Sitting of 22 June 1905

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

  PRIVATE BILLS [LORDS] (STANDING ORDERS NOT PREVIOUSLY IN-QUIRED INTO COMPLIED WITH).
  Mr. SPEAKERlaid upon the Table Report from one of the Examiners of Petitions for Private Bills, That, in the case of the following Bills, originating in the Lords, and referred on the First Reading thereof, the Standing Orders not previously inquired into, and which are applicable thereto have been complied with, viz.:—Southport, Birkdale, and West Lancashire Water Board Bill [Lords]; Formby Township Bill [Lords]; Blackpool Improvement Bill [Lords]; Littlehampton Urban District Council Bill [Lords]; Metropolitan Electric Supply Company (Acton District) Bill [Lords]; Matlock Bath Improvement Bill [Lords]; Llandrindod Wells Urban District Council Bill [Lords].
  Ordered, That the Bill be read a second time

  PRIVATE BILLS [LORDS] (STANDING ORDERS NOT PREVIOUSLY IN QUIRED INTO NOT COMPLIED WITH)
  Mr. SPEAKERlaid upon the Table Report from one of the Examiners of Petitions for Private Bills, That, in the case of the following Bill, originating in the Lords, and referred on the First Reading thereof, the standing Order not previously inquired into, and which are applicable thereto, have not been complied with, viz.:—Administrative County of London and District Electric Power Company Bill [Lords].
  Ordered; That the Report be referred to the Select Committee on Standing Orders.

  PROVISIONAL ORDER BILLS (NO STANDING ORDERS APPLICABLE).
  Mr. SPEAKER,laid upon the Table Report from one of the Examiners of the Petitions for Private Bills That, in the
  1326
  case of the following Bill, referred on the First Reading thereof, no Standing Orders are applicable, viz.:—Pier and Harbour Provisional Order (No. 3) Bill.
  Ordered, That the Bill be read a second time to-morrow

  PROVISIONAL ORDER BILLS [LORDS] (STANDING ORDERS APPLICABLE THERETO COMPLIED WITH).
  Mr. SPEAKERlaid upon the Table Report from one of the Examiners of Petitions for Private Bills That, in the case of the following Bill, originating in the Lords, and referred on the First Reading thereof, the Standing Orders are applicable, viz.:—Education Board Provisional Order Confirmation (London, No. 2) Bill [Lords]; Education Board Provisional Orders Confirmation (Liverpool, etc.) Bill [Lord]; Pier and Harbour provisional Order (No. 1) Bill [Lords]; Pier and Harbour Provisional Orders (No. 2) Bill [Lords].
  Ordered, That the Bill be read a second time to morrow.

  CHURCHES (SCOTLAND) BILL (NO STANDING ORDERS APPLICABLE).
  Mr. SPKAKFRlaid upon the Table Report from one of the Examiners of Petitions for Private Bills, That, in the case of the following Bill, referred pursuant to the Order of the House of the 7th day of June, no Standing Orders are applicable, viz.:—Churches (Scotland) Bill.
  Great Northern Railway (Ireland) Bill (changed from "Great Northern (Ireland) and Midland Railways Bill"). As amended, considered; Amendments made; Bill to be read the third time.
  Rhymney Railway Bill [Lords]. As amended, considered; Amendments made; Bill to be read the third time.

  DONOVAN'S DIVORCE BILL [LORDS].
  Ordered, That a Message be sent to the Lords to request that their Lordships will be pleased to communicate to this House copies of the Minutes of Evidence and Proceedings, together with the documents deposited in the case of Donovan's Divorce Bill [Lords].—(Mr. Attorney-General.)
  Ordered, That it be an Instruction to the Select Committee on Divorce Bills, that they do hear Counsel and examine Witnesses for Donovan's Divorce Bill [Lords], and also that they do hear Counsel and examine Witnesses against the Bill, if the parties concerned think fit to be heard by Counsel and produce Witnesses.—(Mr. Attorney-General.)

PETITIONS.
  JUVENILE SMOKING BILL.
  Petition from Edinburgh, in favour; to lie upon the Table.
RETURNS, REPORTS, ETC.
  IRISH LAND COMMISSION.
  Return [presented June 20th] to be printed. [No. 203.]
  MINT.
  Copy presented, of Thirty-fifth Annual Report of the Deputy Master and Comptroller of the Mint, 1904 [by Command]; to lie upon the Table.
  RAILWAYS ABANDONMENT.
  Copy presented, of Report by the Board of Trade respecting the Hastings Tramways Bill [Lords], and the objects thereof [pursuant to Standing Order 158b]; referred to the Committee on the Bill.
  TRADE REPORTS (ANNUAL SERIES).
  Copies presented, of Diplomatic and Consular Reports, Annual Series, Nos. 3414 and 3415 [by Command]; to lie upon the Table.
QUESTIONS AND ANSWERS CIRCULATED WITH THE VOTES.

  The Dissolution of the Union between Norway and Sweden.
  MR. BRYCE): To ask the Under-Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs whether His Majesty's Government have received any communications
  1328
  from Norway or Sweden regarding the constitutional question which has arisen between King Oscar and the Norwegian Storthing; and, if so, whether such communications, or the substance or purport of them, can be laid before Parliament.
  (Answered by Earl Percy.) A copy of the King of Sweden's Address to the Storthing has been communicated to His Majesty's Government. His Majesty's Consul-General at Christiania has been furnished unofficially with copies of documents relating to the Storthing's Declaration of Dissolution of the Union.

  Memorial of Officers of Dublin and Queens town Travelling Post Office.
  MR. NANNETTI: To ask the Postmaster-General if a memorial had been received in October last from certain sorting clerks and telegraphists employed on Dublin and Queenstown T. P. O. asking for increased trippage allowance; and could he say when a decision would be communicated to them.
  (Answered, by Lord Stanley.) The memorial to which the hon. Member refers has been received. I am not as yet prepared to reply to it, but I hope to be shortly in a position to do so.

  Site for Statue of late Duke of Cambridge.
  MR. TREVELYAN: To ask the hon. Member for Chorley, as representing the First Commissioner of Works, on what spot in the Horse Guards Parade it is intended to erect the statue of the Duke of Cambridge.
  (Answered by Lord Balcarres.) There is a proposal to erect a statue in memory of the late Duke of Cambridge in the neighbourhood of the Horse Guards, but as yet no site has been selected, and it has not been suggested that it should be erected upon the Horse Guards Parade.

  Alleged Caning of Children in Preston for Non-Payment of School Fees.
  SIR JOHN GORST: To ask the Secretary to the Board of Education what is the result of the inquiry made by the Board of

  1329
  Education into the alleged caning of children in the public elementary schools at Preston because their parents did not pay school fees; whether school fees are charged in the Preston schools with the sanction of the Board of Education; and, if so, on what specific ground such sanction has been given.
  (Answered by Sir William Anson.) I have made inquiries, and I find that on three occasions a councillor has called the attention of the council to alleged cases of caning for non-payment of fees. As a result of careful investigation the education committee came practically unanimously to the conclusion that there was no foundation for the charge in the first set of cases. In the second set it was found that all the children had been in occupation of recognised free places for more than twelve months. The third set are still under investigation. In all the schools except one, where fees are charged, the right to do so is based upon Section 2 (2) of the Act of 1891, and no sanction of the Board is required. In the remaining case the fees were sanctioned by the Board under Section 4 (1) of the Act of 1891.

  Escape from Fire Committee—London Building Acts Amendment Bill and the City of London (Escape from Fire) Bill.
  MR. JOHN BURNS: To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department whether, in view of the appointment of a Select Committee to inquire as to the provision of means of escape from fire in factories, workshops, laundries, offices, shops, hotels, and other buildings where persons work or live in large numbers, and to report what changes in the law are necessary, he proposes to take any action in regard to the consideration by a Select Committee of the now pending London Building Acts Amendment Bill and the City of London (Escape from Fire) Bill.
  (Answered by Mr. Secretary Akers-Douglas.) Some two years ago I suggested to the London County Council that they should amend the provisions of the London Building Act in respect to the means of escape from fire; and it was not my intention or wish, in assenting to the request of the hon. Member for
  1330
  Berwick for a general inquiry into the subject, that such an inquiry should interfere with the consideration of the proposals that have been made for London, which stands on a somewhat different footing from the rest of the country, and has a more urgent need for legislation.

  Annual Leave of Abstractor Clerks.
  MR. CLAUDE HAY (Shoreditch, Hoxton): To ask the Secretary to the Treasury whether the Treasury Letter of the 8th May, granting eighteen days annual leave to abstractors of the new class after ten years service applies to abstractors of the old class; and, if so, whether he will take steps to have this concession communicated to those departments where abstractors of the old class have hitherto been given only fourteen days.
  (Answered by Mr. Victor Cavendish.) The concession referred to by my hon. friend is applicable in the case of abstractors of the old class, and heads of departments have been so informed.

  Sentence of Imprisonment on the Chaukidar Mahabir.
  MR. WEIR: To ask the Secretary of State for India whether he is aware that Mr. Burkitt, officiating Judge at Allahabad, recently passed a sentence of six years rigorous imprisonment on the Chaukidar Mahabir for the theft of letters the property of the Post Office; and, having regard to the fact that less severe punishment is inflicted for similar offences in this country, will he suggest the expediency of a reconsideration of the case with a view to a remission of part of the sentence.
  (Answered by Mr. Secretary Brodrick.) I have observed a report of the case referred to in the newspapers. The accused appears to have committed an extensive series of thefts and to have stolen considerable sums of money contained in the intercepted letters. It is open to him to appeal to the High Court and the Governments of the United Provinces and India in regard to the severity of the sentence, and I see no reason to interfere.

  Permanent Appointment of a Third Judge for the Province of Oudh.
  MR. WEIR: To ask the Secretary of State for India if the Government of India will consider the expediency of making the appointment of a third Judge for the province of Oudh permanent instead of merely temporary.
  (Answered by Mr. Secretary Brodrick) I agreed in April last, on the recommendation of the Government of India, to the that third Judge in the Chief Appellate Court in Oudh being made permanent.

  Allen's Hill School, County Armagh.
  MR. SLOAN: To ask the Chief Secretary to the Lord-Lieutenant of Ireland whether he is aware that the Board of National Education, at their meeting on the 26th May, 1903, at which the Resident Commissioner was not present, unanimously resolved to grant aid to Allen's Hill School, county Armagh, and that the secretaries of the Board, contrary to the usual practice, failed to notify this decision to the applicants; and will he explain why this resolution was afterwards, at a meeting of the Board at which the Resident Commissioner was present, rescinded.
  (Answered by Mr. Walter Long.) The Commissioners at their meeting on the 26th May, 1903, decided to grant aid to this school, but, as there were peculiar circumstances in the case, at their next meeting on the 8th June following, they requested the Resident Commissioner to, visit the locality of Allen's Hill, and, in view of the number of small schools in that locality, to report on the best arrangement of the schools. The Commissioners ordered that in the meantime the action of the Board on the 26th May was to be suspended and no intimation of the grant of that date was to be sent to the applicant. On the 15th December, 1903, the case was again before the Commissioners, and in view of the unsuitable nature of the schoolhouse premises and of the fact that there was no real necessity for the school, with small schools, the order granting aid was rescinded.
  MR. SLOAN: To ask Chief Secretary to the Lord-Lieutenant of Ireland whether he is aware that a school was established at Allen's Hill, county Armagh, in the year 1899, by the Rev. David McLaughlin, to meet the wants of that district; that, on 31st December, 1899, application was made to the National Board for aid, on the grounds that there were sixty-two pupils on the roll, thirty-eight of whom never attended any other school; that nearly all the sixty-two pupils were nearly all the sixty-two pupils were resident over two miles from any existing school, a statutory declaration to that effect having been lodged with the Board; and if he can say why the application for aid was refused in this case.
  (Answered by Mr. Walter Long.) An application for aid to this school was receive on the 30th December, 1899. The average daily attendance was given as twenty-nine. The inspector in his report on the application stated that there were only forty-two pupils on the rolls and about thirty-one in average attendance, and of the forty-two on rolls eighteen had been withdrawn from neighbouring national schools. The reasons for refusing aid given in Answer to the preceding Question.
  MR. SLOAN: To ask the Chief Secretary to the Lord-Lieutenant of Ireland whether he is aware that the fact that a new school building had been erected in 1900 at Allen's Hill, county Armagh, was reported to the National Board with an offer to make any reasonable alterations or improvements suggested by their inspector; and that an application for aid was made and supported by two memorials and afterwards verified by statutory declaration; and whether, in view of the fact that in February, 1901, the Resident Commissioner informed the applicant that if he could show by memorial or otherwise that there were thirty children residing in the district and two miles from existing school his claim would receive favourable consideration, and that a memorial from the parents of forty-eight children resident at the distance named by the Resident Commissioner was presented to the Board, he

  1333
  can say why the Board refused aid in this case.
  (Answered by Mr. Walter Long.) The facts are substantially as stated, save that there is no record of any such promise as that alleged to have been given by the Resident Commissioner, nor could such a promise be given without the consent of the Board. Aid was refused for the reasons stated in reply to the two previous Questions.

  QUESTIONS IN THE HOUSE.

    H.M.S. "Emerald."
    CAPTAIN DONELAN: I beg to ask the Secretary to the Admiralty if he will say whether H.M.S. "Emerald," training ship in Cork Harbour, has been condemned.
    THE SECRETARY TO THE ADMIRALTY (Mr. PRETYMAN, Suffolk, Woodbridge): No, Sir.
    CAPTAIN DONELAN: Then is there no intention of removing this ship from Cork Harbour?
    MR. PRETYMAN: No, Sir.

  South African War Stores—Fortnightly Reports.
  MR. LOUGH: I beg to ask the Secretary of State for War why were the fortnightly reports of the stocks of goods hold in South Africa discontinued at the 31st of December, 1902; did any cargoes of war stores arrive after the 1st of January, 1903; and were the large stocks which had then accumulated all sold locally, at some such scales of prices as those obtained for forage, and described in the Butler Report.
  THE SECRETARY OF STATE FOR WAR (Mr. ARNOLD-FORSTER): These fortnightly reports were telegraphed reports, which originated during the war for the guidance of the War Office in the maintenance of the supplies required by the troops in the field. In view of the cost of these cablegrams, and as similar information was also
  1334
  given in a monthly state of supplies rendered by mail, the telegraphed reports were considered no longer necessary and were dispensed with on March 18th, 1903. The monthly states were continued. No cargoes of war supplies, so far as is known at the War Office, arrived in South Africa after the 1st January, 1903. As regards the last part of the Question the reply is in the negative. These stocks were disposed of, some at prices approved by the War Office, others at prices approved locally; some were sent to England for disposal, some were condemned as bad, and some still remain.
  MR. LOUGH: Will the right hon. Gentleman publish these monthly reports which go on after the fortnightly reports?
  MR. ARNOLD-FORSTER: I think I ought not to undertake to publish isolated War Office Papers. All these statements as they are required for the purposes of the inquiry will be produced.
  SIR ROBERT REID: Did the monthly states disclose the names of the buyers of the stocks in South Africa and the prices?
  MR. ARNOLD-FORSTER: The prices, yes. One set of reports did disclose the names. The others not.

  Cost of Sold Stores.
  MR. J. A. PEASE: I beg to ask the Secretary of State for War what was the actual or approximate cost in the first instance of those stores which Lord Kitchener Valued at from £6,000,000 to £7,000,000 when he left South Africa; what has been the actual or approximate sum realised by subsequent sales; what has been the estimated value of these stores actually consumed by the Army left in occupation; whether any of these stores still remain in stock; and, if so, what is the estimated value of the same.
  MR. ARNOLD-FORSTER: The War Office is not in possession of any detail of the stores on which the estimate made by Lord Kitchener—admittedly a rough

  1335
  one—Was based. A total sum of approximately £8,000,000 was realised by the sale of various stock in South Africa from April, 1902, to September, 1904, but the monies arising from the sale of ordinary supplies to soldiers, captured stock, etc., are included in this total and cannot be separated. As regards the other points raised in the Question the information desired by the hon. Member would require considerable labour to obtain in consequence of the difficulty of differentiating between the stores actually consumed and those of a similar description which arrived at a later date.
  MR. J. A. PEASE: May I ask whether it is not the fact that strict ledger accounts were kept of all these transactions in accordance with Lord Kitchener's recommendation when he left South Africa; and also whether the suggestion made by Mr. Edwards to Sir Neville Lyttelton that there was a wastage of between £2,000,000 and £3,000,000 of our money is correct?
  MR. ARNOLD-FORSTER: I really would prefer not to answer these supplementary Questions off hand. They refer to matters of which I have no personal cognisance whatever. I do not wish to make any mistakes.
  SIR CHARLES DILKE: Was the sum of £8,000,000, of which the right hon. Gentleman just spoke, the sum of money roughly stated at £7,000,000, I think, which the Chancellor of the Exchequer led us to suppose he would get back and did not?
  MR. ARNOLD-FORSTER: No, Sir. I think not. I think it would include a portion of it; but the two sums are not identical.
  MR. WHITLEY: That sum would include the stores sold, but never removed, and then bought back again?
  MR. ARNOLD FORSTER: Yes, Sir. The losses on those stores are allowed for.

  The War Office and Colonel Morgan's Libel Actions.
  MR. MACVEAGH: I beg to ask the Secretary of State for War whether his attention has been called to the fact that Colonel Morgan's solicitors have threatened a libel action against the Daily News for commenting on the Report of Sir William Butler's Committee; and whether, in the event of actions being entered against that or any other newspaper, the War Office will give access to the documents necessary for the defence.
  MR. ARNOLD-FORSTER: I am not at present prepared to discuss the probable attitude of the War Office in the event of a civil action being commenced.
  MR. PIRIE: Was the Secretary of State cognisant of the fact that Colonel Morgan proposed to bring this action against the Daily News before his solicitors communicated with the paper?
  MR. ARNOLD-FORSTER: No, Sir, I was not.
  MR. LABOUCHERE: Can the right hon. Gentleman say whether any application was made by The Times newspaper to obtain documents for the defence of The Times' action; was any similar application made by the Daily News; and, if so, what answer was given?
  MR. ARNOLD-FORSTER: Yes, Sir, an application was made, and they were informed that all documents which were at the disposal of the plaintiff were at their disposal also, and were open to their inspection if they desired to see them.
  MR. MARKHAM: Did the War Office suggest either directly or indirectly to Colonel Morgan that he ought to take proceedings against The Times and the Daily News?
  MR. ARNOLD-FORSTER: I have already answered that Question. Action was taken independently by Colonel Morgan.

  Surplus Stores Offered tot Sale at Bermuda, Barbados, St. Helena, and Woolwich.
  MR. MACVEAGH: I beg to ask the Secretary of State for War whether he can state under what circumstances he has advertised for sale unused lots in first-rate condition of surplus boilers, distilling apparatus, dynamos, and other plant at Bermuda, Barbados, St. Helena, and Woolwich.
  MR. ARNOLD-FORSTER: The War Office has advertised for sale various lots of surplus boilers, distilling apparatus, dynamos, and other plant now lying at the stations mentioned, which were originally bought for Boer camps and which are no longer required by the War Department.
  MR. MACVEAGH: The right hon. Gentleman has not stated how it comes about that these things are offered for sale, although housed and in first-rate condition.
  MR. ARNOLD-FORSTER: Because it is no use keeping plant that is not required, and it is considered cheaper to sell it than to bring it back.
  MR. MACVEAGHasked why the plant was ordered if not required.
  MR. ARNOLD-FORSTER: It was provided mainly for the Boer prisoners' camps. The number of Boer prisoners was a varying number, and we had to make provision against contingencies.

  Report of Butler Committee—Officers Relieved from Duty.
  MR. MACVEAGH: I beg to ask the Secretary of State for War whether he can state the number of officers relieved from duty in consequence of the Report of the Butler Committee, and their names; whether they are still drawing pay; and whether he can state the distinction between suspension and relief from duty.
  MR. ARNOLD-FORSTER: The number of officers relieved from duty is eight. Their names are as follows, viz:-—Brevet-Colonel A. G. Hipwell, Army Service Corps; Lieutenant-Colonel H. G. Morgan, C. B., D.S.O. Army
  1338
  Service Corps; Major G. F. Walton, Army Service Corps; Corps; Captain R. H. Limond, Army Service Corps; Captain P.C. De la Pryme, Army Service Corps; Colonel G. Dewar, Army Pay Department; Lieutenant-Colonel H. Swire, Army Pay Department; Captain H. de C. Huntsman, Army Pay Department. They are still drawing pay. An officer suspended from duty is placed under the same restrictions as if in open arrest. An officer relieved from duty is not placed under such restrictions and retains all his privileges as an officer.
  MR. PIRIE: Have any of these officers applied for a Court-martial?
  MR. ARNOLD-FORSTER: No, Sir.

  Press Censorship in South Africa.
  MR. WHITLEY: On behalf of the hon. Member for South Wolverhampton, I beg to ask the Secretary of State for War if he can state whether the Press Censor in South Africa refused to permit newspaper correspondents to transmit information regarding the purchases and sales of stores reported by Sir William Butler's Committee; if so, on what occasions he took this action; and by whose orders, or for what reason, he so acted.
  MR. ARNOLD-FORSTER: All restrictions on telegraphic correspondence to and from South Africa were removed on July 21st, 1902. It would not, therefore, appear practicable for this censorship to have interfered in any way with the transmission of information of the transactions mentioned.

