Sitting of 20 April 1910

Preamble
The House met at a Quarter before Three of the clock, Mr. SPEAKEE in the Chair.
One other Member took and subscribed the Oath.

NEW WRITS.
For the Borough of Edinburgh (South Division), in the room of Arthur Dewar, esquire, K.C., appointed one of the Senators of His Majesty's College of Justice in Scotland.—[Master of Elibank.]
For the County of Lanark (Govan Division), in the room of William Hunter, esquire, K.C., who has been appointed His Majesty's Solicitor-General for Scotland. —[Master of Elibank.]

Sir WILLIAM CROSSLEYpresented a Petition against the exportation of worn-out horses.

PRIVATE BUSINESS.
Bankers Guarantee and Trust Fund Incorporation Bill [Lords],
As amended, considered; An Amendment made; Bill to be read the third time.
Glasgow Gas Consolidation Bill,
Great Western Railway (General Powers) Bill,
Worksop Urban District Council Bill,
As amended, considered; to be read the third time.
Staffordshire Potteries Water Bill (by Order),
Read a second time, and committed.
Message from The Lords,—That they have passed a Bill, intituled, "An Act to empower the Baker Street and Waterloo Railway Company to construct a subway; and for other purposes." [Baker Street and Waterloo Railway Bill [Lords].
And, also, a Bill, intituled, "An Act to confer further powers on the Urban District Council of Matlock Bath and
2072
Scarthin Nick in relation to the gasworks undertaking; and for other purposes." [Matlock Bath and Scarthin Nick Urban District Council Bill [Lords].
Baker Street and Waterloo Railway Bill [Lords],
Matlock, Bath, and Scarthin Nick Urban District Council Bill [Lords],
Read the first time; and referred to the Examiners of Petitions for Private Bills.

ORAL ANSWERS TO QUESTIONS.

  Visits to Dockyards.
  Mr. FALLEasked the First Lord of the Admiralty, if it was by his direction, suggestion, or sanction that the Admiral Superintendent, Portsmouth Dockyard, wrote on 16th April to the junior Member for Portsmouth to ask if it was correct that he visited the dockyard on Saturday the 9th and entered the muster station, and warned the hon. Member to apply for permission in the event of his desiring to pay any further similar visits?
  The FIRST LORD of the ADMIRALTY (Mr. McKenna): The hon. Gentleman's question contains the first information I have received upon the subject, but had I been informed of the occurrence at the time I should certainly have supported the action of the Admiral Superintendent.
  Mr. FALLE: May I ask why it is that some gentleman who is unknown and wishes to remain unknown has merely to blacken his face and he may go over the whole of the dockyards and His Majesty's ships without any trouble?
  Mr. McKENNA: No; the hon. Gentleman has found from personal experience that it is not so easy to go over His Majesty's dockyards.

  Portland Harbour (Coaling Hulks).
  Mr. GIBSON BOWLESasked the First Lord of the Admiralty whether he can state how many coaling hulks there are now in Portland Harbour; who are their owners; and whether it is a fact that none of them are fitted with modern appliances for rapid coaling; whether it is the Admiralty policy to discourage the coaling of merchant ships at Portland; and, if not, will he either exercise pressure on the owners of the existing hulks there to fit their hulks with modern

  2073
  appliances or else entertain applications from other owners to replace some of the existing hulks by others fitted with such appliances?
  Mr. McKENNA: I would suggest to my hon. Friend that he should postpone this question until after the decision of the Court of Appeal in the action now pending. It would be difficult to frame a reply to my hon. Friend's question without intrenching upon matter which is subjudice.

  Armoured Ships.
  Mr. MIDDLEMOREasked how many armoured ships are now building or provided for by the Powers bordering upon the Mediterranean?
  Mr. McKENNA:

  Spain

  3

  France

  10

  Italy

  4

  Austro-Hungary

  3

  Turkey

  3

  Greece

  1

  Naval Gun Trials (13·5-inch).
  Mr. MIDDLEMOREasked the First Lord of the Admiralty whether, with due regard to the national interest, he can make any statement with regard to the trials of the new 13.5-inch gun?
  Mr. McKENNA: It would obviously be most undesirable to give particulars of experiments with trial guns of any size.

  Floating Docks.
  Sir JOHN JACKSONasked whether a contract has been signed for the construction of floating docks, for which tenders were obtained about a year ago; if so, when was the contract signed, and with what firm; and has construction yet commenced?
  Mr. McKENNA: The contracts have not yet been signed, but preparations for construction have commenced.
  Sir JOHN JACKSON: Does the right hon. Gentleman not consider that it is expedient at present that no undue delay should occur in providing dock accommodation, either floating docks or otherwise, to take any of the largest class of vessels which are now being built?
  Mr. McKENNA: Yes, I am entirely of the same mind as the hon. Gentleman upon the desirability of increasing our docking accommodation, and steps are
  2074
  being taken at the present time with that object.

  Sawyers' Wages (Devonport Dockyard).
  Sir CLEMENT KINLOCH-COOKEasked the First Lord of the Admiralty whether he will inform the House what is the maximum wage paid to established sawyers in Devonport Dockyard; whether the limit has varied during the last twenty years; if so, at what periods and to what extent; how these variations compare with similar variations in the maximum pay of the established skilled labourers; and whether he will consider, as a matter of efficiency, the possibility and advisability of increasing the maximum wage of sawyers in the same manner as in the case of other kinds of work in the yard?
  Mr. McKENNA: The maximum rate of wages for established sawyers is 27s. a week; five men of this grade are borne at Devonport; there has been no increase in the maximum rate since 1892; in the same period the maximum rate for established skilled labourers has been increased from 25s. to 26s. 6d. a week. A request from the workmen affected for an increase of pay has recently been under consideration in connection with the petitions from various grades of employés in His Majesty's dockyards, and a reply will shortly be made to the petitioners.
  Sir C. KINLOCH-COOKE: Does the right hon. Gentleman not think the time has arrived when some attention should be given to this matter?
  Mr. McKENNA: I have stated that a petition has been received from the workmen. That is being dealt with, and a reply will be given in due course. I do not wish to anticipate that reply, or to say anything which would indicate what the nature of the reply is going to be.
  Mr. JOHN WARD: Could the right hon. Gentleman indicate whether the wages paid to the sawyers directly employed by his Department in Devonport Dockyard compare favourably with those paid to sawyers employed by the contractors?
  Mr. McKENNA: I could not say without notice.

  North-East Arabia (Tribal Warfare).
  Mr. REESasked the Under-Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs whether he can give the House any information regarding an outbreak of tribal warfare in North-East Arabia?
  The UNDER-SECRETARY for FOREIGN AFFAIRS (Mr. McKinnon Wood): We have recently heard that a force was collected in the North-East of Arabia under Bin Saud with the supposed object of attacking certain Sheikhs in the neighbourhood, but up to the present no further news has been received on the subject.

  Brussels Convention.
  Mr. HAMILTONasked whether the Brussels Convention binds each of the Signatory Powers to impose Excise duties on home-grown sugar which shall be less than the Import Duty by an amount not more than about 2s. 6d. per cwt.; and why, seeing that the present British Import Duty is only 1s. 10d. per cwt., it has been decided that a remission of the whole or part of this duty for British-grown sugar is inadmissible while the Convention remains in operation?
  Mr. McKINNON WOOD: The Sugar Convention does not bind the signatory Powers to levy an Excise on home-grown sugar. If there is no Excise the Import Duty must not exceed six francs per 100 kilogrammes for refined and five and a half francs for raw sugar, and if there is an Excise the Import Duty must not exceed it by more than these amounts.

  Native Court of Appeal, Cairo.
  Captain CRAIGasked whether Mr. John Selden Willmore, whose services as a judge in the Native Court of Appeal in Cairo have recently been dispensed with by the Egyption Government, is the gentleman referred to in the Secretary of State's reply in this House in June, 1907, as being fully qualified for his office; and whether anything has occurred since that date to lead the Secretary of State to alter the opinion then expressed by him?
  Mr. McKINNON WOOD: The gentleman mentioned is the one who was referred to in June, 1907, as being fully qualified in regard to his legal training for the office which he then held. I have no reason to alter the opinion then expressed.
  Captain CRAIG: Why are Mr. Willmore's services dispensed with?
  Mr. McKINNON WOOD: That was a matter for the Egyptian Government, in which they acted on their own discretion.
  Captain CRAIG: Was there any blot on his character?
  Mr. McKINNON WOOD: Certainly not No reflection on his character.
  Mr. GOULDINGasked whether Mr. John Selden Willmore, whose contract as a judge of appeal after twenty years' service the Egyptian Government has lately terminated, is a member of the Levant Consular service and an Arabic scholar; is Arabic the only language employed in the Egyptian Native courts; had the Egyptian Government, some months prior to the expiration of Mr. Willmore's contract, entered into negotiations with a Belgian gentleman with a view to his replacing Mr. Willmore; whether Mr. Willmore at that time protested both to the Egyptian Government and to the Foreign Office, or to either of them, against his removal; and had the Belgian gentleman in question any previous knowledge either of Egypt or of the Arabic language?
  Mr. McKINNON WOOD: The Gentleman in question was lent from the Levant Consular Service for service in the Native Court of Appeal. At the time of his appointment to that court he had a thorough knowledge of Arabic, which he no doubt retains. A Belgian judge has been appointed to the Native Court of Appeal, but I have no knowledge of the negotiations leading to his appointment. He was no doubt fully qualified for the post. Mr. Willmore protested against his proposed removal both to the Egyptian Government and to His Majesty's Government.
  Mr. FALLE: If so, why is there any preference shown to Belgians over English?
  Mr. McKINNON WOOD: I have already stated that I have no knowledge of the negotiations which led to the appointment.
  Mr. GOULDING: Has the. Government considered the protest of Mr. Willmore?
  Mr. McKINNON WOOD: The Government have no right to interfere in the matter. Mr. Willmore retained his position for four periods of five years, and the Egyptian Government is within its rights in not renewing his appointment. He was only appointed for five years.

  Old Age Pensions.
  Mr. VINCENT KENNEDYasked in how many cases have refunds been claimed in England, Scotland, Wales, and Ireland under the Old Age Pensions Act from persons who were deprived of pensions; and what are the amounts recovered in the respective countries?
  The FINANCIAL SECRETARY to the TREASURY (Mr. Hobhouse): I regret that the statistics asked for by the hon. Member are not available, and I do not think it would be desirable to have them specially prepared, in view of the fact that a Departmental Committee, now sitting, is inquiring into the question as to what old age pension statistics it is desirable to publish.
  Mr. VINCENT KENNEDY: What was done with the moneys refunded?
  Mr. HOBHOUSE: I have explained that a Committee is sitting which will determine the statistics in connection with old age pensions, which it is desirable and necessary to make public. Until the Committee has reported I do not think I can answer the question.
  Mr. O'DOWD: Have any sums at all been recovered from persons who have received pensions which have been improperly paid?
  Mr. HOBHOUSE: That is so, but I do not know what the amounts are.
  Mr. JOHN O'DONNELLasked the Secretary to the Treasury, whether he is aware that the pension clerks in the county of Galway who have been acting for old age pension committees since the Act came into operation have only received an instalment of the fees due to them for the period ending 30th June last; and, if so, whether he will take the necessary steps to have the outstanding balances paid forthwith?
  Mr. HOBHOUSE: When the June accounts for county Galway were received, early in August, 1909, the number of claims and questions charged for by the clerks to the sub-committees was in excess of that certified by the pension officers to have been dealt with. A payment on account was made at the end of August, and the clerk to the committee was requested to inquire into the discrepancy, and send particulars of the adjustments necessary to bring the two sets of figures into agreement, upon receipt of which particulars the balances due to the clerks would be paid. These particulars have not yet been received, though the Clerk has recently been reminded of them, and the June balances are, therefore, still unpaid. The accounts for the September and December quarters have been paid.

  "PARNELLISM AND CRIME."

    SIR ROBERT ANDERSON AND "THE. TIMES" ARTICLES.
    Mr. REDDYasked the Secretary of State for the Home Department whether he can state if any secret service money was disbursed at the instance or on the advice of Sir Robert Anderson; and, if so, whether he can state the total amount?
    The SECRETARY of STATE for the HOME DEPARTMENT (Mr. Churchill): For obvious reasons I can make no statement on this subject.
    Mr. MacVEAGHasked what safeguards are in operation to prevent money disbursed in connection with the Secret Service Fund being improperly or waatefully employed?
    Mr. HOBHOUSE: No charge is admitted by the Comptroller and Auditor-General against the Vote for Secret Service unless covered by a certificate by the Minister of the Crown responsible for the payments, solemnly declaring that the interests of the public service required them to be made out of the Secret Service Fund and that they were properly so made.
    Mr. MacVEAGH: Has the Treasury any reason to think those safeguards are sufficient, and is there any record as to whether any part of the £50,000 -which was offered by "The Times" newspaper to P. J. Sheridan was to come from the Secret Service Fund?
    Mr. HOBHOUSE: There are no such records at all that I know of.
    Mr. MacVEAGH: Is the hon. Gentleman not aware that large sums of money were paid out from the Secret Service Fund to agents provocateurs for giving information with regard to plots which they themselves were organising with money supplied by the Secret Service Fund?
    Mr. HOBHOUSE: I have no such information.
    Mr. FLAVIN: Who supervises or checks the expenditure of the Secret Service Fund?
    Mr. HOBHOUSE: I have already explained that the Minister responsible for the Department with which the particular expenditure is connected is responsible for the proper expenditure.
    Mr. MacVEAGHasked whether Mr. Munro received any gratuity from public

    2079
    funds on the termination of his appointment in Scotland Yard; and whether he was entitled to any pension?
    Mr. CHURCHILL: The answer to both questions is in the negative.
    Mr. MacVEAGH: Why is it that Sir Robert Anderson had an increase of salary, a pension and a knighthood whilst his superior official receives neither a pension nor a knighthood?
    Mr. CHURCHILL: I am afraid I. cannot give any explanation of the freaks of fortune in the world.
    Mr. MacVEAGH: Are there any records to show on whose advice Sir Robert Anderson received a knighthood?
    Mr. CHURCHILL: That was the decision of a Government which has long passed away. I cannot investigate, justify or explain, still less impeach their motives.
    Mr. FLAVIN: Was the knighthood conferred on Sir Robert Anderson for services rendered to the Tory party?
    Mr. CHURCHILL: I know nothing of the circumstances.
    Mr. FLAVIN: Who conferred the knighthood on Sir Robert Anderson?
    Mr. CHURCHILL: The King.
    Mr. MacVEAGHasked what official position was being held by Sir Robert Anderson on the date on which Pigott and Mr. Soames got permission to visit John Daly and Dr. Gallagher in Chatham Prison; on the date on which a similar permit was issued to Inspector Littlechild; and on the date on which Pigott escaped?
    Mr. CHURCHILL: Neither Inspector Littlechild nor Pigott appears to have visited Dr. Gallagher. At the time when the other visits mentioned took place, and also at the time of Pigott's escape, Sir Robert Anderson occupied the position of Assistant Commissioner of Police.
    Mr. MacVEAGH: Can the right hon. Gentleman say whether Inspector Littlechild and Pigott were admitted to the prison to interview these prisoners?
    Mr. CHURCHILL: My information is that they were not.
    Mr. MacVEAGH: Well, that information is diametrically opposed to the information given to the Parnell Commission.
    Mr. MacVEAGHasked whether Sir Robert Anderson filed any official memoranda embodying the substance of the communications made to him by Le Caron?
    Mr. CHURCHILL: No, Sir.
    Mr. MacVEAGH: If no official report has been filed, what evidence have the Home Office that they ever got value for their money?
    Mr. CHURCHILL: I suppose that the Secretary of State for the time being was satisfied that full value was received for the money.
    Captain CRAIG: May I ask whether value was not received in the fact that a great many of the crimes of the Nationalist party of that day were laid open to the public?
    Mr. MALLABY-DEELEY: May I ask how much further time of this House is to be wasted by these fruitless and absurd inquiries?
    Mr. SPEAKER: The hon. Member is not entitled to make that observation.
    Mr. MacVEAGHasked whether there is any precedent for terminating the career of any Scotland Yard official on the ground that he wrote articles for a magazine?
    Mr. CHURCHILL: The correspondence which led to Sir Charles Warren's retirement in 1888 originated in a magazine article written by him; but it would hardly be correct to say that that article was the ground of his retirement. Apart from that case, I know of no precedent.
    Mr. MacVEAGH: Has the attention of the right hon. Gentleman been called to the fact that the Home Secretary of that time, Mr. Matthews, now Lord Llandaff, declared explicitly in this House that the only cause for the censure passed on Sir Charles Warren and his subsequent retirement was that he wrote this article in "Murray's Magazine"?
    Mr. LAWSON: May I ask the right hon. Gentleman whether it is a not uncommon practice for high officials to write articles in various magazines?
    Mr. CHURCHILL: If it is a not uncommon practice it is certainly one which should be discouraged when and if these articles trench at all upon subjects which are matters of controversy, and in respect to which the knowledge they have ac-

    2081
    quired has been due solely to their official position.
    Mr. MacVEAGH: May I ask the right hon. Gentleman to answer the question I put to him, namely, whether the Home Secretary of the day declared in this House that the only cause for the censure passed on Sir Charles Warren was as stated in the question?
    Mr. SPEAKER: The hon. Member can find that out for himself. If there is any record in the Proceedings of the House, he will be able to find it.
    Mr. MacVEAGH: I have found it out already.
    Mr. CHURCHILL: The hon. Member has placed newspaper extracts at my disposal, and, so far as public accounts go, his statement is not out of harmony with those accounts, but I am informed by the Home Office that the retirement of Sir Charles Warren was not the writing of the article, but the discussion and correspondence which proceeded from that original act.
    Captain COOPER: May I ask if that applies to Ministers of the Crown who write articles descriptive of the Departments for which they are responsible?
    Mr. CHURCHILL: Every case must be judged entirely on its merits or demerits.

    Perth and Kinnoull (Poor Law Adminis tration).
    Mr. FREDERICK WHYTEasked the Lord Advocate whether he is aware that a Petition from the parish council of Perth was presented to the Secretary for Scot land, on 9th February, 1905, praying that the parishes of Perth and Kinnoull should be amalgamated for the purposes of Poor Law administration; that an inquiry into the merits of the question was held by the Local Government Board for Scotland in the summer of 1907; that up to the present date the result of that inquiry has not been communicated to the petitioners; and that, owing to this delay and the con sequent uncertainty which prevails on this question, annoyance has been aroused in the districts affected; and, in view of the preparations now in progress for the forthcoming elections to the parish councils, will he take steps for the decision of the Local Government Board for Scotland to be made without delay and communicated to the interested parties in the parishes of Perth and Kinnoull?
    The LORD ADVOCATE (Mr. Ure): I am aware of the application in question and of the inquiry held by the Sheriff of Perth. The issues raised in the case made it advisable to await the Report of the Poor Law Commission before coming to a decision. The matter is one for determination, not by the Local Government Board for Scotland, but by the Secretary for Scotland, and I understand that a' communication will be made to those interested at an early date.
    Mr. WHYTE: Can the Lord Advocate give any indication of what an early day will be?
    Mr. URE: Within a fortnight.

    Drink Traffic in Scotland.
    Mr. CARLILEasked the Lord Advocate whether the average daily number of prisoners in custody in Scotland in 1908 was greater than during any previous year since 1878; whether the drink traffic in Scotland is conducted under much more restrictive legislation than in any other part of the United Kingdom; and whether the Government will therefore decline to give facilities to the Temperance (Scotland) Bill?
    Mr. URE: The answer to the first two portions of the question is in the affirmative; the answer to the concluding portion is in the negative.
    Mr. CARLILE: May I ask whether, since restrictive legislation seems to lead to an increase of crime, the Government will reconsider their decision in regard to the Bill?
    Mr. URE: It does not lead to an increase of crime.
    Mr. KILBRIDE: Will the right hon. Gentleman say what the increase in the population has been between 1878 and 1908?
    Mr. URE: I must ask the hon. Gentle: man to give notice of that question.
    Mr. PAGE CROFT: May I ask the Lord Advocate whether, in view of the fact that there has been a great betrayal of Ireland, and that the Budget is now to be passed with the Licensing Clauses, this Bill has become unnecessary?
    Mr. WHYTE: May I ask the Lord Advocate whether he is aware that in the past year, which is not included in the question, the state of affairs was very different?
    Mr. URE: That is quite correct.

    Lead Poisoning (Pilkington's Tile Works Manchester).
    Mr. CLYNESasked the Secretary of State for the Home Department whether the two cases of lead poisoning at Pilkington's Tile Works, Manchester, recently the subject of inquiry, stood alone; and whether he will cause investigation to be made as to the amount of raw lead used in the glazes at Pilkington's?
    Mr. CHURCHILL: Besides the two cases referred to in the question, only one of which, however, was found by the medical referee to be a case of lead poisoning, communications have been received calling attention to the cases of two other workers at these works. Both cases have been investigated, and in neither have any grounds been found for regarding them as cases of lead poisoning. With the exception of a case in 1903 of a man who, after a short period of employment at these works, died as a result of disease set up by long-contiuued work in lead processes in other works, there had been no cases at these works since 1899; and the arrangements at the works are exceptionally good. I see no ground for issuing any special instructions to the Factory Department in the matter.
    Mr. JOHN WARD: Can the right hon. Gentleman give any reason whatever why this attack is being made on a factory that has the best health register of any factory in the country?
    Mr. SPEAKER: How can the right hon. Gentleman answer that question?

    Canvas for Mail Bags.
    Mr. ARBUTHNOTasked whether the canvas required for the manufacture of mail bags has been ordered from firms who will supply canvas manufactured abroad, as was the case last year, or whether the contracts have been placed with British firms who will supply British-made canvas?
    Mr. CHURCHILL: I have been able to arrange that all contracts for the supply of canvas required for the manufacture of mail bags during 1910–11 should be placed with British firms, who will supply canvas manufactured in the United Kingdom.

    Eddisbury Division, Chester (Alleged Intimidation).
    Mr. SEDDONasked the Attorney-General whether his attention has been
    2084
    called to the cases of alleged intimidation during the recent Parliamentary election in the Eddisbury Division of Chester brought against Mr. Charles Bell, of Norley, a justice of the peace for Cheshire, ac the Oakmere Petty Sessions, held on 12th April, and to the admissions made by Mr. Bell in cross-examination of the reasons why he dismissed two of his workmen, who had been in his employ for eight years and five years respectively; and whether, in view of these admissions, the Lord Chancellor proposes to allow Mr. Bell to remain one of His Majesty's justices of the peace?
    Mr. BARNSTON: May I ask whether it is not a fact that the bench unanimously dismissed the charge against Mr. Bell, and whether the Lord Chancellor never removes names from the commission of the peace in connection with charges which are dismissed because the conclusion is that there is no case?
    The ATTORNEY-GENERAL (Sir William Robson): Although the Bench unanimously dismissed the case it by no means follows that the Lord Chancellor is bound by the action of the Bench. He may exercise, and must exercise, an independent opinion on the facts. The Lord Chancellor has considered the proceedings in this case, as reported in the "Manchester Guardian." It appears that the ground of dismissal, as alleged by Mr. Bell, was that the action of the men in wearing Liberal colours while in a motor car was an insult to the owner of the motor car, who had lent it to Mr. Bell, and had complained of the men's conduct. This appears to the Lord Chancellor a very poor reason for dismissing men from their employment, but it was, if believed by the Bench, a sufficient answer in law, and the bench accepted it. The Lord Chancellor's authority to remove a magistrate from the bench en complaint being made is for misconduct alone, and he considers that the action of Mr. Bell, however arbitrary and reprehensible, cannot be treated as misconduct justifying so strong a step as removal from the Bench.
    Mr. SEDDON: Does the right hon. Gentleman think that a gentleman who can be guilty of such gross tyranny can exercise a judicial faculty?
    Mr. SPEAKER: That is not a question for the right hon. Gentleman, but for the Lord Chancellor?
    Mr. PAGE CROFT: Is not it a fact that a man is perfectly entitled to discharge anyone who is in his employment for what is undoubtedly a most dishonourable action?
    Sir W. ROBSON: I do not know what the hon. Member refers to as as undoubtedly dishonourable action. I am not aware of any action, undoubtedly or otherwise dishonourable in what is related of the voter in this case.

    Fair Wages in Brush Trade (Dublin Dispute).
    Mr. NANNETTIasked the President of the Board of Trade whether he is aware that a dispute has existed in the works of Messrs. Varian and Co., Dublin, brush contractors, for now close on six months; whether this firm has refused the offer of arbitration made by the Lord Mayor and corporation of Dublin; whether this firm holds a Government contract; if he is aware that it is alleged that boy labour is employed in the execution of this contract; and whether, in view of the Fair Wages Resolution of this House and his refusal to settle the dispute by arbitration, he will continue this firm on the list of contractors to the Government?
    The PRESIDENT of the BOARD of TRADE (Mr. Buxton): The dispute affecting the firm referred to began in October last, and I understand that the negotiations which have been conducted at the instance of the Lord Mayor of Dublin did not, unfortunately, result in a settlement. I am informed that the firm are contractors to the Board of Public Works, Dublin; if the hon. Member has information that the firm are not complying with the Fair Wages Clause of their contract, perhaps he would communicate with the Department concerned.
    Mr. NANNETTI: Considering the efforts that have been made by the Lord Mayor and Corporation of Dublin to settle this unfortunate dispute, and the refusal of the firm to entertain proposals for arbitration, does the right hon. Gentleman consider that this is a firm to which Government contracts should be given. I would also ask whether this firm is not carrying out Government contracts at lower wages than those recognised in the district, and if the right hon. Gentleman will take action to stop that?
    Mr. BUXTON: That raises the question whether the Fair Wages Clause is, or is
    2086
    not, carried out. That is not within my discretion. It is within the discretion of the Board of Works in Dublin. If the hon. Member would communicate with I them and get further information I shall be glad to consider it.

    Australian Mails (Andes Railway Route).
    Mr. WILLIAM REDMONDasked the Postmaster-General how long it would take the Australian mails to go from London to Sydney by the route of the new Andes railway; what is the time now taken for the mails by the Suez Canal route; and whether any change is under consideration?
    The POSTMASTER-GENERAL (Mr. Herbert Samuel): The time of transit for mails from London to Sydney by the Suez Canal route is thirty days sixteen hours. I am unable to say what the time of transit would be by the route of the new Andes railway. It would depend largely on the speed of the service between Valparaiso and Sydney. There is no such service at present, and I am not aware that it is proposed to establish one. It is clear, however, that the total transit from the United Kingdom to Australia would be considerably longer than by the route of Suez, even if a trans-Pacific service were provided of the highest speed attainable under existing conditions.
    Mr. WILLIAM REDMOND: In view of his reply given now, is it untrue that the right hon. Gentleman made representations to the Australian Government that by the new route the mails would be conveyed in twenty-seven days?
    Mr. HERBERT SAMUEL: I have made no such representations.

    Superintending Engineers' Office, General Post Office.
    Mr. JOHN WARDasked the Postmaster-General whether the application of the recommendation of the Hobhouse Committee with regard to the pay of third-class clerks, Superintending Engineers' Office, London, at a scale of £65 per annum, rising by annual increments of £7 10s. to £185, with an allowance of £15, has been complied with; and, if not, will he indicate the reason for this delay of over two years in the enforcement of the recommendation?
    Mr. HERBERT SAMUEL: The recommendation referred to by the hon. Member has been carried out as far as possible, but certain officers have not yet decided whether to keep to the old scale of pay or to adopt the scale recommended by the Select Committee. The representations that have been made by these officers are now under consideration.
    Mr. JOHN WARDasked what are the circumstances under which it has been decided that the report of a superintending engineer as to fitness for promotion of a third-class clerk under his control to the next higher clerical grade should no longer be regarded as a reliable basis upon which to make such promotions; and whether the same principle will be applied to the clerical establishment of the Engineer-in-Chief's Office and the other departments of the Post Office?
    Mr. HERBERT SAMUEL: The circumstances are that the clerks in question are now on one list for promotion purposes and that promotions must therefore be settled by a central authority. Similar circumstances do not obtain with regard to the clerical establishment in the Engineer-in-Chief's Office and in other departments of the Post Office.

    Telegraph Operators (Employment of Aliens).
    Mr. COURTHOPEasked the Postmaster-General whether any foreigners are employed by his Department as telegraph operators; and whether alien operators are employed on the East Coast of Yorkshire, and elsewhere, at stations and offices through which communications to and from the Fleet would be made in time of war?
    Mr. HERBERT SAMUEL: Only British subjects are now eligible for appointment to the establishment of the Post Office. So far as I am aware the sole foreigner employed in a post office on the East Coast is of Greek nationality and has resided in this country since he was nine months old. I know of no other aliens employed at post offices through which communications to the Fleet would be made.
    Mr. SEDDON: Is the right hon. Gentleman aware that these frequent insulting references to foreigners are deeply resented by many people?

    Small Holdings (Compensation to Farmers).
    Mr. NEWDEGATEasked the Parliamentary Secretary to the Board of Agriculture whether in any legislation dealing with the matter it is the intention of the Government to arrange that compensation shall be granted to farmers owning their own land in the same way as to tenant farmers, in the event of some of that land being compulsorily taken for small holdings or allotments?
    The PARLIAMENTARY SECRETARY to the BOARD of AGRICULTURE (Sir Edward Strachey): Owners of land whose property is taken compulsorily for small holdings and allotments are under existing enactments entitled to compensation, and the Government has no intention of introducing further legislation on the subject.

    Black Scab in Potatoes.
    Mr. CHARLES BATHURSTasked the Parliamentary Secretary to the Board of Agriculture whether, in view of the spread of black scab in potatoes in several districts in England, and its special prevalence in Scotland, whence many English potato growers are obtaining seed potatoes with the object of increasing the weight of their crops and reducing the risk of potato disease, the Board will take steps, if necessary by statutory enactment, to prohibit the sale of all seed potatoes infected with the scab, and to penalise all persons selling such potatoes with full knowledge of their diseased condition?
    Sir E. STRACHEY: The Board have under consideration the issue of an Order which will render it an offence to sell potatoes for seed if they are known to be affected with scab. The disease in field crops, from which seed potatoes are obtained, is rare in Scotland. It is practically confined to cottage gardens.
    Mr. CHARLES BATHURST: Is not it a fact that potatoes for Scotland have been sold extensively for seed purposes in Lancashire and Cheshire particularly?
    Sir E. STRACHEY: I will inquire.

    Elementary Schools (Minimum Floor Space).
    Mr. CARLILEasked the President of the Board of Education whether he will modify or postpone the requirement of the Board as to the minimum floor space per child in public elementary schools in country towns and in rural places?
    The PRESIDENT of the BOARD of EDUCATION (Mr. Runciman): I am unable to draw the distinction suggested. I am not aware of any reason why children and teachers in country towns and in rural places should be deprived of the advantages we seek to secure for children and teachers in other localities.
    Mr. CARLILE: Can the right hon. Gentleman inform me what the additional burden on the local authority will be as a result of this inquiry?
    Mr. RUNCIMAN: I do not think that that arises out of this answer.

    Taxation in England and Germany.
    Captain FABERasked the Chancellor of the Exchequer if he will state how much taxation amounted to in England in 1908 per capita and how much in Germany; and how much Germany has in her savings banks compared to England?
    Mr. BARNES: Before the right hon. Gentleman answers that question, can he tell us how much of this taxation is indirect taxation of food and how much direct taxation on property?
    The CHANCELLOR of the EX-CHEQUER (Mr. Lloyd-George): I cannot answer that without being given time to ascertain the facts. In reply to the hon. Member for West Hampshire, the total tax revenue of the United Kingdom for the financial year 1908–9 was £125,346,000, or £2 16s. 3d. per head of the estimated population as on 30th June, 1908. The amount due to depositors in the Trustee Savings Banks on 20th November, 1908, was £51,715,950, and in the Post Office Savings Bank on 31st December, 1908, £160,648,214.
    I regret that I am not able to give the corresponding information in regard to tax revenue and savings banks in Germany. The revenue figures would require an analysis of Imperial and State Returns and a discrimination of the various heads of revenue into "tax" and "non-tax," which in many cases would be a matter of opinion rather than of fact. The German savings banks statistics are also very complicated.
    Mr. CHARLES BATHURST: I should like to ask whether the figures referring to England refer only to Imperial taxation and not to local taxation, or whether they include local taxation?
    Mr. LLOYD-GEORGE: I think they include grants towards local taxation from Imperial sources.
    Mr. CHARLES BATHURST: The figures do not include the amounts which are paid by the ratepayers in this country?
    Mr. LLOYD-GEORGE: Oh, no.
    Sir GILBERT PARKER: In view of the fact that this question has been asked for many times in Parliament, and that it is a matter of very acute controversy, may I ask the right hon. Gentleman whether it would not be of advantage to Parliament if his Department made an analysis of such figures and supplied a correct and accurate statement?
    Mr. A. F. WHYTE: Is it not a fact that the information was published last year in connection with the Budget, and that it supplies a good deal of what is asked for?
    Mr. LLOYD-GEORGE: It is information which I shall have to get from the Foreign Office. I shall certainly communicate with my right hon. Friend and do my best to get the information for the House.
    Mr. WEDGWOOD: Will the right hon. Gentleman, if he prepares any information of this sort, include in his Return the amount invested by the British working classes in friendly societies?

    Grants for Higher Education.
    Mr. FRANCEasked if the right hon. Gentleman's attention has been drawn to the deficiencies in the grants paid to local education authorities under The Local Taxation (Customs and Excise) Act, 1890; if he is aware that the estimates of many of these authorities have already been framed for this year; if he can hold out any hope that these deficiencies will be made good; and whether he will consider the possibility of taking the necessary steps to see that these grants for higher education are placed on a sounder and more permanent basis?
    Mr. LLOYD-GEORGE: The answer to the first part of the question is in the affirmative, and I also understand that the facts are as stated in the second part. The Government recognise that it is undesirable that so important a matter as education should be dependent on a fluctuating source of revenue, and they have decided to take steps to place it in future on a more stable basis.
    Mr. FRANCE: In view of the satisfactory condition of the national finances, which the right hon. Gentleman announced yesterday, can he hold out any hope that at a very early date the local education authorities will be encouraged by further grants for this purpose?
    Mr. LLOYD-GEORGE: I promise to consider the matter.
    Lord BALCARRES: Will the change take place in the present financial year?
    Mr. LLOYD-GEORGE: Does the Noble Lord mean the year 1910–11?
    Lord BALCARRES: Yes.
    Mr. LLOYD-GEORGE: Yes, I hope it will be possible; in fact, it is the intention of the Government that it shall be dealt with in this financial year.

    Punjab Irrigation Colonies.
    Mr. REESasked the Under-Secretary of State for India whether he has any official information showing that land in irrigation colonies in the Punjab in one or more cases fetched £3,000 an acre?
    The UNDERSECRETARY of STATE for INDIA (Mr. Montagu): The instance in which the exceptional price of £3,000 the acre was obtained from market sites in a proposed new town in the Chenab Colony is mentioned in the Report on the Punjab Irrigation Colonies for 1908–9. Particulars of other land sales are given in the Report, but in none of them was a similar price reached. The Secretary of State has caused a copy of the Report to be placed in the Library of this House.
    Mr. REES: Will the Secretary of State consider the advisability of giving publicity to this illustration of the way in which British administration is impoverishing British India?
    Mr. MONTAGU: The hon. Member will be able to draw his own conclusions from the Report in the Library.

    Evicted Tenants (County Donegal).
    Mr. KELLYasked how many evicted tenants have been reinstated in county Donegal from the date of the passing of the Land Act, 1903, to the date of the passing of the Evicted Tenants Act, 1907; how many have been reinstated under the Evicted Tenants Act, 1907; how many estates in county Donegal have been sold to tenants, and the acreage and number of tenant-purchasers; and how many
    2092
    estates still remain unsold, and the acreage and number of tenants?
    Mr. BIRRELL: Since the passing of the Irish Land Act, 1903, seventy evicted tenants, or representatives of evicted tenants, in county Donegal have been reinstated in their former holdings or provided with other holdings. In one case the lands were acquired under the Evicted Tenants Act, 1907. From the passing of the Act of 1903 to the 31st ultimo, ninety estates in that county, comprising an area of 67,166 acres and 3,071 holdings, have been vested in the purchasing tenants, and proceedings are pending before the Estates Commissioners for the sale of 168 estates in that county, comprising 8,084 holdings and an estimated area of 322,734 acres.

    Glasnevin Agricultural Training College.
    Mr. JOHN O'DONNELLasked what was the date on which a Mr. Scrimgeour was appointed as a horticultural superintendent at Glasnevin Agricultural Training College; what is the annual salary attached to the office, including allowances; and whether his appointment was a nominative one?
    Mr. BIRRELL: I understand that Mr. Scrimgeour was promoted on 1st November, 1909, to the post of gardener at the Albert Agricultural College, Glasnevin, with salary at the rate of £104 per annum, with a house and coal. Mr. Scrimgeour completed his training in horticulture at the college in November, 1903, when he was given an appointment in connection with the fruit-growing experiments of the Department of Agriculture. He has been continuously in the employment of the Department since November, 1903.

    Ventry Estate (Evicted Tenants).
    Mr. THOMAS O'DONNELLasked whether the case of R. Barry, Annascaul, Dingle, evicted tenant on the Ventry estate, has been investigated; and what steps have been taken, or are proposed to be taken for the purpose of his reinstatement?
    Mr. BIRRELL: The Estates Commissioners have not received any application for reinstatement from R. Barry.
    Mr. THOMAS O'DONNELLasked what steps have been taken to reinstate Thomas Crohan, of Ballykeen, Dunquin, Dingle, and Patrick Moore, of the same district, and both on the Ventry estate?
    Mr. BIRRELL: The Estates Commissioners have noted Patrick Moore's name for consideration, and have decided to take no action in the other case mentioned in the question.

    King's Scholarship Examination (Ireland).
    Mr. THOMAS O'DONNELLasked when will the decision of the National Board to make a second language essential for the scholarship examination be a rule and become operative?
    Mr. BIRRELL: The Commissioners of National Education hope to be in a position to make a second language obligatory at the King's Scholarship Examination for 1912.

    Irish Colleges (Expenses of Teachers).
    Mr. THOMAS O'DONNELLasked if he will explain why the Commissioners of National Education do not pay expenses to teachers who attend lectures at the Irish colleges (Dingle, Ballingeary, etc.), while expenses are paid to those who attend courses in cookery, kindergarten, physics, rural economy, etc.?
    Mr. BIRRELL: The Commissioners have no funds out of which they could pay the expenses of teachers who attend the colleges referred to for the purpose of learning Irish. A qualified substitute may be employed by the teacher of a national school during his attendance at any of these classes, and the service of such substitute is recognised as service given by the teacher. A payment of £5 is made to the college for each teacher who passes the examination at the end of the course, and who subsequently teaches Irish satisfactorily in a public school for one year. The Commissioners have not so far recognised a college for the teaching of Irish at Dingle.

    Examinations in the Irish Language.
    Mr. THOMAS O'DONNELLasked what provision is made in each of the training colleges recognised by the National Board for the training of King's scholars both in Irish and methods of language teaching, the number of students from each college who presented themselves for examination in Irish last July, and the number who obtained certificates?
    Mr. BIRRELL: The Commissioners of National Education inform me that provision is made for the instruction of the King's scholars in Irish in all the training colleges, except the Church of Ireland
    2094
    Training College in Dublin, by (the appointment of a professor or teacher of Irish. The Commissioners examine any students presented to them by the authorities of the colleges with a view to their recognition as being qualified to teach Irish. The question of providing training in the methods of teaching Irish and in the principles of bilingual teaching is under consideration. The number of students presented for examination in Irish last July and the numbers who qualified were as follows:—Marlborough Street Training College—fifteen presented, one qualified; St. Patrick's Training College, Drumcondra—fifty-nine presented, seven qualified; Blackrock Training Oollegie— thirty-one presented, five qualified; St. Mary's Training College, Belfast—twenty-three presented, six qualified; Limerick Training College, twenty-two presented, one qualified.
    Mr. THOMAS O'DONNELL: Do these figures not show that the training colleges have either an insufficient number of professors or that they are not giving sufficient time to the teaching of the subject?
    Mr. BIRRELL: The only conclusion I draw from it is that the examiners very wisely have to consider a high standard of excellence, and I hope they will adhere to it.
    Mr. MOORE: Does the right lion. Gentleman still propose to waste public money to the extent of £10,000 a year in teaching a language which even the students do not care to acquire?
    Mr. BIRRELL: The hon. and learned Member will surely recognise that when a language of this sort is being taught gradually and scholastically for the first time there must be considerable difficulty in obtaining the requisite standard of excellence. So long as a standard of excellence is maintained I, at all events, am quite satisfied.
    Mr. MOORE: Can the right hon. Gentleman suggest that in view of these figures there is any national want for instruction in this language?
    Mr. BIRRELL: Yes. Obviously there is a great desire to learn the language.
    Mr. THOMAS O'DONNELL: Will the right hon. Gentleman say whether there are more schools teaching the Irish language in the constituency of the hon. and learned Gentleman than in any other part of the North of Ireland?

    Horticulture Schemes (Ireland).
    Mr. JOHN O'DONNELLasked the Chief Secretary for Ireland whether he will give the name of the official who is responsible to the Department of Agriculture and Technical Instruction in Ireland for the carrying out of the various schemes of horticulture throughout the country; whether he will state how many instructors are working under the Department; what are their qualifications and the salary paid to each; the amount of travelling expenses incurred under this head during 1909; what positions were held by each inspector previous to getting his present position; whether these appointments were made by nomination or as a result of a competitive examination; and how many are of Irish and Scotch birth, respectively?
    Mr. BIRRELL: The supervision of the work of the thirty-two instructors employed in connection with county horticultural schemes is part of the duty of the Department's horticultural overseer, Mr. Irving. The instructors must have an adequate knowledge of horticulture and ability to give instruction in it. Their salaries vary from £104 to £200 a year, but the latter rate is only paid by one county committee. The total amount paid to them for travelling expenses could not be ascertained except by applying to all the county committees. Some of the instructors were in the employment of the Department prior to their engagement by the county committees. The county committees usually advertise vacancies, and the Department test the qualifications of the candidates. So far as is known to the Department, all the instructors are Irishmen and trained at Glasnevin.

    University College, Dublin (Lease of Premises).
    Mr. CHARLES CRAIGasked the Chief Secretary for Ireland if the University College, Dublin, has taken a lease of the premises Nos. 82 to 86, Stephen's Green, Dublin, known as the Jesuits' College; and, if so, what rent is payable for them and for what term; and if this rent is received by the Roman Catholic archbishops and bishops of Ireland in whom the premises are vested?
    Mr. BIRRELL: I am informed by the college authorities that they have taken the premises referred to for three years at a rent of £450 a year. I understand that the Roman Catholic Bishops are the owners of the premises.

    National University (Ireland).
    Mr. CHARLES CRAIGasked the Chief Secretary for Ireland if Roman Catholic students at Maynooth are now taught and examined by Maynooth professors, and thereupon eligible for degrees in the national university without leaving the precincts of Maynooth; and, if so, will he state how this condition of affairs differs from actual affiliation of Maynooth. College in the national university?
    Mr. BIRRELL: St. Patrick's College, Maynooth, is a recognised college of the National University, and the conditions under which students of a recognised college are admitted to degrees are laid down in the charter and statute of the university which have been presented to Parliament.
    Mr. C. CRAIG: What is the difference between this college and a college properly affiliated?
    Mr. BIRRELL: I am under no obligation to answer questions of this sort. It is not a Department of State. If the hon. Member reads the charter and statutes he can see for himself.
    Mr. C. CRAIG: I would like to know, seeing that public money is expended on the upkeep of those colleges, if it is not the duty of the right hon. Gentleman to answer questions which are addressed to him on the subject, and if it is not his duty, whose duty is it?
    Mr. MOORE: Before the right hon. Gentleman answers that, may I ask does he not recognise an obligation because he obtained those moneys from the House by representing that the institution would be undenominational?
    Mr. BIRRELL: I adhere to that statement perfectly. At all events, the Act of Parliament provided for the machinery for the government of those universities by their senates, by charter, and by statutes. Those charters and statutes have now come into existence, and have been laid on the Table of this House. Anybody who reads them can discover what the constitutions of those universities are. I really cannot undertake at this Table to answer questions of discipline, and to give an explanation of the various acts of those great bodies which govern themselves subject to Parliament.
    Mr. MOORE: Does the light hon. Gentleman suggest that Maynooth College is an undenominational college?
    Mr. BIRRELL: No, I do not suggest anything of the kind.
    Mr. FLAVIN: May I ask the right hon. Gentleman whether he is not aware that the hon. Gentlemen are not always in a.state of mind that they can read?
    Captain CRAIG: Does the right hon. Gentleman intend to keep up the myth any longer that this National University is undenominational?
    Mr. SPEAKER: The question has been answered.
    Mr. CHARLES CRAIGasked if the Board of Studies have recommended the senate to make regulations that every student in the university should be compelled to go through a course in Irish and attend the lectures on Irish in the university college for one year before his degree is conferred; and if this regulation will be applicable to students at Maynooth College?
    Mr. BIRRELL: The authorities of the National University, to whom this question has been referred, inform me that the proceedings of the General Board of Studies are confidential and that they are not at liberty to make any statement on the subject. Resolutions passed by the Board must take the form of recommendations to the senate before they can be carried into effect.
    Mr. C. CRAIG: May I ask, seeing that these proceedings which are supposed to be confidential become public at a very early date, it would not be better for him to give the fullest information when asked questions on this subject?
    Mr. BIRRELL: I do not think so.
    Captain CRAIG: When it suits him everything is confidential, and when it does not suit him—[HON. MEMBEBS: "Order, order."]

    Lord Clonbrock's Labourers (Wages Dispute).
    Mr. JOHN ROCHEasked the Chief Secretary for Ireland whether he is aware that, owing to Lord Clonbrock's refusal to grant to his labourers an increase of wages, a force of police has been drafted into the district; and whether, considering the reasonableness of their demand, and having regard to the fact that for six months of the year they were in receipt of 10s. per week, for two months 8s. 6d. per week, and for four months 7s. per
    2098
    week, he will secure that the people of the district shall not be called upon to pay for extra police?
    Mr. BIRRELL: I understand that a number of Lord Clonbrock's workmen, have struck for higher wages, and that the men who have taken their places are under protection, and five extra police have been sent temporarily to the district for that purpose. This does not involve any special charge on the locality.

    Estate of Mr. Nicholas Richardson, Galway.
    Mr. JOHN ROCHEasked the Chief Secretary for Ireland whether he can state if the offer of the Estates Commissioners, to Mr. Nicholas Richardson for his Galway estate has been accepted; and, if so, whether the Commissioners will now be allowed to distribute the grass lands?
    Mr. BIRRELL: The owner in this case has expressed his willingness to sell at the price estimated by the Estates Commissioners, and his instituted proceedings for the sale of the lands, which will be dealt with in order of priority.

    Athenry Agricultural College.
    Mr. JOHN O'DONNELLasked the Chief Secretary for Ireland whether he is aware that two gentlemen at present occupying positions at the Athenry Agricultural College are in the habit of visiting neighbouring towns for the purpose of recruiting members for a secret sectarian organisation; and, if so, whether they are carrying on this practice with the consent or direction of the Vice-President, who is now at the head of affairs in connection with the Department of Agriculture in Ireland?
    Mr. BIRRELL: The Department have no knowledge of the matter referred to.
    Mr. KILBRIDE: Can the right hon. Gentleman say if either of those gentlemen was ever a candidate for the Royal Irish Constabulary?
    Mr. MOORE: Will the right hon. Gentleman say if either of those officials ever got a farm from the Government by State money?

    Extra Police, County Galway.
    Mr. JOHN ROCHE (for Mr. Duffy)asked the Chief Secretary for Ireland whether, in view of the peaceful state of Benmore, Kilchreest, Kilrickle, Loughrea, and the county

    2099
    of Galway generally, and the absence of crime of any serious character, he will cause the extra police to be removed, and in this way relieve the taxpayers of the extraordinary tax which the presence of the extra police force imposes on them?
    Mr. BIRRELL: The county of Galway cannot be said to be free from crime. Part of the West Riding, including the districts round Loughrea to which the hon. Member refers, is still in a very unsatisfactory condition, and while this state of affairs continues no reduction in the extra force can be made.
    Mr. MOORE: Can the right hon. Gentleman say how long it is since the last cattle-drive took place in this district?
    Mr. BIRRELL: No; I cannot give the exact date.
    Captain CRAIG: Will the right hon. Gentleman wait until next week, when I will be able to give him some information -about the subject?
    Mr. JOHN O'DONNELLasked the Chief Secretary for Ireland whether he will now consider the advisability of withdrawing the extra police from the county of Galway, seeing that there is no crime or outrage whatever in any part of the county; and, in view of the peaceable condition of the people of that area, in face of provocation on the part of some landlords and graziers, he will, without further delay, remove the cause of such a tax on the ratepayers of the county as a further continuance of extra police would entail?
    Mr. BIRRELL: I would refer the hon. Member to the reply which I have just given to a similar question asked by the hon. Member for South Galway?

BILL PRESENTED.
The following Bill was presented, and read the first time:—
BILL PRESENTED.
  PUBLIC HOUSES (IMPROVEMENT) BILL.
  " To facilitate the provision of accommodation and other improvements in connection with premises licensed for the sale of intoxicating liquors by retail," presented by Mr. RUTHEHFORD; supported by Mr. Austen Chamberlain, Mr. Staveley-Hill, Mr. Mason, Lord Ronaldshay, Sir Henry Kimber, Mr. Goulding, Sir Alfred Cripps, and Mr. Bridgeman. (To be read a second time upon Monday next.)

SMALL HOLDINGS (No. 3) BILL.
The PARLIAMENTARY SECRETARY to the BOARD of AGRICULTURE (Sir Edward Strachey): I beg leave to ask permission to introduce a Bill to provide compensation to tenants on whom notice to quit is served with a view to the use of the land for the provision of Small Holdings under the Small Holdings and Allotments Act, 1908.
It is not in the least surprising that in the Small Holdings Act, which has been in force for over two years, some amendment might be required. I think it is only due to the fact that the Small Holdings Act was carried through this House with such tact and ability by the First Commissioner of Works that up to now so very little friction has arisen in the working of the Act. There is undoubtedly one case where friction has arisen and where there is a genuine grievance. This Bill is brought in by the Government to provide compensation for tenants who have been obliged to quit their farms to enable the county councils to provide small holdings. The Bill applies in such cases the provisions of the Agricultural Holdings Act of 1908, which gives compensation to tenants turned out of their farms by their landlords without good or sufficient cause, and for reasons inconsistent with good estate management. Up to now, farmers who have been disturbed by a council, and who have had their land taken for the provision of small holdings, have received no compensation, the reason being that under the present law the provision of small holdings is held to be good and sufficient cause for a council giving notice to quit. Though that is so it is undoubtedly a great hardship that the tenant should be excluded from compensation. This has been recognised, I believe, in all quarters of the House, and Bills to remedy an admitted grievance have been introduced on both sides. The Government, therefore, to meet the general desire of the House for legislation, have decided to introduce, and I hope with the help of all parties, to pass into law a Bill to place the tenant of a council in as good a position as the tenant of a private landlord.
The Bill is a short one of only two clauses, and I will briefly state its provisions. The Bill provides that in all cases where the council, or the landlord at the written request of the council, terminates a tenancy by notice to quit, compensation shall be paid to the tenant by the council

2101
in a similar manner to that provided by Section 11 of the Agricultural Holdings Act, 1908, except that Sub-sections (b) and (c) of that Section are omitted. Sub-section (b) is not consistent with Sub-section (3) of the Bill, which provides for compensation if notice to quit was given before the commencement of the Amending Act, and Subsection (c) limits compensation to a living tenant and excludes the representatives of a, deceased tenant. There seems to be no reason in this Bill for such a limitation, and it is left out therefore. Sub-section (2) of the Bill provides that the Board of Agriculture shall repay to a council all compensation payable by them to the disturbed tenant. Where there has been no arbitration, and the parties have agreed between themselves as to the amount of compensation, it is provided that the Board of Agriculture shall have a discretionary power to pay only such expenses as seem reasonable to the Board. While I think it is very unlikely that it will be necessary for the Board to use that discretion, the House will probably agree that it is very proper that there should be some provision of this kind in order to guard the expenditure of public money for this purpose. Further, the Board will have power to repay to the county council any expense reasonably incurred by them, such as valuation fees and costs of arbitration. The last, but not the least important provision in the Bill, is that the compensation repayable by the Board of Agriculture shall be out of the Small Holdings Account, The reason why this repayment to a council is to be out of the Small Holdings Account is that if the county council had itself to pay compensation to a disturbed tenant, one of two things would have to be done. Either the council would have to take the money out of the funds raised for general expenses, with the result that the ratepayers generally would suffer, as the rates would be increased; or, on the other hand, it would be necessary to increase the rent of the small holder. I think the House will agree that in the interest of the extension of small holdings, it is not desirable that either of these contingencies should arise. I beg to move.
Question put, and agreed to.
Bill ordered to be brought in by Sir Edward Strachey and Mr. Harcourt. Presented accordingly, and read the first time. (To be read a second time upon Monday next.)

WAYS AND MEANS.

  BUDGET (1909–10) RESOLUTIONS.
  [PROGRESS, 19TH APRIL.]
  Considered in Committee.
  [Mr. EMMOTT in the Chair.]
  (In the Committee.)

GROUP (1) LAND TAXES.

  (1) LAND VALUE DUTIES.
  Question again proposed:
  That as from the thirtieth day of April, nineteen hundred and nine, the following duties be charged in respect of land:—

  (i.) A duty on any increment value accruing after the said date at the rate of one pound for every full five pounds of that value, the duty to be taken on the occasion of the transfer, or the grant of a lease of the land, and on the occasion of the death of any person where the property passing on his death comprises any such land, and in the case of land belonging to a body corporate or unincorporate on such periodical occasions as Parliament may determine;

  (ii.) A duty on the value of any benefit accruing to a lessor by reason of the determination of a lease at the rate of one pound for every ten pounds of that value;

  (iii.) An annual duty in respect of the capital site value of land which has not been developed for building or other purposes at the rate of one halfpenny for every pound of that value.

