Sitting of 4 June 1907

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

PRIVATE BILL BUSINESS.
Tyne Improvement Bill [Lords].—As amended, considered; to be read the third time.
London County Council (Electric Supply) Bill.—Mr. W. Howell Davies, Mr. Joseph Nolan, Mr. W. W. Rutherford, Sir Albert Spicer, and Mr. D. A. Thomas were nominated Members of the Select Committee on the London County Council(Electric Supply) Bill.—(Mr. Whiteley.)
Local Government (Ireland) Provisional Orders (No. 2) Bill. Read a second time, and committed—
Standing Orders. Resolutions reported from the Select Committee—
"That, in the case of the Selsey Water Bill [Lords], the Standing Orders ought to be dispensed with:—That the parties be permitted to proceed with their Bill."

463
"That, in the case of the Alton Military-Hospital [Lords], Petition for Bill, the Standing Orders ought to be dispensed with:—That the parties be permitted to proceed with their Bill."
Resolutions agreed to.

MESSAGE FROM THE LORDS
That they have agreed to:—Irish Tobacco Bill, without Amendment; Keswick Urban District Council (Water) Bill, with Amendments.
Amendments to:—Birmingham Corporation Bill [Lords]; Middlesbrough Corporation Bill [Lords]; Newquay and District Water Bill [Lords], without Amendment.
That they have passed a Bill, intituled, "An Act to remove doubts as to the validity of a certain Decree, dated thirtieth October, one thousand eight hundred and ninety-three, of the High Court of Justice (Probate, Divorce, and Admiralty Division), dissolving the Marriage solemnised on the sixteenth day of November, one thousand eight hundred and eighty, between William Howard Murphy Grimshaw and Mary Evalina Julia Murphy Grimshaw, then Mary Evalina Julia Woodward, Spinster, and to confirm the said Decree." [Murphy Grimshaw's Divorce (Validation) Bill [Lords].
Also, a Bill intituled, "An Act to confer further powers on the Lord Provost, Magistrates, and Town Council of the City and Royal Burgh of Aberdeen in connection with their electricity undertaking; and for other purposes." [Aberdeen Corporation Bill [Lords], now Aberdeen Corporation Electricity Bill [Lords.]
And, also, a Bill intituled, "An Act to extend the limits of supply of the Wisbech Waterworks Company; and to confer further powers upon that Company." [Wisbech Water Bill [Lords.]
Murphy Grimshaw's Divorce (Validation) Bill [Lords]. Read the first time; to be read a second time.
Aberdeen Corporation Electricity Bill [Lords]; Wisbech Water Bill [Lords].— Read the first time; and referred to the Examiners of Petitions for Private Bills.

PETITIONS.
  CONGO FREE STATE.
  Petition from Eccles, for protection of the Native Races; to lie upon the Table.
  EDUCATION (SCOTLAND) BILL.
  Petitions for alteration: From Campbeltown; and Rutherglen; to lie upon the Table.
  EDUCATION (SPECIAL RELIGIOUS INSTRUCTION) BILL.
  Petitions against: From Great Crosby; Haydock; Little Woolton and Child-wall; Rainford; Southport; and Speke; to lie upon the Table.
  LICENSING ACTS.
  Petition from Eccles, for alteration of law; to lie upon the Table.
  LIQUOR TRAFFIC (LOCAL OPTION) (SCOTLAND) BILL.
  Petition from Alva, in favour; to he upon the Table.
  MARRIAGE WITH A DECEASED WIFE'S SISTER BILL.
  Petitions against: From Alexandra Park; Bearsted; Bournemouth; Cambridge (three); Carshalton; Chantry; Eakring; Lewes; Newark; Oxford; Ryde; Watford; and Wood Green (two); to lie upon the Table.
  OLD AGE PENSIONS BILL.
  Petition from Glasgow, in favour; to lie upon the Table.
  PAUPER LUNATICS (COST OF MAINTENANCE).
  Petition from Wolstanton and Burslem, for legislation; to lie upon the Table.
  PUBLIC LIBRARIES BILL.
  Petition from Islington, against; to lie upon the Table.
  SALE OF INTOXICATING LIQUORS ON SUNDAY.
  Petition from Boston, for prohibition; to lie upon the Table.
RETURNS, REPORTS, ETC.
  LOCAL CONTRIBUTIONS (IRELAND).
  Return [presented 31st May] to be printed. [No. 174.]
  TRADE REPORTS (ANNUAL SERIES).
  Copies presented, of Diplomatic and Consular Reports, Annual Series, Nos. 3810 and 3811[by Command]; to lie upon the Table.
  TURKEY (No. 1, 1907).
  Copy presented, of Further Correspondence respecting the Affairs of South Eastern Europe [by Command]; to lie upon the Table.
  TURKEY (No. 2, 1907).
  Copy presented, of Correspondence respecting the Increase of the Turkish Customs Duties [by Command]; to lie upon the Table.
  TURKEY (No. 3, 1907).
  Copy presented, of Despatches from the British Adviser on the Macedonian Financial Commission [by Command]; to lie upon the Table.
  EMIGRATION AND IMMIGRATION.
  Return presented, relative thereto [ordered 3rd June; Mr. Lloyd-George]; to lie upon the Table, and to be printed. [No. 175.]
QUESTIONS AND ANSWERS CIRCULATED WITH THE VOTES.

  Maximum Salaries of Assistant Clerks.
  MR. CLAUDE HAY: To ask the Secretary to the Treasury whether, in view of the fact that there are several senior assistant clerks in the various Government Departments who have already reached their maximum of £150 per annum,
  466
  whose ages range from forty years and upwards, and who have little prospect of promotion, he can hold out any hope of conceding personal allowances, so that these persons may receive more than £ 150 in each year.
  (Answered by Mr. Runciman.) The scale was fixed as appropriate to the duties, and it is not reasonable to expect a grant of personal allowances merely because the maximum 'is attained in due course

  Criminal Appeal Bill—The Grand Jury System.
  MR. LLOYD MORGAN (Carmarthenshire, W.): To ask Mr. Attorney-General whether, in the event of the Criminal Appeal Bill becoming law this Session, and seeing that the Bill gives prisoners increased security against punishment for wrongful conviction, he will consider whether it will be necessary in future to send indictments before a grand jury, and the question of introducing a Bill to put an end to the grand jury system.
  (Answered by Sir John Walton.) The grand jury system provides a safeguard against the oppressive exercise of the right to prefer an indictment against an accused person. Its abolition would be a serious change in the administration of the criminal law, which would not be justified by the creation of a right of appeal in favour of persons who have already been tried and convicted. I do not see that any case for the proposed change has boon established.

  Appointment to Headmastership of Dublin Metropolitan School of Art.
  MR. GWYNN: To ask the Vice-President of the Department of Agriculture (Ireland) whether the headmastership of the Metropolitan School of Art in Dublin is still vacant, if so, when an appointment will be made; and whether he will endeavour to recover and apply to purposes of the art school the sums which have lapsed to the Treasury by the prolonged refusal to fill this post.
  (Answered by Mr. T. W. Russell.) An appointment is about to be made to the headmastership of the Metropolitan School

  467
  of Art. The suggestion contained in the latter part of the Question is, I am afraid, impracticable. The unexpended balance of salaries must, in the usual course. be surrendered to the Exchequer.

  Horse Breeding in Ireland.
  MR. O'MALLEY: To ask the Vice-President of the Department of Agriculture (Ireland) if the Department is still in possession of the hackney stallions handed over to it by the Congested Districts Board some years ago; if so, whether he will state if these horses are now used for breeding purposes in Ireland; and, if they are, whether the action of the Department in this respect has the approval of the Council of Agriculture and of the committee appointed by the Department to advise in matters connected with horse breeding in Ireland.
  (Answered by Mr, T. W. Russell.) Twelve hackney stallions were transferred to the Department by the Congested Districts Board at the close of 1903. Seven of these animals were sold early in 1904 in England and one has since died, leaving four still retained. Two of these have been located by the Department in remote parts of county Donegal and two in county Galway. It is intended, as opportunity arises through the purchase of sires of a more suitable type, to dispose of the hackney stallions in question. On the recommendation of the departmental advisory committee on horse-breeding stallions of the hackney breed have always been declared by the Department to be ineligible for registration under the general horse-breeding scheme, and accordingly none of the four hackney stallions at present in their possession are used by the Department in connection with that scheme. The action of the Department in excluding hackneys from the operations of the horse-breeding scheme formed the subject of discussion at the meeting of the Council of Agriculture held on 13th February, 1902, when a resolution approving of the policy of the Department in this respect was adopted by a large majority.

  Children charged at metropolitan police courts.
  MR. WEDGWOODS: To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department what were the numbers of boys and girls, aged seven, eight, nine, ten, eleven, twelve, thirteen, fourteen, and fifteen years, respectively, who were charged and summoned at the metropolitan police courts during the twelve months ended 1st May, 1907.
  (Answered by Mr. Secretary Gladstone.) It would be impossible to give the age of children who have merely been summoned, and many of whom have not been in police custody at all. The ages of children who have been apprehended and charged are recorded, and, so far as they are concerned, it would be possible to give the Return; but its preparation would involve a long search through the records of each of the police courts, and I am not prepared without strong reasons to impose this additional labour on the already hard-worked officers of the police courts. The hon. Member will find, in Table XIII. of the Criminal Statistics, particulars of the number of children under twelve years and between twelve and sixteen who are convicted after apprehension. I may supplement that information by the following figures for the Metropolitan Police District for the year 1905 (those for 1906 are not yet completed) — Youthful offenders convicted summarily of indictable offences, under twelve years of age, 175; between twelve and sixteen, 777. Youthful offenders apprehended and convicted of non-indictable offences, under twelve years of age, 52; between twelve and sixteen, 1,295. The hon. Member will bear in mind that these figures relate to a district with a population exceeding 6,000,000.

  Inebriate Reformatories for the London District.
  MR. PICKERSGILL: To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department whether his attention has been drawn to the fact that the London County Council have determined to terminate the arrangement which they entered into in 1904 with the

  469
  National Institution for Inebriates, under which inebriates committed from London wore sent to their reformatories on condition that the more hopeful class of cases should be transferred to the Council's reformatory at Farmfield; whether the effect of this decision will be that London magistrates will be deprived of the opportunity of committing inebriates to inebriate reformatories, except as regards a small number of strictly selected cases eligible for Farmfield; and what steps he proposes to take to render possible the continued committal of London inebriates to reformatories in suitable cases, so that the Inebriates Act may not be made largely inoperative so far as London is concerned.
  (Answered by Mr. Secretary Gladstone.) My attention has been drawn to the decision of the London County Council to discontinue their present provision for the reception of all classes of female inebriates and to restrict their work to a few selected cases eligible for Farmfield, and there is no doubt that if this policy is maintained the London magistrates will be deprived of the opportunity to commit female inebriates to reformatories save as regards a few isolated cases. I am about to communicate with the Council upon this important matter.

  Age for Exercise of Franchise in Foreign Countries.
  MR. HAROLD COX: To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department whether he has yet been able to ascertain at what age the right to vote in parliamentary elections is conferred upon citizens of the principal foreign countries.
  (Answered by Mr. Secretary Gladstone.) The following information has been collected for me by the Foreign Office from His Majesty's representatives abroad. The age at which persons, who are otherwise qualified, are entitled to exercise the franchise is in a large number of countries either twenty-one or twenty-five years. In the following countries twenty-one years is the age: Brazil, Bulgaria, Cuba, France, Greece, Italy, Portugal, Roumania, Servia, Sweden, United States of America, Wurtemberg.
  470
  In the following countries the age is twenty-five years: Baden (Baden Diet), Bavaria, Belgium (Chamber of Representatives), Germany (Empire), Hesse-Darmstadt (Hessian Diet), Luxemburg (Chamber of Deputies), Netherlands, Norway, Russia, Spain (Cortes), Saxony (Landtag). In Mexico and Uruguay married men otherwise qualified may exercise the franchise at eighteen years of age, unmarried men at the ages of twenty-one and twenty in the two countries respectively. In Hungary and Switzerland the age is twenty; in Spain, for the election of senators, it is twenty-three; in Austria and the Kingdom of Prussia it is twenty-four; and in Belgium, in the case of direct election to the Senate, and in Denmark it is thirty.

  Site for new post office at bolt on.
  MR. W. T. WILSON: To ask the Postmaster-General whether he has acquired a site yet for the proposed new post office at Bolton; and, if not, what steps he is taking to secure one.
  (Answered by Mr. Sydney Buxton.) The matter is under consideration.

  Application of Postman Langworthy, of Tiverton, for Transfer.
  MR. JAMES O'CONNOR: To ask the Postmaster General whether he is aware that Postman Lang-worthy, of Tiverton, applied for transfer to another walk, and quoted the regulations saying that rural postmen on arduous walks have the first claim to better walks, either town or rural, in the same district, and that not only has he been refused permission to transfer, but has been informed in the Secretary's name there is no such regulation, although it is quoted on page 24 of the Tweedmouth Committee's Report; and whether he will make inquiries into this case with the view to granting Mr. Lang-worthy's request.
  (Answered by Mr. Sydney Buxton.) It is recognised that rural postmen on arduous walks may reasonably be allowed a first claim to better walks in the same district, other considerations being equal. This point was by no means overlooked

  471
  in the present case, but was in fact pressed with a serious desire to grant Lang-worthy's request, if possible. There are reasons, however, which make it undesirable that he should be transferred to the duty he asks for; and, as it appears that there is nothing very arduous in his present duties, his request was refused. The reference to the regulation seems to have been given under a misapprehension; but this in no way affected the decision.

  Acting Head Postman D Dixon, of Dublin—Claims for Promotion.
  MR. JAMES O'CONNOR: To ask the Postmaster General whether he is aware that Mr. Dixon, of Dublin, has been repeatedly passed over for promotion to the rank of assistant inspector of postmen, but is constantly called upon to perform the duty as substitute without extra pay; and whether he will take steps to see that Mr. Dixon is promoted to the next vacancy.
  (Answered by Mr Sydney Buxton.) It is the case that Acting Head Postman D. Dixon has frequently been employed with- out extra pay as a substitute assistant inspector under the direct supervision of a superior officer. In view of his seniority, it is not considered desirable to deprive him of the opportunities thus afforded of qualifying for advancement, although under the rules he does not receive extra remuneration on such occasions. I can only say that his claims and qualifications for promotion have always been and will still be carefully considered in connection with vacancies on the higher class.

  Continuous Discharge Books Issued to Seamen.
  MR. J. HAVELOCK WILSON: To ask the President of the Board of Trade if he will state the number of continuous discharge books issued to seamen since the scheme was instituted; the number of new discharge books issued during 1906, distinguishing the number issued to men going to sea for the first time, together with their ratings; and the number of books of deserters, etc., now in the custody of the Board of Trade;
  472
  and the number received and returned to seamen during 1906.
  (Answered by Mr. Lloyd-George.) The total number of continuous discharge books issued up to 31st March, 1907, was 418,917. The number of new discharge books, including renewals, issued during 1906 was 41,463. The number of books of deserters, etc., now in the custody of the Board of Trade is over 35,000, and the numbers received and returned during 1906 were 16,959 and 8,307 respectively. The work and cost of ascertaining the number of books issued in 1906 to men going to sea for the first time, and the ratings of those men, would be so considerable that I regret that I cannot supply the information on those points for which my hon. friend asks.

  La Fiesta Mine.
  MR. BOLAND: To ask the Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs whether his attention has been called to the fruitless efforts of some Maltese shareholders in the American Exploration Mining Company of San Francisco to obtain information about La Fiesta Mine; and whether he will direct the British Consul for the district to find out whether such mine exists, and to send a report on the subject.
  (Answered by Secretary Sir Edward Grey.) I am afraid it is not practicable to instruct British consuls to make inquiries on behalf of individual shareholders in foreign companies in order to correct or supplement the information given by the companies themselves.

  Special Service Men in The Navy.
  MR. BRAMSDON: To ask the Secretary to the Admiralty if he will state what is the number of men now in the navy under the short-service system, and how many were recruited during the year 1906; will he also state what is the highest rating that a man enlisted under this system can attain without passing over to the continuous service, and how many short-service men have reached such highest

  473
  rating since the introduction of the System; and how many men enlisted under the short service have passed over into the continuous service.
  (Answered by Mr. Edmund Robertson.) (1) The numbers of special-service men borne on the 25th March last were:— Seamen, 1,324; stokers, 3,645; total, 4,969. (2) The numbers recruited during the year 1906 were:— Special - service seamen, 527; special service stokers, 2,329; total, 2,856. (3) Leading seaman and stoker, 1st class, respectively. (4) Special-service seamen, none. Special-service stokers, five. (5) The number of transfers from special-service to continuous service up to 31st December last were:— seamen, 58; stokers, 37; total, 95.

  Scottish Schools for Teaching Junior Students.
  MR. GULLAND: To ask the Secretary for Scotland whether he will give the names of the schools selected for teaching junior students, and the reasons why these have been chosen in preference to others making application.
  (Answered by Mr. Sinclair.) A list of the schools in question will be included in the Report on the training of teachers which will be issued shortly. It is not possible to state in detail in answer to a Question the considerations which have guided the Department in making a decision in each case, but generally speaking those schools have been accepted which gave promise, either from past successes, or from the undertakings now given to provide a sufficiently qualified staff and suitable equipment, of being in a position to give a complete five years' course of secondary instruction to pupils who have reached the stage of the qualifying examination (Article 29 of the Code).

  Messrs. Davidson and Company, of Belfast-and Trade Unions.
  MR. C. DUNCAN: To ask Mr. Attorney-General for Ireland whether he is aware that the firm of Davidson and Company, Limited, Sirocco Works, Belfast, insist upon all men when entering their employment signing an
  474
  agreement to cancel memberships with any labourers' society or of any union of which they are members, and that they shall not join any trade union while in the employ of that firm; and whether he will take such action as will prevent any repetition of such action in the future.
  (Answered by Mr. Cherry.) I have no information upon the subject of this Question. The matter is not one which falls within my province.

  The Patents Bill and Patents worked Abroad.
  MR. SAMUEL ROBERTS: To ask the President of the Board of Trade whether the Patents and Designs (Consolidation) Bill will in any way interfere with or override the provisions of the Patents and Designs Bill now before a Standing Committee of the House, having regard especially to the clauses in the latter Bill relating to the revocation of patents worked abroad, and to the procedure thereon.
  (Answered by Mr. Lloyd-George.) No, Sir. It is intended, before the Consolidation Bill is passed, to incorporate in it the provisions of the amending Bill.

  British Shipping Trading to South Africa.
  MR. ASHLEY (: To ask the President of the Board of Trade what was the total tonnage of British shipping actually trading to South Africa in the years from 1902 to 1906 inclusive; what percentage of that tonnage was chartered to American firms in those years; and what percentage of the total tonnage owned by British South African lines was lying idle in each year.
  (Answered by Mr. Lloyd-George.) The following table gives the particulars asked for in the first part of the Question. I am unable to give the further information which the hon. Member desires. Statement showing the net tonnage of British vessels, including their repeated voyages, that entered and cleared at the ports of the United Kingdom from and to British South Africa in each of the years from 1902 to 1902 inclusive: —

  Entered from British South Africa.

  Year.

  With Cargoes

  In Ballast.

  Total.

  Sailing.

  Steam.

  Total.

  Sailing.

  Steam.

  Total.

  Sailing.

  Steam.

  Total.

  Tons.

  Tons.

  Tons.

  Tons.

  Tons.

  Tons.

  Tons.

  Tons.

  Tons.

  1902

  472

  639,958.

  640,430

  2,137

  71,293

  73,430

  2,609

  711,251

  713,860

  1903

  2,499

  775,226

  777,725

  2,334

  105,574

  107,908

  4,833

  880,800

  885,633

  1904

  1,186

  819,338

  820,524

  1,782

  43,987

  45,769

  2,968

  863,325

  866,293

  1905

  —

  735,143

  735,143

  —

  1,938

  1,938

  —.

  737,081

  737,081

  1906

  —

  726,930

  726,930

  —

  23,849

  23,849

  —

  750,779

  750,779

  Cleared to British South Africa.

  1902

  125,205

  1,013,736

  1,138,941

  2,124

  84,545

  86,660

  127,329

  1,098,281

  1,224,610

  1903

  53,986

  1,226,078

  1,320,064

  —

  66,253

  66,253

  53,986

  1,332,331

  1,386,317

  1904

  33,817

  1,096,951

  1,130,768

  —

  45,804

  45,804

  33,817

  1,142,755

  1,176,572

  1905

  12,558

  819,844.

  832,402

  60

  22,434

  22,494

  12,618

  842,278

  854,896

  1906

  17,306

  678,767

  696,073

  —

  8,322

  8,322

  17,306

  .687,089

  704,395

  Channel islands shipping laws.
  SIR W. J. COLLINS: To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department whether the authorities of Guernsey and Jersey have yet passed into law the detailed suggestions prepared by the Board of Trade with a view to the assimilation of the shipping law of the Channel Islands to that of this country, in respect of certificates of competency, safety, and inquiries into shipping casualties.
  (Answered by Mr. Secretary Gladstone.) It is proposed to hold a meeting with the insular authorities at the Board of Trade early next month to deal with points in the Board's memorandum on which discussion has been found to be desirable. There will be no avoidable delay, but the provisions of the Merchant Shipping Acts are long and complicated, and their application to the Channel Islands, and the provision of the necessary machinery, must occupy some time. In the meanwhile the Guernsey Bill, to which I referred in my Answer on the 19th March last, has received the approval of the King in Council.

  Gambling Operations in American Cotton.
  MR. FIELD: To ask the Prime Minister whether he is aware that, owing to international gambling operations in the United States and in Great Britain in options and futures of American cotton, its price has been j artificially raised to over 7d. per pound on the Liverpool Exchange and a corner for the next few months established; and, if so, what steps does His Majesty's Government intend to take in order to safeguard the Lancashire cotton industry as well as the masses of this country in the future from advances caused by international gambling operations in fictitious raw materials through option and future contracts.
  (Sir H. Campbell Bannerman.) I have nothing to add to the Answer given on the 20th of Marsh to a somewhat similar Question of the hon. Member by my right hon. friend the President of the Board of Trade.†
  † See (4) Debates, clxxi., 834–5.

QUESTIONS IN THE HOUSE:

  Cordite.
  MR. BELLAIRS: I beg to ask the Secretary to the Admiralty whether the Board have any official information showing that the explosions in the case of the American cruiser "Maine," the Brazilian battleship "Aguidaban," the Japanese battleship "Mikasa," and the French battleship "Iena," were due to spontaneous explosion of smokeless or nitro-powders; and whether, in the cases of the spontaneous explosions of cordite in the "Revenge "some years ago and in "Fox" last year, a quantity of cordite was found to be in a very deteriorated condition.
  THE SECRETARY TO THE ADMIRALTY (Mr. EDMUND ROBERTSON, Dundee): It would be manifestly improper for me to make any statement in regard to the foreign battleships in question; and as regard the second part of the Question the reply is in the negative.
  MR. BELLAIRS: Would it not be proper for the right hon. Gentleman to answer the Question, seeing that a Commission has already reported, and the Report has been published in the Press?
  MR. EDMUND ROBERTSON: I do not think so.
  LORD R. CECIL: I beg to ask the Secretary to the Admiralty if he will state the date of the spontaneous explosion of a six-inch cordite cartridge in the magazine of the "Fox" last year; whether it was subsequently found that a quantity of the cordite was in a deteriorated condition; and whether he can afford any information as to the name of the maker of the cordite and its age.
  MR. EDMUND ROBERTSON: The date was 31st October. The Answer to the second part of the Question is in the negative, but cordite stowed in the same magazine was destroyed as a precautionary measure. The cordite in question was eight years old. There is no reason to suppose that the ignition was due to any defect in manufacture, and it is not therefore considered desirable to give the name of the maker.
  MR. ARTHUR LEE: Was not the explosion due to the deterioration of the cordite? If not, what was the cause?
  MR. EDMUND ROBERTSON: It is supposed that the cause was high temperature acting on a weak spot in the cartridge in question.
  MR. COWAN: I beg to ask the Secretary to the Admiralty how many of our fifty-one battleships, twenty - eight armoured cruisers, and seventy-six unarmoured cruisers have refrigerating apparatus for their magazines in order to prevent the risk of deterioration to cordite which is caused by high temperature.
  MR. EDMUND ROBERTSON: Ships at present under construction are being fitted with magazine cooling arrangements, and steps are being taken to equip ships on tropical stations with apparatus of this description at once. The remaining ships will be fitted as the necessary machinery is delivered.
  MR. BOWLES: I beg to ask the Secretary of State for War how many cases of the spontaneous explosion of cordite in magazines occurred last year; whether the magazine which exploded at Woolwich on the 11th February last contained a large quantity of cordite; and whether he can lay the results of the investigation into this explosion upon the Table, or indicate their purport to the House.
  MR. HALDANE: There was no explosion last year in any magazine under the control of the War Office. The magazine which exploded on 11th February last contained various explosives including a small amount of cordite. It is not considered expedient in the interests of the public service to make known the results of the investigation.
  MR. BELLAIRSasked whether there were not two explosions in magazines under the India Office.
  MR. HALDANEsaid that was quite true.
  MR. LEAasked whether those explosions wore due to the presence of mercuric chloride in cordite.
  MR. HALDANEsaid he thought that was extremely unlikely. He was inclined to think that the cordite was made out there.

  BRITISH GENERALS AND DISARMAMENT.
  DR. COOPER: I beg to ask the Secretary of State for War whether his attention has been directed to the reply given by General Sir T. Kelly - Kenny to Dr. Maurice Ernst, the London correspondent of the Neues Wiener Tagblatt for publication in that paper, on England and the disarmament question, and the answers of Generals Sir Ian Hamilton and Sir Alfred Turner to the Allegemeine Zeitung of Munich on the same question; whether either of these generals are on the active list of the Army or Reserve of Officers; if so, whether any permission has been given to these officers to express their opinion in the newspapers on the action of the Government; and, if not, what does he intend to do in the matter.
  THE SECRETARY OF STATE FOR WAR (Mr. HALDANE, Haddington): Of the generals referred to, only one—Sir Ian Hamilton—is on the active list and thus subject to military law. On General Hamilton being approached by a representative of a Bavarian newspaper, with a view to expressing his opinion on disarmament, Sir Ian replied that the military regulations forbade his writing to the Press on military matters. The expression of opinion in the Bavarian newspaper ascribed to General Hamilton is a translation of a passage of a speech delivered by him at Petersham on the 27th April last. I may add that the opinions of the retired officers alluded to in the Question are not such as to call for any action on my part.

  DEFECTIVE RIFLE AMMUNITION.
  *MR. BELLAIRS: I beg to ask the Secretary of State for War what has been the cause of recent failures of rifle ammunition; how many rounds of ammunition will have to be withdrawn from issue; and how many cases of cartridges bursting the rifles have occurred this year.
  MR. HALDANE: The whole matter is being investigated; and until the investigation is completed and full information obtained, a reply to the Question cannot be furnished.

  Eltham Common.
  LORD BALCARRES: I beg to ask the Secretary of State for War whether his attention has been drawn to a report by Mr. Percival Birkett, made to the council of the metropolitan borough of Woolwich, as to the existence of rights of common upon Eltham Common; and whether he will now abandon the proposal to build upon this metropolitan common, and at once stop the felling of trees upon and the removal of the loam by the military authorities from it, with a view to its preservation as an open space for the benefit of the inhabitants of Woolwich.
  MR. HALDANE: I have not seen the report referred to, but Mr. Birkett has been in correspondence with my Department on the subject. The proposal to build is still under consideration, but the felling of trees and removal of loam has nothing to do with the proposal to build. These measures have been taken to render the ground more suitable for the purposes of military training.
  LORD BALCARRES: Is the War Office entitled to do this without bringing in a Bill?
  MR. HALDANE: I have said that no decision has yet been come to.
  MR. CROOKS: Will the right hon. Gentleman prohibit the removal of the loam?
  MR. HALDANE: It is only being removed in order to improve the ground and to make it available for training purposes.

  Yeomanry inspections.
  CAPTAIN CRAIG: I beg to ask the Secretary of State for War whether any general scheme is laid down by the War Office for the inspection of Imperial Yeomanry regiments; and, if so, whether he will ensure that such general scheme is adhered to by inspecting officers.
  I beg also to ask the Secretary of State for War if he will state for what reason the War Office has recently decided that Imperial Yeomanry regiments must march past at inspections.
  482
  I beg further to ask the Secretary of State for War whether ho is aware that two and sometimes three different officers insist on inspecting Imperial Yeomanry regiments during a single training, and in consequence unnecessarily encroach upon the already limited time at the disposal of Imperial Yeomanry regiments for real practical work; and whether he proposes to take steps to stop this practice.
  MR. HALDANE: Inspections of Imperial Yeomanry regiments in Great Britain are at present carried out by staff officers for Imperial Yeomanry under the General Officer Commanding - in-Chief. The Imperial Yeomanry regiments in Ireland are inspected by the Brigadier - General Commanding 3rd Cavalry Brigade No departure from the above procedure has been reported to the Army Council except in the case of one regiment in Great Britain which was inspected by the colonel commanding a cavalry regiment. No recent decision has been given as regards the compulsory marching past of Imperial Yeomanry. When for any reason the Imperial Yeomanry arc required to march past, the same instructions are in force as those issued with the "Instructions for Training of Imperial Yeomanry," dated March, 1905.

  ST. Helena.
  MAJOR ANSTRUTHER-GRAY: I beg to ask the Under-Secretary of State for the Colonies whether, in consideration of the suffering' caused by the removal of the garrison at St. Helena, he will consider the advisability of making a further grant to the islanders to help them tide over their present troubles.
  THE UNDER-SECRETARY OF STATE FOR THE COLONIES (MR. CHURCHILL, Manchester, N.W.): I can assure the hon. and gallant Member that the Secretary of State is watching events in St. Helena with sympathetic interest, and, if circumstances at any time demand it, he will not hesitate to ask the Lords Commissioners of the Treasury to give further assistance to the island.
  MAJOR ANSTRUTHER-GRAY: May I ask what garrison it is proposed to

  483
  furnish St. Helena with in the event of Zulu prisoners being sent there?
  *MR. SPEAKER: Notice should be given of that Question.

  Transvaal loans.
  MR. GEORGE FABER: I beg to ask the Prime Minister whether, in consideration of or connection with the guarantee by this country of the new Transvaal Loan of £5,000,000, General Botha, or any one on his behalf, was asked to give, or did give, any undertaking or promise or assurance to His Majesty's Government or to the Colonial Office regarding the repatriation of Chinese coolies from South Africa, or whether such repatriation came under discussion in connection with the guarantee.
  MR. CHURCHILL: The questions of according an Imperial guarantee for a £5,000,000 loan of the Transvaal Government and of the repatriation of the Chinese coolies from the Witwatersrand goldfield have been and will continue to be decided upon their respective merits by His Majesty's Government. No bargain of the kind suggested by the hon. Gentleman was over made. The Transvaal Government remain perfectly free to deal with the repatriation of the Chinese coolies within the limits of the constitution under which they have assumed power; and His Majesty's Government on their part have every intention of most strictly adhering to and enforcing the policy in regard to the termination of Chinese labour in South Africa which has been repeatedly declared to Parliament and which in important particulars is embodied in the Letters Patent. But it is right that I should add that among the reasons which influenced His Majesty's Government in their decision to accord the Imperial guarantee in question to the Transvaal Government was a desire that the credit of that Government should in the early days of its existence be independent of the favour or ill-will of local interests.
  MR. GEORGE FABER: May I ask the right hon. Gentleman to reply specifically to the last part of my Question, whether such repatriation came under discussion in connection with the guarantee? And may I ask, further, whether he will inform the House, if he
  484
  can, the last occasion on which a loan issued by a self-governing Colony was guaranteed by the Imperial Government?
  MR. CHURCHILL: That is plainly a Question of which I should have notice, but I may say that there are several excellent precedents.
  SIR F. BANBURYasked the right hon. Gentleman whether he would answer the last part of his hon. friend's Question.
  MR. CHURCHILL: All sorts of matters connected with South Africa formed the subject of discussion with General Botha and Ministers of the Crown during his stay in England, and I have already stated to the House that there was no question of balancing the policy of His Majesty's Government in respect of the loan against the policy of the Transvaal Government in respect of repatriation.
  MR. MYER: Is it not a fact that, in consequence of the granting of the Chinese Ordinance to the South African mine owners, they guaranteed the loan of £30,000,000?
  MR. CHURCHILL: That is a matter which concerns the late Government, and not the present one.

  British "Embassy at Tokio—Medical Officer.
  SIR W. J. COLLINS: I beg to ask the Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs whether the British Embassy at Tokio is a public institution within the meaning of the Medical Acts; whether a medical officer appointed to the Embassy ought to be a legally qualified medical practitioner; whether on the occasion of the last appointment to this office the vacancy was advertised or otherwise made known in Japan or in this country; and whether the gentleman now occupying the position of medical officer to the British Embassy at Tokio holds any medical qualification entitling him to act as a legally qualified medical man on British territory or to practise in Japan.
  THE SECRETARY OF STATE FOR FOREIGN AFFAIRS (SIR EDWARD GREY, Northumberland, Berwick): As

  485
  regards the first, second, and last parts of the Question I am not prepared to make any statement involving an interpretation of the meaning of any portion of the Medical Acts, but would refer the hon. Member to the last sentence of my reply to him on 14th May†. In regard to the third part, I may say that no advertisement was issued in the Press, but his Majesty's Ambassador reported at the time that he had made numerous inquiries in Great Britain as well as in Japan, without, however, finding a suitable British candidate.

  Chinese Customs House at Dalny.
  LORD BALCARRES: On behalf of the hon. Member for Mid. Armagh, I beg to ask the Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs whether an agreement has yet been arrived at with regard to the establishment of a branch of the Chinese Maritime Customs at Dalny; and, if so, whether he is in a position to state the nature of the agreement and when effect will be given to its provisions.
  SIR EDWARD GREY: His Majesty's Minister reported on the 31st ultimo that an agreement was signed on 30th May, providing for the functioning of a Custom House at Dalny from 1st July next, if the necessary arrangements were completed by that date. The reply to the second part of the Question is at present in the negative.

  German Trade With the United States.
  MR. PIKE PEASE: I beg to ask the Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs if the modus Vivendi on trade arrangements between Germany and the United States has now been settled.
  SIR EDWARD GREY: I am informed that the administrative changes will take effect at once in the United States, and the reduction of duties on the 1st proximo.

  Rebellion in Persia.
  MR. LYNCH: I bee to ask the Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs whether the recent Report of His Majesty's Minister in Tehran to the effect that all
  † see (4) Debates, elxxiv., 787.
  486
  is now quiet in the South of Persia makes any mention of the fact that a brother of His Majesty the Shah has been for some time engaged in the south-western provinces organising a rebellion against the Persian Government; and whether lie has any official information as to the report that this prince is now marching northwards at the head of an army.
  SIR EDWARD GREY: His Majesty's Minister at Tehran has reported that a younger brother of His Majesty the Shah is in revolt between Kermanshah and Hamadan, and that military measures are being taken.
  MR. LYNCH: Has there been any request for mediation made to either the British or the Russian Government?
  SIR EDWARD GREY: Not that I am aware of.

  Chinese Anti-Opium Edict.
  *MR. REES: I bog to ask the Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs whether the anti-opium edict is of the same character, force, and validity as the ordinary official edicts of the Chinese Government.
  SIR EDWARD GREY: As far as I am aware, the reply to the hon. Member's Question is in the affirmative
  MR. REES: In that case, Sir, has the right hon. Gentleman seen the edict decreeing the posthumous promotion of the sage Confucius from the rank of the Sun and the Moon to that of Earth and Heaven?
  MR. LYNCH: How can it be supposed the edict will be carried out when our Consuls are unable to give even an approximate idea of the amount of opium grown in China?
  SIR EDWARD GREYasked for notice of the Question.

  Depreciation of Securities.
  MR. FELL: I bog to ask Mr. Chancellor of the Exchequer if his attention has been called to the fact, that the list of representative bankers' securities now shows a depreciation in their value, since 1st January, 1906, amounting to more than the whole

  487
  cost to us of the Transvaal war; and whether, having regard to the uneasiness caused to investors by this fall in values and to the losses which the Revenue must ultimately sustain, he will consider the question of applying a larger portion of the sinking fund to the purchase of Consols than he did in the past year.
  THE CHANCELLOR OF THE EXCHEQUER (Mr. Asquith, Fifeshire, E.): I am aware that a very considerable depreciation has taken place in securities generally during the period in question, but I doubt whether any useful conclusion can be based on statistics showing the precise sum by which an arbitrarily selected list of stocks may have fallen in value within an arbitrarily selected period, or by comparing that sum with the total cost of the South African, or any other war. On the question of the mode of application of the sinking fund during the current year, I am not prepared, for the reasons which I gave in reply to a Question by my hon. friend the Member for the Mile End division on 27th ultimo, † to make any definite pronouncement at the present time.
  MR. GEORGE FABER: May I ask if any of the money falling into the fund has been temporarily loaned for the purpose of the issue of Irish Land Stock?
  MR. ASQUITH: I should like notice of that Question.

  Income Tax Returns.
  MR. PIKE PEASE: I beg to ask Mr. Chancellor of the Exchequer if he can now give an estimate of the probable receipts into the Exchequer resulting from the new regulations as to compulsory returns of income made by individuals and employers.
  MR. ASQUITH: No, Sir. I have no data on which to base an estimate of the amount of taxable income which escapes assessment through the imperfections of the present regulations.
  MR. PIKE PEASE: Can the right hon. Gentleman make no estimate?
  † See (4) Debates, clxxiv., 1818.
  MR. ASQUITH: It is purely conjectural. We must wait to learn by experience.

  Finance Bill
  MR. AUSTEN CHAMBERLAIN: I desire to ask the Chancellor of the Exchequer whether it is necessary the Royal Assent should be given to this Bill by any particular date?
  MR. ASQUITH: I do not think so.

  Workmen's Compensation.
  MR. BOTTOMLEY: I beg to ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department whether his attention has been called to a recent ease heard in the City of London Court, in which a printer who had sustained serious injuries in the course of his trade was disqualified for compensation on the ground that the premises on which he was working at the time were a portion of a factory hired temporarily by his employers from another firm occupying it; that the Judge said he was very sorry for the plaintiff', but there was no course open to him except to find for the defendants with costs; and whether he will consider the desirableness of amending the Workmen's Compensation Act so as to cover such a case.
  THE SECRETARY OF STATE FOR THE HOME DEPARTMENT (Mr. GLADSTONE, Leeds, W.): I have seen the new paper report of the case which the hon. Member has been good enough to send me. The point is met by the amending and consolidating Act of last session, which comes into force on the 1st July. Under that Act workmen will no longer be debarred from recovering compensation from employers on the ground indicated in the Question.
  MR. H. J. TENNANT: Does the fact that the premises were only temporarily hired constitute good ground for the refusal of compensation?
  MR. GLADSTONE: I am afraid I cannot answer that question.

  Departmental Committee on Check-Weighing.
  MR. WATT: I beg to ask the Secretary of State

  489
  for the Home Department whether his Departmental Committee on Check-weighing in the Iron and Steel Trades contains a representative of the finished trades; and, if not, will he appoint such, in view of the fact that the necessity for compulsory weighing or measuring applies more particularly to the finished iron and steel trades, than even to the pig iron or smelting trades.
  MR. GLADSTONE: The Committee does represent the employers and men engaged in a part of what I understand my hon. friend to mean by the finished iron and steel trades, and as I informed him on 8th May I prefer not to add to their numbers. The present Committee may, I think, be left to deal with such of the finished trades as come within their own experience, and the question can then be considered whether the Committee should be reconstituted with different representatives of the masters and men for the purpose of dealing with others.
  MR. J. WARD: Will the terms of reference entitle the Committee to inquire into the case of other trades where piecework obtains? For instance, quarrymen and navvies are nearly always employed by piece.
  MR. GLADSTONE: As it is a Departmental Committee I can add to or alter the terms of reference in any manner I may consider desirable. It is my intention that the inquiry shall cover the cases referred to by the hon. Member.

  The Companies Bill.
  MR. BOTTOMLEY: I bog to ask the President of the Board of Trade when it is proposed to proceed with the Companies Bill [Lords].
  THE PRESIDENT OF THE BOARD OF TRADE (Mr. LLOYD-GEORGE, Carnarvon Boroughs): It is proposed to proceed with the Companies Bill on the first available day, but I am unable to give an exact date at present.

  Sale of Disinfectants.
  MR. REES: I beg to ask the President of the Local Government Board whether he is aware that the Privy Council Order of 27th July, 1900,
  490
  which permits the sale without trial of fluids containing less than 3 per cent. carbolic acid or its homologues, on the ground that such fluids are not poisons within the meaning of the Pharmacy Act of 1868, has resulted in flooding the market with disinfectants containing less than 3 per cent. carbolic acid; and whether he proposes to take such action as may be necessary to prevent this and to ensure the standardisation of disinfectants.
  THE PRESIDENT OF THE LOCAL GOVERNMENT BOARD (Mr. JOHN-BURNS, Battersea): Liquids containing less than 3 per cent. of carbolic acid are, I understand, chiefly used as deodorants. They would not be likely to be used where, in case of infectious disease, disinfectants wore supplied by the sanitary authority on the advice of the medical officer of health. My attention has not been drawn to an increased use of deodorants of the kind referred to since the Order of the Privy Council was made, and it does not appear to me that I could take any action in the matter.
  MR. REES: Is it not the case that many of the fluids are bought by the public under the impression that they are not only deodorisers but also disinfectants? If they do not disinfect, are they not a source of public danger?
  MR. JOHN BURNS: If the hon. Member will supply me with examples, I will inquire.

  Southminster Guardians' Election.
  MR. THORNE: I beg to ask the President of the Local Government Board whether his attention has been called to the Southminster guardians' election, where two candidates by the name of Messrs. Pipe and Downing were elected, at the same time holding contracts under the Maldon Union for the supply of boots and conveyances, and who took their seats in defiance of a protest made to the returning officer (Mr. White, of Maldon) before the votes were counted; and whether he intends taking any action.
  MR. JOHN BURNS: I have no authority to deal with the qualification or disqualification of candidates at an election of guardians, but I have made

  491
  inquiry with regard to this case, and I understand that before the counting of the votes at the election a protest was made on the ground referred to in the Question. I am, however, informed that no contracts were then or are now held by either of the two candidates mentioned. It is stated that one of them has been accustomed from time to time occasionally to supply a pair of boots or shoes to paupers, but that since his election he has stopped supplying them, and that the other has never since his election supplied conveyances to the guardians.

  General Post Office — Leave of Absence Regulations.
  MR. THORNE: I beg to ask the Postmaster - General whether ho will explain the diversity of treatment with regard to various grades of postal officials in relation to leave of absence for urgent domestic distress, in view of the fact that recently a telegraphist in the Central Office, London, was refused leave of absence by his deputy controller to attend the funeral of a near relative.
  THE POSTMASTER GENERAL (Mr. SYDNEY BUXTON, Tower Hamlets, Poplar): If the hon. Member will give me the particulars of the case to which he refers, I will have inquiry made.

  Belfast Post Office Staff.
  MR. MOORE: I beg to ask the Postmaster-General if there are. at present in the post office, Belfast,, thirteen post office assistants, originally in the service as telegraph messengers, who should have been dismissed at the age of sixteen, if it was not desired to continue them in the postal service; if these lads have service and unimpeachable records for from four to six years; if they are now aged from eighteen to twenty-one years, and, if dismissed, will have to search for new employment, out of which their continuance in the service after the age of sixteen has thrown them; what were the conditions under which they were so continued; and can he see his way, under all the circumstances of the case, to retain them in the postal service.
  MR. SYDNEY BUXTON: There are thirteen telegraph messengers at Belfast, aged from eighteen to twenty, who have
  492
  been employed from four to six years, and most of whom have a good record. Their employment was continued after the age of sixteen in the hope that it would be possible to appoint them as established postmen within a reasonable time. Unfortunately, the prospect of finding them established appointments is still remote; and it is considered best in their own interests that they should procure outside employment. They have for some time been employed as substitute postmen; and their employment in this capacity will be temporarily continued. It is clearly understood, however, that they will not thereby acquire any claim to established positions. It may be possible to appoint a few of them assistant postmen in the near future.
  CAPTAIN CRAIG: May we take it that the boys will not be dismissed immediately?
  MR. SYDNEY BUXTON: They are not exactly dismissed. They are simply told it is better for their own prospects to obtain outside employment.
  MR. J. WARDasked if it was not a fact that a considerable number of these boys were dismissed from the service about this age, because a preference was given to ex-military and naval men.
  MR. SYDNEY BUXTON: The House knows that an agreement was entered into years ago by which a certain percentage of vacancies was sot apart for ex-soldiers and naval men. We do not propose to extend that system, or indeed to interfere with it.
  MR. AUSTEN CHAMBERLAIN: Will the right hon. Gentleman consider the possibility of giving some technical training to these boys so that they may become skilled servants as sorters or telegraphists?
  MR. SYDNEY BUXTON: The right hon. Gentleman was not present I think when I spoke on the Post Office Estimates. We have given the utmost consideration to the question. We have the very greatest sympathy for the boys who have to find other work because we cannot employ them.

