Sitting of 20 July 1910

Preamble
The House met at a Quarter before Three of the clock, Mr. SPEAKER in the Chair.

PRIVATE BUSINESS.
Great Northern Railway (Ireland) Bill (by Order),
Consideration, as amended, deferred till Friday.
Port of London (Port Rates on Goods)
Provisional Order Bill (by Order),
Adjourned Debate on Third Reading [18th July] further adjourned till tomorrow, at a quarter-past Eight of the clock.
Highland Railway Order Confirmation Bill (by Order),
Consideration deferred till to-morrow.
Message from the Lords,—That they have agreed to—
Census (Ireland) Bill, without Amendment.
Amendments to—
Supreme Court of Judicature Bill [Lords],
That they have passed a Bill, intituled, "An Act to confirm a Provisional Order under The Burgh Police (Scotland) Act, 1892, relating to Paisley Gas."
And, also, a Bill, intituled, "An, Act to confirm a Provisional Order under The Private Legislation Procedure (Scotland) Act, 1899, relating to Clydebank and District Water."
Paisley Gas Order Confirmation Bill [Lords],
Read the first time; Referred to the Examiners of Petitions for Private Bills.
Clydebank and District Water Order Confirmation Bill [Lords],
Read the first time; referred to the Examiners of Petitions for Private Bills.

ORAL ANSWERS TO QUESTIONS.

  Rosyth Dockyard.
  Mr. PETOasked the First Lord of the Admiralty whether, seeing that preliminary preparations are to be made for a
  1228
  second dock at Rosyth, the Board of Admiralty, in order to secure economy in peace and security in war, would make it an axiomatic rule that at each and every place selected as a site for a land or floating dock a minimum of two docks shall be provided?
  The FIRST LORD of the ADMIRALTY (Mr. McKenna): Such a rule would not always be applicable. Each case is considered on its merits, with due regard to economy and efficiency.

  Naval Manœuvres.
  Lord CHARLES BERESFORDasked whether all the ships' companies have been made up to full numbers in ships taking part in the manœuvres?
  Mr. McKENNA: Yes, Sir.
  Lord CHARLES BERESFORDasked how many seamen, trained men (active ratings), are there left in the naval ports during the manœuvres for replacing casualties, sick, etc., in war; and how many trained stokers (active ratings) are there left in the naval ports during the manœuvres?
  Mr. McKENNA: The numbers left in the ports during the present manœuvres bear no relation to those that would be left on mobilisation, owing to certain vessels not being completed, and certain training establishments not being clo ed. In any case it is contrary to the public interest to give details of numbers such as those asked for.
  Lord CHARLES BERESFORDasked if all ships have their proper complements of Royal Marines during the manœuvres; if not, how has the shortage been made up to full numbers; and how many Royal Marines (trained men, not recruits) are left at each port division during the manuœvres?
  Mr. McKENNA: The reply to the first part of the question is in the affirmative. It is not in the interests of the naval service to furnish the information asked for in the remainder of the question.
  Lord CHARLES BERESFORDasked whether any of the Naval Reserve have been called out for the manœuvres, and of what class?
  Mr. McKENNA: The Reserves were not called out but, as is customary, volunteers from the Royal Naval Reserve and Royal

  1229
  Fleet Reserve (Classes A and B) have been accepted for service in these manœuvres, in place of their ordinary training or drill.
  Lord CHARLES BERESFORD: Can the right hon. Gentleman state the number?
  Mr. McKENNA: Speaking roughly and from memory, I think 2,000.

  Cruiser "Sutlej" (Explosion).
  Lord BALCARRES (for Mr. Lonsdale)asked whether the First Lord of the Admiralty has received a report upon the explosion which occurred on board the cruiser "Sutlej" on Friday last; and whether he can communicate the facts to the House?
  Mr. McKENNA: No report has been received yet beyond the statement of the fact that such an explosion did occur and of the deaths of the two men. The Commander-in-Chief is no doubt holding an inquiry into the circumstances and will report in due course.

  West Coast of Africa (Slave Traffic).
  Mr. FELLasked how many vessels belonging to the Government are now stationed on the West Coast of Africa for the purpose of assisting in the suppression of the traffic in slaves?
  Mr. McKENNA: One vessel is stationed on the West Coast of Africa. I am not aware that there is any traffic in slaves there to be suppressed, but she has the necessary authority if the occasion arose.
  Mr. FELL: Is the vessel at the Western station?
  Mr. McKENNA: I could not state where the vessel is at present.

  Wireless Telegraphy (Australia and New Zealand).
  Mr. G. J. SANDYSasked the Under-Secretary for the Colonies whether the recommendations of the conference, held in Melbourne, in December, upon the establishment of wireless telegraphy between Australia, New Zealand, and the Pacific Islands have been adopted by the Governments concerned?
  The UNDER-SECRETARY of STATE for the COLONIES (Colonel Seely): I understand that the Australian and New Zealand Governments have taken steps to establish high-power stations at Sydney
  1230
  and Doubtless Bay, but it has not yet been possible to carry out the recommendations of the conference with regard to the Pacific Islands.
  Mr. SANDYS: Has the right hon. Gentleman any information as to when this work is likely to be completed?
  Colonel SEELY: In Australia and New Zealand the Government have already taken steps to establish high-power stations. Of course, we expect to hear when the work is completed or is nearing completion; but the time has not yet come for making a statement on the matter.
  Mr. GIBSON BOWLES: In view of the very great importance of the increase of wireless stations in that hemisphere will the Government do their best to establish there as many stations as they can?
  Colonel SEELY: I could not give a pledge as to that. Of course, the establishment of such stations, if this system is extending, would be of great value; but I could not make a statement on the subject now.

  Inspector of Prisons, Trinidad (Major A. S. Bowen).
  Mr. POINTERasked the Under-Secretary for the Colonies (1) whether his attention has been called to the fact that Major A. S. Bowen, one of the Crown Colony officials, warden of St. Ann's and Diego Martin, in Trinidad, inspector of prisons for that Colony, inspector of reformatories, and justice of the peace for the county of St. George and Port-of-Spain, in the same island, was convicted, before the S.J.P. of Port-of-Spain on 22nd June last, for assaulting and beating an Indian immigrant who was indentured to him, and that the maximum penalty of £10, or in default seven days' imprisonment, was inflicted upon the said A. S. Bowen; whether he is aware that the same official was convicted, on 11th January, 1907, by the S.J.P. of Port-of-Spain for an assault upon a boy and was fined 12s. 6d. with 7s. costs or seven days' hard labour; whether he is also aware that on 3rd April, 1907, the same A. S. Bowen was committed by the S.J.P. of Port-of-Spain to the criminal sessions held in that city to stand his trial for endeavouring to provoke a breach of the peace; and will he state why the Government of Trinidad failed to bring Major Bowen to trial when committed to the criminal sessions, and on what grounds the prosecution of Major

  1231
  Bowen was allowed to drop; (2) if he can give the number of previous convictions recorded against Major A. S. Bowen, of Trinidad, for violent assaults committed by him; and whether he will lay all the Papers connected with the convictions of Major Bowen, including those relating to his committal to the criminal sessions in April, 1907, upon the Table of the House; (3) whether the name of Major A. S. Bowen, of Trinidad, has been, or will be, removed from the roll of justices of the peace for the Colony of Trinidad, in view of the number of his breaches of the peace and convictions for assault; (4) if the right hon. Gentleman can inform the House if the indentures of the Indian Shoenauth to Major A. S. Bowen have been cancelled, subsequent to the conviction of Major Bowen for beating the Indian, or whether Shoenauth has been allowed to purchase his freedom, as from the magistrate's remarks when trying the case of assault it was shown that the Indian had saved enough money for that purpose, and was assaulted because he refused to return the bank book to his employer; (5) if he can furnish the House with a Return of the number of prisoners flogged by order of Major A. S. Bowen during his term of office as Inspector of Prisons in Trinidad; and also with the number of boys and girls ordered to be flogged or whipped by the same official in his capacity of Inspector of Reformatories; and (6) whether, in view of the repeated convictions recorded against Major A. S. Bowen, of Trinidad, for violent assault and the like, and of the character of his administration of the prisons and reformatories and the consequent dissatisfaction in the island, the right hon. Gentleman will consider the advisability of recalling Major Bowen and replacing him with an official who will administer the duties of his various offices with more regard for the amenities of civilised administration?
  Colonel SEELY: Major Bowen was appointed Inspector of Prisons in October 1903. There were ninety-five floggings and whippings of prisoners by order of the Inspector of Prisons during the six years 1904 to 1909. Inquiry will be made in regard to the number of whippings in reformatories. With regard to the other points raised in the questions, we have no information, but inquiry is being made.

  Pacific Phosphate Company.
  Mr. ALDENasked (1) whether the right hon. Gentleman has any official information showing that in respect of the phosphates of the Ocean Island, Western Pacific, the licence granted to the Pacific Phosphate Company was obtained by false pretences; and, if so, whether he will have the said licence declared null and void; and whether, in the event of any new licence in the future being granted, he will secure that native and Imperial interests are safeguarded; (2) whether, in view of the disclosures made in connection with the concessions secured by the Pacific Phosphate Company, he can see his way to arrange that all dealings with public and native lands, including concessions for mineral and other rights, be placed in charge of competent and responsible officials, answerable for their conduct in the same manner as trustees for private estates, in order that the rights of the natives may be conserved and the Imperial interests safeguarded?
  Colonel SEELY: I have no information tending to show that the Pacific Phosphate Company obtained its licence in respect of Ocean Island by false pretences. There is, therefore, no reason for considering the question of cancelling the licence. The Colonial Office will take steps to see that Imperial and native interests are adequately safeguarded in this and other cases.
  Mr. ALDEN: Is the right hon. Gentleman in a position to state what the prices were?
  Colonel SEELY: I can give my hon. Friend all the information about it. I think what I have stated is correct, so far as that information goes. There is nothing to bear out the suggestion made in the first part of the question.
  Sir J. D. REES: May I ask whether commercial interests are not also worthy of the attention of hon. Members with Imperial instincts?
  Colonel SEELY: Native interests are often more important, because there are fewer people to look after them.
  Mr. WEDGWOOD: May I ask the right hon. Gentleman whether, in view of the development of rubber companies and mining companies, it would not be worth while to appoint some Commission to see whether Imperial and native interests are properly safeguarded in British Colonies?
  Mr. ALDEN: Was the question of appointing officials to safeguard these natives in the contemplation of the Colonial Office when the concession was made?
  Sir J. D. REES: Do the records of the Colonial Office afford justification for the general assumption that the British trader ill-treats or cheats the natives?
  Colonel SEELY: No; I did not wish to convey that at all. It is the fact that a careful watch has to be kept on the action of all companies in remote parts of the world. I think experience shows that natives are ill-treated at times not only by the natives of the country, but by the people of other countries, and we must watch over them.

  Brussels Act, 1892 (Carrying Slaves).
  Mr. FELLasked the Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs if he proposes to invite the signatory Powers to the Brussels Act of 1892 to revise the stipulations contained in Article 22 that the right of search and capture at sea of vessels carrying slaves is limited to vessels of less than 500 tons, seeing that the experience of the conveyance of natives between Angola and San Thomé shows the necessity for such revision?
  The UNDER-SECRETARY of STATE for FOREIGN AFFAIRS (Mr. McKinnon Wood): Chapter III. of the Brussels Act, which contains the Article referred to (Article 23), applies to the East Coast only, and its provisions have no reference to the conveyance of natives between Angola and San Thomé.
  Mr. FELL: Is Angola comprised in this Convention of 1892?
  Mr. McKINNON WOOD: No. I think the Brussels Convention dealt with a different kind of traffic in slaves from that.

  Arrest of British Trawler "Onward Ho" (Territorial Waters).
  Mr. GUY WILSONasked the Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs whether, in view of the fact that His Majesty's Government do not recognise any claims on the part of Russia to exercise jurisdiction over British vessels beyond the generally recognised territorial limit, he will take steps to ensure that British trawlers will not in future be arrested or molested when fishing off the coast of Russia outside these limits?
  Mr. McKINNON WOOD: As regards the first part of the question, we have already made representations based on the information received in regard to the arrest of the "Onward Ho," and this case will be dealt with on its merits as soon as we have received the reply of the Russian Government. As regards the general question, we will ascertain what the Russian Government do claim as territorial waters, and whether these claims are in accordance with the generally recognised limits of territorial jurisdiction.

  Old Age Pensions.
  Sir JOHN JARDINEasked the Lord Advocate what has been decided on the application of Mrs. Morburn, of Abbey Street, Melrose, made in March last for an old age pension; and what is the reason for delay in disposal?
  The FINANCIAL SECRETARY to the TREASURY (Mr. Hobhouse): It is assumed that the claim in question is that of Mrs. Thorburn (not Morburn). It was dated the 2nd May, 1910, and will be submitted to the Melrose Burgh Pension Committee at their next meeting. The Board of Customs and Excise are inquiring as to whether there was any unnecessary delay on the part of the pension officer in dealing with the claim.
  Mr. RENDALLasked how many prosecutions under the Old Age Pensions Act have taken place in the counties of Somerset and Gloucester?
  Mr. HOBHOUSE: There have been twelve prosecutions under the Old Age Pensions Act, 1908, in these two counties, including Bristol. The number is made up as follows:—Somerset 4, Gloucester 6, Bristol 2.
  Mr. LYNCHasked whether the Pension Committee of Ennistymon, county Clare, recommended James Neylon, of Caheraderry, Ennistymon, number in register 6,286, for an old age pension; that the pension officer objected that James Neylon had not reached the age of seventy, but that the applicant was able to prove that he was recorded as four years of age in the Census of 1841; that the pension officer then objected on the ground that the applicant had failed to work according to his ability for the past twenty years; and that the Pension Committee, after hearing this objection, again recommended James Neylon for the pension; whether the fact that the applicant has maintained himself and

  1235
  family on a scanty holding, and has reached the age of seventy-three without parish relief and free from debt, will be considered sufficient evidence of working according to his ability; and whether the Local Government Board will allow the pension to James Neylon?
  Mr. HOBHOUSE: I understand that, though the local pension committee decided in favour of the grant of a pension, the Local Government Board have disallowed the claim on appeal. I have no power to interfere with their decision.
  Mr. HAZLETON: Can the right hon. Gentleman say on what grounds they disallowed the pension?
  Mr. HOBHOUSE: No. I know nothing about the proceedings of the judgment of the Local Government Board.
  Mr. FRANCEasked the Chancellor of the Exchequer (I) if the initial sum to be agreed as the contribution from each locality to the Exchequer towards the payment of old age pensions is to be a fixed annual sum, and, if not, on what basis it will be calculated in future years; (2) in the case of a present inmate of a Poor Law institution becoming a pensioner, on what basis the contribution of the guardians will be calculated; (3) on what basis the local authorities will be asked to contribute in the case of granting an old age pension to a person who, on only one or on comparatively few occasions, received temporary relief; (4) if, in the case of a pension being granted to a person formerly in receipt of poor relief, the pensioner will be entitled in the future to medical relief?
  Mr. LLOYD GEORGE: It is intended that the contribution from local authorities should not, as I have already explained to the House, exceed the amount by which the rates will be relieved owing to the removal of the pauper disqualification. I do not think it would be advisable at present to give details as to the means by which this will be effected or as to the basis of the contribution.
  Mr. FELL (for Mr. Lonsdale)asked the Chancellor of the Exchequer if he has any estimate of the number of persons in Ireland who will become eligible for Old age pensions in consequence of the removal of the Poor Law relief disqualification; and if he can state the approximate amount which the guardians of the poor will be required to contribute towards these pensions?
  Mr. LLOYD GEORGE: The number of persons over seventy years of age in receipt of relief in Ireland on 1st January last was believed to be about 25,000. It is not possible to say what addition to the numbers relieved in a single day must be made in order to arrive at the total number of persons at present disqualified. The contribution of the guardians will be based on the cost of relief as at present administered. It is not possible to give an estimate at the present time, but the intention of the Government is that the charge shall not exceed the actual saving to the guardians by the removal of the disqualification.

  Emigrants' Information Office.
  Mr. LAWSONasked the President of the Board of Trade (1) whether he is aware that the Emigrants' Information Office have no direct means of obtaining information in respect to the demand for labour in various trades in the Dominions and Colonies overseas except in answer to certain circular letters addressed to correspondents; if at present the information published is mainly drawn from newspaper reports and official publications of the various Governments; whether this belated information is sufficient for the purposes of the Labour Exchanges; and whether it is proposed to have the principal facts and figures telegraphed from week to week; (2) whether he is in negotiation with the High Commissioners and Agents-General of the various Colonies with a view to bringing the Labour Exchanges into touch with the labour departments overseas; and whether the managing committee of the Emigrants' Information Office is to contain representatives of the Labour Exchanges?
  The PRESIDENT of the BOARD of TRADE (Mr. Sydney Buxton): The information of the Emigrants' Information Office is, I am informed, derived from official sources and from unofficial local correspondents in the Dominions and Colonies and from newspaper reports. This information on the general labour conditions prevailing in the overseas Dominions is of use to the Labour Exchanges, but it is hoped that fuller information will ultimately be available as to the existence of particular opportunities of employment. The whole subject of the relation of the Labour Exchanges to employment in the Colonies is now under careful consideration in conjunction with the Colonial Office.
  Mr. LAWSON: Is the right hon. Gentleman aware that there is no information sent by cable in respect of the demand for labour overseas?
  Mr. BUXTON: I think that is a point the hon. Gentleman might mention again. The matter is being considered.
  Sir C. KINLOCH-COOKE: Supposing that official information was given, would artisans assisted and sent out under the Labour Exchanges Act be admitted to Canada?
  Mr. BUXTON: I do not think the matter arises now. Perhaps the right hon. Gentleman will put down a question on the subject.
  Sir C. KINLOCH-COOKE: May I ask whether the Regulations under the Labour Exchanges Act, which allow of the payment of fares from one part of the United Kingdom to another, apply from one part of the Empire to another.
  Mr. BUXTON: That is a point also for consideration. As I have already said, this question is not a very simple one. It is under consideration by the Colonial Office, and they hope to arrive at a satisfactory solution.
  Mr. KEIR HARDIE: Will the right hon. Gentleman see that in the consideration of this matter the opinion of the trade unions of Canada will be taken into account?
  Mr. GRETTON: Is it intended to facilitate the emigration to the Colonies of the unemployed by means of the Labour Exchanges?
  Mr. BUXTON: My answer covers that point.

  Children Boarded Out (Deaths).
  Mr. STAVELEY-HILLasked the President of the Local Government Board whether, in the case of the deaths of children boarded out under the provisions of the Within Union Orders of May, 1899, and 31st December, 1909, and the Beyond Union Order of 1905, the funeral expenses of such children fall on the foster-parents or should be discharged by the guardians?
  The PRESIDENT of the LOCAL GOVERNMENT BOARD (Mr. Burns): The prescribed form of agreement between boards of guardians and boarding-out committees contains an undertaking on the part of the guardians to pay the funeral expenses in the case of the death of a child who is boarded out.

  Butter and Margarine Act, 1907.
  Mr. BYLESasked whether the inspectors who take samples of butter, with the view of enforcing the provisions of the Butter and Margarine Act, 1907, take those samples indiscriminately from all shops, or whether, in the majority of cases, they are taken from the shops of suspected firms or individuals, with the result that a relatively high proportion of the samples of butter taken are found to be incorrectly described and therefore condemned; and whether the statistics of adulteration are thereby vitiated?
  Mr. BURNS: No provision is made in the Acts for sampling in proportion to sources of supply, quantity sold, number of retailers, or other factors which would have to be taken into account in order to obtain statistics such as appear to be referred to. The statistics which are published by the Local Government Board do not profess to be of this nature.

  International Travelling Passes (Motorists or Motor Cyclists).
  Mr. ALDENasked what are the conditions to be fulfilled by a motoring club in order that it may be officially authorised to issue the international travelling passes to its members who are motorists or motor cyclists; and on what grounds the Cyclists' Touring Club was refused authority to issue such passes to those of its members who are motorists or motor cyclists?
  Mr. BURNS: The Motor Car (International Circulation) Order, 1910, empowers the Local Government Board themselves to issue international travelling passes, or to authorise, under such conditions as they think fit, one or more associations to issue such passes. I have already authorised three associations for this purpose for a period of six months as a temporary arrangement, and I do not think it necessary at present to add to their number. Members of the Cyclists' Touring Club can obtain their passes through any one of the associations authorised.
  Mr. ALDEN: Is the right hon. Gentleman aware that those other associations charge very much more in the case of passes than the Cyclists' Touring Club, and therefore it is the poorer clubs' travellers that are affected?
  Mr. BURNS: I am considering that point, and at the end of the six months I intend to make some arrangement.
  Mr. GRETTON: Can the right hon. Gentleman state the three authorised associations?
  Mr. BURNS: The Automobile Association, the Motor Car Union, and the Royal Automobile Club—the only three associations that applied. The Cyclists' Touring Club did not apply until a month after the Order was issued.

  Cottage Nursing.
  Mr. ERNEST JARDINEasked the President of the Local Government Board whether he will consider the issuing of an order by which boards of guardians shall be empowered to contribute towards the cost of cottage nursing in the homes of the sick poor by nursing associations, in the proportion of visits paid and total cost, on the same lines that such boards can contribute towards the cost of workhouse children attending elementary schools?
  Mr. BURNS: Boards of guardians are already empowered under Section 10 of the Poor Law Act, 1879, with, the consent of the Local Government Board, to subscribe towards associations for providing nurses, and the Board have sanctioned many subscriptions under this enactment. In the recent Circular on Outdoor Relief I drew attention to the importance to guardians of being in a position to supply nurses in case of need, and expressed the opinion that nurses are generally best provided through the agency of local nursing associations. At the same time, I intimated willingness to continue to sanction subscriptions for this purpose.

  Sanatoria for Consumptives.
  Mr. EDMUND HARVEYasked the President of the Local Government Board whether he is prepared favourably to consider a scheme for making use of some of the vacant hospital accommodation under the control of the Metropolitan Asylums Board for the provision of sanatoria for consumptives, if the Metropolitan Asylums Board will submit such a scheme?
  Mr. BURNS: The whole question of utilising the spare accommodation in the institutions under the control of the managers of the Metropolitan Asylums District is under consideration. I may say, however, that the question of using such accommodation for consumptive patients is one involving special difficulties.

  Justices of the Peace (Oaths).
  Colonel PROBYasked the Secretary of State for the Home Department whether any arrangements are being made to enable justices of the peace to take the oath of allegiance and judicial oath at petty sessions, with a view of obviating the attendance of such justices at the quarter sessions of the county for this purpose?
  The UNDER-SECRETARY of STATE for the HOME DEPARTMENT (Mr. Masterman): A direction has been given to allow of justices of the peace taking the oaths at petty sessions when they are being re-sworn in consequence of the demise of the Crown. It has not been thought necessary or desirable to make any change with regard to newly-appointed justices.

  Church in Wales (Royal Commission).
  Mr. ORMSBY-GOREasked on what date the Royal Commission on the Church in Wales commenced its sittings, finished hearing evidence, and signed the chairman's Report; and how much longer the issue of the chairman's Report is likely to be delayed by the prolonged deliberations of one Commissioner whose Memorandum is not yet ready?
  Mr. MASTERMAN: The Commission sat for the first time on 23rd July, 1906, and it finished hearing evidence on 15th June, 1908. The chairman's draft Report was submitted to the Commission in January, 1909, and the Secretary of State is informed that all the Commissioners present at the sittings in March last (one alone being absent) expressed their willingness to sign the Report, subject, in some cases, to the right to submit separate memoranda. As regards the latter part of the question, I can only repeat that my right hon. Friend is now in communication with the chairman on the subject.
  Mr. ORMSBY-GORE: Can the hon. Gentleman say why so long a delay has taken place in issuing the chairman's Report?
  Mr. MASTERMAN: It is not a case of issuing the chairman's Report. The Commissioners have finally to settle the question of issuing a Report; it is not the chairman's Report at all.

  Police Authorities and Dr. Crippen.
  Mr. WILLIAM THORNEasked the Secretary of State for the Home Department if he could state who was responsible for allowing Dr. Crippen to get out

  1241
  of the hands of the police when it was known by the Chief of the Police at Scotland Yard that Dr. Crippen had made several false statements about the murdered woman which cast suspicion upon the woman's husband that he was responsible for the crime; whether he was aware that the Chief of the Police on 30th June began his investigation on the strength of information given by Mrs. Crippen's friends; if he was aware that during the investigation the police kept no close watch upon Dr. Crippen, and it was in consequence of the pressing inquiries that caused Dr. Crippen to vanish; and that it was not until 13th July that a search of his house was made, which gave Dr. Crippen three days to get away before the police acted, which went to show that the Chief of the Police had Dr. Crippen under his observation for nine days and then allowed him to get away; and if he intended taking any action in the matter?
  Mr. MASTERMAN: If the hon. Member will repeat his question later the Secretary of State will endeavour to answer it. It is very undesirable to discuss at the present time details of the important inquiry on which the police are intently engaged.
  Mr. W. THORNE: Can the hon. Gentleman suggest a date when I should put the question again?
  Mr. MASTERMAN: I think the hon. Member had better watch the course of public events.
  Mr. W. THORNE: Does that mean that I am to wait until the whole business is settled before I put the question again, or until Dr. Crippen is captured?

  Factory and Workshops Act (Differing Standards).
  Mr. RAMSAY MACDONALDasked the Secretary of State far the Home Department (1) whether his attention had been drawn to the very differing standards used by different local authorities in reporting action taken under Section 108 of the Factory and Workshop Act, as shown by the Home Office Summary of Reports for 1908, Code 5110; whether he would explain the difference between Derbyshire and Devonshire shown by the fact that, whilst Devonshire returned a considerably higher number of out-workers, 1,493 against 1,290 in Derbyshire, the instances given of outwork in unwholesome premises in Devon-
  1242
  shire amounted to only nine, whilst in Derbyshire they were 115, or between Greenwich, which with 232 out-workers had fourteen similar instances, and Hackney with 3,354 out-workers but with no unwholesome premises to report; (2) whether his attention had been called to such further disparities in the Home Office Return [Code 5110] as were shown with regard to notices served under Section 108 by various local authorities; whether he could explain why on 104 instances of outwork in unwholesome premises in Derby only thirteen notices had been served, whilst on 111 instances in Leeds 111 notices had been served, or why, in the neighbouring towns of Great Yarmouth and Norwich the former had served twelve notices on fourteen instances, and the latter ten notices on 129 instances, and why Newcastle reported having served fifty-one notices on forty-five instances; and whether the attention of the local authorities concerned had been drawn to these discrepancies, and explanations asked for; and (3) whether, in view of the many disparities so clearly pointed out in the Chief Inspector's introductory note to the Return, Code 5110, which were in many points more pronounced than in 1907 and showed but little improvement during the five or six years during which the Return had been issued, in spite of the circulars issued for the Home Office and the conference of medical officers held at the Home Office in 1907, he had considered how he could raise to a higher and more uniform standard the action taken by the local authorities and secure greater accuracy in the records of that action sent to the Home Office?
  Mr. MASTERMAN: The administration of the provisions of Section 108 with regard to employment in unwholesome premises rests entirely with the local authority, and does not come within the jurisdiction of the factory inspectors. The figures in the tables are supplied voluntarily by the medical officers of health, at the request of the Home Office, and the Department, though it endeavours to secure the correction of obvious errors spearing on the face of the Returns, has no power to intervene with regard to the administrative action taken by the local authorities under the Section. My right hon. Friend will consider whether anything further can be done to improve the Returns, but the chief inspector and staff cannot give more time to the revision of the statistical

  1243
  information supplied by the local authorities without encroaching on the time which is and ought to he devoted to their own proper work.
  Mr. RAMSAY MACDONALD: Will my hon. Friend consider the advisability of ceasing to publish this Return at all, in view of its unsatisfactory character?
  Mr. MASTERMAN: I agree with the hon. Member. I think the Return is thoroughly unsatisfactory, and the point is worth considering.

  Royal Commissions Procedure (Minority Reports).
  Mr. WEDGWOODasked the Secretary of State for the Home Department whether his attention had been called to those parts of the Report of the Departmental Committee on the Procedure of Royal Commissions which recommended the placing of difficulties in the way of Minority Reports and independent action by members of Royal Commissions; and, seeing that the Minority Reports of the Licensing Commission, the Royal Commission on Local Taxation, and the Royal Commission on the Poor Law would have been suppressed under these recommendations, whether he would assure the House that no steps would be taken by the Home Office to act on the Report of this Departmental Committee without first obtaining the approval of this House?
  Mr. MASTERMAN: The recommendations contained in the Report of the Departmental Committee referred to are under the consideration of my right hon. Friend, but the Report was only issued a short time ago, and he cannot say yet what action it may be necessary for him to take.
  Mr. WEDGWOOD: May we be assured that no action will be taken in the direction of abolishing the Minority Reports of Royal Commissions without the House being consulted?
  Mr. M ASTERMAN: I have no idea that there is any intention of abolishing the Minority Reports of Royal Commissions.
  Mr. WEDGWOOD: May we be assured that no action will be taken in the direction of preventing Minority Reports being printed in the Government Papers where less than a certain number of people sign the Reports?
  Sir J. D. REES: Can steps be taken to prevent Minority Reports assuming more importance than Majority Reports?

  Agricultural Tenancies (Valuations).
  Mr. C. BATHURSTasked whether it was proposed, through the medium of the Agricultural Holdings (Scotland) Act (1908) Amendment Bill, to differentiate as regards contracting-out of the provisions of the principal Act in reference to way-going valuations between Scottish and English agricultural tenancies, and, if so, why; whether it was proposed to proceed with the further stages of this Bill before the Autumn Session; and whether, to secure uniformity, a similar amendment of the Agricultural Holdings (England and Wales) Act, 1908, was contemplated by the Government?
  The LORD ADVOCATE (Mr. Ure): The answer to the first part of the hon. Member's question is in the negative; to the second part in the affirmative; and to the third part in the negative.

  Potato Crop (Prevention of Disease).
  Mr. C. BATHURSTasked the Parliamentary Secretary to the Board of Agriculture whether, in view of the exceptionally luxuriant growth of the potato crop throughout Great Britain and of the risk, under prevailing atmospheric conditions, of serious loss to growers from potato disease unless precautionary measures were forthwith adopted, the Board would take steps to make known to farmers, small holders, market gardeners, and allotment holders the proved efficacy of spraying the crop, before the disease develops, with Bordeaux Broth, its constituents and the best method of mixing them, and the special pecuniary value of its use in such a season as the present?
  The PARLIAMENTARY SECRETARY to the BOARD of AGRICULTURE (Sir Edward Strachey): The Board have issued a leaflet dealing fully with the various points mentioned by the hon. Member. About 3,000 of them have been distributed this year.
  Mr. C. BATHURST: Is not this just one of those questions in regard to which the Irish Department give much more useful information that the English Board?

  Sheep Washing (Recovery of Soluble Potash).
  Mr. C. BATHURSTasked whether, in the opinion of the expert advisers of the Board of Agriculture, the amount of

  1245
  soluble potash contained in the suint of the fleeces of sheep was of sufficient commercial value to justify steps being taken by flockmasters to save it, by evaporation or otherwise, after the process of sheep-washing; whether, failing the possibility of its recovery in sufficient quantities to dispose of commercially, the Board considered that its value as a dressing for clover and other leguminous crops rendered it desirable after sheep-washing to use the wash water on the farm for irrigation purposes; and, if so, whether the Board would issue any information on the subject for the guidance of the farming community?
  Sir E. STRACHEY: The Board do not consider that it would pay to recover potash on a commercial scale from sheep washings. Occasionally the water might usefully be employed for irrigation where the configuration of the land is favourable.

  Sale of Margarine Bill.
  Mr. BYLESasked the Parliamentary Secretary to the Board of Agriculture whether he had received from the London Chamber of Commerce a resolution, unanimously passed by the Provision Trade Section of the Chamber, condemning the Sale of Margarine Bill now before the House, and pointing out that the Memorandum of the Bill was calculated to mislead; and, if so, what, if any, reply had been sent?
  Sir E. STRACHEY: The resolution has been received, and acknowledged.

  Rural Education Conference.
  Mr. CARLILE (for Sir Philip Magnus)asked whether the Rural Education Conference, recently constituted by the Board of Education and the Board of Agriculture, was required to consider matters referred to it by either Board; and, if so, what matters, if any, had already been referred to it, and by which of the two Boards such reference had been made?
  The PARLIAMENTARY SECRETARY to the BOARD of EDUCATION (Mr. Trevelyan): If the hon. Member will read paragraph (7) of the Minute of 4th February, 1910, constituting the Rural Education Conference, he will there find that the primary duty of the conference is to discuss and advise the two Boards upon all questions connected with education in rural districts which may, from time to time, be referred to them by the two Boards—that is to say, by the two Boards acting together. From paragraph (8) of
  1246
  the same Minute he will see that the conference is not limited to the discussion of questions formally referred by the two Boards, but it is open to any member of the Conference to propose questions for discussion provided that he gives due notice. The Conference has held a preliminary meeting to settle questions of procedure. The two Boards desire to leave the Conference as free as possible to discuss matters which appear to them to require consideration, and the two Boards are now considering whether there are any particular questions to which they desire that precedence should be given.
  Mr. CARLILE: When are the subjects considered by the Boards likely to he available?
  Mr. TREVELYAN: I do not suppose there will be any long delay in the matter.

  Political Tribunals in India.
  Mr. KEIR HARDIEasked the Under-Secretary of State for India whether he could give a list of all the cases since the Report of the Police Commission of 1905 in which political tribunals in India had set aside convictions or refused to convict on the grounds that evidence for the prosecution was procured by torture or corruption?
  The UNDER-SECRETARY of STATE for INDIA (Mr. Montagu): Such cases are not necessarily reported to the Secretary of State, and I am not therefore able to give the list asked for by my hon. Friend.
  Mr. KEIR HARDIE: Will there be any Reports of the Government of India on the subject sent over to this country?
  Mr. MONTAGU: I understand the hon. Member to mean the judicial tribunals of India. For various causes cases are dismissed, but they are not necessarily reported, except in the public Press.
  Mr. KEIR HARDIE: Will the hon. Member be prepared to issue a Return of the number of such cases if it is asked for?
  Mr. MONTAGU: It would require a very careful analysis of the judicial procedure of India for the last five years; but if a question is put down I will consult my Noble Friend.
  Sir J. D. REES: Are the lists of this character maintained by any other Administration in Asia?
  Mr. MONTAGU: I do not know any—thing about that.

  Seditious Meetings Act (Proclamation of Rohtak District).
  Mr. KEIR HARDIEasked the Under-Secretary of State for India whether he was aware that the Rohtak district of the Punjab had been proclaimed under the Seditious Meetings Act; and whether he could say what number of political offences had been prosecuted in this district during the past three years; what meetings had hitherto been held which had been calculated to excite public feeling against the Government; and what were the special reasons which led to the proclamation being issued?
  Mr. MONTAGU: The district in question has been proclaimed. I cannot state the number of offences against public tranquillity during the past three years, but the Secretary of State is satisfied from the information before him that the proclamation is fully justified as a precautionary measure.
  Mr. KEIR HARDIE: Has there been reported from this district any single case of a political meeting of any kind being held during the last three years; if not, on what ground was this place proclaimed?
  Mr. MONTAGU: The Seditious Meetings Act does not refer only to political meetings, but to public meetings likely to excite disaffection; and, having regard to the fact that such meetings were being held in this district, it was thought necessary to proclaim it.
  Mr. KEIR HARDIE: Can the hon. Gentleman say what was the nature of the projected meetings: were they political or religious?
  Mr. MONTAGU: In India, religious meetings very often become political.
  Mr. KEIR HARDIE: Does that apply to Liverpool?

  Development of Match Industry (India).
  Sir CHARLES DILKEasked the Under-Secretary of State for India whether he was aware that steps had recently been taken with a view to develop the match industry in India; and, if so, whether the provisions of the Act forbidding the manufacture of matches with yellow phosphorus in this country or their importation were likely to be recommended on international grounds by the Secretary of State to the Government of India as suitable for adoption by the Indian Legislature?
  Mr. MONTAGU: The Secretary of State has received a report on the subject from the Government of India. It is under his consideration.

  Rent Appeals (Limerick).
  Mr. LUNDONasked the Chief Secretary for Ireland whether he was aware that Mr. Justice Fitzgerald and his assessor Mr. Lynch heard appeal cases in Limerick in January last and almost in every case raised the rents of those who sought to have their grievances redressed; were any instructions issued to Mr. Lynch to put an extra value on the land in county Limerick; and would steps be taken to protect the interests of the tenant farmers who were driven to the Land Court owing to their landlords' refusal to sell?
  The CHIEF SECRETARY for IRELAND (Mr. Birrell): The Land Commission inform me that twenty fair rent appeals were heard by the Judicial Commissioner and his Assessor mentioned in the question at Limerick in last January. In nine of the cases the landlord alone appealed, in one case the tenant alone appealed, and in ten cases both landlord and tenant appealed. In three of the cases the rents fixed by the Sub-Commission was confirmed, and in seventeen eases the rents fixed by the Sub-Commission were raised. In these twenty cases the total amount of existing rents dealt with was £940 5s. which was reduced by the Sub-Commission to £673 9s. 11d., and the total amount of rent fixed on appeal is £755 9s. 7d. No instructions whatever were given to the assessor as to the amount of his valuation; the cases were heard in the ordinary way and judicially decided by the court.

  Landless Men (Ireland).
  Mr. GINNELLasked the Chief Secretary for Ireland whether the Estates Commissioners have yet acquired compulsorily, or taken the preliminary steps for compulsorily acquiring, any untenanted land for the relief of congestion or the provision of new holdings for landless men who without land must emigrate; if so, will he state the names of the estates affected and the counties in which they are situate; if not, will he say when, if at all, the Commissioners propose to put their compulsory powers in operation in the counties under their jurisdiction containing untenanted land and many persons

  1249
  defined by statute as suitable for it, in need, and willing to purchase it at its value ascertained by the Commissioners?
  Mr. BIRRELL: The Estates Commissioners have received sixty-five memorials from tenants and other persons requesting them to acquire lands on their behalf under the provisions of the Irish Land Act, 1909, and are making the necessary inquiries. At the present stage the Commissioners are not in a position to furnish the detailed information asked for. The question of compulsory acquisition will be considered in the event of the Commissioners deciding that the lands referred to in these applications should be acquired.
  Mr. GINNELL: Can the right hon. Gentleman say as to whether any land has been acquired yet compulsorily by the Commissioners?
  Mr. BIRRELL: No, Sir.

  Kilmurry Estate, County Kerry.
  Captain COOPERasked the Chief Secretary for Ireland if he is aware that in connection with the proceedings taken against Richard J. Walsh, a tenant on the Kilmurry estate, near Castleisland, county Kerry, for ejectment for non-payment of rent, resolutions were passed by the Tralee Rural District Council and the Kerry County Council in support of the tenant; if these bodies were subsequently the defendants in a claim by the trustees of the Kilmurry estate and another person for malicious injuries; if he will state the amount of damages and costs recovered by the different plaintiffs and the amount of he rate struck to defray the same, together with the loss entailed upon the ratepayers through the non-payment of rates by the late tenant; whether he will direct the attention of the Local Government Board to the resolutions passed by the Tralee Rural District Council and the Kerry County Council; and whether he will state what steps have been taken to bring the perpetrators of the malicious injuries at Kilmurry in June, 1909, to justice?
  Mr. BIRRELL: I understand that resolutions to the effect mentioned in the question were passed by the local bodies referred to, who were subsequently defendants in claims for compensation for malicious injury as stated in the question. Compensation and costs amounting in all
  1250
  to £200 were allowed, necessitating the striking of a rate of 1s. 4d. in the £ on three electoral divisions. The amount of rates owing by the tenant at the time of his eviction was £12 14s. 7d. It is not necessary for me to call the attention of the Local Government Board to the resolutions of county or district councils which come before the Board in the ordinary course of business. The police were unable to obtain such evidence as would justify a prosecution for malicious injury against any particular person.

  Technical Instruction (Ireland).
  Mr. LYNCHasked the Chief Secretary for Ireland whether he is aware of the need for funds, amounting to at least £200,000, for the development of technical instruction in Ireland; whether he is aware in particular that the county Clare Joint Technical Instruction Committee is obliged to conduct its classes in makeshift buildings unsuitable for its purposes, and is otherwise greatly hampered in the development of its schemes by reason of the inadequacy of the financial provision; and whether steps will be taken to remedy this state of affairs?
  Mr. BIRRELL: My attention has frequently been called to the need for further funds for technical instruction in Ireland. I am aware that the buildings used by the Clare Technical Instruction Committee are unsuitable for their purpose, but I am not at present in a position to say whether anything can be done in the immediate future to improve the provision for technical instruction there and elsewhere in Ireland.

  Berridge Estate, Connemara.
  Mr. O'MALLEYasked the Chief Secretary if he will state whether negotiations are proceeding for the purchase by the Congested Districts Board of the Berridge estate, Connemara; whether there are negotiations for the purchase of other estates in Connemara; if so, what estates; if he will state what is the cause of the delay in the building of houses, etc., in Inishbofin, an island purchased several years ago by the Congested Districts Board; if he is aware that discontent prevails throughout Connemara at the inordinate delay in dealing with the purchase of estates; and if he will bring pressure to bear on the Board to expedite the working of the Land Act of 1909 in the congested districts?
  Mr. BIRRELL: The Congested Districts Board are negotiating for the purchase of the Berridge and many other estates in Connemara, but at this stage of the proceedings it is not considered desirable to state their names. The Board have completed their building operations and improvements in Inishbofin Island, and no further expenditure will be made there. There has been no avoidable delay in dealing with estates by the Board, who are doing all in their power to facilitate land purchase in Connemara.

  Army Rifle (Sights).
  Major MORRISON-BELLasked the Secretary of State for War if, in view of the improvement in the shooting that would be caused thereby, he will have a B.S.A. or some similar sight attached to the rifle now in the possession of the troops?
  The SECRETARY of STATE for WAR (Mr. Haldane): Patterns of aperture sight available up to the present time have not been found suitable for military purposes. The Small Arms Committee is, however, carrying out further trials to determine whether a suitable sight can be obtained.

  Territorial Garrison Artillery, Ardhallow (Gun Practice).
  Mr. WATTasked the Secretary for War whether he is aware that the arc of fire from which the public are advertised to absent themselves in order to avoid risk from the firing from Ardhallow battery on 18th to 29th July, is six miles on the firing side and twenty miles on the opposite side; and, if so, will he bring pressure to bear on the commanding officer to limit his demand on the sea space largely utilised by the public on holiday on these dates?
  Mr. HALDANE: The arrangements for the practice are in the hands of the General Officer Commanding in Chief. I am inquiring whether any modification can be made to meet the difficulty to which the hon. Member refers.
  Mr. WATT: Are we to understand that these distinguished artillerymen require ten miles on each side of the target in order to ensure the public safety?
  Mr. WATTasked the Secretary for War whether he can say what is the number of the artillery who take part in the gun practice from Ardhallow Battery advertised for 18th to 29th July instant; are
  1252 they members of the Territorial Force or of the Regular Army; and, if of both, will he say in what proportion?
  Mr. HALDANE: The units concerned are the 5th and 6th Companies Forth Royal Garrison Artillery belonging to the Territorial Force. The strength of these two companies amounts to five officers and 153 other ranks.

  Post Office Contractors (Casual Drivers).
  Dr. ADDISONasked the Postmaster-General if he will obtain from Messrs. M'Namara, mail contractors, of Castle Street, Finsbury, a Return showing the hours of waiting upon their premises, and of employment of part-time and casual drivers employed by them, and of the wages such drivers have individually received during the month of June, 1910, and present such a Return to the House; whether he will state the hours of the day or night during which such drivers are free to rest at home without interfering with their chances of employment; whether horse-keepers are sent out to drive whilst drivers are waiting on the premises; and if he will inform the House of the number of hours per week the horse-keepers are employed by this firm?
  The POSTMASTER-GENERAL (Mr. Herbert Samuel): No record is kept of the hours of waiting of part-time or casual drivers. With regard to the hours of employment of these men, the compilation of a detailed Return for the month of June would entail a considerable amount of labour, and it will perhaps suffice if I furnish the hon. Member with the results of a special Return which was taken for a week in April last. This Return showed that sixty part-time drivers were employed by the contractors in question, the average number of hours during the week being 50† and the average wages £1 1s. Forty-four casual drivers were also employed, the average number of hours' casual work being fifty and the average wages £1 0s. 4½d. These drivers arrange their own hours of rest. A number of horse-keepers, whose services are available at certain times of the day, are employed regularly on short driving duties. According to the April Return, sixty-one horse-keepers and yard-men were employed on driving duties, the average duration of which amounted to seventeen hours twenty-six minutes for the week.
  Dr. ADDISON: Will the right hon. Gentleman be good enough to call for

  1253
  time tables of the men employed as day drivers, so as to ascertain the amount of time available for their meals?
  Mr. HERBERT SAMUEL: Yes, I will make further inquiries.
  Dr. ADDISONasked the Postmaster-General whether, in view of the fact that single-horse drivers are employed by Messrs. M'Namara and Company, mail contractors, of Castle Street, Finsbury, at a wage of 25s. a week for seventy-two hours a week, or a little more than 4d. per hour, and that such waiting as may enter into this time is incidental to and inseparable from the conditions of their employment, he will include in any future contract with this firm stipulations that the men shall receive a minimum wage of 6d. per hour for all the hours they are employed?
  Mr. HERBERT SAMUEL: As I informed the hon. Member on the 14th instant, these wages were settled in 1907 as satisfying the requirements of the Fair Wages Clause. I propose, however, to make fresh inquiries as to how far they are those which in practice now prevail amongst good employers.
  Dr. ADDISONasked the Postmaster-General whether the existing contract with Messrs. M'Namara and Company, mail contractors, of Castle Street, Finsbury, provides that the contractors shall be allowed to take back old uniforms from drivers and to impose fines for the failure to return the old uniforms; if so, does the contract provide for the disposal of the old uniforms and of the money received from fines; and, if not, by what authority have Messrs. M'Namara acted in this manner, and are the fines imposed under conditions which accord with the provisions of the Truck Acts?
  Mr. HERBERT SAMUEL: The contract with Messrs. M'Namara and Company provides for the return of all uniforms supplied by the Post Office; and the contractors are responsible for any failure to comply with this provision. They are, however, allowed to renovate and use the old uniforms for their casual drivers. There is no clause in the contract dealing with the question of levying fines for failure on the part of the drivers to return old uniforms, and I am in communication with the contractors as regards the conditions under which such fines have been levied.

  Macao (Hostilities).
  Sir J. D. REESasked the Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs if he can give the House any information regarding the hostilities at present or lately in progress in Macao?
  The UNDER-SECRETARY of STATE for FOREIGN AFFAIRS (Mr. McKinnon Wood): No information has been received at the Foreign Office.

  Income Tax.
  Mr. STAVELEY-HILLasked the Chancellor of the Exchequer whether he is aware that Income Tax notices are being issued in which it is stated that when the income from all sources does not exceed £2,000, and any part of that income is earned income, a claim may be made for reduction of the Income Tax on the earned income at the lower scale applicable thereto; whether £3,000 ought to be substituted for £2,000; and, if so, whether he will give instructions for the withdrawal of the misleading notices?
  The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER (Mr. Lloyd George): I may refer the hon. Member to the reply given to my hon. Friend the Member for the Mansfield Division (Notts) on the 13th instant.
  Mr. STAVELEY-HILL: Can the right hon. Gentleman answer that part of the question as to whether instructions have been given, or will be given, for the withdrawal of these notices?
  Mr. LLOYD GEORGE: That is the question that was put by the hon. Gentleman the Member for Mansfield. The answer to that explains the whole thing. It had reference to the state of things before the Finance Bill was passed.

  Friendly Societies and Invalidity Insurance.
  Mr. CHARLES BATHURSTasked whether, in making friendly societies the medium of carrying out the proposed scheme of invalidity insurance, the Government propose to differentiate between registered friendly societies on the one hand and unregistered friendly societies and slate clubs on the other, or whether all friendly and provident societies will be utilised alike for this purpose?
  Mr. LLOYD GEORGE: I do not think it would be advisable for me to make a definite statement on this subject at

  1255
  present, as I have informed my hon. Friend. I may, however, say that every opportunity will be given to all types of friendly societies interested in insurance matters to lay their views before the Government before a final decision is taken.
  Mr. LAWSON: May I ask the right hon. Gentleman whether he is in communication and negotiation with the great friendly societies on the subject?
  Mr. LLOYD GEORGE: I have been in communication with them since last year, and am still in communication with them.

