute overcrowding followed. With regard to the statement that this would be a great hardship in the case of the little man who had just got his head above water, he would observe that if the alien was in that position he would not be living in the insanitary and overcrowded condition referred to. He could say from experience that the question of overcrowding was one of the most difficult questions with which local authorities had to deal. He hoped the clause would be allowed to remain as it stood.
  LORD STANLEY OF ALDERLEYcalled attention to Lord Belper's statement
  in his reply that there was no hardship if these persons were dealt with in the way proposed after notice. He did not understand that there was any provision that the person should have notice.
  LORD BELPERdid not intend his words to be taken in that way. He meant that when this Act passed aliens would know that if they lived under insanitary conditions due to overcrowding they did so at the risk of being expelled.
  LORD STANLEY OF ALDERLEY: If the noble Lord means that Acts of Parliament are known to every subject, that may be law, but it is not common sense.
  On Question, "That the words proposed to be left out stand part of the clause," their Lordships divided:—Contents, 72; Not-Contents, 15.

  CONTENTS.

  Halsbury, E. (L. Chancellor.)

  Mayo, E.

  Clonbrock, L.

  Vane, E. (M. Londonderry.)

  Minto, E.

  Colchester, L.

  (L, President.)

  Morton, E.

  De L'Isle and Dudley, L.

  Onslow, E.

  Dunboyne, L.

  Argyll, D.

  Shrewsbury, E.

  Ellenborough, L.

  Marlborough, D.

  Verulam, E.

  Estcourt, L.

  Portland, D.

  Waldegrave, E. [Teller.]

  Forester, L.

  Hampton, L.

  Ailesbury, M.

  Churchill. V. [Teller.]

  James, L.

  Bath, M.

  Hood, V.

  Kenyon, L.

  Lansdowne, M.

  Hutchinson, V. (E. Donoughmore.)

  Kilmarnock, L. (E. Erroll.)

  Linlithgow, M.

  Kinnaird, L.

  Knutsford, V.

  Kintore, L. (E. Kintore.)

  Pembroke and Montgomery, E.

  Lawrence, L.

  (L. Steward,)

  Bangor, L. Bp.

  Ludlow, L.

  Clarendon, E. (L. Chamberlain.)

  London, L. Bp.

  Macnaghten, L.

  Peterborough, L. Bp.

  Newton, L.

  Abingdon, E.

  Robertson, L.

  Camperdown, E.

  Abinger, L.

  St. Oswald, L.

  Carnwath, E.

  Addington, L.

  Somerton, L. (E. Normanton.)

  Chichester, E.

  Allerton, L.

  Stalbridge, L.

  Denbigh, E.

  Alverstone, L.

  Suffield, L.

  Doncaster, E. (Buccleuch and Queensberry.)

  Amherst of Hackney, L.

  Windsor, L.

  Ashbourne, L.

  Wolverton, L.

  Eldon, E.

  Balfour, L.

  Wynford, L.

  Haddington, E.

  Belper, L.

  Zouche, of Haryngworth, L.

  Lathom, E.

  Chelmsford, L.

  Lauderdale, E.

  Cheylesmore, L.

  NOT-CONTENTS.

  Manchester, D.

  Carrington, E.

  Stamford, E.

  Kimberley, E.

  Ripon, M.

  Spencer, E.

  Gordon, V. (E. Aberdeen.)

  Burghclere, L.

  Grimthorpe, L.

  Stanley of Alderley, L. [Teller.]

  Coleridge, L. [Teller.]

  Monkswell, L.

  Tweedmouth, L.

  Davey, L.

  Ribbesldale, L.

