Sitting of 30 April 1906

Preamble
The House met at a quarter before Three of the Clock.
PRIVATE BILL BUSINESS.

  LONDON COUNTY COUNCIL (MONEY) BILL (STANDING ORDERS APPLICABLE THERETO COMPLIED WITH).
  Mr. SPEAKER laid upon the Table Report from one of the Examiners of Petitions for Private Bills, That, in the case of the following Bill, referred on the First Reading thereof, the Standing Orders which are applicable thereto have been complied with, viz.—;London County Council (Money) Bill.
  Ordered, That the Bill be read a second time.

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

PROVISIONAL ORDER BILLS (STANDING ORDERS APPLICABLE THERETO COMPLIED WITH).
Mr. SPEAKER laid upon the Table Report from one of the Examiners of Petitions for Private Bills, That in the case of the following Bills, referred on the First Reading thereof, the Standing Orders which are applicable thereto have been complied with, viz:—;Electric Lighting Provisional Order (No. 1) Bill; Electric Lighting Provisional Orders (No. 2) Bill).
Ordered, That the Bills be read a second time to-morrow.

PRIVATE BILLS PETITIONS [LORDS] (STANDING ORDERS NOT COMPLIED WITH).
Mr. SPEAKER laid upon the Table Report from one of the Examiners of Petitions for Private Bills, That, in the

209
case of the Petitions for the following Bills, the Standing Orders have not been complied with, viz.:—;Crellin's Patents Bill [Lords]; Ritz Hotel, Limited, Bill [Lords].
Ordered, That the Reports be referred to the Select Committee on Standing Orders.
Midland Railway Bill (King's Consent signified). Bill read the third time, and passed.
Kidderminster Gas Bill [Lords] (by Order). Read the third time, and passed, with Amendments.
Local Government (Ireland) Provisional Orders (No. 1) Bill, "to confirm certain Provisional Orders of the Local Government Board for Ireland relating to the Urban District of Sligo and the Counties of Kildare and Limerick," presented by Mr. Attorney-General for Ireland; supported by Mr. Bryce; read the first time; and referred to the Examiners of Petitions for Private Bills, and to be printed. [Bill 179.]
North Berwick Corporation Order Confirmation Bill, "to confirm a Provisional Order under The Private Legislation Procedure (Scotland) Act, 1899, relating to North Berwick Corporation," presented by Mr. Sinclair, and ordered (under Section 7 of the Act), to be considered upon Wednesday.
Cathcart District Railway (Superfluous Lands) Order Confirmation Bill "to confirm a Provisional Order under The Private Legislation Procedure (Scotland) Act, 1899, relating to the Cathcart District Railway," presented by Mr. Sinclair, and ordered (under Section 7 of the Act) to be considered upon Wednesday.
Electric Power and Supply Bills Ordered, That the Memorandum by the Commissioners of Works on Electric Power and Supply Bills be referred to the Committee on the London County Council (Electric Supply) Bill.—;(Mr. Harcourt.)
Corporation of London (Blackfriars and other Bridges) Bill, reported, with
210
Amendments; Report to lie upon the Table, and to be printed.
Wandsworth and Putney Gas (Removal of Sulphur Restrictions) Bill, reported [parties do not proceed]; Report to lie upon the Table.
Gas Companies (Removal of Sulphur Restrictions) Bill, reported; Report to lie upon the Table.

PETITIONS.
  CLERKS OF THE PEACE AND COUNTY COUNCILS BILL.
  Petition from Bury St. Edmunds, for alteration; to lie upon the Table.
COAL MINES (EIGHT HOURS) BILL.
Petitions in favour; From Aldwarke (No. 2); Bruntcliffe; Bwllfa; Cadeby Main; Cwmaman; Dinnington; Ellenborough; Gelli Ilaf; Greasbro; Heck-mondwike; Hickleton Main; Kiveton Park; Low Laithes; Moorhouse Guards; Nantymelyn Gray; Old St. Helen's, Robin Hood; Rotherham; Scholes; and, Silverwood Collieries; to lie upon the Table.
EDUCATION (ENGLAND AND WALES) BILL.
Petition from Stoke Bruerne, against; to lie upon the Table.

EDUCATION (ENGLAND AND WALES) BILL (RELIGIOUS TEACHING).
Petitions against alteration of Law; from Ampfield; Arreton (two); Aycliffe; Barton upon Irwell (two); Baschurch, Biggin; Biggleswade; Bellerby (two); Billingham (two); Birmingham; Blackpool (two); Bournemouth; Boxmoor (two); Burghclere; Burnley; Bury (two); Carlton Scroop; Clifton; Clifton Brighouse; Cockayne Hatley; Compton and Shawford (two); Croft; Deaf Hill cum Langdale; Duddeston; Durham; Egglescliffe; Elton; Elwick Hall (two); Eversley; Fair Oak (two); Fakenham (two); Fyfield; Grateley (two); Greywell (two); Hadleigh (two); Hampton; Hampton Hill; Hampton Wick; Hannington; Harrold; Hatherden in Andover (two); Hathersage (two); Hay

211
(two); Hornsea; Houghton le Spring; Kelloe; Kingsclere (two); Kingsley (two); Laverstoke; Lightcliffe (two); Margate; Mirfield (two); Monk Hesleden, Morley cum Churwell (two); Newmarket (two); Northampton (two); Nottingham; Rookhope; Ruislip; St. Mary Bourne; St. John's in the Vale (two); Savile Town (two); Sherburn; Shincliffe; South Helton; South Tidworth; Stockbridge (two); Stoke Charity; Teddington (two); Ticehurst (two); Tostock; Tredington; Welton; Westbrook; Margate; West Stow; Whitchurch (two); Woolton Hill (two); and Wouston; to lie upon the Table.

EDUCATION OF DEFECTIVE CHILDREN (SCOTLAND) BILL.
Petition from Edinburgh, in favour; to lie upon the Table.
RETURNS, REPORTS, ETC.
  ENDOWED CHARITIES (ELEMENTARY EDUCATION) (NORTHAMPTON).
  Copy presented, of Report made to the Board of Education in the result of an Inquiry into Endowments subject to the provisions of the Charitable Trusts Acts, 1853 to 1894, and appropriated in whole or in part to proposals of Elementary Education in the Administrative County of Northampton or in any part thereof (by command); to lie upon the Table.
UNIVERSITIES OF OXFORD AND CAMBRIDGE ACT 1877 (OXFORD).
Copy presented, of Statutes made by the Governing Body of Merton College, Oxford, on December 9th, 1905, altering and amending Statutes III., V., and VIII. of the College Statutes (by Act); to lie upon the Table, and to be printed. (No. 141.)

UNIVERSITIES OF OXFORD AND CAMBRIDGE ACT, 1877 (OXFORD).
Copy presented, of Statutes made by the Governing Body of Corpus Christi College, Oxford, on April 23rd, 1904, amending Statute XXIV. (b), and on December 2nd, 1905, amending Statutes XXIV. (b) and XXXII. (a) of the
212
College Statutes (by Act); to lie upon the Table, and to be printed. (No. 142.)

UNIVERSITIES OF OXFORD AND CAMBRIDGE ACT, 1877 (CAMBRIDGE).
Copy presented, of Statutes made by the Governing Body of Sidney Sussex College, Cambridge, on December 27th, 1905, amending certain of the Statutes of the College [by Act]; to lie upon the Table, and to be printed. [No. 143.]
MERCHANT SHIPPING ACT, 1894.
Copy presented, of Order in Council of 4th April, 1906, making provision as to lights and signals of fishing vessels in substitution for those contained in Article 10 of the Regulations scheduled to the Order in Council of August 11th, 1884, as amended from time to time [by Act]; to lie upon the Table.
FOREIGN JURISDICTION ACT, 1890.
Copy presented, of Order in Council of April 4th, 1906, entitled The Siam Order in Council, 1906 [by Act]; to lie upon the Table.
PUBLIC INCOME AND EXPENDITURE.
Account presented, of the Gross Public Income and Expenditure in the year ended March 31st, 1906, together with the Balances in the Exchequer at the commencement and at the termination of the year, and the amounts received into or issued from the Exchequer in respect of Funded and Unfunded Debt created or redeemed in the said year [by Act]; to lie upon the Table, and to be printed [No. 144.]
SUPERANNUATION ACT, 1887.
Copy presented, of Treasury Warrant, dated April 23rd, 1906, amending Warrant of September 1887, relating to the grant of gratuities and allowances, under Section 1 of The Superannuation Act, 1887 [by Act]; to lie upon the Table.
LIGHT RAILWAYS ACT, 1896.
Copy presented, of Report of the proceedings of the Board of Trade up to the 31st December, 1905, and of the proceedings of the Light Railway Commissioners up to the same date [by Act]; to lie upon the Table, and to be printed. [No. 145.]
RAILWAY AND CANAL TRAFFIC ACTS, 1854 TO 1894,
Copy presented, of Seventeenth Annual Report of the Railway and Canal Commission, with Appendix [by Command]; to lie upon the Table.
POLLING DISTRICTS (COUNTY BOROUGH OF TYNEMOUTH).
Copy presented, of Order made to the Council of the County Borough of Tynemouth, dividing the Borough into Polling Districts [by Act]; to lie upon the Table.
SHOP HOURS ACT, 1904.
Copy presented, of Order made by the Council of the County Borough of Bolton, and confirmed by the Secretary of State for the Home Department, fixing the hours of closing for barbers' and hairdressers' shops within the borough [by Act]; to lie upon the Table.
METROPOLITAN POLICE.
Accounts presented, of the Metropolitan Police and the Police Pension Funds for the year ended March 31st, 1906 [by Act]; to lie upon the Table, and to be printed. [No. 146.]
EDUCATION (SCOTLAND).
Copy presented, of Report of the Committee of Council on Education in Scotland, with Appendix, 1905–6 [by Command]; to lie upon the Table.
DRUMDOE, COUNTY ROSCOMMON (INQUIRY).
Return presented, relative thereto [ordered April 11th; Mr. James O'Kelly]; to lie upon the Table.
PUBLIC RECORDS (IRELAND) ACT 1867.
Copy presented, of Rules made under the Public Records (Ireland) Act, 1867, dated April 2nd, 1906 [by Act]; to lie upon the Table.

FINANCIAL STATEMENT (1906–7).
Copy ordered, "of Statement of Revenue and Expenditure as laid before the House by the Chancellor of the Exchequer when opening the Budget."—;(Mr. McKenna.)
Copy presented accordingly; to lie upon the Table, and to be printed. [No. 147.]

EAST INDIA (RAILWAYS AND IRRIGATION WORKS).
Address for "Return showing the estimated position, as regards capital expenditure, of the several Railways and Irrigation Works under construction in India on the 31st day of March, 1906, and the proposed expenditure thereon during 1906–7 (in continuation of Parliamentary Paper, No. 163, of Sesson 1905)."—;(Mr. Robert Price.)
EMIGRATION AND IMMIGRATION.
Copy ordered "of Statistical Tables relating to Emigration and Immigration from and into the United Kingdom in the year 1905, and Report to the Board of Trade thereon."—;(Mr. Lloyd-George.)
ORAL ANSWERS TO QUESTIONS
  QUESTIONS AND ANSWERS CIRCULATED WITH THE VOTES.

    Naval Shipbuilding Designs.
    MR. BELLAIRS: To ask the Secretary to the Admiralty whether the Admiralty are prepared to follow the precedent of 1889, when Sir William White was permitted to read a paper on the naval designs of ships, by permitting Sir Philip Watts to read a similar paper for purposes of discussion; and, failing this, whether they will afford information before Vote 8 is discussed similar to that given by the American, French, and German naval authorities.
    (Answered by Mr. Edmund Robertson.) The reply to the first portion of the Question is in the negative. A Statement on the "Dreadnought" design will be made when Vote 8 is under discussion, which it is hoped will afford the information desired by the hon. Member.

  Court Martial on Captain Grogan.
  MR. BELLAIRS: To ask the Secretary to the Admiralty whether Captain Grogan, of H.M.S. "Donegal," was informed that he had been superseded in the command of his ship immediately prior to his trial by court martial; and, if so, whether there is any precedent for such action on the part of the Admiralty; and whether the Admiralty took into consideration the effect the decision would have on

  215
  the minds of the officers constituting the court.
  (Answered by Mr. Edmund Robertson.) Captain Grogan was not superseded, but remained in command of the "Donegal" until the ship was paid off with a view to the necessary repairs being undertaken. It was not considered that the court would have been in any way biassed by the fact that Captain Grogan was not appointed to a new command while a charge of negligence was pending against him.

  Closure of Navy Votes.
  MR. BELLAIRS: To ask the Secretary to the Admiralty what Navy Votes were closured without discussion in 1903, 1904,and 1905, respectively.
  (Answered by Mr. Edmund Robertson.) The information is as follows:—;1903 None; 1904, 3 Votes, viz., 5, 12, and 14; 1905, 11 Votes, viz., 2 to 7, 9, 11, and 13 to 15.

  Post Office Electrical Patents.
  MR. STEADMAN: To ask the Postmaster-General whether he will explain why, in view of the amount of money expended at the General Factory, Mount Pleasant, in experimenting on electrical condensers and other work, and of the fact that the whole of the work was done at the factory and by the staff generally, some seven patents have been taken out by an officer of the factory on the results of the experiments done, and is he aware that the patents have been let on royalty to a foreign firm who are now manufacturing condensers on the results obtained at Mount Pleasant.
  (Answered by Mr. Sydney Buxton.) The officer in question has been allowed to take out patents on conditions which amply protect the interests of the Post Office and other Government Departments. I think it is to the public advantage that the inventive faculty of public servants should be encouraged.

  Short Time at Holloway Postal Telegraph Factory.
  MR. STEADMAN: To ask the Postmaster General whether he can offer any explanation as to the cause of the em-
  216
  ployees at the Holloway postal telegraph factory being placed on short time; and whether orders are still being given to outside manufacturers for telegraph and telephone apparatus which could be produced cheaper at the factory, which has been recently enlarged at a considerable cost.
  (Answered by Mr. Sydney Buxton.) I regret that it was necessary recently to put some of the hands at Holloway on short time. They have now been placed on full time again, and I am taking such steps as I can to keep the work constant, and to reduce to a minimum both short time and discharges. The factories are now receiving the orders for such apparatus as can be produced there as cheaply as outside, subject of course to the capabilities of the factories.

  Grievances of Overseers Class, London Postal Services.
  MR. STEADMAN: To ask the Postmaster-General whether he is aware that representatives of the overseers class, London postal service, have on several occasions asked for a reply to the points raised in their interview with the Postmaster-General in 1903; that since the issue of Lord Stanley's scheme they have been informed that the matter was still under consideration, and that, as recently as November, 1905, they were informed by the Secretary of the Post Office that a reply would be given shortly; and will he explain why these replies were made in view of his statement that an answer was given to most of the points raised in December, 1904, and that the question of their pay was settled when the Stanley scheme came into operation.
  (Answered by Mr. Sydney Buxton.) Most of the points raised by the memorialists were answered in 1904, but no final answer could at that time be given either to their request for the creation of a body of second class assistant superintendents or in respect of their scale of pay. The consideration of these points and the questions arising out of them was delayed pending the consideration of the Report of the Bradford Committee. The scale of pay was settled by the Stanley revision, but the other remaining points were still not in a

  217
  condition for settlement. At the present time it is obviously impossible for me, in view of the Select Committee now sitting, to decide the matter, or deal with the further demands they have made. I can only suggest to the memorialists that they should await the result of the Committee's Report, and that if, after I have considered it, they still desire to raise any question on the subject, they should do so.

  Belfast Postal Learners' Wages.
  MR. SLOAN: To ask the Postmaster-General under what circumstances learners, male and female, at Belfast have recently been called upon to say in writing whether or not they are prepared to accept the recent wages concession, and have been warned that any decision in the matter at which they may arrive will be considered final.
  (Answered by Mr. Sydney Buxton.) The inquiry was addressed to the learners at Belfast in order that it might be ascertained whether they desired to be paid under the new system or under the old until their appointment to the establishment. It is most undesirable that there should be frequent changes in the system of payment as regards individuals, hence the notice that their decision in this respect would be considered final.

  Pay of Post Office Adult Night Messengers.
  MR. KENDAL O'BRIEN: To ask the Postmaster-General whether he is aware that adult night messengers in Scotland are only paid in some instances 1s. when kept on duty on public holidays; will he issue instructions that at the ensuing King's birthday, and succeeding holidays, these adult messengers shall be paid a full day's wages at the rate at present paid for Bank Holidays in England and Ireland, namely, time and a half.
  MR. KENDAL O'BRIEN: To ask the Postmaster-General if he will state the scale of pay received by established adult night messengers at Sheffield and Hull; and will he consider the advisability of placing on the establishment the adult night messengers in Scotland who have five years of approved service,
  218
  as the duties performed by the unestablished night messengers in the Scottish offices are quite as arduous as at the Yorkshire offices named, where the adult night messengers enjoy all the advantages of an established appointment.
  (Answered by Mr. Sydney Buxton.) I will answer the hon. Member's Questions together. A few of the adult night messengers at Sheffield and Hull are on the scale 18s., 1s., 21s. a week. The arrangement is, however, exceptional and, as vacancies occur, unestablished messengers at fixed wages will be employed as at all other offices. Full duty messengers are, in common with other full duty officers, entitled to extra payment at a single rate for duty performed on Bank Holidays or on those holidays in Scotland which correspond to the four Bank Holidays in England and Wales. The King's birthday is not kept as a public holiday at provincial post offices.

  Speed of Express Trains.
  MR. CHANNING: To ask the President of the Board of Trade whether the report of the inspector of the Board as to the recent accident near Kirtlebridge has yet been received; whether his attention has been called to statements since made that serious risk is caused to express trains to and from Scotland by excessive speed on down grades where there are curves and facing points, and notably to the west coast trains in descending Shap Fell towards Penrith, and also in descending the down grade near Grayrigg to the south; and whether he will cause inquiry to be made into this allegation and, if necessary, representations to be made to the company concerned.
  (Answered by Mr. Lloyd-George.) The Report on the Kirtlebridge accident has not yet been received. Pending its receipt it would be premature to consider the necessity of taking any steps such as are suggested by my hon. friend.

  Toll Bars.
  MR. ARTHUR STANLEY: To ask the President of the Board of Trade whether a considerable number of tolls are still imposed on roads and bridges in this

  219
  country; and, if so, whether he will cause a Return to be prepared showing the places where such tolls are imposed and by what authority they are levied.
  (Answered by Mr. John Burns.) Tolls are imposed on a certain number of roads and bridges, but I cannot state the precise number. As regards such a Return as that suggested, there might be some difficulty in obtaining correct information as to the legal authority under which the tolls are levied, and, at all events, the preparation of the Return would involve communication with some 1,800 local bodies. Legislation on the subject of these tolls would not be practicable now, and in all the circumstances it does not seem to be necessary that a Return should be obtained at the present time.

  Wages in Royal Dockyards.
  MR. J. WILLIAMS BENN: To ask the Secretary to the Admiralty what progress has been made in the inquiry as to the wages paid in the Royal Dockyards and those obtaining under trades union rates outside; and how soon he would be able to announce the decision of the Admiralty with regard to the matter.
  (Answered, by Mr. Edmund Robertson.) The inquiry will be completed shortly, and the decision will be made and published as early as possible.

  Police Inspectors Soliciting Testimonials on Retirement.
  COLONEL LOCKWOOD: To ask the Under-Secretary of State for the Home Department how many cases have been brought to his knowledge since he took office of police inspectors on leaving the force going round their districts and soliciting the publicans in those districts for subscriptions for testimonials on their behalf; and what measures he will take to stop such practices.
  (Answered by Mr. Herbert Samuel.) No actual cases of this having happened since I took office have been brought to my knowledge, but past experience shows that it is desirable that police authorities should have power to pre-
  220
  vent it, and Clause 4 (f) of the Police (Superannuation) Bill, which was drafted for this purpose, has already received the assent of the House.

  Irish Poor Law Commission—; Representation of Irish Medical Officers.
  MR. FETHERSTONHAUGH: To ask the Chief Secretary to the Lord-Lieutenant of Ireland whether his attention has been called to the Resolutions of the Irish Medical Association urging the importance of appointing an independent Irish medical man to the Poor Law Commission before it comes to investigate complaints as to the position and remuneration of the Irish Poor Law medical officers; and whether it would be possible for him to receive a deputation of the association as to the present condition of the Irish Poor Law Medical service.
  (Answered by Mr. Bryce.) The Resolutions referred to do not appear to have been forwarded to me, but I beg to refer to the reply given by my right hon. friend the First Lord of the Treasury on a Question on the subject put by the hon. Member for South Down on March 14th.† I am not sure whether the reference to the Royal Commission extends to the grievances of the Irish Poor Law medical officers, but the Commission will doubtless be prepared to receive any statement on the subject which the medical officers may choose to forward, either directly or through me, as they may prefer. In the meantime, it does not appear to be necessary that I should consider the question of receiving the proposed deputation.

  Coast Erosion.
  MR. HALPIN: To ask the Chief Secretary to the Lord-Lieutenant of Ireland whether the Royal Commission on Coast Erosion applies to Ireland; and, if so, whether it will embrace the embankments protecting slob lands on the tidal rivers, such as the Shannon and the Fergus; and, if not, will he explain for what reason.
  (Answered by Mr. Lloyd-George.) It is intended that the Royal Commission
  † See (4) Debates, cliii, 1233.

  221
  should deal with the coasts of the United Kingdom and the banks of tidal rivers.

  Waterford Prison.
  MR. JOHN REDMOND: To ask the Chief Secretary to the Lord-Lieutenant of Ireland if he is aware that at the present time Waterford prison, in addition to receiving prisoners from the county and city of Waterford, also receives them from Wexford, Carlow, Kilkenny, Queen's County, and the South Riding of Tipperary; whether his attention has been directed to the hardships inflicted on the ratepayers of the county and city of Waterford in having to support patients transferred from the Waterford prison natives of other counties, who remain insane at the expiration of their sentences; and whether he can take any steps to have such patients removed at the expiration of their sentences to the asylums of the districts from which they came.
  (Answered by Mr. Bryce.) The fact is as stated in the first part of the Question. Under the Act, 1 and 2 Vic. cap. 27, persons who become insane while in prison are removed to the lunatic asylum of the district in which the prison is situate, and there is no power to transfer such persons on the expiration of their sentence to the asylums of the districts from which they come. There are, I understand, in all the district asylums in Ireland patients who belong primarily to other districts, and matters are therefore substantially equalised. Legislation on the subject would involve the introduction into Ireland of a law of settlement, and I am not at present prepared to say that the Government could undertake such legislation.

  Expenses of Auditors of Local Government Board for Scotland.
  MR. SLOAN: To ask the Chief Secretary to the Lord-Lieutenant of Ireland if he will explain why, while in the Estimates for the financial year ending March 31st, 1907, provision is made in the Vote for the Local Government Board, Ireland, for £9,944 in respect of the salaries and £3,700 in respect of the travelling expenses of their staff of
  222
  auditors, of which it is estimated that £6,500 will be recovered from local bodies, there is no similar provision for any outlay out of either Imperial or local funds in the Vote for the more recently constituted Local Government Board for Scotland.
  (Answered by Mr. Bryce.) The figures as regards Ireland are correctly stated in the Question. The reason why the Estimates of the Local Government Board for Scotland do not contain similar information would appear to be that local authorities in Scotland have to pay the entire cost of audit.

  Irish Local Government Expenditure.
  MR. SLOAN: To ask the Chief Secretary to the Lord-Lieutenant of Ireland if he can state by what sum, and at what rate per cent., the net amount of expenditure examined by the auditors of the Irish Local Government Board has increased or diminished from the amount in the financial year ending March 31st 1897, as compared with 1905, the net amount of expenditure being reckoned as the amount of expenditure which passed under the review of the auditors, excluding money passed to the accounts of other public bodies, and money transferred from one account of a public body to another account of the same public body and set against the expenditure shown and audited in the other account.
  (Answered by Mr. Bryce.) The Local Government Board are not in a position to give the precise figures asked for having regard to the limited time given by the notice of this Question. The Board, however, estimate the increase in the net amount of expenditure audited to be over £1,500,000, or from 33 to 35 per cent.

  Irish Local Government Auditors.
  MR. SLOAN: To ask the Chief Secretary to the Lord-Lieutenant of Ireland whether he is aware that in the majority of cases the audits carried out under the Irish Local Government Board are in the hands of men who are without

  223
  any experience or training or technical qualifications; and that, in return for the services of these officials, each public body is obliged to repay to the Treasury an annual fee, fied by the Local Government Board, without any regard to the volume of work done; and wether, seeing that this fee is usually more than double what would secure an exhaustive examination of the same accounts by a fully qualified public accountant, holding a leading position in his profession, he proposes to takes any action in the matter.
  (Answered by Mr. Bryce.) No person can be appointed an auditor of the Local Government Board in Ireland who is not certified by the Civil Service Commissioners as qualified for the position, after an examination which includes technical qualifications. The volume of work to be done and the time occupied by the auditor are determining factors in arriving at the fee charged for the audit of the accounts of public bodies. The Local Government Board have no definite information as to any scale which might regulate the charges likely to be made by qualified public accountants; but the board are satisfied that their audit fees are not excessive, and that they would compare favourably with the fees which would be charged for similar work by such accountants.

  Army Pensions.
  MR. A. L. LEVER: To ask the Secretary of State for War if he will state the number of officers under forty-five years of age who, under voluntary retirement, are receiving pensions, the amount of the respective pensions, and the total sum of all such pensions for the last financial year; and the number of officers under forty-five years of age who, under compulsory retirement, are receiving pensions or half-pay, the amount of the respective pensions or half-pay allowances, and the total sum of all such pensions or half-pay allowances for the last financial year.
  (Answered by Mr. Secretary Haldane.) Officers under forty-five years of age who are in receipt of non-effective pay.
  224
  Officers of the Regular Army. Voluntary retirement to retired pay:—;

  Number.

  Annual Value of Pensions.

  Approximate Charge during 1905–6.

  £

  £

  509

  81,635

  78,000

  Compulsory retirement:—;
  (1) To retired pay (on account of permanent ill-health, etc.):—;

  Number.

  Annual Value of Pensions.

  Approximate Charge during 1905–6.

  £

  £

  71

  8,940

  8,500

  (2) To half-pay (temporary, on account of ill-health, etc.):—;

  Number.

  Annual Value of Pensions.

  Approximate Charge during 1905–6.

  £

  £

  131

  15,636

  15,500

  Officers of the Militia, Imperial Yeomanry, Volunteers, and Colonial (Irregular) Forces granted retired pay on account of ill-health due to service in the late South African War.

  Number.

  Annual Value of Pensions.

  Approximate Charge during 1905–6.

  £

  £

  89

  6,844

  6,500

  Reduced Railway Fares for Soldiers in Mufti.
  MR. RENDALL: To ask the Secretary of State for War whether having regard

  225
  to the fact that railway companies invariably refuse cheapened tickets to private soldiers and non-commissioned officers when out of uniform, and thereby make largely useless the lately granted privileges of wearing plain clothes when on leave, he will consider the desirability of bringing pressure to bear upon them to accept a written form or metal disc as proof of being in His Majesty's service; and whether, in default of securing such a reform by arrangement, he will support amendments to future railway Bills making the acceptance of some such evidence by railway companies compulsory.
  (Answered by Mr. Secretary Haldane.) It must be remembered that the fact that non-commissioned officers and soldiers travel at reduced rates when proceeding on furlough and leave is due to a concession on the part of the railway companies, and this concession has been of great value to the bulk of the Army. Renewed efforts will, however, be made to induce the railway companies to permit J the use of cheapened tickets to non-commissioned officers and private soldiers when out of uniform. I am not prepared to endeavour to secure the concession by the means suggested in the last part of the Question.

  Discharges of Royal Engineers Civil Staff at Salisbury.
  MR. RENDALL: To ask the Secretary, of State for War whether he is aware of the treatment accorded to certain members of the Royal Engineers civil staff at Salisbury who were transferred from the late Military Works Loan Staff at Tidworth to the Barrack Construction Branch at the War Office, but were led to decline the latter appointments owing to offers made them by the Royal Engineers authorities in the southern command in May last and accepted by them under an implication of equal tenure; and whether he is aware that these gentlemen have been recently discharged, notwithstanding the circumstances attending their engagement; and whether, in view of their removal of residence in accordance with orders, and their simultaneous discharge, it is proposed to award them any compensation for the losses they have sustained under the peculiar circumstances attending their cases.
  226
  (Answered by Mr. Secretary Haldane.) When the Military Loan Works at Tidworth were handed over to the Barrack Construction Department in March, 1905, the members of the Royal Engineers civil staff mentioned were offered appointments by the Director of Barrack Construction. As, however, there appeared at the time a reasonable probability of their services being required for some time to come under the Royal Engineers they elected to remain under the Royal Engineers. Subsequently it was decided to reduce the staff, and, as there were no available vacancies, these gentlemen were discharged in February, 1906. Their names have been noted for re-employment should an opportunity arise. As regards the question of compensation for losses stated to have been incurred by reason of change of residence, this matter is now under investigation.

  St. Helena Garrison.
  MR. HICKS BEACH: To ask the Secretary of State for War what opportunity he proposes to give the House for raising the question of the removal of the garrison from the island of St. Helena.
  (Answered by Mr. Secretary Haldane.) The hon. Member can raise the question on the Vote for my salary, but I cannot at present forecast the date on which this will be taken.

QUESTIONS IN THE HOUSE.

  Naval Gunnery.
  MAJOR RENTON: I beg to ask the Secretary to the Admiralty how many seamen and how many marines competed in the gunlayers' tests and battle practice for heavy guns in 1905; and how many seamen and marines, respectively, were in the first hundred on the list.
  THE SECRETARY TO THE ADMIRALTY (Mr. EDMUND ROBERTSON,): The following are the numbers of seamen and marine gunlayers respectively, who competed at the gunlayers' test of 1905, with heavy

  227
  guns of 6-inch calibre, which are the only heavy guns having a sufficient proportion of marine gnnlayers to allow of any comparison being established: 6-inch Breech Loading.—;Number of men who competed—;Seamen, 400; marines, 121. First 100 men on the list—;Seamen, 75; marines, 25. 6-inch Quick Firing.—;Number of men who competed—;Seamen, 176; marines 51. First 100 men on the list—;Seamen, 78; marines, 22. As regards the battle practice, no comparison is possible, as the hits from the ship as a whole are counted, and no distinction is possible between the hits from different guns.

  Examinations for Naval Cadetships.
  MR. GODFREY BARING: I beg to ask the Secretary to the Admiralty whether it has been the custom to publish the examination papers set to candidates for naval cadet-ships under the old system of entry as well as the marks obtained; whether the same information is afforded in the case of cadets entering under the new system; and, if this is not the case, will he state the reasons for the new procedure.
  MR. EDMUND ROBERTSON: The examination papers set to candidates under the old system of entry, and the marks obtained, were published by the Civil Service Commission, who conducted the examination. The papers set to candidates under the new system are published by the Oxford and Cambridge Schools Examination Board. There are no marks published under the new system of entry, the examination being a qualifying one only

  Disposal of Obsolete War Ships.
  MR. JENKINS: I beg to ask the Secretary to the Admiralty if he will state the number of ships recently sold by public auction at Chatham; the date when they were built and the cost of each ship; the names of the persons to whom they were sold; and the amount realised in each case.
  MR. EDMUND ROBERTSON: The particulars asked for, with the exception of the purchasers' names, have already been given in reply to a Question by the hon. Member for the Kennington Division
  228
  of Lambeth on April 9th†. I am sending the hon. Member a copy of this reply, to which has been added the further information desired.

  Ships' Canteens.
  MR. BOWLES: I beg to ask the Secretary to the Admiralty whether he is aware that in the case of seven of His Majesty's ships stationed in English waters the contract for the supply of the canteen is held by Maltese firms; will he say why no English firm has in these cases had accepted a tender for the supply of provisions which are mainly English; is he aware that the canteen provisions for these ships are supplied by English firms to the Maltese firms whose tenders have been accepted; will he state the terms and prices of the successful tender of the canteen of H.M.S. "Prince George" and the terms and prices of the tenders put in by English firms for the same canteen; and is he aware that in several of these ships-margarine of a quality which can be bought ashore at from 6d. to 8d. per pound is now being sold to the ship's company under the name of butter at 1s. 2d. per pound.
  MR. EDMUND ROBERTSON: The contracts made by canteens, and the prices at which articles are sold, are not matters which come under the control of the Admiralty, and consequently there is no-information available upon the points referred to. The Admiralty lays down certain general principles upon which canteens may be established in His Majesty's ships, but the actual details of management are conducted by the Canteen Committee, with the reservation that the selection of the tradesmen with whom the canteen deals is to be approved, by the captain.

  Vaccine for the Army and Navy.
  MR. WEIR: I beg to ask the Secretary of State for War if he will state what quantity of glycerinated calf lymph was produced at the Army and Navy Vaccine Institute last year; the number of tubes used during the year at military stations; were any of the tubes sold; and, if so, to whom.
  † See (4) Debates, clv., 969.
  THE SECRETARY OF STATE FOR WAR (Mr. HALDANE,): The quantity produced was sufficient for 107,766 vaccinations. The number of tubes used during the year at military stations was 67,685. No lymph produced at this establishment is sold.
  MR. WEIR: Is it proposed to use the lymph which has become stale, or is it to be destroyed?
  MR. HALDANE: I have no reason to think it is as the hon Member suggests, but I will inquire.
  MR. WEIR: I hope you will not continue producing a large surplus every year at heavy cost to the taxpayers.

  Payment of Army Pensions.
  MR. ESSEX: I beg to ask the Secretary of State for War whether he can arrange for weekly or fortnightly payment of pensions to Army reservists and time expired soldiers, in place of the present system of quarterly payments.
  MR. HALDANE: The whole question of the mode of payment of Army pensions and reserve pay is now receiving careful consideration.

  Sparkbrook Factory.
  SIR FRANCIS LOWE: I bog to ask the Secretary of State for War whether eighty workpeople have already been discharged from the Royal Small Arms Factory at Sparkbrook, and whether the factory is about to be closed and the remainder of the workpeople discharged; and, if this is so, why it is that the stipulation which was said to have been made on the sale of the premises namely, that the factory should be kept open and the services of the workpeople retained, has not been complied with.
  MR. HALDANE: Seventy-seven men were discharged on Thursday last. These were men formerly employed on repairs who cannot be transferred to manufacture. Eighty-four men have been transferred from employment on repairs to manufacture at Sparkbrook, and twenty-eight to Enfield. This factory is not about to be closed, and it
  230
  is not anticipated that there will be further discharges.
  SIR FRANCIS LOWE: Will there be any opportunity of finding employment for the men who have been discharged?
  MR. HALDANE: I cannot give any pledge, but I hope the orders given will enable it to be done.
  SIR FRANCIS LOWE: When is the factory likely to be reopened?
  MR. HALDANE: As soon as possible. I cannot give the date, but it is being pushed on.

  History of the South African War.
  MR. T. HART DAVIES: I beg to ask the Secretary of State for War what progress has been made with the official history of the late South African War; when it is expected that any portion of it will be issued; and what are the causes which have led to the delay in publishing it.
  MR. HALDANE: Considerable progress has been made with this work. The first volume will probably be out by midsummer, and it is expected that the second and third volumes will be out about the end of the year, and the concluding volume in 1907. I have pushed the matter on. Accordingly, the hope held out to the House in 1904† that the book would be completed within throe years time will thus, as far as can be foreseen, be realised.

