Sitting of 27 July 1905

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

  BOOTLE CORPORATION BILL.
  On the order for the consideration of the Lords Amendments to the Bootle Corporation Bill being read,
  MR. MACVEAGHobjected to the order being proceeded with.
  MR. CROOKS:In the interest of many workmen who are dependent for their work on these Bills getting through during the present session, may I respectfully appeal to hon. Gentlemen from Ireland to with-
  578
  draw their objection and allow these Bills to proceed?
  MR. JOHN REDMOND:Within the last few days I have received representations from many quarters of the country with regard to the action of my hon. friends in blocking the passage of these Bills. Amongst others, I have received communications from representatives of labour, both in and out of this House, to the effect that if some of these enterprises are stopped now vast sums of money that would be spent in the coming winter in the employment of workmen will be hung up, and that thousands of working men will be kept out of employment during the winter. Whatever cause of quarrel and resentment we have with political Parties in this House, and with the Government at the moment, we have none with the working men of the country. In the course they have taken my hon. friends never intended to inflict any injury on workmen. In these circumstances I appeal to my hon. friends to withdraw their opposition to these Bills. I am all the more pleased to do so in

  579
  response to the appeal of the hon. Member for Woolwich.
  MR. MACVEAGHsaid that after that appeal he would not think of pressing his objections. He wished it to be understood he was responding to the wish of the leader of his Party and certainly would not have allowed himself to be influenced by the vulgar denunciation heaped upon him and his colleagues by the daily Press. They had been told that much public money had been spent in the promotion of the Bills which would be wantonly wrecked if the objections were persisted in, while much employment might be withheld from the working classes in the coming winter, but all those objections applied with equal force to the Tramways Bill promoted by the London County Council, and rejected by the House of Lords without the slightest consideration for the loss and inconvenience inflicted on the public. The action of his colleagues and himself had been denounced as a public scandal, but there was a much gieater scandal, and that was a Government holding on to office years after the country had got sick of it and in spite of an adverse vote of that House.
  Lords Amendments considered, and agreed to.
  Great Northern, Piccadilly, and Brompton Railway (No. 1) Bill; London Gas Bill; Rhondda Urban District Council Bill; Shropshire, Worcestershire, and Staffordshire Electric Power Bill. Lords Amendments considered, and agreed to.
  Blackpool Improvement Bill [Lords]. As amended, considered; Amendments made; Bill to be read the third time.
  North Metropolitan Electric Power Supply Bill [Lords]. As amended, considered; to be read the third time.
  Nottingham Corporation Bill [Lords]. As amended, considered; Amendments made; Bill to be read the third time.
  580
  Baker Street and Waterloo Railway Bill (by Order); Charing Cross, Euston, and Hampstead Railway Bill (by Order); Edgware and Hampstead Railway Bill (by Order); London and North Western Railway Bill (by Order); Metropolitan Electric Tramways Bill (by Order); Dublin United Tramways Bill (by Order); Midland Railway Bill (by Order); Skegness Water Bill (by Order); Woolwich Borough Council Bill (by Order). Lords Amendments considered, and agreed to.
  Formby Township Bill [Lords] (by Order). Read the third time, and passed, with Amendments.
  Workington Harbour and Dock Bill [Lords] (by Order) (King's consent signified). Read the third time, and passed, with Amendments.
  Llandrindod Wells Urban District Council Bill [Lords] (by Order); Matlock Bath Improvement Bill [Lords] (by Order). Read the third time, and passed, with Amendments.
  Metropolitan Electric Supply Company (Acton District) Bill [Lords] (by Order). Read the third time, and passed, with an Amendment.
  Sheffield University Bill [Lords] (by Order). Third Reading deferred till to-morrow.
  South Lancashire Tramways Bill [Lords] (by Order). Reid the third time, and passed, with Amendments.
  Littlehampton Urban District Council Bill [Lords] (by Order). As amended, considered; Amendments made; Bill to be read the third time.
  Shepton Mallet Gas Company (Electric Lighting) Bill [Lords](by Order); Bristol Blind Asylum Bill [Lords] (by Order); Corbett Estate Bill [Lords] (by Order).

  581
  As amended, considered; to be read the third time.

  PRIVATE BILLS (GROUP K).
  Sir JAMES KITSONreported from the Committee on Group K of Private Bills; That, for the convenience of parties, they had adjourned till Monday next, at half-past Eleven of the clock.
  Report to lie upon the Table.

  MESSAGE FROM THE LORDS.
  That they have agreed to—London County Council (Money) Bill, without Amendment.
  Amendment to—Gas and Water Orders Confirmation (No. 2) 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 the M'Callum Celtic Lectureship in the University of Glasgow." [Glasgow University Order Confirmation Bill] [Lords.]
  Glasgow University Order Confirmation Bill [Lords]. Ordered, under Section 7 of The Private Legislation Procedure (Scotland) Act, 1889, to be considered upon Monday next.

RETURNS, REPORTS, ETC.
  CIVIL SERVICES (SUPPLEMENTARY ESTIMATES, 1905–6).
  Estimate presented, of the Further Sums required to be voted for the Service of the year ending 31st March, 1906 [by Command]; referred to the Committee of Supply, and to be printed. [No. 268.]

  CHURCHES (SCOTLAND) BILL.
  Copy presented, of Extracts from the Proceedings of (I.) the General Assembly of the Church of Scotland; and of (II.)
  582
  the General Assembly of the United Free Church of Scotland [by Command]; to lie upon the Table.

  BISHOPRICS ACT, 1878, AND BISHOPRICS OF SOUTHWARK AND BIRMINGHAM ACT, 1904.
  Copy presented, of Order in Council of the 11th July, 1905, approving a scheme of the Ecclesiastical Commissioners with respect to the Bishopric of Birmingham, and for other purposes [by Act]; to lie upon the Table.
  ARMY.
  Copy presented, of Statement of sum of money granted, in pursuance of Royal; Warrant of 1st March, 1856, as compensation to the son of an officer killed at the Battle of Abu Klea [by Command]; to lie upon the Table.
  BOARD OF AGRICULTURE AND FISHERIES (INTELLIGENCE DIVISION).
  Copy presented, of Annual Report of Proceedings under the Sale of Food and Drugs Acts, 1875 to 1899, the Merchandise Marks Acts, 1887 to 1894, and other Acts for the year 1904 [by Command]; to lie upon the Table.
  TRADE REPORTS (ANNUAL SERIES).
  Copies presented, of Diplomatic and Consular Reports, Annual Series, Nos. 3460 to 3462 [by Command]; to lie upon the Table.
QUESTIONS AND ANSWERS CIRCULATED WITH THE VOTES

  Fining and Imprisonment of Chinese Coolies in the Transvaal.
  MR. HERBERT SAMUEL:To ask the Secretary of State for the Colonies if he will state what are the numbers of Chinese coolies in the Transvaal who have suffered imprisonment, and the number who have been fined, classified according to offences.

  583
  (Answered by Mr. Secretary Lyttelton.) The following is the information desired: —

  Imprisoned.

  Fined.

  Desertion or absence without leave

  675

  43

  Travelling without permit

  79

  12

  Refusing to work

  88

  12

  Theft or forgery

  25

  Assaults of various kinds

  146

  1

  Indecent offences (2)

  Riot

  184

  237

  Inciting to Riot

  53

  Total

  1,250

  68

  Applications to English and Welsh Local Authorities for Loans under the Small Dwellings Acquisition Act.
  DR. MACNAMARA. (Camberwell, N.):To ask the President of the Local Government Board whether he can state separately for the years 1900, 1901, 1902, 1903, and 1904, how many applications in each year have been made to local authorities in England and Wales for loans, for the purpose of acquiring the ownership of small dwelling-houses, under the Small Dwellings Acquisition Act of 1899; how many such loans have been made in each year; and what amount has been advanced in each year.
  (Answered by Mr. Gerald Balfour.) As regards London, I am informed by the London County Council that the total number of applications received by their during the years 1900–1904, inclusive was thirteen, and that the total amount advanced was £1,500. As regards the rest of England and Wales, the only information in my possession relates to cases of applications made by local authorities to the Local Government Board for sanction of loans. The total number of these applications for the years referred to was eighty-two, and the total amount sanctioned was £74,244.
  The figures for each year separately I shall be happy to send to the hon. Member if he desires it.

  Rates of Wages Paid to Chinese Coolies on the Rand.
  MR. HERBERT SAMUEL:To ask the Secretary of State for the Colonies if he can state what are the rates of wages now being paid to the Chinese coolies employed on the Rand; and whether there are any coolies who have been employed for a longer period than six months, whose average wage is less than 1s. 6d. a day.
  (Answered by Mr. Secretary Lyttelton.) The coolies are, I understand, being paid as provided in the contract. The great majority of them do not draw the 1s. 6d. after the expiration of the six months, but enter into the agreement for piece-work contemplated in Article 6, paragraph 1, of the contract.

  Number of Wives and Children of Chinese Coolies in the Transvaal.
  MR. HERBERT SAMUEL:To ask the Secretary of State for the Colonies if he will state how many Chinese coolies

  585
  and how many of their wives and children are now in the Transvaal.
  (Answered by Mr. Secretary Lyttelton.) The number of Chinese coolies at the end of June was 41,340. No families were introduced during the quarter ended 31st March last, and the number, so far as I know, remains as at the end of December, two wives and twelve children.

  Repatriation of Chinese Coolies
  MR. HERBERT SAMUEL:To ask the Secretary of State for the Colonies if he will state how many Chinese coolies in the Transvaal have terminated their contracts and been repatriated at their own expense, as provided by the regulations under the Labour Importation Ordinance.
  (Answered by Mr. Secretary Lyttelton.) None, so far as I am aware, have taken advantage of the provision.

  Mosquito Nets for Railway Employees in West Africa.
  MR. CATHCART WASON (Orkney and Shetland):To ask the Secretary of State for the Colonies if he is aware that railway employees in West Africa are constantly stricken with fever through old and defective mosquito nets; and if he will give instructions that the nets in use shall be constantly reported on; and that any employee refusing or neglecting to use the same shall be liable to instant dismissal.
  (Answered by Mr. Secretary Lyttelton.) I am not in a position either to corroborate or to deny what the hon. Member alleges as to the causing of fevers. I cannot, however, undertake to direct the holding of inquisitions as to whether railway employees use their nets or not. These employees are adult skilled workmen, and must be regarded as having some personal intelligence and responsibility.

  Reduction of Duty on Scotch Herrings Imported into Russia.
  MR. HARMSWORTH (Caithness-shire):To ask the Under-Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs if he will take steps to obtain from the Russian Govern-
  586
  ment a reduction of the duties imposed on Scotch herrings imported into Russia.
  (Answered by Earl Percy.) The matter referred to has received the careful consideration of His Majesty's Government, but it does not appear that any useful purpose would be served by any representations to the Russian Government.

  International Fisheries Conference—The Three-Mile Limit.
  MR. NOEL BUXTON:To ask the Under-Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs whether it is the intention of His Majesty's Government to raise the question of the three-mile limit, with regard to sea fisheries, at the next international conference which may be called for the discussion of such matters.
  (Answered by Earl Percy.) There is no intention on the part of His Majesty's Government to propose any general extension of the three - mile limit, nor does the information at present in our possession suggest that such an extension would be consistent with British fishery interests. Some further light on the subject will doubtless be afforded, however, by the the inquiries now being made by the International Council for the Investigation of the North Sea.

  Cheap Cottages—Modifying of Model By-Laws of District Councils.
  MR. NOEL BUXTON:To ask the President of the Local Government Board whether, in view of the favourable opinion held by competent authorities of the cheap cottages now being exhibited at the Garden City at Letchworth, he will take into consideration the question of further-modifying the model by laws issued for the guidance of district councils.
  (Answered by Mr. Gerald Balfour.) It is, I think, desirable that in the first-instance an officer of the Department should visit the exhibition and report on the subject, and arrangements are being made for this purpose.

  Report of Salmon Fishery Commission—Proposed Legislation.
  MR. NOEL BUXTON:To ask the President of the Board of Agriculture

  587
  what circumstances have arisen to induce His Majesty's Government to postpone proposing legislation on the lines of the Report of the Salmon Fishery Commission of 1902.
  (Answered, by Mr. Ailwyn Fettowes.) I do not think that any pledge has been given by His Majesty's Government to propose legislation on this subject, but I quite concur in the view that it might with advantage be undertaken. I propose during the recess to communicate with those who are interested in the matter, and I hope it may be possible to arrange for the presentation of a Bill next session, either by a private Member or as a Government measure. The subject is one, however, which can scarcely be dealt with successfully unless a general agreement can be arrived a'as to the necessity of legislation and as to the form which it may most advantageously take.

  Suggested Increase in the Salaries of County Court Judges on Account of Increased Work.
  MR. BROTHERTON (Wakefield):To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department whether he will see that, when the Estimates for the Home Office are prepared for next year, some increase in the salaries for the County Court Judges is made, considering that since 1865, the last occasion when their salaries were fixed, an increase of work has been given to their Courts which has lengthened their hours of attendance, and in the case of provincial County Court Judges increased their travelling.
  (Answered by Mr. Austen Chamberlain.) The salaries of County Court Judges are not provided in the Estimates. They are charged on the Consolidated Fund, and cannot be increased except by Act of Parliament. The County Courts (No. 2) Bill now before Parliament proposes an increase of the salaries of a certain number of the Judges under certain conditions from £1,500 to £1,800. I see no sufficient reason for going any further at present.

  Interest on Money Borrowed under the Naval Works Bill.
  MR. HERBERT SAMUEL:To ask Mr. Chancellor of the Exchequer if he will state approximately what will be the total amount of interest payable on £1,000,000 borrowed in accordance with the Naval Works Bill of this year from the time the loan is contracted until the last instalment of it is repaid.
  (Answered by Mr. Austen Chamberlain.) The terminable annuity required to repay an advance of £1,000,000 in twenty-nine years with interest at 3 per cent, is between £52,000 and £53,000. The exact amount of the annuity would depend upon the interval between the dates of the instalments of the advance and the date of commencement of the annuity. The aggregate amount of interest included in the annuity payments would be approximately £525,000.

  Board of Revenue, Lower Provinces—Appointments for Indian Natives.
  MR. WEIR:To ask the Secretary of State for India whether he is aware that in the Calcutta Gazette of the 10th May last it was announced that in the office of the Board of Revenue, Lower Provinces,30 per cent, of the appointments carrying pay of forty rupees and upwards per month would be reserved for Europeans and Eurasians; and will he state whether arrangements can be made for the apportionment of a larger proportion of appointments to the natives of India.
  (Answered by Mr. Secretary Brodrick.) I beg to refer the hon. Member to the Answer I gave to a Question on this subject by the hon. Member for West Denbighshire on the 6th instant.† The persons described as Europeans and Eurasians are presumably in most cases born or domiciled in India, and, as at present advised, I see no reason for interfering with the arrangements made.

  Application of Lieutenant-General Pakenham for Advance under Land Act.
  MR. T. W. RUSSELL (Tyrone, S.):To ask the Chief Secretary to the Lord-Lieutenant of Ireland whether an application has been lodged with the
  † See (4) Debates, cxlviii., 1317.

  589
  Estates Commissioners by Lieutenant-General Thomas Henry Pakenham, of Langford Lodge, Crumlin, county Antrim, for an advance of £650 as the purchase price of a farm of land at Graigarogan, county Antrim, from which Martha O'Beirne was evicted in June, 1903, for non-payment of one and a half year's rent, and which she held at a rent fixed by the Irish Land Commission of £13; whether, seeing that the amount applied for would represent fifty years purchase of the said rent, will he say what the Estates Commissioners intend doing in reference to this application; and is he aware that the former tenant has offered to the landlord on several occasions for the purpose of redeeming the lands all rent due on the farm and all costs incurred by the landlord, and that the landlord has refused to accept the same.
  (Answered by Mr. Walter Long.) An application for an advance of £650 for the purchase of the farm mentioned has been lodged by John G. Reid. An application for reinstatement in the farm as evicted tenant has been received from Martha O'Beirne. When the estate comes in due course before the Commissioners for consideration, the evicted tenant's claim will be fully inquired into.

  Delay in Construction of Poulduff Pier, County Wexford.
  SIR THOMAS ESMONDE:To ask the Chief Secretary to the Lord-Lieutenant of Ireland if the contractor has signed the contract for the construction of Poulduff Pier, in county Wexford; and, if not, what is the reason of the delay.
  (Answered by Mr. Walter Long.) The contract has not yet been signed. The Department are in communication with the contractor on the subject.

  Turbary Bights on Mr- Barrett's Holding at Parke, near Castlebar.
  DR. AMBROSE:To ask the Chief Secretary to the Lord-Lieutenant of Ireland whether his attention ha been called to the fact that Lord Norbury in March, 1903, took his tenant, Mr Martin Barrett, of Parke, near Castle bar, county Mayo, into Court with a view
  590
  to raising the rent from £6 15s. per annum to £10 per annum; that the Court fixed be rent at the original figure, viz., £6 15s., carrying with it the right of turbary; and that, notwithstanding the decision if the Court, the tenant is prevented by be bailiff, Mr. Thomas Moran, from exercising his right of cutting turf; and will he say whether he proposes to take my, and, if any, what, action in the matter.
  (Answered by Mr. Walter Long.) This case is the subject of an appeal from the ruling of the County Court Judge by both be landlord and the tenant, and, pending decision on the appeal, I must decline to discuss the matter through the medium of a Question.

  Salary of Teacher of Mohorough National School.
  MR. KENDAL O'BRIEN:To ask the Chief Secretary to the Lord-Lieutenant of Ireland what were the several sums paid to the teacher of Mohorough National School, Roll No. 5097, for the yearly period ended 31st May, 1900; and why did not the total amount for this period equal his consolidated salary of £85.
  (Answered by Mr. Walter Long.) The sums were: —

  £

  s.

  d.

  Class salary

  44

  0

  0

  20 per cent, increase thereon

  8

  16

  0

  School grant

  9

  5

  2

  Equivalent grant

  15

  15

  5

  77

  16

  7

  The consolidated income was based on payments made to the teacher during the three years ended March 31st, 1900, and this income would not necessarily correspond with payments actually made for the twelve months ended May 31st, 1900.

  Native Government Hospital at Calabar
  MR. SLOAN:To ask the Secretary of State for the Colonies whether the High Commissioner of Southern Nigeria acted on his own initiative in inviting at the beginning of the present year a sisterhood of French nuns to Calabar to take charge of the Native

  591
  Government Hospital, where the inmates are non-Catholic; if he can say for what period have these nuns been engaged; whether it is intended to retain the services of these nuns in preference to nurses who are not connected with religious orders.
  (Answered by Mr. Secretary Lyttelton.) The proposal that two Roman Catholic sisters should be employed as nurses in the native hospital at Calabar (which is a separate institution from the European hospital) was originally made to the Protectorate Government by the head of the Roman Catholic Mission at Calabar in September, 1903. There had previously been no women nurses at the native hospital, and, as the proposal received the support of the principal medical officer and of the Acting High Commissioner, it was accepted on terms, which were referred to and approved by me. It was stated in the terms of agreement that no undertaking could be given that the sisters would be employed for any stated period, but if the system is found to work well, I see no reason, on the information before me, why it should be changed.

  Death Rate of Indentured Indians in Northern Australia.
  MR. HERBERT SAMUEL:To ask the Secretary of State for the Colonies whether his attention has been drawn to the statement recently made by the chairman of the Transvaal Chamber of Mines, and printed on page 62 of [Cd. 2563], to the effect that the death rate of indentured Indians in the northern districts of Australia has been lately officially reported to be 23 per cent.; whether he has any official reports as to this death rate; and, if so, whether he will make inquiry into the matter.
  (Answered by Mr Secretary Lyttelton.) I have no information on the subject, but will make inquiries.

  Contracts for Supply of Military Badges—Machine and Hand Labour.
  MR. MOON (St. Pancras, N.):To ask the Financial Secretary to the War Office whether, in the case of military badges, etc., made of other materials than metal, the War Office is willing to abandon any
  592
  conditions stipulating that a given article should be made by hand or by machine, or partly by one method and partly by the other, so that conformity to the sealed pattern may be the sole criterion.
  (Answered by Mr. Bromley Davenport.) The matter has been carefully considered and the reply is in the negative.

  The Unemployed Bill.
  MR. LEVY (Leicestershire, Loughborough):To ask the First Lord of the Treasury if he can now state whether he intends to proceed with the Unemployed Bill this session; and, if so, when.
  (Answered by Mr. A. J. Balfour.) I think the best Answer to the hon. Gentleman is to refer him to what fell from me in the House this afternoon upon this subject.

  QUESTIONS IN THE HOUSE.

    Proposed Expenditure at Rosyth.
    MR. AINSWORTH (Argyllshire):I beg to ask the Civil Lord of the Admiralty what are the items of the £49,320 proposed to be expended at Rosyth during the years 1905–6 and 1906–7; why this expenditure is required before the final contract for the works is decided upon; and in what respect it differs from the expenditure intended to be hereafter placed upon the Estimates.
    THE CIVIL LORD OF THE ADMIRALTY (Mr. ARTHUR LEE,):The expenditure which it is anticipated will be incurred on this item during the period 1905–7, covered by the Naval Works Bill, 1905, is on account of the following services:—(a) Making connection with North British Railway Company's system; (b) Diversion of roads, (c) Miscellaneous preliminary works and contingencies. It is necessary that these services should be carried out before the final contract for works is let, as the Admiralty, being in a position to offer contractors the facilities which these services afford, will be able to make a more advantageous contract. In reply to the last part of the

    593
    hon. Member's Question, this expenditure is of a general and preliminary character such as was contemplated when the Naval Works Act of 1903 was framed, and for which a "token" sum of £200,000 was authorised therein. The expenditure intended to be hereafter placed upon the Estimates is for the prosecution of the main contract.
    MR. AINSWORTHasked for the exact figures of the expenditure on water supply, railway communication, etc.?
    MR. ARTHUR LEE:The hon. Member had better put another Question down.
    MR. GIBSON BOWLES (Lynn Regis):Is this £49,000 included in the £200,000?
    MR. ARTHUR LEE:Yes, Sir.

    School Cadet Corps and Rifle Clubs.
    SIR HOWARD VINCENT (Sheffield, Central):I beg to ask the Secretary of State for War if the Department of the Director of Auxiliary Forces, or other branch of the War Office, can be designated to assist school cadet corps and rifle clubs in obtaining on payment rifles and ammunition and military drill instruction, in the sense suggested by Field-Marshal Earl Roberts, and others; and if, further, officers commanding districts and sub-districts may be instructed to visit, so far as invitation may be extended to them, the schools in their several areas, and to encourage drill and rifle practice in the same way as in the United States and in the Eastern Command of Great Britain, without regard to the wearing of uniform or any particular dress by the pupils.
    THE SECRETARY OF STATE FOR WAR (Mr. ARNOLD-FORSTER,):Military training in schools has for some time past been encouraged by the War Office. In January last, instructions were sent to general officers commanding to make further efforts in this direction, and it is not intended that these efforts shall be in any way relaxed. It is hoped, also, that the headmasters of the schools will in their turn co-operate to the best of their ability in furthering matters.

    Volunteers and the South African War.
    SIR HOWARD VINCENT:I beg to ask the Secretary of State for War if the records of the War Office bear out the statement obtained by individual inquiry from corps that out of 204,000 Volunteers on the muster roll on November 1st, 1899, of 263 corps no less than 71,758 volunteered for active service over sea, and that 29,049 actually took part in the South African Campaign (17,344 with Volunteer service companies, and 11,705 with other corps); or, if not, what figures does the War Office put forward in that connection.
    MR. ARNOLD-FORSTER:There are no records at the War Office showing the number who volunteered for active service oversea during the South African War. The numbers of Volunteers that are known to have served in South Africa in service companies and the City of London Imperial Volunteers amounted to 19,856 of all ranks. Besides these, 6,209 of all ranks were struck off the strength of Volunteer corps with a view to their joining the Imperial Yeomanry.
    SIR HOWARD VINCENT:Does that include the number of Volunteers who joined the Regular Army?
    MR. ARNOLD-FORSTER:No, Sir.

    Bengal Excise Bill.
    MR. HERBERT ROBERTS:I beg to ask the Secretary of State for India whether he has received from the Government of India a summary of the views expressed by the district officers in reply to the despatch of the Government of India, dated the 30th September, 1904, with reference to certain Amendments in the Bengal Excise Bill as passed by the Select Committee; and whether he can give an assurance that the Bill will be reintroduced in the Bengal Legislative Council during the ensuing session.
    THE SECRETARY OF STATE FOR INDIA (Mr. BRODRICK,):The Answer to the first part of the Question is in the negative. There is no intention of dropping the Bill, but I will inquire as to the possibility of

    595
    proceeding with it during the ensuing session.

    Macedonia—The Mürzsteg Programme.
    MR. CORBETT:I beg to ask the Under Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs what steps have been taken to enforce the Article of the Mürzsteg programme providing for a modification of the territorial boundaries in Macedonia.
    THE UNDER-SECRETARY OF STATE FOR FOREIGN AFFAIRS (Earl PERCY,):Article 3 of the Mürzsteg scheme provides for an eventual modification of the boundaries of administrative areas in Macedonia, but no steps were to be taken in the matter pending the pacification of the country.

    Chicory.
    MR. LOUGH (Islington, W.):I beg to ask Mr. Chancellor of the Exchequer what were the total receipts in the last financial year of the Customs and Excise duties, respectively, on roasted or ground chicory and raw or kiln-dried chicory; what was the quantity of each kind of chicory produced, in this country and imported from foreign countries in the same period; and what does he estimate, as the effect on the chicory revenue, for a full financial year of the proposals included in his Revenue Bill.
    THE CHANCELLOR OF THE EXCHEQUER (Mr. AUSTEN CHAMBERLAIN,):The total receipts in the last financial year on roasted or ground chicory were £1,017; and on the raw or kiln-dried article £50,392. The quantities imported were 177,263 lbs. of the first and 89,776 cwts. of the second. The only receipts from home-grown chicory were £1,449 on 2,398 cwts. of chicory in the raw or kiln-dried state. I do not anticipate that the proposed change would have any considerable effect upon the revenue.