  American Mail Service.
  MR. MOORE: I beg to ask the Postmaster-General is he aware that the North Gorman Lloyd steamers are 23-knot vessels while those of the White Star Company are only 19; and as, under the altered arrangements of sailing, the steamers of both lines are to leave Southampton at 11 a.m. on Wednesdays, letters carried by the North German Lloyd steamers will arrive in New York on Tuesdays and enable replies to be sent by the White Star steamer leaving the following day, whereas mails sent by the White Star steamer from Southampton will not be in time for answers to be so sent, is it, in these circumstances, his intention to continue sending the mails which are ready for despatch on Wednesday mornings, and which heretofore have been embarked in Liverpool, by the White Star steamer at 11 a.m., or will he have these mails sent by the North German Lloyd vessels leaving at the same hour.
  MR. SYDNEY BUXTON: The fact that the packets of the White Star Line now sail from Southampton instead of Liverpool will not affect the arrival of the mails in New York; because the packets will continue to call at and to leave Queenstown at the same hour as before, and the final despatch of mails from England will still take place on Wednesday evenings. It is and has always been possible to secure the transmission of correspondence by the German steamers by superscribing the letters accordingly. Consequently I do not propose to alter the arrangement by which all correspondence is sent by the British contract packets, unless marked for transmission id some other way. It should be borne in mind that the foreign steamers do not furnish a regular weekly service all the year round whereas the British packets are bound under contract to perform the voyage regularly.

  Imports of Paper.
  SIR HOWARD VINCENT: I beg to ask the President of the Board of Trade if he is aware that rolls of green paper constantly arrive at the London Docks with an outside label, "Paper for the Westminster Gazette "; and whether, in view of the 16th section of the Merchandise Marks Act, 1887, he
  494
  proposes to take steps to secure that the paper contained in this outer covering shall not be put into circulation bearing printed matter in the English language without a definite indication of the country in which such paper was made or produced.
  MR. J. WARD: Before the hon. Gentleman replies, may I ask whether he is also aware that rolls of white paper constantly arrive at the London Docks labelled "Five miles of paper for the Daily Mail," and whether he will apply similar regulations to this paper?
  THE FINANCIAL SECRETARY TO THE TREASURY (Mr. RUNCIMAN, Dews-bury): I am informed by the Board of Customs that the facts are not correctly stated in the first sentence of the Question. The rolls of green paper referred to are not labelled as described, but boar merely an initial letter and a number when cleared by the Customs Department.
  SIR HOWARD VINCENTasked whether the hon. Gentleman had himself seen this paper arrive at the docks marked as described, as ho himself had, and on whose authority he contradicted the statement in the Question. What was the name of the inspector on whose authority he spoke?
  MR. RUNCIMANreplied that, as the hon. Member must be aware, at the time the paper was cleared by the Customs it bore only an initial and a number, and not the mark referred to in the Question.
  SIR HOWARD VINCENT: Then I understand that the label is put on afterwards in order to deceive the public.

  Second Division Clerks.
  MR. PARKER: I beg to ask the Secretary to the Treasury, in view of the fact that an examination for seventy vacancies in the Second Division has been announced by the Civil Service Commissioners, if he will state whether there are any new class assistant clerks serving in those Departments of the State in which such vacancies exist who are efficiently performing duties similar to those on which their Second Division colleagues are employed; whether any

  495
  such assistant clerks are eligible for promotion to the Second Division; and, if so, whether he will consider the desirability of arranging that some of the Second Division appointments now vacant should be given to such eligible assistant clerks.
  MR. RUNCIMAN: Promotions of assistant clerks can only be made in cases of exceptional merit and upon the recommendation of the head of the Department. Any such recommendations will be carefully considered, but I cannot undertake to adopt the course suggested by the hon. Member.

  Dog Regulations-
  MR. ASHLEY: I beg to ask the hon. Member for South Somerset, as representing the President of the Board of Agriculture, what is the meaning of the word "dog" for the purpose of regulations under Section 2 (1) (a) of The Dogs Act, 1906; and at what age a puppy becomes a dog for that purpose.
  THE TREASURER OF THE HOUSEHOLD (SIR EDWARD STRACHEY, Somersetshire, S.): The word "dog" is not defined in the Act, but there is no doubt that it includes puppies.
  MR. ASHLEY: But at what age does a puppy become a dog under the Act? I wish to know because several of my constituents have been prosecuted.
  SIR EDWARD STRACHEY: What the hon. Member wants to know is the effect of this section. It imposes no obligation, but it gives power to make orders; and what happens is that the local authorities submit regulations to the Board of Agriculture for approval. The hon. Member suggests that the local anthorities and the Board of Agriculture would be so stupid as to make puppies wear collars.
  MR. ASHLEY: I ask the simple question, What is the age which the regulations lay down?
  [No Answer was returned.]

  Meat Trade in Glasgow.
  MR. WATT: I beg to ask the Secretary for Scotland whether, in
  496
  view of the facts that chilled meat, marked U.S., inspected, and passed, was seized in Glasgow Meat Market on 18th and 20th February, and found unfit for human food, that this meat showed no evidence of having been previously inspected, that United States statistics show that each inspector there has to examine the car cases and viscera of at least 937 animals daily, he will take steps to ensure greater precaution in admitting into Scotland this class of meat for human consumption.
  THE SECRETARY FOR SCOTLAND (Mr. SINCLAIR, Forfarshire): I am not in a position to confirm the suggestion in my hon. friend's Question as to the conditions under which meat is inspected in the United States. The Local Government Board for Scotland have no power to take any stops to ensure greater precaution in the admission into Scotland of the class of moat referred to. I am informed that chilled and frozen meat does not come direct to Scotland from the United States, but that it usually goes to London or Liverpool and is consigned to Scottish centres from those Ports.

  Irish. Licensing Laws.
  MR. MOORE: I beg to ask Mr. Attorney-General for Ireland if he is aware that, notwithstanding the present provisions of the Licensing Law requiring public-houses to close, in all but certain towns in Ireland, at 9 o'clock, chemists and druggists claim the right to sell medicated or other wines and Burgundies between nine and ten o'clock; and if he will take steps to stop this practice.
  THE ATTORNEY-GENERAL FOR IRELAND (Mr. CHERRY, Liverpool, Exchange): I am aware that a claim by chemists and druggists mentioned in the Question has been made, but the Government has been advised that it has no foundation in law. The police, however, have been instructed not to interfere when they find that the sale of medicated wines for the use of invalids is bona fide carried on as chemists' business, but where there is reason to believe that an ordinary wine business is being conducted and the regulations of the Licensing Acts merely evaded, prosecutions will be instituted.

  Irish Schools—Heating Arrangements.
  CAPTAIN CRAIG: I beg to ask the Chief Secretary to the Lord-Lieutenant of Ireland whether, in view of the climatic conditions prevailing in Ireland, causing distress among children attending national schools through the insufficient and irregular heating of class rooms, he will urge the Government to take steps to provide the funds necessary to remedy the existing state of affairs before winter sets in.
  MR. CHERRY: I am afraid that I can add nothing to the reply given by my right hon. friend to the hon. Member's previous Question on this subject on 14th February last. †

  Skibbereen Medical Officer.
  MR. LONSDALE: I beg to ask the Chief Secretary to the Lord Lieutenant of Ireland whether the Local Government Board have ordered a sworn inquiry into the election recently of a medical officer by the Skibbereen Board of Guardians, in view of allegations of bribery and corruption which have been made publicly.
  MR. CHERRY: The Answer is in the affirmative.

  Intimidation in Ireland.
  Mr. LONSDALE: I beg to ask the Chief Secretary to the Lord-Lieutenant of Ireland whether he is aware that a number of grazing farms in county Roscommon cannot be used by their occupiers because of the intimidation and unlawful interference with their user organised by the United Irish League; whether he is aware that it is publicly asserted in the district that the Government approve of the methods of the League; and whether, seeing that the object of this action is to force the sale of the grazing farms for distribution among members of the League, the Estates Commissioners will be instructed not to purchase any lands in regard to which intimidation has been practised to force a sale.
  MR. CHERRY: I am informed that there are a number of grazing farms in county Roscommon at present unoccupied,
  † See (4) Debates, clxix., 311,562.
  498
  and I regret to say that there is reason to believe that, in some of those cases at all events, this result is due to unlawful interference by crowds of people who have driven cattle off the lands. I have no information that it has been publicly asserted that the Government approve of methods of intimidation, an assertion which would be quite contrary to the fact. The real facts are that prosecutions have boon instituted in every case where intimidation has been reported and whore evidence is forth-coining, and that full police measures have been taken for the protection of the occupiers of grazing farms in the exercise of their legal rights. As regards the concluding part of the Question, I would refer to the Answer given by my right hon. friend to the Question put by the hon. Member for the Oswestry Division on 14th May. ‡
  MR. BYLES: May I ask whether the intimidation and unlawful interference spoken of is properly described in the evening newspapers as "Terrorism in Ireland"?
  MR. CHERRY: That is a matter of opinion.
  MR. BYLES: Does it amount to that?
  [No Answer was returned.]

  Nevins Estate, County Limerick.
  MR. JOYCE: I beg to ask the Chief Secretary to the Lord-Lieutenant of Ireland at what date was the Nevins Estate at Mountshannon, Annacoty, county Limerick, parcelled out to the tenants; how was the allotment made; wore all the persons who were given farms on this estate evicted tenants; have any changes been made since by any inspector; and has an inspector power to change a tenant from one farm to another after such tenant being put in possession and signing the agreement for purchase for the farm allotted to him.
  MR. CHERRY: The Estates Commissioners inform me that the distribution of the lands referred to took place on the 7th of last month. Of the persons who were allotted holdings, nine were
  ‡ See (4) Debates, clxxiv., 799–800.

  499
  evicted tenants, two were tenants on the estate, and four were tenants of adjacent small holdings. The allocation of such holdings is decided on by the Commissioners themselves, upon a scheme prepared by their inspector, and approved of by them. The Commissioners are not aware that any change has been made since the new occupiers were put into possession. No change could be made without the Commissioners' approval.

  Birr Compensation Cases.
  MR. LONSDALE: I beg to ask the Chief Secretary to the Lord-Lieutenant of Ireland how many claims for compensation for malicious damage to property were before the last Birr quarter sessions; and what was the total amount awarded by the court.
  MR. CHERRY: Three claims for compensation were heard on the occasion mentioned. In one case the claim was dismissed. In another case the sum of £1,660 was awarded as compensation for the malicious burning of a stable and horses. Appeals have been lodged in this case by both the county council and district council. In the third case, the sum of £35 was awarded as compensation for the burning of the roof of a dwelling house.

  Irish Council Bill.
  MR. LONSDALE: I beg to ask the Chief Secretary to the Lord-Lieutenant of Ireland whether, in the event of the Irish Council Bill not becoming law, he will take steps to secure that the whole or some part of the proposed additional grant of £650,000 shall be available for development purposes, and particularly to facilitate land purchase and to avoid further inroads upon the Guarantee Fund.
  MR. CHERRY: The financial provisions of the Irish Council Bill were framed in connection with the Bill itself, and cannot be considered apart from it.
  MR. LONSDALE: Is it not necessary to do something towards relieving the congested condition of Ireland? Cannot a portion of this money be applied to that purpose?
  MR. CHERRYsaid he thought it was desirable that they should get as much
  500
  money for Ireland as they could in every possible way.

  Irish Land Purchase.
  MR. LONSDALE: I beg to ask the Chief Secretary to the Lord Lieutenant of Ireland whether he will state what sum is at present available for advances to purchasers under the Land Purchase Act of 1903; and when it is proposed to make a fresh issue of Irish land stock.
  MR. ASQUITH: Money is at present being supplied to the Irish Land Purchase. Fund by temporary loans from funds in the hands of the National Debt Commissioners, as and when required, as provided by Section 30 of the Irish Land Act, 1903. This answers the Question just put by the hon. Member for York. There is no present intention of making a public issue of stock.
  MR. LONSDALE: Can the right hon. Gentleman say what sums are lying to the credit of the Estates Commissioners?
  MR. ASQUITH: I cannot say without notice.

  Derby Day.
  MR. BOTTOMLEY: I bog to ask the Prime Minister whether, in view of the great interest taken by.Members of all Parties in the House in the working of the Street Betting Act, and of the unique opportunity afforded by the Epsom racing carnival of ascertaining in what respects the Act requires amendment or extension, he will consider the desirableness of adjourning the House over Derby Day, and thus afford Members an opportunity in the public interest of studying the matter upon the spot.
  MR. ASQUITH (for Sir H. CAMPBELL BANNERMAN): The Answer is in the negative.

Rise in the Price of Wheat.
SIR HOWARD VINCENT: I beg to ask the Prime.Minister if his attention has been called to the considerable rise in the price of American wheat since the failure of the Prime Ministers at the Imperial Conference to obtain any consideration of preference for grain grown in the Empire; and what steps he proposes to take to prevent

501
the increased cost of bread falling upon the poor.
MR. CATHCART WASONasked the right hon. Gentleman whether he was familiar with the lines—
"Who fills the butchers' shops with large blue flies?
Who makes the quartern loaf and Luddites rise?"
MR. ASQUITH (for Sir H. CAMPBELL-BANNERMAN): I am familiar with those lines. I am aware that there has been a rise in the price of wheat, though I did not know that it was due to the proceedings of the Imperial Conference. His Majesty's Government are not prepared to regulate the price of food-stuffs or other commodities, but they propose to keep the ports of the United Kingdom open for the free importation of wheat from whatever quarter it may come.
Sir HOWARD VINCENT: Arising out of that Answer, may I ask the right hon. Gentleman whether he is aware that the price of bread is now considerably higher than it was during the time the shilling registration fee was in force and when,£7,000 a day was being received by the public revenue for that registration foe, and, also, whether he is aware that the price of bread is considerably higher now than it was before the preferential door was banged, barred, and bolted?
[No Answer was returned.]

POST OFFICE SITES BILL.
Reported from the Select Committee.
Report to lie upon the Table, and to be printed. [No. 176.]
Minutes of the Proceedings to be printed. [No. 176.]
Bill, as amended, re-committed to a Committed of the Whole House for tomorrow, and to be printed. [Bill 220.]

PATENTS AND DESIGNS BILL.
Reported, with Amendments, from Standing Committee C.
Report to lie upon the Table, and to be printed. [No. 177.]
Minutes of the Proceedings of the Standing Committee to be printed. [No. 177.]
Bill, as amended (in the Standing Committee), to be considered to-morrow, and to be printed. [Bill 221.]

SELECTION (STANDING COMMITTEES).
Sir WILLIAM BRAMPTON GURDON reported from the Committee of Selection; That they had discharged the following Member from Standing Committee A (in respect of the Public Rights of Way (No. 2) Bill): Mr. Attorney-General; and had appointed in substitution (in respect of the Public Rights of Way (No. 2) Bill): Mr. Solicitor-General.
Sir WILLIAM BRAMPTON GORDON further reported from the Committee; That they had added to Standing Committee A. the following fifteen Members (in respect of the Public Rights of Way (No. 2) Bill): Mr. William Johnson, Sir Walter Nugent, Mr. William Redmond, Mr. Cheetham, Mr. Eugene Wason, Mr. Watt, Lord Robert Cecil, Mr. Rawlinson, Mr. Hills, Mr. Meysey-Thompson, Mr. Abel Thomas, Dr. Hazel, Mr. Gooch, and Mr. Beck.
Sir WILLIAM BRAMPTON GURDON further reported from the Committee; That they had added to Standing Committee A the following fourteen Members (in respect of the Municipal Elections Bill): Mr. O'Mara, Mr. M'Crae, Mr. Cleland, Mr. Barnes, Major Coates, Mr. Younger, Mr. Mooney, Mr. Mitchell-Thomson, Mr. Wood, Mr. King, Mr. Alfred Mason, Mr. Lewis Haslam, Mr. Benn, and Mr. Mallet.
Reports to he upon the Table.

NEW BILL.
  FACTORY AND WORKSHOP ACT (1901) AMENDMENT (No. 2) BILL.
  "To prohibit employment between noon on Saturday and six o'clock on Monday morning in cotton, woollen, worsted, flax, hemp, silk, jute, and paper factories, and in bleaching and dyeing works," presented by Mr. Jowett; supported by Mr. Snowden, Mr. Steadman, Mr. Wardle Mr. O'Grady, Mr. Hudson, and Mr. George Roberts; to be read a second time upon Monday next, and to be printed. [Bill 222.]

  TERRITORIAL AND RESERVE FORCES BILL.
  Considered in Committee.
  (In the Committee.)
  [Mr. EMMOTT (Oldham) in the Chair.]
  Clause 8:
  *VISCOUNT MORPETHmoved to insert after the word "Act" the words "and of the Militia Ballot Act which shall be applicable to the Territorial Force. "He said the Secretary of State had made an appeal for a nation in arms, but he had not attempted to enforce that duty upon the nation by putting into the Bill any clause which would lead the nation to recognise the duty. The other day the right hon. Gentleman made a very remarkable statement. He admitted that country was in the greatest difficulty in regard to its military institutions, owing to the system of voluntary enlistment. Successive Secretaries of State had endeavoured to overcome those difficulties with various schemes which had been put before the House. But the right hon. Gentleman had not gone to the very root of the matter. He hoped under his system to get the number of men he required, and many hon. Members shared that hope, but some of them were very sceptical on the point, and consequently desired that there should be some safeguard in the Bill upon which the Government could fall back in the event of the right hon. Gentleman's hopes failing realisation. The whole question was based upon this point: it was impossible to get trained men in time of war in sufficient numbers unless there was some compulsion in time of peace. It was not that the British citizen was unpatriotic, nor was it that ho was unwilling to serve when the necessity stared him in the face; the difficulty was one rather of want of thought. Men were not anxious in time of peace to undertake the drudgery of military instruction. Where thousands would be willing to come forward in time of war only tens, or perhaps hundreds, would come forward in time of peace and consent to undergo the drudgery which was essential for their utility in time of war. When the right hon. Gentleman threw out the hope that his scheme might be successful he forgot that other schemes which had also been heralded with high
  504
  expectations in the past had proved failures. Every device had been attempted, but all had been equally futile. The history of recruiting was an ignominious one wholly ignored in popular histories. They had tried voluntary enlistment with high bounties, and they had also tried a modified form of compulsion, but both systems had broken down. The right hon. Gentleman had told the House that he had copied the example afforded in the Parliamentary wars and had set up county associations, but he did not tell the House that that most successful army of Cromwell's was based upon a system of compulsion. Coming to later times they would find that this country carried on its wars with the aid of subsidised allies and the employment of foreign mercenaries. He knew of no great war in which this country had been engaged, barring the late South African War, in which that had not been the case. That, however, was impossible in the present day, and, therefore, the question of what they were to fall back upon in time of a great war was one which would have to be considered in a different spirit from the spirit of optimism which the right hon. Gentleman had displayed. The right hon. Gentleman had referred more than once to the Napoleonic wars, the last great European conflict in which this country was engaged. Well, it was only by putting the Ballot Act in force during that war that we were enabled to maintain a large force in the field. For the Militia was able to find drafts for the Regular Army and yet maintain its strength. But the Act had another effect at that time. The Volunteer movement, it was true, was partly due to a purely patriotic spirit, but it also originated in a desire to avoid the liability imposed by the Ballot Act. The right hon. Gentleman, in some of his speeches, had told them that in some future war we might require as many as 900,000 men. The highest total the forces of the Crown ever reached during the wars of Napoleon was about 800,000; therefore the right hon. Gentleman contemplated the possibility of Army Forces which would exceed the greatest force ever raised by 100,000. Yet he hoped to raise that force by a purely voluntary system of enlistment. He was afraid the right hon. Gentleman was doomed to disappointment. He was not asking in his Amendment that compulsion should be applied, but he was

  505
  asking that the power of compulsion should be retained in the hands of the Government, so that if it should turn out that they were not able to procure the necessary men in the way the right hon. Gentleman expected they would have some power to fall back upon. Compulsion was not, as he had endoavoured to point out, a new principle, nor was it an undemocratic principle, because it was enforced by some of the greatest democracies both in the past and in the present. Neither was it at variance with the principles of the Party opposite, because they had introduced the principle of compulsion in the matter of land purchase, and ho failed to see that it was any wore contrary to the principles of Liberalism to compel a citizen to defend his country than to acquire land under compulsion for the public service. The first argument ho wished to put forward in defence of the retention of the Ballot Act was that it was necessary, and that probably the right hon. Gentleman would not be able to provide an Army without it. The second reason was that it was the primary duty of every citizen to take part, or be liable to take part, in the defence of his country. That principle was recognised by our Colonies and by our late enemies in the field—the Boers. Thirdly, it was the only fair way to raise troops The right hon. Gentleman's Bill called upon a large number of men to serve in the Territorial Army, not for payment but from patriotism and a sense of duty. Under the Bill a largo number of men would serve, owing to a sense of patriotism, at great inconvenience and possibly loss of income, and they would see around them men who were indifferent and were unwilling to face the obligations which they themselves had readily undertaken. Therefore, the only fair way was to provide that all citizens should be equally liable to serve in the Territorial Army. Such an obligation would not encourage a spirit of what was called "militarism" or "jingoism." On t he contrary, the Auxiliary Force that would exist under such a system would be mainly civilian in spirit, and every question would be looked at from the civilian rather than the military point of view. He wished to draw attention to two points connected with the Ballot Act itself. At the present time the Secretary of State for War had to consider, not how many men he required for the Army or for
  506
  the Territorial Force, but how many he could raise. Under a system of compulsion he would be able to fix the establishment at what he regarded as necessary and to maintain it at that strength. The other day the right hon. Baronet the Member for the Forest of Doan said that the Ballot Act was obsolete as applied to Militia. He would be more than reluctant to differ from the right hon. Baronet, who was a well-known authority on such matters, but there were high authorities whom he had consulted who did not agree with that statement. Moreover, there was a debate in the House of Lords in 1900 when the matter came under discussion, and Lord Lansdowne then stated that the retention of the Ballot Act was a power the late Government were not willing to part with. Evidently, therefore, in the opinion of Lord Lansdowne the provisions of the Ballot Act were still applicable. Until they had a statement to the contrary from the Law Officers of the Crown they were entitled to assume that in the opinion of the present Government also the Ballot Act was still on the Statute-book and could be enforced. He frankly admitted that the Ballot Act as it stood was archaic and would have to be re-drafted and re-east. It was impossible for him on that Amendment to suggest what its provision should be, but if the Amendment wore carried it would entail the re-casting of the Act. The old Act allowed anyone who was drawn for service to obtain a substitute. He would object to any system which allowed substitutes. Those who were richer should not be allowed to buy off and compound their duty to their country by hiring men to take their place. It was rash for the Secretary of State for War to assume without any proof that he would obtain the number of men he required under the Bill, and even if he obtained them it would only be at an enormous expenditure, an expenditure far exceeding any amount yet presented to the House as the probable cost. If he were willing to base the Territorial Army upon duty to serve when the Government considered the necessities of of the country required it he would get a more efficient and vastly cheaper Army than he would get under this Bill, and he would have behind him an inexhaustible supply of men ready to fill up gaps in

  507
  the Army during a long campaign. He, therefore, moved the Amendment, which he believed was in consonance with the dictates of true patriotism and citizenship.
  Amendment proposed—
  "In page 8, line 11, after the word 'Act.' to insert the words ' and of the Militia Ballot Act which shall be applicable to the Territorial Force.' "—(Viscount Morpeth.)
  Question proposed, "That those words be there inserted."
  *THE SECRETARY OF STATE FOR WAR (Mr. HALDANE, Haddington)said the noble Lord's speech showed that he had given serious consideration to this question, and had endeavoured to got at the facts and the law of the case. But he had admitted that the Militia Acts, even if they could be applied to this force, were of such a character as to work in the most unfair fashion. Those Militia Acts not only took no account of the Volunteers, but they enabled rich men to buy substitutes. If there was any proposition likely to prove more odious than another it was that a rich man should be allowed to buy a substitute. What, then, became of the proposal to apply the Militia Ballot Act to this force? The noble Lord had asked whether hon. Members on the Government side of the House could take objection to his plan of making compulsory what was the duty of the citizen. Why should that question be addressed to that side of the House? He was not sure what was the view of hon. Members opposite. The right hon. Gentleman the Member for Croydon was an apostle of the objection to compulsion. How, then, was it possible to challenge the Government on this principle? No doubt they would have a clear and emphatic utterance from him upon this question. The noble Lord said they would never get this force; but was it not worth trying? The Government were asking for 300,000 men when the establishment was full. They had very nearly that number at the present time n the Yeomanry and Volunteers, and it was not extravagant to expect that such a force would come forward if a proper and satisfactory organisation were provided. At any rate, that was the view of the Government, and they wished to do
  508
  everything in their power to see whether this force could not be raised upon a purely voluntary footing. The Militia Acts of 1852 and 1860 were both alive and could be applied; but the view of the Government was that it was not expedient to raise the question of compulsion. There was not the smallest reason for passing the Amendment, because they did not propose to sweep away any obsolete machinery. They were not proposing to raise a force of 900,000 men, except in a case of very great emergency. What they were proposing was such a force as would give the public a sense of security, and so get rid of all the grumblings and murmurs that distracted attention from useful topics. Therefore, they did not desire to resort to machinery which could not possibly be required excepting under circumstances of such grave emergency that they might be left to take care of themselves. The Government had endeavoured to frame an organisation for a comparatively small force, and for that purpose they considered that compulsion was useless, and might be mischievous to their ends. For those reasons they could not accept the Amendment.
  MR. WYNDHAMsaid that if the Government system were voluntary, it could not be uniform. If the plan were tried upon a uniform basis it would inevitably have to be strengthened by compulsion. He thought the plan of the Government was going to fail. There was also a question of principle involved. The right hon. Gentleman said the Militia Ballot Act remained in force. That was true, and it enshrined the principle that in this country for the last thousand years it had been the duty of its inhabitants to defend it. The existing Ballot Act, however, was not only suspended, but was quite obsolete. It was possible to amend it, and an amending Bill had already been drafted and printed. It contained these words—
  "A person balloted to serve in the Militia shall not be permitted to find a substitute."
  If the Militia Ballot Act remained in force, then to whom did it apply? Under the plan of the right hon. Gentleman the Militia would be abolished. If the Militia Ballot Act were still alive, where were the men liable under it to go? Were they to go in to the Territorial

  509
  Force which the right hon. Gentleman had just said was to be on purely voluntary principle? This was another example of the vague position in which matters were left under the very vague provisions of this Bill. The Militia was to live until the county associations made some plan which was incompatible with the continued existence of the Militia as a body. That was an illustration of the difficulties in which they were placed by the very singular method of drafting pursued in the Bill. The proper course would have been to amend the Militia Act. That course, however, had not been followed. As this was a somewhat academic question, he did not propose to proceed further with it.
  VISCOUNT CASTLEREAGHsaid the Amendment involved a principle which was advocated by a great many Members at the present moment. He joined that band of isolated individuals who favoured the principle without being desirous of seeing it enforced unless it was proved to be an absolute necessity. It had not been enforced in this country for a good many years. It was obvious that if the present scheme failed the country must be involved in a position of great danger. In fact with regard to our Auxiliary Forces there would be chaos. The right hon. Gentleman was very sanguine with regard to the success of the Bill, and he declined on that account to contemplate any suggestion of failure. He could not say that he shared the right hon. Gentleman's optimistic views. Ho did not believe the men of this country would come forward in the spirit in which the Secretary for War wished they would. In saying that he did not wish to say anything against the patriotic spirit of the country, but he did not believe that the men were prepared to sacrifice a great deal for the purpose of displaying the spirit of patriotism. Consequently he welcomed the Amendment because he believed it would place in the hands of the Government a weapon which they ought to possess, and one which, if the necessity arose, they should put in force. With regard to the 300,000 men whom the right hon. Gentleman hoped would come forward, it was obvious that the conditions under which they would be asked to serve in future
  510
  would be different from those which had obtained in the past. A great many of the attractions which formerly induced the I Yeomanry and the Volunteers to join would I be absent. They knew well how recruits I joined the Regular Army. A certain percentage joined for the purpose of doing something for their country, but he believed that was a very small percentage. That was proved by the seasons at which the majority of the recruits joined. They joined because they were unable to find other employment in the labour market. He hoped the right hon. Gentleman would get the recruits he believed would come in. Under ordinary circumstances this weapon, which involved the principle of compulsion, would not be put in force, but he thought the Government should have the power of enforcing men to join the ranks for the purpose of serving their country in a time of great national emergency. That was done during the Peninsular War, and there was no reason to believe that circumstances of equal magnitude might not arise in the near future. The time might come when the Government would be at their wits' end to obtain a large number of men, and when it might be necessary to send a large force to the continent of Europe. He sincerely hoped the emergency would never arise, but he thought that the Government should be furnished with a weapon for the purpose of expanding the military forces of the country.
  *SIR SAMUEL SCOTTsaid he understood that the Secretary for War fully acknowledged that contingencies might arise when it would be necessary to enforce the Militia Ballot Act, and that at the present time it was a living Act. He understood the right hon. Gentleman to say that when the Territorial Army was created the Militia Ballot Act would die a natural death. Therefore the present Bill entirely killed the Militia Ballot Act. Perhaps the right hon. Gentleman would correct him if he was wrong.
  *MR. HALDANEsaid it did not kill it legally; so far as the Militia continued to subsist for a short time theoretically the Act would remain with vitality. But should the Militia in their present form become obsolete, then, no doubt, the Statute Law Revision Committee would regard the Act as obsolete
  MR. ASHLEYasked whether the Act would continue as far as the Irish Militia were concerned.
  *MR. HALDANEsaid they came under Part III., and would cease as Militia in the old sense.
  *SIR SAMUEL SCOTTsaid he understood, at any rate, that the Militia Ballot Act would be practically killed. He much regretted that he found himself unable to support the Amendment of the noble Lord. The right hon. Gentleman had brought forward a voluntary scheme, and he thought it only just that they should give that scheme a fair chance. Nobody knew better than the right hon. Gentleman that, if he failed to obtain the men under it, there would be and could be no alternative but compulsory service. But the right time to discuss compulsory service was when they had practical proof of the failure of the right hon. Gentleman's scheme.
  *SIR CHARLES DILKEmentioned that high legal authorities had advised successive Governments that the Militia Ballot Acts were virtually already obsolete, because they largely applied to a class of Militia which had ceased to exist.
  *MR. ARNOLD-FORSTERthought that some of the explanations given in the course of the debates had been rather obscure. He had, unfortunately, been compelled to obtain his information from the public prints, and on many points he was absolutely in the dark. He believed that that state of things prevailed inside as well as outside the House. But there could be no ambiguity about the fact now elicited by his noble friend. They had now got two unequivocal statements— first, that the Secretary for War believed that the Militia Ballot Act was a valid and subsisting Act, and, secondly, that he believed that, being a valid and subsisting Act, it ought to be put an end to. The pretence which had been put forward by some supporters of this proposal, that the Militia was not going to be destroyed, must now be abandoned. It had been stated over and over again, in speeches and in contributions to the Press, that those who said the Militia was to be destroyed were mistaken. But they now
  512
  found that so entirely was the Militia to be abolished, lock, stock, and barrel, that a set of Statutes which were valid and subsisting, which had been called into action in the past, and might easily be invoked in the future, would be struck off the Statute Book by the early efforts of the Statute Law Revision Committee because there would be nothing to which those Statutes could apply.
  *MR. HALDANEsaid he had expressly stated that this Bill did not abolish the Militia. The Militia would become obsolete in consequence of the new system set up under this Bill, and they had taken power to bring in Orders in Council to abolish Militia units if and as they pleased.
  *Mr. ARNOLD-FORSTERsaid that if ever there was a distinction without a difference, that was one. The right hon. Gentleman said he was not abolishing the Militia, but he was passing an Act which would be regarded by the Statute Law Revision Committee at an early date as having had that effect.
  *MR. McCRAEsaid the whole discussion had been on the assumption that the Militia Ballot Act, if put in operation, would compel these men to give themselves for service abroad. That was not so. If the Ballot Act were put in operation the only thing the men could be asked to do would be to serve for home defence. What was the good of that when they had in the Volunteer Act of 1863 a provision that in case of actual or apprehended invasion the whole of the Volunteer Force could be asked to serve for home defence? He thought it was immaterial whether the Ballot Act was in operation or not, since the Secretary foe War had all that ho wanted with regard to mobilisation in the Volunteer Act of 1863. The clause to which ho referred was in the following terms—
  ''Every officer and Volunteer and every N.C.O. of the Permanent Staff belonging to every Corps so called out shall lie bound to assemble as the Lieutenant of the County directs, and to march according to orders within Great Britain; and shall for the purpose of this Act, be deemed on actual military service. If any such Officer, Volunteer, or N.C.O., not incapacitated by infirmity for military service, refuses or neglects to so assemble or march, he shall be deemed a deserter."

  513
  They had there everything they could secure under the Ballot Act. The impression had been given outside that hon. Gentlemen opposite were anxious to continue the Ballot Act because it would enable the Government in case of war to send men to fill the first line of the Army. That was absolutely absurd.
  MR. WYNDHAMsaid the hon. Member for East Edinburgh was generally very lucid in his contributions to the debates, but in this case he was confusing two matters which were totally distinct.
  *MR. HUNTsaid he was supporting the Amendment because there was an element of compulsion in it. The hon. Member for East Edinburgh had forgotten that even the American Government could compel not only Volunteers but every man in the country to fight in its defence in case of emergency. The Secretary for War had told them that his scheme would give the people of this country a sense of security. He could not see how it could give them any possible sense of security; because the right hon. Gentleman would get neither the quantity nor the quality of men he required. The quantity of men for the Territorial Army was likely to be considerably less than it now was, and the quality to be considerably worse. After all, they had had warnings as to the dangers of invasion formal most all our great war captains from the Duke of Wellington down to Lord Roberts and Lord Wolseley. He asked the Secretary for War whether, oven if he succeeded in getting 300,000 men for his Territorial Army without the use of the ballot, he really thought that 300,000 partially trained men would be enough to protect the country from invasion? Three hundred thousand men would not be anything like enough to guard our coasts; and therefore it would be impossible to use the Navy in chasing and destroying the enemy's ships. And if we could not do that, we could not secure the necessary supplies of food for our people and of the raw material for our manufactures. That would mean that our people would be starved into submission in a very short time. The Secretary for War had gone out of his way to prevent the people of this country from learning
  514
  that it was their duty to join the Auxiliary Forces. He had capitulated to that section of the Government Party who did not take any notice of history; and had prevented the teaching of boys in elementary schools that it was their first duty to learn enough to defend their country in any great national emergency. So far as he could make out the right hon. Gentleman was going to try—he thought probably unsuccessfully—to get 300,000 men to take all the trouble and risk of the defence of our shores, leaving millions of able-bodied men to do nothing to make themselves of any use. He could not see that that was a scheme on Radical or democratic lines. Moreover, by the scheme of the right hon. Gentleman they wore going not only to have fewer troops but less training. It seemed to him that we were really in danger of a sudden war and of invasion every month; and the Government might very well be compared to Nero who fiddled while Rome was burning, or to Belte-shazzar who trusted to water to defend his country—and they all knew what the result of that was.
  *THE CHAIRMANsaid he hoped the hon. Member would adhere a little more closely to the Amendment.
  *MR. HUNTsaid he was sorry he had got over the line; he found it rather difficult to keep to the Amendment, but if the Chairman should find it necessary to put him down again ho would remain there. It seemed to him that this attempt to get 300,000 men for home defence without using the Ballot Act meant that with the self-deception of the ostrich the Government were sticking their heads in the mud and refusing to see the dangers to which they were exposing the country; and he believed that if the country had the chance next month they would send the Government out to grass, like Nebuchadnezzar of the swollen head. "Quem Deus vult perdire prius dementat." He hoped, however that in this case, it might be the curious conglomeration of fragmentary atoms which called itself the Liberal Party which would be destroyed and not the country.
  *THE CHAIRMANsaid that the hon. Member was not confining himself to the

  515
  subject matter of the Amendment before the Committee.
  MR. ARTHUR LEEsaid he did not want unnecessarily to prolong the discussion; but he was in a position of some difficulty as to how he should vote owing to the fact that he did not understand the position of the right hon. Gentleman as to the Militia Acts. The right hon. Gentleman had said that those Acts were real, vital, and living Acts, and he distinctly understood him to say that they applied to the Militia as at present constituted. If that were so, and they could be used in case of emergency, the right hon. Gentleman brought in a Bill that did away with the Militia in its present form, and by a side-wind destroyed the Militia Acts which were the safeguard of the reserve. If the right hon. Gentleman accepted that position and refused this Amendment, he supplied the Opposition with a very strong argument in favour of excluding the Militia from the scope of this Bill.
  *MR. HALDANEsaid he was against compulsion in every shape or form, and he did not want to see those Acts put in force.
  COLONEL KENYON SLANEYsaid that the right hon. Gentleman had found himself in difficulty in trying to explain why there should not be compulsion; because he admitted that he could conceive a set of circumstances under which the only alternative to national danger was to have recourse to compulsion. The right hon. Gentleman based his objection to the acceptance of the Amendment on the ground—reasonable and natural enough for him—that if this Bill were passed there would be no necessity for the grumbles and murmurs of some hon. Members about compulsory service. If he could agree with the right hon. Gentleman in that respect he might postpone further consideration of compulsion till some future time. But if that grumbling and murmuring were to cease the right hon. Gentleman must correct his scheme so as to make the country certain that he was providing an adequate force physically lit for the defence of the country. The force should be capable in regard to the physique of the men and because they
  516
  had boon well trained. The reason why the country was murmuring and looking to compulsion as a necessity was that this Bill, which was the last ditch between the present system and compulsion, did not provide an adequate force or give them sufficient training. He thought the right hon. Gentleman must amend his Bill in the direction proposed unless he showed that he had put aside the idea that compulsion might be necessary. It might be said that he was allying himself with the advocates of compulsory service, but ho was not. He did regret, however, that the right hon. Gentleman had not allied himself with any system for the production of national efficiency and training powers. He wondered whether his right hon. friend had noticed a curious piece of information given in print the other day by those representatives of the working classes who went through Germany, who laid it down categorically that the compulsory service in that country had been of direct advantage to the working population. That was a fact which the right hon. Gentleman might bear in mind as showing an increasing disposition in this country to recognise that some form of compulsory service was not inimical to the interests of the population or adverse to the growing desires of the people. He confessed he was not desirous of advocating immediate compulsory service in this country, but he was glad to see that the right hon. Gentleman confessed that it might become necessary, and that when it was necessary he would not shrink from it.
  SIR GILBERT PARKER:associated himself with the position taken up by the hon. Member for Fareham, although he had no doubt the right hon. Gentleman the Secretary of State for War would think him very stupid for doing so. He understood the right hon. Gentleman to say last night, that the Militia as it existed would to a largo extent be absorbed in the special contingent or reserve In that case the Militia Ballot Act would not apply to any of the Auxiliary Forces absorbed, and the Irish Militia would also be excluded from the possible operation of the Ballot Act while this Act remained in force. However, he might ask if any of the Militia absorbed into the Territorial Force would be liable to the operation of the Militia Ballot Act?
  *MR. HALDANE: No.
  SIR GILBERT PARKERwas glad to have it made quite clear that the Bill excluded any member of the Territorial Force from the operation of the Militia Ballot Act, His hon. friend the Member for East Edinburgh had asked what was the good of the Militia Ballot Act, because they wore already able to secure by means of the Territorial Forces what they required in cases of emergency. But the Secretary of State for War had said he was going to leave great emergencies to take care of themselves, and he was not going by this Bill to do anything to provide any safeguards for emergencies except on the principle of embodiment. He put it to the Secretary of State for War, supposing he had 700,000, 800,000 or 900,000 men, which was the number the right hon. Gentleman expected to keep up for expansion and to get from this Territorial Force, did he imagine that that force would be a Reserve providing a large number of men to go abroad? In the Napoleonic wars four out of every five men who joined the Militia subsequently entered the Regular Army. They might expect therefore that a great number of men could be brought in under the Militia Ballot Act, and that would provide a much larger number of men not only for Home defence but to go abroad. The proposal was perfectly sound and reasonable, as he thought the Minister for War would admit. What he complained of was that the Minister for War had deliberately excluded from this Bill a safeguard which had been given to this country and exercised by them for generation after generation. Did the right hon. Gentleman think it wise to throw aside a weapon which the State had placed in his hand—a time honoured weapon and a live weapon as he himself had said? What harm would it be to retain it?
  MR. HALDANE: It is a blunderbuss.
  SIR GILBERT PARKERdid not think the right hon. Gentleman's estimate of the weapon was quite in keeping with his previous utterance, which was to the effect that it was a live weapon. If it was a live weapon it could be applied. If it was applied it cast a responsibility upon the men. The only objection in principle which the right hon. Gentleman had to the Militia Ballot was that it gave the opportunity of substitution. As his
  518
  right hon. friend the Member for Dover had pointed out, it could be amended, and if his noble friend had moved his Amendment and added the words—
  "And the Militia Ballot Act; is it exists or may be amended,"
  that objection would be met. [Laughter.] Well, his drafting might not be very good, but his suggestion was perfectly sound all the same. Suppose that the right hon. Gentleman's scheme failed? He knew that the right hon. Gentleman looked upon the mere supposition as an indication of incipient lunacy on his part, but there were a great many people who were very doubtful on the subject. When the right hon. Gentleman had established his County Associations and his Territorial Army, and after he had dismissed his Militia and they had been absorbed, a reconstruction would mean a crisis in the military organisation of the country. Whatever the result of the right hon. Gentleman's scheme might be—whether it succeeded or failed—it must go on for a great many years, and he felt very strongly that if it failed in whole or in part, and we wore faced by an emergency, the right hon. Gentleman would not have done the country or the patriotism of its people justice if through the operation of this Bill he had thrown away the obligations of the Militia Ballot Act. He was not going on that occasion to advocate a compulsory system of military training although he was strongly in favour of it. If they were to look at the cases of Guernsey and Jersey the Committee would see that there they had the operation of the Militia Ballot. In Guernsey they got three times the Volunteers they wanted. Why? Because a kind of Militia Ballot Act was in force, and every employer of labour and every employee knew the fact and faced it. Therefore the people came forward as Volunteers rather than wait to be compelled. He appealed to any hon. Gentleman who knew the facts to say whether it was not the case that Guernsey could to-day get three times the number of Volunteers they wanted. That was not in consequence of a system of militarism, but it was a purely democratic policy which every Colony in the Empire either had or was about to place in its constitution. Australia was even now making it compulsory for every man to serve. He was convinced that in this matter the right

  519
  hon. Gentleman had made a mistake, and, although he thought it was too late, he heartily supported the Amendment.
  MR. ARTHUR LEEasked whether the Volunteer Act of 1863 would apply to the Territorial Force when the Volunteer Force disappeared.
  *MR. HALDANE: No, but other provisions of the same nature will.
  *SIR CHARLES DILKEpointed out that a large number of the provisions of the Militia Acts alluded to a different kind of Militia from that which was now in existence. There used to be two kinds of Militia, a general Militia and a local Militia. The local Militia had ceased to exist. The Militia Acts were therefore inapplicable in every particular to the Militia as it existed to-day. It was at one time proposed to repeal all the Acts relating to the local Militia as being obsolete, but that was not done and large portions of them were still in force although they did not apply to the present force. It was the Act of 1802 which proposed to establish a local Militia which had been described as a respectable military force under the landed proprietors of a district. Under the later Act it would be found that there was a provision by which the overseers out of parish rates had to pay half the sum currently charged for a substitute in cases of persons not possessing property of £500, and a description was given of the persons who should have the opportunity of providing substitutes. Since boards of guardians were established that system had ceased to exist. A great many of the provisions of those Acts could no longer be put in force in regard to the existing Militia, and therefore they could not be put into force in regard to the Territorial Army which it was proposed to create.
  MR. CHARLES CRAIGsaid he was afraid that he must be suffering from the incipient military lunacy alluded to by the hon. Member for Gravesend as he did not think the scheme of the Secretary for War would be a success. He did not look forward to it as being an immediate failure, because it would take many years to establish, but he believed that when it was put to a severe test, comparable with the late war in South Africa or with a great
  520
  European war, the scheme would fail as signally and totally as the other schemes which had gone before it. There was, however, at least one good point in the scheme, namely, that it did form the groundwork of a scheme of universal military service, and when the country came to its senses and saw that without a scheme of universal military service they could not consider themselves safe from any point of view it would be possible to go forward on those lines. To that extent, and from that point of view, he welcomed the Bill, but in other respects he did not think the system which the right hon. Gentleman proposed to set up would be better than the system under which they had been working for some years. Whether it would be worse was a matter upon which it would be premature for him to express an opinion, but at all events, it furnished a starting point, from which the country, when they realised what some of them had realised, what a system of makeshift the present was, could start upon a system of universal service. For these reasons he was glad that his noble friend behind him had introduced the Amendment, as it served as a distinct point at which Members could avow themselves in favour of some form of universal service and definitely state that in their opinion the voluntary system had been and always would be found wanting.
  *MR. CARLILE:supported the Amendment and said it was to be regretted that the debate must be necessarily curtailed, because a week could be usefully spent in thoroughly discussing the proposal which the Amendment involved. The Secretary of State for War had referred to the Ballot Act as inapplicable, but he was sure that the noble Lord who moved the Amendment did not desire that the Ballot Act, exactly as it stood now, should be applied in connection with the Territorial Force, but only that the right hon. Gentleman should consider whether it was possible to embody the principle in this Bill. It was the desire of everyone in the House that the Bill should be a thorough success. But it was felt that there would be a difficulty in obtaining a full establishment on the various occasions when it was needed. Therefore the noble Lord moved the Amendment to

  521
  ensure that the establishment required would be obtained if the Government at any time found it necessary to have the full strength in connection with the Territorial Force. Under the Bill those who at present were taking, and those who in the future were to take, an active part in qualifying themselves to defend their hearths and homes were subjected to certain pains and penalties. It seemed to him, however, that it was those who took no part in such matters but stood by apparently indifferent to what happened to their country in time of difficulty and stress, who should have the pains and penalties and not those who took trouble in order to qualify themselves to take part in the defence of the country. Under the proposal of the noble Lord the Government would have in time of difficulty the power to call upon every man of suitable age to take his place in assisting his fellow-citizens in the forces of the kingdom. The Amendment did not propose, as some hon. Members appeared to have thought, that the Militia Ballot Act should be put in force at once. It was only with a view of meeting an emergency which might arise that the proposal was made. In that way it would not interfere with the working of the Territorial Act or the forces raised under that Act, but would merely supplement those forces at a time of national difficulty and danger. At the present moment they were face to face with a condition of things which discouraged many from associating themselves with that which the right hon. Gentleman had submitted to the House in connection with this Bill. National prosperity alone was opposed to it, and sports and games, which seemed to take up all the thought, time, ambition, and interest of vast numbers who might qualify themselves for service in the Territorial Force, also seemed to be opposed to the people taking upon themselves any such duty. If, however, it was understood that the citizens of this country were expected to qualify themselves in this way, it could not have other than an excellent effect both physically and mentally upon the young and growing men of the country. The mere expansion of suitable provisions such as had been adumbrated would not have the effect of encouraging a love of war. He did not think that love of war was widespread in the population at all,
  522
  but there was a fear that what was called militarism would arise. Nothing could be more fatal to that spirit of militarism than the proposal of the noble Lord, and, so far from tending to foster any kind of military spirit, on every occasion when the country was threatened with a crisis or a war the Amendment would tend to the maintenance of peace, for the manifest reason that every man would be liable to be called upon, and therefore every man's interest would be in the direction of the maintenance of peace. Moreover it would constitute a protection against the difficulty which had arisen in France and Germany under their present system. There was no doubt, young men being taken from their occupations for a period of many months or for two or three years, the mere consequences of military training had the effect of killing initiative and originality in the working classes of those countries. At the present moment there was no question that the British working man was far superior to the working man in Germany or France or any other country in regard to initiative, inventive power, and enterprise generally. This proposal, which did not involve absolute military service for any considerable period, would not have any such drawback as was involved in the systems of other countries, while the physique of the population would be preserved and all their powers in the directions to which he had referred maintained to the great advantage of the industrial and other classes of the community. When they looked back upon the spirit shown by every class in the land at the time of the South African War, could they conceive for a moment that any section of society would consent to be exempt from such duties as they rightly believed ought to devolve on every able-bodied citizen in the country? Although the Amendment might not be carried that afternoon, he felt sure that the spirit and principle of the proposition would not have been placed in vain before the right hon. Gentleman, with his great and rapidly increasing knowledge of military affairs.
  *MR. MADDISONsaid he was very glad that the Secretary for War was carrying out to the full his assurances to many of them that this Bill would not be an indirect method of

  523
  getting compulsion. He could quite understand that the noble Lord and his friends opposite had some real liking for the Militia Ballot Act. The right hon. Gentleman the Member for the Forest of Dean had shown him one clause which was unrepealed.
  VISCOUNT MORPETHsaid that if the hon. Member had done him the courtesy to listen to his speech he would see that he was speaking under a total misapprehension. He had stated that the Ballot Act as it stood was archaic, and would require drastic redrafting. It was the spirit of the Militia Ballot Act which he advocated, and not the clauses.
  *MR. MADDISONsaid, with all respect to the noble Lord, he judged him by his Amendment on the Paper rather than by his speech.
  *VISCOUNT MORPETHsaid ho had expressly explained that the Militia Ballot Act should be subject to modification in the future.
  *MR. MADDISONsaid that would be a subject of separate legislation, and how could they know what modifications the noble Lord and his friends would accept or reject? Therefore, he submitted that he was within his right in reading an unrepealed clause of the Militia Ballot Act, and from that gathering something of what hon. Members were after. It was a truly appalling clause—
  "That in case any person not possessed of any estate in land, goods, or money of the clear value of £500, and who shall make oath that he is not possessed of such estate, shall be chosen by ballot to serve in the Militia for any parish, tything, or place…..the churchwardens, or overseers of the poor, of such parish, shall pay to every such person any such sum of money not exceeding one half of the current price then paid for a Volunteer."
  The clause was one long drawn out and invidious distinction.
  VISCOUNT MORPETH: May I ask which Act the hon. Member is quoting from?
  *SIR C. DILKE: The clause is unrepealed.
  *Mr. MADDISONsaid it was quite clear that if the right hon. Gentleman
  524
  were to accept the Amendment he would undoubtedly be making a very serious concession to the openly expressed desire of hon. Members for compulsion. An hon. Gentleman opposite had said he would look upon compulsory training as the triumph of the Bill into which it was introduced. On his side of the House they would regard the introduction of compulsion in any form as being reactionary and requiring vigorous resistance. He ventured to say that the right hon. Gentleman in resisting the Amendment was keeping to the voluntary character of his Bill, and for his part he should oppose the Amendment.
  COLONEL SANDYSsaid he understood that the Amendment embodied a principle of which he himself had always been very much in favour. He thought that by applying an improved Militia Ballot Act they would have very much greater power than existed at the present time for obtaining a reliable and sufficient service in time of need. The only point he would impress upon the House was that the power should not be left dormant until it was too late. They must recollect that however powerful the House of Commons might be to vote money, and to vote numbers of men, the money would be wasted, and the men would not be efficient unless time was given for training before the period of pressure came. He was speaking with knowledge of the subject, because this day fifty years ago there occurred the massacre of Cawnpore, and, as he was serving in India at that time ho had seen what these needful precautions meant in actual operation. He could quite understand the feeling of the hon. Gentleman opposite with regard to compulsory military service; but however repugnant might be the sacrifice to their preconceived notions which they might be called upon to make in order to provide an efficient defensive and fighting force, the sacrifice would be very likely to lighten what they would have to endure if, under some mistaken idea, they did not too long delay making it. Therefore, he thoroughly supported the Amendment. As the Secretary of State for War knew, he was opposed to the Bill as a whole, but he was not opposed to it in so far as it afforded a basis for legislation which would furnish the counrty with a sufficient, and to some extent properly trained force for

  525
  use in the hour of need. But why was it necessary to break down the well-recognised military lines on which the Army had been constituted?
  THE CHAIRMANsaid the hon. and

  AYES.