  Debates on War Office Votes.
  MR. BELLAIRS: I beg to ask the Secretary of State for War what were the last occasions on which the Votes for the War Office, military education, and ordnance factories were discussed in the House or in Committee.
  MR. HALDANE: It is regretted that by inadvertence the figures given to my hon. friend in reply to his Question of April 27th‡ were those for the votes actually closured en bloc at the end of the sessions concerned, although some of them had been discussed on previous
  † See (4) Debates, cxxxiii., 77.
  ‡ See Col. 131.

  231
  dates. I will see that a correct reply to the Question is circulated. The War Office Vote was last separately discussed in 1905, the Military Education Vote in 1902, and the Ordnance Factories Vote in 1901.

  Irish Yeomanry.
  MR. MACVEAGH: I beg to ask the Secretary of State for War whether the powers and duties of Yeomanry in Ireland were taken over either by Her late Majesty or His present Majesty, in pursuance of the 6th Section of the Regulation of the Forces Act, 1871; and, if so, whether he can give the date of the Order in Council so doing.
  MR. HALDANE: Yes, Sir. The powers were taken over by Her late Majesty and the date of the Order in Council was February 5th, 1872.

  British Indians in South Africa.
  SIR H. COTTON: I beg to ask the Under-Secretary of State fur the Colonies whether his attention has been drawn to a memorial addressed by the Natal Indian Congress in March last to the Colonial Secretary, Maritzburg, protesting against the imposition of prohibitive fees and passes issued under the Immigration Restrictions Act; and whether he will take steps to remove the grievances of which British Indians resident in South Africa complain in this matter.
  THE UNDER-SECRETARY OF STATE FOR THE COLONIES (Mr. CHURCHILL,): The Secretary of State has seen a copy of the memorial referred to as printed in a Natal newspaper. The Secretary of State will ascertain from the Governor of Natal what answer was sent by the Colonial Secretary of Natal to the memorial, in reply to the contention that the fees were not reasonable. The Act provides for charging reasonable fees by regulation.

  Case of Mr. Abu Bakir Ahmed, of Pretoria.
  SIR H. COTTON: I beg to ask the Under-Secretary of State for the Colonies whether his attention has been drawn to a decision of the Supreme Court in the Transvaal, in March last, in which it was decided that, under the operation of Act 3
  232
  of 1885, the heirs of Mr. Abu Bakir Ahmed, who have been in possession of valuable property in Pretoria for a period of fifteen years, have no title to that property and have therefore been deprived of their interest in it, and to the recorded opinion of the Court that the law was harsh, but that the judges could only interpret it, and that it was for the Legislature to interfere; and whether, having regard to the racial provisions of this statute, which have always been objected to by the British Government, His Majesty's Ministers will now take steps to ensure the repeal of this Act.
  MR. CHURCHILL: My attention has been drawn to a newspaper report of the case referred to. Lord Elgin is in communication with the Governor on the subject.

  Repatriation of Chinese Coolies.
  MR. PARTINGTON: I beg to ask the Undersecretary of State for the Colonies if he can state the number of Chinese coolies who have been repatriated at the expense of the Imperial Funds.
  MR. CHURCHILL: From the Answer which I gave to the hon. Member for the Newbury Division of Berkshire on the 26tht, the hon. Member will understand that no coolies have yet been repatriated at the expense of Imperial funds.
  MR. LANE-FOX: I beg to ask the Undersecretary of State for the Colonies whether he can now state when the Chinese coolies in South Africa will be informed that they are at liberty to demand repatriation.
  MR. CHURCHILL: I fully appreciate the motive of the hon. Member's anxiety upon this subject; but I can only refer him to my Answer to the hon. Member for the Newbury Division of Berks on Thursday last† and to the conversation which followed upon it.
  MR. LANE-FOX: Is it right for the hon. Gentleman to impute motives?
  [No answer was returned.]
  † See Col. 21–23.

  Natal Government and the Native Rising.
  MR. ASHLEY: I beg to ask the Under-Secretary of State for the Colonies whether the Government of Natal have expressed their determination to cope with the native rising in that colony without calling in the aid of Imperial troops.
  MR. CHURCHILL: I have seen the reports in the Press telegrams from South Africa of statements to this effect made by Mr. Smythe, the Prime Minister, and Mr. Maydon.

  The Imperial Government and the Natal Rising.
  MR. ASHLEY: I beg to ask the Under-Secretary of State for the Colonies whether, in the event of Imperial troops being employed in connection with the native rising in Natal, His Majesty's Government would hold themselves justified in claiming, in consequence of such employment, a greater share in any settlement of the native question in that colony.
  MR. CHURCHILL: The interest of the Imperial Government in, and its responsibility for, the welfare of the native population in Natal is not wholly dependent upon the employment of Imperial troops; but that responsibility would, undoubtedly, become more intimate and direct in proportion as Imperial forces were employed. Should the situation in Natal undergo changes in the direction indicated by my hon. friend, the Secretary of State is confident that the Imperial Government and the Responsible Government of Natal would continue to work together in friendly co-operation; and he believes that it is by the promotion of that friendly co-operation that the welfare of the native subjects of the King may best be secured, both during the present period of tension and at its close.

  India and the Opium Traffic
  MR. MACVEAGH: I beg to ask the Secretary of State for India whether he can state the value of the opium exported from India last year, what proportion went to China, and what
  234
  revenue the Government of India derived from the trade.
  THE SECRETARY OF STATE FOR INDIA (Mr. JOHN MORLEY,): The total value of the opium exported from India in 1904–5 was £7,082,295, of which opium to the value of £5,541,040 was consigned direct to ports in China. The net opium revenue of India in the same year amounted to £4,050,999. This includes revenue from opium consumed in India or consigned to other than ports in China. That portion of the revenue which is derived from opium exported direct to China may be estimated at about £3,000,000.

  Orders for Indian Railway Material.
  MR. SAMUEL ROBERTS: I beg to ask the Secretary of State for India whether his attention has been called to the fact that for many years past dissatisfaction has been caused by reasons of orders for mounted wheels and axles and loose tyres and axles for the Indian State and other railways being given to Continental makers; and whether he is prepared to take steps to ensure that future orders may be placed with British manufacturers.
  MR. JOHN MORLEY: I am not aware of the feeling of dissatisfaction to which the hon. Member refers. As regards purchases for the Indian State railways, orders for wheels, axles and tyres are, as a rule, given to foreign makers only when British prices are comparatively high, or when a sufficiently quick rate of delivery cannot be obtained in this country. Every case is carefully considered on its merits, and due regard is paid to possible differences in the qualities of British and foreign workmanship respectively, the result being that the great bulk of Government orders for goods of this description is placed in this country. To this practice I propose to adhere. For Indian railways other than the State railways, orders are given not by the Secretary of State in Council but by the companies who manage them.
  MR. SAMUEL ROBERTS: Will British manufacturers who tender in

  235
  future have a fair opportunity of getting orders?
  MR. JOHN MORLEY: I will inquire if there is any reason to suppose that the tenders are not decided on their merits.

  Partition of Bengal.
  MR. C. J. O'DONNELL: I beg to ask the Secretary of State for India whether he is aware that fifty-four large public meetings to protest against the partition of Bengal were held in the month of March, and if he will state what has been done to allay the unrest in that province.
  MR. JOHN MORLEY: I am not sure of the exact number, but I understand that many such meetings have been held. No special measures are being taken, so far as I am aware, for the purpose mentioned in the Question, nor, as I am advised, do such measures seem to be demanded.

  Serajgunge Criminal Courts.
  MR. C. J. O'DONNELL: I beg to ask the Secretary of State for India whether thirty-four complaints were recently made in the criminal courts of Serajgunge against the military police, inquiry being refused in all by the local magistracy; and, seeing that the High Court at Calcutta on appeal in one of them, a test case, ordered a judicial inquiry, whether he proposes to take any action in the matter.
  MR. JOHN MORLEY: I have no information as to the details stated in the Question, but I gather from it that the High Court have already ordered an inquiry in a case where it was refused, and it would appear that persons considering themselves aggrieved can similarly apply to that Court, and that no action on my part is required.

  Chinese in South Africa.
  LORD TURNOUR: I beg to ask the Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs whether he has any official information showing that facsimiles of the cartoons depicting Chinamen in chains, issued in this country during the
  236
  General Election, have been widely circulated in China, and have inflamed the lower class Chinese against this country.
  THE SECRETARY TO THE LOCAL GOVERNMENT BOARD (Mr. RUNCIMAN,, for Sir EDWARD GREY): The information which I have received is to the effect that some agitation was aroused in China by criticisms of the Transvaal Labour Ordinance in 1904, but that it has since died away.

  Income-Tax Collection.
  LORD CASTLEREAGH: I beg to ask Mr. Chancellor of the Exchequer whether he is aware that persons liable to income-tax are often subject to demands for payment from two or three surveyors of taxes; that such demands are sometimes accompanied by threats of prosecution for recovery of tax already paid; and whether he will endeavour to secure that the levying of income-tax shall be made as little vexatious as possible, more especially to the struggling professional and trading classes.
  THE CHANCELLOR OF THE EXCHEQUER (Mr. ASQUITH,): That the same taxpayer should in some cases receive demands for income-tax from two or more different surveyors is a necessary incident of the system of collection of income-tax at the source, but every effort is made to render the collection as little vexatious as possible.

  Patent Spirit.
  MR. MACVEAGH: I beg to ask Mr. Chancellor of the Exchequer whether he is aware that patent spirit, made in London, is blended in bond with pot still whisky, supplied to tied houses, and sold to the public as genuine Irish and Scotch whisky; and what steps he proposes to take to protect the public against such frauds.
  MR. ASQUITH: I have no official information on the subject, as the Excise Duty Acts do not discriminate between patent-still and pot still spirits. The functions of my Department in the matter are confined to the protection of the revenue, and, as the rate of duty upon

  237
  the two kinds of spirit is the same, the officials of the Inland Revenue Department have no authority to concern themselves in the matter.

  Irish Education.
  MR. HUGH BARBIE: I beg to ask Mr. Chancellor of the Exchequer whether, seeing that the additional demands upon Imperial funds caused by the proposals in the new Education Bill are estimated at £750,000 per annum, he is prepared to include in his Estimates a proportional additional grant for educational purposes in Ireland.
  MR. ASQUITH: As the financial arrangements under the Education Bill will not come into force during this financial year, I consider it would be premature to come to any decision on the question raised by the hon. Member.

  Pay of Customs Preventive Men.
  SIR GILBERT PARKER: I beg to ask the Secretary to the Treasury if he is aware that the concession of an enhanced increment of 1s. 6d. per week, per annum, given to Customs preventive men, as from the 1st October, 1905, does not, according to the interpretation which the Board of Customs placed on that concession, take effect until the 1st October, 1906; that, as a result of the re-assessment of salaries last October, many of the officers referred to received less salary this year than they would have done had there been no concession; and if he will take such steps to give the full intended benefit of the concession.
  THE FINANCIAL SECRETARY OF THE TREASURY (Mr. MCKENNA,): In the Civil Service an annual increment accrues during the year in respect of which it is earned, but is not payable until that year has expired. The increments in question began to be earned as from the 1st October, 1905, but will not be payable until they are fully earned by a year of service, viz., on the 1st October, 1906. It is not the case that as a result of the re-assessment of salaries last October many of the officers referred to will receive less salary this year than they would have done had there been no concession.

  French Labour Disputes.
  SIR GILBERT PARKER: On behalf of the hon. Member for Central Sheffield, I beg to ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department if he can obtain through the Foreign Office a report concerning the industrial disturbances now prevailing in the department of France adjoining the Straits of Dover, and particularly as to instances of the destruction of the houses and property of workmen and personal assaults upon them, leading to deaths, to persuade them to abstain from working.
  THE SECRETARY OF STATE FOR THE HOME DEPARTMENT (Mr. GLADSTONE,). I have conferred with my right hon. friend the Foreign Secretary with regard to this request. In his opinion, with which I entirely concur, it is not desirable to make the industrial disturbances referred to the subject of a special report for publication by his office. The accounts which are being published in the daily Press appear to contain very full information.

  Pay of Prison Warders.
  MR. HUDSON: I beg to ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department if his attention has been called to the difference in pay existing in the subordinate ranks of officers employed in His Majesty's local and convict prisons; can he, in view of the fact that the responsibilities have been equalised by reason of convicts not only being located in local prisons but in those cases where the convict is sentenced to penal servitude the term of separate confinement has to be passed there, give to the officers of local prisons the same annual increment and maximum salary as officers in convict prisons.
  MR. GLADSTONE: Convicts have been kept in local prisons for their term of separate confinement for the last nineteen years, and the recent decision to send certain selected convicts to local prisons after the term of their separate confinement is completed would offer no sufficient justification for an increase of pay. It affects only three prisons, and the convicts, being carefully selected men of good behaviour, throw no special responsibility on the warders. The

  239
  petitions from prison officers which are now being received will be given careful consideration, but any general increase of pay would involve a very serious additional charge on the Prison Vote.

  Alleged Wrongful Arrests by London Policemen.
  LORD R. CECIL: I beg to ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department whether he will appoint a Departmental Committee to inquire into recent unjustifiable arrests by the Metropolitan Police, and especially of Messrs. Gerothwold and Lavalette; whether he has received any reports on the subjects of these arrests; and whether he will lay the same upon the Table of the House.
  MR. GLADSTONE: I do not think the question whether these arrests were justifiable or not can be properly dealt with by a Departmental Committee, which could not take evidence on oath. The charges brought against certain officers of the Metropolitan Police and strongly denied by them raise a clear issue, which can only be disposed of satisfactorily by a court of law; and if Dr. Gerothwold and Mr. Lavalette desire to take proceedings, no obstacle will be put in their way by the police authorities. The reports I have received are confidential, and could not be published without prejudice to the parties in any proceedings that may be taken.
  LORD E. CECIL: Will the right hon. Gentleman state what remedy he suggests is open to these gentlemen?
  MR. GLADSTONE: I am sure the noble Lord is much better able to say than I am. Proceedings can be taken for wrongful arrest.

  Erection of Lighthouse and Fog Signal on the Island of Rona.
  MR. WEIR: I beg to ask the President of the Board of Trade if he will state whether the Northern Lighthouse Commissioners have yet decided to establish a light and fog signal on the Island of Rona, thirty-nine miles north-east of the Butt of Lewis.
  THE PRESIDENT OF THE BOARD OF TRADE (Mr. LLOYD-GEORGE,): I am informed by the Commissioners of Northern Lighthouses that they have not yet decided to propose the erection of a lighthouse and fog signal station on north Rona, and that in view of the heavy cost which its establishment and maintenance would involve, and the more pressing claims of other schemes, it is unlikely that the erection of the station referred to will be proceeded with in the near future.

  Shipwrecks in Belfast Lough.
  MR. T. L. CORBETT: I beg to ask the President of the Board of Trade whether he can state the number of shipwrecks and strandings that have taken place during the last ten years on the Irish coast from Belfast Lough Copeland Lights on Mew Island to Carlingford Lough.
  MR. LLOYD-GEORGE: The number of vessels which have stranded between the entrances of Belfast Lough, Grey Point, and Carlingford Lough, Cranfield Point, during the last ten years is 179, of which thirty-one became total wrecks and 148 were more or less damaged. Only two of the strandings were attended with loss of life, the number of lives lost being five.

  East London Water Supply.
  MR. BOTTOMLEY: I beg to ask the President of the Local Government Board whether his attention has been called to the quality of the drinking water supplied to London, and particularly to the fact that the inhabitants of East London are daily drinking, as water, some 2,000,000 gallons of sewage effluent; and what steps he proposes to take in the matter.
  THE PRESIDENT OF THE LOCAL GOVERNMENT BOARD (Mr. JOHN BURNS,): My attention has been called to this subject. I am aware that it is desirable that further steps should be taken to safeguard the supply of water from the Lee from the possibility of contamination. The Metropolitan Water Board included in a Bill promoted by them this session proposals with this

  241
  object, but they have, as I understand, withdrawn this part of the Bill, and I am in communication with them in relation to the matter. I may, however, state that I learn from the Water Examiner that the water supplied in the East London District during the past winter (consisting mainly of filtered Lee water) was clear and of good quality.

  Distress Committees.
  MR. J. WARD: I beg to ask the President of the Local Government Board whether he has any information as to the towns that have established distress committees under the Unemployed Workmen's Act of 1905; and whether he will give a list of such towns and the sum expended by distress committees upon actual work done by unemployed workmen up to the 30th March, 1906.
  MR. JOHN BURNS: There are seventy-five municipal boroughs and urban districts for each of which a distress committee is required to be established by the Act, and to these fourteen boroughs and urban districts have been added by the Local Government Board on the application of the local authorities concerned. I will send my hon. friend a complete list of the places. I am not at present able to state the sum expended by the committees on work, but I hope to obtain information on the subject in due course.

  Fees for Re-Addressing Telegrams.
  MR. BRIDGEMAN: I beg to ask the Postmaster-General what is the fee charged for having telegrams which have been addressed to business offices delivered at the private houses of the recipients after business hours; and whether he can see his way to reduce it in favour of persons only receiving a limited number of telegrams.
  THE POSTMASTER-GENERAL (Mr. SYDNEY BUXTON,): The fee is one guinea a year in addition to the ordinary redirection charge. The registration of special instructions for the treatment of particular telegrams leads to much additional trouble, whether the telegrams be many
  242
  or few, and tends to retard the service; and I am afraid, therefore, that I do not see my way to reduce the fee.

  Manchester Post Office and the Halfpenny Packet Post.
  MR. BRIDGEMAN: I beg to ask the Postmaster-General whether he has received complaints as to the manner in which the postal officials at Manchester now interpret the rule with regard to the halfpenny packet post; whether, in view of the fact that figures may be corrected in writing, it is an entirely new interpretation to exclude circulars in which figures are inserted in writing; and if he will give general instructions to postal officials to put the wider construction on the rules in future.
  MR. SYDNEY BUXTON: Under the regulations a printer's error may be corrected in manuscript in a circular sent by the halfpenny post, but they do not permit the insertion in manuscript in such circulars of any figures other than those indicating the date of despatch of the circular, the date of a meeting or appointment, and index or reference numbers. But I am inquiring into the whole question.

  Post Office Mail Contracts—;Treatment of Horses.
  MR. ASHLEY: I beg to ask the Postmaster-General whether, pending inquiries with reference to the general conditions under which Post Office contractors' work is carried on, he will take steps to insure that horses driven in mail vans should not be worked for fourteen hours in any one day.
  MR. SYDNEY BUXTON: The horses referred to in the hon. Member's previous Question only work on alternate days; and, although they are then out of their stalls for fourteen hours, they are during that time actually travelling for less than six hours. The condition of the contractor's horses is reported as satisfactory, and his stud is kept under official supervision.

  Private Letter Bags and Boxes.
  MR. HAY MORGAN: I beg to ask the Postmaster-General whether his attention has been

  243
  drawn to the fact that in consequence of the increased charge for letter hags and boxes many subscribers have ceased to use letter bags and boxes altogether; and whether he can inform the House what is the number of those who have ceased to subscribe for letter bags and boxes since the increased charge came into force.
  MR. SYDNEY BUXTON: The number of renters of private boxes has somewhat decreased since the revised charges came into force, but I am not at present in a position to give a return of the number of boxes which have been given up. No increase has been made in the fees for private bags. Perhaps I may point out to my hon. friend that the reason why my predecessor increased the charge for private boxes was that the previous fee did not cover the additional cost incurred. It is a fallacy to suppose that these private bags and boxes are an advantage to the Post Office. On the contrary, they add appreciably to the complexity of the sorting.

  Mr. W. Taverner's Pension Trust Scheme.
  MR. CHIOZZA MONEY: I beg to ask the Postmaster-General if he has granted, or intends to grant, special facilities to Mr. William Taverner, the controller of a national old age pension trust, to assist him in his scheme, whether by way of cashing pension warrants at post offices or otherwise.
  MR. SYDNEY BUXTON: I am glad to have the opportunity of stating that neither my predecessor nor I have granted, nor do I intend to grant, special facilities to Mr. William Taverner, the controller of a national old age pension trust, to assist him in his scheme, whether by way of cashing pension warrants at post offices or otherwise.

  Crown and Sub Post Offices.
  MR. SEAVERNS: I beg to ask the Postmaster-General if he will grant a Return of the Crown post offices in London, showing the location of each and the amount of business transacted by each during the last completed year of which he has record; and if he will state the amount of business trans-
  244
  acted during the corresponding period by the sub-post offices in Brixton.
  MR. SYDNEY BUXTON: I find that the preparation of such a Return will involve considerable trouble and expense, and I do not see that any really useful purpose will be served by it.

  Religious Instruction in Elementary Schools.
  LORD R. CECIL: I beg to ask the President of the Board of Education whether he will lay upon the Table of the House the syllabuses of religious instruction issued by the local education authorities in England and Wales.
  THE PRESIDENT OF THE BOARD OF EDUCATION (Mr. BIRRELL,): I understand that a Parliamentary Return is to be moved for in another place giving the syllabuses of religious instruction adopted by all local education authorities in England and Wales. The Government will be glad to grant such a Return, and I will take steps to obtain it and lay it before Parliament with the least possible delay.
  MR. ADKINSasked whether the Government would take steps also to obtain the syllabuses of religious instruction issued by diocesan authorities of the Church of England for use in non-provided schools.
  MR. BIRRELLreplied that the information would be as complete as possible. If he could obtain that information he would endeavour to do so.
  MR. LLEWELYN WILLIAMS: Will the right hon. Gentleman endeavour also to find out in how many schools in this country there is no religious instruction of any kind given?
  MR. BIRRELL: I hope that will be the result of these inquiries.

  The Apostles Creed.
  LORD R. CECIL: I bog to ask the President of the Board of Education whether the Education Department has

  245
  ruled that the Apostles Creed is or is not a religious formulary distinctive of a particular denomination within the moaning of Section 14 of the Education Act, 1870.
  I beg further to ask the President of the Board of Education whether, in the opinion of the Education Department, the teaching that can be given under Section 14 (2) of The Education Act, 1870, is confined to the ethical, literary, and historical use of the Bible.
  MR. BIRRELL: The Board have no jurisdiction to determine these or any other questions under Section 14 of the Act of 1870. My own opinion, however, which is purely personal, is that the reply to both Questions is in the negative. The noble Member may be interested to learn that the question of the legality of the inclusion of the Apostles Creed in a board school syllabus was submitted to the Department some years ago under the jurisdiction then possessed under Section 16 of the Act of 1870, which has since been repealed. The Department then decided that the inclusion of the Apostles Creed was legal.

  Return of Certificated Teachers.
  MR. LLEWLYN WILLIAMS: I beg to ask the President of the Board of Education whether he can state the number of certificated teachers engaged at the close of the last completed statistical year in Council, Church, Roman Catholic, Wesleyan, Jewish, and British, and other undenominational schools, respectively, in Wales and Monmouthshire.
  MR. BIRRELL: The information asked for can only be obtained by the expenditure of much labour, which would hardly be compensated for by the value of the results obtained.

  Children on School Rolls.
  MR. LLEWELYN WILLIAMS: I beg to ask the President of the Board of Education whether he can state the number of children enrolled, at the close of the last completed statistical year, in
  246
  Council, Church, Roman Catholic, Wesleyan, Jewish, and British, and other undenominational schools, respectively, in Wales and Monmouthshire.
  MR. BIRRELL: The numbers for the statistical year ending June 31st, 1905, are:—;Council, 307,698; Church, 92,480; Roman Catholic, 14,138; Wesleyan, 704; Jewish, nil; British and other undenominational, 6,227.

  School Departments.
  MR. LLEWELYN WILLIAMS: I beg to ask the President of the Board of Education whether he can state the number of separate school departments under head teachers in existence at the close of the last completed statistical year, classified as Council, Church, Roman Catholic, Wesleyan, Jewish, and British, and other undenominational school departments respectively, in Wales and Monmouthshire.
  MR. BIRRELL: The numbers for the statistical year ending July 31st, 1905, are:—;Council, 1,543; Church, 830; Roman Catholic, 80; Wesleyan, 3; Jewish, nil; British and other undenominational, 61.

  Clause 4 of the Education Bill.
  MR. ARTHURLEE: I beg to ask the President of the Board of Education if he can state what are the approximate numbers of voluntary schools which could be affected by the provisions of Clause 4 of the Education Bill, 1906, giving separate figures for the various denominations; and what are the approximate percentages of the respective totals of the various denominational schools to which the special facilities, provided in Clause 4, could be applied.
  MR. BIRRELL: I will let the hon. Member have, I hope by the end of the week, the number of voluntary schools of different denominations at present existing in urban districts with a population of over 5,000, but it is quite impossible for me to say in how many of these cases parents of four-fifths of the children are

  247
  likely to desire extended facilities. Still less can it be stated in how many cases other accommodation is available for the children whose parents do not desire these facilities, as required in Section 4 (2) of the Bill.
  MR. ARTHUR LEE: Is the right hon. Gentleman aware that the National Education Association have made a calculation from the latest Blue-books, and has he any reason to suppose the figures published by them are incorrect? The right hon. Gentleman appears to have misunderstood my Question.
  MR. BIRRELL: I cannot make myself responsible for those figures.

  The Zoological Gardens.
  MR. SEAVERNS: I beg to ask the First Commissioner of Works whether he has recently authorised a further lease of land to the Zoological Gardens; what is the period for which the lease is given, what the acreage, and what the annual rental.
  THE FIRST COMMISSIONER OF WORKS (Mr. HARCOURT,): No new lease of land has been made to the Zoological Gardens. A licence for the user of a few yards of land on the banks of the canal has been granted to the society in order to afford access for visitors to the Gardens to the new bridge which is being built, for the convenience of the public mainly, at the expense of the Zoological Society. The new bridge will be double the present width; half will be used by the Zoological Society and the other half as a public footway as at present from Regent's Park to Primrose Hill.
  MR. SEAVERNS: What rent is paid for this land? And is the use of it confined to the purposes indicated in the reply of the right hon. Gentleman?
  MR. HARCOURT: No rent is paid. The object is to give the Society access to a bridge of which they are paying nearly the whole cost.
  MR. MYER: Have the Board any power of control over the pathways from the Gardens to the bridge. On Easter Monday—;
  MR. SPEAKER: Order, order! Notice should be given of these details.
  MR. J. WARDasked whether the right hon. Gentleman could use his influence to procure a reasonable tariff for refreshments served to the public in the Gardens in holiday times.
  MR. HARCOURTsaid he had no control over the tariff charges.

  Ecclesiastical Commissioners' Estates.
  MR. HERBERT ROBERTS: I beg to ask the hon. Member for East Bristol, as Church Estates Commissioner, how many applications have been made to the Ecclesiastical Commissioner by lessees for their leave to sell wine, beer, and spirits in each of the years 1890–1905, both inclusive; and in how many cases in each of these years the application has been granted.
  MR. CHARLES HOBHOUSE: The number of such applications, would not exceed six in any one year, and the number granted would be less, but I have no means of ascertaining the respective numbers without a laborious, search through the papers of the Ecclesiastical Commissioners, for which there appears to be no sufficient reason.
  MR. HERBERT ROBERTS: I beg to ask the hon. Member for East Bristol, as Church Estates Commissioner, how many of the places upon the estates of the Ecclesiastical Commissioners, which were licensed during 1905 for the sale of beer, wine, or spirits, have been leased from the Commissioners since 1889, and in how many cases the lease will expire within the next five years.
  MR. CHARLES HOBHOUSE: The Ecclesiastical Commissioners know of no licence granted in respect of any place upon their estates during the year 1905.

  Attorney-General's Fiat for Criminal Prosecution.
  MR. DICKINSON: I beg to ask Mr. Attorney-General if he will state the several Acts of Parliament under which the right of any private individual in England to institute criminal proceedings is limited by the requirement that the fiat of the Attorney-General shall be first obtained, and the number of occasions upon which, since the passing of each Act, application has been made thereunder for such fiat, and the number of times that such fiat has been granted and refused.
  THE SOLICITOR-GENERAL (Sir W. ROBSON,): The Attorney-General's fiat is required under the following Acts of Parliament:—;Vexatious Indictments Acts, 1859; Law of Property Amendment Acts, 1859 and 1860; Larceny Act, 1861; Newspapers, Printers, etc., Act, 1869; Larceny (Advertisements) Act, 1870; Explosive Substances Act, 1883; Official Secrets Act, 1889; Public Bodies (Corrupt Practices) Act, 1889; Money Lenders Act, 1900. It is not possible to give statistics relative to all the applications under the earlier Acts, but the numbers for the last twenty years are as follows:—;Larceny Act, 1861: 159 granted, 21 refused, total 180; Public Bodies Corrupt Practices Act, 1889: 30 granted, 6 refused, total, 36; Newspapers, Printers, etc., Act, 1869: 5 granted, 12 refused, total 17; Larceny (Advertisements) Act, 1870: 7 granted, 6 refused, total 13; Explosive Substances Act, 1883: 5 granted, 5 refused, total 10; Vexatious Indictments Act, 1859: 5 granted, 3 refused, total 8; Law of Property Amendment Acts, 1859 and 1860: 2 granted, 5 refused, total 7; Money Lenders Act, 1900: 4 granted, total 4; Official Secrets Act, 1889: 3 granted, total 3. The fiat of the Attorney-General was formerly required under the Public Health Act 1875, and the Public Health (Members and Officers) Act 1885 for certain of the offences now covered by the Public Bodies Corrupt Practices Act 1889, and under these Acts, 10 applications were granted and 11 refused, total 21.
  MR. J. HENDERSON: I beg to ask Mr. Attorney-
  250
  General whether it is the intention of the Government to reintroduce the Bill to amend The Married Women's Property Act, 1882, which was brought from the Lords on April 4th, 1905 as well as in the previous session of Parliament, with a view to its being passed into law this session.
  SIR W. ROBSON: The substance of the Bill of last session is contained in Lord Davey's Bill which has already been read a second time in the House of Lords.

  MR. Rider Haggard's Report.
  SIR WILLIAM BULL: I beg to ask the hon. Member for South Somerset, as representing the President of the Board of Agriculture, whether the Report of Lord Tennyson's Committee upon MR. Rider Haggard's Report on the Salvation Army's Agricultural Colonies in Canada, the United States, and at Hadleigh, in Essex, will be printed.
  MR. CHURCHILL: I have reason to believe that the Report in question will very shortly be presented to the Secretary of State. It will be thereupon laid before Parliament.

  Protection of Scottish Fisheries.
  MR. WEIR: I beg to ask the Secretary for Scotland if he will state the names of the Admiralty cruisers placed at the disposal of the Fishery Board for Scotland for sea police service, and what districts they patrol.
  THE SECRETARY FOR SCOTLAND (Mr. SINCLAIR,): The names of the Admiralty cruisers placed at the disposal of the Fishery Board for Scotland for sea police service are His Majesty Ship "Ringdove" and His Majesty's Ship "Daisy," and the areas patrolled by them are the Moray Firth and Loch Fyne respectively.

  Scottish Registration Anomalies.
  SIR J. JARDINE: I beg to ask the Secretary for Scotland

  251
  whether he is is aware that every year many voters in the counties of Roxburgh and Berwick have their names removed from the register of voters because they have settled in a neighbouring county to work at a different farm or under a different employer in the ordinary work of their calling; and whether he will consider the propriety of removing the disqualification so arising under the present law in Scotland.
  MR. SINCLAIR: Such points, which affect the whole country, will no doubt be considered with any general reform of the present franchise and registration law, and they are under the observation of the Government.

  The Convention of Burghs and Royal Proclamations.
  SIR J. JARDINE: I beg to ask the Secretary for Scotland whether he is now in a position to state if the request of the Convention of Burghs anent the proclamation of the accession of Sovereigns will be granted.
  MR. SINCLAIR: No, Sir. I regret to say that it has been found impossible to reconcile conflicting opinions and claims. I hope to arrive at a decision after personal conference during the autumn recess or whenever there is opportunity; and I shall be obliged if the hon. Gentleman and other hon. Members interested will allow the matter to stand over accordingly.

  Scottish Education Board.
  MR. GULLAND: I beg to ask the Secretary for Scotland if he will state how often the Lords of the Committee of Council on Education in Scotland have met since their appointment was gazetted on February 16th.
  MR. SINCLAIR: It is contrary to precedent and practice to give such particulars as to meetings of any Committee of the Privy Council.
  MR. GULLAND: May I ask if their Lordships ever meet at all?
  [No Answer was returned.]

  Scottish Education Grant.
  SIR HENRY CRAIK: I beg to ask the Secretary for Scotland whether he has represented to the Treasury the claim which will arise for Scotland in view of the additional annual grant proposed for England and Wales under the Education Bill; and whether that claim has been admitted.
  MR. SINCLAIR: The Chancellor of the Exchequer has already stated, in Answer to a Question in the House, that a decision on the question of giving an equivalent grant for Scotland would be premature, but due representation will be made to the Treasury as to the claims and needs of Scotland as occasion arises.

  Scottish School Finance.
  MR. WEIR: I beg to ask the Secretary for Scotland if he will state whether, in considering questions of school finance, there is any reason why the financial year should not in all cases be identical and terminate on March 31st in each year.
  MR. SINCLAIR: The financial year of school boards is identical in all cases and ends at May 15th, the date to which the accounts of all other local authorities in Scotland are made up, which date could not be departed from without causing grave inconvenience.

  American Paupers in Irish Workhouses.
  MR. SULLIVAN: I beg to ask the Chief Secretary to the Lord-Lieutenant of Ireland whether he is aware that a widow named Delia Turner, who had resided for thirty-four years in America, became partially paralysed and was admitted to the Tucksbury State Hospital, Boston; that she was placed on board a vessel by the authorities and her passage paid to Athlone, her native town, without consulting her wishes in the matter; that she has been admitted to this workhouse and is now a charge upon the rates; and whether, seeing that she is anxious to go back to America, he proposes to take any action in the matter.
  THE CHIEF SECRETARY FOR IRELAND (Mr. BRYCE,): The Local Government Board have ascertained from the clerk of the Athlone Union that, according to the information supplied to the Guardians by Mrs. Turner herself, the facts are as stated in the Question. Mrs. Turner is now in the Athlone workhouse and is a charge upon the races. Having regard to the United States immigration laws which forbid the entrance of persons unable to provide for themselves, I do not see that any steps can be taken for sending Mrs. Turner back to the United States. The general question of the deportation of paupers and lunatics from the United States to this country is, however receiving the consideration of the Government.

  Irish Land—;Estates Commissioners' Staff.
  MR. FETHERSTONHAUGH: I beg to ask the Chief Secretary to the Lord-Lieutenant of Ireland whether, now that further funds have been made available for carrying out sales under The Purchase of Land (Ireland) Act, 1903, it is intended promptly to appoint more examiners of title and examining clerks in the offices of the Estates Commissioners, as the present staff is inadequate to deal with the work, and the delays are retarding land purchase and are very injurious to the tenant purchasers as well as the vendors; and if the President of the Land Commission has recommended further appointments of examiners.
  MR. BRYCE: I am informed by the Land Commission that the question of the sufficiency of the existing staff of examiners and examiners' clerks is at present engaging the earnest attention of the Commissioners.

