Sitting of 1 July 1908

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

PRIVATE BILL BUSINESS.
Merthyr Tydfil Corporation Bill [Lords].—As amended, considered; to be read the third time.
Electric Lighting Provisional Orders (No. 1) Bill; Electric Lighting Provisional Orders (No. 2) Bill.—Lords Amendments considered, and agreed to.
Buckie Burgh and Buckie (Cluny) Harbour Order Confirmation Bill [Lords].—Read the third time, and passed, without Amendment.
Local Government (Ireland) Provisional Orders (No. 1) Bill [Lords]; Local Government (Ireland) Provisional Orders (No. 2) Bill [Lords].—Read a second time, and committed.
Taff Vale Railway Bill [Lords].—Reported with Amendments. Report to lie upon the Table, and to be printed.

MESSAGE FROM THE LORDS.
That they have agreed to:—Louth and East Coast Railway (Transfer) Bill;
738
Seaham Harbour Dock Bill, with an Amendment.
Stockport Corporation Bill; Humber Commercial Railway and Dock Bill; Southwell District Gas Bill, with Amendments.
"That they have passed a Bill, intituled, "An Act to amend The Criminal Appeal Act, 1907, with reference to the Appointment of the Judges of the Court of Criminal Appeal and the Appointment of a Deputy Registrar." [Criminal Appeal (Amendment) Bill [Lords].
Companies (Consolidation) Bill [Lords] Post Office Consolidation Bill [Lords], and Statute Law Revision Bill [Lords]. That they communicate that they have added two Lords to the Joint Committee appointed to consider the Companies (Consolidation) Bill [Lords], Post Office Consolidation Bill [Lords], and Statute Law Revision Bill [Lords], as desired by this House, and propose that the said Joint Committee do meet in Committee Room A on Wednesday next, at Two of the Clock.

PETITIONS.
  CHILDREN BILL.
  Petition from Norwich, in favour; to lie upon the Table.

  LICENSING BILL.
  Petitions from Stroud, against; to lie upon the Table.
  Petitions in favour:—From Birmingham; Cwmgorse; Esh Winning and Waterhouses; Gower (two); Leeds (two); Llanrlidan; Llansannan; Luton; Nebo Llanrwst; Norwich (five); Pembroke Dock and Sowerby Bridge; to lie upon the Table.

RETURNS, REPORTS, ETC.
  COLONIAL REPORTS (ANNUAL).
  Copy presented, of Report No. 562 (Falkland Islands, Annual Report for 1907; [by Command]; to lie upon the Table.
  WAGES BOARDS AND INDUSTRIAL ARBITRATION (AUSTRALIA AND NEW ZEALAND).
  Copy presented, of Report to the Secretary of State for the Home Department, by Ernest Aves, Esquire, on the Wages Boards and Industrial Conciliation and Arbitration Acts of Australia and New Zealand [by Command]; to lie upon the Table.
  SHOP HOURS ACT (AUSTRALIA AND NEW ZEALAND).
  Copy presented, of Report to the Secretary of State for the Home Department, by Ernest Aves, Esquire, on the Acts for the Regulation of Hours of Employment in Shops in Australia and New Zealand [by Command]; to lie upon the Table.
  FACTORIES AND WORKSHOPS.
  Copy presented, of Report of the Chief Inspector for 1907 [by Command]; to lie upon the Table.
  TREATY SERIES (No. 17 1908).
  Copy presented, of Convention between the United Kingdom and the United States of America respecting the Protection, Preservation, and Propagation of Food Fishes in the Waters contiguous to the United States and the Dominion of Canada. Signed at Washington, 11th April, 1908. Ratifications exchanged at Washington, 4th June, 1908 [by Command]; to lie upon the Table.
  TREATY SERIES (No. 18, 1908).
  Copy presented, of Treaty between the United Kingdom and the United States of America respecting the Demarcation of the International Boundary between the United States and the Dominion of Canada. Signed at Washington, 11th April, 1908. Ratifications exchanged at Washington, 4th June, 1908; [by Command]; to lie upon the Table.
  TRADE REPORTS (ANNUAL SERIES).
  Copies presented, of Diplomatic and Consular Reports, Annual Series, No. 4020, 4051, and 4053 to 4056 [by Command]; to lie upon the Table.
  CENSUS OF PRODUCTION ACT, 1906.
  Copy presented, of Rules made by the Board of Trade [by Act]; to lie upon the Table.
  BOARD OF EDUCATION.
  Copy presented, of Regulations for the Training of Teachers for Elementary Schools (in force from 1st August, 1908) [by Command]; to lie upon the Table.
  PAPER LAID UPON THE TABLE BY THE CLERK OF THE HOUSE.
  Public Records (Treasury) (African Companies), Copy of Classes of Documents among the Records of the Royal African Company and the Company of Merchants Trading to Africa, which have been removed from the Office of the Lords Commissioners of His Majesty's Treasury and deposited in the Public Record Office, but are not considered of sufficient Public value to justify their preservation therein [by Act].
  QUESTIONS AND ANSWERS CIRCULATED WITH THE VOTES.

    Bristol Post Office Vacancies and Members of Postal Associations.
    MR. W. T. WILSON: To ask the Postmaster General whether vacancies exist for the position of second-class superintendent and two overseerships in the Bristol telegraph office; whether the postmaster at that office regards the membership of the Postal Telegraph Clerks' Association as being a disqualification for the positions and has made inquiries respecting the attendance of members of the staff at association functions in connection with his recommendations for these superior positions; and whether, in view of the fact that a well-known non-trade unionist was especially selected to fill a recent vacancy over the heads of senior men holding superior technical qualifications, he will inquire into the administration at Bristol.
    (Answered by Mr. Sydney Buxton.) I would refer the hon. Member to paragraph 95 of the recent Report of the Select Committee on Post Office Servants. That paragraph, with which I entirely agree, states the principles which I have always followed in making promotions in the service. No distinction is made between members of associations and others.

    H.M. Yacht "Victoria and Albert."
    MR. WATT: To ask the First Lord of the Admiralty what

    741
    is to be the future of His Majesty's yacht "Victoria and Albert" now that she has been replaced by a new vessel; is she to be sold; and, if so, will he see that the breaking-up clause is not insisted on, so that a much larger sum may be got for the benefit of the nation?
    (Answered by Mr. McKenna.) There is no intention of selling His Majesty's yacht "Victoria and Albert," which has not been replaced by a new vessel.

    Coal Residues in Re-inforced Concrete.
    MR. RIDSDALE: To ask the President of the Local Government Board if he is aware that the use of coal residues in reinforced concrete for building purposes has been forbidden through out Germany on account of its danger whether such materials are in common use in this country; and, if so, what steps, if any, he proposes to take.
    (Answered by Mr. John Burns.) I have no official information as to the use of the materials referred to being prohibited for building purposes in Germany. I have, however, seen some statements in the newspapers to this effect. I am aware that these materials are in common use in this country, and I propose to obtain some further information as to the result of such use, and also as to how the matter has been dealt with in Germany.

    Fishing and Foreshore Rights in Scotland.
    MR. DUNDAS WHITE: To ask the Secretary for Scotland, in view of the decision of the Court of Session in the case of Smith v. Lerwick Harbour Trustees, 1903, F., 680, that the law of udal and not of feudal tenure applies to the foreshore as well as to the rest of the solum of the Shetland Islands, and of the subsequent decision in the case of the Lord Advocate v. Balfour, 1907, Session Cases, 1360, in which the Lord Ordinary held that the reasoning in that Shetland case applies equally in Orkney, that in Orkney the feudal law of salmon-fishing does not apply, and that the right of fishing for salmon in Orkney is not inter regalia, if the question as to whether the right of oyster-fishery in Orkney is or is not inter regalia has been considered with reference to the Oyster and Mussel Fishery (Bay of Firth) Provisional Order Bill;
    742
    and, if so, what conclusion has been arrived at.
    (Answered by Mr. Sinclair.) The procedure being under the specific powers conferred by the Sea Fisheries Act of 1868, I am advised that no question of the nature indicated by my hon. friend arises.
    MR. DUNDAS WHITE: To ask the Secretary for Scotland whether he has powers under Section 5 of The Fisheries (Oyster, Crab, and Lobster) Act, 1877, to prohibit, restrict, and regulate the fishing of oysters at the Bay of Firth, in Orkney; whether, if the Oyster and Mussel Fishery (Bay of Firth) Provisional Order Confirmation Bill, which is designed to create a several oyster fishery over an area of about 4,500 acres for a period of 60 years, becomes law, he will be precluded from exercising his powers under that section over that area while that Order is in force, and the only remedy in the event of that fishery not being conducted satisfactorily will be to repeal the Order by a certificate under Section 45 of The Sea Fisheries Act, 1868, under which Act the Provisional Order Bill is being promoted; and why the creation of a private monopoly in this public oyster fishery under the Act of 1868 is preferred to the regulation of it, in the interests of the public, under the Act of 1877.
    (Answered by Mr. Sinclair.) The Secretary for Scotland has power, under Section 5 of The Sea Fisheries (Oyster, crab, and Lobster) Act, 1877, to prohibit, restrict, and regulate the fishing of oysters, but that power does not extend to places where a several oyster fishery is constituted by Order under The Sea Fisheries Act, 1868, the remedy for unsatisfactory administration in such cases being as stated by my hon. friend. Mere prohibition, restriction, or regulation would now have little effect in resuscitating the beds at the Bay of Firth. What is wanted is the cultivation of the beds on approved modern methods, and neither the Secretary for Scotland nor Fishery Board have powers or funds for this purpose. Every effort to get local public bodies to take up the matter failed, and the Fishery Board were compelled to fall back on the proposal for a public syndicate. I am

    743
    informed that no public interest is being violated, while, on the other hand, the operations of the syndicate will afford employment to a number of the local people.

    Alleged Assault of a Warder by Governor of Ayr Prison.
    MR. T. F. RICHARDS: To ask the Secretary for Scotland whether his attention has been drawn to an inquiry held by the Prison Commissioners into a charge made by Warder F. W McDonald that he had been assulted by the Governor of Ayr Prison; whether he is aware that, although McDonald's statement was corroborated, he was reprimanded and otherwise punished; and whether he will make full inquiry into the case with a view to securing justice to this warder.
    (Answered by Mr. Sinclair.) This case has been carefully investigated, and it has been found that the statement of the warder that the Governor assulted him by striking him a violent blow which caused an illness is disproved. I am aware that the warder was reprimanded and placed upon special probation for one year.

    Alnwick Post Office Drains.
    MR. SUMMERBELL: To ask the Postmaster General if he can state whether the defects appertaining to the drains at Alnwick post office have been carried out; and, if so, as to whether the health conditions are now of a satisfactory character.
    (Answered by Mr. Sydney Buxton.) The work necessary for remedying the defects in the Alnwick post office has been ordered, but its execution has been delayed by local difficulties. These have, I understand, now been overcome, and the work will be put in hand at once.

    Purchase of Inverliever Estate, Argyllshire.
    Mr. WATT: To ask the Secretary to the Treasury, in connection with the purchase of Inverliever, Argyllshire, for afforestation, what were the casualties the redemption of which was included in the price of £2,110, or 33 years' purchase, paid for the feu duty; what was the value placed upon these casualties by his
    744
    Department; and who was the seller of the feu duty.
    (Answered by Mr. Hobhouse.) The purchase from the Duke of Argyll for £2,110 was of certain rights of superiority in parts of the Inverliever estate and included feu duties payable to His Grace amounting to £62 19s. l0d. sterling, and certain casualties. The casualties are as to part untaxed, and a composition for this part would amount approximately to £380. As to a further part there is a question as to whether the composition is taxed at a nominal sum or not. If it is untaxed the amount would be about £45. The statutory rate for redeeming casualties is one-and-a-half times the highest casualty. The transaction was dealt with as a whole, and the Commissioners of Woods were advised that the price agreed upon was reasonable.

    Service in Armed Forces of the Crown as Qualification for Old-age Pensions.
    CAPTAIN FABER: To ask Mr. Chancellor of the Exchequer whether he can recommend that any man who has served His Majesty, either in the Volunteer Navy or in the Territorial Army for a term of years shall be considered eligible for an old-age pension, so far as character is concerned, without any further inquiry.
    (Answered by Mr. Lloyd-George.) There is no disqualification in respect of character except for actual criminality, and the only test for the purpose of which service in the forces of the Crown could in practice be taken into account is the industry test contained in paragraph (b) of Clause 3, subsection 1, of the Bill. The matter was carefully considered when that paragraph was drafted, but it did not appear to be possible to treat what would in many cases be only a short period of such service performed early in life as conclusive evidence of an applicant's industrial character, without any regard to his history during the subsequent period between his leaving the service and applying for a pension.

    Establishment of a British Post Office at Jerusalem.
    MR. HENNIKER HEATON: To ask the Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs whether he is yet in a

    745
    position to announce a decision on the question of the establishment of a British post office in Jerusalem.
    (Answered by Secretary Sir Edward Grey) A letter informing the hon. Member of that decision was despatched from the Foreign Office yesterday.

    Local Loans for Extension of Union Buildings.
    MR. T. E. BETHELL: To ask the President of the Local Government Board whether in view of the prospective reform of our present Poor Law system the sanction by the Local Government Board to the borrowing of money by boards of guardians for the purpose of extending union buildings will be withheld, except in cases where the works are of a specially urgent character.
    (Answered by Mr. John Burns.) The Board would not lose sight of the point referred to in dealing with proposals for building made to them, but I do not think that any general rule can be laid down on the subject. Each case must be considered on its own merits.

    American Gooseberry Mildew.
    MR. LAURENCE HARDY: To ask the hon. Member for South Somerset, as representing the President of the Board of Agriculture, whether in the sixty-eight recent outbreaks of the American goose berry mildew in the summer stage, attributed by them as probably due to imperfect pruning, the plantations, in which these outbreaks or any of them have occurred, had been passed by the Board's inspector as properly pruned according to the requirements of the order of the Board.
    (Answered by Sir Edward Strachey.) The plantations to which the hon. Member refers were, with one exception, to all appearances pruned as required by the Board's order, and their inspectors reported that no further visits were necessary before the summer. The Board recognise that disease is likely to recur in certain cases, and therefore provided in their American Gooseberry Mildew Order of 1907 that no infected premises should be freed for twelve months after disease last appeared there, so long as any bushes remain on the
    746
    premises. The gardens will of course be kept under observation during that time.

    The Provincial Homes Investment Company.
    MR. SCOTT: To ask the President of the Board of Trade if his attention has been called to a company named the Provincial Homes Investment Company, whose operations are advertised to assist the working classes in buying their houses; whether he is aware that meetings of dissatisfied certificate holders are being held in various towns where it is alleged the holders have been unable to obtain advances on their properties in accordance with the prospectus of this company; and will he cause an inquiry to be made into the workings of this company.
    (Answered by Mr. Churchill.) I have received several letters of complaint from dissatisfied holders of certificates in a company named the Provincial Homes Investment Company, Limited, and I have been informed that meetings have been held. The Board of Trade have no general power to institute an inquiry as suggested by my hon. friend. The only power vested in the Board of Trade is the power to appoint an inspector in accordance with the provisions of Sections 56 to 59 of The Companies Act, 1862, on the application of shareholders holding not less than one-tenth of the whole of the shares of the company for the time being issued.

  QUESTIONS IN THE HOUSE.

    H.M.S. "Highflyer."
    MR. MITCHELL-THOMSON: I beg to ask the First Lord of the Admiralty whether the temporary repairs to the main starboard crank-shaft of H.M.S. "Highflyer" have yet been completed; whether she is returning to England forthwith for permanent repair: and what ship relieves her.
    THE CIVIL LORD OF THE ADMIRALTY (Mr. LAMBERT,): The repairs on H.M.S. "Highflyer" undertaken at Bombay have been completed, and she is now at Colombo. The present intention is for her to meet

    747
    her relief, H.M.S. "Fox," at Suez, in the middle of August. On her return home, further repairs will be undertaken at one of the home dockyards.
    MR. ASHLEY: Is the right hon. Gentleman satisfied that now the temporary repairs are completed it will be safe for the "Highflyer" to go through the Indian Ocean when monsoons are prevalent?
    MR. LAMBERT: Yes, Sir.
    MR. REES: Is this the flagship of the East Indian squadron.
    MR. LAMBERT: Yes, she is quite capable of doing the work at present required of her. She will soon be relieved.
    MR. MITCHELL-THOMSON: But is not the "Fox" at present taking part in the manœeuvres? How can she be sent there by the time named?
    MR. SPEAKER: Notice had better be given of the Question.

    Debates on Navy Estimates.
    MR. ASHLEY: I beg to ask the First Lord of the Admiralty what was the average number of hours devoted to discussion of Navy Estimates in Committee of Supply and on Report during the two concluding years of the last Government; and what were the corresponding figures for 1906 and 1907.
    MR. LAMBERT: In Committee of Supply Naval Estimates were discussed in 1904 on five days; 1905, five days; 1906, four days; 1907, five days. In 1904 one day was devoted to Supplementary Estimates, and there were three short discussions on Report.
    MR. ASHLEY: Shall we have five days this year?
    MR. LAMBERT: That Question should be addressed to the Prime Minister.
    MR. JAMES HOPE: Do these figures include the time devoted
    748
    to the Motion to go into Committee of Supply?
    MR. LAMBERT: No, Sir. I distinctly said: "in Committee of Supply."

    Coastguardsmen in the Fleet.
    MR. GRETTON: I beg to ask the First Lord of the Admiralty how many coastguards have been required to man the fleet mobilising on 1st July; and how many have actually been included in the ships' complements.
    MR. LAMBERT: I beg to refer the hon. Member to my right hon. friend's reply to the Question of the hon. Member for Great Yarmouth on 29th June, in which he said that the number of coastguard men to be embarked is 1,300. All of them will be in the ships' complements.

    H.M.S. "Irresistible."
    MR. BELLAIRS: I beg to ask the First Lord of the Admiralty when the official inquiry is to be held into the flooding of the engine-room of the battleship "Irresistible" up to the level of the water outside; and, in view of the warnings that have been addressed to the Admiralty as to the danger of entrusting the work of skilled engine-room artificers to imperfectly trained mechanicians, whether he will cause inquiry to be made into the circumstances under which one of the new mechanician class was entrusted with the duty of dealing with the valves through which the ship was flooded.
    MR. LAMBERT: The Report of the Court of Inquiry which has been held on the flooding of the "Irresistible" was received at the Admiralty on 17th June, and referred to the technical officers for observations. The Board have not yet considered the Report.

    Sailors' Grog.
    MR. MEYSEY THOMPSON: I beg to ask the First Lord of the Admiralty whether he will consider the advisability of allowing sailors in the Royal Navy the option of drawing 1d. per day in lieu of their grog.
    MR. LAMBERT: This matter is already receiving consideration, and reports have been called for from the Fleet with a view to ascertaining how many men would be likely to take advantage of such an option if granted, and what the extra expense to Navy Votes would be.
    MR. MEYSEY THOMPSON: But is not the grog now given worth 1d.? Would there not be a saving? If the right hon. Gentleman gets an undertaking that no extra expense will be incurred will he grant this privilege?
    MR. LAMBERT: The matter is receiving consideration.
    MAJOR ANSTRUTHER-GRAY: But would it not be an economy?
    MR. MEYSEY THOMPSON: Seeing there are so many complaints of over taxation I am prepared——
    MR. SPEAKER: The hon. Member is not entitled to make a speech.
    MR. WILLIAM REDMOND: Will the hon. Gentleman give this matter his best consideration, in view of the fact that the present Government claim to be temperance reformers?
    [No Answer was returned.]

    Dockyard Territorials.
    MR. ASHLEY: I beg to ask the First Lord of the Admiralty whether, in the event of any large proportion of the men employed in naval dockyards joining the Territorial Army, he is satisfied that on mobilisation of that force the efficiency of the Navy will not be affected by the withdrawal of these men from their ordinary duties
    MR. LAMBERT: The Admiralty have the first claim on the services of all men employed in the royal dockyards, and any who belong to the Territorial Army would not leave their work on the mobilisation of that force unless the Admiralty were satisfied that they could be spared.
    MR. ASHLEY: Has the Admiralty informed the War Office authorities that in the event of mobilisation a certain portion of the Territorial Force will not be available?
    MR. LAMBERT: I expect the War Office are aware of the facts.
    MR. BELLAIRS: But is not the Admiralty perfectly well aware that the services of these men could not possibly be spared? Would they not be performing a far more important duty by repairing ships?
    MR. LAMBERT: I can only repeat that they will not be allowed to leave their work unless the Admiralty is satisfied that they can be spared.

    Territorial Artillery Battery Adjutants.
    CAPTAIN FABER: I beg to ask the Secretary of State for War whether he will consider the advisability of having adjutants from the Regular Army for the Territorial Artillery batteries; and whether, with a view of saving the expense incurred thereby, he will reduce the number of Territorial batteries so as to balance the expense incurred by such adjutants.
    THE FINANCIAL SECRETARY TO THE WAR OFFICE (Mr. ACLAND,): This Question of the proportion of adjutants necessary for the Territorial Artillery has been very fully considered and it was held that one adjutant per brigade of Field Artillery and one per battery of Horse Artillery was sufficient.
    MR. ASHLEYput two Supplementary Questions, both of which were inaudible.

    The Thakur Bahadur Singh.
    DR. RUTHERFORD: I beg to ask the Undersecretary of State for India whether he is aware that the Thakur Bahadur Singh, a noble of the State of Bikanir, was dismissed arbitrarily from the office of member of the Bikanir State Council in the year 1905, and ordered to reside under surveillance in his house in the

    751
    city of Bikanir; that he was brought before the Maharajah of that State on 6th April last, and, without any charge being framed or furnished to him, deported from the State and placed in confinement in the neighbouring State of Jaipur, and that he is still kept in confinement there, without trial or investigation of any sort; and whether inquiries will be instituted by the Government into these matters in order that justice may be secured.
    THE UNDER-SECRETARY OF STATE FOR INDIA (Mr. BUCHANAN,.): Thakur Bahadur Singh was removed from the Bikanir State Council in consequence of the part played by him in the events which led to the mprisonment of three leading Thakurs of the State in January, 1905. The condition of residence in the town of Bikanir was imposed upon the Thakur in 1888, when he was permitted to return to the Bikanir State, from which he had been expelled five years previously for rebellion against the State. In November, 1907, the Maharajah of Bikanir represented that Thakur Bahadur Singh had violated the conditions on which he had been permitted to return to Bikanir, and had been taking part in intrigues against the State. His Highness, therefore, proposed that the Thakur should again be banished from Bikanir, and the Government of India gave their assent to this course in March, 1908. I have no information as to the arrangements made for the Thakur's residence outside the Bikanir State. The case in these circumstances does not seem to the Secretary of State one for inquiry.

    The Thakur Ram Singh.
    DR. RUTHERFORD: I beg to ask the Under-Secretary of State for India whether he is aware that the Thakur Ram Singh, a noble of the State of Bikanir, was not released from his imprisonment in August, 1906, nor were his estates restored to him, but that he was merely brought out of the fort at Bikanir and detained in that City, that he was not allowed to go outside the city limits or permitted to go to his village, or to hold communication with anyone, and that his estate is still in the hands of
    752
    the Courts of Wards of the Bikanir Raj, no accounts being furnished to him; will he say whether he is still so detained and forbidden even to execute a power of attorney in favour of any person to conduct his case before the authorities, or to represent him in the matter of his grievances; and whether inquiries by the Government of India will be ordered to secure that justice may be done.
    MR. BUCHANAN: My information is that Thakur Ram Singh was released in August, 1906, but I have no knowledge of any conditions as to place of residence, etc., attached to his release. As regards his landed property, one village was confiscated in 1905, and the rest of his estate was placed under the management of the Court of Wards of the Bikanir State, until such time as he should have satisfied the State that he had reformed his chraacter and attitude towards the State, or until his son should have attained his majority. The confiscated village has, I understand, been restored, but I have no information as to whether the conditions necessary for the return of the estates from the management of the Court of Wards have been fulfilled. As stated in reply to a question by the hon. Member on 17th March last, the circumstances are not such as to justify a departure from the established policy of non-interference in the internal affairs of a native State.
    MR. REES: I wish to ask whether incidents such as those brought to notice in this native State are not characteristic of rule according to native ideas and methods such as the hon. Member and his friends profess to desire to see adopted in British India?
    MR. BUCHANAN: The policy of the Government of India is not to interfere with native States in conducting their affairs in accordance with ideas which prevail in native India.
    MR. KEIR HARDIE: Is it not the case that this particufar incident required to be confirmed by His Majesty's Government?
    MR. BUCHANAN: Certainly.

    Transvaal Mines—Mortality among Labourers.
    MR. MITCHELL-THOMSON: I beg to ask the Under-Secretary of State for the Colonies what was the death-rate per 1,000 during the first five months of 1908 among the Chinese, all natives and natives from north of 22° south latitude, respectively, who were employed in the Transvaal mines.
    THE UNDER-SECRETARY OF STATE FOR THE COLONIES (Colonel SEELY,): We are not in possession of later figures than those contained in the recent Parliamentary Paper, Cd. 4120.
    MR. MITCHELL-THOMSON: Will the hon. Gentleman apply for the information?
    COLONEL SEELY: I do not think we can do that. The Transvaal Government have assured us that they are taking every step possible to reduce the mortality, and seeing that the results of their action are eminently satisfactory, I think it would be an unwarrantable interference with a self-governing Colony to take such action as is proposed by the hon. Member.

    British Honduras—Railway Project.
    MR. MITCHELL-THOMSON: I beg to ask the Under-Secretary of State for the Colonies whether he has received from British Honduras a petition expressing the desire of the community that His Majesty's Government should facilitate the construction of a railway westward from Belize; and when he will lay Papers giving the views of His Majesty's Government upon the whole question of railway construction in the Colony.
    COLONEL SEELY: The Secretary of State has just received the petition referred to by the hon. Member, and it is now under his consideration. In the present position of the matter it would be premature to lay Papers, but the question of doing so will be duly considered hereafter.

    British Guiana Militia.
    MR. BYLES: I beg to ask the Under-Secretary of State for the
    754
    Colonies whether his attention has been drawn to the circular letter to all heads of departments issued from the Government secretary's office of British Guiana under date 6th May, 1908, in which the Governor calls for certain quarterly returns, commencing from 1st July, relating to the attendance of junior officers in the public service of the Colony at drill in connection with the local Militia or Volunteer forces; whether the circular is to be interpreted as calculated to penalise the position of young officers in the service who fail to fulfil the requirements laid down by the Governor to introduce a species of compulsory military service; whether its terms are inconsistent with the Colonial Office Regulations governing appointments in the Crown Colonies, as also with the British Guiana Militia Ordinance of 1891, which makes provision for the recruiting of the ranks of the Militia when the strength falls below the statutory standard; and whether, in the circumstances, instructions will be issued to the Governor of British Guiana to have the circular forthwith cancelled and withdrawn.
    COLONEL SEELY: The Secretary of State has no information with regard to the circular referred to. but will make inquiry of the Governor.

    Crown Service and Old-Age Pensions.
    CAPTAIN FABER: I beg to ask Mr. Chancellor of the Exchequer whether he can recommend that any man who has served His Majesty either in the Volunteer Navy or in the Territorial Army for a term of years shall be considered eligible for an old-age pension so far as character is concerned, without any further inquiry.
    THE CHANCELLOR OF THE EXCHEQUER (Mr. LLOYD-GEORGE,): There is no disqualification in respect of character except for actual criminality, and the only test for the purpose of which service in the forces of the Crown could in practice be taken into account is the industry test contained in paragraph (b) of Clause 3 subsection 1, of the Bill. The matter was carefully considered when that paragraph was drafted, but it did not appear to be possible to treat what would

    755
    in many cases be only a short period of such service performed early in life as conclusive evidence of an applicant's industrial character without any regard to his history during the subsequent period beween his leaving the service and applying for a pension.

    London Police Holidays.
    MR. HART-DAVIES: I beg to ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department whether he is yet in a position to grant to the police the same privilege as is accorded to postmen, of fourteen days leave in the year.
    THE SECRETARY OF STATE FOR THE HOME DEPARTMENT (Mr.): My hon. friend will be aware that a Select Committee appointed to consider the question of granting a weekly rest day to police forces is now sitting. I am not, therefore, prepared to answer the Question until that Committee has presented its Report.

    Regent Circus Flower Girls.
    CAPTAIN FABER: I beg to ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department whether the flower girls in Regent Circus have been ordered by the police to quit that place; and, if so, who authorised such an order, and for what reason.
    MR. GLADSTONE: No, Sir, the flower girls in Regent Circus have not yet been ordered by the police to quit that place. The police have had no occasion to take action in the matter.

    Motor Vehicle Speeds.
    MR. BOWERMAN: I beg to ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department whether he will consider the advisability of making a regulation that all mechanically-driven vehicles, such as motors, motor-omnibuses, and electric trams, shall carry speedometers, in view of the fact that drivers of such vehicles, in the absence of any such apparatus, can only guess the speed at which they are travelling, many drivers having been, summoned and punished, and in some cases had their licences withdrawn, for exceeding speed limits.
    MR. GLADSTONE: I have considered this question and consulted the Commissioner of Metropolitan Police, but have not, so far, thought it desirable to impose the use of speedometers as the condition of the grant of a public carriage licence. The hon. Member may recollect that the Royal Commission on Motor Cars stated, on page 14 of their Report, that they could not recommend making the use of these appliances compulsory by law. Drivers of motor omnibuses, at any rate, cannot exceed the speed limit of twelve miles per hour fixed for their vehicles without knowing it, since to do so they must consciously make an excessive use of the accelerator. My jurisdiction in this matter extends only to public carriages in London. Other motor vehicles would be dealt with by Regulations under the Motor-Car Act.
    MR. WILLIAM REDMOND: Is not twelve miles an hour an excessive speed in the streets of London?
    MR. GLADSTONE: I do not know that it is an excessive speed, but it is often exceeded.
    MR. CATHCART WASON: Has the right hon. Gentleman received any applications from local authorities to vary the speed limit?
    MR. SPEAKER: That hardly arises out of the Question.

    Vehicular Routes.
    MR. CARR-GOMM: I beg to ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department whether at the present time the Commissioners of Police of the Metropolis and the City of London find it possible to carry out any of the provisions of the Section 11 of the Metropolitan Streets Act, 1867, which deal with the control of the routes of vehicles; and, if not, whether he will state the reason for this failure of the Act.
    MR. GLADSTONE: The Commissioners of the Metropolitan and City Police report to me that the section is practically inoperative. The difficulty in making

    757
    use of it to control the routes of vehicles arises, first, from the fact that it applies only to those streets which are within the special limits of the Act; and, secondly, from the proviso in the section that the number of Metropolitan stage carriages that may pass down any street in pursuance of their ordinary trade cannot be limited. I may refer my hon. friend on this subject to Paragraph 166 of the Report of the Royal Commission on London Traffic.

    The Woman Suffragists.
    SIR J. BRUNNERasked the Home Secretary whether he was considering the advisability of according to the women who were arrested on Tuesday outside the House treatment as first-class misdemeanants, and whether he was also considering the advisability of taking them into safe custody until the House had risen, and thus avoid giving them the notoriety they desired.
    MR. GLADSTONE: I have had no notice of the Questions.
    MR. WILLIAM REDMOND: Is it not a fact that these ladies are simply agitating for the passage of the Bill which has passed its Second Reading by an enormous majority in this House?
    MR. GLADSTONE: I cannot be responsible for that.
    MR. WILLIAM REDMOND: Well, if you pass a Bill you ought to go on with it.

    Thames Conservancy—Public Rights on the Upper Thames.
    MR. MORRELL: I beg to ask the President of the Board of Trade whether, in any legislation affecting the Upper Thames, in view of the fact that the Thames Conservancy are a nominated body and not directly representative of those who chiefly use the river, and of the importance of the public rights involved, the Government will consider the advisability of providing for the responsibility of the Board to some Department of the Government in all matters affecting the protection of any public right.
    THE PRESIDENT OF THE BOARD OF TRADE (Mr. CHURCHILL,): The Bill which is now being considered by a Joint Committee of the two Houses will establish an authority, which I hope will include representatives of those who use the river. The new authority will have power under the Thames Conservancy Act, 1894, to make bye-laws subject to the approval of the Board of Trade for regulating the use and enjoyment of the river, and they will be empowered to apply to Parliament if they find that their powers for this purpose are insufficient. I am advised that it would not be practicable to deal directly with the question of public rights in the present Bill.
    MR. MORRELL: Is the right hon. Gentleman aware that the new body will still be a nominated body, and would there not be a strong case for making it responsible to a Government Department?
    MR. CHURCHILL: The general character of the body is indicated in the Bill which is now being considered. As to whether any alteration should be made in the different proportions of which that body is composed, that is a matter which may well be held over for future consideration. The general character of the body may be regarded as defined in the Bill.
    MR. MORRELL: I beg to ask the President of the Board of Trade whether he is aware that on the south bank of the Thames, between Cleeve Lock and Streatley, there are notice boards stating that the Conservancy pay rent for the use of the bank as a towpath and that the public have no right to use the bank as a footpath except by permission; whether, before the erection of these notices, the inhabitants of Streatley and the public generally used this path to reach Cleeve Lock and the ferry at the Leather Bottel; whether he is aware that this is the only path by which the lock and the ferry can be reached from Streatley; what is the amount of rent paid by the Conservancy, and at what date they began to pay it; and whether the Government will take steps, in connection with any legislation affecting

    759
    the Upper Thames, to protect the public in the use of the banks as footpaths wherever such use has occurred, and rights of way have been acquired by long user, in addition to rights of towing.
    MR. CHURCHILL: I am informed by the Thames Conservancy that the notices referred to in the Question have been erected by the owner of the towpath on his own property. I have no information as to the former use by the public of the path or as to the access to the lock and ferry. I am informed that the yearly rent paid by the Conservancy is 2d. per rod for a distance of several hundred yards, and it has been paid ever since 1866, when the Conservators took over the control of the river above Staines. I am advised that questions of rights of way could not properly be dealt with by the Bill which is now under consideration.
    MR. MORRELL: I beg to ask the President of the Board of Trade whether his attention has been called to the frequent disputes that have arisen in consequence of the attempt to restrict portions of the towpath along the Thames to those persons who are engaged in navigation of the river, and the difficulty of ascertaining when there is or is not an ancient right of way along the bank in addition to the right of towing; and whether the Government will consider the advisability of introducing legislation to secure the right of any person to walk along the towpath, whether towing a boat or not.
    MR. CHURCHILL: Questions as to rights of way do not come under the jurisdiction of the Board of Trade, and my attention has not been hitherto called to the disputes referred to. I understand that in many cases the tow-paths of the River Thames are private property, subject to a right of use by any persons for towing vessels. I will give careful consideration to any concrete proposals that may be submitted to me for attaining the object at which my hon. friend aims, but I am advised it is not practicable to deal with the matter in the Bill now before a Joint Committee.
    MR. MORRELL: Will the right hon. Gentleman consider the advisability of dealing with that in another Bill so as to secure some such control of the Upper Thames for the public as exists in the case of the lower Thames?
    MR. CHURCHILL: This Bill creates an authority for the upper river.
    MR. MORRELL: I beg to ask the President of the Board of Trade whether he is aware that on the north bank of the Thames, at Mapledurham, a notice board has recently been erected prohibiting landing without permission and signed J. D. B.; whether, at the request of the gentleman who erected it, and who is himself a Conservator of the Thames, the Conservators have given orders to the lock-keeper at Mapledurham not to ferry people across to this point as had been done by the lock-keeper at a small charge for more than twenty years previously; and whether, in view of the fact that this has been always regarded as a public crossing between the parishes of Purley and Mapledurham, and that any foot-passengers between these parishes are now obliged to go round by Caversham, an extra distance of nearly six miles, he will cause a full inquiry to be made into the action of the Thames Conservancy in this matter.
    MR. CHURCHILL: I am informed by the Thames Conservancy that the notice board referred to is not on land over which the Conservators have rights or control, and that the Conservators have not objected to the lock-keeper when not engaged on his duties conveying authorised persons over the river. The Board of Trade have no authority to decide whether there is or is not a public right of way, and I have, therefore, no power to cause an inquiry to be made as suggested.
    MR. MORRELL: Can the right hon. Gentleman explain the meaning of the term "authorised persons"?
    MR. CHURCHILL: Some doubt has occurred to my mind, and I have asked for information on the point.
    MR. BYLES: Will the newly-created body have any power whatever with regard to public rights and private enclosures?
    MR. CHURCHILL: That question of protecting public rights against private enclosures does not arise in the present Bill, which merely sets up the authority.
    Sir CHARLES W. DILKE: Will the upper river body have the same powers as the Thames Conservancy?
    MR. CHURCHILL: Yes, and the question is whether wider powers shall not be granted to the new body.
    MR. MORRELL: I beg to ask the President of the Board of Trade whether, in view of the fact that the Thames Conservancy are frequently reluctant to give full information upon matters that come within their knowledge, and that when recently asked by a Member of this House to produce the correspondence that had passed between themselves and a parish council they replied by asking to what use the information would be put, he will take steps to see that Members of this House shall have proper access to all documents and correspondence in the possession of the Thames Conservancy relating to any matters of public interest.
    MR. CHURCHILL: I have no knowledge of the alleged action of the Thames Conservancy, and I am not advised that the Board of Trade have any power to require them to produce documents and correspondence.
    MR. MORRELL: Are not the Board of Trade represented on the Thames Conservancy?
    MR. CHURCHILL: Yes, but I was speaking of the action of the Conservancy as a whole.
    MR. MORRELL: Will the right hon. Gentleman instruct his representative to allow me to see the correspondence?
    MR. SPEAKER: Notice should be given of that Question.
    MR. CHURCHILL: I shall be very I glad to give the hon. Member all the information I can.

    Nottingham Bankruptcy.
    MR. RICHARDSON: I beg to ask the President of the Board of Trade if he is aware that George Henry Taylor, of Kyte Street, Nottingham, filed his petition in bankruptcy in November, 1885, and paid 11d. in the £., his liabilities being between £4,000 and £5,000; that in March, 1907, he called his creditors together and through the Official Receiver paid them the balance £3,917 1s. 2d., 19s. 1d. in the £ whether he is aware that cheques to the amount of £146 15s. 7d. were returned to the Official Receiver marked not known, and that the Official Receiver has paid over this £146 15s. 7d. to the Board of Trade, to whom Mr. Taylor has made application for repayment, but is refused on technical grounds; and will he take such measures as will enable Mr. Taylor to secure this money.
    MR. CHURCHILL: The facts are as stated by my hon. friend, except that claims amounting to upwards of £50 have now been made on the undistributed balance mentioned. The Board of Trade are in the position of trustees for the creditors in respect of any such balance and are under statutory obligation, without limitation of time, to hold the amount at the disposal of the creditors concerned, who have proved in the bankruptcy upon their establishing the claims to be undistributed dividend. I have no power to enable Mr. Taylor to secure the money in question.
    MR. RICHARDSON: But could not the Board of Trade release the money if the debtor gave security for its payment in case of necessity?
    MR. CHURCHILL: I am advised by legal authorities that I have not that power.