  (2) MINERAL RIGHTS DUTY.
  That there shall be charged for the financial year ending the thirty-first day of March, nineteen hundred and ten, and every subsequent financial year, on the rental value of all rights to work minerals and of all mineral wayleaves, a duty at the rate in each case of one shilling for every twenty shillings of that rental value.
  The rental value to be taken to be—

  (a) Where the right to work the minerals is the subject of a mining lease, the amount of rent paid by the working lessee in the last working year in respect of that right; and

  2103

  (b) Where minerals are being worked by the proprietor thereof, the amount which is determined by the Commissioners of Inland Revenue to be the sum which would have been received as the rent by the proprietor in the last working year if the right to work the minerals had been let and the minerals had been worked to the same extent and in the same manner as they have been worked by the proprietor in that year; and

  (c) In the case of a mineral wayleave, the amount of rent paid by the working lessee in the last working year in respect of the wayleave.

  (3) INCREMENT VALUE DUTY ON MINERALS.
  That any duty charged on the increment value of minerals which are comprised in a mining lease or are being worked shall be charged annually, and the increment value shall be taken to be the sum by which in each year the rental value of the minerals exceeds the annual equivalent of the original capital value of the minerals, or the capital value of the minerals on the last preceding occasion on which Increment Value Duty has been collected.—[Chancellor of the Exchequer.]
  4.0 P.M.
  Mr. DILLON: When I returned to this House after a somewhat prolonged absence I found the House engaged in a prolonged Debate on the question of bargain and private interviews between Ministers and private Members. The Leader of the Opposition, in a speech of singular eloquence and subtlety, was at the moment engaged in proving to the House and, I suppose, to the country, that a transaction of a highly discreditable character had taken place between the Prime Minister and the hon. and learned Member for Waterford, in which the Prime Minister had come off second best, and the hon. Member for Waterford and the Irish party were on top. But when the Leader of the Opposition sat down up rose the hon. and learned Member for North Louth (Mr. T. M. Healy), who declared that the Prime Minister had ascertained the weight to an ounce of the hon. Member for Waterford, had sized him up, had planted his foot upon his neck, and was now engaged in the operation of reducing him to pulp or powder—a task which I do not think the Prime Minister has ever undertaken against any individual, either opponent or supporter. Then the Debate was wound up by the right hon. Member for East Worcestershire (Mr. Austen Chamberlain).
  2104
  who in a few sentences of intense passion, declared that in his opinion there was no bargain, because the Prime Minister had not the courage to make one, that he had simply taken his orders from the hon. Member for Waterford, and, like an obedient slave, had obeyed them without making any bargain at all. Do not hon. Members see that there is a slight inconsistency between these statements'? In my opinion, a more futile and preposterous Debate was never engaged in by this House. One fact, and one fact alone, to a somewhat detached spectator, such as I was upon that occasion, was perfectly manifest, namely, that the Members of the Tory party and the Friends of the hon. Member for North Louth were exceedingly angry because the Members of the Nationalist party and the Members of the Liberal party saw their way to co-operate in a policy having for its object the advancement of the liberty of the democracy of Ireland and England alike. Really I do not see anything in that to be ashamed of. I believe, on the contrary, that what took place will be the cause of genuine rejoicing to every true friend of liberty in Great Britain and Ireland. There was a great deal of talk about bargains. As a matter of fact, there was no bargain; but I am not one of those who think that political bargaining is discreditable. On the contrary, I think we are here for the purpose of political bargaining. So long as the bargain is made in the interests of one's country and not in one's own interests I do not think that any party ought to be ashamed of political bargaining; still less, a small party like ours, who can never hope or desire to obtain political office in this country. How can we hope to serve the cause of Ireland in this House if not by political bargaining? The only thing I regret in the course of recent transactions is that there was not a political bargain made between the Irish party and the Liberal party at a much earlier stage: [An HON. MEMBER: "Then it was made?"] I said there was no bargain. I point to the authority of the right hon. Gentleman the Member for East Worcestershire (Mr. Austen Chamberlain), who declared there was no bargain. As a matter of fact, it is notorious there was no bargain. When the Irish party met the other day to consider the situation they were as free as air. They were in no way tied. It was open to the Irish party, when they met' last Monday, to decide to vote against

  2105
  this Budget and against the Government. Where, then, does the bargain come in? I am not unsupported in this contention. I am supported by the hon. Gentleman the Member for North Louth (Mr. T. M. Healy). It was his chief complaint. The right hon. Gentleman the Member for East Worcestershire said there was no bargain: that the Prime Minister had not the courage to make a bargain. I agree with the hon. Gentleman the Member for North Louth. I am sorry that there was no bargain. Again, as regards these private interviews between Ministers and others. The Prime Minister made a speech the other day at Oxford, I think. It was a very frank speech. In it the right hon. Gentleman said:—
  " He deeply regretted that he was not at the head of a homogeneous majority in the House of Commons.''
  That was a very frank and manly statement, and perfectly natural. Of course, it is far easier for the Prime Minister, as the Leader of a great party, if he is at the head of a homogeneous majority. It simplifies his task. But the right hon. Gentleman manfully recognised in that speech that he was not at the head of a homogeneous majority, and that if he was going to carry on the Government of this country it would only be by setting up a mutual confidence and a mutual understanding. That has been made the subject of a great deal of taunt from above the Gangway. Hon. Members seem to forget that not very long ago—there are men in this House who will remember it—the second Government of Lord Salisbury adopted this method. The Government of 1886, which last till 1892, was based on a coalition. It was a great and powerful Government. It was composed of a coalition of two absolutely independent parties, with separate leaders and separate party organisations. So absolute was the separation that the Leader of one of the parties could have turned out the Government at any time. But hon. Gentlemen sat upon these benches side by side. Does anybody suppose for a single moment that Lord Salisbury took one step or decided upon a single matter without consulting the right hon. Gentleman the Member for West Birmingham? In the same sense as has been suggested was not the right hon. Gentleman the Member for West Birmingham the master? Hon. Members above the Gangway—those certainly who remember those days—did not think any less of that Government. It was a strong Government. It lasted for six years. It was strong enough to destroy the Constitution of Ireland—
  2106
  and perhaps the coalition at present may provide a strong enough Government to right that.
  I have lived in many countries and seen something of politics in other countries, and you have bargains made. Men make bargains for their country, and men make bargains for themselves. I am not quite sure that this House is entirely free from the latter kind of bargaining. At all events it cannot be said—and I have been in this House for thirty years—that the Irish party have even been successfully accused of making in the true sense of the word a corrupt bargain. We have been approached more than once. Offers have been made to us in the course of these recent Debates. They are very interesting. I was reading the other day a leading article in the "Morning Post," which is a very important paper—at least it is in my opinion, for it speaks for a great body of Unionist opinion. What does that paper say in regard to this matter? It is really rather interesting, when the Irish are represented as rebels and dynamitards whom no British Minister would deal with at all Said the "Morning Post" of 28th March:—
  "The Nationalists have it in their power to decide whether the taxation of Ireland shall now be increased by anything between £500,000 and £2,0 0,000 a year— to take the extreme estimate of Mr. Lloyd-George's new taxation—or reduced by a corresponding amount through the transfer of taxation to imported food of a kind which Ireland produces for home consumption and does not have to buy."
  That is a very important offer. As I read it, it means an offer of £4,000,000 per year—supposing this basis of £2,000,000 added taxation to Ireland, which was accepted by the "Morning Post" to be correct. If that offer were made to us by the responsible leaders of the Tory party, of course we should be bound to consider it. I do not know whether such an offer has been contemplated. Responsible leaders of the Tory party have not approached us. They have offered nothing to us, or we would be bound to consider it. Personally I, as a Home Ruler, would refuse it, because, even though that be a very considerable mess of pottage— £4,000,000 a year to a country like Ireland, which has been over taxed—I would not barter away our chance of liberty. Because the "Morning Post" goes on to intimate that we should make up our mind to abandon Home Rule and definitely settle down as a part of the United Kingdom under the present system. I would not accept that offer. I can quite understand Irishmen saying, "Well, it is a great offer to a poor country

  2107
  like Ireland," because you must always remember that £4,000,000 a year to Ireland is equal proportionately to £100,000,000 to a country like Great Britain—and it is a mighty bribe ! I can understand an Irish leader saying, "This is a very big offer, and if the Tory party consider it worth while to buy up the Home Rule movement by the offer of £4,000,000 a year, then I shall accept." So far as I am concerned I do not see anything discreditable in an Irish leader considering that. 1 can conceive an Irish leader taking the view that I have indicated. I certainly would not lake it. I have so much faith in the virtue of home government and liberty that even for that bribe I would not sell the prospect of liberty. Even on the basis named, according to my idea, there would be no dishonour in that bargain so long as none of the £4,000,000 went into our private pockets. It would be a bargain that the Irish party would be perfectly entitled to consider and refer to the Irish people for consideration. The "Morning Post" goes on to say—they go into figures:—
  " Take the single item of dairy produce. According to figures lately given in a Free Trade contemporary, a duty of u per cent, on the foreign supply imported into the United Kingdom, and of 2½ per cent, on the Colonial supply, would yield £1,650,000 of revenue, practically none of which would be paid by Ireland. Ireland exports to Great Britain over £4,000,000 of dairy produce, and under the operation of the 5 per cent, preference might soon export more.''
  They go on to point out that the 5 per cent, duty upon dairy produce would, of course, apply to, the British Colonies as well as to foreign countries. From that statement, what they offer us is that by this bargain our taxation is to be reduced by making the English consumer pay 5 per cent, more for his dairy produce than he now pays. That would not induce me to abandon the cause of Home Rule. But I repeat again that I see nothing to be ashamed of in political bargaining made by an Irish leader so far as these bargains concern the interests of the Irish people. And I deeply regret that at an earlier stage in these proceedings we were not able to enter into a closer bond of understanding and bargaining with the Government for the pursuit of a policy, the main dominant policy of the Liberal party, with which we are entirely agreed.
  Let me turn for a moment to the Budget and our attitude towards it. This has been continually misrepresented in this House. As originally introduced the Budget undoubtedly in many of its clauses
  2108
  was most unjust to Ireland. The hon. Gentleman the Member for North-East Cork in his speech last night said that in his opinion "the Budget in most of its clauses was drawn with the malignant purpose of hitting Ireland "—that is the Budget as it was originally introduced. I myself on the Second Reading expressed a directly opposite view. I do not believe that any such purpose entered into the minds of Ministers. I believe, on the contrary, as we then stated, and as the Chancellor of the Exchequer in the course of Debate asseverated, that in drafting the Budget his mind was entirely occupied with the conditions of Great Britain, the country from which he expected by far the greater amount of his money. He did not advert—that is the usual ground of our complaint—'to the fact that a Budget which might be conceivably perfectly fair to Great Britain might hit Ireland most cruelly, because Ireland is a country economically different in all its details to Great Britain—more so perhaps than any other country in Western Europe. Therefore, if you draft a Budget based upon the different characteristics, economic, social, c and industrial of the two different countries, you are always certain to inflict a gross injustice upon Ireland.
  What is our attitude towards the Budget? From the beginning we said that even in its original form, as regards its general purpose and its general scheme, we were not opposed to it; but as regards many of its clauses, it hit Ireland with intolerable injustice. We brought these matters under the attention of the House and the Governmnt last year. The Government were able to vote us down by a majority of 150. I must point to the fact that we succeeded in obtaining from the Government by force of argument and long discussion concessions which removed at least three-fourths of the grievances of which we complained. I will have a word to say about that in a moment. Then came the Third Reading of the Budget. We abstained from voting by an overwhelming vote of the Irish party, and we decided to abstain from voting against the Third Reading for two reasons. In the first place, because, as I have said, we have succeeded in the course of discussion in removing the greatest grievances of which we complained, and we thought that some recognition was due to the Government for the way in which they had acted to us in Committee.

  2109
  In the second place, the stronger reason why we abstained from voting on the Third Reading was, as has already been stated by the Chairman of the party, because a dominant issue had risen, so vital to the question at present of Home Rule for Ireland, and we saw the shadow of this great conflict between the Commons and the Lords might bring Home Rule within our grasp. We therefore decided not to take part with the Lords against the Commons in the approaching struggle.
  Now these were the two reasons upon which we decided not to vote against the Third Reading of the Budget after it had passed through its Committee stage and Report stage in this House. That was our attitude towards it. We said—and our position was perfectly accurately described by the Prime Minister on Monday night—we did not object to the Budget as a whole. On the contrary, as a whole we thought it a fair democratic Budget, but to certain clauses of it we took the strongest possible objection, and we protested against certain provisions, which we still hold worked unfairly towards Ireland. Let me say a word, first, as to the provisions of which we still complain, and then as to the question of concessions. We hold, at least I personally hold, that the concessions we were seeking are, as regards the main structure of the Budget and its eventual effect, insignificant, although vitally important to certan limited interests and classes in Ireland. They have been misrepresented, I think, with deadly effect as concessions specially in favour of Ireland and not applying to Great Britain. That is not true. As regards nine-tenths of the concessions for which we were anxious, they were concessions that would apply equally over the whole of the three Kingdoms. There were alterations in respect of certain provisions which, like those we had got altered last autumn owing to the different financial and economic conditions of the two countries, undoubtedly pressed upon Ireland, and I hold and still hold—it is my own opinion —that these concessions, even under the very peculiar circumstances under which this Budget of last year is now being passed, might have been made without exciting any undue conflict, because I think we would have been able to show so strong a case, and to show that there were not special exemptions in favour of Ireland but in favour of the whole country, and which would remove from the Budget certain blots and provisions which inflict
  2110
  grievous injury upon Ireland without altering substantially or radically the framework of the Budget machinery or of its principles.
  The hon. Member for Cork City (Mr. William O'Brien) delivered a speech recently about which a great deal has been said. I do not intend to refer to it for more than a sentence or two. The hon. Member declared the Government were prepared to exempt Ireland altogether from the Budget, and also to restore the finances of the Wyndham Act, in which he was specially interested, which would cost at least £500,000 or £600,000 a year. I think the delivery of that speech rendered it absolutely impossible for the Government to give us any further concessions. I still hold, and feel perfectly confident, that our concessions for which we asked are so reasonable that when the Budget of next year comes to be introduced, whoever is in power—[An HON. MEMBER: "IS this a bargain?"]. There is no bargain; I wish there was. [An HON. MEMBER: "An understanding."] It would be a very excellent understanding; I should not be ashamed of it. But I was going to say that the concessions which we asked for whichever Government is in power next year we shall succeed in obtaining. Somebody said, I think the hon. Member for North-East Cork, when we were speaking of next year's Budget, "When will that be?" And a voice answered, "After the House of Lords is abolished." But the Budget of this year must be introduced, the Government must be carried on, and no matter what happens at the next General Election, and it would be a wise man who could tell, I have a shrewd suspicion, indeed I have a confident hope, that no-matter what may be the fortunes of the next election, so far as British parties are concerned the Irish party will have a very considerable voice in the next Parliament. I care not which party gets into power at the next election, the Irish party will have a considerable voice, and I think we will be able to get our concessions; at any rate we shall be able to bargain. It will not be necessary, nor would it be tolerable, that the next Budget should be carried through under the closure—in the circumstances that may be both necessary and desirable now—and therefore we would be able to put forward our claims for the concessions which we consider just to Ireland, and I have such confidence in the strength of our case that I think we shall get these concessions. One thing that has

  2111
  astonished me during the last few days is the extraordinary change that has come over the Tory party during the past few weeks. For the last two months they have been clamouring every night for the Budget. Now they have got the Budget, and they do not seem to be entirely happy. It seems to me to be rather hard to please them. When the Budget was held back they attacked the Government; now that the Budget is to be passed they do not seem happy.
  I turn now to the speech of the hon. Member for North-East Cork (Mr. Maurice Healy.) The hon. Member last night delivered a most powerful attack upon the Budget. He represented himself—he was in a humble vein—as an extremely incapable man. I rather quarrel with the hon. Member's description of himself. I think he is an extremely capable man and one of the best experts in Ireland upon this subject. But I think that that makes the character of his speech all the more inexcusable, for I never heard a speech in this House that more grossly misrepresented the subject. I am very glad that the hon. Member addressed the House upon this question of the Budget, because he gave hon. Members in every part of the House a specimen, and a good specimen, of the class of oratory with which certain parts of Ireland have been deluged in the last six months—arguments which have been supported by various powerful interests, including the landlords and the distillers and others of that class. The hon. Member commenced by complaining bitterly that the hon. and learned Member for Waterford (Mr. John Redmond) did not address the House in the course of this Debate. But when the hon. and learned Member for Waterford does address the House his utterances are not accepted with enthusiasm or support in the quarter in which the hon. Member for North-East Cork sits. He went on to say that the Budget was drafted in most of its clauses with the deliberate and malignant purpose of hitting Ireland, and he proceeded to analyse the Budget for the purpose of illustrating that proposition. He first alluded to what I will call the two-million theory. He said that the Budget was inflicting an additional burden upon Ireland of £2,000,000 a year. He was a little more cautious in bringing out that proposition in the House where he knew he could be dealt with than in the freer air of Irish platforms. We
  2112
  are charged with relying upon official figures. In dealing with these matters you must rely to some extent on official figures, because you have nothing else. But orators like the hon. Member for North-East Cork have a contempt for figures. They do not need to discuss figures. They take some good round solid substantial sum, and they hurl it at the heads of their audience; £2,000,000 a year sounds well, but I never saw any of these gentlemen whom I may describe as the £2,000,000 a year school give any figures to support their contention.
  I assert that the Budget as it originally stood would have laid upon Ireland an additional burden of £540,000 a year. As it now turns out, owing to the failure of the Spirit Duties and other matters the actual additional load placed upon Ireland by this Budget will be considerably under £500,000 a year. The hon. Member for North-East Cork spoke in scornful accents of Irish Members whom he described as helping the Chancellor of the Exchequer when they ought to be helping Ireland. I can never understand, and can never accept the proposition that you are helping Ireland in matters of this character by making ridiculous and preposterous statements, nor will I ever understand that you are helping Ireland by hurling baseless and cruel charges against men who have been lifelong and faithful friends of Ireland, while you cover with adulation the lifelong enemies of Ireland. We have a strong case against England on this question of over-taxation, but in my opinion —I state it for what it is worth— the worst enemies of our cause are those who are the propagators of these preposterous and exaggerated statements. This Budget, in my opinion, passing as it now will pass, will lay upon Ireland the charge this year of about £480,000.
  The CHANCELLOR of the EX-CHEQUER (Mr. Lloyd-George): £435,000.
  Mr. DILLON: I quite agree that Treasury figures should be scrutinised, and I ask the right hon. Gentleman at the earliest possible moment to lay upon the Table of the House a White Paper containing the Treasury estimates of these figures, showing exactly what Ireland is paying. Then let these gentlemen who talk about £2,000,000 produce their calculations to show that the Budget does in fact lay a burden of £2,000,000 a year upon Ireland. That is a fair challenge, and let them face the Irish people upon the issue, and if they are proved to be wrong I hope

  2113
  they will withdraw and apologise. That I think is perfectly fair.
  Let me take up one or two particulars with which the hon. Member for North-East Cork dealt in order to prove his charge that the Government had a malignant purpose in drafting certain clauses of this Budget. He dealt, I think, with four points in this long Budget. He dealt first of all with the taxes upon agricultural land, Death Duties, Stamp Duties, and the Whisky Tax. I am one of those who believe still, notwithstanding the figures of the hon. Member for North-East Cork—1 admit he is a great expert upon the matter—that the wording of the Budget as it originally stood does exempt agricultural land. When hon. Members above the Gangway are challenged on this point they begin to talk about cabbage gardens in the centre of the City. Their idea applies to about twenty or thirty acres of land in a city, upon which cabbages have been planted, and they call that agricultural land; but that is not our view. We mean the genuine farmer. I quite agree that if there is a shadow of a doubt about the exclusion of agricultural land the words should be made clear. We do know, however, that the intention of the Government was never questioned, and they have now put in words to make the meaning clear. But whether the words proposed are effective or not, the intention of the Government in putting them in is beyond all question. Surely, when we come to this provision the learned lawyers in the House will be able to frame words which do not include cabbage gardens in the city, but which will nevertheless carry out the intention of the Government. What was the view taken in Ireland upon this subject. It was that if a farm was put up for auction—I may say that small farms in Ireland are sold for what rational men would call far above their agricultural value—Increment Duty might be charged on all the value obtained by the small farmer which was above the fair price. The words of the Act are, "If sold at the time in open market."
  Viscount HELMSLEY: Supposing it was undervalued?
  Mr. DILLON: I am dealing with what was the intention of the Government, and this is quite clear. Let me now deal with the Death Duties. The hon. Member for North-East Cork on this point said:—
  " Hitherto the Irish tenant farmer has paid practically no Death Duties."
  2114
  The hon. Member went on to explain what the effect of the Budget would be, and the substance of his statement was that after the passing of this measure the Government would get from Irish land a double Death Duty—one from the landlord and another from the tenant, while the English tenant would be let off scot-free. The hon. Member then went on and gave the impression to the House that the protection given to the Irish tenant by the case of the Attorney-General versus Robinson was abrogated by this Bill, and that in future the Irish tenant farmer would be in a worse postion under this Budget than the English tenant farmer, and that a double Death Duty would be exacted from Irish land. Now there is not a shadow of foundation for that statement, because the law is left unchanged by this Bill, and all the protection given to the Irish tenant farmer by the Attorney-General versus Robinson is still reserved to them. How can the hon. Member for North-East Cork stand on that statement? The hon. Member makes a long charge, and says all he wants is equal justice, and he leaves the House under the impression that a great injustice is intended to be done by an alteration of the law in this respect, when, as a matter of fact, the law has not been in the least altered, the Government having met that point by Amendments inserted in the Budget last year. When we come to examine further the provisions of Clause 61 of the Finance Bill we find that a great majority of the Irish farmers, and some of the poorest of them, will be placed in a much better position as regards the Death Duties by this Budget than they were before. Is the method adopted by the hon. Member a tolerable way of conducting Debate in this House? I put that question to any hon. Member who listened to his speech last night. Most skilfully he gave the impression that this Budget was going to inflict an enormous injustice on Irish farmers as a whole. I maintain that, so far as the tenant farmer of Ireland is concerned on this point, he is left untouched by the Budget, and the purchasing farmers will get substantial relief from this Budget.
  Now I turn to the Stamp Duties. The hon. and learned Member for North-East Cork drew an extraordinary and vivid picture of the injustice that would be inflicted on Ireland by the Stamp Duties. He said all we want and ask for is that there should be equal justice done between the Irish and the English as regards the Stamp Duties, and he went on to state

  2115
  that this Budget had introduced an intolerable injustice in regard to the Stamp Duty to the Irish farmer who had bought his holding.
  Mr. MAURICE HEALY: I said it doubled it.
  Mr. DILLON: The hon. and learned Member never alluded to that at all. What he complained of was that the Budget introduced a principle of gross injustice as regards the Stamp Duties in relation to purchase agreements in Ireland. He said that hitherto the tenant who sold his farm only paid Stamp Duty on the money he received as the price of his farm, and that under this Act he will pay not only Stamp Duty on the money he received, but he will also be obliged to pay Stamp Duty on his unpaid mortgage due to the Land Commission. That, Sir, has been the law in Ireland for years, and the Budget has nothing whatever to do with that.
  Mr. MAURICE HEALY: I am sure the hon. Member will not object to my interrupting him. My point was that the effect of land purchase in Ireland had already converted nearly half that country into tenant purchasers, and in the case of those tenant purchasers they had to pay on the sale of their holdings, and not merely on the purchase money, but also on the mortgage due to the Land Commission, and I stated that the effect of this Budget will be to double that injustice.
  Mr. DILLON: The hon. and learned Member did not refer to the doubling of the Stamp Duty at all. What he said was:—
  " We all know that over half the area of Ireland the landed property is now held by tenant farmers, each of whom holds his farm subject to a substantial mortgage payable to the Irish Exchequer. Hitherto when an Irish tenant sold his farm, Death Duty was paid on the money got for the farm."
  Now that statement is false.
  Mr. MAURICE HEALY: But I drew a distinction between tenant and tenant purchaser.
  Mr. DILLON: You never mentioned the question of the doubling of the Stamp Duty. What the hon. Member said was that before that the tenant paid on the money he paid for his farm, and that now under this Act he would have to pay not only on the money he got when it was sold, but also on the mortgage. The hon. and learned Member seems to forget that when
  2116
  he was speaking on this very question on 18th May he used the following words, and I have looked up the reference:—
  "The complaint we make on this Resolution is not the doubling of the Stamp Duty. If the Stamp Duty is to be doubled in England, we apprehend that we cannot make any fair complaint if it is doubled also in Ireland.''
  I again assert that the hon. and learned Member for North-East Cork never uttered a word last night about doubling the Stamp Duty. I know this, because I sat and listened carefully and critically to his speech last night. What he complained of was that the Budget was going to bring into the Stamp Tax the mortgage due to the Land Commission. Now the Budget has no influence on that matter whatever, and it is an old grievance which we complained of long before the Budget was introduced.
  Mr. MAURICE HEALY: That doubles the grievance.
  Mr. DILLON: That was not his complaint last night, although it may be his complaint now, when he is hedged and driven into a corner. Last night he never said anything at all about a double grievance, and this is only an example of the kind of oratory which has been used to poison public opinion in Ireland. We are not afraid to debate this question either before our Constituencies in Ireland or before this House, nor are we afraid of the policy we have adopted. I, myself, would have been willing to make even larger sacrifices rather than divide the democracies of the two countries, once we were satisfied that this was going to be a real fight. I, for one, am prepared to maintain on any platform in Ireland that the grievances, real as they are, inflicted upon Ireland by some of the clauses of this Budget, have for political purposes been grossly, monstrously, and wickedly exaggerated.
  Mr. J. H. CAMPBELL: I am sure the rest of the Committee will share with me the pleasure we feel at the return of the hon. Member for East Mayo to the House of Commons. I do not think, however, that I can compliment him upon the clearness of his utterances in regard to this question of the bargain. In the first place, he suggests that there has Been no bargain, and then he went on immediately to express his great regret that the bargain had not been struck at an earlier period.
  Mr. DILLON: A bargain.
  Mr. J. H. CAMPBELL: That is not what he said. I do not intend to follow the hon. Member in the references he has made to his colleagues who represent the City of Cork and a portion of the county of Cork. Those hon. Members are perfectly well able to take care of themselves, and I am not concerned to interfere in their disputes. I am, however, anxious to draw the attention of the Committee to an important matter which vitally affects the interests of Ireland—I allude to the position which agricultural land is going to occupy under this Budget both in Ireland and in the rest of the United Kingdom. The Prime Minister, in his speech on Monday night, used the following words:—
  " I confess, I think the plain language of the Bill itself, and the repeated declarations of Members of the Government—undoubtedly fears and anxieties were expressed in the course of the General Election, not only in Ireland, but in Great Britain, as to whether a rise in the value of purely agricultural land might not under some conditions, become subject to Increment Duty. No doubt a great man3' hon. Members opposite have used that argument. Possibly some have even secured votes, for aught I know, and may even have won their present seats by suggesting to the electorate that this was the case."
  I have no doubt that some hon. Members hold their seats in this House of Commons as the result of false pretences. I have no doubt whatever about that. We would not have had all these fictions about the big loaf and old age pensions unless it was thought that they would have some effect, and I assume they were found just as useful at the last election as were the fictions about Chinese slavery at the previous election. Let us see what exactly was the controversy in Ireland over this question, and on which side the truth lies, and who was right. The right hon. Gentleman has not exactly stated it as it arose, because he has introduced these words:—
  "The controversy was as to whether a rise in the value of purely agricultural land, might not under some conditions become subject to the Increment Duty."
  He has introduced the word "purely" there. I will show later on, from the utterances of the Chancellor of the Exchequer, that he stated in this House, beyond the shadow of a possibility of contradiction, that even in the case of purely agricultural land there were a number of provisions under which, if its value as purely agricultural land was increased, that increased value would have to pay Increment Duty. I will deal with that later on; it is not the issue now.
  2118
  Let me state how the controversy arose. There were three ways in which this question of the exemption of agricultural land might have been dealt with in this Budget. It might have been dealt with by the simple exclusion of all agricultural land. Amendments were moved from this side of the House with a view of obtaining the insertion of a provision to that effect, but the Chancellor of the Exchequer could not see his way to accept it. I am not quarrelling with that now. Another method would have been to insert a provision that agricultural land, so long as it was used for purely agricultural purposes should be exempt from Increment Duty. That also was suggested and argued, but the right hon. Gentleman declined to accept it. The only remaining method by which it could be done was the one adopted by the Chancellor of the Exchequer, namely, to exclude from this Increment Duty the agriculture value of agricultural land, but not the agricultural land itself. The result is that agricultural land in respect of every element and every ingredient, whether present or prospective, over and above the agricultural value, becomes subject to Increment Duty. That is perfectly clear on the express language of the Bill itself, and I will show in a few minutes that it is borne out by the declarations of responsible Ministers.
  What was the position taken up by the lion, and learned Member for Waterford (Mr. John Redmond) and his colleagues in Ireland upon this point? Did they tell the farmers of Ireland that their agricultural land was to be subject to Increment Duty in respect of every ingredient other than its agricultural value? No, they did not. This is what they told the farmers of Ireland, and it was upon this statement that the controversy arose which has been finally disposed of against the hon. and learned Gentleman by the statement of the Prime Minister made in this House en Monday evening. Speaking in the City of Dublin, a short time after the close of last Session, and summing-up the so-called victories of his party in connection with this Budget of last Session, the hon. and learned Gentleman claimed two main and substantial concessions. His first claim was that he had obtained a relief for Irish publicans in the matter of the Licence Duties, and I think the hon. Member for East Mayo (Mr. Dillon) must have forgotten that when he said that they had claimed and received no concession that was not applicable or was not extended over the entire United Kingdom.
  Mr. DILLON: I never said that at all. What I said was that most of the concessions we were claiming—I did not say all —extended to the United Kingdom.
  Mr. CAMPBELL: I quite fall in with what the hon. Gentleman says, but I understood him to say, not merely the Concessions they were now claiming, but the concessions they had succeeded in obtaining during the course of the Budget discussion last Session. That, however, is a small point. The hon. Gentleman thought it necessary to severely criticise his colleague the hon. and learned Member for North-East Cork (Mr. Maurice Healy) for not having recourse to official figures, but what was the course taken by the hon. and learned Member for Waterford on that occasion? He said:—
  " This concession to Ireland in the matter of publicans' licences is worth in actual money £61.000 a year"
  I wonder where he got that figure, because the Chancellor of the Exchequer, from his seat in this House on 22nd October last year, stated that the total money value of that concesion was £25,000. So much for official figures. The hon. and learned Member for Waterford went on to make this statement, as the result of which the controversy arose at home with regard to agricultural land:—
  "We have succeeded in exempting from the operation of all the Land Taxes all the agricultural land of Ireland. I have seen that statement contradicted. I have seen statements to the contrary made. I say that these statements to the contrary are false. It is an absolute fact that all agricultural land is excluded from Unearned Increment, and from all other Land Taxes."
  I observe that hon. Members below the Gang-way are very faint in their cheers, but I will demonstrate to them that that statement of the hon. and learned Member was absolutely incorrect, and I will prove it out of the lips of the Chancellor of the Exchequer himself. Let there be no mistake as to what the assertion was. It was that agricultural land, as such, was exempt from all the Land Taxes, the true fact being that agricultural land, as such, was not exempt, but only its agricultural value; and, in respect of every other incident connected with agricultural land and every other ingredient in it, it was included in the Budget for the purpose of the Increment Duty. The hon. Member for East Mayo seems to be under the delusion that the result of the definition, or the exemption of the agricultural value of agricultural land, is to exclude from the Increment Duty any additional price that agricultural land
  2120
  fetches by reason of undue competition. He never made a greater mistake in his life. The Chancellor of the Exchequer has deliberately stated in this House that one of the elements he intended to charge, and which he does charge in respect of Increment Duty under this Budget, is the excessive price resulting from undue competition in the case of small holdings. Let me quote. Speaking in this House on 22nd June last year of the cases in which agricultural land is going to remain subject to Increment Duty, the Chancellor of the Exchequer made the following statement:—
  " One is the case where, owing to artificial reasons over which he has no control, and which cannot possibly he placed to his credit, there is an enhanced value given to his land by the efforts of the community."
  I ask the attention of hon. Gentlemen below the Gangway who uttered that faint cheer a moment ago to this:—
  " I divide these first of all into markets. What does that mean? It means, as I have already explained, generally, that where a town grows in a certain direction with great rapidity naturally land which was far removed from a market suddenly gets, as it were, almost within reach of the market, and the land is, therefore, doubled, trebled, or quadrupled in value. That is a, value that has nothing to do with its normal growth or those fluctuations in prices which I have referred to. It is a value which is created by the community and by those great aggregations of people who have come together."
  What was his next illustration?
  "The second case is where there is a special building" value which is attributable to the same circumstances.
  Now I ask special attention to his third illustration—
  "There is another value which is created in many cases. I am sorry to say, by the demand for small holdings. In some cases the demand for small holdings and allotments have put up the value of land by 100 per cent. I know of a case myself where the demand for allotments put the value of land up 300 per cent. That is not the natural value: it is a purely artificial value, which is created by the action of the community. I think in a case of that kind, a landlord ought to be subject to the same increment as if it had been a purely building value."
  5.0 P.M.
  We have it on the authority of the Prime Minister that the language carries out the express intention of himself and his colleagues, and I should like to know who was right in the controversy in Ireland— the hon. and learned Member for Water-ford, who stated that all agricultural land was excluded from all land taxation, or the hon. Member for the City of Cork (Mr. William O'Brien), and the hon. and learned Member for the East Division of the County of Cork (Mr. Maurice Healy), who stated that the whole agricultural land of Ireland would be subject to the every item of Increment Duty in respect of any value or any ingredient in it over and above its actual agricultural value.

  2121
  But the matter was again put beyond doubt by the statement of the Attorney-General, who, speaking in this House on 10th August, said:—
  " Whenever you get a value over and above your agricultural value, then that is an indication, as fair us any indication that you can get, that the needs of the community in respect of this particular piece of land are now in excess of their needs in respect of that land for merely agricultural purposes… Therefore that is an indication that the time has come for a change in the purpose for which that land is used. ‥ ‥ Undoubtedly it id clear we have proposed to tax value—the value in the market—the saleable value rather than the value which arises from existing use."
  I should have thought that that made the matter absolutely and abundantly clear. Therefore one effect of this Budget, in reference to which the hon. and learned Member for Waterford and his colleagues are not going to raise one finger to save their country, under the Budget is the ordinary case of the farmer who gives a higher price for the farm that lies near to his own. Over and above its agricultural value he pays an additional sum per acre owing to his anxiety and keenness to get it by reason of it running into his own land. I say if there is any meaning in the language of the Chancellor of the Exchequer that farm, in respect of the additional sum paid, will be liable to Increment Duty. The right hon. Gentleman the Prime Minister made it perfectly clear in his statement on Monday night that the additional Amendment he was making to the Budget on this point was not to be taken or intended as any concession. It was merely declaratory of the previous intentions of the Government, and it could not be quoted against him as any departure from the Budget. He seemed rather to plume himself on the fact that, even in this particular, there was to be no departure from the Budget of last year. I want to know whether, having regard to the revelations made in this House last Monday night, it was worth while for the right hon. Gentleman to plume himself so much on the inviolability of this Budget. Had he forgotten that the pen-and-ink result of the negotiations in regard to the Budget was that the right hon. Gentleman the Chancellor of the Exchequer was not prepared to give way in the case of Ireland unless the hon. and learned Member for Waterford and his colleagues would spare him and his Government from the crowning humiliation of swallowing their proud declaration as to the impropriety and impossibility of seeking assurances from the Crown at a certain
  2122
  stage of his administration? I am not going to enter into the merits of the controversy between the Chancellor of the Exchequer and the hon. Member for Cork City (Mr. W. O'Brien). I listened very carefully to the conflicting grounds, if they may be called conflicting, and the only discrepancy I noticed was that while the hon. Gentleman the Member for Cork City said he had read a letter to the Chancellor of the Exchequer, the Chancellor of the Exchequer made what I thought was a rather pettifogging point.
  The CHAIRMAN: I must point out that that has nothing to do with the matter before the Committee.
  Mr. J. H. CAMPBELL: I quite understand that, but I would remind you of what was said in the speech of the hon. Member for East Mayo, to whom I am replying.
  The CHAIRMAN: The hon. Member was not dealing with the discrepancies in the accounts given by the right hon. and hon. Members.
  Mr. J. H. CAMPBELL: Having regard to what did transpire, having regard to the avowals of the hon. and learned Member for Waterford that all these concessions were offered to him long ago, and having regard also to the statement addressed to the American Press by the hon. Member for the Scotland Division of Liverpool that the Irish party had been offered these concessions, I think the time has gone for right hon. Gentlemen opposite to be pluming themselves on their devotion and attachment to every comma in this Budget. What I cannot understand in this connection is the action of the hon. and learned Gentleman the Member for Waterford and his colleagues. They held this Government in the hollow of their hands. They had them on the run, and, so far from its being a case of choosing between alternative bargains, I believe the hon. and learned Gentleman had only to hold out and the Chancellor of the Exchequer would have taken him to the very highest mountain from which he could have surveyed the whole Liberal programme and would have said to him, "All this and more will be yours if you will only give me your seventy votes." The hon. and learned Gentleman has not thought fit to pursue his advantage. He stated in the speech to which the hon. Member for East Mayo referred yesterday his reasons for not dividing against the Budget on the Third Reading last Session. The hon. Member for East Mayo quoted two of

  2123
  those reasons, but he failed, or forgot, to mention the third. The third reason given by the hon. and learned Member for not voting against the Budget on that occasion was that it was quite unnecessary, because, at that time, it was well known that the Budget would be thrown out by the House of Lords. Therefore he has put himself in this position. He was saved, in so far as he and his party were concerned, from deliberately voting for the betrayal of the financial interests of Ireland, and so certainly saved from the infliction of financial injustice on that country by the action of a House whose destruction he now seems bent upon.
  With regard to this question, in which I take the greatest interest, having regard to its application to my own country— and I think it will be admitted, although this question of the exemption of agricultural land is a serious one both for England and for Scotland, there is, perhaps, no part of His Majesty's Dominions in which its importance is greater than in Ireland—I want to say just one word, although I fear it may not be quite in order. I am not going to deal with the proposed addition to the Clause of the Financial Bill, except to say that I fail to understand it. Certainly it does not extend relief to agricultural land. Of course, we have the assurance of the Prime Minister that it is not intended, by the addition, to give any relief that was not covered by or contemplated in the original Finance Bill. We have that most distinct assurance. Let us see what the clause was without this addition. It provided that the Increment Value Duty shall not be charged in respect of agricultural land while that land has no higher value than its value for agricultural purposes. Surely hon. Gentlemen below the Gangway from Ireland can see that that bears out entirely what I have said—that this exemption is in respect of agricultural land solely and only in regard to its agricultural value in the case of thousands and millions of acres throughout Ireland, which by reason of their proximity to a market, or a railway, or a large town, or which through any other cause gets an inherent value over and above its agricultural value, that value is to be subject to the Increment duty. Hon. Gentlemen behind the Government cheer that statement, but hon. Members below the Gangway from Ireland are dumb on the point. To my certain knowledge they have gone throughout the length and breadth of Ireland
  2124
  assuring the Irish farmers that we, who told them that that was the effect of this Budget were entirely mistaken, and that the true solution of the position was this: That under all conditions agricultural land in Ireland, as such, was free, and exempt from any of these duties. Yet it is as clear as anything can be—if, indeed, there is anything clear in this Budget—the one thing that the only exemption agricultural land is given is in respect of its agricultural value, and that every other ingredient and element of valuation, whether present or prospective, is to come within and be made subject to this Increment Duty. I believe in my heart that when the farmers of Ireland understand the position which has been arrived at — namely, that as a result of seventy votes controlled not merely by the hon. and learned Member for Waterford, but controlled by the Chancellor of the Exchequer and the Prime Minister, not a single voice among the seventy has been raised in this House in defence of their interests, and in opposition to an imposition which will ultimately, I believe, crush many of them out of existence. There will be a day of reckoning for the hon. Gentleman and his party.
  The FIRST LORD of the ADMIRALTY (Mr. McKenna): I listened with very great attention to the right hon. and learned Gentleman, but I was not very well able to gather what was the precise purpose of his speech. It seemed to me that if he intended anything it was not to complain of the Budget as it now stands, but to regret that on its first introduction the Budget was something different from what he now appreciates it to be. I am asked what I mean by that. Let me repeat. I did not understand that any criticism which has fallen from the right hon. Gentleman had regard to the Budget as it is now introduced; the whole point of his criticism was that, as originally introduced, there was not that exemption of agricultural land which is now given.
  Mr. J. H. CAMPBELL: I am sure the right hon. Gentleman would not intentionally misrepresent me. I think every Member of the Committee understood that when I called attention to the existing Finance Bill I was pointing out that the proposed exemption leaves the matter exactly where it was, and that under that exemption the only thing exempted is the agricultural value of the land.
  Mr. McKENNA: I quite appreciate the right hon. Gentleman's point, and I am sure he will quite appreciate the natural error into which I think he falls.
  Mr. J. H. CAMPBELL: No.
  Mr. McKENNA: Yes; I think he will. He quoted in support of his case a speech made by my right hon. Friend on 22nd June and a speech made by the Attorney-General on 10th August, but those speeches related not to the Budget as it left this House, or to the Budget that is now introduced, but to a different Budget.
  Mr. PRETYMAN: I am sure the Prime Minister stated that the invariable intention from the first of the Government was to exempt agricultural land.
  Mr. McKENNA: I have not his words by me, but I am sure that the Prime Minister has not referred to anything except to the Budget as it left this House, and when he said that it was the intention of the Government not to tax agricultural land, and that, in his opinion, the Bill did not tax agricultural land, he referred to the Bill after it had passed through Committee. The right hon. Gentleman will surely appreciate the point when I remind him that the speech of my right hon. Friend the Chancellor of the Exchequer referred to the Bill as originally introduced, and in that Bill the exemption as to agricultural land was in the following words:—
  ''And in the case of agricultural land the value of which is due solely to its capacity for agricultural purposes. "
  Mr. J. H. CAMPBELL: Hear, hear. That is even stronger.
  Mr. McKENNA: The right hon. Gentleman cheers that, and no doubt if he had quoted those words he would have commented upon the absence of cheers from the benches opposite; but that was not the Bill which went through the House, that was not the Bill before the right hon. Gentleman. I am not going to leave the right hon. Gentleman on this point until he appreciates it.
  Mr. J. H. CAMPBELL: You will have to take a long time.
  Mr. McKENNA: I rather agree that I may have to take a long time.
  Mr. J. H. CAMPBELL: You must alter your argument.
  Mr. McKENNA: No; my argument will remain the same. I have read the words
  2126
  of the Bill upon which my right hon. Friend the Chancellor of the Exchequer founded his speech on 22nd June and the words to which the speech of the Attorney-General, which has been quoted, also related. The Bill as it passed this House was as follows:—
  " Increment Value Duty shall not be charged in respect of agricultural land while that land has no higher value than its value for agricultural purposes only."
  Mr. J. H. CAMPBELL: I have read every word of that.
  Mr. McKENNA: No, Sir; the right hon. Gentleman is not going to ride off so easily. In support of his explanation of those words he read a speech of my right hon. Friend the Chancellor of the Exchequer made on 22nd June, and from that speech he quoted the reference my right hon. Friend made to propinquity of markets, and he said—quoting a speech of 22nd June, and referring to the speech as relating to the clause of the Bill as it left this House—that the Chancellor of the Exchequer intended to charge Increment Duty on increment value arising from propinquity of markets. My right hon. Friend intended that in his Bill as originally introduced, but not in his Bill as it left the House.
  Mr. J. H. CAMPBELL: What words were excluded?
  Mr. McKENNA: I will come to that in another moment, but I will ask the right hon. Gentleman whether he regards it as fair argument to quote words from a Bill in Parliament, and to explain those words by a reference to a speech which related to a different clause. With regard to the substance of the question, I will put a case to the right hon. Gentleman which will explain to him the difference between the intention of the Government and what he believes to be their intention. Suppose land is let at the rate of £15 an acre, as it very well might be close to a town. I mean agricultural land; and there are cases where close to a town land is let for market gardening purposes alone at £15 an acre.
  Mr. J. H. CAMPBELL: Where?
  Mr. McKENNA: The figure is not material, and I will take £10 if it is wished. Supposing land for market-gardening purposes is let close to a town for £10 an acre. The value of that land at that figure is determined by the value of the agricultural produce which can be raised from it, and that would be £10 an acre, which would be

  2127
  its agricultural value. Supposing that land had let for building purposes at £8 an acre. Then there would be no increment value payable upon it, because inasmuch as the agricultural value is in excess of any other value the exemption of agricultural land sets it free from taxation. Is that first point clear?
  Mr. J. H. CAMPBELL: It was never in doubt.
  Mr. McKENNA: Now suppose some plot of land which is let for £10 an acre for agricultural purposes could, if let for building purposes, be let for £20 an acre. If that land is then sold Increment Value Duty will be payable upon it in respect of of its excess building value. Is there anything unreasonable in that, and is not that complete exemption of agricultural land? [An HON. MEMBER: "No."] The hon. Gentleman well knows, and I may remind him of the point, that the excess is reckoned from the datum line of valuation. You start from the original valuation, and no matter how much the agricultural value of the land may exceed that datum line no Increment Duty will be charged upon it, but if that building value goes up beyond the agricultural datum line the building value is greater than the agricultural value, and then Increment Value Duty will be charged. I appeal to the Committee whether in this explanation by the Government of their intention under the Bill—an intention which they have done their best to carry put in words—it is not manifest that a sincere, and, I believe, an effectual effort, has been made to distinguish between what my hon. Friend the Member for East Mayo (Mr. Dillon) has so correctly called the cabbage garden of the city, and really agricultural land. I do not suppose, if the principle of increment value is once accepted, that any one will deny that the mere fact that valuable land is being used for the purpose of growing cabbages, ought not to exempt the owner from increment value. No one denies that.
  Mr. J. H. CAMPBELL: Except some people in Ireland.
  Mr. McKENNA: I do not think it is denied in Ireland for a moment. The hon. Members who represent Irish constituencies have from their own point of view, and from the public point of view, very rightly endeavoured to see that every precaution is taken in order to exempt
  2128
  genuine agricultural land. That, as the Prime Minister has said, has been the intention of the Government, and they believe still that that intention is sufficiently carried out by the words of the Bill as it stood when it left this House. It is quite true it was not sufficiently guarded by the words of the Bill when originally introduced, but all arguments drawn from the original Bill have no weight or validity now, and it was in the Bill as it left this House. Although, however, we do not think it was necessary, we have been willing to introduce further words which, by way of extra precaution make it manifest that no land which has an agricultural value in excess of the building or any other value shall be chargeable to Increment Duty. I hope the right hon. Gentleman is satisfied that if the building value is in excess of the agricultural value it ought to be charged, and as he agrees to that, he also recognises that where the agricultural value is in excess of the building value, it is not chargeable, and, therefore, agricultural land is now exempted.
  Mr. J. H. CAMPBELL: I said all that.
  Mr. McKENNA: Then I am bound to come back to my original statement that I do not quite see the purport of his speech. Let me turn for a moment to the question of contribution—the whole question of the contribution made by Ireland to this Budget. It has been said, and I think very widely believed in Ireland, that in one way or another Ireland was made to contribute to the extent of £2,000,000 to the total revenue of £12,000,000 or £13,000,000. That has been said and repeated again and again. If that were true I think every Irish Member would be bound to vote against the Budget and to resist the Budget in the most determined manner. If that were true, I do not think even if they got something else in exchange they would be justified in throwing such a burden upon the Irish taxpayer at the present time—a burden which would be out of all proportion to that borne by the British taxpayer, and which certainly on no principle of finance could be justified. If it were true that Ireland is charged to the extent of £2,000,000 the Government would be the first to recognise the great grievance of the unjustifiable burden which would be thereby imposed upon Ireland. But what are the facts? Let us get down to the actual facts. Last year the amount received for the year 1909–10 was approximately £13,000,000 from the

  2129
  whole of the United Kingdom, and so far from the contribution of Ireland being £2,000,000 to that amount, it was not half a million.
  Mr. DILLON: You are supposing now that all the taxes are collected?
  Mr. McKENNA: Assuming that all the taxes in this Budget have been raised and paid, the contribution of Ireland would be not half a million; it would, in fact, be £435,000.
  Mr. J. H. CAMPBELL: How much is included in that estimate of the yield of the 3s. 9d. tax on whisky?
  Mr. McKENNA: I am coming to that. I am dealing now with the revenue raised last year. Assuming that all the taxes had been collected by this Budget, the actual contribution to the total of £13,000,000 raised in the United Kingdom would be £435,000. I think it will be agreed upon all hands that if that figure is correct the burden upon Ireland is not excessive. So far from its being excessive it is a smaller proportion than the existing proportion of the Irish contribution to the total of our revenue. Therefore, for the year 1910, the Irish under this Budget will pay a less percentage than they have ever paid before. In other words, so far from hitting them exceptionally hard it lets them off, that is, for the contribution for last year, assuming the taxes all to have been raised. It is quite true that in that estimate we take the actual amount of whisky on which duty has been paid during the last year, and the Chancellor of the Exchequer has already explained that it would not be safe to take that estimate as likely to be true for future years, because stocks have been reduced to a minimum, and once the controversy over the Budget is settled there is no doubt a larger amount will again be taken out of bond for the re-supply of stocks than was taken last year. But what is the estimated increase of the revenue from Ireland under this head? I notice that the hon. Member (Mr. Maurice Healy) said the final contribution to this Budget from Ireland would be not £435,000, but £760,000 a year.
  Mr. MAURICE HEALY: No; what I said was that the yield from spirits on the basis of consumption in the year previous to this would have been £765,000 if the tax had been increased to 3s. 9d. The figures were taken from an answer by the Secretary to the Treasury.
  Mr. McKENNA: I have not those figures before me.
  Mr. DILLON: Does that not mean the entire year?
  Mr. MAURICE HEALY: Not at all. The amount which would be produced by a 3s. 9d. tax on the basis that the consumption of whisky and spirits was the same as it had been.
  Mr. McKENNA: I should accept without prejudice, for the sake of the argument the figures given by the hon. Member. I have not those figures here, but they certainly strike me as of doubtful value.
  Mr. STEPHEN GWYNN: May I suggest that these figures are calculated not on the total consumption of whisky, but on the production of whisky?
  Mr. MAURICE HEALY: Not at all. That is a most ridiculous statement. If the figures had been taken on the basis of the production of whisky they would be £2,000,000, so the Chancellor of the Exchequer stated. The figures are the figures of the consumption of whisky and spirits, and, if the First Lord of the Admiralty throws doubt on them, they were given last year in this House by his colleague the Secretary to the Treasury.
  Mr. McKENNA: I have not the precise figures or the terms in which the answer was given. I do not contradict anything said by the hon. Gentleman, and, for the sake of the argument, I accept the figures he has given. Although the estimate of the Chancellor of the Exchequer is that next year a larger revenue will be raised from whisky, owing to the depletion of stocks, he does not estimate that there is going to be an increase in the individual consumption of whisky.
  Mr. MAURICE HEALY: The right hon. Gentleman said, in originally discussing the question, that, while no doubt the increase in the tax would temporarily have the effect of lessening the consumption of whisky, that would only happen temporarily, and that ultimately the consumption would go back to its original figure.
  Mr. McKENNA: I know, as a matter of fact, that my right hon. Friend has always anticipated that the effect of the duty would be to reduce the consumption of whisky permanently, and it is common ground that every increase in the duty does reduce the consumption of alcohol.