  The War Secretary's Preface the Butler Report.
  MR. WHITLEY: On behalf of the hon. Member for South Wolverhampton, I beg to ask the Secretary of State for War if he will state what is to be understood by the expression sub judice in his letter prefixed to the Report of Sir William Butler's Committee; and to what judgment is reference made in the expression quoted.
  MR. ARNOLD-FOSTER: The words quoted were used merely in the ordinary acceptation of the term and designed to

  1339
  express the fact that the whole of the issues upon which judgment is required had not been tried, and that many of the persons whose character and credit are concerned have either not been heard or have not had an opportunity of defending themselves by the means open to all persons accused of misfeasance or dereliction of duty.

  Local Contracting System in South Africa.
  MR. WHITLEY: I beg to ask the Secretary of State for War on whose authority the system of local contract for the purchase and sale of stores was set up in South Africa; and why transactions involving six or seven millions of money were entrusted to military instead of civil officers.
  MR. ARNOLD - FORSTER: The system of local contracts for the purchase of stores in South Africa was approved by the Financial Secretary on the advice of the Quartermaster-General and the Director of Contracts. The system of local sales in South Africa was initiated by Lord Kitchener and was subsequently approved by the Quartermaster-General and the Secretary of State. As these transactions were to be dealt with locally they were necessarily entrusted to the military officers on the spot.
  MR. WHITLEY: Will the right hon. Gentleman say, for the purpose of reference, which Financial Secretary and which Secretary of State respectively was responsible?
  MR. ARNOLD-FORSTER: I could give the hon. Gentleman the dates when a change took place. I was responsible for the transactions which occurred after the beginning of October, 1903. My predecessor was responsible up to that time.
  MR. WHITLEY: The right hon. Gentleman has not given us the date of the transactions. Can he say who was responsible for authorising the setting up of this system of local purchase and sales?
  MR. ARNOLD-FORSTER: The system was set up in 1902.

  The Military Stores Report—Propose Royal Commission.
  MR. J. H. LEWIS: I beg to ask the First Lord of the Treasury whether it is intended to take any and, if so, what steps to carry out the recommendation of the Departmental Committee presided over by General Butler, to the effect that further inquiries on the question of sales and refunds to contractors should be made in South Africa.
  THE PRIME MINISTER AND FIRST LORD OF THE TREASURY (Mr. A. J. BALFOUR,): I think the first part of the hon. Gentleman's Question is covered by the statements I have already made to the House. He knows it is proposed to appoint a Royal Commission to make inquiries on this subject. If that Commission find, as I do not doubt they will find, that investigations have to be made in South Africa, they will, of course, take the necessary steps to have those investigations carried out.
  MR. J. H. LEWIS: Am I to take it that the Royal Commission will have power to issue a Commission to take evidence in South Africa, and that that evidence can be taken on oath, and the attendance of witnesses and the production of documents compelled?
  MR. A. J. BALFOUR: My learned friend the Attorney-General informs me that he has received private notice of a Question by the hon. and learned Member for Dumfries dealing with some of the legal aspects of the case, and perhaps the hon. Gentleman will wait until the hon. and learned Gentleman has put his Question.
  MR. BLAKE: Will the right hon. Gentleman cite the precedents on which he relies for the proposed issue on the advice of His Majesty's Ministry of a Royal Commission empowering its nominees to investigate the action and conduct of various Ministers (a) without, and (b) with, the concurrence of the House of Commons?
  MR. A. J. BALFOUR: I only received notice as I came into the House, when it was not in my power to make any investigation into the question of precedent. But I do not think the hon. Gentleman will regard that as necessary. There is no other possible way of appointing a Royal Commission except upon the advice of the Ministers of the Crown.
  MR. MACVEAGH: May I ask whether powers similar to those given to the Parnell Commission will be vested in the Army Contracts Commission, and whether the proposed Commission will be composed of Judges of the High Court, but not including Judges who have held seats in this House.
  MR. A. J. BALFOUR: I may perhaps repeat in the case of this Question the Answer I have already given to another supplementary Question.
  MR. BLAKE: Is it not in accordance with precedent for the House of Commons to pass Resolutions or take steps to move the Crown to issue a Royal Commission, and to concur in giving powers to the Royal Commission.
  MR. A. J. BALFOUR: I should like to look into that question before giving an Answer.

  Powers of Royal Commissions.
  SIR ROBERT REID: I beg to ask the Attorney-General whether a Royal Commission, in whatever terms it may be appointed, is entitled to require a witness to be sworn, unless a special Act of Parliament bestows upon it that power; whether a witness summoned before such a Royal Commission may, at his pleasure, refuse to attend or to be sworn, or to produce documents; and whether there is any case of a witness who has consented to be sworn, and has given false testimony before such a Commission, being indicted for perjury.
  LORD EDMUND FITZMAURICE: At the same time I will ask Mr. Attorney-General, with reference to the proposed Royal Commission on the Sale of Stores in South Africa, if a Royal Commission has power
  1342
  to enforce the attendance of witnesses and examine them on oath, to compel the production of documents, to punish persons guilty of contempt, or to issue a Commission to examine witnesses abroad, seeing that it is laid down in Coke's Institutes that a new oath cannot be imposed on any subject without the express authority of Parliament, and that the giving of every such oath must be warranted by Act of Parliament, or by common law time out of mind.
  THE ATTORNEY-GENERAL (Sir ROBERT FINLAY, Inverness Burghs): A Royal Commission cannot without statutory authority compel a witness to be sworn, nor can it Without such authority compel the attendance of witnesses or the production of documents. For the purpose of such compulsory powers a statute would be necessary, as the Prime Minister stated yesterday. I am not aware that any case has arisen in which a prosecution has been instituted in respect of evidence given before such a Commission. I may remind my hon. and learned friend and the noble Lord, that the suggestion made yesterday by the Prime Minister was that the precedent of 1886 should be followed. In that case the Royal Commission contained a clause giving power to administer an oath, but it was stated that if the Commissioners should desire further powers they were to apply to the Government to give them. As a matter of fact, however, the work of the Commission was completed without its being found necessary for it to apply for any such statutory powers. I may add that in practice the difficulties apprehended as to the working of Royal Commissions have not been found to exist.
  MR. BLAKE: May I ask whether, in the view of the hon. and learned Gentleman, a prosecution would lie supposing a witness was sworn and answered falsely.
  SIR ROBERT FINLAY: I may remind the hon. and learned Member that technically there could not be a prosecution for perjury, as that would relate to a judicial proceeding. In such a case the prosecution would be for the common law disdemeanour of giving a false answer in an inquiry of a public nature.
  LORD EDMUND FITZMAURICE: The Answer of the Attorney-General does not cover the point I put with regard to the power of the Commission to issue a sub-Commission to examine witnesses abroad.
  SIR ROBERT FINLAY: Of course a Royal Commission would have power to send out persons to make inquiry in South Africa and to receive reports. It would not have power to issue a Commission in the sense in which the term is used in a Court which sends out persons to administer oaths and take evidence. They would not have that power, but they would have power to make every inquiry.
  MR. BLAKE: Am I to understand that the Attorney-General is of opinion that the taking of an oath and the answering of a question untruly is a common law offence in England?
  SIR ROBERT FINLAY: If such a prosecution were instituted, it would be perfectly open to the defendant to contend, as I understand is contended by hon. and learned friends of mine, that the Crown has not power to authorise the administration of the oath. In 1842 Lord Campbell, in a report on the procedure of a Commissioner who examined a witness without administering the oath, said he thought the point a doubtful one whether, without a statute, an oath could be administered. But since he made that statement in 1842 we have had four cases under different Governments in which a clause has been inserted in the Commission empowering the administering of an oath, and I do not think any one who has regard to the importance of practice in affording us guidance for our procedure in these matters can ignore that in 1860, 1862, 1867, and 1886 a clause to that effect was inserted.
  MR. BLAKE: Is it not the case that since these precedents there have been at least two instances in which Parliament itself has expressly by Act given the power to administer the oath?
  SIR ROBERT FINLAY: I think the hon. and learned Member overlooks the fact that for the purpose of giving com-
  1344
  pulsory powers a statute is necessary. [OPPOSITION cheers.] I am merely stating what was stated by the Prime Minister yesterday. The hon. and learned Member's Question seemed to be directed to the question of the power of administering the oath.
  MAJOR SEELY: May I ask a Question of which I gave notice last night, viz., whether, in view of the peculiar circumstances of this case, and considering the fact that if this Royal Commission be appointed, although the attendance of officers might be compelled through the power the Government has over them, any one likely to be indicted for fraud who is not an officer could obviously not be compelled to attend, the Attorney-General will consider the desirability of advising the Government to proceed by statute, as otherwise the proceeding may be entirely farcical.
  SIR H. CAMPBELL-BANNERMAN: I would appeal to the Prime Minister to tell us whether he will not say at once, in view of all that has been disclosed by the discussion of this subject, affecting a most important matter, whether the Government still adhere to the intention of not having a statutory Commission, what harm would be done by a statutory Commission, and why that obvious course of having a complete inquiry is to be neglected.
  MR. A. J. BALFOUR: The right hon. Gentleman is wrong in his facts. So far from having said we would not have the aid of a statutory Commission, we have distinctly and over and over again stated that if, when the Commission is at work, the necessity for a Commission with statutory powers should be made clear, we should of course grant one—
  MR. MACVEAGH (interrupting): What would happen if the necessity arose in the recess?
  MR. SPEAKER: Order, order! The right hon. Gentleman has been asked a Question, and is entitled to complete his reply.
  MR. A. J. BALFOUR: So far I have confined myself to correcting what was

  1345
  no doubt a slip. The right hon. Gentleman then asks me whether we have any objection to appointing a statutory Commission. The suggestion I made yesterday was based upon a precedent to which the right hon. Gentleman was a concurring party. It was based upon a precedent which dealt with matters in pari materia to those we are now discussing. It therefore seemed to me that we could not go far wrong if we followed a precedent having this authority behind it. But we have no objection to the statutory powers. The clauses necessary to give these powers are common form; and if the hon. and learned Gentleman opposite, who initiated this conversation, were to consult with my learned friend near me I am sure they would arrive at a conclusion as to the clauses which ought to be introduced into the Bill. That Bill, I presume, would be uncontroversial. I should introduce it and treat it as an uncontroversial Bill. I am confident no opposition will be given to it on this side, and if opposition is given to it on the other side, the responsibility will rest there. As I am on my legs, I may perhaps ask, with regard to this Commission, whether I am to take the Question put to me by the hon. and learned Gentleman the Member for Longford as indicating, in the view of the Opposition generally, that the reference should be so drawn as to enable the investigation to deal with the action, not only of the subordinate officers of the Government, but of the Government itself. Is that the desire?
  After a pause.
  MR. WHITLEYasked whether the members of the Commission would be nominated by His Majesty's Government?
  MR. A. J. BALFOUR: I do not know whether I can get any guidance from that Question. I should be glad of any guidance from the right hon. Gentleman opposite.
  SIR H. CAMPBELL-BANNERMAN: The right hon. Gentleman need not be too particular in demanding guidance
  1346
  from this side of the House, seeing that he has himself twice changed his plans. But let me ask him, do we understand, notwithstanding all that has been said—even to-day—that the right hon. Gentleman proposes to introduce a Bill constituting a statutory Commission for this inquiry? Then may I further ask whether the names of the Commissioners will be included in that Bill as usual? When the right hon. Gentleman asks me whether on this side of the House the Bill will be treated as a non-controversial measure, my reply is that, of course, in its main purpose the Bill will be non controversial; but it is impossible to say, until we see the terms of reference and the names of the Commissioners, if that applies to every detail. Upon these we must leave ourselves open to take such course as we may consider necessary under the circumstances. But saving these sub-points, upon which we may properly claim some reserve—and everyone in the House will admit it to be a proper reservation—saving these we shall do our best to expedite the passage of the Bill.
  MR. A. J. BALFOUR: I do not quite comprehend the first part of the right hon. Gentleman's observations. I have done my best to meet the views expressed. I do not know why the right hon. Gentleman should make that a matter of reproach. I made a suggestion yesterday, and it does not appear to meet the views of hon. and right hon. Gentlemen opposite. I have now, I hope to their satisfaction, told them that I am willing to agree to the appointment of a statutory Commission. An hon. Gentleman opposite asks me whether it is proposed to go on with the Commission at once, and I have to say that I will not be a party to any dilatory action. I propose also to introduce concurrently and independently a Bill giving the necessary powers to the Commission. I gather from what he has said that the right hon. Gentleman is not prepared to pledge himself and his friends to allow the Bill to pass, as it ought to be passed, sub silentio, unless he is satisfied with the reference. ["And the names?"] As to the names I do not ask his assistance, but as to the terms of reference I ask the right hon. Gentleman, does he desire that the reference shall include review of the

  1347
  action of the Government and the higher officials or does he not?
  SIR H. CAMPBELL-BANNERMAN: Well, that is a point upon which it would be very convenient that my hon. and learned friend the Member for Dumfries should, as has been suggested by the right hon. Gentleman himself, confer with the Attorney-General, the corresponding legal authority on that bench.
  MR. A. J. BALFOUR: Great as is the admiration and regard I have for the hon. and learned Gentleman opposite, I do not propose to ask him to confer with my hon. and learned friend near me on a question of policy; the conference I had in mind had reference to drafting arrangements. The question of policy there is, I presume, no wish to delegate to my learned friend.
  MR. BLAKE: Will not the answer largely depend on the result of researches which, in an Answer given to me this afternoon, I was told had not been made? I asked whether there was any precedent for an inquiry by Commission into the action of the Administration itself having been made with the concurrence of Parliament.
  SIR CHARLES DILKE: May I ask, do we clearly understand—the words of the Prime Minister were not distinctly heard in this part of the House—did the right hon. Gentleman ask if we wished the action of the Government and of higher officials to be included in the inquiry?
  MR. A. J. BALFOUR: Yes.
  SIR CHARLES DILKE: Is he aware that the Government are already pledged to an inquiry that will cover the responsibility of higher officials? An Answer from the Secretary of State for War said that responsibility attached to the general officer commanding, but that the actual nature of the responsibility would be ascertained by further inquiry.
  MR. A. J. BALFOUR: Well, then, I restrict my Question and exclude any reference to officials who are not members of the Government; and the Question I
  1348
  put is whether the right hon. Gentleman considers it desirable that the conduct of the Government should form part of the subject of inquiry by Commission?
  MR. JOHN O'CONNOR: I desire to ask if the right hon. Gentleman is aware that the Bill creating the Parnell Commission contained the names of the Commissioners; that the House was asked to allow the Bill to pass sub silentio; that the request was not assented to by Mr. Parnell, who claimed the right to discuss the Bill and to propose Amendments, and that the Bill was discussed and Amendments were proposed and accepted by the Government?
  MR. A. J. BALFOUR: Yes, I remember the circumstances. No doubt Mr. Parnell, as the person into whose conduct the inquiry was directed, did claim that right. Nobody on this bench is going to claim such a right.

  The Vote of Censure.
  SIR H. CAMPBELL-BANNERMAN: On another subject, or on another phase of the same question, may I ask what facilities the right hon. Gentleman proposes to give for the discussion of the Motion standing in the name of my hon. and learned friend the Member for Dumfries.
  MR. A. J. BALFOUR: Monday next, Sir.

  Delay in Delivery of New Field Guns for India.
  SIR CHARLES DILKE: I beg to ask the Secretary of State for War what has been the extent of the delay of the delivery of the new field guns for India which is alluded to in the Memorandum of General Sir Edmond Elles.
  MR. ARNOLD-FORSTER: The first Indian order was for three batteries Horse Artillery and eighteen Field Batteries. The guns and carriages of the Horse Artillery Batteries are reported for shipment and the limbers and ammunition wagons either ready for inspection or approved. Of the 114 guns and carriages required for the Field Batteries, forty three are reported for shipment, the remainder being either ready for inspection

  1349
  or approved. The limbers and ammunition wagons are in a similarly forward condition. The second orders for eight batteries Horse Artillery and thirteen Field Batteries are due for completion in October, and there is every reason to believe that they will be complete at that date.
  SIR CHARLES DILKEasked what was the shortage complained of by the Indian Government.
  MR. ARNOLD-FORSTERwas understood to reply that the only thing he could trace was an anticipation of delay. The guns were not ready by the 30th April as originally intended, but they were now ready.

  Bread Contracts for Irish Troops.
  MR. DELANY: I beg to ask the Financial Secretary to the War Office whether he can state if the contract for the supply of bread to the troops at Holywood and Ballykinlar camps, county Down, were in both cases given to firms making the lowest tender; and whether in either case any complaints have been made as to the quality supplied; and, if so, what action has been taken.
  THE FINANCIAL SECRETARY TO THE WAR OFFICE (Mr. BROMLEY DAVENPORT,): In both cases the lowest offer for bread was accepted. There have been three complaints, one entailing rejection of the bread and its replacement. Otherwise the contracts are reported satisfactory.
  MR. MACVEAGH: At which camp?
  MR. BROMLEY DAVENPORT: I cannot say.

  Private Use of Regimental Horses
  MR. NANNETTI: I beg to ask the Secretary of State for War whether he is aware that the practice is growing up in Dublin of officers of regiments stationed in that city using Army horses belonging to their regiments for the purpose of bringing parties to and from balls, polo matches, and race meetings; and whether, seeing that such conduct inter-
  1350
  feres with carmen plying for hire, he will take such steps as will put a stop to the alleged grievance.
  MR. ARNOLD-FORSTER: Nothing is known at the War Office of the matters alluded to. I must point out to the hon. Member that officers paying hire for Government chargers are entitled to drive them.
  MR. NANNETTI: If I give the right hon. Gentleman definite information as to the men who drove the parties, will he cause further inquiries to be made?
  MR. ARNOLD-FORSTER: It is a matter for the General Officer Commanding.
  MR. NANNETTI: Surely if I give definite information I am entitled to an Answer.
  MR. ARNOLD-FORSTER: My Answer is as to the principle involved. If the hon. Member can furnish me with any facts they will be considered.

  Anglo-Newfoundland Development Company, Limited.
  MR. TREVELYAN: I beg to ask the Secretary of State for the Colonies whether he has received a petition or petitions from public meetings held in Newfoundland, to protest against a Bill passed by the Colonial Legislature on June 12th last, to approve and confirm an agreement dated January 12th, 1905, between the Government of Newfoundland and the Anglo-Newfoundland Development Company, Limited; and whether he will advise His Majesty to withhold his assent to the Bill until an opportunity shall have been afforded to the electors of Newfoundland to express their opinion upon it at a general election.
  The following Questions also appeared on the Paper on the same subject—
  MR. WHITLEY: I beg to ask the Secretary of State for the Colonies whether, in view of the fact that the contract entered into by the Government of Newfoundland on January 12th last,

  1351
  with the Anglo-Newfoundland Development Company, Limited, contains provisions which are in contravention of the provisions of the Crown Lands Act of 1903, he will advise His Majesty to withhold his assent to the Bill for confirming the said contract until full inquiry shall have been made into the circumstances under which the contract was entered into.
  MR. LEVY: I beg to ask the Secretary of State for the Colonies whether, seeing that the Government of Newfoundland has entered into an agreement with a limited company, called the Anglo-Newfoundland Development Company, Limited, to lease to the said company for a term of ninety-nine years, with a right of continuous renewal, an area of 3,000 square miles of land in the colony, including the inland waters and full mineral and quarry rights throughout the leased area, and that the paid agent of the said company spoke and voted in the Legislative Council on the Bill for approving and confirming the said contract, he proposes to take any, and, if any, what steps in the matter.
  MR. HERBERT SAMUEL: I beg to ask the Secretary of State for the Colonies whether his attention has been called to a contract entered into by the Government of Newfoundland of the one part and the Anglo-Newfoundland Development Company, Limited, of the other part on the 12th of January last, and now printed in the schedule to a Bill lately passed by the Legislative Council and House of Assembly of Newfoundland; and whether, having regard to the unusual provisions of the said contract, he will cause a copy of the contract and of the Bill to confirm the same to be printed for the information of the House.
  SIR JOHN BRUNNER: I beg to ask the Secretary of State for the Colonies whether his attention has been called to Section 11 of an indenture made and entered into at St. John's, in the Colony of Newfoundland, between His Excellency the Governor of Newfoundland and the Anglo-Newfoundland Develop-
  1352
  ment Company, Limited, which section gives to a limited liability company the right of compulsory expropriation of lands held by citizens of the colony within a very large area of the colony; and whether he will advise His Majesty to withhold his assent to the Bill confirming the said indenture until clauses shall have been inserted in the indenture for the more effectual safeguarding of the rights of the Crown and of the citizens of the colony in the lands affected.
  MR. BLAKE: Will the right hon. Gentleman also state whether this measure has received the assent of the representative of the Crown in the Colonies, and has so become an Act, and whether he proposes to follow or depart in any way from the principles of action stated by his predecessors in the case of the Newfoundland Railway Act?
  THE SECRETARY OF STATE FOR THE COLONIES (Mr. LYTTELTON, Warwick and Leamington): Until I receive the Act as finally passed by the Newfoundland Legislature on the subject of the concession to the Anglo-Newfoundland Development Company, Limited, I am not in a position to decide what action I shall take in the matter, but in the meantime I would refer the hon. Members to Mr. Chamberlain's despatch of December 5th, 1898 to the Governor of Newfoundland, published in Command Paper 9137, as laying down the general principles which have guided my predecessors in considering the question of advising His Majesty in regard to the disallowance of the Acts of Colonies possessing responsible government.
  MR. CATHCARTWASON: Has the Act received the assent of the Governor of the colony, or is it reserved for His Majesty's decision?
  MR. LYTTELTON: I think it has but I have not yet received the Act.
  MR. WHITLEY: Is it correct that this Act was passed in a very hurried manner through all its stages by the suspension of the Standing Orders, that as soon as it was known to have been passed great indignation was shown in the colony,

  1353
  and that public meetings were held and petitions drawn up, and will the right hon. Gentleman undertake to reserve the consideration of the matter until the public of the colony have had an opportunity of representing their view of the case?
  MR. SPEAKER: The hon. Member should give notice of that Question. It introduces fresh matter not mentioned on the Paper.
  MR. WHITLEY: I think it will be found in another Question upon the Paper relating to the same matter.
  MR. SPEAKER: There is not a word in these Questions about the suspension of the Standing Orders.
  MR. WHITLEY: I will put down a further Question.