    Companies (Consolidation) Bill.
    MR. CARLILE: On behalf of the hon. Baronet the Member for the City of London, I beg to ask the President of the Board of Trade if he will print and circulate with the Parliamentary Papers a Memorandum

    763
    showing the alterations in the existing Law which it is proposed to effect in the Companies (Consolidation) Bill.
    MR. CHURCHILL: No alteration or amendment of the existing law is contemplated by the Bill to consolidate the Companies Acts. The Bill, as the hon. Baronet is aware, has been referred to a Joint Committee of both Houses, who will examine the details of the Bill, and I hope eventually to report that it accurately represents the existing law.

    British Patents—The New Act.
    MR. TIMOTHY DAVIES: I beg to ask the President of the Board of Trade if he has received representations from owners of British patents worked abroad to extend the time when they will be expected to have such patents adequately worked in the United Kingdom for one year or more beyond the period laid down in the Patents Act (Amendment), 1907; and if he has received such representations, what answers has he given them.
    MR. CHURCHILL: No representations of the nature of those referred to by the hon. Member have been received.
    MR. TIMOTHY DAVIES: I beg to ask the President of the Board of Trade if he can state the number of patents worked in foreign countries which are affected by the Patents Act, 1907; how many of such patents are worked in the United States of America, Germany, and France respectively; does he anticipate any difficulties in carrying out the provisions of the Act; and can he state how many owners of such patents are already building factories or have taken or are about to take land to build factories in the United Kingdom in order to comply with the law.
    MR. CHURCHILL: The Board of Trade have no information as to the number of patents worked in foreign countries that may be affected by the provisions of Section 27 of the Act referred to, nor have they any record of the number of the owners of such patents who are building or about to build factories in this country, though the number is no doubt considerable.
    764
    I see no reason to anticipate that difficulties are likely to arise in carrying out the provisions of the section.
    MR. LONSDALE: I beg to ask the President of the Board of Trade whether he is aware that German manufacturers have petitioned their Government to obtain, if possible by diplomatic means, an extension of the time-limit, under Section 27 of the Patents Act of last year, under which, unless a patentee makes use of his grant to an adequate extent within the United Kingdom within a year, it may be revoked; and whether the Board of Trade will resist any attempt to secure an extension of the time-limit.
    MR. CHURCHILL: I have seen such statements in the Press, but have no official information. No change in the date on which Section 27 comes into operation could be made without further legislation.

    Industrial Life in Germany—Price of Rye Bread.
    MR. LONSDALE: I beg to ask the President of the Board of Trade whether he is aware that on page 37 of the Report on certain conditions of industrial life in Germany, under the heading of price of rye bread per lb., the prices given are those per 4 lb.; and whether, seeing that the effect of this misstatement is to represent bread as costing four times as much in Germany as in England, he will take steps to have the error corrected.
    MR. CHURCHILL: My attention has been called to the unfortunate omission by a clerical error of the figure "4" in the heading of one of the tables on page 37 of the General Report, which gives the price per lb. of rye bread in certain towns in Germany. I have already caused a corrected page to be issued. I would, however, point out that the prices of bread in Germany are given correctly elsewhere in the Volume.
    MR. LONSDALE: Will the right hon. Gentleman take care to send a copy of this Answer to the Liberal Publication Department?
    MR. CHURCHILL: Does the hon. Gentleman intend to suggest that the publication of this was intended to deceive?
    MR. LONSDALE: My Question is simply, will the right hon. Gentleman send a copy of the corrected Answer to the Liberal Publication Department?
    MR. CHURCHILL: I see no reason for establishing any special connection between the Statistical Department of the Board of Trade and the Publication Department of any Party.

    Speedometers on Tramways.
    MR. BOWERMAN: I beg to ask the President of the Board of Trade whether he is aware that in the regulations and bye-laws dated 5th March, 1907, to govern electrical tramway traction in London, power is given to the Board to insist that every motor-carriage used on the tramways shall be fitted, if and when required by the Board of Trade, with an apparatus to indicate to the driver the speed at which it is running; whether such regulation has been put into force; and, if not, whether he will state the reason for the delay in carrying it into effect.
    MR. CHURCHILL: I am aware that there is such a Regulation, but the fitting of speed indicators on tramcars has not hitherto been required, as no satisfactory appliance of the kind was available, so far as was known to the Board of Trade. I am, however, now advised that the time has come when the matter should be further considered, and I propose to communicate with the London County Council and the corporations of other large cities on the subject.

    Bay of Firth Oyster Fisheries.
    MR. DUNDAS WHITE: I beg to ask the Secretary for Scotland whether he has powers under Section 5 of The Fisheries (Oyster, Crab, and Lobster) Act, 1877, to prohibit, restrict, and regulate the fishing of oysters at the Bay of Firth, in Orkney; whether if the Oyster and Mussel Fishery (Bay of Firth) Provisional Order Confirmation Bill, which is designed to create a several oyster fishery over an area of about
    766
    4,500 acres for a period of sixty years, becomes law, he will be precluded from exercising his powers under that section over that area while that Order is in force, and the only remedy in the event of that fishery not being conducted satisfactorily will be to repeal the Order by a certificate under Section 45 of the Sea Fisheries Act, 1868, under which Act the Provisional Order Bill is being promoted; and why the creation of a private monopoly in this public oyster fishery under the Act of 1868 is preferred to the regulation of it, in the interests of the public, under the Act of 1877.
    THE SECRETARY FOR SCOTLAND
    (Mr. SINCLAIR,): The Secretary for Scotland has power under Section 5 of the Sea Fisheries (Oyster, Crab, and Lobster) Act, 1877, to prohibit, restrict, and regulate the fishing of oysters, but that power does not extend to places where a several oyster fishery is constituted by Order under the Sea Fisheries Act, 1868, the remedy for unsatisfactory administration in such cases being as stated by my hon. friend. Mere prohibition, restriction, or regulation would now have little effect in resuscitating the beds at the Bay of Firth. What is wanted is the cultivation of the beds on approved modern methods, and neither the Secretary for Scotland nor the Fishery Board have powers or funds for this purpose. Every effort to get local public bodies to take up the matter failed, and the Fishery Board were compelled to fall back on the proposal for a public syndicate. I am informed that no public interest is being violated, while, on the other hand, the operations of the syndicate will afford employment to a number of the local people.
    MR. DUNDAS WHITE: Will the Bill referred to be taken to-night?
    MR. SINCLAIR: I understand that it will be postponed.

    Insanitation at Stornoway.
    MR. WEIR: I beg to ask the Secretary for Scotland if he will state why the Report on the sanitary condition of Stornoway is not obtainable by Members of this House, seeing that a similar Report on the sanitary condition

    767
    of the Lews issued when the late Government was in office was readily available.
    MR. SINCLAIR: The Report referred to by my hon. friend is of a different character from the former Report on the sanitary condition of the Lews to which my hon. friend alludes, and it is not considered necessary to give it the same publicity.
    MR. REES: Is the right hon. Gentleman aware that the people of Stornoway have twice held indignation meetings to protest against the insanitary character attributed by the hon. Member to their sanitary and salubrious island?
    MR.WEIR: I have had numerous communications showing that the hon. Member knows nothing about the matter.
    MR. REES: But I can supply proof of what I have said.
    MR. SINCLAIR: I shall be glad to have any information.

    Highland Crofts and Deer Forests.
    MR. WEIR: I beg to ask the Secretary for Scotland, in view of the need for land by crofters and cottars in the Highland crofting counties, will steps be taken to prevent land which is suitable for profitable occupation by the people being converted into deer forest, especially bearing in mind that in recent years some of the best arable land in the Highlands has been thus taken for deer.
    MR. SINCLAIR: My hon. friend is already aware of the land policy of the Government which would have made further land available for occupation by the people, and I am not able to make any further pronouncement at the present time.

    Congestion in Lewis.
    MR. WEIR: I beg to ask the Secretary for Scotland, in view of the fact that it is now upwards of four years since the Scottish Office informed the Lewis district committee that the only way of dealing with the cottar difficulty was by a scheme of voluntary migration to the mainland, will he explain why he has
    768
    made no effort to acquire land for the development of some such scheme, especially bearing in mind that a considerable time has elapsed since he was furnished with a list of Lewis cottars who are anxious to migrate to the mainland.
    I beg also to ask the Secretary for Scotland, in view of the fact that it is now upwards of four years since the Scottish Office informed the Lewis district committee that the only way of dealing with the cottar difficulty was by a scheme of voluntary migration to the mainland, and of the statement of the Secretary for Scotland that he saw a difficulty in finding crofters and cottars at once both desirous to migrate and possessed of the requisite qualification, will he state briefly the qualifications required of cottar migrants; and will he say if any effort has yet been made to ascertain the qualifications of the numerous cottars on the list, furnished to him some time, since, of those willing to migrate to the mainland.
    MR. SINCLAIR: In reply to these Questions I have nothing to add to the Answers given to my hon. friend on 22nd and 23rd June. In the meantime the matter lies with the Landward Committee.
    MR. WEIR: I should be obliged if the right hon. Gentleman would not shunt me on to the Landward Committee. The right hon. Gentleman must know——
    MR. SPEAKER: Order, order. The hon. Member must know he is not entitled to make a speech.
    MR. WEIR: Will the right hon. Gentleman consider the desirability of looking into this matter himself, and not giving me Answers of this character?
    MR. SPEAKER: I must ask the hon. Member to put his Question in a courteous way, and when he receives a reply not to comment on it.
    MR. WEIR: In consequence of the unsatisfactory reply I have received I beg to give notice that I shall take the earliest opportunity of calling attention

    769
    to the negligence of the right hon. Gentleman.

    Sutherland Main Roads.
    MR. MORTON: I beg to ask the Secretary for Scotland whether any arrangements have yet been made for making a grant to the Sutherland County Council towards the cost of making up and widening the main roads.
    MR. SINCLAIR: The Answer is in the negative.
    MR. MORTON: When will this matter be considered?
    MR. SINCLAIRasked for notice of any further Questions, and added that the hon. Member must be aware from the previous Answers that the matter could only be dealt with in a general scheme.
    MR. MORTONreminded the right hon. Gentleman that he had as yet sent no answer to the deputation which waited on him on the subject some months ago.

    Old Shoremore Harbour.
    MR. MORTON: I beg to ask the Secretary for Scotland whether anything has yet been done to improve the harbour at Old Shoremore, Kinlochbervie, Sutherlandshire, so that the fishermen may use it with safety and for their protection.
    MR. SINCLAIR: As I have already informed my hon. friend, the Congested Districts Board, after full consideration, do not feel justified in making a grant in aid of the work indicated.

    Embo Pier, Sutherlandshire.
    MR. MORTON: I beg to ask the Secretary for Scotland whether anything has yet been done to improve the pier at Embo, Sutherlandshire, so that the fishermen can use it for the protection of their lives and boats; and, if not, will he see that something is done for the protection of life and property.
    MR. SINCLAIR: I have nothing to add to my reply to my hon. friend on 28th May, 1907, when I informed him that the Congested Districts Board hold
    770
    that the position of the local fishing industry does not justify them in spending further public money on this pier.
    MR. MORTON: Will the right hon. Gentleman endeavour to induce the Congested Districts Board to do something to protect these fishermen?
    [No Answer was returned.]

    Port Skerra Pier, Sutherland.
    MR. MORTON: I beg to ask the Secretary for Scotland whether he can say whose duty it is to improve and enlarge the pier at Port Skerra, Sutherland; and whether he will see that this pier is improved, so as to be of use to the fishermen in the district.
    MR. SINCLAIR: The obligation to maintain the pier lies with the county council, but it is not obligatory on anyone to improve or enlarge it.

    Illegal Trawling in the Moray Firth.
    MR. MORTON: I beg to ask the Secretary for Scotland whether he is aware that on Wednesday and Thursday, the 17th and 18th instant, eight trawlers were at work in the Moray Firth near Helmsdale; that some of them were at work within the three-mile limit; whether he is aware that at night these trawlers were at work in Loth Bay; and can he say whether there are any fishery cruisers on duty in the Moray Firth, and, if so, where are they.
    MR. SINCLAIR: The Board have had no complaints regarding illegal trawling about the dates mentioned in my hon. friend's Question, but on the 19th instant the "Viking" was reported for illegal trawling within the three-mile limit off Lybster by the commander of the "Ringdove," and the case has been reported to the Procurator-Fiscal at Wick. As to the position of the fishery cruisers, I do not think it expedient to give details.

    Fishing Rights in Scotland.
    MR. MENZIES: I beg to ask the Lord Advocate whether, in view of the fact that forty years continuous use of a footpath gives the public

    771
    a prescriptive right to use, commonly called a right of way, he would bring forward legislation to make the same principle apply to any river in the Lowlands of Scotland which has been continuously fished for the same length of time without let or hindrance from the landed proprietor.
    THE LORD ADVOCATE (Mr. THOMAS SHAW,): The exclusion in recent years of the public from fishing over considerable stretches of water has brought into greater prominence the question of the possible acquisition by the public of such rights of access and fishing by prescriptive use or otherwise. My hon. friend quite rightly alludes to the relation which such acquisition bears to the whole question of rights of way. These questions so related have for some time been receiving the careful consideration of the Government. The point as to future legislation does not fall within my Department, and any Question on the subject should be addressed to the Prime Minister.

    Clonakilty Evicted Tenants.
    MR. E. BARRYI beg to ask the Chief Secretary to the Lord-Lieutenant of Ireland whether the Estates Commissioners have refused to take further action in the reinstatement of Philip Hayes, evicted tenant, in the farm at Ballyvackey, Clonakilty, from which he was evicted; and, if so, on what grounds have they rejected his claim for reinstatement.
    THE ATTORNEY-GENERAL FOR IRELAND (Mr. CHERRY,): The Estates Commissioners have decided that they cannot take any action to procure the reinstatement of Philip Hayes in the holding which his father surrendered in September, 1886. The compulsory provisions of the Evicted Tenants Act, 1907, cannot be applied in this case, and the owner refuses to sell the lands.

    Bustard Estate, Donegal.
    MR. SWIFT MACNEILL: I beg to ask the Chief Secretary to the Lord-Lieutenant of Ireland whether he is aware that representations were made to the Estates Commissioners in
    772
    October, 1907, and in June, 1908, that the owner of the Bustard estate, situate in the electoral divisions of Inver and Dunkineely, County Donegal, was willing to sell the property through the Estates Commissioners; as this estate, outside the tenants' holdings, comprises 1,449 acres of untenanted land in the owner's possession what steps, if any, did the Commissioners take to interview the owner or inspect the property; and whether, having regard to the fact that this grazing tract is urgently needed to relieve congestion in the district and give some land to the landless fishermen and others in these electoral divisions, measures will be promptly instituted to expedite the sale.
    MR. CHERRY: The Estates Commissioners received representations made to them on behalf of the tenants in December, 1907, and June, 1908. So far back as July, 1907, the Commissioners communicated with the owner offering to inspect the untenanted land on the estate with a view to purchase, and have since addressed him on several occasions, but have received no reply. The Commissioners do not consider that they can take any further steps in the matter at present. If the owner is willing to sell his tenanted and untenanted land, as suggested in the Question, he should institute formal proceedings before the Commissioners.

    Carrick-on-Shannon Cattle-drive.
    MR. LONSDALE: I beg to ask the Chief Secretary to the Lord-Lieutenant of Ireland whether he has received information that it is intended to loot the cattle on the Kiltogert Farm, near Carrick-on-Shannon; whether he has been informed that this threat is due to the withdrawal of the charges against the men who were proceeded against for driving cattle on this farm on Easter Monday; whether the owner has informed him of the steps he proposes to take to protect his property in default of receiving any protection from the law; and what action will the Government take in the matter.
    MR. CHERRY: My right hon. friend has received a letter from the owner of a fourth part of this property, in which

    773
    the writer states that he has received information that, as a result of the withdrawal of the previous charges, it is intended to loot the cattle on the farm in question, and that in such event he intends to take certain strong measures for the protection of his property. My right hon. friend has already informed the hon. Member that the former case was not proceeded with because there had been no renewal of cattle-driving in the locality. This course was adopted in the interests of the peace of the locality. Up to the present there has been no case of cattle-driving from the farm since that which occurred two and a half months ago. The police authorities inform me that, so far as they are aware, no threat to loot the cattle has been made. The police, however, are affording constant protection to the property of the gentleman referred to.
    MR. LONSDALE: And in the event of another attempt being made to drive these cattle, may we take it that the gentleman referred to will be justified in taking the steps he suggests?
    MR. CHERRY: I do not say anything of the kind. I do not know what steps he proposes.

    Cattle-drives.
    MR. LONSDALE: I beg to ask the Chief Secretary to the Lord-Lieutenant of Ireland whether he is able to give any facts to the House to show that the practice of binding to be of good behaviour is having any effect in diminishing the number of cattle-drives.
    MR. CHERRY: The number of cattle-drives in the month of June is considerably less than the number in May, but how far this may be due to the fact that persons have been bound to the peace for cattle-driving is a matter of opinion. The police authorities inform me that in two or three instances only have persons who were bound to the peace been again found driving cattle.
    MR. LONSDALE: I beg to ask the Chief Secretary to the Lord-Lieutenant of Ireland how many cattle-drives have been reported by the police during the six months ending 27th June, in how
    774
    many of these cases have accused persons been put on their trial before common juries, and how many convictions have been obtained.
    MR. CHERRY: The number of cattle-drives reported during the period in question was 413. In none of the cases were accused persons put on trial before a common jury.
    MR. LONSDALE: Does the right hon. Gentleman intend to abolish trial by jury in Ireland?
    MR. CHERRY: No, Sir.
    MR. LONSDALE: Does the right hon. Gentleman now recognise the fact that trial by jury in agrarian cases in Ireland is a farce?
    MR. CHERRY: No, Sir. Nothing of the kind.

    Moate Cattle-drive.
    MR. LONSDALE: I beg to ask the Chief Secretary to the Lord-Lieutenant of Ireland whether his attention has been called to the case heard at Trim Quarter Sessions on Thursday, when compensation was awarded for injury done to forty bullocks and heifers, driven off the lands of Captain Fowler, D.L., near Moate on 9th May; whether he is aware that the evidence showed that the cattle were driven over a six-foot fence, across ploughed land, through a river, and over a barbed-wire fence, which cut several of the animals, that the Judge said he was told that these cattle-drives were an innocent form of amusement, and the cattle were only driven gently along the roads, and that he wished those who held that opinion had heard the evidence of the dastardly manner in which these animals were treated; and whether any persons were punished for the cruelty perpetrated in this instance.
    MR. CHERRY: In the case in question the County Court Judge awarded the sum of £21 as compensation for the injury to the cattle. I understand that the evidence given during the hearing of the case, and the remarks of the County Court Judge, were substantially as stated in the Question. I am informed

    775
    by the police authorities that it was not possible to make any person amenable in the case owing to the lack of evidence.

    Dundrum Estate Cattle drive.
    MR. LONSDALE: I beg to ask the Chief Secretary to the Lord-Lieutenant of Ireland whether his attention has been called to the award by Judge Moore of £200 to the Messrs. Hickey, as compensation for injury to cattle driven off grazing lands on the Dundrum estate; whether people who had driven off the cattle have since been put in possession of the lands by the Estates Commissioners; and, if so, will he explain why this has been done in view of the pledge given to a deputation on 13th December last, and since repeated in the House of Commons, that persons who took part in cattle-drives would not share in the division of the lands.
    MR. CHERRY: The Estates Commissioners inform me that the cattle-drive referred to in the Question took place after the purchasers had been selected by them. The Commissioners are not aware that any of the purchasers were actually engaged in the driving of the cattle, and, so far as their information goes, no persons have been prosecuted in connection with the matter.

    Foreign Office Vote.
    DR. RUTHERFORD: I beg to ask the Prime Minister if he will state when the Foreign Office Vote will be taken again.
    THE PRIME MINISTER AND FIRST LORD OF THE TREASURY (Mr. ASQUITH,): No date can yet be fixed for the further consideration of the Foreign Office Vote.

    Sugar Convention Additional Act.
    MR. SCOTT: I beg to ask the Prime Minister if he can now state whether any one, and, if so, which, of the contracting States signatories of The Sugar Convention Additional Act, 1907, with the sole exception of Great Britain, has ratified that Act without previously obtaining the assent of its Parliament; and are His Majesty's Government advised that they have greater powers than the Governments of either Belgium, Holland, Sweden,
    776
    France, or Germany to agree, without Parliamentary assent, to international compacts affecting the trade of the country and its supply of sugar.
    MR. ASQUITH: I can add nothing to the answer given by me on 3rd June. It has never been the constitutional practice to submit commercial treaties to Parliament except in the conditions explained in my answer, none of which apply to the present case. I may add that the decision of His Majesty's Government in regard to the Sugar Convention was announced to this House more than twelve months ago.

    The Navy Estimates.
    MR. BELLAIRS: I beg to ask the Prime Minister whether he is aware that the Report stages of Vote A. and Vote 1 of the Navy Estimates were allowed to go through at a late hour of the night on 19th March as a result of an agreement that Vote 5 of the Navy Estimates would be placed first on the Order Paper at an early date; and whether he can now state in what manner he proposes to carry out this undertaking, so that the question of training of naval officers and the engine-room personnel can be adequately discussed.
    MR. ASQUITH: I recognise that an intimation was given to the House that an opportunity would be afforded for the further consideration of Vote 5 of the Navy Estimates, and I am proposing to place that Vote, and Votes 14, 13, and 15 on the Order Paper next week, probably Wednesday. I am hoping that not more than half a day will be devoted to the discussion of these Navy Votes.
    MR. BELLAIRS: Will the Vote be brought on immediately after the Questions as promised by the First Lord?
    MR. ASQUITH: I am not acquainted with the terms of the promise, but I think it will be first.
    MR. BARNES: Is Vote 5 to be taken on this half-day?
    MR. ASQUITH: Yes, Sir. I do not think Votes 13, 14 and 15 will take much time.

    Scottish Estimates—Debate on Trawling.
    MR. ANNAN BRYCE: I beg to ask the Prime Minister whether he is aware that the question of foreign trawlers is exciting great interest in Scotland; and whether, therefore, he will arrange that, on the further half-day to be allotted to Scottish Estimates, the Fishery Board Vote shall be taken first.
    MR. MORTON: I beg at the same time to ask the Prime Minister whether he will arrange to give another day for the consideration of the Scottish Estimates, especially with regard to the trawling question.
    MR. BARNES: Shall we have an opportunity of discussing the unemployed question on that Vote?
    MR. ASQUITH: In the event of the Navy Votes alluded to in my reply to the last Question being obtained by about eight o'clock, I am prepared to allot the remainder of the sitting to Scottish Estimates and propose to put down the Fishery Board Vote first.
    MR. BARNES: Will the right hon. Gentleman move the closure at a given time, or will we be expected to make our own arrangement as to the debate.
    MR. ASQUITH: I would rather wait and see how matters develop.

    The Budget.
    SIR F. BANBURYasked the Prime Minister what had become of the Budget. When did the right hon. Gentleman propose to take the Committee stage of the Finance Bill, and did he propose to take it under the guillotine?
    MR. ASQUITH: The House, by the Second Reading of the Finance Bill, has affirmed all the principles contained in the Budget. The Committee stage of the Finance Bill remains, and will be taken in the usual course, and according to the ordinary methods of procedure.

    Votes and Proceedings.
    MR. WILLIAM RUTHERFORDcalled the
    778
    attention of the Speaker to an omission from Votes and Proceedings which were circulated each day among Members; and upon which the journals of the House were based. There was no record of an Amendment moved by him, and accepted by the Government in Committee on the Old-age Pensions Bill yesterday. The Amendment was to leave out the word "payable" and insert the word "receivable." He also thought there was an incorrect entry in Votes and Proceedings in regard to what occurred at the fall of the guillotine. It stated that at half past ten o'clock the Chairman proceeded, pursuant to the order of the House of 17th June, to put forthwith Amendments moved by the Government of which notice had been given. He submitted that those words meant that notice must have been given before half-past ten. There was a considerable amount of excitement at the fall of the guillotine and some misunderstanding; and it was presumed that no notice had been given of one of the Amendments put by the Chairman. Could they have an assurance that notice was duly given? If so, they would be satisfied.
    MR. SPEAKER: The hon. Member is making a general speech. What is his point?
    MR. WILLIAM RUTHERFORDsaid he desired to know whether he would be in order in moving that this omission and error in Votes and Proceedings be rectified.
    MR. SPEAKER: In other words, the hon. Member is appealing from the decision of the Chairman of Ways and Means to me on the second point.
    MR. WILLIAM RUTHERFORD: Not exactly, Sir.
    MR. SPEAKER: In regard to that point, it is quite clear that I have no control whatever over what occurred in Committee; and I presume the Chairman would not have put the Question unless he was acting, or thought he was acting, under the direction of the House as contained in the order which the hon. Member quoted. With regard to the first Question, I think the hon.

    779
    Member is in error in supposing that the Votes and Proceedings are, or attempt to be, a complete record of what occurs in Committee. They are nothing of the kind. There are a great number of Amendments which are never recorded in the Votes and Proceedings. The only record of such Amendments is to be found in the amended Bill itself. The only Amendments recorded in the Votes and Proceedings are those which terminate in a division of the Committee and those under consideration when progress is reported. But in the case of Amendments which are accepted by the Committee or withdrawn no record is kept in the Votes and Proceedings. The attempt to keep such a record would be a novel course and would encumber the Votes and Proceedings. If the hon. Member wishes to alter Votes and Proceedings in any respect, he can do so by giving notice and moving when he gets the opportunity.
    MR. WILLIAM RUTHERFORD: I desire to thank you, Sir, for your Answer.

    PUBLIC PETITIONS COMMITTEE.
    Fifth Report brought up, and read; to lie upon the Table, and to be printed.

    SELECTION (STANDING COMMITTEES).
    Sir WILLIAM BRAMPTON GURDON reported from the Committee of Selection; That they had discharged the following Members from Standing Committee A (in respect of the Infant Life Protection (No. 2) Bill): Mr. Montgomery and (in respect of the University of Durham Bill) Mr. Scarisbrick; and had appointed in substitution (in respect of the Infant Life Protection (No. 2) Bill): Mr. Crosfield; and (in respect of the University of Durham Bill): Mr. Lyulph Stanley.
    Sir WILLIAM BRAMPTON GURDON further reported from the Committee; That they had discharged the following Members from Standing Committee A (in respect of the Coroners (Ireand) Bill): Mr. Edward Barry, Mr. Clancy, Mr. Lardner, Mr. Muldoon, and Mr. James O'Connor; and had appointed in substitution (in respect of the said Bill): Mr. Charles MacVeigh, Mr. Patrick White, Mr. Meagher, Mr. John Phillips, and Mr. Hogan.
    Reports to lie upon the Table.

    LOCAL REGISTRATION OF TITLE (IRELAND) AMENDMENT BILL.
    Reported without Amendment, from Standing Committee A.
    Report to lie upon the Table, and to be printed. [No. 205].
    Minutes of the Proceedings of the Standing Committee to be printed. [No. 205.]
    Bill to be taken into consideration, to-morrow.

  NEW WRIT.
  New Writ for the County of Pembroke, in the room of John Wynford Phillipps, esquire, Chiltern Hundreds.—(Mr. Joseph Pease.)
  NEW BILL.
    ISLE OF MAN (CUSTOMS DUTIES) BILL.
    "To amend the Law with respect to Customs Duties in the Isle of Man," presented by Mr. Hobhouse; to be read a second time upon Monday next, and to be printed. [Bill 289].

    OLD-AGE PENSIONS BILL.
    Considered in Committee.
    (In the Committee.)
    [Mr. EMMOTT (Oldham) in the Chair.]
    Clause 7:
    THE CHAIRMANsaid that the Amendment of the hon. Member for Norwood (to leave out subsection (1)), as it referred to the whole of the subsection, would not be in order, because striking out the subsection would be equivalent in this case to striking out the whole clause, and any proposal of that sort ought to come on on the question that the clause stand part.
    MR. A. J. BALFOURasked when the important questions raised by subsection (1) could be rised—not until the end of the clause?
    MR. WALTER LONGsaid the clause proposed to set up three distinct authorities—the pension committee, the pension officer, and the central authority. As a matter of fact, parts of the clause did hang together, but yet they were separate and distinct. Did he understand it would be impossible to discuss the clause as it stood and the duties of the three officers or bodies created until they reached the end of the clause?
    THE CHANCELLOR OF THE EXCHEQUER (Mr. LLOYD-GEORGE,)said he could quite see the difficulty raised by the Leader of the Opposition, but he did not see that that point could not be raised on the Amendment next on the Paper.
    THE CHAIRMANsaid that so far as questions were correlated he always tried not to interfere with proper discussions on them, but as the Chancellor of the Exchequer had said, in this case the question arose on the next Amendment.
    MR. BENNETT*MR. BENNETT (Oxfordshire, Woodstock) moved the omission of all the words of the clause after "determined" in the opening sentence, in order to insert "by the pension officer." He said the object of his Amendment was to substitute the pension officer for the pension committee. He thought a considerable feeling existed in the House with regard to the appointment of a local committee of amateurs to control the distribution of State pensions, and he was more particularly opposed to it from the point of view of a Member for an agricultural constituency. He did not think the majority of Members of the House adequately realised the social conditions under which the older and poorer labourers had to live in our country villages. He was well aware that most towns, like Leicester, and some of the country districts, like the West Riding of Yorkshire, could take ample care that fair play was exercised in the composition and conduct of a pension committee, but he would like to ask with all sincerity what they imagined would be the character of such a committee in an average agricultural district of England. It was not an exaggeration
    782
    to say that such a committee would, in some cases, be saturated with sectarian, political, and social prejudices, prejudices leveled, be it remembered, against the feebler and older labourers. He knew something about it, because he was the son of a country vicar, and he had come into friendly contact with hundreds of labourers. He had no wish to exaggerate, a good case, but hon. Members probably saw in the newspapers of yesterday or the day before a case in which an agricultural labourer in the Tonbridge Division of Kent had been evicted from his house, because he had had the audacity to apply for land under the Small Holdings Act—that was the kind of prejudice and petty tyranny to which the labourers might have to submit. Some of these pension committees would probably be recruited from the ranks of small squires, parsons, their wives, who were often worse than themselves, Tory farmers, retired snobs, et hoc genus omne. Full play would be given to local gossip, and the members of the committee could make political capital out of the fact that they were the arbiters as to whether a pension was to be bestowed or withheld. It might be said that some check existed against that kind of thing, and that it would be unpopular for any local committee to refuse a man a pension, and so put him on the rates. Many unsuccessful applicants, however, might not go on the rates, but relapse into that state of independent semi-starvation from which if they got the pension they would emerge. The faithful adherents of the Government in the counties frequently lived under singularly oppressive conditions, and he regretted to have to say that to some extent the fetters of this accursed feudalism had been rivetted more firmly than ever by some of the Liberal appointments to the Bench, and by handing over our citizen soldiers to County Associations. If it was thought that it was unfair or unwise to entrust so much power to one individual, an Amendment could be framed and accepted, which would allow an appeal from the decision of the pension officer to the local Bench of magistrates. They had, after all, a sense of responsibility and were, by the expert advice of the magistrates' clerk, kept more or less within the bounds of

    783
    legal rectitude. A pension officer, of course was a public official, or, to use the more grandiloquent expression of the Chancellor of the Exchequer, he was an Imperial officer. He would have local knowledge, he would understand his metier thoroughly, and he would be paid by the central authority and be responsible to that authority alone.
    Amendment proposed—
    "In page 4, line 14, to leave out from the word 'determined' to end of the clause, and to insert the words 'by the pension officer.'"—(Mr. Bennett.)
    Question proposed, "That the words proposed to be left out, down to the end of line 14, stand part of the Question."
    MR. WALTER LONGsaid he did not suppose he was speaking alone for Members on his side of the House when he dissociated himself entirely from the speech just delivered, which would have more appropriately found place in a book of ill-natured fairy tales than in the records of the House. The hon. Gentleman had been good enough to take them into his own personal family history, and claimed to be an authority on the subject of squires and country labourers because he was the son of a country rector. Anybody familiar with country life in any part of Great Britain would altogether fail to recognise the description given by the hon. Gentleman as having the smallest relation to what actually occurred in our country districts. Reference had been made more than once by those really conversant with the question to the action of landowners and others in making provision in the form of a pension for their own labourers, and anybody who had studied the question of the present position of the agricultural labourer must know perfectly well that on the estates of the gentlemen so curiously described by the hon. Member for Oxfordshire there was almost invariably to be found a system of pensions by which the old labourers were provided for to the end of their lives, and under which it was never necessary for them to apply to the Poor Law. He was speaking of what he knew from his own personal experience; in almost every case where a village belonged to one or two large owners
    784
    the number of people found on the Poor Law was infinitesimal. He spoke of some villages where it was the record of the village that no man or woman in the most remote degree connected with the estate had ever been allowed to go on the Poor Law; and that was the kind of thing described by the hon. Gentleman when he sought to get rid of the pension committees. The hon. Gentleman said that an agricultural labourer had been evicted because he applied for a small holding; he did not go into the details or facts of the case. He thought even those who did not believe in the land system of the country would agree with him that, in common fairness, before the owner of that property was condemned he ought to have his case stated, and that they ought not to assume, because the hon. Gentleman gave one single case, without one atom of verification, that therefore he was justified in——
    MR. BENNETT: The case occurred in the Tonbridge Division of Kent.
    MR. WALTER LONGsaid it was alleged merely that a man was turned out because he made a particular application. The hon. Gentleman was a distinguished member of one of the Universities, and he would, therefore, know perfectly well the difficulty of proving that an act of an individual was due to one particular cause. It suited him to say the man, whose name they did not know, was turned out because he made a particular application. He did not think that kind of charge would weigh much with the House. It was on totally different grounds that he found himself, with great reluctance, supporting an Amendment moved in such a speech. Owing to the difficulties of the Parliamentary situation he had no other opportunity of considering the question he wanted to bring to the notice of the Government. The Chancellor of the Exchequer, who had borne with great good humour and patience the heavy burden of carrying through this Bill, had charged some Members of the Opposition with inadequate study of the Bill. That charge had been made against him more than once, but he could assure the Chancellor of the Exchequer

    785
    that he had read the Bill, he suspected as often as the right hon. Gentleman himself had done, and he was sure as carefully. He wanted to know from the Government whether they attached to the English language a different meaning from that which was given in any dictionary in any bookseller's shop. He ventured to say the other day that the pension committee under this Bill were charged with a particular duty, and he based that view on the language of subsection (b)—
    "The pension officer shall inquire into and report upon any claim or question so referred to him, and the local pension committee shall, on the receipt of the report of the pension officer, and after obtaining from him, if necessary, any further information as to the claim in question, consider the case and give their decision upon the claim in question."
    Their decision would not require legal interpretation. "Decision" meant a settlement of the case; therefore, he had assumed that the pension committee were intended to hear all the facts as narrated by the pension officer, and then arrive at their decision. But the Chancellor of the Exchequer the other day had pointed out that that was a mistaken view altogether; that the real official in the matter was the pension officer in the first instance—he called him the Imperial officer—and the President of the Local Government Board, through his Department, was also an Imperial officer in the final case. If that were the correct interpretation of the Bill, and of course the Government were necessarily the authority on that point—then he asked for what purpose was the pension committee appointed, and what were the duties they would have to perform? The pension committee was to be appointed as other committees had been appointed in previous Acts of Parliament; that was to say, they were to be members of certain popularly elected bodies, and they were given power to co-opt people from outside. That was the basis on which the education committee, of the county council was appointed, the animals diseases committee and certain other committees. It was obviously a very good plan. They got the representative element of elective members of local authorities, and they were able to bring in outsiders who were suitable for the work, and who had the necessary local knowledge. But what was the use of going through this elaborate
    786
    machinery if, when the committee was appointed, its work was to be limited to approving of the action of the pension officer? The Government might have been very careful in drawing up this clause and its subsections, which defined the limitations under which the Bill was to be applied, but it was unquestionable that there would be great room for a discretionary interpretation of those limitations. But what they were entitled to know before they went further was with whom that discretionary duty was to rest. Was it to rest with the local committee or the pension officer? The hon. Member proposed to abolish the pension committee. If they were to have no discretion, and were merely to act upon the authority of the pension officer, then, in common respect for local government, what was the good of the committee? If the pensions were to be provided by the pension officer on certain conditions set out in the Bill, why go to the trouble of setting up a committee whose duties apparently would be non-existent, and who were merely to ratify the report of the pension officer, which report, if they took the Government's view of their own Bill, was the real decision of the case? What was there left for the pension committee to decide? If they said that in proportion to population there was to be only a limited number of pensions given, if the Government had taken the line that these pensions were to be the reward for exceptional merit in local life, he could have understood that they would discriminate between different candidates. But nothing of the kind was done. What they did was to say that men of a certain age, of a certain income, and fulfilling certain conditions were to be entitled to pensions. The man made his application to the pension committee, and the matter was referred to the pension officer, who made his inquiry and report. What were the inquiry and report upon? The pension officer had to find out whether the statements of the man or woman were correct, and whether he or she conformed to the regulations and conditions of the Bill. Having made his inquiry, the officer reported to the committee. What had the committee to do? There was no option left to them; there was nothing whatever for them to do but to act upon the report of the officer, and give the

    787
    man or woman the certificate with which to obtain the pension at the post office. Was any body of self-respecting men or women going to act in that manner? If the committee disagreed with the report of the pension officer, what was to happen? The matter was to be referred to the Local Government Board. In his ignorance, when he first read the Bill, he assumed that no Government would appoint a semi-locally elective body without charging them with the duty of decision, together with appeal against their decisions, and that if there were no mala fides in their decision it would be upheld by the appellate authority. But the Chancellor of the Exchequer had wiped all that away the other day, and said that they had the Imperial officer, and also the President of the Local Government Board and his officials. If that were so, why have a pension committee at all? They ought to be told what their duties were to be. He did not desire to abolish the pension committee, and his alteration would be of a different kind from that of the hon. Member. The Chancellor of the Exchequer had described the pension officer as an "Imperial officer," but he ventured to say that the people among whom the Excise officer lived would find it very hard to recognise the ordinary revenue officer under the title of Imperial officer. So far as he knew, the revenue officer had never hitherto been regarded as one who was at all familiar with the lives of of the people among whom he lived. To begin with, he usually worked over a large area, and lived in that part of it which he found most convenient for trains or the use of his bicycle. He was absolutely unknown to the life of our poor country villages, and he should have thought that he was the least known of any officials in the towns. And where he was known he was an extremely unpopular and unwelcome visitor. Yet this was the man selected by the Government to make these invidious inquiries. So far he had dealt only with the inquiries which were antecedent to the granting of the pensions; but there was a very much more objectionable duty cast upon the pension officer. He had not only to make inquiries before the granting of the pension, but he had the duty of, seeing that the men or women who had received pensions continued to conform to the conditions
    788
    laid down by the Act. He could not conceive a more odious duty being cast upon any person or a less suitable person than the officer chosen for the purpose. He quite understoood that the Government wanted—and there was a great deal to be said for it, though he believed it rested more on sentiment than on practical knowledge—to dissociate the pension system from the Poor Law, which was very unpopular in many parts of the country. Yet, as was said by the right hon. Baronet the Member for the Forest of Dean, it was perfectly true that in the country districts no stigma rested on those who needed Poor Law relief. It was well understood that outdoor relief was the last resource which the public had to adopt in order to prevent people from starving and suffering, and they gave outdoor relief because there was no pension. The relieving officer was not the unpopular person he was thought to be, and he believed that he would be more popular than the revenue officer. Of this he was quite certain, the relieving officer knew the requirements of the poor in the country better than the revenue officer. If he had to recast this clause, he would leave the pension committee in it, and get rid of the pension officer. He believed that the pension committee in the country districts would be able to get the information they wanted in their own way. In the towns it would be totally different. The mistake the Government were making was in their applying the same machinery to both the towns and the country. In the towns no doubt they would want more than one pension officer. In the big towns the congested population included a large number of the poorer classes, and there the revenue officer would have to be doubled and trebled before he would be able to do his work. In the country districts, if they did not like to employ the relieving officer, they could have the pension committee to make choice of the people to furnish them with the necessary information. But the Government said that the pension committee did not find the money out of which the pensions came, and, therefore, they could not let them grant them. Why did they say in the Bill that the pension committee were to arrive at a decision, and then say they could not trust them because the money was not theirs, and they must have somebody above them?

