Sitting of 16 July 1908

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

PRIVATE BILL BUSINESS.
Leeds Corporation Bill.—Lords Amendments considered, and agreed to.
Barry Railway Bill [Lords].—Read the third time, and passed, without Amendment.
Bognor Gas Light and Coke Company Bill [Lords]; Commercial Union Assurance Company Bill [Lords].—Read the third time, and passed, with Amendments.
Northern Assurance Company Bill [Lords]; South Wales Electrical Power Distribution Bill [Lords].—Read the third time, and passed, with Amendments.
Taff Vale Railway Bill [Lords] (by Order).—Read the third time, and passed, with Amendments.
Lanark Corporation (Extension of Boundaries, etc.) Order Confirmation Bill.—"To confirm a Provisional Order under The Private Legislation Procedure (Scotland) Act, 1899, relating to Lanark Corporation," presented by Mr. Sinclair; and ordered (under Section 7 of the Act) to be considered upon Monday next.
Local Government (Ireland) Provisional Orders (No. 3) Bill [Lords].—Reported, without Amendment [Provisional Orders confirmed]; Report to lie upon the Table.
Bill to be read the third time Tomorrow.
Local Government (Ireland) Provisional Orders (No. 2) Bill [Lords].—Reported, without Amendment [Provisional Orders confirmed]; Report to lie upon the Table.
Bill to be read the third time Tomorrow.
Honourable Artillery Company Bill [Lords].—Reported, with Amendments; Report to lie upon the Table.
Tollemache Estate Bill [Lords].—Reported, without Amendment; Report to lie upon the Table.
Bill to be read the third time.
Leith Burgh Bill [Lords]; Metropolitan Electric Tramways Bill [Lords]; London, Brighton, and South Coast Railway Bill [Lords].—Reported, with Amendments; Reports to lie upon the Table, and to be printed.
Employment of Military in Cases of Disturbance.—Report from the Select Committee, with Minutes of Evidence, brought up, and read.
Report to lie upon the Table, and to be printed. [No. 236.]

MESSAGE FROM THE LORDS.
That they have agreed to:—Public Health (Markets in Rural Districts) Bill, without Amendment; Wishaw Burgh Electricity, etc., Bill, with Amendments.
Amendments to:—Merthyr Tydfil Corporation Bill [Lords], without Amendment.
That they have passed a Bill, intituled, "An Act to enable His Majesty's Postmaster-General to acquire lands in London, Glasgow, Bolton, Devonport, Dover, Ilford, and Stroud for the public service; and for other purposes." [Post Office Sites Bill [Lords.]
Also, a Bill, intituled, "An Act to amend the Law with respect to the Judicial Committee of the Privy Council, and the Court of Appeal in England." [Appellate Jurisdiction Bill [Lords.]
Also, a Bill, intituled, "An Act to make provision with respect to the tenure of office of Masters of Endowed Schools." [Endowed Schools (Masters) Bill [Lords.]
Also, a Bill, intituled, "An Act to amend Section 1 of the Evicted Tenants (Ireland) Act, 1907, with respect to the compulsory acquisition of tenanted land." [Evicted Tenants (Ireland) Bill [Lords.]
Also, a Bill, intituled. "An Act to confirm a Provisional Order under the Private Legislation Procedure (Scotland) Act, 1899, relating to Falkirk and District Water." [Falkirk and District Water Order Confirmation Bill [Lords.]
And, also, a Bill, intituled. "An Act for the preservation of the underground sources of the River Wandle." [River Wandle Protection Bill [Lords.]
Falkirk and District Water Order Confirmation Bill [Lords].—Ordered (under Section 7 of the Private Legislation Procedure (Scotland) Act, 1899) to be considered upon Monday next.
River Wandle Protection Bill [Lords].—Read the first time; and referred to the Examiners of Petitions for Private Bills.

PETITIONS.

  LICENSING BILL.
  Petitions against: From Hawkesbury Upton; and Norwich; to lie upon the Table.
  Petitions in favour: From Edinburgh; and Wakefield; to lie upon the Table.

  LIQUOR TRAFFIC (LOCAL OPTION) (SCOTLAND) BILL.
  Three Petitions from Arbroath, in favour; to lie upon the Table.
  POOR LAW AMENDMENT (SCOTLAND) BILL.
  Petitions in favour: From Monkton and Prestwick; Muirkirk; and Rothesay; to lie upon the Table.
RETURNS, REPORTS, ETC.
  CENSUS OF PRODUCTION ACT, 1906.
  Copy presented, of Rules made by the Board of Trade under the Census of Production Act, 1906 [by Act]; to lie upon the Table.
  CARE AND CONTROL OF THE FEEBLEMINDED (ROYAL COMMISSION).
  Copy presented, of Report of the Royal Commission appointed to inquire concerning the Care and Control of the Feeble-Minded. Vol. VIII. Report [by Command]; to lie upon the Table.
  POLICE ACT, 1890.
  Copy presented, of Correspondence relative to the refusal of the Secretary of State's Certificate under Section 17 (2) of the Act to the River Tyne Police Force for the year ended 29th September, 1907 [by Act]; to lie upon the Table.
  SHOP HOURS ACT, 1904.
  Copy presented, of Order made by the Council of the County Borough of Blackpool, and confirmed by the Secretary of State for the Home Department, fixing the Hours of Closing for certain classes of Shops [by Act]; to lie upon the Table.

  UNIVERSITIES OF OXFORD AND CAMBRIDGE ACT, 1877 (OXFORD).
  Copy presented, of Statute made by the Governing Body of Brasenose College, Oxford, on 11th March, 1908, amending Statute III., Part II., 12, of the Statutes of the College [by Act]; to lie upon the Table, and to be printed. [No. 233.]
  Copy presented, of Statute made by the Governing Body of All Souls College, Oxford, on 28th February, 1908, and sealed on 3rd March, 1908, amending

  1059
  Statute 12 a, Clause 2, of the Statutes of the College [by Act]; to lie upon the Table, and to be printed. [No. 234.]

  UNIVERSITIES OF OXFORD AND CAMBRIDGE ACT, 1877 (CAMBRIDGE).
  Copy presented, of Statutes made by the University of Cambridge (sealed on 27th March, 1908) amending Chapter VI., Statute B, Sections 12 and 13, Chapter VII., Statute B, Sections 2 and 4, and adding paragraphs 8 and 9 to Chapter VII., Statute B, of the Statutes of the University [by Act]; to lie upon the Table, and to be printed. [No. 235.]
  WINTER ASSIZES ACTS, 1876 AND 1877.
  Copy presented, of Seven Orders in Council, dated 4th July, 1908, relating to the ensuing Winter Assizes [by Act]; to lie upon the Table.
  MERCHANT SHIPPING ACT, 1894, AND MERCHANT SHIPPING (MERCANTILE MARINE FUND) ACT, 1898.
  Copy presented, of Order in Council, dated 4th July, 1908, adding to the exemptions from Light Dues in the Second Schedule to The Merchant Shipping (Mercantile Marine Fund) Act, 1898 [by Act]; to lie upon the Table.
  MERCHANT SHIPPING ACT, 1894, AND WORKMEN'S COMPENSATION ACT, 1906.
  Copy presented, of Order in Council, dated 4th July, 1908, empowering certain Officers in British Protectorates to take depositions respecting injuries received by a member of the crew of a British vessel who may be left behind in any of the Protectorates [by Act]; to lie upon the Table.
  FOREIGN JURISDICTION ACT, 1890.
  Copy presented, of Order in Council, dated 4th July, 1908, entitled "The Cyprus Courts of Justice Order, 1908" [by Act]; to lie upon the Table.
  FOREIGN JURISDICTION ACT, 1890, AND CONSULAR SALARIES AND FEES ACT, 1891.
  Copy presented, of Order in Council, dated 4th July, 1908, entitled "The China (Passenger Ships Fees) Order in Council, 1908" [by Act]; to lie upon the Table.
  NAVAL AND MARINE PAY AND PENSIONS ACT, 1865.
  Copy presented, of Order in Council, dated 4th July, 1908, approving a Memorial of the Lords Commissioners of the Admiralty, praying sanction to the extension of the period of full pay sick leave in certain cases und under certain conditions [by Act]; to lie upon the Table.
  OSBORNE.
  Copy presented, of Report by the House Governor and Medical Superintendent at Osborne for the year ending 31st March, 1908 [by Command]; to lie upon the Table.
  LABOURERS (IRELAND).
  Return [presented 15th July] to be printed. [No. 232.]
QUESTIONS AND ANSWERS CIRCULATED WITH THE VOTES.

  European Parcels Post
  MR. HENNIKER HEATON: To ask the Postmaster-General whether he is aware that parcels sent by parcel post, from this country to Germany and Denmark cost for carriage 2s., whilst similar parcels from Germany and Denmark to this country cost only 1s. 5d.; whether he is aware that from Switzerland, in the centre of Europe, a parcel to Norway costs 1s. 5d., whilst a similar parcel from this country to Norway costs 2s., or nearly 50 per cent. more; whether he is aware that a parcel from Switzerland to this country costs 1s. 10d., and vice versa 2s. 6d.; whether the latest agreement with Japan provides for a cost of 4s., where Germany only pays 2s. 7d.; whether he is aware that German postal rates for parcels to seventeen European countries are only half of the average cost from this country; and what steps, if any, he proposes to take in the matter.
  (Answered by Mr. Sydney Buxton.) The hon. Member's comparison of charges is misleading. There is in almost every case a triple scale of postage in force in this country for parcels sent abroad under which a light parcel costs less for

  1061
  postage than a heavy one. The comparisons given in the Question are correct so far as they go, but they are applicable only to heavy parcels, while in most cases the rates on light parcels compare very favourably with those on parcels of the same weight sent from the Continent to this country or to other destinations. Thus, to take some of the exchanges instanced, while light parcels, i.e., parcels not over three pounds, from this country to Germany and Denmark cost 1s., similar parcels from Germany and Denmark cost 1s. 5d.; a light parcel from this country to Norway costs 1s., but from Switzerland to Norway by the cheapest route 1s. 5d.; and on a light parcel sent from this country to Switzerland the postage is the same as in the reverse direction, namely, 1s. 6d. On the whole the triple scale of postage is not, I think, disadvantageous to the public in this country. As I have told the hon. Member, in answer to another Question, I have for some time been considering what improvements can be effected.

  Pekin Indemnity.
  MR. BRIGG: To ask the Secretary to the Treasury what amount is still owing to this country on account of the Pekin indemnity; and how long is it overdue.
  (Answered by Mr. Hobhouse.) The total indemnity payable by China was fixed at 450,000,000 taels. Of this total the British share is 50,620,545 taels. Under the terms of the Protocol the indemnity is to be paid by annuities extending over the period to 1940. These annuities are being paid punctually and fully, and no part of the sum is overdue.

  Volunteer Plain Clothes Drills.
  MR. HICKS BEACH: To ask the Secretary of State for War whether he has received Memorials from ex-Volunteers in Gloucester and other towns praying that they may be allowed to do six or eight plain clothes drills a year and complete the course of annual musketry with the Territorial Army, on condition that they hold themselves liable for service with the Territorial Army in cases of emergency; and whether, in view of the
  1062
  reserve that could in this manner be formed for the Territorial Army without in any way taking possible recruits from it, he can see his way to grant the request of the memorialists.
  (Answered by Mr. Secretary Haldane.) The reply to the first part of the Question is in the affirmative. In view of the fact that the County Associations are at present fully engaged in the formation of the active portion of the Territorial Force it is considered expedient to finish this work before proceeding with the formation of a reserve. In any event it is impossible to take any steps without careful preparation.

  Fyfield Farm, Enford, Wilts.
  MR. HICKS BEACH: To ask the Secretary of State for War whether Fyfield Farm, in the parish of Enford, Wilts, fell vacant last Michaelmas; whether the farm is now let to a tenant who already farms about 4,000 acres of land in the district; whether there were several applications for small holdings from the neighbourhood when the farm fell vacant: and why steps were not taken to sub-divide, at any rate, part of the farm into small holdings.
  (Answered by Mr. Secretary Haldane.) This farm fell vacant last Michaelmas. It is now let to a tenant who farms a very considerable amount of land from the War Department. There were several applications for small holdings from the neighbourhood when the farm fell vacant. The whole question of making the arable part of the farm, about 62 acres, available for small holdings was fully considered, and it was finally decided that it was impossible to let the land for small holdings without interfering with the training facilities of the troops, and it has been found necessary to take a covenant from the present tenant to lay down the arable land in glass within the next two years.

  Woolwich Common.
  LORD BALCARRES: To ask the Secretary of State for War on what date and for what consideration, were the right of common on Woolwich Common acquired by the War Office.

  1063
  What is known as Woolwich Common formerly consisted of two commons, Woolwich and Charlton, which were respectively acquired under two Acts of 1803. Under these Acts, commissioners were appointed to inquire into existing rights and ascertain the compensation to be paid, and their decrees were to be final. About £9,000 was paid over Charlton and £3,000 over Woolwich in extinction of commonable rights.

  Armoy Water Supply.
  MR. GLENDINNING: To ask the Chief Secretary to the Lord-Lieutenant of Ireland if he is aware that the inhabitants of Armoy, County Antrim, have no water supply of any kind, and that people are compelled to use the water of a well beside the Presbyterian burying ground which water has over and over again been condemned by the medical officer of health; that the Ballycastle Rural Council have not taken any steps to provide a proper water supply for the town, although representations have been made to them and to the Local Government Board for the past eight years asking them to take action in this matter; and whether he will put pressure on the Local Government Board to compel the local sanitary authority to remedy this grievance.
  (Answered by Mr. Birrell.) Complaints have been made from time to time that the arrangements for the water supply of the town are not satisfactory, and the Local Government Board have brought these complaints to the notice of the rural district council, whose duty it is to see that a proper water supply is provided. It appears that the council have made borings for two pumps, but apparently the supply obtained therefrom is not considered to be sufficient for the needs of the whole town. A formal complaint has recently been made to the Local Government Board under Section 15 of the Public Health (Ireland) Act, 1896, alleging that the rural district council have made default in the matter of providing a proper supply of water for the town, and this complaint is at present under the Board's consideration.

  Drumkirk Evicted Tenant
  MR. SLOAN: To ask the Chief Secretary to the Lord-Lieutenant of Ireland if the inspector deputed by the Estates Commissioners to make inquiries with the view to the restoration of Mr. John F. McQuade to the holding from which he was formerly evicted in the townland of Drumkirk, on the Irvine estate, County Fermanagh, has yet furnished his report; and, if so, do the Commissioners intend to take immediate steps to restore McQuade to his holding, seeing his case has been under consideration for more than three years.
  (Answered by Mr. Birrell.) The Estates Commissioners have considered their inspectors' report upon this case, and have made an offer to the owner for the purchase of the holding from which McQuade was evicted. The Commissioners will endeavour to restore the applicant to his former holding, or in the alternative, to provide him with I another holding.

  Estate Commissioners' Reports on Evicted Holdings.
  MR. WILLIAM ABRAHAM: To ask the Chief Secretary to the Lord-Lieutenant of Ireland whether he has received a copy of a resolution, adopted by the North-East Cork Executive of the United Irish League, at a meeting held in Fermoy on the 6th instant, pointing out the necessity for copies of reports made by Estates Commissioners' inspectors on cases of evicted tenants and on non-judicial holdings being supplied to the parties concerned; and if he can see his way to invite the attention of the Commissioners to the matter.
  (Answered by Mr. Birrell.) The inspectors' reports are made for the-information of the Estates Commissioners and are confidential documents, and the Commissioners do not consider that it would be proper to communicate them to the parties interested.

  Rathlin Poor Law Valuation
  MR. J. DEVLIN: To ask the Chief Secretary to the Lord-Lieutenant of Ireland whether he is aware that the Poor Law valuation on

  1065
  the Island of Rathlin is in many cases more than double the old rent, and more than treble the judicial rent of the holdings; whether he can state if, in fixing the valuation, any account was taken of the, hardships under which the islanders exist, or of the loss and danger to which the crops and live stock are exposed from wind and tide; and whether he will make inquiries with a view to a revision of the present valuation.
  (Answered by Mr. Hobhouse.) The Commissioner of Valuation informs me that he has no information as regards the statement in the first part of the Question, but that the total Poor Law valuation of the land in Rathlin Island is £791, which is equivalent to an average of 4s. 5d. per acre. The Answer to the second part of the Question is in the affirmative. There is no power, I understand, under the existing law to make a revaluation; but the fact that the valuations are above or below the rent does not affect the amount of local taxation paid by the individual taxpayer so long as all the valuations in the rating area are determined upon a uniform and proportionate basis.

  De Vesci Estate, Abbeyleix.
  MR. P. MEEHAN: To ask the Chief Secretary to the Lord-Lieutenant of Ireland whether he is aware that in fifteen cases where judicial rents have been recently fixed on the De Vesci estate, Abbeyleix, Queen's County, appeals have been lodged by the landlord; and whether, in view of the fact that all those tenants are poor people, many of them being unable to provide the means of attending in Dublin with their witnesses, he will arrange for the appeals to be heard at Abbeyleix.
  (Answered by Mr. Birrell.) The Land Commission inform me that no sitting has yet been fixed for the hearing of the appeals referred to in the Question. The place for holding the sitting will be considered by the Commissioners with due regard to the public convenience.

  Bombay Political Department.
  SIR SEYMOUR KING: To ask the Under-Secretary of State for India whether the Committee appointed by the Viceroy to inquire into complaints made by a number of officers on the general cadre of the Political Department, in respect of their position under the reorganisation scheme, will also be empowered to consider the complaints of the military officers in the Bombay Political Department as to their position and prospects.
  (Answered by Mr. Buchanan.) The Secretary of State has no information beyond that which has appeared in the Press as to the Committee referred to. As regards the Bombay Political Department, I understand that the Government of Bombay will shortly submit proposals for improving the position of military officers of the Department.

  Motor Traffic on Main Roads.
  MR. LYULPH STANLEY: To ask the President of the Local Government Board whether his attention has been called to the injury to main roads caused by heavy motor traffic; and whether, in view of the fact that in many cases this injury is caused by heavy motors, the owners of which are not ratepayers in the county in which the injury is done, he will consider the advisability of introducing legislation to amend the law of rating, so that the burden of maintaining main roads should be more equitably distributed.
  (Answered by Mr. John Burns.) My attention has been called to this matter. It will receive consideration in connection with the subject of local taxation generally, but it would not be practicable to introduce legislation with regard to it at the present time.

  Lewis Fishing Industry.
  MR. WEIR: To ask the Secretary of State for Scotland if he will state the weight and value of line-caught fish landed in the Island of Lewis for each year during the last fifteen, years.

  1067
  (Answered by Mr. Sinclair.) The following Table gives the information desired by my hon. friend, and I have

  Year.

  Boats.

  Catch.

  Average catch per boat.

  Average value per boat.

  Cwts.

  £

  Cwts.

  £

  1893

  —

  126,024

  36,144

  —

  —

  1894

  —

  90,973

  26,236

  —

  —

  1895

  —

  103,990

  26,078

  —

  —

  1896

  —

  115,690

  23,294

  —

  —

  1897

  —

  125,737

  32,764

  —

  —

  1898

  666

  100,413

  25,184

  151

  38

  1899

  577

  101,914

  25,076

  177

  43

  1900

  615

  83,842

  21,255

  136

  35

  1901

  622

  70,335

  20,173

  113

  32

  1902

  599

  49,318

  16,671

  82

  38

  1903

  585

  41,072

  13,381

  70

  23

  1904

  488

  76,011

  24,556

  156

  50

  1905

  471

  70,092

  22,559

  179

  48

  1906

  469

  73,074

  25,107

  156

  54

  1907

  451

  69,833

  25,025

  154

  55

  Glasgow Schools.
  MR. WATT: To ask the Secretary for Scotland if he will state the cost of administration in the session 1907–1908 of the following two schools respectively, viz., Girls' High School, Glasgow, and Bridgeton Public School, Glasgow; and what was the number of pupils from each who took bursaries at the recent examination for bursaries in the Glasgow centre.
  (Answered by Mr. Sinclair.) I have not the information required to enable me to reply to my hon. friend. The information would be more conveniently obtained by application to the school board.
  also included the Returns which are available since 1898 of the average catch and value per boat—

  Boy Clerks.
  MR. FIELD: To ask the Secretary to the Treasury whether a new scheme for boy clerks is at present under consideration in Government Departments; whether the scheme provides for the payment to assistant clerks at twenty-five years of age of the salary of £85 per annum; and, if so, whether the Treasury will reconsider the scheme, so that the scale of salary may be made at least equivalent to the scale recently conceded to male sorters in the Post Office.
  (Answered by Mr. Hobhouse.) The Answer to the first two parts of the Question is in the affirmative. The

  1069
  recent concession to the male sorters in the Post Office was made on the recommendation of the Committee, of which I was Chairman, upon the ground that a sorter attains full efficiency after five years of service, which, of course, is not true of an assistant clerk. But sorters work longer hours, and the conditions of service in the two cases are so different as to make inapplicable the comparison suggested.

  Post Office Life Insurance.
  MR. HENNIKER HEATON: To ask the Postmaster-General whether the Committee, of which Lord Farrer is Chairman, to inquire whether it is desirable that steps should be taken to encourage the present life insurance system of the Post Office, and, if so, what steps, has yet reported; and whether the Committee has considered the advisability of appointing a specially trained man to manage the life insurance business, the desirability of severing the insurance business from the savings bank system of accounts, and the advantage of the payment of premiums by means of stamps.
  (Answered by Mr. Sydney Buxton.) I have received and am considering the Report of the Committee, presided over by Lord Fairer, appointed to consider the desirability of encouraging the life insurance system of the Post Office, but I am not yet prepared to make any statement with regard to the Committee's recommendations. I take this opportunity of publicly thanking the Committee for the great consideration they have given to the question.

  Suggested Civil Service Conciliation Board.
  MR. SLOAN: To ask the Post-master-General if it is his intention to appoint a conciliation board composed of trade union representatives, staff and secretarial in equal numbers, to meet periodically for the decision of such questions as may arise; and, if not, will he consider the advisability of appointing such a board.
  (Answered by Mr. Sydney Buxton.) Answer is in the negative.

  Bexhill Post Office.
  MR. COURTHOPE: To ask the Postmaster-General whether he can state the date upon which the classification of the Bexhill Post Office for the indoor staff will be announced; and whether, in the event of changes being made, the staff will receive the benefit of such changes as from 1st January, 1908.
  (Answered by Mr. Sydney Buxton.) Bexhill, which is a salaried sub-office under Hastings, falls naturally into the new Class V. for the scale of pay of the indoor force. This announcement was; made in a Post Office Circular, dated 8th July, 1908. The new classification dates from 1st January, 1908.

  Country Postmen's Uniforms.
  CAPTAIN CLIVE. To ask the Postmaster-General whether he will consider the possibility of providing country postmen, who have long daily rounds to walk, with a thinner uniform in summer, as is now done in the case of the Metropolitan Police.
  (Answered by Mr. Sydney Buxton.) The whole question of the supply of uniform to Post Office servants is now under consideration. The point raised by the hon. Member shall have attention.

  Kildorrery Assault Prosecution.
  MR. WILLIAM ABRAHAM: To ask Mr. Attorney-General for Ireland if his attention has been called to the proceedings at Kildorrery Petty Sessions on the 8th instant, when a man named William Stackpoole was charged with an assault endangering life upon John Galligan on 22nd May; whether Stackpoole was arrested and sent to prison at the time, bail having been refused in consequence of Galligan's life being in danger; and if he will explain why the magistrates refused informations in this case, although the assault, the serious nature of which was not disputed, was clearly proved to have been committed by Stackpoole; and if he will take any action in the matter.
  (Answered by Mr. Cherry.) My attention had not been called to this case, but

  1071
  I am informed that the facts are as stated in the first two paragraphs of the Question. Informations were refused by the majority of the bench, but I have no information as to the magistrates' reasons or as to the nature of the evidence given before them. I will call for a full report upon the case with the view of considering whether further proceedings are necessary.

  Communication with Rathlin Island.
  MR. J. DEVLIN: To ask the Vice-President of the Department of Agriculture (Ireland) whether his attention has been drawn to the danger and difficulty experienced by the people of Rathlin Island in conveying passengers, live-stock, and goods to and from the mainland, and to the comparatively high cost of transportation, owing to the class of boats employed; and whether he will consider the practicability of such transport accommodation as will enable the islanders to enjoy a safe, cheap, and regular means of communication with the mainland.
  (Answered by Mr. T. W. Russell.) I am aware that the difficulties of transit to Rathlin Island are considerable. A better landing-place might be constructed at Rathlin at a comparatively reasonable expenditure, but the cost of providing a corresponding landing-place at Ballycastle on the mainland would probably run to £5,000 or more. A representative of the Department has visited the district in company with the piers committee of the county council, and it was decided, considering the difficulty mentioned, that present effort should be concentrated on Port Ballintoy, another harbour on the mainland opposite Rathlin which needs improvement. The cost of the minimum improvement at Rathlin would be £1,000, and the Department are prepared to consider such improvement if the county council will contribute to the cost. As the hon. Gentleman is aware, the Bill now before Parliament will enable the council to increase their contribution.

  London Stock Exchange Bye-Laws.
  MR. B. S. STRAUS: To ask Mr. Chancellor of the Exchequer whether he is aware that the committee of the London Stock Ex-
  1072
  change are proposing new bye-laws which are restrictive in their character; and whether, with the view of safeguarding public interests and the exchange of business between financial centres, he will propose legislation.
  (Answered by Mr. Lloyd-George.) I understand that the Stock Exchange Committee have certain new rules under consideration, but I am not aware of anything which would justify me in proposing legislative action in the matter.

  Royal Engineer Volunteer Quartermaster.
  MR. COURTHOPE: To ask the Secretary of State for War when the scheme for the future employment of quartermasters of the late Royal Engineer Volunteer Corps will be communicated to them.
  To ask the Secretary of State for War what decision, if any, has been reached as to the inclusion of quartermasters in the establishment of the Royal Engineer units of the Territorial Force; why the announcement of such decision has been so long delayed; whether the quartermasters of the late Royal Engineer Volunteer Corps will be permitted to attend the camp of their units and to receive pay and allowances this year; and what course will be taken as to the pay and allowances of those Royal Engineer quartermasters who have already this year attended the camp of their units.
  (Answered by Mr. Secretary Haldane.) The decision not to include quartermasters in the Royal Engineer units of the Territorial Force, other than certain corps for coast defence, was arrived at before the issue of the Special Army Order of 18th March, and they were not included in the establishment table in that Order. Since then the matter has been further considered and the previous decision was upheld. Accordingly, since 31st March there has been no such appointment as quartermaster in these units, and it is not understood how any persons could have attended the camps of such units as quartermasters.

  Territorial Force Regulations.
  MR. COURTHOPE: To ask the Secretary of State for War when the Regulations for the Territorial Force will be issued.
  (Answered by Mr. Secretary Haldane.) The Regulations are being distributed as fast as they are supplied by the printers. The Yeomanry supply was despatched yesterday.

  British Garrison in South Africa.
  MR. BRODIE: To ask the Secretary of State for War whether the Government contemplate withdrawing any of the British troops, now there, from South Africa, if so, what number of them and on what date; and whether, in the interest of economy, lie has considered the desirability of concentrating the troops in South Africa nearer the coast, and what, if any, are his plans in this respect.
  (Answered by Mr. Secretary Haldane.) One regiment of cavalry and four battalions of infantry will be withdrawn from South Africa on dates commencing with 7th September and ending on 6th February. The future disposition in South Africa of the garrison is now under consideration.

QUESTIONS IN THE HOUSE.

  The Coastguard.
  MR. W. F. D. SMITH: I beg to ask the First Lord of the Admiralty whether any decision has yet been arrived at with reference to the number of men on the establishment of the Coastguard; and whether, if at any time it is decided to reduce the establishment, he can give an undertaking that no reduction will be made at those stations where the Coastguard are now employed in assisting in the saving of life at sea.
  THE FIRST LORD OF THE ADMIRALTY (Mr. MCKENNA,): The further Report of the Inter-departmental Conference has not yet been received by the Admiralty, but in the meantime no reduction will
  1074
  be made of coastguard stations at which assistance in life-saving has hitherto been rendered.
  MR. W. F. D. SMITH: Is it to be understood that no reduction will be made before next year's Estimates are introduced, or before the House has an opportunity of discussing any further reduction?
  MR. MCKENNA: I cannot say what the results of the Conference will be. But no reduction will be made before next year, and I anticipate the House will have some opportunity of discussing it early next session.
  MR. W. F. D. SMITH: Did not the right hon. Gentleman's predecessor give a promise that there should be no further reduction until the House had had the opportunity of discussing it?
  MR. MCKENNA: I will look into that matter. I am not familiar with the terms of the pledge.

  The Admiralty and the Press
  MR. STAVELEY-HILL: I beg to ask the First Lord of the Admiralty what rule or practice governs communications sent by the Admiralty to the Press; who frames these communications, and who is the responsible authority for them; are they invariably sent to the Press generally, or only to certain newspapers; and, in the latter case, on what principle is the selection made.
  MR. MCKENNA: Official communications to the Press, apart from advertisements, are placed in a room set apart for the purpose at the Admiralty, to which all newspaper representatives have access, or in the case of special communications, they are sent under cover to the principal Press agencies and newspapers which have offices in London. Special communications are framed by the Department which deals with the subject matter of the communication, and are issued with the authority of the Secretary of the Admiralty.
  MR. BELLAIRS: Are we to understand that all newspapers

  1075
  are treated on an equal footing by the Admiralty and that no editors or Press correspondents have special access to any official at the Admiralty?
  MR. MCKENNA: I think my Answer is complete on the subject. I have told the House the full relations of the Admiralty with the Press.
  MR. SWIFT MACNEILL: Are we to take it for granted that the interests of our friend The Times are specially safeguarded? This is specially important.
  [No Answer was returned.]

  The Mediterranean Fleet.
  MR. DU CROS: I beg to ask the First Lord of the Admiralty what was the longest period spent in harbour at one time by the Mediterranean Fleet during the years 1907 and 1908 respectively.
  MR. MCKENNA: The longest continuous period spent in harbour, as a Fleet, by the Mediterranean Fleet during 1907, was three months, and during 1908, one month; but individual ships are continually going out during such periods to perform gunnery and torpedo exercises.

  The Home Fleet.
  MR. DU CROS: I beg to ask the First Lord of the Admiralty if he will furnish a Return showing the amount of training at sea which the squadrons of the Home Fleet have received during the current year and the amount of fleet training.
  MR. MCKENNA: As stated in answer to a similar Question put by the hon. Member for West Marylebone on 8th August last, the required information is not available at the Admiralty, and it would entail great labour to call for a precise Return from each of the large number of ships forming the Home Fleet.

  Yeomanry Forage Contracts.
  *MR. LAMONT: I beg to ask the Secretary of State for War whether commanding officers of Yeo-manry regiments must now obtain their
  1076
  supplies of hay and corn through Government contractors instead of by local purchase; whether he is aware that many commanding officers had, in 1907, made local contracts for the 1908 training, and will, in consequence of the new Regulation, be put to considerable expense in repudiating those contracts; and whether he can see his way in such cases to relax the Regulation.
  THE SECRETARY OF STATE FOR WAR (Mr. HALDANE,): It is the intention that the supply of forage to Yeomanry regiments during training should in future be made by contract or local purchase under War Office supervision on the same line as the supply to the Regular Army. Cases brought to notice of arrangements made regimentally by commanding officers for the supply of forage for the training during 1908 have been specially sanctioned. I will consider whether any, and what relaxation of the broad principle might be made, in order to admit of the advantage of local knowledge and influence of Territorial officers being obtained.
  MR. WATT: Will the War Office compensate those officers who have entered into contracts for 1908?
  MR. HALDANE: That will be considered.
  *MR. LAMONT: Is the right hon. Gentleman aware that in one case last year, the commanding officer contracted locally at £410s., whereas the Government contractor is now asking £5 5s.?
  MR. HALDANE: Sometimes commanding officers did make a good bargain and the benefit went to the funds of the the corps. That is the kind of thing we want to eliminate now.
  MR. AUSTEN CHAMBERLAIN: Does the right hon. Gentleman really mean that in order to obviate the possibility of the profit going to the corps fund, a higher price is to be paid to contractors?
  MR. HALDANE: We want to get the assistance and advice of Territorial officers for the benefit of the general system, and we relieve commanding officers of the responsibility for these things, and adopt the plan which obtains in the Army generally.

  Special Trains for Territorial Camps.
  VISCOUNT CASTLEREAGH: On behalf of the hon. Member for Kingston, I beg to ask the Secretary of State for War whether the London, Brighton and South Coast Railway Company have refused to provide special trains for the purpose of taking certain battalions of the Territorial Force to camp for training on 1st August, the reason given being that all the rolling stock is required for holiday traffic; whether the commanding officers consider it essential that the men should reach camp on the day named; and whether the Government propose to take any and what action in the matter.
  MR. HALDANE: Nothing is known at the War Office of this matter. I would remind the hon. and learned Member that I have no power to compel the company to carry those men in special trains.
  VISCOUNT CASTLEREAGH: Can the right hon. Gentleman make some recommendation with a view to inducing the company to comply with the request?
  MR. HALDANE: We will do the best we can.

  Territorial Adjutants.
  MR. CARLILE: I beg to ask the Secretary of State for War whether he will consider the advisability of appointing as adjutants to the Territorial Force officers only who have been adjutants of their own regular units; and whether, should these appointments be confined to such officers, he would be prepared when their term had expired to recommend them where possible for positions on the Territorial divisional staffs.
  MR. HALDANE: Every endeavour is made to select the most suitable officers for these important appoint-
  1078
  ments, and when a candidate has already served as adjutant of his unit, that fact is given due weight in considering his suitability. At the same time the number of applicants would scarcely justify an undertaking that the appointments should be wholly restricted to officers with the suggested experience. Similarly in the selection of Regular officers for the divisional staffs, previous experience as an adjutant of the Auxiliary Forces has already been allowed to carry considerable weight, and this procedure will be followed in the future.

  Degradation of a Fife Yeoman.
  MR. KEIR HARDIE: I beg to ask the Secretary of State for War whether his attention has been drawn to the circumstances attending the degradation for alleged disobedience of Private James Rennie, of the A. squadron of the Fife and Forfar Imperial Yeomanry at their animal training camp at Annsmuir, Ladybank, on 27th June; whether Rennie was taken under escort to the centre of the square and informed that he had been sentenced to be drummed out of the regiment, and was thereupon deprived of his cap and had the buttons and decorations cut from his tunic, and was thereafter marched outside the camp; what was the offence-for which this punishment was inflicted, and what opportunity had Rennie for defending himself; and what regulations authorise this form of punishment, without trial.
  MR. HALDANE: The facts of this case are substantially those described in the Question, with the addition that the commanding officer reports that Private Rennie was provided with a civilian overcoat and money necessary for his journey. The offence was disobedience of orders to his troop officer. The usual inquiry was held by his commanding officer and the summary of evidence forwarded to the General Officer Commanding with an application for the man's trial by court-martial. The general reports that as he received the application only on the day before the regiment left camp, he directed the commanding officer to deal summarily with the case. The commanding officer under the powers vested in him by

  1079
  Section 181 (6) of the Army Act dismissed the man. The procedure adopted by the commanding officer in dismissing the man was highly improper, and he has been so informed by the Army Council. This method of public marching out is obsolete in the British Army, and certainly should not have been adopted in this case. I must add that there is no reason to doubt that Rennie deserved to be dismissed from the regiment, or to question the sufficiency of the investigation.
  MR. KEIR HARDIE: Is it not the case that Rennie was refused his pay and travelling allowance for his horse, and had to borrow money to pay his train fare home; and were not the captain and sergeant-major both allowed to testify to the commanding officer against Rennie, while Rennie was not permitted to state his own case, or give evidence on his own behalf?
  MR. HALDANE: I have no knowledge of these circumstances, but if the hon. Member will put down a Question I will make inquiry. I would point out, however, that I am informed, and I have no reason to doubt it, that Rennie was provided with a civilian overcoat and the money for his journey.
  MR. KEIR HARDIE: Has the right hon. Gentleman received a copy of the letter sent to Lord Lovat in connection with this case, in which all the facts I have stated are set forth?
  MR. HALDANE: I have not seen the letter, but if the hon. Member will put down another Question I will make inquiry.

  Military Churches in India.
  MR. C. E. PRICE: I beg to ask the Under-Secretary of State for India whether any of the churches attached to the military stations in India which have been consecrated to the Episcopalian form, of worship have at any time been used by any other denomination for any other form of service; and, if so, where and when.
  THE UNDER-SECRETARY OF STATE FOR INDIA (Mr. BUCHANAN, ): If the hon. Member will refer to the Memorandum prefixed to the Papers recently presented to Parliament (Cd. 4022), he will see that consecrated churches at military stations in India have frequently, with the consent of the Bishops, been used for Presbyterian and Wesleyan services, except for the celebration of the Communion.
  DR. RUTHERFORD: At whose cost were those churches built? At the cost of the Anglicans or the Indians?
  MR. BUCHANAN: For the most part the cost came out of the Indian Exchequer.
  DR. RUTHERFORD: That is, the Indian taxpayer?
  MR. BUCHANAN: Yes.
  MR. C. E. PRICEasked whether it would not be possible to use those churches now as had been done in the past, so that Scottish regiments could be moved about in India as the military authorities desired.
  MR. BUCHANANsaid he could not accept the statement that the movements of the Scottish regiments in India were impeded by anything the Government did at the present time.
  MR. EUGENE WASONasked whether it was not the fact that there was increased opposition on the part of the Anglican Church to giving Presbyterians the right to the use of those churches built by the State in India.
  MR. BUCHANANsaid the Memorandum contained the whole history of the question. He did not think it could be fairly said that since 1899 there had been any alteration or exacerbation of the attitude of the Anglican Church towards Nonconformists.
  *MR. SMEATON: Will the hon. Gentleman bring influence to bear on the metropolitan to induce the bishops to consent to the extended use of these churches by Presbyterians?
  MR. BUCHANAN: If the hon. Member will refer to the Papers he will see that the Government have done everything they can to induce the metropolitan and other bishops to adopt the attitude which my hon. friend desires in regard to the use of these ehurches for the celebration of the most sacred rites of our religion.
  MR. WATT: Has consent ever been given by Anglican authorities for the use of these churches for Presbyterian services?
  MR. BUCHANAN: I have said so.

  Punjab Irrigation Works.
  MR. C. J. O'DONNELL: I beg to ask the Undersecretary of State for India whether the net profit from Government irrigation works in the Punjab last year was roundly £1,000,000, or 13 per cent. on the capital invested; whether it was as high as 25 per cent. on the Chenab Canal system, which includes the Sikh Colonies; and whether, seeing that excessive irrigation rates have been judicially declared to be the chief cause of unrest amongst the Sikh population, he will say what action, if any, he proposes to take in the matter.
  MR. BUCHANAN: The figures given in the Question are approximately correct. There is no evidence, so far as the Secretary of State is aware, that the rates on the Chenab Canal are excessive, or that they are the cause of unrest. Proposals for raising existing rates on the Bari Doab Canal occasioned some discontent, but the new rates were not put in force, and the lieutenant-governor undertook to re-examine them. The Chenab rates, judging from the competition for land and its selling price, leave large profits to the cultivator.
  MR. C. J. O'DONNELL: Was it not mentioned and accepted by the judicial authorities that the riots were due to the excessive taxation of land?
  MR. REES: Was not the judicial opinion that the ii crease of the rate induced the riots, and not that the rate itself was excessive?
  MR. BUCHANAN: I do not think there was any specific allegation that the irrigation rates on the Chenab Canal were excessive and were the cause of any unrest or trouble in the locality.
  *MR. SMEATON: Was not the capital for the construction of this canal obtained by loan and do not the Sikh peasants, as taxpayers, contribute their share of the interest due on the money borrowed; and is it reasonable that these peasants should at the same time be charged these excessive rates? Is it fair?
  *MR. SPEAKER: Order, order. That is an argumentative Question.

  Uganda Import Duties.
  MR. SMEATON: I beg to ask the Under-Secretary of State for the Colonies whether the officials in the Uganda Protectorate are required to pay 10 per cent. duty on all articles of food, clothing, and other necessaries of life which, owing to the difficulty in obtaining local supplies, they are obliged to import; whether the Governor receives a special allowance to meet the import charges on all articles which he imports; and whether it is contemplated to make some similar allowances to the officials of the Protectorate.
  THE UNDER-SECETARY OF STATE FOE THE COLONIES (Colonel SEELY,): In accordance with the practice formerly prevailing in most Colonies, the Governor of Uganda was until recently exempted from the payment of Custom duties. This exemption is now being abolished in the Colonies, and in Uganda a duty allowance has been granted to the Governor in lieu of it. It is not proposed to give allowances to other officials, who never enjoyed the exemption; but the cost of living in the Protectorate is naturally one of the factors considered in fixing their emoluments.

  Uganda Officials' Insurance against Loss.
  MR. SMEATON: I beg to ask the Under-Secretary of State for the Colonies whether he is aware that one guinea is annually deducted from the salary of every administrative officer in the Uganda Protectorate as premium of an insurance

  1083
  against loss in the money transactions of those officers; whether the insurance office to which this premium is paid is the Crown Agent of the Colony; whether in cases of loss of money, notwithstanding the insurance with the Crown Agent, the officers concerned are required to make good the amounts lost; whether this one guinea premium is retained by the Crown Agent, notwithstanding that no loss has occurred; and whether it is intended that this system shall continue.
  COLONEL SEELY: Administrative officers in Uganda are secured under an agreement with the Law Guarantee and Trust Society, Limited, for £200 each at annual premiums of £1 each. The agreement is to protect the Government against the risk of its being unable to recover from an officer moneys lost by his default, and does not protect the officer from having to make good such moneys. The premiums are paid over to the insurance company, and are not retained by the Crown Agents, who are simply the agents through whom the money is paid to the company by the Protectorate Government. The question of modifying the system of securities now in force in the Crown Colonies and Protectorates is under consideration.

  Natal Indemnity Bill.
  MR. G. GREENWOOD: I beg to ask the Under-Secretary of State for the Colonies whether he has now been made acquainted with the provisions of the Natal Indemnity Bill.
  COLONEL SEELY: No, Sir. The Natal Ministry has been under reconstruction owing to the retirement of a member from ill-health, and the settlement of this and other matters has, no doubt, been delayed in consequence.
  MR. LUPTON: What will occur if this House declines to give the indemnity?
  *MR. SPEAKER: That is a hypothetical Question.

  Tilonko.
  MR. G. GREENWOOD: I beg to ask the Prime Minister whether his attention has
  1084
  been called to a petition recently presented to the House of Commons by the Zulu chief, Tilonko, who is now undergoing a term of ten years imprisonment with hard labour in St. Helena, under sentence of a court martial passed upon him in Natal on 17th August, 1906, more than a month after the passing, by both Houses of the Colonial Legislature, of the Natal Indemnity Act of that year, but before such Act had received the Royal assent; and whether in view of the fact that under the provisions of that Act no appeal is allowed from the sentence of any court martial held in Natal previously to the passing thereof, and that Tilonko is thereby debarred from all legal remedy by way of appeal either to the Privy Council or to the Supreme Court of Natal, he will consider the desirability of advising the Crown to exercise the prerogative of mercy in this case.
  COLONEL SEELY: The Prime Minister has asked me to reply to this Question. I have seen the petition referred to. A similar petition was recently presented to His Majesty, and on the advice of the Secretary of State for the Colonies was referred to the Governor of Natal for such action, if any, as he may be advised to take. No further action in the matter is at present possible.
  MR. G. GREENWOOD: Is not the Government prepared to consider all the facts with a view to advising the exercise of the prerogative of mercy?
  COLONEL SEELY: I have said that no action is at present possible.
  MR. SWIFT MACNEILLasked was it not the fact that the exercise of the prerogative would be on the advice of the Natal Government, under whose system of martial law this chief was condemned to a long term of imprisonment.
  MR. BYLESasked if the Prime Minister would give his personal attention to the matter, as many persons believed the man to have been illegally convicted.
  THE PRIME MINISTER AND FIRST LORD OF THE TREASURY (Mr. ASQUITH,)said he would be happy to do

  1085
  so, but he could not hold out any expectation that the result would be other than that referred to in the answer giv by his hon. and gallant friend.