  Clause 3 agreed to.
  Clause 4:—
  *LORD ELLENBOROUGH, in the absence of Lord Muskerry, moved to make the owner or agent directly responsible for the expenses connected with the expulsion of an alien instead of the master of the ship. It was, perhaps, right enough to fine captains in the old days of wooden sailing ships, previous to telegraphs and railways. Then a captain was really captain of his ship, but at present he was only captain when his ship was at sea. In harbour everything was managed by the owner or agent, who had the telegraph wire and a telephone in his office. If the captain who was engaged in short trips was to be held responsible for all that was done in harbour, he would not be able to get sufficient rest to enable him adequately to perform his duties when at sea, with the result that the safety of the ship's navigation would suffer.
  Amendment moved—
  "In page 4, line 34, to leave out the word 'master' and insert the words 'owner or agent.'"—(Lord Ellenborough.)
  LORD BELPERregretted that the Government could not accept the Amendment to leave out the masters. The object of the Bill was, in dealing with these foreign ships—and they were all foreign ships—to make the owner responsible. The owner was a foreigner living in a foreign country, and the only way of dealing with him was through the captain. There were similar cases under the Merchant Shipping Act in which large penalties were nominally placed on the master of the ship with the object of their hitting the owner, and in cases of this sort it was absolutely necessary to follow this course in order to prevent a foreign shipowner escaping liability altogether. It might be argued that the master would in all cases be the agent, but he was informed that that was not the case, and that unless he was made the agent for this special purpose he would not be liable.
  Amendment, by leave of the Committee, withdrawn.
  *LORD ELLENBOROUGHthen moved to omit that part of the clause which provided that the master of any ship belonging to the same owner should be liable for the expenses of the return of an alien under an expulsion order. He said that under this clause as it stood at present a captain could be fined in consequence of the conduct of any captain in the employ of the same company. For instance, a captain in the Wilson line, running from Hull to Hamburg, might be fined for the neglect of duty of a captain in the same line who was running between Newcastle and Riga, whom he might never have seen, and with whose appointment as master he had had nothing whatever to do. Next year a new Motor-Car Bill would be brought before Parliament. What would their Lordships or the Members of the House of Commons say if it were to contain a clause making any Member of either House liable for the fines inflicted on any other Member of the House in which he happened to sit. Yet this was on all fours with what was being done by this Bill. He was speaking in the presence of several motorists, some of whom might have been fined, but, if so, he was sure that they would not wish that other Members of the House should pay their fines for them. Captains of ships had no more power to select or interfere with the captains employed by the same owner than Members of their Lordships' House had of selecting those amongst whom they sat. He thought it probable that the noble Lord in charge of the Bill would refer him to Section 2 of Clause 7, which again referred to certain sections of the Merchant Shipping Act of 1894, more especially to Clauses 681 and 693. Clause 681 made the fine recoverable as a civil debt from the captain. He could find nothing in any of the clauses which gave any protection to the merchant captain, and it was only when all the powers of the law against the captain had been put in force, that the shipowner's liability appeared to come in. The clause as it stood was a blot on

  37
  the Bill, and he hoped that the Government would accept his Amendment.
  Amendment moved—
  "In page 4, lines 35 and 36, to leave out the words 'and also the master of any ship belonging to the same owner.'"—(Lord Ellen-borough.)
  LORD BELPERsaid the remarks he had made with regard to the former Amendment applied equally to this one. This particular provision, however, went a little further. It was to the effect that where a particular ship which had brought aliens in had gone out of port, there should be a means of getting at the owners through the captain of any other ship belonging to the same line. The object was not to make any one pay who was not liable, but to get rejected aliens taken back by a ship belonging to the same company.
  Amendment, by leave of the Committee, withdrawn.
  Clause 4 agreed to.
  Clauses 5, 6, and 7 agreed to.
  Clause 8:—
  LORD NEWTONmoved to amend the definition of "immigrant ship," which in the clause is defined as "a ship which brings to the United Kingdom more than twenty alien steerage passengers," etc., by substituting the number ten for twenty. This was another Amendment which he believed enjoyed the sympathy of the Home Secretary, and he hoped he might be more successful with it. He did not see what special virtue there was in the number twenty. An alien immigrant was an alien immigrant whether he came as a single spy or in whole battalions. He could see no reason whatever why any number should be specified, but he desired to be reasonable, and he suggested, as a compromise, ten. Under the Bill the Home Secretary enjoyed very considerable power. Over and over again they would find in the Bill that the Secretary of State had power to do pretty much as he liked. The Bill would come into operation on January 1st next, and by
  38
  that time it was possible there might be a Government in office which was not particularly friendly to the Bill. Lord Coleridge might be Home Secretary, and they knew from his own words that the noble and learned Lord was very far from being amicably disposed to the Bill; and it would be open to him to render the Bill almost innocuous. He thought it was advisable that some check should, if possible, be placed on hypothetical proceedings of this character. With regard to the inevitable objection, he foresaw that if this Amendment were carried it would lead to trouble in another place, he would point out that it need involve only one division in the other House, and, therefore, without being unduly rash, the Government might accept it.
  Amendment moved—
  "In page 7, line 28, to leave out the word 'twenty' and insert the word 'ten.'"—(Lord Newton.)
  THE EARL OF MAYOsupported the Amendment. Whether a ship brought in one alien immigrant or twenty, it was much the same thing. He could not understand why the limit of twenty was inserted in the Bill.
  LORD BELPERsaid the remarks of the noble Earl who had just sat down showed that he had not studied the scheme of the Bill deeply. The object was to deal with alien immigrants coming in at particular ports. It was not proposed to examine every ship that arrived in the United Kingdom. Certain ports would be selected, the ports to which these aliens were usually shipped, and at those ports there would be an officer and an immigration board. He did not see any particular virtue in the number twenty, but he thought it was a number which was more applicable to the scheme of the Bill than ten. It was an adequate number, and one at which the line of wholesale traffic might be drawn. The Government were aware that if the number was rigidly fixed at twenty the provision in the Bill might be avoided by shipowners bringing in less than twenty aliens. That was the reason why special power was given to the Secretary of State to vary the number if