  FINANCE ACT,, 1909–10.

    RESTAURATEURS AND CATERERS.
    Mr. FELLasked if, under the second of the general provisions of Scale 7 of the First Schedule of the Finance (1909–10) Act, 1910, many of the principal restaurateurs and caterers in London and the country will be compelled to either take out an ordinary public-house licence, which is in most cases impossible for them, or else surrender their off-licences to sell wines and spirits?
    Mr. LLOYD GEORGE: One well-known caterer has written to me on the subject, and I have directed that inquiry shall he made into the case. I am informed by the Board of Customs and Excise that no representations on this subject have been received by them from any other licence holder answering to the description given in the question.

    LAND VALUATION.
    Mr. WHELERasked how many referees are to be appointed in connection with the Land Valuation (Finance Act, 1909–10), and at what salaries?
    Mr. LLOYD GEORGE: The number and the remuneration of the referees is still under consideration, and I am not at present in a position to make any statement on the subject. The panel of referees is made up by the Reference Committee—the Lord Chief Justice, the Master of the Rolls, and the President of the Surveyors' Institution in England, and corresponding authorities in Scotland and Ireland. They are still considering the matter.
    Mr. WHELERasked whether the travelling allowances granted to the valuers and assistant valuers appointed under The Finance (1909–10) Act, 1910, include first-clas railway fares?
    Mr. LLOYD GEORGE: I may refer the hon. Member to the answer given to the hon. Member for county Down, North, on the 4th instant.
    Mr. GIBSON BOWLES: Is the right hon. Gentleman aware that most noblemen and gentlemen and Members of this House now travel third class?
    Mr. FELLasked if it is proposed to collect the duty on undeveloped land as each piece is valued; and, if so, on what principle will the land be selected for valuation, and how are the owners of undeveloped land, which may not be valued for possibly some years, to know how much they must set aside to meet the duty when it becomes payable?
    Mr. LLOYD GEORGE: Arrangements are being made to expedite as far as possible the valuation of land which maybe liable to Undeveloped Land Duty, and I trust that such valuation may proceed so speedily as to obviate the inconveniences which the hon. Member fears.
    Lord BALCARRES: When will this valuation begin?
    Mr. LLOYD GEORGE: It has begun already.

    PASSENGER STEAMER LICENCE DUTIES.
    Mr. ORMSBY GORE (for Marquess of Tullibardine)asked the Chancellor of the Exchequer whether his attention has been called to the case of the Licence Duties imposed on the small passenger steamer "Ossian," plying in Loch Etive; and whether he will consider the propriety of amending the scale of Licence Duty on pasenger steamers by fixing a sliding scale on either the tonnage, passenger accommodation, or liquor consumed?
    Mr. LLOYD GEORGE: I have received through the Noble Lord a letter on the subject of the Licence Duty payable in respect of the steamer in question, and I am considering the matter.

    SUPER-TAX.
    Mr. STAVELEY-HILLasked whether a deduction is allowed from the claim for Super-tax in the case of an estate on which the Land Tax has not been redeemed; and whether any corresponding deduction is allowed in cases where a sum is being paid for redemption?
    Mr. LLOYD GEORGE: Land Tax, if paid by a landlord, is an admissible deduction in estimating the income of the landlord for assessment for the Super-tax. It

    1257
    should be borne in mind, however, that in those cases, in which the return for Super-tax is based upon the net value as assessed to the Income Tax Schedule A, this allowance will ordinarily have already been made. The capital expenditure referred to in the second part of the question is not an admissible deduction.

    Great Northern (Ireland) Railway.
    Mr. MacCAWasked whether the Great Northern Railway of Ireland have recently discontinued the running of their 6 p.m. train from Banbridge to Belfast, calling at Dromore and Hillsborough, which has been running for many years past; whether he is aware that the urban councils of Banbridge and Dromore have protested to the Great Northern Railway Company against this, pointing out the inconvenience it is causing to the inhabitants of these districts, without receiving any satisfactory reply; and whether he will make the necessary inquiries into the matter?
    Mr. SYDNEY BUXTON: I have communicated with the railway company on the subject, and will inform the hon. Member of the result.

    Irish Railway Disaster.
    Mr. MICHAEL REDDY: I beg to ask the Chief Secretary a question of which I have given him private notice—whether he has any information which he could give the House in reference to the railway disaster which occurred yesterday to a Birr excursion party on the Great Southern and Western Railway?
    Mr. BIRRELL: I have telegraphed for the information for which the hon. Member asks, but I have not yet received it. When I get it I will communicate it to the hon. Member.

    North-Eastern Railway Strike.
    Mr. ELVERSTON: I beg to ask the President of the Board of Trade a question, of which I have given him private notice—what steps, if any, he is taking, or proposes to take, to bring the strike among the shunters and other servants on the North-Eastern Railway, to a satisfactory end?
    Mr. SYDNEY BUXTON: I have made such inquiries as are in my power. Information in regard to the position of affairs appears at present to be very meagre. The whole matter will be very carefully watched by the Board of Trade.

    BILL PRESENTED.
      HIGHWAYS (IRELAND) BILL.
      "To assimilate the Law in Ireland with the Laws of England and Scotland in the matter of traction," presented by Mr. MACVEAGH; supported by Mr. Lardner, Captain Craig, Mr. Kennedy, Mr. Joyce, Viscount Castlereagh, Mr. Kelly, Mr. Mitchell-Thomson, Mr. Patrick O'Brien, Captain Cooper, Mr. Kilbride, and Mr. Hugh Barrie; to be read a second time tomorrow.
BUSINESS OF THE HOUSE (REPORT OF WAYS AND MEANS).
Ordered, "That the Proceedings on Report of Ways and Means, if under discussion at Eleven o'clock this night, be not interrupted under the Standing Order (Sittings of the House), and may be entered upon and proceeded with at any hour, though opposed."—[The Prime Minister.]

EDUCATION (PROVISION OF MEALS) ACT AMENDMENT.
Mr. JAMES PARKER: I ask leave to introduce a Bill "to amend the Education (Provision of Meals) Act, 1906."
The Bill does not necessarily alter the existing Act passed in 1906 providing for the provision of meals for children except in so far as that Act failed to cover the period of vacation when the children are not attending school. That Act provides that the local authorities may take such steps as they think fit for the provision of meals for children attending public elementary schools in their area. It was thought by the House of Commons that that not only covered the time the children were actually attending school, but also that it covered the period of the vacation. All parties in this House were agreed that it was necessary that meals should be provided for those children sent to school without sufficient food, and that in cases where it was found the parents were neglectful provision was made in the Act for making them pay for the food supplied to their children. Several local authorities in Halifax, which I have the honour to represent, have been surcharged by the district auditor because they provided meals for children during

1259
the period of vacation. In the case of the borough of Halifax the auditor says as follows:
The sum of £28 7s. 0d. was expended during the year on the provision of meals to the children when the schools were closed during the Christmas holidays. Such expenditure is not authorised by the Education (Provision of Meals) Act, 1906, and, therefore, I surcharge the amount to three members of the Education Committee."
I submit that if it be necessary that the children should be fed during the time they are attending the public elementary schools they should also be fed during the period of vacation. The Clause which gives effect to this and is embodied in my Bill is to the effect that the Education (Provision of Meals) Act, 1906, shall be extended so as to provide that where the local education authority is putting the Act into operation such operation may be continued although the attendance of the children at the school for education purposes may not be required, the school being closed for the vacation. It will be noticed that we do not attempt in this Bill, although some of us are in favour of it, to make the adoption of the Act compulsory. It is in the power of the local authorities to adopt the Act or not, and I simply suggest that the same shall apply in the case of this amending Bill. The Bill provides that when a local authority puts the Act of 1906 into force they shall have the power of feeding the children during the vacation period just as they do during the school period.
Mr. WILLIAM PEEL: Do you propose to exceed the halfpenny rate?
Mr. PARKER: No. I do not in any sense alter the limit, and it does not give the local authorities any increased power to levy rates. I trust, as the original Bill passed this House without a Division, and passed the other House so far as it applied to England and Scotland without any Amendment, the House will give this Bill not only a First Reading, but will be prepared later on to let it go through.
Mr. ASHLEY: I rise to oppose this measure. I had no idea what this Bill contained until I had the pleasure of listening to the hon. Member's speech. Like hon. Members opposite, I claim that I wish to do all that I can to help those who are less well off, but when they push their doctrine in regard to taking away the responsibility of parents to the length to which the hon. Member proposes then I for one cannot follow them. I can quite
1260
conceive that very strong arguments can be founded on the fact that Parliament, in its wisdom, has decided that children must be educated and must spend long hours in class rooms, and if parents, owing to their poverty, are unable to supply proper food and nourishment for their children then the ratepayers, through the local education authority, should have the power, and perhaps should be compelled, to supply the children with food. All that I quite understand, and I am in sympathy with it to a large extent. The hon. Member, however, does not appear to grasp that what he is proposing is that during the time when no compulsion is put upon the parents to send their children to school at holiday times the local ratepayers may be called upon to pay for the food of their children.
Mr. JAMES PARKER: The Clause does not suggest that at all. Where the parents can afford it, and where they have the money or the means to provide the food, the local authority have full power to get back the amount expended upon the children.
Mr. ASHLEY: As a matter of practical policy very little money indeed has been recovered in this way, and the explanation made by the hon. Member does not remove my objection. What I object to is that the local ratepayers will be obliged to pay for food even though the parents can afford to pay for it themselves. Surely we are travelling a very long way when we lay down that when parents are not compelled to send their children to school the local authority will have to provide food for the children of necessitous parents.
Question, "That the Bill be now read the first time," put, and agreed to.
Bill ordered to be brought in by Mr. James Parker, Mr. Barnes, Mr. Clynes, Mr. George Roberts, Mr. Charles Duncan, Mr. Tyson Wilson, Mr. Shackleton, and Mr. William Thorne. Presented accordingly, and read the first time; to be read a second time upon Wednesday next.

HOPS (No. 2) BILL.
Mr. GRETTON: I ask leave to introduce a Bill "to prohibit the use of hop substitutes and to provide for the marking of imported hops."
It will he within the recollection of the Members of the last House of Commons

1261
that the Hops Committee sat and inquired into the state of the hop industry, and it was generally agreed amongst all those connected with the hop trade that this question ought to be the subject of legislation. The prohibition of the use of hop substitutes and the marking of imported hops were the two main points considered. Bills dealing with this subject have been in the hands of private Members, with the result that they have not had an opportunity of passing into law because they have not been fortunate in the ballot. It is well known that a very small amount of opposition suffices to kill these measures. Last year in another place a Bill was introduced by Lord Carrington, and it was very fully discussed. May I point out that the Clause which provided for the prohibition of hop substitutes was agreed to by the House of Lords and by the Government itself, but the Bill was withdrawn because there was opposition on the ground that the measure went further than was intended and infringed the principles of Free frade. The promoters of this Bill have never desired that it should prevent the importation of foreign hops; all they wish is that it should be effective to prevent fraud. In bringing forward this measure I am fortified by two facts: The Bill as it is now drafted has been unanimously agreed to by the hop growers themselves; by the Hop Trades Association, which represents all those people who deal in hops either as merchants or factors; and there is not the smallest detail in regard to this question upon which we have not obtained the support of everybody interested. Therefore I think the House should have an opportunity of passing this Bill, all the more so because the time is very urgent and very short. Of course, some notice must be given to the foreign hop trade of the new conditions which are proposed under this Bill. We propose that this measure should come into force on 1st January next. Manifestly it will be impossible in the forthcoming Autumn Session to get this Bill through, and at the same time give adequate notice to foreign dealers if the measure is to take effect on 1st January next. If the Bill is postponed until November it will mean postponing its operation for another twelve months. Under these circumstances I think the House should have an opportunity of passing this Bill. After long negotiations and careful inquiry, we learn that the Government is not prepared to legislate on this subject this
1262
year. For these reasons we ask the support of the House, and I think all hon. Members will agree when they see this measure in print that it does not in any way infringe the principles of Free Trade, and it does not go any further than the existing Merchandise Marks Act. The Bill has been most carefully drawn to ensure that foreign importers will be able to comply with it. It will prevent fraud in the importation of foreign bops, and will not in any way go beyond that. For these reasons I ask the leave of the House to be allowed to introduce this Bill.
Question, "That the Bill be now read the first time," put, and agreed to.
Bill ordered to be brought in by Mr. Gretton, Mr. Courthope, Mr. Akers-Douglas, Mr. Laurence Hardy, Sir William Collins, Mr. George Younger, Mr. Arkwright, Colonel Warde, Captain Spender Clay, Mr. Wheler, Captain Clive, and Colonel Hall Walker. Presented accordingly, and read the first time; to be read a second time upon Friday.

REPORT OF SUPPLY— [20th Allotted Day].
  CIVIL SERVICES AND REVENUE DEPARTMENTS ESTIMATES.
  [Class 2, VOTE 4.]

  HOME OFFICE.
  Resolution reported, "That a sum, not exceeding £149,078, be granted to His Majesty, to complete the sum necessary to defray the Charge which will come in course of payment during the year ending on the 31st day of March, 1911, for the Salaries and Expenses of the Office of His Majesty's Secretary of State for the Home Department and Subordinate Offices."—[NOTE.—£75,000 has been voted on account.]
  Sir CHARLES DILKE: I beg to move to reduce the vote by £100.
  The Prime Minister's allusion in his fine old-fashioned speech last week about the position of women in the political, commercial, and industrial world, to his steps in the direction of creating a woman's branch of the Factory Department of the Home Office was cheered by the whole House. There is now the most complete unanimity on what was at first regarded by some as a doubtful experiment. That there was some friction at first need be no secret now; but the

  1263
  experiment was successful, and all parties in this House for some years past have desired to extend it even further than it has been extended. There has been some cessation of the extension, and it is to he regretted, because the Department, in the words of the chief inspector, the medical inspector, and Miss Anderson, the principal lady inspector, has throughout the past year been at least one below its limit, and the work has enormously increased. The number of miles travelled in this country amounting to a prodigious figure, and the number of visits and complaints received and acted upon, all of them increasing by fifty or sixty per cent., show the enormous work thrown upon the Department and, as Miss Anderson points out, it is short of the staff agreed upon. The predecessor of the present Secretary of State, now Lord Gladstone, gave us to understand it was unwise to increase the Department suddenly for obvious reasons. A Department of that kind does not usually absorb a large addition. It was thought wise, however, to increase it steadily as the work increased and as public confidence in the Department increased, and he led us to expect an increase of two or three members each year. I therefore come with some regret upon the fact that the staff has remained for at least a year and a-half one below the normal strength of seventeen. There were only sixteen last year, and we have not had an increase now for a year, though we had reason to expect it and though I am sure the figures before the House show it is wanted. Last year the number of miles travelled was 116,000 and the number of visits had enormously increased. The Chief Inspector points out that, although there has been an increase of 60 per cent. of complaints, nevertheless the proportion of actions on complaints has remained the same, so that the work of the Department in that respect has enormously grown. The increase of complaints acted on in London is startling, and it is interesting to notice that Miss Anderson gives as the reason not that there has been any change in industrial conditions, but that the addresses of the inspectors have become more widely known, and there are, therefore, a larger proportion of the people with complaints to make who know how and where to make them. An enormous number of notices is necessitated by exceptional treatment in certain trades. Whenever, for reasons which are generally thought necessary, we
  1264
  put in Acts of Parliament exceptional hours, or give exceptional powers of changing or varying the hours, we should do it with our eyes open, knowing that we create an enormous amount of work in inspection. Regular and fixed hours extended over the largest possible number of workers receive universal assent when they become thoroughly understood, but in every case where you vary hours by Act of Parliament, or give power to regulate them by Orders, you enormously increase the difficulties of inspection and cause a great amount of friction. The presumption therefore should be against every change and variation.
  4.0 P.M.
  Last year, and I think the year before, some of us had to comment upon what appeared to be a complete abnegation of the law in Ireland. I am happy to find there has been an immense improvement this year. The Report of Miss Martindale, who works in the North of Ireland, shows they are receiving an enormous amount of support from the workers, priests, and trade unions, which is most valuable. Without it the law could not be enforced. Public opinion seems to be on the side of preventing any infraction of the law, and the support received now is far wider and more complete than it was before the present year. "The workers," says Miss Martindale, "call at the office freely, and pour out their grievances." That, of course, is the way to secure good advice and good administration of the law. In Belfast, of course, there is still a great deal to be done, and, generally speaking, the law of Truck is in so abominable a condition that it is natural Members should think it cannot be dealt with or mentioned without infringing the Rules of Order in this House. It is not in order for us to recommend legislation, and the Royal Commission presided over by Lord Shaw, appointed as a result of a Motion which I had the honour to move on the first private Members' night in the Parliament of 1906, reported in 1908–9 asking for legislation. But entirely outside the report of that Commission, which it will not be in order to discuss, we have the fact that the law of Truck is less enforced than it should be. I cannot help thinking that the law, as it stands, could be put more in force, risking, no doubt, the loss of cases, which inspectors do not like, and risking, too, the infliction of very small fines by the magistrates in cases where local customs and bad habits support the system of fines and deductions. The present

  1265
  law certainly could be enforced more actively than it is. I need not call the attention of the Committee to many of the reports on the subject. Miss Paterson points out that in one factory the fines for lateness are at the rate of 1s. per hour, and they are allowed to accumulate in the case of girl workers whose wages amount to 1½d. per hour. These accumulated fines are deducted three times a year, at periods which are about the most inconvenient and most cruel that could be chosen—namely at Christmas, at Easter, and at the August Bank Holiday, which are statutory holidays for which the workers do not receive any pay. At those particular periods, however, they may be called upon to lose a whole week's pay. That is a statement by one of our most skilled inspectors, and the House may accept it as a fact beyond all doubt. The complaints under the Truck Act have increased 50 or 60 per cent., and Miss Anderson reports that in nearly all cases they are justified. There are also the complaints of special Truck in the Potteries. Those will be dealt with in the Debate, I believe, by my hon. Friend the Member for Durham (Mr. Hills). The inspector for the Potteries district (Mr. Shuter) states in his report that the condition of things in regard to Truck in that district are the same as he reported a year previously, and that deductions continue to be made from the wages of the workpeople. The Departmental Committee on Truck took an immense amount of evidence, and one witness was one of the ablest Master Potters (Mr. Burton). He was the principal representative of the masters' side in this controversy. He and many of his colleagues seemed to agree that the old grievance had ceased to exist, but I am afraid that that position has been receded from, and the recommendation of the Committee, presided over by Sir Ernest Hatch, certainly seems to show that we have gone back in this matter, and that the abuse continues. It certainly is an abuse which should be put an end to. These deductions are perhaps illegal as the law stands. The wonder is how much the workers are able to keep back for themselves in order to purchase the necessaries of life. We are told in the report of one inspector that firms which have given up the practice have still found that discipline is well maintained without the stoppages.
  The principle upon which the Report of Sir Ernest Hatch's Committee is based is a thoroughly sound one, but I am sorry to say the way in which it is applied is a
  1266
  profound disappointment to many of us who have long had to deal with this subject. The principle laid down in that Report is that of making the employer in dangerous trades responsible for the keeping in order-of all those appliances which are necessary to prevent sickness among the workers. They recommend the adoption of regulations which do not involve any change in the law, and in my opinion those regulations ought to be generalised throughout the trades of the country. At the present moment the law is such that there is special regulation with regard to some trades, but the principle laid down in the Report is that the manufacturer in whose factory dangerous material, such as lead, is used, should bear the cost of the necessary precautions, and that is the right principle. I would observe that there is a tendency in applying the law as it stands to go steadily to leewards in the matter. The general prosecutions for Truck nave fallen from seventy-six in 1908 to twenty-two in 1909. I know administrative reasons can be given for that. The Government has on three occasions changed the law, and the position still is that the law requires to be changed, but I am certain that, without any change, the law as it stands at the present moment could be enforced with good effect, although, perhaps, many cases would be lost. There would be a great deal of legal fighting before certain principles could be established, principles which are thoroughly recognised, and much good would be done if they were enforced. It would, therefore, be worth while to institute prosecutions more frequently than is done at present. The manner in which we have left off applying the law of Truck is very remarkable. In the women inspector's report we are told that just about one-half of the complaints substantiated are followed by the prosecutions, and where they are taken into court an overwhelming majority have produced convictions, although sometimes the fines imposed have been merely nominal. In the prosecutions for Truck the proportion has been only one-thirteenth compared with the complaints upheld. There is a distinction here as against one-half, and that is a startling difference in the case of Truck. If we take the cases outside for all factories and workshops, we find the proportion is one-eleventh instead of one-thirteenth. Therefore I think this points to the fact that much more might have been done to apply even the existing law. In Manchester we have the report of Mr.

  1267
  Ramsbottom that Truck is always a source of trouble. There is a system of making deductions thoroughly established in the clothing trade. In Yorkshire the abuse is even more widespread, and last June there was reported in the "Yorkshire Factory Times" the suicide of a young girl weaver, who killed herself on account of this deduction system. This poor weaver lass in a worsted mill ended her days solely through this industrial worry. She was "a victim of this pernicious system."
  We have always associated the Truck system with the Particulars Orders which are made in regard to trades in which there is a good deal of piece-work. It is unnecessary to describe to the House the methods of the ascertainment of wage of which the particulars are the necessary root. There were four Orders made last year, and they applied to a number of trades, including chocolate, sweets, tobacco, cartridges, cotton bleaching, dyeing, and printing. They also applied to some branches of the shipping trade. There have been no Particulars Orders made since that time.
  The UNDER-SECRETARY for the HOME OFFICE (Mr. Masterman): There soon will be.
  Sir CHARLES DILKE: I am very glad to hear it, but we have been told that in two consecutive Reports, and I somewhat fear that the Home Office has gone to sleep in this matter. The delay may be ascribed partly to the enormous amount of work thrown on the Department by the increase of complaints, and to the fact that the principal inspectors, whose advice is needed in matters of this kind, have so much to do that they cannot be expected to turn cheerfully from their general business in order to make special inquiries with regard to the circumstances of some particular trade. I want to know whether there have been any Orders made this year, of which six months have gone, and when we may expect some more, because the fact is that the giving of powers to the Home Office to extend Particulars by Order in the case of certain trades was not the real wish of the Standing Committee under the last Factory Bill. The system on its introduction having worked admirably, it was proposed by some of us to generalise it, and in 1895 it was extended to the woollen and the worsted trades by a clause. It was only after it
  1268
  had been in action that it was extended outside the two counties where it was commenced, and in 1901 the feeling of the Central Committee was in favour of generally extending it, while the Trades Union Congress has of course passed the principle year by year, and there is no opposition to it by the great number of employers. There are difficulties in various trades, although those difficulties are being thrashed out, but there is no opposition to this arrangement, by which general workers can accurately compute their wages.
  As the law stands it can only be ex tended by the Order of the Home Secretary, and I do implore the Secretary of State to generalise it as much now as is possible, and not to think that it is essential that we should wait for the passing of a Checkweighing Bill in order to extend the principle much further than it has been extended at the present time. I have a curious reference to this matter, on which I think I may congratulate the Home Office in showing every sign of incorruptible sternness when they deal with it, in respect to Dundee, in two or three very important cases. I almost hesitate to call attention to this lest denunciations from the Secretary of State should fall upon the inspectors responsible, but I think he is impartial and knows that it is the general wish of his constituents that the law should be applied generally, and for the benefit of the great mass of the community in the same way in his own constituency as elsewhere. It is pointed out on page 118 that there is a difficulty about particulars in Glasgow, in Dundee, and in Belfast, and that there is a good deal of suspicion entertained, and that in Ireland there is still some continuance of the fear to make inquiry—a very natural fear until the law is better known. I think we ought to hope to go faster in this matter, and I leave it there. Coming to other matters which have to be dealt with by Order of the Home Office in a similar way, as regards industrial poisoning we have made a good deal of progress except, perhaps, in lead, about which I shall have some more to say by and by. In regard to phosphorus, of course, we have a new Act of Parliament, and I was glad to hear to-day at Question Time that the Government of India is considering the introduction of similar legislation into India. That is very interesting, but I do not know whether I can deal with it now as I do not know whether Indian

  1269
  legislation can be properly described as legislation or administration. Perhaps, however, it is in order because it has reference to communications from the Government to the Government in India about legislation, and perhaps I may say that the introduction of this legislation into India may probably have some effect in causing similar legislation in Japan, ultimately to the advantage of the trade, to be made universal.
  The Report before us takes, of course, credit for stamping out and for the complete final extinction of that evil disease necrosis, and states that it will be "relegated to the category of the past." Those are the words in which the fact is described, but unfortunately there has been an outbreak of old cases of phosphorus necrosis, which gives rise to some suspicion in one's mind as to whether the statements which have been previously made upon the subject were all true, or whether there had been recent instances of this disease. There is a period during which the retail trade has to be worked, and I would ask my hon. Friend that a very careful watch should be kept upon any factories that might be suspected in this matter to see that there is no infraction of a very beneficial law. As regards lead poisoning, not only in the Potteries but elsewhere are there cases of poisoning, notably in the tinning trade, as to which I should like to say one word. There there has been complete breakdown in regard to this question, which I do not know whether my hon. Friend recognises. I hope he will not try to put a good face upon it, because I know his sympathies are with us in all these matters. I quite follow that it would be quite possible to give an explanation at some length of all the points, but the facts are these. There was a well-founded agitation based upon German precedent for the special treatment of lead poisoning which occurred in the tinning of hollow ware, which is used in the preparation of food. I believe that the original cause of the German legislation was that there was some danger of lead poisoning on the part of those who partook of food cooked in these vessels as well as the workers in the trade which produced them. At all events there was an agitation for the purpose of preventing lead poisoning in, any tinning of hollow ware, and there was a very excellent report on the subject.
  The last year's Report in this country had for its object to congratulate us as to
  1270
  what was done, and then step by step by the action of the employer, and through other circumstances the whole of the original object of the proposal disappeared, and what is now applied is a miserable remnant of what was originally proposed while the main portion of the rules has disappeared. It is hardly worth while describing it step by step to the House, but that is the net result of what has happened. I can assure the House of that, and a description of the whole case is found in the Chief Inspector's introduction last year, where all the steps that were taken are set out. Then on page 171 of the present Report you will see how the draft regulations, which originally included tinning, of all metal articles, are cut down in the particular case of tinning hollow ware, and the prohibition of Women dipping and carrying in other processes disappear in the amended regulations. That was the whole object of the regulations, and now that they have come into force a power is still reserved to grant exceptions, so that the position is a very sad one, and we have secured nothing under these rules. No doubt it is open to my hon. Friend to say that the inquiry into the matter has done good, and that there is improvement in the figures, but that improvement is a fluctuating one alike in the Potteries and in this lead trade, and as the cases have gone up in one, they will go up in the other, too. As regards lead, there was a falling off in the figures last year, and that falling off is the subject of congratulation to all concerned in this Report, but there has been a great increase again this year, and it is a very notable fact that while Dr. White-legge explains the falling off in cases by the fact of the inquiry, pointing out that it is too notable a fall to be due to scientific measures and improvement in ventilation. But whatever the explanation, the fact remains that while lead is used these cases, with whatever fluctuations, will continue to occur.
  In the present year the cases in the potteries in regard to china and earthenware have increased to forty-one as against twenty-four in the six months of last year—a very heavy increase indeed, and the deaths, although only a few now, have also increased. There are also a great number of doubtful cases. The hon. Member for North-West Manchester raised some of those doubtful cases in this House and he was, to use a doubtful expression, "jumped upon" for doing so, but I should like to say, having many

  1271
  sources of information, that in what he said about these lead-poisoning cases in the potteries he was doing a public service. These cases are of this amount of public interest that they throw some doubt on the working of the certifying surgeon and medical referee system as it exists in connection with this dangerous trade and other dangerous trades. I do not know whether such an appeal could be brought about, but in regard to these debatable and contested cases of industrial poisoning in trades where the mortality is very high, such as the lead trade, what one wants is some sort of appeal to some competent scientific or medical authority. If we could get that I should feel we should have done a great deal. Of course, these cases have to occupy the time of Dr. Legge, because he has to classify and catalogue them, but some further power should be given. The position is this: that last year there was a tremendous case made out in the Report of the Home Office. But it was only a few years ago since that Department went back from their policy of prohibiting or discouraging the use of dangerous material, and reverted to the idea of curing the danger by ventilation, which is unsatisfactory to many of those who have watched it in these trades. It seemed impossible to secure safety by that means. We were told that phosphorus was kept out by ventilation, but we now know that ventilation is not sufficient in cases of that kind. That is where I have been disappointed with the Report of Sir Ernest Hatch. It does seem to me to be reverting to the method of regulation as contrasted with the prohibition or discouragement of dangerous material in those cases where it could, with entire safety, be prohibited.
  That there is still a tremendous case is obvious from the attack rate in the case of women. It is tabulated in both Returns. It is at page 202 of the Annual Report in table 6 and the next table. There we see that the attack rate for women is double the attack rate for men. We have not yet got the evidence before the Lead Committee, but in the Lead Report there is an extraordinary change, apparently at the last moment, which is to me almost inexplicable. On page 114 of the Lead Report you will find the result of scientific inquiry laid before the Committee by Dr. Reid, the famous medical officer of health, and very strong words are used by the Committee, such as "alarming," in reference to dangerous
  1272
  trade processes, and they say that "the conclusions drawn from the figures are too startling to be ignored," and teen the figures were so startling that inquiries had to be made among the women themselves, and the Committee point out that the results of that second inquiry were not to be depended on for one moment. I confess it does appear strange that a Committee having given some sort of scientific figures, which, although they point out that they were in too small a number of cases to give an absolutely scientific truth, were still most valuable as an indication, should then have gone back to an inquiry by way of gossip in the presence of others on a subject as to which they would naturally have the greatest difficulty in obtaining accurate information. They say that the second set of figures point to a different conclusion; but they also say that they are so surprising that it is clear they must be of doubtful accuracy; and they also say that the figures submitted by the doctors are very disquieting, and that the gravity of the matter cannot be over-estimated. Then they suggest that the matter seems to require immediate and drastic action. After this they go out of their way in a footnote to put forward an unsupported and opposite conclusion, and say they would not be justified in advocating the immediate exclusion of women from certain branches of the trade, but that attention should be concentrated on the subject with a view to dealing with it in the near future.
  Then they suggest further inquiry, which means hanging up the whole thing again. In the case of the Truck question there was the first inquiry; then there was another inquiry, and each of these was hung up. Here, again, you have the two inquiries, and each is hung up. The result of these was the general Committee appointed by the Home Office, which has not yet completed its Report. There is one branch of the lead inquiry which the Noble Lord the Member for Nottingham is likely to deal with. I do not know whether he will deal with it as regards this late inquiry in particular, or as regards the subject in general; but there is the subject of the carrying of heavy weights by children and women, which is the subject of much censure both in the General Report and also in the Lead Report. There is on that a suggestion in reference to all these abuses, occurring specially as they do in all trades no doubt, in connection with certain old

  1273
  and broken-down factories, the very existence of which is injurious to the whole trade, because they tend to make worse the position of the trade as a whole, and they work directly in competition with better employers under circumstances which make the application of the general rule unfair in the better cases. That is pointed out with great clearness, and I should like to ask my hon. Friend if anything more has been heard in recent times of the use of the power which exists to close in one or two selected cases of the worst kind. This was under consideration at one time with regard to phosphorous. A great firm in the china trade, Messrs. Wedgwood, have issued a circular, headed "Lead Poisoning in the Potteries," contradicting in general terms every assertion that those of us from time to time have made who are interested in this subject, and who have none but the public interest at heart. Declaring the effects of lead "not so lasting or so dreadful as has been suggested," they print letters, one of which is from a local clergyman, which ends by saying that the average rate of sickness of women in pottery occupations is lower than that of women following other occupations. I cannot conceive how a great firm like Wedgwoods can circulate a letter in which statements so ignorant are made. They ask for statistics and Blue Books in connection with those statements; but the attack rates themselves, to which I have already referred, showing double in the case of women in all the branches what they are in the case of men engaged in a similar branch, is a complete answer to a wild statement like that.
  As regards the remedies that Sir Ernest Hatch has suggested, one is a special Board for the purpose, which the manufacturers will not accept. There is also suggested what they call an "alternative scheme," which is one for self-inspection, and, I am certain, one that this House would never look at. The real remedy is one which he calls "Enforcement of regulations," and having a sufficient staff, but the suggestions that he makes upon certain points are such as I would press upon the attention of the Home Office—for instance, those that concern the whole system of certifying surgeons and medical referees in dangerous trades. I will not keep the House with details of the matter. I have put them in writing before the Home Office. I would only ask now that attention should be given to the reduction of the
  1274
  fees in the case of certifying surgeons. The fees are different in Ireland from what they are in England. They are five times as high in the case of an action for workmen's compensation as in the case of the same action taken under the dangerous trades provisions, so that a poor man in one case has to pay 5s. for the same certificate which he can get for a shilling in another case. I was glad to find that there was a chance of the subject of carrying weights being dealt with by the Noble Lord opposite, and I am sure that I need say nothing upon the details of the subject; but we find there is a very special danger in the potteries in connection with the employment of young children, who are so much affected by this matter of carrying weights. There may be one or two Members here who will remember that last year I dealt almost exclusively in this Debate with the frightful strain of factory employment upon children under fourteen and the enormous proportion of accidents in those cases, even in the best-managed places, even in Lancashire among the little piecers, and still more so among the less well-governed portions of the country. I will not repeat to-day the arguments which I have addressed to the House upon the subject last year; but there is not much improvement. The figures are still very bad. Here, again, Dundee is sacrificed in the case of children under fourteen. We have it before us that there is a larger number of exemptions from school for children over thirteen—that is, under fourteen—granted in Dundee as compared with other industrial centres; and Miss Anderson also pointed out on another subject that in Dundee there are excessive numbers of girls of thirteen in the jute trade, which, curiously enough, we have just prohibited in India. A girl under fourteen will not be employed in India. I do not want to be disagreeable, but we had some trouble some years ago with one or two large firms in Dundee on this very subject, and I confess, I hope, that the inclusion of certain names in the honours list will not be taken as meaning that the girls of Dundee are to stand in an exceptionally bad position with regard to employment between the ages of thirteen and fourteen.
  The SECRETARY of STATE for the HOME DEPARTMENT (Mr. Churchill): My right hon. Friend has no grounds for the imputation that there has been the slightest distinction made in the enforcement of the law in any part of the country.
  Sir CHARLES DILKE: On the contrary, I have said that the law is admirably enforced, and what I have referred to with regard to these firms took place years ago, and not in connection with this side of the House of Commons. I wish to make clear that I am not intending any political allusion. At all events, the whole House desires that the law should be firmly and impartially administered, and there should be a discouragement of this system in Dundee and in Belfast where these abuses have been pointed out, as they have been pointed out by the Members for Belfast over and over again. The abuses in Belfast have been pointed out in this House again and again, and they have been pointed out on the authority of some of the inspectors of the Home Office, who have no interest in the matter, who belong to both creeds and both political parties; and in the particular case which I have in my mind the inspector is a member of the same party as the hon. Member who sits opposite. The conditions in Dundee with regard to the employment of industrial mothers are worse than in any other place. In one mill there are 503 actual married women, having their husbands living, working in a single mill; and in that case there has been a difficulty in carrying out the childbirth law as to rest in childbirth. France and Germany have both improved their law in the beginning of the present year. In Germany the period of rest from factory work for childbirth is double what it is here. That has been the case from the beginning of the present year. I hope that in connection with the invalidity insurance legislation suggested for next year, and in which the Home Secretary takes, I know, a deep interest, maternity insurance will he considered. I cannot deal with that now, because it is a question which involves legislation, and not merely administration, as in the case of some of the other matters to which I have alluded.
  Last year we had to deal with the dangers in connection with the potteries. I hope that this year I shall be excused for referring to the terrible rate of infant mortality in connection with employment in dangerous trades in that district. The "Lancet" has made a special inquiry since last year, and it published the results in June. That journal points out that a very serious situation exists in the Potteries in consequence of the excessive mortality among the infant population. The Employment of Children Act of 1903,
  1276
  a Home Office Act, which was passed without alteration by this House, contained general provisions quite outside of those which have been the subject of a recent Inquiry by a Departmental Committee. The Members of that Committee, with one exception, consisted of Members of this House. The Committee cut out of its work what many of us thought ought to have been the main portion of it. We were told privately by Lord Gladstone when the Committee was appointed that it was to deal with the very subjects in regard to which we had asked the enforcement of the law under the Act of 1903. The Committee took it into its mind that only the street trading portion of the Act was to be the subject of inquiry. The Committee state frankly at the beginning of their Report, which has just been published, that it covers a narrower field than the terms of reference might have admitted. It covers only street trading under by-laws. Of course, the general powers of that Act apply to other employments which are dangerous to children. The general powers under Section 3 apply not only to the carrying of weights, but to work which is deleterious to children, and which might be prevented. Although no doubt at first it might be difficult to get a conviction before certain benches of magistrates, yet that was the meaning of the Statute. I believe that all the greatest abuses might have been avoided if these words of the Act had been applied as originally drafted and passed by Parliament.
  As to special exemptions from the law, I understand that my hon. Friend behind me is likely to address the House. Year after year we used to deal with exemptions and show the dangers arising from their being granted in the case of the fish and jam industries. The exemptions still go on with bad consequences, and I understand that there has been a good deal of abuse in Scotland. One inspector reports that there are glaring abuses in connection with the granting of special exemptions. If you look at the table for this year you will find that there were 240,000 notices in respect of these special exemptions. These form an enormous proportion of the work of the Home Office Department, and more than half of them concern London. That is without counting laundries, which have special exemptions. Institution laundries are a case in point. On account of timidity on the part of the Roman Catholic Members of the House, some Members of the Church of England,

  1277
  and some Wesleyans, exemptions were made from the general rule in respect of laundries. That exemption, I understand, is working well, but it throws an enormous amount of work on the Department concerned. My hon. Friend behind me wishes to make a further exemption in respect of florists. I hope we shall not allow ourselves under any social pressure—there has been social pressure on this subject—to assume that the girls concerned, or many of them, are on the side of this new exemption. I have taken every possible step which could be taken to look into the case. I have no sort of reason to be otherwise than impartial in this matter of the employment of girls in this trade, and I think the House ought not to further weaken the enforcement of the law by means of an exemption in this case. There was a prosecution in Manchester last year which is familiar to those hon. Members who are interested in the subject. When it was brought before the stipendiary magistrate he expressed his astonishment at the extraordinary hours worked by these young girls, and said it was very necessary to protect them. That was one of the early cases. All were convinced that the law was a wise one, and that the hours worked were painful and cruel. Public sympathy at that time was on the side of the administration of the law. I know that my hon. Friend honestly thinks that this is a cruel law, but I can assure him that having had means of forming an opinion on the subject, I take another view. I am sure he will do me the justice to think that I am acting quite honestly in taking an opposite view.
  A complaint was recently made with respect to the hours worked in the Royal mourning preparations on account of a special relaxation of the law. I have looked into the matter and I do not believe it can be said to be so, unless there has been an illegality in the case of the Prayer Book printing. I can appeal to my hon. Friend (Mr. Masterman), who is to answer me and who is a High Churchman, that it is possible that this complaint has arisen not because of the change in the Royal title but because of the change of the comma, which has caused this pressure. I believe there is no doubt that some of those authorities who print the Prayer Book have been violating the law by the illegal employment of young persons at night, not in their own Press at Oxford but in the places where the work of stitching and binding the new and corrected edition is done. I only mention this
  1278
  matter because there has been a great deal of comment about exemptions in connection with court mourning. No Order was made, and I believe there has not been in practice more than the usual infraction of the law. In the case of the Prayer Book I am sure the House would desire that the law should be enforced and that no such scandal should come up as arose in connection with the printing of Bibles in Scotland a few years ago. The report of one of the principal inspectors concludes with words which I am sure the House will be glad to join in. He says that they still have to face the dismissal of a certain number of workers for giving information and procuring the observance of the law. It is pointed out that some Members of this House have set up an organisation, an industrial law committee, which protects workers in these cases. There is still need for their protection, and I am sure the whole House will join in thanking the inspectors for doing what they can to secure the general enforcement of the law.
  Mr. HILLS: I rise to second the Amendment. I do so with special reference to the question of lead poisoning in the Potteries. Two years ago a Committee was appointed to deal with the question of lead poisoning. I do not want to trouble the House with too many figures, but I should like to say in starting that the cases of lead poisoning in 1896 were about 400. After five years had elapsed there were 100 cases in 1900. showing that in that period the cases fell by three-fourths. Since 1901 the figures have been stationary. Therefore on the whole we have seen a large improvement, but I should like to say in passing that the figures for last year look rather lower at first sight, as though there was a progressive fall. I am sorry to say that was not the case. The figures for the first half of this year show a very substantial rise and the deaths occurring among workers in the scheduled trades were 6,000 or 7,000 in number. The whole death rate is about one in a thousand. These figures are very serious, and, of course, the whole evil is not contained in them. The whole of the dangers to health extend much wider than that, and it falls especially hardly upon women.
  5.P.M.
  They are affected far more than men by lead poisoning. Lead poisoning is occasioned by the inhalation or swallowing of lead dust, and lead dust is caused by the glaze which

  1279
  is put on the pottery. Lead poisoning injures the child-bearing capacity of women, so much so that miscarriages are three or four times above the average. Therein lies the really serious point of lead poisoning. It is not the actual numbers, but it affects the general condition of the workers, and especially women. In the face of that the Committee of two years ago was appointed, and their Report is on the lines of increasing the precautions which already exist in the Potteries. They advocate the extension of all the precautions. Fans, ventilating shafts, and the washing of cloths and materials are all to be increased, and inspection is also to be increased, and they think that thereby they can reduce the evil.
  Seven years ago, at the time of the arbitration of Lord James of Hereford, the employers said they would extirpate lead poisoning, but there has been no improvement at all in the figures, so it does not look as if the extra precautions would do very much good. The regulations are very complex and elaborate, and they depend entirely on the working. It is no good to say that cloths must be washed every day unless the cloths are washed every day. An inspector who cannot go round more than about once in two months cannot possibly see that the regulations are enforced. You can inspect the mechanical shortcomings of a factory and send round an inspector to see that the shafts and fans are in order, but you cannot inspect all the daily life of the factory. To meet that the Committee said they would allow the factories to inspect themselves. They proposed to do that by publishing a list. of rules to be affixed in the factory and causing the answers to certain questions to be signed each day arid filed for reference. At first sight that does not seem a very good system of inspection. If the rules are not observed now, I do not see much chance of their being observed under this system, and the whole question is one of the observation of a large number of very small rules. I do not in the least want to make any attack on the employers, the large majority of whom are striving hard to extirpate this poisoning, but they said seven years ago that they would put an end to it, and things are now as bad as ever. In the case of yellow phosphorus we were told exactly the same story, that if the rules were observed, and ventilation and cleanliness increased poisoning would be put down, but nothing did put it down
  1280
  except prohibition of the use of yellow phosphorus. You have there exactly the. same state of things as you had a few years ago in phosphorus. You have, on the one hand a body of opinion which says that by increasing the strictness of your rules you can put down the evil, and you have on the other hand a body which says that you cannot, and that the only way is prohibition or nothing.
  A further point I should like to take in regard to this Report is that it would increase the cost of production. It sets up a very expensive system and the expense is bound either to come off wages or profits. I think it has this further consequence, that if the factories are made to inspect themselves the tendency of the Government inspectors will he to rely on that inspection, and not to carry out their work to the same extent as now. I think the only inspection of the least value is inspection by the Government inspectors. Two alternative plans were before the Committee. The first was that a Committee should be set up of employers and employed under a neutral chairman very much on the lines of trade boards, and the Committee was to take charge of all these questions, and to see in a general way that the regulations were observed. They would hear complaints and call the attention of manufacturers to any breach of regulations. For some reason or other the employers entirely refused to accept that, and it was swept away. The other alternative was to prohibit the use of raw lead glaze in certain specified articles. I think it can be shown from this Report that for certain articles, and especially certain very cheap articles, such as jam pots, leadless glaze is cheaper than lead glaze. So a very strong case was made for the establishment of a schedule of articles in which the use of raw lead glaze should be prohibited. I regret that the Committee did not report in favour of that, and I wish to examine the objections they found to that scheme. In the first place they said it would increase the whole cost of production, for any given factory which turns out both articles is obliged to have separate rooms for lead-less glaze and for raw lead glaze, and you would hamper the work of the factories, and especially of the small factories. I think the answer to that is this. It is not proposed all at once to schedule a large quantity of things. All you want to do is to find things that you can make as cheaply by leadless glaze, and schedule

  1281
  them, and then, perhaps, after a few years' experience you can go on, always with the object, in the end, of exterminating the use of raw lead glaze. I think if you started slowly and did not rush at the thing like a bull at a gate, but just used ordinary common-sense in the matter you could propose a schedule which would hurt nobody, but, unfortunately, all the employers were very strongly opposed to it, and the Committee reported against it.
  The next objection the Committee make is that the competition in the home market will be very severe from the foreign article where it is not restricted. Of course, that all depends on the price, and if we cannot get an international agreement to deal with lead glaze we should he entitled, if we forbid the use of lead glaze here, to prohibit the importation of lead-glazed articles. Then they also raise the point that in foreign and neutral markets they would meet with competition. There again, of course, all depends on the price, and if you can make certain articles as cheaply with leadless glaze all question of competition falls to the ground. Of course the best plan of dealing with all these questions is by international agreement, on the lines of yellow phosphorus, but I am afriad I do not see many signs of getting one just now. Some countries are, perhaps, ahead of us in legislation, but the large majority are far behind, and I do not think public opinion is ready yet for an agreement. Still, I think if we could lead the way we might in the end reach that. A further alternative before the Committee was to employ what are known as low solubility glazes in which the amount of soluble lead, which is poisonous, is very small. There is a vast amount of technical knowledge about low solubility glazes, but I think the general opinion is that for certain classes of work they are unsuitable. In the first place they fuse at a much higher temperature, and therefore hotter ovens are required; and, secondly, they do not run so smoothly over the article. When Lord James made his award seven years ago he gave a special advantage to the potteries which would use glaze of low solubility, or rather he imposed on the potteries which would not use it the penalty of compensation for disease caused by lead poisoning. Since the Employers Act of 1906 all employers are liable, and, therefore, the special penalty has now ceased to operate. I quite agree that it has a very small effect, and very few employers took advantage of the Act and escaped the special penalty.
  1282
  Still, I do think it is worth while remembering and quite worth considering whether it might not be a good plan to impose on potteries which employ a glaze with a high proportion of soluble lead special terms as to compensation in respect of industrial diseases. I think it is quite an open question whether it will not be a good thing in the case of these special works to throw an extra charge on them, and to make them bear the whole cost of compensation for diseases caused by lead poisoning. Though the evil is one which is small as to numbers—some six or seven thousand—yet it is very real in its effects on the workers in the schedule of trades; it is a very real evil to them, and it comes very close to their homes. I do ask the House to consider whether the time has not come for taking more definite action. We have gone on for the last seven years on the old plan of restrictions and regulations and so on, and we are not improving our position one jot, nor improving the condition of the workers. Unless you have a staff of inspectors, the cost of which would be prohibitive, I do not think you could enforce the regulations at all, where it depends on the minute observance of rules, under which you must sweep the floors, keep overalls for the men, and prevent a single flash of lead glaze from drying and giving off dust, and so running the risk of lead poisoning. When you come to the inspection of the factories we know what happens. We know that when the foreman has to fill up the temperature, if it is rather too high, he waits until it falls, and then fills it up. We know that he will be rather easy about seeing that these regulations are carried out, because you. cannot expect such a man, whose whole livelihood depends upon his employer, to go against him day after day. When we have evidence of importance that in certain potteries the rules are openly broken how can we hope they will be observed any more in the future? As to the increase of inspection, which the Report recommends, inspection every two months of each factory instead of an inspection in three months is not a very great increase. You cannot in that way enforce these very elaborate and minute rules. I appeal to the House to consider the matter very carefully before they go further on this road which has not led to improvement in the past. We have got now to a state where the evil is fairly small, and can be handled, and I think if we now deal with the matter thoroughly we can, without