  Acland-Hood, RtHnSir Alex.F.

  Faber, George Denison (York)

  Randles, Sir John Scurrah

  Arnold-Forster, Rt. Hn.HughO.

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

  Remnant, James Farquharson

  Aubrey-Fletcher.Rt. Hn. SirH.

  Fardell, Sir T. George

  Roberts, S. (Sheffield, Ecclesall)

  Balcarres, Lord

  Fell, Arthur

  Rutherford, W. W. (Liverpool)

  Baldwin, Alfred

  Fletcher, J, S.

  Salter, Arthur Clavell

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

  Gardner, Ernest (Berks, East)

  Sandys, Lieut.-Col. Thos.Myles

  Banbury, Sir Frederick George

  Harrison-Broadley, H. B.

  Sassoon, Sir Edward Albert

  Barrie, H.T. (Londonderry, N.)

  Hay, Hon. Claude George

  Sheffield, Sir BerkeleyGeorge D.

  Beckett, Hon. Gervase

  Helmsley, Viscount

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

  Bignold, Sir Arthur

  Hervey.F. W.F. (BuryS. Edm'ds

  Starkey, John R.

  Bowles, G. Stewart

  Hill, Sir Clement (Shrewsbury)

  Stone, Sir Benjamin

  Bridgeman, W. Clive

  Hills, J. W.

  Talbot, Lord E. Chichester)

  Bull, Sir William James

  Houston, Robert Paterson

  Thomson, W.Mitchell-(Lanark)

  Butcher, Samuel Henry

  Hunt, Rowland

  Thornton, Percy M.

  Carson, Rt. Hon. Sir Edw. H.

  Kennaway, Rt. Hn. Sir JohnH.

  Valentia, Viscount

  Castlereagh, Viscount

  Kimber, Sir Henry

  Walrond, Hon. Lionel

  Cavendish, Rt. Hn. Victor C.W.

  King, SirHenrySeymour (Hull)

  Williams, Col. R. (Dorset, W.)

  Cecil, Evelyn (Aston Manor)

  Lee, Arthur H.(Hants.,Fareham

  Willoughby de Eresby, Lord

  Chamberlain, RtHn. J.A.(Wore.

  Liddell, Henry

  Wolff, Gustav Wilhelm

  Chaplin, Rt. Hon. Henry

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

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

  Courthope, G. Loyd

  Long, Col. CharlesW.(Evesham

  Wyndham, Rt. Hon. George

  Craig, Chas. Curtis (Antrim, S.)

  Lonsdale, John Brownlee

  Craig, Capt. James (Down, E.)

  Marks, H. H. (Kent)

  Craik, Sir Henry

  Mildmay, Francis Bingham

  TELLERS FOR THE AYES—

  Dixon-Hartland, Sir FredDixon

  Parker, Sir Gilbert (Gravesend)

  Viscount Morpeth and Mr. Carlile.

  Douglas, Rt. Hon. A. Akers-

  Parkes, Ebenezer

  Duncan, Robert(Lanark,Govan

  Percy, Earl

  NOES.

  Abraham, William (Rhondda)

  Buchanan, Thomas Ryburn

  Davies, W. Howell (Bristol, S.)

  Acland, Francis Dyke

  Burns, Rt. Hon. John

  Dewar, Arthur (Edinburgh, S.)

  Alden, Percy

  Burt, Rt. Hon. Thomas

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

  Allen, A.Acland (Christchurch)

  Buxton, Rt. Hn. SydneyCharles

  Dickson-Poynder, Sir John P.

  Allen, Charles P. (Stroud)

  Byles, William Pollard

  Dilke, Rt. Hon. Sir Charles

  Ashton, Thomas Gair

  Cairns, Thomas

  Duncan.C. (Barrow-in-Furness)

  Baker, Sir John (Portsmouth)

  Cameron, Robert

  Dunne. Major E. Martin (Walsall

  Baker, Joseph A. (Finsbury, E.)

  Carr-Gomm, H. W.

  Edwards, Frank (Radnor)

  Barker, John

  Causton, Rt. Hn. Richard Knight

  Elibank, Master of

  Barlow, Jno. Emmott (Somerset)

  Cawley, Sir Frederick

  Ellis, Rt. Hon. John Edward

  Barlow, Percy (Bedford)

  Chance, Frederick William

  Erskine, David C.

  Barry, Redmond J. (Tyrone, N.)

  Channing, Sir Francis Allston

  Essex, R. W.

  Beck, A. Cecil

  Cheetham, John Frederick

  Esslemont, George Birnie

  Bell, Richard

  Clough, William

  Evans, Samuel T.

  Bellairs, Carlyon

  Clynes, J. R.

  Everett, R. Lacey

  Benn, Sir J. Williams (Devonp'rt

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

  Fenwick, Charles

  Bennett, E. N.

  Collins, Stephen (Lambeth)

  Findlay, Alexander

  Berridge, T. H. D.

  Cooper, G. J.

  Foster, Rt. Hon. Sir Walter

  Bethell,Sir J.H.(Essex,Romf'rd

  Corbett, A. Cameron (Glasgow)

  Fowler, Rt. Hon. Sir Henry

  Bethell, T. R. (Essex, Maldon)

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

  Fuller, John Michael F.

  Billson, Alfred

  Cornwall, Sir Edwin A.

  Fullerton, Hugh

  Bowerman, C. W.

  Cory, Clifford John

  Gardner, Col. Alan (Hereford,S.)

  Brace, William

  Cotton, Sir H. J. S.

  Gibbs, G. A. (Bristol, West)

  Bramsdon, T. A.

  Cowan, W. H.

  Gill, A. H.

  Branch, James

  Craig, Herbert J. (Tynemouth)

  Gladstone, Rt. Hn. Herbert Jn.

  Brigg, John

  Crombie, John William

  Glover, Thomas

  Bright, J. A.

  Crooks, William

  Goddard, Daniel Ford

  Brocklehurst, W. B.

  Crosfield, A. H.

  Gooch, George Peabody

  Brodie, H. C.

  Crossley, William J.

  Grant, Corrie

  Brooke, Stopford

  Davies, David (MontgomeryCo.

  Greenwood, G. (Peterborough)

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

  Davies, Ellis William (Eifion)

  Greenwood, Hamar (York)

  Bryce, J. Annan

  Davies, M. Vaughan-(Cardigan

  Guest, Hon. Ivor Churchill

  gallant Gentleman was not now addressing himself to the Amendment.
  Question put.
  The Committee divided:—Ayes, 75; Noes, 261. (Division List No. 202.)

  Gulland, John W.

  M'Kenna, Rt. Hon. Reginald

  Seely, Major J. B.

  Gurdon, Sir W. Brampton

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

  Shackleton, David James

  Haldane, Rt. Hon. Richard B.

  Maddison, Frederick

  Shaw, Charles Edw. (Stafford)

  Hall, Frederick

  Mallet, Charles E.

  Sherwell, Arthur James

  Harcourt, Rt. Hon. Lewis

  Marnham, F. J.

  Shipman. Dr. John G.

  Hardy, George A. (Suffolk)

  Massie, J.

  Silcock, Thomas Ball

  Harmsworth, Cecil B. (Worc'r)

  Masterman, C. F. G.

  Smeaton, Donald Mackenzie

  Harvey, A. G. C. (Rochdale)

  Micklem, Nathaniel

  Soames, Arthur Wellesley

  Harvey, W.E. (Derbyshire,N. E.

  Molteno, Percy Alport

  Stanley, Hn. A. Lyulph (Chesh.)

  Harwood, George

  Mond, A.

  Steadman, W. C.

  Haslam, Lewis (Monmouth)

  Money, L. G. Chiozza

  Stewart, Halley (Greenock)

  Haworth, Arthur A.

  Morgan, G. Hay (Cornwall)

  Strachey, Sir Edward

  Hedges, A. Paget

  Morton, Alphcus Cleophas

  Straus, B. S. (Mile End)

  Henderson, Arthur (Durham)

  Myer, Horatio

  Summerbell, T.

  Henry, Charles S.

  Napier, T. B.

  Sutherland, J. E.

  Herbert, Colonel Ivor (Mon. S.)

  Newnes, Sir George (Swansea)

  Taylor, Austin (East Toxteth)

  Herbert, T. Arnold (Wycombe)

  Nicholson, Chas. N. (Doncast'r

  Taylor, Theodore C. (Radcliffe)

  Higham, John Sharp

  Norton, Capt. Cecil William

  Tennant, Sir Edward (Salisbury

  Hobart, Sir Robert

  Nussey, Thomas Willans

  Tennant, H. J. (Berwickshire)

  Hobhouse, Charles E. H.

  Nuttall, Harry

  Thomas, Sir A. (Glamorgan, E.

  Holland, Sir William Henry

  O'Donnell, C. J. (Walworth)

  Thomasson, Franklin

  Holt, Richard Durning

  O'Grady, J.

  Thorne, William

  Hope, John Deans (Fife, West)

  Parker, James (Halifax)

  Torrance, Sir A. M.

  Horniman, Emslie John

  Partington, Oswald

  Toulmin, George

  Horridge, Thomas Gardner

  Paul, Herbert

  Trevelyan, Charles Philips

  Hudson, Walter

  Pearce, Robert (Staffs., Leek)

  Ure, Alexander

  Idris, T. H. W.

  Pearce, William (Limehouse)

  Walton, Sir John L. (Leeds, S.)

  Illingworth, Percy H.

  Pease,Herbert Pike( Darlington

  Walton, Joseph (Barnsley)

  Jacoby, Sir James Alfred

  Philipps,J. Wynford (Pembroke

  Ward, John(Stoke-upon-Trent)

  Johnson, John (Gateshead)

  Pirie, Duncan V.

  Warde, Col. C. E. (Kent, Mid.)

  Johnson, W. (Nuneaton)

  Pollard, Dr.

  Wardle, George J.

  Jones, Sir D. Brynmor (Swansea

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

  Waring, Walter

  Jones, Leif (Appleby)

  Price, Robert John(Norfolk, E.)

  Wason, Eugene (Clackmannan)

  Jones, William (Carnarvonshire

  Priestley, Arthur (Grantham)

  Wason, John Cathcart(Orkney)

  Jowett, F. W.

  Pullar, Sir Robert

  Waterlow, D. S.

  Kearley, Hudson E.

  Radford, G. H.

  Watt, Henry A.

  Kekewich, Sir George

  Rainy, A. Rolland

  Weir, James Galloway

  Kitson, Rt. Hon. Sir James

  Raphael, Herbert H.

  White, George (Norfolk)

  Laidlaw, Robert

  Rea, Russell (Gloucester)

  White, J. D. (Dumbartonshire)

  Lamb, Ernest H. (Rochester)

  Rea, Walter Russell (Scarboro'

  White, Luke (York, E.R.)

  Lambert, George

  Rees, J. D.

  Whitehead, Rowland

  Lamont, Norman

  Richards, Thomas (W.Monm'th

  Whitley, John Henry (Halifax)

  Lehmann, R. C.

  Richards, T.F.(Wolverh'mpton

  Whittaker, Sir Thomas Palmer

  Levy, Maurice

  Robertson, SirG.ScottfBradf'rd

  Wiles, Thomas

  Lewis, John Herbert

  Robertson, J. M. (Tyneside)

  Williams. J. (Glamorgan)

  Lloyd-George, Rt. Hon. David

  Robson, Sir William Snowdon

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

  Lough, Thomas

  Runciman, Walter

  Wilson, John (Durham, Mid.)

  Luttrell, Hugh Fownes

  Russell, T. W.

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

  Lyell, Charles Henry

  Rutherford, V. H. (Brentford)

  Wilson, W. T. (Westhoughton)

  Lynch, H. B.

  Samuel, Herbert L. (Cleveland)

  Winfrey, R.

  Macdonald, J. R. (Leicester)

  Samuel, S. M. (Whitechapel)

  Yoxall, James Henry

  Macdonald,J.M. (Falkirk B'ghs

  Schwann, Sir C.E. (Manchester)

  Mackarness, Frederic C.

  Scott,A.H.(Ashton under-Lyne

  TELLERS FOR THE NOES—Mr. Whiteley and Mr. J.A.

  Macnamara, Dr. Thomas J.

  Scott, Sir S. (Marylebone, W.)

  Pease.

  Macpherson, J. T.

  Sears, J. E.

  M'Callum, John M.

  Seaverns, J. H.

  M'Crae, George

  Seddon, J.

  *MR. ASHLEYmoved to insert the words "Provided that no man shall be enlisted for any duties for which he is not physically fit." He thought that any man who had had experience with the Regulars and the Auxiliary Forces would agree that such a proviso was necessary. He desired to elicit from the right hon. Gentleman some explanation as to the standard of physical fitness he proposed to impose. Was the standard of physical fitness to apply to foreign or home service?
  528
  It seemed to him that the Territorial Force would be of very little use unless they were allowed to use it oversea. There was Clause 12, which the right hon. Gentleman on the previous day had attempted to minimise; but perhaps later on it might be found to be of more use in time of need than the Party opposite seemed to think. What standard did the right hon. Gentleman propose to set up to ensure that the Territorial Force would be fit to defend the country or to repel a

  529
  serious raid? He had had the privilege of serving His Majesty in the Militia Forces, and although he found that all ranks were animated with the greatest desire to defend their country, there wore men in the force who were not fit to go on active service, either at home or abroad. The country ought not to be asked by any War Minister to pay for a man who was not able to perform all the duties required of him. Under the present regulations there was some excuse, because there was a great temptation to keep within the ranks men who did not come up to the required physical standard, and they were obliged to permit a certain number of men in the ranks who were not able to carry out their duties efficiently. He might be asked why he wished to impose this severe test when he had not, in regard to the Army Annual Bill, made any such proposals with respect to the Regular Forces. His reply to that would be that the soldier in the Regular Forces lived all the year round in barracks under the eye of his company officer or colour-sergeant and medical officer. Frequently the Regular soldier went out for training and took part in manœuvres, and any serious ailment must come to the notice of the medical officer. But the Territorial soldier would only be for fifteen days in the year under the eye of the military authorities, and if any serious physical infirmity existed he would go to his own medical adviser, and knowledge of it would not come to the ears of the military authorities. Unless some special regulations were issued there was no reason to suppose that those who were medically unfit would ever be found out. He suggested that there should be a reasonably strict medical examination on enlistment and that there shall be another on embodiment. If a Territorial soldier missed two consecutive trainings of fifteen days each he should be compelled to undergo a medical examination. If a man missed the training for two years, the presumption would be that his absense was duo to some physical defect, and therefore an examination by a medical officer was necessary. He had put the case with moderation, but the right hon. Gentleman had gone very much further than he had done. Talking on the efficiency certificate of the Volunteers in the past, the right hon. Gentlemen in the
  530
  course of the debate, on Wednesday last, said—
  "The certificate is of an extremely general character. A man might be old and he might be toothless. You produce the man and you get the capitation grant."
  Could there be a better justification for the Amendmant than that?
  Amendment proposed—
  "In page 8, line 14, at the end, to insert the words "Provided that no man shall be enlisted for any duties for which he is not physically fit.' "—(Mr. Ashley.)
  Amendment proposed, "That those words be there inserted."
  *MR HALDANEsaid it was true that he used the expression which the hon. Gentleman had referred to. He was then speaking of men who had got into the force, and who, remaining in it, had grown into the condition which he described. But it was not the case that with the Volunteers there was no examination. On the contrary, he believed that that examination was not altogether of an informidable character.
  *MR. ASHLEY: You said that some of the men are old and toothless.
  *Mr. HALDANE: Even the best of us became old and toothless. There was a test now, and it was intended in the future to have a test, possibly a bettor organised and more severe test than now. But the Government did not wish to lay down any such test of disability as that which the hon. Gentleman proposed. Who was to settle that a man was not physically fit? By what test of law was he to be adjudged incapable? He assumed that all the hon. Gentleman meant was to raise the question of having a standard. He agreed that there must be a standard. He did not at present tie himself as to what it was to be. There was a different standard for different corps in the Regular Army, and so there might be a different standard for different arms in the Territorial Force. Only experience could guide them as to what it should be.
  SIR HOWARD VINCENT,:referring to the return of the right hon. Gentleman the Member for Croydon, said they were

  531
  delighted to see the right hon. Gentleman, and hoped he might be able to remain during the rest of their discussions on the Army Bill. The hon. Member who moved the Amendment had fired off the old fallacies about insufficient medical inspection of Volunteers and about commanding officers accepting men in order to obtain the capitation grant. There was not a word of substance in the statement. Commanding officers of Volunteers desired for their own sake always to have the most effective and efficient men, because if they enrolled inferior and indifferent men they would receive a great reduction in the capitation grant. It should be remembered that the grant was not. 30s. but only 10s. for third-class shots and inefficient men. Volunteer recruits were not only medically examined on enrolment, but were subject to the inspection of the adjutant, who was a perfectly independent officer for purposes of recruiting, and the commanding officer could not accept men who did not comply with the War Office requirements. The recruits were always separately inspected by the inspecting officer, and if he found that the men were of insufficient physique—wholly apart from eyesight, on which the capitation grant absolutely depended—he would call upon the commanding officer and the adjutant to explain how these men of defective physique had been admitted. He knew there had been many allegations on this point, but they had never been proved in the slightest degree. There was a very much smaller number of rejections of men of the Volunteer force than of the Regulars in regard to fitness to take the field. The right hon. Gentleman the Member for Dover when Under-Secretary stated that no less than 36½per cent. of the Regular Army—men who had been enlisted for regular service—were prior to the South African campaign rejected as unfit for field service and retained at home. No such percentage as that had occurred as regards the Volunteer force, and he regretted that his hon. friend had dished up this old chestnut.
  *MR. ARNOLD-FORSTERthanked his hon. and gallant friend the Member for the Central Division of Sheffield for his kind reference to himself. He welcomed the promise given by the Secretary of State for War that this question would not
  532
  escape his notice. He did not altogether agree with his hon. and gallant friend; but he thought the mover of the Amendment went a little too far. What he asked was that the men who wore willing to leave the country should be fit to serve in time of war. Was it not going a great deal too far to say that those men were likely to be immune from those evils which overtook the men in the Regular Army? It was not fair. His hon. friend had no right to suppose that the Volunteers of the Territorial Army would be immune from the afflictions which often existed in the case of the Regular Army. His hon. friend had spoken of this question having been raised before. It had been raised before, but he would remind the Committee of the point on which inquiry was made. At the time it was urged by Members of the House that there should bean inquiry as to whether the Volunteers could be relied upon for foreign service and as to their fitness for service abroad. It was not quite a matter of physical standard as the hon. Gentleman had suggested. That had nothing to do with it. It was a question of physical fitness— whether they were of such sound health as to be able to undertake the rigours of a campaign. It did not really matter whether they fought at home or abroad. He had read an account of what took place when the French were fighting on their own soil and under conditions as favourable as ever could prevail in a country fighting for its existence. He had read nothing to lead him to suppose that a weak constitution was permissible in the case of troops fighting under such circumstances at home or anywhere else. He did not think it was unwise that the inquiry had been made. He repeated what ho had said before, that the Volunteer officers behaved in this matter with immense public spirit. The inquiry was to ascertain what was the state of preparation of the Volunteer Force, and whether they were physically fit from the point of view of active service. The Volunteer officers themselves in most cases led the way in undertaking the examination. There were 180,000 men examined. Let it not be be supposed that the examination was one which imposed a high standard, or that there was any question of demanding that they should come up to some impossible standard. The demand made

  533
  was very light. The inquiry was to ascertain whether the men between the ages of nineteen and forty-live came up to the requirements laid down, not for the Regular Army, but in the Volunteer regulations—whether the men were of sound constitution and free from organic disease; and the result was that 29,000 men were reported by their own commanding officers as not coming within that category.
  MAJOR SEELY: Will the right hon. Gentleman say how many were under age?
  *MR. ARNOLD-FORSTERsaid he could not tell the hon. Gentleman at present; the present total was over 60,000, but the question did not seem relevant to this matter. The disqualifications wore in many cases strangulated hernia and heart disease. There were many cases of men serving who really ought not to be serving at all. Owing to the assistance of the capitation grant there wore very strong reasons for retaining these men in the force under the old conditions. It did not follow that because a man had strangulated hernia he was not a first-class shot. He might be able to earn the capitation grant, and there was, therefore, a motive for retaining unfit men in the force. If the whole of the Volunteer force had been examined no less than 40,000 men would have come within this category. Was it a desirable thing to delude themselves in a matter of this kind? He admitted that what the right hon. Gentleman said yesterday put a different complexion on the matter to a certain extent. He had always believed, and he thought many of them had been led to believe, I hat among other purposes the Territorial Force would serve as a great reservoir for the expansion of the Regular Army in time of war. He had before him a speech made by the Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs who took the view which, he understood, was originally taken by the Secretary of State for War. The Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs said that in any modern war a nation required an Army capable of very large expansion; and after citing the case of Japan, he went on to ask how we were to get those, larger numbers as quickly as possible in case of war, adding that the only way
  534
  was to get them from the Volunteers, and that the Volunteers must be made to fool that their system was the national system, and that if this country was over attacked the nation would be able to use all its resources and united energies in defence of the Empire If that stood it was absolutely imperative that there should be a careful examination of the kind referred to in the Amendment. It was no answer to say that the Volunteers were examined when they joined. He thought that in some cases that, examination was somewhat perfunctory. The hon. Gentleman had spoken of the Regular Army, but if ho looked at the annual return he would find that tens of thousands of men after enlistment left the Army after two or throe years because they were unfit for active service. He thought that that was very deplorable, and he was glad to think that the right hon. Gentleman was continuing the number of medical rejections. That was the true way of avoiding the waste of the Army. But let it not be supposed that unsuitable men did not leave the Army. They did in thousands. Every military authority knew that it was not only useless but dangerous to take into the field men who were incapable of active exertion or of conforming to the modest requirements necessary in connection with inarching and manœuvres. He understood that the men were to be enlisted for a period of four years; and if they could not enforce any regular medical inspection every year during that term of four years, some steps should betaken on re-enlistment to see whether the men were physically fit. Was not that a reasonable demand? A very largo sum of money was being voted for the maintenance of the Volunteers, and unless they were capable of fighting there was no justification for maintaining them. They all knew that there were in the Volunteer force men who, although in good health when they joined the force, might not at the end of their four years service be able to undertake the hardships which might be imposed upon them. And yet the commanding officer could not get rid of such men so long as they complied with the other conditions of service regulations promulgated by the War Office, He hoped the right hon. Gentleman would carry out the indication he had given of his intention to put a very serious construction on this matter. If it was

  535
  contemplated that these men were to serve abroad, then we must take the precaution, which every other country took, of ascertaining their fitness to go abroad. It was for that reason that he would support the Amendment of his hon. friend.
  *MR. MCCRAEsaid that on the previous day he had ventured to express his regret at the absence of the right hon. Gentleman the Member for Croydon, and he wished to congratulate him on his presence in the House to-day. He could not understand what was the object of the Amendment. At the present time no Volunteer was enrolled until he had been subjected to medical examination. The right hon. Gentleman the Member for Croydon had issued the unfortunate circular as to medical examination, but to-day the right hon. Gentleman had tried to minimise the demands made therein. The objection of the Volunteers was that the test sought to be imposed on them was more severe than that applied to soldiers of the Line. What the right hon. Gentleman asked from the Volunteers was fitness for service abroad; but on his own showing to-day he asked for a test of fitness for men of nineteen years of age. But the right hon. Gentleman knew that for the Auxiliary Forces men were enlisted before they were nineteen years of age, and that if they were not recruits would not be obtained. The right hon. Gentleman had said that age did not come in at all. But age did come in, and that youths of seventeen should have the same physical fitness as men of nineteen years of age. The right hon. Gentleman had also skipped very lightly over the question of teeth, but many men were cast out on the question of indifferent teeth. The figures the right hon. Gentleman quoted were produced in rather an extraordinary way. Many commanding officers felt that the demand which the right hon. Gentleman was making on them was one which did not come within the terms of service of their men, who were enrolled for service at home, and not for active service abroad, and that therefore the demand was unconstitutional. When his regiment was in camp he himself put his men through the examination;

  AYES.

  Acland-Hood, Rt. Hn. SirAlex.F

  Anstruther-Gray, Major

  Aubrey-Fletcher.Rt Hn. Sir H.

  Anson, Sir William Reynell

  Arnold-Forster.Rt.Hn.HughO.

  Balcarres, Lord

  but they had always in camp a very large number of young recruits, and therefore the comparison was very unfair. What happened? Many of these young men did not come up to the standard of the right hon. Gentleman. But what did they do? Two days after arrival in camp they were turned out with the Regular troops for a night march, which extended to fifteen miles, and thereafter engaged at half past three in the morning in field operations without a break, but not one man of his battalion fell out. And yet many of these young men did not come up to the standard of the right hon. Gentleman the Member for Croydon. No Volunteer commanding officer would object to any reasonable standard of efficiency in so far as physical fitness was concerned, but he insisted that it should not be demanded that youths of seventeen should be subjected to the same test of physical fitness as to chest-measurement and height as men of nineteen years of age, which the right hon. Gentleman ought to impose.
  SIR GILBERT PARKER:held that the principle of examination for physical fitness should be embodied in the Bill, and not in regulations to be made under the Bill. His argument was that this Act should become part of the history of the nation, and he could not understand why the right hon. Gentleman objected to embodying in it the words of the Amendment. Presumably the regulations might be altered in many respects, but he could not see why the right hon. Gentleman should have any objection to accept an Amendment which would secure for ever a standard of physical fitness in what was to be the greatest force for our home defence.
  *MR. HALDANE:hoped that the Committee would come to a decision on this question, the discussion of which had been conducted in such a business-like fashion, in order that other important points might be fully considered.
  Question put.
  The Committee divided:—Ayes, 95; Noes, 248. (Division List No. 203.)

  Baldwin, Alfred

  Fardell, Sir T. George

  Rawlinson, JohnFrederick Peel

  Balfour,Rt. Hn. A.J.(CityLond.

  Fell, Arthur

  Remnant, James Farquharson

  Banbury, Sir Frederick George

  Fletcher, J. S.

  Roberts,S.(Sheffield, Ecclesall)

  Baring, Capt. Hn.G.(Winchester

  Forster, Henry William

  Ruthsrford, John (Lancashire)

  Barrie, H. T. (Londonderry,N)

  Gardner, Ernest (Berks, East)

  Rutherford, W. W. (Liverpool)

  Beckett, Hon. Gervase

  Gibbs, G. A. (Bristol, West)

  Salter, Arthur Clavell

  Bignold, Sir Arthur

  Hay, Hon. Claude George

  Sandys, Lieut.-Col. Thos.Myles

  Bowles, G. Stewart

  Helmsley. Viscount

  Sassoon, Sir Edward Albert

  Boyle, Sir Edward

  Hervey, F.W.F.(BnryS.Edm'ds

  Scott, Sir S. (Marylebone, W.)

  Bridgeman, W. Clive

  Hill,SirClemont(Shrewsbury)

  Seddon, J.

  Bull, Sir William James

  Hills, J. W.

  Sheffield, Sir Berkeley George D.

  Burdett-Coutts, W.

  Houston, Robert Paterson

  Smith, F.E.(Liverpool, Walton)

  Butcher. Samuel Henry

  Hunt, Rowland

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

  Carlile, E. Hildred

  Kennaway.Rt.Hon.Sir John H.

  Starkey, John R.

  Carson, Rt. Hon. Sir Edw. H.

  Kenyon-Slaney.Rt. Hon.Col.W.

  Stone, Sir Benjamin

  Castlereagh, Viscount

  Kimber, Sir Henry

  Talbot, Lord K. (Chichester)

  Cave, George

  King.Sir HenrySeymour (Hull)

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

  Cavendish, Rt. Hon. VictorC.W.

  Lee,ArthurH.(Hants,Fareham)

  Thomson,W.Mitchell- (Lanark)

  Cecil, Evelyn (Aston Minor)

  Liddell, Henry

  Thorne, William

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

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

  Thornton, Percy M.

  Chaplin, Rt. Hon. Henry

  Long, Col. Chas. W. (Evesham)

  Valentia, Viscount

  Corbett, A. Cameron (Glasgow)

  Lonsdale, John Brownlee

  Vincent, Sir Col. C. E. Howard

  Courthope, G. Loyd

  Mildmay, Francis Bingham

  Walrond, Hon. Lionel

  Craig, Chas. Curtis (Antrim,S.)

  Morpeth, Viscount

  Willoughby de Eresby, Lord

  Craig. Capt. James (Down, E.)

  Muntz, Sir Philip A.

  Wolff, Gustav Wilhelm

  Craik, Sir Henry

  O'Neill, Hon. Robert Torrens

  Wyndham, Rt. Hon. George

  Dixon-Hartland,Sir Fred Dixon

  Parkes, Ebenezer

  Younger, George

  Douglas. Rt. Hon. A. Akers-

  Percy, Earl

  Dancan, Robt. (Lanark, Govan)

  Powell. Sir Francis Sharp

  TELLERS FOR THE AYES—Mr.

  Faber, George Denison (York)

  Randles, Sir John Scurrah

  Ashley and Sir Gilbert

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

  Ratcliff,.Major R. F.

  Parker.

  NOES.

  Abraham. William (Rhondda)

  Cameron, Robert

  Findlay, Alexander

  Acland, Francis Dyke

  Carr-Gomm, H. W.

  Foster, Rt. Hon. Sir Walter

  Agnew, George William

  Causton,Rt. Hn. RichardKnight

  Fowler, Rt. Hon. Fir Henry

  Allen, A. Acland-(Christchurch)

  Cawley, Sir Frederick

  Fuller, John Michael F.

  Allen, Charles P. (Stroud)

  Chance, Frederick William

  Fullerton, Hugh

  Armstrong. W. C. Heaton

  Cheetham, John Frederick

  Gardner. Col. Alan(Hereford,S.

  Ashton, Thomas Gair

  Cherry, Rt. Hon. R. R.

  Gill, A. H.

  Baker, Sir John (Portsmouth)

  Cleland, J. W.

  Gladstone. Rt. Hn.HerbertJohn

  Baker, JosephA.(Finsbury, E.)

  Clough, William

  Glover, Thomas

  Barlow, JohnEmmott (Somerset

  Clynes, J. R.

  Goddard, Daniel Ford

  Barlow, Percy (Bedford)

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

  Gooch, George Peabody

  Barry, Redmond J.(Tyrone,N.)

  Collins, Stephen (Lambeth)

  Grant, Corrie

  Beck, A. Cecil

  Collins.Sir Wm. J. (S. Pancras)

  Greenwood, G. (Peterborough)

  Bell, Richard

  Cooper, G. J.

  Greenwood, Hamar (York)

  Bellairs, Carlyon

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

  Gulland, John W.

  Benn,SirJ.Williams(Devonp'rt

  Cory, Clifford John

  Gurdon, Sir W. Brampton

  Benn,W.(T'wrHamlets,S.Geo.

  Cotton, Sir H. J. S.

  Haldane, Rt. Hon. Richard B.

  Berridge, T. H. D.

  Cowan, W. H.

  Hall, Frederick

  Bethell,SirJ.H.(Essex, Romf'rd

  Craig, Herbert J.(Tynemouth)

  Harcourt, Rt. Hon. Lewis

  Bethell, T. R. (Essex, Muldon)

  Crombie, John William

  Hardy, George A. (Suffolk)

  Billson, Alfred

  Crooks, William

  Harmsworth, Cecil B. (Worc'r)

  Bowerman, C. W.

  Crossley, William J

  Hart-Davies, T.

  Brace, William

  Davies, David(Montgomery Co.

  Harvey, A. G. C. (Rochdale)

  Bramsdon, T. A.

  Davies, Ellis William (Eifion)

  Harvey,W. E. (Derbyshire, N.E.

  Branch, James

  Dewar, Arthur (Edinburgh, S.)

  Haslam, Lewis (Monmouth)

  Brigg, John

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

  Haworth, Arthur A.

  Bright. J. A.

  Dickson-Poynder, Sir John P. I

  Hedges, A. Paget

  Brocklehurst, W. B.

  Dilke, Rt. Hon. Sir Charles

  Hemmerde, Edward George

  Brodie, H. C.

  Duncan, C. (Barrow-in-Furness

  Henderson, Arthur (Durham)

  Brooke, Stopford

  Dunne, Major E. Martin(Walsall)

  Herbert, Colonel Ivor (Mon., S.)

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

  Edwards, Frank (Radnor)

  Herbert, T. Anold(Wycombe)

  Bryce, J. Annan

  Elibank, Master of

  Higham, John Sharp

  Buchanan, Thomas Ryburn

  Erskine, David C.

  Hobart, Sir Robert

  Burns, Rt. Hon. John

  Essex, R. W.

  Hobhouse, Charles E. H.

  Burt, Rt. Hon. Thomas

  Esslemont, George Birnie

  Holland, Sir William Henry

  Buxton,Rt. Hn.Sydney Charles

  Evans, Samuel T.

  Holt, Richard Durning

  Byles, William Pollard

  Everett, R. Lacey

  Hope. John Deans (Fife. West)

  Cairns, Thomas

  Fenwick, Charles

  Horaiman, Emslie John

  538

  539

  Hudson, Walter

  Myer, Horatio

  Spicer, Sir Albert

  Illingworth, Percy H.

  Napier, T. B.

  Stanley,Hn. A. Lyulph(Chesh.)

  Jacoby, Sir James Alfred

  Newnes, Sir George (Swansea)

  Steadman, W. C.

  Johnson, John (Gateshead)

  Nicholson,Charles N(Doncast'r

  Stewart, Halley (Greenock)

  Johnson, W. (Nuneaton)

  Norton, Capt. Cecil William

  Strachey, Sir Edward

  Jones, Sir D. Brynmor(Swansea

  Nussey, Thomas Willans

  Straus, B. S. (Mile End)

  Jones, Leif (Appleby)

  Nuttall, Harry

  Strauss, E. A. (Abingdon)

  Jones, William (Carnarvonshire)

  O'Donnell, C. J. (Walworth)

  Summerbell, T.

  Jowett, F. W.

  O'Grady, J.

  Taylor, Austin (East Toxteth)

  Kearley, Hudson E.

  Parker, James (Halifax)

  Taylor, Theodore C.(Radclide)

  King, Afred John (Knutsford)

  Partington, Oswald

  Tennant,Sir Edward(Salisbury

  Laidlaw, Robert

  Paul, Herbert

  Tennant, H. J. (Berwickshire)

  Lamb, Ernest H. (Rochester)

  Pearce, Robert (Staffs. Leek)

  Thomas,Sir A.(Glamorgan, E.)

  Lambert, George

  Pearce, William (Limehouse)

  Thomasson, Franklin

  Lamont, Norman

  Philipps,J. Wynford(Pembroke

  Torrance, Sir A. M.

  Layland-Barratt, Francis

  Pickersgill, Edward Hare

  Toulmin, George

  Lehmann, R. C.

  Pirie Duncan V.

  Ure, Alexander

  Levy, Maurice

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

  Verney, F. W.

  Lewis, John Herbert

  Price Robert John(Norfolk E.)

  Walters, John Tudor

  Lloyd-George, Rt. Hon. David

  Priestley, Arthur (Grantham)

  Walton.Sir John L.(Leeds,S.)

  Lough, Thomas

  Pullar, Sir Robert

  Ward, John (Stoke upon Trent)

  Lupton, Arnold

  Radford, G. H.

  Ward, W. Dudley (Southampton

  Luttrell, Hugh Fownes

  Rainy, A. Rolland

  Wardle, George J.

  Lyell, Charles Henry

  Raphael, Herbert H.

  Waring, Walter

  Lynch, H. B.

  Rea, Russell (Gloucester)

  Wason, Eugene( Clackmannan)

  Macdonald, J. R. (Leicester)

  Rees, J. D.

  Wason, John Cathcart(Orkney)

  Macdonald,J.M.(Falkirk B'ghs

  Richards T. F.(Wolverh'mpt'n

  Waterlow, D. S.

  Macnamara, Dr. Thomas J.

  Robertson.SirG Scott(Bradf'rd

  Watt, Henry A.

  Macpherson, J. T.

  Robertson J. M. (Tyneside)

  Weir, James Galloway

  M'Callum, John M.

  Robson Sir William Snowdon

  White, George (Norfolk)

  M'Crae, George

  Runciman, Walter

  White, J. D. (Dumbartonshire)

  M'Kenna, Rt. Hon. Reginald

  Russell, T. W.

  White, Luke (York, E.R.)

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

  Rutherford, V. H. (Brentford)

  Whitehead, Rowland

  M'Micking, Major G.

  Samuel, Herbert L.(Cleveland)

  Whitley, John Henry(Halifax)

  Maddison, Frederick

  Samuel, S. M. (Whitechapel)

  Whittaker. Sir Thomas Palmer

  Mallet, Charles E.

  Schwann, Sir C.E. (Manchester)

  Wiles, Thomas

  Manfield, Harry (Northants)

  Scott, A.H.(Ashton under-Lyne

  Williams, J. (Glamorgan)

  Marnham, F. J.

  Sears, J. E.

  Wilson, John (Durham, Mid)

  Massie, J.

  Seely, Major J. B.

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

  Masterman, C. F. G.

  Shackleton, David James

  Wilson, W. T. (Westhoughton)

  Menzies, Walter

  Shaw, Charles Edw. (Stafford)

  Winfrey, R.

  Molteno, Percy Alport

  Sherwell, Arthur James

  Mond, A.

  Shipman, Dr. John G.

  TELLERS FOB THE NOES—Mr.

  Morgan, G. Hay (Cornwall)

  Silcock, Thomas Ball

  Whiteley and Mr. J. A. Pease.

  Morse, L. L.