  Morocco.
  MR. O'GRADY: I beg to ask the Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs whether he is aware that the French have occupied the town of Azimur in Morocco, and on so doing forced the governor to proclaim Mulia Abd El Assiz sultan, the said governor being appointed by Mulia Hafid; and, if so, whether this constitutes an infraction of the Act of Algeciras, which provides that there shall be no interference with the internal affairs of the country.
  THE SECRETARY OF STATE FOR FOREIGN AFFAIRS (Sir EDWARD GREY,): It appears from the information which has reached me that French troops did not occupy Azemour, and that the reconnaissance towards that town was only undertaken in connection with the pacification of the Shawia district, into which large supplies of arms were being passed through Azemour. The answer to the second part of the Question is in the negative.

  Persian Constitution.
  MR. LYNCH: I beg to ask the Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs whether he is aware that the text of Article 45 of the Persian Constitution provides that the Royal Firmans will be sanctioned only when they have received the signature of a responsible minister, and in that case the minister will be responsible for them; will he ascertain whether the military operations which resulted in the sacking of the Persian Parliament House and the suppression of the Parliament were conducted by Colonel Liakhoff and other Russian officers, and, if so, whether the orders executed by them were sanctioned by a responsible minister; and whether, in the opinion of His Majesty's Government, it is in accordance with the spirit of the Anglo-Russian Agreement that military officers lent by Russia to the Persian Government shall direct the suppression by force of arms of the rights guaranteed to the Persian people by their Constitution.
  SIR EDWARD GREY: This is practically the same Question as the hon. Member asked me two days ago, and I am not prepared to give any other reply than I gave then. I have been dealing by telegram with the points which were most urgent in connection with the recent crisis at Teheran; and I cannot form an opinion, and still less say whether it is necessary to express an opinion, upon other matters connected with the proceedings of the Shah and officers in his service till I receive full Reports.

  Scottish Expenditure.
  MR. EUGENE WASON: I beg to ask Mr. Chancellor of the Exchequer what is estimated to be the total expenditure out of the Exchequer, or out of taxes raised by the authority of Parliament, upon purely Scottish purposes in the year 1908–9.
  THE CHANCELLOR OF THE EXCHEQUER (Mr. LLOYD-GEORGE,): The total expenditure on Scottish services in 1908–9, as provided for in the Budget, is estimated at £6,608,000.
  MR. REES: Will the right hon. Gentleman give the figures for purely Welsh purposes?
  MR. LLOYD-GEORGE: I must ask for notice.
  MR. WATT: How much was raised by taxation in Scotland?
  MR. LLOYD-GEORGE: I must ask for notice of that also.

  Prison Trade Instructors.
  MR. WILES: I beg to ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department whether complaints have been brought to his notice of the length of time certain prison officers known as trade instructors are compelled to stand on small platforms overlooking prisoners under their charge; and whether, having regard to the fact that several of these officials have suffered considerably from swollen veins and legs caused by such long periods of standing, he will cause

  1087
  stools to be provided for those who take this special kind of duty.
  THE SECRETARY OF STATE FOR THE HOME DEPARTMENT (Mr. GLADSTONE,): No complaints of this nature have been brought to the notice of the Commissioners. Trade instructors do not stand on platforms, but walk about instructing prisoners. It would be quite impossible for them, or for any other officers, to carry out their duties properly if seated on stools. No reports of officers suffering from swollen veins or legs have been received for a very long time.

  West Ham Guardians Trial—Treatment of Prison Witnesses.
  MR. J. M. MACDONALD: On behalf of the hon. Member for the Hitchin Division of Herts, I beg to ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department whether his attention has been called to the fact that on Tuesday a witness for the Crown named Calcutt, who is at present undergoing a term of imprisonment in one of His Majesty's gaols, was brought into Court for the purpose of giving evidence in a case now proceeding at the Central Criminal Court without having received any food since he began work at 5.30 a.m., and that the Judge adjourned the case in consequence; and, if so, whether he proposes to take any action in the matter.
  MR. GLADSTONE: The facts are not quite accurately stated. The prisoner was employed in cleaning from 6.5 to 6.50. Breakfast was provided for him at 7.0, but he refused to eat any. He was not put to any further work before leaving for the Court. Although it was his own fault that he had no breakfast, I do not think the arrangements were wholly satisfactory, and instructions have been given to ensure his being properly fed at a later hour before he gives his evidence. He will not do prison work while his examination is going on, and will also have special opportunities for exercise.

  Factory Inspector's Report.
  MR. RAMSAY MACDONALD: I beg to ask the Secretary of State
  1088
  for the Home Department if he will state when the annual Report of the Chief Inspector of Factories is to be published.
  MR. GLADSTONE: The Stationery Office informs me that the Report will be issued to-morrow.

  Fencing of Disused Pits.
  MR. GEORGE ROBERTS: I beg to ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department if his attention has been directed to the number of drowning accidents which have recently occurred in the West Cheshire district due to the unprotected state in which disused clay and other pits are left; and whether he will consider the advisability of introducing legislation to so amend the provisions of The Quarry (Fencing) Act, 1887, as to empower local authorities to require that dangerous pits accessible to the public shall be properly fenced.
  MR. GLADSTONE: My attention has been called to a recent case of drowning in a disused clay pit in West Cheshire. The Quarry (Fencing) Act provides for the fencing of dangerous quarries situate in open or unenclosed land within fifty yards of a public place, and gives power to a local authority to enforce the requirement. Some amendment of the provisions of the Act with a view to securing greater safety for the public is perhaps desirable, and the point has been noted for consideration in connection with the next amendment of he law relating to quarries.

  Load Lines.
  MR. SUMMERBELL: I beg to ask the President of the Board of Trade, in view of the statement made to the House on 4th April, 1906, to the effect that negotiations were proceeding with Germany with a view to an arrangement being arrived at under which each country would accept load-lines assigned by the other, if he is in a position to state the result of such negotiations; whether such negotiations had anything to do with the altering of the load-line; and whether the men engaged in the mercantile marine were at all consulted in the matter.
  THE PRESIDENT OF THE BOARD OF TRADE (Mr. CHURCHILL,): The negotiations with Germany as to the freeboard regulations of each country being treated as equally effective as their own by the other are almost concluded, and I have every hope that the result will be satisfactory to both countries. These negotiations were not entered into until after the revision of the British Load-Line Tables had been completed. This revision was the outcome of representations and conferences which had been in progress since 1899 between the Board of Trade and the other assigning bodies; and in the course of that revision the German Regulations of 1903 were duly considered. As the matter was one purely for technical experts it was not considered necessary to consult representatives of officers and seamen with regard to it.
  MR. SUMMERBELL: Is the old load-line to be restored?
  MR. CHURCHILL: I am unable to forecast the decision of the Committee.

  Overcrowding on the District Railway.
  MR. POWER: I beg to ask the President of the Board of Trade whether he is aware of the continued overcrowding which still takes place on most of the trains of the District Railway in spite of the assurances of the company to Parliament that they were closely watching the traffic and making arrangements accordingly; if his attention has been called to the fact that, except during certain hours in the mornings and evenings, the District trains consist of not more than two ordinary and one first-class carriage; and whether, considering the great overcrowding which takes place on these three-carriage trains, he will see that at any rate a fourth carriage is provided on such trains.
  MR. CHURCHILL: The Board of Trade are informed that the railway company are at present putting all their rolling stock through the shops for thorough overhaul and for the removal of the pneumatic arrangements controlling the carriage doors, and the substitution of latches. The company expect that this work will be finished by the autumn
  1090
  and they then intend to increase the number of carriages on their trains. In the meantime they state that they do no anticipate that there will be any cause for complaint with regard to overcrowding as during the holiday season the traffic on their line is considerably decreased.
  MR. POWERasked whether the right hon. Gentleman was aware that on the Circle line every train was composed of four carriages, and that every train was full. Might he assure him that the overcrowding on the District Railway went on every day, as Members of the House could testify?
  MR. KEIR HARDIEasked whether four carriages could not be put on every train on the District Railway at certain hours every day.
  MR. RIDSDALE: Has the right hon. Gentleman contemplated, in the event of an accident, the serious results which might follow from this overcrowding?
  MR. CHURCHILLsaid he would address the railway company on the subject, and acquaint them with the statements made in the House; but the information he had given was that which had been furnished by the company.
  MR. POWER: The right hon. Gentleman has been quite deceived by the reply of the company.
  MR. CHURCHILL: I hope it is not so bad as all that.

  The Board of Trade and International Exhibitions.
  MR. PATRICK O'BRIEN: I beg to ask the President of the Board of Trade whether the Board of Trade has set up a Department to deal with International Exhibitions, with an honorary director for art sections, British art; whether he will give the names of the members of the new Department and of the director; and whether he proposes to appoint an Irish director for the supervision of Irish art.
  MR. CHURCHILL: In reply to my hon. friend, I beg to state that the Board of

  1091
  Trade have established a new branch of their Commercial Department to deal with matters arising out of the possible participation of Great Britain and Ireland in future international exhibitions. Mr. U. F. Wintour has been appointed officer in charge of the Exhibition Branch, Sir Isidore Spielmann, C.M.G., has also been appointed Honorary Director for British (including Irish) Art at International Exhibitions. When the necessary arrangements are being made for particular exhibitions care will be taken that the interests of Irish art and industry shall intimately be studied, but I am not advised that the appointment of a permanent officer is necessary.

  Misleading Cigar Boxes.
  MR. RAMSAY MACDONALD: I beg to ask the President of he Board of Trade whether his attention has been drawn to certain prosecutions for the purpose of restraining the British manufacturers of cigars from using boxes with labels printed in Spanish as being contrary to the law of merchandise marks; whether his attention, has also been drawn to the fact that cigars in boxes, with labels printed in Spanish, are imported from countries where Spanish is not more commonly spoken than it is in Great Britain; and whether he proposes, in view of the handicap which this places upon the British manufacturer, to equalise the administration of the law between British manufacturer and foreign importer.
  MR. CHURCHILL: My attention has been called to the prosecutions referred to. I entirely agree with the hon. Member that there should be equality in the administration of the law between British and foreign manufacturers, and I am now in communication with the Customs on the subject.

  Members' Privileges—Free Postage.
  MR. WILLIAM REDMOND: I beg to ask the Postmaster-General whether letters directed by Members of Parliament to public officials or departments, such as the Irish Land Com missioners, are entitled to go stamp free.
  THE POSTMASTER-GENERAL (Mr. SYDNEY BUXTON,): Members of Parliament have no special postal privileges. Generally speaking, any letter on official business, which is directed to a Metropolitan Government Department, such as the Irish Land Commission, or to one of the chief officials of such a Government Department at his official address, may be posted without a stamp.
  MR. WILLIAM REDMONDinquired if letters addressed to Government Departments in Ireland, with which hon. Members had to communicate very frequently, needed to be stamped.
  MR. SYDNEY BUXTONreplied that the Metropolitan Departments would cover London, Edinburgh, and Dublin.
  MR. PATRICK O'BRIEN: Then I have paid a lot of money unnecessarily—money which I could ill afford.
  MR. SYDNEY BUXTON: I am afraid I cannot undertake to refund any money paid.
  MR. O'SHAUGHNESSY: Can letters to the Estates Commissioners be sent without stamps?
  MR. SYDNEY BUXTONwas understood to reply in the affirmative.

  Dublin Post Office—Stores Department Clerks' Salaries.
  MR. CREAN: I beg to ask the Postmaster-General whether the salary of third-class clerks in the Stores Department, Dublin, is £15 a year less than the same class in London; whether the candidates for this class in both cities have to pass the same competitive examination and are performing identical duties; whether, seeing that the Hob-house Committee has recommended equality of treatment, he will say whether this recommendation has been acted on in connection with the second division, assistant, and women clerks employed at the Dublin Post Office; and, if so, whether he can say why an exception has been made in the case of third class clerks in Dublin.
  MR. SYDNEY BUXTON: I do not know what recommendation of the Hobhouse Committee the hon. Member refers to. The pay of the third class clerks has been fixed on the analogy of that of third class clerks in engineering offices, for whom the Select Committee recommended a difference in emoluments to the extent of £15, in favour of those employed in London. The recommendations of the Committee did not cover second division and assistant clerks as such officers belong to classes not exclusively employed in the Post Office. As regards the women clerks the Committee recommended a somewhat lower scale for women clerks in Dublin and Edinburgh than for those employed in London.

  Postal Officials and Betting Telegrams.
  MR. RAMSAY MACDONALD: I beg to ask the Postmaster-General whether he has been taking action upon complaints recently sent, to him from betting agents, whose headquarters are on the Continent, alleging that members of the Pout Office staff are guilty of malpractices in connection with the transmission of bets through the post; whether he has taken steps to protect postmen, otherwise than by punishing those who have been found guilty, from the temptations placed in their way by the advertisements of these betting agents; and whether he has taken any steps to make it difficult for these agents to use the Post Office for their purposes.
  MR. SYDNEY BUXTON: It is obviously necessary to investigate complaints which impute malpractices to members of the Post Office staff, and to take action according to the result of such investigations. Illegal advertisements of betting agents are stopped if they are posted in open covers; but I have no power to open or detain closed letters, on the suspicion that they contain such circulars. I have recently taken steps to withhold in such cases facilities for prepayment of postage in money. I may add that the whole question of lottery and other circulars is under the consideration of a Joint Committee of both Houses, and my Department have given evidence before the Committee.

  House of Commons Medicine Chest.
  MR. PATRICK O'BRIEN: I beg to ask the First Commissioner of Works whether he is aware that some years ago it was arranged, as a provision in case of accident or illness of Members or others persons in the Houses of Parliament, that a properly-equipped medicine chest would be provided, and also a room in which those needing prompt medical attention could be treated; whether he is aware that on a recent occasion, when a Member of the House required medical aid, it was found that the so-called medical chest consisted of a small basket less than twelve inches square, which did not contain the most ordinary first-aid requirements, some of which had to be obtained from a neighbouring hospital; whether he can explain this state of things; and will he invite some of the medical Members of the House to suggest what necessary medicines and medical appliances should be provided, and see that they are available in the shortest possible time in case of accident or sudden illness.
  THE FIRST COMMISSIONER OF WORKS (Mr. L. HARCOURT,): The Sergeant-at-Arms has for many years generously placed his room at the disposal of Members when medical attention is required. I much regret to hear that the medicine chest on a recent occasion was found to be insufficiently equipped, but I am informed that the material required was available in the box attached to the ambulance if that had been examined. I shall take immediate steps to obtain the best gratuitous advice from the medical Members of this House as to what is required, and see that it is provided and is easily and immediately available in case of emergency.
  MR. PATRICK O'BRIENasked who was responsible for not having examined the alleged medicine chest on this particular occasion.
  MR. L. HARCOURT: The whole matter is very complicated. It was decided two years ago that it would be impossible to bear the expense of such a service on any of the Votes. Therefore we are indebted to the generosity of the hon.

  1095
  Member for Edinburgh University for the provision of the medicine chest. When it required to be replenished a year ago, owing to the difficulty that faced me in view of the Comptroller and Auditor-General, I was compelled to ask the same hon. Member to replenish it at his own expense. I have made arrangements recently by which I hope to be able to supply the necessities of al Members.
  MR. CROOKS: Will you have to get an outdoor medical relief order?

  Kew Gardens Painters.
  MR. SUMMERBELL: I beg to ask the First Commissioner of Works if he could state whether any extra pay is allowed the workmen employed, either by day or contract work, while employed painting and cleaning the dangerous parts of the palm house or pagoda in the Royal Gardens at Kew; and, if so, how much.
  MR. HARCOURT: The reply to the first paragraph is in the negative. The contractors, however, pay a heavy premium upon the insurance of workmen engaged on this work, amounting to 40s. per cent., which is considerably above the ordinary rate.

  Elementary School Teachers.
  SIR THOMAS ROE: On behalf of the hon. Member for North-West Norfolk, I beg to ask the President of the Board of Education whether lie will publish the next result list of the preliminary examination for the elementary school teachers' certificate, with the names in order of merit, and indicate those who have stated their desire to enter a training college.
  I beg also to ask the President of the Board of Education whether he will consider the desirability of paying the grants for the maintenance of training colleges and hostels in respect of individual students selected according to the order of merit, as shown by the preliminary examination for the elementary school teacher's certificate, instead of paying grants in respect of
  1096
  whichever students the colleges choose to admit.
  THE PARLIAMENTARY SECRETARY TO THE BOARD OF EDUCATION (Mr. MCKINNON WOOD,): The preliminary examination, as at present organised, is designed to establish a standard rather than to afford a test of comparative merit. There are serious objections to the adoption of the scheme suggested in these Questions. A considerable number of colleges have been, or are being, provided by local education authorities, who naturally desire to give preference to candidates residing in their own areas, and for other colleges connected with Universities certain special educational qualifications will always be needed. To require that candidates should be admitted to the training colleges strictly in an order of merit based on the single examination test suggested would lower the educational standard of the colleges and discourage local authorities from any further efforts to provide for the training of their teachers. It would also, I imagine, preclude the acceptance by the Board of any examination other than the preliminary as qualifying for admission to a training college. Moreover, a single examination, especially when attended by 20,000 candidates, is generally admitted to be an unsatisfactory test by itself. In the opinion of the Board, the authorities of training colleges, with a view to selecting the most suitable students, ought to be at liberty to supplement the examination results by reports from the authorities of the schools at which the candidates have been educated. These reports, in the opinion of the Board, are decidedly more valuable than the evidence obtained from a competitive examination.

  Kew Gardens.
  MR. SUMMERBELL: I beg to ask the hon. Member for South Somerset, as representing the President of the Board of Agriculture, if he can state by whose authority a large quantity of choice hardy shrubs and herbaceous and alpine plants were removed from the Royal Gardens, Kew, to No 4, Branston Road, Kew; whether any workmen from the

  1097
  Royal Gardens were employed on this private work; whether such action is contrary to the rules of the Gardens; and, if so, what action, if any, he intends to take in regard to the matter.
  THK TREASURER OF THE HOUSEHOLD (Sir EDWARD STRACHEY,): A number of surplus shrubs and plants were with the authority of the director moved by the employees at the Gardens to the residence of the Assistant-Director, who has recently been appointed. The Board are informed that a similar practice has always obtained when a new officer takes up his duties at Kew.
  MR. SUMMERBELL: Did not the hon. Gentleman say a short time ago that no privileges were allowed to the Assistant-Director or Director at Kew?
  SIR EDWARD STRACHEY: I must ask for notice of that.
  MR. SUMMERBELL: I will certainly give it.

  Clergy Pensions.
  MR. RADFORD: I beg to ask the hon. Member for the Crewe Division, as representing the Ecclesiastical Commissioners, whether his attention has been directed to the scheme for clergy pensions recently inaugurated by the Commissioners; whether he is aware that one-third of the parochial clergy, viz.: assistant stipendiary curates, are excluded from the benefits of the scheme; will he say whether this exclusion is due to any limitation by Statute of the Commissioners' powers; and, if so, whether the Commissioners will consider the advisability of applying to Parliament for powers to enable them to extend their scheme so as to include the most necessitous class of the clergy.
  MR. TOMKINSON: Having regard to the limitations imposed by Statute upon the application of the Common Fund of the Ecclesiastical Commissioners the scheme for pensions to aged or infirm incumbents recently inaugurated by the Commissioners cannot without fresh legislation be extended to unbeneficed clergymen.
  MR. RADFORD: Arising out of the reply, I observe that the hon. Gentleman has not replied to the latter part of the Question, viz.: whether the Commissioners will consider the advisability of applying to Parliament for powers to enable them to extend their scheme so as to include the most necessitous class of the clergy. If he has no reply ready on the spur of the moment, will he kindly confer with the Commissioners on the subject?
  MR. TOMKINSON: The Ecclesiastical Commissioners are constantly considering questions such as this, and have considered the Question of the hon. Gentleman. I am afraid that they feel that no useful purpose would be served by applying to Parliament for fresh powers to extend the application of their funds in the direction desired by the hon. Gentleman.
  SIR H. COTTON: Am I to understand that poor curates are entirely excluded from the benefit of the scheme?
  MR. TOMKINSON: Yes, Sir; I understand that retired curates do not come within the scope of the application of the surplus revenue of the Commissioners. The application of the surplus revenue in the hands of the General Commissioners is limited to the "Cure of Souls"—and a pension to a retired curate does not fall within that limit. Subventions to retirement can be made only to incumbents of benefices, and in order to prevent the stipend of a benefice being unduly reduced by the pension of the retiring incumbent and to enable worn-out incumbents to make way for more effective men.

  Clyde Pilot's Grievance.
  MR. JOYCE: I beg to ask the Prime Minister whether he will take any steps to obtain a reconsideration of the exceptional circumstances of the case of a Clyde pilot tried on 15th May last at Glasgow before the Sheriff of Lanark, who sat without the assistance of nautical assessors, although the case rested entirely on points of practical navigation and local pilotage knowledge.
  THE SECRETARY FOR SCOTLAND (Mr. SINCLAIR,): The Prime Minister has requested me to answer this Question, and I have only to say that after full consideration I have nothing to add to my Answer of 6th July to the effect that a rehearing of the case is not legally competent, and as to reduction of penalty I do not see my way to interfere.
  MR. JOYCE: The unsatisfactory Answer I have received in regard to this case has caused a great deal of unrest among the pilots of the United Kingdom, and I hope they will go to a higher authority than this House—to the King himself.

  Limerick Labourers' Cottage Scheme.
  MR. WILLIAM REDMOND: I beg to ask the Chief Secretary to the Lord-Lieutenant of Ireland if he will state what is the cause of the delay in the publication of the result of the inquiry into the labourers' scheme of the Limerick (No. 2) District Council held last March.
  THE CHIEF SECRETARY FOR IRELAND (Mr. BIRRELL,): The inspector's order was signed on the 10th instant, and copies have now been forwarded to the rural district council.

  Riverstown Band and Police.
  MR. O'DOWD: I beg to ask the Chief Secretary to the Lord-Lieutenant of Ireland whether, on the night of the 3rd July instant, the sergeant in charge of the Royal Irish Constabulary, in Riverstown, County Sligo, entered the yard rented by the local band committee and ordered a baton charge; and, if so, will he state under what law police are empowered to enter the private rented premises of any band committee.
  MR. BIRRELL: The police authorities inform me that it is not the fact that the sergeant or any of the police entered the premises of the band committee at Riverstown on the occasion in question. It was necessary that the police, in the discharge of their duty, should keep the band and its followers under observation because of their intimidatory conduct towards the owners of grazing farms whose cattle had been driven. The crowd assumed a threatening attitude
  1100
  towards the sergeant, who ordered the police to draw batons, but there was no necessity to use them as the crowd thereupon withdrew quietly. The incident occurred upon the public road.

  Proclamation of Sligo County.
  MR. O'DOWD: I beg to ask the Chief Secretary to the Lord-Lieutenant of Ireland will he state the grounds on which the Lords Justices issued a proclamation declaring the county of Sligo to be in a disturbed state; whether such proclamation was due to depositions made by certain civilians in the district of Riverstown, in that county; and, if so, can he give the names of these persons.
  MR. BIRRELL: The county of Sligo was proclaimed by the Lords Justices as being in a state of disturbance upon information furnished by the responsible police authorities to the effect that cattle-driving and other forms of intimidation were prevalent in the county. No depositions were made in the matter.
  MR. O'DOWD: Arising out of the reply, may I ask the light hon. Gentleman whether it is a fact that in his charge to the Grand Jury at the recent Sligo Assizes, Judge Johnson made no reference whatever to the alleged disturbed state of the county; and whether he is aware that the foreman of the Grand Jury, who is a Unionist and also Lord-Lieutenant of the county, absolutely refused to make any representations to his Lordship on the subject.
  *MR. SPEAKER: Notice should be given of that Question.

  Riverstown Boycotting Case.
  MR. O'DOWD: I beg to ask the Chief Secretary to the Lord-Lieutenant of Ireland whether his attention has been drawn to the fact that Catherine Cogan, of Riverstown, County Sligo, has repudiated all knowledge of boycotting and intimidation having been directed against her; and, if so, will he say whether this was one of the reported cases used as a justification for having extra police drafted into a peaceable district.
  MR. BIRRELL: I am informed by the police authorities that Mrs. Cogan's

  1101
  name has never appeared on the list of persons who are subject to boycotting and intimidation. The case, therefore, has had no bearing upon the appointment of additional police to County Sligo.
  MR. O'DOWD: Arising out of the reply, may I ask the right hon. Gentleman whether it is a fact that in May last a meeting was held in an out-of-the-way Mayo village, between the Vice-President of the Local Government Board and the representative of the Landowners' Association, and whether it was in consequence of this meeting that the county was proclaimed?
  MR. BIERBLLsaid he had no knowledge of such a meeting.

  Work of the Irish Congested Districts Board.
  MR. KAVANAGH: I beg to ask the Chief Secretary to the Lord-Lieutenant of Ireland whether the Government have yet considered the Report of the Royal Commission on Congestion in Ireland; if so, whether it is intended to carry out the recommendations of the Commission by legislation, and, if so, when; and in the meantime what provisions, if any, have been made to enable the Congested Districts Board to continue their land-purchasing operations.
  MR. BIRRELL: The Report of the Royal Commission on Congestion in Ireland is under the consideration of the Government, and, as I have already announced, it is proposed to introduce legislation on the subject in the coming autumn. The question of increasing the statutory income of the Congested Districts Board cannot be dealt with apart from that legislation, and consequently the Board cannot in the meantime incur fresh liabilities by proceeding with the purchase of estates generally. The hon. Member, however, will be aware, from my Answer to the hon. Member for East Mayo on 7th instant, that arrangements are under consideration whereby the Board may at once be placed in funds for proceeding with the improvement of estates already purchased.
  MR. JOHN REDMONDMay I ask whether the question of increasing the income of the Congested Districts Board and the question of enabling them to carry on the work for the time being are not entirely distinct questions? And am I right in gathering from the right hon. Gentleman's Answer that, pending the consideration of legislation in the autumn, no provision is to be made to enable the Congested Districts Board to carry on its work in the meantime?
  MR. BIRRELL: What is now under consideration is a loan to the Board to enable it to carry on its work in the meantime.
  MR. JOHN REDMOND: Its land purchase work?
  MR. BIRRELL: No, its general work.
  MR. JOHN REDMOND: Do the Government intend to suspend the operation of land purchase in the meantime.
  *MR. BIRRELL: The Congested Districts Board have recently decided to purchase eight large estates on, my advice and there is no reason to increase further their purchases of land within the next few months.
  MR. CONOR O'KELLY: Will this loan enable the Congested Districts Board to purchase selected estates for which negotiations have been going on for the past twelve months?
  *MR. BIRRELL: The Congested Districts Board under my advice some months ago agreed to negotiate for the purchase of several very large estates amounting to enormous sums of money. These will be proceeded with. The loan is to enable the Board, pending the consideration of increasing their statutory income, to proceed with improvements.
  MR. JOHN REDMOND: Will this loan obviate the threatened dismissal of the workmen under the Board?
  MR. BIRRELL: I cannot quite answer; that Question until the amount of the loan is determined.
  MR. JOHN REDMOND: Will steps be taken by the right hon. Gentleman to press upon the Government as a whole the extreme seriousness of the situation if these men are all dismissed and the whole work of the Board brought to a standstill?
  MR. BIRRELL: The whole object of the loan is to prevent the operations of the Board being brought to a standstill. I am fully alive to the importance of that.

  Ulster Catholics and University Education.
  MR. C. J. O'DONNELL: I beg to ask the Chief Secretary to the Lord-Lieutenant of Ireland what provision he proposes to make for the University education of Catholics in Ulster, who form half the population of that province, seeing that no facilities are given to them in the Irish Universities Bill, whilst two colleges, Belfast and Magee, are provided for Presbyterians, who form only one-third of the population of Ulster.
  MR. BIRRELL: I do not propose to make any further provision for University education.
  MR. C. J. O'DONNELL: Will the hon. Gentleman consider the advisability of providing a college for West Ulster where most of the Catholics are?
  MR. BIRRELL: I cannot do more fit the present moment than promote the interests of the University of Belfast, and I hope they will attend there.
  MR. FLYNN: Will the Catholics there not have the same privileges as the non-Catholics of Cork and Dublin?
  MR. BIRRELL: Precisely so.

  Primary Education Conference.
  MR. C. J. O'DONNELL: I beg to ask the Chief Secretary to the Lord-Lieutenant of Ireland if there is a Regulation of the National Board of Education
  1104
  requiring the two chief inspectors of national schools to hold conferences to discuss questions relating to primary education with the inspectors, some thirty in number, subordinate to each chief inspector; and, if so, whether this Regulation has been frequently disregarded in recent years; and if he will ascertain what action the Commissioners of Education have taken or propose to take.
  MR. BIRRELL: The Commissioners of National Education inform me that their instructions require that the chief inspectors shall hold at least one conference in the year with the inspectors of each circuit, and that these instructions are strictly followed.

  Clanricarde Estate Evicted Tenants.
  MR. JOHN ROCHE: I beg to ask the. Chief Secretary to the Lord-Lieutenant of Ireland whether he can state the number of applications from evicted tenants upon the Clanricarde Estate for reinstatement in their holdings, and how many have been reinstated up to date.
  MR. BIRRELL: The Estates Commissioners inform me that so far as they are aware no change has taken place in this matter since I answered the hon. Member's similar Question on 20th May last.

  Completion of Land Purchase Agreements.
  MR. JOHN ROCHE: I beg to ask the Chief Secretary to the Lord-Lieutenant of Ireland whether landlords who have come to agreements to purchase with their tenants have been paid promptly the purchase price as soon as the examiners of title have got through their duties and the work of inspection has been completed; and whether any landlord has been kept out of the money agreed to be paid for his land by reason of the fact that the Estates Commissioners were short of funds.
  MR. BIRRELL: The Answer to the first part of the Question is in the affirmative, and the Answer to the second part is in the negative.

  Rathmullan Evicted Farmer.
  MR. O'DOHERTY: I beg to ask the Chief Secretary to the Lord-Lieutenant of Ireland whether he is aware that the attention of the Estates Commissioners has been called to the claim of Joseph Gallagher to the farm on the estate of C. F. Stewart, situate at Ray, Rathmullan, North Donegal, from which his brother Patrick Gallagher was evicted over twenty years ago; whether he is aware that the estate was recently bought by the Estates Commissioners to be resold to the tenants; and, seeing that the farm is in the occupation of one Bryan Meehan, who does not reside on it, as a grazing ranch, whether he will direct the Estates Commissioners to reinstate Joseph Gallagher in the farm, which he held jointly with his brother, or in one of equal value, or award adequate compensation.
  MR. BIRRELL: The Estates Commissioners have received from Joseph Gallagher an application for reinstatement. The estate in question has not been purchased by the Commissioners, but proceedings have recently been instituted before them for direct sale by the owner to the tenants. The Commissioners will consider Gallagher's application when the estate reaches its turn to be dealt with, but this cannot be for a considerable time to come.

  Innishowen Labourers' Cottages.
  MR. O'DOHERTY: I beg to ask the Chief Secretary to the Lord-Lieutenant of Ireland whether his attention has been tailed to the refusal of the Estates Commissioners to pay the half or any portion of the compensation paid to them for land acquired from the occupying tenants for labourers' cottages in the Innishowen rural district, North Donegal; and, if so, whether he will take steps to have the tenants' annual instalments reduced in proportion to the land taken and the proper portion of the compensation granted paid to them.
  MR. BIRRELL: The Land Commission are unable to identify the particular cases referred to in the Question, as the particulars of the arbitrator's award have I not been notified to the Commissioners, and they have not received the compen-
  1106
  sation money. Upon the subject generally the Commissioners inform me that there are two kinds of cases to be dealt with. First, the case of direct sales in which purchase agreements have been lodged, but the advances have not yet been made. In these cases, when portions of the holdings are acquired under the Labourers Acts, the Commissioners require that the purchase agreements; should be amended by excluding the plots so acquired and reducing the purchase money as the landlord and tenants may agree. The compensation money in such cases is payable to the owner and tenant and not to the Commissioners. The second class of ease is that in which the lands are already charged with an annuity under the Land Purchase Acts. The annuity is a paramount charge upon the lands, and when any part of such lands is acquired under the Labourers Acts, the proper proportion of the annuity must be redeemed if the local authority is to acquire the land free from encumbrance. When the plot taken is small as compared with the entire holding, or when the annuity has been paid for a considerable number of years, the Commissioners hold that a proportionately smaller part of the compensation may be applied in part redemption of the annuity. But when the plot taken represents the whole or the greater portion of the holding, it is essential that the whole or greater part of the annuity should be redeemed out of the compensation money, if the rates of the county are not to suffer. All compensation moneys received by the Commissioners are applied in full in the redemption pro tanto of the outstanding advances under the Land Acts, and the tenant-purchasers' annuities are reduced accordingly.
  MR. KILBRIDEasked on what basis—when only a small portion of a farm was taken compulsorily by the local authority—the calculation for compensation was based.
  MR. BIRRELL: Each case has to be considered on its merits. When a small portion of land is taken to provide for labourers' cottages the compensation awarded has, in the first instance, to be so applied as to redeem a pro tanto

  1107
  amount of the purchase annuity, otherwise there would be no proper security left for the ratepayers. It is a rather difficult job to make the calculation.

  Irish Loan Stock.
  MR. DUNN: I beg to ask Mr. Chancellor of the Exchequer whether he is aware that in the issue of the Guaranteed £2 15s. Irish Loan Stock no application for less than £2,000 stock has received allotment, thus absolutely ignoring the small investor; whether this practice is to be pursued in the future; and, if so, whether an official intimation to the effect that no small investors need apply will be made to the public.
  MR. LLOYD-GEORGE: The method of allotment was settled after the applications had been received. In view of the very large number of applications for small amounts, it was found to be impossible to apply any method of pro rata allotment to all the applicants. It is not the practice to make an allotment of a less amount than £100 stock, and, in order to observe this rule and at the same time to ensure as nearly as possible a pro rata allotment, it was found necessary to exclude all applications under £2,000. Such a course is only resorted to when the number of applications for small amounts renders it necessary, so that it would be impossible as well as inexpedient to give notice beforehand of the maner in which applications can be dealt with.
  MR. SWIFT MACNEILL: Therefore, the whole benefit of this loan falls into the maws of the Stock Exchange sharks.
  SIR F. BANBURY: Is the right hon. Gentleman aware that advantage has been taken of the Supposed preference given to small investors to enable the sharks referred to by the hon. Member for South Donegal to obtain large allotments by filling up an enormous number of small applications?
  MR. LLOYD-GEORGE: I quite agree. The question is not so simple
  1108
  as it appears. In the past advantage has undoubtedly been taken of the preference given to small investors.
  MR. FLYNN: Has not a distinguished ex-Chancellor of the Exchequer declared that this stock should have been issued at £1 higher in favour of Ireland? Can the right hon. Gentleman say why that was not done?
  MR. LLOYD-GEORGE: I have explained the circumstances over and over again.
  MR. RIDSDALE: Will the right hon. Gentleman consider the advisability of allowing preferential allotment to small applicants who pay in full on application?
  MR. LLOYD-GEORGE: I am not sure that would be a sufficient guarantee, and I am perfectly certain it would be a very great mistake for me to say so beforehand.
  MR. WATT: I beg to ask Mr. Chancellor of the Exchequer if he will state the number of applicants for £250 stock, or less, of the recent issue of Irish Land Stock; how many of these were granted allotments and how many were refused; and whether in future issues he will provide some means of giving allotments to applicants for small sums on some condition that they will hold the stock for a certain time whereby their bona fides as investors will be proved.
  MR. LLOYD-GEORGE: Applications could only be made in multiples of £100. The applications for £100 and £200 numbered 14,412. It was impossible, in view of the number of the applications, to make an allotment in any of these cases. The object of my hon. friend's suggestion is one that has my full sympathy, and I shall be prepared to consider any method that can be suggested for attaining it, but the difficulties appear to be considerable.

  Irish Expenditure.
  SIR F. BANBURY: I beg to ask Mr. Chancellor of the Exchequer what is estimated to be the

  1109
  total expenditure out of the Exchequer, or out of taxes raised by the authority of Parliament, upon purely Irish purposes in the year 1908–9.
  MR. LLOYD-GEORGE: The total expenditure on Irish services in 1908–9, as provided for in the Budget, is estimated at £8,172,000.

  Ireland and the Income-Tax.
  MR. VINCENT KENNEDY: I beg to ask Mr. Chancellor of the Exchequer if he will state the proportion which the income-tax assessment on which taxes were contributed by Ireland bears to that of Great Britain for the years 1904–5,1905–6,1906–7, and 1907–8.
  MR. LLOYD - GEORGE: The respective amounts of income-tax contributed by Great Britain and Ireland must necessarily be a matter of speculation, but calculated on the basis of the estimate shown in the Return (House of Commons Paper No. 242 of 1907), "relating to Imperial Revenue (Collection and Expenditure) (Great Britain and Ireland) for the year eroding 31st March, 1907," they would be as follows—

  Year.

  Great Britain.

  Ireland.

  £.

  £.

  1904–5

  29,737,000

  1,115,000

  1905–6

  29,803,000

  1,085,000

  1906–7

  30,377,000

  1,102,000

  1907–8

  30,356,000

  1,106,000

  MR. JOHN REDMOND: Is it not the fact that the amount raised for each 1d. in the £ in Ireland is a decreasing quantity, while in England it is an increasing one?
  MR. LLOYD-GEORGE: It looks like it.
  MR. R. DUNCAN: Can the figures for Great Britain be divided for England and Scotland?
  MR. LLOYD-GEORGEasked for notice.

  Transfer of Coastguards to the Customs.
  MR. SUMMERBELL: I beg to ask the Prime Minister if it is the intention of the
  1110
  Government to grant facilities to discuss the recommendations of the Inter-Departmental Committee that has inquired into the proposed transfer of the Coastguard to the Customs; and, if so, when.
  MR. ASQUITH: I regret that it will not be possible to find an opportunity for discussing the recommendations of this Committee.

  Foreign Office Vote.
  MR. LYNCH: I beg to ask the Prime Minister on what date the promise given to the hon. Member for the Ripon divison on 4th June that the Foreign Office Vote would be put down for discussion in the ordinary course this session will be fulfilled.
  MR. ASQUITH: I hope that a portion of Monday, the 27th, may be set aside for the Foreign Office Vote.

BUSINESS OF THE HOUSE.
MR. WALTER LONG: Is the Prime Minister in a position to state what the business will be for next week?
MR. ASQUITHsaid that if the Procedure Resolution with regard to the Licensing Bill were carried the next day, Monday and Tuesday would be given to the first clause of the Licensing Bill in Committee. On Wednesday the Indian Budget would be taken, and on Thursday and Friday the Report stage of the Irish Universities Bill. On Saturday the Third Reading of the Finance Bill and the Irish Universities Bill would be taken.
COLONEL WILLIAMS: Will there be any opportunity of discussing the Report of the Public Accounts Committee?
MR. ASQUITH: I quite recognise the importance of the Report being discussed, but I cannot hold out any hope of time being found for it this year.
MR. AUSTEN CHAMBERLAINpointed out that only two days had been occupied in Committee on the Finance Bill. There was no Report stage, and he

1111
asked whether the right hon. Gentleman would not give the House a more satisfactory opportunity of discussing the Third Reading. This was one of the most important measures of the session and it was, he thought, the universal practice to put the Bill down as the first order on an ordinary day.
MR. ASQUITH: I do not remember any session in recent years in which the financial arrangements of the Government have been more largely discussed.
SIR F. BANBURY: In the event of the Third Reading of the Finance Bill and the Report stage of the Irish Universities Bill being obtained before Saturday, the House will not sit on that day?
MR. ASQUITH: That is so.
SIR EDWARD SASSOONwas understood to ask when the Board of Education Vote would be taken.
MR. ASQUITH: I cannot make any statement as to that.

POST OFFICE SITES BILL [LORDS].
Read the first time; to be read a second time upon Wednesday next, and to be printed. [Bill 325.]
Ordered, That the Examiners of Petitions for Private Bills do examine the Post Office Sites Bill [Lords] with respect to compliance with the Standing Orders relative to Private Bills.—(Mr. Sydney Buxton).

NEW BILL.
  NATIONALISATION OF CANALS AND RAILWAYS BILL.
  "To provide for the Nationalisation of Canals and Railways," presented by Mr. William Thorne; supported by Mr. Steadman, Mr. Shackleton, Mr. Gill, Mr. Bell, Mr. Bowerman, Mr. James Haslam, and Mr. Wilkie; to be read a second time upon Monday, 27th July, and to be printed.

SUPPLY [I7TH ALLOTTED DAY.]
Considered in Committee.
(In the Committee.)
[Mr. EMMOTT (Oldham) in the Chair.]