  1283
  any appreciable hurt to trade, slowly exterminate this terrible evil of lead poisoning.
  Sir J. D. REES: We are so accustomed to hear it said that we live in a free country, that we almost believe that at any rate there is something in it. But when I heard my right hon. Friend the Member for the Forest of Dean (Sir C. Dilke), with indeed that courtesy and consideration that he always shows to the younger and less experienced and less distinguished Members, dilate upon the advantages of uniformity, and upon the unfortunate nature of the exemptions and the trouble they cast upon Ministers, I began to wonder whether my right hon. Friend realized that element of tyranny which necessarily resides in uniformity. As to its giving trouble to officials, they are "born to trouble as the sparks fly upwards." If the hon. Gentleman on the Treasury Bench representing the Home Office is asked whether he has any objection on that ground I think he would disclaim it. I would rather say that his official mind, running in official grooves, would state that no objection whatever existed on the ground of trouble. My right hon. Friend's theory to me seems rather to be that the trade was made for the rules; mine is that the rules are made for the trade, and that where there is a case for exemption it should be welcomed, and not regarded with disfavour. Even this very day we have had an abundance of sentiment for the Pacific Islanders, for the Africans, the Congolese, and the Macedonians. Why is there none of this sentiment to spare for English women, engaged in a legal occupation, who I submit are hardly treated by the withdrawal of exemptions which they were previously allowed? If a case be made out for exemptions, the Home Office may very well be asked to allow them. A fact which I have not seen seriously disputed—and my right hon. Friend will allow me that good faith and impartiality which I know distinguishes him in this and in all other matters—is that the action, for merely technical and legal reasons, taken under the Factory Acts, has led and will lead to a large displacement of Englishwomen by foreigners. Foreigners are as good as we are, but I am opposed to the theory that the Englishman's house is the foreigner's castle. We should protect our own people just as the foreigners protect their people,
  1284
  fog which I honour and respect them. My right hon. Friend did not dispute the fact that this would prejudice women engaged in this trade.
  Sir C. DILKE: I did not want to detain the House by reading passages in this book. I have got them all here.
  Sir J. D. REES: I have seen those passages. I had the honour to be summoned to the Home Office to advocate this case, and there I met the hon. Member for Clitheroe and other Members. The hon. Member for Clitheroe dealt with the case in that fair, I may even say that ingenuous fashion for which he is famous. But I do not think that he made out a case, nor can I say there is evidence in the Report that is very material. Just as in regard to female suffrage, or anything you like, you will find it is the agitator whose evidence is reported, while other quiet people who think differently remain in the background and do not have their opinions brought forward with the same emphasis, or perhaps they are not brought forward at all. The idea of enforcing uniformity is essentially tyrannical in its nature. Even at Question Time to-day the hon. Member for Leicester questioned the Home Office because there were different numbers of cases reported of unwholesome premises in different parts of England. I should suppose the easy explanation of that is that there are different numbers of unwholesome premises in different parts of England. The hon. Gentleman said that there were 3,000 outworkers in Poplar, and that there were no unwholesome houses to report. The hon. Gentleman forgot that the hon. Member for South Hackney spends his time in that district as a guardian of the morality and comfort of those people. There are always local differences. For my part, I protest againt the theory that a rule, even if it is good for a great number of trades, therefore should necessarily be enforced in regard to any part of the country, or in regard to any trade for which it is not proved up to the hilt to be absolutely necessary. The hon. Member for Leicester put questions to the Home Office about notices being served as to unwholesome premises. He said there were more in some towns than in others, and that therefore the towns in which the notices were not served must be unwholesome and not properly looked after. I submit that is utterly fallacious. For the very reason upon which my right hon. Friend argued, I submit that, instead of the principle of

  1285
  uniformity for all trades, we should welcome exemption wherever a case is made out for it. The last thing we ought to do is to insist upon this fatal spirit of uniformity. When the florist's shops were brought under the Factory Act, owing to a legal decision, there was no more reason that I can see for doing so than for bringing in a private kitchen. A florist's shop is not a factory in any sense of the word. Surely anyone who understands what a factory is would not say that a florist's is an unwholesome trade. Those employed in florists' shops needed exemption to work after 8 p.m. They must work after that hour if they are to earn their living. It is absolutely necessary to the trade,which, though not one of the greatest in the country, is very important to those concerned in it. They have to prepare floral displays for dinner parties, balls, and so on, and, in view of the fragile and fugitive character of the flowers, they must deliver them at an hour when they will be fresh, and not during the day, when they would wither before the time came for their being used in the decorations. Another question is as to whole or half-holidays for different employés on different days. What is the reason for enforcing similar holidays on everybody in the same employment. If these women were satisfied, as they were, why should they not have the benefit and enjoyment of these exemptions?
  The Home Office very properly, on the representations made to them, appointed Judge Ruegg as the Commissioner to hold an inquiry. He did so, and made certain recommendations. He recommended that these exemptions should be retained as advantageous both to the employers and employed. I should have thought, if any regulation or any condition of affairs in a trade was satisfactory to the employer and employed, satisfactory to both parties, then nothing more is necessary. However, the Government neglected the precedent in the case of Judge Hamilton, who made a report which was disregarded, and whereupon swift ruin fell upon those who paid no heed to the recommendations of their own Commissioner. That wa a precedent by which they might have been warned. They have not accepted the recommendations of their own Commissioner, but I ask the hon. Gentleman, representing the Home Office, to tell us that these recommendations will be accepted, and that he will not consider as sacrosanct any particular sets of rules, because none of them are
  1286
  sacrosanct, but exceedingly human and full of error. He should consider the recommendations of his own Commissioner as regards this particular case, and should carry them out in the interests of the workers as free subjects.
  Those employés are now liable to be discharged whenever the factory inspector chooses to enforce the Act, and he will be bound to do so in the future. He may sympathise with those ladies, as I have no doubt he will, because they are exceedingly nice people; but however much he may sympathise with them, he will have to carry out this Procrustean law, by which they will very likely lose their employment and be replaced by foreigners, against whom I have nothing to say except that, in competition with our own people, I would give our own people the advantage. I confess I do not know why employers, whether of florists or not, and particularly British employers, should be presumed to be harsh and unkind to their employés. An echo of that theory, which seems to prevail widely, was heard at QuestionTime, when it was lightly assumed that the British trader, upon whose operations the prosperity of this Empire depends, treated his employés unkindly. That is a monstrous theory, founded on no fact whatsoever. A similar theory seems to me to pervade the action of those who object to the exemptions in the case of these florists. They must presume that the employers of these ladies do not treat them well, otherwise why should they insist upon enforcing this Act, which only applies in a purely technical sense, against the wishes of the women concerned and the wishes of the employers, and to their detriment, as I have endeavoured to show? I see that the hon. Member for Clitheroe has returned, and I may repeat that I have borne testimony to the fair and ingenuous manner in which he placed the case at the Home Office. I do not think that that case is made out, and I think the exemptions should be retained.
  Lord H. CAVENDISH-BENTINCK: I rise to supplement what has fallen from the right hon. Gentleman the Member for the Forest of Dean (Sir C. W. Dilke) with regard to child labour, and there are two or three points in the Reports of the lady inspectors to which I should also like to draw the attention of the right hon. Gentleman the Home Secretary. There is the question of the excessive weights which women and children are forced to carry. There seems to me, as far as I can

  1287
  gather from these reports, a disposition in many districts to treat women and children as beasts of burden. For instance, I see a case of a boy carrying cloth weighing 84 lb., equal to his own weight. At the same place, from the weaving shop to the warehouse, women twisters carry weights of from 126 1b., to 136 1b., and women weavers carry cloth looms to the warehouse weighing from 50 1b. to 70 1b. In a making-up warehouse in Manchester girls carried backwards and forwards pieces of cloth weighing from 50 lb. to 70 lb. The inspector reports that they found weights as high as 70 lb. of cloth being laid by men upon women's shoulders. Those were not robust women, they were slight women, and in some cases undeveloped girls. Unfortunately, the law in regard to this seems to be in a rather inadequate and unsatisfactory state. For young persons employed in the fruit-bottling trade and the fruit-preserving trade there is no provision with regard to either young persons or women.
  In this matter we are somewhat behind the French. I see that last year an order was promulgated by the Government there laying down very definitely the weights to be carried, not only by children and young persons, but also by grown-up women and men. We get something approaching to that in the Majority Report of a recent Commission, which recommends that no child should be allowed to carry more than 30 1b. in weight, and only then if the certifying surgeon says that the child is fit for that work. I think a great deal might be done in this direction by the more adequate carrying out of the present state of the law. As far as I can make out by the Children Act of 1903, the certifying surgeon has the power to attach to his certificate any limitation which he may think fit, either as to the weights children may carry or in the nature of their employment. Apparently this provision is very much neglected and not taken advantage of. Out of 37,403 certificates issued in 1909 only 5,775 had any qualifying conditions at all. In fact, I think the position of certifying surgeon seems to he in a very unsatisfactory state altogether, because they are appointed by the Home Office and paid by the employer, and very inadequately paid. I think they only receive 3d. for each case they examine. I consider it would be far better if their duties could be com-
  1288
  bined with other duties, and that a much better solution of the problem would be, for instance, if the surgeon or doctor who carries out the medical inspection of the children should be able also to include the duty of certifying surgeon, because he would be able to follow them up to the age of sixteen.
  Another point to which I would draw the attention of the right hon. Gentleman is as to the condition under which certifying surgeons have to examine children—a matter which is, I think, also extremely unsatisfactory. I understand they are obliged, very often or in most cases, to examine the children either in the factory or else in the office adjoining the factory. It is quite obvious that an examination in the factory would not be very satisfactory, with all the noise of the machines running, and also it is hardly decent that a girl should be examined in an office where, very probably, young men and boys are also employed. Another matter is as to the overtime which is still worked in laundries. As the House well knows, there has been a great improvement since the Act of 1908 was passed, both in regard to accidents and overtime. There is still, however, a great deal of overtime worked by young persons, and young persons are obliged to work as long as grown-up women. There are instances of children of fourteen working as long as thirteen hours per day. There ought to be, I think, where dangerous machinery is installed, and where women and young girls are working, some qualified person in charge whenever that machinery is running. There are still a great many accidents and to quite young girls. Those accidents are very much aggravated by the fact that the engineer or forewoman, or foreman, is absent when they occur. There is a case in the report of girls getting their fingers caught in this machinery and being unable to release them for half an hour or more, simply because the foreman or competent person is absent, and nobody present is sufficiently acquainted with the machinery in order to release them. That is a point which I think the right hon. Gentleman ought to attend to because some competent person ought to be present whenever those dangerous machines are running.
  The hon. Member for Durham (Mr. J. W. Hills) alluded to the question of lead poisoning. I do not pretend to be an expert in this matter which has been inquired into. I think it is now almost ten years since the House concerned itself on this subject. A great many

  1289
  reports have been issued and a great many regulations have been laid down, but so far as I can judge those regulations have not borne very much fruit and they are very difficult to carry out effectively. Another Committee comes along and super-imposes upon this old structure of useless results a more complicated system of rules, probably equally useless and difficult to get carried out properly. I cannot help agreeing with the Member for Durham that the best course to adopt would be to take the bull by the horns and schedule certain classes of ware, particularly if that policy was taken cautiously, and also to combine with that policy the prohibition of the importation of similar articles from abroad, which would please Tariff Reformers and philanthropists, and assure to the workers work in that trade under proper conditions. Another subject to which I wish to refer, and one quite foreign to those I have been dealing with, is that of pit ponies and horses employed in mines. Lately there have been appearing in the public Press a great many very strong statements as to the condition under which those horses and ponies are worked. I have no means myself of testing the truth of those statements but they are undoubtedly very strong. It is stated that those horses and ponies are very much ill-treated in the mines, that they are over-worked, that they are employed in two shifts with practically two hours' rest, and suffering from sores on their shoulders, and also worked on three legs. I do not know whether these allegations are true; but only last week a miner in my own Constituency sent for me and felt so very strongly on this subject that he asked me to bring the matter up here and I do so. I think there is no doubt that there is a very strong feeling among miners about this question. I hope and trust that the right hon. Gentleman will inquire into it, and do what he can to put the dumb animals on an equal footing with human beings.
  Mr. GILL: I listened with attention to the remarks of the hon. Member for Montgomery Boroughs (Sir J. D. Rees) and I think he failed to make out a case for reopening the question of the florists. I believe it would be a very great mistake to reopen that question, especially in view of the inquiry held with regard to it and the compromise arrived at. There were four Orders, and of those two have been withdrawn and the other two are still in operation. I desire to express my
  1290
  appreciation of the work of the Home Office in regard to the extension of the Industrial Particulars Clause. The Particulars Clause, which was instituted in the first instance in connection with the cotton factories of Lancashire, has proved a very great boon indeed, and I think it ought to be extended to every industry where piece-work is carried on. Every person who works for wages ought to be entitled to have particulars supplied to him to enable him to calculate the wages he will draw at the end of the week. That is only common justice. I would ask the Home Secretary to issue as many orders as he possibly can in regard to piece-work industries. Last year I had an opportunity of calling attention to various matters connected with the administration of the Home Office in regard to cotton mills. One of these had relation to the generating of dust in connection with the stripping and carding. It is a very unhealthy occupation; only adult men are engaged in it, but many of them suffer very largely from asthma and bronchitis. The Medical Officer of the Home Office (Dr. Collis) some time ago made a particular examination into certain groups of men engaged in this industry, and he found that out of 130 men, whose average age was forty-five years, only thirty-two were sound, the remaining ninety-eight suffering from asthma. Out of another body of 136, 78 per cent, suffered in the same way. I think we have reason to congratulate ourselves that something has been done. In reply to a question some time ago the Home Secretary stated that some fifty mills were wholly or partially fitted with appliances for taking away the dust from the breathing level of the operatives. That is something; but I would particularly press that more active steps should be taken to get other employers to attach these appliances, which are now very effective and prove a great boon. Fifty is a considerable number, but seeing that there are nearly 1,000 mills engaged in this industry there is a great deal yet to be done. In regard to automatic locking machines something has been done, but I wish to urge that further steps should be taken in the same way as is being done in the matter of dust. This question needs to be carefully handled. I believe appliances are being put up at the present time which result in a reduction of accidents so far as this particular class of work is concerned.
  Twelve months ago a deputation from the weavers of Lancashire waited upon the

  1291
  Home Secretary in regard to the abolition of fines in weaving sheds, and they were promised that something should be done as soon as possible. In many cases fines are imposed when the operatives are not to blame. The operatives in the weaving shed have no control whatever over the character of the material supplied to them. On many occasions the material is very faulty, and is of such a class that finished cloth of a perfect character cannot be made by it; yet if the cloth is not perfect, the weaver is blamed and a deduction is made from his wages. Fines are also imposed if a weaver is, say, fifteen minutes late, although it may be through no fault of his own. The fines are at the rate of 2d. for fifteen minutes, although the weaver may not be earning more than 4d. or 5d. an hour. These fines are absolutely unnecessary for the purpose of enforcing discipline. In the case of the spinners, some years ago fines were imposed in the same way as is at present done with the weavers, but they made up their minds that the practice should not continue, and they made a determined effort to stop it. They raised the question of people being discharged for breach of discipline, and the practice has been stopped from that time, and I believe there is no industry where there is such good discipline as amongst the spinners of Lancashire. Evidence on this point has recently been given by Mr. Cadbury, who said that a system of fines was formerly in practice at his works, but they decided to abolish it. The result was that in 1900, the first year after the removal of the fines, the offences amongst the workers were 115, but in 1905 they reached a total of only thirty-three, and the complaints of bad work fell from 139 in 1900 to nineteen in 1905. Mr. Cadbury declared that under the new order of things there had been fewer dismissals than when fines were imposed. I think that that valuable piece of evidence shows quite clearly that there is no necessity to impose fines for the purpose of enforcing discipline. The difficulty in regard to fines is that a man never knows when they are going to be imposed. It is an easy matter to find something to complain about, and under these circumstances it is difficult for a worker to know exactly what wages he will draw at the end of the week.
  The question of time-cribbing has been raised for many years past, and, while I am glad that there has been some improvement, a great deal yet remains to
  1292
  be done. Last year there were 477 cases, and the fines amounted to £565. This year there were 419 cases. A remarkable feature is that in Oldham last year there were 201 cases and this year 251, although for ten months the mills had been working only four days a week. I do not know whether the fact that there were 251 cases in Oldham out of a total of 419 is to be attributed to the greater activity of the inspector there; at any rate, it is certainly to his credit to have discovered these cases. The practice is not honest, and it is decidedly unfair to the good employers ho keep proper time. A new form of time-cribbing has grown up. The Factory Act seems to have been interpreted differently from what was formerly the case. Everyone who has had to do with textile factories knows that the Factory Act provides that the last half-hour on Saturday morning is to be devoted to cleaning purposes, and ever since 1878 it has been understood that the machinery should be stopped for that purpose. During the last twelve months, however, a number of firms have continued to run the machinery after 11.30—sometimes up to 11.45 or 11.50. Young persons have been employed in sweeping or work of that character, and the interpretation of the Department is that they are not engaged in a manufacturing process, and that, although a manufacturing process has been going on, the practice is perfectly legal. The leaders of the operatives in Lancashire—men who have been in the movement for twenty or twenty-five years—contest that position very strongly, and say that it was never intended when the Factory Act was passed that the machinery should be run for producing purposes during that last half-hour. I hope that something will he done to give a correct interpretation of the law, and that the authorities will insist on the machinery being stopped during the last half-hour.
  When the Workmen's Compensation Act was in Committee we pressed very strongly that referees who were appointed should not be engaged in private practice. We were unsuccessful, the then Home Secretary thinking that it would cost too much money. The result is that the referees who finally decide whether or not a person after an injury is fit for his work. are persons engaged in private practice. This gives rise to a considerable amount of dissatisfaction both amongst the workmen and amongst employers in Lancashire. The vice-chairman of the Cotton Employers Federation told me only last night

  1293
  that he would prefer that instead of the medical referees being engaged in private practice they should be State officials, with large districts, and that they would then be able to give unbiassed decisions, because they would nat depend for part of their salaries on being engaged by other people. It is said, I believe with some truth, that some of these medical referees are engaged in examining injured persons for the insurance companies. It was distinctly understood that that should not take place. I believe it is provided in the Compensation Act—at any rate it was stated at the time—that if they were engaged in any case by an insurance company they should not in that case act as medical referees. But that is not enough, by any means. The medical referees ought to be in such a position that they could have no bias whatever. I know one case where the partner of a medical referee examined a person, for the insurance company, and afterwards that the same person was sent to the medical referee, who declared that he was fit for his work. That man. had to give up his situation, as he was not able to perform the work, and his compensation was stopped. In a very serious case connected with my own society a man was examined by a medical referee, who declared him to be fit to follow his occupation. The man, however, could not do so, and the Committee of the Spinners' Association, every member of which is a practical man, and knows exactly what is required for the purpose of performing the work, felt that the man was so seriously injured that they paid him £100 as permanent accident grant. You cannot expect them to be satisfied when the decisions of medical referees are given in this way, and there is no appeal.
  6.0 P.M.
  In many cases employers are now asking injured persons to bring doctors' certificates to show their condition from time to time. That is distinctly illegal. These doctors' certificates generally cost 1s., and it is not right that an injured person should be put to that expense because the employer wants to know his condition. The Act provides that an employer can have a workman examined by his own doctor at his own expense, and so long as that is the case I think it is decidedly wrong to require workmen to bring certificates in the way I have described. I want the Workmen's Compensation Act to be administered in as good a way as possible. There are some defects in it to
  1294
  remedy which we shall have to ask for legislation in the near future; but I should be out of order in referring to that matter on this occasion. We want the Act efficiently administered, so that it may be of benefit to the persons it was intended to benefit. But not only that, a great deal of the industrial legislation has been taken hold of by other countries in the world. I had the opportunity last year of visiting the United States and Canada. I found there that the question of employers' liability and workmen's compensation were burning questions. They are a long way behind us in this respect. The hon. Gentleman the Member for North-East Manchester (Mr. Clynes) and myself had the unique opportunity of giving evidence before the New York States Commission that was inquiring into this particular question. They wanted to know all about the working and administration of our Acts. I look upon the Workmen's Compensation Act as one of the best pieces of industrial legislation that has been passed for a long time, and I want, being interested in the progress of other countries as well as our own, to see them go on the same lines as ourselves in these matters. For that reason I ask that every attention should be paid to the administration of this Act, and if there are any flaws let us have them done away with, so that not only our own working people shall have the benefit arising, but it will extend to other countries in the world, and we shall get the credit for it.
  Mr. MILDMAY: I am anxious to call the attention of the right hon. Gentleman to a question which greatly concerns the future employment of women in the florist trade, a question upon which, as yet, the Home Office has given, I believe, no final decision. I am in disagreement with the right hon. Baronet below the Gangway (Sir Charles Dilke). I am of opinion that this is a question which urgently presses for solution, as this large class of women workers are in a state of doubt as to whether or not they are to be deprived of their means of livelihood. Let me say that I do not approach the Home Office in a militant spirit, disposed as the Home Secretary is to see much reason in the appeal of these women. Moreover, I am convinced that, as a sensible man, the Home Secretary is bound to admit the justice of the claims, if he has made himself acquainted with the facts. Nor am I speaking in any sense antagonistic to the

  1295
  Factory and Workshops Act, for that very Act admits the necessity of a certain elasticity in hours of employment in industries dealing with perishable articles. To this the exceptions in the Act bear witness. Employers and employés in the florist trade urge with force that they, too, dealt with perishable articles, which can only be made up and arranged shortly before they are required, and that they, too, are entitled to plead for a certain amount of the same elasticity. As the hon. Baronet the Member for Montgomery Boroughs has pointed out, when this class of work came under the Factory and Workshops Act, the Home Office, recognising the exceptional conditions, granted important exemptions to the women employed in the industry. They were: (1) Permission to work after 8 p.m. under certain conditions. (2) Provision that the annual whole or half-holiday might be given to different employés on different days, and not of necessity simultaneously on the same day.
  Both of these concessions were afterwards withdrawn. I maintain that disastrous consequences are in sight. What did these concessions mean? Why were they asked for? As the Factory Act stood then women were only allowed to work between the hours of 8 a.m. and 8 p.m. I shall be glad if the hon. Baronet will give me his attention.
  Sir CHARLES DILKE: I have controverted the statement that they never worked outside these hours.
  Mr. MILDMAY: There were exceptions, of course.
  Sir CHARLES DILKE: Yes, I know.
  Mr. MILDMAY: What we ask on behalf of the florist trade is, not that the hours of work should be increased, but that possibly they may be varied, so that when necessary assistants may be employed outside the prescribed hours, provided that the same amount of time is restored to them on the same day, or preferably on the following day—this is an important point—a period of twelve hours being allowed in any case to elapse between the ending of work upon one day and its resumption on the next. I wish to draw especial attention to this provision, for those who are against us are trying to make out that we are desirous of curtailing the period of rest between working hours. We wish to do nothing of the
  1296
  kind. We recognise that if a table decorator worked until 10 p.m. she should not appear at work on the following morning until 10 a.m. Our great point is that by our suggestions the aggregate hours of work will not be increased by a fraction. Are these concessions necessary? London hostesses, without exception, would say that they wish that floral decorations should be arranged at the latest possible moment before the arrival of their guests. As balls and such entertainments generally begin at from 10.30 p.m. to 11 p.m. it is obvious that the services of decorators are mostly required between 8 p.m. and 10 p.m.—now forbidden hours, so far as women were concerned. Again, skilled women's services are often required before 8 a.m. in order that funeral wreaths may be despatched by early trains, and in order, too, that they may go early to Covent Garden to buy flowers. If they go after 8 a.m. they find all the best flowers bought up by street sellers, and only an inferior quality obtainable.
  With regard to the second exemption from simultaneous holidays. Flowers are often wanted on Bank Holidays for weddings and funerals, or for church decoration. The exemption will not curtail the number of holidays. It will merely allow the employer to arrange with employés that they shall not take their holidays simultaneously.
  The Home Office originally conceded both exemptions, which are surely reasonable, but in December, 1908, it was proposed to withdraw them. There was thereupon much agitation, and many appeals were made to the Home Secretary. In deference to those appeals, Mr. Gladstone appointed Judge Ruegg as a Commissioner to inquire into the whole matter. An opportunity, such as had never been afforded before, was given to him to hear both sides of the case and to get at all the facts. It was not until six months had elapsed, after exhaustive inquiry had been made, that the report was issued—a report which acknowledged that the claims made on behalf of the florists could be justly conceded. Judge Ruegg declared it as his opinion, after hearing all evidence, that, subject to the stipulation that there should be no resumption of work for twelve hours, these women should be allowed to work from 8 a.m. to 10 p.m. for 100 days in the year. This covers May, June, and July—practically the whole of the London season, with the addition of a week at Easter and a week at Christmas for church decorations. This report was

  1297
  issued in November, 1909, and on 16th December, to the astonishment of all concerned, the exemptions were withdrawn in face of Judge Ruegg's distinct decision. But it is rather difficult to go on with a running commentary on the opposite side, though I cannot hear a word of it distinctly.
  Sir CHARLES DILKE: You said "to the astonishment of all concerned."
  Mr. MILDMAY: It was really to the astonishment of everybody who is not prejudiced in the matter.
  Sir CHARLES DILKE: What I meant was that a Parliamentary promise was given to withdraw the exemptions.
  Mr. MILDMAY: Well, they were withdrawn, and withdrawn in the face of the decision of Judge Ruegg. I am now making an appeal to the Home Secretary to uphold the recommendation of the Home Office's own Commissioner, and not to go back on the opinion of their own Judge. I am sanguine that the Home Secretary will recognise the justice of the demand, for in answer to a question by, I think, the hon. Member for the Montgomery Boroughs,he declared that it would not be correct to say that the recommendations of Judge Ruegg had been finally rejected. "He had reason to believe," he added, "that Lord Gladstone hoped that a solution of the question might be eventually found on the lines indicated by Judge Ruegg." That is encouraging to me, but I do not like the use of the word "eventually," for it means further delay, and an immediate, decision is very necessary. The reason why the matter is so urgent is that Englishmen are admittedly not gifted with the necessary qualifications for this particular skilled work, whereas foreign men are, and if the order forbidding these women to work after 8 p.m. is not altered, it follows, of necessity, that florists will be compelled to employ foreign men, who are only too easily obtainable, and who, of course, will not be subject to any limitation of hours under the Act.
  I know that I may be told by the Labour Members and the right hon. Baronet that this is a threat; that it is merely bluff, that there is no such danger. I can only assure the Home Secretary that it is so. I could supply him with the names of particular firms. In the case of one firm, twelve of the women employés have
  1298
  already been discharged and foreign men have been taken on in their places, the employer not daring to risk prosecution by continuing to employ women. The matter cannot wait, for if foreigners are once established it will be difficult to dislodge them. I know the Home Secretary will agree that it will be a grievous calamity if this work is lost to English women. There is so much work which is too laborious for women that they are physically unfitted for, whereas the work of decoration, of arranging flowers, is work for which they are eminently fitted, work which they enjoy, work in which they take a pride, work, to attain proficiency in which, they have sacrificed much time and trouble. As to the suggestion of the right hon. Baronet that in this matter it was social pressure that has been exercised, let me tell him, though, of course, he knows well enough, that the Home Office would disregard any social pressure. We only wish that that should be done which is in the true interests of the women. I feel sure that if the Home Secretary looks into the facts for himself I shall not have made this appeal to him in vain.
  Mr. ELLISDAVIES: Before criticising certain matters in North Wales may I mention another matter on which I put a question to the right hon. Gentleman the Home Secretary with regard to the appointment of Welsh-speaking inspectors for the mines of North Wales. By the Coal Mines Regulation Act of 1887 it is provided that, all other things being equal, mines inspectors in Wales shall be expected to have a knowledge of the Welsh language. The main reason for this is that the greater part of those employed in the mines and quarries are only conversant with the Welsh language, and it is essential that the inspector, in coming in contact with the men, shall be enabled to carry on a conversation with them in a language that they understand without the intervention of any official. I hope that that Act to secure more Welsh-speaking inspectors is not going to be set at nought.
  Then as to the slate quarries. The existing high rate of accidents there is a painful subject. Four years ago I put a question to the then Home Secretary, Lord Gladstone, and pointed out that the chief inspector had reported that 33 per cent. of the accidents were due to falls owing, he suggested, to the gallery system in the quarries. No special notice was taken of the remarks made by the chief inspector. I returned to the question a

  1299
  year later and I drew the attention of the Secretary of State to the very serious increase that had taken place in the number of accidents, and I asked that a Committee be appointed to inquire into the matter. In the following year, 1907, the chief inspector again reported the very unsatisfactory feature of the high death rate among inside workmen in the slate quarries. The year after that the attention of the Home Office was again drawn to the state of things and to the fact that in the year 1908 the number of accidents in two of the larger quarries, Penrhyn and Dinorwic, ranged successively from 25 to 33 per cent. of those employed. The seriousness of the whole position lies in this: The number of accidents in these quarries is higher than in the coal mines; even in fatal accidents. The chief inspector in his report says the fatalities in the slate quarries approach the fatalities even in the coal mines, while the number of accidents to inside workmen exceed the number of accidents in coal mines three or four times. There can he no doubt that the whole position is due to want of proper inspection on behalf of the officials of the Home Office.
  The slate quarries in North Wales are divided into three classes. First you have the underground quarries, which in the ordinary course of things should be the most dangerous; secondly, quarries in the form of pits, which are dug down to an enormous depth, so much so that one not accustomed to the work would be afraid to stand and look over the side; and, thirdly, there are the larger quarries, such as the two quarries of Penrhyn and Dinorwic, where the number of accidents should be the least. But the fact remains that statistics prove conclusively that the least dangerous quarries are those in which the largest number of accidents occur, and that in the underground quarries there is no serious complaint as to the number of accidents. In these quarries last year the number of accidents was only 7 per cent. altogether, and I do not think that any man could reasonably complain of that number when all the circumstances are taken into consideration.
  In the quarries carried on by way of pits, which I put in the second category, the accidents came last year only to 5 per cent, but, as I have already pointed out, the accidents in the two larger quarries, one of which employs something like 6,000 men, were 21 per cent. of those
  1300
  employed in the case of Penryhn and in the case of Dinorwic 33 per cent. of those employed. I put it to the Home Secretary that there is no industry carried on at the present moment in the United Kingdom where there is such an appalling number of accidents as in these two quarries. It is not a temporary matter, for this state of things has taken place in the Dinorwic Quarry for two years. In 1908 it was 33 per cent. and in 1908 it was 33 per cent., and I have received information that the number of accidents this year is not less. The attention of the Home Office was drawn to this fact two years ago, and I am at a loss to know what was at the hack of the official mind, which assured us things were improving. Although one in three of the workmen were injured in 1908, no inquiry was carried on by the Home Office as to that sad state of things. Again this year I called the attention of the Home Office to the matter, and the Home Secretary refused the suggestion for an independent inquiry. As a matter of fact, an inquiry was made, but the gentleman appointed to make that inquiry was the gentleman responsible to the Home Office and to the House of Commons for the state of things existing. I then put a question to the Home Secretary, and asked him whether that was so, and the right hon. Gentleman, I think, with less than the candour he owed to me and the House, said he had already replied to a question which had never been asked. The fact remains that the inquiry was conducted by the chief inspector, who is responsible for this state of things; not only that, but I believe the right hon. Gentleman admitted later on that that particular gentleman had no knowledge of the employés, and it is for that reason I assume that even in the Mines Commission the Home Office declined to produce his report for the inspection of the Commissioners themselves.
  I have very carefully perused the evidence of the chief inspector and his subordinates before the Mines Commission, and the position is this: Those two gentlemen faced with these facts have absolutely no suggestion to make with a view to reducing the number of accidents. In the quarries where these accidents take place, and where one in four of the men and one in three of the men are seriously injured every year, if proper inspection was made and more pressure was put by the Home Office on those in charge of the quarries, the number of accidents would be reduced by 50 per cent.

  1301
  in the next six months. If the accidents in the underground slate quarries are less than 10 per cent. there is no earthly reason except carelessness and want of inspection why the accidents in one of the two bigger quarries should average no less than 33 per cent. two years in succession. The Mines Commission have already drawn the attention of the inspector to this state of things. How did he meet it? By saying that most of the accidents are trivial in their nature, but in reply to the questions of the Commissioners he admitted that 500 accidents had occurred to the workmen compelling them to stay at home on the average for three weeks and six days. I wonder whether the Home Secretary thinks that 500 accidents which compel the workmen to be at home on an average of three weeks and six days is a trivial matter either from the position of the State or the workmen concerned. The second suggestion made by way of explanation of this enormous number of accidents was that it was due to the Compensation Act. The inspectors seriously advanced the proposal that these men stay at home because they were receiving compensation, but they forgot that in the cases in which complaints were made there is a quarry hospital and a doctor, both maintained by the generosity of the employer; and in one case the hospital is looked after by one of the most competent surgeons in North Wales at the present moment. And it is seriously suggested to the Mines Commission that these workmen who are injured are allowed by the quarry doctor to remain at home when they were fit for work. But the truth of the matter is this—the whole position could be remedied, and should be remedied, and would have been remedied if, when I drew attention to the matter the Home Office had put proper pressure upon their inspector.
  It is monstrous, I submit, that while accidents in the more dangerous class of quarries are only 5 or 6 per cent., that when we come to the larger and more easily-worked quarries the accidents should be 21 to 33 per cent. I hope when the Under-Secretary comes to reply he will give me an assurance that, so far as it lies with the Home Office, either by increasing the number of inspectors or removing the present inspector, and putting in his place someone who will be more competent, or, at all events, who will put more pressure upon the employers, he will do what is
  1302
  necessary, not only in the interests of the workmen, but also in the interests of the employers themselves to lessen these accidents, because some employers have to spend energy and money in order to save the lives and the limbs of their workmen, and are consequently handicapped in competition with those men who do not spend such money, and do not exercise the care they ought to exercise in protecting the lives of their workmen.
  The UNDER-SECRETARY of STATE for the HOME DEPARTMENT (Mr. Masterman) (who was very indistinctly heard): It is time, I think, that I should reply to the lengthy and desultory succession of discussions which we have had this afternoon in connection with the administration of the Home Office, more especially as I understand there is a general desire in the House that for the first time in three years the Prisons Administration should be fully discussed on the Prisons Vote. I hope the House will forgive me if I do not follow the course the Debate has taken, but if I take up rather in a disjointed manner the various subjects raised. My hon. Friend the Member for Carnarvon has been indefatigable in season and out of season in pressing upon the attention of my right hon. Friend the Home Secretary both the question of Welsh-speaking factory inspectors, and the question of the condition of the quarries in North Wales. I think we have satisfied him for the moment on the question of the Welsh-speaking factory inspectors. I think he agrees we are doing all we reasonably can to provide a Welsh-speaking inspector accessible to the Welsh-speaking population. As to the question of the quarries, I do not in the least degree want to avoid dealing with the matter. My hon. Friend, like a practical man, is mainly concerned not with the past, but with the future, and with the limit that can be put upon these accidents in the present year or in the future. Whether any action of the employers might have decreased the number of accidents has now become a theoretical question. With my hon. Friend, I am not at all satisfied with the number of accidents reported from the quarries concerned. I do not think it is quite fair to take the evidence given before a Commission which is only sitting about three weeks or a fortnight, as if that evidence was the last word upon the condition of things. The Commission has been appointed to go fully into this matter. I hope evidence will be given from all sides,

  1303
  and I hope the Commission will be able to recommend some remedies. I must confess our inspectors have not yet made any report of any practical means for decreasing this formidable number of accidents in quarries of North Wales.
  I come now to the long, but not too lengthy, speech of the right hon. Gentleman the Member for the Forest of Dean in his general survey of the factory industrial administration of the year. His first complaint was that we were not continuing the appointment of more lady factory inspectors. He said he had understood we were going to increase the number, and that evidence had shown that an increasing amount of work was thrown upon those already appointed. The lady inspectors under our Home Office system are overworked; so are the men inspectors; so is every official concerned in the administration of the factory law, including the officials of the Home Office. We have increased in three years the number of lady inspectors from ten to eighteen—that is, very nearly double the original number—and, so far as I can ascertain, the predecessor of my right hon. Friend the Home Secretary made no definite promise that he would immediately go beyond that number.
  With regard to the question of mine inspectors, my right hon. Friend has made promises in the direction of bringing up mine inspection to the level we have achieved in regard to factories. Of course he will have to make demands on the Treasury, and even those who like everything at once will agree it is more important to deal with the question of mines inspection, which has been hung up so long, than to proceed with the appointment of further lady inspectors of factories, more especially in view of the fact that we have nearly doubled the number of lady inspectors in three years. At the same time I agree that we should have more lady inspectors. The right hon. Baronet the Member for the Forest of Dean dealt with the question of Truck, and I think he accused us of lukewarmness in connection with prosecutions. I think he will not find that is the case if you deal with percentage of prosecutions in comparison with the number of contraventions, which are less in the case of Truck than in general factory law. I agree that the law is in an abominable condition in reference to this matter, and if we have held our hands in
  1304
  certain prosecutions and decided that they were impossible, it is because we think it is not a good thing to be getting decisions against you on these delicate matters. A great deal of consideration has been given to the interpretation of the word "reasonable," but I think in that matter we are running a great risk if we allow the law to be decided against us. What we want is a remodelling of the Truck Act. Although I cannot make any promise, I can assure the right hon. Baronet that the Home Office is fully alive to the necessity of legislation on this question. With regard to this matter of Truck, I am aware that special factory conditions prevail in certain districts, especially in Belfast and in the surrounding districts of the North of Ireland, and the Government fully endorse the right hon. Gentleman's statement on that matter. Those particular districts, I agree, are far behind the average level of England and most parts of Scotland in factory legislation. We are now making a very special and detailed examination as to how far those particular districts are behind in this matter and why they are behind. Speaking with the full responsibility of the Home Office, I say that we desire to give every consideration to those districts, and we are prepared to give special attention to the cases which have been mentioned. My right hon. Friend is not quite right in regard to the number of Particulars Orders we have issued. We issued five Orders—not last May, but last December.
  Sir CHARLES DILKE: What I asked was whether you had issued any during the last six months.
  Mr. MASTERMAN: We are still continuing the preliminary work towards the issuing of Orders. Sir E. Hatch, the gentleman who has hitherto done this work so excellently for us, has been filled up with other Home Office business, to which he has most patriotically given his time during the last three or four years, and the work he has done in the five trades dealt with has resulted in masters and men alike agreeing, except for some slight dispute in shipbuilding, which I think he will be able to settle. The more we can do by such preliminary investigations, bringing masters and men together, the better it will he for the administration of the Particulars Orders. We are continuing those inquiries, and we hope to be able to add more trades than we have included. I come now to a more

  1305
  interesting question upon which a perpetual fight has continued for so many years with varying but, on the whole, progressive results for the extirpation of one of the most terrible diseases of our industrial system—I refer to lead poisoning. I shared with the hon. Member for Durham the rejoicing which last year's Return gave us, showing the diminution of this disease in the Pottery district by nearly one-half. I also share with him the regret that the statistics for the first six months of the subsequent year fail to carry out the expectations which the previous Return led us to hope for. In this industry trade has very greatly improved, and this is unfortunately reflected in the increase in the number of cases of lead poisoning. I find myself disagreeing with the right hon. Baronet, for the first time, in his criticism of the Report. Investigations have been carried on for two years, and I can assure all those who are interested that the evidence is most voluminous, and will satisfy the most voracious appetite. The inquiry was carried on by representatives of the masters and the employés and impartial persons, and the result was a unanimous Report with the single exception of the lady representative of the women workers, who, in her memorandum, does not so much take exception to the recommendation in the Report, as recommend more drastic measures of dealing with the question. I think it would be a very serious matter if my right hon. Friend threw over a report on such a subject upon which so much unanimity has been displayed in order to start a rival policy of his own, or, what I think would be more fatal still, appoint another Committee. There are certainly one or two subjects connected with that Report—I am speaking not entirely as an amateur, although I do not claim to be an expert—in regard to which I would rather they had come to another conclusion. This remark applies to the question of scheduling. I should have been pleased if the Committee had seen its way to schedule certain articles which should be made without lead or with lead of low solubility. The question was discussed very thoroughly, and representatives from all sides were heard, and the Committee recognised the special difficulty which the Noble Lord the Member for South Nottingham (Lord CavendishBentinck) referred to in regard to the importation of these articles from abroad. They came, with reluctance, to the con-
  1306
  clusion that the remedy suggested was impracticable.
  With regard to the use of phosphorus, I may point out that the use of yellow phosphorus has been stamped out under an International Convention, but we have no International Convention in regard to the use of lead. If all the countries engaged in lead manufacture were to join with us in the prohibition in certain cases of the use of lead, we should soon be in a very different position. The Report recommends a very considerable extension of the Special Order which at present exists, and recommends what has been rather unduly condemned this afternoon, namely, a system of self-inspection in factories. I do not see why the course suggested should not be given a trial as a supplementary system to our present factory inspection. If the special rules and this system of self-inspection prove a failure, those who have considered this question are anxious to be in a position to recommend the total prohibition of the employment of women—or at any rate of women under a certain age—in the lead factories. If within a reasonable time it is proved that we cannot get rid of lead poisoning by special rules and self-inspection, due notice has thus been given to the masters that other action will be taken if the figures do not come down. The right hon. Baronet the Member for the Forest of Dean asked if we could put into operation the power to definitely close the worst of these factories. May I point out that that power is not in the possession of the Home Office, and we can only appeal for a legal decision in this matter. One such factory was closed last year, but a very strong case indeed has to be made out in order to obtain a conviction. The right hon. Gentleman also challenged the statement made by the firm of Wedgwood as to the condition of the lead workers, but for that or any other statement of the kind the Home Office do not take any responsibility.
  One word as to the question of the certifying surgeons. I agree the position is not a very satisfactory one, and I recognise that some action will probably have to be taken in the not distant future. We all recognise that sooner or later a Committee will have to be appointed to consider the working of the Workmen's Compensation Act in regard to such questions as whether old people are being driven out of employment, as well as questions regarding the certifying surgeons and medical referees. The Act has only been in

  1307
  operation three years, and the Committee will be better appointed when it has settled down, and we can get the greatest possible evidence as to the necessity for any change. The right hon. Gentleman the Member for the Forest of Dean (Sir Charles Dilke) protests against the divergence of fees demanded. The fee of 1s. is supplemented under the Factory Act of 1901 by an additional amount given by the Home Office, but the fee of 5s. under the Workmen's Compensation Act for a complete examination cannot be supplemented. We do not feel very much inclined to decrease the very small fee paid for a very thorough examination, and what he should press for is not a reduction of the fee of 5s., but whether it might not be possible for the Home Office to supplement in the one case, as in the other, the fee paid to the doctor.
  My right hon. Friend raised again the case of infant mortality, which I had the pleasure of raising with him on former Home Office reports when I sat beside him below the Gangway. We are concerned with the question. We have called for special reports from the medical officers of health, and especially from the districts concerned. Those reports, which are voluminous in character, are now before the Home Office, and I hope they will give us some definite guidance. He dealt with the question of the employment of children, and, as I understood, expressed some dissatisfaction at the comparatively limited explorations made by the Committee which has reported on Street Trading. If there is any general desire that that Committee should continue its labours and deal with other employments, I think it might do so. I was very glad to hear the appeals made by the Noble Lord the Member for Nottingham (Lord Henry Cavendish-Bentinck) in connection with those very deplorable cases of considerable suffering and disability being laid upon children of quite early age. I welcome him among that small body of experts who are continually pressing the Home Office forward on these and other matters, and I hope my right hon. Friend will be able to utilise his services on some of the many Committees or Commissions by which the Home Office is always desiring to effect improvements in administration.
  I am amazed, after the often moderate and accurate statements which are made by my hon. Friend the Member for Montgomery Boroughs (Sir J. D. Rees), to find him fathering such affirmations as he has
  1308
  been making in the House on the question of the florists. He asked a question the other day in which he suggested that thousands of honest British workwomen were being thrown out of employment and being replaced by aliens under the stern, hard, and cast-iron effect of our regulations dealing with florists. If a hundredth part of that were true, there would be a case for the reconsideration of the decision of the Home Office, but I can find no trace even of that moderate amount of justification for the hon. Member's remarks.
  Mr. MILDMAY: Have these regulations been enforced?
  Mr. MASTERMAN: Certainly; and there have been applications for overtime work this year. Let me put clearly before the House what the position is with regard to this particular trade. The trade is brought under the Factory law by a legal decision. My hon. Friend asserted that this was merely a technical and legal reason for bringing it under the law, and that there was really no case for bringing under the law so well-conducted and satisfactory a trade. I take out of our Report one quotation only. The inspector for the North-West Division (Manchester) says:—
  "Prior to the visits of inspection, the women and young persons worked from 5 a.m. to 10 p.m. daily—seventeen hours. No half-holiday was allowed, and no proper meal times were recognised. Extraordinary hours of work occurred during the Whit-week rush One young person of fifteen years of age was employed no fewer than thirty-one and a half hours with a break of two and a half hours for rest and short breaks for food. Another girl worked for thirty-three and a half hours."
  My hon. Friend regards the breaking-down of that system as an abolition of the freedom of England.
  Sir J. D. REES: It was an exceptional day.
  Mr. MASTERMAN: The Home Office has no intention of allowing a girl, even on an exceptional day, to work thirty-three hours. The question of women working out of florists' workshops beyond the normal working hours is entirely a local one concerned with the demands of West London. The whole of the reports from the other parts of England are that there is no such necessity. Here is a report which breathes the austerity and the simplicity of manners of the Northern Kingdom condemning our opposite development. It is given by our factory inspector at Glasgow:—
  "The conditions disclosed by the reports can hardly be compared with those existing in London, the require-

  1309
  ments of the public being so totally different. Mr. Broadhead, at Glasgow, says, according to his information, there is only one function in the year at Glasgow which requires outside work being extended beyond 8 p.m. and then only till 9 p.m. There is no 'season' in the London sense in Glasgow, and entertainments are neither so lavish nor so late."
  The challenge made was that if we knew the facts we would agree with the hon. Member, but I make the challenge—and I hope I am not speaking offensively—that if he had the facts which we have at our disposal he would agree with us. The facts, briefly, are these. We have no cast-iron and inelastic system. In florists' workshops women and girls can work from six to six, from seven to seven, or from eight to eight. They can work two hours' overtime thirty days, or five full weeks in the year, and they can work it by merely sending a notice to the factory inspector before eight o'clock on the same day that they intend to work the overtime. If they chose, on any special occasion, not to bring in a woman or a girl till after the dinner hour-that is one o'clock-that woman or girl can work to any hour outside the factory, so that she can get in the full service of fifteen or sixteen hours of work which is said to he required. We have evidence which was not before Judge Ruegg, to whom I should like to pay the highest compliment for the work he did. On every other point except this we entirely agree and accept his decision. Last year our factory inspectors went thoroughly through the various florists' shops, and personally interviewed those who might be affected. We find the number very small indeed. The total number of women who might be affected is something like thirty-two. Most of the great firms, such as those who do the decorations of Buckingham Palace, employ men. All the firms, I think, employ men as well as women, and, so far as I see, there is no reason why the particular work required to be done in these hours should not be done by men. We have taken the trouble this year to go through them again. A factory inspector from our own Department and another inspector which the Board of Trade were kind enough to place at our disposal went round to see the result and ascertain what the opinion is on the subject. We find no cases of women being dismissed as the result of this Order. We have one case given us of a man having been taken on as a new hand who is not an Englishman, and we find another case of a boy taken on as a new hand who is not an Englishman. The thousands of aliens of my hon. Friend
  1310
  therefore resolve themselves into one alien and a half. We are asked to put into operation a clause of the Factory Act which has never been put into operation before, and to allow on 100 days in the year a working day of fourteen hours for women and girls and on thirty days in the year a working day of sixteen hours. Upon such evidence as that I could not get up and defend it in the House of Comons.
  Mr. MILDMAY: No, that is not the proposal.
  Mr. MASTERMAN: It is the proposal. If we granted what is demanded, on 100 days in the year florists could work from eight to ten and on thirty days in the year by the overtime rule they might work from six till ten. That is fourteen hours in the one case and sixteen in the other. We have nothing like it in our factory legislation. If and when any evidence can be submitted that there is any large hardship in connection with this work, my right hon. Friend has always an open mind on this and other matters, but, so long as the facts remain as they are at present, we have no intention of changing our decision.
  The hon. Member for Bolton (Mr. A. H. Gill) dealt with the question of dust in the carding-room. I agree with him that there has been some delay in connection with the matter, and that the figures which have been presented show a very regrettable amount of disease and some mortality, but I think the delay is to be accounted for, as it is under somewhat similar circumstances in the case of rescue apparatus for mines. There is a good deal of variety of opinion among the experts, and most of them are engaged with designs; but I am authorised to state that the Employers' Federation have appointed a committee to consider the various systems in use and also the new systems claiming superiority, and they are about to make definite recommendations as to the choice among them. They assure us no time will be lost in doing so. At the same time our factory inspectors in the districts affected are watching the matter, the gravity of which we all recognise.
  7.0 P.M.
  In connection with the point made by the hon. Member for Bolton as to
  extra half-hours, I gather he thinks we have come to a decision which is not legal. But we are only anxious to follow the law in this matter, and if any body of men want a test case