  Smeaton, Donald Mackenzie

  Morton, Alpheus Cleophas

  Soames, Arthur Wellesley

  *THE CHAIRMANsaid he thought the next Amendment was consequential on a previous Amendment, which had not been carried.
  *SIR CHARLES DILKEpointed out that though it might be consequential it afforded the only opportunity of asking the right hon. Gentleman what was the meaning of the new word "enlisted," and how it differed from the old word "enrolled." The word had been passed without discussion in a previous section and the Amendment could not be now pressed, but it was a word to which a good deal of objection was taken. It was a change or might be a change which might have some effect on the Volunteer Force. The Volunteers at present were enrolled, not enlisted, and ho desired to know how far it was intended to exclude,
  540
  or how far it was intended to alter the civil character of the Volunteers. The last paragraph in page 3 of the Bill, which read—
  "The recruiting for the Territorial Force both in peace and in war and defining the limits of recruiting areas,"
  might give power to use the words enlist or enroll, and to continue to enlist as well as enroll. He would like to ask the right Gentleman to consider how far it was possible to make use of this wording in recruiting for the Auxiliary Force. He begged to move.
  Amendment proposed—
  "In page 8, lines 12 and 13, to leave out the words 'enlisted by such persons and,' and to insert the word 'enrolled.' "—(Sir Charles Dilke.)
  Question proposed, "That these words be inserted."
  *MR. HALDANEsaid that the status of the territorial soldier under this Bill would not be exactly the same as the old-fashioned Volunteer. His status would be more akin to that of the Yeomanry, and came rather under the conditions attaching to the Militia than to the Volunteers. The reason why "enrolled" had not been chosen was because it was a term reserved for the somewhat loose state of things appropriate at the time when the Volunteer Force was created, and with the idea that the "enrolled" citizens should come forth on a proper signal being given. That was a condition which was very different from that to which the Volunteer Force now aspired; and therefore the word "enlisted" had been chosen as being more appropriate to the character of the force in these days.
  *SIR CHARLES DILKEsaid he would not press the point. But it came within the right hon. Gentleman's powers to vary the terms in certain cases. Only the other day, the right hon. Gentleman had said he would vary the terms of the Army name so that the regiments and battalions might be known as Volunteers and not by any new names, and therefore he ventured to press the right hon. Gentleman to say whether the word "enrolled" should be retained for the second line of Volunteers, as there was a very great predjudice in many quarters against the words "Army" and "enlistment."
  Amendment, by leave, withdrawn.
  MR. ASHLEYsaid the Amendment he now moved was to put right what he believed to be a mistake in the drafting of the Bill. According to the Bill a man could only enlist for general county service. As the Bill was drawn a man in, say, Hampshire could only go and enlist in the Hampshire force. He could not specify a particular regiment in which he desired to enlist. That seemed to him an extraordinary position to take up when in the Regular Army a man could enlist in a particular regiment, and in the Volunteers in a particular company. He only moved this Amendment formally lost the Amendment a lit tic lower down, which the right
  542
  hon. Gentleman had agreed to accept, was not in order. He begged to move.
  Amendment proposed—
  "In page 8, line 17, after the word 'enlisted,' to insert the word "for a particular corps or."—(Mr. Ashley).
  Question proposed, "That those words be there inserted.
  *MR. HALDANEsaid the form of this clause was taken from the old Militia Acts, He quite agreed that it was not quite the proper form, and if the hon. Member would withdraw this Amendment and move a subsequent Amendment of which he had given notice he would accept it.
  MR. WYNDHAMsaid that if the Government accepted the subsequent Amendment that would be for particular corps. Before that was done the Committee ought to know what the right hon. Gentleman meant by corps. He was probably aware that there was very great dissatisfaction in the Army at one time when a corps was interpreted to mean a particular body.
  *MR. HALDANEsaid in Section 190 of the Army Act there were two distinct definitions of the words corps. One was in sub-section 15 (a), and was open to the criticism just made, and the other was in sub-section 15 (b), and related entirely to the Auxiliary Forces. That was the definition they proposed to adopt, and under that definition a corps might consist of one battalion or two or three associated battalions of Auxiliary Forces. He could not make a complete plan.
  MR. WYNDHAMsaid that under that definition it would be in the power of the Crown to say that anything which they thought convenient was a corps. What he thought his hon. friend wanted to ensure was that it should be possible to enlist in a regiment or a battalion. The right hon. Gentleman might not be able to make a complete plan, but he could limit establishments so as to prevent one regiment being swollen and another being starred. He could say that a regiment should contain so many and no more. It was not right that the Government should have power to call anything they liked a corps.
  MR. ASHLEYsaid that though the Committee might be satisfied with the statement of the right hon. Gentleman they had no guarantee that in the new rules mentioned there might not be one changing the whole condition. In the Middlesex County Association area there were twenty-seven battalions. Would they all form one corps? If so, and the Territorial soldier was to be changed about from one body to another, he would be no better off if the Amendment was passed than he was before.
  MR. A. J. BALFOURthought the right hon. Gentleman would clear up the whole matter if he would tell the Committee what was not a corps.
  *Mr. HALDANEsaid that what was contemplated as a corps was a group of battalions. The 1st and 2nd Norfolks, with the Volunteer and Militia battalions, would form a corps in virtue of the definition in the Army Act. A man enlisting for a corps such as that could not be transferred to another corps, from one body defined by Royal warrant to another body so defined. In the Regulars a man could be transferred from battalion to battalion of the regiment to which he belonged. It was necessary when a particular battalion was cut up in war time, for instance. The utmost concession which the Government could make would be that a man might insist on serving in a particular corps, but not in the one particular battalion of the corps which he joined.
  *MR. ARNOLD-FORSTERsaid it might be that he was the only Member of the House who did not understand the right hon. Gentleman's reply; but what he submitted was that a person wanted to know when he had enlisted whether he was liable to be transferred. For instance, the Rifle Brigade and the 60th, each had eight, ten or twelve battalions—some in Ireland, some in England, and some in Scotland. They wore attached battalions, and came exactly within the definition; and what he understood his right hon. friend wanted to know was whether a person, having enlisted in the Territorial Army for a battalion—say in the.North Riding of Yorkshire—was liable, against his own will, to be transferred, either in time of peace
  544
  or in time of war, to another battalion in some other part of Yorkshire, though the limitation was not at present confined to a single county. They wanted to know a little more about what was intended. He could quite understand, and did not for a moment dispute, that there might be strong military reasons for making a transfer of that kind desirable, but if that was the view of the War Office they ought to know it. He thought that transfer might be very useful in time of war, but it would be profoundly unpopular in time of peace. Therefore, they ought to know a little more than what was contained in the definition which the right hon. Gentleman had read. He did not believe that any Volunteer would be one penny the wiser after he had read it twenty times. What the Volunteer wanted to know was whether he enlisted into the regiment which he named, or some other regiment to be created in the future—some corps of which he nothing at all One example would bring this matter home. He heard the other day of two corps, one of which was enlisting more men than the other. The commanding officer of one of them told him that, much to his regret, his corps was losing men because in a neighbouring corps the men were being paid as much as 5s., and even more, in order to got them, with the result that they were getting men to enlist who otherwise would have enlisted in his corps. What that indicated was that there was very great reluctance on the part of different corps to give up their men under any circumstances, whether in peace or war. He would again ask the right hon. Gentleman to tell them what was a corps at the present moment. They ought to know how it was this definition came to be used, and an answer might bring them nearer to a solution than they were at the present time.
  *THE CHAIRMANsaid they were getting into irregularity. An Amendment had been moved by the hon. Member for Blackpool, and ho understood that he was willing to withdraw it because another of his later on was likely to be accepted. If this Amendment were withdrawn he did not see why another Amendment should not be proposed raising the question of what the Government meant by the clause as it stood in reference to enlistment.
  MR. ASHLEYasked leave to withdraw his Amendment.
  Amendment, by leave, withdrawn.
  MR. WYNDHAMmoved, for the purpose of eliciting a further statement from the Secretary of State for War, an Amendment providing that a man should be enlisted "in any regiment or battalion" in a county for which an association had been established. The right hon. Gentleman had said that the word "corps" might mean two battalions of Regular infantry, a Militia battalion and a Volunteer battalion. It might mean that now, but surely it would not mean that if this Bill passed into law. Many of them desired to see those three stages kept, but this Bill abolished them. If he followed the right hon. Gentleman's intention that was not the state of affairs which he wished to create. In the second place, the right hon. Gentleman said ho meant by the word "corps" several battalions of the Territorial Force presumably in one county. That would not satisfy his hon. friend behind him, and certainly did not satisfy himself. The right hon. Gentleman had spoken of transfer and had pointed out that in time of war they transferred men in the Regular Army from one battalion to another. That might be desirable in time of war, but the question which the Committee had before them was the question of enlisting the men. As the Bill stood, without any Amendment, they could enlist for a county; that was to say, that if a roan went to the recruiting office and wished to enlist it was in the power of the authorities to post him, so to speak, to any battalion in the county. They objected to that. What they held was that the man should be able to enlist in this regiment of Yeomanry or cavalry or that battalion of infantry. He was at a loss to conceive on what grounds the right hon. Gentleman refused the Amendment when ho had it in his power to say that in the case of a popular regiment its establishment should not exceed 1,500, and that an unpopular regiment should not be less than 300. He thought it was legitimate to limit or diminish the establishment of a regiment and that where a regiment was persistently weak to say that the regiment must be disbanded. The right hon. Gentleman had these two weapons, and;
  546
  they ought to be ample to enable him to form the purely voluntary force which he was trying to make.
  *MR. HALDANEsaid that as a layman he had listened to the right hon. Gentleman speaking as a soldier, and he was very much surprised that the right hon. Gentleman had not had in mind that when a man enlisted for the regiment he enlisted for the corps and was posted to the unit. The analogy which they had got here was the exact analogy which obtained everywhere. They never did enlist for the unit. In the Yeomanry, for instance, or any other force, they never did enlist for the unit; they enlisted for the corps and were posted to the unit. The corps in the future would be the same as the corps constituted under the Army Act. They would consist of groups of battalions. For instance, they would be on a county basis, and enlistment would be by corps. The Bill provided that a man could not be transferred from one corps to another without his consent. No doubt recruits would be posted to the units to which they asked to be posted. That was intended to be done, and it was the practice in the Regular Army. The right hon. Gentleman had raised this point to have the matter elucidated, but he could not expect him to accept the Amendment, which would be wholly inconsistent with the structure of the Bill.
  *MR. ARNOLD-FORSTERsaid that a recruit was surely posted to his particular unit now—that was his particular corps. Was that what the right hon. Gentleman meant?
  *MR. HALDANEsaid ho had explained that the man enlisted for the corps.
  *MR. ARNOLD-FORSTERsaid that for many years they had enlisted, and did so now, for the 9th Lancers, the 17th Lancers, and the 8th or 10th Hussars, and he know that men in many cases enlisted for a particular regiment; but the War Office had made an arrangement altering that state of things, and very much against the will of the officers and many of the men of cavalry regiments, those cavalry regiments had been turned into a corps. It was quite a mistake to suppose that enlisting for a regiment was

  547
  unknown in the Army. For many years, for a hundred years at least, it had been the universal rule. That had been the constant and uniform practice in the Army for many years. What they wanted to know was, which practice was to prevail; was a man to enlist for a regiment, or for a number of regiments?
  THE UNDER-SECRETARY of STATE for INDIA (Mr. CHARLES HOBHOUSE, Bristol, E.)said that if a man enlisted into the Territorial Force under the County Association, say, of Norfolk, he would enlist for the part governed by that Association, and he could not be shifted out of that county against his will. He therefore could not be separated from the corps for which he had enlisted—namely, the corps of the Territorial Force belonging to the Norfolk regiment.
  SIR HOWARD VINCENTsaid the Under-Secretary for India was full of good intentions, but he had not conveyed to his mind any clear idea of the intentions of the Government as regards this Territorial Force. They were very anxious about the success of this new force. The right hon. Gentleman had no experience either of the force or of the Auxiliary Forces, except that he had distributed a few prizes, and he really must listen to those who had had experience. Anyone who knew anything of the Auxiliary Forces knew perfectly well that they would not get a single man if they enlisted for general service. If they wanted to get these men the Government ought to listen to practical experience in the matter. The Under-Secretary for India said he had dealt with the case, but that was not so, and he did not appear to understand the elements of the voluntary force. He had told them what would happen in the various regiments, and he had mixed them up. If the Under-Secretary would consult his hon. friend sitting behind him, who had served in one of the Metropolitan regiments, he would find out that he was absolutely wrong in regard to what he had said about those regiments. Did anybody suppose for a moment that the class of men who were likely to form the Territorial Force were going to join it for general service? A man generally joined a Volunteer regiment because
  548
  he happened to be connected with it by tradition. Probably he knew the Colonel and the officers, and that was the particular regiment ho was prepared to give voluntary service to, and he would not be prepared to give service to an unspecified regiment in some distant part. The right hon. Gentleman refused Amendments, and would not listen to the views of those who had had experience; under those circumstances was it likely that the Territorial Force would prove to be the success he desired? The men wished to join some definite regiment, and if they persisted in allowing a man to enlist for general county service he was afraid they would not get a single man to join.
  *MR. HALDANEsaid they did not wish to enlist the new Territorial soldier for general service, as the hon. Gentleman seemed to think. They wished to enlist a man for his corps and to post him to the battalion he chose, but, above all things, what they wished to stick to was accurate language in the Bill. Accurate language demanded that they should say that a man enlisted for a corps and was posted for the unit which was in that corps. Of course, in framing the corps for the purpose of the Territorial Force they would define the units to be associated in such a fashion as would be convenient for the purpose of enlistment and for the purpose of posting; but no idea was more remote from the mind of the Government than that a man should be enlisted for general service and posted anywhere against his will.
  LORD EDMUND TALBOT: Having posted a man, will it be in the power of the authorities to transfer him to another battalion in the same county?
  *MR. HALDANE: They never do in time of peace. In time of war such a power is considered necessary in all well-regulated military organisations.
  MAJOR SEELY:suggested that the difficulty might be met if the right hon. Gentleman would accept an Amendment to add at the end of the clause some such words as these:—"Provided always that every man shall be posted to the unit in which he desires to serve,

  549
  and shall not be transferred there from in time of peace without his consent." It applied to men of all classes. Suppose a man residing in Portsmouth enlisted in the Hampshire Infantry and wished to serve at Portsmouth, if it were possible to transfer him against his will to Bournemouth and to force him to take his drills there and run the risk of losing his employment at Portsmouth, he would probably not join the force.
  *MR. HALDANEsaid his hon. and gallant friend had expressed what he had himself said, and if it would be any comfort to the Committee to have it put in words," he had no objection to doing so. He should prefer to bring up the exact words on the Report stage. He would undertake to bring up an Amendment which would give effect to the sense of his hon. and gallant friend's suggestion.
  MR. A. J. BALFOURsaid he was glad the right hon. Gentleman had taken this course. He thought it was the right course, and he congratulated the right hon. Gentleman on the fact that there would be a Report stage for this Bill.
  MR. WYNDHAMsaid that in view of what the right hon. Gentleman had said he would ask leave to withdraw the Amendment. He understood that what had been suggested by the hon. and gallant Member for the Abercromby Division would be incorporated in the Bill.
  Amendment, by leave, withdrawn.
  *MR. McCRAEmoved to amend Sub section (b) in order to provide that enlistment should be "for a period not less than four years." He said that under the clause as drafted, after the first three years, the commanding officer would have to ask each man specifically whether he wished to re-engage, and if he reengaged he would have to be re-sworn. That would have a disturbing effect. At the present time a Volunteer served for three years, and could remain for such length of time as he liked, subject to certain notice of his intention to retire. He was quite sure that the provisions in the clause practically making an annual re engagement necessary after the first three years, would en-
  550
  courage men to resign rather than to continue in the service. Human nature was human nature, and they had an example of what this system led to in the three years' enlistment of Mr. Brodrick. At the end of the three years the soldier was to have an opportunity of re-engaging, and the consequence was that hardly a man after the three years did reengage. He felt that if the right hon. Gentleman adhered to the clause as at present drafted he would put a great obstacle in the way of maintaining the numbers in the different battalions. He could not understand why the words which he proposed to omit should have been introduced. It seemed to be entirely a piece of red tape. He hoped the right hon. Gentleman would look into the matter. It was most essential that some modification should be made in the clause He begged to move.
  Amendment proposed—
  "In page 8, lines 21 and 22, to leave out the words, 'such a period as may be prescribed, not exceeding,' and to insert the words, 'a period of not less than.' "—(Mr. McCrae.)
  Question proposed, "That the words proposed to be left out stand part of the question."
  *MR. HALDANEsaid his hon. and gallant friend's proposal was inconsistent with the object of the Bill. They were aiming at something much more thorough going than the Volunteer Force as at present constituted. They wished to make the position of the Territorial soldier more akin to that of the Regular soldier, and they had taken as their type the Yeomanry. The responsibility of the Territorial soldier would be greater than that of the Volunteer. Therefore they thought it right that a man should know at the end of his time that he was entitled to his discharge, and that it should be open to him to say whether he would go on or not. Moreover, it was also proposed that a man should be able to go into a Reserve, in which he would get less training, but would still be available for rejoining his battalion in case of war. He did not share his hon. and gallant friend's fears.
  MR. WYNDHAMsaid he would like to adduce one practical reason against

  551
  the Amendment. In the Auxiliary Forces there was sometimes a difficulty as to what should be done with a non-commissioned officer who had committed no fault, although he was not the best man for the post. While he might be damaging the troops, they could not get rid of him without causing a feeling of injustice. But they could without hurting his feelings say that they were not going to accept his re-engagement. On that ground he was against the Amendment.
  SIR HOWARD VINCENTsaid he did not agree with the right hon. Gentleman the Member for Dover. He thought what had fallen from the hon. Member for East Edinburgh had great force in it. The less formality proposed in connection with the Territorial Army the better chance of its success. He could not agree with the statement that there was the slightest difficulty in getting rid of a non commissioned officer who was not fit for his post. They could get rid of him by a friendly word without hurting his feelings. The regulation was perfectly clear as to the age limit. The maximum age limit, which was never departed from in the Volunteers, was fifty-five, and j the rule for officers was fifty-eight.
  AN HON. MEMBER: After thirty-eight years service.
  SIR HOWARD VINCENTsaid that the ordinary Volunteer could not serve beyond fifty-five years of age. Did the hon. Gentleman think that a man could go on serving till the day of judgment? He asked the right hon. Gentleman to accept the advice of the hon. Member behind him not to hamper the Territorial Army with all these restrictions, which seemed to be dictated by a desire to make it an impossible force.
  *MR. MCCRAEsaid he was very sorry that his right hon. friend had not accepted his Amendment, which was intended to perfect the machinery of the Bill. But as both Front Benches were against it, he begged leave to withdraw the Amendment.
  Amendment, by leave, withdrawn.
  MR. COURTHOPEmoved an Amendment providing that a man who had served his four years' term should be
  552
  able to re-engage from year to year rather than for a further period of four years. From practical experience he was sure there would be great difficulty about a re-engagement for four years, or for any period of a definite character beyond one year. A man was always pleased when he got to the end of the period of three or four years for which ho had enrolled; and would not re-engage except from year to year. He thought it was particularly important that this question should be considered, because these old soldiers—he did not mean old men, but soldiers of experience—ought to be kept if possible, as they stiffened and strengthened the company, and nothing should be done to discourage them from re-engagement from year to year. Moreover, the system of re-engagement from year to year facilitated the getting rid of non-commissioned officers who were doing no good. It would be very easy to draw up a form of oath which would obviate re-attestation on re-engagement for one year. He begged to move.
  Amendment proposed—
  "In page 8, line 24, to leave out from the beginning to the word 'and' in line 2", and insert the words 'may, on the conclusion of his engagement, be reengaged from year to year.' "—(Mr. Courthope.)
  Question proposed, "That the words proposed to be left out stand part of the clause."
  *MR. HALDANEsaid that the hon. Member had not noticed that the words of the clause permitted what he desired to be done. These words were that every man enlisted under this part of the Act "shall be enlisted to serve for such a period as may be prescribed, not exceeding four years, reckoned from the date of his attestation." There was nothing to prevent a man re-engaging from year to year, or for two years. He wished, however, to leave the period of re-engagement open. If a man would re-engage for a period of four years, he was far more valuable as a reserve in making their mobilisation arrangements. The Amendment of the hon. Gentleman would deprive the Government of that latitude, and for that reason they wished to keep the clause as it stood.
  COLONEL, E. WILLIAMSthought the words of the Amendment would be more useful than the words of the clause as it stood.
  VISCOUNT HELMSLEYsaid after their first period of service they would not get men to reengage for more than a year, and it would be most disastrous if the men were compelled to re-engage for four years. In the Yeomanry they had had experience of re-engagements from year to year, and they had no difficulty in getting the men to do so, if they had not to sign a paper, and take the oath again. He pressed the right hon. Gentleman to accept the Amendment, which he thought would be a safeguard.
  MR. WYNDHAMhoped that the right hon. Gentleman would not maintain the attitude he had taken in regard to the Amendment. He thought it was for Parliament to decide what was the best period for re-engagement. With all due respect to the Army Council, he did not think the Council wore in a position to know what was best for each member of the Territorial Force. If there was a rule laid down that four years should be the period of re-engagement, the country would lose the services of a great many men whom it was desirable to retain, while a great many would be retained in the force for four years of whom it was better to get rid. The safe plan ought to be adopted of re-engagement for one year, leaving the matter to the commanding officer.
  MR. COURTHOPEsaid he wished to call the attention of the right hon. Gentleman to the fact that this point in the Bill was the one of which the rank and file in the Volunteers were afraid. There were a great many men in the Volunteers who hoped to go on serving their country for a long time, and this was the one thing which they had picked out of the Bill of which they went in fear. He therefore did not think that they would be satisfied with the right hon. Gentleman's announcement that power was taken to make regulations.
  *MR. HALDANEsaid that power was taken to make regulations prescribing an alternative period, and they would be
  554
  made before the men were asked to serve under them.
  COLONEL R. WILLIAMS:did not think that the declaration of the right hon. Gentleman would satisfy the Volunteers. They did not want to come under the Act until they knew what its conditions were. They were willing to serve for four years, but they wanted at the end of that period to go on from year to year, and they did not want one Army Council to say that they should go on for four years, another to say they should go on for three, another two, and another one year. This was a very important matter, and before the Bill was passed they ought to know what the arrangements were to be.
  *MR. HALDANEsaid the regulations would be published. Alterations in them might be required after a time due to altered social conditions or other circumstances, and he thought it would be an act of unwisdom to tie the hands of the War Office so as to prevent them from making a change.
  MR. LUTTRELLurged the right hon. Gentleman to reconsider his decision, as he thought the Amendment would be desirable.
  MR. WYNDHAMassured the right hon. Gentleman that all that had been said about the feeling of the Volunteers was equally true of the Yeomanry in this matter. Was the position taken up by the right hon. Gentleman a consistent one in regard to the penalties to be inflicted on a man leaving before his four years had expired? Had the right hon. Gentleman not been disposed to be too lenient, and would it not be better that a man should come in for four years and look that far ahead and then go on from year to year? There were a number of reasons which might prevent a man after four years from binding himself in advance for a longer period than a year, and he could not see what was the use of the right hon. Gentleman's insisting upon four years when those who had knowledge and were interested in the Auxiliary Forces would tell him that he would get more men under a year to year system than by binding them for four years.
  *COLONEL HERBERTsuggested that the right hon. Gentleman should on Report bring up I the clause in such a form that it would allow of re-enlistment for four years or alternatively from year to year. That was what hon. Gentlemen wished, and he thought there would be a great advantage in having that elasticity. If a man had served four years he was undoubtedly worth keeping, and therefore they should make the regulations so elastic that they would induce him to stay on.
  MR. ACLANDsaid the provision in the Yeomanry Act was in the exact words of the clause as proposed by his right hon. friend and re-enlistments under that Act were j from year to year. He had in his hand the Yeomanry form of declaration for re-enlistment, and it was simply a declaration in regard to service from year to year for three years, and that was done in exactly the same words as were proposed in this Bill; so that there need not be any fear that the Yeomanry, at all events, would have their conditions of service altered in any way.
  MR. ASHLEYsaid the speech of the hon. Gentleman afforded the strongest reason for importing into the Bill some such words as were suggested. Similar words had acted very excellently in the case of the Yeomanry, and they were therefore desirous of having the conditions of re-enlistment of that force extended to the Territorial Army. The hon. Member had said that the Yeomanry need not be afraid that their conditions of service would be altered; but surely, under the Bill as it at present stood, the regulations might be changed. As they found something which seemed to meet the case of the Yeomanry, and was satisfactory to the Army Council and the Government, why should they not embody it in the Bill?
  *MR. HALDANEsaid he would further consider the matter before the Report stage. As at present advised, he thought the Yeomanry form the best, but if he could express the substance of the desire expressed by the Committee he would do so. He did not want to tie his hands, however, and it was understood that a
  556
  man had the option of choosing his period of service.
  MR. COURTHOPEsuggested that ho should withdraw the Amendment and move the one suggested by the hon. Member for Monmouth to insert the words "or alternatively from year to year." If the right hon. Gentleman could see his way to accept that he would immediately save the time of the Committee by withdrawing his Amendment.
  *MR. HALDANE:was not sure that he could accept that, and thought it was better to leave the matter over. He would consider the matter between this and the Report stage. It was not possible to give an undertaking, but if he could arrive at the substance of what the Committee wished he would do it. He did not, however, want to tie his hands in regard to words which might turn out to be wrong.
  MR. WYNDHAMasked whether they were to understand that a man under the control of the Army Council was to have the option of re-engaging.
  *MR. HALDANEsaid the man would have the option, but for what periods he did not know. He did not quite see how he could work it, but it was understood that a man was to have the option; but ho wanted the latitude to have these different periods. The matter was not so easy as it looked, but he would take time to consider it.
  MR. COURTHOPEasked whether one of the alternative periods of service would be from year to year.
  Mr. HALDANEwas understood to assent.
  Amendment, by leave, withdrawn.
  SIR HOWARD VINCENTmoved to omit from sub-section (c) the words "provided that a soldier on re-engagement should make the prescribed declaration before a Justice of the Peace or an officer. "He thought this was an Amendment which the Secretary of State might easily accept. There was no advantage in repeated declarations on oath before a Justice of the Peace. The man had been

  557
  sworn in, and that was quite sufficient to carry him to the end of his service, and there was no use in lugging him off' to the police court or the county court to make him take the oath again.
  Amendment proposed—
  "In page 8, line 27, to leave out from the word ' term' to the end of subsection."—(Sir Howard Vincent.)
  Question proposed, "That the words proposed to be left out stand part of the clause."
  MR. ACLANDpointed out that a man in the Territorial Force would not enlist for an indefinite but for a definite period, and therefore the declaration he made on taking the oath and attesting for the first time could not be indefinitely extended to cover the whole period for which he might serve, although it might cover the period for which he enlisted. That was the whole point, and to provide for a reattestation was not lugging a man before a police or county court, because he could at any time go through the proceeding before an officer of his own unit. That could be done at any time during his last term of service, when the men were in camp and the junior subaltern came round to their tents. It was not a difficult or complicated formality, and nothing was more simple. It was desirable in order that a man should be made to think, and not drift on from year to year as many men wore allowed to do. The man was engaged for a definite period, and his service should not be allowed to extend beyond that period without a formality of this nature, which was of the simplest kind.
  MR. ASHLEYsaid that the Yeomanry were at present re-engaged without all these formalities, and if it was possible in the case of the Yeomanry why should it not be possible in the case of the Territorial Army,
  SIR HOWARD VINCENTsaid it had been stated that there was no fresh declaration from year to year.
  *MR. HALDANEsaid he had a copy of the declaration. The arrangement was that when the Imperial Yeoman reengaged he re-engaged for the period of—
  558
  whatever it might be—and then came the declaration—
  "I do declare that I will faithfully serve. His Majesty, his heirs, and successors for a further period of one year from the end of ray current term of engagement in the Imperial Yeomanry in any part of the United Kingdom for the defence of the same provided my services should so long be required."
  SIR HOWARD VINCENTsaid it was not worth pressing, but he might say that anything in the way of unnecessary formalities would prevent, in many cases, men re-engaging, and that if they chose to insist on these formalities they must take the responsibility of so doing.
  Amendment, by leave, withdrawn.
  SIR HOWARD VINCENTmoved to omit the sub-section providing for the payment of a sum not exceeding £5 on discharge by the Territorial soldier. He objected to the man who voluntarily undertook the defence of his country being fined. If a £5 fine had boon inflicted on a man who did not enlist, that would have been a sensible provision. Judge Bryn Roberts, for many years a well-known Member of the House, once stated that for every man killed in battle he would have one civilian executed—that that, in his opinion, would be the best way of preserving peace. Ho certainly thought that the man who did not enlist should be fined. He begged to move.
  Amendment proposed—
  "In page 8, to omit lines 40 and 41."—(Sir Howard Vincent.)
  Question proposed, "That the words proposed to be left out stand part of the clause."
  *MR. HALDANEsaid he was surprised that the hon. and gallant Gentleman should have made this Motion, for nobody knew better that the subsection introduced nothing which was not an existing practice in Volunteer corps. The hon. and gallant Gentleman knew that when a man joined a corps it took security from him that if he left he should give back some part of the expense incurred in his training. Every man who joined was bound by the rules of the corps, and a scale was usually drawn up under which, if

  559
  a man who had only boon a year in the corps loft it, he had to pay more than the man who had served longer, because the loss was greater. The payment was by way of compensation to the public for the money spent on the man's training. No scale had been put in here, because it required a good deal of thinking out, but it was proposed to make a scale by regulation, under which a little only would be taken from the man who had served a long time, and more from the man who had served only a short time—in other words, to carry out a system which was familiar to Volunteer corps to-day. Power would, however, be taken to remit or reduce the payment in special circumstances. Whore, for instance, a man had to leave the force for family or other good reasons, or where he had to remove from one part of the country to another, it would be very hard on him to be called on to pay.
  LORD WILLOUGHBY DE ERESBYsaid this was a most important point when read in conjunction with the rest of the clause, it being subsequently provided that a man who was disobedient or misconducted himself was to be discharged. Hence the sub-section placed a premium on disobedience, because if a man was hard up—and there were many who would join the Territorial Force to whom £5, or even £2, would be a consideration—he would have an easy way of getting out of paying by not doing what he was told. If the Territorial Force was to be a useful force it was essential that there should be some discipline; and while he agreed with a man being fined for leaving before his term had finished, he also thought the right hon. Gentleman must make it clear that when a man was discharged for disobedience, the corps should have some claim to getting the fine out of him.
  SIR HOWARD VINCENTsaid the payment now made under the civil contract between the commanding officer and the man was not for the expense of training, but to recoup the cost of the uniform supplied to him. The man was bound to serve a certain time or pay a certain sum of money, but the contract was a very elastic one, and it was made with the commanding officer, a man the Volunteer knew and had confidence in.
  560
  To leave the matter to the Army Council or Territorial Association was quite a different thing. If it were left to the right hon. Gentleman.himself, he would have no objection, but they all knew he was here to-day and gone to-morrow and they could not expect to have a successor so genial and able.
  COLONEL R. WILLIAMShoped the Amendment would not be pressed; he was quite certain, from what he knew of Volunteers, that they must have some sort of pecuniary fines.
  Question put, and negatived.
  Amendment proposed—
  "In page 8, line 40, to leave out the words' His Majesty,' and insert the words, 'the association for the county for which he was enlisted.' "—(Mr. Haldane.)
  Question proposed, "That the words proposed to be left out stand part of the Clause."
  SIR HOWARD VINCENTpointed out that it was under the commanding officer of the corps that the Volunteer was enrolled. The county association had no individual knowledge of him, and probably it would only meet once in six months. If the man paid the £5, thy unit to which ho belonged ought to have the money.
  MR. HALDANEsaid under the Bill the county association would manage all the business, and they should have the cash with which to do it.
  LORD BALCARRESthought the money ought to go to the particular unit to which the man belonged. The right hon. Gentleman ought not to merge all these battalions into the entity of the County Association. The County Association in the West Riding might have twenty or thirty battalions; the County Association of London would have twenty-seven. He thought the money from these fines ought to be credited to the individual unit from which the men resigned.
  VISCOUNT VALENTIAsaid that in the case of the Yeomanry and Militia the fines invariably went to the regimental coffers, and he was quite sure that it would be to the advantage of the various

  561
  regiments that the same system should obtain in the Territorial Army. If a man broke his engagement the fine which he paid ought to go to the advantage of the unit to which he belonged rather than to the association.
  MR. ACLANDsaid the Bill proposed to reform the system of administration, and in the Territorial Army, instead of the commanding officers being responsible for the administration, it would be the County Association. The loss would not be to the particular corps when a man left, but to the association, and, therefore, the money to make good that loss should go to the association. The association which had to provide the money for grants had a right to receive the money paid in fines.
  Question put, and negatived.
  Proposed words there inserted.
  *MR. ASHLEYmoved to leave out the words 'five pounds,' and insert the words ' in any particular case the sum there for specified in the schedule to the Act.' It had been decided, ho said, that a fine should be levied, and they had to consider what the amount of the fine should be. He had placed an Amendment to the schedule on the Paper to substitute for the fine of £5 a sliding scale. If a man left within one year after his attestation, he should be liable to a fine of £4; if within two years, £3; if after two years and within throe, £2 if after three years or any time after he had re-engaged (they knew that there was to be re-engagement, from year to year), £1. He thought that was common sense, as surely a man who had seen three years service to the State ought to be able to leave under easier circumstances than the man who left after three, six, or nine months service. The man who left so soon had put the State to considerable expense and trouble. The man who had served five or six or ten years ought to be able to go out on very easy terms. Therefore, on the ground of justice ho asked the Committee to consider his proposal, which made a difference between the man who had served a short time and the man who had served for a considerable length of time. With a sliding scale of fines, men would be induced probably to stay on longer
  562
  with the corps in order to reduce the amount of the fine to be paid; it would in reality act as a sort of bonus to continue with the Territorial Army. If the schedule which ho suggested were put in the Bill, it would act as a guide | to the local associations as to what scale of fines they should exact. After all, it was purely permissive; they had the power to remit fines altogether or partially. By his plan, they would get uniformity all over the country. The County Associations would turn to the Act, see what Parliament considered to be approximately the right amount, and then take action upon it. If they simply put £5 in the Bill, they might have one County Association fining practically up to the limit, and over the border another County Association imposing practically no fine at all. That was not at all a sound system, and it might create bad feeling between the men of one County Association and the men of another. He thought that was very much to be deprecated. With regard to the sliding scale which he suggested, he had consulted a number of Volunteer officers in reference to it, and it was framed on the advice they had given from their practical experience. What he urged was that the man who had served four, five, six, or ten years should not be liable to be fined to the same extent as a man who had only served six months.
  Amendment proposed—
  ''In page 8, line 41, to leave out the words, 'five pounds,' and to insert the words, 'in any particular case the sum there for specified in the Schedule to the Act' "— (Mr. Ashley.)
  Question proposed, "That the words 'five pounds' stand part of the clause."
  *MR. HALDANEsaid this was a matter which had to be dealt with by regulations. There were different arms and different corps, which stood on a different footing. For instance, some of the corps required higher training. In the Clyde Corps of Engineers the fine of £5 always remained £5, whether the time was long or short, because the training was such a very important matter. They took the view that the longer a man was trained, the greater was his value to the State. Or, they might take the instance of the cost of training cavalry, which was greater than that of training infantry.

  563
  They had to distinguish between these j cases and it was essentially a matter to be | dealt with by regulation and not by a rigid schedule such as the hon. Member would put into the Bill. In the circumstances, he preferred that the matter should be dealt with by regulation rather than by putting anything into the Bill.
  SIR HOWARD VINCENTthought there was good sense in what the Secretary for War had said, that the matter should be dealt with by regulation and not by the Bill. If a schedule were put into the Bill' it could not be altered except by legislation. He pointed out that the money was paid not in respect of training but with regard to clothing. That was a comparatively small matter. He noticed that the Secretary for War spoke of the fine as a recompense for the cost of training; but that was not so; it was a reimbursement for the cost of providing a man with a uniform, and the fine should in amount recognise that the value of the uniform became less year by year. It was essential that there should be a sliding scale.
  CAPTAIN CRAIGsaid the remarks made by the Secretary for War upon this point seemed to be at variance with the attitude he took up yesterday. Was the scale to be prescribed by the association, or by regulations issued by the War Office, or by the House of Commons each year? How could anyone who wished to join the Territorial Force ascertain under what scale ho was enlisting? He would also like to know if that scale could be altered at a moment's notice. The Amendment laid down exactly what a man would have to pay if he desired to resign. He knew of nothing more injurious than a system which compelled men to remain in a force when they would prefer to pay something in order to be released from their undertaking. Many hon. Members who had spoken had pointed out the difficulty which would be experienced under this scheme of retaining in the Territorial Force men of the Militia class. Those were just the kind of men who would find it difficult to pay a heavy fine. If the Territorial Force was to be recruited from the old Militia class of men—who must necessarily from the backbone of any such schome— it was absolutely necessary to make
  564
  the conditions to suit that class. Those men were drawn mostly from the working classes and they were not prepared to pay such a large fee as would be exacted by the Secretary of State for War. He intended to support the Amendment.
  COLONEL HERBERThoped that in the framing of regulations the principle of a sliding scale in proportion to length of service would be accepted. He had on the Paper a similar Amendment to that which had been moved by the hon. Member for Blackpool, and ho was in entire agreement with him upon the point. He hoped the Secretary of State for War or the Financial Secretary to the War Office would be prepared to announce that they accepted the proposal. There certainly ought to be a sliding scale under which every man would know what he would be called upon to pay if he wanted to leave the corps.
  LORD BALCARRESsupported the proposal for a scale in lieu of a lump sum, and reminded the Committee that a man would be under further penalty if he did not deliver up his equipment in good condition. The schedule would not deprive the association of discretion, but it would give the local authority an indication of the intention of Parliament. He did not think that the Secretary for War should be altogether a dictator by these regulations. Parliament should not divest itself of responsibility in this important matter. The question had aroused considerable interest amongst Volunteers. He differed entirely from his hon. friend who said that the fine was intended to recoup the loss in training. He did not look at it from that point of view at all. He thought the fine was intended as a deterrent both on thoughtless enlistment and on capricious leaving of a corps. While he thought some fine was right and necessary, ho strongly disapproved of its being put down at £5 subject to remission. A man who might commit the military offence of leaving a corps without proper or adequate notice would not be comforted by the knowledge that the county association, or the officer appointed by the association, would be entitled to reduce the sum to a nominal figure—say, a halfpenny. If £5 were put in the Bill, that

  565
  would be taken as the indication given by the Government of what the line was to be. The amount was too large. He could give scores of cases in which men in mining counties had been obliged to leave their regiments on account of having to go to other districts for work. If a man who had to migrate in order to follow his trade was to be subject to a fine of £5, it seemed to him that it would put a certain check on the man's anxiety to enlist in a corps. He did not believe the knowledge that there were restrictions and exemptions would bring particular comfort to that man. He believed that nine out of ten Volunteers, if asked what was the condition on which they might leave a corps, would say that it was a fine of £b. He was strongly in favour of a sliding scale, but he was not wedded to the figures in' the scale which had boon submitted.
  COLONEL R. WILLIAMSbelieved the fine of £5 would frighten young men, especially in the agricultural districts, from joining the Volunteers. It would be no use telling a man that the tine would be very much less. It would be very difficult to get it out of his head that the fine was £5. He suggested that an Amendment might be introduced providing that the fine should be such sum as was prescribed in a sliding scale under which the maximum should not exceed £4. Ho would like to have the sliding scale in the Bill.
  MR. MADDISONthought they were all agreed in accepting the principle of a sliding scale. What they should consider was how it was to be carried out. There were some hon. Members who thought it should go in to the Bill, and others who wished it to go in to the rules. It appeared to him that if it were put in the Bill, they could not provide for the differences between the various corps which had been referred to by the right hon. Gentleman. If it were put in the schedule, they could make allowance for those differences.
  MR. ASHLEYsaid the local associations would consider that. They could reduce the fine to a shilling.
  MR. MADDISONsaid he could not help feeling that there would be more
  566
  freedom if the various corps were allowed to make their own regulations.
  MR. SHACKLETONsaid it seemed to him that the Government were proposing something which would be a deterrent to young men joining the Volunteers. They were often told that the only alternative to this Bill was conscription. If the effect of this proposal would be to deter people from coming in, he thought it would be a mistake to agree to it. If the proposed force was to be a purely Volunteer Army, surely there should be nothing put in which would change the present system so far as the fine was concerned. Whatever regulations now existed with regard to Volunteers joining or leaving should be retained without change. If they emoted that the fine for leaving was to be £5, it would deter young men of sixteen, seventeen, and eighteen from joining. He urged that they should not put a condition in the Bill which would prevent men from coining in, and thereby enable the Government to say, if the scheme failed, that they must adopt conscription.
  *MR. COURTHOPE:supported the proposal for a sliding scale. When the Bill was introduced he differed from many of his friends on that side of the House who were very much alarmed at the proposal of a £5 fine. But since that time this £5 fine had been a great deal talked about, and the rank and file of the Volunteers had become very much alarmed about the matter. He would like to point out a practical consideration. It was well known by the men that a court of summary jurisdiction always considered a defendant's circumstances before imposing a fine; and fines imposed on Volunteers for failing to become efficient were never more than a few shillings. Thy fine of £5 would not act as a deterrent to men leaving, but it would most certainly act as a deterrent to men joining. He spoke from experience, having been a Volunteer adjutant. He had had some experience in endeavouring to impose fines under the present system. An agricultural labourer might be receiving a wage of only 12s. or 14s. a week, with perhaps an invalid mother to support, and there were very few cases

  567
  in which any appreciable fine would be imposed by the local bench on such a man for breaking his service. He hoped the Secretary for War would see his way to accept a sliding scale.
  THE FINANCIAL SECRETARY TO THE WAR OFFICE (MR. BUCHANAN, Perthshire, E.)said that at present the commanding officers had the power of imposing fines, and it was well known that they put a sliding scale of fines in force.
  *MR. COURTHOPEsaid that it was not the commanding officer but the local bench who would impose the fines.
  MR. BUCHANANsaid that that was a matter on which everybody could form his own opinion. It was not intended always to enforce the maximum amount scheduled. Though there was in reality no point of principle involved, it was

  AYES.

  Abraham, William (Rhondda)

  Cheetham, John Frederick

  Harcourt, Rt. Hon. Lewis

  Acland, Francis Dyke

  Cherry, Rt. Hon. R. R.

  Hardy, George A. (Suffolk)

  Agnew, George William

  Clough, William

  Harmsworth,Cecil B. (Wore'r)

  Allen.A. Acland (Christchurch)

  Collins, Stephen (Lambeth)

  Hart-Davies. T.

  Armitage, R.

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

  Harvey. A. G. C. (Rochdale)

  Armstrong, W.C. Heaton

  Cornwall, Sir Elwin A.

  Harvey,W. E.(Derbyshire,N.E.

  Astbury, John Meir

  Cotton, Sir H. J. S.

  Haworth, Arthur A.

  Baker. SirJohn (Portsmouth)

  Cowan, W. H.

  Hazel, Dr. A. E.

  Baker,Joseph A. (Finsbury.E.)

  Crooks, William

  Helme, Norval Watson

  Barker, John

  Crosfield, A. H.

  Hemmerde, Edward George

  Barlow, JohnEmmott (Somerset

  Davies, Ellis William (Eifion)

  Henry, Charles S.

  Barlow, Percy (Bedford)

  Davies, Timothy (Fulham)

  Herbert,Colonel Ivor(Mon.,S.)

  Barry,Redmond J.(Tyrone.N.)

  Davies, W. Howell (Bristol, S.)

  Higham, John Sharp

  Beck, A. Cecil

  Dewar, Arthur (Edinburgh, S.)

  Hobart. Sir Robert

  Bell, Richard

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

  Hobhouse. Charles E. H.

  Bellairs, Carlyon

  Dunne,Major E.Martin (Walsall

  Holt, Richard Durning

  Benn,Sir J.Williams( Devonp'rt

  Edwards, Clement (Denbigh)

  Horniman. Emslie John

  Bimn.W (TowerHamlets.S.Geo.

  Edwards, Frank (Radnor)

  Horridge, Thomas Gardner

  Bennett. E. N.

  Elibank, Master of

  Howard, Hon. Geoffrey

  Berridge, T. H. D.

  Erskine, David C.

  Hyde, Clarendon

  Bethell,SirJ.H.(Essex,Romf'rd

  Essex, R. W.

  Jacoby, Sir James Alfred

  Bethell, T. R. (Essex, Maldon)

  Esslemont, George Birnie

  Johnson, John (Gateshead)

  Billson, Alfred

  Evans, Samuel T.

  Johnson, W (Nuneaton)

  Birrell, Rt. Hon. Augustine

  Everett, R, Lacey

  Jones, Leif (Appleby)

  Brace, William

  Faber, G. H. (Boston)

  Jones,William (Carnarvonshire

  Bramsdon, T. A.

  Fenwick, Charles

  Kekewich, Sir George

  Branch, James

  Ferens, T. R.

  Kincaid-Smith, Captain

  Brigg, John

  Findlay, Alexander

  King, Alfred John (Knutsford)

  Brocklehurst, W. B.

  Foster, Rt. Hon. Sir Walter

  Laidlaw. Robert

  Bryce, J. Annan

  Fowler, Rt. Hon. Sir Henry

  Lamb, Edmund G. (Leominster

  Buchanan, Thomas Ryburn

  Fuller, John Michael F.

  Lamb, Ernest H. (Rochester)

  Buckmaster, Stanley O.

  Gardner,Col. Alan (Hereford,S.)

  Lambert, George

  Burns, Rt. Hon. John

  Gill, A. H.

  Lamont, Norman

  Burt, Rt. Hon. Thomas

  Goddard, Daniel Ford

  Layland-Barratt, Francis

  Buxton,Rt.Hn.Sydney Charles

  Gooch, George Peabody

  Lehmann, R. C.

  Cairns, Thomas

  Griffith, Ellis J.

  Levy, Maurice

  Carr-Gomm, H. W.

  Gulland, John W.

  Lewis, John Herbert

  Causton,Rt.Hn.Rie.hardKnight

  Haldane. Rt. Hon. Richard B.

  Lough, Thomas

  Cawley, Sir Frederick

  Hall, Frederick

  Luttrell, Hugh Fownes

  needful to possess some kind of power to impose a maximum fine, giving at the same time an absolute discretion and power of relaxation.
  MR. ASHLEYsaid he would rather have the maximum fine inserted in the Bill than leave it indefinitely to the County Associations. An hon. Member had spoken in reference to the difference of treatment between the Yeomanry and the other branches of the Auxiliary services. So far as length of service was concerned all branches should be placed on an equality; but so far as conditions of service was concerned that should lie left to the County Associations who would take them into account in imposing the full fine or relaxing it.
  Question put.
  The Committee divided:—Ayes, 202; Noes, 85. (Division List, No. 204)

  Macdonald,J.M.(FalkirkB'ghs

  Priestley, Arthur (Grantham)

  Torrance, Sir A. M.

  Macnamara, Dr. Thomas J.

  Radford, G. H.

  Toulmin, George

  M'Crae, George

  Rea, Russell (Gloucester)

  Trevelyan, Charles Philips

  M'Kenna, Rt. Hon. Reginald

  Richards,Thomas (W.Monm'th

  Ure. Alexander

  M'Laren,Sir C. B. (Leicester)

  Robertson.Rt.Hn.E. (Dundee)

  Verney, F. W.