REVENUE DEPARTMENT.
Motion made and Question proposed, "That a sum, not exceeding £11,821,531 be granted to His Majesty to complete the sum necessary to defray the Charge which will come in course of payment during the year ending on the 31st day of March, 1909, for the Salaries and Expenses of the Post Office, including Telegraphs and Telephones.
THE POSTMASTER-GENERAL (Mr. SYDNEY BUXTON,): It is customary for the Postmaster-General on this Vote to make a general statement as to the position of the Post Office for the past year, as the expenditure and revenue of the Post Office has now become a very considerable item in our national expenditure. The revenue last year was £22,500,000 and the expenditure was £18,750,000, the surplus being rather over £3,750,000. The estimate of revenue for the present year was £23,000,000 and of expenditure £19,500,000, which gives a surplus of about £3,750,000 again. While the revenue of the Post Office up to a short time ago was fairly elastic, it has now, like other portions of the revenue, shown some falling off, and something in the nature of a stimulus or fillip seems to be required in order to increase the postal revenue. That can be secured in one or two ways. One would be a general election, which would be a very profitable thing for the Post Office; but short of that, public excitement on any particular question is an advantage. Therefore, without expressing any view with regard to woman suffrage or the Licensing Bill, I would say to those who are advocating or opposing those measures: "Agitate agitate, so long as you do it in the proper channel—that is, continue your agitation by means of the penny post." Either the suffragists or the opponents of the Licensing Bill, if they carry out the policy which I suggest to them, will enjoy the double advantage of reflecting that they are doing something to bring

1113
to an end this iniquitous Government, and at the same time to assist the revenue of the country. But there is another form in which the public may contribute to the postal revenue. We have had from time to time various postal crazes. There have been valentines, Christmas cards, and latterly picture post-cards. Last year I pointed out that the picture post-card craze was falling off, and I suggested that the public should direct their superfluous energy and cash into some new form of postal revenue. They responded to my appeal and devoted themselves to Limericks. I find that Limericks bring in postal revenue in this way. The figures are very remarkable. Those who go in for Limericks are told they will get a cottage and a cart—at least, so I am informed, for I have never been in for a Limerick—and they buy sixpenny postal orders. The postal orders themselves are not particularly profitable, but I am glad to say that a considerable amount of correspondence is also involved. The public in the last six months of the past year would have bought in the ordinary way between 700,000 or 800,000 sixpenny postal orders. They actually bought no less than 11,400,000, or fourteen times as many. I am sorry to say that that particular craze has now disappeared. Of course, I am speaking only from the postal point of view, because I have been accused of encouraging gambling and lotteries by the sale of sixpenny orders. But I have, no option. If people want to buy my sixpenny orders, I have got to sell them. I have been considering the, matter, and I have been thinking, for the coming year, of offering a very substantial prize, if the Treasury will allow me, for some public craze which will at the same time be both profitable and innocent—a sort of craze which will pass the scrutiny of the Anti-Gambling League and the Manchester Watch Committee. So far with regard to revenue. I would like to say that as regards expenditure the matter is not so satisfactory, because, while the revenue has been fairly elastic during the last two and a half years, and has been increasing by from £1,000,000 to £2,000,000 a year, the expenditure has unfortunately risen to a larger amount. This is due to the ordinary automatic
1114
increase arising from the increased amount of matter which goes through the Post Office. I know that many postal reformers, including the hon. Member for Canterbury, argue on the seductive fallacy that you can carry any amount of additional postal matter without adding to the postal staff. That is, of course, a pure fallacy. Buildings are increasing, and as we anticipate taking over the telephone system in a few years, that will add to expenditure as our own telephone system has already done; and in addition to the ordinary increase in the rates of pay of the staff, in the last two or three years expenditure has been increased to meet recommendations of the Hobhouse Committee very materially, and the ultimate result will be no less than £1,000,000 a year. But that is an addition which no hon. Member will grudge. So that if we look back for some years we find that the surplus balance available for the Exchequer has not materially increased. The principal, in fact the only profitable, head of revenue we have now left in the postal system is the penny stamp. That is really the sheet-anchor of our postal revenue, and I am glad to say that the sales of penny stamps continue to increase. Even here we find that the telephone system, which is cutting materially into our telegraph system, is doing something to diminish the number of letters. I do not think I need dwell on the disastrous history of our telegraph system. It was over-capitalised to start with; then came the reduction to sixpenny telegrams, and now it is carried on at a very great annual loss to the Exchequer. The only remedy suggested is the introduction of threepenny telegrams; but the result of that would be only to double the loss. I am glad to think that the telephone branch is in a somewhat different position. As far as we are concerned, and I feel certain that it will be so as far as our successors are concerned—we are determined, looking to the experience of the telegraph system, that the telephone system shall remain on a paying basis. It is quite clear that it ought to be on a business basis. Various proposals have been made for modifying rates. The matter is still under discussion with various chambers of commerce. I am very glad that the Post Office, in this

1115
respect and in many other respects, of late has got into more intimate touch with the chambers of commerce and others who are interested in these matters, so that they can be discussed from the point of view of the public. I need not go into the merits of that question. From time to time complaints are made to me that the telephone system is not always quite as effective as it ought to be, and that sometimes more calls are charged for than have been made. I need hardly say that the complaints made as regards the Post Office system are necessarily much less than those made against the National Telephone system, because the Post Office system is much the better system of the two. I should like to point out to those who make complaints of overcharges that, as a matter of fact, they cannot be overcharged. Our experience is, so far as the automatic check is concerned, that if there is a balance of incorrect calls it is rather in favour of the customer than of the office. The impression that there have been overcharges is, I think, greatly due to the fact that people are not always aware how much their telephones are used. An amusing case occurred recently. We received a violent expostulation. We examined into the case and convinced our customer that he had been properly charged. I have from him a letter with an order for the final balance, in which he says: "The mystery has now boon solved which puzzled me. On inquiry I find the housemaid has been using my telephone without my authority to communicate with her young man." I hope, therefore, that before accusing us of endeavouring to obtain money by false pretences people will inquire into the operations of their own households. One word as to underground telegraph work in the country. That is making steady progress. We have spent about £1,250,000 on it—about £230,000 this year—and it is gradually spreading throughout the country. Some hon. Members were very anxious that the underground telegraph should be at once extended to their particular town. But the question of underground telegraphs is not merely a local one. Every mile made of the underground telegraph, which saves the wires from storms, especially where added in connection with sub-
1116
marine telegraphs, is equally advantageous to any particular town, whether it is added close to it or nearer to a submarine cable. Therefore it is not merely a question of a particular expenditure in a particular locality, but of the best system under which it can be expended. As regards overhead telegraphs, the House gave me the Third Reading of a Bill which will assist me very materially in obtaining wayleaves from obstructive individuals, some of whom might be designated as real blackmailers of the postal service. As regards the question of wireless telegraphy, the Convention of last year has now been ratified by ourselves for all our Colonies, with, I think, the exception of Newfoundland, which is peculiarly situated, and the Orange River Colony, which has no seaboard, and has been ratified, I think, by all the Great Powers with the exception of the United States. The United States, I have no doubt, will ratify the Convention later; we know that in principle they are in favour of the Convention. I am glad to say that the relations between the Post Office and the great Marconi Company, which until lately were of a somewhat unfriendly character, are now of the most friendly kind, and that they have accepted and adopted the principle of the Convention—the principle of inter-communication. I am sure they are wise in doing so; the result will be largely to extend their operations. I should like to say, looking to the telegraph system and telephone systems in the past, and our experience in the matter of buying them out, that we do not desire in regard to wireless telegraphy to put ourselves in the same position. We are not going to allow any monopoly in regard to that particular system. Last year we started two experimental stations. We are now working commercial stations which will enable us at any moment, if we desire to do so, for postal purposes, to extend our operations without having to buy up companies and monopolies. I think the House will feel that that is the position which a Government Department ought to take.
I will now turn to the postal reforms which have been carried, out since I have had the honour of being Postmaster-General. We receive a large number of suggestions for postal reforms. It is easy to make suggestions, but those

1117
who make them are neither daunted by the question of cost nor hampered by difficulties of administration. You have to look at this matter from two points of view. It is absolutely essential, in a great administrative department like the Post Office catering for the convenience of the public, to consider whether any suggested reform is of a simple nature and whether it will interfere with the speed and accuracy of the delivery of letters and other postal matter. A departure from simplicity and uniformity which from one point of view may be advantageous, may break down when considered from the point of view of the greatest happiness of the greatest number. It is very easy to say you ought to have a 1d. this and a 1d. that, if you have not to provide the money, and if you underestimate the cost, as I find all postal reformers do. The cost cannot be disregarded. Moreover, the Postmaster-General is not his own master; he has the Treasury behind him, and he has either to cajole or persuade the Treasury if he wants money for postal reforms. In spite of this I have met during my two and a half years of office with great consideration and generosity from the Treasury. One has to look at this from two points of view—those of the taxpayer and the consumer. I contend, and have always contended, to the Treasury that, if the Post Office provides a certain amount of balance for the Exchequer, the consumer of postal matter ought also to be considered by the adoption of postal reforms from time to time for his benefit. I am glad to think that in one way and another I have obtained, during the two years and a half, what will amount, when these postal operations are in full swing, to about £500,000 for postal reforms—home, colonial, and foreign. I have already mentioned the home reforms. They are concerned with postal orders, the lowering of the higher charges of the parcel post, improving the operations of the ½d. post, and the extension of reforms in regard to deliveries to the rural parts of the country. One reform which I was very glad to carry through was a material reduction in the postage of literature for the blind, so as to bring them as far as possible into the same relation to postal charges as their more
1118
fortunate comrades who are able to see. As regards the question of lotteries, we do our best to check them in every possible way. It is not very easy, because the bulk of these papers are sent in sealed envelopes, and in the present state—I am not sure of public opinion, but certainly of public law—I have no authority to stop sealed envelopes properly addressed and posted. A Joint Committee of both Houses is sitting on this question, and we are venturing to make certain suggestions to them. I hope, the result of that Committee will be that we shall be allowed rather more power in dealing with this matter, where it is quite clear that lotteries alone are affected. As regards Colonial postage, we have since last October raised the limit of weight for letters for the Colonies from half an ounce to an ounce. I have started an experimental system of cash on delivery with some of the Colonies. With regard to this country, there is a great deal of feeling in regard to that matter. This is on a totally different plan. This cannot injure any British traders. It will, I think, be greatly to their advantage, and the question does not arise as between the big trader and the little trader. As regards the internal question of cash on delivery, I do not propose to consider it, at all events under present conditions. The Committee is aware that I introduced a very considerable reduction in the magazine post to Canada. I am glad to think that has been a very great success from two points of view. The amount of matter carried has increased by leaps and bounds. An addition of something like six millions of British periodicals annually go now to the Canadian consumer, and they are of a better class and description. As regards the foreign post, we have improved the money order system, we have extended the parcels post, especially to America, we have improved the foreign telegraph service, and I hope in a short time to be able to reduce the telephone charges to France. The limit of weight of foreign postage has been raised from half an ounce to an ounce. Even though we are not able within a limited time to carry out penny postage to France, the improvements I have referred to will be very advantageous to those who send

1119
letters abroad. I have already announced to the House the introduction, as from 1st October next, of penny postage to the United States of America. I was glad to find it received with general satisfaction that, in the future, there should be the same rate of postage to all English-speaking nations. I found that the American Postmaster-General was favourable to the scheme, I made certain representations to him, which he received in a friendly way, and which, after some consideration, he was able to adopt, and thus practically to carry out in regard to America what we have now in the case of British Colonies—namely, 1d. per ounce throughout the scale of the postal system. Taking the two reforms together, after 1st October, the charge for a letter will be only 1d. instead of 2½d. A letter one ounce in weight, which formerly cost 5d., will now cost 1d., and a letter two ounces in weight, which formerly would have been charged 10d. to America, will after October only be charged 2d. I think I may claim also that this reform is not the result of popular clamour or popular pressure, for it came rather as a surprise to the House and the country. I desire to recognise to the full the labours of those who have advocated this claim in the past, of men like my hon. friend the Member for Canterbury and Lord Blyth, Mr. Stead, and others, and I am exceedingly glad that it has fallen to me to be able to seize the psychological moment and to carry through with general approval this great postal reform. I have spoken so far of the Post Office as face to face with the public, but the Postmaster-General is also, of course, a great employer of labour, the greatest in the country. I desire to reaffirm what I said before I became Postmaster-General, that the Postmaster-General ought in that capacity to be a good employer of labour and to set an example to others. The Postmaster-General is in a sense a three-fold employer. He has to employ the postal servants, he has to deal with factories, in which he competes with the outside market, and also he has to deal with great contractors. As far as the factories are concerned, we desire as far as possible to maintain uniformity of work so as not to have at one time to take on a large number of men and at another time to part with them. We
1120
desire as far as we can to keep our work uniform, and have as few discharges as possible at any time of the year. Last Christmas we employed a considerable number of extra men, and I was able to raise the wages for this casual employment from 20s. to 24s. It will be a satisfaction to the Committee to know that this was not only a great advantage to the men themselves, but a very good investment of public money, because I was assured by the Comptroller that the men came with better heart, and, being able to spend more on food, they got into better fettle, and the money came back to us with interest. As regards the contractors, I have appointed an inspector who has personal knowledge of the contractors, and through whom we are able to deride beforehand rather than after. Thus we are able to discriminate between contractors, and know which are bad ones. We apply the fair wages clause to the various contracts, and I am endeavouring to deal with the question of sweating. I come to the question of the Post Office servants themselves. I do not propose to enter in any detail into the Report and recommendations of the Hobhouse Committee. While the Report may have failed to give full satisfaction to those concerned, Members of the House are grateful to the Committee for the very great care and trouble and time which were devoted by them to a very difficult question. I would ask also the sympathy of the Committee towards myself in endeavouring to carry out the recommendations of the Committee, because I can assure them it has been a difficult and delicate task. The only point on which I need trouble the House at the present moment is in regard to classification. The recommendation of the Committee was that there should be a uniform classification for sorting clerks and postmen, and that the classification should depend on the element in the first place of units of work, and in the next should be modified by the cost of living. Looking into the matter and trying to work it out, I found that to adopt this recommendation to the full would be a great hardship on the outdoor postmen. With the assent of the Treasury, which acted very liberally, I was able so to classify the various towns of the country, that

1121
while there would be reductions in a small number of cases, in the large majority of cases there would be an increase. A circular has been issued to Members in the form of a letter in regard to this matter. Any Member not knowing anything about the subject would think from the letter that where the scale was reduced it applied to exist-in postmen. It does nothing of the sort. No existing Post Office servant will lose either his scale or pay. Every existing servant will go to his old maximum and, so far from making any alteration, the scheme will only apply to new entrants, and in no case to existing servants. It is rather a pity that the circular letter has been worded in such a way as to give the impression that I was going to reduce the wages of existing men. The other point dealt with was that it was very unfair to put down a town without inquiry into the cost of living, and that was given as the view of the Committee. Will the Committee believe that I have put up 464 offices without waiting for the complete inquire into the cost of living? I think it rather hard that a case should be made against me in this matter when I have dealt with it broadly and easily, and generally to the advantage of the vast majority of offices. It is a pity when circulars are sent to Members of Parliament that the facts of the case should not be fairly and properly stilted. When the matter is such a question of classification as this, when you have to deal with something like 5,000 offices, it is obvious there must be certain anomalies, and I am quite open to argument in regard to any case brought before me as to a particular office being unfairly treated. Of course, where the unit of work or conditions of living are shown not to be correct, they are subject to revision from time to time. I say one word upon two other points. One is the question of the technical test for telegraphists. When the Supplementary Estimates were being discussed some hon. Members opposite charged me with having put up the technical test, too high. The test I laid down was passed, and passed with ease, by a very large majority of the telegraphists who went in for the electrical teaching. One portion of the test I thought was too high, and that
1122
I have reduced to proper proportions. Roughly speaking, some 550 telegraphists have passed the test, and only nineteen have failed to pass it. So I do not think it could be said I put the test too high. The other question is as to the female typists. I cordially agree they were formerly underpaid. In this general revision of salaries we have raised the female typists from 25s. to 28s. a week, and, in addition to that, if they can show a proficiency in shorthand writing they will get an additional 3s. a week. Speaking generally, I would point out that the scales of pay are improved in nearly every case, and in one way or another the conditions of service in the Post Office have been improved. The House of Commons has voted a very large sum of money for the promotion of these improvements, and when a Parliamentary Committee sits upon a matter of this kind and make recommendations I think their recommendations ought to be carried out to the full. With regard to the general relations of the postal service, one of the very first things I did on coming into office was to recognise the representative character of the great postal associations, and I have never regretted that action from that day to this. I have been converted to the advantage of this because it has brought into closer personal relations than existed before the staff and those who have to represent this great department. I am one of those who believe that if you want to administer a great Department properly the more you have personal relations between the various grades and sections the more likely you are to have smooth working of the Department. I have dealt with 40,000,000 of the public and with some 200,000 postal servants, and now I have to deal with 670 Members of this House, who hive postal servants amongst their constituents. Members are constantly approaching me with matters upon which they do not press me, but which they believe I will look into and do what I can with. Of course, I am naturally not always able to meet them in these matters; there is generally the question of cost, and very often the question of administration, and they frequently take some time to consider. Hon. Members must remember that the consideration by the Department of

1123
questions of postal facilities is very much like a child's puzzle, and that, while a certain proposal may be to the advantage of a particular district, when once you begin taking the pieces of the puzzle out, you may not get your puzzle together again. Hon. Members may rest assured that we do our best to meet them. In conclusion, let me say that only those who have been in such a vast office as the Post Office can appreciate the enormous extent and the size of the wonderful organisation. I am very proud, indeed, to have been its head for two and-a-half years, and after my experience and observation, I wish to put upon record that this great public Department is a credit to the State and a striking testimony to the loyalty and efficiency of a very zealous body of public servants.
*DR. RUTHERFORDsaid he was delighted to know that the Postmaster-General was safeguarding the public interests, especially in regard to wireless telegraphy. All the postal reforms which the right hon. Gentleman had accomplished were in the interest of the public at home and abroad. He congratulated the right hon. Gentleman on his success on having achieved a penny postal service with America, and trusted that the next thing that he would do in this direction, would be the initiation of a penny postal service with France. As an employer of labour, the Post Office endeavoured to do its work thoroughly, and to set an example for other employers to copy. He had listened with pleasure to the remarks of the right hon. Gentleman with regard to the postal wages throughout the country, and was rejoiced to find that the statements in the circular which hon. Members had received were not correct, and that the reductions applied to new servants only, and not to those who were at present engaged. They all felt that, so far as their personal relationship was concerned, the right hon. Gentleman had been most courteous and kind. With regard to classification it seemed to have been settled mostly in relation to the units of work, and that the right hon. Gentleman had been guided by the units of work, rather than by the cost of living. But the cost of living, he thought, should
1124
have been the guide of the right hon. Gentleman in the question of classification. They regard this particular recommendation of the Hobhouse Committee as a retrograde recommendation, and he hoped the Postmaster-General would not approve of it, but would approach the question of classification more from the point of view of the cost of living, which was a wiser and truer test than the units of work. There were some facts which he would put before the Committee with regard to the wages which in the opinion of the postmen were not satisfactory at the present time. The wages paid in Chiswick, which was in the London area, were 33s. a week, but if the right hon. Gentleman walked from Chiswick to Brunt ford, a distance so small that he would not know when he left Chiswick and entered Brentford, he would find on inquiry from the postmen there that the wages were 25s. a week. The point he wished to emphasise was that the cost of living and the conditions of work were the same in Brentford as in Chiswick, and that the postmen in Brentford felt aggrieved because they could not live and do their work under the same conditions as their fellows in the service in Chiswick. Other classes of public servants and workmen in these districts were treated in the same way with regard to scale of wages, the police in Chiswick and Brentford receiving 35s. a week. The appeal he now put forward was a simple and proper appeal. It was that the Postmaster-General should be as good an employer of labour as the London County Council, the police authorities, and other employers of labour in the district. In Southall, a district near at hand, the postmen received 24s. a week. They had lately had a rise of 1s., and were grateful for it, but they were still entitled to more consideration, because at Hanwell, which was within a stone's throw of Southall, the postmen received 33s. a week. The cost of living in both places was practically the same. He had no wish to worry the right hon. Gentleman, but merely to ask him to consider the question, and to see that in the future the cost of living should be his guide. He also asked the right hon. Gentleman to extend the London postal area, so as to include all points

1125
within twelve miles of Charing Cross. He also trusted the right hon. Gentleman would consider the question of the postmen throughout the country, and would deal with them as justly and as liberally and as wisely as he had dealt with the other officials. They did not wish to feel there was any stigma of sweating attached to this great office, but the feeling existed up to the present time, and they wished the very suspicion of it to be removed. He congratulated the right hon. Gentleman upon the reforms he had introduced, and he was glad that he had recognised the rights of the employees to combination, which was a reversal of the policy pursued by the late Postmaster-General. But there were several grievances to be redressed, and he trusted that the right hon. Gentleman would not be daunted by the Hobhouse Committee, but would exercise his independent judgment. He begged to move, simply in order to call attention to the matter, a reduction of the Postmaster-General's salary by £100.
Motion made, and Question proposed, "That Item A (Chief Offices) be reduced by £100."—(Dr. Rutherford.)
*MR. WALSHsaid he had listened to the greater portion of the right hon. Gentleman's speech with a very great degree of satisfaction. During the earlier portion of the speech he was sorry to say that he had been detained in Committee upstairs, and had therefore been unable to listen to the whole of the right hon. Gentleman's statement, but he took it broadly that there was a great deal of matter for satisfaction in the presentment which he had made to the House. Among those matters for satisfaction he thought really nothing could be received in a better spirit by the House or by the nation than the increasing efficiency and increasing cheapness of communication between the English-speaking publics. He was quite sure that most peace-loving men as well as most warlike men would agree that the happiness of the world itself depended very largely upon the cordial relations which were maintained between the English-speaking publics. He thought there was nothing on which a great State Department like that over which the right hon. Gentleman
1126
presided could be more sincerely congratulated than the tremendous success which had attended not only the Postmaster-General's efforts, but also the efforts of others, in bringing about those cordial relations. He thought they ought also to congratulate the hon. Gentleman the Member for Canterbury on his great attention to these matters, and on his efforts, so persistent and at last so successful. When the right hon. Gentleman mentioned the million of magazines which were taken by Canada alone, magazines of the better class, that fact alone must indeed be looked upon as a very great tribute to the intellectual capacity of the Canadian people, as well as to our power of supplying them with such magazines, to meet their literary needs. One could not shut one's eyes to the fact that the carriage of these magazines must entail an enormous amount of work on postal servants who had charge of that supply. The right hon. Gentleman had very rightly stated that he was in charge of a great State Department, the servants of which did their work in such a manner that he thought history had no higher record than that of the splendidly efficient way in which those duties were performed. While all acknowledged—he himself had always recognised it, if they would allow him to say so—not merely the painstaking, but the very zealous manner in which the Postmaster-General had attended to the duties of his office, yet he thought nevertheless that the right hon. Gentleman had paid hardly sufficient attention to the intense feeling that had been occasioned by the action which had been taken in connection with his Department. Of course, it was perfectly true, as the right hon. Gentleman had said, that no present servant or no servant before the circular was issued would in any way be in a worse position as a consequence of the action of the Department. That was a matter which they might themselves view with comparative satisfaction; but they had to remember that this Department, as a whole, would, he hoped, continue for thousands of years—[laughter]—well, until the New Zealander gazed upon ruined London Bridge. The present officers must pass away and new officers appear, and they could not but view with serious apprehension that the

1127
new entrants would start on a scale which, in at least 250 offices, would be seriously reduced compared with the present scale. That was not a matter which the House ought to view with any satisfaction at all. He thought it was admitted that a very good employer of labour, when he came seriously to consider the matter, agreed that to reduce the wages of the labourer was both socially and economically unwise. It brought to the employer himself little benefit, and it often enough left the workman very poor indeed. There was a lack of efficiency, a lack of that standard of home life, and of that reasonable comfort which made for efficiency in the workman, and where wages were reduced it cut down the quality of the product, and the standard of living was gradually lowered. That had been found to be the case by the best employers and by many employers who, perhaps, might not be described as the best employers; but he thought employers generally admitted that to reduce the wages of the worker, lowered the standard of living, the efficiency of work, the quality of the product, and the condition of the employees. Under a competitive system, an employer in many cases was compelled to take action against his better judgment, and even against his will; but his industry had to be maintained, he found his costs mounting up very considerably, he found that the competition was increasing all around him, and he was compelled to reduce the wages of the workmen in order to keep his head above water. In that case, even though it might be economically and socially unwise, yet they might agree that the employer was the victim of circumstances over which he had little or no control. But certainly that argument and that point of view could not be urged in the case of the State Department when it took action that had the effect of lowering the status of, he should think, at least 250 offices, which employed, he should say, many thousands of hands. The competition which existed in the case of a private employer was wholly absent in the case of this great Department. The private employer found from year to year that he had little or no profit from his undertakings, but he hoped for better times; he might indeed, and did sometimes, make a definite loss upon his undertaking, or his gains
1128
might be so small as to be reduced to vanishing point. But here they had a State Department, possessed of a complete monopoly, unencumbered by any competition, making millions of pounds a year, and yet it was by this Department that the circular was issued declaring that new entrants should start on a lower minimum. That would apply to tens of thousands of men. [Cries of "No, no."] He was glad to see his hon. friend the Member for the City of London in his place.
SIR F. BANBURY: They need not come in if they do not like it.
*MR. WALSHsaid that was perfectly true. The right hon. Gentleman suggested that there were not tens of thousands, but the Department over which he presided, he had himself told them, employed about 200,000 people. If he only took a twentieth part of that number, who would be affected by the new regulation, it would be more than 10,000; but he would not boggle about the exact number at all. He thought that the right hon. Gentleman would see, if the figures were actually gone into, that tens of thousands of people under the new status would be adversely affected by the regulations which had already come into operation, or were about to come into operation.
MR. SYDNEY BUXTON: If the hon. Gentleman looks into it I think he will find that, while it is true that in future, in regard to some offices, a certain number of new entrants will be adversely affected, yet, though in the new classification some offices must go down, the vast majority will be benefited in the future as well as at present.
*MR. WALSHsaid he would not lay any special weight on the tens of thousands, and, if the right hon. gentleman was not satisfied, he would waive the number altogether. The point he wished to urge was that the proposal was not necessary. The right hon. Gentleman had alleged that in any classification some offices must go up and some must go down. He did not agree with the latter part of the proposition at all, because let it be remembered that the scale of wage at

1129
present in existence was fixed in 1890. That scale of wages was utterly inadequate to meet present day requirements. Everybody knew, it was perfectly well admitted, that not only had rents gone up in London and in the provinces by anything from 15 to 30 per cent., but the cost of living throughout the country as a whole had also very largely increased. [An HON. MEMBER: Under a Radical Government?] Yes, under a Radical Government, but it had increased for sixteen or seventeen years under a Tory Government. This point, the mere cost of living, was one which it was necessary to urge. The right hon. Gentleman seemed devoted to the idea that, under the classification suggested by the Hobhouse Committee, while some offices might reap benefit, it was necessary for other offices to go down. Taking into consideration the fact that the wages and conditions of labour fixed eighteen years ago wore inadequate, and that there had been a very large and serious increase in the cost of living, in the rents of houses, in the price of commodities which were necessary for the reasonable maintenance of people, it became matter for most serious apprehension that there should be such a large number of offices whose status was to be degraded. It was not a matter that the House could lightly pass over. A private employer who started new hands at a reduced wage nearly always found a trade union confronting him at the earliest possible moment, and had to subject himself to a good deal of negotiation. The men knew perfectly well that not only their interest but the interest of all other people in the district would be adversely affected if they allowed now entrants to lower the scale and standard of living and of wages, When the employer had to meet this organisation, many new points of view might be developed; but in this case there was no organisation that was effective from the trade union point of I view. It was perfectly true that postal servants had unions, but they had not power to strike. They could not suspend their labour as a body. Indeed, he did not think the greatest madcap in the House would suggest that the servants of a great State Department should possess the right of suspending their labour and placing the whole national interest in a very serious state indeed. They could
1130
not suggest any such thing. But that made it all the more incumbent on the House to watch over very carefully and jealously safeguard the interest of these people, because, after all, the House was the final court of appeal before whom they could lay their claim. That really was the special reason why they had brought the matter forward. It was not a fact, however, that the regulation for reduced pay applied to new entrants alone. In the engineering and stores department the regulations had gone forth that those people who hitherto, he thought, had been described as the authorised maintenance men and the continuously employed men, would, instead of rising to a maximum of 42s. as they did in the past when they got in the established class, rise in the future to a maximum of only 38s. These men were actually in the service. They were not new entrants, and they were doing some of the most responsible work to which any skilled man could set his hand. They were passing, and many of them had passed, the very searching examination put forward by the Department, and these people who had given in many cases very long years of service to the Department and had passed the necessary examination, would, when they were placed in the established class, have 4s, less as a maximum than at present. Another point to which attention ought to be directed was the fact that some of that class of labour which might be called auxiliary rather than direct service—say that of painters and mechanics—was in future to be given out to contract. That was not a matter which ought to commend itself to the House. They really ought to employ their labour direct. That great State Department ought to see that its work was done under its own direct supervision. If there were any mistakes they ought to know the person to hang. The work ought not to be delegated to contractors, who, he would not say scamped the work, but did it not nearly so well as the Department itself would do it under its own direct supervision. Besides, the possibility of making the fair wages clause effective was rendered all the more difficult when the payment of the men and the conditions under which they were employed were placed in the hands of a third party altogether. The House found itself hampered time after time, and questions were constantly being showered upon Ministers from all quarters

1131
as to so and so not receiving the wages to which he was entitled under the fair wages clause. That difficulty, which was already great, would be rendered very much greater if the work that the Department had directly performed in the past was handed over to contractors in the future. It was a very serious departure from the principles which he hoped animated both the great governing parties in the State. Again, there was the point that might be urged as to sick allowance and holidays being taken from certain classes of men engaged in what was known as the constructional work department. Large numbers of these men in the past had been encouraged to look forward to being placed on the established list, and indeed it had been held by the Bradford Committee that when these men had worked anything from three to five years on the laying and piecing-up of cables they became skilled workmen, and were entitled to be placed on the established list and to have the advantages to which establishment entitled them. He had a morbid horror of overstating a case, but the number of people who would be adversely affected, and deprived of the legitimate hope to which they were entitled, could certainly be numbered by hundreds, and he thought by thousands. Here, again, he thought the right hon. Gentleman might reconsider the whole matter, and keep the matter entirely in the hands of his own Department and not deprive them of that hope to which I every honest workman was legitimately entitled, and which was the mainspring and motive of the best workmen in the country, He was quite sure the right hon. Gentleman did not look upon the new regulations as containing anything in the nature of finality. These matters had given rise to a very great deal of dissatisfaction in the minds of the men. These new regulations could not work, and in the interests of the State and of the men as a whole he certainly held it was desirable that the right hon. Gentleman should reconsider the matter. He did not want to put forward any special argument against classification. He knew it was a work of exceeding difficulty. He did not intend to complain of the Report of the Committee, because he knew perfectly well that that Committee did its work with exceeding zeal, and it was
1132
a work of tremendous complexity and magnitude. But he rather thought the Department had misinterpreted some of the recommendations of the Committee and carried them a great deal further than the members of the Committee ever thought would be the case. There were 250 offices at the very least which were degraded—where the new entrants would take a lower maximum—but there were some offices which it passed the wit of man to find out why they were being degraded. Take the case of Wigan. It was a murky, grimy, industrial town, very typical of many towns in Lancashire. After all, it was a very large town. It was a centre of population that he made bold to say was certainly not less than 200,000 within a radius of four miles. It was a receiving and a distributing centre, and had a very large number of offices. It had all the usual industries of a South-west Lancashire town—coal, iron, cotton, and many others. In that district it was a matter of notoriety that the cost of living had gone up enormously. According to the Board of Trade Returns the figure that Wigan stood at as to cost of living was ninety, the average of seventy-four large towns on which the classification was based being 100, and therefore the Department had acted upon the principle that the cost of living in Wigan was 10 per cent. lower than the index number. It was certainly 15 per cent. higher than it was ten years ago. Not only that, but cost of living was always largely determined by the rates of the town. Wigan was the fourth highest rated town in the whole country. How the Board of Trade could have arrived at the conclusion that the cost of living was 10 per cent. cheaper in Wigan than in the seventy-four towns mentioned in the list certainly passed his wit and would pass the wit of man. Here was a place with 93,000 population, within three or four miles radius an additional 120,000 population, bracketed with villages of as low as 3,000 population, although there was not one other postal town, with one exception (Walsall), that reached one-third the population of Wigan in the list. Only five years ago Wigan was practically made a first-class office, and to-day the new entrants would begin with a minimum of 1s. 6d. less and would reach the maximum of 3s. less than the existing

1133
employees. That which was a very serious case in Wigan was with certain modifications the case in many other towns. In Oldham, St. Helens, Warrington, Wolverhampton, and a large number of other towns including Clitheroe, this reduction in the case of now entrants would take place. An Irish Member once asked what had posterity done for them. Of course it did not follow that because posterity had done nothing for them they ought not to do anything for posterity. The House was always legislating for posterity. They took into consideration what were likely to be the conditions in the future, and they legislated for those conditions. Here were conditions that were certain to arise if the Department kept on these regulations. He had no right to trespass unduly upon the time of the House, but he was speaking at greater length than he should other wise do because he considered this was a most serious matter. In 1893 the House unanimously passed a Resolution to the effect that when it employed labour it should pay fair wages, observe proper conditions of labour, and, so to speak, be a model employer of labour. But when they degraded labour and the status of labour, when they lowered the weekly wage, they were lowering the standard of living and lessening the amount of comfort that ought to go into the people's homes; they were also making it exceedingly difficult for others to rise to the standard which the House and other lovers of mankind wished the people to attain. They could not view light-heartedly the fact that all new entrants into the postal service, which was the greatest National department we possessed, should have their conditions of life very materially degraded. That was not a matter which the House ought to view with anything like ease or complacency. Good employers would find it difficult in future when they heard of this example to maintain the good conditions they were desirous of giving to their workpeople, and the bad employers would profit by such an example. They ought to proceed upon higher grounds. The right hon. Gentleman had stated that only a very small number were, affected. He had taken the trouble to go through the actual figures of some of the offices, and he found that in Bermondsey, where there were seventeen
1134
offices, no less than 400 people would have their wages actually reduced by this new regulation. That was to say, that the new entrants would start upon a lower scale of pay. The number of people adversely affected by the new regulations would reach very many thousands. He did not intend to delay the Committee one moment more except to say that this was a matter which they could not view with a light heart. The House ought to stand to the Resolution to which he had referred, and which had been constantly reiterated, in regard to being a model employer of labour. The profits made by the Post Office enabled it to be a model employer. They believed that the great amount of work that would be done by the Post Office in future, owing to greater facilities for communications with the United States, Canada, Franco, and other places, would lay a burden of work upon the servants of this great State Department which certainly was a very strong argument against any reduction of their wages or working conditions. It was difficult enough already to hold any persons definitely responsible, but the difficulty would be intensely increased if much of the work now performed by the State was handed over to the contractor. Of course, they protested against that, and they asked that these men who had been in the State's employ and had been led to believe that by passing examinations, making themselves efficient, and by good conduct, they might get on to the establishment list, should not be deprived of hope, and should not have the standard of wages lowered to which they had been led to look forward. It was upon these grounds, and not because they had any animus against the Department—indeed, they would like to join in the well-merited appreciation which had been expressed in regard to the far-reaching reforms which the Postmaster-General had carried out—and not in any carping spirit that they protested. They recognised that the right hon. Gentleman was a good man struggling with adversity, and he had been surrounded by a great many conditions and demands to deal with which had required all his administrative skill. It was for those reasons that they asked him to give his careful attention to the points he had submitted to him.
*MR. CLAUDE HAYsaid he would like to preface his remarks by repeating what he said upon the last occasion when the Post Office Estimates were discussed, viz.: to express his gratitude for the courtesy which the right hon. Gentleman had always displayed towards those who desired to approach him upon many of the thorny and difficult matters which came under his charge. Having said that he was afraid he would now have to proceed to differ with the right hon. Gentleman in regard to some matters. When the Select Committee presented its Report the Postmaster-General intimated in the House that the Government intended to comply with the recommendations of that Committee both in the spirit and in the letter. He only wished that he could agree that the right hon. Gentleman had complied with those recommendations both in the spirit and in the letter. He could not do so, because he believed that in some respects the right hon. Gentleman had departed from both the spirit and the letter of those recommendations. If he remembered the recommendations of the Report aright, one of them was to the effect that no one in the postal service should suffer by the recommendations of the Committee, that everybody should be at least as well off, and that the vast majority should benefit. From what the previous speakers in the debate had said, as well as from other evidence, it was quite clear that in the classification applied by the right hon. Gentleman a great many postal servants would suffer, and he ventured to join in the appeal which had been made urging the Postmaster-General to reconsider the whole basis of the classification, so that not only the existing staff but the new entrants into the service should be placed under tar better conditions with regard to pay than was now proposed. He would not go into any illustrations of the hardships to the staff which must ensue from the Postmaster-General's interpretation of the Committee's Report, because that would involve long statements; but before he dealt with any particular class he would like to ask the right hon. Gentleman whether he had made any progress in loosening the Treasury control of the Post Office. In other words, he wanted to know whether the right hon. Gentleman had got any further on the road towards becoming
1136
master in his own house. Next to the Army and the Navy, the Post Office was the largest Department of the State in regard to the number of persons employed. It was a Department which made a large profit out of its transactions, and surely the Postmaster-General ought to have the absolute control of all the expenditure necessary for the carrying out of the work entrusted to his charge, and should not be subjected to the control of another Department which could not have the knowledge of this particular work which he possessed. In the Report of the Committee one recommendation was that the Postmaster-General should be free from His Majesty's Office of Works. Hon. Members who had studied the evidence laid before the Committee on this subject would have noticed that astounding revelations were made as to the manner in which in the past the Office of Works had carried out the work entrusted to it by the Post Office. Many of the complaints of the postal staff throughout the country were due to the delay and the inefficient manner in which the Office of Works did their part of Post Office work. He was perfectly well aware that an immediate transfer of all the work from the Office of Works to the Post Office would give rise to practical difficulties. Nevertheless he hoped that some definite steps had been taken in the direction of carrying out this recommendation. Having said that, perhaps he might be allowed for a moment to endeavour to remove a misapprehension which he thought was widely felt by the Post Office employees. It was that the Select Committee had a voice in the carrying out of the recommendations of the Committee. Obviously to suggest that a Committee should interfere with Ministerial responsibility would be quite improper and contrary to all practice. Having examined the evidence and done the work which Parliament entrusted them to do, the labours of the Committee were completed, and having stated their view they had no further responsibility. The full responsibility for the carrying out of the recommendations of the Report must rest upon the Minister in charge of the Post Office. There were a few cases in regard to which he desired to put some questions to the right hon. Gentleman and to offer a few criticisms. In the first place, there was the case of the sub-engineers. When he raised

1137
this matter some time ago the right hon. Gentleman said that he would give the subject further consideration. The Committee made very definite recommendations as to what they thought should be done with the sub-engineers, and he was bound to say that he was very much astonished to find that although the evidence justified the view expressed by the Committee, the Postmaster-General had thought fit to declare that the improvements or alterations in the treatment of the sub-engineers were only to apply to new entrants. He hoped that the right hon. Gentleman would take the whole matter into consideration. He would not trouble the House by quoting any portion of the Report of the Committee on that subject, because he had said enough to show that in his judgment it was never the intention of that body that they should find their recommendations set aside by limiting their application to new entrants and excluding the existing staff. As to linesmen he could not but think that the right hon. Gentleman had fallen into some error in respect to this class, because prior to the Select Committee's Report the maximum pay was 42s. a week, obtainable after twelve years service, when only one class existed. Now, under the new conditions laid down by the Postmaster-General, linesmen were divided into two classes. The second class received 38s. a, week, and the first class 47s. a week. In the first class there had been included a number of men who had been promoted to the j rank of foremen, who rose to 50s. a week. This had practically filled all the positions in the first class, and had in effect decreased the maximum pay of the linesmen by 4s. a week. The same conditions in this matter applied to the provinces with a difference of 2s. a week. Certainly it was never intended that the application of the Select Committee's Report should result in such a condition of things. He came now to refer to the largest class in the postal service, numbering something like 21,000, namely, the sub-postmasters. There had been great difference of opinion expressed by the Department, the sub-postmasters and others, as to bankers' postal orders. The right hon. Gentleman was conversant with examples to which he had drawn his attention a few days ago, but he
1138
might be allowed to say that the main cause of discontent was due to the announcement made by the right hon. Gentleman on 3rd June this year that, in spite of the recommendations of the Select Committee, he would only pay half the scale rate for postal orders paid through bankers—in other words, that the old system was to be maintained. The Committee never said that it should be maintained. He did not wish to weary the House by quoting the Committee's Report. He could read words from the Report showing that they certainly did not come to the conclusion which the right hon. Gentleman had come to as to the unit. The view which the right hon. Gentleman had taken as to the unit was not in the sense of the Committee's Report. Taking one illustration, it worked out as follows:—A sub-post office which in 1905 had a turnover of £83,000 received actual gross pay of £438, whereas under the regulations in respect of postal orders which had been issued by the right hon. Gentleman the sub postmaster would now on a turnover of over £90,000 be paid only £314 gross, when he ought to receive £325. He did not wish to weary the Committee by going into technical details, but he would content himself by saying that he was sure the Postmaster-General would recognise that this matter was regarded as one of very great importance by the sub postmasters. He earnestly appealed to the right hon. gentleman to give the matter full reconsideration with the view of meeting what he thought was a very just and business-like view. He wished to say a word or two about the postmen. The Postmaster-General knew that they were very discontented, not only with the application of the Report, but with the Report itself. The way in which the Postmaster-General had applied the Report had had the effect of removing from many of the existing staff the safeguard which the Committee intended to preserve for them in their recommendations. He referred to the safeguard which provided that, though there might be great changes made in the conditions of service, the existing staff, wherever the men might be working, should, in no case, lose in pay or position. Likewise in regard to the auxiliaries he had been grievously disappointed by the manner in which the right hon. Gentleman had applied the

1139
Report. The net result was that in many cases the auxiliaries would be worse off, whereas it was the express view of the Committee that their grievances should be removed. A statement had been issued by the right hon. Gentleman in which the benefits conferred on that class were set forth, but he did not think that that exactly described what the position of the auxiliaries was to-day. Referring to London postmen the Committee recommended for the first stripe a qualifying period of five years, and of four years for each succeeding stripe. The staff naturally thought that the right hon. gentleman, in view of the recommendation, would give the benefit to each man according to his service, but the Postmaster-General had decided that the time only dated from the receipt of the last stripe. The right hon. gentleman had no doubt received from the London postmen a pamphlet setting forth their case, and their view of the result of his scheme. In some cases men of shorter service would benefit much more than men of longer service. In fact he had heard of the case of a man who if he had performed fifteen years service on the 20th December, 1907, would only get his third stripe on 20th December, 1911, while another man, who had performed fifteen years service on 20th January, 1908, would get his fourth stripe on 20th December, 1911. Obviously that was unfair, and should be remedied. Another class about whom he would like to say something were the London postal porters, who were drawn from the same source and did the same work. Obviously, they had the same standard of living to maintain as the London postmen. On 20th February last the right hon. Gentleman promised to reconsider his application of the Report to these men, but up to the present moment they had heard nothing further. He would ask the right hon. Gentleman to give them a reply soon, and endeavour to meet their case, which he Ventured to submit merited most sympathetic consideration. Then among the supervising force they had very good ground for grievance under the new conditions. Practically it amounted to this. In London there were far fewer superintendents than in the case of big towns like Manchester. The proportion, for instance, in London, S.W., was 1 to 209, whereas in Manchester it was 1 to 37. By keeping this great dispro-
1140
portion between the Metropolitan post offices and the post offices of the great towns, the Department not only created what was a very unfair position, but stopped the legitimate channels for promotion. That, he thought, was not at all in consonance with either the spirit or the letter of the Report, and he earnestly appealed to the right hon. Gentleman to try to remove some of those ridiculous anomalies which prevailed in London. He knew that he might be met in this matter with a technical answer, but he thought that an appeal might be made to the right hon. Gentleman not to allow technicalities to stand in the way. He could not put the matter more succinctly than by giving the facts in connection with a case in his own knowledge. Why should a counter-clerk in Thread-needle Street Post Office, which was only a few yards from Lombard Street Post Office, rise to 65s. a week, while his colleague who was doing precisely the same duty in Lombard Street rose to only 62s. a week? Inspectors, supervisors, and the female staff received equal treatment throughout London, and he would earnestly appeal to the right hon. Gentleman to take some measures to remove this ridiculous anomaly.
MR. SYDNEY BUXTONwas understood to say that the Committee made no specific recommendation. The time when the hon. Gentleman should have raised the question was when the Committee was sitting and not now.
*MR. CLAUDE HAYdiffered from the right hon. Gentleman as to his version of the Report but be that as it might, everybody knew that that was a matter of detail in a Report, and that these men were still left with a grievance which should be removed. Even granting, for the sake of argument, that the case might be as the right hon. Gentleman had stated in the interruption, it was obvious, in his judgment, that the Select Committee had made a mistake in making the statement to which the right hon. Gentleman referred, if it was made. He appealed to the Postmaster-General to reconsider the case. He could not deny that he was giving reconsideration to the recommendations of the Committee in regard to other matters. In some cases he had extended

1141
the recommendations of the Committee, while in other cases he had limited them. He had endeavoured to put before the Committee some of the urgent cases brought to his attention, and did not want to occupy the time of the Committee further. He would conclude by saying that he trusted that the friendly relations between the right hon. Gentleman and all those who approached him on these subjects—however much they differed from him—would be maintained. And if the right hon. Gentleman kept an open mind on these matters he had no doubt that during the next twelve months a great deal of trouble and discontent would be removed and that the service; would be better and happier.
MR. HARWOODcongratulated the right hon. Gentleman on his most, amusing and charming exordium which had charmed all those who had watched his career with feelings of joy. There was a class of people who treated serious matters seriously, but another and better class Mho treated serious matters jocosely. Among those was the right hon. Gentleman, who had drawn a very cheering picture of his Department. However, there were one or two points on which he wished to make a few remarks. The first was as to the statement of the right hon. Gentleman that there was a loss on the telegraph business of the Department. When the Chancellor of the Exchequer was making his Budget statement he made the suggestion to the right hon. Gentleman, which he now repeated to the Postmaster-General, that all the different businesses of the State should be kept separate from the general business of the nation. All the different Departments should keep separate business accounts showing income and expenditure, and only the balance one way or another should be transferred to the general national account. The present method invalidated all their calculations of national income and expenditure, and prevented the nation from understanding and watching the proceedings of any one particular business. He suggested that the Post Office was one of the businesses which should be run like a private business, and so
1142
also the telegraph department. Their accounts should be kept separate and the balance only brought forward. The nation had a right to see every year whether each separate business had been conducted at a profit or a loss. The Postmaster-General had admitted that there was a loss on the telegraphs, but as a business-like nation we had no right to carry on any business at a loss, and if there was a loss it was the duty of the House of Commons to see how they could turn that loss into a profit. Another point to which he wished to refer related to the men in the Post Office who had been reduced. The right hon. Gentleman said it should be borne in mind that in the application of a general rule or principle they must be prepared to have some cases of men being raised or lowered. He was not quite sure that that was a legitimate sequitur. He wished to refer to a concrete case in connection with this question of reduction. The wages of the postmen in the Bolton Post Office were reduced from 26s. to 25s. a week, and the maximum wage of the telegraph clerks was reduced 2s. a week. The answer to that was that the reductions did not apply to the present occupants of the posts and that therefore the men had nothing to complain of. Not at all. Hon. Members were there not to look merely at the interests of the men who hold the posts now, but at the interests of the Post Office as a whole. The hon. Baronet the Member for the City of London made a characteristic interjection during the speech of an hon. Member, in which he said that these men need not remain if they were dissatisfied; that the Department could get plenty more. Of course plenty more men could be got. He would say that if the wages of the men were reduced 7s. a week there would be more applicants for the billets than if the wages were only reduced 1s. a week—more applicants for billets if the wages were reduced from 25s. to 18s. than there would be if the wages were, as in this case, reduced from 26s. to 25s. a week. It was not a question of getting people; but a question of the character of the people they wanted. As an employer in the town of Bolton who knew pretty well the different qualities of labour and the price of labour, he said deliberately that the