  2131
  We know that the effect of the duty has been to reduce the consumption of alcohol in Ireland. It may be said that Ireland in that way is a sufferer under the Budget, and that some of the Irish people who would like to have more whisky have to deny themselves, but I do not think that is a suffering which is put forward in this House as a ground for compensation. The only point we are considering is whether the Irish are unduly charged under the Budget either last year or in future years. I have shown that last year it will be £435,000 out of approximately £13,000,000. In future years I have agreed with the hon. Gentleman that Ireland will pay a larger amount on account of the larger payment in respect of whisky, because the duty-paid stocks have been reduced, and they will have to be made good again. But our estimate of that increase of revenue from Ireland is well under £100,000, and even if it amounted to such a sum as £100,000, which the Chancellor of the Exchequer does not expect, the proportion of the revenue from Ireland would not be above the average proportion of revenue paid by Ireland at present.
  Mr. MAURICE HEALY: Is it alleged that the Chancellor of the Exchequer raised the Whisky Tax by 3s. 9d. with the object of reducing the revenue from Ireland by £200,000?
  Mr. McKENNA: No. The hon. Gentleman has put to me a question of motive. We axe dealing now with the facts as to the revenue raised by the Whisky Tax.
  Mr. MAURICE HEALY: The right hon. Gentleman is not dealing with facts, but with estimates—a very different thing.
  Mr. McKENNA: I am dealing with the estimates of facts. It is common ground that the effect of an increased duty is to reduce consumption. I do not think there is very much point in the hon. Member's question.
  Mr. MAURICE HEALY: It will reduce consumption; it will not reduce revenue
  Mr. McKENNA: Assuming that the present decline, and no more than the present decline, in the consumption of whisky continues, Ireland, as I have said, will in future years not bear any burden under this Budget in excess of the proportion, which she has already been bearing in previous years. On the contrary, she will still continue to bear a less burden,
  2132
  and each year it will be a diminishing proportion which Ireland will have to pay.
  Mr. KILBRIDE: What about the hands thrown out of employment in distilleries and breweries?
  Mr. McKENNA: I am endeavouring to deal with the argument that this Budget is costing the Irish taxpayers £2,000,000, and I am endeavouring to show that, so far from that being true, for last year the cost of the Budget for Ireland was well under £450,000, and we do not anticipate that ever in the future it will exceed half a million—a quarter of the alleged charge which it is supposed we are imposing upon the Irish taxpayer. But that is only one side of the picture. How are we spending the money?
  Mr. MAURICE HEALY: On "Dreadnoughts." Not a penny is spent in Ireland.
  Mr. McKENNA: Haulbowline, at any rate, is a Government dockyard on which we do spend money. What is the expenditure under the Budget upon old age pensions? No less than £2,460,000 goes to Ireland, and we only charge Ireland under the Budget under £500,000, and less than £460,000 in the last year. On that item alone there is an excess charge of £2,000,000 paid to Ireland. On other additional services of this Budget £400,000 is spent upon Ireland, so that whereas Ireland is receiving in new expenditure £2,860,000 directly allocated out of the Budget, she contributed last year £435,000, and in no future year will she contribute as much as half a million. Who, upon that statement of figures, is going to say that Ireland is being unfairly treated under the Budget? I do not say for a moment that Irish representatives are not fully justified in calling attention to every matter which affects them and endeavouring to get the best for themselves that they can and putting their case fairly and strongly before the House of Commons; but no one in Ireland is justified in alleging that the Budget costs the Irish taxpayer £2,000,000, and that they are being burdened with the Budget, when the facts show that it costs less than half a million and they are receiving close upon three millions out of it. I hope the right hon. Gentlemen will not mind if I observe that at any rate from one bench opposite no-cheers are being raised at this point. The hon. Member (Mr. Dillon) asked that a White Paper should be circulated, show-

  2133
  ing the effect of the taxes upon Ireland. It is a proposition to which the Chancellor of the Exchequer very readily agrees. The more information is spread upon this subject the better. No one is so anxious as the Government, not only for the sake of Ireland but for the sake of the taxpayers throughout this country, that every detail of the Budget should be thoroughly understood. We have nothing to be ashamed of in the Budget, and I do not think the course of the last few day's Debate has given us any reason for being ashamed. We have had complaints made of the decline in our credit and of the low price of Consols. Does the hon. Baronet (Sir F. Banburf) really attribute the low price of Consols to the Budget?
  Sir F. BANBURY: Certainly.
  Mr. McKENNA: I have always admired the hon. Baronet's courage, but never more than now. He has seen a decline in the price of Consols proceeding steadily for years. He has known Consols at 114, and he has seen them drop steadily year after year until they are down to close upon 80. The hon. Baronet is willing to draw a line from an imaginary point, and say that the drop down to that line was due to all sorts of causes, and not to the Budget, but that below that line the drop was due to the Budget. He has got such a nice appreciation of financial causes, and such an intelligent understanding of the reasons why Consols go up and down, that he says the drop of twenty-two points was due to a variety of causes, which it would take a long time to explain, and that the drop of the last two or three points is due to the Budget. Does he really allege that to be his opinion?
  Sir F. BANBURY: Certainly I do. When the Budget was introduced Consols were at eighty-five, and there has been no war and no reason why Consols should drop, unless it is the introduction of the Budget. Having been challenged on this point, I would say that during that time all foreign Government securities have risen, and if they have risen since the Budget was introduced while money was cheap, what other reason can there be for the fall in Consols except the policy of the Government as exemplified by the Budget?
  Mr. McKENNA: The hon. Baronet when on this style of argument has forgotten the greatest reason of all. Tariff Reform
  2134
  has done it, or, rather, I should say the mere rumour of it. The hon. Baronet will have to find other reasons than that for the decline in the value of Consols. Another objection that has been raised to the Budget, almost as extraordinary as that regarding its effect upon Consols, was that the Land Taxes are going to lead to overcrowding. One hon. Gentleman yesterday raised a serious argument to the effect that the Undeveloped Land Tax will be to cause overcrowding. How is it going to cause overcrowding? The owner of land is taxed in respect of his land ½d. in the £ of its value so long as the land is not built upon, but the moment he builds upon it and relieves overcrowding he is free from the tax. Again, it is declared that the effect of the tax will be to increase overcrowding. It is obviously a tax which is going to promote building. You may raise objections to the Undeveloped Land Tax for an infinite variety of reasons, but the one argument you cannot bring against it is that it will cause overcrowding. One thing the Undeveloped Land Tax is certain to effect is that it will relieve overcrowding. There are critics of the Undeveloped Land Tax who say that its effect will not be to promote the development of land, and that after its first introduction no great results in the way anticipated will follow. Upon that argument I can only say, for my part, that in certain areas in the neighbourhood of growing towns—in fact, in those very areas for which the Land Tax is most appropriately applied— I think there is not a shadow of doubt that the effect must be to prevent land being unduly held up. I have not in my own mind the smallest doubt that when the Undeveloped Land Tax is in operation far greater care will be taken than is taken now to develop estates steadily and upon right lines, and that we shall not have some plots of land held up here and others there in order to await the increased speculative value of the land, while in the interval of time, of course, overcrowding exists on other parts of the land which have already been developed.
  I should have been glad if in the course of the Debate other matters had been raised for criticism with regard to the Budget. It would certainly have given me more opportunity for answering the criticism on those matters. In the main the whole of this Debate upon, the Budget, which has been such a bugbear, has turned upon the amount of the contribution from Ireland. Hon. and right hon. Gentleman

  2135
  who went up and down the country abusing this Budget have, I am glad to say, now with great philosophy accepted it. I have listened to the Debate, and I have been able, I think, to judge of the criticism raised upon the Budget, and I congratulated myself, and I thought I was justified in congratulating the House that it is generally recognised that this Budget is now an accomplished fact. We had very long discussions upon this Budget last year. There never was a measure which went through greater detailed criticism, and I am thankful that now, in one of the last stages of discussion on the measure, we can say that the criticism directed against it has no greater validity than such criticism as it has received during the last couple of days, and I think when the country has again to judge upon this Budget and upon the policy which it has made law, the country will endorse the action of the Government.
  Mr. BALFOUR: The right hon. Gentleman, in the closing portion of his speech, expressed regret that he had not more arguments to answer. That might have been a very natural wish if he had not been insisting that we should work under the guillotine. But as the right hon. Gentleman took nearly an hour out of the two hours that remain before the guillotine falls in attempting to answer the arguments adduced in the Debate I confess that I am extremely glad that there were no more arguments to answer, for I suppose he would have occupied the whole of the time which the Prime Minister has given us for discussion on this stage.
  Mr. McKENNA: The actual time that I occupied was, I believe, thirty-five minutes.
  Mr. BALFOUR: I admit I based my argument upon subjective feelings, and I do not doubt the right hon. Gentleman is right in his estimate of the time he occupied by the clock. I admit it was not the clock that was inaccurate, but the subjective emotion which his speech aroused, and which induced me somewhat to overestimate its length. I do not think the right hon. Gentleman need mourn that he had not other arguments to answer than those which were advanced in the course of the Debate. For in truth he has been singularly unsuccessful in dealing with the main contention against this Budget so far as the general com-
  2136
  munity is concerned. I am not going to enter into the particular quarrel with the Irish Members as to the benefit or the reverse which this Budget does to Ireland. I will only say that, as a British taxpayer, I began towards the end of the right hon. Gentleman's speech to tremble at the calculations he put before us, and began to wonder whether British Members would rise in their wrath and say they were cruelly ill-used. The whole calculation of the right hon. Gentleman with regard to Ireland was based on the assumption that the Budget and the Old Age Pensions were one Bill. They are not one Bill. Old age pensions are among the things which the Budget has got to pay for. Irish police and "Dreadnoughts" are also some of the things which the Budget has got to pay for, and it is perfectly absurd to take a particular Bill passed on general grounds the year before and to say, "Ireland benefits so much by some of our previous legislation that they ought not to complain of this Budget." That may be a fair argument in surveying the finances of Ireland in relation to the whole of the United Kingdom, but it is no argument at all for the defence of the Budget itself regarded in its operation on this or that part of the United Kingdom.
  I am going to deal with the argument which occupied the first part of the right hon. Gentleman's speech, in which he gave his version of what was meant by the Land Taxes and the exemption of agricultural land. I say boldly that he has utterly mistaken the defence which the Government themselves made on that part of the Bill last year, and he has completely misunderstood the argument addressed to him from these benches on that subject. The right hon. Gentleman said that my hon. and learned Friend quoted from speeches made in June and August, and that there were changes made after August which did exempt agricultural land and carried out the policy which the Government are constantly talking about in the House and shouting about on platforms, but which they always refused to put into their Bill. I will not' take speeches made in June or August. I will take the period when the Bill had practically taken its final form, and I will show perfectly conclusively that the Increment Duty does attack agricultural land. The very wording of Clause 7 shows that the Government intend, in certain circum-

  2137
  stances, to tax agricultural value. The words are:—
  " Increment Value Duty shall not be charged in respect of agricultural land while that land has no higher value than its value for agricultural purposes only."
  In other words, you leave it open to charge agricultural land as soon as it gets beyond its agricultural value.
  Mr. McKENNA: We only charge on the higher value.
  Mr. BALFOUR: Make your Bill show that.
  6.0 P.M.
  Mr. McKENNA: If the agricultural value is the higher value you cannot charge, no matter what other value it has. It is only when the other value, the building value or otherwise, is higher than the agricultural value that you charge. It is not on the agricultural value.
  Mr. BALFOUR: Then you do charge on the agricultural value?
  Mr. McKENNA: No. Really the matter is too serious, because obviously it is going to be a subject of representation outside. It must be clearly understood that if the building value of the land is higher than the agricultural value, it is regarded as building value on which increment would be charged.
  Viscount HELMSLEY: It is still agricultural.
  Mr. McKENNA: There is nothing charged on the agricultural value. The Noble Lord must remember that the increment value is the difference in the values, but if the agricultural value is higher than the building value, then no increment value is charged.
  Mr. BALFOUR: I traverse that statement of the right hon. Gentleman. We are dealing now only with land that has a value above its agricultural value, which has risen above its agricultural value either owing to competition or else because it is close to some building centre, or for some other cause. The right hon. Gentleman says, "We will only tax the increment above its agricultural value." I say that under the Bill, and under the defence of that Bill, made in October last, it is perfectly clear that they meant to charge upon the increased agricultural value. I will make the matter perfectly plain by merely reminding the House of
  2138
  what took place in the Debate, which will be found in the official record for 20th October. An hon. Member on that side of the House, who is a Member of the present House, the hon. Member for the Buckrose Division (Sir Luke White) put this illustration. He took land worth £50 an acre, agricultural value; that land increases to £80 an acre, still agricultural value. The increase is due either to a general rise in prices or to competition amongst small holders, or to intensive cultivation, or other causes of a purely agricultural character, £50 is the original datum line. It is the value of the land on 30th April, 1909. After it has risen to £80, purely agricultural value, then a new cause comes into operation which raises it to £100. The right hon. Gentleman says that under the Bill there will be increment value charged only on the difference between £80 and £100.
  Mr. McKENNA: No.
  Mr. BALFOUR: That is what he has just said at great length.
  Mr. McKENNA: Neither at great length nor shortly.
  Mr. BALFOUR: I beg the right hon. Gentleman's pardon. He distinctly said that there was to be no charge on any increase in agricultural value. If he did not say that he said nothing. I say that under the Bill they are going to charge increment value, not on the difference between £80 and £100, which is an increase due to non-agricultural causes, but they are going to charge it on the whole increase between £50 and £100, £30 of which is by hypothesis due, and due solely, to an increase in agricultural value.
  Mr. McKENNA: No.
  Mr. BALFOUR: That was the illustration given of a particular difficulty by an hon. Member opposite. Another hon. Gentleman, who is no longer a Member of the House, Mr. Everett, reinforced the same point later on. The Attorney-General explained the Bill exactly as I have explained it. He said:—
  " The moment the land comes into a different category we treat it as building land, not as agricultural land, and of course we charge the Increment Value Duty upon the datum line of 30th April, 1909."
  And a little later he said:—
  "The agricultural value is superseded. It is ignored the moment the land conies under the new category."
  Mr. LLOYD-GEORGE: I agree.
  Mr. BALFOUR: The Chancellor of the Exchequer agrees with his Attorney-General last year that that was the way the Bill left the House of Commons last year, and that is what happens with the Bill as introduced this year. How can anybody who takes that view of the Bill say that the increase of purely agricultural value is not taxed. It is taxed. I have a small holding, valued last April at £50. By intensive cultivation I make it worth £80. It then gets a building value of £100. I am taxed upon the increment. Upon what increment? Upon the increment between £80 and £100 which is due to the adjoining town? Not at all; but I am taxed on the whole increment of from £50 to £100, three-fifths of which is agricultural and only two-fifths of which is urban. I do not think that there is anything more to be added on this question of agricultural value. We fought in the last Parliament night after night. We at last got the thing clear, as I think I have shown by the extracts from the Attorney-General. On the explanation of the Attorney-General himself, it was manifest that the increase in agricultural value was being taxed. We said so in the country. We have been denounced for saying so in the country. It is perfectly plain to everybody who has been listening to the uncontradicted statements which I have made with regard to the policy of the Bill; it was perfectly plain then to the right hon. Gentleman, that the increments of agricultural value are taxed and axe intended to be taxed, and that no modification introduced by the Government in the present Session makes the smallest difference in that fact.
  Viscount HELMSLEYmoved in Resolution (1) after the word "land" ["in respect of land"] to insert the words: "Other than land used for agriculture."
  I rather anticipated there would be some ambiguity over this question, having a recollection of the Debates which took place on this subject during the last Parliament, and so I have put down, an Amendment which I think will have the effect of clearing up the intentions of the Government before we come to consider the Bill, so that we may see whether their intentions really coincide with the intentions which we on this side of the House are told the Government really have. I think that if that Amendment were carried it would, at all events, put beyond doubt the exemption of agricultural land from these taxes. I
  2140
  am quite ready to admit that this Amendment would go even further, and would also include land which would come under the Undeveloped Land Clause. As regards that there would be no objection, to my mind, if the Government will say that they will confine this Amendment to the Increment Tax Reversion Duty, to introduce in words to give effect to that, and, in that event, I shall be quite ready to withdraw my Amendment, so that the Undeveloped Land Duty exemptions should be as at the present moment. I do not want the Chancellor of the Exchequer, in answering this Amendment, to say that he is opposed to it, because it would also have reference to the Undeveloped Land Duties. I do not think anybody need argue the question of the already heavy burdens upon land. It was argued yesterday with great effect.
  I imagine that with the exception of a few single taxers below the Gangway opposite the view generally taken in this House is that agriculture is far too heavily burdened as it is. Therefore, I may say, we are practically agreed that no additional burden ought to be put upon land. The question before us is whether or not there are any additional burdens imposed by these proposed taxes. It is a curious thing that a great many hon. Hembers who took part in the Debates in the last Parliament went from this House to the country without any real appreciation of the facts as regards this Land Tax. Because, in taking up the Debate on the day already mentioned, 20th October, I find that the hon. Member for Barnstaple, among others, seemed to share in the same delusion which the First Lord of the Admiralty appears still to have, according to the speech made a few minutes ago, because he says that the value of that land is:—
  "owing to the people who are working around that land and who want it to build upon. Then that land is sold as building land. If the Chancellor of the Exchequer thought fit to do so, he could have said, ' I am going to put Increment Duty upon the whole of the building value.' He does not do that. He goes even further than anticipated. He gives the purchaser a boon. He says, 'You may take from that building value the agricultural value up to a. datum line.' That is in the nature of a boon. Therefore there can be no doubt whatever in my mind that agricultural value in every shape and in every form is excluded from this increment."
  He agreed with the First Lord of the Admiralty. There was the same erroneous view. He says, "You may take from that building value the agricultural value up to a datum line," but in doing that he is thinking of the Undeveloped

  2141
  Land Tax, which provides that in assessing the tax you subtract the value of the land for agricultural purposes from that of the land for building purposes, and you put the tax on the difference between the two, whereas in the case of Increment Duty you do nothing of the kind. The hon. Member who is now a Junior Lord of the Treasury, took the view, and I think it is a view that a great many hon. Members have shared, that in the Increment Tax you pay merely on the increased value due to the difference between agricultural value and building value. You do not. You pay, as the right hon. Gentleman the Leader of the Opposition proved just now, on the agricultural value, which is included in the building value, and which may be due entirely to your own efforts, and no allowance whatever is made to the owner of this land for the money and the capital he has spent upon it. That money and that capital is indeed expressly excluded because if the right hon. Gentleman will turn to Clause 25 of the old Bill, line 30, he will see that any improvement of the value of the land as building land, "or for the purpose of any business, trade, or industry, other than agriculture," may be taken in order to get at the site value. Therefore, all expenditure on the land to improve it for agriculture is included in the Increment Duty which is payable, and it is absurd to say that agricultural land is not subject to this tax. Another hon. Member who took part in the Debate last year, but who is uo longer a Member of the House—Mr. Austin Taylor—made an interruption when my right hon. Friend the Member for East Worcestershire was speaking about the Increment Duty. Mr. Austin Taylor said that surely, so long as the land was used for agricultural purposes, no Increment Duty would become due. A great many others on that side of the House at that time, and even as late as 20th October, were of opinion, and they have gone about the country saying so, that land used for agricultural purposes would not be subject to the Increment Duty. It is perfectly obvious, however, that the land is subject to Increment Duty. A great deal of land, now purely agricultural land, and which will be agricultural land for very many years to come, will have a large proportion of increase in value, and that increase will be taxed for the purpose of the Increment Duty. It is perfectly impossible, I suggest to the Chancellor of the Exchequer, to disentangle the value for build-
  2142
  ing or the value for accommodation from agricultural purposes. Take the case of land worth £2 an acre for agricultural purposes only, and that is the datum line on 30th April, 1909. Then say that purely for accommodation purposes, or for a dairy or anything of that kind, or for facilities for a railway, or anything else, the land goes up in value until it is worth £8 an acre, and that at the same time somebody would be prepared to offer the sum of £8 per acre capitalised for building purposes. What happens? As long as those two values "of £8 are, in the opinion of the Government valuer, held to be exactly balanced, no increment is payable; but the moment a Government valuer says that the value for building purposes of that land might reach £8 10s., then there has to be paid, not the difference between £8 and £8 10s., but the difference between £8 10s. and £2. Yet the supporters of the Government go about the country saying agricultural land is exempted.
  I say it is impossible to distinguish this difference in the value. It will pass the wit of any Government valuer to say exactly to what cause the increased value of the land is due. It may be due in some cases largely to the capital which has been sunk in it by the owner of the land, and in some cases to the demand for the land, which seems to refer more especially to Ireland, where, I gather, people are more keen to engage in farming operations than in England, or it may be due to the value given to the land by the fact of its being in the neighbourhood of large towns. No valuer can possibly disentangle those causes, and even if he does so in his own opinion satisfactorily, then the agricultural value will be subject to this tax. In moving this Amendment, I hope I shall have the support of the Nationalist Members who follow the hon. and learned Member for Waterford. I say that because I notice that one of his followers, the hon. Member for East Tyrone, who spoke last evening, made it perfectly clear that he interpreted the Prime Minister's speech as one that would absolutely exclude agricultural land from this tax. The hon. Member said:—
  "The undertaking has been given that agricultural land shall be exempt from this Increment Duty, and it will be our duty, I say quite frankly, to see that the promise is carried into statutory effect."
  I feel very certain that the remark of the hon. Member for East Tyrone will have far more effect upon the Government than any words which can fall from Members on this side of the House who are Members of the

  2143
  Unionist party. I am quite certain, they will have more effect up the Government, and on that ground I feel all the more encouraged in moving my Amendment than I should have been in the last Parliament. The hon. Members who follow the hon. and learned Gentleman the Member for Waterford will have the opportunity now of showing whether they are going to keep the Government to their pledge to relieve agricultural land from this tax, and I only hope they will join me in the Lobby.
  Mr. T. M. HEALY: I think the Noble Lord who has just sat down may compose his mind on the question of whether he will receive any support from Irish Members on this subject. The Irish Members who will vote against him, I think, are taking up a logical position. They could have got many, a great many concessions on this Budget, but they intend to vote for it at all hazards. Therefore, it is idle to suppose that, having once taken the plunge, and committed, as we think, treason against their country, they will in any way retrace their steps. At all events, as they have gone wrong, let them be logical. I am going to support the Amendment. I give the Chancellor of the Exchequer the credit that he fully intended to relieve agricultural land from this burden. But is there any man in the House of Commons who can understand the language in which he proposes to do it except himself? How is it one can understand a fool, and seldom understand a learned man? Draftsmen and Privy Councillors do not express themselves in the language of plain people. The Irish peasantry make inquiry, and they are told agricultural land is protected. We all remember the Gilbert and Sullivan operas of thirty years ago, and in the play of "Patience" there are the lines:—
  "And everyone will say.
  As he treads his flowery way.
  That this young man expresses himself in terms too deep for me.
  Why what a particularly deep young man this deep young man must be !"
  Here are the words, and you may put them to a prize competition or a guessing competition in any assembly in England, and I defy you to say that anyone could understand them, or would say that they bear, and bear only, the sense which the Government assert that they have. I will first read the old words:—
  " Increment value shall not be charged in respect of agricultural land while that land has no higher value than its value for agricultural purposes, only "—
  2144
  Now these are the relieving words:—
  "only if sold at the time in the open market."
  But remember, in this case we are not setting puzzles for judges with £5,000 or £6,000 a year, for the purpose of their answering our conundrums. We are setting puzzles in this case to gaugers and Revenue officers paid from £150 to £300 a year. Let me put this case. An Irish-American comes back from America and he sees a bit of land for sale adjoining his father's home. It is only ten acres, and if he paid a reasonable price upon it, say £20 an acre, it would cost £200. But, for one reason or another—and remember that you are largely responsible for this, for it is you, the English, that have made Irish land valuable, by destroying every other form of industry in the country: their mills are all gone, you have taken good care of that, and you have left no other industry in the country except agriculture—the returned American gives, not £200 for this bit of land, but £500, because he has no other form of investment in his native land. What happens then? The Revenue officer comes down and says, "I will assess this at 20 per cent.; I think it is under the £500, but I will take it off the £200; I will take £40 out of your pocket." What is to happen then? That is the next point. How is this question of whether that Revenue officer is right or wrong to be determined or settled? The officer of the court will not pass the conveyance unless it is stamped, I presume, though I do not pretend to be au fait with these matters. That is the first proposition. How, then, is the returned American to look after his £40? He has to start an action against the Crown, I presume; he has to get the fiat of the Attorney-General. So he goes to his solicitor in Ballydehob and says he wants to bring an action against the King. "You fool," says the solicitor, "is it not far better to pay the money than to embark in a lawsuit of this kind?" But let us suppose that the man goes to law with the Crown, and he gets the fiat of the Attorney-General for the fee of £10 10s. He starts his action, and the Irish judges, who are naturally against the Treasury— I give them the credit that whenever they can decide against the Treasury in any matter they always do so—decide that this £40 is not really payable to the Crown. What will the Crown do? They will take the case to the Court of Appeal, which includes, I will assume, the Irish Lord Chancellor, and that tribunal decides in favour of Paddy O'Rafferty and against the Revenue. What happens next? The

  2145
  Crown take the case to the House of Lords, and by this time this unfortunate man, for the sake of his £40, has incurred a bill of costs to the amount of something like £300 or £400. I say it would cost at least £300. The man is now gambling on a lawsuit, and the Crown go to the House of Lords; and heaven knows what the House of Lords will do. It would not be for me to speculate, but supposing they decide against him, what will the costs be? I venture to say that for the sake of the £40 this wretched man will have incurred either a loss or liability of close upon a thousand pounds. Therefore is it not reasonable at least that now, when this question is in the melting-pot in this House, that those who say that the words are not plain shall be heard, and that those who take up that position shall at least have the satisfaction of having their position made clear?
  I do not for one moment accuse the right hon. Gentleman the Chancellor of the Exchequer of anything like duplicity or a desire to throw dust in anybody's eyes. I believe he has been convinced by the arguments that have been addressed to him to assist agricultural land in this matter. All we ask is that it should be made clear. I know there are many English gentlemen opposite who are what are called single-taxers, and who think agricultural land should bear the burden with the rest of the land. One word on that, and especially as regards Ireland. Have you ever considered that a tax on the land in Ireland or in England, on agricultural land, is a tax on food? Have you ever considered that you are putting on the farmers in this country a burden which the Canadian or the Argentine or the American farmer has not to bear? Remember that to-day the only difference between Buenos Ayres and London, so far as agricultural products is concerned, is a difference of freights, and that is only a question of a very small amount of steam. Therefore are we not right in dealing with this miserable industry of agriculture, which is the real industry that is subject to dumping, to say that the man who is producing butter, or cows, or sheep, or anything in connection with the farm, shall not have a penny of burden upon him, any more than if he started a mill, or a cotton industry, or any other matter of that kind? Remember that the burdens of rates are becoming oppressive. There is no doubt about it. For instance, we never had such burdens as public health
  2146
  charges in Ireland until recently. We had to bring in water supplies and do a number of things which were absolutely necessary because the country until thirty years ago was in an absolutely insanitary state. In addition to that, I know that in fair rents fixed on land near towns as much a3 40 per cent, to be added for proximity value, all of which more or less goes to the landlord. Accordingly many of those farmers are top-rated in competition with the Canadian or American or Argentine farmers. Therefore, fully recognising that the Chancellor of the Exchequer does desire to meet us in this matter, I think we are entitled to ask on this issue that he will not obscure it, but make it plain.
  The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER (Mr. Lloyd-George): The hon. and learned Gentleman (Mr. T. M. Healy) has made an appeal to me on this subject to which I very willingly respond, but I think I am entitled to make another appeal to him. He must not imagine that the case he is putting is the case which is covered by the Amendment of the Noble Lord. His case is totally different, as I think I shall be able to demonstrate, and the words meet his case amply, and if they do not I am quite open to conviction on the question of whether words can more clearly and explicitly set forth the object of the Government. I have absolutely no doubt in the case he gave. It is a sort of case which happens very often in our part of the world. His case is that of an Irishman who has gone abroad, who made money, who goes down to his district and buys the old farm, or any other farm in the locality. Undoubtedly that has the effect of putting up the value of the land. I know that is the case in our part of the world. Welshmen go to Liverpool and Manchester, and make money, return to the old village, and buy a farm which is in the market at a price which is a purely fictitious value to that of the land in the district. That value is a purely agricultural value, and that is the real object of those words. The hon. and learned Gentleman has made merry over the matter, but I do think they carry out the object he had in his mind. The words are: "Increment Value Duty shall not be charged in respect of agricultural land while that land has no higher value than its value for agricultural purposes only." Then, I think, it was in Ireland the opinion of learned counsel was circulated throughout the Irish constituencies that there was a purely artificial value

  2147
  given to land in Ireland because of this competition, and therefore that value was not protected by those words. We introduce these words into the new Bill— "If sold at the time in the open market" —for the purpose of saying that the agricultural value shall be the value which it would fetch in the market if it were sold. That would mean if it were put up for sale by auction you would get from thirty to forty years' purchase purely and simply because you got this rich man who had returned to pay an extravagant price for the farm, not for building purposes, but purely for agricultural purposes. All that is completely protected by those words. I say this to the hon. and learned Gentleman, if he can convince me that those words do not cover that case, or if he can submit to me, or anyone else in the House, words that more completely cover that I have not the slightest hesitation in saying I will accept them on behalf of the Government. Therefore I make an appeal to the hon. and learned Member not to mix up his case with another case which I must take my stand on if he persists. What is the case of the Noble Lord. His case is not the case of purely agricultural land. We all know what that means—the ordinary farm in the country—and I say that is completely protected from every penny of taxation. [HON. MEMBERS: "No, no."] Hon. Members shout "No," and have argued it, and I am going to put the other side of the case. I am only laying down a proposition to begin with. What does the Amendment mean? The case the Noble Lord has in his mind is this—the case of land in the immediate vicinity of a growing town, which may be let for a cabbage garden or horticultural purposes, and fetches a very high price for that purpose possibly. It is sold for building land.
  Viscount HELMSLEY: That is not the case I had in my mind.
  Mr. LLOYD-GEORGE: If that is not the case the Noble Lord has in his mind, that is what is covered by the Amendment he has moved. His Amendment is, and I want the Committee to appreciate what it really means, "Other than land used for agriculture." If those words were introduced there is only one thing for the Government to do, and that is to knock off the whole of the Land Taxes. [An HON. MEMBER: ' Why."] I will say why. I asked the question with
  2148
  a view to answering it. It is for this reason—take building land. A builder comes along and buys an open field, and pays a thousand pounds an acre for it. I know many fields of that kind running from a thousand pounds to two or three thousand pounds per acre. That land is land used for agriculture presently. You may have cattle grazing on it the very moment when the conveyance is signed in the lawyer's office. The conveyance is signed, the solicitor's clerk takes it to the Inland Revenue Stamping Office, where, on being asked, "Is that land being used for agricultural purposes," the reply would be "Yes, there were cows on it when I left the neighbourhood," and so, although it is a thousand pounds an acre, or even five thousand pounds an acre paid for building land, not a penny will be paid under this marvellous Amendment of the Noble Lord.
  Viscount HELMSLEY: I do not think the right hon. Gentleman has quite fairly put the position. Surely if that land was built upon, as I presume it would be, or the price would not be given for it, as the result of the sale, then it would be building land, and not agricultural land.
  Mr. LLOYD-GEORGE: The interruption of the Noble Lord simply bears out exactly what I say. The man buys for the one purpose of having it cut up into building lots. He may the very morning after the conveyance is signed and the stamp is paid, turn his men in to start digging foundations. He is buying land which is building land essentially. To call that agricultural land is a mockery and a sham. It is not intended for the purpose of agricultural land. Purely agricultural land is amply protected in every part of the country. [HON. MEMBERS: "No, no."] That is not the case which the hon. and learned Member has got in his mind. As far as I understand, the hon. and learned Member does not want to protect these valuable building plots purely and simply because for the moment you may have a cabbage or two on them. [HON. MEMBERS: "No, no."] If nobody does, why does everybody say so on the other side of the House? I think I am entitled to make this plain. Criticism may be directed against the words used by the Government, and they may say, "Why can you not frame something that expresses your meaning?" but here is an Amendment which expresses a meaning that nobody on the other side of the House intends it to bear, and yet they will all vote for it Let us have an Amendment that really ex-

  2149
  presses the intention of the Noble Lord. This does not.
  Viscount HELMSLEY: It is on the words of the Bill.
  Mr. LLOYD-GEORGE: Does the Noble Lord really know what the Rules of the House are with regard to these Resolutions? Does he know, if these words are introduced, he could not introduce words to his Bill afterwards which would omit land? You may take a Resolution which covers actually more than you mean to charge, but the moment you extend to all agricultural land you cannot afterwards introduce an Amendment to charge some land. It shows how ill-considered these proposals are that come from the other side of the House, without even knowing the elementary rules of this House.
  Viscount HELMSLEY: I really must interrupt. I do not think his argument on that matter is correct. Otherwise, according to his own Resolution in the last Finance Bill, he would not have been able to move a single exemption.
  Mr. LLOYD-GEORGE: The Noble Lord evidently does not appreciate the point at all. He thinks that if you exempt the whole of agricultural land you can afterwards in the Bill introduce provisions enabling you to charge some of it. That is exactly what you cannot do. I cannot imagine that he will press an Amendment which, according to his own admission, will do something that he does not intend. Let hon. Gentlemen put their real propositions before the House, and I shall be perfectly willing to consider them. What exactly is the position? You have two categories of land. First, there is land which is purely agricultural, whose value is an agricultural value, and which has a larger value for agricultural purposes than for any other purpose. That land is completely exempted from all taxation under the Land Taxes of the Budget. The second class of land is what I call building land, winch has a higher value for building purposes than for any other purpose. That land we propose to charge. Unless that land is charged Increment Duty and Undeveloped Land Duty I do not see the object of the Land Taxes at all. That is their real purpose. How can you arrive at that position? I submit that there is only one way of doing it, and that is the way proposed in the Finance Bill—by determining whether land has a greater value for building than it has for agriculture. The moment it
  2150
  has a higher value for building than for agriculture it passes into the category of building land. What is the proposal that has been put forward? It is that we should exempt the whole of the agricultural value, even after the land has passed into the category of building land. What would that mean? All that a man would have to do in order to evade Increment Duty would be to let the land, even for a few months, for any sort of horticultural purpose, charging any rent he likes, and he could capitalise that rent and deduct it from the building value. There would be no use at all in proceeding with these Land Taxes if a loophole of that kind, through which half a dozen coaches and six could be driven were left. Therefore we have to make up our minds, and divide the land into two categories. The whole theory of land taxation is that these urban site values should be taxed. These site values have been created not by the exertions of the man himself, not by any intrinsic agricultural value of the soil, but purely and simply because you have a crowd of people living in one spot, who, by their own industry, exertion, and skill, have increased the value of the whole of the property in the neighbourhood. We propose that those values shall be taxed for public purposes, but that purely agricultural land shall be exempted. This is the real test. Let any hon. Member opposite think of his own property or any property with which he is familiar. Go to a rural district and pick out a farm, far removed from a town, and the value of which is purely agricultural. I venture to say that not a yard of that land would be charged for either Increment Value Duty or Undeveloped Land Duty. That applies even if the land is let for accommodation purposes. Sometimes when you are even two or three miles away from a village you get a very high rent for accommodation purposes. But that is not charged. Supposing a farmer is able to let his land as accommodation land he may get £4 or £5 an acre for it, whereas for the farm let as a whole he might get only £1 an acre. That £4 or £5 an acre is purely an agricultural value. It is not a building value at all, and therefore it is not charged. We do not propose to charge accommodation land, even if it runs up to £10 an acre. We do not propose to charge any agricultural value where a farm is let as a whole, but the moment land passes from being ordinary farm land, or even accommodation land, into the category of building land, we

  2151
  propose to charge in respect of the increment from the datum line upwards. I think I have made it quite clear why we cannot insert the words proposed, and the other case put by an hon. Member opposite is, in my Judgment, already exempted. The Noble Lord said further that a man might increase the value of his land by his own exertions. If the improvement is of a character that makes the land more valuable, not merely for agriculture, but for building, he is entitled to deduct it.
  Viscount HELMSLEY: What about manuring?
  Mr. LLOYD-GEORGE: I will give a case in point. It depends entirely on the character of the building. For instance, you may have a large house with a garden of two or three acres. Surely manuring would make it more valuable for that purpose. If the land were cut up for cottages with hardly any gardens, the mere manuring of the land would make no difference at all. But the case I would rather take is that of drainage. Suppose you have land which is a pure swamp. If you drain that land, it has undoubtedly an improved value for agricultural purposes, but its value is improved for building purposes as well. Therefore the whole value created by that expenditure would be deducted from the increment for building purposes. When I interrupted the right hon. Gentleman yesterday it was hot to correct him about the datum lines, but purely on the question whether value created by a man's own exertions would be exempted.
  Mr. AUSTEN CHAMBERLAIN: If the right hon. Gentleman's contention is that that value would be exempted, it is only true in so far as the value so created is useful, not only for agricultural purposes, but for building purposes as well. If it has purely an agricultural value the man is taxed on it.
  Mr. LLOYD-GEORGE: I have been explaining the case put to me. I was asked what about manure, and I say that it depends entirely on the circumstances. If you have a two or three-acre garden in connection with a house, that is a value which you can deduct. But a much better case is that of draining. Draining would improve the value, not merely for agricultural purposes, but for building purposes as well. Take the case constantly put by the hon. Member for Chelmsford (Mr. Pretyman)—that of an embankment or a
  2152
  sea wall. An embankment undoubtedly improves the value for agricultural purposes, but it also improves it for building purposes, so that the whole cost of the embankment would be deducted.
  Mr. PRETYMAN: Not one penny of the cost would be deducted. The deduction would be merely that part of the value which was due to the expenditure, and not the cost itself.
  Mr. LLOYD-GEORGE: Why should the hon. Gentleman complain of that?
  Mr. PRETYMAN: I did not complain of it.
  Mr. LLOYD-GEORGE: We deduct not the cost, but the value which is created by it. As a matter of fact, you may spend £50,000 upon an embankment, and create a value of £100,000. What do we propose to deduct? Not the £50,000, but the £100,000. I will quote the actual words of the Bill: "Where any works executed or expenditure incurred for the purpose of improving the value of the land for agriculture have actually improved the value of the land as building land … the works or expenditure shall, for the purpose of this provision, be treated as having been executed or incurred also for the latter purpose." Therefore, to sum up, no agricultural land is charged at all, no accommodation land is charged; the only land charged is land which passes into the category of building land. That we intend to charge, and by that we shall stand.
  Mr. BALFOUR: The Chancellor of the Exchequer has complained that my Noble Friend's Amendment is not in every respect complete. How can we deal with Amendments properly in the circumstances in which we have to discuss these proposals? We are not allowed to put down an Amendment to the Bill itself when it could be carefully guarded so as to exclude agricultural land, and only agricultural land, from the operation of the tax. That is the justification for my Noble Friend. The right hon. Gentleman has proved certain inconveniences which would accrue if you attempted to remedy the injustices of the tax, but he has not shown that there are not injustices. Take as an example a farm improved from a £30 to an £80 value. On purely agricultural grounds it is sold at the £80 value. It then goes up £1 or £5 more as building land, and

  2153
  when that happens the owner has to pay from the original datum line of £30, although with the exception of £1 or £5 it is entirely agricultural value. It is pure folly and misrepresentation to say that you do not tax agricultural value under the Bill, either as it left the House of
  Commons last year, or as it is being re-introduced in the present Session.
  Question put, "That those words be there inserted."
  The Committee divided: Ayes, 248; Noes, 334.

  Division No. 49.]

  AYES.

  [7.1 p.m.

  Adam, Major William A.

  Duke, Henry Edward

  Lawson, Hon. Harry

  Anson, Sir William Reynell

  Duncannon, Viscount

  Lee, Arthur Hamilton

  Archer-Shee, Major Martin

  Dunn, Sir W. H. (Southwark, W.)

  Lewisham, Viscount

  Arkwright, John Stanhope

  Eyres-Monsell, Bolton M.

  Llewelyn, Major Venables

  Ashley, Wilfrid W.

  Faber, George D. (Clapham)

  Lloyd, George Ambrose

  Attenborough, Walter Annis

  Falle, Bertram Godfray

  Locker-Lampson, O. (Ramsay)

  Bagot, Captain J.

  Fell, Arthur

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

  Baird, John Lawrence

  Finlay, Sir Robert

  Long, Rt. Hon. Walter

  Baker, Sir Randoll L. (Dorset, N.)

  Fisher, William Hayes

  Lonsdale, John Brownlee

  Balcarres, Lord

  Fitzroy, Hon. Edward A.

  Lowe, Sir F. W. (Birm., Edgbaston)

  Baldwin, Stanley

  Flannery, Sir J. Fortescue

  Lyttelton, Rt. Hn. A. (S. Geo., Han. Sq.

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

  Fleming, Valentine

  Lyttelton, Hon. J. C. (Droftwich)

  Banhury, Sir Frederick George

  Fletcher, John Samuel

  Mackinder, Halford J.

  Banner, John S. Harmood-

  Forster, Henry William

  Macmaster, Donald

  Baring, Capt. Hon. Guy Victor

  Foster, John K. (Coventry)

  M'Arthur, Charles

  Barnston, Harry

  Gardner, Ernest

  M'Calmont, Colonel James

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

  Gastrell, Major W. Houghton

  Magnus, Sir Philip

  Bathurst, Hon. Allen B. (Glouc. E.)

  Gibbs, George Abraham

  Wallaby-Deeley, Harry

  Bathurst, Charles (Wilts, Wilton)

  Gilhooly, James

  Mason, James F.

  Beach, Hon. Michael Hugh Hicks

  Gilmour, Captain John

  Meysey-Thompson, E. C.

  Beckett, Hon. William Gervase

  Goldsmith, Frank

  Mildmay, Francis Bingham

  Benn, Ion Hamilton (Greenwich)

  Gooch, Henry Cubitt

  Mills, Hon. Charles Thomas

  Bentinck, Lord H. Cavendish

  Goulding, Edward Alfred

  Mitchell, William Foot

  Beresford, Lord Charles

  Grant, James Augustus

  Moore, William

  Bird, Alfred

  Greene, Waiter Raymond

  Morpeth, Viscount

  Boyle, W. Lewis (Norfolk, Mid)

  Gulney, Patrick

  Morrison, Captain James A.

  Boyton, J.

  Guinness, Hon. Walter Edward

  Morrison-Bell, Major A. C.

  Brackenbury, Henry Langton

  Gwynne, R. S. (Sussex, Eastbourne)

  Mount, William Arthur

  Brassey, H. L. C. (Northants, N.)

  Haddock, George Baker

  Newdegate, F. A. N.

  Brassey, Capt. R. (Oxon, Banbury)

  Hall, D. B. (Isle of Wight)

  Newman, John R. P.

  Bridgeman, William Clive

  Hall, E. Marshall (Toxteth)

  Newton, Harry Kottingham

  Brotherton, Edward Allen

  Hambro, Angus Valdemar

  Nicholson, Wm. G. (Petersfield)

  Brunskill, Gerald Fitzgibbon

  Hamersley, Alfred St. George

  Meld, Herbert

  Bull, Sir William James

  Hamilton, Marquis of (Londonderry)

  Norton-Griffiths, J. (Wednesbury)

  Burdett-Coutts, William

  Hardy, Laurence (Kent, Ashford)

  O'Brien, William (Cork)

  Butcher, John George (York)

  Harris, F. L. (Tower Hamlets, Stepney)

  O'Donnell, John (Mayo, S.)

  Butcher, S. H. (Camb. Univ.)

  Harris, H. p. (Paddington, S.)

  O'Neill, Hon. A. E. B. (Antrim, Mid.)

  Calley, Col Thomas C. P.

  Harrison-Broadley, H. B.

  Orde-Powlett, Hon. W. G. A.

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

  Healy, Maurice (Cork, N.E.)

  Ormsby-Gore, Hon. William

  Carlile Edward Hildred

  Healy, Timothy Michael

  Paget, Almeric Hugh

  Carson, Rt. Hon. Sir Edward H.

  Heath, Col. Arthur Howard

  Parkes, Ebenezer

  Castlereagh, Viscount

  Helmsley, Viscount

  Peel, Capt. R. F. (Woodbridge)

  Cator, John

  Hermon-Hodge, Sir Robert T.

  Peel, Hon. Wm. R. W. (Taunton)

  Cautley, Henry Strother

  Hickman, Colonel Thomas E.

  Perkins, Walter Frank

  Cave, George

  Hill, Sir Clement L. (Shrewsbury)

  Peto, Basil Edward

  Cecil, Evelyn (Aston Manor)

  Hillier, Dr. Alfred Peter

  Pollock, Ernest Murray

  Cecil, Lord Hugh (Oxford University)

  Hills, John Walter (Durham)

  Pretyman, Ernest George

  Chaloner, Col. R. G. W.

  Hoare, Samuel John Gurney

  Proby, Col. Douglas James

  Chamberlain, Rt. Hon. J. A. (Worc'r.)

  Hohler, Gerald Fitzroy

  Quilter, William Eley C.

  Chambers, James

  Hope, Harry (Bute)

  Randies, Sir John Scurrah

  Clive, Percy Archer

  Hope, James Fitzalan (Sheffield)

  Rankin, Sir James

  Clyde, James Avon

  Home, William E. (Surrey, Guildford)

  Ratcliff, Major R. F.

  Coates, Major Edward F.

  Homer, Andrew Long

  Rawlinson, John Frederick Peel

  Colefax, Henry Arthur

  Houston, Robert Paterson

  Rawson, Col. Richard H.

  Cooper, Capt. Bryan R. (Dublin, S.)

  Hume-Williams, Wm. Ellis

  Remnant, James Farquharson

  Cooper, Richard Ashmole (Walsall)

  Hunt, Rowland

  Rice, Hon. Walter Fitz-Uryan

  Courthope, George Loyd

  Hunter, Sir Chas. Rodk. (Bath)

  Ridley, Samuel Forde

  Craig, Charles Curtis (Antrim, S.)

  Jackson, John A. (Whitehaven)

  Roberts, S. (Sheffield, Ecclesall)

  Craig, Captain James (Down, E.)

  Jardine, Ernest (Somerset, East)

  Rolleston, Sir John

  Craig, Norman (Kent, Thanet)

  Jessel, Captain Herbert M.

  Ronaldshay, Earl of

  Craik, Sir Henry

  Kerr-Smiley, Peter Kerr

  Rothschild, Lionel de

  Crean, Eugene

  Kerry, Earl of

  Royds, Edmund

  Cripps, Sir Charles Alfred

  Keswick, William

  Rutherford, William Watson

  Croft, Henry Page

  Kimber, Sir Henry

  Salter, Arthur Clavell

  Dairymple, Viscount

  King, Sir Henry Seymour (Hull)

  Samuel, Sir Harry (Norwood)

  Dalziel, Davison (Brixton)

  Kinloch-Cooke, Sir Clement

  Sanderson, Lancelot

  Dickson, Rt. Hon. C. S. (Glasgow, E.)

  Kirkwood. John H. M.

  Sandys, G. J. (Somerset, Wells)

  Dixon, Charles Harvey (Boston)

  Knight, Capt. Eric Ayshford

  Sandys, Lt.-Col. T. M. (Bootie)

  Douglas, Rt. Hon. A. Akers-

  Knott, James

  Sassoon, Sir Edward Albert

  Du Cros, A. (Tower Hamlets, Bow)

  Lane-Fox, G. R.

  Scott, Sir S. (Marylebone, W.)

  Du Cros, Arthur P. (Hastings)

  Law, Andrew Sonar (Dulwich)

  Sheehan, Daniel Daniel

  Stanier, Beville

  Thynne, Lord Alexander

  Willoughby de Eresby, Lord

  Stanley, Hon. Arthur (Ormskirk)

  Tobin, Alfred Aspinall

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

  Stanley, Hon. G. F. (Preston)

  Tryon, Capt. George Clement

  Winterton, Earl

  Starkey, John Ralph

  Tullibardine, Marquess of

  Wolff, Gustav Wilhelm

  Staveley-Hill, Henry (Staffordshire)

  Verrall, George Henry

  Wood, John (Stalybridge)

  Steel-Maitland, A. D.

  Walker, Col. W. H. (Lancashire)

  Worthington-Evans, L. (Colchester)

  Stewart, Gershom (Ches. Wirral)

  Wairond, Hon. Lionel

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

  Stewart, Sir M'T. (Kirkcudbrightsh.)

  Ward, A. S. (Herts, Watford)

  Wyndham, Rt. Hon. George

  Strauss, Arthur

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

  Younger, George (Ayr Burghs)

  Sykes, Alan John

  Wheler, Granville C. H.

  Talbot, Lord Edmund

  White, Major G. D. (Lane. Southport)

  TELLERS FOR THE AYES.—Sir A. Acland-Hood and Viscount Valentia.

  Terrell, Henry (Gloucester)

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

  Thompson, Robert

  Willoughby, Major Hon. Claude

  NOES.

  Abraham, William

  Dalziel, Sir James H. (Kirkcaldy)

  Hope, John Deans (Fife, West)

  Addison, Dr. Christopher

  Davies, Ellis William (Elflon)

  Home, Charles Silvester (Ipswich)

  Adkins, W. Ryland D.

  Davies, Sir W. Howell (Bristol, S.)

  Howard, Hon. Geoffrey

  Agnew, George William

  Davies, M. Vaughan (Cardigan)

  Hudson, Walter

  Ainsworth, John Stirling

  Dawes, James Arthur

  Hughes, Spencer Leigh

  Alden, Percy

  Delany, William

  Illingworth, Percy H.

  Allen, Charles Peter

  Denman, Hon. Richard Douglas

  Isaacs, Sir Rufus Daniel

  Anderson, Andrew Macbeth

  Devlin, Joseph

  Johnson, William

  Armitage, Robert

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

  Jones, Edgar R. (Merthyr Tydvil)

  Ashton, Thomas Gair

  Dilke, Rt. Hon. Sir Charles

  Jones, Henry Haydn (Merioneth)

  Asquith, Rt. Hon. Herbert Henry

  Dillon, John

  Jones, William (Carnarvonshire)

  Atherley-Jones, Llewelyn A.

  Doris, William

  Jowett, Frederick William

  Baker, Harold T. (Accrington)

  Duffy, William J.

  Joyce, Michael

  Baker, Joseph Allen (Finsbury, E.)

  Duncan, C. (Barrow-in-Furness)

  Kelly, Edward

  Ballour, Robert (Lanark)

  Duncan, J. Hastings (York, Otley)

  Kennedy, Vincent Paul

  Barclay, Sir Thomas

  Edwards, Enoch

  Kettle, Thomas Michael

  Barlow, Sir John Emmott

  Ellis, Rt. Hon. John Edward

  Kilbride, Denis

  Barnes, George N.

  Elverston, Harold

  King, Joseph (Somerset, N.)

  Barran, Sir John N. (Hawick B.)

  Esmonde, Sir Thomas

  Lambert, George

  Barry, Edward (Cork, S.)

  Esslemont, George Birnie

  Lardner, James Carrige Rushe

  Barry, Redmond J. (Tyrone, N.)

  Falconer, James

  Law, Hugh A. (Donegal, W.)

  Barton, William

  Farrell, James Patrick

  Layland-Barratt, Sir Francis

  Beale, William Phipson

  Fenwick, Charles

  Leach, Charles

  Benn, W. (Tower Hamlets, S. Geo.)

  Ferens, Thomas Robinson

  Lehmann, Rudolf, C.

  Bentham, George Jackson

  Ferguson, Ronald C. Munro

  Levy, Sir Maurice

  Bethell, Sir John Henry

  Ffrench, Peter

  Lewis, John Herbert

  Birrell, Rt. Hon. Augustine

  Flavin, Michael Joseph

  Lincoln, Ignatius Timothy T.

  Black, Arthur W.

  France, Gerald Ashburner

  Lloyd-George, Rt. Hon. David

  Boland, John Plus

  Furness, Sir Christopher

  Lough, Rt. Hon. Thomas

  Bowerman, Charles W,

  Gelder, Sir William Alfred

  Low, Sir Frederick (Norwich)

  Bowles, Thomas Gibson

  Gibson, James Puckering

  Lundon, Thomas

  Boyle, Daniel (Mayo, North)

  Gill, Alfred Henry

  Luttrell, Hugh Fownes

  Brace, William

  Glanville, Harold James

  Lynch, Arthur Alfred

  Brady, Patrick Joseph

  Glover, Thomas

  Macdonald, J. R. (Leicester)

  Brigg, Sir John

  Greenwood, Granville George

  Macdonald, J. M. (Falkirk Burghs)

  Brocklehurst, William B.

  Greig, Colonel James William

  Macnamara, Dr. Thomas J.

  Brunner, John F. L.

  Grenfell, Cecil Alfred

  MacVcagh, Jeremiah

  Burke, E. Haviland-

  Griffith, Ellis Jones (Anglesey)

  M'Callum, John M.

  Burns, Rt. Hon. John

  Gulland, John William

  M'Kenna, Rt. Hon. Reginald

  Burt, Rt. Hon. Thomas

  Gwynn, Stephen Lucius (Galway)

  M'Laren, F. W. S. (Line., Spalding)

  Buxton, C. R. (Devon, Mid)

  Hackett, John

  Mallet, Charles Edward

  Buxton, Noel (Norfolk, North)

  Haldane, Rt. Hon. Richard B.

  Manfield, Harry ^

  Buxton, Rt. Hon. S. C. (Poplar)

  Hall, F. (Yorks, Normanton)

  Marks, George Croydon

  Byles, William Pollard

  Hancock, John George

  Martin, Joseph

  Cameron, Robert

  Harcourt. Rt. Hon. L. (Rossendale)

  Masterman, C. F. G.

  Carr-Gomm, H. W. |

  Harcourt, Robert V. (Montrose)

  Meagher, Michael

  Cawley, Sir Frederick (Prestwich)

  Hardie, J. Keir (Merthyr Tydvil)

  Meehan, Francis E. (Leitrim, N.)

  Cawley, H. T. (Lanes., Heywood)

  Harvey, T. E. (Leeds, West)

  Meehan, Patrick A. (Queen's County)

  Chancellor, Henry George

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

  Menzies, Sir Walter

  Channing, Sir Francis Allston

  Harwood, George

  Middlebrook, William

  Chapple, Dr. William Allen

  Haslam, James (Derbyshire)

  Millar, James Duncan

  Churchill, Rt. Hon. Winston S.

  Haslam, Lewis (Monmouth)

  Molloy, Michael

  Clancy, John Joseph

  Havelock-Allan, Sir Henry

  Molteno, Percy Alport

  Clough, William

  Haworth, Arthur A.

  Mond, Alfred Moritz

  Clynes, John R.

  Hayden, John Patrick

  Montagu, Hon. E. S.

  Collins, Godfrey P. (Greenock)

  Hazleton, Richard

  Mooney, John J.

  Collins, Stephen (Lambeth)

  Helme, Norval Watson

  Morgan, G. Hay (Cornwall)

  Collins, Sir Wm. J. (St. Pancras, W.)

  Hemmerde, Edward George

  Morgan, J. Lloyd (Carmarthen)

  Compton-Rickett, Sir J.

  Henderson, Arthur (Durham)

  Morton, Alpheus Cleophas

  Condon, Thomas Joseph

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

  Muldoon, John

  Corbett, A. Cameron (Glasgow)

  Henry, Charles Solomon

  Murray, Captain Hon. Arthur C.

  Cornwall, Sir Edwin A.

  Herbert, Col. Sir Ivor (Mon. S.)

  Muspratt, Max

  Cory, Sir Clifford John

  Higham, John Sharp

  Nannetti, Joseph P.

  Cowan, William Henry

  Hindle, Frederick George

  Nellton, Francis

  Craig, Herbert J. (Tynemouth)

  Hobhouse, Rt. Hon. Charles E. H.

  Nicholson, Charles N. (Doncaster)

  Crawshay-Williams, Eliot

  Hodge, John

  Nolan, Joseph

  Crossley, Sir William J.

  Hogan, Michael

  Norton, Capt. Cecil W.

  Cullinan, John

  Hooper, Arthur George

  Nugent, Sir Walter Richard

  2156

  2157

  Nussey, Sir Willans

  Roberts, Sir J. H. (Denbighs.)

  Verney, Frederick William

  Nuttall, Harry

  Robertson, Sir G. Scott (Bradford)

  Vivian, Henry

  O'Brien, Patrick (Kilkenny)

  Robertson, John M. (Tyneside)

  Wadsworth, John

  O'Connor, John (Kildare, N.)

  Robson, Sir William Snowdon

  Walker, H. de R. (Leicester)

  O'Connor, T. P. (Liverpool)

  Roch, Walter F. (Pembroke)

  Walsh, Stephen

  O'Doherty, Philip

  Roche, Augustine (Cork)

  Walters, John Tudor

  O'Donnell, Thomas (Kerry, W.)

  Roche, John (Galway, East)

  Walton, Joseph

  O'Dowd, John

  Roe, Sir Thomas

  Ward, John (Stoke-upon-Trent)

  O'Kelly, Edward P. (Wicklow, W.)

  Rowntree, Arnold

  Ward, W. Dudley (Southampton)

  O'Kelly, James (Roscommon, N.)

  Runciman, Rt. Hon. Walter

  Wardle, George J

  O'Malley, William

  Samuel, Rt. Hon. H. L. (Cleveland)

  Waring, Walter

  O'Neill, Dr. Charles (Armagh, S.)

  Samuel, J. (Stockton-on-Tees)

  Warner, Thomas Courtenay T.

  O'Shaughnessy, P. J.