  Fermanagh Land Commission Appeals.
  MR. FETHERSTONHAUGH: I beg to ask the Chief Secretary to the Lord-Lieutenant of Ireland how many Land Commission appeals from the county of Fermanagh are at present pending; and whether, in view of the number that have been pending over two years, arrangements will be made to have them shortly disposed of.
  MR. BRYCE: I am informed by the Land Commission that appeals are pending in eighty-eight cases in county Fermanagh. The last hearing of appeals in that county took place in January last, when the list for hearing comprised all cases in which notices of appeal were lodged prior to June 1st, 1904. A further appeal sitting for the county will be held as soon as possible having regard to the claims of other districts.

  Scariff (Clare) Drainage.
  MR. WILLIAM REDMOND: I beg to ask the Chief Secretary to the Lord-Lieutenant of Ireland whether his attention has been called to the necesssity for a drainage scheme for Scariff, county Clare; and whether he will inquire into the matter.
  MR. BRYCE: The Local Drainage Committee have recently applied to the Irish Government for aid to a scheme for improving the Scariff drainage system, and have been informed in reply that it is doubtful whether it will be possible to consider the question of aiding, during the current financial year, any development schemes in addition to those to which assistance has already been promised, but that when any question of taking up new schemes arises, the claims of the Scariff district will receive full consideration.
  MR. WILLIAM REDMOND: Will the right hon. Gentlemen be good enough to bear in mind the long-standing necessity for this drainage scheme?
  MR. BRYCE: I will bring the matter to the attention of those who advise me on the subject, and endeavour to have it considered.

  Glanquin (Clare) Police Force.
  MR. WILLIAM REDMOND: I beg to ask the Chief Secretary to the Lord-Lieutenant of Ireland why there is a police force stationed at Glanquin, county Clare, seeing that there is no crime or disorder in that district.
  MR. BRYCE: Glanquin is situated in a remote mountainous district and is six

  255
  miles distant from the nearest police station. In 1904 it became necessary, owing to the disturbed state of the locality, to establish a police hut at Glanquin. The condition of the district has since improved but, in the Inspector-General's opinion, it is not yet possible to dispense with the police force.
  MR. WILLIAM REDMOND: Is it for the Inspector-General to decide this case? May I ask whether, in view of the tranquility of the district and the fact that the Judge of Assize congratulated the county on the absence of crime, this police force will be removed irrespective of the opinion of the Inspector-General?
  MR. BRYCE: I could not think of over-ruling the Inspector's opinion. Probably, as the district is not very disturbed, the police may be removed before long.
  MR. WILLIAM REDMOND: Will the right hon. Gentleman inquire into the matter? We have no confidence in the Inspector-General.
  MR. BRYCEreplied in the negative.
  MR. WILLIAM REDMOND: On whose authority has the Inspector-General come to his opinion? He does not live in the district.
  MR. BRYCE: No doubt he gets his information from the county and district inspectors.

  Clonelly Medical Officer.
  MR. T. W. RUSSELL: I beg to ask the Chief Secretary to the Lord-Lieutenant of Ireland why Dr. Dickson, who was a candidate for the position of medical officer for the Clonelly district, part of which is in Fermanagh and part in Donegal, and received a majority of the votes of the combined districts, has not received the appointment; whether he is aware that the actual voting was, in the Fermanagh part, Patton twenty-three, Dickson fourteen, and in the Donegal part, Dick-
  256
  son twenty-two, Patton six, giving Dr. Dickson a majority in the combined districts of seven votes; and if he will inquire as to why the appointment has not been made.
  MR. BRYCE: I am informed that this Question is asked under a misapprehension of the facts. The Clonelly dispensary district is wholly situate in the Irvinestown Union of county Fermanagh; it adjoins the Pettigo dispensary district of the Donegal Union in county Donegal, but the two dispensary Districts are as distinct as any other two dispensary districts in Ireland. The Guardians of Irvinestown Union have appointed Dr. Patton as medical officer of Clonolly dispensary district, and the Guardians of Donegal Union have appointed Dr. Dickson as medical officer of Pettigo dispensary district. Neither Board of Guardians was under an obligation to appoint the medical officer selected by the other, although the two dispensary districts were formerly in charge of one medical officer.

  Mrs. Grace Mahon's Roscommon Estate.
  MR. JAMES O'KELLY: I beg to ask the Chief Secretary to the Lord-Lieutenant of Ireland if his attention has been called to the manner in which the Land Act of 1903 is being administered in connection with the estate of Mrs. Grace Mahon, Strokestown, Roscommon; and whether the direct tenants are being led to sign purchase agreements by means of which the subtenants in occupation are deprived of the benefits of reductions in rent given since May 1st, 1905, and grazing lands adjacent to the town are being sold to large graziers instead of being divided amongst the small holders in the district belonging to the class which was supposed to benefit under the Act; and whether the Estates Commissioners will be directed to put the 15th section of the Act into operation.
  MR. BRYCE: The Estates Commissioners inform me that 172 agreements for the purchase of holdings on the estate referred to were lodged with them on the 25th instant. The questions of the sub-tenancies and of the lettings

  257
  to large graziers, will be dealt with by the Commissioners in the ordinary course when the report of the inspection comes before them. The question whether the Commissioners will take action under the 15th section is one for their own determination.

  Irish Local Government Auditors—;Case of Mr. Drury.
  MR. J. P. NANNETTI: I beg to ask the Chief Secretary to the Lord-Lieutenant of Ireland whether he will explain why Mr. Drury, an auditor of the Local Government Board, Ireland, who has by length of service attained his maximum rate of salary, namely, £700 a year, has lately been given an addition to his salary of £100 a year on the representation that he is employed in auditing the accounts of county councils, seeing that the only audit for which he is responsible is that of Dublin Corporation accounts, for which he has been responsible for fourteen years without any addition to his salary; and whether, seeing that Mr. Drury also receives a further addition to his salary of £100 a year for controlling the work of his fellow auditors, all of whom have larger experience in conducting audits under the regulations which have been in force since the Local Government Act, 1898, came into operation, and that he allowed to receive from moneys not provided by Parliament a further salary of £50 a year for work outside his duties as a civil servant, he will explain why he is supplied with the services of a lower division clerk to assist him in earning hi emoluments as an auditor.
  MR. BRYCE: Mr. Drury's appointment, duties, salary, emoluments, and staff were fixed in 1904, by the Treasury as the result of a Departmental Inquiry into the audit system in Ireland ordered by their Lordships in 1903. His position is the same as the inspector of audits in England, save that the Local Government Board require him to undertake certain audits in addition to his office work as General Audit Inspector. Mr. Drury ha been appointed by the Irish Government to audit the accounts of petty session clerks, for which he receives £50 per an-
  258
  num, but the Board do not regard this is outside the duties of a civil servant.

  Dublin Corporation and Mr. Drury.
  MR. J. P. NANNETTI: I beg to ask he Chief Secretary to the Lord-Lieutenant of Ireland whether Mr. Drury, by whose advice the Local Government Board were guided in the framing of the Accounts Orders that recently gave rise to dissatisfaction, is the officer whose report on the accounts of Dublin Corporation lately appeared; whether he is aware hat at a meeting of the corporation, specially convened for the purpose, a Resolution was carried refusing to allow Mr. Drury access to their books; and whether, seeing that this official has been selected to advise the Local Government Board on matters of account and audit generally, and to supervise the work of the other auditors, although he is the only member of the auditorial staff who has not had any experience in auditing accounts which have been completely altered in form and character by the legislation of the past eight years, it is the intention of the Local Government Board to require the corporation to employ this officer, while public bodies of the same standing as the corporation in Great Britain have the right to appoint and remove their auditors and are quite independent of the Local Government Boards of England and Scotland.
  MR. BRYCE: Mr. Drury, together with the other auditors of the Local Government Board, assisted in the preparation of the Public Bodies Order, which is now in force throughout Ireland and working satisfactorily. It is a fact that the corporation passed a resolution refusing Mr. Drury access to their books, owing to his having reported unfavourably on their accounts. It is not a fact that Mr. Drury has had no experience in auditing accounts in recent years. The Local Government Board have the utmost confidence in his ability and integrity, and his experience of the accounts of public bodies is second to none. The fact that a different law exists in England and Scotland does not relieve the Local Government Board in Ireland from the statutory obligation imposed upon them

  259
  of auditing the accounts of the Dublin Corporation. Nothing but legislation could alter this.

  Irish Language in Irish Schools.
  MR. J. P. NANNETTI: I beg to ask the Chief Secretary to the Lord-Lieutenant of Ireland whether he is aware that at the national convention of the United Irish League held in Dublin last December a Resolution was adopted requesting the restoration of the fees for the teaching of Irish as an extra subject in the national schools which were available for the past thirty years, and were only withdrawn during the recent administration of the hon. Member for South Dublin; whether he is aware that similar Resolutions have been adopted by the Irish Hierarchy, by three-fourths of the public boards in Ireland and by numerous branches of the Gaelic League, and other educational bodies; whether the Treasury has yielded to this expression of Irish opinion; and, if so, what is the cause of the delay in cancelling the notice of the Commissioners of National Education withdrawing the fees.
  MR. BRYCE: I have seen the Resolution referred to in the first part of the Question, and am aware that many similar Resolutions have been passed. As to the remainder of the Question, I can only repeat the statement which I made to the hon. Member on the 5th instant,† namely, that the existing system for the teaching of Irish will remain in operation until June 30th next, and that matters have not yet reached a stage at which I can make a definite statement as to what change may then be made. The matter is constantly before me, and as soon as I can make a statement I will do so.
  MR. DILLON: When may we expect the statement?
  MR. BRYCE: Probably in the next two or three weeks.

  Irish Agricultural Inquiry—;Mr. Dryden's Interviews.
  MR. CHARLES DEVLIN: I beg to ask the Chief Secretary to the
  † See (4) Debates, clv., 713.
  260
  Lord-Lieutenant of Ireland whether his attention has been called to the statement made by Mr. John Dryden, formerly Minister of Agriculture for the province of Ontario, Canada, and recently appointed to the Commission to inquire into the agricultural conditions of Ireland, to the effect that Canadian farmers enjoy no advantages over Irish farmers; that the latter are better off by reason of their proximity to the English markets; that if they have fallen behind it is simply due to discouragement; and that, by reason of the Irish Land Act, the Irish farmer is on as good a footing as the Canadian farmer in regard to the procuring and tenure of land; will he state if the Government were aware of Mr. Dryden's views when making the appointment; and whether it is the intention of the Government to continue the appointment in view of the publication of Mr. Dryden's views.
  MR. BRYCE: I have not seen, and am not aware that Mr. Dryden made such statement. He informs me that he has said nothing whatever as to Irish farmers, or their advantages or their discouragement. The Committee was not appointed to inquire into the agricultural conditions of Ireland, but into the working of the Department of Agriculture and Technical Instruction. The Government had no knowledge of Mr. Dryden's views when making the appointment. He tells me that he has no preconceived opinions whatever on the matters he is to join in investigating. I believe that Mr. Dryden's knowledge and wide practical experience make him well fitted for the work which he has consented to perform.
  MR. CHARLES DEVLIN: Has the right hon. Gentleman seen the report of the interview given by Mr. Dryden to the Morning Post and other English papers, in which he expresses his views in regard to Irish agriculture?
  MR. BRYCE: Mr. Dryden informs me that the reports he has seen are both inaccurate and misleading.
  MR. JOHN O'CONNOR: Is the right hon. Gentleman aware that the opinions of this gentleman are said to

  261
  have been formed after reading a book written by the very man whose conduct he is appointed to inquire into?
  MR. BRYCE: Mr. Dryden informs me that the opposite is the case. He has formed no opinion, and is waiting to hear the evidence.
  MR. T. W. RUSSELL: Will Mr. Dryden abstain from making speeches and giving interviews to the Press?
  MR. BRYCE: He is following a habit common in America, and I am afraid becoming common here, of receiving interviewers to whom he says something which is entirely misreported.

  Colonel Malone's Westmeath Estate.
  MR. GINNELL: I beg to ask the Chief Secretary to the Lord-Lieutenant of Ireland will the Estates Commissioners suspend payment of price and of bonus to Colonel Malone, of Baronstown, Westmeath, pending the distribution of the untenanted land comprised in it among tenants and others in need of land, and the appointment of trustees chosen by the majority of the users for the purpose of controlling the bog; and will they send an inspector with fresh instructions on these points.
  MR. BRYCE: The Estates Commissioners inform me that in this case they had already issued instructions to their inspector to report upon the points referred to in the Question. When the inspector's supplementary report has been received the case will come before the Commissioners for consideration and ruling.

  Irish Land Annuities.
  MR. GINNELL: I beg to ask the Chief Secretary to the Lord-Lieutenant of Ireland whether any special provision is made in the Civil Service Estimates for costs to be incurred in the recovery of annuities from purchasers within the zones under the Land Act of 1903; if so, in what Vote is it included; and is it
  262
  proposed to pay any of such money to the persons, or to the nominees of the persons, who invented or advised the adoption of the system of purchase without inspection for value.
  MR. BRYCE: Provision is made in sub-head F of the Land Commission Vote for the cost of legal proceedings, including proceedings for the collection of land purchase instalments. In the estimates for the current year a sum of £1,600 is provided under that sub-head as compared with £1,800 last year. I do not know to whom it is suggested in the last part of this Question that payments should be made.

  Irish Teachers in University Degrees.
  MR. LIDDELL: I beg to ask the Chief Secretary to the Lord-Lieutenant of Ireland whether it is the intention of the Government to grant a special rate of salary to national school teachers in Ireland who have taken out university degrees, as was recommended by the Commissioners of National Education last year; and how much an increase of £10 per annum to the salaries of all such teachers would cost.
  MR. BRYCE: The Answer to the first part of this Question is in the negative. Assuming that one in every dozen teachers qualified for the extra award proposed, it is estimated that the additional cost would amount to £10,000 annually, and it would require to be considered whether this was the best way of expending such a sum.

  Irish Local Government Finance.
  MR. MOONEY: I beg to ask the Chief Secretary to the Lord-Lieutenant of Ireland if he will grant the Return standing in the name of the hon. Member for Newry.
  MR. BRYCE: The information asked for, with the exception of column (5), will be found in the Local Taxation Returns, as also in the Annual Report of the Local Government Board for the year ending March 31st, 1904. In these

  263
  circumstances it does not appear to be necessary to prepare the Return in its present form, but if the hon. Member should see fit to move for a Return by counties of the fees recovered by the Local Government Board from public bodies for auditing accounts, I will offer no objection.

  (I.) County Councils.

  Name of County.

  Total Expenditure for the year as shown in the Audited Abstracts including Amounts in Col. (3) and Expenditure out of Loans, but excluding moneys transferred to other funds of the same Council.

  Total money supplied to Asylum Committee, Boards of Guardians, Rural District Councils, and Committee of Agriculture.

  Excess of Amount in Col. (2) over Amount in Col. (3) being net Expenditure

  Amount recovered by Treasury from County Council for Auditors' Salaries.

  Observations.

  (1)

  (2)

  (3)

  (4)

  (5)

  (6)

  £

  £

  £

  £

  s.

  d.

  Total

  (II.) County Borough Councils.

  Name of County.

  Total Expenditure for the year as shown in the Audited Abstracts including Amounts in Col. (3) and Expenditure out of Loans, but excluding moneys transferred to other funds of the same Council.

  Total money supplied to Asylum Committee, Board of Guardians, and Technical Instruction Committee.

  Excess of Amount in Col. (2) over Amount in Col. (3) being net Expenditure.

  Amount recovered by Treasury from County Borough Council for Auditors' Salaries.

  Observations.

  (1)

  (2)

  (3)

  (4)

  (5)

  (6)

  £

  £

  £

  £

  s.

  d.

  Total.

  Appended is the Return referred to.
  Mr. Mooney—;Public Bodies (Ireland) (Accounts),—;Return in respect of the audit of the Accounts, of Public Bodies in Ireland for the financial year ended the 31st day of March, 1904, in the following form:

  (III.) District Lunatic Asylum Committees.

  Name of District Lunatic Asylum.

  Names of Counties and County Boroughs comprised in each Asylum District.

  Apportioned share for each County and County Borough of Total Expenditure for the year as shown in the Audited Abstracts, including Amounts in Col. (3) and Expenditure out of Loans, hut excluding moneys transferred to other funds of the same Councils

  Apportioned share for each County of money paid to Boards of Guardians for maintenance of patients under 38 and 39 Vic, cap. 67, sec. 9.

  Excess of Amount in Col. (3) over Amount in Col. (4), being net Expenditure.

  Apportioned share for each County of the Amount recovered by Treasury from Asylum Committee for Auditors' Salaries, and Total Amount for each Asylum.

  Observations.

  (1)

  (2)

  (3)

  (4)

  (5)

  (6)

  (7)

  £

  £

  £

  £

  s.

  d.

  Total for each Asylum.

  Gross Total-

  (IV.) County Committees of Agriculture and Technical Instruction.

  Name of County.

  Total Expenditure for the year as shown in the Audited Abstracts including Amounts in Col. (3) and Expenditure out of Loans, but excluding moneys transferred to other funds of the same Council.

  Total money supplied to local or Joint Committees.

  Excess of Amount in Col. (3) over Amount in Col. (2) being net Expenditure.

  Amount recovered by Treasury from Committee for Auditors' Salaries.

  Observations.

  (1)

  (2)

  (3)

  (4)

  (5)

  (6)

  £

  £

  £

  £

  s.

  d.

  Total

  (V.) Rural District Councils.

  Name of Rural District Council.

  Total Expenditure for the year as shown in the Audited Abstracts including Amounts in Col. (3) and Expenditure out of Loans, but excluding moneys transferred to other funds of the same Council.

  Total moneys supplied to Joint Burial or other Boards on a Precept or Demand.

  Excess of Amount in Col. (2) over Amount in Col. (3) being net Expenditure.

  Amount recovered by Treasury from Rural District Council for Auditors' Salaries.

  Observations.

  (1)

  (2)

  (3)

  (4)

  (5)

  (6)

  £

  £

  £

  £

  s.

  d.

  Total

  (VI.) Urban District Councils and Town Commissioners.

  Name of Urban District Councils and Town Commissioners.

  Total Expenditure for the year as shown in the Audited Abstracts including Amounts in Col. (3) and Expenditure out of Loans, but excluding moneys transferred to other funds of the same Council.

  Total moneys supplied to County Council and to Joint Burial or other Boards on a Precept or Demand.

  Excess of Amount in Col. (2) over Amount in Col. (3) being net Expenditure.

  Amount recovered by Treasury from Urban District Council or Town Commissioners for Auditors' Salaries.

  Observations.

  (1)

  (2)

  (3)

  (4)

  (5)

  (6)

  £

  £

  £

  £

  s.

  d.

  Total

  (VII.) Technical Instruction Committees in Urban Districts.

  Name of Urban District.

  Total Expenditure for the year as shown in the Audited Abstracts including Amounts in Col. (3) and Expenditure out of Loans, but excluding moneys transferred to other funds of the same Committees.

  Total moneys (if any) supplied to any other Public Body.

  Excess of Amount in Col. (2) over Amount in Col. (3) being net Expenditure.

  Amount recovered by Treasury from Committees for Auditors' Salaries.

  Observations.

  (1)

  (2)

  (3)

  (4)

  (5)

  (6)

  £

  £

  £

  £

  s.

  d.

  Total

  (VIII.) Other Public Bodies.

  Name of each other Public Body.

  Total Expenditure for the year as shown in the Audited Abstracts including Amounts in Col. (3) and Expenditure out of Loans, but excluding moneys transferred to other funds of the same Public Body.

  Total moneys (if any) supplied to any other Public Bodies.

  Excess of Amount in Col. (2) over Amount in Col. (3) being net Expenditure.

  Amount recovered by Treasury from Public Bodies for Auditors' Salaries.

  Observations.

  (1)

  (2)

  (3)

  (4)

  (5)

  (6)

  £

  £

  £

  £

  s.

  d.

  Total

  Ireland's Share of Imperial Taxation.
  MR. JOHN O'CONNOR: I beg to ask the Secretary to the Treasury whether, having regard to the provisions of the statute, 56 Geo. 3, chapter 98, section 1, he will explain why the Irish Taxation Account is charged with the cost of
  270
  Imperial services in Ireland; whether the statute permits such discrimination between Irish and other services of any Imperial character whatever; and whether he will consult the law officers of the Crown as to the effect of the statute in this respect, and if it is found

  271
  that in their opinion, on a case stated, such discrimination is contrary to law, the practice of making such charges will be discontinued.
  MR. MCKENNA: The section to which the hon. and learned Member refers is the one which combined the Consolidated Funds of Great Britain and Ireland to form the Consolidated Fund of the United Kingdom and directed that the charges formerly payable out of the separate funds should for the future be paid out of the combined fund. That direction has been and still is carried out in practice. In the annual Financial Relations Returns, for purposes of comparison, the Irish expenditure is shown as a set off against the amount of Revenue estimated to be contributed by Ireland. But this does not mean, as the hon. Member's Question appears to suggest, that the Revenue so contributed is diverted from the Consolidated Fund and applied to meet the Irish expenditure.
  MR. JOHN O'CONNOR: The right hon. Gentleman has not answered my Question. Will he consult the law officers of the Crown as to whether it is legal to exercise this discrimination?
  MR. MCKENNA: The Answer is that that discrimination has not been made.

BUSINESS OF THE HOUSE.
MR. A. J. BALFOUR, who said he regretted the absence of the Prime Minister through illness, asked the Chancellor of the Exchequer for a forecast of the business of the week, and particularly as to the Supply to be taken on Thursday.
MR. ASQUITH: We hope to got the Budget resolutions in Committee to-night and to take the Report stage to-morrow. On Wednesday the Plural Voting Bill will be introduced and other Bills proceeded with. The Supply on Thursday will be Irish Supply.

SELECTION (STANDING COMMITTEES).
Sir WILLIAM BRAMPTON GURDONreported from the Committee of Selection; that they had discharged the following Member from the Standing Committee on Trade (including Agriculture and Fishing), Shipping and Manufactures, in respect of the Land Tenure Bill: Lord Turnour; and had appointed in substitution: Mr. Meysey Thompson.
Sir WILLIAM BRAMPTON GURDONfurther reported from the Committee of Selection; that they had discharged the following Member from the Standing Committee on Trade (including Agriculture and Fishing), Shipping, and Manufactures, in respect of the Merchant Shipping Acts Amendment (No. 2) Bill: Sir William Evans-Gordon; and had appointed in substitution: Sir Gilbert Parker.
Reports to lie upon the Table.

NEW BILL.
  ENGINES AND BOILERS (PERSONS IN CHARGE) (No. 2) BILL.
  "To grant certificates to persons in charge of Steam Engines, Boilers, and Steam Cranes," presented by Mr. Steadman; supported by Mr. Barnes, Mr. C. Duncan, Mr. James Haslam, and Mr. Joseph Walton; to be read a second time upon Monday, June 18th, and to be printed. [Bill 180.]

BUSINESS OF THE HOUSE (WAYS AND MEANS.)
Motion made, and Question put, "That the proceedings of the Committee of Ways and Means, if under consideration at Eleven o'clock this night, be not interrupted under the Standing Order (Sittings of the House)."—;(Mr. Chancellor of the Exchequer.)
The House divided:—;Ayes, 353; Noes, 88. (Division List No. 55.)

AYES.

Abraham, William (Cork, N.E.)

Alden, Percy

Baker, Sir John (Portsmouth)

Acland, Francis Dyke

Armitage, R.

Balfour, Robert (Lanark)

Adkins, W. Ryland

Armstrong, W. C. Heaton

Baring, Godfrey (Isle of Wight)

Agar-Robertes, Hon. T. C.

Asquith, Rt. Hn. Herbert Henry

Barker, John

Agnew, George William

Astbury, John Meir

Barlow, Percy (Bedford)

Barnard, E. B.

Dillon, John

Jenkins, J.

Barnes, G. N.

Dobson, Thomas W.

Johnson, John (Gateshead)

Beale, W. P.

Dolan, Charles Joseph

Jones, David Brynmor (Swansea

Beauchamp, E.

Donelan, Captain A.

Jones, Leif (Appleby)

Beaumont, W. C. B. (Hexham)

Duckworth, James

Jones, William (Carnarvonshire

Beck, A. Cecil

Duncan, C. (Barrow-in-Furness

Jowett, F. W.

Bell, Richard

Duncan, J. H. (York, Otley)

Kearley, Hudson, E.

Bellairs, Carlyon

Dunn, A. Edward (Camborne)

Kekewich, Sir George

Benn, W. (T'wr'Hamlets, S. Geo.

Dunne, Major E. M. (Walsall)

Kennedy, Vincent Paul

Bennett, E. N.

Edwards, Clement (Denbigh)

Kincaid-Smith, Captain

Bertram, Julius

Edwards, Frank (Radnor)

King, Alfred John (Knutsford)

Bethell, T. R. (Essex, Maldon)

Ellis, Rt. Hon. John Edward

Kitson, Sir James

Billson, Alfred

Erskine, David C.

Laidlaw, Robert

Birrell, Rt. Hon. Augustine

Esmonde, Sir Thomas

Lamb, Edmund G. (Leominster

Black, Arthur W. (Bedfordshire)

Essex, R. W.

Lambert, George

Blake, Edward

Everett, R. Lacey

Lamont, Norman

Boland, John

Faber, G. H. (Boston)

Lawson, Sir Wilfrid

Bottomley, Horatio

Fenwick, Charles

Layland-Barratt, Francis

Brace, William

Ferens, T. R.

Lea, Hugh Cecil (St. Pancras, E.

Bramsdon, T. A.

Ferguson, R. C. Munro

Lehmann, R. C.

Branch, James

Fiennes, Hon. Eustace

Lever, W. H. (Cheshire, Wirral)

Brigg, John

Findlay, Alexander

Levy, Maurice

Brooke, Stopford

Fowler, Rt. Hon. Sir Henry

Lewis, John Herbert

Brunner, J. F. L. (Lancs., Leigh)

Fuller, John Michael F.

Lloyd-George, Rt. Hon. David

Brunner, Sir John T. (Cheshire)

Fullerton, Hugh

Lough, Thomas

Bryce, Rt. Hn. James (Aberdeen

Furness, Sir Christopher

Lundon, W.

Buchanan, Thomas Ryburn

Gibb, James (Harrow)

Lupton, Arnold

Buckmaster, Stanley O.

Gill, A. H.

Luttrell, Hugh Fownes

Burke, E. Haviland-

Ginnell, L.

Lyell, Charles Henry

Burns, Rt. Hon. John

Gladstone, Rt. Hn. Herbert John

Macdonald, J. R. (Leicester)

Burnyeat, J. D. W.

Gooch, George Peabody

Macdonald, J. M. (FalkirkB'ghs

Burt, Rt. Hon. Thomas

Greenwood, G. (Peterborough)

Maclean, Donald

Buxton, Rt. Hn. Sydney Charles

Greenwood, Hamar (York)

Macpherson, J. T.

Byles, William Pollard

Griffith, Ellis J.

MacVeagh, Jeremiah (Down, S.

Cairns, Thomas

Guest, Hon. Ivor Churchill

MacVeigh, Charles (Donegal, E.)

Caldwell, James

Gulland, John W.

M'Callum, John M.

Carr-Gomm, H. W.

Gurdon, Sir W. Brampton

M'Crae, George

Causton, Rt. Hn. Richard Knight

Haldane, Rt. Hon. Richard B.

M'Kenna, Reginald

Cawley, Frederick

Hall, Frederick

M'Killop, W.

Channing, Francis Allston

Halpin, J.

M'Laren, H. D. (Stafford, W.)

Cheetham, John Frederick

Harcourt, Rt. Hon. Lewis

M'Micking, Major G.

Cherry, Rt. Hon. R. R.

Hardie, J. Keir (Merthyr Tydvil)

Maddison, Frederick

Churchill, Winston Spencer

Hardy, George A. (Suffolk)

Markham, Arthur Basil

Clarke, C. Goddard (Peckham)

Harmsworth, Cecil B. (Worc'r)

Marks, G. Croydon (Launceston)

Cleland, J. W.

Hart-Davies, T.

Marnham, F. J.

Clough, W.

Harvey, A. G. C. (Rochdale)

Mason, A. E. W. (Coventry)

Coats, Sir T. Glen (Renfrew, W.)

Harwood, George

Massie, J.

Cobbold, Felix Thornley

Haslam, James (Derbyshire)

Masterman, C. F. G.

Cogan, Denis J.

Haslam, Lewis (Monmouth)

Meehan, Patrick A.

Collins, Stephen (Lambeth)

Haworth, Arthur A.

Menzies, Walter

Collins, Sir Wm. J. (S. Pancras, W

Hayden, John Patrick

Molteno, Percy Alfred

Cooper, G. J.

Hazleton, Richard

Mond, A.

Corbett, C. H. (Sussex, E Grinst'd

Hedges, A. Paget

Money, L. G. Chiozza

Cornwall, Sir Edwin A.

Helme, Norval Watson

Montagu, E. S.

Cory, Clifford John

Henderson, Arthur (Durham)

Montgomery, H. H.

Cotton, Sir H. J. S.

Herbert, Colonel Ivor (Mon., S.)

Mooney, J. J.

Cowan, W. H.

Herbert T., Arnold (Wycombe)

Morgan, G. Hay (Cornwall)

Cox, Harold

Higham, John Sharp

Morgan, J. Lloyd (Carmarthen)

Cremer, William Randal

Hobart, Sir Robert

Morley, Rt. Hon. John

Crombie, John William

Hobhouse, Charles E. H.

Morrell, Philip

Crooks, William

Holden, E. Hopkinson

Murphy, John

Crossley, William J.

Holland, Sir William Henry

Murray, James

Dalziel, James Henry

Hooper, A. G.

Myer, Horatio

Davies, David (Montgomery Co.

Hope, W. Bateman (Somers't N

Nannetti, Joseph P.

Davies, Timothy (Fulham)

Horniman, Emslie John

Newnes, F. (Notts, Bassetlaw)

Davies, W. Howell (Bristol, S.

Howard, Hon. Geoffrey

Nicholls, George

Delany, William

Hudson, Walter

Nicholson, Charles N. (Doncast'r

Devlin, Charles Ramsay (Galway

Hutton, Alfred Eddison

Nolan, Joseph

Dewar, Arthur (Edinburgh, S.)

Hyde, Clarendon

Norman, Henry

Dewar, John A. (Inverness-sh,)

Illingworth, Percy H.

Norton, Capt. Cecil William

Dickinson, W. H. (St. Pancras, N

Jackson, R. S.

Nuttall, Henry

Dickson-Poynder, Sir John P.

Jacoby, James Alfred

O'Brien, Kendal (Tipperary Mid

Dilke, Rt. Hon. Sir Charles

Jardine, Sir J.

O'Brien, Patrick (Kilkenny)

274

275

O'Connor, James (Wicklow, W.)

Rogers, F. E. Newman

Ure, Alexander

O'Connor, John (Kildare, N.)

Rose, Charles Day

Verney, F. W.

O'Connor, T. P. (Liverpool)

Rowlands, J.

Vivian, Henry

O'Donnell, C. J. (Walworth)

Runciman, Walter

Walker, H. De R. (Leicester

O'Kelly, James(Roscommon, N.

Russell, T. W.

Wallace, Robert

O'Malley, William

Rutherford, V. H. (Brentford)

Walters, John Tudor

O'Shee, James John

Samuel, Herbert L. (Cleveland)

Walton, Joseph (Barnsley)

Parker, James (Halifax)

Scarisbrick, T. T. L.

Ward, John (Stoke upon Trent

Partington, Oswald

Schwann, C. Duncan (Hyde)

Ward, W. Dudley (Southampt'n)

Paul, Herbert

Schwann, Chas. E. (Manchester)

Wardle, George J.

Pearce, Robert (Staffs. Leek)

Scott, A. H. (Ashtonunder Lyne

Warner, Thomas Courtenay T.

Pearce, William (Limehouse)

Sears, J. E.

Wason, Eugene (Clackmannan

Pearson, W. H. M. (Suffolk, Eye)

Seaverns, J. H.

Wason, John Cathcart (Orkney)

Perks, Robert William

Seely, Major J. B.

Waterlow, D. S.

Pickersgill, Edward Hare

Shaw, Rt. Hon. T. (Hawick B.)

Watt, H. Anderson

Pollard, Dr.

Silcock, Thomas Ball

Wedgwood, Josiah C.

Price, C. E. (Edinb'gh, Central)

Sinclair, Rt. Hon. John

Weir, James Galloway

Price, Robert John (Norfolk, E.)

Smeaton, Donald Mackenzie

Whitbread, Howard

Priestley, Arthur (Grantham)

Snowden, P.

White, George (Norfolk)

Priestley, W. E. B. (Bradford, E.

Soames, Arthur Wellesley

White, J. D. (Dumbartonshire)

Radford, G. H.

Soares, Ernest J.

White, Luke (York, E. R.)

Rainy, A. Rolland

Spicer, Albert

Whitehead, Rowland

Raphael, Herbert, H.

Stanger, H. Y.

Whitley, J. H. (Halifax)

Rea, Russell (Gloucester)

Stanley, Hn. A. Lyluph (Chesh.

Whittaker, Thomas Palmer

Rea, Walter Russell (Scarboro'

Steadman, W. C.

Williams, J. (Glamorgan)

Redmond, John E. (Waterford

Stewart, Halley (Greenock)

Williams, Osmond (Merioneth)

Redmond, William (Clare)

Strachey, Sir Edward

Williams, W. L. (Carmarthen)

Rees, J. D.

Straus, B. S. (Mile End)

Williamson, A. (Elgin & Nairn)

Renton, Major Leslie

Strauss, E. A. (Abingdon)

Wills, Arthur Walters

Richards, T. F. (Wolverh'mptn

Sullivan, Donal

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

Richardson, A.

Sutherland, J. E.

Wilson, John (Durham, Mid.)

Rickett, J. Compton

Taylor, Theodore C. (Radcliffe)

Wilson, J. W. (Worcestersh. N.)

Ridsdale, E. A.

Tennant, E. P. (Salisbury)

Wilson, P. W. (St. Pancras, S.)

Roberts, Charles H. (Lincoln)

Tennant, H. J. (Berwickshire)

Wilson, W. T. (Westhoughton)

Roberts, G. H. (Norwich)

Thomas, Sir A. (Glamorgan, E.)

Wood, T. M'Kinnon

Roberts, John H. (Denbighs.)

Thomas, David Alfred (Merthyr

Woodhouse, Sir J. (Huddersf'd)

Robertson, Rt. Hn. E. (Dundee)

Thomasson, Franklin

Yoxall, James Henry

Robertson, J. M. (Tyneside)

Thompson, J. W. H. (Somerset, E

Robertson, Sir G. Scott (Bradf'd

Torrance, A. M.

TELLERS FOR THE AYES—;Mr. Whiteley and Mr. J. A. Pease.

Robinson, S.

Toulmin, George

Robson, Sir William Snowdon

Trevelyan, Charles Philips

NOES.

Anson, Sir William Reynell

Duncan, Robert (Lanark, Govan

Lowe, Sir Francis William

Anstruther-Gray, Major

Faber, George Denison (York)

M'Iver, Sir Lewis (Edinburgh W.

Ashley, W. W.

Faber, Capt. W. V. (Hants, W.)

Magnus, Sir Philip

Baldwin, Alfred

Fardell, Sir T. George

Marks, H. H. (Kent)

Balfour, Rt. Hn. A. J. (City Lond

Finch, Rt. Hon. George H.

Mason, James F. (Windsor)

Beach, Hn. Michael Hugh Hicks

Gardner, Ernest (Berks, East)

Meysey-Thompson, Major E. C.

Beckett, Hon. Gervase

Haddock, George R.