  The Congo Commission of Inquiry— Dr. Baccari's Report.
  MR. EMMOTT: I beg to ask the Under-Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs whether he can now state when the Report of the Commission of Inquiry into the condition of the Independent State of the Congo is likely to be issued; whether His Majesty's Government have received a copy of Dr. Baccari's Report to the Italian Government, in which he deals with the state of affairs in that country; and whether a translation of Dr. Baccari's Report will be presented to the House.
  THE UNDER-SECRETARY OF STATE FOR FOREIGN AFFAIRS (Earl PERCY,): In accordance with the promise given in my Answer to the Question asked by the right hon. Baronet the Member for the Forest of Dean on the 23rd ultimo,†His Majesty's Government have represented to the Congo Government the importance of publishing the Report of the Commission of Inquiry as soon as possible; but they have not yet been informed when the Report is likely to be ready. His Majesty's Government have just received a copy of Dr. Baccari's Report as published in the Italian papers, and the
  † See (4) Debates, cxlvi., 1120
  1354
  suggestion made by the hon. Member will be considered.

  Smokeless Coal in British North Borneo.
  MR. WEIR: I beg to ask the Secretary of State for the Colonies whether he is yet in a position to furnish information in regard to the reported discovery of smokeless coal at Jambongon on the north-east coast of the British North Borneo Company's territory.
  EARL PERCY: No definite information in regard to the coal has yet been obtained. A telegram has recently been received from the engineer in charge of the works to say that samples have been sent home but that the excavations have not yet been completed.

  Wages of Foreign Seamen on British Ships.
  MR. NANNETTI: I beg to ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department whether his attention has been called to the fact that the current rate of wages for seamen is higher in London than at Antwerp; and whether he is prepared to accept an Amendment to the Aliens Bill prohibiting the bringing over of foreign seamen at low rates of wages from Continental ports to the United Kingdom for British ships.
  THE SECRETARY OF STATE FOR THE HOME DEPARTMENT (Mr. AKERS-DOUGLAS, Kent, St. Augustine's): Yes Sir, I have seen the Answer which was given to the hon. Member on the 29th May‡by the Secretary to the Board of Trade to this effect, but the Amendment to the Aliens Bill which he suggests appears to me to be outside the proper scope of the Bill.

  South Eastern Railway—Carriage Lighting.
  MR. WEIR: I beg to ask the President of the Board of Trade if he will recommend the South-Eastern Railway Company to arrange for the carriage of passenger trains to be lighted when passing through tunnels, especially between Hildenborough and London.
  ‡ See page 65.
  THE PARLIAMENTARY SECRETARY TO THE BOARD OF TRADE (Mr. BONAR LAW, Glasgow, Blackfriars): I have communicated with the Managing Committee of the South Eastern and Chatham Railway on the subject of the hon. Member's Question, and am informed that it has been a long-standing practice on that line to light all carriages which have to pass through tunnels, and that every train running between Hildenborough and London is so lighted. It is added that since the commencement of this year there have only been six cases of failure of light from accidental causes in individual compartments.

  School Teachers' Houses.
  SIR W. HART DYKE: I beg to ask the Secretary to the Board of Education whether he is aware that considerable doubt exists as to the liability of county educational authorities for payment of the whole rent for school teachers' houses; whether he will consider the advisability of issuing a circular to such authorities defining their liabilities as to the payment of rent for teachers' houses, and their powers as to charging three-fourths of such payment upon the parish served by the school.
  THE PARLIAMENTARY SECRETARY TO THE BOARD OF EDUCATION (Sir WILLIAM ANSON, Oxford University): It does not appear that the payment of rent for a teacher's house forming part of the premises of a Voluntary school is either capital expenditure or rent on account of the provision or improvement of a public elementary school within the meaning of Section 18 (c) of the Act. The county authority would therefore be liable to pay the whole rent of the teacher's house as a part of the maintenance of the school. I do not think that there is any necessity for sending a circular to local authorities on this point. I am not aware of any difficulties experienced by them on this subject.

  Robert Smith's Estate.
  MR. MACVEAGH: I beg to ask Mr. Attorney-General for Ireland whether he can state how many receivers have been in charge of the estate of Robert Smith since it first came under the
  1356
  jurisdiction of the Dublin Court of Bankruptcy; what are the total sums paid to receivers as remuneration; what was the original value of the estate; how many years the estate has been in bankruptcy; and when it is expected to be wound up.
  THE ATTORNEY-GENERAL FOR IRELAND (Mr. ATKINSON,): This matter does not in any way come within my control. I am, however, informed by the Chief Registrar of the Court of Bankruptcy that the estate mentioned came under the jurisdiction of that Court in May, 1895, when a fund was transferred thereto from the Chancery Division. Since that time the estate has been in charge of but one receiver, namely, one of the official assignees. The total sum which has been paid to him as remuneration is £247 Os. 6d. The fund transferred from the Chancery Division in 1805 amounted to £2,881 16s. 4d., and between 1895 and I 1900 the assignee recovered additional funds amounting to £2,116 1s. 2d. From these sums, dividends amounting to 17s. 6½d. in the£were paid. The estate was considered to be wound up in February, 1900, but a further fund, apparently part of the estate, was recently traced in a Chancery suit, and the destination of that fund is now under consideration by the Master of the Rolls. The Chief Registrar is unable to state what sums, if any, were paid to other receivers under the Court of Chancery, or what was the original value of the estate.
  MR. MACVEAGH: When did this case first come under the jurisdiction of the Court of Chancery?
  MR. ATKINSON: I have no record of that.
  MR. MACVEAGH: It first came into the Court in 1793. Can the right hon. Gentleman hold out any hope that the estate will be wound up in the course of the next Century.
  MR. ATKINSON: I was not responsible for the case in its earlier stages.

  Irish Boards.
  MR. MACVEAGH: I beg to ask the Chief Secretary to the Lord-Lieutenant of Ireland whether he can state the total number of boards in Ireland exercising executive or other functions, whether wholly or partially under Government control, and the name of each.
  THE CHIEF SECRETARY FOR IRELAND (Mr. WALTER LONO,): There are in all twelve such boards. The members of the Local Government Board, General Prisons Board, Board of National Education, Board of Intermediate Education, Board of Charitable Donations and Bequests, Loan Fund Board, and one-half the number of Commissioners of Endowed Schools are appointed and removable by the Crown. All these Departments, with three exceptions, are guided in the exercise of their statutory duties by Rules, Orders, or Schemes approved by the Lord-Lieutenant. The Congested Districts Board is regulated by the provisions of Section 34 of the Land Act, 1891; and the Boards of Agriculture and Technical Instruction are regulated by the 8th and 9th Sections of the Agriculture and Technical Instruction Act of 1899. The Board of Public Works is under the. Treasury, and the Board of Irish Lights under the Board of Trade.
  MR. MACVEAGH: That is not a complete list surely! The right hon. Gentleman has forgotten about twenty three.
  MR. WALTER LONG: I have given the hon. Member all the information I could collect.
  MR. PATRICK O'BRIEN: Yon have forgotten the most important of all—the Dublin Harbour Board.

  Sir Douglas Brooke's Speech
  MR. MACVEAGH: I beg to ask the Chief Secretary to the Lord-Lieutenant of Ireland whether, having regard to a statement recently made in a speech by Sir Douglas Brooke, baronet, a magistrate and a deputy-lieutenant of the county of Fermanagn, at Maguiresbridge in that county, while addressing an audience of
  1358
  Orangemen, that, at the time of Mr. Gladstone's second Home Rule Bill, he had given out rifles to his Protestant tenantry, and had taught some of these Protestants how to shoot those rifles straight, and that there were a good many of those rifles still in the country, he can state what action has been taken by the Lord Chancellor in consequence of Sir Douglas Brooke's conduct having been brought under his notice for a second time.
  MR. WALTER LONG: The Lord Chancellor's attention has again been drawn to this matter, and he informs me that he has nothing to add to the reply given to the hon. Member's previous Question on the subject.

  Irish Land Purchase—Negotiation Fees.
  MR. SLOAN: I beg to ask the Chief Secretary to the Lord-Lieutenant of Ireland whether, in sales under the Irish Land Act, 1903, where the vendors or their agents have agreed to pay the land clerks of the estate offices one-half per cent, on the purchase money or one-sixth of the total amount of the land agency negotiation fees, he will ask the Treasury and the Estates Commissioners to arrange that the negotiation fees shall be paid to the negotiators within a reasonable time (say six months) from the date of signing of the purchase agreements, and not deferred until the payment of the purchase money, having regard to the fact that when sales take place under the Act some of these clerks lose their appointments and others have their salaries reduced.
  MR. WALTER LONG: Under Section 23, Sub-section 12, of the Act, these fees can only be paid out of the purchase money when distributed. There is no other fund available for the purpose.

  Kinvara Estate, County Galway.
  MR. T. W. RUSSELL: I beg to ask the Chief Secretary to the Lord-Lieutenant of Ireland whether the claim of the Scottish Union Assurance Company to have the sale of the Kinvara Estate, county Galway, carried through under Section 1 of the Land Act of 1903, and which was reserved on a point of

  1359
  law by the Estates Commissioners for the consideration of Mr. Justice Meredith, has been decided; and, if so, with what result.
  MR. WALTER LONG: The hearing of the point of law referred to was postponed by the Judical Commissioner on the application of the parties, but it will be entered for hearing at an early date.

  Mallow Urban Council Audit.
  MR. WILLIAM ABRAHAM: I beg to ask the Chief Secretary to the Lord-Lieutenant of Ireland whether his attention has been called to a recent audit of the accounts of Mallow Urban Council, and to the action of Mr. Richard Bourke, an auditor of the Local Government Board, in surcharging three members of the council with the sum of 3s., being the cost of framing an address of congratulation, adopted by the Town Commissioners on the 12th September, 1902, for presentation to His Holiness Pope Leo XIII, on the attainment of his Pontifical Jubilee; and if he can explain why this surcharge has been made, especially in view of the fact that the inhabitants of Mallow were unanimously in favour of the action of the Commissioners, and that, as a result of the examination of accounts involving an expenditure of nearly £6,000, this item was the only one which Mr. Bourke disallowed.
  MR. WALTER LONG: The facts are generally as stated. No statutory authority exists for any expenditure from the rates for the purpose mentioned, and the auditor was, therefore, bound to surcharge the amount.

  Imperial Yeomanry at Inniskillen.
  MR. MACVEAGH: I beg to ask the Chief Secretary to the Lord-Lieutenant of Ireland whether his attention has been directed to the fact that some time ago, on the occasion of an Imperial Yeomanry dance in the Orange Hall, Inniskillen, a number of drunken yeomen paraded the streets for several hours cheering and shouting, that on the following morning the knockers on the doors of over thirty houses were found to have been wrenched, that the constabulary while engaged in
  1360
  investigating the occurrence discovered some of the knockers in the Orange Hall; what explanation they give for failing to bring the perpetrators of the outrage to justice; and what steps they intend taking in future to protect the property of the inhabitants when Yeomanry functions are being held.
  MR. WALTER LONG: It is not the case that any of the Yeomanry, who are an extremely well behaved body of men, paraded the streets cheering and shouting. It was, however, found on the morning following the date in question that fourteen knockers had been wrenched off doors in the town. Suspicion strongly pointed to a person who was not one of the Yeomanry as being the offender, but the police were unable to procure evidence of the fact. One of the knockers was found in the Orange Hall. The police will continue to use their best endeavours to protect the property of the inhabitants.
  MR. PATRICK O'BRIEN: Will this appear in the next Return of outrages in Ireland?
  MR. MACVEAGH: Will it not appear as thirty outrages?
  [No Answer was returned.]

  A Dying Voter at Fintona.
  MR. MACVEAGH: I beg to ask the Chief Secretary to the Lord-Lieutenant of Ireland whether his attention has been called to the circumstances of the death of Mary Jane M'Kenna, at Fintona, county Tyrone; whether he is aware that the medical officer of health in the district refused to certify that she was fit to be removed from her cabin to the polling booth, and that notwithstanding this refusal the Unionist agents removed her on the day of the county council elections, after freely supplying the woman with wine; whether he is aware that the woman died on the way to the polling station; whether the facts were reported by the police to the coroner; and, if so, whether he can state the grounds on which the coroner decided not to hold inquest.
  MR. WALTER LONG: I am informed that this person, who was a confirmed invalid, persisted in attending to vote of her own accord and contrary to the advice of her medical attendant. The medical officer of health neither refused nor was asked for a certificate. It is not the case that Unionist agents removed the woman from her cabin or freely supplied her with wine. She was given a spoonful of wine as ordered by the doctor. The police did not consider it necessary to report the circumstances of the death to the coroner. The matter does not call for the intervention of the Government.

  Irish Towns and the New Marine Post Office.
  MR. NANNETTI: I beg to ask the Postmaster-General if he will furnish a, list of the Irish towns, excluding Dublin, for which it was proposed to make up direct bags on the sea post office between New York and Liverpool; and a Return of the number of ordinary letters and the number of registered letters from the "Baltic's" mail, arriving at Queenstown on 1st instant, for each of those towns which instead of being forwarded in direct bags were sent to Dublin for disposal.
  THE POSTMASTER-GENERAL (Lord STANLEY,): Apart from the bags for Dublin, direct bags are at present made up in the sea post offices between New York and Liver-pool for the Irish towns of Ballinasloe, Belfast, Castlerea, Claremorris, Clonmel, Cork, Dundalk, Galway, Kilkenny, Limerick, Lisburn, Londonderry, Lurgan, Mallow, Newry, Portadown, Sligo, Waterford, and Westport. This list is subject to revision as circumstances may require after further experience of the working of the new system. No record was kept of correspondence received in the Dublin bags instead of being included in other direct bags made up on board the packet "Baltic" on the occasion referred to by the hon. Member; but it is estimated that some 800 or 900 letters were so treated.

  Irish Sorters and the New Marine Post Office.
  CAPTAIN DONELAN: I beg to ask the Postmaster-General whether
  1362
  his attention has been directed to a resolution unanimously adopted by the Queenstown Urban District Council, protesting against the exclusive appointment of officials from the Liverpool postal department to the position of marine mail sorters between New York and Liverpool, thus ignoring the claims of Irish officials who have had long experience in sorting the American mails between Dublin and Queenstown; and whether he will consider the desirability of recognising the claims of duly qualified Irish officials by allocating to them a proportion of these new positions.
  LORD STANLEY: My attention has not been previously called to the resolution to which the hon. Member refers; and I have not seen a copy of it. With regard to the last part of the Question, I must refer the hon. Member to replies which I have given in this House to the effect that convenience in working the system and competency to perform the duties will govern the selection of officers for employment in the Transatlantic Sea Post Offices. I cannot admit that any particular officers have a claim to such employment.
  CAPTAIN DONELAN: Why have no Irishmen been appointed to any of these positions?
  LORD STANLEY: I have in each case appointed the man recommended to me as the most competent for the duty?
  CAPTAIN DONELAN: Then are no Irish officials competent or duly qualified?
  LORD STANLEY: I did not say they were not competent, but not as competent.
  MR. NANNETTI: Have not these men done the work successfully for many years?
  LORD STANLEY: This is the first time the scheme has been in operation.
  MR. NANNETTI: At sea, but not on shore.

  NEW BILL.
    FOREIGN SHIPS (STATUTORY RE QUIREMENTS).
    Ordered, That the Minutes of Evidence taken before the Select Committee on Foreign Ships (Statutory Requirements), in Session 1904, be referred to the Select Committee on Foreign Ships (Statutory Requirements).—(Mr. Bonar Law.)

    SUPPLY [11TH ALLOTTED DAY].
    Considered in Committee.
    (In the Committee.)
    [Mr. GRANT LAWSON (Yorkshire, N.R., Thirsk) in the Chair.]

  CIVIL SERVICES AND REVENUE DE PARTMENTS ESTIMATES, 1905–6.

    CLASS II.
    Motion made, and Question proposed, "That a sum, not exceeding £10,633, be granted to His Majesty, to complete the sum necessary to defray the Charge which will come in course of payment during the year ending on the 31st day of March, 1906, for the Salaries and Expenses of the Office of His Majesty's Secretary for Scotland and Subordinate Office, Expenses under the Inebriates Acts, 1879 to 1900, and Expenses under The Private Legislation Procedure (Scotland) Act, 1899, including a Grant in Aid of the Congested Districts (Scotland) Fund."
    MR. WEIRmoved a reduction of the amount by £100. First he desired to enter his protest against the absence from that House of the Secretary for Scotland. In the Lord-Advocate they had a very courteous representative of the Scottish Office, but in this matter Ireland was far better off than Scotland, for it had three representatives on the Front Bench as against one for Scotland. He held that the Government should arrange matters so that the Secretary for Scotland should be a Member of the House of Commons, and he therefore desired on that occasion to protest against the appointment as Secretary for Scotland of a Member of
    1364
    the other House whose knowledge and experience were not sufficient for the vigorous discharge of the duties of the office.
    He desired to draw attention to the failure to deal with the Report of a local Committee appointed on the 15th December, 1902, to inquire into the recommendations contained in the Report of the Crofters Commission on the social condition of the Island of Lewis. Although that Committee reported eighteen months ago on the subjects of Fisheries, Education, Land, and Public Health, nothing had been done, notwithstanding the fact that the means at the disposal of the Department were ample to make an effective beginning. The line fishermen of Lewis asked the late Secretary for Scotland to receive a deputation to lay their grievances before him, but he declined to receive them. They had no Dukes behind them. When the Duke of Sutherland and the Duke of Portland, or their factors, appealed to the late Secretary for Scotland on behalf of the fishermen of Sutherland and Caithness the Mansfield Commission was appointed, and the Report of that Commission had recently been issued. He hoped that the present Secretary for Scotland would do something for the poor fishermen in the Island of Lewis, and would not resort to the delays that the late Secretary for Scotland had practised. It was not right that the most congested part of the Highlands of Scotland should be so treated. The poverty, starvation, and misery which existed in the island could be averted if the Secretary for Scotland would arouse himself and do something for these fishermen and the crofters and cottars. He hoped the Secretary for Scotland would not adopt the late Secretary for Scotland's policy of the "eternal shunt."
    He complained of the conversion of 40,000 acres of sheep-farming land into deer forests in the Lochbroom district of Ross-shire without any effort being made by the Government to secure any portion o the land for the benefit of the people. Look at the state of the fishing industry in the Island of Lewis. Official returns showed that whereas during the four years between 1889–1893

    1365
    526,545 cwts. of fish were landed in the island, the quantity landed between 1900 and 1904 had fallen to 283, 141 cwts., a fall of just half in the short space of sixteen years. The year 1889 was the first year in which a record was kept, but it was seated by the fishermen that the catches were still larger in the years prior to 1889. That meant starvation and misery, which could be avoided if the Scottish Office would arouse itself. The figures were simply appalling, and the Lewis fishermen were naturally disappointed at the failure of the authorities to come to their assistance. They were a most honest and deserving set of men: and he sincerely hoped the Secretary for Scotland would look into their case. In regard to education he had to complain, that very little had been done.
    Now with regard to land. There was plenty of land in Ross-shire which could have been secured for the people if the late Secretary for Scotland had infused some energy into the Congested District Board. In support of this statement the hon. Member read a letter which he had received from one of his constituents some time ago saying that in the district of Lochbroom alone 40,000 acres of land had, in the short space of four years, been converted from sheep farms into deer forests, with the result that fewer hands were now employed. If the late Secretary for Scotland had been watchful he would probably have been able to secure some of that land for the benefit of the people. His correspondent further stated that there was now very little trade in the place, and that unless something was done to bring about an improvement the state of matters must assume a serious aspect. The only provision for new crofts in Ross-shire was the breaking up of the small farm of Aignish Lewis into thirty-two crofts.
    The Secretary for Scotland was head of the Local Government Board in Scotland, and in that connection he must complain of the noble Lord's neglect to secure better sanitary conditions in the Highlands, and especially in the Island of Lewis. There were 4,000 crofters' and cottars' houses in the Island, and in the greater number of them the apartments where the people lived were only divided by
    1366
    a handrail from the places where the cattle were kept, the one door being the only means of access for both human beings and cattle. Hon. Members representing constituencies in the Lowlands laughed at this state of things, but they had really no idea of the insanitary conditions under which the people lived in the Hebrides. The islanders required education in regard to matters of sanitation, and a medical officer or sanitary inspector should be sent to explain to them the importance of giving better attention to questions of health in relation to their mode of living. The present state of things should not be allowed to go on. There was one small hospital at Stornoway, but for forty-five miles in one direction, and thirty miles in another, there was no further accommodation for the sick poor.
    THE CHAIRMAN: The Local Government Board Vote is not now before us.
    MR. WEIRsaid the Vote for the salary of the Secretary for Scotland was now before the Committee, and he was complaining of that Minister not doing his duty, in so far as he neglected to see that others for whom he was responsible did their duty. He hoped this matter of insanitary dwellings would be attended to.
    Referring to the question of foreign trawlers in the Moray Firth, the hon. Member said the Secretary for Scotland, who was chief of the Fishery Board for Scotland, had not taken the steps which might have been expected in order to protect the interests of the line fishermen. He should urge the Foreign Office to approach the signatories to the North Sea Fisheries Convention with the view to secure an understanding in regard to the closing of areas such as the Moray Firth. The Firth was closed against British trawlers but Grimsby trawlers registered under the Norwegian flag, and thus carried on their operations in the Moray Firth to the detriment of the line fishermen. If these trawlers could not be cleared out of the Moray Firth, a by-law should be made which would have the effect