1143
reduction of the wages of the postmen there from 26s. to 25s. a week was very unfortunate. But, first of all, he should mention that the right hon. Gentleman had treated Bolton very kindly in providing new post office buildings, which were a credit to the town. In reference to the pay of the postmen the right hon. Gentleman said that there was a limit; but he had gone far below the limit. The cost of living had gone up in Bolton not only within the last ten but within the last three or four years, and he believed that it would steadily rise, because there had been a large increase in taxation. Generally speaking, the requirements of living were rising. People had to live now at a higher standard than their forefathers did; and it was the business of the House and of the country to encourage the raising of the standard of living. If they wanted to raise people to a higher plane they should be taught to want much. No one could get the kind of labour necessary for post office work at 20s. a week in Bolton. He ventured to say that they could get plenty of people of a sort, but they would be of a lower quality. The Postmaster-General himself had told how the people he employed in London at Christmas time at 24s. a week brought in an adequate return for the increased wage, because the food they were able to procure was better and made it easier for them to work harder. But here the right hon. Gentleman was going to reduce the wages of the postmen from 26s. to 25s. a week. He had been in the House for many years and knew what pressure was brought to bear sometimes on heads of Departments in regard to wages; but in this case he was only speaking in the abstract, as the reduction in Bolton was only to apply in the future. The experience of the right hon. Gentleman contradicted his action in this matter. He said that this was one of the consequences of the rule laid down by the Hobhouse Committee, and that they must put up with the consequences of it. But the right hon. Gentleman had also said that they were not to expect that the Resolution of the Committee was as absolute as the laws of the Medes and Persians. The Committee was appointed not to dictate to the right hon. Gentleman but to
1144
advise him; and if the consequences of that advice were practically unwise, he called upon the right hon. Gentleman to break through the advice when he had shown that in this particular case it was unwise. In any event where it was found that by the working of the rule the wages in the Bolton Post Office were not sufficient to enable the men to keep a proper standard of living, he asked the Postmaster-General to give the rule another application.
MR. ARNOLD-FORSTERsaid he wished to join in the congratulations to the right hon. Gentleman on the approaching extension of the penny post to the United States, and on the great reform he had introduced in regard to the postage of Canadian book-packets. Many years ago he did his best to promote the latter reform, but no one had succeeded in accomplishing it until the right hon. Gentleman had taken it in hand. He knew of nothing which could have a more directly beneficial effect on our relations with Canada than the reform effected by the right hon. Gentleman. He was not going to pretend that private Members should never attempt to force concessions from the heads of an administrative Department; and he wished to bring to the consideration of the right hon. Gentleman a particular case. He represented a Metropolitan constituency in which there were a great many Post Office employees who were affected by the unique finding of the Hobhouse Committee. The scale of living in that constituency was no; only as high as the London scale, but was higher than any other town in the country except Devonport. It stood at 104. It happened that one part of Croydon was in the London district, but the great majority of the postmen lived on the other side of the London district boundary line, and this anomaly occurred. There were two sets of men doing the same work under the same conditions as to cost of living and of work; but they did not receive the same pay. In a place like Croydon, where the cost of living was greater than in many other parts of London, it was not a fair thing to draw an artificial line across a particular part and place these restrictions on the men

1145
living on one particular side of that line. He had taken some pains to ascertain that what he was saying was correct. The borough of Croydon was to all intents a part of the Metropolitan area, and he asked the right hon. Gentleman to say whether there was not ground for a special investigation with regard to it. The distinction drawn was a purely arbitrary one, and worked very hardly indeed with regard to a large number of men.
*MR. TOMKINSONcalled attention to the grievances of the postal servants at Crewe. In the first place, he said, the maximum wage had been reduced from 26s. to 25s., although it was perfectly true that the reduction affected new entrants to the service and not those at present engaged in it. That reduction had been arrived at in the classification, no doubt, on the computation of the cost of living, rent, and the units of work. So far as the question of rent was concerned, it must be borne I in mind that in Crewe they were in a somewhat peculiar position. The average of rent was very greatly affected by the fact that a singularly large number of houses belonged to the London and North-Western Railway Company, who built them for occupation by their own employees. Those houses were let at a lower rent than other houses, those inhabiting them no doubt gutting them at that lower rent indirectly as part of their earnings. The employees of the Post Office found that they had to pay at least 1s. a week more for their houses than was paid by their fellow-citizens in the railway company's employ. With regard to the amount of work, he pointed out that there was an enormous amount of work done at Crewe in the transference of mails. Crewe was the largest station for the transfer of mails in the United Kingdom. No less than 23,000 mail bags were transferred from one van to another in the course of a week and no less than 4,000 parcel cases. Those figures showed plainly the amount of work that took place there, and hon. Members who, in the course of their travels, had had to wait at Crewe between the hours of eleven at night and one in the morning had no doubt pleasantly spent their time
1146
in watching this work being done. Those who had done so would know from their own experience the amount of work that was done. The transfer of mails naturally entailed a considerable amount of night work. It was calculated that 80 per cent. of all the work done there was night work. This in its turn entailed broken hours and greater needs in the matter of preparing meals and lights and fuel, all of which contributed to the increase of the cost of living. He brought these matters to the notice of the right hon. Gentleman for his best consideration. He pointed out that the towns of Preston and Stoke, where the work was less and where similar reductions had been made, had put their case before the Post Office, which had offered to reconsider their position. He trusted that now the case of Crewe had been brought to the knowledge of the right hon. Gentleman that also would be reconsidered.
*VISCOUNT VALENTIAsaid that the postal servants in the constituency which he had the honour to represent suffered from very much the same grievances as those for whom the hon. Member for Crewe had just spoken. They thought that when the Hobhouse Committee sat to consider the grievances of the postal servants something would be done to improve their condition, but they found that not only had nothing been done in that regard, but that the maximum salary had been reduced, in the case of postal clerks from 50s. to 48s., and in the case of the postmen from 25s. to 24s. Another grievance which they suffered was in regard to classification. In the classification they were put into the third class, which they considered was not just, contending that they should be placed in a higher class. The position in which the postal clerks found themselves was found on page 58 of the "Postal Changes Paper." They considered that they had been hardly treated, because in the calculations the average taken of the cost of living was not sufficiently high, and their work—the index number of work in some cases at all events, was the same as that of certain other districts which were put into Class II. The Report made by a representative of the Board of Trade

1147
who was sent down to investigate this matter was not concurred in by those living in the district. They contended that he put in a figure for the cost of living far lower than the sum that it actually cost to live, and that his statement with regard to the difference in the pressure of work during the term and during the vacation was not accurate. What struck them and what had struck him was the comparison to be made between Oxford and other towns that were placed in a higher class. In the town of Sunderland the units of work was 558, and the cost of living 99; at Oxford the units of work were 755, and the cost of living 98. The units of work were considerably higher and the cost of living about the same, and the contention of the postmen of Oxford was that that city should be put in the same class as Sunderland which was in the second class, whilst Oxford now was in Class III. In the same way the amount of work in Cambridge was 681 and the cost of living 100, yet that city was classified as below Sunderland. He would like to know on what principle the classification had been arranged. Fie further pointed out that in the University towns the work of delivery had been considerably increased owing to the new regulations of the Post Office. In former days letters to the collegiates had to be delivered at the porter's lodge, now they had to be delivered at the rooms of the students. He submitted that Oxford should be put in the same class as Sunderland and other towns in the same class, and asked that the figures might be revised with a view that employees of the Post Office in that city might be put in Class II.
*SIR ALFRED THOMASsaid that South Wales had been very hard hit by these new regulations. In his own constituency and in that of his hon. friend the Member for the Rhondda Valley there were no less than eighteen reductions in which, if the cost of living and the units of work were taken as the basis, there ought to have been an increase rather than a reduction. He remembered when the number of his constituents was only 7,400; they now numbered over 21,000, and that fact alone showed the large increase which
1148
must have taken place in the work of the Post Office servants. He asked the Postmaster-General whether this was not a case for reconsideration, not only in the Welsh districts, but elsewhere, for he thought there was a grievance which could properly be amply considered.
SIR F. DIXON-HARTLANDcalled attention to the grievance of the postal servants at Feltham and Hounslow, and said the Postmaster-General would hardly consider it fair that in one part of a district the wages should be raised and in another part of it they should be lowered, though the same work was being done, and at the same time the cost of living was larger where the wages had been lowered, than in the part where they had been raised.
MR. P. MEEHANas one who served on the Hobhouse Committee, said that in his opinion the Postmaster-General had interpreted the recommendations of the Select Committee in a liberal and generous spirit. In any revision which took place it was quite possible cases would occur which gave rise to grievances, but he thought it was in the power of the Postmaster-General to remedy certain of those grievances which had been pointed out in the course of the discussion. From the statements made by several hon. Members it appeared to be their idea that when a revision took place that revision must be entirely in the way of increasing salaries, and that no reductions should be made. It was quite true that the discussion was one of considerable importance, and he thought members of the Committee were bound to give an explanation of the grounds on which they had arrived at the conclusions embodied in their Report, and to defend those recommendations if defence were necessary. Since the issue of the Report comments had been made in many newspapers, but especially in the journals of the Service. He did not intend to deal to any extent with the criticisms. He thought criticism was healthy and should be welcomed, and it was welcomed by the members of the Committee, but it should be criticism founded upon justice. To no man in that House or outside it would he yield in his anxiety that one of the most important bodies connected with the public business

1149
of the country should have not only a living wage but a just wage, and that the conditions of their employment should be such as to bring about contentment and satisfaction in their occupation. He did not say for one moment that the Report of the Committee was perfect. What human effort had been or ever would be perfect? What he said was that in that Report there were the means of remedying grievances, that it contained a solid foundation on which the administration of the Department could erect a satisfactory scheme, alike beneficial to the nation, while securing to the employees just wages, reasonable concessions, and satisfactory conditions of service, at the same time that they could look forward to an old age of security and comfort. Certain statements had been made in the Service journals that evidence was suppressed, and that certain evidence was ignored. In his opinion that statement was not warranted by the facts of the case. It was true that when the evidence was printed and circulated among the Members, certain portions appeared with parts of the printed type having a mark drawn through certain paragraphs, but in his opinion that had been done with the knowledge and the approval of the Committee, because it referred only to evidence which was a repetition, and to evidence on certain points which had already been dealt with by the Committee. He asserted that there was neither a suppression of evidence nor an ignoring of evidence on any point that it was the duty of the Committee to investigate. It might be said that certain portions of the evidence were ignored because the demands put forward were refused by the Committee. With the permission of the House he would refer to one or two of the claims which the Committee decided that they ought not to recommend. One was on the question of promotion, and it would be found on page 11, paragraphs 92–3, of the Report. The claim made was that promotion should be made whether the state of work justified it or not. The Committee considered that promotion should not be made on that ground. Another claim was as to the question of annual leave, to be found on page 14, paragraph 12. The claim was that annual leave should be confined to six of the best months of the year. The Committee considered that it
1150
would be impossible for the Department to give the entire Service annual leave within six months, and the Committee did not recommend that claim. Then there was the question of overtime. The claim was that overtime should be abolished. The Committee thought that overtime could not be abolished, but they recommended that it should be discouraged. It was a remarkable fact that after this claim as to overtime was put forward there appeared in the Service journal in January last, a paragraph condemning the increase of the staff at Christmas in certain offices, thus depriving the men in those offices of the opportunity of earning money by over-time. That was an extraordinary contradiction of the claim put forward that overtime ought to be abolished. Another claim was for second class railway travelling expenses, but the Committee could not see their way to concede second class railway travelling, and did not recommend it. A claim was also made for increased salary because officers had to keep cool heads in order properly to discharge their duties. A claim was further made for increased salary on the ground that postmen frequently, in the course of their work, were rendered liable to sweat and as a consequence to catch cold. He did not know what the opinion of the House would be as to that claim on the part of the Post Office servants. The Committee, however, had not conceded it, though it was their business to mention that which in his opinion would be, if adopted, an attempt to provide machinery to negative the universal decree of God, that by the sweat of his brow man should earn his daily bread. There were other claims which he would not go into. He now turned to the claims admitted and to the recommendations made by the Committee, and to some of the concessions and advantages arrived at. The claim was made as to the question of night duty, and on the recommendation of the Committee in that respect there would be an advantage to the Service estimated at £56,400; and on the question of bank-holidays, the recommendation of the Committee gave an advantage to the Service estimated to the value of £36,900 a year. Under the claim in regard to medical attendance the Committee recommended, and the Department, he believed, had adopted, that every postal official with a salary

1151
of less than £150 a year was entitled to free medical attendance. There were other recommendations with regard to auxiliary and casual labour which had been dealt with by the right hon. Gentleman that evening. Another very serious claim was made on the question of counter losses. It was stated in evidence that in many cases the counter losses amounted to nearly half the officer's salary in a week. The recommendation of the Committee was, and it was adopted by the Department, that counter losses should be limited to 10 per cent. of the officer's salary; no matter how great was the loss, whether shillings or pounds, he would not be charged more than 10 per cent. of his salary. In regard to the stripe allowance, the period for obtaining the stripe had been reduced from five to four years. The first stripe came in five years, and the Committee recommended that for each subsequent stripe the period should be reduced to four years. With reference to the scale of pay for postmen the Committee had made certain recommendations which the Department had adopted. With regard to the effects of the recommendations of the Committee on the postal service in London, 6,906 men would benefit at the rate of 1s. per week; 1,071 benefited at the rate of 3s. a week, and 154 lost 1s. a week. In the provinces the benefit amounted to £52,000 a year, and 13,953 men benefited 1s. a week, 2,707 would benefit 2s. a week, 1,100 would benefit 3s. a week, 312 would benefit 4s. a week, 4,321 were unaltered, 5,832 would lose 1s., 222 would lose 3s. But this reduction was for new entrants only, and did not affect any existing officer. For auxiliary postmen the rate of pay had been increased from 4d. to 4½d. The recommendations in the case of counter clerks and telegraphists were estimated at an annual advantage to the class of £26,300 a year, to provincial sorters and telegraphists at £31,500 a year, to female operative classes in London at £68,250, to the supervising class at £47,350, and to clerical and other classes of men and women at £33,860. In respect to the engineer in-chief office, the construction staff, the maintenance and mechanical staff, and electric lighting staff, they had often complained that the men employed on exactly the same work in Ireland were receiving from 3s. to 5s. a week less than men engaged in England
1152
and Scotland, and he thanked his colleagues on the Committee for the recommendation which they unanimously joined in making that the treatment of Irish officials should be in every sense on terms of equality with those of the United Kingdom. The result of the recommendations of the Committee as regarded this class amounted to an annual expenditure of £76,090 a year. To sub-postmasters and other classes there was an estimated advantage of £58,850 a year. He quoted these figures in answer to the statement which had been made in some quarters, that the Service had derived very little if any advantage at all from the Hobhouse Committee. The question of civil rights occupied a very large place in the journalistic criticisms of the Committee, and in some speeches made by members of the Post Office Association. The claim put forward for civil rights led in some quarters at all events to the belief that Post Office officials were deprived of every single right of citizenship, but that was not at all the case. They had the Parliamentary franchise, the local government franchise, and every other right of citizenship, with the simple restriction which was common to the Civil Service, that they must not make public speeches affecting the return of any Member of the House, or write public letters in newspapers. He felt that where Post Office officials of any class had every right of citizenship subject to the restriction he had mentioned, their best interest was served by the continuance of that restriction, because not being political partisans they could approach every Member of the House, no matter what his political opinions might be, with sympathy and with confidence to have their grievances redressed, whereas, if they were political partisans they would naturally bring about a feeling of hostility in the minds of some people. In practice how would this matter work out in the interests of the public? Take the case of a contested election. The postmaster went to a public meeting and made a speech in favour of one candidate, his principal officer went on one platform and made a speech for the opposition candidate, and the staff selected a candidate of their own, and they all spoke on behalf of three different candidates. The result would be that the postmaster would not be able to maintain the discipline which was

1153
absolutely essential in the public interest. Then one candidate went to the Post Office to send a telegram, and saw the postmaster, who was often making a speech denouncing him, and handed his telegram to a clerk who had also denounced him on a public platform. Could the public have that confidence in the secrecy of the Post Office, and that their business would be transacted in the same satisfactory way as at present, if the staff was given the opportunity of bringing political discussion inside? Then take the case of a thrifty housewife making a deposit in the savings bank. She was compelled to transact her business with some officer who was an opponent of her husband, brother, or son in some local government election. On every ground the best interests of the country were served by the continuance and enforcement of the rule which was applicable to the whole civil service of the country. One of the principal complaints in respect to the Irish service made before the Committee was on the question of promotion. The grievance amounted to a public scandal. The evidence was not given directly by any witness, but was elicited on cross-examination, and the effects of the cross-examination were that while the population of Ireland was 88 per cent. Catholic, and while the rank and file of the service was almost in the same proportion, the non-Catholic element was in possession of almost the whole of the appointments. This could not be brought about by a want of ability in the larger number of the servants. In Dublin, among the principal officials thirty-three holding pensionable appointments were non-Catholics and fifteen were Catholics. He mentioned these matters with a view of pointing out that if the Postmaster-General expected contentment and peace and faithful and zealous discharge of the duties of the Irish branch of the service he must deal with this question with a firm hand. A number of the best men in the service were boycotted from the principal positions. He made no complaint, but asked the right hon. Gentleman with a firm hand to remove from the Irish service this last remnant of the religious ascendency which was the bane and ruin of Irish life. In Cork, seven-eighths of the population were Catholic. The postmaster, the chief clerk, the superintendent of telegraphs, and the
1154
entire heads of staff were exclusively Protestant. In Limerick, fifteen of the principal offices were exclusively Protestant, though seven-eighths of the population I were Catholic. He hoped an absolutely necessary reform would be brought about. He did not want to trespass on the time of the House further than to I say upon the question of salary that in his opinion the Committee did well in the recommendations which they made. It was quite possible that cases might arise where it would be the duty of the Postmaster General to remedy certain grievances in the course of carrying out his system of classification. With regard to the advantages accruing to Ireland from the Committee's Report, he thought his colleagues would agree with him when he said that the country they represented was well to the front. In regard to the indoor staff, in eighty-three head offices the salaries were raised, in twenty-one they were unaltered, and in five they were reduced. In the case of sorting clerks and telegraphists, five officers received an increase of 6s. per week, six an increase of 4s. a week, 462 an increase of 2s. per week, and 839 remained unaltered. He submitted to the right hon. Gentleman that this was a very large number to remain unaltered. Nearly all those men expected that they would get some increase and some advantage from the Committee's Report. Therefore he earnestly appealed to the right hon. Gentleman that the case of those 839 men should be taken into consideration with a view to bettering their position and giving them some share in the advantages which their fellow-workers were going to receive. In his own constituency, six received an increase of 5s., fifty-five 2s., and 115 1s. per week. In regard to postmen, 632 would get an increase of 3s., 213 2s., 157 1s. per week, and 395 would remain unaltered. The average increase per officer in the United Kingdom was for sorting clerks and telegraphists 9d., females 1s., postmen 1s. In Ireland, sorting clerks and telegraphists would receive an average rise of 7d., female staff 10d., and postmen 1s. 4d. The average showed that Ireland got 2s. 9d. and the United Kingdom 2s. 4d. He was pleased with the recommendations of the Committee and the manner in which the right hon. Gentleman had carried them out, for the result had been that a long-delayed act

1155
of justice had been done to a class of public servants in Ireland. He desired again to thank the Postmaster-General for the satisfactory manner in which he had interpreted the recommendations of the Committee.
*SIR H. NORMANsaid he wished to join in the tribute of appreciation and gratitude to the right hon. Gentleman for the admirable series of reforms that he had announced that day. He doubted whether any Postmaster-General had ever had such a good record, and unless he surpassed himself in years to come, this year would probably long remain a record. He desired to call attention for a moment to the reform initiated regarding the circulation of magazines to Canada. That was a concession that he had agitated for for many years. He remembered being a member of a deputation which waited upon the right hon. Gentleman the Member for East Worcestershire when he was Postmaster-General. He received the deputation courteously, but he told them that it was quite impossible to grant what they suggested, and the idea dropped. Therefore he was particularly glad that the present Postmaster-General had been able to make this truly Imperial reform so promptly and satisfactorily. He need hardly say that in the criticism he was going to make he did not speak in any carping spirit. The right hon. Gentleman had only to proceed with the same courage and devotion in other matters which had been brought to his notice, and then he would settle them all in accordance with the wish of every Member of the House. It must be evident to the right hon. Gentleman, from the number of anomalies which had already been pointed out, that the present state of things could not continue. Almost every hon. Member of the House could furnish examples of anomalies and injustices arising in his own constituency from the putting in force of the new regulations. Wolverhampton was not itself in his constituency, but there the maximum had been reduced from 28s. to 25s. per week, and in Bilston, where the cost of living was higher, it had been reduced from 25s. to 23s. per week. As the hon. Member for the Ince division had well said, they strongly resented
1156
that a great Department of State, as the result of a great inquiry, should proceed to lower wages in many directions. That certainly was a retrograde step. They might, after such an inquiry, leave wages where they were, or increase them, but surely they could not go about here and there in a more or less arbitrary manner reducing the wages of a none too well-paid body of servants of the State. How they could be satisfied to do that certainly passed his comprehension. In Bilston, postmen's wages were to be reduced from 24s. to 23s. It was a very poor story that a great party of reform, as the result of an inquiry by an admirable Committee, and the expenditure of an additional £600,000 rising to £1,000,000, should produce as one of the results of the whole business that the poor postmen of Bilston were to be docked 1s. per week. He thought his right hon. friend would see that that was a state of things which called for his very careful consideration. With regard to substitutes for postmen, he was informed from Bilston that adult substitutes doing whole time and work were receiving only 16s. a week. If that was the case, he submitted it was not the wage which a great Department of State ought to pay to a man of that character doing a full weeks work. Even the scavenger in Bilston got £1 a week, and a man performing the responsible duties of a postman would naturally feel himself under a great grievance, and would certainly be justified in taking that attitude, if he only received 16s. a week. He earnestly hoped the right hon. Gentleman would give the questions he had raised his favourable consideration.
*MR. STAVELEY-HILLsaid he wished to call the attention of the right hon. Gentleman to some questions which arose on the Report of the Hobhouse Committee, more particularly with regard to classification. He was surprised to hear the right hon. Gentleman state that when the Select Committee made a Report, it was the duty of the Government and the House to accept it in full. That might be advisable in some cases, but it would be a very dangerous precedent to establish for the future. They were all well aware that the inquiry of the Hobhouse Committee, in many respects, had turned

1157
out well, but it could not be overlooked that the Report had brought about a certain amount of dissatisfaction. There was much dissatisfaction in large towns like Birmingham, Manchester, Liverpool, Dublin and Edinburgh, arising from the fact that the Committee had apparently left stationary the maximum rate of pay. That maximum had remained for seventeen years, and it was not to be altered. No one complained of the rise of pay in the case of female telegraphists, but it seemed very hard that some employees should remain at the stationary figure when others had been raised by 3s. a week. Though that had happened in the larger towns, in the smaller towns the persons employed had received substantial increases. In Wolverhampton, the scale for future entrants was to be 17s., with a yearly rise of 1s. to 25s. At the present time it was 19s., with a yearly rise of 1s. 6d. to 28s., so that this meant practically a reduction of 3s. a week. He contended that that was not in accord with the Report of the Hob-house Committee. He did not agree with the interpretation that the right hon. Gentleman had put upon the Report of the Committee; in fact, he thought the Postmaster-General had brought to bear upon the Report an interpretation of his own which the actual words would not bear. He had stated that thy classification should be the same for the indoor und the outdoor staff, but as a matter of fact he had levelled down the postmen instead of adopting the levelling-up process which was in the mind of the Committee. The hon. Member for Stockport, who was a member of the Committee, in speaking upon this subject last year said—
"The idea of the Committee was that all the scales of postmen should be advanced 1s. on their maximum. When the Committee framed the scales, they did so with the idea that the postmen with 26s. maximum should get 27s. They expected that in a few odd cases that might not be done, but they never anticipated the wholesale reduction of the maximum which would occur under this classification."
That was the view taken by one of the Members of the Committee, and that was the interpretation he put on the findings of the Committee, and it was distinctly different from the interpretation of the Postmaster-General. He wanted to get from the right hon. Gentleman an undertaking that he would put some of those grievances right. If there was any doubt
1158
about what the Committee intended, the right hon. Gentleman might call the Committee together again for the purpose of framing their Report in language which they could all clearly understand. The Postmaster-General had gone upon the levelling-down process, and wages had dropped from 30s. to 25s. As he had already stated, there had been no rise of tins maximum for seventeen years, although during that time the cost of living had considerably increased and was still increasing. If they raised the wages of the female telegraphists and the female staff, who were mostly unmarried, surely they ought to raise the wage of that class of Post Office servants who were mostly married and had families to support. That was one of the reasons why he urged that something should be done to rectify this grievance. The right hon. Gentleman had said that those employed by the Post Office prior to 1908 would not be affected by anything in these new regulations, and that the terms upon which they entered the postal service would not be affected. He had had his attention drawn to the case of a postman employed in Wolverhampton, who, along with others, was sent out to a district surrounding the town on the clear understanding that he should come back to the rate of wages he used to receive at the Central Office. His old wages were 28s. He had come back to the Central Office, but instead of getting 28s. a week, to his disgust he found that on the new scale he was only entitled to 25s. He did not think that was fair. At Dudley the rate of pay was 44s. for many years, and was now reduced to 40s. What the employees asked was that the right hon. Gentleman should give an unmistakable interpretation to the Report of the Committee. They said that if the Report of the Committee was fairly interpreted they would abide by it. The way in which the Postmaster-General read the Report made them think that they were suffering a grievance, and that something should be done in the way of having the Report remodelled, or by the Postmaster-General reconsidering the matter. Passing from that subject, he reminded the right hon. Gentleman that he had for some years written to him about the Post Office situated at Old Hill. He returned to this subject for the third time in the hope that the right hon. Gentleman

1159
would do something for that district. If the Postmaster-General was under the least apprehension that there was any political motive at the back of the demand in regard for that post office, he could assure him that that was not so. The majority of those who formed a deputation to him some time ago held the same views as the right hon. Gentleman and not those of hon. Members on that side of the House, but all were equally desirous that that post office should be increased in size or that a new one should be built. He trusted that the right hon. Gentleman would give the matter his earnest consideration.
*SIR JOSEPH LEESEsaid he rose to ask one Question, and that was whether the Postmaster-General had laid down a hard and fast rule as to classification, or whether on good cause being shown he would reconsider any case where the reduction was believed to act oppressively.
*MR. GEORGE ROBERTSsaid that having regard to the number of hon. Members who desired to take part in the debate, it was not his intention to occupy the attention of the Committee at any great length. He would like to associate himself with his hon. friend the Member for the Ince division, in assuring the Postmaster-General that in the criticism they were compelled to offer they were in no way inspired by personal dislike, but that their criticism was rather aimed at the permanent officials behind the right hon. Gentleman. There was no denying the fact that profound dissatisfaction existed throughout the service at the result of the Hobhouse Committee Report and the interpretation put upon its recommendations. It was not his intention to go at length into these matters, for the hon. Member for the Ince division had expressed their views fairly and with lucidity. He and his friends were concerned to find that a number of employees of the State were subject to a reduction in their status. It was quite true that the right hon. Gentleman had assured the Committee that afternoon that none of the present men would be subjected to a reduction in their wages. But nevertheless they kept in view the fact that the present wages had been in existence for seventeen or eighteen years, and that by the natural flux of time those
1160
wages had been reduced in their purchasing value, and they felt that a strong case existed for a general increase of wages being granted to all those men. During the past seventeen or eighteen years it was undeniable that the cost of living had greatly increased. It was also a desirable thing that the standard of life of the workers should be elevated, and therefore they could not contemplate with any complacency a reduction in the status of any number of workmen, whether in the employ of the Government or in outside concerns. It was not really his purpose to deal with that particular point, but there were two questions to which he wished to direct the attention of the Postmaster-General. First of all, he would like to raise the question of the auxiliary postman. He confessed that when he was first induced to look into this question he regarded an auxiliary postman as a man who was drawn in occasionally to the postal service, but he was a little surprised to find that some of these men had as many as twenty or thirty years service. They had to perform the same duties as the established postmen, and the point he wanted to submit to the right hon. Gentleman was the desirability of abolishing auxiliary postmen as far as possible. He knew that in answer to direct representation made to him on the matter the Postmaster-General had given a reply which was tantamount to a promise that he would give the closest personal consideration to the question with a view to the reduction of the auxiliaries, and with the ultimateaim of abolishing them altogether. To show that these men were subject to grave abuse he would state a few facts to the Committee. He had had laid before him the cases of two men, one established and the other auxiliary, and both having fourteen years service in the postal department. The auxiliary man was receiving 12s. per week in wages, and 6d. per hour for overtime, without any of the privileges enjoyed by the established postman. The established postman with the same length of service was receiving 32s. a week, with 2s. extra allowance, an allowance of 21s. for boots, holiday allowance of 16 days, and full sick pay It seemed to him utterly impossible to reconcile on any principle of justice the-different treatment of these two men, who were doing practically the same class of work. The men in one case were giving

1161
a limited number of hours service, but he did not see why there should be such disparity in remuneration as he had indicated. He did not see that the Post Office had any excuse for the continuance in any large measure of this class of workmen, and he sincerely trusted that the intention of the right hon. Gentleman would be accelerated and that a material improvement would take place. He hoped that this class would be entirely abolished. The second question he desired to raise—and he did so in no carping spirit, because he knew that in vestigations were already in progress—was the desirability of the Post Office abolishing contracting altogether. He felt that the mail-cart drivers should be in the direct employment of the Department. The abuses to which he desired to draw the attention of the Committee undoubtedly arose out of the contract system. To prove that the grievance to which he alluded was a substantial one he would give a few facts. The city mail drivers in Norwich were employed by contractors; they worked seventy-three hours par week, and every third week when the men had to do a rotation of Sunday labour they worked seventy-six and a quarter hours. For these inordinately long hours of labour the men received the unhandsome remuneration of 17s. a week. He had already drawn the attention of the right hon. Gentleman to this matter, but he brought it before the Committee in order to prove that there was a substantial grievance. The city parcel cart drivers were in a similar category. He was assured that the figures he was quoting had been investigated since he was requested to look into the matter. The wages of that class were 15s. a week for a number of hours approximating to seventy per week. The country mail-cart drivers also had a substantial grievance, which, again, he believed was due to the prevalence of the contract system. The wages in their case averaged from 15s. to 17s. per week Those men had to work seven days per week, they got no holiday allowance, no sick pay, and nothing was allowed for accommodation or sustenance. It seemed to him that as long as the contract system was recognised by the Post Office Department these abuses must continue. Undoubtedly they were very widely prevalent in the land. He knew that the Postmaster-General had no sympathy with these abuses, and since
1162
he took control of the Department he had viewed with misgiving the conditions of labour of these contract men. The right hon. Gentleman had approached the Treasury to sanction the appointment of an inspector, whose duty it was to inquire into the conditions of labour of the men employed by the various contractors in his Department. But it was certainly impossible for any inspector, or any number of inspectors, to make themselves thoroughly cognisant of the conditions of labour of all those men. He felt that the right hon. Gentleman would be well advised if he turned his attention to the desirability of abolishing contract service entirely, so that they might be able to say that all the employees of the State were on the established service, and that the House of Commons had direct control over their conditions of labour, knew what they were doing, and that for their work they were receiving a reasonable rate of pay. He desired to point out that Norwich was practically in a similiar position to York in regard to cost of living. Mr. Rowntree found that in York the irreducible minimum on which a man was able to maintain himself, his wife and family, was 21s. 8d. a week. The facts which he had stated showed that there were men doing work in the postal service who were receiving 16s. and 17s. per week. It was a disgrace to the country, and it was desirable that the Department should exercise its ingenuity immediately in order to abolish what was a disgrace to a civilised community. He acknowledged the improvements which the right hon. Gentleman had already effected in connection with the postal service, and the few observations which he had addressed to the Committee were not dictated by any captious spirit, but he fell that those facts should be known. He urged that the contract system should be abolished, and that the House should take the control of all those engaged in the postal service.
*MR. HILLSsaid he wished to direct attention to the scale of pay of postmen, which he was certain wanted reconsideration. He was sure that the right hon. Gentleman had no desire to inflict hardship on anyone, but hon. Members who were interested in the Post Office service must make a stand now if they were to have a chance of

1163
securing a reconsideration of the scale of wages. He had taken the trouble to work out the figures in the circular issued by the Department in February last, and he found that in no less than thirty-one towns out of 102 the scale of pay was reduced. And the class of town where the reduction was the most frequent were the manufacturing towns such as Darlington, Grimsby, Huddersfield, Middlesbrough, Paisley, and Greenock. Moreover, nearly all the reductions had taken place in the lower scales of pay. Most of thorn were in the third class, in which the maximum was 25s. a week. The reductions had also taken place in the towns whore the cost of living was dearer than elsewhere. The two factors which seemed to determine the scale of pay were units of work and cost of living; but he could not make out which was the main factor. He wanted to know what was the comparative value of the two factors. It seemed to him that the unit of work was very bad. In the large and highly organised offices the unit of work was bound to be higher than in the smaller offices. In the former, the work was portioned out and distributed to different classes of workers; while in the latter the men had to take all kinds of work. The men in the small offices worked as long hours as the men in the big offices, and it was unfair that they should suffer by being placed on a lower scale of wages. The existing scale might apply very well if the offices all over the country were of the same size, but it could not be justly applied equally to the different classes of office. He would say that a far better standard of wage would be the cost of living, although the scale must be modified to a certain extent by the class of work. But in any case the present scale operated very badly. The scheme hit the suburbs of large towns very heavily, because the cost of living there was as high as in the towns. In Scotswood, for instance, which was really a suburb of Newcastle, all the prices of food and the conditions of life were as high as in Newcastle, while the pay was much lower. Again in Alnmouth, which was a watering-place, the cost of living was even higher, and yet the maximum was fixed at 21s. as against 30s. a week in Newcastle. The Department ought to make a better appreciation of the various districts than had been done.
1164
The classification according to units of work ought to be reconsidered, if not abolished altogether. He had taken great trouble to understand what the unit of work really meant, but it was absolutely incomprehensible to him. He did not think it represented a fair standard of what a man did. For all these reasons, he hoped that before it was too late the whole scheme would be reconsidered. He was perfectly certain that the right hon. Gentleman had no desire to be harsh, but he must feel that there was a large and growing uneasiness all over the country in regard to the working of the scheme, and he believed that a certain amount of pressure exercised by the right hon. Gentleman himself would effect a great reform.
*MR. WILESsaid he did not wish to compete with many hon. Members in voicing the woes of the Postal Staff in his own constituency only, but desired to point out general cases which required reconsideration and not in any way to harass the Postmaster-General, but to help make the servants of the Post Office who, were always loyal and ready to help him in any way, more contented and more comfortable. The first class he wished to mention were the postal porters, a class entirely employed in in London. They came under Zone 1, and consisted mostly of old soldiers and sailors. Up to the inquiry of 1882 their maximum wage was 27s.; it was then, raised to 30s.; since which time they had received no increase at all. These men had put forth their claim before the Hobhouse Committee in a very reasonable way, and had shown how the cost of living, rents, and rates had increased in. London. The work demanded of them required more intelligence than it did twenty-six years ago, and he asked the Postmaster-General to consider their case again and see whether he could not increase their maximum rate of pay. Another matter to which he wished to direct the attention of the right hon. Gentleman was the allowance made to the postmen who travelled in mail vans. When they had a long journey to make and had to sleep out, it was the custom to grant an allowance of 3s. a night for food and lodging. But another class who travelled in the same van and did the same sort of work received 4s. a night. It seemed to him

1165
very strange that of two men travelling in the same van and sharing often the same lodging, one should receive 4s. and the other only 3s. He hoped the Postmaster-General would adjust this difference. It would not cost much money, and it was one of those pin-pricks which caused dissatisfaction, but which was easy to remedy. He also called attention to paragraph 406 of the Hobhouse Report, which dealt with head postmen. The Report recommended that in the City of London Division a new class termed "head postmen" should be appointed, but up to the present time the Postmaster-General had not made any such appointments. There were few openings for the rank and file of the City postmen to rise to, and they had lost some of the opportunities they formerly had of becoming lobby officers. He hoped the Postmaster-General would see his way to carry out that recommendation and make appointments at once. He believed that when the City postmen interviewed the right hon. Gentleman they submitted to him a scheme for the rearrangement of duties which they knew from experience would make the work of the office run more easily and yet not cause any extra expense. He was sorry to say that the right hon. Gentleman had not yet given any reply or criticism of their scheme, and he would press him to consider the suggestions and give some reply. There was a great discrepancy also in the payment of certain telegraphists. They had heard that to-day two members of the staff at the Central Telegraph Office had got a maximum of 65s., but operators who did absolutely the same class of work in the Metropolitan district offices and had received the same education, and had passed the sumo examination, only rose to a maximum of 62s. It seemed to him that there was something radically wrong there. It came out very clearly in the case of the Threadneedle Street Office, which dealt with the Stock Exchange telegrams, where the maximum was 65s., while the telegraphists in the Lombard Street Office who dealt with the more weighty messages from the great banks, only rose to a maximum of 62s. He thought that if the same rate of pay were paid to all telegraphists in the Metropolitan area the right hon. Gentleman would find that he would get a far better result in the work clone, and that there would be fewer grumbles.
1166
He should like to refer to the engineers and mechanics, a class that had been referred to by another hon. Gentleman and who were not on the establishment. He noticed that the Committee's Report suggested that these men, after having been employed five or six years in the factories, should be placed on the establishment. He personally thought that three or four years trial in the workshops should be a sufficient test before placing them on the establishment, and he asked whether they could not be established after that period. He noticed a suggestion on page 44 of the new paper just issued by the Postmaster-General, that as vacancies occurred in certain classes their work should be put out to contract. It seemed to him that such a thing was in this twentieth century a retrograde movement. That a great Department like the Post Office should think of putting out work which could be done far better and cheaper by the Department, was a very great mistake indeed. He hoped the right hon. Gentleman would see his way rather to increasing the work that was done in this department than putting it out to contract. He would like to say a few words in regard to the telephone staff at the General Manager's Office, Carter Lane. He pointed out that the staff was created in 1901; in 1904 women clerks were introduced and were put on the establishment. But strange to say, the men who had been at work there since 1901, and also those who had come in afterwards, had never been established. It seemed to him only fair that those clerks should be put in the same position as men who did the same class of work in other departments of the Post Office. Therefore he put it to the right hon. Gentleman whether he could not, see his way now to assure the House that he would at once place this class also on the establishment. Another question he desired to raise once again was that of Christmas boxes. The matter came before the Hobhouse Committee, and he was sorry to say that that Committee could not see its way to come to any conclusion. It was the almost unanimous demand of, postmen that this unsatisfactory system should be done away with. It was a most degrading—a most wretched

1167
system. The public who gave these tips would be the persons who would have to pay the extra wages which would be demanded for their abolition. He hoped the right hon. Gentleman would not allow his brilliant term of office to come to a close without bringing this degrading system to a termination. The system of allowing part of the Civil Service to go round touting for tips to make up what was admitted to be inadequate wages was most lowering and should be entirely abolished. He thought the restrictions placed on the civil rights of postmen by the regulation of a previous Postmaster-General were most extraordinary. By that rule they were ''not allowed to become candidates for a county council" as regards the district in which they were employed, nor might they sit on a committee which had for its object to prevent or promote the return of a particular candidate. He would not say anything as to the postman becoming a candidate or having a seat on the county council, because his duties took so long a time that it would be impossible for a postman to be a county councillor and carry out his office duties too. A postman could take part in a borough council election and sit on a borough council, but for some extraordinary reason he could take no part in county council matters. The county council had nothing to do with the Post Office or its management, yet the postman was not allowed to speak or serve on a committee except it was in a district in which he did not work. That restriction worked out in a most extraordinary fashion. For instance, a man working at the Mount Pleasant Office and living on the south side of the City Road, could take no part in L.C.C. elections, because he both lived and worked in Finsbury; he must be dumb! But another worker at Mount Pleasant living on the north side of the City Road, in Islington, might speak or canvass or exercise any of the ordinary rights of a citizen at election time This was one of those little grievances which it was impossible for the right hon. Gentleman himself to remedy, but he knew he was in agreement with him in this injustice and he hoped the Postmaster-General would get the assistance of his colleagues and remove this disability from the postal servants.
1168
He made these criticisms in no unfriendly or carping spirit, but that he might by these suggestions assist his right hon. friend to remedy the grievances which he had pointed out.
MR. WILLIAM RUTHERFORDsaid it would be ungenerous on the part of any Member representing Liverpool to take part in this debate without congratulating the right hon. Gentleman on his brilliant record. His record of the past year would compare with that of any previous Postmaster-General. His achievements were so varied and the results so brilliant that it would not be generous to take part in the debate without testifying to them. There was not a man in the House who had not had occasion to communicate privately or otherwise with the Postmaster-General, and all acknowledged his invariable courtesy. It was, therefore, with the greater difficulty Members, like himself, who sometimes fell foul of some of the arrangements of the Post Office, found themselves obliged to call attention to sundry matters of which they did not approve. He could not help thinking that if the Postmaster-General with his great ability and the assiduity with which he devoted himself to the work of the Department, would throw into the fire the Reports of some of the Committees that had sat and deal with the difficulties in a manner which he thought was right and just, a large number of these anomalies would disappear. There were a number of very serious anomalies, anomalies so serious as to be stupid when stated. There was the case of the counter-clerk at Lombard Street who could only rise to 63s., and the counter-clerk at Thread-needle Street whose maximum was 65s. Yet it was obvious if one went to these offices, as he had done, that both men were on a par and did exactly similar work. Then if the provincial towns were taken, it would be found that one of the things of which the skilled telegraphists complained was that the maximum of 56s., which was fixed in 1890, was still the maximum to which they could attain. If they took into account the increased cost of living, rent, rates, and other