  1311
  we shall be only too pleased, because our desire is that the law shall be interpreted to the satisfaction of the workers. In the name of the Home Office we welcome this day's criticisms as we have always welcomed them. I should like to take this opportunity of thanking those many Members of this House who, partly in the form of questions and partly by conversations with my right hon. Friend and myself, day after day in the Lobbies, have put before us complaints as to present administration as well as suggestions for reform. We welcome the closest connection between Members of this House and the Home Office, and I can assure hon. Gentleman that questions addressed to the Department and private conversations have resulted in material improvements in matters which our factory inspectors charged with the enormous work of carrying out the Factory Laws might otherwise have been unable to detect. My right hon. Friend the Member for the Forest of Dean apologised for the arid nature of the subjects he brought before the Committee. Those subjects may be arid in themselves, but there is not one technical detail which does not affect the health and happiness of the industrial women and children of this community, and all the progress of the future.
  Mr. AKERS-DOUGLAS: I understand there is a general desire we should pass, as soon as possible, to the Prisons Vote, which has not been discussed for some three years. I believe the Home Secretary has an important statement to make in regard to it. But I ask the House to listen to me while I offer a few comments on one or two questions to which I wish to draw his attention. The right hon. Gentleman the Member for the Forest of Dean, in his speech, which we always look forward to with interest and pleasure on this occasion, has criticised the way in which the Government have failed to increase the number of women factory inspectors. There have been no fresh appointments made, but I think I must agree with the Under-Secretary that it was understood from the speech of Lord Gladstone last year that the increase of women factory inspectors must be looked upon not as rapid, but as steady. I fully admit all the right hon. Gentleman has said as to the increase of work which has fallen upon these inspectors, as well as to the admirable manner in which they carry
  1312
  out their duty, and that has been especially the case to my knowledge in respect of the work thrown upon them under the Truck Act. I entirely agree that the work cast upon the inspectors, both male and female, is of a very arduous character. They are fully employed in a most excel lent work, and I am sure the right hon. Gentleman will not mind my paying this tribute to a Department in which I had the pleasure to serve for some three or four years. I do not think there is a harder-worked Department than the Home Office and its subordinate Departments in the whole organisation of the State. The right hon. Gentleman has said that, although there can be no increase in the number of female factory inspectors, there is to be an increase in the number of mines inspectors. I must agree with him, knowing the financial difficulties which beset the Department, and, while sympathising fully with the desire for an increase of the female inspectors, I realise the necessity of cutting one's coat according to the cloth, and therefore I think the Home Secretary has been right in deciding that the first increase shall be among the mines inspectors rather than among the factory inspectors.
  I regret with my right hon. Friend the Member for the Forest of Dean that the decrease in the number of cases of lead-poisoning which was noticeable last year has not been continued in the present year. I hope—indeed, we must all hope—that these more unfortunate figures are not going to prevail, and that we shall still see a greater diminution than present facts point to. May I add one word of congratulation to the Home Office upon its having continued the excellent practice of last year of an early issue of report of the factory inspectors? It is indeed a very great convenience, especially for politicians and to Members not closely acquainted with labour questions to be able to have time to get up technical details. I should think it saves a good deal of time, because, instead of asking questions, they can find out these matters for themselves from the Report.
  I wish I could extend the same congratulations to the Home Office with regard to the question of the deportation of aliens. I think there must be some unaccountable mistake which has resulted in the Report on this subject not having been presented before this Debate. Last year I raised a point in regard to the administration of the Aliens Act. I do

  1313
  not wish to-day to touch the controversial side of the question. The right hon. Gentleman who is now at the head of the Home Office and myself take diametrically opposite views on this point, but so far as deportation of criminal aliens is concerned I think we are on common ground. That, too, is the opinion of the present Postmaster-General. I agree with him as to the desirability of procuring the expulsion of alien criminals at the earliest possible date and their exclusion permanently from this country, whose hospitality they have abused. My only excuse for raising this point to-day is because I wish to be assured that the administration of that portion of the Act has been thoroughly well carried out. I have observed, and I think we must all have observed in the papers in the last few months, the complaints which have been made. by the London police, by magistrates, by chairmen of quarter sessions, and by the Common Serjeant and Recorder of the frequency with which these undesirable gentlemen return to this country. I have several cases before me just now. I will trouble the House only with two. There is the case of the man Henri Handalis, who was in trouble many times, and he came back in a few days. Then there was the case of Louis Smith, who also got back to this country after a few days, and his excuse was, "I like England very much better." We have got, unfortunately, enough criminals to look after without looking after men who abuse the hospitality of this country, and though I do not blame in any way the Home Office or the police in this matter—I know how difficult a thing it is to deal with, and how easily it is for a man with a first-class ticket to come back into this country—I would observe that my only object in raising this question is to ask the Home Secretary to do his best to urge on the police and the other authorities to do more, if they can, to detect these people at the port of landing or in the earliest stages of their return. I understand that sometimes they are known to he about, but that the process of arresting them is not sufficiently quick. But suffieient time has not elapsed to enable judgment to be formed as to the effect these provisions are likely to have on alien crime in this country. What I want to know is what is the opinion of his Department at the present time. I am simply asking the right hon. Gentleman for information, which I am sure he will be prepared to give me.
  Mr. SHACKLETON: I wish to put a question to my right hon. Friend the Home Secretary, and it has reference to a very important matter of administration under the Factory Act. I ask it in order that complete confidence may be given to the workers, who should have full confidence, in the various decisions given in the courts of law under the Factory Act, the Workmen's Compensation Act, and any other Act under the administration of the Home Office. What I want to refer to particularly is the practice—I do not say it is common, but I have known one or two instances—where the magistrate's clerk is also solicitor to the employers' association. If he were in the employ of an individual employer it possibly could not be avoided, but where the clerk to the justices is also solicitor to the employers' association the obvious inference is that such a state of things should not be allowed. The solicitor may have been in a position of preparing the case for his client before it comes before the magistrates, and whatever power the Home Office has in this matter I sincerely hope they will put it into operation. An expression of opinion by the right hon. Gentleman as to the inadvisability or the unfairness of such a provision might be effective in the very few cases in which this happens. The objection not only applies to cases where the workmen are summoned but also to those of his own inspector, who may take a case before the court and find that the adviser of the magistrates is the man who has had to get the case up for the employer who is charged with an offence. In the interests of the administration of justice, and to give confidence to the workpeople and the inspector, the solicitor ought to retire from one position or the othe—I do not care which. Surely he ought not to hold the position of being the private adviser of the employer as well as the public adviser of the magistrates. I hope the night hon. Gentleman will meet this little difficulty, and give such advice as he thinks right in the circumstances.
  Captain COOPER: In the speech of the Under-Secretary and that of the right hon. Gentleman the Member for the Forest of Dean (Sir Charles Dilke), in the portion in which they referred to the hours of work of the women florists, it is a very remarkable thing that both of them ignored the fact that the Home Office itself appointed a Commissioner to inquire into this matter, and

  1315
  all that has been asked by the hon. Members who brought this matter forward was that a recommendation of the Home Office Commissioner should be carried out. The hon. Gentleman said if we knew all the facts we should agree with the Home Office in their action, but did not Judge Ruegg, their Commissioner, know all the facts when he made that recommendation?
  Mr. MASTERMAN: The judge could not have known the facts that I have given as to the Order being in force, because the Order was only issued last December, and we have had this six months' experience.
  Captain COOPER: The point that I want to make is this, that these Orders were rescinded in December in the teeth of Judge Ruegg's recommendation that one of them should not be rescinded and that one of them should be rescinded, and another Order made. He recommended that the Order as regards holidays should not be rescinded, and a month later the Home Office rescinded it. He recommended that the regulation as to working overtime should be rescinded, but that a new Order should be made which should make it possible for skilled women to work two hours after 8 o'clock on condition that they were allowed to come to their work two hours later next day. That Order has never been brought in by the Home Office in spite of the recommendation of their own Commissioner. The Under-Secretary said a great deal about the debt of gratitude which the public owe to the Commissioner, but it is very small encouragement for people to act as Commissioner if they are treated as Judge Ruegg was.
  Mr. MASTERMAN: Once more I say that every recommendation he made except one was carried out. There are six or seven recommendations which he made, and only one was disregarded, and that is this one as to the hours.
  Captain COOPER: I think in a matter of this kind it is better that every side of the question should be stated, and that the question should be explained in detail to the Home Office. Here there is certainly a grievance. I have no interest in the matter, but it is the most important question of the whole lot this question of working late, and there is ground for the opinion expressed by the hon. Member for Montgomeryshire (Sir J. D. Rees) and the fear expressed by Judge Ruegg that the women will be turned out of their work
  1316
  and that foreigners will take their places. I wish again to express my regret that the Home Office, having appointed a Commissioner to inquire into this matter, did not accept his finding.
  Mr. WILLIAM ABRAHAM: I think the case put by the hon. Member for Carnarvonshire with regard to the Dinorwic Quarry is of sufficient importance to ask the Home Office to pay attention to it at once. I know that as it was a case in which there were such a number of lives lost, it will be felt that everything that can be done ought to be done at once. The continuance of this great loss of life to a practical man proves that the system of working that quarry is wrong, and should not be allowed to continue in the face of the figures which have been given in regard to other quarries which are much more dangerous than this. In such a quarry to have a great number of accidents happening proves at once that the system is a wrong one, and the next point is: How is the Home Office to find this out? My experience of the Home Office is that whatever party is in power, when a case is stated and facts are given they take up the matter to see what can be done, and I have no hesitation in saying that the right hon. Gentleman will do so now if he can grasp or looks at this thing as any practical man would. It is admitted here, and it was told us to-night, that the chief inspector of that district admits himself that his qualification is in another direction, and that he knows nothing of quarries. If that was true, how is he to report in order to guide the Home Office in what they are to do in a matter like this? If that is so, I hope that by inquiry they will find out whether it is so or not, that they are guided by the report of a man who knows nothing about quarries. There are certainly one or two men in the service of the Home Office who will know something about quarries, and let them go down and investigate, and let the Home Office get their guidance from those practical men and from their Report. I also wish to express a hope that my right hon. Friend will not allow any inspector—any chief inspector—whether he lives in London or anywhere else, to cut out portions of a Report. We have reason to believe that that has been done. If a Report is made by an inspector on a mine, and if anyone is allowed to curtail and cut out portions of his Report, what guidance will it afford? There is a Report coming before this House which will show, I am afraid, that somebody

  1317
  has exercised authority and cut parts out of it, and unless something is done in future—and I appeal to my right hon. Friend to say that these things ought not to take place—this House will not receive guidance from the man on the spot.
  Viscount MORPETH: The answer of the Home Office, from the point of view of the florists, is an extremely unsatisfactory one. The right hon. Gentleman took up an attitude which is not justified by a Report of the Home Office itself in this matter. He tries to belittle the question, and he says it is one concerning thirty women workers and one and a half men. But what has the attitude of the Home Office been if the matter is of such insignificance as that? First of all they exempted these workers from factory legislation, but under pressure the Home Office withdrew its exemption. They then again changed their course, and appointed Judge Ruegg to hold an investigation, and once again, under pressure, they have changed their course and reverted to their second policy. If the matter is so unimportant as the hon. Gentleman tried to persuade the House of Commons, why is it that they had to change their course so often under pressure of different kinds? The Government have been singularly unfortunate in appointing Commissioners during their tenure of power. They have appointed Commissioners again and again, and have received exhaustive reports, and then they have thrown them over and gone in the opposite direction. Judge Ruegg pointed out that there was a danger that these women would be ousted from their work, perhaps by foreign men, but, at any rate, by men in place of women. Yet the hon. Gentleman chose this afternoon to ridicule that idea, and said there was great exaggeration in this matter. If he looks at the Report itself he will find that his own Commissioner said that although he has not been able to satisfy himself that there has been any case up to the present time there will undoubtedly be a danger in future if these regulations are made so inelastic, so hard and fast, and applying to
  whole of the British Islands, and making no account of the circumstances in West London.
  These women will lose their places as florists, and they will be taken by men who are either foreigners or Englishmen. I pause to say that the West London standard is extremely different to that of Glasgow, and no regulation or laws of this House will force the West of London to assimilate its social regulations to those
  1318
  of Glasgow. West London will have these decorations, and we contend that it is work that is eminently fitted for women under suitable regulations, and it is work which they should continue. I am convinced that the real influence that underlies the action of the Home Office, and the real pressure which has been put upon them throughout all these matters in regard to their constant changes of policy, is dictated by the desire to turn women out of employment and to substitute men for them. It is a sorry thing that many of those Gentlemen who only a few days ago voted for women's rights and women's votes, in this matter, where women have got an employment eminently suited to their capacities, and in which they excel, which is not hard or strenuous work, and in which their natural taste has some play—that these Gentlemen having voted a week ago for women's votes largely on the ground that they would be able by means of them to force up the standard of wages and insist on certain conditions of employment, although soon after they gave that Vote they nullified it by the next one—but it is strange that having given it they should come to this House and ask it to enforce a regulation which will have the effect of forcing women out of employment. There is no one in this House who is advocating the claims of these women workers who desires to see them subjected to the long hours to which the hon. Gentleman made reference. That is not part of Judge Ruegg's Report, and it is not advocated by anyone in this House. I think the overtime which they do at night in the matter of decorations should be taken off their work next morning. Regulations of that sort could easily be enforced if the Home Office were only willing to do it and gave its mind to these matters. They have taken an essentially unreasonable position in saying they cannot break through regulations and that if you make exceptions here and there you will be driving a coach and horses through the Factory Acts. For that reason they throw the whole trade into confusion and drive women out of occupations in which they are at present working.
  The SECRETARY of STATE for the HOME DEPARTMENT (Mr. Churchill): I have heard a good many reasons put forward in the last few years in favour of woman suffrage, but I do not think I ever heard a reason less adequate to bear the strain put upon it than the Noble Lord's suggestion that when that great reform

  1319
  is carried it will at any rate be open to women beyond all doubt to dress the tables in the West End, on occasions of festivities, with flowers. It is not at all just or true to say that the Home Office has continually altered its policy under pressure. The question is one of fact and it is to be judged by the facts. I heard the story some time ago that the most serious consequences were to be apprehended from the present state of the regulations. We were told that a large number of British girls were being driven from their occupation and that their places were being taken by Italian men, If these facts could be established to be true on any scale of which the House of Commons could take notice, we should certainly have to consider the question whether regulations could not be devised to meet the case, but the facts are not true. Since Judge Ruegg's Report my hon. Friend and I have had inquiries made, and I checked those inquiries by inquiries made from another source, and I am quite certain I had the best information which two public Departments could obtain. It is not at all true that there is this displacement of labour or that women are being crowded out of this trade. I am quite willing to keep an open mind on the subject, and if the facts alter, or can be proved to amount to a serious evil, I shall lay the facts before the House and give them the best advice in my power. But at present it would be ridiculous to alter the regulations, which would not have local application but would spread over the whole country, for the sake of an evil which, so far as I can honestly say, having examined it myself, exists in no other place than in the imagination of those who have drawn attention to it.
  Coming to the speech of the hon. Member (Mr. Abraham), I and the Department have been much concerned at the casualties in the Dinorwic Quarry. A special inquiry was ordered some time ago, and a further special inquiry is now being made into the subject by a Commission. It would not be in the power of a Minister to interfere with the work or the Report of the Commission and were it in my power, I hope the hon. Member would acquit me of any intention to follow such an evil precedent. The hon. Member (Mr. Shackleton) raised another point on which I find myself in entire accord with him. He spoke of magistrate's clerks accepting appointments as solicitors to employers' associations and I presume the objection
  1320
  would be equally great if they accepted employment as solicitors to trade unions. I have no power over these appointments, but I am glad to have this opportunity of saying I think such dual functions are very undesirable. I do not say they would come into conflict. I can quite believe a man would do his duty perfectly well and honourably in the two capacities. But that is not the point. The point is not merely that absolute justice should be done but that everyone should be convinced that absolute justice will be done, and that there should be no feeling that prejudice or partiality has entered into the advice which magistrate's clerks tender to the courts.
  Mr. H. E. DUKE: Will the right hon. Gentleman say whether he has considered if it would not be possible to introduce, by a circular to magistrates throughout the country, the same kind of restriction as there is in the case of county courts by which a solicitor who is a magistrate's clerk should not sit to advise the bench in a case where his firm is concerned any more than a solicitor who is a registrar would sit in a county court in a case where his firm was concerned? It seems to me it is a thing which could be done by letter to the justices.
  Mr. CHURCHILL: I think that is a very valuable and useful suggestion, and I am glad it has been made, and I will see that consideration is given to it. The right hon. Gentleman (Mr. Akers-Douglas) touched upon the administration of the Aliens Act and upon the lateness of the Report. I am much obliged to him for his compliments on the fact that the Factory Report has been produced at an early period, and I regret very much that the Aliens Report has lagged behind. It certainly should have been published before this Debate, and I must ask the House to view indulgently any blame which they think attaches to me for not having seen that the House was properly furnished with all particulars in regard to subjects which might be raised. The right hon. Gentleman and I have always differed greatly on the Aliens Act. He was the parent of that measure. He produced one child, which did not long survive, and I am not sure I did not have some part in putting it out of the way. But afterwards he produced another and stronger infant, which has now grown up to manhood, and has taken its place in the legislative and administrative machinery of the country. It is a

  1321
  very weak point in the Aliens Act that any alien, however criminal, however undesirable, however diseased, however poverty-stricken—and of course we must always cultivate that view of all aliens—who wishes to come into this country can do so if he can obtain enough money to pay for a first-class ticket. Of course it is possible that aliens who have been deported under orders from the courts may return, and they do return sometimes, but not, I think, very often. They have not a very clear idea of what may or may not happen to them if they return. I was given a case the other day of an alien who had not merely returned to this country after deportation, but described the Aliens Act as a farce. That person is now suffering a sentence of three months' hard labour, a fate which I earnestly hope will not overtake every person who has characterised the measure in harsh terms. I am very anxious that the courts should not hesitate to add sentence of expulsion to the ordinary sentence. It was common ground between both parties when the measure was debated—it was the one piece of common ground between us—that expulsion might be added to a sentence on an alien who abused the hospitalities of these shores and committed crimes. In several cases where that action has not been taken by the courts we have written privately to the justices, and have drawn their attention to their powers under the Act. When any alien, having been expelled, is found in the country, he is liable on the first occasion to three months' imprisonment, and on the second to twelve months' imprisonment, and I shall not hesitate to put the law into motion when any case of that character is brought to my notice.
  Mr. E. JARDINE: An appeal was made by the hon. Member (Mr. Gill) to the Home Office to give more Orders. There are many arguments which might be brought forward as to why more Orders should not be issued. I want to ask the Home Office always to consider that they are constantly breaking their principles, which are Free Trade principles, principles of the law of supply and demand, by these Orders, and are really acting in restraint of trade and contrary to the best interests of the workers. The hon. Member for Bolton (Mr. Gill) referred to fines. He objects to them, and considers it is wrong for fines to be inflicted in workshops. There was a great deal in what
  1322
  he said, although I personally think, provided the sum that is taken in fines is administered by the workers for the workers, that is a much better way of getting discipline in a workshop than by discharging someone for being late or for spoiling work. The hon. Member went on to say that in a certain shop they objected to the system of fines which was carried on, that the trade union decided the iniquitous system should be stopped, and that they stopped it. That is the line I would ask Members of the Labour party to take. That is the manly, strong, stiff backboned line I would like them always to take. Do not let them go to the Home Office for Orders and Acts which, to those who are not experienced in the matters to which these Orders and Acts refer, appear good, but really do an enormous amount of harm to individuals throughout the country. The hon. Member for Bolton referred in particular to the Workmen's Compensation Act, and said it was one of the best pieces of industrial legislation passed for a long time. I do not think there is a Member in the House on either side who would wish to take away one word or line of that Act. It has done an enormous amount of good, but it has also done a terrible amount of harm. It is impossible to-day for an old man, full of life and vigour, with many years of good service in him that he might render to the country, since that Act was passed to obtain employment. No sane employer would take on a man who is probably on his last job, and who may slip downstairs, hurt his back, and become a permanent charge for half wages on his employer. I mention that because I want to keep the Home Secretary from getting swelled head and imagining that these Orders which he issues bring happiness, prosperity, and health to the people of the country. On the contrary, they are a necessary evil.
  A remark made by the right hon. Baronet the Member for the Forest of Dean (Sir C. Dilke) showed, I think, his utter want of appreciation of the difficulties of manufacturers. He appealed for factories being destroyed or condemned because they were so bad that they gave the users an unfair advantage over other employers. Had the right hon. Baronet been a manufacturer he would have known what is so often lost sight of and what has been lost sight of during the Debate this afternoon, that the best and cheapest way to manufacture is by employing the highest-paid workers in the best possible conditions, and in the finest factories any-

  1323
  one can desire. It is because there has been a sense of unreality about much that has been said this afternoon that there has been a tendency on the part of the Under-Secretary in his exceedingly able and conciliatory speech to promise more Orders and Amendments of the Workmen's Compensation Act, and I fear that unless someone who is actually engaged in business raises his voice in this matter he will get an absolutely wrong notion and issue Orders which he will regret, and will bring forward legislation contrary to the interests of those whom it is ostensibly meant to benefit. I will appeal to the Home Secretary to bring forth no more Orders, to sit still, and not to legislate unless there is some serious and dangerous business which must be legislated for. May I ask the Home Secretary if he cannot let well alone, that he will interfere with manufacturers as little as possible?
  Sir WILLIAM COLLINS: I want to put a question to the Under-Secretary for the Home Department which I think will elicit from him a disclaimer as to certain alleged action of the Home Office which I believe is entirely unfounded. It is in reference to the administration of the Asylums Officers' Superannuation Act passed last Session. Under that Act local authorities are required to provide pensions on a contributory basis. Under Clause 1 it is the duty of the visiting committees of the asylums, with the consent of the local authority, to classify the established officers into two classes, class one receiving more beneficial pension than class two. By a later Clause established officers are defined in that Act, and I believe that the decision as to who is an established officer and who is not is entirely in the discretion of the visiting committees. I have gathered from a circular issued by the County Councils' Association, from the reports made to certain county councils, and also from reports which have appeared in the papers,that it is suggested that the Home Office have given directions or advice to the visiting committees as to which officers should be in class one and which officers in class two. Certain officers say that they are prejudiced by such action of the Home Office. As the Home Office is constituted the appeal authority in regard to certain questions, such as the amount of and right to pensions, it is manifestly improper that the Home Office should give any advice of that kind. I venture to say it is contrary to
  1324
  the wording and the intention of the Act. I hope the Under-Secretary will be able to say that there was no attempt on the part of the Home Office to put pressure on any of the visiting committees.
  Mr. MASTERMAN: I think I can assure my hon. Friend that the Home Office has consistently taken up the position that it has no jurisdiction in this matter on the question of establishment. It is entirely in the discretion of the local authorities, and if any such circular has been sent out, as my hon. Friend describes, that circular is a misleading one. I thank the hon. Gentleman opposite for his personal reference to myself. Whatever other reason we have for what the hon. Member calls swelled head, I can assure him that it is only with reluctance that the Home Office adds to its multifarious duties by issuing Orders. I do not think I made any promise that any particular Order would be issued at all. I would like now to make an appeal to the House. There was a general agreement in the House that some time might be devoted to the consideration of the Annual Report on Prisons. I do not know whether my right hon. Friend (Sir C. Dilke) is prepared to withdraw his Amendment.
  Sir C. DILKE: I beg leave to withdraw the Amendment.
  Amendment, by leave, withdrawn.
  Mr. W. F. ROCH: May I ask the Under-Secretary a question in regard to the quarries at Penrhyn and Dinorwic to which his attention was called by the hon. Member for Carnarvon (Mr. Ellis Davies)? I should like to know whether, pending the inquiry by the Royal Commission on Mines, the hon. Member will take whatever steps are possible now to call the serious attention of the inspectors to what can be done, whether he will satisfy himself that there are sufficient inspectors, and, if there are, whether he will call their serious attention to the fact that many mine-owners have, by their own action, adopted measures for the prevention of accidents; and, further, whether he will bring whatever pressure is possible on the inspectors to remedy the very serious state of affairs which now exists?
  Mr. WATT: I want to call the attention of the Home Office to a grievance we nave in Scotland in relation to the appointment of Commissions to inquire Into various subjects. In the appointment of these Commissions Scottish labour and

  1325
  women have been entirely ignored. There have been five Commissions appointed within recent times, and on each of these five occasions the labour interests of Scotland and Scottish women have not received representation. These bodies in Scotland represented to the Scottish Secretary that they ought to have representation on some of these Committees. I presume the Scottish Secretary represented the matter to the Home Office, and, if so, the Home Office have entirely ignored the representation. I am desirous that in any future Commissions which they appoint they will see that satisfactory representation of Scotland is given, and that that country is not ignored.
  Mr. MASTERMAN: In regard to the last point, I can assure my hon. Friend that we will he very glad to consider the representation of Scotland on any of these Commissions. We have an exceedingly difficult task to perform in the appointment of Commissions. We desire to have everybody represented satisfactorily. Personally, I consider that the matter to which my hon. Friend has called attention is certainly one to bear in mind. As to the question asked by the hon. Member for Pembroke (Mr. Roch), I certainly did not mean to say that the fact that there is a Commission pending on the subject of mines will in any way interfere with any attempts for the betterment of the conditions in mines even while the Commission is sitting.
  Mr. ROCH: My point is that certain employers, by their own action, have materially reduced the number of accidents, and that the attention of the inspectors should be called to that fact.
  Mr. MASTERMAN: If there are any recommendations which can be made with a view to the reduction of accidents, even while the Commission is sitting, they will be made.
  8.0 P.M.
  Mr. CLYNES: The hon. Member seemed to be under a misapprehension in regard
  to the desire for an extension of the Workmen's Compensation Act. We who
  sit on the Labour Benches wish a further extension, and I think the observations of the hon. Member deserves an answer. It is not true, as shown by the Returns, that old men are refused employment because of the operation of the Work men's Compensation Act. It is true that after men turn the corner of forty or forty-five years of age they are frequently
  1326
  refused work, and younger men are preferred for reasons altogether apart from the working of the Workmen's Compensation Act. The feeding of machinery, the tendency to driving men more in these days than was the case in former days, the very natural desire of the capitalists to exact the utmost that human nature can give in regard to industrial processes—all these and many similar causes have much to do with the preference extended to younger men; but it is not true that the Workmen's Compensation Act has in any sense operated prejudicially to the interests and claims of the older men, for the figures prove that it is not the older men but the younger men to whom accidents happen more frequently. The older men are given to perform their labour with greater care and caution, and perhaps with a greater capacity of preserving their lives and limbs on account of the larger experience they have had during their former days. It is true, then, that the younger men are more exposed to the risk and danger of accident. I put it to the House that if it were true that old men are kept unemployed because of the operation of the Workmen's Compensation Act, that would be a strong reason for further Home Office action, and not for staying the hand of the Home Office at all. It is universally admitted that in principle compensation for injuries is a right and proper thing, and the last Return issued upon this matter shows that a total sum of £2,080,000 was paid in a year to the injured workers of this country. If employers of labour were to be so unfair as to keep old men out of work because of the payment of that sum in compensation—a payment which I say is a charge upon the industry, and in no sense taken directly out of the profits of the employers in the trade—if employers of labour were so unfair as to keep old men in a state of unemployment and often consequently in a state of starvation, that would be a strong reason for further law and further administrative action. I trust, therefore, that the Home Office will in no sense be deterred from further administrative action through fear of prejudicing the interests of old men.
  Question, "That this House doth agree with the Committee in the said Resolution," put, and agreed to.

  CLASS III.
  "That a sum, not exceeding £2,445,604, be granted to His Majesty, to defray

  1327
  the Charge which will come in course of payment during the year ending on the 31st day of March, 1911, for Expenditure in respect of the Services included in Class III. of the Estimates for Civil Services."
  [For Services included in this Class, see 19th July, 1910, col. 1191–1192.]
  Question put, "That this House doth agree with the Committee in the said Resolution."
  Mr. DUKE: I presume that this Vote includes the expenditure on prisons. If that is so, I am sure the House will be glad to have either from the right hon. Gentleman (Mr. Churchill), who is absent from the Front Bench, or from the Under-Secretary (Mr. Masterman) some information as to the effect of the immense changes which have been made, I might say, in the course of the existence of the present Administration in the mode and temper with which prisoners are dealt with. There has been a series of Acts of Parliament and administrative acts in very recent times which have transformed the attitude of the Government towards the offender. Formerly there were clumsy Acts to, distinguish between the treatment of the first offender or the very juvenile offender and the treatment of the habitual criminal; but by reason of the Act which has operated providing for the probation of offenders and by reason of the legislation which has brought what is called the Borstal system into effective operation for the humane and civilised treatment of persons who may become criminals, very great changes have been made in those two matters in particular. By the treatment of probation offenders and the remitting of persons who have fallen casually very often into a criminal practice, to the care of those who establish a special institution which is not a prison and which has not the vice of the old reformatory, a course of action has been opened up which those who have experience of dealing with criminal law entertain great and lively hopes may result in very greatly diminishing the criminal population in this country. I do not propose to make a speech on this subject. I dare say either the Home Secretary or the Under-Secretary will be able to tell the House shortly what are the practical results, so far as they come under the observation of the Home Office, of the
  1328
  provision which has been made for putting offenders, especially juvenile offenders, under probation instead of sending them, to prison at all; and what are the practical results of the operation of the Borstal system since it came into operation under the recent Act of Parliament, whereby, instead of a sentence of imprisonment, it is, optional to a bench, or, at any rate, to a, court of record, if not to the justices, to provide for the detention of prisoners between sixteen and nineteen years of age for a term of three years—I think that is the maximum term—but upon such conditions that as soon as the remedial operations which the Borstal system is intended to bring into effect have a beneficial result in the case of the individual, he may be set at large, and he may go into society and take up any work practically without any stigma upon his character, and with the great advantage behind him of having had a practical training. If the Under-Secretary is able to give the House some information as to the practical effect upon the bulk of crime in this country of those two pieces of legislation, and is able to tell us whether the Home Office has in view any possibility of extending the system by providing for a class of sentence intermediate between the probation for the probationer and the Borstal system, which provides for detention in an institution, something which would permit of the supervision of the individual under discipline without even the degree of stigma which attaches to the Borstal system, I think there are many Members of the House who would be very glad indeed to have a statement on that subject.
  Mr. MASTERMAN: It may be a convenience to Members if I say that my right hon. Friend is very anxious to make a full statement on these facts. He thinks the opportunity ought to be given for criticism so that he will be able to reply. He will be here in a moment and if the criticisms are made first then he will make a statement.
  Mr. DUKE: I raised the question really because I had gathered that the Home Secretary and the Under-Secretary were in a position to deal with this matter. It is a matter of very great practical concern in the administration of justice. It deals with the most humane arrangement that has ever been made in this country, or I think in any other country, for the treatment of young offenders. For that reason we are all anxious to hear the statement of the right hon. Gentleman.
  Mr. BYLES: I am very glad that the hon. and learned Gentleman, with his wide knowledge and experience of offenders against the law, has drawn attention to this particular side of our prison administration. I wish we had more of the Borstal, more of the probation, and more of the humane treatment of prisoners in our system. I am afraid we have a long way to travel before we attain the result which the hon. and learned Member and myself would desire to see. I received a letter this morning which interested me so much that I think I shall venture to read it to the House. It conies from a gentleman in my Constituency who is a visiting justice. He says:—
  "On visiting Strangeways Prison to-day in my capacity as visiting justice, I found a boy in a cell in prison clothing. His name is Albert Haseldine, and his age is fifteen years. He was found sleeping in a closet in Harrop Street, Openshaw, at I a.m. on Tuesday morning by a police-constable. He was taken into custody and brought before the Manchester City Court later the same morning and committed On remand to prison for a week! A short time before he had been placed under probation for a period of six months on a charge of 'picking rags,' as he put it. The boy, up to a short time ago, had earned 12s. per week in a coal pit belonging to the Bradford Colliery Company, but lost his situation because he could not find the money with which to pay for a broken lamp. He had assisted to support, his mother, and they had lived together in lodgings, but when their money was done, they had to leave, and they were for a week permitted by his aunt to enter her house after her husband had gone to work at night. He and his mother slept on the sofa, but were compelled to leave the house early each morning before the husband returned from his work. The man's work having changed to the day from night, the boy's aunt could shield them no longer. On Sunday night, July 10th, the mother found shelter with a relative at Eccles. and the boy slept in the closet in Harrop Street. He was doing the same on the following night when apprehended."
  I would like to ask the House is this boy a criminal in the sense in which the public understand the term? Is it very wicked, for example, to pick rags or to find shelter in an unoccupied spot when a boy has no other place in which to seek it? This boy had been keeping his mother, or helping to keep her, and now he is in prison, in prison clothes, in a separate cell. It does appear to me that he is in prison for his poverty, and I cannot get over the feeling, which, I am sure, must be shared by every Member of this House, that an injustice has been committed. We have now, and we have had for many years, a very enlightened Home Secretary. I speak not only of the present occupant of the office, but also of his predecessor, with whom I was associated often, in conversations, at any rate, on the subject of prison reform. Yet these things occur, and I am afraid they occur pretty often. The fact is our prison system is wrong. In my judgment it is
  1330
  often stupid and it is far too inelastic. I believe my right hon. Friend, since he came to the Home Office, is engaged in considering several reforms in prison administration and prison treatment, and I am very anxious to hear the speech he will shortly make to the House, and very anxious to support him in every effort which he makes to ameliorate the condition of our prisons.
  I hope that the old feeling of a desire to be revenged upon those who have offended against society is fast disappearing. In my judgment the broad principle of our punishment should be reclamation. Not only in regard to boys, but in regard to men, and even old criminals, we should aim as far as possible, and wherever possible, at reclamation. I believe the present system is making men worse. My friend Prince Krapotkin, who has a good deal of experience of prisons, regards them as universities of crime. A man having served a long term in gaol comes out, and what can he do? He cannot find work, because of his history. What is more easy, and what is more natural, than that he should fall back amongst his old associates and become a confirmed criminal? If that be so, he has joined the ranks of criminals, and openly sets himself to be an enemy of society. This does show that we, by our system, confirm these men in their criminal courses. We make them confirmed criminals, and we establish a permanent criminal class. Our object should be always, as it is ostensibly, to eradicate crime. After all, there is not very much difference between a man who steps over into crime and the man who has not yet committed a crime, or, perhaps I should say, who has not yet been found out. We have been told by an eminent poet that there is good in the worst of us, and bad in the best of us, and I think probably all know that. We are told sometimes that the police divide society into convicted and unconvicted. There is not so very much difference, after all, between the men who are pursuing a virtuous life and the men who occasionally slip into crime. We should always realise that it is possible to bring them back again into the straight course. Beyond that there is an immense difference between men in prison—undergoing punishment, perhaps, for similar offences. Some of these men are quite reclaimable, some of them quite near to the path of virtue, and therefore the more amenable to kindliness and human sympathy. I am glad to know that this principle of reclamation in the prisons is

  1331
  being more and more tried by our prison authorities, not only under the Borstal system, but under the Probation system, to which the hon. and learned Gentleman referred, and I believe also under the Act we passed two years ago for the prevention of crime. I believe it is still more pursued by authorities in other countries—in the United States, or in some of the States at all events, in Holland, and in Belgium. There they have a parole system by which they let out men in accordance with their behaviour in prison, and they try in that way to shorten. their sentence and get the men back to civil life.
  Then we have a large class of prisoners of whom we are often reminded, and shall be again to-night, I have no doubt, by students of criminology—those who are degenerate, abnormally weak-minded, and who cannot get away from crime. I ask, first of all, if that be so, and if they are irreclaimable, if they are abnormally weak-minded, what is the use of prolonging their punishment? It cannot make them any better keeping them a long time in Dartmoor or some other prison. It cannot do us or them any good at all. Secondly, what is the use of letting them loose after they have served their full term, and put them back on society only to begin again their criminal course? Neither of these is a sensible method of treatment. We should rather, I think, treat the disease, and segregate these men. A friend of mine who has studied this question, Dr. Albert Wilson, in his book on "Education, Personality, and Crime," says:—
  "I venture to say that the mental cripple has no more power to go straight than the paralized child, who cannot raise a foot or an arm. Nor can the moral invalid be upbraided for his degraded position any more than the patient with locomotor ataxia for tumbling down in a crowded street."
  In another passage he says:—
  "A crime is like an abnormal growth, a species of moral cancer. While using the most vigorous measures to destroy it, the criminal should not be discharged uncured At present, nearly all cures are effected by religious bodies."
  I agree with that view of the manner in which an enlightened nation ought to treat the criminal population. I hope that the Home Secretary will say something in his speech about the practice still continued of flogging in prison. I recognise the degradation. I think we ought always to recognise the manhood of men, and not to destroy, as we must destroy by flogging, but to inculcate upon them self-respect. I cannot but believe that these floggings, which are said to be necessary because of the insubordination of the criminal, are
  1332
  the result often of unjust and harsh treatment. There are many warders with kind hearts and humanitarian instincts. These qualities ought always to be considered in making appointments. No doubt warders find their task often most difficult and are very often provoked. For that very reason all men are not suitable for these duties. I have often wondered when I have read of an escape from Dartmoor or elsewhere what had brought that about, what had induced the man to run the terrible risk which he must incur of escaping from a convict prison; what had been going on before; to what harshness and oppression had he been subject? I do not know, but I suspect ill-treatment has been the cause of his insubordination. I ask generally for more discrimination and more sympathy in our methods of dealing with criminals. I firmly believe, and am confident, as the right hon. Gentleman has succeeded with such energy and capacity to the high office which he now holds, that I do not ask in vain.
  Mr. PICKERSGILL: I desire to thank the Government for giving us this opportunity to discuss the Prison Votes, and also to thank the right hon. Gentleman for making an important statement to-night. Before that is done, I desire to make a few observations and criticisms. The first topic to which I wish to refer is the treatment of women prisoners. We were told by the right hon. Gentleman himself quite recently that the fact that women are not represented does not in any way place them at a disadvantage in this House. I think that the case of the prisons is a very strong and very signal example to the contrary. The executive government of prisons is vested in a board which is composed entirely of men—four men—yet it cannot be said unfortunately that women are a negligible factor in our prison population. About 50,000 women and girls pass through our prisons every year. Supposing things were turned about, and that instead of having a Prisons Board composed entirely of men that that Board were composed entirely of women then the absurdity and injustice of it would be at once apparent. It is only custom and prejudice of the past which makes the system tolerable of excluding women altogether from the executive government of prisons. It would be very easy to show that this is not a sentimental grievance, and that the fact that the controlling administration of our prisons is composed exclusively of one sex does in practice result in the unequal

  1333
  treatment of the other. I should like to give one or two illustrations of that. In respect now of prison industries, prison industries for women and girls are not organised at all. Women and girls in this respect are at a very great disadvantage as compared with men. There is not one of the occupations in which women are employed in prisons which is of the slightest use to them for educational purposes, or by the exercise of which they can make a livelihood when they emerge from prison.
  My hon. Friend (Mr. Byles) made mention of another fact which I attribute very largely to the absence of women from the directorate of prisons, and that is that prison treatment is even less reformative in the case of women than in the case of men. I believe that is, to some extent at all events, due to the fact that we have no women on the directorate. That is not so in the United States, for instance. Women are on the directorate of prisons in various States of the United States. There is a woman on the Board of Prison Commissioners in the State of New York and two women on the Board of the Prison Commissioners in the State of Massachusetts. I should like also to call attention to the treatment of untried prisoners. Prisoners in this country under our assize system are kept in gaol for long periods. I find that in 1908 there were 126 persons who were kept in prison awaiting trial upwards of sixteen weeks. That is bad enough, and I would suggest to the right hon. Gentleman that he might very well make with advantage another communication to justices, reminding them of their large powers to grant bail, and urging them that there are many cases in which they might grant bail where they do not grant bail now. However, all that concerns my purpose now is the treatment of those untried prisoners, and, after some knowledge both of our own prisons and of the prisons of other countries, I do not hesitate to say that the treatment of untried prisoners in this country is harsher than the treatment of untried prisoners in any other civilised country that I know. That is a very discreditable fact.
  I would suggest to the right hon. Gentleman that it is not reasonable that a man who was kept for trial perhaps for sixteen weeks, and who may be acquitted when the trial comes on, that that man should be confined to his cell for twenty-two hours out of every twenty-four. I say that that is not treating untried men fairly. I would suggest to him also that
  1334
  there are other respects in which the treatment of untried prisoners should be ameliorated, as, for instance, with regard to the size and appointments of their cells, their opportunities for exercise, and their opportunities for intercourse. The reference to cells leads me to make the further observation that many of the cells—and I am speaking now not specially with regard to untried prisoners' cells—many of them are small and dark, and incapable of being properly ventilated. I do not think that that is denied in the Home Office It was not denied by the right hon. Gentleman's predecessor, but he said that financial considerations stood in the way of improving the cells, or of constructing new ones. I submit to the right hon. Gentleman that financial consideration ought not to be the main consideration in this matter, and if it is admitted that those cells are not in many respects su table, then immediate steps ought to be taken to improve them. Another matter to which I wish to direct attention is the varying degree in which probation orders are made by different courts of similar jurisdiction. If the right hon. Gentleman will look through the Returns, he will see that there is the greatest disparity in the number of probation orders which are made. That disparity is particularly striking in neighbouring jurisdictions, with presumably or certainly populations in all material respects similar, and yet you find that on one side of the border the magistrates use the probation system freely, whilst on the other side of the border they scarcely give committed persons the benefit of the probationary system at all.
  With regard to the staff, the taking over of the prisons by the State in the 'seventies had one unfortunate result, namely, the militarisation of the staff. Far too many military and naval officers were made governors of prisons. It is said that it is desirable to have these men because they are accustomed to control. But I think very different considerations ought to govern the appointment of a governor of a prison from those which one would naturally take into account in appointing the commander of a regiment. Surely a military man, so far as he is a military man, is not the best fitted to he the governor of a prison. With regard to warders, it is scarcely an exaggeration to say that everything in the good and humane management of a prison depends upon them. The power of the warders in a prison is almost appalling. It is

  1335
  extremely desirable that a good class of man should be brought into the service, but I submit that at present the wages are not sufficient to secure that object, nor are the conditions of the service altogether such as are calculated to achieve that purpose. In very many cases the warders work far too long hours. Another matter to which I wish to call attention is the treatment of persons committed to prison who, though they do not come within the legal definition of "lunatic," are certainly mentally affected. They are, one might say, on the borderland of insanity. There is a very large number of these persons—much larger perhaps than the general public, unless they look into the matter, might think—not certifiable for any mental disease, but certainly not altogether of sound mind. It is stated that 3 per cent. of the total receptions into prisons belong to this class, or 6,000 in all. I know the prison at Parkhurst is appropriated to these persons, but it seems to me that prison is not the place for them; or, at all events, if they are nominally in prison, they ought to be treated not as criminals so much as persons whose minds are diseased, and they ought to have medical far more than correctional treatment.
  I should like to recognise that within, say, the last ten years there has been a great improvement in the humane management of prisons. It must be, I suppose, twenty years ago that I drew the attention of this House to the fact, which had come to my knowledge by accident, that a prisoner in an English gaol was not allowed to retain a photograph of wife or child or any other memento of home. I cannot imagine anything more impolitic. Anything which appeals to the best feelings of our nature ought to be encouraged in prisons. Love of mother, wife, or child, and those gracious affections which surround the home, are good influences which will effect more than all your disciplinary punishments or an army of gaolers and Commissioners. I am glad to know that since I made that appeal a change has been made, and that some classes of prisoners, at all events, are allowed to retain those mementoes to which I have referred.
  Mr. CHARLES LEACH: I am glad to be informed that the Home Secretary intends to give some attention to prison reform. I am sure that when he brings his great ability to bear upon the question we
  1336
  shall have some change for the better. He will discover that our prison system, whilst it punishes, quite fails to reclaim, and any system which does that stands self-condemned. I think the prison authorities ought to welcome every agency which is likely to redeem prisoners and help them to get back to a better life. On this point I should like to call attention to the question of Nonconformist chaplains in prison. Nonconformists who get to prison are left almost entirely without any spiritual advice, except such as they are pleased to take from the chaplains of the Church of England. I live in a borough where there are two prisons. Last year, before I was elected to this House, I had the honour of being president of the Islington Free Church Council, and it was laid upon my heart to do something for the Nonconformist prisoners who might be in one of our gaols. I was appointed by the Free Church Council to be Nonconformist chaplain to the prison for women in the Borough of Islington. I had some little difficulty in getting the Home Office or the Prison Commissioners to give me the right of entry to the prison whenever it suited my convenience to talk with such Nonconformist prisoners as might be there. At length permission was fully given, and for six months I acted as voluntary chaplain. No pay was attached to the post, and personally I would not have accepted any. I spent a great part of those six months in periodically visiting the women in Holloway Gaol. I found, as all men will find if they follow the prison records, that there were very few Nonconformists in the prison; but any man who has experience must know that in 700 or 800 women there must be more than ten or twelve Nonconformists. In the nature of things it will be so. But the classification religiously is far from satisfactory. I believe it is the fact that the Church of England is credited with all those prisoners who do not declare themselves to be of any particular denomination. If a proper system of classification were practised it would be discovered, I think, that many of them were Nonconformists.
  I would suggest the desirability of appointing a Nonconformist chaplain to each of our prisons. I do not mean a voluntary chaplain. I know I shall be told that the Wesleyans have a minister visiting probably every prison in England, but there are other Nonconformists than Wesleyans. My suggestion would be that a Nonconformist chaplain should be attached to