    1367
    of preventing the fish so caught being sold in British ports. He had frequently called attention to this grievance, and yet years went by and nothing was done. He wished also to direct attention to the need for better transit facilities in the remote parts of the Highlands. He had for several years suggested that motor-cars might be provided in the remote districts for the purpose of bringing produce to the market. He hoped the Secretary for Scotland would now give the question his serious consideration, especially as the adoption of motorcars for such purposes was strongly recommended by the Mansfield Commission. So long as the Secretary for Scotland was not in that House the state of matters could not be satisfactory; he should be there so that they might speak to him face to face. Before sitting down he desired to state that the Lewis Committee had reported that Port Ness Harbour was extremely unsatisfactory and that no more money should be spent on it. He was informed that Messrs. Stevenson, Edinburgh, were the engineers of that harbour, and they were still the engineers to the Scottish Office. The £15,000 spent on Port Ness Harbour was so much money thrown away. It was expended in 1891–2, on the eve of an election, with the view of catching votes for the Unionist candidate. Years ago he brought to the notice of the Scottish Office that the harbour would be of no use unless the silted sand was removed. He moved to reduce the salary of the Secretary for Scotland by £100.
    Motion made and Question proposed, "That a sum, not exceeding £10,533, be granted for the said Service."—(Mr. Weir.)
    MR. JOHN DEWARsaid he thought that the condition of the House indicated that Scotland was a well-governed country. But still he had one or two grievances to bring before the Committee in reference to the action of the Congested Districts Board of Scotland. He agreed with his hon. friend that they ought to have the Secretary for Scotland in that House; but, failing that, he did not think they could have a better official representative of Scottish
    1368
    administration than the Lord-Advocate. The condition of the West Highlands was extremely interesting in every respect, the people were intellectually and physically a fine people; and were worth preserving. Through no fault of their own, the population there had been reduced to a state of abject poverty. In fact, there was much greater poverty in the western parts of Inverness-shire than in any part of Ireland, and a great deal less was being done to meet that chronic poverty than was being done in Ireland. He did not agree with his hon. friend in his wholesale condemnation of the Scottish Congested Districts Board.
    MR. WEIRsaid he had only condemned the action of the Congested Districts Board in regard to the Island, of Lewis.
    MR. JOHN DEWARsaid he could not agree that the Congested Districts Board deserved the same condemnation as in previous years; because he recognised that there had been of late a distinct improvement in their methods and operations, and that the Board was apparently waking up to the importance of the duty which they had to discharge. He noticed that they had purchased at a fair price a large tract of land for crofter settlements. That was an experiment which ought to have a fair chance. But he wanted to direct the attention of the Committee to the fact that this was a change of policy and would have fair results. Hitherto allotments for crofters had been obtained under the Crofters Act, and these holdings were held under a landlord. But now, with this large purchase of land, they were proceeding to set up a class of peasant proprietors. He, approved of that; but he foresaw that it would lead to very important results. It was not in human nature for a tenant, who was paying a very much larger annual rent for his holding than the tenant on an adjoining property who would get his freehold in a certain number of years under the land purchase system, to be contented. That was shown in Ireland in the case of the tenants on the Dillon Estate, and those on the De Freyne Estate. The Government must keep in view that, having begun this system of land purchase, they

    1369
    could not stop there. Personally, he did not wish to see the landlords of Scotland expropriated. Whatever might be the case in Ireland, he believed that it would be a great misfortune if the Scotch landlords were expropriated. They were, as a rule, very excellent landlords, and were on excellent terms with their tenants. He did not know if it would be good that the tenants under the Crofters Act should be made what were called peasant proprietors. There was much to be said on both sides. One very noticeable feature of the Report of the Congested Districts Board was the apparent willingness of the landlords to get tenants on their properties. Many proprietors had applied to the Congested Districts Board to aid them in getting crofters to settle on their estates. That was, he was glad to say, an encouraging feature. The income from deer forests was not altogether a reliable income, the best results were got from a fair mixture of all kinds of tenants, and he believed that the landlords themselves would largely improve the value of their estates by a judicious settlement of crofters.
    Another feature of interest in the Report was the encouragement of technical education in the Highlands. He thought the scheme was an excellent one, and that the Board had done extremely well in regard to it. The life of a crofter's son was something like this: he remained at school till he was fourteen or fifteen years of age, when he went to assist another croft till he was eighteen or so, and then proceeded to the mainland as a labourer with a labourer's pay, and came back ultimately it may be to his home. What the Congested Districts Board had done was to put themselves in communication with the employers of labour on the mainland and had arranged to send a certain number of boys to learn a trade, and to pay the difference between the pay of an apprentice and the cost of living on the mainland during the term of apprenticeship. The result would be that these boys would be in the position of trained tradesmen instead of labourers and would be able to earn a good wage, wherever their lot was cast. Then, although the population of the Western Hebrides was almost entirely a fishing population, there had scarcely been a single application for
    1370
    entry into the Royal Navy. He could only explain that by the fact that there was, rightly or wrongly, a very strong prejudice amongst them against the Navy. The Congested Districts Board might help in removing that prejudice, and so secure a large supply of first-rate material for the Royal Navy.
    There was one part of the Report of the Congested Districts Board of which he did not approve. He had drawn attention to the deplorable poverty, destitution, and congestion which existed in Long Island and in South Uist over and over again, to relieve which the Board had done absolutely nothing. The people were anxious to get land and were able and willing to work it; and he believed that there was land which might be available for them. He had been very much interested in the recent Report of the Mansfield Commission, and particularly in that part of it which pointed out the advantages of a fishermen having a croft. He believed that the proprietors were not unwilling that the fishermen should have crofts. He had specially to complain that the Congested Districts Board had not done more to develop the fishing industry. Nothing had been done in regard to South Uist and the Long Island generally. No doubt money was needed; but what was more needed was, the organisation of the industry, and an effort made to get the produce of the fishery to market. To show the inefficient management of the Congested Districts Board, last year there was considerable mackerel fishing in the Western Hebrides; and the Congested Districts Board were asked to provide nets; some were sent, but it turned out that they were not suitable nets for the district at all, and he knew of one island where thirty-six nets only caught thirty mackerel. The Board had not tackled the matter in a business-like way. They should have a report from a competent man as in the case of the Irish Board. Again, in connection with the herring fishery, the fishermen had great difficulty in disposing of their produce. The Irish Congested Districts Board provided curing stations, which resulted in an enormous saving. As an instance of the necessity for this in the Western Hebrides,

    1371
    one man informed him that he carried £40 worth of herrings to one market, and then had to take them to another and sell them for £6. If the Congested Districts Board had a curing station where the herrings were first offered the herring income would have kept the fisherman's family for six months. There was also great difficulty in getting lobsters to market. He had heard of one man who sent £10 worth of lobsters to London; they were delayed by the bad steamer connection; and when they arrived they were not worth anything at all. If the Congested Districts Board exercised a little interest in the steamer service a very great deal might be done to improve the condition of the people. But apparently no effort was being made to deal with the fisheries at all. He did not think that there would be complete efficiency until the composition of the Board was changed. It was composed of excellent members; but, unlike the Irish Board which met about once a month, it rarely met at all. The secretary only devoted half his time to the business of the Board and was employed at the Exchequer office. The Board itself did not appear to look for any opportunity to help the people until Members of Parliament and others drew attention to their grievances. He was very strongly of opinion that the Congested Districts Board should be amalgamated with the Crofter Commission—an arrangement which would involve less expense and promote efficiency.
    MR. CATHCART WASONsaid that the hon. Gentleman the Member for Inverness had given a very valuable contribution to the discussion, especially with regard to the Congested Districts Board. He sympathised cordially with his hon. friend's views. There ought not to be a system of dual ownership, which must eventuate in trouble. If the Congested Districts Board purchased land they ought to retain the control of it in their own hands. He could not agree that the ownership of land improved the character of the individual. He could not imagine any difference of character being produced because a man was a freeholder, rather than a tenant of land. He would give every
    1372
    credit to the Congested Districts Board in regard to the management of their affairs. There was one case, however, in his own constituency to which he wished to directattention. In Whalsay, Shetland, there was only one farm on the island, and there was a large number of crofters who were very congested, and who naturally desired to live where their fathers lived. The result was that they agreed to take over the farm at a valuation; and they put together all the money they could possibly get. The cost was a great deal more than they anticipated owing to increased valuation of stock; and he regretted that the Congested Districts Board was not able to take a more sympathetic view of the matter than they did. If they had acted otherwise, they would have shown to the poor people of Scotland that they had a lively sympathy with them, as he himself believed they had. It was not too late yet to take the action he indicated, and when a landlord desired to meet his crofters in a just and reasonable way. every possible assistance should be afforded.
    As regarded fisheries, most of the trouble was caused by the depredation of the trawlers. That was a question on which the Secretary for Scotland might well reconsider the attitude he had taken up. It was, of course, difficult for the Congested Districts Board to increase the number of their fishing cruisers, which were admirably conducted; but the Secretary for Scotland ought to realise the importance of the question, and discourage trawlers which oftentimes were a perfect nuisance. The greatest trouble was not caused by the best class of trawler, but by the smaller boats in small bays and inshore. The evidence of the Commission was perfectly clear on that point, and showed that injury was inflicted on the line fishermen. In the winter time Shetland suffered very much from the difficulty of getting fish away; practically they could only do so once a week, and consequently prices were about one half in Shetland what they were in Aberdeen; and it would be a great advantage if the Secretary for Scotland were to urge this matter on the Post Office.

    1373
    He also wished to refer to the hard and fast line which was adopted in connection with the congested districts. There were certain disticts in Orkney which were just too well off to come under the Congested Districts Board. In such cases the Board might well relax their rules, and allow the poorer parts of a parish to come under the Act. He would wish to attract the attention of hon. Gentlemen representing English constituencies to a paragraph in the Report of the Board which stated with reference to the Barra Settlement—
    "We made arrangements in each township whereby the settlers by their own labour, and the provisions of materials by us, could erect a comfortable and sanitary dwelling and only be indebted to us in the sum of £30 each."
    In Scotland, therefore, poor people could have a fairly satisfactory house for £30, and a certain amount of labour. That showed what might be done in making these people comfortable. He should vote with his hon. friend the Member for Ross-shire if he proceeded to a division; but, at the same time, he wished to express his approval of the Report as far as it went. He wished to thank the Lord-Advocate and his predecessor for the encouragement they had given to fishing in Scotland. He referred to the experiments of applying motor power to fishing boats which, if successful, would be a great advantage to the fishing industry. A catch of herrings might be worth £100 in the morning, and worth practically nothing at night. He hoped the Congested Districts Board would bear that in mind. As regarded the Rackwick Road, the Answer of the right hon. Gentleman was perfectly satisfactory, and he was glad to know that the Congested Districts Board was no party to money being given into the hands of one individual. According to the Answer of the right hon. Gentleman, the road was not to be carried for a certain distance in order, solely, to suit the purposes of an individual. He desired to congratulate the Administration and the right hon. Gentleman on the manner in which the work of the Board had been carried on.
    MR. MUNRO FERGUSONsaid he hoped the Lord-Advocate
    1374
    would consider the question of closing the ports in England against fish caught by trawling in the Moray Frith. The discussion had no reality as long as the English ports were open to trawled fish from the prohibited areas. As regarded the Congested Districts Board, he did not altogether accept the eulogy of his hon. friend. He never thought that the Board worked well, or that it was well constituted. The policy of land redistribution did not appear to be thought out with reference as to whether small occupiers should be tenants under the State, the county council, or be the owners. He admitted it was a difficult point to decide; and he suggested that there should be a competent inquiry before the matter was definitely settled. The objection in parts of the Highlands to small ownerships was that a large class had not as yet much experience in the matter of fending for themselves; and as to whether this peasant proprietary would be a great success or whether some State control should not rather be retained he should not like to give an off-hand opinion. That was a matter which ought to be inquired into before it was proceeded wish on a comprehensive scale. He laid stress on the matter because the land policy of the Congested Districts Board had not been sufficiently developed. That was the main function of the Board; and in respect to it they could not have too clear a policy, too strong an estate office, and a too competent directing committee. There were good members on the Board, but he did not think it commanded confience; and, in his opinion, it was not working well. On the contrary, the Crofters Commission was working extremely well: and he would suggest an amalgamation between the two. The Crofters Commission had not enough work, and with slight changes could do the work of both authorities. As with the land policy to be pursued in the Highlands, so with the amalgamation of these two authorities; he thought there should be an inquiry; he believed the work would then be much better done, and they would have a land policy on a clear and comprehensive basis. He helped the time was not far distant when the Scotch Office would see that matters should no longer be allowed to

    1375
    drift, and would institute such an inquiry as he had suggested.
    MR. CALDWELL: pointed out that there was a practical difficulty in the way of the suggested amalgamation of the Crofters Commission and the Congested Districts Board. It was convenient to have the two bodies separate, as questions sometimes arose between the Congested Districts Board as owners and the Crofters Commission as purchasers with regard to the price of holdings and so forth. The Crofters Commission dealt with other than congested districts, and in many respects there would be great difficulty in amalgamating the two bodies. The Congested Districts Board were the successors of the Highlands and Islands Works Board, which dealt with matters such as lighthouses, piers, and roads. For five years previous to the constitution of the Congested Districts Board the amount spent on those purposes averaged £26,000 per annum, but, as usually happened in such cases, when the Congested Districts Board was established and took over the work of the body that it superseded, the Treasury got the better of the Scotch Office, and the Highlands Works Vote was compounded for £20,000 a year. Additional powers were conferred on the Congested Districts Board for dealing with agriculture, land, and emigration, fishing, and one or two minor purposes, and £15,000 a year was added to the Vote. That money, however, was purely Scotch money, England having equivalent grants for English purposes.
    There was considerably difficulty in following the work of the Board. He fully agreed that there was a total absence of policy. He had been carefully through the accounts endeavouring to find some sort of policy, and though, after devoting considerable time to the work, he had obtained some idea of what had been done by the Board, he had been unable to gain any notion whatever as to what the Board had intended to do. As regarded the land scheme and money from the Congested Districts Board, there had been expended altogether about £250,000, of which Inverness had had £148,000, Sutherland £23,745, and Ross-shire £17,000. But for
    1376
    the settlement of crofters and so forth, Inverness had had only £128, and Rossshire £1,239. The main object of the Congested Districts Board was to deal with the poverty of the people, and not so much with piers and harbours, except so far as they might alleviate the poverty of the people. When they looked round the other congested districts, so far as the crofters were concerned nothing was being done. Argyllshire had had the sum of £35 9s. 6d. He wished to know what was the policy that the Congested Districts Board were seeking to carry out. Were they paying large sums for roads and bridges? For lighthouses and piers (including roads) the amount was £6,900 not long ago, it was £10,000, and in 1905 £14,000; and the average was about £8,000 or £9,000 throughout the whole of that period.
    There were several ways in they might settle crofters on the land. They might, as in Ireland, sell the land to the crofters under a purchase scheme, the amount advanced being repayable in fifty years. In the case of Barra, the land was purchased and divided amongst certain crofters, and they had to build houses. It was pointed out in the Report that these at Barra were not fulfilling their contracts or making their payments, but there could be no question whatever as to the advantage of buying land and migrating crofters upon it, and this plan had produced the best possible results. So great was the change made under this system that a clergyman who visited one of these islands after a long absence could scarcely believe that it was the same place owing to the improvements which had been made by creating large holdings and dividing the land vacated amongst the people, making their holdings larger. In this way they were able to create new holdings, and at the same time give larger holdings to those who needed them. This was the policy which ought to be favoured in the congested districts, because what the people suffered from in those districts was that their crofts were too small. The great point was to give them more land in order that they might utilise their labour and industry to the

    1377
    full, and in that way make it pay. There were varying circumstances in different districts, and they ought to deal with each district by itself. So far as this system of creating new holdings and adding more land to existing crofts had been carried out, the best possible results had followed.
    Hitherto very little had been done in the way of land purchase because the balances had been allowed to accumulate. In the past they had complained that £35,000 a year was far too small a sum for this purpose. He wished to point out that they were not spending even that small amount, because they were allowing it to accumulate, with the result that last year it amounted to no less than £120,000. Was it intended by this accumulation to start a land scheme? A purchase was made in Glendale for £15,000, and to this was added £5,000 for roads, fencing, and buildings, making up the total to £20,000. They had been endeavouring to sell that land to the crofters, and attempts had been made to arrange terms and a fair price to be paid by the crofters. When those terms were settled they would like to know what was the policy of the Board in regard to this matter. Were they going to sell the land to the crofters out and out? Were they to purchase from the Loan Commissioners, and would the money be refunded to the Congested Districts Board in order that they might extend crofts in other districts? Were they going to keep the land in their own hands for fifty years, charging a certain amount of principal and interest annually with a view to the advance being paid automatically? The money which had been accumulated was intended for the benefit of the people of to-day, and not for the future. To accumulate the money in this way was contrary to all precedents. Surely they ought to know what was to become of this money in the future. The balance now was £13,000, but that would not go very far in the way of making roads and developing estates. Having become owner of a large property with a great number of tenants, the Board had appointed Lady Cathcart's factor to manage the estate.
    It was a very remarkable thing that the purchase of the two tracts of land took
    1378
    place about the same time and that Parliament should know nothing about the transactions until they were completed. One tract was purchased in November and the other in January following with the money belonging to the Congested Districts Board. What was the policy in connection with these purchases? What were the Government aiming at? Having purchased that land how were they to have money available for the purpose of relieving distress in other districts besides the Island of Skye? The Board seemed to think that they had too much money on their hands, and they wished additional powers so as to introduce new purposes on which to utilise the money. The Government themselves had laid great stress on the importance of making the crofters the owners of their holdings, and surely that must be because they believed it was the proper policy with the view of relieving congestion in the Highlands. If that was good policy for relieving congestion in the Island of Skye it was good policy for the Island of Lewis. Would any man who knew the facts say that the Island of Lewis was not more congested than the Island of Skye? Why had Skye been deal with in this way? When the Government wanted powers to deal with a matter of this kind the case of the poorest class was brought forward to prove the necessity for their being granted, but when the powers were obtained that class was neglected altogether. Nothing could illustrate that better than the fact that £20,000 had been expended in the Island of Skye, though the people of the Island of Lewis were crying out for assistance.
    Lord Balfour of Burleigh, when Secretary for Scotland, got a Committee appointed with the view of seeing what could be done with regard to any special relief to the congested districts. One of the matters which the Committee were to inquire into was the fisheries; and another point was the insufficiency of educational facilities, and especially the difficulties under which the people of the Island of Lewis suffered from having too limited a knowledge of the outer world. These were matters within the scope of the work

    1379
    of the Congested Districts Board. Technical education was also included in the powers which the Board had just now. He could not understand why more powers were wanted to deal with these questions. As a matter of fact the Board had powers to act at present without waiting to get a Bill passed. He had shown, at any rate, that where the creation of new crofter holdings was concerned they had only touched the fringe of the question, and that the extent to which money had been lavished in the Island of Skye only served to illustrate the poverty in regard to the other districts. There were other moneys which were at the control of the Secretary for Scotland, practically without any legislation at all. There was, as the Lord-Advocate knew, the general aid grant. That money was not set aside for education in any way. It amounted to £223,000, and the Secretary for Scotland by a Minute of his own appropriated half of it for certain purposes. If he could appropriate it for one purpose he could appropriate it for other purposes in the same way. The hon. Member did not say that it was legal for the Secretary for Scotland to appropriate the money, but it had been done. The £223,000 came to Scotland not because Scotland wanted or needed the money, but simply because England had got a certain amount owing to the passing of the Education Act which threw a heavy burden on the ratepayers. As England dipped into the Imperial purse in that way Scotland had to take the equivalent. The policy in every case in regard to the equivalent grant had been to apply the money to purposes most useful for the people of Scotland as a whole. Surely no one would say that the crofters and the Congested Districts Board should not practically get any of it.
    There was no objection whatever to the Congested Districts Board getting enlarged powers, but additional money must be got if the powers were to be enlarged. It was obvious to everyone who studied the work of the Congested Districts Board that the money available in their hands was too little for their present purposes if they were to carry out the Act in a proper spirit. The truth of the
    1380
    matter was that in Scotland they got more money than they could utilise. The ratepayers were jumping for it, the schoolmasters were jumping for it. Really money was thrown at them which they were unable to utilise. Grants-in-aid were wrong in principle; but if they were to be given they should be applied to some useful purpose. The money granted to the Congested Districts Board was insufficient to carry on the schemes for the development of the Highlands and Islands. The members of the Board were, no doubt, excellent gentlemen, but they did not give that time and attention necessary for the understanding of all matters relating to the administration of Scotland. He himself had endeavoured to go through all the accounts, but it was almost impossible to understand them. He was quite certain that the Lord-Advocate would have no objection to give full in formation in regard to all these matters in a way that the ordinary man could understand them. He agreed with the hon. Member for Inverness that the crofters should be tenants under the Crofters Act, paying rent, rather than peasant proprietors.
    MR. LEVESON-GOWERthought that the responsibilities which the Congested Districts Board were taking upon themselves were greater than they could bear. They would, in fact, in coarse of time, if they went on purchasing estates as they were doing, become proprietors of large tracts of land, and their resources would be absorbed in these properties to such an extent that they would have no money to spend in other directions. He would suggest to the Lord-Advocate that the Scottish Office should endeavour to get a certain proportion of the purchase price paid for the land from the Treasury. The Board would be able to pay a very fair interest on the sums thus borrowed from the revenue they derived from the rents, and they would thus not be out of pocket as they were at the present time. Unless this was done, if the purchase of land continued, the Congested Districts Board in a very few years would have nothing at all left. He could not see why there should be a differentiation between