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

  Robertson, J. M. (Tyneside)

  Walters, John Tudor

  M'Micking, Major G.

  Rogers, F. E. Newman

  Walton,Sir JohnL. (Leeds,S.)

  Maddison, Frederick

  Rutherford, V. H. (Brentford)

  Walton, Joseph (Barnsley)

  Manfield, Harry (Northants)

  Samuel,Herbert L.(Cleveland)

  Waring, Walter

  Markham, Arthur Basil

  Scott,A.H.(Ashton under Lyne

  Wason, Eugene (Clackmannan)

  Marks,G. Croydon(Launceston)

  Seaverns, J. II.

  Wason,JohnCathcart (Orkney)

  Marnham, F. J.

  Seely, Major J. B.

  Waterlow, D. S.

  Menzies, Walter

  Shaw, Charles Edw. (Stafford)

  Weir, James Galloway

  Mond, A.

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

  White, George (Norfolk)

  Money, L. G. Chiozza

  Sherwell, Arthur James

  White, J. D. (Dumbartonshire)

  Montgomery, H. G.

  Shipman, Dr. John G.

  White, Luke (York, E.R.)

  Morgan, G. Hay (Cornwall)

  Silcock, Thomas Ball

  Whitehead, Rowland

  Morse, L. L.

  Smeaton, Donald Mackenzie

  Whitley, John Henry (Halifax)

  Morton, Alpheus Cleophas

  Spicer, S:r Albert

  Whittaker, Sir Thomas Palmer

  Myer, Horatio

  Stanger. H. Y.

  Wiles, Thomas

  Napier, T. B.

  Stanley, Hn. A.Lyulph (Chesh.

  Williams. J. (Glamorgan)

  Nicholson,Charles N.(Doncast'r

  Stewart, Halley (Greenock)

  Wilson,Hn. C.H.W. (Hull. W.)

  Norton, Capt. Cecil William

  Strachey, Sir Edward

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

  Nuttall, Harry

  Straus, B. S. (Mile End)

  Winfrey, R.

  O'Donnell, C. J. (Walworth

  Strauss, E. A. (Abingdon)

  Yoxall, James Henry

  Pearce, Robert (Staffs., Leek)

  Taylor, Theodore C. (Radcliffe)

  Pearce, William (Limehouse)

  Thomas, Sir A. (Glamorgan, E.

  TELLERS FOR THE. AYES— Mr.

  Philipps,J.Wynford (Pembroke

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

  Whiteley and Mr. J. A.

  Pickersgill, Edward Hare

  Tillett, Louis John

  Pease.

  Pirie, Duncan V.

  Tomkinson, James

  NOES.

  Acland-Hood.RtHn.Sir Alex.F.

  Fletcher, J. S.

  Salter, Arthur Clavell

  Allen, Charles P. (Stroud)

  Forster, Henry William

  Seddon, J.

  Alison, Sir William Reynell

  Gardner, Ernest (Berks, East)

  Shackleton, David James

  Arkwright,John Stanhope

  Clover, Thomas

  Shelfield,SirBerkeley(Jeorge D

  Arnold-Forster,Rt. Hn.Hugh O.

  Henderson,Arthur (Durham)

  Sloan, Thomas Henry

  Ashley, W. W.

  Henderson,J.M.(Aberdeen, W.)

  Steadman, W. C.

  Aubroy-Flether.Rt.Hon.Sir H.

  Hills, J. W.

  Stone, Sir Benjamin

  Balcarres, Lord

  Hope, John Deans (Fife,West)

  Summerbell, T.

  Banbury, Sir Frederick George

  Houston, Robert Paterson

  Sutherland, J. E.

  Barnes, G. N.

  Hudson, Walter

  Talbot, Lord E. (Chichester)

  Barrie, H. T. (Londonderry.N.)

  Hunt, Rowland

  Taylor, John W. (Durham)

  Bignold, Sir Arthur

  Kennaway,Rt.Hon.SirJohn H.

  Thomson, W.Mitchell-(Lanark)

  Bowles, G. Stewart

  King,SirHenrySeymour (Hull).

  Thorne, William

  Boyle, Sir Edward

  Law, Andrew Bonar (Dulwich)

  Valentia, Viscount.

  Bull, Sir William James

  Lea,Hugh Cecil (St.Pancras.E.)

  Vincent,Col.Sir C. E. Howard

  Butcher, Samuel Henry

  Lonsdale, John Brownlee

  Walrond, Hon. Lionel

  Byles, William Pollard

  Macdonald, J. R. (Leicester)

  Walsh, Stephen

  Carlile, E. Hildred

  M'Callum, John M.

  Ward,John (Stoke upon Trent)

  Castlereagh, Viscount

  Morpeth, Viscount

  Wardle, George J.

  Cave, George

  O'Grady, J.

  Watt. Henry A.

  Cleland, J. VV.

  O'Neill, Hon. Robert Torrens

  Williams, Col. R. (Dorset, W.)

  Clynes, J. R.

  Parker, James (Halifax)

  Willoughby de Eresby, Lord

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

  Powell, Sir Francis Sharp

  Wilson, John (Durham, Mid)

  Craig,CharlesCurtis( Antrim, S.

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

  Wilson, W. T. (Westhoughton)

  Craik, Sir Henry

  Remnant, James Farquharson

  Wyndham, Rt. Hon. George

  Douglas, Rt. Hon. A. Akers-

  Richards,T.F.(Wolverh'mpt'n

  Duncan.C.(Barrow-in-Furness)

  Roberts, G. H. (Norwich)

  TELLERS FOE THE NOES—

  Duncan,Robert((Lanark,Govan

  Roberts.S.(Sheffield,Eeclesall)

  Captain Craig and Mr. Court. hope.

  Fardell, SirT. George

  Rutherford, John (Lancashire)

  Foil, Arthur

  Rutherford, W. W. (Liverpool)

  MR. ASHLEYmoved an Amendment to provide that whore, for good and sufficient cause, the delivery of the arms and appointments was impossible, a man desiring his discharge should be allowed to pay the value of the things. As the
  570
  Bill stood the Territorial soldier had to fulfil three conditions in order to get out of the Territorial Army. He had to give three months notice in writing to his commanding officer, to pay hope.£5 or such sum as might be thought lit, and to

  571
  deliver up in good order, wear and tear only excepted, all arras, clothing, and appointments being public property issued to him. That ho might not be able to do.
  THE DEPUTY CHAIRMANsaid he understood the Government accepted the Amendment. Was it necessary to argue further?
  MR. ASHLEYsaid he only intended to do so shortly.
  MR. BUCHANANsaid the Government accepted the Amendment.
  Amendment proposed—
  "In page 9, line 3, at end, to add the words ' or, in cases where for any good and sufficient cause the delivery of the property aforesaid is impossible, on paying the value thereof.'"— (Mr. Ashley.)
  Question, "That those words be their inserted," put, and agreed to.
  VISCOUNT CASTLEREAGHmoved to leave out of the proviso to Subsection 3 the words "for the association for the county or for any officer authorised by the association," in order to insert the words "for his commanding officer." He said that the power to dispense with the conditions as to notice and payment properly belonged to the commanding officer, and ought not to be usurped by the association. If this subsection of the Bill was left as it stood, the authority delegated by the War Office to the commanding officer and his sense of responsibility would most assuredly be weakened.
  Amendment proposed—
  "In page 9, lines 4 and 5, to leave out the words, 'the association for the county or for any officer authorised by the association,' and insert the words 'his commanding officer."—(Viscount Castlereagh.)
  Question proposed, "That the words proposed to be loft out stand part of the clause."
  SIR H. VINCENThoped the Government would be able to accept the Amendment. There could be no doubt whatever that it was the commanding officer and not the association which would have the knowledge of individuals, and the more the administration of a regiment was left to the commanding officer the better it would be for the regiment.
  MR. ACLANDthought the noble Lord and the hon. and gallant Gentleman opposite had read this subsection as though the words "or for any officer authorised by the association" were not in it. The great importance of the commanding officer and of his retaining all reasonable powers were so universally recognised that one could not conceive of an association, except in very special circumstances, doing otherwise than delegating this power to him if the commanding officer was willing to exercise it. He was not sure it was proper to leave the power of the association so that it should in every case be delegated to commanding officers, because the latter might be put in an invidious position. The money for the fines went to the association, and the commanding officer had ceased to have any interest in them, and he might be tempted, as the matter did not concern his battalion, to let men off. He would rather have this dispensing power vested in someone else. He could conceive that if it were the universal rule that the commanding officer should be the dispensing officer, the commanding officer of one battalion might get the reputation of always letting off men, while another commanding officer might take a much stricter view of his duties, and there would thus be differences between battalion and battalion in the same association, which would-be very undesirable. It was better to leave the matter to the association, with full power to delegate it to the commanding officer or any-other officer.
  *MR. ARNOLD-FORSTERadmitted that the situation was very undesirable when on such an important Amendments this the hon. Gentleman opposite was put up to give the Committee the opinion of the Government. It was most undesirable that he should answer for the Government when the Financial Secretary to the War Office and the Under-Secretary of State for India were both present. He thought his hon. friend should have some reply from responsible member upon the merits of the Amendment.
  MR. BUCHANANwas understood to say the Government were unable to accept the Amendment. The Association would act in the main through the commanding officer. The commanding officers would be largely represented on the association, and no sensible association would act in strong opposition to the views of the commanding officers. But in accordance with the principles of the Bill and of the clauses already passed this was a duty of which the responsibility must remain with the association.
  *MR. COURTHOPEsaid that both the Financial Secretary and the hon. Member for the Richmond Division had given strong arguments in favour of accepting the Amendment. Both of them had said it was ridiculous to imagine that any association would do otherwise than place this power upon the shoulders of sensible commanding officers. He was assuming that the Army Council wore going to be sensible enough to remove a commanding officer who was not himself' sensible. That being the case the whole objection of the Government dropped to the ground. There should be nothing but sensible commanding officers. They were told that the County Associations would place these powers on the commanding officers; but if that were so why was there any objection to putting it in the Bill? The Govern, meat had said that they agreed with all those Amendments; they accepted them in principle, but they did not mean to
  574
  have them in the Bill. It was most extraordinary if the Government intended to place the powers upon the shoulders of the commanding officers that they would not have it put down in black and white. If that was really their intention they should accept the Amendment.
  MR. McCRAEregretted that the Government could not accept the Amendment. He thought this clause was the reddest of red tape and must have been drafted by a most military-minded man. Was the County Association to undertake the duty of clothing each battalion? If so, it must have a very large depot, for the storage of uniforms, etc. Was the Territorial soldier to "deliver up his uniform in good order" to the County Association or the commanding officer? If the uniforms were to be delivered up to the commanding officer, then he ought to have the responsibility. In the district of Edinburgh they had three infantry battalions clothed in different uniforms. Were these uniforms to be stored at the County Association's depot, or were they to be placed under the control of the commanding officer? The clause had been defended only on the plea that it would never be put in force. It was preposterous to put the County Association in the position in which it would be placed by the clause. He hoped that in the interests of discipline the Government would reconsider the point.
  SIR GILBERT PARKERsuggested that the view of both the Government and the mover of the Amendment might be maintained if they would agree to an Amendment to the Amendment providing that it should b3 lawful for the commanding officer, authorised by the County Association, to remit the fine. Then the commanding officer would be responsible. to the County Association. In that case, they would have responsibility established in the County Association and the commanding officer acting for the County Association. The Commanding Officer would then be responsible to the

  575
  County Association, and report to them his reasons for remitting the fine upon discharging a man. He thought probably the Government would be prepared to accept the Amendment in view of the fact that the arguments of the hon. and gallant Member for Central Sheffield and of the hon. Member for East Edinburgh were unanswerable, and also of the fact that those Gentlemen were, on the whole, friendly to the Bill, and were ready to accept its provisions and make it workable.
  MR. CHARLES ALLENexpressed the opinion that it was a great pity that the Government could not accept the suggestion. It had been pointed out that if the Bill remained as it was, the commanding officer would have no interest in the matter, and that would be so because the responsibility would be with the County Association. The commanding officer would find himself in a very unpleasant position if he were inclined to let a man off the fine and the County Association would not allow him to do so. This was a question, not of administration, but of discipline, and he regretted that the Government had not accepted the Amendment.
  CAPTAIN CRAIGsaid the Bill provided that a man was to give three months notice in writing to his commanding officer if he wished his discharge, but the Bill also provided that the association could override the commanding officer's decision and judge whether the reasons for the discharge were sufficient to allow of its being granted. If the idea suggested by the hon. Member for Richmond were carried out, it would simply mean that an official appointed by the association would act as a sort of bailiff to get out of the man the money
  576
  which should go to the colonel of the regiment, who had the interests of the whole of the men at heart. The hon. and gallant Gentleman had struck a wrong note entirely when he said that this matter should not be left to the colonel commanding the regiment. A regiment of first class Yeomanry or a battalion of Infantry should have their interests entrusted to the colonel commanding, and they ought not to be entrusted entirely to the County Association. The association would put in an independent man, just as a county council or a board of guardians would put in a man to collect a rate, and the commanding officer would be passed over in regard to the matter. If such a principle were adopted, and if colonels were to be treated in that way, the Bill would fall entirely to the ground and would never work. The clause said that the reasons for the discharge were to be sufficient and urgent. Who was to be the judge of the sufficiency and urgency? Surely the man who would be the best judge of these matters was the man who commanded the regiment, who was intimate with the men of the corps, who knew them, and was best able to judge when a man was entitled to his discharge. Who knew the men best—the association or the commanding officer, who had his men on parade, whose adjutant was in the closest touch with them all the year round, and who had the knowledge necessary to enable him to come to a determination as to whether the man should have his discharge? The association had not that knowledge of the regiment which was possessed by the commanding officer; but they would delegate a man, John Jones or whoever it might be, to collect the money which should go to the colonel of the regiment; and they would thus be starting the Territorial Force with

  577
  the feeling that its commanding officers were not trusted by the association, the right hon. Gentleman, or the officials of the War Office. The Financial Secretary had said that the object was to keep the men as much as possible within the purview of the County Association. By all means let them keep matters within the County Association, but when they delegated a man to perform certain duties, then let them trust that man right up to the hilt. If the County Associations were to dwarf the powers of the commanding officers, the scheme of the right hon. Gentle man would be starting very badly. It would be cruelty to clip the wings of commanding officers in the way proposed. It was possible that one County Association might appoint a representative who exacted all the fine, while across the border another County Association might appoint an officer who was easy and did not impose fines; and the men would say, "Oh, here is a man who is soft-hearted and does not fine us, we will go there." Therefore what the hon. and gallant Gentleman had pointed out as touching the colonel would certainly touch the person appointed by the County Association. The value of the clause would certainly not be enhanced, and he had much pleasure in supporting the Amendment.
  MR. WYNDHAMsaid he had much pleasure in supporting the eloquent appeal made by his hon. and gallant friend, who had some knowledge of these matters. Under Sub-section 3 of the clause, notice was to be given to the commanding officer. Unless the Amendment were accepted they would give an appeal from the commanding officer to the County Association. It would be difficult to devise anything more subver-
  578
  sive of discipline. He was sure that that point need not be insisted upon. The right hon. Gentleman had again and again assured them that the Territorial Force was to be commanded by military officers, and only administered by the County Associations. If the Amendment were passed, the soldier, if dissatisfied with the decision given, would have the ordinary channel of appeal, namely, he could bring the matter before the brigadier —up the ladder of military authority, to the brigadier if the Territorial Force was to be commanded by soldiers and not by civilians on the County Associations. Any appeal for the commanding officer ought to go. If they allowed an appeal from the commanding officer to the County Association they were transferring questions of discipline from the military authority to a civil body.
  *MR. HALDANEsaid the point raised by the right hon. Gentleman was in substance whether this was a question relating to command or to administration. The Government wanted to separate command from administrative functions, and to give the administrative duties to the association. That was the real point in contest. If they turned to Clause 2, they would find that the County Associations had to administer the territorial units; and if they turned to Clause 8 they had to administer, among other things, the questions of clothes, arms, and equipment. These were clearly administrative items which concerned the association rather than the commanding officer. The Committee had decided that a man who broke his engagement had to pay £5 to cover the cost which the association had been put to in providing for his training and equipment. How could it be said

  579
  that that was a question of command and not of administration? The three items to which he had referred were clearly administrative and concerned the association rather than the commanding officer. He thought the Committee forget that the principle of the Bill was to separate command from administration. Then as to the composition of the association, it must be remembered that on the association there would be commanding officers, and they would have the assistance of the brigadier-in-chief. The Government had left power to the association to delegate it to any other officer to say on what grounds a man might be let off. That was the only way of dealing with the matter consistently with practical common sense and sound business principles. If they took the other course they chose a commanding officer who was not concerned with this matter of administration and put him in an invidious position. The association would want the decision of some officer. That officer might be the commanding officer, but it was better to leave it to the association to say who the officer should be.
  MR. COURTHOPEasked why, if everything else in this sub-clause was to be dealt with by the County Association as a purely administrative matter, was three months notice to be given? He contended that the commanding officer was the natural person to settle the pros and cons as to whether an individual soldier should be let off. The power ought to be entrusted to the commanding officer right through the section. Surely it ought to be the commanding officer's duty to consider whether or not a man was entitled to some remission of the heavy penalties and liabilities or whether the utmost rigour of the law ought to be enforced.
  MR. WYNDHAMsaid the right hon. Gentleman had stated that the County Association was to have these direct appeals and go into their economic effects. That was purely farcical. They must put the responsibility on the commanding officer. If the commanding officer granted discharges unduly so as to involve the association in undue expense it would be time to point out to him that he had not a proper care for public economy. They could not dissipate the responsibility between the commanding officer on the one hand and the county association on the other.
  VISCOUNT CASTLEREAGHappealed to the Secretary for War to accept the Amendment and expressed his regret that the right hon. Gentleman had attempted to support the very flimsy arguments which had been addressed to the Committee by his subordinates. He Could not agree with the hon. Member for Gravesend in the suggestion he had made to take away a small part of the authority of the commanding officer. He would like to see that authority retained and if anything made stronger. As regarded his own regiment the commanding officer should be an autocrat, and everything connected with his regiment should go through the channel of the commanding officer. The question was whether the commanding officer should be looked upon as the responsible individual or not. Commanding officers on both sides of the House had given their view upon the point in the absence of the right hon. Gentleman, and obviously there must be some substance in the Amendment.
  *MR. CARLILEsupported the Amendment. He thought there was a real necessity for retaining the control and services of the commanding officers. There should be no question of delegating

  581
  to County Associations or officers appointed by them the powers which naturally lay with the commanding officer. No commanding officer worth his salt would tolerate the meddling of the County Association. In the County Associations there would be a number of commanding officers. The commanding officer of one battalion would not tolerate dictation by the commanding officers of other battalions, however good they might be. The right hon. Gentleman would be well advised to allow this power to be administered by the commanding officers. He would not regret doing so, for it would save him a great deal of trouble, as Minister of War, in finding commanding officers. It was not every man in a battalion who was suited to occupy a position of that kind. It was often very difficult to find them, and no doubt the result was that unsuitable men were sometimes appointed, very much to the detriment of the corps. Commanding officers had to meet a certain amount of expense in connection with their battalions, and, therefore, there was the double difficulty of finding men who had, not only the necessary qualifications, but the necessary moans to occupy the position. If this proposal were left as it now stood in the Bill, there would be one ready-made source of difficulty to the Minister for War. He hoped the right hon. Gentleman would realise that there were about him in this House commanding officers of experience, and that he would accept guidance from them on such practical details as this. He hoped there would be no delegation to the County Association, or to officers nominated by that association, of powers which naturally lay with the commanding officer with regard to the conditions on which the members of his battalion should be allowed to retire.
  MR. BRODIEsaid that if the Secretary of State for War had been able to be present during the last three-quarters of an hour he would have found that there was a general feeling in all parts of the Committee in favour of some alteration in the wording of the clause. He did not think that the Amendment of the noble Lord quite met the case. He thought the right hon. Gentleman might very well accept the suggestion of the hon. Member for Gravesend. He hoped the right hon. Gentleman would reconsider his decision.
  SIR HOWARD VINCENTsaid he had waited for some time in the hope that the Secretary of State would rise and answer the appeal which had been made to him by hon. Members on his own side. He did not think the right hon. Gentleman could have been informed of the very strong opinion expressed on this subject by experienced Members on his own side as to the great necessity of meeting the Committee on this point. It was really not fair to the Committee or to the force he desired to create for the right hon. Gentleman to try to conduct the Bill with the obstinacy he had shown. There were Members in all parts of the House anxious to help him, and yet he would not accept a simple Amendment like that under discussion. It was certainly a matter in which the right hon. Gentleman could meet the general wishes of the Committee. If he was going to adopt non possumus attitude he had better drop the Bill altogether, for even if the Bill passed through this House, it would never pass the House of Lords.
  COLONEL KENYON-SLANEYthought the right hon. Gentleman did not appreciate the necessity of discipline.

  583
  He did not believe in a Territorial Force or County Associations, but he knew it was impossible that such a scheme could have any success at all unless it was administered in strict accordance with discipline; and discipline could only be

  AYES.

  Abraham, William (Rhondda)

  Dalziel, James Henry

  Horniman, Emslie John

  Acland, Francis Dyke

  Davies, Ellis William (Eifion)

  Horridge, Thomas Gardner

  Agnew, George William

  Davies, Timothy (Fulham)

  Howard, Hon. Geoffrey

  Ainsworth, John Stirling

  Davies, W. Howell (Bristol, S.)

  Hudson, Walter

  Allen, A. Acland (Christchurch)

  Dewar, Arthur (Edinburgh, S.)

  Hutton, Alfred Eddison

  Armitage, R.

  Dewar, John A. (Inverness-sh.

  Hyde, Clarendon

  Armstrong, W. C. Heaton

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

  Isaacs, Rufus Daniel

  Ashton, Thomas Gair

  Duncan,C.(Barrow-in-Furness

  Jacoby, Sir James Alfred

  Asquith,Rt.Hn. Herbert Henry

  Dunne,Major E.Martin(Walsall

  Johnson, John (Gateshead)

  Astbury, John Meir

  Edwards, Clement (Denbigh)

  Johnson, W. (Nuncaton)

  Baker, Sir John (Portsmouth)

  Edwards, Enoch (Hanley)

  Jones,Sir D.Brynmor (Swansea

  Barker, John

  Edwards, Frank (Radnor)

  Jones, Leif (Appleby)

  Barlow, JohnEmmott( Somerset

  Elibank, Master of

  Jones,William (Carnarvonshire

  Barlow, Percy (Bedford)

  Erskine, David C.

  Jowett, F. W.

  Barnes, G. N.

  Essex, R. W.

  Kearley, Hudson E.

  Barran, Rowland Hirst

  Esslemont, George Birnie

  Kekewich, Sir george

  Barry,Redmond J. (Tyrone,N.)

  Evans, Samuel T.

  Kincaid-Smith, Captain

  Beck, A. Cecil

  Eve, Harry Trelawney

  Laidlaw, Robert

  Bell, Richard

  Everett, R. Lacey

  Lamb,Edmund G.(Leominster)

  Bellairs, Carlyon

  Fenwick, Charles

  Lamb, Ernest H. (Rochester)

  Benn.Sir J.Williams(Devonp'rt

  Ferens, T. R.

  Lambert, George

  Benn,W.(T'w'r Hamlets,S.Geo.

  Ferguson, R. C. Munro

  Lamont, Norman

  Bennett, E. N.

  Findlay, Alexander

  Layland-Barratt, Francis

  Berridge, T. H. D.

  Foster, Rt, Hon. Sir Walter

  Lea,Hugh Cecil (St.Pancras.E.)

  Bertram, Julius

  Fowler, Rt. Hon. Sir Henry

  Lehmann, R. C.

  Bethell,SirJ.H.(Essex,Romf'rd

  Fuller, John Michael F.

  Lever, W. H. (Cheshire, Wirral)

  Bethell, T. R. (Essex, Maldon)

  Fullerton, Hugh

  Levy, Maurice

  Billson, Alfred

  Furness, Sir Christopher

  Lewis, John Herbert

  Birrell, Rt. Hon. Augustine

  Gardner,Col. Alan (Hereford,S.)

  Lough, Thomas

  Bowerman, C. H.

  Gill, A. H.

  Lupton, Arnold

  Brace, William

  Glover, Thomas

  Luttrell, Hugh Fownes

  Bramsdon, T. A.

  Goddard, Daniel Ford

  Lyell, Charles Henry

  Branch, James

  Gooch, George Peabody

  Lynch, H. B.

  Brigg, John

  Greenwood, G. (Peterborough)

  Macdonald, J. R. (Leicester)

  Brocklehurst, H. B.

  Griffith, Ellis J.

  Macdonald,J.M.(Falkirk B'ghs

  Brooke, Stopford

  Gulland, John W.

  Maclean, Donald

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

  Gurdon, Sir W. Brampton

  Macnamara, Dr. Thomas J.

  Bryce, J. Annan

  Haldane, Rt. Hon. Richard B.

  M'Kenna, Rt. Hon. Reginald

  Buchanan, Thomas Ryburn

  Hall, Frederick

  M'Laren, Sir C. B. (Leicester)

  Buckmaster, Stanley 0.

  Harcourt, Rt. Hon.Lewis

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

  Bums, Rt. Hon. John

  Hardy, George A. (Suffolk)

  M'Micking, Major G.

  Burt, Rt. Hon. Thomas

  Harmsworth, Cecil B. (Worc'r)

  Maddison, Frederick

  Buxton.Rt.Hn. Sydney Charles

  Harmsworth.R. L. (Caithn'ss-sh

  Mallet, Charles E.

  Byles, William Pollard

  Hart-Davies, T.

  Manfield, Harry (Northants)

  Carr-Gomm, H. W.

  Harvey, A. G. C. (Rochdale)

  Markham. Arthur Basil

  Cans ton, Rt.Hn.RichardKnight

  Harvey.W.E. (Derbyshire,N. E.

  Marks, G. Croydon (Launceston)

  Cawley, Sir Frederick

  Harlam, Lewis (Monmouth)

  Marnham, F. J.

  Channing, Sir Francis Allston

  Haworth, Arthur A.

  Mason, A. E. W. (Coventry)

  Cherry, Rt, Hon. R. R.

  Hazel, Dr. A. E.

  Massie, J.

  Cleland, J. W.

  Helme, Norval Watson

  Menzies, Walter

  Clough, William

  Hemmerde, Edward George

  Molteno, Percy Alport

  Clynes, J. R.

  Henderson, Arthur (Durham)

  Mond, A.

  Collins, Stephen (Lambeth)

  Henderson,J.M.(Aberdeen, W.)

  Montgomery. H. G.

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

  Henry, Charles S.

  Morgan, G. Hay (Cornwall)

  Corbett.C.H. (Sussex.E.Gr'st'd

  Herbert, Colonel Ivor (Mon.,S.)

  Morrell, Philip

  Cornwall, Sir Edwin A.

  Herbert, T. Arnold (Wycombe)

  Morse, L. L.

  Cotton, Sir H. J. S.

  Higham, John Sharp

  Morton, Alpheus Cleophas

  Cowan, W. H.

  Hobart, Sir Robert

  Myer, Horatio

  Craig, Herbert J. (Tynemouth)

  Hobhouse, Charles E. H.

  Napier, T. B.

  Crooks, William

  Holland, Sir William Henry

  Newnes, F. (Notts, Bassetlaw)

  Crossley, William J.

  Holt, Richard Durning

  Nicholson,CharlesN.(Doncast'r

  maintained by the man selected to command.
  Question put.
  The Committee divided:— Ayes, 279; Noes, 95. (Division List No. 205.)

  Norton, Capt. Cecil William

  Rutherford, V. H. (Brentford)

  Trevelyan, Charles Philips

  Nussey, Thomas; Willans

  Samuel, Herbert L. (Cleveland)

  Ure, Alexander

  Nuttall, Harry

  Samuel, S. M. (Whitechapel)

  Walsh, Stephen

  O'Donnell, C. J. (Walworth)

  Schwann,Sir C.E. (Manchester)

  Walters, John Tudor

  O'Grady, J.

  Scott,A.H.(Ashton underLyne)

  Walton, Sir John L. (Leeds, S.)

  Parker, James (Halifax)

  Seaverns, J. H.

  Walton, Joseph (Barnsley)

  Partington, Oswald

  Seddon, J.

  Ward.John (Stoke upon Trent

  Pearce, Robert (Staffs. Leek)

  Seely, Major, J. B.

  Wardle, George J.

  Pearce, William (Limehouse)

  Shackleton, David James

  Waring, Walter

  Pearson.Sir W.D. (Colchester)

  Shaw, Charles Edw. (Stafford)

  Wason, Eugene(Clackmannan

  Philipps, J. Wynford (Pembroke

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

  Wason,John Cat heart (Orkney

  Philipps, Owen C. (Pembroke)

  Sherwell, Arthur James

  Waterlow, D. S.

  Pickersgill, Edward Hare

  Shipman, T)r. John G.

  Weir, James Galloway

  Pollard, Dr.

  Silcock, Thomas Ball

  White, George (Norfolk)

  Price, C. E.(Edinburgh,Central)

  Smeaton, Donald Mackenzie

  White, J. D. (Dumbartonshire

  Price.Robert John (Norfolk,E.)

  Spicer, Sir Albert

  White, Luke (York, E. R.)

  Priestley, Arthur (Grantham)

  Stanger, H. Y.

  Whitehead, Rowland

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

  Steadman, W. C.

  Whitley, John Henry (Halifax)

  Radford, G. II.

  Stewart, Halley (Greenock)

  Whittaker, Sir Thomas Palmer

  Rainy, A. Rolland

  Strachey, Sir Edward

  Wiles, Thomas

  Raphael, Herbert H.

  Straus, B. S. (Mile End)

  Williams, J. (Glamorgan)

  Rea, Russell (Gloucester)

  Strauss, E. A. (Abingdon)

  Wills, Arthur Walters

  Renton, Major Leslie

  Summerbell, T.

  Wilson, John (Durham, Mid)

  Richards,Thomas (W.Monm'th

  Taylor, Austin (East Toxteth)

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

  Richards,T.F.(Wolverhampton

  Taylor, John W. (Durham)

  Wilson, W. T. (Westhoughton

  Roberts, G. H. (Norwich)

  Taylor, Theodore C. (Radcliffe)

  Winfrey, R.

  Robertson.Rt.Hn.E. (Dundee)

  Tennant, H. J. (Berwickshire)

  Wood, T. M'Kinnon

  Robertson,SirG.Scott(Bradf'rd

  Thomas,Sir A.(Glamorgan, E.)

  Yoxall, James Henry

  Robertson, J. M. (Tyneside)

  Thomasson, Franklin

  Robinson, S.

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

  TELLERS FOR THE AYES—Mr.

  Robson, Sir William Snowdon

  Thorne, William

  Whiteley and Mr. J. A. Pease.

  Roe, Sir Thomas

  Tomkinson, James

  Pease.

  Rogers, F. E. Newman

  Torrance, Sir A. M.

  Rose, Charles Day

  Toulmin, George

  NOES.

  Acland-Hood,Rt. Hn.SirAlex.F.

  Duncan, Robert.( Lanark, Govan)

  Powell, Sir Francis Sharp

  Allen, Charles P. (Stroud)

  Faber, George Denison (York)

  Ratcliff, Major R. F.

  Anson, Sir William Reynell

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

  Rawlinson, John Frederick Peel

  Arkwright, John Stanhope

  Fardell, Sir T George

  Remnant, James Farquharson

  Ashley, W. W.

  Fell. Arthur

  Roberts,S.(Sheffield, Ecclesall)

  Aubrey-Fletcher,Rt. Hon.Sir H.

  Fletcher, J. S.

  Rothschild, Hon Lionel Walter

  Balcarres, Lord

  Forster, Henry William

  Rutherford, John (Lancashire)

  Balfour,Rt.Hn.A.J.(CityLond.)

  Gardner, Ernest (Berks, East)

  Rutherford, W. W. (Liverpool)

  Banbury, Sir Frederick George

  Gibbs, G. A. (Bristol, West)

  Salter, Arthur Clavell

  Banner, John S. Harmood-

  Harrison-Broadley, H. B.

  Sandys, Lieut.-Col. Thos.Myles

  Barrie, H. T. (Londonderry, N.)

  Harwood, George

  Scott, Sir S. (Marylebone, W.)

  Beckett, Hon. Gervase

  Hedges, A. Paget

  Sheffield.Sir BerkeleyGeorge D.

  Bignold, Sir Arthur

  Helmsley, Viscount

  Sloan, Thomas Henry

  Bowles, G. Stewart

  Hills, J. W.

  Stanley,Hn.A. (Lyulph(Chesh.)

  Boyle, Sir Edward

  Hope, John Deans (Fife, West)

  Starkey, John R.

  Bridgeman, W. Clive

  Houston, Robert Paterson

  Stone, Sir Benjamin

  Brodie, H.C.

  Hunt, Rowland

  Talbot, Lord E. (Chichester)

  Bull, Sir William James

  Kennaway,Rt. Hn. Sir John H.

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

  Burdett-Coutts, W.

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

  Thomson, W.Mitchell-(Lanark)

  Butcher, Samuel Henry

  King,Sir Henry Seymour (Hull)

  Thornton, Percy M.

  Carlile, E. Hildred

  Law,Andrew Bonar (Dulwich)

  Valentia, Viscount

  Cave, George

  Lee, ArthurH.(Hants., Fareham

  Vincent, Col. Sir C. E. Howard

  Cavendish, Rt. H.n. Victor C.W.

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

  Walker,Col. W.H. (Lancashire)

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

  Lond.Col.Charles W.(Evesham)

  Walrond, Hon. Lionel

  Cheetham, John Frederick

  Lonsdale, John Brownlee

  Warde, Col. C. E. (Kent, Mid)

  Corbett, A. Cameron (Glasgow)

  Lyttelton, Rt, Hon. Alfred

  Williams, Col. R. (Dorset, W.)

  Courthope, G Loyd

  Marks, H. H. (Kent)

  Willoughby de Eresby, Lord

  Craig, Charles Curtis(Antrim,S.)

  Meysey-Thompson, E. C.

  Wilson,Hon. C.H.W. (Hull,W.)

  Craik, Sir Henry

  Morpeth, Viscount

  Wyndham, Rt. Hon. George

  Dalrymple, Viscount

  Muntz, Sir Philip A.

  Davies,David(MontgomeryCo.)

  Nicholson, Wrn.G.(Petersfield)

  TELLERS FOR THE NOSE—

  Dilke, Rt. Hon. Sir Charles

  O'Niell, Hon. Robert Torrens |

  Viscount Castlereagh and Captain Craig.

  Douglas, Rt. Hon. A. Akers-

  Pirie, Duncan V.

  And, it being after half-past ton of the clock, the CHAIRMAN proceeded, pursuant to the Order of the House of the 6th May, successively to put forthwith the Ques
  The Committee divided:—Ayes, 281;

  AYES.

  Abraham, William (Rhondda.)

  Craig. Herbert J. (Tynemouth)

  Higham. John Sharp

  Acland, Francis Dyke

  Crooks, William

  Hobart, Sir Robert

  Agnew, George William

  Crosfield, A. H.

  Hobhouse. Charles E. H.

  Ainsworth, John Stirling; f;

  Crossley, William J.

  Holland, Sir William Henry

  Alden, Percy

  Dalziel, James Henry

  Holt, Richard Durning

  Allen, A. Acland (Christchurch)

  Davies, David (MontgomeryCo.

  Horniman. Emslie John

  Allen, Charles P. (Stroud)

  Davies, Ellis William (Eifion)

  Horridge, Thomas Gardner

  Armitage, R.

  Davies, Timothy (Fulham)

  Howard, Hon. Geoffrey

  Armstrong, W. C. Heaton

  Davies, W. Howell (Bristol, S.)

  Hutton. Alfred Eddison

  Ashton, Thomas Gair

  Dewar, Arthur (Edinburgh, S.)

  Hyde, Clarendon

  Asquith,Rt.Hn.Herbert Henry

  Dewar, John A. (Inverness-sh.

  Isaacs, Rufus Daniel

  Astbury. John Meir

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

  Jacoby, Sir James Alfred

  Baker, Sir John (Portsmouth)

  Dunne,Major E.Martin(Walsall

  Johnson, John (Gateshead)

  Baker, Joseph A. (Finsbury.E.)

  Edwards, Clement (Denbigh)

  Johnson, W. (Nuneaton)

  Barker, John

  Edwards, Enoch (Hanley)

  Jones.Sir D.Brynmor(Swansea)

  Barlow, JohnEmmott(Somerset

  Edwards, Frank (Radnor)

  Jones, Leif (Appleby)

  Barlow, Percy (Bedford)

  Elibank, Master of

  Jones, William(Carnarvonshire)

  Barran, Rowland Hirst

  Erskine, David C'.

  Kearley, Hudson, E.

  Barry, Redmond J.(Tyrone,N.)

  Essex, R. W.

  Kekewich, Sir (Jeorge

  Beck, A. Cecil

  Esslemont, George Birnie

  Kincaid-Smith, Captain

  Bell, Richard

  Evans, Samuel T.

  Laidlaw, Robert

  Bellairs, Carlyon

  Eve, Harry Trelawney

  Lamb,Edmund G. (Leominster)

  Benn,Sir J.Williams (Devonp'rt

  Everett, R. Lacey

  Lamb, Ernest H. (Rochester)

  Benn,W.(T'w'r Hamlets,S.Geo.

  Fenwick, Charles

  Lambert, George

  Bennett, E. N.

  Ferens, T. R.

  Lamont, Norman

  Berridge, T. H. D.

  Ferguson, R. C. Munro

  Layland-Barratt. Francis

  Bertram, Julius

  Findlay, Alexander

  Lehmann, R. C.

  Bethell,SirJ.H.(Essex,Romf'rd

  Foster, Rt, Hon. Sir Walter

  Lever, W. H. (Cheshire, Wirral)

  Bethell, T. R. (Essex, Maldon)

  Fowler, Rt. Hon. Sir Henry

  Levy. Maurice

  Billson, Alfred

  Fuller, John Michael F.

  Lewis, John Herbert

  Birrell, Rt. Hon. Augustine

  Fullerton, Hugh

  Lough, Thomas

  Brace, William

  Furness, Sir Christopher

  Lupton, Arnold

  Bramsdon, T. A.

  Gardner, Col.Alan(Hereford,S.)

  Luttrell, Hugh Fownes

  Branch, James

  Gladstone,Rt.Hn.Herbert John

  Lyell, Charles Henry

  Brigg, John

  Goddard. Daniel Ford

  Lynch, H. B.

  Brocklehurst, W. B.

  Gooch, George Peabody

  MacdonaldJ. M.(Falkirk B'ghs

  Brodie, H. C.

  Greenwood. G. (Peterborough)

  Mackarness, Frederic C.

  Brooke, Stopford

  Griffith, Ellis J.

  Maclean, Donald

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

  Gulland, John W.

  Macnamara, Dr. Thomas J.

  Bryce, J. Annan

  Gurdon, Sir W. Brampton

  M'Crae, George

  Buchanan, Thomas Ryburn

  Haldane, Rt, Hon. Richard B.

  M'Kenna, Rt. Hon. Reginald

  Buckmaster, Stanley O.

  Hall, Frederick

  M'Laren, Sir ('. B. (Leicester)

  Burns, Rt. Hon. John

  Harcourt, Rt. Hon. Lewis

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

  Burt, Rt. Hon. Thomas

  Hardy, George A. (Suffolk)

  M'Micking, Major G.

  Buxton. Rt.Hn.Sydney Charles

  Harmsworth, Cecil B. (Worc'r)

  Maddison, Frederick

  Carr-Gomm, H. W.

  Harmsworth.R.L. (Caithn'ss-sh

  Mallet, Charles E.

  Causton,Rt. Hn.RichardKnight

  Hart-Davies, T.

  Manfield, Harry (Northants)

  Cawley, Sir Frederick

  Harvey, A. G. C. (Rochdale)

  Markham, Arthur Basil

  Channing, Sir Francis Allston

  Harvey, W.E.(Derbyshire,N.E.

  Marks,G.Croydon (Launceston)

  Cheetham, John Frederick

  Harwood, George

  Marnham, F. J.

  Cherry. Rt. Hon. R. R.

  Haslam. Lewis (Monmouth)

  Mason, A. E. W. (Coventry)

  Cleland, J. W.

  Haworth, Arthur A.

  Massie, J.

  Clough, William

  Hazel, Dr. A. E.

  Menzies, Walter

  Collins, Stephen (Lambeth)

  Hedges, A. Paget

  Molteno, Percy Alport

  Collins,SirWm.J.(S.Pancras,W. I

  Helme, Norval Watson

  Mond, A.

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

  Hemmerde, Edward George

  Money, L. G. Chiozza

  Cornwall. Sir Edwin A.

  Henderson,J.M.(Aberdeen, W.)

  Montgomery, H, G.

  Cory, Clifford John

  Henry, Charles S.

  Morgan, G. Hay (Cornwall)

  Cotton. Sir H. J. S.

  Herbert, Colonel Ivor (Mon.,S.)

  Morrell, Philip

  Cowan, W. H.

  Herbert, T. Arnold (Wycombe)

  Morse, L. L.

  tions necessary to dispose of the Business to be concluded—:
  Question put, "That the clause, as amen led, stand part of the Bill."
  Noes,124.(Division List No.206.)

  Morton, Alpheus Cleophas

  Roe, Sir Thomas

  Toulmin, George

  Myer, Horatio

  Rogers, F. E. Newman

  Trevelyan, Charles Philips

  Napier, T. B.

  Rose, Charles Day

  Uure, Alexander

  Newnes, F. (Notts., Bassetlaw)

  Rutherford, V. H. (Brentford)

  Verney, F. WT.

  Newnes, Sir George (Swansea)

  Samuel,Herbert L.(Cleveland)

  Walters, John Tudor

  Nicholson,CharlesN.(Doncaster

  Samuel, P. M. (Whitechapel)

  Walton, sir John L. (Leeds, S.)

  Norton, Capt. Cecil William

  Schwann, C. Duncan (Hyde)

  Walton, Joseph (Barnsley)

  Nussey, Thomas Willans

  Schwann,Sir C.E.(Manchester)

  Ward,John (Stoke upon Trent)

  Nuttall, Harry

  Scott,A.H.(Ashton under Lyne

  Ward.W. Dudley (Southampton

  O'Donnell, C. J. (Walworth)

  Seaverns, J. H.

  Waring, Walter

  Partington, Oswald

  Seely, Major J. B.

  Wason, Eugene (Clackmannan)

  Pearce, Robert (Staffs. Leek)

  Shaw, Charles Edw. (Stafford)

  Wason,John Cathcart(Orkney)

  Pearce, William (Limehouse)

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

  Waterlow, D. S.

  Pearson, Sir W. D. (Colchester)

  Sherwell, Arthur James

  Watt, Henry A.

  Philipps,J. Wynford( Pembroke)

  Shipman, Dr. John G.

  Weir, James Galloway

  Philipps, Owen C. (Pembroke)

  Silcock. Thomas Ball

  White, George (Norfolk)

  Pickersgill, Edward Hare

  Simon, John Allsebrook

  White, J. I). (Dumbartonshire)

  Pirie, Duncan V.

  Smeaton, Donald Mackenzie

  White, Luke (York, E.R.)

  Pollard, Dr.

  Spicer, Sir Albert

  Whitehead, Rowland

  Price.C. E. (Edinburgh.Central)

  Stanger, H. Y.

  Whitley, John Henry (Halifax)

  Price.Robert John(Norfolk, E.)

  Stanley. Hn. A. Lyulph (Chesh.)

  Whittaker, Sir Thomas Palmer

  Priestley, Arthur (Grantham)

  Steadman, W. C.

  Wiles, Thomas

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

  Stewart, Halley (Greenock)

  Williams,Llewelyn Carmarthen

  Radford, G. H.

  Strachey, Sir Edward

  Williamson, A.

  Rainy, A. Rolland

  Straus, B. S. (Mile End)

  Wills, Arthur Walters

  Raphael, Herbert H.

  Strauss, E. A. (Abingdon)

  Wilson,Hon.C.H.W.(Hull, W.)

  Rea, Russell (Gloucester)

  Taylor,Austin (East Toxteth)

  Wilson, John (Durham, Mid)

  Rees, J. D.

  Taylor, Theodore C.(Radcliffe)

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

  Renton, Major Leslie

  Tennant,SirEdward(Salisbury)

  Winfrey, R.

  Richards,Thomas (W.Monm'th

  Tennant, H. J. (Berwickshire)

  Wood, T. M'Kinnon

  Robertson,Rt.Hn. E. (Dundee)

  Thomas,Sir A.(Glamorgan,E.)

  Yoxall, James Henry

  Robertson,SirG.Scott(Bradf'rd

  Thomasson, Franklin

  Robertson, J.M. (Tyneside)

  Thompson,J.W.H.(SomersetE.)

  TELLERS FOR THE AYES—

  Robinson, S.

  Tomkinson, James

  Mr. Whiteley and Mr. J. A.

  Robson, Sir William Snowdon

  Torrance, Sir A. M.

  Pease.

  NOES.

  Anson, Sir William Reynell

  Craik, Sir Henry

  Lonsdale, John Brownlee

  Anstruther-Gray, Major

  Dalrymple, Viscount

  Lyttelton, Rt. Hon. Alfred

  Arkwright, John Stanhope

  Dilke, Rt. Hon. Sir Charles

  Macdonald, J. R. (Leicester)

  Ashley, W. W.