  1337
  every prison, that he should have the right to visit prisoners at his convenience, and that his services should be recognised by the State and paid for as those of Church of England clergymen are paid for. In many cases it has been found that a Nonconformist working among Nonconformists in prison would be of very considerable service in helping many of these people to get back to a better life. Let me give one illustration from my experience of Holloway Gaol. I found there a woman of probably twenty-five years of age, sentenced to two months' imprisonment. She was a first offender. When I applied to see her papers I found described there that she had stolen goods valued at one farthing. Yet for this she was sentenced to two months' imprisonment. On the face of it it struck me as being cruel beyond description. I at once wrote to the Home Office, and they allowed one month off the sentence. I think it all ought to have been taken off. She, being a Nonconformist, probably had not made known to the chaplain what she was in trouble about. Acting as a Nonconformist chaplain, I, in conversation with her, got these facts from her, and was able to get a remission of one month off her sentence.
  I very respectfully suggest to the right hon. Gentleman the wisdom of considering the question of the appointment of Nonconformist chaplains. They would help some of these people back to sobriety; perhaps in many cases back to honesty. But their appointment should not be a voluntary one. They should be paid for their services, as the clergymen of the Church of England are; not perhaps so high a stipend, because for a while, at any rate, the work which they would have to do would not be so heavy as that of the Church of England chaplains. I wish again to express my sincere gratitude that the right hon. Gentleman is going to give some special attention to our prison system. It needs very careful attention and great alteration, for, as I said at the beginning, a system which punishes and does not reclaim stands self-condemned.
  Sir J. D. REES: If the House will be so kindly indulgent as to give me only five minutes again, I would like to ask the right hon. Gentleman a question. I confess, however, having heard the speech of the hon. Gentleman the Member for Salford (Mr. Byles) I cannot go on without making the strongest protest that is permitted to me against his assumption
  1338
  that because prisoners escape from gaol that therefore they are ill-treated in gaol. The hon. Gentleman said he could not understand why they should escape unless they are ill-treated. Has he never heard of the sporting instinct or of boredom? I should like to give him an experience of my own when on one occasion I visited the Andaman Islands. A couple of prisoners were employed as gardeners on the gardens around the houses. I was sitting on the verandah watching the scene before me, when one man dropped his bucket. He asked his neighbour to pick it up, and when the man stooped down to pick up the bucket the first dealt him a fatal blow on the head. "You will be hanged for that" the man was told. His reply was, "I want a change." Yet the hon. Gentleman the Member for Salford cannot bring himself to imagine that any convict could want to escape except he is ill-treated by a warder. I protest against any such way of looking at the matter, which is most unjust to a most honourable, sympathetic, and kindly class of public servants. Then the hon. Gentleman spoke about flogging as being derogatory to the manhood of the man flogged. Where is the manhood of the man who persecutes and terrorises women and children? However, I do not want to be led off by the hon. Member for Salford's speech. Again, the hon. Member for Bethnal Green deprecated the employment of military and naval men as warders in gaols. He seems to think there is something necessarily severe in their method of treatment. I protest, Sir, as one brought frequently of old into contact with the naval and military officers of this country that they are probably more humane than any other class, because they have had greater experience in the control of men. My hon. Friend seems to think that severity distinguishes subalterns, that cruelty is characteristic of captains, and that ferocity culminates in field-marshals. I hope that my right hon. Friend the Home Secretary, whom I first knew as a gallant subaltern in a Cavalry regiment, will correct this grievous misapprehension.
  To come to my point, I want to ask the right hon. Gentleman is there any such—I do not use the word in a bad sense—creature, person, acknowledged by the law of England as a "political prisoner"? I have asked that question several times. I believe in the mouths of those who use this expression, "political prisoner," it means an offender with whom the person

  1339
  using that expression is in sympathy; a man or woman who has committed an offence which the person who uses the word would like to commit himself. I would submit, Mr. Deputy-Speaker, that this is not a satisfactory legal definition, however accurate it may be—and I believe it to be accurate. For instance, where the right hon. Gentleman has to deal with an offender who has not brokenthe law like thievesfrom hunger, or like those who commit manslaughter from jealousy, but where out of mere wantonness and in order to express his or her views upon political matters an offender of this class wantonly breaks the law, I want to know if there is any justification in the law of this country for describing such a person as a "political prisoner," so entitling him or her to a more lenient application of the law? So far as I understand, speaking as an amateur, I believe that the punishment that can be awarded to any class of offenders is entirely in the discretion of the judge, or the magistrates concerned. My right hon. Friend has nothing to say to that. Therefore he has no power to classify offences as political or otherwise. My right hon. Friend the Member for the Forest of Dean, referred to legislation in India. I agree with him that the legislation of India might be an admirable exemplar to the legislation of this country in many respects. Where there we have political offenders it is because prisoners are dealt with under what is admittedly a political statute, and not in accordance with the ordinary procedure of the law. In this country, where we have no law to justify deportation, nothing so far as I know, can justify any person being described as a political offender. I should be grateful to the right hon. Gentleman if he will explain if these is any justification for the attitude so frequently taken in this matter by hon. Members in this House, and without, so far as I know, the slightest shadow of justification.
  Mr. E. GARDNER: I would ask the Home Secretary to consider the case of a class of men who are of great value and very deserving. I refer to the warders in criminal lunatic asylums. All the duties of warders are of a monotonous kind. But I think that those of the warders in criminal lunatic asylums are the most monotonous. There is also a certain amount of danger attached. There are many temptations to violence on the part
  1340
  of the patients, and a good deal of good temper is required from the warders, and not only good temper, but the very best of temper. They have long hours, too, and these are not conducive to continuous good temper. They perform their duties well, as we all desire that they should. Complaints, however, have reached me to the effect that the hours are too long and in respect to other matters. Although I feel quite sure that this matter has not escaped the attention of the right hon. Gentleman the Home Secretary, I venture to put in a word for these men and hope that an opportunity may be afforded for considering their case. In any case where the hours appear too long the right hon. Gentleman might exercise that authority that he has to make their duties as bearable as possible.
  Mr. POINTER: I should like to direct the particular attention of the Home Secretary to a matter which might be of advantage to all concerned. It is as to whether it would not he possible to use the period of confinement of chronic drunkards with a view to effecting their cure. As the right hon. Gentleman is aware, there are various expedients and so-called cures, some of which have been proved to have no foundation, others which have been applied with some success. I was speaking a short time ago to the chief constable of one of the northern towns. and he told me he started with a very great bias against all and sundry of the so-called cures, but that in recent years he had reason to change his mind. He told me that he had in his own house a certain visitor who had become a victim of the drink habit, and a particular cure by the victim's own consent had been tried with success. At first this young man was so bad that when he could not have the whisky bottle he got up in the middle of the night, broke open cupboard doors mid searched for it, and ultimately, when unable to get spirits in the house, he went out and bought them and hid them behind pictures and so on, so that they might be at hand. He consented, however, to submit to the cure, and the chief constable told me that in that particular case it was attended with remarkable results. He knew that the young man for two or three years could never go within smell or sight of spirits without experiencing a feeling of sickness. I suggested to the chief constable it would be a very good thing if the prison authorities could have the authority granted to them of trying experiments

  1341
  of that kind upon chronic drunkards in their confinement, and I ask the Hone Secretary to give his careful attention to it with the view of doing something to reform these men, whom so many of us would like to help, seeing that they are their own worst enemies.
  Mr. WHITEHOUSE: I listened with much regret to what I understand to be the attitude of opposition towards political prisoners being treated with less severity than ordinary prisoners, taken up by the hon. Member for Montgomery Boroughs.
  Sir J. D. REES: I asked if there was such a thing as a political prisoner.
  9.0 P.M.
  Mr. WHITEHOUSE: I think the hon. Member will not dispute that what I have said is a fair inference to draw from his remarks, but I trust we shall not go back upon the position taken up by the present Home Secretary in regard to political prisoners. We do not seek for a close definition as to what constitutes a political prisoner. We should rather be actuated by motives of humanity and common sense. If the hon. Gentleman needs a definition of a political prisoner, I cannot myself at the moment think of any better definition than the one given by the Home Secretary on the floor of this House in reply to a question a few weeks ago, and which seemed to meet with the entire approbation of Members of this House.
  I am sure when we learned that the Home Secretary was to make an important statement upon prison reform many of us remembered the impassioned and eloquent speech which was made by the hon. Member for the Scotland Division of Liverpool (Mr. T. P. O'Connor) in connection with the Debate that arose on the Parnell Commission. Addressing the Home Secretary the hon. Member said he could do nothing greater to mark his accession to the Home Office than to look into the conditions which still prevail in our prisons. I do not suggest that there is any intentional inhumanity in our prisons, I am sure there is not, and that the whole spirit of prison administration has been altered for the better in recent years, but there is unintentional inhumanity. I am sure many of us have in our recollection that very striking play "Justice," which we saw in London, and which so well expressed the point I desire to bring forward. There is first the unintentional cruelty of such matters as considerable periods of solitary confinement.
  1342
  These things do not restore self-respect to the prisoner, they either break his spirit altogether and cause him to go under, or they cause him, upon his release, to embark upon a fresh career of crime. We shall listen with interest to any proposals that may be made with a view to examining further into this question of solitary confinement with the intention either of abolishing it altogether, or else greatly decreasing it.
  Another matter is that relating to the indeterminate sentences. I think many of us saw that legislation passed with some misgiving. I should like to know whether the experiments are being watched and whether it is proposed to extend or to curtail the system. With regard to youthful offenders, still, unhappily, to be found in our prisons, I share the views expressed by the hon. Member for Exeter, who urged that we require some intermediate method of dealing with youthful prisoners between the probation system and the system under which they were committed for a number of years to what we know as the Borstal system. I feel that very much. I feel that we are still experimenting with the methods of treating our juvenile offenders, and I think we want a very much greater classification. The Borstal system is a most admirable method of dealing with a certain type of youthful offender, and for youthful criminals who have been several times convicted, and who obviously require the treatment it is possible to give them under the Borstal system. I should, however, be very sorry for the feeling to grow up that it is a desirable thing to send a youthful offender—and almost any type of youthful offender—to undergo a lengthy course under the Borstal system. I cannot belieye that for many youthful offenders such a system is suitable. I have seen myself, with considerable misgivings, a growing tendency on the part of some magistrates to lightly send to the Borstal system youthful offenders who require, in my view, different treatment. In this matter of the treatment of juvenile offenders I should like to call attention to the very great difference that exists in the methods of the various police courts. If, for instance, we take any Metropolitan area we find a considerable difference in the way in which youthful criminals are treated. Sometimes they are placed under probation, but in many instances, for similar offences, they are committed to prison because they are unable to pay a

  1343
  fine. It is an urgent matter that some -unanimity should be secured on this question, and some attempt should be made to give magistrates guidance as to the proper treatment of youthful offenders. If some reform on these lines can proceed, I am sure that not only shall we be more humane and more just to the individual offender, but we shall also be finding means by which potentially good men may be created for the service of the State.
  Mr. CHURCHILL: I am very glad that the House has found an opportunity of discussing for the first time for several years the Prisons Vote. The Debate and discussion which has arisen upon it has not touched upon any point which is not of substance and of value. I can only say that I have not listened to any speech since the Vote came on which did not contain some suggestion, some point, or some argument of real use and value. Whether it be the question raised by my hon. Friend behind me of the proper access of Nonconformist ministers to local and convict prisons; whether it be the point raised by the hon. Member for Sheffield as to the special treatment of chronic drunkards while in prison for other offences; or whether it be the question of flogging raised by the hon. Member for Salford, concerning which I will only say that it has been reduced to the most rigid minimum, and is only inflicted for acts of brutal violence to the persons who have to live among convicts, or for mutiny, which has not arisen at all of late years; or whether it be with regard to the question of the hours of warders, or of warders in criminal lunatic asylums which has been raised by the hon. Member opposite—on all these points the public have a right to know the view and opinion of hon. Members of this House, and on all these points I find myself, if not in complete concurrence, at any rate I have a sympathetic interest with those who have spoken on these points. The hon. Member for Bethnal Green referred to one special point which I will deal with before I venture to offer any general statement to the House.
  The hon. Member dealt with the treatment of women in prisons. It is quite true that we have not got any women on the Prison Commission, but that is not a matter on which I shall close my mind at all. We have, however, a lady inspector, and I think it might be possible to arrange that the lady inspector should be
  1344
  specially consulted at times when questions regarding female convict prisons are being discussed. I do not think it is true to say that women have suffered in prison because there is not a woman on the Prison Commission. May I point out that whereas the male convict only obtains a remission of one-fourth of his sentence by good conduct, a female convict in this manly world can obtain one-third remission of her sentence It is quite true that we have not yet organised women labour in prisons to anything like the same point of utility, having regard to the prisoners' return to industrial life as in the case of men, but that is due very largely to the fact that a very great proportion of the women are committed for such very short periods, so short, in fact, that it is practically impossible to organise any constructive course of labour for them. I agree that that is a matter to which attention should be drawn, and if it be possible to improve the classes of employment and technical instruction open to women in prisons I shall certainly be very glad to be able to annnounce it to the House of Common the first real principle which should guide anyone trying to establish a good system of prisons should be to prevent as many people as possible getting there at all. There is an injury to the individual, there is a loss to the State whenever a person is committed to prison for the first time, and every care, consistent with the maintenance of law and order, must be taken constantly to minimise the number of persons who are committed to gaol. My hon. Friend the Member for Bethnal Green has referred to the Probation of Offenders Act. It is an admirable Act, and an Act which has already made its effect manifest upon our criminal statistics. That Act has now been in operation for rather more than a year, and it has already produced very satisfactory results, but it is quite true, as my hon. Friend has said, that it is only in operation in the fullest sense of the word in certain parts of the country. Some are very good, others not so good, and others again do not seem to understand the provisions of the Act at all. A Committee was formed at the Home Office shortly before I became responsible, over which my right hon. Friend, now the Postmaster-General (Mi. Herbert Samuel), presided, to inquire into the working of the Act and to try and secure its more uniform adoption. That Committee made various recommendations, some of which we have already carried out, but its principal recommenda-

  1345
  tion, or rather one of its most important recommendations, was that the magistrates should be individually circularised upon the subject of the Act to make them fully acquainted with its use and with its provision. No circular has ever been sent out before to individual magistrates, but I thought the circumstances connected with this Act were so important and valuable that departure from precedent might be justified, and we have sent the circular to every magistrate throughout the country explaining to them clearly the provisions of the Act, and urging them to take advantage of it on every occasion. But, even with the difficulties of the partial adoption of the Act under which we suffer at the present time, there has been a most sensible improvement.
  There is one point, however, in which the Probation of Offenders Act has not operated, and that is in preventing persons from being unnecessarily committed to prison for the non-payment of fines. I have lately been giving my attention to the question of trying to see how we can ensure a period of grace always being allowed before the payment of a fine is enforced by imprisonment. There were 90,000 persons committed to prison last year in default of the payment of fines, and of those 13,000 or 14,000 paid the fine in whole or in part after they had been committed to prison. I think a much larger proportion would have paid the fine if they had had a reasonable period of time to get the money either by earning it or obtaining it from their friends and relations. The Governor of Wandsworth Gaol, one of those military gentlemen, I believe, of whom my hon. Friend the Member for Montgomery Boroughs (Sir J. D. Rees) has such a high opinion, tells me that of 138 prisoners committed in one of the early
  weeks in June he thinks some forty or fifty would have paid the fine if time had been given, and about twenty-five were, in his opinion, fit subjects for the Probation of Offenders Act. Nearly the whole of the persons committed to prison in default of the payment of fines are given no time to pay. Here are a few typical cases from Wandsworth Prison:—
  "Tower Bridge Police Court: Obscene language. In the opinion of Governor, prisoner could have paid if time were given. Belongs to Special Reserve, anti would have gone for training. Commitment to prison forthwith.—Thames Police Court: Could have paid. In good work. Proper case for probation. Forthwith.—Lambeth Police Court: Offence under School Acts. Well-known resident. Could have paid if given time. Forthwith.—Greenwich Police
  1346
  Court: Pedlars' Act. Well-known resident. First offence. Forthwith.—Brentford Police Court: Obscene language. Could have paid. Seventeen years resident. Forthwith.—Lambeth Police Court: Betting. Has lived with parents in same district for over twenty years. Could have paid if given time. Forthwith."
  There is almost an unlimited string of cases of men of fixed abode whose character is well known who commit offences for which they are properly punished by a fine, and who could pay the fine if they had the time, but in default of the money being in their pocket are practically given no time at all, and are committed to gaol. Let the House see what an injurious operation it is. The State loses its fine, and the man goes to prison, perhaps for the first time—a shocking event. He goes through practically all the formalities for a four or five days' sentence that would apply if he were sentenced to a long term of imprisonment for a serious offence, and the State has to pay for it all. Further, more than half the people committed to prison in default of paying fines are committed for offences of drunkenness. The enforcement of a fine is a far better punishment in a case of drunkenness than committal to prison. When the sentence of seven or fourteen days is over release is very often celebrated by the prisoner, but a fine effectively enforced means a period of temperance and of saving, and it achieves the very purpose which the court and the country had in view in the infliction of that punishment. This question of time to pay fines has been the subject of repeated circulars from the Home Office. The right hon. Gentleman opposite (Mr. Akers-Douglas) sent out a most admirable circular in 1905, in which he showed how many people were taken to prison before they could save the money necessary for the payment of a fine, although it subsequently appeared that if a little time and some facilities for communication with their friends had been allowed they would have been able to pay the full amount of the penalty. It shows how this very often falls upon the working man for an offence against the sanitary laws and other minor offences of our civilisation. I think it is time that these circulars should be disregarded or imperfectly attended to no longer, and I hope it may be possible in the Autumn Session to pass a short Act the main provision of
  which will be to secure a certain period of time to every person of fixed abode for the payment of any fine that may be inflicted upon him.

  1347
  I now come to another branch of the problem of preventing persons being committed unnecessarily to prison—I mean the treatment of offenders under twenty-one. Up till sixteen there is the Children Act, an admirable Act, which has practically destroyed the statistics of juvenile commitments. I would ask the House to consider specially the case of youths between sixteen and twenty-one. There is a disaster in sending a lad of that age to gaol, and an old prison visitor told me the other day that often they cry the first time, but not on subsequent occasions. It may be due to the accommodation provided, but at any rate it is a great misfortune when a young lad is sent to prison for the first time. It does not matter much whether he is sent to prison direct or whether he goes in default of paying a fine which he could not pay any more than he could pay the National Debt. I am sure the House will support me in any steps that may be taken to prevent this unnecessary imprisonment. It is an evil which falls only on the sons of the working classes. The sons of other classes may commit many of the same kind of offences and in boisterous and exuberant moments, whether at Oxford or anywhere else, may do things for which the working classes are committed to prison, although injury may not be inflicted on anyone. In my opinion no boy should go to prison unless he is incorrigible or has committed some serious offence I think we ought to discover some from of disciplinary correction outside prison. I hope the House will not be startled at the proposal I am going to make. I see no reason why we should not introduce some kind of system of defaulters' drill—I do not mean military drill, because that would be dishonouring the profession of arms, but I think there are systems which might be extremely salutary which at the same time would be extremely disagreeable. I cannot see why it should not be possible to introduce some system that will create some branch of probation—a disciplinary branch for dealing with minor offences and mere rowdyism, which can be punished without putting the offenders into prison. Let the House remember there are at least 5,000 lads committed to prison for this class of offence every year, and they would be saved if some method of correction of the kind I have indicated could be devised, with a proper regard to the best time for
  1348
  inflicting this punishment. I hope to be able to make proposals next year on this subject. I am proposing to lay down certain general principles for the treatment of youthful offenders. No youth should go to prison unless he is shown to be incorrigible or to have committed some serious offence. We have at the Home Office, in Sir E. Ruggles-Brise, one of the foremost reformers of this country, whose efforts in dealing with youthful offenders have admittedly proved very valuable. No youth between sixteen and twenty-one ought to be committed to prison for any time which is not educative or disciplinary. I think no youth should be committed to prison for any term under a month. It is an abuse to send a boy to prison for a week or ten days for an offence which might perfectly well be settled outside. It is an evil to send him to prison for a long period. I think for young people under twenty-one the three years' Borstal course ought to be the maximum, except in the case of gross crime, and I hope, if I am in office next year, to make more detailed proposals on that point. My hon. Friend the Member for Montgomeryshire has spoken about political prisoners. He has said there is no such thing as a political prisoner known to law. I have never attempted to trespass on that difficult ground, but I will point out that there are prisoners who are committed to prison for offences which do not involve any moral turpitude. I think that will be the general opinion of the House. I am very glad the House has assented to the new prison rule which I placed on the Table some time ago. That rule enables the Home Secretary, in virtue of the various Acts which he has to administer, to relieve certain prisoners not guilty of any acts involving moral turpitude. I propose to relieve them of the necessity of wearing prison clothing, of being specially searched, and of being compelled to take the regulation prison bath. I also propose to enable the offenders in the first division to be permitted, under certain circumstances, to obtain food from outside, to exercise freely both in the morning and in the afternoon, to converse with other prisoners when taking exercise, and to have at their own expense such books, not dealing with current events, and such literature as are in accordance with the public interests.
  Sir J. D. REES: May I venture to ask my right hon. Friend if there is no moral turpitude involved in deliberately breaking the law?
  Mr. CHURCHILL: By moral turpitude I mean offences involving dishonesty, indecency, gross violations of morality, or cruelty. I am not now talking of those other offences which are undoubtedly reprehensible, but do not go so far as that. I have given instructions that all persons committed to prison for passive resistance and all persons committed to prison as suffragettes are, as a matter of course, in the absence of special circumstances, to be accorded the full benefit of the new rules, and there may be other cases to which it will be possible to apply those rules. I come to the question of separate confinement. My noble Friend Lord Gladstone made all his preparations ready for effecting a substantial reduction in the period of solitary confinement. That subject has been brought before our notice by various able writers in the Press, and exponents of the drama, who have with force and feeling brought home to the general public the pangs which the prisoner may suffer in long months of solitude. I have decided that my Noble Friend's proposal to reduce solitary confinement to three months in all cases shall be carried one step further, and that it shall be reduced to one month in all cases, except in the case of convicts who return again and again to penal servitude, and, who are called recidivists. In those cases it will be maintained as at the present time, because those are the men who are anxious when they get into prison to join their old associates, and it is necessary that some deterrent should be put upon those who come again and again back to penal servitude, but for all the rest of the prisoners committed to penal servitude the period of solitary confinement will be one month, with this exception: that if the prisoner wishes for separate confinement——[Laughter.] A great portion of them do. I hope the House will not laugh at that. A certain portion of them shrink from association with the prison gang, and prefer to remain in their cells, and therefore if a prisoner wishes to be permitted to be in solitary confinement for three months, that licence will be granted to him. Then I am glad to say that my right hon. Friend the Chancellor of the Exchequer has been very kind to me in this matter. We have to consider now that it is forty years since the Education Act of 1870 was passed, and that we have got a class of men in our prisons who need brain food of the most ordinary character. There have from time
  1350
  to time been occasional lectures given in the prisons, and a few months ago the Somerset Light Infantry, quartered near, had their band in Dartmoor Prison and it played to the convicts. It was an amazing thing the effect which was produced on all these poor people, and their letters for a month after had been eloquent in recognition of the fact. I have been able to arrange with the Treasury for a small sum of money—only a few hundred pounds a year—which will enable four lectures to be given a year in every convict prison throughout the country. Once in every three months is quite often enough, but it is not too much, and there is every reason to believe that these will be looked forward to, will be the means of securing good conduct, and also the means of supplying persons in prison with certain food for thought, and in regard to music with a certain solace which cannot be injurious to the purpose the State has at heart.
  Mr. FALLE: The music will be an added punishment to some.
  Mr. CHURCHILL: I do nat know about that. The hon. Member for Salford (Mr. Byles) has spoken of the serious figures of recidivists, and they are indeed very serious. In 1900, 1901, 1902 and 1903—in those four years about 4,000 convicts were released from gaol, that is about 1,000 a year. Three out of four have already returned under long sentences—that is appalling. We must make every allowance for weak-minded persons. There is a great element of weak-minded criminals in our system, who are being increasingly segregated and classified, but who must not be regarded as on the same footing as the ordinary rational offender, but when all allowance has been made for them, the House, I am sure, will feel that it is a very grave and serious situation. There are two reasons which are given for the recidivists, one is that the criminal is born and not made, and the propensity to crime is only an affliction and weakness; the other is that the pressure of the prison system is such on the mind and character of a man and his reputation when he comes out that he is never able to establish himself in ordinary life again. I do not know which view is true, but, at any rate, we must regard the figure of recidivists with deep and increasing anxiety. The Prevention of Crime Act, to which the House assented in

  1351
  the last Parliament, is one way of dealing with recidivists. That Act has been at work now for more than a year, and I think its working ought to be very closely and carefully scrutinised and watched. The House, with great justice and wisdom, excluded from that Act the indeterminate sentence. But there is no doubt that the Act has had the effect, as was intended, of procuring much longer sentences in certain cases than would have been enforced under the older law. It is not only the length of the sentences which makes it necessary that the Act should be carefully scrutinised; it is the fact that the disparity between one sentence and another has, I believe, been aggravated by the Act. The method of working the Act is as follows: First of all an application has to be made by the police authority to the Director of Public Prosecutions, who says whether the application shall go forward or not and a particular prisoner shall be prosecuted as a habitual offender. There have been 439 applications by the police authorities, of which 305 have been allowed. There are now in prison 174 persons who have been convicted as habituals and sentenced to a term of penal servitude and of preventive detention of not less than eight years.
  I have made it my duty to search the calendars in which not merely those cases which would ordinarily come under the view of the Home Secretary are contained but where one can view the whole stream of our criminal punishments, and I see in these calendars scores of cases which could just as properly be characterised as habitual as those which have been made the subject of special prosecutions and of this extremely severe treatment. I should like the House to realise that if that be true, as I believe it is, the really important decision as regards convicts depends upon whether the application is made or not for him to be prosecuted as a habitual criminal. If that decision is once made it is irreparable, and it is only three to one that he does not shoot over Niagara in the sense of a very long sentence of eight, ten, or twelve years for an offence for which in many other cases three or four months would be deemed sufficient by the court. That decision, the most important of all as regards the prisoner, is not taken by the judge or the jury or the Director of Public Prosecutions or the Home Office. It is taken by 188 different police authorities from one end of the
  1352
  country to the other, doing their duty to the best of their ability no doubt, but doing it from entirely different points of view in each case and with all the variety of the personal equation as between man and man. I have been very carefully considering this fact, and I have come to the conclusion that altogether too wide a discretionary power is given in the first instance to these numerous authorities, and I am considering by what means limits can be assigned to the exercise of that power so as to secure a much more general and a much more even application of these very special powers and sentences of such great severity which the House has thought fit in its wisdom to authorise in the past. There is a great danger of using smooth words for ugly things. Preventive detention is penal servitude in all its aspects. There may be modifications, but in the main it is a form of confinement and of surveillance which must necessarily be of a severe and rigorous character. I only hope those who are charged with the administration of this Act in its very early days will very carefully bear in mind the very severe character which all forms of penal detention must necessarily take in the present state of our prison system.
  The House will agree that such a system of preventive detention must be closely watched and that it cannot stand alone. We cannot impose these serious penalties upon individuals unless we make a great effort and a new effort to rehabilitate men who have been in prison and secure their having a chance to resume their places in the ranks of honourable industry. The present system is not satisfactory. Convicts obtain a 25 per cent. eduction for good conduct and leave prison on a licence. There are several excellent prisoners' aid societies, to one of which convicts are persuaded to go by the fact that a gratuity is paid them by the society. These societies do extremely good work and I honour them for it, but, of course, there is a lack of co-ordination and a certain amount of rivalry between them, and behind all these societies stands the strong apparatus of police provision and the regular machinery of ticket-of-leave. I have a great admiration for the way in which the police conduct the business of police supervision of prisoners who have been released on licence. It is not a bit true to say they harry a man and hunt him down. At the same time, it is a great impediment to a man to have to go and report himself repeatedly to the police, and to have the

  1353
  police coming repeatedly inquiring after him, in obtaining his position in honest industry again. The proposal I make is that we should establish a new central agency of a semi-official character, half official members representing the authorities and half the representatives of all these prisoners' aid societies. That would combine official power with what I think essential, that there shall be an individual study of every case, that all convicts shall be distributed by the central agency between different prisoners' aid societies of all the different denominations, and all the different charitable societies, that the whole business of police supervision shall be absolutely suspended, and the whole system of ticket-of-leave come to an end completely, and that, except in the case of refractory persons, a convict, when he leaves prison, will have nothing more to do with the police. They need not see them nor hear of them again, but will be dealt with entirely through the agency of these societies, working under the central body, whose only object will be to do the best for the convict. The Chancellor of the Exchequer has been good enough to assign me £7,500 a year for the development and strengthening of the methods by which we are to enable prisoners, on release from penal servitude, to have a fair chance of taking their place in the ordinary life of the country.
  When His Majesty came to the Throne one of the very first wishes which he was pleased to express was the desire that at a time when all hearts were stirred, and when everyone felt anxious to lay aside old quarrels, the wretched prison population of the country should not stand outside that movement in the national mind.
  On similar previous occasions the proposal has always been to release a certain number of prisoners definitely. I think we have found a much better way, and that is not to release individuals, but to make a general pro raid reduction of sentences over the whole area of the prison population. The remissions which were granted on this occasion affected 11,000 prisoners, and at a stroke struck 500 years of imprisonment and penal servitude from the prison population. I
  am glad to be able to tell the House that no evil results of any kind have followed from this. It is not at all true to say that a number of the men released have already returned to gaol. We must not allow optimism, or hope, or benevolence in these matters to carry us too far. We must not forget that when every material improvement has been effected in prisons, when the temperature has been rightly adjusted, when the proper food to maintain health and strength has been given, when the doctors, chaplains, and prison visitors have come and gone, the convict stands deprived of everything that a free man calls life. We must not forget that all these improvements, which are sometimes salves to our consciences, do not change that position. The mood and temper of the public in regard to the treatment of crime and criminals is one of the most unfailing tests of the civilisation of any country. A calm and dispassionate recognition of the rights of the accused against the State, and even of convicted criminals against the State, a constant heart-searching by all charged with the duty of punishment, a desire and eagerness to rehabilitate in the world of industry all those who have paid their dues in the hard coinage of punishment, tireless efforts towards the discovery of curative and regenerating processes, and an unfaltering faith that there is a treasure, if you can only find it, in the heart of every man—these are the symbols which in the treatment of crime and criminals mark and measure the stored-up strength of a nation, and are the sign and proof of the living virtue in it.
  And it being after Ten of the Clock, Mr. SPEAKER, in pursuance of Standing Order No. 15, proceeded to put forthwith the Question necessary to dispose of the Report of the Resolution then under consideration.
  Mr. SPEAKER then proceeded, in pursuance of Standing Order No. 15, to put forthwith the Questions, "That this House doth agree with the Committee in the outstanding Resolutions reported in respect of each Class of the Civil Service Estimates and the Revenue Departments."
  The House divided: Ayes, 263; Noes, 171.

  Division No 115]

  AYES.

  [9.59 p.m.

  Abraham, William (Dublin Harbour)

  Agar-Robertes, Hon T. C. R.

  Anderson, Andrew Macbeth

  Abraham, William (Rhondda)

  Agnew, Gearge William

  Ashton, Thomas Gair

  Addision, Dr. Christopher

  Ainsworth, John Stlrilng

  Asquith, Rt. Hon. Herbert Henry

  Adkins, W. Ryland D.

  Allen, Charles Peter

  Baker, Harold T. (Accrington)

  Baker, Joseph Allen (Finsbury, E.)

  Havelock-Allan, Sir Henry

  Radford, George Heynes

  Balfour, Robert (Lanark)

  Haworth, Arthur A.

  Rainy, Adam Rolland

  Barclay, Sir Thomas

  Hayward, Evan

  Raphael, Herbert H.

  Barlow, Sir John Emmott

  Hazleton, Richard

  Rea, Walter Russell

  Barnes, George N.

  Helme, Norval Watson

  Reddy, Michael

  Barran, Sir John N. (Hawick)

  Henderson, Arthur (Durham)

  Rees, Sir J. D.

  Barton, William

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

  Remnant, James Farquharson

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

  Henry, Charles S

  Randall, Athelstan

  Bentham, George Jackson

  Higham, John Sharp

  Richards, Thomas

  Birrell, Rt. Hon. Augustine

  Hindle, Frederick George

  Roberts, Charles H. (Lincoln)

  Black, Arthur W.

  Hobhouse, Rt. Hon. Charles E. H.

  Roberts, George H. (Norwich)

  Bowerman, Charles W.

  Hodge, John

  Roberts, Sir J. H. (Denbighs.)

  Brace, William

  Hogan, Michael

  Robertson, Sir G. Scott (Bradford)

  Brady, Patrick Joseph

  Hooper, Arthur George

  Robinson, Sidney

  Brocklehurst, William B.

  Hope, John Deans (Fife, West)

  Roch, Walter F. (Pembroke)

  Bryce, John Annan

  Horne, Charles Silvester (Ipswich)

  Roe, Sir Thomas

  Burke, E. Haviland-

  Howard, Hon. Geoffrey

  Rowntree, Arnold

  Burns, Rt. Hon. John

  Hughes, Spencer Leigh

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

  Burt, Rt. Hon. Thomas

  Hunter, Wm. (Lanark, Govan)

  Samuel, J. (Stockton-on-Tees)

  Buxton, C. R. (Devon, Mid)

  Illingworth, Percy H.

  Samuel, S. M. (Whitechapel)

  Byles, William Pollard

  Isaacs, Sir Rufus Daniel

  Schwann, Sir Charles E.

  Cameron, Robert

  Jardine, Sir John (Roxburghshire)

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

  Carr-Gomm, H. W.

  Johnson, William

  Seddon, James A.

  Cawley, Sir Frederick (Prestwich)

  Jones, Edgar R. (Merthyr Tydvil)

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

  Cawley, H. T. (Lancs. Heywood)

  Jones, Henry Haydn (Merioneth)

  Shackleton, David James

  Chancellor, Henry George

  Jones, William (Carnarvonshire)

  Sherwell, Arthur James

  Channing, S Francis Aliston

  Jewett, Frederick William

  Shortt, Edward

  Chapple, Dr William Allen

  Joyce, Michael

  Simon, John Allsebrook

  Churchill, Rt. Hon. Winston S.

  Keating, Matthew

  Smith, H. B. Lees (Northampton)

  Clough, William

  King, Joseph (Somerset, North)

  Snowden, Philip

  Clynes, John R.

  Lambert, George

  Soames, Arthur Wellesley

  Collins, Godfrey P. (Greenock)

  Law, Hugh A. (Donegal, W.)

  Soares, Ernest Joseph

  Collins, Stephen (Lambeth)

  Layland-Barratt, Sir Francis

  Spicer, Sir Albert

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

  Leach, Charles

  Stanley, Albert (Staffs, N.W.)

  Compton-Rickett, Sir J

  Lehmann, Rudolf C.

  Strachey, Sir Edward

  Corbett, A. Cameron (Glasgow)

  Levy, Sir Maurice

  Summers, James Woolley

  Cowan, William Henry

  Lewis, John Herbert

  Sutherland, John E.

  Craig, Herbert J. (Tynemouth)

  Low, Sir Frederick

  (Norwich) Sutton, John E.

  Crosfield, Arthur H.

  Luttrell, Hugh Fownes

  Taylor, John W. (Durham)

  Crossley, Sir William J.

  Lyell, Charles Henry

  Taylor, Theodore C. (Radcliffe)

  Cullinan, John

  Macdonald, J. R. (Leicester)

  Tennant, Harold John

  Davies, Ellis William (Elfion)

  Macdonald, J. M. (Falkirk Burghs)

  Thomas, Abel (Carmarthen, E.)

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

  Macnamara, Dr. Thomas J.

  Thomas, David Alfred (Cardiff)

  Davies, M. Vaughan- (Cardiganshire)

  M'Callum, John M.

  Thomas, James Henry (Derby)

  Dawes, James Arthur

  M'Curdy, Charles Albert

  Thorne, G. R. (Wolverhampton)

  Denman, Hon. Richard Douglas

  McKenna, Rt. Hon. Reginald

  Toulmin, George

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

  Mallet, Charles Edward

  Trevelyan, Charles Philips

  Dilke, Rt. Hon. Sir Charles

  Markham, Arthur Basil

  Twist, Henry

  Doris, William

  Masterman, C. F. G.

  Ure, Rt. Hon. Alexander

  Duncan, C. (Barrow-In-Furness)

  Meagher, Michael

  Verney, Frederick William

  Duncan, J. Hastings (York, Otley)

  Menzies, Sir Walter

  Wadsworth, John

  Dunn, A. Edward (Camborne)

  Middlesbrook, William

  Walker, H. De R. (Leicester)

  Edwards, Enoch

  Millar, James Duncan

  Walsh, Stephen

  Ellbank, Master of

  Molteno, Percy Alport

  Walters, John Tudor

  Elverston, Harold

  Montagu, Hon. E. S.

  Walton, Sir Joseph

  Falconer, James

  Mooney, J. J.

  Wardle, G. J.

  Fenwick, Charles

  Morgan, G. Hay (Cornwall)

  Waring, Walter

  Ferens, Thomas Robinson

  Morton, Alpheus Cleophas

  Warner, Sir Thomas Courtenay

  France, Gerald Ashburner

  Murray, Capt. Hon. Arthur C.

  Wason, Rt. Hon. E. (Clackmannan)

  Furness, Stephen

  Muspratt, Max

  Wason, J. Cathcart (Orkney)

  Gelder, Sir William Alfred

  Neilson, Francis

  Waterlow, David Sydney

  George, Rt. Hon. D. Lloyd

  Nicholson, Charles N. (Doncaster)

  Watt, Henry A.

  Gibson, Sir James Puckering

  Nolan, Joseph

  Wedgwood, Josiah C.

  Gill, Alfred Henry

  Norton, Capt. Cecil W.

  White, Sir George (Norfolk)

  Glanville, Harold James

  Nussey, Sir T. Willans

  White, J. Dundas (Dumbartonshire)

  Glover, Thomas

  Nuttall, Harry

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

  Goddard, Sir Daniel Ford

  O'Brien, Patrick (Kilkenny)

  Whitehouse, John Howard

  Greenwood, Granville George

  O'Connor, John (Kildare, N.)

  Whyte, A. F. (Perth)

  Greig, Colonel James William

  O'Connor, T. P. (Liverpool)

  Wiles, Thomas

  Grey. Rt. Hon. Sir Edward

  O'Grady, James

  Wilkie, Alexander

  Guest, Major

  Palmer, Godfrey Mark

  Williams, John (Glamorgan)

  Gwynn, Stephen Lucius (Galway)

  Parker, James (Halifax)

  Williamson, Sir Archibald

  Hackett, John

  Pearce, William

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

  Haldane, Rt. Hon. Richard B.

  Pease, Rt. Hon. Joseph A.

  Wilson, John (Durham, Mid)

  Hall, F. (Yorks, Normanton)

  Philipps, Sir O. C. (Pembroke)

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

  Hancock, John George

  Pickersgill, Edward Hare

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

  Harcourt, Rt. Hon. L. (Rossendale)

  Pirle, Duncan V.

  Winfrey, Richard

  Harcourt, Robert V. (Montrose)

  Pointer, Joseph

  Wood, T. M'Kinnon (Glasgow)

  Hardie, J. Keir (Merthyr Tydvil)

  Pollard, Sir George H.

  Young, William (Perth, East)

  Harmsworth, R. Leicester

  Pensonby, Arthur A. W. H.

  Younger, W. (Peebles and Selkirk)

  Harvey, A. G. C. (Rochdale)

  Price, C. E. (Edinburgh, Central)

  Yoxall, Sir James Henry

  Harvey, T. E. (Leeds, West)

  Priestley, Arthur (Grantham)

  Harwood, George

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

  TELLERS FOR THE AYES.—Mr. Gulland and Mr. Dudley Ward.

  Haslam, James (Derbyshire)

  Primrose, Hon. Nell James

  Haslam, Lewis (Monmouth)

  Pringle, William M. R.

  1356

  1357

  NOES

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

  Gibbs, George Abraham

  Morrison, Captain James A

  Adam, Major William A.

  Gilmour, Captain John

  Morrison-Bell, Major A. C.

  Arbuthnot, Gerald A.

  Goldsmith, Frank

  Mount, William Arthur

  Archer-Shee, Major Martin

  Gooch, Henry Cubitt

  Newman, John R. P.

  Arkwright, John Stanhope

  Goulding, Edward Alfred

  Newton, Harry Kottingham

  Ashley, Wilfred W.

  Grant, J. A.

  Nicholson, William G. (Petersfield)

  Attenborough, Walter Annis

  Greene, Walter Raymond

  Nield, Herbert

  Balcarres, Lord

  Gretton, John

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

  Baldwin, Stanley

  Guinness, Hon. Waiter Edward

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

  Banbury, Sir Frederick George

  Gwynne, R. S. (Sussex, Eastbourne)

  Ormsby-Gore, William

  Baring, Captain Hon. Guy Victor

  Haddock, George Bahr

  Parkes, Ebenezer

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

  Hall, D. B. (Isle of Wight)

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

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

  Hall, E. Marshall (Toxteth)

  Perkins, Walter Frank

  Bathurst, Charles (Wilts, Wilton)

  Hambro, Angus Valdemar

  Pollock, Ernest Murray

  Benn, Ion Hamilton (Greenwich)

  Homersley, Alfred St. George

  Quliter, William Eley C.

  Bentinck, Lord Henry Cavendish

  Hamilton, Lord C. J. (Kensington)

  Bandies, Sir John Scurrah

  Boyle, W. Lewis (Norfolk, Mid)

  Hamilton, Marquess of (Londonderry)

  Rawlinson, John Frederick Peel

  Boyton, James

  Hardy, Laurence (Kent, Ashford)

  Rawson, Col. Richard H.

  Brackenbury, Henry Langton

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

  Ridley, Samuel Forde

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

  Harrison-Broadley, H. B.

  Roberts, S. (Sheffield, Ecclesall)

  Butcher, S. H. (Cambridge University)

  Henderson, Major Harold (Berkshire)

  Rolleston, Sir John

  Campion, W. R.

  Hermon-Hodge, Sir Robert T.

  Ronaldshay, Earl of

  Carlile, Edward Hildred

  Hickman, Colonel Thomas E.

  Rothschild, Lionel de

  Cater, John

  Hillier, Dr. Alfred Peter

  Royds, Edmund

  Cautley, Henry Strother

  Holler, Gerald Fitzroy

  Salter, Arthur Clavell

  Cecil, Evelyn (Aston Manor)

  Hope, Harry (Bute)

  Samuel, Sir Harry (Norwood)

  Clay, Captain, H. H. Spender

  Hope, James Fitzalan (Sheffield)

  Sanders, Robert Arthur

  Coates, Major Edward F.

  Horne, Wm. E. (Surrey, Guildford)

  Sanderson, Lancelot

  Colefax, Henry Arthur

  Houston, Robert Paterson

  Sassoon, Sir Edward Albert

  Compton, Lord Alwyne (Brentford)

  Hume-Williams, William Ellis

  Smith, F. E. (Liverpool, Walton)

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

  Hunt, Rowland

  Stanier, Beville

  Courthope, George Loyd

  Hunter, Sir Charles Rodk. (Bath)

  Stanley, Hon. G. F (Preston)

  Craig, Charles Curtis (Antrim, S.)

  Jackson, Sir John (Devonport)

  Starkey, John Ralph

  Craik, Sir Henry

  Jardine, Ernest (Somerset, East)

  Staveley-Hill, Henry (Staffordshire)

  Cripps, Sir Charles Alfred

  Jessel, Captain Herbert M.

  Stewart, Gorshom (Ches., Wirral)

  Croft, Henry Page

  Kerry, Earl of

  Strauss, Arthur

  Dairymple, Viscount

  Keswick, William

  Sykes, Alan John

  Dalziel, Davidson (Brixton)

  Kimber, Sir Henry

  Talbot, Lord Edmund

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

  King, Sir Henry Seymour (Hull)

  Terrell, Henry (Gloucester)

  Dixon, Charles Harvey (Boston)

  Kinloch-Cooke, Sir Clement

  Thompson, Robert (Belfast, North)

  Douglas, Rt. Hon. A. Akers.

  Knight, Captain Eric Ayshford

  Thomson, W. Mitchell (Down, North)

  Du Cros, A. (Tower Hamlets, Bow)

  Law, Andrew Boner (Dulwich)

  Thynne, Lord Alexander

  Du Cros, Arthur P. (Hastings)

  Lawson, John Harry

  Valentia, Viscount

  Duke, Henry Edward

  Lee, Arthur Hamilton

  Walker, Col. W. H. (Lancashire)

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

  Lewisham, Viscount

  Walrond, Hon. Lionel

  Eyres-Monsell, Bolton M.

  Llewelyn, Venabies

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

  Faber, George D. (Clapham)

  Locker-Lampson, O. (Ramsay)

  Wheler, Granville C. H.

  Falle, Bertram Godfray

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

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

  Fell, Arthur

  Lansdale, John Brownlee

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

  Fitzroy, Hon. Edward A.

  Lyttelton, Hon. J. C. (Droitwich)

  Willoughby, Major Hon. Claude

  Fleming, Valentine

  MacCaw, Wm. J. MacGeagh

  Willoughby de Eresby, Lord

  Fletcher, John Samuel

  Mackinder, Mallard J.

  Wood, Hon. E. F. L. (Yorks, Ripon)

  Forster, Henry William

  Macmaster, Donald

  Wood, John (Stalybridge)

  Foster, Harry S. (Lowestoft)

  Magnus, Sir Philip

  Worthington-Evans, L. (Colchester)

  Foster, John K. (Coventry)

  Mason, James F.

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

  Foster, Philip S. (Warwick, S.W.)

  Meysey-Thompson, E. C.

  Gardner, Ernest

  Mildmay, Francis Bingham

  TELLERS FOR THE NOES:—Captain Clive and Mr. Barnston.

  Gastrell, Major W. Houghton

  Morpeth, Viscount

  CLASS I.
  "That a sum, not exceeding £2,192,429, be granted to His Majesty, to defray the Charge which will come in course of payment during the year ending on the 31st day of March, 1911, for Expenditure in respect of the Services included in Class I. of the Estimates for Civil Services."
  [For Services included in Class, see 19th July, 1910, cols. 1181–1182.]
  Question put, "That this House doth agree with the Committee in the outstanding Resolutions in respect of Class I. of the Civil Service Estimates."
  The House divided: Ayes, 265; Noes 188.

  Division No. 116.]

  AYES.

  [10.10 p.m.

  Abraham, William (Dublin Harbour)

  Ainsworth, John Stirling

  Baker, Joseph Allen (Finsbury, E.)

  Abraham, William (Rhondda)

  Allen, Charles P.

  Balfour, Robert (Lanark)

  Addison, Dr. C.

  Anderson, Andrew Macbeth

  Barclay, Sir Thomas

  Adkins, W. Ryland D.

  Ashton, Thomas Gair

  Barlow, Sir John Emmott

  Agar-Robartes, Hon. T. C. R.

  Asquith, Flt. Hon. Herbert Henry

  Barnes, George N.

  Agnew, George William

  Baker, Harold T. (Accrington)

  Barran, Sir John N. (Hawick)

  Barton, William

  Helme, Norval Watson

  Raphael, Herbert Henry

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

  Henderson, Arthur (Durham)

  Rea, Walter Russell

  Bentham, George Jackson

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

  Reddy, Michael

  Birrell, Rt. Hon. Augustine

  Henry, Charles S.

  Rees, Sir J. D.

  Black, Arthur W.

  Higham, John Sharp

  Rendall, Athelstan

  Bowerman, Charles W.

  Hindle, F. G.

  Richards, Thomas

  Brace, William

  Hobhouse, Rt. Hon. Charles E. H.

  Roberts, Charles H. (Lincoln)

  Brady, Patrick Joseph

  Hedge, John

  Roberts, George H. (Norwich)

  Brocklehurst, William B.

  Hogan, Michael

  Roberts, Sir J. H. (Denbighs.)

  Bryce, J. Annan

  Hooper, Arthur George

  Robertson, Sir G. Scott (Bradford)

  Burke, E. Haviland-

  Hope, John Deans (Fife, West)

  Robinson, S.

  Burns, Rt. Hon. John

  Horne, Charles Silvester (Ipswich)

  Roch, Walter F. (Pembroke)

  Burt, Rt. Hon. Thomas

  Howard, Hon. Geoffrey

  Roe, Sir Thomas

  Buxton, C. R. (Devon, Mid)

  Hughes, Spencer Leigh

  Rowntree, Arnold

  Byles, William Pollard

  Hunter, W. (Govan)

  Runciman, Rt. Hon. Walter

  Cameron, Robert

  Illingworth, Percy H.

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

  Carr-Gomm, H. W.

  Isaacs, Sir Rufus Daniel

  Samuel, J. (Stockton-on-Tees)

  Cawley, Sir Frederick (Prestwich)

  Jardine, Sir J. (Roxburgh)

  Samuel, S. M. (Whitechapel)

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

  Johnson, William

  Schwann, Sir Charles E.

  Chancellor, Henry George

  Jones, Edgar R. (Merthyr Tydvll)

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

  Channing, Sir Francis Allston

  Jones, Henry Haydn (Merioneth)

  Seddon, James A.

  Chapple, Dr. William Allen

  Jones, William (Carnarvonshire)

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

  Churchill, Rt. Hon. Winston S.