    1381
    the Crofter Commission's rents and the Congested Districts Board's tenant proprietor rents.
    CAPTAIN ELLICEsaid that the hon. Gentleman the Member for Mid-Lanark said that money had been thrown to Scotland in relation to the Congested Districts Board which had been practically wasted. But he would like to point out that there were in Scotland industries other than that of crofting which had not had money thrown at them of recent years. He referred to the Scottish Fisheries Board, which had only the same grant, as they had had for the past forty years—a grant of £3,000 a year. He had not the slightest doubt that the Scottish Fisheries Board would benefit largely in their operations by an increased grant. The Vote he particularly desired to call attention to was the Vote of £3,000 towards piers and harbours.
    THE CHAIRMAN: That will come on the next Vote; it is not on this Vote at all.
    CAPTAIN ELLICEsaid in that case he would defer what he had to say to another occasion.
    MR. AINSWORTHsaid the discussion which had taken place had shown the great importance of this question, not only to the Highlands of Scotland, but to the whole of the United Kingdom, because it dealt with one of the most valuable races of the population of the Empire. He hoped the discussion would enable the Government to make clear first what their policy was going to be in relation to the land question; second, by what machinery they would carry out that policy; and third, the amount of the fund they were prepared to provide in order to carry it out. He assumed they would carry out the policy of land purchase in the manner which was most acceptable to the people of Scotland; that was to say, by a system of having an occupier with a fixed tenancy under a superior. The machinery that at present existed for carrying out that policy consisted of two boards, the Crofters Commission and the Congested Districts Board, both of
    1382
    which had done a great deal of good work. In his opinion, however, the work would be much simplified if those two bodies were united, with the members as paid officials amenable to this House and the country. When they came to the funds for carrying out this policy it was almost laughable to find that for various purposes which were always being added to the e was only £36,000 altogether. He hoped the Lord-Advocate would be able to tell the Committee that more money would be provided. One way in which the right hon. Gentleman could provide money almost immediately for land purchase, without at once troubling the Treasury, would be by taking powers to raise money on the land which the Congested Districts Board had already purchased, and using that for further purchases.
    He hoped the right hon. Gentleman would be able also to tell the Committee something in respect to a small increase in the powers of the Congested Districts Board, which would be of great importance to the people of the Highlands. He alluded to the power of advancing small sums to crofters for the purpose of improving their holdings. In the past the crofter in case of emergency was in the habit of going to his landlord. But the conditions were now different, and if he went to his landlord for £30, £40, or £50 for the purpose of rebuilding his house or otherwise improving his holding, his landlord would say, "The conditions are quite different now to what they were, and if you want me to lend you money you must give up your crofting holding, and become a leaseholder". The result of that was that men desirous of improving their holdings became leaseholders and found the conditions of their holding entirely changed. They had here also an opportunity of dealing with the question of rural depopulation at once, because it was not a question of bringing about a new state of things, but preserving the state of things which at present existed. Could anyone say he was willing to contemplate the probability of a large proportion of the Highlands of Scotland becoming a deer forest? Yet that was the question to-day in many parts of Scotland: "How many deer will the land

    1383
    carry? "Here was an opportunity of giving the proprietor a chance of getting rid of the crofting area; an opportunity of giving the crofter a superior landlord, in the shape of a public board, who was able to spend money on the improvement of the croft; and an opportunity of preserving one of the finest races of the population of the Empire. He asked the Lord-Advocate to bear in mind the difference between a family brought up in the glens of Highlands and on the shores of the lochs, and a family brought up even on high wages in the big towns. If the right hon. Gentleman could see his way to proceed with these reforms he would not only benefit the country but the Empire.
    THE LORD-ADVOCATE (Mr. SCOTT DICKSON, Glasgow, Bridgton)said he did not complain of what had been said on this important Vote nor of the manner in which it had been discussed. All those who had spoken had recognised that the Congested Districts Board had had a record year of progress and development. As to the Secretary for Scotland not being in attendance, that was due to important public duties. He did not think any one could complain that this Government had been unmindful of the claims of the House of Commons so far as the Secretary of Scotland was concerned, although he did not agree that it should be set policy that the Secretary for Scotland should always have a seat in this House. In fact, it was admitted that one of the best Secretaries Scotland ever had, sat in another place. He was rather surprised that the policy of the Congested Districts Board in increasing balances in hand should be regarded as a new development. It had been pursued for a number of years, and it had been long understood and stated in this House that these accumulations had been for the purpose of acquiring land to carry out a scheme of migration on an adequate scale. It was well to recollect that the Congested Districts Board had no means of purchasing property other than from the £35,000 from the local taxation accounts, and the £20,000 voted by Parliament. It was generally accepted that there would be some large demands upon the balances accumulating for the settlement on a
    1384
    large scale of crofters and cottars who would be migrated from one district to another. That policy so enumerated had never been taken exception to. Complaints had been made that the land was not bought, but it was never suggested that the accumulation of balances was not a perfectly proper thing for the purpose of acquiring land. All that the Board required was to get suitable land. The first opportunity occurred in Skye, where the estates of Kilmuir and Glendale were acquired. Every branch of the policy as to how the land was to be disposed of was set out in last year's Report, again without any complaint or objection being taken. The Report stated—
    "The proposal we have made" (that was in dealing with the Glendale Estate)" is that the Board should sell to each existing tenant the holding be at present possesses and also a share in the grazing, the land to be held by the settlers on the club farm system."
    It was stated that the price payable by the purchasers would fall to be met by an annuity calculated to repay the principal and interest of the capital value of each purchaser's interest in thirty years, the rate of interest being 2¾ per cent., and the Report continued—
    "We may add very many, if not all, the tenants are willing to be purchasers."
    That had been the declared policy of the Congested Districts Board for some years. It must have been obvious to those who took an interest in the matter that the balances were accumulating for the very purpose of acquiring land and reselling it when acquired on the annuity principle. The only reason why that plan was not carried out sooner was that suitable land did not come into the market. The propriety of the policy seemed to him to be justified by the very statement of it; because if it were desirable to make provision for the migration and settlement of a crofting population, surely in no better way could it be carried out than by securing considerable tracts of land where there could be a large settlement and the thing would have a chance of being tried on a proper scale. If it were found, as he believed it would be, that this experiment was successful, he had no doubt money would be found for further experiments of the same kind. The fact that they had really made a start in actual practical demonstration

    1385
    intended to make the year a memorable one in the history of the Congested Districts Board.
    A suggestion had been made that there should be an amalgamation of the Crofters Commission and the Congested Districts Board, but there were two sides to that question, and he did not know that any advantage would be derived from combining those two bodies. There was no jealousy or want of desire to co-operate between the two bodies. The hon. Member for Ross and Cromarty objected to two estates being purchased in Inverness-shire, but the claims of Lewis had not been lost sight of. He regretted that so far as the training of boys in seamanship was concerned it had not been so successful as was anticipated. No effort had been spared to remove the prejudice which existed with regard to the matter, and it was hoped that with the diffusion of greater knowledge on the subject that prejudice would disappear, and that considerable numbers would adopt a seafaring life, which it was believed was admirably adapted for giving lads from island districts a better opening in life than they had had hitherto. With regard to the building of houses, while he agreed that the progress had not been as rapid as could have been wished, yet considerable progress had been made, and was still going on. The Congested Districts Board had shown their desire to go even further than their present powers allowed, as more than once since the issue of the Report to which reference had been made they had introduced Bills dealing with the subject, but had been unable to secure the cooperation of the hon. Member for Mid-Lanark. But doubtless the influence of the hon. Member for Orkney and Shetland would remove the difficulty the hon. Member had hitherto felt on the subject, and enable the Board to have the matter dealt with.
    Reference had been made to the Mansfield Commission. So far as the work of that Commission was concerned, there was no desire whatever, if it could have been satisfactorily proceeded with, to prevent the Commissioners from inquiring into the details of the fishing in Lewis and elsewhere, but it was felt that it would tend to delay the
    1386
    investigation they were making without securing any corresponding advantage. Though the Commissioners were confined by the terms of their reference to the counties of Sutherland and Caithness, to a large extent their observations were general in character, and he could not doubt that any remedial legislation which might follow that Report would not be confined to the two counties named, but, with suitable changes, would be extended to other districts. In that way the refusal to extend the scope of the reference would in the end turn out to the advantage of the district in which the hon. Member was interested.
    Another question to which reference had been made—and its importance he fully recognised—was that of the foreign trawlers in the Moray Firth. That question was looked at from very different standpoints, according to the interests concerned. In the North of Scotland, and probably in Scotland generally, they looked at it from the line fisherman's point of view, but South of the Tweed the question was regarded rather from the trawler's point of view, and he doubted whether any proposal to close British ports to trawlers might not raise a branch of that very thorny question, the fiscal problem, and whether they might not be charged with all kinds of fiscal heresies.
    MR. CATHCART WASON: Could you not stop the sale of illegally trawled fish in English ports?
    MR. MUNRO FERGUSONasked whether, in order to avoid the importation of the fiscal question, it would not be fair to say that the restrictions with regard to the Moray Firth were laid down rather to secure a supply of fish than to act on behalf of line fishermen as against trawlers.
    MR. SCOTT DICKSONdid not desire to be taken as not having that course quite in view, but even there serious difference of opinion existed as to the probable result. The question had engaged the attention of those concerned with the interests of Scotland for a considerable time, and was still engaging their attention, to see whether anything could be done

    1387
    to put the matter on a more satisfactory basis. He entirely agreed, as the matter stood, that it was not satisfactory that British trawlers should be kept out of the Moray Firth whilst all the others had to do was to hoist the Norwegian flag to be free of the restrictions. The matter, however, was not one which could be dealt with without legislation.
    MR. WEIRsuggested that the Foreign Secretary could approach the other Powers on the subject without legislation.
    MR. SCOTT DICKSONsaid that in any case Norway was not bound by the Convention, and even with regard to foreign Powers that were so bound serious difficulties arose as to the extent of territorial waters and so forth. The question had not been lost sight of, but it was by no means an easy matter to deal with.
    MR. JOHN DEWARsuggested that they might prevent the sale of fish caught by foreign trawlers.
    MR. SCOTT DICKSONsaid that question was discussed some time ago, but the debate had not proceeded far before it was vehemently protested that it was sheer protection and would prevent the importation of a large amount of fish for the food supply of the people of this country.
    MR. BLACKasked by whom that argument was put forward
    MR. SCOTT DICKSONsaid that was immaterial. He was simply showing the kind of argument they were met with. Then as to the use of motors in fishing boats experiments had been going on, and he understood that Members would have an opportunity of seeing the application of the motor principle in the way suggested, as a fishing boat fitted with a motor was leaving Anstruther for the Thames on Saturday next. Comparisons had been made between Scotland and Ireland in the matter of facilities for curing. It had to be remembered, however, that the position of Scotland was very different from that of Ireland, inasmuch as the fishing in-
    1388
    dustry had practically to be created in many parts of Ireland, whereas in Scotland it had been long established. In fact, wherever curing could be carried on in Scotland with any degree of success the places were occupied by private traders, so that the only result of the Congested Districts Board engaging in the work would be to open up places where the business could not be carried on either satisfactorily or successfully. The provision of increased steamer accommodation for the carrying of fish was a matter not for the Congested Districts Board but for the postal authorities.
    MR. JOHN DEWARsaid his suggestion had reference rather to a rearrangement of the present steamer service.
    MR. SCOTT DICKSON: Belonging to the Congested Districts Board?
    MR. JOHN DEWAR: No; the ordinary steamer service. The Board might also use their influence with regard to the new railway to Mallaig.
    MR. SCOTT DICKSONsaid that in many respects that line had not come up to anticipations. The Board would be only too glad if it could facilitate a rearrangement that would secure any improvement in the carrying trade. With reference to the complaint of the hon. Member for Mid-Lanark that the money spent on roads, improvement of stock, and similar purposes, was simply in the interests of the landlords, he would remind the hon. Member that the crofters were to a largo extent landlords, and there were few better ways of bettering the condition of the people in these districts than by improving the means of access to the land they occupied and upon which they reared their stock and other marketable commodities. In these directions the Board had done and would continue to do much good work, and he believed that such measures were calculated to do more to improve the condition of the population than even migrating the people to other parts. If better road accommodation were provided and improvement of stock took place surely that must be beneficial. The efforts which they had made in that

    1389
    direction had certainly met with commendation in some quarters. With regard to the two estates of Kilmuir and Glendale he would explain how they proposed to deal with them. They were going to use them not only for the enlargement of existing crofts but also for planting new crofts. Their policy would be to create new holdings and utilise the holdings given up to increase the size of those adjoining. The Congested Districts Board were satisfied that by carrying out a policy of this kind a great deal of good would be done by promoting the formation of new settlements.
    AN HON. MEMBERsaid he noticed that the period of repayment was fifty years at £3 14s. 1d. per cent., whereas the Irish tenant was allowed sixty-eight years at 3¼. per cent.
    MR. SCOTT DICKSONsaid he was aware that there had been a good deal of controversy as to the length of the period of repayment, but he was not able to give a full explanation at the present moment. He did not pretend that he had dealt with all the points raised, but he thought he had dealt with the main points and he had indicated generally the policy which the Government had adopted and which they proposed to carry out. This policy had not been initiated this year for the first time, and the House had had ample notice of it. In all its details it was a policy which, so far as criticism was concerned, had not been seriously assailed as being open to objection. He quite understood that ultimately the success or non-success of this policy would be the test as to whether it was a wise one to continue, but as matters stood at present he was of opinion that this policy had been wisely conceived and the efforts made to carry it out were well calculated to secure its success. He thought the efforts of the Congested Districts Board were such as to deserve the commendation which they had received from hon. Members opposite, and the Board deserved every credit for the good work they had done.
    MR. THOMAS SHAWcomplained that there had been great delay in the Congested Districts Board addressing itself to the work com-
    1390
    mitted to it by Parliament. He was glad that that delay had to some extent been abated during the past year. It seemed to him that although this Board had been created for one particular purpose it was always trying to devote itself to another purpose. Every one of the Reports of this Board generally gave a short account of what they had done, and a protracted Report of how they had been prevented from doing something else. The Congested Districts Board and the members of the Crofters Commission seldom, if ever, met round one table. If the Secretary for Scotland would call them together, and invite them to consider their relations to other public boards in the country, he would be doing an enormous national service. With regard to the educational difficulty he could hardly doubt that had the matter been fully understood at the time a couple of clauses would have been inserted in the Education Bill. The importance of this point was that whereas they were entitled to certain moneys for educational purposes those moneys were going to be abstracted from them in a different way altogether, and they were to lose an educational grant; in fact, they were to get a sum of money instead from the Congested Districts Board which would be taken out of funds to which Scotland was entitled from other sources. There was a financial loss as well as an administrative loss year after year. This was very well illustrated by the case of the Island of Lewis. Lord Balfour took this matter up and said that he asked for a Report mainly because he could not help feeling that the problems which pressed for solution in regard to Lewis were more difficult and complicated than in any other area with which the Congested Districts Board had to deal. That Report was made on December 15th, 1902, but nothing had been done, and these delays were aggravating the state of things in Lewis, and a good deal of misery and suffering was being continued in that island.
    Now if there was any occasion upon which they could avoid bringing in the fiscal question he should have thought it would have been a discussion on the Congested Districts Board for Scotland,

    1391
    but it seemed that the fiscal question was always with them, and even the Lord-Advocate had referred to it in connection with the Moray Firth trawling. There was a doctrine known as colonial preference, and he thought that in regard to trawling in the Moray Firth they might fairly claim that Scotsmen Should be preferred. The Sea Fisheries Report, recently issued, stated that the effect of the continual disturbance by trawlers in the Moray Firth was to destroy the mature fish of all kinds, break up the shoals of herring and drive them from their accustomed haunts. That was a matter of national concern. Scotch fishermen were forbidden to go outside the limit, whilst Englishmen and foreigners were not subjected to this restriction. The Lord-Advocate asked—How could they help it? The answer was perfectly simple. Why could not the Congested Districts Board, the Secretary for Scotland, and the various boards act in co-operation with the authorities in England, because the moment they deprived either English or foreign trawlers of an English market for their goods they put an end to this nefarious traffic. All that was required was co-operation with the other public boards in England to prevent the landing not of foreign articles, but of fish procured in a region where it was unlawful for Scotsmen to fish. His right hon. friend said that under the North Sea Convention they could not appeal to Norway because that country was not a party to that Convention. Surely they could prevent, say, a Scandinavian vessel, just as they could an English vessel, landing a cargo illicitly caught and bringing it to a British port. One word to that effect from the British Government to the North Sea Powers would make such an arrangement feasible. After all, the main object of all those boards—the Congested Districts Board, Crofters Commission, and others—was to get bigger scope, and a wider sphere, for the energy of the people themselves.
    He found, with regard to the acquisition of land, that the Congested Districts Board in all its askings for additional powers had been careful never to ask for power compulsorily to acquire land. The effect of such a power would be that the board
    1392
    would be able to procure land at the market price and secure a wider area of selection for its activities, because they knew where the congestion was most acute, and instead of being driven from island to island, and from pillar to post, looking cut for a property where the proprietor was anxious to acquire money for it, they would be able to get land where it was wanted. Until compulsory powers were obtained, the Congested Districts Board, or the authority which succeeded it, would be so shackled that it would be prevented from making much progress. The people were anxious that the little nagging restrictions to which the crofter was subject should be removed. The best type of population, particularly on the northwest coast of the mainland, or in the Hebrides, were the men who had a trade of their own, say, fishing, a little merchant's shop in addition, and also a little bit of land to till. That was the kind of citizen who was useful in the locality; he sat on the school board, took part in parish council work, and was a credit to the community. The House would hardly believe it, but it was a fact that by the decision of a Court of law that type of man had been absolutely disqualified under the Act from taking his position as a crofter. From the time that decision was given nothing had been done to alleviate that grievance. And so in all those respects he found fault with the Congested Districts Board, for its operations were always too slow; secondly, they were always asking for things which they did not require, and which were entrusted to other departments; thirdly, they never asked for the real thing, which was power to compulsorily acquire land; and lastly, they seemed to neglect cases of the kind which were dealt with in the action by Gilmour against Peterson to which he had referred. They neglected those strong and clamant cases, and came forward year after year with complaints about little petty matters which, as compared with the acquisition of land, were mere specks. Therefore, his complaint against them was delay, lack of due firmness and determination, and not knowing their own mind. They proceeded by circuitous methods, and the result was a certain ineffectiveness which, with much that he approved of in the

    1393
    action of the Board, was highly to be regretted.
    SIR CHARLES RENSHAWsaid the hon. and learned Member closed his speech by expressing disapproval of a certain action of the Congested Districts Board, though he had found a source of satisfaction in the fact that they had acquired a considerable property for which they paid a large sum of money. The House would accept that as substantial evidence of a very practical character of the efforts which were being made to solve some of the problems which were pressing themselves on the consideration of the Congested District Boards. The hon. and learned Member had told the House that there would be no satisfactory administration of the Act until land could be bought compulsorily. Why was it possible to purchase the great estate they had been discussing? It had been because the Congested Districts Board had the good sense to accumulate the capital which they had now used for the purchase of the property.
    MR. THOMAS SHAWsaid he made no adverse comment on the accumulation of capital by the Board. His point was that under the present system they were forced to accumulate capital because they had not compulsory powers which would enable them to go on smoothly. They had to wait from year to year until they got the opportunity of buying from. somebody who was willing to sell.
    SIR CHARLES RENSHAWsaid the point which the hon. and learned Member laid down was that the Board would not be able to do their work until they had compulsory powers of purchase, and he suggested that if such powers were in force they would be able to purchase land at what he called the market price. He thought the hon. and learned Member would bear him out when he said that if all rumours were true the exercise of compulsory powers in regard to the purchase of land was never of so felicitous a nature as to make one prefer that method if land could be acquired without putting Compulsory powers in force at all.
    MR. JOHN DEWAR: Land was taken by the Crofters Commission, and the price was fixed by the Commission itself.
    SIR CHARLES RENSHAWsaid that was a very special case. He did not believe the conferring of compulsory powers on the Congested Districts Board would make the slightest difference. He believed there was a great deal of land in the North of Scotland which the proprietors would be very glad to sell if there was any reasonable prospect or chance of selling it. He was perfectly certain that land could be bought more cheaply by the ordinary chance of the market than by putting compulsory powers into the hands of the Board.
    THE CHAIRMAN: I desire to call attention to the fact that land cannot be acquired by compulsion without an Act of Parliament, and therefore the discussion of that is out of order.
    MR. ASHERsaid he desire to make a few remarks on the subject of trawling for fish, in regard to which a great deal of interest was felt in the part of Scotland with which he was connected. He rose chiefly for the purpose of pressing on the attention of the Lord-Advocate a suggestion which might be successful in remedying the mischief which was at present occurring. His right hon. and learned friend acknowledged that the present state of matters was most unsatisfactory. At this moment so-called foreign vessels, but very largely manned by British subjects, were roaming at large outside territorial waters and catching fish, which they immediately transferred to British ports where they were sold. It had been suggested that any attempt to stop that process would be in the nature of protection, but he himself could not see that. The closing of the Moray Firth was authorised in 1889 for the purpose of enabling the Fishery Board of Scotland to make certain experiments; but the effect of those experiments had been absolutely frustrated by the action of these foreign trawlers. Whilst statistics were being collected the foreign trawlers appeared on the scene, and it was found impracticable to carry out the experiments for the purpose of