    The Telephone Purchase Agreement.
    MR. LOUGH:I beg to ask the Postmaster—General when he expects tie Report from the Committee to which the Telephone Purchase Agreement was referred to be presented;
    596
    what day the Government have fixed, in accordance with his promise, for its discussion; and whether the agreement can become operative without the approval of Parliament.
    MR. JOHN ELLIS:I beg also to ask the First Lord of the Treasury whether he can now fix a day for the discussion of the Report of the Select Committee on the Telephone Agreement between the Potmaster—General and the National Telephone Company.
    THE POSTMASTER-GENERAL (Lord STANLEY,:I cannot say exactly when the Report will be received, but I am given to understand that it may be expected very shortly. The agreement could become operative without the approval of Parliament, but there is no intention whatever to go back from the pledge I have given that the matter shall be considered in the House and by the House. My right hon. friend the First Lord of the Treasury authorises me to say that he will undertake, before the end of the session, that time shall be given for such a discussion.
    MR. LOUGHsaid the promise was for a day. Did the noble Lord not think that, as it was now so late in the session, it would be desirable to postpone the matter to next session?
    LORD STANLEY:No, Sir, it cannot be postponed. There was no question of a day. The promise made was that an opportunity should be given for discussion, and that will be given.
    MR. LOUGH:Will it be after twelve o'clock?
    LORD STANLEY:Very likely.
    MR. LOUGH:Will the noble Lord use his influence with the Prime Minister to secure an adequate opportunity of discussion before midnight.
    LORD STANLEY:I will ask my right hon. friend to bring it on as early

    597
    as is consistent with the demands of other business.
    Subsequently,
    MR. JOHN ELLISasked the First Lord of the Treasury whether an opportunity for the consideration of the Report would be given at some sitting before midnight.
    THE PRIME MINISTER AND FIRST LORD OF THE TREASURY (Mr. A. J. BALFOUR,)said he could not promise that the Report should not be taken after twelve o'clock; but he was most desirous of taking it at a, more convenient hour if the state of business allowed him to do so.
    MR. LOUGH:Will it be a fulfilment of your pledge if you only give time after midnight?
    MR. A. J. BALFOUR:Yes, I think so, but I will find time before midnight if I can.
    MR. GIBSON BOWLES:If it is brought on after midnight, I shall oppose it by all the means in my power.

    The Motor—Car Inquiry.
    MR. SOARES:I beg to ask the President of the Local Government Board whether he can yet state the terms of reference to the Royal Commission on Motor-Cars, and the names of the Commissioners.
    THE PRESIDENT OF THE LOCAL GOVERNMENT BOARD (Mr. GERALD BALFOUR,):I am proceeding with the necessary arrangements in this matter; but I am not at present in a position to give the hon. Member the information for which he asks.
    MR. SOARES:Can the right hon. Gentleman say when he will be?
    MR. GERALD BALFOUR:I am afraid it is impossible to do that.

    Housing Loans to Local Authorities.
    DR. MACNAMARA:I beg to ask the President of the Local Government Board whether he can state
    598
    separately for the years 1900, 1901, 1902, 1903, and 1904, how many applications in each year have been made to local authorities in England and Wales for loans, for the purpose of acquiring the ownership of small dwelling-houses, under the Small Dwellings Acquisition Act of 1899; how many such loans have been made in each year; and what amount has been advanced in each year.
    MR. GERALD BALFOUR:As regards London, I am informed by the London County Council that the total number of applications received by them during the years 1900–1904 inclusive was thirteen, and that the total amount advanced was £1,500. As regards the rest of England and Wales, the only information in my possession relates to cases of applications made by local authorities to the Local Government Board for sanction to loans. The total number of these applications for the years referred to was eighty-two, and the total amount sanctioned was £71,244. The figures for each year separately cannot conveniently be given in an oral reply, but I shall be happy to send them to the hon. Member if he desires it.

    National Vaccine Institution, London—Carcasses of Calves Sold for Food.
    MR. WEIR:I beg to ask the President of the Local Government Board, in view of the fact that calves used in the Army and Navy Vaccine Institute for the production of lymph are slaughtered and subjected to a post-mortem examination in each case before the carcasses are sold to the public, will he consider the expedience of adopting a similar course with calves used for the production of lymph at the National Vaccine Institution, London, before the carcasses are sold for human consumption.
    MR. GERALD BALFOUR:I would refer the hon. Member to the reply which I gave to his Question of the 30th May† last, in which I stated that the carcasses are thoroughly examined by a veterinary surgeon before being allowed to be sold for food.
    † (4) Debates, cxlvii. 21.

    Workmen's Compensation Act—Leeds Case.
    MR. KEIR HARDIE:I beg to ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department whether he is aware that three workmen who had met with accidents and been compensated under the Workmen's Compensation Act and had subsequently resumed work were dismissed by their employers, Messrs. Graham, Morton, and Company, of Leeds, solely because the Royal Exchange Accident Company refused to continue the risk of insuring the firm against further claims in their case; and whether he proposes taking any action to protect workmen against dismissal in such cases.
    THE SECRETARY OF STATE FOR THE HOME DEPARTMENT (Mr. AKERS-DOUGLAS,):I have no information with regard to these three cases beyond that which the hon. Member has been good enough to send me, but it appears that each of the three men had received a substantial sum by way of commuted allowance in respect of their continuing disability to work, and that the insurance company objected to their re-employment on the ground of this disability. In these circumstances, since the men have been compensated for the disability which, as I gather, was the bar to their further employment, I fear that I cannot see what action I could take in the matter.
    MR. CROOKS:Will the right hon. Gentleman refer the whole of this case to the law officers of the Crown to see whether it is possible to take action against the insurance company for intimidation and preventing the men earning their daily bread, notwithstanding the fact that the employer is willing to allow them to work. Surely what is sauce for the workmen is sauce for the insurance company.
    MR. AKERS-DOUGLAS:T do not think that can be alleged against the insurance company. The company have paid for the disabilities suffered by these men, and I do not see that I can go so far as the hon. Member suggests.
    MR. CROOKS:They interfere with all the workmen in the firm, because they say that unless the firm discharges these three men they will refuse to insure any of the workmen. Surely we have the right to protect our men better than that.

    Cruelty to Children.
    MR. VINCENT KENNEDY:I beg to ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department if he will state the number of cases of cruelty to children brought before Courts of summary jurisdiction for the month of June last; the number of offenders; the amount of fines struck; the imprisonment-inflicted; the amount for which children dealt with were insured; and how many of these children had untimely deaths.
    MR. AKERS-DOUGLAS:I regret that there are no means of obtaining this information for the whole of the cases of cruelty to children dealt with by the Courts. The annual Criminal Statistics give the total number of persons proceeded against in each year for this offence, the number convicted, the number imprisoned, with the terms of imprisonment imposed, and the number fined. The latest year for which figures are at present available is 1903. A statement of the cases dealt with by the Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to Children is published by the society every month. Their statement for the month of June will probably appear very shortly.
    MR. VINCENT KENNEDY:The statement was, as a matter of fact, published a fortnight ago.

    Mine Fatalities.
    MR. T. RICHARDS:I beg to ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department if he will state the number of persons who have been killed by explosions during the last fifty years, in the South Wales and Monmouthshire collieries, and in all other collieries in Great Britain respectively.
    MR. AKERS-DOUGLAS:The figures are: in South Wales and Monmouth, 2,989; in the rest of Great Britain, 6,305.

    Agricultural Labourers' Wages.
    MR. BLACK:On behalf of the hon. and gallant Member for St. Andrews Burghs, I beg to ask the President of the Board of Agriculture whether, seeing that the average price of British wheat was 5s. 4d. per quarter, barley 4s. 6d. per quarter, and oats 2s. 6d. per quarter higher on July 1st, 1905, than on July 1st, 1904, he proposes to institute any inquiry as to why the rate of wages of agricultural labourers has not increased during the same period.
    THE PRESIDENT OF THE BOARD OF AGRICULTURE (Mr. AILWYN FELLOWES,):I do not know on what information the latter part of the Question of the hon. Member is based, but in any case it is certain that the wages of agricultural labourers depend upon many other considerations than the fluctuations in the prices of wheat, barley, and oats. Information as to the amount of those wages is collected periodically by the Board of Trade and published in the Labour Gazette and otherwise, and I do not think that any further inquiry on the subject could with advantage be instituted.

    Irish Bee-keeping Industry.
    MR. BOLAND:I beg to ask the President of the Board of Agriculture whether he proposes to take any, and, if so, what steps to prevent the injury to the bee-keeping industry caused by foul brood; and whether he is aware of the extent to which the Irish bee-keeping industry has already suffered through the absence of legislation in this matter.
    MR. AILWYN FELLOWES:We have prepared and issued a leaflet on the subject of Foul Brood in Bees, of which over 18,000 copies have been issued since November last in directions in which it seemed likely to be of service. I shall be glad to supply the hon. Member with copies, and to consider any suggestions as to the manner in which the leaflet can be further utilised. A considerable number of county councils give instruction in bee-keeping in one form or another, including directions as
    602
    to the manner in which foul brood should be dealt with, and our inspectors are instructed to keep the matter constantly in view. With regard to legislation, I am afraid that so far as Great Britain is concerned none could be undertaken with much hope of success until greater unanimity prevails amongst bee-keepers as to its necessity and advantages, and as to the general form it should take.
    MR. BOLAND:Is the hon. Gentleman not aware that in Ireland we are prepared for any legislation that may be necessary?
    MR. AILWYN FELLOWES:But there is not unanimity all over the United Kingdom on the subject.

    Gomshall Railway Accident—Compensation.
    MR. WEIR:I beg to ask the Secretary to the Board of Trade if he will ascertain to what extent the four soldiers who were injured at the Gomshall Station on the South Eastern Railway on February 20th, 1904, through an engine becoming derailed, have been compensated; and, in view of the report of the inspecting officer, will he state what action has been taken by the railway company to prevent similar accidents.
    THE PARLIAMENTARY SECRETARY TO THE BOARD OF TRADE (Mr. BONAR LAW,):I am informed by the railway company that the crossing at which the accident in question occurred, and which is referred to in the report of the inspecting officer, was at once replaced, and that the Reading branch of the railway has been and is now undergoing renewal. The compensation to the passengers injured in the accident is not a matter with which the Board of Trade have to deal, but I may say that the company have stated that each of the injured men was compensated to his satisfaction.

    Veal and Vaccine.
    MR. WEIR:I beg to ask the hon. Member for West Essex, as Chairman of the Kitchen and Refreshment Committee, in view of the fact that calves used in the Local Government Board

    603
    National Vaccine Establishment for the production of lymph for vaccination purposes are sold in London for human food, will he consider the desirability of excluding veal from the House of Commons Dining Room menu unless it is well known that the supply has not been derived from vaccine stations.
    COLONEL LOCKWOOD:As it would appear that after the animals are slaughtered their carcasses are thoroughly examined, I feel that no danger can possibly ensue to the hon. Member from the consumption of veal in the House of Commons.
    MR. WEIR:May we rest assured that the manager of the refreshment department takes every precaution that the carcasses of calves honeycombed with smallpox virus shall not be brought into the kitchen of the House?
    COLONEL LOCKWOOD:The hon. Member is doubtless aware that as most calves are popularly supposed to come from Essex, for the safety of the public they are properly examined.

    Physical Exercises in Elementary Schools.
    SIR HOWARD VINCENT:I beg to ask the Secretary to the Board of Education if drill and physical exercises are now an obligatory subject of the Elementary Education Code, and what weekly period of school time has to be given to it; and if His Majesty's inspectors are instructed to be careful that no departure from the rule is permitted.
    THE PARLIAMENTARY SECRETARY TO THE BOARD OF EDUCATION (Sir WILLIAM ANSON,):No subjects are obligatory under the Code, but physical exercises, which generally include drill, are prescribed as a subject which should as a rule be taught in all departments of the school, and are, in fact, almost universally taught. The Board consider that at least one hour's instruction a week should be given, the hour being divided into two or three portions. Recreative exercises should also be daily and constantly practised. The Board are shortly issuing a volume of Hints to Teachers in which the subject will be dealt with. Under the circum-
    604
    stances I do not consider that any special instructions to His Majesty's inspectors are needed.

    Island of Lewis Schools
    MR. WEIR:I beg to ask the Lord—Advocate whether he is aware that the practice of carrying peats to school is still in force at several schools in the Island of Lewis, and will he say why the circular on the subject, which was issued by the Scottish Office some years ago, is not enforced.
    THE LORD-ADVOCATE (Mr. SCOTT DICKSON,):I am not aware that the practice referred to is in force in any school. A circular on the subject was issued in January, 1894, and the attention of the school boards in Lewis was again specifially directed to this circular in October, 1902. The matter can be further dealt with only on the receipt of specific complaints from parents or others.

    The Schoolmaster at Lemreway.
    MR. WEIR:I beg to ask the Lord-Advocate if he will state what decision has been arrived at in regard to the petition which has been forwarded to him from the parents of children attending the public school at Lemreway, Stornoway, urging that Mr. John D. Mitchel should be retained in his appointment as master of the school.
    MR. SCOTT DICKSON:The petition in question has been remitted to the school board of the parish of Lochs, and is, I understand, to be considered at a meeting of the school board and managers to be held this week.

    Galway Assizes—Treatment of Jurors.
    MR. VINCENT KENNEDY:I beg to ask Mr. Attorney-General for Ireland if he is aware that in the recent trials at Galway a number of the jurors were ordered to stand by by the Crown; that several of these gentlemen protested against their enforced attendance, alleging that they had been ordered to stand by twice a day for four days by the Crown; and whether this interference with the liberties of the subject will at once receive the consideration of the Government.
    THE ATTORNEY—GENERAL FOR IRELAND (Mr. ATKINSON,):The Answer to the first inquiry is in the affirmative. As far as I have been able to ascertain, two jurors who had been ordered to stand by asked to be excused from further attendance. It was, of course, impossibleto comply with that request, as these jurors might, after the panel had been perused, be required to serve. In this there is no interference with the liberty of the subject, and there h no intention on the part of the Government to alter a practice which experience has shown to be necessary for the impartial administration of justice.
    MR. VINCENT KENNEDY:But are the facts stated in the Question correct?
    MR. ATKINSON:My information is that several jurors were ordered to stand aside. I have no knowledge as to the number of times. I am also told that two of them asked to be released and were refused.
    MR. T. W. RUSSELL:Is there any fund out of which the expenses of these jurors can be paid?
    MR. ATKINSON:No, Sir.
    MR. T. HARRINGTON:Seeing that there was a panel of 293 jurors, was there any likelihood these men would be called on?
    MR. ATKINSON:The hon. Member knows perfectly well that they might if there were an insufficient number of jurors.
    MR. T. HARRINGTON:Not likely with so big a panel.
    MR. CHARLES DEVLIN:Is it one of the functions of a packed jury to pass resolutions denouncing the United Irish League as these jurors did?
    MR. ROCHE (Galway, E.):How many jurors were ordered to stand aside by the Crown?
    MR. ATKINSON:I must ask for notice of that.

    Employment of Land Clerks by the Estates Commissioners
    MR. SLOAN:I beg to ask the Chief Secretary to the Lord-Lieutenant of Ireland how many land clerks have been employed by the Estates Commissioners in fulfilment of the promise made by the right hon. Gentleman the Member for Dover during the passing of the Land Act, 1903; and will he communicate with the Estates Commissioners with a view of employment being given to specially qualified land clerks in the Estates Commissioners' office on terms approved of by the Treasury.
    THE CHIEF SECRETARY FOR IRELAND (Mr. WALTER LONG,):One such clerk has been appointed. The Commissioners are prepared to favourably consider the employment of land clerks to negotiate sales if names are brought before them by vendors.
    MR. DILLON:I hope men will not be appointed who are bitterly hostile to the spirit and letter of the Act.

    Dublin Metropolitan Police Force Finance.
    MR. NANNETTI:I beg to ask the Chief Secretary to the Lord-Lieutenant of Ireland if he will state the chief items of expenditure in the sum of £62,590 which goes to make up the difference between the pay of the superintendents, inspectors, station sergeants, sergeants, and constables of the Dublin Metropolitan Police, and the total cost of the entire establishment, which amounts to £162,960; and if in future he will cause these particulars to be inserted in the Annual Statistical Tables published by the Chief Commissioner.
    MR. WALTER LONG:The particulars asked for are set forth in the Annual Appropriation Accounts. Further publication appears to be unnecessary.

    Teachers and Irish Training Colleges.
    MR. BOLAND:I beg to ask the Chief Secretary to the Lord-Lieutenant of Ireland whether permission will be given to teachers of national schools to attend

    607
    the Irish training colleges at Mount Partry and Ballingeary for the course of six weeks, without being compelled to provide a substitute; and whether he is aware that this permission is given to teachers who attend technical courses.
    MR. WALTER LONG:The Answer to the first inquiry is in the negative, and to the second in the affirmative. Elementary science is a compulsory subject of the school programme, while Irish is an optional subject. Instruction in Irish can be obtained by the teachers after school hours in most districts.

    Bartlemy Evicted Tenant
    MR. WILLIAM ABRAHAM:I beg to ask, the Chief Secretary to the Lord-Lieutenant of Ireland if he will state whether the Estates Commissioners have received an application for reinstatement from Mrs. Mary Eagan, an evicted tenant on the Nason Estate, Bartlemy, Cork County; and, having regard to the fact that her former holding is now in the landlord's possession, what steps, if any, will the Commissioners take to bring about the restoration of this evicted tenant.
    MR. WALTER LONG:Yes, Sir; but in the absence of proceedings for sale of the estate, the Commissioners are unable to take any effective steps for the evicted tenant's reinstatement.
    MR. CULLINAN:Where a landlord is willing to sell to the Estates Commissioners a holding, but not the entire estate, can the Commissioners purchase
    MR. WALTER LONG:I must ask for notice of that Question, so that I may communicate with the Commissioners.
    MR. SWIFT MACNEILL:You are always communicating with them.

    Dursey Island.
    MR. GILHOOLY:I beg to ask the Chief Secretary to the Lord-Lieutenant of Ireland whether he is
    608
    aware that the tenants of Mr. Leigh White, on Dursey Island, have offered to pay two years more than the purchase value put on the island by the valuer sent down by the Congested Districts Board; that a number of policemen are located under canvas on the island; that a number of them have had attacks of illness owing to being exposed to the severity of the weather; that police constables who had no experience in the management of boats are compelled to engage in that pursuit; and that a crew of them narrowly escaped drowning, and were saved by the islanders; and whether, in view of the offer made for the purchase of the island by the tenants, the police force will be continued on the island.
    MR. WALTER LONG:I have no information as to the first inquiry. Policemen are quartered under canvas on the island for the protection of the caretakers of an evicted farm. There has been no case of illness among the police owing to exposure to the weather. The constables employed as boatmen are competent oarsmen, and no narrow escape from drowning has occurred. The police will be retained on the island so long as their presence is necessary.
    MR. KILBRIDE:How many policemen became ill owing to the fact that the porter on the island went sour?
    MR. GILHOOLY:Is the right hon. Gentleman aware that while one policeman was in hospital both his father and mother died?
    MR. WALTER LONG:I do not see what that has to do with the Question on the Paper.
    MR. T. W. RUSSELL:Is there no chance of settling this wretched dispute?
    MR. WALTER LONG:I should not like to express an opinion.

    Evicted Tenants on the White Estate, near Bantry.
    MR. GILHOOLY:I beg to ask the Chief Secretary to the Lord-Lieutenant of Ireland whether he can state what steps

    609
    have been taken by the Estates Commissioners to reinstate or provide for the evicted tenants on the White Estate, near Bantry.
    MR. WALTER LONG:The former holdings of these evicted tenants are occupied by other tenants, with whom the Commissioners had no power to interfere when the estate was being sold. In the event of the Commissioners acquiring untenanted land in the district the claims of the evicted tenants will be considered.
    MR. GILHOOLY:Have the Estates Commissioners made any offer to the grabbers of these farms with a view to the reinstatement of the evicted tenants? Have they exercised their powers under the Act to offer compensation?
    MR. WALTER LONG:I do not Know whether they have power to do anything of the kind. No doubt they have exercised the powers they possess.
    MR. FLAVIN:Have they made efforts to reinstate these tenants?
    MR. WALTER LONG:Most certainly, they are doing their utmost to carry out the Act.
    MR. FLAVIN:In my constituency there are many untenanted lands which the Commissioners have not tried to purchase.

    Irish Text-books in Connaught Schools.
    MR. O'MALLEY:I beg to ask the Chief Secretary to the Lord-Lieutenant of Ireland whether the Commissioners of National Education will add to their list of text books in Irish additional books particularly suitable for schools in Connaught.
    MR. WALTER LONG:The Commissioners are prepared to consider the question of adding to their list of textbooks any such books as may be submitted for sanction by managers through the Board's inspectors.

    Clifden Harbour.
    MR. O'MALLEY:I beg to ask the Chief Secretary to the Lord-Lieutenant
    610
    of Ireland whether he is aware that the money promised under the Mirine Works (Ireland) Act for the construction of a pier in Clifden Harbour has not yet been expended on that work; and whether, in view of the importance to the propsr development of the fishing industry of the construction of such a per, he will, without further delay, carry out the intention and promise of the Act in respect to Clifden.
    MR. WALTER LONG:In March, 1903, the Government announced to the county council its intention to allocate from funds provided under the Marine Works Act a sum of £4,000 on works at Kinvarra, Salthill, or Clifden. Of this amount £1,100 have already been allocated to Kinvarra. The question of undertaking works at Clifden is at present engaging consideration.

    Granard Labourers' Cottages.
    MR. J. P. FARRELL:I beg to ask the Chief Secretary to the Lord-Lieutenant of Ireland whether he is aware that six labourers living in labourers' cottages in Granard urban district, have applied for an extension of their present allotments by half an acre each to the Granard District Council, but have been referred to the urban council by the former; and if he will direct that in holding an inquiry into any representations in the rural district the inspector will exercise the powers conferred by Section 4 of 54 and 55 Vic., c. 71, in respect of the failure of the urban district to take action in this matter.
    MR. WALTER LONG:The Labourers Acts do not apply to urban districts. Granard has become an urban district since the cottages referred to were provided by the rural sanitary authority.

    Mulloy Estate, County Roscommon.
    MR. TULLY:I beg to ask the Chief Secretary to the Lord-Lieutenant of Ireland whether the Congested Districts Board can state when they propose to have an official inspection made of the Mulloy Estate, Ballyfermoyle, county Roscommon, with a view to its purchase by them.
    MR. WALTER LONG:The Board will have an inspection made as soon as practicable. They cannot at present fix a date.

    Alleged Outrage at Drumdoe.
    MR. TULLY:I beg to ask the Chief Secretary to the Lord-Lieutenant of Ireland whether he can state the nature of the police report as to alleged shooting at the residence of Mr. E. Cole Magenis, of Drumdoe, near Boyle; and whether it is intended to prosecute any person in connection with the alleged occurrence.
    MR. JAMES O'KELLY:I beg also to ask the Chief Secretary to the Lord—Lieutenant of Ireland whether he has called for and obtained the reports of the district inspector of constabulary and the head constable of the locality in reference to the allegation that at a place near Boyle, in the county of Roscommon, the house of a man named Maginnis was fired into and a fight ensued for three hours, one man being wounded; whether inquiry into the matter has resulted in the discovery of any marks of the house in question having been fired into, or of the windows having been broken from the outside; and whether he will lay upon the Table the police reports.
    MR. WALTER LONG:The police investigation in this case has not yet been concluded, and I am, therefore, not at present in a position to make any further statement upon it.
    MR. HAYDEN:Can the right hon. Gentleman say definitely whether there was any attack made on this house? Such a statement has been sent all over the country, and yet it is well known there was no attack.
    MR. WALTER LONG:I should hesitate to accept the latter statement as inquiries are being made. On the last occasion I said there were grave doubts whether an attack was made.
    MR. TULLY:Is the right hon. Gentleman aware that only one window was broken during this five hours fight?
    MR. JOHN REDMOND:Is it not the fact that a long sensational report appeared in the English papers ten days ago of a serious attack by armed men upon this house, and of a fight lasting three hours, men being wounded and carried off? Does not the right hon. Gentleman know that this statement was incorrect, and ought he not to correct it without allowing a long interval of time to elapse?
    MR. WALTER LONG:The hon. Gentleman forgets that when I was asked a Question by one of my hon. friends immediately after the occurrence, I said there must be two parties to a quarrel, and we had only been able to find one in this case. Again and again I have expressed from my place here my regret at the circulation of such reports as these without their being properly verified. The inquiries by the police into this case are proceeding, and the House may rest assured I will lose no time in concluding them and publishing the result. If there has been no attack I will take care the correction is issued.
    MR. HAYDEN:It is a fortnight since the Question was first asked. How long are we to await the correction of this slander?
    MR. WALTER LONG:It is impossible for me to say how long the inquiry will take. Nobody is more desirious than I am that unfounded reports should not be circulated.
    MR. TULLY:Is the right hon. Gentleman aware the local police say there are no traces of any gun shots having been fired?
    MR. PATRICK O'BRIEN:Will the right hon. Gentleman try and identify the ruffian who sent this out to the Press? He is to be found in Boyle town?
    MR. WALTER LONG:I will do my best to arrive at the facts.

    Boyle Ancient Monument
    MR. TULLY:I beg to ask the Chief Secretary to the Lord—Lieutenant of Ireland whether the Estates Commissioners can explain the reason for their delay in obtaining a report from their inspector as to the recent malicious destruction of an ancient monument, their property, near Boyle; what steps have they taken to have it restored; and whether they have approved of any claim for malicious injury being lodged in regard to this affair.
    MR. WALTER LONG:I am making inquiry into this matter.

    King—Harman Estate.
    MR. TULLY:I beg to ask the Chief Secretary to the Lord-Lieutenant of Ireland whether he can state in how many cases on the King-Harman Estate has Clause 2 of the regulations, made by the Lord-Lieutenant under Section 23 (8) of the Irish Land Act, 1903, been applied; and, if so, what are the na-nes of the cases; and what has been the subject-matter of the complaints.
    MR. WALTER LONG:No case on this estate has been postponed under the regulation referred to.

    The Termon Holding.
    MR. TULLY:I beg to ask the Chief Secretary to the Lord-Lieutenant of Ireland whether the Estates Commissioners can state the amount of the extra bonus that must be paid to the vendor for Termon holding as untenanted land as compared with its status as tenanted land on the King-Harman Estate, because they stopped the sale of the tenant's interest to ex-County Inspector Scott; is this holding a town park inside Boyle township; and how far is it situate from the congested areas on this estate.
    MR. WALTER LONG:The first inquiry cannot be answered until the allocation of funds takes place. A small portion of the land is situated within the township of Boyle. There are no congested areas on this estate.

    Kerry Evicted Tenants.
    MR. MURPHY:I beg to ask the Chief Secretary to the Lord-Lieutenant of Ireland whether he can state whether the Congested Districts Board would be prepared to reconsider the question of their possession of the evicted farms at Cragg and Ardcrone, county Kerry, with the view of a satisfactory settlement of the claims of the evicted tenants, Mrs. Cronin and Mr. Lyne, in accordance with the local representations made to them.
    MR. WALTER LONG:The Answer to this Question is in the negative. The hon. Member has more than once been informed that it would be altogether against public policy to reinstate the ex-tenants, who are defaulting annuitants under the Land Purchase Acts.