  Jowett, Frederick William

  Shackleton, David James

  Clough, William

  Joyce, Michael

  Sherwell, Arthur James

  Clynes, John R.

  Keating, Matthew

  Shortt, Edward

  Collins, Godfrey P. (Greenock)

  King, J. (Somerset, N.)

  Simon, John Allsebrook

  Collins, Stephen (Lambeth)

  Lambert, George

  Smith, H. B. Lees (Northampton)

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

  Law, Hugh A. (Donegal, W.)

  Snowden, Philip

  Compton-Rickett, Sir J.

  Layland-Barratt, Sir Francis

  Soames, Arthur Wellesley

  Corbett, A. Cameron

  Leach, Charles

  Soares, Ernest Joseph

  Cornwall, Sir Edwin A.

  Lehmann, Rudolf C.

  Spicer, Sir Albert

  Cowan, W. H.

  Levy, Sir Maurice Stanley,

  Albert (Staffs., N.W.)

  Craig, Herbert James (Tynemouth)

  Lewis, John Herbert

  Strachey, Sir Edward

  Crosfield, Arthur H.

  Low, Sir Frederick (Norwich)

  Summers, James Woolley

  Crossley, Sir William J.

  Luttrell, Hugh Fownes

  Sutherland, J. E.

  Cullinan, John

  Lyell, Charles Henry

  Sutton, John E.

  Davies, Ellis William (Eifion)

  Macdonald, J. R. (Leicester)

  Taylor, John W. (Durham)

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

  Macdonald, J. M. (Falkirk Burghs)

  Taylor, T. C. (Radcliffe)

  Davies, M. Vaughan- (Cardigan)

  Macnamara, Dr. Thomas J.

  Tennant, Harold John

  Dawes, J. A.

  MacVeagh, Jeremiah

  Thomas, Abel (Carmarthen, E.)

  Denman, Hon. Richard Douglas

  M'Callum, John M.

  Thomas, David Alfred (Cardiff)

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

  M'Curdy, C. A.

  Thomas, James Henry (Derby)

  Dilke, Rt. Hon. Sir Charles

  McKenna, Rt. Hon. Reginald

  Thorne, G. R. (Wolverhampton)

  Doris, W.

  Mallet, Charles Edward

  Toulmin, George

  Duncan, C. (Barrow-in-Furness)

  Markham, Arthur Basil

  Trevelyan, Charles Philips

  Duncan, J. Hastings (York, Otley)

  Masterman, C. F. G.

  Twist, Henry

  Dunn, A. Edward (Camborne)

  Meagher, Michael

  Ure, Rt. Hon. Alexander

  Edwards, Enoch

  Menzies, Sir Walter

  Verney, Frederick William

  Ellbank, Master of

  Middlebrook, William

  Wadsworth, J.

  Elverston, Harold

  Millar, James Duncan

  Walker, H. De R. (Leicester)

  Falconer, James

  Molteno, Percy Alpert

  Walsh, Stephen

  Fenwick, Charles

  Montagu, Hon. E. S.

  Walters, John Tudor

  Ferens, T. R.

  Mooney, John.J.

  Walton, Sir Joseph

  France, Gerald Ashburner

  Morgan, G. Hay (Cornwall)

  Ward, W. Dudley (Southampton)

  Furness, Stephen

  Morton, Alpheus Cleophas

  Wardle, George J.

  Gelder, Sir William Alfred

  Murray, Capt. Hon. Arthur C.

  Waring, Walter

  George, Rt. Hon. D. Lloyd

  Muspratt, Max

  Warner, Sir Thomas Courtenay

  Gibson, Sir James Puckering

  Neilson, Francis

  Wason, Rt. Hon. E. (Clackmannan)

  Gill, Alfred Henry

  Nicholson, Charles N. (Doncaster)

  Wason, John Cathcart (Orkney)

  Glanville, H. J.

  Nolan, Joseph

  Waterlow, David Sydney

  Glover, Thomas

  Norton, Capt. Cecil W.

  Watt, Henry A.

  Goddard, Sir Daniel Ford

  Nussey, Sir T. Willans

  Wedgwood, Josiah C.

  Greenwood, G G.

  Nuttall, Harry

  White, Sir George (Norfolk)

  Greig, Colonel James William

  O'Brien, Patrick (Kilkenny)

  White, J. Dundas (Dumbartonshire)

  Grey, Rt. Hon. Sir Edward

  O'Connor, John (Kildare, N.)

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

  Guest, Major

  O'Connor, T. P. (Liverpool)

  Whitehouse, John Howard

  Gwynn, Stephen Lucius (Galway)

  O'Grady, James

  Whyte, A. F. (Perth)

  Hackett, J.

  Palmer, Godfrey Mark

  Wiles, Thomas

  Haldane, Rt. Hon. Richard B.

  Parker, James (Halifax)

  Wilkle, Alexander

  Hall, Frederick (Normanton)

  Pearce, William

  Williams, John (Glamorgan)

  Hancock, John George

  Pease, Rt. Hon. Joseph A.

  Williamson, Sir A.

  Harcourt, Rt. Hon. L. (Rossendale)

  Philippe, Sir O. C. (Pembroke)

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

  Harcourt, Robert V. (Montrose)

  Pickersgill, Edward Hare

  Wilson, John (Durham, Mid)

  Hardle, J. Kelt

  Pine, Duncan V.

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

  Harmsworth, R. L.

  Pointer, Joseph

  Wilson, T. F. (Lanark, WE.)

  Harvey, A. G. C. (Rochdale)

  Pollard, Sir George H.

  Winfrey, Robert

  Harvey, T. E. (Leeds, West)

  Ponsonby, Arthur A. W. H.

  Wood, T. M'Kinnon (Glasgow)

  Harwood, George

  Price, C. E. (Edinburgh, Central)

  Young, William (Perth, East)

  Haslam, James (Derbyshire)

  Priestley, Arthur (Grantham)

  Younger, W. (Peebles and Selkirk)

  Haslam, Lewis (Monmouth)

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

  Yoxall, Sir James Henry

  Havelock-Allan, Sir Henry

  Primrose, Hon. Nell James

  Haworth, Arthur A.

  Pringle, William M. R.

  TELLERS FOR THE AYES.—Mr. Gulland and Mr. Dudley Ward.

  Hayward, Evan

  Radford, George Heynes

  Hazleton, Richard

  Rainy, Adam Rolland

  1360

  1361

  NOES

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

  Gardner, Ernest

  Mount, William Arthur

  Adam, Major William A.

  Gastrell, Major W. Houghton

  Newman, John R. P.

  Anson, Sir William Reynell

  Gibbs, George Abraham

  Newton, Harry Kottingham

  Arbuthnot, Gerald A.

  Gilmour, Captain John

  Nicholson, William G. (Petersfield)

  Archer-Shee, Major Martin

  Goldman, C. S.

  Nield, Herbert

  Arkwright, John Stanhope

  Goldsmith, Frank

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

  Ashley, Wilfrid W.

  Gooch, Henry Cubitt

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

  Attenborough, Walter Annis

  Goulding, Edward Alfred

  Ormsby-Gore, Hon. William

  Bagot, Captain J.

  Grant, J. A.

  Parkes, Ebenezer

  Balcarres, Lord

  Greene, Walter Raymond

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

  Baldwin, Stanley

  Gretton, John

  Perkins, Walter Frank

  Banbury, Sir Frederick George

  Guinness, Hon. Walter Edward

  Pete, Basil Edward

  Baring, Captain Hon. Guy Victor

  Gwynne, R. S. (Sussex, Eastbourne)

  Pollock, Ernest Murray

  Barnston, Harry

  Haddock, George Bahr

  Quitter, William Eley C.

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

  Hall, D. B. (Isle of Wight)

  Bandies, Sir John Scurrah

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

  Hall, E. Marshall (Toxteth)

  Rawlinson, John Frederick Peel

  Beach, Hon. Michael Hugh Hicks

  Hambro, Angus Valdemar

  Rawson, Col. Richard H.

  Benn, Ion Hamilton (Greenwich)

  Hamersley, Alfred St. George

  Remnant, James Farquharson

  Bentinck, Lord Henry Cavendish-

  Hamilton, Lord C. J. (Kensington, S.)

  Rice, Hen. Walter Fitz-Uryan

  Boyle, W. Lewis (Norfolk, Mid)

  Hamilton, Marquess of (Londonderry)

  Ridley, Samuel Forde

  Boyton, James

  Hardy, Laurence

  Roberts, S. (Sheffield, Ecclesall)

  Brackenbury, Henry Langton

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

  Rolleston, Sir John

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

  Harrison-Broadley, M. B.

  Ronaldshay, Earl of

  Brassey, Capt. R. (Oxon, Banbury)

  Henderson, H. G. H. (Berkshire)

  Rothschild, Llonel de

  Burdett-Coutts, William

  Hermon-Hodge, Sir Robert T.

  Royds, Edmund

  Butcher, John George (York)

  Hickman, Colonel Thomas E.

  Salter, Arthur Clavell

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

  Hillier, Dr. Alfred Peter

  Samuel, Sir Harry (Norwood)

  Campion, W. R.

  Hills, John Walter (Durham)

  Sanders, Robert A.

  Carlile, Edward Hildred

  Hohler, Gerald Fitzroy

  Sanderson, Lancelot

  Cater, John

  Hope, Harry (Bute)

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

  Cautley, Henry Strether

  Hope, James Fitzalan (Sheffield)

  Sassoon, Sir Edward Albert

  Cave, George

  Horne, Wm. E. (Surrey, Guildford)

  Smith, F. E. (Liverpool, Walton)

  Cecil, Evelyn (Aston Manor)

  Houston, Robert Paterson

  Stanler, Beville

  Clay, Captain H. H. Spender

  Hume-Williams, William Ellis

  Stanley, Hon. Arthur (Ormskirk)

  Clive, Percy Archer

  Hunt, Rowland

  Stanley, Hon. G. F. (Preston)

  Coates, Major Edward F.

  Hunter, Sir Charles Roderick (Bath)

  Starkey, John Ralph

  Colefax, Henry Arthur

  Jackson, Sir J. (Devonport)

  Staveley-Hill, Henry

  Compton, Lord Alwyne (Brentford)

  Jardine, Ernest (Somerset, East)

  Stewart, Gershom (Ches. Wirral)

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

  Kerry, Earl of

  Strauss, Arthur

  Courthope, George Loyd

  Keswick, William

  Sykes, Alan John

  Craig, Charles Curtis (Antrim, S.)

  Kimber, Sir Henry

  Talbot, Lord Edmund

  Craik, Sir Henry

  King, Sir Henry Seymour (Hull)

  Terrell, Henry (Gloucester)

  Cripps, Sir Charles Alfred

  Kinloch-Cooke, Sir Clement

  Thompson, Robert (Belfast, North)

  Croft, Henry Page

  Knight, Capt. E. A.

  Thomson, W. Mitchell (Down, N.)

  Dairymple, Viscount

  Law, Andrew Boner (Dulwich)

  Thynne, Lord Alexander

  Dalziel, Davison (Brixton)

  Lawson, Hon. Harry

  Tryon, Captain George Clement

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

  Lee, Arthur Hamilton

  Valentia, Viscount

  Dixon, Charles Harvey

  Lewisham, Viscount

  Walker, Col. W. H. (Lancashire)

  Douglas, Rt. Han. A. Akers-

  Llewelyn, Venables

  Walrond, Hon. Lionel

  Du Cros, A. (Tower Hamlets, Bow)

  Lloyd, George Ambrose

  Ward, A. S. (Herts, Watford)

  Du Cros, Arthur P. (Hastings)

  Lockyer-Lampson, O. (Ramsay)

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

  Duke, Henry Edward

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

  Wheler, Granville C. H.

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

  Lansdale, John Brownlee

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

  Eyres-Monsell, Bolton M.

  Lyttelton, Hon. J. C. (Wor. Droltwich)

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

  Faber, George D. (Clapham)

  MacCaw, William J. MacGeagh

  Willoughby, Major Hon. Claude

  Falle, Bertram Godfrey

  Mackinder, Mallard J.

  Willoughby de Eresby, Lord

  Fell, Arthur

  Macmaster, Donald

  Wood, Hon. E. F. L. (Ripon)

  Fitzroy, Hon. Edward A.

  Magnus, Sir Philip

  Wood, John (Stalybridge)

  Fleming, Valentine

  Mason, James F.

  Worthington-Evans, L.

  Fletcher, John Samuel

  Meysey-Thompson, E. C.

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

  Forster, Henry William

  Mildmay, Francis Bingham

  Foster, H. S. (Suffolk, N.)

  Morpeth, Viscount

  TELLERS FOR THE NOES.—Captain Jessel and Mr. C. Bathurst.

  Foster, John K. (Coventry)

  Morrison, Captain James A.

  Foster, Philip S. (Warwick, S.W.)

  Morrison-Bell, Major A. C.

  CLASS II.
  "That a sum, not exceeding £1,879,172, be granted to His Majesty, to defray the Charge which will come in course of payment during the year ending on the 31st day of March, 1911, for Expenditure in respect of the Services included in Class II. of the Estimates for Civil Services."
  [For Services included in Class, see 19th July, 1910. cols. 1185–1188.]
  Question put, "That this House doth agree with the Committee in the outstanding Resolutions in respect of Class II. of the Civil Service Estimates."
  The House divided: Ayes, 263; Noes, 190.

  CLASS IV.
  "That a sum, not exceeding £1,167,181, be granted to His Majesty, to defray the Charge which will come in course of payment during the year ending on the 31st day of March, 1911, for Expenditure in respect of the Services included in Class IV. of the Estimates for Civil Services."
  [For Services included in, Class, see 19tli July, 1910, cols. 1197–1198.]
  Question put, "That this House doth agree with the Committee in the outstanding Resolutions reported in respect of Class IV. of the Civil Service Estimates."
  The House divided: Ayes, 262; Noes, 199.

  Division No. 117.]

  AYES.

  [10.22 p.m.

  Abraham, William (Dublin Harbour)

  Agar-Robartes, Hon. T. C. R.

  Anderson, Andrew Macbeth

  Abraham, William (Rhondda)

  Agnew, George William

  Ashton, Thomas Gair

  Addison, Dr. Christopher

  Ainsworth, John Stirling

  Asquith, Rt. Hon. Herbert Henry

  Adkins, W. Ryland D.

  Allen, Charles Peter

  Baker, Harold T. (Accrington)

  Baker, Joseph Allen (Finsbury, E.)

  Haslam, Lewis (Monmouth)

  Pringle, William M. R.

  Balfour, Robert (Lanark)

  Havelock-Allan, Sir Henry

  Radford, George Heynes

  Barclay, Sir Thomas

  Haworth, Arthur A.

  Rainy, Adam Rolland

  Barlow, Sir John Emmott

  Hayward, Evan

  Raphael, Herbert Henry

  Barnes, George N.

  Hazleton, Richard

  Rea, Walter Russell

  Barran, Sir John N. (Hawick)

  Helme, Norval Watson

  Reddy, Michael

  Barton, William

  Henderson, Arthur (Durham)

  Rees, J. D.

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

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

  Rendall, Athelstan

  Bentham, George J.

  Henry, Charles S.

  Richards, Thomas

  Birrell, Rt. Hon. Augustine

  Higham, John Sharp

  Roberts, Charles H. (Lincoln)

  Black, Arthur W.

  Hindle, Frederick George

  Roberts, George H. (Norwich)

  Bowerman, Charles W.

  Hobhouse, Rt. Hon. Charles E. H.

  Roberts, Sir J. H. (Denbighs.)

  Brace, William

  Hodge, John

  Robertson, Sir G. Scott (Bradford)

  Brady, Patrick Joseph

  Hogan, Michael

  Robinson, Sidney

  Brocklehurst, William B.

  Hooper, Arthur George

  Roch, Walter F. (Pembroke)

  Bryce, John Annan

  Hope, John Deans (Fife, West)

  Roe, Sir Thomas

  Burke, E. Haviland-

  Horne, C. Silvester (Ipswich)

  Rowntree, Arnold

  Burns, Rt. Hon. John

  Howard, Hon. Geoffrey

  Runciman, Rt. Hon. Walter

  Burt, Rt. Hon. Thomas

  Hughes, Spencer Leigh

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

  Buxton, C. R. (Devon, Mid)

  Hunter, William (Lanark, Govan)

  Samuel, J. (Stockton-on-Tees)

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

  Illingworth, Percy H.

  Samuel, S. M. (Whitechapel)

  Byles, William Pollard

  Isaacs, Sir Rufus Daniel

  Schwann, Sir Charles E.

  Cameron, Robert

  Jardine, Sir John (Roxburghshire)

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

  Carr-Gomm, H. W.

  Johnson, William

  Seddon, James A.

  Cawley, Sir Frederick (Prestwich)

  Jones, Edgar R. (Merthyr Tydvil)

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

  Cawley, H. T. (Lancs., Haywood)

  Jones, Henry Haydn (Merloneth)

  Shackleton, David James

  Chancellor, Henry George

  Jones, Willem (Carnarvonshire)

  Sherwell, Arthur James

  Channing, Sir Francis Allston

  Jowett, Frederick William

  Shortt, Edward

  Chapple, Dr. William Allen

  Joyce, Michael

  Simon, John Alisebrook

  Churchill, Rt. Hon. Winston S.

  King, Joseph (Somerset, North)

  Smith, H. B. Lees (Northampton)

  Clough, William

  Lambert, George

  Snowden, Philip

  Clynes, John R.

  Law, Hugh A. (Donegal, W.)

  Soames, Arthur Wellesley

  Collins, Godfrey P. (Greenock)

  Layland-Barratt, Sir Francis

  Soares, Ernest Joseph

  Collins, Stephen (Lambeth)

  Leach, Charles

  Spicer, Sir Albert

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

  Lehmann, Rudolf C.

  Stanley, Albert (Staffs., N.W.)

  Compton-Rickett, Sir J.

  Levy, Sir Maurice

  Strachey, Sir Edward

  Corbett, A. Cameron (Glasgow)

  Lewis, John Herbert

  Summers, James Woolley

  Cornwall, Sir Edwin A.

  Low, Sir Frederick (Norwich)

  Sutherland, John E.

  Cowan, William Henry

  Luttrell, Hugh Fownes

  Sutton, John E.

  Craig,Herbert J. (Tynemouth)

  Lyell, Charles Henry

  Taylor, John W. (Durham)

  Crosfield, Arthur H.

  Macdonald, J. R. (Leicester)

  Taylor, T. C. (Radcliffe)

  Crossley, Sir William J.

  Macdonald, J. M. (Falkirk Burghs)

  Tennant, Harold John

  Cullinan, John

  Macnamara, Dr. Thomas J.

  Thomas, Abel (Carmarthen, E.)

  Davies, Ellis William (Eaton)

  MacVeagh, Jeremiah

  Thomas, David Alfred (Cardiff)

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

  McCallum, John M.

  Thomas, James Henry (Derby)

  Davies, M. Vaughan- (Cardiganshire)

  M'Curdy, Charles Albert

  Thorne, G. R. (Wolverhampton)

  Dawes, James Arthur

  McKenna, Rt. Hon. Reginald

  Toulmin, George

  Denman, Hon. Richard Douglas

  Mallet, Charles Edward

  Trevelyan, Charles Philips

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

  Markham, Arthur Basil

  Twist, Henry

  Doris, William

  Masterman, C. F. G.

  Ure, Rt. Hon. Alexander

  Duncan, C. (Barrow-in-Furness)

  Meagher, Michael

  Verney, Frederick William

  Duncan, J. Hastings (York, Otley)

  Menzies, Sir Walter

  Wadsworth, John

  Dunn, Albert E. (Camborne)

  Middlebrook, William

  Walker, H. De R. (Leicester)

  Edwards, Enoch

  Millar, James Duncan

  Walsh, Stephen

  Elibank, Master of

  Molteno, Percy Alport

  Waiters, John Tudor

  Elverston, Harold

  Montagu, Hon. E. S.

  Walton, Sir Joseph

  Falconer, James

  Mooney, John J

  Wardle, G. J.

  Fenwick, Charles

  Morgan, G. Hay (Cornwall)

  Waring, Walter

  Ferens, Thomas Robinson

  Morton, Alpheus Cleophas

  Warner, Sir Thomas Courtenay

  France, Gerald Ashburner

  Murray, Capt. Hon. Arthur C.

  Walton, Rt. Hon. E. (Clackmannan)

  Furness, Stephen

  Muspratt, Max

  Wason, John Cathcart (Orkney)

  Gelder, Sir William Alfred

  Neilson, Francis

  Waterlow, David Sydney

  George, Rt. Hon. D. Lloyd

  Nicholson, Charles N. (Doncaster)

  Watt, Henry A.

  Gibson, Sir James Puckering

  Nolan, Joseph

  Wedgwood, Josiah C.

  Gill, Alfred Henry

  Norton, Captain Cecil W.

  White, Sir George (Norfolk)

  Glanville, Harold James

  Nussey, Sir T. Willans

  White, J. Dundas (Dumbartonshire)

  Glover, Thomas

  Nuttall, Harry

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

  Goddard, Sir Daniel Ford

  O'Brien, Patrick (Kilkenny)

  Whitehouse, John Howard

  Greenwood, Granville George

  O'Connor, John (Kildare, N.)

  Whyte, A. F. (Perth)

  Grelg, Colonel James William

  O'Connor, T. P. (Liverpool)

  Wiles, Thomas

  Guest, Major

  Palmer, Godfrey Mark

  Wilkie, Alexander

  Gwynn, Stephen Lucius (Galway)

  Parker, James (Halifax)

  Williams, John (Glamorgan)

  Hackett, John

  Pearce, William Wilson,

  Williamson, Sir Archibald

  Haldane, Rt. Hon. Richard B.

  Pease, Rt. Hon. Joseph A.

  Wilson John (Durham, Mid)

  Hall, F. (Yorks, Normanton)

  Philipps, Sir O. C. (Pembroke)

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

  Hancock, John George

  Pickersgill, Edward Hare

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

  Harcourt, Rt. Hon. L. (Rossendale)

  Pirle, Duncan V.

  Winfrey, Richard

  Harcourt, Robert V. (Montrose)

  Pointer, Joseph

  Wood, T. M'Kinnon (Glasgow)

  Hardie, J. Keir (Merthyr Tydvil)

  Pollard, Sir George H.

  Young, William (Perth, East)

  Harmsworth, R. Leicester

  Ponsonby, Arthur A. W. H.

  Younger, W, (Peebles and Selkirk)

  Harvey, A. G. C. (Rochdale)

  Price, C. E. (Edinburgh, Central)

  Yoxall, Sir James Henry

  Harvey, T. E. (Leeds, West)

  Priestley, Arthur (Grantham)

  Harwood, George

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

  TELLERS FOR THE AYES.-Mr. Gulland and Mr. Dudley Ward.

  Haslam, James (Derbyshire)

  Primrose, Hon. Neil James

  1364

  1365

  NOES.

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

  Gardner, Ernest

  Morrison, Captain James A.

  Adam, Major William A.

  Gastrell, Major W. Houghton

  Morrison-Bell, Major A. C.

  Anson, Sir William Reynell

  Gibbs, George Abraham

  Mount, William Arthur

  Arbuthnot, Gerald A.

  Gilmour, Captain John

  Newman, John R. P.

  Archer-Shee, Major Martin

  Goldman, Charles Sydney

  Newton, Harry Kottingham

  Arkwright, John Stanhope

  Goldsmith, Frank

  Nicholson, William G. (Petersfield)

  Ashley, Wilfrid W.

  Gooch, Henry Cubitt

  Nield, Herbert

  Attenboreugh, Walter Annis

  Goulding, Edward Alfred

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

  Bagot, Captain J.

  Grant, J. A.

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

  Balcarres, Lord

  Greene, Walter Raymond

  Ormsby-Gore, Non. William

  Baldwin, Stanley

  Gretton, John

  Parkes, Ebenezer

  Banbury, Sir Frederick George

  Guinness, Hon. Walter Edward

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

  Baring, Captain Hon. Guy Victor

  Gwynne, R. S. (Sussex, Eastbourne)

  Perkins, Walter Frank

  Barnston, Harry

  Haddock, George Bahr

  Peto, Basil Edward

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

  Hall, D. B. (Isle of Wight)

  Pollock, Ernest Murray

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

  Hall, Marshall (Toxteth)

  Pretyman, Ernest George

  Bathurst, Charles (Wilts, Wilton)

  Hambro, Angus Valdemar

  Quitter, William Eley C.

  Beach, Hon. Michael Hugh Hicks

  Hamersley, Alfred St, George

  Randles, Sir John Scurrah

  Benn, Ion Hamilton (Greenwich)

  Hamilton, Lord C. J. (Kensington)

  Rawlinson, John Frederick Peel

  Bentinck, Lord Henry Cavendish

  Hamilton, Marquess of (Londonderry)

  Remnant, James Farquharson

  Boyle,W. Lewis (Norfolk, Mid)

  Hardy, Laurence (Kent, Ashford)

  Rice, Hon. Walter Fitz-Uryan

  Boyton, James

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

  Ridley, Samuel Fords

  Brackenbury, Henry Langton

  Harrison-Broadley, H. B.

  Roberts, S. (Sheffield, Ecclesall)

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

  Henderson, Major Harold (Berkshire)

  Rolleston, Sir John

  Brassey, Captain R. (Banbury)

  Hermon-Hodge, Sir Robert T.

  Ronaldshay, Earl of

  Burdett-Coutts, William

  Hickman, Colonel Thomas E.

  Rothschild, Lionel de

  Butcher, John George (York)

  Hillier, Dr. Alfred Peter

  Royds, Edmund

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

  Hills, John Walter (Durham)

  Salter, Arthur Clavell

  Campion, W. R.

  Hohler, Gerald Fitzroy

  Samuel, Sir Harry (Norwood)

  Carlile, Edward Hildred

  Hope, Harry (Bute)

  Sanders, Robert Arthur

  Cator, John

  Hope, James Fitzalan (Sheffield)

  Sanderson, Lancelot

  Cautley, Henry Strother

  Horne, Wm. E. (Surrey, Guildford)

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

  Cave, George

  Houston, Robert Paterson

  Sassoon, Sir Edward Albert

  Cecil, Evelyn (Aston Manor)

  Hume-Williams, William Ellis

  Smith, F. E. (Liverpool, Walton)

  Clay, Captain H. H. Spender

  Hunt, Rowland

  Stanley, Beville

  Clive, Percy Archer

  Hunter, Sir Charles Rodk. (Bath)

  Stanley, Hon. Arthur (Ormskirk)

  Coates, Major Edward F.

  Jackson, Sir John (Devonport)

  Stanley, Hon. G. F. (Preston)

  Colefax, Henry Arthur

  Jardine, Ernest (Somerset, East)

  Starkey, John Ralph

  Compton, Lord Alwyne (Brentford)

  Jessel, Captain Herbert M.

  Staveley-Hill, Henry (Staffordshire)

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

  Kerry, Earl of

  Stewart, Gershom (Ches., Wirral)

  Courthope, George Loyd

  Keswick, William

  Strauss, Arthur

  Craig, Charles Curtis (Antrim, S.)

  Kimber, Sir Henry

  Sykes, Alan John

  Craik, Sir Henry

  King, Sir Henry Seymour (Hull)

  Talbot, Lord Edmund

  Cripps, Sir Charles Alfred

  Kinloch-Cooke, Sir Clement

  Terrell, Henry (Gloucester)

  Croft, Henry Page

  Knight, Captain Eric Ayshford

  Thompson, Robert (Belfast, North)

  Dairymple, Viscount

  Law, Andrew Bonar (Dulwich)

  Thomson, W. Mitchell (Down, N.)

  Dalziel, Davidson (Brixton)

  Lawson, Hon. Harry

  Thynne, Lord Alexander

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

  Lee, Arthur Hamilton

  Tryon, Capt. George Clement

  Dixon, Charles Harvey (Boston)

  Lewisham, Viscount

  Valentia, Viscount

  Douglas, Rt. Hon. A. Akers-

  Llewelyn, Major Venables

  Walker, Cal. W. H. (Lancashire)

  Du Cros, A. (Tower Hamlets, Bow)

  Lloyd, George Ambrose

  Ward, A. S. (Herts, Watford)

  Du Cros, Arthur P. (Hastings)

  Locker-Lampson, O. (Ramsay)

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

  Duke, Henry Edward

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

  Wheler, Granville C. H.

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

  Lonsdale, John Brownlee

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

  Eyres-Monsell, Bolton M.

  Lyttelton, Hon. J. C. (Droitwich)

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

  Faber, George D. (Clapham)

  MacCaw, Wm. J. MacGeagh

  Wiloughby, Major Hon. Claude

  Falle, Bertram Godfray

  Mackinder, Halford J.

  Willoughby de Eresby, Lord

  Fell, Arthur

  Macmaster, Donald

  Wood, Hon. E. F. L. (Yorks, Ripon)

  Fitzroy, Hon. Edward A.

  Magnus, Sir Philip

  Wood, John Stalybridge

  Fleming, Valentine

  Mallaby-Deeley, Harry

  Worthihgton-Evans,L. (Colchester)

  Fletcher, John Samuel

  Mason, James F.

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

  Forster, Henry William

  Meysey-Thompson, E. C.

  Foster, Harry S. (Lowestoft)

  Mildmay, Francis Bingham

  TELLERS FOR THE NOES.—Col.Rawson and Mr. Walrond.

  Foster, John K. (Coventry)

  Morpeth, Viscount

  Foster, Philip S. (Warwick, S.W.)

  Division NO. 118.]

  AYES.

  [10.31 p.m.

  Abraham, William (Dublin Harbour)

  Guest, Major

  Palmer, Godfrey Mark

  Abraham, William (Rhondda)

  Gwynn, Stephen Lucius(Galway)

  Parker, James (Halifax)

  Addison, Dr. Christopher

  Hackett, John

  Pearce, William

  Adkins, W. Ryland D.

  Haldane, Rt. Hon. Richard B.

  Pease, Rt. Hon. Joseph A.

  Agar-Robartes, Hon. T. C. R.

  Hall, F. (Yorks, Normanton)

  Philipps, Sir O. C. (Pembroke)

  Agnew, George William

  Hancock, John George

  Pickersgill, Edward Hare

  Ainsworth, John Stirling

  Harcourt, Rt. Hon. L. (Rossendale)

  Pirie, Duncan V.

  Allen, Charles Peter

  Harcourt, Robert V. (Montrose)

  Pointer, Joseph

  Anderson, Andrew Macbeth

  Hardie, J. Keir (Merthyr Tydvil)

  Pollard, Sir George H.

  Ashton, Thomas Gair

  Harmsworth, R. Leicester

  Ponsonby, Arthur A. W. H.

  Asquith, Rt. Hon. Herbert Henry

  Harvey, A. G. C. (Rochdale)

  Price, C. E. (Edinburgh, Central)

  Baker, Harold T. (Accrington)

  Harvey, T. E. (Leeds, West)

  Priestley, Arthur (Grantham)

  Baker, Joseph Allen (Finsbury,E.)

  Harwood, George

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

  Balfour, Robert (Lanark)

  Haslam, James (Derbyshire)

  Primrose, Hon. Neil James

  Barclay, Sir Thomas

  Haslam, Lewis (Monmouth)

  Pringle, William M. R.

  Barlow, Sir John Emmott

  Havelock-Allan, Sir Henry

  Radford, George Heynes

  Barnes, George N.

  Haworth, Arthur A.

  Rainy, Adam Rolland

  Barran, Sir John N. (Hawick)

  Hayward, Evan

  Raphael, Herbert Henry

  Barton, William

  Hazleton, Richard

  Rea, Walter Russell

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

  Helme, Norval Watson

  Reddy, Michael

  Bentham, George J.

  Henderson, Arthur (Durham)

  Rees, Sir J. D.

  Birrell, Rt. Hon. Augustine

  Henry, Charles S.

  Rendall, Athelstan

  Black, Arthur W.

  Higham, John Sharp

  Richards, Thomas

  Bowerman, Charles W.

  Hindle, Frederick George

  Roberts, Charles H. (Lincoln)

  Brace, William

  Hobhouse, Rt. Hon. Charles E. H.

  Roberts, George H. (Norwich)

  Brady, Patrick Joseph

  Hodge, John

  Roberts, Sir J. H. (Denbighs.)

  Brocklehurst, William B.

  Hogan, Michael

  Robertson, Sir G. Scott (Bradford)

  Bryce, John Annan

  Hooper, Arthur George

  Robinson, Sidney

  Burke, E. Haviland-

  Hope, John Deans (Fife, West)

  Roch, Walter F. (Pembroke)

  Burns, Rt. Hon. John

  Horne, C. Silvester (Ipswich)

  Roe, Sir Thomas

  Burt, Rt. Hon. Thomas

  Howard, Hon. Geoffrey

  Rowntree, Arnold

  Buxton, C. R. (Devon, Mid)

  Hughes, Spencer Leigh

  Runciman, Rt. Hon. Walter

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

  Hunter, William (Lanark, Govan)

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

  Bytes, William Pollard

  Illingworth, Percy H.

  Samuel, J. (Stockton-on-Tees)

  Cameron, Robert

  Isaacs, Sir Rufus Daniel

  Samuel, S. M. (Whitechapel)

  Carr-Gomm, H. W.

  Jardine, Sir John (Roxburghshire)

  Schwann, Sir Charles E.

  Cawley, Sir Frederick (Prestwich)

  Johnson, William

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

  Cawley, H. T. (Lancs., Haywood)

  Jones, Edgar R. (Merthyr Tydvil)

  Seddon, James A.

  Chancellor, Henry George

  Jones, Henry Haydn (Merioneth)

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

  Chancing, Sir Francis Allston

  Jones, William (Carnarvonshire)

  Shackleton, David James

  Chapple, Dr. William Allen

  Jowett, Frederick William

  Sherwell, Arthur James

  Churchill, Rt. Hon. Winston S.

  Joyce, Michael

  Shortt, Edward

  Clough, William

  King, Joseph (Somerset, North)

  Simon, John Allsebrook

  Clynes, John R.

  Lambert, George

  Smith, H. B. Lees (Northampton)

  Collins, Godfrey P. (Greenock)

  Law, Hugh A. (Donegal, W.)

  Snowden, Philip

  Collins, Stephen (Lambeth)

  Layland-Barratt, Sir Francis

  Soames, Arthur Wellesley

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

  Leach, Charles

  Soares, Ernest Joseph

  Compton-Rickett, Sir J.

  Lehmann, Rudolf C.

  Spicer, Sir Albert

  Corbett, A. Cameron (Glasgow)

  Levy, Sir Maurice

  Stanley, Albert (Staffs, N.W.)

  Cornwall, Sir Edwin A.

  Lewis, John Herbert

  Strachey, Sir Edward

  Cowan, William Henry

  Low, Sir Frederick (Norwich)

  Summers, James Woolley

  Craig, Herbert J. (Tynemouth)

  Luttrell, Hugh Fownes

  Sutherland, John E.

  Crosfield, Arthur H.

  Lyell, Charles Henry

  Sutton, John E.

  Crossley, Sir William J.

  Macdonald, J. R. (Leicester)

  Taylor, John W. (Durham)

  Cullinan, John

  Macdonald, J. M. (Falkirk Burghs)

  Taylor, T. C. (Radcliffe)

  Davies, Ellis William (Elfion)

  Macnamara, Dr. Thomas J.

  Tennant, Harold John

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

  M'Callum, John M.

  Thomas, Abel (Carmarthen, E.)

  Davies, M. Vaughan- (Cardiganshire)

  M'Curdy, Charles Albert

  Thomas, David Alfred (Cardiff)

  Dawes, James Arthur

  McKenna, Rt. Hon. Reginald

  Thomas, James Henry (Derby)

  Denman, Hon. Richard Douglas

  Mallet, Charles Edward

  Thorne, G. R. (Wolverhampton)

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

  Markham, Arthur Basil

  Toulmin, George

  Doris, William

  Masterman, C. F. G.

  Trevelyan, Charles Philips

  Duncan, C. (Barrow-in-Furness)

  Meagher, Michael

  Twist, Henry

  Duncan, J. Hastings (York, Otley)

  Menzies, Sir Walter

  Ure, Rt. Hon. Alexander

  Dunn, Albert E.(Camborne)

  Middlebrook, William

  Verney, Frederick William

  Edwards, Enoch

  Millar, James Duncan

  Wadsworth, John

  Ellbank, Master of

  Molteno, Percy Alport

  Walker, H. De R. (Leicester)

  Elverston, Harold

  Montagu, Hon. E. S.

  Walsh, Stephen

  Falconer, James

  Mooney, John J.

  Walters, John Tudor

  Fenwick, Charles

  Morgan, G. Hay (Cornwall)

  Walton, Sir Joseph

  Ferens, Thomas Robinson

  Morton, Alpheus Cleophas

  Wardle, G. J.

  France, Gerald Ashburner

  Murray, Capt. Hon. Arthur C.

  Waring, Walter

  Furness, Stephen

  Muspratt, M.

  Warner, Sir Thomas Courtenay

  Gelder, Sir William Alfred

  Neilson, Francis

  Wason, Rt. Hon. E. (Clackmannan)

  George, Rt. Hon. D. Lloyd

  Nicholson, Charles N. (Doncaster)

  Wason, John Cathcart (Orkney)

  Gibson, Sir James Puckering

  Nolan, Joseph

  Waterlow, David Sydney

  Gill, Alfred Henry

  Norton, Captain Cecil William

  Watt, Henry A.

  Glanville, Harold James

  Hussey, Sir T. Willans

  Wedgwood, Josiah C.

  Glover, Thomas

  Nuttall, Harry

  White, Sir George (Norfolk)

  Goddard, Sir Daniel Ford

  O'Brien, Patrick (Kilkenny)

  White, J. Dundas (Dumbartonshire)

  Greenwood, Granville George

  O'Connor, John (Kildare, N.)

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

  Greta, Colonel James William

  O'Connor, T. P. (Liverpool)

  Whitehouse, John Howard

  Grey, Rt. Hon. Sir Edward

  O'Grady, James

  Whyte, A. F.(Perth)

  1368

  1369

  Wiles, Thomas

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

  Younger, W. (Peebles and Selkirk)

  Wilkie, Alexander

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

  Yoxall, Sir James Henry

  Williams, John (Glamorgan)

  Winfrey, Richard

  Williamson, Sir Archibald

  Wood, T. M'Kinnon (Glasgow)

  TELLERS FOR THE AYES.—Mr.

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

  Young, William (Perth, East)

  Gulland and Mr. Dudley Ward.

  Wilson, John (Durham, Mid)

  NOES.

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

  Gastrell, Major W. Houghton

  Morrison-Bell, Major A. C.

  Adam, Major William A.

  Gibbs, George Abraham

  Mount, William Arthur

  Anson, Sir William Reynell

  Gilmour, Captain John

  Newman, John R. P.

  Arbuthnot, Gerald A.

  Goldman, Charles Sydney

  Newton, Harry Kottingham

  Archer-Shee, Major Martin

  Goldsmith, Frank

  Nicholson, William G. (Petersfield)

  Arkwright, John Stanhope

  Gooch, Henry Cubitt

  Nield, Herbert

  Ashley, Wilfrid W.

  Goulding, Edward Alfred

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

  Attenborough, Walter Annis

  Grant, J. A.

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

  Begot, Captain J.

  Greene, Walter Raymond

  Ormsby-Gore, Hon. William

  Balcarres, Lord

  Gretton, John

  Parkes, Ebenezer

  Baldwin, Stanley

  Guinness, Hon. Walter Edward

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

  Banbury, Sir Frederick George

  Gwynne, R. S. (Sussex, Eastbourne)

  Perkins, Walter Frank

  Barnston, Harry

  Haddock, George Bahr

  Peto, Basil Edward

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

  Hall, D. B. (Isle of Wight)

  Pollock, Ernest Murray

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

  Hall, Marshall (Toxteth)

  Pretyman, Ernest George

  Bathurst, Charles (Wilts, Wilton)

  Hambro, Angus Valdemar

  Quitter, William Eley C.

  Beach, Hon. Michael Hugh Hicks

  Hamersley, Alfred St. George

  Randles, Sir John Scurrah

  Benn, Ion Hamilton (Greenwich)

  Hamilton, Lord C. J. (Kensington)

  Rawlinson, John Frederick Peel

  Bentinck, Lord Henry Cavendish-

  Hamilton, Marquess of (Londonderry)

  Rawson, Col. Richard H.

  Boyle, W. Lewis (Norfolk, Mid)

  Hardy, Laurence (Kent, Ashford)

  Rice, Hon. Walter Fitz-Uryan

  Boyton, James

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

  Ridley, Samuel Forde

  Brackenbury, Henry Langton

  Harrison-Broadley, H. B.

  Roberts, S. (Sheffield, Ecclesall)

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

  Henderson, Major Harold (Berkshire)

  Rolleston, Sir John

  Brassey, Captain R. (Banbury)

  Hermon-Hodge, Sir Robert T.

  Ronaldshay, Earl of

  Burdett-Coutts, William

  Hickman, Colonel Thomas E.

  Rothschild, Lionel de

  Butcher, John George (York)

  Hillier, Dr. Alfred Peter

  Royds, Edmund

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

  Hills, John Walter (Durham)

  Salter, Arthur Clavell

  Campion, W. R.

  Hohler, Gerald Fitzroy

  Samuel, Sir Harry (Norwood)

  Carille, Edward Hildred

  Hope, Harry (Bute)

  Sanders, Robert Arthur

  Cator, John

  Hope, James Fitzalan (Sheffield)

  Sanderson, Lancelot

  Cautley, Henry Strother

  Horne, Wm. E. (Surrey, Guildford)

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

  Cave, George

  Houston, Robert Paterson

  Sassoon, Sir Edward Albert

  Cecil, Evelyn (Aston Manor)

  Hume-Williams, William Ellis

  Smith, F. E. (Liverpool, Walton)

  Clay, Captain H. H. Spender

  Hunt, Rowland

  Stanier, Beville

  Clive, Percy Archer

  Hunter, Sir Charles Rodk. (Bath)

  Stanley, Hon. Arthur (Ormskirk)

  Coates, Major Edward F.

  Jackson, Sir John (Devonport)

  Stanley, Hon. G. F. (Preston)

  Colefax, Henry Arthur

  Jardine, Ernest (Somerset, East)

  Starkey, John Ralph

  Compton, Lord Alwyne (Brentford)

  Jessel, Captain Herbert M.

  Staveley-Hill, Henry (Staffordshire)

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

  Kerry, Earl of

  Stewart, Gershon (Ches., Wirral)

  Courthope, George Loyd

  Keswick, William

  Strauss, Arthur

  Craig, Charles Curtis (Antrim, S.)

  Kimber, Sir Henry

  Sykes, Alan John

  Craik, Sir Henry

  King, Sir Henry Seymour (Hull)

  Talbot, Lord Edmund.

  Cripps, Sir Charles Alfred

  Kinloch-Cooke, Sir Clement

  Terrell, Henry (Gloucester)

  Croft, Henry Page

  Knight, Captain Eric Ayshford

  Thompson, Robert (Belfast, North)

  Dairymple, Viscount

  Law, Andrew Bonar (Dulwich)

  Thomson, W. Mitchell- (Down, N.)

  Dalziel, Davison (Brixton)

  Lawson, Hon. Harry

  Thynne, Lord Alexander

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

  Lee, Arthur Hamilton

  Tryon, Capt. George Clement

  Dixon, Charles Harvey (Boston)

  Lewisham, Viscount

  Valentia, Viscount

  Douglas, Rt. Hon. A. Akers-

  Llewelyn, Venables

  Walker, Col. W. H. (Lancashire)

  Du Cros, A. (Tower Hamlets, Bow)

  Lloyd, George Ambrose

  Walrond, Hon. Lionel

  Du Cros, Arthur P. (Hastings)

  Locker-Lampson, O. (Ramsay)

  Ward, A. S. (Herts, Watford)

  Duke, Henry Edward

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

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

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

  Lonsdale, John Brownlee

  Wheler, Granville C. H.

  Eyres-Monsell, Bolton M.

  Lyttelton, Hon. J. C. (Droitwich)

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

  Faber, George D. (Clapham)

  MacCaw, Wm. J.

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

  Falle, Bertram Godfrey

  Mackinder, Halford J.

  Willoughby de Eresby, Lord

  Fell, Arthur

  Macmaster, Donald

  Wood, Hon. E. F. L. (Yorks, Ripon)

  Fitzroy, Hon. Edward A.

  Magnus, Sir Philip

  Wood, John Stalybridge

  Fleming, Valentine

  Mallaby-Deeley, Harry

  Worthington-Evans, L. (Colchester)

  Fletcher, John Samuel

  Mason, James F.

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

  Forster, Henry William

  Meysey-Thompson, E. C.

  Foster, Harry S. (Lowestoft)

  Mildmay, Francis Bingham

  TELLERS FOR THE NOES.—Captain Guy Waring and Major Claude Willoughby.

  Foster, John K. (Coventry)

  Morpeth, Viscount

  Foster, Philip S. (Warwick, S.W.)

  Morrison, Captain James A.

  Gardner, Ernest

  CLASS V.
  "That a sum, not exceeding £1,150,190, be granted to His Majesty to defray the Charge which will come in course of payment during the year ending on the 31st day of March, 1911, for Expenditure in respect of the Services included in Class V. of the Estimates for Civil Services."
  [For Services included in Class, see 19th July, 1910, cols. 1201–1202.]
  Question put, "That this House doth agree with the Committee in the outstanding Resolutions reported in respect of Class V. of the Civil Service Estimates."
  The House divided: Ayes, 261; Noes, 188.]

  Division No. 119.]

  AYES.

  [10.42 p.m.

  Abraham, William (Dublin Harbour)

  Hackett, J.

  Parker, James (Halifax)

  Abraham, William (Rhondda)

  Haldane, Rt. Hon. Richard B.

  Pearce, William

  Addison, Dr. C.

  Hall, Frederick (Narmanton)

  Pease, Rt. Hon. Joseph A.

  Adkins, W. Ryland D.

  Hancock, J. G.

  Philipps, Sir Owen C. (Pembroke)

  Agar-Robartes, Hon. T. C. R.

  Harcourt, Rt. Hon. L. (Rossendale)

  Pickersgill, Edward Hare

  Agnew, George William

  Harcourt. Robert V. (Montrose)

  Pirie, Duncan V.

  Ainsworth, John Stirling

  Hardie, J. Keir (Merthyr Tydvil)

  Pointer, Joseph

  Allen, Charles P.

  Harmsworth, R. L.

  Pollard, Sir George H.

  Anderson, Andrew Macbeth

  Harvey, A. G. C. (Rochdale)

  Ponsonby, Arthur A. W. H

  Ashton, Thomas Gair

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

  Price, C. E. (Edinburgh, Central)

  Asquith, Rt. Hon. Herbert Henry

  Harwood, George

  Priestley, Arthur (Grantham)

  Baker, H. T. (Accrington)

  Haslam, James (Derbysire)

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

  Baker, Joseph A. (Finsbury, E.)

  Haslam, Lewis (Monmouth)

  Primrose, Hon. Nell James

  Balfour, Robert (Lanark)

  Havelock-Allan, Sir Henry

  Pringle, William M. R

  Barclay, Sir T.

  Haworth, Arthur A.

  Radford, G. H.

  Barlow, Sir John E.

  Hayward, Evan

  Rainy, A. Rolland

  Barnes, G. N.

  Hazleton, Richard

  Raphael, Herbert H.

  Barran, Sir J. (Hawick)

  Helme, Norval Watson

  Rea, Walter Russell

  Barton, William

  Henderson, Arthur (Durham)

  Reddy, M.

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

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

  Rees, Sir J. D.

  Bentham, G. J.

  Henry, Charles S.

  Rendall, Athelstan

  Birrell, Rt. Hon. Augustine

  Higham, John Sharp

  Richards, Thomas

  Black, Arthur W.

  Hindle, F. G.

  Roberts, Charles H. (Lincoln)

  Bowerman, C. W-

  Hobhouse, Rt. Hon. Charles E. H.

  Roberts, G. H. (Norwich)

  Brace, William

  Hodge, John

  Roberts, Sir J. H. (Denbighs)

  Brady, P. J.

  Hogan, Michael

  Robertson, Sir G. Scott (Bradford)

  Brocklehurst, W. B.

  Hooper, A. G.