  Samuel, S. M. (Whitechapel)

  Wason, Rt. Hon. E. (Clackmannan)

  O'Sullivan, Eugene

  Scanian, Thomas

  Wason, John Cathcart (Orkney)

  Palmer, Godfrey Mark

  Schwann, Sir Charles E.

  Waterlow, David Sydney

  Parker, James (Halilax)

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

  Watt, Henry A.

  Pearce, William

  Seddon, James A.

  Wedgwood, Josiah C.

  Pearson, Weetman H. M.

  Seely, Col., Right Hon. J. E. B.

  White, Sir George (Norfolk)

  Pease, Rt. Hon. Joseph A.

  Shackleton, David James

  White, J. Dundas (Dumbartonshire)

  Philipps, Col. Ivor (Southampton)

  Sheehy, David

  White, Sir Luke (Yorks, E.R.)

  Philipps, Sir O. C. (Pembroke)

  Sherwell, Arthur James

  Whitehouse, John Howard

  Phillips, John (Longford, S.)

  Shortt, Edward

  Whittaker, Rt. Hon. Sir Thomas P.

  Pickersgill, Edward Hare

  Simon, John Allsebrook

  Whyte, Alexander F. (Perth)

  Pirle, Duncan V.

  Smyth, Thomas F. (Leitrim, S.)

  Wiles, Thomas

  Pointer, Joseph

  Snowden, Philip

  Wilkie, Alexander

  Pollard, Sir George H.

  Soares, Ernest Joseph

  Williams, Aneurin (Plymouth)

  Power, Patrick Joseph

  Spicer, Sir Albert

  Williams, John (Glamorgan)

  Price, C. E. (Edinburgh, Central)

  Stanley, Albert (Staffs, N.W.)

  Williams, Penry (Middlesbrough)

  Price, Sir Robert J. (Norfolk, E.)

  Strachey, Sir Edward

  Williams, Llewelyn (Carmarthen)

  Priestley, Arthur (Grantham)

  Summers, James Wooley

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

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

  Sutherland, John E.

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

  Pringle, William M. R.

  Sutton, John E.

  Wilson, John (Durham, Mid)

  Radford, George Heynes

  Taylor, John W. (Durham)

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

  Rattan, Peter Wilson

  Taylor, Theodore C. (Radcliffe)

  Wilson, T. F. (Lanark, N.E.)

  Rainy, Adam Rolland

  Tennant, Harold John

  Wilson, W. T. (Westhoughton)

  Raphael, Herbert Henry

  Thomas, Abel (Carmarthen, E.)

  Winfrey, Richard

  Rea, Walter Russell

  Thomas, Sir A. (Glamorgan, E.)

  Wood, T. M'Kinnon (Glasgow)

  Reddy, Michael

  Thomas, David Alfred (Cardiff)

  Young, William (Perth, East)

  Redmond, John E. (Waterford)

  Thomas, James Henry (Derby)

  Younger, W. (Peebles and Selkirk)

  Redmond, William (Clare, E.)

  Thorne, G. R. (Wolverhampton)

  Yoxall, Sir James Henry

  Rees, John David

  Thorne, William (West Ham)

  Rendall, Athelstan

  Toulmin, George

  Richards, Thomas

  Trevelyan, Charles Philips

  TELLERS FOR THE NOES.—Master of Elibank and Mr. Fuller.

  Roberts, Charles H. (Lincoln)

  Twist, Henry

  Roberts, George H. (Norwich)

  Ure, Rt. Hon. Alexander

  And, it being Seven of the clock, the Chairman, pursuant to the Order of the House of the 18th April, proceeded to put forthwith the Question already proposed from the Chair.
  Main Question put.
  The Committee divided: Ayes, 335; Noes, 249.

  Division No. 50.]

  AYES.

  [7.13 p.m.

  Abraham, William

  Boland, John

  Collins, Stephen (Lambeth)

  Addison, Dr. Christopher

  Bowerman, Charles W.

  Collins, Sir Wm. J. (St. Pancras, W.)

  Adkins, W. Ryland D.

  Bowles, Thomas Gibson

  Compton-Rickett, Sir J.

  Agnew, George William

  Boyle, Daniel (Mayo, North)

  Condon, Thomas Joseph

  Ainsworth, John Stirling

  Brace, William

  Corbett, A. Cameron (Glasgow)

  Alden, Percy

  Brady, Patrick Joseph

  Cornwall, Sir Edwin A.

  Allen, Charles Peter

  Brigg, Sir John

  Cory, Sir Clifford John

  Anderson, Andrew Macbeth

  Brocklehurst, William B.

  Cowan, William Henry

  Armitage, Robert

  Brunner, John F. L.

  Craig, Herbert J. (Tynemouth)

  Ashton, Thomas Gair

  Burke, E. Havlland-

  Crawshay-Williams, Eliot

  Asquith, Rt. Hon. Herbert Henry

  Burns, Rt. Hon. John

  Crosfield, A. H.

  Baker, Harold T. (Accrington)

  Burt, Rt. Hon. Thomas

  Crossley, Sir William J.

  Baker, Joseph Allen (Finsbury, E.)

  Buxton, C. R. (Devon, Mid)

  Cullinan, John

  Balfour, Robert (Lanark)

  Buxton, Noel (Norfolk, N.)

  Dalziel, Sir James H. (Kirkcaldy)

  Barclay, Sir Thomas

  Buxton, Rt. Hon. S. C. (Poplar)

  Davies, Ellis William (Ellton)

  Barlow, Sir John Emmott

  Byles, William Pollard

  Davies, Sir W. Howell (Bristol, S.)

  Barnes, George N.

  Cameron, Robert

  Davies, M. Vaughan (Cardigan)

  Barran, Sir John N. (Hawick B.)

  Carr-Gomm, H. W.

  Dawes, James Arthur

  Barran, Rowland Hirst (Leeds, N.)

  Cawley, Sir Frederick (Prestwich)

  Delany, William

  Barry, Edward (Cork, S.)

  Cawley, H. T. (Lanes., Heywood)

  Denman, Han. Richard Douglas

  Barry, Redmond J. (Tyrone, N.)

  Chancellor, Henry George

  Devlin, Joseph

  Barton, William

  Channing, Sir Francis Allston

  Dilke, Rt. Hon. Sir Charles

  Beale, William Phipson

  Chapple, Dr. William Allen

  Dillon, John

  Benn, W. (Tower Hamlets, S. Geo.)

  Churchill, Rt. Hon. Winston S.

  Doris, William

  Bentham, George Jackson

  Clancy, John Joseph

  Duffy, William J.

  Bethell, Sir John Henry

  Clough, William

  Duncan, C. (Barrow-in-Furness)

  Birrell, Rt. Hon. Augustine

  Clynes, John R.

  Duncan, J. Hastings (York, Otley)

  Black, Arthur W.

  Collins, Godfrey P. (Greenock)

  Edwards, Enoch

  Ellis, Rt. Hon. John Edward

  Lynch, Arthur Alfred

  Roch, Walter F. (Pembroke)

  Elverston, Harold

  Macdonald, J. R. (Leicester)

  Roche, Augustine (Cork)

  Esmonde, Sir Thomas

  Macdonald, J. M. (Falkirk Burghs)

  Roche, John (Galway, East)

  Esslemont, George Birnle

  Macnamara, Dr. Thomas J.

  Roe, Sir Thomas

  Falconer, James

  MacVeagh, Jeremiah

  Powntree, Arnold

  Farrell, James Patrick

  M'Callum, John M.

  Runciman, Rt. Hon. Walter

  Fenwick, Charles

  McKenna, Rt. Hon. Reginald

  Samuel, Rt. Hon. H. L. (Cleveland)

  Ferens, Thomas Robinson

  M'Laren, F. W. S. (Lines., Spalding)

  Samuel, J- (Stockton-on-Tees)

  Ferguson, Ronald C. Munre

  Mallet, Charles Edward

  Samuel, S. M. (Whitechapel)

  Ffrench, Peter

  Manfield, Harry

  Scanlan, Thomas

  Flavin, Michael Joseph

  Marks, George Croydon

  Schwann, Sir Charles E.

  France, Gerald Ashburner

  Martin, Joseph

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

  Furness, Sir Christopher

  Masterman, C. F. G.

  Seddon, James A.

  Gelder, Sir William Alfred

  Meagher, Michael

  Seely, Col. Right Hon. J. E. B.

  Gibson, James Puckering

  Meehan, Francis E. (Leitrim, N.)

  Shackleton, David James

  Gill, Alfred Henry

  Meehan, Patrick A. (Queen's County)

  Sheeny, David

  Glanville, Harold James

  Menzies, Sir Walter

  Sherwell, Arthur James

  Glover, Thomas

  Middlebrook, William

  Shortt, Edward

  Greenwood, Granville George

  Millar, James Duncan

  Simon, John Allsebrook

  Greig, Colonel James William

  Molloy, Michael

  Smyth, Thomas F. (Leitrim, S.)

  Grenfell, Cecil Alfred

  Molteno, Percy Alport

  Snowden, Philip

  Griffith, Ellis Jones (Anglesey)

  Mond, Alfred Moritz

  Soares, Ernest Joseph

  Gulland, John William

  Montagu, Hon. E. S.

  Spicer, Sir Albert

  Gwynn, Stephen Lucius (Galway)

  Mooney, John J.

  Stanley, Albert (Staffs, N.W.)

  Hackett, John

  Morgan, G. Hay (Cornwall)

  Strachey, Sir Edward

  Haldane, Rt. Hon. Richard B.

  Morgan, J. Lloyd (Carmarthen)

  Summers, James Woolley

  Hall, F. (Yorks, Normanton)

  Morton, Alpheus Cleophas

  Sutherland, John E.

  Hancock, John George

  Muldoon, John

  Sutton, John E.

  Harcourt, Rt. Hon. L. (Rossendale)

  Murray, Capt. Hon. Arthur C.

  Taylor, John W. (Durham)

  Harcourt, Robert V. (Montrose)

  Muspratt, Max

  Taylor, Theodore C. (Radcliffe)

  Hardie, J. Keir (Merthyr Tydvil)

  Nannetti, Joseph P.

  Tennant, Harold John

  Harvey, T. E. (Leeds, West)

  Neilson, Francis

  Thomas, Abel (Carmarthen, E.)

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

  Nicholson, Charles N. (Doncaster)

  Thomas, Sir A. (Glamorgan, E.)

  Harwood, George

  Nolan, Joseph

  Thomas, David Alfred (Cardiff)

  Haslam, James (Derbyshire)

  Norton, Capt. Cecil W.

  Thomas, James Henry (Derby)

  Haslam, Lewis (Monmouth)

  Nugent, Sir Walter Richard

  Thorne, G. R. (Wolverhampton)

  Havelock-Allan, Sir Henry

  Nussey, Sir T. Wilians

  Thorne, William (West Ham)

  Haworth, Arthur A.

  Nuttall, Harry

  Toulmin, George

  Hayden, John Patrick

  O'Brien, Patrick (Kilkenny)

  Trevelyan, Charles Philips

  Hazleton, Richard

  O'Connor, John (Kildare, N.)

  Twist, Henry

  Helme, Norval Watson

  O'Connor, T. P. (Liverpool)

  Ure, Rt. Hon. Alexander

  Hemmerde, Edward George

  O'Doherty, Philip

  Verney, Frederick William

  Henderson, Arthur (Durham)

  O'Donnell, Thomas (Kerry, W.)

  Vivian, Henry

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

  O'Dowd, John

  Wadsworth, John

  Henry, Charles Solomon

  O'Kelly, Edward P. (Wicklow, W.)

  Walker, H. De R. (Leicester)

  Herbert, Col. Sir Ivor (Mon. S.)

  O'Kelly, James (Roscommon, N.)

  Walsh, Stephen

  Higham, John Sharp

  O'Malley, William

  Walters, John Tudor

  Hindle, Frederick George

  O'Neill, Dr. Charles (Armagh, S.)

  Walton, Joseph

  Hobhouse, Rt. Hon. Charles E. H.

  O'Shaughnessy, P. J.

  Ward, John (Stoke-upon-Trent)

  Hodge, John

  O'Sullivan, Eugene

  Ward, W. Dudley (Southampton)

  Hogan, Michael

  Palmer, Godfrey Mark

  Wardle, George J.

  Hooper, Arthur George

  Parker, James (Halifax)

  Waring, Walter

  Hope, John Deans (Fife, West)

  Pearce, William

  Warner, Thomas Courtenay T.

  Home, Charles Silvester (Ipswich)

  Pearson, Weettnan H. M.

  Wason, Rt. Hon. E. (Clackmannan)

  Howard, Hon. Geoffrey

  Pease, Rt. Hon. Joseph A.

  Wason, John Cathcart (Orkney)

  Hudson, Walter

  Philipps, Col. Ivor (Southampton)

  Waterlow, David Sydney

  Hughes, Spencer Leigh

  Philipps, Sir O. C. (Pembroke)

  Watt, Henry A.

  Illingworth, Percy H.

  Phillips, John (Longford, S.)

  Wedgwood, Josiah C.

  Isaacs, Sir Rufus Daniel

  Pickersgill, Edward Hare

  White, Sir George (Norfolk)

  Johnson, William

  Pirie, Duncan V.

  White, J. Dundas (Dumbartonshire)

  Jones, Edgar R. (Merthyr Tydvil)

  Pointer, Joseph

  White, Sir Luke (York, E.R.)

  Jones, Henry Haydn (Merioneth)

  Pollard, Sir George H.

  Whitehouse, John Howard

  Jones, William (Carnarvonshire)

  Power, Patrick Joseph

  Whittaker, Rt. Hon. Sir Thomas P.

  Jowett, Frederick William

  Price, C. E (Edinburgh, Central)

  Whyte, Alexander F. (Perth)

  Joyce, Michael

  Price, Sir Robert J. (Norfolk, E.)

  Wiles, Thomas

  Kelly, Edward

  Priestley, Arthur (Grantham)

  Wilkie, Alexander

  Kemp, Sir George

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

  Williams, Aneurin (Plymouth)

  Kennedy, Vincent Paul

  Pringle, William M. R.

  Williams, John (Glamorgan)

  Kettle, Thomas Michael

  Radford, George Heynes

  Williams, Penry (Middlesbrough)

  Kilbride, Denis

  Raffan, Peter Wilson

  Williams, Llewelyn (Carmarthen)

  King, Joseph (Somerset, N.)

  Rainy, Adam Rolland

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

  Lambert, George

  Raphael, Herbert Henry

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

  Lardner, James Carrige Rushe

  Rea, Walter Russell

  Wilson, John (Durham, Mid)

  Law, Hugh A. (Donegal, W.)

  Reddy, Michael

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

  Layland-Barratt, Sir Francis

  Redmond, John E. (Waterford)

  Wilson, T. F. (Lanark, N.E.)

  Leach, Charles

  Redmond, William (Clare, E.)

  Wilson, W. T. (Westhoughton)

  Lehmann, Rudolf C.

  Rees, J. D.

  Winfrey, Richard

  Levy, Sir Maurice

  Rendall, Athelstan

  Wood, T. M'Kinnon (Glasgow)

  Lewis, John Herbert

  Richards, Thomas

  Young, William (Perth, East)

  Lincoln, Ignatius Timothy T.

  Roberts, Charles H. (Lincoln)

  Younger, W. (Peebles and Selkirk)

  Lloyd-George. Rt. Hon. David

  Roberts, George H. (Norwich)

  Yoxall, Sir James Henry

  Lough, Rt. Hon. Thomas

  Roberts, Sir J. H. (Denbighs.)

  Low, Sir Frederick (Norwich)

  Robertson, Sir G. Scott (Bradford)

  TELLERS FOR THE AYES.—Master of Elibank and Mr. Fuller.

  Lundon, Thomas

  Robertson, John M. (Tyneside)

  Luttrell, Hugh Fownes

  Robson, Sir William Snowdon

  2160

  2161

  NOES.

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

  Foster, John K. (Coventry)

  Mount, William Arthur

  Adam, Major William A.

  Gardner, Ernest

  Newdegate, F. A.

  Anson, Sir William Reynell

  Gastrell, Major W. Houghton

  Newman, John R. p.

  Archer-Shee, Major Martin

  Gibbs, George Abraham

  Newton, Harry Kottingham

  Arkwright, John Stanhope

  Gilhooly, James

  Nicholson, Wm. G. (Petersfield)

  Ashley, Wilfrid W.

  Gilmour, Captain John

  Nield, Herbert

  Attenborough, Walter Annis

  Goldsmith, Frank

  Norton-Griffiths, J. (Wednesbury)

  Bagot, Captain J.

  Gooch, Henry Cubitt

  O'Brien, William (Cork)

  Baird, John Lawrence

  Goulding, Edward Alfred

  O'Donnell, John (Mayo, S.)

  Baker, Sir Randolf L. (Dorset, N.)

  Grant, James Augustus

  O'Neill, Hon. A. E. B. (Antrim, Mid)

  Baldwin, Stanley

  Greene, Walter Raymond

  Orde-Powlett, Hon. w. G. A.

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

  Guiney, Patrick

  Ormsby-Gore, Hon. William

  Banbury, Sir Frederick George

  Guinness, Hon. Walter Edward

  Paget, Almeric Hugh

  Banner, John S. Harmood-

  Gwynne, R. S. (Sussex, Eastbourne)

  Parkes, Ebenezer

  Baring, Capt. Hon. Guy Victor

  Haddock, George Baker

  Peel, Capt. R. F. (Woodbridge)

  Barnston, Harry

  Hall, D. B. (Isle of Wight)

  Peel, Hon. Wm. R. W. (Taunton)

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

  Hall, E. Marshall (Toxteth, E.)

  Perkins, Walter Frank

  Bathurst, Hon. Allen B. (Glouc. E.)

  Hambro, Angus Valdemar

  Peto, Basil Edward

  Bathurst, Charles (Wilts, Wilton)

  Hamersley, Alfred St. George

  Pollock, Ernest Murray

  Beach, Hon. Michael Hugh Hicks

  Hamilton, Marquess of (Londonderry)

  Pretyman, Ernest George

  Beckett, Hon. William Gervase

  Hardy, Laurence (Kent, Ashford)

  Proby, Col. Douglas James

  Benn, Ion Hamilton (Greenwich)

  Harris, F. L. (Tower Hamlets, Stepney)

  Quilter, William Eley C.

  Bentinck, Lord H. Cavendish-

  Harris, H. P. (Paddington, S.)

  Randles, Sir John Scurrah

  Beresford, Lord Charles

  Harrison-Broadley, H. B.

  Rankin, Sir James

  Bird, Alfred

  Healy, Maurice (Cork, N.E.)

  Ratcliff, Major R. F.

  Boyle, W. Lewis (Norfolk, Mid)

  Healy, Timothy Michael

  Rawlinson, John Frederick Peel

  Boyton, James

  Heath, Col. Arthur Howard

  Rawson, Col. Richard H.

  Brackenbury, Henry Langton

  Helmsley, Viscount

  Remnant, James Farquharson

  Brassey, H. L. C. (Northants, N.)

  Hermon-Hodge, Sir Robert T.

  Rice, Hon. Walter Fitz-Uryan

  Brassey, Capt. R. (Oxon, Banbury)

  Hickman, Colonel Thomas E.

  Ridley, Samuel Fordo

  Bridgeman, William Clive

  Hill, Sir Clement L. (Shrewsbury)

  Roberts, S. (Sheffield, Ecclesall)

  Brotherton, Edward Allen

  Hillier, Dr. Alfred Peter

  Rolleston, Sir John

  Brunskill, Gerald Fitzgibbon

  Hills, John Walter (Durham)

  Ronaldshay, Earl of

  Bull, Sir William James

  Hoare, Samuel John Gurney

  Rothschild, Lionel de

  Burdett-Coutts, William

  Hohler, Gerald Fitzroy

  Royds, Edmund

  Butcher, John George (York)

  Hope, Harry (Bute)

  Rutherford, Watson

  Butcher, S. H. (Cambridge University)

  Hope, James Fitzalan (Sheffield)

  Salter, Arthur Clavell

  Calley, Col. Thomas C. P.

  Home, William E. (Surrey, Guildford)

  Samuel, Sir Harry (Norwood)

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

  Homer, Andrew Long

  Sanderson, Lancelot

  Carlile, Edward Hildred

  Houston, Robert Paterson

  Sandys, G. J. (Somerset, Wells)

  Carson, Rt. Hon. Sir Edward H.

  Hume-Williams, Wm. Ellis

  Sandys, Lt.-Col. T. M. (Bootie)

  Castlereagh, Viscount

  Hunt, Rowland

  Sassoon, Sir Edward Albert

  Cater, John

  Hunter, Sir Chas. Rodk. (Bath)

  Scott, Sir S. (Marylebone, w.,

  Cautley, Henry Strother

  Jackson, John A. (Whitehaven)

  Sheehan, Daniel Daniel

  Cave, George

  Jardine, Ernest (Somerset, East)

  Stanier, Seville

  Cecil, Evelyn (Aston Manor)

  Jessel, Captain Herbert M.

  Stanley, Hon. Arthur (Ormskirk)

  Cecil, Lord Hugh (Oxford University)

  Kerr-Smiley, Peter Kerr

  Stanley, Hon. G. F. (Preston)

  Chaloner, Col. R. G. W.

  Kerry, Earl of

  Starkey, John Ralph

  Chamberlain, Rt. Hon. J. A. (Worc'r.)

  Keswick, William

  Staveley-Hill, Henry (Staffordshire)

  Chambers, James

  Kimber, Sir Henry

  Steel-Maitland, A. D.

  Clive, Percy Archer

  King, Sir Henry Seymour (Hull)

  Stewart, Gershom (Ches. Wirral)

  Clyde, James Avon

  Kinloch-Cooke, Sir Clement

  Stewart, Sir M'T. (Kirkcudbrightsh.)

  Coates, Major Edward F.

  Kirkwood, John H. M.

  Strauss, Arthur

  Colefax, Henry Arthur

  Knight, Capt. Eric Ayshford

  Sykes, Alan John

  Cooper, Capt. Bryan R (Dublin, S.)

  Knott, James

  Talbot, Lord Edmund

  Cooper, Richard Ashmole (Walsall)

  Lane-Fox, G. R

  Terrell, Henry (Gloucester)

  Courthope, George Loyd

  Law, Andrew Bonar (Dulwich)

  Thompson, Robert

  Craig, Charles Curtis (Antrim, S.)

  Lawson, Hon. Harry

  Thynne, Lord Alexander

  Craig, Captain James (Down, E.)

  Lee, Arthur Hamilton

  Tobin, Alfred Aspinall

  Craig, Norman (Kent, Thanet)

  Lewisham, Viscount

  Tryon, Capt. George Clement

  Craik, Sir Henry

  Llewelyn, Venables

  Tullibardine, Marquess of

  Crean, Eugene

  Lloyd, George Ambrose

  Valentia, Viscount

  Cripps, Sir Charles Alfred

  Locker-Lampson, O. (Ramsay)

  Verrall, George Henry

  Croft, Henry Page

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

  Walker, Col. W. H. (Lancashire)

  Dairymple, Viscount

  Long, Rt. Hon. Walter

  Walrond, Hon. Lionel

  Dalziel, D. (Brixton)

  Lonsdale, John Brownlee

  Ward, A. S. (Herts, Watford)

  Dickson, Rt. Hon. C. S. (Glasgow, E.)

  Lowe, Sir F. W. (Birm., Edgbaston)

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

  Dixon, Charles Harvey (Boston)

  Lyttelton, Rt. Hn. A. (S. Geo., Han. Sq.)

  Wheler, Granville C. H.

  Douglas, Rt. Hon. A. Akers-

  Lyttelton, Hon. J. C. (Droftwich)

  White, Major G. D. (Lanes, Southport)

  Du Cros, A. (Tower Hamlets, Bow)

  Mackinder, Halford J.

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

  Du Cros, Arthur P. (Hastings)

  Macmaster, Donald

  Willouahby, Major Hon. Claude

  Duke, Henry Edward

  M'Arthur, Charles

  Willouyhby de Eresby, Lord

  Duncannon, Viscount

  M'Calmont, Colonel James

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

  Dunn, Sir W. H. (Southwark, W.)

  Magnus, Sir Philip

  Winterton, Earl

  Eyres-Monsell, Bolton M.

  Mallaby-Decley, Harry

  Wolff, Gustav Wilhelm

  Faber, George D. (Clapham)

  Mason, James F.

  Wood, John (Stalybridge)

  Falle, Bertram Godfray

  Meysey, Thompson, E. C.

  Worthington-Evans, L. (Colchester)

  Fell, Arthur

  Mildmay, Francis Bingham

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

  Finlay, Sir Robert

  Mills, Hon. Charles Thomas

  Wyndham, Rt. Hon. George

  Fisher, William Hayes

  Mitchell, William Foot

  Younger, George (Ayr Burghs)

  Fitzroy, Hon. Edward A.

  Moore, William

  Flannery, Sir J. Fortescue

  Morpeth, Viscount

  TELLERS FOR THE NOES.—Mr. H. W. Forster and Lord Balcarres.

  Fleming, Valentine

  Morrison, Captain James A.

  Fletcher, John Samuel

  Morrison-Bell, Major A. C.

GROUP (2) EXCISE LIQUOR LICENCES.
(4) EXCISE LIQUOR LICENCES.
Motion made and Question put, That as from the first day of July, nineteen hundred and nine, in lieu of the duties of

TABLE A.—MANUFACTURERS' LICENCES.

Licence to be taken out annually.

Duty.

1. Spirits:—

(a) By a distiller of spirits

Duty specified in Scale 1.

(b) By a rectifier of spirits

£15 15s.

2. Beer:—

By a brewer of beer for sale

Duty specified in Scale 2.

By brewer of beer not being a brewer for sale

If he is the occupier of a house of an annual value exceeding ten pounds and not exceeding fifteen pounds and brews soley
for his own domestic use, 9s.

In any other case,4s.

3. Sweets:—

By a maker for sale of sweets

£5 5s.

Scale 1.—Spirit Distiller's Licence.

Number of proof gallons of spirits distilled—

Duty.

£

s.

d.

Not exceeding 50,000

10

0

0

Exceeding 50,000—

For the first 50,000 gallans

10

0

0

For every further 25,000 proof gallons or fraction 25,000 proof gallons

10

0

0

B.—WHOLESALE DEALERS' LICENCES.

Licence to be taken out by a wholesale dealer in—

Duty.

Duty.

£

s.

d.

£

s.

d.

1. Spirits

…

…

…

…

15

15

0

3. Wine

…

…

…

…

10

10

0

2. Beer

…

…

…

…

10

10

0

4. Sweets

…

…

…

…

5

5

0

C.—RETAILERS' LICENCES.

I.—On-Licences.

Licence to be taken out annually by a retailer of

Duty.

1. Spirits (Publican's licence)

A duty equal to half the annual value of the licensed premises, subject to the minimum duty payable under Scale 3.

2. Beer (Beerhouse licence)

A duty equal to a third of the annual value of the licensed premises, subject to the minimum duty payable under Scale 3.

3. Cider

Half the duty specified in Scale 4.

4. Wine

Duty specified in Scale 4.

5. Sweets

Half the duty specified in Scale 4.

Excise now payable in respect of the licences for the manufacture and sale of intoxicating liquor, there shall be charged throughout the United Kingdom on the licences specified in the following table the duties of Excise specified in that table.

Scale 2.—Licence to Brewer for Sale.

Number of bulk barrels brewed—

Duty.

£

s.

d.

Not exceeding 100

1

0

0

Exceeding 100 barrels—

For the first 100 barrels

1

0

0

For every further 50 barrels or fraction of 50 barrels

0

12

0

Scale 3.—Minimum Duty payable for Publican's and Beerhouse Licence.
There shall be a minimum duty payable on the publican's licence and the beerhouse licence respectively, as shown in the following scale:—

Population.

Minimum Duty.

Publican's Licence.

Beerhouse Licence.

In Great Britain—

£

s.

£

s.

In urban areas with a population of less than 2,000 and elsewhere than in urban areas

5

0

3

10

In urban areas with a population of—

2,000 and less than 5,000

10

0

6

10

5,000 and less than 10,000

15

0

10

0

10,000 and less than 50,000

20

0

13

0

50,000 and less than 100,000

30

0

20

0

100.000 or above

35

0

23

10

In Ireland—

In areas which are not urban areas, and in urban areas with a population of leas than 10,000

5

0

3

10

In urban areas with a population of 10,000 or above

7

10

4

0

For the purposes of this scale an urban area means any county borough, borough, or other urban district, and the Administrative County of London shall be deemed to be a single urban area.
Scale 4.—Wine Retailer's On-Licence.
Annual value of licensed premises—

Duty.

Under £30

…

…

£4

10

0

£30 and under £50

…

…

6

0

0

£50 and under £100

…

…

9

0

0

£100 and over

…

…

12

0

0

The duty on a cider retailer's on-licence and a sweets retailer's on-licence is to be half the duty under the above scale.

II.—Off-Licences.

Licence to be taken out by a retailer of

Duty.

1. Spirits

Duty specified in Scale 5.

2. Beer

Duty specified in Scale 6.

3. Cider

£2.

4. Wine

Duty specified in Scale 7.

5. Sweets

£2.

Scale 5.—Spirit Retailer's Off-Licence.
Annual value of licensed premises—

Duty.

£

s.

d.

Not exceeding £10

…

10

0

0

Exceeding £10 and not exceeding£20

…

11

10

0

Exceeding £20 exceeding £30

…

14

0

0

Exceeding £30 exceeding £50

…

15

0

0

Exceeding £50 exceeding £75

…

16

0

0

Exceeding £75 exceeding £100

…

17

10

0

Exceeding £100 exceeding £250

…

19

0

0

Exceeding £250 exceeding £500

…

30

0

0

Exceeding £500

…

50

0

0

Scale 6.—Beer Retailer's Off-Licence.
Annual value of licensed premises—

Duty.

£

s.

d.

Not exceeding £10

…

1

10

0

Exceeding £10 and not exceeding £20

…

2

0

0

Exceeding £20 exceeding £30

…

2

10

0

Exceeding £30 exceeding £50

…

3

0

0

Exceeding £50 exceeding £75

…

3

10

0

Exceeding £75 exceeding £100

…

4

0

0

Exceeding £100 exceeding £250

…

4

10

0

Exceeding £250 exceeding £500

…

7

0

0

Exceeding £500

…

10

0

0

Scale 7.—Wine Retailer's Off-Licence.
Annual value of licensed premises—

Duty.

£

s.

d.

Not exceeding £20

…

2

10

0

Exceeding £20 but not exceeding £30

…

3

0

0

Exceeding £30 exceeding £50

…

3

10

0

Exceeding £50 exceeding £75

…

4

0

0

Exceeding £75 exceeding £100

…

4

10

0

Exceeding £100 exceeding £250

…

5

0

0

Exceeding £250 exceeding £500

…

7

0

0

Exceeding £500

…

10

0

0

D.—PASSENGER VESSEL LICENCES.
1. Licence to be taken out annually in respect of a passenger vessel by the master or other person belonging to the vessel nominated 'by the owner of the vessel—
Duty of £10.
2. Licence to be taken out in respect of a passenger vessel by the master or other person belonging to the vessel nominated by the owner of the vessel, and to be in force for one day only—
Duty of £2.
E.—RAILWAY RESTAURANT CAR LICENCES.
Licence to be taken out annually in respect of a railway restaurant car by the railway company or other person owning the car—
Duty of £1.
F.—OCCASIONAL LICENCES.
Occasional licences granted under section thirteen of The Revenue Act 1862 (25 and 26 Vic, c. 22), section twenty of The Revenue Act, 1863 (26 and 27 Vic, c 33), and section five of The Revenue Act, 1864 (27 and 28 Vic, c. 18).
Duties:—

(a) Sale of any intoxicating liquor—per day, 10s.

(b) Sale of beer or wine only—per day, 5s.

The enactments specified to have effect throughout the United Kingdom.
(5) DUTY IN RESPECT OF INTOXICATING LIQUOR SUPPLIED IN CLUBS.
That in the year beginning the first day of January, nineteen hundred and ten, and in every subsequent year, a statement, shall be made of the purchases of intoxicating liquor by every club during the preceding year, and an Excise duty shall be charged at a rate not exceeding sixpence for every pound of those purchases.
(6) BEER (CUSTOMS).
That in addition to the duties of Customs now payable on beer imported into Great Britain or Ireland there shall, as from the eleventh day of May, nineteen hundred and nine, be charged the following duties (that is to say):—
In the case of beer called or similar to mum, spruce, black beer, or Berlin white beer, or other preparations, whether fermented or not fermented, of a similar character—
For every thirty-six gallons where the worts thereof are or were before fermentation of a specific gravity—

s.

d.

Not exceeding one thousand two hundred and fifteen degrees, a duty of

1

0

Exceeding one thousand two hundred and fifteen degrees, a duty of

1

2

In the case of every description of beer other than that above specified:—

For every thirty-six gallons, where the worts thereof were, before fermentation, of a specific gravity of one thousand and fifty-five degrees, a duty of

threepence

and so on in proportion for any difference in gravity.

The Committee divided: Ayes, 333; Noes, 248.

Division No. 51].

AYES.

[7.20 p.m.

Abraham, William

Boland, John Pius

Collins, Stephen (Lambeth)

Addison, Dr. C.

Bowerman, C. W.

Collins, Sir Wm. J. (St. Pancras, W.)

Adkins, W. Ryland D.

Bowles, T. Gibson

Compton-Rlckett, Sir J.

Agnew, George William

Eoyle, D. (Mayo, N.|

Condon, Thomas Joseph

Ainsworth, John Stirling

Brace, William

Corbett, A. Cameron (Glasgow)

Alden, Percy

Brady, P. J.

Cornwall, Sir Edwin A.

Allen, Charles P.

Brigg, Sir John

Cory, Sir Clifford John

Anderson, A.

Brocklehurst, W. B.

Cowan, V?. H.

Armitage- R.

Brunner, J. F. L.

Craig, Herbert J. (Tyncmouth)

Ashton, Thomas Gair

Burke, E. Haviland-

Crawshay-Williams, Eliot

Asquith, Rt. Hon. Herbert Henry

Burns, Rt. Hon. John

Crosfield, A. H.

Baker, H. T. (Accrington)

Burt, Rt. Hon. Thomas

Crossley, Sir W. J.

Saker, Joseph A. (Finsbury E.)

Buxton, C. R. (Devon, Mid)

Cullinan, J,

Balfour, Robert (Lanark)

Buxton, Noel (Norfolk. N.)

Dalziel, Sir James H. (Kirkcaldy)

Barclay, SI? T.

Buxton, Rt. Hon. Sydney C. (Poplar)

Davies, E. William (Eifion)

Barlow, Sir John E.

Byles, William Pollard

Davies, Sir W. Howell (Bristol. S.)

Barnes, G. N.

Cameron, Robert

Davies, M. Vaughan- (Cardigan)

Barran, Sir J. (Hawlck)

Carr-Gomm, H. W.

Dawes, J. A.

Bar ran, Rowland Hirst (Leeds, N.)

Cawley, Sir Frederick (Prestwich)

Delany, William

Barry, E. (Cork, S.)

Cawley, Harold T. (Heywood)

Denman, R. D,

Barry, Redmcnd J. (Tyrone, N.)

Chancellor, H. G.

Devlin, Joseph

Barton, W.

Charming, Sir Francis Allston

Dilke, Rt. Hon. Sir Charles

Beale, W. p.

Chapple, Dr. W. A.

Dillon, John

Benn, w. (Tower Hamlets, St. Geo.)

Churchill, Rt. Hon. Winston S.

Doris, W.

Bentham, G. J.

Clancy, John Joseph

Duffy, William J.

Bethell, Sir J. H.

Clough, William

Duncan, C. (Barrow-in-Furness)

Blrrell, Rt. Hon. Augistlne

Clynes, J. H.

Duncan, J. Hastings (York, Otley)

Black, Arthur W.

Ccllins, G. P. (Greenock)

Edwards, Enoch

Ellis, Rt. Hon. John Edward

Luttrell, Hugh Fownes

Robson, Sir William Snowdon

Elverston, H.

Lynch, A. A.

Roch, Walter F. (Pembroke)

Esmonds, Sir Thomas

Macdonald, J. R. (Leicester)

Roche, Augustine (Cork)

Esslemont, George Birnie

Macdonald, J. M. (Falkirk Burghs)

Roche, John (Galway, E.)

Falconer, J.

Macnamara, Dr. Thomas J.

Roe, Sir Thomas

Farrell, James Patrick

MacVcagh, Jeremiah

Rowntree, Arnold

Fenwick, Charles

M'Callum, John M.

Runciman, Rt. Hon. Walter

Ferens, T. R.

McKenna, Rt. Hon. Reginald

Samuel, Rt. Hon. H. L. (Cleveland)

Ferguson, R. C. Munro

M'Laren, F. W. S. (Line, Spalding)

Samuel, J. (Stockton)

Ffrench, Peter

Mallet, Charles E.

Samuel, S. M. (Whitechapel)

Flavin, Michael Joseph

Manfield, Harry

Scanian, Thomas

France, G. A,

Marks, G. Croydon

Schwann, Sir C. E.

Furness, Sir Christopher

Martin, J.

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

Gelder, Sir W. A.

Masterman C. F. G.

Seddon, J.

Gibson, James P.

Meagher, Michael

Seely, Col., Right Hon. J. E. B.

Gill, A. H.

Meehan, Francis E. (Leitrim, N.)

Shackleton, David James

Glanville, H. J.

Meehan, Patrick A. (Queen's Co.)

Sheehy, David

Glover, Thomas

Menzies, Sir Walter

Sherwell, Arthur James

Greenwood, G. G.

Middlebrook, William

Shortt, Edward

Greig, Colonel J. W.

Millar, J. D.

Simon, John Allsebrook

Grenfell, Cecil Alfred

Molloy, M.

Smyth, Thomas F. (Leitrim, S.)

Griffith, Ellis J. (Anglesey)

Molteno, Percy Alport

Snowden, P.

Gulland, John W.

Mond, Alfred Moritz

Soares, Ernest J.

Gwynn, Stephen Lucius (Galway)

Montagu, Hon. E. S.

Spicer, Sir Albert

Hackett, J.

Mooney, J. J.

Stanley, Albert (Staffs, N.W.)

Haldane, Rt. Hon. Richard B.

Morgan, G. Hay (Cornwall)

Strachey, Sir Edward

Hall, Frederick (Normanton)

Morgan, J. Lloyd (Carmarthen)

Summers, James Woolley

Hancock, J. G.

Morton, Alphcus Cleophas

Sutherland, J. E.

Harcourt, Rt. Hon. L. (Rossendale)

Muldoon, John

Sutton, John E.

Harcourt, Robert V. (Montrose)

Murray, Captain Hon. A. C.

Taylor, John W. (Durham)

Hardie, J. Keir (Merthyr Tydvil)

Muspratt, M.

Taylor, Theodore C. (Radcliffe)

Harvey, T. E. (Leeds, W.)

Nannetti, Joseph P.

Tennant, Harold John

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

Neilson, Francis

Thomas, Abel (Carmarthen, E.)

Harwood, George

Nicholson, Charles N. (Doncaster)

Thomas, Sir A. (Glamorgan, E.)

Haslam, James (Derbyshire)

Nolan, Joseph

Thomas, D. A. (Cardiff)

Haslam, Lewis (Monmouth)

Norton, Capt. Cecil W.

Thomas, J. H. (Derby)

Havelock-Allan, Sir Henry

Nugent, Sir Walter Richard

Thorne, G. R. (Wolverhampton)

Haworth, Arthur A.

Nussey, Sir Willans

Thorne, William (West Ham)

Hayden, John Patrick

Nuttall, Harry

Toulmin, George

Hazleton, Richard

O'Brien, Patrick (Kilkenny)

Trevelyan, Charles Philips

Helme, Norval Watson

O'Connor, John (Kildare, N.)

Twist, Henry

Hemmerde, Edward George

O'Connor, T. P. (Liverpool)

Ure, Rt. Hon. Alexander

Henderson, Arthur (Durham)

O'Doherty, Philip

Verney, F. W.

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

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

Vivian, Henry

Henry, Charles S.

O'Dowd, John

Wadsworth, j.

Herbert, Col. Sir Ivor

O'Kelly, Edward P. (Wicklow, W.)

Walker, H. De R. (Leicester)

Higham, John Sharp

O'Kelly, James (Roscommon, N.)

Walsh, Stephen

Hindle, F. G.

O'Malley, William

Walters, John Tudor

Hobhouse, Rt. Hon. Charles E. H.

O'Neill, Dr. Charles (Armagh, S.)

Walton, Joseph

Hodge, John

O'Shaughnessy, P. J.

Ward, John (Stoke-upon-Trent)

Hogan, Michael

Palmer, Godfrey Mark

Ward, W. Dudley (Southampton)

Hooper, A. G.

Parker, James (Halifax)

Wardle, George J.

Hope, John Deans (Fife, West)

Pearce, William

Waring, Walter

Horne, C. Silvester (Ipswich)

Pearson, Weetman H. W.

Warner, Thomas Courtenay T.

Howard, Hon. Geoffrey

Pease, Rt. Hon. Joseph A.

Wason, Rt. Hon. E. (Clackmannan)

Hudson, Walter

Philipps, Col. Ivor (Southampton)

Wason, John Cathcart (Orkney)

Hughes, S. L.

Philipps, Sir Owen C. (Pembroke)

Waterlow, D. S.

Illingworth, Percy H.

Phillips, John (Longford, S.)

Watt, Henry A.

Isaacs, Sir Rufus Daniel

Pickersgill, Edward Hare

Wedgwood, Josiah C.

Johnson, W.

Pirie, Duncan V.

White, Sir George (Norfolk)

Jones, Edgar (Merthyr Tydvil)

Pointer, Joseph

White, J. Dundas (Dumbartonshire)

Jones, H. Haydn (Merioneth)

Pollard, Sir George H.

White, Sir Luke (York, E.R.)

Jones, William (Carnarvonshire)

Power, Patrick Joseph

Whitehouse, John Howard

Jowett, F. W.

Price, C. E. (Edinburgh, Central)

Whittaker, Rt. Hon. Sir Thomas P.

Joyce, Michael

Price, Sir Robert J. (Norfolk, E.)

Whyte, Alexander F. (Perth)

Kelly, Edward

Priestley, Arthur (Grantham)

Wiles, Thomas

Kemp, Sir G.

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

Wilkie, Alexander

Kennedy, Vincent Paul

Pringle, W. M. R.

Williams, Aneurin (Plymouth)

Kettle, Thomas Michael

Radford, George Heynes

Williams, J. (Glamorgan)

Kilbride, Denis

Raffan, Peter Wilson

Williams, P. (Middlesbrough)

King, J. (Somerset, N.)

Rainy, A, Rolland

Williams, Llewelyn (Carmarthen)

Lambert, George

Raphael, Herbert H.

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

Lardner, James Carrige Rushe

Rea, Walter Russell

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

Law, Hugh A. (Donegal West)

Reddy, M.

Wilson, John (Durham, Mid)

Layland-Barratt, Sir Francis

Redmond, John E. (Waterford)

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

Leach, Charles

Redmond, William (Clare)

Wilson, T. F. (Lanark, N.E.)

Lehmann, R. C.

Rees, J. D.

Wilson, W. T. (Westhoughton)

Levy, Sir Maurice

Kendall, Athelstan

Winfrey, Richard

Lewis, John Herbert

Richards, Thomas

Wood, T. M'Kinnon (Glasgow)

Lincoln, Ignatius T. T.

Roberts, Charles H. (Lincoln)

Young, W. (Perthshire, E.)

Lloyd-George, Rt. Han. David

Roberts, G. H. (Norwich)

Younger, W. (Peebles and Selkirk)

Lough, Rt. Hon. Thomas

Roberts, Sir J. H. (Denbighs)

Low, Sir F. A. (Norwich)

Robertson, Sir G. Scott (Bradford)

TELLERS FOR THE AYES.—Master of Elibank and Mr. Fuller.

Lundon, Thomas

Robertson, J. M. (Tyneside)

NOES.

Adam, Major W. A.

Forster, Henry William

Morrison-Bell, Major A. C.

Anson, Sir William Reynell

Foster, J. K. (Coventry)

Mount, William Arthur

Archer-Shee, Major M.

Gardner, Ernest

Newdegate, F. A.

Arkwright, John Stanhope

Gastrell, Major W. H.

Newman, John R. P.

Ashley, W. W.

Gibbs, G. A.

Newton, Harry Kottingham

Attenborough, W. A.

Gilhooly, James

Nicholson, Wm. G. (Petersfield)

Bagot, Captain J.

Gilmour, Captain J.

Nield, Herbert

Baird, J. L.

Goldsmith, Frank

Norton-Griffiths, J. (Wednesbury)

Baker, Sir R. L. (Dorset, N.)

Gooch, Henry Cubitt

O'Brien, William (Cork)

Balcanes, Lord

Goulding, Edward Alfred

O'Donnell, John (Mayo, S.)

Baldwin, Stanley

Grant, J. A.

O'Neill, Hon. A. E. B. (Antrim, Mid.)

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

Greene, W. R.

Orde-Powlett, Hon. W. G. A.

Banbury, Sir Frederick George

Gulney, P.

Ormsby-Gore, Hon. William

Banner, John S. Harmood-

Guinness, Hon Walter Edward

Paget, Almeric Hugh

Baring, Captain Hon. G.

Gwynne, R. S. (Sussex, Eastbourne)

Parkes, Ebenezer

Barnston, H.

Haddock, George B.

Peel, Capt. R. F. (Woodbridge)

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

Hall, D. B. (Isle of Wight)

Peel, Hon. W. R. W. (Taunton)

Bathurst, Hon. A. B. (Glouc, E.)

Hall, E. Marshall (Toxteth)

Perkins, Walter F.

Bathurst, Charles (Wilton)

Hambro, Angus Valdemar

Peto, Basil Edward

Beach. Hon. Michael Hugh Hicks

Hamersley, A. St. George

Pollock, Ernest Murray

Beckett, Hon. W. Gervase

Hamilton, Marquess of (Londonderry)

Pretyman, E. G.

Benn, I. H. (Greenwich)

Hardy, Laurence (Kent, Ashford)

Proby, Col. Douglas James

Bentinck, Lord H. Cavendish-

Harris, F. L. (Stepney)

Quilter, William Eley C.

Beresford, Lord C.

Harris, H. P. (Paddington, S.)

Randles, Sir John Scurrah

Bird, A.

Harrison-Broadley, H. B.

Rankin, Sir James

Boyle, W. L. (Norfolk, Mid)

Healy, Maurice (Cork, N.E.)

Ratcliff, Major R. F.

Royton, J.

Healy, Timothy Michael

Rawlinson, John Frederick Peel

Brackenbury, Henry Langton

Heath, Col. A. H.

Rswson, Colonel R. H.

Brassey, H. L. C. (N'thamptonshire, N.)

Helmsley, Viscount

Remnant, James Farquharson

Brassey, Capt. R. (Banbury)

Hermon-Hodge, Sir Robert

Rice, Hon. Walter F.

Bridgeman, William Clive

Hickmann, Col. T.

Ridley, Samuel Forde

Brotherton, E. A.

Hill, Sir Clement

Roberts, S. (Sheffield, Ecclesall)

Brunskill, G. F.

Hillier, Dr. A. P.

Rolleston, Sir John

Bull, Sir William James

Hills, J. W.

Ronaldshay, Earl of

Burdett-Coutts W.

Hoare, S. J. G.

Rothschild, Lionel de

Butcher, J. G. (York)

Hohler, G. F.

Royds, Edmund

Butcher, S. Henry (Cambridge Univ.)

Hope, Harry (Bute)

Rutherford, Watson

Calley, Colonel T. C. P.

Hope, James Fitzalan (Sheffield)

Salter, Arthur Clavell

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

Home, W. E. (Surrey, Guildford)

Samuel, Sir Harry (Norwood)

Carlile, E. Hildred

Horner, A. L.

Sanderson, Lancelot

Carson, Rt. Hon. Sir Edward H.

Houston, Robert Paterson

Sandys, G. J. (Somerset, Wells)

Castlereagh, Viscount

Hume-Williams, W. E.

Sandys, Lieut.-Col. T. M. (Bootie)

Cator, John

Hunt, Rowland

Sassoon, Sir Edward Albert

Cautley, H. Strother

Hunter, Sir C. R. (Bath)

Scott, Sir S. (Marylebone, W.)

Cave, George

Jackson, John A. (Whitehaven)

Sheehan, Daniel Daniel

Cecil, Evelyn (Aston Manor)

Jardine, E. (Somerset, E.)

Starler, Beville

Cecil, Lord Hugh (Oxford University)

Jessel, Captain H. M

Stanley, Hon. Arthur (Ormskirk)

Chaloner, Colonel R. G. W.

Kerr-Smiley, Peter

Stanley, Hon. G. F. (Preston)

Chamberlain, Rt. Hon. J. A. (Worc'r)

Kerry, Earl of

Starkey, John R.

Chambers, J.

Keswick, William

Staveley-Hill, Henry (Staffordshire)

Clive, Percy Archer

Kimber, Sir Henry

Steel-Maitland, A. D.

Clyde, J. Avon

King, Sir Henry Seymour (Hull)

Stewart, Gershom (Ches. Wirral)

Coates, Major E. F.

Kinloch-Cooke, Sir Clement

Stewart, Sir M'T. (Kirkcudbright)

Colefax, H. A.

Kirkwood, J. H. M.

Strauss, A.

Cooper, Capt. Bryan (Dublin, S.)

Knight, Capt. E. A.

Sykes, Alan John

Cooper, R. A. (Walsall)

Knott, James

Talbot, Lord E.

Courthope, G. Loyd

Lane-Fox, G. R.

Terrell, H. (Gloucester)

Craig, Charles Curtis (Antrim, S.)

Law, Andrew Bonar (Dulwich)

Thompson, Robert

Craig, Captain James (Down, E.)

Lawson, Hon. Harry

Thynne, Lord A.

Craig, Norman (Kent)

Lee, Arthur H.

Tobin, Alfred Aspinall

Craik, Sir Henry

Lewisham, Viscount

Tryon, Capt. George Clement

Crean, Eugene

Llewelyn, Venables

Tullibardine, Marquess of

Cripps, Sir C. A.

Lloyd, G. A.

Verrall, George Henry

Croft, H. P.

Locker-Lampson, O. (Ramsay)

Walker, Col. W. H. (Lancashire)

Dairymple, Viscount

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

Walrond, Hon. Lionel

Dalziel, D. (Brixton)

Long, Rt. Hon. Walter

Ward, Arnold (Herts, Watford)

Dickson, Rt. Hon. C. Scott

Lonsdale, John Brownlee

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

Dixon, C. H.

Lowe. Sir F. W. (Birm., Edgbaston)

Wheler, Granville C. H.

Douglas, Rt. Hon. A. Akers-

Lyttelton, Rt. Hon. A. (Hanover Sq.)

Whits, Major G. D. (Lanes., Southport)

Du Cros, Alfred (Tower Hamlets, Bow)

Lyttelton, Hon. J. C. (Droftwich)

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

Du Cros, Arthur P. (Hastings)

Mackinder, H. J.

Willoughby, Major Hon. Claude

Duke, H. E.

Macmaster, Donald

Willoughby de Eresby, Lord

Duncannon, Viscount

M'Arthur, Charles

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

Dunn, Sir W. H. (Southwark)

M'Calmont, Colonel James

Winterton, Earl

Eyres-Monsell, B. M.

Magnus, Sir Philip

Wolff, Gustav Wilhelm

Faber, George Denison (Clapham)

Mallaby-Deeley, Harry

Wood, John (Stalybridge)

Fade, Bertram Godfray

Mason, J. F.

Worthington-Evans, L. (Colchester)

Fell, Arthur

Meysey-Thompson, E. C.

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

Finlay, Sir Robert

Mildmay, Francis Bingham

Wyndham, Rt. Hon. George

Fisher, W. Hayes

Mills, Hew. Charles Thomas

Younger, George (Ayr Burghs)

Fitzroy, Hon. E. A.

Mitchell, William Foot

Flannery, Sir J. Fortescue

Moore, William

TELLERS FOR THE NOES.—Sir A. Acland-Hood and Viscount Valentia.

Fleming, Valentine

Morpeth, Viscount

Fletcher, J. S.

Morrison, Captain J. A.

GROUP (3) DEATH DUTIES AND ESTATE DUTIES.

  7. DEATH DUTIES.
  Question put,—
  A.—That, in the case of persons dying on or after the thirtieth day of April, nineteen hundred and nine, there shall be substituted for the rates of Estate Duty set out in the First Schedule to The Finance Act, 1907, the following rates:—

  Where the principal value of the estate

  Estate duty shall be payable at the rate per cent, of

  £

  £

  Exceeds

  100

  and does not exceed

  500

  1

  Exceeds

  500

  and does not exceed

  1,000

  2

  Exceeds

  1,000

  and does not exceed

  5,000

  3

  Exceeds

  5,000

  and does not exceed

  10,000

  4

  Exceeds

  10,000

  and does not exceed

  20,000

  5

  Exceeds

  20,000

  and does not exceed

  40,000

  6

  Exceeds

  40,000

  and does not exceed

  70,000

  7

  Exceeds

  70,000

  and does not exceed

  100,000

  8

  Exceeds

  100,000

  and does not exceed

  150,000

  9

  Exceeds

  150,000

  and does not exceed

  200,000

  10

  Exceeds

  200,000

  and does not exceed

  400,000

  11

  Exceeds

  400,000

  and does not exceed

  600,000

  12

  Exceeds

  600,000

  and does not exceed

  800,000

  13

  Exceeds

  800,000

  and does not exceed

  1,000,000

  14

  Exceeds

  1,000,000

  15

  B.—That in the case of persons dying on or after the thirtieth day of April, nineteen hundred and nine, Settlement Estate Duty shall be charged at a rate double that at which is now chargeable, and that for the purpose of any claim to relief from Estate Duty under Sub-section (2) of Section 5 or Sub-section (1) of Section 21 of the Finance Act, 1894, in the case of persons dying on or after the thirtieth day of April, nineteen hundred and nine, payment of or liability to duty (whether the payment is made or the liability attached before, on, or after that date) in respect of settled property on the death of a person (other than the settlor) who was at the time of his death or had been at any time during the continuance of the settlement competent to dispose of the settled property, shall not be deemed to be a payment of or liability to duty in respect of settled property.
  C.—That as from the thirtieth day of April, nineteen hundred and nine—

  (1) Any Legacy or Succession Duty now payable at the rate of three per cent.
  2174
  shall be payable at the rate of five per cent., and any Legacy or Succession Duty now payable at the rate of five per cent, or six per cent, shall be payable at the rate of ten per cent.;

  (2) Legacy and Succession Duty, payable at the rate of one per cent, under The Stamp Act, 1815, and The Succession Duty Act, 1853, respectively, or any other Act, shall be charged, notwithstanding any repeal effected by or anything contained in any other Act, and the duty shall be charged in the case of husbands or wives as in the case of lineal ancestors or descendants;

  the resolution to take effect in the case of Legacy Duty only where the testator by whose will the legacy is given, or the intestate on whose death the Legacy Duty is payable, dies on or after the thirtieth day of April, nineteen hundred and nine, and in the case of a succession arising through devolution by law only where the succession arises on or after that date, and in the case of a succession arising under a disposition, only if the first succession under the disposition arises on or after that date.
  D.—That in the case of persons dying on or after the thirtieth day of April, nineteen hundred and nine, three years shall be substituted for twelve months as the period preceding the death of the deceased before which a disposition purporting to operate as an immediate gift inter vivoa, or a surrender, assurance, divesting or disposition, must have been made or effected in order that the property taken under the disposition, or effected by the surrender, assurance, divesting, or disposition, may not be included as property passing on the death of the deceased.
  E.—That in the case of persons dying on or after the thirtieth day of April, nineteen hundred and nine,—

  (1) no reduction shall be made in the estimate of the principal value of any property under Sub-section (5) of Section seven of The Finance Act, 1894, on account of the estimate being made on the assumption that the whole of the property is to be placed on the market at one and the same time;

  (2) the limitation on the estimate of the principal value of agricultural property under the same Sub-section shall cease.