Middlemore, John Throgmorton

Bignold, Sir Arthur

Hamilton, Marquess of

Nicholson, Wm. G. (Petersfield

Bowles, G. Stewart

Harrison-Broadley, Col. H. B.

Nield, Herbert

Bridgeman, W. Clive

Heaton, John Henniker

O'Neill, Hon. Robert Torrens

Bull, Sir William James

Helmsley, Viscount

Parker, Sir Gilbert (Gravesend

Carlile, E. Hildred

Hervey, F. W. F. (Bury S. Edm'd

Parkes, Ebenezer

Castlereagh, Viscount

Hill, Sir Clement (Shrewsb'ry)

Percy, Earl

Cave, George

Hill, Henry Staveley (Staff'sh.)

Rasch, Sir Frederic Carne

Cavendish, Rt. Hon. Victor C. W.

Hills, J. W.

Remnant, James Farquharson

Cecil, Lord John P. Joicey-

Hornby, Sir William Henry

Roberts, S. (Sheffield, Ecclesall)

Cecil, Lord R. (Marylebone, E.

Houston, Robert Paterson

Ropner, Colonel Sir Robert

Coates, E. Feetham (Lewisham

Hunt, Rowland

Rothschild, Hon. Lionel Walter

Cochrane Hon. Thomas, H. A. E

Kenyon-Slaney, Rt. Hon. Col. W

Sandys, Lieut.-Col. Thos. Myles

Corbett, T. L. (Down, North)

King, Sir Henry Seymour (Hull)

Sloan, Thomas Henry

Courthope, G. Lloyd

Lane-Fox, G. R.

Smith, Abel H. (Hertford, East)

Craig, Charles Curtis (Antrim, S

Lee, Arthur H. (Hants, Fareham

Stanley, Hon. Arthur (Ormskrk

Craig, Captain James (Down, E.)

Legge, Col. Hon. Heneage

Stone, Sir Benjamin

Craik, Sir Henry

Liddell, Henry

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

Dixon-Hartland, Sir Fred Dixon

Doughty, Sir George

Lockwood, Rt. Hn. Lt.-Col. A. R.

Thomson, W. Mitchell-(Lanark)

Douglas, Rt. Hon. A. Akers-

Long, Col. Charles W. (Evesham

Thornton, Percy M.

Du Cros, Harvey

Lonsdale, John Brownlee

Walrond, Hon. Lionel

276

277

Willoughby de Eresby, Lord

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

TELLERS FOR THE NOES,—;Sir Alexander Acland-Hood and Lord Balcarres.

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

Wyndham, Rt. Hon. George

Wolff, Gustav Wilhelm

Younger, George

Question put, and agreed to.

WAYS AND MEANS.
Considered in Committee.
(In the Committee.)
[Mr. EMMOTT (Oldham) in the Chair.]

THE BUDGET STATEMENT.
THE CHANCELLOR OF THE EXCHEQUER (Mr. ASQUITH,): It is the custom for every new Chancellor of the Exchequer in turn, when he opens his first Budget speech, to make an appeal for a special measure of the indulgence of this Committee. Never, I am certain, has that claim been put forward with more sincerity, and rarely, I venture to think, with more reason, than it is by me to-day, for in the statement which it is my duty to submit, I shall have to deal with the finances of one year for which I am hardly at all responsible, and with the finances of another year for which, although I have direct responsibility, yet, when I assumed it, I found the field of possible action already to a very large degree limited and circumscribed. One result of these conditions—;a very unhappy result—;is that I am afraid I shall not be able to compress what I have to say, with due regard to the necessity of adequate explanation, within the limits I am accustomed to observe, and which certainly as a rule the House is entitled to demand. Let me add to that appeal for the consideration of the Committee an expression of the most sincere regret that my predecessor the right hon. Member for East Worcestershire, the only man now left, I think, in this House who has held the office of Chancellor of the Exchequer, is disabled by continued ill health from being in his place to-day. We all of us, and not least those who are or have been his political opponents, wish for him complete recovery and a speedy return to the labours of this House.

ESTIMATE FOR THE PAST YEAR AND ITS RESULTS.
My first duty is to pass in review the national accounts for the financial year which Expired on March 31st, 1906. According to the balance-sheet presented in the Budget by my predecessor there
278
was for that year an estimated revenue of £142,454,000 and an estimated expenditure of £142,032,000, leaving a margin for contingencies of £422,000. Both sides of the account have falsified the estimate to an unusual, I think to an unprecedented, degree, but happily in each case the error has turned out to be on the right side. The actual revenue has proved to be £143,978,000, an excess over the estimate of £1,524,000. On the other hand, the Exchequer issues for expenditure have only amounted to £140,512,000, a decrease as compared with the estimate of almost exactly the same sum as the excess of revenue—;namely, £1,520,000. The margin of revenue over expenditure was thus increased by £3,044,000, which, added to the estimated margin of £422,000, brings out a realised surplus for the last year of £3,466,000.

EXPENDITURE OF 1905–6.
I shall deal in a later part of my statement with the disposition of this welcome and unanticipated addition to my resources; but for the moment it may be interesting to the Committee to learn how it has been brought into existence. Hon. Members will see from the statement supplied to them how the estimated expenditure compares with the actual Exchequer issues. The estimated expenditure of £142,032,000 was increased by supplementary estimates amounting to £172,000, making the anticipated total £142,204,000. But the sum actually issued from the Exchequer was only £140,512,000, or less than the anticipated total by £1,692,000, and less than the Budget estimate by £1,520,000. This diminution has been entirely due to ascertained and estimated savings in the Supply services. The savings are contributed to in a greater or less degree by almost every spending department, and considerably more than half of the whole, or £963,000, is due to the War Office. In order to realise what has been the actual total expenditure met out of revenue, we must add to the items I have mentioned the sum which is intercepted from the Exchequer out of the proceeds of Customs and Inland Revenue and is paid over to the Local Taxation

279
Account. In 1905–6 the sum so paid over was £9,901,000. Thus, as the Committee will see, the total expenditure of the year provided from revenue was £150,413,000. I lay stress on the words "provided from revenue," because there were in addition issues on capital accouut amounting to £6,148,000, which I shall deal with when I come to speak of the national indebtedness.

REVENUE OF 1905–6.
Now I turn to the revenue side of the account. I will not use more figures than I can help; for the moment I simply point out that, while there was a diminution anticipated in 1905–6 as compared with the preceding year of £916,000, the actual result was to show an increase over the year before of £608,000, and an excess over the Estimate for 1905–6 of more than £1,500,000. The question arises how it is that the revenue has exceeded my predecessor s calculations by so large an amount.

INDUSTRIAL AND COMMERCIAL CONDITIONS IN 1905.
Let me preface a brief analysis of this side of the account by reminding the Committee that the year 1905, as far as the bulk of the industry and commerce of this country was concerned, was a year of slowly but steadily growing prosperity. Our oversea trade reached figures which have never been paralleled. The exports of British and Irish produce, a fallible criterion in itself, but capable of real significance when it is one of the links in a chain of evidence, had a declared value of £330,000,000. If we take, as we are now accustomed to take, the year 1900 as our standard year, the value of the exports of British and Irish produce, estimated at the prices of that year, would work out at £360,000,000, a steady rise in five years of over 23 per cent. Entries and clearances of vessels, and cargoes of foreign trade show a slight increase; and there was a rise in freights estimated at an average of about 10 per cent. The goods receipts of the principal railways grew by 1·32 per cent., and the clearances of London bankers by 17 per cent. The employment of labour, though still below the level of the standard year, 1900, has perceptibly improved. The percentage of unemployment fell from 6·2 in the
280
first quarter to 4·9 in the last quarter. This improvement, moreover, was general throughout almost all the great industries of the country, building and coal-mining being the principal exceptions; and, although there were reductions in these trades, and no actual general rise in the rate of wages, the tendency towards an upward movement became decidedly marked in the second half of the year. So far I have been speaking of the calendar year 1905; but, as the Committee are aware, our accounts include three-fourths of that year and the first quarter of 1906. I am glad to be able to say that all the favourable anticipations have manifested themselves with increasing emphasis in the now year. That I believe to be the main cause of an excess beyond what twelve months ago it would have been natural or legitimate to anticipate.

CUSTOMS AND EXCISE.
Now let the Committee look for a moment at the different items in the accounts. First I turn to Customs and Excise in Table 2; it is the best index of the consuming power of the country. There was an estimated decrease under the head of Customs last year of £1,680,000 and in Excise of £550,000. The actual decrease in Excise has almost exactly tallied with the estimate, there being a trifling gain of £30,000, but in Customs there is a substantial improvement, which brings down the actual decrease to £1,255,000, a difference to the good of £425,000. A principal cause of the decrease, estimated and actual, is of course the reduction of the tea duty from 8d. to 6d. Although as a fact worth noting in passing there has been a substantial increase in the consumption of tea of 10,000,000 lbs., or nearly 4 per cent, over that of 1904–5, the yield of the duty has fallen, and the net loss to the revenue is £1,442,000, the fall having been from £8,272,000 to £6,830,000.

SUGAR.
The main increase in Customs, apart from coal, which shows £180,000, is under the head of sugar, which has exceeded the estimate by £465,000. A considerable decline in the yield of the sugar duty was anticipated in view of the short crop of 1904–5 and a consequent rise in prices; but in the sugar

281
world it is always the unexpected that happens, and the uncertain conditions of the industry from climatic and other causes are unfortunately made still more uncertain by artificial conventions, and, I must add, by organised speculation. The world's production, which in 1904–5 was 9,302,000 tons, rose in 1905–6 to 11,834,000 tons, the speculation to keep up the value broke up in July, and the price of 88 per cent. German beet, which at the end of December, 1904, was 14s. 5d. per cwt., fell at the end of December, 1905, to 8s. 1½d. per cwt. The increase of the crop was beyond all previous records. The result, I am glad to say, has been a steady increase in consumption at home, and the yield of the duty shows an actual increase over 1904–5.

ALCOHOL.
To what then is the absolute want of elasticity in Excise and relative want of elasticity in Customs to be ascribed? The question admits of only one answer, as disconcerting to a Chancellor of the Exchequer as it is welcome, at first sight, at any rate, to social reformers—;the steadily diminishing yield of all the duties on alcoholic drinks. If the Committee will keep in mind the total income under this head, £34,500,000, last year, and remember what a large proportion it bears to the whole tax revenue of the country, they will see what a grave matter this is from a revenue point of view. It will be well to review the facts briefly and to show the steadily progressive diminution of the duties under various heads. First I turn to No. 1, and the Committee will note as I go along that the diminution dates from 1899–1900. First, then, wine. The quantity retained for home consumption steadily rose until 1900, when it was 17,150,000 gallons, but since then there has been an almost continuous fall, until last year, 1905–6, the quantity was 11,800,000 gallons. Secondly, I take foreign and colonial spirits, which include, of course, rum and brandy. Here the fall has been from 9,350,000 gallons in 1899–1900 to 6,780,000 gallons in 1905–6. Then home-made spirits, including whisky and gin. Here I find that the quantity of proof gallons retained for consumption in the United Kingdom in 1899–1900 was 38,716,000, and in 1905–6 it was 32,490,000. Finally, if you take beer,
282
the barrels retained for consumption in the United Kingdom in 1899–1900 numbered 36,500,000, and in 1905–6 they were 33,500,000. Meanwhile, of course, the population had grown by somewhere between 2,000,000 and 3,000,000. Now, as I have said, the progressive decline under every head becomes serious when, as I point out, the receipts under all heads show in 1905–6, compared with the previous year, 1904–5, a decrease of no less than £607,000. We are here in face of a change that has affected all strata of society; indeed, the decline in the consumption of wine is more marked than in that of spirits and beer. To what is the change due? Let me say at once I can trace no causal connection between the decreased consumption and the comparatively small increase of taxation proposed in 1900 and continued since. The main reason, I hope and believe, can be found in the growth of temperance principles and the increased power of competing attractions; but I must add for myself that I doubt whether it is safe to base any very wide generalisation as to a lasting change of social habits on the experience of six or seven years, which have been marked by unprecedently large expenditure on a great war, by an enormous increase in the burden of taxation, and by at any rate a very great curtailment of spending power of almost every class of the community. But, for the moment at any rate, no Chancellor of the Exchequer can count any longer upon this as a source of indefinitely expanding revenue. The days in which it used to be said we drank ourselves out of the Alabama claims are days which are over and do not seem likely to return.

DIRECT TAXATION AND POSTAL SERVICES.
I proceed to deal very briefly with the revenue from direct taxation. It is to the yield, from this form of taxation that the unexpectedly satisfactory result of the year is in the main to be attributed. The death duties all but reached the estimate of £13,000,000, and show an increase in Exchequer receipts of no less than £627,000 as compared with the previous year. If you add the amount intercepted for the relief of local taxation you will find that the total result produced by this tax in the course of the twelve months was no less than £17,336,000. Stamps, which are in some

283
respects a very good criterion of the volume of trade, have shown considerable elasticity, the estimate of £8,000,000 having been exceeded by £180,000. This is largely due to the increased volume of business on the London Stock Exchange. Income tax maintained its productiveness, the Exchequer receipts were £31,350,000, showing a slight increase over those of the preceding year. The produce of each penny in the pound of this tax has slightly exceeded any figure hitherto recorded. Lastly conies the Post Office and Telegraph Services, the largest contributors to our gains, yielding between them an excess of nearly £500,000 over the last Budget estimate and of more than £1,000,000 over the receipts of the previous year. This is a still more satisfactory indication of the general progress of business in the country, though to some extent it must be put down to exceptional causes, such, for instance, as the general election, which led to a large growth in the volume of postal and telegraph business, and there has been an extraordinary popularity in a new fashion of correspondence with which some of us are painfully familiar—;the picture post-card. But, apart from these, there is indication of steady growth of receipts over issues in Post Office services in the last ten years. The average annual surplus for the five years 1897–1902 was £3,728,800, and for the five years 1902–7 (including the estimate for 1906–7) it works out at £4,473,400. It is right to add that the expenditure out of Post Office votes ten years ago was only 73 per cent, of the revenue, but it has now risen to 76 per cent.

LOCAL TAXATION ACCOUNTS.
I must not conclude my survey without again reminding the Committee that the total paid into the Exchequer, that is to say, £143,978,000, does not represent the whole income collected by the State in 1905–6. You must add the sums intercepted from Customs, Excise, and estate duties and handed over to local taxation accounts, amounting to £9,901,000, which brings the total revenue of the year up to £153,878,000. Before I part from this subject I must for myself say emphatically that I regard this procedure of the inter-
284
ception and earmarking of particular Imperial taxes for local purposes as in its nature fallacious and misleading. It complicates and confuses the national accounts, and urgently calls, as do all the relations between Imperial and local taxation, for prompt and thorough review.

EXCHEQUER BALANCES.
In accordance with the intention of my predecessor, which seemed to me thoroughly sound, I have devoted the surplus revenue, the old Sinking Fund of 1904–5, to strengthening the Exchequer balance by repayment of deficiency advances. Thus, the Committee will see that £1,414,000 of these advances were paid off. We started the financial year with a balance of £7,430,000. We close the year with a balance of £10,451,000. The increase is mainly due to the realised surplus of the year which has now become the old Sinking Fund of 1905–6—;namely, £3,460,000. To this has to be added the balance of the bullion account—;£285,000; while we have to deduct £584,000, the excess of issues on capital account over borrowings during 1905–6, and the loss on Exchequer bonds created under the Finance Act of 1905, and issued at a discount—;namely, £146,000. The net growth in the balance for the year is thus £3,021,000.

ESTIMATED EXPENDITURE OF 1906–7.
I pass to forecast the prospects of the now financial year, and here I will deal with expenditure first. The anticipated expenditure on Imperial account for the year 1906–7 is £141,786,000—;that is a diminution of £246,000 on the Budget provision for the preceding year. Then we have to add £9,835,000, the anticipated contribution to local taxation. The two together make a total of £151,621,000 for the year 1906–7, against a Budget provision of £151,788,000 for 1905–6. A further estimated expenditure of £6,500,000, chargeable against capital, I will reserve for later treatment. I have very little to say about this estimated expenditure. The estimates are not in any way the work of the present Government. Coming into office, as we did, in the month of December, and much occupied during January with the general election, my colleagues presiding over the spending departments could not, with the best will

285
in the world, do much to recast the expenditure of the country. The total diminution in the Supply services is £311,000. The Supply services were estimated, in round figures, to cost for this year £111,000,000—;a gigantic and, in my opinion, an excessive sum. I hope and believe, from what I know of the intentions and the zeal of my colleagues, that, if it is my fortune twelve months hence to submit the national accounts again, I shall be able to announce, without any weakening in the national services, a substantial saving under these heads.

FORECAST OF REVENUE ON BASIS OF EXISTING TAXATION.
I pass now to the estimated revenue of 1906–7. The expenditure on Imperial account to be provided for out of the Budget being £141,786,000, I have to inquire upon what revenue I can reasonably count on the supposition that taxation remains unchanged. First of all, I should mention that the present financial year is, from the Chancellor of the Exchequer's point of view, a tiresome freak of the calendar. April 1st last was a Sunday, and March 31st, 1907, will be a Sunday; and thus the year will contain fifty-three Sundays instead of the normal allowance of fifty-two. And, Sir, there is still worse to come—;from a fiscal point of view. Owing to the vagaries of the moon, Easter, which came in April this year, will next year fall in March, and there will consequently be included in the financial twelve months two Good Fridays. I am thus compelled to make a more sober estimate than I should otherwise do of certain important sources of revenue; though against this influence is to be reckoned the growth of population, and, I hope, an increased spending power of the people. I estimate the decrease of customs at £245,000. This allows for a further fall in the receipts from foreign spirits and a reduction in the yield of tea, on the assumption that the duty will be at 6d. for all the four quarters of the year, instead of, as last year, at 8d. for the first quarter and at 6d. for the other quarters. On the other hand, I estimate a slight increase in sugar and tobacco. Excise remains practically the same with a diminution of £30,000. I should, anticipating a diminished consumption of alcohol, put it lower still; but in
286
the March quarter the beer duty has shown some signs of recovery. I allow for a slight decrease in stamps and a slight increase in the estate duty and a considerable increase in Post Office and telegraph service, £840,000. Therefore, the estimated revenue for 1906–7 on the basis of existing taxation is as follows:—;Customs, £34,230,000; Excise, £30,200,000; estate duties, £13,200,000;. stamps, £8,150,000; land tax, £700,000; house duty, £1,950,000; property and income-tax, £31,500,000—;total Exchequer receipts from taxation, £119,930,000—;an increase of £55,000. To this must be added:—;Post Office, £17,500,000; telegraphs, £4,350,000; Crown lands, £480,000; Suez Canal and sundry loans, £1,100,000; miscellaneous, £1,500,000—;total Exchequer receipts from non-tax revenue, £24,930,000. That brings the total Exchequer revenue for the year to £144,860,000, or an increase of £882,000 over the Exchequer receipts of 1905–06. I am now in a position to submit to the Committee the balance-sheet—;not the final one—;but the balance-sheet on the basis of existing taxation. Estimated revenue, £144,860,000; estimated expenditure, £141,786,000; estimated surplus for the year, £3,074,000. If I deduct from this, as I must for safety, at least £400,000 as a margin for contingencies, I am left with a disposable balance of very nearly £2,700,000. What shall I do with it?

SUUVEY OF FINANCIAL SITUATION DURING PAST TEN YEARS.
Before I answer that question, I will ask the Committee to take a rather larger survey than is usual on these occasions of our financial situation. We are in the first session of a new Parliament, and in the first year of office of a new Government. Let us, before we take any step of our own upon the road, realise clearly whence we have travelled, where we stand, and whither, if we pursue the same path, we are going. Our expenditure, our indebtedness, our taxation, how does each compare with what it was and what it ought to be? I make no apology for the retrospect upon which I am about to enter, and it will not be conceived in any polemical spirit. It may take some little time, but I am not without hope that it may impress upon the House, as it has impressed on me, a much needed lesson.
I go back ten years for my starting point. The population of the United Kingdom, which in the middle of 1896 was 39,600,000, had risen in the middle of 1906 to 43,600,000—;an increase of 10 per cent.

EXPENDITURE.
The national expediture on Imperial account—;I exclude from both sides the intercepted sums for local taxation—;was in 1896–7 £101,477,000. For the present financial year it is £141,786,000—;an increase of 39 per cent. Of this increase of £40,300,000 as much as £21,000,000 is to be put down to the Army and the Navy. In 1896–7 the numbers voted for the Army wore 156,000, and the cost was £18,270,000. In 1906–7 the numbers voted are 204,000 and the cost is £29,796,000—;an increase in numbers of over 30 per cent, and in cost of over 63 per cent. For the Navy, the numbers borne in 1896–7 were 91,500, and the cost was £22,170,000. In 1906–7 the numbers are 129,000, and the cost is £31,869,000—;an increase in numbers of 41 per cent., and in cost of 43 per cent. The Civil Service total cost had increased during the same period by over £9,000,000, of which more than two-thirds must be attributed to education. The aggregate expenditure on Glass 4 (educational services) was in 1896–7 a little over £10,500,000. In 1906–7 it is estimated at nearly £17,000,000—;an increase of no less than 60 per cent. By far the largest part of the increased expenditure must be put down to the additional provision for elementary education in England and Wales, an amount which grows automatically, but by leaps and bounds, with the growth of the school population, but is constantly being added to by aid grants and other forms of subsidy, and, as the Committee well knows, is likely before long to receive another enormous contribution from the resources of the State. Due allowance is to be made, and ought always to be made, for the growth not only of population, but of the national demand for education during the same period. These figures appear to me to call for no comment. They speak with an eloquence which needs no rhetorical embroidery. In my opinion they make a return to more thrifty and economical administration the first and paramount duty of the Government.

DEBT.
I pass now to a comparison equally significant and full of warning between the indebtedness of the State as it stood ten years ago and as it stands to-day. This is a rather long and complicated chapter, and I must tax the patience of the Committee in dealing with it. The aggregate gross liabilities of the nation—;I will explain shortly what that phrase means—;on March 31st, 1896, were £652,287,000. On March 31st, 1906, they had grown to £788,990,000, an increase of £136,000,000, or 21 per cent. It will be well to keep those percentage increases in mind—;population 10 per cent.; expenditure 39 per cent; indebtedness 21 per cent. The liabilities of the nation reached their lowest figure—;£635,400,000 it was—;in 1899 on the eve of the war, and their highest for the last thirty-five years, £798,400,000, in 1903. There has thus been a net reduction in the last three years since 1903 of about £9,500,000, of which no less than £7,750,000 must be set down to the credit of the last financial year, 1905–6. Here is a fact which I think we ought all to bear in mind. In the thirty years between 1870 and 1899 the gross national liabilities had been reduced by nearly £150,000,000. The benefit of the whole of that reduction, which occupied the best part of the lifetime of a generation, has been completely wiped out in the last seven years and our total capital indebtedness stands today practically at the same figure as in 1871. These are facts which speak for themselves. Second, and second only, to the duty of reducing expenditure, is that of making a more adequate provision for the reduction of debt. In order to obtain the fulfilment of the one we are, as I explained, able to do little during the present financial year; but towards the fulfilment of the other, I am able and I intend to ask the Committee to make a substantial contribution. I ask the special indulgence of the Committee while I endeavour to track my way through a jungle of technicalities and a forest of figures. Our gross National Debt falls, as the Committee is aware, into two different categories—;first, the dead-weight debt, consisting of Consols, terminable annuities, and unfunded or floating debt, and, secondly, other capital liabilities created of late years by various Acts of Parliament and

289
incurred for the most part in respect of naval and military works. A comparison between 1893 and 1906 brings us to the following result. The dead-weight debt has risen in ten years from £648,000,000 to £743,000,000, an increase of £95,000,000, of which no less than £55,750,000 is due to the growth of the unfunded or floating debt. The whole increase in the dead-weight debt was caused by the war. The "other capital liabilities" have risen in ten years from £4,000,000 to £45,770,000—;that is to say, they have been multiplied by something like eleven times. By far the greater part of this increase has taken place in the last five years.

DEAD-WEIGHT DEBT.
I should like to make clear a distinction between the two classes of debt, not always apprehended outside the House, and sometimes not even inside. The increase in the dead-weight debt—;by far the most serious increase—;has gone for the most part, as is often said, in powder and shot; and apart from the Suez Canal shares and balances at the Bank there are no countervailing assets, with the exception of course—;not an altogether negligible exception—;of the British Empire which, as we realise on Budget nights, has been to a large degree built up, defended, and developed on borrowed money. Further, the provision which Parliament has made for the reduction of the principal of the dead-weight debt consists since the Act of 1875 of two sinking funds—;the old sinking fund or the realised surplus of the past year, a mere windfall and creature of accident, and the new sinking fund which represents the balance which remains of the fixed charge for the debt after you have paid interest and the cost of management for the year, including principal and interest of the terminable annuities. That is a fairly accurate description of the dead-weight debt.

OTHER CAPITAL LIABILITIES.
The "other capital liabilities," though small in amount—;£45,000,000, compared with the £743,000,000—;have been increasing much more rapidly. They stand on quite a different footing. With the exception of a small outstanding sum for the Russian Dutch loan, they have all been created in the last fifteen years by Acts of Parliament for special purposes.
290
Unlike the dead-weight debt, they are, or ought to be, represented by specific and tangible assets, telegraphs, railways, cables, public buildings, and military and naval structures of various kinds and of very varying value which are scattered over the Empire from Wei-hai-wei to Salisbury Plain. Further, Sir, and this is an even more important distinction—;every one of these loans has a separate sinking fund of its own, and a charge not merely for interest but for the redemption of principal appears every year on the votes of the accounting department or, in the case of the Russian Dutch loan and the Cunard agreement, on the Consolidated Fund. In the current financial year we shall vote in the Estimates a sum of nearly £2,000,000—;£1,900,000—;towards the repayment of capital under these various loans, of which about £1,250,000 are charged to the Army and Navy Votes. These are distinctions sometimes obscured which ought in fairness to be borne in mind. There must undoubtedly arise from time to time cases of charges which properly fall under the head of capital expenditure for which temporary borrowing is legitimate; but in the main I regard this as a most unhappy chapter in the history of our national finance; and so far as the Army and Navy are concerned my intention is at the earliest possible moment to bring it to a close. The system, as it has been developed of recent years, has, in my opinion, three fundamental vices. In the first place it tends to confuse the distinction between capital and revenue charges. In the next place it inevitably encourages in the spending departments crude, precipitate, and wasteful experiments. And in the third place (and this is not the least important consideration) it draws large items of annual expenditure from any effective Parliamentary supervision. I will not trouble the Committee with, any unnecessary detail, but the present position as regards this class of debt on March 31st, 1906, was this: The amount of capital liabilities under various Acts was £51,750,000. The amount paid off from first to last was £6,027,000, and the amount of capital liability outstanding, including the Russian Dutch loan, was £45,770,000, a net increase during the year of £4,106,000. The amounts issued during the year under this head were, as I have already stated,

291
£6,148,000, which sum was made up of £5,564,000 new borrowings and £584,000 paid out of balances. On the other hand, £1,458,000 was repaid by terminable annuities provided on Votes, and in addition a sum of £226,630 provided on Army and Navy Votes for the redemption of Exchequer bonds, now in the hands of the National Debt Commissioners, will in due time be applied to that purpose.

LOANS FOR NEW WORKS.
As regards the future, the principle has been laid down that new naval and military works are not to be commenced with borrowed money. Future borrowings under the still unexhausted powers of the existing Acts are, as a rule, to be confined to the continuation and completion of works already in hand. The proposals both of the Army and the Navy for the year have been carefully scrutinised from this point of view. In the case of the Army, which still has a balance of borrowing-power of nearly £6,000,000 the loans for the year will be limited to £1,500,000, which will be applied to continuation works, with the possible exception of works of an urgent and unforeseen character, the necessity for which may become apparent in the course of the year. That £1,500,000, once borrowed, will, so far as this service is concerned, close the book. The naval works in actual progress are on so large a scale that their estimated requirements for 1906–7 are about £3,200,000. This will bring the Navy within £1,000,000 of its unexhausted funds. There are a number of similar sums which fall to be borrowed under other Acts, the most important of which are telegraphs and the Cunard Agreement. I cannot at this moment give the precise figures, but the total for all purposes may be taken as £6,500,000. I deduct from that the sum of £1,900,000, the amount charged in the Votes for this year for the repayment of principal, and there will be, therefore, a net addition for the year under this head of capital liabilities of £4,600,000.

REDUCTION OF DEBT IN 1905–6.
Now, Sir, I pass to the dead-weight debt, and here again the matter is of some complexity, and it is necessary that
292
it should as far as possible be made clear. It stood on April 1st, 1905, the beginning of the financial year, at £755,072,000. Of this £683,439,000 is funded debt and capital value of terminable annuities, and £71,633,000 is unfunded or floating debt. The first item has been reduced during the twelve months, mainly by the automatic operation of the annuities, by £5,932,000, and the unfunded debt during the same period by an almost exactly similar sum, namely, £5,920,000. Thus in the year—;and this is not unsatisfactory—;the total amount of dead-weight debt was lowered by £11,852,000, and it now stands as I have stated at £743,220,000; but the contemporaneous increase which I have already mentioned in our other capital liabilities of £4,106,000 reduces the total diminution of the gross indebtedness of the State for the year to £7,746,000. That is the net amount of debt paid off last year.

THE UNFUNDED DEBT.
I must describe with more particularity the proceedings in the year to contract the unwieldy and dangerous bulk of the unfunded or floating debt, which is far and away the most serious factor in our financial situation at this moment. This debt consisted on April 1st, 1905, of three items; the War Loan at 2¾ per cent, interest, repayable in 1910, £30,000,000; Exchequer bonds at 3 per cent., maturing as to £14,000,000 in 1905 and as to £6,500,000 in 1907; and, thirdly, Treasury bills at short dates and bearing varying rates of interest, £21,133,000, bringing out the total of the floating debt at £71,633,000. I ought to say for the sake of clearness we do not include in this enumeration the Exchequer bonds for £6,000,000 created under the Capital Expenditure Act of 1904. They have a Sinking Fund of their own.
What was done in the year 1905–6 to reduce the bulk of floating debt? The item my predecessor selected for immediate attack was that of Exchequer bonds, of which £14,000,000 were due to mature in December last. His plan was to pay off £4,000,000 of these bonds and to issue in place of the remainder a new series of £10,000,000 at 2¾ per cent, instead of 3 per cent., which were to have a currency of ten years, but to be redeemable by annual drawings of £1,000,000. The drawings were provided for by raising

293
for the time the annual fixed charge for the Debt from £27,000,000 to £28,000,000, and in this way what may be described as a new Sinking Fund was brought into existence, specially earmarked for the gradual redemption and extinction at the end of ten years of the £10,000,000. The immediate reduction effected by this operation in the unfunded debt was the paying off of £4,000,000 out of the £14,000,000 of the then current Exchequer bonds. How did my predecessor acquire the funds for that purpose? First and foremost, he took advantage, quite rightly, of a windfall from South Africa—;whence windfalls do not, as a rule, blow in the direction of the Exchequer-to the extent of £1,213,000. He then added to that the still unemployed new Sinking Fund of 1904 amounting to £2,219,000, and for the balance of £568,000 to make up the £4,000,000 he drew on the new Sinking Fund for the current year. These £10,000,000 of new bonds were issued in April, 1905, the instalments being spread over six months; and, notwithstanding that they bear interest at 2¾ per cent, and every holder must be repaid at par at the outside within ten years, the average price obtained did not exceed £98 13s. 10d. The Committee will see that, on the whole, it was a disappointing operation. The first £1,000,000 of the bonds was drawn in February, but not acually paid off till April 18th, and, therefore, that amount taken from the new Sinking Fund in 1905–6 cannot be credited to the discharge of the unfunded debt in that year. The Committee will observe that when I came into office last December the new Sinking Fund for 1905–6 was already hypothecated in respect of the payment of the old and the drawing of the new Exchequer bonds to the extent of £1,568,000. The total amount of the new Sinking Fund was £3,449,000. After much consideration, I directed that the balance, amounting with sundry accretions to £1,920,000, should be applied to paying off Treasury Bills as they fell due during the March quarter. The result is that the outstanding Treasury Bills, which were at the commencement of the financial year £21,133,000, have been reduced at its close to £19,213,000. The two operations together reduced the unfunded debt by £5,920,000, without taking into account the £1,000,000 of
294
new Exchequer bonds paid off during the present month. That means a net reduction in the capital indebtedness of the State for the year of £7,750,000, not altogether an unsatisfactory result. We have got to go back for nearly ten years, to find anything like a corresponding reduction. But I must add that if there is any meaning or force in the considerations which I have been urging, this is not the moment to slacken our efforts.

THE FUTURE OF THE DEBT.
The unfunded debt, if we no longer include, as I think we ought not, the £10,000,000 of Exchequer bonds, still amounts to £55,750,000, and this is tome a source of the greatest disquietude from two points of view. In the first place, it must be obvious to everybody that it would seriously hamper our borrowing powers if a sudden emergency arose for which temporary provision had to be made by way of loan. And, secondly—;and this is a consideration which, I think, is not sufficiently borne in mind by the public at large—;it means that the Government is competing for and locking up funds that might otherwise be available for commercial and industrial purposes. The speedy contraction in this floating debt is, in my opinion, a matter of urgent necessity, even if it calls for some self-denial on the part of the taxpayer. Let me see in what resources I can count for the repayment of Debt in 1906–7? Here, again, I have to explain a very technical matter.

EXPIRY OF TERMINABLE ANNUITIES.
The year 1906 sees the close of two sets of terminable annuities set up by the National Debt Act, 1883. First there are the converted annuities, the annual charge for which is £684,000, which came to an end in February last; and, secondly, there are the Chancery funds annuities, the annual charge for which is £2,324,516, in respect of which the final payment will be made next July. The two together amount to a little over £3,000,000; but, as there are still two quarters, April and July, to be paid on account of the Chancery funds annuities, the sum of which the State will be relieved in the present financial year will be only £1,846,280. I have had to consider whether, in substitution for these expiring annuities, I should

295
set up fresh annuities, and I have come to the conclusion not to do so. Terminable annuities are in many ways a convenient and useful instrument of Debt reduction. They wrap up and disguise the process of repayment, and they are supposed—;though recent experience has shown that that is not always the case—;to be safe from temporary suspension or reduction at the hands of a hardly-pressed Chancellor of the Exchequer. It is a mistake to suppose that the expiry of these annuities adds anything to the provision for repayment of Debt. As long as the fixed charge is not encroached on or enlarged, it makes no real difference if the balance, after paying interest and cost of management, is applied to the reduction of Debt, whether it passes through the devious channel of terminable annuities or whether it goes straight and direct into the new Sinking Fund. In determining which method you ought to adopt, you must determine what part of the capital you are most anxious to attack; and, in view of all the circumstances, for reasons which I prefer not to elaborate now, I shall leave this annual sum, which has been hitherto tied up in annuities, in a more liquid form and free to discharge any kind of debt to which it can be legally devoted. The result of the non-renewal of the annuities is neither to increase nor to reduce the total applicable to redemption, but simply to give greater latitude in its application.