1169
matters, it was an undoubted fact that if 56s. was a proper maximum in 1890, it was not a proper one in 1908, and that it ought to be revised. They had heard it stated by the Postmaster-General, in fact the remark was made last year, that no existing servants of the Post Office would suffer in consequence of the changes adopted. He fancied that that was not quite correct. There were some who would suffer; at all events, it was correct to say that there would be reductions in the case of future employés in 237 offices of the country. In regard to the Hobhouse Report they had heard speeches from two Members of the Committee. He had listened to those speeches, and he had found that the interpretation put upon the recommendations was not the interpretation which the Postmaster-General put upon them. Some of them who had taken an active part in trying to find out what the real grievances of the Post Office servants were, and to understand the recommendations of the Committee, felt that where the Hobhouse Report broke down was that it did not express in clear and intelligible language what the Committee evidently meant. There were several more points on which they had heard speeches that day, and also on previous occasions, from various members of the Committee, and it was perfectly plain that in coining to that final Report, and in making themselves parties to that Report, they were under the impression that they were agreeing to it on a different interpretation from that which was put upon it now. What was the remedy for the taste of affairs disclosed by the debate? They had had Member after Member for the Metropolis and for different towns of the country getting up in that debate, and with the exception of the members of the Committee, they had all finished their observations by calling attention to something which they considered to be wrong. He ventured to think that a matter of this sort ought to be taken out of the purview of the House of Commons. It was not fair to the House to discuss differences as regarded a shilling on wages; it was not the place for the discussion of the principles of the promotion of hundreds
1170
of men, many of whom were electors. It was a very serious position indeed which arose in consequence of it, and he thought that the Postmaster-General ought to be convinced, after hearing the general condemnation of the system, that it was high time that something should be done to put an end to such a state of things. If he might take an opportunity of repeating what had been said on this head there should be an independent Committee appointed to confer and advise with the heads of Departments, and to take into account the wages of all the Civil servants and the system of promotion, so that an independent body dealing with all these matters could do justice. He was one of those who supported the late Government, yet on this question of the postal telegraph servants he had consistently, for the last six years, supported a Parliamentary inquiry with regard to their case. He was very disappointed to find that the Hobhouse Committee had made such a mess of it. Notwithstanding the ability of the chairman and the devotion of the members of the Committee, they had brought out a lamentable Report The Postmaster-General himself in the past year had been engaged in some very great works; he had accomplished some magnificent results; but he had not had time to turn his undoubted abilities to the details of the postal service; he contented himself by saying that there was a Parliamentary Report and that he was going to carry that out to the letter. He (Mr. Rutherford) thought that the right hon. Gentleman ought to be convinced by this debate, if he had never been convinced before, that it was time that his attention was given to this matter and that he should consider those grievances.
MR. CROSFIELDsaid that in his constituency the proposed change was regarded as a retrograde movement, and he, therefore, was very glad of the opportunity of saying a few words on the subject. Taking the ordinary rate of wages in Warrington, after this reduction there would be a minimum wage of 17s. 2d. which was lower than was paid to labourers, and the maximum rate of 25s. would be little more than was paid to

1171
bricklayers or labourers. He would be very sorry to say a word in disparagement of the position of the ordinary day labourer. For himself he always thought that the labourers perhaps deserved more consideration than any other class of workmen. But after all, if one considered what was expected in the postal service—irreproachable character, and the position which was to be kept up—he thought that one must recognise that the late of remuneration should be higher than had been paid to the class of workers to whom he had just alluded. Certainly there had been an increase in the cost of living, and for the life of him he could not see the slightest reason for any reduction being made. Through the invariable courtesy of the right hon. Gentleman he had had an opportunity of mentioning this matter to him privately, and he hoped that what had been suggested by so many speakers might be reconsidered, because there was a very strong feeling existing about it. With regard to the maintenance of a proper standard of pay and of hours of labour, he could only say that they wanted to keep to a happy mean. No Member of that House felt more strongly than he did on this subject. The people of this country were coming more and more to recognise the advantages of seeing that proper remuneration was given and proper hours of labour fixed. He trusted that the matter would be reconsidered by the right hon. Gentleman.
*MR. SUMMERBELLthought that if the debate had demonstrated anything, it had demonstrated to the Postmaster-General and his staff that a very strong feeling had been aroused against the Hobhouse Report. He wanted at the outset to state that so far as the Postmaster-General was concerned, whether he had consulted him in public or in private, he had always found him most courteous and willing to hear anybody who had a grievance to state. Therefore he wished it to be understood that whatever he said with regard to the changes which had been made, at all events he did not desire that his remarks should be taken as applying directly to the right hon. Gentleman or the position which he occupied. When this matter first came up he gave it very careful consideration,
1172
because Sunderland was one of the districts which was hit very hard—3s. off the maximum, and 2s. off the minimum. In justification of this very great change they were referred to the Board of Trade Returns with regard to the cost of living—and he quite recognised that if anything was to be done, and the post office servants were to get back to their original position, they would have to show that with regard to the cost of living and the volume of work the Board of Trade Returns were wrong. The change had been made upon these Board of Trade Returns, and he wanted to consider them in reference to Sunderland, which he knew was in a similar position to that of many other places in the country. The Board of Trade Returns actually had the audacity to set forth that the rents were higher in the poorer quarters of the town to which he belonged than in the parts of the town where the artisan class were living. And it was upon these incorrect Returns that the case had been, built up in order to justify the reduction of wages to a very great extent. From that standpoint alone the Board of Trade Returns stood condemned. He knew of his own knowledge that what applied to the town of Sunderland in regard to the inaccuracy of these Returns was true of many towns up and down the country. Then, as to the cost of living in Sunderland compared with London, they found with the exception of coal that it was as high in the one as in the other, yet there was anything from 6s., 7s., 8s., and 10s. a week less wages paid in Sunderland than in London. He could nut understand how any Committee could take Returns of that kind without any investigation or verification, and make them the basis of their recommendations. As to the cost of living the Board of Trade Returns were absolutely wrong. If the reductions had been made upon such false Returns the matter ought to be put right at once, for this system was to continue for many years, and it ought to be put right now, and men ought not to be penalised for many years to come. The wages in Newcastle were full 5s. per week more than at Sunderland. There was no difference in the circumstances of the two places, though there was this great difference of wages. He did not think there was a difference of more than

1173
1s. a week for skilled artisans on the Wear and on the Tyne, though there was to be a difference of 5s. a week as between Post Office employees. He considered the system entirely bad, and the same might be said as to the volume of work argument. According to the unit of work system a letter counted one, a telegram thirteen, a money order ten, and a postal order two units. He wanted the Committee to recognise straight off that, in regard to this particular work at all events, the outside staff had nothing whatever to do with the volume of work in the office. Take a garrison town or a naval port where money orders and postal orders were issued to a large extent. No man worked longer than any other, but these people, because they issued money orders and postal orders, had an opportunity of getting a greater volume of work than an office where they might do ordinary routine work and probably work harder than the employees in those other towns. Then take a place like York, which was a receiving centre for Hartlepool, Darlington, Stockton, Middlesbrough, Sunderland, etc. The letters came into the office and went straight away. They were not delivered by this postman, yet the postman would get the benefit according to this system, of the volume of work. The system was absolutely wrong, and he defied anyone to justify it. When the examiners went to these towns did they inquire into the whole work appertaining to the postal system of the town? He would like to have the reports if possible. Everyone recognised that the cost of living during the past ten or seventeen years had increased enormously, yet there was practically no increase of the wages of the postal employees. Probably he would be told they ought to let the postal system by contract. At all events, whatever might be urged in regard to economy in other Departments, economy could not be urged in regard to the postal system. They had no right to make the immense profit they did, and penalise the postal employees the way they were doing. There was something like 16s. difference as between large offices and small, and that was an immense difference, and he did not think the hours would vary very much.
1174
He did not agree with his hon. friend on the benches higher up in regard to the question of citizenship. They had no right to deny to these men their full rights of citizenship and so penalise them because they happened to be Government employees. He would always give his support and fight for them and would not rest content until every man, whether a Government employee or not, had the fullest possible liberty to express his opinion in regard to matters appertaining to the government of the land and his own particular interests. He did not blame the Postmaster-General. The Committee had given him these two things to work on—the cost of living and the unit system, but let them have the matter put right now. He felt assured that if he went carefully into it many men who had suffered reduction during the past year would, at all events, have a substantial increase. The Postmaster-General had put the postmen of his town back 2s., but he wanted them (the whole of the employees) back to what they originally had at the very least.
MR. LUKE WHITEsaid that as a result of the new classification there were a number, of seaside resorts in which there would be a considerable reduction in the rate of wages, and he appealed to the Postmaster-General to give special consideration to those cases. He believed the Postmaster-General would acknowledge that the postmen in seaside resorts deserved special consideration. In the past the cost of living and other circumstances had been taken into consideration, and if this scheme was allowed to continue a number of postmen in seaside resorts would have their wages reduced. In his own constituency in Bridlington there would in future be a considerable reduction in the rate of wages. In another town, of an exactly similar character, the rate of pay had been increased. He took it that the Postmaster-General did not wish to do injustice to any town. He rose for the purpose of calling special attention to the case of Bridlington, because he believed that if all the circumstances of that town were taken into consideration some alteration would be made in regard

1175
to its classification as it now appeared. He hoped that after special inquiry the Postmaster-General would, find that Bridlington deserved a better classification, and that some alteration would be made to give it the full rate of wages to which it was entitled.
*MR. NANNETTIsaid that after the speeches they had heard it would be admitted by the Postmaster-General that widespread discontent existed among Members with reference to the administration of the Hobhouse Report. All the speakers had expressed dissatisfaction and called for a revision of the Report. The Hobhouse Committee was established for the purpose of trying to set at rest the discontent which it was known existed among the members of the postal service. He said unhesitatingly that the findings of the Committee had not met the just claims of the postal service, and he held that it was the duty of the House to do everything in their power to bring the service into such a state of satisfaction as would be the means of producing efficiency and also of enabling these men to carry out the important duties entrusted to them with satisfaction to themselves and to the country. To show how anxious the postal servants felt in reference to the way the Committee had carried out their work, he would quote the finding of the Postal Association—
"The recommendations cannot be expected to remove the prevailing discontent, and, at the most, are only offered as a palliative. The failure in this respect is the more inexcusable as a reference to the Bradford Committee's Report would have shown that such revision is not only possible, but practicable, and, in their opinion, would result in greater efficiency and economy."
That was the opinion expressed by the men directly interested, and he thought the Postmaster-General, who had done so much, and who, he was satisfied, had shown himself sympathetic and anxious to better the condition of the staff under him, would do well if he would take into serious consideration the revision and alteration, of the Report altogether. The Committee said that the recommendations they had made had not been given effect to. That was a matter
1176
of opinion. They had heard that their recommendations had been misinterpreted, and if the Committee had not put before the Postmaster-General their recommendations in a sufficiently clear and vivid manner, it was the duty of the Postmaster-General himself, seeing the universal chorus of disapprobation that had been expressed, to take steps to meet the wishes of Members, and especially the members of the Postal Association. If the conditions and recommendations had given dissatisfaction to the English and Scottish branches they had also given dissatisfaction and had created more discontent than had hitherto existed with the manner of its administration in Ireland. He could not agree with the hon. Member for Queen's County in regard to what he said they had done. Naturally the hon. Member was proud of his own bantling. He believed that those men had done their duty to the best of their ability, but when they found the hon. Member for Queen's County, who was a member of the Committee, and the hon. Member for Hoxton, who was also a member of the Committee, diametrically opposed to each other as to what the Report meant, it was high time that the House should see whether there was any real difference of opinion between the men who framed and presented the Report. That was a point to which the Postmaster-General ought to pay some attention and have that divergence of opinion set right if it existed. He was sorry to hear what the hon. Member for Queen's County had said with regard to the civil rights of the postal servants, and he regretted the action he had taken in regard to that matter. He knew there was no more kind-hearted man or one more interested in the welfare of the men employed in the Post Office than the hon. Member, but for anyone like him in the twentieth century to attempt to justify such action in the House and to argue that members of the postal service were not entitled to enjoy to the full their civil rights was taking up an attitude of which he felt sure the majority of the people of Ireland would not approve. It was already laid down that members of the Civil Service and the postal service were entitled to take part in public affairs by being members of

1177
boards of guardians and borough councils, but a distinction was drawn and for some reason or other which he could not understand they could not be members of county councils. If there was anything wrong in a Civil servant being a member of a county council, why should they not go the whole hog and disqualify them for borough councils and boards of guardians as well? But why should Civil servants be denied the rights to which every other citizen of the Empire was entitled? He thought on behalf of the postal servants in Ireland it was only right that he should give expression to that view and let it be known that the opinion of the hon. Member for Queen's County was not the opinion of the majority of the Members of the Irish Party. He wished to say a few words in reference to the manner in which the Irish portion of the evidence was dealt with by the Committee. He wished the House seriously to consider this point, because he had been informed that the witnesses from Ireland were summoned to London to place their grievances before the Committee. It was the intention of Parliament that it should be a free and open inquiry and that the grievances of the men should be placed before the Committee without their being in any way fettered. If he had been correctly informed the representatives of the men from Ireland were asked to put in their statements and then he understood they were invited into the parlour of the Chairman of the Hobhouse Committee where their statements were read over. Their evidence as set forth in the statements was considered by the Chairman of the Committee and his private secretary, and, although the men protested, a good deal of the evidence they wished to give was deleted. The complaint was that their statements of evidence were mutilated, and the men were told that if they did not give the evidence as it had been curtailed they would not be heard at all. The result was that the witnesses went home dissatisfied and consequently those who mutilated their evidence had to take the responsibility. He wished to know what right had any gentleman sitting in the position of chairman to take such a drastic step as to dictate to the men the class of evidence they were to give. Was it any wonder that there should be discontent when
1178
such a thing was done? The same thing might have been done with other witnesses, but he wished to state that that was not what Parliament set up this Committee for. They set up the Committee to see justice done between these men and the State, and he thought the men had a right to give their evidence in an untrammelled manner. That action naturally had produced intense dissatisfaction in Ireland, and from what he had heard in the debate the new classification had created a good deal of dissatisfaction in England. He did not think he could do better than quote to the House the opinion of the representatives of the men from their official organ as to the manner in which they had been treated and how far such action had tended to remove the men's difficulties in Ireland. A recent issue of the Irish Postal and Telegraph Guardian contained the following passage showing how the findings of the Committee had been received by the Irish postal staff—
"The report had intensified discontent instead of allaying it and that the contemplated expenditure was simply a waste of public money, inasmuch as it would not bring an ounce of contentment into the public service. A most peculiar thing about the report was that it recommended large increases of salaries to the highly paid classes who had not agitated at all, while the lower grades who caused all the agitation got practically nothing. This certainly seemed strange, and it bears the interpretation that the Committee had in their minds the discouragement of agitation in the Post Office.
Anyone who knew how Civil servants in Ireland had to deal with matters of this kind would know what the effect of this would be. The men who put themselves forward as the spokesmen of their class were immediately penalised and would get no promotion, and were practically placed under a ban. He could come to no other conclusion than this, that the result of what had taken place in Ireland would be that those who had would get and those who had agitated would get nothing. If they were going to allow Civil servants of the Post Office to be treated in that manner Parliament would be neglecting its duty to a body of men who, no matter what their faults might be, were only endeavouring in a legitimate way to make the condition of their class such that they might be able to live in comfort. That was what

1179
the men's organisation was established for in Ireland, and he could well imagine, knowing how powerful their organisation was, that those in authority would get the idea that this action was intended as a blow to the organisation for forcing forward the many grievances under which they suffered. The men who would benefit under the new classification were, strange to say, the young men between twenty-one and twenty-two years of age. The object of that was apparently to show the young men that by ceasing to agitate they would be looked after. They would see what had been the result to the men above them. They would see that those who had agitated had been passed over and the young; men had been looked after. He hoped that that was not a system which would find any support in the House. He was sure hon. Members desired rather to treat those who had shown devotion to the service liberally and not do anything to discourage them. He now came to a question which he felt sure would appeal to hon. Members. It was an old question which he had brought forward on several other occasions. What he referred to was a system that existed in the service in Ireland called the learners' system. Under that system many young men were induced to enter the postal service. They were mostly young lads of good character who had to be efficient in education and thoroughly respectable. Unfortunately in Ireland mothers and fathers thought that if they could possibly get their children into the Post Office or into some other respectable calling they would be all right for life. That was one of the greatest fallacies that fathers and mothers could entertain in Ireland, for they ought to bring up their children to be respectable and honest tradesmen. That would be much better for the country and much better for the children. What was the result of the present system? Parents spent any amount of money in educating their children up to passing the necessary examinations in order to bring them into the postal service, and what did they get? Only from 5s. to 6s. a week. In order to get their children into the postal service parents had to send their children to be educated in Dublin amidst
1180
all its temptations, and, therefore, there was very great temptation to go wrong under this system. It was sweating of the worst description, because they did not give a wage which would keep the boys respectable. He had brought this question before the House on many other occasions, but nothing had been done. The Postmaster-General in past years had expressed his sympathy upon the subject, and he now appealed to him that the time had come when something should be done to enable the boys who went into the postal service to obtain at least sufficient wage to keep them in comfort. Those boys were doing practically the work of men after the first three months, and consequently were filling men's places. Under those circumstances they ought to be paid a wage commensurate with the work they were doing. But bad as the Report of the Hobhouse Committee was, it was not proposed to carry out its recommendations. Many hon. Members had expressed their view with reference to the interpretation which had been placed upon the Committee's recommendations, and consequently it would be futile for him to weary the House by going further into that subject. Nearly every hon. Member who had spoken had called attention to the interpretation put upon the Report, and after what had been said upon all sides of the House he hoped the Postmaster-General would be able to adopt a more generous and liberal interpretation. Another question he desired to call attention to was the working hours of various postal staffs in Ireland. In Dublin they had a dual system and also the three-shift system. These were crying grievances against which the men had protested, and if he had read the Report of the Hobhouse Committee aright they had recognised that those systems should be done away with. No man should be compelled to work more than twelve hours in the twenty-four. If he was correctly informed, it was not unusual for a man to be kept working sixteen hours in the twenty-four. He was sure the Postmaster-General did not wish such a thing as that to continue, and he hoped the matter would have his serious consideration. He was given to understand that in the carrying out of the Report the whole desire of the

1181
permanent officials was to economise. Efficiency was not a consideration at all. He would be the last to say that economy should not be carried out, but he wanted economy with efficiency, and economy with justice. It was false economy to deny men that to which they were entitled and to enforce a system which partook of the character of compelling men to work at a wage and under conditions which the State never intended. His hon. friend the Member for Queen's County had called attention to thy spirit of favouritism that existed in the postal service. He did not know whether it existed here, but he was confident from what he knew of the working of the postal service in Ireland that the spirit of favouritism was rampant there. They had been told by the Postmaster-General that efficiency and fitness were to be the essentials of promotion. He dared say that the Postmaster-General meant that, but he was sorry to say that so far as Ireland was concerned it was not efficiency and fitness which gave the passport to promotion. It was quite the reverse. He did not wish to bring in the religious question; it was unfortunate in Ireland that it was brought in. His hon. friend the Member for Queen's County had put the matter in all its glaring nakedness, and he was anxious to hear what the Postmaster-General had to say in reply. Let him state how the men in Ireland were treated. There was a vacancy recently in a Killarney postmastership. The rules of the service required that when vacancies occurcred they should be made known, so that those who were eligible, or who thought themselves eligible, should have an opportunity of applying. That appointment was filled without notice being given to the members of the staff. How had that occurred? Was it any inducement to a man to take an interest in his work if he knew he was going to be a drudge all his life? What incentive had he to do his work in a proper spirit unless he had a prospect of promotion? Everyone liked to have his work recognised, and the Post Office servants were not any less human than others. They wished to be recognised when they gave loyal and dutiful service to the Post Office, and were fit and competent for positions to which they might be pro-
1182
moted. He represented the College Green Division of Dublin, and he knew almost every one of these men personally, and he would not stand there and ask that any man in the service, if he was not competent for a position, should be promoted. He would support the Postmaster-General if he would lay down the principle that those men were entitled, when vacancies occurred, so long as they ware efficient and had ability to do the work, to attain the higher positions in the service. He asked the House to consider this. Could it be maintained that there was not something rotten in Dublin, Cork, Limerick, and the other towns quoted by his hon. friend when they found men of a certain persuasion promoted over the heads of others who belonged to the religion of the great bulk of the population? It was a reflection on the religion of the majority of the people of Ireland to think that there were not men among them competent to fill the higher positions, and it was the duty of every man who respected religious equality to see that there should be nothing in the shape of religious bigotry in connection with the promotion of the men. Catholics came over to this country and could get into any position. They had only to prove that they were fit and competent to fill them. It was a great blot on the history of this country that such a distinction which had gone on for generations and had divided the Irish people so long, should still exist under the Postmaster-ship of the right hon. Gentleman. He hoped it would not exist in future. But for the grievance which existed he would not have touched on religious matters. It was enough for him to know his own religion and go to Heaven the best way he could, but when this subject was forced on him he would be unworthy of his position in the House if he did not draw attention to the grievance which, he was sure, Englishmen would not tolerate or be parties to. It was only in Ireland that it could take place. There was no question in England as to a man's religion as it existed in Ireland. The heads of Departments in Ireland would do the best day's work they had ever done, if they said that a man's religion would be no bar to his advancement so long as he was efficient and able to fill the post.

1183
The postmen in Ireland, like their brethren in this country, had many grievances. They were a class of men who were entitled to a great deal of consideration, and their position ought to be improved. Like the postal clerks, they had not been treated well. A few years ago, Dublin was placed in the same position as London in regard to salary. In 1899 the maximum given in Dublin to postal clerks was fixed at 56s. a week. They did the same work in Dublin as in London. Since then the London men had had their wages increased, and at the present moment the Dublin men were working for 9s. a week less than the London men. They had been discussing that night the question of the cost of living in relation to wages. Did any person who knew the City of Dublin not know that it was harder and dearer to live in Dublin than in London? He had himself lived in London for a great number of years, and he could state that a housewife's budget would go further in London than in Dublin. [An HON. MEMBER: Why?] The price of the loaf in Dublin was 5½d., the same as in London. House-rent in Dublin was dear. [An HON. MEMBER: No.] He was speaking from actual facts. He knew as a working man that he paid £48 a year for his house in Dublin, and he was not a bit better housed than some of the postal servants. In estimating house rent in Dublin, he referred to the class of house in which the Postmaster-General was anxious to house the members of the postal service. He could hardly think that the right hon. Gentleman wished them to live in the slums of Dublin. As to the cost of provisions, oatmeal had increased from 12s. 9d. per cwt. in 1897 to 14s. 6d. in 1906. Potatoes had increased from 1s. 9d. a stone in 1897 to 2s. 10d. in 1906, beef had increased from 45s. 6d. per cwt. in 1897 to 50s. 6d. now. All that went to prove that the cost of living had increased, and yet there had teen no commensurate increase in the wages of the men. Therefore he said that in Dublin the necessities of life compelled them to spend as much as in London. He appealed to the Postmaster-General to consider the grievance of the postmen in this matter. If he was rightly
1184
informed, one of the orders sent out in regard to the conferring of stripes had given dissatisfaction, and he hoped the right hon. Gentleman would give sympathetic attention to that matter. Referring to the men who had been employed on the travelling service between Dublin and Queenstown as sorters on the mail trains, he said that the doing away with that service had removed from the men who were engaged in it all chance of promotion. They had to go back to the post office at a less wage than they had before. He was sure that the Postmaster-General would agree that that was a great grievance. Their positions had been abolished through no fault of their own, and they were entitled to some consideration for the loss which they had sustained through the abolition of the Queenstown service. He appealed to the Postmaster-General to do something for the men who had been engaged in that onerous and responsible work and who had been receiving higher pay for the duties they performed. They had to go to exceptional expense in carrying out their duties, and if they had now to go back to the post office with no hope of improvement that would not be a fair thing, and he was sure the Postmaster-General, having had his attention drawn to this matter, would give it his consideration.
*CAPTAIN MORRISON-BELLsaid that the Postmaster-General admitted that there was a grievance, but that that was in the future, and would not affect the present employees. He submitted that that was a retrograde step. The mere fact that the Hobhouse Committee had been appointed at all was to improve the condition of the postmen from top to bottom, certainly from the bottom, and it seemed to him to be quite wrong that the Postmaster-General should now be considering any reduction of wages in the present or in the future. The scheme hit his constituents very hard. There were five large towns in his constituency; all of them were flourishing, and the work in them was increasing very largely. It was hard that in these towns in the future the postal servants would be worse off by 1s. a week.
MR. SYDNEY BUXTON: Which towns?
CAPTAIN MORRISON-BELL: Teignmouth, Chudleigh, Bovey Tracey, Ashburton, Moretonhampstead. An hon. Member had stated that the tipping system among Post Office servants was entirely wrong, and that, therefore, tipping should be abolished and the postman's wages raised. He agreed, but it seemed to him that under the new scheme they were abolishing tipping, but were going to reduce wages in the future. In the principal town in his constituency, Newton Abbot, the employees were rated for units of work at 195, which placed them in Class 4; while Horsham, Sutton, Sevenoaks, and other places of a like character were placed in Class 3. The Committee had not worked out the cost of living in those towns compared with the cost of living in Newton Abbot.
MR. SYDNEY BUXTONsaid that in fixing the classification the recommendation of the Committee was that two elements had to be considered on which the pay of the men should be based, the units of work and the cost of living.
*CAPTAIN MORRISON-BELLsaid he could not help thinking that the cost of living in Newton Abbot was as high as in some of the places he had mentioned. And there was a feeling of injustice in this matter which the Postmaster-General must realise extended far beyond his constituency. He had only intervened in the debate to do his best to press the views of and to help a very large class of his constituents who, he was convinced, were only endeavouring to get what they considered was fair.
*MR. STUARTsaid that, in the first place, he wished to associate himself with the proposition advanced by the hon. Member for Bolton, that it was desirable that the accounts of the Post Office should be kept separate from the accounts of the general revenue and expenditure of the country. In the second place, he wished to associate himself with his colleague in the repre-
1186
sentation of Sunderland, who had explained the difficulties under which Sunderland laboured. No doubt there were other places which had similar difficulties; although they were extreme in the case of Sunderland. The cost of living in that town was practically identical with that in Newcastle, but the wages in Sunderland of the postal clerks were 8s. a week less than in Newcastle. As an old Member of the House, who had listened for twenty-five years to the debates on the Post Office, he thought that this debate was, on the whole, the most remarkable during the past quarter of a century. In the first place, there had been justly the unanimous expression from all quarters of the House of admiration for the devotion, ability, and sympathy of the Postmaster-General shown in the administration of his Department. There had been on all sides of the House a most complete approval of what was being done by the right hon. Gentleman in the way of expansion of the business during the past year. These were very remarkable features to one who had listened frequently to a different class of debate in the House. There had been only one topic upon which there was the same unanimity, but where fault had been found with the action of the right hon. Gentleman, and that was in connection with the Hobhouse Committee's Report. He had tried to form a conception of where the real difficulty lay, and he thought the Committee would bear him out that that had arisen from the fact that while they had a certain re-organisation of the wages of a great Department, and that re-organisation involved a large increase of wages, along with it there had come a certain number of decreases of wages of those who were to succeed the present occupants of office. The Committee, from beginning to end of the debate, had viewed with the greatest dissatisfaction the fact that there were to be lower salaries in certain parts of the country in respect of the Post Office servants than before; and that that should be attached to the general movement for the amelioration of the workers in the Post Office seemed to him to be the cause and origin of the dissatisfaction. An hon. Member on the Irish benches had said that it was not the case that tens

1187
of thousands of workers were to get worse wages than before, and then he gave the figures showing the large number who would be benefited and the small number who would be set back. That being the fact, it made the case all the worse for the few who woe set back. The fundamental difficulty arose either from the Hobhouse Report or from the construction which had been put upon the Hobhouse Report by the advisers of the right hon. Gentleman. They, or the framers of the Report had acted in this matter in a way in which no business man would have acted. Any gentleman who was connected with the employment of a large number of men must know that it was a most serious thing to reduce the wages of the men in any Department who were to come after those at present engaged in it; and to do that along with a general rise of wages of the employees. It would be almost impossible for any private employer of labour to carry out what was proposed to be done in the Post Office. There was a certain amateurishness in the recommendations of the Hobhouse Report which had led that Committee to this wrong and altogether unbusinesslike transaction. He thought that the unanimity with which the Committee had spoken on every side—the large number of Members who had spoken, and the still larger number who desired to speak—in bringing forward the grievances of a vast multitude of people, must show the Postmaster-General that there was really in the Hobhouse Report, or the interpretation put upon it, something which roust be altered. He wished to make an appeal to the Postmaster-General himself. The right hon. Gentleman had seen many people, he had seen the representatives of many constituencies about the various matters talked of that afternoon, and his own good sense, his own business sense, his own sympathy and desire to do what was right had led him in those cases, and also in cases which went outside the Hobhouse Report, to modify his position and to look at the facts from a reasonable point of view, from a business point of view, from an intelligent point of view, and not from the hard and fast line of a Report which was conceived on wrong lines. Under these circumstances he felt that they owed a great deal to the
1188
Postmaster-General for having got a little free from the bonds of the Hobhouse Report; but still, the right hon. Gentleman had involved himself in the network of that Report, and he should endeavour to get rid of it more and more. He hoped that in his reply the right hon. Gentleman would recognise the fact that he must now be bound not so much by that Report; that it must be modified in a general way or in particular instances. Perhaps it would be far better for his peace of mind if it should be modified in a general way so as to meet all the points brought forward. He wanted to add his testimony to the spirit in which the Postmaster-General had met the appeals which had been made to him.
SIR GEORGE SCOTT ROBERTSONsaid he wished to express his feelings about the question of classification, which frankly and honestly he felt very strongly in connection with his own constituency. He did not mean to say that in Bradford they were in a state of active discontent, but they were feeling a sort of depression and unhappiness in consequence of their being classified differently from all the other great towns. Of the seven very important towns of over 250,000 inhabitants in England, Bradford was the only one that was put down in Class II., the others all appearing in Class I. That was very peculiar, because Bradford was remarkable for the extremely high cost of living there. Working men in Bradford were at a very serious disadvantage indeed. If the cost of living were considered, and the high rents, it would be found that there was no place outside London, where the expenses of the working classes were so great. In spite of all this, Bradford was put down in a lower grade than any other big town. He would like to discuss the questions of units, of rent, and of special circumstances, besides the cost of living. As to the units of work, 1,475 was put down as the number, but it was contended with a good deal of force that this was altogether a mistake, and that the number was 1,600, and probably a good many more. But apart from that, certain units had not been added in at all; for instance, private box units amounted to eighty-two, and there were another

1189
sixty for the Bradford Daily Observer and Daily Telegraph, which numbers had not been considered at all. If all the numbers were put together fairly, honestly, and justly, they amounted to far above 1,600, which should qualify these people to go into the other class. Bradford fared badly in the matter of rent, and even that had not been properly stated in the Yellow-book issued by the Board of Trade, but was a good deal higher than from that Report it would appear. He felt sure that the Postmaster-General would give Bradford his careful and lenient consideration. The work at the telegraph department was of a very peculiar character, owing to the number of foreign telegrams which required special skill in manipulation. As to the postmen, they were in Bradford peculiarly situated. The Postmaster-General was in the town a short time ago, but he was afraid he did not walk about so much as a Parliamentary candidate had to do. Bradford was exceedingly hilly, and the streets were very steep and tiring. Besides that there was only one main post office, and no district post office, so that everything had to be despatched from the central post office, and taken out one to three miles. It could be well understood, therefore, that postmen had to pay from 1s. to 1s. 6d. a week in tram and train fares. He was certain the Postmaster-General would see the reasonableness of his contention, being, extremely free from what might be called official rigidity, which in lesser men than Cabinet Ministers was known as obstinacy. He felt confident, therefore, that his appeal on behalf of the postmen of Bradford would not be made in vain.
MR. STEADMANsaid it was a few years since he had the privilege of speaking in that House on the Post Office Estimates. Most of the ground had already been covered by previous speakers, but there were one or two points that he wanted to bring under the notice of the Postmaster-General. He admitted that so far as his criticism was concerned, it was friendly. He had known the Postmaster-General for a number of years, and knew the work he had done outside the House on be-
1190
half of the Labour movement; he considered he was one of the best men, either Liberal or Tory, who had ever presided at the Post Office; and therefore he was not able to put any venom into his speech. He wanted to call the right hon. Gentleman's attention to a circular which he issued on 29th June informing the mechanics employed at Mount Pleasant that as vacancies occurred in various trades now carried on by the Department the work was to be given out to private contract.
MR. SYDNEY BUXTONsaid he had not the least intention of sending work from Mount Pleasant to contractors. He had stated that Ids object was to keep the work there as far as he possibly could, but he wished to avoid taking on a large number of men and afterwards have to get rid of them. He did not know what the hon. Member was alluding to.
MR. STEADMANsaid he was alluding to a circular which, he understood from the men employed, bore the right hon. Gentleman's signature and had caused a lot of consternation there.
MR. SYDNEY BUXTONsaid there was absolutely no foundation for the statement, and that was the first he had heard of it. He would have thought that if the men themselves thought he was going to take action of that sort they would have made representations to him. It was rather hard on the head of the Department when those in the service, instead of coming directly to him and laying their grievances before him—and he had expressed himself willing to hear them—should go to Members and apparently misrepresent matters. He was not blaming his hon. friend—he was perfectly entitled to bring the matter forward—but the misunderstanding probably arose in this way. One of these circulars in regard to what were called non-established mechanics, stated that vacancies were to be provided for by contract. It referred only to two mechanics who were repairing letter-boxes. That was the only foundation whatever for the statement.
MR. STEADMANsaid he accepted the right hon. Gentleman's explanation and

1191
he was very pleased to have raised the point, because, personally, he felt very strongly upon it, and it had given him an opportunity of clearing it up, and he was sure it would satisfy those interested. His reason for feeling strongly upon it was that at the time of the general election he addressed these men in the dinner hour at the gates of the factory, and he strongly condemned the action of the late Government because they had sent contracts away from the Department whilst their men were working three-quarter time, and these men of course looked to him to be consistent. That was his object, and it had been achieved in raising the point. A matter which had been referred to two or three times was the difference between the salary paid in Lombard Street and that paid in Threadneedle Street. It was a point that wanted clearing up. He was a mechanic, a barge-builder, by trade, and it did not matter to him what portion of the river he was employd upon, he wanted his money as fixed by the trade union, and he would not work without it, and if the working classes were of his spirit they would not be working for the low rates of wages they were employed for to-day. It was very strange that there should be a difference in the price, and, as the Postmaster-General in reply to the hon. Member for Hoxton blamed the Committee for it, the Chairman of the Committee ought to give an explanation why the difference existed. There was one other point dealing with the sorters. He would refer to their hours of labour without going into the question of their wages. They were supposed to work forty-eight hours per week. That looked very reasonable, but in the first portion of the week they were rather slack, and hours were crammed in the last two days in order to bring them up to forty-eight in the week. This was what happened: A man went on night-duty at five o'clock on Friday afternoon and was on duty till five o'clock the next morning. That was twelve hours continuously. He then went home, but he had to be back on duty at five o'clock on Saturday afternoon, and to work all night again in order to bring his hours up to forty-eight. It was a matter of administration. He spoke feelingly on the point, because he had
1192
worked all night himself and he knew how one felt the next day. The men were confined in a building and their brains were taxed for twelve hours. There was a very great amount of strain upon them, and it was no wonder if some of them were driven into asylums. It was, he considered, more a matter of administration than anything else. He did not want to overburden the Postmaster-General, because he knew he was doing a lot; but he hoped he would look into the matter and see if some alteration could not be made. He smiled when listening to the pertinent remarks of the hon. Member for Bolton. He spoke on the subject of the law of supply and demand in the labour market. He had heard the argument used in the House till he was tired of it. If a man had only 18s. per week, it was idle for a Government official to tell him that there were thousands and thousands ready to take his place, though unfortunately it was true and showed the state of the labour market. He would challenge any Member to get up and tell them what he considered a living wage or a standard of living. Was it imagined that if a man got 30s. per week that was a standard of living? He considered it very far from being so. He preached the gospel of discontent outside. He said that the best was made by labour and labour had a right to enjoy the best. Heaven knew how a man with a wife and family lived on £1 or 18s. per week, for he did not. He was not satisfied with his living on a mechanic's wage and he was always in regular work. Why should he not have a standard of living as well as anybody else? Why should the economic conditions of the country allow one man to become a millionaire and another a pauper? He felt for those on the lower rung of the ladder. Under the instructions of the last Trade Union Congress, held at Bath, he gave a notice of motion calling for a minimum in the London district of 30s. per week. That was low enough in all respects, and it did not follow that if a man received it he would have a fair standard of living. As a matter of fact, a man's standard of living was regulated by the purchasing power of his wages. Hon. Members smiled, but it was no smiling matter to him, for he

1193
had gone through the mill, and it was no smiling matter to the millions outside, eating out lives of semi-starvation on low wages. This was a problem which every social reformer had to face. He wished to call attention to the case of the postal porters. He went to see a man at Mount Pleasant. He had 25s. per week; and he, his wife, and three or four children were living in two rooms, in a narrow thoroughfare, for which they had to pay 8s. per week. What standard of living was he enjoying? His wife and children ought to have the same air space as the wife and children of the millionaire in Park Lane. Humanity was equal. One man was as good as another so long as they obeyed the laws of the country. These low wages were the cause of overcrowding and of physical deterioration. He desired to say a few words on the subject of promotion. It seemed to him that the middle and upper classes imagined that the Civil Service was established for their sons, and their sons only. A great deal of caste existed in the Civil Service, and he was sorry to say it was spreading to other Departments. The London County Council, which was a large employer of labour, had tightened up its examination to such an extent that it was impossible for the son of a workman to secure an appointment. The examination was not necessary for the duties that had to be performed. The middle and upper classes had not all the brains, and in his judgment the Civil Service should be opened to merit and not to a certain class. It did not follow that because a man had received a University education he knew everything, or that he was a better man than anybody else. He knew that the Postmaster-General, fifteen years ago fought hard to secure the humble docker 6d. per hour, but there were men in the; Post Office who were being paid 4½d. per hour. These were the messenger boys. If they had the merit and the ability to go in for the higher grades they ought to stand on an equality with the rest. They might say what they liked about the Hobhouse Committee's Report, but I the service was seething with discontent at the present time, and he did not wonder at it. Men were passed over, not by better men, but because he sup-
1194
posed those men considered themselves "class." He was certain there would be more satisfaction if, when a man entered the Department, he knew that if he had the ability the time would come sooner or later when he could attain a higher position. The Department should not be under the control of one man. He was bound to be at the mercy, to some extent, of the permanent officials, for the Post Office was, after all, an administrative and not a legislative body. He did not agree with the hon. Member for Plymouth, who said that it should be managed by an independent committee. Every Member in the House had a right to say what wages he considered should be paid by any Government Department, and he had no opportunity of voicing his opinion except on occasions like the present. If they wanted the men to perform their duties in an honest and manly spirit, they must encourage them to take a certain amount of pride and satisfaction in their conditions of labour. These men had not that independence. When once they went out of the. Post Office they had to walk the streets and swell the ranks of the unemployed. They could only bring content into the Department by electing a Committee of Members, of which the Postmaster-General could be the head, to hear their complaints week-in and week-out, the same as he had the opportunity of doing for fifteen years when a member at Spring Gardens. If that was done it would save a lot of time now occupied by private Members, and it would bring more content in the postal service than existed at present.
MR. McCALLUMsaid that as Ireland had spoken in two voices and England had been speaking all the afternoon, perhaps the Committee would bear with Scotland for three and a half minutes. They were naturally slow of speech and a long-suffering people and they hesitated to intervene in the debates. He desired to join with. hon. Members who had spoken of the Post master-General in such laudatory terms. His speech was able, humorous, pathetic, kindly, and a vein of human sympathy ran through it. He had shown considerable resource and ingenuity, and had given real evidence of marked

1195
ability in his administration. It was right, therefore, that they should mention frankly that there were a few mistakes that they desired to see remedied. So far as Scotland was concerned, they had reason to be proud of his administration. Many of them who had gone to him for redress had found that he had been fair in his decision, although they had not got all they wanted. They had scarcely been fair in admitting that while the wage, particularly to start with, was not a living wage, the service gave other advantages that private enterprise could not possibly give. If the did their work well, if they showed ability and were determined to advance, there was a clear line of promotion before them. Then there was a pension at the end of their days. Looking at it from that point of view, it should not be maintained that the wage should be higher than was paid outside. The right hon. Gentleman, however, had made a slight mistake in the West of Scotland. The constituency that he represented was not far from Glasgow, and it cost just as much to live there as it did in Glasgow, yet those who entered the service there received less remuneration. He would like the right hon. Gentleman to look into that case, and, if possible, have it remedied. The town was not poor, the wages in the locality were quite as high as in Glasgow, and a great deal of the work done in Paisley naturally found its way into Glasgow. On that account Paisley had a special claim to be classified in the same way.
*MR. C. E. SHAWas a trader and one of the mercantile community, added his praise to the Postmaster-General for the postal reforms which he had carried into effect, more especially those with regard to the Colonies, the far-reaching effects of which would not be fully felt for some time to come. As a Liberal he was grateful also to the Postmaster-General for having seen his way clear to recognise trade unionism and collective bargaining in the Post Office, and was glad it had been carried through without any detriment to the Post Office organisation and work, generally speaking. He, however, expressed profound regret that the Com-
1196
mittee's recommendations and the way they had been carried into effect had not effected a settlement of the question. From the point of view of the postal service it was well that a great service should be contented, and it certainly added very greatly to the burden of the life of a Member of that House that a great service should be discontented, because it meant that they had to under take to voice that discontent and to make very searching inquiries in connection therewith. It was also decidedly detrimental from the public point of view. The public simply read in the Press, and from the statement of the Postmaster-General, that something like £500,000 more money had been devoted to the benefit of the great postal service, and, therefore, they were unable to understand why, when this great sum of money had been devoted to the bettering of the service, it should still be discontented. The service was still discontented because the Department had placed an arbitrary interpretation on the Committee's Report and recommendations. He had interviewed several members of the Committee which issued the Hobhouse Report, and one and all had expressed their belief that the Committee when issuing their Report did not mean that any wages should be diminished. Only one member of the Committee, he believed, had spoken, and while he defended the findings of the Committee generally, when he came to deal with his own constituents he found fault with any diminution of the wage, and indeed with the maintenance of the standard wage which had prevailed. It had been said that they had in many other Departments been suffering from Judge-made law. In this case the Post Office was suffering from Departmental-made classification. The Post Office servants with whom he had been brought into contact contended rightly that the men already in the service and of long standing should benefit to the full extent of the Report and not merely those entering from this date on. He had interviewed a gentle man who pointed out that the maximum which he could reach would take him twenty years to attain, though a new entrant would achieve it in fifteen years. He certainly believed old servants should

1197
always have a preference and at any rate should not be treated worse than new entrants. With regard to this much debated question of classification, the method to those who had not technical knowledge was extremely difficult to understand, and he failed to see the relation which the units of work bore to the cost of living. He had read and re-read the Memorandum issued by the Postmaster-General, and had added and subtracted figures in vain. If the unit of work was the major factor in deciding the classification, that was entirely wrong. The strain of work was not very great in difference as between the various offices, because if there was more work the number of officers was increased and the labour was distributed among a greater number of men. It was the cost of living that ought rather to govern the situation and not the unit of work. If they ruled out London, the cost of living did not differ very materially in various parts of the Kingdom—at any rate not so much as to justify the difference between a 40s. and a 56s. maximum. If 56s. was a fair maximum it was apparent that a great injustice was done to the 40s. man. It was bad where no increase had been made, and whore things were left as they were, but what about places where an absolute decrease had been announced? For years he had contended that Stafford should have a certain maximum, and at last he achieved it, but now it had been taken away. Stafford's maximum was 50s. It had now been reduced to 48s. Had the cost of living decreased, and would the wage of the new entrants be sufficient to maintain decency of living? Such would not lie the case, because 50s. by no means met the necessities of the case. He had gone into this matter at considerable length, and he would give to the House the budget of a poor family of five persons in the borough of Stafford, the head of which was a postal servant. He, made his calculation upon prices supplied by tradesmen in the borough, and he had taken 25s. a week which was the maximum figure allowed according to the new classification of the postal department. He had not taken one post man but twenty-four, and he found that twelve of them paid for a six-roomed house from 6s. to 6s. 6d. per week; ten
1198
of them paid in rent from 5s. to 5s. 9d. per week, and two of them paid 4s. per week for a four-roomed house. The mean average of those twenty-four post men for rental was 5s. 7d. and to that had to be added 9d. for rates making the total for rent and rates 6s. 4d. And now as to the cost of living. He would not go through all the items that he had compiled, which included such thing's as bread, sugar, tea, butter, bacon, jam, flour, fish, potatoes, eggs. He had taken each article carefully and compiled the budgets in each case. The sum total taken upon a very low basis amounted to no less than £1 0s. 3½d. as the cost of living. If they took the cost of coal, fire wood and other things at 2s. 6d. they would find that with the rent the average budget amounted to £1 9s. 1½d. a week. An hon. Member representing a Scottish constituency had stated that he was satisfied with the conditions of the Postal Service even although it did not always afford a living wage, but he was a long way from being satisfied with it when postmen in the borough of Stafford were only going to receive a maximum of 25s. a week. This was far more serious in view of the fact that the postmen's budget, compiled upon the most meager basis, totalled £1 9s. 1½d. He thought it was time that the postmen's pay should be amended and increased, in the interests of the department itself as well as in the interests of the nation generally. He challenged any hon. Member to contradict the figures he had given, which made no provision for sickness, insurance, and numerous other calls which were sure to be made upon a careful and thrifty family. Could it be wondered at that under those circumstances his constituents were profoundly disappointed with the result of the Committee's recommendations, which, when, translated as to their practical effect, meant the cutting down of the maximum wage by 1s. and 2s. per week in Stafford? The conditions under which the Stafford postmen performed their work was specially onerous having regard to the fact that Stafford was a great mail centre and nearly the whole of the work was night work. This entitled some of the employees to at least 52s. per week instead of being cut down from 50s. to 48s. per week. A great deal had been said about the £600,000 which was going be