    789
    He believed that they could perfectly well leave this matter to the local committee as proposed under the Bill, and get rid altogether of the pension officer, leaving, if necessary, an appeal to the Local Government Board. It was rather an absurd position in which to be placed that they had to raise this question on an Amendment of which they could not approve, moved in a speech of which they strongly disapproved. In order to follow a course which they thought was right they had apparently to support an Amendment which they thought wrong. That was not the fault of the Opposition. They would much rather make their statement and survey on the general discussion of the clause as a whole. They could not pick and choose, and were compelled to raise it in a most unfortunate form. On the decision at which the Committee arrived in reference to this most important question depended the smooth and successful working of the Bill or the reverse. Further, it should be remembered that the money they were spending was Imperial money, and they were touching closely on the limits of local government. However carefully they might frame the provisions for old-age pensions, in the rural districts they would undoubtedly come alongside, and very close up to, the action of the Poor Law guardians in granting relief to the poor. They were going to call up a body of men who were members of various local authorities to form the pension committee, and he submitted that they had no right to put them in that position unless they clothed them with actual power. He believed it would be better to strengthen the position of the pension committee and to get rid of the pension officer. He thought it right to take the present opportunity of telling the Committee what the view of the Opposition was as to this clause. He hoped to see it altered before it left the Committee, and made at once more agreeable to the people concerned and more likely to be successfully administered.
    THE PARLIAMENTARY SECRETARY TO THE LOCAL GOVERNMENT BOARD (Mr. MASTERMAN,)said it was of course entirely in agreement with the general wishes of the Committee, and had already been suggested by the Chancellor of the
    790
    Exchequer, that the whole question of the machinery should be raised on the first Amendment. No doubt it might have been more convenient to deal with each piece of the machinery separately, but they had no guarantee that each piece as it arose would have been able to be dealt with with liberal discussion, thanks to the fact that they had only a day. As a matter of fact, as everyone would honestly acknowledge, this was not a party controversial point in any sense of the word. It was true there had been a controversy between the right hon. Gentleman the Member for South Dublin and the hon. Member for Woodstock, but that was rather a discussion on the amenities and realities of rural life, upon which they held different opinions, than of the machinery of the Bill. He had no wish to enter that discussion, but he supposed most of them would agree in their hearts that if they drew something like a mean between the picture of universal benignity on one side, and what the hon. Member for the Woodstock division called accursed feudalism on the other, they would not be very far from the truth. As to the question of the inquiry and the obligation laid either on the Imperial officer or the relieving officer or upon some local committee, not only to make the preliminary inquiry, which was difficult, but also to continue the inquiries from time to time, to which the right hon. Gentleman stated he had a fundamental objection, they agreed, but in so much of this debate, they were not dealing with stupidities or lack of foresight in the drafting of Resolutions or Bills, but with fundamental difficulties which had been familiar to all who had gone into the subject, and which accompanied any scheme which was not a universal scheme, as the right hon. Baronet the Member for the Forest of Dean had pointed out two days ago. If there had bee a different drafting in the Bill the same fundamental difficulties would have arisen. It might be objectionable that the Imperial officer should have laid upon him this continued inquiry, but it would be more objectionable if it was given to the relieving officer. If there was one thing upon which that House would absolutely make up its mind in connection with

    791
    this machinery manipulation, whatever Amendments they were prepared to listen to, they would not be prepared to lay this burden of pension investigation upon the relieving officer, because that, certainly in the towns and, to a large extent, in the villages also, would bring the whole scheme into such intimate connection with the disability of the Poor Law as would make it profoundly unpopular among the very class who they hoped would come in and immediately benefit by it. With regard to the functions of the committee, he had less controversy with the language of the clause, and more difficulty in finding out exactly what the objections were to the clause as it stood, than perhaps some other Members of the House. To him the working of the machinery appeared comparatively simple. The pension committee, under subsection (a) of Clause 7 received all claims for pensions and automatically referred them to the Excise man or the Imperial officer. He should think they would be prepared to receive suggestions from anyone as to those who had a right to claim. There were only two possibilities under the Amendment. Either they must leave the pension officer absolute authority to decide in any case of uncertainty as to income, as to association with pauperism, or as to past history in connection with what his right hon. friend called the industry test, with his decision final, or they must make some tribunal to receive an appeal from the pension officer, or they must adopt some such system as this, where under subsection (b) the reports of the pension officers were submitted to the local pension committee. The local penion committee, in the case of any doubt, might obtain any further information from the pension officer as to the claim in question, and might certainly consider any difficult cases brought before them, such as those indicated in the general discussion they had been having for the past few days. Further, there were a number of small but difficult points that it would be exceedingly undesirable to throw entirely upon the responsibility of a single man to decide in connection with this most important decision as to whether an old man or woman should
    792
    receive a pension or not. Supposing the pension officer reported in favour and the pension committee accepted the report, the applicant would get his pension. If the pension officer reported against a pension, and the committee also reported against it, he would not get his pension. But in any case where the pension committee said "Yes," and the pension officer "No," then the matter was referred to the central pension department. Surely that was the natural meaning. If that was not so, and the point was raised later in the debate, he was sure the Local Government Board and his right hon. friend were fully prepared to establish a satisfactory system. Now he came to the demand of the hon. Member for Woodstock to sweep away the pension committee. He was not quite sure whether the hon. Member was as anxious that the committee should be swept away as he was to emit some explosive sentiments. To begin with, he made no distinction between town and country, and swept away the local committee because, he said, in rural life county councils and their nominees were against the democratic spirit and would be inclined to be prejudiced against ardent democratic work. If he desired that, he ought to have drawn the distinction very sharp, because that was certainly not the case in towns where the great majority of the population were, and the only method by which labour representation could be introduced into the scheme was by some such committee as this, the town councils appointing members of their own bodies and outsiders to form a first court of appeal. Without some such committee as that, the whole decision as to whether a man should have a pension or not depended entirely upon the nominee of the Department whose interest must be, from its nature, not to give a pension rather than otherwise. If the Treasury was not the guardian of the public purse it would be unfaithful to its duties, and in consequence it would be for the Imperial officer, representing the Treasury, to be more inclined to use evidence which tended to prove that the man came under one of the disabilities, than for the local committee, where, as was declared in the characteristic and welcome speech from

    793
    the noble Lord the Member for Lincolnshire, the whole impulse both in towns and country would be to get as many pensioners as possible. Allusion had been made to West Ham. Speaking with a due sense of responsibility for that respectable neighbourhood, he assured the Committee that its whole inclination where Imperial money was concerned was to get as much of it as possible—not only because it was good for the people themselves, but because it was good for trade generally, most of the money being spent in the neighbourhood; and therefore, so far from the fear of his hon. friend being fulfilled that the pension committee would act as a check upon the liberality of the Treasury and the Imperial officer, he was almost entirely convinced that the impulse towards enlargement would come from the pension committee, and the impulse towards the reduction of expenditure from the Treasury. Then, it was very evident that Parliament would under no circumstances give absolute discretion to an Imperial officer as to whether a pension should be given or not in doubtful cases. They must, therefore, have a Court of Appeal. He would submit to anyone familiar with the realities of rural life that the knowledge that an appeal had to go to the justices of the peace would, of itself, cause a very large amount of repugnance to carry out any appeal at all; whereas the pension committee would be regarded as a perfectly natural and satisfactory method of machinery in so far as it was kept apart from and recognised as independent of the machinery of the Poor Law. If they were not to have a local committee of some such character as this, the only other suggestion was that every appeal should go to the central authority, and that as a matter of machinery would break down. It would mean an enormous increase in staff, because they might have to deal with thousands of appeals. It seemed to them that this first sifting, under which no substantial injustice could be done, was a quite satisfactory method by which all the obvious cases of doubt could be first of all dealt with locally, and the right to challenge in the event of diverse decisions in cases of more intricacy and difficulty should be
    794
    carried to the Local Government Board. For these reasons the Government asked the House to support the formation of the local pension committees.
    MR. WALTER LONGasked what provision was made in the Bill for the publication of the report of the pension officer. Was it proposed that it should take some public form?
    MR. LLOYD-GEORGEsaid he would answer the various points raised later on.
    MR. LYTTELTONsaid the effect of the machinery made the appointment of the local pension committee entirely useless. The committee had to refer claims to the pension officer, who would submit his report to the pension committee. The pension committee could return the report to the pension officer. If the decision of the local pension committee allowed a claim for a pension not in accordance with the report of the pension officer, then the matter could be referred to the central pension committee. If the supplementary information upon which the local pension committee wished to act differed from the report of the pension officer, the report stood and the matter had to go to the Local Government Board Surely that was not common sense, but it was the only option left to the local committee. Obviously, what would be sensible and just was that the committee with the pension officer should consider the supplementary information, vary the report, and come to an agreement. He did not think that that was the effect of the clause as it stood. He would like to know if the Attorney-General was satisfied with the language of subsection (c). What would happen in the case of disallowing the claim? He would like the Government to consider these two questions. He held strongly that they ought not to put this limitation upon a body of local gentlemen who would be desirous of doing justice, because it was most undesirable that they as well as the pension officer should be fettered by these very restrictive words; they should be left to arrive at a determination of a case together.
    MR. BARNESsaid the Government had discovered that there were fundamental difficulties in connection with the Bill. He and some of his colleagues had foreseen them before they had had much experience of the discussion; all these difficulties were inseparable from any Bill of a partial character. He was going to vote against the Amendment, feeling perfectly sure that what the hon. Member had proposed would not work out satisfactorily. There were objections to the Bill as it was framed, so far as these committees were concerned. He looked with considerable apprehension to the formation of co-opted committees which might include all sorts of faddists and people who arrogated to themselves the possession of virtues which sometimes they did not possess. The Charity Organisation Society was no doubt a very useful body in its way; but he felt that the Charity Organisation agents would be on the spot when these committees were formed and would no doubt be appointed on those committees, and inasmuch as that Society took a view in regard to the provision of pensions by the State altogether contrary to the principle of the Bill, it seemed to him that they would not get efficient service from them. He would be just as keen to exclude local authorities dealing with the Poor Law as the Charity Organisation authority, since the Bill was intended to dissociate pensions from the Poor Law, and he was not going to agree to the Poor Law officer coming in at the back door after being thrust out from the front. He was likewise opposed to a friendly society man or a trade unionist official on these committees, since they would be liable to judge partially in regard to cases brought before the committees. He was in favour of the committees because he wanted this pension scheme to be associated with the local life of the people where pensions were to be distributed, and he wanted to see a committee of really representative men who had gone through the mill and been elected to public positions. That would be a very considerable safeguard for the exclusion of faddists and the other persons he had mentioned. If women could be added to these bodies so much the better. He would heartily
    796
    welcome any proposal for the inclusion of women in those bodies. It had been said by the hon. Member for South Dublin that those committees would not really have much power, and that the central official and the Excise officer who made the report would really be the man to determine whether or not a pension was to be paid. He did not agree with that. So long as they kept the committees apart from the Excise officer, and they were in a position to discuss amongst themselves with absolute independence, there was considerable scope for the committee. He had had experience in connection with trade unionists, and they frequently found it necessary to have recourse to local officers upon cases sent up for adjudication. He hoped the Excise officer would not be brought in to act with the committee, because in that event he would be sure to become the guiding factor, and he wanted the committee to consider the report in a perfectly independent manner. He noticed that no provision was made for an appeal by the claimant to a pension which was refused by a local committee. The right hon. Gentleman had referred them to an Amendment on the point which was on the Paper, but in view of the closure it was useless to refer them to Amendments later on. He was not speaking against the closure because he felt that it was a regrettable necessity. He referred more to the long-winded speeches from the front Opposition Benches. If they reached the Amendment referred to there would certainly have to be less speeches from the front benches, and they would have to be much shorter.
    SIR WALTER FOSTERthought the committee ought to be got rid of at any cost. He admitted that Committees that had examined this question had regarded a local committee as of primary importance, but this was under different conditions. The Report of the Select Committee of 1899, which was presided over by the right hon. Gentleman the Member for Wimbledon, contained this sentence—
    "It seems to us to be essential that the authority to grant the pension should also be the authority which finds the means."

    797
    The committee to be constituted under this Bill, however, did not find the means, but on the contrary they would relieve local charges by using the Bill, and consequently they would have an inducement to grant pensions widely, because by so doing they would relieve the local rates. Every Committee which had proposed that there should be a local committee had done so on the ground that, having the charge of moneys raised by the local rates, they ought to have the right of granting the pension and judging of the claim which an applicant had to it. His view twenty years ago was that there should be a committee, and that it should be appointed by the county council. In the Bill which he took about the country some fifteen years ago and discussed in various parts of rural England, he proposed that a committee should be appointed by the county council. A local rate was to be levied for pensions, and, therefore, it was only fair that a local committee should be appointed to spend their own money. In every locality he was met with hostile criticism in regard to the proposal to appoint a committee. If there was one form of mind more suspicious than another, it was that of the agricultural labourer. That suspicion was deep-seated and strong; they feared not only the favouritism and partiality of a local committee, but they resented any inquisition on the part of neighbours or local residents into their affairs. If a committee was to have any power whatever in this matter, and to command confidence, it must be one consisting of active people acquainted with the poor who would make inquiries in every case where a pension was suggested. But the committee now proposed was worse than ordinary committees, because it was not of a representative character. It might consist of men who had gone through the ordeal of election to public bodies, or it might consist of nominated members. There might be sub-committees nominated to do the work, and consequently any inquiry or investigation would be of the most odious nature to the rural mind. He believed that a committee of that kind would be a serious blot on the administration of the Bill. It would engender an amount of suspicion in the
    798
    rural districts which would be fatal to the efficiency of the work, or to that satisfactory working which would give confidence to the people to whom the awards were made. He had been driven from the position of approving of a local committee to that of desiring to substitute something else. He did not think the appointment of a pension officer was the best solution, though it was one which he would prefer to a committee. There were various other means. He would like to see the Treasury in this matter doing away with all appeals to the Local Government Board. He did not think the Local Government Board, which was already the most overburdened Department of the State, had time to do this work. If the Department had to go into appeals in hundreds and thousands of cases in regard to pensions the work would be left to a permanent official, who would look over these things from the high and dry position of the exact wording of the law, and consequently the decisions would not command that regard and consideration which they would if they were dealt with in other ways. That it should be left to a Department which was not properly in charge of the scheme, and that the Treasury should allow the Local Government Board to incur expenditure in these cases, was a blot on the system. He thought they might get rid of the pension committee altogether if they had another kind of authority. All the preliminary inquiries must be made by the pension officer. He would find out all about the individual. The Bill had been improved in the course of its passage through Committee. Now, nearly all these inquiries were to be of a documentary kind. The Bill had been made more automatic. It ought to be absolutely automatic. There ought to be no personal inquisition into the life of any applicant. He wished to see the Bill improved in that direction. It could be made so that nothing but documentary evidence need be required. About the applicants' means, the evidence would be given on oath so that the applicant made himself liable to severe penalties if he made a false statement. That would all be done if they substituted what was found necessary in New Zealand. There they

    799
    had adopted the principle of having these pension cases all decided in Court by a stipendiary magistrate, who, with all the documents before him, allowed the claimant to come in and make a statement to the contrary if he desired to do so. The inquiry was made by a local officer, called the registrar, who reported to the magistrate, and the Court gave a decision. The decision need not be in public, so that there would be no unnecessary exposure of a man's life or means. That would do away with the necessity for any appeal to the Local Government Board. He would much rather that the work was done by the mayor of a borough or the chairman of a county council than by a committee. If it was to be done by an Imperial officer, it might be done by a stipendiary magistrate or a County Court Judge. If none of these officers were available they might follow the example in connection with the preparation of the electoral rolls. That was difficult and delicate work, and yet they could entrust it to the revising barrister. Such an officer would not cost very much, he could sit so many times a year to hear claims, and the judgment he gave would settle the cases. On the other hand, if local committees were chosen they would find various reasons for rejecting applications for pensions. A committee might consist of local busy-bodies who prided themselves in taking a stringent attitude, or it might consist of men who would not regard with favour applicants in a rural district who had ever killed a rabbit or a hare. Such people would have a very poor chance of getting their pensions. [Cries of "Oh."] He was not saying that from any political bias. It would be equally the same with Members on that side of the House. Wherever they had local committees they were bound to have a certain amount of political feeling introduced into work of this kind. There was a great deal of human nature in both the Tory Party and the Liberal Party. He had found that it was very prevalent in local committees. It was almost inevitable that partiality of feeling should enter into the minas of the local committees, and that, taken in conjunction with the suspicion which characterised the rural mind, would, he was sure, lead to great dissatisfaction
    800
    in connection with the work of such committees.
    MR. BOWLESsaid the question they were now considering was whether or not the proposed local pension committee was of any practical use. It seemed to him that all the speeches he had listened to were to the effect that the committee would be of no practical use whatever. It had been pointed out with practical unanimity by hon. Members holding widely different views on the general subject of old-age pensions that the function of the local committee, if the clause stood as it was in the Bill, would be merely to register the decisions of the pension officer. He understood that they were able on this Amendment to consider the larger and more important question whether the whole machinery of the clause was of any use. He was bound to say that his concern on that subject had been greatly strengthened by what had been said on the present Amendment. The machinery clause was of the greatest practical importance in regard to the scheme, and it should be perfectly explicit. It was, however, absolutely vague on all the matters of detail which were of real importance in the working of the scheme. There were two forms of questions which were dealt with in this section. There were questions raised by the original claim and questions raised after the pension was granted. Nothing was said as to how the original claim was to be made; but, having been made, it was to be laid before the local pension committee, and that body was to pass it on to the pension officer to make inquiry and report. The pension officer was recommended as being, at any rate, an Imperial officer. No doubt there were many devoted and laborious servants of the Crown, but it seemed to him that none of them would be able to compare in point of dignity or favour with this lonely unbefriended man defending the taxpayer and the Exchequer against extortion by repeated and continuous inquiries of the most sordid and disagreeable description—inquiries which it would be the direct interest of every human being to render nugatory. He

    801
    did not know whether hon. Gentlemen realised the extraordinary duties and functions which this officer would have to perform under this clause. He would have, in every case, to have produced to him the applicant's birth certificate, and, if married, his marriage certificate; to take a complete account of the man's means and of the means of his wife, of how long his residence had been within the United Kingdom, and to make sure in every case that the man had not for ten years been in gaol. He would have to discover whether or not the applicant had habitually failed or not failed to work according to ability, opportunity, and need—which would vary in every case—and which need and opportunity throughout the whole of the man's life the pension officer would have to determine for himself. He must make an absolute exposure of the whole financial position of the man, not only actually but potentially, and of his discretion to manage his own affairs. He had to discover whether or not he had joined within the last few weeks a friendly society or benefit club, or had received a Christmas-box or charitable donation of any kind. He would have to sound the wall of the man's cottage to be sure that he had no hidden hoard, and to search for papers in order to be certain that he had not conveyed some portion of his property to some of his relations to their mutual benefit. He knew that the Chancellor of the Exchequer ridiculed a description of that sort. An hon. Gentleman opposite on the previous night had ridiculed the notion that the pension officer would search to see whether a man had a hoard or make sure whether a man actually owned his own house. But he was not overdrawing the picture of what was really possible. He was simply stating what were the actual duties laid by the Government on this pension officer who was bound to carry them out. It was perfectly absurd for the Government to come down and lay these enormous and vital duties on their servants in the interest of the taxpayer and the Exchequer and expect that they would be seriously carried out. From his point of view, he was sure that this wretched Imperial officer would do his best. He would make, and have to
    802
    make, a most invidious and painful inquiry, and it seemed to him that an officer to whom those powers and duties were to be entrusted might equally well be entrusted with the decision of the claim to a pension. But when the pension officer had made this laborious inquiry, as the clause was drawn, he might be overruled, and without any appeal, by the pension committee. According to his reading of subsection (c) it would be perfectly within the power of the pension committee to disallow a claim, and although they disagreed with the report of the pension committee the pension officer was not to make any appeal to the Local Government Board, or to make any appeal whatever. The subsection said—
    "If any decision of the local pension committee allowing a claim for a pension or determining any question is not in accordance with the report of the pension officer, the matter should be referred to the central pension authority, and should be considered and determined by them."
    There was nothing there about the decision of the pension committee being disallowed. There was one other consideration. The clause contemplated not merely the case of the original claimant, but the case of a pension having been granted, and the man for one reason or another being disqualified from continuing to receive the pension. But if the information as to disqualification could not easily be got at what was to prevent the man from receiving the pension for life? A man might have made a false statement; he might have come into a fortune after receiving the pension; or many other events might happen which would disqualify him from continuing to receive the pension. What was extremely important was that the Government should provide that it should be somebody's interest or duty to see that the pension did not go on being paid for an indefinite time. There was no machinery by which it could be discovered whether the man continued to have a right to draw his pension. Under the clause it would be nobody's business to ferret into the case. Why should one object to an old man of seventy-two or seventy-five years of age getting this little money? The right would be taken on trust. Nobody would put himself in the odious

    803
    position of objecting to the old man getting the pension of 5s. a week. The subsection suggested that that extremely disagreeable duty should be carried out by the pension officer. Was the pension officer to occupy what little spare time he had in running over the whole district to see whether any pensioner had become disqualified or had done something which might disqualify him from continuing to receive his pension? Was he to understand that the case would have to be referred to the central committee; and would they refer it back to the pension committee, who in turn would refer it to the pension officer to inquire into his own report? The whole scheme was full of objections; and he did not believe that any pension officer or any human being could be found who could satisfactorily make these enormous, prolonged, and complicated inquiries. In regard to the Amendment, for his part he regarded the pension committee as, on the whole, likely in the practical working out of the scheme, to be a useful body, but he would hesitate to throw the complete obligation on to the pension officer. If the hon. Member merely moved the leaving out all the words after "determined" he would feel no hesitation in supporting him, but as to what other words should be inserted he was not now prepared to say.
    SIR J. DICKSON-POYNDERsaid that there were difficulties almost inseparable from any scheme of old-age pensions which the Government desired to meet as far as possible. He did not think that hon. Gentlemen opposite would support a universal scheme of old-age pensions; therefore if they were in favour of any other schemes they should be prepared to consider possible methods of overcoming the difficulties connected with the present proposal. He wished to express shortly the pleasure he felt that the Government were resisting the proposal made by the hon. Gentleman who moved the Amendment. He thought it was necessary in the disposal of these pensions that there should be some form of local committee, composed of gentlemen connected with the district, who had known for years past those who would
    804
    become applicants for and who would enjoy the benefits of a pension. He ventured to say that the appointment of a committee of members of the county council was not the wisest form of constituting the body. For himself, he would advocate that work of this character should be placed under the guidance of the district council. They were a more local body, and more in touch with the working people of the district. There would not be applicants coming forward every day. They would come by ones and twos in the country districts, and the gentlemen and ladies who formed this committee would be in touch with the applicants and would be much more likely to know their circumstances, being part of the district council, than a committee appointed by the county council which had to deal with the whole of a large county. It would be impossible for the members of such a committee to be in close touch with all the centres and districts of the county. He disagreed with the proposal of the right hon. Gentleman opposite made when he spoke in a previous part of the debate, that the relieving officer would be a more appropriate officer than the Excise officer. The relieving officer was appointed by the local authority, and was in no way responsible to the State. The Excise officer would be directly representative of the State and of the taxes, and therefore seemed the only appropriate officer in existence to whom the work should be given of guiding and directing the local committee. But he thought it became more important, if this Excise officer was to give a really valuable report to the local committee, that the material at his disposal should be in its truest sense of a definite character. Unfortunately, owing to the exigencies of debate, they had been unable to discuss Clause 3, which, in his opinion, was the most important clause of the Bill, especially that subsection of it which dealt with the question of employment. As it at present stood, subsection (3) of Clause 3, in its amended form, was of a very vague character—
    "Who work to the best of their ability and opportunity for those legally dependent upon them."
    That at best was a very vague definition, and it would, of course, be very difficult

    805
    for the most competent Excise officer to come to a really definite and clear decision upon it. He would like to see inserted in the Bill an elaboration of that provision, and with that object in view he had himself put down a new clause, providing that, if the Excise officer was to have definite information, it must appear in a written statement of claim prepared by the applicant for the pension. He hoped that this was contemplated by his right hon. friend. He thought it would be much better to have the matter definitely laid down in the schedules of the Bill, so that the statement of claim might show clearly the age and occupation of the applicant, where he had lived, what had been his employment during the previous ten years, and who his employers had been. He would like to see the statement of claim accompanied by two certificates endorsed by responsible people in the locality, thus showing definitely to the Excise officer that what was stated was accurate and could be relied upon. He thought in that way the Excise officer would have more real material to work upon in coming to a decision, and would be able to report to the local pension committee his opinion upon the facts laid before him. There would then be much more likelihood of a definite and clear opinion being come to by the local pension authority. It would be of advantage to both sides. In the first place, a statement of the character he suggested, put down plainly, and with endorsements, would be of advantage in making it quite clear that the conditions defined in the Bill——
    THE CHAIRMAN: The hon. Member really cannot go into this new clause to such a large extent.
    SIR J. DICKSON-POYNDERsaid he would abide by the Chairman's ruling and would not go further into the point. He had only mentioned the idea because he thought the present material on which the Excise officer had to work, to form an opinion, and report to the pension committee, was somewhat vaguely introduced in the Bill, and he would like to have seen the provision framed in a more definite form. He believed the real efficacy of the Excise officer's report
    806
    would depend upon the definite information which he would be able to obtain, and he hoped something of the character he had suggested would be inserted in the Bill.
    MR. AUSTEN CHAMBERLAINsaid that whether or not the Amendment was accepted, whether or not the decision arrived at was subject to appeal to the Local Government Board, or whether or not the pension committee was retained, it was quite clear that the position of the pension officer was going to be one of great responsibility and importance for the purposes of the Bill. If the committee were retained, it would be only through the eyes of the pension officer that they would see. They would act on information supplied by him of his own motion, or in answer to the pension committee's inquiries, and, as he understood the Chancellor of the Exchequer, the pension committees must, like a jury, act on the facts as presented to them by the pension officer. Under these circumstances it became of great importance to know who the pension officer was to be. It had been generally assumed throughout these discussions that the pension officer would be an Excise officer; but the words "Excise officer" were nowhere used in the Bill; they had only heard of the Excise officer in the speeches of the Prime Minister, and the subsequent speeches of Ministers had been carefully consistent on that subject. What was stated in the Bill was that—
    "A pension officer shall be appointed by the Treasury,"
    and the Treasury might appoint pension officers in such numbers and in such districts as they thought fit. He could conceive that it was the intention of the Government to allow the appointment of none but Excise officers, but he thought they ought to have a definite statement from them on the subject. If that was their intention, then he asked them whether they thought it possible that the Excise officers, in many cases, would be able to do this new work over the whole of their districts, without assistance. If the Government thought the Excise officers would require assistance, how did they propose to give it to them? There was no provision in the Bill for giving them

    807
    clerks or assistants, but there was power in the Treasury, if they chose, to appoint two men in a district which for Excise purposes was now in the hands of one officer. Another matter of great importance was this. The pension officer would occupy a position of great influence, and his would be a very invidious position. He would be more influential than any other man in the country in exercising the most vast system of patronage which the State had. It was very important that the officer charged with this important duty, however humble his rank and position, should be above suspicion. His appointment should have no partisan origin—nothing about it which had its source in party spirit. The Excise officer had to compete in the Civil Service examinations before he could get his position, and it could not be alleged that he had been put there for a party purpose any more than it could be said of any other Civil servant. But this Bill did not confine the appointment to Excise officers, and the Treasury might appoint whom they thought fit. They could make a series of appointments, not on the recommendation of a permanent official, but on the old patronage system. There might be a party recommendation to the Patronage Secretary to the Treasury, and such recommendations might be made even by Members of that House. Clearly that was not a tolerable situation. It was not a thing which any of them on either side of the House would desire. He asked the Government, when they replied on the Amendment, to state what their intentions were, and at the same time to give an assurance that they would so amend this clause or the next clause as definitely to secure that every man holding one of these appointments, whether he were an Excise officer or not, had entered the Civil Service by competitive examination and not by patronage.
    MR. COURTENAY WARNERsaid the right hon. Gentleman had opened his remarks by saying that the duties of the pension officer would be immensely important because the pension committee would have to act entirely upon his report. That might be true if they had constituted
    808
    a committee who knew nothing about the local circumstances. But the really important point was that there would be a committee who would know the local details and undoubtedly be in touch with the people. Unless they had a committee who knew all the circumstances, they would have, as had been pointed out by several Members, inquisitorial examinations into the lives of the applicants. When the tribunal consisted of neighbours, and so on, there would be no inquisitorial proceedings, because the committee would know all about the persons in their district. He knew of a gentleman who, when summoned before a County Court Judge for the payment of a debt, pleaded no means. Although the Judge himself knew that that gentleman was in possession of something like £600 a year derived from relatives, there was no documentary evidence of means, and he had to treat the case as if the man had nothing. But the committee would not be compelled to deal in that way. They would know what the man had generally, although there was no documentary evidence to prove it. The Committee would like to know, therefore, what these committees were going to be. It would affect their voting. He thought a local committee would be a great safeguard to the Exchequer, and also a great advantage to the men applying for a pension.
    COLONEL LOCKWOODsaid the Secretary to the Local Government Board in the early part of the debate had alluded to the difficulties which crowded on them on this subject as fundamental difficulties that must be encountered. They were fundamental difficulties undoubtedly, but were such as would arise in any Bill of a non-contributory character. Speaking as a Member for a rural constituency, and speaking of what he knew of the rural districts, he believed that the words of the Government would work better than the Amendment, for which he could not possibly vote. The hon. Member for the Blackfriars Division of Glasgow had objected to extending this clause outside the councils because it would make room for faddists on the

    809
    committees, but faddists would find their way on to any committee. His right hon. friend the Member for the Ilkeston Division had spoken of the suspicion in the rural mind. That was a thing that would never be got rid of, but his opinion was that the people likely to be affected by this Bill were less likely to be suspicious of a local committee than of an extraneous one. There were people in the rural districts who would be suspicious of any committee. He thought the Government plan was best, but he hoped they would give power of appeal to the persons whose applications were rejected. If there was no power of appeal, there would be a sense of soreness which would go far to undo a great deal of the good of the Bill. He agreed that the Government had not inserted the words Excise officer in the Bill as the person who was to do this work, but by common consent he was considered to be, and he did not think the relieving officer was at all the proper person to take charge of the work. His own opinion was that the Government would be forced to create a new class of men for that purpose, and for nothing else. The Government would no doubt see the wisdom of appointing an officer entirely removed from political bias. It would be impossible for the Excise or any other officer who had other duties to perform to perform these as well.
    SIR CHARLES W. DILKEsaid the discussion was wide enough without its being widened by drawing morals as to the advantage of a universal or a contributory scheme. There were certain considerations which seemed to affect the rural districts, but in a sense contrary to what had been stated that day. The hon. Member for Lichfield seemed to think that a local committee would be likely to know the people, but in the rural districts that would not be so, because it would be the county councils. The Bill gave power to appoint sub-committees, but unless the whole authority was delegated to them would they do the work? Unless the whole power was delegated to these subcommittees it would be done by the county councils, who had no local knowledge
    810
    but paper knowledge, and directly they were driven to paper knowledge it was a matter of indifference where the committee was. Everything must rest with the pension officer. In these cases every district was going to refuse the information required for disqualification and patch up the case so as to present the best case for every applicant. They were not going to incur the unpopularity of keeping people off the pension list. They would report in favour of everybody, and the pension officer would have to bear the whole of the odium. He quite agreed with what had been said as to the appointment of the Excise officer. It was assumed that the Excise officer did not go about his district and would have no knowledge, but he was very much about his district at the present time. He went after the dogs, and inasmuch as he sometimes succeeded in causing the collection of two licences for the same dog, in the opinion of some he was about the district too much. He was not very popular in his district for that reason. But he was now going to cease dealing with dogs and deal with people, and he would have to bear the odium of these odious inquiries. He would therefore naturally try to protect himself as far as possible by the form of certificate he would obtain. The Bill certainly contemplated a written declaration, as would be seen not only from the subsection under discussion but from the whole of Clause 9. It would, of course, depend on the regulations, and they did not know what would be put into those regulations, but certainly the pension officer would go as far as the regulations allowed him in obtaining a written certificate. It was certain that the deficiencies in the claim would be patched up, and that the local committees would strain every point in favour of the applicant. They would say: "It is quite true that nine or ten years ago this man did so and so, but he ought to have a pension." So that in every case the pension officer, and the pension officer alone, would have to do the work. He should support the Government, because he did not see what other scheme they could adopt. It seemed to him the best choice that could be made. The difficulty was enormous, but it was inherent in any scheme that picked and chose in this

    811
    way, and therefore, while they ought not to attach too much importance to local committees in rural districts, yet on the whole they could not do better under the circumstances than what the Government proposed.
    MR. SAMUEL ROBERTSasked whether it was wise from the point of view of the Chancellor of the Exchequer to entrust the administration of these large sums of money to local bodies elected by the ratepayers, whose local interest was to protect the rates. Was it not placing these gentlemen in a very invidious position? Their natural inclination as representing the ratepayers would be to put as many pensioners on the Exchequer fund as they could, because the more they did that the more they would relieve the rates. This was Imperial money and ought to be administered by officials appointed by the Government. He rather agreed with the remarks of the right hon. Gentleman the Member for Ilkeston when he said in lieu of the local body he would place the decision in the hands of either a stipendiary or a County Court Judge. There was a precedent for the County Court Judge in the Workmen's Compensation Act. He agreed most thoroughly with the remarks of the right hon. Gentleman the Member for East Worcestershire that the pension officer ought to be a man of a very high character who would act independently of party in any way. He suggested the class of men from whom surveyors of income-tax were drawn. He had come across them as a Commissioner of Income-Tax, and they were men quite above suspicion. Did the local authorities want this further duty placed upon them? He understood that some of them at all events did not. The London County Council were making representations at the present moment that they did not want this duty cast upon them.
    MR. MASTERMAN: They only suggest that the borough councils would be more appropriate.
    MR. SAMUEL ROBERTSsaid the hon. Gentleman did not know whether the borough councils wanted it either.
    812
    In his opinion, and he had had some experience, these bodies had quite enough to do already—more than they could do properly. The last Education Act cast upon them duties which entailed an immense amount of time, and the duties had become so onerous in many localities that they had difficulty in finding to undertake men them. He hoped the Chancellor of the Exchequer would take into consideration the arguments he had placed before him, and also what was said by the right hon. Gentleman the Member for Ilkeston, that a committee appointed by a local authority was not altogether a satisfactory body to administer Imperial money.
    MR. GEORGE D. FABERsaid it seemed to him that so much depended on elaborating the proper machinery to decide who should or should not be entitled to a pension that the discussion was one of the most important that had arisen. The Government had had a very difficult choice before them, because whichever way one looked difficulties met them, but on the whole he thought the machinery the Government had devised was not unsatisfactory in all the circumstances of the case. Let them imagine, however, that the scheme had been established, and an old man of seventy wanted a pension. How would he claim it—orally, or in writing? If he made it in writing, would he lodge it with the local pension committee? Would it have to be in a stereotyped form? The pension committee could look at the claim, as he understood it, but when it was lodged they had nothing to do for the moment. They handed it over to the pension officer, who had to go into all the facts of the case on his own mere notion. Nobody could interfere with him. Would the evidence he took be upon oath? Before an applicant could qualify for a pension this officer had to go into the most inquisitorial examination. They had been told in the earlier discussions that there would be nothing inquisitorial, but there must be a great deal that was inquisitorial or the pension officer would not be performing the statutory obligations which were laid upon him. Where would the inquiry be held—in open Court or in the cottage of the