DEBT FIGURES FOR 1906–7.
I come now, Sir, to the Debt figures for 1906–7—;the fixed annual charge for Debt. I estimate that, after interest and management have been paid, there will be a balance on the fixed charge amounting to £9,000,000 available for the reduction of the capital of debt. Of this, £3,650,000 will represent the capital included in the instalments payable on the remaining terminable annuities; £1,000,000, in accordance with the arrangement last year, will go to the drawing and cancellation of Exchequer bonds, and the balance of £4,350,000 will go to the new Sinking Fund. But this happily does not exhaust the matter. I explained at the beginning that the realised surplus of last year, amounting to £3,466,000, which constitutes the old Sinking Fund of 1905–6, must by law be
296
devoted to the repayment of Debt. Therefore, in round figures, the total provision for 1906–7 is £12,500,000. But I cannot leave out of sight the fact that you have to borrow for the present year for capital liabilities a sum estimated at £6,500,000, against which has been set off the provision made in the Votes for the repayment of similar liabilities of £1,900,000, and you are still left with an increase of Debt under this head of £4,600,000. In my opinion, if we are to do our duty in the matter, we must not be content with this.

PROPOSAL—;ADDITION TO SINKING FUND.
We must make a substantial addition to the provision for debt redemption; and for this purpose I propose first to draw on my own surplus, the estimated surplus of 1906–7, to the extent of £500,000, and to take another £500,000—;which will bring the additional contribution for the year towards the redemption of the Debt up to £1,000,000—;from a different source. What is that source? By the protocol of September 7th, 1901, China agreed to pay to the aggrieved Powers, of whom we were one, an indemnity of 450,000,000 Haikwan taels, by annual payments, with interest at 4 per cent., for thirty-nine years from 1902. The British share of this was 50,620,545 taels, or £7,593,081, being 11¼ per cent of the total. Of this, £1,500,000 goes in settlement of private and railway claims, and the free balance due to the British Government, payable in annual instalments, may be put approximately at £6,000,000. There is a balance now at the bank, which has never yet reached the Exchequer, on this account of £359,000; and with the further instalments to come in we may reckon on a total of £500,000 from this source for 1906–7. Having regard to the origin of this indemnity and to its history, I see no purpose to which this and the succeeding instalments can be better put than the repayment of Debt. The result will be that the total provision made during the year for the reduction of the dead-weight debt will be about £13,500,000, and that the reduction in the gross capital liabilities of the State ought to amount for the year to nearly £9,000,000, a large, but, in the circumstances, by no means an excessive sum. I must add that the modest demand I have made on the surplus must have been considerably

297
greater but for the largely fortuitous and wholly unforeseen dimensions of the old Sinking Fund of 1905–6.

DISPOSAL OF REMAINDER OF THE SURPLUS.
Now, Sir, I approach the more agreeable, as I am sure it will be the more interesting, part of my task. But before I deal with taxation, there are two other encroachments upon the disposal of the surplus which I feel myself obliged to provide. Out of all my colleagues who sit on this bench, if I were asked which were the sturdiest and most valiant beggars, I should without any hesitation divide the prize between two of them—;the President of the Board of Education and the Postmaster-General. There is, however, a point of distinction between them. The Postmaster-General, as I have already acknowledged, is a revenue-providing instrument. He brings grist to the mill. But the President of the Board of Education—;though there is much about him and his office which appeals to our higher nature—;does nothing, or less than nothing, to grease the financial wheels, unless, indeed, you can call the dust of controversy a lubricant. I will deal first with his demands.
NECESSITOUS SCHOOL DISTRICTS.
He wants in addition to the colossal sum which already appears on his Estimates a further contribution from the Exchequer to meet the special exigencies of certain necessitous school districts, of which East and West Ham are the type—;districts where you have side by side an exceptionally poor population and an exceptionally high school rate. The problem is not a new one. For some time it has taxed the Education Office and knocked at the doors of the Treasury. I cannot either deny the urgency or resist the justice of the demand; and I propose to devote—;I will not say to its solution, but, at any rate, to its appeasement—;the sum of £135,000 out of the surplus. It is clearly to be understood that this is a temporary grant for the existing year.

POSTAL REFORMS.
The case of the Postmaster-General is different. He wishes me to sacrifice some of the revenue which I should otherwise obtain from him for effecting improvements in the service,
298
and giving increased facilities to the public. Among the many large and beneficent schemes on which his affections are set, he agrees to be content in the present year with two or three, which I must briefly enumerate and describe. The first is the revision of the upper scale of the parcel post, which I can best explain by an illustration. A 4lb. parcel will continue to be carried as at present for 6d., a 5lb. parcel for 6d. instead of 7d., a 7lb. parcel for 7d. instead of 9d., and parcels from 7lb. to 11lb. at a rate of 1d. per lb. It is believed that this reduction will be especially beneficial to agriculturists, and particularly to those who carry on their industry on a small scale, and who in consequence of it will be able to send consignments of fowls, butter, eggs, vegetables, and other produce by post at a much easier rate. Secondly, we give enlarged postal and telegraphic facilities to rural districts, securing that each place in the United Kingdom shall have save in very exceptional cases at least three deliveries a week, and, in case of a guarantee being required, where postal telegraph or telephone facilities are given, the Postmaster-General shall in ordinary conditions take two-thirds of the risk. Thirdly, we give a reduction of commission on postal orders for small amounts. The present scale presses very heavily on the comparatively poor. The commission on postal orders of 2s. and 2s. 6d. will be reduced from 1d. to ½d., and on orders of 11s. to 15s. inclusive from 1½d. to 1d. At the same time, the commission on foreign and colonial money orders for sums not exceeding £1 will be reduced from 4d. to 3d. There will finally be an enlargement of the definition of documents transmissible by post at ½d., so as to give benefit to purely formal communications. This will stop a good deal of friction between the Post Office and the trading community. Assuming that the changes in the parcel post and postal order rates come into force on July 1st and those in the halfpenny post on October 1st, there will be in the current financial year an estimated loss of revenue of £105,000.

RELIEF OF TAXATION.
I have now got rid of £740,000, and I am left, after allowing a margin, with a

299
little less than £2,000,000, which can be properly applied towards the relief of taxation. Now I think that it will be generally agreed that the most urgent case either for reduction or repeal is to be found amongst those taxes which wore increased in amount or for the first time imposed during the period of the war. I will revert for a moment to my comparison between 1896 and 1906. I find that additional taxation has in the interval been imposed to the annual amount of about £23,000,000. The income-tax has been raised from 8d. to 1s., the beer and spirits duties have been raised respectively by 1s. a barrel and 6d. a gallon, tea from 4d. to 6d. per lb., unmanufactured tobacco from 2s. 8d. to 3s. as regards the raw leaf, and to 3s. 3d. as regards strips, while new duties which were not in existence before the war have been imposed on exported coal at 1s. a ton and on imported sugar at 4s. 2d. a cwt. These appear to have claims to the first consideration. But it is obvious that with the funds at my disposal they cannot all receive immediate or equal relief, and I am therefore driven to the difficult and invidious task of selection. Let me pass them in review.

THE INCOME-TAX.
In regard to the income-tax, I do not hesitate to associate myself with the declarations of more than one of my predecessors that an income-tax of a uniform rate of 1s. in the pound at a time of peace is impossible to justify. It is a burden on the trade of the country which in the long run affects not only profits but wages. It presses with excessive and peculiar severity on that large class of the community with incomes of from £700 to £2,000 a year, who pay in addition their full share of the taxation on articles of consumption; and from the point of view of the nation it is open to the same objection as the continuance at an abnormal figure of the floating debt, namely, that it tends to destroy, or at any rate to contract, a most readily available reserve on which; the State can draw in a sudden and unforeseen emergency. But that reduction of the income-tax by a penny means in these days a sacrifice of £2,600,000, which is more than this year I can afford. Although I am not able to give any
300
immediate relief to the income-tax payer I propose to take a step which will at any rate clear the ground for future operations. There are two familiar and, in point of justice and economic principle, valid objections to the incidence of the tax. They are, as every one knows, first, that above the limits of exemption and abatement it is levied at a uniform rate; and, secondly, that no distinction is made between precarious and permanent incomes. It appears to me that the time has come for a searching and authoritative inquiry, and at the earliest possible moment I shall ask the House to appoint as strong a Select Committee as we can get together to undertake the task. The reference to the Committee will be simply to inquire into the practicability of graduation and differentiation. It is well known, however, that many experts in these matters have grave doubts as to whether it is possible to reconcile graduation with our practice of collecting the tax at its source, and as to whether the additional yield of a graduated tax would be sufficient in amount to compensate for the worry, cost, and irritation which it might involve. On the other hand, there is the experience of foreign countries and of our self-governing Colonies, who have made experiments in that direction and apparently are contented with them. I express no opinion of my own as to the probable results of an inquiry. I am satisfied it ought to be hold, and hold without delay.

TAXES ON ALCOHOL.
All the other taxes which I have enumerated are taxes on commodities. With the extra duty on beer and spirits proposed in 1900, and since annually renewed, I do not propose to interfere. In my opinion, as I have already said, it has not been an operative cause of the diminution of consumption; if it were, I do not feel sure that I should be called upon to remove it. The anomalous and unsatisfactory condition of the licensing duties, of course, does not escape my attention; but I must postpone dealing with that until the House has before it the licensing legislation which the Government proposes to introduce and the general relations between local and Imperial taxes come up for review. In the meantime, I may mention that I

301
propose to reintroduce the legislation which was attempted, but not carried through, last year to facilitate the use of alcohol for industrial purposes and to bring the growing industry of the manufacture of what are called "basis wines," which are manufactured in the United Kingdom and come more or less into competition with duty-paid foreign wines, under Excise supervision and control.

THE TOBACCO DUTY.
A Chancellor of the Exchequer who touches the tobacco duty is apt to find, as many of my predecessors have found, that he has put his hand into a wasps' nest. But there is one change under this head which, in view of what took place in the last Parliament and of our subsequent experience, I feel bound to propose without delay. I almost tremble to utter, and hon. Members who were present in the last House of Commons will, I am sure, tremble to hear, the two words "leaf" and "strips." Hours and days, and even weeks, of embittered controversy are associated in our memory with these simple monosyllables. It will be in the recollection of all who sat in the House in 1904 that my predecessor for the first time differentiated between leaf and strip tobacco, and proposed an extra duty of 3d. per lb. on strips. The ground alleged for the alteration was that stripping was a process of manufacture, and to admit raw leaf and strips at the same rate of duty was in effect to discourage stripping at home and encourage it abroad. It was further contended that as leaf carries more moisture and sand than strips, there was more smokable tobacco in a pound of strips than in a pound of leaf, and therefore it ought to pay a higher duty. A fierce controversy ensued, in which my hon. friend who sits near me, the Secretary of the Treasury, and my hon. and learned friend the Solicitor-General, took an extremely belligerent part, and the Chancellor of the Exchequer was only able to carry through his scheme by consenting to a rebate of half the duty, 1½d. out of 3d., on all strips then in bond. The effective duty has ever since been at that rate, 1½d., as the quantity of strips in bond was over 140,000,000 lbs. weight—;rather more than two years consumption. I am satisfied that little or no revenue will ever be derived from the 3d. duty.
302
The curious result, which was predicted by both the hon. Gentlemen, has been that in two years the stock of leaf in bond has considerably more than doubled, and that of strips has diminished by half. A differential duty is in my opinion wholly unjustified, being at the same time prejudicial to the trade and unfruitful to the revenue. I propose to reduce the duty on strips from 3s. 3d. to 3s. 0½d. which will leave a difference of a halfpenny between strips and leaf. Leaf will have that advantage, and considering the relatively short supply, and that that supply cannot be materially increased for the purpose of consumption for the best part of two years, the existing holders of leaf ought to have no difficulty in disposing of their stocks. The reduction of the duty on strips will entail a reduction in the scale of drawbacks. I propose that the new scale of duties shall come into force at once, and the new drawbacks three weeks hence, May 21st. I do not anticipate in view of the prospect in any event of a considerable addition to the consumption of tobacco, that this charge will involve any appreciable loss of revenue.

"PERMANENT" TAXES.
The duty on sugar and that on exported coal wore imposed in 1901. Although they were no doubt suggested by the exigencies of the war, they were not put forward by the then Chancellor of the Exchequer as mere temporary expedients. On the contrary, he intended, as he said, by means of them to widen the basis of taxation, and they were to be regarded as taxes of a permanent character. I confess I have always looked upon both of them as singularly unsuited to that purpose. Sugar, which had been admitted free of tax for nearly thirty years, may fairly be ranked among the necessaries of life, and it is, further, raw material for more than one important industry. Again, an export duty like that upon coal is unique in our fiscal system, and it handicaps the British producer in those foreign markets where he is exposed to the keenest competition. Nor can we forget in this connexion—;I certainly cannot forget—;that other duty which was imposed the next year with a similar intention. The corn-tax of 1902 was, according to the avowed purpose of its author, "to form

303
part of the normal taxation of the country," or, as he said again, "part of our permanent system of taxation." This "normal permanent" tax had a brief, if eventful, life. The very next year, 1903, it was hurried by the same Cabinet which presided over its birth to an early burial—;I see two of the principal gravediggers opposite—;and over its grave there have ever since stalked strange spectres. With such a precedent we need not attach undue importance—;certainly nothing in the nature of constraining sanctity—;to the similar professions which wore made about coal and sugar.

REPEAL OF THE COAL DUTY.
Now, among these taxes there is one which is singled out, not only by the pledges and the action of the Liberal Party in the last Parliament, but by its own intrinsic demerits, as an inevitable victim to be offered on the altar. Upon what ground, Sir, is an export duty on coal to be defended as a permanent part of our system of taxation? The suggestion that it has become desirable to restrict our output—;there are still people who hold that view—;because our reserve of potential supply is being exhausted, has been emphatically negatived by the Report of the Royal Commission. They report our available resources at 100,000 millions of tons, and our annual output at 230,000,000 tons. It is said the tax has not injuriously affected our exports inasmuch as the quantity exported, if you include bunker coal and coal equivalent of coke and patent fuel, has increased from 60,000,000 tons in 1902, to nearly 66,000,000 tons in 1904. But the Royal Commission again point to the increase of shipments as largely due to the growth in the export of the very classes of coal, bunker coal and coal which costs less than 6s. per ton, which are exempt from the tax. The balance of increase is, I believe, more than accounted for by the continued demand for the really first-class steam coal of South Wales and gas coal of Durham, in which are natural advantages which make our producers practically independant of the tax. It is in regard to the low and medium-priced coal, on which the margin of profit is smallest, that the tax has pressed so heavily on the British producer. Let me point out to
304
the House in this connection that in the last ten years the coal production of Germany has increased by nearly 60 per cent., and in such markets as those of France, Holland, and Belgium our exports have decreased, while those of Germany have been steadily increasing. Whatever you may say about the injurious effects of foreign tariffs on British productions and British trade, surely we shall all admit that it is the height of folly by our own hand, by a fiscal arrangement not imposed upon us from outside, but voluntarily and spontaneously adopted by ourselves, to fetter our exporters in the very markets where competition is keenest. Nor is it to be forgotton that there are other interests involved in this tax. Coal is practically our only bulky export, and it is the chief commodity which supplies us with outward freight on a large scale. Anything that checks coal export checks, also the activity and prosperity of our shipping trade. I might add other considerations, but these are more than sufficient to justify what I am about to propose—;namely, the complete repeal of the export duty on coal. One question remains. On what date ought that repeal to take effect? The export trade in coal is carried on for the most part under contracts made in advance to provide for periodical delivery over a long period of time, in many cases twelve months. The suspicion that this tax was not likely to have a very protracted life has been long in the air, and a large proportion of the contracts now running stipulate that the foreign purchaser shall have the benefit of the remission if and when it occurs. I do not propose to incur a sacrifice of revenue for the benefit, not of our own coal producers, but of foreign buyers. The circumstances of different districts are not the same, and. it is not easy to choose a date to give at the same time the maximum of benefit to the trade and the minimum of loss to the Exchequer. But after much consideration I have resolved to propose the repeal of the duty as from November 1st next. The loss to the revenue during the financial year I estimate at £1,000,000.

REDUCTION OF THE TEA DUTY.
I have still, before I have exhausted the whole of the surplus, the best part

305
of £1,000,000 in hand. I think we are apt to treat our system of taxation too much as if it were divided into watertight compartments, as if, from the remission of one tax, one class and one class only gained, and from the remission of another tax another class and only that class gained. As a matter of fact, we are all parts of one organic and related body. If one member suffers, every other member suffers also. But, while that is perfectly true, the claim of the consumer, the rank and file of the army of industry, to some direct mitigation of the added load of recent years is clear, both on its own merits and in the interest of the State. The sugar duty is, for reasons which I have already stated, one which I should be glad to deal with; but it produces over £6,000,000 of revenue, and I am not rich enough to give it any effectual relief. Tea, which, like sugar, has become to the mass of our people a prime necessity of life, is more happily circumstanced. It is true that the duty was reduced last year from 8d. to 6d., but it is still by far the highest in proportion to its value of all the taxes levied on articles of food apart from alcohol. I have had the percentages taken out of taxation on the average values of articles charged with Customs duty in the year 1905, and they work out as follows:—;Cocoa, 13 per cent.; coffee, 25 per cent.; sugar, 30 per cent.; tea, 90 per cent. And if you take the cheaper qualities of tea the percentage, of course, would be much higher. A reduction, however small—;and the Committee will see that any reduction I propose must be small—;in the tea duty has, as compared with other remissions of taxation, several distinct advantages of its own. In the first place, tea, being an article which does not undergo, as tobacco does, after importation, more or less elaborate processes of manufacture and manipulation, the lowering of the tax is not intercepted or delayed, but goes almost direct to the consumer. He gets the benefit at once, or almost at once, either in a lower price or, what is often of greater importance, in an improved quality of the article. During the decade 1890 to 1900, when the duty was at its lowest point—;namely, 4d.—;the annual consumption increased by 55,000,000 pounds, or an average of 5,500,000 pounds a year. During the five years, 1901 to 1905, when the duty had been raised to 6d.,
306
and stood for one year at 8d., the consumption increased by something over 9,000,000 pounds, or an average of something less than 2,000,000 pounds a year, showing a direct relation between the duty and the consumption. Again, an excessive duty on tea injures the producer as well as the consumer, and in this case, as I think my predecessor pointed out last year, the producer in nine cases out of ten is one of our fellow-subjects developing in India or Ceylon the resources of the British Empire. And, let me add, it is not unsatisfactory to be able to show that a small, but at least a substantial, reduction on tea is posssible without attempting or contemplating any revolutionary change in our system of free trade and without requiring the consumer to submit to a more than countervailing sacrifice in a new or added tax upon some other necessity of life, such as corn or meat. I propose that the duty shall be reduced by one penny, from 6d. to 5d., as from July 1st of the present year. Reductions of, or impositions on, the tea duty have been usually reductions or impositions of 2d. in the pound at a time; but, apart from the fact that I have not the means to suggest so large a reduction, let me remind the Committee that the duty will then stand at a lower figure than it has reached for a quarter of a century, except during the years from 1890 to 1900, when it stood at 4d. And when account is taken of the almost complete displacement in recent years of the weaker China tea by the stronger Indian and Ceylon teas, the actual burden on the consumer with the tax at 5d. will probably be as light as, if not lighter than, it has ever been before, and I am glad to think chat there is no part of the United Kingdom where the relief will be more felt than in Ireland. The cost of the reduction for the year I estimate at £920,000.

THE FINAL BALANCE SHEET.
The Committee will now see how my surplus has been got rid of. I started with £3,074,000. From this has now to be deducted—;Sinking Fund, £500,000; necessitous schools, £135,000; postal and telegraph services, £105,000; repeal of the coal-tax as from November 1st, £1,000,000; and reduction of the tea duty as from July 1st, £920,000—;a total of £2,660,000,

307
leaving a balance for contingencies of £414,000. The final balance-sheet which will appear to-morrow in the blank spaces of the return, will show that, as the result of these changes, the estimated revenue for the year is reduced by £2,025,000, and the estimated expenditure for the year is increased by £635,000. That will be the general result. I have only now to offer my most grateful thanks to the Committee for the patience with which they have listened to a statement of unusual, but I hope of not wholly unwarrantable, length and complexity. I have only one thing more to say. In judging of the merits or demerits of this Budget the House and the country will realise that we only came into office late in last year. As I said at the beginning of my speech, some of the governing factors in the case had already been fixed in advance, and, so far as I am personally concerned, I had little more than four months in which to survey a large tract of rough and tangled ground. I should like to see, I hope to see, more attempted and more done than I can attempt or do this year in the reduction of expenditure, in the repayment of debt, and in the readjustment of the incidence of taxation. But, within the limit of our possibilities, I have tried to do whatever I could to maintain the national credit and to deal out even justice and to preserve the balance of proportion between obligations and claims. If, as I hope will be the case, we are able in one and the same year to make a relatively large step in advance in the repayment of debt, to free a great industry from the hampering load of an unnecessary tax, and to give to the community of consumers an easier command over one of the first necessaries of life, I think we may fairly claim to have contributed a chapter not wholly unworthy to take its place in the annals of our national finance.
Alteration of Duty on Stripped Tobacco and of Drawbacks on Tobacco.
Motion made, and Question proposed, That for the increase of three pence per pound payable on stripped tobacco under section two of The Finance Act, 1904, there shall, as from the first day of May, nineteen hundred and six, be substituted an increase of one halfpenny per pound and that the drawbacks allowed by the
308
same Act on tobacco of the following description shall, as from the twenty-first day of May, nineteen hundred and six, be reduced by the substitution for the ordinary rate set out in the Table of Rates of Drawback in the Schedule to the said Act of the rate following (that is to say):—;

s.

d.

In the case of cigars the lb.

3

1

In the case of cigarettes the lb.

3

0

In the case of cut, roll, cake, or other manufactured tobacco the lb.

2

11

In the case of snuff, not being offal snuff the lb.

2

10

—;(Mr. Chancellor of the Exchequer.)
MR. A. J. BALFOUR: It is not, as the Committee is aware, usual to enter into any controversy with the Chancellor of the Exchequer immediately after he has made his Budget statement. That statement always requires and deserves careful consideration, and it never required and never deserved more careful consideration than on the present occasion. Time is required in order that the proposals of the Government may receive adequate consideration; and I rise not to discuss in detail the proposals of the right hon. Gentleman, but to ask him for the second time to-day, and in hopes of receiving a more favourable Answer than I received before, what course he proposes to take with regard to our discussion of those proposals. The right hon. Gentleman began his speech by asking for the indulgence of the Committee, as he had to make a statement of exceptional length and exceptional complexity. I have to congratulate the right hon. Gentleman upon the extreme lucidity with which he developed the views which he and his friends entertain. The excellence of the speech, I which he has just delivered is, indeed, no surprise to those who have heard the right hon. Gentleman often before in this House. We expected no less of him; but I am sure it must have given great pleasure and be a subject of congratulation to those Members of the House who have not yet had the opportunity of hearing the right hon. Gentleman on a great and important occasion. But the very importance of that speech makes it quite obvious that the discussion of the subjects with which he dealt cannot be confined to a single night, as he

309
seemed to hint in answer to the Question I addressed to him at Question time. Such a proposal has, as far as I know, never been made by any Chancellor of the Exchequer before. The invariable practice has been to have, on the first night of the Budget Resolutions, a discursive, but not usually a very controversial or a very long debate, it being understood that on one of the later Resolutions which the Chancellor of the Exchequer will have to move on subsequent days, there shall be, with the leave of the Chairman, a general discussion, not confined within the four corners of the Resolution, travelling over the whole field of national finance and over all the topics raised by the right hon. Gentleman. We have only got to consider what those topics were. I do not mean merely the coal-tax or the corn-tax or the various rather controversial points which the right hon. Gentleman made. But consider the earlier part of the speech, and the views he uttered upon the question of national expenditure. He has told the Committee I that, from henceforth, neither he nor his colleagues mean to allow any loan, so I understand him, either for naval or military works.
MR. ASQUITH: New works.
MR. A. J. BALFOUR: New naval or military works. He said, I think with great truth, that there are objections to the system under which we have been working for the last ten years; that it may possibly have rendered too easy the expenditure of money on permanent works by the great spending departments. But does he not see, and does the Committee not see, that there are great and corresponding dangers on the other side; and that to ask the Chancellor of the Exchequer to find some large sum of money for a military or naval work, however necessary that work might be, and to require the whole of the expenditure on that work to be found within the financial year, is to make it so difficult to carry out works, however needful, that we may be perfectly confident that needful works will be neglected? I am certain that anybody who will impartially survey the financial, the military, and the naval history of the last thirty years will see that what happened under such a system is that a
310
Government, like the Government of the right hon. Gentleman and his friends, come in; they promise economy—;a very good thing, economy—;and they carry out their promise by starving absolutely necessary capital expenditure. Their successors come into office, they find that these necessary works have been neglected, and they are driven, not from any love of spending money—;that and its consequences are always unpopular—;but from the sheer necessities of the situation, to make up the deficiencies of their predecessors, and to do by loan what can only be done by loan, unless you are to upset the whole of the system of taxation of the country, and to impose sudden burdens on the commercial community which disturb trade, and which in the long run involve a great deal of most unnecessary expenditure. The mere fact that such a broad declaration of policy has been made by the Government itself requires most careful study; and for my part, while I agree with the right hon. Gentleman that great sacrifices should be made to keep the expenditure of the year within the finances of the year, it is absurd, in the present condition of modern invention, in face of the expenditure made by foreign countries on borrowed money, for us to expect, if we insist on never using borrowed money for these purposes, that we shall not gravely imperil the national well-being under the illusion that we are carrying out a scheme of national economy. I merely touch very lightly on some of the subjects dealt with by the right hon. Gentleman. May I ask him whether he has made any provision in his Budget for the million promised in the Education Bill?
MR. ASQUITH: Certainly not; the Bill would not in any case come into operation this year.
MR. A. J. BALFOUR: Then, leaving that topic, may I express my surprise that to the long and interesting preface which the right hon. Gentleman made to his proposals for increasing the Sinking Fund, there was, as it appeared to me at all events, a somewhat lame and impotent conclusion? He told us, and truly, that the unfunded debt was a great national danger—;he used that word, and I am not disposed to minimise it, I accept the word. He told us that the debt had

311
not only increased, but had reached a magnitude that ought to exite our greatest concern; he told us that the actual amount of money given this year for the reduction of debt was, I think, £12,000,000, or a sum nearly approaching that figure; then he told us he thought that the country ought to make great sacrifices to increase that sum, and when the great sacrifice was announced it turned out to be not more than £500,000. I do not say that the right hon. Gentleman is wrong; but had it been my duty to make a proposal of such a modest character, I do not think I should have prefaced it with such an elaborate glorification of the self-sacrificing proposals which the House and country were asked to accept.
The right hon. Gentleman touched on the tobacco duty, a subject on which I feel myself quite incapable of either criticising the right hon. Gentleman or enlightening the Committee; it is, as he has suggested, one of the most technical in the world, and the most unfortunate absence from our debate of the late Chancellor of the Exchequer will, I am afraid, render us somewhat weak in our capacity to deal with the proposals of the right hon. Gentleman. I, at least, feel myself quite unable to supply the knowledge which we have so unhappily lost by my right hon. friend's absence. There was one point, however, as the right hon. Gentleman is modifying the tobacco duties, which I should, like to ask him—;Does he propose to abolish their protective character? If he had left the tobacco duty alone, perhaps I should not have asked him the question; but as he is modifying it, and as he and his friends have just committed the House of Commons to a very elaborate Resolution on the subject, I should like to know whether he interprets that Resolution as a command of the Administration of which he is a member to remove the protective character from the tobacco duty. I think nobody would deny that that protective element exists; it has long existed; it might well, I think, be left alone since it is there. But as the House has chosen to pass a Resolution on the subject, and as the right hon. Gentleman himself is modifying the duty, I suppose that if he leaves the duty alone in that particular it is, for some reason
312
wholly inexplicable to myself, to be regarded as not being affected or touched by the Resolution which was passed. He will have to give us an explanation on this point when he deals with the question again.
The right hon. Gentleman, following in this particular all his predecessors, I think, has given us a long, elaborate, and interesting, and I would add important, essay upon national expenditure. My right hon. friend the late Chancellor of the Exchequer, I remember, did so in his Budget, Lord Ritchie did so when he was Chancellor of the Exchequer, and Lord St. Aldwyn has done it on many occasions in this House. I, for my part, am the last person to suggest that national expenditure is not one of the most important subjects which can engage the consideration of the House; and if the right hon. Gentleman sees his way through the Estimates of next year to carry out the promise which I understood he made just now—;that is to say, largely to reduce the national expenditure without interfering with the power either of our Navy or of our Army—;if he really sees his way to do that, I assure him I shall be the first to be glad, and certainly no Party consideration shall prevent me from getting up in my place and saying that the right hon. Gentleman has done a great service to his country. But if he fails to do that, if he finds on examination that the enormous expenditure with which we now have to cope is expenditure which is necessary unless we are going to effect great and dangerous reductions in the Army and Navy, then I beg him to consider that the ten years during which the growth of expenditure has occurred are ten years in which the condition of our Navy and Army has been at the very root of our national position in Europe. I do not believe, unless the world forces greatly change, unless the interaction of great military and naval empires takes on a new phase, which we have no right to prophesy and which we have no ground to expect—;I do not believe we can safely diminish the effective power either of our Army or of our Navy. And if that be so, I greatly fear, when the spending departments carry on the annual controversy with the Chancellor of the Exchequer, it will be found that, if the Chancellor of the Exchequer is really to

313
carry out his pledge, it will only be at the cost of national interests which are at least as important as the national interests over which the Chancellor of the Exchequer has to preside. Because, though I quite admit, as everybody admits, that a point may be reached in national expenditure upon national defence which would weaken instead of strengthening national defence, I do not think we have reached that point, or are near it. There was one figure of which the right hon. Gentleman reminded the House which is eloquent in this matter. He was complaining of the burden of our National Debt, and said it had now risen to a point at which it had never stood since the year 1871. Well, but what was the population of this country in 1871, what was its wealth in 1871, as compared with what it is now? And if without murmuring, if without national weakness, if without any serious interference with trade and industry we bore in 1871 the same debt that we bear now, surely it shows that our national finance is not in the absolutely deplorable condition which the right hon. Gentleman almost seems to suggest. I wish him well in his endeavour to reduce expenditure, I welcome every penny in reduction of expenditure which carries with it no diminution of national strength. But he has a difficult task before him. He knows the claims made by Ministers who sit near him. Does he, for instance, imagine that the claim of the Minister for Education—;not the greediest of his colleagues, but still a greedy colleague—;will not increase? It must increase. Then there are all the schemes on which hon. Members have been returned to this House; I will not call them dreams, I hope they may receive embodiment—;but all the hopes of social reform, all the great schemes for amelioration which hon. Members sincerely desire, and which they think this Parliament will carry out. I do not believe that they can be carried out without increasing our expenditure. An hon. friend near me mentions payment of Members, but I am not going to mention that, as I do not wish to strike a controversial note at the present moment. If you look at the source of the growth of national indebtedness and the increase of national expenditure in the last thirty years outside the Army and Navy, you will find that all that increase, the whole of it, is due to the
314
desire of this House to ameliorate the social position and to carry out great reforms in this country; and as that has cost money in the past, it will in the future, I, for my part, am anxious for national economy. Anxious as I am for national economy, I cannot bring myself to believe in any sanguine spirit that any great diminution of national expenditure is possible in the immediate future. All the forces of political life—;not corrupt forces, but honest, honourable, and patriotic forces—;move in the direction of increasing and not of diminishing expenditure, and when the right hon. Gentleman allowed himself more than once to sneer at those who consider that some widening of the basis of taxation has been desirable in the past, may be desirable now and will be desirable in the future—;when he sneers, not in any offensive spirit, but still with a confident disbelief in this prophecy, I venture to say that the time will come, and come soon, when the Chancellor of the Exchequer, probably the right hon. Gentleman himself, will have to face the claims made upon him by hon. gentlemen sitting below the gangway on the Opposition side of the House and hon. Gentlemen sitting behind him; and he will be forced, whether he desires it or not, to ask this House to reconsider the basis of national taxation which is only barely adequate for national expenditure at the present time and which, inadequate as it will be in the future, will render it impossible for the holder of the office which he so ably fills not to resurvey in a somewhat different spirit from that shown to-day the whole question of our national finance. That is all I desire to say at the present moment as to the substance of the right hon. Gentleman's proposals. All I ask him at the present time, is to say what arrangements he proposes to make for the discussion of the speech which he has just delivered, and to make some selection of the Resolutions on which the general discussion may take place. Of course, we shall not resist to-night any proposal or any Resolution which is required on financial grounds. It is absolutely necessary, as we quite well know, that certain classes of proposals made by the Chancellor of the Exchequer should receive the immediate sanction of the Committee, and whatever is necessary for the purpose I am confident that my hon. friends will

315
give the Government without discussion and without dispute, but I hope in exchange that the right hon. Gentleman will not endeavour unduly to curtail our opportunity of debate, or deprive us of the opportunity which every Opposition up to the present has enjoyed, of thoroughly sifting the proposals of the Chancellor of the Exchequer in his Budget speech.
MR. ASQUITH: In at once responding to the appeal of the right hon. Gentleman, will say that nothing is further from our desire than to curtail the opportunity for general debate. I quite understand the spirit in which the right hon. Gentleman has made his suggestion, and I think it has been usual to select one of the financial Resolutions as the text upon which to hang the debate, and the Resolution usually selected is, I think, that in regard to the income tax. But it does not very much matter which one it is so long as you have one upon which a general discussion may be relevant. That is all that is really wanted, and I would suggest that if we can carry Resolutions about the taxes—;the tobacco duty, the tea duty, and the continuance of the duty upon beer and foreign spirits—;to-night and reserve the income-tax for to-morrow that may be convenient to all parties.
MR. A. J. BALFOUR: I do not wish to criticise the right hon. Gentleman too severely, but, if I remember rightly, last year we were allowed three days debate, Monday, Tuesday, and Wednesday, one of which was occupied by the general discussion, and the others by debates upon specific proposals. I do not agree that we should take the tobacco duty to-night.
MR. ASQUITH: It is necessary.
MR. A. J. BALFOUR: Oh, it is necessary; but I hope I shall not be considered as having consented to finish the discussion to-morrow; of course, as far as the necessary proposals and Resolutions are concerned, I quite assent to dealing with them to-right, and that the general discussion should be taken on the income-tax Resolution.
MR. SAMUEL EVANSsaid that every one who had
316
heard the speech of the Chancellor of the Exchequer would recognise that the finance of the country was in perfectly safe keeping in his hands. Members for South Wales in particular were pleased with the announcement in regard to the complete repeal of the coal tax. He wished to make a reservation, however, in regard to the retention of the tax until the 1st November. It was perfectly true that many of the contracts, and especially the contracts for steam coal, were made at that time for the year following, but there were other coals to which other considerations applied, and without entering into detail now he reserved to himself the right, as representing the western portion of the coalfield of Wales, of bringing before the right hon. Gentleman at a later stage considerations which ought to weigh with him as to the difference between the various classes of coal. So far as the reduction of the tea duty was concerned, they were all very pleased to hear the announcement which the Chancellor of the Exchequer had made. He was personally extremely gratified that the right hon. Gentleman had had the courage to tackle the question of the practicability of the graduation and differentiation of the income-tax. Many people had been preaching that some reform in that direction ought to have been embarked upon long before now, yet no Committee had dealt with the matter from 1861 to the present time. He was pleased not only because the right hon. Gentleman had promised to appoint a Committee to inquire into the matter, but also because he felt that those who desired reforms would have a friend in the Chancellor of the Exchequer. It was the fact that in all our colonies except Canada the principles of graduation and differentiation had been followed, and in almost all the countries of Europe they were in operation and a practical method had been found of giving effect to them. He was glad that they had now a Chancellor of the Exchequer who was willing to put his hand to the plough, and he thought the Select Committee would find that the application of the principles was practicable, and enable the right hon. Gentleman to introduce a system of graduation and differentiation. Such a policy was necessary not merely for the purpose of