  (8) ESTATE DUTY DEDUCTIONS.
  That it is expedient to limit the debts and encumbrances which may be deducted from the value of an estate in determining
  the value of the estate for the purposes of Estate Duty.
  The Committee divided: Ayes, 331; Noes, 248.

  Division No. 52.]

  AYES.

  [7.40 p.m.

  Abraham, William

  Denman, Hon. R. D.

  Kemp, Sir G.

  Addison, Dr. C.

  Devlin, Joseph

  Kennedy, Vincent Paul

  Adkins, W. Ryland D.

  Dillon, John

  Kettle, Thomas Michael

  Agnew, George William

  Doris, W.

  Kilbride, Denis

  Ainsworth, John Stirling

  Duffy, William J.

  King, J. (Somerset, N.)

  Alden, Percy

  Duncan, C. (Barrow-in-Furness)

  Lambert, George

  Allen, Charles P.

  Duncan, J. Hastings (York, Otley)

  Lardner, James Carrige Rushe

  Anderson, A.

  Edwards, Enoch

  Law, Hugh A. (Donegal, W.)

  Armitage, R.

  Ellis, Rt. Hon. John Edward

  Layland-Barratt, Sir Francis

  Ashton, Thomas Gair

  Elverston, H.

  Leach, Charles

  Asquith, Rt. Hon. Herbert Henry

  Esmonde, Sir Thomas

  Lehmann, R. C.

  Baker, H. T. (Accrington)

  Esslemont, George Birnle

  Levy, Sir Maurice

  Baker, Joseph A. (Finsbury E.)

  Falconer, James

  Lewis, John Herbert

  Balfour, Robert (Lanark)

  Farrell, James Patrick

  Lincoln, Ignatius T. T.

  Barclay, Sir T.

  Fenwick, Charles

  Lloyd-George, Rt. Hon. David

  Barlow, Sir John E.

  Ferens, T. R.

  Lough, Rt. Hon. Thomas

  Barnes, G. N.

  Ferguson, R. C. Munro

  Low, Sir F. (Norwich)

  Barran, Sir J. (Hawick)

  Ffrench, Peter

  Lundon, T.

  Barran, Rowland Hirst (Leeds, N.)

  Flavin, Michael Joseph

  Luttrell, Hugh Fownes

  Barry, E. (Cork, S.)

  France, G. A.

  Lynch, A. A.

  Barry, Redmond J. (Tyrone, N.)

  Furness, Sir Christopher

  Macdonald, J. M. (Falkirk Burghs)

  Barton, W.

  Gelder, Sir W. A.

  Macnamara, Dr. Thomas J.

  Beale, W. P.

  Gibson, James P.

  MacVeagh, Jeremiah

  Benn, W. (Tower Hamlets, St. Geo.)

  Gill, A. H.

  M'Callum, John M.

  Eentham, G. J.

  Glanville, H. J.

  McKenna, Rt. Hon. Reginald

  Bethell, Sir J. H.

  Glover, Thomas

  M'Laren, F. W. S. (Line, Spalding)

  Birrel, Rt. Hon. Augustine

  Greenwood, G. G.

  Mallet, Charles E.

  Black, Arthur W.

  Greig, Colonel J. W.

  Manfield, Harry

  Boland, John Pius

  Grenfell, Cecil Alfred

  Marks, G. Croydon

  Bowerman, C. W.

  Griffith, Ellis J. (Anglesey)

  Martin, J.

  Bowles, T. Gibson

  Gulland, John W.

  Masterman, C. F. G.

  Boyle, D. (Mayo, N.)

  Gwynn, Stephen Lucius (Galway)

  Meagher, Michael

  Brace, William

  Hackett, J.

  Median, Francis (Leitrim, N.)

  Brady, P. J.

  Haldane, Rt. Hon. Richard B.

  Meehan, Patrick A. (Queen's Co.)

  Brigg, Sir John

  Hall, Frederick (Normanton)

  Manzies, Sir Walter

  Brocklehurst, W. B.

  Hancock, J. G.

  Middlebrook, William

  Brunner, J. F. L.

  Harcourt, Rt. Hon. L. (Rossendale)

  Millar, J. D.

  Burke, E. Haviland-

  Harcourt, Robert V. (Montrose)

  Molloy. M.

  Burns, Rt. Hon. John

  Hardie, J. Keir (Merthyr Tydvil)

  Molteno, Percy Alport

  Burt, Rt. Hon. Thomas

  Harvey, T. E. (Leeds, W.)

  Mond, Alfred Moritz

  Buxton, C. R. (Devon, Mid)

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

  Montagu, Hon E. S.

  Buxton, Noel (Norfolk, N.)

  Harwood, George

  Mooney, J. J.

  Buxton, Rt. Hon. Sydney C. (Poplar)

  Haslam, James (Derbyshire)

  Morgan, G. Hay (Cornwall)

  Byles, William Pollard

  Haslam, Lewis (Monmouth)

  Morgan, J. Lloyd (Carmarthen)

  Cameron, Robert

  Havelock-Allan, Sir Henry

  Morton, Alpheus Cleophas

  Carr-Gomm, H. W.

  Haworth, Arthur A.

  Muldoon, John

  Cawley, Sir Frederick (Prestwich)

  Hayden, John Patrick

  Murray, Captain Hon. A. C.

  Chancellor, H. G.

  Hazleton, Richard

  Muspratt, M.

  Channing, Sir Francis Allston

  Holme, Norval Watson

  Nannetti, Joseph P.

  Chapple, Dr. W. A.

  Hemmerde, Edward George

  Neilson, Francis

  Churchill, Rt. Hon. Winston S.

  Henderson, Arthur (Durham)

  Nicholson, Charles N. (Doncaster)

  Clancy, John Joseph

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

  Nolan, Joseph

  Clough, William

  Henry, Charles S

  Norton, Capt. Cecil W.

  Clynes, J. R.

  Herbert, Col. Sir Ivor

  Nugent, Sir Walter Richard

  Collins, G. P. (Greenock)

  Higham. John Sharp

  Nussey, Sir Wilians

  Collins, Stephen (Lambeth)

  Hindle, F. G.

  Nuttall, Harry

  Collins, Sir Wm. J. (St. Pancras, W.)

  Hobhouse, Rt. Hon. Charles E. H.

  O'Brien, Patrick (Kilkenny)

  Compton-Rickett, Sir J.

  Hodge, John

  O'Connor, John (Kildare, N.)

  Condon, Thomas Joseph

  Hogan, Michael

  O'Connor, T. P. (Liverpool)

  Corbett, A. Cameron (Glasgow)

  Hooper, A. G.

  O'Doherty, Philip

  Cornwall, Sir Edwin A.

  Hope, John Deans (Fife, West)

  O'Dowd, John

  Cory, Sir Clifford John

  Horne, C. Silvester (Ipswich)

  O'Kelly, Edward P. (Wicklow, W.)

  Cowan, W. H.

  Howard, Hon. Geoffrey

  O'Kelly, James (Roscommon, N.)

  Craig, Herbert J. (Tynemouth)

  Hudson, Walter

  O'Malley, William

  Crawshay-Williams, Eliot

  Hughes, S. L.

  O'Neill, Dr. Charles (Armagh, S.)

  Crosfield, A. H.

  Illingworth, Percy H.

  O'Shaughnessy, P. J.

  Crossley, Sir W. J.

  Isaacs, Sir Rufus Daniel

  Palmer, Godfrey Mark

  Cullinan, J.

  Johnson, W.

  Parker, James (Halifax)

  Dalziel, Sir James H. (Kirkcaldy)

  Jones, Edgar (Merthyr Tydvil)

  Pearce, William

  Davies, E. William (Elflon)

  Jones, H. Haydn (Merioneth)

  Pearson, Weetman H. M.

  Davies, Sir W. Howell (Bristol, S.)

  Jones, William (Carnarvonshire)

  Pease, Rt. Hon. Joseph A.

  Davies, M. Vaughan (Cardigan)

  Jowett, F. W.

  Philipps, Col. Ivor (Southampton)

  Dawes, J. A.

  Joyce, Michael

  Philipps, Sir Owen C. (Pembroke)

  Delany, William

  Kelly, Edward

  Phillips, John (Longford, S.)

  Pickersgill, Edward Hare

  Schwann, Sir C. E.

  Walton, Joseph

  Pirie, Duncan V.

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

  Ward, John (Stoke-upon-Trent)

  Painter, Joseph

  Seddon, J.

  Ward, W. Dudley (Southampton)

  Pollard, Sir George H.

  Seely, Col. Right Hon. J. E. B.

  Wardle, George J.

  Power, Patrick Joseph

  Shackleton, David James

  Waring, Walter

  Price, C. E. (Edinburgh, Central)

  Sheehy, David

  Warner, Thomas Courtenay T.

  Price, Sir Robert J. (Norfolk, E.)

  Sherwell, Arthur James

  Wason, Rt. Hon. E. (Clackmannan)

  Priestley, Arthur (Grantham)

  Shortt, Edward

  Wason, John Cathcart (Orkney)

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

  Simon, John Allsebrook

  Waterlow, D. S.

  Pringle, W. M. R.

  Smyth, Thomas F. (Leitrim, S.)

  Watt, Henry A.

  Radford, G. H.

  Snow den, P.

  Wedgwood, Joslah C.

  Raffan, Peter Wilson

  Soares, Ernest J.

  White, Sir George (Norfolk)

  Rainy, A. Rolland

  Spicer, Sir Albert

  White, J. Dundas (Dumbartonshire)

  Raphael, Herbert H.

  Stanley, Albert (Staffs, N.W.)

  White, Sir Luke (York, E.R.)

  Rea, Walter Russell

  Strachey, Sir Edward

  Whitehouse, John Howard

  Reddy, M.

  Summers, James Woolley

  Whittaker, Rt. Hon. Sir Thomas P.

  Redmond, John E. (Waterford)

  Sutherland, J. E.

  Whyte, Alexander F. (Perth)

  Redmond, William (Clare, E.)

  Sutton, John E.

  Wiles, Thomas

  Rees, J. D.

  Taylor, John W. (Durham)

  Wilkle, Alexander

  Rendall, Athelstan

  Taylor, Theodore C. (Radcliffe)

  Williams, Aneurin (Plymouth)

  Richards, Thomas

  Tennant, Harold John

  Williams, J. (Glamorgan)

  Roberts, Charles H. (Lincoln)

  Thomas, Abel (Carmarthen, E.)

  Williams, P. (Middlesbrough)

  Roberts, G. H. (Norwich)

  Thomas, Sir A. (Glamorgan, E.)

  Williams, Llewelyn (Carmarthen)

  Roberts, Sir J. H. (Denblghs)

  Thomas, D. A. (Cardiff)

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

  Robertson, Sir G. Scott (Bradford)

  Thomas, J. H. (Derby)

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

  Robertson, J. M. (Tyneside)

  Thorne, G. R. (Wolverhampton)

  Wilson, John (Durham, Mid)

  Robson, Sir William Snowdon

  Thorne, William (West Ham)

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

  Roch, Walter F. (Pembroke)

  Toulmin, George

  Wilson, T. F. (Lanark, N.E.)

  Roche, Augustine (Cork)

  Trevelyan, Charles Philips

  Wilson, W. T. (Westhoughton)

  Roche, John (Galway, East)

  Twist, Henry

  Winfrey, Richard

  Roe, Sir Thomas

  Ure, Rt. Hon. Alexander

  Wood, T. M'Kinnon (Glasgow)

  Rowntree, Arnold

  Verney, F. W.

  Young, William (Perth. East)

  Runciman, Rt. Hon. Walter

  Vivian, Henry

  Younger, W. (Peebles and Selkirk)

  Samuel, Rt. Hon. H. L. (Cleveland)

  Wadsworth, J.

  Yoxall, Sir James Henry

  Samuel, J. (Stockton)

  Walker, H. De R. (Leicester)

  Samuel, S. M. (Whitechapel)

  Walsh, Stephen

  TELLERS FOR THE AYES.—Master of Elibank and Mr. Fuller.

  Scanlan, Thomas

  Walters, John Tudor

  NOES.

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

  Cautley, H. G.

  Gastrell, Major W. H.

  Adam, Major W. A.

  Cave, George

  Gibbs, G. A.

  Anson, Sir William Reynell

  Cecil, Evelyn (Aston Manor)

  Gilhooly, James

  Archer-Shee, Major M.

  Cecil, Lord Hugh (Oxford University)

  Gilmour, Captain J.

  Arkwright, John Stanhope

  Chaloner, Colonel R. G. W.

  Goldsmith, Frank

  Ashley, W. W

  Chamberlain, Rt. Hon. J. A. (Worc'r.)

  Gooch, Henry Cubitt

  Attenbarough, W. A.

  Chambers, J.

  Goulding, Edward Alfred

  Bagot, Captain J.

  Clive, Percy Archer

  Grant, James Augustus

  Baird, J. L.

  Clyde, J. Avon

  Greene, W. R.

  Baker, Sir R. L. (Dorset, N.)

  Coates, Major E. F.

  Guiney, P.

  Baldwin, Stanley

  Colefax, H. A.

  Guinness, Hon. W. E.

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

  Cooper, Capt. Bryan (Dublin, S.)

  Gwynne, R. S. (Sussex, Eastbourne)

  Banbury, Sir Frederick George

  Cooper, R. A. (Walsall)

  Haddock, George B.

  Banner, John S. Harmood-

  Courthope, G. L.

  Hall, D. B. (Isle of Wight)

  Baring, Captain Hon. G. V.

  Craig, Charles Curtis (Antrim, S.)

  Hall, E. Marshall (Toxteth, E.)

  Barnston, H.

  Craig, Captain James (Down, E.)

  Hambro, Angus Valdemar

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

  Craig, Norman (Kent, Thanet)

  Hamersley, A. St. George

  Bathurst, Hon. A. B. (Glouc, E.)

  Cralk, Sir Henry

  Hamilton, Marquess of (Londonderry)

  Bathurst, Charles (Wilton)

  Crean, Eugene

  Hardy, Laurence (Kent, Ashford)

  Beach, Hon. Michael Hugh Hicks

  Cripps, Sir C. A.

  Harris, F. L. (Stepney)

  Beckett, Hon. W. Gervase

  Croft, H. P.

  Harris, H. P. (Paddington, S.)

  Benn, I. H. (Greenwich)

  Dairymple, Viscount

  Harrison-Broadley, H. B.

  Bentinck, Lord H. Cavendish-

  Dalziel, D. (Brixton)

  Healy, Maurice (Cork, N.E.)

  Beresford, Lord C.

  Dickson, Rt. Hon. C. Scott

  Healy, Timothy Michael

  Bird, A.

  Dixon, C. H.

  Heath, Col. A. H.

  Boyle, W. L. (Norfolk, Mid)

  Douglas, Rt. Hon. A. Akers-

  Heimsley, Viscount

  Boyton, J.

  Du Cros, Alfred (Tower Hamlets, Bow)

  Hermon-Hodge, Sir Robert

  Brackenbury, Henry Langton

  Du Cros, Arthur P. (Hastings)

  Hickman, Col. T.

  Brassey, H. L. C. (Northants, N.)

  Duke, H. E.

  Hill, Sir Clement

  Brassey, Capt. R. (Banbury)

  Duncannon, Viscount

  Killler, Dr. A. P.

  Bridgeman, W. Clive

  Dunn, Sir W. H. (Southwark)

  Hills, J. W.

  Brotherton, Edward Allen

  Eyres-Monsell, B. M.

  Hoare, S. J. G.

  Brunskill, G. F.

  Faber, George Denison (Clapham)

  Hohler, G. F.

  Bull, Sir William James

  Falle, Bertram Godfray

  Hope, Harry (Bute)

  Burdett-Coutts, w.

  Fell, Arthur

  Hope, James Fitzalan (Sheffield)

  Butcher, J. G. (York)

  Finlay, Sir Robert

  Home, William E. (Surrey, Guildford)

  Butcher, S. Henry (Cambridge Univ.)

  Fisher, W. Hayes

  Homer, A. L.

  Calley, Colonel T. C. P

  Fitzroy, Hon. E. A.

  Houston, Robert Paterson

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

  Flannery, Sir J. Fortescue

  Hume-Williams, W. E. '

  Carllie, E. Hildred

  Fleming, Valentine

  Hunt, Rowland

  Carson, Rt. Hon. Sir Edward H.

  Fletcher, J. S.

  Hunter, Sir C. R. (Bath)

  Castlereagh, Viscount

  Foster, J. K. (Coventry)

  Jackson, John A. (Whitehaven)

  Cator, John

  Gardner, Ernest

  Jardine, E. (Somerset, E.)

  Jessel, Captain H. M.

  Newman, John R. P.

  Sheehan, Daniel Daniel

  Kerr-Smiley, Peter Kerr

  Newton, Harry Kottingham

  Stanier, Beville

  Kerry, Earl of

  Nicholson, Wm. G. (Petersfield)

  Stanley, Hon. Arthur (Ormskirk)

  Keswick, William

  Nield, Herbert

  Stanley, Hon. G. F. (Preston)

  Kimber, Sir Henry

  Norton-Griffiths, J. (Wednesbury)

  Starkey, John R.

  King. Sir Henry Seymour (Hull)

  O'Brien, William (Cork, N.E.)

  Staveley-Hill, Henry (Staffordshire)

  Kinloch-Cooke, Sir Clement

  O'Donnell, John (Mayo, S.)

  Steel-Maitland, A. D.

  Kirkwood, J. H. M.

  O'Neill, Hon. A. E. B. (Antrim, Mid)

  Stewart, Gershom (Ches. Wirral)

  Knight, Capt. E. A.

  Orde-Powlett, Hon. W. G. A.

  Stewart, Sir M'T. (Kirkcudbright)

  Knott, James

  Ormsby-Gore, Hon. William

  Strauss, A.

  Lane-Fox, G. R.

  Paget, Almeric Hugh

  Sykes, Alan John

  Law, Andrew Bonar (Dulwich)

  Parkes, Ebenezer

  Talbot, Lord E.

  Lawson, Hon. Harry

  Peel, Capt. R. F. (Woodbridge)

  Terrell, H. (Gloucester)

  Lee, Arthur H.

  Peel, Hon. W. R. W. (Taunton)

  Thompson, Robert

  Lewisham, Viscount

  Perkins, Walter F.

  Thynne, Lord A.

  Llewelyn, Venables

  Peto, Basil Edward

  Tobin, Alfred Aspinall

  Lloyd, G. A.

  Pollock, Ernest Murray

  Tryon, Capt. George Clement

  Locker-Lampson, O. (Ramsay)

  Pretyman, E. G

  Tullibardine, Marquess of

  Lockwood, fit. Hon. Lt.-Col. A. R.

  Proby, Col Douglas James

  Valentia, Viscount

  Long, Rt. Hon. Walter

  Quilter, William Eley C.

  Verrall, George Henry

  Lonsdale, John Brownlee

  Randles, Sir John Scurrah

  Walker, Col. W. H. (Lancashire)

  Lowe, Sir F. W. (Birm., Edgbaston)

  Rankin, Sir James

  Walrond, Hon. Lionel

  Lyttelton, Rt. Hon. A. (Hanover Sq.)

  Ratcliff, Major R. F.

  Ward, Arnold (Herts, Watford)

  Lyttelton, Hon. J. C. (Draftwich)

  Rawlinson. John Frederick Peel

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

  Mackinder, H. J.

  Rawson, Colonel R. H.

  Wheler, Granville C. H.

  Macmaster, Donald

  Remnant, James Farquharson

  White, Major G. D. (Lanes., Southport)

  M'Arthur, Charles

  Rice, Hon. Walter F.

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

  M'Calmont, Col. James

  Ridley, Samuel Forde

  Willoughby, Major Hon. Claude

  Magnus, Sir Philip

  Roberts, S. (Sheffield, Ecclesall)

  Willoughby de Eresby, Lord

  Mallaby-Deeley, Harry

  Rolleston, Sir John

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

  Mason, J. F.

  Ronaldshay, Earl of

  Winterton, Earl

  Meysey-Thompson, E. C.

  Rothschild, Lionel de

  Wolff, Gustav Wilhelm

  Mildmay, Francis Bingham

  Royds, Edmund

  Wood, John (Stalybridge)

  Mills, Hon. Charles Thomas

  Rutherford, Watson

  Worthington-Evans, L. (Colchester)

  Mitchell, William Foot

  Salter, Arthur Clavell

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

  Moore, William

  Samuel, Sir Harry (Norwood)

  Wyndham, Rt. Hon. George

  Morpeth, Viscount

  Sanderson. Lancelot

  Younger, George (Ayr Burghs)

  Morrison, Captain J. A.

  Sandys, G. J. (Somerset, Wells)

  Morrison-Bell, Major A. C.

  Sandys, Lieut.-Col. T. M. (Bootie)

  TELLERS FOR THE NOES.—Mr. H. W. Forster and Lord Balcarres.

  Mount, William Arthur

  Sassoon, Sir Edward Albert

  Newdegate, F. A.

  Scott, Sir S. (Marylebone, W.)

GROUP (4) INCOME TAX.

  (9) INCOME TAX.
  Resolved,
  A.—That Income Tax shall be charged for the year beginning the sixth day of April, nineteen hundred and nine, at the rate of one shilling and two pence in the pound, and that an additional duty of Income Tax at the rate of six pence in the pound be charged in respect of incomes which exceed five thousand pounds on every pound of the amount by which the income exceeds three thousand pounds.
  B.—That no exemption, abatement, or relief under the Income Tax Acts shall be be given to any person who is not ordinarily resident in the United Kingdom.

GROUP (5) STAMPS.

  (10) STAMPS.
  Question put:
  A.—That the Stamp Duties charged on conveyances or transfers on sale of property or leases shall be double those now chargeable.
  B.—That the conveyances or transfers operating as voluntary dispositions inter vivos shall be charged with Stamp Duties,
  2180
  calculated on the value of the property conveyed or transferred, at the like rates as those chargeable on conveyances or transfers on sale.
  C.—That the Stamp Duties charged on marketable securities transferable by delivery and share warrants or stock certificates to bearer shall be double those now chargeable.
  D.—That in lieu of the Stamp Duties now chargeable on contract notes for or relating to the sale or purchase of any stock or marketable security there shall be charged the following Stamp Duties, that is to say:
  Where the value of the stock or marketable security—

  s.

  d.

  Is £5 and does not exceed £100

  0

  6

  Exceeds £100 and does not exceed £500

  1

  0

  Exceeds 500 and does not exceed 1,000

  2

  0

  Exceeds 1,000 and does not exceed 1,500

  3

  0

  Exceeds 1,500 and does not exceed 2,500

  4

  0

  Exceeds 2,500 and does not exceed 5,000

  6

  0

  Exceeds 5,000 and does not exceed 7,500

  8

  0

  Exceeds 7,500 and does not exceed 10,000

  10

  0

  Exceeds 10,000 and does not exceed 12,500

  12

  0

  Exceeds 12,500 and does not exceed 15,000

  14

  0

  Exceeds 15,000 and does not exceed 17,500

  16

  0

  Exceeds 17,500 and does not exceed 20,000

  18

  0

  Exceed 20,000

  £1

  0

  E.—That the like obligation to execute a contract note shall have effect, and the like Stamp Duty shall be charged—

  (a) In the case of a contract under which an option is given to purchase or sell any stock or marketable security at a future time at a certain price; and

  (b) in the case of the sale or purchase of any stock or marketable security

  by a person who, by way of business, deals or holds himself out as dealing as a principal in stocks and marketable securities;
  as in the case of the sale or purchase of any stock or marketable security by a broker or agent.
  The Committee divided: Ayes, 328; Noes, 244

GROUP (6) SPIRITS—CUSTOMS AND EXCISE.

  (11) SPIRITS (CUSTOMS).
  Question put,
  That, in addition to the duties of Customs now payable on spirits imported into Great Britain or Ireland, there shall, as from the thirtieth day of April, nineteen hundred and nine, be charged the following duties (that is to say):—

  s.

  d.

  For every gallon computed at proof of spirits of any description except perfumed spirits

  3

  9

  For every gallon of perfumed spirits

  6

  0

  For every gallon of liqueurs, cordials, mixtures, and other preparations entered in such a manner as to indicate that the strength is not to be tested

  5

  1

  and the duties of Customs on the articles hereafter mentioned, being articles in which spirit is contained or in the manufacture of which spirit is used, shall be
  proportionately increased and shall be as follows:—

  £

  s.

  d.

  Chloral hydrate

  …

  the lb.

  0

  1

  9

  Chloroform

  …

  the lb

  0

  4

  4

  Collodion

  …

  the gallon

  1

  14

  11

  Ether acetic

  …

  the lb.

  0

  2

  7

  Ether butyric

  …

  the gallon

  1

  1

  10

  Ether sulphuric

  …

  the gallon

  1

  16

  6

  Ethyl, iodide of

  …

  the gallon

  0

  19

  0

  Ethyl bromide

  …

  the lb.

  0

  1

  5

  Ethyl chloride

  …

  the gallon

  1

  1

  10

  (12) SPIRITS (EXCISE).
  That, in addition to the duty of Excise now payable for every gallon computed at proof of spirits distilled in the United Kingdom, there shall, as from the thirtieth day of April, nineteen hundred and nine, be charged the following duty (that is to say):—

  s.

  d.

  For every gallon of spirits computed at proof

  3

  9

  and so on in proportion for any leas quantity.
  The Committee divided: Ayes, 321; Noes, 235.

  Division No. 53.]

  AYES.

  [7.52 p.m.

  Abraham, William

  Cullinan, J.

  Hogan, Michael

  Addison, Dr. C.

  Dalziel, Sir James H. (Kirkcaldy)

  Hooper, A. G.

  Agnew, George William

  Davies, E. William (Elflon)

  Hope, John Deans (Fife, West)

  Ainsworth, John Stirling

  Davies, Sir W. Howell (Bristol, S.)

  Home, C. Silvester (Ipswich)

  Alden, Percy

  Davies, M. Vaughan- (Cardigan)

  Howard, Hon. Geoffrey

  Allen, Charles P.

  Dawes, J. A.

  Hudson, Walter

  Anderson, A.

  Delany, William

  Hughes, S. L.

  Armitage, R.

  Denman, Hon. R. D.

  Illingworth, Percy H.

  Ashton, Thomas Gair

  Devlin, Joseph

  Isaacs, Sir Rufus Daniel

  Asquith, Rt. Hon. Herbert Henry

  Dillon, John

  Johnson, W.

  Baker, H. T. (Accrington)

  Dories, W.

  Jones, Edgar (Merthyr Tydvil)

  Baker, Joseph A. (Finsbury E.)

  Duffy, William J.

  Jones, H. Haydn (Merioneth)

  Balfour, Robert (Lanark)

  Duncan, C. (Barrow-ln-Furness)

  Jones, William (Carnarvonshire)

  Barclay, Sir T.

  Duncan, J. Hastings (York, Otlay)

  Jowett, F. W.

  Barlow, Sir John E.

  Edwards, Enoch

  Joyce, Michael

  Barnes, G. N.

  Ellis, Rt. Hon. John Edward

  Kelly, Edward

  Barran, Sir John N. (Hawick B.)

  Elverston, H-

  Kemp, Sir G.

  Barran, Rowland Hirst (Leeds, N.)

  Esmonde, Sir Thomas

  Kennedy, Vincent Paul

  Barry, E. (Cork, S.)

  Esslemont, George Birnle

  Kettle, Thomas Michael

  Barry, Redmond J. (Tyrone, N.)

  Falconer, J.

  Kilbride, Denis

  Barton, A. W.

  Farrell, James Patrick

  King, J. (Somerset, N.)

  Beale, W. P.

  Fenwick, Charles

  Lambert, George

  Benn, W. (Tower Hamlets, St. Geo.)

  Ferens, T. R.

  Law, Hugh A. (Donegal, W.)

  Bentham, George Jackson

  Ferguson, R. C. Munrs

  Layland-Barratt, Sir Francis

  Bethell, Sir J. H.

  Ffrench, Peter

  Leach, Charles

  Birrell, Rt. Hon. Augustine

  Flavin, Michael Joseph

  Lehmann, R. C.

  Black, Arthur W.

  France, G. A.

  Levy, Sir Maurice

  Boland, John Pius

  Furness, Sir Christopher

  Lewis, John Herbert

  Bowerman, C. W.

  Gelder, Sir W. A.

  Lincoln Ignatius T. T.

  Bowles, T. Gibson

  Gibson, James P.

  Lloyd-George, Rt. Hon. David

  Boyle, D. (Mayo, N.)

  Gill, A. H.

  Lough, Rt. Hon. Thomas

  Brace, William

  Glanville, H. J.

  Low, Sir F. A. (Norwich)

  Brady, P. J.

  Glover, Thomas

  Lundon, T.

  Brigg, Sir John

  Greenwood, G. G.

  Luttrell, Hugh Fownes

  Brocklehurst, W. B.

  Greig, Colonel J. W.

  Lynch, A. A.

  Brunner, J. F. L.

  Grenfell, Cecil Alfred

  Macdonald, J. R. (Leicester)

  Burke, E. Haviland-

  Griffiths, Ellis J. (Anglesey)

  Macdonald, J. M. (Falkirk Burghs)

  Burns, Rt. Hon. John

  Gulland, John W.

  Macnamara, Dr. Thomas J.

  Burt, Rt. Hon. Thomas

  Gwynn, Stephen Lucius (Galway)

  MacVeagh, Jeremlah

  Buxton, C. R. (Devon, Mid)

  Hackett, J.

  M'Callum, John M.

  Buxton, Noel (Norfolk, N.)

  Haldanz, Rt. Hon. Richard B.

  McKenna, Rt. Hon. Reginald

  Buxton, Rt. Hon. S. C. (Poplar)

  Hall, Frederick (Normanton)

  M'Laren, F. W. S. (Line, Spalding)

  Bytes, William Pollard

  Hancock, J. G.

  Mallet, Charles E.

  Cameron, Robert

  Harcourt, Rt. Hon. L. (Rossendale)

  Manfield, Harry

  Cawley, Harold T. (Heywood)

  Harcourt, Robert V. (Montrose)

  Marks, G. Croydon

  Cawley, Sir Frederick (Prestwich)

  Hardle, J. Keir (Merthyr Tydvil)

  Martin, J.

  Chancellor, H. G.

  Harvey, T. E. (Leeds, W.)

  Masterman, C. F. G.

  Channing, Sir Francis Allston

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

  Meagher, Michael

  Chapple, W. A.

  Harwood, George

  Meehan, Francis E (Leitrim, N.)

  Clancy, John Joseph

  Haslam, James (Derbyshire)

  Meehan, Patrick A (Queen's Co.)

  Clough, William

  Haslam, Lewis (Monmouth)

  Menzies, Sir Walter

  Clynes, J. R.

  Havelock-Allan, Sir Henry

  Middlebrook, William

  Collins, G. P. (Greenock)

  Haworth, Arthur A.

  Millar, J. D.

  Collins, Stephen (Lambeth)

  Hayden, John Patrick

  Molloy, M.

  Collins, Sir Wm. J. (St. Pancras, W.)

  Hazleton, Richard

  Molteno, Percy Alport

  Compton-Rickett, Sir J.

  Helme, Norval Watson

  Mond, Alfred Mortiz

  Condon, Thomas Joseph

  Hemmerde, Edward George

  Montagu, Hon. E. S.

  Corbett, A. Cameron (Glasgow)

  Henderson, Arthur (Durham)

  Mooney, J. J.

  Cornwall, Sir Edwin A.

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

  Morgan, G. Hay (Cornwall)

  Cory, Sir Clifford John

  Henry, Charles S.

  Morgan, J. Lloyd (Carmarthen)

  Cowan, W. H.

  Herbert, Col. Sir Ivor

  Morton, Alpheus Cleophas

  Craig, Herbert J. (Tynemouth)

  Higham, John Sharp

  Muldoon, John

  Crawshay-Williams, Eliot

  Hindle, F. G.

  Murray, Captain Hon. A. C.

  Crosfield, A. H.

  Hobhouse, Rt. Hon. Charles E. H.

  Muspratt, M.

  Crossley, Sir W. J.

  Hodge, John

  Nannetti Joseph P.

  Neilson, Francis

  Richards, Thomas

  Twist, Henry

  Nicholson, Charles N, (Doncaster)

  Roberts, Charles H. (Lincoln)

  Ure, Rt. Hon. Alexander

  Nolan, Joseph

  Roberts, G. H. (Norwich)

  Verney, F. W.

  Norton, Capt. Cecil W.

  Roberts, Sir J. H. (Denbighs)

  Vivian, Henry

  Nugent, Sir Walter Richard

  Robertson, Sir G. Scott (Bradford)

  Wadsworth, J.

  Nussey, Sir Wilians

  Robertson, J. M. (Tyneside)

  Walker, H. tie R. (Leicester)

  Nuttall, Harry

  Robson, Sir William Snowdon

  Walsh, Stephen

  O'Brien, Patrick (Kilkenny)

  Roch, Walter F. (Pembroke)

  Walters, John Tudor

  O'Connor, John (Kildare, N.)

  Roche, Augustine (Cork)

  Walton, Joseph

  O'Connor, T. P. (Liverpool)

  Roche, John (Galway, East)

  Ward, John (Stoke-upon-Trent)

  O'Doherty, Philip

  Roe, Sir Thomas

  Ward, W. Dudley (Southampton)

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

  Runciman, Rt. Hon. Walter

  Waring, Walter

  O'Dowd, John

  Samuel, Rt. Hon. H. L. (Cleveland)

  Warner, Thomas Courtenay T.

  O'Kelly, Edward P. (Wicklow, W.)

  Samuel, J. (Stockton)

  Wason, Rt. Hon. E. (Clackmannan)

  O'Kelly, James (Roscommon, N.)

  Samuel, S. M. (Whitechapel)

  Wason, John Cathcart (Orkney)

  O'Malley, William

  Scanlan, Thomas

  Waterlow, D. S.

  O'Neill, Charles (Armagh, S.)

  Schwann, Sir C. E.

  Watt, Henry A.

  O'Shaughnessy, P. J.

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

  Wedgwood, Josiah C.

  Palmer, Godfrey Mark

  Seddon, J.

  White, Sir George (Norfolk)

  Parker, James (Halifax)

  Seely, Col., Right Hon. J. E. B.

  White, J. Dundas (Dumbartonshire)

  Pearce, William

  Shackleton, David James

  White, Sir Luke (York, E.R.)

  Pearson, Weetman H. M.

  Sheehy, David

  White, Patrick (Meath, North)

  Pease, Rt. Hon. Joseph A.

  Sherwell, Arthur James

  Whltehouse, John Howard

  Philipps, Col. Ivor (Southampton]

  Shortt, Edward

  Whittaker, Rt. Hon. Sir Thomas P.

  Philipps, Sir Owen C. (Pembroke)

  Simon, John Allsebrook

  Whyte, Alexander F. (Perth)

  Phillips. John (Longford, S.)

  Smyth, Thomas F. (Leitrim, S.)

  Wiles, Thomas

  Pickersgill, Edward Hare

  Snowden, P.

  Wilkie, Alexander

  Pirie, Duncan V.

  Soares, Ernest Joseph

  Williams, Aneurin (Plymouth)

  Pointer, Joseph

  Spicer, Sir Albert

  Williams, J. (Glamorgan)

  Pollard, Sir George H.

  Stanley, Albert (Staffs, N.W.)

  Williams, Penry (Middlesbrough)

  Power, Patrick Joseph

  Strachey, Sir Edward

  Williams, Llewelyn (Carmarthen)

  Price, C. E. (Edinburgh, Central)

  Summers, James Woolley

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

  Price, Sir Robert J. (Norfolk, E.)

  Sutherland, J. E.

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

  Priestley, Arthur (Grantham)

  Sutton, John E.

  Wilson, John (Durham, Mid)

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

  Taylor, John W. (Durham)

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

  Pringle, W. M. R.

  Taylor, Theodore C. (Radcliffe)

  Wilson, T. F. (Lanark, N.E.)

  Radford, G. H.

  Tennant, Harold John

  Wilson, W. T. (Westhoughton)

  Raffan, Peter Wilson

  Thomas, Abel (Carmarthen, E.)

  Winfrey, Richard

  Rainy, A. Holland

  Thomas, Sir A. (Glamorgan, E.)

  Wood, T. M'Kinnon (Glasgow)

  Raphael, Herbert H.

  Thomas, D. A. (Cardiff)

  Young, W. (Perthshire, E.)

  Rea. Walter Russell

  Thomas, J. H. (Derby)

  Younger, W. (Peebles and Selkirk)

  Reddy, M.

  Thorne, G. R. (Wolverhampton)

  Yoxall, Sir James Henry

  Redmond, John E. (Waterford)

  Thorne, William (West Ham)

  Redmond, William (Clare)

  Toulmin, George

  TELLERS FOR THE AYES.—Master of Elibank and Mr. Fuller.

  Rees, J. D.

  Trevelyan, Charles Philips

  Rendall, Athelstan

  NOES.

  Adam, Major W. A.

  Calley, Col. Thomas C. P.

  Eyres-Monsell, B. M.

  Anson, Sir William Reynell

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

  Faber, George Denison (Clapham)

  Archer-Shee, Major M.

  Carlile, E. Hildred

  Falle, B. G.

  Arkwright, John Stanhope

  Carson, Rt. Hon. Sir Edward H.

  Fell, Arthur

  Ashley, W. W.

  Castlereagh, Viscount

  Finlay, Sir Robert

  Attenborough, W. A.

  Cator, John

  Fisher, W. Hayes

  Bagot, Captain J.

  Cautley, H. G,

  Fitzroy, Hon. E. A.

  Baird, J. L.

  Cave, George

  Flannery, Sir J. Fortescue

  Baker, Sir R. L. (Dorset, N.)

  Cecil, Evelyn (Aston Manor)

  Fleming, Valentine

  Balcarres, Lord

  Cecil, Lord Hugh (Oxford University)

  Fletcher, J. S.

  Baldwin, Stanley

  Chaloner, Colonel R. G. W.

  Forster, Henry William

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

  Chamberlain, Rt. Hon. J. A. (Worc'r.)

  Foster, J. K. (Coventry)

  Banbury, Sir Frederick George

  Chambers, J.

  Gastrell, Major W. H.

  Banner, John S. Harmood-

  Clive, Percy Archer

  Gibbs, G. A.

  Baring, Captain Hon. G.

  Clyde, J. Avon

  Gilhooly, James

  Barnston, H.

  Coates, Major E. F.

  Gilmour, Captain J.

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

  Colefax, H. A.

  Goldsmith, Frank

  Bathurst, Hon. A. B. (Glouc., E.)

  Cooper, Capt. Bryan (Dublin, S.)

  Gooch, Henry Cubitt

  Bathurst, Charles (Wilton)

  Cooper, R. A. (Walsall)

  Goulding, Edward Alfred

  Beach, Hon. Michael Hugh Hicks

  Courthope, G. Loyd

  Grant. J. A.

  Beckett, Hon. W. Gervase

  Craig, Charles Curtis (Antrim, S.)

  Greene, W. R.

  Benn, I. H. (Greenwich)

  Craig, Captain James (Down, E.)

  Guiney. P.

  Bentinck, Lord H. Cavendish

  Craig, Norman (Kent)

  Guinness, Hon. W. E.

  Beresford, Lord C.

  Craik, Sir Henry

  Gwynne, R. S. (Sussex, Eastbourne)

  Bird, A.

  Crean, Eugene

  Haddock, George B.

  Boyle, W. L. (Norfolk, Mid)

  Cripps, Sir C. A.

  Hall, D. S. (Isle of Wight)

  Boyton, J.

  Croft, H. P

  Hall, E. Marshall (Toxteth)

  Brackenbury, H. L.

  Dairymple, Viscount

  Hambro. Angus Valdemar

  Brassey, H. L. C. (Northants, N.)

  Dalziel, D. (Brixton)

  Hamersley, A. St. George

  Brassey, Capt. R. (Banbury)

  Dickson, Rt. Hon. C. Scott

  Hamilton, Marquess of (Londonderry)

  Bridgeman, W. Clive

  Dixon, C. H.

  Hardy, Laurence (Kent, Ashford)

  Brotherton, E. A.

  Douglas, Rt. Hon. A. Akers-

  Harris, F. L. (Stepney)

  Brunskill, G. F.

  Du Cros, Alfred (Tower Hamlets, Bow)

  Harris, H. P. (Paddington, S.)

  Bull, Sir William James

  Du Cros, Arthur p. (Hastings)

  Harrison-Broadley, H. B.

  Burdett-Coutts, W.

  Duke, H. E.

  Healy, Maurice (Cork, N.E.)

  Butcher, S. Henry (Cambridge Univ.)

  Dunn, Sir W. H. (Southwark)

  Healy, Timothy Michael

  2184

  2185

  Heath, Col. A. H.

  Magnus, Sir Philip

  Salter, Arthur Clavell

  Helmsley, Viscount

  Mallaby-Deeley, Harry

  Samuel, Sir Harry (Norwood)

  Hermon-Hodge, Sir Robert

  Mason, J. F.

  Sanderson, Lancelot

  Hickman, Col. T.

  Meysey-Thompson, E. C.

  Sandys, G. J. (Somerset, Wells)

  Hill, Sir Clement

  Mildmay, Francis Bingham

  Sandys, Lieut.-Col. T. M. (Bootle)

  Hillier, Dr. A. P.

  Mills, Hon. Charles Thomas

  Sassoon, Sir Edward Albert

  Hills, J. W.

  Mitchell, William Foot

  Scott, Sir S. (Marylebone, W.)

  Hoare, S. J. G.

  Moore, William

  Sheehan, Daniel Daniel

  Hohier, G. F.

  Morpeth, Viscount

  Stanier, Beville

  Hope, Harry (Bute)

  Morrison, Captain J. A.

  Stanley, Hon. Arthur (Ormskirk)

  Hope, James Fitzalan (Sheffield)

  Morrison-Bell, Major A. C.

  Stanley, Hon. G. F. (Preston)

  Horne, W. E. (Surrey, Guildford)

  Mount, William Arthur

  Starkey, John R.

  Horner, A. L.

  Newdegate, F. A.

  Staveley-Hill, Henry (Staffordshire)

  Houston, Robert Paterson

  Newman, John R. P.

  Steel-Maitland, A. D.

  Hume-Williams, W. E.

  Newton, Harry Kottingham

  Stewart, Gershom (Ches., Wirral)

  Hunt, Rowland

  Nicholson, Wm. G. (Petersfield)

  Stewart, Sir M-T. (Kirkcudbright)

  Hunter, Sir C. R. (Bath)

  Nield, Herbert

  Strauss, A.

  Jackson, John A. (Whitehaven)

  Norton-Griffiths, J. (Wednesbury)

  Sykes, Alan John

  Jardine, E. (Somerset, E.)

  O'Brien, William (Cork, N.E.)

  Talbot, Lord E.

  Jessel, Captain H. M.

  O'Donnell, John (Mayo, S.)

  Terrell, H. (Gloucester)

  Kerr-Smiley. Peter

  O'Neill, Hon. A. E. B. (Antrim, Mid)

  Thompson, Robert

  Kerry, Earl of

  Orde-Powlett, Hon. W. G. A.

  Thynne, Lord A.

  Keswick, William

  Ormsby-Gore, Hon. William

  Tobin, Alfred Aspinall

  Kimber, Sir Henry

  Paget, Almeric Hugh

  Tryon, George Clement

  King, Sir Henry Seymour (Hull)

  Parkes, Ebenezer

  Tullibardine, Marquess of

  Kinloch-Cooke, Sir Clement

  Peel, Capt. R. F. (Woodbridge)

  Verrall, George Henry

  Kirkwood, J. H. M.

  Peel, Hon. W. R. W. (Taunton)

  Walker, Col. W H. (Lancashire)

  Knight, Capt. E. A.

  Perkins, Walter F.

  Walrond, Hon. Lionel

  Knott, James

  Peto, Basil Edward

  Ward, Arnold (Herts, Watford)

  Lane-Fox, G. R.

  Pollock, Ernest Murray

  Ward'!, Col. C. E. (Kent, Mid.)

  Law, Andrew Bonar (Dulwich)

  Pretyman, E. G.

  Wheler, Granville C. H.

  Lawson, Hon. Harry

  Proby, Col. Douglas James

  White, Major G. 0. (Lanes., Southport)

  Lee, Arthur H.

  Quilter, William Eley C.

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

  Lewisham, Viscount

  Randies, Sir John Scurrah

  Willoughby, Major Hon. Clauds

  Llewelyn, Venables

  Rankin, Sir James

  Willoughby de Eresby, Lord

  Lloyd, G. A.

  Ratcliff, Major R. F.

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

  Locker-Lampson, O. (Ramsay)

  Rawlinson, John Frederick Peel

  Winterton, Earl

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

  Rawson, Colonel R. H.

  Wolff, Gustav Wilhelm

  Long, Rt. Hon. Walter

  Remnant, James Farquharson

  Wood, John (Stelybridge)

  Lonsdale, John Brownlee

  Rice, Hon. Walter F.

  Worthington-Evans, L. (Colchester)

  Lowe, Sir F. W. (Birm. Edgbaston)

  Ridley, Samuel Forde

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

  Lyttelton, Rt. Hon. A. (Hanover Sq.)

  Roberts, S. (Sheffield, Ecclesall)

  Wyndham, Rt. Hon. George

  Lyttelton, Hon. J. C. (Droltwich)

  Rolleston, Sir John

  Younger, George (Ayr Burghs)

  Mackinder, H. J.

  Ronaldshay, Earl of

  Macmaster, Donald

  Royds, Edmund

  TELLERS FOR THE NOES.—Sir A.

  M'Arthur, Charles

  Rutherford, Watson

  Acland-Hood and Viscount Valentia.

  M'Calmont, Colonel James

  Division No. 54.]

  AYES.

  [8.5 p.m.

  Abraham, William

  Elverston, H.

  Lundon, T.

  Addison, Dr. C.

  Esmonde, Sir Thomas

  Luttrell, Hugh Fownes

  Agnew, George William

  Esslemont, George Birnis

  Lynch, A. A.

  Ainsworth, John Stirling

  Falconer, J.

  Macdonald, J. R. (Leicester)

  Alden, Percy

  Farrell, James Patrick

  Macdonald, J. M. (Falkirk Burghs)

  Allen, Charles P.

  Fenwick, Charles

  Macnamara, Dr. Thomas J.

  Anderson, A.

  Ferens, T. R.

  MacVeagh, Jeremiah

  Armitage, R.

  Ferguson, R. C. Munro

  M'Callum, John M.

  Ashton, Thomas Gair

  Ffrench, Peter

  McKenna, Rt. Hon. Reginald

  Asquith, Rt. Hon. H. H.

  Flavin, Michael Joseph

  M'Laren, F. W. S. (Lines., Spilding)

  Baker, H. T. (Accrington)

  France, G. A.

  Mallet, Charles E.

  Baker, Joseph A. (Finsbury E.)

  Furness, Sir Christopher

  Manfield, Harry

  Balfour, Robert (Lanark)

  Gelder, Sir W. A.

  Marks, G. Croydon

  Barclay, Sir T.

  Gibson, James P.

  Martin, J.

  Barlow, Sir John E.

  Gill, A. H.

  Meagher, Michael

  Barnes, G. N.

  Glanville, H. J.

  Meehan, Francis E. (Leitrim, N.)

  Barran, Sir J. (Hawick)

  Glover, Thomas

  Meehan, Patrick A. (Queen's Co.)

  Barran, Rowland Hirst (Leeds, N.)

  Greenwood, G. G.

  Menzies, Sir Walter

  Barry, E. (Cork, S.)

  Greig, Colonel J. W.

  Middlebrook, William

  Barry, Redmond J. (Tyrone, N.)

  Grenfell, Cecil Alfred

  Millar, J. D.

  Barton, A. W.

  Griffith, Ellis J. (Anglesey)

  Molloy, M.

  Beale, W. P.

  Gulland, John W.

  Molteno, Percy Alport

  Benn, W. (Tower Hamlets, St. Geo.)

  Gwynn, Stephen Lucius (Galway)

  Mond, Alfred Moritz

  Bentham, G. J

  Hackett, J.

  Montagu, Hon. E. S.

  Bethell, Sir J. H.

  Haldane, Rt. Hon. Richard B.

  Mooney, J. J.

  Birrell, Rt. Hon. Augustine

  Hall, Frederick (Normanton)

  Morgan, G. Hay (Cornwall)

  Black, Arthur W.

  Harcourt, Rt. Hon. Lewis (Rossendale)

  Morgan, J. Lloyd (Carmarthen)

  Boland, John Plus

  Harcourt, Robert V. (Montrose)

  Morton, Alpheus Cleophas

  Bowerman, C. W.

  Hardie, J. Keir (Merthyr Tydvil)

  Muldoon, John

  Bowles, T. Gibson

  Harvey, T. E. (Leeds, W.)

  Murray, Captain Hon. A. C

  Boyle, D. (Mayo, N.)

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

  Muspratt, M.

  Brace, William

  Harwood, George

  Nannetti, Joseph P.

  Brady, P. J.

  Haslam, James (Derbyshire)

  Neilson, Francis

  Brigg, Sir John

  Haslam, Lewis (Monmouth)

  Nicholson, Charles N. (Doncaster)

  Brocklehurst, W. B.

  Havelock-Allan, Sir Henry

  Nolan, Joseph

  Brunner, J. F. L.

  Haworth, Arthur A.

  Norton, Capt. Cecil W.

  Burke, E. Haviland-

  Hayden, John Patrick

  Nugent, Sir Walter Richard

  Burns, Rt. Hon. John

  Hazleton, Richard

  Nussey, Sir Wilians

  Burt, Rt. Hon. Thomas

  Helme, Norval Watson

  Nuttall, Harry

  Buxton, C. R. (Devon, Mid.)

  Henderson, Arthur (Durham)

  O'Brien, Patrick (Kilkenny)

  Buxton, Noel (Norfolk, N.)

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

  O'Connor, John (Kildare, N.)

  Byles, William Pollard

  Henry, Charles S.

  O'Connor, T. P. (Liverpool)

  Cameron, Robert

  Higham. John Sharp

  O'Doherty, Philip

  Cawley, Sir Frederick (Prestwich)

  Hindle, F. G.

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

  Cawley, Harold T. (Heywood)

  Hobhouse, Rt. Hon. Charles E. H.

  O'Dowd, John

  Chancellor, H. G.

  Hodge, John

  O'Kelly, Edward P. (Wicklow, W.)

  Charming, Sir Francis Allston

  Hogan, Michael

  O'Kelly, James (Roscommon, N.)

  Chapple, Dr. W. A.

  Hooper, A. G.

  O'Malley, William

  Clancy, John Joseph

  Hope, John Deans (Fife, West)

  O'Neill, Dr. Charles (Armagh, S.)

  Clough, William

  Horne, C. Silvester (Ipswich)

  O'Shaughnessey, P. J.

  Clynes, J. R.

  Howard, Hon. Geoffrey

  Palmer, Godfrey

  Collins, G. P. (Greenock)

  Hudson, Walter

  Parker, James (Halifax)

  Collins, Stephen (Lambeth)

  Hughes, S. L.

  Pearce, William

  Collins, Sir Wm. J. (St Pancras, W.)

  Illingworth, Percy H.

  Pearson, Weetman H. M.

  Compton-Rickett, Sir J.

  Isaacs, Sir Rufus Daniel

  Pease, Rt. Hon. Joseph A.

  Condon, Thomas Joseph

  Johnson, W.

  Philipps, Col. Ivor (Southampton)

  Corbett, A. Cameron (Glasgow)

  Jones, Edgar (Merthyr Tydvil)

  Philipps, Sir Owen C. (Pembroke)

  Cornwall, Sir Edwin A.

  Jones, H Haydn (Merioneth)

  Phillips, John (Longford, S.)

  Cory, Sir Clifford John

  Jones, William (Carnarvonshire)

  Pirie, Duncan V.

  Cowan, W. H.

  Jowett, F. W.

  Pointer, Joseph

  Craig, Herbert J. (Tynemouth)

  Joyce, Michael

  Pollard, Sir George H.

  Crawshay-Williams, Eliot

  Kelly, Edward

  Power, Patrick Joseph

  Crosfield, A. H.

  Kemp, Sir G.

  Price, C. E. (Edinburgh, Central)

  Crossley, Sir W. J.

  Kennedy, Vincent Paul

  Price, Sir Robert J. (Norfolk, E.)

  Cullinan, J.

  Kettle, Thomas Michael

  Priestley, Arthur (Grantham)

  Dalziel, Sir James H. (Kirkcaldy)

  Kilbride, Denis

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

  Davies, E. William (Elfion)

  King, J. (Somerset, N.)

  Pringle, William M. R.

  Davies, Sir W. Howell (Bristol, S.)

  Lambert, George

  Radford, G. H.

  Davies, M. Vaughan- (Cardigan)

  Lardner, James Carrige Rushe

  Raffan, Peter Wilson

  Dawes, J. A.

  Law, Hugh A. (Donegal, W.)

  Rainy, A. Rolland

  Delany, William

  Layland-Barratt, Sir Francis

  Raphael, Herbert H.

  Denman, Hon. R. D.

  Leach, Charles

  Rea, Walter Russell

  Devlin, Joseph

  Lehmann, R. C.

  Reddy, M.