    813
    applicant? Would it be with closed doors? Would the local community be allowed to be present? All these were matters which would arise in almost every case. When the inquiry was concluded the officer who had conducted it could do no more, but he handed over the determination to a different body altogether. He doubted whether this part of the machinery was the best that could be devised. They were essentially, cardinally, at the very root, dividing the responsibility. The officer's report went to the committee, who could not go into any evidence at all. The hon. Member for Lichfield had spoken about the pension committee using their local knowledge, but he doubted if they could use it. He doubted if they could look outside the four corners of the report, or ask for any further information that could be given them except what was given by the pension officer. He asked anyone who had listened to him whether that was a satisfactory solution of the difficulty, which he agreed was inherent in the case, whichever way they put it. But his cardinal objection was that they severed the responsibility, that one man took the evidence and another body gave the judgment, and the second body could not go into any evidence at all. They were making the local pension committee practically a court of appeal that could only consider the evidence that was submitted to them by the local officer. He would have thought it much better to have given, in the first instance, fuller power to the pension officer; to let him hear the evidence and come to a conclusion upon it. He was in a much better position to adjudicate upon the matter. He asked the Chancellor of the Exchequer to lend a sympathetic ear to bona fide objections, and even at that hour so to alter the scheme that the local officer should be the judge in the first instance, and then give fuller power to the pension committee on appeal.
    SIR MAURICE LEVYsaid the hon. Member had conjured up all sorts of objections that existed nowhere except in his own imagination. The hon. Member appeared to desire one man only to be the deciding
    814
    factor as to whether a person ought to have a pension or not. They on that side of the House were anxious that as many as possible should be eligible for and receive pensions, and believed the proposals of the Government to establish pension committees far preferable to the suggestion of the hon. Member for York, who appeared to disapprove of inquiry and yet wanted more. Would hon. Gentlemen opposite support an Amendment to the effect that every person over seventy should be able to walk into the post office and demand their pension? If so he would put an Amendment on the paper to effect that, [Cries of "Move it."] He wished to impress upon the Chancellor of the Exchequer that the pension committee ought not to be elected by the district councils, for after all they were simply Poor Law guardians. They ought, as far as possible, to keep the scheme clear of any idea that it was Poor Law relief. He would rather have a committee than leave the matter in the hands of one individual. It was far better to adopt the Government plan, but he would like it to be made clear and definite that the pension committee should be composed of a majority of elected members to the borough and county councils. He hoped the Chancellor of the Exchequer would not be in a hurry to decide who should be the pension officer. It had been suggested he should be the Excise officer. Many county councils had already expressed the opinion that they did not feel themselves in a position to take over the duties now performed by the Excise officer and which were to be transferred to them in order to give the Excise officers time to act as pension officers. The hon. Member did not trust the Treasury; he appeared to think the appointment of pension officers was too much patronage to be in the hands of the Government and would lead to the appointment of unsuitable men. He did not believe there was justification for any such fears; in the past the appointment of our Civil servants whether by Liberal or Conservative Governments had been satisfactory, and we had a body of Civil servants we were justly proud of; he therefore had no fear the Treasury would appoint unsuitable men.
    MR. A. J. BALFOURsaid he agreed with what had been said by most of those who had taken part in the debate, that next to the fundamental principles of the Bill its most important aspect was its machinery; and he confessed that the discussion of the Amendment left him in the most depressed state of mind as to the mechanism by which the Government desired to carry out their pension scheme. The Bill professed to give the right to a pension to persons with certain qualifications of age and character. The Labour Members thought it was an inherent right. He did not agree with them; but he thought effective machinery should be provided by which, on the one hand, every man who had the statutory right to the pension should be enabled to get it; and by which, on the other, the taxpayers should be protected against persons obtaining the pension who had no right to it. That was the problem they had to solve. What was the plan of the Government? In the first place, they selected an officer who discharged functions partly inquisitorial and partly judicial, the Excise officer, and made him the Court in the first instance. The Excise officer was not a highly-paid official, and, presumably, he was not a highly-educated official. The duties he had now to carry out required energy and impartiality, concerning, as they did, questions whether dog licences had been paid and gun licences taken out, but they did not carry with them, by implication, any proof that he possessed the qualifications which were necessary for the delicate investigations thrown upon him by the pension scheme. In the first place, the Excise officer had to determine the age of the applicant for a pension. That might be a tolerably easy matter in England, but it would be a difficult task in Ireland, where he understood there was no obligatory registration of births until 1860, and the only evidence as to age before that date was the ecclesiastical registers of baptisms. He did not say that the desire to get the pension at the earliest possible age would be peculiar to the Irish. No doubt it would not be confined to any particular part of the United Kingdom. But, after all, the discovery of the age of the applicant would be an easy task compared with
    816
    the investigation of his previous life's history to discover his character. This task involved powers of a detective and a Judge rolled into one, and it was proposed to place it upon a man whose previous experience was confined to licences for dogs and guns. So much for the qualifications of the man who was to carry out the investigations in the first instance. Then the county council was to be asked to appoint a committee. This committee was not to be given powers of independent investigation to arrive at the truth. They were to be invited to listen to the report of the Excise officer; and if they did not like his first report, to ask him for a second or supplementary report. They were to form an opinion on the evidence brought forward, in the first instance, by one witness alone; and corrected, in the second instance, by the same witness. If they had some doubt as to the justice of the opinion arrived at by the Excise officer, they could call upon him for further information; and if the Excise officer chose to say he had nothing to add to, or nothing to qualify in, his first report, there was nothing further for them to do. This committee of a great county or borough was left face to face with this "Imperial officer," but were absolutely unable to question him. The whole clause was framed on the idea that the committee were to act on the report of the Excise officer and on any further information that he chose to supply. They could not go outside the report. That was the clause as it was drawn. Would county councils appoint committees to occupy this subordinate and humiliating position in the face of the Excise officer? If they did appoint committees, and the committees could be got to sit, would they be able to supervise effectually? Assuming that the Excise officer committed accidentally an act of gross injustice, how were the committee to deal with it? They could not call the applicant before them. Amazing as it seemed, the Government did not appear to have contemplated that the very man who made this appeal should have au opportunity of appearing anywhere at any time or before anybody at all to see that his rights under the Bill were not improperly denied him. He thought that perfectly astounding. When the

    817
    question came up to the Local Government Board, what were they to do? They also could only have the report of the Exciseman. They never got in this Bill beyond the Exciseman. It was the Exciseman at the beginning, the Exciseman in the middle, and the Exciseman at the end.
    MR. MASTERMANsaid the Local Government Board had full machinery for dealing with things similar to that in full operation.
    MR. A. J. BALFOURasked what was the machinery provided at the Local Government Board for looking into the character, and age, and property of these applicants for pensions? The only machinery he knew of was the Poor Law machinery, and that machinery he thought the Government had intended to keep out of the old-age pension scheme. The man whose right was in question here was never allowed to appear to give evidence before anybody except the Exciseman. That was preposterous and intolerable machinery. There ought, somehow or somewhere, to be brought in an authority for allowing evidence to be taken, as it were, in open Court, where a poor man could show why he should have his pension. They ought not to throw the whole power over these £7,500,000 entirely into the hands of these very subordinate Civil servants, who were made practically the distributors of this gigantic national subvention according to their own views of justice and equity. The machinery for seeing that justice was done, he was confident, could be greatly improved if only the Committee and the Government themselves had the time and the opportunity to improve it.
    MR. LLOYD-GEORGEsaid that until the right hon. Gentleman got up they were having a quiet and serviceable discussion on the machinery of the Bill. The right hon. Gentleman had again made a violent attack on the measure. He had shown a great dislike to the Exciseman. That, he thought, must be of Scottish extraction. He had told the Committee that the Exciseman was not a highly-paid and not a highly-educated officer.
    818
    He did not think a University don would be the best person to discharge these duties. Why were the Excise officers to be considered incompetent? They had to discover the age of a man. Need a man be highly educated, or have great skill, to discover that. They had to make inquiries as to means; and they had to make inquiries as to past character—inquiries made in New Zealand by officials of a very subordinate character. Surely an Excise officer could discover these things or whether a man belonged to a friendly society or trade union. It did not require great scholarship to discover those things. The right hon. Gentleman gave an amusing account of procedure. He had invented his own procedure, and it was naturally a very absurd one. It had nothing to do with the procedure of the Bill. The Government were following the precedent of New Zealand here. They were laying down general principles in outline and leaving the machinery to be developed by regulations. He denied that the Exciseman was at the beginning, the middle, and the end of the Bill. He simply made the preliminary inquiry. The right hon. Gentleman said they could not call the pensioner before them. Of course they could.
    LORD R. CECILasked where this was set forth.
    MR. LLOYD-GEORGEsaid it would be part of the regulations. If the noble Lord would take the trouble to look at the New Zealand regulations——
    LORD R. CECILsaid he did not care about New Zealand.
    MR. LLOYD-GEORGE: But the pensioner would care. All this detail with regard to communications with the pension officer and subsequent appeal to the Local Government Board would be provided for in elaborate regulations to be prepared. Embodied in the regulations would be advice to the local pension committee as to the methods of obtaining information not merely from the pension officer, who, however, would be the man primarily responsible, but from other sources.
    MR. A. J. BALFOURsaid he might be mistaken in the meaning of subsection (b), but it ran—
    "The pension officer shall inquire and report upon any claim or question so referred to him, and the local pension committee shall, on the receipt of the report of the pension officer, and after obtaining from him if necessary any further information as to the claim or question, consider the case and give their decision upon the claim in question."
    No regulations could be made repugnant to that.
    MR. LLOYD-GEORGEsaid he quite understood the right hon. Gentleman's point. The subsection said that the local pension committee should employ the pension officer to get information, but that did not prevent them getting information from any other source. If they were going to lay down a whole code of procedure in an Act of Parliament of this sort, it would take up thirty pages in order to explain the thing step by step. It was because they had to leave the matter to regulations that the Government did not specify every particular in this clause. If they did that they would have to put in a specimen form of claim, which was very important; and an hon. friend suggested that they should provide here an elaborate schedule as to the sort of questions which should be put to the applicant. That, again, was a matter for the regulations which would be prepared by the Department. Were there any words in the subsection to prevent the local pension committee asking for other information from another source?
    MR. LYTTELTONsaid that the words "from him" seemed to be specially directed to that point. He believed that they were inserted in order to prevent the local committee from themselves making inquiries which sometimes might be objectionable, and to confine them to the channel of the pension officer.
    MR. LLOYD-GEORGEsaid that these words were inserted there for a totally different purpose—to give the local authority the right to demand the services of the pension officer. If the words had not that effect as a matter
    820
    of drafting, but had the effect which the right hon. Gentleman seemed to imagine they had, he would be perfectly willing to insert other words to make it quite clear that the local pension committee had perfect freedom to obtain information in any quarter. At the same time, he would have to consider whether the cutting out of those words would deprive the local authority of the right to command the services of the pension officer on their behalf.
    MR. AUSTEN CHAMBERLAINreminded the right hon. Gentleman of the argument of the Solicitor-General that the inclusion of one person excluded all others, and suggested that unless they put in such words as "and from such other people as they desire" the section would have an excluding effect.
    MR. LLOYD-GEORGEsaid that a question of drafting he would leave to his hon. and learned friend. The intention of the Government was, however, identical with that of the Leader of the Opposition and of the right hon. Member for St. George's. Hanover Square. He had fully decided that the pension committee should have the full right to make inquiries on their own authority. Of course, the committee must provide the machinery within the lines laid down by the Bill in order to carry the Bill into effect. He did not want to raise discussion on a subsequent clause, but if the hon. Baronet directed his attention to Clause 10 he would find most ample latitude there for regulations being prepared. He would like to say a few words in reply to the Questions put in the course of the discussion. As his hon. friend had said, the Government were not prepared to accept the Amendment, which would eliminate altogether the local element from the machinery of the Bill. That he did not think would be desirable. He agreed with some hon. Members opposite and certainly with his right hon. friend the Member for Forest of Dean, that undoubtedly the whole influence of the pension committee would be cast in favour of the applicant. It would be their desire in 99 cases out of 100 to see that the application was conceded in order to relieve the local rates and the committee from the obloquy

    821
    and unpopularity of ruling out the claim of an applicant. Every claim ruled out would add to the rates. But he did not think that the pension committee would not do their duty. At the same time, their inclination would be, in the vast majority of cases, rather to rule in than to rule out. Therefore it was absolutely essential that there should be someone to represent the Treasury in the transaction. The hon. Gentleman opposite had made merry with the designation of "Imperial" officer; but he used the word in the sense of distinguishing Imperial from local, and not in order to give him any status he had not on his merits. It was essential to have some one representing and guarding the interests of the Treasury, for they could not leave it to a local body with no financial responsibility to make these allowances at the expense of another authority. The right hon. Gentleman had criticised the Government for nominating an Excise officer; could he suggest anyone else? The right hon. Member for East Worcestershire had made a suggestion, and he was glad to hear that, on the whole, the right hon. Gentleman approved of an Excise officer; the only stipulation being that he should not be appointed without any qualification or examination and should not be left to the exercise of the unlimited patronage of a political Party.
    MR. AUSTEN CHAMBERLAINsaid he was not so much enamoured of the Excise officer, but he could not find anyone else.
    MR. LLOYD-GEORGEsaid that that was a great concession from the right hon. Gentleman, which he would translate into approval, and that on the whole the Government had done their best under the circumstances. He agreed with the right hon. Gentleman that it was important that they should as far as possible utilise the services of men who came in by means of examination, and who had not the slightest degree or taint of political bias or corruption. He was informed that Excise officers were quite well qualified by education and adequate to discharge these functions; that they were sufficient in number and equal to their duties, especially if they were relieved of looking
    822
    into the wastrel class. There had been one or two suggestions as to making use of relieving officers, but that had been repudiated by Members of all parties, and he did not think that beyond the one or two Members who made the suggestion anyone would go into the division lobby in favour of it. The relieving officer was mixed up with the Poor Law; not only that, he represented the local taxation authority, and was entirely the wrong kind of person to administer this great fund. What other officer was there who could be employed? They had only the Exciseman. He agreed with the hon. Member for the Ecclesall Division of Sheffield that the ideal type of a man they wanted would be such as was found in the higher branches of the Excise service—such as a supervisor, or a surveyor of taxes in the Revenue service. He did not want to draw invidious distinctions or to say that they were quite of the same rank, but they were much too busy to add these functions to those they already discharged so well. They had, therefore, by a process of exhaustion and exclusion been driven back to the Excise officer. He did not take the view of the right hon. Gentleman, the Leader of the Opposition, as to the qualifications of the Excise officer. He believed that they discharged very unpopular, invidious, and disagreeable functions very well.
    MR. A. J. BALFOURsaid he had never said anything against the Excise officer. What he complained of was that the whole thing was the Excise officer from beginning to end.
    MR. LLOYD-GEORGEsaid that inasmuch as he had shown that that was not the case, the right hon. Gentleman's complaint disappeared. He agreed that if it had been the Excise officer first, second, and third, there would have been ground for complaint; but, as a matter of fact, it was the Excise officer first, the pension committee second, and the representative of the Local Government Board third; therefore the solitary objection of the Leader of the Opposition to this machinery completely disappeared. That, therefore, was an answer to the charge.

    823
    The Excise officer was the only officer available for the purpose. He would report; the pension committee would sit on and examine and sift those reports, and decide upon them, and if necessary they would send for the applicant. In nine cases out of ten they would not send for the applicant, because it would not be necessary. Beyond that, it was the idea of the Government in framing the regulations to provide that where the pension committee decided against the applicant he should have an opportunity of appearing before them and making further representations before a final decision was arrived at. After that there certainly ought to be an appeal to the Local Government Board to vary the order. He agreed that that ought to be made perfectly clear, and if it was not perfectly clear from the words of subsection (c) he was quite prepared to accept the Amendment of the hon. Member for Woodstock which appeared further down on the Paper. In reply to the right hon. Gentleman opposite as to whether the reports of the committee should be published, he should say not. In New Zealand these inquiries were conducted with closed doors, and he thought it would be very undesirable under this Bill that the reports should be published. In certain unpleasantness. He did not think they ought to be published.
    MR. KEIR HARDIEasked whether the appeal should not be widened so as to include the decision of the pension officer as well as the decision of the pension committee.
    MR. LLOYD-GEORGEsaid that that raised a very much larger question, which was raised by a specific Amendment later. He would rather not argue that on this Amendment, upon which it did not quite properly arise. The other Amendment did raise the question of the interpretation of subsection (c).
    MR. LYTTELTONpointed out that in a case where a pension officer made an original report, and was afterwards required to supplement the information, if on that supplementary information
    824
    the pension committee differed from the original report, there was no machinery for the pension officer to modify his first report. He thought there should be that power.
    MR. LLOYD-GEORGEagreed; he thought the pension officer should have that power. The report was the report as it stood after it had been decided upon. It was the final report. That was rather a different point, and there was no Amendment with regard to it. But if there was any doubt about the matter it should be made clear in the regulations, if not in the Bill itself. He had now dealt with all the points raised, and suggested that the Committee should now come to a decision on the Amendment. Having disposed of the question of whether they should have local committees or not, they could then proceed with the drafting Amendment.
    Mr. BENNETTasked leave to withdraw the Amendment.
    Leave refused, and Amendment negatived.
    SIR WALTER FOSTER*SIR WALTER FOSTER moved an Amendment, the object of which was to substitute for the pension committee the stipendiary magistrate of the district, or, where there is no stipendiary magistrate, the County Court Judge, within whose jurisdiction the claimant or pensioner resides. He felt that in this matter they ought not to trust to any local body. They ought to have some procedure which would give everybody not only an opportunity of appealing but of appearing before a judicial officer and stating his case. It was quite possible that a committee constituted as proposed in the Bill might be a source of danger to the Exchequer. It might also exercise its functions in a way injurious to the locality. If, as the Chancellor of the Exchequer had pointed out, this committee was to have a kind of roving commission to inquire into the character of every applicant for a pension they would have an inquisition of a most odious nature set up in every village and town in the country. It was because he thought that a committee of this kind might lead to a great deal of trouble that he preferred the simpler method

    825
    embodied in his Amendment. According to his scheme the local pension officer would do the work under similar conditions to those which the Chancellor of the Exchequer had described. After the inquiry had been made the report would go to the official who would sit in court where he could deal with any appeal or statement on behalf of the applicant. There would be no working in camera. The whole thing would be done by an officer who would be in a position to act judicially and impartially, for he would be totally removed from local influences and above suspicion. The whole scheme with reference to the local pension committee was, in his opinion, bound to break down. When he had put this question before large audiences in rural districts they had told him that they did not wish to have these committees, and would not even trust their parish councils to carry out the measure. It was because he knew that feeling to exist that he begged to move his Amendment.
    Amendment proposed—
    "In page 4, line 16, to leave out the words 'local pension committee, and the committee,' and to insert the words 'stipendiary magistrate of the district or where there is no stipendiary magistrate to the County Court Judge within whose jurisdiction the claimant or pensioner resides who.'"—(Sir Walter Foster.)
    Question proposed, "That the words 'local pension committee and the committee,' stand part of the Clause."
    MR. LLOYD-GEORGEsaid he could not possibly accept the Amendment; to cause a man to appear before a local magistrate to apply for a pension would be open to a good deal of criticism. Neither a magistrate nor a County Court Judge could possibly attend to these thousands of cases in the first place, and, in the second, it would appear too much like litigation. It would be very undesirable to go before either a County Court Judge or a magistrate.
    MR. HAROLD COXwas surprised to hear from the cheers of hon. Members opposite that they disapproved of this Amendment. If the pension was to be a matter of right, as he understood they claimed it should be, it was a question
    826
    to be decided in open Court, and not by a committee sitting in secret or a pension officer in secret. That was exactly the difference between the procedure proposed by the Government and the procedure of the Amendment. By the judicial procedure the Court heard all the evidence on either side before arriving at a decision. Hon. Members opposite, in refusing the Amendment, were recording the opinion that these pensions were not a right, but a charity. ["No, no."] If they were a right why did they object to this kind of action being taken? The only way to try rights in this country was by judicial procedure. They would not try this by judicial procedure, but would try it by a secret committee and a department working in secret.
    LORD R. CECILsaid he was very much struck by the statement of the right hon. Gentleman who had moved the Amendment that he had found very large audiences objecting to these matters being considered by a committee. He quite agreed with the large audiences. Whether hon. Members below the gangway who assumed omniscience with regard to the opinions of the labouring classes were right, or whether the right hon. Gentleman was right he did not know, but he could understand the objection. The objection was this. The working-men of the country knew perfectly well, if they had considered this Bill at all, that it meant inquiry into their character for years and years past. They were not content that the inquiry should be made by a committee, even in camera, and even with all the astonishing machinery designed by the Government for this clause. He confessed he did not feel sure that an inquiry in open Court would be any more popular; he did not know that those who wished to have the pensions were really so anxious to have their whole character investigated before an open Court.
    SIR WALTER FOSTERsaid that his scheme would not work in that way at all. The pension officer would inquire into the whole of the case, and having made his report he would send to the magistrate or to the County Court Judge his recommendation. There would be no inquiry in open Court except in the

    827
    case of an appeal against the decision. If the Judge granted the pension there would be no appearance in open Court. In case the decision was adverse to the applicant, he would have an opportunity of going before the magistrate, whether in open Court or in private Court, and giving evidence on oath in favour of his claim.
    LORD R. CECIL: said that the right hon. Gentleman accepted what appeared to him the chief vice of the Government scheme, namely, the enormous power put into the hands of the pension officer; in fact, the right hon. Gentleman said that the pension officer was to decide whether anybody was to have a pension in his district, and if anyone objected the remedy was an appeal in open Court. He could quite understand that a man with some passages in his life which he would not desire to have exposed in open Court would be content to forego his pension rather than appeal against a pension officer, who, in spite of everything the Chancellor of the Exchequer had said, would have an absolute hold over these pensions. That was a matter for very serious consideration, and it seemed to him that the House ought not to give to these men the disposal of that vast patronage which the Government suggested. He certainly believed that no such suggestion had ever been made in any previous Act of Parliament, and he confessed that he should feel very great hesitation in accepting it. Then as to what the hon. Member for Preston had said, there was a great deal, as there always was, in what he had said, but he thought that the hon. Gentleman had forgotten that the German system did not involve inquiry into character.
    MR. HAROLD COXsaid he hoped that he had not beeen misunderstood. He had not said that he would support the Amendment. He had only said that hon. Gentlemen on the Labour Benches ought to support it.
    LORD R. CECILsaid he agreed in the criticism on the Labour Members, who had been misled by the ingenious phrasing of the first clause of the Bill. They really thought that the Government
    828
    were giving this pension as a matter of right. They believed that that was said in the first clause. They either had not carefully read over the other clauses or they had been deluded by the Celtic eloquence of the Chancellor of the Exchequer. But if they once grasped that there was no right conferred by the Bill, if they once grasped that it was a matter entirely within the discretion of the pension officer, without a shadow of control by the local pension committee, then it appeared to him that they could not treat it as a right, and they could not have it discussed in Court at all; and the objection which the large audiences of the right hon. Gentleman felt to a discussion of the matter by a pension committee would be even greater than to a discussion in open Court. Therefore, he was afraid that he would not be able to support the Amendment of the right hon. Gentleman.
    MR. SHACKLETONsaid that Labour Members considered it a very poor argument to have pointed out to them what was done in Germany. They were not built that way. Probably they would not stand a lot of things that were stood in Germany. He wanted the Committee to realise the kind of people they were legislating for. First of all, they were mainly workpeople, men and women, all of the age of seventy, and was it really suggested by the right hon. Gentleman on the other side that these old men and old women had to go before a magistrate with a wig on? ["No, no," and laughter]. Well, he had seen a stipendiary magistrate with a wig on. Were these old people to appear in a criminal court where cases were being tried, to await their turn either after or preceding a "drunk"? Failing a magistrate, they were to go before the County Court Judge—a Court of which many of them had never heard and which might be miles away from the little villages in which they lived. They were going to put all this trouble on those old people, when they got beyond the recommendation of the Excise officer. That was the position. He did not care much about inquiry, and he believed that the Bill would be better without some of it. But on

    829
    the other hand he would rather put these poor people into the hands of a local committee who had known them nearly all their lives, to settle between their claims and the report of the pension officer. He thought that was the fairest plan. To take these people before a Judge of any description would simply mean that they would not go, but would do without the pension. They might get a few who had the bluff, the courage and effrontery to do it, but those who were really deserving of a pension would not go near the Court. The Bill already put sufficient obstacles in the way of these people getting the pension, and the Amendment if adopted would make the matter impossible.
    MR. EUGENE WASONpointed out that the Bill applied to Scotland, where they had neither stipendiary magistrate nor County Court Judge, so that the right hon. Gentleman's Amendment would require to be amended if it was to apply to Scotland, and they would have to insert "sheriffs and sheriffs-substitute." He hoped that the House would not proceed with the Amendment, and if the right hon. Gentleman pressed it he should certainly vote against it. The Amendment really made nonsense of the Bill, and if it were carried as it was it could not possibly apply to Scotland.
    MR. A. J. BALFOURsaid he quite agreed that the Amendment was impracticable, and the hon. Gentleman who had just sat down had pointed out that it would have to be profoundly modified in order to make it read properly in regard to all parts of the Kingdom to which it applied. He thought that the Government ought seriously to consider the point, however. The hon. Member for Clitheroe seemed to think that it would be a great hardship upon those who desired the pension that they should have to go before a magistrate. For his own part, he would like to have the judicial authority brought in if only to protect the people who were refused pensions. Under the Bill as it stood the man who could refuse to grant a pension was the Excise officer, who permeated the whole system up to the Local Government
    830
    Board. Even with the modifications promised by the Government, it appeared to him that in the case of the Excise officer they would never have any efficient machinery for sifting and examining in favour of the applicant for a pension. The man who was unlucky in his Excise officer, or suspected that the Excise officer had made a mistake, would have no protection under the Bill as it stood, and he confessed that he would like an appeal. It seemed to him that persons who were refused pensions should have the opportunity to go before some judicial authority who would interpret the statutory rates which were now to be given to them.
    MR. HUGH LAWsaid the hon. Member opposite objected to the Amendment because they had no magistrates in Scotland, but the Amendment was equally objectionable to Ireland, because there they had stipendiary magistrates, sometimes called resident magistrates, and he hoped that the Chancellor of the Exchequer would stand firm in resisting the Amendment. He was rather astonished to hear from the other side of the House, in the case of some hon. Members, the extreme mistrust of local authorities in this country. In Ireland they had confidence in their county councils, and they would have confidence in the committees appointed by them. For these reasons he would be certainly compelled to vote against the Amendment.
    MR. STAVELEY-HILLsaid he had listened with considerable attention to the speech of the right hon. Gentleman the Member for Ilkeston, but, whether the County Court Judge with or the stipendiary without a wig, he did not think either would in any way meet the requirements of this particular case. There had been many suggestions as to the formation of the pension committee, but they knew from what had fallen from the Chancellor of the Exchequer that he considered that boards of guardians would not be proper persons to deal with this question of pensions, though these guardians, as private individuals, might have something to do with the question. In his

    831
    opinion to leave the matter to the country council was to leave it to a body dealing with far too large an area.
    THE CHAIRMAN: That question comes upon Clause 8.
    MR. STAVELEY-HILLsaid he would not pursue that subject any further, but turn to the original point, which surely came within the scope of the Amendment proposed by the right hon. Gentleman. There was one body who would be more efficient to deal with the question than the County Court Judge, and that was the district council. They knew the district, and the people knew them.
    THE CHAIRMAN: That should come on Clause 8.
    MR. STAVELEY-HILLsaid he was entitled to suggest an alternative to the proposal of the right hon, Gentleman. He objected to the stipendiary magistrate and to the County Court Judge, because they were persons who did not know these people, who could not in any way be concerned with their affairs, and would probably terrify them, whereas the rural district councils knew the people and were known by them.
    SIR WALTER FOSTERsaid he recognised the difficulty under which his hon. friends opposite laboured. He had great sympathy with them, and he also understood the difficulty in connection with Scotland. Under these circumstances he asked leave to withdraw the Amendment.
    Leave refused, and Amendment negatived.
    MR. HILLS MR. HILLS (Durham) moved, as an Amendment, that the word "authority" should be substituted for "committee" where that word first occurs in subsection (a) of the clause. This proposal, he explained, was submitted as a preliminary step towards an Amendment which he wished to make in the next clause by appointing the registrar of births, marriages, and deaths in each district to act as the local pension authority. In his judgment a local
    832
    committee of the county or district council was the very worst body that could be found to decide questions of this sort. All the investigations was carried on by the Excise officer, and the decision on the facts was in the hands of the local committee, That decision would be of great importance, for these authorities were bound to decide the cases on certain rules, a set of precedents would be set up, and the real decision and the interpretation of the Act in time would come into the hands of the pension authority. The objections to that were very great. The local committee knew the facts, and that was an advantage in certain cases, but it did not apply in the present case, for all the investigations were made by the pension officer and not by the local committee. In the second place, there might be some argument for the employment of a local committee if local funds were being administered, because the local committee would give economy of administration; but here no local funds were being administered, and on that ground there was no advantage in employing a local committee. On the other hand, the objections to a local committee were very great. He did not think the people whose past life was to be looked into cared for an investigation carried on by a local committee. In the case of the income-tax the right was often exercised of being assessed by Commissioners who were not local people. Then if they had these local bodies all over the country there were sure to be large differences between them, and there would be inequalities between different localities. One authority would interpret the Act in a liberal spirit, and another would place a stricter interpretation upon it. But if all pension authorities were officers subject to some sort of central control they would get uniformity of administration. In the country now, they could not get the people to serve on these committees and to do the work there was to do. There was far too much already, and if these committees were appointed they were perfectly certain to be Poor Law guardians, for the simple reason that there was no one else who could do the work. The registrars of births, deaths, and marriages were under the

    833
    supervision of the superintendent registrar, and he suggested that he should be the central authority and the district registrar should be the local authority. At present they were very badly paid, and he quite agreed that if they were appointed for this work their pay must be increased. But there was the existing local organisation, and with extension and extra assistance they could carry on the work. At any rate, in his opinion, it was a far better scheme than any form of local elected committee, under which they were sure to get all sorts of improper electoral pressure. It was certain to be a test question at the elections, and that would be very unfortunate. As had been said already, the tendency of these committees would be to admit all applicants for pensions. They would not save the rates by refusing applicants, and they would gain a certain sort of reputation for generosity by including them.
    Amendment proposed—
    "In page 4, line 16, to leave out the first word 'committee,' and insert the word 'authority.'"—(Mr. Hills.)
    Question proposed, "That the word 'committee' stand part of the clause."
    MR. MASTERMANsaid he thought the Amendment could be disposed of somewhat rapidly, largely owing to the fact that for the last three hours they had been debating practically the same point. All parts of the House had agreed tacitly when the Amendment of the hon. Member for Wiltshire was withdrawn that whatever criticisms might be advanced against local pension committees (and some of them were substantial criticisms), that this was the method by which they would have to work, reserving, of course, their constitution, and the appeal from them for later discussion. They did not intend after that discussion to sweep away the local pension committee and substitute something else for it. But the particular alternative suggested by the Amendment was an impossible one. They would have one official who technically was an official under the Poor Law paid for by the rates, in close proximity and perhaps in disagreement with another official who was an Imperial
    834
    official. That surely would not make for the smooth and efficient working of the scheme. The local registrar, except for the fact that he possessed knowledge of births, marriages and deaths, had none of the qualifications which they hoped the local pension authority would have to mitigate or to modify the decision of the Exciseman. He had not the wide local knowledge nor the intimate acquaintance with the conditions of these people, and particularly he would not have the inclination which the pension authority would have to stand for the enlargement of the possibilities of claims as against the demand of the Treasury officer for economy and retrenchment. He hoped, therefore, the hon. Gentleman might see his way to withdraw the Amendment.
    LORD R. CECILsaid he shared the difficulty of the Secretary to the Local Government Board as to the proposal of his hon. friend, but it appeared to him there was this to be said, and it had not really been dealt with, that there was a great disadvantage in an elected authority dealing with these pensions. He rather agreed that they must have a local committee, and he trusted the Government would keep an open mind if they could, consistently with their natural affection for the drafting of their own Bill, as to whether the local committee should be ejected or appointed. That appeared to be a matter of very serious concern, because if they had to elect them they would have carried out all over the country very much the same kind of scene as had prevailed according to the Chancellor of the Exchequer in the House during the last two days.
    MR. HILLS: I think the sense of the House is against me, therefore I will withdraw the Amendment.
    Amendment, by leave, withdrawn.
    LORD R. CECIL LORD R. CECIL moved to insert after "and" in line 16 "except where such claim or question has been originated by the pension officer." It was a pure machinery point. The provision of the clause was that any such claim or question should stand referred to the

    835
    local pension committee, which, should before considering the claim or question refer it for report and inquiry to the pension officer. That might be fair enough when it was started, but when it was a question not of a claim for a new pension but of whether a man was entitled to continue to receive his pension, who was to raise the question? Clearly not the applicant himself. It must be the pension officer. There was nobody else. It was surely rather ridiculous that, if he told the committee that a pensioner was no longer entitled to his pension, the matter should be again referred to him for further report and inquiry, as the Bill provided.
    Amendment proposed—
    "In page 4, line 16, after the word 'and,' to insert the words 'except where such claim or question has been originated by the pension officer.'"—(Lord R. Cecil.)
    Question proposed, "That those words be there inserted."
    SIR W. ROBSONsaid he did not like the words suggested, and he would suggest other words to meet the case on the Report stage. He thought the point might be met by the words "except in cases where the pension officer has already reported thereon."
    MR. AUSTEN CHAMBERLAINpointed out that a claim might originate with the pension officer, or come through his hands. If an applicant was an ignorant man who did not know how to draw up or present his claim, naturally he would go to the pension officer who would fill up his form and send in his claim.
    MR. BOWLESthanked the Attorney-General for having met this point, because it was a matter of some importance. As they were all agreed surely the most convenient course would be to insert the words now.
    Amendment, by leave, withdrawn.
    SIR MAURICE LEVY*SIR MAURICE LEVY moved an Amendment to insert after the word "question" the words "and within three days of its receipt." If the
    836
    Government accepted this Amendment he hoped they would accept another Amendment which would compel the pension officer to make his report within fourteen days, and the committee to give their decision within fourteen days after receiving the report from the pension officer. This would give practically one month for decision, which he considered ample. When people reached seventy years of age it was essential there should be no unreasonable delay in deciding whether they were entitled to a pension.
    Amendment proposed—
    "In page 4, line 17, after the word 'question,' to insert the words 'and within three days of its receipt.'"—(Sir Maurice Levy.)
    Question proposed, "That those words be there inserted."
    MR. LLOYD-GEORGEsaid he quite sympathised with the object his hon. friend had in view, and it was very desirable that all the claims should be dealt with as soon as possible. He could not, however, accept the Amendment as it was desirable that a certain Amount of elasticity should be retained.
    Amendment, by leave, withdrawn.
    MR. SMEATON*MR. SMEATON moved an Amendment providing that there might be associated with the pension officer for the purpose of the inquiry "such other person as the committee may appoint." His object was not only to strengthen the machinery for inquiry, but also to provide an adequate check upon the pension officer who had to conduct these inquiries. There were matters he would have to inquire into which might offer temptations, and for the protection of this officer, the public, and the Exchequer, there ought to be some check kept upon the inquiries of the Excise officer. It must be remembered that the Excise officers were by no means highly paid; and the Chancellor of the Exchequer the other day, in another connexion, had warned the House that these officers were to exercise an enormous patronage amounting to £7,000,000 annually. Was it not right to have some kind of check upon their private—for they would be private—inquiries and on their decisions—for they were, in practice,

    837
    the deciding authorities? And, seeing how intricate were the subjects into which he had to inquire, was it not advisable to give him the assistance of an assessor? He thought it was a very serious matter to place the Excise officer in fall charge of the inquiry, and make him the real responsible authority. They might appoint an assessor who would exercise a check upon this officer's operations. In the debate upon subsection (c) of Clause 4 he had ventured to make some remarks which were somewhat pooh-poohed by the right hon. Gentleman. He had pointed out that a pensioner might even own a house, a horse, or a donkey. The right hon. Gentleman said that had nothing to do with the case, and the only men he had to deal with were stocking-holders whose resources they had to fathom before granting the pension. It was these aged folk who had, the Chancellor said, hidden away a stocking full of pence or silver—it was these poor old folk who disturbed the right hon. Gentleman's sleep! These were his nightmare! Well, if there were any stocking-holders they ought to do their best to find them out. The old man might meet the pension officer at the front door, whilst the wife was taking out the stocking at the back door. In view of the great responsibilities placed upon the pension officer the temptation he was exposed to was enormous and his duties complicated and diffioult. For those reasons he thought this Amendment deserved the serious consideration of the right hon. Gentleman. He begged to move.
    Amendment proposed—
    "In page 4, line 18, after the word 'officer,' to insert the words 'with whom may be associated for the purpose of the inquiry such other person as the committee may appoint.'"— (Mr. Smeaton.)
    Question proposed, "That those words be there inserted."
    SIR E. CARSONasked if the hon. Member proposed that all those people should make reports.
    MR. SMEATON: No, they should assist the pension officer, and act as assistants to him.
    SIR E. CARSON: Suppose they not agree with the pension officer?
    MR. SMEATONsaid in that case they might report their opinion or their view of the facts to the pension committee.
    MR. LLOYD-GEORGEthought the cross-examination of the right hon. Gentleman was the best answer to the Amendment which contained an impossible proposition. How could they send an Excise officer to see if there was any stocking? He agreed with what was said by the right hon. Member for St. George's, Hanover Square, as to the necessity for an Amendment of the Bill with reference to the pension officer, but he could not assent to the proposal in the Amendment that that officer should have certain men around him watching to see whether he was doing right or wrong.
    LORD R. CECILsaid the Chancellor of the Exchequer had denounced the Leader of the Opposition for having wholly misunderstood the Bill, and for suggesting that the pension officer was realty supreme. Now the right hon. Gentleman admitted that the Bill was defective in drafting, and he was going to introduce an Amendment which would meet the criticism of his right hon. friend.
    MR. LLOYD-GEORGE: To meet the views of the right hon. Member for St. George's, Hanover Square.
    LORD R. CECILsaid that if the Chancellor of the Exchequer preferred to give the credit to his right hon. friend the Member for St. George's, Hanover Square, he might do so. It was admitted that the inquiries would be very difficult to carry out. The Chancellor of the Exchequer had said there would be no great difficulty in finding out the age of an applicant. That would be a very difficult thing indeed. The right hon. Gentleman assumed that the applicants would necessarily be resident in country villages, and that everybody would know everything about them. As a matter of fact, a vast number would be people living in towns, of whom even their next door neighbours had little or no personal knowledge. The pension officer would have to find out who the applicant was, where he was born, and he would have to get some information as to his early

    839
    history. He thought that they should give the pension authority power to appoint men, not to check the Excise officer, but in order to obtain additional information which the Excise officer might not be able to obtain. The Chancellor of the Exchequer seemed to think that the Excise officer would be at the order of the local committee. That was not so. The Excise officer would not be bound to comply with a single direction of the local committee; he was not appointed or paid by them. The essential feature of this machinery was that the Exciseman should be an independent authority with no connection with the local committee at all. If the local committee desired further inquiries to be made and the pension officer did not make them, the committee would have no means of getting it unless the Bill was amended. The committee could not spend a half-penny unless they were authorised by the statute to spend it. Under the Bill they had no power to obtain information of any sort except what they obtained from the pension officer. If the committee were to be given effective power to check the information they got from the pension officer, then power must be given to them in the statute to make inquiries, and, if necessary, to appoint an officer to make the inquiries. He would support the Amendment.
    MR. JESSE COLLINGSsaid the Amendment would destroy the whole intention and character of the pension officer. If they gave the local committee power to appoint an officer independent of the pension officer they would cut away the whole principle involved in the matter. He thought the Chancellor of the Exchequer had made a most effective reply in opposing the Amendment.
    MR. BOWLESsaid it seemed to him that, unless this Amendment or some Amendment having the same effect, was incorporated in the clause, the pension officer would be destroyed physically. He would be hopelessly overcome by the enormous work which would be piled upon him. What provision was there in the clause for giving the pension officer assistance in making the inquiries?
    840
    There might be thousands of applicants in the area served by one Excise officer or, at any rate, by not very many officers. The labour of inquiring into the lives of all these people would be enormous. [An HON. MEMBER: That is provided for in Clause 8.] Subsection 4 of Clause 8 said—
    "Pension officers shall be appointed by the Treasury, and the Treasury may appoint such number of those officers as they think fit, to act for such areas as they direct."
    That did not meet his point. The point was that the pension officer was carefully prevented from being assisted, and it appeared to him that duties would be put upon the officer which he could not possibly be expected to perform, and if they were not performed enormous expense would result.
    MR. MUNRO FERGUSONsaid it was obvious that the duties to be performed in connection with the inquiries must rest upon the pension officer, and it would naturally be absurd to divide his responsibility. Repeated reference had been made in the course of the debate to the pension committee. He had some experience of local authorities, and he was inclined to think that they would go far wrong if they relied on the efficiency of the local committee. Everything would depend on the officer.
    MR. MADDISONhoped his hon. friend would withdraw the Amendment. If the intention was to give the pension officer assistance that was already provided for. The power conferred by subsection (4) of Clause 8 would enable the Treasury to appoint such number of pension officers as they thought fit. There was no specific number stated in the Bill, and surely if an Exciseman had too large a district, provision could be made to meet the requirements of the case. He thought the Treasury might be trusted to provide sufficient men.
    MR. SMEATONsaid he was sorry the intention of the Amendment had been so completely misinterpreted. The question of responsibility was very important indeed, but he maintained that responsibility would be divided if there were