317
placing the burden upon the shoulders most able to bear it, but for the purpose of exonerating those who paid income-tax at a very high rate which they could ill afford. The principle of differentiation and graduation was one which he was sure would appeal to everybody, because it was hard that people who had to work very strenuously for their incomes should be brought under the same weight of taxation as those who had incomes prepared for them by generations that had gone, and which they had inherited in the shape of funded property. He was sure the vast majority of Members were glad that the proposal had been made to appoint this Committee immediately. He hoped it would at once proceed with its labours, and that his right hon. friend would have the report and be able to make reforms at no distant date.
MR. PIKE PEASEwas pleased to hear that an Income-tax Committee was to be appointed, as he believed there was a large number of people in the country at present who paid far more income-tax than they ought, persons who owned shares on whose dividends the income-tax was deducted before the dividends were paid, and who took no action to get back the money which was due to them under the existing law. Another instance of that was in reference to overdrafts at banks. In many instances people placed as security with their bankers large numbers of shares, and they might get as much as 6 per cent on them. The bank charged an interest of 4 per cent, on the money which was lent, and the income-tax was always deducted from the dividends before they were paid. In that way many people paid a considerable amount more income-tax than necessary. He sincerely trusted that some graduated form of income-tax might be arranged in the future. With regard to the coal tax, he had found it not a little difficult, being himself interested in the coal trade to vote for that tax in past years. The right hon. Gentleman the Member for Berwick, some years ago, in an interesting speech upon this question, showed that the incidence of the tax fell upon the miners and said it was a remarkable fact that if there was an import tax put on German coal coming to this country, they
318
would be told on all hands that the tax would be paid by the consumer. He congratulated the right hon. Gentleman upon having been able to cancel this tax, and he believed that the people in the North of England would receive the news with great satisfaction. Many Members wished to see a tax upon goods imported into this country. He sincerely trusted the day would come when we, as a nation, should follow the example of many foreign countries by putting taxes on foreign manufactured goods coming to our shores. He believed that that day would come, though perhaps it was some time ahead. When it did come we should be able to derive a considerable amount of revenue from that source. At the present time we did not take advantage of our opportunities and many of our manufactories were in consequence being set up in foreign countries. He believed if the Government would appoint a Royal Commission to consider the subject it would be of great advantage to the country.
MR. HELMEsaid that, having presented a memorial to the Chancellor of the Exchequer asking for the remission of the duty on "Strips," signed by manufacturers throughout the country, he desired to express the thanks of the tobacco trade to the Government for the alteration made with regard to that duty. He was glad of the change made in the tobacco duty, which, he was sure, would greatly benefit many struggling tradesmen and small manufacturers and avert the ruin with which they would have been threatened if the duty had continued. There was another matter to which he wished to draw attention. It was very hard that people who borrowed money from bankers for the purpose of purchasing property were not allowed to deduct the amount payable as income-tax in respect to the interest paid thereon. In the case of an ordinary mortgage they could withhold the income-tax on the interest, but bankers would not allow it as had been suggested by the authorities, because they made their profits on the difference between the interest at which money was advanced and the rate they charged their customers. He thought that was a grievance to which the Chancellor of the Exchequer might well address himself and thus relieve many borrowers from an impost which they regarded as unjust and

319
unfair, either by departmental action, or if necessary by legislation in the Finance Bill.
SIR GEORGE DOUGHTYcongratulated the Chancellor of the Exchequer upon the lucid statement he had made to the Committee, and said that with the greater part of that statement he was in agreement. There were, however, two points upon which he must express an opposite opinion He regretted that the right hon. Gentleman had not seen his way to give a larger grant towards education, which would have been most acceptable to the general body of the ratepayers of the country. The ratepayers had now to bear a much greater burden for education than they had ever had to bear before, and they were distinctly told a little while since that a considerable sum would be given in the Budget in relief of secondary education. As to the coal tax he was entirely opposed to its remission. He thought that what was proposed was a great mistake and a step backwards. He considered that the imposition of the tax by the late Government was a broadening of the basis of taxation which might well be followed by the present Government. The tax was not paid by either those who were engaged in getting or consuming the coal in this country. It was paid entirely by the foreigner, and, notwithstanding the tax, there had been a very considerable increase in the export of coal to various countries abroad. The tax could easily have been continued and would have produced a large amount of revenue. In 1902 the total export of coal from this country was 37,250,000 tons, and that had grown in 1905 to 48,169,000 tons, an increase of some 10,000,000. That was a total increase of some 22 per cent., and it did not look as if the tax pressed hardly or heavily on the industry. The amount produced by the tax was £1,311,000 in 1902 and £2,032,000 in 1905, and he thought it a strange thing on the part of the Government that they should give up an income of over £2,000,000 a year which was paid by the foreigner and place it on the heavily burdened taxpayer of this country.
MR. JOSEPH WALTONoffered his heartiest congratulations to the Chancellor of the
320
Exchequer on having in his first Budget decided on the total abolition of that most unjust tax on coal to which reference had just been made by the hon. Member for Great Grimsby. He was really astonished at the hon. Member's remarks. He could only say that he had recently attended meetings of coal exporters all over the country, and their unanimous opinion was that the tax on coal was one of the greatest hindrances to one of the greatest trades of the country. It had to be remembered that the coal trade was one of the great industries of the country, and that no fewer than 4,000,000 of the people were dependent upon it for a livelihood. There was no question that in the case of Scottish and Durham coal our trade with countries such as France and Holland had had laid upon it for the first time a most serious competition, which, he feared, would never be driven out. The evil that men did lived after them, and though they owed to the Chancellor of the Exchequer their gratitude for having done this act of justice towards the coal trade he feared that they would not for a generation, if ever, recover the ground they had lost in the markets of the world through the fully of a British Government in putting a tax on one of our own industries in a form in which it operated actually as a bounty of 1s. a ton in favour of foreign producers when competing with British producers in certain markets of the world he could only say, on behalf of the coal miners and the colliery owners and exporters, that they recognised that this action on the part of the Government in their first Budget showed that they were a Government who believed in the equal incidence of taxation and that they would not place on the coal trade any longer a burden that was placed on no other great industry in the country. Therefore he had risen simply to express on behalf of those with whom he had been for so long associated their gratitude that at last this measure of justice had been done to this great industry, the future prosperity would be enchanced thereby.
MR SAMUEL ROBERTSdesired to add his congratulations to those already offered to the right hon. Gentleman the Chancellor of the Exchequer. He had one regret, and he believed the right hon. Gentleman had

321
expressed it also, that he was not able to give any relief to the income-tax payer. The right hon. Gentleman had said very truly that one shilling was far too high. The income-tax was essentially a war tax, and if it were kept at one shilling in peace time where was their reserve in time of war? They were told by the predecessor of the right hon. Gentleman last year and the year before, he believed, that the income-tax payer should have the first relief of a surplus, but the Chancellor of the Exchequer to-day had said he had not enough money, as it took £2,600,000 to relieve the income-tax payer of a penny in the £. He only hoped that the inquiry which was to be set up would find some means of relieving the income-tax payer even if the right hon. Gentleman had not so much as £2,600,000 to give away. He quite admitted the Chancellor of the Exchequer's difficulty. He was sorry to say that the right hon. Gentleman was giving a good deal away in trifles, and the only substantial amounts he was able to give were in respect of the coal tax and the tea duty. He was not sure that, considering that 2d. came off the tea duty last year, the consumers of tea might not have waited another year before having further relief, although of course they wore all glad to relieve those who depended so largely upon tea. With reference to the coal duty he did not share the view of the hon. Member for Grimsby. He was glad the Chancellor of the Exchequer had repealed that duty. The Report of the Royal Commission on the Supply of Coal showed that they had no need to fear that it would run out before something like 500 years. One of the main reasons why Sir Michael Hicks-Beach put on the tax was the limited character of our coal supply, and that it was good economy to store it up. That reason had entirely gone now, the country having no need to be under any apprehension on that account for many years to come. Moreover, it would be bad policy to try to economise at a time when new inventions were coming in every day. If they stored that which was of good value now, but which might not be in the future, it would not be good policy. With regard to expenditure the Chancellor of the Exchequer had given very valuable advice, but was it really a great expenditure compared with the Income of the country, which had doubled
322
during the last forty or forty-five years, though we were not paying more in taxation per head of the population than was the case one hundred years ago He hoped the Chancellor of the Exchequer would be able to give the direct taxpayer, especially the income-tax payer, some relief next year both on the ground of public policy and as a matter of right.
MR. MCCRAEsaid he would like to add his congratulations to those already given to the Chancellor of the Exchequer oil his very clear and able speech. He should also like to associate himself with the Leader of the Opposition in regretting the absence of the late Chancellor of the Exchequer. The Chancellor of the Exchequer, although he entered into office under very serious conditions of expenditure and accumulations of debt, had some compensations. He had first of all the falling in of all these terminable annuities; and, secondly, the improved conditions of trade, of which, by the way, he did not think the right hon. Gentleman had taken full advantage in estimating his revenue for the coming year. The right hon. Gentleman had made a very conservative estimate, though, perhaps, if he erred at all it should be on the side of safety. He had had his hands strengthened in that there had been a public demand for economy in expenditure, and it was in that direction more than in any other that they must look for a diminution of that extra burden of taxation which was imposed on the country by the late Government. He would like to make two criticisms on the proposals of the Chancellor of the Exchequer. The first was with reference to his reduction of taxation. So far as the commodities were concerned the right hon. Gentleman could not have done otherwise. The coal tax seemed more than any other opposed to economic principles, and, with reference to the tea duty, seeing that the right hon. Gentleman was unable to reduce the sugar duty, which would have been even more important, being a raw material as well as an article of general consumption, he thought the right hon. Gentleman was confined to tea. He put to him, however, whether it would not have been better to have taken 2d. off instead of a Id. If he had done that and postponed its operation it would have been very much better. It would have

323
given the consumer a better chance of participating in the reduction. The right hon. Gentleman was to be commended for his proposal with reference to restoring the national credit, which, to use a very mild phrase, had been somewhat shattered by the proceedings of the late Government, not only with regard to the growth of ordinary expenditure, but also with regard to the war, and the way in which the late Government had borrowed for ordinary purposes of expenditure. Bankers had been alarmed and business men disturbed, and the Chancellor of the Exchequer was only expressing the feeling prevalent in all business circles when he said that the way in which the State had been borrowing recently had handicapped commerce. With regard to the method which the Chancellor of the Exchequer had adopted in dealing with terminable annuities which fell out, he would beg leave humbly to differ. He at once conceded, so far as the reduction of debt was concerned, that there was no difference at all in the principle which he applied. The money in any case went to the Sinking Fund, and if they wore sure of always having a Liberal Chancellor of the Exchequer in office, he would say that the simplest and, therefore, the best course was that which the right hon. Gentleman had proposed. As it was, the right hon. Gentleman had left a very wide open door to the next Conservative Chancellor of the Exchequer. The history of the terminable annuities gave ample evidence that there was a great danger in that. If the right hon. Gentleman set up other annuities in place of those falling out he would prevent any successor from reducing the Sinking Fund until the termination of the annuities set up for, say, another twenty years. When they looked back they found that the Sinking Fund had in every case been reduced by Conservative Chancellors of the Exchequer, and they had always, with one exception, taken the occasion of the falling in of those annuities to do something. The Chancellor of the Exchequer by his proposal was really giving the next Conservative Chancellor of the Exchequer an opportunity of reducing the contribution to the Sinking Fund. That was no remote contingency, because in 1890, when Sir Michael Hicks-Beach was Chancellor of the Exchequer, he anticipated the
324
falling out of certain annuities by several years and he reduced the contribution to the Sinking Fund by £2,000,000. The reason he gave for adopting that course was that too large a Sinking Fund was a danger to succeeding Chancellors of the Exchequer and he wanted to take away the chance of dipping into that source of revenue. Lord Goschen took advantage, not of the expiry of annuities, but of the system that Mr. Childers set up of postponing the payment, and reduced the fund by £2,000,000, so that altogether the Sinking Fund had been reduced by £4,000,000 by Conservative Chancellors of the Exchequer whenever they had had the opportunity. Therefore there was a real danger in this, and while they were delighted that the Chancellor of the Exchequer should make what he ventured to call adequate provision for the redemption of Debt, which would have its effect in the City and upon Consols, he nevertheless wished to point out that if the right hon. Gentleman had set up other annuities and bought Consols, say, at ninety, he would have been able to make a greater reduction of debt in that way. The Chancellor of the Exchequer when dealing with the amount of our national indebtedness had been exceedingly fair to his predecessors in office. He hid shown how the debt had been increased by £136,000,000 and that the increase really ought to have been more. He had made a simple calculation of what the National Debt ought to have been to-day had the ordinary operation of the Sinking Fund gone on uninterrupted either by the war or those excessive borrowings for military and naval works loans. But for those causes the Debt would have stood a £584,000,000, and, as the Chancellor of the Exchequer had told them, it now stood at £789,000,000, so that the National Debt to-day was nearly £205,000,000 more than it ought to have been but for the war and those borrowings upon military and naval works. Perhaps the most serious charge that they chould bring against the late administration from a financial point of view was that in 1904–5, in a year of peace, and not for war purposes but for ordinary purposes, they increased the National Debt by £2,250,000 sterling. The Chancellor of the Exchequer had made a very adequate provision for the Debt, he was laying aside £13,500,000, and there would be a net

325
reduction of Debt amounting to some £9,000,000. That was the largest contribution that had ever been made to the reduction of the Debt, and the Chancellor of the Exchequer was to be congratulated upon taking this very bold step. He did hope that the right hon. Gentleman would direct his attention to retrenchment. New Members of the House had a restive feeling because they thought that the Government had not used the pruning knife as effectively as they ought to have done. According to last year's expenditure they had saved £940,000 on the Army Estimates alone, and he thought that they ought to have had a proportionate reduction of the Army Estimates for the current year. He realised that the right hon. Gentleman had had to face automatic increases in the expenditure upon the Army and the Navy on account of the policy previously adopted, but if he had looked with a more hopeful eye on the increase of revenue which he was likely to receive next year he might have given a reduction of 2d. in the £ upon tea. The only excuse which he could offer for the Chancellor of the Exchequer's producing such a conservative estimate of revenue was that he was looking to a great Budget next year, and with the increase in the revenue and a reduction in the expenditure the Chancellor of the Exchequer would take the opportunity of doing what he was asked to do by the Leader of the Opposition, namely, to broaden the basis of taxation—;not in the way contemplated by the hon. Member for Gravesend, but by dealing with land and the licence duties and by adopting a progressive scheme for the reform of local taxation. They ought to do away with subventions to local authorities that were so wasteful in their operations. It had been estimated that the revenues which were intercepted for that purpose really meant that the working men put £1 into the Imperial Treasury and drew 5s. out of the local exchequer. He urged the Labour Members to keep a watchful eye upon that aspect of taxation. Next year he believed the Chancellor of the Exchequer would have such an opportunity of relieving industry from some of the shackles with which it was at present burdened, that he would be able to put taxation on a more sound and economic basis, and to relieve the pressure from the shoulders
326
of those least able to bear. If the right hon. Gentleman had such an opportunity as Mr. Gladstone had in 1853 then he would go down to posterity as one of the great Chancellors of the Exchequer who had adorned the pages of history.
MR. J. F MASONsaid that the Chancellor of the Exchequer had left the Committee in considerable doubt as to the incidence of the coal tax. If the contention that the foreigner paid this tax was true, why should they remove it; why not let him go on paying it? If on the contrary the producer paid the tax, on what grounds could it be contended that the producer did not also pay the tax on imported wheat? The conditions as regards competition were similar in the two cases, and the economic laws governing both cases seemed to be identical. If the removal of the coal tax could be justified on the plea that it was paid by the producer, then the whole policy of opposition to the fiscal proposals of the right hon. Gentleman the Member for West Birmingham was entirely without justification.
MR. FENWICKsaid that as one who had taken part in opposing the coal tax upon every possible occasion, he would not like the debate to close without offering a word of congratulation to the Chancellor of the Exchequer, both upon his own personal account and on account of the thousands of working miners whom he had the honour to represent. He was glad that the right hon. Gentleman had taken the earliest possible opportunity of removing what he had always considered was not merely an unjust, but also an unfair tax, inasmuch as the miners had to pay their full share of all other taxation as well. They paid the duty on sugar, tea, and tobacco, and many of them, he was sorry to say, also paid a fair share of the duty on beer and spirits. Of all other taxation miners paid their share, but in addition to that, the exporting districts, one of which he had the honour to represent, had had a special tax levied upon their particular industry. He would ask hon. Members who represented the industrial constituencies how long they would tolerate a special tax upon any particular industry in their own division. The coal duty was not

327
a tax that was levied upon the coal industry of the country, but it affected selected areas, namely, the exporting areas, which were picked out and penalised by means of this coal tax. The late Mr. Hanbury, in justifying this tax, called special attention to the fact that the miners who would suffer were Radicals, and were opposed to the policy of the Government that imposed the tax. During the General Election the right hon. Gentleman the Member for West Birmingham had said that the coal tax had not realised the expectations of the Government that imposed it, and that the late Chancellor of the Exchequer, if he had remained in office, intended to repeal the tax. The hon. Member congratulated the Chancellor of the Exchequer on the courage he had displayed in tackling this question. The hon. Member for Great Grimsby had called the attention of the Committee to the fact that the export of coal had increased every year since the tax was imposed, and had stated that it was impossible for anyone to say that the tax had proved injurious to the industry. He admitted that the export of coal had increased since the tax was imposed, but the Committee should remember that the rate of development prior to the imposition had not been maintained since the tax was imposed. For the ten years prior to the imposition of the coal tax the average annual rate of increase in our coal exports was 1,500,000 tons, and since the imposition of the tax the rate of development had fallen to practically only 500,000 tons, so that, with even a larger amount of capital employed, and with a larger number of workmen, they had been unable to keep up the average rate of development. He, therefore, contended that in addition to its being an unjust tax it was one of the most ridiculous taxes, from the free trade point of view, it was possible to imagine. While he sincerely congratulated his right hon. friend on having tackled the question, he regretted that the circumstances of the case were such that the tax could not cease forthwith. He was also glad that the Chancellor of the Exchequer had seen his way to reduce the tea duty by one penny, and in the name of the thousands of men whom he had the honour to represent, he thanked the right hon. Gentleman for what he had done. The hon. Member for Great
328
Grimsby had declared that the coal tax was a just tax, but if he had gone a little farther north than Grimsby and stood as a candidate in Durham or Northumberland they would not have had the honour of his presence in that assembly, for not a single candidate in Durham or Northumberland had declared himself in favour of the continuation of the coal tax.
MR. VICTOR CAVENDISHsaid he wished to join in the general chorus of congratulation to the Chancellor of the Exchequer on the lucidity and ability of his long and complicated statement. He rose for the purpose of asking two or three questions relating to small points in that statement. So far as he could judge the right hon. Gentleman had taken credit to himself and the Government for having introduced the principle that no new military or naval works should be undertaken on borrowed money with the exception of unforeseen expenditure. He understood that that principle had been most clearly and emphatically laid down by the late Chancellor of the Exchequer in recent years. In addition to military and naval works, there were other matters to which allusion might be made in this connection, and particularly works under the Telegraph Acts. He did not know what the policy of the Government would be in future. At no distant date there might be an extension of the buildings required for public offices, and he should like to know whether it was intended to carry out these undertakings with money voted in the Estimates. He did not wish to quarrel in any form with what had fallen from the right hon. Gentleman with reference to the reduction of debt. He thought the present Chancellor of the Exchequer had fully supported the proposals which the late Chancellor of the Exchequer had made with respect to the reduction of debt, and he thought the Committee should be thankful that he had made a considerable step in that direction. The right hon. Gentleman had seemed to imply that there might be some doubt as to whether he could or could not take some of the money coming to the Treasury for the Chinese Indemnity, and whether it could be utilised for the reduction of debt. He himself understood that it had been clearly laid down by the Treasury that the whole of that indemnity was in one form or another to be directed to the

329
repayment of debt. He hoped the money would be devoted to that purpose when it fell into the hands of the Chancellor of the Exchequer. As to the facilities to be placed in the hands of the Postmaster-General, he was quite sure that they would be of extreme benefit to the country. He would remind the Committee that facilities which were sometimes given by the Post Office for the purpose of stimulating business had also other consequences. Members of the Committee might not look at the proposal from the point of view of the Chancellor of the Exchequer, because undoubtedly, a large number of Gentlemen, not only in this House but outside, viewed with very great apprehension anything like an increase in the number of unnecessary advertisements they received by post. He recently received one morning as many as thirty advertisements by post, and although that kind of business might be a fruitful source of revenue to the Chancellor of the Exchequer, it was an intolerable nuisance to the people who were placed under the necessity of going through the advertisements. The right hon. Gentleman had also stated that it was his intention to appoint a strong Committee to consider the graduation of the income-tax. He should not like to take up an absolutely non-possumus position on that matter, but he confessed that he viewed with a very great feeling of alarm any attempt which might be made to reduce the value of that tax. Any recommendations to increase the abatements and reductions at present allowed ought to be viewed with considerable apprehension. This matter had been considered by many of the right hon. Gentlemen's predecessors, and he believed that it would be extremely difficult to introduce a system of graduation. He hoped that the right hon. Gentleman before accepting any recommendation of the Committee would allow the House a full opportunity of discussing the matter. Last year or the year before, after the late Chancellor of the Exchequer had introduced the Budget, the present Prime Minister remarked that he had omitted the warning on the subject of economy which they were accustomed to receive from the Chancellor of the Exchequer, but not even the greatest advocate of economy would complain of the right hon. Gentleman in that respect this afternoon. He
330
had addressed, and most wisely addressed, to the Committee a very strong expression of opinion on the administration of the Estimates in the future. He had reminded the Committee, as he himself had done on previous occasions, that not only Ministers of the Crown but the House of Commons itself were frequently guilty of rushing into the greatest expenditure. Never was a warning from a Chancellor of the Exchequer more necessary than to-day. Within a few weeks of the assembling of Parliament a series of Resolutions were passed which, if carried into effect, would throw a very serious burden on the country. He only hoped the House of Commons as a whole would bear in mind the warning it had received from the Chancellor of the Exchequer, and not attempt to force his hand in the way of increased expenditure. In conclusion, he wished to offer his congratulations to the right hon. Gentleman upon his excellent statement, and to express his sincere regret that the right hon. Gentleman the late Chancellor of the Exchequer was unable to be present during the Budget statement.
MR. REESsaid he would like, as one long familiar with the tea question, as an administrator, legislator, and latterly as an agitator, to express his dissent from the view taken by the hon. Member for the Eccleshall Division of Sheffield. He was sure that those interested in the tea industry would gratefully accept the remission of the 1d. on the tea duty in the hope that the other 1d. would be taken off next year. The tea duty had two aspects: one as it affected their constituents in this country, and the other as it affected their fellow subjects, the tea planters in India and Ceylon. Nearly 2,000,000 of Indian coolies were engaged in cultivating 1,000,000 acres of tea gardens; and when the duty on tea was raised some years ago it affected both the tea producers in the East and tea consumers in this country There was no country in the world, with the exception of Russia, France and Italy, which taxed tea to the same rate as we taxed our own tea in this, country; and he hoped that the Chancellor of the Exchequer would bear that in mind next year and take off the other 1d. He urged this in behalf of the producer in India and Ceylon, who

331
had been very hard hit by the increased tax and also by the Indian currency legislation. The planter paid for his labour in silver and sold his tea for gold, and now he got fifteen rupees instead of eighteen or more for every sovereign. It was said that gold prices would so appreciate as to redress the balance, but they had not done so. He did not oppose the currency legislation of the Government of India, which was inevitable, but he did say the planter was hit all round. He was no agitator and was not well represented in the House. He hoped the 1d. reduction would result in a fall in retail prices; at any rate it was a step in the right direction, and tea had half of the whole amount available for reduction. He could not follow those who asked for 2d. or nothing, and he did not intend to move an Amendment to that effect.
MR. STUART WORTLEYwished to say a few words as to sugar, with the claims of which he had a good deal more sympathy than with the interests of tea and coal. The proposal to get rid of the coal tax left him far from enthusiastic, because he represented those who were entirely consumers and not producers of coal. He thought that the claim of tea for a remission of taxation stood in an inferior position to that of sugar, because tea had received a remission last year, and the right hon. Gentleman had reminded the Committee that the reduction of the tea duty to the 6d. limit was quite a modern scheme of taxation. There was this differentiation between tea and sugar, inasmuch as the latter was a raw material of many British industries. He hoped that the claim of sugar would be considered by the Chancellor of the Exchequer in the future, as it constituted not only an article of food but was the raw material for many British industries. It had always seemed strange to him that when the duty on sugar was re-imposed a few years ago the duty on manufactured confectionery imported from abroad was at the same rate as on the raw material. Why should not the same principle have been adopted as in the case of tobacco and a higher duty imposed on manufactured confectionery, and so have given some assistance to the manufacturers in this country? It was quite true that the Chancellor of the
332
Exchequer had said that there were arithmetical difficulties in the way of giving relief to sugar. The total duty realised on sugar last year was £6,180,000. If the Chancellor of the Exchequer were to knock off a quarter of that sum, it would take about £1,500,000 of the right hon. Gentleman s surplus. That would make the tax 3s. 0½d. instead of 4s. 2d. It was true that the right hon. Gentleman could not at the same time give a reduction on tea, but for the reasons he had ventured to give, he submitted the claims of sugar were higher than those of tea in the present year, and, regretting as he did that the coal tax had been removed, he considered that the sugar trade and the industries dependent upon it should have received more consideration.
MR. J. BETHELLasked the Chancellor of the Exchequer how he proposed to allocate the sum which he had provided for the necessitous school districts.
MR. ASQUTTH: The principle upon which the Government are proceeding is this. In the case of an education authority whose expenditure to be met by the rate exceeds the produce of a 1s. 6d. rate, a grant will be made out of the Exchequer of three-fourths of the excess. Take, for example, West Ham. There the expenditure to be met by rates in excess of the 1s. 6d. rate is £63,612, and there will be a special grant of £47,709, with the result that the rate which is now 29·9 will be reduced to 21·9. In East Ham the expenditure in excess is £21,916; the special grant of three-quarters will be £16,437, with the result that the present rate of 29·2 will be reduced to 20·8. In Walthamstow the excess is £22,000 odd, and the special grant of £16,000 will reduce the rate from 30·6 to 21·1. At Edmonton the excess is £13,000; the grant will be £9,700, and the reduction from 33 to 21·7.
MR. YOUNGER: Will this provision apply to Scotland?
MR. ASQUITH: No, Sir, it does not apply to Scotland.
MR. YOUNGER: May I ask why not?
MR. ASQUITH: I was not aware that there was any demand for it from Scotland.
LORD WILLOUGHBY DE ERESBYsaid he was glad to hear the speech which the right hon. Gentleman had made, as he considered the proposals which he had placed before the House were exceedingly wise, and well considered. There was one point to which he should like to call special attention, and that was that the right hon. Gentleman had resisted any temptation to make some large and popular reduction of taxation and had recognised that one of the sound principles of finance was to reduce debt as rapidly as possible. He was sorry to say that he remembered that when he was first a Member of this House there were a certain number of people who used to go about the country with long faces saying that it was a disastrous thing that there were so few Consols left upon the market, so that there were none available for the investment of trust funds. He, however, was one of those who considered that it was sound finance for the individual, and also for the State, that they should pay their way as far as they could and refrain from borrowing. He thought the country would be an enormous gainer if there were no Consols at all, and he held that the proposal of the Chancellor of the Exchequer to devote a portion of his surplus to the reduction of debt was one which should receive the support of the Committee. Another portion of the right hon. Gentleman's speech which he was glad to hear was that in which he said that he intended in the future to resist to the uttermost of his power loans for naval and military works, to be repaid after a certain number of years. He thought that was an extremely dangerous form of legislation and an extremely dangerous way of borrowing money. We lived in days when events moved very quickly. Fresh inventions came out every day and science was developing very rapidly. It was perfectly obvious, therefore, in regard to naval and military works that what might be considered extremely necessary in one year might in the course of three or four years be absolutely useless. He thought, however, that there was another object for which money could be borrowed for either
334
short or long periods. It was another of the reasons why the Chancellor of the Exchequer should reduce debt, that the Government of this country should be able to obtain cheap money in connection with a certain class of loan. He meant those loans which had to be contracted either by the State or by local bodies for the purpose of ameliorating the social condition of the people. It was perfectly impossible that any of the schemes for getting the people back to the land or for the housing of the working classes could be carried out unless they obtained cheap money, and it was therefore most important that our finances should be so regulated that money could be obtained at as low a rate of interest as possible in order to provide for those works. Therefore as regarded the question of reducing the debt he viewed the speech of the right hon. Gentleman with the greatest pleasure, and he hoped that the right hon. Gentleman's resolve in this respect would not during the next year or two be in any way weakened. It was a consolation to him that the Government obtained such a large majority at the last election, as he had always considered that a Government which had a large majority at their back were in a much better position to resist any demands which might be made upon them by any section of their following, and to resist demands for large expenditure which would seriously hamper the interests of the country. It frequently happened in debates that hon. Members got up and advocated the reduction of the tea duty, the income-tax, and other taxes. They spoke very much of the value of economy, and what a scandal it was that the country should be spending this large amount of money. Yet it frequently happened that a few days afterwards the same hon. Members would be addressing the House and advocating some useless expenditure. He was glad also that the Chancellor of the Exchequer recognised the fact which must be recognised by all people who had looked into the finances of the country, that any tax which was imposed was certain to be a tax upon our industries here, and would prevent the development of industry and the use of capital. He had always maintained that taxes must have the effect of reducing employment and reducing the amount of capital which could be properly

335
invested to employ men and further the industries of the country. The most important point of the right hon. Gentleman's speech was the proposal to abolish the duty on coal. He, for one, was very pleased that it was the intention of the Chancellor of the Exchequer to take this step, and he was not surprised that he should have done so, because he understood that during the right hon. Gentleman's election campaign this was one of the points on which he had distinctly pledged himself to his constituents. Although he did not think there was a single coal miner in his constituency, he was glad that the tax was to be removed, as he believed that it was a tax upon the producer. What had happened was that the miners and coal owners in this country paid the tax and the foreigners who bought the coal paid exactly the same price for the coal as if the tax had not been imposed. He had always thought the tax fell upon the producers in this country, and therefore he was glad that the right hon. Gentleman proposed to abolish it, because it showed that we had now a Chancellor of the Exchequer who had a clear idea of the incidence of taxation. With regard to the small changes the right hon. Gentleman was going to make in the postal arrangements, he understood that he now proposed to deliver letters at every place in the United Kingdom three times a week. He was afraid the right hon. Gentleman would find some difficulty in carrying out that proposal, but he should vote for it because, although it might entail some loss to the Exchequer, he thought it was only right that people who lived in out of the way places and who only had one delivery a week should be brought into closer touch with civilisation. At the same time he would like the right hon. Gentleman to urge on the Postmaster-General the desirability of inquiring into the question of the service of rural districts where there were two or three posts a day. In his opinion the second post was one of the curses of civilisation. There should be a delivery as early as possible in the morning, and the post should leave as late as possible at night. The majority of the people in the rural districts felt that when they had received their morning's delivery, they should be done and finished with letters for the day and that they should not receive a post at two o'clock or five o'clock in the after-
336
noon. If the right hon. Gentleman would look into this matter and argue it out with the Postmaster-General, he would find that in many rural districts there were two or three deliveries in the day, which must cost money and which the people in the district did not consider of any use. If the right hon. Gentleman could reduce those deliveries to one and spend the money saved in giving more deliveries to those people who received only one post a week, he would be responsible for a very great reform. With regard to the proposed reduction of 1d. per lb. on tea, he believed that the people who got the worst and most unfair treatment in this respect were the poorest of the population—;the people who bought their tea in very small quantities. A man who was able to buy his tea by the chest or in large quantities could usually insist on being treated fairly by the tea dealer. The question he desired to ask the right hon. Gentleman was, would this penny only benefit the seller, or did the right hon. Gentleman think that by this reduction of the duty he was going to reduce the price of tea to those who could only-purchase tea in small quantities?
MR. ASQUITH: Or improve the quality.
LORD WILLOUGHBY DE ERESBYwas doubtful whether the reduction would achieve either of those results, in which case the right hon. Gentleman would have done far better by leaving the duty alone until he could give a reduction which would benefit these poor persons. In conclusion, with these exceptions he could only repeat what he had said before, that he believed the wise and sound policy of steadily reducing the debt of this country and at the same time attempting to reduce the taxes would be the policy of the right hon. Gentleman, who would not allow himself to be made a party to any great expenditure which would lead to heavy taxation being levied which, though it was levied upon the rich alone, must in the long run react on the commerce and the producers of this country.
MR. C. PRICEcongratulated the Chancellor of the Exchequer upon his Budget, which he thought was the first honest Budget for

337
many years, and differed in that respect from that introduced by the ex-Chancellor of the Exchequer last year, which was absolutely dishonest and misleading in many respects. He was sorry the right hon. Gentleman had not seen his way to do something to alter the conditions of the floating debt of the country. In his opinion it would have been a good thing if that could have been solidified and added to the National Debt. Owing to there being so much floating debt it was difficult to understand what really was the condition of the debt of the country. He was glad, however, that the amount earmarked for the reduction of debt was to be increased. He was exceedingly sorry that the right hon. Gentleman had not made the reduction on tea 2d. instead of 1d., because that would have benefited the consumer, and he was perfectly certain that the consumers would not get the benefit of the reduction proposed. He strongly urged that before the Budget was carried through this reduction should be made 2d., because everyone who had anything to do with the increase and reduction of the price of eatables knew that these small reductions did not benefit the consumers in any degree.
COLONEL KENYON-SLANEYthought the position most Members on the Unionist side took up was not that the proposals of the Budget were bad but that possibly they might have been better. He regretted to hear the hon. Member for Central Edinburgh say the Budget of the ex-Chancellor of the Exchequer was dishonest. It was not the fact, and he thought it very offensive on the part of the hon. Member to have applied such a term to his right hon. friend the late Chancellor of the Exchequer. What the Committee had now to consider was whether the right hon. Gentleman the Chancellor of the Exchequer had made the best use of his surplus. He should be sorry to think that he had made the worst use of it, but he was not sure he had made the best use of it. Greater experts than he doubted whether the reduction of 1d. on tea would benefit the poorest classes, and that being so he would like to have seen a better test of the good intentions of the right hon. Gentleman. As to the abolition of the tax on exported coal, he was not quite sure that the right hon.
338
Gentleman had made a wise selection. On the right hon. Gentleman's own showing the result of the arrangements made after the imposition of the tax had been that the foreigner who bought the coal had practically paid the extra price necessitated by the tax. He understood the right hon. Gentleman to say, however, that this tax did press rather hardly upon a type of coal that was not of the best; but at the same time he laid it down very clearly that this tax did not in any way interfere with the export of the best coal, of which this country had a monopoly. If it was true that foreign consumers must buy this best type of coal, and if it was allowed that our store of coal, though very large, was to a certain extent the life blood of the mining interest of this country—;if all that was true, would it not have been better to have retained the tax and to have applied the amount of income received from it to the reduction of some other tax which would be better for the well-being of the people of this country, who had a right to look for every remission when there was any money to spare? He remembered many years ago the present Lord Goschen laying down the proposition that the first duty of a Chancellor of the Exchequer ought to be to consider how he could, as far as possible, broaden the basis of taxation and increase the sources of revenue rather than dry up altogether any of the present sources. He argued that although they might reduce a certain tax they should not get rid of it altogether, because by keeping open numerous sources taxation would be fairer. In his Budget statement the right hon. Gentleman appeared to have lost sight of the importance of not drying up any source of taxation, and to that extent he had departed from the wise principle laid down by Lord Goschen. The effect of the abolition of the coal tax would be to take money out of the pockets of the people in this country to relieve their foreign rivals of a slight contribution to our revenue, and it would also narrow instead of broaden the basis of taxation. He should have thought that the Chancellor of the Exchequer would have recognised that the income-tax had a greater claim to a reduction than a proposal to narrow the basis of taxation. He did not think the right hon. Gentleman had made the best use of his surplus, and while hon. Members