  Douglas, Rt. Hon. A. Akers-

  Macpherson, J. T.

  Aubrey-Fletcher.Rt. Hon. SirH.

  Duncan.C. (Barrow-in-Furness)

  Marks, H. H. (Kent)

  Balcarres, Lord

  Duncan,Robert(Lanark, Govan

  Meysey-Thompson, E. C.

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

  Faber, George Denison (York)

  Mildmay, Francis Bingham

  Banbury, Sir Frederick George

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

  Morpeth, Viscount

  Banner, John S. Harmood-

  Fardell, Sir T. George

  Muntz, Philip A.

  Barnes, G. N.

  Fell, Arthur

  Nicholson, Wm.G.(Petersfield)

  Barrio, H. T. (Londonderry,N.)

  Fletcher, J. S.

  O'Grady, J.

  Beckett, Hon. Gervase

  Forster, Henry William

  O'Neill, Hon. Robert Torrens

  Bignold, Sir Arthur

  Gibbs, G. A. (Bristol, West)

  Parker,Sir Gilbert(Gravesend)

  Bowerman, C. W.

  Gill, A. H.

  Parker, James (Halifax)

  Bowles, G. Stewart

  Glover, Thomas

  Parkes, Ebenezer

  Boyle, Sir Edward

  Harrison-Broadley, H. B.

  Ratcliff, Major R. F.

  Bridgeman, W. Clive

  Helmsley, Viscount

  Rawlinson,John Frederick Peel

  Bull, Sir William James

  Henderson, Arthur (Durham)

  Remnant, James Farquharson

  Burdett-Coutts, W.

  Hervey,F.W.F.(BuryS.Edm'ds

  Richards,T.F.(Wolverhampton

  Butcher, Samuel Henry

  Hill, Sir Clement (Shrewsbury)

  Roberts, G. H. (Norwich)

  Byles, William Pollard

  Hills, J. W.

  Roberts,S.(Sheffield. Ecclesall)

  Carlile, E. Hildred

  Hope, John Deans (Fife, West)

  Rothschild,Hon. Lionel Walter

  Castlereagh, Viscount

  Houston, Robert Paterson

  Rutherford, John (Lancashire)

  Cave, George

  Hudson, Walter

  Rutherford, W. W. (Liverpool)

  Cavendish,Rt.Hon. Victor C.W.

  Hunt, Rowland

  Salter, Arthur Clavell

  Cecil, Evelyn (Aston Manor)

  Jowett, F. W.

  Sandys, Lieut.-Col. Thos.Myles

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

  Kennaway,Rt.Hon.Sir JohnH.

  Scott, Sir S. (Marylebone, W.)

  Chaplin, Rt.Hon. Henry

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

  Seddon, J.

  Clynes, J. R.

  King,Sir Henry Seymour(Hull)

  Shackleton, David James

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

  Law, Andrew Bonar (Dulwich)

  Sheffield,Sir BerkeleyGeorge D.

  Corbett.A. Cameron (Glasgow)

  Lea,Hugh Cecil (St.Pancras.E.)

  Sloan, Thomas Henry

  Courthope, G. Loyd

  Lee,Arthur H. (Hants., Fareham

  Smith,F.E. (Liverpool.Walton)

  Craig,CharlesCurtis(Antrim,S.)

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

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

  Craig.Captain James(Down,E.)

  Long,Col.Charles W.(Evesham

  Starkey, John R.

  590

  591

  Stone, Sir Benjamin

  Vincent, Col. Sir C. E. Howard

  Wilson, W. T. (Westhoughton)

  Summerbell, T.

  Walker.Col.W.H. (Lancashire)

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

  Sutherland, J. E.

  Walrond, Hon. Lionel

  Wyndham, Rt. Hon. George

  Talbot, Lord E. (Chichester)

  Walsh, Stephen

  Younger, George

  Talbot, Rt. Hn.,T. G. (Oxf dUniv.

  Warde, Col. C. E. (Kent, Mid)

  Taylor, John W. (Durham)

  Wardle, George J.

  TELLERS FOB THE NOES—

  Thomson,W.Mitchell (Lanark)

  Williams, J. (Glamorgan)

  Sir Alexander Acland-Hood

  Thorne, William

  Williams, Col. R. (Dorset, W.)

  and Viscount Valentia.

  Thornton; Percy M.

  Willoughby, De Eresby, Lord

  Clause 9:
  The Committee divided: -Ayes, 277;

  AYES.

  Abraham, William (Rhondda)

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

  Haworth, Arthur A.

  Acland, Francis Dyke

  Cornwall, Sir Edwin A.

  Hazel, Dr. A. E.

  Agnew, George William

  Cory, Clifford John

  Hedges, A, Paget

  Ainsworth, John Stirling

  Cotton, Sir H. J. S.

  Helme, Norval Watson

  Alden, Percy

  Cowan, W. H.

  Hemmerde, Edward George

  Allen,A. Acland (Christchurch)

  Craig,Herbert J. (Tynemouth)

  Henderson,J.M.(Aberdeen, W.

  Allen, Charles P. (Stroud)

  Crosfield, A. H.

  Henry, Charles S.

  Armitage, R.

  Crossley, William J.

  Herbert, Colonel Ivor (Mon.,S.

  Armstrong, W. C. Heaton

  Dalziel, James Henry

  Herbert. T. Arnold (Wycombe)

  Ashton, Thomas Gair

  Davies,David (Montgomery Co.

  Higham, John Sharp

  Asquith,Rt.Hn.Herbert Henry

  Davies, Ellis William (Eifion)

  Hobart. Sir Robert

  Astbury, John Meir

  Davies, Timothy (Fulham)

  Hobhouse, Charles E. H.

  Baker, Sir John (Portsmouth)

  Davies, W. Howell (Bristol, S.)

  Holland. Sir William Henry

  Baker,Joseph A.(Finsbury, E.)

  Dewar, Arthur (Edinburgh, S.)

  Holt, Richard Durning

  Barker, John

  Dewar, John A. (Inverness-sh.

  Horniman. Emslie John

  Barlow, JohnEmmott(Somerset

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

  Horridge. Thomas Gardner

  Barlow, Percy (Bedford)

  Dunne,Major E. Martin (Walsall

  Howard. Hon. Geoffrey

  Barran, Rowland Hirst

  Edwards, Clement (Denbigh)

  Hutton. Alfred Eddison

  Barry, Redmond J. (Tyrone, N.

  Edwards, Enoch (Hanley)

  Hyde. Clarendon

  Beck, A. Cecil

  Edwards, Frank (Radnor)

  Isaacs, Rufus Daniel

  Bell, Richard

  Elibank, Master of

  Jacoby. Sir James Alfred

  Bellairs, Carlyon

  Erskine, David C.

  Johnson, John (Gateshead)

  Benn.Sir J,Williams(Devonp'rt

  Essex, R. W.

  Johnson. W. (Nuneaton)

  Benn,W.(T'w'r Hamlets.S.Geo.

  Esslemont, George Birnie

  Jones.Sir D. Brynmor(Swansaa)

  Bennett, E. N.

  Evans, Samuel T.

  Jones, Leif (Appleby)

  Berridge, T. H. D.

  Eve, Harry Trelawney

  Jones.William (Carnarvonshire

  Bertram, Julius

  Everett, R. Lacey

  Kearley, Hudson E.

  Bethell,SirJ.H.(Essex,Romf'rd

  Fenwick, Charles

  Kekewich, Sir George

  Bethell, T. R. (Essex, Maldon)

  Ferens, T. R,

  Kincaid-Smith, Captain

  Billson, Alfred

  Ferguson, R. C. Munro

  Laidlaw, Robert

  Birrell, Rt. Hon. Augustine

  Findlay, Alexander

  Lamb, Edmund G. (Leominster

  Brace, William

  Foster) Rt. Hon. Sir Walter

  Lamb. Ernest H. (Rochester)

  Bramsdon, T. A.

  Fowler, Rt. Hon. Sir Henry

  Lambert. George

  Branch, James

  Fuller, John Michael K.

  Lamont. Norman

  Brigg,John

  Fullerton, Hush

  Layland-Barratt, Francis

  Brocklehurst, W. B.

  Gardner.Col.Alan (Hereford,S.)

  Lehmann, R. C.

  Brodie, H. C.

  Gladstone. Rt. Hn. Herbert John

  Lever.W.H. (Cheshire, Wirral)

  Brooke; Stopford

  Goddard, Daniel Ford

  Levy, Maurice

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

  Gooch, George Peabody

  Lewis, John Herbert

  Bryce, J. Annan

  Greenwood, G. (Peterborough)

  Lough, Thomas

  Buchanan, Thomas Ryburn

  Griffith, Ellis J.

  Lupton, Arnold

  Buckmaster, Stanley O.

  Gulland, John W.

  Luttrell, Hugh Fownes

  Burns, Rt. Hon. John

  Gurdon, Sir W. Brampton

  Lyell, Charles Henry

  Burt, Rt. Hon. Thomas

  Haldane, Rt. Hon. Richard B.

  Lynch. H. B.

  Buxton,Rt.Hn.Sydney Charles

  Hall, Frederick

  Macdonald,J.M.(Falkirk B'ghs)

  Carr-Gomm, H. W.

  Harcourt, Right Hon. Lewis

  Mackarness, Frederic C.

  Causton,Rt. Hn. RichardKnight

  Hardy, George A. (Suffolk)

  Maclean, Donald

  Cawley, Sir Frederick

  Harmsworth, Cecil B. (Worc'r)

  Macnamara, Dr. Thomas J.

  Cheetham, John Frederick

  Harmsworth, R.L.(Caithn'ss-sh

  M'Crae, George

  Cherry, Rt. Hon. R. R.

  Hart-Davies, T.

  M'Kenna. Rt. Hon. Reginald

  Cleland, J. W.

  Harvey A. G. C. (Rochdale)

  M'Laren. Sir C. B. (Leicester

  Clough, William

  Harvey, W.E.(Derbyshire,N.E.

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

  Collins, Stephen (Lambeth)

  Harwood, George

  M'Micking, Major G.

  Collins,SirWm.J.(S.Pancras,W.

  Haslam, Lewis (Monmouth)

  Mallet, Charles E.

  Question put, "That the clause stand part of the Bill."
  Noes, 12G. (Division List No. 207.)

  Manfield, Harry (Northan.s)

  Rees, J. D.

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

  Markham, Arthur Basil

  Renton, Major Leslie

  Tomkinson, James

  Marks,G.Croydon(Launceston

  Richards, Thomas (W.Monm'th

  Torrance, Sir A. M.

  Marnham, F. J.

  Robertson, Rt. Hn. E.( Dundee

  Toulmin, George

  Mason, A. E. W. (Coventry)

  Robertson.Sir G.Scott(Bradf'rd

  Trevelyan, Charles Philips

  Massie, J.

  Robertson, J. M. (Tyneside)

  Ure, Alexander

  Menzies, Walter

  Robinson, S.

  Verney, F. W.

  Molteno, Percy Alport

  Robson, Sir William Snowdon

  Walters, John Tudor

  Mond, A.

  Roe, Sir Thomas

  Walton.Sir John L. (Leeds, S.)

  Money, L. G. Chiozza

  Rogers, F. E. Newman

  Walton, Joseph (Barnsley)

  Montgomery. H. G

  Rose, Charles Day

  Ward, John (Stoke upon Trent

  Morgan, G. Hay (Cornwall)

  Rutherford, V. H. (Brentford)

  Ward.W.Dudley (Southampt'n

  Morrell, Philip

  Samuel, Herbert L.(Cloveland)

  Waring, Walter

  Morse, L. 1..

  Samuel, S. M. (Whitechapel)

  Wilson, Eugene (Clackmannan)

  Morton, Alpheus Cleophas

  Schwann, (C Duncan (Hyde)

  Wason.John Cathcart (Orkney)

  Myer, Horatio

  Schwann.Sir C.E.(Manchester)

  Waterlow, D. S.

  Napier, T. B.

  Seaverns, J H.

  Watt, Henry A.

  Newnes, F. (Notts, Bassetlaw)

  Seely, Major J. B.

  Weir, James Galloway

  Nicholson,Charles N.(Doncast'r

  Shaw, Charles Edw. (Stafford)

  White, George (Norfolk)

  Norton, Capt. Cecil William

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

  White, J. D. ( Dumbartonshire)

  Nussey, Thomas Willans

  Sherwell, Arthur James

  White, Luke (York, E.R.)

  Nut-tall, Harry

  Shipman, Dr. John CJ.

  Whitehead, Rowland

  O'Donnell, C. J. (Walworth)

  Silcock. Thomas Ball

  Whitley,John Henry (Halifax)

  Partington, Oswald

  Simon, John Allsebrook

  Whittaker, Sir Thomas Palmer

  Pearce, Robert. (Staffs, Leek)

  Sinclair, Rt. Hon. John

  Wiles, Thomas

  Pearce, William (Limehouse)

  Smeaton, Donald Mackenzie

  Williams, J. (Glamorgan)

  Pearson,Sir W. D.(Colchester)

  Spicer, Sir Albert

  Williams,Llewellyri(Carmarth'n

  Philipps, J. Wynford (Pembroke

  Stanger. H. Y.

  Williamson, A.

  Philipps, Owen C (Pembroke)

  Stanley, H11. A.Lyulph(Chesh.

  Wills, Arthur Walters

  Pickersgill, Edward Hare

  Steadman, W. C

  Wilson, Hn.C.H.W.(Hull, W.)

  Pirie, Duncan V.

  Stewart, Halley (Greenock)

  Wilson John (Durham, Mid.)

  Pollard. Dr.

  Strachey, Sir Edward

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

  Price.C. E.(Edinburgh,Central)

  Straus, B. S.(Mile End)

  Winfrey, R.

  Price, Robert John(Norfolk,E.)

  Strauss, E. A. (Abingdon)

  Wood, T. M'Kinnon

  Priestley. Arthur (Grantham)

  Taylor, Austin (East Toxteth)

  Yoxall, James Henry

  Priestley, W. K.B.( Bradford, K.)

  Taylor, Theodore C.(Radcliffe)

  Radford, (G. H.

  Tennant, Sir Edward( Salisbury

  TELLERS FOR THE AYES—.Mr.

  Rainy, A. Rolland

  Tennant, H. J.(Berwickshire)

  Whiteley and Mr. J. A. Pease.

  Raphael, Herbert H.

  Thomas,Sir A. (Glamorgan, E.)

  Pease.

  Rea, Russell (Gloucester)

  Thomasson, Franklin

  NOES.

  Acland-Hood,Rt.Hn.SirAlex.F

  Clynes, J. R.

  Houston, Robert Paterson

  Anson, Sir William Reynell

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

  Hudson, Walter

  Anstruther-Gray, Major

  Corbett, A. Cameron (Glasgow)

  Hunt, Rowland

  Arkwright, John Stanhope

  Courthope, G. Loyd

  Jowett, F. W.

  Ashley, W. W.

  Craig.Charles Curtis (Antrim,S.

  Kennaway,Rt. Hon. Sir John H.

  Aubrey-Fletchcr,Rt.Hon.Sir H

  Craig.Captain James (Down, E.

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

  Balfour.Rt Hn.A..T.(City bond.

  Craik, Sir Henry

  King,Sir Henry Seymour (Hull)

  Banbury. Sir Frederick George

  Crooks, William

  Law, Andrew Bonar (Dulwich)

  Banner,.John S. Harmood

  Dalrymple, Viscount

  Lea,Hugh Cecil (St. Pancras, E.

  Barnes, G N.

  Dilke, Rt, Hon. Sir Charles

  Lee.Arthur H.(Hants.,Fareham

  Barrie, H T.( Londonderry, N.)

  Douglas, Rt. Hon. A. Akers

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

  Beckett, Hon. Gervase

  Duncan, C (Barrow-in-Furness

  Long,Col.Charles W.(Evesham)

  Bignold,.Sir Arthur

  Duncan,Robert (Lanark,Govan

  Lonsdale, John Brownlee

  Bowerman, C. W

  Faber, George Dension (York)

  Lyttelton, Rt. Hon. Alfred

  Bowles, G. Stewart

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

  Macdonald, J. R. (Leicester)

  Boyle, Sir Edward

  Fardell, Sir T. George

  Macpherson, J. T.

  Bridgeman, W.Clive

  Fell, Arthur

  Marks, H. H. (Kent)

  Bull, Sir William James

  Fletcher, J. S.

  Meysey-Thompson, E. C.

  Burdett-Coutts, \

  Forster, Henry William

  Mildmay, Francis Bingham

  Butcher, Samuel Henry

  Gibbs, G. A. (Bristol, West)

  Morpeth, Viscount

  Byles, William Pollard

  Gill, A. H.

  Muntz, Sir Philip A.

  Carlile, E. Hildred

  Glover, Thomas

  Nicholson,Wm. G. (Petersfield)

  Castlereagh, Viscount

  Harrison-Broadley, H. B.

  O'Grady, J.

  Cave, George

  Helmsley, Viscount

  O'Neill, Hon. Robert Torrens

  Cavendish, Rt.Hn. Victor C. W.

  Henderson, Arthur (Durham)

  Parker, Sir Gilbert (Gravesend)

  Cecil, Evelyn (Aston Manor)

  Hervey,F.W.F.(BuryS. Edm'ds

  Parker, James (Halifax)

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

  Hill, Sir Clement (Shrewsbury)

  Parkes, Ebenezer

  Channing, Sir Francis Allston

  Hills, J. W.

  Powell, Sir Francis Sharp

  Chaplin, Rt. Hon. Henry

  Hope, John Deans (Fife, West)

  Ratcliff, Major R, F.

  594

  595

  Rawlinson,JohnFrederick Peel

  Sloan, Thomas Henry

  Walsh, Stephen

  Remnant, James Farquharson

  Smith.F.E. (Liverpool,Walton)

  Warde, Col. C E. (Kent, Mid.)

  Richards,T. F.(Wolverh'mpt'n)

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

  Wardle, George J.

  Roberts, G. H. (Norwich)

  Starkey, John R.

  Williams, Col. R. (Dorset, W.)

  Roberts.S. (Sheffield, Ecclesall)

  Stone, Sir Benjamin

  Willoughby de Eresby, Lord

  Rothschild,Hon. Lionel Walter

  Summerbell, T.

  Wilson, W. T. (Westhoughton )

  Rutherford, John (Lancashire)

  Sutherland, J. E.

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

  Rutherford, W. W. (Liverpool)

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

  Wyndham, Rt. Hon. George

  Salter, Arthur Clavell

  Taylor, John W. (Durham)

  Younger, George

  Sandys, Lieut.-Col. Thos Myles

  Thomson,W. Mitchell (Lanark)

  Scott,A.H.(Ashton under Lyne

  Thorne, William

  TELLERS FOR THE NOES—

  Scott, Sir S. (Marylebone, W.)

  Valentia, Viscount

  Lord Edmund Talbot and

  Seddon, J.

  Vincent, Col. Sir( E. Howard

  Lord Balcarres.

  Shackleton, David James

  Walker,Col.W.H. (Lancashire)

  Sheflicld,SirBerkeloyGeorge D.

  Walrond, Hon. Lionel

  Clause 10:
  The Committee divided:—Ayes, 281;

  AYES.

  Abraham, William (Rhondda)

  Cawley, Sir Frederick

  Gulland, John W.

  Acland, Francis Dyke

  Channing, Sir Francis Allston

  Gurdon, Sir W. Brampton

  Agnew, George William

  Cheetham, John Frederick

  Haldane, Rt. Hon. Richard B.

  Ainsworth, John Stirling

  Cherry, Rt. Hon. R. R.

  Hall, Frederick

  Alden, Percy

  Cleland, J. W.

  Harcourt, Et. Hon. Lewis

  Allen,A.Acland (Christchurch)

  Clough, William

  Hardy, George A. (Suffolk)

  Allen, Charles P. (Stroud)

  Collins, Stephen (Lambeth)

  Harmsworth, Cecil B. (Wore'r)

  Armitage, R.

  Collins,SirWm.J.(S.Pancras W.

  Harmsworth,R.L.(Caithn'ss-sh

  Armstrong, W. C. Heaton

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

  Hart-Davies, T.

  Ashton, Thomas Gair

  Cornwall, Sir Edwin A.

  Harvey, A. G. C. (Rochdale)

  Asquith,Rt.Hon HerbertHenry

  Cory, Clifford John

  Harvey, W.E.(Derbyshire,N.E.

  Astbury, John Meir

  Cotton, Sir H. J. S.

  Harwood, George

  Baker, Sir John (Portsmouth)

  Cowan, W. H.

  Haslam, Lewis (Monmouth)

  Baker, Joseph A. (Finsbury, E.)

  Craig. Herbert J. (Tynemouth)

  Haworth, Arthur A.

  Barker, John

  Crosfield, A. H.

  Hazel, Dr. A. E.

  Barlow, JohnEmmott(Somerset

  Crossley, William J.

  Hedges, A. Paget

  Barlow, Percy (Bedford)

  Dalziel, James Henry

  Helme, Norval Watson

  Barran, Rowland Hirst

  Davies,David (MontgomeryCo.

  Hemmerde, Edward George

  Barry,Redmond J. (Tyrone,N.)

  Davies, Ellis William (Eifion)

  Henderson,J.M.(Aberdeen, W.)

  Beck, A. Cecil

  Davies, Timothy (Fulham)

  Henry, Charles S.

  Bell, Richard

  Davies, W. Howell (Bristol, S.)

  Herbert.Colonel Ivor (Mon., S.)

  Bellairs, Carlyon

  Dewar, Arthur (Edinburgh, S.)

  Herbert, T. Arnold (Wycombe)

  Benn,SirJ.Williams (Devonp'rt

  Dewar, John A. (Inverness-sh.)

  Higham, John Sharp

  Benn, W.(T'w'rHamlets,S.Geo.

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

  Hobart, Sir Robert

  Bennett, E. N.

  Dilke, Rt. Hon. Sir Charles

  Hobhouse, Charles E. H.

  Berridge, T. H. D.

  Dunne, MajorE.Martin(Walsall

  Holland, Sir William Henry

  Bertram, Julius

  Edwards, Clement (Denbigh)

  Holt, Richard Durning

  Bethell, SirJ.H.(Essex,Romf'rd

  Edwards, Enoch (Hanley)

  Hope, John Deans (Fife, West)

  Bethell, T. It. (Essex, Maldon)

  Edwards, Frank (Radnor)

  Horniman, Emslie John

  Billson, Alfred

  Erskine, David C.

  Horridge, Thomas Gardner

  Birrell, Rt. Hon. Augustine

  Essex, R. W.

  Howard, Hon. Geoffrey

  Brace, William

  Esslemont, George Birnie

  Hutton, Alfred Eddison

  Bramsdon, T. A.

  Evans, Samuel T.

  Hyde, Claredon

  Branch, James

  Eve, Harry Trelawney

  Isaacs, Rufus Daniel

  Brigg, John

  Everett, R. Lacey

  Jacoby, Sir James Alfred

  Brocklehurst, W. B.

  Fenwick, Charles

  Johnson, John (Gateshead)

  Brodie, H. C,

  Ferens, T. R.

  Johnson, W. (Nuncaton)

  Brooke, Stopford

  Findlay, Alexander

  Jones, Sir D.Brynmor(Swansea

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

  Foster, Rt. Hon. Sir Walter

  Jones, Leif (Appleby)

  Bryce, J. Annan

  Fuller, John Michael F.

  Jones,William (Carnarvonshire

  Buchanan, Thomas Ryburn

  Fullerton, Hugh

  Kearley, Hudson E.

  Buckmaster, Stanley O.

  Furness, Sir Christopher

  Kekewich, Sir George

  Burns, Rt. Hon. John

  Gardner, Col. Alan (Hereford.S.

  Kincaid-Smith, Captain

  Burt, Rt. Hon. Thomas

  Gladstone, Rt.Hn.HerbertJohn

  Laidlaw, Robert

  Buxton, Rt.Hn.Sydney Charles

  Goddard, Daniel Ford

  Lamb, Edmund G.(Leominster

  Byles, William Pollard

  Gooch, George Peabody

  Lamb, Ernest H. (Rocheter)

  Carr-Gomm, H. W.

  Greenwood, G. (Peterborough)

  Lambert, George

  Causton,Rt.Hn.RichrdKnight

  Griffith, Ellis J.

  Lamont, Norman

  Question put, "That the clause stand part of the Bill."
  Noes, 120. (Division List No. 208.)

  Layland-Barratt, Francis

  Pearson, SirW.D. (Colchester)

  Straus, B. S. (Mile End)

  Lehmann, R. C.

  Philipps, J. Wynford(Pembroke

  Strauss. E. A. (Abingdon)

  Lever, W.H. (Cheshire, Wirral)

  Philipps, Owen C. (Pembroke)

  Taylor, Austin (East Toxteth)

  Levy, Maurice

  Pickersgill, Edward Hare

  Taylor, Theodore C. (Radcliffe)

  Lewis, John Herbert

  Pirie, Duncan V.

  Tennant,SirEdward(Salisbury)

  Lough, Thomas

  Pollard, Dr.

  Tennant, H. J. (Berwickshire)

  Lupton, Arnold

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

  Thomas,SirA.(Glamorgan,E.)

  Lyell, Charles Henry

  Price, Robert John( Norfolk, E.)

  Thomasson, Franklin

  Lynch, H. B.

  Priestley, Arthur (Grantham)

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

  Macdonald,J.M.(FalkirkB'ghs)

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

  Tomkinson, James

  Mackarness, Frederic C.

  Radford, G. H.

  Torrance, Sir A. M.

  Maclean, Donald

  Rainy, A. Rolland

  Toulmin, George

  Macnamara, Dr. Thomas J.

  Raphael, Herbert. H.

  Trevelyan, Charles Philips

  M'Crae, George

  Rea, Russell (Gloucester)

  Ure, Alexander

  M'Kenna, Rt. Hon. Reginald

  Rees, J. D.

  Verney, F. W.

  M'Laren, Sir C. B. (Leicester)

  Renton, Major Leslie

  Walters, John Tudor

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

  Richards, Thomas(W.Monm'th

  Walton, Sir John L. (Leeds,S.)

  M'Micking, Major G.

  Robertson,Rt.Hn.E. (Dundee)

  Walton, Joseph (Barnsley)

  Maddison, Frederick

  Robertson,SirG.Scott(Bradf'rd

  Ward, John (Stoke upon Trent

  Mallet, Charley E.

  Robertson, J. M. (Tyneside)

  Ward, W.Dudley( Southampton

  Manfield, Harry (Northants)

  Robinson, S.

  Waring, Walter

  Markham, Arthur Basil

  Robson, Sir William Snowdon

  Wason, Eugene(Clackmannan)

  Marks,G.Croydon(Launceston)

  Roe, Sir Thomas

  Wason,John Cathcart( Orkney)

  Marnham, F. J.

  Rogers, F. E. Newman

  Waterlow, D. S.

  Mason, A. E. W (Coventry)

  Ross, Charles Day

  Watt, Henry A.

  Massie, J.

  Rutherford, V. H. (Brentford)

  Weir. James Galloway

  Menzies, Walter

  Samuel, Herbert-L. (Cleveland)

  White, George (Norfolk)

  Molteno,Percy Alport

  Samuel, S. M. (Whitechapel)

  White, J. D. (Dumbartonshire)

  Mond, A.

  Schwann, C. Duncan (Hyde)

  White, Luke (York, E.R.)

  Money, L. G. Chiozza

  Schwann,SirC.E.( Manchester)

  Whitehead, Rowland

  Montgomery, H. G

  Scott, A. H.(AshtonunderLyne)

  Whitley, John Henry (Halifax)

  Morgan, G. Hay (Cornwall)

  Seaverns, J. H.

  Whittaker, Sir Thomas Palmer

  Morrell, Philip

  Seely, Major J. B.

  Wiles, Thomas

  Morse, L. L.

  Shaw, Charles Edw. (Stafford)

  Williams, J. (Glamorgan)

  Morion, Alpheus Cleophas

  Shaw, Rt. Hon. T. (HawickB.)

  Williams,Llewelyn(Carmarth'n

  Myer, Horatio

  Sherwell, Arthur James

  Williamson, A.

  Napier, T. B.

  Shipman, Dr. John G.

  Wills, Arthur Walters

  Newnes, F (Notts Bastlaw)

  Silcock, Thomas Ball

  Wilson, Hon. C. H.W.(Hull,W.

  Newnes Sir George (Swansea)

  Simon, John Allsebrook

  Wilson, John (Durham, Mid.)

  Nicholson.Charles.N (Doncast'r

  Sinclair, Rt. Hon. John

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

  Norton. Capt. Cecil William

  Smeaton, Donald Mackenzie

  Winfrey, R.

  Nussey, Thomas Willans

  Spicer, Sir Albert

  Wood. T. M'Kinnon

  Nuttall, Harry

  Granger, H. Y.

  Yoxall, James Henry

  O'Donnell, C.J. (Walworth)

  Stanley, Hn. A. Lyulph (Chesh.)

  Partington, Oswald

  Steadman, W. C.

  TELLERS FOR THE AYES—Mr.

  Pearce, Robert (Staffs., Leek)

  Stewart, Halley (Greenock)

  Whiteley and Mr. J. A.

  Pearce, William (Limehouse)

  Strachey, Sir Edward

  Pease.

  NOES.

  Anson, Sir William Reynell

  Cecil, Evelyn (Aston Manor)

  Gill, A. H.

  Anstruther-Gray, Major

  Chamberlain,RtHn.J.A.(Worc.

  Glover, Thomas

  Arkwright, John Stanhope

  Chaplin, Rt. Hon. Henry

  Harrison-Broadley, H. B.

  Ashley, W. W.

  Clynes, J. R.

  Helmsley, Viscount

  Aubrey-Fletcher,Rt.Hon.SirH.

  Coates, E. Feetham (Lewisham

  Henderson, Arthur (Durham)

  Balcarres. Lord

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

  Hervey,F.W.F.(BuryS. Edm'ds

  Balfour, RtHn.A.J.(CityLond.)

  Corbett, A. Cameron (Glasgow)

  Hill.SirClement (Shrewsbury)

  Banbury, Sir Frederick George

  Courthope, G. Loyd

  Hills, J. W.

  Banner, John S. Harmood-

  Craig, CharlesCurtis(Antrim, S.

  Houston, Robert Paterson

  Barnes, G. N.

  Craig, Captain James( Down, E.)

  Hudson, Walter

  Barrie, H. T. (Londonderry,N.)

  Craik, Sir Henry

  Hunt. Rowland

  Beckett, Hon. Gervase

  Crooks, William

  Jowett, F. W.

  Bowerman, C. W.

  Dalrymple, Viscount

  Kennaway.Rt. Hon.Sir JohnH.

  Bowles, G. Stewart

  Douglas, Rt. Hon. A. Akers-

  Kenyon-Slaney,Rt.Hon.C'ol.W.

  Boyle, Sir Edward

  Duncan, C.(Barrow-in-Furness

  King,SirHenrySeymour(Hull)

  Bridgeman, W. Clive

  Duncan, Robert (Lanark,Govan

  Law, Andrew Bonar (Dulwich

  Bull, Sir William James

  Faber, George Denison (York)

  Lea,HughCecil(St.Pancras, E.)

  Burdett-Coutts, W.

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

  Lee, ArthurH.( Hants.,Fareham

  Butcher, Samuel Henry

  Fardell, Sir T. George

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

  Carlile, E. Hildred

  Fell, Arthur

  Lonsdale, John Brownlee

  Castlereagh, Viscount

  Fletcher, J. P.

  Luttrell, Hugh Fownes

  Cave, George

  Forster, Henry William

  Lyttelton, Rt. Hon. Alfred

  Cavendish, Rt. Hon. VictorC. W.

  Gibbs, G. A. ('Bristol, West)

  Macdonald, J. R. (Leicester)

  598

  599

  Macpherson, J. T.

  Rutherford, John (Lancashire)

  Thornton, Percy M.

  Marks, H. H. (Kent)

  Rutherford, W. W. (Liverpool)

  Vincent. Col, Sir C. E. Howard

  Meysey-Thompson, E. (

  Salter, Arthur Clavell

  Walker,Col.W.H.(Lancashire)

  Middlemore, JohnThrogmorton

  Sandys, Lieut. -Col.Thos.Myles

  Walrond, Hon. Lionel

  Mildmay, Francis Bingham

  Scott, Sir S. (Marylebone, W.)

  Walsh, Stephen

  Morpeth, Viscount

  Seddon, J.

  Warde, Col. C. E. (Kent, Mid.)

  Muntz, Sir Philip A.

  Shackleton, David James

  Wardle, George J.

  Nicholson, Wm.G.(Petersfield)

  Sheffield,SirBerkeleyGeorgeD.

  Williams. Col.R, (Dorset, W.)

  O'Grady, J.

  Sloan, Thomas Henry

  Willoughby de Eresby, Lord

  O'Neill," Hon. Robert Torrens

  Smith,F.E. (Liverpool,Walton)

  Wilson. W. T. (Westhoughton)

  Parker,SirGilbert(Gravesend)

  Starkey, John R.

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

  Parker, James (Halifax)

  Stone, Sir Benjamin

  Wyndham. Rt. Hon. George

  Parkes, Ebenezer

  Summerbell, T.

  Younger. George

  Rawlinson,JohnFrederickPeel

  Sutherland, J. K.

  Remnant, James Farquharson

  Talbot, Lord E. (Chichester)

  Richards, T.F.(Wolverh'mpt'n

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

  TELLERS FOR THE NOES—Sir

  Roberts, G. H. (Norwich)

  Taylor, John W. (Durham)

  Alexander Acland - Hood and Viscount Valentia.

  Roberts,S.(Slieffield,Ecclesall)

  Thomson,W.Mitchell- (Lanark)

  Rothschild, Hon.Lionel Walter

  Thorne, William

  Clause 11:
  Question put, "That the clause stand part of the Bill."

  AYES.

  Abraham, William (Rhondda)

  Burns, Rt. Hon. John

  Fenwick, Charles

  Acland, Francis Dyke

  Burt, Rt. Hon. Thomas

  Ferens. T. R,

  Agnew, George William

  Buxton,Rt. Hn.SydneyCharles

  Ferguson, R. C. Munro

  Ainsworth, John Stirling

  Byles, William Pollard

  Findlay. Alexander

  Alden, Percy

  CarrGomm, H. W.

  Foster Rt. Hon. Sir Walter

  Allen.A Acland(Christehurch)

  Causton,Rt.HnRichard Knight

  Fuller, John Michael F.

  Allen, Charles P. (Stroud)

  Cawley, Sir Frederick

  Fullerton, Hugh

  Armitage, R.

  Channing, Sir Francis Allston

  Furness, Sir Christopher

  Armstrong, W. C. Heaton

  Cheetham, John Frederick

  Gardner.Col.Alan(Hereford,S.)

  Ashton, Thomas Gair

  Cherry, Rt, Hon. R. R,

  Gill, A. H.

  Asquith.Rt.Hon HerbertHenry

  Cleland, J. W.

  Gladstone,Rt. Hn HerbertJohn

  Astbury, John Meir

  Clough, William

  Glover, Thomas

  Baker, Sir John (Portsmouth)

  Clynes, J. R.

  Goddard, Daniel Ford

  Baker,Joseph A (Finsbury,E)

  Collins, Stephen (Lambeth)

  Gooch. George Peabody

  Barker, John

  Collins,SirWm J.(S.Pancras,W.

  Greenwood, G. (Peterborough)

  Barlow, JohnKmmott(Somerset

  Corbett,C.H. (Sussex,EGrinst'd

  Griffith. Ellis J.

  Barlow, Percy (Bedford)

  Cornwall, Sir Edwin A.

  Gulland. John W.

  Barnes, G. N.

  Cory, Clifford John

  Gurdon, Sir W. Brampton

  Barran, Rowland Hirst

  Cotton, Sir H. J. S.

  Haldane, Rt, Hon. Richard B.

  Barry,Redmond J.(Tyrone,N.)

  Cowan, W. H.

  Hall, Frederick

  Beck, A. Cecil

  Craig, Herbert J(Tynemouth)

  Harcourt, Rt, Hon. Lewis

  Bell, Richard

  Crooks, William

  Hardy. George A. (Suffolk)

  Bellairs, Carlyon

  Crosfield, A. H.

  Harmsworth, Cecil B.(Worc'r)

  Benn,Sir J Williams(Devonp'rt

  Crossley. William J.

  Harmsworth R.L. (Caithn'ss-sh

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

  Dalziel, James Henry

  Hart-Davies, T.

  Bennett, E. N.

  Davies, David (MontgomeryCo.

  Harvey. A. C. G. (Rochdale)

  Berridge, T. H. D.

  Davies, Ellis William (Eifion)

  Harvey, W.E.(Derbyshire, N.E.

  Bertram, Julius

  Davies, Timothy (Fulham)

  Harwood, George

  Bethell,SirJ.H (Essex,Romf'rd

  Davies, W.Howell (Bristol, S.)

  Haslam. Lewis (Monmouth)

  Bethell, T. R. (Essex, Maldon)

  Dewar, Arthur (Edinburgh, S.)

  Ha worth, Arthur A.

  Billson, Alfred

  Dewar, John A. (Inverness-sh.

  Hazel. Dr. A. E.

  Birrell, Rt. Hon. Augustine

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

  Hedges, A. Paget

  Bowerman, C. W.

  Duncan, C,(Barrow-in-Furness

  Helme, Norval Watson

  Brace, William

  Dunne,MajorE Martin(Walsall)

  Hemmerde, Edward George

  Bramsdon, T. A.

  Edwards, Clement (Denbigh)

  Henderson, Arthur (Durham)

  Branch, James

  Edwards, Enoch (Hanley)

  Henry. Charles S.

  Brigg, John

  Edwards, Frank (Radnor)

  Herbert. Colonel Ivor (Mon. S)

  Brocklehurst, W. B.

  Elibank, Master of

  Herbert,T. Arnold (Wycombe)

  Brodie, H. C.

  Erskine, David C.

  Higham, John Sharp

  Brooke, Stopford

  Essex, R. W.

  Hobart, Sir Robert

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

  Esslemont, George Birnie

  Hobhouse. Charles E. H.

  Bryce, J. Annan

  Evans, Samuel T.

  Holland, Sir William Henry

  Buchanan, Thomas Ryburn

  Eve, Harry Trelawney

  Holt, Richard Durning

  Buckmaster, Stanley O

  Everett, R. Lacey

  Hope, John Deans (Fife, West)

  The Committee divided:—Ayes, 300; Noes, 99. (Division List No. 209.)

  Horniman, Emslic John

  Morton, Alpleus Cleophas

  Spicer, Sir Albert

  Horridge, Thomas Gardner

  Myer, Horatio

  Stanger, H. Y.

  Howard, Hon. Geoffrey

  Napier, T. B.

  Stanley,Hn. A. Lyulph(Chesh.)

  Hudson, Walter

  Newnes, F. (Notts, Bassetlaw)

  Steadman, W. C.

  Hut-ton, Alfred Eddison

  Newnes, Sir George (Swansea)

  Stewart, Halley (Greenock)

  Hyde, Clarendon

  Nicholson. Charles N.( Doncaster

  Strachey, Sir Edward

  Isaacs, Rufus Daniel

  Norton, Capt. Cecil William

  Straus, B. S (Mile End)

  Jacoby, Sir James Alfred

  Nussey, Thomas Willans

  Strauss, E. A. (Abingdon)

  Johnson, John (Gateshead)

  Nuttall, Harry

  Summerbell, T.

  Johnson, W. (Nuneaton)

  O'Donnell, C. J. (Walworth)

  Sutherland, J. E.

  Jones,Sir I). Brynmor(Swansea)

  Parker, James (Halifax)

  Taylor, Austin (East Toxteth)

  Jones, Leif (Appleby)

  Partington, Oswald

  Taylor, John W. (Durham)

  Jones,William (Carnarvonshire

  Pearce, Robert (Staffs. Leek)

  Taylor, Theodore C. (Radcliffe)

  Jowett, F. W.

  Pearce, William (Limehouse)

  Tennant, Sir Ed ward( Salisbury

  Kearley, Hudson E.

  Pearson.Sir W. D. (Colchester)

  Tennant, H. J. (Berwickshire)

  Kekewich, Sir George

  Philipps,J Wynford (Pembroke

  Thomas,Sir A(Glamorgan, E.)

  Kineaid-Smith, Captain

  Philips, Owen C. (Pembroke)

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

  Laidlaw, Robert

  Pickersgill, Edward Hare

  Tomkinson, James

  Lamb,Edmund G. (Leominster)

  Pirie, Duncan V.

  Toulmin, George

  Lamb, Ernest- H. (Rochester)

  Pollard, Dr.

  Trevelyan, Charles Philips

  Lamont, Norman

  Price.C. E. (Erlinb'gh.Central)

  Ure. Alexander

  Layland- Barratt, Franc is

  Price,Robert John( Norfolk, E.)

  Verney, F. W.

  Lea,Hugh Cecil(St. Pancras,E.)

  Priestley, Arthur (Grantham)

  Walsh, Stephen

  Lehmann, R. C.

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

  Walters. John Tudor

  Lover, (Cheshire, Wirral)

  Radford, G. H.

  Walton, Sir John L.(Leeds. S.)

  Levy, Maurice

  Rainy, A. Rolland

  Walton. Joseph (Barnsley)

  Lewis..John Herbert

  Raphael, Herbert H.

  Ward. John (Stoke upon Trent)

  Lough, Thomas

  Rea. Russell (Gloucester)

  Ward.W. Dudley(Southampton

  Lupton, Arnold

  Rees, J. D.

  Wart Me, George J.

  Luttrell, Hugh Fownes

  Renton, Major Leslie

  Waring, Walter

  Lyell, Charles Henry

  Richards,Thomas( W. Monm'th

  Wason, Eugene(Clackmannan)

  Lynch, H. B.

  Richards, T.F.( Wolverhsimpt'n

  Wason,John Catheart (Orkney)

  Macdonald, J. R. (Leicester)

  Roberts, G. H. (Norwich)

  Warerlow, D. S.

  Macdonald,J.M.(Falkirk B'ghs

  Robertson,Rt. Hn. E. (Dundee)

  Watt, Henry A.

  Mackarness, Frederic; C.

  Robertson, SirG. Scot t( Bradford

  Weir. James Gelioway

  Maclean, Donald

  Robertson, J. M. (Tyneside)

  White, George (Notfolk)

  Macnamara, Dr. Thomas J.

  Robinson, S.

  White, J. D. (Dumbartonshire)

  M'Crae, George

  Robson, Sir William Snowdon

  White, Luke (York, E.R.)

  M'Kenna, Rt. Hon. Reginald

  Roe, Sir Thomas

  Whitehead, Rowland

  M'Laren, Sir C. B. (Leicester)

  Rogers. F. E. Newman

  Whitley,John Henry (Halifax)

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

  Rose, Charles Day

  Whittaker, Sir Thomas Paimer

  M'Micking, Major G.

  Rutherford, V. H. (Brentford)

  Wiles, Thomas

  Maddison, Frederick

  Samuel, Herbert L. (Cleveland)

  Williams, J. (Glamorgan)

  Mallet, Charles E.

  Samuel, S. M. (White-chapel)

  Williams,Lleweiyn( Carmarthen

  Manfield, Harry (Northants)

  Schwann, (Duncan (Hyde)

  Williamson, A.

  Markham, Arthur Basil

  Schwann,Sir C. K.(Manchester)

  Wills, Arthur Walters

  Marks,G. Croydon(Launceston)

  Scott,A.H.(Ashton under Lyne

  Wilson, Hon.C.H.W.(Hull, W.)

  Marnham, F. J.

  Seaverns, J. H.

  Wilson, John (Durham, Mid)

  Mason, A. E. W. (Coventry)

  Seely, Major J. B.

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

  Massie, J.

  Shackleton, David James

  Winfrey, R.

  Menzies. Walter

  Shaw, Charles Edw. (Stafford)

  Wood, T. M'Kinnon

  Molteno, Percy Alport

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

  Yoxall. James Henry

  Mond, A.

  Sherwell, Arthur James

  Money, L. G. Chiozza

  Shipman, Dr. John G.

  Montgomery, H. C.

  Silcock, Thomas Ball

  TELLERS FOR THE AYES—Mr.

  Morgan, G. Hay (Cornwall)

  Simon, John Allsebrook

  Whiteley and Mr. J. A. Pease.

  Morrell, Philip"

  Sinclair, Rt. Hon. John

  Morse, L. L.

  Smeaton, Donald Mackenzie

  NOES.

  Acland-Hood.RtHn.SirAlex.F.

  Bowles, G. Stewart

  Chaplin, Rt. Hon. Henry

  Anson, Sir William Reynell j

  Boyle, Sir Edward

  Coates, E. Feetham(Lewisham)

  Anstruther-Gray, Major.

  Bridgeman, W. Clive

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

  Ark Wright, John Stanhope

  Bull, Sir William James

  Corbett, A. Cameron (Glasgow)

  Ashley; W. W.

  Burdett-Coutts, W.

  Courthope, G. Loyd

  Aubrey-Fletcher.Rt.Hon.SirH.

  Butcher, Samuel Henry

  Craig,CharlesCurtis(Antrim, S.)

  Balfour.Rt HnA.J.(City Lond, '

  Carlile, K. Hil Ired

  Craig.Captain James( Down, E.)

  Banbury. Sir Frederick George

  Castlereagh, Viscount

  Craik, Sir Henry

  Banner, John S. Harmood-

  Cave, George

  Dalrymple, Viscount

  Barrie,H. T. (Londonderry.N.)

  Cavendish, Rt. Hon. Victor C.W.