    841
    two or three Excise officers in charge of a district in precisely the same way as if they were to associate with each officer such other person as the committee might appoint. He regretted that the Chancellor of the Exchequer, in the airy way he had got into, had spoken as if this Amendment was brought forward for obstructive purposes. He repudiated that entirely. If this was the way the right hon. Gentleman was going to treat private Members who were at last trying their humble best to improve the Bill, he would be discouraging instead of encouraging private Members to help him; and the day might come when he might regret it. He asked leave to withdraw the Amendment.
    Amendment, by leave withdrawn.
    MR. LLOYD-GEORGE MR. LLOYD-GEORGE moved to insert in subsection (b) words enabling the local pension committee to obtain information not only from the pension officer but "from any other source."
    Amendment proposed—
    "In page 4, line 23, after the word 'information,' to insert the words 'from any other source.'"—(Mr. Lloyd-George.)
    Question proposed, "That those words be there inserted."
    MR. LYTTELTONthought those words carried out quite sufficiently the object he had in view, viz., that the pension committee should have power to make inquiries independently of the pension officer, if they thought it necessary.
    LORD BALCARRESsaid the Amendment authorised the local committee to obtain information from some other source if they were not satisfied with that given by the pension officer. But could they appoint an official through whom that information could be obtained? An immense amount of inquiry would have to be made which would not be of a local character. The pension committee would be obliged to get particulars of a man's past history away from the parish where he now resided. He saw the Attorney-General for Ireland present. That right hon. and learned Gentleman would correct
    842
    him if he was wrong, but he was certain that seventy years ago there was no organised system of registration of births in Ireland; and it would be practically impossible to ascertain the date of birth of many persons in Ireland of the artisan class. Sources of information of that character other than the pension officer would have to be available to the pensions committee. He thought it would have been simpler and wiser to have authorised, by the Amendment, the pension committee to obtain regular assistance for the purpose of making those outside inquiries. The hon. Member for Burnley rather misapprehended the difficulty of securing a sufficient number of pension officers when he said that if more were required they would be appointed. That did not follow at all.
    MR. MADDISON: Why not?
    LORD BALCARRESsaid that for years the Local Government Board had been pressing upon the Treasury the desirability of appointing a certain particular class of officials to carry out a certain statutory obligation, and the Treasury had refused to appoint them. Again, at present the Home Office had an application for a certain number of officials to carry on work connected wish that Department, but the Treasury refused. He could quite readily see that the Treasury might say to the local pension committee that official assistance to carry out their inquiries would cost too much money and the local pension committee would find themselves thrown overboard.
    MR. MADDISONsaid that in these cases surely it would be to the interest of the Treasury to appoint the officials.
    LORD BALCARRESsaid that the answer might be "the more Excise officers the more expense." However, if information was to be obtained from other sources than the pension officer, then somebody ought to be appointed to make the investigations which would not be local. An applicant's history was to be traced back to the time he was twenty years of age and inquiries made as to whether he had worked according to his

    843
    capacity and need, and he might have worked in many different parishes throughout the country.
    LORD R. CECILsaid he would like the Chancellor of the Exchequer to say whether in his judgment the words would authorise the appointment of someone on behalf of the pension committee to make the further inquiries if they thought it necessary. The Excise officer might come to the pension committee and say: "I have done my best to make inquiries, but I have not been able to find out this man's past history, or to trace his character. I have lost trace of him in some particular places, and I should like to know a little more about him before I definitely decide on my report. I should like to know something more locally as to whether he has funds or property." Or the Excise officer might be bad or incompetent, and the local pension committee would have no power to appoint another. He, therefore, wanted to know whether the local pension committee could not put anybody to make inquiries unless they were expressly authorised to pay for them. He knew that there was a subsection of Clause 10 which gave power to pay the expenses of carrying out the Act, but it was essential to know whether that gave power to the local pension committee to do a particular thing not mentioned in the Bill.
    MR. LLOYD-GEORGEsaid that, of course, the Treasury would not give sanction to the appointment of any number of officers, but only such officers as were necessary to discharge the functions which came under the purview of the section. He could not see why there should not be the appointment of the officers mentioned by the noble Lord. He thought it was quite clear that the pension committee would have at their disposal sufficient pension officers to make further inquiries. That was the object of the clause. The noble Lord suggested the case of an incompetent local pension officer. He had no doubt that the pension committee might on occasion require an assistant and in that case the Treasury would sanction the expense.
    Amendment agreed to.
    MR. BOWLES MR. BOWLES moved to insert the words "providing that the committee should hear the claimant if requested to do so by him or thought desirable by the Committee." The Amendment seemed to him to be very reasonable, indeed absolutely essential unless the whole administration of the Bill after it became an Act was to be handed over to the pension officer. As the Bill stood at present, the only person to whom the applicant could apply, the only person he was to see throughout the proceedings and to whom he could tell his own story, was the Exciseman. He could make no appeal to the pension committee or to the President of the Local Government Board or even to the world outside. One did not want to suggest anything of the kind, but either through incompetency, lack of judgment, or for a thousand other reasons, the pension officer might be unmoved by the statement of the applicant. The man would be absolutely at the mercy of the Exciseman, and there was nothing in the Bill to ensure that the man would have a fair hearing. That might result, and probably would, in considerable injustice being done to the applicant. Further, it involved putting the pension committee in a position entirely false and almost impossible. The pension committee would rely in fact on the reports of the pension officer. The whole point about the pension committee was that it was a local committee. It would very likely have a member or two upon it who would know all the circumstances. But the whole of that advantage would be destroyed if the man was not to be allowed to appear before them, and they were to confine themselves to the paper reports drawn up by the pension officers. It would make an enormous difference in the case of an honest bona fide applicant against whom the pension officer or one of the county council committee had a grudge. It would be of tremendous importance to him to be able to say: "If you doubt what I say I shall claim to appear before the pension committee, and make my case good so far as I can." It would have a great effect on the committee, and certainly obviate cases of real injustice. He did not much like the Bill, but if pensions were to be

    845
    given it was essential, if they were to be given as a matter of right, that the man should not have that right controlled by a third person, and be prevented from coming before the pension committee and making his case good. The point was clear and appeared to be important, and he hoped the Chancellor of the Exchequer would see his way to concede it.
    Amendment proposed—
    "In page 4, line 24, after the word 'question,' to insert the words 'and after hearing the claimant, if requested to do so by him or thought desirable by the Committee.'"—(Mr. Bowles.)
    Question proposed, "That those words be there inserted."
    MR. LLOYD-GEORGEagreed that the applicant ought to have the right to present his case before the committee before the pension was refused, but argued that it was obviously unnecessary for him to come before the committee if his pension was to be granted. All these questions would be dealt with by regulations. As he had explained earlier in the debate it was the intention of the Government by regulations not only to give the committee power to send for the applicant, but also to give the applicant power to go before the committee, if necessary, to establish his claim. The whole matter required great consideration, but he did not think it was a matter which should appear even in rough outline in the Bill itself. He hoped the hon. Gentleman would withdraw the Amendment, which in any case was much too wide. In nine out of ten cases these claims would be decided without difficulty and the pension would be given. He thought before applicants were allowed to go before the committee notice should be given to them that their application had been refused. The applicant should then be allowed to go before the committee in support of his own application.
    AN HON. MEMBERsaid he agreed with a good deal of what the right hon. Gentleman had said. If this point could be dealt with by regulations that would be the best way of dealing with it. What he felt, however, was that the clause was so drawn that there would be
    846
    no power to deal with these matters by regulations. Subsection (a) said that the committee, before considering the claim, should refer it for report and inquiry to the pension officer, and subsection (b) said that the local pension committee should, on the receipt of that report, consider the case and give their decision. He did not think they had power to see the applicant.
    MR. LLOYD-GEORGEsaid that if the hon. Member looked a little further at Clause 10 he would find that it said that the Treasury might make regulations for prescribing the manner in which claims to pensions might be made, and the procedure to be followed on the consideration and determination of claims and questions by pension officers, local pension committee, or central pension authority.
    THE HON. MEMBERsaid he could not quite agree with the right hon. Gentleman, because Section 7 had already laid down the procedure and could not be altered by regulation. This body was set up as a kind of judicial body, and was bound to proceed according to its constitution. Regulations could not be made to nullify the procedure specifically stated in an Act of Parliament. Everybody agreed as to the advantage of the Amendment. He only desired to put before the right hon. Gentleman the difficulties.
    MR. LLOYD-GEORGEsaid that if there was any doubt at all about it he thought it ought to be made perfectly clear what the intention of Parliament was. In any case he thought these words would not meet the difficulty, and if the Amendment was withdrawn at this stage a form of words might be considered before the Report Stage.
    LORD R. CECILsaid that if the right hon. Gentleman only read the wording of the clause he would at once see the difficulty that was felt by the Committee. Subsection (b) was imperative. It said the pension committee "shall," on receipt of the report of the pension officer, and so on, consider the application and give their decision. He quite agreed that the proper way to deal with this

    847
    matter was by regulations, but he contended that the foundation for those regulations must be laid in this clause. Some words were really essential if they were to have the power taken in Clause 10.
    MR. LLOYD-GEORGEquite agreed that the matter was one for consideration. He thought it was entirely a matter of drafting, but if words were necessary to make absolutely clear the fact that regulations could be brought in to deal with this point he would be happy to insert some words.
    MR. McARTHURcontended that the whole point was that, inasmuch as the applicant himself was the source of all information, the pensions committee had a perfect right to demand his attendance and hear all he had to say; but he thought some words were necessary to enable the applicant to assert his right to go before the committee and state his case before his claim was finally rejected.
    MR. BOWLESsaid that after the remarks of the right hon. Gentleman opposite he had no desire to put the Committee to the trouble of a division. He, therefore, begged leave to withdraw his Amendment.
    Amendment, by leave, withdrawn.
    LORD R. CECILsaid the House would agree that the Amendment he now proposed to move was of importance, but whether the right hon. Gentleman would accept it was a different matter. He had slightly modified it and it would read as follows: "Provided that a local pension committee may, and if the committee refuse a pension shall, if required, state a case on any question arising as to the claim to a pension for the opinion of the High Court, and the High Court shall accordingly give its opinion thereon, and the local pension committee or central pension authority, as the case may be, shall determine such question in accordance with such opinion." The object of the Amendment was to give an applicant the right to have any question of law raised by his claim determined by a Court of law, and
    848
    to give the pension committee, if they should be in any doubt as to the meaning of the Act—a not improbable contingency—the right to obtain the guidance of the High Court, and ask their opinion upon any question as to the construction of the Act. If it was thought more desirable to substitute the County Court for the High Court, he saw no great objection to that; but his experience was that proceedings in the High Court were not really more expensive than in the County Court in this kind of matter. It was merely a question of stating a case for the opinion of the High Court. The opinion would be obtained, and the matter would be disposed of in that way. The procedure had been adopted in a large number of cases and had been found to work satisfactorily. He could see no objection to the proposal, except that of expense. He quite agreed there was that objection, but there were only two cases to which the Amendment applied. First, there was the case of refusal of a pension where there might be some great principle involved in the construction of the Act; and that would rule a vast number of others; secondly, there was the case where the local pension committee was genuinely in doubt what was the law, and in which any legal expenses incurred would be borne by the Treasury, no expenditure being thrown upon the applicant. Personally, he would not support a proposal which would give the pension officer the right of appeal against the allowance of a claim. Surely, however, if the pension committee or the central authority felt genuine doubt as to whether they had not gone wrong, it was not unreasonable to give the power of going to the High Court to ascertain what was the real meaning of the statute. At present it appeared to him that under the Bill, as it was drawn, every difficulty would be put in the way of an applicant for a pension. He was frankly against the Bill, and he disapproved of it; but it seemed to him that hon. Members should not pretend to support it and really withdraw it by the machinery imported into it. He, therefore, wished the pension to be a genuine one and that it should not be filched away by any chicanery or departmental red tape.

    849
    At present, the whole thing was in the hands of the Department. There was no appeal at all from the Department. The pension officer was an officer of the Government, and, if the pension committee disagreed with him and allowed a pension, there was appeal to the central authority, which was the Local Government Board. The whole thing, therefore, was absolutely and entirely in the hands of the Local Government Board. He did not think that that was a satisfactory system; there ought to be some control over the Local Government Board. He very much disapproved of excessive centralisation. It was one of the besetting sins of modern legislation, and the result was that, partly by perversity and partly by folly, the Departments destroyed what was really intended to be done by the statute, and destroyed it privately and secretly. It was not like a Court which went wrong, and where the matter could be put right by a small amending Act. If a Department went wrong, they were faced with two difficulties. First, they did not generally know what the Department had done, and in the second place the very person they wished to set right was on the Treasury bench with all the apparatus of the Whips and with sheep behind him to destroy any attempt to over-rule his decision. They, therefore, placed themselves absolutely in the hands of the politician who happened to be the head of the Department. He knew it was very difficult to convince the Government, but he asked the Committee seriously to consider whether this Amendment should not be adopted. He did not want to embitter the discussion, but he would ask hon. Gentlemen opposite to imagine the time when they would be in Opposition and a wicked and perverse Tory Government in power who would do their best, as hon. Gentlemen believed, to destroy this beneficial Act; and to conceive the hon. Baronet the Member for the City of London holding high office in that Tory Government and having to administer this Act? Would it not be a comfort to them to know then they would have the opportunity of taking the matter to the High Court as to whether his decision on the meaning
    850
    of the Act was right or wrong? He, therefore, asked the Committee to consider very carefully and impartially the desirability of this Amendment.
    Amendment proposed.
    "In page 4, line 25, at the end, to insert the words, 'provided that a local pension committee may, and, if the committee refuse a pension, they shall, if required, state a case on any question of law arising as to the claim to a pension for the opinion of the high court, and the high court shall accordingly give its opinion thereon, and the local pension committee or central pension authority, as the case may be, shall determine such question in accordance with such opinion.'"—(Lord R. Cecil.)
    Question proposed, "That those words be there inserted."
    MR. AUSTEN CHAMBERLAINsaid he was not in agreement with his noble friend. He agreed with him as to the danger which he had pointed out existed in the Bill as it stood, but he had not been able to convince himself, nor had his noble friend's speech convinced him, that the course proposed by him was the best way of meeting the difficulty. Under the Bill as it stood, in the event of disagreeement between the pension officer and the pension committee, there was an appeal to the central authority, which was the Local Government Board. He viewed with great jealousy, and he thought he might say with great anxiety, the attribution to the Local Government Board of such vast powers as were involved in these provisions. His vote would be influenced by what the Government intended under the name of the Local Government Board, and he would ask the Chancellor of the Exchequer to tell them how the Government intended that the Local Government Board should carry out its functions in this matter. If the President of the Local Government Board, a political officer, was to decide on the merits of individual cases, then he thought there was an overwhelming case for some appeal to a Court of law. The Chancellor of the Exchequer agreed with him a little time ago when he suggested that anything which raised the suspicion of political bias on the part of the local pension officer would be most detrimental to the working of the Bill, and he thought it would be so if anything raised the

    851
    suspicion of political bias on the part of the central authority to whom the appeal must go. If the Government would make it clear that it was the intention that the Local Government Board should appoint an independent officer to judge these questions independently and in a judicial way, though not being actually a judicial officer, then he did not think they need have this appeal to the Court. Did the Government intend to act in that way? He would give an illustration. The Registrar of Friendly Societies, he imagined, was appointed and could be removed from office by the First Lord of the Treasury. Very serious duties had been imposed upon him: for instance, that of certifying under the Workmen's Compensation Act in regard to schemes of contracting out. He was an official of the Government, but in deciding all such cases he acted in a judicial capacity, and it would be an improper and practically, he might say, an impossible thing for any Member of the Government of the day to issue to him instructions as to how he should decide in any particular case. There must be power to issue such general instructions as were contemplated in Clause 10 which would be binding to a certain extent upon an officer in an independent position such as he had described. He would view with the gravest mistrust and alarm the power of the Board of Trade or the practice of the President to interfere in particular cases. It ought not to be left to a political officer. It might be left to an officer appointed by him, but that officer ought to be recognised as holding a judicial position, judging on his own authority, and not directed to find this, that, or the other, or to have his decision in a particular case upset by the Parliamentary officer for the time being. The way in which the Government answered that question would affect his vote on this Amendment.
    MR.LLOYD-GEORGEsaid his difficulty in answering the right hon. Gentleman's very pertinent and sensible question, which he would have no difficulty in answering to his satisfaction, was that it really arose on the next subsection and the very next Amendment. He was rather afraid from his experience of the noble Lord's methods that if he answered him on this Amendment it would enlarge
    852
    the whole scope of the discussion, and he did not want to do that. He agreed absolutely with the right hon. Gentleman that this officer must be quite independent. The officers now appointed by the Local Government Board to inquire into local loans and questions of that kind were absolutely independent; there never was the slightest suspicion that they were influenced by political considerations. That was the kind of officer they proposed to appoint here.
    MR. AUSTEN CHAMBERLAINasked whether the officer's decision would require approval in particular cases by the President.
    MR. LLOYD-GEORGEthought the right hon. Gentleman would be the very last to say that the President of the Local Government Board should never intervene. He was very anxious that the Bill should be drafted in a way which would make litigation impossible. There was a Court of Appeal, viz., Parliament. The noble Lord had tried to rush them into millions of expenditure and had succeeded to the extent of £200,000 or £300,000 and was delighted with it, he was sure.
    LORD R. CECILsaid the right hon. Gentleman had made that charge several times, and it was quite inaccurate. He had made no speech in favour of any of the extending Amendments except the one as to right, nor had he voted in favour of any of them.
    MR. LLOYD-GEORGEsaid he was under the impression that the noble Lord had spoken in favour of almost every extending Amendment. If the Local Government Board and the Treasury interpreted the Act in a narrow, near, shabby, restricted sense, there was always Parliament, and it was far and away better to depend on Parliament than to go up to a Divisional Court to interpret the provisions of the Act. Nothing would suit the Treasury better than to be able to say: "We are very sorry. We cannot grant it. The Courts will not allow us." Whenever there was any difficulty at all it would be referred to the Judges, and they would say that it did not come within the four corners of a

    853
    particular section. But when they came to deal with Parliament, they had to deal with merits. He trusted the right hon. Gentleman would see that it was very much better that they should trust to an independent officer of the Local Government Board as a Court of Appeal rather than go to a Court of law.
    MR. BOWLESsaid the answer of the right hon. Gentleman was altogether in adequate to the Amendment. His noble friend suggested that the applicant should be able to require the committee refusing a pension to state a case for the High Court. The right hon. Gentleman said that that was quite unnecessary; it would be settled in a back room at Whitehall, and if anybody disliked the settlement there would be no need to complain, because the whole thing could be re-tried and re-heard right through—where? In that House. No injustice, no doubt, no trouble, no inconvenience, need be feared in leaving the whole determination of the question to officials in back rooms in the Treasury and the Local Government Board, because, said the right hon. Gentleman, behind them there was the House of Commons. The right hon. Gentleman knew as they all did that the decision of the Local Government Board upon these matters, however wrong in law, could not, in fact, be effectively questioned in that House or anywhere else than in open Court. It really seemed to him that more nonsense, if one might say so in a Parliamentary sense, was talked about the power and capabilities of the House in matters of this kind than about almost any other subject. Everyone knew it was perfectly illusory to suggest that where a poor old man had been refused a pension upon some ground of law which was in extreme doubt, it could be dealt with by any proceeding possible to any Member of the House. The truth was, as all of them had seen and many of them had said, that the increasing tendency in these days was to go on piling up powers in the back rooms of the Department in Whitehall, and to pretend to the people and to the House that it was all right, because the House existed to carry out functions which it could not discharge. It had been said that
    854
    democracy was merely another word for bureaucracy, and they were seeing every day enormous extensions of the pretensions and powers of the bureaucrat. He entirely objected to that, particularly when, as in this case, and in almost every case, that extraordinary extension of bureaucratic powers was defended as being really quite harmless. There could be no doubt that this Amendment really ought to be added to the Bill, and he hoped some friend of liberty and enemy of mere bureaucratic government in matters of this kind, untempered in any way, would rise to support the Amendment.
    MR. McARTHURsaid that this was a matter on which he had felt for some time very strongly, though he had been a silent listener to the proceedings on the Bill. It appeared to him to be one which pre-eminently demanded that there should be arranged some way of invoking the authority of a Court of law in respect to it. He had never witnessed a Bill which had been so hastily drawn and so full of ambiguities. There was not a line, hardly a word in the Bill which was not full of ambiguity. Of course that remark applied to some clauses more than others. Clause 3 was full of ambiguity which would lead to diversity of treatment by different authorities. He could not help feeling that the Bill, in its present form, would have the most demoralising effect on the public mind. It was eminently necessary to have an impartial authority to which anyone might appeal to consider the clauses of the Bill and determine any point of difficulty. There was the central authority and the pension committee, and neither of them would be able to take a legal view of the Bill. It was most desirable that a ruling should be obtained on any doubtful point.
    MR. PIKE PEASEasked if the Chancellor of the Exchequer was going to proceed with the Amendment he had referred to.
    MR. LLOYD-GEORGEsaid he Could not make any statement then.
    Question put.
    The Committee divided:—Ayes, 46; Noes, 267. (Division No. 155)

    AYES.

    Anstruther-Gray, Major

    Forster, Henry William

    Parkes, Ebenezer

    Ashley, W. W.

    Gardner, Ernest

    Rawlinson, John, Frederick Peel

    Balcarres, Lord

    Gooch, Henry Cubitt (Peckham)

    Renton, Leslie

    Baldwin, Stanley

    Guinness, Walter Edward

    Ronaldshay, Earl of

    Banbury, Sir Frederick George

    Hardy, Laurence (Kent, Ashford

    Ropner, Colonel Sir Robert

    Baring, Capt. Hn. G (Winchester

    Harrison-Broadley, H. B.

    Rutherford, W. W. (Liverpool

    Beach, Hn. Michael Hugh Hicks

    Helmsley, Viscount

    Stanier, Beville

    Bignold, Sir Arthur

    Hill, Sir Clement

    Staveley-Hill, Henry (Staff'sh.

    Bowles, G. Stewart

    Hills, J. W.

    Stone, Sir Benjamin

    Butcher, Samuel Henry

    Hope, James Fitzalan (Sheffield)

    Thomson, W. Mitchell-(Lanark

    Carlile, E. Hildred

    Houston, Robert Paterson

    Valentia Viscount

    Cecil, Lord. R. (Marylebone, E.

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

    Walrond, Hon. Lionel

    Craig, Captain James (Down, E.)

    Lowe, Sir Francis William

    Craik, Sir Henry

    MacCaw, William J. MacGeagh

    TELLERS FOR THE AYES—Mr.

    Du Cros, Arthur Philip

    M'Calmont, Colonel James

    M'Arthur and Mr. Bridge-

    Duncan, Robert (Lanark, Govan

    Meysey-Thompson, E. C.

    man.

    Fell, Arthur

    Morrison-Bell, Captain

    NOES.

    Abraham, William (Cork, N. E.)

    Cobbold, Felix Thornley

    Harcourt, Rt. Hn. L (Rossendale

    Adkins, W. Ryland D.

    Collins, Stephen (Lambeth)

    Harcourt, Robert V. (Montrose

    Allen, A. Acland (Christchurch)

    Condon, Thomas Joseph

    Hardie, J. Keir (Merthyr Tydvil)

    Allen, Charles P.(Stroud)

    Corbett, A. Cameron (Glasgow)

    Harmsworth, Cecil B. (Wore'r

    Armstrong, W. C. Heaton

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

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

    Astbury, John Meir

    Cornwall, Sir Edwin A.

    Hart-Davies, T.

    Balfour, Robert (Lanark)

    Cotton, Sir H. J. S.

    Harvey, A. G. C. (Rochdale)

    Barker, John

    Cox, Harold

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

    Barlow, Percy (Bedford)

    Crean, Eugene

    Haslam, James (Derbyshire)

    Barnard, E. B.

    Cremer, Sir William Randal

    Haslam, Lewis (Monmouth)

    Barnes, G. N.

    Crooks, William

    Haworth, Arthur A.

    Barry, Redmond J. (Tyrone, N.

    Crosfield, A. H.

    Hayden, John Patrick

    Beck, A. Cecil

    Crossley, William J.

    Healy, Timothy Michael

    Bell, Richard

    Cullinan, J.

    Hedges, A. Paget

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

    Davies, Ellis William (Eifion)

    Helme, Norval Wason

    Bennett, E. N.

    Davies, Timothy (Fulham)

    Henderson, Arthur (Durham)

    Berridge, T. H. D.

    Dewar, Arthur (Edinburgh, S.)

    Henderson, J. M. (Aberdeen, W

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

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

    Henry, Charles S.

    Bethell, T. R. (Essex, Maldon

    Dilke, Rt. Hon. Sir Charles

    Herbert, T. Arnold (Wycombe)

    Black, Arthur W.

    Dobson, Thomas W.

    Higham, John Sharp

    Boland, John

    Duckworth, James

    Hobart, Sir Robert

    Boulton, A. C. F.

    Duncan, C. (Barrow-in-Furness

    Hobhouse, Charles E. H.

    Bowerman, C. W.

    Dunn, A. Edward (Camborne)

    Hodge, John

    Bramsdon, T. A.

    Dunne, Major E. Martin (Walsall

    Holland, Sir William Henry

    Branch, James

    Edwards, Enoch (Hanley)

    Hooper, A. G.

    Brigg, John

    Essex, R. W.

    Horniman, Emslie John

    Bright, J. A.

    Esslemont, George Birnie

    Horridge, Thomas Gardner

    Brocklehurst, W. B.

    Everett, R. Lacey

    Hudson, Walter

    Brodie, H. C.

    Ffrench, Peter

    Hutton, Alfred Eddison

    Brooke, Stopford

    Findlay, Alexander

    Hyde, Clarendon

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

    Flynn, James Christopher

    Idris, T. H. W.

    Bryce, J. Annan

    Foster, Rt. Hon. Sir Walter

    Isaacs, Rufus Daniel

    Burnyeat, W. J. D.

    Freeman-Thomas, Freeman

    Jacoby, Sir James Alfred

    Burt, Rt. Hon. Thomas

    Fuller, John Michael F.

    Johnson, John (Gateshead)

    Buxton, Rt. Hn. Sydney Charles

    Fullerton, Hugh

    Johnson, W. (Nuneaton)

    Byles, William Pollard

    Furness, Sir Christopher

    Jones, Leif (Appleby)

    Cameron, Robert

    Gibb, James (Harrow)

    Kekewich, Sir George

    Carr-Gomm, H. W.

    Gill, A. H.

    King, Alfred John (Knutsford)

    Cawley, Sir Frederick

    Glover, Thomas

    Laidlaw, Robert

    Channing, Sir Francis Allston

    Goddard, Sir Daniel Ford

    Lambert, George

    Cheetham, John Frederick

    Gooch, George Peabody (Bath)

    Lamont, Norman

    Cherry, Rt. Hon. R. R.

    Greenwood, G. (Peterborough)

    Law, Hugh A. (Donegal, W.)

    Clancy, John Joseph

    Gulland, John W.

    Layland-Barratt, Francis

    Cleland, J. W.

    Gurdon Rt Hn. Sir W. Brampton

    Lea, Hugh Cecil (St, Pancras, E

    Clough, William

    Hall, Frederick

    Levy, Sir Maurice

    Clynes, J. R.

    Halpin, J.

    Lloyd-George, Rt. Hon. David

    Lundon, W.

    O'Doherty, Philip

    Soares, Ernest J.

    Luttrell, Hugh Fownes

    O'Dowd, John

    Spicer, Sir Albert

    Lyell, Charles Henry

    O'Malley, William

    Stanley, Albert (Staffs, N. W.)

    Lynch, H. B.

    O'Shaughnessy, J. P.

    Steadman, W. C.

    Macdonald, J, R. (Leicester)

    O'Shee, James John

    Stewart, Halley (Greenock)

    Macdonald, J. M. (Falkirk B'ghs

    Parker, James (Halifax)

    Straus, B. S. (Mile End)

    Maclean, Donald

    Pearce, William (Limehouse)

    Stuart, James (Sunderland)

    Macpherson, J. T.

    Phillips, John (Longford, S.)

    Summerbell, T.

    MacVeagh, Jeremiah (Down, S.)

    Pirie, Duncan V.

    Sutherland, J. E.

    MacVeigh, Charles (Donegal, E.)

    Pollard, Dr.

    Taylor, John W. (Durham)

    McCrae, George

    Ponsonby, Arthur A. W. H.

    Taylor, Theodore C. (Radcliffe

    McLaren, H. D. (Stafford, W.)

    Power, Patrick Joseph

    Thomas, David Alfred (Merthyr

    Maddison, Frederick

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

    Thorne, G. R. (Wolverhampton

    Mallet, Charles E.

    Price, Robert John (Norfolk, E.)

    Thorne, William (West Ham)

    Markham, Arthur Basil

    Priestley, Arthur (Grantham)

    Tillett, Louis John

    Marks, G. Croydon (Launceston)

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

    Torrance, Sir A. M.

    Marnham, F. J.

    Pullar, Sir Robert

    Toulmin, George

    Mason, A. E. W. (Coventry)

    Radford, G. H.

    Walsh, Stephen

    Masterman, C. F. G.

    Raphael, Herbert H.

    Walton, Joseph

    Meagher, Michael

    Rea, Russell (Gloucester)

    Wardle, George J.

    Meehan, Patrick A. (Queen's Co.

    Rea, Walter Russell (Scarboro'

    Wason, John Cathcart (Orkney

    Micklem, Nathanial

    Redmond, John E. (Waterford

    Waterlow, D. S.

    Molteno, Percy Alport

    Redmond William (Clare)

    Watt, Henry A.

    Mond, A.

    Rendall, Athelstan

    Wedgwood, Josiah C.

    Money, L. G. Chiozza

    Richardson, A.

    Weir, James Galloway

    Montague, Hon. E. S.

    Roberts, G. H. (Norwich)

    White, J. D. (Dumbartonshire)

    Morgan, G. Hay (Cornwall)

    Roberts, John H. (Denbighs.)

    White, Luke (York, E. R.)

    Morse, L. L.

    Roberston, Sir G. Scott (Bradf'rd

    Whitehead, Rowland

    Morton, Alpheus Cleophas

    Robinson, S.

    Whitley, John Henry (Halifax

    Murnaghan, George

    Roche, Augustine (Cork)

    Wiles, Thomas

    Murphy, John (Kerry, East)

    Roche, John (Galway, East)

    Williams, J. (Glamorgan)

    Myer, Horatio

    Rogers, F. E. Newman

    Wills, Arthur Walters

    Nannetti, Joseph P.

    Rutherford, V. H. (Brentford)

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

    Napier, T. B.

    Samuel, S. M. (Whitechapel)

    Wilson, John (Durham, Mid)

    Newnes, F. (Notts, Bassetlaw)

    Schwann, C. Duncan (Hyde)

    Wilson, J. W. (Worcestersh. N.

    Nicholls, George

    Schwann, Sir C. E. (Manchester)

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

    Nicholson, Charles N. (Doncast'r

    Scott, A. H. (Ashton under Lyne

    Wilson, W. T. (Westhoughton)

    Nolan, Joseph

    Seely, Colonel

    Wood, T. M'Kinnon

    Norton, Capt. Cecil William

    Shackleton, David James

    Yoxall, James Henry

    Nugent, Sir Walter Richard

    Shaw, Charles Edw. (Stafford)

    Nussey, Thomas Willans

    Shipman, Dr. John G.

    TELLERS FOR THE NOES—

    Nuttall, Harry

    Silcock, Thomas Ball

    Mr. Joseph Pease and Master

    O'Brien, Kendal (Tipperary Mid

    Smeaton, Donald Mackenzie

    of Elibank.

    O'Brien, Patrick (Kilkenny)

    Smyth, Thomas F. (Leitrim, S.

    O'Connor, John (Kildare, N.)

    Snowden, P.

    MR. DICKINSON*MR. DICKINSON (St. Pancras, N.) moved to leave out subsection (c) and insert: "The decision of the local pension committee allowing or refusing a claim for pension or determining any question referred to them shall, on the application of any person aggrieved or the pension officer be referred to the central pension authority, and shall be considered and determined by them." He submitted that under the Bill as drafted both the pension officer and the committee would be placed in a somewhat novel and unsatisfactory relationship to one another. The proposal in the Bill was not expedient from the point of view of either party. He did not think it was right to make by statutory enactment the position of the pension officer himself so absolutely independent of the committee, and
    858
    further he thought it was very inadvisable to deprive the committee of the responsibility which ought to be on their shoulders rather than on those of a Government official. If they wished, as he believed they did, to obtain the services of good and responsible men on the pension committees, he felt certain that Parliament ought not to place them in that position. There were many men who would say they would not serve on the committee under such conditions. He proposed, therefore, to achieve the same object as the Government intended, but by different means. The principle of his proposal was that the Excise officer should be first, the committee second, and the Local Government Board third. The aggrieved person could then appeal from the pensions committee to the Local

    859
    Government Board. The procedure would thus be, first, a report would be made to the committee by the officer; then the committee would deal with the officer's report; then, in case of a dispute, there would be an appeal to the Local Government Board by the claimant or by the pensions officer as the case might be.
    Amendment proposed—
    "In page 4, line 26, to leave out subsection (c), and to insert the words '(c) The decision of the local pension committee allowing or refusing a claim for pension or determining any question referred to them shall, on the application of any person aggrieved, or the pension officer, be referred to the central pension authority, and shall be considered and determined by them.'"—(Mr. Dickinson.)
    Question proposed, "That the words proposed to be left out, down to the end of line 26, stand part of the clause."
    MR. LLOYD-GEORGEsaid that in the debate which took place at the beginning of the proceedings that afternoon hon. Members impressed on the Government the desirability of giving an appeal to the person aggrieved in addition to the appeals already provided for in the Bill. A good deal of pressure was brought to bear on the Government to concede that appeal, and he desired to assent to the Amendment of his hon. friend. There was a good deal to be said for it. His hon. friend had put the case very lucidly, and it was not necessary for him to say anything further. He did not know whether it would involve much more expense, but it would give a sense of confidence to the people of the country. Practically there would be three different authorities to deal with the cases. First of all, there was the Excise officer. If they were entirely dependent upon him, there would always be the fear that on account of personal or social considerations a case might not be properly considered. Then there was the local committee, and in their case there would be the suspicion that political prejudices would affect their judgment. Under the Amendment of his hon. friend an aggrieved person would be able to come to the Local Government Board, which would appoint an officer who knew
    860
    nothing of the local trouble and prejudices to go down and inquire. That officer would sit like a revising barrister and consider the appeals that came up for decision. He thought that would give a greater sense of security and confidence, and what was more, a greater sense of independence. The local workman, artisan, or labourer would feel that he was not altogether dependent on the caprice, prejudice, or predilection of any persons, great or small, in his district when he could appeal and go beyond them. Even if there was the conspiracy of the local parson and squire against an applicant, as his hon. friend feared there might be in some cases, the applicant would know that he could go beyond them and have his case considered.
    SIR E. CARSON,while agreeing with the Government, wished to make sure that the expression "person aggrieved" applied to the claimant, and would not give an aggrieved taxpayer, who objected to pensions as likely to increase his taxes, the right of appeal.
    MR. LLOYD-GEORGEsaid that that was not the intention, and if the Committee would accept the words of the Amendment in the meantime, he would undertake that on report any alteration which the draughtsman considered necessary to make the intention clear should be made.
    MR. BRIDGEMANsaid he could not understand why the words "person aggrieved" should be used at all. Why not use the word "claimant"? It would be better to settle this matter now than at a future time.
    MR. LLOYD-GEORGEsaid that a man who had had a pension might have been struck off. He might be an aggrieved person, and the right of appeal should extend to cases of that kind.
    SIR F. BANBURYsaid the words "any person aggrieved" must include every person who had a grievance. He hoped one of the law officers would state whether the words in the Amendment would include a taxpayer who might be

    861
    aggrieved. A taxpayer might claim the right to go before the Local Government Board and say: "I am an aggrieved person, because I believe this pension has been granted in error, that the facts of the case as stated by the applicant are not true, and that he has not fulfilled all the statutory duties." He was in favour of the Amendment as explained by the Chancellor of the Exchequer, but he thought the word "claimant" should be put in to meet the point which had been raised.
    MR. GEORGE ROBERTSsaid that the Labour Members were obliged to the Chancellor of the Exchequer for accepting this Amendment. It embodied the principle of an Amendment which stood in his own name. It was desirable that the claimant should have an appeal. At present they did not know whether the local pension committee was to consist of elected people, or of people entirely outside the local governing bodies. He wished to know whether in these cases a taxpayer who desired to protect the public purse would have the right of appeal against the granting of a particular pension.
    MR. LLOYD-GEORGEsaid that that was not intended, and, if necessary, words would be introduced to make that clear.
    MR. GEORGE ROBERTSasked whether these words covered the right hon. Gentleman's intention or not.
    MR. ADKINSsaid they were all agreed that those interested in the question should have a right of appeal. It had been conceded that the pension officer and the pension committee should have a right of appeal; but he could conceive circumstances in which it might be desirable that a member of the pension committee, who felt himself aggrieved, should also have a right of appeal.
    Question put, and negatived.
    Proposed words there inserted.
    Question proposed, "That the Clause, as amended, stand part of the Bill."
    MR. WALTER LONGsaid he did not wish to say anything as to the position in which the clause stood now in relation to the Amendment, for he was not quite clear on the matter. While they, on that side of the House, fully acknowledged that the Chancellor of the Exchequer had done his best to meet some points, they thought that the right hon. Gentleman had left the clause in an extremely unsatisfactory position. He believed that the clause was left in an impossible condition. The duties and powers thrown on the pension committee were still undefined. Generally he thought the Committee had tried to make the clause workable. He spoke in no sense as a Party man, but as one who had been for many years at the Local Government Board, and he did not believe that the machinery devised through the committee and pension officer would be workable. He could not understand how the Local Government Board would act as a Court of Appeal. While he was not in the House he was told that the right hon. Gentleman had said that these appeals would be dealt with by the general inspectors, and that they would decide them in the same way in which they decided other cases. Perhaps the right hon. Gentleman would tell him by whom these cases would be dealt with.
    MR. LLOYD-GEORGEsaid that what he had stated was that machinery would be constructed for the purpose.
    MR. WALTER LONGsaid that he had served at the Local Government Board for eleven years and, therefore, he knew the work probably better than anyone now in the House. It was of no use talking to him about machinery. Machinery could easily be provided by the permanent officials for anything. What he wanted to know was who were the officials in the Department to whom these matters were to be referred? The Secretary to the Local Government Board said the work was to be done by machinery that was to be devised.