    1395
    which the Act of 1889 was passed. He suggested that steps should be taken for treating foreign, trawlers who landed fish in England in exactly the same way as they were treated in Scotland. His complaint was that it was the duty of the Government to enforce a British statute just as much in England as in Scotland. In 1897 a ship carrying the German flag, and registered in Germany, trawled for fish outside territorial waters in the Moray Firth. The Secretary for Scotland gave instructions to the Commander of the "Jackal" at Aberdeen and a fishery officer to prevent the landing of the fish, and the fish were not allowed to be landed. Immediately after that the foreign owner of the vessel came into the Scottish Court and asked for redress for what would be called in England an injunction against anything being done which would prevent the fish being landed at Aberdeen. The case was defended by the then Secretary for Scotland, who, in his pleadings, stated that no British subject was entitled to take fish by steam trawling in the Moray Firth, or to land the same in Scotland—
    "And it will be seriously prejudicial to the national interests and to the said fisheries and the British subjects interested therein, if foreign trawlers are allowed to land such fish in Scotland."
    It was also set out in the pleadings that—
    "The Government resolved in the interest of the State, and as an act of State"
    that fish caught by beam or other trawling should not be allowed to be landed in Scotland. The Court decided that His Majesty's Government acted absolutely within their rights in doing what they did; and as that judgment was not appealed against, it had been accepted from that time as the law of Scotland that the foreign trawler was not entitled to land his fish in a Scotch port. What he would suggest to his right hon. and learned friend was that His Majesty's Government should instruct their officers in England not to allow any fish trawled in the Moray firth to be landed in any English port, and to institute proceedings against any foreign trawlers doing so.
    MR. SCOTT DICKSONsaid that the Secretary for Scotland could not issue
    1396
    any such instructions as far as English ports were concerned. What was done in the case referred to by the hon. and learned Member opposite was done by the Secretary for Scotland acting in Scotland, but he could not do that in England.
    MR. ASHERsaid he would remind his hon. and learned friend that in the pleadings in the Scotch Court the Secretary for Scotland recited that he was a member of His Majesty's Government, and that "the Government resolved in the interest of the State, and as an act of State," that fish trawled in the Moray Firth should not be allowed to be landed. He was not suggesting legislation; what he was suggesting was that the Secretary for Scotland should go to his colleagues in the Government and ask them, "as an act of State," to prevent fish which were trawled against the law in the Moray Firth being landed in the ports of England. It was absolutely in the power of the Executive to prevent an alien entering British ports and landing fish which had been caught in violation of British law. What was taking place was so grievous an evil that it ought to be taken up and grappled with. There was an enormous population all along the coast of the Moray Firth on the verge of rebellion in consequence of what was happening, and why should not the Secretary for Scotland secure that the British Government should, "as an act of State," intervene for the purpose of preventing these illegally trawled fish being landed in English ports. He strongly urged on his hon. and learned friend to take the course which he had suggested. Of course, legislation was out of the question; and he agreed with his hon. and learned friend the Member for the Border Burghs that negotiation was also out of the question. If the Government instructed its officers at English ports not to allow fish illegally trawled to be landed at these ports nothing more would be heard of the matter.
    MR. BLACKsaid that the reply of the Lord-Advocate would occasion great disappointment. The question was a very burning one all along the coast; and affected the livelihood of

    1397
    many men. It was a matter of wonder to many of them that for ten or twelve years the Government should have done nothing to grapple with this evil. There were from thirty to forty trawlers in these waters; and yet the Government said they could do nothing. Perhaps they should not have expected anything better from such a quarter. But who were the supporters of the Lord-Advocate which he said he could not offend. These trawlers were practically pirates. They went to foreign countries, registered their vessels there, and then, under a foreign flag, came into the waters of the Moray Firth and broke the domestic law which governed trawling in those waters. If the Government were in earnest they would be able to deal with this matter, and, somehow or another, bring about a remedy. He was surprised that the Lord-Advocate should have endeavoured to stop his hon. and learned friend when he made a practical suggestion to deal with this matter. It was done openly; and, surely, if the Government were in earnest they could grapple with it. There was certainly a lack of earnestness on the part of the Government in providing a remedy
    SIR HERBERT MAXWELLsaid he desired to support the views of the two hon. Members who had just spoken on the other side. He could not help thinking that the Lord-Advocate was not aware of the extent and depth of feeling which the existing state of things had created. Had it not been that his countrymen were of a practical and orderly disposition there would have been more serious scenes on the coast of Scotland than had been witnessed. The operations of these trawlers were carried on, not only during the day, but at night, when it was almost impossible for any human being to prevent them from violating the three-mile limit. It was a very common belief of the fishermen, especially in the Moray Firth, that that limit was habitually violated by these foreign trawlers. He could not conceive a more inequitable state of things than that which prohibited trawled fish being sold in Scotland, and yet permitted it to be sold in another part of the United Kingdom. He begged the right hon.
    1398
    Gentleman to take this matter into serious consideration and use his influence with the Government so that some such action as had been suggested by the hon. and learned Member for the Elgin Burghs might be taken.
    MR. DOBBIEsaid that his hon. and learned friend the Member for the Elgin Burghs had suggested a remedy which ought to appeal to the Lord-Advocate. The trawling grievance was felt equally, and even in a magnified form, in the Firth of Clyde as in the Moray Firth. They were troubled with trawlers not only from Norway but from Germany and Holland, and he appealed to the Lord-Advocate to make some representation to those countries with a view to getting the evil remedied by a convention or otherwise. Trawling was the great cause of the depression and congestion of the fishing population. The Report of the Departmental Committee was very valuable; but localities other than Sutherland and Caithness should also be considered. It was quite true that the recommendations of the Committee were general; but there were varying conditions in different localities. He, therefore, thought that the Government would confer a great boon on the fishing community in Scotland if they endowed the Committee with further powers. He hoped, from the excellent tone of the speech of the Lord-Advocate, that some attention would be given to this matter.
    MR. PIRIEcomplained of the absolute apathy displayed by the Secretary for Scotland. It was, he asserted, nothing more nor less than a scandal for the Scotch representatives to treat with contempt, silence, and indifference the complaints that had been made respecting trawling and harbour dues. So long as the present state of affairs continued they had every right to consider that the Scottish officers were grossly negligent of their duty, which was first of all to protect Scottish interests and then to see that justice was done to British interests. He thought that probably in view of the approaching election and of the strong feeling prevailing in Scotland, this discussion would have a little more effect than usual.
    MR. WEIRsaw no ray of hope in the speech of the right hon. Gentleman, who had put before them roads, bulls, rams, cockerels, and bee-hives as a solution of the crofter problem. Those were all useful in their way, but what the people wanted was more land. It was because the Secretary for Scotland had shown no desire to secure land suitable to the wants
    of the people that the reduction had been moved. He also failed to find a ray of hope for the settlement of the foreign trawlers question.
    Question put.
    The Committee divided:—Ayes, 87; Noes, 142. (Division List No. 203.)

    AYES.

    Asher, Alexander

    Goddard, Daniel Ford

    Parrott, William

    Asquith, Rt. Hn. Herb. Henry

    Griffith, Ellis J.

    Pease, J. A. (Saffron Walden)

    Black, Alexander William

    Guest, Hon. Ivor Churchill

    Pirie, Duncan V.

    Bright, Allan Heywood

    Hardie, J. Keir (Merthyr Tydvil)

    Reid, Sir R. Threshie (Dumfries

    Brown, G. M. (Edinburgh.)

    Harmsworth, R. Leicester

    Roberts, John Bryn (Eifion)

    Bryce, Rt. Hon. James

    Hayter, Rt. Hn. Sir Arthur D.

    Russell, T. W.

    Buchanan, Thomas Ryburn

    Henderson, Arthur (Durham

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

    Burke, E. Haviland

    Higham, John Sharp

    Shaw, Thomas (Hawick B.)

    Burt, Thomas

    Holland, Sir William Henry

    Sheehan, Daniel Daniel

    Buxton, N. E (York, NR, Whit by

    Hutchinson, Dr. Chas. Fredk.

    Shipman, Dr. John G.

    Caldwell, James

    Lamont, Norman

    Sinclair, John (Forfarshire)

    Campbell, J. (Armagh, S.)

    Langley, Batty

    Smith, Samuel (Flint)

    Causton, Richard Knight

    Lawson, Sir Wilfrid (Cornwall)

    Soames, Arthur Wellesley

    Cheetham, John Frederick

    Leese, Sir J. F. (Accrington)

    Soares, Ernest J.

    Craig, Robert Hunter (Lanark)

    Leng, Sir John

    Spencer, Rt Hn C. R (Northants

    Delany, William

    Levy, Maurice

    Sullivan, Donal

    Dewar, John A. (Inverness-sh.

    Lundon, W.

    Thomas, Abel (Carmarthen, E.

    Dilke, Rt. Hon. Sir Charles

    Macnamara, Dr. Thomas J

    Tillett, Louis John

    Dobbie, Joseph

    Mac Veagh, Jeremiah

    Trevelyan, Charles Philips

    Donelan, Captain A.

    M'Crae, George

    Villiers, Ernest Amherst

    Doogan, P. C.

    Markham. Arthur Basil

    Wallace, Robert

    Douglas, Chas. M, (Lanark)

    Murphy, John

    Wason, Eugene (Clackmannan

    Ellice, Capt E. C (S Andr' ws B' ghs

    Nannetti, Joseph P.

    Wason, John Catheart (Orkney

    Evans, Samuel T. (Glarmorgan)

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

    White, Luke (York, E. R.)

    Eve, Harry Trelawney

    O'Brien, K. (Tipperary Mid.)

    Whitley, J. H. (Halifax)

    Fenwick, Charles

    O'Brien, Patrick (Kilkenny)

    Wilson, John (Durham, Mid.

    Ferguson, R. C. Munro (Leith)

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

    Wilson, John (Falkirk)

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

    O'Connor, John (Kildare, N.)

    Flynn, James Christopher

    O'Malley, William

    TELLERS FOR THE AYES—Mr.

    Gladstone, Rt. Hn Herb. John

    O' Mara, James

    Weir and Mr. Ainsworth.

    NOES.

    Agg-Gardner, James Tynte

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

    Egerton, Hn. A. do Tatton

    Agnew, Sir Andrew Noel

    Butcher, John George

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

    Allsopp, Hon. George

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

    Fielden, Edward Brocklehurst

    Anson, Sir William Reynell

    Carson, Rt. Hn. Sir Edw. H.

    Finch, Rt. Hn. George H.

    Arnold-Forster, Rt. Hn. H. O.

    Cautley, Henry Strother

    Finlay, Sir R. B. (Inverness B' ghs.

    Arrol, Sir William

    Cavendish, V. C. W. (Derbyshire)

    Fisher, William Hayes

    Atkinson, Rt. Hn. John

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

    FitzGerald, Sir Robert Penrose

    Aubrey-Fletcher, Rt. Hn. Sir H.

    Chamberlayne, T. (S'thampton

    Flower, Sir Ernest

    Bailey James (Walworth)

    Chapman, Edward

    Forster, Henry William

    Bain, Colonel James Robert

    Coates, Edward Fectham

    Galloway, William Johnson

    Balcarres, Lord

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

    Gardner, Ernest

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

    Coghill, Douglas Harry

    Godson, Sir Augustus Fredk.

    Balfour, Capt. C. B. (Hornsey)

    Corbett, A. Cameron (Glasgow

    Gray, Ernest (West Ham)

    Balfour, Rt. Hn. Gerald W (Leeds

    Craig, Charles Curtis (Antrim, S.

    Green, Walford D. (Wednesbury

    Banbury, Sir Frederick George

    Cross, Alexander (Glasgow)

    Greene, Sir E. W (B'ry S. Edm'nds

    Banner, John S. Harmood-

    Gubitt, HOP. Henry

    Guthrie, Walter Murray

    Bartley, Sir George C. T.

    Dalkeith, Earl of

    Hamilton, Marq of (L'nd'nderry

    Beach, Rt. Hn. Sir Michael Hicks

    Dalrymple, Sir Charles

    Hardy, Laurence (Kent, Ashford

    Bentinck, Lord Henry G.

    Davenport, Wm. Bromley

    Hare, Thomas Leigh

    Bignold, Sir Arthur

    Dickson, Charles Scott

    Haslam, Sir Alfred S.

    Bill, Charles

    Dixon-Hartland, Sir Fred D.

    Hay, Hon. Claude George

    Blundell, Colonel Henry

    Dorington, Rt. Hn. Sir John E

    Heath, Arthur H. (Hanley)

    Bond, Edward

    Douglas, Rt. Hn. A. Akers

    Heath, Sir Jas, (Staffords., N. W.

    Bousfield, Wm. Robert

    Dyke, Rt. Hn. Sir Wm. Hart

    Heaton, John Henniker

    Hermon-Hodge, Sir Robert T.

    Morrison, James Archibald

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

    Hickman, Sir Alfred

    Morton, Arthur H. Aylmer

    Spear, John Ward

    Hozier, Hn. James Henry G.

    Mount, William Arthur

    Stanley, Rt. Hn. Lord (Lanes

    Hudson, George, Bickersteth

    Muntz, Sir Philip A.

    Stirling-Maxwell, Sir John M.

    Jebb, Sir Richard Claverhouse

    Murray, Chas. J. (Coventry)

    Stock, James Henry

    Jeffreys, Rt. Hn. Arthur Fred.

    Myers, William Henry

    Stroyan, John

    Kerr, John

    O'Neill, Hn. Robert Torrens

    Strutt, Hn. Charles Hedley

    Keswick, William

    Percy, Earl

    Talbot, Lord E (Chichester)

    Law, Andrew Bonar (Glasgow)

    Pilkington, Colonel Richard

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

    Lawrence, Sir J. (Monmouth)

    Platt-Higgins, Frederick

    Thornton, Percy M.

    Lawrence, Wm. F. (Liverpool)

    Powell, Sir Francis Sharp

    Tuff, Charles

    Lee, Arthur H. (Hants., Fareham

    Pretyman, Ernest George

    Tuke, Sir John Batty

    Legge, Col. Hon. Heneage

    Purvis Robert

    Walrond, Rt. Hn. Sir Win. H.

    Leveson-Gower, Fredk, N. S.

    Pym, C. Guy

    Warde, Colonel C E.

    Lockwood, Lieut.-Col. A. R.

    Randles, John S.

    Whitmore, Charles Algernon

    Long, Rt. Hn Walter (Bristol, S.

    Renshaw, Sir Charles Bine

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

    Lonsdale, John Brownlee

    Renwick, George

    Wilson, John (Glasgow)

    Lucas, Reginald J (Portsmouth)

    Ritchie, Rt. Hn. C. Thomson

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

    Lyttelton, Rt. Hon. Alfred

    Robertson, Herbert (Hackney

    Wortley, Rt. Hn. C. B. Stuart

    M'Killop, James (Stirlingshire

    Rutherford, John (Lancashire

    Wyadham-Quin, Col. W. H.

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

    Sackville, Col. S. G. Stopford

    Melville, Beresford Valentine

    Sadler, Col. Samuel Alexander

    TELLERS FOR THE NOES—Sir

    Montagu, Hn. J. Scott (Hants)

    Shaw-Stewart, Sir H. (Renfrew

    Alexander Acland-Hood

    Morgan, D. J. (Waithamstow)

    Sloan, Thomas Henry

    and Viscount Valentia.

    Morrell, George Herbert

    Smith, Abel H. (Hertford, East

    Original Question again proposed.
    MR. MUNRO FERGUSONsaid that as the answer of the Lord-Advocate was rather disappointing, both as regarded the working of the Board, and its constitution, and the holding of an inquiry into those matters, he should move a reduction of £500 in respect of the
    grant in aid to the Congested Districts Board.
    Motion made, and Question proposed, "That a sum, not exceeding £10,133, be granted for the said Service."—(Mr. Munro Ferguson.)
    The Committee divided:—Ayes, 82; Noes, 140. (Division List No. 204.)

    AYES.

    Ainsworth, John Stirling

    Hardie, J. Keir (Merthyr Tydvil)

    Parrott, William

    Asher, Alexander

    Harmsworth, R. Leicester

    Pease, J. A. (Saffron Walden)

    Black, Alexander William

    Hayter, Rt. Hn. Sir Arthur D.

    Pirle, Duncan V.

    Bright, Allan Heywood

    Henderson, Arthur (Durham)

    Roberts, John Bryn (Eifion)

    Brown, George M. (Edinburgh)

    Higham, John Sharp

    Russell, T. W.

    Buchanan, Thomas Ryburn

    Hutchinson, Dr. Chas. Fredk.

    Shaw, Thomas (Hawick B.)

    Burke, E. Haviland

    Lamont, Norman

    Sheehan, Daniel Daniel

    Burt, Thomas

    Langley, Batty

    Shipman, Dr. John G.

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

    Lawson, Sir Wilfrid (Cornwall)

    Sinclair, John (Forfarshire)

    Caldwell, James

    Leese, Sir J. F. (Accrington)

    Smith, Samuel (Flint)

    Campbell, John (Armagh, S.)

    Leng, Sir John

    Soares, Ernest J.

    Causton, Richard Knight

    Levy, Maurice

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

    Cheetham, John Frederick

    Lewis, John Herbert

    Sullivan, Donal

    Craig, Robert Hunter (Lanark)

    Lundon, W.

    Taylor, Theodore C. (Radcliffe)

    Delany, William

    Macnamara, Dr. Thomas J.

    Thomas, Abel (Carmarthen, E.

    Dilke, Rt. Hon. Sir Charles

    MacVeagh, Jeremiah

    Trevelyan, Charles Philips

    Dobbie, Joseph

    M'Crae, George

    Villiers, Ernest Amherst

    Donelan, Captain A.

    M'Killop, W. (Sligo, North)

    Wallace, Robert

    Doogan, P. C.

    Markham, Arthur Basil

    Wason, Eugene (Clackmannan

    Douglas, Chas. M. (Lanark)

    Morgan, J. Lloyd (Carmarthen

    Weir, James Galloway

    Ellice, Capt EC (S. Andr'wsB'ghs

    Murphy, John

    White, Luke (York, E. R.)

    Evans, Samuel T. (Glamorgan

    Nannetti, Joseph P.

    Whitley, J. H. (Halifax)

    Eve, Harry Trelawney

    Nolan, Col John P (Galway, N

    Wilson, John (Durham, Mid.)

    Fenwick, Charles

    O'Brien, K (Tipperary Mid)

    Wilson, John (Falkirk)

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

    O'Brien, Patrick (Kilkenny)

    Flynn, James Christopher

    O'Connor, Jas (Wicklow, W)

    TELLERS FOR THE AYES—Mr.

    Goddard, Daniel Ford

    O'Connor, John (Kildare, N.)

    Munro Ferguson and Mr.

    Griffith, Ellis J.

    O'Malley, William

    John Dewar.

    Guest, Hon. Ivor Churchill

    O'Mara, James

    NOES.

    Agg-Gardner, James Tynte

    Anson, Sir William Reyneil

    Atkinson, Rt. Hn. John

    Agnew, Sir Andrew Noel

    Arnold-Fortser, Rt. Hn Hugh O.

    Aubrey-Fletcher, Rt. Hn. Sir H.

    Allsopp, Hon. George

    Arrol, Sir William

    Bailey, James (Walworth

    Bain, Colonel James Robert

    FitzGerald, Sir Robert Penrose

    Murray, Chas. J. (Coventry)

    Balcarres, Lord

    Flower, Sir Ernest

    Myers, William Henry

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

    Forster, Henry William

    O'Neill, Hon. Robert Torrens

    Balfour, Capt. C. B (Hornsey

    Galloway, William Johnson

    Percy, Earl

    Balfour, Rt. Hn. Gerald W (Leeds

    Gardner, Ernest

    Pilkington, Colonel Richard

    Balfour, Sir Frederick George

    Godson, Sir Augustus Fredk.

    Platt-Higgins, Frederick

    Banner, John S. Harmood-

    Gordon, Hn. J. E (Elgin & Nairn

    Powell, Sir Francis Sharp

    Bartley, Sir George C. T.

    Gray, Ernest (West Ham)

    Pretyman, Ernest George

    Beach, Rt. Hn. Sir Michael Hicks

    Green, Walford D.(Wednesbury

    Purvis, Robert

    Bentinck, Lord Henry C.

    Greene, Sir E W (B'ry S Edm'nds

    Pym, G. Guy

    Bignold, Sir Arthur

    Guthrie, Walter Murray

    Randles, John S.

    Bill, Charles

    Hamilton, Marq of (L'nd'nderry

    Renshaw, Sir Charles Bine

    Blundell, Colonel Henry

    Hardy, Laurence (Kent, Ashford

    Renwick, George

    Bond, Edward

    Hare, Thomas Leigh

    Robertson, Herbert (Hackney)

    Bousfield, William Robert

    Haslam, Sir Alfred S.

    Rutherford, John (Lancashire)

    Bowles, Lt.-Col. H F (Middlesex

    Hay, Hon. Claude George

    Sackville, Col. S. G. Stopford

    Butcher, John George

    Heath, Arthur H. (Hanley)

    Sadler, Col. Samuel Alexander

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

    Heath, Sir Jas. (Staffords. N. W.

    Shaw-Stewart, Sir H.(Renfrew

    Carson, Rt. Hn. Sir Edw. H.

    Heaton, John Henniker

    Sloan, Thomas Henry

    Cautley, Henry Strother

    Hickman, Sir Alfred

    Smith, Abel H. (Hertford, East

    Cavendish, V. C. W.(Derbysh.

    Hozier, Hn. James Henry Cecil

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

    Chamberlain, Rt Hn J A (Wore.