  Douglas. Rt. Hon. A. Akers-

  Beckert, Hon. Gervase

  Cecil, Evelyn (Aston Manor)

  Faber, George Denison (York)

  Bignold, Sir Arthur

  Chamberlain,RtHn.J.A.(Worc.

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

  602

  603

  Fardell, Sir T. George

  Middlemore, John Throgmorton

  Starkey, John R.

  Fell, Arthur

  Mildmay, Francis Bingham

  Stone, Sir Benjamin

  Fletcher, J. S.

  Morpeth, Viscount

  Talbot,Rt.Hn.J.G.(Oxfd Univ.

  Forster, Henry William

  Muntz, Sir Philip A.

  Thomson. W. Mitchell (Lanark)

  Gibbs, G. A. (Bristol, West)

  Nicholson, Wm. G.(Petersfield)

  Thorne, William

  Harrison-Broadley, H. B.

  O'Grady, J.

  Thornton, Percy M.

  Helmsley, Viscount

  Parker, Sir Gilbert (Gravesend)

  Valentia, Viscount

  Hervey,F.W.F.(BuryS.Edmd's

  Parkes, Ebenezer

  Vincent, ('ol. Sir C. E. Howard

  Hill, Sir Clement (Shrewsbury)

  Ratcliff, Major R. F.

  Walker, Col.W.H.(Lancashire)

  Hills, J. W.

  Rawlinson.John Frederick Peel

  Walrond, Hon. Lionel

  Houston, Robert Paterson

  Remnant, James Farquharson

  Warde, Col. C. E. (Kent, Mid)

  Hunt, Rowland

  Roberts, S.(Sheffield, Ecclesall)

  Williams, Col. R. (Dorset, W.)

  Kennaway,Rt.Hn. Sir John H.

  Rothschild, Hon. Lionel Walter

  Willoughby dc Eresby, Lord

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

  Rutherford, John (Lancashire)

  Wilson. W. T. (Westhoughton)

  King,Sir Henry Seymour (Hull)

  Rutherford, W. W. (Liverpool)

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

  Lee.Arthur H. (Hants., Fareham

  Salter, Arthur Clavell

  Wyndham, Rt. Hon. George

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

  Sandys, Lieut-Col. Thos. Myles

  Younger, George

  Long,Col.Charles W.(Evesham)

  Scott, Sir S. (Marylebone, W.)

  Lonsdale, John Brownlee

  Seddon, J.

  Lyttelton, Rt. Hon. Alfred

  Sheffield,Sir Berkeley GeorgeD.

  TELLERS FOR THE NOES.—Lord

  Macpherson, J. T.

  Sloan, Thomas Henry

  Edmund Talbot and Lord

  Marks, H. H. (Kent)

  Smith,F.E.(Liverpool, Walton)

  Balcarres.

  Meysey-Thomson, E. C.

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

  Clause 12:
  Question put, "That the clause stand part of the Bill."

  AYES.

  Abraham, William (Rhondda)

  Buchanan, Thomas Ryburn

  Essex, R. W.

  Acland, Francis Dyke

  Buckmaster, Stanley O.

  Esslemont, George Birnie

  Agnew, George William

  Burns, Rt. Hon. John

  Evans, Samuel T.

  Ainsworth, John Stirling

  Burt, Rt. Hon. Thomas

  Eve, Harry Trelawney

  Alden, Percy

  Buxton.Rt.Hn.Sydney Charles

  Everett, R. Lacey

  Allen,A.Acland (Christchurch)

  Byles, William Pollard

  Fenwick, Charles

  Allen, Charles P, (Stroud)

  Carr-Gomm, H. W.

  Ferens, T. R.

  Armitage, R.

  Causton, Rt. Hn. RichardKnight

  Ferguson. R. C. Munro

  Armstrong, W. C. Heaton

  Cawley, Sir Frederick

  Findlay, Alexander

  Ashton, Thomas Gair

  Cheetham, John Frederick

  Foster, Rt, Hon. Sir Walter

  Asquith,Rt.Hn.Herbert Henry

  Cherry, Rt, Hon. R. R.

  Fuller, John Michael F.

  Astbury, John Meir

  Cleland, J. W.

  Fullerton, Hugh

  Baker Sir John (Portsmouth)

  Clough, William

  Furness, Sir Christopher

  Baker, Joseph A.(Finsbury,E.)

  Clynes, J. R.

  Gardner,Col.Alan (Hereford.S.)

  Barker, John

  Collins, Stephen (Lambeth)

  Gill, A. H.

  Barlow,JohnEmmott (Somerset

  Collins,SirWm.J.(S.Pancras,W.

  Gladstone. Rt.Hn.HerbertJohn

  Barlow, Percy (Bedford)

  Corbett,C.H.(Sussex,E.Grinsfd

  Glover, Thomas

  Barran, Rowland Hirst

  Cornwall, Sir Edwin A.

  Goddard. Daniel Ford

  Barry, Redmond J.(Tyrone,N.)

  Cory, Clifford John

  Gooch, George Peabody

  Beck, A. Cecil

  Cotton, Sir H. J. S.

  Greenwood, G. (Peterborough)

  Bellairs, Carlyon

  Cowan, W. H.

  Griffith, Ellis J.

  Benn,SirJ.Williams(Devonport

  Craig, Herbert J.(Tynemouth)

  Gulland, John W.

  Benn,W.(T'w'r Hamlets.S.Geo.

  Crooks, William

  Gurdon, Sir W. Brampton

  Bennett, E. N.

  Crosfield, A. H.

  Haldane, Rt. Hon. Richard B.

  Berridge, T. H. D.

  Crossley, William J.

  Hall, Frederick

  Bertram, Julius

  Dalziel, James Henry

  Harcourt, Rt. Hon. Lewis

  Bethell Sir J.H.(Essex,Romf'rd

  Davies, David (Montgomery Co

  Hardy, George A. (Suffolk)

  Bethell, T. R. (Essex, Maldon)

  Davies, Ellis William (Eifion)

  Harmsworth, Cecil B. (Worc'r)

  Billson, Alfred

  Davies, Timothy (Fulham)

  Harmsworth,R.L.(Caithness-sh

  Birrell, Rt. Hon. Augustine

  Davies, W. Howell (Bristol, S.)

  Hart-Davies, T.

  Bowerman, C. W.

  Dewar, Arthur (Edinburgh, S.)

  Harvey, A. G. C. (Rochdale)

  Brace, William

  Dewar, John A. (Inverness-sh.)

  Harvey, W.E. (Derbyshire,N.E.

  Bramsdon, T. A.

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

  Harwood, George

  Branch, James

  Duncan.C. (Barrow-in-Furness)

  Haslam, Lewis (Monmouth)

  Brigg, John

  Dunne,Major E.Martin(Walsall

  Haworth, Arthur A.

  Brocklehurst, W. B.

  Edwards, Clement Denbigh)

  Hazel, Dr. A. E.

  Brodie, H. C.

  Edwards, Enoch (Hanley)

  Hedges, A, Paget

  Brooke, Stopford

  Edwards, Frank (Radnor)

  Helme, Norval Watson

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

  Elibank, Master of

  Hemmerde, Edward George

  Bryce, J. Annan

  Erskine, David C.

  Henderson, Arthur (Durham)

  The Committee divided:—Ayes, 289
  Noes, 105. (Division List No. 210.)

  Henry, Charles S.

  Money, L. G. Chiozza

  Simon, John Allsebrook

  Herbert, Colonel Ivor (Mon.,S.)

  Montgomery, H. G.

  Sinclair, Rt. Hon. John

  Herbert, T. Arnold (Wycombe)

  Morgan, G. Hay (Cornwall)

  Smeaton, Donald Mackenzie

  Higham, John Sharp

  Morrell, Philip

  Spicer, Sir Albert

  Hobart, Sir Robert

  Morse, L. L.

  Stanger, H. Y.

  Hobhouse, Charles E. H.

  Morton, Alpheus Cleophas

  Stanley,Hn.A. Lyulph (Chesh.)

  Holland, Sir William Henry

  Myer, Horatio

  Steadman, W.C.

  Holt, Richard Burning

  Napier, T. B.

  Stewart, Halley (Greenock)

  Horniman, Emslie John

  Newnes, F. (Notts, Bassetlaw)

  Strachey, Sir Edward

  Horridge, Thomas Gardner

  Newnes, Sir George (Swansea)

  Straus, B. S. (Mile End)

  Howard, Hon. Geoffrey

  Nicholson, CharlesN.(Doncaster

  Strauss, E. A. (Abingdon)

  Hudson, Walter

  Norton, Capt. Cecil William

  Sutherland, J. E.

  Hutton, Alfred Eddison

  Nussey, Thomas Willans

  Taylor, Austin (East Toxteth)

  Hyde, Clarendon

  Nuttall, Harry

  Taylor, Theodore C. (Radcliffe)

  Isaacs, Rufus Daniel

  O'Donnell, C.J. (Walworth)

  Tennant,SirEdward (Salisbury)

  Jacoby, Sir Alfred James

  Parker, James (Halifax)

  Tennant, H. J. (Berwickshire)

  Johnson, John (Gateshead)

  Partington, Oswald

  Thomas,Sir A.(Glamorgan,E.)

  Johnson, W. (Nuneaton)

  Pearce, Robert (Staffs. Leek)

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

  Jones, Sir D.Brynmor(Swansea)

  Pearce, William (Limehouse)

  Tomkinson, James

  Jones, Leif (Appleby)

  Pearson, Sir W. D. (Colchester)

  Toulmin, George

  Jones,William (Carnarvonshire)

  Philipps, J. Wynford (Pembroke

  Trevelyan, Charles Philips

  Kearley, Hudson E.

  Philipps, Owen C. (Pembroke)

  Ure, Alexander

  Kekewich, Sir George

  Pickersgill, Edward Hare

  Verney, F. W.

  Kincaid-Smith, Captain

  Pirie, Duncan V.

  Walsh, Stephen

  Laidlaw, Robert

  Pollard, Dr.

  Walters, John Tudor

  Lamb.Edmund G. (Leominster)

  Price, C.E.(Edinburgh,Central)

  Walton,SirJohn L. (Leeds, S.)

  Lamb, Ernest H. (Rochester)

  Price, Robert John( Norfolk, E.)

  Walton, Joseph (Barnsley)

  Lamont, Norman

  Priestley, Arthur (Grantham)

  Ward, John (Stoke upon Trent)

  Layland-Barratt, Francis

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

  Ward,W.Dudley(Southampton

  Lehmann, R. C.

  Radford, G. H.

  Wardle, George J.

  Lever, W. H. (Cheshire, Wirral)

  Rainy, A. Rolland

  Waring, Walter

  Levy, Maurice

  Raphael, Herbert H.

  Wason, Eugene (Clackmannan)

  Lewis, John Herbert

  Rea, Russell (Gloucester)

  Wason,JohnCathcart( Orkney)

  Lough, Thomas

  Rees, J. D.

  Waterlow, D. S.

  Lupton, Arnold

  Renton, Major Leslie

  Watt, Henry A.

  Luttrell, Hugh Fownes

  Richards,Thomas(W.Monm'th)

  Weir, James Galloway

  Lyell, Charles Henry

  Roberts, G. H. (Norwich)

  White, George (Norfolk)

  Lynch, H. B.

  Robertson,Sir G.Scott(Bradf'rd

  White, J. D. (Dumbartonshire)

  Macdonald,J.M.(Falkirk B'ghs

  Robertson, J. M. (Tyneside)

  White, Luke (York, E. H.)

  Mackarness, Frederic C.

  Robinson, S.

  Whitehead, Rowland

  Maclean, Donald

  Robson, Sir William Snowdon

  Whitley,John Henry (Halifax)

  Macnamara, Dr. Thomas J.

  Roe, Sir Thomas

  Whittaker, Sir Thomas Palmer

  M'Crae, George

  Rogers, F. E. Newman

  Wiles, Thomas

  M'Kenna, Rt. Hon. Reginald

  Rose, Charles Day

  Williams, J. (Glamorgan)

  M'Laren, Sir C. B. (Leicester)

  Rutherford, V. H. (Brentford)

  Williams, Llewelyn(Carmarth'n

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

  Samuel.Herbert L.(Cleveland)

  Williamson, A.

  M'Micking, Major G.

  Samuel, S. M. (Whitechapel)

  Wills, Arthur Walters

  Maddison, Frederick

  Schwann, C. Duncan (Hyde)

  Wilson,Hon.C.H.W.(Hull,W.)

  Mallet, Charles E.

  Schwann, Sir C.E.(Manchester)

  Wilson. John (Durham, Mid)

  Manfield, Harry (Northants)

  Scott,A.H.(Ashton underLyne)

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

  Markham, Arthur Basil

  Seaverns, J. H.

  Winfrey, R.

  Marks.G.Croydon (Launceston)

  Seely, Major J. B.

  Wood, T. M'Kinnon

  Marnham, F. J.

  Shackleton, David James

  Yoxall, James Henry

  Mason, A. E. W. (Coventry)

  Shaw, Charles Edw. (Stafford)

  Massie, J.

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

  Menzies, Walter

  Sherwell, Arthur James

  TELLERS FOP. THE AYES—Mr.

  Molteno, Percy Alport

  Shipman, Dr. John G.

  Whiteley and Mr. J. A.

  Mond, A.

  Silcock, Thomas Ball

  Pease,

  NOES.

  Anson, Sir William Reynell

  Barrie, H. T. (Londonderry, N.)

  Castlereagh, Viscount

  Anstruther-Gray, Major

  Beckett, Hon. Gervase

  Cave, George

  Arkwright, John Stanhope

  Bignold, Sir Arthur

  Cavendish,Rt.Hon.Victor C.W.

  Ashley, W. W.

  Bowles, G. Stewart

  Cecil, Evelyn (Aston Manor)

  Aubrey-Fletcher, Rt. Hn. SirH.

  Boyle, Sir Edward

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

  Balcarres, Lord

  Bridgeman, W. Clive

  Channing, Sir Francis Allston

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

  Bull, Sir William James

  Chaplin, Rt. Hon. Henry

  Banbury, Sir Frederick George

  Burdett-Coutts, W.

  Coates,E. Feetham (Lewisham)

  Banner, John S. Harmood-

  Butcher, Samuel Henry

  Cochrane, Hon. Thos. H. A. E

  Barnes, G. N.

  Carlile, E. Hildred

  Corbett, A. Cameron (Glasgow

  606

  607

  Courthope, G. Loyd

  Long,Col. Charles W. (Evesham

  Sloan, Thomas Henry

  Craig,CharlesCurtis( Antrim,S.)

  Lonsdale, John Brownlee

  8mith,F.E.(Liverpool,Walton)

  Craig,Captain James(Down,E.)

  Lyttelton, Rt, Hon. Alfred

  Starkey, John R.

  Craik, Sir Henry

  Macdonald, J. R.(Leicester)

  Stone, Sir Benjamin

  Dalrymple, Viscount

  Macpherson, J. T.

  Summerbell, T.

  Douglas, Rt. Hon. A. Akers-

  Marks, H. H. (Kent)

  Talbot, Lord K. (Chichester)

  Faber, George Denison (York)

  Meysey-Thompson, E. C.

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

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

  Middlemore, John Throgmorton

  Taylor. John W. (Durham)

  Fardell, Sir T. George

  Mildmay, Francis Bingham

  Thomson,W. Mitchell-( Lanark)

  Fell, Arthur

  Morpeth, Viscount

  Thorne, William

  Fletcher, J. S.

  Muntz, Sir Philip A.

  Thornton, Percy M.

  Forster, Henry William

  Nicholson, Wm. G. (Petersfield)

  Vincent, Col. Sir C. E. Howard

  Gibbs.G. A. (Bristol, West)

  O'Grady, J.

  Walker,Col. W. H. (Lancashire)

  Harrison-Broadley, H. B.

  Parker,Sir Gilbert(Gravesend)

  Walrond, Hon. Lionel

  Helmsley, Viscount

  Parkes, Ebenezer

  Wards, Col. C. E. (Kent, Mid)

  Hervey,F.W.F.(BuryS.Edm'ds

  Ratcliff, Major R. F.

  Williams, Col. R. (Dorset, W.)

  Hill,Sir Clement (Shrewsbury)

  Rawlinson, JohnFrederick Peel

  Willoughby de Eresby, Lord

  Hills, J. W.

  Remnant, James Farquharson

  Wilson, W. T. (Westhoughton)

  Hope, John Deans (Fife, West)

  Richards,T.F. (Wolverhampton

  Wortley, Rt. Hon. C. B. Stuart

  Houston, Robert Paterson

  Roberts,S.(Sheffield,Ecclesall)

  Wyndham, Rt. Hon. George

  Hunt, Rowland

  Rothschild, Hn. Lionel Walter

  Younger, George

  Kennaway, Rt.Hon.Sir.JohnH.

  Rutherford, John (Lancashire)

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

  Rutherford, W. W. (Liverpool)

  King,Sir Henry Seymour (Hull)

  Salter, Arthur Clavell

  TELLERS FOR THE NOES—Sir

  Lea, Hugh Cecil (St.Pancras,E.)

  Scott, Sir S. (Marylebone, W.)

  Alexander Acland-Hood and

  Lee, ArthurH.( Hants.,Fareham

  Seddon, J.

  Viscount Valentia.

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

  Sheffield,Sir BerkeleyGeorgeD.

  Where upon the CHAIRMAN left the Chair to make his Report to the House.
  Committee report Progress; to sit again To-morrow.

  MARRIED WOMEN'S PROPERTY BILL.
  Read a second time, and committed to a Standing Committee.

  INJURED ANIMALS ACT (1894) AMENDMENT BILL.
  Order for Second Reading read.
  Objection being taken,
  SIR HOWARD VINCENTappealed to hon. Members to withdraw their objection to a small and useful measure which provided that an animal which was so badly injured that it could not be moved without gross cruelty might on the certificate of a veterinary surgeon, be slaughtered.
  Bill read a second time, and committed to a Standing Committee.

  INCEST BILL.
  Read a second time, and committed to a Standing Committee.

  HOME WORK.
  Ordered, That a Select Committed be appointed to consider and report upon
  608
  the conditions of labour in trades in which home work is prevalent, and the proposals, including those for the establishment of wages boards and the licensing of work places, which have been made for the remedying of existing abuses.
  Ordered, That the Committee do consist of Twenty-one Members.
  Committee accordingly nominated of, Mr. Arkwright, Mr. Bridgeman, Sir William Bull, Mr. Boland, Mr. Brunner, Mr. Chiozza Money, Mr. Joseph Devlin, Mr. Arthur Dewar, Mr. Fell, Mr. Arthur Henderson, Mr. Ernest Lamb, Mr. Massie, Mr. Masterman, Mr. Parkes, Mr. William Redmond, Mr. Richardson, Mr. Robinson, Mr. Stuart Samuel, Mr. Sherwell, Mr. Trevelyan, and Sir Thomas Whittaker.
  Ordered, That the Committee have power to send for poisons, papers, and records.
  Ordered, That Seven be the quorum. —(Mr. Whiteley.)
  And, it being half-past Eleven of the clock, Mr. Speaker adjourned the House without Question put, pursuant to the Standing Order.
  Adjourned at half after Eleven o'clock.

Preamble
Lucas Peerage.—Committee for Privileges met: Counsel heard to open the case on behalf of the claimant; the Attorney-General appearing on behalf of the Crown; the Attorney-General heard; witnesses examined; claim considered: Then it was resolved that the Petitioner Auberon Thomas Herbert, claimant to the Barony of Lucas of Cradwell, hath made out his claim to the said Barony; report thereof to be made to the House.
Viscount Midleton.—Petition of— William St. John Fremantle Brodrick, Baron Brodrick in the Peerage of the United Kingdom, and Viscount Midleton, in the Peerage of Ireland, claiming a right to vote at the elections of Representative Peers for Ireland; read, and referred to the Lord Chancellor to consider and report thereupon to the House.

PRIVATE BILL BUSINESS.
Alton Military Hospital Bill [H.L.].— Presented (pursuant to leave given yesterday), and read 1a
Birkenhead Corporation Water Bill [H.L.].—The King's consent signified; and Bill reported from the Select Committee, with Amendments.
National Trust for Places of Historic Interest or Natural Beauty Bill [H.L.].— Reported, with Amendments.
Port Talbot Railway and Docks Bill.— Committee to meet on Tuesday next.
Collooney, Ballina, and Belmullet Railways and Piers Bill; Kingston-upon-Hull Corporation Bill.—Read 2a, and committed. The Committees to be pro posed by the Committee of.Selection.
Renfrewshire Upper District (Eastwood and Mearns) Water Bill [H.L.].—Read 3a, and passed, and sent to the Commons.
Local Government Provisional Orders (No. 5) Bill.—Brought from the Commons.
Armagh Urban District Council Bill.— Brought from the Commons; read 1a; and referred to the Examiners.
Royal Bank of Scotland Bill [H.L.]; Society of Apothecaries of London Bill [H.L.].—Returned from the Commons agreed to.
Maidstone Gas Bill.—Returned from the Commons with the Amendments agreed to.
Worthing Gas Bill; Hull and Barnsley Railway Bill; Taff Vale Railway Bill; Neath, Pontardawe, and Brynaman Railway Bill; Swansea Harbour Bill; Ann-field Plain and District Gas Bill; Broad-stairs and St. Peter's Urban District Water Bill [H.L.]; Great Northern and City Railway Bill; City of London (Union of Parishes) Bill [H.L.]; Kingston-upon-Hull Corporation Bill; Collooney, Ballina, and Belmullet Railways and Piers Bills.—Report from the Committee of Selection, That the following Lords be proposed to the House to form the Select Committee for the consideration of the said Bills, viz.:—
E. Abingdon,
E. Morley,
V. Hutchinson (E. Donoughmore) (chairman),
L. Oriel (F. Massereene),
L. Bowes (E. Strathmore and King-horn);
agreed to; and the said Lords appointed accordingly. The Committee to meet on Wednesday, the 12th instant, at Eleven o'clock; and all petitions referred to the Committee, with leave to the petitioners praying to be heard by counsel against the Bills to be heard as desired, as also counsel for the Bills.
Canals Tolls and Charges (New Junction Canal) Order Confirmation Bill [H.L.]; Education Board Provisional Orders Confirmation (Surrey, etc.) Bill [H.L.]; Electric Lighting Provisional Orders (No. 1) Bill [H.L.].—Committed to a Committee of the Whole House To-morrow.
Local Government Provisional Orders (No. 5) Bill.—Read 1a; to be printed; and referred to the Examiners. (No. 62.)
Pier and Harbour Provisional Orders [(No. 2) BILL[H.L.].—ABill to confirm certain Provisional Orders made by the Board of Trade under the General Pier and Harbour Act, 1861, relating to Fleetwood, Portsmouth, and Sennen. Was presented by (The Lord Granard (E. Granard) ).Then it was moved, That the Order of the 20th day of March last, "That no Provisional Order Confirmation Bill originating in this House shall be read a first time after Thursday, the 2nd day of May next," be dispensed with in respect of the said Bill, and that the Bill be now read 1a; agreed to; Bill read 1a accordingly; to be printed and referred to the Examiners. (No. 63.)

RETURNS, REPORTS, ETC.

  TURKEY (1907).
  No. 1. Further correspondence respecting the affairs of South-Eastern Europe. (In continuation of "Turkey, No. 1." (1906) [Cd. 2816.].)
  No. 2. Correspondence respecting the increase of the Turkish customs duties.
  No. 3. Despatches from the British Adviser on the Macedonian Financial Commission.

  TRADE REPORTS: ANNUAL SERIES.
  No. 3810. Germany (Pomerania).
  No. 3811. Portugal (Madeira).
  Presented (by Command), and ordered to lie on the Table.

  MARRIAGE WITH DECEASED WIFE'S SISTER.
  Petition against legalisation of; of clergy of the deanery of Midhurst; read, and ordered to lie on the Table.

  MUNICIPAL REPRESENTATION BILL [H.L.]
  The evidence taken before the Select Committee from time to time to be printed, but no copies to be delivered out except to members of the Committee and such other persons as the Committee
  420
  shall think fit until further order. (No 61.)

ARREARS IN THE LAW COURTS.
THE EARL OF HALSBURY: My Lords, I beg to ask the Lord Chancellor a Question of which I have given him private notice, as to the stops that are being taken with reference to the state of business in the Court of Appeal.
THE LORD CHANCELLOR (Lord LOREBURN): My Lords, there is undoubtedly a very serious arrear of business, and through no fault at all of the Judges of the Court of Appeal. They have done their utmost, but there is a heavy arrear which I am quite satisfied ought to be cleared off if the business of the Courts of Justice is to be efficiently conducted. For that purpose I have brought in a Bill which has passed through your Lordships' House and is really in the nature of a Bill providing for emergencies. I hope that the Bill may be allowed to become law, and then I think we shall be able to take in hand the clearance of the list in the Court of Appeal. In addition I have asked a number of distinguished gentlemen to act as a Committee to consider the working of the Judicature Acts and to report whether any alteration in the constitution or practice of the Courts is advisable. Lord Macnaghten has kindly consented to act as Chairman, and I myself propose to serve on the Committee, though I am afraid I shall not be able to give so much attention to the matter as I would wish. The following have also consented to serve:—The Lord Chief Justice of England, the Master of the Rolls, the President of the Probate and Admiralty Division, Mr. Justice Bigham, Mr. Justice Warrington, the Attorney-General, Sir Robert Finlay, G.C.M.G., K.C., Mr. J. E. Bankes, K.C., Mr. S. A. T. Rowlatt, Mr. Willes Chitty, Mr. C. A. Coward, and Mr. William Cobbett. These gentlemen are all familiar with this subject, and I do not apprehend that much, if any, evidence will be required. I sincerely hope that the efforts of this Committee will enable us before long to get the whole of the business of the High Court of Justice placed on such a footing that there will be no delay and no arrears in the management of public business.

FACTORY AND WORKSHOP BILL [H.L.]
House in Committee(according to Order).
[The Earl of ONSLOW in the chair.]
Clause 1 agreed to.
Clause 2:—
THE EARL OF LYTTONsaid he desired to put a question to the Government with regard to Subsection (b) of Clause 2. There was, he said, no mention in the Bill as it stood of any notice being required to be sent to the inspector as to the days of the week upon which a particular laundry elected the system of employment there set out. He understood, however, that by Section 32 of the principal Act notice would be required to be sent once in every quarter. There occurred in Section 32 of the principal Act the following words—
"The occupier of every factory and workshop…shall, subject to any special exceptions made by or in pursuance of this Act, specify in a notice—"
He feared that there was some danger that the words "subject to any special exception" might, in any subsequent proceedings, be urged as doing away with the necessity of sending any notice at all, inasmuch as the whole of this clause was an exception to the general Act. He would like to know if the Government had fully considered this point.
EARL BEAUCHAMP:assured the noble Earl that His Majesty's Government had considered the matter, and that in their opinion there was no doubt at all upon the point.
THE EARL OF LYTTONmoved to leave out subsection (d) which ran—
"(d) Different periods of employment may be fixed for different days of the Week."
He did so for the reason that the "subsection seemed to him to tend to complicate what was already a very complicated measure. From year to year constant references were made in the various Factory Reports to the great difficulty of getting the Act understood, and to the fact that constantly in prosecu-
422
tions which were instituted Under the Act for breaches of the law excuses were put forward on behalf of the guilty person that he was utterly unable to understand the law as it stood and the complicated notices brought before him. There was no doubt that this Bill would be a great improvement in that direction, but he maintained that this particular subsection tended in the direction of increased complication. Therefore, unless some very strong reason were put forward for its inclusion in the Bill he would ask the House to cut it out.
Amendment moved—
"In page 2. lines 21 and 22, to leave out paragraph (d)."—(The, Karl of Lytton.)
EARL BEAUCHAMP:expressed the hope that their Lordships would require further reasons before consenting to the elimination of a somewhat important part of the clause. As their Lordships were aware, by this clause laundries were brought under special provisions in a manner in which they had not been regulated up to the present time, and it had been thought only right that there should be a certain latitude in the matter. This was part of the general scheme by which His Majesty's Government had considered that they could meet the equity of the case and give that liberty in the management of laundries which they thought those institutions ought to have. The scheme was not so complicated as the noble Earl seemed to imagine. The factory inspector would have information as to where employment was going on at a specified time, and the inspectors would always be able under this subsection to visit a laundry if at any moment they had reason to suppose that employment was improperly taking place.
Amendment, by leave, withdrawn.
Clause 2 agreed to.
Clauses 3 and 4 agreed to.
Clause 5:—
*LORD CLIFFORD OF CHUDLEIGHmoved to leave out the words "or

423
religious" from the second line of Clause 5, which ran —
"Where in any premises forming part of an institution carried on for charitable, reformatory, or religious purposes," etc
He explained that his Amendment was intended in no way to be hostile to the object of the Bill. It appeared to him, however, that the words as they would stand if his Amendment were agreed to would be quite sufficient to include every case proposed to be covered by the Bill.
Amendment moved—
"In page 3, line 16, to leave out the words 'or religious.'" —(Lord Clifford of Chudleigh.)
EARL BEAUCHAMPsaid His Majesty's Government were quite willing to meet the noble Lord on this point, and would agree to the Amendment.
On Question, Amendment agreed to.
THE EARL OF LYTTONmoved to substitute the word "or" for the words "and not" in the beginning of Clause 5. As amended the clause would read—
"Where in any premises forming part of an institution carried on for charitable or reformatory purposes or subject to inspection by or under the authority of," etc.
By the Bill as it stood all institutions which came under the authority of any Government Department other than the Factory Department were exempted from the provisions of the Bill. There were laundries attached to such institutions as industrial schools, orphanages, reformatories, workhouses, and so forth, which would all be excluded by the words as they stood, together with Clause 6 of the Bill. Surely it was just as necessary that dangerous machinery should be fenced in a laundry connected with one of these institutions as in any other. Indeed, it was even more necessary, because in a great many instances the people who had to look after the machinery in these institutions knew very little about it, and were not qualified to take care of it properly. Then, if this machinery was to be fenced, and if the sanitary conditions, ventilation, and so forth were to be properly regulated, it was obvious that such work could only be carried out by an inspector of the Department responsible for this sort of thing. No inspector under
424
the Board of Education or the Local Government Board would be qualified to inspect laundry machinery, or to see that a laundry was properly ventilated. He supposed he would be told that the Government were now for the first time placing the services of the Factory Department at the disposal of other Government offices, but they were only placing those services at their disposal when those offices came to the Factory Department and asked for them. He could not help thinking that so long as the matter was left in that position the circumstances would be in the future exactly as they were at present—namely, that there would be no inspection at all, that machinery would remain unfenced, and that laundries requiring better regulation as regards ventilation, drainage, and such matters, would be left exactly as they were at present. Therefore he felt that, merely to meet what might be called departmental etiquette, a very serious evil would be left in existence. If the Government could see their way so to amend Clause 6 as to place the initiative with the Factory Department and leave the right of consent or refusal with the Department under which the institution came, he would be perfectly satisfied, and would be willing to withdraw his Amendment.. But unless they would amend the clause in that way ho, would be compelled to press his Amendment to a division.
Amendment moved—
"In page 3, line 17, to leave out the words 'and not' and to insert the word ' or.'" — (The Earl of Lytton.)
EARL BEAUCHAMPsaid His Majesty's Government were quite ready to draft the clause in the way suggested, and he would bring up Amendments on the Report stage which he hoped would be satisfactory to the noble Earl.
Amendment, by leave, withdrawn.
*LORD CLIFFORD OF CHUDLEIGHmoved an Amendment to the first subsection, inserting after the reference to institutions in which manual labour was exercised the words "as a source of pecuniary profit to the institution and as one of the purposes and objects thereof."

425
The Amendment, he said, was not intended in any hostile spirit. It appeared to him that the Bill as drafted spread the net rather too wide, and was liable to bring in places where work was not carried on as part of the ordinary working of the institution, but only as a secondary or temporary object. He did not conceive that it was the intention of the Government to include such cases and to bring institutions of this kind under the Factory Act; and to make that clear he moved his Amendment.
Amendment moved—
"In page 3, line 18, after the word 'exercised' to insert the words 'as a source of pecuniary profit to the institution and as one of the purposes and objects thereof.' "—(Lord Clifford of Chudleigh.)
EARL BEAUCHAMPassured the noble Lord that his Amendment was not necessary. So far as regarded institutions in which labour of this kind was only done occasionally, the provision would no more apply under this Bill than under the original Factory and Workshop Act; but, so far as pecuniary profit was concerned, he hoped that the noble Lord would not press the point, for the reason that there were instances in which the Government were anxious that institutions should be inspected, even though pecuniary profit was not made out of them. It was, indeed, one of the purposes of the Bill that the mere question of pecuniary profit should not be made a test as to whether inspection should take place or not.
*LORD CLIFFORD OF CHUDLEIGHsaid that, subject to any action he might consider it necessary to take on Report, he would for the present withdraw his Amendment.
Amendment, by leave, withdrawn.
LORD CLIFFORD OF CHUDLEIGHexplained that the object of his next Amendment was to remove any doubt there might be that the particular premises in which the work was carried on constituted the part of the building which was subject to inspection, and not any other part.
Amendment moved—
"In page 3, line 23, after the word 'premises' to insert the words 'where such labour is
426
exercised,' and to leave out from the word 'notwithstanding' to 'that' in line 24.'"— (Lord Clifford of Chudleigh.)
EARL BEAUCHAMP:referred the noble Lord to the first line of Clause 5, which contained the words—
"Where in any premises forming part of an institution—" etc.
Therefore it would only be that part which was affected by the Bill.
Amendment, by leave, withdrawn.
LORD BALFOUR OF BURLEIGHcalled attention to the language of subsection (2) of Clause 5, which provided that, if the managers of an institution satisfied the Secretary of State, among other things, that the only persons working therein were inmates of the institution, or persons, not exceeding two in number, engaged in general supervision, an order might be made applying the principal Act to the institution subject to certain modifications. He asked their Lordships' attention to the phraseology of the subsection. He was not really sure what it was intended to mean. The question he wished to ask was, what was the legal interpretation of the word "inmates"? There was no definition in the Bill, and he wished to know whether it applied to those who were, in current phraseology, "inmates"—namely, persons who were objects of charity and were there for reformatory purposes—or whether it meant to include those who were engaged n supervision. He could hardly believe that matrons, superintendents, and so on were intended to be described under,he word "inmates." He thought the natural meaning of the word excluded hat suggestion, but if they were not included in the word it seemed to and them in this absurd result, that no institution, however large, could have more than two persons engaged in the supervision of the inmates. It was not quite clear on the face of the clause,what was meant, and he hoped that some definite assurance would be given that,he definition which seemed the natural one was not intended, and that words would be inserted to give its proper meaning.
Amendment moved—
"In page 3, line 31, after the word 'persons' to insert the words 'dwelling elsewhere.'"— (Lord Balfour of Burleigh.)
EARL BEAUCHAMPassured the noble Lord that in the opinion of the Home Office his fears were groundless. If he would withdraw his Amendment at the present time the Government would be willing to consider the matter carefully. If it were found necessary to amend the wording they would do so, but the present opinion of the Home Office was that such an Amendment would not be necessary.
LORD BALFOUR OF BURLEIGHexpressed the hope that they would have a definite assurance that in Standing Committee the point would be looked into, because those whom he had had an opportunity of consulting shared his doubts as to whether the provision was really workable in the form in which it was presented. Their Lordships would see that the sentence was an extremely involved one, and, in the interests of those who would have to work the Act and understand it, he thought the provision might be drafted in a more understandable form.
Amendment, by leave, withdrawn.
THE EARL OF LYTTONsaid his next Amendment proposed to leave out the whole of Clause 5 after the first subsection. If the clause remained as it stood the conditions of labour in the institutions dealt with by the clause would be left entirely vague. The only thing they would know was that each institution would have to submit a scheme and satisfy the Home Office that n its general respects it was not less favourable than the corresponding provisions of the principal Act. His Amendment proposed to omit all that part of the clause and to define in precise terms in the Bill what were the special exemptions which, by reason of their special character, ought to be allowed to these institutions. In support of the Amendment he urged, on the Second Reading, the immense amount of additional labour which would fall on the Home Office if it were called upon to
428
look through all the schemes submitted; but he would not go further into that argument at the present moment. His objection to the clause as it stood was that every single point at the present moment in dispute with regard to the conditions which ought to prevail in these institutions was put on one side; not one of the points was settled, the whole thing was left vague, and those points were the very ones which required the most precise definition.
There were only three points of importance which could be dealt with under any scheme which an institution might submit to the Home Office—namely, the hours of work, the question of meal times, and the question of holidays. With regard to hours of work it would scarcely be contended, he thought, by any religious or charitable institution, that any licence should be given to work longer hours in such a place than were allowed under the ordinary law to commercial laundries. Nor would longer hours, he imagined, be allowed under the scheme, which had to be on the whole not less favourable than the provisions in the original Act. Therefore, there were only two modifications with regard to hours which could be asked for. One was that different periods of labour should be chosen from those allowed by the Act. The Factory and Workshop Act at present allowed the hours of labour to be from 6 a.m. to 6 p.m., from 7 a.m. to 7 p.m. from 8 a.m. to 8 p.m., or from 9 a.m. to 9 p.m. That, he thought, was sufficiently wide for any laundry. Those were limits arrived at, he might almost say by international agreement, and if institutions on charitable or religious grounds were going to ask to be allowed to begin work before 6 a.m. in the morning or to continue work after 9 o'clock at night, he could not help feeling very strongly that that was an exception that ought not to be made in their favour.
On the other hand, an institution might ask within those limits to be allowed a wider discretion; in other words, to be allowed to choose their own period of twelve hours between 6 o'clock and 9 o'clock. If that was what they were going to ask for, it was exactly the situation which had caused so much trouble in the past and been objected to

429
by factory inspectors. That loose system by which a laundry could choose its own period of employment did away altogether with the value of inspection. This was bad enough in an ordinary laundry; it was considerably worse in a laundry attached to a charitable or reformatory institution, because the only way the inspector could ascertain whether the law was being carried out was by questioning the inmates, and that was a course which should as much as possible be avoided. Those were the only points in regard to the question of hours which could be put into a scheme, and both of them, he maintained, in the interest of the institution themselves, ought not to be made matter of special exemption.
With regard to meal times, it was often urged by these institutions that it was impossible for them to conform to the provisions of the principal Act that all the inmates should take their meals at the same time, but there was a clause in the Factory Act which gave power for a variation in that respect. Clause 40 subsection (4) of the principal Act enabled the Secretary of State to make any exception in the case of a particular factory or workshop, where cause was shown, to enable the meals to be taken at different hours, so that in regard to meals there was no need for this exemption. There only remained the question of holidays, and that was a matter on which these institutions were entitled to some little consideration. If the condition of the weather or other matters were unfavourable and they wished to change their holidays at very short notice, he did not see why that liberty should not be given to them; but that should be put into the Act and should be definitely stated as an exception in their favour. That was what his Amendment proposed to do. In all other respects these laundries ought to work on the same conditions as commercial laundries with which they competed.
He would remind the Government that there was a possibility of objection being taken to their Bill from the other side, and that if the Bill were sent down with these points which had been for so many years in dispute unsettled considerable objection would be taken to the Bill as from a different quarter in the
430
House of Commons. He would also remind the Government that the institutions themselves were not united in this matter. Among these institutions there was a progressive section and there was a timid and apprehensive section. Those who belonged to the former had constantly felt that the more the conditions of labour in the institutions were brought into line with those outside the better it would be for the institutions themselves. He was convinced—and he was sure the most rev. Primate would bear him out—that it was in the best interests of the institutions themselves that where they were engaged in industrial work they should frankly accept the conditions which had been accepted by and were enforced upon all bodies carrying out the same industrial work, and that it would only do harm to them in the long run if they claimed, on special religious grounds or in consequence of their special reformatory work, privileges which would only have the effect of arousing suspicion and mistrust. Therefore, unless the Government offered to amend in some form or another this clause as it stood in the direction of greater definition, he would respectfully ask the House to cut out the clause and substitute one of a more definite character.
Amendment moved—
"In page 3, line, 27, to leave out from the beginning of subsection (2) to the end of the clause, and to insert as a new subsection:—

(2) In laundries attached to or forming part of any institution to which this section applies the following modifications of the law relating to holidays and notices shall have effect:

(a) Subsection three of Section thirty-five of the Factory and Workshop Act, 1901, shall not apply, and the following provisions shall be substituted in lieu thereof: A notice of every holiday or half holiday must be forwarded during the first week in January to the inspector for the district, and unless the notice has been so sent, cessation from work shall not be deemed to be a whole holiday or a half holiday. Provided that any such notice may be changed by a subsequent notice sent in like manner not less than twenty-four hours before the holiday or half holiday to which it applies.

(b) The managers of the institution shall not later than the fifteenth day of January in each year send to the Secretary of State a correct return in the prescribed form, specifying the names of the managers and

431
the name of the person (if any) having charge of the institution under the managers, and such particulars as to the number, age, sex, and employment of the inmates and other persons employed in the work carried on in the institution as the Secretary of State may require, and shall, if any requirement of this paragraph is not complied with, be liable to a fine not exceeding five pounds.—(The Earl of Lytton.)

THE LORD ARCHBISHOP OF CANTERBURY: asked the meaning of subsection (d)—
"The provisions of the principal Act as to sending notices to the inspector shall not apply except so far as an order made by the Secretary of State may otherwise direct."
If this meant that an institution was not, for instance, to be obliged to send notices of accident just as a trade laundry was, he would deprecate that in the strongest possible manner. He found it difficult to imagine what notices were hens referred to unless they were the notices regarding holidays about which the noble Lord had already spoken. The more consideration he gave to this question the more he felt himself coming to the conclusion that the justification for very exceptional treatment of institutional laundries was unnecessary and practically unworkable. He did not believe that institutions properly conducted need fear anything from inspection. This was a matter of administration rather than of legislation. If the administration was carried out by the Home Office in the way he believed it would be, he did not think the occasions would be at all numerous on which any difficulty would arise from inspection taking place in the ordinary way. He was strongly in favour of inspection by experts in machinery. While there were some few points on which special information was necessary, he felt that what the noble Earl called the timid section of managers must not be allowed to prevent the more trustful section of the managers of these institutions from claiming that protection for their inmates which would result from inspection, which was feared much more from ignorance of what it really meant than because of any real harm that it would do them.
LORD BALFOUR OF BURLEIGH:hoped the noble. Lord would not accept
432
the very sweeping Amendment pro posed by the noble Earl. It would destroy the scheme which the Home Office had elaborated in concert with those who were for the first time to be brought under inspection. It would destroy all the elasticity which was necessary to the working of the Bill in these institutions. He agreed with the most rev. Primate that the institutions which dreaded the interference of a Government department were unduly apprehensive, but they were willing to try it loyally under the safeguards and conditions proposed by the Home Office in the Bill. The Amendment would re-open controversy, and the failure of the Bill in another place would be risked. There was no desire in the institutions for which he could speak that the hours of work should be longer than in commercial laundries, but i t was reasonable to ask that there should be greater elasticity in the arrangement of them. If any institution were caught even once deceiving the Home Office or its inspectors, there might be a penal power given to the Home Office to strike it out of the list of privileged institutions, but he would not harass those engaged in a difficult and delicate work by putting them all at once under the stringent regulations applicable to an ordinary factory. In regard to holidays, he would point out that it was one of the objects of certain institutions to teach their inmates lessons of self-control and discipline, and for that purpose the power of giving or withholding holidays was a valuable assistance. The public holidays were not the occasions on which to turn this class of inmate out into the streets. He had no desire that they should have fewer holidays, but the managers should have power to change the holidays or to substitute two half-holidays for one.
EARL BEAUCHAMPsaid the noble Lord had expressed so admirably the views of His Majesty's Government, and he thought also the commonsense point of view, that he need not detain their Lordships at any length in further reply to an Amendment which went at once to the root of the part of the Bill under consideration. If the noble Earl would turn to the words of subsection (a), he

433
would see that the Secretary of State would have to be satisfied that the provisions of a scheme were not less favourable than the provisions of the principal Act, and there would be no unfair competition, therefore, with industrial laundries. For the information of the inspector the necessary particulars had to be entered in a register, and no notices would be required to be sent to the inspector except such as the Secretary of State might direct; but he could assure the most rev. Primate that notices of accident would be amongst those which the Secretary of State would expect to have sent to the inspector. The idea was that if the Bill became law there would probably be a conference between representatives of the Home Office and these institutions, and the general lines of a scheme would be laid down showing the conditions under which modifications would be allowed. In institutions dealing with women whose characters were not well regulated, it was essential for purposes of discipline that variation of the regulations applying to industrial laundries should be allowed, and the concessions corresponded generally with those asked for by a representative deputation to the Home Secretary upon the subject.
THE EARL OF LYTTON:replied, expressing himself as dissatisfied with the answer he had received. He denied that inspection would be obstructive to discipline, and quoted from a letter he had received from the mother superior of a large institution in favour of inspection as a help rather than a hindrance to the maintenance of discipline. There was enough elasticity in the provisions of the Factory Act to meet the conditions existing in institution laundries. He would not now press his Amendment, and withdrew it, but without prejudice to proposals he might make at a subsequent stage.
Amendment, by leave, withdrawn.
Clause 5, as amended, agreed to.
Remaining clauses agreed to, and Bill reported with an Amendment to the House.
EARL BEAUCHAMPasked whether, in view of the noble Earl's intention to bring up Amendments on the Report stage, their Lordships would think it necessary to deal with the Bill in Standing Committee. The reference of the Bill to that Committee would somewhat delay matters, and time would be saved and two discussions prevented if the Amendments were dealt with on Report only. If that were agreeable to noble Lords opposite— and only if it were agreeable—he would move that the Standing Committee be negatived.
Moved, "That the Standing Committee be negatived."—(Earl Beauchump)
On Question, Motion agreed to.
The Report of the Amendment to be received on Thursday next; and the Bill to be printed us amended. (No. 64.)