    Rosscarbery Evicted Tenants.
    MR. EDWARD BARRY:I beg to ask the Chief Secretary to the Lord-Lieutenant of Ireland whether he is aware that the farm in Castleventry, Rosscarbery, from which Patrick Donovan was evicted, is now in the Court of Chancery; whether the Court authorised the auctioneers to sell the hay by private auction; and, if so, to whom; whether the Court intends selling the farm privately; and whether any steps will be taken to restore the evicted tenant to the farm.
    MR. WALTER LONG:The case referred to cannot be traced in the Court of Chancery upon the information contained in the Question. If the hon. Member will communicate to me the name of the owner, further inquiry will be made.
    MR. EDWARD BARRY:I beg to ask the Chief Secretary to the Lord-Lieutenant of Ireland whether, seeing the Rosscarbery section of the Carbery Estate has been sold to the tenants, any arrangements have been arrived at between landlord and tenants to restore Patrick M'Carthy, evicted tenant, to the farm at Carrigfaddean, Castle Freke; whether the farm is still in possession of Arthur Dearne, J. P., Clonakilty; whether the landlord offered him any compensation

    615
    for disturbance; and, if so, how much; and what steps are being taken by the Estates Commissioners to assist the landlord in restoring M'Carthy to the farm formerly held by him.
    MR. WALTER LONG:Proceedings for the sale of this estate have been instituted before the Commissioners, but the name of Mr. Dearne does not appear among the purchasing tenants. The Commissioners have no knowledge of the facts mentioned in the second and third queries. The evicted tenant's application will be considered when the estate has been inspected.
    MR. EDWARD BARRY:Will the right hon. Gentleman take steps to have this evicted tenant restored?
    MR. WALTER LONG:I have said that the tenant's application will be considered by the Commissioners.

    Irish Agricultural Department—Staff
    MR. J. P. FARRELL:I beg to ask the Chief Secretary to the Lord-Lieutenant of Ireland, in view of the fact that the Irish Agricultural Department have in their service a number of Catholic gentlemen of ten years service and upwards and with salaries of less than £100 a year, and that other gentlemen of less than two years service in the Department received positions carrying salaries of from £200 to £350 a year, and whether, in view of the dissatisfaction in the Department and of the fact that local bodies have expressed the opinion that the facts require independent examination, he will give an opportunity for such independent examination at an early date; and, if not, what steps does he propose to take in the matter.
    MR. WALTER LONG:I have nothing to add to my replies to the numerous Questions already addressed to me in this matter.

    Trinity College Estates in Kerry.
    MR. THOMAS O'DONNELL:I beg to ask the Chief Secretary to the Lord-Lieutenant of Ireland whether any, and, if so, what estates in Kerry either let directly
    616
    by Trinity College to tenants or to middle landlords have yet been sold under the Land Act of 1903; what is the price to tenants and the price demanded of landlords for the redemption of their head rents; whether any steps have been taken for the sale of the Wren and Stokes Estates; and, if not, will he explain why.
    MR. WALTER LONG:The reply to this Question is in the negative.
    MR. THOMAS O'DONNELL:Have any steps been taken to enable this landlord to carry out the Act?
    MR. WALTER LONG:I am fully aware of the importance of this Question. I cannot say when the Government will be in a position to make any recommendation on the subject.

    Irish National School Plans
    MR. BOLAND:I beg to ask the Secretary to the Treasury whether the proposed new plans for national schools in Ireland have now been approved of; and, if so, can he state when they will be issued.
    MR. J. P. FARRELL:I beg also to ask the Secretary to the Treasury if he will explain the delay in extending the scope and powers of managers of schools in Ireland by increasing plan VI. (a) of the Board of Works for the erection of national schools in Ireland; whether he is aware that in consequence of the increase in the cost of materials and erection the specifications under this plan are now impossible of being cairied out; and when the Board of Works intend to take action in this matter.
    THE FINANCIAL SECERTARY OF THE TERASURY (Mr. VICTOR CAVENDISH,):I have as yet no statement to make on this matter, which is, however, I hope, on the eve of a final settlement.
    MR. J. P. FARRELL:Is the hon. Gentleman aware that this matter has been under consideration at least six years.
    MR. VICTOR CAVENDISH:I know, but I hope it will soon be settled now.
    MR. PATRICK O'BRIEN:Before the end of this Parliament? Is there any Statute of Limitations?

    Irish Teachers' Pension Fund.
    MR. THOMAS O'DONNELL:I beg to ask the Secretary to the Treasury whether he intends to appoint a Committee of the House to inquire into the Irish Teachers' Pension Fund, with a view to suggest improvements or alterations of the present system.
    MR. VICTOR CAVENDISH:As I have stated on previous occasions, I consider the appointment of a Committee would be premature until we are in possession of the results of the quinquennial valuation, which takes place at the close of this year.
    MR. THOMAS O'DONNELL:When I raised the question before, the hon. Gentleman promised to consider the appointment of this Committee apart from the Departmental Committee.
    MR. VICTOR CAVENDISH:Yes, but my decision must rest upon the Report of the Departmental Committee.

    Purchases of Army Horses in Ulster.
    MR. EDWARD MITCHELL:I beg to ask the Secretary of State for War how many cavalry horses have been bought in Ulster during the past six months by His Majesty's Government; and if he can state the numbers bought in each province in Ireland for a similar purpose during that period.
    MR. ARNOLD-FORSTER:The total number of cavalry horses purchased in Ulster since January 1st, 1905, is eighty-one. In the other provinces in Ireland for the same period the figures are as follows:—Leinster,409; Munster, 264; Connaught, nil.
    MR. EDWARD MITCHELLwas understood to ask why, if private dealers could buy in Ulster, the horses could not be obtained there for Army purposes as well?
    [No Answer was returned.]

    Belfast Postal Official's Trial and Acquittal
    MR. SLOAN:I beg to ask the Postmaster-General if his attention has been called to the case of Robert M'Whirter, tried at the current Belfast Assizes, on July 18th, on a charge of embezzling £5; to the nature of the evidence given on behalf of the Crown by a man previously unaccustomed to the work of the Savings Bank Department; to the charge of the Lord Chief Baron; and to the fact that the jury promptly returned a verdict of not guilty; aid, seeing that M'Whirter has been suspended from duty, and this unproven criminal charge renders it difficult for him to secure work elsewhere, and that his record of seventeen years has been hitherto unblemished, will he take steps to have him reinstated.
    LORD STANLEY:I have just received a report of the trial and other papers relating to the case referred to by the hon. Member, and I will give them my most careful consideration. The whole thing will be gone into carefully.

    Post Office Property in Dublin
    MR. T. HARRINGTON:I beg to ask the Postmaster-General whether the houses, Nos. 101 and 102, Amiens Street, Dublin, are the property of the postal authorities in Dublin; whether he is aware that the condition in which they are kept is complained of by the business people of the city; and whether there is any intention of rebuilding them, or putting them in a decent state of repair.
    LORD STANLEY:The houses referred to by the hon. Member belong to the Post Office and are used as a basket store. I find that representations as to the condition of the two housjs have been made, and it is proposed to pull them down.

    Crasdoney (Cavan) Railway Fatality.
    MR. J. P. FARRELL:I beg to ask the Secretary to the Board of Trade if he will state the result of the inquiry, if any, held into the death of John Brennan, who was accidentally killed at Crasdoney Station, near Cavan, in December, 1901.
    MR. BONAR LAW:No inquiry was held into the accident to John Brennan. I observe that it took place as far back as the 20th December, 1900.
    MR. VINCENT KENNEDY:Is the right hon. Gentleman aware that the family dependent on this man are now in a terrible state of destitution? Will he make further inquiry with a view to setting them compensation?
    [No reply was audible.]

    Irish Provident Assurance Company.
    MR. THOMAS O'DONNELL:I beg to ask the Secretary to the Board of Trade whether any, and, if so, what decision has been come to by the law officers of the Crown with regard to the position of the Irish Provident Assurance Company.
    MR. BONAR LAW:I am informed that the inquiries regarding the Irish Provident Assurance Company are not yet complete, and that the matter is still under the consideration of the authorities in Dublin.
    MR. THOMAS O'DONNELL:As this is a matter which concerns a large number of poor men will the hon. Gentleman press it forward?
    MR. BONAR LAW:I can assure the hon. Member that it is being gone into very thoroughly both by the Board of Trade and the Irish Department.
    MR. FLAVIN:You have already taken more than three months over the inquiry.

BUSINESS OF THE HOUSE
MR. JOHN REDMONDasked the First Lord of the Treasury whether the promise given when the Bill creating the Irish Development Grant Fund was passed, that each session an opportunity would be afforded for the allocation of the fund, would be redeemed, especially as the Estimate issued early in the session had been withdrawn and an entirely different Estimate substituted only two days ago.
MR. A. J. BALFOUR,in reply, said that if the hon. and learned Gentleman would allow him to look into the facts and consult with his right hon. friend, he would then give him all the information he could on the subject:
MR. GIBSON BOWLESasked whether, this being in the nature of a new Estimate, it could be taken on one of the allotted days.
MR. A: J. BALFOURdid not think it came under that description.
MR. JOHN REDMOND:It is headed "Revised Estimate," and there is a note as follows:—"This Estimate is to be substituted for the Estimate presented for the same service earlier in the year." It is dated July 24th. I will put another Question down for Monday. May I further ask whether the Government really intend to introduce their amending Land Bill, which has met with hostile criticism from all quarters of the House. If it is introduced, I can tell the right hon. Gentleman that it will be treated as a highly controversial measure.
MR. A. J. BALFOURsaid the Bill to which the hon. and learned Gentleman referred was one which was as muck in the interests of the Irish tenants, indeed more of the tenants than of the Irish landlords. [Cries of "No."] That was the intention of the Government; it might have been ill carried out in the Bill. In view of the explicit declaration made by the hon. and learned Gentleman, and in view of the period of the session, of course it would be impossible to proceed with the Bill if it was going to meet with determined and hostile opposition on the part of the majority of Irish Members.

FOREIGN SHIPS (STATUTORY REQUIREMENTS).
Report from the Select Committee, with Minutes of Evidence, brought up, and read.
Report to lie upon the Table, and to be printed. [No. 269

WORKMEN'S TRAINS.
Report from the Select Committee, with Minutes of Evidence and an. Appendix, brought up, and read.
Report to lie upon the Table, and to Reprinted. [No. 270.]

NEW BILL.
  LAND VALUES ASSESSMENT (SCOTLAND) BILL.
  "To amend the Law relating to the. Assessment of Land Values in Scotland," presented by Mr. Munro Ferguson; supported by Mr. Dalziel, Mr. Douglas, and Mr. Lamont; to be read a second time upon Saturday, 12th August, and to be printed. [Bill 298.]

  SUPPLY [17TH ALLOTTED DAY].
  Considered in Committee.
  (In the Committee.)
  [Mr. GRANT LAWSON (Yorkshire, N. R., Thirsk) in the Chair.]
  CIVIL SERVICES AND REVENUE DEPARTMENTS ESTIMATES,1905–6.

  CLASS II.
  Motion made, and Question proposed,; 'That a sum, not exceeding £28,920, 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 Department of His Majesty's Secretary of State for the Colonies, including a Grant in Aid of certain Expenses connected with Emigration."
  MR. SYDNEY BUXTONrose to call attention to the Transvaal Constitution. The Colonial Secretary the other day made a speech in which he taunted the Opposition with not having brought on this Vote earlier in order to discuss this particular question. He thought the taunt was very unworthy of the right Ion. Gentleman, as there were very
  622
  good reasons for not pressing it on. One was that the matter of time did not arise. The whole question had been practically taken out of the power of the House to deal with by the issue of Letters Patent. Then he hoped the right hon. Gentleman would allow him to say that, though they dissented from the proposals he made, hon. Members on the Opposition side desired as much as he did to avoid any action that might accentuate friction in South Africa, or tend to jeopardise the settlement of this very difficult question. They, quite as much as the right hon. Gentleman himself, desired the peace and prosperity of South Africa, and they equally desired with him a satisfactory settlement. He regretted very much that the question had been taken out of the purview of the House. He would have thought the Government would have welcomed the assistance and criticisms of the Opposition on that very important question. They had not been so singularly and uniformly successful either in their anticipation, or action, or results in South African affairs, as to justify them in arrogating to themselves omniscient wisdom with regard to South African matters. Moreover, this House had exceptional claims to consideration in this matter. Nobody could deny that the last election turned largely on the question of the settlement in South Africa, and that the Government were given a majority because it was supposed by the electors that they would be better able to bring about a rapid and successful peace and a good settlement after the war. The House ought under such circumstances to have had an opportunity of discussing this question in a friendly way.
  Being now challenged he was bound to say that in two material matters the policy of the Government was not one in which he for one was able to concur. The first was the decision which the Government had come to in regard to the Orange Free State. There the problem was a. much simpler one than in the case of the Transvaal; and if any forward steps were to be taken at all, it should, in his opinion, have been the Orange Free State that should have taken precedence, for there

  623
  they had no complications in regard to mining or Chinese labour, and the State had for many years been accustomed to absolute self-government of the most constitutional description. While he was in office they never had any trouble of any sort or kind with the Orange Free State. In this connection, he regretted that Lord Selborne had declared that the Government could hold out no promise as to the time when the care of this colony would be taken in hand, and that reform might not take place for years to come. He did not think that would tend to the smooth or satisfactory working of the new Transvaal Constitution.
  The other point in which he entirely dissented from the decision of the Government was that instead of giving to the Transvaal responsible government they were going to give it representative institutions. He and his friends were not in a position to say whether the time had arrived when the Transvaal was fitted for complete self-government. But it would have been far better, if necessary, to have waited for a further period in order to grant, as one step, complete self-government rather than representative institutions. The Government had always said that they intended to treat the Transvaal on the basis of a self-governing colony, and that the Colonial Secretary was bound by the pledges of his predecessor. But the only pledge given by the right hon. Member for West Birmingham was that at some time or other the Transvaal should have full responsible government. The Colonial Secretary had spoken of the risks of giving full responsible institutions to the Transvaal; but whatever steps were taken in this matter there were risks. The unfortunate thing about South Africa was that there were risks in any course of action which might be taken there. In his opinion, however, there was less risk in giving a full Constitution to the Transvaal at the proper time than in carrying this proposal of representative institutions and then subsequently granting a Constitution. He was glad to think, in respect of the racial difficulties, that a large section of British sub-
  624
  jects in the Transvaal were in accord and in co-operation with the Dutch, and this agreement and co-operation would do a great deal to help the future government of the country. He feared, however, that the grant of a. representative system, instead of reconciling the Dutch, might alienate the British, and thus there might spring up a common antagonism against this country, who, after all, would still remain responsible for the country. A good feature about the proposal of the Government was that it would not need any very revolutionary step to move from the present position to the next step of full self-government.
  The substantial difference between a constitutional and representative government was that in the one case the Executive was under the control of the representatives of the people, and in the other case the Executive was irresponsible and could neither be made nor dismissed by the representatives. Having quoted from Sir Charles Bruce in condemnation of a system of hybrid Constitution which existed in so many Crown Colonies, he pointed out that there were drawbacks and dangers in. the representative system as compared with complete self-government. Under it the Executive had the power of the purse, though in the minority, while the representatives in the majority had the pow to refuse the proposals of the Government and to criticise the subjects brought before them. The minority could prevent the majority from having their way, and the majority could similarly block the proposals of the minority. On the one side there was power without responsibility on the other responsibility without power. This position of affairs was not calculated to smooth the working of Government institutions as. a whole. There was also the serious danger that such a Constitution must almost certainly lead to friction, justifying or even compelling delay in the granting of fuller powers. Finally, instead of self-government being given spontaneously and received gratefully, it would be given grudgingly, under pressure, and received without favour.

  625
  He hoped, however, that those interested in this question, would do their best to utilise the Constitut on which had been granted to the Transvaal, to make it successful, and would take a share in its administration and control. He would advise them to do so for this very good reason—that the more they showed themselves desirous of taking part in their own government, the sooner and easier it would be to give full self-government to the Transvaal. Those who sat on the Opposition side of the House still retained a profound belief in the healing virtues of responsible government and liberty. They thought that when the time had arrived for a step to be taken in that direction it should have been the step of granting a complete Constitution to the Transvaal. Such a Constitution would have ensured that liberty, equality, and fraternity which was best calculated to bring peace and prosperity to the Transvaal.
  MR. PEELsaid that the hon. Member who had just spoken had indulged in gloomy prophecies as to the result of the Constitution now granted and the delay in granting full responsible government to the Transvaal, though at the end of his speech he seemed rather to regret the statements he had made and had expressed the hope that the different races in South Africa would do all they could to work this Constitution in such a manner as would make responsible government possible in the near future. In the course of the hon. Gentleman's observations he had, however, omitted two considerations from his criticisms, one being that neither the Transvaal nor any of the colonies in South Africa were inhabited only by two white races. In the case of the Transvaal there was a vast population of a different character, which rendered all analogies based on the experience of other colonies, where that fact did not exist, entirely alien to the particular problem which had to be considered. The hon. Member made a useful and kindly admission which went far to dispose of the criticisms he had made, because he admitted that the Constitution as at present laid down would require very little change, and all that would have to be done in order to give full responsible
  626
  government would be to alter the relations of the electoral to the Executive parties. But the hon. Gentleman, went very far when he assumed to bring a general criticism against the whole system of what might be termed half-way houses to colonial Constitutions, and said that he would be willing that the present conditions should exist a little longer, if in the end responsible government was granted to the Transvaal. That was contrary to the chief precedents in colonial government. On questions of this kind they ought to be very careful how they departed from what was the usual course in granting a Constitution. The hon. Gentleman's criticisms seemed to imply that the system of half-way house representative government was likely to be permanent, but as a matter of fact it was introduced by his right hon. friend the Colonial Secretary as a temporary system; introduced merely to give these peoples in the Transvaal an opportunity to learn to work a responsible Constitution when it was granted to them; a Constitution which it might fall to the lot of hon. Gentlemen opposite to grant.
  Although the hon. Gentleman had criticised the action of the Government in with holding from the elected body several great questions, notably that of the railways which were controlled by the Inter-Colonial Council, he should not suggest that the Inter-Colonial Council ought to be abolished. The advantages of that body were obvious; they had co-ordinated the railways of the Transvaal and the Orange River Colony, and they had stimulated other portions of South Africa in their desire to combine other railways and work them together in one general system for the country. That must eventually come. It was only a question of time. There had been some changes in the composition of the Inter-Colonial Council which dealt with these railways, and as the Constitution of the Transvaal and the Orange River Colony broadened, a broader basis would be introduced into the control of these railways, and that broadening process would go on pari passu with that of the Constitution.
  His right hon. friend the Colonial Secretary had laid it down that the

  627
  natives should not have votes under the new Constitution, and that to safeguard the native races of the country special legislation was to be passed in the Colonial Legislature, legislation relating to native rights and interests. If he might venture to make a suggestion, he would suggest that that was not enough, because it might be that insufficient legislation, or legislation which was not of the proper kind, might be passed to deal with native interests. It had also to be remembered that there was a certain amount of native representation in Cape Colony, and although he would not say that it had worked well, there was a means of communication between the dark races of South Africa, and a certain feeling of annoyance might arise from the fact that while they had no voice in the affairs of the Transvaal, their fellow races in Cape Colony had some means of influencing the authorities of that colony. He would therefore suggest that there should be one or two gentlemen in the council itself to definitely represent native interests. I hey should ascertain what the wishes of the native races were, and influence, so far as they could, the council in those matters. That was a matter he ventured to press on his right hon. friend. He strongly deprecated many of the statements made that because of some technicality in connection with the guarantee, those who guaranteed the £30,000,000 would repudiate their guarantee when elected to the council. He believed that they fully recognised their obligations, and that their guarantee would be taken up. It would be, he thought, most unfortunate, if they were to suggest that these men, after taking advantage of a bargain or arrangement of that kind, would go back upon it. It seemed to him inconceivable that men who wished to start on a new representative career, shortly to emerge into full responsible government, should seek to repudiate the responsibility and obligations they had voluntarily taken upon themselves.
  MR. FULLERsaid that it was his last wish to approach the subject raised by his hon. friend in a controversial or Party spirit, but he
  628
  wished to echo the opinion expressed by his hon. friend that a certain resentment was felt in certain quarters at the boast which the Colonial Secretary had made, that because his colonial policy in South Africa bad not been challenged by the Opposition in that House that therefore that policy was approved of. He reminded the right hon. Gentleman that apart from the reasons given by his hon. friend for not raising the question before, there was a third reason which had not been given. The first reason given for not raising this question before was that there was no urgency, and the second was that the whole matter had been removed from the purview of that House. But the third reason, which had not been put forward, was their desire and endeavour to criticise these matters in such a way as not to prevent the peace, prosperity, and safety of South Africa being achieved by anything that might be said either in or outside that House.
  While he agreed generally with the views expressed by his hon. friend, he thought the Orange River Colony would be fortunate if it was allowed to go by one step from Crown colony government to full responsible government. He was at a loss to understand why the Government had embarked on the policy embodied in the proposed Constitution. There had been no demand whatever for this "halfway house" policy from either Boer or Briton in the colony. There had been no great grumbling against the policy of Crown colony government. The Dutch population were accepting the inevitable in no unfriendly spirit, and were looking forward to the time when responsible government would be given, but as the result of the introduction of this proposed Constitution the white population of the Transvaal had divided itself into two hostile camps, and political agitation, which was practically unknown until November of last year, had greatly developed. He thought, therefore, that on all grounds it would have been better to have deferred the settlement of this question until some future date, and then to have granted full responsible government. If the future of South Africa was to be assured as an integral portion of the British Empire, it was absolutely essential

  629
  that the active co-operation of the Dutch population should be enlisted in the government of the country. So far as could be judged, this Constitution would not secure the co-operation of the Dutch population, and he believed that if such a system of government were imposed upon the Transvaal it Was bound to fail in the long run. The policy was not Lord Milner's, but had been imposed upon the Colonial Government in the Transvaal by the Government at home. That was evident from the speech of Lord Milner in reply to a deputation from the Progressive Party at Johannesburg on January 10th last, when he said—
  "Entirely apart from any personal opinion, I have received instructions from the Home Government to make what suggestions I can and to throw what light I can upon the execution of what is their settled policy—which is to introduce here a representative Legislature elected by the people, with an Executive which will continue for a time to be appointed by the Crown."
  Whether or not the Government received advice from Lord Milner, they had no right to refuse to take the fullest responsibility in the matter. It was only necessary to read the Blue-books to see that both parties were in agreement on many matters, including the electoral areas, the basis of the franchise, and, in substance, as to responsible government being the only possible future government for the colony. Practically the only difference between them was as to when responsible government should be granted. He thought, therefore, the Government should have deferred the settlement of the question until the psychological moment, agreed on by both Parties, arrived, when full responsible government could be granted. The dangers involved in the proposed Constitution were very real. By setting up a nominated Executive, practically at the mercy of an elective Assembly, they were running the risk of bringing the whole Government to a deadlock. Mr. E. P. Solomons, at a, public meeting in Johannesburg, said—
  "The result of the proposed Constitution will be that you will create ill-feeling amongst our personal friends; there will be disruption amongst the English section of this community, and there will be the alienation of the Dutch population. Once the disruption and alienation occurs, it will take years to bring then into the position which they formerly occupied."
  630
  Then, speaking of the Progressive Party, he said—
  "Are these men going to take this responsibility for the sake of one solitary year? —"
  his point being that the Progressives were anxious, after a little delay, to a; rant responsible government. That being so, it would have been only sensible, wise, and statesmanlike to have deferred the settlement. It was too late to ask the Government to hang up the matter. The Constitution would soon be in operation; but, in the interests of peace and the future of the colony, he earnestly urged the Government to grant full responsible government at the earliest possible moment.
  Mr. WORSLEY-TAYLOR(Lancashire, Blackpool) thought that all would agree that this matter should be treated as outside Party controversy, and that nothing should be said that would tend to jeopardise the harmonious working of the Constitution. It had been said that there was no demand for this proposed Constitution, but from the very first page of the Blue-book he found a reference to a most powerful association, containing the leading men in the Transvaal, the first two articles of which were the maintenance of the British flag, and the immediate fulfilment of the promise of the establishment of representative government on liberal and fair terms with a view to clearing the way for the granting, as early as might be expedient, of the freest and fullest form of responsible government.
  Mr. FULLERsaid he distinctly stated there was no agitation for that particular form of Constitution before November, 1904.
  MR. WORSLEY-TAYLORdid not think the date was very material. One of the sections of the terms of peace provided that military administration should at the earliest possible date be succeeded by civil government, to be followed as soon as circumstances permitted by representative institutions leading up to self-government. This measure of representative government was in accordance with the section. It was justified by the history of the case