    Jebb, Sir Richard Claverhouse

    Spear, John Ward

    Chamberlayne, T. (S'thampton

    Jeffreys, Rt. Hn. Arthur Fred,

    Stanley, Rt. Hon. Lord (Lanes

    Chapman, Edward

    Kerr, John

    Stirling-Maxwell, Sir John M.

    Coates, Edward Feetham

    Keswick, William

    Stock, James Henry

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

    Law, Andrew Bonar(Glasgow)

    Stroyan, John

    Coghill, Douglas Harry

    Lawrence, Sir J. (Monmouth)

    Strutt, Hn. Chas. Hedley

    Corbett, A. Cameron (Glasgow

    Lee, A. H. (Hants., Fareham

    Talbot, Lord E. (Chichester

    Craig, Chas. Curtis (Antrim, S.

    Legge, Col. Hon. Heneage

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

    Gross, Alexander (Glasgow)

    Leveson-Gower, Frederick N. S.

    Thornton. Percy M.

    Cubitt, Hon. Henry

    Lockwood, Lieut.- Col. A. R.

    Tuff, Charles

    Dalkeith, Earl of

    Long, Rt. Hn. Walter (Bristol, S

    Tuke, Sir John Batty

    Dalrymple, Sir Charles

    Lonsdale, John Brownlee

    Turnour, Viscount

    Davenport, William Bromley

    Lucas, Reginald J. (Portsm'th

    Walrond, Rt. Hn. Sir Win. H.

    Dickson, Charles Scott

    Maconochie, A. W.

    Warde, Colonel C. E.

    Dixon-Hartland, Sir Fred D.

    M'Killop, Jas. (Stirlingshire)

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

    Dorington, Rt. Hn. Sir John E.

    Maxwell Rt. Hn Sir H E(Wigt'n

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

    Douglas, Rt. Hn. A. Akers-

    Melville, Beresford Valentine

    Wilson, John (Glasgow)

    Dyke, Rt. Hn. Sir Wm. Hart

    Montagu, Hon. J. Scott (Hants)

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

    Egerton, Hon. A. de Tatton

    Morgan, D. J. (Walthamstow

    Wortley, Rt. Hn. C. B. Stuart

    Forgusson, Rt. Hn. Sir J. (Mancr

    Morrell, George Herbert

    Wyndham-Quin, Col. W. H.

    Fielden, Edward Brocklehurst

    Morrison, James Archibald

    Finch, Rt. Hn. George H.

    Morton, Arthur H. Aylmer

    TELLERS FOR THE NOES—Sir

    Finlay, Sir R. B (lnv'rn'ss B'ghs

    Mount, William Arthur

    Alexander Acland-Hood and

    Fisher, William Hayes

    Muntz, Sir Philip A.

    Viscount Valentia.

    Original Question, put and agreed to.

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

    EVENING SITTING.
    SUPPLY [11TH 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 £9,005, be
    1404
    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 Local Government Board for Scotland (8 and 9 Vie., c. 83; 52 and 53 Vic., c. 50; 57 and 58 Vic., c. 58; 60 and 61 Vic., c. 38; and various other statutes)."
    MR. EUGENE WASONsaid he moved to reduce this Vote because he did not think the Scottish Local Government Board had done what it ought and might have done with reference to the obtaining of allotments for all parts of Scotland. The Parish Councils Act for Scotland which was passed in 1894. and in which was incorporated the Allotment Act for

    1405
    Scotland, gave power to parish councils to acquire land by agreement for the purposes of granting allotments. If they were unable to obtain land they lad a right to call on the county councils to put the proper machinery in motion, if after inquiry they saw fit to do so, to ensure allotments being granted, and should the county council refuse to do so then they could call upon the Local Government Board for Scotland, which had power to acquire land compulsorily for the purpose of granting allotments. They tad all hoped that the Parish Councils Act of 1894 would have changed the whole face of rural Scotland, but although there had been a great many applications for allotments he could not find from the Returns which had been granted to him in reference to this matter (and this it was to which he wished to direct particular attention) that the Local Government Board had put their compulsory powers into force in one single instance. Leaving out the crofting counties there was only one county in Scotland that had succeeded in obtaining allotments, the county of Wigtonshire. If the Act of 1894 had been administered sympathetically, and if the Local Government Board had done their duty and put pressure on the county councils, the allotments which were so much desired in Scotland would have been obtained, but nothing had been done and he moved the reduction which stood in his name upon the Paper in order to call attention to that fact. Everybody deplored the migration of the population to the towns, and he knew that in Ayrshire it would be almost impossible to get in the harvest now if it were not for the labour which came from Ireland. He hoped the Lord-Advocate would be able to give some explanation of the reasons why the Local Government Board had not done anything with regard to this matter. He begged to move that the Vote be reduced by £100.
    Motion made, and Question proposed, "That a sum, not exceeding £9,805, be granted for the said Service."—(Mr. Eugene Wason.)
    MR. MUNRO FERGUSONsaid the question raised by the hon. Member was
    1406
    a very interesting one, and not less interesting because of the fact that the question of allotments in Scotland was rather different to that in this country. The farm servants of Scotland were not so accustomed to the use of allotments as they were in some parts of this country; but in the villages, at all events, there was a good opportunity for the utilisation of the soil in this way. If the Government really wished to extend allotments in Scotland, they would have to approach the subject in various ways. In the first place some stimulus would have to be given to the people themselves to cultivate the soil in this manner. They were not so handy in the cultivation of small patches of soil as were the people of England, and would therefore have to be trained. An extraordinary variety of vegetables was grown in the allotment garden of this country, while the variety grown in Scotland was extremely limited. He believed a good deal might be done by instruction in the schools to tarn the attention of people to the cultivation of small pitches of land, thus giving them a healthy occupation and affording a stimulus for rural life. Then again, while some landlords wore ready and willing to grant allotments voluntarily, others were indifferent and took no interest in the subject, and under those circumstances it was desirable that the local authorities should have some practical knowledge of how to act. They were not so able in Scotland to deal with questions of this kind as in England, owing to their having no knowledge, therefore he thought in connection with the Local Government Board and the Board of Agriculture experts should be available to give advice to local authorities in order to facilitate the carrying out of such a scheme as that to which his hon. friend had drawn attention. Many local authorities could not carry out the provisions of the Allotments or Small Holdings Act, because from want of knowledge, they were not competent to do so. It was a very great pity to see the great farm system of agriculture brought up to the very houses of the towns and villages of Scotland without there being any attempt made to utilise the soil in those towns and villages in the shape of gardens and allotments. He did not think that the

    1407
    Local Government Board had done much to help Scotland in that regard.
    He complained that the constitution of the Local Government Board had not been kept up to date in order to meet the altered conditions of the times. In the matter of pollution of the air and water, for instance, the inspectorship was under the Scottish Office, and he contended that if the Local Government Board were to control the action of the local authorities with regard to pollution, they would be more directly concerned than they were at present with the administration of the Act. There were many aggravated cases of pollution which were very bad for public health, but the Local Government Board had no power to compel those responsible for that pollution to abate the nuisance. In point of fact, the Local Government Board was unable adequately to discharge its functions for want of sufficient powers. Some of the parish councils had suggested that the Local Government Board should convene an annual conference of the parish councils, and there was no doubt that that suggestion was a good one, as it would, if carried out, bring the Local Government Board into closer touch with the local authorities throughout Scotland, and would enable it to give useful information and guidance to the local authorities when they had to deal with large and pressing questions, such as the unemployed. He did not think that the Local Government Board was quite efficient in regard to the auditing of accounts. Allowances were sometimes given on their retirement from the public service to men who were not worthy of them. He mentioned this to show the necessity of a rigorous audit, and he thought it would be a great advantage if the auditing of the accounts of all local authorities was done under a thoroughly reliable system. He did not wish to enlarge upon this subject, but he could not help thinking that after education had been dealt with there was no question of greater interest than that of perfecting the control of local self-government. Most of the great authorities knew very little indeed about central control. There should be no longer any difficulty in attaching responsibility to proper persons in a case of a serious outbreak of
    1408
    preventable disease, but that was where hitherto the central authority had failed. Although the right hon. Gentleman was not in favour of inquiry, he would venture to suggest once more that there was room for inquiry into the working of the Local Government Board in Scotland, and as to how it should be brought into closer relations with the different local authorities and made more efficient.
    MR. MACONOCHIEsaid he differed from the hon. Member for Mid-Lanark, who stated that they had more money in Scotland than they knew what to do with. Very few men over the border would agree with the hon. Member, for there were many parts of Scotland where they would be glad to have more money to expend for public purposes. The system followed in many parts of Scotland was for the farm worker to receive so much meal and potatoes from his employer, but he did not know that that was as satisfactory as the system of allotments in England, and he was sure that anything that could be done to promote the system of allotments in Scotland would be very much appreciated. As to the administration of the Poor Law, he maintained that it would bear comparison in Scotland with anything of the kind in England. He did not think any man in the House would stand up and say that there was any business in the country which could not be improved. No doubt the Local Government Board in Scotland could be improved, and he should he very proud if anything could be done to enable it to assist the people of Scotland, but if they expected to do it in a moment, without any notice whatever, he did not think they would be very successful in what they wanted to obtain. He did not know that in regard to the unemployed in Scotland there was very much to complain of. There was a certain amount of want of employment in some districts, but he did not think that was due to the action of the capitalists or the workmen. So far as the people in the North were concerned, the only thing they wanted was the opportunity of earning money. As to the question of consumption, he did not think it was disputed that that disease was infectious. In most localities infectious diseases

    1409
    hospitals had been erected. If any English Member would take the trouble to visit Scotland and examine the methods of Poor Law administration and hospital management he would admit that for every twenty shillings expended the value of a sovereign was obtained. He did not think it was fair to twit the local bodies in Scotland with extravagance.
    MR. BLACKsaid that one result of the pressure brought to bear on the parish councils by the Local Government Board was that the number of paupers in the poorhouses had very much increased. In 1868 the total number of paupers in Scotland with their dependents was 130,441, and of these the total number in the poorhouses was 8,774. From a Blue-book recently published it appeared that the total number of paupers in 1904 was 91,240, and of these there were in the poorhouses 12,827. The children who were boarded out, and who for the purpose of comparison could not be reckoned as outdoor paupers, numbered 6,455, making the total number of indoor paupers 19,282. He agreed that excellent results were being obtained from the system of boarding out children. He would remind English Members that in Scotland there was no need to offer the house as a test of the bona fides of the applicants for relief because in that country a man, in order to be entitled to poor relief, must be either a lunatic, or over sixty-five years of age. What was the result of the continuous pressure brought to bear on the Poor Law authorities to put people in the house rather than give them relief outside? The test of a successful inspector of poor was that he should have no outdoor people at all, and that all paupers should be in the house. He knew of a case of a widow with four sons who was refused outdoor relief, and had to go into the house. How much better it would have been from the point of view of keeping the population on the land if that poor widow had been allowed to keep her own home and bring up her family! He was sure that cases of that kind could be multiplied throughout the country. Was it really wise policy that the present system should be continued? If that was true in regard to the ordinary
    1410
    adult, it was doubly true in regard to the aged. This Government came into office in 1885 on a promise to give old-age pensions, but instead of fulfilling that promise they had pursued the system of forcing poor people into the house. It was lamentable that these old people should be forced into the house and compelled to stay there. It was a state of matters which was not creditable and the system ought to be revised. It was sometimes argued that the old people were better looked after in the house than they would be in their own homes. But, after all, that was a matter for the poor people themselves. He was not putting forward the statement that they were not well cared for in the poorhouse, but if they preferred to stay outside why should not arrangements be made which would enable them to do so? While indoor paupers cost £9 9s. 2d, outdoor relief only cost £6 11s. per head, so that neither economy nor goodness of heart was on the side of the Local Government Board.
    SIR HUGH SHAW-STEWARTsaid he did not think the mover or the seconder of the Amendment had adduced any argument why the Local Government Board should be censured in regard to the question of allotments. If censure was to be passed anywhere it was upon the Scottish people who had not demanded allotments.
    MR. EUGENE WASON: But they have.
    SIR HUGH SHAW-STEWARTsaid the hon. Member had recited a list of counties where the demand had come from, but he thought that, excluding the crofting counties, there were only three or four.
    MR. EUGENE WASONsaid there were twelve or fourteen counties, and he lived in one of them.
    SIR HUGH SHAW-STEWARTsaid the county the demand came from most was Wigtonshire, where it was admitted the matter had been fully dealt with. The hon. Member opposite would agree

    1411
    with him that the demand for allotments had been infinitely small in Scotland as compared with England. He wished there was a greater demand for allotments in Scotland. Who were most likely to wish for allotments in Scotland? The population of that country might be divided into the extremely rural and the entirely urban. The extremely rural population did not want to spend its spare time in digging gardens. That population consisted chiefly of farm labourers who worked hard all day and wanted something else to do than digging gardens at the end of their day's work. It was different in the towns. It would be a wholesome and a happy thing if those engaged in urban occupations turned their attention and their energy to working in gardens in the evening. But in the case of burghs and cities the providing of allotments, in his opinion, fell more within the province of the burgh and city authorities. He suggested to hon. Members opposite that it would be a very good thing to induce the urban population to engage in gardening, but he did not think their Bill for the taxation of land values was one that was very likely to assist their efforts.
    MR. FINDLAYsaid he wished to emphasise what had been said in regard to the administration of the Poor Law. It was quite true that in many cases it was well to offer the "house" instead of outdoor relief. At the same time there were instances where that involved hardship. He mentioned a case which recently came within his own knowledge of a widow with four young children, who on making application for relief was only granted 7s. 6d. a week. The case was brought before the Local Government Board, which expressed sympathy in the matter, but took no steps to enforce its own recommendation. There being no other power to compel the local board to increase the allowance, the woman was offered the poorhouse, but did not accept it. He thought hon. Members would agree that the allowance which was granted was not in any way adequate for such a case, and that every consideration, patriotic or otherwise, showed that in the case of a widow with four children who was trying to keep her
    1412
    home together and to maintain independence, which so many Scottish, people cherished, there should be some power which could intervene in order that proper outdoor provision should be made for deserving cases. He urged that in future better arrangements should be made for dealing with such cases. In this special case the treatment which was given to the widow was very unfeeling.
    MR. JOHN WILSONsaid that in regard to Poor Law administration in Scotland there was no fault to be found with the local authorities or the Local Government Board. It would be a great mistake if the Local Government Board were to interfere in all the cases where people might feel dissatisfied with the action of the local authorities.
    MR. WEIRsaid that the people in Ross-shire were badly in want of allotments, but they did not get them. He thought that the suggestion of the hon. Member for Clackmannan was an excellent one, namely, that something should be done to give the people in the remoter districts light and leading in this matter. They were anxious to get allotments attached to their cottages on which they might be able to grow vegetables. Under the Act passed in 1894 the Local Government Board in Scotland was empowered to employ medical inspectors. He had asked for a medical inspector for the Island of Lewis, but the Answer given him was that there was only one medical inspector in the whole of Scotland. Now, Ireland, with a smaller population than Scotland, had seven medical inspectors. The Island of Lewis had been grossly neglected by the Local Government Board of Scotland. Within the last few days he had been informed that one of His Majesty's inspectors of schools had been instructed to report, in conjunction with a local medical officer of health, on the sanitary condition of some of the schools in Lewis. During the year 1903 as many as 127 schools were closed in the Crofting Counties for periods of one to four months owing to epidemics. There were fifty-three schools on the mainland of Ross and Cromarty alone,

    1413
    and of these forty had no water supply laid on, and in many of the schools the ventilation was bad. He asked the right hon. and learned Gentleman to insist on the Local Government Board arranging for a proper supply of water in the schools, efficient ventilation, and an improvement in the other sanitary arrangements. He hoped, indeed, that the Local Government Board would give more attention than they had hitherto impossible for one medical inspector to a efficiently inspect the schools in the Highlands, much less the schools of the whole country. The result of this neglect of thorough inspection by the Local Government Board was that epidemics had broken out, and that many schools had been closed from one to four months in the year. It was most unfair to the children that, for lack of proper sanitary arrangements, the schools should be shut up in this manner for so long; and he trusted that there would be a thorough inquiry into the whole matter. It was most undesirable that children in remote country districts—some of them as young as five years of age—should be compelled to traverse wild and rugged moors in stormy weather to attend these schools. Many of these children were often without food and had to sit for hours in wet clothes. Surely something should be done to ameliorate these conditions, and that school boards in the Crofting area should have the power to extend the age for attendance at school from five to seven.
    MR. SCOTT DICKSONsaid the Local Government Board had nothing to do with that.
    MR. WEIRsaid that this was a matter of hearth, and it was the duty of the Local Government Board to see that proper sanitary precautions were taken and that a supply of water was laid on to every school. The old sleepy system was being carried on by the Local Government Board. He had brought the question of uncertified deaths in
    1414
    the Highlands of Scotland before the House on previous occasions. He was glad to say that there had been a slight improvement of late; but the state of things was still one which would not be tolerated in this country. There were not sufficient doctors in the Island of Lewis. Some time since, on visiting a manse in the island, he found the minister ill. Fortunately he had a London physician, with him, otherwise it would have been necessary to send to Stornoway, forty-five miles distant, for a doctor. No wonder that under such circumstances there were so many uncertified deaths in the Highlands. Then as to the question of vaccination, the use of humanised lymph taken from the arms of children had been abolished in this country, yet it was tolerated in the Highlands. The use of humanised lymph had been condemned by the highest medical authorities, and he insisted that it should be absolutely abolished; and that a sufficient supply of glycerinated calf lymph should be provided by the Local Government Board, not only to all parochial doctors, but to every medical practitioner who wished to purchase it.
    MR. CHARLES DOUGLASsaid he wished to urge the desirability of the Local Government Board initiating some degree of common action amongst bodies such as the Prison Commissioners and the Lunacy Board. One of the greatest difficulties and hardships of those engaged in unskilled labour arose from the presence among them of people who were unable to maintain themselves and who constituted a perpetual difficulty in the labour market, and were a drag upon more capable and industrious persons. The time had come when some systematic way of dealing with this population should be adopted at central headquarters, because it could not be done by anyone else. The Government ought to try to devise some more systematic way of dealing with those particular sections of the community. There was another matter upon which the Local Government Board for

    1415
    Scotland had been somewhat remiss—he alluded to the attitude they had taken up towards the desire of the municipalities of Scotland to have some full and careful consultation in regard to the treatment of the unemployed. It was most desirable that when a crisis was not acute they should consider carefully what measures ought to be taken to deal with such crises as that which occurred last winter, and which might recur next winter. The local authorities had their own views as to the steps which ought to be taken. They desired to consult the Local Government Board and to hold conferences with them upon the subject in order that they might consider the various aspects of the question. It was regrettable that such an opportunity had been allowed to slip by. There ought to be special consultations between the local administrators and the Local Government Board in order that they might be prepared to deal with important problems like this. He was sure that the Local Government Board would increase its usefulness if it would place itself in closer relation with the other boards and local authorities in order to thresh out these questions when the opportunity offered.
    MR. KEIR HARDIEasked whether the Local Government Board of Scotland did not intend to issue a circular on the treatment of the unemployed analogous to that which had been issued in England. In Scotland nothing whatever had been done and no advice or guidance had been given by the Local Government Board. Although responsible authorities and great municipalities like Glasgow, Aberdeen, Leith, and other places had met together in conference and agreed to send representatives to the Scottish Office on
    1416
    this question they had been practically ignored. He hoped that they would have some assurance from the Lord-Advocate that some measure, equivalent to the one now before the House, dealing with the unemployed question in Scotland would be promoted by the Local Government Board, so that when the winter came on and the unemployed question became acute the local authorities would be in a better position to deal with the distress. The Local Government Board would not do its duty if it did not also, in Scotland, take the same action as had been taken in England with regard to the underfeeding of school children. A joint circular had been issued by the Local Government Board and the Education Department in England pointing out to the local authorities and the boards of guardians that they were jointly responsible for making provision for destitute and hungry children. The need for doing this was quite as urgent in Scotland as in England. He was aware that the law in Scotland was more restricted than in England, but he felt that if the Local Government Board would exert itself and approach this question in the same sympathetic spirit as had characterised the recent attempt of the Local Government Board for England and Wales, more could be done than had been done up to the present, and the people of Scotland would not feel that they had been neglected and that England and Wales had been given favoured treatment.
    MR. SCOTT DICKSONsaid he noticed in the Returns with regard to allotments for 1902 such entries as—
    "the parish council did not consider that there was any general demand for allotments in the parish,"

    1417
    and—
    "the county council resolved not to take proceedings, and the parish council acquiesced in this decison."
    These particular entries were from Ayrshire, but they were typical of the whole country. He thought they showed that there was no great desire for allotments on the part of the people of Scotland. The Local Government Board would be glad to see the Allotments Act put more into operation, and, therefore, they were quite willing to issue to the parish councils a circular calling attention to the matter if it were thought calculated to increase the distribution of allotments.
    The hon. Member for Leith had spoken of the powers of the Local Government Board with regard to preventing pollution. At the time when he was a member of the Local Government Board he remembered that some very serious questions were raised upon the question of pollution in one of the counties with which the hon. Member was specially connected, and he could assure the Committee that it was no easy matter under the present law to deal with the question, and it was certainly not an economical process to bring the law into operation. The powers of the Local Government Board in regard to this question were very limited, and they were anxious to do everything possible to secure an improvement. The Local Government Board had done their best in the matter, and he was sure that the local authorities quite appreciated the situation and were ready to second their efforts with a view to obtaining some amelioration of the state of things existing at the present time. With reference to what had been said about auditing, that was a very thorny question, and he
    1418
    was afraid that the efforts of the Local Government Board to secure an effective audit were not always appreciated. The Local Government Board, however, had been consistent in this matter, and in many respects they had been able to bring about a better state of things than previously existed.
    With regard to the general question of Poor Law administration which had been raised by the hon. Member for Banffshire, he thought that the suggestion that there had been an inordinate increase in the number of aged poor in the workhouses was not based upon information that was accurate. But even if the suggestion were well founded, it was evidence of improvement in the administration of the workhouses in Scotland. In his view it would be better for the aged poor to be in the workhouses, where they would be properly attended to, than left outside often alone and unattended. The hon. Member for Cromarty complained that there was only one medical inspector. That was true. But, so far as the Local Government Board were aware, one medical inspector was able sufficiently to discharge the duties that fell upon him, and there was no justification for appointing additional medical inspectors. An investigation was being made in regard to the water supply of the particular schools in which the hon. Member was interested with a view to seeing whether any change was necessary, and whether, if a change was necessary, it could be carried out at a reasonable cost. The Local Government Board were most anxious to secure the services of an additional number of medical men in the Highland districts, and efforts had been made to improve the condition of things in that respect. The Local Government