  39
  he found it necessary to do so. He did not entertain intense distrust of Secretaries of State in this matter. He thought the procedure in the Bill fixing the adequate number of twenty in the first instance a most convenient one. If they fixed a lower number he did not see that there would be any advantage, and it might make it necessary to examine a much larger number of ships in some cases than would be desirable. They felt that the fixing of the number of twenty, tempered by the discretion vested in the Secretary of State, was the best way of dealing with the clause, and they must adhere to it as it stood.
  Amendment, by leave of the Committee, withdrawn.
  LORD TWEEDMOUTHmoved to omit that part of the clause which provides that if a question arises as to whether any offence is an offence of a political character it shall be referred to the Secretary of State. He said the Amendment was not one directed in any sense against the principle of the Bill, nor was it, as he thought, in any way out of accord with it. There was an additional reason why they should give attention to this particular proposal, because both in Committee and on Report in the House of Commons, through the circumstances under which discussion was carried on, this Amendment was not reached and was not discussed at all.
  As the Bill stood, an alien who was destitute could be excluded from this country. He could then claim asylum and shelter on the ground of being a political offender. Having done so, his claim was referred to the Home Secretary, and the Home Secretary then decided finally whether or not his offence was a political one. This raised the question, a very old question and one that had been the subject of controversy very often before, as to how far the power of deciding what was a political offence should lie with the Executive Government rather than with a judicial body. At the time of the passing of the Extradition Act of 1870 this point was raised, and it was most carefully provided that all decisions
  40
  of this kind should be left with the judicial body. The Attorney-General, speaking on the second Reading of that Bill, said—
  "There was a distinct provision that no criminal should be surrendered for any political offence. They had found it most difficult to define all political offences, and had finally given up the attempt and left the matter to the Courts."
  Under this Bill it was proposed to leave what was admitted by distinguished lawyers to be a difficult matter to the ipse dixit of the Home Secretary. In 1890 a case arose under the Act of 1870, in which the extradition of a Swiss was demanded by the Swiss Government. The man said he was engaged in a political disturbance, that his offence was a political one, and that therefore it was not right that he should be extradited. The matter was brought before the Bow Street magistrate, who decided that the man should be extradited, but he appealed to the Court of Queen's Bench, and that Court decided that his was a political offence and that he should not be extradited. He thought difficult cases on the borderland would constantly arise, and he contended that this was not a question that should be left to a member of the Executive Government. In some cases difficulties might arise between our own Government and a foreign Government on such a subject, and he did not think that it was a very desirable thing that a member of the Government of the day should, decide the matter. That was essentially a case where the subject should be referred to a judicial body, and where the principle laid down in the Extradition Act of 1870 should be adhered to. He had to confess himself a layman in such matters, but he thought this was a point which was worthy of serious consideration. If the Government could not accept his Amendment then, he hoped they would consider the subject and introduce an Amendment of their own on the Report stage.
  Amendment moved—
  "In page 8, lines 5 and 6, to leave out the words 'or whether any offence is an offence of a political character.'"—(Lord Tweedmouth.)
  THE LORD CHANCELLORthought that the noble Lord had hardly appreciated the effect of his own Amendment.