  631
  and by the Vereeniging Treaty, which was submitted to the burghers and ratified by them.
  With regard to the general circumstances of the country, he wished to point out that there were two races in South Africa. Whether the Boers were in a majority as to population, or whether they would have a majority of voters he could not say; but even if they were not in a majority they would have a minority so powerful that by allying themselves, with another party they would dominate the situation. Since the conclusion of the war they could not shut their eyes to the fact that some of the Boer leaders had shown themselves hostile, and many of them had abstained from co-operating in any of those measures which had been brought forward to restore prosperity to the country. Good work had been done under Lord Milner of a civil, economic, and municipal kind in which the Boers might very well have co-operated. That the new Constitution was very generous to the Boers nobody could deny, for although not long ago they were in arms and made war against us, there was not a single thing under the Constitution which was now being granted to our fellow-countrymen in the Transvaal which was not granted to the Boers as well. There was no other nation on the face of the earth which would have treated a community of that kind so generously.
  There was another matter which to his mind was one of great moment, and that was the opinion of the Progressive Association. He did not want to go into names, or introduce comparisons, but nobody would deny that there were amongst the members of the Progressive Association men who were recognised as leaders of public opinion in the Transvaal. It included men of all shades of opinion, men who fought for us in the war, eminent constitutional lawyers, men who had done most useful municipal work, prominent commercial men, and leaders of the mining community. The members of the Progressive Association had declared against granting responsible government, and they asked that the terms of the Treaty of Vereeniging should
  632
  be carried out in their entirety. He ventured to say that if the Government had disregarded an appeal of that kind from the people on the spot they would have been doing wrong.
  Since the promulgation of the new Constitution there had been a greater advance towards co-operation on the part of the Boers than had been displayed during the whole of the time that had elapsed since the war. He noticed that in a speech delivered the other day, General Louis Botha said that they must show the Government of this country that they were loyal. For his part, said General Botha, he intended to turn over a new leaf and make a new start, and it was the duty of all Boers to do all they could to help Lord Selborne to carry on successfully the government of the country. He was glad to read statements of that kind from influential Boer leaders, and they ought to do all they could to encourage them to co-operate under the new Constitution, and not discourage, them by adverse criticism of it. The Boers were now registering themselves as voters in order to be able to exercise their rights and functions under the Constitution, and for such reasons as these he hoped we might draw the inference that they intended to co-operate loyally with their fellow-countrymen under the new Constitution, which lent itself to a gradual approximation to that fuller form of responsible government which they all desired to see introduced at the earliest possible moment. It was so drawn that members of the Executive could be chosen from those who were elected. It was, therefore, possible under the new Constitution gradually to approximate very closely to the fuller form of responsible government. He hoped that before many years were over they would find all parties in the Transvaal joining together and saying to this country, "Now that we have proved ourselves able to co-operate with you under this Constitution in bringing prosperity to the Transvaal we ask you to grant us responsible government." Then, and not till then, would any Government be justified in granting that full measure of responsible government to which the new Constitution, which had been recently promulgated, was the stepping stone.
  MR. BLACKsaid he was sure they all welcomed what the hon. Member had said in regard to the sincerity of General Botha's intentions, but if such evidence meant anything at all it ought to lead to quite a different conclusion to that which the hon. Gentleman opposite had drawn. Such declarations rather led to the conclusion that instead of introducing elements of difference and friction the Government should at once accept such professions of loyalty as real, and grant complete self-government to the Transvaal.
  He had risen more to point out that the present condition of affairs in South Africa was a complete and absolute condemnation of the policy of the Government as stated by the right lion. Gentleman the Member for West Birmingham whilst he occupied the position of Colonial Secretary. What did they find? The forecast made by the late Colonial Secretary had been completely falsified. The right hon. Gentleman the Member for West Birmingham stated that the real reason for embarking upon the war was that unless they did so and rejected the proposals of President Kruger it would be necessary to maintain an armed force in South Africa of 25,000 men with the inevitable result that our whole Army system would be thrown into confusion. As a result of the war they found that they were still maintaining an armed force of 25,000 men, for they were keeping up in South Africa a constabulary numbering 5,000, and 20,000 British troops. For what reason were they being maintained? Because they could not trust the people. In South Africa there was a white population of 250,000 men, women, and children; and out of that total about 50,000 were capable of bearing arms. Therefore, they had one soldier or policeman for every two men in the Transvaal and Orange River Colony. Not only this, but the expenditure upon the constabulary was about £1,000,000. What did that mean? That every man, woman, and child (outside the Rand) in the Transvaal and the Orange River colony was subject to a charge of £4 a head, or £20 per household. The total cost of Government in all its departments in this country was £3 10s. or £4 per head. Therefore, in South Africa
  634
  they were subjected to as heavy a charge for police alone as the whole expense of governing these islands. In addition to this charge on the people of the new colonies, the people of this country had to maintain those 20,000 troops at a cost of £4,000,000, and that was a large proportion of the whole outlay upon our military establishments. They thus found that we had obtained no relief through the war from the burden of maintaining a large force in Africa, and he ventured to say that the form of Constitution now proposed by the Government would not give them relief. They would still require to govern by force and not by reason. The Government could not take their courage in both hands and go forward and trust the people. He, therefore, supported the hon. Member for Poplar in urging that every consideration of policy and economy pointed to an early grant of self-government instead of the intermediate stage, which almost, by universal experience, led to friction and to the delay of the consummation of self—government under the British flag which they all desired.
  SIR ROBERT REIDsaid there was a certain degree of unreality in this debate, for the Transvaal Constitution had been promulgated irrespective of the opinion of the House, and without their having an opportunity of considering it beforehand and offering their judgment upon it. He ventured to say that the course which the Government had pursued for a considerable time in regard to the House of Commons had diminished the power of the House. However, they must say something in regard to the new Constitution of the Transvaal, because it greatly affected this country. He did not propose to refer to precedents, although the Colonial Secretary in his covering despatch to Sir Arthur Lawley had laid considerable stress on precedents. He believed it was true that in many, if not most cases, responsible government had been preceded by a form of purely Crown government. But in all cases—certainly in Canada, Cape Colony, and, he thought, in some of the colonies of Australia—friction had become extreme, because there was an irresponsible Assembly without the power of expressing opinons, while alongside of

  635
  it there was a Government which was responsible, but responsible only to itself. He did not wish to dwell on these precedents, although some things had been said by distinguished statesmen in the past warning the Government of the danger of the course taken in this case, namely, the half-way course. After all, they should not be governed by analogy. What they had to do was to use common sense and to see whether partial self-government was advisable and what were the proposals of the Government which were now to be carried into effect.
  The Legislative Assembly had four-fifths of elected members—he did not say anything of the franchise at the moment—and therefore they could carry, if they had a mind to do so, any rote they thought proper. But what had they withdrawn from it? They had withdrawn from it the salaries of all the servants of the State. In other words, they might object in the strongest possible manner to the conduct of one person or another, but they would not have an opportunity of discussing it on the Estimates because those salaries were taken out of the Consolidated Fund. They could not remove a single member of the Administration, however strongly they might disapprove of him. In that way they could not enforce any active administration at all. That was a very serious matter. That meant that the constabulary could act as it pleased. The power of criticising the constabulary was withdrawn from the Legislative Assembly. The revenue and expenditure of railways were withdrawn. The railways were the greatest source of revenue in the Transvaal, and the railway management had been giving rise to great dissatisfaction in recent months, as everyone who read the papers on the subject was well aware. In addition to that the Governor could not pass any law relating to Asiatics or natives without referring it home. There was an express power reserved which he thought was unprecedented. The power was reserved to the King in Council, notwithstanding the grant of this quasi— Constitution, to disallow any laws which the council thought fit to pass, over-riding the Legislative Assembly by the mere issue of an Order in Council. If that was
  636
  according to precedent well and good, but, whether it was so I or not, it was surely against the rule laid down more than a hundred years ago by Lord Mansfield, who said—
  "The Sovereign need not grant a Constitution unless he thinks fit, hut once he grants a. Constitution that Constitution is irrevocable."
  That law had been abrogated by the form of this Constitution.
  What could the Legislative Assembly do? They could discuss grievances, and they could point out the defects of Ministers. They could stir up dissatisfaction and discontent all over the country. He did not say they would do it. But they could not invoke a. certain remedy fur the purpose of removing grievances. That was a situation-which must necessarily lead to friction. It was contrary to the interests of this country, and also to the real interests of the Transvaal, that this state of things should be set up. In the first place what were the interests of this country? Under the new Constitution we should continue to be responsible for the government of the Transvaal. He noticed that one of the planks of the Progressive Association was that Party politicians in this country were not to interfere in the affairs of the Transvaal. He was perfectly certain that nobody wanted to interfere in the affairs of the Transvaal, but we must look into them and prevent them from being a constant source of expenditure to this country.
  He noticed that the Colonial Secretary, in a speech the other day, said in substance that almost all the millions which had been spent on the great works which were being carried out had come directly or indirectly out of the mines. The right hon. Gentleman could not have been correctly reported, or he did not mean. it in a literal sense. The Blue-book stated that the expenditure which had been incurred for these very purposes came out of the guaranteed loan. He thought that was very likely what the Colonial Secretary referred to. That was money which was advanced by this country. they had spent £3,000,000, roughly, on new railways; £4,500,000 had been advanced by way of loans; £4,500,000 had been spent on charges in the way of repatriation; £2,200,000

  637
  had gone for land settlement; nearly £1,500,000 on other public works; and £1,500,000 on the improvement of railways. All that had come out of the guaranteed loan—that was to say, the money which was provided on condition that £30,000,000 would be contributed by the Transvaal towards the cost of the war. That was not all. There had been in addition to that, since the war concluded, a sum of upwards of £20,000,000 spent out of the pockets of the people of this country which was not to be repaid. The late Colonial Secretary, answering a Question which he put to him two years ago, said that between £15,000,000 and £16,000,000 would be spent, and he understood the present Colonial Secretary to say, in the debate last year, had been spent, to repair the mischief which had been wrought through the devastating war. He was making no complaint about that, for there were many things which we were under an absolute obligation to do for the purpose of repairing the mischief. But we were still paying about £4,000,000 a year for the garrison in South Africa which consisted now of 20,000 men. Ten years ago we had less than 4,000 men there. The present garrison of 20,000 men represented nearly one-tenth of the adult population of the Transvaal. We would have to keep up that garrison as long as there was not peace and goodwill in the country. That was one of the reasons why politicians in this country were bound to take an interest in the affairs of the Transvaal.
  It would be a good thing to have responsible government in the Transvaal for the sake of that country itself. He said this because in this country and in the House they did not possess the necessary knowledge, and the information was not accessible to them, to enable them to settle the difficult questions which arose in the Transvaal. There was, to begin with, the matter of Chinese labour. That was a question of infinite difficulty. From some points of view it was a matter which should be settled in accordance With opinion out there. It was a question which could not be settled according to opinion here. So it was with regard to the Asiatic question. So it was with
  638
  regard to railway rates and Customs charges, which made the cost of living out there three times what it was in. this country. Were the gold mines to pay only 10 per cent.? That was a matter which had to be settled, as well as other kindred things, by opinion out there and not by us. Every one of the subjects he had referred to were withdrawn by the Constitution from the decision of the new Legislative Assembly. All these things were reserved. for the Executive Government, and the consequence was that we should not get rid of the responsibility, and, what was much more important, the people of the Transvaal would not be able to settle these matters according to what they themselves thought was right. He had no doubt that Lord Selborne and other Ministers who might be sent there would desire to do their duty, but what was the use of having a Constitution which did not command the support of the people to be governed. Power should be bestowed on the people themselves, because they knew where the shoe pinched. That was an elementary fact in human government which had been forgotten. We should not satisfy these people until we gave them responsible government.
  He had said nothing at all about the Orange Free State. What he was putting forward was the goal which was professedly aimed at by the Colonial Secretary. When he said "professedly" he did not say that the right hon. Gentleman was affecting it. It was the goal which was provided for by the Treaty of Vereeniging. Why was nothing to be given to the Orange Free State? He did not know whether it was a fact, but it was said that in the Transvaal there was not a majority of Boer voters, while in the Orange Free State there was a majority of Boer voters. It was said that that was the reason that nothing had been done for the Orange Free State. He hoped not. Let them think for a single moment what that meant. It meant that a great part of the manhood in the Transvaal at the present time was there by reason of the mines. He did not know how long the mines would last. Probably they would be temporary, but there was likely to be for a long time

  639
  to come a preponderance of men who went there for the purpose—the legitimate purpose—of making their way in the world and returning home. They did not take their families there, and they did not rear families there. They were largely single men. The Boers had their families there. They were proverbially a prolific race. They were increasing enormously, and bad been doing so far the last century.
  It was essential for us to consolidate our position in South Africa and to follow out the old policy which was carried on before the misery came arising out of the Jameson Raid. South Africa could not be governed successfully except with the consent and goodwill of the population. It was true that the Boers had fought and had been beaten; but how long would the memories of their struggle last? There were a class of memories not likely to fade away in three, four, five, ten, or twelve years. There were memories on hoth sides which, so far as the combatants on both sides were concerned, they were entitled to be proud of. He was speaking not of the politicians, but of the men who fought in the field, and who risked their lives. Lord Kitchener himself had said that if be were a Boer he would be proud of these memories. Now, as he understood human nature, that was the frame of mind in which they could best approach the Boers, in a spirit of confidence and trust. And that was the reason why he said that when the Government was going to give the Transvaal a new Constitution they should have granted responsible self-government. That would have been the best for South Africa, for the Boers, and for all concerned.
  THE MASTER OF ELIBANKasked if the High Commissioner had the power to appoint to the Executive Council men who had been elected to the Legislative Assembly? If so, he thought it would considerably facilitate business in the council if he were to appoint two or three of the leading citizens to the Executive Council.
  THE SECRETARY OF STATE FOR THE COLONIES (Mr. LYTTELTON,)said that the High
  640
  Commissioner had the power to appoint elected members to the Executive Council, but that appointment by the High Commissioner would necessarily vacate the seats of the elected members of the Legislative Assembly, as in the case of Ministers here, and their re-election would, therefore, be necessary.
  MR. BRYCEsaid that he had very little to add to what had been said by his hon. and learned friend as to the Constitution granted to the Transvaal; but he had some Questions to ask as to the present condition of the natives. That was of very great importance, especially in regard to land and education. There had been a desire on the part of a large section of the whites to prevent the natives from having any permanent interest in the land—particularly on the part of the squatters and the leaseholders. In the Report of the Land Commission, two of the members were dissatisfied with the view of the other Commissioners, and held that it would be to the interest of the native population and of the country if a permanent land tenure were given to the natives on holdings which they could work for themselves, instead of being obliged to work on the farms of the white men. Now, there was nothing more to be desired than that in the Transvaal there should be a native peasant proprietary. Under such conditions they would acquire habits of industry and thrift. In that way there could be bridged over the necessary passage from tribal conditions to those to which they must ultimately come in order to take their place in the general social economy of the country. He was anxious to hear some statement of the policy of the Government from the right hon. Gentleman on that point, and he hoped that the right hon. Gentleman would not accede to the wishes of those who desired that the natives should be prevented from acquiring land in their own country. His belief was that the natives were better off in regard to the acquisition of land under the old Boer Government than under the present Government.
  Similarly in regard to education. He found from the Report of the

  641
  Commissioner of Native Affairs that the natives paid in direct taxation £280,000 a year. That was a large sum; it was more than they had paid before the war. Let him say, in passing, that the natives were worse off now than before the war. One of the flimsy pretexts for the war was that we were going to do so much for the benefit of the natives. So far from that being true, the natives were now, as he had said, worse ft While the natives of the Transvaal paid £280,000 in direct taxation, the sum expended on native education was only £5,000. That was a very much lower sum than was spent in the other colonies. In Cape Colony, with self-government, the amount contributed in direct taxation by the natives was £105,000, and the public expenditure on the education of the natives was £47,000. He put it to the Committee whether it was not dealing unfairly and unkindly with the natives of the Transvaal to spend only £5,000 a year on their education when they contributed £280,000 in direct taxation? The character of the education was of very considerable importance. It was desirable that that education should not merely be an education in the elements of reading and writing and some knowledge of English, but that the natives should be taught some industries. Nothing would do so much for a backward race as to give them industrial training. There should be a few places where that industrial training could be given—a training which had been found to be so extremely valuable in the Southern States of America. The natives were in a vast majority in South Africa; and when they began to learn to speak English or to arrive at a common dialect they would begin to realise their power and be a far more important element in the country than they were at the present moment. That was all the more reason why we should do more for them now, and endeavour to lead them by a friendly hand.
  In regard to the Constitution given to the Transvaal, his hon. and learned friend the Member for Dumfries Burghs and the hon. Member for Poplar had pointed out that if they were to discuss that Constitution properly it ought to have
  642
  been discussed before that Constitution was settled. They showed how very restricted was the scope left open to the Legislative Assembly and how little that Legislative Assembly could do with effect; how many opportunities there would be for friction; and how much temptation there would be to oppress the natives. That had been found to happen in other colonies where the same experiment had been tried. Let him recall a remark made by the hon. Member for Manchester in connection with the condition of the natives. He said that there would be a considerable advantage in having in the Legislative Assembly some person, not necessarily having a vote, but having a voice in the deliberations where native questions were concerned, and capable of giving expression to native sentiment. There were precedents for that in other colonies.
  Although he did not intend to traverse the points of the Constitution which fell short of a system of responsible self-government, there were two points on which he must say a word. One was the provision for giving votes to British soldiers. Could anything be imagined more absurd than to give the electoral franchise to the British soldiers stationed in the Transvaal?
  MR. LYTTELTONsaid that he had stated, in answer to a Question, that the Letters Patent were not designed to give the soldiers a vote, and that the Transvaal Government had been instructed accordingly.
  MR. BRYCEsaid he was very glad to hear what the Colonial Secretary had told the Committee. It, however, had been assumed both in this country and the Transvaal that the soldiers were to have votes.
  MR. LYTTELTONsaid that there were cases in which soldiers not living in official quarters would have a vote.
  MR. BRYCEsaid that that was quite a different matter. That was the case in this country and was not open to the exception he had taken.
  The other point to which he wished to direct attention, was the provision in

  643
  regard to the use of language. The late Government in the Transvaal always permitted the use of Dutch in the Volksraad. What possible objection was there to allowing Dutch to be used in the Legislative Assembly? Was it not quite certain that the Lieutenant-Governor, if he was a man of sense, would give that permission? But why should it be thought necessary for a Boer to ask permission to speak in Dutch? The two languages were used in the Legislative Assembly of Cape Colony. There was nothing that had had more effect there in bringing the minds of the two races together, or in removing old jealousies, than in giving permission to use Dutch. It never did any harm. In point of fact, nobody supposed that this provision in the Constitution would have any possible effect in the way of preventing the use of Dutch for many purposes. This question of language was not new. It had existed in many countries: it had never put down the language of either race and had invariably produced friction. He had heard it said that the Danes would have secured Schleswig if they had not endeavoured to put down German.
  Lastly, he could not understand why, when a Constitution was being granted to the Transvaal, a Constitution was not also granted to the Orange River Colony. The Colonial Secretary confined himself to saying that they could not do two things at once. The Orange Fiver territory was simple compared with the Transvaal. It had a homogeneous population, there was no capital interest in it, the people were quiet and law-abiding, and the relations between the Dutch and the British, friendly before the war, were friendly now. There was, therefore, no reason to think that the same difficulty would occur there as in the Transvaal. Lord Selborne the other day intimated in a speech that the granting of a Constitution to the Orange River Colony would be a matter of a very short time. Did the Colonial Secretary think that if there were any difficulties and dangers now they would be less serious in four or five years? The concession of a Constitution to the Orange River Colony would have a healing and encouraging effect both there and in the
  644
  Transvaal. It would be taken as a pledge of the bona fides of the Government, of their willingness not to do things by halves, of their belief that there was a desire both in the British and the Dutch element to come together and to work the Constitution in harmony. It would have been, moreover, an encouraging sign of the spirit in which the Government approached this problem. This spirit of timidity and distrust of the people would inevitably do harm, while the concession of a Constitution to the Orange River Colony would, he believed, have done good. However unsatisfactory might be the position in which this question had been left, he thought that the Colonial Secretary would recognise that it was the wish of the Opposition in making these criticisms to say nothing which would add to the difficulty of working the Constitution he had granted to the Transvaal.
  MAJOR SEELYasked, the Colonial Secretary to tell the Committee whether he would be able to take steps to see that all receipts signed by British officers were paid. The right hon. Member for West Birmingham had explained the view that the Government took of this question; but it so happened that there was evidence available to show that some of the receipts, no doubt accidentally, had not been paid, and it was desirable that, a definite pledge having been made to meet these receipts, they should be honoured.
  MR LYTTELTON:Some of the ritics of the Constitution given to the Transvaal appear to think it never ought to have been granted at all, whilst some think it ought to have been granted, and others think it ought to have been granted in a different form to that proposed. It is not unnatural when hon. Gentlemen opposite hold these diverse views that the conclusion they have arrived at is not altogether cogent. But I desire to recognise that there has been no dissent at all from the proposition laid down by the hon. Member for Poplar when he expressed the hope that all the British representatives in the Transvaal would cooperate in working the Constitution in a

  645
  generous and loyal spirit. I agree with the advice that the hon. Member has given that it would undoubtedly lead sooner to responsible government being granted if the present Constitution were worked in a cordial spirit. Having said that generally, I will deal in a few words with the Questions put to me.
  The right hon. Gentleman who spoke last referred to the question of native policy. Let me say at once it is agreed on all sides that in the evidence and Report of the Commission appointed under the chairmanship of Sir Godfrey Lagden we have a document of the greatest possible merit and importance. It was the result of the most laborious and assiduous inquiry, and it has been welcomed by the Press of the country, Radical as well as Unionist, in a cordial and warm spirit. It would be very un-desirable that Downing Street should dictate to the new Parliament, about to be created, the policy it should adopt, acting, as they probably will act, through the advice of that Royal Commission. I think the right hon. Gentleman has misunderstood the effect of reserving native questions to the Constitution. Unless an Act passed by the Legislature of the Transvaal dealing with native affairs was approved by His Majesty's Government in the course of two years it would not become law. Until it is disapproved it is the law, but unless it is approved it will cease to be the law at the end of two years. The provision does not reserve the subject from the consideration of the Transvaal Legislature, but it merely gives an opportunity to the Government to protect, if necessary the natives, for owing to the treaty the natives have no means of representation at the present time and of protecting themselves. The Royal Commission gave particular attention to the subject of the education of the natives as well as to representation. I am certain that both questions will be laid to heart by the Legislature. It would be premature on my part to express any view as to the policy of the Government until we know what is to be the policy of the Transvaal Government upon the subject and the report of the High Commissioner on it. With regard to this question of native races the light hon. Gentleman gave, I
  646
  think, figures which would be misleading if it were not explained that he ought to have accompanied those figures with the statement that there are a great many more natives than white people in the Transvaal; that the proportion of natives to whites is very large indeed.
  As to the use of the Dutch language, it was never intended for a moment to depart from the example of Cape Colony as to the permission to speak Dutch within the Assembly. I think that it is an extravagant and exaggerated anticipation to suppose that any Dutchman who wishes to use Dutch in the Parliament to be created will be prevented by any British Government from doing so. It is the intention of the Government that Dutch should be spoken by Dutchmen when they desire to address the Assembly, and there is not the least doubt that the rule followed in the Cape will be followed in the Transvaal, and that every facility will be given to those who desire to speak the Dutch tongue in Parliament.
  MR. SWIFT MACNEILL:In Cape Colony permission is not needed; the right is conferred by a statute passed in 1882.
  MR. LYTTELTON:The hon. Member is quite right; but there is no difference in substance, in my judgment, between the statute and the permission given by the Speaker of the Assembly.
  As to the Orange River Colony, it is the fact that the burden of passing this Constitution and of bringing it into operation is very heavy indeed. But I adhere to what I stated in my despatch, not that it is impossible to bring the two Constitutions forward at the same time, but that it is not an easy or desirable thing to do. I hope we shall get some experience from the criticisms which will necessarily arise on the new Constitution, so that the Orange River Colony may get the advantage of those criticisms, and if there are holes to be stopped up we may stop them in the Constitution when granted to it. But there is a more important reason than that. The Orange River Colony has not asked for this Constitution at all. There has not been a single

  647
  petition or inquiry from that quarter at all. I have been advised that they do not require this Constituton, and that they would not be thankful for it if they got it.
  MR. BRYCE:Do you mean that what they desire is responsible government?
  MR. LYTTELTON:I am coming to that. I agree that they wish there to be no interval before ultimate responsible government is given. His Majesty's Government have never for a moment swerved from their original policy that responsible government could not be given at the present stage. Therefore, if the majority of the Colony do not wish for this proposed Constitution, but are entirely satisfied for the time being as between the two alternatives before them, there is no reason why it should be given to them.
  I come now to the justification of the course which has been determined upon. I ought perhaps to notice three or four points made by the hon. Member for Dumfriesshire. He complained that there had been no Parliamentary debate upon this Constitution. That is true, but no Parliamentary criticism has ever been allowed upon such a Constitution in the history of the Empire. It is not denied for a moment that there are certain important matters reserved from the jurisdiction of the new Parliament. We consider it right, prudent, and just that certain matters should be reserved. There has been no concealment of the fact, aid I do not regret our decision. One of the points is with reference to the salaries of officials. It would have been absolutely useless to have had an Executive responsible to the Government unless it was placed beyond the power of the Parliament to withdraw their salaries. Then there was the question of the railways. The railways are common to both colonies, and it is hoped that in the future there will be an amalgamation of the trunk lines in the self-governing colonies as well as in these two colonies. It would be a deplorable and retrograde step to annihilate the power of the Inter-Colonial Council to deal with the question of the railways of the two States, and to disintegrate the whole question
  648
  by placing each railway system under the control of the State in which it happened to be The object of Lord Milner from the first has been to create a system of railways throughout South Africa which would be under one board, and the Inter-Colonial Council is an admirable machine for inaugurating that policy.
  Then let me reassure my hon. friend with regard to what he thinks is the utter powerlessness of the Assembly. They have the power of legislation and the power of Supply. They can refuse Supply except in the matters which are reserved, and they have the initiative and control in the matter of legislation. The hon. Member would be untrue to all his traditions if lie did not think there was a substantial difference between the power of an Assembly, four-fifths of which is elected by the people and one-fifth nominated by the Executive, and the recent nominated council. The hon. Member for Westbury asked why this Constitution had been introduced at all. One reason is that there was a strong demand for it by the most influential people in the country. In the next place, there have been strong denunciations in this House of the nominated council which existed, I believe indeed that, had it not been for the disfavour with which that council was regarded by hon. Gentlemen opposite, and their strong expressions of that disfavour, that nominated council might have continued longer. With a large proportion of the Dutch in the Transvaal anxious to catch up any criticisms made in this House of the existing Government there was naturally produced a dissatisfaction and a withdrawal of confidence, which but for these criticisms would not have occurred.
  MR. SYDNEY BUXTON:In what way was this nominated Council criticised by the Opposition?
  MR. LYTTELTON:I could give many instances, but one will suffice. All through last year His Majesty's Government contended that the majority of the nominated Assembly were in favour of Chinese labour, and that that majority represented the feeling of the country. That was not the opinion of the Opposition. They said the nominated Assembly

  649
  was no test at all of public opinion. When such a position is taken up, whether it is right or wrong, it is expedient to replace the nominated Assembly by an elected Assembly if we desire to test beyond question the opinions of the country. It cannot be denied that an Assembly elected on a democratic franchise does represent the country.
  Then there is another point. It would be a serious thing if the weight which might be placed on some of the words of the hon. Member for Dumfries were placed on them. The hon. and learned Member suggested that the great expenditure on the development of the Transvaal had been advanced by this country. I traverse that statement altogether. Where does he get his authority for saying that we have spent £20,000,000 in this way since the war?
  SIR ROBERT REIDsaid that two years ago the right hon. Member for West Birmingham said that £15,000,000 had been spent by this country on the Orange Free State since the war, and last year the right hon. Gentleman put the sum at £20,030,000 or £21,000,000. Hansard would doubtless bear out bis statement.
  MR. LYTTELTON:My memory is not the same as that of my hon. and learned friend. There has been a £3,000,000 grant to the burghers, £2,000,000 has been spent by the Transvaal itself, and £5,000,000 has been advanced out of the guaranteed loan for the purpose of repatriation. Altogether £10,500,000 has been spent in restoring our late enemies to their homes, reconstructing society, and enabling the burghers to procure building materials, stock, and so forth. But £5,000,000 of that has come out of the guaranteed loan, a considerable portion of which it is hoped may be recovered from the burghers themselves. My hon. and learned friend is really unintentionally using a misleading expression when he says that that money has been advanced by this country. The interest on that £5,000,000 is paid by the Transvaal Government; it is secured on one of the best securities in the world, viz., the railway receipts and the assets of the
  650
  Transvaal; and it is an absolute illusion to suppose that this country will ever be called upon to bear a sixpence of that charge. As far as the British taxpayer is concerned, the alleged £20,000,000 over and above the £10,500,000 of which I have spoken is completely unsubstantial.
  Now I come to the justification of the course we have pursued in reference to this Constitution. In the first place, the granting of the Constitution was a wholly natural course. It was in conformity with, and in pursuance of, the terms of peace, and these terms were emphasised by formal and distinct declarations made by my predecessor, the right hon. Gentleman the Member for West Birmingham, and by myself. Those promises of a representative Constitution before a responsible Government was granted, were given, I think, on three separate occasions, and were received by this House with silence of unanimous assent, for not a dissenting voice was raised. Obvious prudence, I think, was recognised. From the first it has been the policy to grant this Constitution, in consonance with the uniform policy throughout the Colonial Empire. Canada had representative government for more than fifty years, the Cape had it for nineteen years, Natal for twenty-seven years, and the various States of Australia had it for different terms. If hon. Gentlemen were to look at the history of our own country, they would find that we had representative government, as distinct from responsible government, for many years. It is comparatively modern. I think, I am within the mark in saying that at any rate it was not until the eighteenth century that it was decisively settled that the Ministers of the Crown were not King's Ministers only but Ministers of this House. That is the Constitution, in substance, which is now given to the Transvaal. The Ministers are responsible to His Majesty; they are not necessarily responsible to the Transvaal Assembly. I think I am right in saying, though I confess it is a matter of opinion, that whilst this has been our I invariable practice with regard to the Colonial Empire, whilst it was the practice for many years in England that the only method of influencing the Government and redressing grievances by the