  Dillon, John

  Levy, Sir Maurice

  Redmond, John E. (Waterford)

  Doris, W.

  Lewis, John Herbert

  Redmond, William (Clare)

  Duffy, William J.

  Lincoln, Ignatius T. T.

  Rees, J. D.

  Duncan, C. (Barrow-in-Furness)

  Lloyd-George, Rt. Hon. David

  Rendall, Athelstan

  Duncan, J. Hastings (York, Ottey)

  Lough, Rt. Hon. Thomas

  Richards, Thomas

  Edwards, Enoch (Hanley)

  Low, Sir F. (Norwich)

  Roberts, Charles H. (Lincoln)

  2188

  2189

  Roberts, G. H. (Norwich)

  Summers. James Woolley

  Watt, Henry A.

  Roberts, Sir J. H. (Denbighs)

  Sutherland, J. E.

  Wedgwood, Josiah C.

  Robertson, Sir G. Scott (Bradford)

  Sutton, John E.

  White, Sir George (Norfolk)

  Robertson, J. M. (Tyneside)

  Taylor, John W. (Durham)

  White, J. Dundas (Dumbartonshire)

  Robson, Sir William Snowdon

  Taylor, Theodore C. (Radcliffe)

  White, Sir Luke (York, E.R.)

  Roch, Walter F. (Pembroke)

  Tennant, Harold John

  White, Patrick (Meath, North)

  Roche, Augustine (Cork)

  Thomas, Abel (Carmarthen, E.)

  Whitehouse, John Howard

  Roche, John (Galway, East)

  Thomas, Sir A. (Glamorgan, E.)

  Whittaker, Rt. Hon. Sir Thomas P.

  Roe, Sir Thomas

  Thomas, D. A. (Cardiff)

  Whyte, Alexander F. (Perth)

  Runciman, Rt. Hon. Walter

  Thomas, J. H. (Derby)

  Wiles, Thomas

  Samuel, Rt. Hon. H. L. (Cleveland)

  Thorne, G. R. (Wolverhampton)

  Wilkie, Alexander

  Samuel, J. (Stockton)

  Thorne, William (West Ham)

  Williams, Aneurin (Plymouth)

  Samuel, S. M. (Whitechapel)

  Toulmin, George

  Williams, J. (Glamorgan)

  Scanlan, Thomas

  Trevelyan, Charles Philips

  Williams, P. (Middlesbrough)

  Schwann, Sir C. E.

  Twist, Henry

  Williams, Liewelyn (Carmarthen)

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

  Ure, Rt. Hon. Alexander

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

  Seddon, J.

  Verney, F. W.

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

  Seely, Col., Right Hon. J. E. B.

  Vivian, Henry

  Wilson, John (Durham, Mid)

  Shackleton, David James

  Wadsworth, J.

  Wilson; J. W. (Worcestershire, N.)

  Sheehy, David

  Walker, H. De R. (Leicester)

  Wilson, T. F. (Lanark, N.E.)

  Sherwell, Arthur James

  Walsh, Stephen

  Wilson, W. T. (Westhoughton)

  Shortt, Edward

  Walters, John Tudor

  Winfrey, Richard

  Simon, John Allsebrook

  Walton, Joseph

  Wood, T. M'Kinnon (Glasgow)

  Smyth, Thomas F. (Leltrim, S.)

  Ward, John (Stoke-upon-Trent)

  Young, W. (Perthshire, E.)

  Snowden, P.

  Ward, W. Dudley (Southampton)

  Yoxall, Sir James Henry

  Soares, Ernest J.

  Warner, Thomas Courtenay T.

  Spicer, Sir Albert

  Wason, Rt. Hon. E. (Clackmannan)

  TELLERS FOR THE AYES.—Master of Elibank and Mr. Fuller.

  Stanley, Albert (Staffs, N.W.)

  Wason, John Cathcart (Orkney)

  Stachey, Sir Edward

  Waterlow, D. S.

  NOES.

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

  Cooper, R. A (Walsall)

  Heath, Col. A. H.

  Adam, Major W. A.

  Courthope, G. Loyd

  Helmsley, Viscount

  Anson, Sir William Reynell

  Craig, Charles Curtis (Antrim, S.)

  Hermon-Hodge, Sir Robert

  Archer-Shee, Major M.

  Craig, Captain James (Down, E.)

  Hickmann, Col. T.

  Arkwright, John Stanhope

  Craig, Norman (Kent)

  Hill, Sir Clement

  Ashley, W. W.

  Craik, Sir Henry

  Hillier, Dr. A. P.

  Atherley-Jones, Liewelyn A.

  Crean, Eugene

  Hills, John Walter (Durham)

  Bagot, Captain J.

  Cripps, Sir C. A.

  Hoare, S. J. G.

  Baird, J. L.

  Croft, H. P.

  Hohier, G. F.

  Baker, Sir R. L. (Dorset, N.)

  Dairymple, Viscount

  Hope, Harry (Bute)

  Baldwin, Stanley

  Dalziel, D. (Brixton)

  Hope, James Fitzalan (Sheffield)

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

  Dickson, Rt. Hon. C. Scott

  Horner, A. L.

  Banbury, Sir Frederick George

  Dixon, C. H.

  Houston, Robert Paterson

  Banner, John S. Harmood-

  Douglas, Rt. Hon. A. Akers-

  Hume-Williams, W. E.

  Baring, Captain Hon. G.

  Du Cros, Alfred (Tower Hamlets, Bow)

  Hunt, Rowland

  Barnston, H.

  Du Cros, Arthur P. (Hastings)

  Hunter, Sir C. R. (Bath)

  Bathurst, Hon. A. B. (Glouc, E.)

  Duke, H. E.

  Jackson, John A. (Whitehaven)

  Bathurst, Charles (Wilton)

  Dunn, Sir W. H. (Southwark)

  Jardine, E. (Somerset, E.)

  Beach, Hon. Michael Hugh Hicks

  Eyres-Monsell, B. M.

  Jessel, Captain H. M.

  Beckett, Hon. W. Gervase

  Faber, George Denison (Clapham)

  Kerry, Earl of

  Benn, I. H. (Greenwich)

  Falle, B. G.

  Keswick, William

  Bentinck, Lord H. Cavendish-

  Fell, Arthur

  Kimber, Sir Henry

  Beresford, Lord C.

  Finlay, Sir Robert

  King, Sir Henry Seymour (Hull)

  Bird, A.

  Fisher, W. Hayes

  Kinloch-Cooke, Sir Clement

  Boyle, W. L. (Norfolk, Mid)

  Fitzroy, Hon. E. A.

  Kirkwood, J. H. M.

  Boyton, James

  Flannery, Sir J. Fortescue

  Knight, Capt. E. A.

  Brackenbury, H. L.

  Fleming, Valentine

  Knott, James

  Brassey, H. L. C. (N'thamptonshire, N.)

  Fletcher, J. S.

  Lane-Fox, G. R.

  Brassey, Capt. R. B. (Banbury)

  Foster, J. K. (Coventry)

  Law, Andrew Bonar (Dulwich)

  Bridgeman, W. Clive

  Gastrell, Major W. H.

  Lawson, Hon. Harry

  Brotherton, Edward Allen

  Gibbs, G. A.

  Lee, Arthur H.

  Brunskill, G. F.

  Gilhooly, James

  Lewisham, Viscount

  Bull, Sir William James

  Gilmour, Captain J.

  Llewelyn, Venables

  Burdett-Coutts, W.

  Goldsmith, Frank

  Lloyd, G. A.

  Butcher, S. Henry (Cambridge Univ.)

  Gooch, Henry Cubitt

  Lockyer-Lampson O. (Ramsay)

  Calley, Colonel T. C. P.

  Goulding, Edward Alfred

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

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

  Grant, J. A.

  Long, Rt. Hon. Walter

  Carlile, E. Hildred

  Greene, W. R.

  Lonsdale, John Brownlee

  Carson, Rt. Hon. Sir Edward H.

  Guiney, P.

  Lowe, Sir F. W. (Birm., Edgbaston)

  Castlereagh, Viscount

  Guinness, Hon. W. E.

  Lyttelton, Hon. J. C. (Droltwich)

  Cator, John

  Gwynne, R. S. (Sussex, Eastbourne)

  Mackinder, H. J.

  Cautley, H. S.

  Haddock, George B.

  Macmaster, Donald

  Cecil, Evelyn (Aston Manor)

  Hall, D. B. (Isle of Wight)

  M'Arthur Charles

  Cecil, Lord Hugh (Oxford University)

  Hall, E. Marshall (Toxteth)

  M'Calmont, Colonel James

  Chaloner, Colonel R. W. G.

  Hambro, Angus Valdemar

  Magnus, Sir Philip

  Chamberlain, Rt. Hon. J. A. (Worc'r.)

  Hamersley, A. St. George

  Mallaby-Deeley, Harry

  Chambers, J.

  Hamilton, Marquess of (Londonderry)

  Mason, J. F.

  Clive, Percy Archer

  Hardy, Laurence (Kent, Ashford)

  Meysey-Thompson, E. C.

  Clyde, J. Avon

  Harris, H. P. (Paddington, S.)

  Mildmay, Francis Bingham

  Coates, Major E. F.

  Harrison-Broadley, H. B.

  Mills, Hon. Charles Thomas

  Colefax, H. A.

  Healy, Maurice (Cork, N.E.)

  Mitchell, William Foot

  Cooper, Capt. Bryan (Dublin, S.)

  Healy, Timothy Michael

  Moore, William

  2190

  2191

  Morpeth, Viscount

  Rawlinson, John Frederick Peel

  Sykes, Alan John

  Morrison, Captain J. A.

  Rawson, Colonel R. H.

  Talbot, Lord E.

  Morrison-Bell, Major A. C.

  Remnant, James Farquharson

  Terrell, H. (Gloucester)

  Mount, William Arthur

  Rice, Hon. Walter Fitz-Uryan

  Thynne, Lord A.

  Newdegate, F. A.

  Ridley, Samuel Forde

  Tobin, Alfred Aspinall

  Newman, John R. P.

  Roberts, S. (Sheffield, Ecclesall)

  Tryon, George Clement

  Newton, Harry Kottingham

  Rolleston, Sir John

  Tullibardine, Marquess of

  Nicholson, Wm. G. (Petersfield)

  Ronaldshay, Earl of

  Valentia, Viscount

  Nield, Herbert

  Royds, Edmund

  Walker, Col. W. H. (Lancashire)

  Norton-Griffiths, J. (Wednesbury)

  Rutherford, Watson

  Walrond, Hon. Lionel

  O'Brien, William (Cork, N.E.)

  Salter, Arthur Clavell

  Ward, Arnold (Herts, Watford)

  O'Donnell, John (Mayo, S.)

  Samuel, Sir Harry (Norwood)

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

  O'Neill, Hon. A. E. B. (Antrim, Mid)

  Sanderson, Lancelot

  Wheler, Granville C. H.

  Orde-Powlett, Hon. W. G. A.

  Sandys, G. J. (Somerset, Wells)

  White, Major G. D. (Lancs., Southport)

  Ormsby-Gore, Hon. William

  Sandys, Lieut.-Col. T. M. (Bootle)

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

  Paget, Almeric Hugh

  Sassoon, Sir Edward Albert

  Willoughby, Major Hon. Claude

  Parkes, Ebenezer

  Scott, Sir S. (Marylebone, W.)

  Willoughby de Eresby, Lord

  Peel, Capt. R. F. (Woodbridge)

  Sheehan, Daniel Daniel

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

  Peel, Hon. W. R. W. (Taunton)

  Stanier, Beville

  Wolff, Gustav Wilhelm

  Perkins, Walter F.

  Stanley, Hon. Arthur (Ormskirk)

  Wood, John (Stalybridge)

  Peto, Basil Edward

  Stanley, Hon. G. F. (Preston)

  Worthington-Evans, L. (Colchester)

  Pollock, Ernest Murray

  Starkey, John R.

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

  Pretyman, E. G.

  Staveley-Hill, Henry (Staffordshire)

  Wyndham, Rt. Hon. George

  Proby, Colonel Douglas James

  Steel-Maitland, A. D.

  Younger, George (Ayr Burghs)

  Quilter, William Eley C.

  Stewart, Gershom (Cheshire, Wirral)

  Randies, Sir John Scurrah

  Stewart, Sir MT. (Kirkcudbright)

  TELLERS FOR THE NOES.—Mr. H. W. Forester and Lord Balcarres.

  Rankin, Sir James

  Strauss, A.

  Ratcliff, Major R. F.

GROUP (7) INDIRECT TAXES.

  (13) TEA (CUSTOMS).
  Question put, "That the Customs Duty on tea shall be deemed to have been continued as from the first day of July, nineteen hundred and nine, and shall continue to be charged until the first day of July, nineteen hundred and ten, that is to say:—

  Tea, the pound

  five pence."

  (14) TOBACCO (CUSTOMS).
  " That, in lieu of the duties of Customs now payable on tobacco imported into Great Britain or Ireland, there shall, as from the thirtieth day of April, nineteen hundred and nine, be charged the following duties (that is to say):—
  Upon tobacco unmanufactured, viz.:

  s.

  d.

  Containing ten pounds or more of moisture in every one hundred pounds weight thereof—

  Unstripped

  the lb.

  3

  8

  Stripped

  the lb.

  3

  8½

  Containing less than ten pounds of moisture in every one hundred pounds weight thereof—

  Unstripped

  the lb.

  4

  1

  Stripped

  the lb.

  4

  1½

  Upon tobacco manufactured, viz:

  Cigars

  the lb.

  7

  0

  Cigarettes

  the lb.

  5

  8

  Cavendish or Negrohead

  the lb.

  5

  4

  Cavendish or Negrohead manufactured in bond

  the lb.

  4

  8

  Other manufactured tobacco

  the lb.

  4

  8

  s.

  d.

  Snuff containing more than thirteen pounds of moisture in every one hundred pounds weight thereof

  the lb.

  4

  5

  Snuff not containing more than thirteen pounds of moisture in every one hundred pounds weight thereof

  the lb.

  5

  4"

  (15) TOBACCO (EXCISE).
  " That in lieu of the duties of Excise now payable on tobacco grown in Ireland, there shall, as from the thirtieth day of April, nineteen hundred and nine, be charged the following duties (that is to say):—

  s.

  d.

  Upon tobacco unmanufactured, viz.:

  Tobacco containing ten pounds or more of moisture in every one hundred pounds weight thereof the lb.

  3

  6

  Tobacco containing less than ten pounds of moisture in every one hundred pounds weight thereof the lb.

  3

  11

  Upon tobacco manufactured, viz.:

  Cavendish or Negrohead manufactured in bond the lb.

  4

  8

  and that duties of Excise at the same rates shall, as from the first day of January, nineteen hundred and ten, be charged on tobacco grown in England or Scotland, and that there shall be charged on a licence to be taken out annually by every person growing, cultivating, or curing tobacco in England or Scotland an Excise Duty of five shillings."
  The Committee divided: Ayes, 315; Noes, 232.

  Division No. 55.]

  AYES.

  [8.15 p.m.

  Abraham, William

  Esslemont, George Birnle

  Macdonald, J. R. (Leicester)

  Addison, Dr. C.

  Falconer, J.

  Macdonald, J. M. (Falkirk Burghs)

  Agnew, George William

  Farrell, James Patrick

  Macnamara, Dr. Thomas J.

  Ainsworth, John Stirling

  Fenwick, Charles

  MacVeagh, Jeremiah

  Alden, Percy

  Ferens, T. R.

  M'Callum, John M.

  Allen, Charles P.

  Ferguson. R. C. Munro

  McKenna, Rt. Hon. Reginald

  Anderson, A.

  Ffrench, Peter

  M'Laren, F. W. S. (Lines., Spalding)

  Armitage, R.

  Flavin, Michael Joseph

  Mallet, Charles E.

  Ashton, Thomas Gair

  France, G. A.

  Manfield, Harry

  Asquith, Rt. Hon. Herbert Henry

  Furness, Sir Christopher

  Marks, George Croydon

  Baker, Joseph A. (Finsbury, E.)

  Gelder, Sir W. A.

  Martin, J.

  Balfour, Robert (Lanark)

  Gibson, James P.

  Masterman, C. F. G.

  Barclay, Sir T.

  Gill, A. H.

  Meagher, Michael

  Barlow, Sir John E.

  Glanville, H. J.

  Meehan, Francis E. (Leitrim, N.)

  Barnes, G. N.

  Glover, Thomas

  Meehan, Patrick A. (Queen's Co.)

  Barran, Sir J. (Hawick)

  Greenwood, G. G.

  Menzies, Sir Walter

  Barry, E. (Cork, S.)

  Greig, Colonel J. W.

  Middlebrook, William

  Barry, Redmond J. (Tyrone, N.)

  Grenfell, Cecil Alfred

  Millar, J. D.

  Barton, W.

  Griffith, Ellis J. (Anglesey)

  Molloy, M.

  Beale, W. P.

  Gulland, John William

  Molteno, Percy Alport

  Benn, W. (Tower Hamlets, St. Geo.)

  Gwynn, Stephen Lucius (Galway)

  Mond, Alfred Moritz

  Bentham, George Jackson

  Hackett, J.

  Mooney, J. J.

  Bethell, Sir J. H.

  Haldane, Rt. Hon. Richard B.

  Morgan, G. Hay (Cornwall)

  Birrell, Rt. Hon. Augustine

  Hall, Frederick (Normanton)

  Morgan, J. Lloyd (Carmarthen)

  Black, Arthur W.

  Hancock, J. G.

  Morton, Alpheus Cleophas

  Boland, John Plus

  Harcourt, Rt. Hon. Lewis (Rossendale)

  Muldoon, John

  Bowerman, C. W.

  Hardie, J. Keir (Merthyr Tydvil)

  Murray, Captain Hon. A. C.

  Bowles, T. Gibson

  Harvey, T. E. (Leeds, W.)

  Muspratt, M.

  Boyle, D. (Mayo, N.)

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

  Nannetti, Joseph P.

  Brace, William

  Harwood, George

  Neilson, Francis

  Brady, P. J.

  Haslam, James (Derbyshire)

  Nicholson, Charles N. (Doncaster)

  Brigg, Sir John

  Haslam, Lewis (Monmouth)

  Nolan, Joseph

  Brocklehurst, W. B.

  Havelock-Allan, Sir Henry

  Norton, Capt. Cecil W.

  Brunner, J. F. L.

  Haworth, Arthur A.

  Nugent, Sir Walter Richard

  Burke, E. Haviland-

  Hayden, John Patrick

  Nussey, Sir Wilians

  Burns, Rt. Hon. John

  Hazleton, Richard

  Nuttall, Harry

  Burt, Rt. Hon. Thomas

  Helme, Norval Watson

  O'Brien, Patrick (Kilkenny)

  Buxton, C. R. (Devon, Mid)

  Henderson, Arthur (Durham)

  O'Connor, John (Kildare, N.)

  Buxton, Noel (Norfolk, North)

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

  O'Connor, T. p. (Liverpool)

  Buxton, Rt. Hon. Sydney C. (Poplar)

  Henry, Charles S.

  O'Doherty, Philip

  Byles, William Pollard

  Higham, John Sharp

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

  Cameron, Robert

  Hindle, F. G.

  O'Dowd, John

  Cawley, Sir Frederick (Prestwich)

  Hobhouse, Rt. Hon. charles E. H.

  O'Kelly, Edward P. (Wicklow, W.)

  Cawley, Harold T. (Heywood)

  Hodge, John

  O'Kelly, James (Roscommon, N.)

  Chancellor, H. G.

  Hogan, Michael

  O'Malley, William

  Channing, sir Francis Allston

  Hooper, A. G.

  O'Neill, Dr. Charles (Armagh, S.)

  Chapple, Dr. W. A.

  Hope, John Deans (Fife, West)

  O'Shaughnessy, P. J.

  Clancy, John Joseph

  Home, C. Silvester (Ipswich)

  Palmer, Godfrey

  Clough, William

  Howard, Hon. Geoffrey

  Parker, James (Halifax)

  Clynes, J. R

  Hudson, Waiter

  Pearce, William

  Collins, G. P. (Greenock)

  Hughes, S. L.

  Pearson, Weetman H. M.

  Collins, Sir Wm. J. (St. Pancras, W.)

  Illingworth, Percy H.

  Pease, Rt. Hon. Joseph A.

  Compton-Rickett, Sir J.

  Isaacs, Sir Rufus Daniel

  Philipps, Col. Ivor (Southampton)

  Condon, Thomas Joseph

  Johnson, W.

  Philipps, Sir Owen C. (Pembroke)

  Corbett, A. Cameron (Glasgow)

  Jones, Edgar (Merthyr Tydvil)

  Phillips, John (Longford, S.)

  Cornwall, Sir Edwin A.

  Jones, H. Haydn (Merioneth)

  Pickersgill, Edward Hare

  Cory, Sir Clifford John

  Jones, William (Carnarvonshire)

  Pirie, Duncan V.

  Cowan, W. H.

  Jowett, F. W.

  Pointer, Joseph

  Craig, Herbert J. (Tynemouth)

  Joyce, Michael

  Pollard, Sir George H.

  Crawshay-Williams, Eliot

  Kelly, Edward

  Power, Patrick Joseph

  Crosfield, A. H

  Kemp, Sir G.

  Price, C. E. (Edinburgh, Central)

  Crossley, Sir W. J.

  Kennedy, Vincent Paul

  Price, Sir Robert J. (Norfolk, E.)

  Cullinan, J.

  Kettle, Thomas Michael

  Priestley, Arthur (Grantham)

  Dalziel, Sir James H. (Kirkcaldy)

  Kilbrlde, Denis

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

  Davies, E. William (Elfion)

  King, J. (Somerset, N.)

  Pringle, William M. R.

  Davies. Sir W. Howell (Bristol, S.)

  Lambert, George

  Radford, George Heynes

  Davies, M. Vaughan- (Cardigan)

  Law, Hugh A. (Donegal, W.)

  Raffan, Peter Wilson

  Dawes, J. A.

  Layland-Barratt, Sir Francis

  Rainy, A. Rolland

  Delany, William

  Leach, Charles

  Raphael, Herbert H.

  Denman, Hon. Richard Douglas

  Lehmann, R. C.

  Rea, Walter Russell

  Devlin, Joseph

  Levy, Sir Maurice

  Reddy, M.

  Dillon, John

  Lewis, John Herbert

  Redmond, John E. (Waterford)

  Doris, W.

  Lincoln, Ignatius T. T.

  Redmond, William (Clare, E.)

  Duffy, William J.

  Lloyd-George, Rt. Hon. David

  Rees, J. D

  Duncan, C. (Barrow-in-Furness)

  Lough, Rt. Hon. Thomas

  Rendall, Athelstan

  Duncan, J. Hastings (York, Otley)

  Low, Sir F. (Norwich)

  Richards, Thomas

  Edwards, Enoch

  Lundon, T.

  Roberts, Charles H. (Lincoln)

  Elverston, H.

  Luttrell, Hugh Fownes

  Roberts, G. H. (Norwich)

  Esmonde, Sir Thomas

  Lynch, A. A.

  Roberts, Sir J. H. (Denbighs)

  2194

  2195

  Robertson, Sir G. Scott (Bradford)

  Taylor, John W. (Durham)

  White, Sir George (Norfolk)

  Robertson, J. M. (Tyneside)

  Taylor, Theodore C. (Radcliffe)

  White, J. Dundas (Dumbartonshire)

  Roch, Walter F. (Pembroke)

  Tennant, Harold John

  White, Sir Luke (York, E.R.)

  Roche, Augustine (Cork)

  Thomas, Abel (Carmarthen, E.)

  White, Patrick (Meath, North)

  Roche, John (Galway, East)

  Thomas, Sir A. (Glamorgan, E.)

  Whitehouse, John Howard

  Roe, Sir Thomas

  Thomas, D. A. (Cardiff)

  Whittaker, Rt. Hon. Sir Thomas P.

  Runciman, Rt. Hon. Walter

  Thomas, J. H. (Derby)

  Whyte, Alexander F. (Perth)

  Samuel, Rt. Hon. H. L. (Cleveland)

  Thorne, G. R. (Wolverhampton)

  Wiles, Thomas

  Samuel, J. (Stockton)

  Thorne, William (West Ham)

  Wilkie, Alexander

  Samuel, S. M. (Whitechapel)

  Toulmin, George

  Williams, Aneurin (Plymouth)

  Scanlan, Thomas

  Trevelyan, Charles Philips

  Williams, J. (Glamorgan)

  Schwann, Sir C. E.

  Twist, Henry

  Williams, P. (Middlesbrough)

  Seddon, J.

  Ure, Rt. Hon. Alexander

  Williams, W. Llewelyn (Carmarthen)

  Seely, Col., Right Hon. J. E. B.

  Verney, F. W.

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

  Shackleton, David James

  Vivian, Henry

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

  Sheehy, David

  Wadsworth, J.

  Wilson, John (Durham, Mid)

  Sherwell, Arthur James

  Walker, H. De R. (Leicester)

  Wilson, J. W. (Worcestershire, H.)

  Simon, John Allsebrook

  Walsh, Stephen

  Wilson, T. F. (Lanark, N.E.)

  Smyth, Thomas F. (Leitrim, S.)

  Waiters, John Tudor

  Wilson, W. T. (Westhoughton)

  Snowden, P.

  Walton, Joseph

  Winfrey, R.

  Soares, Ernest J.

  Ward, John (Stoke-upon-Trent)

  Wood, T. M'Kinnon (Glasgow)

  Spicer, Sir Albert

  Ward, W. Dudley (Southampton)

  Young, W. (Perth, E.)

  Stanley, Albert (Stalls, N.W.)

  Warner, Thomas Courtenay T.

  Younger, W. (Peebles and Selkirk)

  Strachey, Sir Edward

  Wason, Rt. Hon. E. (Clackmannan)

  Yoxall, Sir James Henry

  Summers. James Woolley

  Wason, John Cathcart (Orkney)

  Sutherland, J. E.

  Waterlow, D. S.

  TELLERS FOR THE AYES.—Master of Elibank and Mr. Fuller.

  Sutton, John E.

  Watt, Henry A.

  NOES.

  Adam, Major W. A.

  Craig, Captain James (Down, E.)

  Hill, Sir Clement

  Anson, Sir William Reynell

  Craig, Norman (Kent, Thanet)

  Hillier, Dr. A. P.

  Archer-Shee, Major M.

  Craik, Sir Henry

  Hills, J. W.

  Arkwright, John Stanhope

  Crean, Eugene

  Hoare, S. J. G.

  Ashley, W. W.

  Cripps, Sir C. A.

  Hohler, G. F.

  Attenborough, W. A.

  Croft, H. P.

  Hope, Harry (Bute)

  Bagot, Captain J.

  Dairymple, Viscount

  Hope, James Fitzalan (Sheffield)

  Baker, Sir R. L. (Dorset, N.)

  Dalziel, Davison (Brixton)

  Horner, A. L.

  Balcarres, Lord

  Dickson, Rt. Hon. C. Scott

  Houston, Robert Paterson

  Baldwin, Stanley

  Dixon, C. H.

  Hume-Williams, W. E.

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

  Douglas, Rt. Hon. A. Akers

  Hunt, Rowland

  Banbury, sir Frederick George

  Du Cros, Alfred (Tower Hamlets, Bow)

  Hunter, Sir C. R. (Bath)

  Baring, Captain Hon. G. V.

  Du Cros, Arthur P. (Hastings)

  Jackson, John A. (Whitehaven)

  Barnston, H.

  Duke, H. E.

  Jardine, E. (Somerset, E.)

  Bathurst, Hon. A. B. (Glouc, E.)

  Dunn, Sir W. H. (Southwark)

  Jessel, Captain H. M.

  Bathurst, Charles (Wilts, Wilton)

  Eyres-Monsell, B M.

  Kerry, Earl of

  Beach, Hon. Michael Hugh Hicks

  Faber, George Denison (Clapham)

  Keswick, William

  Beckett, Hon. W. Gervase

  Falle, B. G.

  Kimber, Sir Henry

  Benn, I. H. (Greenwich)

  Fell, Arthur

  King, Sir Henry Seymour (Hull)

  Bentinck, Lord H. Cavendish

  Fisher, W. Hayes

  Kinloch-Cooke, Sir Clement

  Beresford, Lord C.

  Fitzroy, Hon. E. A.

  Kirkwood, J. H. M.

  Bird, A.

  Flannery, Sir J. Fortescue

  Knight, Capt. E. A.

  Boyle, W. L. (Norfolk, Mid)

  Fleming, Valentine

  Knott, James

  Boyton, J.

  Fletcher, J. S.

  Lane-Fox, G. B.

  Brackenbury, H. L.

  Forster, Henry William

  Law, Andrew Bonar (Dulwich)

  Brassey, H. L. C. (N'thamptonshire, N.)

  Foster, J. K. (Coventry)

  Lawson, Hon. Harry

  Brassey, Capt. R. B. (Banbury)

  Gastrell. Major W. H.

  Lee, Arthur H.

  Bridgeman, William Clive

  Gibbs, G. A.

  Lewisham, Viscount

  Brotherton, Edward Allen

  Gilhooly, James

  Llewelyn, Venables

  Brunskill, G. F.

  Gilmour, Captain J.

  Lloyd, G. A.

  Bull, Sir William James

  Goldsmith, Frank

  Locker-Lampson, O. (Ramsay)

  Burdett-Coutts, W.

  Gooch, Henry Cubitt

  Lockwood. Rt. Hon. Lt.-Col. A. R.

  Butcher, S. H. (Cambridge Univ.)

  Goulding, Edward Alfred

  Long, Rt. Hon. Walter

  Calley, Colonel T. C. P.

  Grant, James Augustus

  Lonsdale, John Brownlee

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

  Greene, W. R.

  Lowe, Sir F. W. (Birm., Edgbaston)

  Carille, E. Hildred

  Guiney, P.

  Lyttelton, Hon. J. C. (Droltwich)

  Carson, Rt. Hon. Sir Edward H.

  Guinness, Hon. W. E.

  Mackinder, Halford J.

  Castlereagh, Viscount

  Gwynne, R. S. (Sussex, Eastbourne)

  Macmaster, Donald

  Cator, John

  Haddock, George B.

  M'Arthur, Charles

  Cautley, H. S.

  Hall, D. B. (Isle of Wight)

  M'Calmont, Colonel James

  Cecil, Evelyn (Aston Manor)

  Hall, E. Marshall (L'pool, E. Toxteth)

  Magnus, Sir Philip

  Chaloner, Colonel R. G. W.

  Hambro, Angus Valdemar

  Mallaby-Deeley, Harry

  Chamberlain, Rt. Hon. J. A. (Worc'r.)

  Hamersley, A. St. George

  Mason, J. F.

  Chambers, James

  Hamilton, Marquess of (Londonderry)

  Meysey-Thompson, E. C.

  Clive, Percy Archer

  Hardy, Laurence (Kent, Ashford)

  Mildmay, Francis Bingham

  Clyde, J. Avon

  Harris, H. P. (Paddington, S.)

  Mills, Hon. Charles Thomas

  Coates, Major E. F.

  Harrison-Broadley, H. B.

  Mitchell, William Foot

  Colefax, H. A.

  Healy, Maurice (Cork, N.E.)

  Moore, William

  Collings, Rt. Hon. J. (Birmingham)

  Healy, Timothy Michael

  Morpeth, Viscount

  Cooper, Capt. Bryan (Dublin, S.)

  Heath, Col. A. H.

  Morrison, Captain J. A.

  Cooper, R. A. (Walsall)

  Helmsley, Viscount

  Morrison-Bell, Major A. C.

  Courthope, George Loyd

  Hermon-Hodge, Sir Robert

  Mount, William Arthur

  Craig, Charles Curtis (Antrim, S.)

  Hickman, Colonel T.

  Newdegate, F. A.

  2196

  2197

  Newman, John R. P.

  Ridley, Samuel Forde

  Thompson, Robert

  Newton, Harry Kottingham

  Roberts, S. (Sheffield, Eccleshall)

  Thynne, Lord Alexander

  Nicholson, Wm. G. (Petersfield)

  Rolleston, Sir John

  Tobin, Alfred Aspinall

  Nield, Herbert

  Ronaldshay, Earl of

  Tryon, Capt. George Clement

  Norton-Griffiths, J. (Wednesbury)

  Royds, Edmund

  Tullibardine, Marquess of

  O'Brien, William (Cork, N.E.)

  Rutherford, Watson

  Walker, Colonel W. H. (Lancashire)

  O'Donnell, John (Mayo, S.)

  Salter, Arthur Clavell

  Walrond, Hon. Lionel

  O'Neill, Hon. A. E. B. (Antrim, Mid.)

  Samuel, Sir Harry (Norwood)

  Ward, Arnold (Herts, Watford)

  Orde-Powlett, Hon. W. G. A.

  Sanderson, Lancelot

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

  Ormsby-Gore, Hon. William

  Sandys, G. J. (Somerset, Wells)

  Wheler, Granville C. H.

  Paget, Almeric Hugh

  Sandys, Lieut.-Col. T. M. (Bootle)

  White, Major G. D. (Lanes., Southport)

  Parkes, Ebenezer

  Sassoon, Sir Edward Albert

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

  Peel, Capt R. F. (Woodbridge)

  Scott, Sir S. (Marylebone, W.)

  Willoughby, Major Hon. Claude

  Peel, Hon. W. R. W. (Taunton)

  Sheehan, Daniel Daniel

  Willoughby de Eresby, Lord

  Perkins, Walter F.

  Stanier, Beville

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

  Peto, Basil Edward

  Stanley, Hon. Arthur (Ormskirk)

  Wolff, Gustav Wilhelm

  Pollock, Ernest Murray

  Stanley, Hon. G. F. (Preston)

  Wood, John (Stalybridge)

  Pretyman, Ernest George

  Starkey, John R.

  Worthington-Evans, L. (Colchester)

  Proby, Col. Douglas James

  Staveley-Hill, Henry (Staffordshire)

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

  Quilter, William Eley C.

  Steel-Maitland, A. D.

  Wyndham, Rt. Hon. George

  Randles, Sir John Scurrah

  Stewart, Gershom (Ches., Wirral)

  Younger, George (Ayr Burghs)

  Ratcliff, Major R. F.

  Stewart, Sir M'T. (Kirkcudbright)

  Rawlinson, John Frederick Peel

  Strauss, Arthur

  TELLERS FOR THE NOES.—Sir A. Acland-Hood and Viscount Valentia.

  Rawson, Colonel R. H

  Sykes, Alan John

  Remnant, James Farquharson

  Talbot, Lord E.

  Rice, Hon. W.

  Terrell, H. (Gloucester)

GROUP (8) MOTOR SPIRIT AND MOTOR CARS.

  (16) MOTOR SPIRIT (CUSTOMS AXD EXCISE).
  Resolved,
  " That there shall be charged on motor spirit, as from the thirtieth day of April, nineteen hundred and nine, a Customs import duty of three pence per gallon, and as from the first day of June, nineteen hundred and nine, an Excise duty of the like amount; and that there shall be charged, as from the last-mentioned date, on a licence to be taken out annually by a manufacturer of motor spirit, an Excise duty of one pound, and on a licence to be taken out annually by a dealer in motor spirit an Excise duty of five shillings."

  (17) MOTOR CARS.
  " That, in lieu of any Excise duties now payable for motor cars, there shall be charged, both in Great Britain and Ireland, in the year beginning the first day of January, nineteen hundred and ten, and in every subsequent year, for every motor bicycle or motor tricycle a duty of one pound, and for every other motor car a duty at the following rates, calculated in accordance with horse-power:—

  Horse-power

  Duty.

  Under 6½

  …

  …

  Two guineas.

  6½but under 12

  …

  …

  Three guineas.

  12 but under 16

  …

  …

  Four guineas.

  16 but under 26

  …

  …

  Six guineas.

  26 but under 33

  …

  …

  Eight guineas.

  33 but under 40

  …

  …

  Ten guineas.

  40 but under 60

  …

  …

  Twenty guineas.

  60 and over

  …

  …

  Forty guineas.

  That the duty under this Resolution shall not extend to motor cars which are charged with duties as hackney carriages under The Customs and Inland Revenue Act, 1888, or to motor cars which are not carriages within the meaning of that Act, and that the unit of horse-power for the purpose of the duty shall be calculated in accordance with the regulations made by the Treasury for the purpose."

GROUP (9) AMENDMENT OF LAW.

  (18) AMENDMENT OF LAW.
  Resolved,
  " That it is expedient to amend the Law relating to National Debt, Customs, and Inland Revenue (including Excise)."

FINANCIAL RESOLUTIONS.
Considered in Committee.
[Mr. WHITLET in the Chair.]
(IN THE COMMITTEE.)
Mr. LLOYD-GEORGEMoved the following Resolutions:—
(1) LEVYING OF MOTOR CAR DUTIES IN IRELAND.
" That it is expedient that in Ireland any duties for motor cars imposed by any Act of the present Session be levied by county councils (including the councils of county boroughs) and paid into the Exchequer, and that an annual sum be paid out of the Consolidated Fund to county councils in Ireland in connection therewith."
(2) PAYMENTS OUT OF CONSOLIDATED FUND TOWARDS DEVELOPMENT OF ROADS.
" That there shall be charged on the Consolidated Fund in every financial year, and paid into a separate account to be appropriated towards the development of roads, a sum equal to the net proceeds in each year of any duties on motor spirit imposed by any Act of the present Session, and the net proceeds in each year of the duties on licences for motor-cars which are affected by any such Act, and the net proceeds of the duties shall be taken to be the gross proceeds of the duties subject to deductions for cost of collection, and for any payments into any local taxation account or to any county council (including the council of a county borough), in respect of the proceeds of the duties or any deficiency of those proceeds."
(3) DIVISION OF LOCAL TAXATION LICENCE DUTIES BETWEEN LOCAL AUTHORITIES AND EXCHEQUER.
" A.—That for the purpose of payments into any Local Taxation Account, the proceeds of any duties on any local taxation licences (including duties for motor-cars) which are altered by any Act passed in the present Session shall be deemed to be the proceeds of the duties in the year ending the thirty-first day of March, nineteen hundred and nine.
" B.—That any duties for motor-cars imposed by any Act of the present Session be levied by county councils in England and Wales, and be duties to which Section six of the Finance Act, 1908, applies, and that the amount of the duties so levied be divided between county councils (including the councils of county boroughs) in England and Wales, and the Exchequer, so as to provide for the payment to each such county council of an amount equal to the proceeds of the duties levied by that council during the year ending 31st day of March, nineteen hundred and nine, in respect of motorcars on which the new duties are imposed, and for the payment of the balance into the Exchequer, and that if in any year the amount of the duties so levied is not sufficient to pay to each such county council the amount required to be paid, the deficiency shall be charged on the Consolidated Fund.
" C.—That all payments made in pursuance of conditions attached to new licences under Section four of the Licensing Act, 1904, shall be paid into the Exchequer."
(4) ADDITIONAL PAYMENTS TO LOCAL AUTHO RITIES ON ACCOUNT OF LAND VALUE DUTIES.
" That there shall be charged on the Consolidated Fund in each year a sum equal to half the proceeds of the duties levied in respect of land values (including Mineral Rights Duties) under any Act of the present Session, and that sum shall be divided between England, Scotland, and Ireland in such manner and paid into such separate accounts for the. benefit of such local authorities as Parliament may determine."
(5) VALUATION OF LAND (EXPENSES, ETC.).
Mr. LLOYD-GEORGEmoved "That it is expedient to authorise the payment, out of moneys provided by Parliament, of any expenses or remuneration payable in connection with any valuation of land or premises for the purposes of any duty-charged under any Act of the present Session relating to Finance."
Resolutions agreed to, and Reported.
Question put, and agreed to, "That this House doth agree with the Committee in the Resolutions reported this day from the Committee of Ways and Means."
Question put, and agreed to, "That this House doth agree with the Committee in the Resolutions reported this day from the Committee on the Financial Resolutions."
Question put, and agreed to, "That this House doth agree with the Committee in the further Resolution (5) reported this day from the Committee on the Financial Resolutions."

FINANCE BILL (1909–10).
Bill ordered to be brought in by the Chairman of Ways and Means, the Chancellor of the Exchequer, and Mr. Hob-house. Presented accordingly, and read the first time. (To be read a second time upon Monday next.)

EDUCATION.
Mr. WHITEHOUSE: I beg to move, "That, in view of the relation of unemployment to adolescent and child labour, this House regards an improved educational system, with more adequate provision for the care and training of adolescents, as a matter of urgent necessity, and considers that the Imperial Exchequer should bear an increased share of the cost of this national service."

2201
I had hoped that in this day of mandates it might be possible that I could claim that a mandate had been given at the last election for the cause of educational reform, and I went so far as to begin the examination of the election addresses of Members of the present House. I trust hon. Members will forgive me if I say that I found the examination of election oratory in such bulk peculiarly fatiguing. I should say that the examination of the whole of the great thoughts enshrined—I dare not say entombed—in that election literature remains incomplete. But I did examine no inconsiderable number of election addresses, and I very much regret to say that I only found two which referred to matters of education in the sense in which they are referred to in the terms of this Motion, so that I cannot claim an electoral mandate in this connection. I did, indeed, find the word "education" was frequently referred to. but it stood for that unhappy religious dispute which has so long, I think, prevented the real vital needs of education being satisfactorily dealt with. I think I am expressing not the opinion on this side of the House only when I say that one reason why we looked forward with such great hope to the formation of the Education Settlement Committee was because we thought with this unhappy religious and sectarian question out of the road it would be possible to make much speedier progress with those reforms in education for which we have waited so long. I think, though the immediate settlement has failed, we do not regard the labours of the Committee as thrown away. We believe we have been drawn nearer to a settlement which will satisfy all reasonable people.
If I can claim no electoral mandate, I can at least claim for this Resolution that it represents the views of all social workers, inquirers, experts and economists, who have been brought- into direct touch with the problems of the youth of our country. Nor does the case rest on such evidence alone, for we have had presented to this House during the last year or two certain reports of unparalleled importance which no nation could delay long in giving its serious attention to. I refer particularly in this connection to the Reports presented by the Royal Commission on the Poor Law. Both the Majority and the Minority Reports devote a considerable amount of attention to the consideration of these educational problems. But I refer especially to the Report of the Consulta-
2202
tive Committee of the Board of Education on Continuation Schools, which appears to me to stand out amidst all the other reports as of very great importance indeed. The facts of the case arc there gathered together and marshalled with great care, skill and accuracy, and the deductions which are made from these facts are, I think, very clearly established. It is such a Report, in short, as we should have expected from this Committee when we remember the names of the men who composed it, and especially when we remember that it included a thinker like Mr. Michael Sadler, who has done so much for this cause, and a practical worker like Mr. Lewis Paton, of the Manchester Grammar School.
The criticism I make at the beginning on our system of elementary education is that it has made very slow progress indeed. It has kept for the most part in a certain narrow groove. I must not spend time now in examining the reason for this. I think if we entered upon any minute examination we should find that the terms "code" and "cost" would be used in this connection, but we have not shown any considerable enterprise in amending our system of education, though during the time it has existed we have seen unparalleled developments in our industrial system. We have seen very many changes and developments which require very important alterations in our method of education. Our system of elementary education remains a series of unrelated episodes. The system under which an elementary school boy is trained is not related as it should be to his after life and to the industrial future that awaits him. The Resolution I have the honour to submit affirms the existence of a direct relationship between the great national problem of unemployment and our system of child and adolescent labour. I need not remind the House that this is established in the Reports I have referred to, but I want to express in a sentence or two what this great problem of boy labour is, and how our system works. Under it many thousands of schoolboys, leaving each year the elementary schools, are compelled or driven through their ignorance and the ignorance of their parents, and through the poverty of their parents, into what I think are very aptly called "blind alley occupations." They leave the elementary schools, and without guidance and without knowledge they become van boys, errand boys, or newspaper boys. They go on the streets as traders,

2203
or they go to those many forms of industrial life where, owing to the specialisation of industry, they cannot hope to be absorbed as men. There is an ever-increasing demand for boy labour. The old apprenticeship system has died away, in consequence of changes in industrial conditions, and what particularly causes the employment of boy labour are these changes, and especially the great increase in our transport services. A boy goes immature in mind and body, and during the years he spends in these blind alley occupations he is not only under no educative influence, not only not learning any trade or industry which will give him a career in later life, but when he becomes a man he is worse off than on the day when he left school. He is physically, morally and mentally worse off. He has lost the little learning that he had. He has been subject to no discipline. He has deteriorated in every way, and it is not to be wondered at that such boys as young men are thrown aside on to the industrial scrap heap in order that their places may be taken by other members of this great army of boys. They not only enter the ranks of the unemployed, but speedily enter the ranks of the unemployable. In this connection I venture to read two short extractions, the first from the Majority Report, and the second from the Minority Report of the Poor Law Commission. The first says:—
" The almost universal experience is that in large towns boys, owing to carelessness or selfishness on the part of the parents, or their own want of knowledge or foresight—for the parents very often have very little voice in the matter—plunge haphazard immediately on leaving school into occupations in which they earn wages sufficient to make them independent of parental control and disinclined for the lower wages of apprenticeships and workshops, and whence, if they remain on, they are excluded when they come to manhood. According to the main statistical sources of information, we find the very serious fact emerges that between 70 and 80 per cent. of hoys leaving elementary schools enter unskilled occupations. All our investigations go to show that there is a regular drift from such boys occupation into the low skilled labour market."
The Minority Report says:—
" There is no subject as to which we have received so much and such conclusive evidence as upon the extent to which thousands of boys, from lack of any sort of training or industrial occupation, grow up almost inevitably so as to become chronically unemployed or under-employed, and presently to recruit the ranks of the unemployable. We regard this perpetual recruitment of the unemployable by tens of thousands of boys who, through neglect to provide them with suitable industrial training, may be said to graduate into unemployment as a matter of course, as perhaps the gravest of all the grave facts which the Commission has laid bare."
But I take it that in every part of this House, as, indeed, all over the country.
2204
the facts which I have outlined as to the present working of our education and industrial system will not be denied. I think that there is a substantial measure of agreement between all parties as to the present grave evils connected with boy labour, and I propose in the few minutes that remain to me to deal with some of the remedies that we suggest, and which we think the situation calls for and public opinion is ready for. I wish first to speak of improvements in our existing schools. I dismiss for the moment the problem of the care of adolescents. It has been, I think, generally felt that the curriculum of our elementary schools is too limited, that it is too literary, and that it attempts too much and achieves too little. We think that the curriculum should be so improved as to include a much greater amount of manual training. We think that the classes of the elementary schools would be much smaller. In this connection we should all desire to acknowledge our great debt of gratitude to the present Minister of Education for the important step forward he has taken in this matter.
Closely related to the subject, of course, and to these points is the question of teaching. We look for a larger number of fully-qualified teachers, and we believe as we adopt these methods of improvement that we shall attract in an ever-increasing degree these men whom we so much wish to attract. Surely we want to aim at the same spirit of personal influence, the strongest of all influences, the human influence, in the elementary school, which we have used to so much advantage in our secondary schools and higher schools generally. That new spirit can only come with the improvements that I have mentioned. We desire to see the physical needs of the elementary school children paid more attention to, and I for one look forward to the day when we shall cease to build our elementary schools in the slums, without playgrounds, at the doors of the children they are intended for. I hope that under our new scheme of town planning the school bases will be a recognised institution, the school base in a country or semi-country place with ample playground; and if that day is in the distant future, I hope we shall take more advantage of our great parks. It appears to me that much good might be done by building our elementary schools on the margin of or very near to our great parks, so that they can be used to foster the outdoor life of elementary school children.

2205
We have an example of what these new methods in education are capable of when we see what has been achieved in the work of the Boy Scouts. I do not speak of, I am not interested in, any scheme of Boy Scouts which is promoted on the assumption that when the bogey of invasion materialises they will be of assistance to us. I am thinking only of Boy Scouts as a Boys Order of Chivalry, where he is encouraged to live the outdoor life, where he is taught to use his powers of observation, to use his hands, and to become a handy boy, and where he is brought into contact with men of strong character. We have seen in connection with that movement the admirable phase of it developed by Sir Francis Vane, and what extremely good results are achieved from this most promising of all material. But I pass now to the more direct consideration of the problem given us by boys who have left our elementary school system. I suggest that we are agreed that we are making a fatal mistake when we withdraw our care for and supervision of these boys at an age when they most require such care and supervision, and that if we longer neglect it in connection with the elementary system we can only longer neglect it at the cost of the national well-being. All the Reports I have mentioned agree in recommending the raising of the school age. It is true that the Reports and opinions of experts vary as to the extent to which at once the school age should be raised, but there is this substantial measure of agreement, that the school age should be raised. We are losing our control of our children at too early an age. I will not go in detail through the separate recommendations of the Poor Law Report, of the Consultative Committee's Report, and others, but I do wish, in connection with the raising of the school age, to call the attention of the House to a few very important figures. It is estimated—and it is a very careful estimate, probably under rather than, over—that at the present time there are 211,000 children of school age—that is, between the ages of twelve and fourteen—who have obtained full-time exemption. They have gone to these blind alley occupations, and we have lost in the majority of cases all control over them. Of these 211,000 we know there are only 40,000 in attendance at any sort of evening school or any sort of continuation school, so that we have to do with 171,000 boys and girls between the ages of twelve and fourteen who are under no sort of educational care
2206
or discipline. I suggest that these figures are of vital importance, and in considering them we have to remember also that this total, great as it is, takes no heed whatever of the large number of children who are partially exempt from school attendance. It takes no notice whatever of the great army of child traders and what may be described as half-timers. If we go above the age of fourteen and consider the children from fourteen to seventeen years of age, we find in round figures that there are 2,000,000, and of that number only 25 per cent, are under any sort of educational care. Seventy-five per cent, of these 2,000,000 between the ages of fourteen and seventeen are under no sort of educational care, so that the case for raising the school age is justified by the gravity of the position as to which we have so much evidence that cannot be minimised in any way.
9.0 P.M.
In reference to the raising of the school age I am not concerned now to suggest to what point it should be raised, and what should be the special conditions, what the exceptions for local districts and for agricultural districts, for instance. I am not concerned to go into these details, but I say the raising of the school age in itself and by itself cannot meet the national need that exists to-day. It must be accompanied by a great development in our educational facilities, in our types of schools, in our methods of instruction, and especially in our technical and manual training schools. I suggest, too, that if, for instance, we follow the advice of the Consultative Committee and raise the age to fourteen, which is their advice, and is more cautious than the advice of the Poor Law Commissioners, I think it could well be said, with perfect truth, that a child of the age of fourteen should not be sent into the world and our care for him withdrawn. I come now to the chief educational claim which is considered to be necessary, and that is the system of compulsory education, of continuation schooling from the time of leaving the school until, say, the age of seventeen or eighteen. Any such system of compulsory training must, we think, be accompanied by a statutory limitation of the hours of labour. I think it only requires to be stated to be proved that it would be absurd to expect a boy, working long hours in the factory or in other existing employments at this period of his life to reap any real benefit by the system of instruction in evening schools. With regard to the kind of in-

2207
struction to be given in these years of adolescence, I will only add that I think it should aim not only at making him adaptable, making him resourceful, giving him technical training, and securing for him the ability to make a career for himself in later life, but it should aim also at his physical well-being, and it should bring to bear upon him moral influences, thus turning out a man qualified to discharge the duties of citizenship. I wish to say also, and it is a great defect in our present system, that we allow a child to enter industrial life in an improper way, and any reform must surely include supervision of employment as well as supervision of education. Indeed, the machinery for this supervision of employment is being rapidly brought into play, or may be rapidly brought into play, through the operation of Labour Exchanges. We think that the juvenile department in connection with these Labour Exchanges is one of very great importance, and without going into details, I think we must not be content with less than this, that whatever arrangements are made we should see to it that every boy or girl before he or she leaves the elementary school, has brought to bear upon him or her personal influence, so that no child shall enter industrial life without having had the very fullest information and the best education that it has been possible to give.
I have not had the time to deal with the objections which are raised and which will be raised to schemes such as those I have mentioned. I would venture to suggest our guiding principle should be the welfare of our youth, that they are our best assets as a nation, and that we should not allow them to be sacrificed for any consideration. Bon. Members in every part of the House have been brought into direct touch with social problems by their personal services in our great settlements and in other ways in the slums of our great cities, and I think they will agree with me as to the wastefulness of our present system. If I may venture to speak for them, and to interpret their views, and if their thoughts be mine, I would venture to say that they do not lose heart in social work, because whilst they realise that the best social schemes will not save many of the present generation, we yet can save the generations that are to come. Therefore, I submit, with much respect to the House, the Resolution which stands in my name.
Mr. S. H. BUTCHER: I beg to second the Resolution. I am sure the House must feel that the hon. Gentleman who has Moved has made out a very powerful and a convincing case. I will merely attempt to supplement slightly what he has said. I start from this significant fact that the Distress Committees of 1905–1907 report that nearly one out of every three qualified applicants are below the age of thirty. That startling fact is carried a step further in both the Majority and Minority Reports of the Poor Law Commission. There we find that among the chief causes of unemployment, the chief cause, which accounts for the ever-increasing ranks of the casually employed, is boy labour. That boy labour may be looked on from two points of view, either from the economic or the educational side. Its effects on the economic side are mainly these, that boy labour tends to displace adult labour by a cheaper and less efficient form of labour. On the educational side the effects are even more ruinous, because they go to the very heart of the matter, and touch the question of character. The kind of employment which those boys get is employment which is uneducational, unintelligent and monotonous. A boy goes from job to job with intervals of idleness, during which he loses all power of mental concentration. The work he does is in no sense a training. It is work that leads to nothing, it is work that has no future before it, and is, in fact, that kind of work that offers no prospect of regular adult employment to that boy when the boy becomes a man. His work does not fit him, it merely unfits him for his future life.
Can there be a more pathetic contrast than when you reflect that a boy at the age when he is least capable of labour has employment even more than he ought to have, and that afterwards, perhaps for the remainder of his life, he is either unemployed or under-employed, and that you can follow him through the whole course down that blind alley, as it has been called, of boy labour, through every grade of unemployment, or of under-employment which leads in very many instances either at the workhouse or the gaol. That surely is a great blot on our whole educational system. We spend millions of money lavishly and ungrudgingly upon elementary education, and while we do that with one hand, with another hand we throw away a large part of the results dl that education. There is so much sheer waste, lavish expenditure on one side, sheer waste on another, because at the most

2209
critical age of those young people we send them out adrift, without any care and without any provision. One thing we know a good education ought to have, and that is to make you hunger for more, to make you know when you are leaving school you are beginning your education, instead of ending it. One sees in the elementary schools that there are children who have got a sense of delight so long as they feel that they are making progress and going forward. Then comes the moment which means a loss of interest, and that fatal gap which has been spoken of as being filled up by years of mechanical and unintelligent toil, the result of which is that the love of learning is entirely deadened and the power of concentration gone, and intelligence and physique are both stunted, and character deteriorates and general incapacity is entailed. That is the real problem we have to deal with. It is quite true there are a certain number of young people who do now go to evening and continuation schools, but I would point out this fact, that comes out through statistics, that they do not go to those schools for the most part, in fact the great majority, direct from the day schools to the continuation schools. A couple of years are wasted in the interval, and with what result? The result is that when they go back to their learning, instead of going forward from the point at which they stopped, they have to go back to begin over again what they have already done to try to recover lost ground, to learn things that are half forgotten, and they bring into it a jaded mind instead of the old keen and alert intelligence. The very interesting and significant figures which have been given as to the number of those who, after they are fourteen years of age, get no education, or so slight an amount that it is almost negligible, point to the fact that at eighteen a young fellow has to begin all over again at enormous disadvantage. No one who considers the facts can doubt that a system which leads to such results is economically unsound and educationally ruinous.
What are the remedies? The interesting thing to my mind is that the different bodies which have investigated the problem have come so very nearly to the same conclusions. That applies to both the Majority and the Minority Reports of the Poor Law Commission, and also to the report of the Consultative Committee. Without going through the proposals in detail, I would just enumerate those which find favour in my mind. First, as regards
2210
elementary or day schools, I fully agree with the Mover of the Resolution that a change is needed in the curriculum, and that that change ought to be in the direction of less insistence upon mere book work, more direct contact with nature, and more manual training. Personally, I would be the last to say a word to underrate the value of literary education, but I am sure we have overdone it, and there we must learn some new lessons. In particular I must insist on the need of some variety of practice in the schools, and put in a special plea for the rural districts. You cannot advantageously have precisely the same curriculum in agricultural districts that you have in the city. I would urge on the Board of Education that they might well have more flexible regulations as regards such things as the equipment of workshops. The workshop in a rural village may well be a very different thing from the more costly workshop in the city. The identity of regulations which I believe exists is nothing short of pedantry. Next, I think the age of school attendance might be raised either to fifteen, as both the Majority and the Minority Reports agree, or to fourteen. You must abolish the half-time exemption under thirteen. You should abolish it, I think, by degrees, but ultimately altogether. In connection with that we have a very good example in the Scottish Act of 1901, which I am told is working remarkably well in Edinburgh. As an instance, I may give the one figure that the number of exemptions granted all over Scotland between the ages of twelve and fourteen was only 4.2 per cent, of the total scholars. Again, I would put in a claim for the rural schools. While believing in raising the age, I would give exceptional treatment to rural schools. A boy does not successfully engage in or get to like agriculture unless he takes to it young. I think a boy in an agricultural district would get a better education if he left school at twelve or thirteen, provided he afterwards carried on his education in a continuation school, than if he remained on to fifteen, afterwards becoming a loafer and learning nothing more. As to the raising of the age, I would certainly give a permissive power to the local authorities. Local conditions differ so greatly that you must not make a perfectly uniform rule. Local authorities ought to have power to make by-laws compelling attendance up to fourteen or fifteen years of age, whatever it may be, with special exemptions if necessary.