  41
  He proposed to omit these words, but he had not suggested who was to try the offences referred to, or where they should be tried. It was doubtless true, as the noble Lord had said, that it was occasionally somewhat difficult to define a particular offence; but, on the other hand, their Lordships should consider what they were doing. In the first place, what tribunal were they going to set up? This was a matter which had to be decided on the arrival of the person. Such a proposal as was made in another place, to have a decision subject to an appeal which in turn would be subject to a further appeal, was not applicable to a matter that must be decided immediately. They could not keep a person in the position of being neither accepted nor rejected; a decision must be given one way or the other at once. Looking at the nature of the decision to be given, he would have thought that perfect security was obtained by leaving the matter to the Secretary of State, responsible to Parliament, because no Secretary of State would care to take the responsibility of refusing asylum in a doubtful case. The noble Lord was doubtless moving with a desire to aid the supposed refuges, but his own view was that the most perfect security was obtained by leaving the matter to the Secretary of State, who was responsible to Parliament.
  LORD TWEEDMOUTHsaid he had purposely left the Amendment in its present form, and had refrained from suggesting another tribunal because he thought it was a matter rather for the Government. These cases of political offences would not very frequently arise, and they ought to be dealt with with extreme care. Under the Extradition Act a man went before the magistrate, and then from the decision of the magistrate there was an appeal to a higher Court. He thought it would have been well to follow some similar course in these cases. It was just under this Bill that cases were likely to arise similar to the instance in 1890 to which he had referred. He regretted that the noble and learned Lord had not adopted a more sympathetic attitude. He thought it was a subject which would have commended itself to
  42
  the noble and learned Lord, and, if his noble friends would support him, he was inclined to press the matter to a division.
  *THE MARQUESS OF LANSDOWNEsaid the noble Lord had stated that he would be content with getting rid of the appeal to the Secretary of State, and would leave it to the Government to consider whether any form of appeal should be substituted. That would put them in this position. In political cases, either the question would have to be decided by the immigration board, which had not been spoken of in terms of inordinate respect by the critics of the Bill, and which, he thought, would be quite incompetent to deal with the question; or an appeal would have to be given to the Courts of Law. Several times in the course of the debate it had been said that what was required was some simple and expeditious way of dealing with cases as they arose. The attainment of that object was not consistent with a procedure which would leave it open to any immigrant whose fitness for admission was challenged to raise a question of law, or induce somebody else to raise a question of law, to be carried from Court to Court, involving litigation, during which, presumably, the shipowner would be responsible for the charge of the would-be immigrant. The whole proposal was so foreign to the general purpose and scope of the Bill that the Government could not do otherwise than resist it.
  *The MARQUESS OF RIPONexpressed his disappointment that the noble Marquess had not answered the portion of the remarks of his noble friend in which he called attention to the unwisdom of putting this matter into the hands of a member of the Executive Government. The noble Marquess knew perfectly well the difficulties that had arisen in the past from such a course having been adopted. It was part of the ground that led to the breach of the peace of Amiens, and the noble Marquess would remember the difficulties that arose with the Emperor Napoleon III. Was it really advisable to leave such decisions to the Executive Government? If a foreign Government

  43
  lodged a complaint in a matter of this kind, was not the proper answer to say that the question was one of law, that it had been decided by the law, and that the Executive Government were bound by the law? He could not help thinking that serious difficulties might arise in the future, as they had arisen in the past, if such a power were placed in the hands of
  Clause 8 agreed to.
  Clauses 9 and 10 agreed to.
  Standing Committee negatived; and Bill to be read 3a on Tuesday next.

COMPENSATION FOR DAMAGE TO CROPS BILL.

  THIRD READING.
  Order for Third Reading read.
  Moved "That the Bill be now read a third time."
  the Executive Government, and he should have thought that his noble friend the Foreign Secretary would be the last to desire that this power should be entrusted to the Government.
  On Question, "That the words proposed to be left out stand part of the clause," their Lordships divided:—Contents, 62; Not-Contents, 16.

  CONTENTS.

  Canterbury, L. Abp.

  Haddington, E.

  Alverstone, L.

  Lathom, E.

  Amherst, of Hackney, L.

  Halsbury, E. (L. Chancellor.)

  Lauderdale, E.

  Ashbourne, L.

  Vane, E. (M. Londonderry.)

  Mayo, E.

  Belper, L.

  (L. President.)

  Minto, E.

  Cheylesmore, L.

  Argyll, D.

  Morton, E.

  Clonbrock, L.

  Marlborough, D.

  Onslow, E.

  Colchester, L.

  Portland, D.

  Shrewsbury, E.

  De L'Isle and Dudley, L.

  Verulam, E.

  Dunboyne, L.

  Ailesbury, M.

  Waldegrave, E. [Teller.]

  Ellenborough, L.

  Bath, M.

  Estcourt, L.

  Lansdowne, M.

  Churchill, V. [Teller.]