  651
  British Parliament was by the refusal of Supply, no such generous provisions as I submit we are making in the Constitution of the Transvaal have ever been made by any other country. We, who are 7,000 miles away from the Transvaal, have granted them a Constitution on a far more liberal scale than has ever been done by other countries and one which is in conformity with all the precedents in the Empire.
  If you take these facts, if you take the terms of the treaty of surrender and the specific pledges given by my right hon. friend and by myself, and if you take the history that I have ventured to set forth to the House, what reason is there to be found for departing from pledges so specific, or from a practice so uniform, and giving to the Transvaal straight away, as is argued on the other side, responsible government upon grounds of trust? So far from there being grounds for doing this, the reasons are all the other way. Society has scarcely been reconstructed there. You have had for nearly a hundred years friction between the races, culminating in a desperate struggle, which lasted for three years. You have in the Transvaal, in almost equal numbers, members of two races, different in language and different in history, you have further the most important and serious fact, absent in Canada and in every other of the great self-governing Colonies, a native population outnumbering many times the white population of the country. You have troops stationed in the country numbering some 20,000 men, and it would not be human nature—and it is really preposterous to neglect the fact—that the Boers should entertain very cordial feelings towards the Government of this country at the present moment. When you have a difference of race, and when you have had a recent war, with all the feelings naturally resulting from it, are these the conditions and is this the soil in which you ought to plant a novel and hazardous experiment? I venture to say nobody responsible for the government of that country would have given it responsible government. If right hon. Gentlemen opposite were responsible at this moment I feel certain that they would
  652
  not have ventured as patriots to have done so at this time so near the great war, with confusion still existing, and with feelings of bitterness which necessarily must have been, aroused if they were to gather together in two opposite camps the two races, the Dutch and English, who it is our great hope will ultimately settle down in peace and amity.
  Is it fully realised what responsible government means? It means a struggle for the Treasury Bench. It means Party government. It means two Parties, one wishing to retain power and the other wishing to gain power. That is what Party government is in effect, and surely were this Party struggle to be facilitated by the granting of a Constitution such as hon. Gentlemen opposite require, the result would inevitably be a Party vendetta which would deepen and emphasise and stereotype the differences which exist. What has happened already? It is no use uttering smooth things. Let me tell the House what the truth is, earnestly desiring not to be the least provocative or to stimulate any angry feeling in the colony. What has happened there? Already an organisation which consists entirely of the Dutch, called the Het Volh, has been started. It is managed by a committee of seven. I think Generals Botha, Smuts, Delarey, Beyers, and Messrs. Esselen and Wolmerons are the members of it. The constitution is that all the members of it shall obey the regulations and obligations of the association, but the obligations are nowhere defined, and any district ward or association which differs with the central committee—and if these differences are deemed to be antagonistic to the general interests—can be dissolved by a stroke of the pen of the central committee. Of course, no Briton belongs to that association. I ought to mention that General Beyers, a member of the central committee, which has exercised what I call autocratic powers with regard to the management and control of the association, made a speech recently at Petersburg.
  MR. FULLER:Is the right hon. Gentleman not aware that that speech was repudiated by all the Boer leaders.
  MR. LYTTELTON:I think the hon. I Gentleman should allow me to state the facts in my own way. I was going to state what I believe to be the fact. He said—
  "If things were not altered, his people would act like the man who threw himself down behind a big stone and used his rifle to defend himself. If the Government does not treat us fairly it will lead to another war in South Africa."
  It is perfectly true that that was repudiated by certain gentlemen, but I do not observe that General Beyers has ceased to be a member of this autocratic committee. I do not read that speech in order to provoke any feelings of passion. I wish to say at once I think it would be very remarkable if in the Transvaal even at this date, three years from the war, generals who are not always prudent in the use of language should not allow their real feelings to escape them; but I do venture to think you must take note of those facts, not in any censorious or Pharisaical spirit, but as prudent men. You ought to think of these things before you gather into two separate camps the Boers on the one side and the British on the other. You ought to consider whether the members of these two camps are in such a mood as would be likely to lead to disastrous consequences. Somebody has asked if we are not in point of fact doing that by granting the Constitution which has been granted, whether there is not under that Constitution opportunity for the outlet of racial and Party feeling. I do not think so. The great object which everybody who is dealing with this matter should have is the obliteration of the racial spirit. I do not say it is possible for years from now that that racial spirit should be obliterated; but have the Government contributed towards the obliteration of that spirit, or have they increased it?
  I will give the reasons why I think the granting of government, in the form of the Constitution we have granted, should tend to the obliteration of the racial spirit. You have already, in the agitation for responsible government, Dutchmen acting with Englishmen. If you give responsible government, Dutchmen would draw themselves up in a phalanx on one
  654
  side and Englishmen on the other. [Cries of "No, no."] That is exactly what occurred in Canada for many years. In my opinion that would be the result. But there is a wonderful binding power in political co-operation. I often think of the surprise and pleasure which the noble Lord the Member for Ealing and the right hon. Gentleman the Member for Croydon must feel when they hear the constant eulogies which are passed upon them by hon. Gentlemen opposite at the present moment. We used not to hear those tributes a few years ago at all. But, as I have said, political co-operation leads to strange and warm friendships, and I am told that already in the co-operation which takes place between Dutch and Englishmen against the Government there is to be found the seal of friendship. But you want to take away that nexus. At present you have got a Government against which from time to time the vote of Dutchmen and Englishmen will unite, and in that very circumstance, in the free play of the political game, you will have, I am sure, fruitful opportunities for obliterating that racial spirit which we all deplore and which we wish to see obliterated. In my opinion if, instead of having a Government which would, in a certain sense, be independent of Party, you were to have a Government which was an ordinary partisan Government, either a Government of the British on the one hand, or a Government of the Het Yolk on the other, so far from giving that opportunity for political co-operation to arise you will most inevitably accentuate the racial line which already exists. I think it is right to mention the difficulties and the obvious dangers which attend the granting of responsible government. I rejoice that no one opposite has for a moment carried the sense of criticism to the extent of saying that he thinks it desirable that that work should be undone, and I am entirely grateful for that attitude taken up by the Opposition.
  Let me say that, having dwelt on some matters inauspicious for the future, there are matters which I am sure give us good ground for hope. A great work of material reconstruction is being done. A great work of education is being done. You have twice the number of

  655
  Boer children being educated that were ever educated before. You have got great systems of railways constructed, in course of construction, and arranged to be constructed. You have great public buildings rising up all over the country. You have municipal freedom already granted and in full operation. You have 1,300 miles of roads already made, and you have enterprises of experimental farming, afforestation, and irrigation. Each of these great works is employing Briton and Boer together in a common task of reducing the forces of nature. Far more placating and far more cohering in their nature are the peaceful pursuits of agriculture even than those of politics, and I feel that in those works which have been undertaken and on which the money of the country is being spent—on those topics men will get together and will forget the differences which in the past have separated them. But, whether that may be so or not, what I do hope for and look forward to is that, though it is now obviously impossible that our Dutch fellow-subjects shall ever recover isolated independence, they will have the opportunity in future alongside of Britons to prove which is the better man, to prove by natural and peaceful emulation who can do the best for the country and who can ultimately at any rate strike the most definite and the most successful blows in order to make this State which has been in the past, no doubt, the scene of great and deplorable disasters, in the future a prosperous State under the British flag.
  SIR H. CAMPBELL. BANNERMAN:I do not think that in the whole course of my Parliamentary experience I have ever heard a more unfortunate speech than the one to which we have just listened, or a speech more gratuitously, more wantonly unfortunate in its necessary effect. The right hon. Gentleman is here to defend a certain Constitution which he is giving to one of our new Colonies. He has made a rather lame excuse for not giving it to the other as well; but in order to make things nice and easy in the Transvaal, and to induce that suppression and obliteration of racial spirit which he declares to be his main object, he led off
  656
  by saying that it was not in human nature that the Boers should be well disposed towards us, and some of the proposals he was making were novel and hazardous experiments, and that probably there would arise in that country a political vendetta.
  MR. LYTTELTON:If the right hon. Gentleman quotes me I hope he will quote me accurately. I said that if a Party Government were set up at this present moment and under these conditions, these things were likely to happen. I think so still.
  SIR H. CAMPBELL-BANNERMAN:It is most unfortunate that it should be said here that they would happen. You have your new colony in such a condition, apparently, according to the right hon Gentleman, that if you give them a fair and free Constitution, with responsible government, these are the things that will happen, And the right hon. Gentleman tells us that the way to avoid these dreadful consequences would be to have a restricted Constitution, which he is, apparently, reluctantly, and certainly timoroursly and hesitatingly, giving to the Transvaal. I take exactly the opposite view. I think there is only one way to gain the confidence of the population of the Transvaal, Briton and Boer, and that is to take the people of the country with you and to show that you trust them in all respects. And that is what is being demanded at this moment, not by the Boers only, not by this dreadful society to which he has referred, but by a large portion, if not the majority, of your own British fellow-subjects in the Transvaal. And when the right hon. Gentleman says that the way to get rid of all these feelings is to bring the two races into co-operation, they are in co-operation atthis moment in denouncing the Constitution he has given. [Some MINISTERIAL cries of dissent.] Yes, that is so, and therefore it is unnecessary to wait for that co-operation. The right hon. Gentleman thinks that he will satisfy the demands, I will not say of the Boers—put the Boers on one side—but of the British in the Transvaal by the sort of Constitution which he offers, a Constitution where the representatives of the people will be restricted, on the one side and on the other, as

  657
  to their powers, and in which there will be nominated Government representatives who can do pretty well what they like with most things that men concern themselves with. And the right hon. Gentleman thought that that would satisfy the British in the Transvaal! If there is any truth whatever in the information which filters through to this country, not from. sources prejudiced against the right bon. Gentleman, but even from those which generally support his policy, that is precisely what it will not do. And it never has done so in previous cases.
  The right hon. Gentleman used the most extraordinary argument I have ever listened to. He says that we must go back through all the stages upon which full responsible government has been developed, and that it will not do to confer responsible government immediately upon a country which at present has no representation at all, except representation by grace and favour. What the right hon. Gentleman would like to be done with the Transvaal is exactly the sort of Government of which he is a member, permeated by the same spirit, following the same course, having a few representatives, of course, and a nice system of election—a very good system of election in many respects, with no plural voting, for instance, and based on the number of electors, and not. on the population. Having got this Assembly, with this representation, take no notice of it, give it as little power as possible, let it discuss things, let it amuse itself with debates, but let the power remain in the hands of the Executive Government. That is precisely what the right hon. Gentleman and his colleagues have been seeking, and are seeking, to establish in this country. We need not go any further into that question, because we can deal with it on the occasion of our own affairs being discussed.
  But the right, hon. Gentleman says that this intermediate form of representative government is necessary. It is as though you were to say that, when a grown man requires a suit of clothes, he should begin by wearing all the clothes that he wore when a boy. Then, when he has made himself comfortable in these, he would be gradually admitted to the larger and more suitable
  658
  garments. It reminded me also of children in a nursery who are obliged to munch away through dry slices of bread before they are allowed to have any jam. It is an absurdity to go back in this way upon stages through which we have passed. It may be very well, in dealing with our Colonies, that we began our relations with them by conferring upon them this sort of half-and-half representation. But that was in days when there was only a half—and half system of representation, in many senses, in this country. We had a limited franchise here, and the Colonies with which we were dealing had no representation whatever. But now that we know what representation is and what responsibility is, what is the reason for our doing the thing by halves if it is to be done? And has it been successful in past history? Is it a model that we should follow? Or is it an example to guide us in the other direction? Here is what Lord Durham said in his celebrated report on Canada on the application to Canada of the very system which the tight hon. Gentleman thinks necessary and proper for the Transvaal. He says—
  "It is difficult to understand how any English statesman could have imagined that representation and irresponsible government could be successfully combined."
  And in another place he says—
  "It was a vain delusion to imagine that, by mere limitations in the constitutional act of an exclusive system of government, a body, strong in the consciousness of wielding the public opinion of the majority, could regard certain portions of the provincial revenues as sacred from its control, and could confine itself to the mere business of making laws, looking on as a passive or indifferent spectator while those laws were carried into effect or evaded, and the whole business of the country conducted by men in whose intentions and capacity it had not the slightest confidence. Yet such was the limitation placed on the authority of the Assembly of Lower Canada. It might refuse or pass laws, vote or withhold supplies, but it could exercise no influence on the nomination of a single servant of the Crown."'
  That was the condemnation passed by Lord Durham on the experience of Canada. The state of things in those colonies to which this preliminary form of representative government was given may have justified that course being taken at the time. I do not say. But now that we are told that it is a danger

  659
  to give in the Transvaal the full responsible government, which certainly a huge majority of the inhabitants, including, if not a majority, a very large proportion of the British inhabitants, demand—when we are told that that will be dangerous, and also that the present system, of setting up a few representatives and face to face with them men supporting the Government in all they do, and possessing power over the most intimate affairs of the community, would be a system of harmony and one likely to lead to the success and prosperity af the colony, hat surely is a thing which this House, if it retains any atttachment to its old powers, of which it has been recently so greatly robbed, will surely not hold to be correct.
  MR. J. CHAMBERLAIN:The right hon. Gentleman the Leader of the Opposition began his speech by saying that in the whole course of his Parliamentary experience he had never heard any speech so unfortunate, so unnecessarily and wantonly unfortunate, as that of my right hon. friend. It reminds me of the time when I occupied his place, and when the right hon. Gentleman opposite and his friends continually found that the statements which I made were really of unheard of and unprecedented depravity. But the right hon. Gentleman opposite went on to explain that he applied this language to the speech of the Colonial Secretary, because he had pointed out that if responsible government were given at the present moment—which the Government are not prepared to do—it would lead, in his opinion, as indeed it would in mire, to an exaggeration of the racial feeling which must always prevail under such circumstances as exist row in the Transvaal. But that is a statement of fact, or, at all events, of argument which cannot do anything to provoke special irritation or anger either here or on the other side. But if it be wrong—I do not think the majority of the House will hold that view—permit me to say that then similar language ought to be applied to almost every Gentleman who has spoken on the other side of the House, because they have declared that this unfortunate result would follow if the Government
  660
  policy is adopted. I do not object to their holding that opinion and expressing it; but I cannot possibly see why it may be right for them to say that racial differences would be provoked by a particular form of Constitution, and at the same time wrong for my right hon. friend to say they would be promoted by a different form of Constitution.
  We are really engaged on a more than ordinarily interesting and important discussion. Under existing political circumstances, to which the Leader of the Opposition has so frequently appealed during the course of his speech, there is, I think, a particular interest felt here and in the country as to what is likely to be the policy of the right hon. Gentleman and his friends if he were to come back to office, and that feeling is evidently shared in the Transvaal also. Those who have read the interesting discussion of that association, Het Yolk, to which reference has been made, must be aware that some of the leaders of that association, some of the committee which guides its whole deliberations, went so far as to say that indeed it was hardly worth while to discuss the questions which they had before them, and that they had better wait for the advent to office of a Liberal Administration. I say, therefore, that both in the Transvaal and here it is a matter of serious interest and importance to know what is the opinion, and what will be the policy, of hon. Gentlemen opposite, if their present ambitions are speedily fulfilled.
  It is curious, as it seems to me, that even now there appears to be a division of opinion on the other side. It is true that I think everybody who has spoken on the other side has objected, as one would expect, to the particular proposal of His Majesty's Government; but the opener of the debate, the hon. Member for Poplar, and most distinctly the hon. Member for Wiltshire, who made a most interesting and moderate speech, said that they would desire that nothing should be said here and no argument used which would in the slightest degree interfere with the success of the representation now afforded to the Transvaal Although they themselves thought it was

  661
  not the best form which such representation should take, they would do nothing Toy word of mouth or argument in this House to introduce any obstacle to the success of that proposal. And I gathered from the speech of the hon. Member for Wiltshire that really his complaint was not that the Government had not given responsible government, but that they had given this substitute for it. The speech of the hon. Member was conclusive as to his opinion that it was hardly worth while to create what I think he called an interregnum, and that we had better wait till the time came when we could give full responsible government, and—here is the point—I gathered that in his opinion that time has not yet come. That is most important. There is a great deal to be said, in my opinion, for the view of the hon. Member for Wiltshire; but permit me to point out that his view, and I think that indicated by the hon. Member for Poplar, is quite a different thing from what we have had indicated in the clearest terms from the Leader of the Opposition—that in his opinion self-government in the shape of full responsible government ought immediately to he granted to the Transvaal.
  SIR H. CAMPBELL-BANNERMAN:I did not say so. [MINISTERIAL cries of "Oh."] What I said was that if you move in this direction you should not stop short at the kind of Constitution as now proposed, that that would probably give rise to friction and difficulty, whereas the proper course was to take the people with you and proceed with that responsible government which would avoid those difficulties and give contentment and satisfaction. I did not say that should be done immediately. [MINISTERIAL cries of "Oh."]
  MR. J. CHAMBERLAIN:Well, then, really, what was the meaning of the whole of the argument of the right hon. Gentleman to which the House has just listened? Will he explain his quotation from the Earl of Durham? Will he explain his statement about children and their clothes? Will he explain what was the force and meaning of the whole of his argument, if it did not point directly to an immediate
  662
  grant? I have heard a great deal about the obscurity of the policy of certain leaders in this House. But I have never heard anything more obscure—[OPPOSITION cries of "Oh, oh !"] I do not object to hon. Gentlemen opposite emphasising the points of my speech, but I hope they will not interrupt me altogether—I say I have never heard anything more obscure than the policy of the Leader of the Opposition. He speaks one way, or what all the House understands to be in one direction, and then gets up and puts a totally different interpretation upon his words. I wonder what General Beyers will make of the policy which has been indicated to-night by the Leader of the Opposition? At any rate, I am glad to understand from the right hon. Gentleman that he did not intend to argue in favour of immediate responsible government. I understand now he is against immediate responsible government. The right hon. Gentleman shakes his head. Then he is neither for nor against it. Really I think I will leave the right hon. Gentleman and come to the hon. Member for Wiltshire, of whose meaning I have no doubt at all.
  The hon. Gentleman said that, instead of now granting representative government, which does not entirely satisfy anyone—I think the words he used were that it was no use at all—it would have been better to wait for the time when we could grant full responsible government. To that I reply we were bound by our pledges. I admit there is something to be said for that line; but we could not take it, because it must be remembered one of the conditions of the peace made at Vereeniging was that civil government should take the place as speedily as possible of military government; that we should give some form of representative government which should remain until the time came for the full form of responsible I government. We could not wait—we were obliged to substitute some form of civil government—and in our opinion we were justified in substituting representative, although not responsible, government. I confess that I should hesitate very much to criticise the action of the Government, for the reason that, having

  663
  had a large experience of office, I know that outside opinion, while very often suggestive and useful, is very often ill-informed. I know exactly what I believe to have been the state of affairs in South Africa two years ago; but I do not know what has taken place there since then, and consequently I do not know how far a judgment that was correct two years ago would be correct now. Therefore it is with some hesitation I say that in my opinion the Government have gone too far.
  The hon. and learned Member for Dumfries Burghs went so far as to say that there is nothing to choose between the existing form of government in the Transvaal and the form of government which it is now proposed to create. Why, under the new Constitution, the representatives, four-fifths of whom will be elected by popular vote, will have the power of the purse. Accordingly, if the Boers secure a representation in accordance with their numbers, and if even two or three of the British representatives who may be returned in accordance with their numbers join with them, they will have absolute power over civil Supply, save in regard to some matters, I admit, of considerable importance which are reserved. There is no doubt, therefore, that the power to be given to the population of the Transvaal is considerable. We must all hope that they will make good use of it. But it is not the fact historically that every population of the people to whom representative government of this kind has been given have made good use of it.
  It is a curious anomaly that, while the arguments of hon. Gentlemen opposite tend in the direction that full responsible government is the specific remedy for every difficulty in a colony or possession, the moment this power or authority has been given to a colony the Liberal Party has carped at their abuse of it, and has asked this House to interfere. I remember in the case of the Constitution granted to Western Australia, that matter was discussed in this House and we granted to Australia full representative government. Again and again there have been debates in this House as to the treatment
  664
  of the natives by the Government of Western Australia. But let us understand that it must be one thing or another; that if you give full responsible government to the Transvaal it would be absolutely useless and most dangerous or mischievous to interfere, either by speeches or action in this House, with their treatment of the native population, Chinese labour, or any other question on which you hold strong opinions, but as to which they differ from you. Therefore I consider that if you hold yourself bound—as I think we are bound to a certain extent—to protect the natives of these great territories against particular legislation, you must not give responsible government until you are prepared to surrender altogether that right of claim or pretension. That is one of the things which the Government have to consider when it is pressed upon them that they should at once give responsible government to the Transvaal. What we promised is that we should advance by stages. The next step will probably be full responsible government.
  Objection has also been taken that the same government which is now being given to the Transvaal has not been given to the Orange River Colony. I think that the experiment—because, after all, every step of this kind is an experiment—might have been far better tried in the Orange River Colony. It is quite true that in that colony there is an enormous majority of the Dutch or Boer population. But they have shown by long experience that they are most capable and moderate administrators—under the admirable rule of President Brand they set an example to the whole of South Africa—and, although I think there is some danger in this experiment, it is in the Orange River Colony that I myself would have been inclined, in the first instance, to take the risk. The risk lies in this—you may give a Constitution to-morrow, but having given it it is almost impossible to take it away. If there should be a mistake you cannot go back. Look at what happened in Cape Colony in the early days of the war. What I believe to have been at that time a majority of the representatives of the colony came to me

  665
  and asked me to suspend the Constitution which this country had given to them. I did not feel it possible to grant their application, and I incurred a very great deal of unpopularity at the time. I think experience has shown that I was right. But I only refer to the matter in order to show that those who argue in favour of the granting of a full Constitution may live to regret it, or, at any rate, that we may choose the wrong time to grant full responsible government which can never be recalled. I do not think my right hon. friend the Colonial Secretary had any alternative to introducing the Constitution which he has proposed. It is too early to give full responsible government. It was incumbent on us to keep our promise to give representative government. But there remains the question whether too much has been given, as I am inclined to think, or too little, as some speakers on the other side have suggested. I regret that a feeling has been introduced into this debate which was not there before the speech of the Leader of the Opposition. It is absolutely true to say that before the interposition of the right hon. Gentleman the debate was conducted without a spark of political or Party feeling on either side.
  MR. HERBERT SAMUELsaid he rose not to continue the debate on the Constitution but for the pupose of moving a reduction of the Vote of the Colonial Secretary in order to draw attention to the present aspects of the Chinese labour question. It was six months since a word had been said in the House on that subject, which had attracted and was still attracting great attention in the country and among hon. Members in that House. If it had not been debated during that prolonged period it was not because the subject of Chinese labour had lost interest for them, or because their opposition had in any degree abated, but because they had not thought it right to recur again and again to a subject and take up the attention of Parliament until there were new facts to call attention to and new points to be made. There were now many new points to bring to the attention of the Committee, many matters, unforeseen by those who opposed
  666
  the introduction of Chinese labour, had come to light, and very many which were not only unforeseen by the right hon. Gentleman the Colonial Secretary and his supporters, but the possibility of which occurring was loudly denied.
  One of the things unforeseen by hon Gentlemen opposite was the increase in the supply of Kaffir labour during the last year. Whatever the cause might have been, the fact remained that the supply of black labour had increased by nearly 40 per cent., and there were now more Kaffirs employed in the gold mines of the Rand than before the war. Last year the Colonial Secretary persuaded that House by a Party vote to consent to the Transvaal Importation of Labour Ordinance, basing his case on the alleged fact that there was an overwhelming economic necessity, that the mines were suffering from a shortage of labour, and that that shortage amounted to 30,000 labourers as compared with the supply before the war. The whole of that shortage had now been made up, for in May of last year the number of Kaffir labourers in the mines was 77,000 and in May of this year it was 106,000. If the Colonial Secretary had foreseen that within twelve months the supply of Kaffir labour would have been equal to the supply before the war, would he have embarked upon an enterprise distasteful to the people of this country and repudiated by the almost unanimous voice of our colonial fellow-subjects? If he had only allowed the question to wait awhile, natural economic causes would have worked, the improvement in the treatment of the Kaffir labourers would have had its effect, and the mines would have obtained an ample supply of labour. Could the right hon. Gentleman see his way at least to suspend the further importation of Chinese coolies until the new Constitution was in force and in full working order? That surely might be done, since the main ground put forward for the importation no longer operated. The supply of Kaffir labour during the past twelve months had increased by 38 per cent.; adding the Chinese, the supply of coloured labour had increased

  667
  by 87 per cent., but the supply of white labour had increased by only 27 per cent. Thus experience had shown that those who continually argued that with an increase of coloured labour there would be a proportionately increased employment for white labour were absolutely wrong.
  The increase in white labour had not kept pace even with the increase in black labour alone. A year ago there were 175 whites employed to every 1,000 coloured; the number now was only 115, a reduction of nearly one-third in the proportion. The causes of this reduction were two: first, that the unskilled whites who were formerly employed in considerable numbers had been dismissed or employed otherwise; and, secondly, that machines which gave employment to whites had been discarded in favour of hand-drilling by Chinese labourers. It was true that a certain number of whites had been taken on as supervisors of the Chinese, but their wages had in many cases been reduced by about one-third. The substitution of hand-labour for machine-labour was one of the most important points in the whole controversy. Various reasons were given for the substitution. It was said that the machines caused dust, and that they were uneconomical. But by the elaboration of a system of spraying the unhealthiness caused by the machine drills had been completely removed, and the drills were found quite economical so long as there was no Chinese labour available. The real reason for the change was to be found in the fact that the English population had a comparatively high standard of living, while the Chinese had a low standard; that English labour was comparatively dear, while Chinese labour was cheap.
  The Colonial Secretary was wrong also in his prophecy as to the large field of employment which the Ordinance would open to English workmen who chose to emigrate. The right hon. Gentleman, speaking on March 21st, 1904, held out the prospect that if only they could raise the production of the mines to the point which it reached before
  668
  the war a large field of employment would open for emigrants from this country. There were now a. record number of stamps at work, and the gold production was larger than at any previous point in the history of the country, and yet, according to the Emigration Returns for last year, while there was a net outward movement of 127,000 persons from this country to British Colonies and the United States, to the Transvaal alone there was no emigration, and from South Africa there was a net inward movement. For the first time in the recent history of South Africa there was no emigration to that country. It was the only British colony to which there was no balance of British emigration last year, and in the Monthly Circular of the Emigration Information Office in connection with the Colonial Office, published this month, English workmen were strongly warned not to go to the Transvaal, whether as miners or in any other capacity, as there was no demand for them.
  Then as to the position of the Chinese themselves. The House were told that they would have their contracts thoroughly explained to them both in China and in South Africa; that they would go of their own free will; that they would understand the conditions they would have to observe; that they would live in idyllic garden villages, surrounded by their wives and families; that they would prove themselves to be peaceable and industrious people, and that if they found themselves dissatisfied with their conditions of work they could terminate their contracts, and, paying their own passages both ways, return to China. He was perfectly convinced that large numbers of these coolies did not understand the contracts under which they made their engagements. According to information he had received, very many of them were completely ignorant as to the class of work they were undertaking and the conditions of life they would have to undergo. In proof he might quote from a private report drawn up by a Chinese gentleman, of the highest possible testimonials, who was connected with the Immigration Department in the Transvaal. In that report this gentleman stated that he was at