1199
provided for increased pay to the men. He wished to tell the Committee that Stafford's share of that £600,000 was that a superintendent getting over £200 per annum would have a rise of £5 a year given to him and an inspector and assist ant-inspector would have rises of £25 and £15 a year respectively. Those men who had had their salaries increased never asked for a Committee to inquire into their conditions of service at all, and they were not, generally speaking, dissatisfied. Those men had had their salaries increased whilst the wages of future clerks and postmen were going to be reduced. This was taking place in spite of the fact that postal duties were increasing and the work was becoming more and more onerous. All those postal reforms of which the Postmaster-General had spoken, and for inaugurating which they were very grateful to him, would increase the work and responsibility of the postal service. He had recently been talking to a postman about this matter, and he called attention to the enormous increase of his work as a result of the extension of the book-post to Canada. Then there was the penny post to the United States which would also bring more work, and the increase in the sale of postal orders would also throw more responsibility upon individual post men. He associated, himself heartily with the hon. Member for the Ince division, whose speech he specially admired, with regard to the point, he made as to the State not being in the right when it endeavoured to cut down rather than to raise the wages of any large class employed in this country. Undoubtedly the State ought to be a model employer of labour and ought to level up wages and not level them down. He failed to understand how it had come about that Stafford had been relegated to the third class. He found upon looking at the figures that in the Memorandum which had been issued by the Postmaster-General, Stafford was put down in the third class. He noticed that a blank had been left in the space which dealt with the cost of living. He trusted that that meant that the Post master-General's decision was not final with regard to Stafford. He noticed that in the case of Birkenhead a blank was also left under the cost of living.
MR. SYDNEY BUXTON: Yes, that means that it is a special case.
MR. C. E. SHAWsaid he hoped that Stafford would be treated as a special case. He was encouraged to believe that that would be the case, because he noticed that in the prefatory Memorandum to the figures it was stated that offices were not to be put up or down in class unless the cost of living differed considerably from the average. Generally speaking, the benefit of the doubt had been given in moving an office up in the class and not reducing it. He claimed that Stafford should occupy a better class than it did having regard to the night work which fell with such weight on the employees. He felt that a better wage which was earned after many years of agitation ought not to be taken away from those men as the outcome of the recommendations of the Committee. This was all the more unjust because in his humble opinion, after having heard the opinions of some Members of that Committee, it was never intended that their I recommendations should result in a I diminution of the maximum wage but rather in a levelling up of wages through out the country.
*MR. ANNAN BRYCEsaid it was not clear from the Report of the Hobhouse Committee what was its intention with regard to the future position of the existing members of the sub-engineer class. It was, however, quite evident from the wording of the circular of the right hon. Gentleman that he did not intend to apply to existing members the recommendation of the Hobhouse Committee with regard to future members of the class. That left those people I who well deserved promotion under the old system in a very unfortunate position, and he hoped the right hon. Gentleman would indicate in his replay some method of getting over the difficulty which existed in relation to them. He did not believe there was any class of the postal service who performed harder work than the sub-engineers. Many of them had to work hours ranging from seventy to eighty and ninety in

1201
the week, and after several years of that kind of labour it would be very hard if they did not receive the promotion to which they were fully entitled.
*MR. PIKE PEASEsaid the Postmaster-General had been extremely courteous in replying to the communications he had addressed to him in regard to the constituency he represented, and he did not propose to bring the matter before the Committee, but he would like to hear from the right hon. Gentleman how he arrived at the cost of living in the various constituencies. From the interesting speech just delivered by the hon. Member for Stafford, it was perfectly plain that if the cost of rent was from 6s. to 6s. 6d. per week on the average the cost of living must be high, because in those districts food would not be particularly cheap, and in spite of this Stafford was placed in the third class. As far as other constituencies were concerned it was clear that there was I a strong feeling in the House that the present position was far from satisfactory. As far as his own constituency was concerned the maximum; rata had been reduced, and this had produced a considerable amount of dissatisfaction. In York the standard was much higher although the cost of living was very much the same. He wished to ask the Postmaster-General if he would say exactly how he arrived at his calculation in regard to units of work and the cost of living in the various constituencies.
MR. JOHN WARDsaid that in view of the enormous amount of criticism which had been passed upon the Committee of which he was un fortunately a Member, he wished to say a word or two. He particularly wished to reply to the statement made by one of the hon. Members for Dublin, to the effect that in the case of witnesses fetched from Ireland, their evidence was mutilated and never placed before the Committee. He did not think the hon. Member for Dublin could have been properly informed upon that subject, The Committee discovered that some of the evidence of those witnesses was of the
1202
most peculiar character, raising points that were of no importance at all, although some of the witnesses thought they were important. It was decided that the Chairman, with the assistance of the secretary, should look over certain statements proposed to be put before the Committee in the form of evidence. It was for that reason that certain matters, not touched upon in the evidence as printed, were never printed before the Committee officially, the matters referred to being utterly purposeless for the objects for which the Committee was appointed; so that the whole of the evidence which the witnesses wished to be presented was unquestionably placed before the Committee before a decision was arrived at in regard to it. To-day he had been delighted with the laudation of the Postmaster-General, but there had been a tendency to praise the right hon. Gentleman at the expense of the Committee. That was unfortunate, because it placed the Committee in the position that they were bound to defend themselves and their Report. He was there to stand up for the Committee from beginning to end. It had been stated that he did not sign the Report, but simply agreed to it. In spite of what the hon. Member for Stockport had said, he did not see the difference between agreeing to the Report and signing it. While he wished to get a broad and fair interpretation of the recommendations of the Committee, at the same time he stood with his colleagues in reference to the Report. There was one point in reference to the classification which he insisted upon, in spite of the hope which the hon. Member for Sunderland had expressed that the Post master-General would throw the Report of the Select Committee, so far as classification was concerned, into the waste-paper basket. With reference to classification, there were two principles on which the Committee decided to go. The first was the cost of living. Had that been properly applied? He was only able to speak with reference to the localities where he had made personal inquiries, and he was most certainly of opinion that the method by which the Department had sought to arrive at a conclusion as to the cost of living was utterly fallacious. It so happened that,

1203
either by accident or design, a list of streets in a town adjoining his own constituency had fallen into his hands. It showed the mode by which in the district selected the representatives of the Board of Trade found out the average rent in that particular locality. About fifty-two streets were selected, and except in the case of four or five streets, one would describe the district as one of the worst slum areas in the place. It was a district in which there were tumble down houses where rents of 3s. a week were charged. Was that carrying out the letter of the Department of 7th September, 1905, asking that only those localities should be taken into consideration when collecting information where it would be regarded as perfectly proper for postal servants to reside? So far as the locality to which he referred was concerned, he was positive that if the Postmaster-General only saw some of the houses, some of the streets, some of the courts, and some of the alleys selected for the purpose of getting at the proper average rent, he would either discharge the postal servant who lived there, or make him remove to another locality. It was not fair to denounce the findings of the Committee until they had been properly applied. In this case they had not been properly applied. The whole debate had rested on the question of classification, although there were a hundred and one other things dealt with in the Report. He wished to refer to the matter of the lowering of status. It was said that no officers were to be reduced. The Department might give two interpretations to that. They might say that the Committee reported that no officers were to be lowered in status, or that no officers in particular districts were to be lowered, which might mean that, whatever the classification might do as to the raising of status, none should be lowered below the position in which they were before. That interpretation might be applied perfectly reasonably and properly. As a member of the Committee he was not prepared to say what the majority of the Committee thought on that point. So far as he was concerned, he took it that nobody's wages I would be reduced, and that the status of no district would be reduced. He was only speaking for himself with respect
1204
to that. Others might have thought some thing entirely different, With reference to the second point, they were told that the cost of living should be the only principle for deciding the standard of a locality. That would be grossly unfair, as hon. Members would discover if they inquired into the peculiar circumstances of some localities. The Committee recommended as a safeguard that the volume of work in particular districts should be taken into consideration. If they inquired into the whole postal organisation from one end of the country to the other, he thought that that recommendation if applied would remove almost every one of the grievances which had been referred to. Had the Department carried out the recommendation of the Committee with reference to the volume of work in localities? The right hon. Gentleman said he had. He knew that the right hon. Gentleman had not carried out the intention he had when he made the recommendation. The Committee took it for granted that the volume of postal work in a particular locality would almost exclusively decide the importance of a district as a postal area. They thought that the whole of the work of the district would be calculated to find out what was the status of the district in the organisation of the Post Office. What had been done? In his own locality, for example, which included three or four sub-offices, every form of employment, except the actual work which a servant would perform, was excluded from the classification. The consequence was that the classification did not settle itself according to the volume of work, but according to the particular kind of organisation in it. If it was done by the sub-agent it did not count; but if done directly by the Department it did. That was grossly unfair. Some of the chief offices in his locality and in the surrounding locality were utterly excluded from the calculation as to the volume of the work done in the district. That was not carrying out the recommendations of the Committee. In the case of Shrewsbury the opposite was the case; for instead of excluding any thing from Shrewsbury it included seven or eight officers who were sent as far as Darlington in the North for the purpose of sorting all the letters, and to somewhere

1205
in South Wales, in the South and West, so that Shrewsbury was given the highest possible status in the scale. He said that that was grossly unfair under the circumstances. He had asked for an explanation, but none which was satisfactory had been given; at least none more satisfactory than that the surveyor who arranged those affairs resided in Shrewsbury. The most important thing in applying this principle was that the wages depended upon it; and unless that was attended to they could not prevent disturbance and difficulties being put in the way of the Department. He asked the Postmaster-General to reconsider the arrangements already arrived at with reference to classification; and to consider whether it was advisable to lower the status of any district when it was not the intention of a single member of the Committee that any district should be lowered.
*SIR A. SPICERsaid he wished to ask the Postmaster-General's kindly consideration of two questions in connection with stripes. The Hobhouse Committee reported that the stripe system should be revised, and that the first stripe should be given after five years service; and another stripe for each succeeding four years service. The Postmaster-General had accepted that recommendation, and it was agreed that the new system of four years probation from the receipt of the second stripe should date from the last one. That was a great advance, but it led to certain anomalies, and that in some cases faithful service in the past times was less rewarded than faithful service in recent times. The Hobhouse Committee recommended that on occasion of any offence sufficiently grave to deprive a man of a stripe, a period should be fixed. It was necessary that there should be some time-limit and it had been fixed at ten years. That meant, however, perpetual punishment for all offences that had taken place more than ten years ago. He asked the Postmaster-General's consideration of these two points.
MR. SYDNEY BUXTON,in replying on the debate, said that in the first place the Committee would, he hoped, allow
1206
him to say how very much he was indebted to hon. Members on both sides of the House for their kindly references to himself personally and also from the point of view of his administration. One or two of the speakers had, as he thought, endeavoured to discriminate in those matters between the Postmaster-General and those who served with him in the Department. He wanted to say that, having regard to all matters discussed that evening, the officers in his Department had given him the greatest possible support. They had worked together harmoniously, and he deprecated any distinction being drawn between the Postmaster-General and those who were associated with him. He thought it would be more convenient in his reply if he took up first some of the minor points raised by hon. Members. He could assure the hon. Member for Finsbury that the Post Office were not disestablishing any work they had now under their control, and were not proposing to go to contractors for the execution of work which was done by the Post Office at the present time. Some reference had been made to the Circular issued by the Department and the displacement of two painters in London and two mechanics in Glasgow. It was the remnant of an old charge, and it was thought that all the rest of that work was being done by contractors. It was really better while organising the system to get rid not of individuals but the system and have all the work done by the Department. But that was not the position. There was no wish to disestablish any work under the control of the Department. The hon. Member had mentioned another class which he thought was put in a worse position by the recommendations of the Committee—the auxiliary officers. He did not think that was so as a matter of fact. He thought the scale had been increased, but in every case the auxiliary officer had the option of keeping on at the old scale or of coming under the new; so there could be no question of their being in a worse position than before. There was no intention, as had been suggested by the hon. Member, of reducing their wages; the pay in London was still to be 6d. and not 4½d., as suggested. It was true the hours of the sorters were arduous

1207
and long and the conditions unhealthy, but the Department were trying to reduce the hours and to make the conditions of work as healthy and as convenient to the staff as possible. It must, however, be understood that in a question of this sort and a Department of this kind they did not keep regular hours and it was not always possible to improve the hours of the sorters. When the Daylight Bill became law they might be able to do something of the sort. The hon. Member for Islington had raised several questions. The trip allowances had been improved under the recommendations of the Committee, but as to the porters he did not think it would be possible to re-try the whole case tried by the Committee, and go beyond its recommendations, which were very precise. With regard to the telephone men, he rejoiced to say that, although there had been a long delay, these men were being brought on to the establishment. When one had two public Departments to deal with in these matters as he had they did not get on so quickly as one would like. The question of the sub-engineers was a somewhat complicated one, but he would have an opportunity in the holidays of meeting the society, and that was one of the matters he had to discuss with them. With regard to the question of the sub-post masters and the commission they received on the sale of postal orders there again he was to meet them and discuss the matter, and he hoped to come to a friendly arrangement. With regard to auxiliary labour in a Department of this character they ought to do with as little as possible, but it was not possible to get rid of it altogether under the present conditions, although his desire was to reduce it to the lowest possible extent. With regard to the carmen, to the underpayment of whom attention had been drawn, arrangements were being made which would prevent all that. In all new contracts he was inserting a new clause with that object. With regard to the assistants, the Committee recommended that in future the period in which these postmen were to qualify for their stripe should after the first stripe be reduced from five years to four. The Committee did not propose that that should be retrospective, but he had
1208
appealed to the Treasury to make it retrospective in the sense that it should date from the period when the man got his last stripe. This would, no doubt, create an anomaly, but he thought these men would rather have an anomaly with a considerable amount of cash than have neither anomaly nor cash. He must confess that he occasionally felt that he was not met in the way he should be in some of these matters. They had had a very interesting and significant discussion, chiefly with regard to classification. If a stranger knowing nothing of the matter had come into the House and listened to the debate he would probably have thought that the Post master-General had put down the wages of every existing and future postman. But if they took the case of the offices and sub -offices, as a whole, under the proposals of the Committee as modified and revised by himself with the assistance of the Treasury, the Committee would see that there would be an increase in the postmen's wages in 4,800 cases, and the diminutions had been only 750 in all. In the offices in London there were only five in which reductions had taken place. So that, taking the postmen as a whole, there was a very great improvement in their conditions. In this matter he thought the Committee intended that they should be taken as a whole and not individual cases. One hon. Member had said he was there to-day to have bricks thrown at his head. He certainly had had cartloads thrown at him. He thought a few of them might come to his assistance. "Were there not ten, and where are the nine?" He really thought he might have had a little support, and he hoped in the division lobby, if they came to a division, he might receive practical support. If any body had been listening to the debate, they would not have been made aware that there had been such a thing as a Parliamentary Committee sitting on this very question, a Committee appointed by the House and representative of all Parties, a Committee which came, if not absolutely—because no member submitted to everything—substantially unanimously to the conclusions, suggestions, and proposals embodied in the Report with regard to classification. He had, as he had said, considerably

1209
modified it at a very considerable additional cost, and he was obliged to the Treasury for the sum they had placed at his disposal in order to do it. What did the Committee recommend in regard to the question of classification? They said, and said specifically, that the classification of towns in future was to be made in two ways. There were at the present moment two divergent systems of classification, one dealing with the indoor force and the other with the outdoor force. They said the classes in the indoor force were to be reduced from seven to five, and that the outdoor force was to be classified on the lines of the posting clerks and telegraphists. The unified classification was to be based on two factors; first on the volume of work, and secondly on the cost of living where it was sufficient to modify the unit of work. That was the specific recommendation of the Parliamentary Committee, and he thought it was a very sensible one. He had been asked by one or two Members what constituted the unit of work, and how the Committee's recommendation was arrived at. He thought the hon. Member for Stoke had been somewhat misinformed as to the basis of the system of the unit of work and as to how it was carried out in the Department. The Committee took the system as it was carried out before they sat and recommended that it should be one of the bases of the classification.
MR. JOHN WARDsaid he would like the right hon. Gentleman to look at Paragraph 258. The Committee recommended that any resulting classification should be based upon the volume of work in the locality.
MR. SYDNEY BUXTONsaid that of course by unit of work he meant volume of work. That was to be one basis, and the other was the cost of living. He did not think there was any difference between them in that matter. The hon. Member had mentioned his own district, and said that the work done at the sub-offices there was not calculated in the volume of work. He did not know whether he had seen the details. A considerable volume of
1210
work was allowed for every sub-office; all the letters posted and delivered throughout the area, whether they went through the sub-offices or not, were brought into account, He could assure the House that all the items of work which went to form the volume of business in a particular locality were taken into account and calculated in the classification of the, various towns. He was not in any way responsible for the estimated cost of living. Naturally, he was not able to arrive at any conclusion as to whether one town was dear and another cheap. They had had somewhat interesting domestic details as to the cost of living in different towns, and especially in Stafford. Of course, he was not in a position to judge whether Stafford, Wigan, and Dudley were dear or cheap places to live in. One would have to go and live there himself in order to be able to say. The Committee recommended that the Board of Trade system of arriving at the cost of living should be extended to other towns, and that they should base their classification on that. The Board of Trade, who were perfectly impartial and had no prejudice, had supplied them with the figures. They did not know whether Shrewsbury was a Tory or a Liberal town. His hon. friend seemed to think that Shrewsbury, as a Tory town, had been specially privileged. Well, sometimes it was worth conciliating one's enemies. The Board of Trade provided the figures, but, like the Postmaster-General, they did not consider themselves infallible. He did not consider himself infallible with regard to the classification, and he was open to argument with regard to any particular town. The Board of Trade were also open to argument, and if a prima facie case could be made out, they would be prepared to reconsider their decision in any instance. If they came to a different conclusion, and made a material alteration in their figures, that would necessarily affect the classification of any town. Speaking on behalf of the Treasury, he would be glad if any hon. Member would endeavour to show that the cost of living in any place was put too high. They might then reconsider that case and reduce it. He would then be able to save some money. Everybody would appreciate that he had been at an enormous amount

1211
of trouble and labour, and, speaking seriously, he had accepted the general basis of the proposals of the Committee, modified very considerably in favour of the postmen, and he had honestly endeavoured to carry out the classification to the best of his ability. He believed it a fair and just basis. It was quite obvious that by starting with two divergent classifications and unifying them, a certain number of places must be adversely affected, but he was glad to think that the vast majority would be advantaged. The Committee themselves fully recognised that that would be the case, because they said in Paragraph 260 of the Report—
"Your Committee recognises that the position in these classes of each individual town or district may be considerably affected as the result of the inquiry above referred to by the Board of Trade."
Therefore, it was quite obvious that they themselves believed there must be a certain amount of alteration in the position of the towns in a reclassification. He had endeavoured to minimise it as fat as possible and to modify it as far as he could in favour of postmen and to reduce as few towns as possible. Of course, they all sympathised with those places in which in the future the maximum would have to be reduced; but he must repeat that it did not affect a single existing postman but only future entrants, and even there he sympathised with those places in which this classification might result in a reduction. All he could say in regard to it was that they had tried to minimise it as far as they could. As regarded individual towns, either in regard to units of work or the ordinary volume of work, if it increased so as to improve the classification, and also as regarded the cost of living and the other elements, if serious facts could be brought to his attention, he would certainly present them to the Board of Trade, who were perfectly willing to reconsider any decisions they had come to in regard to the cost of living if they had really material facts. They were still inquiring in a considerable number of places for the first classification and there were other places which would have to be inquired into, and he must ask the Committee in regard
1212
to any individual case they brought before him to understand that they must carry out, before they could reconsider these cases, the classification which they at present had in hand—he meant the inquiry into the cost of living by the Board of Trade. Subject to that, he frankly said to the House that he had proposed this classification on the lines of the Committee believing it to be a fair classification, and as a general framework he adhered to it. But as regarded any individual case, he was perfectly open to consider the position either from the point of view of the volume of work or of the cost of living. He asked the House to look at the matter as a whole and not to think quite so much about their constituents as about the postal service.
MR. SEDDONwas sure every Member of the House had heard with pleasure the efforts that the right hon. Gentleman had made on behalf of the postal employees; he was glad to be able to express the thanks of a large number of men who had benefited by his attention, and he hoped and believed he would not slacken his zeal on behalf of those who still had a perfect right to have their wages increased and their hours reduced. They were also thankful that he had increased the wages of the typists in the various offices. It secured to many of the women a living wage. Did that advantage apply to all centres as well as London where typists were engaged? He also wanted the right hon. Gentleman to clear the mind of the Committee with, reference to another question—the position of members of the postal service who belonged to the Territorials. There was an idea abroad, though it had been denied by the Minister for War, that those who had been engaged in the postal service and belonged to the Territorial Army, when on duty in that connection, had to make up the difference when persons in receipt of a higher wage were put in their place. Finally, he would like to ask the right hon. Gentleman when going into the merits or demerits of the classification scheme, where no inquiry had been made, that he would stay his hand.

1213
He was credibly informed that there were 120 offices where no inquiry had taken place, and they were already threatened with a reduction from the maximum of 1s. per week. It was only fair, whether classification was right or wrong, that where there had been no inquiry there should be no threatened reduction until an inquiry had taken place.
*MR. HUNTpointed out that when rural postmen could live in the country and get a cottage with a garden, fruit trees, and pig-sty included, for about £5 a year, they could manage to live in moderate comfort on their wages; but it was distinctly hard on rural postmen getting about the same wages when they had to live in a country town, pay £6 or £7 a year or more for a house, with none of the other advantages. That was a point that the right hon. Gentleman might well consider, because it was thought a great deal of in country districts. It was pretty clear from what had been generally stated that the cost of living had considerably increased in recent years, and from all sides of the House they also heard that the wages paid to the postmen by the Government were too low. How was it that these things were so under the present Liberal Government after sixty years of what hon. Gentleman opposite were pleased to call "free trade."
DR. RUTHERFORDsaid although he was not satisfied with the statements of the right hon. Gentleman lie felt that he had been met a considerable distance. They were thankful that the Postmaster-General had promised to reconsider the question of classification, because they contended, that that was a very important and serious point. Hon. Members appeared to be quite satisfied with the discussion which had taken place, and under the circumstances he was prepared to withdraw his Amendment. [Cries of "No, no."]
MR. CLYNESsaid that in the course of his reply the Post master-General had not touched upon the various grievances which had been
1214
put before the Committee by successive speakers in the course of the discussion. It was clear that there had been an increase in the cost of living, and this was likely still further to increase in the future. If under those circumstances there was going to be a reduction in the remuneration of those employed in the postal service, he contended that the Committee had no alternative but to go to a division as a protest.
*MR. WARDLEsaid he had been waiting the whole of the day in order to get an opportunity of saving one or two words upon this question. There was one aspect which had not been sufficiently recognised by the Committee. The advance in wages which had been granted had not been, obtained by the barbarous method of a strike, but had been granted by a Committee of this House, and it seemed to him that that was an aspect of the case which deserved full consideration and showed that they believed in peaceable methods. With regard to those places where it was alleged that there had been a threat of reduction, he wished to point out that in none of those cases could that policy have fruition for at least four or five years, and during that period there was ample time for inquiry into the cost of living. Therefore, he did not think there was any need to be uneasy with regard to the question of these threatened reductions. Personally, he subscribed very largely to the view put forward by the hon. Member for Sunderland, who had pointed out that in a general scheme of reorganisation such as this where a large number of offices went up and a few went down it was certain, there would be a considerable amount of dissatisfaction. He still held the opinion that it was quite possible to classify postmen, sorting clerks, and telegraphists in one classification, and there was a possibility of building up a better organisation on those lines. For those reasons, even the modification which the Postmaster-General had made might be entirely unnecessary in order that the indoor and outdoor forces could be put into the same classification, provided the criteria were altered by which the standard was arranged for the indoor and outdoor

1215
forces, or provided that the scales were rearranged on the same lines as those at present in force. There was one paragraph in the Committee's Report to which no allusion had been made, and it was one of the most important in the whole Report. For that reason he desired to call the attention of the Committee to it. In his opinion and in the opinion of the Committee there ought to be some reorganisation of the whole of the classes in the Post Office apart from the question of wages. He felt sure that a Committee of business men if they were to investigate—
And, it being Eleven of the clock, the Chairman left the Chair to make his Report to the House.
Committee report progress; to sit again upon Monday next.

REGISTRATION BILL. [LORDS.]
Order for Second Reading read.
THE ATTORNEY-GENERAL (Sir W. ROBSON, South Shields),in moving the Second Reading, said that this was a small Bill to amend the Registration Acts in connection with certain proceedings on appeals. The Bill had been made necessary owing to the alteration of the termination of the long vacation from 24th to 12th October. The dates in the Registration Acts were fixed with reference to the date at which the Michaelmas sittings began. The advancing of the date to 12th October made inappropriate nearly all the dates under the Registration Acts with regard to appeals.
Motion made and Question proposed, "That the Bill be now read a second time."—(Sir W. Robson.)
Question put, and agreed to.
Bill read a second time and committed to a Committee of the Whole House for to-morrow.—(Mr. Joseph Pease.)

FRIENDLY SOCIETIES BILL.
As amended, considered.
THE FINANCIAL SECRETARY TO THE TREASURY (Mr. HOBHOUSE,)THE FINANCIAL SECRETARY TO THE TREASURY (Mr. HOBHOUSE, Bristol, E.) moved to insert words in Clause 9 for the purpose of meeting certain criticisms which were offered when the Bill was in Committee.
Amendment proposed—
"In Clause 9, line 14, after the word "improperly," to insert the words "and costs."—(Mr. Hobhouse.)
Question proposed, "That those words be there inserted.
MR. FORSTERasked whether the effect of the Amendment was to bring the Bill into conformity with the existing law.
MR. HOBHOUSE: Yes, that is so.
MR. GRETTONasked whether the meaning of the Government was "to repay, with costs, any sum of money applied improperly," and suggested that the words, as inserted in the Government Amendment, were not clear, and required explanation; they ought to have been inserted after the word "repay."
MR. HOBHOUSEreplied that there might be some ambiguity as to the meaning of the clause without that word. He thought the Amendments proposed by the Government would clear up any doubt which might otherwise exist.
Question put, and agreed to.
MR. HOBHOUSE MR. HOBHOUSE moved to delete all the words after the word "liable" to the end of the clause and to insert other words providing that certain liabilities should be deemed a civil debt recover-able under the Summary Jurisdiction Acts. He hoped the alteration would be satisfactory to the House.
MR. CARLILEsaid that it was essential that the members of friendly societies should realise that their funds were safe. He was quite sure that the hon. Gentleman desired that that should be the case and that he did not wish to weaken the hold of friendly societies on their funds. He asked whether these words would not rather weaken the hold of friendly societies over the persons who had the administration of their funds, by simply dealing with them as if they owed a civil debt. The onus of proving fraud would lie on the friendly societies, whereas hitherto, as he understood, if any trustee or officer misappropriated or misapplied the funds of a friendly society he had to prove himself innocent.
SIR W. ROBSONsaid that the hon. Gentleman was mistaken in his view of the law. The words now under discussion added very useful powers to those already possessed by friendly societies and did not in any way weaken or detract from their existing powers. A friendly society was able to go to a Court of Summary Jurisdiction and secure certain advantageous orders accompanied with a fine, but in order to do so under Section 87, subsection (3) of the principle Act, fraud had to be proved.
MR. CARLILE: But suppose the man had disappeared?
SIR W. ROBSONsaid that in that case he thought there could not be much difficulty in proving fraud. But it frequently happened that in a charge under Section 87, subsection (3) of the Act of 1887, the friendly society was unable to prove fraud. If these words were inserted the friendly society would be entitled to ask the magistrate to make an order to pay the money as if for a debt and that would enable the society to regain possession of their funds.
MR. CLAUDE HAYasked why these Amendments should be proposed by
1218
the Government when hon. Members had not had the opportunity of considering them, and had simply to acquiesce in the explanation given by the hon. and learned Gentleman. He suggested to the hon. Gentleman in charge of the Bill that the most expeditious manner of carrying this measure through would be to defer it for further consideration on the Report stage to-morrow. If the Amendments had any value they could be discussed on their merits. The practice of bringing forward Amendments without notice was only another illustration of the way in which business was conducted from the Treasury Bench.
MR. HOBHOUSEsaid that these words were introduced at the express wish of the friendly societies.
MR. CLAUDE HAYsaid, if that were so, why were they not introduced before?
Amendment agreed to.
MR. HOBHOUSE MR. HOBHOUSE moved to omit Clause 13. When this clause was brought up by the hon. Member opposite without his having had time to value its effect, he said he could only accept it conditionally, and that if on examination it was found to be an undesirable addition to the Bill he would delete it on the Report stage. The reason he moved its omission now was that the clause would give a premium on unnecessary legal procedure. It would undoubtedly have that effect.
MR. FORSTERsaid he wished to enter a mild protest against that method of amending such a Bill at that hour. Everybody would agree that if Amendments of this importance were necessary, they should appear on the Paper in order that those who took an interest in the subject matter of the Bill might know what to expect. He was in complete ignorance as to what Amendments the

1219
hon. Gentleman intended to propose to other parts of the Bill. He did not intend, however, to stand in the way in its immediate passage. He hoped the hon. Gentleman would put the Amendments on the Paper so that they might see where they stood.
*MR. CLAUDE HAYasked whether this Amendment had been put forward by the Government at the instance of the friendly societies, and if so, why the right hon. Gentleman did not say so, He also would like to know if it was not on that ground why the hon. Gentleman proposed these Amendments. If they were put forward at the instance of friendly societies he wished to know at the instance of which friendly society or societies they were proposed.
Amendment agreed to.
Bill read the third time, and passed.

COMPANIES BILL [LORDS].
Order for Second Reading read.
THE PARLIAMENTARY SECRETARY TO THE BOARD OF TRADE (Sir H. KEARLEY,)said the necessity for this Bill was brought to the attention of the Board of Trade by an influential deputation representing the large Colonial companies. The capital of Colonial companies invested in this country was computed to be between £24,000,000 and £25,000,000. It was shown that these companies had difficulty in carrying on business in this country, as they were under the Mortmain Act. Under that Act they could not acquire land in this country without either an Act of Parliament or an authorisation under the Crown. But protection was given under the Registration of Companies Act of 1862. Companies formed in the Colonies had not the benefit, of the Companies Act, and had not the privilege of obtaining a private Act of Parliament: therefore they could only acquire land under the Mortmain Act at a fee of £60 on every
1220
transaction. What this Bill proposed to do was to provide that companies promoted in British Possessions should have the same privileges as companies formed in this country under the Companies Limited Liability Act. He had consulted the right hon. Member for St. George's on the question and was glad to say that the right hon. Member agreed with him that this was a concession that might be made and would be well received in the Colonies. He hoped the House would give it a Second Reading.
Motion made, and Question proposed, "That the Bill be now read a second time."
MR. LYTTELTONsaid he knew that the present disability in regard to these companies existed in several of our Colonies, and he was grateful to the Government for bringing in a Bill to remove it.
MR. CLAUDE HAYthanked the right hon. Gentleman for his lucid explanation of this Bill, but asked why it should be thought necessary that the benefits of this Act should only apply to companies registered in British Possessions having business in this country. He did not see that it was necessary for them to have a place of business here in order to enjoy the benefits of the Bill.
SIR H. KEARLEYsaid it was only those who carried on business here that came within the provisions of the Mort-main Act.
Question put, and agreed to.
Bill committed to a Committee of the Whole House for To-morrow.—(Sir H. Kearley.)
Whereupon Mr. SPEAKER, pursuant to the Order of the House of 10th July, adjourned the House without Question put.
Adjourned at twenty-nine minutes after Eleven o'Clock.

FAIRFAX PEERAGE.
Petition of Albert Kirby Fairfax (claiming to be) Lord Fairfax of Cameron for leave to lodge his printed case; read, and ordered as prayed.
The Lord Saint Levan—Sat first in Parliament after the death of his father.

PRIVATE BILL BUSINESS.
The LORD CHANCELLOR acquainted the House, That the Clerk of the Parliaments had laid upon the Table the Certificates from the Examiners that the farther Standing Orders applicable to the following Bills have been complied with:—Sligo and Arigna Railway; Nottinghamshire and Derbyshire Tramways (No. 2).
The same were ordered to lie on the Table.

STANDING ORDERS COMMITTEE.
Report from, That the Standing Orders not complied with in respect of the Ards Railways Kill ought to be dispensed with and the Bill allowed to proceed provided Clauses 79 and 81 be struck out unless proof be given before the Examiners that the Bill has been approved by the proprietors of the Belfast and County Down Railway Company present at a meeting called and held in accordance with Standing Order 64.
Read, and agreed to.
South West Suburban Water Bill.—Reported, with Amendments.
River Wandle Protection Bill [H.L.].—Reported, with Amendments.
Ards Railways Bill.—Moved, That the order made on the 25th day of March last, "That no Private Bill brought from the House of Commons shall be read a second time after the 18th day of June next," be dispensed with, and that the Bill be
994
now read 2a; agreed to; Bill read 2a accordingly, and committed for Tuesday next.
Wishaw Burgh Electricity, etc., Bill.—Read 3a, with the Amendments, and passed, and returned to the Commons.
River Wandle Protection Bill [H.L.].—Moved, "That Standing Order No. 143 be considered and dispensed with, in respect, of the said Bill, and that the Bill be now read 3a; agreed to; Bill read 3 accordingly, and passed, and sent to the Commons.
Garw and Ogmore Gas Bill.—Returned from the Commons with the Amendments agreed to.
Public Offices Sites (Extension) Bill; London United Tramways Bill, Local Government Provisional Orders (No. 5) Bill—(Bradfield Rural Order); Holder-ness Water Bill.—Report from the Committee of Selection, That the Lord Willoughby de Broke and the Lord Colchester be proposed to the House as Members of the Select Committee on the said Bills in the place of the Lord Elphinstone and the Lord Hindlip; read, and agreed to.
Falkirk and District Water Order Confirmation Bill [H.L.].—Read 3a according to order), and passed, and sent to the Commons.
Education Board Provisional Orders Confirmation (Cornwall, etc.) 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 on Monday next.

RETURNS, REPORTS, ETC.
  MERCHANT SHIPPING ACT, 1894, AND WORKMEN'S COMPENSATION ACT, 1906.
  Order in Council, dated 4th July, 1908, empowering certain officers in British Protectorates to take depositions respecting injuries received by a member of the crew of a British vessel who may be left behind in any of the Protectorates.
  FOREIGN JURISDICTION ACT, 1890.
  Order in Council, dated 4th July, 1908 entitled "The Cyprus Courts of Justice Order, 1908."
  FOREIGN JURISDICTION ACT, 1890, AND CONSULAR SALARIES AND FEES ACT 1891.
  Order in Council, dated 4th July, 1908, entitled "The China (Passenger Ship Fees) Order in Council, 1908."

  NAVAL AND MARINE PAY AND PENSIONS ACT, 1865.
  Order in Council, dated 4th July, 1908, approving a Memorial of the Lords Commissioners of the Admiralty praying sanction to the extension of the period of full-pay sick leave in certain cases and under certain conditions.
  Laid before the House (pursuant to Act) and ordered to lie on the Table.

  OSBORNE.
  Report of the House Governor and Medical Superintendent for the year to 31st March, 1908.

  CARE AND CONTROL OF THE FEEBLEMINDED (ROYAL COMMISSION).
  Report of the Royal Commissioners appointed to inquire concerning the care and control of the feeble-minded. Vol. III. Report.
  Presented (by command), and ordered to lie on the Table.

  SHOP HOURS ACT, 1904 (COUNTY BOROUGH OF BLACKPOOL).
  Order made by the council of the county borough of Blackpool, and confirmed by the Secretary of State for the Home Department, fixing the hours of closing for certain classes of shops within the county borough.
  POLICE ACT, 1890.
  Correspondence relative to the refusal of the Secretary of State's certificate under Section 17 (2) of the Act, to the Tyne River Police Force, for the year ended 29th September, 1907.
  WINTER ASSIZES ACTS, 1876 AND 1877.
  Seven Orders in Council, dated 4th July, 1908, relating to the ensuing Winter Assizes.
  MERCHANT SHIPPING ACT, 1894, AND MERCHANT SHIPPING (MERCANTILE MARINE FUND) ACT, 1898.
  Order in Council, dated 4th July, 1908, adding to the exemptions from light dues in the Second Schedule to the Merchant Shipping (Mercantile Marine Fund) Act, 1898.
  BEE PEST (IRELAND) BILL. [No. 156.] COSTS IN CRIMINAL CASES BILL. [No. 157.]
  Brought from the Commons, read 1a, and to be printed.

  TOBACCO GROWING (SCOTLAND) BILL.
  [SECOND READING.]
  Order of the Day for the Second Reading read.
  THE EARL OF CAMPERDOWN: My Lords, this is a Bill to repeal the law which prohibits the growing of tobacco in Scotland. It also provides that the Commissioners of Inland Revenue may issue licences to persons to grow tobacco, and may state the places in which tobacco may be grown. The Bill is identical with die one which was passed for Ireland last year; and as, I believe, there is no objection to it on the part of the Government, I beg to move the Second Reading.
  Moved, "That the Bill be now read 2a."—(The Earl of Camperdown.)
  LORD DENMAN: My Lords, there is no objection whatever on the part of the Government to the Bill which the noble Earl has just introduced. Therefore we cordially assent to the Second Reading.
  On Question, Bill road 2a, and committed to a Committee of the Whole House on Monday next.

IMPORTATION OF PLUMAGE PROHIBITION BILL [H.L.]
House in Committee (according to order): The amendments proposed by the Select Committee made: Standing Committee negatived: The Report of Amendments to be received on Monday next.

CORONERS (IRELAND) BILL.
[SECOND READING.]
Order of the Day for the Second Reading read.
*THE EARL OF DONOUGHMORE: My Lords case for the Second Reading of this Bill is this. In England power is given for the appointment of deputy coroners. In Ireland we have no such power; and we ask that the sections in the English Act of 1892, which give this power, should be applied to Ireland. All I need draw attention to is that it is provided that the power shall be subject to the provisions of the Coroners Acts and to the law relating to coroners "in like manner" as to coroners.
Moved, "That the Bill be now read 2a."—(The Earl of Donoughmore.)
LORD DENMAN: We have no objections whatever to the provisions of this Bill. In fact, we cordially assent to it. Under the existing law in Ireland a considerable difficulty arises owing to the absence of any enactment enabling a deputy coroner to be appointed. I understand that this Bill is to enable that to be done, and the Government offer no objection to the Second Reading.
LORD ASHBOURNE: I have no doubt the Bill is desirable. The only thing I will say is, that I think it may need examination at the next stage in order to see that adequate provision is made to secure that a fit deputy is appointed, and that the power which is reserved to remove a coroner should also apply to a deputy coroner under this Bill. Those, however, are matters for Committee. I do not oppose the Second Reading of the Bill.
On Question, Bill read 2a, and committed to a Committee of the Whole House on Tuesday next.

POST OFFICE SAVINGS BANK BILL.
[SECOND READING.]
Order of the Day for the Second Reading read.
THE EARL OF GRANARD: My Lords, this Bill is very simple in character, and
998
its object is to amend Section 11 of the Savings Bank Act, 1904. The provision in that section has resulted in a considerable saving to the Exchequer through not having to transmit acknowledgments of deposits below the amount stated, and the object of this Bill is to enable the amount to be increased. The Bill provides that in the case of deposits not exceeding £1, or such higher maximum amount as may from time to time be fixed by regulations made by the Postmaster General with the consent of the Treasury under the Post Office Savings Bank Acts, 1861 to 1904, the entry in the depositor's book shall be conclusive evidence of the depositor's claim to the repayment of the deposit, with the interest thereon, upon demand made by him on the Postmaster-General, and it shall not be necessary in such case to transmit any acknowledgment of the deposit by the Postmaster-General.
Moved, "That the Bill be now read 2a."—(The Earl of Granard.)
On Question, Bill read 2a, and committed to a Committee of the Whole House on Monday next.

CROFTING PARISHES (SCOTLAND) BILL [H.L.]
Read 3a (according to order). Amendments (Privilege) made; Bill passed, and sent to the Commons.