2211
Second among the remedies I would name continuation schools. The subject of study and the work done in those schools ought, I imagine, to include both physical and technical training, with special reference to the local industries, including agriculture. I would also include moral instruction in the duties of citizenship. But continuation schools will not solve or help to solve the problem unless you have a measure of compulsion. What should be the form of that compulsion? You will have to compel three different sets of people. First of all, local authorities must be put under a statutory obligation to provide continuation schools for young people up to seventeen, or whatever the age is, as they do in several foreign countries. Secondly, you will have to compel the attendance of the young people. That can only be done by giving the local authorities permissive power to enforce attendance. I would not make attendance obligatory everywhere. In some country parts it would be a mistake to enforce that; but by arrangement, by choosing the seasons of the year and the time of the day or evening it would be possible for the local authorities who know their business to produce reasonable rules for compulsory attendance. Thirdly, compulsion on the employers is absolutely necessary if the scheme is to work. That is to say, it should be made illegal for an employer to have in his employment young people at the age of which we are speaking unless they are in regular attendance at a continuation school. Personally, I would add one other thing, in regard to which I am afraid the Mover of the Resolution will entirely part company with me. I would add a short period of universal and compulsory military training. That is not the spirit of militarism. I feel confident that that short period of training, quite apart from whatever effect it might have in connection with the defence of the country, would turn out men physically sound, industrially fit, and more capable of performing the larger duties of citizenship. The last word I should say is: There are objections that may be raised, and real difficulties to be met. The difficulties are mainly of an industrial and financial order. First of all, it may be said, that if you withdraw so many young people, boys and girls, from employment that you will very seriously disturb the labour market, and that you will produce some industrial
2212
disorganisation. Undoubtedly there is force in that objection. I would submit, however, that if the changes which we are suggesting on both sides of the House came into existence they would not come in very rapidly. They would come in gradually, and would be spread over a sufficient time to allow the labour market to adjust itself to the new conditions. Of this, I think, we are all agreed, if those changes came gradually, that the result in the end would be to establish much sounder economic conditions than exist to-day. The other objection, the other difficulty, possibly the greatest of all, is the cost of this educational reform. Whether we look at the cost of the elementary schools and the proposed changes, or the continuation schools, it will mean large subsidies from the central authority. There is no doubt about that. If the State is not prepared to spend that money I fear these reforms cannot come about.
But what I would submit is this: that if the cost is thereby increased the efficiency of our citizens will be increased out of all proportion to the cost. If ever the expenditure of money repaid itself, in the truest sense of the word that expenditure would be reproductive. Anyhow, I would express the hope that both sides of the House may help to work out this problem. I believe we are almost in complete agreement —for I do not think there is any party in this. It is a problem which is urgent. All the facts of it have been supplied to us. We have had time to make up our minds, or at least to consider the various schemes. We ought, I think, to unite in making a national effort to check the waste of human material and to prevent that which is the saddest of all things, the wreckage of young lives, and the loss of early hope in many who have as yet hardly entered upon their career. The future of this country, as a great industrial nation, and, I believe, even as an Imperial race, will depend very largely on the measures we take to meet this gigantic evil.
Mr. ELVERSTON: I think the hon. Gentleman the Member for Mid-Lanark has, by putting down this Motion, certainly drawn attention to an outstanding blot upon our educational system. The absence of adequate provision for those who have completed the elementary school course, and do not proceed to a secondary school, is one of the most serious outlooks at the present time before this

2213
country. We are, as the hon. Gentleman opposite said, spending millions of money upon the elementary education of our children up to the age of thirteen or fourteen. Then we turn them over to the education of the streets. Cast adrift, they can only rely upon their own efforts, and they are a serious and grave social menace. As a consequence they certainly add very largely to the ranks of the unemployed. It is a serious thing that at the present time only one out of every six persons between the ages of fourteen and twenty-one is receiving a systematic education; that no less than 2,000,000 out of 2,800,000 between the ages of fourteen and eighteen have done with education once and for all. In the interests of the country, quite as much as in the interests of the children themselves, it is essential that local authorities should be compelled to provide further educational facilities. I quite agree with hon. Gentlemen who have spoken to-night that it is essential also that attendance at these schools shall be made obligatory upon the children. I am of opinion that there should be attached to our elementary schools technical or industrial departments for boys who are serving their apprenticeship, and that they should attend in these schools for two years, from fourteen to sixteen, as part of their period of apprenticeship. Such a school as I have in my mind has recently been opened by the London County Council, who have a technical school for boys to teach them the business of book production—letterpress printing, bookbinding, and the rest. A similar department might be added to many of our higher elementary schools in accordance with the trades of the locality, agriculture, commerce, or whatever industry might be taught at such schools. Since I came into this House I have been very much impressed with the feverish anxiety that hon. Gentlemen on the opposite benches have displayed to try to prove that this country is not keeping pace with Germany in the race for "Dreadnoughts." I was glad to hear from the few hon. Gentlemen who have addressed the House remarks to the effect that they do desire that this country should keep pace with Germany in the race for education.
The German Government, at any rate, appears to be fully convinced that education will be the determining factor in the future of nations. Germany to-day is, at any rate, of opinion that brains and not bullets will eventually prevail. There is plenty of evidence to show that the extra-
2214
ordinary industrial development of Germany during the past generation is mainly attributable to its educational system, and not to another cause, which it is often attributed by hon. Gentlemen on the other side of this House. In elementary education Germany had a start of something like a century over Great Britain. Rich and poor alike were obliged to attend the elementary school in practically every German State for a hundred years before the Forster Act. Germany is now paying very great and special attention to this subject of continuation schools. We find that every year an increasing number of students are being taught commercial knowledge in the continuation schools which have been established in Germany during the last ten years. In 1907 there were 1,600 of these continuation schools, and in the same year no less than 50,000 students from the rural districts as compared with 8,000 students some twenty years ago. During the last eight or nine years Germany has increased her State grant for this particular kind of education by no less than 100 per cent. This extraordinary activity should surely stimulate the people of this country to something very similar. The same activity has been going on in Holland ever since 1900. In that country every Commune has been obliged to provide a continuation school for the children, at which they may attend if they wish. Attendance at the German continuation schools is an obligatory matter.
We have in this country technical schools which compare with those of any other country in the world, but we do lack in this country a better quality of pupils for these technical schools. A sound general education is an essential necessity to successful technical training, and if we were to insist upon children attending continuation schools after the age of fourteen, we should be doing something towards supplying our technical institutions with better materials, and would produce better results. Believing, as I do, that localities which provide a high standard of education are performing a great national service, I would venture to take advantage of the last line of this Resolution to ask the President of the Board of Education whether it would be possible for him to use his influence to secure further financial help for the poorer areas in this country, insisting, of course, that the Government should be satisfied with the manner in which the work was carried on. I know perfectly well that when public money is

2215
to be secured there is a general scramble for it from every part of the country, and I also know that it is generally thought that Imperial grants may lead to extravagance of administration, but those fears are more imaginary than real. Certainly the experience of the last seventeen years points to this. But there is a fear, and very real fear at the present time that local authorities, finding the cost of education such a heavy burden upon them will pinch and starve that great service whenever and wherever they can.
I have had the honour of serving upon the Manchester Education Committee for a good many years, and I must say there is a difference of feeling on that Committee now from what there was five or six years ago. The increased demands put upon the local authorities by the Board of Education are making it literally impossible for them to do more than they are doing at the present time, and if there are to be further developments the money can only come from one source, and that is the Imperial Exchequer. I would most respectfully ask the President of the Board of Education if he cannot see his way to do what I have suggested, to, at any rate, see if it is not possible to readjust the basis upon which special grants are given at the present time. I might remind the House that since 1905 the sum of £200,000 a year has been provided for the purpose of helping certain local authorities in whose area the rate for elementary education is specially high. The regulation under which the grant is paid provides that where this part of the expenditure for education is met by a rate exceeding one-sixth in the £ the Imperial Exchequer may come to its aid to the extent of about 75 per cent, of the balance, but, having offered this encouragement and help to the poorer local authorities, it was forthwith modified. After the first year a Clause was inserted in the regulations to the effect that grants would not be paid to any local authority which had not already participated in the special grant. We know, of course, it is a very difficult matter to readjust grants from year to year. The House will remember that on 8th April last the President of the Board of Education, in answer to a question, admitted that some seventeen authorities raised rates of more than Is. 6d. in the £ for elementary education, but they are excluded from any participation in the special grant because of the autocratic regulation that only first comers should share in these particular benefits.
2216
I think many hon. Members will agree with me that the present basis of distribution is rather a curious one for a Liberal Government to perpetuate. Certainly it is lacking in the open-minded-ness and the ready adaptability to change which we usually associate with Liberal administration. I see that according to the latest Blue Book in my possession out of £157,000 distributed by the Board for this purpose £97,000 went to the county of Essex. West Ham alone received £55,700 in one year. Speaking on behalf of these other seventeen areas—and I may say the area which I have the privilege to represent in this House is one of them—I venture to ask whether now, after a period of five years, it is not possible for this matter to be at any rate reconsidered. The restriction, we know, was doubtless originally created for the purpose of keeping the grant within the limit of £200,000, and we know the grant was originally intended to be only a temporary affair, but, as I have already said, education is a national rather than a local service, and Parliament ought to equalise the burden of this service upon the various localities and not leave some to be doing work which ought to be done by others.
Mr. HOARE: As the only member of the London education authority who is also a Member of this House it may be interesting in this discussion for me to briefly allude to one or two points that seem to me to have weight in connection with the question raised by the hon. Member for Mid-Lanark. Reference was made by my hon. Friend (Mr. S. II. Butcher) to the insistency of the problem with reference to rural schools. The problem is insistent, but I venture to urge, from its magnitude in the county of London, that problem is even more insistent in London than in the rural districts. In London we are dealing with something like 1,000.000 children, and we are spending considerably over £5.000,000 a year on our elementary and other schools. We are administering educational institutions of every kind. If a child desires to go to a secondary school a large quantity of those schools are supported by the London County Council to which such children can go. If a child wishes to go to those schools and its parents have not the means to maintain the child there we have a very liberal and generous scholarship system which the London County Council adopted several years ago. At the present moment we are spending £250,000 a year on our.scholarship system by which children

2217
have been provided with a ladder enabling them to pass from the provided, or non-provided schools, to the secondary school and the university. I may mention only last year one of our scholars was senior wrangler at Cambridge. We also have a large number of technical institutions and trade schools; indeed, I think I may very well quote the lines of Crahbe:—
" To every class we have a school assigned; Rules for all ranks and food for every mind."
Side by side with all these educational facilities, there are remarkable industrial opportunities as well. It may sound a hackneyed thing to say, but it is a true one, that the county of London is the greatest industrial centre in the world. I have taken the trouble to get out a few figures from the 1901 Census. I find that the number of men, women, boys and girls employed in the factories and workshops in London, apart from the commercial warehouses, business institutions, and domestic service, is very nearly 600,000. One would think the London child with all these various educational opportunities and all these industrial advantages in regard to employment ought to be in a particularly favourable position. But what do we find? If we consider the statistics given and the researches of such authorities as Mr. Charles Booth, we find that at the present time London is dependent for two-thirds of its skilled labour not on boys and girls who are London born and bred, but on boys and girls and men and women who come from the provinces. If we look to the ranks of casual labour we find that no less than 70 per cent. of the dock labour in the Metropolis is London born and bred. If we take institutions like common lodging houses and the Salvation Army and the Church Army shelters, we find eight or nine out of every ten men and women who take refuge there are London born and bred. If we ask ourselves what is the reason for this very remarkable disproportion between educational facilities and the opportunities that are taken advantage of by London children, it seems to me that two reasons at least can be given. In the first place the London child has a peculiar temptation to enter those blind alleys about which we have heard to-night. There are probably better facilities for transport in a metropolitan area than there is anywhere else. In the case of the London child it is very often the child who decides what profession or trade he shall enter. The child generally decides this at the age
2218
of fourteen or fifteen years, when he is manifestly unfit to make that choice. No wonder, then, with the encouragement that the parents give him in nine cases out of ten, he chooses to earn at once a certain amount of money rather than to learn for a longer period, and defer the receiving of high wages for two or three years during which he may continue his education.
Side by side with this there is very good reason for an employer in London giving a preference consciously or unconsciously to provincial men and women. This is due to the fact that in the provinces rents and rates are lower, and there is much more opportunity for a boy to attach himself to some particular trade and to learn the elementary details of that trade, whereas in London, with high rates and high rents, a great many employers cannot afford to have a beginner on their staff. That is the reason why they give a preference to a boy who has had this opportunity in the provinces when he has not had a similar opportunity in London. Side by side with the great temptation to casual labour and casual occupation in London there is this preference, which, consciously or unconsciously, the employer gives to a country child. With these two facts before us it is of the utmost importance for this House to consider what steps can be taken to remedy this very grave evil.
Let me say at once that I am in entire agreement with the suggestions that have fallen from hon. Gentlemen who have already spoken. There is one exception, and that is with reference to the commercial superiority of Germany, but this point, as the Debate has been non-controversial, I shall not elaborate. There are many lines upon which the problem can be simplified and differentiated. There are the Labour Exchanges, the work being done by the teachers in the elementary schools, the Care Committees, and the apprenticeship and skilled employment associations. All these bodies, each in their own particular way, are doing excellent work, but you cannot get the full benefit of that work until you have adopted the recommendations urged to-night. In the first place you must alter or modify the present curriculum in our elementary schools. In the past that curriculum has been too much in the direction of academic and commercial occupations, and it must needs be that if we are to remedy this state of affairs we

2219
must import an industrial bias to the education given in the majority of our elementary schools. If you are to have an industrial bias successfully imparted in the elementary schools you must go back a step further, and see that the teachers are qualified to give industrial training. In the training colleges the same preponderance is given to academic learning as in the elementary schools; therefore, if you wish an industrial bias imparted in our elementary schools, you must see that the atmosphere of the training colleges must be altered, so that the teachers may be well qualified to give this particular kind of industrial training. Side by side with that you must increase the accommodation now provided in the higher trade schools such as we possess in London and the various technical institutions. I am glad to think that the London education authority is realising the importance of this particular movement, and is pressing on as fast as it can with an increase in the accommodation of its trade and technical classes. I find that during the last three years something like 1,000 new places have been provided in the trade schools or technical classes, but, in order to get the full benefit of this new tendency in elementary and higher education, you must go a step further, and increase the school age.
There have been several alterations in the school age, but it is a noteworthy fact that the last alteration took place, I think I am right in saying, as long ago as 1889. Since that time there have been many changes in our industrial outlook, and it does seem to me the time has now come to further extend the age of compulsory attendance at any rate up to fifteen. That, of course, will cost a very large sum of money, and here I come to the second part of the hon. Member's Resolution, a part to which I do not think he paid sufficient attention, because it is a very material point. If we are to extend the age of compulsory attendance in the county of London it will cost the London ratepayers £188,000 a year. It will mean providing something like 60,000 new places for boys and girls in our elementary schools, and that comes to £188,000. We are already at our wits end to find the money for the various branches of public education in London, and I am certain, if we do not receive a very large extra grant from the National Exchequer, there is no chance whatever of this most necessary and urgent reform being carried out.
2220
May I, before I sit down, refer to the recommendations of the Royal Commission on Local Taxation? The President of the Board of Education will there find the case for increased grants to education set out in a forcible and undeniable manner. It is shown how education is one of the most national of all the services, and I venture, as a member of the London education authority, to press upon him as strongly as I can that if these most necessary reforms are to be carried out, and carried out soon, he will have to find very largely increased grants from the National Exchequer.
10.0 P.M.
Mr. GEORGE ROBERTS: I think we are all glad to find that there is so much unanimity on this question. We are all agreed that our present educational system is most unsatisfactory, and that reform is urgent; and there are points on which all parties are agreed in order to promote the educational efficiency of the country. I know various opinions are held as to what is essential in order to attain the desired end, but I will endeavour to emulate the example of previous speakers and avoid anything of a violently controversial nature. First of all, I think we shall have to admit that school life at present is far too short. I find there is some little dissent from that, but I do not think it is great. We endeavour to cram too much education into a comparatively few years of a child's life, and all education reformers are agreed that it is absolutely essential to raise the school age as early as possible. Side by side with that there is another problem which is receiving considerable attention, and in regard to which I believe a great consensus of opinion is being formed in favour of its solution.
The half-time system is inseparably wrapped up with this question of the raising of the school age, and I feel the time has arrived when all parties in the State might unite for the purpose of solving that problem. I believe that the opposition which has prevailed in Lancashire and Yorkshire is now being allayed. We have been compelled to recognise that parents have been at fault in this particular phase of the educational question, and one of our first considerations has been the necessity of bringing them round to a greater recognition of their duty to their children, I believe we are now coming to the conclusion that, after all, a section of parents cannot be allowed to alone dominate this question. The nation recognises that an

2221
efficient education for every unit of its population is desirable and essential, and, if it should be that any fault of a given number of parents stands in the way of this attainment, then I think we ought to recognise our duty to overcome the fault of those parents in order that we may attain to this higher form of educational efficiency. It is not only a question affecting the particular parent or the particular child. The prevalence of the half-time system in certain of our schools is inimical to the educational progress of those even in attendance during the whole of the school hours. I am glad to observe that there is an increasing recognition of the necessity for educational reform, and, having arrived at that conclusion, I feel we must contemplate this matter of the half-time system as one of the essential parts of that reform. Progress has undoubtedly been made during recent years.
The right hon. Gentleman the President of the Board of Education has been congratulated upon the issue of what is known as Circular No. 709. This is a very good administrative improvement long overdue, but it does not altogether concede what educational reformers desire. Nevertheless, it is a tangible step in the right direction. We are gratified that it should have been undertaken, and we hope that the success which will inevitably attend upon this reform may be an inspiration to the right hon. Gentleman and his successors to proceed further along the same line. Unless our teachers are able to have restricted classes they cannot note the various qualities of the children. When I was connected with educational administration and used to visit a number of public schools, I used to regard some of the teachers as more in the nature of drill sergeants than instructors. A great deal of their time was occupied in maintaining order and discipline in their classes. An hon. Member says that is a very good thing, but it is not the altogether absorbing quality of our teaching profession. Therefore all educationists are getting to recognise that classes should be made.smaller in order that the teachers may give closer individual attention to the various qualities of their children, because, as was well observed by the Seconder of the Resolution, it is not alone the question of cramming instruction into our children that is aimed at. The real purpose of education is to create a desire on the part of the child for more of that education. I am one of those who believe that without education our people will
2222
never learn how to live. It is only educated persons who realise the loftiest pleasures of life, and, therefore, I view the question from a dual aspect. Not only do I agree that the productivity and quality of labour should be promoted, but I desire it also to be cultured and refined, in order that the people may enjoy life as fully and completely as any other class. I am quite prepared to accept the standard set and enjoyed by other classes of society, which keep their children at school till they are over twenty. That is a good thing, and I am hoping to see the pathway opened for children of the working classes to enjoy equal facilities, which, alone, shall be restricted by the possibility of assimilating the education which may be provided in those higher stages. I feel we have cause to congratulate ourselves on some little progress having been made in encouraging it.
Emerging from this discussion has been the insistence on the necessity of looping up the various phases of education so that children may pass from one scheme to another without break. Therefore the idea of continuation schools has been suggested, and is receiving considerable attention in the country. It is but right it should have been introduced into this discussion. I quite agree that every inducement should be given to compel our children to avail themselves of the highest forms of education that the State can provide for them. I am a strenuous advocate, therefore, of the extension of the school age. I feel that fifteen might be the immediate enactment, and, subsequently, sixteen might be adopted, and even then the education should not be broken, but provision should be incorporated for the attendance of the lads and girls at continuation classes in connection with the employment that they may be adopting. There is just one little danger that we on these benches are too apprehensive of. We are fearful, unless we restrict the hours of labour during which children may be employed of their, being overworked and being rendered unable to avail themselves of the facilities provided in our continuation classes. Therefore we are putting forward as an essential feature of the continuation school system a proposal that the permissible hours of boy labour shall be curtailed. In brief the idea is that the time spent in the continuation school and in the workshop or factory shall not exceed the normal working day applicable to that

2223
class of labour. I find a general recognition when we are dealing with the unemployed problem that we are brought into close contact with large masses of unskilled and uneducated labour. Some are inclined to think that if we simply educate those who are uneducated at the present time, and if we give trades to those classes which do not practice trades, we are solving the unemployed problem. I do not think we are justified in putting that forward in serious fashion, for there are large groups of highly skilled labour in our midst even at the present time who are unable to find a market for their labour. But during times of depression the ranks of unemployment are no doubt recruited first from the ranks of those who are least skilled and least educated. Therefore one is bound to recognise that the promotion of education and the creation of a higher amount of skill amongst those classes may do something to mitigate the evil, though, possibly, some people expect a great deal more in that direction than is likely to be realised even if their ideas were put into an enactment.
I recognise, too, that a higher amount of technical training is desirable. There is a great misuse of boy labour in our midst owing to the ever-increasing encroachments of machinery into the domains of industry as a consequence of the subdivision of industries we find that there is a great demand for boy labour for a limited number of years. These boys enter the mill or factory, and they are engaged in one small monotonous operation during the whole time of their employment. Subsequently, when they reach the adult stage and make a demand for a man's remuneration they are passed on one side, and more boys are introduced, and it is quite true that these lads have no outlook in life, and undoubtedly go largely to recruit the unemployed army in our midst. I admit, therefore, the necessity for a greater amount of technical skill and training in connection with our educational system. Nevertheless, we must recognise that we should provide employment for that class of labour, and it will become incumbent on the State to organise national labour so that it may be absorbed within its ranks. One hon. Gentleman has introduced the question of transit labour in the country. It is widely recognised that the hours in this form of industry are inordinately long, and were they re-
2224
duced it would provide avenues of employment for large numbers of people. I stated at the outset of my brief observations that I desired to avoid unduly controversial questions, but I will venture to lay down this proposition. If we are able to place within the reach of every lad in the community a high form of education with skill in some form of craft, it will then become necessary on the part of the State, in order that it may not forfeit the expenditure incurred, to regularise the hours of labour and to organise national labour conditions in order that these men may find their proper place therein. I recognise that the concluding portion of the Resolution is not the least important part of it. Undoubtedly every Minister at the Education Department has been pressed for larger grants in aid of the educational administration of the country. Undoubtedly this demand will have to be insisted upon and further grants will have subsequently to be made, because there is a, large margin in this problem which is really a poverty characteristic. There are some parents, however much they might desire it, who could not afford to keep their children at school for the higher age, and if we are really anxious that every child should have equal opportunity for availing themselves of educational facilities, then I contemplate that we shall have to recognise the poverty conditions and come to the aid of the parents in those cases. Of course I contemplate that this will immediately conjure up evils in the minds of some people, but I venture to look upon this as merely a temporary liability, because I am certain that if we give the children a fair start in the form of educational and technical equipment then we shall make it possible for them to work out their own salvation and become independent citizens in our land, and it will not be necessary for them to rely upon the social effort and assistance which their parents might require at the present time. I said that there were one or two controversial points introduced into the discussion, but on the whole I am pleased to observe so much harmony and unanimity on this question that I hesitate to make anything in the nature of critical observations thereon. I can simply say as far as the party with whom I am associated, and on whose behalf I speak tonight are concerned, that we support the Resolution, because it moves in the right direction, and because we recognise a desire that every child of every class in

2225
the country should have placed within its reach the highest form of education that it can absorb, and because we realise that it is the highest interest of the State that the best which is in every child shall be brought out.
Sir W. ANSON: There is a great deal in this Resolution with which I think both sides of the House are heartily in accord, but it must be admitted that it is a proposition of the most general character, and the important part of it which comes at the end was hardly touched upon by the hon. Member who moved it. After all, when we are making a considerable demand upon the Imperial Exchequer for a purpose which we think desirable it is well to have some notion of the amount which is being asked for and of the bodies to whom the money is to go, and the hon. Member who moved the Resolution gave us no indication of the cost of the various remedies which he suggested, nor did he tells us whether he proposed that this money should go direct to the local authorities or should be placed at the disposal of the Board of Education to be doled out as they thought fit. For my own part, I should not be prepared to support the Resolution at all unless I thought the money was going to the local authorities, because, for one thing, the local authorities are precluded from differentiating in their assistance to any school by any other than educational considerations, whereas the Board of Education have a wider latitude. I will not, however, pursue that matter further. And, further, the local authorities have been greatly disappointed in the amount of whisky money placed at their disposal. I believe a good many of them are in serious financial straits, and that is a matter which I hope will engage the attention of the Board of Education and the Treasury. It is a matter which is left so vague that one would have been very glad to have some notion what it was that we were asking for when we made this general demand of the general character of which we all approve.
But the serious evil which we are asked to remedy is, I understand, that there is a great number of boys in all our large towns, and more particularly in London, who, as soon as they leave school, go into some employment which is of material assistance to the family for a limited number of years, but which leaves the boy stranded, having forgotten what he has learned at school, with no future before him, to drift into the ranks, first of the
2226
unemployed, and then of the unemployable. How is this to be remedied? The hon. Member spoke of "our" care and "our" supervision, as if there was no one responsible for the child but the State. I think the parent ought not to be left out of sight when we are considering how the child should best be brought up and how his future should be marked out. I quite agree that once we have taken away the child, as we do under our Education Acts, for the greater part of the working hours of every day from the control of his parents, the State incurs a certain responsibility in many respects which it cannot relieve itself of. On the other hand, we must not forget that the child is a member of the family and that the family is responsible as well as the State. I should be very sorry to use any language or accept any Resolution which in any way weakened parental responsibility over the child. The hon. Member suggested as remedies a better course of instruction at the elementary schools so as to fit boys to take better care of themselves when they left school and to go into some higher grade of education or to take up some employment. He said the curriculum was too literary, and ought to be made more scientific. At one time the pendulum in education had swung so completely over to the side of science—that was when I first had anything to do with the education of the children of this country—that it was necessary to redress the balance in order that the boy should have sufficient command of his own language to be able to express in intelligible terms what he had learnt. What I understand the hon. Member really meant was that literary education was of a pedantic character, that it did not really stimulate the intelligence of the child, and what we want is that such literary education as the child gets at the public elementary school, apart from the practical work, which I desire to see extended, should be the sort of teaching which makes the boy or girl wish to read, and to go on reading, books, and something besides the halfpenny papers.
Then the hon. Member thought that if the staffing of the schools was better, and the influence of the teacher more closely brought to bear upon the child, that would have a good effect. The personal influence of the teacher depends, of course entirely, in its value, or the quality of the teacher himself and the training of the teacher. It seems to me that the distinction between the good teacher and the

2227
mere lecturer is—[An HON. MEMBER: "The size of the class."]—whether he looks upon each child as a separate individual, as a creature in whom he can personally interest himself, and not as a mere member of a class, the size of which is comparatively immaterial. These are both desirable things, but they do not bring us to a solution of the problem of how, when a child leaves school, care is to be taken that he is embarked in an occupation which will be to his advantage. Hon. Members who have spoken adopted as a universal panacea the raising of the school age. While the raising of the school age would be a very good thing in many cases, it would not be a good thing in every case. I entirely agree with my hon. Friend the Member for Cambridge University (Mr. S. H. Butcher) that in the rural schools we should rather lower than raise the age of compulsory school attendance. If you are to keep a man on the land you must get the child out of school at an earlier age than now. That is not inconsistent with the child's education. I would not take him out of school without keeping some hold upon him. Whoever employs him should be bound to see that he is worked properly, that he attends classes in the long evenings, and that his education is not lost sight of. I believe that combination of practical work and continuation studies would tend to keep our agricultural population on the land, and also to place their education at a higher level than it is now. Then as regards town schools, the occupations in one place are not the occupations in another. One sort of occupation is inconsistent with a continuance of school life, and another form of occupation makes it practically necessary that a boy should go on learning; but in all cases I entirely agree that whether the school age is increased or diminished, a boy should not be relieved from the liability to attend classes of some sort until he reaches the age of sixteen or seventeen. But we must bear in mind that when we lay down this hard and fast rule that no boy should leave an elementary school until he is fifteen, the Board of Education and the local authorities have provided a great variety of educational opportunities. There is beyond the elementary school the secondary school, which involves an outlay of time which many children are not able to give. Then there are the higher schools, the technical institutes, continuation classes, and various ways in which
2228
a boy may continue his education although he is engaged in some sort of occupation during the day which does not disable him from working at evening classes. From reading the Report of the Board of Education it is very encouraging to find how much trouble employers now take to ensure that those whom they employ continue their education and attend classes. That is done to a very much larger extent than formerly, and that interest which employers take in the continued education of the boys they employ is really an essential feature in the development of our education.
But there is one point on which I agree entirely with what fell from the Mover of the Resolution, that a boy should not be allowed to embark in any occupation without good advice and without some security that he is not taking up work which will lead to nothing and which will land him in difficulties a few years later. One way of doing that might be to put some constraint upon employers that those whom they employ must either continue their education or must be engaged in work which will lead to something in the future. But after all what is really wanted is that those who look after our elementary schools should take some interest in the future of the children as well as in their present teaching. What I have always thought is that the position of manager in one of our great elementary schools should be one of interest and ambition for anyone who cares about the future of our children, because we shall never solve this problem merely by legislation, nor by the use of public money, nor by successful administration, nor by the best of teachers, nor the best of curriculums. What is really wanted is that we should care more individually about one another, and that those who are well-to-do and those who have leisure should take more trouble about the lives and the homes of the poor.
The PARLIAMENTARY SECRETARY to the BOARD of EDUCATION (Mr. Trevelyan): I think the House will unquestionably feel that it owes a debt of gratitude to the Mover and Seconder of this Resolution for the large-minded experience with which they addressed themselves to the Question. I am myself rising at the conclusion of this Debate simply to express my sympathy with the Resolution on behalf of the Department for which I am speaking, and even, perhaps, more than sympathy, strong approval. In the few minutes during which I shall speak I do

2229
not propose to spend any time over the financial problem and the question of increased subsidy from the nation if any large reforms are initiated in the direction suggested by any of the speakers. It is not peculiar to the question which my hon. Friend has brought forward. The financial difficulty of local taxation is a general one which meets every reform and in particular obstructs the work of our Department at every turn. No one doubts that any great educational reform in the future must mean a greater expenditure of money. But neither do I doubt that if the conscience and imagination of the nation are struck by great reforms such as many of the speakers have foreshadowed to-night the nation will feel how small the sum is compared with their national resources which we are now spending on purposes of this sort. Consider how small the expenditure at this moment is upon our technical and evening schools. The nation is giving under half a million and the localities are providing about a million. That is to say, less than the cost of one battleship is being spent every year in dealing with what a great many of the very best judges in Church and State are apt now to say is the biggest social problem of all—how to give a fair start to the boys and girls leaving school, in some way that will enable them to start in employments that will not lead to nothing. The biggest question which we are discussing to-night is this immense, uncontrolled, unapprenticed army of children between thirteen and eighteen. Of all times in life the ages from thirteen to eighteen is perhaps the most critical. It is the age when children are still almost entirely imitative; they have no confirmed moral standard; it is an age in which everything is interesting to them, vice and virtue alike, and when they have no power of selection. It is an impressionable age in every way, and the great educational motto of the upper class is that the battle of Waterloo was won on the playing fields of Eton. They recognise that the public school is a most important part of education. It is a time when children, are most impressionable; and, when my right hon. Friend talks of parental responsibility, the way the upper classes, who have the chance of keeping their children at school, exercise parental responsibility is to insist on their continued education. What we ask to-day is that other classes who are not so fortunately situated, should also have the opportunity of insisting
2230
on their parental responsibility in the same kind of way. The question is, I think, rather more serious than some people imagine. There is an impression that in the last few years great progress has been made in the increasing number of children who now go to technical and education classes of various kinds. It is true that the attendance at these classes has greatly increased, but, unfortunately, we find that the younger the age the less has been the increase; in fact, that in the earliest ages of all up to fifteen there has not been an increase, but there has been an actual decrease of the number of children attending such classes. There has been no increase at all up to the age of twenty-one, and where the increase has taken place—an increase of something like 100,000 new students in the last seven or eight years—-it has been in adult students over the age of twenty-one, and not among the young, whose position, of course, we are really considering to-night. My hon. Friend, the Member for Mid-Lanark dealt with the way in which this immense number of children between fourteen and seventeen are at the present moment employed. I think the number getting no schooling at the present time is 1,500,000. Some of them are employed in ways that nobody would pretend to do other than regret. A large number of them are hardly distinguishable from loafers, or from those who do bits of street trading, which is a proficient school for the wastrels and thieves. Some time ago, I think it was the Commissioner of Police in Birmingham, who said that out of 713 children doing street trading in Birmingham, two-thirds of them had been prosecuted in the course of six months. Then the class of errand boys, messenger boys, and van boys, to which my hon. Friend alluded, are earning an honest wage, but, as everybody knows, their occupation lead to absolutely nothing. The boys are discarded at the age of sixteen or seventeen, or they discard themselves because they get a wage which is enough for a boy, but not enough for a man. But there is another thing which I hope the House will realise: Even those occupations in which boys and girls are engaged, and which are more or less skilled, often lead just as little to permanent occupations. I had the duty of going with a committee into the question of half-time in Lancashire and Yorkshire, and we went very thoroughly into it. We, of course, had to deal with one of the

2231
arguments which is always brought forward in favour of half-time—that it is a kind of apprenticeship for the children going into it. I do not say that that is altogether a false argument. But we found, when half-time work was under consideration in the neighbourhood of Bradford, the following conditions. I quote from the Report:—
" But the majority of the boys do not got permanent employment in the trade at all. Doffing or piecing is no apprenticeship to them because they do not continue in the trade. Between fifteen and eighteen years of age the greater part of the boys leave the trade, having lost an important part of their schooling, having acquired some preliminary knowledge of a trade which cannot find them employment, and are cast upon the labour market to try and find employment in a district, which is peculiarly deficient in well-paid male occupations. As far as the boys are concerned the system seems calculated to create casual and unskilled male labour. In Halifax the position is much the same as in Bradford. We are informed that it has been ascertained in the result of certain investigations into the careers of all the boys between thirteen and fourteen years of age in attendance at evening schools in that town in the Session 1903–4, that over 40 per cent. of the boys who had been half-timers, and subsequently remained in the mills as full-timers, drift into the unskilled labour market; and that 14 per cent, of the boys who hail been half-timers, but did not subsequently continue as mill hands, do the same. On the other hand, only 3 per cent, of the boys who did not work as half-timers drift into the unskilled labour market."
That is the state of a great many of the children, who are naturally getting a certain skill in a particular occupation, and who are cast off when they are beginning to approach man's estate. I do not want to pretend, however, that the outlook is wholly bad. It is no doubt true that the great mass of children are at present not looked after as they should be; but when we consider in what direction the nation can move in order to remedy this evil we have no lack of guidance from experience. In the first place, there are local authorities in many of our big industrial towns who have done a great deal to get the whole of the child population into technical and continuation schools after the elementary period is over. Take the town of Halifax. 66 per cent, of the children who left elementary schools there regularly go on to the technical schools and the continuation schools. The principal of the technical school and the local authority do everything they can to induce them to continue at school. The result is, the custom of that town has begun to be that all children shall do so unless there is some obstacle which absolutely prevents them going on. I mention the case of Halifax, and there are other towns which, no doubt, are known to hon.
2232
Members. Then there are many employers at the present time, few it is true compared with the total number of employers, but a very perceptible number who insist on all their young employ½s under the age of seventeen and eighteen going to technical schools after their work, sometimes letting them off the last hour of their work, or, at any rate, seeing that they are not overworked, but insisting as a condition of employment that they shall go to the continuation classes. Great firms like Mather and Platt, Brunner and Mond, Crossley, and Vickers and Maxim all insist, although I am not quite certain of Vickers and Maxim, on the young men of their employ½s going to technical schools as part of their conditions of employment. The State also, I am glad to say, is trying in various directions to do the same thing. Apprentices in dockyards are expected to do it. The Postmaster-General is making up his mind that if by any plan boy messengers in the Post Office can obtain a steady education, they shall do so, and that the Post Office shall not be, as it is now to many boy messengers, a dead employment, ceasing at the age of sixteen. I think he hopes to find some plan by which that shall cease to be the case. This Session, unhappily, is not one in which there can be any legislation. I take it that both sides are largely agreed in regard to many of the things which have been said to-night, but there are few of the questions which will not lead to a great deal of discussion, even if they are not definitely contentious. Therefore, in a certain sense, I speak with greater freedom in that the Board of Education is not in this Session required to produce any legislation. But during the last year or two the Board, both its political head and its permanent officials, have been discussing many of these questions with a view to legislating as soon as possible. I am glad of this opportunity of stating publicly the directions in which the Board are prepared to move if time, money, and public opinion are favourable.
In the first place, as far as we are concerned, we have made up our mind that we want a more drastic method of dealing with street trading. The present law is insufficient. I will not say more than that, because a Committee is sitting on the subject, and will, I believe, report soon. All I can say is that the stronger their Report the better the Board of Education will be pleased, for I think there is very little, from all the evidence we have received, to

2233
show that street trading is anything but a curse. Further, we are certainly prepared for the abolition of the half-time system. The Committee over which I presided was unanimous in supporting the strong Report brought before it. The contentions in favour of half-time are steadily failing. Half-time is generally admitted to be educationally useless, and its industrial value to the children is greatly exaggerated. We are bound to recognise, however, that it is supported by a great deal of the stale force of custom. The working classes and the employers themselves do not like to change, not so much because they fear the change in regard to expense, but because they do not want to be bothered with it We think, also, that the time has come when children ought not, necessarily, to pass out of the guidance of the educational authorities at the age of fourteen, at any rate until they are provided with some kind of occupation which is of a more than temporary character. We ought to think of arriving at some kind of plan by which every boy or girl who is not apprenticed to some hopeful trade should be bound to continue to attend a day trade, secondary, or technical school, and in some way keep his mind and fingers alert until he can get a start.
This matter connects itself very closely with the new Labour Exchanges. We hope to be able to get statutory power to establish in this country what they have in Scotland statutory power to establish, namely, committees of the local education authorities, composed of educationists and others, systematically to watch the careers of children and to give them advice in co-operation with the heads of the Labour Exchanges. There are masses of parents who have not the knowledge of how to help their children, however much they may wish to do so. It is the children of these parents that we wish to help.
But I think the greatest question that has been raised to-day is the question of compulsory continuation schools. There are signs that opinion in England is coming round. This valuable Report of the Consultative Committee shows that by far the larger number of witnesses who gave evidence before it were in favour of some kind of compulsion. In the case of private firms they have insisted upon their young men going to technical continuation classes as a condition of their employment. 'The thing has been entirely satisfactory. Any objection, in the first instance
2234
by the parents themselves, and by the young people, has entirely disappeared. Everybody concerned recognises the advantage of a compulsory system enforced by private action of this sort. In many parts of Germany there is compulsion. I am not bringing that example forward only—for we have much better examples in our own country. Still it is a fact that within the last few years both employers and workmen in Germany have accepted willingly in many parts a system of compulsory evening schools. There is the case of Scotland. In 1908 the Scottish Education Bill included a clause which, enabled local authorities to adopt compulsory continuation classes. It is quite true that we do not know how it is going to work; but what we do know is this: that the proposal was supported by a great mass of Scottish opinion, and that there has been one interesting result of the discussions on that Bill which has brought the matter so closely before the public— that is, that the number of classes in Scotland in one year rose from 775 to 1,069.
We are bound, in considering the question of compulsion, to avoid the overstrain of children who have been working all day. I am anxious not to exaggerate, and there is no need to assume that a moderate amount of work cannot be followed in the evening by a moderate amount of intellectual exercise. In one of the cases I cited, Halifax, it is proved that there the great mass of the children do their day's work and afterwards go to the evening classes. Still there are unquestionably many trades in which the necessity for restriction is obvious—obvious if 'for no other reason than that some of the occupations go on till after the hour at which the classes begin. It certainly would be absolutely necessary, if you were to have any system of compulsion, to secure that the occupation should cease in time for the children to go to the classes. Therefore we have to face this: that if we are to have anything like a universal system of continuation schools we have got to impose some kind of obligation upon employers to shorten the hours, or at least to allow the children to come in" time for the classes. I quite admit that this, and, indeed, all the things of which I have spoken and which the greater part of the House are anxious to do, form a programme which requires a strong public opinion at its back. It will not be carried merely by people who are keen about education, as most of the Members of the

2235
House on both sides are. We have got to get the force of public opinion to override the objections of lesser and more immediate interests' by belief in greater national interests. For my part, I do not fear the lack of money. I think as surely as day follows the night the readiness to provide public money comes with enthusiasm for any great step forward such as we have been discussing to-night. We have not got to overcome Government reluctance or Treasury reluctance so much as other kinds of reluctance, such as the reluctance of the working classes to keep their children from the first profitable employment that comes to them. My hon. Friends below the Gangway know that. The scope for their energies in this direction is to get the working classes to accept that view if we are to push forward these things. Then there is the reluctance of the employers also to make arrangements for shorter hours for their young people. I believe it is possible to overcome that reluctance also.
My right hon. Friend the Secretary of State for War did ask a great many of the employers of the country, not only for their passive concurrence, but for their active co-operation in his Territorial scheme, and the result has been that large numbers of employers have inconvenienced themselves and allowed their employés to go for a much longer period of training which the Territorials now have than was required under former conditions. In the same way I believe it to be possible when our people understand that in this, as well.as in the defence of their country, it is a great patriotic duty to allow this sort of system of continued education to be set up, when we get that opinion formed, there will be no difficulty in this House, and there will be no political difficulty or Treasury difficulty, in enabling us to march on in the direction set out by those who moved this Resolution.
Question, "That in view of the relation of unemployment to adolescent and child labour, this House regards an improved educational system, with more adequate provision for the care and training of adolescents, as a matter of urgent necessity, and considers that the Imperial Exchequer should bear an increased share of the cost of this national service," put, and agreed to.

INTERMEDIATE EDUCATION BOARD (IRELAND) RULES.
11 P.M.
Mr. THOMAS O'DONNELLmoved, "That the Rules of the Intermediate Education Board for Ireland for the year 1910–11 be not sanctioned by Parliament till they are amended in the following particulars ":—
Section 1: (General provisions regarding the examinations)—courses for exhibitions and prizes; (2) the modern literary course —Division 1, Division 2.
Amendment proposed: To leave out "Division 1, Division 2."
Rule 42: (Courses for exhibitions— special paper for exhibitions, prizes, and medals).
A Special Paper will be set in each of the following subjects in these Rules called main subjects:—

A. In the Classical Course.

(a) Greek.

(b) Latin.

B. In the Modern Literary Course, Division 1.

(a) French or German.

(b) Irish.

C. In the Modern Literary Course, Division 2.

(a) French.

(b) German.

D. In the Mathematical Course.

(a) Arithmetic and Algebra.

(b) Geometry or (for Senior Grade) Trigonometry.

E. In the Experimental Science Course.

(a) One of the preliminary courses in Experimental Science (for Junior Grade only); or a special course in Physics, Chemistry, or Mechanics: or (for girls) in Botany or Domestic Economy and Hygiene.

(b) One of the subjects in D.

Amendment proposed: To leave out from "Division 1" to "German" ["(a) French; (b) German"] and to insert "Irish, French, German."
Rule 47 (Number of exhibitions allotted to each course). Amendment proposed: To leave out "The exhibitions allotted to the Literary Course will be divided equally between Divisions 1 and 2."
The motion I move here to-night is one which is practically similar to the one which I moved on this subject about four years ago. The right hon. Gentleman (Mr. Birrell) was not then the Chief Secretary for Ireland, but Mr. Bryce sat on the Treasury Bench opposite, and after having heard the arguments from these Benches he was satisfied that we had made out a case for the alteration of the rules which had been presented by the Intermediate Board. He therefore asked his colleagues to vote for disallowing, and therefore altering the rules which had been presented to the House. The history of what followed is very interesting, showing as it does the contempt with which most Irish Boards, and especially our Education Boards, treat public opinion in Ireland, and even as they did in this case, the opinion of this House. After a Resolution had been unanimously passed by this House, and sent to the Intermediate Board of Education directing attention to the fact that the House requested them to alter their rules in regard to a few very simple matters, the Board met. Let the House consider for a moment what it was they did. This Board in Dublin —which ought to be under the control of some public authority, which one would suppose would be responsible to some Minister in this House, which is financed by Irish money, and which is supposed to take charge of and conduct the interests of Irish education—was asked by this House to alter their rules for the benefit of Irish students. They met a few days after they received this request from the Chief Secretary, and passed the following Resolution:—
" Resolved, that this Board feel themselves compelled in the interests of intermediate education in Ireland to decline to amend their rules in the particulars mentioned in the Resolution of the House of Commons."
Let English members picture to themselves what would happen if an Education Board, or any other Board, after a Resolution of this House had been passed declaring that certain things should be done in the interests of education or any other branch of the public service, flatly refused to carry out the directions of this House of Commons. I think there would be something heard of it. A considerable correspondence followed this Resolution, and it is very interesting to note the rather strong language which Sir Antony MacDonnell found himself compelled to use in order to deal with this Board. He had to tell them in the end that the Chief Secretary for Ireland and
2238
the House of Commons were responsible for carrying out the wishes of the people as expressed by the Irish representatives, that it was the Chief Secretary who appointed the Board and had the power of dismissing them, and with this threat he hoped to be able to bring the Board to its senses. Instead of getting more frightened, or becoming more loyal, the Board replied that they knew their own business, that they would continue to act as they had formerly acted, that they would not alter their rules, and had not the slightest intention of doing so.
The Debate, when that Resolution was unanimously passed requesting the rules to be altered, was very interesting. Mr. Bryce read a communication from the Board in which they pretended to state their objections to the alterations which were requested to be made. They tried to defend the rules on educational grounds, and they tried to show that the alterations would make a very serious alteration in the body of the rules, and could not be done in the limit of time that then remained. There was, however, one very interesting paragraph in that statement presented to the House, which I suggested was the sole reason why they refused the request I then made. They said:—
"The Board are of opinion that for intermediate students the study of French or German is of greater educational value and likely to be of more use in after life than the study of Irish."
Hon. Members above the Gangway who cheer that statement undoubtedly think it correctly expresses the comparative educational value of these languages to Irish students, but I have given some study to this question, and I differ fundamentally from them in that view. No small nationality in the world has progressed materially if at the beginning it has abandoned all that made for its independent nationality. I therefore say, that the views put forward by the Board, antagonistic to the study of our native language, instead of being for the material advantage of our country, are reactionary and are not based upon a wide and broad knowledge of the progress of nationalities throughout the world, but that the views we in our humble way put forward are far more likely to stimulate enthusiasm and interest in education and make for progress. Mr. Bryce, who it will be admitted was well-known throughout the educational world wherever the English and indeed the Irish language are spoken, and who was no mean authority to speak on the relative

2239
importance of Irish and German to Ireland, did not share the views of the Board. He heartily disagreed with their views. He thought them most reactionary and opposed to the interests of education. He said:—
"There was no reason why Irish should not take its place among other languages; and, as to its practical value in after life, certainly no language could give the student a more severe mental training. It was a language far more difficult to learn than French or German."
That was the opinion of the Chief Secretary for Ireland. I will not quote some of the most eminent educational authorities from Berlin and Copenhagen, but these men have one and all stated that the Irish language as more difficult to learn than Latin, French, or German. And for Irish boys whose native language it is, and whose interest it would stimulate, it is infinitely more important and more useful from an educational and material standpoint than any other foreign language. Yet this was the response of the Intermediate Board to the request we made at that time. One would have thought that when this House by a unanimous resolution told them this opposition should cease, they would have climbed down. But they did nothing of the kind. Where do we stand to-day? They made some slight alteration in their rules, but they did not attempt to do as we requested. In the Rules first published by the Intermediate Board of Education they divide the studies into four courses—Mathematics, Science, Classical and Literary. With the three first we are quite satisfied. Our difficulty is with the Literary Course. The modern Literary Course is now divided into two divisions. They do not find it necessary to do that in any of the other courses, but because they have been compelled to acknowledge that Irish is one of the modern languages, they make a special division so that French and German may be classed by themselves, and there shall be no competition between Irish speaking boys and girls from the hills of Kerry and Connemara and the better class of boys and girls who will study German and French in the Intermediate Schools.
I have not the slightest objection—on the contrary, I am most desirous that French and German should be taught in the best possible way in our Secondary Schools. I am most desirous and anxious that our Irish boys should learn these languages as fully and completely as it is
2240
possible for them to do. But I think most educationalists will admit that where there are two languages, as is the case in Ireland, it is far more easy to learn three and four languages than it is in the case of a nation with only one language. Educationally, it is an admitted fact that the possession of a second language makes it more easy for a boy or girl to learn a third and fourth language. Therefore in order to make our children linguists, begin with their home language, and encourage them to do so. But instead of doing that the Intermediate Board— instead of encouraging Irish boys to learn their own language—have created a system of Protection for German. English members now engaged in the fight between Free Trade and Protection will, I think, admit it is intolerable that in this matter Protection should be set up for the foreigner as against the home article. This is exactly what this code is doing. They make a special Division in which only boys compete and where exhibitions are given for those who only take French or German. Then they take another division in which the boys take either French or German or Irish, and they pass a rule in which they say that exhibitions will be divided equally between those two classes of boys. The making of those two classes is bad enough, the giving of protection to foreign languages is bad enough, but the worst is done when they make the absurd, unfair and unjust rules to divide exhibitions equally between those two divisions. Will the right hon. Gentleman believe that last year the number of boys who took Irish was 4,389 and the number who took German was 333, and under this rule the 333 would be entitled to as many exhibitions as the 4,389 Irish boys. I ask the right hon. Gentleman whether he thinks that is a fair way of treating our own country's language in our own country, and I trust, when he comes to speak on this question, he will tell these gentlemen who, for the moment, mismanage our educational affairs in Dublin, that they really are not carrying out the views of the Irish people nor, I trust, his own views either.
The claim I make is a simple and just one, and is based on educational grounds. Even if this House passed a unanimous Resolution, probably the Board would snap their fingers at it, as its predecessors did in a similar case. But this House ought to be masters of the situation and we, the representatives of the Irish people, having expressed our views upon