  669
  Durban when the first batch of Chinese arrived, and in the course of his duties he was careful to question the labourers. To his great surprise more than 50 per cent, of the men did not know what their work was to be. They understood that they were to do hard work, but the nature of the work was absolutely misrepresented to them by the recruiting agents in China. A similar report was presented with regard to subsequent batches. Then he had two letters giving the position from the point of view of the Chinese coolies themselves. One of the writers committed suicide and left the letter behind him; the other attempted to commit suicide but was prevented. One stated that they were helpless; to return to China was impossible; he pitied those who were to remain, and asked his compatriots at the conclusion of their three years service to take his bones back to China. The other said—
  "I expected to work under the sun, but I have to go into deep tunnels under ground. Three long years, foremen beating us right and left. Who would not die?"
  Then as to the wives and children. At the present time there were 41,340 coolies in South Africa. The number of Chinese wives in South Africa was two and the number of children twelve. Ariot occurred at a mine in April last because, as the right hon. Gentleman had explained, leave of absence from the compound had been temporarily restricted. No coolie had been able to avail himself of the benefit of the provision enabling him to terminate his contract and to go back to China, because, of course, it was beyond his power to repay the mineowners for their original outlay and for his passage home.
  In one respect the mineowners had been in a considerable difficulty in regard to the employment of these coolies, because, in consequence of the assurances given in that House, there had been inserted in the contract of employment a definite minimum wage. In order to compel the coolies to do a definite amount of work for the minimum wage the employers had resorted to various methods. The white foreman was given the right to withhold the coolies' pay, but that practice was put an end to. Then the coolies were charged before the magistrates with not doing a sufficient day's work, and
  670
  they were fined and imprisoned. The custom was to post up statements, in Chinese characters, of these convictions, just as in this country the names of people who were convicted of travelling without a ticket were posted on the stations by the railway companies. Another method adopted was the system of promiscuous flogging. The system had prevailed widely, and was resorted to constantly in order to induce the coolies to do what was considered a reasonable day's work. But the worst method of all adopted was in respect of the minimum wage. In the early debates the House was assured by the Colonial Secretary that this wage would be at least 2s. a day, subsequently altered to 1s., rising to 1s. 6d. He held in his hand a copy of a new contract, dated March 23rd, which the coolies had been required to sign. It superseded the contract signed by the coolies in China and on the faith of which they took employment in South Africa. It provided payment at the rate of a halfpenny per inch, or sixpence per foot, for drilling, and the minimum wage was neither 2s. or 1s. 6d., as the right bon. Gentleman had said, but a halfpenny.
  MR. LYTTELTON:Does the hon. Member say that this is a piecework contract?
  MR. HEEBERT SAMUEL:Yes.
  MR. LYTTELTON:Does he say that the Chinese were forced to sign this piecework contract?
  MR. HERBERT SAMUEL:They were pressed to sign it, though not, of course, under the coercion of troops.
  MR. LYTTELTON:Do I understand him to allege that a halfpenny represents the minimum wage of 1s. 6d., or what does he mean?
  MR. HERBERT SAMUEL:Yes, that is what I say—a halfpenny per day. This contract was made in connection with the New Comet Mine. Some of the coolies refused to sign it, and a message was sent to the manager to say that the coolies must sign it. So much pressure was brought to bear on the Chinese that

  671
  they at last signed the contract. It was this contract that had caused the first riots among the Chinese. He was rather surprised that the right hon. Gentleman thought that he ought to have given him some notice in regard to this point. He had no desire to be discourteous. He would, however, remind the right hon. Gentleman that not long ago he put a Question to him as to the cause of these riots, and he replied that this riot had originated in a difference with regard to wages and the terms upon which these coolies were to be put upon this work. The new contract which the coolies had been pressed to sign provided for a minimum wage of one halfpenny and a maximum of 3s.
  MR. LYTTELTON:The hon. Member, I think, is rather misleading the House. An average day's work in the mine is thirty-six inches, and at one halfpenny per inch that works out at 1s. 6d. As a matter of fact, many coolies do much more. Therefore, so far from it be ng true or accurate that halfpenny represents 1s. 6d., in point of fact the coolie received 1s. 6d. for a fair day's work and many of them earned more.
  MR. HERBERT SAMUEL:But what becomes of the guarantee as to the minimum wage being 1s. 6d.
  MR. LYTTELTON:If the coolie does not care to accept the terms which the hon. Member has referred to, he is entitled to receive the minimum of 1s. 6d. per day.
  MR. HERBERT SAMUELsaid they practically had no choice. Their riots had been suppressed. 1,250 of them had been in prison for desertion, rioting, and other offences against the Ordinance. The riots at the New Comet Mine had not been isolated instances. Month after month there had been riots and disturbances on a large scale owing to the dissatisfaction of the Chinese coolies with their condition. He had received letters from the white miners' organisation vehemently protesting against the whole system of Chinese labour. A deputation of white miners had waited on Lord Selborne praying him for protection against the danger to which they might
  672
  be subject in the mines from the coolies. These disturbances were the inevitable outcome of the system of attempting to govern people after depriving them of their liberty. The number of imprisonments was increasing. In April it was 378, a number equivalent to a rate of 4,503 a year. If such a method of employment were attempted in this country, however excellent were the buildings in which the miners were housed, however generous the diet, however great the economic necessity, and however powerful the financial interests concerned, the indignation of a freedom-loving people would sweep it away in a moment.
  Motion made, and Question proposed, "That Item A (Salaries, Wages, and Allowances) be reduced by £100, in respect of the Salary of the Secretary of State for the Colonies."—(Mr. Herbert Samuel.)
  MR. BRIGHTsaid he was sure the Committee had listened with great interest to the exhaustive speech of his hon. friend. He himself approached the question on wider and different grounds. The introduction of Chinese labour in South Africa, influencing as it did the conditions of white labour and black labour, was equally disastrous to the interests of South Africa and of this country. As compared with the time before Chinese labour was brought to South Africa, he found that there were about 3,000 more whites employed now in the mines; coloured men had increased by 30,000; and the number of Chinese introduced was 35,000. Before the entry of the Chinaman in May, 1904, there was one white man to six coloured, and now there was one white man to nine coloured and Chinese. But if they took the newcomers who had arrived since the Chinese came, they found that there was one white man to about twenty-one coloured and Chinese. Sir George Farrer stated on 31st March, 1904, at Dreifontein, that for every seven Chinese employed there would be one white man employed. They now found that the prophecy had been entirely falsified, as the mineowners, prophecies always had been falsified. According to the Government's own

  673
  labour journal for July the introduction of Chinese labour had not increased, but had tended to diminish the employment of white people in South Africa. The building trades in Johannesburg were in a state of stagnation, and—
  "In spite of the large output of gold the local supply of white labour was more than sufficient."
  His hon. friend had spoken of how the Chinamen were recruited. They were what was called in connection with shipping "crimped." He would read an extract from a perfectly non-political source to show how Chinamen were decoyed into coming. It was from Reuter's correspondent at Hong-Kong under date October 22nd last year—
  "From information which I specially sought while in Kwangsi Province, there seems no doubt that the Viceroy of the two Kwangs has inquired whether captured rebels would be accepted by the emigration authorities. The reply was in the affirmative, providing that the men came voluntarily. The Viceroy has since issued a proclamation, but the Kwansi freebooters prefer to remain away from any possible chance of capture. They believe the action of the Viceroy is a ruse to take them prisoners. Some little time ago a number of men in chains were sent to one of the recruiting stations, but were refused admittance, and a strongly-worded protest was made to the Viceroy. Since then this official has refrained from despatching men, and it seems improbable that he will be able to secure any."
  That was the sort of thing that had been going on. They were brought to South Africa under false pretences. He distinctly said that if the British public had known that the war was going to end in indentured labour in the mines for the benefit solely of the mineowners, there would have been no war at all. At the bottom of all this had been the attempt to get cheap labour. In April, 1904, The Times in its commercial supplement said—
  "With regard to Chinese labour, it is certainly unfair that the mining companies should be compelled to pay a minimum wage of a shilling a day, which is increased to 50s. a month after the first six months. Under the existing arrangement a Chinese coolie can do as small an amount of work as he sees fit, and the company by which he is employed must pay him his stipulated wage whether he has earned it or not."
  The mineowners looked after their own interests and they wanted labour, black yellow or white, as cheaply as they possibly could get it.
  674
  His hon. friend had referred to the practice of flogging at the mines. Replying to a Question which he himself put on this subject, the Colonial Secretary declined to admit that there was flogging, but since then further information as to flogging had been furnished by his hon. friend the Member for Morpeth. Mr. Thomas Ratcliffe, representative of the South African Trades Councils, Chorley, Lancashire, had written a letter, from which it appeared that the practice was unfortunately pretty prevalent. There was no doubt that the introduction of Chinamen was gradually eliminating white men from the mines. The mine-owners were now introducing black convict labour, and he wanted to know how that came about. In the last Blue-book it was said that the number given did not include 690 coloured convicts. He wanted to know by what authority and on what terms these convicts were employed, and how that entered into the idea of the good government and treatment of the natives. The fact was that this indentured labour, whether of Chinese or native blacks, was absolutely wrong, contrary to humanity, to Christianity, and to all our principles of liberty. All the great Empires of the past had fallen from their failure to deal fairly with the inferior races. It was that which destroyed the Roman Empire and the Spanish Empire, and which would also destroy out Empire, if that policy were continued to be pursued. He could quote the great authority of the right hon. Member for West Birmingham who, speaking in defence of the Majuba settlement, in one of the greatest speeches the right hon. Gentleman had ever made, said on July 25th, 1885—
  "Then as to slavery, he had no doubt that it would be put down. The indentureship, it might be admitted, was almost as bad as slavery, and they had made a stipulation that that should be done away with. But while they denounced indentureships amongst the Boers, they must remember that it had existed for years and still existed in some of their British Colonies. He had himself called attention to the fact that hundreds of children had been separated from their parents, and especially also to cases where the widows and orphans of men killed in the wars had come under the abominable system of indentureship, and with no guarantee whatever for their treatment or future liberty. It was a bad practice whether accepted in the Transvaal or in the Colonies;

  675
  they had tried to put a stop to it in the Transvaal, and they hoped that this example would have due weight elsewhere, so that the shame of the system might no longer attach to the British name in any of their Colonies."
  He agreed with the right hon. Gentleman that the system of indentured labourers, wherever it had been introduced in our Colonies, was contrary to our ideas of liberty and was to the disadvantage of both the inferior and superior races. The superior race invariably abused its power and received as much damage as it gave to the inferior. It was one of the greatest curses from which this country had suffered. It was the apotheosis of might as against the rule of right.
  SIR BRAMPTON GURDONsaid that he had never yet had an opportunity of speaking on this question, although he had been very anxious to do so because he was interested in all questions relating to native labour, and because he had had considerable experience in South Africa, and knew something of the subject. He did not wish to address himself to the condition of the compounds, because he believed that improvements had been made in them on account of the constant attention paid to the matter in this country. But there was a great deal of cruelty perpetrated on the Chinese labourers; and the employment of Chinese at all in the mines was directly opposed to the promises made by the Government supporters at the last general election when it was said that the Transvaal was a white man's country. At that time he said that the Transvaal was a white man's country, but not a good white man's country. He pointed out that it was not an agricultural, but a pastoral country, where no rain fell for five months of the year, and that the Boers then went into the bash in waggons, with their herds, in order to get food for their cattle. He said that although that might suit the Boer farmer it would not suit the British farmer. Now because he had used these words—which had been used since by the present Colonial Secretary, the whole of his constituency was placarded with bills containing vile lies. All these placards were sent down from London, and were not issued by the local Conservatives. He thought he might speak
  676
  of his own Conservative constituents as Napoleon did of the British soldiers: the Conservatives of North Norfolk are the best in the world; happily there are not many of them. He did not mind being called a little Englander. He was proud of his country. He was born and brought up in little England, and what little public work he had done he had done for little England.
  Every Tory candidate had told the electors that the Transvaal and the Orange River Free State were the most splendid countries for white men—that they were perfect El Dorados for farmers, labourers, and artisans; and Lord Roberts in a speech said that those who had served their country in the field were to be given the first opportunity of obtaining employment in these countries, and that he hoped it would not be long before they would be able to avail themselves of their privileges. He, himself, remembered one member of the Yeomanry who had actually taken with him to Southampton a plough which he was going to use when he had settled in South Africa after the war ! If ever there was a mandate given to a Government in this country it was that at the last general election the British Government was to find a new field for the British workman.
  They were told by no less important a statesman than the late Colonial Secretary that the war was a miner's war. It was not a miner's war, but a mineowners' war, a Stock Exchange war, a contractor's war. He had gained the experience in South Africa twenty-five or thirty years ago that it was contractors that made wars. When Ministers received correspondence about British Indians not getting their rights in South Africa, and that the natives were not being treated fairly, they should read a good deal between the lines. What the writer meant was that he had some damaged oats or lame horses to sell. White men were returning from the Transvaal by hundreds, and there were monthly warnings in the Board of Trade Gazette that no miners or artisans were to go out to the Transvaal at present, and that no man

  677
  was allowed to go into the Orange River Colony or the Transvaal without a permit. Had the white men in this country believed that that was to be the result of the war they would never have allowed £250,000,000 to be spent on that war and at a cost of the loss of 23,000 British lives. When he was born the battle of Waterloo was twenty—five years past. The people talked with pride about the great Waterloo campaign, and the Duke of Wellington was looked upon as the greatest hero in this country. It was only a very few years since the South African War had ended, but they did not t ilk about it now with much pride. Lord Roberts had a great reputation before that war as a gallant and successful general. He was, perhaps, the most popular general in all England, but now his reputation was practically gone. [MINISTERIAL cries of "Oh, oh!" and "No, no!"]
  He did not want to say anything against the Chinaman. It was a very great pride to us that in 1819 we acquired the island of Hong-Kong, then occupied only by a few fishermen. There was now there a great city with 230,000 inhabitants attracted from every surrounding country, because they could get good government under the British flag. There they had an opportunity of rising in life. The Chinaman had really made that island when they were allowed to have businesses of their own, and to have every privilege that a British citizen could enjoy. Under free conditions Chinamen were improved, elevated, and civilised by their contact with whites, but under the conditions of their life in South Africa they were only lowered and degraded. The real reason for the introduction of the Chinese in the mines in South Africa was, as Lord Milner had stated, that the mine-owners did not want white men out there. The Chinese labourers wanted their own overseers, and now white labour had decreased in the mines. Some months ago 2,000 English navvies who had gone out to work on the railways in South Africa were sent home because it was said that they were of no use and would not work. He had read the report of the resident engineer in South
  678
  Africa, in which it was stated that it was impossible to pay these navvies their wages, and it was because of that that the men struck and did refuse to work. Would anyone in England be able to get workmen to continue in work if it was quite impossible to pay their wages? Under these circumstances a strike was the only means by which the workmen could obtain their rights.
  And, it being half-past Seven of the clock, the Chairman left the Chair to make his Report to the House.
  Committee report Progress; to sit again this evening.

  EVENING SITTING.
  County of London Electric Supply Company Bill [Lords] (by Order); Hum-ber Conservancy Bill [Lords] (by Order); Southport, Birkdale, and West Lancashire Water Board Bill [Lords] (by Order); Newcastle-upon-Tyne Corporation Bill [Lords] (by Order). As amended, considered; to be read the third time.
  Earl of Stamford's Cheshire Estate Bill [Lords] (by Order); Metropolitan Electric Supply Company (Various Powers) Bill [Lords] (by Order]. Read a second time, and committed.
  Education Board Provisional Order Confirmation (London, No. 1) Bill [Lords] (by Order); Electric Lighting Provisional Orders (No. 8) Bill [Lords] (by Order). Read the third time, and passed, without Amendment.

  PIER AND HARBOUR PROVISIONAL ORDERS (No. 1) BILL [LORDS] (BY ORDER).
  As amended, considered.
  MR. BUTCHERmoved to leave out the Tralee and Fenit Pier and Harbour Order. He said the Bill was promoted under the impression that an agreement had been arrived at between

  679
  the harbour board and the Kerry County Council, but that was a misunderstanding. The board had no desire to press the Bill in its present form in opposition to the views of the council, and as time did not permit an agreement being arrived at this session, he moved to omit this particular Order. He hoped that by next year an agreement would be arrived at. His Motion was to omit the second Order from the Bill. He begged to move.
  MR. WOLFFformally seconded the Motion.
  Amendment proposed—
  "In page 14, line 1, to leave out the words to the end of schedule (Tralee and Fenit Pier and Harbour Order).'"—(Mr. Butcher.)
  Question proposed, "That the words proposed to be left out to the word 'time,' in page 16, line 6, stand part of the Bill." —
  MR. THOMAS O'DONNELLsaid the Bill was promoted by the harbour board of county Kerry. He should be very sorry to see the Bill dropped if it could be amended so as to meet the wishes of the county council, because it would mean the useless expenditure of so much money. The understanding that the hon. Member for York had mentioned had reference to the system of election to the harbour board. He read to the House a telegram he had received from the chairman of the county council as follows—
  "Just seen Order. It upsets clear undertaking given by the chairman of the harbour board that there would be no multiple voting, and agreement arrived at by the county council and the harbour board to this effect."
  The Bill proposed to give two merchants who imported the largest amount of tonnage seats on the board ex officio, and votes for the election of the board were given to other merchants in proportion to the tonnage they imported with a maximum of three votes. But the tonnage could be broken up between partners in any firm, and the largest importer who brought in 30,000 tons might have eight or ten partners who would each have votes, and the two gentlemen who had seats ex officio might
  680
  thus control the election of the board. That was a condition of affairs which he thought was not right. They wanted a better and more democratic system. The ratepayers paid £5,000 every year for the management of the harbour board, and paid the loss on working expenses and interest on the original capital spent on the pier and railway, but had no voice in its control He did not think they would gain much by giving these two merchants an absolute monopoly. If nothing could be done to mend it now, and it was decided to withdraw it—and they preferred its withdrawal to its passing in its present form—he hoped more attention would be paid to its drafting when it was introduced next year, so that the ratepayers of county Kerry would not be put to further expense. The county council were responsible for debts contracted by the board of £200,000. The annuity in respect of that sum amounted to £5,000, and they had been paying it for twenty Tears, though they had nothing to say to the board's expenditure. It was time something was done in that matter. He had an Amendment asking that each firm composed of one or a dozen men should pay dues in the name of the firm only, and not be allowed to break up its tonnage.
  MR. BUTCHERsaid he was not authorised to accept such an Amendment.
  MR. FLAVINpointed out that in 1901 the harbour board was formed by the three principal merchants in Tralee. There were then twenty-eight votes. Merchant No. 1 controlled thirteen votes, Merchant No. 2, seven, and Merchant No. 3, five votes, or a total of twenty-four out of a possible twenty-eight. He held that this had been done illegally, and he wanted to see this prevented in the future. The county of Kerry had to pay £5,000 a year, and the claim they made was the modest one that they should have three representatives out of a total of fourteen. Under no consideration would he be a party to this Provisional Order being carried out.
  MR. FIELD(Dublin, St. Patrick) thought the House did not realise the

  681
  gravity of this matter. £5,000 a year was a considerable sum to the ratepayers of Kerry, and he thought some amicable arrangement ought to be entered into. He had received a telegram showing that an agreement was entered into between the promoters of the Bill and the county council, and if that were so he intended that that honourable understanding should be carried out. He hoped the Bill would be allowed to pass. An enormous amount of correspondence had passed on the subject, the Bill was badly wanted for the harbour, and all the people were anxious about it. The hon. Member for York must recognise that the discharging of the Order did not meet the situation, because the matter would have to be brought forward again next session.
  MR. MURPHYsuggested that as all the Members for Kerry were in agreement, the hon. Member for York should not do anything which would make the position more difficult. He proposed that there should be an adjournment for a week in order that an understanding might be arrived at between the county council and the promoters of the Bill.
  Motion made, and Question proposed, "That the Debate be now adjourned."—(Mr. Murphy.)
  MR. BUTCHERconsidered that would have been an admirable suggestion if the session were younger, but unfortunately there was not the slightest chance of the parties coming together at this late period. There were two alternatives. One was to read the Bill a third time, and the other was to discharge it in the hope that early next session the parties might come to an agreement which would satisfy everybody. He asked the House to adopt the second alternative.
  MR. THOMAS O'DONNELLdid not think anything would be lost by postponement so as to give the county council and the harbour board an opportunity of coming together to decide the small and simple point in the Bill. That would avoid the difficulty and
  682
  expense of promoting another Bill next year.
  MR. DILLONsaid that he was informed that the promotion of the Order would cost £200 or £300, and he thought they should not take a course which would inflict the cost upon the taxpayers of the county. It would injure no one to adjourn the matter. If the misunderstanding which ought to be cleared up could not be cleared up, then they could take the alternative suggested by the hon. Member for York.
  MR. BUTCHERsaid that if there were really a possibility of agreement he would certainly not oppose the proposed adjournment.
  Question put, and agreed to.
  Debate to be resumed upon Monday next.
  Glasgow Corporation Order Confirmation Bill [Lords] (by Order); Paisley District Tramways Order Confirmation, Bill [Lords] (by Order); Glasgow Corporation (Tramways Consolidation) Order Confirmation Bill [Lords] (by Order). Read a second time; and ordered to be considered upon Monday next.

  SUPPLY [17TH ALLOTTED DAY].
  Considered in Committee.
  (In the Committee.)
  [Mr. GRANT LAWSON (Yorkshire, N. R., Thirsk, in the Chair).

CIVIL SERVICES AND REVENUE DEPARTMENTS ESTIMATES, 1905–6.

  CLASS II.
  Motion made, and Question proposed, "That a sum, not exceeding £28,920, 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 Department of His Majesty's Secretary of State for the

  683
  Colonies, including a Grant in Aid of certain Expenses connected with Emigration."
  MR. HERBERT SAMUELsaid he wished to correct a statement he made earlier in the evening. He spoke of the new piecework contract and said he had questioned the right hon. Gentleman with regard to the New Comet Mine. It should have been the North Rand-fontein Mine. He would again move the reduction of the Vote by £100.
  Motion made, and Question proposed, "That Item A (Salaries, Wages, and Allowances) be reduced by £100, in respect of the Salary of the Secretary of State for the Colonies."—(Mr. Herbert Samuel.)
  SIR BRAMPTON GURDON,resuming his speech, said he had always looked on Ministerial promises as to the payment of the £30,000,000 war loan as mere rhetorical flourish. That had, however, been the suggested return for sanctioning the use of Chinese labour in mines which were only started in order to dump shares on credulous share buyers in this country, which would never otherwise have been started, and which would soon cease working. When Chinese labour was first introduced into the Transvaal a great deal was heard from ministers of religion as to the grand opportunity that was given for missionary work among the Chinese. What missionary work had really been done? The Government had ruined South Africa. They had not really annexed the Transvaal; they had simply put the Opposition into office. The country was governed by the mine-owners, and the Government pledges to the British labourers had been broken, while thousands of aliens had been admitted to the Transvaal at the very moment legislation was being passed to exclude them from this country.
  MR. JOHN STROYAN(Perthshire, W.) said no doubt the hon. Member for the Cleveland Division had made his startling statements in good faith. He had listened to them with much astonishment, and thought the House would do well not to accept them without some proof being adduced,
  684
  There was, no doubt, a large increase in Kaffir labour, one of the causes being that the Kaffirs had got rid of the money they obtained during the war, and another that competition had been stimulated by the advent of the Chinese. But they were still short of unskilled labour, and this arose from the great extension and the further discovery of large mining areas, such, for instance, as the Premier Diamond Mine, from which the Government of the Transvaal would derive a very large income, it being entitled to six-tenths of the profits of the mine. It would be a great mistake to curtail the mining industry by stopping the supply of Chinese or coloured labour, as the entire development of the country depended upon a full supply of unskilled labour. Every working man in South Africa depended directly or indirectly on the mining industry for his living. Since the establishment of the industry some of the ports had risen from insignificance to very great importance indeed, and thousands of miles of railways had been constructed for the use of, and to carry goods to, the gold-mining industry, and upon that industry depended the future development, prosperity, and welfare of the country. A plentiful supply of unskilled labour would result in more work for the whites as overseers, on farms, in stores, in connection with the railways, at the ports, and in fifty other directions. The unskilled labour in the mines was not suitable for white men. It was true that Mr. Cresswell said it was, but every mining expert and engineer in South Africa held the contrary view.
  MR. BRYN ROBERTS(Carnarvonshire, Eifion) asked whether Mr. Cresswell's view was not based on personal experience, while the opinions of the experts were based only on theory.
  MR. JOHN STROYANsubmitted that when all the best mining experts in the world were on one side with only one man on the other there could not be much doubt about the matter. As to the proportion of white labour to coloured labour, an hon. Member opposite had led the House to believe that it had