SALE OF LANDS IN FIJI.
*LORD STANMORErose to move for any further correspondence between the Secretary of State for the Colonies and the Governor of Fiji relating to the sale of certain lands in the Island of Viti Levu, in continuation of Papers laid before the House last year. The noble Lord said: My Lords, as I have reason to understand that His Majesty's Government do not object to the Motion I have brought forward, it is unnecessary for me to weary your Lordships by going at any length into my reasons for making it. I look forward to the Papers which [ire to be produced under it with more than usual interest, because I understand they contain a sharp criticism of my action thirty five years ago with regard to the Native Land Tenure. But I am lot going to discuss that matter now,

999
or to raise any question about it. In the first place, the controversy would be entirely uninteresting to your Lordships. In the next place, I do not think much time need be spent in discussing the rather comic theory that half-a-dozen successive Governors of Fiji and half-a-dozen successive Secretaries of State, to say nothing of a host of other officials concerned in the matter, have taken for the last thirty-six years a wrong view of the Treaty of Cession, and, in the third place I have not the smallest apprehension that the noble Earl the Secretary of State will adopt this new-fangled theory that the natives of Fiji have no right in the land they hold, except such as the indulgence of the Crown may choose to give. I should not have alluded to the matter had it not been that I think I owe a duty to an excellent public servant who in past times, when I was Governor of Fiji, rendered invaluable service, and to whom I shall be always under obligation and grateful for the assistance then rendered; I mean Mr. David Wilkinson, who, I understand, has in some recent official utterances had his name coupled with mine in regard to what is now supposed to be my faulty action thirty-five years ago. I owe it to that gentleman to say that, whether my views were right or wrong, his is not, as has been represented, the maleficent influence which caused me to take the views referred to. Whatever the case may be, whether I was right or wrong, that gentleman—Mr. David Wilkinson—had no share in the forming of those opinions or in guiding my action. I have no doubt he agreed with my opinion, but, as a matter of fact, I had hardly any communication with him during the first year of my Governorship. My views of the Deed of Cession were founded on communication with those who negotiated it: the late Lord Rosmead and Commodore Goodenough on the one side, and Thakombau and the late Sir John Thurston on the other, and my views of native tenure were chiefly influenced by Sir John Thurston, that distinguished ethnologist Dr. Fison, Mr. Walter Carew, and others. Therefore, after what has been said about Mr. Wilkinson recently, I think it only right to state here in my place in Parliament that the accusation, though doubtless involuntarily so, is unjust
1000
and unfounded. My views with regard to the granting of the Treaty of Cession were formed on the evidence of those who took part in that Treaty; and to charge Mr. Wilkinson with my sins, whatever they may have been, is entirely mistaken and uncalled for.
"Moved, That an humble address be presented to His Majesty for further correspondence between the Secretary of State for the Colonies and the Governor of Fiji relating to the sale of certain lands in the Island of Viti Levu, in continuation of Papers laid before the House last year."—(Lord Stanmore.)
*THE SECRETARY OF STATE FOR THE COLONIES (The Earl of CREWE): My Lords, I need not detain your Lordships at any great length upon this important and interesting matter of the native lands in Fiji. It is a question which in this House the noble Lord on the cross benches has made practically his own, and that may be natural, considering the high position he held as Governor of the Colony. The noble Lord has alluded to what has happened in Fiji since the Treaty of Cession in the year 1874. There may be some dispute as to what the precise rights of the natives were over what were then known as the unoccupied lands. The lands were of three kinds—there were some which were already in the occupation of white settlers; there were other lands under actual cultivation by native communities; and there was a third class of lands which were quite unoccupied and as to which a certain degree of controversy has arisen. But that controversy is really only of historical interest, because it has been an undoubted fact that during the last thirty years the claims of the natives over those unoccupied lands have been both implicitly and explicitly admitted by governor after governor in statements made to the natives. That is fully admitted also by the present distinguished Governor of Fiji, who takes a different view from the noble Lord on the cross benches as to the historical merits of the case. He fully admits that in practice the rights of the natives over these unoccupied lands have been recognised over and over again. At the same time we have to bear in mind that it is very important that, so far as these lands are not used by or wanted for the native

1001
communities, they should be as far as possible developed in the interest of the islanders as a whole. That is a proposition which the noble Lord on the cross benches will not dispute. That development must, however, take place with full regard to the rights of the natives over these lands. An influential body of planters have recently presented a petition in which they ask that the lands in actual occupation by the natives should be delimited, and that all remaining lands should be declared to be the property of the Crown, and, as such, put up for public sale and purchased by anybody who desires to acquire them. That is a proposition which we cannot entertain. An alternative, made as a compromise, proposes that the lands necessary for the support of the natives should be delimited, and that the Government should have full power to alienate the unoccupied lands, but should allow two-thirds of the profits to go to the native community, and that lands granted by the tribal communities to individuals should be subject to the consent of the Governor in Council if it was proposed to lease or sell them. With this alternative proposition we do not find ourselves in complete agreement. We take the view that the tenure of these lands has been essentially communal, and that in no circumstances is it desirable that an individual native should be in a position to sell the land and pocket the money. We also hold that the natives do possess full interest in the unoccupied land, but we quite agree that, with the consent of the Council and the chiefs, some of the land immediately required for occupation should be leased on terms to those willing to develop it, but only in exceptional cases should the native land be allowed to be sold at all. When the lands are leased or, in rare eases, sold, the money should be, in our opinion, held in trust for the benefit of the existing community and their successors. That is to say, the advantage to be derived from the development of the land by Europeans should, so far as possible, be wholly reserved for the benefit of the community and not of the individual. I would merely say, in conclusion, that there is no objection whatever to printing further Papers on the subject; and I think it is quite true, as the noble Lord on the cross benches has stated, that he will find in those Papers some observations reflecting
1002
on his own views on this matter, to which I hope he will not find it necessary to take very serious exception.
LORD STANMORE: My Lords, if I had known that the noble Earl was going to make a full explanation of the land policy of His Majesty's Government with regard to Fiji on this occasion, I am afraid I should hardly have been so indulgent to your Lordships, but should have thought it necessary to go more fully into the matter. That I shall not do now. I merely thank the noble Earl for promising further Papers, and for the very interesting speech he has made, with the general tenor of which I entirely agree.
On Question, Motion agreed to, and ordered accordingly.

PROPOSED SANATORIUM AT STREAMHILL.
*LORD CASTLETOWN: My Lords, I rise to ask His Majesty's Government the rather long string of Questions standing in my name, viz.: (1) What evidence was tendered before the Local Government Board Committee of Enquiry with regard to the proposed sanatorium at Streamhill which warranted the Board in stating they would not with hold sanction of a loan? See letter, 16th March, 1908. (2) Whether it is a fact that the two arbitrators appointed to decide the conflicting views of the ratepayers were the same gentlemen who approved the site in the first instance, and whether this is considered a proper form of arbitration? (3) Whether the views of the ratepayers have been obtained as to the heavy expenditure proposed? (4) Whether any real practical medical expert on tuberculosis has examined the proposed site? (5) Whether it is not a fact that all experts now agree that temporary wooden houses, and not stone buildings, are the proper typos for use in sanatoria; and whether the Local Government Board will protect the ratepayers by having this question investigated by competent authorities before any unnecessary or additional expenditure is incurred? (6) Whether the purported gift of land does not contain peculiar legal provisions as to resumption, and whether these provisions have been fully considered by the Board or their legal representative?

1003
In putting these Questions I should like to say a few words explanatory of my reasons for doing so. Those who are acting with me in this matter have no wish to prevent proper sanatoria for consumptive patients being built in any portion of Ireland. We are most anxious to see the work now being carried on in Ireland so well against tuberculosis carried on to the fullest extent. But at the same time we desire to prevent, so far as possible, the ratepayers' money being wasted in schemes which may be neither suitable nor advisable. The story of how the question arose is a very simple one. An Act was passed some few years ago which enabled the county council of any part of Ireland to appoint what were called joint hospital boards, and, once they were appointed, they were prepared to spend any sum of money which was considered fair by the county council in building sanatoria for consumptive patients. The effect has been that in some parts of Ireland, I believe in two parts, very proper places have been selected, and, I believe, fairly successful sanatoria have been started. In the district with which I am dealing, where we desired to protect as much as possible the interests of the ratepayers, we considered that the joint hospital board did not act very wisely. They selected what we considered, and are informed by medical officers to be, improper places for sanatoria for consumptive patients; and are also preparing to waste the ratepayers' money in erecting a stone building which is unsuitable, as we are informed, on the best possible authority, that these sanatoria should all be wooden erections and capable of being destroyed after the lapse of a certain number of years. Therefore, I feel I am acting in the interests of the ratepayers in the county of Cork in putting these questions; and I would ask the Government to give us some information on the subject.
LORD DENMAN: My noble friend has raised a question of considerable importance, at all events locally; and perhaps, with the permission of the House, I may be allowed to give a short history of the matter. In the year 1904 it was represented to the Local Government Board in Ireland that there was urgent need for a sanatorium in the county of Cork; and the Local Government Board, by a Provisional Order
1004
confirmed by Parliament, authorised the formation of a joint board consisting of representatives of the sanitary authorities in the county of Cork and of the Cork Corporation for the purpose of providing a sanatorium for the county. As I have no doubt many Members of this House are aware, it is a very difficult thing to obtain a site for a hospital for either infectious or contagious disease. The residents in the district invariably enter strong objection; and frequently it is necessary to seek compulsory powers. The joint board had before it schemes for two sites, but such strenuous opposition was offered to either of those sites being adopted that the Local Government Board did not consider themselves justified in allowing the matter to go further.
Mr. Brasier Creagh then came forward and himself offered to provide a site for a sanatorium. Now, when a free gift is made of a site it is not necessary, I understand, to ask the sanction of the Local Government Board. It is true the Local Government Board have power whereby they can block such a scheme going forward; but, looking to the fact that it was impossible, or extremely difficult, to obtain a site without compulsory powers, and looking to the fact that this was a free gift, the Local Government Board considered that it would be a rather highhanded action on their part were they to prevent its going forward. Then, when this offer had been made by Mr. Brasier Creagh, a committee was appointed by the joint board, consisting, no doubt, of men most competent to deal with the subject. This committee, with their, sanitary engineer, inquired into the question of the site, and reported unanimously in favour of it. After that, the Chief Engineering Inspector, Mr. Cowan, and the Medical Inspector, Dr. Biggar, of the Local Government Board, went down and made an inspection of the site; on their advice the Local Government Board authorised an inquiry being held into the matter.
The inquiry, I may say, was held by Mr. Cowan and Dr. Biggar, and notice that it was to be held was advertised in newspapers circulating throughout the county. In the notice all the ratepayers were invited to attend and to make any objection to the loan being

1005
sanctioned. At the inquiry evidence was given for and against this particular proposal; and I may say that although the Local Government Board were not directly called upon to approve of the site, the inspectors thought it better not to exclude e vide ace upon that point; and, accordingly, they gave every opportunity to witnesses for stating their views on that matter. The only professional evidence given against the scheme was that, of Dr. Corby, Professor of Midwifery in Queen's College, Cork, who, however, admitted that he had not seen the site before he gave evidence oil the question. It is only fair, however, to Dr. Corby to say that he has since seen the site, and has furnished a report supporting the conclusion he arrived at before he had seen the site. The only other professional evidence was that of Mr. Hall, a Fellow of the Royal College of Veterinary Surgeons. No doubt the opinion of a veterinary surgeon is of great value upon this as upon all other points. The Local Government Board had to consider the professional evidence for and against. On the one hand they had the committee of the joint board, with their sanitary engineer; they had the evidence of their own medical export and their own inspecting sanitary engineer. Against those, they had the evidence of the Queen's College professor who had not seen the site, and the evidence of a veterinary surgeon from Cork. I submit that in view of the nature of the evidence it was impossible for the Local Government Board to do otherwise than to sanction the loan of £12,000 for the erection of the hospital buildings.
Now, perhaps, I had better answer categorically the other questions that my noble friend has put. The first, I think, I have already dealt with. Then, the second question he asks is whether it is a fact that the two arbitrators appointed to decide the conflicting views of the ratepayers were the same gentlemen who approved the site in the first instance, and whether this is considered a proper form of arbitration. My noble friend, I am informed, is not correct in referring to the two inspectors as arbitrators. The inquiry was not in the nature of an arbitration. The function of the inspectors was to receive evidence tendered at the inquiry, and to report upon it. Then I come to the third question,
1006
whether the views of the ratepayers have been obtained as to the expenditure proposed. The ratepayers were invited to attend and give evidence at the inquiry of which I have spoken. Then, there is Question 4, whether really any practical medical expert on tuberculosis has examined the proposed site. In answer to that, the Local Government Board say they are satisfied that no additional evidence is necessary as regards suit ability of the proposed site. Now, I come to Question 5. I am bound to say that I am just a little surprised at the form in which my noble friend has placed that Question on the Paper. He asks whether it is not a fact that "all experts now agree." My experience is that I have never known experts to agree upon any subject whatever; and the answer I would give to him would be a direct negative. But I believe the prevailing opinion among medical men is that some of the buildings, at all events, should be of a temporary as opposed to a permanent character. The Local Government Board, in their letter of March 16th, state that they require the plans of the building amended, with a view to securing economy, and the loan will not be finally sanctioned until the Board are satisfied that the plans are suitable.
In answer to Question 6, with regard to the gift of land containing peculiar legal provisions, the Local Government Board say that the deed conveying the site does contain some conditions which are unusual, but the Board are satisfied that they are not unreasonable. I hope I have shown that the ratepayers' money will not be wasted, as the noble Lord appears to fear, and that every care was taken before this site was chosen. I can assure him that everything will be done to secure that the proposed sanatorium shall be erected in conformity with the most modern regulations and requirements.
*LORD CASTLETOWN: My Lords, I am sorry to trespass further upon your Lordships' indulgence. I thank the noble Lord for so kindly and exhaustively answering my Questions. But there are one or two points upon which I think I ought to clear myself. Question 2 I put because I think it is a very remarkable fact, and the Local Government

1007
Board should bear it in mind in the future, that the Cork inspectors who were sent down to examine this land, which we know to be absolutely unsuitable for a sanatorium, were the same men who were appointed to hear the objections of the ratepayers to their own Report. That may be a very Irish proceeding, but I do not think it is a very proper one. We asked that other experts should be brought down to hear our objections, and we would have procured a great deal more evidence than my noble friend has cited if we had been treated in a proper manner by the two gentlemen who were acting, as we call it, as arbitrators on this question. But, naturally, when we came before the two men who were pledged to a particular site and to a particular scheme, it was very difficult for us to make our objections felt. With regard to Question 5, as to the agreement of experts, I can only indorse what the noble Lord had said, that experts do not always agree. But there is a general consensus of opinion that temporary wooden houses, and not stone buildings, are the proper types for sanatoria. With regard to the gift of land, I want to say, and I say it with all deference to the gentlemen who made this munificent gift, that there is in this legal document a very remarkable clause. The clause is that if any consumptive patient goes outside the wall enclosure round this land during treatment at the sanatorium, the gift will be null and void, and will revert to the donor. That, I venture to say, is a very remarkable legal arrangement; and I would ask my noble friend to suggest to the Local Government Board that they should look into the question of this deed of gift. It is not for me to say more on the question. I know there is a very strong feeling in our district on the subject; and I say, from the absolute knowledge of experts who have been over the ground and from the commonsense knowledge of any human being who knows anything at all about consumption, that a more unsuitable spot could not have been chosen. It is boggy, cold, clayey land facing all the wildest winds from the Atlantic; and I hope the Local Government Board, before they absolutely complete the arrangement, will look seriously into the question of the site.

THE TERRITORIAL ARMY.
*THE DUKE OF BEDFORDrose "To call attention to the state of the Territorial Army on 1st July, 1908, and to the Report of the Director of Recruiting for 1907, and to the statement showing the number of recruits enlisted for the Special Reserve between the 15th January and 16th May, 1908 [Cd. 3935]." The noble Duke said: My Lords, I beg to call attention to the state of the Territorial Army on July 1st. In estimating the present value of the Territorial Army it is necessary to remember that His Majesty's Government has bestowed that force upon the country, not as an additional force, but in substitution for, first, the whole Militia and the whole Militia system destroyed; secondly, in place of 100,000 Volunteers and Yeomanry, for that is the difference between the strength of those forces given in the Annual Report of the British Army for 1908, and the numbers of the Territorial Army on the 1st July; and, finally, in exchange for great reductions in the Regular Army and its Reserves.
Let me say at once that I attach far more importance to the effect which the recent Territorial and Reserve Forces Act may produce on the Regular Army than to any influence it may have on the Territorial Force. The fighting efficiency of the Regular Army has been impaired by the loss of many excellent Reserve-creating cadres, and its strength will be further diminished by the shattering of its present recruiting system. The Director of Recruiting comments, in paragraph 63 of his Report for 1907, on the changes which that Act may make in the future of recruiting. He writes—
"The changes which must necessarily take place in the future consequence of the legislation enacted by the Territorial and Reserve Forces Act, 1907, may affect recruiting materially, It maybe found, for instance, that by the abolition of the Garrison Artillery Militia, Garrison Artillery recruits may be harder to obtain. It is possible that in some areas the formation of the Territorial Associations may materially assist in popularising the Army and aid recruiting. On the other hand, large reductions have been made in the Permanent Staff of the present Auxiliary Forces which will in themselves reduce the numbers of recruiters throughout the United Kingdom. Experience only can show what changes and modifications will have to be made in future to meet the new conditions of affairs."
The number of recruits obtained for the Regular Army in the year 1907 was

1009
34,916. Of this number the Militia Permanent Staff enlisted directly for the Regular Army 11,752, and for the Militia 15,034. Last year 12,113 men transferred from the Militia to the Regular Army, all of whom had been obtained by the Militia Permanent Staff. We find, then, that in 1907 the Militia Permanent Staff raised 23,865 men for the Regular Army. Thus nearly three-quarters of the recruits for the Regular Army were obtained by the Militia Permanent Staff. It is a fact that the Militia Permanent Staff is, and has been for many years, the chief recruiting agency for the Army. It follows that if great changes are made in the Permanent Staff of the Militia great differences must result in recruiting for the Regular Army. In 1907 there were 2,232 non-commissioned Officers of the Militia Permanent Staff actively engaged in recruiting duties throughout the United Kingdom.
The whole duty of the Militia Permanent Staff, when it has boon converted into the Staff of the Special Reserve, will be confined to drilling small squads of Special Reservists on the barrack square, and as each squad will be in a different stage of instruction many instructors will be required. The impossibility of the Permanent Staff being on the barrack square and at the same time engaged in recruiting work was apparent to the Army Council. They therefore ordered that two non-commissioned officers from every third Special Reserve battalion should be sent out recruiting, all the remainder being wanted for duties in barracks. The net result, then, is that instead of the Militia Permanent Staff amounting to 2,232 non-commissioned officers all engaged on recruiting duties during eleven months of the year, there will now be, according to the new regulations, 148 sergeants on the staff of the Special Reserve employed for that purpose. Now 148 recruiting agents cannot possibly give the same results as 2,232. That is what the Director of Recruiting means when he alludes to—
"Large reductions in the Permanent Staff of the Auxiliary Forces which will in themselves reduce the number of recruiters throughout the United Kingdom."
I ask the noble Lord the Undersecretary of State if any arrangements
1010
have been made to replace the Regular Army's Recruiting Staff, or if it is not considered necessary to trouble about recruiting for the Regular Army because we are now blessed with a Territorial Army on paper?
You cannot look to the Permanent Staff of the Territorial Army to recruit for the Regular Army. The Permanent Staff of the Territorial Army is less than that of the Volunteers and of the Yeomanry. By the Recruiting Return for 1907 I see that the Volunteer Permanent Staff raised 3,168 men for the Regular Army, and the Permanent Staff of the Yeomanry raised sixty-two men for the Regular Army. At present the whole of their energies arc required for bringing, their own force into existence. No doubt there are the County Associations. There is an idea, founded on I know not what, that in some mysterious manner those County Associations arc to be of enormous benefit to the Regular Army in the matter of recruiting. For instance, in the Report of the Director of Recruiting we read—
"It is possible that in some areas the formation of the Territorial Associations may materially assist in popularising the Army and aid recruiting."
Again, I read in a paper written by the noble Lord the Under-Secretary of State on the duties of County Associations, the following—
"In that I include the advantage that should accrue from being linked up more closely with the Regular Army, she greater sympathy between the Regular and citizen forces which must come with assimilation of system and organisation."
I am not sure that I follow the meaning of the noble Lord, and I therefore ask him to explain how the sysmpathy will assist the County Associations in recruiting for the Army? "An ounce of practice is worth all the dry theory in the world." The noble Lord will recognise that sentence as another quotation from his own writings. Let me give him my ounce of practice in recruiting for the Army through the Militia, as I knew it. Perhaps he will tell me, in return, how I can in future help the Regular Army through the County Association, now that the Militia has been abolished.
First of all I used to have, not two, but ten or twelve non-commissioned officers out on recruiting

1011
duties, and that in a small county. When the recruits were assembled for preliminary drill, I used to send them home to their villages, from Saturday to Monday, smartly dressed, and with their pay in their pockets. Then I asked them to bring others back with them, and this they did, thus making every recruit into a recruiter. I urged them to bring their friends and relatives to see the manner of life which was led in barracks. By means of the local Press I informed parents that, when visiting barracks, if they saw anything to which they, as parents, objected, I hoped they would at once directly communicate with me. A large number of the men's friends and relations were constantly visiting the barracks. This ounce of practice, so well said to be worth all the dry theory in the world, consists of the commanding officer dealing personally with the recruit, the recruit returning home, and there himself acting as a recruiter, and the friends and relatives of the men coming from their homes into barracks. The recruit, if he had a fancy for Regular soldering could go the Regular Army, and many went; if he preferred Militia soldiering he was free to remain in the Militia. If he disliked both he could buy his discharge with his bounty at the end of the training, and put ten shillings in his pocket as well. Above all, he knew he could make his own choice and would never be trapped into doing what he did not wish or intend.
My experience of the past two winters training of the Militia recruits is that voluntary enlistment conducted on the lines I described would give you a Regular first line and a Militia second line, but enlisted for foreign service, closely connected, mutually dependent, and numerically sufficient. But the Government will have none of it. They look to the Territorial Army and the County Associations as the future foundation of our military system. Now, will the noble Lord tell me the practice, not the dry theory, of the aid which members of the County Associations can give recruiting for the Regular Army? There is no such thing as recruit training for the Territorial Army carried on in barracks, and the men of the Regular and Territorial Army are so different in stamp, conditions, and employment, that it is impossible to bring them together as the men of the
1012
Militia and Line used to be brought. For my own part I believe that the advantages which may accrue to the Regular Army in Great Britain from County Associations to be nil, and I must be right in the case of Ireland, because Ireland is excluded from the Territorial Force.
It is clear from the paragraph I have first quoted from the Report of the Director of Recruiting, that he considers that the recruiting system for the Regular Army has, like much else, gone into the general melting pot, and that we must wait and see what may come out. We are now half way through the year, and can begin to discern some of the results. From the statement relating to recruiting for the Special Reserve in the first quarter of this year we can compare recruiting for the Militia in the corresponding period of 1907. In the first place, in Great Britain between the 15th January and the 16th May of this year, during the best quarter of the year for recruiting, for the Special Reserve Infantry, 6,389 recruits were taken. During the corresponding period of last year for the Militia Infantry, 9,110 recruits were taken. That is a drop of 2,721 infantry recruits in Great Britain in the best recruiting quarter of the year. In the case of Ireland the falling off is much greater. The figures there are: Recruits for the Special Reserve Infantry, 495; for the corresponding period in last year for Militia Infantry 1,697—a drop of 1,202.
Last year showed a decrease in recruiting for the Militia of only 156 for all arms in the United Kingdom, but the Government have achieved for their Special Reserve in the first quarter of this year a drop of 4,545 for all arms. Now this drop has come about when the full recruiting staff of 2,232 were at work, whereas at the end of this summer there will only be 148 recruiting agents available, which makes a further drop inevitable. I have no doubt I shall be told that recruiting for the Regular Army has not fallen off. Well, why should it, because the Permanent Staff of the Militia will not be reduced until the end of this summer? Again, it is in the matter of transfers from the Militia to the Army that the Army must lose heavily when the Militia has been abolished. It is a certain loss of 12,000 men for the Army next year. Every man now in

1013
the Special Reserve has taken £2 to stay out of the Army for a year, and the remainder of the Militia have gone. But for a year at least the results of the abolition of the Militia on the strength of the Regular Army need' not be revealed.
Recruiting for the Special Reserve does not and will not interfere or compete with recruiting for the Regular Army for the simple reason that a younger, a weaker, and an inferior class of boy is taken for the Special Reserve. It is essential for the existence of the Regular Infantry that every Special Reserve recruit on attaining Army standard should be passed into the Army. Consequently, bounties are offered to Special Reserve recruits to join the Army and rewards to non-commissioned officers to promote their transfer. It is too early yet to ask for any Return of Special Reservists joining the Regular Army, because they must have served in the Special Reserve for three months before they are allowed to join the Army, but from my own knowledge and from all accounts I have heard from Militia Officers every Special Reserve recruit who has become qualified for the Army has joined the Army. A Line recruit used to be kept at the depot for three months before he joined his Line battalion. Now a Special Reserve recruit is kept at the depot for three months, and, if up to Army standard, is sent to the Line with a bounty of 30s. at the end of three months. If not fit in three months, then; at the end of six months; and finally, if still physically unfit for the Army, he is posted to the Special Reserve to form with his fellows of like quality the backbone of the British Infantry when mobilised for war. I should like to ask the Government if they are satisfied that a Reserve for the Regular Army composed of boys and men whose presence in that Reserve is due to their unfitness to serve in the Army, is a sound piece of military re organisation.
We are told in an Army Memorandum on the military forces of the United Kingdom, dated February, 1907, that—
"On mobilisation, including the numbers required to meet wastage for six months, nearly 3,500 officers and 75,000 men would be required for the Special Contingent. The bulk of these men will receive six months' recruit training."
1014
That is more than a year ago, and we have heard very little about the Special Contingent lately. Could the noble Lord the Under-Secretary of State say if there is any prospect of obtaining these 3,500 officers and 75,000 men? They are part of the first line and are absolutely essential to the expeditionary force.
One more question as to the non-combatant braches of the Special Reserve. We were informed in the Army Order of 23rd December last, that—
"The conditions under which officers and men of this category will join the Special Reserve will he published hereafter."
The noble Lord the Under-Secretary of State for War, in the same note from which I have already quoted, writes—
"Think of an Army Service Corps whose drivers came from Pickfords, whose butchers from Smithfield, whose bakers from Spiking, mid the men who serve out the grocery rations from Fortnum and Masons."
—a charming and imaginative picture. But can the noble Lord say if any progress has been made in its realisation?
Page 4 of the statement of recruiting for the Special Reserve gives the strength—that is, the number of men actually serving on the 1st January last—of the twenty-throe disbanded Militia Battalions as 10,307 men. Of these 10,307, 4,632 have joined the Special Reserve, and the rest have taken a free discharge or remained Militiamen till time expired—a loss of 5,675 men. It seems to me that the Government may now rely on one half, or perhaps rather more than one half, of the Infantry Militia accepting the £2 bounty and joining the Special Reserve. The strength of the Militia Infantry in 1907 is given as 76,473, which should give 40,000 Special Infantry Reservists. But it must be remembered that this balance of men obtained from the Militia at a cost of £80,000 are subject to rapid waste. For instance, many would have joined the Line in their first or second year of service, but having taken the £2 they must stay out of the Line for a year. Many of my own men who took the £2 are now asking to be allowed to join the Army, but cannot refund the £2. Others have joined the Special Reserve because they have but a short time to serve before getting their discharge. They are ready enough to take the £2 and chance it for a couple of years. This balance, then, is a dwindling balance

1015
and in two years time it will become a negligible quantity. If the numbers of the Special Reserve are to be maintained that can only be effected by recruiting, and the failure for recruiting for the Special Reserve during the first quarter of this year is apparent by the Return now rendered. What will be more serious than the failure of the Special Reserve will be the effect of the abolition of the chief recruiting agency for the Regular Army, which will render the collapse of recruiting for the Regular Forces certain. But that, again, need not appear for a year.
The Militia Commanding Officers have always advised the War Office that they would not be able to enlist men in sufficient numbers—that is the point, sufficient numbers—for foreign service under the conditions proposed for the Special Reserve. As regards transfers, it appears probable that the Army Council will obtain half, or rather more than half, of the Militia now serving, which means that 40 per cent. of the Force will be lost. Undoubtedly, without the costly inducement of the £2 bounty no men would have transferred from the Militia to the Special Reserve. Many Governments have resorted to bounties in time of need. It will get you the men for the moment, but it is a hateful system. It means that you go with money in jour hand to a man, in this case a poor man, and persuade him by means of a bribe to risk taking conditions of service which he would not, and in many cases ought not to, accept. It also promotes the practice of a zealous commanding officer advising the man to take the bounty and sign the paper and not bother about the contents, saying that he is himself bound by the same conditions which make no difference to him. True, no doubt, as far as the officer is concerned, but too often untrue in the case of the man. The unsoundness of the plan is that the men taking the bounty soon become time-expired. In this case the Government may spend £50,000, or they may spend £100,000, according to the number of men they get, it does not matter which, because the Force vanishes at the end of two years never to be replaced. It is, no doubt, advantageous for the moment for the Army Council to say we always knew we could get 50,000 men from the
1016
Militia for the Special Reserve, but then they should in fairness add we have got them at a cost of £100,000 and in a couple of years we shall lose them.
The creation of the Special Reserve means the transfer of some thousands of men from the Militia to the Special Reserve at a cost of £2 per head, who will disappear in two years time, and an immediate drop in recruiting of 4,545 of all arms in the first and best recruiting quarter of the year. It means the loss of several hundred capable and experienced officers, who are not anxious to resign but are not allowed to remain as Militia officers and whom the Government have no chance of replacing. It means a loss of 892 non-commissioned officers to the first line, due to the disbandment of twenty - three Militia battalions, and the reduction in the permanent staff of 101 Militia battalions transferred to the Special Reserve, and the abolition of 101 depot sergeant majors. It means the discharge of some 30,000 men. It means the final break up of the whole Militia system and of all Militia traditions and regimental spirit. It is the disappearance of a force which found 120,000 men for the purposes of the past war, went abroad a month after war was declared, and was our only military force capable of providing complete units of itself for active service. You cannot dispense with a force of that kind without creating a dangerous gap in Imperial defence.
Last year I urged the Government to leave the Militia as a force in being for two years, whilst the Territorial Army was in process of formation. But they then considered that two years was too long. One year, we were assured, was amply sufficient to get the Territorial Army perfectly ready to march on guard, and relieve the Militia and take over all their duties. The Militia is gone. But I gather from numerous interviews granted by the Secretary of State for War to members of the Press that the right hon. Gentleman is at present of the opinion that it is unreasonable to expect to form the Territorial Army under two years. The Secretary of State informed us last year that the third line, the Volunteers, were to become the second line in place of the Militia abolished, and consequently to undertake the duties, training, and conditions of second line

1017
troops. Let me say at once that I do not wish to disparage the service of men in the Volunteers or in the Territorial Army. I fully recognise that their patriotism far surpasses that of their fellows. My opinion, expressed last year, was that the Government cannot get second line training and duties from third line men, and my contention this year is that the failure to obtain sufficient numbers for the Territorial Army under these conditions shows that my opinion was correct.
You will remember that the Territorial Army was to have come into existence on the 31st March last. But so long as the conditions and training necessary for second line troops were insisted upon no men would join or transfer. So the Government decided to abandon the fifteen days camp, the four years enlistment, and all the other conditions pertaining to troops of the second line, and to offer conditions of service even more indulgent than they were in the Volunteers. The Financial Secretary to the War Office, in a letter to The Times, wrote—
"There is no hard and fast compulsory attendance at camp for eight days or fifteen. No one will be fined for non-attendance if there is a good reason."
You cannot make a third line into a second with these conditions of service.
The strength of the Territorial Army on 1st July is given at 173,351 men and 8,326 officers. That is below establishment by 128,848 men and 3,049 officers. The establishment of the Territorial Infantry is fixed at 194,727 men and 5,863 officers. On July 1st (in round numbers) of these, 112,000 men and 4,747 officers had been obtained, mostly by transfer from the serving Volunteers, leaving some 83,000 men and 1,116 officers to be raised by recruiting. Last year for the Volunteer Infantry 49,914 recruits were obtained. Let us say 40,000 for the purposes of calculation. In order to complete the proposed establishment of the Territorial Infantry in this year's time the Volunteer intake of recruits must be doubled. Now the Government must allow that the conditions of service in the Territorial Army have proved themselves far less attractive than in the Volunteers. In addition, you must allow for wastage. Last year the Volunteers, numbering, in round numbers,
1018
180,000, gave a wastage of 40,000 men. Therefore the 112,000 Territorial soldiers would show a wastage of 25,000. A shortage of 83,000 plus 25,000 for wastage equals 108,000. But 78,000 are enlisted in the Infantry for one year only on the old Volunteer conditions and a promise of a free discharge at the end of the year. This body of men will give an extraordinary wastage at the end of their year's service for which extra allowance must be made.
Assuming that half of these one-year men claim their free discharge, that would be 39,000. Therefore for ordinary wastage allow 25,000, for extraordinary wastage 39,000, and 83,000 short of establishment; this shows that 147,000 recruits are required during the coming year to bring the Territorial Infantry up to establishment. The County Associations must raise 13,000 recruits for the Territorial Infantry per month for a whole year. Last month, after the most special appeals on the part of the Government, 6,000 recruits were obtained. That number must be more than doubled for every month for a year to complete the Infantry establishment, and there are more than 1,000 officers to be obtained. Now will to failure to find these recruits and officers rest on the County Associations or is it to rest on His Majesty's Government? The establishment for the Territorial Army I understand to be the minimum, consistent with safety, having regard to the reductions in the Army and the abolition of the Militia. But if it is impossible to come anywhere near that minimum what happens to the safety? Possibly the Goverment who are responsible for the safety will inform us.
The Infantry of the Territorial Army now number 112,000 on paper. But what will be their field strength? The Annual Return of the Volunteer corps shows that there are 28½ per cent. of the men in the Volunteers under twenty years of age. It may be said, Why deduct boys of under twenty when it is a case of home service? The answer is that the whole reason for the existence of the Territorial Army, as stated by the Secretary of State for War, is not only to meet, but also to beat, possible raiders from the Continent. It is certain that if any invaders do come from the Continent they will not be untrained and

1019
immature boys. The persons who come will be seasoned men and soldiers. No one would suggest that it was possible to beat a carefully selected first line Army of trained soldiers with a third line force having 28½ per cent. of untrained boys in its ranks. So that boys must be deducted from the strength of the Territorial Army before it takes the field to repel the foreign foe.
In 1905 a partial medical examination of the Volunteer Force, not at all of a severe character, showed that out of 180,000 serving Volunteers examined 29,000 were medically unfit; that is, 15 per cent. All the 29,000 unfit men were retained in the Force, and many are now, no doubt, in the Territorial Army, because for the Volunteer who transfers to the Territorial Army no medical examination is required. I cannot accept the contention that unfit men have not been allowed to transfer from the Volunteers to the Territorial Army in view of the fact that all medical examination has been expressly prohibited in the case of transfers from the Volunteers. We must deduct 16 per cent. on account of physical unfitness. On embodiment for permanent service a margin must be allowed for absentees. For my own part I have always maintained that it will be impossible to embody the Territorial Army because it is composed of precisely the same men who could not, when called Volunteers, owing to the circumstances of their civilian life, give two months of consecutive service during the South African War. I have often asked the question, but I have never yet got an answer. Why should the Volunteers, because they are now called Territorial soldiers, have changed all the conditions of their civilian life and be able to give that embodied service in 1910 which they were not able to do in 1900?
The Volunteer is being constantly exhorted by the War Office to transfer to the Territorial Army because his duties will be just the same as when a Volunteer. The Government may make that true in peace, but it cannot be made true in war. The noble Lord the Under-Secretary of State for War, describing the functions of the new second line army, writes—
"In the first place it accepts the whole responsibility for home defence, and in the second place, if there is need for expansion of the forces in the field, it is asked to volunteer
1020
in companies or even in whole units for service at the front."
These are entirely new duties which never belonged in the past to the Volunteers. We can see that the Territorial soldier is meant to be a third line man in peace, but a second line man in war. For instance, it is said that because the Volunteers have never been embodied since their formation consequently the Territorial soldier need not be apprehensive of embodied service. But the Volunteer was a third line man, and the Territorial soldier is a second line man, and there is the difference. The Volunteers, being third line troops, have never been embodied, but it is due to the fact that the Militia, the second line, has always stood between them and embodiment, so long as they were the third line, and also because the only time when it was proposed to call them out on permanent service it was found impossible to do so.
I read in the paper written by the noble Lord the Under-Secretary of State for War on the County Associations and their work, as follows—
"If the Territorial Army had existed in the nineteenth century it would certainly have-been embodied during the Napoleonic wars. It would also, according to the Act, have been embodied after the events of 1899 in South Africa. So I am only talking now of what occurs at most once in a generation."
I take it that the meaning of the noble Lord is that after the battle of Waterloo the Territorial Army would not have been embodied until the South African War. I do not admit that that is true of a second line into which the Government have now converted the Volunteers.
Under the Territorial and Reserve Forces Act, by the calling out of the Army Reserve the whole Territorial Force is automatically embodied. It is said that the whole Army Reserve must be first called out. Now it is certain that any war with a civilised power will necessitate the calling out of the whole Army Reserve and the whole Special Reserve—that is, if the Special Reserve ever comes into existence. Take from the Crimean War in 1854 to the South African War in 1899; assume that the second line, the Militia, was non-existent as it now is; assume also that the Territorial and Reserve Forces Act was then in operation, and that the Territorial Army was the only Force supplementary to the

1021
Regular Army. Then the Territorial Force would have been called out on permanent service on the following occasions:—first, during the Crimean War; secondly, during the Indian Mutiny; thirdly, in 1877, when all the Army and Militia Reserve were called out during the Russo-Turkish War; fourthly, in 1885, when the Reserves of the Army were called out and there was a partial Militia embodiment; and finally, during the South African War; when it would have been embodied for upwards of two years and required to serve abroad within a month of the declaration of war. That is to say, five times in fifty-five years, or an average of once in eleven years.
By Clause 10 of the Territorial and Reserve Forces Act every man enlisted into the Territorial Army is enlisted under the Army Act, and is an enlisted soldier, subject to the same severe penalties as men of the Regular Forces. Therefore any man absent on embodiment can be apprehended and thrown into prison. For my own part, I doubt whether any Government could imprison a man of the Territorial Force for absence on embodiment, and whether they could imprison him for leaving his regiment and staying absent at home after serving for a short time on permanent service. It is obvious that many men in the Territorial Army cannot give permanent service—men employed in arsenals, in dockyards, and on railways, bank clerks, and men employed in houses of business, to say nothing of married men. I understand that the Admiralty would have first claim on all Territorial soldiers employed in arsenals and dockyards in case of embodiment. Then why enlist such men? On the embodiment of the Territorial Infantry we must deduct 28½ per cent. for men under twenty, 16 per cent. for men physically unfit—these are official figures—and I suggest the very low figure of 5½ per cent. for absentees. In other words, 50 per cent. of the Territorial Infantry will not be available for field service on embodiment. So 112,000 comes down to 56,000, and of these 56,000 two-thirds are enlisted for one year only, and under the distinct understanding that they are to serve under more indulgent conditions for their last year than they have ever done before.
1022
It is, of course, possible for the Government definitely to abandon all second line conditions of training and preserve precisely the same conditions as obtained in the Volunteers, but that will not meet the point of embodied service. I am glad to think that we have at last ceased to regard any military force from a purely peace point of view. We look at all our military forces now from the point of view of war. It is only just becoming clear to the country that the Militia is destroyed, because the disbandment is seen in actual operation, and that in consequence the third line must, as the Secretary of State told us last year, take the place of the old second line abolished. It is useless for a man to join the Territorial Force unless he is prepared to give prolonged permanent service, which the Volunteer need not have contemplated.
The present field strength of the Territorial Infantry may be taken as 56,000. The fighting efficiency we can judge of from the Report of the Norfolk Commission on the Volunteers—and we are dealing now with the same men and the same conditions of training. That Commission reported that:—
"Taking the Force as a whole, neither the musketry nor the tactical training of the rank and file would enable it to face with a prospect of success, the troops of a Continental Army."
That is not to the discredit of the Volunteers. No third line force can be equal, on short notice, to a picked Regular force. That is why the Territorial Army, if ever we get it, will be so hopelessly unfitted for the very purpose for which it was called into existence, namely, to meet and beat the best Continental troops. Let us recognise frankly that the new organisation means, a weakened first line, no troops of the second line, and a third line which may or may not be formed.
Finally, this body of 112,000 men, with a field strength of 56,000 and a fighting efficiency described by the Royal Commission, will be absolutely the only body of Infantry left to us outside the Regular Army. But whatever may be our military weakness at present, we shall be far weaker in a year's time. In the first place, 78,000 of the Territorial Infantry have been induced to transfer for one year only, and on third line conditions of training. We were told that

1023
this plan had been adopted in order that Volunteers who transferred might give the new system a fair trial for one year, and see how they liked it. But this is precisely what they are not doing. They are not trying the new system. They have told you they do not like it, and will not have anything to do with it. They are serving under the old system, plus a promise of easier and more indulgent conditions than they ever served under before and a free discharge at the end of the year. Is it likely that they will take second line conditions of training at the end of this year for four years, having just refused to serve under them as a trial for one year?
At the end of the year two courses are open to the Government. First, to insist on the four years term of enlistment, and on the training conditions first proposed, by which the third line was to be rendered an efficient second line. In this case you will lose most of the men you have retained for one year on third line conditions. I strongly urge this course, because there can be no further idea about the Territorial Army as a second line. But what I anticipate is that you are going to tell the men that they may continue in the Territorial Army on more indulgent terms of service than they ever had in the Volunteers. This course, would be perfectly consistent with the great principle of the Territorial Force, namely, that it is not meant to be available for garrison duties until six months after the declaration of war. This must be the case so long as the Territorial Army is not trained to second line duties in time of peace. But it means that the Regular Army, that is, the expeditionary force, is tied down to home garrison duties for six months. In short, when the crisis is upon us we have no power of offensive action overseas for an indefinite period. Are we to understand that the principles of Imperial defence to which the Government has finally committed us are—war first, military training after, and no power of immediate offensive action overseas? It is said that before an expeditionary force can leave this country command of the sea must be obtained, and that that will take the required six months. Yes, but how did that apply to South Africa? Does it apply to India? At any time you may be called upon suddenly and swiftly to double
1024
the white garrison of India. At the present moment you could not do any such thing for an indefinite period.
My view of the result of the reorganisation of the forces of His Majesty's Governments best expressed in a sentence used by Mr. Windham in Parliament in 1803 of Mr. Addington, the then Prime Minister. Early in 1800 there were 380,000 Volunteers in Great Britain and 70,000 in Ireland. Mr. Windham, a subsequent Secretary of State for War, summed up the value of that force created by Mr. Addington, by saying that—
"not only had the right hon. Gentleman not provided an Army, but lie had made it impossible that an Army should be provided."
On Mr. Windham's accession to office in 1806 as Secretary of State for War he said, previous to the disbandment of this Force—
"It is a fact that during the three years and a half that this system has existed, it has cost the Government no less than five millions sterling in allowances to the Volunteers. The expenses that the Volunteers themselves have gone to, and the various subscriptions and contributions that have been made in aid of the system, amount to at least as much more. I am stating below the mark when I say that the security which the country has derived from the Volunteers for the last three years and a half has been purchased at the enormous expense of above ten millions sterling, besides depriving our more efficient descriptions of force of many men who would otherwise have entered into them."
Peace came in 1814, followed by the return from Elba in March, 1815, the reign of 100 days, and the battle of Waterloo, fought by an Army with a strong Militia element, because it had been thought perfectly safe, war in Europe being impossible, to send a great part of the Regular Army to America. But the period of 100 days is suggestive. The whole foundation for the new scheme of Imperial defence is that six months—that is, 180 days—must be allowed to elapse before the Territorial Army is fit for garrison duty at home, and consequently before the Regular Army can be set free for service abroad. The Territorial Army of to-day will never compete with the Regular Army for men, but it will itself suffer competition from the rifle clubs and the proposed Reserve for Volunteers. Under voluntary enlistment the tendency is always to gravitate towards the least disciplined force. The Territorial Army has bled and will

1025
bleed the Regular Army for money, and has in that sense already bled the Militia out of existence. Every extra grant which County Associations obtain for the Territorial Army will be paid for by the Regular Army. Many of those belonging to the County Associations, especially the Associations of smaller counties, no doubt see that as far as private contributions are concerned the moment has come when the hat must be sent round. I am myself of opinion that nothing could be more unsound in principle than supporting our second line Army by private contributions, and the Government, by accepting that unsound principle, has abandoned one of its most essential duties.
It will take a year before we really touch bottom in the matter of the destruction of our military system and forces. In twelve months the one year go-as-you-please men of the Territorial Force will leave, and the inadequate supply of Territorial recruits, inadequate to bring it up to establishment, and inadequate to meet the ordinary and extraordinary wastage from the Force, will become apparent. At the end of the year or a little more the Militiamen bribed by the bounty into the Special Reserve will have left to join the Regular Army or on becoming time-expired. It will be clear that the 75,000 men of the Special Reserve have no existence. At the end of a year the effect of abolishing the Militia, the great feeder of the Line, and the chief recruiting agency for the Army, will make itself felt in a lamentable shortage of regular recruits. Then when these three facts burst upon an astonished and alarmed country the military authorities who have urged His Majesty's Government to pursue their present military policy will triumphantly proclaim that the voluntary system has broken down. And so it will have done, but it is His Majesty's Government who have destroyed it, and on them must over rest that responsibility. I submit that if His Majesty's Government blow up the bridge of voluntary enlistment over which men were wont to pass into the military forces of the Crown, they will not be justified in running about the country wringing their hands and declaring that the bridge of voluntary enlistment has broken down. It is they themselves who have blown it up, and they are perfectly incapable of reconstructing it.
1026
In the near future we must be faced by the breakdown of our military forces, the inevitable result of the policy pursued by His Majesty's Government. The soldiers will then raise the cry for compulsory military service. I am myself convinced that compulsory military service is impossible. I cannot conceive that any political party can appeal to the country with compulsory military service as part of its programme and be returned to power. It seems to me that there can be but one solution—a return to the three line organisation, an organisation which, however imperfect, has never failed to pull us through our difficulties. The County Associations could continue to administer our third line, but under third line conditions of service which alone are possible and acceptable to the men hitherto known as Volunteers.
I do not see much difficulty as regards the County Associations and the third line. The task of reconstructing the second line, the foundation of the Regular Army, matters of much greater importance, will not be so easy. Meantime we have lost all power of offensive action overseas. The great expeditionary force about which we have heard so much is relegated to the position of acting as the garrison of the United Kingdom from which the Government dare not move it, because they have no force ready or likely to ready to relieve it of homo garrison duties. His Majesty's Government commenced their tenure of office by delivering an ultimatum to a land Power. But that was before the Regular Army had been reduced, the Militia abolished, and the Volunteers shattered. I quite understand that His Majesty's Government, having successfully delivered one ultimatum, are perfectly satisfied to rest content, reduce all their forces, and deliver no more. But, unfortunately, if you are impotent to deliver an ultimatum you are a hundred times more likely to receive one, and that is the perilous position in which we are placed for some years to come. It is the price which we have paid for our Territorial Army.
LORD RAGLAN: My Lords, my noble friend the Duke of Bedford has gone most exhaustively into all the results of the proposals of the right hon. Gentle-