THE STATE OF IRELAND.
THE MARQUESS OF LONDONDERRY:rose to "call the attention of His Majesty's Government to the continuance of acts of lawlessness in various districts in Ireland; and to ask the Government whether, having regard to such acts, they were still of opinion that 'the condition of Ireland as a whole was very satisfactory,' as stated by the Prime Minister in the House of Commons." The noble Marquess said: My Lords, I have no doubt whatever that in raising this question I shall, in the mind of the Chief Secretary for Ireland, be classed with those of my hon. friends in another place of whom the right hon. Gentleman said their questions were put with the sole object of maligning and misrepresenting their country in the eyes of the English people. Well, my Lords, that may be the opinion of the Chief Secretary, but I venture to say it is not the opinion of fair, honest-minded men in any part of His Majesty's dominions; it is not the opinion of the law-abiding, industrious inhabitants of Ireland, and I am perfectly convinced that it is not the opinion of the unfortunate inhabitants of those parts of Ireland to which my hon. friends in the House of Commons alluded who

435
are now groaning under the tyranny of the United Irish League.
I need hardly explain to your Lordships that on the present occasion I have no intention of raising an ordinary Irish debate. I have myself had official experience of Ireland. I have also had practical experience of that country as an Irishman, and I therefore venture to think that your Lordships will do me the credit of believing me when I say that had this not been a matter of extreme importance I should not have raised it at the present time. I have taken this action in the interests of Ireland as a whole, and to show those unfortunate persons who live in the less peaceful parts of the country that we in the north of Ireland are not unmindful of their welfare. I can assure your Lordships that I put the question with a full sense of my responsibility, and I feel that His Majesty's Government have an even more serious and important duty in answering the question. Upon that answer will depend the condition, whether peaceable or disturbed, of a very great part of the south and west of Ireland.
I have myself always taken the line— and I am sure the noble Earl the Lord President of the Council will agree with me as to its wisdom—of not laying too great stress on violent speeches when those speeches have been made in districts where no great harm is likely to accrue. The noble Earl will remember that I endorsed a remark of his last session when he stated that Irishmen often say a great deal more than they mean, and in consequence of that belief I am not prone to attach undue importance to violent speeches delivered in districts where comparatively little harm is likely to be done by them. But it is a very different thing when violent speeches are made in districts under the thraldom of the United Irish League; for there they are calculated to injure the property and endanger the lives of the people denounced, and consequently it is the bounden duty of the responsible Government to prevent them. I assert that such speeches are now being made in certain parts of the west of Ireland, where the United Irish League is so strong and powerful that it is able to
436
carry on a widespread conspiracy almost with impunity.
Now, what has been the answers to the Questions of my hon. friends in another place? Of course the Government naturally do not desire to offend their Nationalist supporters in the House of Commons. Consequently the Chief Secretary and his representative, whose answers I shall quote in a moment, have made very light of the present serious condition of affairs. The right hon. Gentleman has declared, in answer to a Question in another place, that there is no widespread conspiracy, though he admitted that certain limited areas gave some cause for anxiety. I think that is a very remarkable statement for the Chief Secretary to make. Supposing it were true that this conspiracy is confined to certain limited areas, I would ask His Majesty's Government whether the life of every individual within those areas is not as valuable as the life of every individual outside them; and have any responsible Government the right to disregard the lives of people within certain limited areas on the ground that the rest of Ireland is in a peaceable condition?.Such a contention is unworthy of any responsible Government. Every individual in every part of Ireland has just as much right to look for protection to the law as the Chief Secretary himself in his lodge in Phoenix Park.
I entirely controvert the statement of the Chief Secretary that this violent conspiracy is confined to certain small areas. Proof that the conspiracy is widespread is to be found in the admissions of the Chief Secretary himself and the Attorney-General for Ireland in answer to Questions in the House of Commons during May. On 7th May Mr. Cherry, answering for Mr. Birrell a question put by Mr. Bridgeman, stated that—
"On 1st May, 245 grazing farms were under police protection."
On 15th May, Mr. Birrell, replying to a question by Mr. Arkwright, said that—
"Eighty-one policemen are occupied in affording protection to occupiers of grazing farms in the counties of Galway, Mayo, and Roscommon. In addition some 400 police secure the stock on the farms from molestation."

437
Then on 29th May, Mr. Birrell, replying to a Question by Captain Craig, said that during the month ended 25th May approximately twenty cases of driving cattle off farms occurred, and prosecutions had been instituted in eight of these cases. During the same period six police officers and 280 men were drafted into Connaught. In two cases, Mr. Birrell added, policemen were encamped on farms, one being in County Roscommon and the other in King's County. On 30th May, in reply to Mr. Long, Mr. Birrell gave the following districts as those where additional forces of constabulary were employed, viz.—

(1) County Clare, four districts, one head constable and sixty-five reserve.

(2) County Cork, East Riding, two districts, seven reserve.

(3) County Leitrim and Cavan, two districts, twenty-two reserve.

(4) County Galway, E.R. Athenry, thirty- five reserve.

(5) County Roscommon, districts of Stokes-town and Castlerea, one district inspector, two head constables, eighty-three reserve, and fifty men from other counties.

(6) King's County, Parsonstown, one district inspector and twenty-five reserve.

Mr. Birrell added these very significant words—
"In all these cases the augmentation of the local police force was necessitated by the disturbed state of the district."
Yet in spite of these facts it is asserted that the state of Ireland is satisfactory.
I have received a large number of letters on the state of the west of Ireland; I will not trespass upon your Lordships' indulgence by quoting them all. I will only mention three cases to illustrate the nature of the offences on account of which extra police have been drafted into the disturbed districts. I will first give the Russell case. Mr. Russell held a grazing farm at Kilmore. On 5th May as he was coming from church a mob of forty or fifty people rushed out of the Temperance Hall close by, where a meeting of the United Irish League was being held, shouting, groaning, and booing until Mr. Russell passed on. In the evening a crowd of 200 men came out to Mr. Russell's house, shouting, booing and cheering and banging a drum. Five hundred yards from Mr. Russell's house they were met by thirty police who barred
438
the way. A free fight ensued; some of the crowd tried to get across the fields to Mr. Russell's house, but finally the crowd were forced back. The case was tried at Hill Street on 28th May, and these parties were bound over; they refused to give bail and accepted the default of a month's imprisonment. After the trial a free fight between the mob and the police ensued. Later the prisoners left Hill Street for Carrick-on-Shannon in cars, under constabulary escort. On their arrival at Carrick the police and cars were attacked by the crowd at the railway station, but the prisoners were ultimately got safely away. It is now reported that the magistrates concerned in the case have been boycotted.
I will now give your Lordships another case. A Protestant merchant named Nathaniel Luttrell, who held a grazing farm at Roscommon, was denounced at a public meeting on April 14th. This public meeting, according to the poster, was held—
"For the purpose of taking immediate steps to have the large grazing tracts divided up amongst the people."
Mr. Michael Reddy, a Member of Parliament and a supporter of noble Lords opposite, said at the meeting—
"You are cowards if you allow Luttrell to stand between you and your just rights."
Further on he said—
"You ask me how there lands are to be divided—"
and then, waving his hands in the direction of Mr. Luttrell's farm, he continued—
"And I tell you to follow the example of the West."
Then on April 30th, forty-one cattle, nine horses, and 291 sheep were driven off Mr. Luttrell's farm by a crowd of 300 men, the greater portion of whom were armed with sticks. The police were not present. The case was tried on May 27th, and, as the Court was evenly divided, the case was adjourned for a fortnight. On May 18th another drive occurred, in which 200 men were concerned. Twelve were arrested, and their case was heard on May 31st. They were returned for trial at Nenagh Assizes and allowed on bail. The point of this persecution of Mr. Luttrell was the announcement at a

439
meeting of the United Irish League at Roscrea on 27th May, that Mr. Luttrell had promised to surrender next gale day. Can it be denied that such persecution would not for one moment be permitted in any other part of His Majesty's dominions? The third case is furnished by a circular issued by the Athenry Branch of the Town Tenants' League, pointing out in violent language that their desire to secure accommodation land is frustrated because the farms are in the occupation of graziers who refuse to surrender.
I have received a number of letters from inhabitants of county Clare which lead me to believe that their lives are being made a burden to them. There was a case of a man named M'Auliffe who, when walking home with his brother, was fired at and he fell senseless on the road with twenty-seven shots in his neck and shoulders, and the doctor declared that it was only by a miracle that the man was alive at all. I do not, however, propose to read private letters; it is sufficient for me to rely on the public utterances of public men. In charging the grand jury at the Clare assizes Lord Chief Justice O'Brien said—
"He regretted very much that it was not his pleasing privilege to congratulate them on the condition of the county. He was afraid that many parts of the county were in a demoralised and lawless condition.…Now, in a shire in England, if it was found necessary, either by special protection or protection by police, to protect from risk of outrage thirty persons, what would be thought?"
The Lord Chief Justice at Tralee, on the opening of the assizes, said as regards county Kerry—
"I regret to say that there are a considerable number of people under police protection. There are thirteen persons under constant police protection—protection by police living in the houses of these people, or living in huts immediately contiguous, and the object of the protection is to shield them against outrage. There are eleven people protected by occasional patrols, that is to say. by police coming from the neighbouring barracks or from certain constabulary huts. Now, the existence of so many people under police protection, the necessity for this protection, is unquestionably an ugly feature."
Then there is a statement of the Judge with regard to county Leitrim, in which he declared that the condition of that county was unsatisfactory. Mr. Justice Ross, in the Land Judge's Court, on
440
17th May, made this important statement—
"He had known from other receivers about this widespread and audacious conspiracy at present rampart in the West of Ireland. There might be something to he sail for it if it. were a conspiracy not to take up any land that had belonged to any former evicted tenant, but this was actually a conspiracy which on ordinary moral grounds amounted to highway robbery, to seize on these grass lands, to drive away the stock of the people who had been in the habit of taking it, and then, when the owner had been starved out, the Estates Commissioners were expected to buy up the property and distribute it amongst the very people who had been urging on the business, and who had been engaged in these outrages and unlawful assemblies."
Upon that statement I believe the Chief Secretary has more or less cast doubt; but from Mr. Justice Ross's position as receiving Judge of the Court of Chancery, I beg to state, with all due respect to Mr. Birrell, that if the opinion of the learned Judge was to be put in the scale against that of the Chief Secretary, the scale would come down heavily on the side of Mr. Justice Ross. The people in the districts in question, in which lawlessness prevails which would not be tolerated in England or Scotland, believe that they have, the Government at their back. At Athenry there was the case of the Nationalist justice of the peace, Mr. Kelly, who, sitting on the Bench, said—
"We have, it out of the mouth of the Chief Secretary that they should agitate, and arc you going to condemn these men for what they were told to do by the Chief Secretary?"
I commend that observation to the consideration of the noble and learned Lord on the Woolsack. I should like to ask the noble Earl the Lord President of the Council to state, when he replies, how he justifies such an expression, and how he justifies the Chief Secretary for not contradicting it. As that statement was made from the Bench and has not been contradicted these people naturally believe that they have the Government at their back. I would point out to the noble and learned Lord on the Woolsack that this same Mr. Kelly, on the occasion in question, went out of his way to cross-examine the witnesses for the prosecution, showing that his bias was undoubtedly on the side of the prisoners. I would ask my noble and learned friend whether, in his opinion, the Lord Chancellor of Ireland is justified in allowing to

441
remain on the Bench a man who takes such a line as that. Then I find Mr. James Fagan, a leading local Nationalist in Roscommon, addressing a meeting at Carrick-on-Shannon on 2nd May declaring—
"I know we have the sympathy of the English Government on our side, and I know the Chief Secretary, Mr. Birrell, is heart and soul with us in the movement."
There was a curious statement made at a land convention by Mr. John Fitzgibbon, who said—
"They in Roscommon had taken the land question into their own hands and had constituted compulsory power without waiting for legislation."
I ask noble Lords opposite whether they consider that a statement which ought to be passed by in silence. Can we wonder that the people in Ireland believe they have the Government at their back when such statements arc made on the Bench or by prominent men in public meeting and never contradicted by responsible members of of the Government in Ireland? There was a most remarkable case a short time ago. A number of men were brought before the resident magistrate at Athenry for lawlessness, and were told that they must either give bail or go to jail for three months. They refused to give bail and the magistrate committed them to prison for three months, but within fourteen days the Lord-Lieutenant, at the request of the Chief Secretary, released those men. Now what must be the effect of action of that kind in that part of Ireland where lawlessness is rampant and the law is ignored?
There is another reason which leads people to believe that the Government do not disapprove of this intimidation, and that is the attitude of the Irish executive in acceding to actions recently taken by the majority of the Estates Commissioners in Ireland. I speak subject to correction, but I believe my noble friend Lord Atkinson framed a rule which enabled the Estates Commissioners to postpone purchasing any estate if it were found that intimidation had been indulged in. That rule was carried out in its entirety by Mr. Walter Long when he was Chief Secretary. I believe that since then the majority of the Estates Commissioners have dis-
442
obeyed that rule, and comparatively recently one of the Estates Commissioners, a layman with no professional knowledge, gave it as his considered opinion that that rule was ultra vires. The ruling of this lay gentleman was accepted by the Irish Government exactly as if it had been the ruling of a Judge of the High Court. The Commissioners were naturally bound to obey the Executive, and the adoption of this ruling was a direct encouragement to intimidation. Cattle are driven off farms in the hope that the unfortunate owners will be forced to sell their holdings to the Commissioners at any price whatever, and the Commissioners will then distribute the property among the people in the district. What will be the result of that? These men will enter into holdings from which honest men have been driven, and the money will either come out of the pocket of the unfortunate owner who is forced to sell, or out of the pockets of the British taxpayers, who thus becomes a party to what I may call robbery by violence.
I think I have shown that I am justified in asking the Question that stands in my name. The question of insisting on the preservation of law and order should not be made a Party one. I hope that in the interests of the country as a whole the Government will take steps to put an end to a state of lawlessness which does not extend over small areas merely, but is rapidly spreading over very large areas. They will, I am sure, receive from the Unionist Party in Ireland hearty support in taking measures to restore law and order, and to do justice to the unfortunate people in the districts to which I have referred.
What can the Government do? They can make use of the Crimes Act of 1887. They can bring to justice the people who are guilty of these outrages, and not go through the farce of a trial where they know that the accused will be acquitted. They might also insist that where intimidation exists the Estates Commissioners should postpone their operations. The Government have no right to gloss over the present state of affairs. Hon. friends of mine in another place have frequently raised this question. It is the duty of the

443
Unionists Members to take under their protection the law-abiding people in other parts of Ireland. I noticed with pain the epithet which the Chief Secretary applied to them for taking such action. I have looked on the Chief Secretary as a man of courtesy and culture, and I could not hear without indignation the epithet which was applied to men who were merely doing their duty. I hope they will raise these questions whenever it is necessary to do so. That is the only way in which a knowledge of the condition of Ireland can be brought before the English people. I beg to put the Question standing in my name.
*LORD CLONBROCK: My Lords, coming as I do from the West of Ireland I regret—I most deeply regret—for the credit of my country that I can only confirm the description which has been given by my noble friend of the state of agitation and terrorism existing there. The noble Marquess has fully described the nature of the movement against the holders of grass farms and the object which the agitators have in view, but I wish to add that this agitation is not conducted solely against holders of farms held under the eleven months system, or against large farmers. It has been directed against men who have held the same farm for years, and against small farmers. Only the other day a woman, evidently in very humble circumstances, was summoned before the United Irish League for not surrendering her share of grazing on a farm. She agreed to surrender, but a fine of £5, which was subsequently reduced to £2, was imposed upon her for not promptly obeying the order of the League. The League holds regular courts, summons people before it, decides whether they should be allowed to work for certain persons, and regulates the whole proceedings of the. country, and the League is able, owing to the state of terror that is inspired, to enforce their decrees with impunity.
To show what the power of the League is, I might mention that the other day a man who was going to Loughrea Fair put a few cattle on the land of a shopkeeper at Loughrea who was in bad odour from having refused to join the
444
League, and in the night the cattle were daubed over with paint to show that they were boycotted and were rendered unsaleable. These cases are at one end of the scale. I will now take the other. I have had a letter put into my hands, since I came into the House, from a gentleman, a magistrate for the county, describing his experience on a journey to attend the fair at Loughrea. He stayed at an hotel over night and found difficulty in getting a car in the morning. After waiting some hours he recognised that they were boycotted. The police procured a car for him. His man was assaulted and his hat thrown into the river." He made a request for police protection, which was complied with. His man was taken by the police to his lodgings, but he was not admitted, nor could he get any lodgings at Loughrea. On the fair morning the cattle were escorted by police, and neither he nor his man could move a step without protection. The people were warned not to buy his cattle, which consequently could not be sold and had to be taken back under police escort. Such a case as is described by the writer of this letter, who is implicitly to be relied upon, shows the terrorism that exists in the country.
A personal friend of my own has the hardihood to hold a farm of which he is the owner. He has refused to sell it, and therefore has committed the unpardonable offence of being possessed of property coveted by others; he is also a very active magistrate. He has been unable to obtain shearers to shear his sheep. No one would work for him. He therefore sent them to another farm of his, seven or eight miles away; but a mob came on to the farm, assaulted the shearers, and drove the sheep into the road, at the same time scattering the wool that had been shorn. I have since seen a letter from his herd saying that they were forbidden by the League to shear or brand the sheep, and were ordered to inform the agent for the property that if he did not remove the sheep by last Saturday they would be driven out. This latter farm has a curious history. It was offered for sale to the Estates Commissioners and a provisional offer

445
from the Estates Commissioners was accepted; but when their inspector came to make the survey, a mob suddenly appeared and drove him and everybody off the farm. What the object was I do not know, except that because they could not all get a slice of the farm they determined that nobody should have any. The inspector tried again, and was again molested, and now the commissioners have dropped the negotiations. That is an illustration of the lawless state of the country.
The same gentleman the other day was driving through the town of Athenry and left his car outside a house, when a man came up to the groom and asked him how he dared drive his master. The groom replied that he was a good master, and he therefore intended to remain in his service. The man then drew a revolver from his pocket saying to the groom, "This fires six times. We have all got them now." There is another case within my knowledge, of the agent of a friend of mine receiving a threatening letter that he would be killed if he did not give up his farm. All the graziers on his property have surrendered and the house of one has been fired into. As showing the power of the League the shopkeepers in Loughrea, acting on the orders of the League, do not now get the boxes and things that they require for their trade from his sawmill. There has been plenty of warning of all this; yet it is not so long ago that we were told "Redeunt Saturnia regna." The golden age has come back to Ireland under the auspices of His Majesty's present Government, and Ireland is quieter than it has been for 600 years, while those who asked inconvenient questions, or dragged out information conflicting with these golden dreams were stigmatised as the maligners of their country and as carrion crows. I cannot help thinking that that was an unfortunate simile, for carrion crows do not show themselves in any locality unless there is good reason for it; "wherever the carcase is there will the eagles be gathered together," but the carcases must be there first.
I cannot answer for 600 years, but I can answer for about sixty, and excepting some terrible period when
446
crime and outrage were rife in the country, and many trembled daily for the life of their friends, I cannot recall any period when property has been so insecure and the action of the Government so supine as at present. I fully admit that steps are now being taken for the protection of property, and that prosecutions are being instituted; but what we complain of is that they were not taken in time. In the year 1905 precisely the same campaign against graziers was contemplated; but Mr. Walter Long, the then Chief Secretary, sent a large force of police into the country, and his firm attitude had the desired effect. The month of May passed off quietly. The noble Marquess did not, I think, refer to the Judge's charge in regard to the county of Galway at Spring Assizes. The Judge there said—
"I regret to say that lawlessness in the form of boycotting and intimidation has been rife in connection with agrarian agitation, and it is of such a nature that it leaves ma no option but to refer to it. There are now forty-one cases in which police protection has to be afforded. In addition there; have been twenty cases of intimidation by threatening letters, and during the same period there have been eleven cases of firing into dwelling houses, some of them being within the last few days."
This was before the announcement was made of the tranquil state of Ireland. Orders had also been sent by the League to graziers, in very many cases, to surrender their farms, sometimes with the intimation that bands of men had been enrolled to drive off their stock if they did not do so. The Government surely must have known of this, and I cannot conceive how such a roseate description of the condition of the country came to be given.
My noble friend referred to the case of a man who refused to give bail and was committed to prison for three months but was released after fifteen days. The explanation given in another place was that fifteen days was an adequate punishment, the sentence having been inflicted under an old Statute of Edward III. The other day another man was summoned for a similar offence, and he said—
"He did not care. It was only fifteen days, and King Edward III. was dead and buried."
Again, the other day, when a man was remonstrated with by a constable, and

447
ordered to desist from driving cattle off a farm, he said he had a perfect right to do it because—
"They had the Government at their back."
The people are firmly convinced that while the Government would repress any overt act of violence, they look with no unfavourable eye on the agitation which prompts such acts, as it may lead to the grass lands being sold by landlords at a low rate. I have received assurances from a very high quarter privately that the Government look upon intimidation as every right-minded man does, but I appeal to them to set the matter at rest and. to discontinue the practice of prophesying smooth things and crying peace where there is no peace. The area of disturbance is said not to be widely extended. If it is not I do not know when we should use the phrase. Perhaps it is not to be considered wide unless agitation approaches the gloomy portals of Dublin Castle, of which we heard lately. In that case the right hon. Gentleman the Chief Secretary might not think it an unmixed evil that those gloomy portals separated him from the stream of national life flowing outside. I appeal to His Majesty's Government to set the matter at rest, and by their action and by public announcement to express emphatically their stern disapproval and condemnation of the system of terrorism which lies like an incubus upon all classes in the country, keeping people from going about their legitimate business, and forcing them to comply with any tyrannical or unjust order which the Party of agitation may choose to issue.
LORD DENMAN: My Lords, I do not think there is anyone better qualified than the noble Marquess who initiated this discussion, and the noble Earl who has just addressed you, to raise a discussion on this Question in your Lordships' House. I do not propose, in replying to those speeches, to deal at any length with the wider questions of policy which were raised more especially by the noble Marquess. I will confine myself rather to show, by such facts and figures as I have been able to obtain, what is the state of Ireland generally at the present time, to refer to those parts of the country
448
in which disturbances have lately occurred, and to tell the House briefly what action the Government have taken in dealing with those disturbances.
In Leinster and Minister, with the exception of a small part of King's County bordering on Tipperary, near Roscrea, and parts of County Clare, things are in a normal condition. In parts of Connaught, as Lord Clonbrock has told us, notably in the East Riding of Galway and Roscommon, there is considerable unrest and disturbance. The total number of outrages, agrarian and non-agrarian, for the first four months of 1907 was 548; for the corresponding period of 1906 it was 587, and for 1905, 555. Taking agrarian outrages alone, the number up to 29th May of this year was 139, including seventy-seven cases of threatening letters, which even when trivial are included in the Crimes Return. For the corresponding period of 1906 the number was ninety, including fifty-seven threatening letters, while for 1905 it was 125, including seventy-nine threatening letters. Therefore the House will see that, so far as the number of agrarian outrages is concerned, the condition of the country is pretty much the same as it was in the spring of 1905.
THE MARQUESS OF LONDONDERRY: May I ask the noble Lord how those figures have been arrived at?
LORD DENMAN: I am afraid I cannot inform the noble Marquess. They have only just come over from Ireland. Coming to the cases of boycotting, in the first four months of 1907 the number of serious boycotting cases reported was ten, in 1906 they were seven, and in 1905 they were thirteen. At the end of April, 1907, the number of persons under constant police protection was forty-six, and those receiving protection by patrol was 154. At the same time in 1906 the numbers were forty and 165. I think it is fair to state, with regard to these cases of police protection, that many of them are cases of long standing, some of them extending over ten or twenty years.
The noble Marquess and the noble Earl who spoke last have quoted the statements of Judges in their charges to the

449
grand juries at the recent spring assizes. I am perfectly prepared to admit that in four counties the reports of the Judges have been distinctly unsatisfactory, but I think I am right in saying that in every other county of Ireland the reports of the Judges have been eminently satisfactory. When you take this into consideration, as well as the facts and figures I have quoted, it does seem to me that there is furnished, I will not say conclusive proof, but at any rate ample justification for the statement that, generally speaking, Ireland is in a satisfactory condition at the present time.
I will now come to the question of the disturbed districts. At present those parts of the country which in our opinion can be described as disturbed are the East Riding of Galway, the County of Roscommon, parts of County Clare and County Leitrim, and in King's County the district adjoining Tipperary, Roscrea. The agitation, as both noble Lords have told us, is due especially in the case of the two first-named districts, to the grazing system. At this season of the year most of the grass lands are let for the ensuing eleven months, and these lands ape generally surrounded by a number of uneconomic holdings occupied by small tenants, who have in past years made attempts to prevent the letting of the grass lands, in the hope of accelerating their purchase by the Estates Commssioners or by the Congested Districts Board.
This year the agitation against the grazing system has resulted in a determined attempt to force the surrender of grazing land. When the tenants have refused to surrender, in many instances disorderly crowds have assembled and driven cattle off the land, but without any attempt at injury. In the other districts, in County Clare and County Leitrim and in King's County, from information which the Government have received, the grazing system has hitherto played a comparatively subordinate part in the disturbances. I have here the details of the cases in these parts of Ireland which are said to have been the principal cause of the disturbances. I do not think I need take up the time of your Lordships by quoting them, with the exception of the one to which the
450
noble Marquess alluded—I refer to the case of Mr. Luttrell. Mr. Luttrell is the holder of a grazing farm in King's County, and his stock on two occasions had been driven off. In the same locality the stock on the farms of three graziers had been driven off on a day when the police had been drafted into Roscrea. Although in our opinion the driving of cattle cannot, of itself, be considered a crime of a very serious nature—
LORD ASHBOURNE: Will the noble Lord kindly repeat that sentence?
LORD DENMAN: I said that although in our opinion the driving of cattle cannot, of itself, be considered a crime of a very serious nature—
THE EARL OF DONOUGHMORE: It would be in England.
LORD DENMAN: It is a crime, but hardly a crime of a serious nature. Although, as I say, in our opinion the driving of cattle cannot, of itself, be considered a crime of a very serious nature, nevertheless the disturbance in these districts is such as to give grave anxiety to the Government of Ireland. In the case of Galway and Roscommon, where the disturbance is more widely spread and I believe more acutely felt, we think that we know what the cause of the agitation is. There are grounds for believing that in those districts a legitimate grievance does exist, and if the recommendations of the Royal Commission appointed for the purpose of investigating the question of the congested districts are such as to hold out the hope of removing, at any rate in part, the cause of this alleged grievance, the Government will not be slow to act upon them. At the same time we do deplore—we very deeply deplore—this agitation, not only for the reasons which the noble Lords have given, but also because in our opinion it must be entirely fruitless. It may seriously retard or even defeat any attempt which may be made later on to deal with this question; and we have no option but to administer the law with firmness and decision.
As to what has been the action of the Government in these disturbed areas

451
additional police have been drafted into the East Riding of Galway for occasional service as required, and thirty-five men have been added to the police force stationed at Athenry. In the County of Roscommon thirty-five additional police are at present stationed in different parts of the county. In these two counties fifteen prosecutions, affecting 127 persons, have been ordered, a number of the accused have been returned for trial, and other cases are still pending, In County Clare an extra force of fifty-six police is at present stationed in four of the police districts. In County Leitrim an extra police force has been sent to the disturbed area which now appears to be settling down. In King's County twenty-six police have been drafted into the county and are stationed on Luttrell's farm. In the disturbed counties proceedings have been taken in twenty-eight cases and the number of persons prosecuted is 189. I hope, my Lords, that this statement will serve to refute the suggestion of the noble Marquess, Lord Londonderry, that the Government are engaged in encourgaing intimidation and lawlessness in Ireland. We in this House are always accustomed to hear him state his case with fairness and moderation, and I confess I was surprised to hear from him, as I think I did, a suggestion that the Chief Secretary himself was engaged in encouraging intimidation and lawlessness in that country.
THE MARQUESS OF LONDONDERRY: What I said was that the action of the Chief Secretary had given the people in the country the right to say that they had the Government at their back, and the Chief Secretary had never contradicted that statement. I am glad to hear that the Government are taking these steps. What I said was that these people made the statement that they had the Government at their back.
LORD DENMAN: I am glad to hear from the noble Marquess that he does not hold that view of the Chief Secretary's conduct. In conclusion I wish to say that we have no desire whatever to minimise the seriousness of the disturbances in these particular districts.
452
Equally it does seem to me to be inexpedient to over-estimate the character and extent of these occurrences. Surely it is obvious that nothing can be so congenial to persons engaged in agitation as that notice should be taken of their sayings and doings by Parliament, and that they should be commented on and quoted in the country. It is in the interests of good government that no exaggerated idea of the extent or importance of the disturbances which have occurred should be conveyed through whatever medium to the people of Ireland.
*THE EARL OF MAYO: My Lords, as one who lives in Ireland I feel that the House will expect that I should say something on this matter. The noble Marquess said he did not regard this as a Party question, and I hope in what I say I shall not be considered as wishing in any way to make Party capital out of the present state of lawlessness in the country. The fact that there is lawlessness in Ireland has often been drawn attention to, and it must be remembered that the forces which direct and organise defiance of law and order, and especially agrarian outrage, always exist in Ireland, The movement begins in a small way, but the authorities at first ignore it, and notwithstanding that attention is drawn to the matter in Parliament and in the Press nothing of any importance is done. The Ministers responsible as a rule take the matter very easily and do not credit the statements of those who live in Ireland, whose business is carried on there, and who have a stake in the country. Suddenly his Majesty's Ministers wake up one fine morning to find that parts of the country are almost in a state of revolution, and that unless they are prepared to allow this revolution to go on it is necessary to have police outside Court houses armed with rifles and ball cartridges, and also to provide police to camp out on land herding castle. That is what is going on now. I ask if it is a dignified proceeding that the officers of the law in Ireland should be so occupied on farms. The noble Lord in his answer actually justified cattle driving—
LORD DENMAN: I deny that I justified it.
*THE EARL OF MAYO: The noble Lord described it as a crime not of a serious nature. Let us consider what this cattle driving is. A man takes a grass farm for eleven months, paying rent, and because the people living around would like to have the grazing land divided among them they turn his cattle on to the road, and then shouting and yelling they drive the animals at full pace to near the owner's house, and there leave them, and this in a district where it is impossible to get people to assist in putting the cattle back. Is that not a crime of a serious nature? The United Irish League have had their eyes on these grass lands for the last two or three years, and have found out that to drive cattle from the owner's land and to leave them to wander for miles over the country is not a serious crime, and they encourage the practice in the hope that the grazing lands may become derelict and be purchased by the Congested Districts Board or the Estates Commissioners. This to those unacquainted with Ireland seems a charmingly simple plan of campaign.
Let me now state the areas where disorder at present exists. They are Sligo, Leitrim, Roscommon, Mayo, Gal-way, Clare, Kerry, King's County and West Cork—nine counties in all; and signs are not wanting that the agitation is spreading to Queen's County and to Longford. This is hardly a satisfactory state of affairs, notwithstanding that the noble Lord who replied on behalf of the Government described the condition of Ireland as normal with considerable "unrest" in parts. We know perfectly well that this unrest is exactly like a gangrene in the little finger of the human hand; unless it is cut out it spreads to the whole body and involves loss of life. That is the reason why we have drawn attention to the matter. The noble Lord said that there were 548 agrarian outrages in Ireland. The number of these outrages depends upon how they are ordered to be reported by the police. I have not the honour of a seat on either Front Bench and therefore I do not think there is much harm in my saying that. We know perfectly well that when the police have orders they report agrarian outrages, and that when they do not receive orders they sit quiet, and small blame to them.
THE LORD PRESIDENT OF THE COUNCIL (The Earl of CREWE): As I shall have to speak later I would like to ask the noble Earl whether he means to suggest that the police have at present orders not to report outrages?
*THE EARL OF MAYO: I did no suggest anything of the kind. I simply stated that we believe in Ireland that the police have instructions to report or not to report outrages. That may be perfectly wrong, but it is the belief, and I have lived in Ireland many years. I would like to draw your Lordships' attention to a case that came under my own notice. I was going to Mallaranny in county Mayo the other day for change of air. At Castrea station I noticed the station to be full of police. I subsequently ascertained that that morning about 200 men, under the command of Mr. Gamble, Assistant Inspector-General, and County Inspector Gray, Roscommon, and five district inspectors, proceeded to Ballymoe, where Mr. Payne lives. This is the account of their operations—.
"Here they were met by another force of Galway police. In a short time thirty cattle were driven out, the police surrounding them. They proceeded to within half a mile of Fohenagh where they were met by about twenty women and children, who set up a mournful cry. The police afterwards drove the cattle on the farm, where they now remain. The whole force is at present located on Fohenagh farm, and the district is in an excited state."
That is where the police are camping out. Then in County Mayo, on a Saturday night, near Ballina, about 100 cattle and sheep on a grazing farm not far away were driven during the night and on Sunday morning were found roaming about the roads. Some ill-feeling had been caused by the tenant renewing his eleven months take of the farm.
I should like to call your Lordships' attention to an Answer which was given by the Chief Secretary in the other House to a Question put to him by Lord John Joicey-Cecil. The Chief Secretary was asked in this Question if he would state how many of the persons who attacked Mr. Payne's farm, near Ballintubber, on the 10th May were employees of the Congested Districts Board and of the Estates Commissioners, and whether he

455
proposed to take action in the matter. Mr. Birrell replied—
"I am informed that about Seventy-five labourers who were temporarily in the employment o the Congested Districts Board, and about thirty employed by the Estates Commissioners, were members of the crowd, some of whom drove the cattle off Mr. Payne's farm. This fact has already been brought to the notice of the Departments mentioned. Twelve persons are being prosecuted for unlawful assembly on the occasion, and the case is sub judice."
I hope that these men who amuse themselves by driving cattle will not be again employed by these Departments. These are people employed by Government Departments, and yet with a gay heart and in a free-and-easy way they take part in these disturbances. This incident, I think, throws a little light on what is going on in Ireland.
The opinion of local Nationalists as to the duty of popular justices in such cases is well exemplified in the following extract from a letter published in the Roscommon Herald on 18th May—
"Dear Sir,—If there had been two more Nationalist J.P.'s in Elphin on Wednesday the Crown would have got a fall in their first coercion prosecution. I am informed that the local leaders sent out urgent whips. A prepaid telegram was sent to the Chairman of the Boyle District Council and another was sent to him on Wednesday, but he did not reply. It was the people made him, and they can unmake him."
There is no doubt that noble Lords in this House will take for granted what we who come from Ireland say with regard to the unrest in that country. The English people, however, have been deceived in the matter, and I would like to ask how much longer are responsible. Ministers going on deluding themselves and the public. I admit that Ulster is quiet and that the district in which I live is quiet—thank God for it—but my point is that if you do not stop this now it will spread all over the country. Ireland was peaceful when Mr. John Morley was Chief Secretary, and I do not see why the present Liberal Government should not be able to manage to maintain peace in these districts just the same as Mr. Morley did.
It would not be difficult to deal with the disorder without exceptional legislation or calling out the military. Let the Government restore the regulation providing that the Congested Districts Board and the Estates Commissioners
456
would deal with no land that was made the subject of any kind of intimidation, and let the convictions of guilty persons be secured by change of venue, and the agitation and rule of the United Irish League would cease and an end would be put to the untold misery caused to all who have anything to do with it or come under its ban. Under the rule of the United Irish League business and trade come to a standstill, friends view each other with suspicion, and a dread of evil comes over the land. Moreover, if this system of cattle driving is not suppressed, there is a grave danger of Ireland's most important industry of stock-raising being ruined. I hope, therefore, the Government will take the bull by the horns and put a stop to the ruffianly proceedings now going on. What is wanted in Ireland is law and order and not too much legislation.
LORD BARRYMORE: My Lords, the discussion up to the present has chiefly dealt with Connaught and the Western portion of Ireland. It is not alone the west of Ireland that is disturbed. The county of Cork, in which I live, appears to be in a complete state of peace according to the view of His Majesty's Government. I am sorry to inform the noble Lord opposite that that county is by no means in so satisfactory a state as he appears to imagine. In the western portion of the county of Cork the greatest difficulty has been experienced for some time past in collecting rents.
On a small estate near Berehaven the landlord's offer to sell at nineteen years purchase was not alone rejected by the tenants, but they refused to pay their arrears of four years rent, and only last week 300 police had to accompany the sheriff to execute writs. I am glad that in this most recent case in County Cork the Government appear to have realised the danger of the situation and to have fully supported the sheriff in the execution of his duty. This small army went down to the estate and a settlement was, I believe, come to, but there was a regular battle royal; resistance was made by men and women; stones, mud, water, and every sort of thing was thrown at the sheriff and at the attacking party. One man was

457
seriously injured and is now in hospital, whilst one of the defending party who struck him with a stone is in jail. This certainly does not look as if there was a peaceful state of things in that county.
In the central part of the county, around Macroom, things are in even a worse state. A well-known land agent in the city of Cork who acts for landlords in that district recently sent a writ for the non-payment of rent for service to a civil bill officer at Macroom, and got the following reply—
"Sir,—Owing to the disturbed state of the district at present, I do not think it safe for me to serve writs for rent."
Two similar letters were produced in evidence in the King's Bench, Dublin, at the end of April last from other civil bill officers in the district. One gentleman writes—
"Being unable to get rent we were obliged to submit to the tenants' own terms and sell at a very low price. The district is in a terrible condition, and it is practically impossible to get rents there. Tenants absolutely refuse to pay unless you sell at their terms."
The result is that the landlords, burdened with very heavy charges, are forced to sell at a loss. What is worse, these unfortunate landlords will not get the purchase money for five or six years, and meanwhile they will be paid only2½ per cent. interest on the amount, while they will have to pay 5 or 6 per cent. on the charges on their property.
In the same district an eviction took place for non-payment of rent and a caretaker with two policemen was placed in charge. The house was attacked by a mob of 150 people, and the result was that the police and the caretaker had to get out by a back door. They succeeded in retiring to the police barracks, where this wretched caretaker remained for twenty-four hours before they could smuggle him back to Cork. A week or two later another caretaker went down, accompanied by fifty police. They took possession of the house and occupied it that night. The house was again attacked by the mob, but the police were afraid to take any active steps in resisting, because they were afraid that if they did they would probably run the risk of being summoned and tried before a jury in Cork, and that the consequences would be very severe. They also feared that
458
they would not get the support and protection of His Majesty's Government. That caretaker was again withdrawn.
THE EARL OF CREWE: May I ask the noble Lord's authority for the statement that the police took that view.
LORD BARRYMORE: That was the information I obtained from the caretaker and the people who were mixed up in the case. The fact remains that the police made no attempt to attack the mob beyond firing one or two shots through the roof of the thatched house in which they were. Then in March there was the case of a postman who was going down to that neighbourhood with a number of letters purporting to contain writs and processes. The postman was waylaid by disguised men and relieved of a number of letters which had significant marks indicating the nature of their contents. The postman resisted the attack but was unable to save the messages from confiscation.
Then on 4th April the police went to arrest a man who was known to the police as having been engaged in one of these outrages. He was working in a field with some others. The attempt to serve the writ was resisted, and a fight ensued, and the police, as far as I can make out, went off without their prisoner. One of the men was struck on the head with a truncheon and the result was that he brought a summons against the policeman for assault. The summons was tried before seven magistrates on 27th May, and after a long trial the magistrates decided by a majority that they would send the policeman for trial at Cork. The chairman, who was the resident magistrate and an exceedingly able and capable officer, gave judgment in these words—
"They had given the ease considerable attention, and he regretted to say they were by no means unanimous. The majority had decided to return the ease for trial. Speaking for himself, he had no hesitation in emphatically dissenting from the decision of the majority of the Court, and he thought the administration of the law in the county of Cork, and particularly in this neighbourhood, stood a bad chance in the future, if a policeman with a warrant going to effect the arrest of an offender were openly resisted and treated in this way. it boded very ill for the maintenance of law and order in the county.

459
These cases show that there are places besides Connaught in which the law is broken and where the country is in a very serious state. These cases have nothing to do with evicted tenants, and such matters as these cannot be remedied by any Bill introduced by His Majesty's Government to reinstate those tenants.
The cases which I have laid before your Lordships show that throughout parts of the country there is an organised determination on the part of lawless people to band together to defy the law. They show, moreover, the difficulty, if not the impossibility, of getting the officers of the law to do their duty, and, more serious still, that magistrates themselves are not to be trusted to carry out the law which they have sworn to administer. I hope that before it is too late the Government will realise the state of Ireland, and endeavour to do something to put things upon a better footing.
*LORD DUNBOYNE: My Lords, I happen to reside in County Clare, and can testify that the state of that county is not quite as peaceful as the noble Lord opposite, who spoke on behalf of His Majesty's Government, would wish the House to imagine. Within the last two months there have been no less than seven cases of shooting besides other outrages, and those who say that the outrages are not serious would probably change their opinion if they could place themselves in the position of the unfortunate peasants.
I will state to your Lordships a few of the outrages that have been committed On the night of 23rd March, at Scariff, the house of a farmer named John Carroll was fired into. His daughter was struck by the broken glass through which the shot passed. The outrage is attributed to a local land dispute. Again, at Crossagh, Newmarket-on-Fergus, in the county of Clare, the house of a man named Christopher Boland was fired into. He was in charge of an evicted farm. On 16th. April, in Kilbogin district, a man named Frank M'Auliffe, while returning from Ennis, was fired at and received a gunshot wound in the shoulder. But, as these people were not killed, perhaps the offence, is not considered a serious one.
460
Cranagher House, midway between Ennis and Tulla, belonging to General Sir Bindon Blood, was recently the scene of a dastardly outrage. Men broke into the house and in several of the rooms started fires on the floors with hay saturated with paraffin oil. A hay barn, which contained about ten or twelve tons of hay, was also set on fire and destroyed, while attempts were made to destroy the herd's house. All the indications pointed to a deliberately planned outrage. A claim was made at Ennis Quarter Sessions on 16th April by Sir Bindon Blood for the malicious injuries to his property. The agent of the property, in giving evidence, said he had received a threatening letter in connection with the farm. This threatening letter contained these passages—
"Sir,—As a member of the Sacred Society of Clooney I would draw your attention to the state of the Cranagher Farm at the present time. In order to avoid murder and bloodshed we hope you will be good enough not to give the farm in question to any one man; more than that, you will not give said farm through your own hands…as we will not take it except through the Estates Commissioners.…No other measures will do us. Any who becomes tenant of said farm will meet an untimely death. … No protection will save you from an unexpected death if you make tenant of any one man in Cranagher.…A sudden death awaits you if you do not act fair, and you will be responsible before God for the death of any man you make tenant of."
This letter is signed by the "Captain of the Sacred Society, Clooney." Compensation was recovered in that case.
I have details of another case which happened in the Corofin district. A respectable farmer named Michael O'Connor, who resides at Shanballysallagh, was, it seems, on a visit to a friend's house, about a mile and a half distant from his home, on the night of March 21st. He left for home at half-past ten o'clock, and had only gone a short distance when a shot was fired at him from behind the roadside wall. One grain of the shot struck O'Connor on the calf of one leg. O'Connor ran as hard as he could towards home, when six or seven more shots were discharged after him, none of which, however, struck him. He subsequently reported the matter, and the county inspector and district inspector visited the place. No arrests were made. The outrage is said to be attributed to Mr. O'Connor's having

461
taken portion of a large farm in the district lately, over the division of which there was some local feeling.
Then on 3rd May there was another shooting outrage in Ruane district, the victim being John Murphy, a young man of the farming class. He was on horseback, and on his return home, within three or four hundred yards of the village of Ruane, two gunshots were fired at him from behind a hedge. Though badly wounded he galloped to Ruane and reported the outrage at the police barracks. As late as 23rd May the house of a farmer living at Fermoyle was fired into, but fortunately without injury to the occupants. One revolver bullet lodged in the window frame, and a second in a door. The county and district inspectors visited the scene, and as the result of their inquiries two young men were arrested. This, however, is of very little use, as the unfortunate peasants are so intimidated that it is impossible to procure evidence. The only government in these districts is that of the United Irish League, and the people know that if they attempt to do anything contrary to the orders of the League the probability is that they will be made severely to suffer. They know that they can get no protection from the properly constituted authorities, and that makes them unwilling to come forward.
There was a case last September within a mile of my house. A most respectable young man was picking nuts on a Sunday afternoon, when a man came up to him and drew a revolver. He said, "Now I have got you," and fired two bullets into him. One went through his neck and the other through his thigh. The young man struggled with his assailant to get the revolver, but fell down exhausted through loss of blood. The man then jumped on him and deliberately fired two more bullets into him while he was lying on the ground. The young man told me himself that pressure was brought to bear upon him, and that if it had not been for the parish priest he would have been obliged to say he did not know the man who assaulted him, although he knew him intimately. That shows the state of terror which exists in the country, and the fact that the League alone in that
462
part of the country can enforce the law, and the law they enforce is their own law. I do not speak for the landlords. They are to a great extent immune, most of them being quite capable of taking care of themselves. But I do earnestly plead for deliverance for the poor tenants and farmers, who groan under the terrible oppression of the League. There can be no real happiness nor prosperity among the Irish people so long as the law of the United Irish League is allowed to rule the country.
Moved, "That the debate stand adjourned."—(Viscount Hill.)
On Question, Motion agreed to.
House adjourned at half-past Seven o'clock, till To-morrow, half-past Ten o'clock.