    863
    That made the matter all the more unsatisfactory. The Committee ought to know what was the method by which these cases were to be decided in the future. They had, first of all, the application to the pension committee; secondly, the investigation by the pension officer; and thirdly, if there was disagreement, there was to be a reference to the central pension authority, which was defined as the President of the Local Government Board. The case could then only be dealt with in one of two ways. First, that the President of the Local Government Board for the time being would have the right to give his decision in every case. Did the Committee realise what was meant by that? The President of the Local Government Board had at present more work to do in the way of administration than the head of any other Department in the Government. More cases came before him for his personal decision than before the head of any other Department. It might be that there would be very few cases of appeal. He agreed that the general tendency would be to grant the pensions and not to refuse them; but supposing there were a great number of appeals, how were they going to be decided? Were they to be decided by reference to one of the sub-departments of the Board which would advise on the general law; or were they to be referred to the legal department? The President of the Local Government Board would be compelled to say: "Here is a statute which gives the right to a pension and imposes certain limitations. My business is to refer the case to the legal adviser of the Board to see whether the statute has been complied with or not." Was that the position which the President of the Local Government Board was to take up? It was not unreasonable that they on that side of the House should ask what procedure the Government proposed to adopt when they talked of referring to the head of a Government Department this extremely difficult and unpopular duty. Everybody knew how difficult it was for the head of the Department at present to control local authorities, even where he had a right to sanction or refuse expenditure by them. But here the whole of the money was coming from the State, and
    864
    if differences arose between the pension officer and the local committee, and these were referred to the head of the Local Government Board, surely the Committee and the country ought to know how the power of deciding these differences was going to be exercised. They had been informed that the appeal cases were to be referred to the general inspectors; but he ventured to say that these general inspectors were not charged with any duties which would enable them to come to a decision. Their business would be to report to the head of the Department with whom the decision would ultimately rest. He was driven to the conclusion that when these differences occurred, and it was left in the hands of the head of the Board to decide them and to exercise all this patronage, not even an angel from Heaven would discharge the duty without a great deal of adverse criticism, or with any possible hope of doing justice to the case. He could not know the facts, or have the knowledge possessed by the local committee. It would, he insisted, be wise, even now, at the eleventh hour to get rid of this appeal. If there was to be an appeal at all, let it be to a Court of law; but it would be better still to leave it to the Excise officer or the local committee and absolve the head of the Local Government Department from a duty which he could not possibly perform. Believing, as he did, that the clause was a thoroughly bad clause, and would operate unjustly, he should certainly vote against it.
    SIR F. BANBURYsaid it could not be denied that this was the most important part of the Bill. The Committee must remember that this clause gave most extraordinary powers to people who in his opinion were not fit to exercise them. The real person who under this clause would exercise the patronage of giving old-age pensions to certain people was the Excise officer. He would have to inquire into any number of circumstances and considerations with regard to the lives of the persons claiming the pensions, and, as had been pointed out by the hon. Member for Norwood, an extraordinary number of inquiries would have to be made before he would recommend the

    865
    pension. Excise officers, whose salary by the way was £100 to £150 a year, were excellent men in their way, but he did not think they were fitted by their training to exercise the very difficult duties that would be put upon them under this Bill, especially after a few years of Radical Government. The right hon. Gentleman had himself admitted that, because he had said the duties were duties which should be performed by Inland Revenue supervisors. The next point to which he would draw attention was the local pension committee.
    Mr. CROOKSon a point of order, asked whether the hon. Member was in order in discussing the local pension committee on this clause, and so preventing the House from getting on to Clause 8, which dealt with these committees.
    THE CHAIRMANsaid that in discussing the duties of these committees, with which Clause 7 dealt, the hon. Baronet was quite in order, but he could not discuss the constitution of those committees.
    SIR F. BANBURYsaid the duties of the committees would be to inquire into all the circumstances of the case and investigate the report of the pension officer with regard to the person claiming a pension, but they could not decide the matter; they could only report to the Local Government Board. The real dictator was the President of the Local Government Board. As a matter of fact, this was going back to the old practice of the Star Chamber. An official appointed theoretically by the King was to have the power to say whether 500,000 people in the country should or should not have pensions. [Cries of "Divide, divide," and counter cries of "Order, order."]
    MR. CROOKS: You make more speeches than all the other Members of the House put together.
    SIR F. BANBURY: That is no reason for dividing. [Cries of "It is an absolute waste of time" and "Let him talk."]
    THE CHAIRMAN: I must appeal to hon. Members below the gangway to allow the hon. Baronet to speak.
    AN HON. MEMBER: He is always at it.
    MR. CROOKS: May I ask you, Sir, whether this painful repetition is to go on and keep us from Clause 8 until the closure? It is abominable.
    SIR F. BANBURYmade repeated attempts to proceed, amid renewed cries of "Divide." He declared that hon. Gentlemen were mistaken if they supposed he was to be browbeaten. However much noise they made, they could not prevent him standing there. He believed in free speech.
    AN HON. MEMBER: And plenty of it.
    MR. CROOKS: All your own.
    THE CHAIRMAN: I really must appeal to hon. Members below the gangway. Our proceedings must perforce stop at half-past ten o'clock. There is no possible use in interfering with the hon. Baronet.
    MR. CROOKS: That is just our position. If the time is to be wasted we may as well waste it like this.
    SIR F. BANBURYsaid he would conclude his remarks by expressing the wish that the right hon. Gentleman would give them some information upon the point raised by his right hon. friend.
    MR. AUSTEN CHAMBERLAINsaid the point raised by his right hon. friend was really one of great importance. During the dinner hour he addressed the same question to the Chancellor of the Exchequer. The central authority was the Local Government Board of somebody whom they might appoint. What did the Government intend to be the practice in deciding these

    867
    cases? The Government by the acceptance—quite rightly—of the Amendment just moved had widened the scope of the appeal to the central authority, making that authority even more important than it was under the original Bill. He wanted to know what was the Local Government Board for this purpose. When he put the question to the Chancellor of the Exchequer, he replied that the questions would be referred to gentlemen in a position similar to that of the general inspectors, under the Board. He was not conversant with the working of the Board, and he did not know exactly what that meant, but he learned from his right hon. friend that these inspectors did not decide anything in the matters confided to them. They occasionally advised the local authority, and they constantly reported to the President, but in no cases did they themselves give a decision. Therefore, if that analogy was followed, the inspectors might report to the President of the Local Government Board, but it was the President himself who would have to determine in every individual case that came before him whether on the facts A. B. should have a pension or not. He submitted with all the seriousness and gravity which so big an issue demanded that a party official, temporarily at the head of a great public office, ought not to have the ultimate distribution among individuals of a sum of £7,000,000 or probably something like £9,000,000 or £10,000,000 a year. For the sake of the success of the Bill, for the sake of guarding the Government of the day against undue pressure in particular cases, and for the sake of guarding it against suspicion of acting unfairly and from improper motives, it was most important that this very delicate and semi-judicial task should be discharged by some independent and non-party authority. He would be quite content if they could find some official acting under the nominal authority of the Local Government Board as independent of any control by any executive office, as, for instance, the Registrar of Friendly Societies was in his semi-judicial functions. It would not redound to the success of the Bill, or to the satisfaction, contentment, and respect of
    868
    the persons concerned, or to the safe conduct of proceedings in the House, if the President of the Local Government Board was made personally responsible for each individual decision and liable to be called in question by any Member or section of Members over his decision in any individual case. Of course, in Clause 11, in the case of Ireland and Scotland the Chief Secretary and the Secretary for Scotland were respectively named, and his remarks, therefore, equally applied to them. He was not speaking in any spirit of unfriendliness to the Bill, but with a desire to preserve the holders of these offices from a very invidious duty which he thought it would be most difficult for them to discharge, and the House from being in each individual case the Court of Appeal against the decision of the Local Government Board. The House must retain its right to vary the conditions under which pensions were given, and to make general rules; but nobody would contend that the House sitting in Committee of Supply on the Vote for the salary of the Secretary for Scotland, or of the Chief Secretary, or of the President of the Local Government Board, was capable of judicially determining whether a particular claim was really fair. He therefore strongly urged that they should have a really independent officer to decide individual cases, leaving the Local Government Board to lay down general regulations. He appealed to the Government to adopt that solution. He begged that they would at any rate tell them before they proceeded to a division, quite clearly and specifically, what was their intention in the matter. Did they mean each individual case to be subject to the review of the President of the Local Government Board, and the action of the President of the Local Government Board to be subject to the review of the House in each individual case, or did they not?
    MR. MASTERMANsaid that he was unable to give an outline of the machinery through which this pension authority would act, but no one would imagine that the President of the Local Government Board personally could review every

    869
    one of many thousands of cases. Some officers would be chosen to deal specifically with the work of these appeals, but ultimately the responsibility of the Local Government Board must be recognised.
    LORD R. CECILsaid that the Committee were still in the dark as to what the Government really intended. Was it to be an administrative or a judicial appeal? If it was to be a judicial appeal, it was true they ran the risk of establishing a bureaucracy and removing the matter entirely from the control of Parliament. It was desirable, in his judgment, that the decision of these individual cases should be removed from the control of Parliament, for the House was incapable of formulating a judicial decision in any form. If the idea was to establish an administrative appeal it would still have to come before the House, and that, in his opinion, was the worst possible solution that could be desired. He still thought the practical control of the pension would be in the
    hands, not of the local committee, but of the Excise officer himself. He would be supreme. They were going to put into the hands of thousands of officers this power, knowing perfectly well that the action of subordinate local officials was one of the great difficulties of country life. Every one who lived in the country knew the kind of charges of corruption that were made against smaller officials in the country, and here they were going to put into the hands of men of very much the same position this enormous patronage, this enormous temptation to corruption, without any real supervision. In his opinion, the Committee was acting very unwisely in entrusting to these men this vast patronage and putting them in a dangerous and, he feared, fatal position of temptation.
    Question put.
    The Committee divided:—Ayes, 343; Noes, 92. (Division List No. 156.)

    AYES.

    Abraham, William (Cork, N. E.)

    Branch, James

    Cowan, W. H.

    Agnew, George William

    Brigg, John

    Cox, Harold

    Allen, A. Acland (Christchurch)

    Bright, J. A.

    Craig, Herbert J. (Tynemouth)

    Allen, Charles P. (Stroud)

    Brocklehurst, W. B.

    Crean, Eugene

    Armstrong, W. C. Heaton

    Brodie, H. C.

    Cremer, Sir William Randal

    Ashton, Thomas Gair

    Brooke, Stopford

    Crooks, William

    Asquith, Rt. Hn. Herbert Henry

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

    Crosfield, A. H.

    Astbury, John Meir

    Bryce, J. Annan

    Crossley, William J.

    Balfour, Robert (Lanark)

    Buchanan, Thomas Ryburn

    Cullinan, J.

    Baring, Godfrey (Isle of Wight)

    Burke, E. Haviland-

    Davies, David (Montgomery, Co.

    Barker, John

    Burnyeat, W. J. D.

    Davies, Ellis Williom (Eifion)

    Barlow, Sir John E. (Somerset)

    Burt, Rt. Hon. Thomas

    Davies, M. Vaughan-(Cardigan

    Barlow, Percy (Bedford)

    Buxton, Rt. Hn. Sydney Charles

    Davies, Timothy (Fulham)

    Barnard, E. B.

    Byles, William Pollard

    Devlin, Joseph

    Barnes, G. N.

    Cameron, Robert

    Dewar, Sir J. A. (Inverness-sh.)

    Barry, E. (Cork, S.)

    Carr-Gomm, H. W.

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

    Barry, Redmond J. (Tyrone, N.)

    Causton, Rt. Hn. Richard Knight

    Dilke, Rt. Hon. Sir Charles

    Beale, W. P.

    Cawley, Sir Frederick

    Dillon, John

    Beauchamp, E.

    Chance, Frederick William

    Dobson, Thomas W.

    Beck, A. Cecil

    Channing, Sir Francis Allston

    Duckworth, James

    Bell, Richard

    Cheetham, John Frederick

    Duncan, C. (Barrow-in-Furness

    Bollairs, Carlyon

    Cherry, Rt. Hon. R. R.

    Dunn, A. Edward (Camborne)

    Benn, Sir J. Williams (Devonp'rt

    Churchill, Rt. Hon. Winston S.

    Dunne, Major E. Martin (Walsall

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

    Clancy, John Joseph

    Edwards, Enoch (Hanley)

    Bennett, E. N.

    Cleland, J. W.

    Erskine, David C.

    Berridge, T. H. D.

    Clough, William

    Essex, R. W.

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

    Clynes, J. R.

    Esslemont, George Birnie

    Bethell, T. R. (Essex, Maldon)

    Cobbold, Felix (Thornley

    Evans, Sir Samuel T.

    Birrell, Rt. Hon. Augustine

    Collins, Stephen (Lambeth)

    Everett, R. Lacey

    Black, Arthur W.

    Condon, Thomas Joseph

    Ffrench, Peter

    Boland, John

    Cooper, G. J.

    Findlay, Alexander

    Boulton, A. C. F.

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

    Flynn, James Christopher

    Bowerman, C. W.

    Cornwall, Sir Edwin A.

    Freeman-Thomas, Freeman

    Bramsdon, T. A.

    Cotton, Sir H. J. S.

    Fuller, John Michael F.

    Fullerton, Hugh

    Lough, Rt. Hon. Thomas

    Price, Robert John (Norfolk, E.

    Furness, Sir Christopher

    Lupton, Arnold

    Priestley, Arthur (Grantham)

    Gibb, James (Harrow)

    Luttrell, Hugh Fownes

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

    Gill, A. H.

    Lyell, Charles Henry

    Radford, G. H.

    Gladstone, Rt. Hn. Herbert John

    Lynch, H. B.

    Rainy, A. Rolland

    Glover, Thomas

    Macdonald, J. R. (Leicester)

    Raphael, Herbert H.

    Goddard, Sir Daniel Ford

    Macdonald, J. M. (Falkirk B'ghs

    Rea, Russell (Gloucester)

    Gooch, George Peabody (Bath)

    Mackarness, Frederic C.

    Rea, Walter Russell (Searboro'

    Greenwood, G. (Peterborough

    Maclean, Donald

    Reddy, M.

    Greenwood, Hamar (York)

    Macpherson, J. T.

    Redmond, John E. (Waterford)

    Guest, Hon. Ivor Churchill

    MacVeagh, Jeremiah (Down, S.

    Redmond, William Clare

    Gulland, John W.

    MacVeigh, Charles (Donegal, E.

    Rendall, Athelstan

    Gurdon, Rt Hn Sir W. Brampton

    McCallum, John M.

    Richardson, A.

    Haldane, Rt. Hon. Richard B.

    McCrae, George

    Ridsdale, E. A.

    Hall, Frederick

    McKillop, W.

    Roberts, Charles H. (Lincoln)

    Halpin, J.

    McLaren, H. D. (Stafford, W.)

    Roberts, G. H. (Norwich)

    Harcourt, Rt. Hn. L. (Rossendale

    McMicking, Major G.

    Roberts, John H. (Denbighs.)

    Harcourt, Robert V. (Montrose)

    Maddison, Frederick

    Robertson, Sir G. Scott (Bradf'rd

    Hardie, J. Keir (Merthyr Tydvil

    Mallet, Charles E.

    Robinson, S.

    Hardy, George A. (Suffolk)

    Markham, Arthur Basil

    Robson, Sir William Snowdon

    Harmsworth, Cecil B. (Worc'r.)

    Marks, G. Croydon (Launceston)

    Roche, Augustine (Cork)

    Harmsworth, R L. (Caithn'ss-sh

    Marnham, F. J.

    Roche, John (Galway, East)

    Hart-Davies, T.

    Mason, A. E. W. (Coventry)

    Roe, Sir Thomas

    Harvey, A. G. C. (Rochdale)

    Masterman, C. F. G.

    Rogers, F. E. Newman

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

    Meagher, Michael

    Runciman, Rt. Hon. Walter

    Harwood, George

    Meehan, Patrick A. (Queen's Co.

    Rutherford, V. H. (Brentford)

    Haslam, James (Derbyshire)

    Menzies, Walter

    Samuel, S. M. (Whitechapel)

    Haslam, Lewis (Monmouth)

    Micklem, Nathaniel

    Scarisbrick, T. T. L.

    Haworth, Arthur A.

    Middlebrook, William

    Schwann, C. Duncan (Hyde)

    Healy, Timothy Michael

    Molteno, Percy Alport

    Schwann, Sir C. E. (Manchester)

    Hedges, A. Paget

    Mond, A.

    Soott, A. H. (Ashton-under-Lyne

    Helme, Norval Watson

    Montagu, Hon. E. S.

    Seaverns, J. H.

    Henderson, Arthur (Durham)

    Montgomery, H. G.

    Seely, Colonel

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

    Mooney, J. J.

    Shackleton, David James

    Henry, Charles S.

    Morgan, G. Hay (Cornwall)

    Shaw, Charles Edw. (Stafford)

    Herbert, T. Arnold (Wycombe)

    Morse, L. L.

    Sherwell, Arthur James

    Higham, John Sharp

    Morton, Alpheus Cleophas

    Shipman, Dr. John G.

    Hobart, Sir Robert

    Muldoon, John

    Silcock, Thomas Ball

    Hobhouse, Charles E. H.

    Murnaghan, George

    Smeaton, Donald Mackenzie

    Hodge, John

    Murphy, John (Kerry, East)

    Smyth, Thomas F. (Leitrim, S.

    Hogan, Michael

    Murray, Capt Hn A. C. (Kincard.

    Snowden, P.

    Hooper, A. G.

    Myer, Horatio

    Spicer, Sir Albert

    Hope, John Deans (Fife, West)

    Nannetti, Joseph P.

    Stanley, Albert (Staffs, N. W.)

    Horniman, Emslie John

    Napier, T. B.

    Stanley, Hn. A. Lyulph (Chesh.

    Horridge, Thomas Gardner

    Newnes, F. (Notts, Bassetlaw)

    Steadman, W. C.

    Howard, Hon. Geoffrey

    Nicholls, George

    Stewart, Halley (Greenock)

    Hudson, Walter

    Nieholson, Charles N. (Doncast'r

    Strachey, Sir Edward

    Hutton, Alfred Eddison

    Nolan, Joseph

    Straus, B. S. (Mile End)

    Hyde, Clarendon

    Norton, Capt. Cecil William

    Strauss, E. A. (Abingdon)

    Idris, T. H. W.

    Nugent, Sir Walter Richard

    Stuart, James (Sunderland)

    Illingworth, Percy H.

    Nussey, Thomas Willans

    Summerbell, T.

    Isaacs, Rufus Daniel

    Nuttall, Harry

    Sutherland, J. E.

    Jacoby, Sir James (Alfred

    O'Brien, Kendal (Tipperary Mid

    Taylor, John W. (Durham)

    Jardine, Sir J.

    O'Brien, Patrick (Kilkenny)

    Taylor, Theodore C. (Radcliffe)

    Johnson, John (Gateshead)

    O'Connor, John (Kildare, N.)

    Tennant, H. J. (Berwickshire)

    Johnson, W. (Nuneaton)

    O'Doherty, Philip

    Thomas, Abel (Carmarthen, E.)

    Jones, Leif (Appleby)

    O'Donnell, C. J. (Walworth)

    Thomas, David Alfred (Merthyr

    Jowett, F. W.

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

    Thomasson, Franklin

    Joyce, Michael

    O'Malley, William

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

    Kekewich, Sir George

    O'Shaughnessy, P. J.

    Thorne, G. R. (Wolverhampt'n

    Kilbride, Denis

    O'Shee, James John

    Tomkinson, James

    Kincaid-Smith, Captain

    Parker, James (Halifax)

    Torrance, Sir A. M.

    King, Alfred John (Knutsford

    Partington, Oswald

    Toulmin, George

    Laidlaw, Robert

    Pearce, Robert (Staffs, Leek)

    Trevelyan, Charles Philips

    Lambert, George

    Pearce, William (Limehouse)

    Verney, F. W.

    Lamont, Norman

    Pearson, Sir W. D. (Colchester)

    Walker, H. De R. (Leicester)

    Law Hugh A. (Donegal, W.)

    Philipps, Col. Ivor (S'thampton

    Walsh, Stephen

    Layland-Barratt, Francis

    Phillips, John (Longford, S.)

    Walters, John Tudor

    Leese, Sir Joseph S. (Accrington

    Pickersgill, Edward Hare

    Walton, Joseph

    Lehmann, R. C.

    Pirie, Duncan V.

    Wardle, George J.

    Lever, W. H. (Cheshire, Wirral

    Pollard, Dr.

    Wason, Rt. Hn. E. (Clackmann'n

    Levy, Sir Maurice

    Ponsonby, Arthur A. W. H.

    Wason, John Cathcart (Orkney)

    Lloyd-George, Rt. Hon. David

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

    Waterlow, D. S.

    872

    873

    Watt, Henry A.

    Wiles, Thomas

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

    Wedgwood, Josiah C.

    Williams, J. (Glamorgan)

    Wilson, W. T. (Westhoughton)

    Weir, James Galloway

    Williams, Osmond (Merioneth)

    Wood. T. M'Kinnon

    White, J. D. (Dumbartonshire)

    Wills, Arthur Walters

    Yoxall, James Henry

    White, Luke (York, E.R.)

    Wilson, Hon. G. G. (Hull, W.)

    White, Patrick (Meath, North)

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

    TELLERS FOR THE AYES—Mr.

    Whitehead, Rowland

    Wilson, John (Durham, Mid)

    Joseph Pease and Master of

    Whitley, John Henry (Halifax)

    Wilson, J. H. (Middlesbrough)

    Elibank.

    Whittaker, Sir Thomas Palmer

    Wilson, J. W. (Worcestersh. N.

    NOES.

    Acland-Hood, Rt Hon Sir Alex. F

    Du Cros, Arthur Philip

    Moore, William

    Anstruther-Gray, Major

    Duncan, Robert (Lanark, Govan

    Morrison-Bell, Captain

    Arkwright, John Stanhope

    Faber, George Denison (York)

    Nicholson, Wm. G. (Petersfield

    Ashley, W. W.

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

    O'Neill, Hon. Robert Torrens

    Aubrey-Fletcher, Rt. Hn. Sir H.

    Fell, Arthur

    Parkes, Ebenezer

    Balcarres, Lord

    Forster, Henry William

    Pease, Herbert Pike-Darlington

    Baldwin, Stanley

    Foster, Rt. Hon. Sir Walter

    Ratcliff, Major R. F.

    Baring, Capt. Hn. G (Winchester

    Gardner, Earnest

    Rawlinson, John Frederick Peel

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

    Gooch, Henry Cubitt (Peckh'm

    Renton, Leslie

    Beach, Hn. Michael Hugh Hicks

    Gretton, John

    Roberts, S. (Sheffield, Ecclesall)

    Beckett, Hon. Gervase

    Guinness, Walter Edward

    Ronaldshay, Earl of

    Bignold, Sir Arthur

    Hardy, Laurence (Kent, Ashford

    Ropner, Colonel Sir Robert

    Bowles, G. Stuart

    Harrison-Broadley, H. B.

    Rutherford, W. W. (Liverpool)

    Bridgeman, W. Clive

    Hay, Hon. Claude George

    Sheffield, Sir Berkeley George D.

    Bull, Sir William James

    Helmsley, Viscount

    Stanier, Beville

    Burdett-Coutts, W.

    Hill, Sir Clement

    Starkey, John R.

    Butcher, Samuel Henry

    Hills, J. W.

    Staveley-Hill, Henry (Staff'sh.

    Campbell, Rt. Hon. J. H. M.

    Hope, James Fitzalan (Sheffield

    Stone, Sir Benjamin

    Carlile, E. Hildred

    Houston, Robert Paterson

    Talbot, Lord E. (Chichester)

    Carson, Rt. Hon. Sir Edw. H.

    Kerry, Earl of

    Thomson, W. Mitchell- (Lanark

    Cave, George

    Keswick, William

    Thornton, Percy M.

    Cecil, Lord R. (Marylebone, E.)

    Lane-Fox, G. R.

    Tuke, Sir John Batty

    Chamberlain, Rt Hn. J. A.(Worc

    Law, Andrew Bonar (Dulwich)

    Valentia, Viscount

    Coates, Major E. F. (Lewisham

    Lee, Arthur H.(Hants, Fareham

    Walrond, Hon. Lionel

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

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

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

    Collings, Rt. Hn. J. (Birmingh'm

    Lowe, Sir Francis William

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

    Craig, Charles Curtis (Antrim, S.

    MacCaw, William J. MacGeagh

    Wolff, Gustav Wilhelm

    Craig, Captain James-Down, E.)

    Mc Arthur, Charles

    Younger, George

    Craik, Sir Henry

    McCalmont, Colonel James

    Dalrymple, Viscount

    Meysey-Thompson, E. C.

    TELLERS FOR THE NOES—Sir

    Doughty, Sir George

    Middlemore, John Throgmorton

    Frederick Banbury and Mr. Hunt.

    Douglas, Rt. Hon. A. Akers-

    Mildmay, Francis Bingham

    And, it being after half-past Ten of the Clock, the CHAIRMAN proceeded, pursuant to the Order of the House of 17th June, successively to put forthwith the Question, on any Amendments moved by the Government, of which notice had been given, and on any Questions necessary to dispose of the Business to be concluded this day.
    Question put, "That Clauses 8 and 9 stand part of the Bill."
    MR. AUSTEN CHAMBERLAIN: On the point of order, are we not entitled to vote separately on Clauses 8 and 9?
    THE CHAIRMAN: No, the instruction under which I am putting this Question is—
    "In the case of a series of clauses to which no notice of Amendment has been given by the Government, (the Chairman) shall put the Question that those clauses stand part of the Bill without putting the Question separately as respects each clause.'
    The Committee divied:—Ayes, 330; Noes,127. (Division List No. 157.)

    AYES.

    Abraham, William (Cork, N. E.)

    Cory, Sir Clifford John

    Hobart, Sir Robert

    Agnew, George William

    Cotton, Sir H. J. S.

    Hobhouse, Charles E. H.

    Allen, A. Acland (Christchurch)

    Cowan, W. H.

    Hogan, Michael

    Allen, Charles P. (Stroud)

    Craig, Herbert J. (Tynemouth)

    Hooper, A. G.

    Armstrong, W. C. Heaton

    Crean, Eugene

    Horniman, Emslie John

    Ashton, Thomas Gair

    Cremer, Sir William Randal

    Horridge, Thomas Gardner

    Asquith, Rt. Hn. Herbert Henry

    Crosfield, A. H.

    Howard, Hon. Geoffrey

    Astbury, John Meir

    Crossley, William J.

    Hutton, Alfred Edison

    Balfour, Robert (Lanark)

    Cullinan, J.

    Hyde, Clarendon

    Baring, Godfrey (Isle of Wight

    Davies, David (Montgomery Co.

    Idris, T. H. W.

    Barker, John

    Davies, Ellis William (Eifion)

    Illingworth, Percy H.

    Barlow, Sir John E. (Somerset

    Davies, M. Vaughan-(Cardigan)

    Isaacs, Rufus Daniel

    Barlow, Percy (Bedford)

    Davies, Timothy (Fulham)

    Jacoby, Sir James Alfred

    Barnard, E. B.

    Devlin, Joseph

    Jardine, Sir J.

    Barran, Rowland Hirst

    Dewar, Arthur (Edinburgh, S.)

    Johnson, W. (Nuneaton)

    Barry, E. (Cork, S.)

    Dewar, Sir J. A. (Inverness-sh.)

    Jones, Leif (Appleby)

    Barry, Redmond J. (Tyrone, N.)

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

    Joyce, Michael

    Beale, W. P.

    Dillon, John

    Kekewich, Sir George

    Beauchamp, E.

    Dobson, Thomas W.

    Kettle, Thomas Michael

    Beck, A. Cecil

    Duckworth, James

    Kincaid-Smith, Captain

    Bell, Richard

    Dunn, A. Edward (Camborne)

    King, Alfred John (Knutsford)

    Bellairs, Carlyon

    Dunne, Major E. Martin (Walsall

    Laidlaw, Robert

    Benn, Sir J. Williams (Devonp'rt

    Edwards, Enoch (Hanley)

    Lamb, Ernest H. (Rochester)

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

    Erskine, David C.

    Lambert, George

    Bennett, E. N.

    Essex, R. W.

    Lamont, Norman

    Berridge, T. H. D.

    Esslemont, George Birnie

    Law, Hugh A. (Lonegal, W.)

    Bertram, Julius

    Evans, Sir Samuel T.

    Layland-Barratt, Francis

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

    Everett, R. Lacey

    Leese, Sir Joseph F. (Accrington

    Bethell, T. R. (Essex, Maldon)

    Ffrench, Peter

    Lehmann, R. C.

    Birrell, Rt. Hon. Augustine

    Findlay, Alexander

    Lever, W. H. (Cheshire, Wirral

    Black. Arthur W.

    Flynn, James Christopher

    Levy, Sir Maurice

    Boland, John

    Freeman-Thomas, Freeman

    Lloyd-George, Rt. Hon. David

    Boulton, A. C. F.

    Fuller, John Michael F.

    Lough, Rt. Hon. Thomas

    Bowerman, C. W.

    Fullerton, Hugh

    Lupton, Arnold

    Bramsdon, T. A.

    Furness, Sir Christopher

    Luttrell, Hugh Fownes

    Branch, James

    Gibb, James (Harrow)

    Lyell, Charles Henry

    Brigg, John

    Gladstone, Rt. Hn. Herbert John

    Lynch, B. H.

    Bright, J. A.

    Goddard, Sir Daniel Ford

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

    Brocklehurst, W. B.

    Gooch, George Peabody (Bath)

    Mackarness, Frederic C.

    Brodie, H. C.

    Greenwood, G. (Peterborough)

    Maclean, Donald

    Brooke, Stopford

    Greenwod, Hamar (York)

    MacVeagh, Jeremiah (Down, S.

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

    Grey, Rt. Hon. Sir Edward

    Mac Veigh, Charles (Donegal, E.

    Brunner, Rt Hn Sir J. T (Cheshire

    Guest, Hon. Ivor Churchill

    McCallum, John M.

    Bryce, J. Annan

    Gulland, John W.

    M'Crae, George

    Buchanan, Thomas Ryburn

    Gurdon, Rt Hn Sir W. Brampton

    M'Killop, W.

    Burke, E. Haviland-

    Haldane, Rt. Hon. Richard B.

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

    Burnyeat, W. J. D.

    Hall, Frederick

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

    Burt, Rt. Hon. Thomas

    Halpin, J.

    Mc Micking, Major G.

    Buxton, Rt. Hn. Sydney Charles

    Harcourt, Rt. Hn. L. (Rossendale

    Maddison, Frederick

    Byles, William Pollard

    Harcourt, Robert V. (Montrose,

    Mallet, Charles E.

    Cameron, Robert

    Hardy, George A. (Suffolk)

    Markham, Arthur Basil

    Carr-Gomm, H. W.

    Harmsworth, Cecil G. (Worc'r)

    Marks, G. Croydon (Launceston)

    Causton, Rt. Hn. Richard Knight

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

    Marnham, F. J.

    Cawley, Sir Frederick

    Hart-Davies, T.

    Mason, A. E. W. (Coventry)

    Chance, Frederick William

    Harvey, A. G. C. (Rochdale)

    Massie, J.

    Channing, Sir Francis Allston

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

    Masterman, C. F. G.

    Cheetham, John Frederick

    Harwood, George

    Meagher, Michael

    Cherry, Rt. Hon. R. R.

    Haslam, James (Derbyshire)

    Meehan, Patrick A.(Queen's Co.

    Churchill, Rt. Hon. Winston S.

    Haslam, Lewis (Monmouth)

    Menzies, Walter

    Cleland, J. W.

    Haworth, Arthur A.

    Micklem, Nathaniel

    Clough, William

    Healy, Timothy Michael

    Middlebrook, William

    Cobbold, Felix Thornley

    Hedges, A. Paget

    Molteno, Percy Alport

    Collins, Stephen (Lambeth)

    Helme, Norval Watson

    Mond, A.

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

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

    Montagu, Hon. S. E.

    Condon, Thomas Joseph

    Henry, Charles S

    Montgomery, H. G.

    Corbett, CH (Sussex, E. Grinst'd

    Herbert, T. Arnold (Wycombe)

    Mooney, J. J.

    Cornwall, Sir Edwin A.

    Higham, John Sharp

    Morgan, G. Hay (Cornwall)

    876

    877

    Morrell, Philip

    Raphael, Herbert H.

    Tennant, H. J (Berwickshire)

    Morse L. L.

    Rea, Russell (Gloucester)

    Thomas, Abel (Carmarthen, E

    Morton, Alpheus Cleophas

    Rea, Walter Russell (Scarboro'

    Thomasson, Franklin

    Muldoon, John

    Reddy, M.

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

    Murnaghan, George

    Redmond, John E. (Waterford)

    Thorne, G. R. (Wolverhampton

    Murphy, John (Kerry, East)

    Redmond, William (Clare)

    Tomkinson James

    Murray, Capt Hn A.C. (Kincard.

    Rendall, Athelstan

    Torrance, Sir A. M.

    Myer, Horatio

    Ridsdale, E. A.

    Toulmin, George

    Nannetti Joseph P.

    Roberts, Charles H. (Lincoln)

    Trevelyan, Charles Philips

    Napier T. B.

    Roberts, John H. (Denbighs.)

    Verney, F.W.

    Newnes F. (Notts, Bassetlaw)

    Robertson, Sir G. Scott (Bradf'rd

    Walker, H. De R. (Leicester)

    Nicholson, Charles N. (Doncast'r

    Robinson, S.

    Walters, John Tudor

    Nolan, Joseph

    Robson, Sir William Snowdon

    Walton, Joseph

    Norman, Sir Henry

    Roche, Augustine (Cork)

    Waring, Walter

    Norton, Capt. Cecil William

    Roche, John (Galway, East)

    Warner, Thomas Courtenay T.

    Nugent Sir Walter Richard

    Roe, Sir Thomas

    Wason, Rt. Hn. E.(Clackmann'n

    Nussey, Thomas Willans

    Rogers, F. E. Newman

    Wason, John Cathcart (Orkney

    Nuttall, Harry

    Runciman, Rt. Hon. Walter

    Waterlow D. S.

    O'Brien, Kendal (Tipperary Mid

    Rutherford, V. H. (Brentford)

    Wedgwood, Josiah C.

    O'Brien Patrick (Kilkenny)

    Samuel, S. M. (Whitechapel)

    Weir, James Galloway

    O'Connor, John (Kildare, N.)

    Scaris brick, T. T. L.

    White, J. D. (Dumbartonshire)

    O'Doherty, Philip

    Schwann, C. Duncan (Hyde)

    White, Luke (York, E. R.)

    O'Donnell, C. J. (Walworth)

    Schwann, Sir C. E. (Manchester)

    White, Patrick (Meath, North)

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

    Scott, A.H.(Ashton under Lyne

    Whitehead Rowland

    O'Dowd, John

    Seaverns, J. H.

    Whitley, John Henry (Halifax)

    O'Malley William

    Seely, Colonel

    Whittaker, Sir Thomas Palmer

    O'Shaushnessy, P. J

    Shaw, Charles Edw. (Stafford

    Wiles, Thomas

    O'Shee James John

    Sherwell, Arthuer James

    Williams, Osmond (Merioneth)

    Partington, Oswald

    Shipman, Dr. John G.

    Williamson, A.

    Pearce, Robert (Staffs, Leek)

    Silcock, Thomas Ball

    Wills, Arthur Walters

    Pearce William (Limehouse)

    Sinclair, Rt. Hon John

    Wilson, Hon. G. G. (Hull, W.)

    Pearson, Sir W. D. (Colchester)

    Smeaton, Donald Mackenzie

    Henry J. (York, W.R.)

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

    Smyth Thomas F. (Leitrim, S.)

    Wilson, John (Durham, Mid)

    Philipps, Col. Ivor (S'thampton

    Snowden, P.

    Wilson, J. H. (Middlesbrough)

    Philipps, Owen C. (Pembroke)

    Soares, Ernest J.

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

    Phillips, John (Longford, S.)

    Spicer, Sir Albert

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

    Pickersgill Edward Hare

    Stanley, Albert (Staffs, N.W.)

    Wodehouse, Lord

    Pirie Duncan V

    Stanley, Hn. A. Lyulph (Chesh.)

    Wood, T. M Kinnon

    Pollard, Dr

    Stewart, Halley (Greenock)

    Yoxall, James Henry

    Ponsonby Arthur A. W. H.

    Stewart-Smith, D. (Kendal)

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

    Strachey, Sir Edward

    TELLERS FOR THE AYES—

    Price, Robert John (Norfolk, E.

    Straus, B. S. (Mile End)

    Mr. Joseph Pease, and the

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

    Strauss, E. A. (Abingdon)

    Master of Elibank.

    Radford, G. H.

    Stuart, James (Sunderland)

    Rainy, A. Rolland

    Sutherland, J. E.

    NOES.

    Acland-Hood, Rt. Hn Sir Alex. F

    Carson Rt. Hon. Sir Edw. H.

    Fell, Arthur

    Anson, Sir William Reynell

    Cave, George

    Foster, Rt. Hon. Sir Walter

    Anstruther-Gray, Major

    Cecil, Lord R. (Marylebone, E.)

    Gardner, Ernest

    Arkwright, John Stanhope

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

    Gill. A. H.

    Ashley, W. W.

    Clive, Percy Archer

    Glover, Thomas

    Aubrey-Fletcher, Rt. Hn. Sir H

    Clynes, J. R

    Gooch, Henry Cubitt (Peckham)

    Balcarres, Lord

    Coates, Major E. F (Lewisham)

    Gretton, John

    Baldwin, Stanley

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

    Guinness, Walter Edward

    Banbury, Sir Frederick George

    Collings, Rt. Hn. J. (Birmingh'm

    Hardie, J. Keir (Mertyr Tydvil

    Baring, Cap. Hn. G (Winchester

    Cooper, G. J.

    Hardy, Laurence (Kent, Ashf'rd

    Barnes, G. N.

    Craig, Captain James (Down, E.)

    Hay, Hon. Claude George

    Beach, Hn. Michael Hugh Hicks

    Craik, Sir Henry

    Helmsley, Viscount

    Beckett, Hon. Gervase

    Crooks, William

    Henderson, Arthur (Durham)

    Bignold, Sir Arthur

    Dalrymple, Viscount

    Hill, Sir Clement

    Bowles, G. Stewart

    Doughty, Sir George

    Hills, J. W.

    Bridgeman, W. Clive

    Douglas, Rt. Hon. A. Akers-

    Hodge, John

    Bull, Sir William James

    Du Cros, Arthur Philip

    Hope, James Fitzalan (Sheffield)

    Burdett-Coutts, W.

    Duncan, Robert(Lanark, Govan

    Houston, Robert Paterson

    Butcher, Samuel Henry

    Faber, George Denison(York)

    Hudson, Walter

    Carllile, E. Hildred

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

    Hunt, Rowland

    878

    879

    Johnson, John (Gateshead)

    Nicholson, Wm. G. (Petersfield)

    Summerbell, T.

    Jowett, F. W.

    O'Neill, Hon. Robert Torrens

    Talbot, Lord E. (Chichester)

    Kerry, Earl of

    Parker, James (Halifax)

    Taylor, John W. (Durham)

    Keswick, William

    Parkes, Ebenezer

    Thomas, David Alfred (Merthyr

    Lane-Fox, G. R.