  685
  dwindled from one in eight down to one in twenty-five.
  MR. BRIGHTsaid that his statement was that of the new men who had come in the proportion was one white man to twenty-one coloured and Chinese.
  MR. JOHN STROYANsaid that as a matter of fact the true proportion was one in 8·5, which was exactly the proportion that existed in 1899 before the war.
  MR. BRIGHTsaid that according to the Blue-book the number of whites had increased from 13,127 in May. 1901, to 16,232; and coloured, from 77,519 to 107,756. There were 35,575 Chinese. If the new men ware totalled up it would be found that there was one new white man to twenty-one new Chinese and coloured.
  MR. JOHN STROYANsaid the fact still remained that the proportion of whites to coloured was one in eight, the same as before the war. There seemed to be an impression that the white working men were unable to look after their own interests. They were educated men, perhaps the most able and enterprising of their class, and if they were badly treated or the proprietors departed from their undertakings, they would say so very quickly and plainly for themselves. It was not true that the Chinese were doing skilled. labour. Hand-drilling was not skilled labour, and had always been done by Kaffirs. Their was a large amount of machine-drilling immediately after the war, but that was because unskilled dabour was unprocurable. Machine-drilling was very expensive as compared with hand-drilling, but notwithstanding that, in order to relieve the distress that existed, the mineowners on the Rind put men into the mines who did not earn their pay, and worked the mines without profit for a considerable time. No Chinaman had ever been asked to do skilled labour; if he had, they would have heard of it from the whites. It was true that emigration had fallen off. Whenever a country was advertised as South Africa had been, there was a great
  686
  rush. Many men went out with the idea of picking up money without working, round men went out to fill square holes, and a number came back. But there was no return of skilled miners. Six or eight months ago there was a large number of skilled labourers unemployed, but as the Chinese had come in, openings had been found for these men, and to-day he was informed on excellent authority, there were no skilled labourers out of employment. The Chinese had rever been so well treated, well fed, and well housed in any other country as they were in the Transvaal, and they, had never been paid anything like so high wages. As to piecework, the fact was that instead of earning 1s. 6d. a day. Chinamen of experience were able to make from 3s. to 4s. a day. The British Indian was utterly unsuited for work in the mines, nor could he stand the rigours of the Rind winter. As to the alleged flogging of Chinamen, it was absolutely untrue. Personally he had never known a case of flogging, either of Kaffir or of Chinaman, on the Rand. He was absolutely certain that such a thing had never occurred, and that the mineowners in their own interest would not allow it. If any compound manager were to flog a Chinaman or a Kaffir he would lose his situation as soon as the fact was known to his employers.
  MR. BURTsaid that the hon. Member had declared that flogging did not exist on the Rand. He did not think that the Colonial Secretary would utter a universal negative in such an emphatic way as the hon. Member had done. Questions had been put to the Colonial Secretary on this subject, and it was notorious that the compound manager of the Croesus Mine at an inquest which was held admitted that he had repeatedly flogged Chinamen. He had privately brought cases at another mine to the attention of the Secretary of State, who, accepting his assurances that his informant was thoroughly straightforward and trustworthy, had cabled to Lord Selborne to make inquiries, and the right hon. Gentleman had declared in that House that Lord Selborne was fully alive to the importance of the question, and was making a thorough investigation. That

  687
  was a sufficient Answer to the hon. Member.
  MR. JOHN STROYAN:There may be one blackguard on the Rand, but one swallow does not make a summer. [Cries of "You said there was no flogging."] I said that I have never known a case.
  MR. BURTsaid that was a specimen of the hon. Gentleman's logic ! Because he had never known a case, therefore no case existed! As a mode of punishment he thought flogging was hateful; he regarded it as an indignity to our common humanity and a degradation to everybody concerned. If he did not carry the Committee with him in that view, he was certain they would all agree that if inflicted at all it should be only in the very gravest cases after thorough investigation, and under the strictest supervision.
  He wished to call the attention of the right hon. Gentleman to the great mortality in the mines. In the case of Chinese, Mr. Evans, superintendent of the Foreign Labour Department, stated that up to the end of January the death rate was 23·16 per 1,000 per annum, or, excluding deaths from beri-beri, 15·4, "which compared favourably with the great towns in England." That was a most extraordinary comparison. The death rate in our great towns was enormously swelled by infant mortality, and it included deaths at all ages and under all conditions, whereas those in the Transvaal were picked men in the prime of life. In the case of the natives the death rate was even more serious. In January last, the President of the Chamber of Mines in a speech at Johannesburg stated that, in the ten months of 1902 the deaths of natives were at the rate of 51·25 per thousand; in 1903,80·92; in 1904, from accident and disease,48·02; from accidents alone,4·05. In this country the death rate in mines from accidents was 1·34, so that where we lost 1,000 lives per annum in our coal mines, if the rate were as high as in the underground gold mines of South Africa we should lose 3,000 or 4,000. That was a matter requiring very careful investigation. Certainly the high death rate
  688
  was no inducement to the natives to come and work in the mines. He believed the high death rate from disease was due largely to climatic conditions. There was a much lower percentage of mortality on the part of those who came from the Transvaal and the Cape Colony than prevailed among the natives of the more tropical parts of the country.
  He had not discussed the general question of bringing the Chinese to the Rand. He had very strong opinions upon the subject. He thought it was an evil day for this country when they were introduced, an evil day for our traditions and our liberties as Britons. Having introduced them, he thought that at any rate they ought to do what they could to treat them humanely and considerately until the time came for their departure, and that would be a welcome day not only to the people of this country, but to a great number of the workers in the Transvaal itself. There was not, as was generally supposed, anything like an unanimous opinion among them in favour of the importation of the Chinese. He saw scores and hundreds of the workmen when he visited the Transvaal, and he attended a good many of their trade union conferences and their executive committees, and he found miners, engineers, railway workers, and mechanics of all kinds, in fact all the organised workmen of South Africa, unanimously and very determinedly hostile to the introduction of the Chinese. That opinion was strongly held at the present time, and he felt that at any rate the Government ought to have waited until the people of the Transvaal had representative and responsible government before they made that evil and hateful departure from our previous policy.
  MR. LYTTELTON:I always listen to the hon. Member who has just sat down with the greatest possible interest, and I think the method in which he has addressed the House to-night compares most favourably with other methods of controversy which have been pursued on this topic. It is perfectly true, as my hon. friend behind. me said in reference to the two points before me at present, and on which he has addressed the House, that there is

  689
  no convincing evidence before me at present that any flogging has taken place. When I say that, I am not unmindful of the fact that Mr. Stewart, compound manager of the Crœsus Mine, stated in his evidence at the inquest, that he had frequently caused un-authorised floggings to take place in the mine: but it ought to be remembered that Mr. Stewart was a dismissed servant of the mine, and it ought not to be forgotten that he was charged—I do not say for a moment whether justly or not—of inciting the Chinese to murder the white men. [A LIBERAL MEMBER: He was acquitted.] It was at that time, when he was under the charge, that he made the statement. He, very likely, and very likely quite justly, resented the charge. At any rate, though I do not say a word against his veracity, under the circumstances I say he is a man whose testimony would be required to be closely watched and tested before an absolute belief was accorded to what he said. I do not say one word more than that.
  But this evidence, which I think is fairly open to those remarks, has been supplemented by the statement of the hon. Member for Morpeth, made to me in private, viz.: that a correspondent in whose straightforwardness and trustworthiness he has thorough reliance has stated to him that unauthorised flogging has taken place on the Rand, and anybody whom the hon. Gentleman speaks of in those terms, I am quite satisfied would not endeavour to mislead him or me. I considered upon that statement alone it was fully worth while, indeed I felt it was incumbent upon me, to make special investigations, and I telegraphed to Lord Selborne asking him that very special investigations should be made into the allegations which I had heard. That is all I can say or do at present with regard to the truth of these allegations, because it is a fact that Lord Se. borne has telegraphed to me within the last few days that he has been unable to trace any such instances as the hon. Member has referred to. But that does not by any means prove that the allegations are not true. We hope we have in London
  690
  one of the best systems of police in the world, but that does not prevent the grossest crimes being committed in the Metropolis. We think we have an admirable system both of law and of supervision in the Transvaal under the Ordinance, which only permits flogging of Chinese for assaults with violence, and permits those only on conviction by a magistrate and on confirmation of that sentence by the Supreme Court. That is the law, and that will be satisfactory to hon. Members of this House. I do not think anything further can be asked.
  But you will say the law is no use unless the administration of it is well safeguarded. I can only say that the utmost vigilance has been enjoined upon those who are superintending in the mines, and we have now, as the result of the telegram I sent to Lord Selborne, and as the result of the misgivings which the information of the hon. Member for Morpeth undoubtedly gave me, an addition of five new inspectors in the mines. We propose that the Superintendent of the Native Labour Departments and these inspectors shall be given the powers of magistrates, that the offences which may be committed by the Chinese shall be tried by them judicially, that their sentences shall require the corroboration and confirmation of the Supreme Court in the event of their ordering flogging, and that the flogging shall be confined purely to the offences I have mentioned. I think those provisions, coupled with the determination which Lord Selborne has expressed to me, and which I have myself emphatically expressed to this House, that any system under which illegal floggings have taken place should be absolutely put an end to, suffice to show that we have taken every precaution we can reasonably take at the present moment, and I can assure the House that if anybody can suggest any other method by which these unauthorised acts can be stopped, and which commend themselves to me, I will most carefully consider them. Let me say in justice to those who are at present on the mines, and I trust I shall not be misunderstood, that at present we have taken this abundant precaution merely on the uncorroborated evidence which the hon. Member has been able to give

  691
  us, so highly do we rate the information he has given us.
  He went on, and I thoroughly sympathise, too, with his object in the matter, to mention the mortality in the mines. The figures that I have before me do not absolutely coincide with his. I must give them from memory, but I can give them accurately without decimals. My figures show that in 1903 the mortality was more than 70 per 1,000 among the natives. Great exertions were used by the medical officer; at my instance and Lord Milner's instance, measures were taken ar. d wore put through by the mineowners with great willingness and energy, and the result was to reduce the mortality from 70 odd to 43 per 1,000, a reduction of very nearly half. I urged Lord Milner to take counsel with his advisers, I said I did not think we ought to be satisfied until the mortality was reduced below 40 per thousand. That has not been obtained yet, but I think the mortality for the present year is 44 per 1,000. We must bear in mind that these mines are not coal mines. I always understood that coal mining was a very healthy occupation, and I think comparison between coal mines and metalliferous mines is not just. I shall not, however, be satisfied until the mortality is below 40 per 1,000.
  May I say in this connection that the High Commissioner of British Central Africa has informed me that the conditions in the Transvaal mines have been so very greatly improved that the distaste for emigration from British Central Africa to the Transvaal has entirely worn off, and there is now the greatest desire on the part of the natives of British Central Africa to engage in that employment. I quite recognise that it is quite desirable, wherever you can with clue regard to health, to employ the natives of South Africa, and even perhaps of Central Africa, but I still think it is a very doubtful question whether it is advisable to bring from Central Africa, and from the tropical parts of Africa, natives who you may depend upon it are far more subject to the climatic dangers of the Rand than those who are at present engaged there. I merely
  692
  mention these things because the fair inference to be drawn from Central African experience is that the treatment of the natives in the Transvaal mines has enormously improved. At the same time I wish to press upon the House that it is unwise to bring natives from Central Africa if there are those more suited to the climate available.
  May I in this connection make this observation to the hon. Member for Morpeth? Is there any difference in principle between bringing African natives over hundreds of thousands of miles of land to the Rand and bringing Chinamen thousands of miles across the sea to the Rand? I venture to think there is no difference in principle, though I agree that the conditions must be considered. So far as what is called alien immigration is concerned, the Kaffir who comes from Portuguese Africa is just as much an alien to the Rand as the Chinaman. Take the view of general humanity in the matter, and contrast the mortality which prevails, and which prevails to a large extent unavoidably owing to the weakness among the Kaffirs, and the mortality which prevails among the Chinese. The fact is that, notwithstanding all the exertions which have been made, the death rate among the Kaffirs is still slightly over 40 per 1,000. I am speaking without the book for the moment, but I am sure I am accurate. The mortality among the Chinese is less than half that amount, and it has actually gone down in some mines to as little as 12 per 1,003. I think I am right in saying that it has never exceeded a little over 20 per 1,000. If you consider merely the wastage of life that takes place in this industry, I put it to the House whether it is not incomparably better that Chinese should be employed in this labour than that the natives of Central or Portuguese Africa should be employed with a loss of life more than twice as great.
  An observation made by the hon. Member for Morpeth as regards the accidents, I think I must notice. He has made a comparison between the accidents which take place in these mines among the natives, and accidents which take

  693
  place among English miners in coalmining parts of this country. I have only to put to him this consideration to convince him that that comparison is not wholly a just one. I consider the miners of this country are among the finest of the population and among the most intelligent, and I do not think you can compare the skill which they exercise in doing their work with the skill exercised by the Kaffir of Central or South Africa. Therefore, when the hon. Member points cut that the mortality from accidents is great, I must point out to him that the mortality in their own kraals would probably be as great as in the mines, so at least I have been informed by great experts in the matter. In the next place the care you can expect from these men in dangerous employment is incomparably less than you both expect and obtain from skilled white miners engaged in coal mining in this country.
  Another point has been made, and I am not surprised it has been made, of the comparatively large number of persons on the Rand who had been subject to prosecution and imprisonment. Allow me to analyse for a moment the figures given, I believe, by the hon. Member for Cleveland, which showed that 1,250 cases of imprisonment occurred in the course of last year. Of these imprisonments no less than 909 are for offences under the Ordinance, which really amount to breach of contract, that is to say, refusal to work and desertion from work. I am quite aware that that sounds a large number, but the House must remember that this Ordinance authorises the repatriation of the Chinese at the end of their term of service, and that costs something like £21. Naturally, and I think it will be agreed, if there were a general abstention from work without justification it would be ruinous in its consequence to those who employ the men. When you take out those 909 men who have been imprisoned for short terms for desertion and refusal to work, you reduce the convictions for assaults of various kinds, exclusive of riots, to 146. Cases of riots come up to 237, and of these 53 convictions occurred upon the occasion of one riot, and 69 upon the occasion of another. You have therefore, apart from these outbursts,
  694
  which no doubt are to be expected in the initiation of a great experiment of this kind, and which occurred not infrequently in days when there were only Kaffirs engaged in these mines, 146 assaults. If you include all the rioters you get a total of something like 400. The population of the Chinese now amounts to 43,000 odd, and it has averaged over the whole time about 20,000, and, if you bear that in mind, and if hon. Gentlemen will take the trouble to investigate the criminal statistics of our sea-port towns and great centres of population, they will find that the crimes of violence are neither surprising nor alarming.
  Reference has been made by one hon. Member, the hon. Member for Shropshire I think, to convict labour. It is a common practice in South Africa to apply convict labour to all industrial purposes. I do not say it is a thing we do here, but I have myself seen in the self-governing Colonies—in the Cape Colony—convict labour so applied. It has been applied always, I believe, to a small extent in the Transvaal, and there was particular reason for the employment of it on the present occasion. As perhaps hon. Gentlemen know, there was great congestion in the prison at Johannesburg, which was in course of being enlarged.
  There was also the point raised by the hon. Member for Cleveland, that none of the Chinese had exercised their power of returning to their own country at their own expense.
  MR. CROOKS:They cannot save the money out of a shilling a day.
  MR. LYTTELTON:I think the hon. Member will find he is not quite accurate. I myself saw Mr. Evans, who was the superintendent we appointed from the Malay States, and who had for twenty years been engaged in the school of Mr. Pickering, of the Malay States. I had three or four hours conversation with him, and, amongst other things, be told me that no punishment he had been

  695
  able to devise or that could be legally imposed under the Ordinance was deemed -to be half as severe as repatriating the Chinaman.
  MR. CROOKS:It is a question of going or having your head off.
  MR. LYTTELTON:I do not quite follow that interruption.
  MR. CROOKS:He dare not go back.
  MR. LYTTELTON:I do not know what the hon. Member means. The fact is the Chinaman can go back to his own country if he pleases. When it is a question of repatriating him as a punishment, the expenses of his return trip have to be paid by the mines. Some considerable numbers have been repatriated under those provisions, and I have Mr. Evans' authority that no punishment is considered so severe as taking these men from a condition which I hold to be, after all, on the evidence. thoroughly satisfactory as a whole, and sending them back to their own country.
  An astounding statement was made by the hon. Member for Cleveland, but it has been apologised for and withdrawn. He gave the House the impression that the minimum wage of 1s. 6d. a day, secured to the Chinaman under Clause 6 by his contract, had been reduced by force to a halfpenny.
  MR. HERBERT SAMUEL:The right hon. Gentleman is quite wrong. I did not apologise for or withdraw any statement. What I did was to mention the New Comet Mine. I ought to have said the North Randfontein Mine. That is the only correction I have made.
  MR. LYTTELTON:The fact is that all along it has been contemplated that the Chinaman would prefer piecework, because, being a good worker, he could earn considerably more than 1s. 6d. a day, amounting in some cases, I think, to as much as 3s. a day. That anticipation has proved correct, and a very large
  696
  majority of the Chinamen engaged upon the Rand have undertaken, after six months, to go on piecework. I believe the result will be that the general average among them will considerably exceed 1s. 6d.
  MR. HERBERT SAMUEL:Is there any minimum?
  MR. LYTTELTON:This afternoon the hon. Member had on the Paper three or four Questions addressed to me. They were not reached, and, therefore, the hon. Member was not entitled to any information from me except in the course of the debate, but in order that he might have them for the benefit of his speech, and have a few hours to consider them. I went out of my way voluntarily to hand across to him my Answers in writing. The return which the hon. Gentleman gave this courtesy was grossly to misrepresent the purport of one of the Answers and grossly to mislead the Committee on the subject of the wages paid to the Chinese.
  MR. HERBERT SAMUEL:The right hon. Gentleman says that I have misrepresented him. I shall be greatly obliged if he will tell me, and I think I am entitled to ask, in what way I have misrepresented him.
  MR. LYTTELTON:The Question I was asked was in regard to wages, and I am now dealing with the Question which the hon. Member himself raised. After I allowed the hon. Member an opportunity of going back from the position which he took up he persisted in the accusation that we have reduced the minimum wage under Clause 6 from 1s. 6d. I say that is absolutely untrue.
  MR. HERBERT SAMUEL:Will the right hon. Gentleman excuse me. He used the word "untrue," which I do not think is Parliamentary language. I venture to ask him whether the new contract which is in force assures Chinese labourers anything more than ½d. an inch for any work they may do. Does he

  697
  mean to say that there is any minimum wage fixed at all? My contention is that the minimum wage for piece workers absolutely disappears.
  MR. LYTTELTON:If a Chinaman, instead of taking a minimum wage of Is. 6d. for a day's work, chooses to take piecework, he may do so and earn more. It was contemplated from the beginning that those who wished to earn more should have an opportunity of doing so. If, on the other hand, he misdoubts his ability to earn more than 1s. 6d. a day, and prefers to go on the day-work system he is entitled for his day's work to 1s. 6d. I do not suppose that the enthusiasm of the hon. Member for the rights of the Chinese labourers would induce him to stand up in this House and say that a man should get 1s. 6d. a day for doing nothing. A Chinaman is expected, as all of us who receive remuneration for what we do, to do what he honestly can to earn his money, and if a Chinaman on the Rand chooses to malinger or wilfully to idle, of course he will not be entitled to claim Is. 6d. for a day's work. If there is anything in the nature of the work unduly or exceptionally arduous, if there is anything in the state of his health that makes him unfit to work, or if there is. anything defective in his skill, he would of course be entitled to have these matters considered under the Ordinance, but unless there is some such reason for not doing an ordinary day's work he would not be entitled to produce less. [An HON. MEMBER: What is an ordinary day's work?] An ordinary day's work is thirty-six inches, but some Chinamen can do from forty-eight to sixty inches.
  Let me make this observation with regard to what was said by the hon. Member for Morpeth as to machine-drilling. Machine-drilling is not done by skilled labourers. The manual drilling which is—done by unskilled labourers is much less deleterious to health than machine-drilling. The great cause of miners' phthisis is the dust which comes from the mineral he is working, and, therefore, so far as the workers are concerned, it is a clear gain that hand-drilling should be sub-
  698
  stituted for machine—drilling. I am sure that the substitution which has taken place has not reduced the labour of white men at all. I would further remark in connection with the allegation that machine-drilling ought to be persisted in, that it is not the case that it employs more white men. I have shown that it does not employ white men. It is objectionable to return to that method, because the effect of machine-drilling is to bring down a larger quantity of debris, and to displace much more of the rock part of the seam than you require to get; it is also dangerous to those engaged in the workings, owing to the "falls" which are liable to occur.
  The main principle which I should like to urge upon the House in connection with this difficult and complicated matter is this. The Opposition for two years have denounced the Government because they have not vetoed the Ordinance, but they have never attempted to prove that the Government have misjudged local opinion in the matter. I will prove that. I know that there were a few sporadic attempts made at the beginning to show that the opinion of the Transvaal white population was against the introduction of the Chinese. It was said, and it has been repeated again quite incorrectly by the hon. Member for the Cleveland Division, that all the self-governing Colonies were against the experiment. As a matter of fact, Mr. Deakin, the present Prime Minister of Australia, when Attorney-General, being approached on the matter and asked to express an opinion about it, said it was the business of the Transvaal itself. Natal has taken a similar line. Above all, Canada, which has a knowledge of this matter, and which has very strong views indeed in regard to the autonomy of the self-governing Colonies, has from first to last declined to express any opinion on the matter and said that it was entirely a matter for the Transvaal. The hon. Member for Cleveland was. therefore, incorrect in his statement that the self-governing Colonies were unanimous in this matter.
  MR. HERBERT SAMUEL:I did not say unanimous.
  MR. LYTTELTON:I am in the recollection of the House, and I say that the word "unanimous" was used. Arc His Majesty's Government right in thinking, and were they right in giving it as their opinion last year, that the white population of the Transvaal are in favour of the introduction of Chinese labour? I say they are right, and I will give the House a reason. Mr. Quin, who was formerly a lending opponent of Chinese labour, has declared in favour of it since the Ordinance has been introduced. I give the substance of what ho said. He abjured any further opposition to it on the part of his friends. It was said that the Boers were against Chinese labour, but as a matter of fact it was beyond all possibility of doubt that the Het Volk, the Boer union, entered into an agreement with certain gentle men on the Rand who were agitating with them for responsible government, it being stipulated that no attempt should be made to repeal the Ordinance for seven years, and that agreement was made definitely and finally for five years. So much for the strong opinion of the Boers. In tie next place, no resolution. no petition, no communication indeed from anybody in the Transvaal, organised or unorganised, against the introduction of the Chinese has reached me, or, so far as I know, the Transvaal Government, for the repeal or discontinuance of the Ordinance. I commend this fact to the notice of the right hon. Gentleman opposite, who may have to deal with this matter at no distant date. This question of practically unanimous local assent to this Ordinance will be and must be, in the course of a few months, put to the test of the Legislative Assembly, four-fifths of which will be elected on a democratic franchise. It is demonstrated that local opinion is on the side of the Ordinance; and although I do not like to prophesy, I will go the length of saying that I do not believe even a Motion will be made in the Assembly for the arrest or the denunciation of the Ordinance. I can imagine a dialogue between the representatives of this country and those of the Transvaal, who would say that they want this Ordinance for the well-being of their country and would ask why we want to stop it.
  MR. CROOKS:No slavery under the Union Jack!
  MR. LYTTELTON:Now supposing I were to make the answer which the hon. Member for Woolwich has been kind enough to suggest to me, the Transvaal representatives would say that for fifty years or more this country has deliberately sanctioned the system of indentured labour under close and restricted conditions. If I had the industry of the hon. Member for Poplar, I might suggest certain minute differences between the present Ordinance and the Ordinances which were sanctioned by himself, Lord Ripon, the right hon. Gentleman for Wolverhampton, and other Members of the Liberal Party, but do you think that would be convincing? Do you think that would be an argument which a Minister could use? The hon. Member for Shropshire took a more honest view of the subject when he declared that these Ordinances for the West Indies were repugnant to him and that he would sweep them out of the Statute-book. But that is not the attitude of hon. Members opposite. There has been debate after debate on this subject, and not a single Gentleman on the Front Opposition Bench has had the manhood to declare that he is in favour of that policy. Although before audiences not fit to argue with him he talks about slavery, he knows that he is responsible for the organisation of Ordinances and statutes scarcely to be distinguished from this one in South Africa. The experiment, however, will never attain the dimensions that have been predicted. The measure of it will probably be the introduction of 50,000 Chinamen. I have been assured by a missionary that the introduction of Chinese and of the provision made for them has actually had the effect of raising the standard of living of all the natives.
  The hon. Member for Morpeth has said that the ratio of white to coloured men employed in the mines has diminished This is not so. The white skilled workers in the last year have increased from 13,413 to 16,989, though some of the increase may be attributed to the increase of native labour. The success of the measures

  701
  taken to prevent the undercutting of Kaffir labour is shown by the fact that since the introduction of Chinese labour the number of Kaffirs employed in the mines has increased from 74,000 to 104,000, and the wages are substantially the same as before the war. It is true that there was a period just alter the termination of the war in which the ratio of white to black was rather higher. I think it was one to six for some time, and that, no doubt, was due to the experiment that was being made, not merely by Mr. Cresswell, of whom I wish to speak with the greatest respect, but to other experiments made on the Rand mines. These were honest experiments, and it would have been a happy thing for the Government, if, as the result, white unskilled miners could have been engaged in these mines. But what was the result of the experiment? There were required in the mines what I call 470 unskilled miners, and to maintain that constant throughout the year it was necessary to pass through the mines white men to the number of no less than 5,800. What is the meaning of those figures? That no white men would stay in the mines working alongside of Kaffirs more than a few days. The mineowners were put to enormous expense in the first place in paying the white miners much more than the natives. I venture to say, and I quote the great authority of the hon. Member for Morpeth, that it is an idle dream to suppose that you would ever get white men, citizens of this country, to work at unskilled work below ground alongside of Kaffirs.
  SIR BRAMPTON GURDON:May I point out that what I asked was in regard to the working of these mines, whether many missionaries had gone into the Chinese compounds.
  MR. LYTTELTON:I have no recollection of the subject at all; but it the hon. Gentleman will give me notice as to the number of missionaries who have gone into the Chinese compounds I shall be happy to answer him. I have never been under the delusion that it was either practical or desirable that the mines should be worked exclusively by white
  702
  men, and I entirely agree with the hon Member for Morpeth that that bears out the fundamental basis upon which this legislation has proceeded.
  SIR H. CAMPBELL—BANNERMAN:There are only two points upon which I wish to say a few words. The first is as to the question how far the employment of Chinese labour has the approval of the inhabitants of the Transvaal. The right hon. Gentleman assumes that it has. We have never dogmatised on the subject. We have never said it had not. We have always denied that there was any proof that it had. I remember an interchange of words between myself and the right hon. Gentleman last year, when he asked me what I should be disposed to do if representative government were given to the Transvaal and the Transvaal Legislature approved of Chinese labour. I said I should answer that when the occasion arises; when the thing is accomplished Well I think it is only reasonable to see whether representative government is given to the Transvaal in the first place, and then to see what the result of that change may be. The right hon. Gentleman, I think, on that occasion for the first time, intimated that this year we should. have an opportunity of expressing our decision upon that point, because before that time the Government would have conferred representative institutions upon the Transvaal. If those representative institutions are genuine and sound representative institutions, carrying with them responsible government, then, of course, for my part, I should bow to the decision of any such body.
  MR. J. CHAMBERLAIN:Slavery under the Union Jack !
  SIR H. CAMPBELL-BANNERMAN:But until that has taken place we suspend our opinion—we suspend our judgment as to the real feelings and the intentions in this matter of the inhabitants of the Transvaal. If you constitute one of the Colonies a responsible item in the Empire, and give it that degree of independence, then, of course, we must accept the work of your own hands and allow them to deal with