2241
this question, feel very deeply and keenly upon it. We resent this slight upon our country's language, and whether it is the Government or this Board which casts that slight they will have our most determined opposition. I trust the Chief Secretary will not think that in speaking as I am upon this question to-night I am in any way dealing with the agitation which went on last year with regard to the examination papers in Irish. I have nothing to do with that, and no one is more concerned than myself in seeing that the examination in Irish shall be a real and a thorough one. My friends and myself do not ask that the examination in Irish shall be a farce or a sham, we do not want that the teachers in schools should earn money by mere sentimental education, and we want as severe a test applied to Irish as to any other language. This Board is practically independent of this House, and is nominated by the Chief Secretary.
The House spent some time last night in discussing judges who spend half their time asleep, but some of our judges do not do so—they spend it in charge of various Irish Boards. I do not wish to say anything about these gentlemen except that education is not their line, and men far more capable, and suitable for dealing with the work of Irish education can be got than judges who are called to the work at seventy or eighty years of age. If the Chief Secretary has not already come to the conclusion that this Intermediate Education Board is a farce and a sham, and that the time has come for giving the Irish people some representation and some control over it, if the system is to continue, I trust that when appointments have to be made the judges will not have a preference. English secondary education is differently controlled, differently financed, and differently managed. You give out of the Treasury every year about £800,000 for English secondary education, you give to Scotland nearly £300,000, to Wales nearly £100,000, and to Ireland you do not give a penny. Every single penny of money devoted to secondary education is Irish money, and it is all the more important that we should require that it should be spent, in some measure at least, according to the wishes and demands of the Irish people. I do not know whether the Chief Secretary will be able to change the rules in the direction that we request, but I think the House will admit that it is a fair and just request and one which ought to be conceded. The fact that we have to discuss so important a subject as
2242
secondary education within such narrow limits and at such a late hour shows that there is something wrong with the system. There is another matter I wish to press on the right hon. Gentleman. The income of this Board is extremely small—£30,000 from the Church Fund and a variable income from the whisky tax.
Mr. SPEAKER: That does not arise out of the Motion.
Mr. THOMAS O'DONNELL: I beg to move.
Mr. E. KELLY: I beg to second the Motion, and I fail to see why it should not have the support of every section of this House. That it should have the support of the Irish Members is a matter of course. After the hon. Gentleman has shown so clearly that this is a question of the abolition of a sort of preference in favour of the foreigner, that ought to secure him the support of the Tories, and I think he might fairly claim the support of the Liberal and Labour Members in opening up and maintaining a sort of system of Free Trade in foreign languages in the intermediate. We are familiar with the old wheeze that the study of French and German are of greater educational utility than the study of Irish, but this is a question which might safely be left to be solved by the boys and girls of Ireland, assisted by the advice of their parents and school teachers. It has been found impossible in these regulations to drive the boys and girls into the study of French and German. They have chosen Irish and a foreign language in preference to the two foreign languages, and this alone ought to justify us in placing the three languages upon a level. Moreover, I must remind hon. Members that this is rather an important question, because upon the choice of foreign languages depends the exhibitions. It is three times more difficult to obtain an exhibition or prize if you choose French or German, and the importance of getting an exhibition is very great in. the school life of an Irish boy or girl. Many an Irish boy or girl is helped on to a university education by gaining an exhibition. If I might notice my own case, I would say that but for these exhibitions I would not have been able to obtain a university education. Therefore the maintenance of this unjust regulation deprives a great many Irish pupils of the advantages which they might otherwise obtain. Surely it is a strange thing that a board

2243
should be able not only to snap its fingers in the face of the Chief Secretary—I am not referring specially to the right hon. Gentleman who at present occupies that position—but also to snap its fingers in the face of the Irish Government and the House of Commons. When we look into the constitution of this board we find that, as usual in the latter days of Irish administration, there are two permanent officials and members who are nominated by the Crown. This board contains perhaps three or four antiquated judges, but there are, in addition, some real educational authorities, who see clearly in educational matters, and one is inclined to wonder how this unjust regulation receives the sanction of these educational authorities. I think the explanation of that is pretty simple. It has been the policy of the Government, especially in recent years, to cloak over as it were the bureaucracy, which we knew of old, by associating with the bureaucrats gentlemen whose nomination might be more or less popular with the people of the country.
There is, therefore, in several Irish public departments a sort of advisory committee who meet for a couple of hours once or twice a year. At these meetings they have to sanction rules, payments, and the making of appointments. The permanent officials turn up at these meetings with all their schemes cut and dry, and nothing is wanted to make them legal but a couple of signatures. The real mind expressed in the rules is the mind of the permanent officials. I have read somewhere that in the green room of the mediæval theatre there was always a cloak which was donned to make it known that the wearer was invisible. When an actor donned this cloak the audience understood that the actor was moving about unseen by the other actors. It seems to me that the popular members of the Irish boards are like these actors with the right to go invisible, so that their actions may be less unpalatable to the people of Ireland. But still as the robe to go invisible did not deceive the audience so we are not deceived, and we still see the narrow-mindedness of the bureaucrat behind all this. We still see the imperviousness to public opinion, and the same old policy of which we are sick. In this case we appeal, with a certain amount of confidence, for a rectification of the abuses which have been pointed out.
The CHIEF SECRETARY for IRELAND (Mr. Birrell): I do not propose to follow the two hon. Gentlemen who have spoken in criticism of the Intermediate Education Board or any other education board in Ireland. I certainly, at one time, did my best to secure for the Irish people absolute and complete control over their own educational system, and I look forward to a time when they will possess it. But I may point out that this is not a matter merely of the Intermediate Education Board. This is a Government matter. The rules of the Intermediate Board have received the sanction of the Irish Government, and therefore I am standing here responsible for them and defending them, at all events for the time being, as an act in which the Irish Government have participated. I should like also to point out that the situation is very different now from what it was when my distinguished predecessor took part in the Debate to which reference has been made. He spoke then with a great authority which I cannot claim, but I associate myself with every word he said in favour of teaching the Irish language in Ireland and giving every facility for it and every proper reward and encouragement. That has been done to a very remarkable extent, and as I think, happily successfully.
But the real object of the Motion is to alter an educational scheme of which the Board of Intermediate Education, with the sanction of the Irish Government, have approved, and the whole question comes to this. As the hon. Member who moved very accurately pointed out, there are four courses in the scheme, and one course, namely, the modern literary course, has been divided into two divisions. In the first division you take Irish and either French or German, and in the second division you take French and German. Now the proposal is to throw all those three languages together and to allow the young men and maidens of Ireland to choose of their own choice which two of these three languages they will take. There is no doubt whatever that in the opinion of the Irish population French and Irish are the two most popular languages that they can take up. Last year 2,950 boys and 3,126 girls, who must not be omitted in this matter, took up Irish, while only 270 boys and 107 girls took up German. Looking at this from the educational point of view, if these three languages were left to the free play of these young people's minds or that of their teachers' minds German

2245
would disappear altogether. It would have hardly any hold on the educational system.
There are intermediate schools in Ireland where German is taught most admirably. According to the reports of the inspectors excellent provision is made for the teaching of that language, and if it were left to the popular mind, I am afraid it would drop out. That, I consider, would educationally be a great disadvantage. I am not speaking of the future of Irish, which has been safely secured, and will, as the years go by, be much better taught than at the present time. Therefore, I do not feel in the least anxious about Irish, but I feel exceedingly anxious about German. Without going into the question which language is best or which is commercially useful, or any consideration of that sort, which I should not allow to enter very materially into my mind, I only wish to say that the teaching of Irish, from an educational point of view, is encouraged by the course of action taken now. At some future date perhaps the effect might not be produced, but were we now to proceed on the view which the hon. Gentleman put forward, the German language would immediately suffer most deplorably and would almost altogether disappear from the curriculum of the intermediate system of education. I think that would be a great blow. I certainly know of no better cure for Germanophobia than a knowledge and love of the German language, and I think it would be a most desirable thing, even if we have Germano-phobia and believe that we are going to have an invasion, that we should know the language of our opponents. Therefore I think the Board are quite right at the present time in making this division. It is all very well to say that the popular demand ought to dictate the educational policy of the education authority in Ireland. I really cannot agree to that. If that were the policy put to the popular vote, I am afraid that the classical course with all its exhibitions would disappear altogether, because it would have very small chance as compared with the literary course, and it would not have the number of exhibitions which it has at present. We should give that protection to the classical course which it ought to have. I think the education authorities are bound to consider and survey the whole field of subjects of education; they are bound to consider what is the best thing to be done in the interests of education in Ireland, which certainly does not occupy the position that
2246
it ought, having regard to the love of education and the passion for it which undoubtedly exists in that country.
It would be an unfair thing to Irish, and lovers of Irish, were you now at this stage to proceed to give it such a predominance as to allow the popular feeling with regard to it to thrust out of consideration a language like German—so important in the education curriculum. I am quite certain that it would not be desirable at the present moment, in the interests of Irish itself, because Irish is not now well taught. There is nothing to be surprised at in that. You have not got a sufficient number of Irish teachers properly qualified to teach Irish, which is an extraordinarily difficult language, and the result is that an enormous number of persons fail to pass the examinations, or at all events to get exhibitions. In putting all these three languages together, and allowing people to choose two, I am not at all sure that the people who stick to French and German would not succeed in getting a great deal more than their share of exhibitions and of students, because they are better taught, and better able to face the formidable risk of examination than are the persons in Irish.
I think, therefore, at the present moment it is very doubtful whether Irish students would gain a larger number of exhibitions were they brought into competition with those who would take up German. At all events, I think in the present position of affairs that the Intermediate Board of Education are quite right in adhering to the decisions that they have made. Nobody can say that they have dealt unfairly with Irish, or that the Board of Intermediate Education is unfriendly to Irish. It is all very well talking about old judges. A man may be an old judge, and yet be quite favourable to Irish. That is quite possible. There are certainly on the Intermediate Board some very good friends of the Irish language, and they have appointed as their examiners one, at all events, and I do not doubt others also, of the most learned and distinguished Gaelic scholars that are to be found in Ireland. All their examiners are members, I believe, of the Gaelic League. Therefore they are in their own way enthusiasts about Irish. It is all very well for hon. Gentlemen below the Gangway opposite to have a proper zeal for the Irish language. They have not always had the opportunity of learning

2247
it themselves, but they have a great and genuine zeal for it, and so have many members of the Board of Intermediate Education.
No useful purpose is served to the Irish language by sneering at the Intermediate Board as if they were hostile. They really are not, and I would not say so much in their defence if I thought they were. They are nothing of the kind. They feel that as trustees of Irish moneys which are placed at their disposal they are bound to give fair play all round alike to the Irish, to the French, and to the German. They are perfectly wise in resisting a policy which would for the present have the effect, I am afraid, of driving German out of consideration altogether, and schools which teach German, and have German teachers, and our inspectors tell us it is done exceedingly well, would undoubtedly drop the study of the language, and it would go out of use to a large extent. I therefore think in regard to this purely educational question, and it ought to be regarded as that, Irish ought not to be allowed to push its way at the expense of other elements in a good rational education. I am very glad to see the people taking it up as they do, and very glad to think that great encouragement is being given, to the teaching of the teachers of Irish. I have very little doubt that after some years have passed the Irish language will play, as it is entitled to do, a very great part in the genuine education of the children going to intermediate schools. I think now to adopt this course would be to carry the desire—my desire at all events—to an unreasonable pitch. Therefore I am bound to say I think that for the present those rules are right and wise, and rules which the House would do well to support, and I do not in any way regret the sanction which the Irish Government has already given to them. I therefore hope this matter will not be pressed forward at the present time. These rules are made each year, and can be reviewed from time to time when the Irish language occupies an even stronger position educationally than it is enabled to play at the present time. I ask the House to reject the Motion of the hon. Member and to allow this literary course to be divided in this way that everybody who likes can take up either Irish or French and German. [Mr. HAZLETON: "Why penalise Irish?"] The exhibitions are divided equally between them or very
2248
nearly. Last year in Division 1—Irish and French or German—there were thirteen first-class and thirty-one second-class exhibitions; while in Division 2—French and German—there were twenty-three first-class and twenty-six second-class exhibitions. There are rules under which when two or more candidates are equal in merit and exhibition may be given to each, and that may slightly increase the number. The Intermediate Board keep the exhibitions equally divided between the two divisions, and I think that, for the reasons I have given, the rules are for the time being good and sound educationally.
Mr. T. O'DONNELL: Does the right hon. Gentleman think it fair to give 323 boys £840 in exhibitions, and to 4,389 boys who took Irish £640 in exhibitions?
Mr. BIRRELL: Yes, I do.
Mr. T. O'DONNELL: Is that equal division?
Mr. BIRRELL: I think it is perfectly fair. Take the classical schools. There are comparatively few persons go in for the classical schools, and yet they get as large a number of exhibitions as any others. You cannot count these things entirely per capita.
Mr. STEPHEN GWYNN: I regret exceedingly the speech of the right hon. Gentleman, because he has given us an opportunity to do our best to establish a strong school of Irish study in different university centres, up to which the intermediate education of the country ought to lead. The great majority of us are agreed that we want every boy growing up in Ireland and getting a reasonably good education, to include the Irish language as a portion of his education. How many languages does the right hon. Gentleman think an ordinary schoolboy ought to learn? Most of us think he ought to learn Latin, and, if possible, a second and a third language as well. There will always be a considerable minority who will not conform to our assumption that every boy ought to learn Irish. I am desirous that they should learn French and German as well. But you cannot expect everybody to learn three modern languages, and as far as possible, it should be our idea to bring Irish into the education of every educated Irishman.
The Intermediate Education Board have taken a most definite stand on this matter. They have deliberately used their power to

2249
drive people into learning German. They have offered a bribe to those who will neglect to learn Irish. That is what it comes to. They have said that they will divide the exhibitions equally between the modern languages group, in which the students take French and German, and the other group, in which they may take either French and Irish, or, I presume, German and Irish, knowing well that the group in which Irish is taken will be three or four times as numerous as the other. They do not even stand by their own rule. They establish an absolute equality of division, but numerically there are forty-nine exhibitions in the smaller group as against forty-four in the larger, and in point of value also the smaller group has an advantage. I am quite prepared to admit that possibly there should be more second-class exhibitions in the Irish group, because the teaching of Irish is not yet on a satisfactory basis. I am glad that a rigid standard is insisted upon in that matter. I was delighted to see a fierce attack made on the teaching of Irish by the examiners of the Intermediate Education Board, who were leading persons in the Gaelic League. That makes for good sound education. But I say we ought to have a reasonably fair system of distribution between the two groups, and that the number of exhibitions ought to be proportionate to the number of youths in the two groups. That seems to me to be common fair play. I am bound to say that I cannot at all enter into the notion of justice which seems to have regulated the Chief Secretary's action on this occasion. I rise here simply because we have no control in this matter, and because all that we can do in this House is to give utterance to public opinion. I wish to put on record my view that the Intermediate Education Board have in this case deliberately done an unfair thing.
Mr. HUGH BARRIE: The hon. Gentleman the Member for Galway City (Mr. Gwynn) has just told the House that he desires to put on record the opinion of the Intermediate Education Board held in his part of the country. I desire to intervene very briefly to respectfully put on record what I believe to be the opinion of the Board prevailing in other parts of Ireland. That is that we entirely approve of the firm attitude that the Government have taken up under the pressure that has been brought to bear upon them during the last four years to give special facilities
2250
for the endowment of the Irish language. May I remind the House that there were some interesting figures read out this afternoon in answer to certain questions. These proved that, whatever may be the explanation or the reason, the standard reached by the students of Irish at the present time in Ireland is utterly inadequate to qualify for any grants whatever of public money. I entirely agree that the reason that has been given by the Chief Secretary partly, at least, explains the matter. It is this: That this sentimental demand for the teaching of Irish which has come to the front so much of recent years is in advance of the number of Irishmen and Irishwomen qualified to give proper tuition in the language. I hope that that is rapidly being overtaken. Whilst, too, we treat the teaching of Irish as a sentimental subject, we do not wish to be taken as at all hostile to it in its higher standards.
But there is a larger question behind. I very respectfully put it to the House, and more particularly to hon. Members below the Gangway, if in pressing this question forward they are really doing their best to equip the young men and women of Ireland for the battle of commercial life that we are anxious they should be fully qualified for? Take our great cities in Ireland—not to speak of those in Scotland and England. We want there a continued succession of young men coming forward well equipped for modern commercial requirements. I respectfully ask: Is the knowledge of Irish a commercial requirement? I entirely agree with the mover of this Resolution in the suggestion that he made that so far the State has not done its duty financially to Ireland as regards secondary education. So long as the amount available for secondary education is so miserably inadequate surely we are entitled to see that the commercial requirements of the times are first dealt with, and fully and adequately dealt with, before we allocate a larger proportion of that inadequate sum to the teaching of what I have already described as a sentimental language?
I remember the discussion that took place on this matter four years ago. I remember Mr. Bryce, in his sincere sympathy, I believe, with the desire for the teaching of the Irish language yielded to the demands of our friends below the Gangway. We all know the sequel? We know that the Commissioners were legally right, and notwithstanding the threat of Mr. McDonnell they stood to their guns, and the House had

2251
finally to recede from the position it took up. I am delighted that the Chief Secretary is not going to make a similar mistake. I find little to complain of in the statement he has just made to the House. I congratulate him upon realising where his duty lies in this matter. I only regret that he should have proclaimed, in the course of the statement he made, that the Irish people if they had adopted a certain measure might have had by this time control, not only of their educational affairs, but of other affairs also. I venture to ask Members of the House to take note that if we had in Ireland at present that control to which the Chief Secretary looks forward so cheerfully and so hopefully we would have the teaching of Irish going on first and the teaching of commercial languages coming next.
Mr. T. M. HEALY: I venture to think there is no greater humbug and sham than to pretend that in Ireland German has any value in connection with what is called modern commercial training. You can always hire a German waiter for about 15s. a week. Taking the whole of Ireland, it must be remembered that so far as the commercial business of the country is done, German—I am speaking of its commercial value as a language—is absolutely unnecessary. All our commercial life so called— because we are merely the handlers of English goods—is done by middlemen, who do all their work from London, and the notion that German is of the smallest value for any purpose except when you go abroad, if you do go abroad, to be able to pretend to ask for a plate from a German waiter is the most absolute absurdity. In Belfast I once met a German. I think he was the only German there—he was the local Consul—
Mr. MacVEAGH: The Lord Mayor.
Mr. T. M. HEALY: Was it the Lord Mayor? I never met him. In Belfast, no doubt, they are very anxious to show their sympathy and they could not get an honest Belfast man to oppose this motion. They got a Scotchman who has a respect for German. I will not say any more as to his antecedent roots or origin, but so far as he is concerned he is the only relation that exists between Ireland and Germany. It is not that these Gentlemen above the Gangway desire to have German. If Irishmen engaged in studying Chinese or Hebrew or Choctow or Sanscrit, they would say what splendid workers they
2252
are in the field of philological research. But the moment they begin to study anything concerning their own country, then the Undertakers — I mean the Undertakers in the sense of two or three centuries ago — those who have lately come hither into the land, and who hate the native race, and desire to drive them out, and whose ignorance gives them a contempt and bitterness for everything that was great and glorious in the past—these gentlemen think that modern German, which is probably as contemptible a language as you could possibly have, and in which I defy any gentleman in this House, except the Secretary of War, to express himself intelligibly for five minutes, pretend that the great thing for young Irish boys in Connemara or Donegal or Moville or the Island of Achill is to be able to translate Schopenhauer.
12.0 M.
The view I take of the Irish language is this: It divides itself into two considerations. In the first place, it is an absolutely unsoiled language, it has nothing of the commercial or modern research, or spiritualism, or Christian science, or anti-vaccination, nor even could you state the current price of rubber in it. The reason why we venture to press it is because it brings you back to ancient times, ancient days, and ancient people, to the chivalry, gentlehood, kinship, and the liberties of past centuries. It does not connect us with county councils, it does not connect us with gas or water, but it brings to the people who study it free air, and the very times and the very men of 2,000 years ago. Its proverbs, its songs, its speeches, and its poetry breathe of a past time when Ireland was great, and was not subjected even to Scotchmen, when our breed sent the men across to Scotia who made Scotland great, and whose descendants perhaps are not as great as their ancestors. Sir, that is the reason why the Irish people desire to be brought into touch with those past days, and that is why we are content to leave the language of the German and the Choctow, yes, even the language of the invaders with whom we are threatened—the gentlemen of the "Dreadnoughts"—that is why we are content to give them a lesser position than the language of our country. Nobody is more conscious than I am—and I rejoice in it— of the fact that the English are beginning to discover their own country. I think it is a new discovery for most Englishmen.
When I came into this House first every Englishman thought the beginning of

2253
England was the time of William the Conqueror, and you were all proud of thinking that you had been soundly thrashed by a pack of Frenchmen from Normandy. Even you of the rubber estates are beginning to discover that you had a past before the eleventh century, and Englishmen are beginning to find that there is something behind nationality: race, blood and all that ancient thought descending from father to son. I have accordingly been glad to notice again and again within the last ten years, no matter who has been in power, no narrow or restricted gospel proceeding from the Government Bench as to Irish, but that a desire that in the past of this ancient race you should find something to admire, and from which to draw instruction. I think with regard to these restrictions, of which my hon. Friend behind me complained, we are not altogether free from fault ourselves. The gentlemen who are concerned with teaching the Irish language might separate and divide it into two categories, and give prizes for Irish music and Irish songs. They can be taught apart. Even those who know nothing of the language will be struck by the beauty and the liquidness of Irish songs and Irish music. Let them treat that as one subject, and then deal with the grammar in a wholly different fashion.
You must remember, when you attack the Intermediate Education Board, and when you deal with men who probably draw their inspiration from a prior generation, that the notation of Irish which is treasured and cuddled by those who think it a thing of wonder is the most repellant and least attractive thing connected with it. It is really these precisions which are at the bottom of the repugnance of the gentlemen connected with the teaching board. No Englishman now thinks there is any learning in being able to spell, and the thing which is keeping back Irish lore and learning is a matter largely in our own hands. You can learn German and French in less time, and I can well conceive the gentlemen connected with the Intermediate Board telling these gentlemen who are pushing on the question of Irish learning saying "Bring us decent grammars, bring us a decent system of spelling which will not waste the time of our pupils on absurd knowledge which merely consists of knowing whether ' B' should precede 'E,' neither having anything to do with the sound," and insist that we should first put our own house in order. That view does not at all relieve
2254
the Government from the argument which has been put forward by my hon. Friend behind me. He has shown that in a country where Irish ought to be the subject of special consideration, three, if not four times—perhaps I might be right in saying ten times—as much money is allotted to the student of one of the foreign tongues as is allotted to the student of the native tongue. That is the reproach. You may say you want to encourage German and you may want to encourage French. But how much advantage have hon. Gentlemen derived from reading French novels. How has the right hon. Gentleman the Secretary for War advantaged himself by his translation of Schopenhauer? The teaching of Irish means the teaching of the life of our own country, and I do respectfully urge that all the present talk about Colonial Preference should yield to Irish learning and Irish preference.
Mr. R. THOMPSON: After fifty years experience in the commercial capital of Ireland, I have no hesitation in saying that German is the most important language for a young boy or girl coming into business life. French comes next and after that Spanish, and these are the three most important languages for business purposes in a city like Belfast. I remember the time when French was the most important, but to-day it is German, and anyone who wants to succeed in business in Belfast must have a knowledge of two languages, German being the most needed. To learn Irish, so far as Belfast is concerned, would be a sheer waste of time from a business point of view. It would occupy, as is admitted, a great deal of time. Young men and young women with a knowledge of German and French can always command much larger salaries than others who do not know the languages, and who can simply do shorthand and typewriting. I was delighted to hear the remarks of the right hon. Gentleman opposite, who seems to understand the wants of a progressive country. I happen to be a governor of the Campbell College at Belfast, which is largely endowed, and which has a large number of pupils. I was asked by the managers, as a business man, to give the benefit of my experience in regard to the languages which the pupils in this college should be taught, and I put the curriculum as I have put it to-night—German first, French second, and Spanish third. I think those are the languages which any young man, and any young woman either, should

2255
learn if they wish to make progress in the City of Belfast, and after the remarks of the hon. Member for North Louth (Mr. T. M. Healy) I could not refrain from expressing the necessity for a knowledge of French and German.
Mr. ARTHUR LYNCH: I am entirely in favour of the Motion of my hon. Friend, but I have not arrived at this decision hastily; there was a time, probably up to a very recent period, when I should have been opposed to or hesitating in regard to it, not on account of under-rating Irish, but because I believe that in our whole modern education science should bulk much more largely than it does. After all, however, that is a question of competition between language on the one hand and science on the other; but in fining it down to the issue of one language against another, I would venture to think that the whole pith of this matter is to be found in one phrase of the Board itself. They say:—
" The Board are of opinion that for intermediate Students the study of French or German is of greater value and likely to be of greater use in after life than that of Irish."
Irish has been called a sentimental language, but I thoroughly agree with the hon. Member for North Louth, that in this particular regard, as this question applies to Irish boys living in Ireland, it is French and German which are sentimental languages. The hon. Gentleman who has just sat down has spoken of the great advantage of French or German in commercial life, but I ask whether those who are capable of conducting a commercial correspondence have learnt their French or German in intermediate schools.
Mr. THOMPSON: The foundation was laid there.
Mr. LYNCH: It may have been, but when I went to Universities abroad I discovered that, although I had been trained in school in regard to them, I know little of French or German which would be of any use in that way, and I actually had to devise means of my own for instructing myself in those languages, recognising for the first time that French and German were really living languages, and spoken by men of flesh and blood. I remember the First Secretary of the American Embassy in Paris who said to me:—
" Our Government make a great mistake when they send our Ambassadors here for four years, and when they are beginning to pick up French nicely they take them away."
2256
That was his experience after living in Paris fox forty years—that a residence of four years enabled men to begin "to pick up French nicely." I do not think after that four years' training the Ambassador would have been competent to conduct a correspondence in French. If it were not for Irish, one might question the advantage of any study of language at all. The Greeks were the brightest minds of all antiquity, but not even their greatest men knew any language other than their own; and those in our modern day who most resemble the Greeks, and stand on the very highest flight of intellectual merit, the French, are the most signally ignorant of modern languages of any people in the civilised world. Although the Germans are proficient in modern languages, and astonishingly so in French and English, perhaps in regard to their past history it may be with certain ulterior motives. Those motives may be put forward as a reason why we should learn German. That is perhaps at the back of the minds of the Germans in their study of modern languages. M. Rochefort, the former editor of the "Intransigeant," who lived in London for a great number of years, refused to learn English because he said it would spoil his style. I am inclined to think, when I listen to gentlemen from Belfast, who live in the ambiance of beautiful things out of touch with all that is vivid in the life of Ireland, that one of their objections to Irish may be that they are afraid it may spoil their style.
It is said that these modern languages, French and German, are better taught; but that again, to my mind, would be a reason for the preference of Irish. No matter how well these languages are taught, they can never be well enough taught to be of great service to a boy or girl in Ireland. I do not speak in any disparagement of these languages. Not a day passes but I refresh my memory of French. I never go a long journey without taking a German book in my pocket—a book of science. Science, after all, is the only motive whatever which should induce anyone to study German, except, perhaps, for two or three names in literature—Schiller, Goethe, and Heine. With regard to commercial advantages, I would take the challenge up directly. I say Irish may be in indirect effect of greater commercial advantage than German. After all, Ulster is not the entire world, and Ireland is not the entire world of Irishmen. Irishmen may emigrate to Australia, to South Africa, to the glorious Republic

2257
of the West, where floats the Stars and Stripes. I never utter the name without a thrill of gratitude in my mind at what has been accomplished under the Stars and Stripes, knowing that there are many Irish exiles there. You will find more Irish spoken in the streets of New York or Chicago or St. Louis than you will find in many towns in Ireland. Irish even becomes a useful thing when the people emigrate, for it immediately forms a bond of brotherhood among exiles. In all those immense tracts I have mentioned French and German are of absolutely no use at all. Even in Germany itself I venture to say that German is of very little use to the English-speaking visitor. If a visitor from an English-speaking country wishes to learn the language, one of the disadvantageous things which he finds in connection with living in Berlin is how many Germans know English and that they are more concerned to speak English than German.
I have pointed out where the advantage of Irish comes in. You cannot measure the advantage of a language merely by saying that the use of it in a commercial sphere will bring so many shillings a week more. Irish, after all, is the native language of the people. It is of their blood and bone, and it is distincive of their race. Many of the authors whose names adorn English literature have sprung from the Irish race. I happened to talk to a French lady some time ago, and she informed me that the English authors she admired were Sheridan, Goldsmith, and Sterne. While they have brightened English literature, they drew their inspiration from an Irish source. I maintain that the study of Irish would be a better preparation for Irish boys and girls than French or German given in little snippets, badly taught, and easily forgotten. "Leicht bei einander wohnen die Gedanken" —"Easily one with the other dwell the thoughts." I quote these words of Goëthe to enforce this argument. Two languages, he said, are necessary to an educated man, because the man who knows only one language does not know that language
properly. Some of us remember those dreadful years at school when we tried to pack into our brains Latin declensions and Greek irregular verbs, which leave very little trace behind. I say again you cannot measure the advantage of a language by merely commercial considerations. The Irish language is redolent of the spirit, the history, and the genius of the country.
There is another reason which might make us respect the claim for the teaching of Irish. In Bohemia all the arguments which are used against the teaching of Irish were used with even greater force against the teaching of the Czech language. I believe it was said there that if a certain roof had fallen the Czech language would have been lost; but the roof did not fall, and there is not one boy in Bohemia now who does not learn his native tongue. Has that been to the disadvantage of Bohemia? No. It has given new life and spirit to the country, as I know from my intercourse with Bohemians. It has given a new soul, and a new impetus to that country and it has made a literature. As to this Motion of my hon. Friend, there are considerations far beyond mere commercial considerations. Man does not live by bread alone. Man cannot subsist merely on ledgers. There are other considerations besides these, and it is very intimate to the point we are now discussing to put in a word for the Irish language; and in spite of the opposition of those who are unfriendly to that language, as they are unfriendly to the advancement of everything national in Ireland. If there were no other reason that consideration alone would make me support the Motion of my hon. Friend. The question has been held up as a banner, and once it has been held up as a banner, we Nationalists are all anxious to rally round the standard and to enter into the fight for the language of Ireland.
Question put.
The House divided: Ayes, 46; Noes, 75.

Division No. 56.]

AYES.

[12.30 a.m.

Barry, Edward (Cork, S.)

Duncan, C. (Barrow-in-Furness)

Hogan, Michael

Bowerman, Charles W.

Flavin, Michael Joseph

Hope, John Deans (Fife, West)

Boyle, Daniel (Mayo, North)

Gill, Alfred Henry

Joyce, Michael

Brady, Patrick Joseph

Gwynn, Stephen Lucius (Galway)

Kennedy, Vincent Paul

Burke, E. Havlland-

Hackett, John

Lardner, James Carrige Rushe

Crean, Eugene

Harvey, T. E. (Leeds, West)

Lundon, Thomas

Cullinan, John

Havelock-Allan, Sir Henry

Lynch, Arthur Alfred

Dairymple, Viscount

Hazleton, Richard

MacVeagh, Jeremiah

Doris, William

Healy, Maurice (Cork, N.E.)

Meagher, Michael

Duffy, William J.

Healy, Timothy Michael

Meehan, Francis E. (Leitrim, N.)

Muldcon, John

O'Neill, Dr. Charles (Armagh, S.)

Smyth, Thomas F. (Leitrim, S.)

Mannetti, Joseph P.

O'Shaughnessy, P. J.

Whyte, Alexander F. (Perth)

Nolan, Joseph

Phillips, John (Longford, S.)

Williams, Llewelyn (Carmarthen)

O'Brien, Patrick (Kilkenny)

Pointer, Joseph

O'Connor, John (Kildare, N.)

Scanlan, Thomas

TELLERS FOR THE AYES.—Mr. Thomas O'Donnell and Mr. Kelly.

O'Doherty, Philip

Seddon, James A.

O'Dowd, John

NOES.

Adkins, W. Ryland D.

Harcourt, Robert V. (Montrose)

Roberts, Charles H. (Lincoln)

Ainsworth, John Stirling

Haworth, Arthur A.

Roch, Walter F. (Pembroke)

Armitage, Robert

Helme, Norval Watson

Sanders, Robert Arthur

Attenborough, Walter Annis

Higham, John Sharp

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

Baker, Harold T. (Accrington)

Hindle, Frederick George

Seely, Col., Right Hon. J. E. B.

Balcarres, Lord

Hobhouse, Rt. Hon. Charles E. H.

Shackleton, David James

Barclay, Sir Thomas

Horner, Andrew Long

Soares, Ernest Joseph

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

Howard, Hon. Geoffrey

Spicer, Sir Albert

Barry, Redmond J. (Tyrone, N.)

Jackson. John A. (Whitehaven)

Summers, James Woolley

Beale, William Phipson

Jones, Edgar R. (Merthyr Tydvil)

Tennant, Harold John

Benn, W. (Tower Hamlets, S. Geo.)

Jones, Henry Haydn (Merioneth)

Thompson, Robert

Bentham, George Jackson

Kerr-Smiley, Peter Kerr

Thorne, G. R. (Wolverhampton)

Birrell, Rt. Hon. Augustine

Keswick, William

Toulmin, George

Carllie, Edward Hildred

King, Joseph (Somerset, North)

Trevelyan, Charles Philips

Chapple, W. A.

Lewis, John Herbert

Verney, Frederick William

Clough, William

Macnamara, Dr. Thomas J.

Ward, W. Dudley (Southampton)

Corbett, A. Cameron (Glasgow)

Mond, Alfred Moritz

Warner, Thomas Courtenay T.

Courthope, George Loyd

Morpeth, Viscount

Watt, Henry A.

Crawshay-Williams, Eliot

Muspratt, Max

Williams, Aneurin (Plymouth)

Dawes, James Arthur

Neilson, Francis

Williams, Penry (Middlesbrough)

Falconer, James

Newton, Harry Kottingham

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

Grant, James Augustus

Paget, Almeric Hugh

Willoughby, Major Hon. Claude

Grenfell, Cecil Alfred

Pease, Rt. Hon. Joseph A.

Wood, T. M'Kinnon (Glasgow)

Gulland, John William

Pickersgill, Edward Hare

Haldane, Rt. Hon. Richard B.

Pringle, William M. R.

TELLERS FOR THE NOES.—Master of Elibank and Mr. Fuller.

Harcourt, Rt. Hon. L. (Rossendale)

Raffan, Peter Wilson

Question put, and agreed to.

MILITARY MANŒUVRES ACT, 1897. (ORDER IN COUNCIL).
The SECRETARY of STATE for WAR (Mr. Haldane)moved, "That an humble Address be presented to His Majesty, praying His Majesty to make an Order in Council under the Military Manœuvres Act, 1897, a draft of which was presented to this House on the 21st day of February last."
Mr. CARLILE: I do not want to delay the right hon. Gentleman in getting the Order in Council, but there are one or two questions which I should like to ask him with reference to the provision made by them for the compensation of owners for property within the area concerned on the one hand, and on the other with reference to the safety of persons during the course of the manœuvres. We are all strongly in favour of the manœuvres and we know it is most essential that they should be carried out. I would remind the House that during the course of the manœuvres last year a very serious accident happened in consequence of a newspaper motor-car running into a column of troops. That really illustrates the sort of accident which might happen unless efficient steps are taken to secure the safety of vehicular and pedestrian traffic. We all know that in these days a large amount of work is done
2260
by motor-car. We know that as soon as messengers with motors receive messages to take to the General Officer they are not; very careful as to the speed at which they travel. The consequence is that the public, who naturally have the first claim to the use of the roads, are exposed to dangers which otherwise would not arise. Therefore I asked the right hon. Gentleman to assure the House that efficient steps will be taken in this regard, and also that owners of property will have due consideration with regard to the damages that may be done to their roads, crops, hedges, and so forth.
Mr. HALDANE: The protection to which the hon. Member refers is conferred by Sections (5) and (6) of the Military Manœuvres Act, 1897. The House realises the procedure under which this Address arises. The Act provides that their should be a draft Order in Council; then that it should go for six months to the localities, to the county, borough, and parish councils; then it has to lie for thirty days on the Table of both Houses; then an Address must be presented by both Houses asking His Majesty to make an Order in Council. That, however, is not all. When the Order in Council is made, a Commission is appointed, containing a large number of local representatives, which can and does make orders deter-

2261
mining, among other things, what roads are to be used, due consideration being given to the public safety. If there is damage done by the operations, a compensation officer, appointed by the Commission, not dependent upon the War Office, assesses compensation. Thus there is complete provision for the public safety, and the greatest pains are taken by the military authorities to do nothing that would cause any inconvenience or damage.
Lord BALCARRES: I notice that Fife is the only area in Scotland included. That is the most highly-cultivated county in Scotland, whereas the large area of Government land in Peeblesshire or Selkirk is not included. In the first Schedule the whole of the Government property on Salisbury Plain is included, so that the exclusion of the land to which I have referred is not due to the fact that Government ownership lenders its inclusion unnecessary. Perhaps the right hon. Gentleman can explain that point.
Mr. HALDANE: These manœuvres are taking place this year on a very exceptional scale. The House has sanctioned an expenditure of £100,000, in addition to the ordinary cost of manœuvres. The special manœuvres included in the scheme are designed to test the new scheme of coast defence worked out by the General Staff. One of the places which might be liable to invasion, and which certainly requires most attention, is the Firth of Forth. Accordingly, the coast there is being made the special locality for the manœuvres this year. That is the reason why the county of Fife is scheduled.
And, it being after half-past Eleven of the clock on Wednesday evening, Mr. Speaker adjourned the House without Question put, pursuant to the Standing Order.
Adjourned at Ten minutes before One o'clock.

  Old Age Pensions (Ireland).
  Old Age Pensions (Ireland).
  Woods, Forests, and Land Revenues (Scotland).
  Woods, Forests, and Land Revenues (Scotland).
  East African Land Leases.
  East African Land Leases.
  Protestants and Irish Appointments.
  Protestants and Irish Appointments.
  Horticultural Inspectors in Ireland.
  Horticultural Inspectors in Ireland.
  Refusal of Purchase Agreements.
  Refusal of Purchase Agreements.
  Reeves Estate (West Clare).
  Reeves Estate (West Clare).
  Westmeath County Council (Printing).
  Westmeath County Council (Printing).
  Pasturage Lands (Ireland).
  Pasturage Lands (Ireland).
  Labourers Acts (Mullingar and Coole).
  Labourers Acts (Mullingar and Coole).
  Estates Purchased (Ireland).
  Estates Purchased (Ireland).
  Floods in South Galway.
  Floods in South Galway.
  National Board, of Education, Ireland.
  National Board, of Education, Ireland.
  Tenant Purchasers (County Galway).
  Tenant Purchasers (County Galway).
  Education Expenditure (Ireland).
  Education Expenditure (Ireland).
  Female National Schools, Newmarket, County Cork.
  Female National Schools, Newmarket, County Cork.
  Senior School Inspector, Dublin District.
  Senior School Inspector, Dublin District.
  Royal Irish Constabulary (Sir H. Considine)
  Royal Irish Constabulary (Sir H. Considine)
  Tuthill Estate, Herbertstown, County Limerick.
  Tuthill Estate, Herbertstown, County Limerick.
  National School Teachers, Ireland.
  National School Teachers, Ireland.
  Reinstatement Applications, County Waterford.
  Reinstatement Applications, County Waterford.
  Lord Huntingdon's Estate, County Waterford.
  Lord Huntingdon's Estate, County Waterford.
  Police Charges, County Waterford.
  Police Charges, County Waterford.
  Armoured Ships in North Sea.
  Armoured Ships in North Sea.
  Warrant Engineers in Naval Reserve.
  Warrant Engineers in Naval Reserve.
  Rate of Depreciation (Woolwich Factory).
  Rate of Depreciation (Woolwich Factory).
  Supply of Horses.
  Supply of Horses.
  Dublin Lord Mayor's Military Annuity.
  Dublin Lord Mayor's Military Annuity.
  Deaf and Blind Pensioner.
  Deaf and Blind Pensioner.
  Indian Public Works Department.
  Indian Public Works Department.
  West Riding Elementary Schools' Re-assessment.
  West Riding Elementary Schools' Re-assessment.
  Vernacular Press (Egypt).
  Vernacular Press (Egypt).
  Cairo Water Supply.
  Cairo Water Supply.
  Murder of Boutros Ghali Pasha (Egypt).
  Murder of Boutros Ghali Pasha (Egypt).
  Peruvian Amazon Company.
  Peruvian Amazon Company.
  Long and Short Service Men (Unemployed).
  Long and Short Service Men (Unemployed).
  Raw Hides (Exported).
  Raw Hides (Exported).
  Wireless Telegraphy (Bolt Head Station).
  Wireless Telegraphy (Bolt Head Station).
  Auxiliary Postmen (Territorial Force).
  Auxiliary Postmen (Territorial Force).
  Small Holdings and Allotments Act, 1907.
  Small Holdings and Allotments Act, 1907.
  State Aid to Scotch Education.
  State Aid to Scotch Education.
  Congo Free State.
  Congo Free State.
LLANELLY HARBOUR.
Petition of the Urban District Council of Llanelly and the Llanelly Harbour Trust under their Corporate Seals praying for leave to bring in a Bill to confirm and give effect to an Indenture between the Llanelly Harbour Trust, the Urban District Council of Llanelly, and the Governor and Company of the Bank of England, to amend the Llanelly Harbour Act, 1904, and for other purposes, together with a copy of the proposed Bill annexed thereto; read, and referred to the Examiners.
WARRINGTON CORPORATION BILL.
(Petition for Additional Provision.)

ABERTILLERY AND DISTRICT WATER BOARD BILL. [H.L.]
(Petition for Additional Provision.)
Examiners' Certificates of non-compliance with the Standing Orders referred to the Standing Orders Committee on Monday next.

HANDSWORTH URBAN DISTRICT COUNCIL BILL. [H.L.]
Reported from the Select Committee, with Amendments.
GREAT CENTRAL RAILWAY BILL. [H.L.]
The King's consent signified, and Bill reported, with Amendments.
EAST GRINSTEAD GAS AND WATER BILL.
Read 2a, and committed: The Committee to be proposed by the Committee of Selection.
RAILWAY PASSENGERS ASSURANCE COMPANY (TRANSFER) BILL. [H.L.]
Read 2a.
BAKER STREET AND WATERLOO RAILWAY BILL. [H.L.]
Read 3a, and passed, and sent to the Commons.
MATLOCK BATH AND SCARTHIN NICK URBAN DISTRICT COUNCIL BILL. [H.L.]
The King's consent signified: Bill read 3a, and passed, and sent to the Commons.
MALLOW URBAN DISTRICT GAS BILL.
Brought from the Commons; read 1a; and referred to the Examiners.

IRISH UNIVERSITIES ACT, 1908.
Statute B. for University College, Cork. (No. 30):
Laid before the House (pursuant to Act), and to be printed.

ENDOWED SCHOOLS ACT, 1869, AND AMENDING ACTS (HOWELL'S CHARITY).
Scheme for the administration of the foundation, consisting of the share determined by the Charity Commissioners to be applicable for the benefit of the county of Denbigh, of Howell's Charity for girls' schools in Wales, as held for educational purposes. (No. 31):
Laid before the House (pursuant to Act), and to be printed.

LAND DRAINAGE PROVISIONAL ORDER BILL.
Read 2a (according to order), and committed.

REFORM OF THE HOUSE OF LORDS.
THE EARL OF ROSEBERY: My Lords, I was sorry not to be in my place yesterday when the question arose as to the time when the Resolutions standing in my name should be brought forward. I have taken every opportunity to-day and previously during the week to find out what would be most to the convenience of noble Lords generally, and I understand that if I were to give notice for next Monday, as I had at one time thought of doing, if I received encouragement, that would be considered too short a notice. I have, therefore, put the Resolutions down for the first day of the meeting of the House of Lords after the recess. I see by the report of what passed yesterday that my noble friend opposite proposes to take the Government's Resolutions as soon as possible after the recess. But I think he will agree that it is better that our Resolutions should have priority in our own House, more especially as they have been for some time on the Paper and as in any case the postponement cannot be for more than two or three days after the time that he had originally contemplated.
THE LORD PRIVY SEAL AND SECRETARY OF STATE FOR THE COLONIES (THE EARL OF CREWE): My Lords, I do not desire to take any exception to what my noble friend has said, subject, of course, to the fact that we are anxious to proceed as soon as possible after the recess with the discussion of our own proposals, and on the understanding that the time named by my noble friend—two or three days—is not likely at any rate to be greatly exceeded.
THE EARL OF ROSEBERY: I cannot give any guarantee on that point.
THE MARQUESS OF LANSDOWNE: My Lords, I venture to think the proposal made by my noble friend on the Cross Benches is one which will suit the general convenience of the House. We on this Bench were fully prepared to take the Resolutions next week had my noble friend so desired. My noble friend, however—I think rightly—felt that the question was one in which the body of Peers had naturally a great interest, and that it would not be fair to them to take the discussion at a time when many of them might find it impossible to attend. My noble friend, I understand, has made inquiries which have satisfied him that if he had given notice to-night of his intention to take the Resolutions next Monday, that would not have been regarded as sufficient notice by many of those who desire to be present.
House to be again in Committee to consider the best means of reforming its existing organisation so as to constitute a strong and efficient Second Chamber on the first sitting day after the Recess at Whitsuntide.

COUNTY COMMON JURIES BILL. [H.L.]
[SECOND READING.]
Order of the Day for the Second Reading read.
LORD ALVERSTONE: My Lords, this Bill is brought in to get rid of a small difficulty in the civil work of Assizes. The Juries Act of 1825, Section 22, limits the number of common jurors who may be summoned to 144. With the concurrence of the Lord Chancellor the Judges have been arranging for very extended sittings at Manchester and Liverpool, and we have assigned a Judge to take the civil work for a period of about two months and it
674
may be more. As these common jurors have to servo on criminal and civil cases, at times the number of 144 would not be enough. I therefore propose to repeal the words "not exceeding one hundred and forty-four." Exactly the same difficulty arose in connection with special jurors, and a similar course was taken in 1898 when a Bill was passed excising the limit of numbers. I provide in this Bill that the High Court shall have power to make rules so that there shall be no excessive summoning of county jurors.
Moved, That the Bill be now read 2a.—(Lord Alverstone.)
THE LORD CHANCELLOR (LORD LOREBURN): My Lords, this is an eminently reasonable proposal for facilitating business, and I do not think any objection will be raised to it.
On Question, Bill read 2a, and committed to a Committee of the Whole House on Tuesday next.

PERSIA.
LORD LAMINGTON LORD LAMINGTON rose "to ask His Majesty's Government whether they will state what is the position of the negotiations in regard to Persia obtaining a loan from Great Britain and Russia." The noble Lord said: My Lords, ours is not the only country that is undergoing a constitutional spring-cleaning. This process is taking place in an excessive degree in Persia, only her operations are hampered to a far greater degree than our own by the lack of money. I have raised this question because it is imperative for Persia to have the means of carrying on her administration, and she can only obtain the necessary funds through a loan guaranteed by our Government and that of Russia.
The amount asked for is comparatively small. It is calculated that with so small a sum as £500,000 Persia could be set on her feet, and it would have been thought that these two great countries between them would have been able to make this advance without any difficulty. No doubt the intentions of His Majesty's Government are excellent in this matter, but there is reason to doubt whether they have stood steadfastly by Persia in these negotiations. I am not by any means complaining of the action of Russia. Her attitude

675
towards the national movement in Persia has always been perfectly clear. For her own reasons she has not regarded that movement with approval, and ever since it was started she has done her best to thwart it. Therefore it is quite natural that Russia would regard with disfavour any procedure calculated to give Persia a greater amount of independence. The result has been that conditions too onerous for the acceptance of Persia were attached to the proposed loan. Possibly the Persian Government might have accepted them, but the Mejliss would not submit to those conditions; and I do not think we should blame them for striving to free themselves from foreign domination.
Persia's efforts to secure independence are at times referred to slightingly in the Press. For my own part I think every fair-minded person should admire the conduct of that small band of patriots who have shaken off the worst despotism of modern times, and who have succeeded at least in setting up the machinery of constitutional government. They have done this without any money at their disposal. They acquired an empty Treasury and yet have for months, till the incident recently reported in the Press, kept order in a country seamed by mountain ranges and broken up by desert tracts, and I do not believe that at any time during these troubles, until recently, have the life and property of Europeans been really in danger in Persia. This has been managed in the face of the fact that the troops of another Power have been garrisoning certain towns in Persian territory, thereby diminishing the prestige of her Government and emboldening the old reactionary party to, if possible, subvert the new Constitution. In spite of these difficulties, which I think may be described as almost unparalleled in the case of a newly-born Constitution, they have, as I say, achieved a reasonable amount of success, and consequently they deserve our encouragement and goodwill.
His Majesty's Government take credit to themselves for the Anglo-Russian Convention, and all that I ask is that they should see that life and substance are given to it. The Preamble of that Convention recites that—
"The two Governments engage to respect the integrity and independence of Persia."
That, I maintain, is exactly what they have failed to do. I would undertake
676
that, given the withdrawal of foreign troops from the country and allowing free action to the Persian Government, then, even possibly without the aid of a loan, the peaceful development of Persia, which is what the Convention sought, would be obtained. The conditions of the loan were published the other day in the Press, and without going into details it may be stated that the conditions were of too hampering and onerous a nature to impose on any self-respecting country. I have heard, on what as far as I can ascertain is perfectly reliable authority, that, ever when it was a question of obtaining a considerable sum of money which had nothing to do either with the Government of Russia or with ourselves, as soon as it was understood that this money might be paid into the Persian Exchequer the Russian representative and our representative at once agreed that it would not do to allow any money to be given to Persia, as thereby she would be in a position to carry out her own system of government. I say that that is diametrically opposed to any idea of allowing Persia a free hand in her work of regeneration.
The outcome of all this is not only to increase the difficulties of the Government in keeping order amongst the tribes with the return of Spring and the melting of the snows, but also it has led, as we have recently seen in the Press, to the intrusion of Germany. I do not profess to know the result of that, but, obviously, the intervention of a third great Power will not tend to facilitate matters or to diminish the complications in Persia; and if it has met with any success it is because we have been subservient to the policy of fettering Persia, of making her weak and disorganised, instead of endeavouring to let her realise her dream of a free regenerated country. Formerly we enjoyed the goodwill and confidence of the entire population and the special regard of the Nationalists. This position we have now forfeited, and it is not surprising, in view of our pusillanimous action, if Persia in her despair and needing outside support should be ready to meet the advances of Germany.
It would seem that we are engaged in a dog-and-manger policy or what may soon become a dog-and-manger policy, and the outcome of it will be not only to stifle Persian independence but to lead to com-

677
plications disastrous in their effect to our position in the Middle East. The Mahomedan world is beginning to assert itself, and Persia is the geographical centre of that great belt of Mahomedanism which stretches from the Atlantic to the China Sea. It is also the political and literary centre, and Mahomedans associate largely their past greatness with Persia. The thoughts of a Mahomedan revival sprung from Persia, and therefore if Persia is crippled and her position lowered in the eyes of the whole Mahomedan world, that will react most unfavourably on our own Mahomedan subjects. I have been told that the Persians in their distress have sent emissaries to Mahomedans in India. More-ever, it is very unlikely that Turkey would regard with favour the humiliating position in which Persia is placed. The future promises chaos, yet the danger might be averted. It seems so simple merely for both parties honestly to act up to the spirit of the Convention, and then, with an independent Persia, there would be the strongest bulwark against possible friction between ourselves and Russia. The position is far more favourable in these circumstances for a frank understanding with Russia than it was at the time of the signing of the Convention, when there was the corrupt rule of the late Shah to be dealt with. By the establishment of Persia on a sound footing the prestige and security of our Indian Empire would be immeasurably enhanced.
There is one further point I should like to mention. Second only to the authority of our representative at Teheran is that of The Times. For some unexplained reason that great journal has gone quite round in its attitude towards Persia, and now belittles their new aspirations and upholds the ascendancy of the two parties to the Convention. This change of feeling has had a grievous effect on the friendly attitude of the Persians towards us. Recently, in the review of a Life of Warren Hastings, The Times article concluded with a quotation that seems to me, and inferentially to The Times itself, to be very apposite to present circumstances. The anecdote is a record of a conversation in 1814 between Hastings and a young naval lieutenant of his own name, in the course of which the Persian Gulf was mentioned. Hastings said—
"If I were the War Minister of the Czar I should not spend time and effort in trying to get
678
to Constantinople by way of Europe. I should endeavour to occupy Persia, and to establish myself at the head of the Persian Gulf. I should then be in a fine position; I could strike at India with one hand and at Asia Minor with the other."
That quotation, my Lords, sets forth my own fears with regard to this matter.
THE EARL OF CREWE: My Lords, I am sure we have all listened with interest to the speech of the noble Lord on a subject with which he is so competent to deal and upon which he feels strongly; but I am obliged to point out that that speech does constitute something of an abuse of the forms of this House. The noble Lord put on the Paper quite a simple Question, with no notice of motion or any indication that he intended to raise the entire question of the policy of His Majesty's Government in regard to Persia, and, indeed, other matters which may be of a kindred character but are not absolutely involved in that policy; and the noble Lord has come down with a number of papers and made a speech as I say of great interest, but one which is altogether outside the terms of the Question which he placed on the Paper. If he had stated that he desired to call attention to the policy of His Majesty's Government in Persia it would have been a different case, and I might have communicated with him beforehand as to whether it was desirable at this particular moment that such a discussion should be raised. In the circumstances I am afraid I must ask to be excused from following the noble Lord into the question of policy which he has raised, and confine myself simply to answering his Question. Of course the nature of that answer he will know beforehand—namely, that the negotiations in question have been broken off because the Persian Government have not seen their way to comply with the conditions for the loan which were asked for by the British and Russian Governments. Speaking generally, I need only say that His Majesty's Government are inspired by nothing but feelings of the utmost goodwill towards the Persian Government and the Persian nation; but in this particular instance they found it necessary to impose these conditions, and as the conditions could not be complied with it has not been found possible to make the advance.
THE MARQUESS OF LANSDOWNE: My Lords, the concluding words of the noble Earl's speech will probably have served somewhat to reassure my noble friend who

679
has called attention to this matter. Both sides of the House must feel that this country cannot be indifferent to what happens in Persia. Her geographical position makes it inevitable that we should take an interest in all that concerns her, and at this moment we are no doubt all of us animated by a feeling of sincere sympathy with the new Persian Government in its endeavour to evolve order out of the chaotic condition of things which has lately obtained in Persia. But, my Lords, I am bound to say it seems to me that the noble Earl is justified in asking my noble friend not to press him for more precise information as to the negotiations which are now proceeding. Those negotiations must obviously be of a very delicate and difficult character, and if the noble Earl thinks it inconsistent with the public interest that a statement should be made going beyond that which he has already offered to the House, I certainly do not think we on this side would be justified in asking for such a statement.
LORD LAMINGTON: May I be permitted to say that I originally asked His Majesty's Government whether I should put down a Question to this effect. That
680
was a month or six weeks ago. I was requested more than once to postpone it. There must be some limit of time in such matters, and I do not think that my action has been altogether inconsistent with the public good.
THE EARL OF CREWE: The noble Lord must not misunderstand me. I did not complain of his putting down the Question, which, indeed, I have answered. I merely asked to be excused from following him into the wider questions of policy which he raised at the same time.

BUSINESS OF THE HOUSE.
THE EARL OF CREWE: My Lords, I understand that there is no business on the Paper for to-morrow, and I therefore suggest that the House should adjourn, except for Judicial business, until Monday next.
Moved, That the House do adjourn, except for Judicial business, until Monday next—(The Earl of Crewe.)
On Question, Motion agreed to.
House adjourned at five minutes before Five o'clock, till To-morrow, half-past Ten o'clock.