    Pease, Herbert Pike (Darlington

    Thomson, W. Mitchell- (Lanark)

    Law, Andrew Bonar (Dulwich)

    Priestley, Arthur (Grantham)

    Thornton, Percy M.

    Lee, Arthur H.(Hants, Fareham

    Ratcliff, Major R. F.

    Tuke, Sir John Batty

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

    Rawlinson, John Frederick Peel

    Walrond, Hon. Lionel

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

    Renton, Leslie

    Walsh, Stephen

    Lowe, Sir Francis William

    Richardson, A.

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

    Lyttelton, Rt. Hon. Alfred

    Roberts, G. H. (Norwich)

    Wardle, George J.

    MacCaw, William J. MacGeagh

    Roberts, S. (Sheffield, Ecclesall)

    Williams, J. (Glamorgan)

    Macdonald, J. R. (Leicester)

    Ronaldshay, Earl of

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

    Macpherson, J. T.

    Ropner, Colonel Sir Robert

    Wilson, W. T. (Westhoughton)

    M'Arthur, Charles

    Rutherford, W. W. (Liverpool)

    Wolff, Gustav Wilhelm

    M'Calmont, Colonel James

    Shackleton, David James

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

    Meysey-Thompson, E. C.

    Sheffield, Sir Berkeley George D

    Younger, George

    Middlemore, John Throgmorton

    Stanier, Beville

    Mildmay, Francis Bingham

    Starkey, John R.

    TELLERS FOR THE NOES—

    Moore, William

    Staveley-Hill, Henry (Staff'sh.)

    Viscount Valentia and Mr. Forster.

    Morrison-Bell, Captain

    Steadman, W. C.

    Nicholls, George

    Stone, Sir Benjamin

    Clause 10:
    Amendment Proposed—
    "In page 5, line 31, after the word 'Board' to insert the word 'and with the postmaster-General (so far as relates to the Post Office).'"—(Mr. Lloyd-George.)
    Question Put, "That the Amendment be made."
    The committee divided:—Ayes, 363; Noes, 101. (Division List No. 158.)

    AYES.

    Abraham, William (Cork, N. E.)

    Bramsdon, T. A.

    Cory, Sir Clifford John

    Agnew, George William

    Branch, James

    Cotton, Sir H. J. S.

    Allen, A. Acland (Christchurch)

    Brigg, John

    Cowan, W. H.

    Allen, Charles P. (Stroud)

    Bright, J. A.

    Craig, Herbert J. (Tynemouth)

    Armstrong, W. C. Heaton

    Brocklehurst, W. B.

    Crean, Eugene

    Ashton, Thomas Gair

    Brodie, H. C.

    Cremer, Sir William Randal

    Asquith, Rt. Hn. Herbert Henry

    Brooke, Stopford

    Crooks, William

    Astbury, John Meir

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

    Crosfield, A. H.

    Balfour, Robert (Lanark)

    Brunner, Rt Hn SirJ. T (Cheshire

    Crossley, William J.

    Baring, Godfrey (Isle of Wight)

    Bryce, J. Annan

    Cullinan, J.

    Barker, John

    Buchanan, Thomas Ryburn

    Davies, David (Montgomery Co)

    Barlow, Sir John E. (Somerset)

    Burke, E. Haviland-

    Davies, Ellis William (Eifion)

    Barlow, Percy (Bedford)

    Burnyeat, W. J. D.

    Davies, M. Vaughan- (Cardigan)

    Barnard, E. B.

    Burt, Rt. Hon. Thomas

    Davies, Timothy (Fulham)

    Barnes, G. D.

    Buxton, Rt. Hn. Sydney Charles

    Davies, W. Howell (Bristol, S.)

    Barran, Rowland Hirst

    Byles, William Pollard

    Devlin, Joseph

    Barry, E. (Cork, S.)

    Cameron, Robert

    Dewar, Arthur (Edinburgh, S.)

    Barry, Redmond J. (Tyrone, N.)

    Carr-Gomm, H. W.

    Dewar, Sir J. A. (Inverness-sh.)

    Beale, W. P.

    Causton, Rt. Hn. Richard Knight

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

    Beauchamp, E.

    Cawley, Sir Frederick

    Dickson-Poynder, Sir John P.

    Beck, A. Cecil

    Chance, Frederick William

    Dillon, John

    Bell, Richard

    Channing, Sir Francis Allston

    Dobson, Thomas W.

    Bellairs, Carlyon

    Cheetham, John Frederick

    Duckworth, James

    Benn, Sir J. Williams (Devonp'rt

    Cherry, Rt. Hon. R. R.

    Duncan, C. (Barrow-in-Furness

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

    Churchill, Rt. Hon. Winston S.

    Dunn, A. Edward (Camborne)

    Bennett, E. N.

    Cleland, J. W.

    Dunne, Major E. Martin (Walsall

    Berridge, T. H. D.

    Clough, William

    Edwards, Enoch (Hanley)

    Bertram, Julius

    Clynes, J. R.

    Erskine, David C.

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

    Cobbold, Felix Thornley

    Essex, R. W.

    Bethell, T. R. (Essex, Maldon)

    Collins, Stephen (Lambeth)

    Esslemont, George Birnie

    Birrell, Rt. Hon. Augustine

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

    Evans, Sir Samuel T.

    Black, Arthur W

    Condon, Thomas Joseph

    Everett, R. Lacey

    Boland, John

    Cooper, G. J.

    Ffrench, Peter

    Boulton, A. C. F.

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

    Findlay, Alexander

    Bowerman, C. W.

    Cornwall, Sir Edwin A.

    Flynn, James Christopher

    881

    Foster, Rt. Hon. Sir Walter

    Lehmann, R. C.

    Pearce, William (Limehouse)

    Freeman-Thomas, Freeman

    Lever, W.H. (Cheshire, Wirral)

    Peason, Sir W. D. (Colchester)

    Fuller, John Michael F.

    Levy, Sir Maurice

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

    Fullerton, Hugh

    Lloyd-George, Rt. Hon. David

    Philipps, Col. Ivor (S'thampton)

    Furness, Sir Christopher

    Lough, Rt. Hon. Thomas

    Philipps, Owen C. (Pembroke)

    Gibb, James (Harrow)

    Lupton, Arnold

    Phillips, John (Longford, S.)

    Gill, A. H.

    Luttrell, Hugh Fownes

    Pickersgill, Edward Hare

    Gladstone, Rt. Hn Herbert John

    Lyell, Charles Henry

    Pirie, Duncan V.

    Glover, Thomas

    Lynch, H. B.

    Pollard, Dr.

    Goddard, Sir Daniel Ford

    Macdonald, J. R. (Leicester)

    Ponsonby, Arthur A. W. H.

    Gooch, George Peabody (Bath)

    Macdonald, J. M. (Falkirk Bg'hs

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

    Greenwood, G. (Peterborough)

    Mackarness, Frederic C.

    Price, Robert John (Norfolk, E)

    Greenwood, Hamar (York)

    Maclean, Donald

    Priestley, Arthur (Grantham)

    Grey, Rt. Hon. Sir Edward

    Macpherson, J. T.

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

    Guest, Hon. Ivor Churchill

    Mac Veigh, Charles (Donegal, E.)

    Radford, G. H.

    Gulland, John W.

    M'Callum, John M.

    Rainy, A. Rolland

    Gurdon, Rt Hn Sir W. Brampton

    M'Crae, George

    Raphael, Herbert H.

    Haldane, Rt. Hon. Richard B.

    M'Killop, W.

    Rea, Russell (Gloucester)

    Hall, Frederick

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

    Rea, Walter Russell (Scarboro'

    Halpin, J.

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

    Reddy, M.

    Harcourt, Rt Hn. L. (Rossendale

    M'Micking, Major G.

    Redmond, John E. (Waterford

    Harcourt, Robert V.(Montrose)

    Maddison, Frederick

    Redmond, William (Clare)

    Hardie. J. Keir (Merthyr Tydvil

    Mallet, Charles E.

    Rendall, Athelstan

    Hardy, George A. (Suffolk)

    Markham, Arthur Basil

    Richardson, A.

    Harmsworth, Cecil B. (Worc'r.)

    Marks, G. Croydon (Launceston)

    Ridsdale, E. A.

    Harmsworth, R L. (Caithn'ss-sh

    Marnham, F. J.

    Roberts, Charles H. (Lincoln)

    Hart-Davies, T.

    Mason, A. E. W. (Coventry)

    Roberts, G. H. (Norwich)

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

    Massie, J.

    Roberts, John H. (Denbighs.)

    Harwood, George

    Masterman, C. F. G.

    Robertson, Sir G. Scott (Bradf'rd

    Haslam, James (Derbyshire)

    Meagher, Michael

    Robinson, S.

    Haslam, Lewis (Monmouth)

    Meehan, Patrick A.(Queen's Co.

    Robson, Sir William Snowdon

    Haworth, Arthur A.

    Menzies, Walter

    Roche, Augustine (Cork)

    Healy, Timothy Michael

    Micklem, Nathaniel

    Roche, John (Galway, East)

    Hedges, A. Paget

    Middlebrook, William

    Roe, Sir Thomas

    Helme, Norval Watson

    Molteno, Percy Alport

    Rogers, F. E. Newman

    Henderson, Arthur (Durham)

    Mond, A.

    Runciman, Rt. Hn. Walter

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

    Montague, Hon. E. S.

    Rutherford, V. H. (Bentford)

    Henry, Charles S.

    Montgomery, H. G.

    Samuel, S. M. (Whitechapel)

    Herbert, T. Arnold (Wycombe

    Mooney, J. J.

    Scarisbrick, T. T. L.

    Higham, John Sharpe

    Morgan, G. Hay (Cornwall)

    Schwann, C. Duncan (Hyde)

    Hobart, Sir Robert

    Morrell, Philip

    Schwann, Sir C. E. (Manchester)

    Hobhouse, Charles E. H.

    Morse, L. L.

    Scott, A.H.(Ashton-under-Lyne

    Hodge, John

    Morton, Alpheus Cleophas

    Seaverns, J. H.

    Hogan, Michael

    Muldoon, John

    Seely, Colonel

    Hooper, A. G.

    Murnaghan, George

    Shackleton, David James

    Hope, John Deans (Fife, West)

    Murphy, John (Kerry, East)

    Shaw, Charles Edw. (Stafford)

    Horniman, Emslie John

    Murray, Capt Hn A.C.(Kincard.

    Sherwell, Arthur James

    Horridge, Thomas Gardner

    Murray, James-(Aberdeen, E.)

    Shipman, Dr. John G.

    Howard, Hon. Geoffrey

    Myer, Horatio

    Silcock, Thomas Ball

    Hudson, Walter

    Nannetti, Joseph P.

    Sinclair, Rt. Hon. John

    Hutton, Alfred Eddison

    Napier, T. B.

    Smeaton, Donald Mackenzie

    Hyde, Clarendon

    Newnes, F. (Notts, Bassetlaw)

    Smyth, Thomas F. (Leitrim, S.)

    Idris, T. H. W.

    Nicholls, George

    Snowden, P.

    Illingworth, Percy H.

    Nicholson, Charles N.(Doncast'r

    Scares, Ernest J.

    Isaacs, Rufus Daniel

    Nolan, Joseph

    Spicer, Sir Albert

    Jacoby, Sir James Alfred

    Norman, Sir Henry

    Stanley, Albert (Staffs, N.W.)

    Jardine, Sir J.

    Norton, Capt. Cecil William

    Stanley, Hn. A. Lyulph(Chesh.)

    Johnson, John (Gateshead)

    Nugent, Sir Walter Richard

    Steadman, W, C.

    Johnson, W. (Nuneaton)

    Nussey, Thomas Willans

    Stewart, Halley (Greenock)

    Jones, Leif (Appleby)

    Nuttall, Harry

    Stewart-Smith, D. (Kendal)

    Jowett, F. W.

    O'Brien, Kendal(Tipperary Mid

    Strachey, Sir Edward

    Joyce, Michael

    O'Brien, Patrick (Kilkenny)

    Straus, B. S. (Mile End)

    Kekewich, Sir George

    O'Connor, John (Kildare, N.)

    Strauss, E. A. (Abingdon)

    Kilbride, Denis

    O'Doherty, Philip

    Stuart, James (Sunderland)

    Kincaid-Smith, Captain

    O'Donnell, C. J. (Walworth)

    Summerbell, T.

    King, Alfred John (Knutsford)

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

    Sutherland, J. E.

    Laidlaw, Robert

    O'Dowd, John

    Taylor, John W. (Durham)

    Lamb, Ernest H. (Rochester)

    O'Malley, William

    Taylor, Theodore C. (Radcliffe)

    Lambert, George

    O'Shaughnessy, P. J.

    Tennant, H. J.(Berwickshire)

    Lamont, Norman

    O'Shee, James John

    Thomas, Abel (Carmarthen, E

    Law, Hugh A. (Donegal, W.)

    Parker, James (Halifax)

    Thomas, David Alfred (Merthyr

    Layland-Barratt, Francis

    Partington, Oswald

    Thomasson, Franklin

    Leese, Sir Joseph F. (Accrington

    Pearce, Robert (Staffs, Leek)

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

    882

    883

    Thorne, G. R. (Wolverhampton)

    Watt, Henry A.

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

    Tomkinson, James

    Wedgwood, Josiah C.

    Wilson, John (Durham, Mid)

    Toulmin, George

    Weir, James Galloway

    Wilson, J. H. (Middlesbrough)

    Trevelyan, Charles Philips

    White, J. D. (Dumbartonshire)

    Wilson, J. W. (Worcestersh. N)

    Verney, F. W.

    White, Luke (York, E. R.)

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

    Walker, H. De R. (Leicester)

    White, Patrick (Meath, North)

    Wilson, W. T. (Westhoughton)

    Walsh, Stephen

    Whitehead, Rowland

    Wodehouse, Lord

    Walters, John Tudor

    Whitley, John Henry (Halifax)

    Wood, T. M'Kinnon

    Walton, Joseph

    Whittaker, Sir Thomas Palmer

    Yoxall, James Henry

    Wardle, George J.

    Wiles, Thomas

    Waring, Walter

    Williams, J. (Glamorgan)

    TELLERS FOR THE AYES—

    Warner, Thomas Courtenay T.

    Williams, Osmond (Merioneth)

    Mr. Joseph Pease and Master of Elibank.

    Wason, Rt. Hn. E. (Clackmannan

    Williamson, A.

    Wason, John Cathcart (Orkney)

    Wills, Arthur Walters

    Waterlow, D. S.

    Wilson, Hon. G. G. (Hull, W.)

    NOES.

    Acland-Hood, Rt Hn. Sir Alex. F

    Douglas, Rt. Hon. A. Akers-

    Middlemore, John Throgmorton

    Anson, Sir William Reynell

    Du Cros, Arthur Philip

    Mildmay, Francis Bingham

    Anstruther-Gray, Major

    Duncan, Robert (Lanark, Govan

    Moore, William

    Arkwright, John Stanhope

    Faber George Denison (York)

    Morpeth, Viscount

    Ashley, W. W.

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

    Morrison-Bell, Captain

    Aubrey-Fletcher, Rt Hon. Sir H.

    Fell, Arthur

    Nicholson, Wm. G.(Petersfield)

    Balcarres, Lord

    Gardner, Ernest

    O'Neill, Hon. Robert Torrens

    Baldwin, Stanley

    Gooch, Henry Cubitt (Peckham)

    Parkes, Ebenezer

    Banbury, Sir Frederick George

    Gretton, John

    Pease, Herbert Pike (Darlington

    Baring, Capt. Hn. G (Winchester

    Guinness, Walter Edward

    Ratcliffe, Major R. F.

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

    Hardy, Laurence (Kent,Ashford

    Rawlinson, John Fredrick Peel

    Beach, Hn. Michael Hugh Hicks

    Harrison-Broadley, H. B.

    Renton, Leslie

    Beckett, Hon. Gervase

    Hay, Hon. Claude George

    Roberts, S. (Sheffield, Ecclesall

    Bignold, Sir Arthur

    Helmsley, Viscount

    Ronaldshay, Earl of

    Bowles, G. Stewart

    Hill, Sir Clement

    Ropner, Colonel Sir Robart

    Bridgeman, W. Clive

    Hills, J. W.

    Rutherford, W. W. (Liverpool)

    Bull, Sir William James

    Hope, James Fitzalan (Sheffield

    Sheffield, Sir Berkeley George D.

    Burdett-Coutts, W.

    Houston, Robert Paterson

    Stanier, Beville

    Butcher, Samuel Henry

    Hunt, Rowland

    Starkey, John R.

    Campbell, Rt. Hon. J. H. M.

    Joynson-Hicks, William

    Staveley-Hill, Henry (Staff'sh.

    Carlile, E. Hildred

    Kennaway, Rt. Hon. Sir John H.

    Stone, Sir Benjamin

    Carson, Rt. Hon. Sir Edw. H.

    Kerry, Earl of

    Talbot, Lord E. (Chichester)

    Cave, George

    Keswick, William

    Thomson, W. Mitchell-(Lanark)

    Cecil, Lord R. (Marylebone, E.)

    Lane-Fox, G. R.

    Thornton, Percy M.

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

    Law, Andrew Bonar (Dulwich)

    Tuke, Sir John Batty

    Clive, Percy Archer

    Lee, Arthur H. (Hants, Fareham)

    Walrond, Hon. Lionel

    Coates, Major E. F. (Lewisham)

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

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

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

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

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

    Collings,Rt. Hn. J. (Birmingh'm

    Lowe, Sir Francis William

    Wolff, Gustav Wilhelm

    Courthope, G. Loyd

    Lyttelton, Rt. Hon. Alfred

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

    Craig, Charles Curtis (Antrim, S.

    MacCaw, William J. MacGeagh

    Younger, George

    Craig, Captain James (Down, E.)

    McArthur, Charles

    Craik, Sir Henry

    McCalmont, Colonel James

    TELLERS FOR THE NOES—

    Dalrymple, Viscount

    Magnus Sir Philip

    Viscount Valentia and Mr. Forster.

    Doughty, Sir George

    Meysey-Thompson, E. C.

    Question put, "That the Clause, as amended, stand part of the Bill."
    The Committee divided:—Ayes, 360 Noes, 99. (Division List No. 159.)

    AYES.

    Abraham, William (Cork, N.E.)

    Astbury, John Meir

    Barnes, G. N.

    Agnew, George William

    Balfour, Robert (Lanark)

    Barran, Rowland Hirst

    Allen, A. Acland (Christchurch)

    Baring, Godfrey (Isle of Wight)

    Barry, E. (Cork. S.)

    Allen, Charles P. (Stroud)

    Barker, John

    Barry, Redmond J. (Tyrone, N

    Armstrong, W. C. Heaton

    Barlow, Sir John E. (Somerset)

    Beale, W. P.

    Ashton, Thomas Gair

    Barlow, Percy (Bedford)

    Beauchamp, E.

    Asquith, Rt. Hn. Herbert Henry

    Barnard, E. B

    Beck, A. Cecil

    Bell, Richard

    Dunn, A. Edward (Camborne)

    Kettle, Thomas Michael

    Bellairs, Carlyon

    Dunne, Major E. Martin (Walsall

    Kincaid-Smith, Captain

    Benn, Sir J. Williams (Devonp'rt

    Edwards, Enoch (Hanley)

    King, Alfred John (Knutsford)

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

    Erakine, David C.

    Laidlaw, Robert

    Bennett, E. N.

    Essex, R. W.

    Lamb, Ernest H. (Rochester)

    Berridge, T. H. D.

    Evans, Sir Samuel T.

    Lambert, George

    Bertram, Julius

    Everett, R. Lacey

    Lamont, Norman

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

    Ferguson, R. C. Munro

    Law, Hugh A. (Donegal, W.)

    Bethell, T. R. (Essex, Maldon)

    Ffrench, Peter

    Layland-Barratt, Francis

    Birrell, Rt. Hon. Augustine

    Findlay, Alexander

    Leese, Sir Joseph F.(Accrington

    Black, Arthur W.

    Flynn, James Christopher

    Lehmann, R. C.

    Boland, John

    Foster, Rt. Hon. Sir Walter

    Lever, W. H. (Cheshire, Wirral).

    Boulton, A. C. F.

    Freeman-Thomas, Freeman

    Levy, Sir Maurice

    Bowerman, C. W.

    Fuller, John Michael F.

    Lloyd-George, Rt. Hon. David

    Bramsdon, T. A.

    Fullerton, Hugh

    Lough, Rt. Hon. Thomas

    Branch, James

    Furness, Sir Christopher

    Lupton, Arnold

    Brigg, John

    Gibb, James Harrow

    Luttrell, Hugh Fownes

    Bright, J. A.

    Gill, A. H.

    Lyell, Charles Henry

    Brocklehurst, W. B.

    Gladstone, Rt. Hn. Herbert John

    Lynch, H. B.

    Brodie, H. C.

    Glover, Thomas

    Macdonald, J. R. (Leicester)

    Brooke, Stopford

    Goddard, Sir Daniel Ford

    Macdonald, J.M.(Falkirk B'ghs

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

    Gooch, George Peabody (Bath)

    Mackarness, Frederic C.

    Brunner, Rt. Hn Sir J. T (Cheshire

    Greenwood, G. (Peterborough)

    Maclean, Donald

    Bryce, J. Annan

    Greenwood, Hamar (York)

    Macpherson. J. T.

    Buchanan, Thomas Ryburn

    Grey, Rt. Hon. Sir Edward

    MacVeigh, Charles (Donegal, E.)

    Burke, E. Haviland-

    Guest, Hon. Ivor Churchill

    McCrae,'George

    Burnyeat, W. J. D.

    Gulland, John W.

    McKillop, W.

    Burt, Rt. Hon. Thomas

    Gurdon, Rt. Hn Sir W. Brampton

    McLaren, Sir C. B. (Leicester)

    Buxton, Rt. Hn. Sydney Charles

    Haldane, Rt. Hon. Richard B.

    McLaren, H. D. (Stafford, W.)

    Byles, William Pollard

    Hall, Frederick

    McMicking, Major G.

    Cameron, Robert

    Halpin, J.

    Maddison, Frederick

    Carr-Gomm, H. W.

    Harcourt, Rt. Hn. L. (Rossendale

    Mallet, Charles E.

    Causton, Rt. Hn. Richard Knight

    Harcourt, Robert V.(Montrose)

    Markham, Arthur Basil

    Cawley, Sir Frederick

    Hardie, J. Keir (Merthyr Tydvil)

    Marks, G. Croydon (Launceston)

    Chance, Frederick William

    Hardy, George A. (Suffolk)

    Marnham, F. J.

    Channing, Sir Francis Allston

    Harmsworth, Cecil B. (Worc'r)

    Mason, A. E. W. (Coventry)

    Cheetham, John Frederick

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

    Massie, J.

    Cherry, Rt. Hon. R. R.

    Hart-Davies, T.

    Masterman, C. F. G.

    Churchill, Rt. Hon. Winston S.

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

    Meagher, Michael

    Cleland, J. W.

    Harwood, George

    Meehan, Patrick A.(Queen's Co.

    Clough, William

    Haslam, James (Derbyshire)

    Menzies, Walter

    Clynes, J. R.

    Haslam, Lewis (Monmouth)

    Micklem, Nathaniel

    Cobbold, Felix Thornley

    Haworth, Arthur A.

    Middlebrook, William

    Collins, Stephen (Lambeth)

    Healy, Timothy Michael

    Molteno, Percy Alport

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

    Hedges, A. Paget

    Mond, A.

    Condon, Thomas Joseph

    Helme, Norval Watson

    Montagu, Hon. E. S.

    Cooper, G. J.

    Henderson, Arthur (Durham

    Montgomery, H. G.

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

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

    Mooney, J. J.

    Cornwall, Sir Edwin A.

    Henry, Charles S.

    Morgan, G. Hay (Cornwall)

    Cory, Sir Clifford John

    Herbert, T. Arnold (Wycombe)

    Morrell, Philip

    Cotton, Sir H. J. S.

    Higham, John Sharp

    Morse, L. L.

    Cowan, W. H.

    Hobart, Sir Robert

    Morton, Alpheus Cleophas

    Craig, Herbert J. (Tynemouth)

    Hobhouse, Charles E. H.

    Muldoon, John

    Crean, Eugene

    Hodge, John

    Murnaghan, George

    Cremer, Sir William Randal

    Hogan, Michael

    Murphy, John (Kerry, East)

    Crooks, William

    Hooper, A. G.

    Murray, Capt. Hn A. C. (Kincard

    Crosfield, A. H.

    Horniman, Emslie John

    Murray, James (Aberdeen, E.)

    Crossley, William J.

    Horridge, Thomas Gardner

    Myer, Horatio

    Cullinan, J.

    Howard, Hon. Geoffrey

    Nannetti, Joseph P.

    Davies, David (Montgomery Co.

    Hudson, Walter

    Napier, T. B.

    Davies, Ellis William (Eifion)

    Hutton, Alfred Eddison

    Newnes, F. (Notts, Bassetlaw)

    Davies, M. Vaughan- (Cardigan)

    Hyde, Clarendon

    Nicholls, George

    Davies, Timothy (Fulham)

    Idris, T. H. W.

    Nicholson, Charles N. (Doncast'r

    Davies, W. Howell (Bristol, S.)

    Illingworth, Percy H.

    Nolan, Joseph

    Devlin, Joseph

    Isaacs, Rufus Daniel

    Norman, Sir Henry

    Dewar, Arthur (Edinburgh, S.)

    Jacoby, Sir James Alfred

    Norton, Capt. Cecil William

    Dewar, Sir J. A. (Inverness-sh.)

    Jardine, Sir J,

    Nugent, Sir Walter Richard

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

    Johnson, John (Gateshead)

    Nussey, Thomas Willans

    Dickson-Poynder, Sir John P.

    Johnson, W. (Nuneaton)

    Nuttall, Harry

    Dillon, John

    Jones, Leif (Appleby',

    O'Brien, Kendal (TipperaryMid

    Dobson, Thomas W.

    Jowett, F. W.

    O'Brien, Patrick (Kilkenny)

    Duckworth, James

    Joyce, Michael

    O'Connor, John (Kildare, N.)

    Duncan, C. (Barrow-in-Furness)

    Kekewich, Sir George

    O'Doherty, Philip

    886

    887

    O'Donnell, C. J. (Walworth)

    Roe, Sir Thomas

    Toulmin, George

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

    Rogers, F. E. Newman

    Verney, F. W.

    O'Dowd, John

    Runciman, Rt. Hon. Walter

    Walker, H. De R. (Leicester)

    O'Malley, William

    Rutherford, V. H. (Brentford)

    Walsh, Stephen

    O'Shaughnessy, P. J.

    Samuel, S. M. (Whitechapel)

    Walters, John Tudor

    O'Shee, James John

    Scarisbrick, T. T. L..

    Walton, Joseph

    Parker, James (Halifax)

    Schwann, C. Duncan (Hyde)

    Wardle, George J.

    Partington, Oswald

    Schwann, Sir C. E. (Manchester)

    Waring, Walter

    Pearce, Robert (Staffs, Leek)

    Scott, A. H. (Ashton-under-Lyne

    Warner, Thomas Courtenay T.

    Pearce, William (Limehouse)

    Seaverns, J. H.

    Wason, Rt. Hn. E. (Clackmann'n

    Pearson, Sir W. D. (Colchester)

    Seely, Colonel

    Wason, John Cathcart (Orkney)

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

    Shackleton, David James

    Waterlow, D. S.

    Philipps, Col. Ivor (S'thampton

    Shaw, Charles Edw. (Stafford)

    Watt, Henry A.

    Philipps, Owen C. (Pembroke)

    Sherwell, Arthur James

    Wedgwood, Josiah C.

    Phillips, John (Longford, S.)

    Shipman, Dr. John G.

    Weir, James Galloway

    Pickersgill, Edward Hare

    Silcock, Thomas Ball

    White, J. D. (Dumbartonshire)

    Pirie, Duncan V.

    Sinclair, Rt. Hon. John

    White, Luke (York. E.R.)

    Pollard, Dr.

    Smeaton, Donald Mackenzie

    White, Patrick (Meath, North)

    Ponsonby, Arthur A. W. H.

    Smyth, Thomas F. (Leitrim, S.

    Whitehead, Rowland

    Price, C. E. (Edinburgh, Central

    Snowden, J.

    Whitley, John Henry (Halifax)

    Price, Robert John (Norfolk, E.

    Soares, Ernest J.

    Whittaker, Sir Thomas Palmer

    Priestley, Arthur (Grantham)

    Spicer, Sir Albert

    Wiles, Thomas

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

    Stanley, Albert (Staffs, N.W.)

    Williams, J. (Glamorgan)

    Radford, G. H.

    Stanley, Hn. A. Lyulph (Chesh.)

    Williams, Osmond (Merioneth)

    Rainy, A. Rolland

    Steadman, W. G.

    Williamson, A.

    Raphael, Herbert H.

    Stewart, Halley (Greenock)

    Wills, Arthur Walters

    Rea, Russell (Gloucester)

    Stewart-Smith D. (Kendal)

    Wilson, Hon. G. G. (Hull, W.)

    Rea, Walter Russell (Scarboro'

    Strachey, Sir Edward

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

    Reddy, M.

    Straus, B. S. (Mile End)

    Wilson, John (Durham, Mid)

    Redmond, John E. (Wateford)

    Strauss, E. A. (Abingdon)

    Wilson, J. H. (Middlesbrough)

    Redmond, William (Clare)

    Stuart, James (Sunderland)

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

    Rendall, Athelstan

    Summerbell, T.

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

    Richardson, A.

    Sutherland, J. E.

    Wilson, W. T. (Westhoughton)

    Ridsdale, E. A.

    Taylor, John W. (Durham)

    Wodehouse, Lord

    Roberts, Charles H. (Lincoln)

    Taylor, Theodore C. (Radcliffe)

    Wood, T. M'Kinnon

    Roberts, G. H. (Norwich)

    Tennant, H. J. (Berwickshire)

    Yoxall, James Henry

    Roberts, John H. (Denbighs.)

    Thomas, Abel (Carmarthen, E.)

    Robertson, Sir G. Scott (Bradf'd

    Thomas, David Alfred (Merthyr

    TELLERS FOR THE AYES—

    Robinson, S.

    Thomasson, Franklin

    Mr. Joseph Pease and Master of Elibank.

    Robson, Sir William Snowdon

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

    Roche, Augustine (Cork)

    Thorne, G. R. (Wolverhampton

    Roche, John (Galway, East)

    Tomkinson, James

    NOES.

    Acland-Hood, Rt. Hn Sir Alex. F.

    Coates, Major E. F.(Lewisham)

    Hope, James Fitzalan (Sheffield)

    Anstruther-Gray, Major

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

    Houston, Robert Paterson

    Arkwright, John Stanhope

    Collings, Rt. Hn. J. (Birm'gham)

    Hunt, Rowland

    Ashley, W. W.

    Courthope, G. Loyd

    Joynson-Hicks, William

    Aubrey-Fletcher, Rt. Hn. Sir H.

    Craig, Charles Curtis (Antrim, S.)

    Kennaway, Rt. Hn. Sir John H.

    Balcarres, Lord

    Craig, Captain James (Down, E.

    Kerry, Earl of

    Baldwin, Stanley

    Craik, Sir Henry

    Keswick, William

    Banbury, Sir Frederick George

    Dalrymple, Viscount

    Lane-Fox, G. R.

    Baring, Capt. Hn. G. (Winchester

    Doughty, Sir George

    Law, Andrew Bonar (Dulwich)

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

    Douglas, Rt. Hon. A. Akers-

    Lee, Arthur H. (Hants, Fareham

    Beach, Hn. Michael Hugh Hicks

    Du Cros, Arthur Philip

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

    Beckett, Hon. Gervase

    Duncan. Robert (Lanark, Govan

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

    Bignold, Sir Arthur

    Faber, George Denison (York)

    Lowe, Sir Francis William

    Bowles, G. Stewart

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

    Lyttelton, Rt. Hon. Alfred

    Bridgeman, W. Clive

    Fell, Arthur

    MacCaw, William J. MacGeagh

    Bull, Sir William James

    Gardner, Ernest

    McArthur, charles

    Burdett-Coutts, W.

    Gooch, Henry Cubitt (Peckham)

    McCalmont, Colonel James

    Butcher, Samuel Henry

    Gretton, John

    Magnus, Sir Philip

    Campbell, Rt. Hon. J. H. M.

    Guinness, Walter Edward

    Meysey-Thompson, E. C.

    Carlile, E. Hildred

    Hardy, Laurence (Kent, Ashf'rd

    Middlemore, John Throgmorton

    Carson, Rt. Hon. Sir Edw. H.

    Harrison-Broadley, H. B.

    Mildmay, Francis Bingham

    Cave, George

    Hay, Hon. Claude George

    Moore, William

    Cecil, Lord R. (Marylebone, E.)

    Helmsley, Viscount

    Morpeth, Viscount

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

    Hill, Sir Clement

    Morrison-Bell, Captain

    Clive, Percy Archer

    Hills, J. W.

    Nicholson, Wm. G. (Petersfield)

    888

    889

    O'Neill, Hon. Robert Torrens

    Stanier, Beville

    Wilson, A. Stanley (York, E. R

    Pease, Herbert Pike (Darlington

    Starkey, John R.

    Wolff, Gustav Wilhelm

    Ratcliff, Major R. F.

    Staveley-Hill, Henry (Staff'sh

    Wortley, Rt. Hn. C. B. Stuart

    Rawlinson, John Frederick Peel

    Stone, Sir Benjamin

    Younger, George

    Renton, Leslie

    Talbot, Lord E. (Chichester)

    Roberts, S. (Sheffield, Ecclesall)

    Thomson, W. Mitchell- (Lanark)

    TELLERS FOR THE NOES—

    Ronaldshay, Earl of

    Thornton, Percy M.

    Viscount Valentia and Mr. Forster.

    Ropner, Colonel Sir Robert

    Tuke, Sir John Batty

    Rutherford, W. W. (Liverpool)

    Walrond, Hon. Lionel

    Sheffield, Sir Berkeley George D.

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

    Clause 11:
    Amendment proposed—
    "In page 6, line 30, to leave out the word 'municipal'"—(Mr. Lloyd-George. )
    Question put, "That the Amendment be made".
    The Committee divided:—Ayes, 358; Noes, 90. (Division List No. 160)

    AYES.

    Abraham, William(Cork, N. E.)

    Burt, Rt. Hon. Thomas

    Duncan, Robert(Lanark, Govan

    Agnew, George William

    Buxton. Rt. Hn. Sydney Charles

    Dunn, A. Edward(Camborne)

    Allen, A. Acland(Christchurch)

    Byles, William Pollard

    Dunne, Major E. Martin(Walsall

    Allen, Charles P. (Stroud)

    Cameron, Robert

    Edwards, Enoch(Hanley)

    Anstruther-Gray, Major

    Carr-Gomm, H. W.

    Erskine, David C.

    Armstrong, W. C. Heaton

    Causton, Rt. Hn. Richard Knight

    Essex, R. W.

    Ashton, Thomas Gair

    Cawley, Sir Frederick

    Esslemont, George Birnie

    Asquith. Rt. Hn. Herbert Henry

    Chance, Frederick William

    Evans, Sir Samuel T.

    Astbury, John Meir

    Channing, Sir Francis Allston

    Everett, R. Lacey

    Balfour, Robert(Lanark)

    Cheetham John Frederick

    Ferguson, R. C. Munro

    Baring, Godfrey(Isle of Wight)

    Cherry. Rt. Hon. R. R.

    Ffrench, Peter

    Barker, John

    Churchill, Rt. Hon. Winston S.

    Findlay, Alexander

    Barlow, Sir John E. (Somerset)

    Cleland, J. W.

    Foster, Rt. Hon. Sir Walter

    Barlow, Percy(Bedford)

    Clough, William

    Freeman-Thomas, Freeman

    Barnard, E. B.

    Clynes, J. R.

    Fuller, John Michael F.

    Barnes, G. N.

    Cobbold, Felix Thornley

    Fullerton, Hugh

    Barran, Rowland Hirst

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

    Furness, Sir Christopher

    Barry, E. (Cork, S.)

    Collins, Stephen(Lambeth)

    Gibb, James(Harrow)

    Barry, Redmond J. (Tyrone, N.)

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

    Gill, A. H.

    Beauchamp, E.

    Condon, Thomas Joseph

    Gladstone, Rt. Hn Herbert John

    Beck, A. Cecil

    Cooper, G. J.

    Glover, Thomas

    Bell, Richard

    Corbett. CH(Sussex. E. Grinst'd

    Goddard, Sir Daniel Ford

    Bellairs, Carlyon

    Cornwall, Sir Edwin A.

    Gooch, George Peabody(Bath)

    Benn, Sir J. Williams(Dovonp'rt

    Cory, Sir Clifford John

    Greenwood, G. (Peterborough)

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

    Cotton, Sir H. J. S.

    Greenwood, Hamar(York)

    Bennett, E. N.

    Cowan, W. H.

    Grey, Rt. Hon. Sir Edward

    Borridge, T. H. D.

    Craig, Herbert J. (Tynemouth)

    Gulland, John W.

    Bertram, Julius

    Crean, Eugene

    Gurdon, Rt Hn Sir W. Brampton

    Bethell, Sir JH. (Essex, Romf'rd

    Cremer, Sir William Randal

    Haldane, Rt. Hon. Richard B.

    Bethell, T. R. (Essex, Maldon)

    Crooks, William

    Hall, Frederick

    Birrell, Rt. Hon. Augustine

    Crosfield, A. H.

    Halpin, J.

    Black, Arthur W.

    Crossley, William J.

    Harcourt, Rt. Hn. L. (Rossendale

    Boulton, A. C. F.

    Cullinan, J.

    Harcourt, Robert V. (Montrose)

    Bowerman, C. W.

    Davies, David(Montgomery Co)

    Hardie, J. Keir(Merthyr Tydvil

    Bramsdon, T. A.

    Davies, Ellis William (Eifion)

    Hardy, George A. (Suffolk)

    Branch, James

    Davies. M. Vaughan-(Cardigan)

    Harmsworth, Cecil B. (Worc'r

    Brigg, John

    Davies, Timothy(Fulham)

    Harmsworth, R L. (Caithn'ss-sh

    Bright, J. A.

    Davies, W. Howell(Bristol, S.)

    Hart-Davies, T.

    Brocklehurst, W. B.

    Devlin, Joseph

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

    Brodie, H. C.

    Dewar, Arthur(Edinburgh, S.)

    Harwood, George

    Brooke, Stopford

    Dewar, Sir J. A. (Inverness-sh.)

    Haslam, James(Derbyshire)

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

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

    Haslam, Lewis(Monmouth)

    Brunner, Rt Hn Sir J. T(Cheshire

    Dickson-Poynder, Sir John P.

    Haworth, Arthur A.

    Bryce, J. Annan

    Dillon, John

    Healy, Timothy Michael

    Buchanan, Thomas Ryburn

    Dobson, Thomas W.

    Hedges, A. Paget

    Burke, E. Haviland-

    Duckworth, James

    Helme, Norval Watson

    Burnyeat, W. J. D.

    Duncan, C. (Barrow-in-Furness

    Henderson, Arthur(Durham)

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

    Mond, A.