  Robinson, S.

  Bryce, J. Annan

  Hope, John Deans (Fife, West)

  Roch, Walter F. (Pembroke)

  Burke, E. Haviland-

  Horne, G. Silvester (Ipswich)

  Roe, Sir Thomas

  Burns, Rt. Hon. John

  Howard, Hon. Geoffrey

  Rowntree, Arnold

  Burt, Rt. Hon. Thomas

  Hughes, Spencer Leigh

  Runciman, Rt. Hon. Walter

  Buxton, C. R. (Devon, Mid)

  Hunter, W. (Govan)

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

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

  Illingworth, Percy H.

  Samuel, J. (Stockton)

  Byles, William Pollard

  Isaacs, Sir Rufus Daniel

  Samuel, S. M. (Whitechael)

  Carr-Gomm, H. W.

  Jardine, Sir J. (Roxburgh)

  Schwann, Sir C. E.

  Cawley, Sir Frederick (Prestwich)

  Johnson, W.

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

  Cawley, Harold T. (Heywood)

  Janes, Edgar (Merthyr Tydvil)

  Seddon, James A.

  Chancellor, H. G.

  Jones, H. Haydn (Merioneth)

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

  Channing, Sir Francis Allston

  Jones, William (Carnarvonshlre)

  Shackleton, David James

  Chapple, W. A.

  Jowett, F. W.

  Sherwell, Arthur James

  Churchill, Rt. Hon. Winston S.

  Joyce, Michael

  Shortt, Edward

  Clough, William

  King, J. (Somerset, N.)

  Simon, John Allsebrook

  Clynes, J. R.

  Lambert, George

  Smith, H. B. (Northampton)

  Collins, G. P. (Greenock)

  Law, Hugh A. (Donegal, West)

  Snowden, P.

  Collins, Stephen (Lambeth)

  Layland-Barratt, Sir Francis

  Soames, Arthur Wellesley

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

  Leach, Charles

  Soares, Ernest J.

  Compton-Rickett, Sir J.

  Lehmann, R. C.

  Spicer, Sir Albert

  Corbett, A. Cameron (Glasgow)

  Levy, Sir Maurice

  Stanley, Albert (Staffs., N.W.)

  Cornwall, Sir Edwin A.

  Lewis, John Herbert

  Strachey, Sir Edward

  Cowan, W. H.

  Low, Sir Francis (Norwich)

  Summers, James Woolley

  Craig, Herbert J. (Tynemouth)

  Luttrell, Hugh Fownea

  Sutherland, J. E.

  Crosfield, A. H.

  Lyell, Charles Henry

  Sutton, John E.

  Crossley, Sir W. J.

  Macdonald, J. R. (Leicester)

  Taylor, John W. (Durham)

  Cullinan, J.

  Macdonald, J. M. (Falkirk Burghs)

  Taylor, Theodore (Radcliffe)

  Davies, E. William (Elfion)

  Macnamara, Dr. Thomas J.

  Tennant, Harold John

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

  M'Callum, John M.

  Thomas, Abel (Carmarthen, E.)

  Davies, M. Vaughan- (Cardigan)

  M'Curdy, C. A.

  Thomas, D. A. (Cardiff)

  Dawes, J. A.

  McKenna, Rt. Hon. Reginald

  Thomas, J. H. (Derby)

  Denman, Hon. Richard Douglas

  Mallet, Charles E.

  Thorne, G. R. (Wolverhampton)

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

  Markham, Arthur Basil

  Toulmin, George

  Doris, W.

  Masterman, C. F. G.

  Trevelyan, Charles Philips

  Duncan, C. (Barrow-In-Furness)

  Meagher, Michael

  Twist, Henry

  Dunn, A. Edward (Camborne)

  Menzies, Sir Walter

  lire, Rt. Hon. Alexander

  Edwards, Enoch

  Middlebrook, William

  Verney, F. W.

  Elibank, Master of

  Millar, J. D.

  Wadsworth, J.

  Elverston, H.

  Molteno, Percy Alport

  Walker, H. De R. (Leicester)

  Falconer, J.

  Montagu, Hon. E. S.

  Walsh, Stephen

  Fenwick, Charles

  Mooney, J. J

  Walters, John Tudor

  Ferens, T. R.

  Morgan, G. Hay (Cornwall)

  Walton, Sir Joseph

  France, G. A.

  Morton, Alpheus Cleophas

  Wardle, George J.

  Furness, Stephen

  Murray, Captain Hon. A. C.

  Waring, Walter

  Gelder, Sir W. A.

  Muspratt, M.

  Warner, Sir Thomas Courtenay

  George, Rt. Hon. D. Lloyd

  Neilson, Francis

  Wason, Rt. Hon. E. (Clackmannan)

  Gibson, James P.

  Nicholson, Charles N. (Doncaster)

  Wason, John Cathcart (Orkney)

  Gill, A. H.

  Nolan, Joseph

  Waterlow, D. S.

  Glanville, H. J.

  Norton, Capt. Cecil W.

  Watt, Henry A.

  Glover, Thomas

  Nussey, Sir Willans

  Wedgwood, Josiah C.

  Goddard, Sir Daniel Ford

  Nuttall, Harry

  White, Sir George (Norfolk)

  Greenwood, G. G.

  O'Brien, Patrick (Kilkenny)

  White. J. Dundas (Dumbartonshire)

  Graig, Colonel J. W.

  O'Connor, John (Kildare, N.)

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

  Grey, Rt. Hon. Sir Edward

  O'Connor, T. P. (Liverpool)

  Whitehouse, John Howard

  Guest, Major

  O'Grady, James

  Whyte, A. F. (Perth)

  Gwynn, Stephen Lucius (Galway)

  Palmer, Godfrey Mark

  Wiles, Thomas

  1372

  1373

  Wilkie, Alexander

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

  Younger, W. (Peebles and Selkirk)

  Williams, J. (Glamorgan)

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

  Yoxall, Sir James Henry

  Williamson, Sir A.

  Winfrey, Richard

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

  Wood, T. M'Kinnon (Glasgow)

  TELLERS FOR THE AYES.—Mr. Gulland and Mr. Dudley Ward.

  Wilson, John (Durham, Mid)

  Young, W. (Perthshire, E.)

  NOES.

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

  Foster, P. S. (Warwick, S.W.)

  Mount, William Arthur

  Adam, Major W. A.

  Gardner, Ernest

  Newman, John R. P.

  Anson, Sir William Reynell

  Gibbs, G. A.

  Newton, Harry Kottingham

  Arbuthnot, G. A.

  Gilmour, Captain J.

  Nicholson, Wm. G. (Petersfield)

  Archer-Shee, Major M.

  Goldman, C. S.

  Nield, Herbert

  Arkwright, John Stanhope

  Goldsmith, Frank

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

  Ashley, W. W.

  Gooch, Henry Cubitt

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

  Attenborough, W. A.

  Goulding, Edward Alfred

  Ormsby-Gore, Hon. William

  Begot, Captain J.

  Greene, W. R.

  Parkes, Ebenezer

  Balcarres, Lord

  Gretton, John

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

  Baldwin, Stanley

  Guinness, Hon. W. E.

  Perkins, Walter F.

  Baring Captain Hon. G.

  Gwynne, R. S. (Sussex, Eastbourne)

  Peto, Basil Edward

  Barnston, H.

  Haddock, George Bahr

  Pollock, Ernest Murray

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

  Hall, D. B. (Isle of Wight)

  Pretyman, E. G.

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

  Hall, E. Marshall (Toxteth)

  Quitter, William Eley C.

  Bathurst, Charles (Wilton)

  Hambro, Angus Valdemar

  Handles, Sir John Scurrah

  Beach, Hon. Michael Hugh Hicks

  Hamersiey, A. St. George

  Rawlinson, John Frederick Peel

  Benn, I. H. (Greenwich)

  Hamilton, Marquess of (Londonderry)

  Rawson, Colonel R. H.

  Bentinck, Lord H. Cavendish-

  Hardy, Laurence (Kent, Ashford)

  Rice, Hon. Walter F.

  Boyle, W. L. (Norfolk, Mid)

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

  Ridley, Samuel Fordo

  Boyton, J.

  Harrison-Broadley, H. B.

  Roberts, S. (Sheffield, Ecclesall)

  Brackenbury, H. L.

  Henderson, H. 'Barks, Abingdon)

  Rolleston, Sir John

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

  Hermon-Hodge, Sir Robert

  Ronaldshay, Earl of

  Brassey, Capt. R. (Banbury

  Hickman, Colonel Thomas E.

  Rothschild, Llonel de

  Burdett-Coutts, W.

  Hillier, Dr. A. P.

  Royds, Edmund

  Butcher, J. G. (York)

  Hills, J. W.

  Salter, Arthur Cleveil

  Butcher, S. H. (Cambridge Unlv.)

  Hope, Harry (Bute)

  Samuel, Sir Harry (Norwood)

  Campion, W. R.

  Hope, James Fitzalan (Sheffield)

  Sanders, Robert A.

  Carlile, E. Hildred

  Horne, W. E. (Surrey, Guildford)

  Sanderson, Lancelot

  Cator, John

  Houston, Robert Paterson

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

  Cautley, H. G.

  Hume-Williams, W. E.

  Sassoon, Sir Edwar Albert

  Cave, George

  Hunt, Rowland

  Smith, F. E. (Liverpool, Walton)

  Cecil, Evelyn (Aston Manor)

  Hunter, Sir C. R. (Bath)

  Stanier, Beville

  Chaloner, Colonel R. G. W.

  Jackson, Sir John (Devonport)

  Stanley, Hon. A. Lyulph (Cheshire)

  Clay, Captain H. H. Spender

  Jardine, E. (Somerset, E.)

  Stanley, Hon. G. F. (Preston)

  Clive, Percy Archer

  Jessel, Captain H., M.

  Starkey, John R.

  Coates, Major E. F.

  Kerry, Earl of

  Staveley-Hill, Henry (Staffs.)

  Colefax, H. A.

  Keswick, William

  Stewart, Gersham (Ches. Wirral)

  Compton, Lord A. (Brentford)

  Kimber, Sir Henry

  Strauss, A.

  Cooper, Capt. Bryan (Dublin, S.)

  King, Sir Henry

  Seymour (Hull) Sykes, Alan John

  Courthope, G. Loyd

  Kinloch-Cooke, Sir Clement

  Talbot, Lord E.

  Craig, Charles Curtis (Antrim, S.)

  Knight, Capt. E. A.

  Terrell, H. (Gloucester)

  Craik, Sir Henry

  Law, Andrew Bonar (Dulwich)

  Thompson, Robert (Belfast, North)

  Cripps, Sir C. A.

  Lawson, Hon. Harry

  Thomson, W. Mitchell (Down, North)

  Croft, H. P.

  Lee, Arthur H.

  Thynne, Lord Alexander

  Dairymple, Viscount

  Lewisham, Viscount

  Tryon, Capt. George Clement

  Dalziel, D. (Brixton)

  Llewelyn, Venables

  Valentia, Viscount

  Dickson, Rt. Hon. C. Scott

  Lloyd, G. A.

  Walker, Col. W. M. (Lancashire)

  Dixon, C. H.

  Lockyer-Lampson, O. (Ramsay)

  Walrond, Hon. Lionel

  Douglas, Rt. Hon. A. Akers.

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

  Ward, Arnold (Harts, Watford)

  Du Cros, Alfred (Tower Hamlets, Bow)

  Lonsdale, John Brownlee

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

  Du Cros, Arthur P. (Hastings)

  Lyttelton, Hon. J. C. (Droitwich)

  Wheler, Granville C. H.

  Duke, H. E.

  MacCaw, Wm. J. MacGeagh

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

  Dunn, Sir W. H. (Southwark)

  Mackinder, Halford J.

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

  Eyres-Monsell, B. M.

  Macmaster, Donald

  Willoughby, Major Hon. Claude

  Faber, George Denison (Clapham)

  Magnus, Sir Philip

  Willoughby de Eresby, Lord

  Falle, B. G.

  Mallaby-Deeley, Harry

  Wood, Hon. E. F. L. (Ripon)

  Fell, Arthur

  Mason, J. F.

  Wood, John (Stalybridge)

  Fitzroy, Mon. E. A.

  Meysey-Thompson, E. C.

  Worthington-Evans, L. (Colchester)

  Fleming, Valentine

  Mildmay, Francis Bingham

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

  Fletcher, J. S.

  Morpeth, Viscount

  Forster, Henry William

  Morrison, Captain J. A.

  TELLERS FOR THE NOES.—Major Gastrell and Mr. Holster.

  Foster, H. S. (Suffolk, N.)

  Morrison-Bell, Major A. C.

  Foster, J. K. (Coventry)

  CLASS VI.
  "That a sum, not exceeding £6,105,949, be granted to His Majesty to defray the Charge which will come in course of payment during the year ending on. the 31st day of March, 1911, for Expenditure in respect of the Services included in Class VI. of the Estimates for Civil Services."
  [For Services included in Class, see 19th July, 1910, cols. 1205–1206.]
  Question, "That this House doth agree with the Committee in the outstanding Resolutions reported in respect of Class VI. of the Civil Service Estimates," put, and agreed to.

  CLASS VII.
  "That a sum, not exceeding—605,961, be granted to His Majesty to defray the Charge which will come in course of payment during the year ending on the 31st day of March, 1911, for Expenditure in respect of the Services included in Class VII. of the Estimates for Civil Services."
  [For Services included in Class, see 10th July, 1910, cot. 1207.]
  Question, "That this House doth agree with the Committee in the outstanding Resolutions reported in respect of Class VII. of the Civil Service Estimates," put, and agreed to.

  NAVY ESTIMATES, 1910–11.
  "That a sum, not exceeding £17,398,300, be granted to His Majesty, to defray the Charge which will come in course of payment during the year ending on the 31st day of March 1911, for Expenditure in respect of the Navy Services."
  [For Services included in Class, see 19th July, 1910, col. 1207.]
  Question, "That this House doth agree with the Committee in the outstanding Resolutions reported in respect of the Navy Services," put, and agreed to.
  ARMY ESTIMATES, 1910–11.
  "That a sum, not exceeding £17,116,100, be granted to His Majesty, to defray the
  Charge which will come in course of payment during the year ending on the 31st day of March, 1911, for Expenditure in respect of the Army Services, including Army (Ordnance Factories)."
  [For Services included in Class, see 19th July, 1910, col. 1208.]

  REVENUE DEPARTMENTS ESTIMATES, 1910–11.
  "That a sum, not exceeding £2,554,400, be granted to His Majesty, to complete the sum necessary to defray the Charge which will come in course of payment during the year ending on the 31st day of March, 1911, for Expenditure in respect of the Services included in the Estimates for Revenue Departments.
  [For Services included in Class, see 19th July, 1910, col. 1208.]
  Question put, "That this House doth agree with the Committee in the outstanding Resolutions reported in respect of the Services included in the Estimates for Revenue Departments."
  The House divided: Ayes, 257; Noes, 184.

  Division No. 120.]

  AYES.

  [10.52 p.m.

  Abraham, William (Dublin Harbour)

  Carr-Gomm, H. W.

  Ferens, T. R.

  Abraham, William (Rhondda)

  Cawley, Sir Frederick (Prestwich)

  France, G. A.

  Addison, Dr. Christopher

  Cawley, Harold T, (Heywood)

  Furness, Stephen

  Adkins, W. Ryland D.

  Chancellor, H. G.

  Gelder, Sir W. A.

  Agar-Robartes, Hon. T. C. R.

  Channing, Sir Francis Allston

  George, Rt. Hon. D. Lloyd

  Agnew, George William

  Chapple, Dr. W. A.

  Gibson, James P.

  Ainsworth, John Stirling

  Clough, William

  Gill, Alfred Henry

  Allen, Charles P.

  Clynes J. R.

  Glanville, H. J.

  Anderson, A. M.

  Collins, G. P. (Greenock)

  Glover, Thomas

  Ashton, Thomas Galt

  Collins, Stephen (Lambeth)

  Goddard, Sir Daniel Ford

  Asquith, Rt. Hon. Herbert Henry

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

  Greenwood, G. G.

  Baker, H. T. (Accrington)

  Compton-Rickett, Sir J.

  Greig, Colonel J. W.

  Baker, Joseph A. (Finsbury, E.)

  Corbett, A. Cameron (Glasgow)

  Grey, Rt. Hon. Sir Edward

  Balfour, Robert (Lanark)

  Cornwall, Sir Edwin A.

  Guest, Major

  Barclay, Sir T.

  Cowan, W. H.

  Gwynn, Stephen Lucius (Galway)

  Barlow, Sir John E.

  Craig, Herbert James (Tynemouth)

  Hackett, J.

  Barnes, G. N.

  Crosfleid, A. H.

  Haldane, Rt. Hon. Richard B.

  Barran, Sir J. (Hawick)

  Crossley, Sir W. J.

  Hall, Frederick (Normanton)

  Barton, William

  Cullinan, J.

  Hancock, J. G.

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

  Davies, E. William (Elfion)

  Harcourt, Robert V. (Montrose)

  Bentham, G. J.

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

  Harcourt, Rt. Hon. L. (Rossendale)

  Birrell, Rt. Hon. Augustine

  Davies, M. Vaughan- (Cardigan)

  Hardie, J. Keir (Merthyr Tydvll)

  Black, Arthur W.

  Dawes, J. A.

  Harmsworth, R. L.

  Bowerman, C. W.

  Denman, Hon. R. D.

  Harvey, A. G. C. (Rochdale)

  Brace, William

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

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

  Brady, P. J.

  Doris, W.

  Harwood, George

  Brocklehurst, W. B.

  Duncan, C. (Barrow-in-Furness)

  Haslam, James (Derbyshire, N.E.)

  Bryce, J. Annan

  Duncan, J. Hastings (York, Otley)

  Harlam, Lewis (Monmouth)

  Burke, E. Haviland-

  Dunn, A. (Camborne)

  Havelock-Allan, Sir Henry

  Burns, Rt. Hon. John

  Edwards, Enoch

  Haworth, Arthur A.

  Burt, Rt. Hon. Thomas

  Elibank, Master of

  Hayward, Evan

  Buxton, C. R. (Devon, Mid)

  Elverston, H.

  Hazelton, Richard

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

  Falconer, J.

  Helme, Marval Watson

  Byles, William Pollard

  Fenwick, Charles

  Henderson, Arthur (Durham)

  Henry, Charles S.

  Nolan, Joseph

  Soares, Ernest J.

  Higham, John Sharp

  Norton, Capt. Cecil W.

  Spicer, Sir Albert

  Hindle, F. G.

  Nussey, Sir Willans

  Stanley, Albert (Staffs, N.W.)

  Hobhouse, Rt. Hen. Chariot E. M.

  Nuttall, Harry

  Strachey, Sir Edward

  Hodge, John

  O'Brien, Patrick (Kilkenny)

  Summers, James Woolley

  Hogan, Michael

  O'Connor, John (Kildare, N.)

  Sutherland, J. E.

  Hooper, Arthur George

  O'Connor, T. P. (Liverpool)

  Sutton, John E.

  Hope, John Deans (Fife, West)

  O'Grady, James

  Taylor, John W. (Durham)

  Horne, C. Silvester (Ipswich)

  Palmer, Godfrey Mark

  Taylor, Theodore C. (Radcliffe)

  Howard, Hon. Geoffrey

  Parker, James (Halifax)

  Tennant, Harold John

  Hughes, S. L.

  Pearce, William

  Thomas, Abel (Carmarthen, E.)

  Hunter, W. (Govan)

  Pease, Rt. Hon. Joseph A.

  Thomas, D. A. (Cardiff)

  Illingworth, Percy H.

  Philipps, Sir Owen C. (Pembroke)

  Thomas, J. H. (Derby)

  Isaacs, Sir Rufus Daniel

  Pickersgill, Edward Hare

  Thorne, G. R. (Wolverhampton)

  Jardine, Sir J. (Roxburgh)

  Plrie, Duncan V.

  Touimin, George

  Johnson, W.

  Pointer, Joseph

  Trevelyan, Charles Philips

  Jones, Edgar (Merthyr Tydvll)

  Pollard, Sir George H.

  Twist, Henry

  Jones, H. Haydn (Merioneth)

  Ponsonby, Arthur A. W. H.

  Ure, Rt. Hon. Alexander

  Jones, William (Carnarvonshire)

  Price, C. E. (Edinburgh, Central)

  Verney, F. W.

  Joyce, Michael

  Priestley, Arthur (Grantham)

  Wadsworth, J.

  King, J. (Somerset, N.)

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

  Walker, H. De R. (Leicester)

  Lambert, George

  Primrose, Hon. Neil James

  Walsh, Stephen

  Law, Hugh A. (Donegal, W.)

  Pringle, William M. R.

  Walton, Sir Joseph

  Layland-Barratt, Sir Francis

  Radford, G. H.

  Wardle, George J.

  Leach, Charles

  Rainy, A. Rolland

  Waring, Walter

  Lehmann, R. C.

  Raphael, Herbert H.

  Warner, Sir Thomas Courtenay

  Levy, Sir Maurice

  Rea, Walter Russell

  Wason, Rt. Hon. E. (Clackmannan

  Lewis, John Herbert

  Reddy, M.

  Wason, John Cathcart (Orkney)

  Low, Sir F. A. (Norwich)

  Rees, Sir J. D.

  Waterlow, D. S.

  Lyell, Charles Henry

  Rendall, Athelstan

  Watt, Henry A.

  Macdonald, J. R. (Leicester)

  Richards, Thomas

  Wedgwood, Josiah C.

  Macdonald, J. M. (Falkirk Burghs)

  Roberts, Charles H. (Lincoln)

  White, Sir George (Norfolk)

  Macnamara, Dr. Thomas J.

  Roberts, G. H. (Norwich)

  White, J. Dundas (Dumbartonshire)

  MacVeagh, Jeremiah

  Roberts, Sir J. H. (Denbigh.)

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

  M'Callum, John M.

  Robertson, Sir G. Scott (Bradford)

  Whitehouse, John Howard

  M'Curdy, C. A.

  Robinson, S.

  Whyte, A. F. (Perth)

  McKenna, Rt. Hon. Reginald

  Roch, Walter F. (Pembroke)

  Wiles, Thomas

  Mallet, Charles E.

  Roe, Sir Thomas

  Wilkie, Alexander

  Markham, Arthur Basil

  Rowntree, Arnold

  Williams, J. (Glamorgan)

  Masterman, C. F. G.

  Runciman, Rt. Hon. Walter

  Williamson, Sir A.

  Meagher, Michael

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

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

  Menzies, Sir Walter

  Samuel, J. (Stockton)

  Wilson, John (Durham, Mid)

  Middlebrook, William

  Samuel, S. M.(Whitechapel)

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

  Millar, J. D.

  Schwann, Sir C. E.

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

  Molteno, Percy Alpert

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

  Winfrey, Richard

  Montagu, Hon. E. S.

  Seddon, J.

  Wood, T. W'Kinnon (Glasgow)

  Mooney, J. J.

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

  Young, W. (Perthshire, E.)

  Morgan, G. Hay (Cornwall)

  Shackleton, David James

  Younger, W. (Peebles and Selkirk)

  Morton, Alpheus Cleophas

  Sherwell, Arthur James

  Yoxall, Sir James Henry

  Murray, Captain Hon. A. C.

  Shortt, Edward

  Muspratt, M.

  Simon, John Alisebrook

  TELLERS FOR THE AYES.—Mr. Gulland and Mr. Dudley Ward.

  Neilson, Francis

  Smith, H. B. (Northampton)

  Nicholson, Charles N. (Doncaster)

  Soames, Arthur Wellesley

  NOES.

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

  Carille, E. Hildred

  Fell, Arthur

  Adam, Major W. A.

  Cater, John

  Fitzroy, Hon. E. A.

  Anson, Sir William Raynell

  Cautley, H. S.

  Fleming, Valentine

  Arbuthnot, G. A.

  Cave, George

  Fletcher, J. S.

  Archer-Shee, Maier M.

  Cecil, Evelyn (Aston Manor)

  Forster, Henry William

  Arkwright, John Stanhope

  Chaloner, Colonel R. G. W.

  Foster, H. S. (Suffolk, N.)

  Ashley, W. W.

  Clay, Captain H. H. Spender

  Foster, J. K. (Coventry)

  Attenborough, W. A.

  Clive, Percy Archer

  Foster, P. S. (Warwick, S.W.)

  Bagot, Captain J.

  Coates, Major E. F.

  Gardner, Ernest

  Balcarres, Lord

  Colefax, H. A.

  Gastrell, Major W. H.

  Baldwin, Stanley

  Compton, Lord A. (Brantford)

  Gibbs, G. A.

  Banbury, Sir Frederick George

  Cooper, Capt. Bryan (Dublin, S.)

  Gilmour, Captain J

  Baring, Captain Hon. G.

  Courthope, G. Loyd

  Goldman, C. S.

  Barnston, H.

  Craig, Charles Curtis (Antrim, S.)

  Goldsmith, Frank

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

  Craik, Sir Henry

  Gooch, Henry Cubltt

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

  Cripps, Sir C. A.

  Goulding, Edward Alfred

  Bathurst, Charles (Wilton)

  Croft, H. P.

  Greene, W. R.

  Beach, Hon. Michael Hugh Hicks

  Dairymple, Viscount

  Gretton, John

  Benn, I. H. (Greenwich)

  Dalziel, D. (Brixton)

  Guinness, Han. W. E.

  Bentinck, Lord H. Cavendish

  Dickson, Rt. Hon. C. Scott

  Gwynne, R. S. (Sussex, Eastbourne)

  Boyle, W. L. (Norfolk, Mid)

  Dixon, C. H.

  Haddock, George Bahr

  Boyton, J.

  Douglas, Rt. Hon. A. Akers-

  Hall, D. B. (Isle of Wight)

  Brackenbury, Henry Langton

  Du Cros, Alfred (Tower Hamlets, Bow)

  Hall, E. Marshall (Toxteth)

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

  Du Cros, Arthur P. (Hastings)

  Hambro, Angus Valdemar

  Brassey, Capt. R. (Banbury)

  Duke, H. E.

  Hamersley, A. St. George

  Burdett-Coutts, W.

  Dunn, Sir W. H. (Southwark)

  Hamilton, Marquess of (Londonderry)

  Butcher, J. G. (York)

  Eyres-Monsell, B. M.

  Hardy, Laurence (Kent, Ashford)

  Campion, W. R.

  Falle, B. G.

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

  1378

  1379

  Harrison-Broadley, H. B.

  Mason, J. F.

  Sanderson, Lancelot

  Henderson, H. (Berks, Abingdon)

  Meysey-Thompson, E. C.

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

  Hickmann, Col. T.

  Mildmay, Francis Bingham

  Sassoon, Sir Edward Albert

  Hills, J. W.

  Morpeth, Viscount

  Stanler, Beville

  Mohler, G. F.

  Morrison, Captain J. A.

  Stanley, Hon. Arthur (Ormskirk)

  Hope, Harry (Bute)

  Morrison-Bell, Major A. C.

  Stanley, Hon. G. F. (Preston)

  Hope, James Fitzatan (Sheffield)

  Mount, William Arthur

  Starkey, John R.

  Horne, Wm. E. (Surrey, Guildford)

  Newman, John R. P.

  Staveley-Hill, Henry (Staffordshire)

  Houston, Robert Paterson

  Newton, Harry Kottingham

  Stewart, Gershom (Ches. Wirral)

  Hume-Williams, W. E.

  Nicholson, Wm. G. (Petersfield)

  Strauss, A.

  Hunter, Sir C. R. (Bath)

  Nield, Herbert

  Sykes, Alan John

  Jackson, Sir J. (Devonport)

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

  Talbot, Lord E.

  Jardine, E. (Somerset, E.)

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

  Terrell, H. (Gloucester)

  Jessel, Captain H. M.

  Ormsby-Gore, Hon. William

  Thompson, Robert (Belfast, North)

  Kerry, Earl of

  Parkes, Ebenezer

  Thomson, W. Mitchell (Down, North)

  Keswick, William

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

  Thynne, Lord A.

  Kimber, Sir Henry

  Perkins, Waiter F.

  Tryon, Capt. George Clement

  King, Sir Henry Seymour (Hull)

  Peto, Basil Edward

  Valentia, Viscount

  Kinloch-Cooke, Sir Clement

  Pollock, Ernest Murray

  Walker, Col. W. H. (Lancashire)

  Knight, Capt. E. A.

  Pretyman, E. G.

  Walrond, Hon. Lionel

  Law, Andrew Boner (Dulwich)

  Quitter, William Eley C.

  Ward, Arnold (Herts, Watford)

  Lawson, Hon. Harry

  Randles, Sir John Scurrah

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

  Lee, Arthur H.

  Rawlinson, John Frederick Peel

  Wheler, Granville C. H.

  Lewisham, Viscount

  Rawson, Col. R. H.

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

  Llewelyn, Venables

  Rice, Hon. Walter F.

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

  Lloyd, G, A.

  Ridley, Samuel Forde

  Willoughby, Major Hon. Claude

  Locker-Lampson, O. (Ramsay)

  Roberts, S. (Sheffield, Ecclesali)

  Willoughby de Eresby, Lord

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

  Rolleston, Sir John

  Wood, Hon. E. F. L. (Ripon)

  Lonsdale, John Brownlee

  Ronaldshay, Earl of

  Wood, John (Stalybridge)

  Lyttelton, Hon. J. C. (Droltwich)

  Rothschild, Lionel de

  Worthington-Evans, L. (Colchester)

  MacCaw, Wm. J. MacGeagh

  Royds, Edmund

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

  Mackinder, H. J.

  Salter, Arthur Clevell

  Macmaster, Donald

  Samuel, Sir Harry (Norwood)

  TELLERS FOR THE NOES.—Dr. Hillier and Mr. G. Faber.

  Magnus, Sir Philip

  Sanders, Robert A.

  Mallaby-Deeley, Harry

  Bill read the third time, and passed.

  WAYS AND MEANS.
  Resolution reported, "That, towards making good the Supply granted to His Majesty for the service of the year ending on the 31st day of March, 1911, the sum of £95,297,884 be granted out of the Consolidated Fund of the United Kingdom."

  CONSOLIDATED FUND (APPROPRIATION) BILL.
  Ordered, That a Bill be brought in upon the said Resolution, and that the Chairman of Ways and Means, the Chancellor of the Exchequer, and Mr. Hobhouse do prepare and bring it in.
  Mr. Hobhouse accordingly presented a Bill to apply a sum out of the Consolidated Fund to the service of the year ending on the 31st day of March, 1911, and to appropriate the Supplies granted in this Session of Parliament. Bill read the first time, and ordered to be read a second time to- morrow.

  ISLE OF MAN (CUSTOMS) BILL.
  Read a second time, and committed to a Committee of the Whole House.
  COMPANIES (CONVERTED SOCIETIES) BILL.
  Considered in Committee, and reported without Amendment.

  LICENSING (CONSOLIDATION) BILL.
  [RE-COMMITTED.]
  Considered in Committee.
  [Mr. WHITLEY, Deputy-Chairman, in the Chair.]
  (IN THE COMMITTEE.)

  CLAUSE 15.—(Notices Requisite on Application for New Licence.)
  (1) A person applying for a new justices' licence must—

  (a) advertise notice of his application in some paper circulating in the place in which the premises to which the notice relates are situated, on some day not more than four and not less than two weeks before the application is made, and on such day or days (if any) as may be fixed by the licensing justices; and

  (b) within twenty-eight days before the application is made, cause notice of his application to be affixed and maintained between the hours of ten in the morning and five in the afternoon, of two consecu-

  1381
  tive Sundays, on the door of the premises, and on the door of the church or chapel of the parish or place in which the premises are situated, or, if there is no such church or chapel, on some other public and conspicuous place within the parish or place; and

  (c) not less than twenty-one days before the application is made, give notice in writing of his intention to apply for the licence to one of the overseers of the parish in which the premises to which the notice relates are situated and to the superintendent of police of the district, and, not less than twenty-one days before the date of the general annual licensing meeting, give a similar notice to the clerk of the licensing justices; and

  (d) if the application is for a new justices' on-licence, not less than twenty-one days before the date of the general annual licensing meeting, deposit with the clerk of the licensing justices a plan of the premises in respect of which the application is to be made.

  (2) Any notice to be given under this section shall set forth the name and address of the applicant, a description of the licence or licences for which he intends to apply, and a description of the situation of the premises in respect of which the application is to be made.
  Amendment made: In paragraph (c) leave out the words, "date of the general annual licensing meeting," and insert the words, "application is made."
  Clause, as amended, added to the Bill.

  CLAUSE 16.—(Renewal of Justices' Licence and Procedure on Renewal.)
  (1) For the purpose of this Act, the renewal of a justices' licence means the grant of a justices' licence at a general annual licensing meeting by way of renewal.
  (2) The holder of a justices' licence applying for the renewal of his justices' licence need not attend in person at the general annual licensing meeting unless he is required by the licensing justices to attend, and he shall not be required so to attend save for some special cause personal to himself.
  (3) Subject to the provisions of this section, the licensing justices shall not, where the holder of a justices' licence applies for the renewal of his license, entertain any objection to or take any evidence with respect to the renewal thereof unless written notice of an intention to oppose
  1382
  the renewal of the licence stating in general terms the grounds on which the renewal is opposed, has been served on the holder thereof not less than seven days before the commencement of the general annual licensing meeting.
  (4) The licensing justices may, notwithstanding that no notice of intention to oppose the renewal of a justices' licence has been given, on an objection being made to the renewal, adjourn the consideration of the renewal to a future day fixed by them (whether more or less than one month from the date of the original general annual licensing meeting), and require the attendance of the holder of the licence on that day when the case will be heard and the objection considered as if notice to oppose had been given.
  (5) Where the licensing justices, on an application for the renewal of an old on-licence, as defined in the Second Schedule to this Act, ask the holder of a licence to give any undertaking, they shall adjourn the hearing of the application, and cause notice of the undertaking for which they ask to he served upon any registered owner of the premises, and give him an opportunity of being heard.
  (6) The licensing justices shall not, where the holder of a justices' licence applies for the renewal of his licence, receive any evidence with respect to the renewal of the licence which is not given on oath.
  Amendment proposed: In Sub-section (1) after the word "renewal" to insert the words "of a similar licence which is in force in respect of the premises at the date of the application.
  "Provided that where an application is made for the grant of a licence in respect of premises in respect of which a similar licence is not in force at the date of the application but was in force at the date of the general annual licensing meeting in the previous year, the application shall be treated as an application for the renewal of a licence, and the grant of a licence in pursuance of the application shall be treated as a renewal of the licence, if the licensing justices are satisfied that the applicant had reasonable cause for not making his application at the previous general annual licensing meeting."—[Mr. Simon.]
  Amendment agreed to.
  Clause, as amended, added to the Bill.
  Clauses 17 to 21 inclusive added to the Bill.

  CLAUSE 22.—(Transfer Sessions.)
  (1) At the general annual licensing meeting in every year the licensing justices shall appoint a day, hour, and place for not less than four nor more than eight special sessions (in this Act referred to as transfer sessions) to be held in their district in the year following the general annual licensing meeting, at periods as near as may be equally distant, and except as provided by this Act with respect to justices' on-licences granted for a term, the transfer of a justices' licence, and the special removal of a justices' licence, shall not be authorised except at transfer sessions.
  (2) When the day, hour and place for transfer sessions have been appointed, the same procedure shall be followed for the purpose of giving notice thereof as is directed by this Act for the purpose of giving notice of a general annual licensing meeting.
  Amendments made: In Sub-section (1), after the word "and" ["equally distant, and"], leave out the words "except as provided by this Act with respect to justices' on-licences granted for a term";
  Clause, as amended, added to the Bill.
  At end of Sub-section (1), add the words, "or at a general annual licensing meeting. Any reference to transfer sessions in this Act shall, so far as respects any application for a transfer or special removal of a justices' licence, or any transfer or special removal of a justices' licence in pursuance of such an application, and so far as respects protection orders, include a reference to the general annual licensing meeting."
  Clause, as amended, added to the Bill.
  Clauses 23 to 28 inclusive added to the Bill.

  CLAUSE 29.—(Appeals to Quarter Sessions.)
  Sub-section (4).—The court of quarter sessions shall at those sessions hear and determine the matter of the appeal, and make such order therein with or without costs, as the court think fit, and may, if necessary, grant the renewal, transfer, or special removal of the licence in the same manner as the licensing justices.
  Amendment made: In Sub-section (4), after the word "shall ["quarter session shall"], leave out the words "at those sessions."
  Clause, as amended, added to the Bill. Clauses 30 to 34 inclusive added to the Bill.

  CLAUSE 35.—(Disqualified Persons.)
  The following persons are disqualified persons for the purposes of this Act:—

  (1) Any sheriff's officer or officer executing the legal process of any court of justice in England or Wales while he is such an officer; and

  (2) Any person convicted of felony, the disqualification to continue during the lifetime of that person; and

  (3) Any person convicted of making use of a forged justices' licence for the sale of beer, cider, or wine, knowing it to have been forged, the disqualification to continue during the lifetime of that person; and

  (4) Any holder of a justices' licence convicted, whether under this Act or otherwise, of permitting his premises to be a brothel, the disqualification to continue during the lifetime of that person; and

  (5) Any person ordered to be disqualified under the provision for the purpose contained in this Act on conviction for selling intoxicating liquor without a justices' licence, the disqualification to continue for the time mentioned in the order; and

  (6) Any person who by virtue of any other Act is disqualified for holding a justices' licence, the disqualification to continue as provided under that Act. Amendments made: In Sub-section (3), after the word "of" ["person convicted of"], insert the words "forging a justices' licence or;"

  In Sub-section (3), leave out the words "for the sale of beer, cider, or wine."
  Clause, as amended, added to the Bill.
  Clauses 36 to 42 inclusive added to the Bill.

  CLAUSE 43.—(Authentication, of Licence.)
  Sub-section (1). A justices' licence shall either—

  (a) be signed by the majority of the licensing justices who are present when the licence is granted; or

  (b) be sealed or stamped with an official seal or stamp in such form as the licensing justices may direct, the seal or stamp to be affixed in the presence of the licensing justices at their general annual licensing meeting or transfer sessions as the case may be, and verified in each case by the signature of their clerk.

  Amendments made: In Sub-section (1), paragraph (b), leave out the words "in the presence" and insert instead thereof the words "under the authority."
  In Sub-section (1), paragraph (b), after the word "justices" [" presence of the licensing justices"] insert the word "given."
  Clause, as amended, added to the Bill.
  Clauses 44 to 86 inclusive added to the Bill.

  CLAUSE 87.—(Right of Owner to Apply for Transfer Forfeited.)
  Where the holder of a justices' licence is convicted for the first time of any one of the following offences:—

  (a) making an internal communication between his licensed premises and any premises not being licensed premises;

  (b) forging a justices' licence for the sale of beer, cider, or wine;

  (c) selling spirits without a licence;

  (d) any felony;

  and in consequence either becomes personally disqualified or has his licence forfeited, or where a justices' on-licence for a term is forfeited under the provisions of this Act, or where a justices' licence is forfeited on account of alterations being made in licensed premises without the consent required under this Act, any owner of the premises or any person on his behalf may make an application to a court of summary jurisdiction for a protection order, and the court may in their discretion grant to him such an order, in the same manner and subject to the same provisions in and subject to which they may grant such an order to a proposed transferee pending a proposed transfer.
  Amendment made: In paragraph (b), leave out the words "for the sale of beer, cider, or wine."
  Clause, as amended, added to the Bill.
  Remaining Clauses and the Schedules added to the Bill; Bill, as Amended, to be considered to-morrow (Thursday).

  PARLIAMENTARY FRANCHISE (WOMEN) BILL.
  Order for Committee read.
  Mr. SPEAKER: Under the Standing Orders, I have to deal with the Instructions which stand on the Order Paper. The Instruction in the name of the hon. Member for Hexham (Mr. Holt) is out of order. ["That it be an instruction to the Committee that they may amend the Bill
  1386
  so as to provide that the wife of any man registered as a voter in respect of a household qualification shall also be registered as a voter in respect of that qualification."] The second Instruction in the name of the hon. Member for North Somerset (Mr. King) can be inserted as an Amendment. ["That it be an Instruction to the Committee that they may amend the Bill so as to provide that no woman be registered as a Parliamentary voter until she has first signified in writing that she desires to be so registered."] The third Instruction, in the name of the hon. Member for Scarborough (Mr. Rea), is beyond the scope of the Bill. ["That it be an Instruction to the Committee that they may amend the Bill so as to provide for the enfranchisement of husband and wife occupying a house of less than—20 annual value."]
  Bill considered in Committee.
  Committee report Progress, to sit again to-morrow (Thursday).

  CHILDREN ACT (1908) AMENDMENT BILL.
  Considered in Committee, and reported without Amendment. Bill read the third time, and passed.
  ADJOURNMENT—Resolved, "That this House do now adjourn."—[Master of Elibank.]
  Adjourned accordingly at Twenty-one minutes after Eleven o'clock.

  Finance Act, 1910 (Whisky Duty Paid).
  Finance Act, 1910 (Whisky Duty Paid).
  Grants to Scottish Universities.
  Grants to Scottish Universities.
  Old Age Pensions (Ireland).
  Old Age Pensions (Ireland).
  Somerset House (Estate Duty Office).
  Somerset House (Estate Duty Office).
  Finance Act, 1910 (Reduction of Licence Duty).
  Finance Act, 1910 (Reduction of Licence Duty).
  Civil Service (Statistical Abstractors).
  Civil Service (Statistical Abstractors).
  Sale of Untenanted Land, Ireland.
  Sale of Untenanted Land, Ireland.
  Teachers' Certificates (Ireland).
  Teachers' Certificates (Ireland).
  Cagney and Harold Estate.
  Cagney and Harold Estate.
  Ormathwaite Estate, North Kerry.
  Ormathwaite Estate, North Kerry.
  Lord Carbery's Tenants, Ovens, County Cork.
  Lord Carbery's Tenants, Ovens, County Cork.
  Loyd Estate, Killea, County Tipperary.
  Loyd Estate, Killea, County Tipperary.
  Reinstatement Application, Bownahow, County Cork.
  Reinstatement Application, Bownahow, County Cork.
  Orangemen and Catholics (Bessbrook).
  Orangemen and Catholics (Bessbrook).
  Kiltane Farm, County Clare.
  Kiltane Farm, County Clare.
  Lough Swilly (Depth of Water).
  Lough Swilly (Depth of Water).
  Admiralty (Writers).
  Admiralty (Writers).
  Naval Manœuvres.
  Naval Manœuvres.
  Army Order (Old Comrades' Associations).
  Army Order (Old Comrades' Associations).
  Templemore Military Barracks.
  Templemore Military Barracks.
  King Edward's Funeral (Casual Labourers, Shoeburyness).
  King Edward's Funeral (Casual Labourers, Shoeburyness).
  School Grants in India.
  School Grants in India.
  Indian Railways (Breakages and Repairs).
  Indian Railways (Breakages and Repairs).
  Smallpox Epidemic (Bombay).
  Smallpox Epidemic (Bombay).
  Legislative Councils (India).
  Legislative Councils (India).
  Indian Railway Board Orders.
  Indian Railway Board Orders.
  Technical Schools (Attendance Registers).
  Technical Schools (Attendance Registers).
  Littleport School, Isle of Ely.
  Littleport School, Isle of Ely.
  Anæsthetics (Administration).
  Anæsthetics (Administration).
  Spurious Sports.
  Spurious Sports.
  "Sandwich" Girls (Woolwich).
  "Sandwich" Girls (Woolwich).
  Dredging at Malta.
  Dredging at Malta.
  St. Elmo Barracks.
  St. Elmo Barracks.
  Russian Fisheries, Gunnishtepe, near Astrabad.
  Russian Fisheries, Gunnishtepe, near Astrabad.
  Congo (Localities for British Traders).
  Congo (Localities for British Traders).
  Arrest of British Trawler (Territorial Waters).
  Arrest of British Trawler (Territorial Waters).
  Mental Diseases (International Committee)
  Mental Diseases (International Committee)
  Soudan (Cotton Cultivation).
  Soudan (Cotton Cultivation).
  Dr. Pepperdene (Injury from X-ray Work)
  Dr. Pepperdene (Injury from X-ray Work)
  Prosecution of Miss L. C. Wilson (Alleged Political Intimidation).
  Prosecution of Miss L. C. Wilson (Alleged Political Intimidation).
  Corrupt and Illegal Practices (Prosecutions).
  Corrupt and Illegal Practices (Prosecutions).
  Labour Exchange Officials.
  Labour Exchange Officials.
  Bankruptcy Law Reform.
  Bankruptcy Law Reform.
  Old Age Pension Refused (Glasgow).
  Old Age Pension Refused (Glasgow).
  Central Telegraph Office Assistants.
  Central Telegraph Office Assistants.

BARON WILLINGDON OF RATTON.
Freeman Freeman-Thomas, Esquire, having been created Baron Willingdon of Ratton in the county of Sussex—Was (in the usual manner) introduced.
The Lord LECONFIELD—Took the Oath.
The LORD CHANCELLOR The LORD CHANCELLOR acquainted the House, That the Clerk of the Parliaments had laid upon the Table the Certificate from the Examiners that the further Standing Orders applicable to the following Bill have been complied with:
Barry Railway.
The same was ordered to lie on the Table.

WATER PROVISIONAL ORDER BILL.
Reported from the Select Committee, with Amendments, and re-committed to a Committee of the Whole House To-morrow.
LANCASHIRE AND YORKSHIRE RAILWAY BILL.
The King's consent signified, and Bill reported from the Select Committee, with Amendments.
MINES ACCIDENTS (RESCUE AND AID) BILL.
Brought from the Commons.
POLICE (WEEKLY REST-DAY) BILL.
Returned from the Commons, with the Amendments, agreed to.
MINES ACCIDENTS (RESCUE AND AID) BILL.
Read 1a, and to be printed. (No. 121.)
LOCAL GOVERNMENT PROVISIONAL ORDERS (No. 5) BILL.
Read 2a (according to order), and committed: The Committee to be proposed by the Committee of Selection in regard to the Merthyr Tydfil Order.

LOCAL GOVERNMENT PROVISIONAL ORDERS (No. 6) BILL.
LOCAL GOVERNMENT PROVISIONAL ORDERS (No. 7) BILL.
LOCAL GOVERNMENT PROVISIONAL ORDERS (No. 9) BILL.
LOCAL GOVERNMENT PROVISIONAL ORDERS (No. 10) BILL.
LAND DRAINAGE PROVISIONAL ORDER (No. 3) BILL.
Read 2a (according to order), and committed for Tuesday next.

LOCAL GOVERNMENT (IRELAND) PROVISIONAL ORDERS (No. 3) BILL.
  METROPOLITAN POLICE PROVISIONAL ORDER BILL.
  House in Committee (according to order): Bills reported without amendment, and to be read 3a To-morrow.