  Forester, L.

  Hood, V.

  Hampton, L.

  Pembroke and Montgomery, E.

  Hutchinson, V. (E. Donoughmore.)

  Kenyon, L.

  (L. Steward.)

  Kilmarnock, L. (E. Erroll.)

  Clarendon, E. (L. Chamberlain.)

  Knutsford, V.

  Kintore, L. (E. Kintore.)

  Abingdon, E.

  Lawrence, L.

  Albemarle, E.

  Bangor, L. Bp.

  Robertson, L.

  Camperdown, E.

  London, L. Bp.

  St. Oswald, L.

  Carnwath, E.

  Peterborough, L. Bp.

  Stalbridge, L.

  Denbigh, E.

  Suffield, L.

  Doncaster, E. (D. Buccleuch and Queensberry.)

  Abinger, L.

  Windsor, L.

  Addington, L.

  Wolverton, L.

  Eldon, E.

  Allerton, L.

  Wynford, L.

  NOT-CONTENTS.

  Manchester, D.

  Spencer, E.

  Grimthorpe, L.

  Kinnaird, L.

  Ripon, M.

  Gordon. V. (E. Aberdeen.)

  Monkswell, L.

  Carrington, E. [Teller.]

  Burghclere, L.

  Ribblesdale, L.

  Kimberley, E.

  Coleridge, L.

  Stanley of Alderley, L.

  Portsmouth, E.

  Davey, L.

  Tweedmouth, L. [Teller.]

  On Question, Motion agreed to.

  THE EARL OF WEMYSS: My Lords, there is a clause in this Bill of which I think your Lordships ought to take some notice. I refer to Clause 2, which appears to allow a railway company to enter any part of a wood and to go in any direction cutting away the undergrowth. That seems to me to be a very strong power to give. Indeed, a railway friend of mine told me that there had been communications between the promoters and the railway companies, that this clause was the result, and he thought the railway companies had got very much, the best of it. I think your Lordships will agree with that view, and also in thinking that some protection ought to be

  45
  given in reference to the exercise of the power. It occurred to me that some such words as those ought to be inserted: 'Provided that due notice be given and 'that some person is present authorised by the proprietors." My railway friend agreed with the suggestion. The question arises whether it would be sufficient to insert "due notice being given," leaving it to the proprietor to instruct a representative to be present if he chose. But I think some words of that kind ought to be introduced, and I beg to move.
  THE LORD CHANCELLOR: The noble Earl cannot move to introduce an Amendment on Third Reading without notice.
  Motion made, and Question proposed, "That the Bill do now pass."
  On Question, Motion agreed to.
  Bill read 3a, and passed.

  TRADE MARKS BILL.
  House in Committee, according to Order.
  (The Earl of ONSLOW in the Chair.)
  EARL SPENCERstated that there were a large number of Amendments to this Bill, which was a private Member's Bill and had come from the other House. It would take a long time to deal with the Amendments now, and he would suggest that, with the approval of His Majesty's Government, they should be agreed to en bloc now, and that tomorrow the Bill should be recommitted and the Standing Orders suspended, so that all the remaining stages might be taken at the one sitting. Unless this were done, he was afraid there would be no chance of passing the Bill.
  The LORD CHANCELLORintimated the willingness of the Government to assent to this course.
  EARL SPENCERthen formally moved that the Amendments on the Paper (which were of a drafting character) be agreed to.
  On Question, Amendments agreed to.
  Standing Committee negatived. The Report of Amendments to be received To-morrow: and Standing Order No. XXXIX. to be considered in order to its being dispensed with; and Bill to be printed as amended. (No. 164.)

  IRISH CREAMERIES.
  THE DUKE OF MANCHESTER THE DUKE OF MANCHESTER rose to ask "whether it is a fact that the Local Government Board (Ireland) have no power to enforce the orders of sanitary authorities, based upon the recommendations of their medical officers, for the more sanitary conduct of creameries; and, if not, whether they can give any assurance that, in view of the anomalous position at present obtaining which causes the sanitary authorities to be set at defiance, they will take such powers." He said: I do not propose at this late hour to detain your Lordships at any length, but I would like to say a word or two in explanation of the Question which I have placed upon the Paper. It is a Question affecting the way in which creameries, which are very numerous in the North of Ireland, are conducted at the present moment. When the creameries were started they were compelled to put in certain machinery for the proper sterilisation of the milk products that passed through them, but, although the> were forced to put in this machinery in the first place, there is no process of law by which they can be compelled to use it. The consequence is that with regard to the vessels which contain the milk and carry the milk to the separator, and during the time separating is being effected, proper sterilisation is not carried on. I could give several instances in which horrible and disgusting things had arisen out of this practice. I will give only one. During the winter in the smaller auxiliary creameries there are only two separations of milk a week. The consequence is that from Friday until possibly the next Tuesday milk is collected in the cottages, and anybody who knows anything about cottages in Ireland will agree that this is not a satisfactory state of affairs to begin with. In addition to that, the vessels have not