339
had spoken with gratitude of the assistance given to the coal-mining industry he had not heard a word of regret that the agricultural industry was not to get the slightest benefit or help. The great blessings which according to the Prime Minister were to accrue to agricultural districts, and which figured so largely in the Prime Minister's election address, were not advanced by a single inch under this Budget. It would have been a far wiser policy if a portion of the surplus had been devoted to carrying out some of the promises made by hon. Gentlemen opposite during the election. He was not quite clear whether the Chancellor of the Exchequer intended to advance loans to local authorities at a lower rate of interest. If so, he agreed that that would be a benefit to certain rural developments which they would all like to see carried out. Had the right hon. Gentleman held out any promise that such would be the case? If so, he would like to know to what extent the rate of interest would be lowered. He would reserve any further criticisms upon details, and in conclusion he desired to say that he did not think that the Chancellor of the Exchequer had made the best use of his opportunities, for he might have made a wiser selection for the remission of taxation. At any rate he could not promise the right hon. Gentleman much gratitude or many expressions of satisfaction on behalf of the large agricultural and rural districts which would be affected by the Budget.
MR. HOLDENsaid he was not directly interested in tea, sugar, or coal, but he was interested in the general financial position of the country, and he would like to deal with that in his maiden speech. He had followed closely the figures of the Chancellor of the Exchequer, and as he was somewhat of a pessimist with regard to them, he was not very sanguine as to a future revenue. He was also pessimistic about the estimated expenditure which the right hon. Gentleman had estimated at £246,000 less than last year. The question arose whether this decrease was an actual retrenchment or an actual economy. He did not think it was either. In the Navy Estimates in 1904, the stock of Naval stores was £4,188,000, in 1905 £4,600,000 and in 1906 £4,700,000. In
340
the Estimates for 1907 those stores had fallen to £4,000,000, showing clearly that they were working out of stock. That was not real retrenchment, and he urged on the right hon. Gentleman the necessity of watching these stock accounts, because it was on the cordite stock account the last Liberal Government fell. It would be a very good thing if he ordered a general stock-taking for the whole country, not only as to quantity, but as to quality, so that he might commence on solid ground. They had heard that it was absolutely necessary that the unfunded debt should be reduced as quickly as possible. If that was a dangerous debt because it was payable at short dates, then they must also consider that the debts which were incurred by the National Debt Commissioners and the Postmaster-General would also be dangerous debts under certain circumstances. That liability amounted to £150,000,000, against which they were told that this country held £100,000,000 Consols and other stocks, and £50,000,000 annuities. But before accepting this as satisfactory they wanted to know the market price of the stocks held against the Post Office debt. In 1898 the surplus market value of those stocks was £11,000,000, but in 1903 there was a deficiency on this account of £11,000,000. The last Parliament passed an Act that the Postmaster-General should be relieved from the statutory obligation of publishing a balance sheet on the ground that it would be misleading. It would certainly be misleading if the stocks were not entered at their market value. If there was a deficiency in this account, and the nation was responsible for it, they ought to know what it was. He sincerely hoped the Chancellor of the Exchequer would not continue the style of finance adopted by the late Government, and would not take advantage of the Act permitting him to withhold a balance sheet. On the contrary he begged of him to commence his financial career by making provision for this deficiency, and by publishing the balance sheet redeem the character of the House for sound finance. He was pleased that the Chancellor of the Exchequer was keeping liquid a portion of the annuities. If he would take out of these annuities £1,000,000 sterling per annum and create a Sinking Fund

341
until it was equal to the deficiency, he would then place the savings hank business on a sound foundation. He would also render great service to the country if he would invest that Sinking Fund in gold as opportunities presented themselves, so that at the end of ten years there would he a gold reserve to meet liabilities. The transactions which took place at all our commercial exchanges amounted to about £15,000,000,000 per annum, by the exchange of pieces of paper, whether bills or cheques—;all received on the understanding that they were payable in gold. If the Chancellor of the Exchequer would take the opportunity of putting the deficiency right, and of creating a reserve of gold amounting to £10,000,000 sterling to meet the general indebtedness in case of necessity, he would earn the gratitude of the whole of the financial community of this country.
MR. WARDLEsaid he was not, like the last speaker, a pessimist with regard to the progress of this country on its financial side. He was interested, as was every Member of the Committee, in the comparisons drawn by the Chancellor of the Exchequer between population and expenditure, but there were one or two other comparisons which he would have liked the right hon. Gentleman to have given, but which, whether purposely or not he did not know, were certainly withheld from the Committee. There was the question of the income of the country, and the growing wealth of the country. While the expenditure had increased by 39 per cent, and the population by 10 per cent., he thought it would be found that notwithstanding all the money that was wasted during the South African war, the wealth of the country had been increasing by £200,000,000 per year, and that therefore the country was not in the bad position some people would have them believe. Undoubtedly there would come from the benches below the gangway demands for increased expenditure in certain directions on behalf of social reform. One of the demands—;that for old age pensions—;would be pressed most strongly. They had been told time after time that the money for these things could not be raised, and they were invited by the noble Lord who had spoken a short time ago to resist every demand for increased expenditure. The noble Lord had
342
said the country was oppressed by the load under which it staggered, and the Committee were also invited by the right hon. and gallant Member for the Newport Division of Shropshire to look at the question from the point of view of the broadening of the basis of taxation. He would venture to suggest two or three sources of income that were open to the Chancellor of the Exchequer without in any way broadening the basis of taxation. One of those sources was hinted at by the last speaker. He referred to the question of banking, and he ventured to suggest that as municipalities had found it necessary on various occasions to get out of the hands of the financiers and the money-lenders, it would be for the general good of the country if the State took over the business of banking and used the profits on behalf of the whole community. He would like to suggest that if they could get a Chancellor of the Exchequer with imagination enough he would find in the income which might be derived from the nationalisation of the railways of this country an enormous fund which might be used for the purposes of old ago pensions and various other social reforms. In thirty years every penny subscribed by the shareholders of the railways of this country had been paid back, and they still owned the original amount and a large sum of watered capital besides. The income of the shareholders amounted to £40,000,000 a year. In Germany about £22,000,000 was provided by the railways for the relief of taxation, to the general advantage of the State. So that when hon. Members said they must either broaden the basis of taxation or find other sources of income, he told them there were other sources waiting at the moment to be tapped, and it seemed that what was wanted was sufficient imagination in some Chancellor of the Exchequer to convert the great railways in this country to the public use. Of course, there would be other subsidiary advantages, but in the main it would be a nucleus from which a fund could be formed to provide for matters of social reform. A great deal had been heard about another matter, namely, mining rents and royalties. He thought the Chancellor of the Exchequer when looking about for new sources of income might put a tax on these rents and royalties, and the sooner he did so the

343
sooner would the pledges which candidates gave during the general election be fulfilled. It seemed to him that more advantage would have been conferred on the community by taking the tax off sugar instead of by reducing the tax on tea. Sugar was the raw material of certain industries and it was far more important that it should be free from taxation than that a penny should be taken off the tea duty. On the whole he did not think they could have expected more from the Chancellor of the Exchequer who had only been four months in office. He hoped that before this Parliament had finished its course some of the greater questions which he had referred to would be tackled, and that something would be done in the way of social reform.
MR. W. H. LEVERcongratulated the Chancellor of the Exchequer on his proposals, especially in regard to the reduction of the National Debt. In his opinion, the nationalisation of the railways would result in a loss of revenue to the State, though it would certainly benefit the shareholders. He did not believe that money for an old age pension scheme could be obtained by that means. He would rather advocate the nationalisation of canals, and the providing of improved facilities for motor traffic. If that were done the rates for the carriage of goods would fall, and anyone who wished to buy railway stock ten years afterwards would not have to pay the price which the Government would have to pay for the railways if they were bought by the State now. There were other sources from which income might be derived. There was a strong desire that the pledges which had been given with regard to old age pensions should be redeemed. He rejoiced that the Chancellor of the Exchequer had promised an inquiry into the question of the graduation of the income-tax. Reference had been made by the Chancellor of the Exchequer to the difficulties which were said to prevail in regard to the graduation of the income-tax, and one speaker who had taken part in the debate had said that it was perfectly impossible. He himself agreed that discrimination should be made between incomes which were derived from investments and those which came from daily toil, either by the hand or the head.
344
They should differentiate between the incomes from investments which survived the death of the owners, and incomes which ceased with the death of the wage-earner. He ventured to say that if they would combine these two principles they would have a basis of taxation which would be perfectly fair to all classes of the community. By having a graduated income-tax and collecting it at the source and by doing away with the system of rebates that now existed, it would be possible to collect on the highest scale from wealthy companies making the largest profits, and in that way they would make a distinction between the wage-earners and the dividend receivers. It would work out in this way. Supposing a person had an investment in a large corporation, although his income might be below the amount ordinarily assessable, he would pay on that income on the highest scale because he enjoyed all the security which the large corporation gave, and the high rate of dividend which it paid. He did not think there was any other system on which a graduated income-tax would be available for the purpose of producing any considerable increase of revenue. If they had a graduation of the income-tax he thought they should commence with a tax of 2d. on incomes of £1 a week and tax the wealthy on the highest scale. They would then get sufficient money not only for old-age pensions, but also for other social reforms. He was confident that those who contributed on the larger scale would be doing no more than bare justice, and they would be performing an obligation resting upon them.
MR. CARLILEsaid that earlier in the debate reference was made to the fact that some foreign countries had a graduated income-tax. He knew that the effect of a graduated income-tax in Switzerland was that people who possessed incomes approaching large proportions lived out of the country for the whole of the year except eighty-nine days, and their incomes were spent in Italy and elsewhere instead of in their own country. That did not make for the welfare of the country. If a system of graduated income-tax was introduced, legitimate methods of evading payment would be devised which it was not now worth while to adopt.

345
He trusted that if a graduated income-tax were introduced it would be in such a way that capital would not be driven out of the country, and that a premium would not be put on evasion. As to the tea duty he had hoped that if a reduction was to be made, the whole system of levying the duty would be altered. It seemed to him to be an appalling thing that the duty on tea dust which was the luxury of the working man should be equal to 330 per cent, of its value, while those who bought a 3s. tea only paid 14 per cent, on its value. Why should not the right hon. Gentleman impose an ad valorem duty on tea? Of course there were difficulties in introducing an ad valorem duty, but these should be faced rather than continue the present rotten system. He dared say that it would involve the engagement of a staff of experts, but he should say that if the Chancellor of the Exchequer could afford to take off a penny from the tea-tax, he might engage a staff which could provide a better principle of charging the duty than at present. In the main he did not think that the Chancellor of the Exchequer was likely to be hardly dealt with by hon. Members on the Opposition side of the House. It seemed to him that in many ways this was a most excellent Budget. He was sure that on the Opposition side of the House it would not be criticised in the disgraceful manner in which an hon. Gentleman on the Liberal Benches had described the Budget of the late Chancellor of the Exchequer. Members of the Opposition were not in the habit of using the sort of epithets which an hon. Member on the Liberal Benches had employed in the absence of the late Chancellor of the Exchequer in regard to a Budget which was one of the best and most intelligent ever placed before the country, and which was received with admiration by the whole country. He ventured to say that the Budget statement of the right hon. Member for East Fife would receive more considerate treatment at the hands of the Opposition, and he thought that they might consider it as in the main a satisfactory statement. It was a great consolation to them that the handsome surplus placed at the disposal of the right hon. Gentleman was largely the result of the excellent conduct of public affairs by the late Government.
MR. W. JOHNSONsaid that the hon. Member for St. Albans had argued strongly against a graduated income-tax, contending that it would not work out properly. But directly afterwards he had said that the poor man's tea dust should be taxed more lightly than the rich man's tea which cost 3s. or 4s. a pound. That was a graduated tea-tax; and if the poor man was let off on account of his tea, why not on account of his income? The hon. Gentleman could not argue logically for a graduated tax on tea and against a graduated income-tax. He was glad that the coal duty was to be abolished, because he knew that it had reduced the wages of miners throughout the country, and that it was one of the most grievous burdens that trade had had to bear. He would suggest to the hon. Member who objected to the removal of the coal duty to go down to South Wales, to Durham, and to Scotland, where he would be told that the coal-tax had interfered with the trade of the country, and that many contracts for the supply of coal abroad had been lost through it. He believed that the hon. Member opposite was an owner of mining royalties and a very wealthy landowner, and he suggested that a provision might be made for old-ago pensions by a land-tax and a tax on mining royalties. As the son of a father who had to keep a family upon 12s. a week he knew what it was for the small wage-earners to be taxed. They were taxed already sufficiently by indirect taxation, and the sooner it was removed the better. They could only put the sympathy which they professed with the working-classes into practical effect by giving them a larger income which would procure for them better homes and surroundings, better education for their children, more leisure for themselves, and, in their old age, something better than the workhouse.
MR. RIDSDALEdesired to join in the general tribute paid to the statement of the Chancellor of the Exchequer. He felt sure that the Budget when it became known in the City of London, would have a good effect upon the credit of the country. It had been well thought out, and it was based on broad and sound lines. The Chancellor of the Exchequer had placed his finger on the weak spots of the national balance-sheet, from which

347
the credit of the country had been suffering during the last few years. He had stated that the naval and military expenditure was no longer to be paid for out of borrowed money. The £41,000,000 under this head was to be greatly reduced. He had stated that the Unfunded Debt, a debt which ought never to have been allowed to approach the enormous sum of £71,000,000, was now to receive more careful attention, and he had promised a reduction of £7,000,000 next year. Such reduction could not fail to be attended with good consequences to our credit. If there was one thing which had pressed upon the credit of the country during the past few years it had been the existence of that £71,000,000. It had absorbed the liquid finances of the country which would otherwise have been available for the ordinary purposes of trade. There was another point the right hon. Gentleman had dealt with. Taxpayers were all shareholders in the great company of the British Empire; and everyone had a right to be shown a true statement of debtor and creditor, a statement which should contain each item of expenditure and receipt which the nation incurred or received. He was delighted to hear that the Chancellor of the Exchequer intended to abolish the appropriations in aid and other undisclosed, accounts which had hitherto been omitted from our balance-sheet and thus obscured its whole meaning from any person who endeavoured to understand exactly how the nation stood. Anyone who was versed in the study of finance must have unqualified praise for the general statement of the Chancellor of the Exchequer. He would like to say a few words in impartial criticism as to the method by which he had disposed of the surplus. He could have wished to see the balance of the money given to reduce the taxation on sugar rather than upon tea, or the abolition of the coal-tax. Sugar was food; tea was not, although we put it inside us. Sugar was raw material to many of our industries, but tea was not raw material to anything.;—;unless it was indigestion! Though any tax must be a hindrance to the trade of the product upon which it was imposed, at the same time of all taxation imposed upon commodities probably the last he would be inclined to touch would be the tax
348
upon coal—;for the reason that he did not think it was by any means clear that the people of this country had paid it. He admitted that the tax upon coal must have been a hindrance to the mining industry and had probably caused, to a slight extent, a decrease in wages, but he did not think it made any difference whether the tax was put on here or the other side of the sea, as to whether the producer or the consumer paid the bulk of it. There was a statement made by the Chancellor of the Exchequer which rather bore out that statement. The right hon. Gentleman had declared that in many contracts made for the sale of coal there was a clause to the effect that the foreign buyer should have the benefit of the remission of the tax if, and when, it occurred. But why should the foreign buyer have the benefit of the remission of a tax, if and when it occurred, unless he paid it now? He did not wish to press the point. He wished to see all these indirect taxes taken off sooner or later, but he urged that if there were a tax which in his opinion should be left on until the last, it was the tax upon coal.
SIR GILBERT PARKERcomplimented the Chancellor of the Exchequer upon his extraordinarily lucid statement. If they were to have a Budget of the conventional and orthodox kind to which the country had been accustomed for a good many years, he could not imagine a Budget that would appeal more to those who sat upon the Ministerial side of the House than the present one. From first to last it was an exposition by a master of exposition. All who sat upon the Opposition side acknowledged the immense ability, the high political character, and the extraordinary command of detail and generalisation possessed by the Chancellor of the Exchequer, but having said that he thought he detected one or two remarkable contradictions in the statement of the right hon. Gentleman. It was, he ventured to say, a Budget which would not cause great astonishment in the country. It was a Budget which, he thought, had been expected. So long as they retained the habit of taxing a very few articles of consumption, and those articles principally food and drink, a Chancellor of the Exchequer had very small room in which to swing his economic cat. He must play see-saw with the few

349
objects of taxation, and they had had that see-saw through a great many years by Conservative Chancellors of the Exchequer, and now they had a similar Budget from a Radical Chancellor. After all, what did this Budget do? There was a certain reduction for which all were grateful, upon tea; but the hon. Member who had just sat down had suggested that there might have been a reduction to greater advantage upon sugar. There was the see-saw. The Chancellor of the Exchequer himself had admitted that a reduction upon sugar would perhaps be of greater advantage to the manufacturer, since sugar was a raw material; but instead of taking the tax off sugar it was to be taken off tea, and he ventured to say that if the late Chancellor of the Exchequer had been in the position of the present Chancellor of the Exchequer to-day, he would have done exactly the same thing, and have see-sawed from one object of taxation to another, with no direct change so far as the general effect was concerned, but a direct change so far as the individual object of taxation was concerned. As to the coal tax he could not understand how hon. Members on the Ministerial side of the House reconciled their views concerning it. Personally he had always been opposed to export taxes of every kind, and there was scarcely a Protectionist community which did not hold practically similar views. The United States in its constitution prohibited any export tax being put upon any product of manufacture or natural product going out of that country. Why? For the simple reason that they considered that a tax put upon goods coming into the country had a certain restrictive effect upon competition. He voted for the coal tax—;and a good many others had been as guilty of inconsistencies in the House—;for the reason that he now voted for a tax upon tea and sugar, because so long as we continued the present method of taxation, those who thought as he did must give their votes in favour of certain forms of taxation to which they were actually opposed. He had supported the coal tax because we needed the money, and so long as we had a system of taxation narrow in form, they were bound to support it until the country changed the system pursued by Governments of both sides of politics. He had supported the coal tax, but they could not have the effect of that tax both ways. Some said it was the producer who paid
350
the tax, and if that was so the contention that it was paid by the consumer fell to the ground. He was, however, opposed to the principle of the coal tax, because it had a certain restrictive effect on the trade. He would put taxes on other articles which were excluded from the purview of the Chancellor of the Exchequer, because they would have a restrictive effect on competitive importations and at the same time would yield revenue. The coal tax was not analagous to the shilling tax which was put upon corn, and which was taken off without any reason whatever. If that tax had been maintained it would have given us £2,500,000 revenue without any appreciable effect on the cost of living in this country. He thought the Chancellor of the Exchequer had been extremely fortunate. Every one had been delighted with the result of last year's operations in taxation. Through the past year's operations there had been an estimated surplus of £3,000,000, and on the Budget of last year there had been a saving of £422,000. Did the right hon. Gentleman and hon. Gentlemen opposite take credit for the whole of that saving on the one hand and all the surplus on the other? The Budget which the right hon. Gentleman had been able to present was the result, as he himself had acknowledged, of operations which began before he became Chancellor of the Exchequer—;the result of a year of savings and careful expenditure, as he himself would admit, largely of operations he had not initiated. The Chancellor of the Exchequer had boasted of the return to thrifty and economical administration. For thrift and economy the right hon. Gentleman's Budget would hardly set the Thames on fire. It was true the right hon. Gentleman held out hopes of future reductions in national expenditure. Though he had not had time to consider large schemes of reform of administration and large and wide methods of economy which would result in substantial reductions in the expenditure of the country, he did not think that would come so speedily as the right hon. Gentleman imagined. The right hon. Gentleman had also hinted at raising money by increasing the taxation on the liquor trade. That trade was already taxed up to the utmost limits. If hon. Gentlemen opposite said abolish the licence trade altogether and be prepared

351
to make up the revenue of £34,000,000 got from it by other reasonable means, he would vote with them if it was believed it could be done legitimately, but because there was a trade which would yield revenue it did not follow that it should be taxed to yield the highest possible revenue. There were some who believed with regard to the liquor trade that the tongue of the buckle had been drawn to the last hole. A land tax had also been suggested as a means of raising revenue. Something might be said for taxing land values, but that was not a problem that could be worked out on principles alone. It would have to be worked out through a series of complicated and conflicting interests and claims, and hon. Gentlemen who represented rural constituencies would have to give very careful consideration to any proposals to tax land which at present did not pay the landlord, the farmer, or the labourer. They must look in other directions for the revenue to meet the constantly growing expenditure of the country. Did hon. Members opposite believe they were going to curb in any great degree the growing expenditure of the country? The right hon. Gentleman had pointed out that despite the 10 per cent, increase of our population in ten years, and the necessary increase in the expenditure in all Civil Service departments consequent on the increase of population, the increase in expenditure had only been £9,000,000. That was an extremely small increase. The largest item of general increase had been in regard to education, a matter of 60 per cent. Hon. Members opposite were now embarking on a scheme of education much larger than any which preceded it, if the Bill now before the House passed. The Chancellor of the Exchequer could not remove expenditure by a magic wand, and turn to the Army and the Navy and the vast expenditure upon those services as an object for reduction. No one would dispute the fact that our Army and our Navy were nominally for the defence of territory, but just as really for the preservation of our trade routes to the other Colonies and the open markets in the East. The Colonies had cost this country nothing save for the operations of the Army and Navy in the acquisition of territory in which those Colonies themselves had no voice. If this country
352
undertook the acquisition of territory in order to build up an empire, that was her business and she must pay for it. Since, however, the country had acquired that territory, these Colonies had paid for their upkeep.
MR. LEA: Is the Uganda Railway a Naval or Military operation?
SIR GILBERT PARKERpointed out that Uganda was not a Colony. Uganda, as yet, was worked as a territory under Britishers, who were not Colonists, but who were occupying the country and enlarging their fortunes. When that territory became a Colony it would take care of itself. He did not, however, want to enter upon a wide discussion of the action of the British Empire through the Treasury, nor would he have mentioned the subject had not the Chancellor of the Exchequer himself, with something of an air of disparagement and with something of a suggestion of over expenditure upon our Colonies, alluded to the subject and seemed to want the House to believe that we could reduce the cost of the Empire in this direction through the operations of the Chancellor of the Exchequer or the Cabinet. He did not think it could be done in that way, and he was one of those who believed that as the years went on—;it might be two, three, four or five years—;it would be found by this House and the country that the narrow field in which our taxation operated was a field which had been fully taken up and was exhausted. Moreover, its operation pressed heavily upon the poor man. There was another form of taxation which pressed very heavily upon the poor man and that was the inelastic taxation of food. [MINISTERIAL cheers.] He knew what hon. Members meant by that cheer. They suggested that a, shilling tax on corn pressed heavily upon the poor. But he would remark that while that shilling tax was in operation the food of no one in this country cost more. [MINISTERIAL cries of "Oh."] At any rate hon. Members would admit that there was a doubt. [Cries of "No."] There was no doubt however about the heavy taxes which the poor man paid upon tea, sugar, coffee, cocoa and tobacco. These were, as he had said,

353
inelastic, and afforded no chance that the man who produced these articles in a foreign country should pay any portion of them. Why? Because we did not grow these things in this country, consequently the effect of those taxes was severe, rigid, and inelastic, he believed that the time would come when the majority of the House would think differently from what it did at that moment. It would recognise that to tax foreign manufactured goods for the purpose of revenue was advisable. [MINISTERIAL cries of "Oh."] Well, that was a free trade tax. [Renewed cries of "Oh."] Hon. Members must not fly away from the principles of free trade. To tax manufactured goods for the purpose of revenue, and revenue alone, was pure free trade. It was the Cobdenite free trade, the John Stuart Mill free trade. It was the foundation upon which hon. Members had built up their present system. Prophecy of course was cheap and inexpensive, and was not well paid by results, but he ventured to predict that hon. Members opposite would yet before they had left that Parliament consider the question whether it might not be possible to get a very considerable amount of revenue from other articles than tea, sugar, tobacco, and such things. He would not object to their getting it from land values if they could prove that it was wise and expedient to do so. But if they got it from land they must still go to other sources of revenue and those were to be found in the reasonable taxation of foreign manufactured goods.
MR. CHIOZZA MONEYdesired to add his congratulations to those which the right hon. Gentleman had already received upon the lucid and luminous manner in which he had unfolded his proposals to the Committee. They on the Ministerial side rocognised that it would be unfair to criticise those proposals since they were based upon expenditure which was not that of a Liberal Government, and were
354
hampered and harassed by Estimates relating to armaments, which Estimates were those of an Administration now happily no longer in power.
They felt that to apply drastic criticism to the details of the present Budget would not be fair to the distinguished holder of the office of Chancellor of the Exchequer. When armaments had boon reduced as they were promised that they should be reduced, then and not before it would be their duty to criticise freely the proposals of the Chancellor of the Exchequer. With the exordium of the Chancellor of the Exchequer with regard to debt he thought everybody on the Ministerial side of the House would agree, though perhaps there might be some traces of disappointment that after that lengthy exordium he did not urge a greater appropriation of the surplus towards the sinking fund. His own view was that the annual proportion of £28,000,000 might well be raised to £29,000,000 or even £30,000,000 with a view to the reduction of the enormous burdens which now pressed upon the industries and activities of the nation. He would point out that our National Debt, which now amounted to nearly £800,000,000, was in many respects to be distinguished from the National Debts of the majority, if not all, of the great countries of the world in this respect, that there were no solid assets to place against that debt. It was absolutely in the truest sense of the word a National Debt, against which we had to place perhaps only the £28,000,000 of the Suez Canal shares, a small matter of Crown lands, and a small matter perhaps of public roads. That debt was an absolute burden upon the people, to sustain the interest upon which was a great burden not only upon the masters and employers, but also upon the wage earners of the country. He thought everybody would agree with the criticisms which the Chancellor of the Exchequer very properly applied to the Local Taxation Account. The Local Taxation

355
Account was an account at the Bank of England which was fed in the most un-business like way, (1) from the Excise Licence Duty; (2) part of the Estates Duties, equal to 80 per cent, of half of the proceeds of the old Probate Duty; (3) the taxes on beer and spirits, and (4) the sums allotted in the Agricultural Rates Act. This system left it uncertain in the minds of those who ruled our local finance what sums they would have to deal with in any one year. The death of a millionaire or two might provide them with a large sum, where as in the succeeding year they might find their funds depleted. He was sure that that was not a kind of finance which would commend itself to the Committee, and that they would all join with the Chancellor of the Exchequer in condemning it root and branch. Coming to the main consideration which underlay British finance, the question of ability in regard to the raising of the taxes of the country, and the classes upon which those taxes should be levied, there cords which had been collected by the Inland Revenue authorities threw a flood of light upon the question of ability, which was always a recognized principle of British finance. Let them take, for instance, the investigations which had been made in the collection of the income-tax and of the estate duties. It was somewhat difficult to decide upon the question of how many people paid income-tax in this country, but if they could arrive at that figure they would have a light thrown upon the incidence of taxation, and guidance would be given them as to how they should frame their Budgets. There was the Inhabited House Duty which was applied only to those people who inhabited houses valued at £20 per annum and upwards. It seemed strange that in a rich and wealthy country like this, containing 9,000,000 houses, there were only 1,300,000 of the annual value of £20 and upwards. That seemed to suggest that the number of income-tax payers could not be much
356
more than 1,000,000, and indeed closer investigation showed that to be the case. They had a most valuable record in that connection in the claims for abatement. In cases where the incomes were between £160 and £700 the income-tax payers were allowed certain abatements of their incomes before they paid income-tax. The number of persons who claimed abatements on the income-tax was shown by the latest Return to be less For the most part people with over 700,000. Even if they assumed that a certain number of people escaped taxation and that a certain number of other people did not take the trouble to claim abatement, they arrived at the conclusion that about 750,000 persons claimed abatement or were entitled to it. For the most part, people with more than £700 a year lived in houses of a high rental. In London he had calculated that a man with £700 a year and upwards would be likely to live in a house at a rental of not less than £60, and in the country he would place it at £50 a year. Taking those two criteria, in the whole of the United Kingdom the number of people with £700 a year and upwards would not be much more than 250,000. In that way they arrived at 1,000,000 income-tax payers, which was what was suggested by the total number of houses at £20 a year and upwards. What a valuable light that threw upon the distribution of incomes and the application of Adam Smith's doctrine of ability to pay, which had been expanded into the doctrine of equality of sacrifice. If there were 1,000,000 income-tax payers, and they represented 5,000,000 people, then it meant that out of 43,000,000, 5,000,000 took the whole of that income which was shown in the income-tax records. This sum amounted in the last year of which they had any record to nearly £900,000,000 sterling. When they had made deduction for repairs to houses, improper abatements, and other allowances, the solid fact remained that an amount of income between £800,000,000 and £900,000,000, or for 1904 about

357
£830,000,000, was enjoyed by a number of people in this country who only amounted to 5,000,000 out of 43,000,000. What a tremendous fact that was, for it meant that one-ninth of the population enjoyed half of the income of the country. But even that was overshadowed by a still greater fact which he would venture to place before the Committee. he had stated already that the possessors of incomes of between £3 per week and £700 per annum were about 750,000, but if they took the 48th report of the Inland Revenue Commissioners they would find that the incomes which they enjoyed could not possibly amount to more than £250,000,000. If that was the case it meant that an income of nearly £600,000,000 sterling, or more than one-third of the entire income of the whole of the people, was enjoyed by 1,250,000 out of 43,000,000. That was an overwhelming fact in relation to taxation, for it meant that one-third of the entire income was taken by one-thirtieth of the people. The possibility of error was so small that he thought it might be taken that the calculation was sufficiently correct to be at any rate the basis which ought to be taken into consideration in regard to any system of taxation imposed in this country. He submitted that these facts were an argument for a graduated income-tax. They also showed that the middle classes were over weighted by taxation, while the upper classes, the rich people who really controlled the activities of the country, because they controlled its land and its capital, were under taxed. Corroboration was to be found in the death duty returns. Every year about 700,000 persons died in this country, and the amount of property they left amounted to nearly £300,000,000. Out
358
of those 700,000 persons 27,000 left £267,000,000—;that was to say, 4 per cent, of the persons who died left nearly the whole of the property which passed at death in any average year. The figures he had given were not for any one particular year, but were the average for the last five years. In each of the last six years less than 4,000 persons had left an average of £195,000,000 per annum. These figures pointed to another means by which they might apply the doctrine of equality of sacrifice. It was agreed by Adam Smith, John Stuart Mill, and other economists of standing that when property passed at death that was a good time for the State to take its toll. What had been the Budget history of the last fifteen years during which period hon. Gentlemen opposite had been in power? It had been a tinkering with taxes; this year something off tea and something on tobacco, the next year something off tobacco and on tea, and so on, year after year until one was inclined to ask whether the ability of British Chancellors of the Exchequer was exhausted when they were obliged to resort to such minor subterfuges. He looked to the time when the Budget would contain more non-tax revenue than at present. We derived more than £4,500,000 of non-tax revenue from the Post Office, which pointed the way to happier methods. He would remind the Committee of what was done by other countries in this very matter. An hon. Member opposite had referred to the question of the nationalisation of the railways, and an hon. Member on the Ministerial side had in reply thrown doubt on the practicability of the proposal. When Prince Bismarck proposed to nationalise the railways of Prussia the same arguments were applied, but he nationalised them.