LAWLESSNESS IN IRELAND.
LORD CLONBROCK*LORD CLONBROCK rose to call attention to the withdrawal of prosecution against the nine men engaged in violently resisting the law at the evictions at Kilmurry, Castle Island, co. Kerry, in June, 1909, and to ask whether His Majesty's Government are so satisfied with the present state of the county of Kerry as to deem the vindication of the law in this case unnecessary.
The noble Lord said: My Lords, the circumstances connected with the eviction which forms part of the Notice on the Paper are so peculiar that I hope I may be allowed to state them in some detail. It appears that negotiations for the sale of this farm were entered into as early as the year 1903. The landlord is Mr. Peirce Gun Mahony; the name of the tenant was Mr. Richard Walsh, and the rent of the farm £34 13 s. 6d. At that time the tenant signed a paper stating that he was perfectly content with the terms offered, provided certain minor matters with regard to turbary were arranged. A scheme was then drawn up by two parish priests of the neighbourhood, but the tenant refused to accept their decision although he had previously stated he would do so. He then refused to go on with the terms of purchase or to pay any rent whatever. In the year 1905 three years rent was due, and proceedings were taken by the trustees for the rent. Judgment was marked against the tenant, and as he had removed all his hay and stock on the farm, his

345
interest was put up for auction and purchased by the agent of the property. An offer was then made to him to accept twenty-one and a-half years purchase of the rent, which was a second term rent. This the tenant refused absolutely. He then fell ill, and no further move was taken for some time.
But in the year 1907, the tenant having paid no rent in the meantime, the trustees of the property issued a writ of ejectment. He defended these proceedings unsuccessfully, and this caused still further delay. The next step was on November 5, 1908, when an attempt was made at ejectment, which failed owing to the insufficient force brought to protect the sheriff and the determined resistance offered by the tenant and others in the neighbourhood. On November 15 of the same year a large meeting was held under the auspices of the. United Irish League, at which violent speeches were made by Members of Parliament and others, calling upon the people in the neighbourhood to support Richard Walsh in his "sturdy struggle for his home against exacting landlordism." A fund was started called the "Castle Island Eviction Fund," which received large subscriptions, and by the help of the people in the neighbourhood the house was fortified in a most scientific manner. Trees were cut down and laid across the road, trenches were cut round the house, fences of bushes and barbed wire were erected, a subterranean passage was made from the house to the yard, the walls of the house were propped up with timber, and barrels of tar and lime were procured, with syringes and a pump in order that the ingredients might be poured on the attacking party.
Another attempt at ejectment was made on June 4, 1909, which again failed. Finally, early in July of last year a force of 250 police accompanied the eight bailiffs, and in the course of a several hours siege the police, as the right hon. gentleman the Chief Secretary stated in the House of Commons, were subjected to every kind of violence. Hot tar and lime were poured upon them, and the sight of one police officer was seriously imperilled. An entrance was effected after several hours by making a breach in the wall, and the garrison, consisting of fifteen men, were arrested on the spot. They were then brought before the magistrates at Petty Sessions, but though they had been caught red-handed, the magistrates
346
by a majority of one refused information. The then Attorney-General, recognising that there had been a gross miscarriage of justice, directed the prosecution of nine of them at the Spring Sessions last March. Six had in the meantime left the country and gone to America. One would have supposed, seeing the excitement and agitation that prevailed in the district and that the magistrates had refused to convict, that it would have been manifest that nothing better could be expected from a common jury, and one would have thought that the case would have been brought before the Winter Assizes, when the trial would not have been held in the county of Kerry, or else that application would have been made to change the venue. But the matter was brought before a Kerry jury last March, and the jury acquitted the prisoners on the main charge. The learned Judge who tried the case, Lord Chief Justice O'Brien, expressed strong disapproval of the verdict, but added some words of commiseration of the jury in the position in which he saw they were placed.
It was then stated, that the prosecution of the defendants on several other charges would be for the present postponed. But we saw from the statement of counsel for the Crown a fortnight ago at the Summer Assizes that these prosecutions had been withdrawn in consequence of the peaceable state of the county. It is only fair to say that the learned Judge who presided, Lord Justice Cherry, had previously spoken of the peaceable state of the county. There had only been a few cases of minor boycotting and threatening letters reported to him by the Constabulary. But even with this apparent outward improvement as regards the diminution of these offences, it is hard to imagine why His Majesty's Government, in the face of the terrorism which they must have known was exerted a few months before, when the jury were afraid to convict in the face of clear evidence, should consider the county to be. in a satisfactory state. They must surely see that if it is quiet, it is because the United League and the party of agitation have got matters so completely into their own hands and have been able to defy the law so successfully that they have exercised a system of terrorism over the country which has enabled them to dispense with any acts of violence. It is hard, therefore, to conceive how this could be considered a satis-

347
factory state. But, even if it were, I confess I fail to see the connection between the present peaceable state of the country and an outrage which was committed a year ago.
We sometimes hear comparisons instituted between the state of crime in Ireland and the state of crime in England. It would be no doubt impossible to draw a parallel with regard to this particular outrage, because I do not suppose it has ever happened in England that an ejectment for non-payment of rent has had to be executed by 250 police; but taking any other sort of crime, people would be very much surprised in England if they heard that a prosecution for any criminal offence was withdrawn because for the last few months no similar crime had taken place in the county concerned. Have these prosecutions been abandoned because the Government supposed that their abandonment would be popular in the county, that the majority of the people are in sympathy with the parties who were to be brought up? If that is the case, and if there is a widespread sympathy on the part of the majority of the people in favour of resistance to the law, what becomes of the peaceable state. of the country? Is it to be considered in a. satisfactory state? Or is it the case that the party of agitation have not only established a, thorough system of terrorism over the particular district, but that they have struck terror into His Majesty's Government, and that the Government are afraid that any proceedings taken against these men would create a disturbance? If so, it would appear that they are so anxious to be able to assure the country of the peaceable state of Ireland that they want peace at any price—even at the price of allowing offenders against the law to go scot free. It is so curious that I am anxious to know from His Majesty's Government what motive they had in dropping the prosecution.
THE EARL OF MAYO: My Lords, I rise to support my noble friend in his action in putting this Question to His Majesty's Government. I do not wish to go into the details of this case. They are sufficiently known to the officials at Dublin Castle, to the officials at the Irish Office, and to the Chief Secretary; and your Lordships have heard from my noble friend Lord Clonbrock what happened—how the jury refused to convict, and how the Lord Chief Justice said that, after all,
348
he pitied these jurymen for there was no doubt they could not convict, because we all know that a very broad hint is given to common juries in that part of Ireland that if they convict their lives will be made unbearable, and perhaps something worse may happen. The details of the case, as I have said, are well known. But some reference to the action of the Chief Secretary and the Law Officers of the Crown is absolutely essential with regard to this matter.
I will take what occurred at the Kerry Summer Assizes on July 8 this year. Mr. Lynch, K.C., referring to the case of the King against Richard J. Walsh and others, said—
"The principal indictment was disposed of at the last, Assizes."
We know how that was disposed of—by the jury refusing to find the parties guilty, although they were caught in the act. Mr. Lynch continued—
"There were still some minor charges, but the Attorney-General had directed him, in consequence of the peaceable condition of the county, to enter a nolle prosequi."
The Judge is thereupon reported to have said—
"I am very glad. Let it be done."
With regard to the "minor charges," I should like to ask His Majesty's Government whether they consider tins one of the minor charges. Sergeant John McIntyre, of the Royal Irish Constabulary depot, stated before the magistrates at Castle Island—
"The remains of a bag of dry lime were thrown on him; he became practically stone blind for a time, and his right eye was still very weak. He was medically treated."
There is one thing which is rather satisfactory with regard to this matter, and that is that since the authorities announced their intention of sending these persons for trial six of these blackguards have left the country. I only wish that the minor charges had been gone on with, because the rest of the blackguards would most likely have left the country also, and we should have had no more of this ruffianism in the district.. I know it is wrong to animadvert on anything that a Judge does, but I should like to refer to the remark of the Judge when the Attorney-General withdrew these cases at the Assizes. The Judge said he was "very glad." I wonder if the respectable citizens and farmers and those who wish to do their business

349
in quiet in the county of Kerry are very-glad that these people are not to be prosecuted for these offences.
With regard to the statement that the county of Kerry is in a perfectly peaceable state, I should like to draw your Lordships' attention to what the Roman Catholic Bishop of Kerry said in his Lenten Pastoral published a few months since. The Bishop drew a very different picture. He referred to "wholesale drunkenness," "violence," deeply criminal conduct, in connection with malicious injury to property, which he denounced as "contemptible, mean and cowardly," "personal violence leading to the loss of human life"—these are some of the epithets employed by the Bishop in admonishing his people and trying to reform them. I submit that the Roman Catholic Bishop of Kerry knows a great deal more about the doings of his flock than even the officials, the police, or the resident gentlemen and farmers in the county of Kerry. He has the means of knowing exactly what is going on, and no stronger language could have been used than that contained in his Lenten -Pastoral. I wish that those in authority in Ireland and in another place would use that language or language approaching to it.
No doubt we shall be told that this is an isolated case, and that the rest of Ireland is in a prosperous condition. But what these people want is to be able to go about their business in a quiet and orderly manner, and to see the ordinary law of the land carried out and malefactors of this kind pursued in the same manner as they pursue their evil practices. I hope the Government will give a direct though I do not know whether it. will be a satisfactory answer to the Question which my noble friend Lord Clonbrock has put to them. We do not bring these cases up for Party purposes, or anything of that sort. It does not matter to those who live in Ireland what Party is in power. We ask that Party to keep the country in order according to the law of the land as it exists. That is what we ask, and I hope that an answer will be given which will at all events allay the doubts which exist in our minds at present.
THE PAYMASTER-GENERAL (LORD ASHBY ST. LEDGERS): My Lords, I am very glad that. the noble Earl who has just
350
sat down disclaimed any intention of making Party capital or advantage out of the case which Lord Clonbrock has brought before your Lordships' attention this afternoon. If we start from that basis, I think we shall get on better in this and similar matters than if a Party spirit prevailed. This case is on the general lines stated by the noble Lord, but perhaps you will allow me to recapitulate rapidly exactly what happened. This farm was held by a man named Walsh at a judicial rent of £31. and he had fallen into arrears for rent. In March, 1906, judgment was marked against him for £107 and £10 costs.
LORD ASHBOURNE: How many half-yearly gales was that?
LORD ASHBY ST. LEDGERS: I do not know how far it was retrospective, but that was the judgment given in March, 1906. Walsh thereupon removed his hay and stock from the farm. The sheriff then seized his interest in the farm and put it. up for sale, when the agent purchased it. In July, 1907, a writ of ejectment was issued, and after a good deal of litigation Walsh's eviction was carried out on June 22, 1909. On this date the sheriff's officers, assisted by a protecting police force, arrived at Walsh's house, finding it strongly barricaded as has been described, and on the sub-sheriff demanding possession, hot water, tar, lime, etc., were thrown at him and his officers as well as the police. In endeavouring to effect an entrance the sub-sheriff and his officers were assaulted, and the police, on instructions, forced an entrance. They were also attacked. and two men were rather severely injured., but. I am glad to say that I hear in both cases they are doing well and there is no permanent injury. There were fifteen men inside the house, and they were arrested and brought before the resident magistrate, who remanded them; on July 7, when the case came before the bench of magistrates, it was adjourned to July 16, and further adjourned to August 3, and on that date the magistrates refused information, the resident magistrate dissenting.
Upon that the Attorney-General took up the matter, and bills against nine of the defendants were sent up to the Spring Assizes. The charges made against them were three—first, resisting the sheriff's officers; secondly, assaulting the police;

351
and, thirdly, unlawful assembly. As the noble Lord has stated, the jury acquitted the defendants on the first indictment—that of resisting the sheriff's officers. I may here say, in parenthesis, that the position of the police in cases of eviction is peculiar. They are not entitled to assist the sheriff in bringing about the eviction. They can only step in if there is a breach of the peace, or likely to be a breach of the peace. I do not know whether it was on that ground that the jury acquitted the prisoners under the first. head. I merely mention it as a technical point which may have availed in regard to this case. The trial on the other indictments was postponed to the next Assizes, and then the Crown counsel, by direction of the Attorney-General, entered a nolle prosequi and the defendants were discharged.
LORD ASHBOURNE: What were the charges then outstanding?
LORD ASHBY ST. LEDGERS: Assaulting the police, and unlawful assembly. With regard to the state of the county, I may say no further disturbance occurred in connection with the eviction, and the county generally remained peaceful throughout the remainder of the year, although there were some cases of serious crime. Your Lordships will remember that an election took place in January of this year as a result of a petition, and although feeling ran very high the police were able to maintain the peace; in April and May there was a slight anti-grazing outbreak in a part of the county, but in June, however, the county inspector reported the county to be generally peaceful.
With regard to the statement of the Roman Catholic Bishop of Kerry in his Pastoral Letter, I dare say the House would like to have the figures as to the state of lawlessness in that. county at the present time contrasted with last year. There were last year 13 cases of incendiary fires; this year, up to June 30, there were 10. Of cattle maiming there were 7 cases in 1909; for the half-year up to June, 1910, there were 5. These are the chief headings under which compensation for malicious injuries is claimed. As regards the Bishop's reference to crime involving violence or loss of human life, I may mention that in 1909 there were: one case of murder,
352
2 cases of manslaughter, 3 cases of firing at the person, 5 cases of aggravated assault, and 3 cases of maiming. It is satisfactory to know that there has been no case of murder, manslaughter, or firing at the person since January of this year. In 1909 there were 3 cases of firing at the person, and 8 cases of firing into dwellings. There has been no case of firing at the person since January of this year, and there have been 5 cases of firing into dwellings. The number of cases in which police protection is afforded is about the same as in previous years, but there is no case of serious boycotting. Six cases of cattle-driving were reported in 1909; there has been only 1 case since January of this year. It was upon those facts, no doubt, that Lord Justice Cherry felt himself justified in making the speech to the Grand Jury at the Summer Assizes at Tralce, in which he said—
"I am extremely happy to be able to inform you that there are only three bills to go before you involving three offences, none of which is of a serious character";
and he went on to say—
"There is not any crime of a serious character which has not been brought to justice, and I am glad to be able to inform you that the whole county is now in a perfectly peaceable condition."
With regard to cattle-driving he said—
"I also hear that there is no cattle-driving here";
and then he made a statement with regard to threatening letters, the figure of which is contained in the schedule presented to Parliament, and I think what he said is worth considering, because very often these threatening letters are of a most bombastic kind, and have very little real intimidatory meaning. He says, for instance—
"There have been twenty cases of threatening letters; but threatening letters not followed up by any hostile action is not a very serious matter; and I am informed that they are entirely disregarded by the recipients, who are not even annoyed with them, so that they may be regarded as of no importance. There is in the Irish character a certain melodramatic temperament, which derives pleasure in writing bloodthirsty letters and making bloodthirsty speeches which do not mean very much."
I may say that, as Lord Mayo anticipated, the Government regard this as an isolated case. It is a case where many special conditions prevailed, not in any sense connected with a general conspiracy to refuse to pay rent. Several features

353
occurred of a kind which would be easily understood by noble Lords opposite. For instance, a new owner came into the property, and possibly he may have been a little lacking in tact in dealing with this case. Then there is the familiar figure of an old woman of eighty in the house, and all these things tended to inflame feeling in the district.
THE EARL OF MAYO: The landlord never interfered with the old lady at all. It was entirely the action of the son which created all this row. She is still in the house, and is as comfortable as circumstances will permit her to be.
LORD ASHBY ST. LEDGERS: I only mention that to show that there was in this case all the elements which lead to a popular demonstration in favour of the tenant. Anyhow, with regard to this prosecution, as I have said, the first charge failed, and the Attorney-General, using his discretionary powers, decided that it was undesirable, in the interests of the permanent peace of the district, to pursue the defendants with other charges. The discretionary power of the Attorney-General is a very real one. He is obliged to take into consideration all the circumstances of the case, and it is for him to decide whether, in the general public interest and having regard to the general condition of the country, it is desirable that the Crown should prosecute or not. Even if the Government had been in possession of those greater powers under the Crimes Act, it would have fallen to the Attorney-General to use his discretion in exactly the same way. I also frankly admit, although I cannot speak for the Attorney-General, that he may have had a doubt in his mind as to whether the Crown would have been more successful in securing a conviction on the other two charges than they were on the first. What do noble Lords opposite suggest that we should have done?
THE MARQUESS OF LONDONDERRY: Changed the venue.
LORD ASHBY ST. LEDGERS: I have no doubt the Attorney-General ' considered that, and came to the conclusion that it was not in the interests of permanent peace to pursue this matter any further.
THE MARQUESS OF LONDONDERRY: Why?
LORD ASHBY ST. LEDGERS: Because the general state of the country is satisfactory. The noble Marquess himself admitted, in the recent debate on this subject, that with the exception of four counties—Clare, Galway, Longford, and Roscommon—the condition of Ireland is on the whole peaceful, and that a considerable improvement has taken place of late years.
THE MARQUESS OF LONDONDERRY: Yes; but I was careful to point out that, however satisfactory the condition of affairs might be in other parts of Ireland, it is extremely unpleasant for the unfortunate people in these four counties to be ignored, and to be told that they must not complain of the misery they are undergoing because the rest of Ireland is satisfactory.
LORD ASHBY ST. LEDGERS: Speaking last year the noble Marquess gave the House to understand that in his opinion the condition of Ireland was worse than it had. been for thirty or forty years. That Was the impression which the noble Marquess conveyed to the House last year. But in the speech he made the other day he carefully stated, in his opening remarks, that he addressed himself merely to the condition of affairs in the four counties I have named.
THE MARQUESS OF LONDONDERRY: My point is that the people in those counties have the same right to protection as the people in other counties, and ought not to be ignored and told that they must not complain because the rest of Ireland is satisfactory.
LORD ASHBY ST. LEDGERS: The noble Marquess will have an opportunity later of making his point. I say that there has been, as is admitted by noble Lords opposite, a great improvement in 'the condition of Ireland generally, and Kerry is one of those counties in which, according to the noble Marquess himself, there has been an improvement. I do not know whether noble Lords opposite are again hinting or suggesting that the Crown ought to be armed with greater powers than are now possessed for dealing with these cases. Of course, this is a bad case. I do not deny that for a minute, and it is very unfortunate that such a case should occur. I am not concerned to argue the inefficacy

355
of coercive measures, if it is coercion which noble Lords opposite desire. No doubt in a way and for a time you can, by the exercise of the Crimes Act, produce a temporary and superficial state of law and order. You can crush crime, no doubt, by the use of the Crimes Act, but what we say is that that policy is a sterile policy, and a proof of that is to be found in the fact that even in the eyes of its authors and advocates the policy of coercion has been a failure. In proof of that I would refer your Lordships to the speech made in this House by the noble Earl, Lord Dudley. Lord Dudley said—
"Ever since I went to Ireland I have striven, to the best of my humble ability, to do the best I could in the true interests of the country, and I cannot refrain now from dissociating myself from the advocacy of a policy the policy of coercion] which, though, perhaps, temporarily efficacious, to my mind cuts at the root of all true union between England and Ireland, and embitters public opinion in that country to such an extent as to render successful government difficult, if not impossible."
LORD ASHBOURNE: Lord Dudley stood in the debate alone in that opinion. I followed hint and repudiated many of the things he said.
LORD ASHBY ST. LEDGERS: It is none the less true that Lord Dudley made that speech, and it is none the less true that he was your Viceroy in Ireland. If any further proof were needed of the failure of coercive measures, it is to be found in the introduction of Mr. Wyndham's Act. The fact of the matter is, the management of Ireland requires tact and patience. We shall no doubt have these cases from time to time. They are very deplorable and no one can defend them. But we do say that we are gaining ground, that the condition of Ireland is better than it was two years ago, and is increasingly on the mend. His Majesty's Government do not in any sense of the word condone anything that has happened in this or in similar cases, nor have they refrained from prosecuting because, as was suggested, it would be an unpopular act in the county. We are pursuing steadfastly the policy of putting into operation, so far as we are able and when not advised to the contrary, those ordinary processes of law which exist, and we believe that if we are allowed to continue that policy for a sufficiently long time the condition of Ireland will be very much better.
LORD ASHBOURNE: My Lords, the noble Lord who has just spoken has gone
Lord Ashby St. Ledgers.
356
very much outside the point that was brought under the notice of the House by my noble friend Lord Clonbrock. My noble friend referred to nothing except the condition of Kerry, and in that connection he largely directed attention to one particular case. The noble Lord who has just spoken has gone far outside that. He even went back to a debate of a couple of years ago, when my noble friend Lord Dudley somewhat surprised many of us by a speech which he made on that occasion. With regard to this case, I think Lord Ashby St. Ledgers failed to give sufficient weight and significance to what was said, with all the weight of his responsible position, by the Roman Catholic Bishop in this part of Ireland. Every one knows the close attention which the Bishops of the Roman Catholic Church give to everything that goes on in their diocese, and the deep interest they take in the happiness, well-being, and correct conduct of those within their religious jurisdiction. Therefore what was said by the Roman Catholic Bishop of Kerry and quoted by my noble friend Lord Mayo is entitled to very great weight. The grave words which the Bishop used in his Lenten Pastoral this year were written with a profound knowledge of the whole position, and are consequently entitled to serious attention from your Lordships and every one desirous of understanding the real, unvarnished tale to be told with reference to this matter.
An important circumstance is that very few of these people were made amenable for the offences. And of those who were made amenable, how many were convicted and punished? In other words, in how many cases were the crimes allowed to remain unpunished? This is a grave question. It may be that terror has now wrought its inevitable result, and that in many- cases the victim ceases to struggle. I do not disparage statistics, or suggest that the state of Ireland and the state of Kerry may not be reasonably examined by the light which statistics may give; but statistics have to be examined with a knowledge of the whole of the circumstances of the case. What. is the position which the noble Lord who has replied on behalf of the Irish Office has presented with reference to this special case? He has not sought to minimise its importance and gravity, except that the general tone of his remarks was rather, I will not

357
say, to whitewash it, but to prevent its looking as dark as people thought. And I think be described this as an isolated case. I am not sure that I could give assent to that.
LORD ASHBY ST. LEDGERS: I mean that it was not part of a conspiracy not to pay rent. It rested on quite exceptional circumstances.
LORD ASHBOURNE: I will take that as the noble Lord's meaning, but if I were discussing this question in the presence of those who were informed technically on the matter and with all the information before them, I would be disposed to greatly question that description. There was a great deal of co-operation in reference to the matter, and that it was an isolated case is one of the last things I would be disposed to accept. In occurrences of this kind if you find a good deal of local sympathy, no matter how you may describe it, it is a serious element, and there must have been a good deal of sympathy and cooperation among all the neighbours in this matter. What are the "exceptional circumstances"? Is not a man who is owed several years rent entitled to look for it? Is he not entitled, if payment is not forthcoming, to ask for possession of his land? Is he not entitled, if he does not get possession of his land, to take legal process?
LORD ASHBY ST. LEDGERS: The tenant has been evicted.
LORD ASHBOURNE: Yes, but where are the exceptional circumstances? What is there exceptional in a man who is owed several years rent asking for that rent? And what is there exceptional in a man who cannot get his rent seeking to regain possession of his land and appealing to the law? I think it is to be regretted that a word which gives a false impression should be used in reference to this transaction. To misrepresent a single word that the noble Lord has said would be the last thing I would desire.
LORD ASHBY ST. LEDGERS: I used the word "exceptional" in connection with the decision which the Attorney-General had to take. It was not at all a matter as to whether the man had a right to stay on the land. The circumstances were exceptional, and when the Attorney-
358
General had to make up his mind what to do, he took those circumstances into account.
LORD ASHBOURNE: The noble Lord now explains what he meant by exceptional circumstances.
LORD ASHBY ST. LEDGERS: That is what. I said.
LORD ASHBOURNE: Then I take it that what was taking place in reference to this matter was normal; that it was not improper, not exceptional, and not unbecoming on the part of the landlord to seek to get possession of his land as he could not get payment of his rent. That being so, what is the state of facts? The landlord did not get his rent. He endeavoured to obtain possession of his land, but failed. He tried to execute legal process, but again failed. He then appealed to the Government of the day for aid, and I gather from the discussion that the Government felt it so important to overcome the feeling that was surrounding this case that they sent a large force of police to see that the legal process was executed and the law administered in that part of Ireland. If there is one thing that is needed everywhere, particularly in Ireland, it is to satisfy the people that the law is strong enough to assert itself and to insist on being obeyed. Here the law failed to enforce itself and to be obeyed. The police were repudiated and driven back; and when ultimately possession of the house was obtained the men who had actively and openly resisted the law were found to a substantial number inside. It is to those men and what was their fate that my noble friend has directed attention. Some of them have left the country. I do not regret it. Others were summoned before the magisterial bench, but informations were refused. Then they were presented at the Assizes, but the local jury acquitted them of one of the charges, and the two other charges, since baptised "minor charges"—resistance of the police and unlawful assembly—have stood over.
The result of the proceedings in Court being what it was, it would probably have been wiser if at an earlier stage in the proceedings some effort had been made to change the venue to a calmer atmosphere. The noble Lord has said that the Attorney-General has to consider

359
many things when he comes to decide, in reference to particular cases, how he will assert and vindicate the law. I have filled that office myself and know that it is one of great responsibility, and I have no doubt whatever that the Attorney-General in dealing with this case applied his mind to it with a desire to do the best he could in the circumstances. But, none the less, it is to be regretted, in face of the grave defiance of the law that had taken place and the painful incidents that occurred in the administration of justice in this case, that at an earlier period some vigorous effort was not made to ensure that the trial would take place in a locality and under conditions where prejudice, violence, and possibly terrorism did not prevail.
In reference to this matter I should like the noble Lord or any member of His Majesty's Government who may take part in this discussion to tell me whether anything has been done, or is going to be done, in reference to the carriage of arms in Ireland. I have no doubt that if there was a check on the holding of firearms in Ireland—a check unfortunately removed by the action of His Majesty's Government —the men who resisted the police and resisted the assertion of the law would have found themselves not in possession of the weapons which enabled them to offer the defiance which they did. I regard this matter as of the highest importance. Since the discussion the other day in this House many people, not men of my own way of thinking in general politics, have spoken to me in reference to this matter, and they say that one of the greatest misfortunes in Ireland at the present time is the ease and facility with which firearms can be -obtained. This ease might have presented a different aspect in some of its particulars if the Peace Preservation Act had been in force, and I venture to think that it is reasonable to press the Government upon this point. There is not a single member of the Government who does not agree with us in reference to this question of the carriage of arms. I do not think the Government were right, judicious, or prudent. in allowing to lapse the Act which placed restraint on the possession of arms; but, having done so, their responsibility to show that some kind of discretion will be exercised in reference to this matter is increased. I hope we shall have a satisfactory assurance on this point.
THE LORD PRIVY SEAL AND SECRETARY OF STATE FOR THE COLONIES (THE EARL OF CREWE): My Lords, with reference to the last part of the noble and learned Lord's speech, I can assure him that we are not losing sight of this question of the carrying of arms in Ireland, or, indeed, in the United Kingdom generally, and he can rely upon it that we shall endeavour to deal with the subject as a whole. At the same time I am not quite sure what bearing that fact, although I fully admit it is important, has upon the particular case brought forward by the noble Lord, Lord Clonbrock. In this particular case of eviction, when most regrettable and reprehensible violence was used, I am not aware that firearms were even produced. I am, however, certain that they were not used, and therefore I confess I do not quite follow the noble and learned Lord in his observation that had more severe restrictions been placed upon the carrying of firearms this particular incident might have assumed a different character. There was, I am afraid, a great deal of violent assault. with hot water and tar in the course of these proceedings, but I think I am right in saying that there was no exhibition of firearms in the case.
I do not complain of noble Lords opposite for having called attention to this case, but the general issue raised by the noble Lord's question is, I think, a simple one. It was somewhat complicated owing to the interruption made by the noble Marquess, Lord Londonderry, during the remarks by my noble friend behind me. My noble friend Lord Ashby St. Ledgers was, I think, justified in drawing attention to the fact that when four counties were specifically mentioned by the noble Marquess as forming the disturbed part of Ireland, the county of Kerry, in which this incident occurred, was not one of them; and the importance of that fact rests upon this, that the reason, as I understand, which actuated the Attorney-General in taking the course he did in not proceeding with the prosecutions was that the state of the county of Kerry was not unsatisfactory. That, I admit, is a point on which any noble Lord is entitled to hold his own opinion. Whether it is or is not a sufficient reason for not proceeding with the prosecution in a particular case that the general state of the county, particularly in relation to the special offence, that of

361
resistance to eviction, does not give cause for apprehension, is, as I say, a matter on which every one is entitled to his own opinion; but, after all, the Attorney-General has that particular discretion. It is in a sense an act of government, but it is the discretion of the Attorney-General, taking into account, as the noble and learned Lord has stated, all the circumstances of the case; and my learned friend the Attorney-General, reviewing the whole of the circumstances, did undoubtedly decide, in view of the general state of the county, and I conclude also bearing in mind the special circumstances of the case, that it was not expedient, in the interests of justice or of the public peace, to proceed with these particular prosecutions. We cannot, I think, take it further than this. The Attorney-General acted on his own discretion, and if noble Lords opposite consider that he acted imprudently I am afraid they must retain that. opinion. But the discretion exists, and I confess that, speaking for myself and with recollections of Irish administration, I agree that there are cases in which it may be more expedient not to proceed with a particular prosecution in view of the general circumstances of a particular locality.
There is only one other point to which I desire to allude. Lord Justice Cherry's charge to the Grand Jury and his expression of satisfaction at the result of the case have been the subject of souse animadversion, to some extent in this House, but also outside. As regards the learned Judge's statement as to the state of the county, that was obviously founded on the police reports, and upon them alone; and, in view of what was said by the noble and learned Lord who has just sat down, it is important to note that it was not merely the fact that there were but few cases before the Court which caused the learned Judge to express that satisfaction—
LORD ASHBOURNE: I did not mention Lord Justice Cherry.
THE EARL OF CREWE: I know the noble and learned Loll did not, but what the noble and learned Lord did say was that the mere absence of criminal cases might not be a true index of the condition of a county, because a county might be so terrorised that there is no crime. But in
362
reading the charge of the learned Judge I gather that the police had informed him—and, after all, a Judge speaks on police information—that there was not any quantity of undetected or unprosecuted crime, and that there was not any serious boycotting. If that is so, if there was neither crime nor boycotting, I think it is difficult to assume that a state of terrorism exists. Terrorism may be carried on in one of two ways. It may be carried on, as it has been at different times in some parts of Ireland, by threats to commit crime, by firing into dwellings, and so on, or it may be carried on by boycotting; but in the absence of those two symptoms it seems to me difficult to assume that a state of anything like terrorism exists.
But the point to which I wished to draw attention was that the learned Judge expressed his satisfaction, as was stated by Lord Clonbrock or by Lord Mayo, at the result of the ease. What I understand the learned Judge to have done was to have expressed his satisfaction that the state of the county was such that the Attorney-General felt justified in not proceeding with the case, which is altogether a different thing from expressing satisfaction at the result of the case. I think it is important to draw that distinction, because although we are not in the habit of discussing, I am glad to think, in this House the conduct of learned Judges on the Bench, yet this is a case in which I know animadversions have been made adverse to the particular learned Judge. I have nothing further to add, because my noble friend behind me dealt so very clearly and fully with all the details of the case itself.
THE MARQUESS OF LANSDOWNE: My Lords, the noble Lord who speaks for the Irish Office let fall one observation which I think sums up very aptly the whole of the somewhat unedifying story to which we have been listening. He said this was a bad case. So it is; and if the noble Earl who leads the House will forgive me, I am not sure that the statement to which we have just listened makes it a much better case. I am still puzzled as to the reasons which induced His Majesty's Government to abandon these prosecutions. We are, of course, all aware that there have been periods in the recent history of Ireland when His Majesty's Government have found it necessary, and have pro-

363
claimed that they thought it necessary, to deal leniently with persons who had broken the law. I do not suggest that they have condoned lawlessness. But take, for example, the case of the restoration of the evicted tenants to their holdings, many of whom, as we all know, were deeply implicated in lawless proceedings. They regarded these people as sufferers in a great agrarian conflict, and they desired that bygones should be bygones. That was the proclaimed policy of His Majesty's Government. More recently they have given the benefit of extenuating circumstances to persons implicated in the offence of cattle-driving. That was in a way justified by His Majesty's Government upon the ground that these people not unnaturally cast hungry eyes upon the great cattle ranches which joined their holdings; and I think we were once told from the Bench opposite that it was really we who were to blame because of the immense advantages which we have conferred upon the occupiers of land in many parts of Ireland by giving them the opportunity of purchasing their holdings, and that we had thus created the land hunger which the cattle-drives were to satisfy.
But in this case where are the extenuating circumstances? What is the pretext for taking a lenient view of the occurrences we have been discussing? It seems to me, in the first place, that the initial offence committed by the people who defended "Walsh's Fort"—I think that is what it was called—was absolutely unpardonable and unjustifiable. The tenant held his farm under a judicial rent which had been twice reduced. It was a rent considerably below the Poor-law valuation, and that is notoriously a low rent in that part of Ireland. The tenant had, moreover, an opportunity of acquiring the fee of his farm upon terms of the most tempting and advantageous character. Some of my noble friends will, perhaps, correct me, but I will venture to say that in all probability this man before he went into the Land Court had been paying a rent somewhere in the neighbourhood of £40, and that he had an opportunity of buying his farm upon terms which would have left him the payer of an annuity of £20. That was a. golden chance for any occupier of land, and the terms were notoriously good because they were accepted by the other tenants on the estate. In the case of this particular man there was a breakdown owing to some hitch with regard to turbary.
364
We know how extremely important this question of the supply of fuel is to Irish tenants, and nobody would think worse of a man for declining to proceed with a purchase arrangement because he found that satisfactory terms were not forthcoming with regard to the supply of turf. But that is not what he did. He said he would neither buy nor pay rent, and he remained for several years without paying any rent.
What followed? The farm was fortified, and the people of the neighbourhood were incited, I am sorry to say. by Members of Parliament and others who visited the county, to resist the operation of the law, with the result that there were no less than three successive attacks on this place before it finally succumbed to the police. There was an assault in which sixty police were involved, a. second in which 170 were employed, and finally a third in which no fewer than 250 police were engaged. The noble Earl pointed out just now that no firearms were employed. That is quite true, but it is, I believe, in evidence that boiling tar, quicklime, scalding water, and I think I heard something about vitriol—I am not quite sure—were employed by the defenders. The resistance, to use the Chief Secretary's language, was so fierce that the Chief Secretary thought it desirable to pay a high compliment to the police force that was employed. The place was finally carried, and I see that when the trustees of the estate put in a claim for compensation, Judge Shaw, a learned Judge no doubt well known to many of your Lordships, described the whole occurrence as a shocking outrage. I must not forget to mention that among the persons caught red-handed in the so-called fort was one person who had been concerned in the second of the three assaults, and who had been bound over to keep the peace, but nevertheless was found engaged in these hostile operations.
Then, after that, we get a most instructive glimpse of the criminal law as it works in Ireland. First there were the proceedings before the magistrates. The evidence was amply sufficient. I believe it satisfied the stipendiary magistrate who was present. But the two other magistrates refused informations. The noble and learned Lord on the Woolsack has lately been paying attention to the circumstances under which

365
Justices of the Peace are appointed in this country, and I would suggest to His Majesty's Government that it might. be useful if some inquiry were to be made as to the conduct. and appointment of some of these Irish magistrates. In spite of this miscarriage before the magistrates, the men were put on trial and the trial took place at Tralee, in a county which, in spite of all that has been said, was, at any rate a very few months before, considered to be—parts of it., at all events—in a not very peaceful condition. So much was this the case that Lord Justice O'Brien went out of his way to say that he sympathised with the jurors—that is, the jurors who had acquitted the persons charged—on account of "the state of society." Now what does that mean? It means that the state of society, in that particular neighbourhood at. any rate, was such that the jurors had to choose between, in plain words, forswearing themselves, or taking the consequences of the honest discharge of their duties and facing the persecution to which that honest discharge of their duties would certainly have exposed them. After that abortive proceeding the accused men were to be tried a second time, and on that occasion, as your Lordships have been told, the Attorney-General entered a nolle prosegui on behalf of the Crown, and he did so on account of the condition of the county.
I do not want to enlarge on the condition of the county. I am quite certain it has undergone considerable improvement. I am quite certain that there are many parts of it wholly free from lawlessness and crime. But it is, perhaps, asking a good deal to ask us to accept the view that the condition of the county is wholly satisfactory when we remember the emphatic words used this year in his Lenten charge by the Roman Catholic Bishop of Kerry. Let me remind the House of the words which the Bishop used. He said—
"Another subject which claims our attention is malicious injury to property. We must candidly state that recently we were shocked to see the large number of these criminal cases which came up for hearing before some of our Courts.… Recent happenings oblige us to censure very severely the tendency still existing in some places to settle agrarian disputes by recourse to violent and lawless methods."
THE EARL OF CREWE: I think he also spoke in two places of the improvement of the county.
THE MARQUESS OF LANSDOWNE: I hope the noble Earl will not misunderstand me. I admit the improvement. That is conceded. Then there is the remarkable statement made by Lord Justice O'Brien in regard to the jurors which I quoted a moment ago, and which also seems to me to show that one must take cum grano the assertion that the condition of the country is quite so satisfactory as we are asked to believe. What I venture to put to the House is this. Let us assume that the condition of the county has not only improved, but that it is as satisfactory as we are told. Is that a sufficient reason for not allowing the law to take its course in a case of this kind? I fail altogether to follow the train of thought which leads to that conclusion. I say nothing of the question of moral right or wrong in this matter. Let us put it merely upon the bare ground of expediency. The noble Lord who spoke for the Irish Office told us that it was necessary to deal, I think he said, with tact arid patience with these matters. 1 do not see that any tact or any patience is exhibited in the abandonment of this prosecution. What reason can there be for letting off men who break the law, because their neighbours have not broken it? It seems to me so illogical that I cannot understand the reasons -which have influenced His Majesty's Government. Whom are they going to propitiate by this clemency and forbearance? Not the law-breakers. I do not believe for one moment that persons who are disposed to be lawless in that or in any part of Ireland are going to become less lawless because you deal with these matters with kid gloves on. Then what about the effect upon the law-a biding part of the population, the people who have stood aside and kept clear of all these conspiracies? What will be the effect upon their minds of seeing that His Majesty's Government are so easily deterred from following up a really atrocious case such as the one we are discussing this evening? I am afraid that what has happened in this case will further inculcate a lesson which we have been too apt to inculcate upon the people of Ireland during the last few years—I mean that in all these cases the scale inclines in favour of those who break the law and against those who have the courage to abide by the law and to vindicate it.
There is one other point. What will be the effect of this action upon the police,

367
who were complimented upon the courage with which they faced the defences of this so-called fort? Could anything be more discouraging to them than to see the whole of the arduous work which they had done rendered abortive by this miscarriage of justice in the last stage? Then, my Lords, are we quite sure that an occurrence of this kind does not place rather a slight upon the Courts of law and the learned Judges who have had these matters before them, and who at the last moment see that no further attempt is to be made to vindicate the law and to uphold what they have done? Finally, is it not worth while to consider what effect a scandal of this kind—for I can only call it a scandal —must have upon the progress of land purchase in Ireland? Land purchase, as has been readily admitted on both sides of the House, has proved the panacea for most of this discontent and lawlessness. Here you have a case where a land purchase transaction was going forward quite smoothly and satisfactorily, but one reckless, malcontent, cantankerous man is allowed to disturb the whole peace of the locality and to upset by his conduct all the good that is being done by the transfer of their farms to the tenants. It seems to me that this affair has been discreditable from beginning to finish, and I do not think that in the course of the debate anything has been said to diminish the grave misgivings with which we regard the conduct of the whole business.

ALDERMEN IN MUNICIPAL BOROUGHS BILL.
[SECOND READING.]
Order of the Day for the Second Reading read.
THE EARL OF LIVERPOOL: My Lords, in moving the Second Reading of this Bill, perhaps your Lordships will allow me to state briefly what it enacts. The Bill was introduced in another place on behalf of the Local Government Board, and it has passed that House without any amendment at all. Its object is to assimilate in two very small particulars the procedure in municipal boroughs to the kind of procedure now in vogue in the case of county councils and metropolitan borough councils. The councils of municipal boroughs, as your Lordships well know, consist of a mayor, aldermen and councillors; the number of aldermen being one—
368
third of the number of councillors; the aldermen hold office for six years, one half of their number retiring every three years, when their places are filled again by election. At these triennial elections of aldermen in municipal boroughs the aldermen, other than the outgoing aldermen, have been allowed up to now to vote; but in the case of county councils and metropolitan borough councils the sitting aldermen have not been allowed to vote in the election of new aldermen, the object being to secure that the aldermen should be chosen only by the elected representatives —namely, by the new councillors. This Bill extends this principle to municipal boroughs.
The second portion of the Bill is as regards outgoing aldermen. It provides that an outgoing alderman shall not, as alderman, vote in the election of mayor. As your Lordships are well aware, as soon as a new council comes together the first duty is to elect a mayor, who presides over the deliberations of the councillors during the corning year, and it seems only reasonable that the outgoing aldermen, who will not, unless they are re-elected, form part of the council, should not vote in this election. As I have already said, this is the rule which prevails in the case of county councils and the metropolitan borough councils, and it seems only right to extend it to municipal councils. The second subsection of Clause 1 merely makes the necessary amendment to the Municipal Corporations Act, 1882, to carry into effect the object of the Bill. In other words, this Bill is simply an amending Bill to the Municipal Corporations Act of 1882.
Moved, That the Bill be now read 2a.—(The Earl of Liverpool.)
LORD COURTNEY OF PENWITH: My Lords, I do not rise to oppose the passage of this Bill, the objects of which, indeed, I entirely approve, but to suggest to your Lordships the expediency of making certain additions to it in Committee which will make it even more useful than it is as presented to your Lordships now. Let me, in the first place, call attention to the fact that we. are put in rather an inconvenient position in respect of this Bill, because, although it was brought up here some time since, it has not been circulated, and it was not until this after-

369
noon when I came down to the House that I was able to procure a copy. I do not know where the delay has arisen, but I think that as it his occurred we ought not to suffer for what has happened.
The object of the Bill, as the noble Earl has said, is to extend to the election of aldermen of municipal councils the rule which now applies to the election of aldermen on county councils and the metropolitan borough councils. As your Lordships will remember, the introduction of aldermen on county councils and municipal councils was long resented by the advocates of pure democracy as an inroad on the principle of confining the composition of these councils entirely to those elected by the people. But we have had less and less objection of late years to this principle, and it now seems coming to be well admitted that, owing to the defects in representation as we have it at present, it is necessary that elected councillors should be supplemented by co-opted persons if you desire to obtain a body which shall be competent on all sides to undertake the affairs of the community, whether from the point of view of knowledge or experience or even of judgment and practical action. So that now the question is how we can best secure these aldermen, how we can bring into the composition of municipal councils aldermen who shall satisfy the conditions to which I have referred.
Formerly, under the Municipal Corporations Act, on all these councils aldermen were admitted to equal rights with the elected councillors, and therefore had a share in the election of the aldermen and were not distinguishable in their powers from other members of the corporation. That gave rise to much criticism, and the unfairness of the operation in the election of aldermen was long made the subject of complaint. There used to be in the other House a Bill annually brought in providing for the election of aldermen by a different method so that they should represent as nearly as possible the different elements in the composition of the original council. It did not, however, pass, but when Mr. Ritchie brought in his County Councils Bill he conceded the objection to the system which then prevailed by providing that in the election of aldermen to county councils the aldermen themselves should have no voice in the election, but
370
that the election should be entirely confined to the elected councillors. But he did not provide that the elected councillors should themselves elect the aldermen by methods which would secure a fair apportionment of aldermen among the different parties represented by the elected councillors, and he may not have done that for many reasons. Up till quite recently in the election of aldermen on the London County Council care was taken to apportion the aldermen among the two main parties on the council so that they should represent a fair proportion of the original elected elements, not disturbing the balance but bringing into the composition of the council elements corresponding to the original elements in the council. I am sorry to say that that method, so honourably initiated and pursued in the London County Council, has recently been flagrantly abandoned, and the election of aldermen has been employed, not for the purpose of adding to the council elements of experience and judgment and weight from persons belonging to both parties, but simply employed in order to add to the voting power of the majority; and I desire that your Lordships may seize this opportunity by means of this Bill to add to the proposal of His Majesty's Government, which provides that in the election of aldermen on municipal councils only councillors should take part and that the aldermen themselves should not vote—to add to that a provision that the councillors themselves shall elect according to a method which shall secure an addition to the council of aldermen representing the different elements in the original composition of the council; in other words, that the aldermen should remain as valuable an addition to the council as it is possible to secure.
It has been said by the noble Earl that this Bill passed through the other House without amendment, and it may be asked whether it is prudent to raise this question here. The conduct of a Bill through Parliament has become, owing to various circumstances, largely a series of manœuvres. You introduce your Bill and construct it so as to prevent as far as possible any discussion or any amendment, and this Bill was brought into the other House in a manner which effectually prevented the mooting of the question I am submitting to your Lordships. The Motion was made to bring in a Bill to deal with the election of aldermen

371
by alderman, and inasmuch as the Resolution admitting the Bill governs the subsequent dealing with it, it was impossible to introduce into the Bill the Amendments which I now suggest to your Lordships it would be advisable to bring into it. Here we are free to deal with the matter as we may think desirable in the public interest, and it will be in the power of your Lordships, if you are so disposed, to secure that the councilors engaged in the election of aldermen shall vote in such a fashion that the aldermen they elect shall correspond to the divisions of opinion among the councilors themselves. Amendment can be made to the Bill to secure that result, and it would be competent for your Lordships to alter the title of the Bill so as to cover the additions you make to it; and I have reason to believe that they were totally unable to make owing to the very ingenious way the Local Government Board presented the Bill to their notice.
As I have said, this Bill was brought in without your Lordships having had an opportunity of seeing it, and it will be obvious that the Amendments which I have hinted at, and which I propose to put on the Table, require some little care and attention in their construction. I think, therefore, I may appeal with confidence to the noble Earl in charge of the Bill to allow the Committee stage to be postponed for a sufficient time to enable your Lordships not only to become acquainted with the scheme of the Bill as it stands but to consider the Amendments which will be put down to it.
THE EARL OF LIVERPOOL: My Lords, we propose to take the Committee stage of this Bill on Tuesday next, if that meets the view of my noble friend. We are most anxious to get the Bill through before the end of this portion of the session. There is, therefore, not a great deal of time, and if that meets my noble friend's view, we could put down the Committee stage for Tuesday.
LORD COURTNEY OF PENWITH: I will do what I can by then, but the time is rather short.
On Question, Bill read 2a, and committed to a Committee of the Whole House on Tuesday next.

CONVEYANCING BILL.
[SECOND READING.]
Order of the Day for the Second Reading read.
THE LORD CHANCELLOR (LORD LOREBURN): My Lords, this is in substance a Bill which has already passed its Second Reading in this House, and it has run the gauntlet of a Select Committee. There have been some alterations and additions made to it, but not of any really vital import, and if any question is raised by any noble Lord with regard to it I think the Committee stage would be an appropriate time to discuss it. I approved the Bill myself, but as it is very technical, and in case I might have overlooked something, I sent it to one of His Majesty's Judges who is very skilled in conveyancing and asked him for his opinion with regard to it, and he advised that it was a very sensible Bill. It has already passed, in substance, the Second Reading, and I hope your Lordships will not offer any objection to it to-day.
Moved, That the Bill be now read 2a.—(The Lord Chancellor.)
On Question, Bill read 2a, and committed to a Committee of the Whole House.

CENSUS (GREAT BRITAIN) BILL.
Order of the Day for the Third Reading read.
THE LORD PRESIDENT OF THE COUNCIL (EARL BEAUCHAMP): My Lords, in moving that this Bill be read a third time, it would perhaps save trouble if I explain at once that the Amendments I have put down are purely drafting Amendments. Although His Majesty's Government still disapprove of the Amendment which was inserted on the motion of Lord Newton, they think that the Bill ought to go to another place in a form which will not be disapproved of by the Government draftsman. Therefore I have put these Amendments on the Paper and I think on the most cursory examination your Lordships will be satisfied that they are purely verbal. I beg to move that the Bill be now read a third time.
Moved, That the Bill be now read 3a.—(Earl Beauchamp.)
On Question, Bill read 3a.
Amendments moved—
Clause 4, page 2, line 3, after ("profession") insert ("or") and after ("occupation") leave out ("or")
Clause 12, page 4, lines 31 to 33, leave out ("Provided that no person shall be subject to any" such penalty for refusing to state his religious "profession")
Clause 12 page 5, line 8, after ("pounds") insert ("Provided that no person shall be subject to any "such penalty for refusing to state his religious "profession."—(Earl Beauchamp.)
On Question, Amendments agreed to.
Bill passed, and returned to the Commons.

DISEASES OF ANIMALS (No. 2) BILL.
Read 3a (according to order), with the Amendments, and passed, and returned to the Commons.
SMALL HOLDINGS (No. 3) BILL.
Amendment reported (according to order), and Bill to be read 3a, To-morrow.

BISHOPRICS BILL. [H.L.]
A Bill to facilitate the foundation of new Bishoprics and the alteration of dioceses and to amend the Bishops' Resignation Act, 1869, and for other matters incidental thereto—Was presented by the Viscount St. Aldwyn; read la; to be printed; and to be read 2a on Wednesday next. (No. 122.)
House adjourned at twenty minutes past Six o'clock, till To-morrow, half-past Ten o'clock.