    1419
    Board were doing everything that was possible to secure that burial grounds that ought to be closed should be closed and to induce the local authorities to provide new burial grounds and thus remove ground for complaint.
    With regard to vaccination, they were not troubled with the conscientious objector in Scotland.
    MR. WEIRsaid there could be no such person as a conscientious objector in Scotland. The parents must either allow their children to be vaccinated or go to gaol.
    MR. SCOTT DICKSON: In Scotland a few vaccinators still asked for humanised lymph, of which a small supply was always available. He found that in the Report of the Local Government Board for 1904 they stated that the proportion of humanised lymph remained about the same as before. The figures for the hon. Member's own county were calf lymph 514, humanised lymph 21; and for all Scotland the figures were calf lymph 3,085, and humanised lymph 154. Some parents preferred humanised lymph, and the Local Government Board desired to fall in with the views of the parents.
    The hon. Member for North-West Lanark had suggested that the Local Government Board ought to assist co-operation among the various boards. That was a matter that could not be brought about without legislation. So far as the treatment of the unemployed question and the feeding of children were concerned, the Scottish Local Government Board had nothing like the powers that the English Local Government Board possessed. But in regard to the question of the
    1420
    unemployed, adequate provision had been made in the past by the voluntary efforts of the large local authorities concerned. The Local Government Board appreciated the importance of the question, and had no idea of losing sight of it. The feeding of children was a matter entirely beyond their power under the Act of 1894, but it was a question that would receive, as it deserved, their most careful consideration.
    MR. WEIRasked for an explanation with regard to the salary of the medical inspector, which, according to the Estimates, appeared to have decreased in amount instead of rising by the sum of the annual increment of £25.
    MR. CALDWELLpointed out that the Reports of the Local Government Board gave the percentage of paupers, indoor and outdoor together, of sixty-five years of age and upwards as 39·8; there were also 7,433 children, and 26,233, or 46·8 per cent., between the ages of fourteen, and sixty-five. The test of the poorhouse was applied particularly to the old people, in order to secure support for them from their families. It was not applied to men unwilling to work, because, according to the law of Scotland, men who were able to work were not entitled to relief. Personally, when connected with the administration of the Poor Law, he had always endeavoured to have as few people as possible in the poorhouse. There were doubtless cases in which, through the inability of persons to look after themselves and the absence of relatives to do for them, it was better that poorhouse relief should be given, but as a rule the poorhouse was not resorted to under good administration

    1421
    except in special cases. He hoped the Lord-Advocate would see that future Reports of the Board of Supervision gave fuller statistics as to the ages of people in the poorhouse, so that it could be more easily seen whether the aged inmates were increasing in number. One reason why a larger number of aged poor might be expected in the poorhouse was the increasing difficulty experienced by old people in obtaining employment. Formerly partially disabled or aged persons did certain light work, or odd jobs, for which they received a few shillings a week, and were thus able to keep out of the poorhouse, but now all labour was in the hands of the able-bodied between the ages of eighteen and forty-five or so, and full trade-union rate of wages had to be paid. That being so, a state of things was arising in connection with these old people who were able to do a certain amount of work, which would have to be dealt with. He believed the local boards, with the sanction of the Department were relaxing the rigidity of the law, and, therefore, he failed to see why the Lord-Advocate should be so unsympathetic and refuse to meet a conference on the subject.
    MR. SCOTT DICKSONsaid the explanation asked for by the hon. Member for Ross and Cromarty was that a fresh appointment had been made, and naturally the newly-appointed official started at a lower salary than had been paid to his predecessor. With regard to the aged poor, his point was that he could not find any figures enabling him to say whether there had been an increase in the number of the indoor paupers is the figures given drew no distinction between indoor and outdoor. But, so
    1422
    far as the figures went, they did not justify the suggestion that there was any increase in the proportion of indoor paupers. The difficulty experienced by old men in getting employment might point in that direction, but the figures showed that in regard to all paupers, indoor and out, there was a diminution in the number over sixty-five years of age. The percentages were: in 1901, 42·37; in 1902, 42·72; in 1903, 42·16; and in 1904, 39·87; the actual numbers for the same years being 32,157, 32,017, 32,139, and 32,331 respectively.
    MR. BLACK: There is an actual increase.
    MR. SCOTT DICKSONsaid that taking the growth of pauperism and the growth of the population there was a net decrease in the number of paupers over sixty five-years of age. He repudiated the suggestion of want of sympathy put forward by the hon. Member for Mid-Lanark. He regarded the question as one of great gravity which would have to be considered and dealt with sympathetically, and there was no desire on the part of the Local Government Board to avoid the consideration of the matter.
    MR. MUNRO FERGUSONsaid that in times of depression in Scotland, as in England, works were hastily improvised for the relief of the unemployed, in connection with which the money spent might frequently be better employed and the labour directed into more useful channels. Attempts had been made to deal with such emergencies elsewhere

    1423
    and he thought it very desirable that the Local Government Board in Scotland should study the efforts which had been made with a view to being better able to deal with any emergency that might arise.
    MR.SCOTT DICKSONsaid that that idea had not been lost sight of by the Local Government Board.
    Question put.
    The Committee divided:—Ayes, 59; Noes, 114, (Division List No. 205.)

    AYES.

    Abraham, William (Cork, N.E.)

    Ferguson, R.C. Munro (Leith)

    Pirie, Duncan V.

    Ainsworth, John Stirling

    Griffith, Ellis J.

    Roberts, John Bryn (Eifion)

    Asher, Alexander

    Hardie, J.Keir (Merthyr Tydvil

    Runciman, Walter

    Bright, Allan Heywood

    Henderson, Arthur (Durham)

    Shaw, Charles Edw. (Stafford)

    Brown, George M (Edinburgh)

    Higham, John Sharp

    Shaw, Thomas (Hawick B.)

    Bryce, Rt. Hon. James

    Hutchinson, Dr. Chas. Fredk.

    Sheehan, Daniel Daniel

    Buchanan, Thomas Ryburn

    Jones, Leif (Appleby)

    Shipman, Dr. John G.

    Buxton,N.E (York NR. Whitby)

    Lamont, Norman

    Sinclair, John (Forfarshire)

    Caldwell, James

    Lawson, Sir Wilfrid (Cornwall)

    Sullivan, Donal

    Campbell, John (Armagh, S.)

    Layland-Barratt, Francis

    Taylor, Theodore C. (Radcliffe)

    Cheetham, John Frederick

    Lough, Thomas

    Tennant, Harold John

    Craig, Robert Hunter (Lanark)

    Lundon, W.

    Thomas, David A. (Merthyr)

    Cremer, William Randal

    MacVeagh, Jeremiah

    Villiers, Ernest Amherst

    Delany, William

    M'Crae, George

    Weir, James Galloway

    Dewar, John A. (Inverness-sh.

    Morgan, J. Lloyd (Carmarthen

    White, Luke (York, E. R.)

    Dobbie, Joseph

    Murphy, John

    Whitley, J. H. (Halifax)

    Doogan, P. C.

    Nannetti, Joseph P.

    Wilson, John (Falkirk)

    Douglas, Chas. M. (Lanark)

    O'Brien, K. (Tipperary Mid.)

    Ellice, Capt EC(S Andrws'Bghs

    O'Brien, Patrick (Kilkenny)

    TELLERS FOR THE AYES—Mr.

    Evans, Samuel T (Glamorgan)

    O'Connor, John (Kildare, N.

    Eugene Wason and Mr.

    Eve, Harry Trelawney

    Pease, J. A. (Saffron Walden)

    Black.

    NOES.

    Agg-Gardner, James Tynte

    Davenport, William Bromley

    Majendie, James A. H.

    Agnew, Sir Andrew Noel

    Dickson, Charles Scott

    Maxwell, Rt HnSirH.E. (Wigt'n

    Anson, Sir William Reynell

    Douglas, Rt. Hn. A. Akers

    Montagu, Hn. J. Scott (Hants)

    Arnold-Forster, Rt. HuHwgh O.

    Dyke, Rt Hn. Sir Wm. Hart

    Morgan, D. J. (Walthamstow)

    Arrol, Sir William

    Fergusson, Rt. Hn Sir J (Manc'r

    Morrell, George Herbert

    Atkinson, Rt. Hon. John

    Fielden, Edward Brockclehurst

    Morrison, James Archibald

    Bain, Col. James Robert

    Finch, Rt. Hn. George H.

    Mount, William Arthur

    Balcarres, Lord

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

    Mowbray, Sir Robert Gray C.

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

    Fisher, William Hayes

    Murray, Chas. J. (Coventry)

    Balfour, Capt. C. B. (Hornsey

    Forster, Henry William

    Murray, Col. Wyndham (Bath)

    Balfour,Rt Hn Gerald W(Leeds

    Gardner, Ernest

    Nicholson, William Graham

    Banbury, Sir Frederick George

    Godson, Sir Augustus Fredk.

    Percy, Earl

    Banner, John S. Harmood-

    Gordon, Hn. J. E (Elgin & Nairn

    Plummer, Sir Walter R.

    Beach, RtHn Sir Michael Hicks

    Goschen, Hn. George Joachim

    Pretyman, Ernest George

    Bentinck, Lord Henry C.

    Gray, Ernest (West Ham)

    Purvis, Robert

    Bhownaggrce, Sir M. M.

    Greene, Henry D. (Shrewsbury

    Randles, John S.

    Bignold, Sir Arthur

    Hamilton,Marq of L'nd'nderry

    Renshaw, Sir Charles Bine

    Bill, Charles

    Hardy, L. (Kent, Ashford)

    Renwick, George

    Blundell, Colonel Henry

    Hare, Thomas Leigh

    Robertson, Herbert (Hackney)

    Bond, Edward

    Heath, Arthur Howard (Hanley

    Round, Rt. Hon. James

    Brodrick, Rt. Hn. St. John

    Heath, Sir Jan. (Staffords. NW

    Rutherford, John (Lancashire)

    Carson, Rt. Hn. Sir Edw. H.

    Hermon-Hodge, Sir Robert T.

    Rutherford, W. W. (Liverpool)

    Cavendish, V. C. W. (Derbysh.

    Jebb, Sir Richard Claverhouse

    Sackville, Col. S G. Stopford

    Cecil, Evelyn (Aston Manor)

    Jeffreys, Rt. Hn. Arthur Fred

    Sadler, Col. Samuel Alexander

    Cecil, Lord Hugh (Greenwich)

    Kennaway, Rt. Hn. Sir J. H.

    Shaw-Stewart, Sir H.(Renfrew

    Chamberlain, Rt.HnJ A (Wore.

    Kerr, John

    Skewes-Cox, Thomas

    Chapman, Edward

    Keswick, William

    Smith, Abel H. (Hertford,East

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

    Law, Andrew Bonar (Glasgow

    Smith,Rt HnJ Parker (Lanarks

    Coghill, Douglas Harry

    Lawrence, Wm. F. (Liverpool)

    Spear, John Ward

    Cook, Sir Frederick Lucas

    Lee,Arthur H.(Hants,Fareham

    Stanley, Rt. Hn. Lord (Lancs.)

    Corbett, A. Cameron (Glasgow

    Long, Rt Hn Walter (Bristol, S.

    Stock, James Henry

    Corbett, T. L. (Down, North)

    Lucas, Reginald J (Portsmouth

    Cross, Alexander (Glasgow)

    Lyttelton, Rt. Hon. Alfred

    Stroyan, John

    Dalkeith, Earl of

    M'Arthur, Charles (Liverpool

    Talbot, Lord E (Chichester)

    Dalrymple, Sir Charles

    M'Killop, James (Stirlingshire

    Tomlinson, Sir Wm. Edw. M.

    Tuff, Charles

    Welby, Sir Chas G. E (Notts

    TELLERS FOR THE NOES—Sir

    Tuke, Sir John Batty

    Whiteley, H. (Ashton undLyne

    Alexander Acland-Hood

    Turnour, Viscount

    Wilson, A. Stanley (York, E. R

    and Viscount Valentia.

    Walrond, Rt. Hn. Sir Win. H.

    Wilson, John (Glasgow)

    Warde, Colonel C. E.

    Wylie, Alexander

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

    CLASS IV.
    Motion made, and Question proposed "That a sum, not exceeding £1,047,290, 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 Public Education in Scotland, and for Science and Art in Scotland, including a Grant in Aid."
    MR. MCCRAEmoved a reduction of the Vote by £100 in order to call attention to the Minute of the Education Department dealing with the training of teachers. He asked for information as to denominational teaching in colleges, and contended that the representation of the Edinburgh School Board on the committee established by the Minute should at least be six members instead of three as at present. He wished particularly to bring before the notice of the Lord-Advocate the method by which this committee had been appointed. He thought the claim put forward by the Education Department that they had power to arrange for the transference of property from certain organisations to this committee was an extraordinary one. By doing this the Department were not only ignoring Parliament but they were claiming a right which this House ought to inquire into most carefully before they allowed the Department to exercise it. The Department took this course and laid the Minute on the Table of this House,
    1426
    and hon. Members had had no opportunity whatever of drawing attention to it, although an ample opportunity had been given for its discussion in another place. He wished to ask the Lord-Advocate under what statute the Education Department for Scotland had the powers which they had arrogated to themselves in regard to this question? With regard to the principle involved in the establishment of this committee under the Minute there was a general agreement in Scotland. He thought it was a step in the right direction, and he had no hesitation in saying that the principle upon which they had proceeded was a right one. He wished to point out that the colleges which it was proposed to take over were denominational, and he understood that after the committee had taken them over they were still to remain denominational. That was contrary to the spirit of the time in Scotland, and he hoped the Lord-Advocate would give them some information as to how it was proposed to continue this system. He wished to know what they intended to do after the Education Bill was passed if the provincial councils were established? Would the committee now established be swallowed up or would it remain as a separate entity? The great desire was in favour of co-ordination, and the provincial councils ought to superintend the training of the teachers. He did not think that the representation given to Edinburgh upon this committee was sufficient. Whether they took population as their basis or the number of teachers employed in grant-earning

    1427
    schools the proportion of representation Edinburgh was concerned was entirely disproportionate. Edinburgh had a population of 316,000 and 748 teachers, and yet it only had three members on this committee. It could not be overlooked that Edinburgh would really be the training ground for the teachers, and he thought it was entitled to a more reasonable representation, and they claimed that Edinburgh ought really to have six members on this committee. At any rate, the Universities had five representatives and the least that should be given to Edinburgh was five. He begged to move.
    Motion made, and Question proposed, "That a sum, not exceeding £1,047,190, be granted for the said Service."—(Mr. McCrae.)
    SIR ANDREW AGNEWhoped the Lord-Advocate would see his way to give Edinburgh a little better representation on the committee. The School Board of Edinburgh contended that their views would not be adequately represented by only three representatives, and he thought they were quite right in this contention. Whatever test was taken, whether the population served by the board, size, the importance of the schools, or the number of teachers employed, Edinburgh was entitled to a larger representation. But there was a still stronger reason. In this Minute it was laid down as a condition of making the Parliamentary grant that the school boards should provide the students being trained as teachers with proper facilities for practice in teaching in their schools. Another clause laid down that classes for these students were to be held in towns
    1428
    where a University or part of a University was situate. It was, therefore, obvious that nearly all the students who were trained by the Edinburgh Committee would have to learn the art of teaching in the board schools of Edinburgh. That being the case, it was surely right that the School Board of Edinburgh should have a more liberal representation on this committee. He thought that under these circumstances the School Board of Edinburgh had made out a strong case for an increase in their representation.
    MR. BRYCEcommented on the large proportion of elementary school teachers who had taken University degrees in Scotland, and said this had largely contributed to the efficiency of education. The accessibility of the Scottish Universities had been increased by the gift of Mr. Carnegie. Perhaps the Lord-Advocate would explain why is was that the denominational character of the training colleges was retained. It was not necessary, nor would it have been made a condition had the authorities been properly approached. There was surely no object in retaining the denominational character when there was no force in the condition. This was really a step in the direction of denominationalism which was, as a matter of fact, an anachronism in Scotland at the present time. He trusted that the Lord-Advocate would be able to assure them that the training colleges in Scotland would be put upon a proper footing, and that they would have none of this State denominationalism left in them.
    MR. HALDANEappealed to the Lord-Advocate for a statement that would remove the uncertainty

    1429
    that existed in reference to the training of teachers. They wished to be assured that action of some sort would be taken upon this Minute, or at least announced, so that those responsible for the training of teachers might know exactly where they stood.
    MR. PARKER SMITHhoped that the Government would announce that they proposed to proceed at once to develop the training of teachers. He quite agreed with what had been said by the right hon. Gentleman the Member for Aberdeen. He regretted that the discussion of so important a subject as this had been crowded into such a very small corner, because it seemed to him to be the largest question they had to deal with either upon the Estimates or the Bill.
    MR. SCOTT DICKSONsaid he could not complain of the considerate way in which this subject had been treated by hon. Members who had spoken. The view of the Department was that their proposals should be such as would satisfy the people of Scotland and Parliament. The question had excited a good deal of interest for years past, and the present state of things was admitted to be unsatisfactory. The Government had undertaken that the Minute should not be acted upon until the view of Parliament was ascertained. With regard to training colleges the truth was that, though they were termed denominational, they had not, in fact, been denominational institutions with the exception of a few Roman Catholic colleges. So far as the Presbyterian bodies were concerned, they had given the training which the large
    1430
    majority of the people of Scotland desired for their teachers and children, and therefore they could not be regarded in any proper sense as denominational institutions. On the other hand, it was right to state that before this Minute was passed negotiations took place between those who were the owners and managers of the various training colleges, and the distinctly intimated, as the condition of any possible transference to the proposed committees, that they would insist on the same religious teaching being continued in the colleges after they were handed over as in the past. It was obvious that the arrangement would be for the benefit of both parties, and he did not think they were trenching in any way upon any question which would raise religious or sectarian animosity.
    As to the position with regard to the provincial councils, if the Education Bill passed, as he hoped it would, this session, obviously the right position seemed to them to be that the provincial councils should step into the position of the committees and should supersede them. It would be out of the question that the provincial councils should not be allowed to carry on what was really the most important part of the educational system of Scotland. He thought both sides would agree that the view of the Government upon this point was the sound and correct one. As to the additional representation claimed by the Edinburgh School Board, he did not think that school board could claim that it was badly treated if it was treated in the same way as the Glasgow School Board. There were a great many other school boards represented, and there was a general representation of all the educational authorities in the district. As far

    1431
    as this question of the increased representation of Edinburgh was concerned, he was afraid that he could not hold out any hope that there would be any modification.
    MR. McCRAEthought that in what the right hon. Gentleman said had he had shown great lack of faith as to the prospects of passing the Education Bill. The Lord-Advocate had not given any adequate explanation as to why the Department had exercised these powers in reference to the transference of property.
    MR. CALDWELLsaid that this was a matter which could not be decided before twelve o'clock. He denied that by a Minute of the Department they could give power to transfer private property vested in individuals to another body of individuals, that could only be done by an Act of Parliament.
    And, it being Midnight, the Chairman left the Chair to make his Report to the House.
    Resolution to be reported upon Monday next; Committee also report Progress; to sit again upon Monday next.

    MR. SPEAKER'S RETIREMENT (KING'S ANSWER TO ADDRESS, JUNE 7TH.)
    Resolution reported.
    "That the annual sum of £4,000 net be granted to His Majesty out of the Consolidated Fund of the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Ireland, the said annuity to commence and take effect upon the day upon which the right hon. William Court Gully, late Speaker of the House of Commons,
    1432
    ceased to hold the office of Speaker of the House of Commons, to be settled in the most beneficial manner upon, and to continue during the life of, him the said right hon. William Court Gully."
    Bill ordered to be brought in by the Chairman of Ways and Means, Mr. A. J. Balfour, Mr. Chancellor of the Exchequer, and Mr. Victor Cavendish.

    MR. SPEAKER'S RETIREMENT BILL.
    "To settle and secure an annuity upon the right hon. William Court Gully in consideration of his eminent services," presented accordingly, and read the first time; to be read a second time upon Monday next, and to be printed. [Bill 249.]

    ADJOURNMENT.
    THE PARLIAMENTARY SECRETARY OF THE TREASURY (Sir A. ACLAND-HOOD,),in moving the adjournment of the House, said the first business tomorrow would be the Second Reading of the Consolidated Fund (No. 2) Bill. The second order would be the Committee on East India Loans (Railways). He was desired by the Prime Minister to say that on the earliest convenient opportunity he would move, on going into Committee, that Mr. Laurence Hardy do take the Chair as Deputy-Chairman of Committees.
    Adjourned at four minutes after Twelve o'clock.