    Runciman, Rt. Hon. Walter

    Henry, Charles S.

    Montagu, Hon. E. S.

    Rutherford, V. H. (Brentford)

    Herbert, T. Arnold(Wycombe)

    Montgomery, H. G.

    Samuel, S. M. (Whitechapel)

    Higham, John Sharp

    Mooney, J. J.

    Scarisbrick, T. T. L.

    Hobart, Sir Robert

    Morgan, G. Hay (Cornwall)

    Schwann, C. Duncan (Hyde)

    Hobhouse, Charles E. H.

    Morrell, Philip

    Schwann, Sir C. E. (Manchester)

    Hodge, John

    Morse, L. L.

    Scott,A. H. (Ashton-under-Lyne

    Hogan, Michael

    Morton, Alpheus Cleophas

    Seaverns, J. H.

    Hooper, A. G.

    Muldoon, John

    Seely, Colonel

    Horniman, Emslie John

    Murnaghan, George

    Shackleton, David James

    Horridge, Thomas Gardner

    Murphy, John (Kerry, East)

    Shaw, Charles Edw. (Stafford)

    Howard, Hon. Geoffrey

    Murray,Capt. Hn A. C. (Kincard.

    Sherwell, Arthur James

    Hudson, Walter

    Murray, James (Aberdeen, E.)

    Shipman, Dr. John G.

    Hutton, Alfred Eddison

    Myer, Horatio

    Silcock, Thomas Ball

    Hyde, Clarendon

    Nannetti, Joseph P.

    Sinclair, Rt. Hon. John

    Idris, T. H. W.

    Napier, T. B.

    Smeaton, Donald Mackenzie

    Illingworth, Percy H.

    Newnes, F. (Notts, Bassetlaw)

    Smyth, Thomas F. (Leitrim, S.)

    Isaacs, Rufus Daniel

    Nicholls, George

    Snowden. P.

    Jacoby, Sir James Alfred

    Nicholson, Charles N. (Doncast'r

    Soares, Ernest J.

    Jardine, Sir J.

    Nolan, Joseph

    Spicer, Sir Albert

    Johnson, John (Gateshead)

    Norman, Sir Henry

    Stanley, Albert (Staffs, N. W.)

    Johnson, W. (Nuneaton)

    Norton, Capt. Cecil William

    Stanley. Hn. A. Lyulph(Chesh.)

    Jones, Leif (Appleby)

    Nugent. Sir Walter Richard

    Steadman. W. C.

    Jowett, F. W.

    Nussey Thcmas Willans

    Stewart, Halley (Greenock)

    Joyce, Michael

    Nut tall, Harry

    Stewart-Smith, D. (Kendal)

    Kekewich, Sir George

    O'Brien,Kcndal(Tipperary Mid

    Strachey, Sir Edward

    Kelley, George D.

    O'Brien, Patrick (Kilkenny)

    Straus, B. S. (Mile End)

    Kettle, Thomas Michael

    O'Connor, John (Kildare, N.)

    Strauss, E. A. (Abingdon)

    Kincaid-Smith, Captain

    O'Doherty, Philip

    Stuart, James (Sunderland)

    King, Alfred John (Knutsford)

    O'Donnell, C. J. (Walworth)

    Summerbell. T.

    Laidlaw, Robert

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

    Sutherland, J. E.

    Lamb, Ernest H. (Rochester)

    O'Dowd, John

    Taylor, John W. (Durham)

    Lambert, George

    O'Malley, William

    Taylor, Theodore C. (Radcliffe)

    Lamont, Norman

    Parker, James (Halifax)

    Tennant, H. J (Berwickshire)

    Law, Hugh A. (Donegal, W.)

    Partington, Oswald

    Thomas, Abel (Carmarthen E.)

    Layland-Barratt, Francis

    Pearce, Robert (Staffs, Leek)

    Thomas, David Alfred(Merthyr

    Leese, Sir Joseph F. (Accrington

    Pearce, William (Limehouse)

    Thomasson, Franklin

    Lehmann, R. C.

    Pearson, Sir W. D. (Colchester)

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

    Levy, Sir Maurice

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

    Thomson,W. Mitchell-(Lanark)

    Lewis, John Herbert

    Philipps, Col. Ivor (S'thampton)

    Thorne, G. R. (Wolverhampton

    Lloyd-George, Rt. Hon. David

    Philipps, Owen C. (Pembroke)

    Tomkinson. James

    Lough, Rt. Hon. Thomas

    Phillips, John (Longford, S.)

    Toulmin, George

    Lupton, Arnold

    Pickersgill, Edward Hare

    Verney, F. W.

    Luttrell, Hugh Fownes

    Pirie, Duncan V.

    Walker, H. De R. (Leicester)

    Lyell, Charles Henry

    Pollard, Dr.

    Walsh, Stephen

    Macdonald, J. R. (Leicester)

    Ponsonby, Arthur A. W. H.

    Walters, John Tudor

    Mackarness, Frederic C.

    Price, Robert John(Norfolk,E.)

    Walton, Joseph

    Maclean, Donald

    Priestley, Arthur (Grantham)

    Wardle, George J.

    Macpherson, J. T.

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

    Waring, Walter

    MacVeigh, Charles(Donegal,E.)

    Radford, G. H.

    Warner. Thomas Courtenay T.

    M'Callum, John M.

    Rainy, A. Rolland

    Wason,Rt. Hn. E (Clackmannan

    M'Crae, George

    Raphael, Herbert H.

    Wason, John Cathcart(Orkney)

    M'Killop, W.

    Rea, Russell (Gloucester)

    Waterlow, D. S.

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

    Rea, Walter Russell (Scarboro'

    Watt, Henry A.

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

    Reddy, M.

    Wedgwood, Josiah C.

    M'Micking, Major G.

    Redmond, John E. (Waterford)

    Weir, James Galloway

    Maddison, Frederick

    Redmond, William (Clare)

    White, J. D. (Dumbartonshire)

    Mallet, Charles E.

    Rendall, Athelstan

    White, Luke (York, E. R.)

    Markham, Arthur Basil

    Richardson, A.

    White Patrick (Meath, North)

    Marks, G. Croydon(Launceston)

    Ridsdale, E. A.

    Whitehead, Rowland

    Marnham, F. J.

    Roberts, Charles H. (Lincoln)

    Whitley, John Henry (Halifax)

    Mason, A, E. W. (Coventry)

    Roberts, G. H. (Norwich)

    Whittaker, Sir Thomas Palmer

    Massie, J.

    Roberts, John H. (Denbighs.)

    Wiles, Thomas

    Masterman, C. F. G.

    Robertson. Sir G. Scott(Bradf'rd

    Williams, J. (Glamorgan)

    Meagher, Michael

    Robinson, S.

    Williams, Osmond (Merioneth)

    Meehan. Patrick A. (Queen's Co.

    Robson, Sir William Snowdon

    Williamson, A.

    Menzies, Walter

    Roche, Augustine (Cork)

    Wills, Arthur Walters

    Micklem, Nathaniel

    Roche, John (Galway, East)

    Wilson, Hon. G. G. (Hull, W.)

    Middlebrook, William

    Roe, Sir Thomas

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

    Molteno, Percy Alport

    Rogers, F. E. Newman

    Wilson, John (Durham, Mid)

    892

    893

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

    Wood, T. Mckinnon

    TELLERS FOR THE AYES—Mr.

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

    Younger, George

    Joseph Pease and Master of Elibank.

    Wilson, W. T. (Westhoughton)

    Yoxall, James Henry

    NOES.

    Acland-HoodRt. Hn. SirAlexF

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

    Morpeth, Viscount

    Arkwright, John Stanhope

    Fell, Arthur

    Morrison-Bell, Captain

    Ashley, W. W

    Forster, Henry William

    Nicholson, Wm. G. (Petersfied)

    Aubrey-Fletcher, Rt. Hn. Sir H.

    Gardner, Ernest

    O'Neill, Hon. Robert Torrens

    Balcarres, Lord

    Gooch,Henry Cubitt(Peckham

    Parkes, Ebenezer

    Baldwin, Stanley

    Cretton, John

    Pease, Herbert Pike(Darlington

    Banbury Sir Frederick George

    Guinness, Walter Edward

    Ratcliff, Major R. F.

    Baring, Capt. Hn. G (Winchester

    Harrison-Broadley, H. B.

    Rawlinson, John Frederick Peel

    Barrie, H. T, (Londonderry,N.

    Hay, Hon. (Claude George

    Renton, Leslie

    Beach, Hn. Michael Hugh Hicks

    Helmsley, Viscount

    Roberts, S. (Sheffield. Ecclesall

    Beckett, Hon. Gervase

    Hill, Sir Clement

    Ronaldshay, Earl of

    Bignold, Sir Arthur

    Hills, J. W.

    Ropner, Colonel Sir Robert

    Bowles, G. Stewart

    Hope, James Fitzalan(Sheffield) j

    Rutherford, W. W. (Liverpool

    Bridgeman, W. Clive

    Houston, Robert Paterson

    Sheffield, Sir Berkeley George D.

    Burdett-Coutts, W.

    Hunt, Rowland

    Stanier, Beville

    Butcher, Samuel Henry

    Kennaway, Rt. Hon. Sir John H.

    Starkey, John R.

    Campbell, Rt, Hon. J. H. M.

    Kerry, Earl of

    Staveley-Hill, Henry (Staff'sh.

    Carlile, E. Hildred

    Keswick, William

    Stone, Sir Benjamin

    Carson, Rt. Hon. Sir Edw. H.

    Lane-Fox, G. R.

    Talbot, Lord E. (Chichester)

    Cave, George

    Lee, Arthur H. (Hants, Farcham

    Thornton, Percy M.

    Cecil, Lord R. (Marylebone, E.)

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

    Valentia, Viscount

    Clive, Percy Archer

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

    Walrond, HOD. Lionel

    Coates, Major E. F. (Lewisham)

    Lowe, Sir Frames William

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

    Collings, Rt. Hn. J. (Birm'gham)

    Lyttelton, Rt. Hon. Alfred

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

    Courthope, G. Loyd

    MacCaw, William J. MacGeagh

    Wolff Gustav Wilhelm

    Craig, Charles Curtis(Antrim,S.

    McArthur, Charles

    Wortley Rt. Hon. C. B. Stuart-

    Craig, Captain James(Down, E.)

    McCalmont, Colonel James

    Craik, Sir Henry

    Magnus, Sir Philip

    TELLERS FOR THE NOES—Mr.

    Dalrymple, Viscount

    Meysey-Thompson, E. C.

    George D. Faber and Sir William Bull.

    Doughty, Sir George

    Middlemore, John Throgmorton

    Douglas, Rt. Hon. A. Akers-

    Mildmay, Francis Bingham

    Du Cros, Arthur Philip

    Moore, William

    SIR BRAMPTON GURDON: On a point of order, is it not contrary to all rules of tie House that a teller should receive the bows of all Members in passing without removing his own hat?
    MR. CHAIRMAN: I daresay in future the tellers will take the hint.
    Amendment proposed—
    "In page 6, line 41, to add at the end the words '(3) In the application of this Act to
    894
    the Isles of Scilly, those isles shall be deemed to be a county and the council of those isles the council of a county."—(Mr. Lloyd-George. )
    Question put, "That those words be there added."
    Amendment agreed to.
    Clause, as amended, agreed to.
    Clause 12 agreed to.

    New Schedule:

    Means of Pensioner.

    Rate of Pension.

    Where the yearly means of the pensioner as calculated under this Act—

    S.

    d.

    Do not exceed £21

    5

    0

    Exceed £21, but do not exceed £23 12s. 6d.

    4

    0

    Exceed £23 12s. 6d., but do not exceed £26 5s.

    3

    0

    Exceed £28 5s., but do not exceed £28 17s. 6d.

    2

    0

    Exceed £28 17s. 6d., but do not exceed £31 10s,

    1

    0

    Exceed £3110s.

    No pension.

    —(Mr. Lloyd-George.)
    Question put, "That the Schedule be added to the Bill."

    AYES.

    Abraham, William (Cork, N. E.)

    Birrell, Rt. Hon. Augustine

    Clough, William

    Acland-Hood,Rt. Hn Sir Alex. F

    Black, Arthur W.

    Coates, Major E. F. (Lewisham)

    Agnew, George William

    Boland, John

    Cobbold, Felix Thornley

    Allen, A. Acland (Christchurch)

    Boulton, A. C. F.

    Collins, Stephen (Lambeth)

    Allen, Charles P. (Stroud)

    Bramsdon, T. A.

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

    Armstrong, W. C. Heaton

    Branch, James

    Condon, Thomas Joseph

    Ashley, W. W.

    Brigg, John

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

    Ashton, Thomas Gair

    Bright, J. A.

    Cornwall, Sir Edwin A.

    Asquith. Rt. Hn. Herbert Henry

    Brocklehurst, W. B.

    Cory, Sir Clifford John

    Astbury, John Meir

    Brodie, H. C.

    Cotton, Sir H. J. S.

    Balfour, Robert (Lanark)

    Brooke, Stopford

    Cowan, W. H.

    Banbury, Sir Frederick George

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

    Craig, Herbert J. (Tynemouth)

    Baring, Godfrey (Isle of Wight)

    Brunner, Rt Hn Sir J. T(Cheshire

    Crean, Eugene

    Barker, John

    Bryce, J. Annan

    Cremer, Sir William Randal

    Barlow, Sir John E. (Somerset)

    Burke, E. Haviland-

    Crooks, William-

    Barlow, Percy (Bedford)

    Burnyeat, W. J. D.

    Crosfield, A. H.

    Barnard, E. B.

    Burt, Rt. Hon. Thomas

    Cullinan, J.

    Barran, Rowland Hirst

    Buxton. Rt. Hn. Sydney Charles

    Davies, David(Montgomery Co)

    Barry, Redmond J. (Tyrone, N.)

    Byles, William Pollard

    Davies, Ellis William (Eifion)

    Beauchamp, E.

    Cameron, Robert

    Davies, M. Vaughan-(Cardigan)

    Beck, A. Cecil

    Carlile, E. Hildred

    Davies, Timothy (Fulham)

    Beckett, Hon. Gervase

    Carr-Gomm, H. W.

    Davies, W. Howell (Bristol, S.)

    Bellairs, Carlyon

    Causton. Rt. Hn. RichardKnight

    Devlin, Joseph

    Benn. Sir J. Williams (Devonp'rt

    Cawley, Sir Frederick

    Dewar, Arthur (Edinburgh, S.)

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

    Chance, Frederick William

    Dewar, Sir J. A. (Inverness-sh.)

    Bennett, E. N.

    Cheetham, John Frederick

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

    Berridge, T. H. D.

    Cherry, Rt. Hon. R. R.

    Dillon, John

    Bertram, Julius

    Churchill, Rt. Hon. Winston S.

    Dobson, Thomas W.

    Bignold, Sir Arthur

    Clive, Percy Archer

    Douglas, Rt. Hon. A. Akers-

    896

    897

    Duckworth, James

    Illingworth, Percy H.

    Morpeth, Viscount

    Du Cros, Arthur Philip

    Jacoby, Sir James Alfred

    Morrell, Philip

    Dunn, A. Edward (Camborne)

    Jardine, Sir J.

    Morse, L. L.

    Dunne, Major E. Martin Walsall

    Johnson, W. (Nuneaton)

    Morton Alpheus Cleophas

    Erskine, David C

    Johnson, W. (Nuneaton)

    Morton, Alpheus Cleophas

    Essex R. W.

    Jones, Leif (Appleby)

    Muldoon, John

    Esslemont, George Birnie

    Kekewich, Sir George

    Murnaghan, George

    Evans, Sir Samuel T.

    Keswick, William

    Murphy, John (Kerry, East)

    Everett, R. Lacey

    Kincaid-Smith, Captain

    Murray Capt. Hn A C. (Kincard)

    Ffrenoh Peter

    King, Alfred John (Knutsford)

    Murray, James (Aberdeen, E.)

    Findlay Alexander

    Laidlaw, Robert

    Myer, Horatio

    Foster, Rt. Hon. Sir Walter

    Lambert, George

    Nannetti, Joseph P.

    Freeman-Thomas, Freeman

    Lament, Norman

    Napier, T. B.

    Fuller, John Michael F.

    Lane-Fox, G. R,

    Newnes, F. (Notts, Bassetlaw)

    Fullerton, Hugh

    Law Hugh A (Donegal, W.)

    Nicholls, George

    Gibb, James (Harrow)

    Layland-Barratt, Francis

    Nicholson. Charles N. (Doncast'r

    Gladstone. Rt. Hn Herbert John

    Leese, Sir Joseph F. (Accrington

    Nieholson, Wm. G. (Petersfield)

    Goddard, Sir Daniel Ford

    Levy, Sir Maurice

    Nolan, Joseph

    Gooch, George Peabody (Bath)

    Lewis, John Herbert

    Norman, Sir Henry

    Greenwood, G. (Peterborough)

    Lloyd-George, Rt. Hon. David

    Norton, Capt, Cecil William

    Greenwood, Hamar (York)

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

    Nugent, Sir Walter Richard

    Grey, Rt. Hon. Sir Edward

    Lupton, Arnold

    Nussey, Thomas Willans

    Gulland, John W.

    Luttrell, Hugh Fownes

    Nuttal, Harry

    Gurdon, Rt Hn Sir W. Brampton

    Lyell, Charles Henry

    O'Brien Patrick (Kilkenny)

    Gwynn, Stephen Lucius

    MacCaw, William J. MacGeagh

    O'Connor, John (Kildare, N.)

    Haldane, Rt. Hon. Richard B.

    Mackarness, Frederic C.

    O'Doherty, Philip

    Harcourt, Rt. Hn. L. (Rossendale

    Maclean Donald

    O'Donnell, C. J. (Walworth)

    Harcourt, Robert V. (Montrose)

    MacVeigh. Charles (Donegal. E.)

    O'Dowd, John

    Hardy, George A. (Suffolk) i

    M'Arthur, Charles

    O'Malley, William

    Harmsworth, Cecil B. (Worc'r.)

    M'Callum, John M.

    O'Shee, James John

    Harmsworth, R L. (Caithn'ss-sh

    M'Crae, George

    Parkes, Ebenezer

    Harrison-Broadley, H. B.

    M'Killop, W.

    Partington, Oswald

    Hart-Davies, T.

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

    Pearce, Robert (Staffs, Leek)

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

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

    Pearson, Sir W. D. (Colchester)

    Harwood, George

    M'Micking, Major G.

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

    Haslam, Lewis(Monmouth)

    Mallet, Charles E.

    Pease, Herbert Pike(Darlington

    Haworth, Arthur A.

    Markham, Arthur Basil

    Philipps, Col. Ivor (S'thampton

    Healy, Timothy Michael

    Marks. G. Croydon (Launceston)

    Philipps, Owen C. (Pembroke)

    Hedges, A. Paget

    Marnham, F. J.

    Pickersgill, Edward Hare

    Helme, Norval Watson

    Mason, A. E. W. (Coventry)

    Pirie, Duncan V.

    Helmsley, Viscount

    Massie, J.

    Pollard, Dr.

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

    Masterman, C. F. G.

    Ponsonby, Arthur A. W. H.

    Henry, Charles S.

    Meagher, Michael

    Price, Robert John (Norfolk. E)

    Higham, John Sharp

    Meehan, Patrick A. (Qneen's Co

    Priestley, Arthur (Grantham)

    Hill, Sir Clement

    Menzies, Walter

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

    Hobart, Sir Robert

    Micklem, Nathaniel

    Radford, G. H.

    Hobhouse, Charles E. H.

    Middlebrook, William

    Rainy, A. Rolland

    Hooper, A. G.

    Mildmay, Francis Bingham

    Raphael, Herbert H.

    Horniman, Emslie John

    Molteno, Percy Alport

    Ratcliff, Major R. F.

    Horridge, Thomas Gardner

    Mond, A.

    Rea, Russell (Gloucester)

    Howard, Hon. Geoffrey

    Montagu, Hon. E. S.

    Rea, Walter Russell (Scarboro')

    Hutton, Alfred Eddison

    Montgomery, H. G.

    Reddy, M.

    Hyde, Clarendon

    Mooney, J. J.

    Redmond, John E. (Waterfords

    Idris, T. H. W.

    Morgan, G. Hay (Cornwall)

    Redmond, William (Clare)

    898

    899

    Rendall, Athelstan

    Smeaton, Donald Mackenzie

    Waring, Walter

    Renton, Leslie

    Smyth, Thomas F. (Leitrim, S.)

    Warner, Thomas Courtenay T.

    Ridsdale, E. A.

    Spicer, Sir Albert

    Wason. Rt. Hn. E (Clackmannan

    Roberts, Charles H. (Lincoln)

    Stanier, Beville

    Wason, John Catheart (Orkney)

    Roberts, John H. (Denbighs.)

    Stanley. Hn. A. Lyulph (Chesh.)

    Waterlow, D. S.

    Roberts, S. (Sheffield, Ecclesall)

    Starkey, John R.

    Watt, Henry A.

    Robertson. Sir G. Scott (Bradf'rd

    Staveley-Hill, Henry (Staff'sh.)

    Weir, James Galloway

    Robinson, S.

    Stewart-Smith, D. (Kendal)

    White, J. D. (Dumbartonshire)

    Robson, Sir William Snowdon

    Strachey, Sir Edward

    White, Luke (York, E. R.)

    Roche, Augustine (Cork)

    Straus, B. S. (Mile End)

    White, Patrick (Meath, North)

    Roche, John (Galway, East)

    Strauss, E. A. (Abingdon)

    Whitehead, Rowland

    Roe, Sir Thomas

    Stuart, James (Sunderland)

    Whitley, John Henry (Halifax)

    Ronaldshay, Earl of

    Sutherland, J. E.

    Whittaker, Sir Thomas Palmer

    Ropner, Colonel Sir Robert

    Talbot, Lord E. (Chichester)

    Wiles, Thomas

    Runciman, Rt. Hon. Walter

    Taylor, Theodore C. (Radcliffe)

    Williams, Osmond (Merioneth)

    Rutherford, V. H. (Brentford)

    Tennant, H. J. (Berwickshire)

    Wills, Arthur Walters

    Samuel, S. M. (Whitechapel)

    Thomas, Abel (Carmarthen, E.)

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

    Scarisbrick, T. T. L.

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

    Wilson, Hon. G. G. (Hull, W.)

    Schwann, C. Duncan (Hyde)

    Thomson, W. Mitchell (Lanark)

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

    Scott, A. H. (Ashton-under-Lyne

    Thome, G. R. (Wolverhampton

    Wilson, J. H. (Middlesbrough)

    Seaverns, J. H.

    Thornton, Percy M.

    Wilson, J. W. (Worcestersh. N)

    Seely, Colonel

    Tomkinson, James

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

    Shaw, Charles Edw. (Stafford)

    Toulmin, George

    Wood, T. M'Kinnon

    Sheffield, Sir Berkeley George D.

    Verney, F. W.

    Younger, George

    Sherwell, Arthur James

    Walker, H. De R. (Leicester)

    Yoxall, James Henry

    Shipman, Dr. John G.

    Walrond, Hon. Lionel

    TELLERS FOR THE AYES—Mr.

    Silcock, Thomas Ball

    Walters, John Tudor

    Joseph Pease and Master of Elibank.

    Sinclair, Rt. Hon. John

    Walton, Joseph

    NOES.

    Anstruther-Gray, Major

    Guinness, Walter Edward

    Rawlinson, John Frederick Peel

    Barnes, G. N.

    Hall, Frederick

    Rutherford, W. W. (Liverpool)

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

    Hardie, J. Keir(MerthyrTydvil)

    Shackleton, David James

    Bowerman, C. W.

    Hay, Hon. Claude George

    Snowden, P.

    Bridgeman, W. Clive

    Henderson, Arthur (Durham)

    Stanley, Albert (Staffs, N. W.)

    Carson, Rt. Hon. Sir Edw. H.

    Hills, J. W.

    Steadman, W, C.

    Cecil. Lord R. (Marylebone, E.)

    Hodge, John

    Summerbell, T.

    Charming, Sir Francis Allston

    Hudson, Walter

    Taylor, John W. (Durham)

    Clynes, J. R.

    Hunt, Rowland

    Thomas, David Alfred(Merthyr)

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

    Johnson, John (Gateshead)

    Walsh, Stephen

    Cooper, G. J.

    Jowett, F. W.

    Wardle, George J.

    Courthope, G. Loyd

    Kelley, George D.

    Williams, J. (Glamorgan)

    Craik, Sir Henry

    Lamb, Ernest H. (Rochester)

    Wilson, John, (Durham, Mid)

    Dalrymple, Viscount

    Lowe, Sir Francis William

    Wilson, W. T. (Westhoughton)

    Doughty, Sir George

    Macdonald, J. R. (Leicester)

    Wolff, Gustav Wilhelm

    Duncan, Robert (Lanark, Govan

    Macpherson, J. T.

    TELLERS FOR THE NOES—Mr.

    Gill, A. H.

    O'Neill, Hon. Robert Torrens

    George Roberts and Mr.Charles Duncan.

    Glover, Thomas

    Parker, James (Halifax)

    Bill reported, as amended, to be considered upon Monday next, and to be printed. [Bill 290.]

    MARRIED WOMEN'S PROPERTY BILL.
    Not amended (by the Standing Committee), considered; to be read the third time upon Monday next.
    And, it being after half-past Eleven of the Clock, Mr. SPEAKER adjourned the House without Question put, pursuant to the Standing Order.
    Adjourned at ten minutes before Twelve o'clock.

PRIVATE BILL BUSINESS.
The LORD CHANCELLOR acquainted the House that the Clerk of the Parliaments had laid upon the Table the Certificate from the Examiners that the further Standing Ordersapplicable to the following Bill have been complied with: Liverpool Corporation (General Powers). The same was ordered to lie on the Table.

STANDING ORDERS COMMITTEE.
Report from, That the Standing Orders not complied with in respect of the petition for an additional provision in the Ards and Bangor Railways Bill, ought to be dispensed with and leave given to the Committee on the Bill to insert the additional provision.
Read, and agreed to.
London County Council (Money) Bill, South West Suburban Water Bill.—Brought from the Commons, read la, and referred to the Examiners.
Educational Board Provisional Orders Confirmation (Cornwall, &c.) Bill [H.L.].—(Swansea Orders No. 1 and No. 2); London County Council (General Powers) Bill; Manchester Corporation Bill; Burnley Corporation Bill; Central Ireland Electric Power Bill; Widnes Corporation Bill; Tyne Improvement Bill. Report from the Committee of Selection that the following Lords be proposed to the House to form the Select Committee for the consideration of the said Bills, viz.: E. Stradbroke, V. Hutchinson (E. Donoughmore) chairman, L. Dunboyne, L. Elphinstone, L. Hindlip; agreed to, and the said Lords appointed accordingly. The Committee to meet on Tuesday next, at Twelve 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.
Pier and Harbour Provisional Orders (No. 1) Bill [H.L.]. House in Committee (according to order). The Amendments proposed by the Committees made.
730
Standing Committee negatived. The report of Amendments to be received tomorrow.
Pier and Harbour Provisional Order (No. 3) Bill [H.L.]. House in Committee (according to order). The Amendments proposed by the Committee made. Standing Committee negatived. The report of Amendments to be received tomorrow.
Gas and Water Orders Confirmation Bill [H.L.]. House in Committee (according to order). The Amendments proposed by the Committees made. Standing Committee negatived. The report of Amendments to be received to-morrow.
Gas Orders Confirmation Bill [H.L.]. House in Committee (according to order). The Amendments proposed by the Committee made. Standing Committee negatived. The report of Amendments to be received to-morrow.
Tramways Orders Confirmation (No. 2) Bill [H.L.]. House in Committee (according to order). The Amendments proposed by the Committee made. Standing Committee negatived. The report of Amendments to be received to-morrow.
Education Board Provisional Orders Confirmation (London) Bill [H.L.]. House in Committee (according to order). The Amendments proposed by the Committee made. Standing Committee negatived. The report of Amendments to be received to-morrow.

RETURNS, REPORTS, ETC.
  TRADE REPORTS: ANNUAL RETURNS.
  No. 4020. Italy (Consular District of Genoa); No. 4051. Mexico (Consular District of Tampico); No. 4053. France (Consular District of Nice); No. 4054. Brazil; No. 4055. United States (Consular District of New Orleans); No. 4056. Turkey (Crete).
  COLONIES: ANNUAL.
  No. 562. Falkland Islands.

  TREATY SERIES (1908).
  No. 17. Convention between the United Kingdom and the United States of America, respecting the protection,

  731
  Preservation, and propagation of food fishes in the waters contiguous to the United States and the Dominion of Canada; signed at Washington, 11th April, 1908. (Ratifications exchanged at Washington, 4th June, 1908.)
  No. 18. Treaty between the United Kingdom and the United States of America, respecting the demarcation of the international boundary between the United States and the Dominion of Canada; signed at Washington, 11th April, 1908. Ratifications exchanged at Washington, 4th June, 1908.

  WAGES BOARDS AND INDUSTRIAL ARBITRATION (AUSTRALIA AND NEW ZELAND).
  Report to the Secretary of State for the Home Department, by Ernest Aves, Esq., on the Wages Boards and Industrial Conciliation and Arbitration Acts of Australia and New Zealand.
  SHOP HOURS ACT (AUSTRALIA AND NEW ZEALAND).
  Report to the Secretary of State for the Home Department, by Ernest Aves, Esq., on the Acts for the regulation of hours of employment in shops in Australia and New Zealand.

  FACTORY AND WORKSHOPS.
  Annual Report of Chief Inspector of Factories and Workshops, for the year 1907. Report and statistics.
  Presented (by command), and ordered to lie on the Table.

NEW BILL.
  ENDOWED SCHOOLS (MASTERS) BILL [H.L.]
  A Bill to make provision with respect to the tenure of office of masters of endowed schools.—Was presented by the Lord Steward (E. Beauchamp); read 1a; to be printed, and to be read 2a on Tuesday next. (No. 120.)
COMPANIES CONSOLIDATION BILL [H.L.]
  POST OFFICE CONSOLIDATION BILL [H.L.]

    STATUTE LAW REVISION BILL [H.L.]
    Commons message considered (according to order). The Lord Balfour and
    732
    the Lord Faber added to the Joint Committee; a Message ordered to be sent to the Commons to acquaint them therewith, and to propose that the Joint Committee do meet in Committe Room A. on Wednesday next at Two o'clock.

    ACCIDENTS IN PORTSMOUTH HARBOUR.
    LORD MUSKERRY LORD MUSKERRY rose to ask whether His Majesty's Government could furnish particulars concerning a series of accidents which recently befel the steamship "Bengore Head" in Portsmouth Harbour; if so, what was her draft of water at the time, and whether these accidents were attributable to the "Bengore Head" being in an unmanageable condition owing to a want of sufficient ballast.
    The noble Lord said: My Lords, before putting the Question that stands in my name, I would like to say a few words in connection with it. When I was advocating in this House the passing of the Light Load Line Bill I argued that the provision of a light load mark might very well be extended to, and enforced on, foreign vessels sailing in our waters, for this reason—that vessels that were not sufficiently ballasted were unmanageable under certain circumstances, and therefore not only a source of danger to themselves, but also to any other vessels that might be near. If my information is right, and this steamer was unmanageable through want of sufficient ballast, it is another proof that my contention is correct. I may say that I am not alone in my views as to the unseaworthiness through not being under proper control of these underballasted vessels. I think you will find that every sailor, or marine engineer, holds the same opinion. Had the "Bengore Head," as she might well have done, sunk one of His Majesty's ships, it would have meant a very serious pecuniary loss to the nation, to say nothing of the lives which might have been sacrificed.
    But what I specially want to do in connection with this Question is to enter an earnest protest against the callous indifference with which the safety of seamen's lives appears to be regarded by a Government Department. Where the vessels are carrying passengers, it is

    733
    true that every human precaution is taken; but this is not so when only the lives of their crews are concerned. Your Lordships have only to refer back to the pages of Hansard for the past ten years, and see from the replies that I have received when I have advocated precautionary measures for the safety of sailors' lives that they have been refused mainly from the point of view that shipowners would incur additional expense. Now I venture to say that if it were a question of taking precautions against loss of life on shore no Government, or Government Department, would dare to advance such an argument against them. Think if the "Bengore Head" instead of being in a harbour had been on a rocky lee shore, with a gale blowing; what poor chance there would have been for the lives of her crew? I again most emphatically protest against our seamen's lives being considered as second to any pecuniary interests whatever, and I am sure that in this I have the support and sympathy of your Lordships.
    LORD HAMILTON OF DALZELL: My Lords, I quite agree that if the accident to which the noble Lord alludes could be proved to have been due to the ship having been insufficiently ballasted, it would be an argument in favour of the establishment of a light load line; but, as a matter of fact, the information in the possession of the Board of Trade points in a precisely opposite direction. I think that my best course will be to read a statement prepared from several reports which have been made to the Board of Trade by, amongst others, the master of the ship, the principal officer of the Board of Trade on marine registry, and the Board of Trade surveyor at Southampton. I am informed that the steamship "Bengore Head" left the Government dockyard at Portsmouth at 2.30 p.m. on 13th June, in charge of a Trinity House pilot and assisted by a tug. When turning the north corner of the jetty the tug boat, owing to a violent squall, got out of position, and to avoid accident to his vessel the master of the tug boat threw off the tow rope, thus leaving the "Bengore Head" practically unmanageable, as, owing to the limited space between His Majesty's ships and the lack of room to manœuvre, it was impossible to make satisfactory use of
    734
    the ship's engines. The starboard anchor was at once let go, but, notwithstanding, the vessel drifted against H.M.S." Revenge" and afterwards did some slight damage to the torpedo net booms of H.M.S. "Vengeance." The draft of water of the "Bengore Head" at the time was 14 feet 11 inches aft, and I am advised that the accident was in no way attributable to the want of sufficient ballast, the propeller being well immersed.
    A NOBLE LORD: What was her tonnage?
    LORD HAMILTON OF DALZELL: I think 1,600 tons.
    LORD ELLENBOROUGH: My Lords, this question of the accident which befel the s.s. "Bengore Head" is far more an Admiralty question than a Board of Trade question. In the then existing conditions of wind and weather the vessel ought not to have been moved at all. The pilots who take our ships in and out of harbour do manage their vessels exceedingly well, and I look upon it as a great triumph that two years ago they brought in the whole of the French Fleet in one tide into Portsmouth harbour without any accident whatever. Supposing the "Bengore Head" had filled with water and remained aground off Blockhouse Point; owing to its position no ship could have got in or out of Portsmouth harbour, and if such a thing were to occur at a time of strained relations with a foreign Power it would be a serious matter. I think the Admiralty should have control of all shipping in Portsmouth Harbour in order to avoid what might prove a national danger, and I hope, therefore, that the Admiralty will take this matter into their consideration.

    THE POSITION OF THE MILITIA.
    THE DUKE OF BEDFORD: My Lords, I rise to ask the Lord Chancellor if, having regard to the following sections of the Militia Act of 1882, a Militiaman can during his term of service be appointed, transferred, or attached, without his consent, to any military body other than that to which he at present belongs, viz.:
    "Section 4, subsection 3. Subject to the provisions of any such order, a Secretary of

    735
    State may from time to time make, and when made revoke and vary, general or special regulations with respect to any matter with respect to which Her Majesty may make orders under this section.
    "Subsection 4. Provided that the said orders or regulations shall not—(a) affect or extend the term for which or the area within which a Militiaman is liable under the Militia Acts to serve; or (b) authorise a Militiaman when belonging to one corps to be transferred without his consent to another corps; or (c) where the corps of a Militiaman includes any battalion or other body of the Regular Forces, authorise him to be posted without his consent to that battalion or body.
    "Subsection 5. Where a Militiaman was enlisted or re-engaged before the date of any order or regulation under this Act, nothing in such order or regulation shall render him liable without his consent to be appointed, transferred, or attached to any military body to which he could not without his consent have been appointed, transferred, or attached, if the said order or regulation had not been made."
    By the whole of the Militia force the Act has always been read to mean that transfer without the men's consent was not possible. The question arises at the present moment in this way. As each Militia regiment completes its training the men have three alternatives—they may go to the Special Reserve, they may take a free discharge, or they may remain Militiamen until their period of service expires. In the last case they receive the non-training bounty but are not called out, though they remain subject to the Act of 1882 and to embodiment. The question, therefore, arises: If these men are called out after the Militia is abolished what are you going to do with them? It would appear necessary to attach them to some regiment of the Line, and I ask if that is possible without the men's consent.
    THE LORD CHANCELLOR (Lord LOREBURN): My Lords, I am not an authority on military matters, but my right hon. friend the Secretary of State for War has desired that I should present the legal Answer to the noble Duke. The Question of the noble Duke raises the point as to what will be the position of a Militiaman who has not enlisted in the Special Reserve. Different considerations appear to apply in the case of a Militiaman belonging to a Militia unit which has been transferred to the Special Reserve by an Order in Council under Section 34 of the Territorial and Reserve Forces Act, 1907, and in the case of a
    736
    Militiaman who belonged to one of the Militia units which have been disbanded. In the former case, by virtue of Section 34 (2) of the Act of 1907, the Militiaman becomes a Special Reservist for all purposes, except that the terms and conditions of service are those which were applicable to him whilst he was in the Militia, and not those applicable to Special Reservists. But the unit to which he belongs retains its identity and remains part of the same corps as that in which the Militia unit was previously included. In the latter case, the Militiaman ceased on the disbandment of the Militia unit to belong to any corps, but otherwise remains subject to the terms and conditions of his Militia service. Though, therefore, Section 4 of the Militia Act, 1882, continues to apply in each case, the result of its application will be different. In the case of the man belonging to the transferred unit he can be transferred or attached, without his consent, to any military body to which he could have been so transferred or attached whilst he was still in the Militia, and he could be called out for training or on permanent service with his unit, but the length of his training with the unit could not exceed that to which he was liable under the Militia Acts, and probably, in order to call him out on permanent service, it would be necessary to embody the Militia, as he would not be affected by a proclamation calling out the Army Reserve. With respect to the Militiaman belonging to the disbanded unit, it is clear that not belonging to any corps, he could not, unless the Militia were embodied at any rate, be transferred or attached to any military body without his consent. He could, however, be called up for annual training, and trained with a Special Reserve battalion, though not attached to that battalion. The only difference his not being attached to the battalion would make would be that he would not be bound by an order issued to the battalion unless specially named in the order. On embodiment of the Militia, however, the provisions in the Militia Regulations, which provide that the Militia when embodied shall be governed by the provisions contained in the various warrants relating to the Regular forces, and by the regulations and orders laid down for the Regular forces, so far as such warrants, regulations, and orders may be applicable to the Militia, would

    737
    apply to him, and, consequently, without his consent, he could be attached to any military body to which, under the King's Regulations, a soldier of the Regular forces could be attached, though, of course, he could not be attached to a military body sent on service outside the United Kingdom. I am sorry the Question could not be answered more shortly than I have endeavoured to do.

    ASSIZES AND QUARTER SESSIONS BILL.
    Amendments reported (according to order), and Bill to be read 3a To-morrow.
    House adjourned at ten minutes before Five o'clock, till Tomorrow, half-past Ten o'clock.