  47
  been in any way sterilised, nor are they proper vessels appointed for the purpose of holding milk. Then in one case that I know of, the milk was kept for collection underneath the bed of a tuberculous patient, and was then sent to the creamery to be made into butter, which was despatched to England, doubtless for your Lordships to eat. That being so, I think your Lordships will agree that something ought to be done.
  For the guidance of His Majesty's Government I will quote the Local Government Orders to which I refer. The first was Local Government Order 20566 of 1903, asking medical officers of health to inspect the creameries in their districts and to see that sterilisation and live-steam flushing of delivery cans, etc., was observed. In the case to which I have particularly referred this was done by the medical officer of health; he found out these dreadful details and reported them to the local sanitary authority, who passed them on to the Local Government Board. On October 11th, 1904, the Local Government Board replied in general terms, pointing out that the responsibility rested with the district council. The district council then ordered that the medical officer of health's recommendations should be carried out, but no further action could be taken in consequence of the district council having no legislative power. Thus it seems that the thing goes round in a vicious circle. The recommendation is sent to the Local Government Board, who return it to the district council, who in turn send it back to the Local Government Board, and nobody has any power to insist on the carrying out of the obviously necessary precautions and recommendations suggested by the medical officers of health. I beg to put the Question standing in my name.
  THE LORD PRESIDENT OF THE COUNCIL AND PRESIDENT OF THE BOARD OF EDUCATION (The Marquess of LONDONDERRY): My Lords, I am sure that if the instance given by the noble Duke represented a condition of things prevalent all over Ireland, creameries would not occupy the satisfactory position they do at the present moment. I can only hope that the graphic description he has given of
  48
  milk concealed under an invalid's bed applies to a solitary case of which he has heard, and which has not come to the ears of the Department which I represent on this occasion.
  The Question which has been put down by the noble Duke is calculated to give the impression that there is a general disposition among the owners of creameries to disregard the demands of the sanitary authorities. This, I am informed, is not the case; on the contrary, the owners of creameries have as a rule been perfectly willing to comply with any requests made to them. In one case, that of the Tanderagee Creamery, this is not so, and it is this, doubtless, to which the noble Duke's Question has reference. In this case, the local sanitary officer recommended certain changes which, in spite of the representations of the Local Government Board and the Irish Agricultural Organisation Society, have not been carried out.
  Then I wish to point out what exactly is the position of those who are responsible for the sanitary condition of these creameries. Under Section 15 of the Public Health (Ireland) Act, 1896, the Local Government Board are empowered to compel sanitary authorities to perform certain of their duties in case of their default; but the Board have no power under the Public Health Acts or the Contagious Diseases (Animals) Acts to enforce orders made by sanitary authorities on individuals. Any such orders can only been enforced by the local authority taking legal proceedings against defaulters in the manner provided in the Acts (either at petty sessions or before other legal tribunals) for the recovery of the penalties therein provided for.
  In the course of his Question the noble Duke refers to the "anomalous position" which he says at present obtains. I cannot admit that the position is anomalous. The powers of the Irish Local Government Board in this matter are substantially the same as those possessed by the English Local Government Board. Any further steps to secure the enforcement of the recommendations of the sanitary officer should be taken not by

  49
  the central body but by the local authority, who, as I have already stated, have power of taking legal proceedings against any defaulters. If I might venture to make a suggestion to the noble Duke, it would be that he should inform the local authority of the case he has brought under your Lordships' notice, and tell them that it is their duty to prevent its recurrence. I would further suggest, as an Ulster neighbour of his, that, occupying the important position he does in the county of Armagh, he should bring the case of the Tanderagee Creamery under the notice of his own local authority. I am afraid that is the only Answer I can give.
  THE DUKE OF MANCHESTER: I am very much obliged to the noble Marquess; he has quite answered my Question.
  House adjourned at twenty-five minutes before Eight o'clock, till To-morrow, half-past Ten o'clock.