  703
  this matter according to their own consciences. I pass from that, which is the mere answer to the inquiries as to the feeling of the Transvaal, of which we have as yet no definite and absolute knowledge whatever.
  And now I would ask the right ton. Gentleman what is his attitude in the present temporary situation towards this Chinese experiment. I asked this Question at the beginning of the session, and I repeat it now—Is it an experiment, or is it a permanent policy, adopted and capable of extension to. any large degree? You have, now, I believe,40,000 Chinamen in compounds in the Transvaal. There are more than 40,000—there are 40,002, because I understand there are two women. Is that considered a desirable state of things? Can the right hon. Gentleman, or any one else on that bench, get up and say that they think that that is conducive to the best interests either of the country in which they work or of the men themselves; that these 40,000 men should be kept in compounds segregated from the rest of the world? If they think so, are they going to stop at 40,000, or are they going to allow it to go on to as great an extent as the mineowners desire? If it is a good thing, why do you stop at 40,000? If it is a bad thing, why do you allow it to go the length of 40,000? I repeat that Question. I do not see that we have ever had any definite or satisfactory reply to that Question-But, as far as the previous point is concerned, I base myself entirely, as far as I am concerned, on the opinion of the community in which this thing exists; and I say that if the inhabitants of the Transvaal, having full opportunity of expressing their opinion, deliberately endorse the
  704
  policy which has been adopted, I, for one, should not be disposed to interfere with them in that decision. [MINISTERIAL cries of "Although it is slavery."]
  THE PRIME MINISTER AND FIRST LORD OF THE TREASURY (Mr. A. J. BALFOUR,):Where was the hon. Member far Woolwich when the right hon. Gentleman was speaking? The hon. Member conld not restrain his enthusiasm when my right hon. friend the Colonial Secretary ventured to make certain observations upon the sort of indentured labour adopted by the Government of hon. Gentlemen opposite in various other pares of the British Empire. I think it was the hon. Member for Woolwich who interrupted, saying that under the British flag slavery could be committed nowhere.
  MR. CROOKS:Under any circumstances.
  MR. A. J. BALFOUR:How sad are these differences in a united Party ! Did the hon. Gentleman hear the speech of his leader a few minutes ago?
  MR. CROOKS:The right hon. Gentleman is labouring under a delusion. I am here simply as a Labour man, and as such I stand up. I know what I talk about, and I will take care of myself.
  MR. A. J. BALFOUR:I apologise to the hon. Gentleman. I thought he recognised the right hon. Gentleman as his leader, but I understand I have been mistaken. I do not wish to bring into collision the views of the hon. Gentleman below the gangway and the views of the right hon. Gentleman who has just spoken. After all, the views of the right

  705
  hon. Gentleman are sufficiently interesting by themselves to be taken without the commentary of any of his Party, And what are those views? They are that the system which my right hon. friend and the Government of which he is a member have sanctioned in the Transvaal is a system of slavery, an outrage against humanity, out of harmony with modern civilisation, destructive of those who come from China, and destructive of the population of the Transvaal among whom they come. But the right hon. Gentleman is perfectly prepared to sanction that slavery. [MINISTERIAL cheers and OPPOSITION cries of "No, no !"] The right hon. Gentleman is perfectly ready to sanction slavery. [Renewed MINISTERIAL cheers and OPPOSITION cries of "No, no !"] I hear dissent. Prom which of the propositions is there dissent? Is there dissent from the proposition that the system of indentured labour is a system of slavery? [OPPOSITION cries of "No."] That is accepted. [Some cries of "Hear, hear."] Is that accepted by the right hon. Gentleman? Very well. Is it denied that the right hon. Gentleman has just in the hearing of the whole House said that if he were convinced that the white population in the Transvaal desired it he would permit indentured labour? [OPPOSITION cries of "No," and MINISTERIAL cries of "Hear, hear!"]
  SIR H. CAMPBELL-BANNERMAN:I never said anything of the kind. [Ironical MINISTERIAL laughter.] I referred to circumstances in which the population of the Transvaal would have a responsible Government. If they have a responsible Government, we cease to be responsible. It should be no part, I
  706
  think, of the business of the Imperial Government to interfere with their action in such a domestic matter. [OPPOSITION cheers and MINISTERIAL ironical laughter.]
  MR. A. J. BALFOUR:This is the first time I have ever heard a British statesman describe slavery as a domestic matter. Let us just analyse the principle of policy which is going to animate the next Radical Government. They consider that they are justified in giving responsible government to persons who they have every reason to believe—[OPPOSITION cries of "No"]—will abuse it—[OPPOSITION cries of "No"]—by instituting slavery.—[OPPOSITION cries of "No."]—Then I understand they are not going to give it. They are never going to give responsible government to the Transvaal unless and until [Renewed OPPOSITION cries of "No"]—am I not to be allowed to finish any sentence?—until they have reason to believe that the Transvaal will not permit slavery. That is an irresistible conclusion from the observations of the right hon. Gentleman [OPPOSITION cries of "No"] from which the right hon. Gentleman cannot dissent. Now is it not irresistible? [OPPOSITION cries of "No."] Just consider. Indentured labour itself is slavery. If the Transvaal have absolute self-government and choose to maintain slavery [OPPOSITION cries of "No" and MINISTERIAL cries of "Order"] the right hon. Gentleman says that he considers he has nothing more to do with it. But it rests with the British Government to give them complete self-government. If we give them complete self-government in the full consciousness that they will use it to maintain slavery, without taking precautions that they

  707
  shall not so use it, we are responsible for the slavery. [MINISTERIAL cries of "Hear, hear!"] And I can imagine nothing more contemptible than the position of the man [OPPOSITION ironical cheers] who, knowing perfectly well how the power which he confers is going to be used [OPPOSITION cries of "How? "]—knowing full well that it will be misused in the grossest manner, yet insists on conferring it, and washes his hands of the result. [MINISTERIAL cheers.] However, it may be that the right hon. Gentleman will fill a very authoritative position in the Councils of his Sovereign before the Transvaal has complete self-government, when it only has a representative Assembly, and when it will rest with His Majesty's Government to decide whether any Ordinance passed by that Assembly is accepted or not. It will be interesting to know, if the right hon. Gentleman should ever be in that position, how far he is going to condone what he describes as slavery—how far he is going to make himself a party to a system which the hon. Member for Woolwich truly says, if it be slavery, ought not to be permitted under the British flag—how far he is going to make himself the accomplice of those whom he cannot but regard as criminals.
  MAJOR SEELYasked whether the Prime Minister had not himself sanctioned the Ordinance which he now described as a system of slavery.
  MR. A. J. BALFOUR:The hon. Gentleman's friends have been making so much noise that possibly he did not hear what I said. I do not regard the Ordinance as slavery, but the right hon. Gentleman the Leader of the Opposition
  708
  does; and that is the difficulty which he is in.
  MAJOR SEELYsaid that the Prime Minister had pointed out that there was a great danger, if the right hon. Gentleman the Leader of the Opposition had the reigns of power, that he might be faced with the dilemma to sanction a system of slavery. He would ask the Prime Minister on whom the special responsibility rested for that dilemma? The great responsibility rested on the right hon. Gentleman the Member for West Birmingham, who gave a specific promise that the importation of Asiatic labour would not be permitted unless it was clearly shown that. a great majority of the white inhabitants was in favour of it. He defied the Prime Minister [MINISTERIAL ironical laughter]—he appealed to hon. Gentleman opposite to listen to him; if they would not resign their seats he could not go on resigning his seat on this question [OPPOSITION cheers]—he defied the Prime Minister to say that that condition had. been fulfilled. No reasonable man. could positively assert that that condition had been fulfilled.
  It was well known that the great majority of the white population of the Transvaal was against Chinese labour. The hon. Member for Norfolk, who had just visited the Transvaal, stated that hundreds of Englishmen there objected to Chinese labour. It was admitted that the Boers in the Transvaal were in the great majority. They held a convention at Pretoria in June last at which there were 159 delegates, and by a. unanimous vote they protested against the introduction of the Chinese. Why had the promise made by the right

  709
  hon. Gentleman for West Birmingham been broken? It had been pointed out by the Member for Shropshire, six months ago, that the effect of this experiment would not be for the economic good of the Transvaal, and that a system of servile labour in disguise would be bad for that country. The Blue-book showed that the result of the introduction of Chinese labour into the Transvaal might have increased the production of gold, but it had not increased the revenue of the Transvaal. He and his friends were convinced that this system was, in itself, wrong, and they had the support of high legal authority that it was, in essence, slavery. The Standing Counsel for the Indian Government said that the Chinese indentured labourers were not free according to either English or Anglo-Dutch law, and that he could not conceive of any system, of jurisprudence in any civilised country where a contract of this kind could be enforced. Better still—and he drew the attention of the Colonial Secretary to this—he said that the contract was an indirect contravention of the accepted principles of the liberty of the subject. He did not say that that legal opinion was conclusive, but it should be tested. He maintained that the system of indenture of the Chinese labourers was wrong both legally and morally.
  When complaint was made about the flogging of the Chinese labourers the right
  hon. Gentleman, the Colonial Secretary, had airily dismissed the subject, but then they had the testimony of the hon. Member for Morpeth; and he held that a system like that could not be continued without some degree of cruelty supervening. The only reply of the Colonial Secretary was that when the mine-owners paid £21 per head to get these Chinamen, they ought to get their money's worth. He and his friends condemned this system of indenture root and branch. It was perfectly true that if responsible self—government were granted to the Transvaal it would be difficult to take away the right to import Chinese if the Transvaal Government so desired it. He quite admitted the difficulty. But a system like this, even making allowance for the natural humanity of Englishmen, could not continue without cruelty supervening. If a situation of difficulty and danger arose owing to any conflict of opinion between ourselves and the responsible governing authority in the Transvaal, on hon. and right hon. Gentlemen opposite, and on the Prime Minister, would for ever rest the responsibility, because they broke the word of this country.
  Question put.
  The Committee divided:—Ayes, 170; Noes, 237. (Division List No. 314.)

  AYES.

  Abraham, William (Cork, N. E.

  Burke, E. Haviland

  Cheetham, John Frederick

  Ainsworth, John Stirling

  Burns, John

  Cogan, Denis J.

  Allen, Charles P.

  Burt, Thomas

  Condon, Thomas Joseph

  Ashton, Thomas Gair

  Buxton, NE (York, NR, Whitby

  Crean, Eugene

  Atherley-Jones, L.

  Buxton, Sydney Chas. (Poplar)

  Cremer, William Randal

  Baker, Joseph Allen

  Caldwell, James

  Crooks, William

  Barry, E. (Cork, S.)

  Campbell-Bannerman, Sir H.

  Cullinan, J.

  Beaumont, Wentworth C. B.

  Causton, Richard Knight

  Delany, William

  Black, Alexander William

  Cawley, Frederick

  Devlin, Chas. Ramsay (Galway

  Bolton, Thomas Dolling

  Chance, Frederick William

  Devlin, Joseph (Kilkenny, N.)

  Bright, Allan Heywood

  Channing, Francis Allston

  Dilke, Rt. Hon. Sir Charles

  Dillon, John

  Lloyd-George, David

  Roberts, John Bryn (Eifion)

  Doogan, P. C.

  Lough, Thomas

  Roberts, John H. (Denbighs.)

  Duffy, William J.

  Lundon, W.

  Robson, William Snowdon

  Duncan, J. Hastings

  Lyell, Charles Henry

  Roche, John (Galway, East)

  Edwards, Frank

  Macnamara, Dr. Thomas J.

  Rose, Charles Day

  Ellice. CaptEC (S. Andrw'sBghs

  MacNeill, John Gordon Swift

  Russell, T. W.

  Ellis, John Edward (Notts.)

  MacVeagh, Jeremiah

  Samuel, Herbert L. (Cleveland

  Emmott, Alfred

  M'Fadden, Edward

  Samuel, S. M. (Whitechapel)

  Esmonde, Sir Thomas

  M'Hugh, Patrick A.

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

  Eve, Harry Trelawney

  M'Kenna, Reginald

  Shackleton, David James

  Farrell, James Patrick

  M'Killop, W. (Sligo, North)

  Shaw, Charles Edw. (Stafford

  Fenwick, Charles

  Mitchell, Edw. (Fermanagh, N.

  Shaw, Thomas (Hawick B.)

  Ffrench, Peter

  Mooney, John J.

  Sheehy, David

  Field, William

  Muldoon, John

  Shipman, Dr. John G.

  Flavin, Michael Joseph

  Murnaghan, George

  Sinclair, John (Forfarshire)

  Flynn, James Christopher

  Murphy, John

  Slack, John Bamford

  Foster, Sir Walter (Derby Co.)

  Nannetti, Joseph P.

  Soames, Arthur Wellesley

  Fuller, J. M. F.

  Newnes, Sir George

  Spencer, Rt. Hn. C. R (Northants

  Furness, Sir Christopher

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

  Stanhope, Hon. Philip James

  Gilhooly, James

  Nolan, Joseph (Louth, South)

  Strachey, Sir Edward

  Goddard, Daniel Ford

  Norman, Henry

  Sullivan, Donal

  Grant, Corrie

  Nussey, Thomas Willans

  Taylor, Treodore C. (Radcliffe)

  Griffith, Ellis J.

  O'Brien, K. (Tipperary, Mid.

  Tennant, Harold John

  Guest, Hon. Ivor Churchill

  O'Brien, Patrick (Kilkenny)

  Thomas, Sir A. (Glamorgan, E.

  Gurdon, Sir W. Brampton

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

  Thomas, DavidAlfred(Merthyr

  Hammond, John

  O'Connor, James (Wicklow, W.

  Tomkinson, James

  Harrington, Timothy

  O'Connor, John (Kildare, N.)

  Tully, Jasper

  Hayden, John Patrick

  O'Donnell, John (Mayo, S.)

  Villiers, Ernest Amherst

  Helme, Norval Watson

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

  Wallace, Robert

  Hemphill, Rt. Hon. Charles H.

  O'Dowd, John

  Walton, Joseph (Barnsley)

  Higham, John Sharp

  O'Kelly, Conor (Mayo, N.)

  Warner, Thomas (Courtenay

  Holland, Sir William Henry

  O'Malley, William

  Wason, Eugene (Clackmannan

  Hutchinson, Dr. Chas. Fred.

  O'Mara, James

  Wason, J. Cathcart (Orkney}

  Isaacs, Rufus Daniel

  O'Shaughnessy, P. J.

  Weir, James Galloway

  Jones, Leif (Appleby)

  O'Shee, James John

  White, Luke (York, E. R.)

  Jones, William (Carnarvonsh.

  Partington, Oswald

  White, Patrick (Meath, North)

  Jordan, Jeremiah

  Paulton, James Mellor

  Whiteley, George (York, W. R)

  Kearley, Hudson E.

  Pearson, Sir Weetman D.

  Whittaker, Thomas Palmer

  Kennedy, V. P. (Cavan, W.)

  Pease, J. A. (Saffron Walden)

  Williams, Osmond (Merioneth)

  Kilbride, Denis

  Perks, Robert William

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

  Labouchere, Henry

  Power, Patrick Joseph

  Wilson, John (Durham, Mid.)

  Lambert, George

  Priestley, Arthur

  Woodhouse. Sir J T(Huddersf'd

  Lamont, Norman

  Rea, Russell

  Young, Samuel

  Law, Hugh Alex. (Donegal, W.

  Reddy, M.

  Lawson, Sir Wilfrid (Cornwall)

  Redmond, John E. (Waterford

  TELLERS FOR THE AYES—Mr.

  Layland-Barratt, Francis

  Richards, Thomas

  Herbert Gladstone and Mr.

  Leese, Sir J. F. (Accrington)

  Rickett. J. Compton

  William M'Arthur.

  NOES

  Agg-Gardner, James Tynte

  Bignold, Sir Arthur

  Chamberlain, Rt. Hn. J (Birm.)

  Agnew, Sir Andrew Noel

  Bigwood, James

  Chamberlain, Rt. Hn. JA (Wore.

  Allhusen, Augustus Henry E.

  Bill, Charles

  Chapman, Edward

  Anson, Sir William Reynell

  Bingham, Lord

  Clare, Octavius Leigh

  Arkwright, John Stanhope

  Blundell, Colonel Henry

  Clive, Captain Percy A.

  Arnold-Forster. Rt. Hn. HughO

  Bond, Edward

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

  Arrol, Sir William

  Boscawen, Arthur Griffith

  Coghill, Douglas Harry

  Atkinson, Rt. Hon. John

  Brassey, Albert

  Compton, Lord Alwyne

  Aubrey-Fletcher, Rt. Hn. Sir H

  Brodrick, Rt. Hon. St. John

  Corbett, T. L. (Down, North)

  Bagot, Capt. Josceline FitzRoy

  Brymer, William Ernest

  Crossley, Rt. Hon. Sir Savile

  Bailey, James (Walworth)

  Burdett-Coutts, W.

  Cubitt, Hon. Henry

  Balcarres, Lord

  Butcher, John George

  Dalrymple, Sir Charles

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

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

  Davenport, William Bromley

  Balfour, Capt. C. B. (Hornsey)

  Carlile, William Walter

  Dewar, Sir T. R. (T'r Hamlets)

  Balfour, Rt. Hn. G. W. (Leeds)

  Carson, Rt. Hon. Sir Edw. H.

  Dickson, Charles Scott

  Balfour, Kenneth R. (Christch.

  Cautley, Henry Strother

  Dimsdale, Rt. Hon. Sir J. C.

  Banbury, Sir Frederick George

  Cavendish, V. C. W. (Derbyshire

  Disraeli, Coningsby Ralph

  Banner, John S. Harmood-

  Cayzer, Sir Charles William

  Dixon-Hartland, Sir F. Dixon

  Bathurst, Hon. Allen Benjamin

  Cecil, Evelyn (Aston Manor)

  Douglas, Rt. Hon. A. Akers

  Bentinck, Lord Henry C.

  Cecil, Lord Hugh (Greenwich)

  Doxford, Sir William Theodore

  712

  713

  Duke, Henry Edward

  Kimber, Sir Henry

  Robertson, Herbert (Hackney)

  Dyke, Rt. Hn. Sir William Hart

  Knowles, Sir Lees

  Robinson, Brooke

  Egerton, Hon. A. de Tatton

  Lambton, Hon. Frederick Wm.

  Rolleston, Sir John F. L.

  Faber, Edmund B. (Hants, W.)

  Law, Andrew Bonar (Glasgow)

  Rollit, Sir Albert Kaye

  Faber, George Denison (York)

  Lawrence, Wm. F. (Liverpool)

  Ropner, Colonel Sir Robert

  Fellowes, Rt. Hn. Ailwyn Edw.

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

  Round, Rt. Hon. James

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

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

  Royds, Clement Molyneux

  Fielden, Edward Brocklehurst

  Lees, Sir Elliott (Birkenhead)

  Rutherford, John (Lancashire)

  Finch, Rt. Hon. George H.

  Legge, Col. Hon. Heneage

  Sackville, Col. S. G. Stopford

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

  Leveson-Gower, Frederick N. S.

  Sadler, Col. Sir Samuel Alex.

  Fisher, William Hayes

  Liddell, Henry

  Saunderson, Rt. Hn. Col. Edw. J

  FitzGerald, Sir Robt. Penrose-

  Lockwood, Lieut. -Col. A. R.

  Scott, Sir S. (Marylebone, W.)

  Fitzroy, Hon. Edw. Algernon

  Long, Col. Chas. W. (Evesham)

  Sharpe, William Edward T.

  Flannery, Sir Fortescue

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

  Shaw-Stewart, Sir H. (Renfrew)

  Flower, Sir Ernest

  Lonsdale, John Brownlee

  Sinclair, Louis (Romford)

  Forster, Henry William

  Lowe, Francis William

  Skewes-Cox, Sir Thomas

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

  Lucas, Col. Francis (Lowestoft)

  Smith, A. H. (Hertford, East)

  Gardner, Ernest

  Lucas, Reg. J. (Portsmouth)

  Smith, RtHn JParker (Lanark

  Godson, Sir Augustus Fredk.

  Lyttelton, Rt. Hon. Alfred

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

  Gordon, J. (Londonderry, S.)

  Macdona, John Cumming

  Stanley, Hon. A. (Ormskirk)

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

  Maclver, David (Liverpool

  Stanley, Edw. Jas. (Somerset)

  Gore, Hon. S. F. Ormsby-

  Maconochie, A. W.

  Stanley, Rt. Hon. Lord (Lancs.

  Goschen, Hn. George Joachim

  M'Arthur, Charles (Liverpool)

  Stewart, Sir Mark J. M'Taggart

  Goulding, Edward Alfred

  M'Killop, James (Stirlingshire)

  Stirling-Maxwell, Sir John M.

  Gray, Ernest (West Ham)

  Manners, Lord Cecil

  Stone, Sir Benjamin

  Greene, H. D. (Shrewsbury)

  Marks, Harry Hananel

  Stroyan, John

  Greene, W. Raymond-(Cambs.)

  Martin, Richard Biddulph

  Strutt, Hon. Charles Hedley

  Grenfell, William Henry

  Massey-Mainwaring, Hn. W. F

  Talbot, Lord E. (Chichester)

  Gretton, John

  Maxwell, Rt. HnSirH E. (Wigt'n

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

  Greville, Hon. Ronald

  Melville, Beresford Valentine

  Thorburn, Sir Walter

  Groves, James Grimble

  Mildmay, Francis Bingham

  Thornton, Percy M.

  Guthrie, Walter Murray

  Milvain, Thomas

  Tollemache, Henry James

  Hall, Edward Marshall

  Molesworth, Sir Lewis

  Tomlinson, Sir Wm. Edw. M.

  Halsey, Rt. Hon. Thomas F.

  Montagu, Hn. J. Scott (Hants.)

  Tritton, Sir Charles Ernest

  Hamilton, RtHnLordG (Midd'x

  Morgan, D. J. (Walthamstow)

  Tuff, Charles

  Hamilton, Marq of(L'donderry)

  Morpeth, Viscount

  Tuke, Sir John Batty

  Hardy, Laurence (Kent, Ashf'rd

  Morrell, George Herbert

  Turnour, Viscount

  Harris, F. Leverton (Tynem'th)

  Morrison, James Archibald

  Vincent, Col. SirC. E H(Sheffield

  Haslam, Sir Alfred S.

  Morton, Arthur H. Aylmer

  Vincent, Sir Edgar (Exeter)

  Hay, Hon. Claude George

  Mount, William Arthur

  Walrond, Rt. Hn. SirWilliam H

  Heath, Sir J. (Staffords., N. W.)

  Mowbray, Sir Robert Gray C.

  Warde, Colonel C. E.

  Heaton, John Henniker

  Murray, Charles J. (Coventry)

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

  Helder, Sir Augustus

  Nicholson, William Graham

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

  Henderson, Sir A. (Stafford, W.

  O'Neill, Hon. Robert Torrens

  Whiteley, H. (Ashton und. Lyne

  Hermon-Hodge, Sir Robert T.

  Peel, Hn. Wm. Robt. Wellesley

  Whitmore, Charles Algernon

  Hickman, Sir Alfred

  Percy, Earl

  Willoughby de Eresby, Lord

  Hill, Henry Staveley

  Pierpoint, Robert

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

  Hoare, Sir Samuel

  Pilkington, Colonel Richard

  Wilson, John (Glasgow)

  Hope, J. F. (Sheffield, Brightside

  Platt-Higgins, Frederick

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

  Hoult, Joseph

  Powell, Sir Francis Sharp

  Wolff, Gustav Wilhelm

  Howard, J. (Kent, Faversham)

  Pretyman, Ernest George

  Wortley, Rt. Hon. C. B. Stuart

  Hozier, Hn. James Henry Cecil

  Pryce-Jones, Lt. -Col. Edward

  Wrightson, Sir Thomas

  Hudson, George Bickersteth

  Purvis, Robert

  Wylie, Alexander

  Hunt, Rowland

  Randles, John S.

  Wyndham-Quin, Col. W. H.

  Jameson, Major J. Eustace

  Rankin, Sir James

  Yerburgh, Robert Armstrong

  Jeffreys, Rt. Hn. Arthur Fred.

  Rasch, Sir Frederic Carne

  Jessel, Capt. Herbert Merton

  Ratcliff, R. F.

  TELLERS FOR THE NOES—Sir Alexander Acland-Hood and Viscount Valentia.

  Kennaway, Rt. Hn. Sir John H

  Reid, James (Greenock)

  Kenyon, Hn. Geo. T. (Denbigh

  Renshaw, Sir Charles Bine

  Kerr, John

  Ritchie, Rt. Hn. Chas. Thomson

  Keswick, William

  Roberts, Samuel (Sheffield)

  Question, "That this House do now adjourn"—(Sir A. Acland-Hood)—put, and agreed to.

  Original Question again proposed.
  And, it being after Midnight, the Chairman left the Chair to make his Report to the House.
  Committee report Progress; to sit again To-morrow.

  IRISH EDUCATION (AFFLICTED CHILDREN) [EXPENSES].
  Considered in Committee.
  (In the Committee.)
  Resolved, That it is expedient to authorise the payment, out of moneys provided by Parliament for Public Education in Ireland, of the Expenses of Education given to Afflicted Children, in pursuance of any Act of the present session to make better provision for the Elementary Education of Afflicted Children in Ireland.—(Mr. Walter Long.)
  Resolution to be reported this day.

  VALUATION (IRELAND) BILL.
  Order for Second Reading read, and discharged. Bill withdrawn.
  LOCAL TAXATION LICENCES, 1904–5.
  Return ordered, of "the amount received in respect of each administrative county and county borough in England and Wales for Local Taxation Licence Duties and Penalties, under The Local Government Act, 1888, in the year ended March 31st, 1905 (in continuation of Parliamentary Paper, No. 300, of Session 1904)."—(Mr. Jeffreys.)

  LONDON (EQUALISATION OF RATES) ACT, 1894 (ACCOUNTS UNDER SECTION 1 (7) OF THE ACT).
  Return ordered, "showing, according to the accounts for the twelve months
  716
  preceding the 31st day of March, 1905, furnished to the Local Government Board under Section 1 (7) of The London (Equalisation of Rates) Act, 1894—

  (1) The amounts paid during the year out of the Equalisation Fund under the Act to the Corporation of the City of London and each of the Councils of the Metropolitan Boroughs to whom payments out of that fund were made.

  (2) The amount of the expenses incurred during the year by each of these authorities (a) under The Public Health (London) Act, 1891 (including expenses of scavenging streets); (b) in respect of lighting; and (c) in respect of streets (other than the expenses of scavenging); and

  (3) The amount expended during the year by each such authority out of the sums received by them under the Act (in continuation of Parliamentary Paper, No. 325, of Session 1904)."—(Mr. Jeffreys.)

  BUSINESS OF THE HOUSE.
  THE PARLIAMENTARY SECRETARY OF THE TREASURY (Sir A. ACLAND HOOD,),in moving the adjournment of House, said that the first order for the next day would be the Second Reading of the Naval Works Bill, and the second order the East India Railways Loan Bill.
  Adjourned at a quarter after Twelve o'clock.