1027
man the Secretary of State for War, and I venture to think any impartial person will admit that the noble Duke has shown that everything which when the matter was discussed last year he and those who think with him prophesied would happen is rapidly coming about. The appalling state to which the land forces of this country are being reduced and the still more appalling state to which they will shortly fall, is a matter which, I venture to think, except to those very few persons who are still believers in the scheme of His Majesty's Government, must be patent and easily seen. Never in the history of this country have its defences been in a more lamentable and dangerous condition. As to the Navy, I have no knowledge of naval matters. All I know is that we have always been told that all is for the best in the best of all possible Navies. Yet within the last very few years we have seen the most far-reaching reorganisations and the most far-reaching changes made in the whole of our naval policy. All I can say is that if what existed a few years ago was right then, that which exists now cannot be right, and vice versa.
There are one or two points with regard to the Regular Army to which the noble Duke did not allude, and to which I will venture presently to call your Lordships' attention. We all know that an immense and most dangerous reduction has been made in the Regular Forces by His Majesty's Government, but it is amazing that quite recently the War Office have closed almost the whole of Section D. of the Army Reserve. I should like to ask the noble Lord the Under-Secretary of State for War why Section D. of the Army Reserve has been closed. It is most remarkable that the War Office seem determined, whenever it is in any way possible, to reduce the number of His Majesty's soldiers. If they can issue an order, such as that closing Section D., which will affect very large numbers of men, that order is issued; if they can, by any twisting of regulations, issue an order which will discharge men, that is done; and the result is that the Regular Army, as regards both officers and men, is in a state of commotion and turmoil,
1028
and in a great number of cases in a thoroughly dissatisfied condition.
The noble Duke has called attention to the reduction of the permanent staff of the old Militia and its inevitable effect on the recruiting for the Regular Army. That reduction has fallen with the greatest possible severity upon the non-commissioned officers of the two arms of the service which I myself happen to know something about—namely, the Royal Artillery and the Royal Engineers. It was almost impossible for a sergeant in those forces to complete sufficient service with the rank of sergeant to entitle him to his full pension, and it was only by going to the permanent staff of the Auxiliary Forces that those men were able to extend their service, and thereby earn a full sergeant's pension. I venture to think that the falling off in recruiting is largely the result of the fact that a very large number of non-commissioned officers on the permanent staff have, at very short notice, been dismissed into civil life. These men have always been more closely in touch with the civil population than any other description of His Majesty's soldiers, and the way in which they have been treated has gone abroad throughout the length and breadth of the land, and has had the most deleterious effect upon recruiting for the Regular Army as well as for the Special Reserve.
I was one of those who endeavoured to impress upon His Majesty's Government that the proposed conditions of recruiting for the Special Reserve were such that an immense falling off was bound to accrue. In the Royal Monmouthshire Engineers, which regiment I know best, we have during the last seven years enlisted, on an average, somewhere between 350 and 400 recruits during the year. They were all men earning good wages and of a similar stamp to the miners, iron workers, and so forth, who enlisted in similar regiments in South Wales and neighbourhood. Those men were perfectly able to do the ordinary sixty-three drills as a recruit, and to give from four to eight weeks to training in the year, but you will not get them to come out for six months. It is quite possible to get

1029
agricultural labourers but not industrial labourers, of which the bulk of the recruits of the old Militia in South Wales and other districts were composed.
There had been for a very considerable time—I think I have alluded to the fact before—a strong and a violent hatred of the Militia on the part of a certain section of soldiers of the Regular Army. Why that should have been, I know not. It can hardly have been from jealousy; but there was a strong feeling against the Militia, which is most remarkable, and the result of which we have seen in this new system. I am firmly convinced that, in destroying the Militia, His Majesty's Government have killed the goose that laid the golden eggs. I should like to emphasise, before passing away from the Special Reserve, what fell from the noble Duke with regard to the number of the Special Reserve, especially the Army Service Corps. We were told last year, if I recollect aright, that the future number of the Special Reserve would be about the same as the old Militia—about 85,000 or 90,000 men. As far as I make out now, the future establishment of the Special Reserve will not be more than about 50,000 or 60,000. Perhaps the noble Lord can enlighten us upon that point. The new conditions in the Yeomanry are practically the same as the old, and we may say that the Yeomanry have transferred en bloc to the Territorial Army. The artillery is a new toy, and the recruiting has gone fairly well on that account. But the infantry, as has been so clearly shown to the House by my noble friend, is, after all, the most important part of an Army. Cavalry are all very well; artillery are useful in their place; but after all, the solid nucleus of an Army, the thing upon which its whole fighting capacity must rest, is its infantry; and it is in the infantry where the failure is the most patent.
Now, my Lords, I come to the question of the training of the Territorial Army. The noble Duke has alluded to that, and I do not wish to labour the point; but we have arrived at this, that all the flourish of trumpets about the amount of training which was going to be given to the Territorial Army is boiled down
1030
to this, that they are going to receive considerably less training than the old Volunteers. The Volunteer did sixty drills as a recruit and twelve annually as a trained soldier; the Territorial will do forty and ten respectively. I think the noble Lord will find that I am correct.
*THE UNDER-SECRETARY OF STATE FOR WAR (Lord LUCAS): That is only the Engineers.
LORD RAGLAN: I think the noble Lord is incorrect there. However, I pass from that. I venture to think that in this question of training the War Office were misled by the Volunteer commanding officers, as every War Office Committee which has discussed this subject has been misled. Every commanding officer of Volunteers knew, at the bottom of his heart, that the training was absurd, ridiculous, and most inefficient; and, therefore, in consultation with the War Office he always pressed for more training for his men. In conversation any commanding officer would say he could do this and that, and his men were prepared to do the other. But, when it came to the actual point, he found that his men could not and would not do it. That is an absolute fact of which I can give half-a-dozen instances from my own personal knowledge; and this has misled the War Office and the right hon. Gentleman the Secretary of State for War. Personally, I would far rather have to deal with men who had never had any training in their lives than with men who had learned the work of a soldier under a wrong system. The net result of the changes introduced by His Majesty's Government is that we have practically lost 200,000 of the armed forces of the Crown and have nothing whatever to put in their place. When war breaks out we shall be unable to use the Fleet or to send out the Expeditionary Army until the Territorial Army is sufficiently trained to take its place, and that will be a very long time.
I have only one more word to say. It appears to be rather the fashion now that if anybody says a word against the proposals of the right hon. Gentleman the Secretary of State for War, he is accused of want of patriotism, and it is

1031
said that any failure that may result from this scheme will be largely attributable to its critics. I venture to think that if any scheme is essentially sound it ought to be able to stand on its own merits, and ought not to depend upon the casual voice of any humble Member of your Lordships' House such as myself. But I do not believe for one moment that it is possible that anything that can be said, either inside this House or outside of it, can alter the essentially wrong idea upon which the whole of this scheme is founded. We have seen how little success it has had during the time it has been in operation. It has had every possible advantage. The enthusiastic Gentleman, the Secretary of State for War, I believe to be a thorough believer in his own scheme. It has had the entire support of the Press of the country; and I venture to think His Majesty's Government have also had the entire and whole-hearted support of their political opponents in your Lordship's House as well as ill the country. It is a pity, I think, in many ways, that it has not received more support from their own political supporters. But I venture to think that when one believes, as I honestly and thoroughly do believe, that this scheme is not only based on wrong ideas but is exceedingly dangerous to the country, it is his duty to speak. In my opinion the breakdown is complete, and the sooner the country understands that the better. I believe, with the noble Duke, that when the country wakes up to what has been done, His Majesty's Government will regret that they did not pay more attention to those who know something as to how military forces should be raised and trained.
*LORD HARRIS: My Lords, I should like to offer to the noble Lord the Under-Secretary of State for War one crumb of comfort to help to remove the gloom which I have seen gradually spread over his countenance during the speeches of the two noble and gallant Lords on this side. I am rather hopeful that the Yeomanry will still exist, not because the Government have given it any encouragement, for they have done everything they could to discourage it, but because it is accustomed to knocks. For by far the greatest part of its existence it had no friends in Parliament,
1032
except the officers who belonged to it. There was no one to say a word for the Yeomanry. Even Secretaries of State and under Under-Secretaries could afford very little encomium for it. The cost was small, and therefore they managed to keep it afloat without any very serious efforts at defending it. It was not until after the war, when it was found to be a really useful body, that politicians were encouraged to defend it; and now it is as rare to find anyone attacking it as before it was to find anyone defending it.
If the men have transferred, it is not because of any advantage they receive under the scheme. They have lost their title of Imperial Yeomanry, their pay has been reduced, and their status as the mounted branch of Militia has been taken away. But the Yeomanry has been so accustomed all its life to knocks that I think it is even going to stand these knocks. My noble friend behind me said just now that the new conditions in the Yeomanry were practically the same as the old, and that they had transferred en bloc because they were not affected. That is hardly correct. The conditions affecting the present Yeomanry are in several particulars different; and it remains to be seen whether in a year's time the class from which the force has hitherto recruited will recruit as readily as heretofore. Personally, I am really in hopes that, notwithstanding these changes, the Yeomanry will go on. As I said before, it is accustomed to these knocks.
Regarding the scheme as a whole, it has always been a matter of profound astonishment to me, what induced the right hon. Gentleman to take it up. I never could understand what he thought he was going to get from it. It is obvious that he is not going to get more drill out of the men than he got before. I cannot help thinking that his idea—I have absolutely no authority for suggesting this, it is merely something that has occurred to me—was that the counties, through the County Associations, would come forward, as they did before the war, with large sums of money, to support the Territorial Army, and as a result large sums would be saved to the Regular Army. It must have been

1033
a great disappointment to the right hon. Gentleman when the first thing the county organisations did was to pass a self-denying ordinance declining to do that. I fear that the right hon. Gentleman, basing his scheme, I suppose, somewhat upon the Swiss system, conceived that he would be able, with financial assistance from the counties, to create a Territorial Army very much on the lines of the old Auxiliary Army with the financial help of private individuals. Not having had very great experience of the Auxiliary Forces, the Secretary of State overlooked this fact, that the Auxiliary Forces did obtain a very large measure of assistance from their friends and neighbours; their friends and neighbours have already contributed very large sums towards the maintenance of the companies and troops of the Auxiliary Army, and it is highly improbable that they are going to put their hands any deeper into their pockets than they did before. And, therefore, from that source it is unlikely that the right hon. Gentleman is going to get any greater assistance than the Auxiliary Forces got before. I sincerely hope that my forebodings will not be fulfilled. The subject is far too serious for anything but the most careful consideration. I am happy to offer the Under-Secretary one small crumb of comfort by expressing the belief that the force which has been treated worst will show the best results.
LORD WILLOUHGBY DE BROKE: My Lords, the utterly illusory character of the Territorial Force has been well illustrated in the speeches which have been delivered. I do not propose to add anything to that very telling indictment; but if the noble Lord the Under-Secretary of State for War will give me his attention for one moment I would like to ask one question about the equipment of the Yeomanry, a force which I venture to anticipate he will find a very useful addition to the Territorial Army should it ever take actual effect. I understand that the Yeomanry are to act as the cavalry of the new Territorial Force, and that, I think, will give very great satisfaction. May I ask the noble Lord whether it is the intention of the Army Council to give the Yeomanry another arm
1034
in addition to the rifle they now carry? Are they to have the new rifle, as now served out to the cavalry, and are they to have a sword also? I am told that the Yeomanry are to be utilised, with the rest of the Territorial Army when it comes into being, for purposes of Home defence. In that event it would be highly desirable that they should have an additional arm to defend themselves with at close quarters. It is impossible to prevent sudden surprises in any cavalry action in an enclosed country. I speak with very great diffidence about military matters in the presence of so many who know such a great deal more about them than I do; but the small experience I have had in the Yeomanry has shown me that it is almost impossible to avoid getting to close quarters. Therefore, in the event of invasion it is essential that the Yeomanry should be armed with a sword in addition to the rifle.
*LORB HENEAGE: My Lords, I should like to say one or two words with regard to the Territorial Force. I cannot accept all the facts as stated in conjunction with the gloomy prophesies to which we have listened. In the first place, I do not think that the Territorial Force is in quite such bad circumstances as have been put forward. Many people seem to think—and some noble Lords seem to think—that the Territorial Force was started on the 1st January. No doubt nominally it was started on that date, but the War Office were not ready, and as a matter of fact, very little could be done till the latter days of March. The force has therefore not had the six months it ought to have had to embody its members and complete its establishment. I am happy to say, however, looking at it from a practical point of view, that I am very well satisfied with what we have done since March in the county with which I am connected. We have done extremely well up to the present. There were several matters which made it very difficult to proceed. In the first place, there was a great deal not ready. The Financial Memorandum was not sent down to the Associations until 20th March. Nobody knew what money we should have to spend, and we could not do much in any way. The commanding officers were also very anxious to know the terms on which

1035
their men were to serve. We had, indeed, a great many difficulties thrown in our way. We had no guns for our Artillery until quite late in April; and I think that what has since been accomplished in my county is very creditable both to the commanding officers and to the men. The Yeomanry regiment with which I am associated is entirely up to strength, and has been in camp, where the men acquitted themselves well. We sent one battalion of Artillery into camp with three new guns, yet Colonel Hammond gave them an excellent report, in which he stated that their firing, considering the weather, was very creditable to them and could not have been improved upon even by Regular Artillery, which I think is a pretty good report in all the circumstances. We took our own horses into camp, and so satisfied are those who lend them that we shall have no difficalty whatever in getting the horses for these operations next year. We have had considerable difficulties to contend with owing to the breaking up of one of the battalions and the disruption, if I may use the word, of some seven or eight companies; yet notwithstanding that we have done well. Therefore I hope that those who have joined the Territorial Force will not in any way be discouraged by the gloomy forebodings to which expression had been given.
*LORD LUCAS: My Lords, I think a small amount of actual fact is worth a great dual of theory. The noble Duke's speech consisted entirely of conjecture as to what was going to take place, and of predictions and prophecies of various forms of failure which were bound to befall the new Army scheme. These were based upon the very insufficient data which we have before us at present with regard to recruiting and other matters.
I must say I did not follow the line of argument which the noble Duke took up. I understand his argument to be that the Regular Army will be in considerable danger of losing that flow of recruits which it has hitherto derived from the Militia; and I understood him to say immediately afterwards that the old Militia class of man was not going into the Special Reserve, and that the class of men going into the Special Re-
1036
serve used it as a stepping-stone into the Regular Army. The noble Duke cannot have it both ways. Either the Special Reserve is going to form an efficient Militia, or else to be a funnel for recruits for the Regular Army. If it is going to starve the Regular Army of recruits it will be an efficient Militia, for it will keep its recruits. If it is going to supply the Regular Army we need have no fear as to any failure in the supply of troops required for the Regular Army. The noble Duke tells us that the Special Reserve is going to be altogether inferior to the old Militia. He bases his view on the fear that by no means all the old Militia are joining the force, and he predicts that when the present Militia have passed away others will not take their place, on what ground we do not quite know.
THE DUKE OF BEDFORD: The falling off is shown in the recruiting returns.
*LORD LUCAS: The noble Duke will probably agree with me that during a period of transition such as we are going through at the present moment you can hardly build up a safe prediction as to what is going to take place in the future upon the basis of what is happening now while the scheme is new and the men are in a state of considerable uncertainty. How great is that uncertainty is seen in the varying effects the scheme has had upon different battalions. The noble Duke is to be condoled with on the ill-success of his efforts to induce his young men to transfer into the Special Reserve; but your Lordships have heard also of the individual success which has befallen a neighbouring battalion commanded by the noble Marquess on the front Opposition bench.
LORD RAGLAN: I do not wish to interrupt the noble Lord, but surely they are quite different cases.
*LORD LUCAS: The noble Marquess has transferred something like 70 per cent of his men, whereas the noble Duke, I believe, has only succeeded in transferring 40 per cent. We have not yet had the Returns in from the various units of the Special Reserve, and where you have

1037
such startling differences as that, it is, of course, absolutely impossible to predict in any way what the results are going to be. The reports, as far as they have come in, show that the class of men we are now taking as recruits are, on the whole, superior to the class of men who have hitherto enlisted in the Militia, and, if one can believe that, it is presumable—I am not going to commit myself any further than that—that, with a better class of men coming in, you will, at any rate, maintain as force, the average a special reserve number who went into the old Militia and remained there.
The noble Duke raised a very important point as to the question of recruiting. That is a point which we are watching very carefully. It is too early yet to say what the result is going to be, but if we find that the present Permanent Staff cannot provide us with a sufficient number of recruits, we are prepared with other methods of augmenting their efforts. The character of the debate is really summed up in a single sentence by the noble Lord (Lord Harris) when he said that he could not conceive what induced the taking up of this scheme. That has been the attitude of almost all the speakers who have hitherto spoken upon it. I can tell the noble Lord in one sentence what induced the taking up of this scheme. The reason for the reorganisation of the Army was that the Army could not fulfil its commitments at the time the Government came into office, and, therefore, some reorganisation was necessary. It was impossible for the Government to put into the field any force approaching 100,000 men, and maintain it there during hostilities. It was also impossible to do what every military authority has insisted ought to be done—to keep that force up to its strength in the field, with a proper supply of properly trained drafts, and have in this country any sort of organised force for the defence of these shores after the Regular Army had left. Those, very shortly, were the reasons for which this reorganisation was undertaken. And when the reorganisation took place, all branches of the service and the various lines on which the Army was based had to be considered, not solely from the point of view of what was best for their individual interests,
1038
but also from the point of view of what was best in the interests of the whole military system of the country.
I deplore that the Militia was in that intermediate position between the first line and the third line which could not be maintained, and that it has, therefore, as far as its individual interests are concerned, to undergo, perhaps, more inconvenience than other branches of the Service. But the first thing of all that the Government had to consider was the efficiency of the Regular Army in the field, and they also had to face the fact that, having placed the Regular Army in the field, it was their duty to maintain it when it was there. That is a point upon which we are all agreed. From the whole tenour of the speeches delivered by the noble Duke and the noble Lord who followed him, it is obvious that the Militia were the class who could be looked to and depended upon to come out for that purpose in the event of hostilities.
The noble Duke has based his case almost entirely upon the question of numbers, which is the sole criterion he has taken in estimating the efficiency of the Army. But there are a great number of other considerations. There is the use to which you are going to apply them, when you have got them, and I say without hesitation that, from the point of view of the whole of our military system, one Special Reservist who is prepared to go out as a draft to fill the depleted ranks of the Regular Army is worth one and a half or two Militiamen who could not be called upon to fulfil that function. Therefore, though your Special Reserve may not reach in numbers what the Militia was before, the value of your Special Reserve is proportionately much greater, man for man, than the Militia was before. Similarly in the case of the officers. The officer of the Special Reserve will in future be available for filling those gaps which we know will exist in the Regular Army on mobilisation, and in that way every officer we get in the Special Reserve is an officer to the good from the point of view of the general military situation. In other ways the whole of this scheme has from the beginning been aimed at making the first line and

1039
the second line of the Army a more coordinated machine than it was before. We have devoted ourselves to filling up the gaps that existed in it before. After all, as I say, numbers are by no means the only consideration in the efficiency of an Army. A large Army with a bad staff has often, as your Lordships know, been beaten by a very small but more efficient Army. We have devoted ourselves to that. We have done what we can to increase the numbers of officers and improve their training. All these things have to be taken into account when you are considering the relative efficiency of the Army before and since the reorganisation was begun.
With regard to what Lord Raglan said as to the hardships that are incurred by the Permanent Staff, nobody realises that more fully than we do, and nobody deplores more than we do that those hardships have to be incurred; they are consequent upon any scheme of re-organisation, and it is very much to be regretted that that is so. We are doing all we can to save individuals from incurring hardships. The noble Lord mentioned the new conditions of service for the Special Reserve. The six months training, and the shorter period afterwards, is, to a certain extent, in the nature of an experiment. It is perfectly open to modifications, but, as the noble Lord, I think, himself admitted, there are certain classes of people whom it undoubtedly does suit to come out for six months recruit training. They are the men who cannot give up a very long and indefinite period, but who yet have six months at their disposal at a certain period of their lives; and that suits them. The object of the Army Council in laying down these conditions is to secure the greatest efficiency possible, but, if it is found that there are large classes of men who are precluded from joining the Special Reserve by reason of those conditions, I have no doubt modifications will be made in them to suit the circumstances of these men as long as it does not impair general military efficiency.
I now pass to the question of the Territorial Army. I am not going to follow the noble Duke in the figures into which he entered, and which were pure conjecture. We have no reason to be
1040
in any way despondent as to the figures of the Territorial Army at the present time. I think that from every point of view they are perfectly satisfactory. We did not expect there would be a great rush, and that we should at once fill the establishments. It is much better that we should not do that; it is better that we should go slowly and pick our recruits, as is being done. There are a large number of units in this country which could be up to and over their establishments at the present moment. A large number of units are only about I two-thirds of their establishment because, for the first time, care is being exercised to secure a really efficient class of men. The reports we have in all tend to show that the Territorial Army, from a physical point of view, is far more efficient than the Volunteer Force was before. This transformation has acted as a purge upon the force. Speaking broadly, we have been able to keep the most efficient men, while the men who are not efficient and who did not intend to make themselves more efficient than they could possibly help, have been got rid of. The class of men who are coming in are of a most excellent standard and quality. Only to-day in the War Office, I saw an official report from one of the divisions which said that, although smaller in numbers, the Territorial force is a far finer force in physique and general efficiency than the force which it has superseded. The medically unfit to whom reference has been made, are the men to a great extent who have been weeded out by this process of transformation, and the men now coming in are being I subjected to a far more rigorous medical examination than ever before. In otherways, there is an enormous improvement in the Territorial Force.
THE DUKE OF BEDFORD: Perhaps the noble Lord will inform me if I am right in thinking there was no medical examination in the case of transfers?
*LORD LUCAS: The men transferred were not medically examined, but at the same time the great majority of the men who when they were examined some years ago were found physically unfit have been weeded out of this force by the

1041
transformation which has taken place. I should have thought that we had by this time laid down very clearly what the functions of the Teritorial Force are, and that to fulfil those functions we are going to do our best to give them a satisfactory training. I differ entirely from the view, which has been expressed more than once, that if the Territorial Force is, as a whole, unable to fulfil the whole fortnight's training provided in the Act, it is, therefore, going to be unable to fulfil its function as a second line force. Whether you give a force a week's training or a fortnight's training, you have only to read the opinions that were expressed by a number of prominent soldiers before the Norfolk Commission to see that neither of those two periods will fit a force of this nature to take the field at the outbreak of hostilities. We have all along said that this force must have a certain amount of training on embodiment before it can take the field against trained foreign troops, and it is a misconception of what a second line force really is if you say that because it is not prepared on the outbreak of war to take the field at once, it is, therefore, a failure. No second line force could.
I will not follow the noble Duke into his views as to the possible embodiment or not of the Territorial Force. There we are getting into the region of even more remote speculation than we had been in up to that point; but after all, the Act provides for the embodiment of the Territorial Force and the immediate commencement of its training as soon as the whole of the Reserves are called out. My recollection of what took place during those various times which the noble Duke mentioned is not sufficiently accurate to enable me to say whether it was the case that the whole of the Reserves were called out in 1885, and on the other occasions. But the embodiment is absolutely automatic. As the Reserves comes out the Territorial Force has to be embodied. It does not require an Act or an Order in Council or anything of that sort, and I do not think that the point is worth arguing whether or not the Government will avail itself of the power in the case of a great emergency.
1042
Finally, the noble Duke suggests a return to the three line system. I should like to know how the noble Duke proposes, first of all, to supply the Regular Army when in the field with drafts of properly trained men. I know that he will not agree—I, at least, imagine he will not agree—to start the Militia Reserve again. I should like to know how we are going to provide that Reserve which is absolutely essential when we have used up the Regular Reserve. In the second place, what are the functions of a force which the battalions under the present scheme will not be able to carry out? And, in the third place, where does the great difference come in between the position of this country with the Regular Army gone from it, a certain number of battalions on lines of communication, and the remainder of the Militia and the Volunteers left in this country—where does the great difference come in between that and the position when you have got the Territorial Army automatically embodied? If you return to the old system you return to a system which does not give you an organised force; whereas this force does really represent the best efforts of the country to form a second line Army. The noble Duke has not in his speech in any way met those considerations. To say that the system has broken down is, I think, premature, and to advocate a return to the three line system without explaining how he proposes that those functions should be discharged certainly does not carry conviction.
My Lords, I must apologise for having detained you so long. I hope your Lordships in considering this question, will realise that the Army is going through a transition stage, and that it is too early at the present moment to judge of the success or the failure of the Territorial Force. It is an enormous ploblem. I am sure that noble Lords who are Presidents or members of their County Associations, will agree with me when I say that they have not yet begun to touch the fringe of the recruiting problem in most of the counties, and cannot tell whether or not they will get all the men required until a couple of years have lapsed. When this scheme has been working for some time, and when it is

1043
seen how far the country responds to the appeal which has been made to it, then will be the time, and not until then to say whether the scheme of the Territorial Army is a success or not.
*VISCOUNT MIDLETON: My Lords, I am sure the last words of the noble Lord will have evoked a sympathy on the part of your Lordships and a desire to suspend judgment upon every point upon which judgment can be suspended. But I must say, after the powerful indictment of the noble Duke, that the speech of the noble Lord was not altogether a reassuring one. The noble Duke drew a very clear picture, and certainly the figures which the Under-Secretary was able to give to the House were few indeed. I entirely agree that many of those figures are incomplete, but I do not agree with the noble Lord when he said that we had not yet touched the fringe of the recruiting problem. I know that in some counties every effort has been made by meetings of all kinds to induce recruits to come in; and I regret to say that in some cases the recruiting for the Territorial Army has shown a very marked falling off.
I have no desire to say a word, if I can help it, which will in any way increase the difficulties of His Majesty's Government. Whether we like the scheme or not, it is the only scheme upon which we can depend at this moment for the defence of the country. But I deprecate as strongly as I can the tone of confidence in which the noble Lord speaks in all these matters and some of the statements he has made this evening, which I do not believe can be for a moment substantiated. I put away the inducements which he has held out to me to challenge his statement I that the organisation which has been set on foot with a much smaller number of men will discharge the functions which the late organisation with a much larger number of men could not discharge. But when the noble Lord claims that the men we have enlisted into the Territorial Army are of a different and more reliable class altogether than the old Volunteers and Yeomanry, I reply that the noble Lord has not seen as many of them as I have. I saw 4,000 of them the other day, and noticed with regret the lack of physique,
1044
age, and stamina amongst them. It was a matter of general remark; and, so far from the noble Lord being justified in saying that the change has caused the transfer of all the best men, I believe that, on the contrary, the additional demands made upon them have caused many of the best men to feel that they were not able to transfer. The noble Lord shakes his head. But I am afraid he must give us a little more in the way of chapter and verse before he can induce us to believe that a far finer force now exists than that which has been practically disbanded.
I would call the noble Lord's attention to two points in particular. In the first place, I think that the large number of the one-year Territorials enlisted and the enormous amount of recruiting which may be rendered necessary as a consequence must give us cause for serious anxiety. We have not up to this moment had any pledge from the Government—any reliable pledge—as regards their intentions in the future. One point was not mentioned, and that is the state of recruiting for the Regular Army. It is not merely the recruiting for the Territorial Army and the Special Reserve which has fallen off; the recruiting for the Regular Army has been at a lower ebb than for many years. Your Lordships will, perhaps, allow me to give you a few figures. Recruiting for the Regular Army has fallen off from 39,000 in 1898 and 40,000 in 1899 to 35,000, 36,000, and 34,000 respectively in the last three years. That number of men is not sufficient to keep the Regular Army even at the reduced strength at which it has been placed by the present Secretary of State for War.
LORD LUCAS: I am sorry to interrupt the noble Lord, but, if he looks at paragraph 2 of the Report, he will see why the numbers are smaller in those years.
*VISCOUNT MIDLETON. I cannot follow out Paragarph 2 at this moment. But, whatever the cause may be, the reduction in recruiting is certainly a fact. Now, I want to ask for a definite pronouncement on the part of the Government. I do not wish to build upon what seem to me the anxious statistics of the last few months at all more than they

1045
ought to be built upon. On the contrary, I hope that the next few months may see a large increase of recruiting for the Territorial Army and of the number of transfers from the Militia to the Special Reserve. But, pending that result, I want to ask His Majesty's Government whether they will categorically promise us that no further reductions of the Regular Army will take place. A question on this subject was put in another place somewhat in these terms—
"Whether it is intended to effect any further reduction in the Infantry of the Line; and, if so, whether it is proposed to effect this reduction by destroying additional units, or by reducing the strength or establishment of existing units."
The answer was in the negative. But since that answer was given ominous language has been used by Members of the Government, and we have had statements in the public Press by which the public mind has been gravely disturbed upon these matters.
Last year we addressed a serious warning from this Bench to the Government, with regard to the effect on the Militia of what was proposed; and there were also serious warnings from men of experience in Territorial work as to the effect of the Secretary of State's proposals. We then urged upon the Government with all the force we could that they should see their foundation formed before they built upon it by destroying those units of the Regular Army which they thought would be unnecessary when they had this Special Reserve, from which they expect so much and from which they have received comparatively so little. I think the condition of our forces at this moment is one of supreme national danger. You have largely reduced the Regular Army; and you have considerably induced for the moment the second line. Is it too much to ask that until those confident expectations which the Under-Secretary has voiced this afternoon has been made effective, His Majesty's Government should refrain from further reducing the Regular troops? My Lords, I put that question to the Government. I see the President of the Board of Agriculture in his place, and I hope he will be able to answer it. But if he is unable to give us a categorical answer in that respect, I will put the question on Monday to the noble Lord the Leader of the House. I
1046
hope I have not said a word which is likely in any way to reflect upon recruiting, or to have any effect, except to urge upon His Majesty's Government at this moment, when everything is, as it were, in the melting-pot and when the new organisation in Brigades and Divisions has not even been brought into work, not to sacrifice what they have got in the expectation of something which may never be realised. I ask the noble Earl to go as far as he can in giving me an answer, because the expectation of further reductions is operating as a pall over the whole military system and is paralysing the efforts of those who are most anxious to assist the Government in this matter.
THE PRESIDENT OF THE BOARD OF AGRICULTURE AND FISHERIES (Earl CARRINGTON): My Lords, I feel that a very important question has been raised this afternoon, but I am not quite certain that the case is so bad as has been made out. I have had some experience of a Militia regiment—my father commanded one for forty years, and I had the honour to command one for five years. It was a very good regiment; and, during the whole time I was in command, we never had one single court-martial. They were a very good class of men; and, if there is an improvement on them now, we certainly may congratulate ourselves upon the class of men we have been fortunate enough to secure. As regards the Yeomanry, we had a re-assuring statement from Lord Harris. He is one of the best Yeomanry officers we have, and, according to his statement this afternoon, that branch of the Service does not seem to have suffered or to have been terrorised in any way. Then, as regards the Territorials, I think the House must, in fairness, remember that they have only been three months in existence. We have been told that already 60 per cent. of the total number required have been secured, and that during a period of transition. The noble Lord opposite called attention to the physique of the Territorials he had lately seen. Well, I saw them too, and I cannot say that they were not what we should wish to see in the great Territorial Force of this country I think, in fairness, he will agree with

1047
me that there were some that were a very good class of men indeed. I saw the Territorials in the South of England at Bristol during the same week; and their appearance was so good as to call forth a well-deserved compliment from His Majesty himself, who was pleased to express his satisfaction. We have been told that there is a great danger in these men being bound for only one year. Well, as an outsider, I think one must suppose that if a man gets a chance of joining for one year or for a number of years, it is probable that he would join for the shortest period just to see how he got on, and how he liked it. I do not think it can be said that because he joined for only one year it therefore followed that he would be unwilling to continue the service for two, three, or four years, or longer. The noble Lord opposite has asked for a definite pronouncement from the Government that they will make no further reductions in the Regular Army. I do not agree with the noble Lord's view that the country is in a position of supreme danger, but nevertheless, in the name of His Majesty's Government, I desire to thank him and other noble Lords opposite for their promise of assistance in the difficulty we are supposed to find ourselves in at the present moment. The question will be very carefully considered by the Secretary of State for War, but it is absolutely impossible for me to make any definite pronouncement.
THE MARQUESS OF LANSDOWNE: My Lords, I do not rise for the purpose of challenging the statements made by the noble Earl the President of the Board of Agriculture, although I must say I think at some points his testimonial to the excellence of the present military arrangements was not a very conclusive one. I wish to say one word with regard to the request made by my noble friend beside me for a specific assurance with regard to future reductions in the Regular Army. It is quite natural that the President of the Board of Agriculture should feel that a pledge of that kind is one which he may not be in a position to give upon the spur of the moment, but it is a pledge which we desire, if possible, to obtain. We admit the force of that part of the argument of the
1048
Under-Secretary of State which rested upon the contention that we were passing through a period of transition, and that during that period it was not unnatural that at some point there should be a certain amount of weakness in our military position. But what we desire to know is whether, while that period of transition is still in progress, it is or is not the intention of His Majesty's Government to carry further those large reductions in the fighting strength of the Regular Army which have already taken place. Those reductions have filled many of us with a feeling of great anxiety, and after what has fallen from the Under-Secretary of State this evening we feel more strongly than ever that no further reductions of the kind should be allowed to take place.
LORD RAGLAN: The noble Lord the Under-Secretary has not answered my question as to why Section D. of the Army Reserve has been closed.
LORD LUCAS: Owing to the three years enlistment, the Reserve at the present moment is so unduly inflated that it has been thought that that section should be closed for the time being. It is only a temporary measure.

EDUCATION CODE—MEDICAL INSPECTION OF CHILDREN.
LORD CLIFFORD OF CHUDLEIGH LORD CLIFFORD OF CHUDLEIGH moved to resolve "That, in the opinion of this House, the words "Satisfactory provision must be made for the medical inspection of children attending the school in accordance with Section 13 (1) (b) of the Education (Administrative Provisions) Act, 1907,' in Article 25, Subsection (c) of the Code of Regulations for Public Elementary Schools in England should be omitted from the Code." He said the words to which he had taken exception and which he moved to delete from the Code did not, on the face of them, convey, the exact point to which it was his wish to call the attention of the House. That point was more clearly brought out in the Memorandum which prefaced the Code than in the Code itself. By Section 13 of the Education (Administrative Provisions) Act, 1907, it was provided that

1049
the powers and duties of the local education authority under the Education Act, 1902, should include the duty of providing for the medical inspection of children immediately before or at the time of, or as soon as possible after, their admission to a public elementary school, and on such other occasions as the Board of Education should direct. That section came into operation in January last, and in explanation of it the Board had issued a Memorandum, which had been supplemented by a further circular containing specific directions. When the Bill was before their Lordships, Lord Belper, on behalf of the county councils, moved an Amendment to make the adoption of medical inspection a matter more or less of option with the county council. This was refused on the ground that such inspection was one of great importance to the national interests of the country; and the recent Report of the Commission on Physical Deterioration was brought up in support of that contention. Lord Belper had reminded their Lordships, in a speech in the recent debate on local taxation, that county councils had laid before the Board of Education a claim to be assisted out of the national Exchequer on the ground that medical examination was a matter of national importance. The President of the Board of Education had received that representation with a certain amount of sympathy, and had promised that some assistance would be given to work this provision. But they had seen nothing of that assistance. All that they found in the Code was a threat that money which they had already earned was to be taken away from them if they failed to perform this duty of inspection. He was quite willing to admit that to make such a condition was well within the power of the Board of Education; but he held that it was unjust when the services for which grants were given had been well and faithfully fulfilled that the money so earned should be taken away because the local education authority had failed, unaided and unassisted by the Board, to carry out a duty which they felt was one that did not pertain to education in its normal condition and which was really a national duty. The Board of Education had not stopped
1050
at threatening the local authority with a heavy fine if they did not carry out this duty. They had, in a somewhat unfortunate way, interpreted the Act as giving them a power to force upon the local education authority the appointment of certain officers. They alluded in several places in the Code to an officer called the school medical officer. The wording used was rather curious, and referred to the "naming" of the medical officer by the Board of Education. A Speaker of the House of Commons who threatened to name a Member was once asked, "if you do name me, what will happen?" The Speaker was said to have replied, "The Lord only knows." Well, he was rather in that position; he failed to make out what the Board of Education meant by "naming" a medical officer. It was the custom for most local authorities to appoint their medical officers and to pay them. He did not know whether naming them was supposed to include payment as well as appointment. In this matter he did not think the local education authorities were being treated with justice. Before any threat to penalise and to fine was indulged in, the Government ought to give some substantial assistance which would aid them in their work; and if, on the failure of their work, that grant was stopped he was sure the local education authorities would not complain. But to impose upon local authorities the duty of the medical inspection of children, without giving them any monetary assistance for that special purpose, and at the same time to threaten them with fines if they failed to carry out that duty, was most unjust.
Moved to resolve "That, in the opinion of this House, the words 'Satisfactory provision must be made for the medical inspection of children attending the school in accordance with Section 13 (1) (b) of the Education (Administrative Provisions) Act, 1907,' in Article 25, subsection (c) of the Code of Regulations for Public Elementary schools in England, should be omitted from the Code."—(Lord Clifford of Chudleigh.)
LORD STANLEY OF ALDERLEYwas sorry that this important question had

1051
come on at so late an hour. The matters to which the noble Lord had called attention were matters of some importance, but he could not support the Motion he had made. In the first place, he felt that if there was an objection to this medical inspection it should have been made last year when the Act was being passed. That Act contained a number of valuable provisions, and therefore there was a general desire in all parts of the House that it should pass, and a willingness to take the items they did not like in order to secure those which they regarded as of value. The Bill having become law, they could not blame the duties upon the local authorities, and not to give them additional moneys from public funds to meet those new duties; but it should not be forgotten that the grants had been increased year by year. Therefore, he did not think complaint could be made if Parliament imposed extra duties if those duties were effect to the will of Parliament by ordering local authorities to carry out medical inspection, but rather that the circular in which the Board had ordered or suggested that medical inspection should be carried out, in many points went far beyond their statutory rights. They had been very anxious to thrust upon the county authority, which was also the education authority, the working of all this through the county medical officer. Many counties had not appointed medical officers, and many did not mean to do so. All that the Board of Education had a right to demand was that there should be medical inspection. The exact measure of that inspection, whether through the county medical officer or through officers appointed specially for the purpose, was, in his opinion, left by the Act in the discretion of the local authority. As to the Code, he had a complaint to make. The Code made more and more obscure the things that had to be done. In former days
1052
they had, attached to the Code, an appendix showing article by article any practice which had to be amended. That was a great help. But now a person had to do a piece of collation, adding and comparing one Code with another, and that made it hard for the man in the street and members of county councils to follow the Code. He agreed with the noble Lord that they ought to watch very jealously the attempt of any Government Department to usurp more than its own legal powers. He felt strongly that the hope for the future of education was to trust very much more to the local authorities, and that the possession by the Board of Education of too much power was not to the advantage of local education.
THE LORD STEWARD (Earl BEAUCHAMP): My Lords, I share the regret expressed by the noble Lord that this subject has been raised at this late hour, and I regret it the more, because the subject is one of real importance. It is one of those few subjects connected with education upon which I think there inspection with the method by which it should be carried out. The duty is laid by Act of Parliament upon the Board of Education of seeing that there in this medical inspection, and therefore, the only matter which really comes before us to-night is the method by which the medical inspection should be carried out. The Resolution of the noble Lord seems to me to be aimed much more at Section 13 of the Education (Administrative Provisions) Act of last year, than at the present policy of the Board of Education. I think we must take it for granted that this duty does lie upon the Board of Education. The question, therefore, is how they are carrying out the obligation Parliament has laid upon them. In this matter it seems to me, if I may say so, that the Board of Education are dealing with great gentleness with the various local authorities. The words in the appendix are to the effect that the medical inspection will, in future, be one of the elements to

1053
be considered in determining the efficiency of each school, in regard to the grant to the school. The noble Lord must remember that the Act came into operation on the first of January this year. Seven months have gone by, and during that period the Board of Education cannot be said to have applied any harsh pressure upon the various local authorities. Indeed, it seems to me that they have treated them with very great consideration, and that the least they could have done was to have inserted in the Code the words to which the noble Lord has called attention. Indeed, from the personal acquaintance I have with current public opinion, so far as it is interested in questions of this kind, I think it is more likely that in future public opinion will urge upon the various local authorities that they should make even more stringent inquiries than those at present suggested by the. Board of Education, and for my own part, I hope that public opinion will demand that the local education authorities should take a real, sincere, and thorough interest in this question of medical inspection. As to the expense entailed, the figures which had been published by the County Councils Associations ranged from 4d. per child in Essex and Lancashire to 1s. 4d. in Cheshire and Yorkshire. The difference between those figures makes it very difficult to say that all these estimates can have been framed with accuracy. At the present moment, in the opinion of the Board, the probable cost of medical inspection is too obscure to allow of any reliable estimate being formed. The average of the estimates of the county councils is 10d., and at the outset that may be regarded as not an unlikely amount. But I must remind the noble Lord that this whole question of the estimate depends very largely upon local circumstances. I think he quoted from a footnote to the Code, in which the Board of Education expressly say that in certain circumstances they require varying degrees of medical inspection, and I cannot help thinking that some of the authorities have included in this estimate of medical inspection something more than the duty which lies upon them. They have probably included in their estimate
1054
every possible source of expense, upon the supposition that some local authorities will make a full, and, perhaps, even an extravagant use of the powers as well as the duties with which they have been entrusted. For the present, at any rate, I think I may venture to reassure the noble Lord, and to say that the extravagant estimates which are to be found in certain pessimistic quarters are not likely to prove entirely accurate. I am encouraged in saying that by a figure which was given by the noble Marquess, Lord Londonderry, when he was President of the Board in 1905. He said then that the cost of medical inspection would be extremely small, generally involving less than one-tenth of a penny rate. That is borne out by the fact that in one large county borough where medical inspection is now in operation and is, in the general opinion, efficiently carried out, the cost works out at between 6d. and 1s., although some of the authorities stated that it would be something like 2s. 9d. per child. The noble Lord, complained that His Majesty's Government, in giving these fresh powers to local authorities, had done nothing to help them to carry them out. I must remind the noble Lord that at the present moment there is an Education Bill before the other House of Parliament by which His Majesty's Government take power to distribute a sum of £1,400,000 amongst the various local authorities. That, of course, is not allocated to any one specific purpose, but is to meet the expense of duties now cast upon them. I shall not detain your Lordships further, though I have here certain figures which, had it been earlier in the evening, I should have ventured to give the House dealing with the way in which various local authorities have already dealt with this matter, and which, I think, would go far to show that it has not been found oppressive or hard by the vast majority of local authorities. Generally speaking, the local authorities show a willingness and desire to co-operate with the Board of Education in carrying out the provisions of the Act of last year. The Board of Education, in their Code and in the Memorandum, have merely done their best to assist the various local authorities to carry out the Act, and in these circumstances I venture to hope the

1055
noble Lord will agree to the suggestion which has been made by Lord Stanley of Alderley and withdraw his Motion.
LORD CLIFFORD OF CHUDLEIGHsaid he was glad to hear that the Board of Education took such a moderate view of the expense. A borough medical inspection, however, could be conducted much more easily, cheaply, and efficiently than in a scattered county, and his fear was that the Board of Education, in making their regulations, might act very harshly. With regard to the assistance that had been promised, he suggested that the financial aid should have been given by the Government at the same time that fresh duties were placed upon the local authorities.
Motion (by leave of the House) withdrawn.
House adjourned at ten minutes past Eight o'clock, to Monday next, a quarter before Eleven o'clock.