359
In 1905 the income of the Prussian railways amounted to £79,000,000 and the expenditure to less than £55,000,000, with the result that there was a net profit of nearly £25,000,000. [An HON. MEMBER: What did they cost?] They cost a sum which was largely represented in the national debt of Prussia. The profits of the national Prussian railways were not only sufficient to pay the interest on the whole of the national debt, but to pay £10,000,000 per annum for other matters. The State mines of Prussia yielded a profit of £1,200,000 a year, and the forests and domains a profit £4,000,000. In Japan the non-tax revenue was one-half of the total revenue, and would soon be two-thirds. Japan, like ourselves, had passed through a great war, but because of her national assets and revenue producing administrations the burden of taxation in Japan would diminish as time went on, while ours steadily increased. These things, he urged, must have consideration in the Budgets of the future. It was time to think of the development of the country in all its resources and to the devotion of national wealth to truly national ends.
MR. BRIDGEMANsaid the exhaustive speech of the hon. Member for North Paddington conclusively proved, if it proved anything at all, that the country was now suffering from the fact that the rich had been getting richer and the poor poorer for some considerable time. That result had been arrived at by the blessed system of free imports which he understood the hon. Gentleman somewhat strongly to support. In regard to the coal tax he was not an expert; but he was glad to note that the Government had practically repudiated the doctrine
360
that a tax upon a commodity must necessarily fall upon the consumer. [MINISTERIAL cries of "Oh, oh!"] Well, if it did not fall upon the consumer he could not see the logic of the argument of hon. Gentlemen on the Ministerial Benches. The argument advanced in favour of the repeal of the coal tax was that it was the producer who paid the duty. [An HON. MEMBER: That is an export duty, not an import duty.] This was a matter of principle, and two different things could not be said in regard to the same principle. What he had risen, however, to draw attention to was the very poor treatment which agriculture had received at the hands of the Government. In the Gracious Speech from the Throne they were told that earnest inquiries were being made into the social and economic conditions of the people of Great Britain, and that measures were to be submitted to the House by which a larger number of people would be retained on and attracted to the soil. Those measures, however, had not yet been brought before the House. The Chancellor of the Exchequer in the course of his speech had said that he intended to go very thoroughly into the question of State subventions towards local purposes. He hoped that the right hon. Gentleman would at the same time consider the incidence of local and Imperial taxation on the various industries of the country, including agriculture. At present, rural, and paid far more than its proper share in rates and taxes. He felt quite certain that a great deal could be done towards lightening in a fair and just manner the taxation on farmers and occupiers of small holdings, on whom the existing rates fell very heavily compared with people who were not on the land. He hoped that when the Chancellor of the Exchequer took this Subject into his serious consideration

361
he would realise that the proper way to bring the people back to the laud was to make it easier and more profitable for them to live upon the land.
MR. MITCHELL-THOMSONsaid if it was not presumptions on his part he would express his appreciation of the remarkable way in which the right hon. the Chancellor of the Exchequer had handled a very abstruse and complicated array of figures. It was all very well to hear homilies on retrenchment, but it was one thing to preach such homilies, and another thing to practise them. He believed that when the Chancellor of the Exchequer came to deal with the various departments he would perhaps find his prophecies of retrenchment a little difficult of fulfilment. There was the President of the Board of Education, and the right hon. Gentleman would have to come into conflict with him if a question arose concerning education. Then he would have the Postmaster-General to deal with. It was well known that a conflict was going on between the Post Office and the National Telephone Company, which must inevitably entail the expenditure of a large amount of public money; that was a question upon which retrenchment was quite impossible and impracticable. He should have liked to say something as to the advisability of reducing the taxation on sugar, but he recognised that any remarks that he might make upon that subject might be regarded with a certain amount of suspicion by hon. Members on the Ministerial side. Therefore, he would not presume to urge upon the right hon. Gentleman his regret that he had not been able to do something to relieve the country from the sugar tax; he would only say that not only as a food was sugar worthy of some amount of consideration; it was
362
even more worthy of attention as the raw material for certain industries from which they heard complaints at the present moment. The right hon. Gentleman had said that sugar was taxed within 30 per cent, of its value, but that was the retail selling value. The right hon. Gentleman went on to say that tea was taxed within 90 per cent, of its value, but that was the wholesale selling value, not the retail selling value. That was quite, if he might use the expression, another pair of shoes, and if the anti-tea duty agitation had done nothing else it had directed the attention of the people of this country to the enormous profits made by the middlemen who had dealings in tea. He had always hold strong views against the coal tax, and therefore he was exceedingly glad that the right hon. Gentleman had seen his way to abolish it, but there was a point in regard to it upon which he wanted a certain amount of illumination the question had reference to the incidence of the tax and upon the logical methods by which the right hon. Gentleman had arrived at the conclusion that it ought to be abolished. He thought they might start with the proposition—;he was sure this statement would commend itself to hon. Gentlemen who were followers of Mr. Cobden—;that every tax had an inherent vice, and that all taxes were vicious because they were barriers between nations and were preventatives of free exchange between those nations. Applying that doctrine to the coal tax it was vicious, but taking the case of Hamburg, which, if he remembered rightly, was called more than once the test market, from the point of view of Great Britain in selling coal to Hamburg the tax was a disadvantage upon us, because it was a barrier raised between our market and that of Hamburg. That was the reason which underlay the

363
removal of the tax, and he thought all hon. Members would agree that the barrier was just as much a barrier whether it was raised by the selling nation or whether it was raised by the buying nation, and that the coal tax would have been equally a barrier if, instead of being imposed by this country, it had been imposed by the free city of Hamburg. Therefore, hon. Members would have been equally pleased at its removal, and the reason was that the barrier was erected in regard to an article which could be obtained by the good people of Hamburg in any quantities they liked from other countries. There were two conditions which might justify the retention of such a barrier. The first was that the Exchequer must have money, and the other was the political difficulty. It was said that coal was an article of great national value, and in the interests of the nation ought not to be alienated. That was an argument which he confessed could only apply to one class of coal, and that was the finest steam coal, and with regard to that he could not see why the tax should not be retained, because finest steam coal was an article which would command its price and sell in any market in the world. It was a monopoly, and therefore was an article in regard to which the tax always feel upon the consumer and not upon the producer. He agreed, however, that the coal tax was to be regarded as a barrier between this country and—;for instance—;Hamburg, and that it was desirable for this country to remove it; it was a barrier because it applied to an article of universal consumption and produced by other countries. But let them look at the question from the point of view of Hamburg. It did not matter to Hamburg whether the tax was imposed by this country or by themselves. Ex hypothesi they did not
364
pay the tax, because if our market was closed they could draw their supply from another market. Then they went one stop farther, and here it was that he wanted illumination from the right hon. Gentleman. Let thorn suppose instead of Hamburg they road Great Britain, and instead of a tax on British coal, a tax on foreign wheat, an article eatable of being produced by untaxed countries in unlimited quantities, large enough to supply the requirements of this country, they had substantially the same tax in the main, only in this case it was imposed by the buying countries instead of by the selling countries. Would hon. Gentlemen say that the tax had in one case an incidence on the one side, and in the other an incidence on the other side? They could not have it both ways. More than once in the course of the session they had had indications that hon. Gentlemen opposite were beginning to see light, and to appreciate the fact that it was highly desirable that wherever possible British work should be conserved for British workmen. He could only hope that, in the days to come, the Chancellor of the Exchequer would fulfil this theory, of which he had laid down the foundation that night, and come over and help tariff reformers.
MR. MEYSEY-THOMPSONcraved the indulgence of the Committee in making his maiden speech. He hold that he had a greater right to that indulgence than the right hon. Gentleman the Chancellor of the Exchequer, inasmuch as he claimed to be a real maiden. The Chancellor of the Exchequer had asked indulgence in making his maiden Budget, but he regarded the right hon. Gentleman more in the light of a widow, as he only came before the House in a new capacity. He congratulated the Chancellor of the

365
Exchequer on the excellent speech he had made in introducing what the right hon. Gentleman would excuse him for calling a thoroughly bad Budget. When the right hon. Gentleman spoke he thought he had never heard him speak so well, and when he heard the right hon. Gentleman propose to pay off the National Debt in a comparatively brief space of time he quite expected to hear a speech on the subject of fiscal reform, which would provide the funds to enable us to pay off the Debt while encouraging our native industries. The right hon. Gentleman did not, however, fulfil his early promise. The only result of this magnificent beginning was a proposal to take off the coal duty. "What a falling off was there." He believed the right hon. Gentleman was honest in his wish and his attempt to reduce the National Debt by a large sum, and he had gathered from the right hon. Gentleman's remarks that they were going to get rid of it altogether in the next four or five years. The Committee could imagine his disappointment when he heard they were only going to have a reduction out of the surplus of £500,000. What he wanted to know was this. If the consumer paid the 1s. duty, why did we not have an export duty on coal? If the consumer did not pay the duty, why not have a tax on imported corn? In either of these ways we could realise the right hon. Gentleman's beautiful dream of paying off the National Debt.
MR. ASQUITHheartily congratulated the hon. Member upon having discharged the difficult task of delivering a maiden speech with admirable discretion and much point and humour. The hon. Member had said that he (the Chancellor of the Exchequer) was not a real maiden. If he might use the French tongue he
366
would say he was afraid he was a demivierge. He certainly had not got that sanguine enthusiasm which the hon. Member had displayed, in the full tide and fervour of which he attributed to him the intention of paying off the National debt in three or four years. That was an intention which he was sure he had never expressed. He did not however rise for the purpose of making a controversial speech. His object in rising was merely to ask the Committee to proceed to pass the formal Resolutions necessary to the financial business of the country, with the assurance that upon the tea duty Resolution there should be a general discussion to-morrow on the general policy of the Budget.
MR. A. J. BALFOURoffered no resistance to the right hon. Gentleman's proposal. He understood that the right hon. Gentleman had met their wish. Under those circumstances he would not oppose the Resolutions of which the right hon. Gentleman had spoken. Of course, no other business would be taken to-night.
MR. GEORGE WHITELEY: That is understood.

CONTINUANCE OF ADDITIONAL CUSTOMS DUTIES ON TOBACCO, BEER, AND SPIRITS.
Resolved, That the additional Customs duties on tobacco, beer, and spirits imposed by Sections two, three, four, and five of the Finance Act, 1900 (including any increased duties imposed by Section five of that Act), shall continue to be charged until the first day of July, nineteen hundred and soven.—;(Mr. Chancellor of the Exchequer.)

CONTINUATION OF ADDITIONAL EXCISE DUTIES ON BEER AND SPIRITS.
Resolved, That the additional Excise duties on beer and spirits imposed by

367
Sections six and seven of The Finance Act, 1900, shall continue to be charged until the first day of July, nineteen hundred and seven.—;(Mr. Chancellor of the Exchequer.)

PERMANENT ANNUAL CHANGE.
Resolved, That the permanent annual charge for the National Debt for the current financial year be twenty-eight and a-half instead of twenty-eight million pounds.—;(Mr. Chancellor of the Exchequer.)
CHINA INDEMNITY.
Resolved, That it is expedient to authorise the application in like manner as the new sinking fund is applied of any sums paid into the Exchequer on account of the China Indemnity.—;(Mr. Chancellor of the Exchequer.)
INCOME-TAX.
Resolved, That Income-tax shall be charged, for the year beginning the sixth day of April, nineteen hundred and six, at the rate of one shilling in the pound.—;(Mr. Chancellor of the Exchequer.)

AMENDMENT OF LAW.
Resolved, That it is expedient to amend the law relating to the National Debt, Customs, and Inland Revenue.—;(Mr. Chancellor of the Exchequer.)
Resolutions to be reported To-morrow;
Committee to sit again To-morrow.

ALLOTMENTS (LONDON) BILL.
Order for Second Reading read.
Motion made, and Question proposed, "That the Bill be now read a second time."
LORD WILLOUGHBY de ERESBYobjected to the Bill's being proceeded
368
with without its object being explained. The Opposition could not be expected to allow a Bill of this description to pass when they had received absolutely no explanation and no information in regard to its provisions.
MR. J. WILLIAMS BENNsaid that the Bill was merely to extend to London the provisions of the Allotments Act in order that the London County Council might have power to let small pieces of land on the outskirts of London for the convenience of working men desiring such plots. There was nothing new or revolutionary in the measure, and he hoped hon. Gentlemen opposite would allow it to pass. It was not a compulsory measure.
COLONEL LEGGEsaid it was very undesirable that a Bill of this character should be brought in in this way, and the House asked to pass it without any explanation whatever. It was all very well for the hon. Member for Devonport to say it was simply a Bill to apply to the County of London. He thought that even the London Members would like to know something about it before they assented to the Second Reading. He did not wish to speak disrespectfully of the London County Council, for he had been a member of it himself, and he had great admiration for the work the Council had done, but they had quite enough work to do at the present time, and it was very desirable that their duties should not be increased.
And, it being Eleven of the Clock, the debate stood adjourned.
Debate to be resumed upon Wednesday.
Adjourned at eight minutes after Eleven o'clock.

Preamble
Several Lords—;Took the Oath.

PRIVATE BILL BUSINESS.
The LORD CHANCELLOR acquainted the House that the Clerk of the Parliaments had laid upon the Table the Certificates from the Examiners that the Standing Orders applicable to the following Bills have not been complied with:—;Poole Corporation Water; Sutton District Water.
Also the Certificates that the Standing Orders have not been complied with in respect of the petitions for the following Bills:—;Ritz Hotel, Limited; Crellin's Patents.
And also the Certificates that the further Standing Orders applicable to the following Bills have been complied with:—;Metropolitan Police Provisional Order; Scottish Provident Institution Buildings [H.L.]; Epsom and Ewell Gas; Dowlais Gas; Merthyr Tydvil Gas.
The same were ordered to lie on the Table.
Great Western and Rhymney Railway Companies Bill [H.L.]; Cardiff Railway Bill [H.L.]; Barry Railway Bill [H.L.]; London and North Western Railway Bill [H.L.]. Report from the Select Committee, That the Committee adjourned on Monday, the 9th instant, until Tomorrow; read, and ordered to lie on the Table.
West Cumberland Electric Tramways Bill [H.L.]. The Lord Chancellor informed the House that the Promoters do not intend to proceed further with the Bill. The Orders made on 19th March last and the 3rd instant discharged. Ordered that the Bill be not further proceeded with.
National Assurance Company of Ireland and Yorkshire Fire and Life Insurance Company Bill [H.L.]. Read 3a, and passed, and sent to the Commons.
Seed Potatoes Supply (Ireland) Bill; Post Office (Money Orders) Bill; Notice of Accidents Bill; Police (Superannuation) Bill. Brought from the Commons.
Carlisle Corporation Bill; Todmorden Corporation Bill; Great Eastern Railway Bill; Bacup Corporation Bill; Cardiff Gas Bill; North East Lincolnshire Water Bill; Thornton Urban District Gas Bill; Macclesfield and District Tramways Bill; New Mills Urban District Council Bill; Uxbridge Gas Bill. Brought from the Commons; read 1a; and referred to the Examiners.
County of Aberdeen (Monymusk Bridge and Road) Order Confirmation Bill [H.L.]. Wallis' Divorce Bill [H.L.]; Crystal Palace Company Bill [H.L.]; Dover Harbour Board Bill [H.L.]. Returned from the Commons agreed to.
Western Valleys (Monmouthshire) Sewerage Board Bill [H.L.]. The order made on Tuesday, the 13th of March, appointing certain Lords the Select Committee to consider the Bill, discharged.
Great Western and Rhymney Railway Companies Bill [H.L.]; Cardiff Railway Bill [H.L.]; Barry Railway Bill [H.L.]; London and North Western Railway Bill [H.L.]. Report from the Committee of Selection, That the Earl of Verulam, the Earl of Eldon, the Viscount Hill, and the Viscount Colville of Culross be proposed to the House as members of the Select Committee on the said Bills in the place of the Earl of Harrowby, the Lord Monson, the Lord Seaton, and the Lord Somerton (E. Normanton); read, and agreed to.
Clacton Urban District Council Bill [H.L.]; Newport Corporation Bill [H.L.]; West Yorkshire Tramways Bill [H.L.]; Bury Corporation Bill [H.L.]; New-castle-upon-Tyne Electric Supply Bill [H.L.]; County of Durham Electric Power Supply Bill [H.L.]; Cumberland Electricity and Power Gas Bill [H.L.]; Report from the Committee of Selection, That the Lord Hamilton of Dalzell be proposed to the House as a member of the Select Committee on the said Bills in the place of the Viscount Ridley; read, and agreed to.
Great Northern Railway (Ireland) Bill [H.L.]; Maryport Harbour Bill [H.L.]; Railway Clearing System (Superannuation Fund) Bill [H.L.]; Lancashire and Yorkshire Railway Bill [H.L.]; Crediton Lighting and Power Bill [H.L.] Southport and Latham Tramroad (Extension of Time) Bill [H.L.]; Portsmouth Water Bill [H.L.] Report from the Committee of Selection, That the Lord Ravensworth be proposed to the House as a member of the Select Committee on the said Bills in the place of the Lord Leigh; read, and agreed to.
Hull and Barnsley Railway (Steam Vessels) Bill [H.L.]. The Chairman of Committees informed the House that the opposition to the Bill was withdrawn: the orders made on the 8th of March last and the 3rd instant discharged, and Bill committed.
Haslingden Corporation Bill [H.L.]. The Chairman of Committees informed the House that the opposition to the Bill was withdrawn: The orders made on the 5th of March last and the 3rd instant discharged, and Bill committed.
Truro Gas Bill [H.L.]. The Chairman of Committees informed the House that the opposition to the Bill was withdrawn: The orders made on the 12th of March last and the 3rd instant discharged, and Bill committed.
South Eastern and London, Chatham, and Dover Railways Bill [H.L.]. The Chairman of Committees informed the House that the opposition to the Bill was withdrawn: The orders made on the 8th of March last and the 3rd instant discharged, and Bill committed.
Wallasey Tramways and Improvements Bill [H.L.]. The King's consent signified; and Bill reported from the Select Committee, with Amendments.
Penllwyn Railway and Road Bill [H.L.]. Reported from the Select Committee, with Amendments.
Portsmouth Water Bill [H.L.]. Witnesses ordered to attend the Select Committee.
Great Northern Railway (Ireland) Bill [H.L.]; Clacton Urban District Council
196
Bill [H.L.]. Witnesses ordered to attend the Select Committee.
Preston, Chorley, and Horwich Tramways Bill [H.L.]. Read 3a; Amendments made; Bill passed, and sent to the Commons.
South Lancashire Tramways (Extension of Time) Bill [H.L.]; Sheffield District Railway Bill [H.L.]. Read 3a, and passed, and sent to the Commons.

PETITIONS.

  EDUCATION.
  Petitions in favour of maintenance of existing religious teaching in Church of England schools of—;
  1. Parents and guardians of children attending schools at Darwen; Darwen, St. John the Evangelist; Darwen, St. John, Central; Manchester, St.Stephen's; Manchester, Stowell Memorial; Manchester, St. Peter's, Westleigh; Manchester, St. Wilfrid's; Manchester, St. Andrew's; Manchester, Christ Church; Appley Bridge, Manchester; Laugho, Manchester; Hornby, Manchester; Ashworth, Manchester; Dobcross, Manchester; Barrowford, Manchester; Holme-in-Cliviger, Burnley; Chorlton-cum-Hardy; Eccleston; Hulme, St. Michael's; Hulme, St. Philip's; Hulme, St. Mary's; Hulme, St. John the Baptist; Woodford, Chester; Gorton, AllSaints'; Pendleton, John Street School; Oldham, St. Mary's; Newton Heath, All Saints'; Salford, St. Stephen's; Pallow field and Ladybarn; Chorlton-on-Medlock, St. Luke's; Pendlebury, Christ Church; Levenshulme, St. Andrew's; Heywood, All Souls'; Scotforth, St. Paul's; Burnage; Todmorden; Horwich; Adlington; Douglas, near South-port; Walton-le-Dale; Overton; Brindle Heath; Flixton; Lougton, Manchester; Royton, St. Anne's; Royton, All Saints'; Royton, St. Paul's; and Preston, St. James'.
  2. Petitions in favour of Religious Liberty, sound Religious Education for children according to the faith of their parents, and the maintenance of denominational training colleges, of teachers

  197
  in schools at Holme-in-Cliviger, Burnley; Darwen; Manchester, St. Stephen's; Manchester, Stowell Memorial; Manchester, St. Andrew's; Newton Heath; Chorlton-cum-Hardy; Douglas, near Southport; Eccleston; Hornby, Manchester; Hesketh, near Preston; Laugho, Manchester; Dobcross, Manchester; Whit worth, Rochdale; Gorton, All Saints'; Pendleton, John Street School; Barrowford, Manchester; Newton Heath, All Saints'; Salford, St. Stephen's; Fallow field and Ladybarn; Walton-le-Dale; Todmorden; Preston, St. James'; Royton; Levenshulme, St. Andrew's; Heywood, All Souls'; Scotsforth, St. Paul's; Adlington; Miles Platting, St. Luke s; Brindle Heath; Flixton; Pendlebury, Christ Church; Hulme, St. Mary's; Chorlton-on-Medlock, St. Luke's; Hulme, St. John the Baptist; Droy-lesden; Burnage; Oldham, St. Mary's; and Bury (Elton), All Saints'.
  Read and ordered to lie on the Table.

PARLIAMENTARY PAPERS—; RECESS.
The LORD CHANCELLOR acquainted the House that the following Papers, having been commanded to be presented to this House by His Majesty, had been so presented on the following dates by delivery to the Clerk of the Parliaments, pursuant to Standing Order No. CXI., viz.:

MINES AND QUARRIES.
I. General Report and Statistics for 1904—;Part IV. Colonial and Foreign Statistics. Statistics relating to persons employed, output, and accidents at mines and quarries in the British Colonies and in Foreign Countries. (April 10.)
II. Reports of His Majesty's Inspectors of Mines under the Coal Mines Regulation Acts, 1887 to 1896, the Metalliferous Mines Regulations Acts, 1872 and 1875, and the Quarries Act, 1894, for the year 1905. East Scotland District, R. McLaren; West Scotland, R. M. Ronaldson; Newcastle, J. B. Atkinson; Durham, R. Donald Bain; York and Lincoln, W. Walker; Manchester and Ireland, John Gerrard; Liverpool and North Wales, Henry Hall;
198
Midland, A. H. Stokes; Stafford, W. N. Atkinson; Cardiff, F. A. Gray; Swansea, J. T. Robson; Southern, J. S. Martin. (April 10.)

BANKING, RAILWAY, AND SHIPPING STATISTICS (IRELAND).
Report on the Banking and Railway and Shipping Statistics of Ireland, for the half-year ended 31st December, 1905. (April 10.)

TRADE REPORTS (I. ANNUAL SERIES).
No. 3549. Chile (Coquimbo).
No. 3550. Austria-Hungary (Trieste).
No. 3551. United States (Maryland, Virginia, West Virginia, and Kentucky). (April 10).
No. 3552. Italy (Genoa).
No. 3553. Colombia (Santa Marta), (April 11).
No. 3554. France (Réunion).
No. 3555. Norway (April 19).
No. 3556. Greece (Morea, Aetolia, and Acarnania).
No. 3557. Argentine Republic (Buenos Ayres).
No. 3558. Venezuela (Ciudad Bolivar) (April 19).
No. 3559. Greece (Corfu).
No. 3560. Sweden (Stockholm and Eastern Coast of Sweden). (April 20).
No. 3561. Turkey (Palestine). (April 21).
No. 3562. Egypt (Alexandria). (April 24).
No. 3563. Germany (Leipzig). (April 26).
No. 3564. United States (States of California, Nevada, and Utah, and Territory of Arizona).
No. 3565. Italy (Rome).
No. 3566. Russia (Batoum). (April 27).

II. MISCELLANEOUS SERIES.
No. 646. Persia (Persian Customs Regulations).
No. 647. United States (Turpentine Industry). (April 10).
No. 648. Italy (Agriculture of Tuscany). (April 21).

POST OFFICE.
I. Additional articles to the Money Order Convention between the Post Office of the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Ireland and the Post Office Denmark, dated 20th December, 1905 and 23rd January 1906. (April 10).
II. Agreement between the Post Office, of the United Kingdom of Great Britain, and Ireland and the Royal Imperial Austrian Postal Administration concerning the exchange of money orders.(April 10).
III. Agreement for an exchange or money orders between the Post Office of the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Ireland and the Post Office of Hungary, dated 28th October, 1905, and 16th November, 1905. (April 27).
IV. Agreement for an exchange of money orders between the Post Office of the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Ireland and the Post Office of Switzerland, dated 8th-17th October,1905. (April 27).

CAPE OF GOOD HOPE (OBSERVATORY).
Report of His Majesty's Astronomer at the Cape of Good Hope to the Secretary of the Admiralty, for the year 1905. (April 10).
FIRE BRIGADES AND FIRES, 1903 (ENGLAND AND WALES).
Return relative to Fire Brigades and Fires in England and Wales, for the year 1903. (April 11).
AUSTRIA-HUNGARY (NEW CUSTOMS TARIFF (INTERIM STATEMENT)).
Translation of the New Customs Tariff of Austria-Hungary as modified by commercial treaties with Germany, Russia Italy, Belgium, and Switzerland. (April 11).
INDIA TRADE.
Tables relating to the trade of British India with British Possessions and Foreign Countries, 1900–1901 to 1904–1905. (April 11).
PRISONS (SCOTLAND) ACT, 1877.
Twenty-eighth Annual Report of the Prison Commissioners for Scotland, being the Sixty-seventh Annual Report on Prisons in Scotland (April 11).
EAST AFRICA PROTECTORATE.
Return of grants of land in the East Africa Protectorate from 1st January 1904,to 31st December, 1905 (in continuation of [Cd. 2331] Africa, No. 15 of 1904). (April 19).
UGANDA PROTECTORATE.
Report on a botanical mission through the forest districts of Buddu and the Western and Nile Provinces of the Uganda Protectorate by Mr. M. T. Dawe, officer-in-charge, Forestry and Scientific Department. (April 19).
ELECTRIC POWER AND SUPPLY BILLS.
Memorandum by the Commissioners of Works. (April 19).
STRAITS SETTLEMENTS, HONG KONG, GIBRALTAR.
Further correspondence relating to measures adopted for checking the spread of venereal disease (in continuation of [Cd. 9253], September 1899). (April 19).
NATIONAL GALLERY, &c. (SCOTLAND).
Twelfth Annual Report to the Secretary for Scotland by the commissioners and trustees of the Board of Manufactures in Scotland, for the year ended 30th September, 1905. (April 19).
ROYAL OBSERVATORY, EDINBURGH.
Sixteenth Annual Report of the Astronomer-Royal for Scotland. (April 19).
CROFTERS HOLDINGS (SCOTLAND) ACTS, 1886–1887.
Report by the Crofters Commission being for the year ended 31st December, 1905.(April 19).
TRADE.
Annual Statement of the Trade of the United Kingdom with Foreign Countries and British Possessions, 1905, compared with the four preceding years: Volume I. (Summaries, abstract, and detailed tables of imports and exports). (April 19).
AGRICULTURE AND TECHNICAL INSTRUCTION (IRELAND).
Fifth Annual General Report of the Department, 1904–1905. (April 19).
TREATY SERIES, No. 3 (1906).
Treaty of commerce and navigation between the United Kingdom and Roumania; signed at Bucharest, 31st October, 1905. (Ratifications exchanged at Bucharest, 17th March, 1906). (April 23).
REFORMATORY AND INDUSTRIAL SCHOOLS (GREAT BRITAIN).
Forty-ninth Report for the year 1905 of the Inspector of Reformatory and Industrial Schools. Part I. List of Schools and detailed Reports. (April 25).

BOARD OF AGRICULTURE AND FISHERIES (LOUTING-ILL AND BRAXY COMMITTEE).
Report of the Departmental Committee appointed by the Board of Agriculture to inquire into the Aetiology, Pathology, and Morbid Anatomy and other matters connected with the diseases of sheep, known as Louping-III and Braxy.
Part I. General Report.
Part II. Details of Investigation.
Part III. Summary of Suggestions, (April 25).

EGYPT, NO. 1 (1906).
Reports by His Majesty's Agent and Consul-General, on the Finances, Administration, and Condition of Egypt and the Soudan in 1905. (April 25).
EDUCATION (SCOTLAND).
Report and Papers relating to the training of teachers, for the year 1904–1905. (April 27).
IRELAND DEVELOPMENT GRANT ACT, 1903.
Report of the Lord-Lieutenant of all his proceedings under the Act, for the financial year ended 31 March, 1906. (April 27).
LAND LAW (IRELAND) ACT, 1887.
Return of the number of eviction notices filed during the quarter ended 31st March, 1906. (April 27).

RAILWAY AND CANAL TRAFFIC ACTS, 1854–1894.
Seventeenth Annual Report of the Railway and Canal Commission, with Appendix. (April 28).
The same were ordered to lie on the Table.

RETURNS, REPORTS, ETC.
  BOARD OF EDUCATION (ADMINISTRATIVE COUNTY OF NORTHAMPTON ENDOWED CHARITIES).
  Report made to the Board of Education in the result of an inquiry into endowments subject to the provisions of the Charitable Trusts Acts, 1853 to 1894, and appropriated in whole or in part to purposes of elementary education in the administrative county of Northampton or in any part thereof.

EDUCATION (SCOTLAND).
Report of the Committee of Council on Education in Scotland, with Appendix, 1905–1906.
Presented (by command), and ordered to lie on the Table.

FOREIGN JURISDICTION ACT, 1890 (SIAM).
Order passed at the Council held on April 4th, 1906, under the authority of a Royal Commission, entitled "The Siam Order in Council, 1906."
MERCHANT SHIPPING ACT, 1894 (COLLISIONS AT SEA).
Order, passed at the Council held on the April 4th, 1906, under the authority of a Royal Commission, making provision as to lights and signals of fishing vessels in substitution for those contained in Article 10 of the Regulations scheduled to the Order in Council of August 11th, 1884, as amended from time to time.
COUNTY COURTS.
Rules, 1906; explanatory memorandum.
POLICE (COUNTIES AND BOROUGHS, ENGLAND AND WALES).
Reports of His Majesty's Inspectors of Constabulary, for the year ended September 29th, 1905.
LOCAL LOANS FUND (ACCOUNTS, 1904–1905).
Accounts of receipts and payments by the Commissioners for the Reduction of the National Debt, in respect of the capital and income of the local loans fund, for the year ended March 31st, 1905; together with the Report of the Comptroller and Auditor-General thereon.
IRISH LAND PURCHASE FUND ACCOUNTS (1903–1905).
Accounts of receipts and payments by the Commissioners for the Reduction of the National Debt in respect of the capital and income of the Irish Land Purchase Fund, from November 1st 1903 to March 31st 1905; together with the Report of the Comptroller and Auditor-General thereon.
PUBLIC RECORDS (PRISON COMMISSION).
Schedule containing a list and particulars of classes of documents existing or accruing in the office of the Commissioners of Prisons and Directors of Convict Prisons, which are not considered of sufficient public value to justify their preservation in the Public Record Office.
POLLING DISTRICTS (COUNTY BOROUGH OF TYNEMOUTH).
Order made by the council of the county borough of Tynemouth dividing the borough into polling districts.
SHOP HOURS ACT, 1904.
Orders made by the councils of the following city, county, and county borough, and confirmed by the Secretary of State for the Home Department fixing the hours of closing for certain shops in the city and county of Bristol; county borough of Bolton.
PENAL SERVITUDE ACTS, 1853–1891 (CONDITIONAL LICENCE).
Licences granted by His Majesty under the provisions of the Penal Servitude Acts, 1853 to 1891, to which are annexed conditions other than those contained in Schedule A. of the Penal Servitude Act, 1864, to Frederick Sadler, William Jones, James Kitching.

PRISONS, ENGLAND AND WALES (TREATMENT OF SELECTED MALE CRIMINAL PRISONERS).
Draft of rules proposed to be made by the Secretary of State for the Home Department under Section 25 of the Prisons Act, 1877, and Section 2 of the Prisons Act, 1898, appropriating Borstal Prison and part of Lincoln Prison to selected male criminal prisoners, and providing as to the treatment of selected male criminal prisoners between
204
the ages of sixteen and twenty-one under special rules.

COMPANIES (WINDING-UP) ACT, 1890.
Account showing receipts and expenditure on account of proceedings under the Companies (Winding-up) Act, 1890, during the year ended March 31st, 1906.
BANKRUPTCY ACT, 1883 (PROCEEDINGS.)
Account showing the receipts and expenditure on account of bankruptcy proceedings during the year ended March 31st, 1906.
GREEK LOAN OF 1898.
Account up to March 31st, 1906.

SUPERANNUATION.
Treasury Minute, dated April 12th, 1906, declaring that Robert William Street, boy, Ordnance Vessel "Prudent" War Office, was appointed without a Civil Service certificate through inadvertence on the part of the head of his department.
Treasury warrant, dated April 23rd, 1906, amending warrant of September, 1887, relating to the grant of gratuities and allowances under Section 1 of the Superannuation Act, 1887.

EGYPTIAN GUARANTEED LOAN OF 1885.
Account up to March 31st, 1906.
PUBLIC RECORDS (IRELAND) ACT, 1867.
Rules made under Section 17 of the Act.

METROPOLITAN POLICE.
Accounts showing the sums received and expended for the purposes of the Metropolitan Police and Police Pension Funds between April 1st, 1905 and March 31st, 1906.
Laid before the House (pursuant to Act), and ordered to he on the Table.

UNIVERSITIES OF OXFORD AND CAMBRIDGE ACT, 1877.
Statutes made by the Governing Body of Sidney Sussex College, Cambridge, on December 29th, 1905, amending certain of the Statutes of the college.
Statutes made by the Governing Body of Merton College, Oxford, on

205
December 9th, 1905 (and sealed on December 14th, 1905), altering and amending Statutes III., V., and VIII. of the Statutes of the college.
Statutes made by the Governing Body of Corpus Christi College, Oxford, on (1) April 23rd, 1904 (and sealed on December 13th, 1905), amending Statute 24 (b); and (2) December 2nd, 1905 (and sealed on December 13th, 1905), amending Statutes 24 (b) and 32(a) of the Statutes of the college.
Laid before the House (pursuant to Act), and to be printed. (No. 55.)

THAMES CONSERVANCY.
General Report of the Proceedings of the Conservators of the River Thames during the year ended December 31st, 1905, with Statement of the Accounts of the Conservators of the River Thames for that year: Delivered (pursuant to Act), and ordered to lie on the Table.
WESTMINSTER BRIDGE AND THE THAMES EMBANKMENT.
Return respecting: Laid before the House (pursuant to order of the 8th of March last), and to be printed. (No. 54.)
SEED POTATOES SUPPLY (IRELAND) BILL.
Read 1a; to be printed; and to be read 2a to-morrow (The Lord Denman). (No. 56.)
POST OFFICE (MONEY ORDERS) BILL.
Read 1a; to be printed; and to be read 2a to-morrow (The Lord Granard [E. Granard]). (No. 57.)
NOTICE OF ACCIDENTS BILL (No. 58). POLICE SUPERANNUATION BILL (No. 59).
Read 1a, and to be printed.
WIRELESS TELEGRAPHY BILL.
Order of the day for the House to be in Committee, read, and discharged.

GERMAN GIPSIES IN SCOTLAND.
LORD BALFOUR OF BURLEIGH: My Lords, before the Motion for the adjournment of the House is put I should like to ask a Question on which I have given private notice. I cannot say that it
206
is on a subject of first-class importance, but the matter with which it deals has caused a good deal of inconvenience during the last three or four weeks in that part of Scotland which I know best. About a month ago there was a considerable incursion of German gipsies. I believe they came over to the number of eighty at one time. They marched through various counties commencing on the South bank of the Forth and reaching as far as Stirling, and when I tell your Lordships that they even encamped upon the historic plains of Bannockburn the House will understand how much feeling in the locality was stirred. I am informed that they committed various depredations. Not only did they steal from poultry yards and so on, but they even milked some of the farmer's cows before their owners got up in the morning. They also did a considerable amount of damage, and at last the services of the police had to be invoked. Whether or not it has been possible for the authorities to re-transport them to Germany I cannot say, but there have been reports—;well founded, I believe—;that larger numbers still were coming. I believe it is the fact that a small number came last year and the year before and that they found the country such a land of promise that they circulated reports of their prosperity, and others have since come. A rumour has appeared in the newspapers to the effect that this incursion is likely to continue. The German Government have been passing laws to endeavour to get this class of people to settle down and become orderly subjects, but, resenting this, they are leaving Germany. I do not know whether, under the powers of the much controverted Aliens Act or by representations to the authorities in Germany, His Majesty's Government can do anything to abate a state of things which, though it has, I admit, its humorous side, has also its serious aspect.
THE FIRST LORD OF THE ADMIRALTY (Lord TWEEDMOUTH): My Lords, in the absence of my noble friend who represents the Scottish Office, I have been asked to reply to this Question. I think my noble friend opposite will admit that this is rather a far cry from the

207
Admiralty. Though we are very ready to protect the country against raids, I am afraid that the prevention of a raid of this sort is even beyond the power of His Majesty's ships. I believe the facts are substantially as stated by my noble friend. These are not persons who would come under the Aliens Act, because, in the first place, they arrived in different ships in numbers fewer than twenty. We have no information that such legislative measures as my noble friend suggested are being taken in Germany. What we are told is that these German gipsies belong to a tribe whose chief lives in Italy, and that they are birds of passage in Scotland on their way to Italy. They are not entirely without means of subsistence, as has been suggested. They have horses and carts of sorts—;I believe not very good ones—;and they are also adepts in certain acrobatic performances. They are wandering about Scotland getting money by horse dealing and by giving acrobatic shows, and I am told that they have been so far successful that they have from time to time made as much as from £3 to £5 a day out of their performances. From what we can gather these people are perfectly peaceable and quiet. It is true that they have, after the fashion of gipsies, been guilty of some petty larcenies, but the offences have not been of a serious character. Though they do not come within the scope of the Aliens Act so far as their entry into this country is concerned, Clause 3 of the Act does give power to deport them if they prove undesirable; but there does not at present seem to be any reason why such action should be taken against them. I think that perhaps too much attention has been paid to them by the police, and that they have been unduly hustled from county to county. I hear further, that some German residents in Glasgow are taking steps to induce them to return to their own country or to go on to their chief in Italy without delay. I do not think this is a matter on which I need detain your Lordships longer, or which is likely to cause much difficulty to His Majesty's lieges.
House adjourned at twenty-minutes before Five o'clock, till To-morrow, at half-past Ten o'clock.